Комментарий о цитате к Берешит 24:14

AND SHE CALLED HIS NAME SHELAH, AND HE [Judah] WAS AT CHEZIB, WHEN SHE BORE HIM. Rashi wrote: “I am of the opinion that because it was there that she ceased bearing children, the place was called Chezib (deceit). It is similar in expression to the verse, Wilt thou indeed be unto me as a deceitful (‘achzav’) brook.¹³⁹Jeremiah 15:18. If this be not so, what is the verse teaching us by mentioning that Judah was in Chezib?”
Now I do not know why a place should be named for that reason, [i.e., because there she ceased bearing children], there being nothing outstanding in such an event as three sons were sufficient for her.¹⁴⁰Had she been barren that would be a tragedy of some significance. Moreover, at the time she gave birth to the third son it was not yet known whether she had ceased bearing or would give birth afterwards. Only at the time of her demise did it become established [that she had ceased bearing with the third son].¹⁴¹Why then would the place have been called Chezib at the time she gave birth to the third son?
Now some scholars¹⁴²R’dak in his commentary. Also in Da’ath Z’keinim ba’alei Tosafoth. say that it was their custom for the father to name the firstborn, and the mother the second one. It is for this reason that Scripture states concerning the first son, And he called his name,¹⁴³Verse 3 here. and concerning the second one, And she called.¹⁴⁴Verse 4 here. Now concerning the third son, [the naming of whom was the father’s prerogative, Scripture nevertheless] says, And she called, explaining that this was because Judah was in Chezib when she gave birth to him, and he was not there to name him. This interpretation lacks rhyme or reason.
In the opinion of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra Scripture relates where they were born; the statement, when she bore ‘him,’ is as if it had said ‘them,’ as all three sons were born in one place.
In my opinion, the name Shelah is an expression meaning a thing which stops and deceives. Thus, do not ‘thashleh’ (deceive) me,¹⁴⁵II Kings 4:28. which the Targum there renders as, “Let not your word deceive your handmaid.” Perhaps it is related to the concept of error, for he who commits an error deceives his thinking. Thus Scripture is saying that she called him Shelah, [a word which is traceable to the root of the Hebrew word meaning ‘error,’] because of the name of the place, as he was in Chezib — [a word which means ‘deceive’] — when she bore him. And [the word v’hayah (and he was), although it should really be saying, v’haytha, (and she was), is identical with the expression ‘V’hayah hana’arah’ (And the damsel shall be).¹⁴⁶Above, 24:14. There, too, it should be saying, v’haytha hana’arah in the feminine, except that the word v’haya does not refer to na’arah but to the event itself and is therefore to be understood as: “And it shall come to pass that the damsel, etc.” Here, likewise, it is to be so understood. This is the intent of the saying of the Rabbis in Bereshith Rabbah:¹³⁷85:5. “Paskath was the name of the place.”¹⁴⁷This contradicts the opinion of Rashi, who maintains that it was the mother who named the place Chezib because she ceased bearing children.

From here … is solicitous of the [Israelites’] property. You might ask: From where did Rashi derive this? Perhaps Hashem was answering their request when they asked why they and their livestock should die there, and Hashem answered, “Give drink to the community and their livestock.” The answer is that the term השקית (lit. "you will give water") refers to animals, as it is written in Parshas Chaye Sarah (Bereishis 24:14) “וגם גמליך אשקה” ["And I will also water your camels"]. Thus the Torah should have said “וישתו העדה” ["Let the community drink"] as it writes shortly (v. 11) “ותשת העדה” ["And the community drank"] because the term שתייה ["drinking"] refers to people, as it is also written “שתה אדוני” ["Let my master drink"] (Bereishis 24:18). However, since Scripture modifies its wording and writes והשקית ["And give drink"] it is certainly because “[Hashem] is solicitous of the Israelites’ property.” (Mahari) Also one may answer that Rashi is answering the question: Why is it necessary for the Torah to state “And their livestock”? For in Parshas Beshalach (Shemos 17:3) when Hashem answered Moshe’s request for water, He answered only that the people would drink, and the answer was despite Yisroel having said “To kill me and my children and my livestock [through thirst].” If so, why does it state, “And their livestock”? Rather it was because “[Hashem] is solicitous…” (Kitzur Mizrochi) Hashem said בעירם ["their livestock"] with a mem. Thus we learn that He is solicitous of them because they are the Israelites’ livestock, and not merely because they are animals. For if not so, it should have said “Give drink to the community and the animals”! This answer is also apparent from Divrei Dovid.

הוכח תוכיח וגו׳ lehrt zunächst das nicht nur gestattete, sondern als Pflicht ob liegende Verfahren, sobald wir uns durch irgend jemanden durch Wort oder Tat gekränkt fühlen; es lehrt aber zugleich eine allgemeine Pflicht, die uns jederzeit und jedem gegenüber obliegt, den wir von den Bahnen des Rechts und der von Gott gebotenen Pflicht abweichen sehen. הוכח, in bei weitem überwiegender Zahl von Fällen heißt הוכיח: jemandem eine unliebsame Erkenntnis zu überzeugtem Bewußtsein bringen sei es, ihn eines logischen Irrtums, wie Job 9, 33, oder ihn einer sittlichen Verirrung überführen, wie in den meisten anderen Fällen, und zwar wird dieses letztere sowohl direkt durch mündliche Beweisführung, wie Jesaias 29, 21 und sonst, oder indirekt durch Leiden, wie Prov. 3, 13 und sonst, bewirkt. In dieser Beziehung dürfte יכח in Verwandtschaft mit יגה stehen, das im הפעיל auch: Leiden geben heißt und vielleicht, wie הלך und ילך, auch mit הגה, dem Ausdruck der Gedankenerzeugung, verwandt ist. Es gibt nur eine einzige Stelle, in welcher die Erkenntnis, die הוכיח vermittelt, nichts Unliebsames hat, es ist dies das: אותה הוכחת לעבדך ליצחק Eliesers (Bereschit 24, 14) und ebenso in dessen Bericht (daselbst V. 44). Es dürfte Elieser damit die ganze Entschiedenheit haben ausdrücken wollen, in welcher er den Erfolg des sich vorgesetzen Wahrzeichens auffassen wollte. Es sollte ihm das als eine absolute Erklärung des göttlichen Willens gelten, vor welcher alle etwa entgegenstehenden Bedenken und Erwägungen zurückzutreten hätten. Nach unserer Auffassung gehörte hierher auch das: ואת כל ונוכחת (daselbst 20, 16). Abimelech sagte damit, sie könne sich ferner nur mit aller Entschiedenheit als das kundgeben, was sie sei, alle entgegenstehenden Bedenken seien durch sein letztes Benehmen gegen sie beseitigt. Es findet sich übrigens הוכיח konstruiert mit ל־ und mit את der Person. Ersteres heißt: jemandem etwas zum Bewußtsein bringen letzteres: jemanden sich zum Bewußtsein, ihn zur Selbsterkenntnis bringen.

גם אתה DRINK THOU ALSO — Her use of the word גם, also suggests that she intended to include the men who accompanied him.

ותפל SHE ALIGHTED (literally, she fell) — She let herself slide towards the ground; as the Targum renders it וארכינת —she inclined herself towards the earth, but did not actually reach the ground. Similarly in (Genesis 24:14) “let down thy pitcher, I pray thee”, the word הטי let down, Onkelos translates by ארכיני “incline”, and (Psalm 18:10) “He bowed (ויט) the heavens” he translates by וארכין which means “He bent them towards the ground”. A similar idea is (Psalms 37:24) “Though he fall (יפול) he shall not be utterly cast down” which is as much as to say, “though he bends himself towards the earth yet he shall not touch the ground (i. e. shall not fall entirely)” (Genesis Rabbah 60:15).