[First posted in 2014. Despite attempts of commentators to explain this chapter, for us these questions remain unresolved:
- How does a man ‘wrestle’ with a ‘Divine Being’ and prevail’?
- Is the ‘Divine Being’ here a messenger/angel . . . or God Himself?
Image from Pinterest
Is this image of two beings (human and divine) a physical wrestling match (which is unreal), or is this just another figure of speech to reflect a human’s inner conflict, or spiritual struggle between one’s will and the Divine’s expressed will which is more credible so that we can all relate to it?
- If it is figurative, then Jacob’s struggle is much the same as the struggle of any individual who has difficulty submitting his will to the Will of a Higher Power, much like each one of us, whenever we confront a ‘truth’ that we have to either accept or refuse.
- Atheists and agnostics most likely do not have this struggle within, since they consider themselves the highest authority over their lives and make their choices accordingly; so the ‘struggle’ is only when an individual has to make a crucial decision: my will or submit to Another’s Will expressed in a book of antiquity to another people alien to my context.
Since this is in the Patriarchal narratives which at this point explains the roots of yet a future nation, a people that will struggle with the God of its Scriptures, then the name ‘Israel’ is indeed apt. Jacob, his descendants, Israelites of old, Israel today — reflect all the implications that connect with the name of this third patriarch. Their history will bear it out and their continued existence and place in world politics today evokes all the undercurrents associated with Jacob who emerges as Israel here.
One more item in this chapter to think about: after Jacob is renamed, he asks the name of the Being and the answer? Read the title of this Chapter, it comes from verse 30. Is this where Jews got the habit of answering a question with another question? Unbracketed commentary is from Pentateuch and Haftorahs, ed. Dr. J.H. Hertz; additional commentary by EF/Everett Fox and RA/Robert Alter who both published their translations with the same title: The Five Books of Moses. Our translation of choice is EF.— Admin 1]
—————-
Genesis/Bereshith 32
1 Lavan started-early in the morning, kissed his grandchildren and his daughters and blessed them, and Lavan went to return to his place.his sons. i.e. his grandchildren.
[EF] Lavan (started-early) . . . : The verse numbering follows the Hebrew; some English translations number 32:1 as 31:55.
[RA] The verse numbering reflects the conventional division used in Hebrew bibles. The King James Version, followed by some modern English Bibles, places the first verse here as a fifty-fifth verse in chapter 31, and then has verses 1-32 corresponding to verses 2-33 in the present version.
2 As Yaakov went on his way, messengers of God encountered him.went on his way. To Bethel, whither God had sent him to fulfill his vow. This vision assured him that God was mindful of His promises.
[EF] messengers of God accosted him. There is a marked narrative symmetry between Jacob’s departure from Canaan, when he had his dream of angels at Bethel, and his return, when again he encounters a company of angels. That symmetry will be unsettled when later in the chapter he finds himself in fateful conflict with a single divine being.
God’s camp . . . Mahanaim. The Hebrew for “camp” is maaneh. Mahanaim is the same word with a dual suffix and thus means twin camps, a signification that will be played out in a second narrative etymology when Jacob divides his family and flocks into two camps. The entire episode is notable for its dense exploitation of what Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig called Leitwortstil, key-word style. J.P. Fokkelman (1975) has provided particularly helpful commentary on this aspect of our text. The crucial repeated terms are maaneh, “camp,” which is played against minah, “tribute” panim, “face,” which recurs not only as a noun but also as a component of the reiterated preposition “before,” a word that can be etymologically broken down in the Hebrew as “to the face of” and ‘avar, “cross over” (in one instance here, the translation, yielding to the requirements of the context, renders this as “pass”).
3 Yaakov said when he saw them: This is a camp of God! And he called the name of that place: Mahanayim/Double-camp.Mahanaim. i.e. two camps; the company of the angels and Laban’s camp.
4 Now Yaakov sent messengers on ahead of him to Esav his brother in the land of Se’ir, in the territory of Edom,As Jacob approaches his homeland, the fear of his brother revives in him. Twenty years had passed, but Esau might still wreak vengeance on Jacob and his dependents. Jacob well knew that some men nurse their anger, so that it should not die down or out.
field. i.e. territory.
[EF] Jacob sent messengers before him. These are of course human messengers, but, in keeping with a common principle of composition in biblical narrative, the repetition of the term effects a linkage with the immediately preceding episode, in which the messengers, mal’akhim, are angels.
5 and commanded them, saying: Thus say to my lord, to Esav: Thus says your servant Yaakov: I have sojourned with Lavan and have tarried until now.Jacob frames his message in the most humble and conciliatory words.
I have sojourned. Rashi takes these words to mean: ‘I have not become a prince but am only a “sojourner”; therefore thou hast no cause to hate me because of my father’s blessing, in which I was promised to be made greater than thou. It has not been fulfilled.’ Since the letters of the Hebrew word ” I have sojourned’ correspond to the numerals denoting 613, the number of Pentateuchal commandments, the Midrash comments: ‘With Laban I sojourned, but the 613 Commandments I observed’ —an exhortation to Jacob’s descendants to be faithful to the Torah even when living in a non-Jewish environment.
[RA] Thus shall you say. The syntactic division indicated by the cantillation markings in the Masoretic Text is: “Thus shall you say to my lord Esau.” But E.A. Speiser has convincingly demonstrated that “To my lord Esau, thus says your servant Jacob,” precisely follows the formula for the salutation or heading in ancient Near Eastern letters and so must be part of the text of the message.
my lord Esau . . . your servant Jacob. The narrator had referred to Esau as Jacob’s “brother,” as will the messengers. An elaborate irony of terms underlies the entire reunion of the twins: Jacob, destined by prenatal oracle and paternal blessing to be overlord to his brother, who is to be subject (‘eved) to him, repeatedly designates himself ‘eved and his brother, lord (‘adon). The formulas of deferential address of ancient Hebrew usage are thus made to serve a complex thematic end.
6 Ox and donkey, sheep and servant and maid have become mine. I have sent to tell my lord, to find favor in your eyes.to tell my lord. that I am on my way home, and am desirous of finding ‘favour in thy sight’.
7 The messengers returned to Yaakov, saying: We came to your brother, to Esav— but he is already coming to meet you, and four hundred men are with him!to thy brother Esau. lit. ‘to thy brother, to Esau’; which the Rabbis explain to mean, ‘We came to him whom thou hast called “brother”, but we found that we had come to “Esau”, to one who still hates thee.’
four hundred men. A considerable following; which naturally alarmed Jacob as to his brother’s intentions.
[EF] four hundred men: A considerable fighting force. Even if the number is schematic (as ten times forty), it still represents something formidable.
[RA] he is actually coming . . . and four hundred men are with him. There is no verbal response from Esau, who has by now established himself as a potentate in the trans-Jordanian region of Edom, but the rapid approach with four hundred men looks ominous, especially since that is a standard number for a regiment or raiding party, as several military episodes in 1 and 2 Samuel indicate.
8 Yaakov became exceedingly afraid and was distressed. He divided the people that were with him and the sheep and the oxen and the camels into two camps,greatly afraid. Lest he and his be slain.
and was distressed. Even greater anguish possessed him at the thought that he might be compelled to slay (Midrash). He does not, however, give way to despair, but takes all possible steps to safeguard himself and those with him. He adopted three methods for overcoming the evil intentions of his brother. His first defence was prayer to God for His protection (v. 10-13); the second was to turn Esau’s hate into goodwill by gifts (v. 14-22); his third and last resource was to stand his ground and fight (XXXIII,1-3).
[RA] two camps. A law of binary division runs through the whole Jacob story: twin brothers struggling over a blessing that cannot be halved, two sisters struggling over a husband’s love, flocks divided into unicolored and particolored animals, Jacob’s material blessing now divided into two camps.
9 saying to himself: Should Esav come against the one camp and strike it, the camp that is left will escape. 10 Then Yaakov said: God of my father Avraham, God of my father Yitzhak, O YHVH, who said to me: Return to your land, to your kindred, and I will deal well with you!—Jacob’s prayer, showing his humility and gratitude, is proof that misfortune had developed the nobler impulses of his heart. Twenty years of fixed principle, steadfast purpose, and resolute sacrifice of present for future, purify and ennoble. It proves that even from the first, though he may appear self-centered, Jacob is yet delicately sensitive to spiritual realities and capable of genuine reformation. And the truly penitent—declare the Rabbis—come nearer unto God than even those who have never stumbled or fallen i to sin.
who saidst unto me. See XXXI,3.
[RA] and I will deal well with you. The first part of the sentence is in fact a direct quotation of God’s words to Jacob in 31:3 deleting only “of your fathers.” But for God’s general reassurance, “I will be with you,” Jacob, in keeping with his stance as bargainer (who at Bethel stipulated that God must provide him food and clothing) substitutes a verb that suggests material bounty.
11 Too small am I for all the faithfulness and trust that you have shown your servant. For with only my rod did I cross this Jordan, and now I have become two camps.truth. i.e. faithfulness.
staff. Such as a lonely wanderer would use on his journey.
[EF] Too small: This is the first indication of the change in Yaakov’s personality. Now he relies on God (although he still uses his wits, by diplomatically and strategically preparing for his meeting with Esav).
12 Pray save me from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esav! For I am in fear of him, lest he come and strike me down, mothers and children alike!the mother with the children. lit. ‘the mother upon the children’ — a vivid picture of the mother placing herself in front of her children to shield them, so that she is slain upon them. The phrase is apparently a proverbial expression to describe a pitiless massacre; like a pogrom in our own times, not sparing the weak and helpless.
13 But you, you have said: I will deal well, well with you, I will make your seed like the sand of the sea, which is too much to count!as the sand of the sea. Jacob was thinking of the promise to his forefathers (XXII,17).
[EF] you have said: I.e., you have promised. See also note on 31:10. like the sand: In fact, this is God’s promise to Avraham, in 22:17.
14 Spending the night there that night, he took a gift from what was at hand, for Esav his brother:[RA] a tribute. The Hebrew minah also means “gift” (and, in cultic contexts, “sacrifice”), but it has the technical sense of a tribute paid by a subject people to its overlord and everything about the narrative circumstances of this “gift” indicates it is conceived as the payment of a tribute. Note, for instance, the constellation of political terms in verse 19: “They are your servant Jacob’s, a tribute sent to my lord Esau.”
15 she-goats, two hundred, and kids, twenty, ewes, two hundred, and rams, twenty,15-21. Jacob hopes by the succession of gifts to pacify Esau’s wrath against him.
[EF] she-goats . . .: The gift is a special one, promising increase (females with their young).
16 nursing camels and their young, thirty, cows, forty, and bulls, ten, she-asses, twenty, and colts, ten; 17 he handed them over to his servants, herd by herd separately, and said to his servants: Cross on ahead of me, and leave room between herd and herd. 18 He charged the first group, saying: When Esav my brother meets you and asks you, saying: To whom do you belong, where are you going, and to whom do these ahead of you belong? 19 Then say: —to your servant, to Yaakov, it is a gift sent to my lord, to Esav, and here, he himself is also behind us. 20 Thus he charged the second, and thus the third, and thus all that were walking behind the herds, saying: According to this word shall you speak to Esav when you come upon him: 21 You shall say: Also—here, your servant Yaakov is behind us. For he said to himself: I will wipe (the anger from) his face with the gift that goes ahead of my face; afterward, when I see his face, perhaps he will lift up my face!appease him. lit. ‘cover his face’; so that he no longer sees any cause for being angry with me; the phrase used in XX,16.
accept me. lit. ‘lift up my face’, i.e. receive me favourably.
[EF] lift up my face: Or “be gracious to me.”
[RA] Let me placate him with the tribute that goes before me, and after I shall look on his face, perhaps he will show me a kindly face. The Hebrew actually as “face” four times in this brief speech. “Placate” is literally “cover over his face” (presumably, angry face); and “before me” can be broken down as “to my face.” To “look on his face” is a locution generally used for entering the presence of royalty; and “show me a kind face,” an idiom that denotes forgiveness, is literally “lift up my face” (presumably, my “fallen” or dejected face).
22 The gift crossed over ahead of his face, but he spent the night on that night in the camp.23-33. JACOB BECOMES ISRAEL
This passage represents the crisis in Jacob’s spiritual history. It records his meeting with a Heavenly Being, the change of his name to Israel, the blessing of the Being that wrestled with him, and the consequent transformation of his character.
Maimonides is of opinion that the whole incident was a ‘prophetic vision’; and other commentators likewise have in all ages regarded the contest as symbolic, the outward manifestation of the struggle within the Patriarch, as in every mortal, between his baser passions and his nobler ideals. In the dead of night he had sent his wives and sons and all that he had across the river. Jacob was left alone—with God. There, in the darkness, given over to anxious fears, God’s Messenger was wrestling with him who had so often wrestled with men and had won by sheer energy, persistency and superior wit. In the words of the Prophet chosen as the Haftorah for this Sedrah, ‘He (Jacob) strove with an angel, and prevailed: he (Jacob) wept, and made supplication unto him.’ That supplication for mercy, forgiveness and Divine protection is heard. Jacob, the Supplanter, becomes Israel, Prince of God. ‘This mysterious encounter of the Patriarch has become the universal human allegory of the struggles and wrestlings on the eve of some dreadful crisis, in the solitude and darkness of some overhanging trial’ (Stanley).
23 He arose during that night, took his two wives, his two maids, and his eleven children to cross the Yabbok crossing.Jabbok. A tributary of the jOrdan,m halfway between the Dead Sea and the Sea of Galilee.
[EF] Yabbok: A traditional natural boundary, it creates a wild gorge which is the perfect setting for this incident.
[RA] the Jabbok ford. The word for “ford,” ma’avar, is a noun derived from the reiterated verb ‘avar, “to cross over.” The Jabbok is a tributary of the Jordan running from east to west. Jacob has been travelling south from the high country of Gilead, Esau is heading north from Edom to meet him.
24 He took them and brought them across the river; he brought across what belonged to him. 25 And Yaakov was left alone— Now a man wrestled with him until the coming up of dawn.26 When he saw that he could not prevail against him, he touched the socket of his thigh; the socket of Yaakov’s thigh had been dislocated as he wrestled with him.
touched the hollow of his thigh. This is usually interpreted as a final effort of the assailant to overcome Jacob.
[EF] touched: Perhaps in homage, for the injury had already occurred (Ehrlich).
[RA] he touched his hip socket. The inclination of modern translations to render the verb here as “struck” is unwarranted, being influenced either by the context or by the cognate noun nega’, which means “plague” or “affliction.” But the verb naga’ in the qal conjugation always means “to touch,” even “to barely touch,” and only in the pi’el conjugation can it mean “to afflict.” The adversary maims Jacob with a magic touch, or, if one prefers, by skillful pressure on a pressure point.
27 Then he said: Let me go, for dawn has come up! But he said: I will not let you go unless you bless me.The opponent’s anxiety to escape before ‘the day breaketh’ suggested to the Patriarch’s mind that he was a supernatural Being. Jacob, therefore, demanded a blessing as the price of release.
[EF] dawn has come up: In folklore, supernatural beings often must disappear with the break of day.
[RA] Let me go, for dawn is breaking. The folkloric character of this haunting episode becomes especially clear at this point. The notion of a night spirit that loses its power or is not permitted to go about in daylight is common to many folk traditions, as is the troll or guardian figure who blocks access to a ford or bridge. This temporal limitation of activity suggests that the “man” is certainly not God Himself and probably not an angel in the ordinary sense. It has led Claus Westermann to conclude that the nameless wrestler must be thought of as some sort of demon. Nahum Sarna, following the Midrash, flatly identifies the wrestler as the tutelary spirit (sar) of Esau. But the real point, as Jacob’s adversary himself suggests when he refuses to reveal his name, is that he resists identification. Appearing to Jacob in the dark of the night, before the morning when Esau will be reconciled with Jacob, he is the embodiment of portentous antagonism in Jacob’s dark night of the soul. He is obviously in some sense a doubling of Esau as adversary, but he is also a doubling of all with whom Jacob has had to contend, and he may equally well be an externalization of all that Jacob has to wrestle with within himself. A powerful physical metaphor is intimated by the story of wrestling: Jacob, whose name can be construed as “he who acts crookedly,” is bent, permanently lamed, by his nameless adversary in order to be made straight before his reunion with Esau.
28 He said to him: What is your name? And he said: Yaakov.what is thy name? A rhetorical question not seeking information. As indicated on XVII,5, a name in Scripture is more than a label; it possesses significance.
[EF] 28-29 What is your name? . . .Not as Yaakov: As if to say “You cannot be blessed with such a name!” The “man” in effect removes Esav’s curse.
29 Then he said: Not as Yaakov/Heel-sneak shall your name be henceforth uttered, but rather as Yisrael/God-fighter, for you have fought with God and men and have prevailed.no more Jacob. That is, ‘the Supplanter,’ prevailing over opponents by deceit.
Israel. The name is clearly a title of victory; probably ‘a champion of God’. The children of the Patriarch are Israelites, Champions of God, Contenders for the Divine, conquering by strength from Above.
striven. The Septuagint and Vulgate translate, ‘Thou didst prevail with God, and thou shalt prevail against men.’
with God. Hosea XII,4. We have here another instance of ‘God’ interchanging with ‘angel of God’, as in XVI,7, XXXI,11.
with men. Laban and Esau.
[EF] God-Fighter: The name may actually mean “God fights.” Buber further conjectured that it means “God rules,” containing the kernel of ancient Israel’s concept of itself, but he retained “Fighter of God” in the translation.
[RA] Not Jacob . . . but Israel. Abraham’s change of name was a mere rhetorical flourish compared to this one, for of all the patriarchs Jacob is the one whose life is entangled in moral ambiguities. Rashi beautifully catches the resonance of the name change: “It will no longer be said that the blessings came to you through deviousness [‘oqbah, a word suggested by the radical of “crookedness” in the name Jacob] but instead through lordliness [serarah, a root that can be extracted from the name Israel] and openness.” It is nevertheless noteworthy—and to my knowledge has not been noted—that the pronouncement about the new name is not completely fulfilled. Whereas Abraham is invariably called “Abraham” once the name is changed from “Abram,” the narrative continues to refer to this patriarch in most instances as “Jacob.” Thus, “Israel” does not really replace his name but becomes a synonym for it—a practice reflected in the parallelism of biblical poetry, where “Jacob” is always used in the first half of the line and “Israel,” the poetic variation, in the second half.
striven with God. The Hebrew term ‘elohim is a high concentration point of lexical ambiguity that serves the enigmatic character of the story very well. It is not the term that means “divine messenger” but it can refer to divine beings, whether or not it is prefixed by “sons of” (as in Genesis 6). It can also mean simply “God,” and in some contexts—could this be one? —it means “gods.” In a few cases, it also designates something like “princes” or “judges,” but that is precluded here by its being antithetically paired with “men.” It is not clear whether the anonymous adversary is referring to himself when he says ‘elohim or to more-than-human agents encountered by Jacob throughout his career. In any case, he etymologizes the name Yisra’el, Israel, as “he strives with God.” In fact, names with the ‘el ending generally make God the subject, not the object, of the verb in the name. This particular verb, sarah, is a rare one, and there is some question about its meaning, though an educated guess about the original sense of the name would be: “God will rule,” or perhaps, “God will prevail.”
and won out. In almost all his dealings, Jacob the bargainer, trader, wrestler, and heel-grabber has managed to win out His winning out against the mysterious stranger consists in having fought to a kind of tie: the adversary has been unable to best him, and though he has hurt Jacob, he cannot break loose from Jacob’s grip.
30 Then Yaakov asked and said: Pray tell me your name! But he said: Now why do you ask after my name? And he gave him farewell-blessing there.As in Judg. XIII,17, the angel refuses to disclose his name, because it was something mysterious.
31 Yaakov called the name of the place: Peniel/Face of God, for: I have seen God, face to face, and my life has been saved.I have seen God face to face. The Targum translates, ‘I have seen angels of God face to face.’
my life is preserved. Jacob had seen an angel, a Divine Being, and yet lives; Exod. XXXIII,20.
[EF] Peniel/Face of God: See v.21, and 33:10, for the important allusions.
[RA] Peniel. The name builds on “face to face” (panim’el panim), the “face” component being quite transparent in Hebrew.
God. Again the term is ‘elohim, and there is no way of knowing whether it is singular or plural.
I came out alive. The Hebrew says literally: “My life [or, life-breath] was saved.”
32 The sun rose on him as he crossed by Penuel, and he was limping on his thigh.limped. The struggle left its mark, but Jacob issued from the contest victor, redeemed and transformed by the contest. So it has ever been with the People called by his name.
[EF] The sun rose: A sign of favor. Penuel: A variant spelling of Peniel.
[RA] And the sun rose upon him. There is another antithetical symmetry with the early part of the Jacob story, which has been nicely observed by Nahum Sarna: “Jacob’s ignominious flight from home was appropriately marked by the setting of the sun; fittingly, the radiance of the sun greets the patriarch as he crosses back into his native land.”
he was limping on his hip. The encounter with the unfathomable Other leaves a lasting mark on Jacob. This physical note resonates with the larger sense of a man’s life powerfully recorded in his story: experience exacts many prices, and he bears his inward scars as he lives onward—his memory of fleeing alone across the Jordan, his fear of the brother he has wronged, and, before long, his grief for the beloved wife he loses, and then, for the beloved son he thinks he has lost.
33 —Therefore the Children of Israel do not eat the sinew that is on the socket of the thigh until this day, for he had touched the socket of Yaakov’s thigh at the sinew.
thigh-vein. The sciatic nerve. This, together with other arteries and tendons, must be removed from the slaughtered animal, before that portion of the animal can be ritually prepared for Jewish consumption. This precept is a constant reminder of the Divine Providence to Israel as exemplified in the experience of the Patriarch.
Image from www.healthinessbox.com
[EF] sinew: The sciatic nerve.
[RA] Therefore the children of Israel do not eat the sinew. This concluding etiological notice is more than a mechanical reflex. For the first time, after the naming-story, the Hebrews are referred to as “the children of Israel,” and this dietary prohibition observed by the audience of the story “to this day” marks a direct identification with, or reverence for, the eponymous ancestor who wrestled through the night with a man who was no man.