Kommentar zu Dewarim 2:23

והעוים הישבים בחצרים וגו׳ BUT THE AVIM WHO DWELL IN HAZERIM etc. —The Avim are part of the Philistine people, for they are enumerated together with them in the Book of Joshua (Joshua 13:3), as it is said, “The five lords of the Philistines, the Gazathites, and the Ashdothites, and the Eshkalonites, the Gittites, and the Ekronites; also the Avim”. But because of the oath which Abraham had sworn to Abimelech, king of the Philistines (Genesis 21:24), Israel would have been unable to take their land out of their possession; but, says God, I brought the Caphtorites against them and they destroyed them and dwelt in their stead, and now you are permitted to take it (that land) from their (the Caphtorites) possession (Chullin 60b).

AND THE AVIM THAT DWELT IN VILLAGES. Scripture is stating of the Avim that dwelt in villages — without a wall around them¹⁸⁰Leviticus 25:31. as far as Gaza which was the Canaanite border, as it is said, And the border of the Canaanite was from Zidon, as thou goest toward Gerar, unto Gaza¹⁸¹Genesis 10:19. — the Caphtorim that came forth out of Caphtor destroyed them and they dwelt in their stead. Now the Caphtorim were descendants of Mitzraim¹⁸²Ibid., Verses 13-14. and their land was not part of the gift given to Abraham; nevertheless their land was possessed by Israel because the Caphtorim had conquered it from the children of Canaan. The verse stating with reference to the land of the Philistines, for unto thee [Isaac], and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands¹⁸³Ibid., 26:3. was said for this reason: that the land [of the Philistines] originally belonged to the children of Canaan. Therefore, in the days of Joshua Israel drove out the five lords of the Philistines: the Gazite, the Ashdodite, the Ashkelonite, the Gittite, and the Ekronite; also the Avim,¹⁸⁴Joshua 13:3. for they all dwelled within the Canaanite border — in Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, and in Ekron. They [the lords] were called by the name of their place [i.e., the Gazite, the Ashdodite etc. because, although they were foreigners, after their conquest of these five Canaanite towns, they adopted their names], for they destroyed the Avim who were of the children of Canaan¹⁸⁵Ramban will later explain that the Avim are identical with the Hivites, and of the Hivites it is clearly written that they were of the children of Canaan (Genesis 10:17). who dwelled within the border of the Canaanite from Zidon, as thou goest toward Gerar, unto Gaza,¹⁸¹Genesis 10:19. and they abode in their stead. Zidon also belonged to the Philistines, as it is written, And also what are ye to Me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the regions of Philistia?¹⁸⁶Joel 4:4.
In my opinion the Avim are identical with the Hivites [who were of the children of Canaan],¹⁸⁷Genesis 10:15-17. for such is the customary way of Scripture to alter names, as we have said, so long as they indicate the same meaning, and “the serpent”¹⁸⁸Indicated by the name Chivim (the Hivites), which is of the term chivah — a snake. ye’aveit (curves) itself.¹⁸⁹This suggests the name Avim. Thus the Chivim are identical with the Avim, as both names suggest the snake and its characteristic of crawling crookedly. And in Bereshith Rabbah [we find the following text]:¹⁹⁰Bereshith Rabbah 26:17. “Said Rabbi Eleazar the son of Rabbi Shimon: They were as expert in [tasting] earth [to determine which crops it is capable of producing] as the serpent [whose only food is the earth]. In the Galilee they call chivya (a serpent) ivya.” The Sages used to call it achna,¹⁹¹Berachoth 19. and also chachina.¹⁹²So found in Aruch Hashalem, under the term chachan that such was the reading in the Talmud. Thus it is clear that the letters a’yin and cheth are interchangeable, which explains why the name “Avim” is identical with “Chivim.” The Rabbis have interpreted:¹⁹³Vayikra Rabbah 30:3. “‘Vayei’ather’ (and He was entreated) of him, and heard his supplication.¹⁹⁴II Chronicles 33:13. Said Rabbi Levi: In Arabia they call chatirah (an opening) atirah” [and the meaning of the verse is thus: “and the Eternal made ‘an opening’ for his prayer to be accepted”].¹⁹⁵The text refers to Menasheh, king of Judah, who for a long time worshipped the idols. When the Assyrians came and carried him off to Babylon and placed him in an oven heated from below, Menasheh began calling upon idol after idol to rescue him. When no help came he turned his supplication to G-d. The attribute of mercy prevented Menasheh’s repentance from being accepted because he had lived so wicked a life, but the Holy One, blessed be He, “made an opening” in the Throne of His Glory “and received his prayer” (Sanhedrin 103a). The verse concludes, He brought him back to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Ramban uses this text to prove that the letter a’yin [in the word vayei’ather — “and He was entreated”] interchanges with the cheth [vayeichather — and He made “an opening”]. This is an additional support to Ramban’s thesis that the Avim are identical with the Chivim — the Hivites. Ramban will go on to cite several further examples of the interchangeability of the letters a’yin and cheth. — In conclusion it should be noted that the episode with Menasheh, king of Judah, illustrates the efficacy of repentance under all circumstances, for even when all the “gates” were closed to his supplication, Menasheh’s prayers were yet accepted through a special “opening” in the “Throne of the Almighty.” The Rabbis have also said:¹⁹⁶Eichah Rabbathi 2:2. “How hath the Eternal ‘ya’iv’¹⁹⁷This is generally explained as being of the word av (a cloud): How hath the Eternal ‘covered with a cloud’ … The Midrash will explain it as though it were written with a cheth, as Ramban continues. the daughter of Zion in His anger!¹⁹⁸Lamentations 2:2. Rabbi Chama the son of Rabbi Chanina explained it as follows: how has the Eternal chiyeiv (assigned guilt) in His anger! There are places where they call chiva (guilt) iva.” Chavkim (rungs) are called avkim.¹⁹⁹Vayikra Rabbah, 9:1: “The prince of the kingdom of Babylon ascended seventy avkim (rungs).” See also Vol. I, p. 350. Such [interchangeability of the letters a’yin and cheth] is common in the language. Of Rabbi “Chiya” [the Rabbis say],²⁰⁰In this exact form I have not found the source for the statement. However, in Moed Katan 16b, and in Kerithoth 8a we do find Rabbi Chiya being referred to as “Iya.” “And what does ‘Iya’ say of this matter?” Our Rabbis were also accustomed to speak of heisei’ach hada’ath (distractedness or absent-mindedness) instead of hisa hada’ath [changing the a’yin of hisa to cheth of heisei’ach]. In the Jerusalem Talmud, they always [use the term] hisiya [to signify “distractedness”].²⁰¹See my Hebrew commentary p. 354, Note 2, for a number of such references. And in the Mishnah we also find:²⁰²Tahoroth 7:8. “[If someone was clean] v’heisia (and had given up the thought of) eating.” Commentators have also said of the verse ‘ushu’ and come all ye nations²⁰³Joel 4:11. The commentators referred to, are Menachem ben Saruk and Rashi. that it is like chushu (hasten ye). And in the Mechilta we find:²⁰⁴Mechilta, Pis’cha 7. “Ufasachti,²⁰⁵Exodus 12:3. Rabbi Yashiya says: Do not read ufasachti (and I will protect), but read ufusati (and I will step over), meaning that G-d, blessed be He, will ‘pass over’ the houses of the children of Israel.” He [Rabbi Yashiya] made ufasachti refer to the word p’sioth (steps) by interchanging the cheth with an a’yin.
Scripture now finished informing us about the entire land of the Hivites that was lost [to them]. Part of it was taken by [the children of] Esau²⁰⁶Verse 22. and that is forbidden to us, and part of it was taken by the Caphtorim and we may take it from them.
And in Bereshith Rabbah²⁰⁷Bereshith Rabbah 26:16. I have found that the Avim are identical with Rephaim [and not with the Hivites as we have stated hitherto]. Thus the Rabbis comment on the verse, The Nephilim were in the earth:²⁰⁸Genesis 6:4. “The Rephaim are the Avim. They were called Rephaim [of the root raphoh — weak] because the heart of anyone who beheld them became weak as wax. They were called Avim [of the term ivya — serpent] because they were as expert as a serpent [whose food is the earth] in [tasting] earth [to determine which crops it is capable of producing].” The Rabbis further said there with reference to G-d’s gift to Abraham:²⁰⁹Bereshith Rabbah 44:27. “Rabbi Dostoie in the name of Rabbi Shmuel said: Because He does not mention here [among the lands of the ten nations given to Abraham] the Hivite, therefore, He introduced the Rephaim in their place.” Now when I pondered this text, I found the matter to be true and authentic, correct and affirmed. For Moses our teacher mentioned to them the seven nations [whose lands] Israel inherited, as he said, and He shalt cast out many nations before thee, the Hittite, and the Girgashite, and the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite, seven nations greater and mightier than thou.²¹⁰Further, 7:1. Now six of these are mentioned in the gift given to Abraham,²¹¹Genesis 15:20-21. but the Hivite is not mentioned there! Then he [the Hivite] must in any case be either the Rephaim²¹²Genesis 15:20. or of the Kenite, Kenizzite, and Kadmonite²¹³Ibid., Verse 19. [all of whom are mentioned in the gift to Abraham]. All our Rabbis say²⁰⁹Bereshith Rabbah 44:27. that Israel did not inherit [the lands of] the Kenite, Kenizzite and Kadmonite, but that He will make them inherit [those lands] in the future, and about them it is said, And when the Eternal thy G-d enlarge thy boundary, as He hath sworn unto thy fathers, and give thee all the land which He promised to give unto thy fathers.²¹⁴Further, 19:8. And so also it is not mentioned anywhere that they inherited them in the days of Joshua. If so, the Rephaim given by Him to Abraham must be the Hivite, who was the sixth son of Canaan,¹⁸⁷Genesis 10:15-17. and who was called Hivi by his father; while in the days of Abraham they surnamed him Rephaim. In my opinion the name Rephaim is derived from that of the Chivi [Hivite — which as explained above denotes “a serpent”], related to the expression on the lair of the asp and on the viper’s den,²¹⁵Isaiah 11:8. for things that are hidden in the earth [like the serpent], the [Hebrew] language calls ‘rephaim’, for example: ‘ha’rephaim’ (the dead) tremble beneath the waters and the inhabitants thereof;²¹⁶Job 26:5. and the earth shall bring to life ‘rephaim’ (the dead).²¹⁷Isaiah 26:19.
Now the children of this Hivite were very numerous and, when the families of the Canaanite spread abroad,²¹⁸Genesis 10:18. this family took possession of large territories, some of them called “the land of Rephaim;” others, [“the land of] Horites;” and some, [“the land of] Avim;” and generally they were all Hivites, and they were all Rephaim, just as, among our people [there are] Ephraim, Judah, Israel — but generally speaking, all are [called] Israel. Now, these names [Rephaim, Horites, Avim] are all descriptives derived from the name Chivi [Hivite — which denotes “a serpent”] since his name was Chivi they surnamed him Rephaim from chivya (a serpent) because the serpent dwells in the holes of the earth [and things that lie hidden in the earth are called “Rephaim,” as explained above]. They were likewise called “the Horite” and “the Avim” because of their association with the term serpent, as I have explained above.²¹⁹Ramban refers to his explanation above that the letters cheth and a’yin interchange. Now since chivya is a snake, the word “Avim” likewise denotes the same. Ramban did not explain the name Chorim (Horites) above; but it is obvious that his intent is that the name is derived from the word chur (a hole), since the serpent dwells in a lair in the ground. Now the Holy One, blessed be He, gave to Abraham [the land of] the Rephaim in general,¹⁷⁰Genesis 15:20. and Moses mentioned to Israel “the Hivite”²¹⁰Further, 7:1. which was the first name by which his father [Canaan] called him,¹⁸⁷Genesis 10:15-17. for the land of Rephaim was already divided in the days of Moses and parts of it [i.e., that belonging to Moab, Ammon, and the children of Esau] were forbidden to Israel. Thus Scripture comes here to mention the subject of the entire land of the Hivites, who are Rephaim, and all that was done with it. First it states²²⁰Above, Verses 10-11. that the Emim were also of the Rephaim and the Moabites succeeded them. Then it states²²¹Verse 12. that the children of Esau succeeded the Horites, who were also of the Rephaim. And then it repeats²²²Verses 20-21. that the land of Ammon was also the land of Rephaim, and all this was forbidden to Israel. He also narrated²²³Verse 23. that the Caphtorim who came from Caphtor took part of their land [i.e., of the Avim who are also Rephaim] and that [on account of the Caphtorim’s prior conquest] it was permissible for Israel. Thus Joshua mentioned [to the children of Joseph] the land of the Perizzites and of the Rephaim²²⁴Joshua 17:15. [wherein they were to settle].
However, Rashi wrote:²²⁵On Verse 23 before us. “The Avim were of the Philistine people,²²⁶The Philistines were descendants of Mitzraim (Genesis 10:14). Thus, while according to Ramban, as explained above, the Avim who are identical with the Hivites and Rephaim were descendants of Canaan whose land was permissible to Israel, Rashi holds the Avim to have been part of the Philistines who were descendants of Mitzraim. Now, both Mitzraim and Canaan were sons of Ham (ibid., Verse 6). But only the land of the children of Canaan was given to Abraham. How Rashi’s opinion affects the subject under consideration will be made clear in the text which follows. for they are enumerated together with them in the Book of Joshua: [the five lords of the Philistines:] the Gazite, and the Ashdodite, the Ashkelonite, the Gittite, and the Ekronite, also the Avim.¹⁸⁴Joshua 13:3. But, because of the oath that Abraham had sworn to Abimelech,²²⁷Ibid., 21:24. Israel could not go into their land to remove them from their territory. Therefore, I brought upon them the Caphtorim and they destroyed them [i.e., the Avim who were Philistines] and they dwelled in their stead; now you are permitted to take it from them [i.e., the Caphtorim].” But the intent of Rashi’s words are not clear to me. For Scripture [in the verse from Joshua quoted above]¹⁸⁴Joshua 13:3. does not enumerate the Avim among the Philistines; instead it refers to the five lords of the Philistines¹⁸⁴Joshua 13:3. and lists them — and then mentions the Avim as a separate people. The verse states that from the Shihor, which is before Egypt, even unto the border of Ekron northward¹⁸⁴Joshua 13:3. — all this is accounted the land of Canaan; [the lands of] the five lords of the Philistines that it lists, with the Avim who are another people. But according to the Rabbi [Rashi] the land of the Avim became permissible to Israel because the Caphtorim had taken it from them, but who made permissible [the lands of] the other lords of the Philistines?²²⁸But according to Ramban, as explained at the beginning of this verse, the Philistines had taken their land from the children of Canaan, all of whose lands were given to Abraham. Since the Avim [identical with the Hivite who is mentioned in Genesis 10:17 as a son of Canaan] were one of the ten children of Canaan, it is self-understood that their land was permissible to Israel. Verse 23 here, telling that the Caphtorim [who were of the children of Mitzraim, like the Philistines — Genesis 10:14] destroyed the Avim, serves the purpose of informing Israel that they should not be misled into thinking that the land is forbidden to them because the Caphtorim were not descended from Canaan. Therefore, the verse informs us that the Caphtorim had taken it from the Avim who are Canaanites and, consequently, their land is permissible to Israel. The same was true of the five lords of the Philistines who had taken the land away from the Canaanites; hence Joshua was permitted to take it from them. All this explains Ramban’s interpretation. Rashi, however, wrote that the Avim were part of the Philistine people, and Verse 23 before us informs us that their land was made permissible to Israel because the Caphtorim had taken it from them. On this Ramban asks: if so, what made the lands of the five lords of the Philistines permissible to Israel? There are other questions as well, which Ramban raises on Rashi’s interpretation. And why did the Israelites conquer all of them, for Joshua was the one who suppressed the Philistines and the Avim! Moreover, [according to Rashi] why should the land of the Philistines belong to Abraham altogether and why did Abimelech find it necessary to make his covenant [with Abraham]²²⁷Ibid., 21:24. in this matter, when the Philistines are of the children of Mitzraim,²²⁹Genesis 10:13-14. and so were the Caphtorim,²²⁹Genesis 10:13-14. and they were not of the ten nations [given to Abraham]?²³⁰Ibid., 15:19-21. — The question on Rashi is thus made all the stronger: If the Avim and the Caphtorim were Philistines, why should the land of the Avim have become permissible to Israel as a result of its conquest by the Caphtorim? Whichever of the two held the land, it was a Philistine possession and Philistia was not permissible to Israel. But the [fact of the] matter is the opposite! For the Caphtorim and the Philistines [children of Mitzraim] destroyed the Canaanites, as indicated by the fact that Abimelech [a Philistine, not a Canaanite] was the king of Gerar, [indicating that the Canaanites had been driven out],²³¹Ibid., 20:2. and the Gazite dwelled in Gaza, and Zidon was a Philistine city. All these were part of the Canaanite territories, as it is said, And the border of the Canaanite was from Zidon, as thou goest toward Gerar, unto Gaza.²³²Ibid., 10:19.
Now it appears to me that the Philistines and Caphtorim [children of Mitzraim] were considered one people, and so Scripture states, For the Eternal will spoil the Philistines, the remnant of the isle of Caphtor.²³³Jeremiah 47:4. And this is the sense of the expression [in the verse before us], the Caphtorim that came forth out of Caphtor. It was out of Caphtor that a small [band of] people came forth to sojourn where they could find a place.²³⁴Judges 17:8. They destroyed the Avim who were of the seed of Canaan that dwelled as far as Gaza, and the Caphtorim dwelled in their stead in Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron — all these places being within the borders of the land of Canaan and they divided it among their five lords. The name of these districts was Philistia and they were called Philistines. The Avim were left with the remainder of their land as Joshua mentioned.²³⁵This refers to Joshua 13:3 [quoted above] where, after mentioning the five lords of the Philistines, he cites ‘also the Avim.’ According to Ramban this indicates that the Philistines [who are identical with the Caphtorim, as explained] took but part of the land of the Avim [as stated in Verse 23 before us] while the Avim were still left with part of their land. Now, since the Avim are identical with the Hivites who were of the children of Canaan, Joshua was permitted to take the entire original land of the Avim — what had been conquered by the five lords of the Philistines, as well as what was still in the hands of the Avim. It is this which is meant by the verse the Philistines, the remnant of the isle of Caphtor,²³³Jeremiah 47:4. for the Caphtorim were Philistines. This is also the meaning of the expression, whence went forth the Philistines and the Caphtorim,²³⁶Genesis 10:14. as I have explained there.²³⁷Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 149-150. As to what Scripture states, Have I not brought up Israel out of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor, and Aram from Kir?²³⁸Amos 9:7. — [which would seem to indicate that the Philistines were a separate nation that was redeemed from Caphtor just as Israel was a separate nation that was redeemed from Egypt — thus contradicting Ramban’s thesis that the Philistines and the Caphtorim were one nation — the explanation is as follows:] The verse there is speaking of the wars of the Eternal. It was He Who brought up Israel from the land of Egypt by signs, and by wonders, and by war,²³⁹Further, 4:34. and He brought up the Philistines from Caphtor, their land, because He brought them forth from there, to deliver unto them the Avim through a great miracle and they destroyed them, and dwelt in their stead [as stated in Verse 23 before us] and they left the land of Caphtor to their brothers.²⁴⁰Thus it is again established that the Caphtorim are identical with the Philistines, as they were one people. Or the matter may have been as I have mentioned, that the Avim, the children of Canaan who first dwelled in the land, were known as Philistines because the name of the land was Philistia. When the Caphtorim that came forth out of Caphtor subdued them, they exiled some of them to their land Caphtor which was part of the land of Egypt, settling them among their brothers [the Caphtorim]. G-d redeemed them [i.e., the Avim who were known as Philistines] from there and they returned to their original place [in the land of Canaan]. We know not in which generation this happened. Thus the Philistines were inhabitants of the land of Canaan, and, therefore, Scripture states, The word of the Eternal is against you, O Canaan, the land of the Philistines; I will even destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant.²⁴¹Zephaniah 2:5. And so Israel did not drive out the Philistines until the time of the oath had expired, when three generations²⁴²The oath was specifically limited to three generations: Now therefore swear unto me here by G-d that thou [Abraham] wilt not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my son’s son (Genesis 21:23). of Philistines in that land of Abimelech had died. And so the Rabbis have said in the Midrash:²⁴³Tanchuma, Beshalach 1. “For that was ‘near,’²⁴⁴Exodus 13:17. [meaning] the oath which Abraham had sworn to Abimelech was yet ‘near’ [i.e., was still in effect, because] his grandson was still living” [and therefore G-d did not lead the people through Philistia after the exodus from Egypt]. This is a fitting and correct interpretation of this subject.
However, in the Gemara [of Tractate Chullin] in the Chapter V’eilu Treifoth²⁴⁵“These are accounted treifah” among cattle. It is the third chapter of Tractate Chullin. The text quoted is on 60b. the Rabbis have cited an opinion in a dispute agreeing with the words of Rashi [that the Avim were Philistines]. Rav²⁴⁶Rav, the leading teacher in the first generation of Amoraim in Babylon, laid the foundation for the great Yeshivoth in Babylon. He was a pupil of Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi, also called Rabbeinu Hakadosh, the redactor of the Mishnah in Eretz Yisrael. Rav returned to his native Babylon where he founded the Academy of Sura which existed for about eight hundred years without interruption. His real name was Abba, but because of the great respect accorded to him he was called “Rav,” as Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi was called simply “Rabbi.” said there that the Avim came from Teman, and we learned a Beraitha²⁴⁷See Vol. II, p. 133, Note 209. that concurs with him. Teman is of the seed of Edom, as it is written, Of Edom, thus said the Eternal of hosts: Is wisdom no more in Teman?²⁴⁸Jeremiah 49:7. This is possible, and, [if so] Scripture is stating of the Avim, who are of the children of Esau, [that] part of their land was made permissible [to Israel] through the Caphtorim [who took it from the Avim], just as [parts of the lands of] Ammon and Moab were made permissible by Sihon [conquering them]. And what I have written is good and upright.

והעוים היושבים בחצרים עד עזה, even though the latter belonged to the descendants of Esau or the Philistines with whom Avraham had made a solemn non aggression pact, the Israelites were not now denied the right to conquer these lands. The reason they could do so now was that the Philistines no longer owned the land in question כפתורים היוצאימ מכפתור, the Cretans emigrating from Crete because their island could not contain them all and who were seeking “lebensraum,” had annihilated the Avim and replaced them in that land. When the Israelites conquered the land in which Avimelech used to be king, it already had been lost by Avimelech. [Perhaps the reason that this coastal strip was still known as “the land of the Philistines,” long after the Israelites drove out the Canaanites, is the same as when the Torah referred to the land of the descendants of Ammon as “the land of the Refaim,” (verse 20) the latter having been its original owners.” Ed.]

והעוים היושבים בחצרים עד עשזה, “as well as the Avites who dwelled as far south as Gaza.” Nachmanides explains that all these details are provided by Moses to show that although the Caphtorim are not part of the 7 Canaanite nations G’d promised the descendants of Avraham, seeing that they had settled in the coastal plain only after having expelled the Avites, a Canaanite tribe, when the Israelites later on occupied those lands this was quite legal. Further more, in Genesis 26,3 G’d confirmed the fact that the land of the Philistines was included in the Holy Land, as Yitzchok was in the land of the Philistines at the time when G’d promised him ”these lands.” Name changes by people who had supplanted others were historically quite frequent, and Bereshit Rabbah 26,7 mentions in particular that the Chivi, as we mentioned a name analogous to נחש, snake, was so- called as these people were experts in what roots were safe to eat and which not, something extremely important to snakes which had been condemned by G’d to eat עפר, things growing directly in the earth. Moreover, in certain parts of the galil the word עוי was used interchangeably with chivi. Moses concludes by informing us that at that time all these lands were occupied by the Chivi, part of which used to belong to the descendants of Esau. Bereshit Rabbah identifies the Avim with the Refa-im, speaking also about the gift promised by G’d to Avraham, seeing that no mention is made by Moses here of the Chivi, it is logical that the Refa-im replace that tribe in Moses’ recital here. This also seems to be born out when Moses in Deut. 7,1 speaks of seven nations G’d will fling out of the land and replace them with the Israelites, and six of the seven are identical with the names mentioned by G’d when He promised the land to the Israelites, the seventh, the Chivi, not having been included in the list in Genesis 15,19-21 where the Refa-im, apparently is meant to be identical with the Chivi. If not that, the “Chivi” might be either one of the three other tribes mentioned in that promise and none of the others, i.e. the Keyni, K’nizi, or Kadmoni. Our sages claim that Israel never inherited the lands of the three last mentioned tribes, and that this will be fulfilled only after the coming of the Messiah. If that is factual, there can be no question but that the “Chivi” is identical with the Refa-im in the promise to Avraham in chapter 15 of Genesis. The latter (Chivi) was the 6th of the sons of Canaan. (Genesis 10,17) His father had called him “Chivi.” However in the days of Avraham, over 200 years later, his descendants were known as Refa-im. Personally, I feel that Chivi was a nickname, based on his familiarity with the various plants and their roots, as I mentioned earlier. The word רפאים is also used in Scripture as describing things buried underground, as we know from Job 26,5 הרפאים יחוללו מתחת מים ושוכניהם, “are dead things formed beneath the water and the inhabitants thereof?” Or, Isaiah 26,19 וארץ רפאים תפיל, “you make the land cast out the dead.” The children of the Chivi increased drastically, and when the Canaanites eventually took possession of the land now known as the land of Canaan, the family of the Chivi grabbed a major share of that land. All these names describe in one way or another the sixth son of Canaan, Chivi. Since at the time of Avraham the tribe was known as Refa-im, G’d referred to that tribe by the name known to Avraham. Moses, here, refers to it by its original name. Some of these lands had been known as the land of the Chorim, etc. At any rate, at the time of Moses the lands formerly belonging to the Refa-im had already been parceled out to other tribes/nations and their names had been changed. Seeing that some of the lands promised to Avraham were not included in the lands that Israel was about to invade and conquer, Moses had to identify which lands were still forbidden to the Israelites to invade. Hence we have the references to the Eymim, the Bney Ammon, etc. On the other hand, lands that on the face of it had no connection to the Canaanites, such as the regions occupied by the Philistines, or the Caphtorim, were mentioned in order that we know that the people dwelling in them had themselves been interlopers. Let us now turn to Rashi’s explanation that the Avim were descendants of the Philistines, seeing that they are lumped together in the Book of Joshua, 13,3 and that the Israelites at this time were unable to dispossess them on account of the oath given by Avraham to Avimelech in Genesis 21,23 (which spanned 4 generations) Seeing that the Philistines there had been replaced by the Caphtorim, Avraham’s oath no longer applied. Nachmanides challenges this interpretation by Rashi, claiming that the Avim have not been included under the heading of the Philistines, as in the quotation from Joshua the five leaders of the Philistines are mentioned first, without any mention of the Avim; only subsequently are the Avim listed as a separate nation. [Presumably, Nachmanides’ argument is based on the fact that the verse begins mentioning that there were only 5 such leaders of the Philistines, so that anyone mentioned after those five have been named is not included. Ed.] Furthermore, assuming that the land of the Avim had become permitted to the Israelites because they were not the original inhabitants there but had been replaced already by a previous invading force by the Caphtorim, who permitted the lands of the Philistines? [We know they had been there at the time of Avraham and at the time of Moses. Ed.] What reason was there that the lands of the Philistines should ever become part of the land of Israel so that Avimelech had felt threatened and asked Avraham for a non-aggression pact covering the next four generations? After all, the Philistines did not belong to the seven Canaanite tribes whose land G’d had promised to Avraham? The Philistines are after all descended from Mitzrayim, the second son of Cham, not of Canaan his fourth son! In light of all the above the true historical facts are that the Philistines as well as the Caphtorim had invaded and captured some of the lands previously occupied by the Canaanites, else how come Avimelech was King in Gerar, a territory at one time belonging to the Canaanites? The Philistines as well as the Caphtorim expanded southwards in the coastal plain and conquered Gaza, Ashkelon, Gat and Ekron from the Cananites. This made it legal for the Israelites to occupy lands that had been illegally acquired by its residents. Those lands, according to G’d’s promise to Avraham, had been intended as their ancestral heritage. As it happened, the Israelites did not actually conquer that coastal plain until long after the time frame provided for in Avraham’s oath to Avimelech had expired. Three generations of Philistines had already died before Joshua began his conquest of the land of Canaan.

That Avrohom swore to Avimelech, etc. Rashi is answering the question: How does, “Arise to travel and cross, etc.” relate to the previous verse? [For Scripture implies:] Since the Caftorim destroyed the Avim and settled in their stead, this is the reason to arise to travel! Rashi answers: “Because of the oath, etc.”

והעוים היושבים בחצרים עד עזה, “and the Avvim who dwelled in villages as far south as Gaza.’ Moses now elaborates where the Chivvi is located. The letters ח and ע are used interchangeably. Do you want to know where to find the Chivvim? They dwell in chatzerim, They were so powerful that they did not bother to live in cities surrounded by a security wall, as they relied on their physical prowess to protect them. The land called: eretz refa-im, was identical with the kingdom of the giant Og, (3,13) it had been promised to Avram and by now the time had come to inherit it and to settle there. However, the land of Moav which the latter had taken away from Eymim, who were giants like the Refaim, are not identical with the Refa-im that G–d promised to Avram, seeing that Moabites called them by a different name,; also the land now occupied by the Ammonites who had dispossessed the Zamzumim and were not the same Refaim as the ones who had lived there hundreds of years earlier.

כפתורים היוצאים מכפתור השמידם וישבו תחתם. Knowing history you will know that G’d will give you the land that He has sworn to your ancestors.