Parshas Chayei Sarah
1. On the verse,[1] "G‑d, the G‑d of heaven, Who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth…" — which Avraham Avinu said to Eliezer — Rashi dwells on the words "G‑d, the G‑d of heaven, Who took me from my father's house" and explains:[2] "He did not say 'and the G‑d of the earth,' yet above he said, 'And I will make you swear, etc.' He said to him: Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth, for I have made Him familiar in the mouths of the people; but when He took me from my father's house, He was the G‑d of heaven and not the G‑d of the earth, for the inhabitants of the world did not recognize Him, and His Name was not familiar on earth."[3]
Learning it simply, Rashi comes to address the reason for the change between the verses: in this verse he does not say "and the G‑d of the earth," while in the previous verse he says, "And I will make you swear by G‑d, the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth." Rashi explains this: "He said to him: Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth, etc."
According to this, however, we need to understand:
a) The change is only that in this verse it says only "the G‑d of heaven," while "above" it also says "the G‑d of the earth." Why, then, does Rashi also quote the word "G‑d,"[4] which also appears in the previous verse — "And I will make you swear by G‑d"?[5]
b) Why does he quote the continuation of the verse, "Who took me from my father's house,"[6] which is certainly not relevant to the question?
[And even if, simply, he quotes it because further on in his comment he says, "but when He took me from my father's house, He was the G‑d of heaven and not, etc." — this itself is not understood, as will be explained below.]
c) Why does Rashi need to spell out "He did not say 'and the G‑d of the earth'" — something one sees for oneself? He should have begun: "Yet above he said, etc." Rashi's wording implies that there is a reason why "the G‑d of the earth" should have been written here, and he therefore asks (in wonder), "He did not say 'and the G‑d of the earth'?!" — and the wonder becomes stronger because "above he said" it.
One cannot say that the reason "and the G‑d of the earth" should have been written here is only that it is written earlier with "And I will make you swear," and that "He did not say 'and the G‑d of the earth'" comes merely for added clarity. For besides the question above — what does this teach us? — Rashi should at any rate have written in the reverse order: "Above he said, 'And I will make you swear by G‑d, the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth,'" and [from this the question arises] afterwards, "and here he did not say 'and the G‑d of the earth.'"[7]
d) Rashi points out the place of the change with the word "(Yet above he said) 'And I will make you swear,'"[8] while the change itself (that above it says "and the G‑d of the earth") Rashi only alludes to with the word "etc." This is a double wonder: the words "and the G‑d of the earth," which are the subject of the question, Rashi does not quote at all — yet precisely the word "And I will make you swear," which has nothing at all to do with the question, he does quote! A pointer to the verse is altogether superfluous: had Rashi said "above he also said 'and the G‑d of the earth,'" one would know which verse he means, since it stands in the same passage, a mere four verses earlier!
2. One could seemingly explain (at least the last two questions — and with difficulty) that Rashi's question here arises chiefly from the word "And I will make you swear" (Eliezer!). In our verse, where Avraham Avinu says, "G‑d, the G‑d of heaven… He will send His angel before you, and you shall take a wife for my son from there" — since this speaks of G‑d's action here below, "and you shall take a wife for my son from there," it should have said here also "the G‑d of the earth." Whereas "above he said, 'And I will make you swear, etc.'" — there it speaks of Avraham Avinu's making Eliezer swear ("that you will not take… but you shall go to my land and to my birthplace…"), and Eliezer was "his servant, the elder of his household,"[9] the one who "drew and gave others to drink of his master's Torah";[10] it would surely have been enough to make him swear "by G‑d, the G‑d of heaven." Yet in fact it is the reverse: Avraham added "and the G‑d of the earth" with "And I will make you swear," and does not say it in the verse where it seemingly should have been written!
It is difficult, however, to explain it this way [besides the fact that the other questions above still remain]: for according to this, Rashi should have brought (at the beginning of his comment, and) chiefly, the continuation and end of the verse, "He will send His angel before you, and you shall take a wife for my son from there" (or at least alluded to it with "etc."), since the main question lies there.
3. We also need to understand several details and precise points in Rashi's answer and explanation:
a) If Rashi's intention in his comment is, as is simply implied, that with the change of wording (first "the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth," and now only "the G‑d of heaven") Avraham meant to emphasize the difference — that "now, for I have made Him familiar, etc., but when He took me, etc." — it is not understood why Rashi adds "He said to him: Now, etc.," rather than beginning his explanation "Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth," or the like [similar to the wording in the Sifri and in the Midrash,[11] where it does not say "He said to him"].
From the wording "He said to him" it is evident that Rashi understands that the matter of "Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth, etc." was explained by Avraham to Eliezer not only through the change in his wording, but through an explicit statement (in speech) to Eliezer here.
This is also apparent from the length of Rashi's wording: "for I have made Him familiar in the mouths of the people; but… for the inhabitants of the world did not recognize Him, and His Name was not familiar on earth" (and especially in the first person — speaking of himself). If all that Avraham said was nothing more than the change regarding "and the G‑d of the earth," Rashi need only have explained the change: "Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth, but when He took me from my father's house He was the G‑d of heaven and not the G‑d of the earth." From the length and the style it is understood that Avraham said this explicitly. It is not understood, then: (a) where is it alluded to in the verse that there was any statement at all from Avraham to Eliezer here; (b) and especially — the details of what was said in that statement?
b) Rashi continues: "but when He took me from my father's house, He was the G‑d of heaven and not the G‑d of the earth." What difference does it make that this was at the time when "He took me from my father's house"? True, Rashi uses the wording of the verse written here — "G‑d, the G‑d of heaven, Who took me from my father's house" — but in the verse the intent of Avraham's words is something entirely different: to enumerate the kindnesses that G‑d had done for him, "Who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth, and Who spoke to me, etc.," and that therefore He will surely (with the emphasis "He") "send His angel, etc."[12] — an intent that has no bearing on explaining the change.[13]
c) Regarding the time of "now," Rashi says only "for I have made Him familiar in the mouths of the people," whereas regarding the time of the negation Rashi adds "for the inhabitants of the world did not recognize Him (and His Name was not familiar on earth)."[14] Seemingly, regarding "now" too he should have added what stands opposite the first matter: "for I have made Him recognized among the inhabitants of the world," or the like.[15]
d) Rashi uses a new expression here (in his comment), "the inhabitants of the world" (ba'ei olam), changing from the wording just before it, "the people" (habrios) — and he concludes with a third expression, "on earth"!
e) With "the people" he says "I have made Him familiar"; with "on earth" — "His Name was not familiar"; with "the inhabitants of the world" — "recognize Him."
4. All this will be understood by first raising a general wonder about this comment of Rashi: What relevance at all does the matter of "Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth, etc., but when He took me from my father's house He was the G‑d of heaven and not the G‑d of the earth" have here, in the course of Avraham's conversation with Eliezer about a match for Yitzchak?
The explanation of this: When Avraham made Eliezer swear "that you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell; but you shall go to my land and to my birthplace…," it is understood that Avraham does not want for Yitzchak a wife from the daughters of the Canaanites — even though "I dwell among them," so that they are close to Avraham and under his influence, nevertheless Avraham wants specifically one from "(my land and) my birthplace." Simply, the reason is the advantage that, being of Avraham's family, they are in themselves better, more refined, and closer to the qualities of Avraham.[16]
Eliezer then asked: "Perhaps the woman will not want to follow me… shall I bring your son back to the land from which you came?" Since it is a place "from which you came" — Avraham comes from there and lived there — it would be fitting to "bring your son back" there. And when Avraham answered him, "Beware lest you bring my son back there," a great wonder must have arisen for Eliezer — either way: If the place "from which you came," Avraham's land and birthplace, has in it such an advantage that specifically from there "you shall take a wife for my son" — why should he not bring Yitzchak back there?[17]
And on the other hand, if what is chiefly important and significant is the place where Avraham is now — so that he does not want Yitzchak to go away (from Avraham's supervision and influence) even to the place that was Avraham's birthplace (because Avraham's influence on those "among whom" he dwells outweighs the advantage of "my land") — then why should he not take from "the daughters of the Canaanites," since "I dwell among them"?
We must therefore say that Avraham told Eliezer something that answered this wonder — though the answer is not explicit in the verses — and this is Rashi's intent in his comment, "He did not say 'and the G‑d of the earth,' yet above he said, 'And I will make you swear, etc.'": (a) from this it is evident that Avraham gave an answer to the wonder; and consequently (b) it is understood that the matter of "Now He is the G‑d, etc., but when He took me, etc." is relevant to the content of Eliezer's mission.
5. The explanation:
Rashi dwells on the words "G‑d, the G‑d of heaven, Who took me from my father's house" and infers precisely: since "G‑d created the heavens and the earth," and nevertheless "he did not say 'and the G‑d of the earth,'" it is evident that the words "the G‑d of heaven" were not said simply as praise of G‑d, as is done when one mentions His Name[18] (similar to "G‑d Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth," stated earlier[19]) — for then he should have said the praise in its entirety, saying also "and the G‑d of the earth."
"Yet above he said, 'And I will make you swear, etc.'": Above, too, where it says "the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth" — since this is said with "And I will make you swear," and when G‑d's Name is mentioned in the midst of an oath it is not fitting to interrupt with mere words of praise[20] (and that is why Rashi quotes "And I will make you swear," for this is what proves that the "etc." [the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth] is not mere praise).
Rather, we must accept that both "the G‑d of heaven" here and "the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth" "above" are relevant to the content of Avraham's words to Eliezer; with them he explained the above wonder — "either way, etc." (That is why Rashi must say "He said to him": it is not simply a lesson and an explanation of the change, but something that Avraham said and explained to Eliezer.)
And since he changed his wording — first "the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth," and now only "the G‑d of heaven" — it is understood that this change alludes to Avraham's explanation to Eliezer:
"He said to him: Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth, for I have made Him familiar in the mouths of the people" — this removes the wonder of why Avraham does not want to take from "the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell." For although "now" G‑d is here (in Avraham's place) also "the G‑d of the earth," through Avraham's having publicized His G‑dliness in the world, this has not yet influenced the daughters of the place to the point of making them fit as a match for Yitzchak, because it is only in the manner of "I have made Him familiar in the mouths of the people" — merely a matter of habit "in the mouths of the people," but not a change in conduct and in deed.
"But when He took me from my father's house, He was the G‑d of heaven and not the G‑d of the earth, for the inhabitants of the world did not recognize Him, and His Name was not familiar on earth": on the other hand, there is no room to bring Yitzchak to the land of "my father's house," because Avraham's influence — his "calling there in the Name of G‑d, the G‑d of the world"[21] — to the point that He became also "the G‑d of the earth" (at least in the manner of "I have made Him familiar in the mouths"), came only later, after "He took me from my father's house." "But when He took me from my father's house… [His Name] was not familiar on earth" — and consequently the place of "my father's house" was (and remained) in a state where He was only "the G‑d of heaven and not the G‑d of the earth":[22] they did not recognize G‑d, and "His Name was not familiar on earth."
6. In this, Rashi also changes the terms, etc., as mentioned above — and here we see once again how every word in Rashi's commentary is utterly precise.
By way of preface, at least briefly and in order: On "Then it was begun to call in the Name of G‑d,"[23] Rashi explains that they made the Name of G‑d profane, calling men and idols by it.
On "And he called there in the Name of G‑d, the G‑d of the world,"[24] Rashi explains that Avraham then brought it about that people should know that "you have not eaten of mine," but of that of "Him Who spoke and the world came into being" — the world belongs to "the G‑d of the world." In light of the above it is understood that:
a) From the days of Enosh, people always knew of G‑d's Name, but they made it profane — which shows that "they did not recognize Him" (G‑d).
b) Before Avraham's "calling," people thought that "you have eaten of mine," and so too with every thing and matter; it is understood, then, that "His Name was not familiar," for everything was either one's own or one's fellow's, etc.
c) Consequently, they recognized that He is "the G‑d of heaven," but "the inhabitants of the world" (before Avraham's "calling" — his speaking to them) "did not recognize Him":[25] they thought that "you have eaten of mine." And
d) "On earth" it is not usual to speak about "heaven"; therefore His Name was also not familiar (although they recognized His Name, the G‑d of heaven).
e) Avraham made familiar not only "His Name" but also Him Himself — as "the G‑d of the earth" — at every meal, etc.: 1) he told them that "you have eaten of His"; 2) he said to them, "Bless!" (with the mouth).
f) Regarding "the souls that they had made in Charan," Rashi says that he converted them;[26] they too recognized Him. But regarding "the people," it was only "I have made Him familiar in the mouths," not recognition.
7. The explanation in the inner dimension of the matter:
Seemingly, we need to understand: what Avraham accomplished "now" was that G‑d is also "the G‑d of the earth," for "the G‑d of heaven" He always was. Why, then, does Rashi double and lengthen the wording — "Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth, etc., but when He took me from my father's house He was the G‑d of heaven and not the G‑d of the earth" — and not say briefly, "Now He is also the G‑d of the earth, but when He took me from my father's house He was not the G‑d of the earth"?[27]
The explanation of this:[28] When Avraham was outside the Land, in Charan, his level was in the manner of the concealment of the level of Chochmah, and therefore his name at that time was "Avram" — av ram, "exalted father," a term of loftiness and concealment. This is also the matter of "Charan," which is numerically equal to garon, "throat" — and the throat interrupts the flow from the intellect to the emotions.
So too it was with the flow drawn down through his service: he drew down additional lights above, in Atzilus, but the flow did not come down into Beriah, Yetzirah and Asiyah, and into this world.
Only after G‑d told him, "Go for yourself from your land and from your birthplace… to the land," and he came to the Land of Israel, was there the descent and flow of the concealed intellect into the emotions, down to Malchus, the level of "land";[29] and then the additional lights that Avraham had drawn down in Atzilus also came down below, into Beriah, Yetzirah, Asiyah and this world.
According to this the reason is understood why only "now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth,"[30] but "when He took me from my father's house He was the G‑d of heaven and not the G‑d of the earth." Although in "my father's house," in Charan, Avraham also worked to publicize G‑dliness in the world,[31] since at that time his level was in the state of concealed intellect, this did not bring about in the world that He should be "the G‑d of the earth."
And this is also why Avraham said, "but when He took me from my father's house, He was the G‑d of heaven (and not the G‑d of the earth)": for in "my father's house," too, Avraham accomplished through his service in the matter of "the G‑d of heaven," that additional lights be drawn down into Atzilus; only at that time it was "and not the G‑d of the earth," for it was not drawn down into the world.
8. According to this we will understand why he said, "Now He is the G‑d of heaven and the G‑d of the earth" — for in the matter of "the G‑d of heaven," too, there was something new "now" compared with before:
That Avraham now brought it about that He should be also "the G‑d of the earth" — that the flows above in Atzilus should be drawn down also into Beriah, Yetzirah and Asiyah[32] — came about because the concealed Chochmah, which is higher than Atzilus, was drawn down and revealed. The additional lights that Avraham had previously drawn down into Atzilus were only to the extent set out from the outset in the order of the chain of worlds (hishtalshelus). But when G‑d told him (and this was also an empowerment for it), "Go for yourself from your land and from your birthplace…," and he went out of Charan to the Land of Israel, the av ram was then revealed: through there being drawn into it from the concealment that is higher still, the bond and union of the Emanator with the emanated came about, and through Avraham's service additional lights were drawn down into Atzilus beyond what is set out according to the order of hishtalshelus.
It follows that the matter of "the G‑d of heaven," too, that Avraham accomplished "now," was in a higher manner than "when He took me from my father's house." On the contrary: because of the elevation and addition that came about in "the G‑d of heaven" — in the flow and union in Atzilus — there came about, through this, the matter of "the G‑d of the earth": that the concealment of Atzilus should be drawn down and revealed also in Beriah, Yetzirah and Asiyah, down to the very lowest level.
9. Nevertheless, since this was before the annulment of the decree — which took place at the Giving of the Torah,[33] when "the lower beings shall ascend to the higher, and the higher shall descend to the lower" [and although Avraham's service in going out from Charan to the Land of Israel was the preparation for the union of higher and lower at the Giving of the Torah[34]] — Avraham's service did not bring about a change and an elevation in the very nature of the matters of the world and of the creatures in it,[35] so that He would be the G‑d of the earth in a manner of recognition; it was no more than "I have made Him familiar in the mouths of the people."
(From a talk of Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah, 5732)
Key Lesson
Avraham did not want Yitzchak to marry a Canaanite woman, even though G‑d's Name had become familiar where he lived, because people saying the right words is not the same as people being changed in how they live. Nor would he send Yitzchak back to Charan, where G‑d was not known at all. Real influence means bringing G‑dliness down until it changes conduct and deed; Avraham began this by going to the Land of Israel, and at Mattan Torah it became possible to transform the world itself.