Like the Messiah Who comes forth from her, Israel has suffered death and will experience resurrection. Introduction: This chapter records the second of three pairs of dreams that mark important transitions in Joseph’s life. The first pair being those he shared with his brother’s and father, who became the interpreters of them (Gen. 37:5-11). The result being his sale into slavery (Gen. 37:18-38). The second pair, recorded here, are interpreted by Joseph, after he explains that the interpretation of dreams is a gift from God. Where the former dreams foretold Joseph’s future authority and almost resulted in his death, the dream of the cupbearer foretells his future reinstatement to his place of authority and the baker’s dream foretells his death. This chapter is also filled with Messianic symbolism from start to finish: the bread (Chori: white linen/unleavened) and wine, the three days, the pit (As Joseph puts it), a metaphor for death, and the restoration of the cupbearer, a type for resurrection. All is pointing to the redemptive purposes of God for His chosen people Israel, to be carried out through Joseph (A type for the future Messiah). 1 And it came to pass after these ha-d’variym the words/things, the one who provided the king of Miytzrayim Egypt (double distress) with drink, incurred guilt due to an offence, as did the baker; against their lord, king of Egypt. “After these words, things, events” is more than a reference to the physical events of the previous chapter. It is a reminder of the d’variym, the words themselves and their spiritual significance. This is seen in the repetition of the phrases, “HaShem was with him, and that which he did HaShem made to prosper”. These phrases form a foundation for what is about to unfold. Both Yarchi and Rashi note that according to Midrash, with regard to the cupbearer’s offense, a fly was found in Pharaoh’s cup, and in the baker’s case a stone was found in the baked goods served to Pharaoh. This is more likely than the Targum Yonatan’s assertion that they both tried to poison the Pharaoh, given that such an act would have seen them executed immediately. The cupbearer’s offense would have been considered less serious than the baker’s because a fly could have flown into the cup at any time and is therefore unlikely to be a premeditated act, whereas the stone had been baked into the goods and is therefore seen as a premeditated attempt to chock Pharaoh to death: or at very least, an attempt to cheat Pharaoh out of the true weight of the bread, a form of theft. It was not uncommon in ancient Egypt for various factions to seek to assassinate the Pharaoh in order to place a ruler on the throne of Egypt who would be sympathetic to a different political agenda. The conflict between the Pharaonic authority and the Egyptian priesthood is well documented. It’s possible that the baker belonged to such a faction. The identities of the two princes of Pharaoh are of great importance with regard to the meta-narrative of Scripture. The cup and the bread will become central symbols for both Israel and the nations. We find that the cupbearer is a bearer of wine and the baker of broken bread. We are being introduced to the elements which will latter represent the poured out blood and broken body of our Messiah Yeshua. 2 And displeased, Pharaoh (Great house) placed the two into the custody of the official: the prince responsible for drink and the prince responsible for baking. 3 And they were given into a prison house of the prince of executioners into the house, ha-sohar the round place, where Yosef (HaShem: Mercy adds) was imprisoned. In Genesis 39:1 Potiphar is called Pharaoh’s official and Prince of the executioners. In the present text the prince cupbearer and prince baker are given to the official (Potiphar), who gives them into the care of his sub commander (Prince of Executioners). Alternatively, both titles refer to Potiphar, just as they did in Genesis 39:1. The Hebrew term ha-sohar apparently refers to the shape of the prison which was possibly built as a cylinder going down into the ground. This would explain Joseph’s use of the Hebrew ba’bor (well, pit) in verse 15. 4 And the prince executioner placed them in the care of Yosef (HaShem: Mercy adds) to vay’sharet (minister to) them, and it came to pass after yamiym (a year, many days) of confinement: 5 That the two men dreamed a dream, they dreamed in the one night, each man interpreting his dream, the one who provided drink and the baker to the king of Miytzrayim Egypt (double distress), who were imprisoned in the house, which was round. As previously stated, “The prince executioner” probably refers to Potiphar’s subordinate but may refer to Potiphar. Either way, Potiphar is in the chain of command and at least partly responsible for giving Joseph this opportunity. We notice that once again the Hebrew y’sharet (minister to, serve willingly) is employed to describe Joseph’s care of these men. Even in prison Joseph is a minister of God to those in his charge. His generous spirit and integrity are sustained because HaShem is with him. The Hebrew yamiym can denote a period of up to a year. In the present context this means that the cupbearer and baker were in Joseph’s care for a period of at least a year before they had their respective dreams. The Hebrew, “Ish c’fit’ron chalomo” is usually translated as, “each man according to the interpretation of his dream” and is said to mean that each man dreamed according to his station. I have rendered the phrase, “each man interpreting his dream”. I believe that the text is inferring that the men each attempted and failed to interpret their respective dreams to their satisfaction. This would help to explain the phrase “We have dreamed a dream and no one can interpret it” (v.8). The belief that dreams could contain prophetic messages concerning the future was widely held throughout the ancient Near East and is attested to in part by Abimelech’s experience in Genesis 20:3. This makes Joseph’s offer of interpretation in the following verses an inviting proposition and gives him the opportunity to prove himself to be an accurate interpreter of dreams. It is interesting to note that in verse 5 the cupbearer and baker are called by their occupations alone without the Hebrew sar (prince) being used to refer to their now former positions of authority. 6 And Yosef (HaShem: Mercy adds) entered toward them in the morning, and saw them and behold they were zoafiym (sad, angry, troubled and perplexed). 7 And he enquired of the s’riseiy (officials, eunuchs) of Pharaoh (Great house) who were with him in the place of confinement, house of their lord, saying, “Why are your faces full of raiym (bad, evil, worry, sadness, distress, and misery) today?” We notice that Joseph, who has had Mercy Himself add comfort to him in his distress, now “adds mercy” to the troubled cupbearer and baker. Like all great men of God, Joseph allows the overflow of his experience of God’s love and mercy to affect those around him. He is looking for an opportunity to comfort these men who have been placed into his care. The Hebrew raiym, used here to describe the faces of the men can be translated a number of ways and allows for an ambiguous interpretation. It may mean that the face of the cupbearer was distressed and the face of the baker was full of evil intent. If the conjecture concerning the sins of each of the men is true, it makes sense that the would-be assassin (baker) would be angered by his incarceration and what he perceived his dream to mean. The cupbearer on the other hand is simply distressed due to his inability to interpret his dream and troubled by his present predicament. 8 And they replied, “We have chalom chalam’nu dreamed a dream and no one can interpret it.” And speaking toward them Yosef said, “Is it not l'elohiym (to God, gods, judges) that interpretation belongs? Let me saf’ru (relate, number, recount, rehearse) for you.” The phrase “We have dreamed a dream” can also be understood to say, “We have dreamed a firmly bound thing” or, “We saw a firmly bound firmly bound thing”. In other words, the doubling of the phrase establishes the certain nature of the dream outcomes. These matters have been established by God and will come to pass. Neither the cupbearer nor the baker, nor any of the other prisoners, had been able to make sense of the dreams. Joseph’s response may have been understood in a slightly different manner to his intended meaning. Alternatively, Joseph used the generic term elohiym (God, gods, judges) in order to make it easier for the Egyptians to accept the help of a Hebrew. To Joseph, elohiym referred to the God of the Hebrews but to the cupbearer and baker the term elohiym could be understood to refer to the Egyptian deities. Regardless, Joseph was saying that the accurate interpretation of dreams was made possible by God. It is only after Joseph establishes the authority of God that he offers to recount the meaning of the dreams. 9 And the prince of providing drink recounted his dream to Yosef and said, “In my dream behold, all of a sudden a vine grew before my face: 10 And on the vine three tendrils and it (she) sprouted buds as it (she) ascended and blossomed, and produced ripe grapes in a cluster of fruit. 11 And the cup of Pharaoh was in my hand and I took it and the grapes I pressed into the cup and gave the cup into the palm of Pharaoh.” The writer of Genesis includes the title prince (sar) again, perhaps denoting the fact that the cupbearer is soon to be reinstated. The rapid growth of the vine and the singling out of three tendrils, as well as the quick ripening of the fruit, are all elements that indicate the imminent outcome. The specific nature of the fruit of the vine (Grape juice, wine) is important because it relates this easily identifiable symbol to the meta-narrative of redemption. The wine of the cupbearer’s dream, once it is joined by the bread of the baker’s dream, provides a foreshadowing of the blood and body of Messiah. This is also in keeping with the fact that Joseph is a type for the Mashiyach. Another important aspect of the cupbearer’s dream is the fact that Pharaoh takes the cup directly from his hand without the cup bearer having drunk from it to test for poison (one of the most important steps in presenting a cup to a king). This denotes Pharaoh’s complete trust in the cupbearer (according to the dream), and infers future favor where the cupbearer is concerned. 12 And Yosef said, “This is the interpretation of it, the three branches are three days. 13 In three days you'll return and yisa par’oh et roshecha, Pharaoh will lift up your head vahashiyv’cha and return you to you position and you will give the cup into Pharaoh's palm in the way you did at first as the provider of drinks. The idiom, “lift up your head” can mean to count (Exodus 30:12), meaning that the cupbearer will be once again counted worthy in Pharaoh’s sight. The same phrase can also mean to reestablish position (Psalm 3:3; 27:6). In addition, this phrase is used to describe the release of a prisoner (2 Kings 25:27; Jeremiah 52:31). The exact same phrase is used in verse 19, as a word play, followed by the qualifying terms, above and hang. 14 When this occurs remember me and show kindness toward me I plead, make mention of me to Pharaoh and bring me out from this the house. Joseph is certain of the interpretation he has received from God. Thus he affirms his faith by requesting that the cupbearer use his position to help deliver him from prison. Unfortunately the cupbearer will soon forget Joseph’s plight (v.23) and it will be two years before he recalls Joseph and his gift for interpreting dreams (41:1, 9-13). 15 For I was carried away from mei-eretz the land of Ha-Ivriym the Hebrews, and also here I've done nothing at all to warrant putting me in this ba’bor (well) pit.” It’s worth noting that this is the first time that Joseph breaks his silence and protests his innocence. The phrase, “Land of the Hebrews” shows that at very least Hebron and the surrounding area was known to belong to the Hebrews at that time in history (Approx.1900 BCE). It is no coincidence that Joseph employs the same Hebrew word ba’bor (well, pit) used to describe the empty well he was thrown into by his brothers (Gen. 37:24). He sees the connection between these two injustices and longs for deliverance. Perhaps, based on the fact that he was freed from the former pit, he relates it to his present captivity because he believes that through his dreams God has shown him an already established future deliverance. 16 And the prince of baking seeing the good interpretation said, “I also dreamed and behold, all of a sudden three baskets of chori white bread (white linen) were upon my head. The fact that the prince of baking spoke only after hearing the first interpretation, infers that he was not intending to take up Joseph on his offer at first. The use of the rare verb chori (choor, charar), which comes from a root meaning white stuff, white linen, indicates that the bread in the baskets was unusual in some way. I understand this to be a concise way of presenting the idea of matzah unleavened bread in an Egyptian context prior to the establishment of Pesach and the days of unleavened bread. The Hebrew matzah is used only in Genesis 19:3 prior to its use in Exodus 12:8 and is used in the context of Avraham meeting face to face with a manifest representation of God. This seems to be a unique use that is intended to convey the time of year that the event occurred. The same need is not present here, nor has the Pesach been established, therefore it seems probable that the use of chori rather than lechem (yeast filled bread) in the present context, is intended to denote matzah or an historical Egyptian equivalent (unleavened bread). The cupbearer saw events unfold before his face, but the baker sees the baskets on top of his head. This is the first indication that the dreams have tragically different meanings. The cupbearer witnesses the events of his dream from within his own body, whereas the baker witnesses the events of his dream from outside of his body. This is an almost universal representation of a transitional death experience. 17 And in the highest basket there was a selection of every kind of baked goods for Pharaoh, v’ha-oph and the birds (flying creatures) ate from the basket on my head.” The Hebrew oph meaning flying creature, is used to refer to carrion that feed on the flesh of fallen corpses (1 Kings 14:11; 16:4). The fact that the birds are eating Pharaoh’s baked goods without fear, shows that the baker is absent. The phrase “every kind of baked goods” represents the full range of the prince baker’s responsibilities. The basket that is being plundered is on top of the baker’s head, the head being the symbol of authority. Therefore, the plundering is taking place over and above the authority of the baker. This is another way of conveying loss of position. In the case of the baker, he had already lost his position and had been imprisoned in a pit (metaphor for death), thus the dream must be speaking of a further demotion. The only demotion lower than prison is death. 18 And Yosef said “This is the interpretation of it: the three baskets are three days. 19 It will come to pass in three days yisa par’oh et roshecha, Pharaoh will lift up your head meialeycha v’talah otcha al eitz above and hang you upon a tree: and the birds will devour your flesh from above. The similarities with the cupbearer’s dream end at the three days. Here, the phrase, “yisa par’oh et roshecha, Pharaoh will lift up your head” is employed as a sort of morbid word play and is qualified by the phrase, “meialeycha v’talah otcha al eitz above and hang you upon a tree”. There is historical evidence that the Egyptians practiced an execution method where the body of the victim was impaled on a long spiked stave and lifted into position outside of the city walls. This is probably the means of the baker’s coming execution. There is of course a correlation with the “hanging on a tree” of the cursed (Deut. 21:23) and the crucifixion of Messiah, who is the bread of life (John 6:35). 20 And it came to pass that after three days it was the birthday of Pharaoh and he prepared a feast for all his servants. And he lifted up the head of the prince of the drinks and he lifted up the head of the prince of the baking in the midst of all his servants. The repetition of the three days is an indication of God’s hand on the events and conveys a sense of completion and resurrection. The cup bearer is metaphorically dead in prison and after three days he is resurrected to face judgement and is given new life, whereas the baker is metaphorically dead in prison and after three days is resurrected to face judgement and is condemned to death. Both are lifted up, and each one is judged according to his deeds. This is of course a clear depiction of Yom Ha-Din (The day of Judgement). The wine of the cupbearer’s dream is a foreshadowing of the blood of the Messiah, and the chori (matzah) unleavened bread in the three baskets symbolize the Messiah’s body and His resurrection is seen in the restoring of the cupbearer because the life is in the blood (wine). 21 And he lifted up the prince of the drinks to serve drinks again and he gave Pharaoh's cup into his palm. 22 And the prince of baking was hung (2 Samuel 21:9) according to the interpretation of Yosef. Joseph is thus established as one whose interpretations are trustworthy. The events transpired just as he had interpreted they would. 23 And the prince of drinks did not remember Yosef, he ceased to care and forgot. How soon we forget the charitable acts of others. While we’re in a place of torment and suffering we often turn to others for comfort and benefit from their care, but when we are free once more, we quickly forget those who remain in the place of torment that we had once endured. However, the forgetfulness of the cupbearer is part of God’s timing. The cupbearer will recall Joseph at just the right time so that he can have maximum exposure and gain high position from the Pharaoh. This failure to remember Joseph is a prophetic link to the future of Israel. A future filled with the rhythm of being forgotten and redeemed (Exodus 1:8). We see here, that Joseph is also a type for his people Israel, a people whom a subsequent Pharaoh will not recognize. Like the Messiah Who comes forth from her, Israel will suffer death and experience resurrection. The reinstatement (resurrection) of the cupbearer is followed by two years of waiting. Joseph awaits God’s deliverance and the crown of authority promised to him in his dreams. In many ways this is like our spiritual journey in Messiah. We meet Him and experience freedom/resurrection from sin but this is only the beginning. We must then continue to hold on to our trust in God as we await His kingdom come, when Messiah will return and we will enter the Olam Haba (World to come), the ultimate fulfillment of our hope in Him. © Yaakov Brown Without HaShem the most prosperous of circumstances are worthless but with HaShem, even the worst forms of suffering and adversity are given value. Introduction: In an age when success is measured in wealth and freedom, we are wise to stop and take notice of the story of Joseph. A story of adversity and of the stripping of personal wealth and freedom. It is in adversity that we discover the real meaning of success. If, like Joseph, we have trusted our journey to God, we will become successful even in our suffering. Not by possessing the wealth of this world but by carrying the honour of the world to come. 39:1 And Yosef (YHVH: Mercy adds) descended to Mitzray’mah (Double distress: Egypt). And was purchased by Potiphar (Belonging to the sun)—an official of Pharaoh (Great house), prince of the executioners of Mitzri (Double distress) Egypt—from the hand of the Yishm’eiliym (Ismaelites: hears God), who had brought him down there. We would be understanding these opening words well if we were to read them using the meanings of the names of the people and places concerned. “And Mercy was added as he descended into double distress…” We can also read: “Mercy was added to the land of double distress via the hand of one who heard from God and descended.” Both Potiphar and Pharaoh are thought to be titles rather than proper nouns. However, there is a possible linguistic and genealogical link between Potiphar and Ham the son of Noah. One translation of Potiphar reads “the fruit of Pot” meaning the son, grandson or great grandson of Pot (Genesis 10:6). In support of this proposed meaning is the fact that Egypt is said to be the land of Ham (Psalm 105:23). 2 And HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) was with Yosef (YHVH: Mercy adds). So he became a successful man in the house of his adonaiv (master), the Mitzri (Double distress: Egyptian). “Mercy was with Joseph, adding to him…” HaShem was with Joseph (Gen. 39:2, 3, 21, 23). The great Jewish martyr Stephen also emphasises this in his speech recorded in Acts 7:9-10. It is not that HaShem was ever not with Joseph. To the contrary, these words are a reminder to the reader, that God is with us and we are in Him. The fact that Joseph was employed as a house servant is evidence of the hand of God at work keeping him in a position of favour where his talents could be observed and his status elevated. Egyptians despised the Hebrew race, considering them to be dirty sheep herders. Even to the point of refusing to sit down to eat with them (Gen. 43:32). This means that both societal norms and deep seeded bigotry were overcome in order for Joseph to be accepted as a household servant. Particularly given the high position of Potiphar, who was the ruler over the executioners of Pharaoh. Seder Olam Rabba says that Joseph remained in Potiphar’s service for twelve months. Living near the pyramids built in the neighbourhood of Memphis (Seder Olam Rabba, c. 2. p. 5.). This is affirmed by Jablonski, who notes that to this day there is an historical site a hill, on which the house of Potiphar was built, and some of the debris from the bricks of the ancient home can still be examined (Jablonski de Terra Goshen, Dissert. 6. sect. 6.). 3 His adonaiv (master) saw that HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) was with him and that HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) made everything he set his hand to successful. We note that it was not Yosef’s talent or natural ability that brought him success. Rather it was because HaShem was with him. Potiphar and his wife and servants know that Yosef is a Hebrew (Genesis 39:14). Therefore, they attribute his success to the Deity of the Hebrews, though they don’t know HaShem themselves they do recognize the existence of the tribal gods of other nations. Thus they see HaShem as the tribal God of the Hebrews, and they are correct, He is. HaShem is both the tribal God of the Hebrews and the God of all things. Notice that the text allows the reading: “Joseph’s earthly lord saw that Mercy was with Joseph and that Mercy made everything that Joseph did successful.” 4 Yosef (YHVH: Mercy adds) found favour in his eyes, so he ministered to him (Potiphar) as a personal servant and he (Potiphar) appointed him (Yosef) over his household; everything that was his (Potiphar) he gave into his (Yosef’s) hand. Joseph y’sharet (ministered) to him. This is more than mere obligatory servitude. The Hebrew text infers a willing participation and an empathetic caring for the one being served. It seems that Joseph’s service, genuine thoughtfulness and integrity endeared him to Potiphar in such a way as to make him a trusted member of the household. The servant who is given care of the household becomes more than a piece of property, he becomes a member of the family. 5 From the time that he made him an overseer in his house and over everything that belonged to him, HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) blessed the Egyptian’s house because of Yosef (YHVH: Mercy adds); HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) blessing was on everything that belonged to him, in the house and in the field. 6 So he released everything he owned into Yosef’s (YHVH: Mercy adds) hand. With him in charge, he did not think about anything except the food he ate. And Yosef (YHVH: Mercy adds) was handsome in form and handsome in appearance. By virtue of the name which HaShem has given him, wherever Joseph goes HaShem adds. It is clear from the text that Potiphar trusted Joseph entirely and without reservation, leaving everything in his care just as Laban had left his flocks in the care of Jacob (Gen. 30:31-34). In the same way that HaShem blessed Laban because of Jacob (Gen. 30:27), He also blesses Potiphar because of Joseph. The progeny of Avraham continue to be a blessing to the nations (Gen. 12:2-3). Joseph is called yafeh (beautiful, handsome) in both form and appearance. He had a fit body and kept himself well groomed. The double use of the Hebrew yafeh emphasizes Joseph’s extreme good looks. It also offers a correlation between Joseph and his mother Rachel (Gen. 29:17). 7 And after these things, the adonaiv (master’s) wife made eyes at Yosef (YHVH: Mercy adds) and said, “Come, lie down with me!” Potiphar’s wife is said to “look after Joseph” or “place her eyes on him, gaze at him”. This is a euphemism intended to convey her lusting after him. “Lie down with me” is a euphemistic invitation to have sex. 8 But he adamantly refused. “Look,” he said to his adonaiv (master’s) wife, “my adonaiv (master) doesn’t think about anything in the house with me in charge, and everything that belongs to him he’s entrusted into my hand. The Hebrew, “vay’maei” infers that Joseph’s refusal was adamant. The staccato and emphatic Masoretic cantillation of the word is evidence of this ancient understanding of the text. This is also consistent with the fact that Potiphar’s wife continued to make numerous advances toward Joseph, who was either becoming weary of the temptation or annoyed by her constant harassing of him. 9 No one in this house is greater than I, and he has withheld nothing from me—except you, because you are his wife. So how could I commit ha-ra’ah ha-g’dolah (the evil that is the great) hazot (This one), and my sin would be against l’Elohiym (The Judge: God)?” Joseph implores Potiphar’s wife using a common sense moral argument and adds the warning of the judgement of God or the gods (as she may have understood the generic noun elohiym) in the hope that she will desist. What is certain is that Joseph understood that all he did was seen by God, Who was with him. 10 And when she spoke to Yosef (YHVH: Mercy adds), day after day, he refused to listen to her invitation to lie down beside her, to be with her. Potiphar’s wife was insatiable. Her lust for Joseph had obviously consumed her with wanton blindness for the consequences (Though, she seems to be sly enough to avoid any negative repercussions for herself). “When she spoke” can be understood to mean, “She attempted to coax him”. The phrase, “lie down beside her” can be taken literally or to mean “Sleep close to her”, perhaps in the next room. “To be with her” is again a euphemism for sexual intercourse. 11 And it came to pass, on one particular day, he came into the house to do his work, and none of the men of the house were there in the house. Iben Ezra suggests that the day in question was at least a year hence. Meaning that the repetition of the Hebrew phrasing in the previous verse denotes a lengthy process of taunting and seduction. 12 And she caught him by his garment saying, “Come, lie with me!” But he left his garment in her hand, fled and went outside. This is now the second time Joseph has been stripped of the garment of his authority. The first being the garment his brothers used to fool their father into thinking Joseph was dead. Ironically, the garment captured by Potiphar’s wife will also be used as false evidence. In both cases the garment of the righteous is taken by the wicked in order to further a dark agenda. However, it is also true to say that in both cases what was meant for evil is turned to good by an all loving, all knowing God of redemption. We are reminded of the stark contrast between the foolish actions of Judah in the previous chapter (where as a free man he gives away his garment of authority) and the stripping of the garment of Joseph, who though a slave, has lived and acted with integrity. It seems that God is more interested in prospering the spiritual health of His chosen servants than He is in seeing them lose sight of Him through the rose coloured glasses of wealth and freedom. The American dream it seems, couldn’t be further from the will of God. 13 When she saw that he had left his garment in her hand and fled outside, 14 she screamed to the men of her house and said to them, “Look! Someone brought a Hebrew (Ivri) man to us to mock us. He approached me to lie with me so I screamed out loud. 15 When he heard me raise my voice and scream, he left his garment with me, fled and went outside.” The phrase “Someone has brought” is translated as “Your lord has brought,” by Targum Yonatan In reference to Potiphar. Potiphar’s wife’s use of the phrasing “Hebrew man” is an attempt to invoke tribal bigotry and garner support from the Egyptian slaves and servants in her household. She adds, “To mock us” inferring that Joseph thinks himself above the other servants and slaves of the household. She is hoping that the household staff will aid her in testifying to her husband so that she can have Joseph punished for his refusal to satisfy her lust. The use of the term “Ivri” is rare. It was last used of Avram prior to his becoming Avraham (Gen. 14:13), where it reads Ha-Ivri (The Hebrew). It is no coincidence that this same phrasing is used in verse 17. There is soon to be a transformation where Joseph the servant of Hashem will become Joseph the Redeemer of Israel. In a very real sense, just as the Hebrews (Ivriym) could not have come into existence without Ha-Ivri, the Hebrew Avram, so too, they could not have continued to exist without Ha-Ivri, the Hebrew Joseph (Gen 39:17). 16 Then she kept the garment with her until his adonaiv (master) came home. 17 She spoke the same words to him saying, “The Hebrew (Ha-Ivri) slave that you brought us approached me to make a play thing of me. 18 When I raised my voice and screamed, he left his garment with me and fled outside.” Both here and in verse 15 Potiphar’s wife lies, saying “he left his garment with me” (inferring that Joseph disrobed of his own accord) rather than telling the truth: “I tore his garment off of him”. 19 Now when his adonaiv (master) heard the words his wife spoke to him saying, “Such are the things your slave did to me,” his anger burned. Rashi understands “Such are the things your slave did to me” to mean that Potiphar’s wife showed him how Joseph had tried to arose her. Potiphar’s anger may not have been directed entirely toward Joseph. It’s possible that he was angry with his wife. There is a good case for suggesting that Potiphar was aware of his wife’s sexual appetite and propensity for indiscretion, and that he was now angry because for appearances sake, he would have to imprison a trusted and valuable servant. 20 Then Yosef’s (YHVH adds) adonaiv (master) took him and put him in prison, the place where the king’s prisoners were confined. So there he was, in the prison. The fact that Potiphar escorted Joseph to the prison rather than having guards take him away, gives support to the idea that Potiphar did not believe his wife’s charges against Joseph. Midrash, Yefen Toar suggests that Potiphar explained to Joseph that if he failed to imprison him others would presume that his wife was regularly unfaithful and may even call into question the legitimacy of his children. We know from Genesis 40:3 that Joseph is imprisoned in the house of the Captain of the guard. That is, the house or barracks that Potiphar was captain over (Gen. 37:36). A place where royal prisoners were kept. Rather than place Joseph in a less desirable prison where prisoners rarely lived long due to harsh labour and poor conditions, Potiphar chose instead to put Joseph into the less taxing environment of the house of the captain of the guard. That is, where prisoners of higher social status serving time in anticipation of execution for treason or for lesser crimes against the crown, were kept. One of the alternate interpretations of the Hebrew translated “guard” is, “executioner”. The sages suggest that Joseph was in prison for a period of 10 to 12 years (Pirke Eliezer, c. 39; Seder Olam Rabba, c. 2. p. 5; Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 3. 2), which is very likely given that he probably spent one year in Potiphar's house (Iben Ezra) and there were thirteen years between his being sold into Egypt, and his appearance before Pharaoh; he was seventeen (Gen. 37:2) when he was sold, and he was thirty (Gen. 41:46) when he stood before Pharaoh after being freed from prison. This allows for the 13 year difference between 17 and 30. However, it’s also possible that he spent more time in Potiphar's house and less time in prison. Regardless, Joseph spent a total of thirteen years from the time he was sold into Egypt until the time he was brought before Pharaoh. 21 And HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) was with Yosef (YHVH adds) and stretched out toward him kindness, goodness and faithfulness (Chesed) and gave him favour in the eyes of the keeper of the prison. The story of Joseph’s adversity in this chapter begins and ends with the words “HaShem was with Yosef”. Without HaShem the most prosperous of circumstances are worthless but with HaShem, even the worst forms of suffering and adversity are given value. The keeper of the prison in verse 21 is clearly subordinate to Potiphar who is captain over the entire guard. 22 The keeper of the prison entrusted into Yosef’s (YHVH adds) hand all the prisoners who were in the prison, so that everything that was done there, he was responsible for. Joseph is immediately shown favour and given a role of leadership over all the workings of the prison. Once again we must note that he is of a despised race and is perceived to be a criminal, and yet God’s hand is upon him to prosper him for the sake of his people Israel. Targum of Yonatan paraphrases the phrase “He was responsible for” as, “he (Joseph) commanded it to be done”. 23 The keeper of the prison did not concern himself with anything at all under his care, because HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) was with him (Yosef), and HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) made whatever he did successful. Finally, we note that Joseph was trusted by the keeper of the prison because Joseph had trusted HaShem and HaShem had made whatever he did successful. The message is clear: “Trust in HaShem with all your being and don’t rely on your own intellect; in all the ways you walk, in thought, speech and action, acknowledge Him, and He will make straight the paths you walk on and the direction in which you’re heading.” –Proverbs 3:5-6 (YBV) © Yaakov Brown 2017 Redemption seeded in a fallen world. It may seem strange to us to read this sordid sub plot in the midst of the majestic redemptive narrative concerning Yosef and his brothers. We may even conclude that it seems out of place, even irrelevant. However, as is the case throughout the Torah, these words affect a greater understanding of the meta-narrative. The account of Judah and Tamar sheds light on the dynamics of Yaakov’s family and specifically reveal Judah’s poor spiritual health. The previous chapter shows us that Judah had become the de-facto leader of the sons of Yaakov. He has now parted company with his brothers of his own fruition and has sought out a heathen wife. All of this serves to show the unworthiness of Judah to lead Yisrael at this point in her journey. The Patriarchs Avraham and Yitzchak gave their families into the hands of chosen younger sons, now Yaakov’s family will also be led by someone other than the first–born (Yosef). Time and again God uses the small, the young, the weak and the hated, to bring about His redemptive purpose for His beloved children. As tragic as this story is, it ends with a scarlet sign of redemption. A symbol of blood that will permeate the historical narrative of Israel. A son will break out (Perez) from the womb of his mother and the line of Judah. And as a result a greater Son will be born to the Davidic line. A Son Who will break out from the womb of the earth bringing the dawn of eternity to humanity (Zerah). 38:1 And it came to pass at that time Y’hudah (Praise) went down from his brothers and he vayit stretched out (camped) near an Adulami (Justice of my people) man, whose name was Chirah (Noble family, from charar: old, white hair). Adulam is thought to be approximately 13 km south west of Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 11:5, 7). We should ask why Judah left the company of his brothers and what spiritual significance this might have. Yosef was forced to leave but Judah chose to leave. We have established from the previous chapter that Judah had become the leader of the brothers (Gen. 37:26-27). Therefore, by leaving them he was in effect, despising his new found birth right (Esau). Or, at very least, he was despising his position of authority over his brothers. 2 There Y’hudah (Praise) saw the daughter of a K’naani (Lowlander) man whose name was Shua (Wealth, cry for help), and he took her (Shua’s daughter Gen. 38:12) as wife and slept with her. Shua was from Adulam, and was probably an idolater. Why then did Judah take his daughter as a wife, knowing that his family were to be set apart unto HaShem? Judah’s actions are in stark contrast to those of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov, all of whom married women from their own ancestral land. While a number of Orthodox Jewish commentators interpret “K’naani” to mean “Merchant”, there is no textual reason for this translation. It is simply motivated by a desire to show Judah in a more saintly light than is reasonable. Judah is not chosen because he is perfect but because God has decided to work out His plan of redemption through him. This is the core message of the Gospel of our Mashiyach. 3 Then she became pregnant and gave birth to a son, and he named him Er (Awake, arose, incite, laid bare) 4 She became pregnant again and gave birth to a son, and she named him Onan (Strong, vigorous from a root meaning sorrow, loss). 5 She gave birth to yet another son and she called him Shelah (Petition, request, demand). He was in Cheziv (false, to lie, deception) when she gave birth to him. Targum Yonatan says Er was so named, "because he should die without children;'' the Targum links the name Er to Ariri, "childless". The same Targum says that Onan was so named, "because his father would mourn for him;'' In other words, he was a Ben-oni (Gen. 35:18), a son of my failing strength. Shelah can signify tranquillity, quietness, and is a word that comes from the same root as Shiloh (Gen. 49:10). Targum Yonatan suggests that he is given this name,"because her (Daughter of Shua) husband forgot her:" Cheziv [approx. 8km west of Adulam) has been linked to the city of Achiziv (Micah 1:14; Joshua 15:44), apparently a city of the tribe of Judah, part of her allotted inheritance among the tribes of Israel. “The men of Kozeba (Cheziv)” are descendants of Shelah son of Judah (1 Chronicles 4:21-22) The text mentions only Shelah’s place of birth. It seems that this is done for two reasons. First, Shelah is the only one of the three sons who will remain on the earth long enough to produce progeny. Second, Cheziv means “deception”, and is possibly an allusion to the deception Y’hudah will perpetrate against Tamar regarding the possibility of her marrying his son Shelah, who is linked to deception (Cheziv) at his birth. 6 Then Y’hudah (Praise) got a wife for Er (Awake, arose, incite, laid bare), his firstborn, and her name was Tamar (Date palm) 7 But Er (Awake, arose, incite, laid bare), Y’hudah’s (Praise) firstborn, was evil in the eyes of HaShem (YHVH: Mercy), so HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) put him to death. Er is said to be evil (raah), meaning all his deeds were evil in HaShem’s eyes. In other words, God saw the intention of his heart and it was set on evil. The Hebrew raah (evil) is used in a similar way to describe the men of Sodom (Gen. 13:13). This gives us a good idea of the extent of Er’s wickedness. Targum Yonatan suggests that Tamar is a daughter of Shem (Bereishit Rabbah 85:10) If “daughter” here is understood in the Hebraic sense, then it can refer to a granddaughter or great granddaughter, making this a possibility at least. 8 Then Y’hudah (Praise) said to Onan (Strong, vigorous), go to your brother’s wife to perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up a seed for your brother. 9 But Onan (Strong, vigorous) knew that the seed would not be his. So every time he went to his brother’s wife he would shicheit destroy, allow his seed to decay on the ground so as not to provide a seed for his brother. The duty to provide offspring is illuminated in the Torah (Deut. 25:5-10), and is known by the term levirate: a word taken from the Latin Levir meaning brother-in-law. The name and family honour of Israel came through the father’s line, which meant that to provide a man with progeny was of the utmost importance in ancient Hebrew culture. Those questioning the Mashiyach in Matthew 22:24 are alluding to this obligation as recorded in the Torah. The associated practice of chalitzah is revealed in the story of Ruth (2:20, 3:12, and 4:5). This exception regarding the Kinsman Redeemer was a halakhic practise employed when all the eligible sons were dead or unable to fulfil the levirate obligation. Onan’s sin was his failure to provide his brother with an heir upon the earth. HaShem takes this very seriously as can be seen from the subsequent punishment. This is because failure to provide for the continuation of a man’s name was, at this time in history, proof of a desire to see his identity and memory snuffed out completely. In the case of a family member, this was one of the worst forms of sin. The naming and recording of ancestors is a picture of the eternal and speaks to generational blessing and curse. More importantly, by refusing to produce this particular heir, both Er and Onan were (albeit unknowingly) intentionally seeking to prevent the line of the Davidic dynasty and the coming Mashiyach (Matt. 1:3). 10 What he did was evil in HaShem’s (YHVH: Mercy) eyes, so He put him to death also. While his older brother Er was evil (to the core), the text says that what Onan did was evil. This is a subtle but important distinction. 11 Then Y’hudah (Praise) said to his daughter-in-law Tamar (Date palm), “Stay as a widow in your father’s house until my son Shelah (Petition, request, demand) grows up,” because he thought, “Otherwise he too might die, like his brothers.” So Tamar (Date palm) went and stayed in her father’s house. Shelah is obviously already sexually mature, or Judah (whose reason for asking Tamar to wait was the fear that his third son would also die) wouldn’t have asked Tamar to wait. By saying, “wait until my son has grown up” Judah is making it clear to Tamar that he has no intention of allowing her to marry his youngest son. This based on superstition. Judah, like so many others before and after him, has decided to place the blame for his sons’ deaths on Tamar. This shows Judah’s own lack of faith in HaShem at this point in his journey, and his unwillingness to accept that his sons have been acting wickedly. Ironically, Judah’s youngest son Shelah (Request, demand, Petition) was born in Chizev, a place of deceit and falseness. “Went to her father’s house” means that she left the camp of Judah and returned to live with her father in their family camp/township. This would have been considered extremely shameful. Tamar had not provided children for her husband according to societal norms, nor had she been accepted as a fit bride for the youngest son, an expected union that could only be refused if the woman concerned had been unfaithful or the son was incapable of procreation. Tamar remained bound to Judah’s family as a widow in perpetual betrothal according to ancient custom. Therefore, any attempt by Tamar to have sexual relations with anyone other than Judah’s son would be considered adultery. The loss of his two sons and Judah’s unwillingness to let his son Shelah enter into harm’s way is a foreshadowing of Yaakov’s withholding of Benjamin after the perceived loss of both Yosef and Simeon (Gen. 42:36-38). 12 Now many days passed, and Shua’s (Wealth, cry for help) daughter, Y’hudah’s wife, died. After Y’hudah consoled himself, he went up to shear his sheep, he and his friend Chirah (Noble family, from charar: old, white hair) the Adulami (Justice of my people) at Timnatah (portion, to count, recon, number). Timnatah is a city that will later belong to the tribe of Judah (Joshua 15:57). 13 Then Tamar (Date palm) was told, “Look! Your father-in-law is going up to Timnatah (portion, to count, reckon, number) to shear his flocks.” Judah would probably have to travel past the encampment of his daughter-in-law on his way from Adulam to Timnatah in the north. 14 And she removed her widow’s clothes from herself, covered herself with a veil, wrapped herself, and sat by the entrance to Eiynayim (Two springs, eyes) on the way to Timnatah [portion, to count, reckon, number] (for she saw that Shelah [Petition, request, demand] had grown up and she had not been given to him as a wife). Like Yaakov (Gen. 27) before her, Tamar had been denied her legal rights and being bound by betrothal to Judah’s family, is left with no other option but to seek out her father-in-law. She positions herself at the entrance to Eiynayim, a town in the lowlands of Judah (territory), which probably had two natural springs (as per the name) [Ibn Ezra]. Targum of Yonatan paraphrases this verse to read, "In the division of the ways where all eyes look (Eiynayim)”: understanding Eiynayim from its root ayin (eye). As previously explained, Shelah had been of marrying age since the time of the death of Onan. He was now obviously grown and probably already being matched to another bride. 15 When Y’hudah saw her, he thought she was a prostitute because she had covered her face. In spite of the protests of a number of scholars, the plan meaning of the text is clear. It is because of Tamar’s covered face that Judah presumes she is a prostitute. This ancient form of attire, warn by prostitutes of the east, was a means of objectifying and demeaning women, while at the same time causing the imagination to wander; creating an intoxicating lure. 16 So he vayit stretched out (camped), turned aside to her along the way and said, “Please let me come in toward you (have sex with you)” (for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law). “What,” she asked, “will you give me to come in toward me?” The Hebrew “vayit” meaning to stretch out, is used in verse 1 to refer to the fact that Judah camped, that is, pitched his tent. It is possible that this is the intended meaning here. He wasn’t just engaging in a passing fancy, he was being intentional, devoting the night to his sexual conquest. He obviously didn’t see Tamar unveiled in the daylight, however, due to her use of the veil, he may have stayed several days and still not had an opportunity to recognize her. One recalls the equally difficult circumstances of Lot and his daughters (Gen. 19). The phrase, “He turned aside to her on the way” offers a poignant drash. When we have been set a righteous goal, we should not turn aside from the way in order to pursue an unrighteous distraction. “What will you give me?” is not a petition for money or payment, although this is the way Judah understood it at the time. Tamar was seeking symbols of Judah’s identity because it was her intention from the beginning to provide progeny for her husband’s name, a righteous desire, though technically it was not a righteous act. A harlot is identified by the intention of her heart, she sells what is sacred for temporary gain. Tamar does not qualify as a harlot in the traditional sense because she is seeking eternal gain and has been forced to sacrifice that which is sacred in order to achieve her goal. 17 “I will send you a young goat from the flock,” he said, “Provided you give a pledge until you send it,” she said. 18 “What kind of pledge shall I give you?” he asked. “Your seal (ring), and your p’tilecha garment (Thread, bracelet, cord, twisted), and your tribal staff in your hand,” she said. So he gave them to her and he came in toward her, and she got pregnant by him. My translation follows Yarchi and Ben Melech and Targum Yonatan, which understand p’tilech to mean cloak. If this is the correct translation, Judah’s giving away of his cloak is antithesis to Joseph’s cloak being taken from him. In the case of Judah, he despises the cloak of his authority (Like Esau). All three items were symbolic of Y’hudah and his household. They were signs of his tribe and his familial authority. It is because of this pregnancy that Tamar is found in the genealogy of the Messiah (Matt. 1:3), along with another woman considered to be a prostitute, Rahab (Joshua 6: Hebrews 11:31; James 2:25; Matt. 1:5). Thus, like Rahab, Tamar is justified by faith in the purposes of God and not remembered for her sin. 19 After she got up and left, she removed her veil from herself and put on her widow’s clothes. Note that a number of years have passed, so many that Shelah has grown much older. Tamar has been wearing her widow’s cloths the entire time, with the exception of this short period where she seeks out Y’hudah. This devotion to Judah’s family shows the righteous character of this woman, who will become one of only five women mentioned in the genealogy of the Messiah (Bathsheba being mentioned but unnamed). 20 When Y’hudah sent the young goat by the hand of his friend the Adulami (Justice of my people) to take back the pledge from the woman’s hand, he could not find her. 21 He asked the men of her area saying, “Where is ha-k’deishah the (Sanctified, temple, cult) prostitute? She was at the springs along the way.” But they said, “There hasn’t been a k’deishah temple/cult prostitute here.” The reason she had been at the springs along the way was probably because of the ease of washing up following the act. Notice that Y’hudah had thought Tamar to be a devotee to an idolatrous cult, a holy prostitute. The word k’deishah comes from the root kadash, meaning to consecrate, sanctify etc. In this case Y’hudah slept with Tamar thinking she was the devoted prostitute of a heathen deity. This sheds light on the extreme lack of integrity and low spiritual state of Y’hudah at the time of these events. Alternatively, given than a number of scholars who believe cult prostitution was not practiced at this time, we can understand the Hebrew text to infer that this union, because it will bring about the line of David and the birth of the Messiah, is a K’deishah (holy, sanctified) union, in spite of the way it was consummated. Redemption seeded in a fallen world. 22 So he returned to Y’hudah and said, “I couldn’t find her, and the people of that place also said, ‘There hasn’t been a k’deishah (Sanctified, temple, cult) prostitute here.’” 23 Then Y’hudah said, “Let her take them for herself, or we’ll be held in contempt. Behold, I did send this young goat, but you couldn’t find her.” Judah was afraid of being held in moral contempt, not only by his own family but also by the surrounding peoples, Chirah included. This is an acknowledgement by him that even among the Godless peoples what he has done would be considered immoral. 24 About three months later, Y’hudah (Praise) was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar (Date palm) has been a prostitute—look, she’s even pregnant by prostitution.” “Bring her out!” Y’hudah said, “and let her be burned.” Targum of Yonatan suggests, Tamar was judged deserving of this death, because she was the daughter (granddaughter) of a priest (Not an Israelite priest); and therefore, comes under the same law recorded in the times of Moses, Lev. 21:9, which calls for the offender to be burned. Both Yarchi and Rashi say that Tamar was the daughter of Shem, who was thought to be the same person as Melchizedek, priest of the Most High God. [Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 4. 1. Rashi, sighting the Midrash] 25 As she was being brought out, she sent word to her father-in-law saying, “I’m pregnant by the man to whom these things belong.” Then she said, “Do you recognize whose these are—the seal (ring), the garment (bracelet, bound thread) and the tribal staff?” 26 Then Y’hudah recognized them and said, “She is more righteous than I, since I didn’t give her to my son Shelah.” He was not intimate with her again. Judah did not say, “She is righteous”, thus ignoring the defiling sexual act, rather he said, “She is more righteous than I”. While we may empathize with Tamar’s situation and even honour her tenacity and motivation, we must none the less conclude that even under these circumstances both Judah and Tamar are guilty of a sin which is considered sexual immorality by the Torah (Leviticus 18:15). The progeny of this relationship serve the redemptive purpose of God because He is able to work all things (even the fruit of sin) together for good to them that love Him, to them who are the called according to His purpose (Romans 8:28). Both Judah and Tamar will become lovers of God, they are members of the called. They are chosen and will be redeemed. 27 Now when it was time for her to give birth, behold there were twins in her womb. 28 While she was giving birth, one stuck out his hand, and the midwife took a scarlet thread and tied it to his hand saying, “This one came out first.” The significance of the scarlet thread should not be overlooked. It is a sign of the first born and a symbol of blood covenant and redemption. The colour scarlet will continue to play an important part in the symbolism of Israel’s redemption. On her door posts in Egypt, on the wall of Jericho, and at the cross of the Mashiyach. Here, the sacrificial blood comes first but the resurrection (Perez: breaking out, rising) follows. 29 But as he was pulling his hand back in, behold, his brother came out. So she said, “How you have broken through! The breach is because of you.” And he (Y’hudah) named him Perez (Break out, arise). 30 Afterward his brother, on whose hand was the scarlet thread, came out. And he (Y’hudah) named him Zerah (rising, dawning, shinning, and appearing). From Perez, in a line of succession, the Messiah will break forth, (Micah 2:13; Matt.1:3). The names Perez and Zerah both contribute to identifying the Messiah. He will be One Who is born of the earth, sheds blood (Scarlet thread), and then is to the earth’s womb [death] (Zerah), only to re-emerge, break out, resurrect, and breach (Perez) death’s prison; to appear shinning as the dawning light (Zerah) of eternal life. It is not difficult to see the correlation with Joseph’s life story. Having read the account of the birth of Judah’s two sons and realised the redemptive message in their names and the direct link from Perez to David and finally the Messiah, we are able to observe a comparison between Joseph and Judah. Joseph is clearly a type for Messiah and is affirmed in his role as a redeemer in Israel through dreams and events. His apparent death and later, his rise to glory, allude to the life of the coming Messiah, his death and resurrection. All this is taking place over a thousand years before Yeshua’s birth. The birth of Zerah and Perez also tells of the death and resurrection of the Messiah but has the added aspect of physical connection to Yeshua’s genealogy. In Perez is the seed that will make way for the Messiah to be born into humanity. Where Joseph is a type for Messiah, Perez is a literal forebear of the Messiah. It makes sense for these events to be included at this juncture, in order to show that the coming of the Messiah has been firmly decided and will be further illuminated in the outworking of Joseph’s calling. © Yaakov Brown 2017 Hatred, while dangerous, is no match for jealousy. 37:1 Va’ishev Now dwelled, remained, abided Yaakov (Follows after the heel) in the land where his father had m’goreiy made his pilgrimage (sojourned), in the land of K’naan (Lowland). 2 These are the toledot (generations) of Yaakov (Follows after the heel). Yosef (YHVH [Mercy] will add)… Genesis/Bereshit 37 begins this way, “Yaakov dwelt, remained, abided in the land of his father’s pilgrimage.” Avraham and Yitzchak--Yaakov’s fathers—were temporarily employed in the land as sojourners while on their pilgrimage with HaShem and in a generational sense, toward the Land of Israel. Yaakov on the other hand, had become a permanent resident following his exile and pilgrimage of return. The Webster dictionary defines the word sojourn as, “a temporary stay,” others have inferred the idea that to sojourn is to work and live in a land while journeying to another. Both these ideas are present in the text of Genesis 37:1. This concept is important for us today both physically and spiritually. Firstly Yaakov being a resident, one who dwelt in the land, has the right to return to the land of promise. Today we see the media and the majority Muslim world surround the physical land of Israel, often demanding that Yaakov/Yisrael leave the land for the sake of peace. In fact the schools of surrounding Muslim nations teach that the Shoah—Holocaust—is a lie and the religious zealots in these same nations preach that the genocide of Yaakov is the only answer. It should be noted that even in the unlikely event that Yisrael/Yaakov were to leave the land, he would eventually return, not by his own strength but by the strength of Hashem—God. Avraham and Yitzchak saw the promise and journeyed toward it, but Yaakov received the promise. This parashah (Torah portion) begins with Yaakov, the follower, rather than Yisrael the overcomer. This is because it was while he was yet seeking that God found him. Spiritually speaking perhaps we should do a reboot of our Messianic/Christian philosophy and consider this; Avraham and Yitzchak journeyed but Yaakov dwelt. It has become popular to disassociate ourselves from immutable truth with the words, “everyone is on a journey,” while this is of course true, it must be held loosely within the mystery of absolute truth. What if we, as followers of and heirs with Messiah are no longer on a temporal journey? What if we are already dwelling? Those who journey suffer fatigue and look perpetually forward to a goal, which, as long as they journey, is always out of reach. What if we, like Yaakov, have begun at the goal? What if we are beginning at our destination in order to find our destination? Of course this is only possible if we have a Yosef. It’s important to note that Genesis 37:2 begins with these words, “These are the generations of Yaakov.” Then, in the very next line it says, “Yosef”. Without Yosef (YHVH adds) there are no generations of Yaakov/Yisrael. Yosef, being a type for Mashiyakh (Messiah) allows us retrospective insight into the plan of God. Yosef is called “The lord of dreams,” He dreamed (chal’m made firm) a dream (chalom). His dreams are firmly bound both to the earth and to the universe in the eternal plan of God’s redemption for humanity. Who is our Yosef? Who is our lord of dreams? Is it not Mashiyakh Yeshua? It is Yeshua who leads us from our destination in Him to our destination in God, the Olam Haba (World to come). He is the Goal and the Beginning. Does all this mean that we are no longer sojourners? No, but, one who dwells temporarily in a land that he will one day dwell in permanently is beyond the temporal journeying of humanity. We have already begun an eternal journey in Messiah that is outside time and space. In Messiah Yeshua we live in the eternal present. Our forebears gave us the hope (ha-tikvah) which they heard from the Word (ha-D’var) of God. Now in our time we have been given the success of Yaakov, the filling of that hope, the ability to dwell in the journey through Messiah. We have been made secure and from security we birth transformation—both personal and corporate. Yaakov dwelt, abided, remained, and lived in the land his fathers’ had journeyed through—on their way to where Yaakov would dwell (His bones were brought up from Egypt to be interred in the land of Israel), and this was made possible through the life of the Lord of dreams, without Whom there would be no generations of Yaakov. Yaakov’s son was 17 years old, he was shepherding the flocks, and he was a youth with his brothers— with the sons of his father’s wives (nisheiy) Bilhah (troubled) and Zilpah (A trickling). Yosef (YHVH [Mercy] will add) brought back a bad report about them to their father. When Yosef was 17, Yaakov was 108 years old and Yitzchak, at 168 years of age was still 12 years from his death. This event occurred nine years after Yaakov returned home and at the approximate time of Leah’s death according to traditional dating (Seder Olam 2). This helps make sense of the fact that Bilhah and Zilpah are mentioned but Leah is not. Rachel had already passed away. It is worth noting that Bilhah and Zilpah are called nisheiy (wives) here. Among the Patriarchs, so called “concubines” were afforded the status of wives. Thus their sons are legitimate heirs. Yosef is seen here in the role of shepherd from a young age. This has great significance in Biblical thought because Israel’s prophets, rulers, kings and leaders were often called to their positions from the practical vocation of the shepherd. Additionally, God Himself shepherds Israel and calls her leaders shepherds. This allusion to Yosef’s vocation illuminates that which is to come. Yosef is called a “naar” (youth) because, with the exception of Benyamin, he is the youngest among the brothers. The text can be understood to be saying that, “Yosef was with his brothers and specifically with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah” or, “Yosef was with his brothers the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah. The sons of Bilhah and Zilpah are: Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher. Yosef’s ill report regarding his brothers seems to be nothing more than the tell-tailing action of a young sibling. It is impossible to tell whether he was informing his father of idolatrous practices or other defiling sin. The normal response from siblings who become the victims of tell-tailing is to despise the whistle blower. 3 Now Yisrael (Overcomes in God) loved Yosef (YHVH [Mercy] will add) more than all his other sons because he was the son of his old age. So he had made him a K’tonet pasiym (Literally a tunic flat: meaning that it reached the palms [flat] of the hands and the soles [flat] of the feet). Up till this point the name Yaakov has been used. That is, the follower after the heel, the man. Now the name Yisrael is employed. Why? Because not only is Yosef, Yaakov the man’s favourite son, he will also become the favoured one and deliverer of Yisrael the nation. Many a modern parenting manual will look poorly on Yaakov favouring Yosef, however, there is plenty of Biblical precedent for favouritism. Throughout Scripture God Himself is portrayed as favouring a one person over another, even to the point of saying, “I loved Yaakov and Esau I hated” (Malachi 1:2-3). In fact, one could say that Yaakov was honouring God by favouring Yosef. The Zohar suggests that Yosef (like Yaakov) was a more spiritually attuned than his brothers, and thus gained his father’s favour. Avraham favoured Yitzchak over Ishmael, and now Yaakov favours Yosef over his brothers. The Patriarchs were simply affirming that the subject of their favour was the one who was to guard the spiritual heritage of their descendants. In a society where everyone’s a winner, this Biblical favouritism is a concept that the modern western mind cannot abide. Regardless, God’s favour remains on His people for His Name’s sake and in spite of the Politically Correct protests of the liberal media. He will continue to honour and favour those who look to Him. K’tonet pasiym is interpreted by Rashi as, “a garment of fine wool”, which may well have been the case given that Yosef and his brothers were shepherds. The now famous coat of many colours idea comes from Yafeh Toar, which says that it was a long-sleeved embroidered tunic made of variously coloured strips of fine wool. The second of the two Hebrew words, “Pasiym” comes from the root “pasas” meaning to vanish or disappear. It is of course true that Yosef will soon disappear from his father’s sight. However, his father will see him again. To Yaakov Yosef will be thought dead but he will see him resurrected. This garment may also have denoted authority, even the highest authority in the family under Yaakov himself. That is, the status of the first-born. 4 When his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not overcome their hatred in order to speak to him in shalom. The special attention Yosef received only fuelled the tension he had already created by bringing a bad report of his brothers to his father. It may be that his brothers had truly done wrong and were sore at being exposed, then doubly so when they saw Yosef being treated with a prestigious garment. 5 Then Yosef (YHVH [Mercy] will add) chal’m (bound firmly: dreamed) a chalom dream and told his brothers—and they increased their hatred toward him, stewing on it (letting it go round in their minds). The Hebrew “Chalom” is employed twice in sequence to emphasize the dream and its prophetic nature. The primitive root CH-L-M means to firmly bind. Therefore the remez (hint) inferred by the root tells us that Yosef experienced a dream that was bound firmly twofold. That is, it had already been established outside of time and space as a certainty. From the perspective of the dream Giver (God), Yosef was already the ruler of his brothers and would become ruler over Yaakov’s household. The Hebrew, “vayageid l’echayv vayosifu od sono oto” translates literally as, “And came to his brothers an increase (yosef) of continually cycling hatred toward him”. This is a Hebrew wordplay using the same root word from which Yosef’s name is derived, to show an adding/increasing of hatred rather than an adding/increasing of status or wealth. It may have been immature of Yosef to share the dream with his brothers, however, he may simply have been excited by what he perceived to be the certainty of it and wanted to share that excitement with his siblings. Whatever Yosef’s motivation for sharing the dream, his brothers saw it only as another way in which he was usurping their position and stature. 6 He said to them, “Please listen to Ha-chalom the dream chalam’ti I dreamed. We could read, “Please listen to this firmly established thing that is firmly established”. This in part is what the brothers are hearing. Throughout Scripture, beginning with Avraham, dreams are known to be a means by which God speaks and conveys His established purposes to his chosen ones. The sons surely know of the stories of the dreams of their father and forefathers. This only intensifies their ill feeling toward Yosef. 7 V’henei and now, behold, we were binding sheaves in the middle of the field. V’henei And behold All of a sudden, my sheaf arose and stood upright. V’henei And now, behold, your sheaves turned around and bowed down to my sheaf.” As we can see from the following verse, there is no doubt in the minds of Yosef’s brothers as to what the dream means. Surely Yosef also understood its meaning. Was he wise to share it? Probably not. But, it seems that HaShem intended for Yosef to do so, knowing that the progression of favour placed upon Yosef would ignite a jealous rage in them that would end in their selling him into slavery in Egypt. We can see that this first dream alludes to the future, when Yosef’s brothers will seek grain (Sheaves) from Egypt and will bow before Yosef, the supplier of grain (Sheave). The fact that they turn around to bow to him in the dream shows t’shuvah (repentance), and a change in their attitude toward Yosef in the future. It is also important to note that Yosef’s sheave arose, that is, it needed to be lifted up, to rise from the ground. In other words, the dream also prophesied the time of his trouble, a time when he would be brought down to the ground. It is from this position that he will arise and stand upright, firm. 8 And his brothers said to him, “Will you ha-maloch be the king tim’loch king of us? Will you mashol rule and have tim’shol dominion over us?” And there came to his brothers an increase (yosef) of continually cycling hatred toward him because of his dreams and because of his words. In classic Hebrew a king reigns with the consent of his subjects whereas a ruler dominates them against their will. If this is the intended meaning here, then the brothers are incredulous at the idea that they might willingly consent to Yosef ruling over them as king. This is of course exactly what will happen when they seek help from Yosef in Egypt. 9 But then he chalom dreamed an od reoccurring/cycling chalom dream va’safer and recounted it to his brothers, saying, “Henei Behold, now, I have just chalam’ti dreamed a chalom dream od reoccurring/cycling. And Henei Behold, Suddenly, there was the sun and the moon and the eleven stars bowing down to me!” This dream is similar in meaning to the first but is not the same. The second dream includes not only symbols of Yosef’s brothers (stars) but also alludes to Yosef’s father (Sun: Yaakov) and mother (Moon: Rachel, who is already dead). In the ancient East the sun, moon and stars were worshipped as deities and had masculine and feminine designations. Even today in some Middle Eastern and Eastern European countries, the sun and moon are used as symbols on bathrooms to distinguish between them for male (Sun) and female (moon) use. Yaakov’s dream is communicating the fact that he will rule over his father’s household, and that he will rule as God’s representative, over the false celestial gods of Egypt. This is prophetic not only of Yosef but also of Yisrael. This is why Yosef must rule over the house of Yaakov, that is, the people of Yisrael. Thus it is through Yosef that Yisrael will gain her freedom from slavery to the false gods of Egypt. This is also a drash (comparative teaching) for our time. Many in our time pursue false gods and many of us have come under subjugation to false gods, sin and misguided syncretism. However, God has supplied us with a Yosef, Messiah Yeshua, and God with us. It is Yeshua Who offers to deliver us from our subjugation to sin and idolatry. In fact, this is why a majority of the Jewish nation did not accept Yeshua at His first coming. It was part of the plan of God to make Yisrael like the sons of Yaakov, their ancestors. Just as the sons of Yaakov rejected Yosef (their redeemer) at first, many of the Jews of Yeshua’s time also rejected Him. However, like the sons of Yaakov, their ancestors, Yisrael the nation, the Jews of these latter days, will come to Yeshua in repentance and receive deliverance from sin, hatred and the oppression of the nations who seek our destruction. The nations would do well to remember that our Messiah, like us, is a sheave, risen and standing in a field of sheaves, blood of our blood, the King unto Whom we will willingly bow as individuals and as a nation. Romans 11 speaks of the day yet to come when all of the ethnic people of Israel will be saved through Yeshua our King Messiah. 10 He told it to his father as well as his brothers. Then his father rebuked him and said to him, “What is ha-chalom the dream you have chalam’ta dreamed? Will we really come—your mother and I with your brothers—to bow down to the ground to you?” 11 So his brothers were jealous of him, but his father shamar, guarded, kept, paid heed to ha-D’var the Word. Here is another significant difference. Yosef also tells his father about the dream. This was either the misguided confidence of youth or an act of incredible bravery. Either way, Yaakov’s response, while it is initially one of rebuke, ends with contemplation. Like Miriyam (Mary) the mother of our Mashiyach, Yaakov ponders the words of his son. The Talmid Yochanan calls Yeshua Ha-D’var, the Word (John 1:1). In the present text we could read retrospectively, “His father paid heed to Yeshua (Ha-D’var). In fact, that is exactly what Yaakov was contemplating. He was hearing a dream that foretold the resurrection of the dead. After all, Rachel, the mother of Yosef was already dead. In order for her to bow before her son she would have to be resurrected. Therefore, Yosef’s dream also tells of the last day, Yom Ha-Din, when even the Patriarchs and Matriarchs will bow before the Eternal King of Israel and the Nations, Yeshua, for Whom Yosef is a type. We notice that the hatred of the brothers has now turned to jealousy. Hatred, while dangerous, is no match for jealousy. At first Yosef’s brothers hated him but did not see him as a real threat, now they feel threatened, and have become jealous, feeling powerless to prevent Yosef’s dreams from coming true. As a result it is not their hatred but their jealousy that acts as the catalyst for the sinful actions that follow. 12 Then his brothers went to graze their father’s flocks at Shechem (Place of burdens). 13 Yisrael (Overcome in God) said to Yosef (YHVH [Mercy] will add), “Aren’t your brothers grazing the flocks in Shechem (Place of burdens)? Come, let me send you to them.” “Heneini Here I am, ready, in awe and willing” he (Yosef) said to him (Yaakov). Yosef’s response to Yaakov is one of profound obedience and humility. Heneini is used only in situations of absolute devotion and willing obedience. It’s no coincidence that this same word has been employed in the past at times when other fathers’ have been about to lose or seemingly about to lose their sons (Gen. 22:1, 7, 11; 27:1). 14 Then he said to him, “Go now, and check on the shalom (peace) of your brothers and the shalom of the flocks and bring word back to me.” So he sent him from the valley of Chevron (Company of friends) and he went to Shechem (Place of burden). The double use of the word shalom here is in stark contrast to the inability of Yosef’s brother’s to speak to him in shalom (v.4). The remez (hint) at an allegorical interpretation is poignant. Yosef is leaving the company of friends to go to a place of burden. 15 A man appeared to him there, wandering in the field, and the man asked him, “What are you looking for?” 16 “I’m looking for my brothers,” he said. “Please tell me where they’re grazing.” This verse is reminiscent of, “A man wrestled with him till day break” (Gen. 32:24). It is possible that the man who guided Yosef toward his destiny is the same man that wrestled with Yaakov. The Targum Yonatan, Pirke Eliezer and Yarchi all say that the man who appeared is Gavriel (Mighty one of God) in humanoid form. Rambam says that he had been sent to lead Yosef to his brothers. 17 The man said, “They pulled up camp and moved on from here. For I heard them saying, ‘Let’s go to Dotay’nah (two wells).’” So Yosef (YHVH adds) went after his brothers and found them in Dotay’nah (two wells). 18 Now they saw him from a distance. Before he was close to them they plotted together against him in order to kill him. 19 They said to one another, “Henei Behold, now comes the baal ha-chalomot husband, lord, master of the dreams!” These sons of Yaakov and brothers to Yosef were planning murder. A far cry from their father’s righteousness. The mocking proclamation, “Henei Behold, now comes the baal ha-chalomot husband, lord, master of the dreams!” is both ironic and prophetic, even bordering on blasphemy, given that Yosef’s dreams were a form of conversation with HaShem. We notice that they call Yosef the lord of the dreams, that is, lord of the two specific dreams he had shared with them. The first dream being the firmly established future fact of their willing submission to Yosef (A type for Moshiyach). The second dream being the established future fact of both Yosef’s father’s willing submission to him and of the final resurrection. 20 Come on now! Let’s kill him and throw him into one of ha-borot the wells, so we can say that an evil animal devoured him. Then let’s see what becomes of his dreams.” A careful reading of the Hebrew text provides the reason for the qualifying phrase in verse 24, “Now the well was empty with no water in it”. The translation, “the well” for the Hebrew ha-borot is strengthened by the meaning of the name Dotay’nah (two wells). In other words, they wanted to put him in one of the two wells. Given that at this point the intention was murder, they were probably meaning to throw Yosef into the well that was filled with water. Thus the counter solution of Reuven in verse 24. 21 But Reuven (Behold a son) heard and rescued him out of their hands, saying, “We must not beat him to death.” 22 In order to rescue him from their hand and to return him to his father, Reuven (Behold a son) said to them, “Don’t shed blood! Throw him into this well here in the wilderness, but don’t lay a hand on him!” Reuven seems an unlikely hero here. After all, he had lost standing in Yaakov’s household due to his sin with Bilhah, and he probably suspected that Yosef, as the favoured son of Yaakov, would receive some of his status as first-born (Gen. 35:22; 1 Chron. 5:1). In order to convince his brothers not to kill Yosef, Reuven had to come up with an effective, if temporary, alternative (Gen 42:22). This tells us that the brothers were intent on killing Yosef, a sad reflection on the moral character of Yosef’s brothers. Reuven seems to point out an alternate well (one of the two), the one without water in it, knowing that Yosef has more chance of survival in the empty well. 23 So as soon as Yosef (YHVH adds) came up to his brothers they stripped Yosef (YHVH adds) of his tunic (K’tonet pasiym [Literally a tunic flat]). 24 Then they took him and threw him into the well. (Now the well was empty, with no water in it.) Up till now Yosef had still been approaching. At once upon his arrival (obviously oblivious to his brothers’ intentions), Yosef was taken and stripped of the garment that symbolized his status as favoured son and ruler over his brothers. Yosef pleaded with his brothers not to throw him into the well (Gen 42:21). The stripping of Yosef’s garment is also prophetic of the stripping of Yeshua’s garment prior to His execution (Luke 23:34). 25 Then they sat down to eat bread. When they looked up, v’henei and behold, at once, there was a caravan of Yishm’eiliym (Ishmaelites: Hears God) coming from Gilead (Witness heap/stones), with their camels carrying gum, balsam, and myrrh—going to bring them down to mitzrayimah Egypt (double distress). The Targums of Onkelos and Yonatan call the Ishmaelites, Arabians; and the Targum of Yerushalayim, Saracens. They are descendants of Avraham’s son Ishmael. A remez (hint) appears in the meanings of the names in this verse. Those who hear God have come to bear witness to Yosef’s (Yaakov’s) double distress. That is, the present distress of Yosef and the latter distress of Israel. The Ishmaelites bring myrrh among their goods. A fragrance associated to death and morning. 26 Then Y’hudah (Praise) said to his brothers, “What profit is there if we kill our brother and cover up his blood? Come on! 27 Let’s sell him to the Ishmaelites. Let’s not lay our hand on him—since he’s our brother, our own flesh.” His brothers listened to him. The fact that Y’hudah is listened to infers his position as leader of the disgruntled brothers. Reuven had to support his call for moderation in the treatment of Yosef, whereas the brothers agreed straight away with the proposal made by Y’hudah. Whatever we decide regarding the motivations of both Reuven and Y’hudah, they are both responsible for delivering Yosef from the murderous hands of their brothers. 28 When some men, Midyaniym (Strife) merchants, passed by, they dragged Yosef (YHVH adds) up and out of the well and they sold Yosef to the Yishm’eiliym (Ishmaelites: Hears God) for 20 pieces of silver, and they brought Yosef (YHVH adds) to mitzrayimah Egypt (double distress). It’s clear from the both the text and from ancient mapping, that the Midianites and the Ishmaelites were close neighbours of similar ethnicity (The sons of Ishmael had intermarried with the Midianites and vice versa). This is why the Targums call both peoples Arabians. The answer to the interchangeable use of these names is that they were traveling and trading together. Twenty pieces of silver equal 5 shekalim, which is the price for the redemption of the first-born sons of Israel (Num. 3:45-47). This is the Torah’s way of saying that Yosef will receive the status of a first-born. He was after all, the first-born son of Yaakov’s beloved wife Rachel (Ewe), a shepherd born of a sheep. Yosef was to be a shepherd of shepherds. Sound familiar? It should. He is a type for our Moshiyach Yeshua, the Shepherd, born of His sheep. Alternatively, if we take the twenty pieces of silver to be twenty shekalim, then this is the redemption price for one who is dedicated to HaShem (Lev. 27:5). Also an allusion to the Messiah. 29 When Reuven (Behold a son) returned to the well and saw that Yosef (YHVH adds) was not in the well, he tore his clothes. 30 Then he returned to his brothers and said, “The boy is gone! And I—where should I go?” Reuven was obviously not made party to the plan to sell Yosef and so he returns, possibly from his assigned watch, to find that his brothers have done away with Yosef. This is possibly why he is recorded later saying, “Therefore, behold, also his (Benyamin) blood is required” Gen 42:22. Which infers that Reuven may not have been aware of the selling of Yosef. The act of tearing his garment is symbolic of mourning, meaning that he believed Yosef to be dead, probably murdered. It’s quite possible that he found out that Yosef was still alive only after Yosef himself revealed the fact. Again, this conveys to us that Reuven had lost all respect and authority as first-born son. Reuven was distraught because, not only was Yosef missing and presumably dead, but also, as first-born he would have to give an account of this to his father which would only further diminish his standing in the family. 31 So they took Yosef’s (YHVH adds) tunic, slaughtered a billy goat, and they dipped the tunic into the blood. 32 Then they sent the K’tonet pasiym (Literally a tunic flat) long-sleeved tunic, and it was brought to their father, and they said, “We found this. Do you recognize whether or not it is your son’s tunic?” 33 He did recognize it and said, “My son’s tunic! An evil animal has devoured him! Yosef must be torn to pieces!” It seems that the brothers manufacture the evidence for Yosef’s murder as a response to Reuven’s plea, “Where should I go?” They may have reasoned that if Reuven had concluded that Yosef might have been taken elsewhere rather than murdered, so would their father. It is possible, given the inference in Gen 42:22, that the brothers also hid the dipping of Yosef’s coat in blood from Reuven. The phrasing, “Then they sent the K’tonet pasiym” infers that they sent the tunic ahead of them with a servant and only after Yaakov had received the initial news did they arrive to give explanation. If this is the correct reading it reflects very poorly on the brothers, showing their actions to be cowardly and undignified. Yaakov’s sons (Perhaps with the exception of Reuven) lied in two ways: first, they lied about what they had done, pretending that Yosef had been killed accidentally by a wild animal, and second, they lied by omission when they failed to correct their father’s assumption that Yosef had been ripped apart by a wild animal. 34 Yaakov tore his clothing and put on sackcloth and mourned for his son many days. 35 All his sons got up along with all his daughters to console him, but he refused to be comforted. He said, “For I will go down to Sheol to my son, mourning.” So his father kept weeping for him. Yaakov uses the word sheolah (Sheol: holding place of the dead) and not kever (grave). He is professing his belief in the afterlife. This long before the Hellenization of the known world. Those who say that Jews did not believe in the afterlife prior to the Hellenization of the known world are simply wrong. “All his daughters” refers to Dinah and his daughters-in-laws (Rashi & Rambam). The fact that Yaakov refused to be comforted brings to mind another text that prophecies events which were to occur at the time of the Messiah’s birth: “Thus says Hashem; ‘A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rachel, weeping for her banim children, she refuses to be comforted for her banim, because they were no more’” –Jeremiah 31:15 [Mt.2:18]. In this text Rachel is seen as the mother of all Israel’s sons. This adds to the symbolism of Yosef’s second dream. With reference to the phrase, “mourned for his son many days”, [yamiym (days) can be interpreted as years], and based on Megillah 17a Rashi says that Yaakov mourned for the full 22 years until he was reunited to his son Yosef. 36 Meanwhile the Midyaniym (Strife) sold him into mitzrayimah Egypt (double distress), to Potiphar (Belonging to the Sun) an official of Pharaoh (Great house), the commander of the bodyguards. Either, the Midianites here are those traveling with the aforementioned Ishmaelites or Yosef has been sold to them by the Ishmaelites. Potiphar and Pharaoh are thought to be titles rather than proper nouns. An alternate reading of this verse sees Potiphar as the Chief Officer over Pharaoh’s prison guards. Yosef has travelled from Chevron (Community of friends/brothers) to Shechem (Place of burden) to Dotan (two wells) and down to Mitzrayim (Double distress) and into the service of Potiphar (one belonging to the Sun), under the Rule of Pharaoh (the Great house over all the deities of the heavens). However, in fulfilment of his firmly established dream, he will one day rule over Potiphar (the one belonging to the sun), and his generations will leave Pharaoh’s great house of false gods desolate. Yosef’s suffering is serving God’s purposes. One might say that God caused Yosef to suffer so that he could one day deliver his father, mothers and brothers, Yisrael. “Yet it pleased HaShem (Mercy) to bruise Him. He caused Him to suffer. If He makes His all of himself a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, and the will of HaShem (Mercy) will succeed by His hand.” –Isaiah 53:10 “But in this way God has fulfilled what He foretold through all the prophets, saying that His Messiah would suffer.” –Acts 3:18 © Yaakov Brown 2017 It seems that the Torah intentionally connects Esav’s origin story (Gen. 25:30) regarding the red stew with the nature of both Esav and the nation he will become. That is, Edom. Introduction:
Many a novice Bible student has rushed over this genealogy in pursuit of the detailed dramatic epic of Joseph which follows. However, we can’t properly understand the story of Yaakov’s descendants, Joseph included, if we have not taken the time to understand how one of Israel’s greatest enemies came into being. Esav is called Edom, and throughout history, the nation of Edom will play a strong role in resisting God’s plan for the nation of Israel. One would expect that in a chapter of names there is less to observe than there is in a chapter which offers a detailed narrative. However, within just a few lines we discover that an entire world of interpretation awaits us. Biblical names serve both history and allegory, factual account and halachic (ways of walking) principal. There is no need for binary thinking with regard to the text of the Torah. It is not a case of deciding whether we are reading history or moral allegory. To the contrary, we are gifted a mystery made up of all the colours of the rainbow. A history that is so precisely written by the hand of HaShem, that it includes the real life names of individuals while carrying an allegorical moral imperative within the meanings of these names. It’s significant that this genealogy separates the story of Yaakov—whose 12 sons have just been listed, made complete in the land by the birth of Benyamin—from the story of his descendants, which will fill the remainder of the book of Genesis. This concise genealogy of Esav serves one primary purpose, which is to show Esav’s development as both a man and a nation, that is Edom. In addition, Esav’s line is littered with incest and illegitimacy (1 Ch. 1:35-45), which can be interpreted to be in direct opposition to God’s redemptive plan for humanity, worked out in Yisrael. Gen 36:1 Now these are the toledot (generations) of Esav (hairy, make, accomplish), who is Edom (Red, earth, humanity, a people who symbolize resistance to God). Esav, like Yaakov, has two names with two distinct meanings and outcomes. First he is Esav, meaning hairy, from the root asah, meaning to make or accomplish. Second, he is Edom, meaning red, from the root adam, that is red earth, sin affected humanity. Yaakov begins as a follower after the heel and becomes one who overcomes in Elohim, thus being reconciled to the heavens; whereas Esav begins as one who seeks to accomplish his own wealth in his own strength, and by rejecting God, he returns to Edom (the earth, red). Both men have come full circle. Yaakov from blessing to blessing and Esav from curse to curse (Malachi 1:2-3). Both men are individuals, who through their personal choices, give birth to nations that will carry their brand of spirituality or lack thereof, into the future. We could read, “Now these are the generations of one who sought his own strength and was returned to the earth from which he came.” Rav Sforno observes that, “The overpowering desire of Esau for what attracted his eye was demonstrated when he could not remember the name, ‘lentils’ when he was tired, demanding to be given from ‘this red, red stuff’”. It seems that the Torah intentionally connects Esav’s origin story (Gen. 25:30) regarding the red stew with the nature of both Esav and the nation he will become. That is, Edom. Gen 36:2 Esav (hairy, make, accomplish) took his wives from the daughters of Ke’naan (lowland); Adah (generational ornament) the daughter of Elon (oak grove, strength) the Chitti (Terror), and Oholibamah (Tent of Elevation) the daughter of Anah (answer, eye), daughter of Tzibeon (Variegate, dip, dye) the Chiviy (villager, living community); We note that Esav was forty years old when he married his three wives, as recorded in Genesis 26:34. These wives bare different names here from those used in Genesis 26:34, where they were called Yehudit and Bosmat. This is not unusual for the time and culture, as shown by the multiple names of the patriarchs. Rashi notes that Oholibamah is the daughter of two fathers, and seeing that verse 24 records Anah as the son of Tzibeon, concludes that Tzibeon cohabitated with his own daughter-in-law, Anah’s wife, and Oholibamah was the product of his adultery. However, the Torah often uses the terms ben and bat to refer to both sons and grandsons, daughters and granddaughters. Therefore, it may be that the text is simply saying, Oholibamah was the daughter of Anah and the granddaughter of Tzibeon. Gen 36:3 And Basemat (Fragrance) Ishmael’s (Hears God) daughter, sister of Nebayot (Fruitfulness, flourish). Basemat was introduced to the reader in Genesis 28:9 where she is called by her other name, “Machalat” which is from the root machal, meaning forgiveness. Gen 36:4 And Adah (generational ornament) bore to Esav (hairy, make, accomplish) Eliphaz (My god gold); and Basemat (Fragrance) bore Reuel (Friend of God); This first section of genealogy is making a distinction between the sons born in the land (that will become Israel) and those who will be born in the region of Seir. Those born in the land have a closer connection to their cousins, the sons of Yaakov. There is a remez (hint) present in the names of both Adah and Basemat and their sons. Esav’s descendants are given a choice between making mammon (gold, earthly riches: Eliphaz) their god or becoming a friend of the One true Elohim (Reuel). The name Eliphaz may well denote his following after his father’s nature. A man whose god is gold. In the same way, Reuel may have been the exception among Esav’s children, one who became a friend of God. On the other hand, his name could also denote that he was friend to a god, that is, one of his mother’s gods. The latter is more likely given that Esav disappointed his parents by marrying women who worshipped false gods and thus rejecting the God of Israel. None the less, both interpretations are valid. Gen 36:5 And Oholibamah (Tent of Elevation) bore Yeush (Hasten), and Yaalam (Occult, conceal), and Korah (Ice): these are the sons of Esav (hairy, make, accomplish), which were born to him in the land of Ke’naan (lowland). The names of the sons of Oholibamah show a descent into demonic idolatry. As a woman of foreign gods her tent is elevated (Oholibamah) in pride. In other words, the tent of her false ascension houses the sons born to her. With her, Esav hastens (Yeush) toward the occult (Yaalam) and is left holding the icy (Korah) isolation of idolatry. Esav Separates himself from Yaakov This section of the text is reminiscent of the separation of Avraham and Lot (Gen. 13:5-13), and denotes a similar motivation in Esav to that of Lot. Both men, having been shown the light of God by righteous men, chose to separate themselves from those men and subsequently from God. Gen 36:6 And Esav (hairy, make, accomplish) took his wives, and his sons, and his daughters, and all the persons of his household, and his cattle, and all his beasts, and all his substance, which he had acquired in the land of Ke’naan (lowland); and went into the country from the face of his brother Yaakov (Follows at the heel). Gen 36:7 For their riches were too great for them to dwell together; and the land where they were strangers could not bear them because of their cattle. Gen 36:8 Thus dwelt Esav (hairy, make, accomplish) in mount Seir (Shaggy he goat): Esav (hairy, make, accomplish) is Edom (Red). The phrase, “Esav is Edom” connects Esav to his former sin (Red stew: despising his birth-right) and links the people born of him to the land of Seir and its reddish rocky landscape. It also infers the motivation for his leaving Yaakov. That is, an underlying grudge regarding the birth-right. On a practical level, Esav’s household had simply grown too numerous to share the land. Esav captured Mount Seir from its former inhabitants the Chori, according to the blessing of HaShem, “I have given Mount Seir to Esav as a possession”—Deuteronomy 2:5 Gen 36:9 And these are the toledot (generations) of Esav (hairy, make, accomplish) the father of the Edomites (Red) in mount Seir (Shaggy he goat. Heb. Root. sa’ar: dread, storm, very afraid): This genealogy combines the sons of Esav born in Ke’naan with those born in Seir. Additionally, the lineage of one of Israel’s greatest enemies the Amalekites is established through Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz, Esav’s son. Gen 36:10 These are the names of Esav (hairy, make, accomplish) sons; Eliphaz (My god gold) the son of Adah (generational ornament) the wife of Esav (hairy, make, accomplish), Reuel (Friend of God) the son of Bosemat (Fragrance) the wife of Esav (hairy, make, accomplish). Gen 36:11 And the sons of Eliphaz (My god gold) were Teman (South), Omar (To speak), Tzepho (Observant), and Gatam (Burnt valley), and Kenaz (Hunt). Gen 36:12 And Timna (Restrained) was concubine to Eliphaz (My god gold) Esav’s (hairy, make, accomplish) son; and she bore to Eliphaz (My god gold) Amalek (Valley dweller): these were the sons of Adah (generational ornament) Esav's wife. Gen 36:13 And these are the sons of Reuel (Friend of a god); Nachat (rest), and Zerah (Rising), Shammah (astonishment), and Mizzah (Fear): these were the sons of Bosmat (Fragrance) Esav's wife. Gen 36:14 And these were the sons of Aholibamah (Tent of Elevation), the daughter of Anah (answer, eye) the daughter of Tzibeon (Variegate, dip dye), Esav's wife: and she bare to Esav Yeush (Hasten), and Yaalam (Occult, conceal), and Korah (Ice). Gen 36:15 These were chiefs of the sons of Esav: the sons of Eliphaz (My god gold) the firstborn son of Esav; chief Teman (South), chief Omar (To speak), chief Tzepho (Observant), chief Kenaz (Hunt), Gen 36:16 Chief Korah (Ice), chief Gatam (Burnt valley), and chief Amalek (Valley dweller): these are the chief s that came of Eliphaz (My god gold) in the land of Edom (Red, earth); these were the sons of Adah (generational ornament). Gen 36:17 And these are the sons of Reuel (Friend of God) Esav's son; chief Nachat (rest), chief Zerah (Rising), chief Shammah (astonishment), chief Mizzah (Fear): these are the chief s that came of Reuel (Friend of a god) in the land of Edom (Red, earth); these are the sons of Bosmat (Fragrance) Esav's wife. Gen 36:18 And these are the sons of Oholibamah (Tent of Elevation) Esav's wife; chief Yeush (Hasten), chief Yaalam (Occult, conceal), chief Korah (Ice): these were the chief s that came of Oholibamah (Tent of Elevation) the daughter of Anah (answer, eye), Esav's wife. Gen 36:19 These are the sons of Esav, who is Edom (Red, earth) and these are their chiefs. The Torah commentary Lekach Tov links Edom to Rome, showing the ongoing historical struggle between God’s chosen people and her ancient enemy. Esav’s Sons: Eliphaz – My god is gold (Adah) Reuel – Friend of a god (Bosemat) I have made gold my god and have become a friend of a foreign god. Esav’s Sons and Chiefs of Edom: Yeush – Hasten (Oholibamah) Yaalam – Occult, conceal (Oholibamah) Korah – Ice (Oholibamah) I have hastened after the occult and become like ice. Eliphaz’s Sons and Chiefs of Edom: Teman – South Omar – To speak Tzepho – Observant Gatam – Burnt valley Kenaz – Hunt (Eliphaz’s Illegitimate Son to Timna): Amalek – Valley dweller: enemy of Israel (Exodus 17:8-16; Deuteronomy 25:17-19) To the south, away from Jerusalem I have turned to speak with those who observe idolatrous traditions in a burned out valley, I’ve become an enemy of Israel. Reuel’s Sons and Chiefs of Edom: Nachat – rest Zerah – Rising Shammah – astonishment Mizzah – fear Though I once had rest I have risen in pride, become astonished by God and fearful of my future. Sons of Seir: Lotan – Covering Shobal – Flowing Tzideon – Dipped, dyed, coloured Anah – answer, eye Dishon – Thresher Etzer – Treasure Disahn - Thresher Eliphaz: Eliphaz is also the name of one of Job’s (so called) friends (Job 2:11) and is called a Temanite (Southerner), that is, of the region of Teman (South) or a descendant of Teman. This Eliphaz is probably not the same person as Eliphaz the son of Esav (Gen. 36:4) but rather a descendant of Teman, one of the chiefs that came from Eliphaz (Gen. 36:15). If this understanding is correct, the Eliphaz of Job lived sometime after the Patriarchs in the land of Uz (Gen. 36:28), a large territory east of the Jordan valley which included Edom (La. 4:21) in the south and Aram in the north (Gen 10:23; 22:21). Gen 36:20 These are the sons of Seir (Shaggy he goat, very afraid) the Chori (Cave dweller, hole), who inhabited the land; Lotan (Covering), and Shobal (Flowing), and Tzibeon (coloured), and Anah (answer, eye), Gen 36:21 And Dishon (Thresher), and Etzer (treasure), and Dishan (Thresher): these are the chiefs of the Chori (Cave dweller), the children of Seir (Shaggy he goat, very afraid) in the land of Edom (Red, earth). The Seirites were the original inhabitants of Seir (Genesis 14:6). Esav’s descendants supplanted them according to God’s gifting of Seir to Esav (Deuteronomy 2:12). Gen 36:22 And the children of Lotan (Covering) were Chori (Cave dweller, hole) and Hemam (Exterminating); and Lotan’s (Covering) sister was Timna (Restrained). The link between Lotan, a Chori chief and Timna, concubine to Eliphaz, son of Esav; shows that in part, Esav/Edom usurped the land of Seir through intermarriage. Gen 36:23 And the children of Shobal (Flowing) were these; Alvan (Tall ascend), and Manachat (Rest, comfort), and Ebal (Stone), Shepho (Bold), and Onam (Vigorous). Gen 36:24 And these are the children of Tzibeon (coloured); both Ayah (Falcon), and Anah (answer, eye): this was that Anah (answer, eye) that found the mules in the wilderness, as he fed the asses of Tzibeon (coloured) his father. Anah has special mention here perhaps because he is the illegitimate son of Tzibeon, who is called his brother in verse 20. Rashi asserts that Anah was responsible, as inferred by the text, for cross breeding a mare with a donkey, thus producing the mule, an abomination by Torah standards (Rashi; Pesachim 54a). Gen 36:25 And the children of Anah (answer, eye) were these; Dishon (Thresher), and Oholibamah (Tent of Elevation) the daughter of Anah (answer, eye). Gen 36:26 And these are the children of Dishon (Thresher); Chemdan (Desire), and Eshban (Fire of discernment), and Itran (Advantage), and Cheran (Iyre). Gen 36:27 The children of Etzer (treasure) are these; Bilhan (Their decrepitude) and Zaavan (Troubled), and Akan (Sharp sighted). Gen 36:28 The children of Dishan (Thresher) are these; Uz (Wooded), and Aran (Joyous). Gen 36:29 These are the chiefs that came from the Chori (Cave dweller); chief Lotan (Covering), chief Shobal (Flowing), chief Tzibeon (coloured), chief Anah (answer, eye), Gen 36:30 Chief Dishon (Thresher), chief Etzer (treasure), chief Dishan (Thresher): these are the chief s that came of Chori (Cave dweller), among their chief s in the land of Seir (Shaggy he goat). Chiefs of Edom before There Were Kings in Israel: Bela – Destruction Yobab – Desert Chusham – Haste Hadad – Mighty Samlah – Garment Shaul – Desired, ask, enquire Baal-Hanan – Baal (husband) is gracious Hadar – Honour Gen 36:31 And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom (Red, earth), before there reigned any king over the children of Israel. This verse is probably a scribal addition to the original text written by Moses and completed by Joshua. It was probably added following the Kingdom age of Israel. Ibn Ezra suggests that the following listing of kings are those who reigned prior to Moses, who, as saviour and leader of Israel, was the first King of Israel. According to this interpretation, the aforementioned clause refers to Moses and is therefore not a later scribal addition. Gen 36:32 And Bela (Destruction) the son of Beor (Burning) reigned in Edom (Red, earth): and the name of his city was Dinhabah (Judgement given). Gen 36:33 And Bela (Destruction) died, and Yobab (Desert) the son of Zerach (Rising) of Bozrah (Sheepfold, fortress) reigned in his stead. Gen 36:34 And Yobab (Desert) died, and Chusham (haste) of the land of Temani (Southward) reigned in his stead. Gen 36:35 And Chusham (haste) died, and Hadad (Mighty) the son of Bedad (Solitary), who smote Midian (Strife) in the field of Moab (Of father), reigned in his stead: and the name of his city was Avit (Ruins). Gen 36:36 And Hadad (Mighty) died, and Samlah (Garment) of Masrekah (Vineyard of Noble Vines) reigned in his stead. Gen 36:37 And Samlah (Garment) died, and Shaul (Desired, ask, enquire) of Rechobot (Wide place of streets) by the river reigned in his stead. Gen 36:38 And Shaul (Desired) died, and Baalhanan (Baal is gracious) the son of Achbor (Mouse) reigned in his stead. Gen 36:39 And Baalhanan (Baal is gracious) the son of Achbor (Mouse) died, and Hadar (Honour) reigned in his stead: and the name of his city was Pau (Bleating); and his wife's name was Mehetabel (Favoured of God), the daughter of Matred (Pushing forward), the daughter of Mezahab (Waters of Gold). Chiefs of Esav: Timnah - Restrained Alvah - Evil Yetet – A nail Oholibamah – Tent of Elevation Elah - Terebinth Pinon - Darkness Kenaz - Hunt Tman - South Mizbar - Fortress Magdiel – Prince of God Iram - Anguish Gen 36:40 And these are the names of the chiefs that came of Esav, according to their families, after their places, by their names; chief Timnah (Restrained), chief Alvah (evil), chief Yetet (a nail), Gen 36:41 Chief Oholibamah (Tent of Elevation), chief Elah (Terebinth), chief Pinon (Darkness), The phrases, “after their places, by their names” show a change in the method for naming chiefs. The earlier group of rulers (v.15) used their own names. After the death of Hadad and the end of the Edomite monarchy, the ensuing leaders were known as chiefs of their respective regions. This new procedure is supported by 1 Chronicles 1:51, “And Hadad (Hadar) died and the chiefs of Edom were: the chief of Timna…” etc. (Rashi). Gen 36:42 Chief Kenaz (Hunt), chief Teman (South), chief Mibzar (Fortress), Gen 36:43 Chief Magdiel (Prince of God), chief Iram (Excitement, anguish): these be the chief s of Edom (Red, earth), according to their habitations in the land of their possession: he is Esav (Hairy, make, accomplish) the father of the Edomites (Red, earth). “He is Esav” means, the nation of Edom is like Esav, a man who rejected his priestly role in the family of God, trading it for a pot of stew. Thus Edom the nation is one that rejects the God of Israel and stands in direct and constant opposition to God’s purposes for Israel. We are left with this chilling prophecy over the nations who reject Israel’s God and seek to destroy His ethnic chosen people. This is Esav, (who) remained in his sin from beginning to end, for he never repented (Megillah 11a). “Wasn’t Esav Yaakov’s brother?” declares HaShem (YHVH: Mercy). “I loved Yaakov, 3 but Esav I hated. I turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the jackals in the desert. 4 “The descendants of Esav may say, ‘We have been beaten down, but we will rebuild the ruins.’ “Yet, this is what HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) of Heavens Armies says: They may rebuild, but I will tear it down. They will be called ‘the Wicked Land’ and ‘the people with whom HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) is always angry.’ 5 You will see these things with your own eyes and say, ‘Even outside the borders of Israel HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) is great.’ –Malachi 1:2-5 © Yaakov Brown 2017 The fear of God means an end to fear. We begin this chapter with Yaakov still fearful of the possibility of attack from the surrounding peoples as a result of the actions of Shimon and Levi.
35:1 And Elohim (God the Judge) said to Ya’akov (Follows after the heel), “Arise, go up to Beit-El (House of God, the Judge), and settle there; and make there a Mizbe’ach (altar of blood sacrifice) to El (God, Judge) Who appeared to you when you were fleeing from the face of Esav (Hairy) achicha (your brother).” Approximately 22 years earlier Yaakov had vowed that the place he had dreamed of while in Beiyt El would be none other than the House of God. At that time he had set up a pillar of remembrance commemorating his meeting with God. Yaakov’s intention was to return to his father’s house and although he had settled for a short time outside the city of Shechem, he is now being reminded by God of the vow he had made following his encounter with God at Beiyt El. “And Ya’akov vowed a neder (vow), saying, If Elohim will be with me, and will be shmaraniy (Guardian) over me in this derech (way, journey) that I go, and will give me lechem to eat, and beged (clothes) to put on, So that I return to beiyt avi (House of my father) in shalom; then shall Hashem be for me Elohim (my God). And this even (stone), which I have set for a matzevah (pillar), shall be Beiyt Elohim (House of God): and of all that You shall give me I will surely give the aser (tenth) to You.” –Genesis 28:20-22 We note that even though Yaakov is heading south, he is none the less going up (geographically speaking), making Aliyah. This is an allusion to approaching the Mountain of the Lord. It is Elohim Who meets with Yaakov here. God instructs Yaakov to go up to Beiyt El and to build a sacrificial altar (mizbeach). Elohim speaks in the third person saying, “Make an altar to El Who appeared to you”. This indicates one of two things, either Elohim denotes the Malakh HaShem (Messenger of God/Yeshua) Who is speaking of the unity of God, thus El; or, the speaker Elohim is the unified God-head speaking of El (Yeshua). It is interesting to note that Gur Aryeh, referencing Exodus 34:6, says that in the present text the Name of God El conveys a boundless degree of mercy. Thus Elohim (Judge) and El (Mercy). In any case, the text conveys a sense of the complex unity of God, Who manifests to humanity in a number of ways. God reminds Yaakov that his first encounter at Beiyt El took place in the days when he was fleeing Esav. It seems that God is helping Yaakov to reconnect with his calling, and to make a sober assessment of his present situation. He is no longer fleeing Esav, he is returning in freedom and is experiencing the fullness of God’s provision and protection for him. Yaakov has been in danger of returning to fear and uncertainty, being concerned about the possible repercussions of his sons’ actions against Shechem. Perhaps God is saying, “Remember that I was with you then, and I am with you now.” 2 Then Ya’akov said unto his Beito (Household) and to all that were with him, “Put away the elohei hanekhar (gods foreign) that are among you, vhitaharu (and be pure), and change your simloteiychem (garments); 3 And let us arise, v’na’aleh (and go up) to Beit-El; and I will build there a Mizbe’ach (altar of blood sacrifice) unto El (God, Judge) Who answered me in b’yom tzaroti (in the day of my trouble/distress), and was with me in the derech (way) in which I went. Yaakov’s instructions to his household can be associated with the preparations of Israel as she approached Mount Sinai (Exodus 19:14), the Torah’s instructions regarding preparation for ritual service (Num. 19:7-8), and with a repentant and renewed commitment to the One true God (Joshua 24:14). What is clear is that Yaakov is taking the Holiness of God very seriously. We last heard of household or foreign gods in the account of Rachel’s stealing of her father’s household gods. It is no coincidence that this recollection is inspired by the present text. The curse associated with the stealing of the idols comes to bear soon after these events. This instruction of Yaakov may well have been an opportunity for Rachel to come clean regarding the hidden gods of her father, however, given her premature death, it is possible that she was not among those who gave up their idols to Yaakov for burial. As far as we know she had never told Yaakov of the household idols. She had probably taken them believing (according to ancient tribal cultural standards) that the possession of them entitled her to her father’s holdings at the time of his death. We should also remember that “an undeserved curse cannot land” (Proverbs 26:2), and that Rachel qualifies as deserving of the curse pronounced unwittingly by Yaakov. The instruction to change garments may well have to do with uncleanness associated to touching the dead (of Shechem) and possibly in regard to the clothing having touched idolatrous loot taken from Shechem. 4 And they gave to Ya’akov kol elohei hanekhar (all gods foreign) which were b’yadam (in their hands), and all their nezamiym (rings) which were in their ozneihem (ears); and Ya’akov buried them under the elah (terebinth) which was at Shechem (back). The foreign deities are self-explanatory, however, for the modern reader the allusion to rings is difficult. These rings of the ear are associated with slavery (Exodus 12:6) or, as in this case, subservience. These rings indicate subservience to foreign gods and may well have been most prolific among the captives of Shechem who had now joined Yaakov’s retinue. Some have asked why these idols and earrings were not melted down for use. The reality is that most often, when items are made from melted jewellery, idolatry soon follows (Golden Calf [Exodus 32], Gideon’s Ephod [Judges 8:25-27] etc.). Why were these items buried rather than simply destroyed and thrown away? The act of burying them has all the symbolism of death and shows these gods to be dead, incapable of anything. Therefore, they’re buried, not gods (Psalm 135:15-17). 5 And they journeyed; and the chittat Elohim (terror of God, Judge) was upon the cities that were around them, and they did not pursue after the Bnei Ya’akov (children of Jacob). 6 So Ya’akov came to Luzah (Almond tree), which is in Eretz Kena’an (Land of lowland) that is, Beit-El (House of God, Judge) he and kol ha’am (all the people) that were with him. While one could make the presumption that the terror was due to the slaughter that had taken place at Shechem, this would be a mistaken conclusion. Yaakov was clearly concerned that the surrounding peoples outnumbered his household and that the actions of his sons’ at Shechem would only exacerbate their situation. Additionally the text states that the terror is of God. This means that it was a supernatural terror which had been imparted by God in order to protect Yaakov according to His promises (Genesis 28:10-15), made in the very place that Yaakov was now commanded to approach. 7 And he built there a Mizbe’ach (altar of blood sacrifice), and called l’makom (the place) El Beit-El (God, Judge of the House of God, Judge); because there Ha-Elohim (The God, Judge) appeared to him, when he fled from the face of achiv (his brother). The doubling of words indicates affirmation and firm resolve. Here the doubling of the Name El upon the place of Beiyt El establishes it as a sacred land mark for proclaiming the God of gods and His intrinsic link to Yaakov/Yisrael. God the Judge will Judge, God Who is merciful will show boundless mercy. All this is stated in reference to Ha-Elohim (The God), and is a constant reminder to Israel of the present help of God in times of trouble. 8 But Devorah (Bee) meineket Rivkah (nursemaid of Rebecca: captivating) died, and she was buried under an alon (oak) below Beit-El (House of God, Judge); and was called sh’mo (by the name) Alon Bachut (Oak of weeping). The Midrash says that this account, which deals with the death of Devorah the maid servant, none the less infers the death of Rivkah (Rebecca). The Torah does not mention Rivkah’s death explicitly. This is explained by the Sages in various ways, none of which are convincing propositions. Suffice to say, for whatever reason Rivkah’s death is not recorded, though she is venerated and appreciated as a godly Matriarch of the Jewish people. 9 And Elohim appeared unto Ya’akov again, when he returned from Padan Aram (field of exaltation), and made a bracha (blessing) upon him. God appears to Yaakov again in the sense that this is the second time God has come to Yaakov since his return to the Holy Land. Rashi suggests that Elohim blessed Yaakov following news of Rivkah’s death. 10 And Elohim said to him, Shimcha (your name) is Ya’akov (Follows after the heel); no longer will shimcha (your name) be called Ya’akov (your name), but Yisra-el (Overcome in God) shall be shimecha (your name); and He called sh’mo (his name) Yisra-el. The name Yaakov is not done away with, to the contrary, HaShem says, “Your name is Yaakov”. The second statement, “No longer will your name be called Yaakov” refers to the combined people of Yisrael. Thus we don’t call the tribes of Israel Yaakov. Alternatively, in mundane matters his name is Yaakov, however, with regard to the sacred purposes of God, he will be called Yisrael. Unlike Avraham, whose name is changed and his former name no longer used, Scripture testifies to the ongoing use of the name Yaakov. Where Avraham represents Trust, being the Father of Trust (Faith), Yaakov represents the struggling seeker and Yisrael the overcomer. The Gospel message of sin and redemption is perpetually represented in the life of Yaakov, who, in God, becomes Yisrael. 11 And Elohim (God, Judge) said to him, “I am El Shaddai (God Almighty, all sufficient protector); be fruitful and multiply; a Goy (nation) and a Kehal Goyim (community of nations) shall be from you, and Melechim (kings) shall come out of your loins; The Name El (unlimited mercy) is joined here with the title Shaddai which comes from the root dai, meaning sufficient, enough. Thus God is sufficient, enough. The fear of God means an end to fear. 12 And Ha-aretz (The Land) which I gave Avraham (Father of many peoples) and Yitzchak (He laughs), to you I will give it, and to your zera (seed) after you will I give Ha-aretz (The Land). This affirmation of the covenant promise for the Land of Yisrael reiterates the covenant made with Avraham, one that was reliant on God alone. It is then placed upon Yitzchak, Yaakov and Yaakov’s descendants. Thus the covenant blessing for the Land is not reliant on the actions of the children of Israel but upon the God of Israel. 13 And Elohim ascended from him b’makom (in the place) where He talked with him. This verse infers that Elohim was present in some manifest form. Perhaps even humanoid. Possibly as a Malakh (Angelic messenger), even Yeshua (God with us). This phrasing also denotes the role of Yaakov as the one from whom the ladder of Genesis 28 will come forth. In other words, “Yeshua (Salvation) comes from the Jews”. 14 And Ya’akov set up a matzevah (pillar, monument) in b’makom (in the place) where He talked with him, even a matzevat even (pillar of stone); and he poured a nesech (drink offering) upon it, and he poured shamen (oil) upon it. 15 And Ya’akov called the shem (name) of ha-makom (the place) where Elohim spoke with him, Beit- El (House of God, Judge). This is now the second pillar Yaakov has set up at Beiyt El. Why does he set up a second pillar? Most likely it is to commemorate his second encounter, however, it’s possible that the former pillar had been removed by the inhabitants of the land. Yaakov pours out two offerings, first a drink offering, possibly water, and second an offering of oil. Both symbols are associated with the worship of HaShem. The former being a means of cleansing and the latter a symbol of the Holy Spirit and fuel for the light of the Menorah which represents the present glory of Hashem manifest in the Holy place. This is now the third time Yaakov has named Beiyt El (Gen. 28:18-19; 35:7). Thus the completion and establishment of this sacred place and the past, present and future redemption it represents. 16 And they journeyed from Beit-El; and there was still a space of ha’aretz (the land) to get to Ephratah (Place of fruitfulness); and Rachel (Ewe) travailed, and she had hard labour. 17 And it came to pass, when she was in hard labour, that the meyaledet (midwife) said to her, “Fear not; you shall have this ben (son) also. 18 And it came to pass, as her nefesh (core being) was in departing, (for she died) that she called sh’mo (his name) Ben-Oni (Son of Affliction); but aviv (his father) called him Binyamin (Son of my right). The birth of Benyamin completes the tribes of Israel in the land that they will inherit. His two names, “Son of my affliction” and “Son of my right (strength)” once again reveal the Gospel journey from affliction to strength. His names are a prophetic statement concerning the captivity and freedom of Yisrael. He is the suffering of her captivity and the strength of her freedom. Rachel is not cursing her son by naming him this way. She is simply making an observation from the position of her experience. Nor is Yaakov usurping the name Rachel has given their son, to the contrary, he is adding to it, illuminating it. Rambam observes that Yaakov simply gave the homonym Oni its alternate translation, strength. 19 And Rachel died, and was buried on the derech (way) to Ephratah (Place of fruitfulness), which is Beit-Lechem (House of bread). 20 And Ya’akov set up a matzevah (pillar) upon her kever (grave, tomb); that is matzevet kevurat (Pillar of the grave) of Rachel to this day. 1 Samuel 10:2 says that the tomb of Rachel is in the territory of Benyamin. Jeremiah 31:15 records a prophecy of Rachel weeping in Ramah, a Benjaminite city (Joshua 18:21-28). However, Beit-Lechem would become a significant town in the time of David and is therefore used here as a reference point. We note that a pillar or large stone placed over the grave may be the origin of the Jewish practice of placing stones on top of graves in remembrance of a loved one. The placing of stones atop modern Jewish graves also reminds the modern Jew that Biblical Jewish tradition saw Jews interred above ground, covered by rocks or in tombs. Biblically speaking Jews were not buried beneath the ground. This also makes clear the distinction between Kever (an above ground grave) and the spiritual holding place Sheol (a below ground spiritual location, not a grave). 21 And Yisra-el journeyed, and pitched his ohel (tent) beyond Migdal-Eder (tower of the flock). 22 And it came to pass, when Yisra-el dwelt in that land, that Reuven (behold a son) went and lay with Bilhah (troubled) pilegesh aviv (paramour of his father) and Yisra-el heard it. Now the Bnei Ya’akov (Children of Jacob) were Sheneym Asar (Twelve); 23 The Bnei Leah (Children of Leah): Reuven (Behold a son) bechor (firstborn of) Ya’akov, and Shimon (heard), and Levi (joined to), and Yehudah (Praise), and Yissakhar (exalted wages), and Zevulun (honoured, exalted); 24 The Bnei Rachel (Children of Rachel): Yosef (HaShem has added), and Binyamin (Son of my right/strength); 25 And the Bnei Bilhah (Children of Bilhah) shifchat Rachel (maid servant of Rachel): Dan (Judge) and Naphtali (wrestling); 26 And the Bnei Zilpah (Children of Zilpah) shifchat Leah (maid servant of Leah): Gad (army), and Asher (happy); these are the Bnei Ya’akov (Children of Jacob), which were born to him in Padan Aram (Field of exaltation). Reuven’s act of betrayal is not only an act of abominable sexual sin, it is also a statement of Rebellion (2 Sam. 16:20-22; 1 Kings 2:13-25), not only against his father but also against Yisrael. As a result of his sin Reuven loses the privileges of the firstborn (Gen. 49:4). His birth-right is later transferred to Joseph (1 Chronicles 5:1). Although Yisrael hears of what Reuven has done he does not react. The sages suggest that after Rachel’s death Yaakov had set up home in the tent of Bilhah. As a result, Reuven, seeking to defend his mother Leah’s honour, defiled Bilhah. Regardless of Reuven’s reasons, his sin was grievous and the consequences far reaching. The text of verse 21 uses the name Yisrael rather than Yaakov. This conveys the idea that Reuven has sinned, not only against his father Yisrael but also against the now completed tribes of Yisrael. 27 And Ya’akov came unto Yitzchak Aviv (his father) at Mamre (strength), unto Kiriat Ha-arba (City of Four), which is Chevron (company, friends), where Avraham and Yitzchak sojourned. 28 And the days of Yitzchak were me’at shanah u’shemonim shanah (180 years). 29 And Yitzchak gave up his spirit, and died, and was gathered unto his people, being zaken (old) and full of yamim (days); and his banim (sons) Esav and Ya’akov interred him. Yaakov has come in full circle. He had left his father in fear for his life and has returned to the land under the weight of grief. He has heard of the death of Rivkah his mother (she is not present with Yitzchak upon his return) and recently watched his beloved wife Rachel die in child birth (based on rabbinical tradition she was probably between 35 and 45 years of age). Yitzchak will live another twenty one years in Chevron before he passes away full of days (a Hebrew idiom reserved for the righteous). Yitzchak is “gathered to his people”. A phrase that denotes the afterlife and the latter teaching regarding the Bosom of Avraham. From ancient days Jews have understood sheol as a holding place for those who have passed from this world. A place divided into two sections, the righteous held in the Bosom of Avraham and the wicked in Gehinnom. Twenty one years after Yaakov arrives back at Chevron, Esav journeys north-west to help Yaakov inter their father. Rashi notes that in recording Yitzchak’s death here the Torah doesn’t follow chronological order because Joseph was sold into slavery twelve years before the death of Yitzchak. © Yaakov Brown 2017 Many have focused on the actions of Shimon and Levi in this account, however, the greater lesson here is one of holiness, that is, Israel’s need to be set apart unto God alone. Introduction:
Yaakov has only recently separated himself and his family from Esav in obedience to God’s instruction regarding the unique role that Israel is to have among the nations. Now, having only just returned to the Land of promise, he is faced with yet another threat to Israel’s distinctive identity in God. The threat of intermarriage with the idolatrous inhabitants of Shechem (See Gen 24; 27:46-28:9 for the lengths to which the Patriarchs will go to avoid intermarriage). As in the case of the many other events recorded early in Genesis, this story may well have acted as inspiration for the writing of later commandments (Exodus 23:27-33; Deut. 22:28-29; Deut. 7:1-5). Many have focused on the actions of Shimon and Levi in this account, however, the greater lesson here is one of holiness, that is, Israel’s need to be set apart unto God alone. With this in mind we are able to better navigate the great offense that is represented in the defiling of Dinah and the judgement that comes against the people of Shechem as a result of their prince’s sin. 34:1 And Dinah (Judgement) Bat Leah (Daughter of Leah [Weary]), which she bore unto Ya’akov (Follows after the heel), went out to see the Banot HaAretz (Daughters of the land). Given the lengths to which Yaakov has gone to keep his family separate (camped outside the city Gen. 33:18), it is at very least foolish for Dinah to compromise cultural etiquette by leaving the camp to engage with the daughters of the of the land (Specifically the provence of Shechem). Some of our Sages suggest that Dinah was enticed by the daughters of Shechem, however, there is nothing in the text to indicate this. The plain meaning of the text simply denotes an inquisitive teenager’s poorly thought out adventure, one that ends in tragedy and heart break for Dinah. One might ask, “Why was she not seen leaving and called back?” To which we can respond, “Her brothers were elsewhere herding the animals and Yaakov along with his wives could easily have been preoccupied at the time.” 2 And when Shechem (Back) Ben Chamor (Son of a He-ass) the Chivi (Aramaic: Serpentine or Hebrew: Hivite, villagers), Nasi HaAretz (Prince of the land) saw her, he took her, and lay with her, and violated her. The Midrash notes that the Hebrew Chivi, does not refer to Shechem being a Hivite because he is an Amorite (Gen. 48:22). It states therefore, that the word Chivi is a borrowed Aramaic word meaning Serpentine. Thus we read, “Shechem son of a He-ass, the serpentine prince of the land”. Some suggest that the last word of verse two simply refers to fornication (sexual relations outside of the marriage covenant). However, the combining of the terms, “took, lay, violated” denotes a violent act that can only be seen as rape. This act would have had far reaching consequences for Dinah given the stigma attached to women in this ancient culture, who were considered sexually defiled, unclean (2 Sam. 13:12-16). It is worth noting that these events must have taken place in or near the city of Shechem and in close proximity to the daughters of the land and yet no one came to Dinah’s aid. 3 And his nefesh (Core being) had devak (Clung to, overtook, pursued) Dinah Bat Ya’akov (Judgement the daughter of the one who follows after the heel), and he loved the na’arah (Young woman), and spoke to (implored) the lev (core being, soul, heart) of hanaarah (The Young Woman). 4 And Shechem spoke unto Chamor aviv (his father), saying, “Get me this yaldah (child) for an isha (wife).” In some sense the opening phrase could read, “With all his might he overtook Dinah”. The text is careful to show Dinah’s connection to Yaakov, thus making her rape and capture a defiling act against the household of Israel. Having taken Dinah without any attempt to arrange betrothal through proper channels, and having ruined any chance of her having future prospects for marriage, Shechem seems to have developed a genuine love for Dinah and with no respect for her feelings or her victimization, he begs her to reciprocate. Dinah is initially described as a young woman (na’arah), however this is qualified by the term that follows; yaldah (a female child). The Sages say that Dinah was 13 years of age when these events occurred. This only adds to the despicable nature of Shechem’s crime. 5 And Ya’akov heard that he (Shechem) had made his bat Dinah (Daughter Judgement) tameh (sexually unclean, defiled); now his banim (Sons) were with his mikneh (herds) in the sadeh (field); and Ya’akov held his peace until they were come. Yaakov had heard of Dinah’s defilement but the text infers that he had heard the information from a source other than Dinah herself, which is consistent with the latter verses explaining her residence in the house of Shechem; meaning that Shechem had, with the approval of his father Chamor, kept Dinah at his home in Shechem (city) from the time of the rape. It seems likely that while Yaakov may have wanted to rescue his daughter at once, he realised that the residents of Shechem outnumbered his retinue and that he must consider his response carefully before acting so as not to endanger Dinah further. Thus he, “held his peace”, waiting for his sons to return so that they could aid him in the recovery of their sister. 6 And Chamor avi Shechem (He-ass, father of Back) went out unto Ya’akov to speak with him. Having either intentionally or tacitly approved of his sons actions, Chamor, after ignoring all accepted cultural protocol for seeking a betrothal contract, goes out from the town of Shechem where Yaakov’s daughter Dinah is being held against her will, to speak with Yaakov and arrange a marriage and co-existence between their tribes. If this behaviour is vindictive of the culture in Shechem, it is proof that they are a people of dubious moral character at best. 7 And the Bnei Ya’akov (Sons of Jacob) came from the sadeh (field) when they heard it; and the anashim (men) were grieved (hurt, tortured within), and they were extremely furious, because he (Shechem) had brought nevalah (folly, disgrace, outrage) against Yisrael in lying with Bat Ya’akov (Daughter of Jacob); a thing that should not to be done. At the beginning of this account Dinah is called the daughter of Leah (Weary), that is, a daughter of vulnerability. Here however, she is called the daughter of Yaakov, who is the daughter of the disciple of HaShem, a man who has been given the name Israel and with it the Land. Shechem’s sin, as abhorrent as it is in regard to Dinah’s personal suffering, is considered by the sons of Israel to be a defiling of their father’s name and of Israel’s identity as a set apart people unto HaShem. Thus it is, “a thing that should not be done!” (An abomination). It is in understanding the spiritual implications of Shechem’s act that we are able to better understand the actions of Shimon and Levi in avenging their sister. 8 And Chamor spoke with them, saying, “The nefesh (Inner being) of beni (my son) Shechem longs for your bat (Daughter); now give her to him as a isha (Wife). 9 So intermarry with us, and give your banot (daughters) to us, and take benoteinu (our daughters) for yourselves. This request is offensive on many levels, however the greatest offense is against the lineage of God’s chosen people. The patriarchs have pursued marriage within their own ethnicity according to God’s instruction and Yaakov has imparted this tradition to his children. The Torah, speaking of, among others, the Amorites and Chivi, says: “Neither shall you make marriages with them; your daughter you shall not give unto his son, nor his daughter shall you take for your son. For they will turn away your son from following Me, that they may serve elohim acherim (other gods); so will the anger of Hashem be kindled against you, and destroy you suddenly.” –D’varim/Deut. 7:4-5 In light of God’s calling on Israel and the later instruction of the Torah, what Chamor is proposing stands in direct opposition to the will of HaShem. The Scripture shows that the primary reason for Israel’s need to avoid intermarriage is for her protection against idolatry. 10 Then you will dwell with us; and HaAretz (The land) shall be before you; dwell and trade in it, and take possession of it.” This is a deceptive proposal given that Chamor’s intention is not that Yaakov prosper but that he and the people of Shechem might prosper at Yaakov’s expense (v.23). 11 And Shechem said to her father (Yaakov) and to her achim (Brothers), “Let me find chen (grace) in your eyes, and whatever you require of me I will give. 12 Ask me for a great mohar (bride price, dowry) and mattan (gift), and I will pay according to what you demand of me; but give me the na’arah (Young woman) as isha (a wife).” Having defiled Dinah Shechem now pretends honour by offering a bride price (mohar), something that should have been done before he approached her to have sex with her. 13 And the Bnei Ya’akov (the sons of Jacob) answered Shechem and Chamor aviv (his father) with mirmar (cunning) when they spoke because he had made Dinah their achot (sister) tameh (Unclean, defiled); The sons of Yaakov had arrived at the camp at the same time as Chamor and Shechem but they had time after hearing of the atrocity to formulate a plan of retaliation while the travelled back to the camp. They don’t lose their cool but devise a ruse that will gain them the time they need to rescue their sister and redeem their father’s honour. The emphasis again on the Hebrew tameh (defiled, unclean) juxtaposes the heinousness of the crime against the cunning of the response. 14 And they said to them, “We cannot do this thing, to give achoteinu (our sister) to ish (a man) that is arelah (uncircumcised); for that would be a cherpah (reproach, disgrace) to us; 15 But in this will we consent to you: If you will become like us, that every zachar (male) of you be circumcised; 16 Then will we give benoteinu (our daughters) to you, and we will take your banot (daughters) to us, and we will dwell among you, and we will become as Am Echad (One People). 17 But if you will not pay heed to us, to become circumcised; then we’ll take biteinu (our daughter), and we will go. The brothers of Dinah clearly had no intention of honouring their proposed arrangement. They were preparing for retribution and needed a way to make their enemy vulnerable because without an advantage they would have been outnumbered and unable to rescue Dinah. It is difficult to pass judgement on their deception because it is merely being used as a ploy in order to facilitate the righteous action of rescuing their sister from wicked men. Notice that the brothers of Dinah call her their daughter. This is to emphasize her very young age and identify her as a vulnerable and precious member of the family of Yaakov. 18 And their words pleased Chamor, and Shechem Ben Chamor (Son of Chamor). 19 And the na’ar (Young man) agreed to do the thing, because he had delight in Bat Ya’akov (The daughter of Jacob); and he was the most respected member kol Bait Aviv (of all his father’s house). The title, “Most respected member of all his father’s house” infers Shechem’s rule over the people and his influence upon their daily practices. 20 And Chamor and Shechem bno came unto the Sha’ar of their city, and they spoke with the anashim (men) of their city, saying, As I have alluded to in previous articles, the city gate is the location of all legal agreements and official city wide declarations and proposals in the ancient East. 21 “These anashim (men) are shlemim (peaceable) with us; therefore let them settle in HaAretz (The land), and let them trade for HaAretz (The land), hinei (behold, wow, at once), it is plenty of room for them; let us take their banot (daughters) to us as nashim (wives), and let us give them benoteinu (our daughters). 22 Only in order for these anashim (men) to consent to dwell with us, as Am Echad (One people), every zachar (male) among us must be circumcised, just as they are nimolim (ones being circumcised). 23 Shall not their mikneh (herds) and their property and every behemah (beast) of theirs be ours? Only let us consent to them, and they will settle among us.” It is verse 23 that reveals Chamor and Shechem’s true motivations. In fact, it is possible that Shechem’s raping of Dinah was part of a larger plan to gain wealth through intermarriage with Yaakov. 24 And to Chamor and to Shechem bno (his son) paid heed all those that went out of the Sha’ar (gate) of his city; and every zachar (male) was circumcised, all that went out of the Sha’ar (gate) of his city. This verse is strategically important because it confirms that all the men of the town and surrounding province of Shechem submitted themselves to the procedure. Thus incapacitating the province’s entire force of fighting men 25 And it came to pass on Yom HaShlishi (the third day), when they were in pain, that two of the Bnei Ya’akov (sons of Jacob), Shimon (hears: Listens to God) and Levi (joined to: Priesthood), achei Dinah (brothers of), took each ish (man) his cherev (sword, long knife), and came upon the Ir (city) betach (with trust, boldly, confidently), and they slaughtered kol zachar (all the males). The third day following an adult circumcision is said to be the most painful day of recovery, thus Shimon and Levi planned their attack to maximize the number of potential casualties. In fact, they killed every male in the town of Shechem. It seems that the other sons of Yaakov were either unwilling to kill the men of Shechem, or simply less zealous in retribution and lagging behind. They do however, appear later in order to plunder the city. Shimon is Leah’s third born and Levi her sixth child and the child closest in age to Dinah. It seems that these two brothers of Dinah must have had a close relationship with her and are therefore, fiercely protective of her. Their anger is later criticized by Yaakov but he does not question their reasons or their love for Dinah and the household of Israel. 26 And they slaughtered Chamor and Shechem bno (his son) with the edge of the cherev (sword), and took Dinah from the Bait Shechem (House of) and left. Dinah, like a modern sex trafficked slave, has been kept in Shechem’s own house this entire time. 27 The Bnei Ya’akov came upon the chalalim (dead ones, slain ones), and plundered the Ir (city), because they had made their achot (sister) tameh (defiled, violated, unclean). The remaining sons of Yaakov, though not directly involved in the slaying of the men of Shechem, none the less show tacit approval, and with the defilement of their sister in mind they plunder the entire city. 28 They seized their tzon (sheep), and their bakar (oxen), and their chamorim (asses), and that which was in the Ir (city), and that which was in the sadeh (field), 29 And all their wealth, and all their little ones, and their nashim (wives, women) they carried off and plundered even all that was in the bayit (house). Chamor and Shechem had planned to become rich off of Yaakov, instead, Yaakov grows rich as a consequence of Shechem’s sin. Bayit (House) is singular and denotes a counter point to Shechem’s imprisoning of Dinah in his Bayit. The Bayit, once a place where he trapped the woman whom he thought would bring him joy and riches, is now gutted of all its wealth over his dead body. 30 And Ya’akov said to Shimon and Levi, “You have brought trouble on me to make me a stench among the inhabitants of HaAretz (The land) among the Kena’ani and the Perizzi; and I being few in mispar (number), they shall gather themselves together against me, and attack me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my bayit (household).” Notice that at least at this juncture, Yaakov does not say that Shimon and Levi have acted unjustly, nor does he accuse them of wrong doing (although, on his death bed he does curse the anger of Shimon and Levi and condemns the brothers for being excessive in their zeal Gen. 49:5-7). At this point Yaakov seems less concerned with the retribution carried out on his daughter’s behalf and more concerned with the resulting effect it might have with regard to the tribes who inhabit the land around about him. “Shimon and Levi are achim (brothers); kelei chamas (instruments of violence) are their swords. O my nefesh, enter not you into their sod (secret, council); unto their kehal (assembly), may my kavod (glory), not be united with them; for in their anger they slaughtered ish (a man), and in their ratzon (self-will) they uprooted an ox. Arur (cursed) be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel; I will dispense them in Ya’akov, and scatter them in Yisrael.” –Genesis 49:5-7 Note that it is note Shimon or Levi who are cursed but their anger and their wrath. “Human anger does not produce the righteousness that God requires.” –Yaakov 1:20 31 And they said, “Should he deal with achoteinu (our sister) like with zonah (prostitute)?” This is of course a rhetorical question. It goes unanswered because it need not be answered. No man should defile a woman in this way. The man who does will be judged (Dinah) and hearing God (Shimon) the Priest (Levi: joined) of HaShem will join in the task of punishing him. © Yaakov Brown A trickling troop walks straight after troubled judgement, wrestling, weary, seeing and hearing, are joined by praise and paid wages, exalted in judgement over the sheep to whom HaShem adds. Introduction:
Yaakov has wrestled with God and humanity and has overcome, not in his own strength but through the gracious undeserved favour of God’s blessing. Having been blessed by the Man Who is God with us, Yaakov has been given the name Yisrael (He who overcomes in God). Now, just as Avraham looked up and saw, so too Yaakov/Yisrael looks up and sees his brother Esav approaching, and with the certain knowledge that God is with him, he prepares his family and goes out to meet Esav. 33:1 And Ya’akov (Follows after the heel) lifted up his eyes, and looked, and, hinei (behold, wow, truly, at once), Esav (Hairy) came, and with him arba me’ot ish (four hundred men). And he divided the yeladim (Children) unto Leah (Weary) and unto Rachel (Ewe), and unto the two shefachot (Servants). We ask, “Is it Yaakov or Yisrael who lifts up his eyes?” In fact he will continue to be seen from two distinct perspectives. From the perspective of the Man Who is the Malakh (Messenger, Angel) of HaShem and God with us, Yaakov will hence forth always be seen complete, redeemed and whole as Yisrael (Overcomes in Elohiym). However, in the working out of that journey of completion within time and space, the readers of the Torah look upon Yaakov, the man who yet struggles while his eternal identity is being refined by God. 2 And he (Yaakov) put the shefachot (maid servants) and their yeladim (Children) rishonah (At the first, in front), and Leah and her yeladim (Children) acharonim (behind them), and Rachel and Yosef acharonim (behind them). The order of the wives and children denotes their standing in the family structure and does not mean that Yaakov was using the former as shields for the latter. If Esav had intended to wipe Yaakov out he would have attacked all of Yaakov’s retinue, in which case the order that they approached would have made little difference. The wives and children approached Esav as follows:
A trickling troop walks straight after troubled judgement, wrestling, weary, seeing and hearing, are joined by praise and paid their wages, exalted in judgement over the sheep to whom HaShem adds. 3 And he (Yaakov) passed over ’p’neihem before faces, and bowed to the earth/land/ ground sheva pe’amim seven times (like a beat or a stroke), until he came near to achiv (his brother). Why seven times? The p’shat (plain meaning) of the bowing down reveals Yaakov’s complete humility and reconciliatory intention. The significance of the Hebrew number seven, which means fullness, completion, rest, adds weight to the symbolic nature of Yaakov’s actions. He is not worshipping but placating. Nor is he repenting for wrong doing. After all, as we have already established in the previous chapters, Yaakov received the blessing that was rightfully his. Nowhere in this account does Yaakov admit to having taken what didn’t belong to him, nor does he confess to deceiving Esav. To the contrary, he is seeking to appease his brother Esav, who had formerly vowed to murder him (Gen 27:41, Gen 32:12). 4 And Esav ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his tzavar (neck), and kissed him; and they wept. The Greek text of the Septuagint does not contain the word, “kissed” and the Hebrew vayishakeihu, translated as kissed has special dot pointings over every character to indicate that the latter scribes were possibly uncertain as to whether it should be included. Other views propose that the special pointing indicates an unusual meaning for the Hebrew word. Certain rabbinical commentary has suggested that the reason for the markings is that Esav’s kiss was disingenuous, while others affirm his desire for true reconciliation. 5 And he (Esav) lifted up his eyes, and saw the nashim (wives) and the yeladim (children); and said, “Who are those with you?” And he (Yaakov) said, the yeladim which Elohiym has graciously given your eved (servant). Yaakov seems to be hedging his answer. He doesn’t mention his wives and refers to the children in general terms and with emphasis on their origin being from Elohiym. He also reaffirms his humble status as Esav’s eved (servant). Although Yaakov knows that God has made Esav and his descendants the servants of Israel. 6 Then the shefachot (maid servants) came near, they and their yeladim (children), and they bowed themselves. 7 And Leah also with her yeladim came near, and bowed themselves; and after came Yosef near and Rachel, and they bowed themselves. It’s worth noting that the maid servants and Leah both approach in front of their children in a protective manner but Yosef (YHVH adds) comes before his mother, denoting that even as a young boy he had a sense of his future role as a protector and redeemer of Israel. This also acts as a poetic reconciling of the fact that YHVH has added all that have come before this meeting and that he will add all that will come after it. 8 And he (Esav) said, “Who are all these machaneh (host) which I met?” And he (Yaakov) said, “These are to find chen (grace, favour) in the eyes of adoni (my lord). The servants of Yaakov have already explained the meaning of the droves to Esav, making his question somewhat dubious. However, Yaakov names Esav “My lord” and reasserts his desire to find favour (not forgiveness) in Esav’s eyes. 9 And Esav said, “I have enough, achi (my brother); keep that which you have for yourself.” This seems to be a generous offer but culturally speaking may well simply be the banter of etiquette rather than a genuine refusal. However, Esav does use the more intimate term achi (My brother) rather than ach (brother). 10 And Ya’akov said, “No, now, if I have found chen (grace) in your eyes, then receive my minchah tribute at my yad (hand) based on these gifts I have seen your face, as though seeing the p’nei Elohiym (the face of G-d) vatirtzeini (and you have been appeased by me). The reason Yaakov uses the phrase, “P’nei Elohiym” and thus connects the present meeting with the wrestling of the previous chapter, is that he wants to acknowledge that just as he had seen God’s face and lived, he has now seen his brother’s face and lived. Thus he is in literal fulfilment of the meaning of the wrestling match and his subsequent new name. In the case of the Man Who was God, Yaakov has lived through God’s grace and in the present instance it is through the provisions God has graciously given him that he has been able to appease (not pay back) Esav. In both cases Yaakov was sure he should have died and in both cases God provides for his redemption. 11 take up, now, bir’chati my blessing which has come to you; because Elohiym (Judge) has dealt graciously with me, and because yesh li khol (there is to me everything, my needs are met). And he (Yaakov) pressed him (Esav), and he (Esav) accepted. These words show Yaakov’s gracious and humble character in that they impart to Esav the overflow of the blessing Yaakov has received from God. “Take now my blessing which has come to you.” Note also that although Yaakov has given over a generous portion from his flocks and herds, he none the less says, “yesh li khol” I have everything. This everything is more than just human relationships, children, physical wealth and status. It is the realization that through humility and blessing God has purchased Yaakov an eternal home. HaShem is everything and in Him all things exist and move and have their being. 12 And he (Esav) said, Nise’ah (let us take our journey), and let us go, I will go next to you. 13 And he (Yaakov) said unto him (Esav), “Adoni (My lord) know that the yeladim (Children) are tender and the nursing tzon (small animals of the herds) and bakar (cattle) are upon me; and if men should overdrive them yom echad (in one day), all the tzon (small animals of the herds) will die. 14 Let now adoni (my lord), pass over before his eved (servant); and I will lead on slowly, according to the pace of the drove that goes before me and the pace the yeladim are able to endure, until I come unto adoni at Seiyr.” 15 And Esav said, “Let me now leave with you some of ha-am (the people) that are with me. And he (Yaakov) said, “Why do that? Let me find chen (grace, favour) in the eyes of adoni.” 16 So Esav returned that day on his derech walking to Seiyr. We must ask why Esav felt the need to leave men with Yaakov. This has an ominous tone to it that suggests his mistrust of his brother had not subsided and that his appeasement may not last. Therefore, Yaakov again employs the title my lord and offers a reasonable excuse for remaining. Yaakov may or may not have intended to eventually travel to Seiyr. Regardless, it seems his concern was with keeping to his calling to return to the land which the God of Beit-El had called him back to. He clearly had no intention of joining his brother. Yaakov knew that God had called him and his descendants to be set apart and had instructed Yaakov to return to the land of K’naan (Israel). Therefore, it’s likely that this is the primary reason for his using delay tactics with Esav. 17 And Ya’akov journeyed to Sukkot (shelters), and built a bayit (house), and made sukkot (shelters) for his mikneh (herds); therefore the shem (name) of ha-makom (the place) is called Sukkot (shelters). It is interesting that Yaakov built a bayit (house) for himself rather than a temporary dwelling (sukkah). The building of a house is more permanent, and yet he had not finished his wandering. Of course, the Hebrew bayit (home) may simply denote the fact that he had settled and made a home for himself. The name of the city Sukkot seems prophetic of the future festival of HaShem and its connection to the wanderings of the people of Israel. 18 And Ya’akov came in/to shaleim (wholeness, safety, peace, completeness) a city of Shechem (Back, shoulder), which is in eretz Kena’an (land of Canaan), when he came from Padan Aram (field of exaltation); and encamped before the city. 19 And he (Yaakov) bought a chelkat hasadeh (piece of land), where he had pitched there his ohel (tent), from the yad (hand) of the Bnei (sons) of Chamor (Male Ass) Avi (father) Shechem (Back, shoulder), for a hundred pieces of kesitah (a currency). The purchase of this parcel of land is one of three where the Torah vouches for Israel’s legitimate right of ownership. This is affirmed by the use of a common and uncontested currency. The other places are: The cave at Machpelah, brought by Avraham, and the site of the Temple, purchased by King David. 20 And he erected there a Mizbe’ach (Altar, from zabach: shed blood, slaughter, kill), and called it El Elohei Yisrael (God the God/Judge of Israel: one who overcomes in God). As we have learned previously, an altar, when unqualified by other terms, is by nature an altar of blood sacrifice (zabach). Therefore, we can infer from the text that Yaakov also offered a sacrifice there, acknowledging through the shedding of blood that HaShem is El Elohei Yisrael. In doing so Yaakov takes ownership of his new name and the land that is attached to it. © Yaakov Brown 2017 Yaakov will soon learn that relationship with God is not entered into in one’s own strength but at the end of one’s strength. Introduction:
For a long time Yaakov has endeavoured to understand the Elohiym of his father Yitzchak, the Mercy (YHVH) of his grandfather Avraham. He has recognized HaShem as his Judge, Provider, Protector and Fear of Yitzchak, and has sought to obey His instructions. Now, having been freed from the enemy behind him (Laban), he walks forward into the arms of an old enemy, his brother Esau. Yaakov enters into a season of great distress. The unknowable future and the threat of his brother’s wrath bring great emotional turmoil. In his struggle Yaakov cries out to God, recalling the wonders of God and His promises. It is in this season that Yaakov’s knowledge of God (Ha-Elohiym: The Judge) turns into his being known by HaShem (YHVH: Mercy). The Hebrew Paniym, meaning face/faces, is used seven times in this sidra (section), thus conveying an intimate and complete sense of personal relationship within the passage. Yaakov will soon learn that relationship with God is not entered into in one’s own strength but at the end of one’s strength. 32:1 Rising early in the morning Laban (White) kissed his grandchildren and daughters and blessed them. Then Laban left and returned to his place. Rising early is an allusion to firm resolve. The fact that Laban omits kissing Yaakov stands in stark contrast to their first encounter (Gen. 29:13). A father’s blessing, even the blessing of an unrighteous father, releases his children. Whether Laban knew it or not, by giving his daughters his blessing he was releasing them from curse. They were leaving Laban’s accursed idolatrous community and entering into the promised blessings of God. 2 And Yaakov ha-lach walked forth in l’dar’co his way, and encountered mal’acheiy (Messengers, Angels) of Elohiym (God: The Judge). The book of Daniel (Dan. 10:10-15) reveals that the messengers/angels of God are charged with areas of governance and are constantly at work in the service of HaShem. Darashot Ha-Ran 5:35 notes that the Shekhinah (Manifest Glory) was present in Yaakov’s revelation at Beit-El and that when Yaakov left Laban to return to the land of Israel the Shekhinah revealed to him that the land possessed great eminence over other lands. It goes on to say that the phrase, “met him” implies that the angels always walk in that land and therefore are met by one who enters it. It is for this reason that Jacob called that place Machanayim [camps]. For there are three levels of habitation: the habitation of the celestial encampment, the heavens; the habitation of the terrestrial encampment, the entire earth—with the exception of the land of Israel; and the land of Israel itself, which is both the habitation of the terrestrial encampment (human beings dwelling there) and the habitation of the celestial encampment (“for I have met there a camp of angels”). 3 Then Yaakov said when he saw them, “Machaneih Elohiym, This is the camp of God”, and he named that place Macha’nayim (Camps). Later in the text the term machanot is used to describe two camps. It is therefore noteworthy that the term machanayim is used in verse 3. Radak notes that Yaakov’s reaction to these angels was similar to that of Avraham, his grandfather, in Genesis 18, 20, when the latter is described as running to welcome them as soon as he saw them (Radak on Genesis 32:3:1). Yaakov’s naming of this place reflects his realization that God is in the place. “This is the camp of God” recalls Yaakov’s words at Beit-El, “This is none other than the House of God!” [Gen. 28:10-22] Parashat Vayishlach (And he went forth) This Parashat begins the journey of Yaakov’s return to Eretz Yisrael (The Land of Israel). In one sense his life of exile and returning, like the lives of Avraham and Yitzchak, acts as a type for the cyclical rhythm of Israel’s being exiled and returned. 4 Then Yaakov sent malachiym messengers l’panayn before his face to his brother Esau (Hairy), to the land of Seiyr (Hairy), the field of Edom (Red). Having met with the messengers of God, Yaakov now sends his own messengers. The Hebrew malakh is the root for both angel and messenger. Thus the messengers of God share their title with the messengers of Yaakov. Based on the common noun “malakh” Rashi concludes that Yaakov sent angelic messengers to meet Esau. The name Seiyr and Edom allude to the fact that Esau has become an established presence in the land. Seiyr is the mountainous region from Yam ha-melach (the Sea of Salt) south to the Gulf of Aqaba. 5 And commanded them saying, “This is what you should say to adoniy my lord, to Esau: ‘This is what your servant (av’deicha) Yaakov said: I’ve been lodging (gar’ti) with Laban, and have lingered until now. 6 Now I’ve come to possess oxen and donkeys, flocks, male servants and female servants. I sent word to tell my lord, in order to find favour in your eyes.’” In explaining his current status to Esau, Yaakov uses the term “Gar’ti” from the root “Geir” meaning stranger or alien. He does this in order to humble himself before Esau as one who has no princely status, having remained nothing more than an alien. Additionally Yaakov uses the term adoni (My lord) to address Esau and the term av’deicha (Your servant) to refer to himself. 7 The messengers (ha-malakhiym) returned to Yaakov saying, “We went to your brother, to Esau, and he’s also coming out to meet you—and 400 men with him.” If Esau’s intention at this juncture was to forgive Yaakov he would have had no need of 400 men. The fact that he had mustered such a large contingent is evidence that he intended to overcome Yaakov by force and take what he believed rightfully belonged to him. He is ready for war and is aware that Yaakov is vulnerable having only family and servants in his camp. Rashi paraphrases, “We came to the person whom you regard as your brother, but he behaves toward you as a wicked Esau—he still harbours hatred”. 8 So Yaakov became extremely afraid and distressed. He divided the people with him, along with the flocks and herds and camels, into two camps machanot, 9 for he thought, “If Esau comes to the one camp ha-machaneh ha-achat and strikes it, the camp ha-machaneh that’s left will escape.” Yaakov, the patriarch, blessed of HaShem and chosen for prosperity among the nations, having been fiercely certain of his position only days before when challenging Laban, is now terrified, distressed and afraid. This vulnerability only serves to show his great need for HaShem, his realization that in his own strength he cannot overcome the army of Esau. Up to this point Yaakov has shown great integrity and has worked hard to gain wives and wealth. At this juncture he has come to the end of himself, and so he calls upon God. 10 Then Yaakov said, “Eloheiy God of my father Avraham, v’Eloheiy and God of my father Yitzchak, HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) Adonai, Who said to me, ‘Shuv Return to your land and to your relatives and I will do good with you.’ Yaakov calls on God the Judge as God of his father Avraham and as God the Judge of his father Yitzchak, and finally, he calls on HaShem (YHVH) God as Mercy, crying out in desperation to a personal God, Whose Name he doesn’t know (Exodus 6:3). In his fear of the unknowable future Yaakov turns back to the promises God has already pronounced. He speaks back to HaShem the words that HaShem has spoken over him, not in order to remind God of His promise but in order to remind himself of God’s faithfulness. 11 I am small in respect to all ha-chasadiym the mercies, graces, kindnesses and all ha-emet the truth, faithfulness that You have shown to your servant. For with only my staff I crossed over the Yarden (descender), and now I’ve become two camps (Machanot). Instead of whining Yaakov acknowledges his smallness before God and the prosperity he has experienced due to God’s blessing upon him. 12 Deliver me, please, from the hand of my brother, from Esau’s hand, for I’m afraid of him that he’ll come and strike me--and the mothers with the children. 13 You Yourself said, ‘I will most certainly do good with you, and will make your seed like the sand of the sea that cannot be counted because of its abundance.’” Yaakov’s pattern of prayer begins with calling on God by Name. He then acknowledges his need to return according to the instruction of God. Following this he admits his own smallness and vulnerability before God and recounts God’s grace and goodness toward him. Finally he asks God to deliver him and his household and reminds himself of God’s promise of abundant seed.
14 So he stayed there overnight. Then from all that had come into his possession he took a tribute for Esau his brother: 15 200 female goats, 20 billy goats, 200 ewes, 20 rams, 16 30 milking camels with their young, 40 cows, 10 bulls, 20 female donkeys and 10 male donkeys. Yaakov sent his tribute in numbers divisible by ten, thus indicating his desire to effect fullness of reconciliation with his brother Esau. Yaakov ensured that there would be a proportionate number of males so as to provide the best conditions for good breeding and the enlargement of the herds. This was a gift that Yaakov intended would keep on giving to his brother Esau. 17 He put them in the hands of his servants, each herd by itself, and he said to his servants, “Iv’ru Pass over before my face (L’panay), and put a gap between each of the herds.” 18 Then he commanded the first one saying, “When my brother Esau meets you and asks you saying, ‘To whom do you belong, and where are you going, and to whom do all these before you belong?’ 19 then you are to say, ‘To your servant, to Yaakov—it’s a tribute sent to my lord, to Esau. And look, he’s also behind us.’” 20 And he also commanded the second one, the third one, and all those who were going behind the flocks, saying, “Say the same exact thing to Esau when you find him. 21 Then you are to say, ‘Look, your servant Yaakov is also behind us.’” For he thought, “Let me appease him with the tribute that goes ahead of me, and afterward see his face, perhaps he’ll lift up my face.” 22 So the tribute passed over ahead of him, while he spent that night in the camp. 23 Then he got up that night and took his two wives, his two female servants, and his eleven sons, v’ya’avor and passed over the ford of the Yabok (emptying). 24 He took them and sent them across the stream, and he sent across all that he had. Yaakov’s generous tribute seeks to sooth Esau’s anger and pave the way for reconciliation. He has also sent the tribute with his servants ahead of his family to act as a tactical buffer should fighting break out. This section ends with Yaakov taking his wives and children across the Yabok, and his return to dwell in silence before the Lord. He knows that Esau is still several days off and is seeking solitude in order to gather his thoughts and find peace in the knowledge that God has directed his path. As we will soon read in the following chapter, he has not left his wives vulnerable, to the contrary, this separation is temporary and he will go out before them to meet Esau when he draws near. The Hebrew Yabok, meaning tributary, literally means, “Emptying”. This is a poignant symbol of Yaakov’s having been emptied of all his self-reliance so that he might become utterly and completely reliant on God. Jacob Wrestles With God 25 So Yaakov remained there alone. Then a man (Ish) wrestled with him until the dawn ascended (alot). “He took his brother by the heel in the womb, And in his strength he struggled with Elohiym (God). Yes, he struggled with the malakh (Angel) and overcame; He wept, and sought favour from Him. He found Him in Beit-el, And there He spoke to us-- That is, HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) Elohiym (God: Judge) Ha-tzvaot (of hosts). HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) is His memorable name.” –Hosea 12:3-5 Whatever Yaakov’s reasons for remaining alone, one thing is certain, he had previously been met by God in similar solitude. We note that it is a Man that meets Yaakov. In fact the term malakh (angel: messenger) is not used for the duration of this encounter. While it’s not uncommon for God to appear His servants in human form as a messenger (Gen. 18:2, 19:1 Exodus 4:24-26; Josh. 5:13-15; Judges 13:6, 10; Daniel 10:8-14). It is unusual for the qualifying common noun malakh to be missing from an account. The reason the Man is not called by the title Malakh Ha-Elohiym is to ensure that there is no confusion as to His identity. Our Sages have tried to misdirect us by proposing ludicrous theories concerning who this Man is. Some have said that the Man is Esau’s guardian angel, an impossible conclusion given the Hosea text and the fact that Yaakov identifies the Man as representing the face of God. Others mistakenly conclude that the Man is simply the Angel of the Name YHVH, the Archangel of extra-Biblical Jewish writings, known as Metatron. However, this is precisely the reason the term malakh is not used here. “A Man wrestled with him”. Yaakov is physically wrestling with the Man, he is also wrestling with the unknown, with God, with life in a fallen world. Thus he wrestles through the night (a time of darkness) and is released into freedom at the rising of dawn (A symbol of resurrection and renewal). 26 When He (The Man) saw that He could not overcome him (Yaakov), He struck the socket of his hip, so He dislocated the socket of Yaakov’s hip when He wrestled with him. We know from verse 31 that the Man is God (with us). Therefore, we learn a great deal from the fact that this Man (Who is God with us) has come in a form of equal strength to Yaakov, and yet shows that with a simple touch He is able to immobilize him. The Man could have disabled Yaakov at the beginning of their wrestling, however, He was ministering to Yaakov in his struggle. HaShem had been with Yaakov all along and had never left his side. The Man is showing Yaakov that He will walk in the strength of men, redeeming them with through the realization of weakness. 27 Then He (The Man) said, “Let Me go, for the dawn has gone up (alah).” It’s time for you to stop struggling in the darkness of self-determination and let go of your need to have control over the outcome of your life. Now is the dawn of a new beginning in your life. But he (Yaakov) said, “I won’t let You go unless You bless me.” Yaakov answers the request of the Man with his usual tenacity and the realization that the only one Who can truly set him free and provide him with the blessing he needs is the One Whom he is wrestling with, that is, God Himself. So he now ceases to wrestle and simply cleaves tight to the Man, relying entirely on the Man for his redemption. 28 Then He (The Man) said to him, “What is your name?” “Yaakov,” he said. 29 Then He (The Man) said, “Your name will no longer be Yaakov, but rather Yisrael, for you have sariyta persevered, struggled with Elohiym God and with men, and you have overcome.” God has brought Yaakov to the end of himself and the realization that he is unable to deliver himself. Now that Yaakov has let go of his attempts to control his relationship with God, God gives him the name of his redemption. Once he was Yaakov, follower at the heel, now he is Yisrael, Yisra (Overcome) El (God), “He who overcomes in God”. 30 Then Yaakov asked and said, “hagidah tell me Your name.” “ I appeared to Avraham, to Yitzchak, and to Yaakov, as El Shaddai (God Almighty), but by My name HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) I was not known to them.” –Exodus 6:3 The Holy Name YHVH is present retrospectively within the stories of the Patriarchs because they understood the personal nature of God and the attribute of Mercy associated to the Holy Name though they did not know God by that Name. When Moshe recorded the Torah at Sinai He inserted the Holy Name in the appropriate places so as to convey the attribute of Mercy and the uniqueness of the God of Israel. But He (The Man) said, “Why ask this—My name?” Then He (The Man) blessed him there. The Name of the Man is beyond Yaakov’s comprehension (Exodus 4:24-26). Alternatively, “Why ask My Name, when you already know Who I AM?” “And the Malakh HaShem (YHVH) Angel of the Lord said to him, ‘Why do you ask My name, seeing it is incomprehensible, wonderful?’” –Judges 13:18 And the Man blessed Yaakov according to his request. 31 So Yaakov named the place Peni-el (My face-God), “for I’ve seen Elohiym God face/s (Paniym) to face/s (Paniym), and my soul life has been delivered.” Based on Yaakov’s realization, there can be no doubt that the Man in the text is God manifest in human form. This verse allows for no other interpretation. “My face has seen God and He has delivered my soul”. The only person Who qualifies as the Man who wrestled with Yaakov is the Messiah, Immanuel (God with us), Yeshua (Jesus) our King and Deliverer. “Therefore HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel (God with us)” –Yishaiyahu/Isaiah 7:14 Peniel is on the north side of the Yabok (the wadi Zerka) 32 Now the sun rose upon him just as he passed over by Peni-el—limping because of his hip. 33 That is why the children of Yisrael do not eat the tendon of the hip socket, to this very day, because He (The Man) struck the socket of Yaakov’s thigh on the tendon of the hip. To this day the tendon on the outside of the hip is not kosher to eat. Kashrut (Rabbinical kosher law) prohibits the consumption of this part of the animal (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De’ah 65). This serves as a living reminder of this account, which is one of the most vivid figurative examples of the Gospel message within the Torah. © 2017 Yaakov Brown Yaakov’s oath binds Yaakov to freedom from Laban’s wickedness, while leaving Laban a prisoner to the curse he has brought upon himself. 31:1 Now Yaakov (Follower after the heel) heard the words Laban’s (White) sons were saying, “Yaakov has taken everything that belongs to our father, and from what belongs to our father he has made all these riches.”
Radak concludes that Laban’s sons were saying these things to everyone, including Laban and that is the reason for the subsequent change in Laban’s countenance. The complaint of Laban’s sons is similar to the equally untrue claims of Esau (Gen. 27:36). 2 Then Yaakov saw Laban’s face, and he noticed that his expression wasn’t the same as it was just a day or two before. 3 Then HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) said to Yaakov, “Return to the land of your fathers and to your relatives, and I will be with you.” Verse 3 recalls the words of HaShem to Yaakov in Gen. 28:15 when he first set out for Charan. HaShem has been with Yaakov protecting his going out and guarding his return. This brings to mind the prayer we pray as we leave and return to our homes, touching the Mezuzah and bringing the promises of the Torah to our lips: “HaShem (Mercy) will guard your going out and your coming in, now and forever.” –Tehilim (Psalms) 121:8 4 So Yaakov sent and called for Rachel (Ewe) and Leah (Weary) to come to the field, to his flock. By having his wives meet him in the field he was ensuring that they would be out of earshot of the community and in particular, Laban and his sons. 5 He said to them, “I can see by your father’s face that his expression isn’t the same as it was just a day or two ago. But the Elohim (God: Judge) of my father has been with me. HaShem (Mercy) had spoken to Yaakov, however, Yaakov now acknowledges HaShem in His role as Elohiym (Judge) when he explains his Divine protection while in Laban’s community. 6 Now you yourselves know that I’ve served your father with all my strength. 7 Yet your father has deceived me and has changed my wages ten times—but Elohim (God: Judge) hasn’t allowed him to harm me. The number ten conveys the great duplicity and wickedness of Laban. Ten symbolizes fullness and completion, in this case it is the fullness and completion of Laban’s sinful actions toward Yaakov the patriarch of Israel. Again, in the face of this injustice, Yaakov calls on Elohiym, the Judge. 8 If he would say, ‘the spotted ones will be your wages,’ then the flocks would give birth to spotted ones. Or if he would say, ‘the striped ones will be your wages,’ then all the flocks would give birth to striped ones. 9 So Elohiym (God, Judge) has taken away your father’s livestock and has given them to me. It is a judgement passed by the Judge (Elohiym) that has decided the case against Laban and in favour of Yaakov, thus Yaakov has received the flocks that were owed him. 10 Now it happened when the flocks were in heat that I lifted up my eyes and saw, in a dream, behold, the males going up to the flocks were striped, spotted and speckled. 11 Then Malakh Ha-Elohiym (the angel of God) said to me in the dream, ‘Yaakov,’ and I said, ‘Hineni.’ (Here I am, ready, willing, obedient) 12 He said, ‘Lift up your eyes and see that all the males going up to the flocks are striped, spotted and speckled. For I have seen everything Laban has done to you. 13 I am the Elohiym (God: Judge) of Beit-El (The House of God) where you anointed a memorial stone, where you made a vow to Me. Get up now and leave this land, and return to the land of your relatives.’” It appears from the recounting of this dream that Yaakov dreamed it while watching the flocks mating at a time prior to his offering the solution of ownership of the speckled, streaked and spotted animals as a wage in the previous chapter. At the end of this account Yaakov is commanded by God to return to the land of his birth. Thus, because Yaakov has said Hineini (Here I am, ready, willing and obedient), it seems likely that he approached Laban with his request to leave (Chpt. 30) soon after having the dream encounter with The Messenger of God, Malakh Ha-Elohiym. One of the most prominent elements of this dream interaction is the emphasis God places on the fact that it is as a result of the harm He has witnessed Laban doing to Yaakov that He (God) will increase the streaked, speckled and spotted members of the herds. This should be understood to teach that Yaakov’s efforts have not brought this about, rather it is God Who has both given the dream and fulfilled it. 14 Then Rachel answered along with Leah and they said to him, “Is there still a portion and inheritance for us in our father’s house? 15 Aren’t we considered foreigners to him? For he has sold us and has also completely used up our bridal price. 16 Surely all the riches that Elohiym (God: Judge) has taken away from our father is for us and for our children. So now, everything Elohiym (God: Judge) God said to you, do it!” Rachel and Leah make two charges against their father. First, he has treated them as foreign slaves to be sold like cattle and second, he has used up the bride-price that Yaakov has paid for the privilege of marrying his daughters. The bride-price belonged to the bride and was to act as her security. Laban had kept the just wages of Yaakov’s work from him and had therefore stolen the bride-price that should have been passed on to his daughters when they were ready to move into fields and lands of their own. The selfish Laban had been using his daughters as a means for making himself rich. 17 Then Yaakov got up and put his children and wives on camels. 18 He drove away all his livestock and all his possessions that he had acquired—the livestock in his possession that he acquired in Paddan-aram (Field of Exaltation)—to go to his father Yitzchak’s (He laughs), to the land of Ke’naan (Lowland). The text is careful to call all these people and possession’s Yaakov’s. They are legally and rightfully his. By leaving Yaakov is obedient to God’s instruction to t’shuva (return). Yaakov had shown discernment and wisdom in seeking the council of his wives and had received confirmation from God through their words of affirmation. 19 But while Laban went to shear his flocks, Rachel yig’nov took away the teraphiym (household idols, idols of healing) that belonged to her father, 20 while Yaakov yig’nov took away ha-lev (the heart, mind, will, inner man, core being) from Laban the Aramean (Exalted ones) by not telling him that he was fleeing. The doubling of the yig’nov taking away, emphasizes the removal of all that Laban has wrongly kept as his possessions. Rachel’s motivation for taking the household idols is not clear. However, it’s possible that she is both seeking to benefit from their value and has some belief in the power associated with these idols. The Hebrew teraphiym (Plural) is born of the root raphah (heal) which infers that there was some connection to the belief that these particular idols were used as a means of receiving occult healing power. If this is part of Rachel’s belief system at this point in her faith journey, it is no different than the syncretism found in the faith journeys of many modern Messiah followers. The literal reading of the Hebrew, “Yaakov yig’nov took away ha-lev (the heart, mind, will, inner man, core being) from Laban the Aramean (Exalted ones) by not telling him that he was fleeing.” Proves difficult for many modern English readers and is rarely translated literally into English. However, its literal meaning is important. To say that Yaakov took away Laban’s Lev (Core being) is to say that he had taken all cultural respect, title, wealth, position and familial authority from Laban. By going without Laban’s approval Yaakov was showing his contempt for Laban’s authority and position in the community of Charan. 21 He himself fled with everything that belonged to him, and he got up and crossed the River, and set his face toward the hill country of Gilead (Spring of Witness). Again the text is careful to make clear that Yaakov is fleeing (from an enemy) with everything that belongs to him. These are Yaakov’s legal belongings, they are not Laban’s. 22 When Laban was told on the third day after Yaakov had fled, The third day denotes unity of purpose and a process of death and resurrection. Yaakov had been dead in the sense that he had been held captive to Laban’s whim, he was now free, resurrected, he had escaped and was beginning anew. 23 he took his relatives with him and pursued him a seven days’ journey. Laban takes his relatives as an army of intimidation and pursues Yaakov with evil intent. His journey lasts seven days, the number seven representing the fullness of Laban’s sin and his continued resistance to the God of Yaakov. Then he overtook him in the hill country of Gilead (Spring/mound of witness). 24 But Elohiym God came to Laban the Aramean in a dream at night and said to him, “Watch yourself—lest you say anything to Yaakov, good or bad.” The fact that Laban overtook Yaakov indicates his intention to prevent Yaakov from returning to the Land of Israel. It is Elohiym (God the Judge) Who meets with Laban and not HaShem (YHVH: Mercy). God is fierce for His servant Yaakov. God does not ask Laban, He warns him. 25 So Laban caught up to Yaakov. (Yaakov had pitched his tent in the hill country, so Laban and his brothers pitched their tents in the hill country of Gilead as well). 26 Then Laban said to Yaakov, “What have you done, that you’ve v’tig’nov taken away my ha-lev (the heart, mind, will, inner man, core being) and have driven my daughters away like captives of the sword? Laban acknowledges that his standing, authority and means of prosperity have been taken from him. However, his claim that Yaakov has driven his daughters away as captives is ludicrous. His daughters went willingly and he knows it. 27 Why did you secretly flee, and steal away from me? Why didn’t you tell me, so I could send you away with joy and with songs, with tambourines and with lyres? Laban knows why Yaakov went away secretly, Laban had no intention of ever letting Yaakov go free because he believed that Yaakov was the reason for his prosperity. 28 And you didn’t even let me kiss my grandsons and daughters! “Now, you’ve behaved foolishly. 29 It is in the power of my hand to do evil with you, but yesterday Ha-Elohiym (the God: Judge) of your fathers spoke to me, saying, ‘Watch yourself—lest you say anything to Yaakov, good or bad.’ 30 So now, when you up and left because you really missed your father’s house, why did you steal my elohaiy (gods)?” Laban settles on the only legitimate reason for him to be angry with Yaakov’s retinue, the stolen teraphiym. 31 In response, Yaakov said to Laban, “Because I was afraid, for I thought, ‘Suppose you snatch your daughters away from me.’ 32 Anyone with whom you find your elohaiy (gods) shall not y’ch’yeh remain live. In front of our relatives, identify whatever is yours that is with me, and take it back.” (But Yaakov did not know that Rachel had stolen them.) The scripture reminds us that it is an undeserved curse that cannot land or rest upon a person (Proverbs 26:2), however, in this instance Rachel is guilty of the actions identified by the curse and is thus under the curse of Yaakov. This is why the Torah makes it clear that Yaakov was unaware of Rachel’s actions. If he had been aware he would not have spoken such a dreadful curse. The midrash Genesis Rabah 74:4 suggests that the curse spoken here by Yaakov is the reason for Rachel’s premature death (Gen. 35:16-20). 33 So Laban went into Yaakov’s tent, and Leah’s tent and into the tent of the two maids, but he found nothing. Then he went out of Leah’s tent and entered Rachel’s tent. 34 (Now Rachel had taken the terafiym (idols, household gods) and put them in the camel’s saddlebag and sat on them.) So Laban felt around the entire tent but did not find them. 35 She said to her father, “Let not my lord be angry that I cannot rise before you, for I am having the way of women.” So he searched but did not find the terafiym (idols, household gods) idols. Whatever Rachel’s reasons for taking the teraphiym, the symbolism here is vivid. Rachel, unclean through menstruation (whether by deception or not) is sitting on the elohaiy (gods), the teraphiym (idols, demons) of Laban’s household. According to the Torah anything a menstruating woman sits on becomes unclean (Lev. 15:22). Thus both the idols of Laban’s household and the household they rule over have been menstruated on. Laban’s household has been covered in a curse of barrenness and desecration. While teraphiym could be life sized (1 Sam. 19:13), these were obviously smaller idols due to the fact that Rachel was able to fit them into her camel’s saddle bags. 36 Then Yaakov got angry and argued with Laban. Yaakov answered and said to Laban, “What’s my crime? What’s my sin that you’ve hotly pursued me? 37 For you’ve groped through all my things. What did you find? Any of your household possessions? Put them here, in front of my relatives and yours—so they can decide between the two of us. Here Yaakov calls on the testimony of Laban’s relatives as witness to Laban’s mistreatment of Yaakov. 38 These past twenty years I’ve been with you, your ewes and female goats have never miscarried, and I’ve never eaten the rams of your flock. 20 years is twice the term of completion and emphasizes the fact that Yaakov has gone far beyond expected societal norms in respect to his commitments. 39 I didn’t bring you animals torn by wild beasts. I myself would bear the loss. You would require it from my hand, whether stolen by day or stolen by night. 40 I was consumed by heat during the day, consumed by frost during the night, and my sleep fled from my eyes. 41 This is how it’s been for me twenty years in your house. I served you fourteen years for your two daughters, and six years for your flocks—and you changed my wages ten times! Yaakov states the charge of Laban’s complete duplicity and wickedness before witnesses (Laban’s relatives). 42 Had I not had the Elohiym (God: Judge) of my father, the God Elohiym (God: Judge) of Abraham, and the pachad (fear, terror, dread) of Yitzchak (He laughs), you would have sent me away empty-handed now. But seeing my misery and the toil of my hands and last night Elohiym (The Judge) passed Judgement (Yochach).” Yaakov calls on God as Elohiym (Judge), “The Judge of my father, the Judge of Avraham”. He then uses an unusual title for God, one that also conveys the fear of God that goes before His servants. The text reads, “The fear of Yitzchak”. This fear has a twofold meaning. It reveal’s Yitzchak’s healthy fear and awe of God and at the same time reveals the dread and fear that came upon Yitzchak’s enemies. People like Avimelekh. In effect, Yaakov is calling on the entire story of the Patriarchs in order to bring the weight of the Patriarch’s God given protection upon Laban. 43 In response Laban said to Yaakov, “The daughters are my daughters, and the grandsons are my grandsons, and the flocks are my flocks. Everything you see is mine. But what can I do for these, my daughters, today, or for their sons to whom they’ve given birth? 44 So now, come, let’s make a b’riyt (covenant, cutting) you and I, and let it be l’ad (a witness) between you and me.” When a woman is released into marriage she and her husband become one. Laban ignores this fact when he claims his daughters as property. He is outright lying when he claims that the flocks are his. If he seeks peace it is only because he is afraid (not in awe) of the God of Yaakov. 45 So Yaakov took a aven (stone) and set it up as a pillar, 46 and Yaakov said to his relatives, “Gather avaniym stones.” So they took the avaniym stones and made a pile. Then they ate there beside the spring. At the beginning of this portion of scripture Yaakov recounted his dream concerning the God of Beit-El. Yaakov had set up a stone of remembrance at Beit–El, thus he remembers God’s protection here at Gal-ed. The stone becomes a witness to God’s justice. It is a symbol not an idol. The stones gathered by all present were a separate pile meant to indicate their agreement to making a covenant. 47 Laban called it Yegar-sahadota (Witness heap) and Yaakov called it Gal-ed (spring of witness). 48 And Laban said, “This ha-gal (pile, spring) is a witness between me and you today.” That is why its name is Gal-ed, 49 or Mizpah (watchtower), for he said, “Let HaShem (YHVH: Mercy) keep watch between you and me when we are out of one another’s sight. Laban calls on HaShem because he knows that he is in need of a merciful ruling from Elohiym, the Judge. 50 If you mistreat my daughters, and if you take wives besides my daughters, though no one is with us, look! Elohiym ed (God: Judge is the witness) between you and me.” 51 Laban said further to Yaakov, “Behold, ha-gal (the pile, spring) and this matzeivah (pillar) which I’ve set up between you and me: 52 this ha-gal (the pile, spring) serves as a eid witness, that I won’t pass by this matzeivah (pillar) to go to you, and that you won’t pass by this ha-gal (the pile, spring) and this matzeivah (pillar) to go to me—with evil intent. 53 May ha-Elohiym (the God: Judge) of Avraham and the elohaiy (gods) of Nachor (snorting), the elohaiy gods of their father, y’shp’tu judge between us.” We note that Laban makes his covenant without blood. The very nature of B’riyt requires the shedding of blood. Also, Laban attempts to place Ha-Elohiym (The God) of Avraham among a pantheon of deities, the gods of Nachor and the gods of their father, false gods. Thus Laban’s oath is worthless. It has been made without blood and by using a syncretized pantheon. Yaakov also made an oath by the pachad (fear, terror, dread) of his father Yitzchak (He laughs). 54 Then Yaakov zevach (slaughtered, offered a sacrifice) on the mountain and he invited his relatives to eat lechem (bread) on the mountain. So they ate lechem (bread) and spent the night on the mountain. Yaakov distinguishes himself from Laban and honours God by acknowledging HaShem’s unique position above all other powers. This is why Yaakov swears his oath, “by the fear of Yitzchak” that is, the fear and awe of HaShem and by the fear and dread that HaShem brings against His servant’s enemies. Yaakov makes his oath through blood shed (B’riyt) and has all present eat together in order to recognize this covenant as binding, unlike the oath of Laban which was made without the shedding of blood. Thus Yaakov’s oath binds Yaakov to freedom from Laban’s wickedness, while leaving Laban a prisoner to the curse he has brought upon himself. © Yaakov Brown 2017 |
Yaakov BrownFounder of the Beth Melekh International Messiah Following Jewish Community, Archives
February 2024
|