AND JACOB WENT ON HIS WAY, AND ANGELS OF GOD MET HIM. AND JACOB SAID WHEN HE SAW THEM, "THIS IS THE CAMP OF GOD," AND HE NAMED THE PLACE MAHANAIM.

(Bereishit 32:2-3)

 

and angels of God met him: In the same way that the Lord showed him the ladder and the angels on his way to Padan Aram in order to strengthen his heart, here too, upon his return to his homeland, He showed him angels in order to strengthen his heart so that he would not be afraid of his brother. Now God caused him to imagine that he suddenly saw a camp of men coming towards him, and so he said, "This is the camp of God."

(ShaDaL ad loc)

 

and angels of God - thoughts of wisdom.

(Ibn Ezra 28:12)

 

and angels of God met him... when he saw them, "This is the camp of God" - Either the angel was perceived by the tangible eye, or it was an embodiment of an angel, i.e. "a man met him" - that he was posing as a man, or it was so subtly tangible that it was like the meeting of a thing with itself [i.e., instantaneous]. If one approaches his fellow, he will see him from a distance and meet him when he reaches him. This is not the case with an angel. You do not see him before he arrives, yet when he is with you, you [immediately] see him, for then your perceptiveness grows and you see him. The ancients explained a verse in this fashion: Have I seen [him] here also after I have seen?" (Bereishit 16:13); since he [the angel] stopped speaking with her [Hagar], she suddenly stopped seeing him. That is why it says that even though they went towards him from the Land of Israel, he still could not see them from a distance. Only when they met him - when they were right next to him and he was in need of them - only then he saw them and his vision was purified. That is why it says, when he saw them, i.e., after they met up with him, and not before that meeting [could he say]: "This is the camp of God."

(Meshekh Hokhma Bereishit 32:2,3)

 

 

Mahanaim

Nahem Ilan

Parashat VaYetze concludes with an anecdote involving Jacob that occurred after his peaceful parting from Laban:

And Jacob went on his way, and angels of God met him. And Jacob said when he saw them, "This is the camp of God," and he named the place Mahanaim. (Bereishit 32:2-3)

The Torah does not make clear the significance of the angels' meeting Jacob and why he referred to the place he saw them as Mahanaim, using the dual form of the noun. This ambiguity challenged the commentators. I shall consider some of ways they dealt with it.

Rashi's comments, which are borrowed from Midrash Tanhuma, are well known: "Two camps - one of the [angels of] Diaspora who accompanied him thus far, and one [of the angels] of the Land of Israel, who came to meet him." According to this derasha, Jacob could "see" the two camps with his spiritual sight and therefore he used the dual form. The meeting mentioned in the end of the parasha thus complements the meeting with which the parasha begins:

And Jacob left Beer Sheba, and he went to Haran. And he arrived at the place and lodged there because the sun had set, and he took some of the stones of the place and placed [them] at his head, and he lay down in that place.

And he dreamed, and behold! a ladder set up on the ground and its top reached to heaven; and behold, angels of God were ascending and descending upon it.  (28:10-12)

R. Avraham Ibn Ezra writes in connection with the parasha's two final verses: "And angels of God met him - to help him on the way. And he alone saw the camp of angels surrounding his own camp. That is why he called the place Mahanaim in allusion to shnaim [two] - one [camp] was his and one [camp] was the angels'." It appears that the insistence that only Jacob saw the angels' camp is a polemical response to an opposing exegetical position which held that he was not the only person to see them. Commenting on the parasha's concluding verse, Ibn Ezra offers an alternative explanation of the dual form (Mahanaim). He compares and contrasts Jacob's camp to that of the angels, thus avoiding the need to delineate two different camps of angels in the manner of Midrash Tanhuma and Rashi.

RaMBaN also disagreed with Rashi's interpretation. After criticizing it he explains that the vision that was revealed to Jacob came as a kind of response to his anxiety: "Jacob had this vision when he arrived at his enemies' border to inform him that those who were with him were more numerous than those [who were against him]." That is to say, that while Jacob left Laban after they had agreed to a pact between them, the encounter itself and its events constituted a difficult and draining experience for Jacob, and he required encouragement. Only after the happy ending did Jacob turn his attention to assessing and understanding how fraught with danger his involuntary encounter with Laban had been. It could have ended very badly. The vision revealed to him was meant to calm him and increase his confidence in his own power. But is this the plain meaning of the text? It is very doubtful to me.

Adjacent to these comments we find RaMBaN suggesting two entirely different interpretations of the place name Mahanaim. The first claims that "the place was called Mahanaim because that is the manner of naming," i.e., it follows a common linguistic formula that does not call for further investigation. His second interpretation is closer to that of Ibn Ezra and expands upon it: "or Mahanaim - his camp and the camp of the heavenly ones, to say that his earthly camp was like the angelic camp, both were the camps of God, [both] bless Him and avow to God's unity, may His name be blessed for all eternity." The RaMBaN adds to Ibn Ezra's explanation a characterization of the similarity between the earthly and heavenly camps: they both count as "the camp of God" since they both perform deeds which demonstrate their connection with God. It seems that RaMBaN is referring less to Jacob as a concrete figure than he is referring to the ideal type of Jacob's descendants throughout the generations. This is a characteristic aspect of his commentary on the Torah.

Rabbi Avraham ben HaRaMBaM (RABaM), who lived in Egypt and wrote in Arabic, explains:

The double number of Mahanaim refers to his camp which was with him - his comrades and students who had achieved the level of sons of the prophets [bnei hanevi'im] - and the camp of angels which he saw in his prophecy. For when the angels were revealed to him and he saw them, they seemed to be located within his camp, even though his heart and his condition were separated from them. (This translation comes from Efraim Yehudah Weisenberg's edition, London: 5718, pp. 105-6.)

RABaM agrees with Ibn Ezra (whose commentary was known to him and is frequently quoted by him) and with the RaMBaN (who lived after him) that the two camps were that of Jacob and that of the angels. RaMBaN saw religious practice ("[both] bless Him and avow to God's unity, may His name be blessed for all eternity") as constituting the element common to both camps, while RABaM thought that they shared a common spiritual experience. RABaM went even farther. His last sentence reflects a profound awareness of the essential differences between humans and angels. However, according to his view consciousness is the essential formative factor of religious experience and not realia and the world outside of man. Therefore these outer differences do not influence the powerfulness of religious experience. Revelation depends on one's internal strengths. Jacob, according to RABaM, saw the camp of angels as if it were absorbed into his own camp. It appears that here the RABaM is explicitly and boldly giving voice to one possibility of religious experience, the one in which the divine is assimilated into the human. The alternative possibility is, of course, that the human be assimilated into the divine, which is a more common approach.

According to the Tanhuma and Rashi, the vision which Jacob saw was found outside of him and his camp. Ibn Ezra and RaMBaN agree with this view, even though they had a different understanding of what the two camps were. RABaM suggests an entirely different stance, that the vision was located within Jacob's camp. This interpretation sits well with RABaM's declared affinity for mystical spiritual experiences, which was inspired by the Muslim Sufis. (See: Nahem Ilan, "Hanahot Te'ologiyot Ve'ekronot Parshani'im: Le'tivo U'leyihudo shel Perush R' Avaraham ben HaRaMBaM La'Torah," in Davar Davur al Ofanav, S. Hopkins, S. Strumuza, and B. Kiaza, editors, Jerusalem 5767, pp. 31-70.)

Biblical commentators set before us a number of suggestions for understanding Scripture that can enrich the individual's range of thought and the compass of his understanding of the Bible. Sometimes they also offer a glimpse into their own inner worlds. A careful reading of their words invites insights into general philosophical questions which go far beyond the text that is being explained. The statements of the commentators regarding the name Mahanaim in the end of Parashat VaYetze are a good example of both of these possibilities.

Prof. Nahem Ilan teaches in the MA in Jewish Studies program at Lander Institute in Jerusalem (under the auspices of Touro College)

 

Every Journey Can Deteriorate, Therefore One Must Pray for Perseverance Towards its Original Destination

Rabbi Abahu said: If God remains with me, if He protects me baderekh [on this journey] that I am making - [this is protection] from evil speech. How do we know this? From the verse that says Vayidrekhu [they have trained] their tongues to speak falsely (Jeremiah 9). and gives me bread to eat - [this is protection from] illicit sex, as it is written and he [Potiphar] knew nothing accept the bread he ate - [bread,] this is a euphemism [for sex]. And if I return safe [literally: in peace] to my father's house - [this is protection] from bloodshed. The Lord shall be my God - [this is protection] from idolatry.

(Bereishit Rabbah 70)

 

That is to say, that Jacob does not ask that his own needs be seen to, rather he asks that God help him perform his duties, that he spare him from the sins of evil speech, blood-shed, illicit sex and idolatry. This vow is a very great religious commitment and is not connected with payment of rewards.

(Prof. Yishayahu Leibowitz of blessed memory, He'arot Leparshiyot Hashavua)

 

God Cares for the Weak

And the Lord saw that Leah was unloved (Bereishit 29:31). As Scripture says: The Lord supports all who stumble (Psalms 145: 14) - The qualities of the Holy One Blessed be He are unlike those of humans. When a human has a wealthy friend he sticks to him and submits to him, and when he sees that he has faltered and become impoverished, he no longer values him, but rather places a stone on him. But when the Holy One Blessed be He sees someone who has been subdued and faltered, he lends him a hand and stands him upright, as it says, The Lord supports all who stumble and makes all who are bent stand straight.

(Aggadat Bereishit, 49)

 

And the first-born is the son of the unloved one - Scripture states this with certainty, in the same manner as it states, and the Lord saw that Leah was unloved, for the Lord sees the broken-hearted so as to support them.

(Or HaHayyim on Devarim 21:15)

 

And Rachel arrived with the sheep... for she was a shepherdess

Know that each and every shepherd and shepherdess has a particular melody appropriate to the grasses and the place in which they pasture their flocks. For each and every animal has its own special grass that it must eat. And he does not always pasture in the same place. In accordance with the grasses and the place where he pastures, so shall be his melody. For each and every grass has its own song, which it recites, which is the aspect of Pirkei Shira, and the shepherd's melody is made up from the song of the grasses... for as soon as there was a shepherd in the world, there were immediately musical instruments, as mentioned above. That is why King David, peace be upon him, who knew how to play music (I Samuel 16) was a shepherd (ibid), as mentioned above. (We also find that all of the Patriarchs were shepherds). This is the aspect of, From the end of the earth we heard singing (Isaiah 24), that is, that the songs and melodies come forth out of the end of the earth, for the melodies are made up from the grasses which grow in the earth...

(Likutei MoHaRaN Tanina 63)

 

He Rolled the Stone From The Mouth of the Well: Revelation through the Struggle for Justice

It is still broad daylight: The righteous man despises injustice, even that which is inflicted upon others, as is written, The unjust man is an abomination to the righteous.

(Seforno, Bereishit 29:7)

 

To inform you that contemplation, isolation, and avoidance of the bustle of life and the masses are not the identifying features of one who seeks God's nearness and divine revelation; it is rather the carrying of His banner among the people, action - even dealing with daily routine (often trifling) matters, involvement and integration into daily activity in order to impose justice. This is the reason why the Torah tells of such trivial and unimportant matters such as Jacob and the shepherd.

(Professor Nechama Leibowitz, Studies on the Book of Bereishit, p.219)

 

So Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed to him but a few days because of his love for her.

(Bereishit 29:20)

 

Because of his love for her - "For love disregards the line." (Depending upon the context, "love disregards the line" may mean: "Love disregards accepted conduct"; "Love distorts logic and reason"; "Love distorts perception".)

(Sforno ibid., ibid.)

 

But a few days: On The Relativity Of Time And Difficulty.

And they seemed to him but a few days because of his love for her. - Because of his great love for her, seven years' work for her was but a small price; were Laban to have set a higher price, Jacob would have worked longer.

An alternative explanation: After he had worked, they seemed but a few days, but during the work, they seemed like many days, because of his great love for her.

(Hizkuni Bereishit 29;20)

 

In the many days after that the king of Egypt died - in periods of distress they are called ‘many' and in times of joy, they are called ‘few', as is written, and they seemed to him but a few days because of his love for her. This means: After it had passed, the period of enslavement seemed short.

(Hizkuni Shemot 2:23)

 

Rabbi Yehuda expounded: In the future, The Holy One, Blessed Be He, will bring the yetzer hara - the evil inclination - and will slaughter it before the righteous and the wicked. For the righteous, it will seem like a high mountain, and to the wicked it will seem like a thin hair; these will weep and these will weep. The righteous will weep, saying: "How could we have conquered so high a mountain?"

And the wicked will weep, saying: "How could we not have overcome this thin hair?"

So The Holy One, Blessed Be He, will wonder along with them, as is written, (Zecharia 8): Thus said the Lord of Hosts: Though it will seem impossible to the remnant of this people in those days, shall it also be impossible to Me?

(Sukka 52b).

 

Readers Respond

Moshe Meir (in the Parashat Bereishit Issue of Shabbat Shalom) characterizes the Torah as a form of literature that uses textual gaps to "leave[s] the reader room for interpretation." He brings as an example the question of which species of tree the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil belonged to. Whether or not that question is relevant to the story's significance, the phenomenon involved is well known. However, Meir continues and states this characteristic sets the literature of the Torah apart from other literatures, a claim that is not correct in relation to ancient literatures such as the Ugaritic epics nor in relation to modern Western literature. It is sufficient to mention the work of Prof. Meir Sternberg in connection with the latter. I am afraid that Moshe Meir made his claim with an eye towards suggesting that the literature of the Torah is essentially different from other ancient literatures and also artistically superior to them. It seems to me that such a tendency sands in stark contrast to a famous midrash on our parasha which asks why at first only one human being was created. Its answer is that it is so in order that no one can say "My father is greater than yours." I think that we should free ourselves of the chauvinism that is widespread our culture.

Eliezer (Ed) Greenstein

 

Moshe Meir, author of the article, responds:

The intention of my phrase "in contrast to other narrative forms" [or, more literally, "in contrast with other literatures" - translator's note] was not that there are no non-Jewish literatures which are characterized by textual gaps. I certainly did not mean to demonstrate through this that the Torah is a higher literature. The intention was to describe a simple and well-known characteristic of the Torah which stands in contrast to other literatures, such as that of ancient Greece, as Auerbach explained in his book Mimesis. The writer of these words is the last person who would adopt the "chauvinism" mentioned in the reader's reply, and it is a shame that it was brought up, having nothing to do with the article's main message. I think that readers who appreciate my intention in presenting the transgressive act of eating from the Tree of Knowledge as a necessary outcome of humanity's possession of reason will realize that my theme is not conducive to "chauvinistic" statements and belongs instead to entirely different realms of opinion.

 

The Editor comments:

It is obvious to us that both Dr. Moshe Meir and Prof. Eliezer Greenstein identify with the dictum, "If someone tells you that there is wisdom among the nations, believe him" and with the RaMBaM's words: "Hear the truth from whoever speaks it." We, here at Shabbat Shalom, are certainly opposed to any form of religious, nationalist, or cultural chauvinism. The respondent's comments and the author's clarifications can teach us the importance of communication, attentiveness, and dialogue.

 

 

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $700
• English edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel, checks made out to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made through:

New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD, Great Britain

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS UNDER $100.

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project.

 

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

5,000 copies of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.