Komentaryong Sumisipi para sa Genesis 27:3

Furthermore, the author of the Akeidah based this interpretation on the Midrash (Genesis Rabbah 1:12) which expounds on the verse: Your humility has made me great (Psalms 18:36). A flesh and blood king mentions their name first and then their deeds, but the Holy One, Blessed be He, mentioned His deeds before mentioning His name. One must contemplate: What aspect of humility is demonstrated in this, and what is meant by “has made me great” — in what way did He make us great? The explanation that seems closest to me is that Rashi wanted to address all of this when he said that the verse is calling for interpretation — that it is because of the Torah and Israel, who are called “reishit.” This means that it is impossible to recognize the existence of the Blessed God except through the Torah and Israel. Therefore, they are called “reishit” because both are prerequisites for coming to recognize the existence of the Blessed God, as the Torah publicizes the belief in creation and His divinity, may He be blessed. And Israel also knows how to publicize the existence of the Blessed Name through the tradition they received, passed down from person to person back to Adam, who witnessed the world both destroyed and built, and they are a reliable witness to the world’s creation, which is proof of its Creator. This tradition spread through the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel.

Rabbi Yitzchak said: “The Torah did not need to begin [with the creation story] … rather [it began with creation] so that the nations would not say ‘you are thieves.’” This raises a difficulty: Why should it matter if they call us thieves? Should the Torah’s order be changed because of this? The answer is that this matter leads to denial of fundamental principles, for they will say “there is no law and no Judge” and “might makes right.” For if the world had a ruler who arranges its affairs, its comings and goings, why did He not protest when you took the lands of the seven nations by force through thievery? For this same reason, the decree against the generation of the flood was sealed only because of theft, as it is written: One who robs his father and mother and says “it is not wrong” is a companion to a destroyer (Proverbs 28:24). The reason this sin was considered greater than others is not because of the essence of the sin itself, but because of the evil that stems from it — for one who sins through theft does not consider himself guilty and says “there is no wrong,” [believing] there are no divine judges on earth. Therefore, he is a companion to the destroyer — meaning to the generation of the flood, about whom it is said for all flesh had corrupted its way (Genesis 6:12), for they too denied fundamental principles and said What is the Almighty that we should serve Him (Job 21:15)? This leads to violence and theft in the land. Since the prevention of theft is fundamental to all faith, the Holy One, blessed be He, prioritized it and warned about it in the first commandment This month shall be for you (Exodus 12:2), for there it states Draw forth and take for yourselves sheep (Exodus 12:21) — from what belongs to you, excluding what is stolen, as explained by the Baal HaTurim. Similarly, when Isaac commanded to bring him two young goats, one to make as a Passover sacrifice, he said Hunt game for me (Genesis 27:3) — Rashi explains: from ownerless property, not from theft. And because Esau’s heart was not so inclined, but rather to hunt game even through theft, therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, arranged that only Jacob, who was careful about theft, would bring it. Likewise regarding the ox that Adam offered as a sacrifice, our Sages said (Avodah Zarah 8a) that it had one horn on its forehead. This indicates that just as Adam was “one horn,” meaning he was alone in the world and could not steal from any creature, therefore his sacrifice was accepted. All this is to distance oneself from theft and robbery which leads to denial and heresy.

V. 3. ושב וגו׳. Sätze wie hier ושב וגו׳ את שבותך und so häufig in den Propheten und Psalmen: בשוב ד׳ שבות עמו (Ps. 14, 7) ושבתי את שבות עמי (Jirm. 30, 3), שב שבות אהלי יעקב (Jirm. 30, 18), ושבתי את שבות מצרים (Ezech. 29, 14) usw. legen die Ansicht nahe, daß in solchen Stellen שוב in transitiver Bedeutung, so viel als השיב, stehe. Allein abgesehen davon, daß, außer dieser Gedankenverbindung, es für eine transitive Bedeutung der Wurzel שוב kein Beispiel gibt, so dürfte schon unsere Stelle selbst gegen eine solche Auffassung sprechen. Offenbar sind ושב וגו׳ und ורחמך Akte, die der Zurückführung Israels in die Urheimat, dem ושב וקבצך usw. vorangehen. Nun könnte hier und in den meisten mit את konstruierten Stellen ושב את שבותך heißen: Gott kehrt mit deinen Vertriebenen zurück, d. h.: in demselben Grade und sobald du im Exil zu Gott zurückkehrst, kehrt er auch zu dir zurück. Allein die ohne את konstruierten Stellen wie: בשוב ד׳ שבות עמו usw. wären damit nicht erklärt. Vielmehr glauben wir, an die ganz normalen Erscheinungen erinnern zu dürfen, daß auch sonstige Verba intransitiva, ganz besonders aber, die eine Bewegung ausdrücken, das Ziel der Bewegung, und bei inneren Bewegungen das Moment, auf welches dieselbe gerichtet ist, das sie hervorgerufen und in welches sie sich konzentriert, im Akkusativ nach sich haben. So ja auch לך שוב מצרים :שוב (Schmot 4, 19), שובה ד׳ רבבות עמך (Bamidbar 10, 36), בשוב ד׳ ציון (Jes.52, 8), ויואב שב ירושלים (Sam. II. 20, 22). וצא השרה :יצא (Bereschit 27, 3), צאו ההר (Nehem. 8, 15), בצאתי שער (Job. 29,7). Auch mit את, wo dann der Akkusativ den Gegenstand bezeichnet, dessen Verlassen das Hinausgehen im Auge hat: יצאו את העיר (Bereschit 44, 4) כצאתי את העיר (Schmot 9, 26) und so auch בני יצאוני ואינם (Jirmija 10, 20). Auch ויגש דוד את העם :נגש (Sam. I. 30, 21). Auch הלך mit ואת בית ד׳ אני הולך :את (Richter 19, 18), wo er den ganzen Weg beschreibt, den er bereits zurückgelegt, und mit את בית ד׳ das eigentliche Ziel seiner Reise bezeichnet und hervorhebt, um hinzuzufügen: und doch nimmt mich keiner auf! ואין איש מאסף אותי הביתה.