[Par-reg] for Parshat Vayishlach - re: the Return to Bet El
Menachem Leibtag
tsc at bezeqint.net
Thu Dec 4 23:23:38 EST 2014
*********************************************
****************
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER
[http://www.tanach.org]
In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag
Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem
Leibtag
*********************************************
****************
PARSHAT VA'YISHLACH - shiur #3
YAAKOV'S RETURN TO BET EL
Upon his arrival in Eretz Canaan, why
doesn't Yaakov go
straight home to his parents in Hebron? After
all, he has been
away from his parents for over twenty years!
Secondly, why doesn't Yaakov return
immediately to Bet-el
to fulfill his "neder" [vow]? Hadn't he
promised God that
'should he return home safely' he would
establish a 'Bet
Elokim' in Bet-el (see 28:21-22)?
However, instead of doing what we would
have expected, it
appears from Parshat Vayishlach that Yaakov
prefers to settle
down in Shechem. Then, only AFTER the
incident with Dena, and
only after God reminds him that he must do
so, he finally
returns to Bet-el. [See 33:18-35:1.
So what's going on in Parshat
Va'yishlach?
In the following shiur we suggest a very
simple (but
daring) answer to these questions, based on a
rather intricate
analysis.
INTRODUCTION
To appreciate the analysis that follows,
it is important
to first pay attention to the division of
'parshiot in Parshat
Vayishlach. Using a Tanach Koren, or
similar, note the topics
of its first six 'parshiot' (i.e. up until
the death of
Yitzchak at the end of chapter 35).
The following table presents a short title
for each section.
As you study it, note the progression of
topic from one
'parshia' to the next:
PSUKIM - GENERAL TOPIC
======= ===============
(A) 32:3-33:17 Yaakov's confrontation with
Esav upon his
return to Eretz Canaan.
(B) 33:18-20 Yaakov's arrival in
Shechem.
(C) 34:1-31 The incident with Dena in
Shechem.
(D) 35:1-8 Yaakov's ascent to Bet-el
to flee from
Shechem, and his
building of a mizbayach.
(E) 35:9-22 God's blessing to Yaakov at
Bet-el,followed
by Rachel's death and
Binyamin's birth.
(F) 35:23-29 A summary of Yaakov's
children, followed by
the death of Yitzchak.
We begin our shiur by making some
observations concerning
Yaakov's behavior in the progression of these
events.
KEEPING PROMISES
When Yaakov first left Eretz Canaan on
his way to Padan
Aram, God promised to 'be with him' and see
to his safe return
(28:15). In response to this divine promise,
Yaakov made a
"neder" (vow) that should God keep His
promise, he will return
to Bet-el and establish a Bet-Elokim (see
28:18-22).
Undoubtedly, Yaakov's safe return from Padan
Aram requires his
fulfillment of the neder. In fact, towards
the end of last
week's Parsha, God Himself mentions this
promise when He
commanded (and reminded) Yaakov that it was
time to 'return
home':
"I am the God of Bet-el, where you anointed
a matzeyva, to
whom you vowed a NEDER. Now get up and
LEAVE this land and
RETURN to the land of your fathers."
(31:11-13)
Therefore, upon his return, we should
expect Yaakov to go
immediately to Bet-el to fulfill his "neder."
However, for
some reason, he first settles in Shechem.
HONOR THY FATHER...
Even more troubling is why Yaakov
doesn't immediately go
home to Hebron, at least to say 'hello' to
his parents whom he
hasn't seen in over twenty years! Recall how
the Torah had
earlier informed us that was his original
intention:
"Yaakov got up and took his children and
wives on the
camels. Then he led his sheep... and
everything he acquired
in Padan Aram to GO TO YITZCHAK HIS FATHER
in the land of
Canaan." (32:17-18)
Nonetheless, when Yaakov arrives in
Eretz Canaan, the
Torah tells us he settles down in Shechem.
In fact, we only
learn of Yaakov's return to his father's
house incidentally,
in the final pasuk before Yitzchak's death
(see 35:27-29)!
For some reason, the Torah never informs us
of the details
(or the date) of this reunion.
JUST FOR A 'SHORT STOP'?
At first glance, one could answer that
Shechem was
nothing more than a short stop along the way
to Bet-el. As we
know, Yaakov's young children and immense
cargo forced him to
travel slowly (see 33:12-15). He may very
well have needed a
rest. Thus, Yaakov's 'brief stay' in Shechem
could be
considered no different than his 'brief stay'
in Succot (see
33:17).
[See further iyun regarding Yaakov's stay
in Succot.]
But this approach is difficult to accept
for two reasons:
First of all, recall how Yaakov had
traveled from Padan
Aram to Har ha'Gilad in only seven days (see
31:21-23, read
carefully). Now that journey is much longer
than the trip from
the Gilad to Bet-el. [Check it out on a map.]
Therefore, there
seems to be no reason why Yaakov cannot
complete the remainder
of this journey in two or three days - a week
at most!
Secondly, if Yaakov's plan is just to
'rest up' in
Shechem for a few days, why would he buy a
parcel of land?
Furthermore, the overall impression from
chapter 34 is that
Yaakov's family has pretty much settled down
in Shechem (see
34:7, 34:10, 34:21 etc.).
Therefore, it seems at thought Yaakov
had settled down in
Shechem for quite a while. In fact, we can
prove that Yaakov
may have stayed even several years in Shechem
- by simply
considering the ages of his children at that
time. Let's
explain:
BAR-MITZVAH BOYS OR GROWN UPS?
Recall that Yaakov left Lavan after
working for him for
twenty years (see 31:41). Therefore, when he
began his
journey back to Eretz Canaan, his oldest
child could not have
been more than 13 years old (see 29:18-23),
for he first
married Leah only after completing his seven
years of work.
That would make Shimon & Levi etc. 11 or 12
years old, etc.
Yet, from the Torah's description of the
incident with
Dena in Shechem (see 34:1-31) it appears that
Shimon & Levi
(and the rest of the brothers) must have been
at least in
their late teens. After all, they go to war
against an entire
city!
Furthermore, Dena - Leah's seventh child
- could not have
been older than six and most probably even
younger! [Remember
there was a break between Yehuda and
Yisachar/ see 30:9.]
However, from the story in chapter 34, Dena
appears to be at
least twelve, if not older. Even though
Shechem does refer to
her once as a "yaldah" (see 34:4), the Torah
consistently
refers to her as a "na'arah" (see 34:3,12).
If these assumptions are correct, then
it appears that
Yaakov remained in Shechem for at least
several years prior to
the story of Dena's abduction.
Even if Yaakov stayed in Succot for 18
months, as the
Midrash claims (see Rashi 33:17), it still
doesn't make sense
that the incident with Dena have taken place
when she is in
'first grade' and Shimon & Levi had just
celebrated their 'bar-
mitzvahs'?
Thus, according to "pshat", the incident
at Shechem must
have taken place at least five years later!
This conclusion
strengthens our original question. Why would
Yaakov remain in
Shechem for over FIVE years without first
returning to Bet-el,
and without going home to visit his elderly
parents!
'A CALL TO ORDER'
Whenever we arrive at this kind of
dilemma the temptation
is to 'tamper' with the chronological order
of the narrative.
In Chazal, this is better known as the
principle of "ein
mukdam u'muchar ba'Torah" - the narrative in
Chumash does not
necessarily progress in chronological order.
Clearly, the
principle of "ein mukdam u'muchar" does not
mean that the
stories in Chumash are recorded in purely
random sequence. Nor
should it be understood as just a 'wildcard'
solution for
difficulties in "peshat". Instead, the Torah
often records
certain parshiot out of their chronological
order for thematic
considerations.
[It should also be noted that the principle
of "ein mukdam
u'muchar" usually only applies at the
'parshia' level. In
other words, that events WITHIN a given
'parshia' are always
recorded in chronological sequence. Only a
'parshia' in its
entirety may be presented before an earlier
event or vice-
versa. [This style is sometimes referred to
as "smichut
parshiot."]
Let's see now if this principle can help
us solve the
problems raised in our shiur thus far.
We'll start by taking a closer look at
the various stages
of Yaakov's journey, and how they relate to
the division into
'parshiot' of Parshat Va'yishlach.
IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF AVRAHAM AVINU
We really should have begun our shiur
with a more basic
question: why does Yaakov stop in Shechem at
all? Why doesn't
he go directly from Succot to Bet-el or
Hebron?
The answer lies in the obvious parallel
between Yaakov's
return to Canaan and Avraham Avinu's initial
journey from Aram
to Eretz Canaan. He, too, first stopped in
Shechem and built
a MIZBAYACH:
"And Avram passed through the land, to the
place of
SHECHEM... and God appeared to Avram and
said: I am giving
this land to your offspring; and he built
there a MIZBAYACH
to the Lord who appeared to him." (12:6-7)
[Compare also 12:5 with 31:17-18!!]
Correspondingly, Yaakov also makes
Shechem his first
stop, and he builds a MIZBAYACH specifically
in that region
(see 33:18-20). In contrast to Avraham,
however, Yaakov ALSO
invests in some real estate - he buys a field
(see 33:19).
Soon we will suggest a logical reason for
this purchase.
If Yaakov is indeed following his
grandfather's footsteps
(as his arrival in Shechem suggests), then he
too should
continue directly to Bet-el, just as Avraham
Avinu did (see
12:7-8). Of course, Yaakov had another reason
to proceed
directly to Bet-el - to fulfill his "neder."
Then, we would
have expected him to continue from Bet-el on
to Hebron to see
his parents.
So why does he stay in Shechem?
One could suggest that exactly the
opposite happened,
i.e. Yaakov DID NOT STAY IN SHECHEM for more
than several
days! Instead, he stopped there only to build
a MIZBAYACH,
thanking God for his safe arrival, just as
Avraham had done.
To support this, note how the Torah describes
his arrival in
33:18: "va'yavo Yaakov SHALEM". This most
probably reflects
the phrase in his original "neder" of:
"v'shavti b'SHALOM et
beit avi" (see 28:21).
Furthermore, in 33:20 he calls this
mizbayach: "Kel Elokei
Yisrael", most likely relating to the phrases
in his "neder"
of: "im y'hiyeh ELOKIM imadi..." (28:20) and
"v'haya Hashem li
l'ELOKIM" (28:21).
A WISE INVESTMENT
At that time, he also purchased a plot
of land. This was
a wise investment, for Yaakov is traveling
with a large
family, and realizes that sooner or later,
he'll need to
settle down in Canaan, and build a house of
his own. Planning
an option for his future, he buys a parcel a
land, a
'security' investment should he decide one
day to return.
At this point, we posit, Yaakov really does
continue his
journey from Shechem to Bet El - and then on
to Hebron - after
only a very short stay. However, the Torah
records the details
of this 'first' ascent to Bet-el - at a later
time (see 35:9),
while 'inserting' the details the Dena event
in between (i.e.
in chapter 34), even thought that event took
place at a later
time! [Later in the shiur, we will suggest a
reason why this
story in 'inserted'.]
[To appreciate this theory, it is
recommended that you
review those parshiot, especially noting
the new 'parshia'
that begins in 35:9.]
Let's take a look at the special wording
of the 'parshia'
that begins in 35:9 - which we claim took
place BEFORE the
events in chapter 34:
"And God [had already /"od"? / or 'again']
appeared unto
Yaakov UPON HIS ARRIVAL from Padan Aram,
and blessed him ...
then Yaakov set up a MATZEYVA at this
site... and called the
name of this site BET-EL. Then they
traveled towards Efrat"
[i.e. on the way toward Hebron], and Rachel
gave birth with
complications [& then died]..." (see
35:9-19)
Our contention is that this entire
'parshia' (35:9-22)
actually took place immediately upon Yaakov's
arrival from
Padan Aram (as its opening pasuk suggests/
compare 33:18!),
several years BEFORE the incident with Dena
in Shechem (i.e.
34:1-35:8).
A very strong proof to this claim may be
drawn from the
words of Yaakov himself (to Yosef) before his
death:
"... when I was RETURNING FROM PADAN,
Rachel died on the
road, while still a long distance from
Efrat, and I buried
her on the way..." (see 48:7)
Yaakov himself states that Rachel died
during his
original journey from Padan to Eretz Canaan.
He would not have
spoken of her death as having occurred "when
I was returning
from Padan" if she died only AFTER Yaakov had
spent several
years in Shechem.
Furthermore, why was Yaakov traveling
from Bet-el
southward, towards Efrat? Most likely, he was
on the way home
to his father in Hebron! In other words, it
may very well have
been that Yaakov DID return immediately to
visit his father,
just as we expected him to.
[For some reason, the Torah never records
the details of
this encounter. But this question begs
itself no matter how
we explain the order of the 'parshiot.'
Only in the final
summary psukim (i.e. 35:27-19) are we told
that Yaakov had
returned to Yitzchak, and even there it
appears to be only
for Yitzchak's burial. It would only be
logical to assume
that Yaakov must have gone to visit his
father much
earlier.]
THE NEW ORDER
Before we continue, let's review the
order of events (and
hence the order of the 'parshiot') according
to this
interpretation:
After successfully confronting Esav,
Yaakov continues on
to Eretz Canaan, stopping first in Shechem to
build a
MIZBAYACH and thank God, just as Avraham
Avinu had done. While
in Shechem, he buys a parcel of land for
'future use,'
planning possibly to later return to this
area with his
family. [Recall that Yaakov owns many sheep,
and Shechem is a
prime area for grazing cattle, just as
Yaakov's children later
return many years later to the Shechem area
to graze their
cattle (see 37:13).]
After buying a field in Shechem and
building a mizbayach,
Yaakov continues to Bet-el, where God appears
to him, and
Yaakov re-states his intention to ultimately
fulfill his
"neder" to make a 'bet Elokim' at that site
(even though he
isn't quite ready yet to begin its
construction).
There, God confirms the blessing of
"bechira" and changes
his name from Yaakov to Yisrael (see
35:9-12). [According to
this interpretation, Yaakov had been blessed
and had his name
changed by the "malach" only several days
earlier!/ see 32:26-
28]. Even though he cannot at this point
build the actual Bet-
Elokim that he promised, he re-affirms his
promise by once
again anointing the MATZEYVA and calling that
site Bet-el (see
35:14-15).
Next, Yaakov travels toward Hebron to
see his parents.
Along the way, Rachel dies and is buried on
the roadside.
Yaakov then sets up tent in Migdal Eder (see
35:21). Even
though we do not know its precise location,
it would be safe
to assume that Migdal Eder is located in an
area not too far
from Yitzchak's home in Hebron. It is here
where the incident
with Reuven & Bilha takes place. Although we
may reasonably
assume that Yaakov sharply criticized Reuven,
the Torah for
some reason abruptly curtails this story,
right in the middle
of a sentence! [See 35:22! / see also 49:4!]
Some time later, maybe a year or two (or
even five)
later, Yaakov moves with his family to
Shechem - after all, he
did purchase a parcel of land there
specifically for that
purpose. By now, the children are older - old
enough for the
incident with Dena (as detailed in chapter
34) to occur. It
also stands to reason that at this point the
people of Shechem
see Yaakov as a permanent neighbor, rather
than a transient;
and therefore - they seek marital and
economic ties with
Yaakov's family. Finally, this also explains
why specifically
Shimon & Levi take leadership roles at this
time. Reuven had
most likely been 'demoted' from his position
of 'family
leader' after the incident with Bilha.
After the brothers wipe out Shechem,
Yaakov fears the
revenge of the neighboring population. God
therefore commands
him to MOVE from Shechem to Bet-el for
PROTECTION (see 35:1-7,
read carefully). Just as Bet-el had
protected Yaakov when he
was faced with the threat of his brother
Esav, so will Bet-el
protect Yaakov now from his latest crisis.
[Note how
specifically this point - danger from Esav -
is mentioned over
and over again in this 'parshia' (i.e.
35:1-8, see 35:1,3,7!).
Note also that these psukim imply a recent,
immense
expansion of Yaakov's family and possessions
(see 35:6 -
"v'chol ha'AM asher imo" & 35:2 - "v'et kol
ashe imo"). This
may also explain why Yaakov must remind these
'newcomers' to
rid themselves of their idols before
ascending to Bet-el. (see
35:3-4).
So Yaakov now moves his permanent
residence to Bet-el,
which had already been established as the
site for his future
Bet Elokim, and accordingly builds a
MIZBAYACH (see 35;1,3,7).
Let's use a chart once again to show the
'new order' of
the parshiot:
PSUKIM - GENERAL TOPIC
------ ---------------
(A) 32:3-33:17 Yaakov's confrontation with
Esav upon his
return to Eretz Canaan.
(B) 33:18-20 Yaakov's arrival in Shechem
[& buys a field].
(E) 35:9-22 Yaakov arrives in Bet-el,
receives his blessing
and fulfills his "neder";
Rachel dies along
the way to see Yitzchak
near Hebron.
(C) 34:1-31 Yaakov returns to Shechem,
Dena is abducted,
and Shimon & Levi wipe
out the city.
(D) 35:1-8 Yaakov flees from Shechem
to Bet-el, where he
builds a mizbayach.
(F) 35:23-29 A summary of Yaakov's
children, followed by
the death of Yitzchak.
Thus, by simply changing the location of
a single
'parshia,' nearly all our questions are
solved. However, our
approach raises a much bigger question: WHY
isn't this
'parshia' (35:9-22) recorded where it
belongs?
As stated above, the Torah will present
events out of
chronological sequence only when there is a
compelling reason
to do so. Therefore, we must look for a
thematic reason for
this 'change' in order.
As usual, we will return to the primary
theme of Sefer
Breishit - the process of "bechira" &
"dechiya" - to suggest
an answer to this question.
A THEMATIC REASON
Recall from previous shiurim that the
theme of Sefer
Breishit progresses with each set of Sifrei
TOLADOT.
Throughout the progression, someone from
among the "toladot"
is 'chosen' while the others are 'rejected.'
Recall also that
in Parshat Va'yishlach we are still under the
'header' of
"toldot Yitzchak" (see 25:19). The story of
"toldot Yitzchak"
clearly reaches its conclusion with the
'parshia' of 35:23-29
[(F) in the above chart], which describes
Yitzchak's death.
[Note also that "toldot Esav" (36:1) follow
immediately
afterward.]
This 'parshia' 35:23-29 (F) MUST
therefore appear at the
conclusion of "toldot Yitzchak."
But why was 'parshia' (E) transplanted
from its
chronological location to here, immediately
preceding
'parshia' (F)?
One could suggest several 'thematic'
reasons:
One answer could be alluded to in the
somewhat innocuous
though very telling statement that introduces
(F):
"And the children of Yaakov were TWELVE...
"
(see 35:23-26, noting the 'parshia' in the
middle of a
pasuk)
Unlike Avraham and Yitzchak, ALL of
Yaakov's children are
'chosen' - EVEN his children from the
maidservants, EVEN
Reuven who had most likely been berated, etc.
One could
suggest that the Torah takes this entire
'parshia' (E) - which
ends with the incident with Reuven & Bilha
(which most likely
had taken place much earlier) - from its
chronological
location and intentionally places it here -
NEXT to the
concluding statement of 35:23 - to stress
that ALL of Yaakov's
children are chosen - EVEN Reuven! [See
Ramban 35:22! See also
Rashi, Chizkuni & Radak 35:22.]
This interpretation may also explain why
35:22 ends mid-
sentence. It would seem that the pasuk should
end with
Yaakov's curse of Reuven, which becomes
apparent in 49:4.
However, because the whole point is to show
that Reuven
remains part of the 'chosen family,' the
second half of the
sentence is 'cut off.' Instead, the entire
'parshia' is
attached to the statement, "and the children
of Yaakov were
twelve - the children of Leah: the firstborn
of Yaakov =
REUVEN, and Shimon, Levi..." (35:23-24).
An alternate (and more simple)
explanation could be that
the Torah is simply keeping all of the
stories relating to
Shechem together. Hence, once the Torah
informs us that Yaakov
purchased a parcel of land in Shechem
(33:19), Chumash
continues with what later took place in
Shechem as a result of
this purchase (34:1-35:8). Then, after
completing that story,
Chumash returns to the story of Yaakov's
first return to Bet-
el (35:9-22), even though it in fact took
place much earlier.
Finally, one could suggest a very
significant thematic
reason for this 're-arrangement' of the
'parshiot'. Recall
our explanation that Yaakov's naming of
'Bet-El' reflection
his conviction to one-day establish a
'Bet-Elokim' [a house
for God] on this site. The first time Yaakov
stated this
intention (see 28:19), he could not build a
Bet-Elokim at that
time for he was a fugitive on his way to
Padam Aram. The
second time he arrives at Bet-El (see
35:9-15), he once again
only states his intention. It appears that
it is still pre-
mature to actually begin that project, as he
has not yet
established a name for himself in Eretz
Canaan. After all,
the success of his planned Bet-Elokim would
depend on his
ability to 'reach out' to the neighboring
people, just as
Avraham and Yitzchak had done when they built
"mizbachot" and
'called out in God's Name'.
However, after the 'Dena incident' at
Shechem, and the
actions of Shimon and Levi, Yaakov's status
among the
neighboring people has dropped to an 'all
time low'. As
Yaakov himself stated in the aftermath of
those events:
"achartem oti..." - you have made me look
ugly by embarrassing
me in the eyes of inhabitants of the land..."
(see 34:30).
Given this situation, tragically Bet-El
becomes a place a
refuge for Yaakov, instead of becoming a
Bet-Elokim.
Certainly, in the aftermath of those events,
Yaakov will be
unable to establish a functioning Bet-Elokim
in the
foreseeable future.
From this perspective, one could
understand the Torah's
detail of the 'Dena incident' as a thematic
explanation for
why Yaakov was unable to ultimately fulfill
his "neder" to
build a Bet-Elokim.
Despite Yaakov's resolve to establish a
Bet Elokim,
unfortunately an opportunity for him to do so
never
materialized in his own lifetime. Instead,
Yaakov would have
to pass that goal on to his children, who
would only have the
opportunity to achieve it several hundred
years later.
shabbat shalom,
menachem
=====================
FOR FURTHER IYUN
A. Rashi on 33:17 quotes the Midrash that
Yaakov spent 18
months in Succot! This is based on the fact
that the pasuk
states that Yaakov built a HOUSE there, and
set up tents for
his sheep and cattle. Should this be true,
then in any event,
this pirush only strengthens the question of
why Yaakov did
not return earlier. It does, however,
slightly raise the age
of Yaakov's children by the time the Shechem
episode occurs,
rendering this story a bit more feasible.
B. It is unclear whether Yaakov ever builds
the Bet-Elokim as
he had promised in 28:21. See the meforshim
on that pasuk who
deal with this question, as well as the
meforshim here on
35:14.
Nonetheless, anointing the MATZEYVA and
calling that site
Bet-el (see 35:14-15) clearly reveal Yaakov's
intention to
eventually build the Bet-Elokim, even though
the final goal
may not be realized until Bnei Yisrael
conquer Eretz Canaan in
the time of Yehoshua. See Devarim 12:8-12,
"v'akmal".
C. In closing, it is important to note that
there always
remains the possibility that the parshiot are
in chronological
order. If so, we would either have to explain
that these
events indeed took place when Yaakov's
children were indeed
quite young, or that Yaakov intentionally did
not return to
Bet-el, either because he felt that the time
was not yet ripe,
or possibly because he was waiting for Hashem
to command him
to go there.
D. Note 34:30, and Yaakov's final statement
in his rebuke of
Shimon and Levi:
"And Jacob said to Simeon and Levi: 'Ye
have troubled me, to
make me odious unto the inhabitants of the
land, even unto
the Canaanites and the Perizzites; and, I
being few in
number, they will gather themselves
together against me and
smite me; and I shall be destroyed, I and
my house"
Even though simple "pshat" would explain
that the phrase
'my house' in Yaakov's statement refers to
his family, one
could suggest (based on the above shiur) that
Yaakov is
referring to 'his house' that he plans to
build for God - for
now that Shimon & Levi have made him look so
bad, Yaakov's
plans for building a House for God in Bet-el
have now been
'destroyed'.
E. Comments from Rabbi David Silverberg, who
has researched this topic, and found a number
of sources which seem to explicitly indicate
that Yaakov traveled to Beit-El before the
story of Dina and Shekhem.
The Gemara in Masekhet Megila (17a) asserts
that Yaakov reunited with his father in
Chevron two years after his departure from
Lavan. Along his return from Padan Aram, the
Gemara claims, he spent eighteen months in
Sukkot (see Bereishit 33:16), and another six
months in Beit-El. Rashi, commenting on this
Gemara, explains, "He spent six months in
Beit-El when he left Shekhem." Meaning, the
six month-period to which the Gemara refers
occurred after the story of Dina and Shekhem,
and the Gemara held a tradition that when
Yaakov traveled to Beit-El after the story of
Dina (35:1), he lived there for six months.
Elsewhere, however, Rashi writes that Yaakov
lived for a period in Beit-El before the
incident of Shekhem. In his commentary to
Avot (5:21), Rashi cites the Midrashic
tradition that Levi was thirteen years of age
when he and his brother Shimon killed the
male population of Shekhem. To support this
tradition, Rashi comments that "when you take
into account the two years Yaakov spent in
Beit-El," it indeed emerges that Levi was
thirteen years old at the time of his attack
on Shekhem. Yaakov left Padan Aram thirteen
years after his marriage to Leah, and,
according to Seder Olam (chapter 2), Leah
delivered each of her children after just
seventh months of pregnancy. Levi, Leah's
third son, was thus born just about two years
after her marriage to Yaakov, and hence Levi
was eleven years of age when Yaakov left
Padan Aram. After the two years that "Yaakov
spent in Beit-El," Levi was thirteen years of
age, and it was at that point, Rashi claims,
that Shimon and Levi killed the people of
Shekhem.
Rashi thus clearly held that Yaakov spent
time in Beit-El before settling near Shekhem,
as Rabbi Leibtag contended.
The Midrash Lekach Tov, commenting on the
story of Shekhem (34:25), likewise calculates
the age of Shimon and Levi at the time of
their assault on Shekhem, and claims that
Levi was eleven when the family left the home
of Lavan. The story of Shekhem, the Midrash
claims, occurred after the period of "two
years when he [Yaakov] was offering
sacrifices in Beit-El." Like Rashi, the
Midrash Lekach Tov held that Yaakov first
proceeded to Beit-El upon returning from
Canaan, before settling near Shekhem, and he
spent two years "offering sacrifices."
Apparently, there was a Midrashic tradition
that disputed the chronology espoused by the
Gemara in Megila, according to which Yaakov
spent eighteen months in Sukkot and then six
months in Beit-El after the incident in
Shekhem. This tradition, which Rashi appears
to have adopted in his commentary to Avot,
and was accepted by the author of the Midrash
Lekach Tov, held that the Torah's narrative
does not follow chronological sequence, and
Yaakov's pilgrimage to Beit-El occurred
before he settled near Shekhem. Immediately
upon returning to Canaan, Yaakov proceeded to
Beit-El and spent two years offering
sacrifices in fulfillment of his vow. Only
thereafter did he settle near the city of
Shekhem.
We should note, however, one important
difference between the position reflected in
these sources and Rabbi Leibtag's theory.
According to Rashi in Avot and the Midrash
Lekach Tov, Yaakov spent two years in Beit-El
and then settled near Shekhem before
reuniting with his father in Chevron. Rabbi
Leibtag suggested that Yaakov proceeded to
Beit-El to fulfill his vow, and then
continued southward to Chevron to see his
parents. He remained there for several
years, and then moved with his family to
Shekhem, at which point Shimon and Levi were
in their late teens. These sources provide a
basis for the contention that Yaakov first
visited Beit-El before settling near Shekhem,
but not for the theory that he reunited with
his parents before moving to Shekhem.
David Silverberg [S.A.L.T. 5767]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20141204/6ea2eb81/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vayish3.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 45680 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20141204/6ea2eb81/attachment-0001.pdf>
More information about the Par-reg
mailing list