Most of the mefarshim explain the Akeda as some kind of test of Avraham's emuna in Hashem. The Rashbam however, has a very different fascinating pshat which is very relevant to events in Eretz Yisrael.
The Rashbam says that whenever the Torah uses the phrase ויהי אחרי הדברים האלה it is referring back to what just happened (he brings numerous examples). Here also the Rashbam says, the Akeda is a reaction to what just happened, Avraham's treaty with Avimelech. Hashem was angry with Avraham for making a treaty with Avimelech and giving away part of Eretz Yisrael which Hashem had just promised to Avraham. Avraham made the treaty to protect his son. Therefore Hashem told him, go bring your son as a korban and see if your treaty protects him. Hashem's message is clear, he tells Avraham, all you need is to have faith in me, I will protect Yitzchak and his descendents and I and only I,will ensure that the Jewish People inherit EY. Nothing else (treaties, Presidents, etc.) can protect the Jewish People and EY except for Hashem.
12 comments:
"Hashem was angry with Avraham for making a treaty with Avimelech and giving away part of Eretz Yisrael "
what does he give away? the be'eros are stolen. he then makes a treaty to witness that he dug the beer in be'er sheva so that it cant be stolen.
I looked it up. He doesn't talk about giving away eretz yisroel, he's talking about a treaty that will not allow them in future to fight for the nachala.
Your rhetoric/conceptualization is a bit overinfluenced by disengagment!
The rashbam's point is that they couldn't be makeyam "lo s'chaye kol neshama" and you can see that the plishtim are included because of the gorel.
Letting them live there is in effect giving away the land. Because oof the treaty they could not kick them out.
"letting them live there is in effect giving away the land. Because oof the treaty they could not kick them out."
1. This is not the rashbam's point. His point is lo s'chaye kol neshama
2. It's not. It was generation-limited, as per the gemara.
Of course it was generation limited so what, for that period of time they could not get rid of those people (e.g lo schsye kol neshama)
Bluke: Actually, just as important a point is making treaties for the SECURITY of Eretz Yisrael, regardless of if it involves land transfer or not. The lack of faith in Hashem that Eretz Yisrael belongs to us, and Hashem will help us defend ourselves in Eretz Yisrael seems to be more of the Rashbam's point.
See an interesting article on the topic here:
http://www.ykd.co.il/hebrew/shiurim/rav_yoel/hkedh.htm
I thought I wrote that
Hashem's message is clear, he tells Avraham, all you need is to have faith in me, I will protect Yitzchak and his descendents and I and only I,will ensure that the Jewish People inherit EY. Nothing else (treaties, Presidents, etc.) can protect the Jewish People and EY except for Hashem.
"Of course it was generation limited so what, for that period of time they could not get rid of those people (e.g lo schsye kol neshama)"
The so what is that the rashbam is therefore concerned only with not being able to fulfill lo s'chaye kol neshama only, not with "Giving away the land" which is lo s'chanem. you filter thru the current political situation and changed the concept. You think that not being able to be m'kayem lo s'chaye is giving away land, but the rashbam doesn't.
The Rashbam writes וחרה אפו של הקב"ה על זאת שהרי ארץ פלשתים ניתן לאברהם. Hashem was angry because he had given the land of the Plishtim to Avraham. This has nothing to do with lo tsacheye and everything to do with giving away the land (for a period of time). Only after that does the Rashbam mention Yehoshua and how he could not fulfill lo sechaye. Even here, the Rashbam mentions klo sechaye in the context of their not being able to get rid of them from the land. He mentions lo sechaye because that was a very specific mitzva that they could not do but the whole thrust is that Avraham gave away land promised to him.
Here are some who agree with this interpretation of the Rashbam
R' Charlop from YU - I'M SCARED STIFF!
My nightmare is the MEDRASH SHMUEL cited by the Rashbam on the verse we read on Rosh Hashanah. And it was after these things that G-d sorely tried Isaac. After these things, the Rashbam tells us, refers to what immediately precedes in the Torah narrative - The covenant between Abraham and Avimelech, King of the Philistines. Abraham voluntarily sealed that compact with seven ewe lambs of the flock, thereby relinquishing whatever legal hold he or his children were to have on the Philistines' land which was conceived originally to he part of Eretz Yisroel. For this, Hashem severely rebukes him and subjects the patriarch to the anguish of the Akeda (the Binding of Isaac) and proclaims: 1 swear! because of the seven lambs you gave Avimelech, his descendants will wage seven wars against you and prevail every time. I swear! that his descendant will destroy the seven hallowed sanctuaries that were built from the time of the Exodus through the Second Temple!
OU Parsha - Torah Tidbits
The Rashbam goes as far as to say that the Almighty subsequently gave Abraham the command to sacrifice his beloved son Isaac , as a punishment for his having made a treaty with a non-Jew regarding Eretz Yisroel. We were to be the sole possessors of the Land; never to deal part of the Land away in a treaty with others who made any claim to it.
Perhaps there is something to be learned from this for our time. Hashem meant this Land to be ours. Any attempt, in an effort to make peace, to yield even parts of it to others, might be fraught with severe dangers, including the possibility of losing loved ones.
" The Rashbam writes וחרה אפו של הקב"ה על זאת שהרי ארץ פלשתים ניתן לאברהם. Hashem was angry because he had given the land of the Plishtim to Avraham. This has nothing to do with lo tsacheye and everything to do with giving away the land (for a period of time). Only after that does the Rashbam mention Yehoshua and how he could not fulfill lo sechaye."
This is because the rashbam is trying to prove that lo s'chaye APPLIES and that is only so if the land is part of E"Y.
"Even here, the Rashbam mentions klo sechaye in the context of their not being able to get rid of them from the land. He mentions lo sechaye because that was a very specific mitzva that they could not do but the whole thrust is that Avraham gave away land promised to him"
NO! The Rashbam's point is that GIVEN that it was given to Avraham there is an obligation of lo s'chaye kol neshama. Otherwise, there would not be.
It's obviuos that's what he is saying. Go read it again.
Wht are you obsessed with lo secheye, that is a minor detail of the Rashbam, his point is that Avraham gave away the land.
Post a Comment