This week's article contains questions: "traditional" questions as well as the literary analysis questions taken up by "the Gush Tanakh Method." If you have answers or ideas, please let me know!
Very interesting questions. Rav Avraham Ben Harambam seems so bothered by the pshat that he interprets it as (1) not yaakov’s family - only affiliates and (2) it wasn’t real avoda zarah - rather jewlery with idolatrous images and (3) ויטמן means destruction , so the whole thing ends up being lifnim mishurat hadin.
Some additional questions/observations:
1, The midrash interprets yehoshua 24:26 as a continuation of this story, when he brings the people through a brit to not turn to avodah zara, and warns them that they won’t be able to handle avodat hashem so easily (e.g. 24:19). The story also explicitly connects to yaakov’s purchase of the field (24:32) https://mg.alhatorah.org/Full/Yehoshua/24.26#e0n6
2. Was this known tree (note the ה"א הידיעה) an Asherah? We know that this type of tree served as an asherah (Hoshea 4:13, Yechezkel 6:13, Yeshaya 1:29 etc) and even the name of the tree is the feminine form of ‘god” (אלה ) . (I think that the footnotes on rav avrham ben harambam quote someone to that effect?)
3. Building on the previous point, Is this tied to kingship/leadership which is of direct interest in the parsha? Leaders are often analogized to trees in tanach (e.g. Yechezkel 31, Shoftim 9), and chazal specifically tie corrupt leadership to an ashera (sanhedrin 7b explaining Devarim 16:21)
4. In terms of the different presentation to his family (Question 3), my first thought is that it sounds like a translation from yaakov’s perception of the good (Hashem’s revelation per se) to the common notion of good that his followers/students have (saving from trouble) (akin to a difference between oved miahava vs miyirah, or applying devarim gedolim to their devarim ketanim appliaction)
Thanks, Yaakov! These are some nice leads! I definitely want to check out the Avraham ben ha'Rambam and the footnotes. Additionally, one of my talmidim who is currently at Gush asked Rabbi Menachem Leibtag, who also pointed him to the parallels with Yehoshua 24.
Re the difference in how Yaakov presents the altar to his household, I read in Abarbanel that he had just finished making peace with Eisav and it was delicate and fragile and he did not want it spoken about among the household or getting out that he had a major conflict with Eisav
which kind of reminds me of one of the toalot that the Ralbag would bring down: "once you make peace with someone and it's delicate, be extra mindful about how you speak about it, even among family"
והנה לא אמר לאנשי ביתו בפי׳ ענין עשו כמו שאמר לו ית׳ בברחך מפני עשו אחיך לפי שכבר היה בשלום עמו ולא היה כבודו של יעקב לומר בפני שום אדם שהיה בורח מפניו אלא שהלך בבית לבן לקחת לו משם אשה כמו שצוהו אביו.
The odd placement of the pasuk (5) They traveled and a terror from God was upon the cities that surrounded them, and they did not chase after the sons of Yaakov
which I would have expected earlier and seems to be a direct result of this removal of elohei nechar implies to me that had Yaakov not brought his household to this higher level of removal of traces of foreign gods, the terror of God may not have been upon the surrounding nations. Maybe hashgacha?
(side point there is a midrash that Yaakov did get into battle with the surrounding nations when he tells Yosef that he is giving him שכם which he got with his sword and his bow)
The Gush Tanakh Method (once described by my friend, R. Josh Berman, as "Gushy") appeals to me, and your observations along that line are thought provoking. I'll just make one brief observation, which is less literary and more based on "realia." The earrings worn by Yaakov's family members, as well as those that were contributed toward the making of the Calf, can both be said to have had connections with avodah zarah. Commenting on Gen. 35:4, Shadal cites St. Augustine as attesting that earrings were sometimes worn as a form of devil worship.
THAT's where I saw it! I remembered reading that when I started preparing this last Shabbos, but when I resumed working on it midweek, I couldn't find it. I had assumed it was in the Koren Tanakh of the Land of Israel, but when I looked it up, it wasn't there, so I convinced myself that I had imagined it. Thanks!
I was learning this with my son this week and I showed him "cross" earrings and then we looked up "ank" earrings which could be worn by Egyptians and all sorts of idolatrous earrings. Similar to how we wear magen dovid earrings, many cultures have religious jewelry that is not actually avoda zara. It seems like it was not required to destroy them since they were not actually officially avoda zara, just associated with avoda zara. He was just getting his household to a higher level by removing those also
Very interesting questions. Rav Avraham Ben Harambam seems so bothered by the pshat that he interprets it as (1) not yaakov’s family - only affiliates and (2) it wasn’t real avoda zarah - rather jewlery with idolatrous images and (3) ויטמן means destruction , so the whole thing ends up being lifnim mishurat hadin.
Some additional questions/observations:
1, The midrash interprets yehoshua 24:26 as a continuation of this story, when he brings the people through a brit to not turn to avodah zara, and warns them that they won’t be able to handle avodat hashem so easily (e.g. 24:19). The story also explicitly connects to yaakov’s purchase of the field (24:32) https://mg.alhatorah.org/Full/Yehoshua/24.26#e0n6
2. Was this known tree (note the ה"א הידיעה) an Asherah? We know that this type of tree served as an asherah (Hoshea 4:13, Yechezkel 6:13, Yeshaya 1:29 etc) and even the name of the tree is the feminine form of ‘god” (אלה ) . (I think that the footnotes on rav avrham ben harambam quote someone to that effect?)
3. Building on the previous point, Is this tied to kingship/leadership which is of direct interest in the parsha? Leaders are often analogized to trees in tanach (e.g. Yechezkel 31, Shoftim 9), and chazal specifically tie corrupt leadership to an ashera (sanhedrin 7b explaining Devarim 16:21)
4. In terms of the different presentation to his family (Question 3), my first thought is that it sounds like a translation from yaakov’s perception of the good (Hashem’s revelation per se) to the common notion of good that his followers/students have (saving from trouble) (akin to a difference between oved miahava vs miyirah, or applying devarim gedolim to their devarim ketanim appliaction)
Thanks, Yaakov! These are some nice leads! I definitely want to check out the Avraham ben ha'Rambam and the footnotes. Additionally, one of my talmidim who is currently at Gush asked Rabbi Menachem Leibtag, who also pointed him to the parallels with Yehoshua 24.
I saw most of your questions asked by the Alshich.
Nice! He's one of the meforshim who I don't typically look at, but now I will!
Re the difference in how Yaakov presents the altar to his household, I read in Abarbanel that he had just finished making peace with Eisav and it was delicate and fragile and he did not want it spoken about among the household or getting out that he had a major conflict with Eisav
which kind of reminds me of one of the toalot that the Ralbag would bring down: "once you make peace with someone and it's delicate, be extra mindful about how you speak about it, even among family"
והנה לא אמר לאנשי ביתו בפי׳ ענין עשו כמו שאמר לו ית׳ בברחך מפני עשו אחיך לפי שכבר היה בשלום עמו ולא היה כבודו של יעקב לומר בפני שום אדם שהיה בורח מפניו אלא שהלך בבית לבן לקחת לו משם אשה כמו שצוהו אביו.
The odd placement of the pasuk (5) They traveled and a terror from God was upon the cities that surrounded them, and they did not chase after the sons of Yaakov
which I would have expected earlier and seems to be a direct result of this removal of elohei nechar implies to me that had Yaakov not brought his household to this higher level of removal of traces of foreign gods, the terror of God may not have been upon the surrounding nations. Maybe hashgacha?
(side point there is a midrash that Yaakov did get into battle with the surrounding nations when he tells Yosef that he is giving him שכם which he got with his sword and his bow)
The Gush Tanakh Method (once described by my friend, R. Josh Berman, as "Gushy") appeals to me, and your observations along that line are thought provoking. I'll just make one brief observation, which is less literary and more based on "realia." The earrings worn by Yaakov's family members, as well as those that were contributed toward the making of the Calf, can both be said to have had connections with avodah zarah. Commenting on Gen. 35:4, Shadal cites St. Augustine as attesting that earrings were sometimes worn as a form of devil worship.
THAT's where I saw it! I remembered reading that when I started preparing this last Shabbos, but when I resumed working on it midweek, I couldn't find it. I had assumed it was in the Koren Tanakh of the Land of Israel, but when I looked it up, it wasn't there, so I convinced myself that I had imagined it. Thanks!
I was learning this with my son this week and I showed him "cross" earrings and then we looked up "ank" earrings which could be worn by Egyptians and all sorts of idolatrous earrings. Similar to how we wear magen dovid earrings, many cultures have religious jewelry that is not actually avoda zara. It seems like it was not required to destroy them since they were not actually officially avoda zara, just associated with avoda zara. He was just getting his household to a higher level by removing those also