ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף בראשית 32:8

AND ABRAM SAID, O LORD ETERNAL, WHAT WILT THOU GIVE ME? “Behold, Thou hast saved me from the kings, but Thou hast not assured me against extinction. Thou hast only said that Thou wilt give me great reward, but what can my reward be without children?”
Now it had not occurred to Abraham that this great reward would be in the World to Come for there is no necessity for such a promise; every servant of G-d will find life in the hereafter before him. But in this world there are righteous men, unto whom it happened according to the work of the wicked.²²¹Ecclesiastes 8:14. It is for this reason that the righteous have need of assurance. Moreover, very great²²²Thy reward shall be ‘very great.’ implies that he will merit both worlds²²³“Both worlds,” literally “two tables,” a Rabbinic figure of speech (Berachoth 5 b) signifying access to the best of this world and also of the hereafter. with all the best therein without any punishment whatever as befits the really righteous people. Moreover, an assurance is given for that which a person fears. [Hence, he needed no assurance concerning the hereafter. But he feared being childless; therefore G-d] rejoined and explained that His assurance included that he should not fear this either, as He will make his children as the stars of heaven for multitude.²²⁴Deuteronomy 1:10.
You may ask: Has it not been told to Abraham already, For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth,²²⁵Above, 13:15-16. and so, how could Abraham now say, Since I go childless…lo, my household slave will be mine heir?²²⁶Verses 2-3 here. And why did he not believe in the first prophecy, as he would believe in this [second one which G-d will now relate to him?] The answer is that the righteous ones have no trust in themselves, fearing they might have sinned in error. Thus it is written At one instant I may speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and plant it; but if that nation turn and do evil before Me, then I repent of the good.²²⁷Jeremiah 18:9-10, with some changes. Now when Abraham saw himself advanced in years and the first prophecy concerning him had not yet been fulfilled, he thought that his sins had withheld that good from him.²²⁸See ibid., 5:25. And perhaps he now feared that he would be punished for the people that he killed in the war, as our Rabbis have said.²²⁹Bereshith Rabbah 44:5. They have expressed a similar thought in Bereshith Rabbah:²³⁰Ibid., 76:2. “Then Jacob was greatly afraid and was distressed.²³¹Genesis 32:8. From this we derive the principle that there is no assurance for the righteous ones in this world, etc.”

WITHOUT THOUGHT OF RECEIVING PAY. A different version of our mishna has the text “intending not to receive pay”. I cannot understand that version, for it is impossible that one should serve only on condition that he not receive pay, for the implication is that should he receive pay, he will not serve. Midrash Shmuel writes that the case in the first version is one who serves without declaring that he is doing so specificaly to receive pay; he is still aware that the pay will come, and does have hopes of reward. On the other hand, one who serves intending not to receive pay is one who explicitly serves not in order to receive pay but out of love alone. While this is improves matters exegetically, it doesn’t fit the language of that other version well.
As for his criticism of the first version, that even one who serves out of love alone still knows that the reward will eventually come, I would not call such a one someone who serves out of love; in fact, he is the archetypal servant who serves for reward! One who serves out of love alone is he who constantly finds his service insufficient and, because of his great love of G-d, feels that he has not served properly. As Hillel says in mishna 14, “And I for myself, what am I?”, according to Rav's commentary ad loc.¹¹Rav there: even if I have accrued merit for myself, what is this merit and what is it worth when considered against what I am truly obligated to do? Not only does he hold no anticipation of reward, he fears for his soul lest he sin by falling short in his service, which is what the tanna intends by his last words, “and the fear of heaven should be upon you”, as I will explain.
This was the way of the patriarchs. Although our father Abraham was promised seed he afterwards said, “and I remain childless” (Genesis 15:2).¹²The author is most likely recalling Ramban’s commentary on that verse, which points out that although Abraham had already been promised offspring, he feared that his sins might have annulled the promise. This is why G-d was called “the fear of Isaac” (Genesis 31: 42),¹³I.e., the one before whom Isaac feared the consequences of his sins. and Jacob likewise feared that perhaps he had been sullied by sin.¹⁴As per the Talmud’s exegesis in Berachot 4a on Genesis 32:8. This is the portion and these are the thoughts of the servants of G-d who serve out of love alone; there is no anticipation of reward whatsoever. And so the version before us is correct—so it seems to me.

"Verses would contradict each other!" [Problem:] Even though we find many items that are in grammatical male and female, as it is written "Hand sent (fem.) to me and there was in it (masc.) a scroll" (Ezekiel 2:9), "The sun sets (fem.)" (Genesis 15:17) "The sun rises (masc.)" (Genesis 19:23), "The one (fem.) camp and he struck it (masc.) (Genesis 32:8); and so too in the language of Hazal we find, "A lamp that goes out (fem.) is not required for it" (Shabbat 21a) "Lamp that goes out (masc.)" (Shabbat 44a), "Your donkey left (fem.) Tarfon" (Sanhedrin 33a) "One who rents a donkey and she breaks off and goes to the mountain" (Baba Metzia 78a) "but before the owner of the cow could pull the donkey, the donkey died (masc.)", and so in many places. Solution: Whenever it is possible to teach [something interesting from the use of grammatical gender], we teach, and also with verses if there is a derashah. Alternatively: Because the mishnayot that teach their terminology after the biblical period, [Hazal] wanted to give them reason and specificity [to the biblical use of grammatical gender].