Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk Kejadian 15:7

ויאמר ה' אל אברם לך לך מארצך וממולדתך ומבית אביך אל הארץ אשר אראך, in this instance the word ויאמר refers to something G’d had already said to Avram before he had even moved away from Ur Casdim, a move he made at the command of G’d. We know this from Genesis 15,7 where G’d reminds him that “I am the Lord Who has taken you out of Ur Casdim.” It is possible that G’d repeated this directive once more while Avram was in Charan. As to the meaning of the word lecha, i.e. “for your own good,” this does not have any special significance, being a commonly used figure of speech. One example would be Exodus 18,27 וילך לו where Yitro’s return to Midian is described in a similar way, and no one suggests that he did so “for his own good.” Another such example is found in Jeremiah 5,5 אלכה לי, “I am going,” where no one suggests that Jeremiah had ulterior motives in going to the wealthy people to speak to them in the belief that they knew the ways of the Lord. Still other examples of a similar construction are found in Numbers 22,34 אשובה לי or in Genesis 45,19 קחו לכם.

The explanation of this matter is: When Sarah was remembered [for conception], all barren women were remembered along with her, as I explained in Parshat Lech Lecha on the verse and she shall become nations (Genesis 17:16). However, even though they were remembered with her, they were not equal to Sarah, for Sarah’s remembrance is described with language of actual “doing” by the hands of the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is written (Midrash Tehillim 139:5): The righteous are greater than the works of heaven and earth, for the righteous were created with two hands, meaning actual creation, and with language of “speaking” which indicates endearment, as it is written (Genesis 15:7): And behold, the word of God came to him: This one shall not inherit you, rather one who shall come from your own body, etc. But the other barren women are mentioned only with language of “remembrance” and with language of “saying” which doesn’t contain as much endearment, for in Parshat Lech Lecha it begins with language of “saying,” and there it states (Genesis 17:16): I will bless her and she shall become nations, meaning that she will be of help to all nations as the barren women of the nations of the lands will be remembered with her. This is what is meant by And God remembered et Sarah, as if to say “with Sarah.” The word “et” here serves as “with,” like who came to Egypt with [et] Jacob (Exodus 1:1), meaning that those barren women who were remembered with Sarah were only remembered with language of remembrance and saying. However, And God did for Sarah means for Sarah herself with language of speaking as He had spoken and actual doing. As an analogy: One who doesn’t greatly love their fellow, even though they sometimes remember them, nevertheless doesn’t do as much for them, but for their good friend, they enter into the thick of things and are active on their behalf. And regarding what is written And [Va] God with a vav, our Sages said (Bereishit Rabbah 51:2): “Wherever it says ‘And God’ it refers to Him and His heavenly court.” This supports our Sages’ statement (Rosh Hashanah 11a) that this remembrance occurred on Rosh Hashanah, when the Holy One, Blessed be He, sits in judgment with His entire heavenly court above, which is why we read this portion on Rosh Hashanah.

ושמי ה' לא נודעתי להם, Rashi explains this as follows; “and My attribute (name) of Hashem I have not let them be familiar with.” It is significant that G-d did not use the active causative mode of הודעתי here. In answering the question why He had not done so, what comes to mind is first: “they did not bother to ask Me about it.” [They should have asked as I revealed Myself to Avraham as such already at the covenant between the pieces in Genesis 15,7, where G-d told Avraham that He had saved him miraculously in order to give him (his descendants) that land in which He appeared to him. G-d reminds Moses that neither Avraham nor Yitzchok or Yaakov, to all of whom He had spoken far less that He had to Moses, ever questioned what they could have questioned about G-d’s judgments. To quote just one such example: when after having been told by G-d that his descendants would inherit the land of Canaan, and it came to burying his wife Sarah there, he could not even do this without paying a minor fortune for a cave, he surely might have asked Me about this. They believed Me on My word alone, without the need for any miracles or proof. They could not have known me by My real name, as I had made promises and had not yet kept them. My true name is based not only on My ability to promise but on My ability beyond question to also keep My promises. Now, G-d says, “I will explain to you why I did not reveal Myself to the patriarchs as the attribute of Hashem. The promises I made to them referred to a distant future.” They would not live to see their fulfilment. The promises I made to you and through you to My people, will be fulfilled within the immediate future. As this occurs, the past partially passive mode of the root ידע will be appropriate, i.e. “I will have become known as Hashem.” Seeing that this is so, the people should not have asked: “what is His name?” Who asks about something that he knows and is familiar with? Rashi also explains why the conjunctive letter ו in וגם in verse 4 is appropriate. The word: הקימותי is not to be confused with “I have kept (a promise),” but is to be understood as the promises made to the patriarchs still being in effect, and the fact that they had not yet been fulfilled is due to their having been made by G-d in His capacity as שדי, “the G-d whose promises are meaningful because He is able to fulfill them and no one can stop Him from doing so.” The reason that the time for fulfilling them has arrived is because the Children of Israel’s outcry on account of their suffering is justified.

וגם הקמתי וגו׳ ALSO I SET UP [MY COVENANT WITH THEM TO GIVE THEM THE LAND OF CANAAN], and yet when Abraham wished to bury Sarah he could not obtain a grave until he purchased one at a high price. So, too, in the case of Isaac, people strove with him for possession of the wells which he had dug. Similarly, of Jacob it is stated, (Genesis 33:19) “He purchased a parcel of field,” in which to pitch his tent. Yet none of them criticised My dealings with them, whilst you say “Wherefore hast Thou done so evil [to this people!]” — But this Midrashic exposition does not fit in with the text for several reasons. Firstly, because Scripture does not state “And they did not ask of Me regarding my Name, the Lord”. And if you say in refutation of my objection that they did not mean that ושמי ה' לא נודעתי actually signifies that they did not ask what is My Name, but it means “He did not tell them that this was His Name and yet they did not ask Him what it was”, then I reply that these words cannot mean that He did not tell them His name, for at the very first when He revealed Himself to Abraham at the Covenant “between the pieces’’ it is said, (Genesis 15:7) “I am the Lord (אני ה׳) who brought thee out from Ur of the Chaldees”. Further (secondly), how does the context run on to the statements which Scripture places after the above verses, viz., “And I have also heard etc.” and “Wherefore say unto the children of Israel etc.”? Therefore I say: let Scripture be explained in its literal sense so that each statement fits into its proper setting, but the Midrashic exposition may also be given, if you like, as it is said (Jeremiah 23:29) “Is not my word like as fire, saith the Lord, and like a hammer which, by the force of its own blow, the rock at which it strikes shatters in pieces”.