Comentários de Citação sobre Gênesis 24:3

אל הארץ אשר אראך, “to the land which I will show you.” It is an additional hardship to be ordered to undertake a journey the destination of which has not been revealed beforehand. Avraham considered all this as easy, as he was anxious to fulfill G’d’s request out of a feeling of love for Him. Rashi queries that this commandment was not new, seeing that Avraham had already left his homeland a number of years ago when he went to Charan with his father? He therefore explains that we must understand what G’d is reported to have said here to Avraham to make an even more drastic break with his past by leaving his father’s house. Ibn Ezra views the basic commandment as having been formulated by G’d already when G’d said to him לך לך מארצך as well as ממולדך ומבית אביך, at a time when he was still in Ur Casdim. G’d had known that Terach, Avraham’s father, would not go beyond Charan. In fact, Terach died 60 years after Avraham had continued his journey to the land of Canaan. Nachmanides disagrees, writing that if correct, the paragraph describing the move from Ur Casdim should have portrayed Avraham as the principal, instead of describing Terach as having taken the other family members with him. (11,31) Clearly, at that time Avraham followed his father’s instructions, not G’d’s. No mention had been made of G’d having communicated with Avraham as yet. Furthermore, in the verse from Joshua 24,3 G’d is quoted as having said: “I have taken your father (Avraham) from beyond the river Euphrates.” If Ibn Ezra were correct, Joshua should have quoted: “I have taken your father from Ur Casdim, etc.” Still another proof that Ibn Ezra is not correct can be found in the instructions Avraham issued to his trusted servant Eliezer when he sent him to get a wife for Yitzchok. In Genesis 24,3 Avraham instructs Eliezer to take a wife for Yitzchok from ארצי ומולדתי, “my homeland and the place where I was born.” Eliezer proceeded to travel to Aram Naharyim, not to Ur Casdim in order to discharge his master’s mission. Ibn Ezra is wrong when he interprets the words in that verse as meaning ארצי=חרן and מולדתי as Ur Casdim. How could he say here that this directive was given to Avraham while he was still in Ur Casdim? Avraham had a number of countries that he called “his country” at different times, though he had only one birthplace and one father’s house. The fact is that Charan was both his homeland, his birthplace, and the location of his father’s house.

YIDOR NEDER LA’SHEM (VOWETH A VOW ‘UNTO’ THE ETERNAL). The meaning of [the expression] ‘yidor neder la’shem’ is not like that of ‘asher nishba la’shem (how he — David — swore ‘unto’ the Eternal),³¹Ibid., 132:2. for that [expression mentioned by David] is like ‘vayishava lo’ (and he swore ‘to him’)³²This is in reference either to Genesis 24:9, where Eliezer swore to Abraham to find a wife for Isaac from the country of his birthplace, or to Genesis 47:31, Joseph swearing to Jacob that he would bury him together with his fathers. In both cases the meaning of the prepositional lamed [‘lo’] is its literal meaning — “unto him,” and the intention is to say that the oath was “for his benefit.” Likewise the prepositional lamed [in the word la’shem] used by David has its literal meaning — “for ‘the benefit’ [so to say] and glory of G-d,” since the oath concerned his determination to build the House of G-d. which means that he swore to him for his [the recipient’s] benefit. But [the use of the prepositional lamed in the case of vows is equivalent to the use of the preposition beth (“by”)³³The gist of Ramban’s reasoning is as follows: The prepositional lamed in the case of oaths [in the examples cited above] has the meaning of “to” — to the benefit of the recipient, as is the case of Eliezer where the oath was for the benefit of Abraham. This principle, however, cannot be made to apply to vows, since in our verse it says if a man vows a vow ‘la’shem,’ and the verse is not speaking exclusively about vows to the benefit of the Sanctuary but refers to vows of all sorts, even of secular matters. Hence we must say that the prepositional lamed in vows has the same meaning as the beth [not the lamed] in oaths, which in both cases means “by” — by G-d. In other words, the prepositional lamed in vows and the beth in oaths are identical in meaning. Finally, Ramban will conclude that the Cabala does offer an explanation why a different preposition is used in each case. Thus it is shown that the mystic character of the Sacred Language is deeply embedded in the text of the Torah. in the case of oaths, for] in the case of oaths Scripture says: ‘u’vishmo’ (and ‘by’ His Name) shalt thou swear;³⁴Deuteronomy 6:13. v’ashbiacha ‘ba’shem’ (and I will make thee swear ‘by’ the Eternal);³⁵Genesis 24:3. as I swore ‘lecha’ (unto thee) ‘ba’shem’ (‘by’ the Eternal), the G-d of Israel, saying: Assuredly Solomon thy son shall reign after me;³⁶I Kings 1:30. swear ‘li’ (unto me) here ‘bei’Elokim’ (‘by’ G-d).³⁷Genesis 21:23. But in the case of a vow Scripture does not say: “he vows ‘ba’shem’ (‘by’ G-d)” but la’shem (‘to’ G-d). The Sages in the Sifre have already alluded to the reason for this matter [the different terminology], saying:³⁸Sifre, Matoth 153. See Vol. I, p. 66, where Ramban quotes this Sifre. “What is the difference between vows and oaths? Vows are like vowing³⁹This is the text in the Sifre and in Ramban here. In Genesis, however, Ramban has “swearing” (Vol. I, p. 66). The intent of the texts in both places is equivalent. ‘by the life of the King;’ oaths are like swearing ‘by the King Himself.’ Although there is no [clear] proof for this explanation [in Scripture], there is an allusion to it: By the living G-d, and by the life of your soul. I will not leave thee.”⁴⁰II Kings 4:30. See Vol. I, p. 66, Note 290 where this text is explained in detail. And the secret thereof is that the shevuah (oath) is derived from the word shivah [“seven” — alluding to the seven Emanations], for she [wisdom] hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars,⁴¹Proverbs 9:1. whereas the vow is on [the level of] understanding, the beginning of His way, the first of His works of old.⁴²Ibid., 8:22. Thus you find that vows take precedence over the Torah, and therefore they apply to commandments just as to optional matters [as explained above]. Thus all vows are la’shem (“to” the Eternal), whereas all who swear [do so] “by” Him.

'ה אלהי השמים אשר לקחני מבית אבי THE LORD, GOD OF HEAVEN, WHO TOOK ME FROM MY FATHER'S HOUSE — Here he did not say “[The God of heaven] and the God of the earth”, whereas above (v. 3) he said, “And I will make thee swear etc. … [and the God of the earth]’’. But, in effect, Abraham said to him: Now He is the God of heaven and the God of the earth, because I have made him (i. e. His Name) a familiar one in peoples’ mouths: but at the time when He took me from my father’s house He was God of heaven only and not God of the earth for people did not acknowledge Him and His Name was not commonly known on earth (Genesis Rabbah 59:7).