Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk Keluaran 32:6

“And Abraham proceeded to take another wife, and her name was Keturah.” He went back and married Hagar and called her Keturah because her deeds were as pleasant as incense [ketoret]. This is implied by the language and he proceeded, indicating that he married her a second time. We must explain why he called her Keturah now, based on her deeds, especially since this seems to contradict Rashi’s explanation in Parashat Vayeira (21:14) on she went and wandered that she had returned to her father’s house’s idolatry. What seems correct to me is that initially he divorced her at Sarah’s request, as Abraham was secondary to Sarah in prophecy. Sarah knew prophetically that she [Hagar] would eventually return to her father’s house’s idolatry, and she also saw that her son Ishmael was mocking, which carries the connotation of idol worship, as it says they rose to make merry (Exodus 32:6). Therefore she said, Drive out this maidservant and her son, for their deeds were alike, for the son of this maidservant shall not inherit with my son, with Isaac, meaning he would not inherit Abraham’s ways. The matter distressed Abraham because he did not know through divine inspiration about the idolatrous beliefs in their hearts, therefore he was told Whatever Sarah tells you, listen to her voice, from which they learned that Abraham was secondary to Sarah in prophecy. He immediately sent her away with divorce, and she went and wandered as Sarah had said. If so, since he divorced her because of the impropriety of idolatry, it is difficult to understand how he could take her back. Therefore, the text comes to explain that she had repented, just as her son Ishmael had also repented. To publicize this, Abraham called her name Keturah, referring to the incense [ketoret], thus making public that she had repented. For every penitent, their intentional sins become like merits, and these sins rise as a pleasant aroma like merits. Therefore he compared her to incense, where galbanum, which has a bad smell, rises as a pleasant aroma like all other spices. This is an apt comparison to the sins of penitents that rise as a pleasant aroma, as it is written for her iniquity is pardoned (Isaiah 40:2). For after repentance, even the sin is accepted and favorable, therefore she was called Keturah.

...In this verse, King Solomon, of blessed memory, teaches the virtue of accepting reproof and criticism. Torah depends on one’s ability to accept reproof. The highest virtue is found in the one who accepts criticism and listens to the one who rebukes him. It is the basis for the fulfillment of the Torah. One who rejects reproof is marked by a repulsive virtue containing the worst evils. To reject criticism causes one to reject the yoke of the commandments. Regarding this, Solomon wrote: "Discipline is worse than the one who abandons God's way; he who hates rebuke will die." (Prov. 15:10) This means that one who rejects reproof is worse than the person who abandons the observance of Torah since such a person is guilty of denying the yoke of commandments. A person who abandons the path of Torah may face punishment but he is not condemned to death. One who rejects reproof is not pardoned through suffering but is sentenced to death. This is what King Solomon meant when he said, "He who hates rebuke will die." It is not enough for him to face painful suffering as a judgment…Conversely, Solomon explains that reproof is like a thing of beauty just as earrings are adornments to the body. When a wise person presents criticism to a person who is receptive to the criticism, the criticism is compared to an earring or an adornment which beautifies the soul of the individual. There are two types of people with regard to reproof: those whom we are obligated to criticize and those whom we should avoid criticizing. There are three types of people whom one is obligated to criticize: the wise, the simple and the youth. There are three types of people to whom one should avoid offering reproof: scoffers, fools and the wicked. Regarding scoffers, we are taught, "Do not rebuke the scoffer for he will hate you." (Prov. 9:8) … Regarding fools, it is written, "Do not speak to the fool for he will disdain your sensible words." (Prov. 23:9) The scoffer hates the person who criticizes him while the fool makes light of the words of reproof and mocks the person who is wiser than they are. Regarding the wicked, it is stated, "…to rebuke the wicked person for his blemish is to call down abuse on oneself." (Prov. 9:7) This means that when one criticizes the wicked and points out his blemish, the wicked responds by casting his own blemish back on the one who rebuked him. The people to whom one should offer reproof include the wise. It is written, "Reprove the wise person and he will love you." (Prov. 9:8) Sometimes a wise person needs to be criticized when he accidently sins or does so by chance. Regarding the simple, it is written, "Endow the simple with shrewdness." (Prov. 1:4) Regarding the young, Scripture states "(He endows) the young with knowledge and foresight." (ibid) The most important type of reproof is the criticism offered to the young since their intellect is not fully developed and they lived under the domination of the evil inclination for the thirteen years when their thoughts and understanding were completely focused on worldly pleasures of the body. While they are still adolescents and their nature is malleable, young people are in need of criticism to rein in their behavior and to help them come under the control of their good inclination. They gain this by listening to the person who reproves them and by paying attention to words of Torah which is entirely reproof. It is written, "The way to life is the rebuke that disciplines." (Prov. 6:23) If a person was allowed to follow his basic nature, whether good or bad, he would not be able to separate himself from his youthful behavior when he reached the full maturity, as it is written, "Train a lad in the way he ought to go; he will not swerve from it even in his old age." (Prov. 22:6) Thus, a person acquires great benefit and merit for himself (by accepting criticism when he is young.) Because of this Solomon advises us to offer reproof to a young person with 'the rod of discipline,' "if folly settles in the heart of a lad, the rod of discipline will remove it." (Prov. 22:15) This means that even if the folly has attached itself to his heart and he has become accustomed to acting in this fashion for many years, do not despair and say, 'There is no way to make him improve,' for as long as he is a lad and the rod of discipline is used, he can remove it. By disciplining him little by little, the reproof will eventually enter his heart. When the word of the disciplinarian is soft so and offered with constancy it will eventually make an impression on the one who is disciplined just as drops of water which are soft and pleasing eventually leave a hole in a rock (upon which the water drips). But if a person despairs and does not try to offer a young person reproof, it is as if he hates him, as it is stated: "He who spares the rod, hates his son; but he who loves him disciplines him early," (Prov. 14:23) The Midrash interprets this verse: "He who spares the rod, hates his son," refers to King David, while "He who loves him, disciplines him early," refers to Jacob, teaching that one who withholds discipline in the end will cause his children to follow evil company. We find this to be the case with Abraham who spoiled Ishmael and eventually he followed evil company…similarly Isaac spoiled Esau so that he left his father to follow evil company… David spoiled Adoniyah and Abshalom causing them to follow evil company… "He who loves him disciplines him early" refers to Abraham in the case of Isaac and Isaac in the case of Jacob. Similarly because Jacob disciplined his sons, there was no unworthy sons among them. Because he was a wise disciplinarian and the sons were attentive to him they became like refined gold made into earrings and they were truly the children of their father's legacy.

According to Midrash Tanchuma 1 on our portion, examination of the occurrence of the word וישב throughout the Torah will reveal that this term is always used when some unhappy event was associated with such “settlement.” The following examples illustrate the point. Exodus 32,6 speaks of וישב העם לאכול ושתו ויקומו לצחק, “the people settled down to eat and to drink and they arose to make sport (worship the golden calf).” On that day three thousand of the people were slain on account of this sin). Genesis 37,25 reports that after throwing Joseph into the pit, וישבו לאכול לחם וישאו עיניהם והנה אורחת ישמעלים באה.....וימכרו את יוסף לישמעלים, “when the brothers had settled down to eat their meal they raised their eyes and here a caravan of Ishmaelites arrived,......and they sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites.” In Kings I 5,5 we read וישב יהודה וישראל בטח,...ויקם ה' שטן לישראל, “when Yehudah and Israel had settled safely,...G’d made an adversary against Solomon” (11,14) [as a punishment for transgressing certain commands in the Torah, Ed.] In Numbers 25,1 we read וישב ישראל בשטים ויחל העם לזנות, “when the Israelites settled down at a place called Shittim, the people started debasing themselves by whoring” (with the Moabite women which resulted in G’d killing 24,000 of them). In our instance too Yaakov’s “settling” in the land of Canaan had in its wake his traumatic experience of the loss of Joseph. G’d had said (according to the Midrash) “is Yaakov not satisfied with inheriting the world to come that he must now also inherit this terrestrial world. It is not appropriate for the righteous to enjoy the best of both worlds.” According to Tanchuma when Yaakov became aware of the extent of the kings and chiefs listed in the Torah as descendents of from Esau he became worried about not having anything to counter such physical prowess of the Edomites. The matter may be explained in the form of a parable. A caravan of camels was heavily laden with straw. The onlookers could not imagine that there were storage facilities large enough to accommodate all this straw and they were worried that the owners would demand their own (the onlookers’) facilities to accommodate all that excess straw. An old man amongst the onlookers told his compatriots not to worry seeing that it would require only a single match to set fire to the entire mass of straw carried by the camels. Similarly, G’d put Yaakov’s mind at rest telling him that Esau would go up in flames just as straw would go up in flames. This is what the prophet Ovadiah 18 described when he compared the fate of the house of Esau and the fate of the house of Joseph in the future. The “match” in our instance would be Joseph, whose descendants would vanquish the descendants of Esau.

When Moses ascended: To the mountain. He said to them, "I will come at the end of forty days within the [first] six hours." They reasoned that that day that Moses ascended was from the tally; but he said to them forty complete days - the day and the night with it, but the night was not with the day that he ascended. Behold, he ascended on the Seventh of Sivan, [so] it comes out that the fortieth day was the Seventeenth of Tammuz. On the Sixteenth, Satan came and mixed up the world and showed an image of darkness and obscurity, an image of cloud, mist and disorder. He was saying, "Moses certainly died; as the six hours have already passed, and he has not come." And it is impossible to say that they only made a mistake between before midday and after midday on a cloudy day. As behold, Moses did not descend until the next day, as it is stated (Exodus 32:6), "They arose early the next morning, etc."

מצחק MAKING SPORT — This means worshipping idols, as it is said in reference of the Golden Calf, (Exodus 32:6) “And they rose up to make merry (לצחק).” Another explanation is that it refers to immoral conduct, just as you say in reference to Potiphar’s wife, (Genesis 39:17) “To mock (לצחק) at me.” Another explanation is that it refers to murder, as (2 Samuel 2:14) “Let the young men, I pray thee, arise and make sport (וישחקו) before us” (where they fought with and killed one another) From Sarah’s reply — “for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son״ — you may infer that he (Ishmael) was quarrelling with Isaac about the inheritance, saying, “I am the first-born and will, therefore, take a double portion”. They went into the field and he (Ishmael) took his bow and shot arrows at him (Isaac), just as you say (Proverbs 26:18-19) “As a madman who casteth firebrands, [arrows and death] and says: I am only מצחק mocking” (Genesis Rabbah 53:11).