Komentarz do Rodzaju 15:10

ויבתר אתם AND HE SPLIT THEM — He divided each into two portions. This verse does not lose its literal meaning although there are various Midrashic explanations of it. Since He was making a covenant with him to keep His promise to give the land as an inheritance to his children — as it is written (Genesis 15:18), “In that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying …” — and as it was the custom for parties to a covenant to divide an animal and to pass between its parts, as it is said elsewhere (Jeremiah 34:19) “who passed between the parts of the calf”, so also here the smoking furnace and the flaming torch which passed between the pieces (Genesis 15:17) were representative of the Divine Shechinah which is spoken of as fire.

AND HE DIVIDED THEM IN THE MIDST. This he did in order that He make the covenant with him, to pass between these parts.
He thereby alluded to Abraham that all sacrifices of cattle and fowl will be from these species since the gozeil (young pigeon) mentioned here²⁶⁴In Verse 9 above. is identical with the ben yonah (young pigeon) mentioned in the Book of Leviticus.²⁶⁵1:14. Here it is called gozeil to indicate that only the young of this specie are fit for sacrifices. Now even though all young fowl are called gozlim — as it is said, As an eagle that stirreth up her nest, hovereth over ‘gozalav’ (his young ones)²⁶⁶Deuteronomy 32:11. — Abraham understood on his own that the command of the Eternal applied to the kind which was to be selected [by the Torah, namely, young pigeons]. It may be that Abraham followed his own will in offering a young pigeon, and Scripture selected forever the specie which the patriarch had offered.
Thus did Abraham know that the sacrifices would be of these species and that all of them would be divided into parts: the Whole-offering into its pieces,²⁶⁷Leviticus 1:12. the Peace-offering into the breast, shoulder and fats,²⁶⁸Ibid., 7:30-32 and the Sin-offering and the Guilt-offering into their fats.²⁶⁹Ibid., 4:31; 7:2-5.

ויבתר אותם בתוך, both what he cut in half and what he did not cut was at the command of G’d, even though the Torah did not mention this specifically, The reason for cutting something in half was to show that G’d was making a covenant with Avram, as we already explained on verse 9. G’d hinted to Avram, by means of these carcasses being cut in half, that all the nations exiling the Jewish people, would suffer a fate as that suffered by these sacrificial animals. They would successively fight wars, the younger one against the older one, one wiping out the other eventually. All those nations represented different cultures, both in their secular outlook as well as in their religious orientation. All of this would be caused due their competitive spirit, each nation trying to achieve dominance over the others. Such behaviour is not typical of the Jewish people, although, for a brief period in our history, the tribe of Ephrayim competed violently with the tribe of Yehudah for pre-eminence among the 12 tribes of the Jewish people. Even during such periods, these tribes would not remain divided culturally or religiously. (compare Isaiah 11,13) אפרים לא יקנא את יהודה ויהודה לא יצר את אפרים, “Ephrayim will not be jealous of Yehudah, nor will Yehudah oppress Ephrayim.” To signify this difference between competition among the gentile nations, and tribal warfare in Israel, G’d told Avram not to cut the bird in half, seeing that it represented the nation that would emerge with Avram as their founding father. Therefore, the Torah reported ואת הצפור לא בתר, that Avram did not cut the bird in half. The word הצפור includes both the pigeon and the turtle dove, תור וגוזל, seeing that the Jewish people are scattered in the four directions of the globe and have yet remained a single people, clinging to their Torah and their faith in spite of being scattered all over the world. The people of Israel did not trade their religion for another in spite of the heavy burden involved in enduring exile.

ויבתר אותם בתוך, “he halved them down the middle.” This was in order to conclude a covenant and to pass between them. The procedure also served as a symbol that in future all animal sacrifices would consist only of either of the species that were now in front of him. The only species of fowl acceptable as a sacrifice on the altar is the dove, either when a תר, or when a גוזל. [the difference has to do with the age of the bird. Ed.] The reason the term גוזל is used at all, is that only very young pigeons qualify as sacrifices, and we know from Deut. 32,11 כנשר יעיר קנו על גוזליו ירחף, “as the eagle that awakens its nest, hovers over her young, etc.” It is clear that גוזל is very young bird. [otherwise it would have already flown from the nest. Ed.] Avraham did not have to be told which species of bird would be acceptable to G’d as a sacrifice. It is also possible that he chose a pigeon as the species of bird in question without any direct or indirect prompting by G’d, and that the Torah respected Avraham’s choice and henceforth whenever one of his descendants brought a bird offering it had to be of that species. There is a hint here that all the animal sacrifices had to be cut up after being slaughtered, the burnt offering into its various parts, [although all of them were burned up. Ed.] and the peace offering in accordance with the parts that were allocated to the priest, rib-cage, right upper leg and cheek-bones, and the sin offering into its constituent parts so that the fat parts were separate for being burned up on the altar.

ואת הצפור לא בתר , “and he had not cut the bird in half.” The reason Avram had cut up the four-legged animals but not the birds was that the former represent the idolatrous Gentile Nations, and these have been compared to animals as it says (Psalms 22,13) סבבוני פרים רבים, “many bulls surround me.” It is also written in Daniel 8,20 האיל אשר ראית, “the ram that you saw ....are the kings of Medes and Persia.” In verse 21 of the same chapter the king of Greece is described as הצפיר השעיר, the “he-goat.” On the other hand, in Song of Songs 5,2 and 2,14 the Jewish people are compared to doves. Seeing that Israel will continue to exist indefinitely, Avram did not cut up the birds representing it.

ויקח לו את כל אלה, “He took all these animals for Him;” our sages in B’reshit Rabbah claim that G-d showed Avram even what the measurement of a tenth of an eyfah looked like, (part of meal offerings). This is based on B’reshit Rabbah 34,14 where similar expressions are quoted as occurring here and in Leviticus 2,8: והבאת...מאלה where that meal offering is discussed.

ואת הצפור לא בתר BUT THE BIRDS SPLIT HE NOT — Because other nations are compared to bulls, rams and goats, as it is said (Psalms 22:13) “Many bulls have encompassed me”, and it says, (Daniel 8:20) “The ram which thou sawest having two horns, they are the kings of Media and Persia” and it further says, (Daniel 8:21) “And the rough he-goat is the king of Greece” — and Israel is compared to young doves, as it is written, (Song 2:14) ‘‘O my dove that art in the clefts of the rock” — he therefore divided the animals indicating that other nations will gradually perish, ואת הצפור לא בתר but “the birds split he not”, suggesting thereby that Israel will live forever (Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer 28).

ואת הצפור, “and the bird, etc,” a reference to the pigeon which is part of the generic term צפור.

BUT THE BIRD HE DID NOT SPLIT. He placed the turtle-dove²⁶⁴In Verse 9 above. and the young pigeon opposite each other for they too were in the covenant, but Abraham did not split them in the middle since concerning all fowl offered on the altar it says, He shall not separate it.²⁷⁰Ibid., 1:17. In Bereshith Rabbah the Sages said,²⁷¹44:14. “The Holy One, blessed be He, indicated to him that in a bird Whole-offering, the ministering-priest severs both the gullet and the windpipe, but in a bird Sin-offering he does not sever” [the head from the body, as he must cut one and not both of the organs].²⁷²See Rashi, Leviticus 1:15 and 5:8. The principle is derived from the following textual inference: Since Abraham was asked to bring both “a turtle-dove and a young pigeon,” why does Scripture conclude by saying, And the bird [hatzipor — singular] he did not split? This is to indicate that of the two kinds of sacrifices to be brought from fowl, namely, the Sin-offering and the Whole-offering, only one would be subject to the injunction not to separate it, and Scripture later specifies that this is the bird Sin-offering. (Leviticus 5:8.)

ויבתר אותם, Avram cut these animals in half. Some exegetes feel that all animal sacrifices were to be cut up in a similar manner. (no source mentioned) This opinion is based on the Torah writing in Leviticus 1,6: ונתח אותה לנתחיה, “the priest is to cut it up according to its components.” [The animal being offered as a burnt offering. Ed.]

ואת הצפור לא בתר, “but he did not divide up the bird.” The expression בתר instead of הבדיל is a bit unusual, as in the legislation concerning bird offerings the Torah uses the expression לא יבדיל “he must not separate the head from the body completely.’ (Leviticus 1,17)

ואת הצפור לא בתר, “but he did not cut up the bird.” Later on, after the Torah was given, bird offerings were also not cut up but the priest tore parts apart with his bare hands. (Levitcus 1,17.) [The Torah there adds that the tearing must not result in complete separation of one part from another. Ed.] Our author feels that the reason is that they would then seem as too small to be fit as gifts to the Lord.

A different explanation: The words ויבתר אותם בתוך, mean that he had cut them in half, i.e. in the middle. He had to allocate half of each animal to each party of the covenant, seeing that there were three of each of the mammals. He did not have to cut up the birds as there were only two, so that a whole bird could be allocated (symbolically) to each of the two parties of the covenant.