What did HaSh-m mean when He said that He 'knew' Avraham'?
Rashi, Moshav Zekenim: He meant that He endeared, or befriended, him 1 - because when a person loves his friend, he familiarizes himself with him and brings him close.
Targum Onkelus 2 and Targum Yonasan: He meant that Avraham's Tzidkus was known, or revealed, to Him, as the Pasuk goes on to explain.
Ramban: It means literally that HaSh-m knew Avraham - because in the realm of HaSh-m, knowing is synonymous with Hashgachah Peratis (personal supervision). 3
This is according to our text in Targum Onkelus. Rashi asks that according to this, the word "Le'ma'an" is difficult. Refer to 18:19:1.1.
HaSh-m constantly watches over Tzadikim personally, as the Pasuk says, "Behold the eyes of HaSh-m are on those who fear Him"(Tehilim 33:18). Indeed, here he says that others are subject to Mikrim - but we cannot say that they are left to nature, as the Ramban at the end of Bo (Ramban to Shemos 13:16) says that everything is Nisim, even for a Yachid, without Teva; if he sins, evil will pursue him...
What is the connection between the first two words of this Pasuk, and the rest of the Pasuk?
Seforno: HaSh-m chose and loved Avraham, and divulged what He was about to do Sedom, because as a result, he would teach his children to do Tzedakah and Mishpat, just as he himself was about to display. 1
Why does the Torah say, 'concerning Avraham' (rather than 'concerning Avraham's family') even though it is referring to an era when he will no longer be alive?
Rashi: We learn from here that if someone leaves behind a righteous son, it is as if he (the deceased father) is still alive.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "If you interpret the verse as does Onkelus, 'I know of him, that he shall command his sons [in the future],' then the word "Le'ma'an" does not fit."Why not?
Gur Aryeh: The word "Le'ma'an" presents a reason; it can mean "because," or, "in order that...." According to Onkelus, the word "Yeda'tiv" means "I know him." 1 Rashi writes that this is difficult to fit into the Pasuk, 'I know of him because that he will command....'
Rashi therefore translates, 'I cherish him, because...."
Rashi writes: "All of this [is what Avraham] commands his children, 'Guard the way of HaSh-m, so that He will bring upon Avraham [all the good] that He has spoken of him.'" But perhaps the last phrase is again the words of HaSh-m?
Gur Aryeh: If so, the verse should state (in first person), 'so that I shall bring upon Avraham.'
Rashi writes: "Guard the way of HaSh-m, so that He will bring upon Avraham [all the good...]." But Avraham served HaSh-m out of love, not merely to receive reward?
Gur Aryeh: HaSh-m did not promise Avraham physical blessing, but rather the gift of Eretz Yisrael with its sanctity and Mitzvos, and to be the father of a great nation that would keep all the Mitzvos. These rewards would bring closeness to HaSh-m; this was Avraham's goal.
Rashi writes: "We derive that whoever leaves a righteous son is as if he did not die."Why is this so?
