Fear No Fear

(All scripture from the World English Bible, ebible.org, all rights reserved)

“After this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Machpelah before Mamre (that is, Hebron), in the land of Canaan. The field, and the cave that is in it, were deeded to Abraham by the children of Heth as a possession for a burial place.”
(Genesis 23:19-20)

Abraham bought the field and buried Sarah in the cave, ratifying the sale and sealing it to himself and his family forever. Abraham would be buried there (Genesis 25:9-10). Isaac and his wives Rebekah and Leah would be buried there (Genesis 49:29-31). Jacob would also be buried there (Genesis 50:13).

This cave was in what would be called Hebron. Hebron is where David ruled Judah for the first seven and a half years of his reign as king (2 Samuel 5:5).

The sage Rav Hirsch writes: ‘The legal form of Jewish marriage is also connected with this act of the acquisition of the field of Ephron. “The Jew buys his bride” is the reproach made by thoughtless tongues. Yes indeed, he buys his bride, but for that, she remains his “own”, and he honours in her, his highest, most precious possession. And well indeed would it be with us, if all our marriages were contracted having the memory of this sale in mind, and would remain penetrated with the spirit of a marriage as is represented by that of Abraham and Sarah which made its final impression by this “purchase of the cave of Machpelah”.’

The sage Ramban writes: ‘AND AFTER THIS, ABRAHAM BURIED SARAH HIS WIFE IN THE CAVE OF THE FIELD OF MACHPELAH BEFORE MAMRE — THE SAME IS HEBRON — IN THE LAND OF CANAAN. The reason why Scripture reverts to clarify the field, the place and the land is that the whole section mentioned the sons of Heth and Ephron the Hittite. Therefore Scripture mentions at the conclusion that the field was in the land of Canaan which is the land of Israel. And so it said at the beginning of the section: in Kiryath arba — the same is Hebron — in the land of Canaan. All this is to explain that the righteous woman died in the land of Israel, and there she was interred, as the Hittites were of the families of Canaan. In my opinion, the reason for the verses is only to mention that this was the land of Canaan, not the land of the Philistines. Having said, And Abraham sojourned in the land of the Philistines many days, and since all his habitats were in that land — in Gerar, and the valley of Gerar, and Beer-sheba, and from there to Hebron and back — Scripture therefore mentioned that Hebron is in the land of the Canaanite who dwelt in that hill country, not in the land of the Philistines, which is mentioned in connection with Abraham. And in the end Scripture added a phrase to inform us that the cave was in the field of Machpelah before Mamre, for this was the name by which it was known. This section was written to inform us of G-d’s kindnesses to Abraham, i.e., that in the land in which he came to live he was regarded as a prince of G-d, and each individual as well as all the people called him “my lord” although he did not tell them that he was a prince and a great man. Also, in his lifetime G-d fulfilled His promise to him: And I will make thy name great, and thou shalt be a blessing. Moreover, his wife died and was buried in the inheritance of the Eternal. Further, Scripture wanted to inform us of the place of the burial of the patriarchs since we are obligated to honor the burial place of our holy ancestors. Our Rabbis said that this also was one of the trials of Abraham: he desired a place to bury Sarah but did not find it until he purchased it, [despite G-d’s promise that the entire land would be given to him]. I do not know a reason for the words of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, who says that the purpose of this section is to let us know the superiority of the land of Israel as regards the living and the dead, and also to fulfill the word of G-d which promised him that the land would be an inheritance of his. But what superiority of the land was thus demonstrated? Abraham would not have carried her to another land to bury her, and the word of G-d to Abraham applied to the whole land, and that was fulfilled only with his seed.’ The sage Or HaChaim writes: ‘ואחרי כן…ויקם השדה. Afterwards the field stood as burial plot, etc. We need to understand why the Torah had to write the words: “afterwards,” something that is obvious. What could be more natural than Abraham burying Sarah at the end of these negotiations? Besides, why did the Torah repeat the words: ויקם השדה, something we read already in verse 17? The Torah wanted to confirm that the transaction complied with all and every legal form of acquisition. The words “afterwards” mean that once Abraham had weighed the money for Efron the latter had foregone all claim to that property in perpetuity. Maimonides explains it thus in chapter one of Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah: “A Gentile loses his right to formerly owned property the moment he accepts the money as compensation for it. A Jew, on the other hand, does not acquire title to his new property until he has a written document. Once this has occurred the property in question is like land in the desert which anyone can stake a claim to.” In other words, once the Gentile has accepted the money he loses all former claims. Had Abraham buried Sarah before giving the money to Efron, the fact that he gave the money to Efron afterwards would not have made a full acquisition, seeing that the act of possession expressed by his burying Sarah would not have been performed on land owned by him at the time. We need to examine if the act of חזקה, i.e. using the land for one’s own purpose, is actually legally valid when the act of such חזקה is performed on land previously owned by a Gentile. In chapter two of the above-mentioned tractate of Maimonides, he writes as follows: “In the case of formerly ownerless property, or property formerly owned by a proselyte, the fact that the squatter (Jewish) has eaten the proceeds of such land for a number of years does not constitute an act of acquisition of either tree or the land itself until such time as the squatter has performed an act on the body of the land itself. What kind of activity would qualify in such an event? In the case of a Jew having taken over the house of a proselyte or an abandoned house, if he whitewashed it or added a moulding about 60 centimeters high this would constitute a valid act of acquisition. If he took earth from high ground and transferred it to fill lower ground in the same piece of land this would be considered as an improvement of the earth and would qualify as an act of acquisition.” It is clear therefore that if the squatter merely shifted some earth without specific intent to effect an improvement on that soil- even though he thereby levelled the ground,- this would not be enough to qualify under the heading of קנין, acquisition. Maggid Mishneh (a commentator on Maimonides) writes that if the squatter spread mats on the ground in order to be able to sit on it in comfort and to enjoy this, this would count as a valid act of קנין, acquisition. An alternative cited by the above commentator suggests that even spreading the mats merely in order to improve the appearance of the ground in question suffices. Rabbi lbn Migosh concurs with the latter example. Thus far the quotation from Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah. Granted that according to the first example cited by the Maggid Mishneh anyone who benefits from an act performed on the land he squats on performs a valid act of חזקה, Abraham benefited by having buried Sarah on that land and thereby performed an act of acquisition; however, according to the opinion of Rabbi lbn Migosh that an actual improvement of the land has to take place, Sarah’s burial would not have constituted such an improvement. How then did Abraham acquire that land (even though Efron had forfeited it)? Perhaps the superstructure erected around the grave, and especially the sepulchral chambers dug within the earth which was customary at the time, constituted such an improvement in the field under discussion. These sepulchral chambers were probably white-washed with lime to prevent the earth around them from crumbling. Now we can understand the reason the Torah repeated the words ויקם השדה. It means that after Abraham had buried Sarah the acquisition of that field by Abraham became complete.’