בְּרֵאשִׁית‎

BeReshit

Génesis

CAPÍTULO 22

Con Comentarios

Y fue después de estas, las palabras/las cosas, y los ELOHIM (fueron) para probar a Avrajam, y Él le dijo hacia Avrajam, “Avrajam.” Y él dijo: “He aquí, yo”.

Escucha este capítulo en Hebreo.

Torá Inicio

Inicio Tanakj

◄ Cap. 21

Cap. 23 ►

Y fue después de estas, las palabras/las cosas, y los ELOJIM (fueron) para probar a Avrajam, y Él le dijo hacia Avrajam, “Avrajam.” Y él dijo: “He aquí, yo”.

1 וַיְהִי אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וְהָאֱלֹהִים נִסָּה אֶת־אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּנִי׃

א

הַדְּבָרִים/HaDevarim

Esta palabra significa "Las palabras" o "Las cosas". Supongo que dependería de cómo lo uses en contexto. Al traducir del hebreo antiguo, a veces es necesario parafrasear extensamente; sin embargo, me esfuerzo por hacerlo de la manera más mínima posible. Esta es la razón por la cual mis traducciones pueden parecer o sonar extrañas. Por ejemplo, puede que hayan notado que empiezo las oraciones con la palabra "y" bastante a menudo. Esto es porque así es como está escrito en las escrituras. Si la Torá empieza cada una de sus oraciones con la palabra "y", yo también lo haré. Este versículo está escrito de tal manera que, si usas esta palabra en dos significados diferentes, según sus significados de la palabra, la oración cambia todo. ¿Cómo lo juntarías si ves esto?

Esto es lo que dice, palabra por palabra, junto con los diversos significados de las palabras en este verso.

Esto parece haber ocurrido entre 2050 y 2085, abarcando un período de 35 años. Avraham habría tenido entre 102 y 137 años, Sarah entre 92 y 127, y Yitzkhak entre 2 y 37 años. No veo ninguna otra pista que lo limite más.

“Los ELOJIM (que significa los PODERES), dijo hacia Avrajam”

YJVJ y todos sus ejércitos celestiales iban a poner a prueba a Avrajam. Recuerda que Avrajam está forjando su propio camino ahora, tomando sus propias decisiones. ELOJIM ya no está guiando a Avrajam. Avrajam está actuando de acuerdo con la manera en que ha aprendido de ELOJIM, es decir, YJVJ, los mensajeros de YJVJ y los espíritus. Ha aprendido todo lo que necesita acerca del camino de YJVJ o de Elojim/Poderes/Dioses. Avrajam es ahora un profeta de pleno derecho, un hombre del poder supremo, Dios, YJVJ, que también puede ser llamado Elojim el mismo, porque estuvo en la tierra representando a YJVJ. Y ahora va a ser puesto a prueba. Pero no nomás él.

Rashi (aproximadamente 1040 - aproximadamente 1105) comentario:

הנני Aquí estoy — Tal es la respuesta de los piadosos: es una expresión de humildad y disposición (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayera 22).

Ibn Ezra (aproximadamente 1089 - 1092 a aproximadamente 1164 - 1167) comentario:

QUE DIOS PUSO A PRUEBA A ABRAJAM. Algunos dicen que la palabra nissah (probó, testó) es una variación de nissa (levantado), con el sin reemplazando el samej y el heh reemplazando el alef. Sin embargo, el significado literal de todo el capítulo contradice esta interpretación. La palabra nissah debe tomarse, por lo tanto, de manera literal. Los filósofos enseñan que hay dos tipos de conocimiento: el conocimiento de los eventos antes de que ocurran y el conocimiento de lo que existe en el presente. El último es el significado de Dios probó, y ahora sé (v. 12). Saadiah Gaon dice que "demostró" significa que Dios probó a Abrajam para demostrar su piedad a la humanidad; además, interpreta "por ahora sé que eres un hombre temeroso de Dios" (v. 12) como que ahora he dado a conocer a todos que tú eres un hombre temeroso de Dios.

El significado de "porque ahora sé que" (v. 12) es el mismo que "y si no, lo sabré" (Gén. 18:21). También explicaré, si Dios, que conoce todas las cosas ocultas, me ayuda, el significado secreto de este término en mis comentarios sobre Te conozco por nombre (Ex. 33:12).

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

AND G-D TRIED ABRAHAM. The matter of “trial,” in my opinion, is as follows: Since a man’s deeds are at his absolute free command, to perform them or not to perform them at his will, on the part of one who is tried, it is called “a trial.” But on the part of the One, blessed be He, who tries the person, it is a command that the one being tested should bring forth the matter from the potential into actuality so that he may be rewarded for a good deed, not for a good thought alone.
Know further that God tests the righteous, for knowing that the righteous will do His will, He desires to make them even more upright, and so He commands them to undertake a test. However, He does not try the wicked, who would not obey. Thus, all trials in the Torah are for the good of the one who is being tried.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

נסה את אברהם, to demonstrate that Avraham’s love for G’d as well as his fear of G’d was not merely potential but actual, much as G’d's goodness is not simply potential but actual. The purpose of man’s existence is to emulate the virtues of G’d, and by means of this “test,” Avraham had an opportunity to demonstrate this. When G’d created man, He had set Himself the objective of “let us make man in Our image, etc.,” i.e., as much like Divine beings as is it possible for a creature to be . (Genesis 1:26)

Bekhor Shor (12th century) commentary:

God tested Avraham: He brought him to a test, such that the Accuser (Satan), the prosecutor and the litigator could not say about him, "Does Avraham fear for nothing; did He not protect him and protect everything he has; and even the kings make a pact with him" - in the way that he said [it] about Iyov (Job 1:9-10). So He requested something from him that was more beloved to him than his body and his money.

Ok, I must explain this commentary because of the word used, “Satan”. I explained this before, Satan means "adversary," "opponent," or "accuser". What it all means is that all ELOHIM is conducting this test, meaning all the celestial beings, which include YHVH, his messengers (angels), and spirits. As we see in the book of Job, in the heavenly court, some messengers serve as the defendant's representatives and the prosecutors. The prosecutor is always calling Satan, not meaning that this is a specific evil angel, but that he is the one against the defendant, meaning Avraham, in this case. This test is something serious, a heavenly court matter.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

ויהי אחר הדברים האלה. It was after these events. The events referred to are Abraham's various adventures, the torturous route to becoming Yitzkhak’s father at an advanced age. In the meantime, Yitzkhak had grown up since we find Abraham described as "living in the land of the Philistines for many years," and Yitzkhak was born during the first year of Abraham's stay there. The test assumed much greater impact in view of the repeated promises G'd had made to Abraham concerning Yitzkhak and his future.

והאלוקים נסה את אברהם. G'd tested Abraham. The Torah adds the conjunctive letter ו before the word אלוקים to remind us that this was not Abraham's only test, only the most recent and most difficult one.

ויאמר אליו אברהם. He said to him: "Abraham." This introductory call by G'd was to prepare Abraham that G'd would ask him to do something difficult. Abraham understood this; this is why he said, "I am ready (for whatever You are going to tell me to do)."

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

It is very difficult to explain the matter of G’d’s “testing” someone, seeing that G’d knows in advance what the result of such a test is going to be. What then is the point of such a test? If the point was to demonstrate to the world at large that Avraham successfully passed such a test. The truth is that the purpose of the trial was to demonstrate to the world Avraham’s love for G’d. It was not meant to demonstrate anything to the generation during which Avraham lived, but to prove this to subsequent generations of people who believed in the Torah, which was handed down to us by Moses at the command of G’d Himself. All that is written in the Torah [including such stories as that of Bileam and Balak, none of which had been witnessed by any Jew alive at that time, Ed.] is meant to teach the extent to which we are expected to demonstrate our love for G’d if and when the occasion arises.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

It was not long after these previous matters that God tested Abraham. This is the first event explicitly described as a test planned by God. And God said to him: Abraham; and he said: Here I am. Abraham’s response indicates not only that he has heard God’s call but that he is ready to receive His command.

And He said, “Please take your son, your only son, whom you love, Yitzkhak, and go for yourself (or by your own choice), to the land of Moriyah, and there ascend him for/to a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell you.”

2 וַיֹּאמֶר קַח־נָא אֶת־בִּנְךָ אֶת־יְחִידְךָ אֲשֶׁר־אָהַבְתָּ אֶת־יִצְחָק וְלֶךְ־לְךָ אֶל־אֶרֶץ הַמֹּרִיָּה וְהַעֲלֵהוּ שָׁם לְעֹלָה עַל אַחַד הֶהָרִים אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיךָ׃

ב

Elohim is telling Avraham to take his son, Yitzkhak, to the land of Moriah and to ascend him or to take him up, for a burnt offering. This might be taken in two different ways: one is to give/ascend Yitzkhak as a burnt offering himself (to sacrifice him), or two, to take him along for a burnt offering to an elevated place.
Elohim told him to go to that land, just like He told him to leave everything he knew behind when he was in Haran. ELOHIM did not tell him exactly where to go, just like back then. Elohim was to tell him when he got there, and it was to be his own choice, just like back then. The exact words were used, “go for yourself (or by your own choice)”. Elohim told Avraham that He would tell him where later.
At that place, Moriyah, King Solomon built the first Temple, and later the second Temple was built on top of the foundations of the first Temple.

“Your only son, whom you love, Yitzkhak.”

According to Scripture, Yitzkhak is the only legitimate son. Yitzkhak is named when this was asked of Avraham, and Elohim said, “Your only son.” Yishmael is the son of Hagar. Yes, Hagar became Avraham’s wife, but when Avraham cast them out, it was said to be a divorce between Avraham and his wife and between Avraham and his son. Related verses are:

Bereshit/Genesis 21:10

And she (Sarah) said to Avraham, “Cast out/drive out/divorce this slave woman and her son, for the son of this slave woman and my son, Yitzkhak, shall not inherit (together).”

Bereshit/Genesis 21:12

And ELOHIM, He said to Avraham, “All that Sarah says to you listen/obey, hear her voice, do not let this be evil/bad/displeasing/sad in your eyes when it comes to your boy/lad/youth and your maidservant, for in Yitzkhak shall your seed be called by.

Bereshit/Genesis 21:14

And he rose, Avraham, in the morning to take food and a water bottle/waterskin to Hagar. He placed them on her shoulder and the boy’s. And he divorced/sent her away, and she went and wandered in the wilderness of BeEr Shava.

Basically, Avraham cut all ties with Hagar and Yishmael as YHVH commanded, and now Avraham has only one son, Yitzkhak.

“Please take your son, your only son, whom you love, Yitzkhak, and go for yourself (or by your own choice).”

Elohim is pleading and giving Avraham a choice, to go or not; it is his choice to obey or not. The words seem almost like pleading to do so, even though this is a hard choice to make, depending on how Avraham took the words, and we will find out that as we continue along.
I do not know if this is your first read through of the bible as a whole or not, but I will say that I do not believe that Avraham thought that YHVH would let him go through with sacrificing Yitzkhak, and I will point the reasons why I think this as we go along.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

קח נא TAKE NOW — The word נא is used as a request: God said to him, “I beg of you, stand firm for me in this trial, so that people may not say that the previous trials were no real tests” (Sanhedrin 89b).

ארץ המוריה THE LAND OF MORIAH — This is Jerusalem, and so we find in Chronicles (2 Chronicles 3:1) “To build the house of the Lord at Jerusalem in Mount Moriah”. Our Rabbis have explained that it is called Moriah — Instruction — because from it (i.e., from the Temple built on that mountain), instruction הוראה came forth to Israel (Genesis Rabbah 55:7). Onkelos translates it as “the land of the Divine Service.” He takes it as having reference to the offering of incense brought in the Temple on Moriah in which there were myrrh (מור) nard and other spices.

אחד ההרים ONE OF THE MOUNTAINS — The Holy One, blessed be He, first makes the righteous expectant and only afterwards discloses fully to them his intention — and all this to augment their reward. Similarly, we have (Genesis 12:1) “[Go to] the land which I will show thee”, and similarly in the case of Jonah 3:2 “Make unto it the proclamation which I shall bid thee” (Genesis Rabbah 55:7).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

UPON ONE OF THE MOUNTAINS. The temple was later built on this mountain. This is explicitly stated in Scripture: So Solomon built the house on Mount Moriah. It was not a very tall mountain. The threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite was on it.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

TAKE NOW THY SON, THINE ONLY SON. Since Isaac was the son of the mistress and he alone was to be the one to carry his name, He called him Abraham’s only son. The description was for the purpose of magnifying the command, thus saying: “Take now thy only son, the beloved one, Isaac, and bring him up before Me as a burnt-offering.”

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

קח נא את בנך. "Please take your son, etc." G'd meant for Abraham to proceed immediately and not to ask for time before carrying out the command, as happened with the daughter of Yiftach (Judges 11:37), who had asked to be given two months to prepare for her father's sacrifice to G'd.

Rabbeinu Bahya (1255 – 1340) commentary:

קח נא את בנך את יחידך אשר אהבת את יצחק, “please take your son, your only one, the one whom you love, etc.” The Torah describes G’d’s command as particularly long-winded to lend extra importance to the fulfillment of this commandment. Our sages in Tanchuma Vayera 22 phrase it thus: “When G’d said: ‘take your son,’ Avraham asked: ‘which son?’ When G’d continued: ‘the one whom you love,’ Avraham countered: ‘I love them both.’ Finally, G’d said: ‘Yitzchak.’”

ולך לך, “and go for yourself, etc.” Avraham underwent ten trials of his faith. The first one commenced with the words לך לך, “go for yourself,” and the last one concluded with the introduction לך לך, “go for yourself.” Avraham scored perfect marks each time (Avot 5:3). The first trial was “leave your country;” the last one was the binding of Yitzchak.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ולך לך, this phraseology is quite common. We have encountered it in 12:1, in Jeremiah 5:5, in Exodus 18:27, as well as in Numbers 22:34, and again in Genesis 45:19. There are more such examples.

Shabbethai ben Joseph Bass (1641–1718) (Hebrew: שבתי בן יוסף; also known by the family name Strom[1]), born at Kalisz, was the founder of Jewish bibliography[2] and author of the Siftei Chachamim supercommentary on Rashi's commentary on the Pentateuch. Commentary:

is an expression of a request... I.e., נא mentioned here means “request,” although in many places it does not mean “request.” (Re’m)

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

He, God, said: Take now your son, your only one, as Abraham’s other son had been banished and was not considered an heir, whom you love: Isaac. This long string of descriptions serves to underscore the monumental demand God is about to make. And go you to the land of Moriah, traditionally associated with the area of Jerusalem, and offer him up there as a burnt offering upon one of the mountains that I will tell you.

And Avraham, he arose early in the morning, and he saddled his donkey, and he took his two youths/servants with him, and Yitzkhak, his son. And he split the wood for the burnt offering. And he rose, and he went to the place which he was told (by) the ELOHIM.

3 וַיַּשְׁכֵּם אַבְרָהָם בַּבֹּקֶר וַיַּחֲבֹשׁ אֶת־חֲמֹרוֹ וַיִּקַּח אֶת־שְׁנֵי נְעָרָיו אִתּוֹ וְאֵת יִצְחָק בְּנוֹ וַיְבַקַּע עֲצֵי עֹלָה וַיָּקָם וַיֵּלֶךְ אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר־אָמַר־לוֹ הָאֱלֹהִים׃

ג

Avraham, just like he did back in Haran, when he left his father’s house and everything he knew, left early in the morning to do this command for ELOHIM as well. He did not wait; he just did it. Whatever he understood of the words he was told, he did it without hesitation. He woke up early in the morning and saddled his donkey, split the wood, got his two servants ready, and took his son, because it does not matter how he took the words; Yitzkhak is part of it.
Now, this verse holds the first clue for me, believing that Avraham knew in his heart that YHVH would not let him sacrifice his son, Yitzkhak.
What do we know of Avraham? He is a pure-hearted man. A very emotional man, quick to come to the defense of others, like for his nephew, and the people of Sodom. Scripture was very specific about his feelings when he was asked to cast away his son, Yishmael, and Hagar. This we know of him, and now, if the words are taken in a certain way, he is asked to take this son, his only son, whom he loves, and sacrifice him. Yet, there is no reaction from him. He accepts it and goes to do what is commanded of him. With no argument or pleading from his part. This behavior of Avraham is very telling. And there is more to come as we progress with the chapter.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

וישכם AND HE ROSE EARLY — He was alert to fulfil the command (Pesachim 4a)

ויחבוש AND HE SADDLED [HIS ASS]—He himself: he did not order one of his servants to do so, for love disregards the rule imposed on one by his exalted position in life. (“Love” here means Love of God as displayed in obedience to His command.) (Genesis Rabbah 55:8)

ויבקע AND HE CLEAVED [THE WOOD] — Its rendering in the Targum וצלח has the same meaning as the verb in (2 Samuel 19:18) And they rushed into the Jordan”, which signifies cleaving the waters; old French fendre; English to split.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

AND HE CLEAVED THE WOOD FOR THE BURNT-OFFERING. This illustrates Abraham’s zeal in performing a commandment, for he thought that perhaps there would be no wood in that place, and so he carried it for three days. It may be that Abraham disqualified for use as an offering any wood in which a worm is found, as is the law of the Torah, and so he took from his house sound wood for the burnt-offering. Hence, it says, 'And he cleaved the wood for the burnt offering.'

Bekhor Shor (12th century) commentary:

Avraham awoke early in the morning: To saddle his donkey, as he was alacrity and driven to do the will of his Maker.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

ויקח את שני נעריו, “he took his two attendants;” here Rashi does not interpret what he had explained in connection with a similar expression when Bileam took his two servants (Numbers 22,22). There, he had explained that prominent people must always travel in the company of two attendants so that one of them can follow a call of nature, so the prominent person will not be left alone.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

וישכם אברהם בבוקר. Abraham arose early in the morning. Abraham acted in line with what we know from Leviticus 7,38, that sacrifices may be brought only by day. Our sages also said (Zevachim 98) that one must not bring an offering at night. Abraham therefore set out at an hour that was suitable for bringing an offering. He did not know how far he had to travel, and he wanted to have enough time left to offer the sacrifice once he was at the right place. In view of G'd having addressed Abraham by day, perhaps he should not have waited until the following day; it is possible that he received the instructions in the late afternoon or that Isaac was not at home at the time. By reporting that Abraham rose early, the Torah explains that the day's delay was not due to any negligence on Abraham's part.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

וישכם אברהם, he rose early to carry out G’d’s bidding without telling Sarah anything about it. He was afraid that she might harm herself out of her love for Yitzchok.

למקום אשר אמר לו, to the land known as Moriah, since G’d had not yet revealed to him on which mountain he was to offer Yitzkhak as a burnt offering.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Once again, Abraham wasted no time. Since he had received the command only at night or just before, he awoke early in the morning and saddled his donkey to carry the items he required for the journey. He took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son; and he cleaved the wood for the burnt offering, as he could not know if he would find more wood on the way. He arose, and he went, striding purposefully to the place that God told him, as he knew where it was.

And by the third day, he, Avraham, lifted his eyes and he saw from a distance the place.

4 בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי וַיִּשָּׂא אַבְרָהָם אֶת־עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא אֶת־הַמָּקוֹם מֵרָחֹק׃

ד

At this point, Avraham had already been told where the mountain was, as this is mentioned in verse nine of this chapter. Some commentators say that a cloud was over it; therefore, it was unmistakably distinguishable. Makes me think of when YHVH descended to the mountain in the desert, when Moses received the Torah from YHVH. So, Avraham was already aware of where he was going, and now he is near the location.

The distance they traveled was about 50 miles, from Beer Shaval to Moriyah, which is now Jerusalem. However, back in those days, there were no good roads, and they had to go on foot. So, it took them three days.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

ביום השלישי ON THE THIRD DAY — Why did God delay and not show it to him at once? So that people should not say, “He confused and confounded him suddenly and bewildered his mind. If, however, he had had time for consideration, he would not have obeyed” (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayera 22).

וירא את המקום AND HE SAW THE PLACE — He saw a cloud lowering over the mountain (Genesis Rabbah 56:1).

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

AND HE SAW THE PLACE AFAR OFF. He saw a cloud attached to the mountain, and through this was fulfilled the Divine assurance, which I will tell thee of.
It is possible, in line with the simple meaning of Scripture, that the verse, And he saw the place afar off, means that he saw the land of Moriah, for he knew that entire land, although he did not know the specific mountain.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

וישא אברהם את עיניו וירא את המקום, the place for offering the sacrifice on the mountain of Moriah.

מרחוק, he was granted additional eyesight to espy this place from a greater distance than he would normally have been able to see.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Abraham began his journey in Beersheba, a city many hours away from Jerusalem, on foot. Since he and Isaac had only one donkey and were traveling together, the journey took three days. On the third day, Abraham lifted his eyes and saw the place from afar.

And Avraham, he said to his youths, “Remain here with the donkey by yourselves, and meanwhile, I and the youth are to go, and we will bow down, and we will return to you.”

5 וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָהָם אֶל־נְעָרָיו שְׁבוּ־לָכֶם פֹּה עִם־הַחֲמוֹר וַאֲנִי וְהַנַּעַר נֵלְכָה עַד־כֹּה וְנִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנָשׁוּבָה אֲלֵיכֶם׃

ה

Avraham left the two servants behind and took Yitzkhak with him only. This is because Avraham is following the command of the ELOHIM. He said, “Take your son Yitzkhak,” and did not mention anyone else. So, from here on it’s only Avraham and his son Yitzkhak.
Here is the second clue to why I believe Avraham knew that YHVH would not let him do Yitzkhak’s sacrifice. He told his servants that they both would be back, him and his son. I do not think that he would say that if he did not believe it. I guess you could say that he could have lied, as we know that he did before, once in the incident with Pharaoh, and again in the incident with Avimelekh. However, Avraham has never lied when it comes to matters of YHVH, not once. Only when dealing with men. So, I believe that Avraham meant what he said and genuinely thought that he and his son, Yitzchak, were coming back to his servants, and that Yitzchak would not be sacrificed.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

עד כה YONDER — meaning a short distance: to the place in front of us. The Midrashic explanation (based upon the meaning of כה “thus”) is: I will see where will be (i.e., what will happen to) the promise which God made to me, (Genesis 15:5) “Thus (כה) shall thy seed be” (Genesis Rabbah 56:2).

ונשובה AND WE WILL COME BACK — He prophesied that they would both return (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayera 22).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

Some ask, how could Abraham say, and (we will) come back to you (v. 5)? Others answer them by saying that Abraham intended to return with Yitzkhak’s bones. He disguised his intentions so that his young men would wait for him till he returned, and Yitzkhak would not know what was about to happen and flee. Our sages, of blessed memory, say that Isaac was thirty-seven years old at the time of his binding. If this is a tradition, we will accept it. However, from a strictly logical perspective, it is unacceptable. If Isaac was an adult at this time, then his piety should have been revealed in Scripture, and his reward should have been double that of his father for willingly submitting himself to be sacrificed. Yet Scripture says nothing concerning Isaac’s great self-sacrifice. Others say that Isaac was five years old at the time of his binding. This, too, is unacceptable, since Isaac carried the wood for the sacrificial pyre. It thus appears logical to assume that Isaac was close to thirteen years old and that Abraham overpowered him and bound him against his will. Proof of this can be seen from the fact that Abraham hid his intention from Isaac and told him, God will provide Himself the lamb for a burnt-offering, my son (v. 8). Abraham knew that if he said, “You are to be the burnt-offering,” Isaac would quite possibly have fled.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

שבו לכם פה, so that they should not be able to interfere with what he was about to do.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Abraham does not reveal his intention to sacrifice his son. Instead, he gives his attendants the impression that he and Isaac will sacrifice an offering together and then return.

“We will…return to you,” Is Abraham afraid that the servants will try to stop him? Or does he know the Deity will not let him carry out the instructions?

And Avraham, he took the wood for the burnt offering and he put it upon Yitzkhak, his son, and he took in his hand the fire and the knife and they both went together.

6 וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָהָם אֶת־עֲצֵי הָעֹלָה וַיָּשֶׂם עַל־יִצְחָק בְּנוֹ וַיִּקַּח בְּיָדוֹ אֶת־הָאֵשׁ וְאֶת־הַמַּאֲכֶלֶת וַיֵּלְכוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם יַחְדָּו׃

ו

Avraham putting the wood on Yitzkhak gives me the impression that Avraham is saying that the responsibility of the contract between YHVH and Avraham is on Yitzkhak now. Passing on the torch, if you will.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

וילכו שניהם יחדיו AND THEY WENT BOTH OF THEM TOGETHER — Abraham, who was aware that he was going to slay his son, walked along with the same willingness and joy as Isaac, who had no idea of the matter.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויקח, he did not take the donkey along so that the lads should not think that they were going to a distant location. Also, there would not be anyone guarding the donkey at the time when he would be occupied with binding and slaughtering Yitzchok. Furthermore, he did not want the donkey to enter such sacred precincts.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering and placed it upon Isaac his son. By carrying the wood, Isaac was already participating in the sacrifice. He, Abraham, took in his hand the fire, the kindling, and the knife, and the two of them went together.

And Yitzkhak, he said towards/to Avraham, his father, and he said, “My father.” And he said, “Behold, me (or Here I am), my son.” And he said, “See, the fire and the wood, but where is the sheep for the burnt-offering?”.

7 וַיֹּאמֶר יִצְחָק אֶל־אַבְרָהָם אָבִיו וַיֹּאמֶר אָבִי וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֶּנִּי בְנִי וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּה הָאֵשׁ וְהָעֵצִים וְאַיֵּה הַשֶּׂה לְעֹלָה׃

ז

Here, Yitzkhak, does not sound like a two or three-year-old; he sounds at least ten years and above. Maybe even as young as seven or eight. This is the age that I think fathers start to let sons be part of slaughtering animals for food and perhaps even rituals, so that they can start learning. Maybe not participate, but at least watch so they can learn and get used to the process.
In any case, Yitzkhak was old enough to question the absence of the burnt-offering animal. If Yitzkhak was as young as seven or eight, then he was old enough to have noticed and was eager to help. If he were older, as old as his thirties, he probably would have had an idea of what was going on and would have questioned his father to get some answers.

Haamek Davar is a work of Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin (1816-1893) commentary:

And he said, "Father.": And he did not immediately ask, "Where is the lamb?" As he sensed something wondrous, but he did not find the heart to ask until after reflecting upon the answer of his father, whether it would be with a pleasant countenance and love. Therefore, when he answered him, "Here I am, my son," which was a loving response, he then asked to know.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Now that they were alone, Isaac said to Abraham, his father, "My father." He, Abraham, said to him, as he had responded earlier to God: Here I am, my son, ready and attentive. Abraham has not become any less fatherly toward Isaac, and he listens with a loving ear, despite the knowledge that he must sacrifice him. He, Isaac, said: Here are the fire and the wood, but if we intend to sacrifice an animal, where is the lamb for a burnt offering?

“Father!” This is Isaac’s first word in the Torah.

“Here I am, my son.” Abraham’s response— the first time in the Torah that he calls Isaac his son—are words of comfort.

“But where is the lamb for the burnt-offering?” Isaac is old enough to know what is necessary for a burnt offering, and that they do not have it. Does he sense how much is amiss? Commentators debate whether or not Isaac is aware of what is going to happen.

And Avraham, He said, “The sheep/lamb/goat for the burnt offering, ELOHIM, He will provide/look/see/show us to it, my son.” And they, both of them, went/walked together.

8 וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָהָם אֱלֹהִים יִרְאֶה־לּוֹ הַשֶּׂה לְעֹלָה בְּנִי וַיֵּלְכוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם יַחְדָּו׃

ח

שֶּׂה/Seh

This word means “one of a flock,” so it can also mean a sheep, a lamb, or a goat, any animal that belongs to a flock. This means that Avraham was saying that he did not know what animal it would be, but that ELOHIM would provide it. Was Avraham being evasive? I do not think so.

רָאָה/Raa

This word means to see, look at, inspect, perceive, consider, or provide. The interesting thing is that it also means to be caused to see or to be shown. This is important, and you will see why as we proceed.

I asked at the beginning of this commentary if Avraham was being evasive. No, he was not. I think he was saying precisely what he meant. Among all the translations of all the Bibles, I think the best one would sound like this:

“It will be one from a flock for the burnt offering, ELOHIM, He will make us see or show us to it, my son.”

Let me explain, but do I really need to?

“It will be one from a flock for the burnt offering.”

Meaning, “I do not know what it will be, a sheep, a lamb, perhaps a goat, one of these will be for the burnt offering. An animal that belongs to a flock.”

“ELOHIM, He will make us see or show us to it, my son.”

Meaning, “ELOHIM, He will open our eyes and will make us see what we do not see or do not have, He will provide.”

Some of these things I am discovering along with you, and right now I have shils all over my body. I hope that you see what I see.

“And they, both of them, went/walked together.”

I think that Yitzkhak, if he were in his twenties or thirties, had the suspicion of what could be in store for him. Still, they both walked together, and he obeyed and did as his father said. Does Yitzkhak know that Avraham, his father, was doing this by the command of ELOHIM? We do not know, and if he doesn’t, then he is doing this because he trusts his father, the man, Avraham—a man who has always trusted in YHVH and YHVH that has never let Avraham down.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

יראה לו השה — this means as much as: He will look out for and choose a lamb for Himself, and if there will be no lamb for a burnt offering, then, בני MY SON will be the offering. Although Isaac then understood that he was travelling on to be slain, yet.

וילכו שניהם יחדיו THEY WENT BOTH OF THEM TOGETHER — with the same ready heart (Genesis Rabbah 56:4).

Bekhor Shor (12th century) commentary:

God will see to the lamb for Him, my son: Meaning, my son [will be the lamb for the burnt-offering]. He said to him a matter with two meanings. For he said to him, the [other] one according to his understanding - [its] meaning was like one saying, "My son, the Holy One will see to the lamb for Him." But our Rabbis say (Bereishit Rabbah 56:4) that Yitzchak understood, and nevertheless, "the two of them went together" - with the same mind to fulfil the will of the Creator.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויאמר...אלוקים יראה לו השה לעולה בני, Avraham’s reply to his son is capable of two interpretations. One interpretation would be that the word בני is a response to Yitzchok’s cry or question, meaning “I am here, my son; G’d will select the lamb for the burnt offering.” In other words: “don’t worry, G’d already knows who is going to be the lamb for the offering. He will put it at our disposal.” The second interpretation of Avraham’s answer would arrange the words as follows: “G’d will select the lamb for the offering; who is the lamb? It is my son.” Yitzchok understood from this that he had been chosen to be the offering. This is why the Torah continues, significantly:

וילכו שניהם יחד, “they continued walking together,” i.e., of one mind and of one spirit.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Abraham said, in a poignant response: God will Himself see to the lamb for a burnt offering, my son. At this point, Isaac surely began to ponder: What if we do not find a lamb? The juxtaposition of “burnt offering” and “my son” would have rung in his ears, as Isaac was no doubt aware of the practice of human sacrifice among the surrounding peoples. Nevertheless, the verse repeats the phrase indicating their solidarity: And the two of them went together. Earlier, Abraham was deeply troubled, and Isaac was entirely innocent, and they went together. Now Isaac has heard Abraham’s frightening words, but he continues to walk with his father, without any attempt to escape.

And they came to the place which the ELOHIM had told him of; and there Avraham, he built an altar, and he laid the wood in order, and he bound Yitzkhak his son, and he placed/put him over the altar above the wood.

9 וַיָּבֹאוּ אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אָמַר־לוֹ הָאֱלֹהִים וַיִּבֶן שָׁם אַבְרָהָם אֶת־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וַיַּעֲרֹךְ אֶת־הָעֵצִים וַיַּעֲקֹד אֶת־יִצְחָק בְּנוֹ וַיָּשֶׂם אֹתוֹ עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ מִמַּעַל לָעֵצִים׃

ט

Here, scripture wants to let us know that it was Avraham by his own choice who built the altar, who laid the wood, who bound Yitzkhak, and who placed him on the altar on top of the wood. Still, Scripture does not tell us what Avraham is feeling while he does all of this. One thing we know is that he is not delaying or in a hurry, either. He is just going through the motions of the sacrifice.
As for Yitzkhak, there seems to be no resistance. Obviously, he knows what is going on because Scripture lets us know that he knows the process of a sacrifice. He knew that the animal for the sacrifice was missing, and by the wording, he had a suspicion of what was going on. Yet, he went along willingly, trusting his father.
When Yitzkhak was bound and placed over the altar and above the wood, he, or at least Scripture does not say, put up no resistance. Yitzkhak went along with what he knew was a sacrifice, in which he was the sacrifice. Yet, he did nothing; he went along with it. Is this love for YHVH, or his father, or trust in his father, that, because of what he said, is true? Even at this part of the sacrifice, that ELOHIM would provide or show them the sacrificial animal, even at this stage. We can not know.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

ויעקד AND HE BOUND his hands and feet behind him. Hands and feet tied together is what is meant by עקידה “binding”. It is associated in meaning with עקודים in (Genesis 30:35) “[she-goats] that were streaked” — whose ankles were streaked white so that the place where they are bound could be plainly seen.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

את המזבח, the altar. The Torah did not write: “altar” without the prefix letter ה, which meant that it was an altar that had previously served for such a purpose. According to our tradition, Adam, Hevel, Noach, and his sons had all offered offerings to G-d on that same altar.

Rabbeinu Bahya (1255 – 1340) commentary:

ויבן שם אברהם את המזבח , “Avraham built the altar there.” The letter ה at the beginning of the word המזבח indicates that a specific altar was intended, namely the altar. According to the plain meaning of the text, it means that the altar corresponded halachically to the rules governing such altars in Jewish law, i.e., that they must not be constructed from stones which had been treated with iron tools (compare Exodus 20,22).
A Midrashic approach (Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer 31) sees in the letter ה, which is a definite article, an allusion to the altar which Adam had built and on which also Cain and Hevel had offered their respective sacrifices. The site of this altar had been known to be at Mount Moriah. This was also reputed to be the altar on which Noach had offered his thanksgiving to G’d after the deluge. [The latter detail is difficult to reconcile with the distance Noach would have had to travel from Mount Ararat in North Eastern Turkey to offer his thanks to G’d. Ed.]

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויבאו אל המקום, this refers to Mount Moriah.

אשר אמר לו האלוקים, when Avraham and Yitzchok had been walking together (after leaving the lads behind), G’d told Avraham the exact location, showing it to him in a prophetic vision. According to Bereshit Rabbah 56:2, He showed him either a column of fire over that mountain or a localised pillar of cloud, as we mentioned earlier. According to this aggadic interpretation, the words אשר אמר לו refer to the moment when he became aware of this phenomenon, and his awareness was the equivalent of what is described in our verses as an אמירה, a verbal communication.

ויערוך את העצים, he arranged them above the fire to kindle them.

ויעקד את יצחק, he bound both his hands and his feet so he should not involuntarily kick when the knife would strike him. This was in spite of the fact that Yitzchok was perfectly willing to be the offering. He was afraid that at the last moment he would rebel; this was why he asked his father to tie him securely. (Bereshit Rabbah 56,8)

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

They came to the place that God had told him; Abraham built the altar there, arranged the wood, and bound the hands and feet of Isaac his son to prevent him from moving, and he placed him on the altar upon the wood. He completed his preparation of Isaac as an offering.

9–10. Abraham carries out his actions methodically, with no reported words or emotion—unlike when he lost Ishmael (21:11). Isaac, too, is silent.

And Avraham, he stretched out his hand, and he took the knife to sacrifice/slaughter his son.

10 וַיִּשְׁלַח אַבְרָהָם אֶת־יָדוֹ וַיִּקַּח אֶת־הַמַּאֲכֶלֶת לִשְׁחֹט אֶת־בְּנוֹ׃

י

I have always thought that Avraham was in the process of bringing down the knife to kill his son, but this is not so. The verse says that Avraham reached out to get the knife and took it in his hand. Then it says that he took it to sacrifice or kill his son, but it really does not say that Avraham was about to strike him down with it. He could have been preparing to do so, contemplating it, or getting ready for it, but we do not know. However, because of what is stated in the following verses, Avraham intended to proceed with it, and because of what it says in the next verse, it is possible that he was already striking down, but we don’t know.

Tosafot: Da'at Zekenim on Genesis: Da'at Zekenim is a Torah commentary compiled from the writings of French and German tosafists in the 12th and 13th centuries. Composed: Middle-Age France / Germany / Italy / England, c.1100 – c.1300 CE: Commentary:

ויקח את המאכלת, “he took hold of the knife.” This was the knife that would be used in cutting up the flesh of an offering after the animal‘s throat had been cut. A different view. The word is used metaphorically (based on the meaning of אכל “eating,” as the root of the word), it is the instrument that, since that time, has been feeding Israel throughout history, as we all still benefit from Avraham’s having passed this “test.”

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

וישלח...לשחוט את בנו, to first slaughter him before the fire would burn up the body. This is the usual procedure when meat offerings are brought on the altar.

And a messenger [angel] of YHVH, he called out towards/to him from the heavens/skies, and he said, “Avraham, Avraham.” And he said, “Behold, me (or Here I am).”

11 וַיִּקְרָא אֵלָיו מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה מִן־הַשָּׁמַיִם וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָהָם׀ אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּנִי׃

יא

מַלְאַךְ/MalAkh

I have already discussed the meaning of this word, but it can’t hurt to reinforce it. This word means messenger. Who we now know as angels. The word "angel" does not appear in the Bible. The word "angel" originates from the ancient Greek word angelos, meaning "messenger" or "envoy." This term entered English from Late Latin and is rooted in the Hebrew word malAkh, also meaning "messenger," which appears frequently in the Old Testament. The concept of angels in religions like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam reflects this "messenger" role, as they are seen as spiritual beings who act as divine messengers between God and humans.

I say, get used to the proper terms and discard the new, as these new words warp the image of who these beings really are.

So, this messenger of YHVH called out, meaning that he directed his speech from above, as it reads from the heavens or the skies, and possibly even from a distance, and proceeded to call out to him to get his attention. The messenger called out Avraham’s name twice. We do not know how the messenger said these words, whether in a panic to stop him or in an affectionate way. And Avraham did stop and responded, “Here I am.” If in a panic, then this means that Avraham was, indeed, about to strike Yitzkhak down to kill him or sacrifice him. However, if it was affectionate, that could tell us that Avraham was holding the knife but not about to strike, as if he did not want to do what he thought he must do. However, it could have been that the messenger affectionately called out to him by saying, “Avraham, Avraham,” to distract him from whatever thoughts were going through his head. Another clue is the symbol in between the two Avrahams, the “׀”, which means a punctuation Paseq or a separation of words. This could mean a slight pause between the two Avrahams. If this is so, then it does not sound like the messenger was in a hurry to stop him from striking down on Yitzkhak. It sounds more like the messenger was trying to get him out of a thought process or to prevent him from getting the courage to do what he thought he must do. Whichever route you choose to go, I believe that the messenger was sounding compationate because Avraham was trying to get the currage to do what he did not want to do and that he was right in what I believe Avraham thought process was from the bining, from when the ELOHIM first gave him this command of sacrificing his son, and I will explain this later.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

אברהם אברהם ABRAHAM, ABRAHAM — The repetition of his name is an expression of affection (Genesis Rabbah 56:7).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

ABRAHAM, ABRAHAM. The repetition of the name expresses urgency.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

אברהם, אברהם! “Avraham, Avraham!” The repetition of Avraham’s name is to indicate that the call was of an urgent nature. This is a formulation also known in other languages.

Kli Yakar (כלי יקר), meaning "precious vessel," refers to a popular Torah commentary written by the Polish rabbi Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz (1550-1619). Commentary:

Avraham, Avraham: An expression of love. And that which He did not call him twice the first time, [as] an expression of love, is because his love was still not known to all those that come to the world, perhaps he would not pass the test. But after he passed the test, the love that was beyond that of others was then apparent with tremendous clarity and power in the eyes of everyone. Hence, he [then] called him "Avraham, Avraham," [as] an expression of love - since this test was for the benefit of the one tested, to make known his love.

Another explanation was that at the time he was occupied with the commandment, with the binding of his son, he was so preoccupied with the commandment - to complete it according to its law - that he did not pay attention to the voice of the calling. Hence, it was necessary to call him a second time. And that is the reason for the doubling of the name, Avraham, Avraham, which was not the case the first time, since he was not preoccupied with a commandment. And some say that Avraham understood about this calling, that they would impede him from the Heavens. That is why he made himself like someone in a stupor and like someone who does not hear - to complete the commandment - until they called a second time.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויקרא...מן השמים, he heard a voice without seeing a visual image.

אברהם, אברהם, G’d repeated his name to ensure that Avraham would listen immediately.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

The angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven. Since the angel is a messenger of God, its statement is the word of God. And he said, 'Abraham, Abraham.’ Again, he, Abraham, said: Here I am, always ready to be commanded, even in the midst of such a superhuman effort as this.

And He said, “Do not stretch/send your hand to/towards the youth, and do not do anything to him; for now I know you are fearring/reverent (of) ELOHIM, and for you have not withheld/restrained your son, your only son, from me."

12 וַיֹּאמֶר אַל־תִּשְׁלַח יָדְךָ אֶל־הַנַּעַר וְאַל־תַּעַשׂ לוֹ מְאוּמָּה כִּי׀ עַתָּה יָדַעְתִּי כִּי־יְרֵא אֱלֹהִים אַתָּה וְלֹא חָשַׂכְתָּ אֶת־בִּנְךָ אֶת־יְחִידְךָ מִמֶּנִּי׃

יב

יָרֵא/Yare

This word means to be afraid or to be reverent, and they both go together, sort of. You can be afraid of someone but not revere them, or be afraid of someone and revere them. Additionally, you can revere someone and not be afraid of them, or revere them and be afraid of them, but not in the way some may think. What I mean is that you respect and love someone so much that you are afraid to let them down or disappoint them. You fear letting them down, so you strive to do your best in life for their sake, behaving in a manner that aligns with the values of the person you revere. Suppose you go in life doing what you like, in which your values do not align with YHVH, and later, when you pray to Him or when things are not going well, you pray to him, then, at that moment, you remember all the things that would be considered sinful, even minor sins. Then you do not revere or fear YHVH, our Father and Creator. However, if a situation presents itself to do a sin and you are tempted to do it, but you immediately stop yourself because the first thought that entered your mind was, “YHVH will not like this, I should not do it,” and you do not do it. Then you revere Him because you had that fear of disappointing Him. When that fear comes into you before you act upon that sinful thought and stop, that is when you fear and revere Him.

In the case of Avraham, if he really thought that ELOHIM was asking this of him, then Avraham’s reverence and fear of disappointing YHVH is very much there. Avraham would do anything that YHVH asked, even if it meant losing his son, and in this case, he would have to do it himself.
However, we will find out, in the next verse, that YHVH never had any intentions of letting Avraham do this to Yitzkhak, Avraham’s son. Also, I believe that Avraham knew this; however, as he was going through the motions of doing so, I think he was stalling as much as he could because it was just getting too close to actually killing him. If Avraham did not believe that the meaning was actually to sacrifice his son, because of the double meaning of the command, then why was he going through the motions of actually doing it? That I do not know, maybe because that was common practice with the other gods of that time, and Avraham thought that it was a possibility that YHVH wanted the same, but did not think so. And I will go through the reasons why I believe that Avraham did not think that YHVH was asking for this in a later verse. However, the possibility was there for Avraham. Why? Because an animal sacrifice could have been done anywhere, just like we have seen YHVH ask of Avraham before. However, this sacrifice seems more important because he is being asked to go to a specific place, which makes it more important by itself, espacially if the command has a double meaning like this one. Another reason that reinforces the importance is the wording used, the same words that YHVH used to tell him to leave his land and his home. Avraham’s travels have not been easy so far, and, understandably, this one should be as difficult; therefore, the struggle with the double meaning. But let us continue.

“For now I know you are fearing/reverent (of) ELOHIM.”

Now He knows that Avraham would do anything for Him, even this, but does not actually want him to do it, as he was stopped before it actually happened.

“And for you have not withheld/restrained your son, your only son, from me."

This means that if it were not for the messenger of YHVH who stopped him, Avraham would have done it. YHVH knows this. Otherwise, YHVH would have let him fail.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

FOR NOW I KNOW THAT THOU ART A G-D FEARING MAN. At the beginning, Abraham’s fear of G-d was latent; it had not become actualized through such a great deed. But now it was known in actuality, and his merit was perfect, and his reward would be complete from the Eternal, the G-d of Israel.
The doctrine of this chapter, which teaches that G-d is the One who tries Abraham and commands him about the binding of Isaac, and it is the angel of G-d who restrains and promises him, will be explained in the verse, The angel who hath redeemed me.

Bekhor Shor (12th century) commentary:

Do not stretch out your hand against the lad: For you have already done the commandment. As He only commanded you to bring him up, and you brought him up over the wood.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

עתה ידעתי, “now I know for a fact, etc,” did G-d not already know? Actually, the meaning is: “now I can make my knowledge public to all.” We have a similar formulation in Exodus 32:12, where G-d said to Moses: ידעתיך בשם, “I have made your name well known.” The appropriate translation would be: “I have made you so famous that no one can dispute it.”

Kli Yakar (כלי יקר), meaning "precious vessel," refers to a popular Torah commentary written by the Polish rabbi Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz (1550-1619). Commentary:

Now (ata) I know that you fear God: Not every usage of ata is to negate time before it. As behold we find, "And ata, O Israel, what does the Lord [...] ask of you but to fear [Him]" (Deuteronomy 10:12). And is it that before this, He did not ask fear of us? Rather it is as if He said, "And behold, O Israel." Likewise, "ata I know," is as if He said, "and behold, I know."

Malbim (1809 - 1879) Commentary:

Now I know. Hashem knew that even when Avraham spared his son’s life, he did so only because he was commanded to do so. This was the proof that he was truly God-fearing.

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

כי עתה ידעתי, I now can demonstrate My knowledge about you to the whole world,

כי ירא אלוקים אתה, that you are G’d fearing. [in the most selfless manner. Ed.]

Tur HaAroch (Approximately 1270–1340) commentary:

אל תשלח ידך אל הנער, “do not touch the lad!” According to the Midrash, the angel saw that Avraham had suddenly realized that he no longer had a knife in his hand. (This is why the angel told him not to harm Yitzchok with his hand, instead of with his knife.) Avraham therefore decided to strangle Yitzchok with his bare hands to carry out G’d’s command. This is when the angel had to tell him not to harm Yitzchok in any manner.

Tz'enah Ur'enah is a book written by Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi (1550–1625). Commentary:

“Now I know that you fear God” [22:12]. That is to say, the Holy One said: now I can answer the angels and the nations of the world why I am compassionate to Abraham more than to other people.

And Avraham, he lifted up his eyes to see, and beheld a ram after it got caught in a thicket by its horns. And Avraham, he went and took the ram, and he ascended/offered it as a burnt offering instead of his son.

13 וַיִּשָּׂא אַבְרָהָם אֶת־עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה־אַיִל אַחַר נֶאֱחַז בַּסְּבַךְ בְּקַרְנָיו וַיֵּלֶךְ אַבְרָהָם וַיִּקַּח אֶת־הָאַיִל וַיַּעֲלֵהוּ לְעֹלָה תַּחַת בְּנוֹ׃

יג

This is why I mentioned in the last chapter that this chapter was important. The only difference is that in the previous chapter, Hagar’s eyes were opened by ELOHIM to make her see the well of water that was already there in existence, but that she could not see. In this chapter, Avraham lifted his eyes to see the ram that was or had been, for who knows how long, caught in a thicket by the horns. Neither Avraham nor Yitzkhak saw this ram after Avraham opened his eyes and saw it. Hagar, not being a prophet, could not open her own eyes, but Avraham was a prophet, so he opened his own eyes. Avraham did not physically open his eyes; what this means is that he allowed himself to see what was already there, but had not seen before, because ELOHIM would not allow him to see it until or after it was time. Just like the well that Hagar did not see but was already in existence for about two to three years, Avraham, in the same manner, did not see the Ram that had been caught by the thicket for who knows how long. The main point is,

YHVH had absolutely no intentions of letting Avraham sacrifice his son, Yitzkhak.

YHVH had provided Himself the sacrificial animal for Avraham. Was this all a test for Avraham, or was there something else? Maybe, let me quote the verses from Shemot/Exodus and BaMidbar/Numbers.

Shemot/Exodus 13:11-16

“When YHVH brings you into the land of the Canaanites, as he swore to you and your fathers, and shall give it to you, you shall set apart to YHVH all that first opens the womb. All the firstborn of your animals that are males shall be YHVH’s. Every firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb, or if you will not redeem it, you shall break its neck. Every firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem. And when in time to come your son asks you, ‘What does this mean?’ you shall say to him, ‘By a strong hand YHVH brought us out of Egypt, from the house of slavery. For when Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, YHVH killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man and the firstborn of animals. Therefore, I sacrifice to YHVH all the males that first open the womb, but all the firstborn of my sons I redeem.’

BaMidbar/Numbers 18:15

Everything that opens the womb of all flesh, whether man or beast, which they offer to YHVH, shall be yours. Nevertheless, the firstborn of man you shall redeem, and the firstborn of unclean animals you shall redeem.

BaMidbar/Numbers 18:17

But the firstborn of a cow, or the firstborn of a sheep, or the firstborn of a goat, you shall not redeem; they are holy. You shall sprinkle their blood on the altar and shall burn their fat as a food offering, with a pleasing aroma to YHVH.

What does all this mean? It means that everything that opens the womb, or every firstborn male child, belongs to YHVH. They all belong to Him. In the case of a cow, a sheep, or a goat, it cannot be redeemed; it must be sacrificed to YHVH on the altar by the priests of YHVH. In the case of a male firstborn child or an unclean animal, they can and must be redeemed according to the Law of YHVH.

What does it mean to be redeemed? The definition of the word redeem is to gain or regain possession of (something) in exchange for payment. Why must we do this? Because all firstborn that open the womb of a female belong to YHVH. In the case of a firstborn cow, sheep, or goat, you cannot redeem them because they are holy and are intended for use as a sacrifice to YHVH, so they can be sacrificed. After all, they are clean animals, meaning that they are acceptable to offer as a sacrifice to YHVH. An unclean animal is not fit for sacrificial purposes, so it cannot be sacrificed to YHVH. Therefore, you must redeem them, or they will not belong to you; they will belong to YHVH. If you keep them without redemption, or in other words, without payment, it is the same as stealing from YHVH. Now, in the case of a child, they are not acceptable for sacrifice either, so you must gain possession of them by means of payment as well because they do not belong to the father or the mother; they belong to YHVH, and since YHVH does not accept human sacrifice, you must redeem them or take possession of them by means of payment. YHVH does not accept any form of sacrifice that involves a human, regardless of who the human is or the reason for which it is being done; this is YHVH’s law, and it should not be done, no matter the circumstances. There is no exemption for a human sacrifice.

NONE! This is the Law of YHVH, our CREATOR, and it will never change.

Avraham was at this location to be tested and to redeem his firstborn, who opened the womb of Sarah. This is why the verse says,

“Instead of his son.”

The ram was the redemption, the payment for Yitzkhak.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

והנה איל BEHOLD, A RAM — It was predestined for that purpose from the six days of Creation (Avot 5:5; Midrash Tanchuma, Vayera 23).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

BEHIND HIM A RAM CAUGHT IN THE THICKET. Abraham beheld a ram after (achar) it had been caught in the thicket by its horns. If the chet of ne’echaz (caught) is vocalized with a kamatz, then the word “was” is missing from the text, and the meaning of the phrase is, after it was yet caught in the thicket. There are many other similar instances. Others say that achar is connected to And Abraham lifted up his eyes. But if this were so, the word achar would have been followed by ken or zot, as is the case whenever the word achar (after) indicates a pause.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

והנה איל אחר נאחז בסבך, this incident indicated to him that G’d must have arranged for this ram to be at his disposal.

תחת בנו, in exchange for what he had had in mind to do with his son. The phrase reminds us of Psalms 15,2 ודובר אמת בלבו, “he spoke truthfully in his heart.” [The author justifies the use of the word תחת, “in lieu of,” for something which had not actually happened, i.e., Yitzchok had not been slaughtered. The verse from Psalms proves that the intention is as good as the deed when such an intention was sincere and wholehearted. Ed.]

Bekhor Shor (12th century) commentary:

And he saw; and behold, a ram: And he nevertheless would not have taken it, as he was afraid lest another person lost it; and he would not extend his hand [to take the property] of others. But "after it was caught in the thicket by its horns," he knew that it was a sign to him that he should take it and that it was stuck there for his sake. So he went and took it.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

אחר נאחז בסבך, “subsequently he saw a ram that had become entangled in the thicket.” We find a similar construction (using the preposition אחר) in Psalms 68:26: קדמו שרים אחר נוגנים, “the singers preceded the musicians,” or in Kohelet 12:2: ושבו העבים אחר הגשם, “and the clouds return after the rain.”According to Rashi, Avraham saw the ram as it became entangled. This is why he understood that it was not an accident, but that God had given him a hint to use it as a substitute for the offering the angel had prevented him from completing. If that ram had been standing there as did others, he would have thought it was privately owned by someone else and would not have touched it. A different interpretation: “he noticed it after it had become entangled by its horns.” (Ibn Ezra).

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

וישא, he raised his eyes to see if there was some pure animal suitable for a sacrifice which he could offer instead of his son.

וירא והנה איל אחר נאחז, after it had become enmeshed in the thicket.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Abraham lifted his eyes and saw that behold, there was a ram after it had been caught in the thicket by its horns. Rams, even those with long horns, are typically able to avoid being caught in thickets. Furthermore, this ram was in unusually proximity to humans. Abraham immediately understood that this was no coincidence, but a sign. Therefore, Abraham went, took the ram, and offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son.

Tur HaAroch (Approximately 1270–1340) commentary:

והנה איל אחד, “and lo there was a ram, etc.” According to Ibn Ezra, Avraham had not seen the ram until it had become enmeshed in the thicket with its horns. Other commentators hold that Avraham had observed the same ram previously when it was unencumbered and grazing, whereas now he saw it suddenly caught in the thicket by its horns. He assumed that this was for him to be able to secure it easily as a substitute for Yitzkhak.

And Avraham, he called that place (by) the name “The ONE, YHVH, He provides (or He sees).” As it is said to this day, “On the mountain of YHVH, He provided (or He saw).”

14 וַיִּקְרָא אַבְרָהָם שֵׁם־הַמָּקוֹם הַהוּא יְהוָה׀ יִרְאֶה אֲשֶׁר יֵאָמֵר הַיּוֹם בְּהַר יְהוָה יֵרָאֶה׃

יד

The ONE, YHVH, He provides (or He sees).

Some translations go with YHVH, or in your bible, it probably says, “The Lord, who provides,” or “The Lord, who sees.” The Lord is a reference to the name of YHVH, and the translation could be one of the two, or I say it is both. So, like I usually do, I pick them both. Why? Because they both apply here. YHVH saw that Avraham was a true ELOHIM fearing and reverent of ELOHIM man, and there at that mountain, YHVH provided for Avraham a substitute sacrifice for his son, Yitzkhak.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

'ה יראה. Its real meaning is as the Targum renders it: The Lord will choose and select for Himself this place to make His Shechinah reside in it and for sacrifices to be offered there.

אשר יאמר היום AS IT IS SAID TO THIS DAY — In the generations to come, people will say of it,” On this mountain the Holy One, blessed be He, shows Himself to His people.”

Bekhor Shor (12th century) commentary:

The Lord will see: Meaning, He will see this place and remember the deed.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויקרא...ה' יראה, a reference to his having said to Yitzchok in verse 8 that G’d would select the animal for the offering.

אשר יאמר היום, a reference to the day on which this story is being related. This occurrence would be remembered every time G’d would manifest Himself on that mountain. When the Temple would be built, this event would be commemorated, for instance. Avraham had been told in a prophetic vision why this mountain had been chosen by G’d for this particular event. It was because also in the future Avraham’s descendants would make a point of offering their sacrifices on that mountain.
בהר ה' יראה, G’d would manifest Himself in the future also on this mountain.

And the messenger of YHVH, he called out towards Avraham a second time from the heavens.

15 וַיִּקְרָא מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה אֶל־אַבְרָהָם שֵׁנִית מִן־הַשָּׁמָיִם׃

טו

Remember that a messenger of YHVH is what we now know as angels. Remember that the word “angel” is the Greek translation of the word “messenger”. Let us go straight to the source and translate it into our language; the word is messenger, not angel.

“He called out towards Avraham a second time from the heavens.”

I always wondered if the messenger was in a position that could be seen, and by this wording, it makes me feel like he was not visible. Otherwise, why would it be said that the messenger called to Avraham a second time if Avraham could see him? The messenger could not be seen; therefore, he had to call out to Avraham to tell him the following verses, so Avraham would know that he was still there. After all, some time had passed since Avraham last heard the messenger, and after he heard the messenger, he had obtained the ram and sacrificed it. I would think that takes some time to do. And since Avraham could not see the messenger, the messenger had to call out to him again. I love studying Scripture this way, our Father, YHVH, does not hide anything from us, only those who do not want to see can’t see it.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויקרא, He called him a second time to inform him that, as compensation for what he had just been prepared to do, G’d would compensate his children when the occasion would arise to do so.

To say, “In Me (or by Me), I swear,” declared YHVH, “because you have done this, this thing, and not withheld your son, your only son,

16 וַיֹּאמֶר בִּי נִשְׁבַּעְתִּי נְאֻם־יְהוָה כִּי יַעַן אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתָ אֶת־הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה וְלֹא חָשַׂכְתָּ אֶת־בִּנְךָ אֶת־יְחִידֶךָ׃

טז

The messenger of YHVH is still speaking, but here it clearly states that even though the messenger is speaking, the words coming out of his mouth are not his but those of YHVH.
In this verse and the next two, YHVH, or YHVH through his messenger, will give Avraham an oath, sworn by Him and by Himself, the Highest entity in existence. And YHVH says through His messenger that because Avraham passed the test and was willing to ascend or sacrifice his only son, He would reinforce the promise. And you may say, but he did not, he never actually sacrificed him. And you are right, but he did redeem him by sacrificing the ram. This conforms with the Law of YHVH, as I explained before. And maybe this is what it means by “you have done this thing.” That he really did not ascend him or sacrifice him, as that would be going against the Law of YHVH. A human sacrifice is not allowed; instead, the firstborn is not to be sacrificed, but rather redeemed, and he did redeem him by sacrificing the ram in his son's stead. That was the test, and Avraham passed.

Now that I think about it, this is why there is a double meaning in the wording at the beginning of the chapter. The Elohim made it sound like Avraham needed to sacrifice Yitzkhak, but that is not what He meant. He meant for Avraham to do what he did, and redeem his son, not actually kill him and burn him as a sacrifice, which would be a big no-no in YHVH’s eyes. It all seems so clear now, at least to me.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

BY MYSELF HAVE I SWORN. By Myself indicates a great and eternal oath.

BECAUSE. Ya’an (because) is similar in meaning to anah (testify or bear witness). The meaning of the term is: this act will testify and bear witness.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

נאם ה' כי יען אשר עשית, “I, G’d, say that because you have done this, I will bless you in an increased measure.”

Bekhor Shor (12th century) commentary:

And did not withhold your only [son]: You brought up your only son before Me, and you planned to reduce your seed. But I will give you, "and I shall surely increase your seed" (Genesis 22:17).

Haamek Davar is a work of Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin (1816-1893) commentary:

And did not withhold your only son: Here it did not specify, "from Me," like in the first statement (Genesis 22:12). Rather, it is like its literal meaning - that he gave over the soul of his son for the glory and the will of the Holy One, blessed be He.

Kli Yakar (כלי יקר), meaning "precious vessel," refers to a popular Torah commentary written by the Polish rabbi Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz (1550-1619). Commentary:

Because you have done this thing, etc.: From what it said, "and you did not withhold your son," we understand that the statement "because you have done" is another matter. Moreover, an explanation is required, since above (Genesis 22:12), it said, "and you did not withhold your only son from Me" - whereas here it did not say, "from Me." And also the doubling of the expression, "I will surely bless you," requires an answer. As, according to Rashi's answer - [that] one is for the father and one is for the son - the duplication of "I will surely multiply" is problematic. Hence, it appears to me that with every part of the divine service, he said, "May it be His will that it is as if my son were slaughtered," etc. Hence, it is as if he did two deeds, for he did the sacrifice of the ram in actual practice, and the sacrifice of his son in thought. Hence, it is stated, "because you have done this thing" - meaning, the doing of the sacrificing; since all of the promises were said to him in the merit of the sacrifices. And, "and you did not withhold your only son," is due to his mentioning him with each part of the divine service. That is why it did not state, "from Me," which indicates actual sacrificing. At this point, he did not consider actually sacrificing him. Hence, "I will surely bless you" is a double blessing - one corresponding to the act and one corresponding to the thought. And that is also the reason for, "I will surely multiply."

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויאמר בי נשבעתי, G’d added an oath to the blessing He had already bestowed on Avraham. When G’d swears an “oath,” it is as if He were to say “by My life, etc.” Just as He is eternal and therefore will be able to keep His oath, so He can keep His oath to the children and grandchildren of the ones to whom He promises something by oath. While it is true that G’d does not need to swear an oath to assure us that He will keep His word, the new element in G’d swearing an oath is that even if the recipient of the oath did not keep his part of the bargain, i.e. sinned in the meantime, G’d promises that this will not invalidate His blessing, the one He confirms by an oath. Furthermore, He added another dimension to the existing blessing,

16–17. “because you…did not withhold your son… I will…make your descendants…numerous.” God had promised Abraham numerous progeny even before this test (12:2; 13:16; 15:5; 17:5). What then would have happened had Abraham not attempted to sacrifice Isaac?

For (you are) blessed, I blessed you, and (you will) become many, I will make your seed many, as the stars of the heavens, and as the sands which are upon the lip/shores of the sea, and your seed will take/conquer/drive out the gates/towns/cities of their enemies,

17 כִּי־בָרֵךְ אֲבָרֶכְךָ וְהַרְבָּה אַרְבֶּה אֶֽת־זַרְעֲךָ כְּכוֹכְבֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם וְכַחוֹל אֲשֶׁר עַל־שְׂפַת הַיָּם וְיִרַשׁ זַרְעֲךָ אֵת שַׁעַר אֹיְבָיו׃

יז‎

YHVH, through his messenger, said that he is blessed because he blessed him and that he will be greatly multiplied because He would multiply him greatly and gives an example of how numerous he would become through his descendants. As many as there are stars in the heavens and as numerous as there is sand on the seashores. That is a lot of people, and the descendants of Avraham, the Israelites, have greatly multiplied and still are multiplying; they surely are blessed people.
YHVH says that He blessed him and will multiply him. So, let us recap when He did.

BeReshit/Genesis 12:2

“And I will make you into a great nation, I will bless you, and I will magnify your name, and you will be a blessing. And blessed will be those who bless you, and he that curses you shall be cursed, and blessed in you will be all the families on the land/earth/surface of the earth.”

BeReshit/Genesis 13:14-17

“Please, lift your eyes, and look from the place where you are, to the north, and to the south, and to the east, and to the sea/west, for all the land that you see, to you, I give it and to your seed for ever. I will make your seed as the dust of the earth, which if men are able to count the dust of the earth, so will your seed be. Rise, walk the land, to its length, and to its with, for to you I give it.”

BeReshit/Genesis 15:4-5

“This one will not inherit you, except that which will come from within you, he, will inherit you.” And took him outside and said, “Please, look up at the heavens and count the stars, if you are able to count them.” And said to him, “In this manner will be the number of your seed/descendants.”

BeReshit/Genesis 17:4-8

“I, here/thus, is my covenant with you and to/for you to be a great father of a great number of nations. And no longer will your name be called Avram, and your name will be Avraham, for/because (the) father (of) many nations I will make you. And you, I will make you fruitful in great abundance, and I will give you to/for the nations, and kings will come from you. And I will establish my covenant between me and between you and between your seed after you, through their generations forever, to be to/for you ELOHIM/GOD and to your seed/descendants after you. I give to you and to your seed/descendants after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Kenaan, for a possession forever, and to be to/for them their ELOHIM/GOD.”

This last one is part of the covenant or contract that YHVH made between Himself, Avraham, and his descendants. All these verses are why YHVH said through His messenger, “I blessed you, I will multiply you.”

On this oath or promise, he added something new. YHVH, through His messenger, said that Avraham’s descendants would be victorious against their enemies. What does this mean? It means that even though YHVH promised Avraham's descendants the land of Avraham’s sojournings, they would have to take it from the people of that land, the land of Khanaan. I know that this sounds kind of cruel. Why take a land away from other people? And by force? Because this is the Law of YHVH, which applies to the Israelites, this Law applies to every person and nation. I have talked about this before. If your sins or the sins of a country become full, the country to which they belong will spit them out. And YHVH did drive out the Canaanites from their countries, and He used the Israelites to do so. YHVH did the same to the Israelites when they sinned against Him. YHVH used other countries to exile them from Israel. The people of Israel and Judah were exiled at least three major times in biblical history: first by the Assyrians in the 8th century BCE (affecting the Northern Kingdom of Israel), then by the Babylonians in the 6th century BCE (affecting the Southern Kingdom of Judah), and most significantly, by the Romans in 70 CE, leading to the Diaspora. The concept of the "Four Exiles" also includes a period of slavery in Egypt before the Exodus. This is known from the Tanakh, the Bible, and part of it from known history. No one is exempt from the Torah or the Law of YHVH.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

ברך אברכך I WILL SURELY BLESS THEE — The double use of the term “bless” is intended to signify a blessing for the father and a blessing for the son (Genesis Rabbah 56:11).

והרבה ארבה AND I WILL GREATLY MULTIPLY—Again, double use of the term “multiply”—once for the father, and once for the son (Genesis Rabbah 56:11).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

THE GATE OF HIS ENEMIES. Cities surrounded by walls that have gates.

Kli Yakar (כלי יקר), meaning "precious vessel," refers to a popular Torah commentary written by the Polish rabbi Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz (1550-1619). Commentary:

Like the stars of the sky and like the sand, etc.: We have found that sometimes He compares Israel to the stars and sometimes to the sand on the shore of the sea, and sometimes to dust, as it is stated (Genesis 28:14), "And your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth." It is because it all indicates different times. As in times of tranquility and success, He compares them to the stars. That is an expression of greatness, as Rashi (Rashi on Deuteronomy 1:9) explains on the verse, "The Lord, your God, has multiplied you, and behold you are today as numerous as the stars in the sky" (Deuteronomy 1:10) - "He multiplied and aggrandized you." Likewise, "I will surely multiply you" is here an expression of greatness.

And the comparison of the sand indicates the time when the nations rise against Israel to destroy them, but they cannot [defeat] them. This is like the waves that rise as if they want to flood the whole world. But immediately when they reach the sand, they are broken. So too are the nations, as it is stated (Psalms 42:8), "all Your breakers and waves have swept over me." However, they are not able to [defeat] them, because they fall and break there. That is why it is called them, "Your breakers." That is why Israel is compared to this sand that breaks the waves. As they are unable to pass through the sand, for the sand is the statute and the limit of the sea. So too are the nations not able to destroy Israel. Therefore, when Esav came to meet Yaakov, Yaakov said in his prayer (Genesis 32:13), "You have said, I will do very good with you, and I will make your offspring like the sands of the sea." Why did he mention specifically the promise of the sand and not mention the stars, which have two advantages - numerousness and greatness? And he also did not [even] mention an expression of increase, but rather, "and I will make your offspring like the sands of the sea!" Rather, it is that since this is a promise that their enemies will not be able to [defeat] them, so too will Esav not be able to injure him. And for this reason, he mentioned specifically the sand that is at the shore of the sea. For is there no other sand in the world besides it? Rather, it is because it breaks the waves, as mentioned. That is why "as the sand on the shore of the sea" is stated here. But what is the relationship of this to "and your descendants will inherit the gate of their enemies?" Rather, it is in the way of, "not [only] this, but also that." As it is not only this, that they will be like the sand that the waves - meaning the enemies - are not able to [defeat]; but rather also that, that they will inherit the gate of their enemies and will be able [to defeat] them.

And the comparison of the dirt indicates the time of lowliness. For at the time when they will be like dirt to be trampled on upon the lowest floor, they will rise from there, from their lowly state, and expand in every direction - as it is written (Genesis 28:14), "And your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth, and you shall expand to the west, to the east." And it is as it is written (Psalms 44:26), "We lie prostrate in the dust." And what is written after it? "Arise and help us" (Psalms 44:27). The reason for this is that Israel does not seek God with all their hearts except at the time when they are at their lowest point - as is known from the ways of all generations and our own. And perhaps the comparison of dirt is hinting at the exile of Egypt, since the Egyptians were plowing on their backs (Sotah 11b), like dirt which is plowed upon. This will be explained further later, in Parashat Vayetzeh (Kli Yakar on Genesis 28:13), with God's help.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

וירש זרעך את שער אויביו, the meaning of the words שער אויביו is ארץ אויביו, the land of its enemies. A land surrounded by oceans and mountains is difficult to conquer. Eretz Yisrael is such a country. When one has breached the coastal defences or conquered the mountain ranges, it is as if one had broken through the gates of the fortified walls around a city. This is why the Torah here describes such a victory as “inheriting the gates of one’s enemies.” We find a similar expression used in Nachum 3:13 פתח נפתחו שערי ארצך, “the gates of your country will be completely open.” The prophet refers to the country lying at the mercy of an invader. G’d added further:

ככוכבי השמים וכחול, by this simile, and especially the repeated reference to two different hyperboles, He wanted to reinforce the meaning of this promise. Up until now, the only simile for the multiplying of Avraham’s seed had been the expression כעפר הארץ, “as the dust of the earth.” (13:15) On another occasion (15:5), the comparison had been to the stars. Now, two comparisons are mentioned, showing that the blessing had been reinforced.
והתברכו בזרעך, this too is an additional dimension of the promise made to Avraham concerning his offspring.

וירש, one of the letters י that we would have expected as part of this word, is missing. It is the י which is part of the root of the verb ירש. The י that does appear is the one used to describe the future tense, indirect speech, and the masculine. [This is common for roots beginning with the letter י. Ed.]

And all the nations of the land/earth will be blessed by your seed, as a consequence of your obedience to my voice.”

18 וְהִתְבָּרֲכוּ בְזַרְעֲךָ כֹּל גּוֹיֵי הָאָרֶץ עֵקֶב אֲשֶׁר שָׁמַעְתָּ בְּקֹלִי׃

יח‎

Before in BeReshit/Genesis 12:2 Scripture read “and you will be a blessing. And blessed will be those who bless you, and he that curses you shall be cursed, and blessed in you will be all the families on the land/earth/surface of the earth.” This blessing applied to Avraham, but now this blessing has passed on to all the seed or descendants of Avraham through Yitzkhak.

“As a consequence of your obedience to my voice.”

Here is where we have to be logical. As we know, Avraham was already blessed. You can not bless someone twice with the same blessing, granted an addition to the blessing was made. The verse says, “As a consequence of your obedience.” Whose obedience? We already know that Avraham has remained obedient to YHVH all of his life and has been tested more than once before. Maybe it was not Avraham personally that was obedient this time, or only not him, but Yitzkhak, who was also obedient. As we have seen in this chapter so far, Yitzkhak seemed to have known what was going on, as evidenced by the questions he asked his father and his continued compliance with his father's instructions. Not to mention that according to Scripture, not saying anything about it, there was no revelience in Yitzkhak’s actions, he trusted his father and YHVH too. And since now Scripture says, “And all the nations of the land/earth will be blessed by your seed.” Well, Yitzhak is Avraham’s seed, and it is his obedience that Scripture is referring to. As the saying goes, like father, like son. And so it will be, for the most part, for some of the descendants of Avraham through Yitzkhak.

BeReshit/Genesis 27:33-38

Then Yitzkhak trembled very violently and said, “Who was it then that hunted game and brought it to me, and I ate it all before you came, and I have blessed him? Yes, and he shall be blessed.” As soon as Esau heard these words of his father, he cried out with an exceedingly great and bitter cry and said to his father, “Bless me, even me also, O my father!” But he said, “Your brother came deceitfully, and he has taken away your blessing.” Esau said, “Is he not rightly named Jacob? For he has cheated me these two times. He took away my birthright, and behold, now he has taken away my blessing.” Then he said, “Have you not reserved a blessing for me?” Yitzkhak answered and said to Esau, “Behold, I have made him lord over you, and all his brothers I have given to him for servants, and with grain and wine I have sustained him. What then can I do for you, my son?” Esau said to his father, “Have you but one blessing, my father? Bless me, even me also, O my father.” And Esau lifted up his voice and wept.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

BECAUSE. Ekev (because) means a reward that is granted at the end.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

עקב אשר שמעת בקולי, as a consequence. This is what we know as the concept of שכר מצוה מצוה, that the fulfillment of one commandment begets the opportunity of fulfilling another commandment. By doing this you will receive the satisfaction that your children will be a banner to the nations, teaches to the gentile nations instructing them in how to serve the Lord. All of this will accrue to you as a credit, a merit.

Haamek Davar is a work of Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin (1816-1893) commentary:

And through your seed will be blessed, etc.: This is a blessing in of itself - that they should find grace and kindness in the eyes of the nations of the world to the point that they be blessed by them.

Because you have listened to My voice: This blessing is not because he did not withhold his son, but rather because he understood the voice of God. And he learned from His words that His will was to have a fixed sacrifice, like the law of communal altars - as I wrote above, [verse] 9 (Haamek Davar on Genesis 22:9). Hence his children merited that a thread of grace would be extended over them [when giving these sacrifices], like the principle of the one who occupies himself with Torah. As it is found in Avodah Zarah 3b, "Anyone who occupies himself with Torah at night, a thread of kindness, etc." And we have already explained several times that the meaning of listening to the voice, is understanding and precise inference about [the speaker's] words. And see Deuteronomy 30:2, as we learned from there that it is necessary to explain it that way. And also see verse 20 there.

And Avraham, he returned to his youths/servants, and they rose up, and together they went BeEr Shava, and Avraham, he dwelt/lived/remained in BeEr Shava.

19 וַיָּשָׁב אַבְרָהָם אֶל־נְעָרָיו וַיָּקֻמוּ וַיֵּלְכוּ יַחְדָּו אֶל־בְּאֵר שָׁבַע וַיֵּשֶׁב אַבְרָהָם בִּבְאֵר שָׁבַע׃פ

יט

We have already established that we are unsure of Yitzkhak's age at the time of this chapter. Well, at least I am not sure, but after reading it, it would seem that he had grown and was no longer a child. Hopefully, there will be more clues to that as we go on. However, because of this verse, we know that Avraham was still living in BeEr Shava. Does that help? Well, no. The last we knew of Avraham is that Scripture says that he stayed in BeEr Shava for many days.

Now, it would seem that everyone is preoccupied with the whereabouts of Yitzkhak as he is not mentioned in this verse, and rightly so. I can not believe that this went past me. I did some digging around, and it would seem that they were separated, but since Scripture does not give many time stamps, it could also be that they were not. So let me put together some verses that may help us.

Our verse says that Avraham and his servants, but says nothing of Yitzkhak, went to BeEr Shava, and Avraham, he dwelt/lived/remained in BeEr Shava. For how long, we do not know. In the next chapter, it reads like so.

BeReshit/Genesis 23:2

“And Sarah died at Kiriath-arba (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan, and Avraham went to mourn or went in to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her.”

Now, the word בּוֹא/Bo, means to go in, to come, to go, to come in, or to enter. So, the verse could mean that Avraham went to mourn for Sarah. Not that he went in to mourn for Sarah. I also looked up every passage in which the word mourn is found, and it only appears in Scripture 30 times. All but this one is structured like this; all the others say that they mourned, for them not to mourn, or they will mourn. Here Scripture reads differently; it says, “came in to mourn or came to mourn.” If it is that he came in to mourn, then why does it not say that of all the other 29 times in scripture? However, if he were in a different place than she was, it makes sense that it would read, “Came to mourn or went to mourn.” Last we knew, Avraham was living in BeEr Shava, and the next chapter, from where this quote is from, says that Sarah died in Hebron. Now, where do I find out that Yitzkhak is?

BeReshit/Genesis 24:62

“Now Isaac had returned from BeEr-lahai-roi and was dwelling in the Negev.

BeReshit/Genesis 24:67

Then Yitzkhak brought her into the tent of Sarah his mother and took Rebekah, and she became his wife, and he loved her. So Yitzkhak was comforted after his mother’s death.

BeReshit/Genesis 25:20

And Yitzkhak was forty years old when he took Rebekah, the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean, to be his wife.

So Avraham is at BeEr Shava, Sarah is in Hebron, and now we find out that Yitzkhak is in the Negev desert. BeEr-lahai-roi is located in the Negev desert, so it would seem that Yitzkhak is also journeying, just like his father was and still is, as per YHVH’s commandment. So, that puts chapters 23 and 24 close in time proximity with this chapter.
So, Avraham went from Yitzkhak’s binding to BeEr Shava, and it would seem that Yitzkhak was living in the Negev desert region after his binding. Then, Avraham went to Hebron to mourn Sarah’s death, and Yitzkhak went back to the Negev after Sarah’s death, and shortly after Sarah’s death, Yitzkhak got married. We know it was shortly after because Yitzkhak was still mourning for his mother. But why was Sarah in a different location from Avraham? Well, there is a theory, and a possibility. First, the theory, it is said by rabbis and scholars alike, that Sarah died of a broken heart because of what Avraham went to do in this chapter, and that is to sacrifice Yitzkhak, her only son. It could be that she left Avraham and traveled from BeEr Shava to Hebron to get away from him. Now the possibility. After Yitzkhak’s binding, Avraham was traveling on his own, and it would seem that so was Yitzkhak. Yitzkhak went his own way. Now, if Sarah died shortly after the binding of Yitzkhak, it would seem that she was not in a state for traveling all over the place. Her age caught up to her. So, she stayed in Hebron, where Avraham had stayed the longest and had allies.

There is not much to go on. Were Avraham and Yitzkhak separated after the binding, yes. Avraham was in BeEr Shava and Yitzkhak in the Negev. Why, no one knows. We have to draw our own conclusions, and I, for the most part, said what I thought. Avraham and Yitzkhak separated to continue YHVH’s commandment of journeying the land, each in his own way.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

SO ABRAHAM RETURNED. Isaac is not mentioned because he was under Abraham’s care. Those who say that Abraham slaughtered Isaac and left him on the altar, and following this, Isaac came to life, are contradicting Scripture.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

וישב אברהם אל נעריו, “Avraham returned to his lads;” where did Yitzchok go? According to Midrash Hagadol, quoted in Torah Shleymah item 204 on our verse, he was kept in Gan Eden for the next three years [until he married Rivkah.] A different interpretation: he proceeded to study Torah during those three years in the academy of Ever. (Bereshit Rabbah 56,11)

Haamek Davar is a work of Naftali Zvi Yehuda Berlin (1816-1893) commentary:

And Avraham returned: But it is not written, Yitzchak (returned with him). Onkelos already translated that he brought him to the study hall of Shem to study Torah. And it is reasonable to say that when God finished [saying], "because you listened to My voice," he contemplated that this was the will of God - to occupy oneself with words of Torah. And even though Avraham studied with him, there should be two places regarding contemplation about words of Torah, as it is found in Avodah Zarah 19a.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

וישב אברהם, there was no need to mention that Yitzchak accompanied him. Rather it mentioned Avraham mentioned, because he was the principal.

וישב אברהם בבאר שבע, the Torah did not mention for how many years Avraham lived in Beer Sheva, seeing Sarah died there, [something which must have greatly dampened his joy at living there. Ed.]

The text mentions Abraham and his servants, but not Yitzkhak. Yitzkhak and Abraham are never represented together again. When Yitzkhak reappears in the text, he is near Be’er-lachai-ro’i (24:62), where pregnant Hagar had gone when she ran away from Sarah (16:14).

And it was after these happenings that it was told to Avraham, and it was said, “Behold/See, Milkah also had sons, for Nakhor, your brother.”

20 וַיְהִי אַחֲרֵי הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַיֻּגַּד לְאַבְרָהָם לֵאמֹר הִנֵּה יָלְדָה מִלְכָּה גַם־הִוא בָּנִים לְנָחוֹר אָחִיךָ׃

כ

It was told to Avraham that his brother and his sister-in-law had also had children. Remember that this brother is the same or the only brother left to Avraham, who married Milkah at the same time that Avraham married Sarah. This happened when Avraham’s and Nakhor’s youngest brother died in chapter 11. So let us see, Avraham was born in 1948 and had Yitzkhak when he was one hundred. In the next chapter, Yitzkhak will be 40 years old, so that makes Avraham 140 years old at that time. Nakhor, Avraham’s brother, is younger by at least one year than Avraham, so Nakhor is 139 years old…You know something occurred to me. We are about to learn in this chapter that Sarah is dead, and what happens when someone dies. Friends and family are welcome to come and pay their respects, if possible. Perhaps, just perhaps, this is where and when Avraham was told that his brother Nahor had children as well by people who know Avraham and his family.

BeReshit/Genesis 11:29

“And Avram and Nakhor took for themselves wives; the name of Avram’s wife was Sarai, and the name of Nakhor’s wife was Milkah, daughter of Haran, father of Milkah, and father of Yiska.”

We know that Nakhor is at least one year younger than Avraham, and now we find out that he has sons and daughters. We will find out in the following three verses how many he has. I should also say that the Rabbis think that Nakhow and Milkah did not start having children until Sarah became pregnant with Yitzkhak, but this is not known or confirmed by Scripture that I know of, at least not from Milkah.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

BEHOLD, MILKAH, SHE ALSO HATH BORNE. This is stated to inform us of Rebekah’s pedigree.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

BEHOLD, MILCAH, SHE ALSO HATH BORN CHILDREN. Since Milcah was the daughter of his brother Haran, this was tidings to Abraham that his older brother Nahor had been visited with many children from the daughter of his dead brother Haran.
Now, from the text of Scripture, it would appear that Abraham had no knowledge of any of them except on that day. If they had been visited by children in their younger days, it would be impossible for them not to have been heard of until this time, for the distance between Mesopotamia and the land of Canaan is not great. Now, when Abraham left Haran, he was seventy-five years old, and Nahor was also elderly, as was his wife. Indeed, we must say that G-d performed a miracle for them in that they were blessed with children in their old age. This is the sense of the verse, Milcah, she also. In the words of our Rabbis, it is said that Milcah was visited with children, as was her sister Sarah.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

ובתואל ילד את רבקה, the person relating all this to Avraham added that Betuel, a son of Nachor’s proper wife, sired Rivkah. The meaning of the message was that a girl had been born in his own family who would be a suitable wife for Avraham’s son, so that he would not have to look for such a wife among the Canaanites surrounding him.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ובתואל ילד את רבקה, Laban is not mentioned as the focus of the story is Rivkah. The whole paragraph is recorded only on account of Rivkah.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Betuel begot Rebecca. He had other children as well, and the Torah later introduces his son Laban, who was older than Rebecca. Nevertheless, in this context, the birth of Rebecca is of more significance, as she will marry Isaac. At this point, Abraham knew that there was at least one woman in the family eligible for Isaac, and he may have had Rebecca in mind when he later sent a messenger to Haran to seek a wife for his son (chap. 24).

Bethuel fathered Rebekah. The text highlights only Rebekah in her generation. Rebekah is important not only because she will marry Isaac (Genesis 24) but also because she proves to be decisive in arranging for the transfer of the covenantal blessing in the next generation (27:6–13). Although we know the name of Rebekah’s grandmother, Milcah, we never learn the name of her mother.

Utz, his firstborn, and Buz, his brother, and KeMuel, father of Aram,

21 אֶת־עוּץ בְּכֹרוֹ וְאֶת־בּוּז אָחִיו וְאֶת־קְמוּאֵל אֲבִי אֲרָם׃

כא

עוּץ/Utz

Name meaning is "counsel," "contemplation," or "firmness," though its connection to "tree" (עץ) is also plausible, suggesting shade and protection. It is famously the name of the land where Job lived in the Bible.

בּוּז/Buz

The Hebrew name Buz (בּוּז) means "contempt," "disrespect," or "scorn".

קְמוּאֵל/Kemuel

The Hebrew name קְמוּאֵל (Qəmûʼēl), or Kemuel, primarily means "raised by God" or "God has raised" and can also be interpreted as "God's congregation" or "God's mound". It is a theophoric name, combining the Hebrew verb qum (to rise, stand) and the divine title 'El (POWER/God).

אֲרָם/Aram

In Hebrew, the name אֲרָם (Aram) means "height," "highland," or "exalted region" and is derived from the Hebrew root רום (rum), which also means to be high or elevated.

את עוץ בכורו/Utz, his firstborn, “his firstborn son Utz, etc.; according to B’reshit rabbah, this is a reference to Job (Job, 1,1) where we are told about Job living in the land of Utz.

קמואל/Kemuel, he is supposed to be identical with the prophet Bileam, who tried to manipulate, rise against, G–d (Yalkut Shimoni)

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Nahor fathered several sons: Utz, with a traditional Aramaic name, who was his firstborn, Buz his brother, and Kemuel, father of Aram, who was apparently an important Aramean leader. Apart from Abraham, Terah’s descendants became Arameans.

and Kesed, and Khazo, and Pildash, and Yidlak, and Betuel,

22 וְאֶת־כֶּשֶׂד וְאֶת־חֲזוֹ וְאֶת־פִּלְדָּשׁ וְאֶת־יִדְלָף וְאֵת בְּתוּאֵל׃

כב

כֶּשֶׂד/Kesed

While the name's exact meaning is debated, some sources suggest it may be connected to the Chaldeans (Kasdim), or it might be linked to the Hebrew word חסד (ḥesed), meaning "loving-kindness".

חֲזוֹ/Khazo

Name meaning is "seer" or "visionary." The name's origin is from the Hebrew root ח. Z. H, which means "to see" or "to behold."

פִּלְדָּשׁ/Pildash

Based on biblical scholarship, the Hebrew name פִּלְדָּשׁ (Pildash) is of uncertain derivation, leading to several potential meanings.

Proposed meanings

"Flame of fire": This meaning is proposed by Brown-Driver-Briggs, one of the most respected Hebrew lexicons.
"Fiery iron" or "flashing steel": The Abarim Publications Bible name encyclopedia suggests this possibility, proposing a combination of the feminine noun pelada (possibly "iron" or "steel") and the noun 'esh ("fire"). This could allude to the glint or reflected light of iron.
"Elephant threshes": A traditional interpretation by Rabbi Efraim ben Shimshon (from around 1100 CE) suggests the name is a contraction of the Hebrew words pil ("elephant") and dash ("threshes"). This interpretation suggests Pildash was so tall he could "thresh" over shorter people. This is viewed by scholars as folk etymology, especially since the word pil for "elephant" is not used in the Hebrew Bible.
"Meaning unknown": Many biblical scholars acknowledge the name's uncertain origin and therefore its unknown meaning.

יִדְלָ֑ף/Yildaf

The Hebrew name יִדְלָ֑ף (Yidlaph) means "he will weep," "he weeps," or "he drips".

בְּתוּאֵל/Betuel

This name’s meaning varies depending on the etymological interpretation. The most common meaning is "house of God," but other interpretations also exist, like “Virgin of God”.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ואת כשד, this man became the founding father of the famous nation known as the Kasdim, as we mentioned on 11,28.

and Betuel beget Rivkah.” These eight begot Milkah to Nakhor, Avraham’s brother.

23 וּבְתוּאֵל יָלַד אֶת־רִבְקָה שְׁמֹנָה אֵלֶּה יָלְדָה מִלְכָּה לְנָחוֹר אֲחִי אַבְרָהָם׃

כג

These are the eight sons that Nakhor and Milkah had together, and Rivkah, who is to be Yitzkhak’s wife, was born from the youngest son of Nakhor and Milkah. Milkah, being Avraham’s youngest brother’s daughter, means that Milkah is 14 or 15 years younger than Avraham, maybe even more. Still, I am being extra generous, and since Sarah was 10 years younger than Avraham, then Sarah was 5 or 6 years older than Milkah. If Sarah was 90 when she gave birth to Yitzkhak, then Milkah was about 85 when Yitzkhak was born. Since, for the most part, wives in those days were younger than their husbands, Rivkah was born after Yitzkhak, by about 5 years. So, Milkah was around 90 when Rivkah was born to her youngest son, Betuel. Wow, Milkah might not have birthed Rivkah, but, amazingly, both Sarah and Milkah were 90 years old when Yitzkhak and Rivkah were born. Sarah birthed Yitzkhak at the age of 90, and Rivkah was born to Betuel when Milkah was 90!
Now, let us say that all of this is true, and Rivkah was born five years after Yitzkhak from Milkah’s youngest son. Then Milkah started having kids at a very young age. You have to figure that Rivkah could not have been the firstborn from Betuel, and she was not; she is only mentioned by herself because she is the focus of the story at this point. Later, we will find out that she has an older brother named Laban. Now, Betuel had seven brothers before him, and possibly even sisters between some of the brothers. If Milkah were 85 when Yitzkhak was born, that would mean Betuel was already a grown man, as he had already had at least Laban, and Rivkah would be born shortly after. Additionally, seven brothers of Betuel were born before him, as well as possibly a few sisters between the eight brothers. That would put Milkan in her teens, her twenties, but no later than her thirties when Milkah started having children. I mean, Yaakov had twelve kids, but that was from four wives.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

ובתואל ילד את רבקה AND BETHUEL BEGAT REBECCA — The entire genealogical record is given only for the sake of this verse (i. e. to lead up to this verse).

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

AND BETHUEL BEGOT REBEKAH. The verse does not mention Laban, even though he was older than Rebekah, for its intent is only to mention the eight children that Milcah bore to Nahor. However, Rebekah is mentioned, as the entire chapter is written to reveal her genealogy.
Kemuel, the father of Aram. Aram is mentioned only to reveal the identity of Kemuel, as Aram was a more important person than his father. Perhaps, also, there was another Kemuel in their generation. Hence, Scripture identifies Kemuel by saying that he was the father of Aram.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ובתואל ילד את רבקה, Laban is not mentioned as the focus of the story is Rivkah. The whole paragraph is recorded only on account of Rivkah.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

And his concubine, her name was Reumah, she also begot (for Nakhor) Tevakh, and Gakham, and Takhash, and Maakhah.

24 וּפִילַגְשׁוֹ וּשְׁמָהּ רְאוּמָה וַתֵּלֶד גַּם־הִוא אֶת־טֶבַח וְאֶת־גַּחַם וְאֶת־תַּחַשׁ וְאֶת־מַעֲכָה׃ס

כד

רְאוּמָה/Reumah

The meaning is "exalted" or "sublime (sublime is something of such excellence, grandeur, or beauty as to inspire great admiration or awe)." The name's origin is from the Hebrew verb רָאַם/raam or רוּם/rum, which means "to rise up" or "to be high."

טֶבַח/Tevakh

The name means "slaughter", "massacre", or “confidence”. The name is derived from the verb ṭâbach, which means to slaughter or butcher, often for food, but also in a figurative sense, often with ruthless intent.

גַּחַם/Gakham

This name, Gacham, is a biblical name that means "flame" or "burning."

תַּחַשׁ/Takhash

The meaning of this name is “Hurrier”, “One Sensitive To Incitement”, from the verb חוש (hush), to hurry or hasten.

מַעֲכָה/Maakhah

The name מַעֲכָה means "oppression," or "to press, crush," derived from the verb ma'ak (to press, squeeze). It is a non-gender-specific name referring to multiple individuals, including King David's wife, a queen mother, and even a people known as the Maachathites.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

AND HIS CONCUBINE, WHOSE NAME WAS REUMAH. Scripture recounts the entire account that they related to Avraham concerning his brother’s children.
It is possible that this was written to make known the entire genealogy of Nakhor, to establish that all of them were worthy to marry the children of Avraham, and it was with reference to all of them that Avraham said to Eliezer: But thou shalt go unto my father’s house and to my family.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

And his concubine... And she also gave birth; the words “And she also gave birth” must be understood as “And she also bore him,” meaning that his concubine also bore these children for Nakhor. The letter ו at the beginning of the word ופלגשו/and his concubine made it unnecessary to add the word לו/for, “for him,” after the word ותלד/And she bore.

Torá Inicio

Inicio Tanakj

◄ Ch. 21

Ch. 23 ►