Genesis – Chapter 17

The Covenant of Circumcision

The year was 2047 from Creation.  Ismael is 13 years old and Sarah is eighty-nine.  The momentous importance of the covenant required that it be precisely dated.

God waited thirteen years from the birth of Ismael before instructing Abraham to circumcise himself – an act preparatory to Isaac’s conception.  This was in order that Isaac be born when Abraham was a hundred years old, thus enhancing the miracle; and to display Abraham’s love of God, for he circumcised himself when he was old and frail.  The commandment was given prior to Isaac’s birth in order that Isaac’s conception take place in holiness and in order to emphasize the miracle that Abraham could have a child even though his organ had been weakened.

Because He wanted Isaac to be holy from his conception, God wanted Abraham’s physical prowess to be diminished.  This He accomplished by waiting until Abraham was advanced in age and by weakening him through circumcision.  In addition, Isaac’s conception and birth were miraculous.  Thus he was ideally suited for holiness.  (Malbim)

17:1  “..I am El Shaddai;”  – Exodus 6:3 “And I appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as El Shaddai.’  The commentators differ on the interpretation of this Name – most commonly translated as God Almighty. 

This particular Name was chosen for this communication to inspire Abraham with awe so that he should submit to the following command of circumcision.

This Name, implying Might was used in introducing the command of circumcision because man is weakened when circumcised.  Therefore lest Abraham be apprehensive that after he would undergo circumcision, he would be incapacitated during his recovery and easy prey for his enemies.  God appeared to him with this Name as if to reassure him: I am God Who will grant you and your descendants sufficient strength to overcome your enemies. 

Ma’or Vashemesh comments that the Name Shaddai implies hidden miracles.  God revealed Himself to Abraham as the Almighty, Who could bend the forces of nature to His service, in this case, by enabling Abraham to transcend his natural fate of childlessness.  He would now have children with whom there would be an eternal covenant.  This is the reason that God had communicated the Name Shaddai to Abraham at this time.

“..walk before Me..”  – The Midrash contrasts the command in this verse that Abraham walk ‘before’ God, with 6:9 where Noah is described as walking ‘with’ God in the sense that he needed His support to maintain his righteousness while Abraham was morally strong enough to walk alone, ‘before’ God.

Tanchuma likens the description of the Patriarchs as walking before God (48:15) to a ruler whose elders walk before him and proclaim his glory.  Similarly, the Patriarchs walked before God, proclaiming His Glory.

“..and be perfect.”  – This is a separate command: Be wholehearted in all the trials to which I will submit you.  The Midrash, however, perceives this not as a separate command, but as a natural consequence of the former one: Walk before Me (by observing the mitzvah of circumcision) and as a result of this you will become perfect – for as long as you remain uncircumcised, you lack perfection.

Midrash HaGadol notes that circumcision was one of the ten trials of Abraham.  Although he was commanded to undergo this difficult ordeal in his advanced age, he did not disobey the words of his Creator.  And by the virtue of compliance with this commandment you will be ‘perfect’ because on your flesh will be a sign dedicated to Me.

Turnus Rufus (the Roman general) asked Rabbi Akiva: If your God desires circumcision why is a child not born circumcised?.  Rabbi Akiva replied: Because God gave mitvahs (commandments) to Israel only in order to purify them  – i.e., God wished that man attain perfection by his own efforts through performance of the commandments.

17:2  God now transferred irrevocably to Abraham all the covenants previously made with mankind.  Because Abraham had made himself the suitable instrument for their fulfillment, he was appointed the embryo from which the covenants would develop.  (Hirsch)

In the covenant of the Land, it was God Who had made a covenant that day (15:18); it was a unilateral pledge by God, requiring no reciprocal deed on the part of Abraham.  In this covenant (of circumcision), however, Abraham undertook a reciprocal obligation – for this covenant would be “Between Me and you”. By his compliance, he and his descendants would be instrumental in ‘perfecting; the Work of Creation, and this ‘perfection’ would begin within his own ‘miniature world’ – his body.  (Malbim)

17:3  Until he was circumcised, Abraham was unable to stand while the Holy Spirit was above him and so he literally fell to the ground.

The Midrash notes that twice Abraham fell upon his face – here and in verse 17 – foretelling the two times that his descendants would be deprived of circumcision: in Egypt and in the desert.  In Egypt, Moses came and circumcised them; in the desert Joshua arranged their circumcision before they captured the Promised Land.

Note:  Moses and Joshua, too, cast themselves down upon the ground symbolizing total submissions: ‘and Moses heard and fell upon his face’ (Numbers 16:4): ‘and Joshua fell upon his face’ (Joshua 5:14.  Because they submitted totally to the will of God, they were granted the privilege of being instrumental in the circumcision of the nation – Moses prior to the Exodus, and Joshua after the entry into the Land.  At both of those times the majority of the nation was uncircumcised: in Egypt due to the rigors of the enslavement, and in the desert.  Because Moses and Joshua emulated Abraham, the task of supervising the masses of Israel was entrusted to them.

The details of the covenant

The two ‘sides’ of the covenant are clearly defined.  God’s obligations are listed in verses 4-8.  What God expected of Abraham and his descendants are enumerated in verses 9-14.

17:4  The meaning of the verse is: As for Me, I already have a covenant with you since the Covenant between the Parts at which time I understood certain obligations.  As a result of that covenant, you will be the father of a multitude of nations, as I promised you then.  Now I have come to announce something greater: the change of name by which you will be come a new person, greater in statue.  This Covenant will be not only between you and Me, but will also include your descendants for posterity, without regard to time or place.  (Abarbanel)  Everyone who will undergo circumcision and conversion will consider you his Patriarch.

17:5  That is, your contemporaries and those after you will no longer refer to you by your former name.  They will tell one another how God has changed your name, and thereby the miracle which I am to perform for you will be come manifest to all generations for eternity.  (Radak)

It is a deep-rooted custom to change someone’s name when he rises in stature.  The change signifies that the ‘new’ person has outgrown his old status.  This was also the case with Sarah (Sarai); Joseph (Tzafnas Paane’ach); Joshua (Hoshea); Chananiah, Mishael and Azariah (Shadrach, Mishach, and Abed Nego).

Why were the names of Abraham and Jacob changed but not that of Isaac?  Since both of the above were named by man, God changed their name (to reflect their new mission).  Isaac’s name was not changed because the name, Isaac, was designated for him by God before his birth (see verse 19)

17:6  “..and kings shall descend..”  – Not only will there descend from you sages who are qualified to instruct the nations, but there will come forth from you monarchs with the power to suppress idolatry from the nations.  Such occurred during King Solomon’s reign, and will again occur during the reign of King Messiah.

17:7  “..to be a God to you..”  – The concept has a dual connotation: To be on the one hand the object of your worship and great respect, and on the other hand, to be your God, Protector, and Benefactor.

17:8  “..everlasting possession.”  – This expression does not imply that they would dwell eternally in the Land and never be exiled – that would depend on their deeds.  Rather the expression means that the Land would remain their inalienable possession even though they may be in exile.  The promise was that come what may the Land would always belong to them; they would eventually return to reclaim it and Hashem would be their God.  (Radak)

“and I will be their God.”  – According to Malbim: When they will comply with the covenant and take possession of the land, then they will merit ‘in their own right’ that I be their God, not only because I was the God of their fathers.  At that time, they themselves will be worthy of Godliness; Hashem is called the God of Israel by virtue of their sanctity and righteousness.

17:9  The obligation on Abraham’s part.  Rashi comments that the word begins with the conjunction ‘and’ to imply that it is joined to the previous verses – i.e. I have specified obligations to you (verses 4-8); as a result you must obligate yourself to comply with your obligations to Me as outlined in the following verses regarding circumstances. 

Hirsch elaborates upon this concept.  Since God pledged that His assurance was eternally valid, He charged Abraham and his descendants not to create conditions that would make them unworthy of God’s gifts under the Covenant.  Furthermore, they should remember that were it not for Abraham’s pledge, Israel would not have existence for Isaac’s birth was a direct result of the Covenant.  And this obligation did not rest upon Abraham alone, but extended as well to his descendants.

17:10  The definition of the Covenant.  Hirsch notes an apparent discrepancy between our verse and verse 11.  Here it is called My Covenant, implying that the physical act of circumcision is sufficient fulfillment of the covenant.  Later it is described as the sign or symbol of the covenant, implying that the act is no more than a symbol, and not a complete fulfillment.  He explains that there are two inseparable elements: the act without realization of the idea is insufficient, likewise the concept without the act is not enough.  The act of circumcision must be performed, and it must be recognized as symbolic of the eternal bond between God and Israel.

Rav Yosef Albo writes: The commandment of circumcision was given as an external sign of the covenant binding God and Abraham’s descendants who maintain His covenant.  Since that sign exists continually in our nation, it shows that the divine bond is still with us… The Midrash states that Abraham sits at the door to Gehinnom* and prevents the circumcised from going in.  Therefore, as long as this sign of the Covenant is maintained in the nation we must not despair of redemption… for it points to the bond between God and us… that through the bond of the nation will return to its original strength and cleave to God as was prophesied.

  • Gehinnom is a small valley in Jerusalem and the Jewish and Christian analogue of hell.  The terms are derived from a place outside ancient Jerusalem known in the Hebrew Bible as the Valley of the Son of Hinnom.  The Hebrew Bible also notes that it was initially where some of the kings of Judah sacrificed their children by fire.  Thereafter, it was deemed to be cursed.  See Jeremiah 7:31 and 19:2-6.

17:11  This is a positive commandment requiring every father to circumcise his son, and obligating every child to have himself circumcised when he become a Bar Mitzvah if he had not already been circumcised by his father.  (Radak)

“..and that shall be the sign of the covenant.”  – Circumcision is the supreme, unequaled sign inasmuch as it is indelibly sealed in the body of man. (Radik)  It is a perpetual reminder to walk in His ways, for it is, as it were, the Master’s seal on His servant. (Sforno)

17:12  “..at the age of 8 days..”  – The Talmud derives from the use of the word ‘days’ that circumcision is performed by day and not by night (Shabbos 132a).  The Mechilta comments: Great is the Sabbath for a child is not circumcised until he has lived through a Sabbath.

Even though a child born of a maidservant or purchased from another is considered a slave, they must still be circumcised for they are, as the next verse continues, home born in your house and purchased by your money and hence subject to your obligations.  (Abarbanel)

17:13  Rashi points out a Talmudic discussion:  ‘For it was taught… a slave born in his master’s household is sometimes circumcised on the first day (from his birth) and sometimes on the eighth day; a slave purchased with money is sometimes circumcised on the first day (he was acquired, even If he was not yet eight days old), and sometimes on the eighth day.  The general rule is that a child who was born a Jew is circumcised on the eighth day.  A slave can be considered Jewish for this purpose because non-Jewish slaves owned by Jews are responsible for many commandments.

“..My covenant shall be in your flesh..”  – Flesh is sometimes used in Scripture as a euphemism for the reproductive organ.  The verse thus indicates that since the Covenant is, in the physical sense, associated with the organ whereby the species is perpetuated, it symbolized the continuity of the Covenant upon his descendants for eternity.  (Sforno, Hoffmann)

17:14  As pointed out in verse 11, one who was circumcised neither by his father nor by Beth Din*, is obligated from the time he reaches Bar Mitzvah** to arrange for his own circumcision.  The consequences for one who remains uncircumcised in violation of the commandment until the age of twenty, when he becomes liable to excision***, are given in this verse.

*Beth Din – A house of judgment – a rabbinical Court of Judaism.  In ancient times, it was the building block of the legal system in the Biblical Land of Israel.

**Bar Mitzvah – Bar is a Jewish Babylonia Aramaic word literally meaning son while Bat means daughter in Hebrew and mitzvah means commandment or law.  Although the term is commonly used to refer to the ritual itself, in fact the phrase originally refers to the person.  According to Jewish law, when Jewish boys become 13 years old, they become accountable for their actions and become a bar mitzvah.  A girl becomes a bat mitzvah at the age of 12.  Prior to reaching bar mitzvah age, the child’s parents hold the responsibility for the child’s actions.  After this age, the boys and girls bear their own responsibility for Jewish ritual law, tradition, and ethics, and are able to participate in all areas of Jewish community life.

***The punishment of excision – being cut off from his people – involves dying a childless and untimely death. (Shabbos 104a)

The punishment is not only in This World.  It extends into the Hereafter as well.  The severest retribution beyond which punishment cannot go, is that the soul should be cut off and not attain the life hereafter… It is to this destruction that the prophets metaphorically apply such terms as ‘Pit of Destruction (Psalms 55:23 (English version) or verse 24 (Jewish version)) because it is an irrevocable loss for which repentance is not possible.  (Rambam)

In addition to the spiritual oblivion in the Hereafter, the Talmud (Moed Katan 28a) comments that one liable to excision will die between the ages of fifty and sixty.

In the literal sense, this phrase indicates that the transgressor will no longer be associated with his nation and will be ostracized from the mainstream of his people inasmuch as he violated their beliefs by his transgression of this law, and does not bear their seal of servitude to God.  This is the literal meaning of ‘this soul shall be cut off’ whenever it appears in Scripture.  Conversely, ‘and he was gathered onto his people’ (49:33) is the expression used for the righteous.

“..he has broken my covenant.”  – He has not actually destroyed the covenant, for it is not within the power for any person to do so.  What he has done is to render the covenant ‘ineffective’ in the sense that it no longer assures him the eternal blessings of Abraham. (Hirsch)

17:15  The Promise to Sarah.  Previously the covenant was solely with Abraham.  Now Sarah is called upon as an equally essential factor in this covenant-promise.  And just as Abraham’s significance was to be perpetuated by a change of name, so was Sarai’s importance to be perpetuated by changing her name.  (Hirsch)

Abarbanel notes that throughout the prophecies up to this chapter, God manifested Himself in His Four Letter Name Hashem, signifying the Attribute of Mercy by which He graciously promised the Land, safety, future descendants, and so forth.  In this chapter, however, concerning circumcision and the childbearing of Sarah, He reveals Himself as Elohim, signifying the Attribute of Justice, He would fulfill His promises and obligations within the terms of His covenant.  It also reflected true Justice that the righteous and deserving Sarah be ‘remembered’ by God and granted a child.

Sarai designates ‘my princess’ while Sarah signifies ‘princess to all the nations of the world’.  Prior to the covenant, Sarai’s personal majesty made her the princess of Abraham and of his people Aram.  Now, however, no limitations were placed on her.  She was princess to all mankind.  (Berachos 13a)

17:16  “..and I will bless her..”  – With all blessing that will most appropriately precipitate her imminent childbearing: I will restore her youthfulness.

I will give you a son through her.”  From this verse, the Sages (Rosh Hashanah 16b) inferred that a change of name brings about a change of man’s fate.  For after Sarai’s name was changed, she was blessed with a child. (Ralbag)

“..kings of peoples will rise..”  – The descendants of Jacob and Esau.

17:17  “..and laughed..”  – He rejoiced.  In the case of Sarah, however, (see 18:12) she laughed with mockery.  Abraham had faith and rejoiced while Sarah sneered, hence God was angry with Sarah but not with Abraham. (Rashi)

“..born to a hundred year old man.”  – It is obvious that the question does not imply that Abraham doubted the power of the Almighty God to give him a child of his own even at this advanced age.  Rather it was a naturally jubilant outburst at the prospect of fulfillment of his life’s hope: ‘Could it really be true that this is finally happening to me?  I am overjoyed!’

And Sarah..’  – Since he did not have a child from Sarah when they were younger, he was astonished that he would do so now when he was a hundred years old and she was ninety, especially since he knew she was incapable of bearing.  Therefore, Abraham did not express wonderment when he was told (in verse 6) that nations would descend from him, but only when he was told that these descendants would be born through Sarah.

Ramban concludes that it is certain that Abraham’s remark was motivated by faith and joy.  The proof of this is that God commanded him to name his son Isaac (verse 19), a name commemorating his laughter.

17:18  Since Ishmael was born first, Abraham thought that he would be the heir promised him.  Now that he was told that Sarah would bear him a son, he understood that her son would be the heir, and he feared that it might imply Ishmael’s death.  ( Ramban)

Rashi’s interpretation of the verse is: ‘I will be satisfied if Ishmael lives and grows up to be God-fearing.’

Ramban disagrees with this interpretation because God responded to Abraham’s prayer by saying And as for Ishmael, I have heard you’ (verse 20).

Mizrachi defends Rashi’s interpretation by explaining that Abraham made two petitions here: that Ismael live; and that he be God-fearing.  If, however, his prayer was for life alone, what need was there for the words before You?  Because Sarah had just been promised a son, God assured Abraham that Ishmael would live.  But Abraham’s second petition was not relevant to the promise just made regarding the birth and future survival of Isaac; therefore God did not respond at all.  Or, the failure to respond may have been because God knew that Ishmael would go in the evil path and God did not wish to disclose this to Abraham to avoid causing him anguish.

17:19  “..and I will fulfill My covenant with him..”  – From the general promise made in verse 7, it might be interpreted to embrace the descendants of Ishmael and Keturah, as well.  God specifically declared, therefore, that the covenant will be perpetuated only through the descendants of Isaac, and no other.

17:20  Ramban interprets this verse as: ‘Although the covenant will be perpetuated by Isaac, nevertheless, since you prayed on behalf of Ishmael, I hereby accept your plea and he, too, will be successful.’

..and I will make him into a great nation.”  – We see from this prophecy (in the year of 2047 from Creation, when Abraham was 99) 2,337 years elapsed before the Arabs, Ishmael’s descendants, because a great nation.  Throughout this period, Ishmael waited anxiously, hoping, until finally the promise was fulfilled and they dominated the world.

17:21  “I will maintain My covenant through Isaac.”  –  An explanation offered for this being repetitive of verse 19 is based on the Midrash: Rav Abba said: The Torah draws a conclusion which Isaac, the son of Sarah, could draw from Ishmael, the son of the handmaid.  If God blessed Ishmael so in verse 20, surely it follows logically that He will bless Isaac so much more by maintaining His covenant through him!

The flow of verses 19-21 according to Rashi’s interpretation is: Isaac’s offspring will bear My covenant, but since you prayed on behalf of Ishmael I will make him great.  Nevertheless, the blessing I will heap on Isaac will surely be much greater for through him will My covenant be maintained through the ages.

17:22  “..speaking with him..”  – The expression ‘with him’ indicates a dialogue in contrast to ‘to him’, which implies that one spoke and the other listened.  Whenever God makes a statement or gives a command that does not require clarification, ‘to him’ is used, because it is the function of the prophet merely to listen and nothing more.  This verse, however, says ‘with him’ as the Torah says whenever explanation, clarification, or questioning is required.  This is in the nature of the Oral Law, where the prophet must ask questions thus engaging a dialogue until the intricacies of the law are clear to him. 

     Note:  The Midrash notes when the Holy One Blessed be He commanded Abraham to circumcise himself, he went and took counsel with his three friends,  Aner, Eshkol and Mamre.  (Either to test their beliefs so he could ascertain whether to continue his friendship with them, or because he was uncertain how to go about fulfilling God’s command – whether to sanctify God’s Name by doing it publicly during the day, or possibly to circumcise himself secretly, at night to avoid becoming a spectacle to scoffers, and to avoid possible assault by his enemies.)

Aner tried to dissuade Abraham entirely: ‘You are a man of a hundred years and you would inflict such pain upon yourself?’

Eshkol also was discouraging: ‘Why should you go and thereby make yourself distinguishable to your enemies?’

Only Mamre was vigorously encouraging and showed the firmest faith: ‘Was there ever a circumstance when God did not firmly stand by you – in the fiery furnace, in famine, in the war with the kings?  Will you not obey him then in this matter?’  It was in reward for his good advice that God said He would appear to Abraham only in the fields of Mamre as written in 18:1.

17:23  Ishmael is here identified as Abraham’s son for although thirteen years old at the time and in a position to refuse, Ishmael acted as a true son of Abraham and eagerly consented to being the first to submit to circumcision.  (Alshich)

He circumcised Ishmael, his only son, first, so he would serve as a model for the others to emulate.  Then he circumcised all those servants born in his household who were most dependent on him, and would lovingly comply first with their master’s wish; then he circumcised those servants whom he had purchased for money, and finally all the members of his household, leaving not a single one uncircumcised.  (Abarbanel)

Or HaChaim comments that although not specifically mentioned in the Torah, Abraham circumcised himself first in accordance with the halachah (a Jewish law from the Talmud) that only a circumcised Jew may act as a mohel (the person who performs the Jewish ritual), and in order to set an example for others.  (See verse 26 where Abraham is mentioned first.)

Verses 24-27  The Torah now proceeds in its usual custom, to recapitulate the substance of the previous verses, but in more detail and with additional emphasis.

17:24  Although Abraham is credited with having fulfilled all the Laws of the Torah before they were given, he did not perform the mitzvah of circumcision until he was commanded to do so.  Because he foresaw that this commandment would be implemented later in his lifetime, he therefore waited until he was specifically commanded to do so, in recognition of the proverb: ‘greater is he who is commanded and fulfills the command, than he who fulfills it without having been previously commanded.’  And by performing this after he was commanded, it became obvious to all that he was undertaking this at great risk in fulfillment of God’s wishes, and not for a therapeutic or cosmic reason; as mocking skeptics would have claimed had he undertaken it on his own initiative.

17:25  The ages of Abraham and Ishmael are specified to show that Abraham, despite his age, and Ishmael, despite his youth, went with vigor to perform the will of God.  One might have expected them to fear the pain, or Ishmael’s mother to object, or that they would wait to see the effects of the circumcision on the other members of the household.  In their righteousness, however, they performed the commandment on that very day.

17:26  The same expression ‘on that very day’ is used in connection with Yom Kippur (Leviticus 23:28).  The Sages derive by analogy that Abraham performed these circumcisions on that day, and every year the Holy One, Blessed be He, sees the blood of our father, Abraham’s circumcision, and forgives all the sins of Israel as it say (Leviticus 16;30) ‘for on this day atonement shall be made for you, to cleanse you.’

In that place, Mount Moriah, where Abraham was circumcised and where his blood remained, the altar was subsequently built.  Therefore, the sacrificial blood was required to be poured out at the base of the altar (Leviticus 4:30).

Gur Aryed adds that the Torah stressed the ages of Abraham and Ishmael.  In those times, heavenly punishment was not inflicted until a sinner had become a hundred years old.  God did not want Abraham to reach that stage uncircumcised.  Ishmael, having become thirteen, would attain his majority and – no longer subject to Abraham’s domination – would have refused to circumcise himself.  Therefore, the Torah stresses that he was barely thirteen and still obliging to his father’s guidance.

The reason the Torah stresses that it took place on that day was to point out Abraham’s dedication to God.  Having already circumcised all members of his household, Abraham would have had no one to assist him during his recuperation for all his servants would have been ailing.  Nevertheless he did not delay.  (Abarbanel)

It is also written that he wanted to immediately rid his house of impurity for “whoever eats with an uncircumcised person is as though he were eating with a dog.’

Genesis – Chapter 16

16:1  In Abraham’s cry (15:2) ‘What can you give me seeing that I am childless?’ , we see how deeply Abraham felt his childlessness.  Abraham’s desire for children transcended that of the common childless person.  His mission was to bring God’s teaching to man for all time.  How could he do this if he had no heir?  Sarai’s hurt, too, ran deep.  Her role as Abraham’s true partner in every phase of their life’s mission is stressed by the verse’s emphasis on her as Abram’s wife.  But, as the verse implies, though she was his wife she had not yet carried out the highest obligation of her mission – she had borne him no children (Hirsch).

Hagar was a daughter of Pharaoh.  When he saw the miracles that were wrought on behalf of Sarah (when she was in Egypt with Abraham; 12:17), he gave Hagar to Sarah, saying ‘Better that she be a servant in their house, than a lady in mine’ (Midrash; Rashi).

Malbim continues that it was God’s plan that Ishmael must be born before Isaac and that he be born to Hagar rather than to Sarai.  Like silver from which all impurities are removed before it is put to its ultimate use, all but the holiest, most spiritual forces had to be removed from Abraham before he could beget Isaac.  So Sarai was restrained from conceiving with Abraham until he had reached a state of complete spirituality.  Therefore, Abraham married the Egyptian Hagar.  Into Ishmael went any spiritual impurities that were in Abraham’s makeup.  Thus purified, and at an advanced age when earthly lust was gone and birth could be only a heavenly gift, Abraham and Sarah produced Isaac.

16:2  Sarah realized from Whom her misfortune derived (Midrash).  And she also realized that it was from her – and not from Abraham – that a child had been withhold for she was obviously aware of the promises of descendants that had been given her husband and was apprehensive that she was the obstacle to their fulfillment (Abarbanel).

She said to Abraham: ‘Although He promised you offspring, He did not say it would issue from me. (Sforno)

King Solomon declared (Proverbs 30;21): ‘For three things the earth shudders, there are four it cannot tolerate: a slave who has become a king; a fool when he is filled with food; an unloved woman when she gets a husband; and a handmaid that is heir to her mistress.’  And yet, here the mistress gives her domain to her handmaid!  This emphasizes the righteousness of Sarah who did not consider her own feelings at all but acted solely for the sake of Heaven (Midrash HaGadol).

A childless person is considered as dead and demolished.  As dead, for Rachel said to Jacob (30:1): ‘Give me children, or else I am dead.’  As though demolished, for Sarah said, ‘perhaps I will be built up through her’, and one builds up only that which is already demolished. (Midrash; Rashi)

Sarah poured forth her soul in devising this desperate plan by which she would give her maidservant to her husband in marriage.  She had hope the God, Whose compassion is on all His handiwork, would give compassion for her, and give her a son of her own.  Similarly, He would later be merciful to Leah as it is written (29:31) ‘And when Hashem saw that Leah was hated, He opened her womb’.

And Abraham heeded the voice of Sarai.”  – The Torah does not simply say ‘and he did so.’  Rather it emphasizes that despite his own deep longing for children, Abraham acted only with Sarah’s permission.  Even now his intention was not that he be ‘built up’ from Hagar, or that his offspring be from her.  He acted only to carry out Sarah’s wishes that she be built up through Hagar, that she find satisfaction in her handmaid’s children, or that she should merit her own children because of her unselfish act as explained above. (Ramban)

16:3  ‘Sarai ..took Hagar..’  – According to Ramban, ‘took’ here implies that Abraham did not rush into the matter but waited until Sarai herself took Hagar and brought her to him.

16:4  “..her mistress was lowered..”  – Hagar acted contemptuously toward Sarah, who is clearly still defined as her mistress, because now it became obvious that it was Sarah and not Abraham who was barren.  Now that Abraham’s seed for posterity was through her, she felt that her status was no longer subservient to Sarah. (Radak)  She would also boast that all the promises made to Abraham would be realized only through her and her child, for it was only with her that Abraham would ever have children. (Midrash HaGodol)

16:5  Sarah could no longer contain herself in the face of Hagar’s haughtiness, but she reasoned to herself: ‘Shall I lower myself to this woman’s level and argue with her?  No.. I will argue the matter with her master!’ (Midrash)

Sarah said: I hold you responsible for my hurt, because when you prayed for a child and said (15:2) ‘What can You give me seeing that I go childless?’  and ‘You have not given me any offspring’ (15:3), you prayed only for yourself; therefore God gives a child to you, but not to me.  Had you prayed for both of us, then I too, would have been ‘remembered’ by God and the child being born to you would have been mine – not that of this ungrateful maidservant. 

Why indeed did Abraham not pray for Sarah?  According to Yevamos 64a, Abraham and Sarah were both infertile.  Abraham, however, considered it improper to pray for a double miracle.  He was confident that if he prayed for himself, God would respond by helping them both.  For this reason he was reluctant to take Hagar as a wife, agreeing to do so only upon the insistence of Sarah.  He feared that Sarah might not be remembered with him if he had another mate.

Although Abraham had a son with Hagar, that child was not the true response to his prayer: first, because only Isaac was to be considered his ‘son’ (21:12); and second, because he considered Hagar no more than a concubine and the property of Sarah (16:6), and as such her son would not be regarded as an heir.

Let Hashem judge between me and between you’  – The Talmud notes that he who invokes heavenly judgment, in a case where justice could be obtained in an earthly court of Law – against his fellow, is himself punished first … For, as the Talmud continues, Sarah invoked heavenly judgment upon Abraham and as a result she predeceased him (see 23:2) .. For, it was taught: punishment is meted out first to the one who cries, and is more severe than for the one against whom justice is invoked. (Bava Kamma 93a)

Midrash concludes that whoever plunges eagerly into litigation will not escape from it unscathed.  Sarah should have reached Abraham’s years, but because she invoked God’s judgment, her life was reduced by forth-eight years.

Although Sarah’s attitude was ultimately vindicated by God when He told Abraham (21:12) ‘all that Sarah says to you, hearken to her voice,” which the sages interpret to mean that God agreed with Sarah’s attitude in our incident also, nevertheless since she invoked Heavenly Justice, she was punished.

16:6  The Midrash explains that Abraham was frustrated and ambivalent.  On the one hand, Sarah was suffering insult from her maidservant; on the other hand, this maidservant was now his wife, carrying his child.  “Having made her a wife shall we reduce her to a handmaid?  I can therefore do her neither good nor evil.’

Sarah, righteous though she was, could not bear the insolence of her maidservant and responded harshly for the Midrash comments: She bade her carry her water buckets and bath towels to the baths – which was servant’s work.  Thus, Sarah’s harshness consisted mainly of making her do work unsuited to her wifely status.

Ramban comments that Sarah sinned in afflicting her, and so did Abraham for allowing it.  God therefore heard Hagar’s cry (verse 11), and gave her a son who would be a wild man, whose descendants persecute and afflict the seed of Abraham and Sarah.

Most commentators disagree with Ramban and maintain that Sarah’s intent was not malicious.  Her intention was only to force Hagar to recognize her subordinate position and cease her insulting demeanor.  Instead of accepting Sarah’s admonition gracefully and constructively, Hagar fled.

How could kind, benevolent Sarah stoop to petty retaliation because her servant grew arrogant?  And if the situation at home was indeed so intolerable, why did the angel tell her to go back to her suffering? 

The Midrash explains that the saintly Sarah never changed her behavior at all – it was Hagar who changed her attitude.  It is similar to a rabbi whose disciples render him personal service.  Whatever he may ask of them is not difficult or degrading to them for they feel privileged that they can serve him.  Let an ordinary person request the same service of them, however, and they would be outraged.

So it was with Hagar.  She had always regarded Sarah as an exalted person.  Indeed, she had given up her father’s palace in Egypt to become a servant in the home of Abraham and Sarah.  But when she married Abraham and conceived, she grew arrogant and considered herself to be an equal of, if not greater than, Sarah.  Then, Sarah’s every routine request became an intolerable burden and Hagar fled the ‘persecution’.  The angel’s advice to her was once more to accept Sarah as her mistress, her superior in spiritual qualities.  Then the servitude would no longer be burdensome.

16:7  “An angel of Hashem found her..’  – According to most Sages, angels, when executing their duties, do assume various tangible forms, and may actually communicate with man.  We should not be led to think that Hagar merely imagined these things.  In a state inferior to prophesy, Hagar actually perceived an angel in the form of a human being, and therefore did not become afraid.  She did not experience this by virtue of her own merit, but by the merit of Abraham, so that she could return home and bear his child.  (Abarbanel)

That angel found Hagar cannot be understood in the literal sense as if divine emissary had to search for her.  Obviously, the Torah, which speaks in human terms, informs us that God waited for the frightened, fleeing Hagar to rest at a spring before He communicated with her.  When God considered the moment favorable, the angel found in the sense of revealed himself to her at that moment, and not sooner.

“..on the road to Shur.”  – The verse further identifies the spring of water as being specifically the spring on the road to Shur, to indicate that she was about to return to her birthplace Egypt, for Shur is near Egypt.

16:8  “..Hagar, maidservant of Sarai,..”  – By addressing her as maidservant, he reminded her of her subservience to her mistress, and she acknowledged this subservience when, in her reply (next verse) she refers to Sarah as ‘my mistress’.

It is possible that by so addressing her he was intimating that only by virtue of the fact that she was the maidservant of Sarai did she merit this divine revelation.  He also meant to ratify her subordination to Sarah as being in accordance with the Divine Plan.

16:9-11  These verses address three separate speeches: verse 9: the condition; verse 10: the promise; and verse 11: the task and its result.  (Hirsch)

16:9   “..an angel of Hashem said..”  – ‘Angel’ is repeated in reference to each statement (verses 7, 9, 10, and 11) because for each statement a different angel was sent to her.  This is in line with the dictum that an angel does not carry out two separate functions simultaneously. (Rashi, Meilah 17b)

“..return to your mistress.”  – He thereby hinted that she will always be subservient to Sarah, as Sarah’s descendants will always dominate hers. (Ramban)

16:10  Apparently, Hagar made no move to return, so the angel pressed further.  Hagar did return after which the following promise was addressed to her – ‘I will greatly increase your offspring’.  It was certainly not in the angel’s province to increase her seed; he was merely using the first person, speaking in God’s Name as His emissary.

16:11  Ishmael – God told her what the future will bing: a son would be born to her whose name would be Ismael. 

“Behold you will conceive..”  – This phrase is not interpreted in the present tense: ‘Behold, you are pregnant,’ for obviously Hagar was aware of her state so it plainly says in verse 4.  Rashi, however, states regarding verse 5 that Sarah did address Hagar and cast an ‘evil eye’ upon the unborn child causing Hagar to miscarry.  Accordingly, the angel now tells her that when she returns home, she will conceive again and bear a son.  This expression occurs also in the promise to Manoah’s wife (Judges 13:5, 7) where it also definitely refers to the future – ‘when you return home you will conceive.’ (Rashi)

16:12  “..wild-ass of a man”  – untamable – an image of unrestricted freedom among men: he would not submit to the rule of strangers, and would take what he wished by brutal force. (Ibn Ezra)  Loving the wilderness and hunting wild animals, as is written of him (21:20): “And de dwelt in the wilderness and became an accomplished archer”.  (Rashi)

The comparison of the Ishmaelites to wild-asses reflects their lives as ‘free sons of the desert’ who were wandering merchants.  They are thus referred to as wild-asses, as it is written in Jeremiah 2:24: ‘a wild-ass used to the wilderness’ and Job 24:5: ‘like wild-asses in the desert they go forth to their work’. (B’chor Shor)

Note: The Midrash takes the name to connote savage.  It means that while other people are bred in civilized surroundings, he would be reared in the wilderness.  Resh Lakish said: It means a savage among men in its literal sense, for whereas all other plunder wealth, he plunders lives.  The Zohar (Yisro 86a) remarks that Ishmael was a wild-ass, but he was only partly man.  He possessed the beginnings of ‘manhood’ because he was circumcised, but the ‘manhood’ did not come to fruition in him because he rejected the Torah.

The phrase his hand against everyone indicates that at first his seed will be victorious against all people, but ultimately everyone’s hand – they will conquer him. (Ibn Ezra)

The verse may be seen as a prophesy that has come to complete fulfillment in recent times.  The Ismaelites (the Arab states) are dependent upon other nations for technology, but other nations are dependent upon the Ishmaelites for their vast oil wealth.  And as result of their wealth, they have acquired vast holdings throughout the world.

16:13  Calling the name of Hashem signifies prayer in which she praised God Who spoke to her by exclaiming: ‘You are the God Who sees everywhere, not only in the house of Abraham.  (Sforno)

An exclamation of surprise: ‘Could I ever have expected to see God’s emissaries even here in the desert after seeing them in Abraham’s house, where I saw many angels?’  That Hagar was accustomed to seeing angels in Abraham’s house may be deduced from the fact that Manoah (Samson’s father) saw an angel only once and exclaimed (Judges 13:22): ‘We shall surely die!” while Hagar saw four angels, one after the other, and she showed no fear. (Rashi)

Although the angel appeared to her in human form, Hagar realized that he was an angel because he became invisible as soon as he had completed giving his message to her.  Thus” ‘Did I see him even here after having just seen him?’  (Radak)

16:14  ‘..Be’er Lachai Ro’i..’  Literally translated ‘the well of the Living One Who sees me.’

..between Kadesh and Bered.’  This site is further identified so that if a passerby should see it, he should offer praise to the Almighty for having chosen the righteous.  For it was out of His great love for Abraham that He sent His angel to Hagar though she was not acting as his emissary.  Bered is identical with Shur mentioned in verse 7.

16:15  Bolstered by the promise that her son would become the ancestor of a great people, Hagar returned to her mistress and after a short while, as the angel had foretold …. ‘Hagar bore Abraham a son’.  Abram was not present when the angel charged Hagar to name her child Ishmael )verse 11), nevertheless the (Prophetic) Holy Spirit rested upon him and he gave the child this name.  (Rashi)

Had Abraham heard from Hagar of the angel’s command, he should have allowed her to name the child.  Therefore Rashi explains that Abraham was prompted by the prophetic spirit and it therefore was as if he were the commanded one.

16:16  The year was 2034 from Creation.  Abraham age is recorded to give credit to Ishmael, for it is from here that we know that Ishmael was thirteen years old when Abraham circumcised him, yet he raised no objection.  (Rashi) 

This chronological detail also serves to let us know that all the events in this chapter occurred within one year.  For in verse 3 we are told that Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham ten years after Abraham lived in Canaan.  Since Abraham was seventy-five when he left Charan (12:4), he was eighty-five when he married Hagar, and Ismael was born that following year.

Genesis – Chapter 15

15:1   “Fear not, Abram… – From God’s assurance to Abraham, it is clear that Abraham was deeply worried about something.

The Midrashim and commentators generally explain that when Abraham reflected on the miracle which enabled him to slay the kings, although he was greatly outnumbered, he was concerned that the miracle had been possible only as a reward for his previous righteousness – that he could not expect future divine assistance, and that he would be punished for the men he had slain, some of whom may have been righteous.  He was also apprehensive that the successors of the four kings would collect even greater armies than before and stage an attack on him.  This time, since all his merit had been used to gain the previous victory, he would be defeated (Midrash).  He also feared he would die without children.

“I am your shield..”  – I am your shield against punishment, for you will not be punished on account of all these people you have slain (Rashi); I am your shield against your enemies.  ‘Just as a shield received all spears and withstands them, so will I stand by you.’ Midrash

‘Your reward is very great.’  – Not only need you not fear punishment, but you need not be concerned about the future, for your reward is very great.

God also assured him that there were no righteous people among those whom Abraham slain; rather than deserving punishment for slaying them, he was worthy of reward for ridding the world of the wicked (Midrash).

The Midrash relates that Abraham entertained even further misgivings.  He said to God: ‘Sovereign of the Universe!  You made a covenant with Noah not to exterminate his children.  Yet, through my meritorious acts my covenant superseded his and I was victorious and exterminated the forces of the four kings.  Perhaps another will arise who will accumulate even a greater store of precepts earning a new covenant that will supersede mine.

God therefore reassured him that only to Abraham’s children would He set up shields for the righteous – only to Abraham, but not to Noah, did God promise to be a shield; for there did not arise from Noah even one righteous person (aside from Abraham) whose righteousness could have served to spare his fellowman.  Moreover He assured him that there would always be a righteous one in each generation among Abraham’s descendants who would shield his sinful fellowman and atone on their behalf.

15:2   ..that I go childless, ..’  – Abraham feared that he would die childless; therefore God reiterated His assurance that his descendants would be as numerous as the stars of the heaven.

One might ask why Abraham felt such fear in view of God’s earlier promise (13:15-16) of the Land to his descendants who would be as the dust of the earth?  Further, why would his belief in this second promise be stronger than his belief in the first?

The explanation is that the righteousness never their righteousness for granted.  Abraham saw himself growing old and he was still childless.  The first prophesy had not been fulfilled, and he feared that his own sin was the cause, or as the Midrash notes, that he was being punished for having slain people in the war.  Hence, the principle that the righteous are never confident in this world, they need constant reassurance that they have not deprived themselves of God’s blessing.

15:3   When Abraham said these things he did not suggest that God would renege on His promise.  Rather he was apprehensive that he had committed some offense which had forfeited his claim to the promise; or that he thought that the ‘offspring’ was a relative whom God might be considering as equivalent as Abraham’s own child.

Compare the words of Solomon in Ecclesiastes 2:18-19 who also expressed despair at the fate of one who leaves his estate to heirs whose prudence and wisdom are questionable.

Abraham’s concern continues – And even if You were to grant me a son now, in my old age, he will still be young after my demise and will be susceptible to Eliezer’s maneuverings, and will be at the mercy of the elder servant who will, in effect, be his master.

15:4   Suddenly, the Word of Hashem came forth – Regardless of when your son will be born to you, you need not be apprehensive.  Your servant will not be your heir; your own offspring will inherit you.

The implication of God’s promise is that Abrahm will father a son at some time in the future, and that the child will be an adult at Abraham’s death so he will not require a guardian nor be susceptible to any servant.  In this way he, and none other, would be assured of being the heir Abarbanel).

15:5   “And He took him outside,”  – The Midrashic interpretation is: He took him out of the realm of his constellation.  Although you have seen by the constellations that you are not destined to have children, it is true only that Abram will have no son, but Abraham will have a son; Sarai will indeed be childless, but Sarah will bear a son.  I will change your names from Abram to Abraham and Sarai to Sarah and your constellation will change!

‘Gaze now toward the heavens’  – The Sages have explained that the verb – gaze – always suggests gazing down from above, thus accounting for their explanation that Abraham was raised up above the stars, and as such he was told to gaze down upon them (Malbim).

As far as the Midrashic astrological interpretation cited by Rashi, Ramban notes that he begot Ishmael while his name was still Abram.  How then could the Midrash say that Abram will have no son?  The answer that Abraham’s fear, as expressed in verse 3 was that he would not have a son as an heir; God therefore assured him that as ‘Abram’ he would not have a son who would be his heir (Ishmael was not his heir – see 21:12); only as Abraham would he father a son.  Additionally, it is possible that the astrological indication concerned Abram and Sarai only as a pair together and Ismael was born of Abram and Hagar.

Note:  The commentators generally agree that the comparison of Israel to the stars is not measured by the quantity of stars.   God had already compared them to ‘the dust of the earth’ and the dust particles of the earth are more numerous than the stars.  Rather God was saying that his every descendant would be measured by quality – as worthy and precious as the stars, each of which is individually counted by God for each star is a separate solar system or mighty force. Isaiah 40:26: “Lift up your eyes on high, and see who has created these things, who brings out their host by number; He calls them by name, by the greatness of His might and the strength of His power; not one of them is missing.’

Had God wished to direct Abraham’s attention to the quantity of the stars, it would not have been necessary to show him the heavens, just as He did not show Abraham the dust when He promised – ‘I will make your seed like the dust of the earth.’  Rather, God showed him the stars as if to say, ‘Your national existence will be like that of the stars.’  Here, on earth, everything we see is an evolving product of God’s ‘cause and effect’ natural law.  The stars, however, are still pristine products of God’s hand, unchanged since the day He created them.  Hence, God was, in effect, telling him, ‘Abandon your earthly, natural speculations.  Your offspring will be like the stars, drawing their sustenance from God, above all natural calculations.

Noting also that elsewhere (13:16, 28:14) God compared Abraham’s offspring to the dust of the earth, while here they are likened to the stars in heaven, the Sages (Megillah 16a) derive an ethical lesson: When we do God’s will, we are above all – like the stars in heaven.  However, when we disobey God’s will, we are trampled upon by all – like the dust of the earth.

15:6  “..righteousness.”  – Ramban questions – why should faith in God, especially by one as great as Abraham, be considered a virtue?  ‘God is not a man that He should lie’ (Numbers 23:19)

We are speaking of a man who, on the basis of his faith, was later prepared to sacrifice his beloved son, and had withstood all trials; how could he not show his faith in a good tiding?  Ramban suggests that the subject of the verse is Abraham: He (Abraham) considered it an act of righteousness on the part of God that He would promise him a child unconditionally (in God’s righteousness) and without regard to Abraham’s merit, and the possibility he might sin.  The verse says there, that Abraham’s trust in God’s promise was total, for, since it was an act of Divine Righteousness, it was irreversible as in the verse (Isaiah 45:23) “By Myself have I sworn, the word is issued from My mouth in righteousness, and shall not turn back.’

It is found in Tanchuma Masei 7, based on the verse, “God is not a man that He should lie” (Numbers 23:19).  When God promises to do good, He does not retract His promise even if the generation is guilty of infractions.  However, when He threatens to punish, He does retract if the guilty one repents.  He promised Abraham the good tiding: “Gaze now at the heavens and count the starts … so shall your offspring be”, and He has done so, for Moses said to the children of Israel (Deuteronomy 1:10): “Behold, you are this day as the stars of heaven.” 

We must never forget that Abraham was the First Believer and thus had no one to look back upon.  He established his own precedents; his faith was more difficult to come by than ours – for we are ‘believers, sons of believers’, for our forebears already paved a road of unswerving Faith.  It is no wonder then that the Torah emphasizes Abraham’s faith as meritorious and noteworthy.

The Covenant Between the Parts: The Promise of the Land – Verses 7-21

Note:  The covenant described in the following verses was made when Abraham was seventy years old; chronologically it preceded the prophetic vision of the above verses which, as pointed out above, occurred when Abraham was seventy-five years old.

That the narrative of the Covenant between the Parts commences with this verse is derived from Tosafos Berachos 7b which cites it as an example that the Torah is not necessarily written in chronological order.

While the commentators will generally assume events are chronologically given, there are frequent exceptions.  For example, chapters are sometimes written out of sequence to indicate legal or moral teachings derived from the association of seemingly unrelated concepts or events.  Or, a particular topic may be narrated until its completion, before a new one is introduced.  For example, the Torah tells of Terach’s death before Abraham’s departure to Canaan, which chronologically, Terach did not die until 60 years later and Noah’s death is recorded in 9:29 although Noah was still alive in the days of Abraham.

15:7  “..give you this land..”  – Radak and Sforno interprets this as God saying ‘This decree giving you the Land is not new.  I intended it from the time I saved you from Ur Kasdim; it was for this very purpose that I rescued you so that the Land would be an inheritance which you would pass on to your children as a father bequeaths his personal belongings to his heirs.’

15:8  “..’My Lord, Hashem Elohim:..”  – The Talmud (Berachos 7b) notes that Abraham was the first man ever to call Him Adon, (Master).  The obvious question arises why this verse is cited as the ‘first’ rather than verse 2 where the same Name occurs first.  It is in this connection that Tosafos explains that the Covenant Between the Parts (verse 7-21) happened before the vision of verses 1-6.  Thus, Abraham’s use of the Name Adonai in this verse is the first in history. 

The Name:  My Lord Hashem/Elohim

This combination of God’s Names is most unusual, especially the second Name which has the spelling of the Four-Letter Name but the punctuation of Elohim.

According to Mizrachi (Deuteronomy 3:34) whose interpretation we adopt in the translation, the name in our context is the salutation by which Abraham and Moses addressed God, ie., my Lord, for the word means Master, thus the Name is used to indicate complete obedience and acceptance.

The second Name has the spelling of the Four Letter Name but the punctuation of Elohim.  It appears in the five books of Moses only four times: Genesis 15:2, 15:8, Deuteronomy 3:24 and 9:26.  Although it is found in various books of Prophets, it is used extensively only in Ezekiel.  ‘Hashem’ commonly refers to God’s Attribute of Mercy while Elohim alludes to the Attribute of Judgment.  According to Mizrachi, this Name, combining mercy with judgment, implies the plea that even in judgment, God should temper his decree with mercy.

“  how shall I know..”  – Rashi explains that in addition to the plain meaning that Abraham sought a sign, another interpretation is: By what merit will my descendants sustain themselves in the Land?  (i.e. Abraham was apprehensive about himself and his descendants: would they be sufficiently worthy?)  His question is therefore to be interpreted as if the verse read ‘let me know how’, i.e. by what merit would he receive the Land, and how would his children merit to retain this gift in later generations: perhaps they will sin and forfeit all.

God answered: ‘By the merit of the sacrifices’ which you are about to offer, and which I will institute as a means of atonement for your children.  And because God would forgive Israel on account of their repentance and prayer for which sacrifices are a symbol.

The Talmud (Megillah 31b) on which Rashi’s latter comment is based continues:   Abraham then said to Him: Sovereign of the Universe, this is very well for the time when the Temple will be standing, but when there will be no Temple what will befall them? …  God replied: I have already established for them the Order of the Sacrifice said during prayers.  Whenever they will read the section dealing with sacrifices I will consider it as if they were bringing Me an offering and forgive all their iniquities.

Ramban similarly explains that Abraham’s request is not to be interpreted as asking for a sign as did Hezekiah in II Kings 20:8.  Neither did God give him one.  Rather, Abraham merely asked that he might know with a true inner knowledge that the gift of the Land would be an enduring one unaffected by his sin or that of his descendants.  Additionally, he feared that the Canaanites who were in the Land and had to be driven away before Abraham’s descendants could inhabit it, might repent and thereby deserve to remain in the Land.  (See Jeremiah 18:7-8).  God therefore assured him that he would inherit the Land despite all possible circumstances.

Covenant

A covenant is a permanent bond between two parties, symbolizing a friendship so close that they are like a single body and that each is as responsible for the other as for himself.

Symbolic of this they cut an animal in two and pass between the parts, to signify that just as disease or injury afflicting one half of the animal affected the entire animal when it was a single, living organism, and only death separated the two parts – similarly, the two parties entering into the covenant are to be as one body, each ready to risk danger, if necessary, to help the other.

At the same time, each must reveal to the other his innermost thoughts, and not withhold knowledge about evil plots against the other.

Therefore, as soon as God made a covenant with Abraham, He made known to him the evil that was destined to befall his descendants, symbolically showing him the subjugation of Israel to other nations, but simultaneously comforting him with the knowledge that “afterward they shall leave with great wealth” (verse 14)…

Thus, the covenant symbolized that God would be with Israel in distress just as the whole body shares in the pain of one of its limbs.  Our Sages say: The Shechinah suffers with the suffering of Israel, as is said in Psalm 91:15, ‘I will be with him in trouble’.

15:9  God commanded him to take the following animals to seal the covenant and to give it the additional status of an irrevocable oath.  It was to this that Moses later referred when he said to the Israelites (Deuteronomy 9:5): ‘It is not for your righteousness…that you go to possess their land, but because of the wickedness of these nations Hashem is driving them out before you, and in order to fulfill the oath that Hashem swore to your fathers.  (i.e., even if you do not merit possession of the Land, God must fulfill His oath.)  (Sforno)

“..three heifers,”  – Symbolic of the three sacrifices of bulls which would later be brought on Yom Kippur (Numbers 29:8); the bull which was brought when the whole congregation sinned unintentionally by acting on certain types of erroneous decisions of the Sanhedrin (Leviticus 4:13-21); and the heifer whose neck was to be axed (Deuteronomy 21:4).

“..three goats..”  – Symbolic of the goat which was offered within the Temple on Yum Kippur (Leviticus 16:15); the goats brought as additional offerings on Festivals (Numbers 28:15, 22,30); and the goat brought as a sin offering, by an individual (Leviticus 4:28) (Rashi).

“three rams,..”  – Symbolic of the guilt offering for definite commission of certain offenses (see Leviticus 5:15; 14:24; 19:21; Numbers 6:12); the guilt offering when there is doubt whether an offense was committed (Leviticus 5:17-19); and the lamb brought as a sin offering, by an individual (Leviticus 4:32) (Rashi).

“..a turtledove and a young dove.”  – Radak explains that the Hebrew word for young dove refers to any fledgling bird, just as young eagles are called in Deuteronomy 32:11.  The translation defining it here as ‘young dove’ follows the Midrash.

In choosing the animals listed in this verse, God alluded to future sacrifices of cattle and fowl all of which would be solely from these species.

15:10  God was making a covenant with Abraham that He would bequeath the Land to his children as expressly mentioned in verse 18.  Therefore, in the plain sense, the cutting of the animals, the passing between the parts, and all that ensued must be interpreted as the ritual of those who enter covenant.

Abraham placed the turtledove and the young dove opposite one another for they were both included in the covenant, but he did not divide them in half, since regarding the fowl that is offered up, the Torah states (Leviticus 1:17); ‘he shall not divide’ Ramban).

The symbolism of the animals chosen is that the nations of the world are compared to ‘bulls’ (see Psalms 22:13, Pharisees), ‘rams’ (Daniel 8:3 Media and Persia), and ‘goats’ (verse 21 = Greece).  Israel is compared to young doves (Song of Songs 2:14).  To indicate that the nations were destined to decline, Abraham divided the animals, but the birds he did not cut up suggesting thereby that Israel will live forever (Rashi).

Rav Eliezer said:  At the Covenant Between the Parts, God showed our father Abraham the Four Kingdoms – Babylon, Persia-Media, Greece and Rome – their dominion, and their downfall.

15:11  There was nothing unusual in birds of pray swooping down on carcasses.  That this warranted special mention in the Torah, let the commentators to seek a symbolic interpretation.

The objective of the heathens in time to come would be to attack the spiritual strength of Israel by overturning the divine service.  By severing the spiritual link between God and Israel – the offerings and the study of Torah – the people would be spiritually asphyxiated.  God’s promise, therefore, was that the ‘birds of prey’ would be driven away without attaining their goal. 

15:12  “..a deep sleep..”  – It was the deep sleep that accompanies prophetic manifestations.  Compare Daniel’s prophetic slumber (Daniel 8:18) “As He was speaking with me, I fell into a deep sleep on my face toward the ground..”  This was followed by a dark dread (Daniel 8:17) “and when He approached me I was afraid.”  (Radak)

During the previous vision Abraham did not experience all of this, because the previous tidings were good.  Now that God came to reveal the darkness and bitterness of the future exiles, He cast the deep sleep, fear, and darkness upon him to symbolize the difficult tribulations that lay ahead.  (Rashi; Radak)

According to the Midrash, the fourfold expression, dread, darkness, great, and fell – all of which overtook his soul sequentially – referred to the Four Kingdoms.  The dread is Babylon; darkness is Media-Persia; great is Greece; fell is Rome.  Thus, Ramban explains, God forewarned Abraham that if Israel sinned, they would be exiled from their land by these four powers.  Following this general allusion, He explicitly told him that their possession of the Land would be preceded by the Egyptian exile.

15:13  God, Who has entered into a Covenant with Abraham, withholds nothing from His beloved, and reveals to him the future plight of his descendants.

Abraham is now told that although the land is assured him, actual possession of it will be delayed ‘because the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet full’ (verse 16), and a nation cannot be expelled from its land until it has sinned to the point where God no longer forbears from depriving it of its homeland.  During the interim his offspring shall be an alien nation.  Not all will suffer servitude, however, for the bondage did not begin during the lives of the righteous; the servitude did not begin until after the death of Jacob’s sons when it was deserved by their sinful children.  He revealed all this to Abraham so that the last generation should know that whatever befell them was by the Word of Hashem, and they should attribute it to no other cause, as the prophet declared (Isaiah 48:5): “I have already from the beginning told it to you; announced things to you before they happened” that you might not say ‘My idol has caused them; my carved and molten images commanded them’”.  (Sforno)

It was with the birth of Isaac thirty years after this Covenant (Abraham was seventy at the time of the Covenant and one hundred at Isaac’s birth) that the 400 year calculation in this prophecy would begin.

Rashi notes that the verse does not specify Egypt because the exile in Egypt lasted for only 210 out of the 400 years.  The 400 year period of exile began with the birth of Isaac, for it was from that time onward that the family of Abraham was treated as aliens, even when they lived in Canaan as Isaac did all his life.  Thus the Torah states that soon after Isaac’s birth Abraham lived as a stranger, an alien in the land of the Philistines (21:34); Isaac himself was commanded to live in the land (26:3); Jacob lived in the land of Ham, (Psalms 105:23), while his sons said that they came to Egypt to live temporarily (47:4).

After the exile-alien status, came this more severe phase of the Bondage.  It came to pass after the death of Joseph, when the Egyptians set taskmasters over the Jews (see Exodus 1:11).  (Malbim)

“..and they will oppress them..”  – The oppression began with the birth of Miriam.  This is based upon the Midrashic interpretation that Moses’ sister was named Miriam, which literally means bitterness, because at the time of her birth the Egyptians increased the bitterness of the bondage upon the Jews, as it says in Exodus 1:14 “they embittered their lives”.  Thus, the harshest part of the 210 years of the Egyptian bondage was the 86 years from the birth of Miriam.

The exile and especially the grinding servitude in Egypt must be seen from the perspective of an iron crucible, as the Torah describes Egypt (Deuteronomy 4:20).  A crucible, by melting precious metal, removes the impurities from it.  The purpose of exile in God’s plan for Israel is to purify and elevate the nation.  The extent of the suffering, however, will be increased if Israel is sinful.

Note:  Rashi clarifies the chronology:  The period of 400 years extends from Isaac’s birth until the Exodus.  This total is arrived at because Isaac was 60 years old when Jacob was born (25:26); Jacob, as he himself stated (Genesis 47:9), was 130 years old when he went down to Egypt, making a total of 190 years.  They were actually in Egypt for 210 years, the numeric equivalent of 400 years altogether.

In Exodus 12:40 the length of Israel’s stay in Egypt is given as four hundred and thirty years, while in our verse hour hundred years is foretold.  The texts are not contradictory, however.  The additional thirty year period refers to the years between the Covenant (when Abraham was 70) and Isaac’s birth when Abraham was 100.  This encompasses the period that Abraham, himself, was a stranger.

Abraham’s sojourning was unlike that of his children.  Even while wandering, he was always welcomed.  Even though he was a stranger, he was held in the highest esteem as (23:6) ‘a prince of God’.  Therefore, perhaps, Abraham’s travels are not included in the initial 400 years which began with Isaac, because the nature of Abraham’s travels are different from those of his descendants.  They are mentioned as part of the additional thirty years mentioned in Exodus, because they did, in fact, take place, but they are different in kind, rather than degree, from the sort of sojourning inflicted upon Isaac and his descendants.

15:14  ‘..the nation which they serve..’  –  Hirsch’s interpretation: The nation that I have appointed for a fiery furnace, a melting pot for your descendants, is told here that when it’s mission is accomplished, it will suffer the fate it will have richly earned.

Egypt as God’s Agent

This verse evokes certain profound philosophical questions which touch on the very foundations of man’s Free-Will and God’s Foreknowledge; reward and punishment.  If God decreed that Abraham’s descendants should be strangers in a land not their own, where they would be subjected to servitude and affliction, then why should the Egyptians be punished for having been the agents in the carrying out God’s Providential Will?

Rambam answers that God was not addressing the Egyptians when He uttered this decree, nor did He decree that any one person in particular should enslave the Jews.  God was merely instructing Abraham as to the course of future history.  Just as no one similarly has the right to be wicked because the Almighty has informed Moses that there will be wicked men among Israel, so, too, with the Egyptians: every Egyptian who oppressed and ill-treated the Israelites could have refrained from doing so had he not wished to hurt them.  Since he did perpetrate these acts, however, he is subject to punishment.  Even had no Pharaoh arisen, Israel was destined to servitude, as God specifically foretold.  But good is brought through the worthy, while evil is brought through the guilty.  Pharaoh was chosen for this mission because he was wicked, and therefore he deserved punishment. (Semachos 8)

Ramban explains that the Egyptians were punished not for executing God’s decrees but for their overzealousness in carrying it out: It was not included in His decree that they should throw Jewish children into the Nile, for this was not ‘affliction’ – it was murder.  The same applies to the general severity and vigor which they displayed toward the Israelites. 

This is also the case with Nebuchadnezzar, who, though the prophets unanimously called

upon him and his people to destroy Jerusalem (see Jeremiah 25:9; 32:28-29), and though the Chaldeans were aware that this was the command of God, nevertheless they were all punished because Nebuchadnezzar had his own personal glory in mind (see Isaiah 14:13-14; and 47:8), and because he added to the decree and overzealously perpetrated evil against Israel (see Isaiah 47:6).

“they shall leave with great possessions…”  – Their wealth could not possibly be considered payment for the years of bitter enslavement and countless deaths, pain, and suffering inflicted upon the Israelites by the Egyptians.  Rather, what Abraham is being assured here is that when the time of redemption arrives, the awful past will not be recognizable in his descendants.  They will leave Egypt not as pitiful slaves escaping from their master but as a content nation which has gathered wealth and possessions.

15:15  “..you shall be buried in a good old age.”  – A Scriptural idiom meaning: spared from all suffering.  By this promise, God announced to him that Ishmael would repent in Abraham’s lifetime, and that his grandchild Esau would not go on the wicked path in his lifetime.  To prevent Abraham from witnessing Esau’s evil conduct, however, Abraham died five years earlier than he normally would have, because on the very day Abraham died Esau rebelled,  Had Abraham lived, he would have witnessed it.

This is based on the Midrash which notes that Abraham was destined to live 180 years like his son Isaac, but that God withheld five years of Abraham’s life in anticipation of Esau’s sins, as God said, I promised Abraham, you shall be buried in a good old age.  Is it a good old age when he sees his grandson commit adultery and murder?  It is better to have him die in peace!

15:16   HaChaim writes that there are two distinct terms given in this verse – one for the end of the exile and another for the entry into the Land.  The exile would last no longer than 400 years.  The time of entry into the Land however, would be more flexible – the fourth generation – and it would be sooner or later within the lifetime of that generation, depending on the degree of its righteousness.  The ‘four generations’ begin from the time the Egyptian servitude was imposed which was after the death of Jacob’s twelve sons.  Thus, the four are Perez, Chezron, Caleb, and Caleb’s children.  (Although Caleb entered the Land, he is not counted because the rest of his generation died in the wilderness.)  The verse continues that the sins of the Amorites are also a determining factor.  Had Israel been perfect in its righteousness, then the Amorites would have had to make way for them.  However, since Israel sinned and could not be considered perfect, a different measuring rod was required.  Israel was better than the Amorites, but not perfect.  Therefore, the entry into the Land was delayed until the Amorite’s allotted measure of sin was reached.

The Amorite represents all the Canaanite nations.  It is singled out because it was the most powerful of them all, being described as ‘tall as cedars’ (Amos 2:9).

This is the crux of the entire prophecy: The Promised Land will not be given now, but to the fourth generation because only by then will the iniquity of the Amorites  have reached sufficient dimension to warrant their expulsion from the Land.  Another reason why God specified the Amorites is because Abraham then dwelled in the territory of Mamre, and Amorite.  (Hoffmann)

The Ratification of the Covenant

15:17  “..and it was very dark.”  – The Word signifies ‘thick darkness’.  It is found nowhere else in Scriptures except for three times in Ezekiel (12:6, 7, 12).  The darkness was so all-enveloping that even the light of the stars was not visible.  (Ibn Ezra)

“..smoky furnace and a torch of fire..”  – a vision symbolic of the Divine Presence and all of this occurred during Abraham’s prophetic slumber.  He envisioned these things.  The smoke (which rose up into the thick darkness (Radak) was the ‘Cloud and thick darkness’ which appeared at the revelation of the Torah; and the torch in its midst was ‘the fire’ which appeared at Sinai (see Exodus 19:18; Deuteronomy 5:4).

“which passed between these pieces.”  – In fulfillment of the Covenant.  As pointed out, Abraham did not pass through because he undertook no obligation under the terms of this Covenant.  It was God Who was obligated under this Covenant regarding the gift of the Land, and as such, He caused His Presence, symbolized by the fire, to pass through and conclude the Covenant.

This verse uses the word ‘pieces’ instead of the word ‘carcasses’ as in verse 11.  The use of the more respectful word in our verse is in reference to the Shechinah, which passed between the pieces.  (Ralbag)

15:18-21   The everlasting Covenant between God and Abraham was ratified by the events that occurred on that day: the visions, the division of the animals, the passing through of the Divine Presence and His Promise.

Ramban comments that the promise of the Land was given to Abraham several times, each of them necessary.  When he originally entered the country, God told him (12:7): ‘To your seed, I will give this Land’, a pledge which only included the territory which he had traveled until then.  When his merits increased, God bestowed the additional promise (13:14-15): ‘Lift up your eyes…All the land which you see, to you will I give it and your seed forever.’  This promise was more comprehensive and also added ‘and to your seed forever’, and that his seed would increase ‘as the dust of the earth.’  In this chapter, God defines the boundaries of the Land, mentioning the ten nations which presently occupied the Land and would be displaced (verses 19-21) and further made an irrevocable covenant with him that could not be revoked through sin.  When He repeated the promise on the occasion of Abraham’s circumcision for the final time, He added the words (17:8) “for a possession forever’, which meant that even if they were to be exiled, they would return and inherit it.

Rashi notes that although ten nations are mentioned here, God gave Israel the territory only of seven (Deuteronomy 7:1).  The other three: Edom, Moab, and Ammon (identified respectively with the Kenites, Kenizzites, and Kadmonites in this verse), will become Israel’s possession only in the future (see Isaiah 11:14).

The Midrash sums up with a note on the association of this verse with the next (16:1), which might also explain why the above verses of the Covenant Between the Parts, were placed here even though, according to the Sages, they are not in correct chronological sequence:  The Holy One, Blessed by He, originally contemplated giving Israel possession of ten peoples, but He gave them only seven… Edom, Moab, and Ammon being the three nations that were not given them in this world…  But in the days of the Messiah they shall once again belong to Israel (i.e., they had already belonged to Israel in accord with God’s promise) in fulfillment of God’s promise.  Now, He has given them all but seven…

Genesis – Chapter 14

The War of the Kings

It is twenty-eight years after the Dispersion.  Unsuccessful in unifying his kingdom by building the Tower, Nimrod (identified with Amraphel – see verse 1) reigns over only Shinar (Babylon).  Chedorlaomer (identified with Elam, son of Shem), built an empire under his former name, Elam, and conquered many other provinces – including Sodom and Gomorrah, forcing them to pay tribute.

But peace did not last long.  In the following narrative we learn how the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah together with three other kings, rebelled for thirteen years.

In the fourteenth year, Chedorlaomer and three other kings allied with him took the initiative in crushing the revolt.  They did not take the direct route to Sodom, but marched through the entire east of Eretz Yisrael southward toward Edom.  In a display of might, probably designed to instill their dread in the inhabitants of the region and to bolster the morale of the soldiers, they conquered everything en route, taking spoils from the nations listed in verse 5 and 6 who were probably allied with the five kings.  Only then did they turn back northwards to their intended goal of Sodom.

The battle took place in the Valley of Siddim, and it was here that the first punishment befell the wicked Sodomites who had always lived in luxurious tranquility in their blessed land.  In history’s oldest account of kings and wars, the five kings were quickly beaten and their treasurers – which were always jealously guarded by the wicked Sodomites lest anyone derive pleasure from them – were carried away by strangers.  Ironically, even Lot – who left Abraham to partake of the sensuous luxuries of Sodom – lost all his wealth and was himself carried away.

When Abraham became aware that his nephew Lot was a captive, he led his faithful followers and fearlessly pursued the four mighty kings who had by this time already conquered twelve nations!

He pursued them as far as Chovah/Dan where his strength waned because he prophetically perceived that his descendants would one day erect an idol there.  He pursued the aggressor kings no further, content that they had at least been driven from the Land.

Thus, the righteous Abraham, aided by heavenly forces, became the savior of Lot and the wicked Sodomites, and freed them and their possessions.

On returning from his defeat of the kings, Abraham was met by the king of Sodom who offered that Abraham keep the goods he recaptured.

But Abraham insisted that he will accept no personal benefit from bloodshed.  War may sometimes be necessary to safe guard human life but it is not to be glorified.  Abraham refused to take from the king of Sodom even a thread or a show-strap, lest the king boast ‘I have made Abraham rich.’

Abraham thus disavowed all ungodly purposes, and thereby demonstrated that all his actions were selflessly motivated.

14:1  “..Amraphel..” – He is identified with Nimrod (see 10:8 – it was he who cast Abram into the furnace of Ur Kasdim.  As the Talmud notes, he was called Amraphel because he said to Abram: ‘Plunge into the fiery furnace!’.  And Shinar is Babylon which is evident from 11:2 and 11:9 where it is explicitly state that Shinar was called Babel, because the confusion of languages that happened there.

Chedorlaomer was the primary and most important of these kings as indicated in verse 5 ‘the kings who were with him’, implying that the others were subservient to him.  Nevertheless, in placing the incident in its historical perspective, Scripture speaks of Amraphel because he was the senior member of the alliance.

14:8  The Battle of the Revolt –  “The king of Sodom went forth”  – They did not wait passively to be invaded, but took the initiative and attacked the enemy first. 

“engaged them in battle in the Valley of Siddim”  – It was no accidental encounter, but a carefully chosen battlefield because its nature was such that a small force thoroughly acquainted with the terrain could hold off a much larger and stronger force.  Had the soft and wicked kings of Sodom and Gomorrah been able and brave, they would not have been defeated.  As it was they fled with such disgrace and shame that they fell unto the very pits they knew so well.  (Hirsch)

Notice that the kings are mentioned in an order different from that of verse 2.  Perhaps, now that war was about to begin, they are listed according to their military might.

14:9  “four kings against the five”  – And yet the four kings won, which proves their great might.  Nevertheless, as we see later, Abraham did not hesitate to pursue them (Rashi).

14:10  “full of bitumen wells”  – The area was dotted with wells from which a slime was taken for building (Rashi).  (Bitumen is a thick sticky black mixture of hydrocarbons.)

The kings of Sodom and Gomorrah panicked, and fleeing, fell into the wells.  But, for some reason, the king of Sodom was miraculously saved.  Rashi cites the Midrash that the area was so swampy that only by a miracle was the king of Sodom able to escape it.  This miracle was given to him, unworthy as he was, for one reason…. Those who refused to believe in the miracle enabling Abraham to escape unharmed from the furnaces of Ur Kasdim now saw the miracle performed for the king of Sodom; and in hindsight, they believed in Abraham’s miracle, too.

Ramban observes that faith in God would hardly be enhanced by a miracle performed on behalf of a heathen king.  On the contrary, this miracle could only strengthen their idolatrous beliefs or cause them to attribute all miracles to witchcraft, and not to the God of Abraham.  Thus, the effect would be the reverse!

Ramban goes on to suggest that the Sages of that Midrashic statement would interpret verse 17: “and the king of Sodom went out to meet him” as indicating that ‘he went out’ from the well when Abraham passed by it looking for survivors.  It was obvious to all that he emerged from the well miraculously, only in deference to Abraham, since he failed to get out previously.  The king of Gomorrah, however, had apparently died by the time Abraham arrived.

14:12  “..they captured Lot” – It is strange that Lot’s relationship to Abraham is mentioned when it is already well known.  Equally puzzling is that the relationship is not mentioned after his name, but after “and his possessions.”   It emphasizes that Lot’s capture and the taking of his possessions was motivated first and foremost by his relationship to Abraham.

The Midrash relates that they put Lot in a cage and made a spectacle of him.  They marched around and boasted: ‘We have captured Abram’s nephew!’  This proves that they had come only because of him.

According to the Midrash, Zohar, and commentators, much of their design was to root out Abram.  But as the verse clearly states, as soon as they captured Lot, they departed.  The reason was that Lot closely resembled Abram; therefore when they thought they had Abram, they departed.

The reason for their hostility toward Abram was that he weaned man from idolatry and taught them to worship Hashem.  Also, God incited the kings to this invasion in order that Abram’s name might be aggrandized through their defeat, and all would be attracted to His service.

Hirsch comments on the need for Scripture to repeat these two amply known facts – that Lot was Abraham’s nephew and that he lived in Sodom.  His relationship to Abram would have spared him from the vengeance of Chedarlaomer because Lot was known to be a stranger in Sodom.  But He refused to remain a stranger there – he copied their ways and therefore he fell victim to their fate.  Throughout history, the Jew who remains separate is spared much.  In the Middle Ages, the ghettos and anti-Jewish persecution prevented Jews from becoming murderers and torturers like others.  True, they were considered too inferior to become officials and knights, but, by the same token, their hands did not become blood-stained.  And their ghettos often protected them from the vengeance of conquerors because they were not contaminated by the corruption of their host countries.

14:13  “..there came a fugitive”  – Tradition identifies the fugitive with Og, king of Bashan.  Exactly what he told Abram is not recorded.  Presumably he related to him the course of the battle: how the five kings were defeated, how Sodom was taken and its residents, including Lot, were taken prisoner.

His intention in telling him was not pure.  He knew that the righteous Abram would not sit idly by once he became aware that his nephew was in peril.  He, therefore, told him this news because he wished to incite Abram to engage the kings in battle with the expectation that Abram would be killed so that he himself might marry Sarai. (Midrash; Rashi)

The Midrash continues: ‘By your life!’ said the Holy One, Blessed be He, ‘(Although your intentions were evil), you will be rewarded for your journey (to inform Abram in Hebron) by being granted long life.  (He was still alive in the time of Moses).  But for your wicked scheme, intending Abram’s death, you will see myriads of his descendants into whose hands you will ultimately fall (Numbers 32:33).

14:14  As soon as Abram heard Lot was being held captive, the Spirit of God rested on him, and he bravely armed his trained ones. Through this, Abraham realized that the main reason Lot was taken captive was because he was Abraham’s kinsman.  At its source, their hatred was towards Abraham himself, and would intensify unless it was checked.  Therefore, he was even more determined to act against them.

Initially Abraham had complacently trusted in God to save his nephew.  However, he heard that, due to Lot’s strong resemblance to him, people were boasting that Abraham himself had been captured, and that Nimrod’s easy victory proved the falsehood of the stories that Abraham had been miraculously saved from the furnaces of Ur.  That such blasphemies could circulate was a desecration of God’s Name; Abraham immediately armed his men and set out.

“..three hundred and eighteen..”  – Abraham did not seek the assistance of Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre relying instead on himself and the disciples he had raised in the service of God.

Harav David Cohen comments that the nature of the war dictated that Abraham take his disciples, but not his allies.  Only those trained by Abraham to recognize God’s omnipotence could fearlessly do battle against infinitely superior forces.  Such faith could not be expected of Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre.

14:15  Sforno explains that Abraham chose the night in order to throw them into confusion and at the same time to hide the smallness of his own army.

According to the Midrashic interpretation cited by Rashi, the night was divided for him: during its first half a miracle was wrought for him (and he defeated the enemy), and the second half was reserved for the miracle which would occur at midnight in behalf of his children, in Egypt (Exodus 12:29).

14:16  Abraham’s Triumphant Return –  The verse does not specify ‘the possessions of Sodom and Gomorrah’ but states generally ‘all the possessions’, to indicate that Abraham recaptured the spoils that had been taken from all the nations they had plundered.

He brought back the men and women as stated in this verse, but not the children.  These he left there (rather than return them to their fathers’ idolatrous ways.)  They then arose and converted to the true faith (Midrash).

14:17  “..Valley of Shaveh..King’s Valley..”  – According to the Midrashic interpretation the valley was so called because it was there that all the nations unanimously agreed to accept Abraham as king and leader over them.  (Rashi).

The Midrash states: Upon Abraham’s triumphant return, all the peoples gathered.  They cut down cedars, built a platform and set him on top while uttering praises before him (23:6) “Hear us, my Lord – You are a prince of God among us.’  They said: ‘You are a king over us, you are a God over us!’ But he replied: ‘The world does not lack its King, and the world does not lack its God!’.

14:18  Melchizedek is unanimously identified by the Sages as Shem, son of Noah.  He was so called because he was a king (melech) over a place known for its righteousness (zedek); a place which would not tolerate any form of injustice or abomination for an extended time (Radak); or according to Ramban, because he ruled over the future site of the Temple, the home of zedek, the righteous Shechinah, which was known, even then to be sacred.  Thus Melchizedek might designate him as king of the place of zedek, righteousness.

That Shem was known by this title is not unusual.  The kings of Jerusalem were called by the titles of ‘Melchizedek’ or ‘Adonizedek’ as in Joshua 10:1, just as the kings of Egypt were designated by the common title of Pharaoh, and those of the Philistines as Abimelech (Ralbag).

Rabbi Alshich elaborates on this issue with further detail: Verse 17 which mentions the king of Sodom going out to meet Abraham, should have been followed by verse 21: ‘And the king of Sodom said to Abraham’.  Why was the smooth flow of the narrative interrupted with the episode of Melchizedek?

The interpretation of the episode with Melchizedek is inserted just at this point to emphasize the contrast between the king of Sodom and Melchizedek.  The king of Sodom did not go forth to meet Abraham in personal gratitude but, as the verse says, met him in the Valley of Shaveh, where, as the Midrash relates (see verse 17) all the peoples had unanimously gathered to praise and proclaim Abraham king.  Everyone tumultuously received Abraham – and the king of Sodom merely joined them, though he was the only one who was personally indebted to Abraham.  And furthermore, as the verse implies, he came empty-handed.

This is in sharp contrast to Melchizedek.  As a priest, should have been the recipient rather than the dispenser of gifts; nevertheless he went forth bearing gifts, though not compelled to do so.

As Hirsch explains: The king of Sodom must have felt very humiliated at his defeat and subsequent rescue by Abraham.  Still, after the victory had been won, he came out to meet Abraham as though they were on equal terms – as king.  He ‘demands’ – for this is what a Sodomite king understands.  It does not dawn on him that he has a responsibility to refresh the exhausted, hungry man with a piece of bread and a drink of wine.  Such decency is not included in the code of conduct of His Majesty of Sodom!

By Melchizedek bringing out bread and wine, he also demonstrated that he bore Abraham no malice for having slain his offspring.

14:19  The Sages take special note of the fact that Melchizedek first blessed Abram – as if the thanks for the victory went to ‘him’ – and only in the next verse did he bless God: The Holy One, Blessed be He intended to bring forth the priesthood from Shem (identified with Melchizedek) but because he gave precedence in his blessing to Abraham over God, He brought it forth from Abraham, (for when Melchizedek had blessed Abraham and then God, Abraham had said to him: ‘Is a servant’s blessing to be given precedence over his Master’s?’

God gave the priesthood to Abraham as it is written: Psalm 110:4 “Hashem said ‘You are a priest forever after the manner of Melchizedek’ which means, ‘because of the words of Melchizedek whereby he gave Abraham prominence.’

14:20  Abram gave Melchizedek a tenth of everything.  In reward to Abraham for giving tithes from all, the three great pillars of the world, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, enjoyed prosperity.  Of Abraham it is written (24:1) ‘And Hashem blessed Abraham in all things; of Isaac it is written (27:33) “I have eaten of all”; of Jacob it says (33:11) “Hashem has dealt graciously with me and I have all.’ (Midrash)

It is also important to know that all three Patriarchs gave tithes: Abraham in this verse, Isaac in 26:12 and Jacob in 28:22.

There are reasons for the various tithes.  The respective reasons correspond to the virtues of the respective Patriarchs:

  • the tithe to the poor, (commandment 66) ‘so that God’s creatures become accustomed to the attribute of mercy’.  (This attribute corresponds to Abraham)
  • the First Tithe (to the Levites) (commandment 395) to assist the Levites for God chose Levi, from among his brothers for His service.’ (Isaac represents the ideal of service.)
  • the Tithe from animals which must be brought to Jerusalem (commandment 360) ‘for God chose the Jewish people and desires for the sake of His righteousness that they all engage in Torah study’ .. therefore He instructed them to go to Jerusalem, the center of Torah.  (Jacob represents Torah study.)

14:21  Up until this point, the king of Sodom had requested nothing of Abraham.  But when he saw Abraham’s generosity in giving tithe to Melchizedek, he mustered up the courage to ask for the prisoners, as an act of charity (Ramban). 

The king of Sodom must have recognized that as the victor, Abraham had the right to dispose of the rescued people however he desired.  The king of Sodom sought ‘an act of charity’, a request precipitated by Abraham’s generosity in dispensing tithes to Melchizedek.

Some Sages take Abraham to task for complying with the request ‘give me the people’, for had he kept the people with him, he would have taught them to know God.

Abraham’s rationale is returning the people was apparently that they were of wicked stock and no good would come of them in any event.  And, the Midrash does state regarding verse 16 that Abraham returned adults only.  It was to his credit that he kept the children behind and eventually did covert them to honor God.

14:22  “I lift up my hand to Hashem,”  – Abarbanel perceives the act of raising the hands toward heaven as an indication of one’s affirmation that one’s reliance is on our Father in Heaven.  Thus, in response to the heathen king of Sodom, Abraham raises his hands away from all the gods, signifying that this faith is directed only to the Highest, to Hashem Who, for him, is the Only One.  The implied meaning then is: ‘I lift up my hand to Hashem’ as if to say, ‘When I require gifts or favor, I will raise my hands in supplication to God for He is the Most High, Master of heaven and earth.  Therefore, it is only from Him that I will accept gifts – from you, king of Sodom, I will accept not even a thread or a shoe strap.

14:23  ‘a thread or a shoe strap;’  – The Talmud (Chullin 88b) notes that as a reward for having refused to accept the thread and shoe strap, Abraham’s children received two precepts: the thread of blue (Numbers 15:38 referring to the precept of tzitzis – knotted tassels which hang from a tallit, the Jewish prayer shawl.  The strings and knots are a physical representation of the 613 commandments.)  The second precept was the strap of tefillin – a small box containing small scrolls with Torah verses which have straps to attach to an arm.

The halachah, a Jewish religious law, is that the left shoe should be tied before the right because the strap of tefillin is tied upon the left arm.  The general rule, however, gives precedence to the right because Scripture preferred it in the Temple service.  Therefore, for example, the right shoe is put on first.  Why is the generally preferred order not followed with regard to tying as well.  The answer is indicated by the Talmudic dictum that for refusing a shoe strap, Abraham was rewarded with the strap of teffilin.  Therefore, a shoe strap has a special relationship to tefillin: since tefillin are tied on the left arm, the left in this case takes precedence and the shoe lace is tied first.

Additionally, according to other Midrashim, the reward for Abraham denying himself thread and shoe strap ‘resulted in even more precepts:

  • For denying himself the thread, his children were rewarded with the Tabernacle which was adorned with blue and purple wool.  Thread also alludes to the sacrifices: a thread-like scarlet line encircled the middle of the altar marking the division between the blood sprinkled on the upper part of the altar and the lower.  In reward for ‘thread’ his children were also rewarded with the scarlet thread which turned white on Yom Kippur (as a sign that Israel’s sins were forgiven).  (See Leviticus 16:10 and Isaiah 1:18)
  • For denying himself the shoe strap his children were rewarded with the precept of Chalitzah of which it says (Deuteronomy 25:9) ‘She shall loosen his shoe from his foot.  It also refers to Passover sacrifice’ which was eaten while wearing shoes (Exodus 12:11).

Genesis – Chapter 13

13:1-3  “..and he proceeded on his journey..” –  On his return trip he retraced his steps and lodged in the same places where he stayed on the outward journey – retracing his former route.  This teaches good manners: One should not change his lodging.

The Talmud explains that one’s lodging should not be changed unless one is the object of great harassment and anguish.  This is because a boarder who changes his lodging discredits both himself (because he will acquire the reputation of a man hard to please or of a man who acted improperly and was refused further lodging); and he discredits the lodging place which will be regarded as unsatisfactory.  According to the masters of the Mussar Movement, Abraham’s behavior displays a lesson in frugality.  When he went to Egypt in the midst of famine, he would have chosen inexpensive lodgings in order to conserve his dwindling resources.  Upon his return he was exceedingly wealthy, yet he did not change his style of living.

Malbim perceives in the use of the plural ‘journeys’ that Abraham’s intention was not to journey to one permanent destination, but to visit many places where he could lecture and spread the Word of the True God.

13:4  This informs us that he did not pitch his tent on a different part of the mountain but near the very spot where he had previously built an altar.  This teaches that it is proper for a person to select a permanent place for his prayer and divine service.  One’s heart is better attuned in a familiar place (Radak).

13:6  “..the land could not support them..”  – According to the Midrash the inability of the land to support them went beyond natural considerations:  ‘Could it really be – a land that supported such a large population could not support them?  It was the quarrels between their shepherds that was the true cause.  Even the most abundant land cannot suffice for quarreling parties (Midrash HaGadol).

In truth, Abraham and Lot were separated by great ideological differences as alluded to by the Sages who interpreted the phrase (verse 11) as meaning that Lot removed himself from the Ancient One of the Universe saying ‘I desire neither Abraham nor his God.’  And on verse 14, ‘As long as the wicked Lot was in Abraham’s company, God did not communicate with Abraham.’  Therefore, the verse is to be interpreted: The land could not support them to dwell together because of their abundant possessions; neither could they themselves dwell together because of the ideological differences which separated them (Malbim).

13:7  They quarreled because Lot’s shepherds were wicked and they grazed their flocks on other people’s pastures.  When Abraham’s shepherds rebuked them for this act of robbery, Lot’s shepherds contended that they were within their rights because the land had been given to Abraham (12:7).  Since Abraham was childless, Lot was his heir; therefore, it was not robbery.  The Torah specifically negates their contention by stating ‘the Canaanites and Perizzites were then dwelling in the land’ to emphasize that Abraham was not yet the legitimate owner (Rashi). 

This is elaborated upon more fully in the Midrash.  Abraham’s cattle would go out to pasture muzzled so as not to graze in other’s fields whereas those of Lot were not muzzled.  Abraham’s herdsmen would chide them: “Has then robbery been permitted?”  To which Lot’s herdsmen would reply: ‘Thus did God say to Abraham ‘Unto your descendants will I give this land’, and Abraham is as barren as a mule who cannot begret children.  Therefore when Abraham dies, Lot will be his heir, even if they eat of other’s pastures, they are eating their own because the land will ultimately be theirs.’

God said to them: ‘I have said that I give the land to his descendants.  When? – When the seven nations are uprooted from it (see 15:18).  Meanwhile, however, ‘the Canaanites and Perizzites were then dwelling in the land.’  (The version in Pesikta Rabbasi concludes: ‘…I promised the land to Abraham’s descendants, and not to this wicked man (Lot), as you imagine … and only when I drive the Canaanite and Perizzite from its midst.  Abraham has still not been given children and the Canaanite and Perizzite are still the rightful owners, and you still say thus?)

13:8  Scripture speaks in praise of Abraham.  Although it was arrogant and presumptuous of Lot to cause offense to Abraham, his protector and teacher, Abraham nevertheless pleaded with him ‘let there be no strife.’  What is more, Abraham gave Lot the choice to settle wherever he wished.

B’chor Shor explains it as “The fact that we are related makes our quarrels a source of embarrassment.  Our neighbors will say: They cannot even dwell peacefully and tolerate one another as brother – how will they then act to strangers?  They are a wicked people!”

13:9  “..please separate from me..”  – Abraham did not want a total and unbreachable rift between himself and Lot; what he sought was a separation of ways with a promise that he would still come to Lot’s aid should it be necessary.  And as Rashi comments: Lot was ultimately in need of him (14:14) and Abraham, indeed came to his aid.

13:10  From his vantage point atop the mountain where they had encamped (12:8; 13:3), Lot gazed across the whole area, and his gaze rested on the fertile Jordan plain (Radak).  He based his decision only on the fertility of the area and paid no heed to the evil of his future neighbors.

Lot chose the area because a land which is so well irrigated is unlikely to be affected by drought and is good for pasture (Ramban).

Harav David Feinstein comments that the basis of Lot’s choice should be understood in the light of the Midrashic interpretation to the next verse that Lot departed from the Ancient One of the World.  Lot saw a well watered plain, an area so rich and abundant that there was no need for God’s assistance or intervention, nor would its inhabitants be required to pray for God’s mercy. 

Conversely, during Israel’s formative years in the Wilderness, God gave the manna day by day rather than once a year or once a month, in order to teach the people that they must look to Him constantly for their sustenance.

“..going toward Zoar.”  – Zoar is the name of a city to the south of the Dead Sea.  When God was about to destroy Sodom, Lot was allowed to escape to Zoar, ‘a little city’.  Therefore the name of the city was call Zoar – meaning ‘little’.  Zoar is also mentioned in Deuteronomy 34:3 as being the southernmost locality seen by Moses when he was shown Eretz Yisrael from Mount Nebo.

13:11  “..they departed from one another.”  – There is a great prophetic significance to this statement.  Lot, in whom were hidden the sparks which would one day produce Ruth, the mother of Israel’s royal family, did not remain in the Camp of the Shechinah.  He departed from Abram, and in time the rift would become absolute and irreversible, reaching the point where his male descendants would be prohibited from entering the congregation of Israel (Deuteronomy 23:4 – An Ammorite or Moabite (they were descendants of Lot) shall not enter the assembly of Hashem).

13:12  “Abram remained in the land..”  – In a more positive vein, the Zohar perceives Abraham’s remaining in Canaan as serving as a sign of his desire to cling to the place which was to become the fountainhead of faith – Eretz Yisrael – and to learn wisdom so he could cleave to his Maker.  Lot, on the other hand, dwelt in the cities of the plain and pitched his tents as far as Sodom, among the sinners who abandoned all faith.  Thus, each chose a path befitting his own particular nature.

13:13  “the people of Sodom were wicked and sinful..”  – Lot did not refrain from living with them.  They were wicked with their bodies (adulterous), and sinful with their money (by withholding financial assistance from the poor) (Rashi).

Since the Canaanites were themselves steeped in wickedness and sin, the Torah adds, when describing the Sodomites’ sinfulness, the adjective ‘exceedingly’.  This emphasizes that their wickedness exceeded even that of the Canaanites which will be described in more detail later.

13:14  The Repetition of the Promise….  “..look out from where you are..”  He did not even have to move from that spot!  God caused him miraculously to view the entire land from his present vantage point.  In this respect Abraham was greater even than Moses who, before he was shown the land, was told to ‘get up to the top of Pisgah’ (Deuteronomy 3:27).

13:15  “For all the land that you can see..”  – Bethel, where Abraham was standing, is in the central region of the Land.  From that vantage point he was afforded a magnificent panoramic view of the whole country (Hoffmann).

“..forever.”  Hirsch comments – by this promise God does not proclaim that the Land will always be in their possession, but that they and the land will always be destined for one another, just as here it was given to Abraham without his ever taking possession of it.

13:16  Clearly, the verse does not refer to an enormous Jewish population during any particular generation.  Jews were never consistently prominent numerically – Deuteronomy 7:7: “It is not because you are more numerous ….indeed, you are the fewest of all peoples.”  Rather our verse refers to the countless total of all the generations of an immortal nation which will flourish throughout history (Hirsch).

     The comparison to dust of the earth is explained in the Midrash:

  • Just as the dust of the earth is found from one end of the world to the other, so shall your children be found from one end of the world to the other;
  • As the dust of the earth can be blessed only through water, so will your children be blessed for the sake of Torah which is likened to water (Isaiah 55:1);
  • As the dust of the earth wears out even metal utensils yet itself endures forever, so will Israel exist forever while the nations of the world will cease to be;
  • As the dust of the earth is trodden upon, so will your children be downtrodden under the heel of foreign powers…
  • But as the dust outlives those who tread upon it, so God said to Abraham, shall your sons outlive the nations of the world that persecute them.

13:17  “..walk about the land..”  – Ramban offers two interpretations:

  • This was not a command to Abraham that he walk through the Land.  Rather it was a promise of God’s protection, telling Abraham that he could feel free to get up and walk fearlessly throughout the land for to you will I give it  – eventually it would be his.
  • This was a command.  The act of walking through the Land would denote taking possession of the gift (12:6).  Abraham was now in the east; when he later went to the land of the Philistines in the west, he thereby fulfilled the command.

13:18“..in the plains of the Mamre..”  – Mamre was the name of the owner (Rashi).  He was an Emorite, as it says (14:13).  However, whenever the Torah mentions Mamre – as in 23:19 and 35:27 – it refers to the name of a city (Ramban).

Genesis – Chapter 12

God’s Call to Abraham

Verse 1 is one of the ten trials of faith which God tested Abram, all of which Abram withstood.  The commentators differ on the precise identity of the ‘ten trials’, for more than ten incidents in Abram’s life could be so designated.

According to Avos d’Rabbi Nosson 33 he was tested:

  • Twice when he had to move (once here, and again in verse 10 when, after God’s glowing promise of a good life in Canaan, Abram was forced to go to Egypt in the face of a famine);
  • Twice in connection with his two sons (the difficult decision to heed Sarah’s insistence that he drive away Ishmael (21:10) and second, in the supreme test of binding his beloved son Isaac to the altar in preparation to sacrifice him (22:1-2);
  • Twice with his two wives (when Sarah was taken from him to Pharaoh’s palace (12:15); and when he was required to drive Hagar from his home (21:10).  (An alternate interpretation includes the banishment of Hagar with that of Ishmael as a single test.  In its place among the list of the trials is the abduction of Sarah to the palace of Abimelech 20-2);
  • Once, on the occasion of his war with the kings (14:14);
  • Once, at the Covenant between the Parts (15:7) when he was told that his descendants would be enslaved and exiled for four hundred years);
  • Once, in Ur Kaskim (when he was thrown into a fiery furnace by Nimrod); and
  • Once, at the covenant of Circumcision (17:9) (which was an unprecedented act and, at his advanced age, a dangerous operation).

12:1  “..to the land that I will show you” – In order to keep him in suspense and thereby make the destination more beloved in his eyes, God did not specify it at the time of the command.  God also wished to reward him for every step he took. 

Midrash Tanchuma adds that having Abram embark on a journey and withholding the identity of the goal made the trial even more difficult.  It called for unqualified devotion, and it carried with it much greater reward.  As Malbim explains – It is less of a hardship for one to relocate if he knows his destination.  It was already Abram’s intention to head toward Canaan, and had God revealed His will that Canaan was, indeed the final destination, his journey would not have proven selfless devotion to the will of God.

12:2  “..I will make of you a great nation;”  – Rashi notes that God gave Abraham the assurances in this verse to reassure him regarding three detrimental results usually caused by travel: it diminishes the possibility of having children; it diminishes one’s wealth; and it lessens one’s renown (because while traveling one cannot easily perform deeds deserving of fame (Maharzu).  Abraham therefore needed these three blessings: God promised him children, wealth, and fame.

I will bless you,”  – This interpretation is based on the Midrash.  The basis for the relationship between ‘blessing’ and ‘wealth’ may be the verse in Proverbs 10:22: “The blessings of Hashem makes one rich…”  which is interpreted to mean that a blessing, unless its nature is otherwise specified, is assumed to make one rich – “prospering in God”.

“and make your name great,”  – The Midrash explains that this promise of greatness meant that Abraham’s coinage would be accepted throughout the world like that of the greatest kings, a distinction held by only four persons: Abraham, Joshua, David, and Mordechai.

“and you shall be a blessing.”  – According to Rashi, following the Midrash, the meaning is: the power of blessing will be in your hand and you will bless whomever you wish – you shall become the synonym of ‘blessing’.

Is there a greater blessing for a father than that his name and memory should remain upon the lips and hearts of his descendants for all time?

12:3  “I will bless those who bless you and curse him who curses you..”  – “Those” who bless you are in the pural: “him” who curses you is in the singular for they will be few. (Ibn Ezra)

Ramban discusses the connotation of God’s blessings to Abraham in these verses.  Touching upon a theme from his commentary to 11:28 Ramban notes that before recording God’s promise to Abraham that he would be totally provided for, the Torah should have explained that Abraham was deserving because of his righteousness and love of God (or by recounting his miraculous salvation from the furnace of Kasdim thanks to his total faith and self-sacrifice.)  Obviously, the rewards are too great and unprecedented to be accounted for simply because Abraham left his native land.  We must seek the guidance of the Oral Tradition to justify them.

Ramban continues that the intent of the verses may be that God would now compensate Abraham for the suffering and evil perpetrated upon him by wicked people of Kasdim.  God would establish Abraham in Canaan where he could worship God and proclaim His greatness.  Then those who formerly abused and cursed him would appreciate his greatness and bless themselves by him.  The Torah, however, did not provide us explicitly with this background in order not to elaborate on the opinions of idolators in their controversies with Abraham regarding issues of faith, just as it dealt only briefly with the sinfulness of the generations of Enosh (4:26) and their innovations in instituting idolatry.

12:4  “…and Lot went with him.”  – Since Lot’s father, Haran, had died in Ur Kasdim for having sided with Abraham, the orphaned Lot remained in the care of his uncle, Abraham.

According to the Midrash, there was anger in heaven against our father Abraham when he asked his nephew Lot to leave his company.  “He makes everyone cleave to Me,’ said God, ‘yet he does not make his nephew cleave to Me!’ 

Why then did Abraham show compassion for Lot?  Because he foresaw that David and the Messiah were destined to descend from him, so he took him along.  Also, because it was in defense of Abraham that Haran was killed, and Lot orphaned.  Lot was his brother’s son and his wife’s brother, and Abraham showed compassion, but God was nevertheless displeased.  The compassion was misplaced.

12:5  “Abram took his wife Sarai..”  – ‘Took’ means that he persuaded her to accompany him, with soothing, gentle words, because a man is not permitted to take his wife with him to another country without her consent.  He therefore persuaded her pointing out to her the evil deeds of their contemporaries.

“and the people they had acquired (made)..)  – This refers to those whom they had converted to the true faith and brought under the ‘wings of the Shechinah’, for Abraham converted the men and Sarah converted the women.  They (the converts) are therefore regarded as though they (Abraham and Sarah) had ‘made’ them.  This explains the plural form: they had made, for both Abraham and Sarah had roles to play in the conversions (Midrash).  The verse, as it is written, is to teach you that he who brings near to God and converts him is as though he had created them.

12:6  “..through the land to a place called Shechem..”  – Rashi comments that Abraham went to Shechem in anticipation of the future, in order to pray in behalf of Jacob’s sons, who would one day fight against Shechem.

In addition to the reason given by Rashi, that he prayed for his grandchildren, Abraham’s encampment there (even before the promise of verse 7 that he would be given the land) was an indication that Shechem would be the first place to be conquered by his descendants (the sons of Jacob, 34:25) even before they would merit full possession of the land, an event that was not to take place for about another three hundred years later.  For this reason it states that the Canaanites were then in the land, (to indicate that he symbolically took possession even though they were not yet ousted.) From there he journeyed and encamped between Beth-El and Ai, the latter being the first place conquered by Joshua (by use of the sword.  The fall of Jericho was with the aid of a miracle.)  The story of the Patriarchs will be filled with such symbolism.  (Review the Overview on the Patriarchs.)

Radak points out that the significance of including the information in the narrative is to let us know God’s miracles.  Abraham, a stranger, sojourned in the land with his family, herds of cattle, and ‘souls’ he made in Charan – an imposing entourage.  His cattle would graze in strange areas and his people would require sustenance.  But, although the Canaanites were then in the land, they did not harm him – a miracle.

Abraham is told by God to leave his home and family with the promise that he will be blessed and a great nation will spring forth from him.  The trial is great and he journeys to Canaan, as his inner spirit guides him.  He tours the land, awaiting a divine word, a sign, but all the Torah tells is ‘the Canaanites were then in the land’.  The land would not be Abraham’s for the taking.  What of God’s promise?  Others were living in the land! – But Abraham’s faith was not shaken.  When God’s promise is communicated to him in the following verse, Abraham does not doubt for a moment that his children will, indeed, inherit the land.

Ramban, on the other hand, sees this reference as alluding to the fear felt by Abraham when he saw the Canaanites, that bitter and impetuous nation dwelling there.  Abraham needed God’s assurances in the following verse, after which he built an altar to God and worshipped him openly and fearlessly.

Additionally, this detail prefaces why Abraham found it necessary to move on again after God had appeared to him.  The Canaanites were there, and engaged in battle, and Abraham felt it necessary to keep moving (Bertinoro).

There is something further implicit here:  The Canaanites were then in the land, but in the future they will not be there.  That is why in the very next verse he is promised ‘to your seed will I give this land’.

12:7  “Hashem appeared to Abram..”  – Hashem made Himself visible to Abram:  The stress is strongly on this visibility.  The expression states that, not only was the Voice of God heard, but God Himself, so to speak, appeared, emerging from invisibility to visibility; revealing Himself.  This is of far reaching importance because the Torah thereby specifically refutes the view of those who deny actual revelations and consider them products of human imagination and ecstasy.  The means by which God spoke to human beings is an eternal mystery.  It is enough to recognize that He did indeed speak and reveal Himself to them in some tangible way (Hirsch).

The commentators also point out previously, that outside the Land, Abraham had heard only the divine voice.  When he arrived in the land that was destined to be dedicated to the service of God, he was given the additional privilege of a Divine vision, the nature of which is not described.  This occurred in the year 2023 – after the first two millennia from the time of creation.  Then began the period leading up to the giving of the Torah.  Only then did God reveal Himself to the Patriarchs of the nation to whom He would give His Torah.

Since God appeared to him there, Abraham knew that it was a site worthy of an altar.  He built an altar and offered upon it a sacrifice to give thanks that God had appeared to him.  This was the first time God had appeared to him in any form of prophetic vision.  The command to leave his home came to him in a nocturnal dream or through the Holy Spirit…..And he thus showed his gratitude for having been privileged to reach a level of prophetic vision.

12:8  “From there he relocated..”  – He chose the hill country to escape the battles that were raging throughout the country at the time (Arbarbanel; Malbim).  Sforno suggests that he worked also to situate himself between two cities so that many people would come and hear him call upon the name of Hashem. 

“..and he built an altar..)  – He prophetically perceived that his descendants would stumble there through Achan’s transgression (see Joshua, Chapter 7), he therefore prayed for them. (Rashi)  His prayer proved indispensible.  As the Talmud, Sanhedrin 44b comments: “One should always offer up prayer before misfortune comes; for had not Abraham anticipated trouble and prayers between Bethel and Ai, there would not have remained of Israel’s sinners (at the battle of Ai in the days of Joshua) a single survivor.

Ramban elaborates further, interpreting that Abraham publicly proclaimed Hashem’s Name before the altar, teaching people to know God and recognize His Presence.  In Ur Kasdim he did the same but they refused to listen.  Now, however, after arriving in the land concerning which God promised him “I will bless them that bless you” (v3), he made it his practice to teach of Hashem and proclaim His Majesty.

12:9  The Torah does not specify the exact reason for Abraham’s moving on.  Perhaps the Canaanite civil war (Chapter 14) reached the vicinity of Ai…or perhaps having proclaimed God’s Name publicly and thus drawing many supporters, Abraham’s preaching was sought by others who thirsted for God’s Word, influencing him to move on to other areas, spending a short time in each to further spread the true faith.

Abram in Egypt – Immediately after Abram settled in Canaan, God forced him to undergo a new trial.  Famine compelled him to leave the Land and move to Egypt.  There Sarai was put at risk – but Hashem saved her from Pharaoh, and she returned safely to Canaan with her family.  There, at the very same altar that he had built in Bethel before going to Egypt, Abraham proclaimed the Name of Hashem demonstrating that, though sorely tried, his faith in God was undiminished.

The Midrash comments that God said to Abraham: ‘Go forth and tread out a path for your children.’  Thus you find that whatever is written in connection with Abraham foreshadowed the future.

Abraham went down to Egypt to sustain himself during a famine, the Egyptians oppressed him and attempted to rob him of his wife for which God punished them with great plagues; Abraham was then loaded with gifts and Pharaoh even ordered his men to see that he left the country safely.

Similarly, his descendants went down to Egypt because of a famine; the Egyptians oppressed them with the intention of eventually taking their wives from them, this being the purpose of Pharaoh’s edict to spare the daughters (Exodus 1:22).  They were to be spared for immoral purposes.  However, it is clearly implied from Scripture and explained by the Sages that Israel maintained its morality.  But God avenged them by inflicting great plagues, and He brought them forth with great wealth, as the Egyptians finally pressed them to leave the country.

12:10  “There was famine in the land..”  – This was one of the ten trials; it was the first famine that had ever occurred since Creation, and its purpose was to test whether Abraham would protest God’s justice.  For Abraham had followed God’s command scrupulously: he left his father, his relatives, and his native land and went to Canaan where he had received God’s blessings.  Yet, scarcely upon his arrival there, he was forced to leave it.  One might have expected him to doubt God; but instead he went down to Egypt to sojourn there.  Egypt was not affected by famines because it is irrigated by the Nile and its fertility is not dependent upon rain water.

12:11  As they drew nearer to their destination, certain realizations and apprehensions surfaced in Abraham’s mind.  As Sforno notes, Egypt was known for its immorality.  Abarbanel points out that Abraham was only a sojourner, and at the mercy of the Egyptians who might lust after his wife and do away with him. 

Ramban suggests that Abraham grew fearful because they were approaching a royal city where it was the custom to bring a very beautiful woman to the king and, if he was pleased with her, to slay her husband through some contrived charge. 

12:12  “then they will kill me,”  –  The commentators ask: If both murder and adultery are prohibited, is it not out of place to think that the Egyptians would commit the crime of murder in order to avoid the crime of adultery?  Why wouldn’t they spare Abraham and simply take Sarah away from him?  The commentators explain that Abraham was convinced that the immoral Egyptians would rationalize and decide that it is better to murder once, thereby freeing a woman from her husband, then it was to let him live and commit countless acts of adultery with his still married wife.  Abraham further feared that if they murdered him, she would remain without a protector.  Therefore, at all costs, he must remain alive.

they will keep you alive.”  – A euphemism!!  They will keep you alive for a fate worse than death (Hirsch).

12:13  “Please say that you are my sister,”  – Was she then his sister?  She was his brother’s daughter (11:29).  But a man often calls his kinswoman ‘sister’. (Midrash haGadol)

Ramban suggests that it would seem from the literal meaning of the verses that Sarah did not consent to describe herself as Abraham’s sister, but that it was Abraham who gave the information (verse 19).  She was taken to Pharaoh without being asked about her relationship to Abraham, and she offered no information.  Therefore, when her identity was discovered, Pharaoh blamed only Abraham for the deception.  But Pharaoh directed no accusation against Sarah, for it was proper that she not contradict her husband, but instead remain silent.

Abraham’s choice of deception instead of fighting to protect Sarah was not a resignation of his responsibility for her safety.  On the contrary, he knew full well that were he to be killed defending her – as would have been a virtual certainly – then her own plight would have been hopeless.  She would have been at the mercy of the depraved Egyptians.

12:14  “with Abram’s coming to Egypt..”  – Note that only Abraham is mentioned as coming into Egypt.  In a verse where Sarah is clearly of prime concern and she certainly should have been mentioned along with Abraham, unlike many of the previous verses where it sufficed to mention Abraham alone as the head of the family, Rashi cites the tradition that Abraham had hidden Sarah in a trunk.  She was discovered when it was opened by the customs officials to assess the duty to be paid.

Rashi’s explanation is based on the Midrash:  Where was Sarah?  He had locked her in a chest.  When he came to the customs house the officer demanded that Abraham pay the custom duties.  Abraham agreed.  ‘You carry garments in that box’, he said.  ‘Then I will pay the duty on garments’, Abraham replied: ‘You are carrying silks’, he asserted.  ‘I will pay on silks’, Abraham replied.  But the officer grew suspicious and insisted that Abraham open the chest so he could personally inspect the contents.  As soon as he opened it the land of Egypt was irradiated with her beauty.  Sefer haYashar notes that putting Sarah into the chest was Abraham’s additional scheme in addition to his brother-sister plan, to minimize Sarah’s exposure at all cost.

12:15  Midrash Tanchuma records that when Abraham saw his wife being taken he wept and prayed and so did Sarah.  God answered that nothing would befall either of them, and further, He would make an example of Pharaoh and his household (verse 17).

12:16  “He treated Abram well for her sake,”  – The Talmud derives a moral lesson from the word – for her sake – indicating that prosperity in the home as well as the blessings of home life are dependent upon the wife.  It homiletically perceives God (not Pharaoh) as the implied subject and source of the goodness described on account of his wife, as it is written: “and he dealt well with Abram for her sake.”

Later Abraham vehemently refused to accept anything from the king of Sodom (14:23, even though he rightfully deserved a reward for having come to the Sodomite king’s aid), while here he accepted many valuable gifts from Pharaoh.  This apparent inconsistency must be viewed in the context of Abraham’s claim that Sarah was his sister and the implication that he would allow her to marry a suitable person.  Had he refused gifts, he would have aroused Pharaoh’s suspicions. (Hoffman)

“…slaves and maidservants..”  – Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korchah wrote: Because of Pharaoh’s love fore Sarah he wrote her a document giving her his wealth – in silver, gold, manservants, and land.  He also gave her the land of Goshen as a possession.  Therefore, the children of Israel later dwelt in the land of Goshen (47:27), which belonged to our mother Sarah.  He also gave her Hagar, his daughter from a concubine, as her handmaid.

As the Midrash (45:1) comments: When Pharaoh saw what was done on Sarah’s behalf to his own house (next verse), he took his daughter and gave her to Sarah, saying: ‘Better let my daughter be a handmaid in this house than a mistress in another house.’

12:17  “Hashem afflicted Pharaoh..”  – Rashi explains that Pharaoh was smitten with the plague of raathan (a debilitating skin disease) which makes cohabitation impossible.  This plague assured that Sarah’s chastity would be safeguarded from Pharaoh.  The others in his household were afflicted with other plagues and according to the Midrash, Sarah herself was the only one in the palace complex not afflicted.  This is what led Pharaoh to question whether Sarah was indeed unmarried. 

The night that Pharaoh was afflicted (with a plague that forced him to free Sarah) was (what would later be) the night of Passover.  This paralleled how God would later greatly afflict the Egyptians to force them to free the children of Israel.

(This, then, is yet another example of ‘whatever happened to the Patriarchs is an indication of what would happen to their children’.)

..because of Sarai, the wife of Abram.”  – The literal Hebrew translation of ‘because of’ is ‘by the word of’.  This follows the Midrash which interprets ‘by the word of Sarai’ as: ‘by the prayer of Sarai’ or ‘by the order of Sarai’.

All of that night Sarah lay prostrate on her face crying, ‘Sovereign of the Universe!  Abraham went forth from his land on Your assurance while I went forth with blind faith: Abraham is without this prison while I am within!’  God answered her, ‘Whatever I do, I do for your sake and all will declare “It is because of Sarai, Abram’s wife”.’

Rav Levi said: That entire night an angel stood, whip in hand.  When she ordered, ‘Strike!’ (i.e. inflict him) he struck, and when she ordered, ‘Desist!’, he desisted.  Why was Pharaoh punished?  Because she had told him she was a married woman, yet he would not leave her.  Furthermore, the Zohar adds that with each blow the angel said, ‘this is because of Sarai who is Abram’s wife!’  On learning that she was indeed Abram’s wife, Pharaoh immediately called for Abram.

“..wife of Abram”  – This verse comes to teach us that although Sarah gave the others the impression she was Abraham’s sister, to Pharaoh (as noted above) she revealed the truth thinking that the king would never stoop so low as to defile her if she told him she was a married woman.  But she was wrong; he would not heed her, saying that she was telling him this merely to put him off.  Therefore, God punished him with a debilitating skin disease which prevented any contact between the two.

12:18  Pharaoh pondered upon this strange and sudden outbreak of disease, which coincided with the time Sarah was taken to his house.  He suspected that Sarah was telling him the truth and the plague was indeed associated with her so he called Abraham and accused him.  He was not certain she was his wife but he made the accusations in order to draw the truth from Abraham (Ramban).

12:19  So, why did Abraham not answer Pharaoh – as he later did to Abimelech under similar circumstances (20:11,12) – and justify his actions by expressing his fears and explaining that, as his niece, she could truthfully be called his ‘sister’?

Abraham knew that he should not run the risk of further provoking the king’s anger by engaging him in conversation.  He did as the king told him: he took his wife and possessions and departed.  Compare this to the exchange in Chapter 20 where Abimelech conversed with Abraham and did not immediately permit him to leave.  There, Abraham did respond to the king.

Furthermore, Pharaoh’s order to ‘take her and go’ presents a striking parallel: As pointed out several times, the entire episode of Abraham in Egypt – when a successor of Pharaoh would say to Moses and Aaron (Exodus 12:32) ‘take..and go’.

12:20  “..and all that was his.”  – Pharaoh let them leave with all their property intact.  He did not even suggest that Abraham had taken the gifts under false pretenses and should therefore return them.

That he did not do so was one of the greatest miracles of the entire incident (Ramban).

It was thus God’s providential Mercy that not only did Pharaoh not punish Abraham, or even take back his gifts, but that Pharaoh was so afraid of incurring further punishment from God, that he even had his men escort Abraham and Sarah lest anyone molest them (Malbim).  It was also at this time that Pharaoh gave Hagar to Sarah as a maidservant.

Abarbanel summaries that among the moral lessons to be learned from the entire incident is that there are many plans in a man’s heart, but it is the purpose of Hashem that shall prevail  (Proverbs 19:21.  Witness the course of events: Abraham planned to escape a famine by fleeing to Egypt and save his wife with his scheme.  But events did not work out quite as he had planned, and in a short time he found fimself back in Canaan, sustained for the balance of the famine by the generosity of God “Whose eye is upon those who fear Him, upon those who hope in His loving kindness’ (Proverbs 33:18..)

Genesis – Chapter 11

The Tower and Dispersion

Rambam in Moreh 3:5 states that a fundamental principal of the Torah is that the universe was created out of nothing, and Adam was the forerunner of the human race.  Since the human race was later dispersed over all the earth, and divided into different families speaking very dissimilar languages, people might come to doubt that they could all have originated from one person.  Therefore the Torah records the genealogy of the nations, why they were dispersed, and the cause of the formation of their different languages.

The year of the following narrative is 1996 from Creation, 340 years after the Flood.  Noah and his children were still alive at the time, and Abraham, 48 years old, had already recognized his Creator.  All the national families were concentrated in present-day Iraq and they all spoke one language, the Holy Tongue (Rashi), the language with which the world was created (Mizrachi).

All the ingredients for greatness were there: The nations were united, they were in a central location, they spoke the Holy Tongue and – if they desired guidance in achieving holiness – they had Noah, Shem, and Abraham among them.  Instead, as happens so often in human history, they chose to ignore their spiritual advantages and turn to their opportunities for self-aggrandizement and power.  It seems ludicrous that people who had first-hand evidence of the Flood could have found grounds to rationalize a way of by-passing God’s control of events, but such is man’s capacity for self-deception that he can negate reality and build substance around a vacuum.

According to the Sages, Nimrod was the primary force behind this rebellion.  He planned to build a tower ascending to Heaven and from it wage war against God.  But though the Midrashim perceive sinister and idolatrous motives in this plan, the verses do not reveal the evil motives of the conspirators.  As for the memory of the Flood – which should have frightened them from confronting God – the builders of the tower rationalized that such an upheaval occurs only once every 1656 years, so that they had noting to fear from Divine intervention for another 1316 years, by which time they would have waged their ‘war’ against God and won.


11:2  “And to came to pass, when they migrated from the east..”  – The east was where Adam was created, and where mankind was concentrated before the Flood.  It would seem proper that Noah returned to his native land after he landed at Ararat which was also in the east.  It was by popular consent that they journeyed westward in order to find a place large enough to accommodate them all, lest they would have to disperse when they became numerous.

It must be remembered that Noah and his children were alive at this time and Abraham was forty-eight years old, having already recognized his Creator.  It is certain that they did not participate in the sinister plot of that generation although they might have been helpless to prevent it. (Radak).

“..they found a plain in the land of Shiner..”  –  They found a spacious plain, free of mountain and rocks, and many miles across.  Because they saw that the area was capable of sustaining them they settled there and decided to build a city large enough to accommodate them (Abarbanel).


11:3  “..let us make bricks..”  – The intent of the verse is that they would manufacture bricks – not sun dried bricks, but substantial kiln-fired bricks of great durability.

11:4  “And they said..”  – The pronoun ‘they’ refers to the counsel of the princes who wished to make Nimrod king over the whole human race (Sforno).

According to Chullin 89a, it was Nimrod himself who primarily initiated the scheme, and as the Talmud notes in Erubin 53a: ‘Why was he called Nimrod? – Because in his reign he led all the world in rebellion against God.”

Note: The Talmud states the following.. After the Flood they multiplied greatly and they were all one people, one heart, and one language.  They despised the pleasant land (Eretz Israel) and journeyed east, and settled in Shiner.

R’ Akivah said: They cast off the kingdom of Heaven and appointed Nimrod over themselves: a slave son of a slave – are not all the sons of Ham slaves?  Woe to the land where a slave rules?

By virtue of Adam’s garments which passed on to him he established himself as a mighty hunter.

Nimrod said to his subjects: Come, let us build a great city for ourselves lest we be scattered over the earth.  Let us build a great tower in its midst ascending to heaven and we will war against Him, for His power is only in the heavens and we will make us a great name on the earth.

There were three sorts of rebels among the builders: One said, ‘Let us ascend and dwell there’; the second said, ‘Let us ascend and serve idols’; and the third said, ‘Let us ascend and wage war with God.’  The first group: God dispersed; the second group: He turned into apes and spirits; and the third group: He confused their languages (Sanhedrin 109a).

Many years were spent building the Tower.  The ascending steps were on the east, and the descending steps were on the west.  It reached so great a height that it took a year to mount to the top.  A brick was, therefore, most precious in the sight of the builders than a human being.  If a man fell and died they paid no attention to him; but if a brick fell down they wept because it would take a year to replace it.  They were so intent in their project that they would not permit a pregnant woman to interrupt her work when her hour of travail came upon her.

They would constantly shoot arrows toward heaven, which, when returning, were seen to be covered with blood.  They were thus fortified in their delusion, and they cried ‘We have slain all who are in heaven!’

But God did this to cause them to err, and to have occasion to punish them for their rebellious ways….

“..lest we be dispersed across the whole earth.’  – R’ Bachya summarizes the simple interpretation:

‘…Their intention was only to find a place large enough for them to build a city and concentrate in a single location, lest they be dispersed.  This is the very reason that God later dispersed them, because this scheme ran contrary to His Will for the nations to multiply and inhabit every part of the world according to His Master plan of creation…

The Midrashim perceive sinister and idolatrous motives in their plan, but, unfortunately, the verses themselves, close the doors upon mature reflection on the evil motives lurking within them.  The Torah did not reveal them.  The Midrash alludes to this with the comment: “the deeds of the generation of the Flood are explicitly stated, but those of the generation of the Dispersion are veiled.”‘

11:5  “Hashem descended..”  – When God wishes to examine the deeds of lowly man, Scripture call it ‘descent’ (Radak).  From God’s “descent” to observe conditions among the sinners of Babel, the Midrash derives that a judge must not condemn the accused until he has investigated the case fully.

Ramban comments that the Dispersion came because they attempted disruption of the unity between Hashem the Creator and His Creation.  Therefore, the punishment of Dispersion (a disruption of their unity) was meted out ‘measure for measure’.

Hirsch observes that since God descended to look into the matter before giving judgment, it is obvious that building the city or tower was not wrong in itself.  The danger to the moral future must lie in the purpose for which it was built and the motives of the builders, as expressed in the previous verse: ‘let us make ourselves a name.’

11:6  So unified were the people of Babel in all areas that, were they not stopped, they would have set up idol worship that would have endured for all time (Sforno).

11:7  “Come, let us descent and there confuse their language..”  – In His great humility God thus took counsel with His (heavenly) court (Rashi), for ‘the Holy One, blessed be He, does nothing without consulting His heavenly famalia (Sanhedrin 38b).

The Holy One, blessed be He, turned to the seventy angels who surrounded His Throne of Glory and said: Come, let us descend and confuse the seventy nations and the seventy languages.  They then cast lots concerning the various nations.  Each angel received a nation but Israel fell to the lot of God, as it is written in Deuteronomy 32:9 ‘Hashem’s portion is His people’.

HaK’sav V’Hakaballah notes that according to many there was no sin implicit in the actual construction of the tower and city themselves.  Rather, the construction was the vehicle from which much evil would ultimately spring, although its exact nature has not been revealed to us.  That is why verse 6 reads ‘which they propose to do’; it was for their unanimous evil intent that they were punished: the evil which would have materialized after the completion of the construction.

“..and there confuse..”  – As Hirsch comments – relating the word ‘confuse’ to the root which means ‘to cause to wither’: ‘we will go down, and their speech will at once be withered,’ no further action being required – the withering of their speech being the direct result of God’s descent.

“…not understand one another’s language.”  – And so it happened.  No one knew what the other spoke.  The frustration became so great in the light of the lack of communication, that ‘every one took his sword, and they fought one another, and half the world fell there by the sword’.

B’chor Shor, according to whom each one of the seventy nations previously knew all seventy languages, comments that they each suddenly forgot all but the one language assigned to them.  The Holy Tongue with which God created the world, was reserved for Israel.  The Holy Tongue thus passed on to Eber, the most illustrious of Shem’s descendants, because of which it came to be called “Hebrew”.

11:8  “they stopped building..”  – They gave up their grandiose plans to build a metropolis and a tower, but the group that remained behind did build city on a much reduced scale.  They named it Babel (Radak).  Ibn Ezra explains that the word ‘Babel’ is composed of two words which mean ‘confusion has come’ and ‘being a form of’.

The Midrash comments that a third of the tower sank into the earth, a third was burnt, and a third is still standing.  The latter third is so tall that ‘if one ascends to the top he sees the palm trees below like grasshoppers.’

11:9  Whose sin was greater, that of the generation of the Flood, or that of the generation of the Dispersion?

The former did not plan a rebellion against God and the latter did, yet the former were drowned while the latter were preserved in spite of their blasphemies!

The generation of the Flood, however, who were violent robbers and bore hatred 

for one another, were utterly destroyed; while the generation of the Dispersion who dwelt amicably, in brotherly love toward one another, were spared despite their evil intentions.  This demonstrates how hateful is strife and how great is peace! (Midrash)

Shem to Abraham

“There were ten generations from Noah to Abraham.  This demonstrates how patient God is, for all the generations kept provoking Him, until the Patriarch Abraham came and received the reward of them all” (Avos 5:2).  The cycle was repeated.  There had been ten generations from Adam to Noah, giving mankind the opportunity to fulfill its responsibility to carry out the plan of Creation.  They failed, and the Flood wiped them away.  Then the mission of humanity fell to Noah and his offspring.  The next ten generations failed as well, but this time Abraham was able to prevent destruction.  So great was he and so concerned with helping others that he was able to save the world.  Simultaneously, he assumed the role that had previously been that of the entire race: He and his offspring would be the people of God and bear the primary responsibility for bringing the Divine plan to fruition.  The children of Noah would be left with the seven universal commandments, but Abraham’s would accept the Torah with its 613 commandments.

11:10  “…the descendants of Shem:..”  – Shem’s genealogy is repeated now with the emphasis on the descent of Abraham.  The account of the years from creation to Noah to Abraham was given to enable us to calculate the age of the world, and thus clarify that the world came into existence as a creation of God at a definite point in time before which there was a total vacuum.

11:11  “..he begot sons and daughters.”  – According to Sforno, the deaths of these generations are not mentioned as are those of the generations preceding Noah because all of those died prior to the major historical event of the era – The Flood.  The forebears of these generations, however, were all still alive when the major event of their era occurred – the emergence of Abraham, who excelled all others in proclaiming the greatness of God and leading people to His service through his kindness.

Chronology of the Generations (Seder Olam)

  • Shem:  1558 – 2158
  • Arpachshad:  1658 – 2096
  • Shelah: 1693 – 2126
  • Eber:  1723 – 2187
  • Peleg:  1757 – 1996
  • Reu:  1787 – 2026
  • Serug:  1819 – 2049
  • Nahor:  1849 – 1997
  • Terach:  1878 – 2083
  • Abraham:  1948 – 2123

11:19  With Peleg, we see a dramatic shortening of the average lifespan early cut in half from his immediate ancestor’s lifespan of approximately 450 years to approximately 230 years.

11:26 “… he begot Abram..”  – Abraham was worthy of being created before Adam, but God reasoned: He may sin and there will be none after him to set it right.  Therefore I will create Adam, so that if he sins, Abraham will come and set it right. (Midrash 14:6)

Why did Shem and Eber not influence people to destroy their idols?  It may be that they protested against idols, but the people merely hid them.  Abram, however, destroyed the idols.  Alternatively, Shem and Eber lived in Canaan where they taught the way of God while Abram’s activity against idols was in Babel.  When Abram came to Canaan, he excelled Shem and Eber by actively traversing the land and preaching that the people repent.

11:27  Only Haran is mentioned as having children.  Nahor did not beget children until much later and Abram’s wife was barren (verse 30).  Lot is introduced here as Haran’s son because subsequent to his father’s death he accompanied Abram, and would later play an important role in the narrative.  Harlan’s daughters are mentioned in verse 29.

11:28  “..Haran died in the presence of Terach..”  – Rashi notes that according to the Midrashic interpretation, that Haran died ‘because of his father’.  The Midrash relates that Terach had complained to Nimrod because Abraham had crushed his idols and he had him thrown into a fiery furnace.  Haran, who was present, could not decide with whom to side, and was prepared to join whoever emerged victorious.  When Abraham was miraculously saved from the fiery furnace, Haran was asked to declare himself.  He replied that he sided with Abraham, whereupon, he was thrown into the furnace.  His innards were seared and he emerged from the furnace and died in his father’s presence.  He was unworthy of a miracle since he was willing to defy Nimrod only because he fully expected to duplicate Abraham’s miracle.

Note: Abram’s father, Terach, was a dealer in idols.  One day he fell ill and asked Abram to tend the business.  Abram, who recognized Hashem when he was only three years old, asked his mother to prepare food.  He took it to the room filled with idols as if waiting for them to reach out for it.  Then he took a hammer and smashed all the idols except for the largest.  When he finished, he put the hammer in the hand of the one remaining idol.

Terach, hearing the commotion, came running.  Seeing the carnage, he demanded to know what happened.  Abram answered innocently, ‘The small idols took food before the big one.  He was angered by their lack of manners and shattered them all!’.

Terach raged, ‘You lie.  The idols are dead.  They cannot eat or move!’  ‘In that case,’ Abram answered, ‘why do you worship them?’.

The result of Abram’s brave denunciations of idolatry was that Nimrod cast him into the furnace from which he was miraculously saved.  Ramban asks why so great a miracle is not mentioned in the Torah.  His reply will be discussed later in this study of Genesis.

“Ur Kasdim”  – (Ur of the Chaldeans)  Rashi explains that Ur Kasdim as meaning the fires of Kasdim.  It was so called on account of the miracle by which Abraham was saved from the fiery furnace.

11:29  “And Abram and Nahor took..”  When Haran died, his brothers Abraham and Nahor, married his daughters to carry on his memory and to ease Terach’s grief.

‘Sarai”  Her name was later changed to Sarah (17:15).  Just as Abram’s change of name signified a new and greater role for him, so did Sarai’s.

“Milcah”  Nahor’s wife is mentioned to establish the ancestry of Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah (24:15) (Ibn Ezra).

“..the father of Iscah.”  Isaac was Sarah.  She was called Iscah (from the word meaning to see, gaze) because she could see the future by holy inspiration, and because everyone gazed at her beauty.  Also, Iscah denotes aristocracy, as does her name Sarai, which means my princess.

Maharal explains a fundamental principle in understanding Torah.  He raises the question that it would have been more appropriate to allude to Sarah’s greatness in prophecy in Genesis 21:12 where God told Abraham to obey Sarah because, as Rashi comments there, her powers of prophesy were superior even to Abraham’s.

Maharal further explains that the Torah can be understood on many different levels, and it makes no attempt to deliver its great intellectual explanations to readers incapable of understanding them.  The scholar will understand the allusion to Sarah’s prophetic spirit in the name Iscah while others are free to assume that Iscah was a different person.  No matter how much the Torah makes plain, there will still be profound mysteries hidden within its words.

He comments further that a woman has two missions in life as if she were born twice; the first is hers from birth as an individual, while the second comes with marriage when, if she marries a righteous person, she is elevated to a higher mission.

Sarah’s two names indicate her two missions; one is used in connection with her father and the other in connection with her husband.  “Iscah”, the name indicating personal greatness, was Sarah’s for her own mission and it is the one used in telling of her birth to Haran.  “Sarah”, indicating that she joined Abraham in leading the world to its ultimate goal, was the name associated with the Abrahamitic mission and it is used from the time of her marriage.

11:31  “..his grandson, Lot..”  – Terach took Lot along because Haran had died and Lot was now dependent upon his grandfather.

“..to the land of Canaan;”  – Although God had not specified which land to move to, Abraham chose Canaan as his destination because it was the most acceptable of the lands; its climate had not been adversely affected by the Flood as was that of other lands, and it had the greatest potential for spiritual development (Sforno).

..They came as far as Charan, they settled there.”  – Although Terach had originally intended to go as far as Canaan, he could not bring himself to abandon his land entirely.  He therefore settled in Charan, which was near the border of Canaan so he could be in close proximity to Abraham.

Ramban explains that from the moment Abraham was miraculously saved from the furnace, Terach and Abraham intended to flee to Canaan, away from Nimrod.  When they reached Charan, where their ancestors had always lived they settled there among their family.  Abarbanel explains that Nimrod’s dominion did not extend over Charan.  It was there that Abraham was commanded to go to the land of Canaan, and so he left his father, who later died in Charan, his native land.

11:32  “..and Terach died..”  – In the year 2083; Isaac was thirty-five years old at the time.

Based on various verses, Rashi comments that Terach died more than sixty years after Abraham’s departure from Charan. Nevertheless, Terach’s death is recorded here to avoid the public implication that Abraham disrespectfully abandoned his father in his old age.  In another sense, the report of Terach’s death is accurate.  The Sages teach that even while alive, the wicked are called dead; and the righteous, even when dead, are called alive.  Thus, in the spiritual sense, the wicked Terach was truly ‘dead’.

Ramban comments that it is common for the Torah to record a father’s death before proceeding with the narrative of the son, even though the death occurred many years later, for the Torah records a person’s death when his role is over,  Thus, Noah’s death was recorded above, even though he was still alive at the time of the Dispersion.

In a deeper sense, Maharal explains that Abraham was uniquely absolved from the commandment to honor his father because the commandment to him to leave his family and go to Eretz Israel (12:1) inaugurated a new sort of existence on earth.  Abraham had ceased to be part of his biological family, for the mantle of ‘chosenness’ had been placed upon him.  In this sense, his previous family and homeland had gone out of his life, as if Terach had died.

Genesis – Chapter 10

 The Descendants of Noah – The Seventy Nations

     Ramban suggests that the Torah’s main purpose is to relate the history of Abraham and his family and for that reason, the genealogy of Shem, his ancestor, is also related in detail; Ham’s genealogy is given to inform us of those nations whose lands Abraham was to inherit because of their ancestor’s sin; and Japheth’s line is given, and the story of the Dispersion, is related to account for the difference in languages and to show why mankind became dispersed although it had a common ancestor.  Another reason for the genealogy is to demonstrate God’s mercy in preserving man and maintaining the covenant with Noah.

Me’am Loez stresses the poignancy of the phrase.  It was after the Flood and the people should have realized that they could not defy God with impunity any more than had their ancestors of the generation that was blotted out.

The Seventy Nations

The Talmudic tradition that there are seventy nations in the world is based upon the ensuing list of Noah’s descendants.

This tradition of seventy nations is deep-rooted.  According to the Midrash, each of the seventy nations is placed under the protection of a special angel, except Israel, whose Protector is God Himself.

Just as there were seventy nations, the words of the Torah engraved on the Tablets on Mount Ebal (Deuteronomy 27:2-4) were written in seventy languages (Mishnah, Sotah 7:5) so that all the nations might read it.  For the same reason, God’s voice at Sinai divided itself into seventy languages (Shabbos 88b).

The seventy bullocks sacrificed on Tabernacles were offered to atone for the seventy nations.  “Woe to the nations!’ says Rav Yochanan; ‘for they suffered a lost (by having destroyed the Temple) and do not realize the extent of the loss.  While the Temple existed, the altar atoned for them, but now (that it is destroyed) who will atone for them?” (Sukkah 55b).

The seventy members of the Sanhedrin also corresponded to the seventy nations of the world.

Harav David Feinstein explains the significance of the many parallels to the seventy nations; the seventy languages into which the Torah was translated, the seventy offerings of Tabernacles, the seventy members of the Sanhedrin.

On the verse (Deuteronomy 32:8) “He established the boundaries of nations according to the number of the children of Israel”, the Sages comment that God established seventy nations because Jacob’s family numbered seventy when he descended to Egypt.  Why was it necessary for the number of nations to correspond to the number of Jews?  Besides, at the conclusion of the forty years in the desert Moses explained the Torah to the Jews in all seventy languages (Deuteronomy 1:5).  Why was it necessary for him to use seventy languages when all his listeners were Hebrew-speaking Jews?

Moses explained the Torah in all the languages (Rashi), to symbolize that wherever Jews would be in the future, and whatever the language of the lands of their exile, Jews would study the Torah in a language that they understood.  

Also, each of the seventy nations represented a unique characteristic, as the Sages say, one excelled in warfare, another in licentiousness, another in beauty and so on.  All of these national virtues and strains of character are present in Israel as well, for each person has gifts to develop and temptations to overcome.  God wants all nations to rise to their greatest spiritual potential.

These variations were present in the individuals of Jacob’s family.  And the seventy languages used by Moses parallel the seventy facets of Torah; each ‘speaks’ to one of the seventy characteristics with which God has populated the world.  (It may also be suggested that each of the seventy offerings of Tabernacles atoned for the trespasses of each of these seventy national characteristics present within Israel, and consequently the nations of the world benefitted from this universal atonement).

Israel, as the spiritual model and leader of the world, was to demonstrate within itself that eminence is within reach of every nation; that every type of person can live a Torah life.

Therefore, a significant portion of Jewish life revolves around the number seventy to symbolize that every national trait can become harnessed for holy purposes.

The breakdown of the nations generally accepted is as follows: 14 nations to Japheth; 30 nations to Ham; and 26 to Shem, totaling seventy.  For more on the breakdown of nations, read The Book of Jasher – Chapter 7 – The Generations of Noah.  

The Family of Japheth

10:2  Japheth is mentioned first because it is common Scriptural usage to continue a narrative with the last-named person.  Compare, for example, Joshua 24:4:  ‘And I gave to Isaac, Jacob, and Esau; and I gave to Esau’.  Here, too, Japheth was the last-named in the previous verse, and therefore this verse continues with him (Ibn Ezra).

10:3  Of the seven sons of Japheth mentioned in verse 2, only the further branches of Gomer and Javan are named.  The Torah concerns itself only with those who developed into heads of new nations.  The Children who are not enumerated, apparently did not form separate nations.

Similarly Malbim comments that Gomer had other children, too.  However, only those who themselves formed separate nations – Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah are enumerated.  This is the system used throughout all the following genealogy.

10:4  The Vilna Gaon in his commentary to the parallel chronologies in 1 Chronicles 1:7 explains that all names occurring in these lists without the pronominal suffix ‘im’, such as Gomer and Magog, are proper names of the children which their descendants assumed as national names.  Those names ending with the plural forms ‘im’, however, are not personal names but the designation of the nations that descended from each son.

10:5  Ramban explains that the children of Japheth each dwelt separately and spread far apart on the isles of the sea.  This was the blessing of their father Noah who said (9:27) God expand the boundaries of Japheth which means that his descendants would be spread over a wide area of the earth.  The descendants of Ham and Shem, however, lived near one another as they dwelt on the continents.

“..each according to his language,”  – This verse refers to the period after the Dispersion when God changed their common language, (Chapter 11), the Torah not being written in chronological order.  The nations, dwelling separately one from another, spoke different languages, despite their common ancestry.  Seventy nations decended from Noah, and they spoke seventy languages (Radak).

According to Hirsch, however, this phrase means ‘each to his dialect’.  The fact that they spoke in different dialects became the cause of their separation.  The Dispersion of Chapter 11 was a divinely forced scattering that intensified the already developing separation.  There is a difference between language and dialect, a natural change in pronunciation and speech pattern that results when people are separated from one another.

The Family of Ham

10:6  “..and Canaan.”  – Describing the base characteristics of Canaan the Talmud (Pesachim 113b) comments that, ‘Five things did Canaan charge his sons: Love one another, love robbery, love lewdness, hate your masters, and never speak the truth.’

10:8  “And Cush begot Nimrod.”  – Me’am Loez comments that, as a son of Cush, Nimrod should have been listed among Cush’s other offspring in verse 7.  This separate listing is to suggest that Nimrod proclaimed himself to be a god and people worshipped him thinking that he was not a mortal man born of a woman.  Therefore, Scripture makes a special point of saying that Cush begot him as if to ridicule those who believed he was an idol.

According to Ramban, however, Nimrod is listed separately because he did not form a nation under his own name.

As Hirsch comments: Those mentioned up to now were founders of nations.  That, Nimrod did not do, but introduced the new factor of might and domination into the development of nations.

“He was the first to be a mighty man on earth.”  – Rashi interprets this to be that he was ‘mighty’ in causing the whole world to rebel against God by the plan that he devised for the generation of the Dispersion.

Nimrod became mighty in defiling God’s Name in the world by establishing idolatry.  

Radak explains that in the literal sense it certainly does not mean that there was never a mighty man before him, or that he was the only one in his generation.  Rather, the verse tells us that he was the first to subjugate others and proclaim himself a monarch over others, because until his time there was never a king; people were governed by judges and leaders.  Furthermore, all of these events happened after the Dispersion.

He was the first monarch.  For preceding him there were neither wars nor reigning monarchs.  He prevailed over the Babylonian people until they crowned him (verse 10), after which he went to Assyria and built great cities (Ramban).

Before him every family lived under the authority of its own patriarch (Malbim).

10:9  “He was a mighty hunter..”  – He became a mighty hunter of men, becoming the first to use his intellectual and physical superiority to bring lesser men under his domain.  He kept people under his dictatorial rule until he was ready to exploit them (Hirsch).

Midrash Aggadah takes the phrase literally: Although meat became permitted after the Flood, no one ever partook of it until Nimrod.  He was the first who hunted and ate. 

This is followed by Ibn Ezra who writes: He was the first, as a hunter, to exhibit man’s might over the animals.  As noted in the commentary to 3:21, the garments that God provided for Adam and Eve passed on to Cush who passed them onto his son, Nimrod.  These garments were embroidered with animals and birds.  When he put them on, God endowed him with strength, and all beasts, birds and animals crouched before him so that he had no difficulty in catching them.  The people thought that these feats were due to his extraordinary strength, and they made him their king.

“..before Hashem”  – Ibn Ezra interprets that in the most literal sense, this phrase would suggest that Nimrod built altars upon which he sacrificed unto God the animals he hunted.  

A basis for this interpretation is found in Sefer Hayashar 7:30 which states that in his youth, before he turned evil, Nimrod built altars upon which he offered the animals he trapped.  Abarbanel qualified this.  He explains that Nimrod was the forerunner of those who hypocritically draped themselves in robes of piety as a means of deceiving the masses.

Ha’amek Davar differs from all the above and interprets that Nimrod, unintentionally did indeed perform God’s will.  Without strong government, man cannot survive as a secure, civilized race.  Nimrod was the first to establish such a strong political system.  Thus, although his motives were base and selfish, he is considered as acting ‘before Hashem’, because he was an instrument to carry out God’s will.

10:10  “..his kingdom was Babel..”  – Babel mentioned here refers to the city which later, under Nebuchadnezzar, became the center of the empire.  It had the same Hebrew name, Babel, as the place of the Dispersion, described in Chapter 11.  In English, Nebuchadnezzar’s Babel is usually rendered Babylonia.  It was one of the greatest cities of the ancient world.  The reason it received this name is given in the next Chapter.  Jeremiah 51:13 later describes the city which lies on the east bank of the Euphrates as being upon many waters, abundant in treasurers.  As Nebuchadnezzar himself describes the city (Daniel 4:27): Is this not the great Babylon that I built by the might of my power as a royal residence and for the honor of my majesty?

“..in the land of Shinar.”  – Hoffmann notes that the name Shinar occurs also in 11:2, 14:1,9; Joshua 7:27; Isaiah 11:11; Zechariah 5:11 and Daniel 1:2.  Shinar was the original name of Shumer, the different pronunciations being the result of dialectic variations.  It was originally a region in southern Babylonia, and Sangir was the northern region.  Later it had a wider signification referring to the entire territory of Babylonia.


10:11  “From that land Asshur went forth..”  – We are not told who Asshur was: Since he is listed with the descendants of Ham he was probably a Hamite, or perhaps he was the son of Shem mentioned in verse 22 (Radak).

He saw that his children were hearkening to Nimrod and rebelling against God by building a tower, so he left them (Rashi).

He disassociated himself from that scheme and when he saw that they were defiant to God, he left the country.  ‘You departed from four places (Babel, Erech, Akkad, and Calneh,’ said God to him, ‘by your life!  I will give you four’ – Nineveh, Rechovoth-Ir, Calah, and Resen (Midrash).

Others believe that Asshur refers to the name of the country, Assyria, and the verse should be rendered as if it said ‘to Asshur’ – the subject of the verse still being Nimrod:  After conquering the four cities mentioned above Nimrod expanded his domain and ruled also over Assyria.  For this reason Assyria is called the Land of Nimrod as it is said: (Micah 5:5): And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, the land of Nimrod with the keen-edged sword – referring to Nineveh, the city of Rehoboth, and Calah.


10:12  “..that is the great city.”  – One cannot be certain whether Nineveh or Resen was described as the great city, but since it is written (Jonah 3:3): Nineveh was an exceedingly great city it follows that it is Nineveh that is here referred to as the great city (Yoma 10a; Rashi).


10:14  “whence the Philistines came forth,”  – The Philistine descended from both Pathrusim and Casluhim.  These two nations promiscuously mingled with each other and the Philistines were their illegitimate offspring (Midrash; Rashi)

Midrash Tanchuma derives this from the fact that the verse does not say who begot the Philistines, but whence came forth – intimating that they were the offspring of immorality.

The Philistines played an important – but antagonistic – role in the history of the Jews in Scriptural times.  They founded five cities.  Three of them on the southern coastland of Eretz Israel: Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ashdod, and two inland: Gath and Ekron.

The Descendants of Canaan

10:15 – 18  Ramban explains that the enumerated sons all became heads of the Canaanite nations whose lands were promised to Abraham.  Verse 18 informs us that they dispersed, and it was then that some of their original names changed to the familiar ones listed in 15:19-21.  The land of Canaan was originally destined for Israel (Deuteronomy 32:18), but at the time of the Dispersion God entrusted it to Canaan, a servant nation, until He was ready to present it to Israel, just as one may leave his legacy in trust with a servant until his son matures enough to acquire the treasure as well as the servant.  

Phut’s descendants are not mentioned because they are unnecessary for our narrative (Rashi); also, because his descendants jointly formed a nation under his name, they did not become separate nations (Malbim).


The Territory of Canaan

10:19  The Torah now proceeds to describe the Canaanite’s territory from Zidon to Sodom.  All of the territory is not defined; this will be done later when the land is divided (Joshua 13:21).  The primary purpose of stating the borders is because Israel would later inherit the land.  The verse teaches us that it was God’s will that the Canaanite families dwell in the land until their time was up.  God wanted Israel to occupy a developed, prosperous land, with houses, vineyards, and farms as He promised (Deuteronomy 6:11) that they would enter the land, find houses full of all good things which you did not fill, hewn cisterns which you did not hew, vineyards and olive groves which you did not plant (Radak).

The Line of Shem – 26 Nations

10:21  The genealogy of Shem which had been delayed until this point is now given so the Torah can proceed to recount the history of Abraham and his descendants for they formed the primary nation of mankind.

‘”And to Shem, also to him were born..'” – Scripture emphasizes here that ‘also to him‘ were children born and that moreover he was the ancestry of the ‘children of Eber’ from whom the Patriarchs descended. (Radak).

Although Shem had many descendants, Eber’s children were the most favored of his offspring because they were righteous like him.  (Abarbanel)

Sforno comments that those who believed in God were called Ivrim, after Eber their teacher.  Shem, because he was also their teacher, is called the ‘father of Eber’s children’, meaning his ‘students’, because students are called the children of their teacher.

the brother of Japheth, the elder.”  – Rashi explains that the verse does not designate him as ‘the brother of Ham’, because Shem and Japheth honored their father, while Ham put him to shame (9:22).

10:24  Eber was one of the righteous men of that time (Midrash).  Along with his grandfather Shem, he established a yeshivah.  (A yeshivah is a Jewish academy which focuses on the study of the Torah and Talmud.)

Rambam counts Eber among ‘the few solitary individuals – Enosh, Methuselah, Noah, and Shem – who recognized God as the Creator even when all others were serving idols.

10:25  “And to Eber were born two sons:..”  – He begot other children besides these as it specifically says (11:17) “he begot sons and daughters”.  Only these two are mentioned here because their names indicate important historical events (Radak).  (Only Joktan’s line is traced in the next verse.  Eber’s genealogy through Peleg, culminating in Abraham, is traced in 11:16.)

“..for in his days the earth was divided;”  – Rashi cites Seder Olam that the Dispersion took place at the end of Peleg’s life, therefore as the Midrash notes Eber must have been a prophet to give his son a name which signified division (Peleg = Niphlega = Division).

Rashi, on the parallel verse in 1 Chronicles 1:19 explains that he was called Peleg ‘because in his days the life-span of man was cut in half.  Originally man lived an average of 900 years; from the days of Arphachshad is was split to about 400 years, while from Peleg it was divided further to about 200 years.’

It is this very explanation that is given by Sforno to our verse, who adds that this reduced longevity was a direct result of the punishment of the Dispersion: their vitality was lowered by the abrupt and sudden change of climates.

B’chor Shor cites both explanations – that the ‘division’ refers to the Dispersion and also to the life-span – and concludes that the name probably alluded to both.

10:26  “Joktan..”  – He was so called because he was humble and belittled himself.  Eber was a prophet and the giving of a name meaning ‘small’ must have had a significance.  

Radak attaches the explanation to Joktan which Rashi in Chronicles and Sforno explains regarding Peleg.  He comments that Joktan, from the word diminished, signifies that from his time man’s longevity would be diminished.  He explains that Eber knew that Joktan’s years would be fewer from birth, because he was born physically smaller than those who preceded him.  (This explanation is found in Midrash Zuta.)

10:30  “And their dwelling place..”  – This is where they dwelt before the Dispersion (Rashi to 11:2), this being the territory of the Shemites, while the others lived in the immediate vicinity.  They did not settle in the respective countries enumerated in this chapter until after the Dispersion.  Accordingly verses 5, 19, and 20 are to be interpreted as referring to where they ultimately dwelt after the Dispersion.

10:32  “These are the families of Noah’s descendants,..”  – The reckoning of the seventy nations is complete.  There are 70 descendants listed in this chapter: 14 Japhethites, 30 Hamites; and 26 Shemites.  The territories they inherited carried their names.

But they did not spread forth until after the Dispersion!  The phrase “after the flood” reverts to the beginning of the verse.  Explain the verse, therefore, this way:  These are the families of Noah’s descendants that were born after the Flood who later spread forth over the earth – after the Dispersion. (Radak).  Even those who did not become separate nations nevertheless dispersed to many places until the entire world was settled.

Genesis – Chapter 9

9:1  “God blessed Noah and his sons..”  – The world benefited from God’s blessing to Adam (1:28) until the Generation of the Flood.  When Noah left the ark, God renewed the blessing by repeating it to Noah and his sons.

“‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the land.”  – This verse is considered a divine blessing.  The command to procreate is given in verse 7.  Whe Noah departed from the ark and saw the world in ruins he was dismayed because only four men were left in the world.  God, therefore, put his fears to rest with the blessing that few thought they were, they would, indeed, repopulate the world.  (Abarbanel; Malbim)


9:2  “The fear of you and the dread of you..”  – So that Noah would not be afraid that the few surviving people would be in constant danger from the hordes of animals in the world, God gave this additional blessing that He had implanted in animals an instinctive fear of human beings (Abarbanel).

The Zohar explains that in man’s ideal state, the image of God in which he was created would be sufficient to frighten animals, which are an infinitely lower order of life.  But when the generation of the Flood degraded itself and sank to the level of animals, it forfeited this aura.  Now God restored that blessing.  This concept means that as long as man is true to his Godly image, he need not fear beasts, but if he descends from his calling, after the fashion of the Generation of the Flood, he must indeed fear the beasts of the wild.

The Talmud continues that ‘a beast has no power over man unless it takes him for an animal’.  This means that the man who was attacked by a beast must have been deserving of death for an unwitnessed transgression so that the death penalty could not be applied by the courts.  God therefore sends one of His ‘agents’ – in any form it might take – to execute judgment.  Having lost his human dignity, the sinner appears like an ‘animal’ and is prone to attack by brazen beasts.  Had he maintained his human stamp, the animals would have fled in awe (Zohar; Akeidas Yitchak).

9:3  “…shall be food for you..”  – God now gave Noah and his descendants a right that had never been given to Adam or his progeny: permission to eat meat.  Noah was given the right to eat meat, just as God had given Adam the right to eat vegetation, because (a) Had it not been for the righteousness of Noah, no life would have survived the Flood; and, (b) he had toiled over the animals and attended to their needs in the Ark.  Of him was it said, “You shall eat the toil of your hands” (Psalms 128:2).  Thus, Noah had acquired rights over them (Or HaChaim).

Malbim explains that it is logical and desirable for a lower form of life to be eaten by those absorbed into a higher form.  Therefore, animals eat plant life, thus elevating it, and humans eat animals elevating them to become part of intelligent man.

9:4  “But flesh, with its soul its blood you shall not eat.”  – Now that God permitted all moving things as food, He included a limitation.  God prohibited tearing a limb from a living animal and eating it, because it is one of the greatest barbarisms one can inflict upon animals, and if it were permitted, people would learn cruelty (Radak; Abarbanel).

Rashi explains that this verse prohibits a limb cut from a living animal while its soul is still in it, you may not eat its flesh.  According to Rashi, the word ‘with its soul’, relates to both the beginning and the end of the verse: flesh while it is yet with its soul (life);  and while the blood is yet with its soul.  He accordingly interprets that there are two prohibitions implicit in the verse: both the flesh and the blood taken from a living animal are forbidden.

9:5  “..your blood which belongs to your souls I will demand..”  – According to Hirsch – I permitted you to take the lives of animals, but your own lives you may not take.  I will require an accounting from one who spills his own blood – thus, prohibiting suicide…

The Midrash continues that lest one think that this prohibition of suicide includes even one like Saul’s (who ordered that he be killed to avoid falling into the hands of the Philistines, see 1 Samuel 31:4) and like that of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego (who were prepared to give up their lives for the sanctification of God’s Name, by choosing to be thrown into the fiery furnace rather than worship Nebuchadnezzar’s idols, see Daniel 3:17.  Now one could think that this verse expressly prohibits even such selfless forms of suicide..)  Therefore, the Torah writes ‘but‘ (which in Talmudic exegesis is a limiting particle inferring that some forms of suicide are not prohibited).  Countless Jews have committed suicide to sanctify God’s Name rather than convert to another faith.  These martyrs, respectfully called, holy ones, made the ultimate sacrifice for the sake of Judaism, reaching a spiritual zenith of devotion to God.

The intent, then is that the body, blood, and life of animals are yours and at your disposal, but your own blood which belongs to your soul is Mine (Hirsch).

“..of every beast I will demand it..”  – Although an animal has no reason and is not subject to punishment, nevertheless, in its relationship with man, animals are accountable for their deeds (Radak).  Every beast that kills a human being will itself be devoured, by Divine decree, (by another animal, or it will grow weak and become easy prey (Abarbanel).)  Or, compare the case of an ox which is executed by the court for killing a human being (Exodus 21:28).

“..but of man,..”  The verse gives other examples of bloodshed that God will not condone: someone who contrives to kill without witnesses, so that he is beyond the reach of the courts; or someone who kills his brother, i.e. someone he loves so very much that the death had to have been accidental or unintentional.  In such a case, too, the killer may well have a degree of responsibility due to his failure to exercise proper vigilance.  Whenever a life is taken, God will inflect whatever punishment is merited according to the degree of the crime or the carelessness that led to the death.

9:6  “Whoever sheds the blood of man..”  – I shall seek vengeance if there are no witnesses, but if there are witnesses the court must put him to death.  Why? – “For in the image…” (Rashid; Radak).

“For in the image of God He made man.”  – And therefore whoever sheds blood is regarded as if he had impaired the divine likeness (Midrash).

One might think that since the murderer, too, was made in the image of God, it would be wrong to put him to death.  Hence the verse comes to inform us that – no, the murderer expunged God’s likeness from himself by his heinous act, and deserves himself to be killed (Ragbag).

Beloved is man for he was created in the image of God; but greater still was the love shown to him in that it was revealed to him that he was created in the image of God, as it is said: For in the image of God He made man – for when God informed to man this via Noah, the basis of the sanctity of human life in the recreated world was established (Avos 3:14).

9:7  “And you, be fruitful and multiply”  – Having warned them concerning bloodshed, which destroys the world, he bade them to procreate abundantly and thereby build up the world (Radak), and increase mankind which was ‘created in the image of God’ (Malbim).

According to the plain meaning, the similar statements made earlier to Adam (1:28) and to Noah (verse 1) which are preceded by the phrase ‘and God blessed them’ constitute a blessing, like the one God gave the fish (1:22).  Here, the verse is understood as a commandment.  In fact, the Talmud, Sanhedrin 59b cites this verse as the source of the commandment to procreate…

Additionally, from the sequence of the verse, the Talmud (Yevamos 63b) derives that this command follows the prohibition of murder to liken one who refuses to procreate to one who sheds blood, and who diminishes the Divine Image (Rashi; Ramban).

9:8-17  The rainbow; sign of the covenant  – God established a covenant with Noah and his descendants, and all living beings, until the end of time.  This covenant would be signified forever by the rainbow.  After a rainstorm, which could have been a harbinger of another deluge like that in Noah’s time, the appearance of the rainbow will be a reminder of God’s pledge never again to wash away all of mankind in a flood.  According to Ibn Ezra, it was then that God created the atmospheric conditions that would cause a rainbow to be seen after a rainstorm.  Most other commentators disagree, maintaining that the rainbow, which had existed since Creation, would henceforth be designated as a sign that a deluge like Noah’s would never recur.  Hirsch states that it is the eternal sign that, no matter how bleak the future may seem, God will lead mankind to its ultimate goal.

That the rainbow is a phenomenon that is predictable and explainable in natural terms is no contradiction to its status as a Divinely ordained sign.  The new moon, too, symbolizes the power of renewal that God assigned to the Jewish people, even though its appearance could be calculated to the split second for hundreds of years; indeed this predictability is the basis of the current Jewish calendar, which was made known in the 4th century CE.  Nevertheless, God utilized the natural phenomena of His world as reminders of His covenant, for the very laws of nature should recall to thinking people that there is a God of nature.  

9:8  “..and to his sons with him..”  – Opinions differ as to whether this means that God’s words were transmitted to Noah’s sons by their father, the sons being unworthy of divine revelation (Ibn Ezra, Ramban); or whether they all received God’s word together so they should all be equally aware of God’s promise to them and the other creatures of the world (Ibn Ezra; Radak).

9:11  “..and never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters…”  Part of the world’s population may be destroyed, but never again will the entire world be destroyed by a flood or any other catastrophe (Sforno; Or HaChaim), even if the people are sinful.  The Egyptians erred in this regard.  They thought that they could drown the Jewish babies without fear of God’s measure-for-measure retribution, because He had sworn never to bring another flood.  But they did not realize that only the entire world would not be flooded; therefore, the Egyptian army could be drowned at the splitting of the sea.

9:12  “And God said,..”  – Hirsch comments that the rainbow is one of many signs, such as Sabbath, circumcision, and tefillin, all the which are designed to keep alive and fresh the great teachings which God gave man.  The rainbow is the eternal sign that, no matter how bleak the future looks, God is not oblivious but He will lead mankind to its ultimate goal.

“..to generations forever:”  Rashi notes that the sign is not required in perfectly righteous generations.  For example, rainbows were not seen during the periods of Hezekiah, King of Judah, and of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai (author of the Zohar) just after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE.

9:13  “I have set My bow in the cloud..”  – The use of the first person, My bow, and the past tense, I have set, indicate that the bow was previously in existence.  The verse is therefore to be interpreted: The bow which I have set in the clouds since the beginning of creation – as a natural phenomenon resulting from the sun’s rays refracting upon the moisture-laden air, similar to the rainbow visible in a container of water standing in the sun – shall henceforth service as a sign of the covenant between Me and you (Ramban).

The rainbow was chosen as a sign because it is symbolic of the Glory of God as described in Ezekiel 1:28.  God thus implied: ‘When it shall rain abundantly, I will present you with a symbol of My Glory, so you shall receive the Shechinah, for were it My intentions to destroy you, I would not have manifested to you My Glory because a king does not deign to appear to his disgraced enemies (B’chor Shor).

9:14  This verse introduces the next one which describes the significance of the rainbow.  Thus, when the earth is beclouded and a rainbow is seen, God will remember…

9:15  “I will remember my covenant..”  – Hoffmann notes that the implication of the verse is that without the reminder of the rainbow, God would not remember the covenant, an obviously impossible concept.  The same difficulty exists in connection with the commandment to place the blood of the Paschal offering around the doorway in order to demonstrate that Jews lived in the house and thereby prevent the first-born from dying (Exodus 12:7,13); as if God had no other way of knowing where Jews lived.  Hoffmann contends that the purpose of the signs was to make clear to man that a Merciful God was concerned with his fate and that the good deeds of man were valued by God and could influence the fate of mankind.  Therefore, the signs of God’s mercy had to be such as were plainly apparent to people.

The Torah expresses ‘remembering’ in human terms, because there is no forgetfulness before His glorious throne (Radak).

9:16  “..between God and every living being..”  – Noting that since God is the Speaker the verse should have said ‘between Me’.  Rashid and Radak explain that Elohim represents His Attribute of Justice, and as the Midrash explains, the meaning of the verse is: when strict justice will demand that man be destroyed for his sins, I will see the sign and save you.

(Render, therefore… I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between My stick Attribute of Justice and every living being…)

9:17  ‘And God said to Noah..”  – God, as Elohim, is used throughout the narrative of the rainbow, because this Name describes Him as the One Who possesses absolute power and accordingly that is the name used throughout the original narrative of Creation.  He is referred to by this designation in the case in the Flood as if to proclaim: He Who created the world from nothing is the same One Who destroyed the world in a Deluge, and Who now has promised to heal the world (Abarbanel).

“This is the sign of the covenant..”  – God actually showed Noah a rainbow and said to him: This is the sign of which I spoke (Rashi).  This is why the verse is repeated from v.12.  There, it is a general statement, here, the verse tells us that God actually showed Noah the sign (Mizrachi).

9:18-27  The intoxication and shame of Noah.  The Torah records a shameful event through which Noah was humiliated and which resulted in the blessings and curse that influence the trend of history to this very day.  It demonstrates that even the greatest people can become degraded if they lose control of themselves, and it shows, through the different reactions of his sons and grandson, that crisis brings out the true character of people.  Thus, it is a powerful lesson in history and morality.

9:18  “..Shem, Ham, and Japheth..”  – As the Midrash notes, Japheth was the eldest.  Shem is mentioned first because he was worthy and perfect with his Creator (Tanchuma).

Hirsch notes that although the three sons of Noah represented totally different types of character and striving, all were worth of salvation.  The three are named here to demonstrate that all families of man are equal as creatures of God and refugees from the Flood.  All are responsible to become pure human beings.    

“Ham being the father of Canaan.”  He being the source of the degradation (Midrash).

The Torah makes this preliminary announcement of Ham’s genealogy in order that the reader will be able to understand how, in this episode which deals with Noah’s intoxication, Canaan comes to be cursed through Ham’s misdeed (Rashi).

Ibn Ezra comments that they are both mentioned because they were both evil.  The episode was recorded to show that the descendants of the Canaanites, male and female, were already accursed since the days of Noah, and for this reason Abraham later cautioned against intermarriage with the Canaanites, as did Rebecca.

Malbim cites the Midrash that Ham was the only one of Noah’s sons to cohabit in the ark. He comments, accordingly, that this verse alludes to Ham’s transgression by saying that, upon leaving the ark, Ham was already the father of Canaan, because Canaan was born of this union in the ark.

9:19  Sforno explains that although a wicked one was among them, nevertheless, since they were the sons of Noah, God blessed them that they ‘be fruitful and multiply’.  The Torah stresses in this phrase the phenomenon that one father so righteous and perfect produced three such radically different sons.

“..and from these the whole world was spread out.”  –  This implies that they dispersed and divided the world among themselves.  It is well known that the ancients divided three continents: Asia was taken by Shem; Africa by Ham; and Europe by Japheth (Abarbanel).

9:20  “..the man of the earth..”  – The word implies mastery; Noah was the master because the earth had been saved thanks to him (Rashi).  Alternatively, Noah is associated with the earth because he was skilled at working it (Ibn Ezra), or because he devoted himself to cultivating the earth, rather than to building cities (Ramban).

“..debased himself..”  – The translation of ‘debased’ follows Rashi who relates the verb to profaned or desecrated:  ‘he profaned himself because he should have started his planting with something other than a vineyard’ (Midrash).  Ibn Ezra, Ramban, and most commentators interpret the verb from the word ‘beginning’ and render that Noah, the man of the earth, was the first to plant a vineyard.  His predecessors planted single vines, but he was the first to plant many rows of vines in an orderly fashion, comprising a vineyard.

Targum Yonasan writes:  ‘..and he found a vine which the river had brought from the Garden of Eden and he planted it in a vineyard, and it flourished in a day, its grapes ripened and he pressed them out.’


9:21  “”He drank of the wine..”  – Rav Chiyah said:  He planted it, drank thereof, and was humiliated all in one and the same day.

“..and he uncovered himself..”  –  He was uncovered, not by himself, but by someone else whom the Torah does not identify.  From the curse uttered later, it would seem that Canaan did it (B’chor Shor; Ragbag).

According to Tur, however, Noah was uncovered by Ham who told his brothers.  

Hirsch perceives that Noah had not drunk the wine in the innermost part of his tent, but when he felt that the wine was going to his head, he took refuge in the innermost part of the tent where he hoped nobody would see him.


9:22  “Ham, the father of Canaan, saw..”  – In the plain meaning of the verse, Noah’s intoxication caused him to become uncovered, and Ham gazed at him disrespectfully.  According to Hirsch, the term may mean not nakedness but shame; Ham enjoyed the sight of his father’s dishevelment and drunkenness.

Canaan is associated with the event because he had a part in disgracing Noah.  Some of the Sages say that he was the one who saw Noah and ran to tell his father (Rashi).  According to Sforno, Ham gazed at – but did not protest – the indignity that Canaan had perpetrated upon Noah.  Whatever Canaan did to precipitate or aggravate the situation, Ham’s conduct was disgraceful, for he entered the tent and leered at Noah’s debasement, and then, instead of averting his gaze and covering him, as his brothers did, he went to tell his brothers in a manner of ridicule.

Shem and Japheth waited outside respectfully, but Ham who, as a father, should have best appreciated the dignity due a parent, went in to see the shame of his father and then went to his brothers gleefully telling what he had seen (Hirsch).

“..his father’s nakedness..”  Hirsch suggests that the term nakedness sometimes means not literal nakedness, but the degraded condition of drunkenness as in Habakuk 2:15.  Thus it is possible that Noah was not naked but that Ham enjoyed his father’s compromised condition.

“..he told his two brothers outside.”  – Ramban explains that Ham’s sin was that he should have modestly covered his father’s nakedness and concealed his shame by telling no one.  Instead, he broadcast the matter to his two brothers in public in order to ridicule Noah.  


9:23  “And Shem and Japheth took a garment,”  – The verb ‘took’ is in singular because Shem alone took the initiative in performing this meritorious deed, then Japheth came and joined him.  Therefore, the descendants of Shem (the Jews) were rewarded with the precept of fringed garments (Numbers 15:38); those of Japheth were rewarded with burial in Eretz Yisrael as it is written (Ezekiel 39:11): And it shall come to pass in that day that I will give unto Gog (a descendant of Japheth) a place fit for burial in Israel; and those of Ham, who degraded his father, were eventually ‘led away by the King of Assyria .. naked and barefoot’ (Isaiah 20:4) (Midrash; Rashi).

“..laid it upon both their shoulders,”  –   They laid it on their shoulders to make it easy, when walking backward and approaching close to their father, to let the garment slip off their shoulders and cover their father without having to gaze upon him at all.

“..their faces were turned away,..”  – For not only did their eyes not glance at their father’s shame, even their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness (Alschich).


9:24  “Noah awoke from his wine..”  –  Not only did he wake up from his sleep but even ”from his wine” – his mind was completely lucid and therefore the prophetic spirit for which he was worthy returned to him and through it he knew what had transpired (Ha’amek Davar).

“..his small son..”  – Rashi – following the Midrash which apparently agrees with Sanhedrin

69b that Japheth was the eldest, Ham was the second, and Shem was the youngest – explains that ‘small’ in this verse refers to Ham, who although not the youngest, is called ‘small’ in the sense of ‘the unfit and the despised’, as the word is used in Jeremiah 49:15.


9:25-27  Hirsch calls these verses the most far-reaching prophecy ever uttered.  In it God allowed Noah to encapsulate all of human history.


9:25  “Cursed is Canaan;..”  – Ham sinned and Canaan is cursed!  Rav Yehudah explains that God had already blessed Noah and his sons, and there cannot be a curse where a blessing had been given.  Therefore Noah cursed his grandson, who, as noted above, was deeply involved in the humiliating incident.  According to Rav Nechemiah, the curse is attached to Canaan because he originally saw Noah and informed the others (Midrash).

Radak explains that Noah cursed Canaan because he prophetically foresaw that Canaan’s descendants would be perpetually wicked.  The curse was indeed fulfilled for we see that the patriarchs avoided intermarrying with the accursed Canaanites.

Noteworthy, also, is that it does not say ‘cursed shall be Canaan’, but ‘cursed is Canaan’ which signifies he was already accursed from before this time.

“..a slave  of slaves..”  – The phrase is meant literally, that Canaanites would be enslaved even by people who themselves are dominated by others; or it is a figure of speech, meaning that they would be “the lowliest of slaves” (Ralbag).  

Indisputably, many descendants of Shem and Japheth, too, have been sold into slavery, while not every Canaanite is or was a slave.  The curse is that from birth the Canaanites will be steeped in the culture of slavery and not seriously desire freedom.  The descendants of Shem and Japheth, however, will have a nobler spirit; they will always crave freedom, even if they are enslaved (Ha’ Davar).

The curse was that the raw, uncontrolled sensuality displayed by Canaan could never be permitted to rule.  The person with self-control, on the other hand, will not allow himself to be enslaved (Hirsch).

“..shall he be to his brothers.”  – According to Ramban, ‘his brothers’ might also refer to his father’s brothers, Japheth and Shem, for one’s father’s brothers are called brothers’ as in Genesis 14:14 where Lot (a nephew) is referred to as Abraham’s brother.  It may also be that to his brothers means that he will be enslaved to the whole world; whoever will find him will enslave him.

9:26  “Blessed is Hashem, the God of Shem..”  – Noah did not bless Shem directly, but his blessing indicated the nature and striving of Shem.  The standard-bearers of Shem would be Israel, for whom the primary goal of life is to serve God and increase His glory in the world.  Consequently, when God is blessed, they, too, are exalted.

Though Israel is Hashem’s most devoted servant, He is the universal God; not only Shem’s.  He is called the God of Shem in the sense that He is called the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in that He is especially revealed in their history and because they are the ones who recognized and proclaimed His greatness (Hirsch).

Noah first blessed the God of Shem, thereby letting it be known that Shem will be a servant of Hashem while Canaan will be subject to the descendants of Shem who were many.  

9:27  This verse charts the relationship between the two critical factors of human intellect and spirituality.  Japheth was blessed with beauty and sensitivity; Shem was blessed with holiness and the Divine Presence.  Of the many nations descending from both, the blessing of Japheth took root in ancient Greece and the culture it spawned, while the blessing of Shem rested on Israel and its immersion in Torah and mitzvos (the 613 commandments).  Noah’s blessing states that Japheth’s gift is important and beautiful, but only if it is placed at the service of the spiritual truths represented by Shem; otherwise it can be not only dissipated but harmful.  

“..but he will dwell in the tents of Shem;”  – As the Talmud (Yoma 10a) explains: Although God extended Japheth, inasmuch as his descendant Cyrus built the Second Temple, yet the Shechinah did not dwell in it – he rests only in the tents of Shem, for the Shechinah dwelt only in the First Temple which was built by Solomon, a descendant of Shem (Rashi; Midrash).

Ramban explains it this way: ‘Noah then blessed Japheth with an extension of his territories.  He blessed Shem that God cause His Shechinah to dwell in his tents, and finally said that Canaan be a servant to them – the two of them.

9:28-29  Noah was born in the year 1056 from Creation, the Flood occurred in 1656, and he died in 2006, ten years after the Dispersion (Chapter 11).  Abraham was born in 1948; thus he knew Noah and was 58 years old when Noah died.  It is fascinating that from Adam to Abraham, there was a word-of-mouth tradition spanning only four people:  Adam, Lamech, Noah, and Abraham.  Similarly, Moses, through whom the Torah was given, saw Kehath who saw Jacob, who saw Abraham.  Accordingly, there were not more than seven people who carried the tradition firsthand from Adam to the generation that received the Torah (Abarbanel).

Genesis – Chapter 8

Rashi apparently notes that it is unusual for a verse speaking of God’s compassionate ‘remembering’ of Noah to employ the name of God which designates Him in His strict Attribute of Justice.  ‘Hashem’, which designates Him as a Merciful God would seem more appropriate in this context.  Obviously, there is a lesson to be learned.

Rashi explains it by basing himself upon a Midrash, part of which is cited in 6:7: ‘Woe to the wicked who turn the Attribute of Mercy into the Attribute of Justice…’

The Midrash continues: ‘Happy are the righteous who turn the Attribute of Justice into the Attribute of Mercy.  Wherever Elohim is used, it implies the Attribute of Justice…yet it is written: ‘And Elohim (‘God’) remembered Noah; And Elohim remembered Rachel (30:22); And Elohim heard their groaning (Exodus 2:24).

Thus, Rashi concludes, it is the prayer of the righteous that transforms Justice into Mercy, and while the wrath of His fury was obliterating Creation, He nevertheless displayed Mercy to Noah and to those with him in the ark.


8:1
  “God remembered..”  – To say that God “remembers” implies that forgetfulness is possible for Him, which is clearly an absurdity.  The Torah uses this term, like many others, to make it easier for us to understand the course of events: God’s wisdom had decreed that up to this point He should ignore the plight of His creatures, as if He had forgotten them.  Now, when He was ready to show them mercy, it was if He had remembered.  The commentators state that Noah earned this mercy because he fed and cared for animals during all the months in the Ark. (Midrash)

God remembered that the animals that were permitted to enter the ark had not previously perverted their way, and that they had refrained from mating in the ark (Rashi).

God remembered that Noah was a perfectly righteous man, and there was a Divine covenant to save him.  Concerning the animals, God remembered His plan that the earth should continue with the same species as before (Ramban).

Only Noah is mentioned, not his family, because they were all saved by his merit.  

“And God caused a spirit to pass…’  – Rashi who is consistent with his interpretation of 1:2, comments: ‘It was a spirit of comfort and appeasement that passed before Him’.  Rashi does not translate the word to ‘wind’ instead of ‘spirit’ because wind has the effect of stirring up water (Psalm 147:18).  It was rather His compassion that calmed the turbulent water.

That very same (wind/spirit) which hovered during Creation (1:2) went forth upon the waters during the Flood and returned the waters to their original state.  Then He sent forth this same (wind/spirit) to calm the waters.


8:2  Rashi notes that unlike 7:11 which says that all the fountains burst forth, this verse does not say that all of them closed because some fountains, such as the hot springs of Tiberias were left open to benefit the world (Rashi).  Remember: the waters of the Flood – even those which flowed into Eretz Yisrael (see 8:11) – were hot (Sanhedrin 108a).

“the rain from heaven was restrained.”  – God did this so that Noah should not grow frightened at seeing new rain and think that a new Flood was coming.  God, therefore, withheld all precipitation until He made the covenant with Noah promising him never again to bring a flood upon the world (9:11).


8:6  “..Noah opened the window of the ark..”  – Noah knew that the rains had stopped earlier.  He waited until sufficient time had elapsed since the ark had landed before he opened the window because until then he was afraid that waves might suddenly rise up and rush in through the opening (Radak).

Malbim suggests, however, that he had opened it regularly for a brief time to watch the progress of the waters; this time he left it open permanently.

Ramban agrees that Noah would open and close the window at will.  Seventy-three days after the ark landed, he peered out the window.  He saw the peaks of the mountains of Ararat, and again closed the window.  Scripture then relates that forty days later he sent forth the raven, because he thought that by that time the towers and trees (which according to Ramban were not destroyed by the Flood) would be visible and the birds would find in them a place to nest, so he opened the window and sent forth the raven.  

8:7  Why did Noah send a raven which was an unclean bird (see Leviticus 11:15) and of which there were only two in the ark, thus risking a mishap that would have made an entire species extinct?  Since Noah’s purpose for sending forth the raven is not explicitly stated as it is in the case of the dove in verse 8, the commentators have different views.  The Talmud (Sanhedrin 108b) however answers the question in this way.  The raven was one of the three creatures who transgressed the prohibition of mating in the ark.  Noah’s son Ham, the dog, and the raven.

The raven’s mate had thus already been impregnated and was incubating her eggs.  Therefore Noah reasoned that it was permitted to dispatch the raven because the survival of the species was assured.

This also explains why, in the case of the raven, Noah did not stretch forth his hand to bring it back into the ark, as he did for the dove.  Noah was angered that the raven, dog, and his son Ham transgressed the prohibition, but he was helpless.  He could not banish the other creatures from the ark because they would have drowned, the raven was the only one of the three that could fly and survive outside of the ark for the duration of the Flood.

“..it kept going and returning..”  – Sanhedrin 108b:

Resh Lakish said: The raven gave Noah a devastating retort: ‘Your Master hates me and you hate me.  Your Master hates me since He commanded you to save seven pairs of the clean creatures but only one pair of unclean creatures.  You hate me because you leave the species of seven and send me when I am one of only two.  Should the angel of heat or cold attack me, will not the world be short of one species?  Or perhaps you desire my mate!’

‘Evil one!’ Noah replies.  ‘Even my wife who is usually permitted to me, has been forbidden me in the ark; how much the more (your mate) which is always forbidden me!

According to the parallel Midrash, Noah is answering the raven’s complaints that it was singled out from all the birds to be sent away, by saying: ‘What need has the world for you?  You are fit for neither food nor sacrifice!’  The Midrash goes on to show how the raven was indeed a necessary species.  It was the raven that would one day feed Elijah and keep him alive (1 Kings 17:16).


8:8   When Noah saw that the raven’s mission had been fruitless, he dispatched the dove, for doves have the ability to bring a response to their sender (Radak).

Malbim suggests that Noah had brought along pairs of trained courier birds as part of his own personal belongings.  It was from his own that Noah sent forth this dove, not of the seven pairs he was required to bring into the ark and from which he would not diminish.

8:9  “But the dove could find no resting place..”  – Rav Yahudah bar Nachman comments: Had it found a place of rest, it would not have returned.  The Midrash also perceives the dove as an allegorical symbol of Israel.  Similarly ‘she dwelt among the nations, but found no rest’ (Lamentations 1:3), but had she (Israel) found rest, she would not have longed to return (to God and her land.)

Midrash Aggadah adds: Just as the dove found no resting place, so would Israel not find a haven of rest in Exile, but just as the dove returned to the ark, so will Israel return from Exile to their land, in the face of the burden of the nations who are likened to water.

“..so he put forth his hand, and took it,..”  – Noah’s compassion teaches us that one should treat an unsuccessful messenger as well as a successful one, if the failure was not his fault (Haamek Davar).

8:11  “..an olive leaf..”  – The Midrash asks: From where did the dove bring it?  

Rav Abba said: She brought it from the young shoots of Eretz Yisrael.

Rav Levi said: She brought it from the Mount of Olives, for Eretz Yisrael was not submerged by the Flood.

Rav Birai said: The gates of the Garden of Eden were opened for her and from there she brought it.

By bringing back a bitter olive leaf in its mouth, the dove was saying symbolically, “Better that my food be bitter but from God’s hand, than sweet as honey but dependent on mortal man (Rashi).  Hirsch elaborates: For a full year, the dove could not earn its own food; hunger forced it to rely on Noah’s kindness.  Then it found a bitter leaf that it would ordinarily not eat – and carried it back to Noah, preaching the lesson of the Sages, that even the bitterest food eaten in freedom is better than the sweetest food given in servitude.  

The Midrash says that the leaf was brought from the Mount of Olives since Eretz Yisrael was not inundated.  This should not be taken to mean that the land remained unaffected.  Rather, the rains did not fall upon Eretz Yisrael nor did the deep overflow it.  The waters did stream in from other lands, however, although not with sufficient force to uproot its trees.

The people in Eretz Yisrael, however, were overcome, because, as pointed out, the waters of the Flood were scalding hot.  The fact that the hot springs of Tiberias still exist, indicates there were hot Flood waters in Eretz Yisrael.  Those in the ark, however, were spared the devastating heat, because the water was miraculously cooled at the side of the ark. (Zevachim 113b)

“..and Noah knew that the waters subsided from upon the earth.”  – He inferred from the fact that the dove had not ‘found’ it but, as implied by the verb ‘plucked’ it, the waters had almost entirely subsided from the earth because olive trees are not high (Radak).

8:13  God had not ordered Noah to leave the ark at this time.  Noah waited because he knew that at the appropriate time God would command him to leave just as He had commanded him to enter (Radak). 

8:14  The earth had dried out and returned to its natural condition.  The cycle was complete.  The Flood had commenced on the 17th of the second month of the previous year, and a complete solar year which was the period of punishment of the Generation of the Flood had elapsed before the earth returned to its original state.  Since a solar year is eleven days longer than a lunar year, the additional eleven days from the sixteenth of the month (end of the lunar year) to the twenty-seventh of the month complete the solar year, making 365 days in all (Rashi).

8:16  In telling Noah that the Ark would save him, God used the Name Hashem (7:1), which denotes mercy.  Here, in telling him to return to the world, He uses the Name Elohim, and uses it throughout the narrative.  In addition to its familiar connotation of God as Judge, it also refers to Him as God Who dominates nature and uses it to carry out His ends.  Just as judgment proceeds along clearly defined rules, so too nature has its clearly defined laws, within which God guides the world, unless He chooses to override them and perform a miracle.  The Name Elohim refers to this aspect of God’s total mastery, for it describes Him as ‘the Mighty One Who wields authority over the beings above and below’ and ‘the Omnipotent One.  Here, when God called upon Noah to leave the Ark and build the world anew, He appeared as the God Who created and preserves the natural world, and Who would rejuvenate the universe that had lain virtually dormant for a year.  Regarding this definition of the Name Elohim, commentators note that its numerical value equals that of ‘the nature’, indicating that He controls all natural phenomena.

8:17  ‘..on the earth..”  – Only back on earth were the animals to be fruitful and multiply, but in the Ark, all sexual activity was forbidden (Rashi).  The next verse, by mentioning the males and females separately, suggests that the prohibition was still in force, even after the end of the Flood’s ravages.  

8:20  ‘Then Noah built an altar to Hashem..”  –  When Noah left the ark and saw the world in a state of destruction, he wept and cried out to God: ‘Master of the Universe!  You are called All Merciful.  You should have shown compassion upon the work of Your hand.’

‘Foolish shepherd!’ God answered him.  ‘Now you say this?  Why did you not plead when I said ‘I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation’ and ‘I will bring Flood-waters’, and ‘make unto yourself an ark of gopher-wood.’  I forewarned you to give you ample opportunity to seek mercy for My world.  Instead, as soon as you heard that you would be spared you were complacent; it never occurred to you to pray on behalf of the others.  You contently went into your ark and saved yourself.  Now, that the world is in ruin, you open your mouth with meaningless petitions?’

When Noah heard this, he built an altar and offered sacrifices (Zohar).

There is a tradition that the place where David and Soloman built the altar in the threshing floor of Aravnah (II Chronicles 3:1), was the same place where Abraham built the altar upon which he bound Isaac.  This is the same place where Noah had built an altar after leaving the ark, which was in the same place as the altar upon which Cain and Abel offered a sacrifice.  It was there that Adam offered a sacrifice after he was created, for Adam was created from that very ground, as the Sages have taught: Adam was created from that place where he made atonement.  This place is Mount Moriah, the site of the Temple in Jerusalem.  

8:21  “And Hashem smelled the pleasing aroma..”  –  This is the only time in Scripture where the positive article ‘the’ is used in connection with an offering.  This is to indicate that Noah’s sacrifice was in a class of its own because he was the forerunner of reborn human life and was now dedicating the entire future of the race to God’s service.

“..and Hashem said in His heart..”  – When Scripture uses this term, it means that God kept the resolution private and did not reveal it to a prophet, meaning Noah, at that time.  However, when He directed Moses to write the Torah he revealed to him that Noah’s sacrifice was accepted and. that as a result, He had resolved never again to smite every living thing.

I will not continue to curse again….nor will I again continue..”  – God repeated this so that it would constitute an oath (Shevuos 36a).  It is to this implied oath that Isaiah 54:9 refers: ‘For I have sworn that the waters of Noah will never again pass over the earth’ (Rashi).

“..is evil from his youth;”  – Man receives the Evil Inclination from birth before he has the wisdom and maturity to combat it (meaning that man’s animal instincts are inborn, while the intellect and spiritual desire for self-improvement must be taught and developed with time and maturity).  Therefore, while individuals are responsible for their sins, mankind as a whole should not be wiped out totally because of sin.  God will punish people in other, less drastic, ways (Ramban; Abarbanel).

‘..as I have done.”  – For in the future God will never again punish the human family as a body; He will punish only the individual sinners as He later did in Sodom (Radak).

8:22  Hirsch notes that the Midrash makes it very clear that the seasons, as we now know them and described in this verse, came into existence after the Flood.  Prior to it, fields were cultivated only once in forty years, the climate was always spring-like and the entire land mass of earth was unbroken by seas and oceans.  The Midrash also indicates that this ease of living was a major contributory factor in the corruption of the generation.  The inference is plain that inactivity and excess leisure are harmful to human moral development.

Rashi shows the year is thus divided into six periods of two month each, which, in that part of the world are:

seedtime – the time of planting wheat;

winter – the time of planting barley and beans which are quick to ripen;

cold – which is more severe than winter;

harvest – time to bring in the crops

summer – a name which originally referred to summer fruit, as in II Samuel 16:2, but which is now applied to the season of such fruit, the time when the figs are gathered and laid out to dry in the fields;

heat – the end of summer when the world is excessively hot.

The fact that the verse specifies that day and night shall not cease, implies that during the Flood they did cease, because as the Midrash says, the heavenly bodies did not function and the distinction between day and night was not apparent.

According to Ibn Ezra, the year is divided in this verse into two periods; seedtime and harvest, and then it is further divided into four opposing periods: cold corresponding to heat, summer corresponding to winter, which in total correspond to the four seasons of the year.  Finally it is divided into day and night, for the shortness of the day in one season (winter) is made up in its corresponding season (summer); similarly with night.