Kommentar zu Bereschit 24:69

ברך את אברהם בכל [THE LORD HAD] BLESSED ABRAHAM IN ALL THINGS — The numerical value of the word בכל is equal to that of בן (a son) — suggesting that God had blessed Abraham with a son and since he had a son he had to find him a wife.

AND ABRAHAM WAS OLD, WELL STRICKEN IN AGE. Scripture reiterates [Abraham’s old age although it has already mentioned it]⁵⁷Above, 18:11. in order to inform us of the reason that he adjured his servant. Thus Scripture says that because Abraham saw himself to be very old and he thought that if he will send the servant to the land of his origin, perhaps before the messenger would return, he will have gone to his long home,⁵⁸Ecclesiastes 12:5. he therefore adjured his servant — whose counsel Isaac would follow since he ruled over all that he had⁵⁹Verse 2 here. — that he should not take for him a wife from the daughters of Canaan.
In Bereshith Rabbah,⁶⁰48:19. the Rabbis said: “Here⁶¹That is, above, 18:11, where Scripture says, Now Abraham and Sarah were old. it was old age combined with vitality; further on⁶²That is, in the verse before us. it was old age without vitality.” By this the Rabbis wanted to explain that ba’im [literally: “coming” in days — mentioned above]⁵⁷Above, 18:11. — means the beginning of the days of old age, as the word ba’im indicates the present, just as, ‘Haba’im’ (those that come) in at these gates.⁶³Jeremiah 7:2. But here it says that he was very old for already he was ba bayamim [literally: “he had come in days” — past tense], just as: Thy brother ‘ba’ (came) with subtlety.⁶⁴Further, 27:35.

1 He was advanced in years. This is to say, the time had come to marry off his son during his lifetime.

Avraham was old. He was concerned that he might die without seeing his son married off; therefore he resolved to seek a wife for him without delay. Place your hand. Because of his wealth Avraham was concerned that someone unworthy might bribe Eliezer into taking his daughter for Yitzchok. For this reason he made him swear not to take a Canaanite woman.

ואברהם זקן, And Abraham was old, etc. Inasmuch as Abraham felt that he had aged and also in view of the fact that G'd had greatly blessed him, he worried that the servant who was in charge of all this wealth while his master was visibly aging would develop notions of marrying his daughter to Isaac. Eliezer might want to secure Abraham's wealth for himself through the marriage of his daughter to Abraham's son. This is the reason Abraham made Eliezer swear an oath concerning the fact that his son was not to marry someone of Canaanite descent. Eliezer would thus get the message that his daughter was not suitable marriage material for a son of Abraham who was blessed whereas the Canaanites were cursed (compare Bereshit Rabbah 59,9).

ואברהם זקן, this is either past tense of the verb, or an adjective;

ואברהם זקן בא בימים, “Avraham had become old, advanced in years.” The Torah writes this comment at this point in order to inform us that as a result of the death of Sarah, symptoms of old age suddenly became manifest in Avraham’s whole demeanour. This is also what the sages had in mind when they said” “a wife’s death primarily affects her husband.” True, the Torah had already described both Avraham and Sarah as זקנים באים בימים, “old, advanced in years” (18,11), the matter has been repeated because as a result of Sarah having become pregnant and given birth to Yitzchok both she and her husband had become rejuvenated. Avraham now reverted to being an old man. It is also possible to justify the mention of Avraham having become an old man at this point in view of what follows, i.e. his empowering Eliezer to choose a wife for his son Yitzchok, seeing G’d’s promise that he would die at an old age בשלום, i.e. having seen his major hopes fulfilled, this could not occur until Yitzchok had been married and had produced an heir. We know from Psalms 128,6 וראה בנים לבניך שלום על ישראל, “and live to see children of your children, peace be unto Israel,” that until one has been blessed with grandchildren one does not consider oneself as having died בשלום. He therefore had concluded that the time was overdue to see to it that Yitzchok would marry. The Torah testifies that Avraham considered himself as blessed in all areas of life, i.e. וה' ברך את אברהם בכול, although he was too old now to undertake a strenuous journey to Aram Naharayim. The word בא in our verse is to be understood as being in the past tense as in Genesis 27,35 בא אחיך במרמה, “your brother has already come, deviously, etc.”

Since he had a son he needed to find a wife for him. Otherwise, why does it say this here? The reason Scripture does not write outright [that he had a son] is to teach us that the son was considered like “all things.” Before he had a son, he said (15:2), “What will You give me since I continue to be childless?” But now all his blessings were complete. (Gur Aryeh)

Dieser einleitende Satz enthält das Lebenssummarium Abrahams: er war בא בימים ,זקן, und Gott hatte ihn בכל gesegnet, sein Leben war abgeschlossen, er hatte für sich nichts mehr zu erstreben und zu erreichen; seine einzige Sorge durfte nur noch seinem Sohne und seinem ihn überlebenden Hause gelten.

ברך את אברהם בכל, “He blessed Avraham in all respects.” This was due to the merit he had acquired when tithing the loot of the war against the Kings with Kedorleomer and giving it to the “priest,” who was the King of Shalem. (Genesis 14,20)

ואברהם זקן, “and by now Avraham had visibly aged;” he could no longer move around easily, and that is why he sent his servant (to select a bride for Yitzchok).

2. And God blessed Abraham [with everything] - this is to inform/explain to us about what is said in [the text in] front of us, that Abraham did not send his servant to take a wife [for Isaac] on account of lack of women in the Land of Canaan or because no one wanted to mate with him, because Abraham had been blessed with everything and the entire world desired to mate with Isaac, but because he only wanted a spouse for Isaac from his family. This is why Abraham's servant said: "And Adonai blessed my master very much and he has become wealthy." And it is for this reason that the text needed to explain first that God had blessed Abraham "with everything," as in a similar instance: "And Ham was the father of Canaan" (Genesis 9:18).

בא בימים, the years when man thinks about his departure from this earth and is concerned to make sure that his son or children are safely married while he is still around.

וה' ברך את אברהם בכל, “and the Lord had blessed Avraham in every way; material wealth, property, long life, and all the things which man aspires to make his life enjoyable. The only thing missing in Avraham’s life were grandchildren who would become the heirs of his prominent stature. He therefore decided to take a hand in bringing this about.

AND THE ETERNAL HAD BLESSED ABRAHAM IN ALL THINGS. I.e., with riches, possessions, honor, longevity and children, which are all the treasures of man. Scripture mentions this in order to say that Abraham was perfect in every detail, lacking in no respect save seeing his son have children who would inherit his superior position and his honor. This was why he desired it.
Now our Rabbis have a wonderful insight into this verse. They said:⁶⁵Baba Bathra 16b. “And the Eternal had blessed Abraham ‘bakol’ (in all things). Rabbi Meir said that Abraham was blessed in that he did not have a daughter. Rabbi Yehudah said that he did have a daughter. Acheirim⁶⁶Literally “other ones,” other Rabbis besides those mentioned. Rabbi Meir is sometimes called by this name. Here, however, it could not refer to him since his opinion has already been stated. Acheirim here refers to anonymous authorities or to the opinion of Rabbi Meir’s master, Elisha ben Abuyah, who was also known as Acheir. See Chagigah 15a. say that he did have a daughter and her name was Bakol.”⁶⁷The profounder meaning of this saying will be explained further in the text. Rabbi Meir thus explained that Abraham did not have a daughter. This was a blessing for Abraham for he could not have married her except to the cursed sons of Canaan. If he were to send her to his country, she would also worship the idols as they did because a woman is subject to the authority of her husband. Indeed, Abraham did not want his worthy children from his wife Sarah to go outside the Land, and surely not that they worship the idols. Rabbi Yehudah, however, explained that Abraham did have a daughter since the Merciful One did not even cause him to lack a daughter, and that was the blessing implied by the expression, in all things, for he had everything that people desire, completely without exception. Then came Acheirim and mentioned the name of the daughter. Now truthfully, the intent of Acheirim and their controversy with Rabbi Yehudah were not merely to inform us of the name of this daughter. Far it be from them to expend the great and generalized blessing of Abraham on this matter, i.e., that Scripture is saying that G-d blessed him with one daughter with that name. However, Acheirim established a new interpretation on this verse, a very profound matter, and they explained with it one of the secrets of the Torah. Thus they said that the word bakol hints at a great matter, namely, that the Holy One, blessed be He, has an attribute called Kol (All), so called because it is the foundation of everything. It is with reference to this attribute that it says, I am the Eternal that maketh ‘Kol’ (all).⁶⁸Isaiah 44:24. And this is also what Scripture says, And the profit of the earth is ‘bakol’ (in all),⁶⁹Ecclesiastes 5:8. that is to say, the profit of the earth and the abundant goodness that is bestowed upon all that come into the world is on account of this attribute Kol. It is the eighth attribute of the thirteen attributes.⁷⁰See Ramban Exodus 34:6. And there is another attribute called bath [literally “daughter”] that emanates from it, and with it He moves everything. This is “the Court of the Holy One, blessed be He,” that is hinted at in the word, Vahashem (And the Eternal), in all places. It is called kalah (bride) in the book of The Song of Songs because it is comprised of hakol (the All), and it is this attribute which the Sages have surnamed Knesseth Yisrael (the assembly of Israel) in many places because it is the gathering of hakol (the All). It was this attribute which was to Abraham as a bath because he was the man of kindness, and he conducted himself in accordance with it. This was why Acheirim said that this blessing with which Abraham had been blessed in all things does not allude either to his having begotten a daughter from his wife Sarah, as Rabbi Yehudah said, or not, as Rabbi Meir claimed, but instead it hints at a great matter, i.e., that he was blessed with an attribute called bath which is contained in the attribute Kol, and is therefore also called Kol, being analogous to the expression, For My name is in him.⁷¹Exodus 23:21. Thus Abraham was blessed in heaven and on earth. This is why he said, By the Eternal, the G-d of heaven and the G-d of the earth.⁷²Verse 3 here.
This matter is to be found hinted at in the traditions of our Rabbis in many places. Thus they said in the Midrash Chazita:⁷³Another name for the Midrash Rabbah on the Song of Songs. The name Chazita is derived from the first word in the verse with which this Midrash opens. ‘Chazita’ (Seest thou) a man diligent in his business? he shall stand before kings. (Proverbs 22:29.) The Midrash quoted is found ibid., 3:21. “Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai asked Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Yosi, ‘Have you possibly heard from your father of the meaning of the verse, The crown wherewith his mother hath crowned him?’⁷⁴Song of Songs 3:11. He said to him, ‘Yes.’ He asked, ‘How?’ He replied, ‘It is like a king who had an only daughter whom he loved very much, and he would call her “my daughter.” This did not completely express his love for her until he called her “my sister.” Still he was not satisfied until he called her “my mother.” In the same way, the Holy One, blessed be He, loved Israel in the beginning and called them “My daughter.” It is this which Scripture says, Hearken, O daughter, and consider.⁷⁵Psalms 45:11. This did not completely express His love for them until He called them “My sister,” as it is said, Open to me, my sister, my love.⁷⁶Song of Songs 5:2. Still He was not satisfied until He called them “My mother,” as it is said, Attend unto Me, O My people, ‘ule’umi’ (O My nation).⁷⁷Isaiah 51:4. The word is written le’imi (O My mother).’ Then Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai arose and kissed him on his head, and he said to him, ‘Had I come to listen to this word of yours it would have been sufficient.’…”
Now, had the commentator who prides himself on his knowledge of the Torah’s secrets⁷⁸Reference here is to Ibn Ezra who often prides himself on knowing the secrets of the Torah but who, in the case of this Midrash concerning Abraham’s having a daughter by the name of Bakol, criticizes the interpretation by commenting that if that were the case, the word bakol should have had an additional letter beth preceding it and meaning “and G-d blessed Abraham ‘with’ bakol.” known this, his lips would be dumb and not deride the words of our Rabbis. Therefore, I have written this in order to silence those who speak arrogantly against the righteous one.⁷⁹See Psalms 31:19.

זקן. Es ist schon oben Kap.19, Raw Hirsch on Genesis 24: 4 auf die Verwandtschaft dieser Wurzel mit סכן und זין hingewiesen, die diesem Begriffe die Bedeutung der "gereiften Erfahrung" vindiziert, im Gegensatz zu נער, der Jugend, die noch alle Eindrücke leicht "abschüttelt", nichts an sich haften lässt, noch nichts durchs Leben lernt, vielmehr noch den Trieb hat, alles aus sich heraus zu entwickeln.

וה' ברך את אברהם בכל, he lacked nothing, and did not need anything in this life except to see his son well married.

Dadurch unterscheidet sich זקן von ישן, der anderen Bezeichnung von "alt". ישן wovon ja auch שנה der Schlaf, bezeichnet eine Abnutzung der Kräfte, ein Erschlaffen und Dunkelwerden, daher auch אישון: das Dunkel. זקן aber bezeichnet den durch die Lebensarbeit errungenen Gewinnst, die Reife der Persönlichkeit. Daher die Worte der Weisen: זקן זה שקנה חכמה, oder der noch umfassendere Satz: זה שקנה שני עולמים, der beide Welten erobert. Die jüdische Weisheit erkennt überall den Wert des diesseitigen Lebens neben dem des jenseitigen im vollen Maße an und verleiht ihm Ausdruck. Es ist jüdische Weisheit, die spricht: יפה שעה אחת בתשובה ומעשים טובים בעולם הזה מכל חיי העולם הבא, eine Stunde des sittlichen Fortschrittes und der guten Taten in diesem Leben überwiegt das ganze zukünftige Leben, wenngleich sie ebenfalls hinzufügt: ויפה שעה אחת של קורת רוח בעולם הבא מכל חיי העולם הזה und eine Stunde geistiger Befriedigung im jenseitigen Leben überwiegt das ganze diesseitige. זקן ist ihr derjenige, der mit seinem hieniedigen Dasein beide Welten erworben, die diesseitige für die künftige, indem er der hieniedigen Welt den Stempel des Göttlichen aufgedrückt. צדיקים ישכינו שכינה בארץ, bereiten die Erde zur Stätte des Göttlichen.

So auch nach derselben Anschauung das בא בדופלין :בא בימים, er hatte das Zwiefache, das Irdische und Göttliche durchgemacht, בא בפילון מפולש לחיי עה"ב, seine Lebenstage waren ihm פילון מפולש, ein gerade und offen zum Jenseits führender Gang. Die Tage hatten nicht ihn überwunden, er hatte sie durchschritten, sie waren ihm die Meilenzeiger auf seinem Wege zur Ewigkeit.

ברך את אברהם בכל die Weisen fügen zu diesem Satz die Worte Jizchaks ואוכל מכל und diejenigen Jakobs (Kap.27. 33): יש לי כל und, in diesen (Kap.33, 11) drei Ausdrücken: בכל ,מכל ,כל, die Quintessenz des Lebensinhalts dieser drei Männer erkennend, sprechen sie dabei die bedeutsamen Worte aus: שלשה הטעימן הב"ה מעין עה"ב ואלו הן אברהם יצחק ויעקב דכתיב בהו בכל מכל כל diese drei Väter, so verschieden ihre äußere Lebensstellung gewesen, Abraham, dessen ganzer Lebenslauf eine immer im Segen steigende Linie bezeichnet, und der am Ende seines Lebens als נשיא אלקי׳ unter den Völkern dastand, — dagegen seinen Enkel Jakob, der mit dem Stecken in der Hand aus der Heimat in den Knechtesdienst bei einem ränkevollen Oheim pilgern musste, — und in der Mitte seinen Sohn Isaak, in dessen Hause wir schon die abwärts steigende Sonne des Glücks gewahren — alle drei habe doch Gott schon hienieden einen Vorgeschmack der ewigen Seligkeit empfinden lassen: denn sie empfanden alle drei Gottessegen: בכל ,מכל ,כל.

Verstehen wir diese Worte recht, so bezeichnet Abrahams hieniedige Seligkeit, dass Gott ihn durch alles gesegnet habe. Es kann einem Menschen alles gesegnet werden, ihm alles gedeihen, er selbst aber bleibt unglücklich mitten im Segen, alles Seine blüht, er aber ist nicht שמח, wächst nicht, blüht nicht innerlich; Abraham aber fühlte sich selbst gesegnet und blühte durch allen Segen.

Schwächer wäre der Ausdruck bei Jizchak: ואוכל מכל, es entspräche dem: עוברים בעמק הבכא מעין ישיתהו, ,auch die Träne weiß sich der Fromme zum Segensquell" umzuwandeln", שומר מצוה לא ידע דבר רע, "wer sein ganzes Leben unter dem Begriff der Pflicht betrachtet, der kennt nichts Böses", der schält sich aus dem Trübsten den Kern der nun zu erfüllenden Pflicht, und die Lösung der Aufgabe, die auch das Unglück bringt, macht ihn glücklich: er "genießt" von allem. —

Das höchste, und gleichwohl von allen in jeder Lebenslage zu Erreichende, wäre Jakobs: יש לי כל ihm fehlt nie etwas, weil er überhaupt nur leisten, nichts haben will, und so selbst in der tiefsten Erniedrigung wie Jakob seine seligste Lebensbefriedigung findet. —

Baba bathra 16, 2 werden noch drei Erläuterungen zu dem ודי ברך את א׳ בכל gegeben, die wohl erwogen sein wollen. R. Meir: Der Segen habe darin bestanden, dass Abraham keine Tochter gehabt. R. Jehuda: Der Segen habe vielmehr darin bestanden, dass Abraham auch eine Tochter gehabt. Andere meinen, er habe eine Tochter gehabt, die בכל hieß. R. Elieser Hammodai fügt hinzu: Der Ruf von Abrahams großer astrologischer Kenntnis habe bewirkt, dass alle Könige des Morgen- und Abendlandes ihn täglich aufgesucht. R. Schimeon ben Jochai: Abraham sei mit einer köstlichen Perle geschmückt gewesen, bei deren Anblick jeder sogleich Heilung gefunden etc. Nun kann sicherlich hier nicht jene Gesinnung haben ausgedrückt werden sollen, die den höchsten Segen darin findet, überhaupt keine Tochter zu haben. Abgesehen davon, dass ja dieselben Weisen den Zweck einer jeden Ehe nur in Sohn und Tochter erreicht erblicken (Jebamoth 61, b.), wäre ja auch keine Stelle ungeeigneter zu einer solchen Äußerung, als gerade ein Kapitel, dessen Inhalt, Sara und Rebekka, wie kaum ein anderes der Verherrlichung des Weibes dient. Vielmehr dürfte allen diesen Aussprüchen das בכל, Gott habe Abraham in allem gesegnet, dahin erschienen sein: in allem d. h. selbst in solchen Verhältnissen, in welchen ohne besondere göttliche Fürsorge eine Trübung seines Lebensglückes zu erwarten gewesen wäre. Gerade an dieser Stelle nun, in welcher Abrahams große Sorge hervortritt, für seinen einzigen Sohn eine entsprechende Frau zu finden, eine Sorge, für deren Lösung er nur einer ganz besonderen göttlichen Fügung vertrauen zu müssen glauben durfte, liegt der Gedanke unendlich nahe: welche Sorge, ja welcher kaum zu beseitigende Kummer wäre Abraham daraus erwachsen, wenn er eine Tochter gehabt hätte und für eine Tochter seines Hauses einen Gatten aus den kanaatischen oder aramäischen Männern hätte suchen müssen!! Ein Sohn Abrahams wird zuletzt selbst eine Tochter Kanaans oder Arams zu sich hinüber gewinnen in den Geist eines abrahamitischen Hauses. Allein aus gleichem Grunde wird auch die abrahamitische Tochter dem Geiste und dem Hause Abrahams durch einen kanaanitischen oder aramäischen Gatten verloren gehen. Denn der Sohn baut das Haus des Vaters weiter, aber die Tochter geht über in das schwiegerelterliche Haus, das sie mit als Mauer (חמיה) umfängt. Kanaanitischem oder aramäischem Götzendienste hätte Abraham seine Enkel geboren sehen müssen, wenn er eine Tochter gehabt hätte — vor diesem Schmerz, meint R. Meir, habe Gott ihn segnend bewahrt, indem er ihm keine Tochter geschenkt.

R. Jehuda führt den Gedanken weiter und meint, im Gegenteil, nicht durch Versagung, durch Gewährung sei Abraham selbst in diesem Punkte gesegnet gewesen. Gott habe ihm eine Tochter geschenkt und diese sei selbst in der Ehe "sein" geblieben, habe somit die Brücke gebildet zwischen dem isolierten Hause Abrahams und der übrigen Welt, habe somit einen Segen gewährt, der in der Isolierung unerreicht geblieben wäre, abrahamitischen Geist in die nichtabrahamitische Welt zu verpflanzen.

Dazu jedoch, meinen andere, habe es der leiblichen Tochter nicht bedurft. Das Band, das eine Tochter mit der nichtabrahamitischen Welt geknüpft hätte, bewirkte in noch stärkerem Maße das "בכל", der in allem sichtbare Gottessegen, wodurch Abraham die Augen der Welt auf sich zog, und die Gemüter zur Achtung und Beachtung seines Wandels geweckt wurden.

Dies wird durch R. Elieser und R. Schimeon nun veranschaulicht. Wäre ein Abraham arm, oder auch nur eines bescheidenen Glückes teilhaftig gewesen, er selbst hätte sicherlich nichts zur hieniedigen Glückseligkeit entbehrt; allein unbemerkt wäre er durch die Welt gewandelt. Und hätten die Menschen geglaubt, Abrahams glänzendes Glück beruhe nur auf der Grundlage seiner hohen Sittlichkeit, man hätte ihn angestaunt, aber hätte ihn ebenso isoliert seines Weges ziehen lassen. Denn nicht um zu lernen, wie man sittlich werde, kommen die Menschen zu laufen. Allein, wie bei jedem Menschen eines außerordentlichen Glückes, glaubten die Zeitgenossen, besonderer geheimer Wissenschaft und Zauberklugheit verdanke Abraham sein Glück, und das führte die Großen der Erde zu ihm, um dem "glücklichen Einsiedler" "den Stein der Weisen" abzulauschen.

Nicht nur sein äußeres Glück, bemerkt endlich R. Schimeon, schon die Persönlich keit Abrahams war eine so außerordentliche und wohltuende, dass sie schon allein genügte, die leidende Menschheit in seine Nähe zu führen. —

Jedenfalls haben die Weisen uns hiermit einen Wink gegeben, welche Ansichten über Abraham unter seinen Zeitgenossen verbreitet gewesen sein mögen. —

זקן ביתו THE ELDER OF HIS HOUSE — Because the noun is in the construct state the ק is punctuated with a Patach.

PUT YOUR HAND UNDER MY THIGH. And similarly with Yosef when he swore to Ya'akov. The making of a covenant or an oath of a son, or of a slave to his master was in this fashion, for they shared the aspect of subjugation, and it is thus written (Mal. 1:6), "A son should honor his father, and a slave his master." However, handshaking or cutting an object in two for a covenant and passing between the pieces is found with other persons.

ויאמר...זקן ביתו, the word zekan is a genitive (adjective) of the word zaken just as the word kevod is a genitive of the word kavod. Its meaning here is that this servant had grown up in Avraham’s household until he himself had become elderly. Or, its meaning could be that this servant was older (in the sense of senior) to all Avraham’s other servants.

שים נא ידך תחת ירכי, “please place your hand beneath my hip.” This was a request to swear an oath to his master by placing his hand on the site of the circumcision. Although in Jewish law, someone who needlessly touches his own or someone else’s male organ deserves to have that hand cut off, Avraham explained that in light of his having become an old man there was no chance that touching him there would result in the wasteful ejaculation of his semen. Ibn Ezra writes that in those days servants (slaves) used to place their hands under the hip of their master as a sign of obeisance. The master, by sitting on the servant’s hand signaled the fact that the servant had to do his bidding. The servant, by complying signaled his acknowledgment of his status.

עבדו: er war ihm untertänig, war rechtlich zur pünktlichen Ausführung des Willens seines Herrn verpflichtet; זקן ביתו: wie Abraham durch die Führungen Gottes, so war er durch das Leben im Hause Abrahams gereift, war ganz in dieses Leben ein- und aufgegangen, darum war er: מושל usw. wie das Wort heißt: erteilte allem und jedem in Abrahams häuslichem Kreise die Stellung und Bestimmung, die sie nach Abrahams Willen und in seinem Sinne haben sollten (siehe Kap.4,7).

זקן ביתו, “the senior servant of his household;” Eliezer was old enough so that Avraham did not have to worry that he would take advantage of his position to indulge in incestuous conduct.

תחת ירכי UNDER MY THIGH — because whoever takes an oath must take in his hand some sacred object. such as a Scroll of the Law or Tefillin (Shevuot 38b). As circumcision was the first commandment given to him and became his only through much pain it was consequently dear to him and therefore he selected this as the object upon which to take the oath (Genesis Rabbah 59:8).

מושל בכל אשר לו, he deserved to be entrusted with this task.

Lege doch deine Hand unter meine Hüfte; kommt nur hier, und noch einmal bei Jakob in seiner Aufforderung an Josef (1. B. M. 47, 29) vor. Es scheint nicht eine örtliche Hinweisung auf Mila zu sein. Die Örtlichkeit selbst entspräche nicht, es heißt ja: תחת ירכי. Warum kommt es sonst nicht bei irgend einer Zusicherung vor? ist vielmehr derjenige Körperteil, welcher, wenn man sich setzt oder legt, zuerst in ירך Berührung mit dem Boden kommt, (er ist insofern das Gegenteil von שכם, der Schulter, die beim Aufstehen aus der liegenden Stellung zuerst gehoben wird, woher השכים), es ist lautverwandt mit ירק und bezeichnet das nach hinten oder unten "geworfene" Ende, im Gegensatz zu פנים, daher ירכתים das Hinterteil eines Gebäudes. So heißt auch die Basis des Leuchters: 2) .ירכה. B. M. 25, 31). In beiden Stellen, in welchen dieser Ausdruck vorkommt, ist es ein Sterbender, oder ein dem Tode naher, der einem Überlebenden ein Versprechen abnimmt, ohne dessen zugesagte Erfüllung er nicht ruhig sterben könnte. Sollte nun nicht das: שים נא ידך תחת ירכי wörtlich heißen: "Lass mich auf deiner Hand ruhen"? d. i. gib mir die ganze Kraft und Macht, die du in deiner Hand hast, als Unterlage, damit ich darauf mich ruhig niederlegen könne. Dafür spricht auch, dass die Handlung des Handunterlegens nicht die Handlung des Schwörens ist, sondern dieser vorangeht.

תחת ירכי, according to the plain meaning of the word it has nothing to do with the place where Avraham had circumcised himself, although it was the most sacred symbol of his body. If it had, why did Avraham not make him swear an oath by using it as the focus instead of using Hashem as his focus? It simply was the custom in those days that any person who was subservient to another person would place his had under the thigh of his master as a symbol that he acknowledged him as such. Having done this was equivalent to a promise to carry out his master’s wishes. This custom was still in use in India in our author’s time.

שים נא ידך תחת ירכי, it was customary to make a person reinforce the promise that he would carry out an assignment by his placing his hand within the control of his master. This was a symbolic gesture meaning that just as his hand was under the control of his master so his personality would be under the control of his master to carry out his assignment. This was such a firmly established custom that the gesture itself was equivalent to swearing an oath. We find that in Genesis 47,29 when Yaakov wants an assurance from his son Joseph that he would not bury him in Egypt but in the land of Canaan, that he requests the same symbolic gesture from Joseph. There are commentators who understand this verse as Avraham requesting an oath from Eliezer. If that were correct, the Torah should have used the familiar formula of ואשביעך בה' אלוקי השמים, “I want you to swear in the name of the Lord of the Heavens to carry out this specific task.” [we must understand the author to mean that the oath and the symbol should have been part of the same verse if indeed placing his hand within the control of his master had been part of the oath. Ed.]

AND I WILL MAKE THEE SWEAR BY THE ETERNAL. It would have been proper for Abraham to command his son Isaac that he should not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan. But since it was his wish to dispatch someone during his lifetime to his country and his family, and he made the servant swear to do so whether in his lifetime or after his death, therefore Abraham found it necessary in any case to make the servant swear to go there. In addition he found it necessary to say to him, “I command you that you should not take a woman for my son of the daughters of Canaan. Instead you are to go to my country and take for him a wife from my father’s house.” Now having required the servant to swear to this, he no longer found it necessary to command Isaac at all for he knew that he would not transgress his father’s wish or the oath which he made his servant swear, as the matter was indeed known to Isaac.
It is also possible that the servant Eliezer was the administrator of his possessions, and Abraham commanded him to marry off Isaac in accordance with his will and cause him to inherit his estate on this condition, [namely, that he marry in accordance with his father’s wish]. This is the significance of the expression, that ruled over all that he had.⁸⁰Verse 2 here.

Among whom I live. If Yitzchok lived near his wife’s family, either in Canaan or in Charan, he would be subject to their influence. But if he married a woman from Charan and they lived in Canaan he would not be influenced by them.

אלוקי השמים ואלוקי הארץ, a veiled warning to Eliezer that if he were to betray his trust, there would be a higher power to hold him accountable for such a betrayal.

אשר אנכי יושב בקרבו, "among whom I dwell." Abraham countered Eliezer's assumption that inasmuch as the very proximity of Abraham causes one to be included in the blessing G'd promised to Abraham this did not mean that one's basic status of being cursed (as a result of Noach's curse) had been revoked. Abraham also wanted to dispel the notion that his presence and his status among such people as Aner, Eshkol and Mamre would become endangered if he did not take a wife for Isaac from their families.

ואשביעך..ואלוקי הארץ, meaning that the same G’d Who is ruler in the heavens also exercises His control down here on earth. Do not think that if you do not honour an oath made to the G’d in heaven that failure to honour it would not have negative consequences for you here on earth. When Avraham speaks of his own self, as opposed to the need to make someone else take an oath, he only needs to refer to the “G’d of the heavens” (compare verse 7) Avraham was well aware of G’d being also the G’d on earth. In Bereshit Rabbah 59,8 Rabbi Pinchas is quoted as saying that until He revealed Himself to His creatures G’d was known only as the “G’d of the heavens,” whereas after He revealed Himself to His creatures [or to an individual creature by performing a miracle for such a person Ed.] He also became known as the ”G’d of the earth.”

ואשביעך, “so that I make you swear, etc.” Avraham anticipates Eliezer’s concern that no woman in her right mind would a follow someone’s servant to a distant country on the servant’s say so that he had been empowered to select her as a wife for the son of his master. Therefore, Avraham told Eliezer that he would give him irrevocable documents, oath-like, to prove to the girl’s family that if she were to come she would indeed become the wife of Avraham’s son Yitzchok. Eliezer would have the widest possible latitude in using his good judgment.

ה׳, in dessen Händen die Zukunft ruht. אלקי השמים ואלקי הארץ, nicht אלקי השמים והארץ, welches Gott nur indirekt in Beziehung zur Erde setzen könnte, nur insofern er Gott des Himmels ist, durch welchen wiederum die Erde bedingt ist; sondern: ebenso unmittelbar Gott der Erde, wie er Gott des Himmels ist. —

מבנות הכנעני, “from among the daughters of the Canaanite nation.” Avraham did not want that in the future anyone could claim that his claim on the Holy Land was based on intermarriage with the previous owners of that land. It had to be established beyond any shadow of a doubt that the Israelites’ claim to the land was based on G-d having firmly promised it to me.

מבנות הכנעני, for the entire Canaanite tribe is cursed since the days of Noach, and Avraham’s seed is not to be merged with that of a cursed tribe.

אשר לא תקח אשה לבני מבנות הכנעני, “that you will not take a wife for my son from among the girls who are of Canaanite origin.” Actually, Avraham should have made Yitzchok swear an oath that he would not marry a Canaanite girl. The reason Avraham did not proceed in this fashion was that he wanted to send someone to his family in Charan or thereabouts, but he wanted to make his servant swear that he would perform the task either while he, Avraham, was still alive, or if necessary, even after his death. To this end he had to make Eliezer take an oath anyway. Seeing that he made Eliezer swear there was no longer any need to make Yitzchok swear to the same effect. He knew that Yitzchok would not violate the wishes of his father in this matter. Alternatively, Avraham actually appointed Eliezer to be his executor, ordering him to see that Yitzchok would get married and restricting his choices only by excluding women of Canaanite descent. To make this point quite clear to the reader, the Torah added the words המושל בכל אשר לו, describing Eliezer as having complete power of attorney concerning the affairs of Avraham. Some commentators believe that that at the time in question Yitzchok was simply not at hand, a view supported by the Torah when it described the chance meeting of Yitzchok and Eliezer when the former just returned from the well named by Hagar באר לחי רואי, (compare both 24,18 and 16,14) According to a Midrash (Yalkut), Yitzchok returned from Gan Eden at that time where the wounds inflicted upon him by his father when he had been lying bound on the altar had been healed.

THE G-D OF THE HEAVEN, AND THE G-D OF THE LAND.⁸¹“Of the land.” From Ramban’s commentary it becomes obvious that he understood the word ha’aretz (the land) to mean “the land of Israel.” The Holy One, blessed be He, is called the G-d of the Land of Israel, as it is written, They know not the manner of the G-d of the land,⁸²II Kings 17:26. and it is further written, And they spoke of the G-d of Jerusalem, as of the gods of the people of the earth.⁸³II Chronicles 32:19. There is a secret in this matter which I will yet explain⁸⁴See further, 26:5, and Leviticus 18:25. with the help of G-d. However [in Verse 7], further on where it says, Who took me from my father’s house, it does not say “the G-d of the land” because he [Abraham] was then in Haran or Ur of the Chaldees. So also the Rabbis have said:⁸⁵Ketuboth 110b. “He who lives outside the land of Israel is as if he had no G-d, as it said, For they have driven me out this day that I should not cleave unto the inheritance of the Eternal, saying, Go, serve other gods.⁸⁶I Samuel 26:19. But who said to David, Go serve other gods? However this verse teaches you that he who lives outside of the land of Israel is considered as if he worshipped idols. (Ibid.)

מבנות הכנעני, zwischen einer בת כנעני und einem בן אברהם ist die geistige und sittliche Kluft eine so große, dass sie nie und nimmer zu einander passen. Der Einfluss einer kanaanitischen Frau auf meinen Sohn wird aber ein um so größerer sein, als "ich mitten unter dem Kenaani wohne" somit nicht nur die Frau, sondern die ganze Verwandtschaft und Bekanntschaft ihren Einfluss geltend machen würden. Dass sich dieses letztere auf den Familieneinfluss bezieht, ist auch daran erkennbar, dass Elieser später so feinfühlend ist, statt בארצו :בקרבו zu sagen, in deren Land ich wohne und somit deren Sitten kenne. בקרבו wäre eine Beleidigung gewesen: Ich komme zu euch, weil ihr weit weg wohnet, in der Nähe möchten wir auch euch nicht haben!

יושב בקרבו, compare the verses 36 in our chapter as well as Genesis 48,16 where one or the other of these words is used to describe the environment in which our patriarchs lived.

ואשביעך בה' אלוקי השמים ואלוקי הארץ, “I will make you swear in the name of the Lord of heaven and earth.” The simile was apt as marriages are made in heaven before they are consummated on earth.

כי אם אל ארצי, not to members of any nation which does not dwell physically close to the region from which I originate. This is where you shall go to conduct your search.

כי אל ארצי ואל מולדתי תלך, "rather you shall go to my country and to my birthplace, etc." This was part of the oath also; Eliezer was to secure a wife for Isaac in Abraham's birthplace. This is why Eliezer is described as immediately taking the camels, etc.

כי אם אל ארצי, he referred to Aram Naharyim.

לבני ליצחק, zwei Rücksichten sollen Elieser leiten: לבני, in erster Linie, dass sie würdig sei, die Frau meines Sohnes zu werden, zu der Hoffnung berechtige, dass sie ebenso meine Tochter werde, wie er mein Sohn ist. Dies die allgemeine Anforderung an den Charakter. Es können aber zwei ganz vortreffliche Menschen sein und passen doch in ihrer Individualität nicht zu einander, daher ferner: ליצחק, dass sie auch zu Jizchaks Individualität passe. Wenn Abraham die kanaanitischen Töchter verwarf und eine Tochter aus Aram für seinen Sohn wünschte, so ist wohl zu bedenken, dass sie auch in Aram Götzendiener waren. Nicht darum Kanaans Götzentum, sondern nur die kanaanitische sittliche Entartung konnte das Motiv gewesen sein. Götzentum ist zunächst eine Verirrung des Verstandes, die zu heilen ist. Allein sittliche Entartung ergreift das ganze Menschenwesen in der ganzen seelischen Tiefe des Gemütes, und dort konnte selbst ein Abraham nicht hoffen, ein keusches, sittenreines, unschuldiges Weib für seinen Sohn zu finden, das den Adel der Gesinnung und der Sitte als Perle mit ins Haus bringen würde.

אל ארצי, “to my homeland;” i.e. to Charan.

ואל מולדתי, the town in which I was born, i.e. Ur Kasdim. Avraham meant to say that there Eliezer would find his family; he hinted at Rivkah, seeing that he had been informed of her birth. According to Rabbi Yitzchok in Bereshit Rabbah 59,8 the words “to my land” reflect a well known proverb according to which people prefer to plant seed originating in their own backyard even though the strain is known to be inferior to those available elsewhere.

Dem: לבני ליצחק entspricht vielleicht das: ארצי .לארצי ולמולדתי gibt, wie schon oben (Kap.12. 1) bemerkt, die allgemeine Richtung, und מולדתי, das engere, vaterstädtische, ja, wie hier wahrscheinlich, das verwandte Familiengepräge.

ואל מולדתי, “to my birthplace;” i.e. Ur Casdim. Avraham told Eliezer that he did not want any gentile woman to have a share in his ancestral portion.

PERADVENTURE THE WOMAN WILL NOT BE WILLING. The meaning [of the definite article in the word ha’ishah] is that it refers to “the woman to whom I will speak of all the women there”, or it may mean the woman who is fit for Isaac.

?ההשב אשיב את בנך, to the land of your ancestors? He meant that even though he might not find there any members of Avraham’s former family. He still referred to this as a השבה “a return.”

אשר יצאת משם, a place which you had despised. If I now swear to you to take a wife from there and the girl I choose refuses to come here, my betrothing her to your son will obligate him to fulfill his conjugal duties including living with her as husband and wife. If he refuses to join her there he will have become guilty of betrayal of his bride. Shall I really bring him back there?

?ויאמר...ההשב אשיב, supposing that by the time I return from my mission you will no longer be alive, tell me if I should bring your son back there in the event that the girl I select refuses to move here? Even though Yitzchok was not present during this discussion, Eliezer calls his potential migration to Aram Naharayim a השבה, “return,” as he refers to Avraham who had left that region, not to Yitzchok who had never been there in the first place.

אולי לא תאבה, “perhaps the woman does not want, etc.” He was referring to what might happen after he had located a girl he considered suitable as a future wife for Yitzchok.

אולי und אול, verwandt mit אפל ,אבל. Alle drei: eine Verdunkelung, אפל des physischen, אול des geistigen Lichtes, אבל des heiteren Gemütslebens: Dunkelheit, Zweifel, Trauer. Davon אויל, dem alles in der Schwebe ist, alles zweifelhaft geworden.

ההשיב אשיב את בנך, “shall I really take back your son there? This is a peculiar question by Eliezer, as Yitzchok had never been out of the land of Canaan. Seeing that Eliezer had been sent back there on behalf of Yitzchok, his question was perfectly in order. We find a similar verse in Ruth 1,22 where Naomi is described as “returning” to the land of Israel with her daughterinlaw , although the daughter inlaw, Ruth, had never set foot in that land.

אבה, nicht: Etwas wünschen, wo der Wunsch in unserer Brust entspringt, dies heißt חפץ etc. אבה heißt vielmehr: dem Wunsche eines andern sich fügen. Daher auch אניות אבה, gefügsame, leicht regierbare Schiffe (Job 9, 26). Deshalb auch אביון nicht: der nach allem Lüsterne, sondern: der sich den Wünschen anderer fügen muss, der Widerstandslose.

ויאמר...השמר לך, for Avraham did not want the claim on the land of Israel which G’d had promised him and which had been established through his physical presence in that land, to become subject to doubt through an even temporary migration of Yitzchok.

שמר .השמר לך פן ursprünglich: abwehren, שָמִיר: der abwehrende, schützende Dorn. Der שומר soll ein Wall um das Anvertraute sein. הִשָמֵר stellt die Person selbst unter die eigene Hut: sich vor etwas hüten. Da dies nun in der Regel eine Hut ist, die gegen sich selbst gerichtet ist, die die eigene Persönlichkeit nicht vor Gefährdung, sondern irgend ein Verhältnis vor Gefährdung durch die Persönlichkeit schützen soll, in tiefem Grunde aber in der Tat eine Gefährdung der eigenen Persönlichkeit abwehren soll, die durch jedes Vergreifen an anderem in erster Linie sich selber gefährdet, so wird diese Gedankennuance durch das beigefügte לכם ,לך etc. in der Regel noch besonders hervorgehoben. — פן, von פנה wenden: eine Seite, die Möglichkeit, wörtlich: die "Wendung" der Dinge, dass mein Sohn dorthin zurückkehre, also: Nimm dich in acht in Beziehung auf die Möglichkeit, dass du meinen Sohn dorthin zurückkehren lassen könntest. Schütze dich vor einer solchen Möglichkeit.

פן תשיב, so that you do not bring back. We find a similar formulation in Genesis 3,3 פן תמותון, “so that you will not die,” and in Genesis 31,24 פן תדבר עם יעקב, “so that you will not speak with Yaakov, etc.”

'ה אלהי השמים אשר לקחני מבית אבי THE LORD, GOD OF HEAVEN, WHO TOOK ME FROM MY FATHER'S HOUSE — Here he did not say “[The God of heaven] and the God of the earth”, whereas above (v. 3) he said, “And I will make thee swear etc. … [and the God of the earth]’’. But, in effect, Abraham said to him: Now He is the God of heaven and the God of the earth, because I have made him (i. e. His Name) a familiar one in peoples’ mouths: but at the time when He took me from my father’s house He was God of heaven only and not God of the earth for people did not acknowledge Him and His Name was not commonly known on earth (Genesis Rabbah 59:7).

FROM MY FATHER’s HOUSE, ‘UMEI’ERETZ MOLAD’TI’ (AND FROM THE LAND OF MY NATIVITY). Rashi comments: “From my father’s house — from Haran. And from the land of my nativity — from Ur of the Chaldees.” If this is so, the expression, Unto my country and to ‘molad’ti’ thou shalt go,⁸⁷Verse 4 here. must also refer to Ur of the Chaldees. But Heaven forbid that the sacred seed should mix with the sons of Ham,⁸⁸The Chaldees and the entire land of Shinar belonged to the sons of Ham. See Ramban, above, 11:28. the sinful one!⁸⁹Above, 9:22-24. Even if one would say that Abraham had some family there from the seed of Shem, the fact is however that the servant went to Haran as his master said! Now perhaps the Rabbi [Rashi] thinks that eretz molad’to⁸⁷Verse 4 here.(the land of his birth) was Ur of the Chaldees, but molad’ti⁸⁷Verse 4 here. means “my family,” and my country⁸⁷Verse 4 here. means the land wherein he lived. But all these are futile words since here, in the verse before us, he said, And thou shalt take a wife for my son from there, [and according to Rashi, who explained ume’eretz molad’ti, mentioned in this verse, as meaning Ur of the Chaldees, it would follow that Abraham commanded Eliezer to go there to get a wife from the children of Ham]! Moreover, Abraham stayed in the land of Canaan for a longer period than he did in Haran, and so why should Haran be called his country simply because he lived there for some time? Instead, the meaning of the expression, unto my country and to ‘molad’ti’,⁸⁷Verse 4 here. is “unto my country in which I was born,” [namely, Haran in Mesopotamia], for there he stayed and from there his ancestors came, as was already explained.⁹⁰See Ramban above, 11:28 and 12:1. In Bereshith Rabbah we find:⁹¹59:13. “From my father’s house — this is the house of his father. And from the land of my birth — this is the environs [of his father’s house].”
It is possible that unto my country and unto ‘molad’ti’ means “Unto my country and unto my family,” for he did not want a wife to be taken for Isaac even from the people of his country but only from his family. Similarly in the verse, And thou shalt take a wife for my son from there, [the word misham (from there)] alludes to the expression, from my father’s house, mentioned at the beginning of the verse. And so did the servant say when quoting Abraham, And thou shalt take a wife for my son of my family, and of my father’s house,⁹²Further, Verse 40. and again he said, quoting his master. Then shalt thou be clear from my oath when thou comest to my family.⁹³Ibid., Verse 41. These words were said by the servant to honor them so that they would listen to him.

אלוקי השמים, the One Who has brought me here and has granted me seed in this country (whereas previously I had no offspring) He surely would not want me to now bring back my son to the land He made me leave. If He did, what point was there in His making me move here in the first place?

אלוקי השמים...ישלח מלאכו, may it be the will of the Lord that He will send His angel from the celestial regions. Seeing that it was he Who had taken me from there, and all events are under His constant supervision, He will not arrange matters in such a way that my son would be legally obligated to migrate to that land.

אשר לקחני, since He took me out from there to give this land to my offspring, He would surely not want me to bring my son back there.

אלוקי השמים, “the Lord of the heavens.” In this verse Avraham did not refer to G’d as the “Lord of the earth,” according to Rashi, because when Avraham describes the state of mankind when he left Charan, G’d had not had a foothold on earth that could justify us in describing him as “the Lord of the earth.” Nachmanides says simply that the time frame described by Avraham in that verse refers to when he had resided outside the Holy Land, and we have a tradition that anyone residing outside the Holy Land is considered as if he did not have a G’d (protecting him individually)

Whereas, above he did say, “And I will have you swear...” I.e., it says in v. 3: “[God of heaven] and God of earth.”

Oben Raw Hirsch on Genesis 24: 3, beim Schwure, hieß es auch: ואלקי הארץ, denn, indem der Schwörende, dem Begriff des הִשָבֵעַ zufolge, sich mit allem irdischen Seinen dem strafenden Gottesarm für den Fall des Wortbruches unterstellt, so ist dort der Ausdruck der unmittelbaren Gottesgegenwart auf Erden wesentlich an seiner Stelle. Wenn wir aber hier bei einem Ausspruch des hingebendsten Gottvertrauens, den Ausdruck der echtjüdischen unmittelbaren und speziellsten השגחה פרטית erwarten, die dem bestimmten Manne das bestimmte Weib zuführt, so weist ja auch Abraham auf Gottesoffenbarungen, auf alles das, was Gott speziell für ihn und an ihm getan, hin, welches alles noch weit mehr diese השגחה פרטית bekundet, als der verhältnismäßig noch allgemeine Ausdruck אלקי הארץ sagen würde. Der Gott des Himmels, der doch zugleich mich — nicht הוציאני — sondern לקחני, mich für seine besonderen Zwecke als Werkzeug herausgenommen hat und der דבר לי — nicht אמר לי, was eine Verheißung wäre, sondern — der eine Bestimmung über mich ausgesprochen, z. B. ושמרו דרך ד׳ וגוי ,והיה ברכה und für diese Bestimmung נשבע לי, mir die Verheißung gegeben, mein Same solle dieses Land haben (der hat mir freilich weder direkt verboten, meinem Sohne eine Frau von den jetzigen Bewohnern des Landes zu geben, noch meinen Sohn wieder in meine Heimat zurückwandern zu lassen; allein beides erkenne ich als natürliche Folge dieser Bestimmung und dieser Verheißung, beides als das einzige ihnen Gemäße), der — sei du nur ganz ruhig — der wird seinen Engel — nicht אתך, mit dir — sondern vor dir hersenden, du wirst gar nichts dabei zu tun haben; der mich aus meinem Vaterhause zu finden gewusst, wird auch für meinen Sohn dich das rechte Mädchen aus meiner Verwandtschaft finden lassen — ולקחת so gut wie לקחני.

אלוקי השמים, “the G–d in heaven, etc.;” we must note that Avraham did not, at this stage, describe G–d as also being the G–d acknowledged on earth. He described the situation as it was, i.e. that up until this time the G–d of Israel, or even the G–d of creation had not been acknowledged as such on earth. This fact is reflected in our central daily prayer the עמידה, consisting of 18 (+1) benedictions we do not refer to G–d as “King” in the opening benediction which describes Him as the G–d of Avraham and that of the other two patriarchs. [Whenever we recite a benediction before eating even a morsel or drinking a mouthful of water, we do add the fact that He is the King of the universe. Ed.] (Compare Sifrey on parshat Ha-azinu, section 313).

ה' אלוקי השמים, “the Lord, the G-d of heaven;” Rashi comments that Avraham did not add that this “G-d” was also the “G-d” of the earth. The reason was that the time frame Avraham spoke about was before he had preached monotheism to his peers, none of whom had until then recognised Him as their G-d. If that approach to G-d’s stature were correct, we would have to ask how G-d could have been referred to as the G-d of heaven in Genesis 1,1, when, according to tradition the heaven as we understand it was created only on the second day of the six days of creation? [In our daily prayers, אדון עולם, we commence by stating that that the Master of the universe was “king” before any creature had been created? In other words, the title “King” is not dependent on this King already having subjects over whom to rule. Ed.] The same point has been made by Isaiah 43,10: “before Me no god was formed and after Me none shall exist.” The point that the prophet makes is that G-d’s existence is dependent on His having loyal subjects. Only He is eternal. This is also the reason why the first blessing in our thrice daily amidah, שמונה עשרה, does not contain a reference to G-d as “king,” as do other blessings. It would be inappropriate to commence with the sequence: מלך העולם אלוקי אברהם וגו', “the King of the universe, the G-d of Avraham, etc.” seeing that in the chapter of the Torah whereAvraham is introduced He could not truthfully have been described as the “King” of the whole universe. When Avraham in our verse credited G-d with having taken him out of his father’s house, etc., he thereby “crowned” G-d as “king” also on earth, he being His first subject. Nonetheless this was a far cry from being recognised as king of mankind.

מבית אבי FROM MY FATHER S HOUSE — from Haran.

AND WHO SPOKE ‘LI’ (UNTO ME). Rashi comments: “The word li means ‘in my interest,’ just as in the verse, which He spoke ‘alai’ (concerning me).⁹⁴I Kings 2:4. In the same way, in every case where li and lo and lahem follow the word dibur (speaking), they are to be explained in the sense of al (concerning). For proper usage of the verb dibur [in the sense of speaking to a person, the pronouns li and lo and lahem are not appropriate, and] only eilai and eilav and aleihem are appropriate, and their renderings in the Targum are imi and imei and imhon. In the case of the word amirah, however, the expressions li and lo and lahem are appropriate.”
In the section of Vayeitzei Yaakov, Rashi brought [proof of his above mentioned principle which states that li or lecha, etc., following the word dibur, must be explained in the sense of al (concerning)] from that which is written there, that which ‘dibarti’ (I have spoken) ‘lach,’⁹⁵Further, 28:15. [which must be interpreted to mean “in thy interest and concerning thee”] since He had never spoken to Jacob before this occasion.
But this difference is not valid for we find: And now go, lead the people unto the place of which ‘dibarti’ (I have spoken) ‘lach’;⁹⁶Exodus 32:34. Here the word dibur is found in connection with lach, and yet it means “to you,” and not “concerning you,” as Rashi claimed. And the Chaldeans spoke to the king in Aramaic;⁹⁷Daniel 2:4. This too is a case similar to the above. And thou shalt drive them out, and make them to perish quickly, as the Eternal hath spoken unto thee.⁹⁸Deuteronomy 9:3. This too is similar to the above. Similarly the verb amirah is used with both li and eilai: And they shall say ‘li’ (to me), What is His name? What shall I say ‘aleihem’ (to them)?⁹⁹Exodus 3:13. And as for [the verse which Rashi mentioned as his proof], that which ‘dibarti’ (I have spoken) ‘lach,’⁹⁵Further, 28:15. [which must mean, as Rashi said, “concerning thee,” since He had never spoken to Jacob before this occasion], its interpretation is as follows: “that which I have said to you now that I will give the land to you and to your seed, and I will bless you.” [Thus the word lach (to you) follows the understood verb “give” and is not related to dibarti.]

ואשר דבר לי, furthermore, I remember that he assured me specifically that my offspring will become known as offspring of Avraham though my son Yitzchok.

This is why I am certain that ישלח מלאכו, He will send His angel to make your mission successful to ensure that He can fulfill His promise.

הוא ישלח מלאכו, to ensure the success of your errand to take a wife for my son from there.

אשר לקחני מבית אבי, “the One Who has taken me out of my father’s house, etc.” according to Rashi, the words מבית אבי refer to Charan, and the words מארץ מולדתי refer to Ur Casdim. Nachmanides considers this explanation flawed as if true, when Avraham instructed Eliezer to proceed to אל ארצי ואל מולדתי, he would in fact have instructed him to go to Ur Casdim, something Eliezer did not do. Avraham’s birthplace was Aram Naharayim and not Ur Casdim. G’d forbid that the seed of Avraham should become fused to a girl stemming from that region of the most blatant idolatry. Furthermore, why did Avraham call Charan ארצו, “his homeland,” when he did not even refer to the land of Canaan as “my homeland,” but described himself as a stranger there. He had lived in Canaan for over 60 years at that time, far longer than he and his father had stayed in Charan. Avraham’s birthplace had been Aram Naharayim, and this is where his family had resided from the earliest time. This is also how the matter is explained in Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer, the most ancient of our Midrashic texts where we read: “and take a wife from my family.”

From Ur Kasdim. Re’m and Ramban discuss this at length. But it is clear that Rashi holds that ארץ מולדתו refers to Ur Kasdim, while מולדתו [without ארץ, as in v. 4] refers to his family in the city of Charan. (Nachalas Yaakov)

אשר לקחני מבית אבי, “Who has taken me out of my father’s house;” He removed me from my relatives in order to give me this land, and He certainly would not want me to return my descendants to the land which He had taken me out of. This is why I am so certain that He will send His angel before you to make your mission successful. Why else would He have brought me to this country, if not in order to be able to fulfill His promise to give this country to my descendants.

ומארץ מולדתי AND FROM THE LAND OF MY NATIVITY — from Ur-Kasdim.

ואשר נשבע לי, seeing that He made me this promise reinforced by an oath, I am certain that He will not renege on it. [even if I were to fall out of favour in His eyes due to my own fault. Ed.] He will see to it that my son will be able to marry a suitable soul-mate and thus make His oath come true.

ואשר דבר לי, both before I left that country and afterwards.

אשר לקחני מבית אבי, “Who has taken me from my father’s house;” the meaning of these words which sound as if Avraham had been removed from his father’s house against his will, is that it was G’d’s promise which had been instrumental in Avraham moving to a land where he had no family, to whose members he could marry off his son.

ולקחת אשה לבני, “you will take a wife for my son.” This is not a commandment or a prayer, but a prophecy. We find confirmation for this interpretation in the words: 'כאשר דבר ה “as the Lord has said,” in verse 51 of this chapter.

ואשר דבר לי AND WHO SPOKE לי—The word לי means “in my interest”, just as (1 Kings 2:4) “which He spake concerning me (עלי)”. In the same way, in every case where לי or לו or להם follow after the verb דבר they must be explained in the sense of על “concerning” — and in the Targum they should be rendered by עלי or עלוהי or עליהון regarding me etc. — for with this verb דבר in the sense of speaking to a person, the expressions לי and לו and להם are not the appropriate ones, but אלי and אליו and אליהן, and their renderings in the Targum should be עמי and עמיה and עמהן i. e., to speak with me or him or them. In the case of the verb אמר, however, the expressions לי and לו and להם are the appropriate ones.

ואשר נשבע לי, at the time when I had bound Yitzchok.

ואשר נשבע לי לאמור לזרעך אתן הארץ הזאת, “and Who has sworn to me; ‘to your descendants I will give this land, etc.” It is also written concerning the heir of Avraham :כי ביצחק יקרא לךזרע, “for your descendants will be named after Yitzchok,” so that it is quite clear that this G’d will send his angel with you to make your mission successful. Therefore I can tell you without reservation that under no circumstances are you to allow my son to move back there, seeing it was G’d Who had taken me away from there.

ואשר נשבע לי AND WHO SWORE UNTO ME at the Covenant between the Pieces (Genesis Rabbah 59:10).

'ונקית משבעתי וגו THEN SHALT THOU BE CLEAR FROM THIS MY OATH etc. — and take a wife for him from the daughters of Aner or Eshcol or Mamre.

THEN THOU SHALT BE CLEAR FROM THIS MY OATH. Abraham did not permit him to take a wife for Isaac from the daughters of Canaan, but he would be free [from the oath if Isaac were to do it on his own] and the Eternal do that which is good in His sight.¹⁰⁰II Samuel 10:12.
But Rashi wrote, “And take a wife for him from the daughters of Aner, Eshkol or Mamre.” Now if they were Canaanites, far be it from him! And in truth they were of the seed of Canaan for Scripture says, Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshkol, and brother of Aner.¹⁰¹Above, 14:13. And in Bereshith Rabbah, the Rabbis have said:¹⁰²59:11. “That thou shalt not take a wife, etc.¹⁰³Verse 3 here. He warned him against the daughters of Canaan, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre.” For it was with reference to Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre that Abraham said, Among whom I dwell,¹⁰³Verse 3 here. since he did not dwell among all the Canaanites as they were many nations. But he warned him against these his confederates, and all the more against the others. But the verse, Then thou shalt be clear from this my oath, means that the servant would be free from the oath if Isaac would want to do it on his own, and Abraham relied on his knowledge that his righteous son Isaac would listen to his father and that he would beware of them and go instead to Ishmael or to Lot and the other nations.
It is possible that from this my oath is a hint to that which he said, And thou shalt take a wife unto my son from there,¹⁰⁴Verse 7 here. since perhaps the oath was for everything, [meaning that the oath covered two points: a) that he should not take for him a wife from the daughters of Canaan, and b) that he should go to his family. In case they refused, he would be free from the second oath, while the first oath would always remain in effect]. Accordingly, then thou shalt be clear from this my oath does not allude to that which Abraham told him, Thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites,¹⁰³Verse 3 here. [since he never freed him from this oath]. This explains the word zoth (this) — [thou shalt be clear from ‘this’ my oath — implying there was another oath from which he was not freed]. Therefore, the servant said, That I may turn to the right hand, or to the left,¹⁰⁵Further, Verse 49. and he did not say, “I would return [to the land of Canaan,” since he was not freed from the oath not to take a wife from the daughters of Canaan].

ונקית משבועתי זאת, "and you will be relieved of this oath of mine." This means that Eliezer will be relieved of the duty to take a wife for Isaac from Abraham's birthplace; the oath not to take a wife for Isaac from the local Canaanites would remain in force, however, seeing it was something under his control.

ואם לא, the meaning is clear.

ונקית משבועתי זאת, “and you will be absolved from this oath to me.” According to Rashi, this implied that under the circumstances just described, Eliezer would be free to take one of the daughters of Oner, Eshkol, or Mamre, Avraham’s closest allies I the land of Canaan.. Nachmanides is appalled at the thought that Avraham would have given his consent for Yitzchok to marry a daughter of these Canaanites, the Torah having described Mamre specifically as an Emorite (Genesis 14,13). In fact, according to Bereshit Rabbah, the warning not to marry Canaanite girls was aimed especially at these girls of Oner Eshkol and Mamre as Avraham had specifically described himself as dwelling in their land. (quoting from Eliezer’s speech at the house of Bethuel). Therefore, Avraham’s warning was directed specifically at girls from Yitzchok’s immediate environment. Seeing that Avraham entertained covenantal relations with these three Emorites it would have seemed natural to reinforce such ties by intermarriage between these families. It is quite possible that Eliezer’s oath applied to all Canaanites, and that although Eliezer would be released from the part of the oath directing him to find a wife for Yitzchok from Avraham’s family, but he would not be released from the part forbidding him to select a Canaanite wife for him. This is why Avraha,m did not say (comprehensively) “you will then be released from your oath,” but משבועתי זאת, “from this (part) oath.” Eliezer had also threatened to “turn right or left,” he had not threatened to return to Canaan to look further. He could have had in mind either Ishmael, or the family of Lot.

And you may take a wife for him from the daughters of Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei. [Rashi knows this] because Avraham said (v. 3), “[You shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites] among whom I live.” Avraham commanded Eliezer from the daughters of the Canaanites among whom I live.” Avraham commanded Eliezer not to take a wife from the people they lived among, i.e., Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei, who were Avraham’s allies. So when it is written here, “You are absolved from this oath,” it also refers to Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei.

Sollte gleichwohl — Gott zwingt ja nicht — das dir zugeführte Weib nicht wollen, so bist du frei von diesem meinem Schwure, nur tue du nichts gegen die göttliche Bestimmung. Es kommt viel mehr darauf an, nicht das Unrechte zu tun (und unrecht ist alles, was wir als dem Willen Gottes entgegen erkennen), als dass das Rechte durch uns geschehe. Die Mittel zum Rechten gibt Gott, hüten wir uns nur, das Unrechte zu tun. Dies liegt in dem — ואם לא וגוי, du bist dann frei, du kannst weiter nichts tun; nur glaube dann nicht, dass du dann noch überhaupt etwas, und daher auch das Entgegengesetzte tun müssest, nur bringe meinen Sohn nicht dorthin zurück. Eine Rückkehr Isaaks zur Familie in Aram wäre ein Aufgeben der ganzen abrahamitischen Bestimmung gewesen, die nur isoliert, also in der Fremde zu lösen war. Als Jakob dorthin wieder zurückkehrte, war das Stammhaus noch in der kanaanitischen Isolierung und zog ihn alsbald nach der Geburt seiner Söhne dorthin wieder zurück.

ונקית משבועתי זאת, “you will be absolved from this oath I demand from you.” The apparently unnecessary word: “this,” is to warn Eliezer that the only part of the oath he will be absolved from if the woman refuses to leave her home, is Yitzchok must not go there to wed her. He would still be obligated to look for a suitable wife for Yitzchok. According to this interpretation, we must assume that the “friends” of Avraham, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, were not of Canaanitic descent.

רק את בני, “only my son etc.;” according to Rashi the restriction applied only to Avraham’s son Yitzchok, as he had been a offered as an Elevation Offering on G-d’s altar on the Holy Mountain of Moriah. It is therefore not appropriate for him to leave the Holy Land for any purpose.

רק את בני וגו ONLY [BRING NOT] MY SON [THITHER] etc. — The word רק narrows and limits (מעוט) the sense: it is only my son who may not go back there, but Jacob, my son’s son, in the end will go back there to find a wife (Genesis Rabbah 59:10).

רק את בני לא תשב שמה; "only do not bring my son back there." Abraham did not make Eliezer take an oath concerning this part of his instructions. This was only an answer to Eliezer's question how to act if the bride to be refused to come to the land of Canaan.

נכה ,נקה ,נקית, Grundbedeutung schlagen, stoßen; נקה: alles Fremdartige völlig abgestoßen haben. טהר mehr die Durchsichtigkeit, die innere Reinheit, נקי die äußere, (siehe zu Kap.20. 5): Dann bist du rein von diesem Eide, dann berührt er dich nicht mehr.

רק את בני לא תשב שמה, “as long as you do not bring my son back to the land from which I emigrated.” The words: “bring back”, is somewhat strange seeing that Yitzchok had never been in Charan, having been born in Canaan. Although Yitzchok had indeed never been in Charan, the term שיבה for “returning” is applicable to him because of Eliezer who had been going to the land of Canaan with Avraham and now as Yitzchok’s emissary (accepting tokens of marriage) While it is true that this was not a return in the full sense of the word, Eliezer had already been there with Avraham before the latter left Charan. We find a similar situation in Ruth 2,6, when Ruth is “returning” to the land of Israel with her mother-in-law Naomi, and although Ruth had never been there before, she too is described by one of Boaz’s hired hands as “returning” from the land of Moab. The reason why she was so described was that she was accompanying her mother-in-law who was definitely returning in the full sense of the word.

לא תשב שמה, “do not cause to go back there.” Avraham says that he does not want his son to leave the ancestral earth G-d had promised him.

על הדבר הזה, concerning the condition stipulated by Avraham.

וישבע לו על הדבר הזה, he accepted all of Avraham’s conditions as part of his oath.

וישבע לו על הדבר. He swore to him concerning the matter. An absolute oath concerning a Canaanite girl, and a conditional oath concerning the need to find the girl in Abraham's birthplace should the girl refuse to move to the land of Canaan.

וישם, the meaning is clear. (verse 2)

תחת ירך אברהם, “under the thigh of Avraham.” Joseph, when asked by his father to swear that he would not bury him in Egypt but with his father and grandfather in Machpelah, did not do so, as he considered such behavior not respectful toward his father, even though he had requested him to swear. (Compare Genesis 47,2931)

מגמלי אדניו OF HIS MASTER’S CAMELS — These were distinguished from other camels by going out muzzled to avoid robbery — i.e. that they should not graze in other peoples’ fields (Genesis Rabbah 59:11).

AND ALL THE GOODS OF HIS MASTER BEING IN HIS HAND. Rashi comments: “This refers to a deed of gift of all his possessions which he wrote in favor of Isaac so that they would be eager to send him their daughter.” And so it is also stated in Bereshith Rabbah,¹⁰⁶59:15. “He carried with him a disposition of property.”
According to this opinion, the verse stating, And Abraham gave all that he had unto Isaac,¹⁰⁷Further, 25:5. means that he caused him to take possession of the belonging at the time of his death so that the other children would not contest his ownership, just as it is said, And he sent them away from Isaac his son, while he yet lived.¹⁰⁸Ibid., Verse 6. If so, the word “taking” applies also to the first part of the verse, And the servant ‘took’ ten camels, and departed, and all the goods of his master he took in his hand. Perhaps [the words of the verse are to be transposed as follows]: “And the servant took ten camels and all the goods of his master in his hand, and departed.”
Others¹⁰⁹This interpretation is found in the commentary of Chizkuni. explain the sense of the verse as meaning that immediately upon being sworn, the servant himself went and took many camels from his master’s camels because all his master’s goods were in his hand, he being the officer and captain over all and authorized to take from him whatever he desired, just as the verse says, that ruled over all that he had.⁸⁰Verse 2 here.
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the meaning of this verse is similar to that of the verse concerning Hazael, general of Aram, And Hazael went to meet him [Elisha the prophet], and took a present with him, and every good thing of Damascus, forty camels’ burden,¹¹⁰II Kings 8:9. [which means “and ‘of’ every good thing of Damascus].” Here too Scripture states that he took in his hand of all his master’s goods ten camels’ burden. The sense of the verse concerning Hazael is that the camels carried all that was good and excellent among those species of fruits and precious things that were found in Damascus or in his master’s house, and in addition they carried a present with them. In a similar sense is the verse, ten asses laden with the good of Egypt,¹¹¹Further, 45:23. [which means laden with the good and excellent fruits of Egypt]. The verses, however, shorten expressions when the subjects are understood.

וכל טוב אדוניו, the important people in Avraham’s household. This is why they are referred to as האנשים, a complimentary description, in verse 54.

ויקח העבד עשרה גמלים מדמלי אדוניו וילך. He took permission from his master to set out on the way after he made prepared the camels for the journey.

עשרה גמלים, Ten camels, etc. One reason that Eliezer took ten camels was that relative to Abraham's wealth this was equivalent to an ordinary person taking one single camel loaded with gifts.

ויקח...וכל טוב, not literally “all the good,” but most of the good things. The exaggeration here is similar to when the Torah describes כל הארץ, “the whole earth” as going to Egypt to buy grain. (Genesis 41,57) What is meant is: “most people from all over.” There are many such “exaggerations.” What the Torah meant was that Eliezer took with him samples of most of the precious possessions in Avraham’s household in order to show the family of the potential bride that she would be marrying into a wealthy family. Our sages (quoted by Rashi) explain the term וכל טוב as referring to a document in which Avraham had appointed Yitzchok as his sole heir. Eliezer brought this document with him, i.e. בידו, “in his hand.”

וכל טוב אדוניו בידו, “with all the good things of his master in his hand.” Rashi explains that the word כל טוב refers to a document bequeathing all of Avraham’s wealth to his son Yitzchok. Although we already know (25,5) that Yitzchok had been appointed the sole heir, Avraham gave this document to Eliezer in order to encourage the family of the girl Eliezer would choose as Yitzchok’s bride to allow her to leave home and move to a distant land. Some commentators feel that when the servant (Eliezer) had sworn to his master, he took 10 camels and loaded them with all of Avraham’s portable treasures as he had been instructed to do just that Nachmanides explains the verse in line with the plain meaning of the text, i.e. that Eliezer took 10 of his master’s camels and loaded them with all the valuable chattels including exotic fruit which Avraham possessed.

They would go out only muzzled, out of concern for robbery... [Rashi knows this] because it is written (v. 32): “And he removed the muzzles the camels,” which implies that until now they were muzzled. [You might ask: Why was muzzling necessary?] Hashem does not bring wrongdoing to the animals of the righteous, as it says in Chulin 7a! An answer is: Hashem surely does not bring them wrongdoing but Eliezer muzzled them so they will not eat even [what is lying near] the sides of the road. Although the produce there is considered abandoned since the owners assumedly gave up hope [of recovering it], Eliezer the servant of Avraham was very pious and did not wish to benefit from another’s property even when permitted. But Re’m answers that one should not rely on a miracle. [Although Hashem usually protects,] it is different where harm is sure to happen, as the camels were going among other people’s fields.

Indem erst in der zweiten Hälfte des Verses, ויקם וילך, der Aufbruch zur Reise erzählt wird, kann das וילך der ersten Hälfte nicht schon das Reisen selbst bedeuten, sondern gehört mit zur Zurüstung der Reise. Die Kamele waren nicht beladen, sie waren bestimmt, die Braut und ihre Dienerinnen aufzunehmen. Es waren herrschaftliche Kamele, als solche durch Rüst- und Sattelzeug kenntlich. Er aber ging zu Fuße und trug Geschenke. Aus Kohelet 10, 7 erscheint, dass Knechte überhaupt nie geritten, sie waren daran erkennbar, dass sie nur zu Fuße gingen. Auch bei der Rückreise ging er nur zu Fuße und führte Rebekkas Kamel. Unsere Damen scheinen keine kavaliermäßig geübten Reiterinnen gewesen zu sein, sondern des Führers bedurft zu haben, so ja auch die Sunamiterin (Kön. II. 4. 24). Elieser trat also nicht als reicher Kaufmann mit etwa zehn beladenen Kamelen, sondern völlig als Knecht, als bepackter Knecht auf, der herrschaftliche Kamele irgendwohin zu führen hat. Nur so war ja auch die spätere Probe hinsichtlich des Charakters des Mädchens eine wirkliche. Was einem müden bepackten Knechte gegenüber von reiner Menschlichkeit zeugte, konnte einem reichen Kavalier gegenüber alles andere gewesen sein.

ויקח העבד, “the servant took, etc;” Eliezer was able to do so, as the Torah tells us that Avraham had entrusted all his most treasured possessions to his care, וכל .טוב אדוניו בידו

וכל טוב אדניו בידו AND ALL THE GOODS OF HIS MASTER WERE IN HIS HAND — He wrote a deed of gift of all his possessions in favour of Isaac so that they would be eager to send him their daughter (Genesis Rabbah 59:11).

וכל טוב אדוניו בידו, he took with him many silver and golden trinkets. He did not need to ask for permission to do this seeing that all of these items were under his authority on an all year round basis in his capacity of being Avraham’s general manager.

אל ארם נהרים, so called because it was the confluence of two rivers.

He wrote a gift-deed to Yitzchok of all his possessions... [Rashi knows this] because when the verse says: “He departed, and all the property of his master was in his hand,” a new point is being expressed: even though Eliezer departed, all his master’s property was still in his hand. If all the verse means is that the property remained in Eliezer’s possession, why does the verse even need to tell us this? [It would be obvious, so] what is the new point? Furthermore, why did Scripture not tell us this in the previous section, that all his master’s property was in his possession? Perforce, it means that Avraham gave a gift-deed to Yitzchok. But Re’m writes that [Rashi knows this] because there is no other way that all his master’s property would be “in his hand.” Avraham surely would not grant all his money to Eliezer! We need not ask: It is written later (25:5), “Avraham gave all that he possessed to Yitzchok.” Does this not imply that he did not give a gift-deed to Yitzchok beforehand? [An answer is:] Rashi explained there in the name of R. Nechemia [that Avraham gave Yitzchok] the blessing of Hashem, Who had said to Avraham, “And you will be [in control of the world’s] blessing.” Avraham then entrusted the blessings to Yitzchok. A further answer: Avraham acquired possessions after his gift-deed to Yitzchok, during the ten years following Sarah’s death. Avraham, upon his death, bequeathed them to Yitzchok.

Another reason is that the number ten simply means "many," as we find in Samuel I 1,8, where Elkanan asks Channah if he was not worth more to her than "ten sons?" The meaning there is clearly not the number ten, but "ten" as indicative of a large number.

Dass man die reichsten Schmucksachen von bedeutendem Werte in einem Kasten von eben nicht großem Umfange tragen könne, braucht nicht erst erinnert zu werden.

עשרה גמלים, “ten camels” to be ridden by ten men who would form the necessary quorum at the engagement and (marriage ceremony). [The bracket is to tell the reader that different manuscripts either have or do not have that word. Ed.]

ארם נהרים MESOPOTAMIA (literally, ARAM OF THE TWO RIVERS) — it was situated between the two rivers, Euphrates and Tigris.

ויקם וילך, on his way.

עיר נחור, this refers to Ur Kasdim where Nachor had remained behind after his father Terach had moved to Charan together with his other son Avraham.

The reason the Torah adds that the camels belonged to his master (something we would have assumed even without it being mentioned) is that these camels were specially trained to answer Abraham's specific needs. They were capable of carrying especially heavy loads.

Nach unseren Weisen waren Abrahams herrschaftliche Kamele an den Maulkörben kenntlich, die sie trugen, und welche sie verhinderten, von fremden Ackern etwas zur Nahrung zu nehmen. Jüdische Große dürften somit nicht in der Rücksichtslosigkeit, sondern in der größeren Rücksicht und Schonung für fremdes Eigentum ihre Auszeichnung gefunden haben.

מגמלי אדוניו, “from the camels owned by his master;” from the choicest, raised in his own home.

The Torah adds: וכל טוב אדוניו, "and all the good things of his master," to tell us that Eliezer took the choicest of all the precious possessions of Abraham. This was in order to persuade the girl in the event that she would initially refuse to move away from her parental home. Seeing that her husband-to-be possessed such wealth might change her mind. The word בידו means the same as שבידו, something that was under Eliezer's control (inasmuch as he was in charge of all of Abraham's possessions).

וכל טוב אדוניו בידו, “there are opinions according to whom the letter מ as a prefix to the word מגמלי should be placed in front of the letter כ in the word: וכל, so that that word is read as ומכל, “and samples of all,“ etc. These “samples” are what the Torah speaks about in reporting Eliezer as sharing out all kinds of goodies in verse 53 of our chapter.

והנה רבקה יוצאת אשר ילדה לבתואל‎, “and behold, here ‎Rivkah who had been born for Betuel was coming forth.” She ‎had been born for Betuel, due to beneficial, though indirect, ‎input by Avraham. Betuel was not the originator of Rivkah, but ‎merely a vessel used by G’d as an intermediary. [There is no other ‎verse in the Bible where the expression ‎אשר ילדה‎, “who she bore,” ‎is not connected to the mother who bore that child. Ed.] The ‎Torah alludes to Avraham’s role in that “birth” by using the ‎vowel kubutz, which implies “external influence.” The ‎reason why Eliezer immediately gave Rivkah jewelry even before ‎enquiring who she was, shows that he realized that her attribute ‎of ‎חסד‎ had revealed that she had much in common with his ‎master Avraham, and that there must be a biological link between ‎her and Avraham. This is also what Rashi had in mind when ‎he wrote: (verse 23) “after he had given her the bracelets, because ‎he was certain of his master Avraham’s merits.”‎

ויברך הגמלים means HE MADE THEM KNEEL (Genesis Rabbah 59:11).

ויברך הגמלים, a camel has two knees one above the other; therefore it needs two motions to go down on its knees and because of its height it cannot drink before having thus lowered itself to the level of the trough. This is what the sages referred to in Chulin 76 when they said וכנגדו בגמל ניכר, that a spot known as the ארכובה in cattle is clearly recognisable on the foreleg of a camel.

ויברך הגמלים, he made them go down on their knees in order that the jugs of water could be presented to them for them to drink. While all this was happening he prayed to G’d to arrange for the right kind of girl to put in an appearance.

Beside a well of water. Eliezer resolved to look for the daughter of a poor man, who would gladly allow her to move to another land to marry someone rich. Therefore he waited by a well outside of town, assuming that no rich man would send his daughter to such a place.

ויברך, von בֶרֶך das Kniegelenk, in welchem die Sammlung und Überleitung von Kräften zur Fortbewegung vermittelt wird, analog dem Begriffe ברך segnen, und ברֶכה Wassersammlung oder Wasserleitung. Lautverwandt mit פֶרֶק: Glied (chald.), wovon hebräisch: מפרקת Genick. — אֶל באר, einem Brunnen gegenüber, nicht nahe daran, — בַאֵר ,באר klar machen, im Kal also klar werden, aus dem Dunkel zu Tage treten. בחר ,בער ,בהר ,באר, bedeuten alle ein glänzendes Hervortreten. בער: der erhöhte, brennende und leuchtende Feuerglanz. בחר: das Auserlesene verhält sich zu dem, aus welchem es hervorgehoben worden, wie das Glänzende zum Dunkeln; es ist immer ein leuchtendes Hervortreten. —

ויברך הגמלים, “he made the camels kneel down.” Camels have two sets of knees. They therefore have to perform two acts of kneeling, before being able to drink. We have learned more details in the Talmud Chulin 76.

אל באר המים, near the well.

ויאמר: ה׳ הקרה נא, He said: "G'd! please make it happen, etc." Eliezer was certain that his master's prayer that G'd would send His angel ahead of Eliezer to facilitate his mission would be fulfilled. He added a prayer expressing the hope that he would be found worthy to be the instrument through which Abraham's prayer would be fulfilled. It happens on occasion that the prayer of the original petitioner goes unanswered due to the unworthiness of the petitioner's messenger.

ויאמר...הקרה נא לפני, “arrange for me,” as had been predicted by Avraham. This is what he meant when he added ועשית חסד עם אדני אברהם, “perform an act of loving kindness for my master Avraham.”

ד׳, der du nicht nur als Ur-Ur-Ursache seit Jahrtausenden der Welt zu Grunde liegst, sondern noch jeden kommenden Moment מִהַיֶה bist, ins Dasein treten lässest, den ich ja als solchen ganz besonders in den bisherigen Lebenserfahrungen meines Herrn kennen gelernt, um dessen fernere Lebenszukunft es sich ja auch hier handelt:

The reason Eliezer had to proceed in this order was that he feared Abraham's family might deceive him and try to palm off one of their maidservants on him, claiming that she was their family. He therefore stipulated that the girl to be regarded as suitable for Isaac should proceed to do more than he asked of her by also offering to water his camels. This would be characteristic of a girl who was related to Abraham. In fact Rebeccah described herself immediately as a daughter of Bethuel (verse 24).

הקרה נא! Wir haben nicht nur den Zusammenhang, sondern eigentlich die Identität der Wurzel קרה und קרא schon angedeutet. Es liegt dem jüdischen Begriff ,,מקרה" nichts ferner, als die Vorstellung, die wir mit dem Worte "Zufall׳ verbinden; ihm dürfte gerade nichts weniger "zufällig" sein, als das, was er mit dem Worte מקרה bezeichnet. Erzählt jemand כל הקורות oder קוראות אותו, so sind dies ja alle diejenigen Lebensmomente, die er nicht herbeigerufen, die ihn vielmehr in ihre Richtung hineinrufen, die nur er nicht erwartet, berechnet, beabsichtigt hat, die aber umsomehr die höchste absichtsvolle Sendung des sein können, der alles fügt und schickt. נקריתי בהר הגלבע (Sam. 2, 1) heißt: ich bin dort hingerufen worden, es war nicht mein Wille und meine Absicht, eine höhere, außer mir liegende Macht hat mich dorthin geführt.

Am deutlichsten erscheint dies, wo uns aufgegeben wird, ein מקרה zu veranstalten. והקריתם לכם heißt es 4. B. M. 35, 11 von den Zufluchtsstädten, die wir im Lande also gelegen bestimmen sollen, dass sie den unabsichtlichen Totschläger in leichter Weise zu sich laden und führen, wie dies ganz ausdrücklich in dem תכין לך הדרך (5. B. M. 19, 3) ausgesprochen ist (siehe Makkoth 9b.). Der Unglückliche hat es nicht beabsichtigt, einen Menschen gerade in der Nähe einer zur Zufluchtsstadt führenden Straße zu töten, die ganze Handlung war ja eine unabsichtliche; dass er sich in der Nähe einer solchen Straße befindet, ist ihm gewiß etwas zufälliges. Allein von vornherein war dafür gesorgt, dass in entsprechenden Abständen eine gebahnte Straße zu einer עיר מקלט führte. Koheleth hat daher vollkommen Recht, dass den Weisen wie den Toren מקרה אחד יקרה את כלם, dass auch der Weise sich nicht dem מקרה entziehen kann; denn auch der Weiseste, wenn man will der Klügste, hat Lebensereignisse, ja auch der vielleicht größte Teil der seinigen sind solche, die er weder erwartet, noch vorausgesehen, am allerwenigsten mit Absicht herbeigeführt, die ihn vielmehr in Verhältnisse und Beziehungen hineinrufen, die ganz außer seiner Berechnung lagen.

Wenn also Elieser hier betet: הקרה לפני, so bittet er eben darum, Gott möge die Angelegenheit in die Hand nehmen, die ihn hierhergeführt; er, aus sich, könne sie nicht zum entsprechenden Ziele bringen. Die Beifügung לפני drückt den Wunsch aus, die erbetene Fügung möge eine solche sein, die ihn in der Richtung, in welcher er sich bereits befindet, weiter fördere, d. h. eine seiner unternommenen Aufgabe förderliche.

הנה אנכי נצב על עין המים, “here I am standing at the well of water, etc.” He meant that at this site he could conduct the kind of experiment which should show him if his mission would be successful as he could examine any prospective girl regarding her personal virtues, such as her attitude to unknown strangers making uncalled for requests. His reasoning was that if a girl behaves in a modest manner at home this was a reflection on her mother, whereas if she behaved modestly away from home she displayed her own virtue thereby, and not fear of being reprimanded by her mother.

הנה אנכי נצב, “I am standing;” Eliezer meant that he had come to a critical juncture in his journey, and had to make some decisions.

על עין המים, “at the town’s water fountain.” This is where I can test a potentially eligible girl on her suitability as Yitzchok’s wife to be. When such a girl is away from her home, whatever she decides to do has not been what she had been told to do by her mother or father, but reflects her true personality.

אתה הכחת HER THOU HAST APPOINTED — She is fit for him since she will be charitable and will therefore be worthy of admission into the house of Abraham. The word הכחת means selected; old French approuvest; English thou hast selected.

HER THOU HAST APPOINTED FOR THY SERVANT, EVEN FOR ISAAC. Rashi comments: “She is fit for him since she is charitable and worthy of admission into the house of Abraham. And thereby shall I know — this is a petition: ‘Let me know through her that Thou hast shown kindness unto my master.” If so, Eliezer is saying, “I know for certain that You have appointed her for Your servant Isaac.” But in that case [his petition, which still indicates a doubt as to whether she was the appointed one,] does not connect well.
Its interpretation however is as follows: “Make it happen to me this day that the girl to whom I will speak be the one that You have appointed for Your servant Isaac, and with this, show kindness to my master Abraham for with this I will know that You have shown kindness to him if she be of his family and of good mind and of beautiful appearance.” And so he said [when recounting the events of the day]: And let it come to pass, that the maiden, etc., let the same be the woman whom the Eternal hath appointed.¹¹²Further, Verses 43-44.

אותה הוכחת, she is the one whom You have appointed to be Yitzchok’s wife. The word אותה excludes the possibility of any other girl being the proper wife for Yitzchok.

She You have proven for Your servant, for Yitzchak. Rashi explains, she is worthy for him that she is a doer of chessed. This topic is juxtaposed with the topic of Ephron the Chiti, because he too was from the family of Cana'an, and Ephron was begrudging of eye and therefore he [God] commanded to stay far from the Cana'anim, for they were begrudging [lit. evil of eye], because money will answer and testify to all, and every person is recognized through his pocket, if his actions are pure and straight, and there is no better test or "crucible" for a person than gold and silver. And thus said Shlomo (Mishlei 17:3) "A crucible for silver and a furnace for gold..." because one who wishes to test a person will go to the money and see what his nature is. For if he will remain in his righteousness in the business of money, then in every insight it will be revealed that he is complete [honest], and vice versa. And from here Eliezer learned that he didn't need to check Rivkah except with this trait--if she is generous [lit. has a good eye] and does kindness, and there he said "I will not demand from her anything but that she give me to drink, and if she responds, 'drink, and I will also give your camels to drink' then certainly she is a doer of kindness, that she will give me more than what I ask, and if so she You have proven for Your servant, for Yitzchak, for his entire household is garbed in salvation for other creatures"

והיה הנערה אשר אמר אליה, this was not a statement but a prayer that things should develop in this fashion. He did not rely on any magic, i.e. that the signs he stipulated would determine his actions. We find a similar occurrence with Yonathan son of King Sha-ul in Samuel I 14,10, where he does not rely on the אות which he had stipulated, but where he asked G’d in prayer for help, saying that if certain things were to happen he would regard this as a sign that his prayer had been answered favourably (compare Ibn Ezra there) When the Talmud Chulin 95 כל נחש שאינו כאליעזר עבד אברהם ויהונתן בן שאול אינו נחש, the meaning is that “any divination which is not like that of Eliezer or that of Yonatan ben Sha-ul is not a divination,” i.e. is not permissible, but is akin to relying on witchcraft [Unless the person requesting a sign does so as a prayer directed to G’d it is forbidden. Ed.].

והיה הנערה, seeing that the subject matter had already been introduced, the definitive article ה is in place, as opposed to Deuteronomy 22,23 כי יהיה נערה, where the subject had not been referred to previously.

אותה הוכחת לעבדך ליצחק, “her You have designated for Your servant, for Yitzchok.” Rashi understands the word הוכחת here as meaning “suitable.” Eliezer meant that a girl who would not only agree to draw water for him, the stranger, but would volunteer to also water his camels (although he was an able-bodied man capable of doing this by himself) had proven a fit successor for Yitzchok’s mother Sarah. Nachmanides explains that the words אותה הוכחת וגו' are all still part of Eliezer’s prayer which started with the words הקרה נא, (verse 12) He would consider what appeared like a coincidence מקרה not as such but as a sign from G’d that this was indeed the girl he had been searching for. This sign would prove that G’d had shown an special kindness to his master. If the girl were to be a member of Avraham’s family, this would be an additional sign. If you were to object, pointing out that even non Jews are forbidden to practice any kind of witchcraft or reliance on omens, so that Eliezer’s having given the jewelry to Rivkah before she had told him whose family she belonged to, you would have to answer that he did not give her the bracelets and nose-ring until he knew whose family she belonged to. We have a rule that the Torah is not obligated to report events in their chronological order, hence the fact that here the Torah has chosen to report Eliezer as giving jewelry to Rivkah on the strength of her having helped him, even before reporting who she was, is not so surprising. Another approach could be the fact that actually the Torah describes Eliezer only as ויקח נזם זהב וגו', “He took a golden nose-ring, etc.,” i.e. it does not state that he had already handed over the jewelry or put it on her hands as we hear in verse 47 when the servant recounted his experiences at the well, when he describes this as something he had done after having identified her as a member of Avraham’s family. Maybe, at this stage he showed the jewelry to Rivkah and asked her about her family before giving it to her and placing the bracelets on her hands. The words על ידיה would then describe the function of the צמידים, the bracelets. A third possibility is that the whole question of ניחוש, reliance on magical devices, omens, subjective criteria, etc.’ to establish the truth of something, is not an issue either with Eliezer or with Yonathan, David’s friend. It is only when one bases one’s course of action exclusively on coincidences, magic formulas, etc., that one violates the Torah’s commandment not to do so. Eliezer used the criteria he had set himself to examine the character of the girl as a guideline, but not as determining the issue to the extent of abandoning his own evaluation as to her suitability. Similarly, Yonathan used the arrows to encourage the lad to search further not to determine David’s course of action a fateful course. (Samuel I chapter 20) Ibn Ezra wrote that many people are astounded at Eliezer’s conduct, considering it as inappropriate. He does not understand how these people’s minds work. After all, it is quite clear that if the first girl who had agreed to Eliezer’s request and beyond that had turned out not to be a member of Avraham’s family, he would look further.

Die Weisen wollen übrigens (Thaanith 42.) Eliesers Verfahren keineswegs als eine mustergültige Weise, eine Frau zu wählen, empfohlen wissen. Wohl nur ein Elieser, den die Zuversicht eines Abraham auf einer solchen Sendung geleitet, dass Gott schon seinen Engel vor ihm hersenden und ihm das rechte Mädchen zuführen werde, durfte in einer solchen Zuversicht also handeln. Dass sein Verfahren, welches Chulin 95 b. formell als Beispiel für das verbotene ניחוש aufgeführt wird, nicht eigentlich unter diesen Begriff falle, hat schon ר"ן zur Stelle erläutert. ניחוש ists, wenn Entschlüsse von Vorgängen abhängig gemacht werden, die in keinerlei vernünftigem, natürlichem Zusammenhang zu ihnen stehen. Allein das Merkmal, an welchem Elieser die für Jizchak geeignete Frau erkennen wollte, gehört ja den Charaktereigentümlichkeiten an, die noch heute das charakteristische Kennzeichen der Nachkommen Jizchaks und Rebekkas bilden, und die wir unter dem Begriff von גמילות הסד zusammenfassen. Diese überall hülfreich beizuspringen bereite Menschenliebe, die erst durch die Sendung der Abrahamiden mittelbar und unmittelbar auch in die nichtabrahamitische Welt sich allmälig Bahn gebrochen, hatte Elieser in Abrahams Hause kennen gelernt, sie war das charakteristische Merkmal des Abraham- zeltes, sie mußte den hervorstechendsten Zug in dem Charakter der künftigen Frau dieses Hauses der rechten Gattin Jizchaks bilden, und wohl durfte Elieser glauben, dass nur in der Familie Abrahams sich noch eine solche Gemütsanlage finden dürfte und darauf sein Verfahren gründen. Sie muss doch jedenfalls eine seltene gewesen sein, sonst hätte sie überall für ihn kein Kennzeichen abgeben können. — לעברך ליצחק, mit großer Feinheit sagt er לעבדך וגוי, nicht לאדני oder לבן אדני; eben der Gedanke, dass Jizchak, für den er eine Frau sucht, ׳עכר ד ist, lässt ihn ein solches Merkmal wählen, und zugleich hoffen, dass Gott ihm die rechte zuführen werde. Ist es ja der dem Dienste Gottes Geweihte, dem er eine Genossin sucht. Die Förderung der Gottessache selbst ist durch die glückliche Wahl bedingt. —

ובה אדע, “and through her (conduct) I will know, etc.” according to Rashi, this wording is a kind of plea by Eliezer. This presents an apparent conflict with a statement by Rabbi Sh’muel son of Nachmeni in the Talmud, tractate Taanit, folio 4, according to which the Bible names three people whose requests from G–d were considered as inappropriate, Eliezer’s request here being one of the three. When we examine Eliezer’s request, if a blind girl had performed the tasks he had requested as proof of her worthiness to become the wife of Yitzchok, he would have had to choose her. According to Rashi’s interpretation, there was nothing inappropriate in Eliezer’s request.

והיה הנערה, Eliezer now refers to how he will test a girl who at first glance appears to him as a suitable prospect, seeing that he cannot ask all the girls to draw water his camels; The use by Eliezer of the masculine mode in connection with the word נערה, is most puzzling. The word therefore must refer to some word or subject the Torah has omitted. This is not as unusual as it sounds, as we have another example of something like this in Deuteronomy 22,23: כי יהיה נער בתולה מאורשה לאיש, “when there will be a young girl who is a virgin betrothed to a man, etc;” in that line also the word יהיה, which is in the masculine mode, cannot refer to the girl in question but to the subject matter. In our verse here, Eliezer addresses a subject matter he has not spelled out, such as such, his examination of the girl’s character.

ובה אדע This is a petition: “Let me know through her”.

... And the Sages, may their memory be blessed, said, "Any bride whose eyes are beautiful does not require examination of her whole body." But this is something that the senses contradict; as how many ugly women are there in the world who have beautiful eyes? And there is another difficulty: Why did the Sages, may their memory be blessed, see fit to give advice to ascertain this external beauty - is it not that 'charm is false and beauty is vanity?' Rather it is certain that they gave advice to ascertain her deeds. And this is the advice that was advised: That he check if she has a kind eye and purveys acts of loving-kindness. For if her eyes are kind to the creatures, then she is, without a doubt, perfect in all of her character traits.

I will also water your camels. A supplicant should ask for less than his needs and the giver should provide him with all his needs or more.

אשר אמר אליה, by this qualification Eliezer freed himself from the obligation to address a blind or lame girl. However, he still did not free himself from the obligation of speaking to a slave-girl. or someone born from an incestuous relationship, etc., seeing that such girls have no exterior marks by which one can immediately identify their status. Seeing that this was so, he prayed that G’d would do a kindness to his master and arrange that the girl whom he would approach to offer water would be a girl suitable as a potential wife for Yitzchok.

ואמרה שתה, and she says: “go ahead and drink!” Eliezer is not engaging in ניחוש, divination, but he was looking for an omen, something permitted by Jewish law. He did not rely on this as a reason to give Rivkah the jewelry as he had first enquired about her immediate family history and it had turned out that she was a member of Avraham’s family. He had only made the jewelry ready in the event that it turned out that the girl offering him water to drink should turn out to be a member of Avraham’s family.

כי עשית חסד THAT THOU HAST SHOWN KINDNESS — if she is of his family and a fit companion for him I shall know that thou hast shown kindness to my master.

Whom You have determined. Hochachta in Hebrew can also be rendered “whom You have rebuked” — You admonished and instructed her until she was worthy of marrying Yitzchok.

אותה הוכחת, after passing this test, I will know that she is the one which You, G’d, have selected for Yitzchok, and I will take her as a wife for him.

ובה אדע, if she will be good, and the daughter of good people I will know that You have indeed performed a kindness for my master.

WHO WAS BORN TO BETHUEL THE SON OF MILCAH THE WIFE OF NAHOR, ABRAHAM’s BROTHER. Because Nahor also had children from his concubine Reumah,¹¹³Above, 22:24. they always described the lineage of Bethuel by saying that he was the son of Milcah who was the mistress of the household. And because the girl mentioned her father’s mother first, as it says, I am the daughter of Bethuel the son of Milcah¹¹⁴Further, Verse 25. — for such was customary among the girls, analogous to the verse, And she told her mother’s house¹¹⁵Verse 28 here. — therefore Scripture mentions in the verse before us that he [Bethuel] was the son of Milcah, the wife of Nahor. But the servant later said, And she said, The daughter of Bethuel Nahor’s son,¹¹⁶Verse 47 here. for he corrected the matter as is ethically proper. However, he did say, whom Milcah bore unto him,¹¹⁶Verse 47 here. in order to state that Bethuel was the son of the mistress and not the concubine.

טרם כלה, he had not yet finished. This is what Isaiah 65,24 had in mind when he said that G’d answers a prayer before it has been articulated.

טרם כלה לדנר, Before he had finished speaking, etc. This means that Eliezer was still addressing G'd when Rebeccah materialised. He realised immediately that she was slated to become Isaac's wife.

ויהי הוא, and here indeed he was gratified that the first girl whom he addressed met all the qualifications he had stipulated. Not only was she a member of Avraham’s family, but she was also physically attractive, revealed a number of character virtues immediately on acquaintance, and she was a virgin.

ויהי הוא טרם כלה לדבר, “and it was before he had finished speaking, etc.” We need to understand the need for the apparently extraneous word הוא in this verse. All the Torah had to write to tell us that Rivkah appeared before Eliezer had completed his prayer was ויהי ככלותו לדברו, “as soon as he had finished speaking, etc.” Actually, the word הוא in this verse is not a personal pronoun, i.e. “he,” but a name of G-d. (compare Genesis 19,33 where we encountered this word in that context) We have numerous examples of the word הוא being a reference to a name of G-d, such as Psalms 100, 3 הוא עשנו ולו אנחנו, “He has made us and we belong to Him;” Numbers 18,23 ועבד הלוי הוא, ”and the Levite will serve G-d, etc.;” the word הוא in that verse means that Eliezer enjoyed G-d’s special assistance in his mission by means of the angel concerning whom Avraham had prayed to G-d that He should make Eliezer’s mission successful (verse 7).The angel, was at hand already before Eliezer had completed praying and he arranged for Rivkah to be the maiden whom Eliezer would address first with his request for water. This is why the Torah wrote: והנה רבקה יוצאת, “and here Rivkah was already in the process of coming out, etc.” The word והנה means that what follows was the result of a special arrangement, invitation. If the servant immediately ran towards her (verse 17) it was because he had noticed the water of the well rising to meet Rivkah on her descent. This is what our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 60,5 have derived from the wording in our verses here.
At that moment Eliezer already understood what Avraham had meant when he had said to him that G-d would send His angel ahead. This is also what he related once he was in Bethuel’s house when he told the family that Avraham had assured him already before he set out on his journey that G-d would send His angel ahead and that he would succeed (verse 40). In view of this it is easy to understand that from the moment that Eliezer had become aware that the angel was supporting him the Torah refers to him no longer as עבד, servant, but as איש, a man of stature. Up until then we read about וישם העבד, “the servant placed;” ויקח העבד, “the servant took;” וירץ העבד, “the servant ran.” From this point on the Torah keeps referring to Eliezer as האיש until he leaves the house of Bethuel with Rivkah. The expressionהאיש is applied to the angel Gavriel in Daniel 9,21. It is also applied to the angel who told Joseph that his brothers had moved away from Shechem, (Genesis 37,17) and that they had been overheard as planning to move to Dothan. In other words, as of the time the angel joined Eliezer in his quest, he himself assumed the role of the angel in an executive manner.
The words והאיש משתאה לה (verse 21) which appear to be somewhat problematical if we assume Eliezer and the angel to have become as one, must be understood as “he was waiting for her;” he did so as he had become aware that his mission was about to be crowned with success. Having done so, the Torah from now on refers to him constantly as האיש, such as when we read (verse 22) ויקח האש, or (verse 26) ויקוד האיש, or (verse 30) כה דבר אלי האיש, etc. When, a little while later, Lavan and Bethuel gave their consent for Eliezer to take Rivkah (verse 51) and they said הנה רבקה לפניך קח ולך, “here Rivkah is in your presence, take her and go,” at which point Eliezer’s mission had been completed, the Torah reverts to describe Eliezer as עבד instead of as האיש. In verse 53 when Eliezer is reported as sharing out gifts, as well as in every subsequent move of his, the Torah speaks of העבד, “the servant,” seeing that the angel’s assistance was no longer required for that part of his activity. Avraham’s prayer which invoked the assistance of an angel had been answered in full.
If you were to ask that when Lavan and his mother asked Rivkah if she were willing to go עם האיש הזה, “with this man,” and this occurred only in verse 58, after verse 51 which we described as the point at which Eliezer’s mission had basically been completed, the answer is simple. The words reported in verse 58 were not spoken by the Torah but by Lavan and his mother. They certainly were not bound by the considerations we described before. How could they be expected to refer to someone as “this slave,” when the person in question was distributing lavish gifts to every member of their household, not to mention to Rivkah herself? Would it not have been a gross insult to their sister to ask her is she were willing to leave her parental home in order to travel to a distant land “with this slave?”
Concerning verse 61 in which both Rivkah and her maids are reported as traveling אחרי האיש, which appears to contradict the explanation I have offered that Eliezer had reverted to being an עבד the moment consent had been obtained for her to become Yitzchak’s bride, this wording was chosen by the Torah in honour of Rivkah. It would not have looked respectful if she had been described as riding “behind the slave.”
Another approach to the words והאיש משתאה לה. It is an allusion to the angel who had tarried and waited at the well until the arrival there of Rivkah. From that moment on Eliezer took over the task of the angel; hence he is referred to as האיש from that moment on. Support for this theory is found in the text near the end of the episode where the Torah said (verse 61) “they walked behind האיש, “and the עבד took Rivkah and he went.” This verse makes it crystal clear that the subjects איש and עבד respectively could not have been one and the same.

He had not yet finished speaking. Hashem arranged that the moment he finished speaking, Rivkah would appear. In fact, this was the first time she ever visited the well because her father had many servants to send. And behold. The word “behold” emphasizes that it was a surprising event.

Voller konnte Abrahams Wunsch wohl kaum in Erfüllung gehen. Bethuel war in doppelter Weise mit ihm verwandt. Bethuels Vater war Abrahams Bruder, seine Mutter Abrahams Brudertochter und zugleich Saras Schwester. In diesem Berichte tritt eigentümlich Milka, Rebekkas Großmutter, hervor, ebenso in Rebekkas Antwort; von Rebekkas Mutter wird geschwiegen. Sie, die Mutter, scheint nicht von abrahamitischer Familie und auch nicht von abrahamitischem Geiste gewesen zu sein. Es scheint, in Rebekka lebte der Geist der Großmutter weiter, die Mutter sah wohl ihr geistiges Ebenbild im Sohne. Der Verfolg der Erzählung lässt erkennen, dass beide, Mutter und Sohn, das Regiment im Hause führten, der — abrahamitisch gesinnte — Bethuel aber, — wahrscheinlich als ein alter gutmütiger "Jude", der nicht so am Gelde klebte, — bei Seite geschoben war.

אשר ילדה לבתואל בן מלכה, he was not a son of Re-umah the concubine. [if the Torah had not wanted to make this point, it could simply have written Betuel, son of Nachor.]

טרם כלה לדבר, while he was still formulating his prayer, G’d was already setting in motion the answer to his prayer as soon or even before he had articulated all of it. (compare Isaiah 65,24).

רבקה יוצאת, Rebeccah was coming out. G'd timed her appearance to coincide exactly with Eliezer's prayer so that he would not meet another girl by mistake while Rebeccah, who had been born to Bethuel, was the intended mate for Isaac. I have explained this in connection with 22,20 where the Torah mentions that Abraham had received word of her birth.

בתולה A VIRGIN — from the place of her hymen.

ואיש לא ידעה, she had not even engaged in fondling with a man. She was extremely chaste.

טובת מראה, she had beautiful skin colouring.

והנערה...ואיש לא ידעה, not even in an unconventional sexual embrace. [these words were added as additional to the statement that she was a virgin. Ed.]

בתולה ואיש לא ידעה, “a virgin, with whom no man had been intimate.” Rashi explains the apparent duplication to mean that no man had even had abnormal sexual relations with her. Besides, if she had been sexually violated while being younger than three years of age, her hymen would have regenerated itself and left no visible marks of such penetration.

Möglich, dass טובת מראה und יפת מראה unterschieden sei, ersteres mehr eine geistige und sittliche Schönheit des Antlitzes, eine Anmut bedeute, die mehr auf den Charakter hinweist, das letztere eine wirkliche äußere Schönheit bezeichne. Wir würden dies für gewiss halten, wenn es nicht auch von Waschti hieße כי טובת מראה היא obgleich dies immer noch nicht ausschließt, dass nicht auch Waschti mehr anmutig als schön gewesen. Ihre Weigerung selbst dürfte wohl für Geist und sittliches Anstands-, gefühl sprechen.

בתולה, “a virgin;” according to the view that Rivkah was only three years old, the Torah hardly needed to add this detail; the Talmud Niddah 44, explains this by saying that even if she had been violated by someone, her hymen had grown together again, (something that was known to people in those days).

ואיש לא ידעה AND A MAN DID NOT KNOW HER — not in its way (meaning, anally). Because the daughters of the nations would guard the place of their hymens, but abandon themselves from another place. It testifies about this one that she was clean from all [of this] (Genesis Rabbah 60:5).

ותמלא כדה, which she had drawn from the well, and which was filled with water. Seeing that the water from this well was only marginally below the surface of the earth the” well” is referred to as עין, “fountain,” although one did have to go down some steps to get at the water. Some scholars derive from allusions in the text that the water actually rose toward Rivkah, seeing that the text speaks only of ותמלא כדה, “she filled her jug,” instead of saying “she went down and drew water and filled her jug.” A similar formulation, without using the word “she drew water,” is used in 21,19 where Hagar was filling the hose with the newly discovered well. [one would have to say that when giving water to camels Rivkah did not enjoy this heavenly assist as in verse 20 she did have to “draw water.” Ed.]

והנערָ, bis auf eine einzige Stelle fehlt überall im Pentateuch das ה Femininum bei נַעֲרָ und schließt dann auch קטנה, also das Mädchen in demjenigen Alter mit ein, in welchem es die geschlechtliche Reife noch nicht erlangt hat. Nur bei מוציא שם רע (5. B. M. 22, 19) steht נַעְַרָה, eben um zu statuieren, dass dieses Gesetz nur bei einem erwachsenen, d. i. geschlechtlich reifen Mädchen Anwendung findet (siehe Kethuboth 40 b.).

בתל ,בתולה, lautverwandt mit בדל ,פתל, welche auch ein für sich Abge- schlossensein, Getrenntsein bedeuten. — ואיש לא ירעה kann sich nicht bloß auf die Jungfräulichkeit beziehen, da dies schon durch בתולה gesagt ist. Es heißt auch nicht: לא ידעה איש, wie überall sonst, sondern: ואש לא ידעה, was sonst nie wieder vorkommt. Also: sie war nicht nur בתולה, was identisch mit dem gewöhnlichen לא ידעה איש ist, sondern sie war so außerordentlich züchtig, dass איש לא ידעה, dass noch kein Mann es je gewagt, sich ihr irgend wie vertraulich zu nahen. Das wahrhaft züchtige jüdische Weib besitzt eine solche sittliche Hoheit und Majestät, imponiert unbewusst so, dass der unflätigste Bube es nicht wagt, in ihrer Gegenwart auch nur einen unanständigen Scherz zu äußern, geschweige denn auch nur mit einem unanständigen Blicke ihr zu nahen. Das war allerdings bedeutsam, zumal in Aram.

וירץ העבד לקראתה AND THE SERVANT RAN TOWARDS HER — because he saw that the waters rose in the well when she approached it (Genesis Rabbah 60:5).

AND THE SERVANT RAN TO MEET HER. Rashi comments: “Because he saw that the waters rose in the well when she approached it.” In Bereshith Rabbah the Rabbis said,¹¹⁷60:6. “And she filled her pitcher, and came up.¹¹⁸Verse 16 here. All the women went down and filled their pitchers from the well. But this one, as the waters saw her they immediately rose. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to her, ‘You are a sign of blessing to your children.’”¹¹⁹When Israel wandered in the desert, the waters in the well would rise as soon as they approached it. See Numbers 21:17 and Midrash Rabbah, ibid.
It would appear that the Rabbis derived this interpretation upon observing the language, And she filled her pitcher, and came up,¹¹⁸Verse 16 here. for it does not say, “and she drew water and filled [the pitcher].” Now this miracle happened to her only the first time for afterwards it is written, and she drew.¹²⁰Verse 20 here. The servant, when recounting the day’s events to them, said: And she went down unto the well, and drew water.¹²¹Verse 45 here. That was because he thought that perhaps they would not believe in the miracle.

הגמיאיני נא מעט מים, "let me please sip a little water, etc." Eliezer actually asked for less than he had originally stipulated, seeing he meant to ask her "to incline her jug in order to let him drink (extensively)." Not only did he only ask to take a sip, but he stressed that he wanted only a little water. He also failed to ask her to incline her jug in order to give him to drink. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 60,5) explain that Eliezer saw that the waters rose towards Rebeccah. This is when he realised that she was not a Canaanite girl and that she was destined for Isaac. He became afraid that he might forfeit an opportunity by insisting on the conditions he had made in his prayer, and proceeded to ask for the minimum possible. He wanted to make it easy for the girl to meet his request.

וירץ, seeing that he saw her beauty, plus the fact that his request seemed to have been answered so promptly, he ran towards her, relying on the fact that he had enjoyed a heavenly assist.

וירץ העבד לקראתה, “the servant ran towards her.” He did so after witnessing that the waters in the well had risen in response to her approach. Our sages derive this from the wording of our verse ותמלא כדה ותעל, “she filled the jug and ascended.” There is no mention here of her having “drawn water,” ותשאב, something the Torah emphasis in verse 20 when she descended again in order to draw water for Eliezer’s camels. No miracle occurred in order to facilitate the watering of the camels. The first time the miracle occurred in order that Eliezer focus on the unusual speed with which this girl came up from the well, her jug already filled with water. Although, when Eliezer recounts the events at the table of Bethuel and Lavan he did not mention the miracle which had occurred, but described Rivkah as having drawn the water normally, (verse 45) he omitted mention of the miracle as he was afraid Lavan and Bethuel would not believe him and would consider his having fabricated that event in order to enhance his chances of obtaining their consent for Rivkah to travel back with him to the land of Canaan.

Because he saw the water rise toward her. Rashi is answering the question: Why does the verse say: “Toward her”? Since she already filled the pitcher and came up from the well, it should say he ran after her, as he had been standing by the well next to her, as it is written (v. 13): “Behold, here I stand by this well of water.” Perforce, “toward her” means he ran after her because of the water which rose toward her. (cited in the name of R. Avraham of Prague) Maharshal explains: It seems that Eliezer was not standing right at the well, but some distance from it. And Rashi deduced [his comment] from the fact that it is written, “The servant ran.” Why is it not written, “He ran,” similar to the preceding verses? Perforce, [it comes to say] that since he was Avraham’s servant he knew that Avraham was used to such miracles, as seen in (21:30) שבע כבשות האלה [where Rashi explains: “And the waters rose towards Avraham.” Thus,] Eliezer ran toward her, thinking: “She is worthy for the House of Avraham since the water even rises toward her, like for Avraham.”

(17-20) וירץ העבד, nicht Elieser, "der Knecht" in Knechtesgestalt eilte er ihr entgegen. Er bittet um "ein bischen Wasser" zu "schlürfen": Sie antwortet: "trinke!" und nennt ihn "mein Herr!" obgleich er als Knecht vor ihr stand. Und nun zeichnet Zug für Zug das Weib, das mit abrahamitischem Gemüte wert war, an Saras Stelle zu treten. Sie sagte von den Kamelen, wie Elieser gehofft hatte, zuerst nichts. Erst als sie seinen Durst vollständig gelöscht hatte, sprach sie: Auch für deine Kamele will ich schöpfen, bis sie völlig ausgetrunken haben. Hätte Rebekka dies gleich gesagt, es hätte ein Charakterzug gefehlt, der den wahren גומל חסד und das wahre jüdische Weib kennzeichnet; sie wäre eine eitle Schwätzerin gewesen, die sich auf ihr Gutestun etwas zu gute tut. Und nun erbietet sie sich nicht, auch den Kamelen etwas zu trinken zu geben, was doch auch schon eine ziemliche Mühe gewesen wäre, auch nur ein Krug für jedes Kamel gäbe zehn Wege und zehnmaliges Schöpfen, sondern: sie will schöpfen und in die Tränke schütten bis zehn Kamele sich voll getrunken haben!! Ein Kamel trinkt mit einemmale so viel, dass es auf viele Tage genug hat und des Wassers entbehren kann, vielleicht daher ja sein Name. Dabei, wie ist sie behend und hurtig, ותמהר ,ותמהר, sie besinnt sich nicht lange und ist nicht schwerfällig, zumal wo es gilt, ein menschenfreundliches Werk zu vollbringen. Was Elieser in dem Krug gelassen hatte, schüttet sie zuvor in die Tränke. Sie hätte es darin lassen oder auf die Erde schütten lönnen. Allein die jüdische menschenfreundliche Natur ist so ökonomisch mit Kräften und Werten, wie sie verschwenderisch damit ist. Eben weil ihr alles, auch das Geringste, Mittel zur מצוה, zur Pflichterfüllung ist, ist ihr alles heilig. Nutzlos verschwendet sie nicht den geringsten Splitter Kraft und nicht den geringsten Tropfen Wasser. Für einen guten Zweck kennt hingegen ihre Hingebung mil Kraft und Gut keine Grenzen.

הגמיאיני נא GIVE ME TO DRINK, I PRAY THEE — the word means sipping; old French humer.

הגמיאני נא, the word has a similar meaning to השקיני, “give me to drink!”

ותרד כדה SHE LET DOWN HER PITCHER from off her shoulder.

ותאמר שתה אדוני, She said: "drink my lord, etc." Instead of letting Eliezer merely sip a little water, the girl offered that he drink freely, as much as he wanted. She did not want him to have to use his hand to drink out of, but she lowered the jug to make it more convenient for him. The word ותשקהו, means that not only did Eliezer not have to lift the jug to his lips but she placed it so that he did not even have to tilt it. She brought the jug to the level of his mouth.

ותאמר שתה אדוני, the Torah records this detail in order to tell us of Rivkah’s good manners; although she did not know of the stranger’s social status she addressed him as “my lord.” She was very prompt and actually let him drink directly from her hand.

She quickly lowered her pitcher. Eliezer asked her to tip it for him while it was still on her shoulder to save her the trouble of lowering it. Rivkah, however, was concerned that when he approached to drink it would appear immodest, so she lowered the pitcher.

Rebeccah purposely did not add the words: "I will also water your camels" immediately. Had she added the words immediately, before Eliezer had finished drinking, the latter might have cut short his own drinking knowing that Rebeccah would still have to go to the trouble of watering the camels. As long as she had not offered this, Eliezer had no reason to entertain such considerations.

עד אם כלו literally, UNTIL THAT THEY HAVE FINISHED [DRINKING] — Here the word אם is used in the sense of אשר “that”. The words אם כלו the Targum renders by "That they have done enough drinking”. Though the verb כלה signifies to finish, to end, the Targum is right in translating it thus for this is the end of their drinking when they have drunk as much as they wanted (cf. Rashi on Genesis 43:2).

ותכל להשקותו ותאמר, she waited with speaking until Eliezer had finished drinking his fill. She followed the dictum of our sages that one should not engage in conversation while eating (during the meal) (Taanit 5)

ותכל להשקותו, When she completed giving him to drink, etc. Seeing that the Torah does not describe Eliezer as having finished drinking, it is clear the Torah wants us to know that she kept bringing him water until he stopped drinking.

ותכל...עד אם כלו לשתות, she meant that she would continue drawing water for the camels until she could ascertain that they would stop drinking. Alternately, the word אם is a substitute for the word אשר.

ותאמר גם לגמליך אשאב, she said: “I will also draw water for your camels.” The physical strength required for Rivkah to draw water for all of Eliezer’s camels could only be explained if she enjoyed divine assistance. This is all the more so if we accept the opinion of the sages in the Seder Olam that at that time Rivkah was only three years old. The whole matter can be viewed only as part of the success of which Avraham had assured Eliezer at the outset when he told him: “He will send His angel ahead of you and make your mission successful.” (24,7) This is the reason you find an allusion to G-d’s great name in our verse the name we have discussed in the previous paragraph. The fact that the letter ג in the word גמליך has a dagesh is additional evidence of an allusion to the attribute of גבורה being involved in what transpired at this well.

Because that is the end of their drinking—when they have had enough to drink. Accordingly, כלו is not from כלייה (“finished off”), as the Targum for that word is גמירא.

It is also possible that Rebeccah judged when Eliezer should stop drinking, seeing that weary travellers who have gone without water for a long time are not the best judges of when they may be drinking more than is good for their health.

We may view the matter also in light of what the Talmud teaches in Berachot 40, based on Deuteronomy 11,15 that one must feed one's animals before eating oneself. This ruling applies only when there is no danger to the life of the person involved. If his life is in danger, concern for his own health takes precedence over the wellbeing of his animals. When Rebeccah heard Eliezer ask for some water she concluded that she faced a man whose need for water was immediate. This is why she said to him: "drink!" As soon as she had given him sufficient water to ensure he was not in danger of dehydrating she suggested giving water to his camels, the ones which normally should have been looked after first. This is why the Torah phrases Rebeccah's action in such a way that we understand that as soon as was practicable she turned her attention to the camels, giving them to drink. She added that she would continue until the camels had finished drinking, meaning that in the case of the camels she was not going to rely on her personal judgment of when the animals had had enough to drink. She kept drawing water for the camels until they stopped drinking.

ותער AND SHE EMPTIED — It means “pouring out”. It occurs in this sense many times in the Mishna; e. g., (Avodah Zarah 72a), “He who pours (הטערה) from one vessel into another”, and we find it again in a similar sense in Biblical Hebrew: (Psalms 141:8) “O pour not out (תער) my soul”, and (Isaiah 53:12) “Because he poured forth (הערה) his soul unto death”

ותמהר, by being quick in what one does, a person performing a service indicates that the one whom she serves is someone esteemed highly in his eyes. Rivkah expressed this by the speed with which she went about her tasks.

ותמהר ותער כדה, she poured the water in the jug into a trough from which the beasts were in the habit of drinking.

ותער כדה אל השוקת, “she poured the water in her jug into the trough (for the animals).” She observed the rule of not wasting water by pouring surplus water that Eliezer had not drunk into the trough meant for the camels to drink from, instead of pouring it back into the well.

השקת THE TROUGH — a hollowed-out stone from which the camels drink.

ותרץ עוד אל הבאר, the one in front of the well ((מעיין which was designed for the beasts to drink from.

משתאה WAS WONDERING — The word really has the idea of being waste and desolate, as (Isaiah 6:11) “Until cities be waste (שאו) and the land become utterly desolate תשאה.

והאיש משתאה, the word is derived from Isaiah 6,11 תשאה שממה, and the letter ת is similar to the letter ת in the word ישתבח which is derived from שבח, or the ת in the word וישתמר in the phrase וישתמר חוקות עמדי, which is derived from the root שמר, (compare Micah 6,16). Here the word משתאה means the same as משתומם, being amazed at this girl volunteering that she would also draw water for his camels. From these words of her he understood that G’d had heard his prayer. Commentators who understand the word משתאה as being related to שתייה, drink, are in error. Such an interpretation is impossible, seeing that the letter א in that word cannot be related to שתייה at all. Furthermore, Rivkah had not mentioned anything about watering the camels until after he himself had finished drinking already. At that point Eliezer began to wonder.

Wondering at her. He was amazed at her zeal.

והאיש משתאה לה מחריש, And the man was amazed at her, remaining silent, etc. The Torah explains here that though Eliezer had no longer any reason to await Rebeccah's completing her task of watering the camels seeing she had already done much more than he had stipulated in his prayer, he kept his peace. One of the reasons he waited before enquiring from her about who she was may have been that he wanted to test whether she would indeed complete the onerous task of drawing water for all the ten camels as she had promised to do, or if she would tire in the process and carry out less than she had promised. As soon as she completed watering all the camels he gave her the jewelry intended for Isaac's bride.

והאיש משתאה לה, he was amazed at her, i.e. at the speed with which she went about her work. However, he still kept silent, not wanting to ask her who she was until she would have completed providing the camels with water.

Because the verb “drink” does not take an א. Rashi is saying: [If it means “drinking”] why is there an א? It is plausible according to Onkelos, who said it means שהייה (waiting), for the verb root is שהי or שהה. Thus, the א replaces the third letter of the root, which is י or ה. But if it means שתייה (drinking) whose root is שתה, then all three letters of the root are found in משתאה. [Why is there an א?].

שאה ,משתאה, Grundbedeutung: öde, davon: die Unklarheit der Vorstellung, השתאה ל־: sich im Anstaunen halten. Die Erfüllung überragte alle seine Vorstellungen und Erwartungen, er wollte immer sprechen, hielt sich jedoch immer zurück, um schließlich zu erfahren, ob das so sehr seinen Voraussetzungen entsprechende Mädchen denn auch hinsichtlich ihrer Abstammung Abrahams Bedingungen entspreche. — משתאֵה, stat. const. er war ein sie Anstaunender, staunte sie fortwährend an. —

משתאה לה, although literally “at her,” the word לה here is to be understood as if the Torah had written: עליה, “about her.” We find a similar formulation in Numbers 23,23: כעת יאמר ליעקב ולישראל, “at that time it is reported about Israel, etc.”

משתאה means he was astonished and perplexed, because he saw that what he had said was nearly successful only that he did not know whether she belonged to Abraham’s family or not. Do not be puzzled by the ת in the word משתאה for you will find no word (verb) whose first root letter is ש where, when it is used in the Hithpael, the ת of the Hithpael-prefix does not come between the first two letters of the root, as e.g. משתאה (here) and (Isaiah 59:15) משתולל of the same root as שולל, and (Isaiah 59:16) וישתומם of the same root as שממה and (Micha 6:16) “For the statutes of Omri are kept (וישתמר )” from the same root as וישמר —so, also, here משתאה is of the same root as תשאה. Now, just as you find the expression שמם (which really means waste and desolate) applied to a person who is perplexed and speechless (with amazement) and sunk in deep thought (about what is happening) — e. g., (Job 18:20) “They that come after shall be astonished (נשמו) at his day”, and (Jeremiah 2:12) “Be astonished (שומו) ye heavens”, and (Daniel 4:16) “He was appalled אשתומם for a time” — so too you may explain the expression שאה (which also really means waste and desolate) in all its verbal or noun forms as referring to a person who is perplexed and sunk deep in thought. Onkelos translates it in the sense of lingering — “the man lingered” — i. e. he wailed, standing on one spot, to see “whether God had made his journey prosperous”. But one should not read in the Targum שתי in place of שהי, as the Targum of משתאה, (as evidently some versions of the Targum read), for the word משתאה certainly does not mean drinking, for א has no place in the Hebrew words which mean drinking root (שתה).

Remained silent. He did not try to dissuade her from troubling herself. Waiting to determine. The way she performed her good deeds was to be the test.

ההצליח, if she were also a member of a good family, and one related to Avraham.

הצליח, von צלה, verwandt mit שלה, etwas einem Ziele zu in Bewegung setzen. Der צ-Laut bringt die Nuance des Überwindens von Hindernissen und צלח heißt daher: mit Überwindung aller entgegenstehenden Hindernisse zu einem Ziele gelangen. So vom durch nichts zu hemmenden Fortschritt des Feuers: פן יצלח כאש בית יוסף (Amos 5, 6). הצליח: etwas glücklich zum Ziele gelangen lassen. Vielleicht ist auch סלח damit verwandt. Der schuldbelastete Mensch verdient in seinem Lebenslauf gehemmt zu werden. Ihm gleichwohl noch ein Fortschreiten zu einer neuen Zukunft gestatten, ihn diesem Fortschreiten wieder geben heißt: סלח, verzeihen.

משתאה לה means he was wondering about her, just as the ל has the meaning “about” in (20:13) “Say of me (לי), he is my brother”, and (26:7) “And the men of the place asked about his wife.

Whether Ad-noy had made. If she acted out of pure kindness he would know that his mission was successful.

Or not. If she expected payment she was not the right one

לאשתו BEKA (half a Shekel) — a symbol of the Shekels of the Israelites of which it is said (Exodus 38:26) “a Beka (half a Shekel) a head” (cf. Targum Jon).

AND THE MAN TOOK A GOLDEN RING… AND TWO BRACELETS UPON HER HANDS. This verse omits the deed for it should have said: “And the man took a golden ring and put it upon her nose¹²²So it says in Verse 47 here. and two bracelets upon her hands.” Therefore I say that the interpretation of the verse is as follows: And the man took a golden ring and two bracelets which would be upon her hands, and he said to her, Whose daughter art thou?¹²³Verse 23 here. And after she had told him, I am the daughter of Bethuel,¹²⁴Verse 24 here. he put the ring upon her nose and the bracelets upon her hands, as he told them.¹²⁵In Verse 47 here. He first asked her who she was, and then he gave her the presents. This interpretation differs from Rashi (in Verse 23) who says that after he had given her the presents, he asked her whose daughter she was, for he was confident that, on account of Abraham’s merit, G-d would make his journey successful. Later, however, in Verse 47, when he recounted the story, he changed the sequence of the two events so that they should not sense the inconsistency and say, “How could you give her anything when you did not know who she was?” Here, however, Scripture omits the actual giving, and similarly in many places.

ויקח האיש נזם זהב, one is entitled to assume that Eliezer first had asked her about whose family she belonged to (verse 23) The reason why things were not written in this order is in order not to interrupt the sequence of the story by questions and answers. This is why the Torah reported first about Eliezer giving Rivkah the jewelry.

When the camels had finished. He did not give her the jewelry immediately after she finished drawing the water because he was waiting to see if she would ask for remuneration.

על ידיה, on her hands. This means that the bracelets fitted her as if made to fit her specific measurements. Eliezer placed this jewelry on Rebeccah's hands as a sign of acknowledging G'd's personal guidance in his mission thus far.

ויהי...ויקח, “he took out the jewelry planning to give it to her after he had asked her the relevant questions. This is also how he describes the sequence of what occurred at the well when he relates the nature of his mission in Betuel’s home before eating the first course of the meal served (verse 46)

This is symbolic of the shekels of Israel, a בקע per head. Otherwise, why does it tell us, “Weighing half a shekel”? It was not a tremendous weight! The same is true for, “Weighing ten gold shekels.” Chazal interpreted “two bracelets” as they did because of the question: Why does it need to say “two”? [We always assume the minimum, and] the least number that the term “bracelets” could be referring to is two.

ויקח. Es steht noch nicht, dass er es ihr gegeben. In seiner Erzählung, Raw Hirsch on Genesis 24: 47, sagt er auch, dass er ihr dies Geschmeide erst, nachdem sie ihn mit ihrer Familie bekannt gemacht, gegeben habe. Allein er hielt es doch jetzt bereits für gut, es hervorzunehmen und etwas von dem Reichtum blicken zu lassen, den er bei sich führte. Er wollte ja jetzt auch um Aufnahme in das Haus bitten. Elieser kannte die Welt, jedenfalls die aramäische Welt, sonst wäre ihm ja גמילות חסד nicht als etwas so Charakteristisches und Charakterisierendes erschienen. Um Aufnahme für zehn Kamele und die dazu gehörigen Leute zu finden, dazu gehört nicht bloß eine abrahamitische Tochter, dazu gehört ein ganzes abrahamitisches Haus. Das Mädchen war eine Perle an Menschenfreundlichkeit, allein wer weiß, ob nicht in unedler Fassung. Jedenfalls hielt Elieser vor der Frage nach ihrem Hause und der Möglichkeit, dort Aufnahme zu finden, es nicht für überflüssig, etwas Geld blicken zu lassen. Wer weiß auch, ob Rebekka als zartfühlende Tochter, die den Geist ihres das Hausregiment führenden Bruders sehr wohl kannte, der schwerlich für eine Anzahl bloßer Knechte mit Kamelen ein freundliches Willkommen gehabt hätte, ihren Namen gesagt haben würde, wenn sie in Eliesers Händen nicht etwas hätte blinken gesehen, was, freilich nicht für sie, doch für den Genius ihres Hauses eine größere Anziehungskraft als die Gelegenheit auszuübender Menschenfreundlichkeit gehabt! Dass er bei der Erzählung im Hause ihrer Eltern diesen Umstand umging und einfach die Geschenke nach ihrer Auskunft über ihre Familie erscheinen lässt, ist wieder eine Feinheit, die überhaupt Eliesers Benehmen und Reden charakterisiert.

ויקח האיש נזם זהב, “the man (Eliezer) took out a golden nose ring, etc.;” The sage Rabbi Moshe, interprets this verse as its face value, understanding the words to mean that in preparation of events, Eliezer took out of his satchel jewelry which he would give to Rebecca if she would meet the conditions he had outlined, (and which she was of course quite unaware of). He then asked her about her family status, and when told that she was member of Avraham’s family he gave here the jewelry as a gift. The Torah abbreviated somewhat in its report of what happened, something that is not unusual. That this is so is clear from the sequence of events Eliezer described during the meal, when he filled in the words that have been omitted here. Even here, (contrary to the way some people interpret our verse) the Torah did not write that he gave her the jewelry before having established her family status.

ויקח האיש, literally: “the man took;” the reason why the Torah did not write simply: “the man gave, etc,” is that he searched among the jewelry he had with him the kind which was the appropriate size for someone her age. He would give it to her in the event she met the conditions Eliezer had made as the Torah had previously outlined.

ושני צמידים AND TWO BRACELETS (the word for bracelet signifies something joined or united) — a symbol of the two Tablets of stone, joined one to another (Genesis Rabbah 60:6).

בקע, a half shekel in weight. The word occurs in a similar meaning in Exodus 14,15 נטה ידך על הים ובקעהו, “incline your hand over the sea and divide it!”

ושני צמידים על ידיה, according to the size that fitted her wrists; this is similar to Exodus 28,22 ועשית עלי החושן שרשות גבלות, “you shall construct around it plaited chains of beaten gold,” or Exodus 25,11 ועשית עליו זר זהב, “you shall construct around it a golden border.” In each of these instances the measurements of the chains or border had to fit the pricipal artifact.

בקע, a half shekel. He placed it on her nose as mentioned in verse 46. Similarly, in sequence, he placed the other pieces of jewelry on her hands, bracelets

בקע משקלו, the word בקע means “split,” as we know from Exodus 14,16 ובקעהו, “and he split it;” (the waters of the sea of reeds) a half shekel each (for each arm).

עשרה זהב משקלם TEN SHEKELS OF GOLD WAS THEIR WEIGHT —a symbol of the Ten Commandments written on them (the Tablets) (Genesis Rabbah 60:6).

weighing ten pieces of gold (ten סלעים in weight according to Onkelos).

ויאמר בת מי את AND HE SAID, WHOSE DAUGHTER ART THOU? — He asked her this after he had given her these presents, for he was confident that, on account of the merit of Abraham, the Holy One blessed be He, had made his journey successful.

מקום לנו ללין. Is there room in your father’s house to stay the night so that we do not have to spend the night in an inn?

היש בית אביך מקום, are they prepared to welcome strangers as guests as was customary in that time?

בת מי את, הגידי, "Whose daughter are you? Tell me, etc." The Torah lumps both these questions together to show that Eliezer did not entertain any doubts that the girl must belong to Abraham's family. Had he entertained such doubts he could not have enquired immediately about the chance of lodging in her parents' home until he had clarified who her parents were. He merely wanted to know her father's name. He added his enquiry about staying at her parents' overnight to emphasise that this had nothing to do with her father's name, that he was convinced G'd had guided him to the right family.

ויאמר, he now asked about her family, and whether in the home of such a family there was room to accommodate him and his entourage.

מקום לנו ללין,”we have enough room to offer guests to stay overnight.” He meant “enough room to accommodate animals overnight?” She replied מקום לנו ללון, We have enough room to accommodate visiting strangers overnight. (including their beasts).” Although Eliezer had not enquired about fodder for his camels, she volunteered that all this was included in the invitation. He was not to think that he had to pay for it. She made it plain that her father would be offended if he offered to pay for the accommodation or the fodder.

ויאמר בת מי את, “he said: ’whose daughter are you?‘“ The true meaning of this verse is that the servant had asked this question already before he gave Rivkah the jewelry. It is quite inconceivable that Eliezer should have been handing out such expensive jewelry to a stranger he knew nothing about. This is not the only time that you find in this story that the Torah did not report it in the exact sequence in which the events occurred. You find proof that when Eliezer recounted in Bethuel’s house what had occurred, (24,47) he related that he gave her the jewelry after having ascertained who she was. In Leviticus 9,22 the Torah writes that Aaron raised his hands and they (Moses and Aaron) blessed the people, after which he (Aaron) descended from having performed the sin-offering.” The meaning there is clearly that Moses and Aaron blessed the people after Aaron had descended from the altar. Nonetheless, the Torah saw fit to describe this in a manner which could lead us to receive the wrong impression.

He asked her this after giving her... Although in Eliezer’s recount to Lavan (v. 47) it is written that he first asked and then he gave, Rashi explained there that Eliezer changed the story so they would not catch [something incongruous] in his words. Eliezer’s recount to Lavan cannot be the primary version, while here [we apply the rule that] Torah narratives are not always in chronological order, because within one topic the Torah observes chronological order. (Re’m) A question on the Re’m: In the beginning of Parshas Vayeira, Rashi explains on, “He said, My Master...” (18:3), that the Torah is not following chronological order. Yet there, it is within one topic! And Rashi there brings proof from, “My spirit will not continue to judge man forever” (6:3).

הגידי נא, er erwartet nicht, dass das Mädchen dies ohne weiteres einem fremden Manne sagen würde und wiederholt daher die Bitte dringender.

ויאמר, בת מי את, he said: “whose daughter are you?” He had asked this question before giving her anything, as is clear from when he repeats what took place before sharing any food with her family in verse 47 of this chapter. An alternate interpretation: the line: “the man took out a golden nose ring,” is to be understood literally; he did something completely appropriate as a reward for the girl’s having let him and his camels to drink, a task which had consumed time and effort. He also meant to show that he was a servant of a wealthy man. When telling her family at the dinner table what had transpired at the well, he added that he had first enquired from her about her family status; he did so in order to flatter the family, suggesting that he would not have given her such gifts before knowing that she was a member of Avraham’s family. נזם זהב, the translation of this word by the Targum here is different from the same word in Exodus 35,22. This word sometimes means a ring worn in the ear, other times a ring worn in the nose.

ללין TO LODGE IN — the word means one night’s lodging. The word לין is a noun (of the same form as גיל ,שיר). She however said (Genesis 24:25) ללון (a verb, “to lodge” generally) meaning many nights’ lodging (Genesis Rabbah 60:6).

ללין, the word לין is a noun, just as the word ריב in Deuteronomy 25,1כי יהיה ריב בין אנשים , “when there is a quarrel between men, etc.” is a noun. It is a derivative of Genesis 31,36 וירב בלבן, he “(Yaakov) quarreled with Lavan.” The word דין is a similar noun derived from דן אנכי in Genesis 15,14. לין is in a similar relationship to Genesis 32,14 וילן שם בלילה הוא, “he spent that night there.” (the night of the wrestling match with the angel on the far side of the river Yabbok) Rivkah’s answer גם מקום ללון (as opposed to the word ללין in Eliezer’s enquiry) meant that there is room for you and your men’s bodies to spend the night with us. The formulation ללון is a verbal formulation just as in Genesis 31,35 לקום, where Rachel excuses herself for not rising in the presence of her father. It is also similar to the formulation (verbal infinitive) לשוב מצרימה “to return to Egypt” in Exodus 4,21. If Rivkah had said: גם מקום לכם, she would have had to continue with the word ללין instead of the word ללון. Whereas the word לנו used by Eliezer meant that he and his men would be prepared to spend the night where the camels spent it, the word ללון after the word עמנו, “with us,” which clearly refers to Rivkah and her family, i.e. accommodation designed for human beings. She therefore meant to say: “why would you need to spend the night at an inn? This is the correct meaning as understood by people who understand the nuances of the Holy Tongue, i.e. Hebrew as written in the Torah.

ללין, so that both we and our camels can stay the night there?

?היש בית אביך מקום ללין, The meaning of the word ללין is a verbal mode meaning the same as להלין, “to provide lodging.” The letter י indicates the transitive conjugation hiphil. The word ללון by comparison which is in the simple conjugation (intransitive) kal, describes what the person enjoying the lodging does, i.e. spend the night. Both the enquiry and the response are the same, i.e. Rivkah answered the question asked, she did not answer obliquely, seeing that she used the verb “to lodge” in a different conjugation. After all, Eliezer had asked her both about lodging for the camels and lodging for himself and his men. It is possible to understand the exchange between Eliezer and Rivkah as meaning: “is there room in your father’s house to provide lodging,” a reference to the camels only, whereas Rivkah responds “not only is there room for the camels but there is also room for the men.” The author quotes Job 24,7 to show that the verb לון when used in the transitive mode ערום ילינו מבלי לבוש, “they will have to spend the night without clothing” also means the same as the intransitive conjugation ילונו.

ללין, ”for an overnight stay.” The word is a noun, as opposed to ללון which would be the verb from the same root. The meaning is that there is accommodation for a single night’s lodging. This is the way our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 60,6 interpret this word. Rivkah had changed the word and had said ללון, implying that Eliezer would be welcome for a more extended stay although he had inquired only if he could stay for a single night. She used the word in its infinitive which does not carry any connotation of a limited time.
The correct interpretation is that the word ללין is a transitive form of the verb, i.e. Eliezer asked whether lodging overnight could be provided in her father’s house. Whereas Eliezer had asked whether he and his entourage could be assigned a place in her father’s house to spend the night, Rivkah replied that he did not need to be assigned such a place but that he could choose where in her father’s house he wished to spend the night. By saying ללון, i.e. using the intransitive form of the word, Rivkah indicated that Eliezer would have the choice of a number of accommodations in her father’s house.

One night’s lodging. Otherwise, why does it not say the same in both places: either ללין or ללון?

ושני צמידים על ידיה, “and two bracelets on her hands.” The word: שם , “he placed,” has been omitted in this verse.

לין is a noun. This noun is similar to שיר and ניר. But ללון is an infinitive that can mean many lodgings or one lodging.

ללין, this is a noun meaning: “a place that serves as shelter for the night.” He asked whether there was nearby an inn for travelers. (He did not ask for accommodation for his ten men and camels as a favour). The formulation ללין is parallel to the formulation לדין, and the noun ריב “quarrel,” from the root רוב, “to fight.” When used as a verb we find the formulation: וילן, “he stayed overnight.”

בת בתואל DAUGHTER OF BETHUEL — She answered his first question first and his last last (cf. Avot 5:9).

בת בתואל..אשר ילדה לנחור. The daughter of Bethuel whom Milkah bore for Nachor. Rebeccah emphasised that she was not the daughter or granddaughter of a concubine, but of the ranking wife.

ותאמר , she answered him on his first question; seeing that Milkah and Betuel were well known she told him all this.

בת בתואל אנכי בן מלכה אשר ילדה לנחור, “I am a daughter of Bethuel, who is a son of Milkah she had born for Nachor.” She was so explicit because Nachor also had a concubine named Re-umah, and she wanted it understood that her father was not the son of a concubine. It was the custom in those days to enumerate the father’s genealogy before that of the mother. When it came to other matters, girls tended to keep company and share intimacies with their mothers, as in verse 28 where Rivkah relates her encounter with Eliezer to her mother. [If she had not suddenly worn costly jewelry Lavan might not have become aware that something unusual had happened at the well. Ed.]

Sie hebt Milka und Nachor hervor, die als Abrahams und Saras Geschwister wohl einen bekannteren Namen gehabt haben dürften.

בת בתואל אנכי בן מלכה אשר ילדה לנחור, “I am adaughter of Betuel, who is a son of Milkah whom the latter bore for Nachor (Avraham’s brother). The reason she gave him all these details was that she did not want Eliezer to think that Betuel had been born by a concubine, but that he was the son of Milkah.

מספוא PROVENDER — All kinds of camels’ food is called מספוא e. g., straw and barley.

גם תבן, also straw, something which you did not inquire about as well as lodging, something which you did inquire about. It is a habit of Scriptures to use the word גם, “also,” repeatedly, even if this is not strictly necessary in order to correctly understand the text.

גם תבן גם מספוא, not only do we have room for the camels but we also have feed for them.

ותאמר, she answered his second question, volunteering more information than Eliezer had requested. She wanted to portray the generous nature of her family by mentioning that they would also provide straw and fodder. She volunteered all this before Eliezer had given her anything. (until after she had answered his questions.)

Auch hier tritt wieder die vortreffliche Natur hervor. Denkt zuerst an die Tiere, die sie so eben getränkt und gesehen, wie sie sich gelabt, "haben nun getrunken, sollen nun auch zu essen haben!" Das Gefühl pulsiert noch ganz frisch in ihr. יודע צדיק נפש בהמתו, dazu brauchen wir im Judentume keine Anti-Tierquälervereine, das übte schon unsere Ältermutter Rebekka. — מספא, von ספא, verwandt mit שבע ,סבא.

גם תבן גם מספוא רב עמנו, “we also have plenty of straw and fodder.” She volunteered additional information that Eliezer had not enquired about, so as to indicate that his entourage would also be welcome as guests in her father’s house.

גם מקום ללון, both for yourself and the men with you.

ומספוא, a general term describing any fodder other than straw. It is some kind of barley and oats.

ללון, “for you all as well as your beasts to spend the night.” The formulation is parallel to: לדון, to judge, or לשוב, to come back. She implied that there was no inn for travelers nearby but that there was no need for this.

גם גם, the reason why Rivkah used the word גם, “also,” twice is that it was a customary way of speaking, just as we are in the habit of repeating the word אנחנו. An example of this repetition elsewhere is found in 43,8 גם אנחנו, אם אתה, גם טפינו. Each word גם is intended to reinforce the one mentioned previously.

ויקוד, a bow somewhat more perfunctory than the one known as השתחויה. According to our sages the former means touching one’s face to the ground, whereas the latter involves prostrating one’s body and stretching out with the arms and legs. At any rate, the procedure was to symbolise his gratitude to G’d for having heard his prayer.

HE BOWED ETC - it seems that according to the words of our sages (Brachot 34b) bowing is done with the face towards the earth, meaning, directing the top of the head to the ground (which makes no sense unless after bending the knees) and prostrating is the [further] extending hands and feet, meaning, the entire body is touching the earth.

קידה ist das vollständige Vor- und Niederbeugen des Hauptes fast bis zur Erde ohne Beugung der Knie, bezeichnet somit wohl die Beugung und Hingebung des Geistes, während השתחויה, das völlige Hinwerfen, das Zugebotestellen des ganzen leiblichen Wesens bedeutet. So begegnete das Volk der Aufforderung, die Bedeutung des Peßach seinen Kindern geistig zu vererben, durch קידה und 2) השתחויה. B. M. 12, 27) und stellte damit Geist und Leib dieser Erziehungsaufgabe zu Gebote. Ähnlich Moses bei der ihm gewordenen höchsten Offenbarung des göttlichen Waltens (das. 34, 7). Auch hier beugt Elieser zuerst seinen Geist vor dem ihm hier so sichtbar hervorgetretenen geistigen Walten und Leiten göttlicher Vorsehung, und gab sich dann ganz derselben weiter hin. Er beugte seinen Geist vor dem allerhöchsten Geist, der in sein Herz geschaut und seinen Engel vor ihm hergesandt hatte.

בדרך [I BEING] IN THE WAY — The way i.e. the designated way — the right way — that way which I really required. In the same manner wherever ב or ל or ה are prefixed to a word and are punctuated with a Patach, they speak of some object that is quite definite in sense, having been already mentioned in another passage, or of some object where it is quite clear and evident about what one is speaking.

חסדו ואמתו, if someone constantly endeavours to do what is good and pleasing in the eyes of the Lord, and he succeeds in his personal endeavours, this is no more than just, he deserves to do so. We describe this as G’d’s אמת, “truth.”

אנכי בדרך נחני ה’ בית אחי אדוני, “I was on the way when G-d guided me to the house of my master’s brothers.” It is possible to read into this wording that Eliezer had experienced that the earth miraculously telescoped beneath him while he was travelling, thus shortening his trip considerably, as our sages have explained in Sanhedrin 73. We would then have to understand the word בדרך, as if he had said: “I was on this long and tedious journey, and here G-d brought me to this well in one fell swoop when I had only just set out.” This would also be the reason he emphasized his arrival היום in verse 42, as if to say: “I started out today and I arrived today.”

חסד ואמת. Was אהבה in der Gesinnung ist, das ist חסד in der Tat, אמת ist gewissermaßen ein beschränkender Beisatz. הסד ואמת ist eine solche Liebestat, in welcher doch der Wahrheit nicht zu nahe getreten wird. Des Menschen Liebe ist blind. Sie erfüllt des Geliebten Wünsche ohne Rücksicht auf den wahren Wert dieser Wünsche. Gottes Liebe ist הסד ואמת, sie erfüllt nur solche Wünsche, in denen das Wahre gewahrt ist, die wahrhaft zum Heile gereichen. So bei Jakob (Kap.47, 29). Die Fürsorge für seine Bestattung ist das דoח, die Beachtung der Bedingung: aber nicht in Mizrajim, das אמת. So auch das von den Kundschaftern der Rahab zu Leistende Gos. 2, 14) war ein חסד ואמת, eine bedingte Wohltat. אמת ist überall das Salz, die Klausel, dass in Erfüllung der Liebe das Wahre, die Hauptsache, nicht verloren gehe.

'ברוך ה, “blessed be the Lord, etc.;” wherever we encounter the formula: 'ברוך ה in connection with G-d, be it in the Holy Scriptures, the oral Torah, Mishnah, or in our prayers, or in connection with nature’s products, it is to be understood as either a greeting or praise.

חסד on the other hand, is the recognition that G’d has granted one loving kindness over and beyond what one could have expected based on one’s general conduct. In this instance G’d’s חסד was that not only did He make Eliezer meet a girl who was suitable for marriage to Yitzchok on the basis of her personal virtues, but beyond that she was also qualified through being a member of Avraham’s family. Eliezer attributed these favourable developments to the merits of his master, not to his own.

So vielleicht auch hier. Die Verheiratung ihrer Kinder ist der höchste Wunsch der Eltern. Suchen sie die Erfüllung dieses Wunsches ohne Berücksichtigung des Wesentlichen — (ists nicht eine Tochter von abrahamitischer Gesinnung, so eine von ענר אשכל וממרא oder von ארם) — dann erstreben sie ein הסד ohne אמת. Abraham aber wünschte nur חסד mit אמת, und beides gewährte ihm Gott.

אנכי בדרך, and I had no idea where to spend the night and G’d guided me to בית אחי אדוני, for Nachor was Avraham’s brother and Milkah was his brother’s daughter. This is why he used the plural formulation saying: achey adoni instead of the singular mode as he did when he recounted these events in verse 48 when he said bat achi adoni. Both formulations were accurate with a slight shift of emphasis. The author quotes Genesis 46,21 echi varosh (names of Binyamin’s sons) as a tool to help one remember these two constructions of the words achi and achey. After Eliezer had thanked the Lord for making his mission successful, he produced the jewelry and gave them to Rivkah.

אנכי בדרך וגו׳ Ohne so reinen, gewissenhaften, ganz in Abrahams Ab- und Ansichten eingehenden Sinn hatte Elieser eigentlich eine ganz leichte Aufgabe. Land und Familie Abrahams waren ja bekannt, und dass der Brautwerber für einen Sohn Abrahams, eines so berühmten reichen Mannes, irgendwo einen Korb bekommen sollte, war gar nicht zu denken. Allein Elieser war זקן ביתו ,עבד אברהם suchte ein Weib לעבד ד׳ ליצחק, da war um so größer die Gefahr, die Rechte nicht zu finden, je mehr er eines bereitwilligen Entgegenkommens wohl überall gewärtig sein konnte; daher glaubte er sich ganz der göttlichen Führung überlassen zu müssen. Und wie war die ihm geworden! Er war noch auf dem Wege — war noch gar nicht angekommen — und befand sich schon am Ziele! Darum gelobte er mit ׳ברוך ד, auch weiter sich in dieser Angelegenheit nur ganz der Führung Gottes überlassen zu wollen.

לבית אמה [AND TOLD IT] TO THEM OF HER MOTHER’S HOUSE — It was customary for the women to have their own apartments to sit in at their work — and a daughter, of course, confides only in her mother (Genesis Rabbah 60:7).

ותרץ, she ran home full of joy and told what happened in her mother’s house. She did not tell anything in her father’s house for a daughter shares her experiences with her mother and not with her father.

And a daughter confides only in her mother. Although it is written about Rachel: “She ran and told her father” (29:12), that was because her mother had died. (Bereishis Rabbah)

כדברים האלה, the general outline of what had transpired without going into each detail.

וירץ AND HE RAN — Why did he run and what did he run for? (The next verse explains why). ויהי כראות הנזם AND IT CAME TO PASS WHEN HE SAW THE RING —he said, “This must be a rich man ״, and he had an eye to his money.

וירץ לבן אל האיש, to take a look at the wealthy visitor that had come to town, not to invite him to his own home.

ולרבקה אח ושמו לבן, Rebeccah had a brother called Laban. Our sages observe that whenever the Bible mentions righteous people, their name precedes them, whereas the reverse is the case when the Bible mentions wicked people (Esther Rabbah 6,3). Examples are Ruth 2,1; 1,2. Samuel I 25,3. It is puzzling then that Laban is introduced here in the manner of the righteous. In order to understand this we must pay attention to the verse describing Laban as running. Our sages in Yalkut Shimoni 109 state that as soon as Laban saw the nose-ring on Rebeccah he became greedy for money. This does not throw any light on our problem. The Torah should have written: "As soon as he saw the nose-ring, etc., Laban ran," instead of mentioning the fact that Laban saw the nose-ring after he had already commenced to run towards Eliezer. Besides, why did the Torah repeat the words: "to the man outside at the well" in verse 29 and then again in verse 30?

ולרבקה אח, it is mentioned here seeing that in the report of Nachor’s family he has not been mentioned.

וירץ לבן, “Lavan ran;” some scholars ask what prompted Lavan to run to meet Eliezer even before he had seen the jewelry on the hands of his sister? They explain the sequence of what happened as follows: when Lavan realized that his sister took unusually long to return with her jug of water from the well, he ran to find out if anything had happened to her. He was afraid she might have been violated by some male. Instead of taking the normal route, he ran across orchards etc., in order to reach the well faster. When he did not find Rivkah at the well, seeing she was on the way home by her regular route, and had told her mother who had given her the jewelry, he returned home When Lavan on his return home not only heard the unlikely story of how Rivkah had come into possession of these trinkets, he turned back to confront the man she said had given her such precious gifts. There is no need for such a convoluted explanation. The words ויהי כראות את הנזם ואת הצמידים, “as soon as he saw the nose ring and the bracelets,” merely tell us the reason why וירץ לבן, “Lavan took off in a rush,” to meet this generous stranger.

Why did he run and for what did he run? Rashi is not asking why Lavan ran, and answering, “He said, ‘This one is rich....’” Rather, Rashi is arranging the verses, as they are not written in chronological sequence. It should have said first, “When he had seen the nose ring and the bracelets on the hands of his sister, and heard the words of his sister...” and then, “He ran.” That is the sequence: Lavan saw the ring, heard his sister’s words, and ran. Also, it is not feasible that [the sequence follows the order of the verses]: first he ran, then he saw the ring and heard his sister’s words, and then he went out to the man. An even greater [break in sequence is that] in the middle, it says Lavan saw the ring. [On the contrary,] “He ran” and “He came” should be next to one another, not interrupted by, “When he had seen...” All this brought Rashi to explain, “‘He ran.’ Why did he run...?” Rashi is saying that the verses are written in this order so they will [state that Lavan ran, and then] explain why he ran. Furthermore, there are two [possible] reasons why Lavan ran: seeing the ring, and hearing his sister’s words. When Rashi says, “And for what did he run?” he is asking: for which reason did he run? [Rashi answers:] “He saw” and “He ran” are written next to each other to show that he ran because, upon seeing the ring, he said: “He is rich.” It was not because he heard Rivkah’s words, [in which case we could] judge him favorably, that he ran to honor Eliezer or for some other reason, and not out of his lust for money. Whereas if “He saw” and “He heard” would have been written before “He ran,” [in chronological sequence,] we would not know what he ran for, or if it was for both reasons. This is why Rashi carefully quotes the wording of the verse: “Why ‘He ran’? ‘When he had seen the nose ring...’” From this we see that Rashi’s true intention is to arrange the verses so they will be orderly and connected. He does this by inserting a few [explanatory] words into the verses, which is his practice in most places, as known by those familiar with Rashi’s ways. Whereas if Rashi merely intended to ask and answer, as certain commentators explained, then he should [have paraphrased] and said: “Why did he run? He said, ‘This one is rich’....” [According to them,] that which Rashi quotes, “When he had seen the nose ring,” before explaining, “This one is rich....” is completely not understandable. (R. Meir Stern)

Eine beißende Äußerung unserer Weisen bemerkt: Es war nichts לבן, weiß, an ihm als sein Name! אל האיש, Elieser tritt nicht mehr als עבר auf, bis er es selbst nachher sagte.

The fact is that Laban was sincerely concerned about his sister's innocence, suspecting that the gifts to her of the jewelry by a total stranger could have been the beginning of an immoral relationship between them. The Torah here describes Laban as if he were a righteous person because it acknowledges his concern for his sister's chastity.

When the Torah states: "it was when he saw," this shows that Laban reacted first to what he saw and subsequently to what he heard. As long as he had not yet heard what transpired between the two he put an ugly intepretation on the manner in which he thought his sister had obtained the jewelry, suspecting Eliezer of seducing Rebeccah. Laban nevertheless continued on his way to meet Eliezer and to offer him hospitality.

על הגמלים [HE WAS STANDING] BY THE CAMELS — to look after them. The phrase is the same as (18:8) “And he (Abraham) stood by them עומד עליהם"— to wait on them.

When he had seen. He felt obliged to show gratitude for the gifts.

ויבא אל האיש והנה עומד על הגמלים, he came to the man who was still standing by the camels. What do the words: "he was still standing, etc." teach us? According to Yalkut Shimoni 109, Eliezer interpreted Laban's running as an hostile act and he invoked the holy name of G'd as a result of which the camels stood over the well in the air. This is why the Torah describes the camels as "הגמלים על העין." Eliezer himself stood on top of the camels. He called out to Laban from an elevated position whereupon Laban addressed him with the words: "come in blessed one of the Lord!" If nothing unusual had occurred Laban would have reversed the wording of his invitation saying: "Why should you remain outside, come in blessed one of the Lord!"

ויהי כראות, this is reported in order to inform us that Lavan was envious of anyone getting something he did not have, even including his sister. He was the opposite of his sister who had displayed such generous traits. Lavan ran in order to bring these precious items into his own house.

To watch over them... Otherwise it should say רוכב על הגמלים rather thanעומד על הגמלים.

Es ist dies ein eigentümlicher Satz. Es ist bereits gesagt, dass er zu Elieser hinaus bis zur Quelle gelaufen sei und hier heißt es nun: da er den Nasenring usw. sah und die Worte etc. gehört hatte, ויבא, da kam er etc. Es scheint daher das Ganze eine fortlaufende Erzählung und dies: ׳ויהי כראות וגו bis zum folgenden Vers ein fortlaufender Vordersatz zu sein, zu welchem mit Raw Hirsch on Genesis 24: 31 der Nachsatz beginnt. Alle Hausleute hatten das Geschmeide gesehen, allein während diese mit dem Anschauen beschäftigt waren (es heißt nicht כראותו) hatte bei einem Laban der Anblick des Goldes sofort seinen Zauber geübt: "Da ist mehr! bezahlt er schon so ein bischen Wasser, wie nun gar eine ganze Bewirtung!" Der spekulative Bruder nimmt also die Schwester bei Seite und hört sie nochmals genau aus, und eilt dann hinaus, damit ihm ja kein anderer zuvorkomme, erwartet, ihn schon draußen auf der Straße zu finden, ist nicht wenig verwundert, bis zum Brunnen laufen zu müssen, wird aber vollends perplex, einen Mann, der nach allem, was er gesehen und gehört, doch ein mit Gold um sich werfender Kazin sein mus, noch bescheiden zuwartend bei seinen Kamelen am Brunnen zu finden! Darum verbeugt er sich auch nicht, spricht nicht höflich — wie etwa ein Abraham und Lot — er hat schon an Respekt vor ihm verloren, sondern sagt ziemlich brüsk: Komme doch herein, was genierst du dich, du bist doch ein ׳ברוך ד, d. h. ein reicher, mit Schätzen gesegneter Mann! Das gibt sich auch im folgenden, VV 32 und 33, kund.

And heard the words. That Eliezer had asked for lodgings.

וכשמעו, when he heard that the stranger had spoken to his sister concerning selecting a wife for the son of his master. This is what is meant by

Another reason why Eliezer is reported as remaining standing by the camels maybe that the Torah wants us to know that the mere fact that Rebeccah had indicated that there was lots of room in her father's home for Eliezer to spend the night together with his entourage was not enough reason for him to follow her to her home.

He came to the man. To bring him to his home. Standing beside the camels.

כה דבר אלי האיש. עמד על הגמלים. The words על הגמלים mean the same as עם הגמלים, next to the camels. We have a parallel construction in Exodus 35,22 ויבאו האנשים על הנשים, “the men came in addition to the women.” The meaning here is that Eliezer was seen by Lavan as standing as if waiting for Rivkah to return accompanied by a senior member of the family to invite him and escort him to their home.

The wording of Laban's invitiation, prefaced by his description of Eliezer as a man blessed by the Lord, indicates that Laban did not invite him wholeheartedly but merely to save him the disgrace of having to remain outdoors, i.e. למה תעמוד בחוץ? Even when the wicked perform an act of graciousness such an act reflects a degree of their basic reluctance to do good.

He did not show any expectation of being granted lodgings until Lavan offered

פניתי הבית I HAVE CLEARED THE HOUSE of idols (Genesis Rabbah 60:7).

?למה תעמוד בחוץ, why did you only ask about spending the night? Why would you and your men stand around on the outside?

'ויאמר בא ברוך ה, he meant that he could see that G’d had blessed Eliezer with wealth and therefore

Of idols. Otherwise, it would be sufficient to say there is a place for the camels, or a place to lodge, [without mentioning, “I have emptied the house.”]

'ברוך ה, according to our sages in B’reshit Rabbah 60,7, Eliezer thanked the Lord, who had removed the curse that had lain on him together with all the descendants of Canaan. He no longer suffered from that taint as he had faithfully carried out the mission his master had assigned to him.

ואנכי פניתי הבית, for you and your men,

פניתי הבית, for you and your men, מקום לגמלים, and I have also cleared space to accommodate the camels.

ומקום לגמלים, I also cleared space to accommodate the camels.

ויפתח HE UNGIRDED — He removed their muzzles, for he had closed their mouths by them so that on the journey they might not graze in other peoples’ fields (Genesis Rabbah 60:8).

AND THE MAN CAME INTO THE HOUSE. Eliezer is the man who entered the house. And he ungirded the camels — this refers to Laban who acted ethically towards his guests, unharnessed their camels and gave them straw and fodder, and he also gave water to wash the feet of Eliezer and the feet of the men that were with him. It must refer to Laban for it would be unlikely that it was Eliezer who gave water to wash his own feet and those of his men. A similar case is the verse, And there passed by Midianites, merchantmen, and they drew and lifted up Joseph out of the pit.¹²⁶Further, 37:28. The words, and they drew, refer back to the brothers of Joseph mentioned in the preceding verse, and not to the Midianites. And so in the verse, Then said Ziba unto the king [David]: According to all that my lord the king commandeth his servant, so shall thy servant do; but Mephibosheth eateth at my table as one of the king’s sons.¹²⁷II Samuel 9:11. [The concluding words, but Mephibosheth eateth], are the words of David and not Ziba. There are many such verses.
Now the purport of the expression, and he ungirded the camels, is that he unloosened the bands on their necks, as it was customary to lead them knotted, or perhaps they travelled with saddles girded upon them, just as is expressed in the verses: Let not him that girdeth on his armor boast himself as he that putteth it off,¹²⁸I Kings 20:11. Loose thyself from the band of thy neck.¹²⁹Isaiah 52:2.
Now Rashi wrote, “He removed their muzzles for he had closed their mouths so that they might not graze in other peoples’ fields.” And in the words of Bereshith Rabbah,¹³⁰60:1. “He removed their muzzles. Rabbi Huna and Rabbi Yirmiyah asked Rabbi Chiya the son of Rabbi Aba, ‘Were not the camels of our father Abraham like the ass of Rabbi Pinchas ben Ya’ir,¹³¹A Sage of the Tannaitic period. He was a son-in-law of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai. He was celebrated for his great piety; even his ass refused to eat untithed corn. etc.?’” This question is intended to contradict [the interpretation which maintains that the ungirding refers to] the removing of the muzzles for it is impossible that the piety in the house of Rabbi Pinchas been Ya’ir should have been greater than that in the house of our father Abraham, and just as the ass of Rabbi Pinchas ben Ya’ir did not have to be guarded against eating things which its master was forbidden to feet it, all the more so were the camels of our father Abraham. There was thus no need to muzzle them for no injustice befalleth the righteous.¹³²Proverbs 12:21.

ויפתח, the word is used in the same sense as in Kings I 20,11 אל יתהלל חוגר כמפתח, “let not him who girds on his sword boast like him who ungirds it.”

ויבא....ויפתח, Laban released the various straps, etc., of Eliezer’s camels, something that is done when beasts of burden arrive at their destination. According to an aggadic interpretation quoted by Rashi the expression ויפתח applies to the muzzles which Eliezer had placed around the camels’ mouths to prevent them from eating grass or stalks belonging to private individuals along the route they had been traveling. According to our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 60,8) on

ויבא האיש הביתה, “As soon as the man entered the house,” the man referred to was Eliezer.

ויפתח הגמלים, “he unmuzzled the camels.” Rashi comments that he unmuzzled the camels which he had muzzled before so that they would not graze in land owned by others. This is taken from Bereshit Rabbah 60,8. Rabbi Yirmiyah there asked whether the camels of Avraham were not as pious as the donkey of Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair who would not eat grass in another’s field even without being muzzled. [In fact these donkeys were reported once to have remained without fodder for three days due to their piety.] The matter is raised in the Midrash as it was difficult for people at that time to imagine that the piety in the house of Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair should have exceeded that in the household of Avraham. Keeping this in mind, Rabbi Yirmiyah interpreted the word ויפתח to mean that Eliezer loosened the yokes that these camels normally wore around their necks, and from which the bags they carried were suspended. A parallel of this expression is found in Isaiah 52,2 התפתחי מוסרי צוארך, “loosen the bonds from your necks!” The word ויפתח actually refers to Lavan who performed this task and provided the camels with straw to lie on, fodder to feed, and water to wash the feet of the men traveling with Eliezer.

(32-33) Elieser muss selbst für seine Kamele — vielleicht auch für sich und seine Leute sorgen, das Subjekt ist zweifelhaft — ויישם (von ישם wie טוב und יטב) und יושם — dass das Essen ihm nur so vorgesetzt wurde, mit deutlicher Unentschiedenheit, wie viel Laban dabei tätig gewesen! Alles dies beweist, wie Laban durch Eliesers Bescheidenheit schon herausgefühlt hatte, dass er es nicht mit einem selbst reichen Manne zu thun haben müsse und kennzeichnet den Charakter, wie wir ihn noch bis im späten Alter wieder finden werden.

לרחוץ רגליו ורגלי האנשים, “to wash his feet as well as the feet of the men accompanying him;” even though Rivkah’s brother was an idolater he knew about the customs in Avraham’s house. When he said that he had “cleaned the house already,” he referred to the removal of idolatrous images. At any rate, he respected other people’s religious convictions and did not wish to offend their sensitivities.

ויתן תבן ומספוא, Rabbi Acha concludes that mundane conversation of men such as Avraham’s servant Eliezer is esteemed more highly by G’d (the Torah) than the learned discussion of Torah by the children of the patriarchs; he derives this from the inordinate amount of detail provided by the Torah to the minutiae of the story of Eliezer at the well. On the other hand, basic legislation in the Torah concerning ritual impurity is often only hinted at by a letter here or an extra word elsewhere in the text. The same scholar continues: the washing of the feet of the servants of our patriarchs ranks as more worth reporting than details of the impurities of certain creepers and if the blood of such creepers confers ritual impurity similar to their bodies. This goes so far that the greatest scholars were not able to resolve their understanding of these rules by reference to what is actually written in the text of the Torah.

ויפתח הגמלים ויתן תבן ומספוא לגמלים, “he untied the camels and provided them with fodder and straw to lie on.” Here the verse reverts to activities performed by Lavan who displayed concern for the well being of his guests and their beasts. Apparently, the camels had been tied to one another while they had been wandering. He also gave water for Eliezer and his men to wash their feet after what had been a lengthy journey.

Auffallend ist der Name ׳ה in Labans Munde, zumal er später (31, 53) nur an אלהי נחור appelliert. Es ist möglich, dass Rebekka das ברוך ד׳ אלדי אדני וגו aus Eliesers Munde gehört und Laban wieder erzählt hatte, woher denn Laban bereits sein "Glaubensbekenntnis" kannte. Dass ein Laban überhaupt den Namen Gottes, oder seines Gottes, im Munde führte, gehört mit zum Charakter. Je egoistischer im Herzen, umsomehr die Sprache verbrämt mit "frommen" Phrasen. — ויאמר דבר, Laban führt immer entweder allein, oder vor Vater und Mutter her das Wort!

עד אם דברתי UNTIL THAT I HAVE SPOKEN — This is the same as עד אשר, so that you see that אם has the meaning of both אשר and כי, an example of the latter usage being (49:10) “Until that (עד כי) men come to Shiloh” (where עד כי is equivalent to עד אם in our verse). That is what our Sages, of blessed memory, have said (Rosh Hashanah 3a): The word כי is used in four meanings. One of these they say, is אי which is the Aramaic for the Hebrew word "im".

עד אם דברתי דברי. Having noted that G’d had indicated that He approved of the way he had been handling his assignment, Eliezer concluded that he must not eat and drink until he had concluded his mission.

ויושם, the word is spelled ויישם, “he placed,” although it is read as vayussam, “it was placed.” We find a similar anomaly in Genesis 50,26 when placing Joseph’s remains in a coffin is reported. The root of the verb is ישם.

ויושם לפניו לאכול, “food was placed before him.” There is a difference between the spelling and the reading of the word ויישם, which is read as if it had been spelled ויושם. According to ancient sources, including Yonathan ben Uziel, some poison had been placed in Eliezer’s food so that he would die and Bethuel and Lavan would appropriate to themselves all the riches he had brought with him. The attempt ended in failure, as a mistake was made and the plate with the poisoned food was placed in front of Bethuel. This is why the word was spelled with two letters י, the equivalent of the name of G-d. [When you combine the two letters י which are part of the written text, and you add the letter ו, which is read, you obtain the number 26, the same as the numerical value of the four-lettered ineffable name י-ה-ו-ה. Ed.] According to Psalms 124,2 [the psalmist reputedly had this incident in mind when he composed that hymn, Ed.] this was a hint that had it not been for the merit of Avraham Eliezer would have eaten the poisoned food. While he waited with eating until he had spelled out why he had come there, this afforded the angel the opportunity to switch plates. When the Torah says at the end of that paragraph ויאכלו וישתו הוא והאנשים אשר עמו, “they ate and they drank, he and the men who were with him,” this is to draw our attention to the fact that the members of Bethuel’s household did not eat as they were mourning the sudden death of Bethuel caused by his eating the poison he had prepared for Eliezer. This also accounts for the fact that in verse 55 only Rivkah’s brother and mother are mentioned as requesting a delay in her departure. Her father had died and thus could not offer an opinion.

Here אם is used as a term for אשר as well as כי... Rashi is answering the question: אם [in its usual sense of “if”] implies uncertainty whether Eliezer spoke. Yet, he surely spoke! Rashi answers: אם [also] means “that,” [as seen from the] כי in עד כי יבא שילה (49:10), where כי means “that.” [And since כי means אם, as Rashi explains here, it follows that] אם means “that.”

ויישם, “it was placed before him;” although this word is spelled here with two letters י, it is meant to be read and understood as if it had been written: ויושם. (Compare also Rashi).

ויאמר דבר, either Lavan or Betuel is the subject

This is what is meant when our Sages said... Rashi is answering the question: [אם means “that”] because אם is like כי, [and כי means “that”]. But כי has only four meanings, אלא דילמא אי דהא, and אם is not one of them! If so, how do we know that אם means “that”? Rashi answers: “This is what is meant when our Sages said... and one is אי which means אם.” Thus we see that כי means אם. Here too, אם is like כי, and means “that.”

ויאמר עבד אברהם אנכי, our sages (Baba Kama 92) consider this as an example of a popular proverb that one should mention any personal deficiency before commencing to carry out whatever mission has been assigned to him. [according to this interpretation Eliezer, instead of considering it a privilege to be the servant of a man like Avraham, considered it a stigma that he was a slave. Ed.]

Ihr habts richtig herausgefühlt, bin nicht der Herr, bin nur der Knecht.

ברך את אדוני, this is why the Torah wrote at the beginning of the chapter that “The Lord had blessed Avraham in everything.”
ויגדל, all leading political figures in the country were anxious to become related to him through marriage.

ברך את אדוני, there is no question that many notable families in our own land would want their daughters to become the wife my master’s son.

וה' ברך את אדוני, to such an extent that I, his slave, am received with such honour.

(35-48) Interessant ist ein Vergleich der Erzählung im Munde Eliesers mit dem vorhergehenden Bericht des wirklichen Vorganges. Alle Abweichungen motivieren sich auf den ersten Blick entweder aus Höflichkeitsrücksichten, wie schon einiges bemerkt. oder aus dem Bestreben, den Leuten, die Elieser wohl durchschaute, das Ganze mundgerecht zu machen. Das הקרה נא und alles, was Eliesers Sorge über das Gelingen in den Augen der Leute zu auffallend groß hätte erscheinen lassen und sie misstrauisch machen können, bleibt weg. Ebenso alle die zarten Nuancen, die der obige Bericht enthält. Bei einer gewissen Klasse Menschen ists durchaus gefährlich, gefühlvoll zu erscheinen, sie nennen das "romantisch", "überspannt", und fangen an, an der praktischen Solidität des Verhältnisses zu zweifeln, in welches sie eingehen sollen. Elieser begnügte sich damit, die auffallende Gottesfügung scharf hervortreten zu lassen, der entgegen zu handeln auch ein Laban von seinem Standpunkt aus Scheu zu tragen pflegt.

ועבדם, “and menservants.” The letter י indicating the plural mode before the final letter ם is missing here; it suggests that Avraham had only a single manservant, i.e. himself. Eliezer performed so many tasks for Avraham that it seemed as if he had numerous menservants [If so, it is not clear who the ten men were who had accompanied Eliezer. Perhaps those other assistants, especially the 318 men who accompanied him went he went to liberate Lot from captivity. (Genesis 14,14) Perhaps he gave them their freedom after they had become circumcised? Ed.]

ויתן לו את כל אשר לו AND HE HATH GIVEN TO HIM ALL THAT HE HATH — he showed them the deed of gift.

ויתן לו את כל אשר לו, his brother will not share in the inheritance with Yitzchok.

אחרי זקנתו, this is why this son was beloved for him from the day he was born.

ותלד, even though he had a son from another woman. Seeing that he loved Sarah so much, and she was such an intimate soul-mate of his, and seeing that he loved Yitzchok the son of his old age,

אחרי זקנתה, “after she had become old;” so that he could not expect to have any more sons from her.

ונתן לו את כל אשר לו, so that Yitzchok is wealthy and greatly honoured in his own right.

לא תקח אשה לבני מבנות הכנעני THOU SHALT NOT TAKE A WIFE FOR MY SON FROM THE DAUGHTERS OF THE CANAANITES if you do not first go to my father’s house and to my family that thou mayest take a wife to my son and she will not be willing to follow you.

וישביעני, if you were to ask that if all this is true, why is that I come all this way to find a wife for this man, the reason is that my master made me swear to find a suitable wife for his son from among members of his own family.

וישביעני אדוני, seeing that my master despises the people in his own land and has chosen you to become his in-laws, he has sent me on this errand.

And she will not be willing to follow you. [This comment] solves three problems. First, [in v. 38] it connects תלך to לא, as if it were written אם לא תלך אל בית אבי. [This solves the problem] that לא does not fit with [its following word] אל. Second, [Rashi’s addition of] “And she will not be willing to follow you” [solves the problem] that otherwise it would imply: as soon as you go to my father’s house you will be absolved of the oath not to take a wife from the Canaanites, whether or not she is willing to follow you. [Third, in the phrase, “Unless you first go...”] Rashi adds the word “first” [to solve the problem] that otherwise it would imply: if you take a wife from the Canaanites, and afterwards go [to my family,] and she is not willing to follow you, you still will be absolved of my oath. But this is not so, as Eliezer was not allowed [to take a Canaanite wife] unless he first went [to Avraham’s family] and she would not be willing to follow him. [Accordingly, the final phrase in v. 38,] “Take a wife for my son,” begins a new sentence. It is as if saying: “Rather, you should take a wife for my son from my family, as mentioned above.”

אלי לא תלך האשה PERADVENTURE THE WOMAN WILL NOT FOLLOW ME —The word אולי perhaps is written without ו so that it may be read אֵלַי unto me. Eliezer had a daughter and he was endeavouring to find some reason why Abraham should say that he must appeal to him (Eliezer) that he should give his daughter in marriage to Isaac. Abraham said to him, “My son is blessed and you are subject to a curse. One who is under a curse cannot unite with one who is blessed” (Genesis Rabbah 59:9).

ואמר... אלי, the word veulai is spelled with the letter ו missing, something which gave rise to an interesting aggadic interpretation mentioned already by Rashi. Accordingly, Eliezer himself had hoped to have his daughter marry Yitzchok in the event that the woman he found in Aram Naharyim would be unwilling to relocate in the land of Canaan. This is why he had referred to this possibility with the words אלי, לא תלך האשה אחרי, “to me (if) the woman will not follow me (to the land of Canaan).” The truth is that Eliezer related all the events exactly as they had occurred. We are not able to provide conclusive reasons why the Torah sometimes chose to write certain words defectively, (with a letter missing) or by adding a letter which could have been omitted. There are too many such instances for us to find satisfactory explanations for all of them. Eliezer related the events that had occurred to him in his conversation with his master as well as how G’d had arranged things after he had set out on his mission. His sole purpose was to demonstrate from the course of events that G’d loved Avraham so much that He had made his mission so spectacularly successful up to this point. G’d had responded even to his own prayer in exactly the manner in which he had hoped he would. As a result, the very idea of denying his request would appear out of the question, seeing that it was so clear that the entire sequence of events must have been engineered by G’d, personally. If we find some different nuances here and there in the events as reported by the Torah and as related by Eliezer, this is meaningless, just as different nuances in the wording of the Ten Commandments in the Book of Exodus and the Book of Deuteronomy are not meant to raise concerns as to their authenticity of either version. Everything until the word ועתה in verse 49 is quite clear.

אלי לא תלך, “maybe she is not willing to go, etc.” the word “perhaps,” אולי, is spelled here without the customary letter ו, which prompts Rashi to suggest that Eliezer had a daughter whom he would have liked to be married to Yitzchok.. Since he did not dare suggest this to Avraham, the first time the word אולי appears in this connection it is spelled in the ordinary manner; only now when Avraham was not present, and the whole matter was hanging in the balance, did the Torah hint to the reader about Eliezer’s secret aspirations.

It is written אלי. Eliezer had a daughter... You might ask: Above (v. 5), when Eliezer first said to Avraham, “Perhaps (אולי) the woman will not be willing,” why was it not spelled אלי there, for this exposition? The answer is: There, it is followed by, “Shall I bring your son back to the land from where you came?” There, it does not imply that Eliezer was looking for an excuse. Rather, he was asking: if she will not come with me, should I bring Yitzchok to them? But here, since this is not written afterwards, it is for this exposition. (Mahara’i) Another answer: After Lavan said to Eliezer (v. 31), “Come, you who are blessed of Hashem,” Eliezer thought: “Now I am blessed! Perhaps Yitzchok will marry my daughter.” Thus here, it is spelled אלי, for this exposition. But above, Eliezer was not yet blessed. The Maharshal answers: Eliezer never thought he would become Avraham’s in-law, because Avraham was blessed but he was cursed. Rather, Eliezer feared that once he told them he was under oath to take a wife specifically from Avraham’s family, they would extort him for a great sum of money. Thus he told them אלי, to hint to them that he had a daughter.

אלי לא תלך האשה אחרי, “perhaps the woman (that I chose) will not follow me. (to this land).” Rashi comments on this that it is remarkable that the word: ulay here is spelled without the letter ו after the first letter as we would have expected, and that this is a hint by Eliezer who had a daughter, that he secretly hoped that the refusal of a potential bride from Avraham’s family to move to the land of Canaan, might make his master Avraham willing to let her become Yitzchok’s wife. [Rashi bases himself on an interpretation by B’reshit Rabbah on why in the report of the conversation between Avraham and Eliezer on the same subject in 24,5 that letter ו is not missing. Ed.] It is difficult to understand why he did not write this comment already on verse eight in this chapter where Avraham had not excluded a marital union with the daughters of any of his three friends Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, although they were Canaanites, and not slaves from Damascus, and Avraham had Eliezer released him from his oath in the event that a girl from Charan were to refuse to move to the land of Canaan. We must assume that Avraham had felt that the curse that rested on Canaan had already run its course, whereas the curse on Eliezer’s antecedents had not yet run its course, so that marriage into that family would be spiritually much more dangerous. B’reshit Rabbah 59,9, states specifically that Eliezer was a descendant of Cham, whose son Canaan Noach had cursed. In the book: Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer, chapter 15, Eliezer is identified with Og King of Bashan, whom the Israelites slew in a battle during their last year in the desert. [My edition of Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer does not have this, and my research of a lengthy article about Og by Dr Admiel Kosman of the Bar Ilan university, also does not bring any source for that statement. Ed.] According to our author, the following is the text in his edition of Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer. “Eliezer has been described as the most senior servant, and added that he was a servant for evermore. When he did Yitzchok a great favour by choosing a wonderful wife for him, Yitzchok freed him forever. G–d then rewarded Og by making him King of Bashan. If this is true, why did G–d order Moses to kill Og as a punishment for defending his country against invaders? According to Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer he was a perfectly righteous man! We also know from the Talmud, tractate Sofrim chapter 21, as well as from Derech Eretz zuttah, tractate Sotah, 1, that he was one of only nine people who immediately upon drawing their last breath had their souls transferred to the spiritual hereafter. This matter was discussed in connection with a tradition that when Yitzchok first joined Rivkah in the marital bed, and found that she was not a virgin, he suspected Eliezer as having been to blame for this. He said to him: “may you live as long and enter paradise as you are innocent of my accusation!” In light of all the above, we must assume that there had been two Kings called King of Bashan, one during Avraham’s lifetime and another during Moses’ lifetime. It was the former who was so righteous. Each one of these two persons, once crowned king, used the title King of Bashan, seeing that all of Bashan’s king were called Og, just as all of Egypt’s kings were called Pharaoh.

אלי, “perhaps;” the word is spelled defective with the letter ו missing after the first letter. It suggests that Eliezer was using a certain amount of flattery for his hosts, indicating that if he had wanted to he could have prevented this union and his master might have chosen his own daughter as his daughterinlaw.

And one who is cursed cannot cleave to one who is blessed. I.e., Eliezer came from Canaan, of whom it is written (9:25): “Cursed be Canaan.” You might ask: Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei were also cursed, as they were Amorites, [who also come from Canaan]. The answer is: The curse was actualized in Eliezer, as he was a slave. Thus, he was more cursed than they. This resolves the difficulty of Re’m on v. 8.

ישלח מלאכו, I know they will give you their daughter.

ישלח מלאכו, “He will send His angel, etc.” Avraham had been referring to a specific angel, as in כי ילך מלאכי לפניך, “for My angel will travel in front of you” (Exodus 23,23) [where G’d speaks of an angel that will represent Him specifically during the conquest of the land of Canaan. Ed.] He did not refer to the angel described in Exodus 33,2 ושלחתי לפניך מלאך, “I will send an angel ahead of you.” [In that instance G’d’s benevolent providence had been reduced to a more indirect level, as evidenced by the absence of the suffix ו, “His” at the end of the word מלאך. Here the word מלאכו appears twice, indicating that there were two angels active to ensure the success of Eliezer’s mission. (compare 24,7) The first angel’s mission was to keep harm from befalling Eliezer and his men; the second angel was to ensure the arrival of the right girl at the right place at the right time.

ואבא היום AND I CAME THIS DAY — Today I started on my journey and today I have arrived here. Hence we may infer that the earth (the road) shrunk for him (i. e. that the journey was shortened in a miraculous manner) (Sanhedrin 95a). R. Acha said: The ordinary conversation of the patriarchs' servants is more pleasing to God than even the Torah (religious discourse) of their children, for the chapter of Eliezer (the account of his journey) is repeated in the Torah (i. e. it is written once as a narrative and again repeated as part of the conversation of the patriarch’s servant) whereas many important principles of the Law are derived only from slight indications given in the Text (Genesis Rabbah 60:8).

'ואומר: ה' אלקי אדוני אברהם וגו, Eliezer’s very detailed speech was designed to impress his listeners with how G’d had been the principal factor in everything which had transpired at the well.

“when I arrived today;” on these words Rashi comments that Eliezer’s story has been repeated twice, whereas many other stories have not even been spelled out completely once but have only been hinted at. It is the Torah’s compliment for Eliezer by G-d Himself. According to the plain meaning the reason for the repetition is that the Torah wished to describe Eliezer’s oath to Avraham as one part of the story and his prayer to G-d to help him find a girl such as Rivkah as his own initiative, for how else would he meet a blood relation of his master as the very first girl that came out to draw water. His hosts were suitably impressed, so that they agreed that this match must reflect the will of G-d. (verse 50)

והיה העלמה, earlier (in verse 16) Eliezer had referred to the as yet unknown to him girl as הנער. He had thought previously that the inhabitants of Aram Naharayim only spoke and understood the local language, Aramaic. However, it turned out that they also understood Hebrew, as we know from when they said: תשב הנערה, “let the girl remain for a while.” (verse 55)

גם אתה DRINK THOU ALSO — Her use of the word גם, also suggests that she intended to include the men who accompanied him.

היא האשה אשר הוכיח, she is the woman whom He has appointed. This recalls the statement in the Talmud Sotah 2 that already prior to birth a heavenly voice proclaims which girl is destined to marry which young man.

הכיח means selected and designated. So, too, wherever this word (the Hiphil of יכח) occurs in the Scriptures it signifies “making something clear”.

טרם אכלה means I WAS NOT YET FINISHING. Similarly in the case of every word that expresses an action contemporaneous with another Scripture sometimes uses the past tense — so that it might have written here טרם כִּלִיתִי — and sometimes it uses the future tense. Examples are: (Job I. 5) “For Job was saying (אמר)” — here it is past tense and (ib.) “Thus was Job doing (יעשה)” — here it is future tense. But the meaning of both of them is contemporaneous action: “for Job was saying (whilst he sacrificed) “Perhaps my sons have sinned etc." “and he was doing this" (whenever his sons feasted).

BEHOLD, REBEKAH CAME FORTH WITH HER PITCHER ON HER SHOULDER. This indicates that while he was in her house he heard her name, or perhaps she told him her name at the beginning even though it is not mentioned in Scripture.

אני טרם אכלה לדבר, this was proof to me that all of this has been planned so by G’d.

אני טרם אכלה לדבר אל לבי, "I had not yet finished speaking (praying)." Eliezer said this so no one should think that Rebeccah's actions had been prompted by what she had overheard Eliezer saying.

והנה רבקה יוצאת, “and lo, Rivkah was coming out, etc.” Eliezer had heard while in Lavan’s house that the girl whom he had met was called Rivkah. Alternatively, she might have told him her personal name already while at the well.

ותאמר שתה, “she said: ‘drink!’” This is the version of Eliezer when he recounted what had happened at the well. Actually, for the sake of accuracy, he should have repeated Rivkah’s exact words which had been “drink my lord!” The reason he did not repeat that version in the house of Bethuel was one of etiquette. [I believe Eliezer, who was a slave, did not want to repeat that he had been addressed as “my lord.” Ed.]

ואשאל...ואשם AND I ASKED HER ... AND I PUT THE RING —He changed the order of proceedings for in fact he had first given the presents and afterwards questioned her. But he did this in order that they should not catch him by his own words and say, "How could you give her anything when you did not yet know who she was!"

I placed (asim) a nose ring. The word asim is written defective (i.e. missing a yud) to indicate that he did not actually touch her face or even her hand.

ואשאל אותה…ואשים הנזם על אפה. "I asked her….and put the ring on her nose." He changed the sequence of events in his report so that Laban and his father in their craftiness should not be able to claim these trinkets as belonging to Bethuel since Rebeccah had obtained them as reward for services rendered. If, however, Rebeccah had obtained the jewelry only after she had identified herself as the daughter of Bethuel, it was clear that they were meant to effect the betrothal between her and Isaac, her father not being able to claim them as belonging to him.

בדרך אמת, on a Divine mission to perform a deed of loving kindness for my master Avraham as well as for his son.

את בת אחי אדוני לבנו, “the daughter of my master’s brother for his son”. In verse 27 Eliezer had referred to the family of Betuel as “the house of my master’s brothers,”(plural) whereas here he speaks of my master’s brother (singular mode. Why the sudden change? It was a hint that he was to take only one of his master’s relatives as a bride for Yitzchok.

על ימין TO THE RIGHT HAND — to take a wife of the daughters of Ishmael.

על ימין או על שמאל , to other relatives of his family.

"And now if ye will deal kindly" - that in order to satisfy my master, nullify your desires and agree to send your daughter to a faraway land, and don't be concerned about acquiring relatives in your own land through her.

ועתה...חסד ואמת, emet is the honour and respect that you owe members of your family. You owe even more respect to Araham the most illustrious member of your family. If he requested the hand of your daughter in marriage for his son, you are duty-bound to honour his wish. If you agree to this even though it entails her leaving her homeland and moving far away, this may be considered an act of loving kindness, חסד, on your part.

חסד: חסד ואמת, dass ihr seinem Sohne eine Tochter gibt, אמת, dass ihr auf die Bedingung eingeht, dass Jizchak weder jetzt noch künftig zu euch in die Heimat seines Vaters komme.

על שמאל TO THE LEFT — to take a wife of the daughters of Lot who dwelt at the left of Abraham (Genesis Rabbah 60:9).

"And truly" - that you desire results and the honor of your daughter, like which is fitting for you, and this will come with her entry into the house of Abraham.

ואפנה על ימין או על שמאל, either more prominent and important members of his family than you, or less prominent family members than you. At any rate, I will take a wife for Avraham’s son for Yitzchok from this country since he does not want a daughter-in-law who grew up in the land of the Canaanites.

ויען לבן ובתואל THEN LABAN AND BETHUEL ANSWERED —He (Laban) was a wicked person and so rushed in to answer before his father.

לא נוכל דבר אליך רע או טוב, the success or failure of His plan is not up to us to either confirm or thwart. This has been fated by G’d regardless of whether we like it or not. G’d will accomplish His will as He has the power to bring this about.

לא נוכל דבר אליך רע, in order to neutralise His decree.

ויען לבן ובתואל, Lavan spoke before his father seeing that Betuel was an old man and the affairs of the family were already being conducted by his son Lavan.

ויען לבן ובתואל, “and Lavan and Bethuel responded, etc.” The fact that Lavan spoke before his father already indicated that he was wicked (based on Rashi). Another indication that Lavan was evil is discernible from the fact that in his remarks he first alluded to the negative when he said (regretfully) “we cannot speak to you negatively or positively.” A righteous individual would have reversed the order saying: “positively or negatively.”

לא נוכל דבר אליך WE CANNOT SPEAK UNTO THEE — refusing this proposition either by answering you with unpleasant words (i. e. a flat refusal) or by giving you a reasoned reply, for it is evident that the matter proceedeth from the Lord since, according to your statement, He brought her and you together.

או טוב, to make His decree come true, seeing that He does not need our help in this respect.

מה' יצא הדבר, seeing that matters occurred in the way you have told us, we have no say in the matter. If we were to deny your request the result for us would be רע, bad. If we agree without protest it will turn out to be of benefit to us, seeing it is all in the hands of G’d Who has made your mission so successful thus far.

Take her and go. Since it is Hashem’s will, you are able to take her even without our permission.

הנה.. כאשר דבר, for He has arranged everything in accordance with your request.

As Hashem has spoken. Hashem declares who a person will marry and in this case He has given a clear sign of what He has decreed.

וישתחו ארצה HE PROSTRATED HIMSELF — From this we may learn that we should thank God for good news (Genesis Rabbah 60:6).

ויהי..וישתחו ארצה, prostrating himself on the ground with arms and feet extended.

And he prostrated towards the earth for God - Not just bending the knees, rather, he fell with his entire body to the land given his happiness and gratitude.

From here [we learn] that thanks should be given for good tidings. You might ask: Why did Rashi not make this comment above, on: “The man bowed his head and prostrated himself” (v. 26)? An answer is: Above, it is followed by: “He said, ‘Blessed is Hashem, God of my master, Avraham.’” Perhaps there, he prostrated himself because he mentioned Hashem’s Name in a brocho, as “blessed” means a brocho. But here, no brocho follows. The Kitzur Mizrachi answers: The Bereishis Rabbah (60:7) made this comment on, “The man bowed his head and prostrated himself” (v. 26). But Rashi makes it here, because Eliezer could not have given thanks until after they said (v. 51), “Take her and go.” But, when he first spoke to Rivkah, he did not yet know if she would agree to go with him!

Hier wird er das einzige Mal עבר אברהם genannt. Jetzt hatte er so eigentlich seine Sendung als Abrahams Diener gelöst und fühlte sich als solchen im vollsten Maße.

ומגדנות PRECIOUS THINGS — it has the same meaning as מגדים (cf. Song 7:14) “precious fruits״, for he had brought with him various kinds of fruit from the land of Israel (Genesis Rabbah 60:11).

כלי כסף וכלי זהב, women’s jewelry made of either silver or gold similar to what is described in Numbers 31,50 איש אשר מצא כלי זהב אצעדה וגו', “if someone found golden jewelry such as, etc.” A similar verse appears in Exodus 3,22 where G’d promises that at the Exodus the Jewish women will request from their neighbours and will receive כלי כלי כסף וכלי זהב ושמלות, “silver and golden jewelry and fine garments and they will dress their children in these.”

ויוצא, seeing that Rivkah had been given to him, he produced more silver, gold, and clothing.

ויוצא העבד כלי כסף וכלי זהב ובגדים ויתן לרבקה . “The servant unpacked silver and golden trinkets and garments, and gave all of them to Rivkah.” These she was to take with them back to the home of Yitzchok. To Rivkah’s brother and mother he only gave exotic fruit and other condiments. If he had handed the silver and golden trinkets to her family, they surely would have remained in their possession.

מגדנות. Man ist durch nichts berechtigt, hier an etwas anderes, als an köstliche Früchte und nicht an wertvolle Kostbarkeiten zu denken. מגד, wovon offenbar das Wort gebildet ist, kommt nur in diesem Sinne vor, und מגדנות steht, wo es mit noch anderen Dingen, wie Esra 1, 6 und Chron. II. 21, 3 vorkommt, immer zuletzt, war somit wohl nicht das Wertvollste. Geschenke von Wert gab er der jungen Braut. Confitüres, Artigkeiten, der Mutter und dem Bruder; dem Vater — gar nichts! Es ist dies wohl zu beachten. Was hat man nicht alles in unsere jüdische Vergangenheit hinein und zurück datiert! Erzählungen und Märchen von Reisenden über die jetzigen Gewohnheiten von Orientalen mussten — nach dem Axiom: "Alles ist im Orient stabil und homogen" — die Schablone abgeben, nach welcher man sich das jüdische Altertum zurecht legte. Das מהר ומתן, das man einigemal findet, ward sofort unter der archäologischen Brille zu einem Kaufpreis, den der Bräutigam den Eltern gibt. Hier haben wir doch auch eine "orientalische" Heirat, aber dem Vater gibt Elieser nichts und den anderen Gliedern der Familie nur Aufmerksamkeiten von untergeordnetem Werte. (Beiläufig hatten sich ja auch Rachel und Lea ganz außerordentlich tief verletzt gefühlt, dass Laban sich hatte für sie bezahlen lassen und hatten noch nach zwanzig Jahren nicht vergessen: כי מכרנו!)

ומגדנות, this word includes anything of value, including exotic fruit and fancy garments. The word appears also in Chronicles II 32,23 in a similar sense.

ויוצא העבד כלי כסף, “the servant brought out silver trinkets, etc.” The trinkets mentioned here were intended as gifts accompanying the betrothal, whereas the ones mentioned earlier were gifts for his hosts. Betrothal is viewed as the first step of the wedding. (Kidushin 50) According to the plain meaning of the verse, Eliezer gave the valuable gifts to Rivkah, seeing that he was certain she would take them with her to her new home, whereas he gave relatively inexpensive gifts to various members of her family. Rivkah’s father, Betuel, did not require to be “bribed” by gifts; he was happy that his daughter had been chosen to become the wife of Yitzchok, his cousin. This is reflected in the text when the Torah wrote: “ ויאמר אחיה ואמה וגו', “her brother and her mother said, etc.; (used delaying tactics) Betuel was not in favour of any delay, as he was overjoyed that she married within the family. According to the plain meaning of the text, he allowed his son and wife to speak first, seeing that they had been the recipients of gifts, or because in that household it was Lavan who was the “senior” voice seeing that he was very astute. We have read in an aggadic text that Betuel tried to poison Eliezer’s food in order to prevent the marriage and that due to an angel’s switching plates he ate the poisoned food himself and died. This is supposedly why his name no longer appears in the rest of the story. A third version. The reason that Betuel, בתואל, was known by that name was that seeing that he was the nominal chief in Aram, he had reserved the right for himself to sleep with every virgin before she became married. His peers therefore demanded that he also sleep with Rivkah before she became married, otherwise they threatened to kill him. He agreed, and that it why the angel Gavriel killed him before he could carry out his intention.

לאחיה ולאמה, for they were the mainstay of the household, Betuel being old and frail. According to an aggadic interpretation (Bereshit Rabbah 60,12) based on Lavan speaking instead of his father, he had died suddenly as he intended to raise obstacles to the marriage.

וילינו AND LODGED OVER NIGHT — wherever the root לין occurs in Scripture it signifies staying for only one night.

ויאכלו, this has been explained, i.e. now that Eliezer had explained his mission he felt free to eat the meal which had been placed before him.

ויאמר אחיה ואמה AND HER BROTHER AND HER MOTHER SAID —But where was Bethuel? He wished to prevent the marriage therefore an angel came and killed him (Genesis Rabbah 60:12).

A year. Give her time to adjust to the idea of moving to another country.

ויאמר אחיה ואמה , when there are both major and minor characters in a story, the Torah attributes what is happening primarily to the major character. Although Rivkah’s mother was senior to Lavan, he, in his capacity as the manager of this household was mentioned first. We find something similar in Numbers 12,1 where Miriam, who was junior to Aaron is mentioned first since she did the talking and Aaron only listened. This is also why Esther is mentioned first in Esther 9,29, although the position as prime minister occupied by Mordechai was senior to that of the queen. The initiative of what is reported in the verse was Esther’s, hence her name is mentioned first.

ויאמר אחיה תשב הנערה, “her brother said: let the girl stay here (for a while).” According to the plain meaning of the text, Rivkah’s father Bethuel was the one who had said: הנה רבקה לפניך קח ולך, “here is Rivkah at your command, take her and go.” When they heard this, Lavan and his mother said that she should not leave for a while, a year or at least ten months. Ibn Ezra claims that the ones who spoke were the ones who had received the gifts from Eliezer, whereas the father kept silent on the subject. It is possible that Lavan was a more prominent and distinguished person than his father, and this accounts for his speaking up first. This would be supported by the Torah writing ויען לבן ובתואל, instead of ויען בתואל ולבן.

He wanted to prevent ... [therefore] an angel came and killed him. Besueil poisoned the food in Eliezer’s plate, and then he rushed Eliezer to eat before he would notice it. For it is written here (v. 33), “Food was set before him,” and about Yosef also it is written (50:26), “He was set in a coffin.” Here, too, they sought to kill Eliezer and put him in a coffin. But Eliezer realized it and said (v. 33), “I will not eat until I have spoken my words.” In the meantime, the angel moved the plate and the poison ended up in front of Besueil, who ate the poisoned food and died. (source unknown)

ויאמר אחיה ואמה, “Her brother and mother said;” Rashi, noticing that Betuel, Rivkah’s father is not quoted as making a response to Eliezer, says that he actually wanted to prevent the marriage so that an angel was dispatched by G–d to kill him in order to prevent him from carrying out his objection. He says so although the Torah had quoted both Lavan and Betuel as agreeing to the match being made in heaven in verses 50-51. An alternate interpretation explaining Betuel’s “silence.” He had meant to poison Eliezer so as to prevent the marriage. An angel switched plates while Eliezer was speaking and when Betuel started eating he died from his own poison.

תשב הנערה אתנו, “let the girl stay with us, etc.;” if you were to ask how they could have asked for a delay after having already agreed to the match and having declared the match as having been made in heaven? They had even said: “take Rivkah and be on your way!” (verse 51) At the beginning they had thought that Eliezer had been authorized only to arrange for the betrothal which would take place in Yitzchok’s hometown. The matter therefore had appeared as very urgent. Now that they saw that Eliezer had already performed (through the gifts) the rites of betrothal, they no longer saw any reason for the hurry. They therefore asked that an engaged girl be given the customary 12 months to prepare herself for her nuptials. (Compare Talmud, Ketuvot 57)י

Let the girl abide. They purposely tried to irritate Eliezer because they were disappointed with the gifts they had received. Rivkah alone received substantial gifts, but these would go with her to Yitzchok’s house. Ad-noy has made my journey successful. Therefore it is Him you are offending when you try to delay me. Let us call the girl. This was a strategy to deflect Eliezer’s charge that they were thwarting Hashem’s will. Will you go with this man. They tried to make him seem suspect in her eyes.

ימים (literally, days) means a year — just as (Leviticus 25:29) “For a whole year (ימים) shall he have the right of redemption” — for the custom was to give a maiden twelve months to provide herself with a trousseau (literally, ornaments) (Genesis Rabbah 60:12).

ימים או עשור. a year or at least 10 months. The word ימים meaning “a year” also occurs in Leviticus 25,29. Our sages arrived at the conclusion that this verse is the source for giving a bride a period of 12 months during which she may provide for herself economically before moving in with her husband.

ימים או עשור, the word: ימים does not refer to a few days, but to the days making up 12 months, i.e. a year. (Compare Esther 2,12)

או עשור OR TEN — i. e. ten months. But if you say that it does really mean “days” (“a few days”, and that it does not mean a year) I reply that it is not usual for people who make a request to ask for a little and to say “If you do not agree to this, then give us even more” (Ketubot 57b).

ועשור, a general, as opposed to a specific adjective, including any number. This does not apply to such verses where the number is an ordinal number such as בעשור לחודש “on the tenth of the month” in Leviticus 23,27 and other places in the Torah. In those verses the word עשור is an adjective describing the tenth day of the month.

וה' הצליח דרכי, clearly G’d does not want that the matter suffer any delay seeing that something which experiences delay, obstacles, cannot truly be considered as being successful.

ויאמר אליהם, seeing that it is clear that G’d has made my mission successful, do not cause me any delay of even a single day.

אל תאחרו אותי, By delaying her departure you would be delaying my return home.

שלחוני, let me depart with the girl,

ואלכה לאדוני, and I will go to my master as he has commanded me in order to bring him a wife for his son. How could I possibly return empty-handed?

ונשאלה את פיה AND ASK HER MOUTH — From this we may infer that a woman should not be given in marriage except with her own consent (Genesis Rabbah 60:12).

נקרא לנערה, to find out if she wants to delay her move to your master’s country by a year or ten months, or if she wants to go now as you have said.

ונשאלה את פיה, if she is willing and able to travel with you at this time.

ויאמרו נקרא לנערה, they suggested to ask Rivkah in Eliezer’s presence, for if they would speak to her only privately Eliezer might interpret a negative response by Rivkah as being the result of family pressure on her to remain for a while.

ויאמרו: נקרא לנערה, “They said: ‘let us call the girl herself and ask her.” This was a challenge to Eliezer who had represented her as already having agreed to come with him. Hence they asked her openly: “do you really want to go with this man?” Alternately, the question posed to Rivkah meant: “do you prefer to travel with this man, or would you prefer that one of us comes with you to the land of Canaan?” Her answer when she said; “I will go,” meant that she considered the man as trustworthy and that it would be unfair to delay him on account of the expensive jewelry she had already accepted from him.”

From here [it is derived], that a woman may not be given in marriage unless it is with her consent. Rashi is answering the question: They said before (v. 50), “We cannot say anything to you, bad or good,” as it is clearly ordained by Hashem. [Why then did they now need to ask her?]

ונשאלה את פיה, they would ask her if she wanted to go with Eliezer at this time. From verse 51 it is clear that basically it had been settled that Rivkah would marry Yitzchok, and the family would not have said “here Rivkah is before you take her and go,” unless they had first secured Rivkah’s willingness to marry Yitzchok. It is forbidden to force marriage on anyone. According to Kidushin 41, a father may not make use of the right to marry off his daughter, the minor, unless she is old enough to understand the implication of giving her own consent, by saying: “I want to marry so and so.”

את פיה, a reference to her wishes just as in Joshua 9,14 ואת פי ה' לא שאלו, “they had not asked G’d about His wishes in the matter.”

ותאמר אלך AND SHE SAID, I WILL GO — of my own accord even though you do not consent (Genesis Rabbah 60:12).

ויקראו לרבקה, a matter of common courtesy. Even though G’d had already ,made clear what His wishes were in the matter, tell us what your own wishes are in this matter, if you want to go immediately. עם האיש הזה, with this man or with someone else as your guide after the lapse of 10 months or a year. The question was relevant, seeing that we had explained that it was customary to give a bride (virgin) 12 months to prepare herself for such a radical adjustment as moving from her parents’ home to that of her husband.

I will go. Although she was nervous about riding on a camel she did not want to delay until alternative transportation could be arranged.

Of my own accord... Rashi is answering the question: Why did she answer, “I will go,” instead of simply saying, “Yes”? For they had asked her, “Will you go with this man?” (Re’m)

ותאמר אלך, I do not need all this time in order to prepare my trousseau.

וישלחו, Lavan and his family, this is the meaning of the word אחותם, which, if taken literally would mean “their sister.”

אחתם. Immer tritt bedeutsam Bethuel völlig in den Hintergrund, Laban, der Sohn, regiert, so dass nicht eine Tochter, sondern eine Schwester aus dem Hause entlassen wurde. Welch ein Kontrast zu dem abrahamitischen Hause, wo Jizchak, ein Sohn von vierzig Jahren, in der heiligsten, für sein Leben entscheidendsten Angelegenheit so großartig gar nicht hervortritt, sondern die Wahl seines Weibes ganz dem Vater und dessen Veranstaltung überlässt!

ואת מנקתה, “and her nursemaid.” She was used to her as she was still so young. The reason that the Torah mentions this is that otherwise we would not have understood why her death, while Yaakov was on the way back to the land of Canaan, had been mentioned [on that occasion with her name. (Genesis 35,8) Ed.])

ואת מינקתה, the Torah does not mention the other attendants sent with Rivkah, seeing that the מינקת, nursemaid, is the highest ranking of them all. Eliezer and his men were worth mentioning in their own right as part of the entourage, although regarding who was riding, the women were mentioned. In that context the nursemaid is not accorded any special recognition, seeing that she too was subservient to Rivkah.

Die Amme geht mit. Auch da sehen wir ein reineres Verhältnis. Eigentlich war es der Stolz der Mutter, selbst ihr Kind zu nähren, wie wir von Sara wissen. Wo nicht, so wurde es nicht bloß für Geld gesäugt, das Weib, das es mit ihrer Brust genährt, blieb ihm das ganze Leben anhänglich nahe.

את היי לאלפי רבבה MAYEST THOU BECOME THOUSANDS OF MYRIADS —May you and your seed receive that blessing which was promised to Abraham on Mount Moriah, (Genesis 22:17) “I will greatly multiply thy seed … [and let thy seed possess the gates of their enemies]”. May it be God’s will that that seed may proceed from you and not from another woman”.

את היי לאלפי רבבה ויירש דרעך, may all these children originate from you, as it had been said to Avraham at the time of the binding of Yitzchok: “your descendants will conquer the gates of their enemies” (22,17) according to the commentary of Rabbi Joseph Karo.

May you become. May you so please your husband that all his offspring will come through you and your descendants will inherit Hashem’s vow to Avraham

את היי לאלפי רבבה. "May you become thousands and myriads." The reason Laban stressed the word "you" was that he was aware that Isaac would continue the Abrahamitic tradition and found great nations. Although this fact itself was anathema to wicked people such as Laban, they preferred that Rebeccah would be the founding mother than any other wife Isaac might marry. We must accept the psychological fact that the wicked hate the righteous even if the latter are their own flesh and blood.

ויברכו, when they came to the end of the distance they accompanied her away from Aram Naharayim and wanted to take final leave they blessed her as was customary.

May you and your descendants receive the same blessing... Rashi said, “May it be His will that those descendants...” [but did not speak directly of her,] because the blessings were given to Yitzchok, not to Rivkah. [You might ask:] Is it not written [that they said to her, “May you become thousands of myriads,” even though she was not included in the blessings [to Yitzchok]? The answer is: If her descendants receive the blessing, it is considered as though she received it herself.

Diese Worte im Munde so gewöhnlicher Menschen, wie Laban und seine Mutter, werden nur dann verständlich, wenn wir annehmen, sie haben von der Bestimmung Rebekkas, Stammmutter eines Volkes zu werden, sowie von der Bestimmung dieses Volkes Kunde gehabt. Dass diese erwartete Zukunft des abrahamitischen Hauses bekannt war, haben wir bereits oben bei dem Besuche Abimelechs gleich nach Jizchaks Geburt gesehen.

2. "And your descendants will inherit the gate of their enemies (those who hate them)." This is a bracha that they (the descendants) will be wise men, seated at the gate (ie, a place of public prominence). Even in the gates of their enemies (those who hate them [Hebrew root Sin-Nun-Aleph]) there will be people who seek out their wisdom and advice. Earlier on in the story of the Akeida (the Binding of Isaac) there was a similar blessing "ויירש זרעך את שער אויביו" "and your descendants will inherit the gates of their enemies (those who would seek to do them harm [Hebrew root Aleph-Vav-Yud-Bet])." See Bereishit 22:17, and see Haamek Davar ad loc. In that case, the Holy One Blessed Be He who knows the thoughts [of the "enemies"] described them with the root Aleph-Vav-Yud-Bet [rather than Sin-Nun-Aleph] which describes a feeling in their hearts. But a hater enemy [Sin-Nun-Aleph] implies action as well, as in Devarim 30:7 "upon your enemies [root Sin-Nun-Aleph] who chase after you." And people do not appreciate the wonder this is that even those who actively hate us will need the wisdom of Israel.

היי, the letter ה has both the vowel patach and the semi-vowel sheva.

לאלפי רבבה ויירש זרעך, as the G’d in heaven has blessed the descendants of Avraham.

לאלפי רבבה, thousands which in due course would increase to become tens of thousands. Seeing that the largest individual number in the Holy Tongue is רבבה, i.e. 10,000, and they did not know a word for “million,” they had to express it in those terms.

וירש זרעך, it so happened that the wording of their blessing coincided with the wording used by the angel at the time of the binding of Yitzchok (22,17)

את שער שונאיו, we already explained this term in Genesis 22,16.

AND REBEKAH AROSE, AND HER MAIDS. Scripture relates that after they gave permission for Rebekah and her nurse to go, as well as for Abraham’s servant and his men, Rebekah rose and called her maids. And they rode upon the camels, and followed the man because he led them on the way.

ויקח העבד את רבקה, this describes the transfer from the father’s emissaries to those of the husband, as described in Ketuvot 48. Once the marriage became consummated she became the mistress, and Eliezer became her servant also.

ותקם, after they had departed from accompanying her on foot, Rivkah mounted the camel and rode. It is not good manners for the departing person to ride while those accompanying her are walking on foot. This part of the story teaches us this basic point of good manners, something that Rivkah was aware of.

ויקח העבד את רבקה וילך, “The servant took Rivkah and he went.” The Torah here describes the servant’s desire to quickly complete his mission, after all the women had first accompanied Rivkah to the outskirts of the town, now Eliezer personally took over the task of watching over her to protect her against any possible mishap. Alternatively, seeing that the entire entourage of Rivkah and her family and friends had delayed the orderly departure as they had difficulty in parting from her, Eliezer now told the locals to turn back and let him get on with his task; i.e. ויקח, he now took matters in hand, etc. Ibn Ezra opines that the meaning of the apparently repeated mention of Eliezer taking Rivkah is that he personally walked along side her until they eventually met Yitzchok, and that he did not mind the inconvenience of walking (instead of riding on a camel).

ויקח העבר. Rebekka und ihre Dienerinnen ritten, Elieser aber führte das Kamel Rebekkas und ging zu Fuß.

אחרי האיש, for he knew the way so that he had to be in the lead and Rivkah and her entourage behind him.

AND THE SERVANT TOOK REBEKAH, AND WENT HIS WAY. The purpose of this is to tell of his zealousness for after having left the city with all the women following him, the servant took Rebekah to him and did not part from her in order to guard her against any mishap along the way. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that it means that he walked with Rebekah and never felt the weariness of the journey until Isaac came and met him.

ויקח העבד את רבקה, he took her to be by his side so that she would not be apart from him, a sign of his high regard for her.

מבוא באר לחי ראי HE HAD JUST COME FROM THE WELL LACHAI-ROI— For he had gone there to bring Hagar back to Abraham that he might take her again as his wife (Genesis Rabbah 60:14).

AND ISAAC ‘BA MIBO’ (HAD JUST COME) FROM THE WELL LAHAI-ROI. Scripture states that Isaac had just now come from the well Lahai-roi, having returned from the well of Lahai-roi to which he had previously come. Had the verse stated, “Ba (he came) from the well of Lahai,” it would have appeared as if he lived there. Therefore, it was necessary to explain ba mibo as meaning that he returned to his city from the temporary visit that he had made to the well of Lahai-roi, for he abode in the south country and he was returning to his city.
It is possible that since the word mibo is an infinitive, it indicates that Isaac constantly went to that place since it was a place of prayer for him because of the revelation of the angel there,¹³³See above, 16:14. and he abode in the south country near there. And so did Onkelos translate it, “He came from his coming,” [thus indicating that he was in the habit of so doing].
In Onkelos’ opinion this was Beer-sheba for he translated both between Kadesh and Shur¹³⁴Above, 20:1. and between Kadesh and Bered¹³⁵Ibid., 16:14. as “Rekem and Chagra.”¹³⁶Thus it is obvious that Shur and Bered are synonymous. Now Shur is in Gerar (above, 20:1), and Beer-sheba is in the land of the Philistines near Gerar (see Ramban, above, 21:32). The well of Lahai-roi, which is between Kadesh and Bered (above, 16:14), is thus near Beer-sheba. If so, that place — the place of the tamarisk-tree of Abraham¹³⁷Above, 21:33. — was suitable for prayer. Now Isaac came from that well while he was on his way to another city which was on the same road as his city, and he went out towards eventide to converse in the field with his companions and friends who were there. He met the servant and Rebekah, whereupon they all walked together to the city, and Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent.¹³⁸Verse 67 here.

ויצחק בא מבוא, an expression meaning the same as Genesis 10,19 בואכה סדומה. On that day, the day that Eliezer arrived, Yitzchok arrived from his visit to באר לחי רואי.

בא מבוא לחי ראי, to articulate a prayer at the spot where the prayer of his mother’s servant maid Hagar had been answered.

ויצחק, now the Torah tells us that Yitzchok encountered them as if by coincidence. The fact is, of course, that G’d arranges matters for the benefit of those whom He loves without their even being aware of it at the time.

ויצחק בא מבוא לחי רואי, “Yitzchok was just returning from having visited the well named E-lohay ro-I by the angel who had predicted Ishmael’s birth to Hagar.” According to Ibn Ezra מבוא is the name of a place which was also known as באר לחי רואי. Nachmanides explains that Yitzchok only now returned from the place known as באר לחי רואי. If the Torah had not added the word מבוא but had written בא מבאר לחי רואי, we would have thought that this was where Yitzchok resided permanently. By adding the word מבוא it becomes clear that Yitzchok at this point was on the way home to the city where he resided permanently. His stay at באר לחי רואי had been strictly temporary. It is possible that he would go there for the purpose of offering up prayers seeing that it had been at that location that he had seen the angel (when he lay bound) but that he had a permanent residence far more to the south of Moriah He had reached another town situated on the route to his home town, and there he went out towards evening to have a chat with a friend who lived there. While on route, he encountered Eliezer and Rivkah. And they walked all together to his home town.

It is between Kadeish and Bered. Bered and Shur are the same place, as Onkelos translates both as חגרא. Since it is written about one of them, “To the land of the Negev” (20:1), and it is written about the other that the well was there (16:14), they derived that the land of the Negev [where Yitzchok lived] was close to that well.

בא מבא kommt in ganz תנ"ך nicht wieder vor, "kommt vom Kommen!" בא heißt eigentlich: Hinkommen, dahin, wo man hingehört, wo man sich heimisch und hingezogen fühlt. Er muss also irgendwo hingegangen gewesen sein, wo er sich heimisch, wohin er sich gezogen fühlte: מבא; und nun muss er wieder anderwärts hingegangen sein, wohin er nunmehr sich gezogen, wo er nunmehr sich heimisch fühlte. Und wohin war er gegangen? Nach באר לחי ראי! Wir kennen ja den Brunnen, den eine Standes- genossin Eliesers, durch Freiheitsdrang aus Abrahams Haus getrieben, also genannt, und dort erkannt hatte, dass auch dann und da, wann und wo alles auf Erden für uns erstorben ist, "ein Lebendiger uns schaut"! Und über dem älteren Bruder Jizchaks war da einer Dienerin des Hauses Abrahams Gottes Vorsehung und Waltung sichtbar geworden. Liegt es nicht unendlich nahe, uns zu sagen: während so Elieser, der Diener aus dem Hause Abrahams, ausgezogen war, um in Hoffnung auf Gottes wachende und waltende und fügende Vorsehung einen Schritt einzuleiten, der, wie kein anderer, für die ganze Zukunft Isaaks verhängnisvoll entscheidend sein sollte, also — wenngleich in freudiger Weise, doch in ganz paralleler Lage mit Hagar und Ismael — hatte derjenige, den alles dies am nächsten anging, hatte Isaak sich zu der Stätte hingezogen gefühlt, die ihn in der Zuversicht stärken sollte, dass Gott also für ihn, in seinem sich gestaltenden Geschicke, Elieser sichtbar nahe sein werde, wie er für den älteren Bruder Hagar sichtbar nahe gewesen. Darauf aber sehnte er sich wieder zurück nach derjenigen Stätte, wo ihm das Familienleben erblühen sollte. Der Brunnen lag ja am Rande der Wüste. והוא יושב בארץ הנגב. Es scheint, dass Jizchak bereits selbständig gewohnt und zwar בארץ הנגב. Während Abraham bereits seit mehreren Jahren mitten unter den anderen Völkern lebte, hatte er es für gut gehalten, Jizchak, der jetzt wieder am Anfange stand, in der Stille, wie zuerst er selbst, isoliert wohnen zu lassen. (Siehe zu Kap.20, 1.)

בא מבא באר לחי רואי, “he had returned from visiting b’eerlachay roi;” he did not literally return from that well but from the region’s outer boundary. The formulation in our verse is similar to Kings I 8,65: מלבא חמת, or from Genesis 25,18: בואכה אשורה, “all the way to Ashur.” It is as if the Torah had written: מן בא. The word בא is used here in the same sense as in Judges 1,24: הראנו נא את מבא כניסת העיר, “please show us the way to the entrance of the city.” The letter מ in the word: מבא is to be understood like the letter מ in Psalms 38,5: מתום which means תום, from תמים, pure, unadulterated, (in the spiritual sense. Ed.]

יושב בארץ הנגב FOR HE DWELT IN THE LAND OF THE SOUTH, near to that well, as it is said, (Genesis 20:1) “And Abraham journeyed from thence towards the land of the South and dwelt between Kadesh and Shur”, and the well was there, as is said, (Genesis 16:14) “behold it is between Kadesh and Bered’’.

והוא יושב בארץ הנגב, Yitzchok personally resided to the south of that location; he had gone there only to attend to his business affairs, not to establish a new residence.

יושב בארץ הנגב, the area in which the באר לחי רואי is located. (compare Genesis 16,7 על העין בדרך שור.) seeing that he had come from there on that day. This detail is related to show that Yitzchok continued the work of his father who had planted an orchard in that vicinity. (Genesis 20,1) He had gone there to supervise his workers who were supposed to tend the orchard.

בא מבוא, Yitzchok “happened” to come from that direction on that very day.

באר לחי רואי, he did not reside there, for he resided in Chevron with his father. This is the part known as ארץ הנגב, the southern part of the land. Yitzchok had either some herds or some other business which required him to travel to this place known as באר לחי רואי, from time to time. On the day that Eliezer was about to return to Chevron, he too was on the way there. The meaning of the word מבוא is “a place which one travels to from time to time.” Upon leaving באר לחי רואי on the way to Chevron, he would spend the night in one of the inns on the way from there to Chevron.

לשוח TO MEDITATE — this means “to pray” (Genesis Rabbah 60:14), as we find (Psalms 102:1) “[A prayer of the afflicted …] when he poureth forth his plaint.

ויצא יצחק לשוח בשדה, the word לשוח is basically the same as שיח השדה, “the plants that grow in the field,” (Genesis 2,5). Yitzchok went out to plant useful vegetation, trees, etc., and to check the work of his employees. While he was thus occupied he happened to espy גמלים באים, camels approaching. He came closer to see if per chance they were the camels belonging to his father which the servant Eliezer had been leading.

ויצא יצחק לשוח, he had detoured from his regular path to the field in order to pour out his heart to G’d in prayer. He did not want to be interrupted in his devotion by passing travelers whom he would have to greet. This was in spite of the fact that he had already prayed in Beer lachay Ro-i. His prayer had been answered already, in accordance with Daniel 10,12 מן היום אשר נתת את לבך להבין ולהענות...נשמעו דבריך, “for from the first day you set your mind to get understanding, practicing abstinence before your G’d, your prayer was heard and I have come because of your prayer.”

ויצא יצחק, he left the town where he had spent the night. He went without knowing it, on the same route that Rivkah his wife to be was traveling on the way to meet him. He had gone out

לשוח בשדה, “to pray in the field.” The expression שיח means “prayer.” Although the sages have said that it is bad manners for someone to pray in the outdoors, this case was special seeing the location was Mount Moriah, as our sages are on record that Yitzchok referred to G’d as שדה, “field.” [the field being the source of all nutrition for man and beast on earth. Ed.] Alternately, what the sages disapproved of was prayer in the בקעה an open area frequented by travelers who would be a distraction to the person concentrating on his prayer. A שדה, an open field not frequented by people would not be a source of distraction, and offering one’s prayers there would be approved by the sages.

A term for prayer, as in, “He pours out his prayer.” Question: For the verse ישפוך שיחו (Tehillim 102:1), the Gemara in Avodah Zarah 7b uses the verse over here לשוח בשדה as a source that שיח means prayer [as if our verse was the source]?! Tosafos answer (in Berachos 26b) that this is the way of the Gemara. For we see that the Gemara (Megillah 13a) proves Esther was righteous because it is written about her (Esther 2:7), “He brought up Hadassah,” and it is written (Zechariah 1:7), “And he was standing among the hadassim.” Just as in Zechariah 1:7 it refers to the righteous, so too in Esther 2:7. Yet, in Sanhedrin (93a) the Gemara brings the proof the other way around. But this does not seem right to me. Rather, the answer is: Both verses are needed [to prove that שיח means prayer.] With ישפוך שיחו alone, we would think that שיח means speech, not prayer, since that same verse already said תפלה לעני. But לשוח בשדה [must mean prayer, for] with whom was Yitzchok speaking? Perforce, he established [the afternoon] prayer. And with לשוח בשדה alone, we would think that לשוח means as it does in Demai 1:1: “בנות שוח (white figs).” I.e., Yitzchok went for a walk among the trees in the field. This is why Rashi brings a proof from ישפוך שיחו. (Maharshal)

ויצא יצחק לשוח בשדה לפנות ערב, the שיחה, “conversation,” referred to here is the afternoon prayer, a tradition (the duty to pray at regular intervals) he had learned from his father. The reason why the Torah added the words לפנות ערב, is to teach that this governs the period when the sun has entered the western part of its orbit around the earth. [at that time the earth was presumed to be the center of our galaxy. Ed.]

שוח wovon שיחים Bäume, Pflanzen, bezeichnet das innere Wachsen des Geistes und Gemütes, das Zunehmen der Gedanken und Gefühle (vergl. צוץ — שוש -sein Inneres neu tränken mit den Gedanken und Ge :התפלל Sowie .(צמח — שמח fühlen der Reinheit und Lauterkeit (=התבלל). Die Weisen erklären es hier auch als wirkliches Beten, wie באים — .שפוך שיח, Kamele, die auf seine Wohnung hinzogen.

ויצא יצחק, “Yitzchok went forth;” (he left his house) seeing that the Torah does not specify from where “Yitzchok went out,” our sages have understood it to mean that he left Gan Eden, where he had spent the last three years after undergoing the akeydah on Mount Moriah. (Compare our comments page 164 on Genesis 22,19)

והנה גמלים באים, when he had gone out to pray, the camels were already headed in his direction. This is what Rivkah referred to when she asked about the man walking “toward us?” (verse 65) This is because when Yitzchok returned from Beer lachay Ro-i to his house he was walking from the north to the south. People coming from Charan (Aram Naharaym) headed for Avraham’s house would be traveling from the east to the west. This is why after having deviated from his route which would have taken him from north to south, and walking in an easterly direction instead, Yitzchok would be walking in the direction from which the camels were approaching, from the land known also as ארץ בני קדם the land belonging to the people of the East. He had reason to believe that Rivkah would come from that direction.

לשוח בשדה, to walk among the bushes,

לשוח בשדה, “to the shrubs in the field.” The word is familiar to us from Genesis 2,5: שיח השדה, “vegetation of the field,” it is also familiar to us from Genesis 21,15: תחת אחת השיחים, “under one of the bushes” where Hagar abandoned her son Yishmael who was about to die. An alternate exegesis: it is related to the word: שיחה, “conversation;” it then means that Yitzchok went into the field to converse with G-d (pray).

לפנות ערב, at the time when the sun turns down towards the horizon. This is the time of day when many people go for a walk among the shrubs and bushes. While he was thus walking, he raised his eyes looking further along the route he was walking on and he saw גמלים באים, and he veered off his path to walk toward them to check if this was Avraham’s servant Eliezer who was walking at the head. This is what Rivkah meant when she referred to the man who was walking לקראתנו, (verse 65). ותשא, she thought that possibly the man approaching might be Yitzchok; this is why she asked the servant, to find out if her assumption was correct.

ותרא את יצחק AND SHE SAW ISAAC — She saw his lordly appearance and gazed at him in astonishment (Genesis Rabbah 60:15).

AND SHE SAW ISAAC. Rashi comments: “She saw his lordly appearance and felt abashed¹³⁹“Abashed.” In our Rashi: “and she gazed at him in astonishment.” of him.” And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained that the latter verse, [namely, Verse 65, And she said unto the servant, What man is this], preceded Verse 64. Thus the expression, And she said unto the servant, means “And she had already said to the servant.” In Ibn Ezra’s opinion there are many such verses in the Torah.
This is truly so, but here it is not correct, for in this case you would have to mix the verses and transpose their parts as follows: And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and she saw Isaac [Verse 64] — and she said unto the servant: What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant said: It is my master [Verse 65] — and she alighted from the camel [Verse 64] — and she took her veil, and covered herself [Verse 65].
In my opinion [we need not mix the verses, but the sense thereof is as follows]: When Rebekah saw a man walking in the field towards her, hastening on the road and walking in the field towards them, she knew that he had come to see them and greet them or to bring them into his house for lodging, and so she did as was ethically proper for women, and she stood modestly.

ותפול מעל הגמל, a description of her chastity, seeing she had been riding astride the camel just like a man, not side-saddle. (according to Pessachim 3 the former mode of riding, especially on a high animal, affords a better chance to hold on with both hands and feet against falling)

ותפול מעל הגמל, she inclined her head while remaining on the camel in honour of Yitzchok. We have a similar expression meaning the same in Kings II 5,21 ויפול מעל המרכבה where there is no reason to understand this as Naamon, the general, “falling” off his chariot, but the verse describes a deferential behaviour by Naamon.

ותפול מעל הגמל, when she saw him and Eliezer told her that this was Yitzchok, she lowered herself from the camel, fell on the ground, covered her face with her veil and remounted and rode on. This story teaches us that when a woman has achieved the status of being betrothed it befits her to cover her face until such time as she is a properly married woman.

"And Rivka raised her eyes, etc. and saw Yitzhak"--as he still stood and prayed, and he was then like an angel of God, awesome.

ותרא את יצחק ותפול מעל הגמל, “when she saw Yitzchok she fell from the camel.” Rashi, in common with Onkelos, understands this not as a “fall,” but that Rivkah slid down to the ground from her saddle in order to greet her husband to be not from a position above him, but by observing good manners.

She saw that he was majestic and was astonished at his sight. Otherwise, how did she know it was [someone important like] Yitzchok, so that she let herself down from the camel?

Unzweifelhaft hat Elieser es sich angelegen sein lassen, auf der ganzen Reise ihr von Jizchak zu erzählen; es lag dies ja ganz in der Natur der Sache, so dass sie ihn sogleich erkannte, und braucht daher nicht an eine "Ahnung" gedacht zu werden. Sie konnte auch schon das Ackerfeld nach der Beschreibung erkannt, und aus der Art und Weise, wie Jizchak durch dasselbe so gerade ihnen entgegenging, geschlossen haben, dass er der Eigentümer sei. —

ותרא את יצחק ותפול מעל הגמל, “when she saw Yitzchok she fell from the camel.” When she had her first glance of a handsome tall man walking across a field that had not been trampled by previous pedestrians crossing it, she, being a mere three year old, became frightened because she thought that he was a rapist or an armed robber. She fell from fear. Another exegesis of this line: the sequence here has been distorted. After seeing a figure approaching, she asked about the identity of that person. When told by Eliezer that “this is my master,” (actually his master’s son) she hastily descended from the camel and covered her face with a veil, as a sign of her chastity. Her descent from the camel was totally voluntary, just as when someone prostrates himself in prayer, it is described as ויפול על פניו, meaning: “he deliberately bowed his face to the ground.”

ותפל SHE ALIGHTED (literally, she fell) — She let herself slide towards the ground; as the Targum renders it וארכינת —she inclined herself towards the earth, but did not actually reach the ground. Similarly in (Genesis 24:14) “let down thy pitcher, I pray thee”, the word הטי let down, Onkelos translates by ארכיני “incline”, and (Psalm 18:10) “He bowed (ויט) the heavens” he translates by וארכין which means “He bent them towards the ground”. A similar idea is (Psalms 37:24) “Though he fall (יפול) he shall not be utterly cast down” which is as much as to say, “though he bends himself towards the earth yet he shall not touch the ground (i. e. shall not fall entirely)” (Genesis Rabbah 60:15).

The expression השמיטה used by Rashi means that she did not actually descend to the ground prostrating herself, but that she dutifully inclined her head in greeting. One of the parallel uses of the word quoted by Rashi is ויט שמים, “He inclined the heavens,” also translated by Onkelos with the same expression אתרכינת that he uses for the word ותפול in our verse here. Nachmanides disagrees with this approach by Rashi to the word הרכין used by Onkelos to describe what Rivkah did. He thinks, that just as elsewhere, that word merely means that she adjusted her posture so as to be able to face Yitzchok in a manner she deemed appropriate. In his view the word השמיטה would mean falling or sliding all the way to the ground. Rivkah avoided facing Yitzchok directly and turned somewhat sideways.

She leaned towards the ground but did not reach the ground. [Rashi knows this] because it is written ותפול מעל הגמל, rather than מהגמל ותפול or ותפול לארץ. Consequently, it implies that she let herself down from the camel’s back, but not to the ground.

AND SHE ALIGHTED (‘VATIPOL’) FROM THE CAMEL. Rashi comments: “She let herself slide towards the ground, as the Targum renders it, ‘She inclined herself [towards the earth but did not actually reach the ground]. Similarly, Let down thy pitcher¹⁴⁰Above, Verse 14. was translated by Onkelos to mean ‘incline.’ And He bowed down the heavens¹⁴¹Psalms 18:10. — the Targum translates: ‘and He bent.’ A similar case is the verse, Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down,¹⁴²Ibid., 37:24. which means though he bends himself towards the earth, yet he shall not touch the ground.”
But Onkelos’ opinion is not that she let herself slide off the camel to the earth, for if so, she actually fell off the camel and did not just incline herself. Similarly, all expressions of “inclining” merely mean a bending towards one side. Onkelos’ opinion, however, is that on the camel upon which she was riding she bent herself towards one side in order to turn her face away from him. A similar case, in my opinion, is the verse: And when Naaman saw one running after him, ‘vayipol’ from upon the chariot to meet him, and said, Is all well?¹⁴³II Kings 5:21. The word vayipol here only means that he bent himself in the chariot towards the runner who was on the ground to ask of him whether all is well. And so indeed it is said there, When the man turned back from his chariot to meet thee.¹⁴⁴Ibid., Verse 26. It is possible that as far as Onkelos is concerned, the expression, from on the camel, is like “on the camel,” [the letter mem in the word mei’al (from on) being redundant]. A similar case is the verse, For great ‘mei’al’ the heavens is Thy mercy,¹⁴⁵Psalms 108:5. [which means “for great on the heavens is Thy mercy,” and not “from on the heavens”]. A redundant letter mem like this is also found in these verses: There shall be no more ‘misham’ an infant of days, nor an old man,¹⁴⁶Isaiah 65:20. [which means “there shall be no more there,” and not “from there”]; Ye waters that are ‘mei’al’ the heavens,¹⁴⁷Psalms 148:4. [which means “ye waters that are on the heavens,” and not “from on the heavens”].
In line with the plain meaning [of Scripture, however, the letter mem in the word mei’al is not redundant, but instead] it is like the mem in the verse, And, behold, there came many people ‘miderech’ (from a way) round-about.¹⁴⁸II Samuel 13:34. [And thus in the verse before us, mei’al hagamal would mean that she alighted “from on the camel.”] There are many similar verses.

ותפול, ein freiwilliges, rasches Hinablassen vom Kamele, wie bei Naaman ויפל מעל המרכבה לקראתו (Kön. II. 5, 21) aus Achtung vor Elischa, ja vor dessen Diener. Ganz so wäre auch hier das Gefühl zu verstehen, mit welchem Rebekka dem Isaak nicht entgegenreiten will. Auch dieses ist wieder charakteristisch. Eine eitle Dame würde gewiss etwas darin gefunden haben, stattlich an der Spitze eines großen Gefolges ent gegenzutraben, herablassend sich von ihrem künftigen Gemahle galant herunterheben zu lassen. Zumal da Isaak nicht ritt, sondern ging, passte es nicht, dass sie dem gehenden Isaak entgegenreiten sollte. Ferner scheint ja Reiten ein Zeichen der Vornehmheit gewesen zu sein, Rebekka wollte Isaak nicht als Herrin entgegentreten. Alles dies war aber nicht in Folge einer Berechnung — (sonst wäre diese Bescheidenheit wenig vom Stolze zu unterscheiden gewesen) — sondern ותפול, es geschah ganz von selbst, unwillkürlich, ohne Berechnung, war augenblickliche Eingebung eines richtigen Gefühles.

Similarly, כי יפול לא יוטל... Even though he falls he will not be cast to the ground, as Rashi goes on to explain: “He will not reach the ground.”

ותתכס AND [SHE] COVERED HERSELF — This has a passive meaning (she was covered); it is like (35:8) ותקבר “and she was buried”, and (1 Samuel 4:18) ותשבר “and [his neck] was broken”.

?מי האיש הלזה ההולך בשדה לקראתנו, this verse raises a number of questions. Did Rivkah enquire about the identity of every man that they encountered on this journey? Furthermore, why did the Torah have to write the words בשדה לקראתנו, “in the field toward us?” It appears that the verse is somewhat abbreviated. What Rivkah wanted to know was why the man approaching them had detoured from the regular path and was coming across the field in their direction.

ותתכס, for she was afraid to look more closely, similar to Moses being afraid to look more closely at the burning bush in Exodus 3,6.

ותאמר, she had asked Eliezer who the man was before she alighted from the camel. She did so only after having been informed that the man was her husband to be, Yitzchok. She had not enquired about every person that they met on the journey, but in the case of Yitzchok, the fact that he approached sideways had made her wonder if, by chance, this was Yitzchok or someone from his household. This is why she added the words: ההולך בשדה לקראתנו, she had observed that this man was busy in the field and only after he had seen them did he come walking in their direction.

As in ותקבר and ותשבר. These verbs refer to the object of the action, and are in the נפעל (passive) form. So too with ותתכס: it is reflexive, and she was the object of the action.

ותתכס. Nun erst verschleiert sie sich! Da geht wieder ein Stück "Orientalismus" verloren; und ist dies wieder ein Beleg, wie sehr wir gegen alles auf unserer Hut sein müssen, was uns so apodiktisch zuversichtlich auf diesem Gebiete doziert wird. — צעיף rad. צעף, wahrscheinlich verwandt mit שאף, in sich hineinziehen, ähnlich wie בלע: verschlucken und dem Anblick durch Zudecken entziehen.

הלזה, the additional letter ל in this word indicates that the person it refers to, though identifiable, is still a considerable distance away, in fact may not yet be positively identified beyond any doubt. We have the same construction in Genesis 37,19 where the brothers refer to the unexpected appearance of Joseph in the distance. When the person referred to as זה is close by, such as when Esther entertained the King and Haman, she pointed to Haman as המן הרע הזה, “this wicked Haman!” (Esther 7,6)

ויספר העבד AND THE SERVANT RELATED — He reported to him the miracles that had been wrought for him — how the earth had shrunk for him, and how Rebecca was ready for him in response to his prayer (Genesis Rabbah 60:15).

ויספר העבד ליצחק, to inform him of all the miracles he had encountered on the way to carrying out his mission. This was to convince Yitzchok that Rivkah was destined for him from heaven.

ויספר, Eliezer told Yitzchok all that happened to him since he had commenced his mission. He did so during the time it took to reach Avraham’s house after Yitzchok had met them. It is possible that they arrived in Chevron on that same day, or the day following.

את כל הדברים אשר עשה , “all the things he had done.” This included the recourse to the “sign” he had asked from G’d to determine which was the right girl for him to approach at the well, when he had pleaded with G’d: הקרה נא לפני, “please let it happen before me this day, etc.” in verse 12. He told Yitzchak about the jewelry he had given to Rivkah on the way, and the gifts he had shared out when at her father’s house; he also told Yitzchak that he had experienced a miraculous telescoping of the earth under him so that he had arrived in Charan on the day he departed from Be-er Sheva.

האהלה שרה אמו INTO HIS MOTHER SARAH’S TENT — He brought her into the tent and she became exactly like his mother Sarah — that is to say, the words signify as much as, [And he brought her into the tent] and, behold, she was Sarah, his mother). For whilst Sarah was living, a light had been burning in the tent from one Sabbath eve to the next, there was always a blessing in the dough (a miraculous increase) and a cloud was always hanging over the tent (as a divine protection), but since her death all these had stopped. However, when Rebecca came, they reappeared” (Genesis Rabbah 60:16).

AND ISAAC BROUGHT HER INTO HIS MOTHER SARAH’s TENT. The construct is missing here [for the noun ohel (tent) appears with the definite article, and in this form it cannot be used in construct with “his mother Sarah.” The verse then should be understood as if it were written, “and Isaac brought her into the tent which was the tent of his mother Sarah.”] There are many cases like this.
The purport of the verse is to tell of the honor that Isaac bestowed upon his mother for from the time that Sarah died they did not take down her tent because they said, “Let not another woman come into the tent of the honorable mistress.” But when he saw Rebekah he brought her into that tent in her honor and there he took her as his wife. This is the meaning of the words, and he loved her, and he was comforted, indicating that he was deeply grieved for his mother, finding no comforter until he was comforted by his wife through his love for her. Otherwise, what reason is there for Scripture to mention a man’s love for his wife?
But Onkelos explained: And Isaac brought her into the tent and, behold, she was like Sarah his mother. It is for this reason that Scripture mentions the love he had for her because it was on account of her righteousness and the aptness of her deeds that he loved her and was comforted by her. And so the Rabbis mentioned in Bereshith Rabbah,¹⁴⁹60:15. “Before Sarah died there was a blessing of miraculous increase in the dough. [After her death it stopped, and when Rebekah came the blessing reappeared.”]

וינחם יצחק אחרי אמו, until this time he had refused to accept consolation for the death of his mother, seeing that she had been such an outstanding person.

ויביאה, when they arrived in Chevron he brought her to the tent of his mother Sarah. It was customary in those times for the man and his wife to have totally separate living quarters. When they would sleep together the man would go to his wife’s tent, as for instance when Leah said to Yaakov אלי תבא, “come to me,” i.e. “come to my tent” (Genesis 30,16) We also find that when Lavan searched for his teraphim that he is reported as conducting separate searches in Yaakov’s, tent as well as in Rachel’s tent and in Leah’s tent. (Genesis 31,33).

ותהי לו לאשה ויאהביה, “she became his wife and he loved her.” Onkelos supplies the reason why the Torah felt the need to write this line saying that when Yitzchok observed that Rivkah was a righteous woman like his mother Sarah he fell in love with her. Nachmanides writes that the reason that the Torah mentions Yitzchok’s loving Rivkah in one and the same breath as his finally comforting himself over the loss of his mother, was because Rivkah represented a replacement of all the virtues Sarah had possessed.

That is, she became the image of his mother Sarah. [Rashi knows this] because it should have said ויביאה לאהל שרה אמו, in which case אהל would be connected to שרה, [meaning “Sarah’s tent.”] But האהלה is an independent phrase.

Wiederum ein Grundzug, der sich gottlob bei den Nachkommen Abrahams und Saras, Isaaks und Rebekkas nicht verwischt hat! Je mehr sie sein Weib wurde, desto mehr liebte er sie! Wie diese Ehe des ersten jüdischen Sohnes, werden die jüdischen Ehen, die meisten jüdischen Ehen, nicht durch die Leidenschaft, sondern durch die Vernunft geschlossen. Eltern und Verwandte überlegen, ob die jungen Leute zu einander passen; und darum steigt die Liebe, je mehr sie sich kennen lernen. Die meisten nichtjüdischen Ehen werden jedoch nach dem geschlossen, was sie "Liebe" nennen, und da braucht man nur in die nach dem Leben gezeichneten Novellen-Schilderungen zu blicken, um zu gewahren, welche Kluft da zwischen der "Liebe" vor der Ehe und nach derselben gähnt, wie schal und fade alles nachher, wie man sich alles ganz anders vorgestellt usw. Diese "Liebe" war blind, jeder Schritt in die Zukunft hinein bringt Enttäuschung; von der jüdischen Ehe aber heißt e5: ויקח את רבקה ותהי לו לאשה ויאהבה! Da ist die Hochzeit nicht Blütengipfel, sondern Wurzelkeim der Liebe!

ויביאה האהלה שרה אמו, “he brought her to the tent of Sarah, his mother” Every word which normally requires the letter ל as a prefix, can instead be spelled with the letter ה as suffix. In other words: the word האהלה in our verse means: “to her tent, i.e. the tent that used to be Sarah’s tent.”

אחרי אמו [AND ISAAC WAS COMFORTED] AFTER HIS MOTHER’S DEATH — It is natural that whilst a man’s mother is living he is wrapped up in her, but when she dies he finds comfort in his wife (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 32).

האהלה שרה, a construction similar to Numbers 34,2 הארץ כנען, or in Joshua 3,14 הארון הברית.

For, as long as Sarah was alive a candle burned... They correspond to the three mitzvos which women are commanded (Shabbos 2:6). Corresponding to challah, there was a constant blessing. Corresponding to Shabbos candles, a lamp burned. And the cloud which hung [over the tent] represented the Shechinah. It was there due to the holiness of purity: she carefully observed [the laws of] nidah and would purify herself. And purity brings ruach hakodesh (Avodah Zarah 20b). (Gur Aryeh)

Und nun noch drei Worte, die, seitdem Gott dem Adam die Eva zugeführt, bis ans Ende der Tage nicht herrlicher gezeichnet werden! — וינחם יצחק אחרי אמו —: Ein vierzigjähriger Mann, der untröstlich ist über den Tod seiner alten Mutter — und er findet sich getröstet in seinem Weibe! Das ist die Stellung des jüdischen Weibes! Und zu welchem elenden Gewäsche schrumpft da alles zusammen, was man von orientalischer Sinnlichkeit und Haremwirtschaft auch dem jüdischen Eheleben hat aufbürden wollen! Mit Saras Scheiden war der ganze weibliche Sinn, das weibliche Gemüt aus dem Hause gewichen. Jizchak fand die Mutter in dem Weibe wieder; (daher auch: "es war ihm, als ob ihm die Mutter wieder ins Zelt trat, da er Rebekka einführte"), es ist dies das Höchste, das je über den Adel, über die Würde des Weibes geschrieben worden — und auf einem Blatte der urältesten jüdischen Geschichte stehts geschrieben.

שרה אמו, Rashi presumably because we all know that Sarah had been Yitzchok’s mother explains here that as long as Sarah had been alive, a light was burning in her tent on a 24/7 basis, and her doughs were always blessed, and a cloud was overhead at the entrance to her tent. These phenomena had stopped with her death. As soon as Rivkah entered the tent the light began to burn again. This was taken by Yitzchok as a sign that Rivkah would replace the mother had held dear in his heart as long as she had been alive. (Rashi’s source is B’reshit Rabbah 60,16)

ויקח את רבקה, he took her to complete the marriage ceremonies as people do, i.e. they get married under a wedding canopy, a ceremony followed by a banquet.

As long as one’s mother is alive... Otherwise, why does it say אחרי אמו?

וינחם יצחק אחרי אמו, Now Yitzchok became comforted, (came to terms with) the death of his mother when he saw that his wife possessed the virtues his mother had been famous for.

ותהי לו לאשה ויאהבה, he discovered her many virtuous qualities including her chastity, qualities he had admired in his mother Sarah. Seeing that most husbands love their wives, the statement “he loved her,” here, must have an additional significance. The Torah writes this to tell us that Yitzchok loved the outstanding qualities of Rivkah. This is why the statement is followed by the line

וינחם יצחק אחרי אמו, after having mourned his mother for a suitable period. He was still mourning his mother after 3 years had elapsed since her death. Now that he recognised his mother’s qualities personified in his wife he was able to console himself over his mother’s death.