Chasidut su Genesi 4:1

Such is the avodah of thought. There is a similar focus in the avodah of the heart, of generating feelings of love and reverence and self-nullification, of arousing the soul of holiness in general to serve God with a burning spirit and to cleave to Him. In the hasidic path, the manner of awakening is through thought and contemplation, for: a) the avodah of thought and knowledge, of delving into God, is very great, and through it one effects connection and cleaving to God. For knowledge (daat) connotes connection, as in “and Adam knew his wife…” ³⁸¹Genesis 4:1. This is the ‘Eden’ of knowing and understanding and grasping with one’s intellect and understanding that which one can of the light of Ein Sof, through the Hokhmah and Binah of God which illuminate creation (ibid. 39, 42). Further, b) since the mind is the source and site of the soul of holiness, drawn from there to the heart, one’s soul is aroused through the mind’s thought. Each person’s [measure of] love and reverence correlate with one’s knowledge of God (ibid. Chapter 44). Furthermore, even if one’s heart is not aroused into a revealed, visceral love and reverence of God, if one’s decides nonetheless to fulfill the Torah by mentally understanding that he needs to love and revere Him, these mental understandings will be rendered as revealed, visceral love and reverence, and his soul considered as one which thirsts for God because of the burning coals of love in his heart (ibid. Chapter 16). [In short, t]he foundation of all divine service is in the mind, even the avodah of ‘turning from evil,’ since the soul is aroused and the evil inclination distanced through the mind, and a little light pushes aside much darkness. For it is man’s nature for his mind to rule over his heart (ibid chapter 12).

Regardless, of where that Rashi may be, both in our ‎chapter as well as in Exodus 6,8 G’d speaks about the gift of the ‎land of Canaan becoming an inheritance. If Terach had been ‎involved in the matter, why would G’d have to “give” the land to ‎Avram first? In his commentary on Choshen Mishpat, on the ‎section dealing with the laws of inheritance, the author of ‎‎Meirat Eynayim states that the expression ‎ירושה‎, ‎inheritance, in legal parlance, applies only to property inherited ‎from one’s biological father. From the wording in Exodus 6,8 as ‎well as from the wording in Genesis 15,18 it is clear that G’d ‎considers Himself as Avram’s “father” in the matter of bestowing ‎on him the “gift” of the land. His offspring, or the part of his ‎offspring to whom he deeds it, will henceforth “inherit.” It. When ‎Avram heard this, he was unclear if he had understood correctly, ‎as he had never heard of an inheritance originating as a gift. ‎Hence he asked ‎במה אדע כי אירשנה‎, by what legal process can I be ‎sure that it will be mine as something to bequeath?” In other ‎words, “who is my father from whom I can inherit this land?” ‎Avram’s question reflects his awareness that “his father” in this ‎instance could not possibly be Terach. In response to Avram’s ‎concerns, G’d answered him: “You shall be aware that your ‎descendants in their formative stages will experience both being ‎strangers and even slaves until at the end of the 400 years, I will ‎judge the people who have subjugated them and treated them ‎cruelly, so that they will leave that land with vast possessions.” ‎G’d’s message to Avram is that the Exodus of this people from the ‎land of their oppression will be due to their being his direct ‎descendants. His very birth paved the way for the Jewish people ‎to come into existence and to in due course accept the very ‎Torah that Avram had already been observing without having ‎been commanded to do so.
In light of this, your very birth ‎through Divine input of some holy spirit, seeing that I am your ‎‎“father,” enables Me to speak to you of “inheriting” the land that ‎I am promising to your descendants.” G’d implied that Avram had ‎been quite correct in surmising that Terach had nothing to do ‎with the events occurring in Avram’s future.‎ The author refers to his exegesis of a statement in Baba ‎Batra 117 where the Talmud states that the so-called ‎‎“inheritance” of the Israelites being given the land of Canaan, is ‎quite different from ordinary inheritances. Normally, the living ‎inherit the dead. In the case of the Israelites receiving ancestral ‎land in the Land of Canaan, the dead inherited the living. The ‎‎“normal” process of inheritance is based on the son being a ‎branch of the father, [the father being the trunk. Ed.] The trunk ‎‎(father) provides the elements that enable the branch to achieve ‎its perfection (producing fruit). This parable does not fit the ‎Jewish people and its development. In the history of the Jewish ‎people, the “dead” are the generation of the Israelites that ‎experienced the Exodus as adults, who although not physically ‎living to experience the conquest of the land, “inherited” it, ‎since, but for their existence the next generation could not have ‎taken possession of this land.