יעקב - "עם לבן גרתי"

On (32, 4): וישלח יעקב מלאכים לפניו אל עשו אחיו ארצה שעיר שדה אדום,"Jacob sent angels (resp. human messengers) ahead of him to his brother Esau to the land of Se'ir," Rashi comments that these were "real" angels. If that were so, it is difficult to understand Jacob making use of holy beings for a secular, totally private mission. He could just as well have sent human messengers! We have an explicit ruling that even nowadays, when the כהן cannot perform sacred duties due to the absence of the Temple, one must not employ a כהן to perform mundane tasks. How then could Jacob employ angels for such a purpose? (gloss of the Mordechai on Gittin).

The Torah continues its report with: ויצו אותם לאמור "כה תאמרון לאדני, לעשו, עם לבן גרתי".” Here we again encounter duplication such as לאמור, כה תאמרון. "He commanded them to say: Thus you shall say: 'I have sojourned with Laban.’" Why do we need twice "to say?" Why does Jacob suddenly omit Esau's title saying instead of לאדני לעשו, לאדני עשו? Previously he was reported as sending the angels to "my lord Esau;" now the Torah merely reports Jacob as telling the angels to address "Esau." Why the change in wording?

Rashi offers two explanations of the meaning of the words: עם לבן גרתי. The two explanations of Rashi are almost direct opposites of one another. First Rashi understands the word גרתי as derived from the root גר, stranger, and Jacob stressed that he had not achieved a socially important position during all these years away from home. In his second explanation Rashi tells us that the word גרתי has a numerical value of 613, and that Jacob hinted that despite his prolonged stay in the house of a sinner such as Laban, he had maintained his religious tradition to the fullest, and observed all the commandments of the Torah. Rashi provides a dual meaning for Jacob's words even where the Torah had not bothered to make Jacob appear as if he were repeating himself.

Rashi gives two explanations for Jacob's statement: כי במקלי עברתי את הירדן הזה "For I have crossed this river Jordan with nothing but my walking staff." The two comments by Rashi again seem to contradict each other. First Rashi says that "I had no silver and gold with me, only my staff." Then Rashi quotes a homiletic commentary in which that very staff is described as possessing miraculous power to split the river so that Jacob might cross it. In the first explanation Jacob emphasized his inferior material condition, whereas in Rashi's second explanation the emphasis is on Jacob's spiritual powers and superiority.

In 32, 12, Jacob asks G–d: 1) "Save me from my brother, 2) from Esau." Again an apparent repetition. Next he says that he is afraid that "he will smite me, mother and children." Why is the word "mother" in the singular? The Torah should have written: "mothers with their children." Bereshit Rabbah 76, 6 understands Jacob's words as an appeal to G–d who has written in His Torah "you must not take the mother bird (singular) together with the fledglings" (Deut. 22, 6). This too must be viewed as a strictly homiletic approach. Next we find a similar duplication when Jacob instructs the shepherds leading the flocks of gifts Jacob sent to Esau how to respond to the queries he expects Esau to pose. He expects Esau to ask: למי אתה, ואנה תלך, ולמי אלה לפניך? "Whose are you and where are you headed, and whose are the flocks that are ahead of you" (32, 18)? Why all this cumbersome language? Another duplication is found in the answer these shepherds are instructed to give Esau, i.e: לעבדך, ליעקב "to your servant, to Jacob." Had the reply been לעבדך יעקב, "to your servant Jacob," we would not see in this any form of duplication. The same kind of language recurs in verse 21, when the gift is described as לאדוני, לעשו, "for my lord, for Esau."

Let me now pursue my own path in explaining all the unusual phrasings in the text as listed earlier. According to the author of Bereshit Rabbah 74,4 the מלאכים sent ahead by Jacob were of the flesh and blood variety; unnamed other scholars claim that they were angels. Remember that the struggle between Jacob and his adversary occurred on two levels, the physical and the spiritual, with Esau in this world and with Samael in the Celestial Regions. The latter had an excuse to challenge Jacob's moral integrity for Jacob had married two sisters, as explained. We have mentioned that though Jacob had a legal excuse for what he did, it was not considered appropriate for a man of his stature, whose features were engraved on G–d's throne, to avail himself of such an excuse. Jacob's name on G–d's throne made a profound impression in the Celestial Regions. We know from the description in Chulin 91 that in Jacob's dream the two angels ascending and the two angels descending compared the features engraved on the throne of G–d with the features of Jacob on earth. They threatened Jacob's life because they found discrepancies between the respective features. As a result, G–d quickly intervened and placed Himself on top of the ladder in order to protect Jacob. Those Rabbis who declared that the emissaries Jacob dispatched were angels, and those who claimed that they were human beings, were all correct. The messengers dispatched on earth to report to Jacob on Esau's plans and attitude were human, whereas the messengers sent out to see how Samael felt were angels of the Celestial Regions. Jacob sent out angels to confront those angels who were jealous of his image being engraved on G–d's throne. Jacob's purpose in dispatching human messengers down here on earth was to humble himself before Esau with words and to show Esau that he accepted him as master. This is why every utterance addressed to Esau was one of submission. The purpose of dispatching angels to the Celestial Regions, on the other hand, was the reverse. There Jacob pointed to his moral and ethical merits, his moral superiority over his accuser, Samael. Jacob spoke very confidently and self-assuredly in his confrontation with his celestial accuser (Example: "I have stayed these many years with the wicked Laban and have maintained my spiritual integrity"). It is even possible to understand the word מלאכים as the very merits which Jacob had accumulated. He "sent" these ahead of him to impress any would-be accuser in the Heavenly Regions. We have a tradition that every good deed in this world creates an angel, whereas every sin creates a destructive force. This idea is expressed in Isaiah 58,8: והלך לפניך צדקך, "Your righteousness will walk ahead of you." The word "in front of him" in 32, 4, may well allude to this, seeing that the word is apparently redundant. It would have been enough for the Torah to write: "Jacob sent messengers to Esau."

These words introduce a single speech directed both at terrestrial Esau and at his celestial representative. To make this plain, the Torah employed the letter ל "to" twice; the word לאדוני refers to the celestial representative of Esau, the word לעשו, to Esau here on earth. We must not be surprised that Jacob addressed Samael as אדון, although he represented an alien deity. The address אדון was aimed at the holy part of Samael, for he originated in holy regions. The residue of that holiness still hovers over Samael. I have already indicated that this paragraph and the gifts to Esau described in it are to be viewed as similar to the scapegoat offered by the Jewish people to Azazel on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16,10). During that procedure, there similarly were two approaches. One goat was offered on the altar in the Temple, the other was consigned to a barren region and was killed by having its neck broken. The decision which goat was to serve as the scapegoat was determined by means of a lot. The very fact that the lot could have fallen on either animal means that each could have been chosen as the one to be offered on the altar. This proves that the impression was created that the servant (Samael) was treated on a par with his Master, with G–d. Jacob did something similar when he sent out gifts to terrestrial Esau. Esau assumed that the gifts were in his personal honor, and that he had been elevated, as it were, to eat at the King's (G–d's) table. I will elaborate on this later. עם לבן גרתי . Both the explanations we have quoted from Rashi are correct. The human messengers that went to meet Esau spoke humbly, submissively. They told Esau that in all those long years Jacob had not risen to a position of social or political eminence; he had remained an alien, and it was therefore not worth Esau's while to be envious of or antagonistic to a nobody such as Jacob had remained. The message that Jacob conveyed to Samael in the Celestial Regions via his מלאכים ממש, "real angels," however, was quite different. To Samael he stressed that in all the years with the wicked Laban he had not slackened in his observance of the 613 (numerical value of גרתי) commandments. By emphasizing that he had sojourned with Laban, he also hinted that any suggestion of impropriety committed on his part when he married two sisters was not valid, since this had occurred outside ארץ ישראל. ויהי לי שור וחמור . This statement has to be understood at face value when it was addressed to Esau in line with Rashi's explanation that, whereas in Isaac's blessing Jacob was promised "dew from the heavens and the fat parts of the earth," i.e. success as a farmer, he had in fact only acquired herds. Esau had no reason to be jealous, since that part of Isaac's blessing had not been fulfilled. The same words put in the mouth of Jacob's spiritual emissaries convey a different meaning, however. These words allude to a number of merits Jacob had acquired and that would accrue to him in the future. They correspond very much to Bereshit Rabbah 75,6 which explains that the word שור refers to the כהן משוח מלחמה, the priest who accompanied the troops into battle (Deut. 20,2). The Midrash bases this on Moses' blessing to the tribe of Joseph in Deut. 33, 17: בכור שורו הדר לו, "His firstling bullock, majesty is his." The word חמור is understood as a reference to the Messiah who traditionally is perceived as riding on a donkey, based on Zachariah 9, 9: עני ורוכב על החמור. The צאן, flock, that Jacob also mentions refers to the people of Israel who are repeatedly called צאני"My flock," by G–d in Ezekiel 34. The words עבד ושפחה also refer to Israel as the latter are alluded to in that manner in Psalms 123, 2. Other Rabbis in that Midrash add that the "ox" is a reference to Joseph, that the "donkey" is a reference to Issachar who is described in terms of a patient and hard working donkey in Jacob's blessings in Genesis 49,14. Joshua, a direct descendant of Joseph, would defeat Amalek in battle. The sons of Issachar, steeped in Torah study, know how G–d rules His universe. This is why the emissaries they sent to attend the crowning of King David are referred to as יודעי בינה לעתים, (Chronicles I 12, 33) "who know how to interpret the signs of the times." At that point in history they knew what was required from the people of Israel. The עבד and שפחה may allude to David and Abigail. A Biblical allusion is also cited for this. Thus far the Midrash. Jacob mentioned the merits of Israel as such, singling out a few individuals as examples of the outstanding people who would be part of his offspring. The reason he singled out David rather than Moses, although the latter too has been described as עבד ה' a true servant of the Lord, is because David or his namesake the Messiah is the ultimate purpose of G–d's creation, signalling a time when the whole function of Samael to act as an accuser would become defunct. There is a special reason why the Midrash chose Abigail to serve as an example of the merits that would be acquired by Jacob's descendants. I have found something on the subject in the writings of the Arizal The latter comments on Hoseah 12, 13: ויעבוד ישראל באשה, ובאשה שמר. "There Israel served for a wife; for a wife he had to guard (sheep). I have mentioned elsewhere that Abgail was the mystique or re-incarnation of Leah. I have explained that during the first union of man and wife, the male deposits a spiritual essence -רוח- within the womb of his wife, something which does not leave the body of his wife even at her death. The implications of this idea are elaborated on by the "Saba" in the Zohar on Parshat Mishpatim (Sullam edition page 34). We can see that in the case of Jacob, who deposited this spiritual essence in Rachel, he did experience the emergence of a Benjamin, whose birth the Torah described in the following words: ויהי בצאת נפשה כי מתה ותקרא שמו בנימין. "It happened when her soul left her, for she was about to die…she called his name Benjamin." [This is the version in the author's quote of the Arizal; I am aware of the true reading in the Torah. Ed.] The spiritual essence which Jacob had deposited within Rachel was called “נפשה,” and became Benjamin. The spirit Jacob had deposited within Leah during his first union with her, however, remained within her, and eventually became Abigail. [This is an explanation of the theory that nothing is ever lost in this world, and that semen that does not fertilize will eventually perform its allocated task. When you pursue this idea in the Zohar you will find that the levirate marriage is based on the brother of the deceased being able to access this residue of his deceased brother's spirit in the womb of the widow of his brother's wife. Ed.] The child emerging from this spiritual essence was expected to be a male. Since however, "Israel had served for a wife," he found afterwards that he had indeed guarded sheep for "a woman." There is another explanation, basically along the same lines. We have already explained that Jacob represented the "beauty of Adam," i.e. a human being at its highest spiritual level. He guarded the flocks of Laban for twenty-two years. All this was in order to extract the two good "drops" (of semen) Laban had ever emitted, i.e the ones from which Leah and Rachel were born. These two drops of semen were the ones that were emitted by Adam and had become mixed with the semen which the serpent had injected into Eve when he had mated with her in גן עדן. [The serpent's part of the semen produced the likes of Laban. Ed.] Similarly, David, who was the re-incarnation of Adam, had to become a shepherd of the flocks belonging to Naval (Abigail's first husband) in order to extract from Naval another drop of semen which had not yet been fertilised, and was latent within Abigail's womb. This is the mystical dimension of Abigail. The original serpent, represented in David's time by Naval, who in turn was the re-incarnation of Laban, possessed the spiritual power to retrieve the spiritual essence Jacob had deposited within Leah. When David appeared on the scene of history, he took Abigail from Naval, [she became David's wife after Naval's death.] David had to guard the sheep of Naval, just as Jacob had to guard the sheep of Laban. This is the hidden meaning of Samuel I 25, 16: חומה היו עלינו גם לילה גם יומם כל ימי היותנו רעים הצאן. "They were a wall about us both by night and by day, all the time we were with them tending the flocks." Thus far the Arizal. "The emissaries returned to Jacob." This refers to the human as well as to the spiritual emissaries. The spiritual emissaries told Jacob: באנו אל אחיך, "We have come to your brother, whereas the human emissaries told him: אל עשו, "To Esau." He is also coming to meet you;" this was said by the emissaries sent to the Celestial Regions who reported about Samael. וגם ארבע מאות איש עמו; "and he also has four hundred men with him." This was reported by the human messengers who had been despatched to Esau. "He was afraid and distressed;" the former was due to Jacob's fear that the accuser in the Celestial Regions might have come across sins committed by Jacob that he had not been aware of. He was also afraid that Esau's merit in having performed the commandment of honouring father and mother during all the years Jacob had not performed it might now support him. We find that Moses too was afraid before engaging Og, King of Bashan, in battle, fearing that the merit of Abraham might assist Og, as explained by Rashi on Numbers 21,34. [The merit of Og referred to must be that he became instrumental in Abraham saving Lot, by having told him that the latter had been taken prisoner, even though that had hardly been Og's motive, as Rashi himself explains on Genesis 14, 13. Ed.] Bereshit Rabbah 76, 1, quoting Rabbi Pinchas, understands our verse in a similar vein. "There were two people who had received specific assurances from G–d, and still they were reported as being afraid. One is the choicest of the patriarchs, Jacob, to whom G–d had said: "I shall be with you;" in the end we nonetheless find him afraid of his upcoming encounter with Esau, seeing the Torah says: ויירא יעקב. The other person was the choicest of the prophets, Moses. G–d had told him "for I shall be with you" (Exodus 3,12). Still, we find G–d had to tell him in Numbers 21: "Do not be afraid of him (Og)." G–d certainly would not have bothered to reassure Moses had he not been afraid, (though the Torah did not report this as a fact). Thus far the Midrash.