Comentários de Citação sobre Gênesis 17:17

The fifth question is about the statement (Genesis 21:6), "God has made laughter for me, all who hear of it will laugh for me," whereas it did not mention a word from Avraham, given that the strangeness and the laughter is also on his part. It is as it is written (Genesis 17:17), "To a hundred-year-old man shall there be [children] born, or shall ninety-year-old Sarah give birth?" As there, the impediment [to having children] is from both of them.

Avraham was one hundred years old: Since at the time that it was announced to Avraham that he would father a son, he fell "on his face and laughed and said in his heart, 'Can a hundred year old man have children'" (Genesis 17:17). And he laughed with joy about the miracle that He would do to him; so God told him that he should call him Yitzchak based on this laughter (tzchok). And afterwards when Sarah heard of the announcement, she also laughed with joy, as she went back to her youthfulness and would bear a child in the natural way; whereas Avraham would remain in his old age and require a miracle - as I wrote in my commentary there. According to this, it can be said that that which Avraham called the name of this son Yitzchak was because "Avraham was one hundred years old when his son Yitzchak was born to him." As he laughed and rejoiced about this - "can a hundred year old man have children?" And he was commanded to call him Yitzchak based on this. But about this, Sarah said (Genesis 21:6) that "God made for me" the main laughter and miracle - he made a greater miracle for me, to the point "that anyone who hears," will not laugh about the miracle of Avraham. Rather he "will laugh for me," about the miracle that was done for me. And she explained the thing - that even though I went back to my youthfulness, and based on this, the birth was in the natural way, nevertheless...

V.6. Aus V. 8 ist ersichtlich, daß Aarons Absicht vereitelt, und die Opfer dem Kalbe gebracht wurden. Indem mit וישב das Volk als ein neues Subjekt eingeführt wird, so sieht man, daß an den Opfern nicht das Volk im ganzen sich beteiligte. Es waren die Wort- und Anführer, die bis zu diesem Extreme gingen, allein das Volk nahm an den Opfermahlen und ihren Folgen Teil. Charakteristisch heißen die Folgen:.צֵחֵק Inצחק liegt immer eine Verneinung des von צהוק betroffenen Gegenstandes (siehe zu Bereschit 17, 17), eine Überhebung über ein Schweres, Großes, Hohes, Edles. Das dem einen Einzigen und seinem Gesetze, in Folge seines Gesetzes, gebrachte Opfer lässt den Opfernden im Opfer sich selber Gott und dem Diktate seines heiligen und heiligenden Sittengesetzes unterordnen und hingeben. Es involviert die Huldigung des über dem Menschen stehenden, den Menschen zu sich empor ladenden Hohen, Großen, Edlen. Das heidnische, einem selbstgemachten Gotte dargebrachte Opfer, wie es aus der Tiefe des Subjektivismus entsprungen, weckt auch das Individuum zur kühnsten Subjektivität. Es hat ja nicht die Selbstaufopferung im Opfer gelobt. Es hat einen vermeintlichen Machthaber seiner Zukunft mit dem Opfer in den Dienst seines subjektiven Beliebens gebannt, hat mit dem Opfer dessen Zürnen, dessen Gleichgültigkeit überwunden, hat nicht seinem subjektiven Belieben, sondern seinem Gotte mit dem Opfer Fesseln angelegt, und wir begreifen, wie – ganz abgesehen von der entsittlichenden Idealisierung der sinnlichen Natur, die den Göttern des Heidentums und deren Opfern zu Grunde liegt – völlige Umkehrung des jüdischen Opferbegriffs, Ausschweifung und Zügellosigkeit, das ist ja Entfesselung des Individuums, unmittelbar im Gefolge heidnischer Opfer auftreten können. Auch צחֵק ist hier eine Entfesselung der Sinnlichkeit und zwar, wie das Wort lehrt, nicht eine Ausschweifung aus Leidenschaft, sondern ein sinnliches Ausschweifen, um die Nichtigkeit der sittlichen Fesseln zu demonstrieren, eine Ironisierung des Sittengesetzes durch Kanonisierung der Sinnlichkeit.

and Salma begot Boaz Our Sages stated (Baba Bathra 91a): “Ibzan is Boaz,” but it is amazing because how can this be? Did not Nahshon die in the second year following the Exodus from Egypt? Now Salmon, his son, had already been born, and he was one of those who entered the land, and Boaz, his son, who was Ibzan, was born when he entered the land. Now from the Exodus from Egypt until Jephthah were three hundred years, and the Sages said that when Boaz was intimate with Ruth and she conceived, Boaz died immediately, and Ibzan was a judge after the death of Jephthah, as it is written (Judg. 12:8): “And after him, Ibzan of Bethlehem judged Israel.” About this I am amazed, for we find concerning Abram, that he said, “After his blood had become clotted, etc.,” and he said, (Gen. 17: 17): “Shall a child be born to [a man who is] a hundred years old?” So how did Boaz beget [a child] at the age of three hundred? It is possible to say that for this reason Scripture says (Ruth 4:13): “... and the Lord gave her conception,” on the pattern of “... and the Lord blessed him.” (Ibzan - The father of all the cold ones, for a young woman lay beside him, and he became cold and did not touch her. Not appearing in some editions.)