تكوين ١٣:٥

But as Abram was very rich (כּבד, lit., weighty) in possessions (מקנה, cattle and slaves), and Lot also had flocks, and herds, and tents אהלים for אהלים, Ges. 93, 6, 3) for his men, of whom there must have been many therefore, the land did not bear them when dwelling together (נשׁא, masculine at the commencement of the sentence, as is often the case when the verb precedes the subject, vid., Ges. 147), i.e., the land did not furnish space enough for the numerous herd to graze. Consequently disputes arose between the two parties of herdsmen. The difficulty was increased by the fact that the Canaanites and Perizzites were then dwelling in the land, so that the space was very contracted. The Perizzites, who are mentioned here and in Gen 34:30; Jdg 1:4, along with the Canaanites, and who are placed in the other lists of the inhabitants of Canaan among the different Canaanitish tribes (Gen 15:20; Exo 3:8, Exo 3:17, etc.), are not mentioned among the descendants of Canaan (Gen 10:15-17), and may therefore, like the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, and Rephaim (Gen 15:19-21), not have been descendants of Ham at all. The common explanation of the name Perizzite as equivalent to פּרזות ארץ ישׁב "inhabitant of the level ground" (Eze 38:11), is at variance not only with the form of the word, the inhabitant of the level ground being called הפּרזי (Deu 3:5), but with the fact of their combination sometimes with the Canaanites, sometimes with the other tribes of Canaan, whose names were derived from their founders. Moreover, to explain the term "Canaanite," as denoting "the civilised inhabitants of towns," or "the trading Phoenicians," is just as arbitrary as if we were to regard the Kenites, Kenizzites, and the other tribes mentioned Gen 15:19. along with the Canaanites, as all alike…

We have here an unhappy falling out between Abram and Lot, who had hitherto been inseparable companions (see Gen 13:1, and Gen 12:4), but now parted. I. The occasion of their quarrel was their riches. We read (Gen 13:2) how rich Abram was; now here we are told (Gen 13:5) that Lot, who went with Abram, was rich too; and therefore God blessed him with riches because he went with Abram. Note, 1. It is good being in good company, and going with those with whom God is, Zac 8:23. 2. Those that are partners with God's people in their obedience and sufferings shall be sharers with them in their joys and comforts, Isa 66:10. Now, they both being very rich, the land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell comfortably and peaceably together. So that their riches may be considered, (1.) As setting them at a distance one from another. Because the place was too strait for them, and they had not room for their stock, it was necessary they should live asunder. Note, Every comfort in this world has its cross attending it. Business is a comfort; but it has this inconvenience in it, that it allows us not the society of those we love, so often, nor so long, as we could wish. (2.) As setting them at variance one with another. Note, Riches are often an occasion of strife and contention among relations and neighbours. this is one of those foolish and hurtful lusts which those that will be rich fall into, Ti1 6:9. Riches not only afford matter for contention, and are the things most commonly striven about, but they also stir up a spirit of contention, by making people proud and covetous. Meum and tuum - Mine and thine, are the great make-bates of the world. Poverty and travail, wants and wanderings, could not separate between Abram and Lot; but riches did. Friends are soon lost; but G…

13:5-7 Lot was also wealthy, with flocks and herds. Tents figure prominently in Lot’s story (13:12). • The Canaanites and Perizzites (see 34:30; Deut 7:1; Judg 1:4; 3:5) held the well-watered land; the quarrel between Abram’s and Lot’s herdsmen left Abram more vulnerable to attack.