Having assured Eliezer that an angel would accompany him, why does Avraham then contend with the possibility that the woman would refuse to leave Charan?
HaSh-m might well assure Eliezer that he would locate Charan and Avraham's family successfully. Rivkah's response lay in her hands exclusively since Ha'Kadosh-Baruch-Hu, on principle, does not interfere with a person's Bechirah.
Why did Avraham need to say, "If the woman does not want to go... you will be absolved from this oath"?
Rashi: You will be absolved from the Shevu'ah not to take one of the daughters of Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei, 1 (but not from the Shevu'ah of not taking Yitzchak to Charan).
Ramban #1: He would be absolved only from finding a wife for Yitzchak - and HaSh-m would do as He pleased. He was not permitted to break the other conditions. 2
Ramban #2: He would be absolved from finding a wife from Charan, and would turn to the daughters of Yishmael or Lot. 3
Hadar Zekenim: You will be absolved from going to my homeland, but not from the prohibition to take a Kena'anis for my son.
Moshav Zekenim (to 24:2): Eliezer did not want to accept an oath with a curse, for a Chacham's curse is fulfilled in every case - unless Avraham would explicitly say when he will be exempt.
And as for Yitzchak, Avraham knew that he would never contravene his wishes, but would turn to Yishmael or Lot or to other nations to find a wife.
So Eliezer will tell Lavan and Besu'el later (in 24:49; see Rashi there. Also see Gur Aryeh; refer to 24:8:2.2:1).
Rashi says that if she will not come, Eliezer may take a daughter of Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei. Why could he then not take his own daughter, seeing as they were all Kena'anim?
Da'as Zekenim #1: We are forced to say that in fact, Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei were not Kena'anim.
Da'as Zekenim #2, Hadar Zekenim #1, Riva #1 (all to 24:39): Whereas Noach's curse on the Kena'anim (to be slaves) was only potential, 1 Eliezer was factually an Eved, in which case the prohibition remained in place. 2
Da'as Zekenim #3, Hadar Zekenim #2, Riva #2 (all to 24:39): It would be disgraceful to marry Yitzchak to the daughter of his slave.
Da'as Zekenim #4, Hadar Zekenim #3 (to24:39, from Bereishis Rabasi 24:34): Eliezer was Cham's son.
Why was Yitzchak forbidden to leave Eretz Yisrael (even in the event that the woman refused to leave Charan)?
Rabeinu Bachye: Avraham did not want him to leave the Holy Land 1 because he was an Olah Temimah.
Oznayim la'Torah #1: It was important for the woman to leave her country of birth and not Yitzchak. 2
Oznayim la'Torah #2: If Yitzchak was to leave the land that HaSh-m promised his children, it would be akin to foregoing the inheritance.
What did Avraham mean when he said ?Rak es B?ni Lo Sashev Shamah??
Ha'amek Davar: He meant that Eliezer should not stipulate that Yitzchak will come there tqo marry her, since that would create a Chilul Hashem, but that he should betroth the girl S?tam, and she will be forced to return with him to avoid being an Agunah (unable to marry anyone else) her entire life. 1
Ha?amek Davar: Even though Nochrim are not subject to Kidushin, since the girl would be marrying Yitzchak she would be bound to observe his customs.
Why does it say "Only do not return my son there?"
Rashi: It comes to extrapolate - 'My son will not return, but my grandson Yaakov will!' Every "Rak" and "Ach 1 " comes to exclude (Rashi Shemos 31:13).
Ha'amek Davar: It means, do not stipulate that Yitzchak will go there, for this would cause Chilul HaSh-m. Rather, be Mekadesh Stam, and she will need to come, to avoid being Agunah (unable to marry anyone else) her entire life. 2
Moshav Zekenim: We find that "v'Hayisa Ach Same'ach" includes the last night (Shemini Atzeres) for Simchah! R. Chaim Palti'el (to Devarim 16:15) answers that v'Hayisa Same'ach includes the last night, and Ach excludes the first night. The Vilna Gaon answers that it excludes the Mitzvos of Sukah and Lulav (i.e. Simchah is the only Mitzvah).
Ha'amek Davar: Even though Kidushin does not apply to Bnei Noach, someone designated for Yitzchak would conduct with the laws of Yisrael.
What is 'Shevu'asi Zos,' from which he will be exempt? Was there another Shevu'ah?
Rashi (according to Bartenura, Gur Aryeh): He will be exempt from the last matter mentioned (in 24:3), i.e. not to take not a daughter of the Kena'anim among whom he lives (Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei). However, the Shevu'ah not to take from other Kena'anim will still apply.
Rashi (according to Mizrachi), Ramban: He will be totally exempt. It was all one Shevu'ah. 1
Hadar Zekenim: You will be absolved from going to (according to Ohr ha'Chayim, Malbim - taking a girl from) my homeland. The Shevu'ah not to take a Kena'anis still applies. 2
Ha'amek Davar: The Shevu'ah was to [try to] find a wife for Yitzchak.
Ramban: Perhaps this included an obligation to go to Avraham's family.
Ohr ha'Chayim: It is b'Yado not to take a Kena'anis. "Do not return my son to there" is not part of the Shevu'ah. It merely answered Eliezer's question. Malbim proves from verse 24:41 that there were two Shevu'os (refer to 24:41:152:1).
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "You shall be absolved from this oath of mine - ... And take for him a wife from the daughters of Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei." How do we know that this is the intent?
Gur Aryeh #1: Avraham adjured Eliezer not to take from the Canaanites, adding '... that I dwell amongst' (24:3), and that phrase seems extra. It comes to specify the daughters of Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei, whom Avraham lived in proximity to - despite their obviously being prohibited as Canaanites. Our verse teaches that if Avraham's family were to refuse, Eliezer would be absolved of this oath specifically, and he should take from the daughters of Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei.
Gur Aryeh #2: "From this oath of mine" means he would be absolved from the last oath he had taken, namely regarding Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei. The other Canaanites would remain prohibited.
Rashi writes: "... And take for him a wife from the daughters of Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei." But when Eliezer later recounts the story, Rashi comments (Rashi to 24:49) that Eliezer would look [in such an event] among the families of Lot and Yishmael?
Gur Aryeh: Avraham gave two directives to Eliezer - a) go to 'my land,' b) to 'my birth' (i.e. my family) (24:4). 1 Eliezer first went to Nachor's family in the town of Charan, where he could fulfill both conditions. If that were to fail, he would turn to Lot or Yishmael, Avraham's family, so at least one condition would be fulfilled. Our verse means that if none of the family would agree at all, Eliezer was to take from Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei.
Refer to 24:4:1.1:3.
Rashi writes: "... And take for him a wife from the daughters of Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei." Rashi writes later, "Eliezer had a daughter, and he was seeking a pretext that his daughter should be wed to Yitzchak. Avraham said to him, 'My son is blessed, while you are cursed....'" (Rashi to 24:39). Wasn't Eliezer more righteous than Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei? If so, why were the latter the more preferable choice?
Gur Aryeh: Aner, Eshkol and Mamrei had made a pact with Avraham (14:13). Because HaSh-m had blessed Avraham that all who blessed him would themselves be blessed (12:3), they too were connected with Avraham's blessing. But Eliezer was a slave, thus he remained cursed, for that was precisely the curse of Kena'an (9:25).
Rashi writes: "'Only my son' - ... My son will not return there - but my grandson Yaakov eventually will." Why did Avraham hint at this now, to Eliezer?
Gur Aryeh: Avraham wanted Eliezer to inform the girl's parents of this - that Rivkah's children would come to visit their grandparents, and they would not be forbidden to do so. This was in order that they would not refuse to marry off their daughter on these grounds.
