היה דבר ה' אל אברם במחזה, “G’d’s word came to Avraham in a vision.” According to Nachmanides this wording indicates that Avraham had by now qualified to have a vision in daytime. Until now G’d had communicated with him only in his sleep at night.

אנכי מגן לך, “I will act as your shield.” This promise was in response to two things Avraham was afraid of. 1) that the kings whom he had defeated would reorganize and attack him. 2) that he would die before having sired at least one child. G’d reassured him only about one of his fears.

מה תתן לי, “what can You give me?” Seeing that You have saved me from the Kings but have not given me assurances regarding my having children. Although You promised me a great reward, what is the meaning of any reward as long as I do not have any children to whom I can pass on this reward? The thought that the “great reward” G’d had promised would refer to another dimension entirely, his life in the hereafter, did not occur to Avraham at that time. The reason it did not occur to him was that he had been convinced that anyone serving the Lord would have a share in the hereafter. He knew that if the lives of the righteous do not seem to be substantially different from that of the wicked, this is a condition which exists only in this terrestrial life. Furthermore, the wording הרבה מאד implies that the reward will not be marred by any punishment in respect of sins committed so that he will be “eating at both tables,” using the expression coined by our sages.

ואנכי הולך ערירי, “seeing that I am going childless.” He meant that he would die leaving behind no biological heir. According to Nachmanides he first complained about the meaninglessness of any reward in the absence of that of having children, which meant that he was wandering on the face of the earth without a permanent abode in a land which was not his birthplace. He described the only person that had constant social intercourse with him as being his servant Eliezer who himself was a stranger in those parts, having come there from Damascus, a long way off. After having said this he had added: “here You have not granted me seed as You have promised me,” so that my heir will be this Eliezer. At this stage Avraham did not believe that G’d’s promise meant that he would have children would materialise, so that G’d felt impelled to repeat in a clear manner that he would have physical heirs, genetically his, and that his descendants would be at home in this land, in fact inheriting all of it in due course. [any question about Avraham doubting G’d’s promise is predicated on the assumption that the Torah reports in chronological sequence, so that what we read here occurred after he left his father’s home on his journey to the land of Canaan as his new home. If this vision occurred before he had already moved to the land of Canaan, Avraham’s remonstrating with G’d is quite easy to understand. Ed.] At any rate, righteous people do not believe in themselves, always fearing that some sin on their part will invalidate promises made to them. Although, in the event, only half his lifetime had passed by this time, he considered himself as aging and past the stage where he could sire children easily. He feared a son born too close to his death. Some commentators are convinced that Avraham did not believe G’d’s promises now any more than he had on previous occasions, but that he was afraid that if such an heir would be born only near the end of his father’s life his servant would have to become his heir in practice, at least, until his son would be of age. G’d reassured him on this score, saying that the son who would inherit Avraham would not only be his genetically, but would be adult and take over all that was his.

והנה דבר ה', “and here came the word of the Lord, etc.” the word והנה here indicates that G’d’s response to Avraham’s concern was so immediate that He did not even wait until Avraham had voiced all his concerns.

וספור הכוכבים, “and count the stars, etc.” whereas in the previous prophecy Avraham’s offspring had been compared to the dust of the earth, now it was compared to the stars in the heaven. We are dealing with the relative positions of Esau and Yaakov, both descendants of Avraham, one compared to the earthly phenomena, i.e. dust, the other to celestial phenomena, i.e. stars. Whereas the stars are untouchable, beyond harm, dust is something people trample on.

והאמין ב' ויחשבה לו צדקה, “he had full faith in the Lord, who accounted it as a righteous deed on his part.” According to Rashi the meaning is that G’d accounted it as a righteous deed on the part of Avraham to trust Him completely. Nachmanides queries why trusting G’d should be something deemed especially meritorious. He considers the idea that someone does not trust a promise by G’d when the latter had revealed Himself to him as completely preposterous. Therefore, he considers that what is meant is that Avraham considered it as an outstanding act on G’d’s part to grant him such favour. He considered that G’d granting him physical offspring was an outstanding example of G’d’s kindness to him. Having heard the last words of G’d, Avraham was no longer worried that some sin of his at a future date might invalidate this promise.

אני ה' אשר הוצאתיך מאור כשדים לתת לך את הארץ“I am the Lord Who has taken you out of Ur Casdim in order to give you this land as an inheritance.” According to Nachmanides G’d did not tell Avraham anything new concerning the gift of the land of Canaan in this line. What He meant to tell Avraham here was that already at the time when He saved him from the furnace of Nimrod it had been in order to eventually give him the land of Canaan as an inheritance for his children. The fact that G’d had not revealed this to Avraham previously, had made him think that perhaps this promise was conditional, just as he had thought that the promise of having physical offspring was a conditional promise, based on certain expectations of him in the future. This is also why he did not ask for a sign that this promise would be fulfilled, seeing that he thought it depended on additional factors, such as the Canaanites not becoming penitents, for instance, if the promise would come true. (compare Jeremiah 18,7רגע אדבר על גוי ועל ממלכה לנתוש, ולנתץ ולהאביד ושב הגוי ההוא מרעתו אשר דברתי עליו ונחמתי על הרעה אשר חשבתי לעשות לו., “At one moment I may decree that a nation or kingdom shall be uprooted and pulled down and destroyed, but if that nation against which I made the decree turns back from its wickedness I change My mind concerning the punishment I planned to bring upon it.”) Avraham wanted to be sure that here we are not dealing merely with an אות, a sign, but with a promise backed by a covenant, a promise not subject to being revoked due to the person or persons concerned not having proved worthy after the promise was made.” Other commentators see in the question במה אדע כי אירשנה “how will I know that I will indeed inherit it?” not a lack of faith, but an enquiry what steps he could take to ensure that there would not be a cause to revoke this promise. After all, Avraham dwelled amongst the very people whom G’d said He would displace in his favour, and it was no more than reasonable that if they should become aware of G’d’s promise to him they would make every effort to thwart the realization of this promise. One of the ways in which they would do this would be to pressure him to enter into a covenant with them asking him to forego realization of G’d’s promise to him. G’d told him that by delaying fulfillment of His promise until the fourth generation He could be sure that it would then qualify for fulfillment. These concerns by Avraham were entirely legitimate. Hence he asked for an assurance that the promise would indeed be ironclad.

עגלה משולשת, some commentators believe that the meaning of the expression is “a fat calf,” similar to the expression עגלה שלישיה in Isaiah The requirement to select an especially fat specimen did not apply to the other species from which he was to offer a sacrifice. He took only a single animal from each species, and this was the reason G’d commanded him to cut them in half and place each half opposite its counterpart. Even according to Rashi who holds that he took 3 specimens of each species, he placed two whole animals opposite one another and divided only the third one in half, placing the halves opposite each other. The word עגלה משולשת is an allusion to the three basic categories of animal sacrifice, i.e. עולה, burnt offering, חטאת sin-offering, and שלמים, peace offering. The עולה and חטאת are basically similar different only in name.

ויבתר אותם בתוך, “he halved them down the middle.” This was in order to conclude a covenant and to pass between them. The procedure also served as a symbol that in future all animal sacrifices would consist only of either of the species that were now in front of him. The only species of fowl acceptable as a sacrifice on the altar is the dove, either when a תר, or when a גוזל. [the difference has to do with the age of the bird. Ed.] The reason the term גוזל is used at all, is that only very young pigeons qualify as sacrifices, and we know from Deut. 32,11 כנשר יעיר קנו על גוזליו ירחף, “as the eagle that awakens its nest, hovers over her young, etc.” It is clear that גוזל is very young bird. [otherwise it would have already flown from the nest. Ed.] Avraham did not have to be told which species of bird would be acceptable to G’d as a sacrifice. It is also possible that he chose a pigeon as the species of bird in question without any direct or indirect prompting by G’d, and that the Torah respected Avraham’s choice and henceforth whenever one of his descendants brought a bird offering it had to be of that species. There is a hint here that all the animal sacrifices had to be cut up after being slaughtered, the burnt offering into its various parts, [although all of them were burned up. Ed.] and the peace offering in accordance with the parts that were allocated to the priest, rib-cage, right upper leg and cheek-bones, and the sin offering into its constituent parts so that the fat parts were separate for being burned up on the altar.

ואת הצפור, “and the bird, etc,” a reference to the pigeon which is part of the generic term צפור.

ואת הצפור לא בתר, “but he did not divide up the bird.” The expression בתר instead of הבדיל is a bit unusual, as in the legislation concerning bird offerings the Torah uses the expression לא יבדיל “he must not separate the head from the body completely.’ (Leviticus 1,17)

וירד העיט על הפגרים, “the vulture swooped down on the carcasses;” an allusion to the future when the nations of the world would endeavour to do away with the practice of animal sacrifice and the descendants of Avraham would chase them away and would uphold the practice.

אימה חשכה גדולה, “a fear and great dread;” an allusion to the four exiles the Jewish people would experience during their history, as our sages explained in detail. Nachmanides says that when G’d concluded the covenant with Avraham to give him the land of Canaan this was meant only as a gift, with the condition attached that the four Kingdoms would at one time or another enslave his descendants and would rule over their land. Such an enslavement was not an unalterable decree but was based on the Jewish people becoming disloyal to the Torah which they had accepted as their law book. Later on, G’d informed Avraham of another type of exile, the one in Egypt which would precede their becoming a nation and accepting the Torah as I have explained.

כי גר יהיה זרעך בארץ לא להם ועבדום וענו אותם ארבע מאות שנה, “for your descendants will be strangers in a land which is not theirs, and during that period they (the owners) will enslave them and oppress them for four hundred years.” Nachmanides explains our verse as being truncated, the meaning being that while the offspring of Avraham would be strangers in a foreign land for 400 years, the nature and duration of their enslavement and oppression not having been defined. Ibn Ezra understands our verse as a prophecy describing the length of the enslavement but not the length of the status as exiles.

וגם את הגוי אשר יעבודו דן אנכי, “but I will also judge the nation to whom they will be enslaved;” according to Rashi this prophecy includes the four exiles of the Jewish people starting with the destruction of the first Temple. Nachmanides explains the meaning of our verse as being: “just as I judged your descendants by decreeing exile and bondage for them for having sinned, I will also judge the nation which enslaved them for the violence they have done to this people. Personally, I believe that the correct interpretation of the word וגם “and also,” in our verse is: “although I decreed that your descendants would be exiles in a land not their own, I will also judge and punish the nation that has enslaved them and not exonerate them seeing that by what they did they had carried out My decree.” The reason why such treatment is not unfair has already been described in Zecharyah 1,14-16: “Thus said the Lord of Hosts: I am very jealous for Jerusalem-for Zion- and I am very angry with those nations that are at ease; for I was only angry a little, but they overdid the punishment. Assuredly, thus said the Lord, I graciously return to Jerusalem.” What G’d predicted He would do to the destroyers of Jerusalem, He did to Egypt at the end of the exile of the Jewish people in that land. This is precisely what caused Yitro to convert and to say כי בדבר אשר זדו עליהם, “for He fitted the punishment to the crime, punishing them in the manner they had brutalised the Jewish people,” (by drowning them. Exodus 18,11) Maimonides (Hilchot Teshuvah chapter6) writes that the reason why G’d punished the Egyptians and the nations who had oppressed the Jews throughout the centuries is that not any specific Egyptian or Babylonian or Roman had been instructed by G’d to carry out His decree against the Jews. As a result, not one of them had the right to take it upon himself to be G’d’s ”executioner.” Nachmanides queries Maimonides’ approach writing that if G’d had appointed a particular person or nation to be His “executioner” in this regard, surely if someone had preceded another person, carrying out G’d’s expressed will, not only would he not have been punished for doing so, but he would have been lauded, been given a reward! I therefore conclude that my own reason was the correct one, namely that they used excess zeal in carrying out G’d’s decree, thereby making it their own. This is the reason Nevuchadnezzar was so severely punished although the prophet Jeremiah had foretold that it would be he who would carry out G’d’s decree. Let us not forget that the Israelites came to Egypt at the express invitation of Pharaoh and that the Egyptians by themselves did not have the slightest excuse for making slaves out of them. How could they ever have claimed to have done so at the behest of G’d? If G’d even punished Nevuchadnezzar who did carry out a specific punishment G’d had decreed to be carried out by him, (though he had not been instructed by G’d directly to do so) then the reason for his punishment must lie in the excess cruelty he applied in carrying out G’d’s purpose. The same applies to individuals who, by G’s judgment, are sentenced to be killed by man during the new year. The killer will not be able to claim exoneration arguing that the individual in question was already legally dead as G’d had decreed that he die a violent death during that year. Seeing that G’d had not instructed the killer to be His messenger, His executioner, he will be considered a simple murderer and be dealt with on that basis. The only exception was Yehu who had been instructed by the prophet, in the name of G’d, to kill the family of Achav (Kings II 10,24)

ואתה תבא אל אבותיך בשלום, “but you will die and join your fathers in peace (before all this will happen.)” Rashi says that the meaning is that Avraham will not experience fulfillment of the prophecy or the decree in his lifetime. Nachmanides disagrees, seeing that Avraham has been told specifically that you will be a stranger,” a condition which will be fulfilled the moment Yitzchok was born. The Torah even refers to the fact that when he traveled to the land of the Philistines, ויגר אברהם בארץ פלשתים ימים רבים “Avraham sojourned (was an alien) in the land of the Philistines for many years.” (21,34) It follows that he himself already experienced part of the decree becoming fulfilled. Accordingly, the meaning of our verse is that he would join his forefathers immediately after death without having to experience punishment for any sins committed and not yet forgiven.

ודור רביעי ישובו הנה, “but the fourth generation will return to here.” Rashi understands this to mean that after having been in Egypt for three generations the descendants of Avrham would return to the Holy Land. This was true, as when you consider that Yaakov already went into exile in Egypt and consider Yehudah-Peretz-Chetzron-Calev as his descendants in a straight line, Calev did in fact re-enter the land of Canaan and settled there. The problem with this calculation is that Chetzron in common with Yaakov, had traveled from Canaan to the land of Egypt. (Genesis 46,12) Seeing that this is so there were only 2 generations in Egypt. If being an alien in other countries would count, they actually had been in exile for 7 generations according to the calculation. Actually, there is no problem at all. The reason that the calculation begins with Yaakov, although some of his offspring also were exiled with him, is because he was the head of the clan. One can also explain the meaning of the words “the fourth generation,” as starting from the people who had been born already in Egypt, i.e. Kehot, son of Levi. He was followed by his son Amram, who was the father of Aaron, who was the father of Eleazar who entered the Holy Land as the High Priest. According to Nachmanides, the “fourth generation” mentioned in our verse, refers to the fourth generation of the Emorite, whose sin by that time will have accumulated to a degree which exceeds G’d’s patience and they will be ripe for retribution. This will enable the Jewish people to take over these lands at that time. If they were to repent at that time it would be too late for G’d to change His decree. The reason G’d mentions the “Emorite” instead of “the Canaanite,” was that the Emorite was by far the most powerful and numerous of the Canaanite tribes. There are some commentators who claim that father-son and grandson are all considered as one generation, and that we have proof of that from (?) so that three generations are in reality one generation (due to their lives overlapping somewhat). This would mean in our case that Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yaakov are considered as one generation, Yehudah, Peretz and Chetzron as the second generation, followed by Ram, Aminadav, and Nachshon as the third generation. Salmon, who was the fourth generation, belonged to the people who entered the Holy Land.

ביום ההוא כרת ה' את אברהם ברית לאמור, וגו, “on that day G’d entered into a covenant with Avraham, saying, etc.'” Nachmanides draws attention to the fact that G’d promised the land of Canaan to Avraham many times over. He proceeds to show that all these repetitions were necessary within the context in which they appear. Originally, (12,7) He told Avraham: “I will give the land to your descendants,” without enlarging on the nature and extent of the gift. At that time Avraham walked in the land as far as Shechem, a place then called Elon Moreh. Afterwards, when his merits had increased, (by his activities in the land) He added “raise your eyes and look northward, southward, eastward and westward.” At that time G’d specified that the land would include areas well beyond what he could see in any direction (13,14). As far as G’d saying to Avraham אשר אתה רואה בעיניך, “which you behold with your eyes,” the meaning is not that he would only inherit what he could see with his physical eyes, but this is a spiritual concept referring to the mind’s eye, or that G’d expanded Avraham’s sense of sight at that time so that he could see the whole extent of the land of Israel, just as was shown to Moses before his death. G’d added a special blessing by saying that his descendants would be as numerous as the dust of the earth, and that the gift would remain his descendants’ forever. The third time G’d delineated the borders of the land G’d would give to his descendants (17,5) He also mentioned all the ten Canaanite tribes whose lands would eventually become part of the greater land of Israel. He also concluded the covenant with Avraham as a sign that the promise would not be invalidated due to any sin that might be committed before it had been fulfilled. G’d added further, that in due course He would be the exclusive G’d of Avraham’s descendants. The first time the promise was couched in the future tense, i.e.אתננה , “I will give it,” as He had not yet begun to fulfill any part of the promise. The same was still true on the second occasion G’d promised the land to Avraham’s children who did not exist yet. The covenants both concerning the land and the circumcision, make it plain that even if at some time the conditions of the covenant are broken, this will remain a temporary condition and will not result in annulment of the validity of the terms of the covenants.