Kommentar zu Bereschit 25:19

ואלה תולדות יצחק AND THESE ARE THE PROGENY OF ISAAC — viz, Jacob and Esau who are spoken of in this section.

AND THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF ISAAC, ABRAHAM’s SON. Scripture says this of Esau and Jacob,¹Ramban’s intent is to teach us that the word toldoth is not to be understood in the broad sense of “generations” but in the more specific sense of “children.” Thus the verse reads, And these are the children of Isaac, namely, Esau and Jacob mentioned further on. Compare Ramban at beginning of Seder Noach. Isaac’s sons who are mentioned further on. Scripture further mentions the circumstances of their birth.²Thus, in order to explain fully the story of Jacob and Esau, Scripture begins with an account of their genealogy.

אברהם הוליד את יצחק, according to the plain meaning of the text this statement was necessary to prevent the wrong impression being created by the previous statement in verse 12 where Ishmael is described merely as having been born by Hagar the Egyptian woman. Here when Avraham’s principal son, Yitzchok is the subject of the paragraph, it was important to repeat who had fathered him. He was the son of Avraham’s true wife, his lifetime companion, and G’d had predicted in Genesis 21,12 that Avraham’s descendants would always be known through his son Yitzchok and his descendants. We have a similar verse in Chronicles I 1,28 describing Yitzchok and Ishmael as Avraham’s sons, [but not in the chronological order of their births, to remind us that the principle of preference for the firstborn was ignored. Ed.] In connection with the sons of Keturah, described as the concubine of Avraham, Chronicles does not even spell out that Avraham fathered Keturah’s sons. In fact, in verse 34 of that chapter in Chronicles, the fact that Avraham fathered Yitzchok is repeated once more, no such repetition being made concerning Ishmael.

ואלה תולדת, And these are the developments, etc. Why did the Torah mention the birth of Isaac instead of the birth of his children at this point? Why did the Torah need to tell us here that Abraham fathered Isaac?

ואלה תולדת אברהם יצחק בן אברהם אברהם. Whereas the Torah when listing Ishmael’s descendants had restricted itself to a brief summary, now when reporting about Yitzchok, the Torah elaborates a great deal more both about Yaakov and about his brother Esau.

ואלה תולדת יצחק, his biography and his descendants.

ואלה תולדות יצחק בן אברהם, אברהם הוליד את יצחק. “These are the generations of Yitzchok the son of Avraham, Avraham sired Yitzchok.” Rashi explained that the new element the Torah informs us of here, is that Yitzchok’s facial features were almost identical to that of his father Avraham. This was important because it made it impossible for people to claim that Sarah had been impregnated by Avimelech while being kept a prisoner there. Others believe that the reason that the Torah here repeated information we have long been familiar with, is to tell us that Avraham did not only produce Yitzchok physically, but he raised him in his image so that he represented a true continuation of Avraham’s teachings and their impact on his surroundings. This is why people would refer to him primarily as בן אברהם, although he had been named יצחק. Ibn Ezra explains that that the very word הוליד, does not only mean to provide the semen for such a child, but to raise it, educate it, etc. This was also what the Torah had in mind in Genesis 50,23 when the children of Machir, son of Menashe, are described as יולדו על ברכי יוסף, normally translated as “were born on the knees of Joseph.” Surely, what the Torah meant was that Joseph, their grandfather, was still able to become an influence in shaping these children’s character. Nachmanides writes that it is appropriate when speaking of someone’s descendants, to first list his own genealogy. Yichuss, never starts in a vacuum, except with the first man, of course. It is the Torah’s custom, when dealing with people who are of the elite, to list their founding father. The Torah was compelled to do this here in light of having written in 25,12 ואלה תולדות ישמעאל בן אברהם אשר ילדה לו הגר, “these are the generations of Ishmael, son of Avraham, whom Hagar had born for him.” If the Torah had only written:ואלה תולדות יצחק בן אברהם, without adding אברהם הוליד את יצחק, we would have equated Yitzchok to Ishmael. As it is, the Torah made plain that we would understand that the only תולדה of Avraham which counts is Yitzchok, and no other biological offspring of Avraham. This is again to remind us that G’d had told Avraham כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע, “you will forever be exclusively identified with Yitzchok as your true seed.” 25.20 בקחתו את רבקה, “when he married Rivkah, etc.” Rashi claims that Rivkah was only three years old when she became married to Yitzchok. This is very difficult to accept in view of the fact that the Torah had referred to her repeatedly as נערה, a term used for girls at least 12 years old. This in turn would raise the question why Yitzchok did not divorce Rivkah after she had not born a child after 10 years of marriage, and according to the Talmud Ketuvot 64, in that event a husband should divorce his wife. If so why did Yitzchok even wait for 20 years before he prayed for Rivkah to have children? The Talmud answers the question by explaining that Yitzchok’s situation was unusual in that Rivkah had been biologically unable to have children during the first ten years of her marriage as she had been too young to bear a healthy child. In the Sifri, a sage is quoted giving Rivkah’s age at her marriage as 14 years. Such divergences of opinion between different sages quoted in a Midrash are not unusual, although in this instance that sage has to confront the question why it took Yitzchok 20 years before he prayed for children.

Yaakov and Eisov who are discussed in this parshah. Meaning: wherever it is written, “And these,” it is a continuation of that which preceded. Just as Avraham fathered a righteous son and a wicked one, so too did Yitzchok father a righteous son and a wicked one.

Wenn wir bedenken, wie ausführlich im folgenden Verse die Abstammung, Verwandtschaft und Herkunft Rebekkas nochmals vorgeführt wird, so kann uns die Wiederholung der kurzen Notiz: אברהם הוליד את יצחק nicht Wunder nehmen. Diese Ver schiedenheit der beiderseitigen Abstammung erscheint als die tiefeingreifende Ursache alles folgenden.

יצחק בן אברהם, אברהם הוליד את יצחק, “Yitzchok the son of Avraham; Avraham sired Yitzchok. The numerical value of the letters in the word הוליד, is equivalent to the numerical value of the word דומה, “to be a look a like;” it suggests that Avraham and Yitzchok’s facial features made them look as if they were clones.

ואלה תולדות יצחק, “and these were the descendants of Yitzchok;” previously the Torah had listed the descendants of Yishmael after the descendants of Keturah; now the Torah goes into details of Yitzchok’s descendants.

אברהם הוליד את יצחק ABRAHAM BEGAT ISAAC — Just because Scripture wrote, “Isaac, son of Abraham” it felt compelled to say “Abraham begat Isaac”, because the cynics of that time said, “Sarah became with child of Abimelech. See how many years she lived with Abraham without becoming with child”. What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? He shaped Isaac’s facial features exactly similar to those of Abraham’s, so that everyone had to admit that Abraham begat Isaac. This is what is stated here: that Isaac was the son of Abraham, for there is evidence that Abraham begat Isaac (Midrash Tanchuma, Toldot 1).

ABRAHAM BEGOT ISAAC. Rashi comments: “Since it was written, Isaac, Abraham’s son, it became necessary for Scripture to say, Abraham begot Isaac, since the scoffers of the generation³Those who did not believe in the Divine Providence that guided Abraham’s destiny. were saying, ‘It was from Abimelech that Sarah became pregnant.’ Therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, formed Isaac’s facial features similar to those of Abraham so that all should say,⁴“Say.” In our text of Rashi: “testify.” Abraham begot Isaac.”
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra further says that the meaning of the word holid (begot) is “bring up and raise,” as is the expression, ‘Yuldu’ (were raised) upon Joseph’s knees,⁵Further, 50:23. The word yuldu there could not mean “were born,” for it would then mean that Joseph’s great grandchildren were actually born upon his knees. It must mean “raised.” Similarly, it means here, “Abraham raised Isaac.” even as it says, And he sent them away from Isaac his son.⁶Above, 25:6, referring to the other children that Abraham sent away. Thus it is clear that only Isaac was raised by Abraham.
In my opinion the correct reason [that Scripture states here, Abraham begot Isaac], is that it now reverts and begins the genealogy with the founding father, in consonance with Scriptural custom, which is to revert to the head of the ancestry when dealing with people of distinction.⁷The Hebrew anshei hama’alah, which literally means “men of elevation,” refers to spiritual or political distinction. Similarly, it is written in the book of Chronicles, The sons of Shem: Elam and Asshur, and Arpachshad, and Lud, and Aram, and Uz, and Hul, and Gether, and Meshech. And Arpachshad begot Shelah, and Shelah begot Eber.⁸I Chronicles 1:17-18. After Scripture concluded this listing, it began again by saying, Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah,⁹Ibid., Verse 24. This is explained by the fact that Shem is the head of Abraham’s ancestry. Hence Scripture reverts to him in tracing the generations. until, Abram, the same is Abraham.¹⁰Ibid., Verse 27. So also in the genealogy of Benjamin in the book of Chronicles, Scripture reverts to previous generations and begins, And Ner begot Kish, and Kish begot Saul.¹¹Ibid., 9:39. Saul was king of Israel. Hence Scripture reverts to his founding ancestor. Here also [the Torah reverts to the founding father and says], Abraham begot Isaac, and Isaac begot Jacob, as Scripture will soon mention.
It is necessary that Scripture return to relate this¹²“This” refers to the statement, Abraham begot Isaac. For the purpose of indicating Jacob’s distinction it would have been sufficient to mention, And these are the generations of Isaac, Abraham’s son. Merely mentioning Abraham in this connection would have satisfied the Scriptural principle of reverting to the founding father in the case of “people of distinction.” Why then did the Torah continue, Abraham begot Isaac? Ramban proceeds to resolve this difficulty in accordance with Scriptural textual principles as opposed to Rashi, quoted above, who resorted to an Aggadic explanation: “Since the scoffers of the generation were saying etc.” since it said, And these are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham’s son.¹³Above, 25:12. Now, had it only said, And these are the generations of Isaac, Abraham’s son, it would appear that Scripture equated Ishmael and Isaac with respect to genealogy and distinction, all the more so since it mentioned the firstborn first.¹⁴Thus, Ishmael, the firstborn son of Abraham, would seem to be more significant than Isaac since he was referred to in exactly the same manner as Isaac and additionally he was mentioned first. Hence it became necessary to augment Isaac’s distinction by saying, Abraham begot Isaac. Furthermore it would have been fitting that it begin with Abraham¹⁵In other words, instead of saying, And these are the generations of Isaac, it would have been proper that Scripture begin with Abraham, but Scripture had to avoid this for reasons explained further on in the text. and say, “These are the generations of Abraham.” But Scripture did not wish to do this in order to avoid listing Ishmael and the children of Keturah.¹⁶Above, 25:1-4. It is for this reason that Scripture returns and completes the verse by stating, Abraham begot Isaac, as if to say that it is he [Isaac] alone who is Abraham’s offspring. It is considered as if he [Abraham] did not beget anyone else, just as it says, For in Isaac shall seed be called to thee.¹⁷Ibid., 21:12. It is for this reason that it also says above, And these are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s handmaid, bore unto Abraham:¹³Above, 25:12. the phrase, whom Hagar, etc., is for the honor of Isaac, as if to say that the genealogy of these generations is not traceable to Abraham, rather they are the children of the handmaid, even as it says, And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation.¹⁸Ibid., Verse 13. Scripture does also similarly in the book of Chronicles. At first it states: The sons of Abraham; Isaac and Ishmael. These are their generations: the first born of Ishmael, Nebaioth.¹⁹I Chronicles 1:28-29. Then it mentions, And the sons of Keturah, Abraham’s concubine: she bore Zimran.²⁰Ibid., Verse 32. Now it would have been logical to follow this by saying, “the sons of Isaac,” but instead it reverts and begins: And Abraham begot Isaac. The sons of Isaac: Esau, and Israel.²¹Ibid., Verse 32. The repetition, And Abraham begot Isaac, is necessary lest we equate “the sons of Ishmael” with “the sons of Isaac.”

אברהם הוליד את יצחק, only Yitzchok is truly called Avraham’s seed.

אברהם הוליד את יצחק, we are told in Baba Metzia 86 that Yitzchok’s facial features were so similar to those of his father that anyone ever encountering Yitzchok immediately knew that he must be the son of Avraham. The reason that this had been arranged so by G’d was that when someone claims to have become a father in his old age, some people tend to doubt the “father’s” claim, assuming that the woman who had born that child must have been unfaithful to her husband, or that at least the baby now presented as this father’s was in fact a foundling. Yitzchok’s amazing similarity to his father precluded anyone from making such spurious accusations. Another reason that the Torah repeated something which we all knew, i.e. that Avraham had sired Yitzchok, was that Yitzchok possessed the same virtues and wonderful qualities which Avraham excelled in, so that it was clear who must have been his father not only physically, but that the same father also transmitted a spiritual legacy to his son.

Because the scoffers of the generations were saying... Re’m writes: The reason that Scripture needed to verify that Yitzchok was Avraham’s son was because [the Torah’s writing of, “And these are the descendants of Yitzchok son of Avraham,”] brought about the scoffers of the generation to claim that Sarah conceived from Avimelech. But Re’m’s reason is not correct. Because if so, let it not write the “and” [which connects it to the preceding narrative.] And let it not write the ה [of אברהם, but rather omit mention of Avraham altogether]. It should say simply, אלה תולדות יצחק, as it says אלה תולדות נח (6:9) and אלה תולדות יעקב (37:2). [This way, Scripture would not elicit the scoffing in the first place.] Rather, Rashi means as follows: Our Parshah discusses Yaakov and Eisov, one of whom was righteous, and the other, wicked. Due to them, our verse needs to offer explanation. So we need not ask why it writes “And these,” and אברהם, because [the answer is:] The scoffers of the generations were already claiming at the time of Yitzchok’s birth [that Sarah conceived] from Avimelech. And now, they found support for their claim! One son [of Yitzchak’s] was righteous like Sarah, and the other, wicked like Avimelech. [They claimed] that both sons would be righteous if they came from Avraham. [Our Parshah is thus connected to an earlier narrative, explaining why it says, “And these.”] This is the reason it was necessary to say, “Yitzchok son of Avraham,” and support it by saying, “Avraham was the father of Yitzchok,” [implying that Yitzchok’s face resembled Avraham’s]. And this is why Rashi concludes by saying: “This is the meaning of what is written here....” It is written here because one son was righteous and the other wicked, [as discussed in our Parshah]. Otherwise, it would be written in another place. (Nachalas Yaakov)

The intent of the Torah may be understood thus. "And these are Isaac's developments," refers to events that are mentioned later on in this פרשה. Seeing the Torah will speak about the sons of Isaac, and Isaac himself was not originally capable of siring children since his own existence had been rooted in the "left" side of the emanations [until the fact that he submitted to the binding on the altar resulted in his "graduating" to the status of someone born under the aegis of the "right" side of the emanations (kabbalistic concept) compare 22,2 Ed.], the reader might have asked how Isaac could sire children at all? The Torah therefore hints in this way that the fact that Abraham had fathered Isaac enabled him to bestow upon Isaac the ability to beget children.

אברהם הוליד את יצחק, “Avraham sired Yitzchok.” The Torah appears to repeat itself here because it did not refer again to Yitzchok’s mother as opposed to 25,12 where it stressed that Yishmael’s mother was Hagar, stressing that she was of Egyptian origin. Were it not for this detail, I might have said that the reason why the Torah repeated the line that Avraham was Yitzchok’s father was another way of saying that Yitzchok was raised in his father’s house, similar to Moses, of whom the Torah reported that as soon as Pharaoh’s daughter had brought him to Pharaoh’s palace he was raised as if he had been her son. (Exodus 2,10) The repetition is meant to stress that of all the (eight) sons that Avraham fathered, Yitzchok was by far the most important one (for the Jewish people) An alternate explanation: Yitzchok’s father was not Avram but Avraham. As long as Avram’s name had not been changed he had not been able to sire Yitzchok. A third explanation: if you were to ask why the Torah repeated this information, as if Avraham had numerous sons? The Torah wished to stress that ultimately Avraham’s historical stature was assured only by his son Yitzchok. The Torah hints at a famous line by King Solomon in Proverbs 17,6: עטרת זקנים בני בנים, “the crown of the elders are their grandchildren, but the glory of their children are their parents.”

Alternately, the Torah may refer to Yevamot 64, where we learn that when two righteous people offer a prayer simultaneously, if one of them is also the son of a righteous person G'd will listen to his prayer first. This is why the Torah described G'd as listening to Isaac's prayer in 25,22. Accordingly, the words: אברהם הוליד את יצחק means that Abraham's righteousness was a factor in G'd enabling Isaac to have children.

ואלה תולדות יצחק בן אברהם, אברהם הוליד את יצחק , “and these are the descendants of Yitzchak the son of Avraham; Avraham fathered Yitzchak.” Tanchuma Toldot 6 explains that we find an interesting parallel between Avraham and Yitzchak on one side and David and his son Kilav. When David’s messengers had gone to see Naval and asked for some material assistance, (Samuel I 25,11) the latter replied: “Who is David Who is the son of Yishai? There are many slaves today who run away from their masters....Should I take my water, my bread, and my meat, which I slaughtered for the benefit of my shearers and give it to people whom I do not know whence they have come?” When David heard this he made ready with his men to assault Naval and to take what they wanted. At that point, Avigayil, Naval’s wife, hastened to take 200 loaves of bread, two jars of wine, five dressed sheep, etc., and she told her servants to carry these ahead of her as a gift offering for David and his men. (Avigayil succeeded in persuading David not to act violently against her husband.) The Book of Samuel continues (verse 38) to describe that ten days after this event Naval took sick with a stroke and died. Upon hearing this, David proposed marriage to Avigayil his widow. After Avigayil accepted his proposal, David did not sleep with her for three months in order to avoid the suspicion that any child born to them would be suspected as having been fathered by Avigayil’s first husband. After the three months had passed, David had marital relations with Avigayil and she conceived and gave birth to a son named כלאב, meaning כולו אב “he looked entirely like his father (David),” to preclude anyone thinking that he had been fathered by Naval.

A further meaning may be connected to Bereshit Rabbah 63,2 which explains Isaiah 29,22, where the prophet describes the as yet unborn Jacob as having redeemed Abraham, i.e. saved him from Nimrod's furnace. Had it not been for Jacob's merit Abraham might not have survived that experience. Our verse then would hint that it was only the combined merit of Jacob and Isaac that enabled Abraham to live long enough to beget Isaac.

The wording of our verse contains an additional meaning of the word תולדת, "developments, offspring, generations." The true "offspring" of the righteous are their good deeds. The various trials Isaac underwent during his life are not specifically described as such by the Torah, although it was he who offered his life to G'd on the altar at Moriah. There are even commentators (such as lbn Ezra 22,4) who claim that Isaac submitted only against his will. In order to prevent us from arriving at such a conclusion the Torah describes Isaac once more as a true offspring of Abraham, someone who was in no way inferior to his father in his love for and obedience to G'd. This is stressed both by the word בן אברהם and the conjunctive letter ו before the word אלה. Isaac continued to accumulate meritorious deeds just as Abraham had done before him.

The Torah may also simply hint that Isaac had only one son who followed in the footsteps of Abraham, i.e. "and these are the generations of Isaac, the one who was a true son of Abraham."

Still another meaning may be gleaned from the wording "Abraham begat Isaac." Whereas Isaac did indeed match Abraham in good deeds, he could not receive the same credit since he had his father as an example and could model himself accordingly. Abraham was unique. He was "self-made," did not have a father who served as his role model. This was the reason that the prophet Isaiah (Isaiah 41,8) quotes G'd as describing Abraham as "the one who loved Him." Abraham had had to initiate this love towards his Creator without the Creator having served as a guiding light for him first.

Another reason that Isaac is described as the son of Abraham here once again is to teach us that a צדיק who is himself the son of a צדיק is in class by himself, not to be compared to a צדיק who is the son of a רשע. Even though Bereshit Rabbah 38,12 states that Abraham's father Terach became a penitent before he died, he had been wicked for most of his life. The activities of a sinful father cast a pall over the spiritual light spread by the son. When looked at from that vantage point Isaac was better prepared for a pious life than his father. All this is included in the wording ואלה תולדת יצחק בך אברהם.

Isaac did not experience all the painful experiences that Abraham endured. The Torah explains the reason why by writing that he was the son of Abraham. He was the first beneficiary of his father Abraham's great and cumulative merit. If Abraham experienced far more turbulence in his life this was because it could not be said of him that a great man fathered him.