Comentario sobre Génesis 12:6

ויעבר אברם בארץ AND ABRAHAM PASSED THROUGH THE LAND —he entered it.

AND ABRAM PASSED THROUGH THE LAND. I will tell you a principle by which you will understand all the coming portions of Scripture concerning Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It is indeed a great matter which our Rabbis mentioned briefly, saying:³³Tanchuma Lech Lecha, 9. “Whatever has happened to the patriarchs is a sign to the children.” It is for this reason that the verses narrate at great length the account of the journeys of the patriarchs, the digging of the wells, and other events. Now someone may consider them unnecessary and of no useful purpose, but in truth they all serve as a lesson for the future: when an event happens to any one of the three patriarchs, that which is decreed to happen to his children can be understood.
Concerning all decisions of “the guardians [angels],”³⁴Daniel 4:14. know that when they proceed from a potential decree to a symbolic act, the decree will in any case be effected. It is for this reason that the prophets often perform some act in conjunction with the prophecies, just as Jeremiah commanded Baruch his disciple, And it shall be, when thou hast made an end of reading this book, that thou shalt bind a stone to it, and cast it into the midst of the Euphrates, and thou shalt say: Thus shall Babylon sink.³⁵Jeremiah 51:63-64. Likewise is the matter of Elisha when he put his arm on the bow [held by Joash, King of Israel]: And Elisha said, Shoot. And he shot. And he said, The Eternal’s arrow of victory, even the arrow of victory against Aram.³⁶II Kings 13:17. And it is further stated there, And the man of G-d was wroth with him, and said, Thou shouldst have smitten five or six times; then hadst thou smitten Aram till thou hadst consumed it whereas now thou shalt smite Aram but thrice.³⁷Ibid., Verse 19. It is for this reason that the Holy One, blessed be He, caused Abraham to take possession of the Land and symbolically did to him all that was destined to happen in the future to his children. Understand this principle. Now, with the help of G-d, I will begin to explain in detail the subject matter of the verses.
And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Shechem. This is the city of Shechem for such was the name of this place,³⁸Ramban differs with Ibn Ezra’s comment that the name Shechem was non-existent in the days of Abraham but is used here because Moses called it by the name by which it was known in his time. and Shechem the son of Hamor³⁹Genesis 34:2. was called by the name of his city. Now Rashi wrote, “He entered it unto the place of Shechem in order to pray on behalf of Jacob’s sons when they would come grieved from the field.”⁴⁰Ibid., 34:7. In our text of Rashi: “when they would come to fight against Shechem.” This is correct. And I add that Abraham took possession of this place at the very beginning, even before the land was given to him.⁴¹As told later in Verse 7. His taking possession of Shechem is stated in the preceding Verse 6. It was thus hinted to him that his children would first conquer this place⁴²Reference is to the capturing of the city by the sons of Jacob. See further, 34:25. before they would merit it and before the guilt of the dwellers of the land was full⁴³Further, 15:16. to warrant their exile therefrom. It is for this reason that the verse here states, And the Canaanite was then in the land.⁴⁴He took possession of this place even though the Canaanite was yet in the land. (Tur.) And when the Holy One, blessed be He, gave him the land by His Word, Abraham journeyed from there and pitched his tent between Beth-el and Ai for this was the place that Joshua captured first.⁴⁵In battle. (Joshua 8:1-24.) The capture of Jericho earlier was effected by a miracle.
It is possible that Scripture mentions, And the Canaanite was then in the land, to teach us concerning the substance of this chapter, i.e., to state that Abram came into the land of Canaan, but G-d did not show him the land He had promised him. He passed to the place of Shechem while the Canaanite, that bitter and impetuous nation,⁴⁶Habakkuk 1:6. was yet in the land, and Abram feared him. Therefore he did not build an altar to G-d. But when he came to the vicinity of Shechem at the oak of Moreh, G-d appeared to him and gave him the land, and as a result his fear departed from him for he was already assured in the land that I will show thee, and then he built an altar to G-d in order to worship Him openly.
Now eilon Moreh (the oak of Moreh) is in the vicinity of Shechem and is also called eilonei Moreh, as it is written over against Gilgal, beside ‘eilonei Moreh.’⁴⁷Deuteronomy 11:30. There in Shechem, near the Jordan, are Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal, where the Israelites arrived at the beginning of their entrance into the land.⁴⁸Sotah 36 a: “On the day Israel crossed the Jordan, they came to Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal.” Eilonei Mamre,⁴⁹“The oaks of Mamre.” (Genesis, 18:1.) however, is a place in the land of Hebron,⁵⁰As is clearly stated: Mamre… the city of Arba which is Hebron. (Ibid., 35:27.) far from the Jordan.
Know that wherever Scripture states, eilonei Mamre, the name Mamre is on account of an Amorite by that name to whom the place belonged, just as it says, And he dwelt at the oaks of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshkol and brother of Aner,⁵¹Ibid., 14:13. and wherever it says, eilon moreh or eilonei moreh,⁵²Deuteronomy 11:30. the places were so called on account of a man by the name of Moreh, but he was a Canaanite from the land of the Canaanites, who abide in the plains.⁵³Ibid. The end of this verse reads: beside the oaks of Moreh. From this Ramban derives the fact that Moreh was a Canaanite, unlike Mamre who was an Amorite. When Scripture mentions Mamre alone, it means the name of a city, just as it is said: And Jacob came unto Isaac his father unto Mamre, the city of Arba, which is Hebron;⁵⁴Genesis 35:27. Before Mamre which is Hebron.⁵⁵Ibid., 23:19. The man to whom the oaks belonged was called after the name of the city. A similar case is that of Shechem the son of Hamor, who was called Shechem after the name of the city Shechem.
In Bereshith Rabbah⁵⁶42:14. it is said, “In the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah, Mamre is the name of a place, and in the opinion of Rabbi Nechemyah, it is the name of a person.”

ויעבר אברם בארץ, Avram did not stop anywhere in his journey south through the land of Canaan until G’d appeared to him as He had said: “to the land which I will show you.” (verse 1).

ויעבר אברם בארץ. Abram traversed the land. The Torah informs us that Abraham kept moving from one location to another without any of the local inhabitants challenging him. This in spite of the fact that the Canaanites ruled in the land at the time.

ויעבר אברם..עד מקום שכם, until the outskirts of Shechem. Perhaps the locations mentioned in the Torah are the ones that any traveler who came from Charan to the land of Canaan encounters in the order in which they appear in our paragraph. Avram may have briefly lived in these locations until G’d told him to move on and criss cross the land in 13,17. According to a Midrash quoted by Rashi, Avram saw a prophetic vision of the rape of Dinah in that town, and how the sons of Yaakov would avenge that deed. He therefore stopped there and offered a prayer on behalf of the family of Yaakov, asking G’d to save them from the pursuit and hatred of the Emorites who would try and avenge their compatriots. We know that this prayer was answered from Genesis 35,5 ויהי חתת אלוקים על הערים וגו', “the fear of G’d was on these cities, etc.” [according to Eliyahu Mizrachi, the words עד מקום שכם instead of עד שכם, are hard to justify otherwise. Ed.]

ויעבר אברם בארץ עד מקום שכם, “Avram traversed the country (traveling in a southerly direction) as far as the site of the town of Shechem.” The location is mentioned to tell us that he offered a prayer there concerning the sons of Yaakov, who he foresaw, would encounter many problems associated with that location and who would engage in a war there in order to free their sister Dinah who had been captured and raped. This in spite of the fact that when he had described himself as ערירי, unable to sire offspring, G’d had assured him that he would not only have children but that he would found a great nation. He was concerned that perhaps due to a sin on his part, this promise would be long delayed in being fulfilled. Nachmanides writes that all the journeys of Avraham which are recorded here, as well as those of Yitzchok and Yaakov after him, are recorded to serve as illustrations of the principle מעשה אבות סימן לבנים, that the affairs of the patriarchs foreshadow experiences which occurred in the lives of their offspring during the history of the Jews as a people. The decrees announced by the prophets (the “wakeful ones,” according to Daniel 4,14) were based on their interpreting events in the lives of the patriarchs as foreshadowing the fate of their children and children’s children. When the prophets engaged in what appear to be merely symbolic actions [such as Jeremiah 51,63-64 giving instructions to Baruch, his disciple, to tie a stone to the book of Jeremiah after he has finished reading it, and to throw it into the river Euphrates and to say at that moment: “thus shall Babylon sink and never rise again, because of the disaster that I will bring upon it.”] Baruch was instructed to perform this act so as to make G’d’s decree more than just a potential judgment on the Babylonians. By performing a tangible, visible act, the decree was transformed from something merely potential to something actual, though the time for realization had not yet been determined. In a similar manner, all the stories related in detail about the patriarchs serve as the catalyst for eventual repetition in the lives of the Jewish people. We find a similar example in the days of Elisha (Kings II 13,15) who instructed King Joash to get a bow and arrows and to shoot out the window. Having shot an arrow, Elisha proclaimed this gesture to have been a symbol of victory for the people of Israel. He then instructed the king to pick up the arrows he had shot. The King complied. He was then instructed to strike the ground. The King struck the ground three times and stopped. (without having been told to stop) Elisha was very angry at the King and told him that if only he had continued another five or six times, he would have annihilated Aram. As it were, he would defeat the armies of Aram only three times. [Elisha was already sick at the time, close to death, and therefore especially frustrated by the King’s action. Ed.] The Bible does not tell us stories like this merely to embellish the study of our history. These symbolic actions are extremely important in helping certain decrees of G’d which were in the realm of the potential only, to become translated into reality. G’d provided the patriarchs with opportunities to perform such symbolic gestures, which in the course of Jewish history would prove to have been the trigger setting in motion important historic developments. This is the meaning of מעשה אבות סימן לבנים. The Torah stated והכנעני אז בארץ, that “the Canaanite was then in control of the land of Canaan,” a banal statement, for why else would the land be described as the land of the Canaanites? There is a far deeper meaning to this statement. Among other meanings, the Torah is on record that Jews had already moved around unopposed in the land of Canaan at a time when the time was not yet ripe for this people to be expelled from that land on account of what the Torah described as עון האמורי, “the sin of the Emorite.” (Genesis 15,16) It is also possible that the reason why the Torah saw fit to write the line והכנעני אז בארץ, is to explain why it took Avraham such a long time before he built the first altar dedicated to monotheism. He had been afraid, as the land was owned by the Canaanite and he could not expect that they would take kindly to a stranger publicly challenging their religious convictions. It was only after G’d had appeared to him and given him assurances that he was no longer afraid to do what he had in mind to do already previously. The promise that his children in due course would inherit this land, a promise given in verse 7, encouraged him to become an evangelist on behalf of his G’d. Elon (Moreh) (verse 6) is none other than Shechem. (Nablus in our time) The addition of the word מורה appears in connection with this location which is also defined as being opposite Gilgal and Mount Gerizim elsewhere. (compare Deut. 11,30) The meaning of the words ה-אל הנראה אליו, appears to imply that G’d instructed Avraham to build the altar at that location The word מורה, from הוראה, ”instruction,” was appended to the name of the place Elon to remind us that Avraham had received Divine instructions there. The very word אליו “directly to him,” is indicative of the fact that this revelation was of a more advanced nature than any previous communication by G’d to Avraham. There are some commentators who feel that the words והכנעני אז בארץ, were meant to stress the loving kindness of G’d towards Avraham in that He protected Avraham every step of the way in spite of the fact that the land was owned by a hostile nation [which had already succeeded in driving the Semites out of most of that land. Ed.] Avraham traversed this land with substantial herds, as if the whole land belonged to him. He was not challenged and not molested.

עד מקום שכם,“as far as a place called Shechem. This traversing of the land by Avraham and his moving away towards a mountain of which the Torah (verse 8) speaks as well as the fact that he established his tent (residence) between a place called Ai and a place known as Bet El are all references to matters and places which acquire significance for the Jewish people later on in their history. At this time, these places had not been known by the names reported here in the Torah. This is what the sages (Tanchuma Lech Lecha, 9) had in mind when they said מעשי אבות סימן לבנים, “experiences in which the patriarchs were involved him served as a preview of things that would occur in the lives of their descendants.”

He entered it. ויעבור usually means “he passed through” the land but did not dwell there. Thus Rashi needed to explain that here it is different, and means, “He entered it.” Rashi knows this because here it is written בארץ, not הארץ. Alternatively, because it is written: “Until the place of Shechem,” and Shechem is in Eretz Canaan.

(6-7)Abraham "zog an allem vorüber" — betrachtete keinen der Örter, an denen er "vorüber" kam, als die Stelle, wo er bleiben sollte, weil er auf das von Gott verheißene Zeichen harrte, das ihm den Ort seines Bleibens bezeichnen würde. — Der Kanaanite war אז, damals schon im Lande. Denn zur Zeit, als dies niedergeschrieben wurde, war der Kanaanite ja noch im Lande. Das Land war ursprünglich nicht dem chamitischen Stamm bestimmt, war jedoch zu Abrahams Zeit bereits in chamitische Hände übergegangen. Abraham aber zog immer weiter, bis Gott ihm zeigen werde, dass er bleiben solle. — וירָא, da trat Gott ihm sichtbar entgegen und sprach usw. Der ganze Nachdruck liegt auf diesem Sichtbarwerden. Der Altar wurde auch gebaut לד׳ הנראה אליו. Denn dies war das sichtbare Zeichen, dass dies der für die Zukunft Abrahams und seines Volkes erwählte Boden sei. Es ist dieser Ausdruck ja durchaus nicht der gewöhnliche, er kommt bei Abraham nur noch bei dem Gebot der מילה und der Verkündigung der Geburt Jizchaks vor. Weit entfernt, auch nur im geringsten der kühnen Vorstellung nachgehen zu wollen, wie Gott zu Abraham und den erwählten Männern gesprochen, haben wir uns doch gegenwärtig zu halten, was gesagt ist. Der Ausdruck sagt, dass nicht bloß die Stimme vernommen, sondern ויֵרָא, und zwar nicht הֵרָאה מ־ von Abraham gesehen worden, sondern: הֵרָאה אֶל, sichtbar worden zu Abraham, für Abraham. In dem ersten Falle ginge die Tätigkeit von dem Sehenden aus, das Faktum des Gesehenwerdens wäre bedingt durch die Fähigkeit und Willenstätigkeit des Schauenden und ginge von ihm aus. הראה אל bezeichnet aber den entgegengesetzten Vorgang: Heraustreten aus der bisherigen Unsichtbarkeit in die Sichtbarkeit für einen Bestimmten; die Tätigkeit geht von dem "sich offenbarenden" aus. Es ist dies tief bedeutsam und für eine alles verflachende und durch Umdeutung täuschende Zeit nicht überflüssig. Alle unsere Offenbarungen Gottes gehen von Gott aus an die Menschen. Gott spricht zu dem Propheten, nicht in ihm. "Die Gotteshand kommt auf den Propheten", nicht aus ihm: ׳היתה עלי יר ד. In allen hebräischen Ausdrücken für die Gottesoffenbarung ist der Mensch durchaus nur der empfangende, nicht der aktiv schaffende, und sind alle diese Ausdrücke die entschiedenste Verneinung aller jener die tatsächliche Offenbarung leugnender, diese Leugnung jedoch täuschend bemäntelnder Ansichten, die die Offenbarung Gottes mit Erzeugnissen menschlicher Phantasie und Begeisterung zusammenwerfen. Wie Gott zu unseren Männern gesprochen, mag uns ewig ein Geheimnis bleiben —den sei, auf dem zuerst die שכינה בתחתונים wiederkehren wollte, was ja allgemein das Ziel der Menschengeschichte sein soll und ist. Da, wo die Menschen zuerst gewandelt, wo, oder in dessen Nähe das גן עדן gewesen, der Boden, der, nach der Überlieferung, frei geblieben von der Zerrüttung der Sündflut, der also am jungfräulichsten geblieben, den Boden hatte sich Gott als denjenigen erwählt, auf dem die Wiederkehr des Göttlichen auf Erden beginnen sollte. Die Stelle nun, auf der nach 2000 Jahren das Göttliche zuerst wieder eintrat, wird bezeichnet: 1) als שכם .מקום שכם war nicht diejenige Örtlichkeit im gelobten Lande, die sich als die am meisten rühmenswürdige bewährte. Sie war vielmehr übelberüchtigt als שכיחי רוצחים, als eine Gegend, die heißblütige Menschen erzeugte, denen Mord und Totschlag nichts seltenes war, wie dies bei den Bestimmungen der Zufluchtsstädte hervortrat, und worauf die Charakterisierung des Propheten hinweist, Hosea 6. 9: דרך ירצחו שכמה, so wie das ihm parallel liegende transjordanische Gilead aus gleichem Grunde dort עקבה מדם genannt wird (Makkoth 9); 2) als אלון מורה Es war dies dieselbe Stelle, wo der Ebal und Garisim, wo auf einem und demselben Boden zwei Berge von entschiedenstem Gegensatze emporragten, der eine von unten bis oben wie ein Garten grünend, das Bild des vollendeten Gedeihens, der andere von oben bis unten in kahler Öde starrend, das Bild des völligen Unsegens. Und es heißt ferner 3) והכנעני או בארץ, dass schon damals, als hier mit dieser Offenbarung Gottes an Abraham die Wiederkehr der Schechina begann, der kanaanitische Völkerstamm im Lande war, und wir wissen, welchen Grad der sittlichen Gesunkenheit und Entartung dieser Menschenstamm auf diesem Boden erreichte, also, dass der barmherzige Gott selber Auswanderung oder Vernichtung über ihn verhängte. Wir sehen somit: es soll hier die Regenerierung des Menschengeschlechtes, die Wiederkehr des Göttlichen im Menschenkreise gepflanzt werden — und es wird hierfür ein Boden gesucht, der sich allerdings am vollendetsten dafür eignete, auf welchem allerdings Menschen, die dort nach dem Willen Gottes leben, die höchste geistige und sittliche Weihe erreichen können, auf dem aber schon damals wie in späterer Zeit Menschen, entartet, der Vernichtungswürdigkeit entgegenreiften! So ward auch die תורה in der Wüste gegeben, zu lehren: dass nicht an Zeit und Boden die Erhebung des Menschengeschlechts geknüpft ist. An dieselbe Stelle, auf welcher die Entartung der Menschen im höchsten Grade in die Erscheinung trat, knüpft Gott die Wiederkehr seiner שכינה an! Wohl, dürfte uns dies sagen, wohl ist die Beschaffenheit der Länder nicht ohne Einfluss auf Anlage und Beschaffenheit der Völker, aber das Göttliche im Menschen, dass der Mensch die "Gottesnähe" gewinne, das kann der Lappe in Lappland wie in Griechenland der Grieche erreichen. Da, wo ein Abraham wohnt, können auch רצחנים wohnen, und derselbe Boden kann neben dem רוצח einen נביא tragen. Gerade der Boden, der so verführerisch ist, dass auf ihm die Bewohner bis zur üppigsten Entartung also ausschweiften, dass sie "der Boden ausspie", ihn erwählte Gott und pflanzte dorthin sein Volk, das ja auch nicht zu den gefügigsten, zu dessen Grundcharakter קשה ערף gehörte, auf dass, wenn es gelinge — und es ist gelungen — dass das göttliche Feuer, das אשרת, selbst dieses Volk auf diesem Boden sich gewinne, es eben nirgends einen Menschenstamm mehr geben könne, der nicht durch dieses אש דת für dieses אש דת zu gewinnen wäre. Der Sieg des Göttlichen beginnt mit dem härtesten Volke (עז שבאומו) auf dem härtesten Boden (קשות ,הארצות האל, wie es später nach der Auffassung der Weisen heißt). Es ist nun möglich, dass dieses Entweder Oder dieses Bodens, der entweder den Gipfel des Sittlichen und Geistigen, oder den Gipfel der Vertiefung und Entartung, und demgemäß auch entweder den Segen oder den Fluch trägt, durch das Nebeneinander des blühenden Garisim und öden Ebal vergegenwärtigt war, und wäre es dann tief bedeutsam, dass der erste Nationalaltar beim Eintritt in dieses Land nicht auf dem Garisim, sondern gerade auf dem öden Ebal errichtet wurde. Der Segen ist nicht Bedingung, sondern Folge des göttlichen Aufbaues des irdischen Lebens. Es bedarf dieser Aufbau keiner äußeren Voraussetzung. Der Altar des göttlichen Gesetzes kann auf dem ödesten Boden erbaut werden. Unmöglich scheint es nun endlich nicht, dass אלון מורה — mag 81אל Baum, Hain, oder nach אונקלס Ebene bedeuten (Grundbegriff איל: Kraft der Fortentwickelung, wie ארז, verwandt mit ערץ, überhaupt Bäume das Bild stark fortschreitender Entwicklung darstellen, und daher אֵלה, chaldäisch אִילָן und hier אֵלון von diesem Grundbegriff den Namen von Bäumen bilden; so kann auch diese Anschauung auf eine langgestreckte Ebene übertragen sein, die in einem Gebirgsland sich weithin Bahn bricht) — unmöglich scheint es nicht, dass der Hain oder die Ebene um Garisim und Ebal deshalb מורֶה "belehrend" genannt wurde, weil hier jedem Nahenden durch den Anblick dieser beiden Berge die bedeutsame Lehre entgegengerufen wurde: "So habt ihr hier den Segen, da den Fluch, euer ist die Wahl!"

והכנעני אז בארץ, “and the Canaanites were in the land at that time.” Rashi interprets these words as meaning that at that period the Canaanites were in the process of capturing that land from the descendants of Shem whose king had ruled there in Jerusalem, then known as Shalem. It had been allocated to him by his father Noach. The difficulty with Rashi’s interpretation is that Rashi, when commenting on Hebron in Numbers 13,22, states that Hebron had been founded seven years earlier that Tzoan of Egypt. We know Cham had given that city (Chevron) to his oldest son [Kush and Mitzrayim having been twins? Compare table in Chronicles of Mossad Harav Kook Ed.]. It follows that Canaanites must have been in that land already long before Avraham came to it. This is also the conclusion in the Talmud, tractate Sotah folio 34. We must therefore assume that the details of this subject are the subject of a disagreement of the sages, and that Rashi was forced to side with one side, and chose this without mentioning that there is another opinion. [In the commentary of Haketav vehakabalah by Rabbi Mecklenburg, translated by this editor, the word שבעה in Numbers 13,22, is not understood as a number but as a reference to something superior, and the observation that fathers often treat younger sons with more affection than they have for the firstborn. According to the Bible, Canaan was Cham’s youngest son; (although that raises the question why Noach cursed him, instead of Cham’s eldest son) Ed. It is interesting that the Canaanites were allowed to exist without retribution by G–d for 47 years longer than the Egyptians, 7 years although they had been founded sooner, and 40 years because the first generation of Israelites had forfeited their right to inherit the land of Canaan as the result of the spies having badmouthed the land claiming that it devoured its inhabitants, and anyway could not be conquered by them. They were granted this extension because they agreed to have Avraham’s wife Sarah buried in Chevron.

.עד מקום שכם, as far as the location of Sh’chem (in Moses’ time). During Avraham’s time the city of Sh’chem did not exist yet

עד מקום שכם UNTO THE PLACE OF SHECHEM — In order to pray on behalf of Jacob’s sons, anticipating the time when they would come to fight against Shechem.

עד אלון מורה, he foresaw that there the Jewish people (at Mount Gerizim and Mount Eyval) would confirm that the Torah was binding for them, [especially those commandments that are essentially observed in private, their observance by individuals being difficult to confirm. Ed.] The word אלון is an allusion to the oath the people would swear in that location not to violate those commandments. (compare Deuteronomy 11,30) Avram prayed here to G’d asking Him to make the hearts of the people amenable at that time to take upon themselves this oath.

To pray for Yaakov’s sons. Rashi is answering the question: Why does it not recount that he came to Sukkos, the city closest to Eretz Yisrael’s boundary — as we see in Parshas Vayishlach (33:17)? Thus Rashi explains that [he came to Shechem] to pray. Alternatively, Rashi is answering the question: Why does it say, “The place of Shechem,” and not, “The city of Shechem,” as it is written later (33:18), “Yaakov arrived safely at the city of Shechem”? Thus Rashi explains that he came to pray, and it says “place” because he who prays should set for himself a fixed place for his prayer. This is preferable to Re’m’s explanation, that otherwise there is no reason to say, “Until the place of Shechem” [at all]. One might ask: If Avraham knew all this prophetically, why did he say later (15:2-3): “My Master, God, what will You give me since I continue to be childless ... and the manager of my household is Eliezer of Damascus. Behold, You have not given me children ... .”? We see he feared he would die without children! The answer is: Despite [his knowing about Yaakov’s sons], Avraham feared he would not have children until very old age, and Eliezer would take his wealth. (R. Noson)

The verse also hints that Abraham behaved like an itinerant traveller, not pretending to be a man of stature. This characteristic of Abraham came to the fore later when others refer to him as אברם העברי, Abram the transient. The reason that the Torah mentions the presence of the Caaanite in the land only in this verse, and not in verse 5 where we would have expected it, is to indicate exactly when the land of Israel passed into the hands of the Canaanites (having previously belonged to the descendants of Shem). The fact that the expression ארצה כנען is used already in verse 5 means only that the Torah refers to the name the country would be known by subsequently.

עד אלון מורה, “as far as the terebinth at Moreh;” according to Rashi, this is a reference to the mountains of Gerizim and Eyvol, which G-d showed Avraham on this occasion as a location where the Israelites would confirm their loyalty to the Torah. The Torah refers to this location again in Deuteronomy 11,30. According to our author, Elon Moreh and Elon mamre are the same location.

אלון מורה THE PLAIN OF MOREH — This is Shechem (Sotah 32a). He showed him Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal where Israel took upon themselves the oath to observe the Torah (cf. Deuteronomy 11:29 and Deuteronomy 111:30).

מורה, according to Onkelos this is the name of an individual, just as כנעני. אלון is the name of a plain, this plain bearing the name of a man known as מורה.

He showed him Mount Gerizim. Rashi is answering the question: If Shechem is the same as the Plain of Moreh — and it is written, “Until the place of Shechem” — why does it also need to be called the Plain of Moreh? Rashi answers, “He showed him Mount Gerizim and Mount Eival.” And it is written [regarding the oath that was taken there], “The Plain of Moreh” (Devarim 11:30). Where Israel accepted ... [אלון מורה is so called] because אלון is from the root of אלה (oath), and מורה is from the root of הוראה, which is Torah. (Maharshal)

Possibly the word כנען which has a numerical value of 190 is an allusion to Abraham and Sarah being 100 and 90 years old respectively when Isaac was born. The idea that this land would eventually be transferred to the Israelites therefore is already part of its very name. The latter became potential owners once Isaac was born.

והכנעני אז בארץ, “and the Canaanite was at that time in the process of conquering the Holy Land from the descendants of Shem. (according to Rashi) The justification appears to have been that Cham his father was senior to his brother Shem by two years. Rashi explains further that originally that land had been bequeathed by Noach to his son Shem. This is why G-d told Avraham that in due course, He would give that land back to Avraham’s descendants, as he was a descendant of Shem. In Numbers 13,22 as well as in Deuteronomy 11,10 Rashi states that Cham had built the city of Chevron for his son Canaan. According to this it would appear that the land of Canaan (Holy Land) had been given by Noach to his son Cham. We must therefore understand what Rashi wrote here as referring not to Shem personally, but as to one of Shem’s descendants. Perhaps he referred only to part, the northern section of Eretz Yisrael. His section included Jerusalem. The major section of the land of Canaan spread southwards in the direction of Egypt. Chevron was already part of the southern section. However, if we look at the wording in the Talmud in Ketuvot 112, where the Talmud challenges the underlying assumption that Cham built a city for his younger son Canaan before he built a city for his older son Mitzrayim, this sounds peculiar. According to the Torah in Numbers 13,22 Chevron was built seven years before Tzoan of Egypt. Clearly then the Torah had not spoken of Cham having built these cities, but of Noach. We may assume that the interpretation of the passage we quoted from the Talmud is to be understood as a question, i.e. “surely this is unbelievable?” [This is the way it appears in our versions of the Talmud. Ed.] Noach built Chevron for his younger son Shem, and subsequently he built Tzoan for his son who was 2 years older than Shem. The Torah, according to the Talmud, wished to state that the city of Chevron was seven times more successful than the city Tzoan. [The word שנים, usually meaning “years,” may also be used instead of פעמים, “repeated times.” Ed.] If we accept this interpretation, the line that the Canaanites were at that time trying to wrest the land of Shem from him, i.e. to conquer Chevron and Jerusalem, makes much better sense.

והכנעני אז בארץ AND THE CANAANITE WAS THEN IN THE LAND — They (the Canaanites) were gradually conquering the land of Israel from the descendants of Shem, for it had fallen to the share of Shem when Noah apportioned the earth amongst his sons, for it is said (Genesis 14:18) “And Melchizedek) king of Salem (Jerusalem)”. For this reason the Lord said to Abram (Genesis 12:7) “to thy seed will I give this land” — “I will in some future time return it to thy children who are descendants of Shem”.

והכנעני אז בארץ, all these places belonged to the Canaanite, one of the 7 tribes making up that nation. We encounter such a reference to the Canaanites as a generic term in Deuteronomy 11,30 בארץ הכנעני אשר יושב בערבה, “in the land of the Canaanite who dwells in the Aravah, wilderness.”

He gradually conquered. Rashi is answering the question: “Then” is qualifying word, implying that in Avraham’s days it was so, but afterwards, the Canaanites were not in the Land. But how can this be? They were still there in Moshe’s days! Thus Rashi needed to explain that it means “then but not before.” For [in Avraham’s days,] the Canaanites began conquering the Land.

Another lesson from the mention of the Canaanite "then being in the land," is that the Torah reminds us that Canaan was a slave, having been cursed by Noach who decreed that he should be עבד עבדים, "a slave to slaves (Genesis 9,25)." Slaves do not possess property rights. The Canaanite taking over the land from the Semites eventually opened the way for the Israelites to dispossess, them. The Semites, who had come by the land legally, would have presented G'd with a legal problem He had to solve before He could have disposessed them. Our sages have said that inasmuch as Abraham was a Semite, expelling the Canaanites and having the Israelites take over the land was only a return of the land to its rightful owners. Accordingly, the Torah phrases its description of the Canaanite presence in the land in such a way that the world understands that such a presence was never legal (compare Rashi and Nedarim 32).

והכנעני אז בארץ, the word: אז, “then,” (in the past) indicates that the Torah did not speak about the political situation at the time when the Jewish people were in possession, but about the political situation at the time when Avraham first wandered through that land.

אז בארץ, this is to teach us how G’d deals with those whom He loves. Avram was traveling through the land of the Canaanite with his herds and flocks. He was not challenged by anyone as being guilty of encroaching on their property, stealing their grazing land, etc. This was proof that G’d was with him. Avram was well aware that this was a demonstration of G’d’ keeping His promise to him that his very presence would be considered a blessing for the people surrounding him. There are commentators (Rashi) who say that the reference to the Canaanite occupying that land אז, at that time, means that until shortly before that time the whole land had belonged to Shem and his descendants, and that only at that time had the Canaanites begun to dispossess the Semites in that land. The proof quoted for this theory is 14,18 ומלכי צדק מלך שלם, that this king was Shem, the son of Noach who was still king in Jerusalem at that time. In other words, at the time Avram came to the land of Canaan, the Canaanites had not yet captured Jerusalem.

For it fell to the share of Sheim. This indeed contradicts what Rashi said in (Bamidbar 13:22) וחברון שבע שנים נבנתה לפני צען מצרים. [There Rashi said that Cham built Hebron, implying that all of Eretz Yisrael belonged to Cham — not Sheim — from the start.] Yet we can answer that these Aggados disagree with each other. But we cannot answer that all of Eretz Yisrael fell to Cham, except for Jerusalem and its vicinity which fell to Sheim. For Rashi says here, “He [the Canaanite] gradually conquered Eretz Yisrael from the descendants of Sheim,” implying that all of Eretz Yisrael was Sheim’s. (Re’m) However, the answer that only Jerusalem and its vicinity was Sheim’s seems better. For “The Canaanite gradually conquered Eretz Yisrael” could refer to the small part of Eretz Yisrael that Cham’s son Canaan did not already have. This is better than saying that the Midrashim disagree with each other. Mahara Ashkenazi writes: All Eretz Yisrael surely belonged to Sheim, as Rashi implies here. And what Rashi wrote on Bamidbar 13:22 should be understood as follows: If one man built two cities, it would make sense to identify which was built first. Thus if Cham was the builder, the Torah could very well be identifying which he built first, [by saying וחברון שבע שנים נבנתה לפני צען מצרים]. But it cannot be that Cham built both Hebron and Zoan, due to Rashi’s question there: “Could Cham have built Hebron for Canaan his youngest son, before building Zoan for Mitzrayim his eldest son?!” Thus we see that Sheim built Hebron, while Cham built Zoan. Consequently, the Torah cannot be saying that Hebron preceded Zoan by seven years, as different people built them, and there is no reason to identify their respective order. It follows that there is no contradiction at all [between what Rashi said in Bamidbar and what he said here]. And the verse in Bamidbar means, [as Rashi concludes there,] “Hebron was built up with everything good, seven times more than Zoan.”

Another reason the Torah mentions the presence of the Canaanites as conquerors in the land is to contrast this with G'd's promise to give the land to Abraham's descendants. Had the Torah not informed us of the fact that the descendants of Shem already lost most or all of the land to the Canaanites, we would not have considered G'd's promise as something special, seeing that Abraham was a descendant of Shem and as such already had a legal claim on that country.

As it is said: “Malki Zedek King of Shaleim.” Malki Zedek is Sheim the son of Noach, as Rashi explains on 14:18. And King of Shaleim means King of Yerushalayim. [Thus, the Land originally was Sheim’s].