And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of Goiim,
verse value 3235
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 58 letters. The shortest word is "king" (מֶ֣לֶךְ, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·king·of·Shinar" (מֶֽלֶךְ־שִׁנְעָ֔ר, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 90: king, king, king. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "Amraphel" (אַמְרָפֶ֣ל), "the·king·of·Shinar" (מֶֽלֶךְ־שִׁנְעָ֔ר), "Arioch" (אַרְי֖וֹךְ). The root מלך appears 3 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Amraphel" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "and·it·was" (root היה, 313x in Genesis); "in·days·of" (root יום, 126x in Genesis). First appearance of the root ארי ("Arioch") in Genesis. First appearance of the root כדר ("Chedorlaomer") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Ellasar', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַיְהִ֗י [and·it·was] (31) + בִּימֵי֙ [in·days·of] (62) + אַמְרָפֶ֣ל [Amraphel] (351) + מֶֽלֶךְ־שִׁנְעָ֔ר [the·king·of·Shinar] (710) + אַרְי֖וֹךְ [Arioch] (237) + מֶ֣לֶךְ [king] (90) + אֶלָּסָ֑ר [Ellasar] (291) + כְּדׇרְלָעֹ֙מֶר֙ [Chedorlaomer] (564) + מֶ֣לֶךְ [king] (90) + עֵילָ֔ם [Elam] (150) + וְתִדְעָ֖ל [Tidal] (510) + מֶ֥לֶךְ [king] (90) + גּוֹיִֽם [Goiim] (59) = 3235.
Onkelos
And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Babylon, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of peoples,
Rashi
אמרפל AMRAPHEL — He is identical with Nimrod who said (אמר) to Abraham, “Plunge (פול) into the fiery furnace” (Eruvin 53a). מלך גוים KING OF GOIIM (nations) — There was a place that was called Goiim because people from many nations and localities gathered there and proclaimed as their king a man named Tidal (Genesis Rabbah 42:4).
Ramban
AND IT CAME TO PASS IN THE DAYS OF AMRAPHEL KING OF SHINAR. This event happened to Abraham in order to teach us that four kingdoms will arise to rule the world. In the end, his [Abraham’s] children will prevail over them, and they will all fall into their hands. Then they will return all their captives and their wealth. The first one mentioned here is the king of Babylon See Onkelos. for so it was to be in the future, as it is written, Thou art the head of gold. This was said by Daniel to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, when interpreting the king’s dream of the four kingdoms that will rule the world. Perhaps Ellasar, mentioned here second, is the name of a city in Media or Persia, and Elam, mentioned third, is the city in which the first Greek king — Alexander — was crowned. From there his kingdom spread after he was victorious over Darius, [king of the Persians]. Our Rabbis have already mentioned this matter: “Rabbi Yosei said, ‘For six years the Greeks ruled in Elam, and after that their kingdom spread over the entire world.’” The king of Goiim, Ramban explains it as meaning “nations,” and it is hence an allusion to Rome, whose kings ruled over many nations. [the last of the four kings mentioned here], who ruled over various nations that had made him their head and leader, is an allusion to the king of Rome who ruled over a city comprised of many peoples: Kittim, Edom, and the rest of the nations. Thus the Rabbis said in Bereshith Rabbah,11942:2. “Rabbi Avin said, ‘Just as Abraham’s grief began with four kingdoms, so will it end for his descendants only with four kingdoms.’” And it further says there:4. “And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar — this is Babylon; Arioch king of Ellasar — this is Media; Chedorlaomer king of Elam — this is Greece; And Tidal king of Goiim — this is that kingdom (Rome) which writes out a levy [and collects assessment] from all nations of the world.”
Ibn Ezra
"King of nations" — this is the name of a province, just as Elam is a province name, since Shushan the capital had a royal palace within it (Daniel 8:2). Alternatively, he is called "King of nations" without those nations being specified, the sense being that they were peoples other than the Shinarites and their allies.
Sforno
ויהי בימי אמרפל מלך שנער, who was widely known as a powerful king in his generation and also later. During his lifetime the kings listed forthwith, i.e. Aryoch, king of Elassar, Kedorlaomer, king of Eylam, and Tidal, king of Goyim, jointly made war against Bera, etc.
Or HaChaim
ויהי בימי אמרפל, It was during the reign of Amrafel, etc. The reason the Torah introduces this chapter here is to show that these four kingdoms were the super-powers during that period. Once we have been informed of the exploits of these kings, Abraham's victory when he rescued Lot can be seen in its proper perspective.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויהי בימי אמרפל מלך שנער, “It was in the days of Amrafel the king of Shinar, etc.” “Amrafel” is identical with “Nimrod.” He was the king who ordered Avram thrown into a fiery furnace for his refusal to acknowledge him as a deity. He was the first of ten kings who ruled over the entire populated earth. The last one of these ten kings will be the Messiah. This paragraph is intended to tell us that Avram was a great hero and warrior. This is why the Torah tells us that whereas four kings engaged five kings in war and the five kings succumbed to the four, Avram, practically single-handed, undertook to engage these four mighty kings in battle. He overcame them all. From a Midrashic-homiletical point of view, there is another aspect to this whole report of the Torah. The four kings represent the four empires who at one time or another played host to the Jewish people when they were in exile (compare Bereshit Rabbah 42,4). “Shinar” represents Babylon, based on Daniel 2,38 אנת הוא רישא די דהבה, “you are the head of gold,” (a reference to the huge golden image constructed by Nebuchadnezzar). “Elassar” represents the kingdom of the Medes; this was the name of a city in Persia/Media. The kingdom of “Eylam” is a reference to Greece. Our sages (Avodah Zarah 10) explain that the Greeks ruled in Eylam for six years before their rule extended over most of the inhabited earth. The “king of Goyim,” is a reference to the Roman Empire. This empire was one which many nations chose to be governed by. The reason the Torah calls the king of that country a “king of nations,” is that his capital was a Metropolis of many different nations, tribes, and political groups. The point of the Midrash is to demonstrate that just as Avram overcame these nations, so his descendants in the future would succeed in overcoming their exiles in accordance with the oft-cited principle of מעשה אבות סימן לבנים, that the experiences of the patriarchs foreshadowed the experiences of their descendants.
Tur HaArokh
ויהי בימי אמרפל, “It was in the days of Amrafel, etc.” Although Kedorleomer was the heavyweight among these Kings as we know from verses 4 and 9 in which he is always mentioned as the major figure, the other Kings being his subordinates, “the Kings who were with him,” in this instance Amrafel, is mentioned first, perhaps because he was senior in years, This war too may be viewed as מעשה אבות סימן לבנים, that events in which our forefathers were involved served as a preview of what would happen in the lives of their descendants. Four Kingdoms would emerge in human history, each one of whom would enslave Avraham’s descendants at one time or another. In the end, Avraham;s descendants would prevail over all of them and they would be forced to make full restitution of everything they had ever robbed the Jewish people of. In our chapter, the first King would correspond to the King of Babylon, Nevuchadnezzar, seeing that he was the King of Shinor, the same general area. King Aryoch would be a prototype of the Kingdom of the Medes who supplanted the Babylonians as the ruling Empire in Mesopotamia and Persia. Elassar may be the name of a city rather than the name of a King. It would describe an important city in that country. Eylom would describe what eventually would become Greece, whereas Tidal may be an early allusion to the eventual Rome. The word גויים reflects that the Roman Empire would consist of many nations all under a single Emperor.
that they made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela—the same is Zoar.
verse value 4604
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 71 letters. The shortest word is "they·made" (עָשׂ֣וּ, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·Birsha" (וְאֶת־בִּרְשַׁ֖ע, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 376: they·made, that·is·Zoar. 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "Bera" (אֶת־בֶּ֙רַע֙), "and·Birsha" (וְאֶת־בִּרְשַׁ֖ע), "Shinab" (שִׁנְאָ֣ב). The root מלך appears 5 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "they·made" (root עשה, 152x in Genesis); "that·is·Zoar" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis); "king" (root מלך, 69x in Genesis). First appearance of the root בלע ("Bela") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Gomorrah', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 9 words.
Onkelos
that they drew up battle against Bera king of Sodom, and against Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar.
Rashi
ברע BERA —Evil (רע) towards God and evil towards mankind (Midrash Tanchuma, Lech Lecha 8). ברשע BIRSHA — Because he rose by means of wickedness (רָשַׁע) (Midrash Tanchuma, Lech Lecha 8)). שנאב SHINAB — He hated (שנא) his Father (אב) in heaven (Midrash Tanchuma, Lech Lecha 8)). שמאבר SHEMEBER — He set his wings (שם אבר) to fly, flapping them to rebel against the Holy One, blessed be He (Midrash Tanchuma, Lech Lecha 8)). בלע BELA is the name of this king’s city (but the king’s own name is not mentioned here).
Ramban
AND THE KING OF BELA. The reason [why Scripture does not mention his name as it does with the kings of Sodom, et al], is that he ruled over a small city with few men in it and he had no generally recognized reputation.
Chizkuni
מלך צביים, although the word: צביים is spelled as shown, it is read as if it had been spelled:.צבוים ומלך בלע היא, the pronoun היא (feminine), shows that the word בלע refers to the name of the city, not the name of the king, (who is masculine).
Tur HaArokh
מלך בלע, i.e. a king who ruled only over a small city, a city boasting few inhabitants.
Targum Yonatan
made war with Bera, whose deeds were evil, king of Sedom, and with Birsha, whose deeds were with the wicked, king of Amora: Shinab, who had hated his father, king of Admah, and Shemebar, who had corrupted himself with fornication, king of Zeboim; and the king of the city which consumed (Bela) the dwellers thereof, which is Zoar.
All these came as allies to the vale of Siddim—the same is the Salt Sea.
verse value 1047 — כׇּל־אֵ֙לֶּה֙ = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 7 words, 28 letters. Notable word values: "all·these" (כׇּל־אֵ֙לֶּה֙) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "the·Sea·of" (יָ֥ם, 2 letters) and the longest is "all·these" (כׇּל־אֵ֙לֶּה֙, 5 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "they·joined" (חָֽבְר֔וּ), "the·Sea·of" (יָ֥ם), "Salt" (הַמֶּֽלַח). 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "all·these" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "he" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis); "the·Sea·of" (root ים, 55x in Genesis). First appearance of the root עמק ("to·valley") in Genesis. First appearance of the root שדים ("Siddim") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Siddim', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 3 words. Full calculation: כׇּל־אֵ֙לֶּה֙ [all·these] (86) + חָֽבְר֔וּ [they·joined] (216) + אֶל־עֵ֖מֶק [to·valley] (241) + הַשִּׂדִּ֑ים [Siddim] (359) + ה֖וּא [he] (12) + יָ֥ם [the·Sea·of] (50) + הַמֶּֽלַח [Salt] (83) = 1047.
Onkelos
All these gathered together to the Valley of the Plain, which is the place of the Salt Sea.
Rashi
עמק השדים VALE OF SIDDIM — So it was named because it contained many fields (שדות) There are many Midrashic explanations of this name. הוא ים המלח THE SAME IS THE SALT SEA — After some time the sea flowed into it (the vale) and thus the Salt Sea came into existence. The Midrashic explanation states that the rocks that surrounded it had cracked and streams thus flowed into it (Genesis Rabbah 42:5).
Ibn Ezra
"All these joined" — this verb is from the Qal binyan. "The Siddim" (ha-siddim) — like "you shall plaster (ve-sadta) them with plaster" (Deuteronomy 27:2), and "He has put my feet in the stocks (be-sad)" (Job 13:27); it follows the pattern of pat / patim. The word "valley" (emek) draws itself and what follows along with it, as in "Do not rebuke me in Your anger" (Psalms 6:2). And indeed it is the Valley of the Salt Sea.
Sforno
כל אלה, all the ones just named, Amrafel and the two groups that conducted the war. חברו אל עמק השדים, gathered in that valley and arrived at a compromise concerning the dispute between them. From that time on, the five kings and their subjects served Kedorlaomer, paying him taxes for 12 years, after which they rebelled.
Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled.
verse value 4543
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 39 letters. The shortest word is "year" (שָׁנָ֔ה, 3 letters) and the longest is "Chedorlaomer" (אֶת־כְּדׇרְלָעֹ֑מֶר, 9 letters). Words sharing gematria 355: year, year. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·in·the·thirteenth" (וּשְׁלֹשׁ־עֶשְׂרֵ֥ה), "rebelled" (מָרָֽדוּ). The root שנה appears 2 times in this verse. 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "year" (root שנה, 169x in Genesis); "they·served" (root עבד, 109x in Genesis); "two" (root שנים, 57x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Chedorlaomer', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 3 words. Full calculation: שְׁתֵּ֤ים [two] (750) + עֶשְׂרֵה֙ [ten] (575) + שָׁנָ֔ה [year] (355) + עָבְד֖וּ [they·served] (82) + אֶת־כְּדׇרְלָעֹ֑מֶר [Chedorlaomer] (965) + וּשְׁלֹשׁ־עֶשְׂרֵ֥ה [and·in·the·thirteenth] (1211) + שָׁנָ֖ה [year] (355) + מָרָֽדוּ [rebelled] (250) = 4543.
Onkelos
Twelve years they had served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled.
Rashi
שתים עשרה שנה עבדו TWELVE YEARS DID THEY i. e. these five kings SERVE Chedorlaomer.
Ibn Ezra
The sense of "and thirteen" is "in the thirteenth" — that is, in the thirteenth year — as in "for in six days Hashem made" (Exodus 20:10), where the numeral stands for an ordinal. The author of Seder Olam connected them differently, and his understanding is broader than ours.
Sforno
עבדו את כדרלעמר, after the compromise they had reached 12 years ago. Afterwards, they rebelled.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ושלש עשרה שנה מרדו, “and in the thirteenth year they rebelled.” The word שלש in this instance is to be understood as a cardinal number rather than as an ordinal number. We find an example of such use of the word in Exodus 20,11, where the Torah writes כי ששת ימים עשה ה' instead of כי בששה ימים עשה ה'.
And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaim in Ashteroth-karnaim, and the Zuzim in Ham, and the Emim in Shaveh-kiriathaim,
verse value 7498
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 88 letters. The shortest word is "came" (בָּ֣א, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·the·Zuzim" (וְאֶת־הַזּוּזִ֖ים, 9 letters). 9 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·in·the·fourteenth" (וּבְאַרְבַּע֩), "and·the·kings" (וְהַמְּלָכִים֙), "Rephaim" (אֶת־רְפָאִים֙). 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "came" (root בוא, 213x in Genesis); "year" (root שנה, 169x in Genesis). First appearance of the root רפא ("Rephaim") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·Ham', dividing the verse into phrases of 14 and 3 words.
Onkelos
And in the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer came, and the kings who were with him, and they struck the mighty ones who were in Ashteroth-karnaim, and the strong ones who were in Ham, and the formidable ones who were in Shaveh-kiriathaim,
Rashi
ובארבע עשרה שנה AND IN THE FOURTEENTH YEAR of their rebellion בא כדרלעמר CHEDORLAOMER CAME — Because the matter concerned him mostly, “he bore the heavier side of the beam" (Genesis Rabbah 42:6). והמלכים AND THE KINGS [THAT WERE WITH HIM] — These are the other three kings. הזוזים These are the Zamzumim (see Deuteronomy 2:10 and Deuteronomy 2:20).
Ibn Ezra
"Rephaim" — because anyone who sees them, his heart dies within him, so that he is reckoned among the rephaim, the dead. "Emim" — because they inspire ema (terror).
Sforno
והמלכים אשר אתו, the ones who had been signatories to the compromise deal 12 years previously, amongst whom had also been Amrafel. ויכו את הרפאים... ואת הזוזים... ואת האימים, all of these people had been subservient to the group of 5 kings headed by the king of Sodom, and had even fought wars on behalf of their masters. By telling us all this, the Torah wanted us to know that the five kings were not just paper tigers, pushovers. By inference, it enables us to imagine the military power of the four kings who defeated the five kings afterwards. Having once appreciated all this, we can image what a tremendous feat Avram accomplished when he defeated the four kings under the leadership of Kedorleomer. He must have possessed outstanding military skills in order to have accomplished this. It also testifies to the act of selfless love he displayed for his nephew, when he endangered himself and his men to such a degree in order to free him from captivity. Most of all, it gives us a chance to marvel at the mercy G’d showed both to Lot and to Avram in this sequence of events.
Rabbeinu Bahya
בא כדרלעומר, “Kedorleomer came, etc.” The Torah wants to describe the power of this king as well as that of the kings who joined him and who defeated the various mighty kings who dwelled in fortified cities. This is the true meaning of the words בעשתרות קרנים. The word קרנים, “horns,” symbolizes strength seeing that the strength of a bull is represented by its horns. They even defeated the wealthy amongst them [reference to the name זוזים, derived from זוז, coin. Ed.] Seeing that these four kings defeated the kings (Refaiim) who resided in fortified cities as well as the ones who dwelled in the mountains, there was no need to mention that they overran the cities in the valley. According to Bereshit Rabbah 26,16, שוה קריתים is a reference to cities in the valley. The אימים were people who had inspired fear amongst all the people around them. The חורי בההרם שעיר were tillers of the soil in mountainous territory. According to Tanchuma these people were able to “smell” the earth, i.e. their sense of smell told them about what a particular piece of earth was best suited for. According to another Midrash the name עין משפט refers to Kadesh, the place where Moses would be judged when he hit the rock instead of speaking to it The name חצצן תמר is an allusion to חציון של תמר, another name for the land of Israel which is situated in the very center of the earth. (חציון from the word חצי “half.”) The main reason the Torah provides us with all these details of the military exploits of Kedorleomer and Arafel and their allies is to provide the background to the tremendous military achievement of Avram and his 318 warriors in the latter half of this chapter. This is why the Torah underlines in verse 17 אחרי שובו מהכות את כדרלעומר ואת המלכים אשר אתו “after he (Avram) returned from defeating Kedorleomer and the kings who were with him.”
and the Horites in their mount Seir, to El-paran, which is by the wilderness.
verse value 2955
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 35 letters. The shortest word is "as·far·as" (עַ֚ד, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·the·Horites" (וְאֶת־הַחֹרִ֖י, 7 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·the·Horites" (וְאֶת־הַחֹרִ֖י), "in·their·hill·country" (בְּהַרְרָ֣ם), "El" (אֵ֣יל). 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "by·the·wilderness" (root דבר, 133x in Genesis); "as·far·as" (root עד, 29x in Genesis). First appearance of the root חרי ("and·the·Horites") in Genesis. First appearance of the root שעיר ("Seir") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Seir', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 5 words. Full calculation: וְאֶת־הַחֹרִ֖י [and·the·Horites] (630) + בְּהַרְרָ֣ם [in·their·hill·country] (447) + שֵׂעִ֑יר [Seir] (580) + עַ֚ד [as·far·as] (74) + אֵ֣יל [El] (41) + פָּארָ֔ן [Paran] (331) + אֲשֶׁ֖ר [which] (501) + עַל־הַמִּדְבָּֽר [by·the·wilderness] (351) = 2955.
Onkelos
and the Horites who were in their mountain of Seir, as far as the plain of Paran, which borders on the wilderness.
Rashi
בהררם means IN THEIR MOUNT (i. e.הרר is a form of הר — really an earlier form — with pronominal suffix ָ מ;cf. הררי קדש etc.) איל פארן EL-PARAN — As it is translated in the Targum: Plain of Paran. But I hold that איל does not signify a plain in general but that the lowland of Paran bore the name of El, and that of Mamre was named Elone; that of the Jordan was called Kikkar, whilst that of Shittim was called Abel — Abel-Shittim — and so, too, the lowland of [Baal] Gad was named Baal. All these are translated in the Targum by מישור, but each really had its own particular name. על המדבר BY THE WILDERNESS — next to the wilderness; a similar use of על is (Numbers 2:20) “and next unto him (עליו) shall be the tribe of Manasseh’’.
Ramban
‘EIL PARAN.’ It is translated in the Targum as “Plain of Paran.” But I say that the word eil does not signify a plain. Rather, the lowland of Paran was called Eil, that of Mamre was named Eilonei, that of the Jordan was called Kikar, and that of Shittim was Abel. All these are translated in the Targum as meishra (plain), but each really had its own particular name. Thus the language of Rashi. But if it were so, Onkelos would have mentioned them in his Targum by their name — i.e., “Eila of Paran,” “Eilonei of Mamre,” — as is his custom with names. Besides, who told him122“Him” refers both to Rashi and Onkelos. whether these many places were all plains or high mountains [if Eil, Eilonei and Kikar were but proper names of these places]? Again, Mamre is the name of a person — as it is written, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner, and they were confederate with Abram here. — and that place was his, just as it says, ‘Eilonei’ Mamre the Amorite, Ramban’s intent is to argue that since Mamre is the name of an individual, the word Eilonei could not be a proper name since two names cannot be in the constructive state. as I have explained. Rather, Eil paran means a place of terebinths, as it is said, For they shall be ashamed ‘me’eilim’ (of the terebinths) which ye have desired; eilonei is a place of oaks, as it is said, As a terebinth, ‘veka’alon’ (and as an oak) Of the ‘alonim’ (oaks) of Bashan. It was customary among them that these terebinths and oaks be planted in the plains before the cities which serve them as “an open land.” And so did Onkelos translate alon bachuth And Deborah Rebekah’s nurse died, and she was buried below Beth-el under the ‘alon’ and he called its name ‘Alon Bachuth.’ as “the plain of Bechuta.” There the word alon is surely not a proper noun of the location but only the name of the species of tree planted there, as is made explicit [in the same verse: and she was buried] …under the ‘alon.’ And Deborah Rebekah’s nurse died, and she was buried below Beth-el under the ‘alon’ and he called its name ‘Alon Bachuth.’ Onkelos’ intent, however, is to convey the sense of the expression and not to merely translate the words. Now the Targum Yerushalmi says with respect to both eil Paran and eilonei Mamre that they mean the plain of Paran and Mamre as Onkelos said, but in the case of alon bachuth, And Deborah Rebekah’s nurse died, and she was buried below Beth-el under the ‘alon’ and he called its name ‘Alon Bachuth.’ he [Targum Yerushalmi] says it is the nut-tree of Bachut for he considers alon bachuth to be the name of a tree and not a place. Onkelos, however, thought that alon bachuth is the name of a place, so called because there were many oak trees there, just as Eilonei Mamre [is the name of a place]. It is for that reason that Scripture there uses the word ha’alon. See Note 129 above. Ramban’s intent is to say that since the word alon appears there with the definite article, (namely, ha-alon), it could not be a proper noun since the definite article is never attached to a proper noun. Hence in the end of the verse, which reads, And he called its name ‘alon bachuth,’ the word alon is also not a name designating a particular tree but a descriptive noun referring to a place containing many oaks. Hence Onkelos translates alon Bachuth as “the plain of Bechuta.” According to Targum Yerushalmi, who takes alon bachuth to be the name of a particular kind of tree, the verse should have read, “And she was buried below Beth-el under alon,” not ha-alon. Thus according to Onkelos they are all Hence in all these cases Onkelos translated “the plain of Paran… Mamre… Bechuta” as meaning a plain containing oak trees. Onkelos does this in keeping with his general method of conveying the intent of the verse rather than its strict translation since eil, eilonei and alon, strictly speaking, mean particular kinds of trees. Onkelos however felt free to say “the plain of Paran… Mamre… Bachuth” for his intent is but to convey the general meaning. Ramban continues to point that out in kikar hayarden, (13:11), where Onkelos said, “the plain of the Jordan,” that is indeed the exact translation of the word kikar. descriptive nouns. But kikar hayarden is indeed the actual word for a plain, for kikar in the Sacred Language is the name for the place where the natural streams of rivers overflow. It is for this reason that the messenger who came to rescue Lot said, Stay not in all ‘hakikar’ (the plain; escape to the mountain. Of similar usage are the expressions, Kar nirchav (wide pasture); ‘Karim’ (the meadows) are clothed with flocks; the valleys also are covered over with corn. Sometimes Scripture doubles the first letter of the word kar (meadow), making it kikar, and at other times Scripture discards the double form, as in, bath ayin (the apple of the eye). The double letter form of the word would be babath ayin, with a double beth. There are many other such cases. Swift couriers are also called by this name kar, as in ‘lakari velaratzim;’ It is usually translated: of the Carites and of the guard. According to Ramban its meaning is: of the couriers and the dispatchers. The captains over hundreds and ‘hakari.’ Here too the usual translation is: the Carites. According to Ramban it means: the couriers. The word bakirkaroth is also of the same root. It is the name for speedy camels such as “the flying camel” mentioned in the Talmud. The word mecharkar, And David ‘mecharkar’ (danced) before the Eternal with all his strength. containing the double use of kar, is a derivative of this word. Abel Hashittim, and also Abel Mecholah, they It is [called Abel, which in Hebrew means “mourning”], because it is a desolate place, without plantings or structures for the word abel is, to them, an expression of destruction and waste, as in the verses: ‘Vaya’avel’ (And He made to mourn) the rampart and the wall; The new wine ‘aval’ (faileth), the vine fadeth.
Ibn Ezra
"Be-harram" — this is from the intensive (Piel) binyan, like "be-daberam" (Exodus 7:7). Its meaning is: as they went up to Mount Seir — it is a verb, not a possessive phrase meaning "their mountain."
Chizkuni
בהררם, the ending is similar to Exodus 6,7 בדברם, so that the meaning of our phrase is: “when they were ascending Mount Seir.” עד איל פארן אשר על המדבר, the word על in this verse does not mean: “on, or above,” but: “beside,” as it does in Exodus 40,3, and in Genesis 24,30. The desert in question is the one the Israelites marched through for most of 40 years.
And they turned back, and came to En-mishpat—the same is Kadesh—and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwelt in Hazazon-tamar.
verse value 4315
Insights
Verse structure: 14 words, 64 letters. The shortest word is "it" (הִ֣וא, 3 letters) and the longest is "all·the·territory·of" (אֶֽת־כׇּל־שְׂדֵ֖ה, 7 letters). 7 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "to·En" (אֶל־עֵ֤ין), "Kadesh" (קָדֵ֔שׁ), "all·the·territory·of" (אֶֽת־כׇּל־שְׂדֵ֖ה). 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·En" (root אל, 242x in Genesis); "and·they·came" (root בוא, 213x in Genesis); "who·dwelt" (root ישב, 72x in Genesis). First appearance of the root משפט ("Mishpat") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·Amalekites', dividing the verse into phrases of 9 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַ֠יָּשֻׁ֠בוּ [and·they·returned] (324) + וַיָּבֹ֜אוּ [and·they·came] (25) + אֶל־עֵ֤ין [to·En] (161) + מִשְׁפָּט֙ [Mishpat] (429) + הִ֣וא [it] (12) + קָדֵ֔שׁ [Kadesh] (404) + וַיַּכּ֕וּ [and·smote] (42) + אֶֽת־כׇּל־שְׂדֵ֖ה [all·the·territory·of] (760) + הָעֲמָלֵקִ֑י [the·Amalekites] (255) + וְגַם֙ [and·even] (49) + אֶת־הָ֣אֱמֹרִ֔י [the·Amorite] (657) + הַיֹּשֵׁ֖ב [who·dwelt] (317) + בְּחַֽצְצֹ֥ן [in·Hazazon] (240) + תָּמָֽר [Tamar] (640) = 4315.
Onkelos
And they turned back and came to the plain of the division of judgment, which is Rekem, and they struck all the field of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites who dwelt in En-gedi.
Rashi
עין משפט היא קדש EN-MISHPAT, THE SAME IS KADESH — It is here named EN-MISHPAT (“the well of judgment’’) in reference to what would happen there in the future — where Moses and Aaron would once be judged because of what occurred at that fountain. It is identical with “the waters of Meribah” (cf. Numbers 20:1 and Numbers 20:13) (Midrash Tanchuma, Lech Lecha 8). Onkelos, however, translates it according to its plain sense: the plain where the people of the district used to gather for every lawsuit. שדה העמלקי THE COUNTRY OF THE AMALEKITES — Amalek, it is true, was not yet born, but it is here named in reference to the name it would bear in the future (Genesis Rabbah 42:7). בחצצון תמר IN HAZEZON-TAMAR — This is En-Gedi: so a text plainly states in Chronicles (2 Chronicles 20:2) in the history of Jehoshaphat.
Ramban
TO EIN MISHPAT, WHICH IS KADESH. It is named [Ein Mishpat, meaning, “the Well of Judgment”] on account of a future event, for Moses and Aaron will be judged because of what will occur at that fountain. Thus the words of Rashi based upon an Agadah. So also in Targum Jonathan here. But I do not understand this for this Kadesh [mentioned here] is Kadesh-barnea which is in El-paran which is by the desert, and it is from there that the spies were sent by Moses in the second year following the Exodus from Egypt, as it is said, Unto the wilderness of Paran, to Kadesh. And it is further written, And we came to Kadesh-barnea… and ye said, Let us send men before us, and there Israel abode many days. But the Kadesh where the judgment of the righteous ones took place is in the wilderness of Zin, which they entered in the fortieth year following the Exodus, as it is said, And the children of Israel, even the whole congregation, came into the wilderness of Zin in the first month, and the people abode in Kadesh, and finish the chapter. Perhaps the Midrash [mentioned above] alludes only to the name, meaning that a place bearing this name Kadesh will become “the Well of Judgment.”Now Onkelos said, “the plain of pilug dina,” but I do not know what this means. Perhaps the word pilug is derived from [the Hebrew word used in the following verses]: ‘Plagim’ (Streams) and watercourses; Who ‘pilag’ (hath cleft) a channel for the waterflood. Similarly, in the language of the Sages we find, “Pilgo (The openness) of the sea.” The verse thus states that on that plain there will flow “a fountain of judgment” entering the depth of the case, as this was a fitting plain destined for kings who would sit there to judge all the peoples of these lands. THE COUNTRY OF THE AMALEKITES. Rashi comments: “Amalek, it is true, was not yet born, but it is so named here because of the name it would bear in the future.”Now I do not know whether Rashi’s intent is to say that Moshe Rabbeinu called the place by the name it was referred to in his time, but if this be the case, there is no reference to future events involved. Or [if Rashi’s intent is that the nations of Abraham’s era called it by that name] what is being foretold by the nations’ prophetic naming of this place? But the language of Bereshith Rabbah 2:11. is as follows: “Amalek was not yet born and yet you say, ‘All the country of the Amalekites!’ However, the Torah declares the end from the beginning.” This method of d’rash of the Sages is found in many places. Concerning the rivers of the garden of Eden they also made a similar statement.“That [river] is the one which surrounds the whole land of Havilah. (Genesis 2:11). Havilah was not yet in existence, and yet the verse says, the whole land of Havilah! However, the Torah declares the end from the beginning.” (Bereshith Rabbah 16:2.) The intent of the Rabbis is to say that from the time the rivers came forth it was already declared that a particular river go towards a land which is destined to be called Assyria. (Above, 2:14.)The correct interpretation concerning “the country of the Amalekites” mentioned here is that there was in ancient times some honorable person of the sons of the Horites, the inhabitants of the land, by the name of Amalek, who ruled over this place. Eliphaz, Esau’s firstborn, named his son after this man. Perhaps this Amalek mentioned here was of the family of Timna, his mother, and he also ruled in that place and was chieftain over them.
Tur HaArokh
עין משפט, according to Rashi, the name mentioned here is borrowed from the name of that place in later years. At that time Moses and Aaron would be judged in that location. (מי מריבה). Nachmanides expresses his confusion about this commentary, referring to the קדש, which, he claims is identical with קדש ברנע that we know from Numbers 20,2 in the desert of Tzin, where Moses and Aaron failed to speak to the rock. [I will not bother to translate all he writes as it is clearly based on a misunderstanding of the location. Joshua 12,22 as well as 20,7 refers to locations known as Kedesh in the land of Canaan, There were numerous locations known by that name, so that there is nothing strange about Rash’s explanation, though his apparent conclusion that this was the location later on known as מי מריבה is geographically untenable. What may have bothered Rashi is the reference to שדה עמלקי, considering that also Amalek had not been born yet, seeing that he was a grandson of Esau. Ed.] I believe (author speaking) that the reason the Torah speaks of שדה העמלקי is that there was an important person called Amalek in that region at the time, and that is the reason why Eliphaz, son of Esau, named his son (from the concubine Timnah after this original Amalek. (Genesis 36,12). Esau certainly ruled that region at one time after having separated from Yaakov.
Cross-references: Numbers 20:1; II Chronicles 20:2
And there went out the king of Sodom, and the king of Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela—the same is Zoar; and they set the battle in array against them in the vale of Siddim;
verse value 3119
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 71 letters. The shortest word is "Bela" (בֶּ֖לַע, 3 letters) and the longest is "king·of·Sodom" (מֶֽלֶךְ־סְדֹ֜ם, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 96: and·the·king·of, and·the·king·of, and·the·king·of, and·the·king·of. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "that·is·Zoar" (הִוא־צֹ֑עַר), "and·engaged" (וַיַּֽעַרְכ֤וּ), "in·the·valley·of" (בְּעֵ֖מֶק). The root מלך appears 5 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "king·of·Sodom" (root מלך, 69x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'that·is·Zoar', dividing the verse into phrases of 11 and 5 words.
Onkelos
And the king of Sodom went out, and the king of Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar, and they drew up battle against them in the Valley of the Plain.
Targum Yonatan
And the king of Sedom, and the king of Amorah, and the kind of Admah, and the king of Zeboim, and the king of the city which consumed its inhabitants, which is Zoar, went forth, and set the array of battle against them in the valley of the gardens;.
against Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of Goiim, and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings against the five.
verse value 4732
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 71 letters. Verse gematria: 4732 is divisible by 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "king" (מֶ֣לֶךְ, 3 letters) and the longest is "Chedorlaomer" (אֵ֣ת כְּדׇרְלָעֹ֜מֶר, 9 letters). Words sharing gematria 90: king, king, king, king. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·Amraphel" (וְאַמְרָפֶל֙), "and·Arioch" (וְאַרְי֖וֹךְ), "kings" (מְלָכִ֖ים). The root מלך appears 5 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "king" (root מלך, 69x in Genesis); "the·five" (root חמש, 34x in Genesis); "Goiim" (root גוי, 26x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Ellasar', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 3 words.
Onkelos
Against Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of peoples, and Amraphel king of Babylon, and Arioch king of Ellasar — four kings against five.
Rashi
'ארבעה מלכים וגו FOUR KINGS [AGAINST THE FIVE]— and yet the fewer were victorious; this statement is expressly made to tell you how powerful they were, and yet Abraham did not refrain from pursuing them.
Ibn Ezra
"Et Chedorlaomer" — et here means im, "together with."
Chizkuni
כדרלעמר, he is mentioned first at this point as he was the cause of the entire war.
Targum Yonatan
with Kedarlaomer king of Elam, and Thidal king of the nations obedient to him, and Amraphel king of Pontos, and Ariok king of Thelasar; four kings arrayed in battle against five.
Now the vale of Siddim was full of slime pits; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and they fell there, and they that remained fled to the mountain.
verse value 4091
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 58 letters. The shortest word is "bitumen" (חֵמָ֔ר, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·fell·there" (וַיִּפְּלוּ־שָׁ֑מָּה, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 603: pits, pits. 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·the·Valley·of" (וְעֵ֣מֶק), "and·fled" (וַיָּנֻ֛סוּ), "and·fell·there" (וַיִּפְּלוּ־שָׁ֑מָּה). The root באר appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "king·of·Sodom" (root מלך, 69x in Genesis); "pits" (root באר, 37x in Genesis); "to·the·hill·country" (root הר, 24x in Genesis). First appearance of the root באר ("pits") in Genesis. First appearance of the root נוס ("and·fled") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·fell·there', dividing the verse into phrases of 9 and 3 words. Full calculation: וְעֵ֣מֶק [and·the·Valley·of] (216) + הַשִּׂדִּ֗ים [Siddim] (359) + בֶּֽאֱרֹ֤ת [pits] (603) + בֶּאֱרֹת֙ [pits] (603) + חֵמָ֔ר [bitumen] (248) + וַיָּנֻ֛סוּ [and·fled] (132) + מֶֽלֶךְ־סְדֹ֥ם [king·of·Sodom] (194) + וַעֲמֹרָ֖ה [Gomorrah] (321) + וַיִּפְּלוּ־שָׁ֑מָּה [and·fell·there] (477) + וְהַנִּשְׁאָרִ֖ים [and·the·rest] (612) + הֶ֥רָה [to·the·hill·country] (210) + נָּֽסוּ [fled] (116) = 4091.
Onkelos
Now the Valley of the Plain was full of bitumen pits, and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled and fell there; and those who remained fled to the mountain.
Rashi
בארת בארת חמר FULL OF BITUMEN PITS — There were many pits there from which they took earth as clay for building purposes. The Midrashic explanation is that the clay was closely kneaded together in them (was very sticky) so that it was only because a miracle was performed for the king of Sodom that he escaped from them. For amongst those nations there were some who did not believe that Abraham had been delivered from Ur-Kasdim — from the fiery furnace — but as soon as this one escaped from the slime they corrected their past disbelief regarding what had happened to Abraham (literally, they believed retrospectively in Abraham) (Genesis Rabbah 42:7). הרה נסו means THEY FLED TO A MOUNTAIN. The word הרה is the same as לְהַר. When a word requires a ל as a prefix one may put instead a ה as a suffix. There is a difference between הֶרָה and הָהָרָה, for the ה at the end takes the place of a לְ (with Shewa) prefixed (another version has: for the ה at the end does not take the place of a prefixed ל with Patach which would mean to “the”) so that הֶרָה is equal to לְהַר or to אֶל הַר to “a” mountain, without explaining which mountain — so that the meaning here is that each person fled to the first mountain he came across. When, however, a ה is prefixed to a word having this ה suffix so that it reads e. g., הָהרה or הַמדברה, it is the same as אל הָהר or לְהָהר (to “the” mount) signifying that mount which is well-known and has been definitely mentioned in the passage.
Ramban
‘BE’EROTH BE’EROTH CHEIMAR’ (FULL OF SLIME PITS). There were many pits there since they removed earth to be used as clay for building purposes. The Midrashic explanation is that the clay was closely kneaded together in them, [that is, it was very sticky], but a miracle happened to the king of Sodom and he escaped from there. This miracle occurred because there were some among the nations who did not believe that Abram had been delivered from the fiery furnace, but as soon as this one escaped from the slime, in retrospect they believed in Abram. Thus the language of Rashi. There is no doubt that the meaning of be’eroth cheimar is “pits containing mud and slime,” even as it is written, And in the pit there was no water, but mire, and Jeremiah sank in the mire, and it is further written, He brought me up out of the tumultuous pit, out of the miry clay. And it is possible that the king of Sodom went out from there naturally, without a miracle. And I wonder concerning the above Midrashic explanation, for those nations that did not believe that the Holy One, blessed be He, had performed a miracle for Abraham would not have their faith in the Holy One, blessed be He, augmented by witnessing the miracle which befell the king of Sodom. The king of Sodom was an idol worshipper, and his miracle would either strengthen the hands of the idol worshippers or it would cause them to believe that all miracles are done by witchcraft or are due to some remotely possible chance. His miracle would thus cast doubt into the hearts of those who believed in Abraham’s miracle! Perhaps [the Rabbis who authored this Midrashic explanation] will interpret the verse, And the king of Sodom went out to meet him, here. as implying that “he went out” from the pit when Abraham passed by for it was in honor of Abraham that a miracle was done to him so that he could go forth to meet him in order to honor and bless Abraham. And it is possible that Abraham, upon his return, looked into that pit for he wanted to save the kings and return their wealth to them, and then the miracle happened on his account. Now if a miracle was done to the king of Sodom in honor of Abraham, the nations could now believe all the more that a miracle would be done to Abraham himself in order to rescue him from death. We must further say that the king of Gomorrah had already died when Abraham passed him by or that he had fallen into another pit, as the word “there” ’ The word “there” does not refer to the pit, in which case it would then imply that all five kings fell into one pit. Rather it refers to ‘the vale’ of Siddim. Thus the king of Gomorrah fell into a different pit, near which Abraham did not pass. refers to “the vale.”
Ibn Ezra
"Be'erot" — throughout Scripture a be'er (well) springs up from the ground. This form is unusual on account of the construct state. "And they fell there" — willingly, in their attempt to escape. So too "and he fell upon his face" (Numbers 16:4). "Hara nasu" — they fled to the mountain; this is a rare expression.
Sforno
וינוסו מלך סדום, this made it plain that Avram could not rely on them that they would help him. והנשארים הרה נסו, the remaining three kings.
Chizkuni
ועמק השדים בארות, according to an aggadic commentary quoted by Rash, i the miracle that the king of Sodom escaped from this valley filled with bitumen wells which burns people, convinced the people now that Avram had indeed escaped from Nimrod’s furnace. According to a different interpretation, the word שדים is to be read with the dot on the left side of the letter ש, so that the meaning would be the same as the word שיד in Deuteronomy 27,2 the whitewash with which the stones taken out of the Jordan river were to be smeared as a base for writing on. בארות בארות חמר, “pits full of sticky loam.” The letter ב has a vowel segol under it and the letter א the vowel chatoph segol, (shortened version.) ויפלו שמה, They fell into them. They did not “fall” into them, as they were familiar with them, but they used them to hide in while trying to escape the pursuers. The construction is similar to Genesis 25,18 where Yishmael is described as על פני כל אחיו נפל. The loam was not wet, but could be used to help make bricks.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ועמק השידים בארות בארות חמר, “and the valley of Sidim was full of clay pits, etc.” Rashi says that these pits were full of clay which the people in the neigbouring areas used to make into bricks. According to a Midrash the clay was so sticky that it required a miracle for the king of Sodom to escape from it after he had fallen into it. A miracle was performed for the King of Sodom which enabled him to escape. Some of the people at the time did not believe that Avram had been saved from the furnace into which Nimrod had thrown him. Once the King of Sodom emerged from the clay, these people who had refused to believe when Avram had been saved, would now become convinced of G’d having saved Avram when they observed that the King of Sodom emerged from these pits. Why should they now retroactively believe in the G’d of Avram? Nachmanides feels that those who had believed in G’d at the time would not now have their faith in G’d reinforced; on the contrary, having seen a miracle performed for an idolater and well known sinner such as the King of Sodom, they would question the miracle which had occurred to Avram in retrospect. However, the correct understanding of the Midrash quoted by Rashi must be as follows: The King of Sodom was saved because of Avram’s merit. G’d saved him in order for him to pay honour and respect to Avram (verse 17) after the latter freed him from being stuck in the pit. Once people realised that G’d had performed a miracle for the sake of the King Sodom in order to enhance Avram’s reputation, they could certainly credit that G’d had performed a miracle in order save Avram’s life. In Tanchuma on Lech Lecha section 8 we are told that the word שידים is understood as derived from שדים, “breasts.” The valley provided for its inhabitants what a mother’s breast provides for her infant. Now that the inhabitants of that valley had become so sinful it was turned into the Dead Sea as paraphrased by Psalms 107, 34 ארץ פרי למלחה מרעת יושבי בה “a fruitful land into a salt marsh, because of the wickedness of its inhabitants.”
Tur HaArokh
ועמק השדים, “and the valley of Siddim, etc.” Some commentators derive the word שדים from סיד, lime, quoting ושדת אותם בשיד, as their proof, where it means to smear the stones with white lime. (Deut. 27,2) Accordingly, the region was full of depressions in which people dug for lime. The lime would be burned afterwards. Rashi quotes a Midrash, according to which, most people had refused to believe that Avraham had miraculously survived having been thrown into Nimrod’s furnace. When they witnessed the King of Sodom miraculously surviving falling into a lime pit, they changed their mind and retroactively gave credence to the miracle which had saved Avraham. Nachmanides is amazed at the very Midrash, as he cannot understand why people who failed to believe that a miracle had happened to Avraham should believe that a miracle had happened for the King of Sodom. Why would the G’d of heaven perform a miracle for an idolater such as the King of Sodom? On the contrary, if the King of Sodom could survive his fall into the lime pit, Avraham’s surviving the furnace was now far more plausible, but not in the framework of a miracle. The people who doubted the miracle of the furnace, ascribing it to magic, would most certainly also describe the King of Sodom’s escape as due to magic. It is more likely that seeing the King of Sodom’s escape made even the people who had believed that Avraham escaped by means of a miracle have second thoughts, and they now believed that Avraham had also benefited by magic. Another possibility could be that these commentators understand he words ויצא מלך סדום לקראתו in verse 17 to mean that the King of Sodom emerged from that lime pit at the time when Avraham passed by, i.e. that a miracle was performed for him at that time which resulted in his being saved so that he was able to honour Avraham and bless him, or that Avraham on his return from the successful battle wanted to restore their property to the five Kings, and when passing that neighbourhood, [seeing that his battle had been fought far to the north of there, Ed.] the miracle of the King of Sodom’s rescue then occurred by means of his intervention. When people observed that Avraham could perform such a miracle, they became convinced that a man such a Avraham had been saved miraculously from Nimrod’s furnace. It is quite possible that the King of Gomorrha had already died, so that we hear no more about him, or that he had fallen into a different pit, one that Avraham did not pass. ויפלו שמה, “they fell there.” Some commentators understand the word ויפלו as “they fell (dead)”, similar to וישכבו שמה, “they lay down there,” in the sense of lying down to sleep. (Joshua 2,1) Others understand it in the sense of על פני כל אחיו נפל, “he dwelled in full view of his brothers.” (Genesis 25,18) (compare Onkelos) Others understood the word ויפלו in the sense of “they hid,” i.e. deliberately lowered themselves into these pits.
And they took Lot, Abram's brother's son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed.
verse value 2331 — וְה֥וּא = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 42 letters. Notable word values: "and·he" (וְה֥וּא) = 18, chai, 'life'. The shortest word is "was·dwelling" (יֹשֵׁ֖ב, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·his·possessions" (וְאֶת־רְכֻשׁ֛וֹ, 7 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·his·possessions" (וְאֶת־רְכֻשׁ֛וֹ), "son·of·the·brother·of" (בֶּן־אֲחִ֥י). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "son·of·the·brother·of" (root בין, 146x in Genesis); "and·took" (root לקח, 142x in Genesis); "and·he" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·they·went', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 3 words. Full calculation: וַיִּקְח֨וּ [and·took] (130) + אֶת־ל֧וֹט [Lot] (446) + וְאֶת־רְכֻשׁ֛וֹ [and·his·possessions] (933) + בֶּן־אֲחִ֥י [son·of·the·brother·of] (71) + אַבְרָ֖ם [Abram] (243) + וַיֵּלֵ֑כוּ [and·they·went] (72) + וְה֥וּא [and·he] (18) + יֹשֵׁ֖ב [was·dwelling] (312) + בִּסְדֹֽם [in·Sodom] (106) = 2331.
Onkelos
And they seized Lot and his possessions, the son of the brother of Abram, and they departed; and he had been dwelling in Sodom.
Rashi
והוא ישב בסדם FOR HE DWELT IN SODOM — What made this happen to him? The fact that he was dwelling in Sodom (Genesis Rabbah 42:7).
Ibn Ezra
"And he was dwelling" — he was on that very day dwelling in Sodom.
Sforno
ויקחו את לוט בן אחי אברם, they made a special effort to capture Lot because he was Avram’s nephew. They were aware of his wealth. They were expecting that Avram would pay a heavy ransom for the release of his nephew.
Or HaChaim
ויקחו את לוט, They took Lot, etc. The reason the Torah adds that Lot was Abraham's nephew and that he lived in Sodom, something we have known for a long time, is to tell us that these kings were very well aware of who Lot was. This did not deter them from taking Lot captive. The Torah stresses that these kings deliberately ignored the fact that they were provoking a man of international repute when they took his nephew into captivity. None of this would have happened to Lot had he not chosen to live in Sodom. The matter can be compared to Israel capturing a substantial part of Moab though G'd had forbidden Israel to provoke war with Moab or to attack it (Deut. 2,9). Once the Emorite king Sichon had defeated Moab in war, the lands captured by Sichon were no longer considered as Moabite territory, and Israel took possession of them. Here too, once Lot had chosen to throw in his lot with the Sodomites he was no longer considered as part of Abraham's entourage, and was not entitled to the protection Abraham could have afforded him. This also explains why Abraham did not try to secure Lot's release by peaceful means. He knew that the 4 kings knew very well whom they had taken prisoner. If Lot's relationship with Abraham had not stopped them, there was no point for Abraham to warn those kings before attacking them. Lot's capture was a hostile act against Abraham. Should you argue that the four kings had merely reacted against the insubordination of the five kings associated with the king of Sodom, and that Lot was their legitimate booty, as per the comparison we have drawn with Sichon and the Moabites, this is not an accurate comparison after all. That comparison was valid when there existed neither a state of peace nor a state of war between two parties. Abraham and the four kings were at peace, and the four kings should have warned Lot to leave Sodom before making war just as did King Saul with the Kenites before he attacked the Amalekites (Samuel I 15,6).
Chizkuni
והוא יושב בסדום, “and he dwelled in Sodom;” note the singular mode; none of his relatives lived in Sodom. This accounted for his being taken captive alone. Alternate explanation: he entered the city now that he was afraid of being solitary against the warring nations.
And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew—now he dwelt by the terebinths of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner; and these were confederate with Abram.
verse value 3487 — וְהוּא֩ = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 73 letters. Notable word values: "and·he" (וְהוּא֩) = 18, chai, 'life'. The shortest word is "dwelling" (שֹׁכֵ֨ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·covenant·of·Abram" (בְרִית־אַבְרָֽם, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 19: and·came, brother·of. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "the·fugitive" (הַפָּלִ֔יט), "the·covenant·of·Abram" (בְרִית־אַבְרָֽם). The root אח appears 2 times in this verse. 16 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·came" (root בוא, 213x in Genesis); "brother·of" (root אח, 164x in Genesis); "and·he" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis). First appearance of the root עברי ("the·Hebrew") in Genesis. First appearance of the root בעל ("allies·of") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·Hebrew', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 12 words.
Onkelos
And a survivor came and told Abram the Hebrew; and he was dwelling in the plains of Mamre the Amorite, the brother of Eshcol and the brother of Aner — and they were the men of Abram's covenant.
Rashi
ויבא הפליט AND THERE CAME THE ONE WHO ESCAPED — According to the real meaning this was Og who had escaped from the battle with the Rephaim (see Genesis 5:5) and it is to this that the text refers (Deuteronomy 3:11) “For only Og king of Bashan was left of the remnant of the Rephaim”, and this is what is meant by נשאר “left”, for Amraphel and his allies did not kill him when they smote the Rephaim in Ashteroth Karnaim. So is the statement in the Tanchuma 4:6:25 (Chukat). But according to the Midrash Genesis Rabbah (Genesis Rabbah 42:8) it refers to Og in allusion to him as the only one of the generation of the Flood who escaped that catastrophe, and this is what is meant (Deuteronomy 3:11) “of the remnant of the Rephaim”, for it is said. (Genesis 6:4) “The Nephilim (= Rephaim cf. Genesis Rabbah 26) were in the earth etc.” His intention in telling Abraham that his nephew was captured was that Abraham should wage war against the kings and that he should be killed so that he, himself, might marry Sarah. העברי THE HEBREW — the one who came from the other side (עבר) of the River (Euphrates) (Genesis Rabbah 42:8). בעלי ברית אברם CONFEDERATE WITH ABRAM (literally, owners of a covenant with Abram) — They had entered into a covenant with him. Other versions of Rashi have: another explanation is, they advised him to circumcise himself (to keep the [ברית] covenant), as is explained in another place (cf. Rashi on Genesis 18:1).
Ibn Ezra
The meaning of "the fugitive" (ha-palit) is one who fled and escaped from the people of Sodom — as in "the fugitive came to me from Jerusalem" (Ezekiel 33:21). There is also a homiletical interpretation.
Sforno
ויגד לאברם העברי, this refugee had no idea that Lot was related to Avram. He only knew that Lot’s religious beliefs were similar to those of Avram. והוא שוכן באלוני ממרא, this is why Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre participated in the war with Avram, and why he insisted in verse 24 that they receive their share of the loot.
Chizkuni
ויבא הפליט, “the one who had escaped Kedorleomer’s army arrived;” according to Rashi’scommentary this was the man who later on became Og, King of Bashan who had made a name for himself by having survived the deluge, hence the prefix ה before the word: פליט, escapee. He lived so long that eventually Moses killed him (Numbers 21,35) He was not interested in saving Avram, but intended to marry Sarah after Avram would have been killed in war. G-d retaliated by paying him back in kind. He granted him long life for warning Avram on the one hand, but He foiled his design, Avram becoming victorious, and Sarah predeceasing Avram. He was chagrined to live long enough to see millions of Avram’s descendants, before himself being killed by one of them. [None of these midrashim account for the Torah’s failure to report his having survived the deluge. Ed.] Granted, if this was a fact, Moses had reason to fear him and that is why G-d told him not to be afraid of him. (Numbers 21,34). The Talmud Zevachim, 113, raises the question of how Og managed to escape the deluge and suggests that though the waters were boiling hot, in the immediate vicinity of the ark they were cool miraculously so, so as not to destroy the ark and its inhabitants. Og took advantage of this and survived. [This means that he went without food and water for 365 days. Ed.] The expression: הפליט occurs also in Ezekiel 33,21, where it refers to someone who had escaped and survived the battle of Jerusalem who reported the fall of the city and the Temple to the prophet. The verse which omits identifying who this escapee was is not so unusual that we need to look for far fetched explanations. Our author cites similar “abbreviated” constructions in Genesis 48,1; Genesis 48,2; he claims that there are numerous others. והוא שוכן באלוני ממרא, “and he lived at the time in Elon Mamre.” The tree so called stood in the town of Chevron, as we know from Genesis 13,18. An alternate exegesis: the words: “and he lived in Elon Mamre which is in Chevron,” refer to the home of the person described as הפליט, “the escapee.” This would explain why he came to tell Avram whose home was also in Elon Mamre all about what he had escaped from. והם בעלי ברית אברם, “and they (Oner, Eshkol, and Mamre) being allies of Avram went with him [in this mission impossible, 318 against four armies! Ed.] Compare verse 24.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויבא הפליט, “The fugitive came, etc.” According to the view of Bar Kapparah quoted by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish in Bereshit Rabbah 42,8 the term “the fugitive,” refers to Og who had survived the deluge. The reason he was called עוג was because when he arrived at Avram’s house to tell him that Lot had been captured, Avram was occupied with the halachot concerning עוגות, cakes. Og did not have any creditable motives in telling Avram about this. He hoped that Avram would go to war to rescue Lot and when he would fall in battle, he, Og, would marry Sarai, Avram’s widow. G’d assured Og that he would be rewarded for having troubled himself to inform Avram of Lot’s capture by enjoying inordinately long life, but that he would also have to watch millions of Avram’s descendants because he had meant to cause Avram’s death. The reason that Moses was afraid of Og (Tanchuma Chukat, 25) was that he was concerned that he would still be protected by G’d’s promise of long life. According to Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 27 “the fugitive” was none other than the angel Michael; he is also referred to as “a fugitive” in Ezekiel 33,21 בא אלי הפליט מירושלים “the fugitive came to me saying the city has been smitten.” והוא שוכן באלוני ממרא האמורי, “and he dwelled at Eloney Mamre of the Emorite.” It is well known that the three good friends of Avraham were Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre. All three were Emorites. We do not find however that the description “Emorite” is ever applied to either Aner or Eshkol. We do not find that even Mamre is referred to as an Emorite except here. We do not find that he is mentioned anywhere else in the Torah. [in chapter 23 Mamre is mentioned as a place name only. Ed.] The reason he is mentioned here is because the Torah refers to the ברית. The Torah is concerned that we should not think that all three of Avram’s friends urged him to circumcise himself but only Mamre. Our sages say in Bereshit Rabbah 42,8 that when the commandment to circumcise himself was issued, Avram went to consult with his friends and both Aner and Eshkol advised against, whereas Mamre advised strongly in favour, asking how he could possibly refuse seeing that G’d had saved his life so many times? He argued that seeing Avram was ready to give his life for G’d at any time if requested to do so, how could he even consider refusing to offer a single one of his organs at G’d’s command? In recognition of Mamre’s advice G’d told Avram that He would reveal Himself only in Mamre’s proximity not in the palaces of either Aner or Eshkol. The name ממרא is also viewed as an acrostic for the words מלכים, מילה, רעבון, אש that G’d had saved Avram from the kings, that he had received the advice to go through with the circumcision, that G’d had saved him from the famine in the land of Canaan, and from the fire in Nimrod’s furnace. We also find that the word אמירה is used in connection with the commandment of circumcision, i.e. שש אנכי על אמרתיך, “I rejoice with your utterances” (Psalms 119,162).
Tur HaArokh
ויגד לאברם העברי, “he told the Hebrew Avraham.” Rabbi Joseph Karo explains this as meaning that the reason that Avraham is here described as the עברי, is to counter the answer what good it would do Lot that someone told Avraham of his plight, seeing there were only two Hebrews in the whole land, he and Avraham? By adding that this Hebrew had powerful allies in Oner, Eshkol and Mamre, the situation was not quite as hopeless. Mamre was a well known and powerful personage.
And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued as far as Dan.
verse value 4860
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 64 letters. Verse gematria: 4860 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "that" (כִּ֥י, 2 letters) and the longest is "his·retainers" (אֶת־חֲנִיכָ֜יו, 8 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "taken·captive" (נִשְׁבָּ֖ה), "and·mustered" (וַיָּ֨רֶק), "his·retainers" (אֶת־חֲנִיכָ֜יו). 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "that" (root כי, 167x in Genesis); "his·brother" (root אח, 164x in Genesis); "household" (root בית, 121x in Genesis). First appearance of the root שבה ("taken·captive") in Genesis. First appearance of the root יליד ("born·in") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'his·brother', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 10 words.
Onkelos
And Abram heard that his brother had been taken captive, and he armed his young men, those born in his household, three hundred and eighteen, and he pursued as far as Dan.
Rashi
וירק Its meaning is as the Targum takes it: “he girded”. Similar are (Leviticus 24:33) “And I will gird myself (והריקותי) with the sword against you", and (Exodus 15:9) “I will gird on (אריק) my sword”, and (Psalms 35:3) “Gird thyself (הרק) with the spear and battle axe”. חניכיו HIS TRAINED SERVANTS — The word is written without a י (after the כ) so it may be read חניכו “his trained one”, referring to Eliezer whom he had trained to the observance of religious duties. The word חנך signifies introducing a person or a thing, for the first time, to some particular occupation in which it is intended that he should remain (i. e. to dedicate or devote to some particular purpose). It has a similar sense in (Proverbs 22:6) “Train up (חנוך) a child”, and in (Numbers 7:84) חנוכת המזבח “the dedication of the altar”, and (Psalms 30:1) “The dedication (חנוכת) of the house” In old French enseigner; English: to teach, instruct. 'שמנה עשר וגו THREE HUNDRED AND EIGHTEEN — Our Rabbis said, “It was Eliezer alone whom he armed and it (318) is the numerical value of his name” (Nedarim 32a). עד דן AS FAR AS DAN — There his strength failed him for he saw prophetically that at some future time his descendants would there erect a calf (Sanhedrin 96a).
Ibn Ezra
"Va-yarek" — he distributed weapons to them, as in "draw out (ve-harek) a spear" (Psalms 35:3). Others say it means to draw the sword from its sheath, as in "they empty (yariqu) upon the earth" (Ecclesiastes 11:3), and "emptying (merikim) their sacks" (Genesis 42:35); a spear too can be drawn in this way. "His trained men (hanichav)" — he had trained them many times in warfare, even though this is not stated explicitly. As for the calculation of the letters of Eliezer, that is a homiletical device; Scripture does not speak by way of gematria, for anyone who wishes can manipulate any name to yield a good or bad result. The name is simply to be taken at face value.
Sforno
וירדוף עד דן, in his pursuit to attack them suddenly.
Chizkuni
וירק את חניכיו, “the men who had been trained in warfare.” עד דן, as far as Dan, the place was named such (the original “Dan” not having been born yet until at least 100 years later, Ed.] The place called “Dan” in the Book of Judges was called Leshem at the time of this battle (Compare Joshua 19,47).
Rabbeinu Bahya
וישמע אברם כי נשבה אחיו, “when Avram heard that his brother had been taken captive, etc.” Avram girded himself for battle as soon as he heard about this. He immediately mobilized the three hundred and eighteen men who derived their immediate sustenance from him. Bereshit Rabbah 43,2 claims that the number 318 is really only the numerical value of the letters in the name of his trusted servant אליעזר. How do we reconcile this Midrash with the principle of אין מקרא יוצא מידי פשוטו, that “we must not completely divorce a verse of Scripture from its literal meaning?” After all, the Torah expressly states that the three hundred people concerned were ילידי ביתו “members of Avram’s household?” Actually, the meaning of the Midrash is that all the three hundred and eighteen men mentioned were members of Avram’s household, were being fed at his table. Having mobilized all of them, Avram discounted most of them realizing that the credit for the victory went only to Eliezer who was the most G’d-fearing one amongst them. Victory in battle is not determined by the size of the armies- as we know from Gideon- but is due to the merit of the individual soldiers. The Torah told us in Deut 20,8 that if someone has reason to fear for his life (due to sins he has committed) he should go home instead of joining the ranks of the soldiers. The author of the Midrash noticed that the word וירק, he “mobilized,” is composed of the word רק, “only.” It means that Avram reduced the men whose merit could ensure victory to those that possessed sufficient merit which left him with his trusted servant Eliezer, whose merit was equivalent to that of the other 317 men in his household. While it is true that the word חניכיו is spelled with the letter י indicating that there were more than one person, the fact is that “200 includes 100,” i.e. that the word חניכו, “the one whom he had trained,” is included in the word חניכיו, “the ones whom he had trained.” We may interpret the word to mean that all the people whom Avram had trained (in matters spiritual) were loyal to the most illustrious of them all, to Eliezer. As to the word אחיו, “his brother,” when in fact Lot was Avram’s nephew and not his brother, the Torah wrote it in this way in order to show us the virtue of brotherliness which Avram extended even to a nephew who had chosen to live as a neighbour of the wicked people of Sodom. He had not allowed considerations of the strife which had occurred between them previously to influence his judgment concerning his nephew, the son of his brother. He risked his life on his behalf as if he were a biological brother. וירדף עד דן, “he pursued as far as Dan.” This is a reference to the מדת הדין, “the attribute of Justice.” Once the attribute of Justice caught up with these kings there was no need for Avram to pursue any further. We find a similar expression in Isaiah 41,3 ירדפם יעבור שלום, “He pursues them, he goes unharmed.” According to Bereshit Rabbah 43,7 Avram threw earth at these people and the earth turned into swords. When he threw straws at them they turned into arrows. Another explanation offered by the Midrash (Tanchuma Lech Lecha 13) on these words is that when Avram approached Dan, a place where in later years the Israelites would commit idolatry, his strength suddenly evaporated in view of this prospect. (The Midrash referred to the golden calves erected by Jerobam King of Israel shortly after the division of Solomon’s kingdom compare Kings I 12,29).
Kli Yakar
And he armed his trained servants, etc. Rashi explains that only Eliezer was there, as the number three hundred and eighteen is the numerical value of Eliezer’s name. However, this raises questions: Is it the way of Scripture to use a number that refers to just one person? And what is meant by the verse and divided the men who went with me, when supposedly only Eliezer went with him? The explanation that seems closest to me is that even Rashi agrees that Abraham actually took 318 men with him, for every person is obligated to act within the natural order to the best of one’s ability, and whatever nature lacks, the miracle will complete. However, the question remains: Why did Abram specifically take the number 318, and what is the Scripture teaching us through this? Rather, this comes to teach us that the battle was so formidable for him that there was no natural possibility of victory, and nevertheless Abraham went to battle because he relied on his God’s help. It was symbolic that he took with him men numbering the same as “Eliezer,” to indicate that effectively only Eliezer was there, as the victory was not achieved through any human action but through divine assistance alone. Therefore, he only pursued until Dan, and there the Divine Presence departed because of the golden calf that would eventually be erected in Dan. Thus his strength weakened there with the departure of divine assistance. This is what is meant by and he divided against them by night — the second half was reserved for the midnight of Egypt, for then God Himself went out through Egypt. Similarly, in this battle, there was nothing but the help of the Most High God, who delivered His enemies into His hand. Another explanation [for why] he took 318 men, corresponding to the numerical value of Eliezer’s [name], is to teach that Eliezer was equivalent to all of them because Abraham’s merit clung to him, as [the Sages teach that] the casual conversation of the patriarchs’ servants is more valuable than the Torah of their children, etc. And some say [regarding the word] “vayarek” [usually translated as “he armed”] that he emptied them of all weapons, and they went without weapons, relying on God’s salvation. This interpretation comes from [the similar usage in Exodus 15:9] I will draw my sword, [where Pharaoh says] “even if I draw my sword to remove them completely, nevertheless my hand will destroy them alone, without a sword.”
And he divided himself against them by night, he and his servants, and smote them, and pursued them to Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus.
verse value 2391
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 52 letters. The shortest word is "he" (ה֥וּא, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·his·servants" (וַעֲבָדָ֖יו, 6 letters). 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·he·divided" (וַיֵּחָלֵ֨ק), "and·his·servants" (וַעֲבָדָ֖יו), "and·struck·them" (וַיַּכֵּ֑ם). 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "left·of" (root אל, 242x in Genesis); "he" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis). First appearance of the root חלק ("and·he·divided") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·struck·them', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַיֵּחָלֵ֨ק [and·he·divided] (154) + עֲלֵיהֶ֧ם [upon·them] (155) + לַ֛יְלָה [night] (75) + ה֥וּא [he] (12) + וַעֲבָדָ֖יו [and·his·servants] (98) + וַיַּכֵּ֑ם [and·struck·them] (76) + וַֽיִּרְדְּפֵם֙ [and·pursued·them] (340) + עַד־חוֹבָ֔ה [as·far·as·Hobah] (95) + אֲשֶׁ֥ר [which] (501) + מִשְּׂמֹ֖אל [left·of] (411) + לְדַמָּֽשֶׂק [of·Damascus] (474) = 2391.
Onkelos
And he divided against them by night, he and his servants, and they struck them and pursued them as far as Hobah, which is north of Damascus.
Rashi
ויחלק עליהם AND HE DIVIDED HIMSELF AGAINST THEM — In accordance with its plain sense you must invert the order of the words of the verse: “And he divided himself, he and his servants, against them, at night”, as is the manner of those who pursue their enemies — they divide themselves up to follow after those of whom they are in pursuit when these flee in different directions. לילה BY NIGHT, meaning, even after it became dark they did not give up pursuing them. According to the Midrashic explanation, it was the night that was divided): during its first half a miracle was wrought for him, and the second half was kept in reserve for the miracle of the midnight in Egypt (Genesis Rabbah 43:3). עד חובה UNTO HOBAH — There is no place bearing the name Hobah, but the city Dan is called Hobah (guilty city) on account of the idolatry which would once be practised there (Midrash Tanchuma, Lech Lecha 13).
Ramban
AND HE DIVIDED HIMSELF, BY NIGHT. Rashi wrote: “In accordance with the plain sense of the verse it means [that they divided into groups] as is the manner of those who pursue their enemies when they flee in different directions. By night means that even after it became dark, they did not cease pursuing them.”The correct interpretation is that he pursued the enemies to Dan during the daytime with his entire army. When it became dark and he was not able to see by which road they fled, he divided his people and servants into two or three groups, taking one part with him, and they pursued them on all roads, smiting them as far as Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus. Then he returned from pursuing them. The order of the words [in the verse are thus interpreted as follows]: “And he divided himself, he and his servants, by night.” AND HE PURSUED THEM UNTO HOBAH, WHICH IS ON THE LEFT HAND OF DAMASCUS. It is known that there is a great distance from the oaks of Mamre in Hebron in the land of Judah, to Damascus, which is outside the Land. If so, he pursued them for many days until he forced them to leave the land for they were returning to Babylon, their country. Or possibly there occurred here a great miracle, just as our Rabbis expounded from the verse, The way with his foot he treadeth not. This is interpreted in Bereshith Rabbah (43:7) as referring to Abraham and asserting that he took such long steps that he traveled a mile without setting foot on the ground.
Sforno
ויחלק עליהם לילה, he divided his forces all around them to make them believe that they were being attacked by large forces from several fronts. We have been told about a similar situation in Kings II 7,6 when the Aramites fled headlong after hearing noises that convinced them that they were being attacked by large forces. לילה, this was also part of the subterfuge, preventing the kings from realising that they were facing insignificant numbers of opponents. In Samuel II 17,1 this was the advice to Avshalom by Achitofel when he advised to pursue David at night. ויכם, the defeat caused them to flee. וירדפם, the beginning of all pursuits is putting people to flight.
Chizkuni
ויכם וירדפם, “He defeated (killed) them and pursued them;” Rabbi Tanchum poses the rhetorical question how someone can pursue corpses? [Since the Torah first reports that these people had been smitten. Ed.] He answers that Avram killed the men whom G-d had pursued. G-d put the men to flight so that Avram could easily kill them. אשר משמאל לדמשק, “which is located to the left of Damascus,” where Eliezer and his family hailed from. Onkelos translates the word דמשק as Eliezer; he meant that Eliezer’s family in that town assisted him and Avram in that task.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויחלק עליהם לילה “the night was divided for them.” The plain meaning of the line is that it became dark. Nonetheless, Avram did not desist from pursuing these Kings and their armies until midnight. According to Tanchuma Lech Lecha 9 G’d told Avram: “you have killed My enemies from midnight until morning, I promise you that when the time is ripe I will kill those that hate your descendants from midnight until morning.” This is the deeper meaning of Exodus 11,4 כחצות הלילה אני יוצא בתוך מצרים, “around midnight, I will go out in the midst of Egypt.” From all this it appears that Avram carried on the battle from midnight until morning. According to the plain meaning of the text Avram did not sleep at all during that night. He spent the first half of the night in pursuit; the second half of the night he spent in battling his enemies. This is the meaning of the words ויחלק עליהם לילה הוא ועבדיו ויכם וירדפם, “the night was divided for him and his servants, he smote them in the second half of the night after having pursued them during the first half.” עד חובה אשר משמאל לדמשק, “as far as Chovah which is to the left of Damascus.” This means “until they admitted their guilt he called to them from the “left,” i.e. the seat of the attribute of Justice. They were falling to the left of Eliezer who originated in Damascus. [The word Damascus here is a simile for Eliezer who used to draw water and give others to drink from the Torah of his master Avraham, as will be explained later by our author. (Rabbi Chavel)] The word משמאל in our verse may be read as referring to Damascus or as referring to the previous word עד חובה אשר. In the latter case the translation would have to be “as far as Chovah which is on the left side.” You will find a similar construction of one word being able to be used in the latter half of a verse as well as in the first half in Psalms 50,2 מציון מכלל-יופי אלוקים הופיע “From Zion, perfect in beauty, G’d appeared.” [The word מציון may be understood as the end of verse one preceding it. Ed.]
Tur HaArokh
ויחלק עליהם לילה ויכם וירדפם, “at night they spilt up and smote them and gave chase, etc.” The Midrash poses the obvious question that one does not chase after the dead, [the word ויכם being understood as “he killed them. Ed.] Therefore the word ויחלק is understood by the Midrash as meaning that the subject in the phrase is G’d, Who reserved part of this night for the miracle of the Exodus, Avraham’s descendants experiencing the killing of the firstborn Egyptians on the anniversary of that night. (Bereshit Rabbah 43,3) The plain meaning of the phrase is that Avraham and his men pursued the fleeing armies by daylight as far as Dan. Seeing that after nightfall it was impossible to see in which direction the soldiers had fled, Avraham divided his men so as to continue to pursue every escape route. He kept smiting them as far north as Chovah, a place not far west from Damascus. The Torah describes this detail so that we will realize that this pursuit continued for many days, as the distance from Chevron (Eloney Mamre) is in excess of 300 km by air. Alternatively, the entire campaign was guided by a number of miracles.
And he brought back all the goods, and also brought back his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people.
verse value 4040
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 49 letters. The shortest word is "and·even" (וְגַם֩, 3 letters) and the longest is "all·property" (אֵ֖ת כׇּל־הָרְכֻ֑שׁ, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 49: and·even, and·even. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "all·property" (אֵ֖ת כׇּל־הָרְכֻ֑שׁ), "and·his·possessions" (וּרְכֻשׁוֹ֙). The root שוב appears 2 times in this verse. 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "his·brother" (root אח, 164x in Genesis); "the·women" (root אשה, 148x in Genesis); "and·the·people" (root עם, 87x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'all·property', dividing the verse into phrases of 2 and 8 words. Full calculation: וַיָּ֕שֶׁב [and·brought·back] (318) + אֵ֖ת כׇּל־הָרְכֻ֑שׁ [all·property] (976) + וְגַם֩ [and·even] (49) + אֶת־ל֨וֹט [Lot] (446) + אָחִ֤יו [his·brother] (25) + וּרְכֻשׁוֹ֙ [and·his·possessions] (532) + הֵשִׁ֔יב [brought·back] (317) + וְגַ֥ם [and·even] (49) + אֶת־הַנָּשִׁ֖ים [the·women] (806) + וְאֶת־הָעָֽם [and·the·people] (522) = 4040.
Onkelos
And he brought back all the possessions, and also Lot the son of his brother and his possessions he brought back, and also the women and the people.
Sforno
וגם את הנשים, he liberated Lot’s wives, as well as העם, all the ordinary people of Sodom who had been taken captive. It was these whom the King of Sodom asked to be restored to him, when he “graciously” (verse 21) offered that Avram could keep the chattels.
Or HaChaim
וגם את לוט ואת רכושו השיב, and he also restored Lot and his possessions. Although the whole exercise was designed only to rescue Lot, the Torah first reports Abraham's spectacular military accomplishments and how he restored their property to the five kings. The reason Abraham restored the women and children to the kings of Sodom was in recognition of the fact that they had treated Lot with respect and honour.
And the king of Sodom went out to meet him, after his return from the slaughter of Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him, at the vale of Shaveh—the same is the King's Vale.
verse value 5336
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 71 letters. The shortest word is "which" (אֲשֶׁ֣ר, 3 letters) and the longest is "Chedorlaomer" (אֶת־כְּדׇרְלָעֹ֔מֶר, 9 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "from·striking" (מֵֽהַכּוֹת֙), "and·the·kings" (וְאֶת־הַמְּלָכִ֖ים), "Shaveh" (שָׁוֵ֔ה). The root מלך appears 3 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "he" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis); "to·meet·him" (root קרא, 123x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'with·him', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 5 words.
Onkelos
And the king of Sodom went out to meet him after he returned from striking Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, at the Valley of Turning, which is the place of the King's House.
Rashi
עמק שוה THE VALLEY OF SHAVEH— So was its name; but the Targum translates it, “to the empty plain” — clear of trees and all impediments. עמק המלך THE KINGS VALE Onkelos translates it by the king’s race-course: a hippodrome that was thirty “kona” (measuring rods) and was set apart for the king’s sport. The Midrashic explanation is that it was the valley where all the nations unanimously agreed (הושוו) in appointing Abraham as prince and leader over them (Genesis Rabbah 43:5).
Chizkuni
ויצא מלך סדום, the King of Sodom now emerged from the pits in which he had hidden. He is mentioned by name, as the whole war had revolved around him, he having been the one who had refused to pay taxes to Kedorleomer. (Genesis 14,15) He had been the ringleader of the five rebellious kings.
And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine; and he was priest of God the Most High.
verse value 1346 — וְה֥וּא = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 41 letters. Notable word values: "and·he" (וְה֥וּא) = 18, chai, 'life'. The shortest word is "king" (מֶ֣לֶךְ, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·Melchizedek" (וּמַלְכִּי־צֶ֙דֶק֙, 8 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·Melchizedek" (וּמַלְכִּי־צֶ֙דֶק֙), "brought·out" (הוֹצִ֖יא), "and·wine" (וָיָ֑יִן). 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·God" (root אל, 242x in Genesis); "and·he" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis); "brought·out" (root יצא, 77x in Genesis). First appearance of the root כהן ("priest") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·wine', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 4 words. Full calculation: וּמַלְכִּי־צֶ֙דֶק֙ [and·Melchizedek] (300) + מֶ֣לֶךְ [king] (90) + שָׁלֵ֔ם [Salem] (370) + הוֹצִ֖יא [brought·out] (112) + לֶ֣חֶם [bread] (78) + וָיָ֑יִן [and·wine] (76) + וְה֥וּא [and·he] (18) + כֹהֵ֖ן [priest] (75) + לְאֵ֥ל [to·God] (61) + עֶלְיֽוֹן [Most·High] (166) = 1346.
Onkelos
And Melchizedek king of Jerusalem brought out bread and wine, and he was ministering before God Most High.
Rashi
ומלכי צדק AND MELCHIZEDEK — A Midrashic explanation is that he is identical with Shem, son of Noah (Nedarim 32b). לחם ויין BREAD AND WINE — Thus is done for those wearied through battle. He showed him (Abraham) that he bore him no malice for killing his descendants. The Midrashic explanation is that he (Melchizedek) thereby gave an intimation to him (Abraham) of the meal-offerings and libations which his descendants would offer there (in Salem which is Jeru-salem) (Genesis Rabbah 43:6).
Ramban
AND MELCHIZEDEK KING OF SALEM. This is Jerusalem, just as it is said, In Salem is set His tabernacle. In the days of Joshua, its king was also called Adoni-zedek. Since time immemorial the nations knew that this place, which was the choicest of all places, is in the center of the inhabited region. Or perhaps they knew of its superiority by tradition, i.e., that it is exactly opposite the Heavenly Sanctuary, where the Divine Glory of the Holy One, blessed be He, who is called Tzedek (Righteousness) abides. ”In Bereshith Rabbah 3:6. [we find that Jerusalem is called Tzedek because] “this place makes its inhabitants righteous. And Melchizedek means ‘the lord of Zedek.’ Jerusalem is called Tzedek, as it is said, ‘Tzedek’ (Righteousness) lodged in it.” AND HE WAS PRIEST OF G-D THE MOST HIGH. This is stated in order to inform us that Abraham would not give a tithe to the priest of other gods, but since he knew that he was a priest of G-d the Most High, he gave him the tithe as an honor to G-d. He alluded to Abraham through this episode that the House of G-d will be there, and there his descendants will bring the tithe and the Heave-offering, and there they will bless the Eternal. Now according to the opinion of our Rabbis who say that Melchizedek was Shem, the son of Noah, we must say that he left his country in the east and came to Jerusalem to worship the Eternal. He became the people’s priest of G-d the Most High since he was the honored one among their father’s brothers, Now since according to the Rabbis, Melchizedek is none other than Shem, the Canaanites who were then in possession of Jerusalem recognized in Shem their father Ham’s most honored brother and therefore appointed him “priest of G-d the Most High.” as Jerusalem was ever in the boundary of the Canaanites. Now Rashi wrote above, “And the Canaanite was then in the land. They were gradually conquering the land of Israel from the descendants of Shem, the ancestor of Abraham, for it had fallen to the share of Shem when Noah apportioned the earth among his sons, as it is said, And Melchizedek king of Salem.”This is not correct because the boundary of the Canaanite was from Sidon, which includes all of the land of Israel. The boundary of the children of Shem, on the other hand, was to the east of Mesha, far from the land of Israel. But if Noah apportioned the countries among his sons and gave Shem the land of Israel, it would be similar to the case of a person who apportions his goods by word of mouth. That the land of Israel should belong to the descendants of Shem would thus be a special oral provision by Noah since all their other lands were to the east of Mesha, far from the land of Israel. Meanwhile, the children of Canaan, [who were the descendants of Ham], settled there until the time came when G-d caused the seed of His friend Abraham The seed of Abraham My friend. to inherit it, as I have already mentioned. AND HE WAS PRIEST OF G-D THE MOST HIGH. Since there were, among all nations, priests serving the angels called eilim (the mighty ones) — even as it is said, Who is like unto Thee ‘ba’eilim’ (among the mighty) — the Holy One, blessed be He, is called G-d the Most High, the purport thereof being “the Mighty One, Who is Supreme over all,” as in the verse, It is ‘le’eil’ (the power of) my hand. Now Melchizedek did not mention the Eternal, whereas Abraham said, the Eternal, G-d of the Most High. here.
Ibn Ezra
"Malki-Tzedek" — he was called by this name because he was king over a place called Tzedek. Some say he is Shem. "Shalem" — that is Jerusalem; proof: "In Salem (be-shalem) is His tabernacle" (Psalms 76:3). "And he was a priest" — as the Aramaic Targum renders it; and so too every instance of kohen; proof: "and they shall minister (ve-khihanu) to Me" (Exodus 28:41). The meaning of "after the manner of Malki-Tzedek" in the book of Psalms is that he spoke rightly and acted well in blessing Abram first, because he had volunteered to rescue those who were taken captive; and thereafter he said, "Blessed be Hashem," Who helped him and delivered his enemies into his hand.
Sforno
הוציא לחם ויין, to all those returning from battle who were tired. והוא כהן, it was appropriate therefore that he should intone blessings.
Or HaChaim
ומלכי צדק מלך שלם, And Malki Tzedek the king of Salem, etc. Our sages (Midrash Aggadah) claim that Malki Tzedek was identical with Noach's son Shem. The reason that the Torah interrupts the report of Lot's rescue by reporting Malki Tzedek's arrival is to contrast his behaviour with that of the king of Sodom. Whereas Malki Tzedek came with gifts and a blessing though Abraham had done nothing for him, the king of Sodom came empty-handed although he owed Abraham a great debt of gratitude for having saved both his life and his kingdom. The Torah merely shows the difference between the behaviour of the wicked and that of the just. Another way of looking at this episode is based on our sages who credited Abraham with not only observing the commandments which would later on be legislated in the Torah (Yuma 28), but even observing Rabbinic ordinances such as עירובי תבשילין. In view of Abraham's personal piety the king of Sodom was well aware that he would not eat food or drink wine presented to him by an idolator. In order to save himself such an embarassment the king chose Malki Tzedek to be the messenger who would present this gift to Abraham. [You will note that it does not say that Abraham partook of either bread or wine contrary to his custom when he prepared a meal for Avimelech, for instance. Ed.] According to all this the Torah teaches us here that Abraham would not even eat foods which are forbidden only by Rabbinic injunction. The Torah also wants to teach us how it was that the king of Sodom offered the loot of the war (property previously owned by the four kings) to Abraham instead of demanding both the prisoners and the property. The king of Sodom had observed that Abraham tithed the loot to Malki Tzedek in the latter's capacity as G'd's priest. He understood that one does not tithe matters which do not belong to one. Inasmuch as Abraham apparently considered the loot as his own, the king of Sodom did not give away anything when he made the apparently generous offer for Abraham to keep the loot. והוא כהן לאל עליון, and he was a priest of the Supreme G'd. The emphasis on the word הוא indicates that only he was a priest, not his descendants. The priesthood was conferred upon Abraham as we know from Psalms 110,4: אתה בהן לעולם, "You are a priest forever." The Psalmist refers to the blessing conferred upon Abraham by Malki Tzedek. I will still explain that Malki Tzedek conferred the priesthood upon Abraham willingly. The words "of the Supreme G'd," are necessary as there were many priests of many deities. Our sages (Nedarim 32) claim that Malki Tzedek lost his priesthood because he blessed Abraham before he blessed G'd. Accordingly we would have to understand the words: "and he was a priest" to mean that his priesthood was something of the past. He forfeited it by slighting G'd. The fact that the Torah did not report the unfortunate wording of Malki Tzedek's blessing until after hinting that he had already forfeited the priesthood is irrelevant because the Torah was not written till after the event.
Chizkuni
הוציא לחם ויין, “he produced (from his satchel) bread and wine;” the rules of syntax would have demanded that the verses 1718 should have been written in the following sequence: “The king of Sodom came out of hiding to meet Avram after he had defeated the 4 most powerful kings, and he said to Avram: “hand me over the human beings and keep the chattels for yourself.” (verse 22). Instead, the Torah interrupted with the arrival of Malki Tzedek and his blessing Avram. The reason that the Torah interrupted with verses 1821 was that it wanted to put Avraham’s refusing any offer from the King of Sodom into proper context. If the Torah had inserted the words of Avram, saying that he would not even accept a shoelace so that the King of Sodom could not say that he had personally contributed to Avram’s material wealth, the world would have wondered how Avram could have paid the wages of his soldiers. After reading that Avram had first given ten per cent of all the loot to Malki Tzedek who represented the only G-d, they would not ask such questions. They had also learned that Avram did not mind accepting bread and wine from Malki Tzedek who had acquired all which he possessed by morally acceptable means. They realised that Avram shied away not from material possessions as such, but only from material possessions not acquired by morally and ethically acceptable means. An alternate exegesis: Malki Tzedek produced bread and wine which had not been tithed in order to give Avram an opportunity to perform that commandment, as we will explain on verse 20.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ומלכי צדק מלך שלם, “and Malki Tzedek the King of Salem, etc.” This King was none other than Shem, the son of Noach. He was a Priest of the Supreme G’d. According to the plain meaning of the text the word כהן means “servant.” Seeing that all nations have their “priests” who serve angels who are called אלוהים, such as Exodus 15,11 מי כמוך באלים ה' “who is like You amongst the divine forces O Hashem?,” The Lord G’d is here referred to as אל עליון, Supreme G’d. According to Nedarim 32 he was a real Priest and this is the reason Avram gave him a tithe of ten percent of the spoils of war.
Tur HaArokh
ומלכי צדק מלך שלם, “and Malki Tzedek, King of Salem, etc.” he was the King of Jerusalem, as we know from Psalms 76,3 ויהי בשלם סוכו, “His hut (abode) was in Shalem.” According to tradition, the verse is a reference to G’d having His abode in Zion, Jerusalem. As soon as the gentiles had become aware that this was a chosen site, they realized that the Temple would one day be erected there. והוא כהן לאל עליון, “and he was a priest of the Supreme G’d.” This unusual sounding attribute, which almost could make one believe that we have more than one G’d, was selected by the Torah because most nations had priests who were subservient to their kings, who, in turn were addressed as אלוהים, just as the Torah refers to a judge as אלהים. In order to prevent us from thinking that Malki Tzedek was subservient to anyone but the Lord, the Creator of heaven and earth, the Torah chose to describe Him in these terms. Also, we learn from here that Avraham would not consider giving tithes to anyone who was not a servant of the Creator. Moreover, the place where Avraham gave the tithe to Malki Tzedek reputedly was the area where the Temple would be built in the future. Avraham’s descendants’ offspring would remove these tithes from the precincts of the Temple. Rashi derives from this verse that the land of Israel had originally been part of Shem’s heritage, but that the Canaanite had gradually deprived him of much of his heritage by force. He identifies Malki Tzedek as Noach’s son Shem. Nachmanides claims that this is not correct, and that the legal boundaries of the heritage of Canaan extended from Sidon in the north, comprising practically all of the land of Israel as we know it, whereas the heritage of Shem was located further to the east. If Noach had indeed allocated the surface of the globe to his several sons, then the return of the land of Israel to the descendants of Avraham, a descendant of Shem, the son of Noach, did not really represent a reallocation of lands which had once legally belonged to the descendants of Cham, the Canaanites. The Canaanites merely acted as safe-keepers of these lands until Avraham had sufficient descendants to populate them. According to our sages who say that Malki Tzedek was identical with Shem, the latter had been on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in order to serve the Lord there, and the local population had accepted him as their priest.
And he blessed him, and said: "Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth;
verse value 2046
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 39 letters. The shortest word is "to·God" (לְאֵ֣ל, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·blessed" (וַֽיְבָרְכֵ֖הוּ, 7 letters). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "and·earth" (root ארץ, 305x in Genesis); "to·God" (root אל, 242x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·said', dividing the verse into phrases of 2 and 7 words. Full calculation: וַֽיְבָרְכֵ֖הוּ [and·blessed] (249) + וַיֹּאמַ֑ר [and·said] (257) + בָּר֤וּךְ [blessed] (228) + אַבְרָם֙ [Abram] (243) + לְאֵ֣ל [to·God] (61) + עֶלְי֔וֹן [Most·High] (166) + קֹנֵ֖ה [Creator] (155) + שָׁמַ֥יִם [heavens] (390) + וָאָֽרֶץ [and·earth] (297) = 2046.
Onkelos
And he blessed him and said: Blessed is Abram of God Most High, whose are heaven and earth.
Rashi
קנה שמים וארץ MAKER, or POSSESSOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH — similar to (Psalms 134:3) עשה שמים וארץ “Maker of heaven and earth”: through His having made them He acquired them as His possession.
Ramban
KONEI (POSSESSOR) OF HEAVEN AND EARTH. Rashi wrote: “Konei is similar to osei (maker); Psalms 134:3. through His having made them He acquired them as His possession.”But these are really two different interpretations. Perhaps it is indeed the case that the word kinyan (acquisition) is also used in the case of asiyah (making). Thus you find, For Thou ‘kanita’ (hast made) my reins, repeating the thought [expressed in the second half of the verse], Thou hast knit me together in my mother’s womb. ” A similar case is the verse, Is He not ‘konecha’ thy father? Hath He not made thee, and established thee? Here too the word konecha is used together with asiyah, indicating that they have a similar connotation. Thus the Sacred Language uses kinyan in the case of “making.” Conversely, And the souls which ‘asu’ [literally, they made] in Haran, means “they acquired.” And of that which was our father’s ‘asah’ (hath he made) — [here too it means “hath he acquired.”]That which Rashi says further — “He acquired them as His possession,” is correct, for whatever belongs to a person is called kinyano (his acquisition). Sheep are called mikneh because they constitute the main wealth of a person. In the language of the Sages: “He who picks up a find for his friend, his friend kanah [has taken title to it];” Here the word konah does not mean that he acquired it from the other since he never picked it up for himself. Instead, it means taking title to it. “watching gives ‘keniya’ (the right of possession) in ownerless property;” a. Here too konah does not mean that he acquired it from another person but that he took title to it. “a man’s yard koneh (obtains title) for him without his knowledge.” a. This too is a similar case. Similarly, the Sages, in all places, use the expression of kinyan for taking possession, meaning that it is his. This was the intention of Onkelos when he translated konei (of heaven and earth) as d’kinyanei, [meaning “Whose possessions are heaven and earth”], and he did not say kanah (who acquired).
Sforno
ויברכהו ויאמר ברוך אברם לאל עליון, first he blessed on his own behalf. Then he added that Avram was also blessed by the Supreme G’d. He said basically the same as G’d Himself had said to Avram in 12,2. קונה שמים וארץ, heaven and earth are His, to do with as He pleases. They do not have a will of their own as some scientists believe. G’d alone works His will on them, using them according to His will.
Or HaChaim
ויברכהו ויאמר. He blessed him and said, etc. We need to understand whether the blessing which the Torah mentions here, i.e. ברוך אבדם, is the gist of the blessing. If that were so, why did the Torah have to introduce it with the words ויברכהו, "he blessed him?" I believe that the words ברוך אברם allude to an additional blessing. Were this not so, the expression ויברכהו should have been followed by the word לאמר. We must understand the matter as follows. First Malki Tzedek bestowed a blessing on Abraham which pertained to his personal wellbeing such as that his enemies should not be able to harm him, etc. Next he blessed him wishing him spiritual development a blessing directed to G'd who should allow Abraham to be His true servant. By being successful as a servant of the Lord, G'd Himself would be perceived by man as the owner of not only the heavens but also of the earth. He wished him that through him his descendants would acquire eternal life so that heaven and earth would endure forever. Our sages (compare Zohar 1,89) have expressed all this when they said that but for Abraham, G'd would not really have a true possession in either heaven or earth. Even the closing words of Malki Tzedeks' blessing, i.e. אשר מגן צריך בידך which ostensibly seems to be a blessing conferred by G'd on Abraham, are a blessing conferred upon G'd. G'd considers Himself blessed through the existence of a human being such as Abraham.
Chizkuni
ברוך אברם, “blessed be Avram;” he blessed Avram before blessing the Lord because Avram had gone to such length to imperil his life in order to rescue his nephew, Lot. Subsequently he blessed the Lord, Who had assisted Avram in his rescue mission and delivered his enemies into his hands. קונה שמים וארץ, “(the Lord) Who owns heaven as well a earth.” Malki Tzedek (Shem, son of Noach) used this formulation as he had witnessed in his own lifetime how a world which had been a going concern had been destroyed and rebuilt.
Rabbeinu Bahya
קונה שמים וארץ, “who owns heaven and earth.” The term קונה is not to be understood as a contrast to מוכר, “who sells.” The meaning of the word is similar to זוכה, “who has a rightful claim.” We find the word קונה in that sense on numerous occasions in Talmudic Hebrew such as in Bava Metzia 10 קנה לעצמו. In that instance the Talmud discusses someone who had found an object which he lifts up on behalf of his companion. Such an act represents a claim to ownership of that object by said companion. The word does not imply that the object was acquired from someone else. [The final ruling in that instance is that such an act does not accomplish anything unless the one who lifts up the object had been asked to do so in order to acquire it on behalf of the one who asked him. Ed.] In other words, Malki Tzedek did not mean to imply that in order to own heaven and earth G’d had to acquire it from an outside source. You should realise that every time the word יש appears it implies that the matter is subject to acquisition (from someone else) whereas when we encounter the word אין this means that the object is not subject to acquisition. Seeing that G’d created the universe as a יש מאין — as a “something” out of “nothing,” He naturally “owns” the universe. This is the reason why the Torah in this instance chose the expression קונה to describe G’d’s relationship to His universe. Seeing that he owns it, He is able to transfer it or part of it to the Jewish people. According to Bereshit Rabbah 43,7 it appears that the words קונה שמים וארץ were understood as referring to a literal acquisition in the sense of property passing from one owner to another. It would then refer to the original raw material from which the universe has been constructed. The wording in the Midrash is: “Who did G’d acquire it from?” Answer: “If her eyes are beautiful does this not prove that her hair is beautiful also?” Malki Tzedek made the point that not only part of the universe is G’d’s but all of it. According to our author the point is that the Midrash means that the fact that G’d “acquired” the original raw material does not mean that it was not He who had created that material also ויברכהו ויאמר ברוך אברם לקל עליון קונה שמים וארץ, וברוך קל עליון, “Blessed be Avram to the Supreme G’d who owns heaven and earth, and blessed be the Supreme G’d, etc.” Malki Tzedek first blessed Avram and only then did he bless G’d. He was guilty of a sin by doing so. He should first have blessed G’d just as David did in a similar situation in Samuel I 25, 32-33. David first blessed G’d before he blessed Avigail who had prevented him from becoming guilty of bloodshed. Malki Tzedek was punished for this lack of respect for G’d by losing his position of High Priest. This position was accorded to Avraham instead as is recorded in Nedarim 32. A reference to this is found in Psalms 110,1 נאם ה' לאדני שב לימיני where the man who is described as sitting on G’d’s right hand side is understood to be Avraham. He is the only person to whom David ever referred as אדני, “my master.” David considered Avraham as his personal patriarch. In verse 4 of the same Psalm David says: נשבע ה' ולא ינחם אתה כהן לעולם על דברתי מלכי צדק, “The Lord has sworn and will not relent, you are a priest forever, because of what I have said, taking the place of Malki Tzedek.” It had been inadmissible to praise someone of flesh and blood before praising the Eternal. When Yehudah was about to condemn Tamar, Malki Tzedek’s daughter to death by burning (Genesis 38,24), he had not been aware that G’d had already removed the priesthood from Malki Tzedek [so that death by burning would not have been applicable to his daughter according to Jewish law even if she had been guilty of harlotry. Ed.] According to an opinion expressed in Midrash Mishlei, the words קונה שמים וארץ refer to Avram. This is based on Proverbs 17,1 טוב פת חרבה ושלוה בה מבית מלא זבחי ריב “better a dry crust with peace, than a house full of feasting with strife.” Avram merited to acquire both heaven and earth (life in either world) seeing the Torah said ברוך אברם לאל עליון קונה שמים וארץ The verse means that Avram’s descendants merited the Torah which was given to them from heaven. They also acquired the earth, i.e. they became fruitful and multiplied like the dust of the earth.
Kli Yakar
Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth. Earlier it stated and he was a priest to God Most High, and did not mention “Creator of heaven and earth” because before Abram came, the Holy One, Blessed be He was only called God Most High, as His divine kingship was not recognized in the lower realms, as Rashi explained on the verse The Lord, God of heaven, who took me from my father’s house (Genesis 24:7). And Abram caused heaven and earth to be acquired by God, for he publicized God’s existence to all in the lower realms. Therefore, whenever referring to Abram, it always mentions Creator of heaven and earth. Another explanation: Since all blessings come from the dew of heaven and the fatness of the earth, therefore when mentioning the blessing, it refers to the Creator of heaven and earth. Similarly, when it says later I have raised my hand to God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth, that I will not take from a thread to a shoe strap, etc. He said this because the Holy One, Blessed be He can give him from His own — from the precious things of heaven above and from the deep that lies below. Therefore, “I will not take anything of yours.” Some say regarding what he [Abram] said “so you will not say ‘I have enriched Abram’”: The interpretation is not [simply] “in order that you should not say,” but rather he was actually saying “I know about you that you would not say ‘I have enriched Abram,’” and nevertheless, I do not want to take anything. Another explanation: Initially He [God] was [considered only] Most High because they said that His providence does not extend below the sphere of the moon. But through this war, they saw with their own eyes that He is also the God of the earth and His providence extends to the lower realms as well, for a person does not prevail through [physical] strength but rather through His blessed providence.
Tur HaArokh
קונה שמים וארץ, “owner of heaven and earth.” Rashi understands the word קונה here in the sense of עושה, i.e. “Maker of.” He (G’d) had acquired it by dint of having made it. Nachmanides further affirms Rashi’s understanding of the word קונה here, citing Deuteronomy 32,6 הלא הוא אביך קנך הוא עשך ויכוננך, “does He not own you being your father, having made you and established you firmly?” The roots קנה and עשה are used interchangeably in the Torah. Another prominent example of this usage of the word עשה in the sense off an acquisition is found in Genesis 12,5 where Avraham and Sarah are described as taking along ואת הנפש אשר עשו בחרן, where clearly the meaning of the word עשו is not “made,” but they acquired, in the sense that they had convinced the people in question to acknowledge the G’d in heaven, the Creator. Anything that belongs to a person is described as קנינו, “his property,” that which he has made his own. Our sages, when discussing the point at which a found object is acquired, declared that at the moment the finder picks it up it has become his, is his קנין.
and blessed be God the Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand." And he gave him a tenth of all.
verse value 2583 — בְּיָדֶ֑ךָ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 39 letters. Notable word values: "into·your·hand" (בְּיָדֶ֑ךָ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "God" (אֵ֣ל, 2 letters) and the longest is "who·delivered" (אֲשֶׁר־מִגֵּ֥ן, 6 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·blessed" (וּבָרוּךְ֙), "who·delivered" (אֲשֶׁר־מִגֵּ֥ן), "your·foes" (צָרֶ֖יךָ). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "God" (root אל, 242x in Genesis); "and·gave·him" (root נתן, 150x in Genesis); "from·all" (root כל, 127x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'into·your·hand', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 3 words. Full calculation: וּבָרוּךְ֙ [and·blessed] (234) + אֵ֣ל [God] (31) + עֶלְי֔וֹן [Most·High] (166) + אֲשֶׁר־מִגֵּ֥ן [who·delivered] (594) + צָרֶ֖יךָ [your·foes] (320) + בְּיָדֶ֑ךָ [into·your·hand] (36) + וַיִּתֶּן־ל֥וֹ [and·gave·him] (502) + מַעֲשֵׂ֖ר [a·tenth] (610) + מִכֹּֽל [from·all] (90) = 2583.
Onkelos
And blessed is God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand. And he gave him a tenth of all.
Rashi
אשר מגן WHO HATH DELIVERED [THY ENEMIES INTO THY HANDS] — מגן means who has handed over or surrendered, as (Hosea 11:8) “How shall I give thee over, (אמגנך) Israel” ויתן לו AND HE — Abraham — GAVE HIM מעשר מכל A TITHE OF EVERYTHING that he had, because he was a priest.
Ramban
AND HE GAVE HIM A TENTH OF ALL. Abraham did not wish to take for himself from a thread even to a sandal tie. here. But the part of the Most High he set aside in order to give it to the priest. Now the king of Sodom went out to meet Abraham at the vale of Shaveh in his honor, and he accompanied him to the city of Salem where Melchizedek brought out bread and wine for the people that followed him. The king of Sodom did not ask anything of Abraham, but when he saw his generosity and righteousness in giving the tithe to the priest, then he also asked for the souls Verse 21 here. by way of charity. Abraham, trusting that his G-d will give him riches, possessions and honor, did not wish to take anything from him, and so he returned all the wealth of Sodom which belonged to him, and all the wealth of Gomorrah for it to be returned to its owners. The king of Sodom had asked above all for the souls, Verse 21 here. but Abraham’s consideration above all was that they should not say that they made Abram rich. here. Now the other places mentioned Verse 2. had been destroyed by the enemy in battle; only the wealth of Sodom and Gomorrah, among the cities of the five kings, fell into the hands of the enemy because since their kings were lost in the slime pits, their cities remained defenseless. The other three cities (see preceding note) defended themselves and were completely destroyed in battle. It is possible that [the plunder from the other three cities is alluded to] in the words of Abraham: “If from a thread even to a sandal tie here. will remain with me of all the wealth that has come to me from all of you;208“From all of you,” i.e., from all the five cities. and if I take anything that is thine here. of your wealth which you, the king of Sodom, gave me.”
Ibn Ezra
"Magen" — means "gave" (natan); so too "a crown of glory shall she bestow (temagen-ekha) upon you" (Proverbs 4:9), where the mem is part of the root. Abram gave the tithe in honor of Hashem, and he found no one more worthy to receive it than Malki-Tzedek.
Sforno
וברוך אל עליון, this power G’d gave to Avram to enable him to overcome his enemies, is a blessing for the Lord. He is able to rejoice in the deeds of His creatures when the wicked perish, and when He makes the righteous rejoice in their success. David expressed it in these words in Psalms 117,1-2 שבחוהו כל האומים גי גבר עלינו חסדו, “Praise the Lord all you nations. Extol Him, all you peoples; for great is His steadfast love toward us;”
Or HaChaim
וברוך אל עליון, "And blessed the Supreme G'd, etc." As already mentioned our sages say that Malki Tzedek was punished for putting G'd second in his list of blessings. He lost his priesthood because of this error. We must try and understand what prompted Malki Tzedek to commit such an error. Perhaps he thought that inasmuch as Abraham had come to recognise G'd without parental or anyone else's guidance, he deserved to receive a blessing first and foremost. Afterwards he blessed the Lord who had found pleasure in a human being such as Abraham. Malki Tzedek may have wanted to teach us that G'd only truly enjoys human beings who have first made it their business to please Him. He expressed this thought by saying: "Blessed Abraham to the Supreme G'd because he made himself be fit to be a servant of the Lord. As a result he is blessed by the Supreme G'd who has committed your enemies into your hands." [according to this Malki Tzedek's error consisted in using chronology as a guideline for the order in which he formulated his blessing. Ed.] Despite the good intention of Malki Tzedek, this was an improper way of blessing. The servant never takes precedence over his Master.
Chizkuni
ייתן לו, “he gave him;” Malki Tzedek gave Avram a tithe of everything. Our sages in Nedarim 32, interpret this verse as an allusion by the Torah to Malki Tzedek having forfeited his status of being G-d’s priest, and it being transferred to Avram, as he had committed the error of blessing a mortal human being, Avram, before blessing the immortal Lord. Avram himself had criticised Malki Tzedek for having mentioned him first in blessing both G-d and him. The latter accepted the reproof and treated Avram as the priest by tithing to him all that belonged to him. The Talmud cites a verse from Psalms: 110,4, as its source; there we read: נשבע ה' ולא ינחם אתה כהן לעולם על דברתי מלכי צדק, “The Lord has sworn and will not relent, You are a priest forever a rightful king by My decree.” [Rabbi Moshe Alshich explains there that G-d actually killed all the people Avram fought, as a priest who has killed does no longer qualify for priestly duties. Ed.]
Tur HaArokh
ויתן לו מעשר מכל, “He gave him a tithe from all of it.” According to Ibn Ezra Avraham gave these items to Malki Tzedek as tithe because the latter was a priest of Almighty G’d, and he did not want to hold on to anything which he felt was belonging to a higher power. Once he had given the tithe, the balance belonged to him rightfully, so that all the property which had once been that of the five Kings, was now returned to them by Avraham as a gift from him, not as something that was theirs legally. According to local law, spoils of war belonged to the victor, so that from that point of view Avraham did not need to return anything to the King of Sodom and his companions. This is also why the Torah reports this tithing before it reports what Avraham said to the King of Sodom concerning the oath he had sworn to the supreme Lord of heaven and earth (verse 23) that he would never allow the King of Sodom to take credit for having enriched himself (at his expense) If it had not been legal to do so, such an oath would be completely irrelevant! As soon as the King of Sodom became aware of the generosity and righteousness of Avraham, he also demanded return of his נפש, his human slaves. The entire sequence illustrates that Avraham and the King of Sodom walked all the way to the Jordan valley back together, during which time the King of Sodom had become better acquainted with Avraham. He had not even dared to ask to have the נפש restored to him until he had learned how generous a man Avraham really was. From a halachic point of you, i.e. that one does not give something to someone else unless it was halachically completely above board, Avraham had to tithe the loot so that when he would give the remainder (back) to the King of Sodom, he gave him something which was beyond question his own. Some commentators feel that if the conversation about who the loot belonged to had occurred only now, what did Avraham’s soldiers eat in the meantime? To forestall such an embarrassing question, the Torah made certain that we know that prior to Avraham tithing everything to Malki Tzedek the latter had provided bread and wine for Avraham’s soldiers so that they did not have to partake of something that their master did not yet consider his to give. Still other commentators see in the words ויתן לו מעשר מכל, a veiled rebuke to Malki Tzedek who, instead of receiving a tithe, gave a tithe to Avraham as penance for having first blessed Avraham instead of first blessing the Lord. These commentators quote as their source the verse in Psalms 110,4 נשבע ה' ולא ינחם אתה כהן לעולם על דברתי מלכי צדק, “the Lord has sworn and will not relent, “You are a priest forever, a rightful king by My decree.” [also an oblique reference that G’d had killed the people slain in that war, not Avraham, who otherwise would have been disqualified as a priest. Alshich.] Rabbi Joseph Karo claims that Avraham did not give any tithe to Malki Tzedek, as it is conceptually impossible to give a tithe of something one had never owned, and Avraham had rejected the entire booty so that the King of Sodom could not boast of having made Avraham wealthy. He had already sworn an oath rejecting the entire loot. How could he have violated such an oath? Rabbi Karo also rejects the notion that Malki Tzedek gave a tithe to Avraham. What possible reason could Malki Tzedek have had to give a tithe to Avraham when he had come forth to welcome him with bread and wine? If he gave him a tithe, he would have sold this to him. According to Rabbi Karo this is what happened. The King of Sodom came forth to greet Avraham. When Malki Tzedek arrived he found them dividing the spoils, the King of Sodom asking for the living human beings, and offering Avraham the inert property (and the livestock, presumably). At that point, Avraham swore an oath that he would not accept anything by grace of the King of Sodom, the exception being the expenses he had incurred in feeding his men. Seeing that these men had fought a war in order to save the King of Sodom among others, they were entitled to at least that. Not only that, these men had also saved Sodom’s property, and as such were entitled to a reward. He, Avraham, was not entitled to waive the reward due to Oner, Eshkol, and Mamre. Malki Tzedek then gave Avraham a tithe of what he had received, something that Avraham accepted as being completely legal, as he first and foremost was entitled to that.
And the king of Sodom said to Abram: "Give me the persons, and take the goods to yourself."
verse value 2339
Insights
Verse structure: 7 words, 34 letters. The shortest word is "give·me" (תֶּן־לִ֣י, 4 letters) and the longest is "king·of·Sodom" (מֶֽלֶךְ־סְדֹ֖ם, 6 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "give·me" (תֶּן־לִ֣י), "and·the·possessions" (וְהָרְכֻ֖שׁ). 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "give·me" (root נתן, 150x in Genesis); "take·for·yourself" (root לקח, 142x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·Abram', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֥אמֶר [and·said] (257) + מֶֽלֶךְ־סְדֹ֖ם [king·of·Sodom] (194) + אֶל־אַבְרָ֑ם [to·Abram] (274) + תֶּן־לִ֣י [give·me] (490) + הַנֶּ֔פֶשׁ [the·persons] (435) + וְהָרְכֻ֖שׁ [and·the·possessions] (531) + קַֽח־לָֽךְ [take·for·yourself] (158) = 2339.
Onkelos
And the king of Sodom said to Abram: Give me the persons, and take the possessions for yourself.
Rashi
תן לי הנפש GIVE ME THE PERSONS — Of that which was captured of mine and which you have rescued give me back the people only.
Or HaChaim
תן לי הנפש והרכוש קח לך. "Give me the persons and take the loot for yourself." We need to understand what was the point of the king of Sodom's offer for Abraham to "take" the loot, seeing that Abraham had possession of it. He himself had captured it, including all the people who had been kept prisoner. How could the king say on the one hand: "give me the persons," and "take yourself the loot," when Abraham possessed both at the time? What did the king offer? Was he not in fact merely asking for something instead of offering something? Why did he make it seem like a trade off? Perhaps we can best understand all this in light of what the Talmud teaches in Baba Kama 116. A caravan of travellers is attacked by robbers. One of the travellers succeeds in saving the belongings of all the travellers; he is considered as having done so on behalf of all the travellers; each one picks up his original belongings. If the person who undertook the risk of saving all these belongings had declared that he risked his life only in order that the spoils should be his in the event that he would succeed, then he may keep all the chattels he has saved. Rav Ashi elaborates that this is so when the other travellers could have saved their chattels had they only tried hard enough. Rashi explains there that if none of the other travellers offered any comment when the one who set out to recover the goods announced that he would do so but on his own account, they are all considered as having renounced their hope of recovering their belongings. As a result they cannot reclaim their belongings. The king of Sodom did not consider himself as having abandoned hope of escaping his situation. He argued that had it not been for Abraham's intervention, he could have recovered his belongings himself. As a result, the fact that Abraham had not intervened with the intention of sharing the spoils with the prisoners had no legal basis. After all, the king of Sodom had not overheard Abraham's declaration that he acted on his own behalf. How could he therefore be accused of having remained silent at the crucial moment? This is why he claimed that the spoils should be shared between Abraham and himself. Evidently, the king thought very highly of himself and his abilities. This is why the Torah describes him as: ויצא מלך סדום, "the king of Sodom came forth," he gave himself airs. According to the Midrash he compared his own experience when he fell into the clay pits (14,10) and was saved, with Abraham's having been saved from the furnace of Nimrod. The fact was, of course, that the situation of the king of Sodom who had already fought and lost, was entirely diferent from the situation described in the Talmud by Rav Ashi. When Rav Ashi said that the person rescuing the caravan's property has to declare beforehand that he does so on the understanding that if successful the property will be his, this is only in a situation where the other travellers are able to assist. Since the king of Sodom had certainly not been in a position to assist Abraham, his claim was totally spurious. Rambam and Rosh both rule like this. When Abraham gave the balance of the loot to the king of Sodom after first having tithed it, this was a generous gesture; it did not imply that Abraham accepted any part of the king's argument.
And Abram said to the king of Sodom: "I have lifted up my hand to Hashem, God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth,
verse value 2500
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 49 letters. Verse gematria: 2500 = 50². The shortest word is "God" (אֵ֣ל, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·Hashem" (אֶל־יְהֹוָה֙, 6 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "to·king" (אֶל־מֶ֣לֶךְ), "I·have·lifted" (הֲרִמֹ֨תִי). The root אל appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "and·earth" (root ארץ, 305x in Genesis); "to·king" (root אל, 242x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Sodom', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 8 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֥אמֶר [and·said] (257) + אַבְרָ֖ם [Abram] (243) + אֶל־מֶ֣לֶךְ [to·king] (121) + סְדֹ֑ם [Sodom] (104) + הֲרִמֹ֨תִי [I·have·lifted] (655) + יָדִ֤י [my·hand] (24) + אֶל־יְהֹוָה֙ [to·Hashem] (57) + אֵ֣ל [God] (31) + עֶלְי֔וֹן [Most·High] (166) + קֹנֵ֖ה [Creator] (155) + שָׁמַ֥יִם [heavens] (390) + וָאָֽרֶץ [and·earth] (297) = 2500.
Onkelos
And Abram said to the king of Sodom: I have lifted my hand in prayer before Hashem, God Most High, whose are heaven and earth,
Rashi
הרמתי ידי I HAVE LIFTED UP MY HAND — An expression signifying an oath: I lift up my hand to the Most High God (not, I have lifted up). Similarly, (Genesis 22:16) בי נשבעתי which means “By myself do I swear” and similarly, (Genesis 23:13) נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני which means “I give the price of the field, take it from me”.)
Ramban
I HAVE LIFTED UP MINE HAND TO THE ETERNAL. This is an expression signifying an oath: “I lift up my hand to G-d Most High.” ” Similarly, the verse, By myself have I sworn, Here too the verse uses a past tense, but its meaning is that of the present tense. means “By Myself do I swear.” Thus the language of Rashi.I have found a similar text in the Sifre: “We find in the case of all the righteous that they bring their inclination under oath in order not to do evil. In the case of Abraham, he says, I have lifted up mine hand to the Eternal.” It is thus similar to the verse, And he lifted up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and swore by Him that liveth forever. But Onkelos said, “I have lifted my hand in prayer before the Eternal.” The intent of Abraham’s words according to Onkelos is: “I have prayed to G-d, with my hands spread forth toward heaven, if I take anything that is thine.” That is to say, “G-d do so to me, and more also, if I take, etc.”The correct interpretation appears to me to be that Abraham said, “I have lifted my hand to G-d to make those things Sacred and Devoted to Him, were I to take from that which is thine.” Declaring things to be sacred to Him is called in Hebrew “lifting of a hand,” just as in the verses: Every one that did lift up a heave offering of silver and copper; and every man that offered a wave offering of gold unto the Eternal. This Abraham said because having given a tenth of it to the priest, he declared that whatever he takes from the king of Sodom would be a heave offering to G-d, from which he would derive no benefit. In Bereshith Rabbah 3:12. it is similarly said, “Abraham made it a heave offering, even as it is said, And ye shall heave a heave offering of it for the Eternal.”
Ibn Ezra
"I have raised my hand" — this is an oath, as in "when I lift My hand to heaven" (Deuteronomy 32:40). The sense of "to God Most High" is: I have now sworn by the name by which this priest blessed me.
Or HaChaim
ויאמר אברם אל מלך סדום. Abram said to the king of Sodom. The only reason Abraham raised his hand during his declaration was to make it plain to the king of Sodom that he would not bargain further about any of this. The reason the Torah writes the word אם twice, when it would have sufficed to write simply אם אקח מחוט ועד שרוך נעל is, that Abraham referred both to what was in the past and to anything that might occur in the future. Although he was entitled to a תרומה, some gift, in his capacity of being a priest, he waived his rights in this respect unconditionally He also wanted to make it plain that the tithe he had removed from the loot was not a percentage he had taken for himself. Although he was in a position to waive his own claims, he had no right to waive what belonged to G'd or to His representative. This is why he had removed the tithe from the loot before waiving his own claim to the remainder.
Chizkuni
הרימותי ידי, “I have raised my hand (in a solemn oath)” Avram states in reply to the King of Sodom’s offer [of what was not even his to offer Ed.] that he has already set aside his share for the Lord, as is stated when the Torah wrote: “he gave him a tithe from all of it.” He meant that beyond this he did not mean to keep anything. (as per Rashi).
Tur HaArokh
הרימותי את ידי, “I have raised my right hand in an oath;” this is a standard formula used to describe an oath directed at G’d. In this case, Malki Tzedek was the representative of the Lord.
that I will not take a thread nor a shoe-latchet nor aught that is yours, lest you should say: I have made Abram rich;
verse value 4025
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 52 letters. The shortest word is "and·unto" (וְעַ֣ד, 3 letters) and the longest is "of·all·that·is·yours" (מִכׇּל־אֲשֶׁר־לָ֑ךְ, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 641: of·all·that·is·yours, you·shall·say. 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "not·a·thread" (אִם־מִחוּט֙), "and·unto" (וְעַ֣ד), "a·sandal·strap" (שְׂרֽוֹךְ־נַ֔עַל). 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "you·shall·say" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "and·if·I·take" (root לקח, 142x in Genesis); "of·all·that·is·yours" (root כל, 127x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'of·all·that·is·yours', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 5 words. Full calculation: אִם־מִחוּט֙ [not·a·thread] (104) + וְעַ֣ד [and·unto] (80) + שְׂרֽוֹךְ־נַ֔עַל [a·sandal·strap] (676) + וְאִם־אֶקַּ֖ח [and·if·I·take] (156) + מִכׇּל־אֲשֶׁר־לָ֑ךְ [of·all·that·is·yours] (641) + וְלֹ֣א [and·not] (37) + תֹאמַ֔ר [you·shall·say] (641) + אֲנִ֖י [I] (61) + הֶעֱשַׁ֥רְתִּי [made·rich] (985) + אֶת־אַבְרָֽם [Abram] (644) = 4025.
Onkelos
that from a thread to a sandal strap — if I take anything that is yours — you shall not say: I have made Abram wealthy.
Rashi
אם מחוט ועד שרוך נעל NOT ANYTHING FROM A THREAD EVEN TO A SANDAL TIE shall I retain for myself from the spoil. ואם אקח מכל אשר לך NOR ANYTHING THAT IS THINE WILL I TAKE — And if you say that you will reward me from your own treasures I will still not accept anything 'ולא תאמר וגו SO THAT THOU SHOULDST NOT SAY etc. — For the Holy One, blessed be He, has promised to give me riches, as it is said, (Genesis 12:2) “And I will bless thee” (see Rashi on this passage, where the blessing is explained to consist in ממון “wealth”).
Ibn Ezra
"If from a thread" — the thread with which every garment is sewn. "Sandal strap" (serukh) — the leather cord that ties the sandal.
Sforno
אם מחוט ועד שרוך נעל, every time the word אם occurs in Scripture and is not followed by a verb making it a conditional statement, it is used instead of the word שלא, “so that not.” Avram’s statement here means: “I have sworn an oath not to give you even a shoelace or a length of thread as I do not own any of these things. Conversely, I will also not take (accept) anything that is (was) yours.” G’d said something similar to the Jewish people after the debacle of the spies in Numbers 14,23) when He said אם יראו את הארץ, which is a way of saying that they will most certainly not get to see the land (of Israel). In verse 30 in the same chapter the words אם אתם תבאו also mean “you will certainly not come.” Similarly, Samuel I 15,6 חי ה' אם יומת, means “an oath to G’d that he will not be executed, etc.” Also, in Kings II 5,16 חי ה' אשר עמדתי לפניו אם אקח וגו', means: “As the Lord lives whom I serve, I will not accept anything.” There are many similar examples.
Or HaChaim
ולא תאמר אני העשרתי את אברם, "so that you will not be able to claim credit for enriching me." Why would it have occurred to anyone to give credit to the king of Sodom for enriching Abraham? Was it not obvious that the Lord Himself had protected Abraham all the way? Abraham wanted it clearly understood that the whole loot was legally his, the king had in no way given up one iota of something that was legally his, even if Abraham had consented to share the loot. Abraham chose his words carefully when he said: "you shall not say 'I have made Abraham rich.'" If there had been even a semblance of truth to what the king of Sodom had suggested, Abraham would have had to say: "I do not want to become enriched by you." The very most the king would have been able to do was to claim that he had given up something of his own; such a claim would not have been legal anyways.
Chizkuni
אם מחוט, “if as much as a thread;” the “thread” mentioned here is a thread used as jewelry on one’s head, as stated by our sages in Shabbat 65, the “threads worn by the young girls on their heads were made of silk, and are used to tie their hair with them.” שרוך נעל, similar threads or laces to act as decoration when closing one’s shoes. Avram meant, I will not accept expensive or even inexpensive items. ואם אקח מכל אשר לך, “neither will I keep anything which (once) belonged to you.” Avram, in order not to offend, explained to the King of Sodom that when he left his father’s home G-d had assured him that He would make him wealthy. It is therefore no more than good manners for me to decline anything which would appear as if G-d’s promise had not been sufficient for me. When he would become wealthy, he wished to give the credit for this to G-d.
Rabbeinu Bahya
אם מחוט ועד שרוך נעל, “if as much as a thread or shoe-lace, etc.” This was a demonstration of Avram’s generosity in that he did not want to be enriched by the spoils of war. He did not even want to accept trivial matters which have no monetary value. He even rendered an oath concerning this when he said: “I have raised my hand to the Lord, etc.” The expression ידי הרימותי is equivalent to the expression נשאתי את ידי (Numbers 14,30), the standard formula introducing an oath. The reason he chose this expression is that it is related to תרומה, a gift to the temple treasury or to the priest which sanctifies the objects in question. It is as if Avram had declared that just as sanctified property was out of bounds to him, so the booty of his victory against the four kings was equally out of bounds to him. Such gifts are usually termed תרומת יד, “a gift from someone’s hand.” Rabbi Saadyah Gaon wrote that by mentioning “threads and shoe-laces,” the Torah wanted to include both vegetable, animal matter as well as inert matter. The word מחוט includes all vegetable matter including fruit and grain. The words ועד שרוך נעל refer to matters derived from living creatures such as domestic animals or birds. The words ואם אקח, “or if I will take (accept)” refer to inert matter and include silver and gold, jewels, etc. This is why he added the words: “nor will I take anything which was yours.” Bereshit Rabbah 43,13 views the words: “if either a thread or a shoelace,” as follows. G’d said to Avram: “you have spoken about a ‘thread.’ In recognition I will give your descendants the commandment of ציצית, ‘fringes’. They too are called “threads.’” The translation of פתיל תכלת is חוטא דתכלתא “blue thread.” Regarding the expression שרוך נעל, ‘shoelace’, something else Avram refused to accept, G’d told him that the Jewish people would receive the commandment of תפילין, “the straps of the phylacteries” as compensation. The Jewish people would also receive the commandment of eating from the Passover, of which the Torah says that it should be eaten (the first time in Egypt) נעלכם בגליכם, “while you wear your shoes.” The Israelites also merited the commandment of יבום וחליצה, “the levirate marriage and its corollary the removal of the candidate’s shoe if he refused to perform that commandment and thus would enable his sister-in- law to remarry outside the family” (compare Deut. 25,4-10). The Torah speaks of הנעל חלוץ in that connection also.
Tur HaArokh
אם מחוט, “if as little as some string;” he referred to the least valuable decorative string (used as jewelry) worn by girls in their hair. ועד שרוך נעל, ”or even as insignificant an item as a shoelace;” in those days these were also decorative, used as a form of jewelry worn around the ankles. The meaning of the apparent repetition אם אקח is: “may G’d punish me if I do this.” Nachmanides views the entire sentence in the following light. Avraham considered the entire loot, now that he had tithed it, as if a gift given to G’d, something now out of bounds to him as anything which acquired terumah status is out of bounds to a commoner.
save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, let them take their portion."
verse value 4177
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 62 letters. The shortest word is "only" (רַ֚ק, 2 letters) and the longest is "the·young·men" (הַנְּעָרִ֔ים, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: which, which. 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "ate" (אָֽכְל֣וּ), "and·share" (וְחֵ֙לֶק֙), "went" (הָלְכ֖וּ). The root אשר appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "the·men" (root איש, 153x in Genesis); "let·them·take" (root לקח, 142x in Genesis). First appearance of the root נער ("the·young·men") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'with·me', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 6 words.
Onkelos
Only what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me — Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre — they shall take their share.
Rashi
הנערים THE LADS — My servants who went with me. Then, again, the others ANER, ESHCOL AND MAMRE [THEY MAY TAKE THEIR PORTION ] — Although my servants took part in the battle as it is said (Genesis 14:15) “he and his servants and smote them” — whilst Aner and his friends remained with the baggage to guard it yet they may take their share. From him (Abraham) David took a lesson when he said, (1 Samuel 30:24) “But as his part is that goeth down to the battle, so shall his part be that tarrieth by the stuff: they shall share alike”; therefore it goes on to say (1 Samuel 30:25), “And this had been so from that day — ומעלה — and had been so from former times: therefore he (David) made it a statute and an ordinance” — it does not state והלאה “and henceforward”, for the statute had already been ordained) in the days of Abram (Genesis Rabbah 43:9).
Ibn Ezra
"Except for me" — that is, what they had already taken, namely what his servants had eaten.
Sforno
I am excluding myself. Literally, “Without me” — i.e. “You can take it without asking me because I claim no part of it.” Only what the lads have eaten. Avraham claimed only the cost of provisioning his men, but Aneir, Eshkol and Mamrei could take their share for themselves. אבל ענר אשכול וממרא הם יקחו חלקם, I will neither give them a share, nor will I accept a share on their behalf, but they will themselves take the share they are entitled to.
Or HaChaim
הם יקחו חלקם. "They shall take their share." Again Abraham wanted to make it clear that the share of his allies did not depend on the generosity of the king. They would take their share by right. Abraham did not want that the king of Sodom should make even a spurious statement as it would diminish Abraham's reputation even if untrue.
Chizkuni
בלעדי, the letter י in this word is unnecessary, just as the letter י in the word: זולתי in Deuteronomy 1,36 is unnecessary. The verse means that Avram will take only as much of the loot as belongs to the troops whom he had hired to fight.
Tur HaArokh
בלעדי רק אשר אכלו הנערים, “Exclude me; except for what the servants have eaten;” but he did not allocate to these servants a share of the loot as he had done for Oner, Eshkol, and Mamre. Some commentators hold that these people helped themselves to their share, not waiting for Avraham to give them anything. It makes more sense to accept that Avraham gave to Oner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who were not present, and on whose behalf Avraham had no right to waive their claim, whereas the people with him had helped themselves to what they considered rightfully as theirs.
Onkelos
Rashi
Ramban
Ibn Ezra
Sforno
Or HaChaim
Rabbeinu Bahya
Tur HaArokh