Introduction: Why Does the Book Open with a Genealogical Record?
The Book of Divrei HaYamim opens with a long list of names, and seemingly, what is their relevance? The commentary attributed to Rashi explains at the outset that Ezra recorded this genealogy through the guidance of Chaggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, spanning eighteen years, from the time Zerubbabel and Yehoshua the Kohen arrived in Jerusalem in the days of Cyrus the first until Cyrus the son of Esther came. The entire genealogy - as mentioned in the introduction - was intended to trace the lineage of David HaMelech, and to detail the Levites as gatekeepers, guards, and singers, showing how David established them in their stations, as well as the Kohanim in their watches. For this purpose, he traces the lineage from Adam HaRishon down to Avraham.
And since he needs to trace the lineage of Avraham, he mentions in passing the other nations who are his sons and grandsons; and because of his descendants, he also needs to record the lineage of Canaan's descendants, to make known that Avraham inherited their land. Thus, every mention of a gentile nation here is solely for the sake of Israel: because he wanted to state that his descendants received the Land of Canaan, he mentioned the lineage of Canaan; and once he mentioned the lineage of Canaan, he mentioned along with it the genealogies of the other nations - "he mentions them briefly and casts them aside," meaning he does not dwell on them at length, but mentions them and moves forward.
The Parable of the Pearl
Here, the commentary attributed to Rashi cites the well-known parable that Rashi brings in his commentary on the Torah: This can be compared to a person traveling from place to place who dropped a pearl, so he stood and sifted the dirt through a sieve until he found the pearl. Once he found the pearl, he discarded the dirt. Why mention all the chiefs of Esav and all the sons of Yishmael? In order to reach the pearl. And the moment he reaches the pearl, which is the lineage of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, he leaves all the rest aside. He elaborates on Yaakov, but what transpired with Esav during that period is no longer of interest - that is the dirt. The nations "are regarded as a drop from a bucket, as dust on a balance," like that fine powder left on the scales; they hold no lasting significance. And so the Holy One, blessed be He, said: Why should I trace the lineage of Shem, Arpachshad, and Terach, if not to find Avraham - "And You found his heart faithful before You."
Out of Honor for Yitzchak
The commentary attributed to Rashi continues: Out of honor for Yitzchak, he also traced the lineage of the descendants of Esav, Yishmael, and the sons of Keturah, and there too, he touches upon them briefly and moves on. And why did he mention the descendants of Seir the Horite? First, because the descendants of Esav dispossessed them, and by mentioning Esav he makes known whose portion they inherited. Second, in order to trace the lineage of Timna: Timna became a concubine to the offspring of Avraham, and this is to Avraham's praise - that a daughter of chieftains and princes was willing to be a concubine to his descendants. "And Lotan's sister was Timna," and she said: If I am not worthy of marrying him as a wife, let me be his concubine. Furthermore, the descendants of Seir were chieftains and kings, and Mount Seir belonged to Seir, yet out of love for Yitzchak, Hashem gave Mount Seir to Esav, as it is written, "and the descendants of Esav dispossessed them and dwelt in their stead." It also serves to demonstrate the fulfillment of the words of the Holy One, blessed be He, to Yitzchak that He would multiply his seed and grant them dominion; therefore, he also records the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, who are mentioned later in the chapter.
The First Three Pesukim
אָדָם שֵׁת אֱנוֹשׁ׃ קֵינָן מַהֲלַלְאֵל יָרֶד׃ חֲנוֹךְ מְתוּשֶׁלַח לָמֶךְ׃ - Adam, Shet, Enosh; Keinan, Mahalalel, Yered; Chanoch, Metushelach, Lemech.
We read these three pesukim together because they call for a single observation. Their straightforward meaning is: Adam, and his son Shet, and his son Enosh; and likewise Keinan, Mahalalel, Yered; and likewise Chanoch, Metushelach, Lemech - each one being the son of the one before him. And since they are not the primary focus of the genealogy, he was concise and did not elaborate on who Shet was or what his significance was.
And where are Kayin and Hevel? The commentary attributed to Rashi explains: Because they did not establish enduring generations. As for Kayin - the Flood washed away his descendants and nothing remained of him (and though some say Naamah, the wife of Noach, was of Kayin's lineage, in any case no male carrying his name remained), while Hevel died before fathering children. But from Shet the world was founded, which is why Scripture mentions him, his son Enosh, and so forth.
The Radak emphasizes, like the commentary attributed to Rashi, that here he enumerates generations one after another - Keinan, Mahalalel, Yered, Chanoch, Metushelach, Lemech, Noach, Shem - but when he reaches "Shem, Cham, and Yafet," these are not successive generations but brothers, similar to "Reuven, Shimon, Levi, and Yehudah." Up until them, every name is father and son, father and son.
The Core and the Chosen - The Malbim's Explanation
The Malbim explains: the son of Adam was Sheis, and the son of Sheis was Enosh. The primary intent of the book is to trace the lineage of the core and chosen individuals, namely the Children of Israel who are a treasured nation (segulah) from among the peoples. Therefore, Scripture abridged the genealogy of the nations and mentioned only the core and chosen essence within them.
What is the meaning of this? The Kuzari already wrote, as we have studied in depth, that initially the core and chosen essence existed only in individuals, while the rest were like husks (kelipah). All those mentioned here are individuals, not an entire nation. Segulah refers to the highest virtue, the treasure; everything else is like a peel protecting the fruit. So it was from Adam to Noach, and from Noach to Avraham.
The Malbim adds: there were some individuals who were not chosen essence themselves, so why were they mentioned? Because within them lay hidden the chosen potential for future generations. We can define it like this: there is one who is himself prime fruit, a segulah, and when he fathers offspring, he produces prime fruit like himself. Then there is a case like an orange tree that produces a bitter orange: the bitter orange is completely inedible, so why mention it? Because hidden inside it is the seed that will produce the next sweet orange. Sometimes there is an interruption in the lineage, an unworthy generation that is not of the segulah, yet holds the seed of the segulah. Thus Terach was not an exalted man, but embedded within him was the seed of the segulah - Avraham. It turns out, then, that some of those mentioned here are themselves men of stature, while others are merely a link in the chain that carries the inner seed.
This resolves why Scripture divided these into three short verses. After all, it could have included them all in a single verse: "Adam, Sheis, Enosh, Keinan, Mahalalel, Yered, Chanoch, Metushelach, Lemech" - a completely reasonable verse structure. A verse of just three words was clearly split deliberately. Rather, Scripture sought to differentiate between them: Adam, Sheis, and Enosh were themselves segulah; Keinan, Mahalalel, and Yered were not segulah, but their descendants were, which is why the text placed them in a separate verse so they would not be conflated with the first group; and following them, in the third verse, Chanoch, Metushelach, and Lemech were the core and segulah, known as righteous individuals according to Chazal. Therefore, the text separated the middle verse from what came before it and what followed it, indicating that these were not segulah themselves, but merely bearers of the seed of segulah.
"Adam, Sheis, Enosh - and He Fell Silent?"
This also emerges from the Midrash: They asked Abba Kohen Bardela - Adam, Sheis, Enosh, and he falls silent? The question itself was: continue recording the genealogy onward, why stop after three names? He replied to them: Up to this point, they were in the divine image and likeness (be-tzelem u-vi-dmus). That is to say, the divine image and likeness only returned later on, with Chanoch, Metushelach, and Lemech, whereas Keinan, Mahalalel, and Yered were no longer in the image and likeness - they did not reflect the form in which the Holy One, blessed be He, created Adam, and they did not attain the high spiritual level of the segulah, as we explained.
The Oversized Alef of "Adam"
The Minchat Shai notes that the word "Adam" is written here with an alef rabati, an oversized letter alef. In many printed editions this is not noticeable, but such is the Masorah, and it is larger than all other instances of alef in Scripture. Why is this? Because with man the Holy One, blessed be He, began creating everything, and with him He completed everything. That man was created last is understood; but what does it mean that he is the beginning of everything?
Rather, as we have explained several times: "Let us make man" was said for your sake. The entire world was created solely for man. Does Hashem need animals for His own sake? Rather, they were created for man's needs, as were the heavens and earth, the sun and moon, and all creations - for man's benefit. Thus, man is the ultimate purpose of Creation at its inception, for everything was created for his sake, and he is also its culmination. Why, then, was he created last? When someone builds a mansion, he moves in only once construction is complete, not at the beginning. If the tiler were to say, "I was here before you," the owner would reply, "You are mistaken; you preceded me only to prepare the house so that everything would be ready for me." Is a donkey on a higher level than you simply because it was created before you? On the contrary, everything was created so that man would enter a completed world. This is what Chazal meant by "You formed me behind and before" (achor va-kedem tzartani) - behind the work of Creation, yet preceding the work of Creation: he preceded everything in purpose, for all was created for man's sake.
Verse 4: The Three Roots Among the Sons of Noach
נֹחַ שֵׁם חָם וָיָפֶת׃ - Noach, Shem, Cham, and Yafeth.
The commentary attributed to Rashi notes that it would have been appropriate to immediately mention Shem's son and continue with the chosen lineage, rather than listing the brothers. The Malbim explains: From the sons of Noach came the seventy ancient nations, for Hashem in His wisdom divided the inhabited world into seventy, appointing over them seventy heavenly princes - seventy ministers on high corresponding to the seventy nations. Even if one sees seven hundred or seven thousand nations today, this is of no consequence, for at their root they are no more than seventy; everything we see is merely splintering into fractions and fragments.
The Malbim writes, having noted this elsewhere as well, that just as with a tree - where the fruit is the prized essence, the leaves protect the fruit, and the husks are the superfluous part - so it is with the creation of the human race. There are godly people who walk with Hashem, and they are in the category of the fruit; it was for their sake that Hashem planted the tree of life in the world and created all of mankind. In contrast, there are the bestial types, drawn solely after materiality, and they are in the category of the peel. And there are the intermediate types, who engage in civil society and develop their intellect and character through religion and etiquette - dealing both in spiritual and earthly matters - and they are in the category of the leaves, which protect the fruit, intermediate between the godly people and the bestial.
Since the seventy nations branched out from Noach, come and see that these three roots were already present in his sons, which is why all three are mentioned: "And the sons of Noach who came out of the ark were Shem, Cham, and Yepheth" - these three had to be born to Noach, for from them the entire earth was dispersed, and already at the root this division had to be manifested. From the descendants of Shem came the godly people; from Cham came the basest of nations, the husk, "a slave of slaves shall he be to his brothers"; and Yepheth is the intermediate: at times he "shall dwell in the tents of Shem," and then also "and Canaan shall be a servant to them," attaining elevation as well, while at other times he is drawn only to external beauty, and then he is not counted among those of distinction.
It is fascinating that even today, the Semitic nations are those that believe in the absolute unity of Hashem - an independent oneness that is not dependent on other powers. Christianity, which we generally associate with Yepheth, introduces duality into the Godhead and maintains an impure trinity. In contrast, those who accept Hashem's absolute oneness are the descendants of Shem: the Jewish people, and also the Muslims who accept the oneness of Hashem without associating other powers with Him. Although they believe in their prophet, they do not hold that he is the son of God, but rather a prophet of Hashem; and while their mouth speaks vanity, there is no heresy of polytheism here. Therefore, according to Halachah, entering a mosque is permitted, whereas entering a church is strictly forbidden, because they are idolaters who associate another entity with God (shituf).
Verse 5: Why Begin with Yepheth?
בְּנֵי יֶפֶת גֹּמֶר וּמָגוֹג וּמָדַי וְיָוָן וְתֻבָל וּמֶשֶׁךְ וְתִירָס׃ - The sons of Yepheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Yavan, Tuval, Meshech, and Tiras.
The verse begins with Yepheth, yet in the Torah it is explicit that Yepheth was the youngest. The Radak explains that everywhere the Torah mentions "Shem, Cham, and Yepheth," it lists them in order of their birth: Shem first, Cham second, and Yepheth third. As for the verse that states, "the brother of Yepheth the elder," this does not mean older in years, but greater in stature, for Scripture traces Shem's lineage back to him, noting that he is the brother of Yepheth. This matter is subject to a dispute among the Rishonim: some say they were not listed by order of birth but by order of stature, and according to this view Shem was actually the youngest, mentioned first only because his stature surpassed them all.
According to the opinion that Yepheth was the firstborn, it is understandable why the verse opens with him. But according to the Radak, who holds they are listed by their stature and Yepheth is the least, it requires explanation why Scripture begins with the youngest. The Radak resolves this: since the main subject of the narrative is Avraham, who descends from Shem, and concerning whom Scripture traces an extensive genealogy, it mentions Shem last so as to continue directly from him. This aligns with what was said earlier: Scripture begins with the husks - those whom it mentions briefly and casts aside. It introduces the lesser first because it wishes to dispense with him quickly and proceed directly to the one on whom it intends to elaborate.
The Targum identifies Magog as Germania, and some say Gothia. "This is Germania" fits well with the views suggesting - as we hope - that we have already passed the war of Gog and Magog, and that through what was endured in the horrific Holocaust in Europe, we fulfilled the ordeal of Gog and Magog, since Magog is Germany. Even those who read "Gothia" connect it to Germany, for Gothic script is the script in which the Germans wrote until relatively recently - a highly stylized Latin script; although not originating in Germany, they were the ones who used it. Regarding "Meshech and Tiras," some say Tiras is Persia, and judging by the Persian rearmament, it appears we may be facing some confrontation involving Gog and Magog and Tiras, of whom it is written that they too will come here and fall here.
Verse 6: Riphat or Diphat?
וּבְנֵי גֹּמֶר אַשְׁכְּנַז וְדִיפַת וְתוֹגַרְמָה׃ - The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Diphat, and Togarmah.
The difference is immediately apparent: in the Torah it is written, "Ashkenaz, Riphat, and Togarmah," whereas here it says "Diphat." Here we begin to see name variations compared to the Torah. There are two primary approaches to this: one approach is that it was written with a variation for homiletical exposition (to expound upon it), which is the method of the commentary attributed to Rashi; and the second approach is that the name was actually different, which is the approach of the Radak and others.
The commentary attributed to Rashi brings a homiletic teaching of Chazal: Why were they initially called Riphath and now Diphath? At first they were weak (rafin) and did not overpower Israel, but eventually they became full of blemish (dofi) and ruin. "Dofi" denotes defect or corruption. Thus, initially "Riphath" is an expression of weakness (rifyon), and in the end "Diphath" is an expression of blemish (dofi) and corruption.
The Metzudat Tzion explains that the variation arises because both were his names. This is also the approach of the Radak, as we will see further on, that a person or a nation can be called by several names. Just as one person might be called Yaakov, Yanky, or Yankele - it is all the same individual. And just as in one place people say Britain and in another England, and what is the difference between British and English? Sometimes it is called this, and sometimes that; sometimes America, and sometimes the USA. So too with nations: different names and designations for the very same nation.
The Malbim's Explanation: Only the Heads of Nations
The Malbim reiterates and explains that "the sons of Japheth" is recorded first because the genealogy of Shem is placed last, since that is where the text elaborates - as we explained based on the Radak, once it finds the pearl, it details it at length. Any book that seeks to reach the primary subject quickly moves past the secondary and progresses to the core. And what is mentioned here are solely the heads of the seventy nations.
And here the Malbim says a remarkable thing: that Gomer had several sons besides the four accounted for here, and they all became a single nation named Gomer, which is why the text did not mention them, for they were not independent nations; only Ashkenaz, Diphath, and Togarmah became distinct nations in their own right, so that Gomer and his three sons constituted four nations. Several difficulties arise here: first, how do we know that Gomer had additional sons, given that the Torah mentions no others? Second, "Ashkenaz, Diphath, and Togarmah" - they are three, so how does he say four? Third, the Malbim himself goes on to say "so that Gomer and his three sons", showing he well knew there were three.
However, a resolution was suggested that seems to resolve the difficulty, and although there was room for the Malbim to elaborate further, it provides a sound understanding of his words. When we examine the seventy nations, we find a nation named Gomer, as well as Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah - four nations in all. This requires explanation: if you count the father as a nation, how can you also count his sons as nations? From this, the Malbim necessarily concludes that Gomer must have had additional sons beyond the three recorded: from the three recorded sons, three distinct nations emerged, while the additional sons continued the nation of Gomer itself. There were sons who branched out to establish new nations, and there were sons who carried on the identity of the father.
An analogy, lehavdil: consider a father who is a Rebbe of a particular Chassidic court, and he has several sons who establish dynasties. The eldest son typically continues the father's dynasty and carries its name, while the other sons find other towns in Poland and name new Chassidic courts after them (and someone pointed out that once they ran out of towns in Poland, they moved to America - Boston and the like). So too here: Gomer must have had another son or sons, for Gomer himself is counted as a nation, and who carried on his lineage? Not Ashkenaz, not Riphath, and not Togarmah, for each of them founded a nation of his own. Thus, when the Malbim says "four", he does not mean four sons written here, but four nations: Gomer is one, Ashkenaz two, Riphath three, Togarmah four - three sons, yielding four nations.
The Malbim continues in this vein, explaining that Yavan also had several sons, and all of them were subsumed under the name of Yavan, except for those mentioned here who became heads of nations. Here too, one might wonder how he knows Yavan had more sons, since Sefer Bereishit mentions no others either. By contrast, the descendants of Magog and Madai did not form separate nations; rather, they remained a single nation, which is why Scripture does not mention their individual progeny - they were all simply called Magog, Madai. But all those whom Scripture details, such as the sons of Gomer, were heads of branches that divided into distinct nations, and therefore they are mentioned individually. In total, says the Malbim, fourteen nations emerged from the sons of Japheth.
Why Did the Names Change?
Why was Riphath swapped for Diphath, and Dodanim for Rodanim, as we will see in the next verse? The Malbim explains: when Divrei HaYamim was composed, this was the familiar name. Originally the nation was called Riphath, but thousands of years later it was known as Diphath; when Scripture comes to inform its readers of the nation's identity, it mentions it by the name known to them at that time rather than by the ancient name, which would have meant nothing to them. The Malbim notes that Chazal offer a homiletic interpretation on the matter, but he explains according to the straightforward meaning: because the names changed over time, the text mentions them by the names that were better known in that era.
In Summary:
Chapter 1 opens with the chain of genealogy from Adam HaRishon, with the singular goal of arriving at the pearl - Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, and the Davidic dynasty; it therefore mentions the nations cursorily and casts them aside. The division of the verses is not coincidental: Adam, Seth, and Enosh were themselves chosen (segulah); Kenan, Mahalalel, and Jared carried within them only the seed of the chosen line; and Enoch, Methuselah, and Lamech returned to possessing the Divine image and likeness. The oversized letter Aleph of "Adam" teaches that everything began with him and everything culminates with him, for the entire world was created for his sake. Within the sons of Noach are already embedded the three root elements - fruit, leaves, and peel - from which the seventy nations branched out, and the name variations between Divrei HaYamim and the Torah are intended either for homiletical exposition (derashah) or because these were the names familiar at the time the book was written.