Hebrew Insights into Parashat Va’yishlach B’resheet (Genesis): 32:3 - ch.36

 

"Then Ya'acov sent  [va’yishlach] messengers - "mal’a'chim" - before him to his brother Esau…"  (32:3). These are the opening words of our Parasha. "Mal'a’chim", as we know, are angels, messengers, or emissaries. Ya'acov had seen them in dreams (aside from the famous ladder scene in 28:12, an angel also addressed him in a dream in 31:10-13). He had also run into YHVH's messengers when he departed from Lah'van (32:1,2), and now he sends messengers, human “mal'a’chim”, to his brother Esav. The root of "mal'a’ch" (singular) is “la'a'ch” (lamed, alef, chaf), meaning "to send". It is from this verb (which is not in use as such) that we get the noun: "m’la'cha", occupation, work, workmanship (such as the service that was preformed in the Mishkan), possession and more. Later on, when Esav will propose that Ya'acov come along with him with his entire entourage, the latter will refuse and say that he will move "according to the pace of the cattle that are before him…" (33:14). "Cattle" (or “livestock”) here is also "m’la’cha", as the herds would typically go out ahead, or be sent forth in front of the retinue. When "YHVH rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done" (Gen. 2:2), it was His "m'la’cha" from which He had ceased. This is one example of how the Hebrew language is able to accommodate, as it were, in one word or term, cattle, angels, occupation, the holy service rendered unto YHVH in His Abodde, and even His work of creation.

Such diverse ‘blends’ are not uncommon in Hebrew, and provide a window to the understanding of the thought pattern or mentality of the society which gave birth to them. When the root word for "work", for example, is "to send forth" what does it say about the society where this usage originated? What does it tell us about the basic understanding of the concept of "work" or "occupation"? It certainly speaks of production or labor which does not remain in confinement, or only within one's vicinity. Rather, it appears that the work is rendered or performed for the community and is looked upon as a mission (by its very definition) and therefore cannot be considered incidental or self-serving. The word "m'la’cha" also refers to the one performing it, again, pointing to a member of a socially-inclined community.  The content of the one and only proverb where "m'la’cha" is found, validates what the etymology of this word reveals. Thus, Mishley (Proverbs) 24:27 reads, "prepare your work ("m'la’cha") outside, and make it ready for yourself in the field; afterwards, then, build your [own] house" (italics added).

Just before Ya'acov and company venture to cross the Yarden (Jordan) in anticipation of the unknown, the much concerned Ya'acov prays for safety and deliverance. At the same time he also expresses gratitude to the Elohim of his fathers, acknowledging his own unworthiness "of all the lovingkindness and of all the faithfulness which You have shown to Your servant; for with my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two companies (camps - ma'cha'not)" (32:10). The text of 32:11-12a is sung (in Hebrew) by Yonatan Razel. Here is the link:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEVRSKH54fs 

At the end of last week's Parasha we noted the usage of "double camp" – “machanayim”. Here (in 33:1), Ya'acov is actually dividing up his family into two (out of concern for their safety, but employing a strategy typical of his shrewd disposition). This division hints, yet again, at the future state of his house/family/progeny. We must note, however, that the present division does not conform to the way in which the 'nation of Ya'acov' will eventually split up. In his prayer, in 32:10, he makes reference to having become “two camps” (translated “companies”), which unlike last week’s “double camp”, here is a plain “shney machanot” (“machaneh” singular, “machanot” plural). When meeting up with his brother, Esav, the latter refers to Ya’acov’s family as a “machaneh” (33:8). In 32;21, Ya’acov is said to have “lodged that night in the camp”.

Shortly after, the following scene ensues: "Now he [Ya’acov] arose that same night and took his two wives and his two maids and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. Then Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him until daybreak" (32: 22, 24). Wrestle here, "(va)ye'a'vek", is remarkably similar to the proper name "Yabbok” – “Jabbok” (remember that in Hebrew b and v sounds are designated by the same letter), the root of both being a.v/b.k (alef, vet/bet, kof), forming the noun "ah’vak", which is “dust”. Naturallly, an 'engagement' such as the one in which Ya'acov and the "man" were involved would have raised no small amount of dust. "Ah’vak" speaks of very fine dust, not the kind that is translated "dust of the earth", which is "ah'far" (mentioned and discussed in Parashat Chayey Sarah in Gen. 23). The dust contained in the river's name, as well as in the verb chosen to describe Ya'acov's struggle with the unnamed person in the dark, add even more (proverbial) haziness and mystery to the already obscure event. Even Ya'acov's name-change to “Yisra'el” is not quite clear. The reason for the change is given as, "For you have striven with Elohim and with men and have prevailed" (32:28). The name was bestowed in response to Ya'acov's demand to be blessed by the "man", whom he was not willing to release until and unless his request was granted. Additionally, the river’s name, “Yabbok”, may also be connected to the root b.k.k (bet, kof, kof) which forms the verb for to “empty out”, thus lending another possible perspective to the scene that had just been imposed upon Ya’acov/Yisrael.

The name “Yisra'el” is a composite word formed by the verb "sara" (s.r.h. sin, resh, hey), to “rule, persist, persevere, strive”, and "el" - “strong” or “mighty one”, from which the word “Elohim” is derived. What was meant by the declaration to Ya’acov, and in what way was his life, at least up to that point, congruent with the definition of this name? Were his 'dusty' struggles on behalf of self' taken into account in this lofty pronouncement? Or was it simply a statement of facts, devoid of any qualitative and personal evaluations? Was the name Yisra’el and its meaning the Almighty's way of bestowing pure and unadulterated grace upon him -  the name possessing more of a prophetic significance for a future day when Ya'acov would be empowered by his Elohim - rather than a description of present day facts? Whether Ya’acov ‘merited’ this name at that moment, at least the persistence that he demonstrated that night did, to some degree, validate the meaning of the new name.

Incidentally, if one were to read the consonants making up “Yisrael” without any vowels (which would have been absent in the original Scripture writings), it could be read as “yashar-el” – El is upright (and hence in the future even Yaacov-Yisrael will be ‘nicknamed’ Yeshurun – the one who has been made straight/upright).

 When it was Ya'acov's turn to ask the ‘mystery man’ for his name, the response came in the form of a question: "Why is it that you ask my name?" (32:29). When Ma’no'ach (Manoah), Shimshon's (Samson) father, asked the very same question of the messenger ("mal’ach") who came to him, the response was "for it is wonderful" (Judges 13:18). Another one who was conferred the name “wonderful” (counselor) is the “child who was born to us and th son who was given to us” (see Isaiah 9:6).  In the case before us the reply is followed by, "and he blessed him there". What was the blessing? Did it simply constitute the name change? Additionally, seeing that the story of Yaacov is so replete with “mal’achim” it is quite intriguing that in this particular episode the one, whom we just compared to the person who appeared before Shimshon’s parents, is not called a “mal’a’ch”, but rather “a man” – “ish”! But in Yaacov’s eyes this “man” was Elohim Himself (see 32:31).*

That “mal’achim” are an inextricable part of Ya’acov’s life experience will become evident even later on, as even close to death and while about to bless Yosef’s sons,  when Ya’acov reflects upon his life he makes reference to the “angel who redeemed me from all evil” and even invokes him as the one who was to “bless the lads” (Gen. 48:16). In Hosea 12:4, the “man” whom Ya’acov struggled with, who as we noted was not defined as a “mal’ach” in the original scene, is recognized as such.

After his first heavenly encounter, upon departing from the land, Ya’acov’s experience was marked by the  'Elohim of a place', as he deemed to have been in what he called, "the house of Elohim" (“bet El” - Gen. 28:16,17,19). However, now, upon his return, it is the "face of Elohim" that he encounters – “P'ni'el” (ref. 32:31). An echo of his P'ni'el experience may be detected in what he says to his brother Esav in 33:10, "for I see your face (pa’ne'cha) as one sees the face of Elohim ("p'ney Elohim")" (italics added). Ya'acov's perspective certainly seems to have changed. Having seen "Elohim face to face", he is now able to view even Esav differently.

As he re-enters the land of his fathers, Ya'acov walks in the footsteps of his grandfather Avraham (see Gen. 13:6) and comes to Sh'chem (Shechem). His coming to that town after the encounter with his brother does not pass by unnoticed, "and Ya'acov came safely to the city of Shechem" (33:18 cf. 28:21, where Yaacov prayed for a safe return - shalom). The literal rendering here is, “Ya'acov came "shalem" -  that is, whole, in one piece and in peace to Sh'chem” ("shalem" of course being of the same root as "shalom"). Perhaps this is also an ironic preamble to the events that are about to follow, which will turn out to be far from peacful. Thus the next chapter introduces us to the conflict between Ya'acov's family and the local populace.

In 34:21 the root sh.l.m comes up again, when Cha’mor (Hamor) and his son Sh'chem attempt to talk the town folk into being circumcised. Included in what they said about Ya'acov and his family were also the following words: "these people are peaceful toward us…" - "sh'lemim," “whole hearted, with good intentions, undivided”. We soon learn that nothing could be further from the truth (see 34:25-29).

In chapter 35:1 Elohim tells Ya'acov to "rise ("kum") and go to Bet-El… and make an altar there to Elohim, who appeared before you…" Last week we noted that Ya'acov's call to "rise up" started sounding when he first found himself in the "makom" (place) which he named Bet-El (ref 28:19). Now, having completed a full cycle, Ya'acov is to go back there and continue to "rise up." Truly, from that point Ya'acov's on going maturation process becomes evident. First, he orders his family to "put away the foreign gods which are among you…" (v. 2). In last week's Parasha (31:32b etc.) we saw that Ya'acov's household was not free of idolatry, indeed the ‘man about the house’ seemed to tolerate that state of affairs -  but not so now! After all the foreign idols and the earrings were gathered (some of which may have been part of the plunder of the Shechemites 34:29), Ya'acov buried them under the "ela", the terebinth tree (v.4). This small tree, along with the "alon" (“oak”) share the root "el", pointing to strength, and hence "el” - "god", which has been surfacing often in these narratives about Ya'acov. In fact, in these Parashot (plural for Parasha) the title "Elohim" (plural of "el"), rather than YHVH, seems to be more prevalent.  In verse 8 of our passage, Rivka's nurse D'vora (Deborah) dies and is buried under the "alon", and thus the place was named Alon Ba'chut ("oak of weeping"). Many other place names bear titles connected to the oak tree (Elon Moreh, Eloney - "oaks of…" - Mamreh etc.), which is an indigenous tree and is known for its strength and rejuvenation ability. The oak and the teberinth have both remained symbols of strength and durability, and as such the remnant of the Nation is compared to them in Yishayahu (Isaiah) 6:13: "Yet there will be a tenth portion… and it will again burn, like a terebinth or an oak whose stump remains when it is felled…." (italics added).

Back to our narrative in chapter 35, where Ya'acov calls his Elohim:  "The El who answered me in the day of my distress…" ("tzarati") (35:3, emphasis added).  Before that, in 32:7, we read that he "was greatly afraid and distressed". The word for "distressed" there is "(va)ye'tzar". The two consonants (tz.r tzadi, resh) happen to be used in numerous other words such as “adversity, affliction, anguish, distress, tribulation or trouble”, and in several more such as tza'ar - sorrow; tzar - enemy, adversary; tzarar - bind, tie up, restrict, narrow, scant, cramped, a show of hostility, vexing; tzaraf - smelt, refine, test; matzref - a crucible or instrument of refining; tzir'ah - hornet; tzorev - burn, scorch; tzara'at - leprosy; batzoret - drought; matzor - siege; mitzrayim –  straits, Egypt, and more. Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah) 30:7 contains a reference to "tzarat Ya'acov”, Ya'acov's trouble: "Alas! For that day is great, so that none is like it; and it is the time of Jacob’s trouble, but he shall be saved out of it".

Immediately after Dvorah’s burial Elohim appears before Ya'acov once again, blessing and reminding him that his name is no longer Ya'acov, but Yisrael, repeating the promises He had given to his fathers (ref. 35:9-11). This is the first time that Elohim reveals Himself to Ya’acov also as El-Shaddai (the “breasted Elohim”). The death of the nurse maid signified severance (for Yisrael) from the natural “breasts” and having to now cling to Elohim’s.  In commemoration of the event, Ya'acov-cum-Yisrael sets up a pillar over which he pours oil (v. 14).

Next comes the birth of Binyamin, whom his mother named Ben-Oni, commonly translated “son of my sorrow”, although the usage of “on” as “strength” is much more prevalent. Thus if the labor and birth of Binyamin (as the name is pronounced in Hebrew) drained all of Rachel’s energy and vigor, she could have easily meant his name to be   "son of my strength". His father, on the other hand, called him "Ben-Yamin", meaning "son of the right (hand)" (35:18). Naming him as he did, Ya'acov was actually conferring upon him a firstborn position, perhaps because he was the first and only one to be born in the Land. In B’resheet 49:3, in Ya’acov’s last words to his sons he says about Reuven: “you are my firstborn, My might and the beginning of my strength…” “Strength” in this instance is also “on”. Thus a certain symmetry emerges here; Ya’acov’s last words to his sons echo the words of his beloved wife about the youngest son, who exhausted her strength, while Yisrael’s firstborn exhausted more than once his father’s expectations of being mighty and strong  (and hence ended up losing this position, see 1^st Chron. 5:1).

Upon Ra’chel’s death, Ya’acov set up a pillar on her grave (35: 20). Doing this he was actually repeating what he had done in verse 14 above, after YHVH had talked to him. In both cases it says, “va’ya’tzev ma’tze’va”, that is “and he placed a pillar”. The very act of placing, as well as the pillar itself, are of the root y.tz.v. (yod, tzadi, bet/vet), meaning to “station” or “take a stand”. Just as he did in last week’s Parasha (ref 28:18), Ya’acov again commemorates the events in his life by signposts. There is a significant reference to signposts and landmarks in Jeremiah 31:21 (while in 14-15 there is reference to Rachel), where the command to the virgin daughter of Yisrael, using the same by-now-familiar verb, is issued: “set up” (signposts and landmarks) – ha’tzivi  (imperative, feminine, singular).

In chapter 36, the Parasha’s last, there is a short episode (verses 6 and 7), interposed in the record of Esav's progeny, which explains the physical separation of the brothers - Ya’acov and Esav: "For their property had become too great for them to live together, and the land where they sojourned could not sustain them because of their livestock". This is a clear echo from the past, reminding us of Avraham and Lot's separation (ref. Gen. 13:1-12). However, this piece of information is somewhat curious, because in 32:3 we are told that Esav’s dwelling place was in “Seir, in the country of Edom”. Could it be that up until Ya’acov’s return, his brother held on to the land on both sides of the River?

Let us also take note of 36:12, which tells us that Esav's first born, Elifaz, had a firstborn by his concubine Timnah (who herself was of a noble family of the Horites, 36:22), whom he named Amalek. The latter was to become Yisrael's fiercest enemy. Being a firstborn (and a son of a firstborn), Amalek must have carried his grandfather Esav’s hatred for, and murderous impulse against Ya'acov, and has therefore always targeted the latter’s progeny, resulting in a state of perpetual animosity (ref. Gen. 27:41; Ex. 17:8-14, 16; Deut. 25:17-19).

 * “Hypostatic union” is the theological term used for the ‘union’ of Messiah’s humanity and divinity.

One and the Same

 

In the beginning of Acts chapter one the writer describes what took place during the forty days after Yeshua’s resurrection, at which time the Messiah spoke daily to His disciples concerning the Kingdom of Elohim.  He then instructed “by the Holy Spirit” (1:2), those whom He chose, to not leave Jerusalem until they would receive what was promised.  In the minds of Yeshua’s followers the promise was not the Holy Spirit, as is evident from their question: “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6).     

Yeshua’s main teaching and instructions before and after His resurrection was related to the Kingdom of Elohim. Speaking to the masses, in the Sermon on the Mount, He stressed, “Seek first the Kingdom of Elohim” (Mathew 6:33).   His many followers, who at that time were not filled with the Spirit, could not comprehend the parables that He used to explain the great mystery of YHVH’s Kingdom, which had been in every generation (see Psalm 49:13).

The above-mentioned promise which was from the Father, was further proclaimed by Yeshua. He then reminded His disciples of his cousin John/Yochanan who immersed/baptized in water, but added that in a matter of a few days they would be immersed in the Holy Spirit (v. 5).  This statement most likely bewildered the disciples, as they had not yet made the connection between the Kingdom and the Spirit. The relationship, or linkage, between these two is still a mystery to many believers today, who are taught that Yeshua will set up His Kingdom when He returns, reinforcing the “disconnect” between the impartation of the Holy Spirit and YHVH’s dominion. Based on this viewpoint, it is assumed that what the prophets of old foretold about the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel would not be fulfilled until Yeshua’s return. 

Even before His death and resurrection Yeshua disclosed to His disciples that this power/authority of Elohim, that is the Holy Spirit, could not come to them unless He would go to the Father.  “Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper [Holy Spirit] will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you” (John 16:7).  “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come” (John 16:13). 

What are the things to come? In his sermon in Solomon’s porch, Peter gave a very clear answer to this question, when he spoke of Yeshua, “whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which Elohim has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began” (Acts 3:21).  In other words, Yeshua will not return until He finishes what was prophesied of Him, and that is to restore the House of Jacob and set up His everlasting Kingdom in that house (see Isaiah 49:6; Luke 1:32). This is precisely why Yeshua answered His disciples’ aforementioned question about the restoration of all things, in the manner that He did:

“But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth" (Acts 1:8).  This power is the authority of the Kingdom made manifest in and by the Holy Spirit.  Paul defined this connection very precisely: “For the kingdom of Elohim is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (Romans 14:17 emphases added).  A different aspect of the Kingdom-Spirit connection was brought out by Yeshua in the following statement: “But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of Elohim, surely the kingdom of Elohim has come upon you” (Mathew 12:28 emphases added). 

One might say that where the Holy Spirit is, there is also the Kingdom of Elohim.  So let us take our Messiah’s advice and seek first His Kingdom/His Spirit, so that we may walk in the power of His presence being about His business of restoring and establishing the Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven.

A People's Named Destiny

 

A People’s Named Destiny

In my opinion one of the most important books in scripture generally, and in the Torah in particular, is Genesis. This book constitutes the foundations of everything that Elohim will build upon throughout the history of humanity, which is His-story.

The Torah portions for the last number of weeks have been about the everlasting/eternal covenant that YHVH made with the forefathers.  Included within the context of YHVH’s covenant are a nation (goy), a people (am), a land, and a plan.  What makes this covenant eternal? Obviously it is the Word of Elohim, for He is the same yesterday, today and forever. He has bonded Himself to the life of these three men and to their seed/descendants.  YHVH is committed and has sworn by His own name to fulfill every aspect of His covenants and promises to His family, His inheritance Jacob/Israel.

The target of this letter, is the “people”. The general word in Hebrew is “am”, like in Am Yisrael - the people of Israel.  Today when we think of YHVH’s covenanted people, the Jews come to mind. But those of us who have had our eyes open to the history of the house of Jacob and their prophetic calling of becoming a multitude of nations, know that it is not only the Jews who have been covenanted.  Already when looking back at the inception of this people, there are noticeable hints of their future fulfillment.  Take for example the blessings that Israel bestowed upon Joseph’s two sons.  In Genesis 48 Israel lays his right hand on Ephraim’s head and his left on Menashe’s.  Joseph complains about the positioning and reminds his father that Menashe is the first born.  Israel then says to Joseph: "I know, my son, I know. He also shall become a people (am), and he also shall be great” (verse 19).  Please note (again) the Hebrew word for “people” is “am”.  After Israel places his hands on the lads’ heads he imparts his name “Israel” to Joseph and to the boys, so that this name would live on in them (verse 16).  Does this mean that they are the only ones that would carry this name in the family?  No, Jacob was called a nation - “goy” - in the womb of his mother.  Thus the entire people of Jacob inherited the name “Israel”, as seen in many places but none more blatantly as in Isaiah 8:14, where reference is made to the “two houses of Israel” (according to the Hebrew). As we know, the house was partitioned, splitting into two, with different prophetic aspects attached to each of their respective destinies.    

The blessing given to Menashe, which means “forgetfulness”, signals that the future of all the people of the house of Joseph/Israel (lost tribes) would be great, albeit deprived of the knowledge of their identity as “am” Israel.  Immediately after he blessed Menashe, Jacob/Israel tells Ephraim that he “will become the fullness of the nations (goyim)”.  As with the case of Menashe (regarding a ‘forgetful great people’), this word too would become applicable to the rest of the tribes who will be attached to Ephraim.

Later on in the history of the house of Joseph/Israel, the people defiled themselves and their land, and hence YHVH declared that they would become “not my people (lo-ami)”.  Yet this prophesied condition of rejection on YHVH’s part was to last only until YHVH would complete sowing their seed into all nations, with a pre-determined “fullness”. 

When we view the thousands of years of YHVH’s faithfulness in scattering/sowing and overseeing the seed of Israel, we must confess that these years were (and still are) full of sorrow, just as it is expressed in Psalm 126:5-6 about: “Those who sow in tears…” but who “shall reap with joyful shouting”. The psalm continues, and reiterates: “He who goes to and fro weeping, carrying his bag of seed, shall indeed come again with a shout of joy, bringing his sheaves with him”.  Here we see that it is at the time of harvest that the sorrow will turn to joy. 

Most of the history of YHVH’s people can testify to the truth of these words, as generation after generation, along with the rest of humanity, have suffered under the tyranny of sin.  Even though sin had the upper hand, man continued to reproduce, especially the people of Israel to the point of nearing the quota of the “fullness of the nations”. The question that always arises is, when will this cycle of sorrow end and the joy of reaping begin?  Obviously when the field (earth) will be full of ripe grain… according to YHVH’s seasons.

 

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Toldot

 

B’resheet (Genesis) 25:19 - 28:9

Last week's Parashat Cha’yey Sarah ended with the chronicles of Yishma'el's descendants. This week’s portion opens up with the chronicles of his brother, Yitzchak.  But while “toldot” means "begetting" (root y.l.d - “to give birth”), here “toldot” starts out with the barrenness of Yitzchak’s wife. Rivka’s condition, however, is inserted in an almost parenthetical manner and is couched between Yitzchak's intercession on her behalf and YHVH's response to the plea. 

 

In 25:21 it says that Yitzchak “entreated” - “vaya'a'tor” (a.t.r. - ayin, tav, resh) – YHVH, and "YHVH was entreated “(vaye'ater) of him" (italics added). The very form of the verbs (“entreat” – “entreated”) - both in the original Hebrew and in the English translation - points to the closeness of the “entreatee” to the “entreater”, and the latter’s deep empathy for the former.

 When the request is granted it takes the form of not one, but two sons, the first of whom comes out red all over (ref. 25: 25). The word for “red” is “adom”, and as we saw in Parashat B’resheet (Genesis 1-4), “adom” is connected to “dam” (“blood”), “adama” (“earth”), and thence to Adam, "the first man" who is "earthy" (ref.1 Cor. 15:47). Esav, the firstborn, illustrates therefore the principle that the natural precedes the spiritual (ref 1 Cor. 15:46), despite the fact that his twin turns out to be, for a considerable time period, almost as 'earthy' as the ‘Hairy Red’.

 This second boy, who emerged out of Rivka's womb while holding on to the “heel” – “ah'kev” - of his brother was hence named “Ya'acov” (ref. 25:26). Coming in the footsteps of his sibling, his name, which also means "to follow", perfectly matches the order of the births. In Scripture, the image of ‘heel-holding’ or ‘heel-grabbing’ often refers to hindering or trapping someone, as we see in the following examples:

 “Dan shall be a serpent... that bites the horse's heels” (Gen. 49:17); “The trap shall take him by the heel” (Job 18:9); “They mark my steps” (literally “heels” in Ps. 56:6). The following words in T’hilim (Psalms) 41:9 hint at Messiah’s destiny: “My own familiar friend, which did eat of my bread, has lifted his heel against me”.  This type of friend and follower typically steals quietly behind, with a “crafty” intent (as indeed was the case with Messiah’s “familiar friend”). Thus, from the same root of “heel” and “to follow”, (a.k.v. - ayin, kof, vet) stem words like “crafty, cunning and deceptive”, as is illustrated by the alliteration in Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah) 9:4: “surely every brother deals craftily (ah'kov ya'akov)” (italics added).

 In the first scene that brings the two siblings together, Ya'acov is busy cooking lentil broth, while his brother happens to be returning, famished and exhausted, from the field. Esav's glance strikes what he calls “ha'adom, ha'adom ha'zeh” - "this red, red stuff… therefore his name was called Edom" (25:30) - again from the root “adom” – “red”. The area of Edom, later inhabited by Esav's descendants, is indeed noted for its red soil. Everything about this hunter speaks of adom-adama – earth and earthiness. Whether Ya'acov anticipated his brother's famished condition or not, we do not know. Nevertheless, while in English it says, "Jacob cooked a stew", in Hebrew it says: “va'ya'zed Ya'acov na'zid” which, aside from cooking stew can also be read as: "Ya'acov devised an evil plot" (25:29). After all, 'cooking up' such a plan was only consistent with his name! The word “nah’zid” - “broth” - stems from the root z.y.d. (zayin, yod, dalet) which is shared by the verb to “cook”, and more specifically, to “boil up and seethe”. This verb also lends itself to “evil-doing” and “malice” – such as “zed” and “zadon” (e.g. Ex. 21:14, where “a man schemes” is “yazed”).  All of this seems to be at variance with the earlier description (25:27) of Yaacov, as an “eesh tam”, literally “a man of integrity” (although most translations use “peaceful” here), “living in tents” (while Esav’s lifestyle and implied disposition are very different). The inconsistency in the depiction of Yaacov’s character is not surprising in the narrative of this particular Parasha, which is replete with contrasts, masquerades, and pretense.  But as to the above-mentioned “tam” (man of integrity, peaceful), there may be an earlier hint connecting us to this description. When the twins were still in their mother’s womb, the Hebrew word used there is strangely distorted. Rather than te’omim (twins), they are called “tomim” – which can easily be associated with “tom” (the noun for “integrity, completeness or wholesomeness”). Thus only to one of the brothers were these characteristics attributed (even though it would take many a year before he would display any sign of being “tam”).

Ya’acov does not waste any time. He proposes right away an exchange: broth for birthright (ref. v. 31). And while in English these words form an alliteration, in Hebrew the verb "sell” (in the imperative form) – “michra”, and "birthright" – “b'chora”, sound alike. (Perhaps this linguistic association is what gave Ya'acov the idea in the first place…). Ya'acov, however, does not provide the goods until he makes his brother swear to him that he will not renege on his “sh'vu'ah” (“oath”, connected, as we have learned in previous Parashot, to being “full and satisfied”). After the deal is struck the two depart, and until further notice both seem to be content.

Now that Ya’acov has the birthright he is on his way to fulfilling the word that Elohim gave his mother when she was pregnant namely, that the “elder will serve the younger” (25:23). However, he has yet to acquire the double portion blessing to become the inheritor-redeemer of the family (Deut. 21:17). Thus far Ya’acov has certainly shown his ‘interest’ in taking responsibility as the firstborn of the family. Did Rivka share with her son what YHVH had declared to her, or was he simply ‘choosing to be chosen’, thus proving that he indeed was the one fit for this important position in the family? Additionally, if Esau were to (later) receive the double portion blessing, the birthright would have been split, leaving the family bereft of an acting firstborn.

When the time came for Esav to claim his birthright (the right-hand blessing of the father before death), startled by his brother’s cunning, he “cried out with an exceedingly great and bitter cry: ... ‘Is not he rightly named, Ya'acov? For he has supplanted (akav) me...?’” (Gen. 27:34, 36).  The prophet Hoshe'ah (Hosea), many centuries later, traces the waywardness of the nation of Yisrael (who in this prophecy is called “Ya'acov”) to their progenitor:  “In the womb he took his brother by the heel- akav” (Hos. 12:3).

 “In the wake of”, or “as a result of”, or in short “because”, is the Biblical word “ekev “(from the root a.k.v).  In 26:4-5 of our Parasha, YHVH says to Yitzchak: “I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and will give your descendants all these lands, and by your descendants, all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; because [“ekev”] Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws” (italics added). Abraham’s faith, so often mentioned in the New Covenant books, was characterized not by hearing only, but by obedience and observance of YHVH’s commandments (see James 1:22-25). Following Avraham’s implicit obedience he was told: “And in your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because – ekev - you have obeyed My voice” (Gen. 22:18). “Ekev” is found in Dvarim (Deuteronomy 8:20): “So you shall perish because you would not listen”. It is also in David’s self-implicating reply to the prophet Nah'tan (Nathan), who challenged him with a parable following his sin with Bat’sheva (Bathsheba): “He must make restitution for the lamb, because he did this thing and had no compassion” (2^nd Sam.12:6, italics added). Thus, this little “ekev” (rooted in "heel") - “because” – becomes the fulcrum of the justice balance.

Ya'acov, too, because of (“ekev”) his actions (particularly that of deceiving his father), had to endure the consequences. By the end of the Parasha he becomes a fugitive, running for his life from his brother, and later (in the next Parasha), to be deceived by his father-in-law, Lah'van (Laban). The “heart” of Ya'acov is well described by Yirmiyahu, who says that it is “more deceitful (akov) than all else” (Jer. 17:9).

In a few weeks, in Parashat Vayishlach, we shall see how Ya'acov, while on the road back from Padan Aram to Cna’an (Canaan), will plan once again to use some cunning by walking behind – which also suggests ‘following’ - his entourage, that was to go ahead of him to greet Esav. At this point, he will be met face to face, as he himself testifies in B’resheet (Genesis) 32:30, by YHVH Elohim. Yisrael, according to the name that will be given to him after this encounter at Penniel, will be made to turn around on his heels as it were (and become lame in the process), never to be the same again. Thus when the “crooked” (“akov”) places become “mishor” – that is “straight” (ref. Is. 40:4b) - Ya'acov will become “Yeshurun” (“yashar” - straight”), true to his name “Yisra’el”, which can also be read as “yashar-el” (“El is upright”). As such, the nation is addressed by their Elohim: “But now listen, O Ya'acov, My servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen; thus says YHVH who made you, and formed you from the womb [as ‘crooked’ Ya'acov], and Who will help you: do not fear, O Ya'acov My servant; and you Yeshurun [who was ‘straightened’ by Elohim] whom I have chosen” (Is. 44:1, 2). Lastly, Ya'acov was to become one of the forefathers of Messiah, of whom it was prophesied that His heel would be “bruised” by the serpent. However, as we know, the “Seed of the woman” was destined to triumph by crushing and trampling down the serpent’s head with His heel (ref. Gen. 3:15; cf. Luke 10:19; Rom. 16:20; Heb.1:13b).

Back to our narrative:  Following closely on the heels of the oath that Esav took by his brother’s instigation (25:31-33), YHVH reminds Yitzchak of His oath to Avraham, and at the same time cautions him not to go down to Egypt, despite the famine in the land (ref. 26:1-5), saying: “Do not go down into Egypt. Dwell in the land which I shall tell you” (v. 2). The imperative “dwell”, “sh’chan” (sh.ch.n, shin, chaf, noon), is also “settle and abide” and it is from this root that “mishkan”, the “tabernacle” in the wilderness, derives its title. On this very issue, David makes an emphatic statement: “Trust in YHVH, and do good; you shall dwell in the land, and you shall be fed on truth” (Ps. 37:3 italics added). Continuing to address Yitzchak, in the next verse (25:3), YHVH says to him: “Dwell in this land…” (italics added), but this time the verb used is “gur”, from which is obtained the term “ger” – sojourner (and “fear”). Notice that above, YHVH exhorts Yitzchak to live in “the land”, whereas the second reference is to “this land”. If Yitzchak abides in the land, “which I [YHVH] shall tell you”, he will have a secure and sure dwelling. But even the usage of “gur”, does not diminish YHVH’s promises: “I will be with you and bless you; for to you and your descendants I give all these lands, and I will perform the oath which I swore to Abraham your father, and I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed” (26:3-4). 

Immediately after this, we are told that Yitzchak and Rivka settled in Grar (notice the alliteration of “gur” and “Grar”, 26:1, which is probably intended), and when tested, by being asked about his wife, the Patriarch does not resort to the truth. Like his father before him, fear for his life causes him to present his wife as his sister, and thus he fulfills the “sojourning as a fearful stranger in this land” (when told by YHVH to “gur”- reside as an alien), rather than the former option of “abiding (sh’chan)…  where YHVH shows him”. The root g.r.r (gimmel, resh, resh) means to swirl around, to stir up, or drag down. Is it possible that in the Grar episode, Itzchak got somewhat turned around or dragged down..? What finds Yitzchak out is his act of (literally) "laughing with his wife" (26:8), translated in English "caressing" (or some other equivalent expression). If nothing else, in this episode Yitzchak remains… at least… true to his name…

 It is in this year of drought that Yitzchak, against all odds, sows seed. “Seed” is “zerah” (of the root z.r.a, zayin, resh, ayin, which is also shared by “arm” – “z’ro’ah”), with the yield being "one hundredfold" (26:12). Earlier (in 26:4) YHVH spoke to Yitzchak about his progeny (“zerah”), mentioning its future increase. Is the great harvest that Yitzchak reaps here (during the famine) symbolic of the future fulfillment of YHVH's word to the Patriarch, under all and any conditions?  

Yitzchak's wealth increases tremendously and his neighbors, the Philistines, are jealous of him (26:14) thus Avimelech their king demands, "Go away from us, for you are much mightier than we" (v. 16). “You are much mightier” is “atzam’ta”, from the root a.tz.m (ayin, tazdi, mem). The usage and meaning of this term will prove to be very significant during the Egyptian exile (in Sh’mot – Exodus – chapter 1 it is found in verses 7,9 and 20) and will motivate Par’oh (Pharaoh) to try to annihilate Yisrael. 

In our case, Yitzchak’s jealous neighbors take recourse by filling up all the wells that have been dug by Avraham's servants (ref. 26:15, 18b). In doing this they are "withholding benefits from both themselves and their cattle! But in addition to stopping up the wells, they fill them with earth so as to obliterate their existence altogether and make sure that no water would ever flow out of them again. Why did they wish the land to be desolate?[1]”  The explanation that follows, quoted from Haketav Vehakabala, points out that Yitzchak gave the wells the same names that his father had given them (as we see in v. 18). “These names, such as YHVH Will See, YHVH is My Sign, The Well of Him that Lives and Sees Me, mark the kindness of the Lord."[2] This was done in order "to spread abroad the knowledge of the Lord and show the people that idols were valueless. Avraham thought out a wonderful device to help to bring those who were misled, under the wings of the Divine Presence. He called the well by a name that would drive home the lesson of the existence of the One True God. By this, he would arouse in them an awareness of the truth by saying, ‘Let us go and draw water from the well of the eternal God!’ The wells were a public necessity, and in this manner, the people were initiated into the knowledge of the true God. Whilst he was alive his fear was upon them [i.e. the locals], as they left the wells intact with their names, but after his death they reverted to idolatry. In order to erase from their memory the names of these wells, which recalled the very opposite of their false opinions, they stopped them up. With the disappearance of the wells, the names also disappeared…. Isaac followed in his father's footsteps and endeavored to dig out these same wells and resurrect their names in order to restore the crown of the true faith to its former glory."[3]  

The wording in 26:19, where Yitzchak's servants dig "a well of living water" (translated “running water”), confirms what we have just read regarding the wells of the Patriarchs. The locals fill up the wells, and now they are being re-named, as pointed out, in order to erase the testimony of the Elohim of Yisrael. The name of the first well is “Esek”, “contention” (v. 20). The name of the next, is “Sitna”, “hostility; accusation” (v. 21). It is from the same root, s.t.n (sin, tet, noon), that we get the word “Satan” -  the “accuser”. A closely connected word to “sitna” is “sin'ah” (s.n.a, sin, noon, alef) - “hatred”. This verb is used in Yitzchak’s query in 26:27: “Why do you hate me?” A similar word, both in sound and meaning appears toward the end of our Parasha. In 27:41 it says of Esav that he "bore a grudge against Ya'acov", which is “sotem” (s.t.m. sin/shin, tet, mem). The progressive rate of hostility is seen very clearly by this string of sounds: “soten”, to accuse, “sotem”, to bear a grudge, and “soneh”, to hate”, thus demonstrating accurately how each of these conditions, if left unchecked, will lead to the next one.

When a third well is dug up, some distance away, “they did not quarrel over it; so he named it Rechovot, for he said, 'at last YHVH has made room for us, and we will be fruitful in the land’” (26:22). “Rechovot” is of the root r.ch.v (resh, chet, vet), meaning, "broad, wide, or making room". Thus, enlarging and broadening the subsistence space brings relief, as we see in T’hilim (Psalms) 4:1, where David cries out: "Answer me when I call, O Elohim of my righteousness, You gave room [“hirchav’ta”] to me in trouble – literally in a place of narrowness” (italics added), words with which in his present situation Yitzchak would have certainly concurred.

[1] Studies in Bereshit, Toldot 1, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman.  Eliner Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y

2 ibid

3 ibid

 

 

---

 

 

 

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Cha’yey Sarah

B'resheet?(Genesis) 23-25:18 

Although the name of this week’s Parasha means “Sarah’s life”, it is actually her death and burial which are described in the opening verses. Verse 1 presents a rather curious rendering of Sarah’s length of years: “And the life of Sarah was a hundred years, and twenty years, and seven years, the years of the life of Sarah” (literal translation). It is as though the life of Sarah is being divided up into time periods, the first hundred years, then twenty and the last seven. Her place of death is also ‘overly’ specified: “Kiryat Arba, which is Chevron in the land of C’na’an”. It then tells us that, “Avraham came to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her”. Were Avraham and Sarah separated before that? In 22:19 it says that Avraham dwelt at Beer Sheva. Could it be that the couple separated? Some postulate that this indeed was the case, after Avraham’s attempt to sacrifice his son. But now, with Sarah’s departure Avraham is seen looking to purchase a burial plot for his deceased wife and for his family. He has his eye set on a particular site in Kiryat Arba, opposite Mamre “which is Chevron” (23:19). Notice that both Kiryat Arba and Mamre are mentioned as names of Chevron. The “Oaks of Mamre” is where we met Avraham at the beginning of last week’s Parashat Va’yera. Earlier on, in 14:13, Mamre (and his oaks) is mentioned together with his two brothers who were the Amorite allies of Avram, as he was called then. Hence the Amorites/Canaanites named the place Mamre, whereas Arba was one of the giants (“anak”, e.g. Joshua 14:15). Avraham seeks out Efron (Ephron) the Hittite1, who is the owner of a cave called Machpela.

 “Machpela” stems from the root k.f.l (kaf, fey/pey, lamed), which means “double”. In all likelihood the cave was made up of more than one chamber (thus making it especially suitable for burial purposes).2 Efron’s name, quite appropriately, is derived from the root “ah’far” (a.f.r. ayin, fey, resh) meaning “dust of the ground”. It is the same dust that is mentioned in B’resheet (Genesis) 3:19: “For dust you are and to dust you shall return” - famous words that were pronounced over Adam after he had succumbed to temptation. “Ah’far” is also the term YHVH uses when He makes His promises to the Patriarchs concerning the multiplicity of their seed (see Gen. 13:16; 28:14). Thus the combination of dust (in Efron’s name) and duplication (in the name of the burial cave) point to this very promise,?in?spite?of?the?themes?of?death?and?burial?and?in?their very presence.

Notice the response to Avraham’s description of himself as a “stranger and an alien” (23:4) by the sons of Het: “Your are a prince of Elohim among us” (v. 6). Avraham’s humility and lack of pretentiousness and presumptuousness is met by great respect (cf. Matthew 23:12) and by a truthful pronouncement regarding his position. Hebrews 12:9 confirms that even though a recipient of great promises, “he [Abraham] lived in the land of promise as a stranger,” the Hebrew word being “ger” of the root g.u.r (gimmel, vav, resh) which essentially means ‘fear’, speaking of the vulnerability of a stranger (more on this root will be elaborated in another Parasha down the road).   Avraham pays a “full” amount (v. 9) for his acquisition (in spite of the offer to the contrary, v. 6), as did his grandson Ya’acov when the latter purchased a field in the town of Sh’chem (Shechem, in Gen. 33:19), and likewise David, generations later, when he bought Ornan’s (Araunah) threshing floor in Yerushalayim (2nd Sam. 24:24, upon which the Temple was later built). Not coincidentally, Chevron, Sh’chem (where Joseph is buried), and the Temple Mount are some of the most contested sites in the land of Yisrael!

 The narrative of Chapter 23 presents us with some challenges, as it is characterized by on going repetitions, with every point being reiterated. Here are some examples: In verse 6, “bury, burial, bury your dead”, are repeated over and over. In both verses 7 and 12 Avraham is said to be “bowing down to the people of the land”, with the addition of “the sons of Heth” in the first citing. The mention of the “sons of Heth” reoccurs so many times to the point of sounding superfluous. The transaction for the purchase of the cave and its field is mentioned in vs. 9, 13, 16, and 18, while verse 17 enumerates every article within the property. The question arises as to the purpose of all this  repetitious information and details, which is capped by “… the cave of Machpelah, before Mamre, that is Hebron in the land of Canaan. So the field and the cave were deeded to Abraham by the sons of Heth as a property for a burial place” (vs. 19, 20). The writer itemizes the conditions, the details, as well as the individuals involved, not leaving any room for doubt or mistake. All of this leads to the conclusion that B’resheet chapter 23 constitutes a legal document, a contract or a deed with all of its stipulations ensuring clarity regarding the ownership of the said property, while also citing the many witnesses who were present. Hence, contesting the rights to this land is in direct defiance of the Word of Elohim! 

The payment that Avraham made was in hard cash: 400 shekels of silver. The three consonants that form the root for “shekel,” sh.k.l (shin, kof, lamed) also form the verb “to weigh”. Thus, the price paid for the plot was made up of 400 equal units of approximately one half ounce each. All in all Avraham paid about 200 “weighted” ounces, or 12 pounds of silver. Soon, in 24:22, we will read about the “weight” (“mishkal”) of the golden nose rings and bracelets that were given to a young maiden in exchange for water.

 But back to “Chevron”, a name that is made up of the root ch.v.r (chaf, vet/bet, resh), shared by the following: “to tie, bind, join, unite, friend, and company”. Although in the course of its long history this town has not seen much unity and friendship (it served as David's capital during his seven-year rule over the house of Yehuda-Judah, before he united all of Yisrael, and is currently divided between a hostile Muslim population and a small Jewish presence), its name may point to conditions which will prevail in?days?to?come. In addition to these positive meanings, ch.v.r. also acts as the root for “chavura” – wounding, injury, bruises - such as we read in Yisha’yahu (Isaiah) 53:5, regarding what was to be inflicted upon the Messiah. Only these “bruises” can “heal” the breaches of Chevron and transform them into “friendship and unity”.

Chapter 24 highlights Avraham’s senior servant, who “ruled over all his possessions” (v. 2). The servant is described as a “moshel” (one of the words for “ruler”). “Moshel” shares its root (m.sh.l, mem, shin, lamed) with “proverb, parable, example, to be like, resemble and comparable”. In Tehilim (Psalms) 28:1 the writer cries: “I have become like – “nimshalti” - those who go down to the pit”. The parable in Yechez’kel (Ezekiel) 12:22 is called a “mashal”. In Shmuel Alef (1st Samuel) 10:12 Shaul (Saul) is made a public example of (as a prophet), with the use of “mashal”. The people of Yisrael likewise became a none-too-positive example among the nations, or an object lesson such as described in Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah) 24:9 where they are called: “a reproach and a proverb… in all places where I shall drive them” (italics added). There are many more examples of the usage of the verb and noun emanating from m.sh.l, but how is this connected?to?the?elderly?servant?

The servant, as a representative of Avraham, was to carry out the duties that were delegated to him. As such, we see him striving to serve by approaching his assignments in the same manner as his master would have done. This, therefore, is the format for the conduct of a true Godly ruler, or leader, who takes his orders from above, endeavoring to carry them out like his Master, thus becoming a representative ‘sample’, a “mashal” or a likeness of the One whom he follows. The Elohim of Yisrael said: “he who rules over (“moshel”) men, by ruling (“moshel”) in the fear of YHVH, will shine as the light of the sun in the morning….” (2^nd Sam. 23:3, 4). One such ruler was Yoseph, whose trials and tests were the purifying work of “the Word of YHVH”. Once he was “conformed” to this Word, he was appointed a “ruler [moshel] over all of the king’s possessions” (Ps. 105:18-21). “What is man…” in the eyes of his Creator? Tehilim (Psalms) 8:6 says, “You have made him to rule”, being the verb “tam’shile’hu”, which may be read also as, “you have made him like…”, or, “you have made of him a proverbial example”. These examples point to a representational form of rule, or leadership. Avraham's servant certainly displayed this characteristic of conforming to his master, so much so that his master’s Elohim became his! Yeshua’s words attest to the fact that he too operated by this principle: “I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does” (John 5:19). He therefore declared: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9).

Avraham’s representative or delegate is instructed to perform a mission, but is not told how to carry it out. He chooses to present a 'fleece' to "YHVH, the Elohim of my master Avraham" (24:12). The fleece and its fulfillment have to do with water, or the means of obtaining that commodity. Hence we find here “well” (v. 11), “spring (or source, v.13), and trough” (v. 20). The first two are “be'er” and “ayin”, and the last one is “shoket” (from the verb “le'ha'shkot” - "to give a drink"). “Ayin” is also the word used for “eye”. Although ‘officially’ no direct link has been established between “spring” (or “source”) and “eye”, Yeshua refers to the latter as a type of a source when He says in Matthew 6:22: “The eye is the lamp of the body; so then if your eye is clear, your whole body will be full of light”. The root of “be'er” (“well”) is identical to the root “ba'er” (b.a.r, bet, alef, resh), which means to “expound or clarify”, as it appears in Dvarim (Deuteronomy) 1:5, 27:8, and in Chavakook (Habakkuk) 2:2 (where "make it plain" should read "clarify" or "expound"). And thus it is the episode by the well which makes the results of his mission clear to the inquiring servant, as he is "gazing at her [the girl] in silence [and wondering]… whether YHVH had made his journey successful or not” (24:1 italics?added). 

But?he?did?not?need to?wonder?for long…

 "Success" is “hatzlacha,” from the root tz.l.ch. (tzadi, lamed, chet), which is also “to prosper", and is used a number of times in this Parasha. The primary root means to “advance, or cross" (such as in 2nd Sam. 19:17), and by extension also the “coming of the Spirit” (see Judges 14:6). Whenever its meaning is "success" the verb appears in the active causative form rendering it: “to cause to advance". The verb and noun teach us, therefore, that prosperity and success may be obtained only with the help of an ‘external force’, just as is exemplified here by the servant who is completely dependent on YHVH to “cause him to advance”. The servant's awareness of this fact is also expressed by his prayer in 24:12: "O YHVH Elohim of my master Abraham, please give me success this day, and show kindness to my master Abraham". In this instance the root tz.l.ch for "success" does not show up at all. The literal wording here for "give me success" is, "to bring about" - “hakreh” - literally, “cause to happen”. “Happening, occurrence, incident” are “mikreh”.  Avraham’s servant, however, being cognizant of the fact that the Elohim of his master is in control of life’s supposed random happenstances, relies on Him to put together the ‘natural’ circumstances in such a way, so as to make clear His?choice?of?the?sought-for?bride.

The chain, of the desired events that were brought about, starts with the appearance of a young maiden named Rivka (Rebecca, 24:15). Her rather curious name originates from the root letters r. v/b. k. (resh, vet/bet, kof), which are also the root letters of “marbek”, that is, “stall”, itself stemming from an Aramaic word meaning "to crouch”. “Marbek” is always used in connection with fatted calves (ref. 1st Sam. 28:24; Jer. 46:21; Amos 6:4; Mal. 4:2). Rivka's name points without question to the importance her family attached to their possessions. By naming her thus, they were also expressing hopes regarding their their?livestock.

Later on, upon her departure to the land of C’na’an, Rivka's family blesses her saying "...Our sister, you will become [multiply into] thousands of ten thousands and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies" (Gen. 24:60). This blessing is being uttered by Rivka’s family members without being aware that a similar blessing, about the seed possessing the gate of those who hate them, was also pronounced by YHVH's angel over Avraham, when the latter was obedient to the call to offer up Yitzchak (Gen. 22:17). It is quite likely that Avraham’s servant was informed about this blessing. Now, hearing it again in these present circumstances, the "success" of his mission was being?confirmed?to?him?yet?again.e

 This/blessing/promise is further magnified, when Yeshua says the following to His disciples, in Caesarea Philippi: “….on this rock I will build My kehila, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18, and continues to elaborate on the Kingdom of Elohim).

 “Gate” is “sha'ar” in Hebrew (sh.a.r, shin, ayin, resh). Because much of the administration, jurisprudence, and business took place by the city gate, he who possessed the gate also had charge over the entire city (or area). The “gate of the enemy" denotes, therefore, the enemy's area of control and dominion. Earlier on in our Parasha, “gate” has been referred to in Avraham’s business transaction:  “And Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the ears of the sons of Heth, of all that went in at the gate of his city, saying…  ‘The field of Ephron was certified… to Abraham for a possession in the presence of the sons of Heth, before all that went in at the gate of his city’” (23:10, 18, italics added, cf. Ruth 4:1-11). These transactions by the "gate" have lent that word yet other meanings: "measure, calculate", or "recon," as we shall see in next week's Parasha (Gen. 26:12), where the term used is "one hundred times/fold over”, and in Hebrew, “she’arim” (“gates” plural).

 In addition to the themes of dominion and power in Rivka’s blessing, mention is made of "tens of thousands" - “alfey revava” (24:60). “Revava” is “ten thousand”, whereas “a thousand” is “elef”. “Elef” (a.l.f - alef, lamed, fey), which with a slight modification is the name of the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, “alef”, lending it a place of prominence, and by implication pointing also to great numerical value. “Aluf” is "chief", but at times also means “a companion”, A large group of (proverbial) "companions" makes up the number one thousand - “elef”, whereas “revava” (ten thousands) stems from the very common root of r.v/b. (resh, vet/bet) meaning "much, great and chief". In the next Parasha we will meet "the greater [who will serve] the younger", which will also be designated by the term “rav”?(25:23). 

The Parasha ends in the same way it had begun: burials are the order of the day. First Avraham dies "in a ripe old age, an old man satisfied…” (25:8). "Ripe" or “full” here is “saveh'ah”, which also means "satisfied" (of the root s.v.a, or sh.v.a), a word we examined last week when we looked at the figure “seven” and “oath” (notice the last period in Sarah’s life, in 23:1, is seven – “sheva”). And just as was mentioned about Sarah, her husband’s life span is also divided up into “a hundred years, and seventy years, and five years” (v. 7). Avraham too is buried in the Cave of Machpela (v. 9). Finally, the last verses of the Parasha deal with the death of Yishma'el (v.17),?whose?burial?place/is?not?mentioned.

Multiplicity in various forms, leadership, prosperity, dominion and greatness are some of the terms we encountered in this Parasha, whose main narrative is ‘sandwiched’ in between deaths and burials. These deaths, however, highlight all the more the blessings granted to the progeny left behind, accentuating the abundance of life for which this progeny was destined.

 1 The Amorites and Hittites are both descendants of Canaan the

son of Ham (see Gen. 10:15, 16)

*Confirmed by archaeological evidence