Surf The Site
Genesis: 1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4a 4b 4c/5 6a 6b 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25a 25b 26a 26b 27 28a 28b 29 30a 30b 31a 31b/32a 32b 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44a 44b 45 46 47a 47b 48 49 50
17:1 VA YEHI AV-RAM BEN TISH'IM SHANAH VE TESH'A SHANIM VA YERA YHVH EL AV-RAM VA YOMER ELAV ANI EL SHADAI HIT'HALECH LEPHANAI VE HEYEH TAMIM
Genesis: 1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4a 4b 4c/5 6a 6b 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25a 25b 26a 26b 27 28a 28b 29 30a 30b 31a 31b/32a 32b 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44a 44b 45 46 47a 47b 48 49 50
17:1 VA YEHI AV-RAM BEN TISH'IM SHANAH VE TESH'A SHANIM VA YERA YHVH EL AV-RAM VA YOMER ELAV ANI EL SHADAI HIT'HALECH LEPHANAI VE HEYEH TAMIM
וַיְהִי אַבְרָם בֶּן תִּשְׁעִים שָׁנָה וְתֵשַׁע שָׁנִים וַיֵּרָא יְהוָה אֶל אַבְרָם וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אֲנִי אֵל שַׁדַּי הִתְהַלֵּךְ לְפָנַי וֶהְיֵה תָמִים
BN (BibleNet translation): And Av-Ram was ninety-nine years old when YHVH appeared to Av-Ram, and said to him, "I am El Shadai; walk before me, and be upright...
13 years later…Which is the significant date here? That he was ninety-nine when Yitschak was conceived, and therefore precisely a hundred when Yitschak was born - a millennial event, like the six hundred years in the No'ach tale? Or the fact that any 13-year period would have done between the two boys, the significance lying in the 13 years, which back then was the age of circumcision, and still is in the Moslem-Arab world: the age of initiation in all aboriginal cultures.
Compare this one to the vision that took place last time they spoke; clearly two different traditions, or two different times of writing, had a very different idea of relations between gods and humans.
Surprisingly the Ezraic scholars did not follow their usual pattern and excise this "I am El Shadai" - which is to say, replacing him with YHVH; perhaps the Ezraics simply saw this as an early form of pantheism that later became unism, and needed at some point to acknowledge it.
Exodus 6:3 confirms the name, but also confirms that Av-Ram and Av-Raham "did not know" the name YHVH. The meaning of El Shadai is uncertain, though it is thought by some scholars to mean "to reap benefits", for etymological reasons that require some further investigation, because, to be absolutely frank, I can find no evidence to support the theory, which is probably just an act of evasion. Probably it comes from the Chaldean Shad = "mountain" and therefore El Shadai simply means "the mountain god", the local Zeus. However, SHAD in Yehudit is "the breast", usually in the multiple plural, SHADAYIM, rather than the regular plural, which would be SHADIM, or possibly SHADOT - SHADAYIM would make a nice name for the multi-breasted fertility goddess (the illustration shows the Greek Diana, probably a variation of the Yisra-Eli Dinah), but is not likely as a male deity.
But what is evidently taking place is an attempt by the Redactor to knit two variant traditions, the Av-Ramic and the Av-Rahamic. We shall see how well he does it…
TAMIM (תמים): As was No'ach (Noah), and later Iyov (Job), though it is never stated that Av-Ram achieved this high state, only that it is the benchmark set for him. Translating it as "whole-hearted" is a cop-out however; and most translators do the same for No'ach (Genesis 6:9) and Iyov (Job 1:1), so why do they duck it here? TAMIM, in the case of No'ach and Av-Ram, TAM in the case of Iyov, means "a man of perfect conduct", or at the very least of "integrity". "Whole-hearted" simply means someone who tries very hard and puts their all into it; a very different description and a very different standard of behaviour.
The description, of course, will be absolutely accurate when Av-Ram - or Av-Raham by then; see verse 5 below - starts arguing over the conduct of the deity at the time of the destruction of the Cities of the Plain (Genesis 18:16-33). The deity, alas, and not for the first or the last time, does not come out as TAMIM.
17:2 VE ETNAH VERIYTI BEYNI U VEYNECHA VE ARBEH OT'CHA BI ME'OD ME'OD
וְאֶתְּנָה בְרִיתִי בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ וְאַרְבֶּה אוֹתְךָ בִּמְאֹד מְאֹד
KJ: And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.
BN: "And I will make my covenant between me and you, and I will give you many, many descendants."
There are just too many covenants here; various legends of the covenant, all slightly different, all of them worth keeping and therefore all of them amalgamated into the text together as if they were a single one.
Which was the final covenant, the one that abrogated all previous covenants and became immutable for all time: the Jewish Constitution, so to speak? Presumably the one used by Yehoshu'a at the annual covenant renewal ceremony which he instigated after the conquest (Joshua 24).
There are of course similarities between all of them, as well as considerable differences; mostly connected with fertility and future generations; which is itself not uninteresting.
And don't forget – and worth comparing; for that repeated use of the word ARBEH – the covenant just struck with Hagar in the previous chapter.
17:3 VA YIPOL AV-RAM AL PANAV VA YEDABER ITO ELOHIM LEMOR
וַיִּפֹּל אַבְרָם עַל פָּנָיו וַיְדַבֵּר אִתּוֹ אֱלֹהִים לֵאמֹר
KJ: And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying,
BN: And Av-Ram fell on his face; and Elohim talked with him, saying:
YHVH naming himself as El Shadai; and then as Elohim - the first appearance of an Elohim text in connection with Av-Ram. And with it, the first time that Av-Ram prostrates himself; with YHVH he stood, though he called him Lord. And with the appearance of Elohim, the change of his name from Av-Ram to Av-Raham - as though the Redactor were symbiosing two traditions. These are the minutiae of differences that make the text so interesting to unravel.
17:4 ANI HINEH VERIYTI ITACH VE HAYIYTA LE AV HAMON GOYIM
אֲנִי הִנֵּה בְרִיתִי אִתָּךְ וְהָיִיתָ לְאַב הֲמוֹן גּוֹיִם
KJ: As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations.
BN: "As for me, behold my covenant is with you, that you will be the father of many nations...
This Elohim covenant is very different from the EL SHADAI version just given, going well beyond his own people, and not simply including some others. It ties in with the Keturah fragments later on, where the list of her offspring really does read like a demographic map of the Av-Rahamic world; or actually, given its precise locations, the Ibrahimic world, the same world where the daughters of al-Lah were so predominant (see my notes on Lot to better understand that allusion).
LE AV HAMON GOYIM (לאב המון גוים): given as the meaning of his name, though etymologically this clearly doesn't work in relation to the definition of GOYIM in Genesis 14:1. As the use of the word elsewhere in this chapter will confirm, that definition of Goyim is not the one being used here (see verses 6 and 16 especially)
17:5 VE LO YIKAR'E OD ET SHIMCHA AV-RAM VE HAYAH SHIMCHA AV-RAHAM KI AV HAMON GOYIM NETATICHA
וְלֹא יִקָּרֵא עוֹד אֶת שִׁמְךָ אַבְרָם וְהָיָה שִׁמְךָ אַבְרָהָם כִּי אַב הֲמוֹן גּוֹיִם נְתַתִּיךָ
KJ: Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
BN: "Neither shall your name any longer be Av-Ram, but Av-Raham shall be your name; for I am making you the father of many nations...
The changing of a name as part of the coronation ceremony or the assumption of office was traditional: the new name being the title. Thus Hoshe'a became Yehoshu'a (Numbers 13:16); Gid'on became Yeruv-Ba'al (Judges 6:32); Yedid-Yah became Shelomoh (Solomon) (2 Samuel 12:25); El-Yakim became Yeho-Yakim (2 Kings 23:34); Mattan-Yah became Tsidki-Yahu (Zedekiah) (2 Kings 24:17); also Ya'akov (Jacob) became Yisra-El, and Sarai Sarah. The question is: of which people or land is Av-Ram here being crowned? We witnessed his coronation in Genesis 14 and 15, after the War of the Kings, so is this simply the Av-Rahamic version of that coronation?
But there is also the text relating to Hagar in chapter 16. There it was suggested that he had left Chevron for an area much further west, possibly even as far west as Shur. Has he now conquered this region then, and is being crowned as its king (ironic if it were, because it includes Tsiklag, which was David's first kingship; cf 1 Samuel 27ff)? Probably not, but we needed to check.
Then is it merely a matter of being accepted by this people at a theological level, his anointment as priest-king, or was there now a political role as a consequence of the War of the Kings? Or, given the multitude of regional variations, was it as simply an explanation as the one that his name literally means: "the father of a multitude of people"? And of course, if he was originally the god of the region, as I suspect, then this would indeed be correct.
17:6 VE HIPHRETI OT'CHA BI ME'OD ME'OD U NETATIYCHA LE GOYIM U MELACHIM MIMCHA YETS'E'U
וְהִפְרֵתִי אֹתְךָ בִּמְאֹד מְאֹד וּנְתַתִּיךָ לְגוֹיִם וּמְלָכִים מִמְּךָ יֵצֵאוּ
KJ: And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
BN: "And I will make you exceedingly fertile, and I will make nations from you, and kings shall come out of you...
Note that again yet fertility is a part of the covenant; as Hagar is the fertility priestess and he serves as surrogate for the god, Yishma-El thereby acquires an almost Osiric role in all this.
The oddity here, and in the previous verse, lies in the word GOYIM, which is plural; he is not going to make Av-Raham the father of a single great nation, but of many; we talk today of the Abrahamic faiths, encompassing Judaism, Christianity and Islam, which would appear to fulfill the prophecy or the promise. But in Ezra's day, how would that plural have been regarded?
End of sixth fragment
17:7 VA HAKIMOTI ET BERITI BEYNI U VEYNCHA U VEYN ZAR'ACHA ACHAREYCHA LE DOROTAM LI VERIT OLAM LIHEYOT LECHA LE ELOHIM U LE ZAR'ACHA ACHAREYCHA
וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת בְּרִיתִי בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ לְדֹרֹתָם לִבְרִית עוֹלָם לִהְיוֹת לְךָ לֵאלֹהִים וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ
KJ: And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
BN: "And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your descendants after you, throughout their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be a god to you and to your descendants after you...
All of this in very formal legalistic language. HAKIMOTI the verb used in the No'achic covenant as well (Genesis 9:11).
ELOHIM here is interesting. The phrasing suggests a divine name-change too: "from now on you shall refer to me as Elohim". Not in fact the case, as we shall see in the next verse.
It is also logical (for the Redactor anyway) that with the change of deity there also has to be a covenant, so that the theology can affirm that there is one, regardless of the name of the deity.
17:8 VE NATATI LECHA U LE ZAR'ACHA ACHAREYCHA ET ERETS MEGUREYCHA ET KOL ERETS KENA'AN LA ACHUZAT OLAM VE HAYIYTI LAHEM LE ELOHIM
וְנָתַתִּי לְךָ וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ אֵת אֶרֶץ מְגֻרֶיךָ אֵת כָּל אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן לַאֲחֻזַּת עוֹלָם וְהָיִיתִי לָהֶם לֵאלֹהִים
KJ: And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.
"And I will give to you, and to your descendants after you, this land in which you dwell, all the land of Kena'an, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their god."
Title of ownership, deed of possession. But what precisely were the geographical limits of ancient Kena'an? And which god? Or does this in fact mean "gods" plural? This is in fact the same covenant that YHVH made with Av-Ram in Genesis 12, and just as impossible to determine its boundaries.
17:9 VA YOMER ELOHIM EL AV-RAHAM VE ATAH ET BERIYTI TISHMOR ATAH VE ZAR'ACHA ACHAREYCHA LE DOROTAM
וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל אַבְרָהָם וְאַתָּה אֶת בְּרִיתִי תִשְׁמֹר אַתָּה וְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ לְדֹרֹתָם
KJ: And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
BN: And Elohim said to Av-Raham, "And as for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you, throughout their generations...
What precisely is he going to keep? On no occasion does a covenant ever specify the involvement of the other party. We know what the god will do: give the land and be the god, provide fertility. But what does he expect back? We assume obedience, but is this right - certainly the explanation of the name Yishma-El infers "obedience" (see note to Genesis 16:11)? But what else? The Mosaic law is still centuries away, according to the chronology of Genesis and Exodus; and we will see several occasions when Av-Raham's practices are in contravention of Mosaic Law. There will be circumcision in the next verse, but is that really all that Elohim was seeking? Is Av-Raham bound by the 7 No'achide Laws? But they haven't been deduced yet, and don't apply until Talmudic times; and anyway, Elohim is declaring this covenant with Av-Raham, while the No'achic was with YHVH. Not until the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai is the detail of the other party's commitment made explicit. Or just one item, which now follows.
17:10 ZOT BERITI ASHER TISHMERU BEYNI U VEYNEYCHEM U VEYN ZAR'ACHA ACHAREYCHA HIMOL LACHEM KOL ZACHAR
זֹאת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁמְרוּ בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ הִמּוֹל לָכֶם כָּל זָכָר
KJ: This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
BN: "This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your descendants after you; every male among you shall be circumcised...
What, is this the answer to that last question? The whole answer? Surely not?
HIMOL (המול): circumcision, first mention. Is the eight day rule Av-Rahamic or retrospective? See below, verse 12. See this link too, for an intriguing modern medical view.
ZACHAR (זכר): the inference is animals as well as children, but we know that this has never happened in human history.
The circumcision is not in fact the covenant, but only its symbolic expression, as the rainbow was for YHVH's covenant with No'ach: a form of personal signature. Circumcision was not invented by Av-Raham. Philo says it was used for hygiene only; Maimonides believed it controlled lust; modern anthropologists see in it a substitution for child sacrifice (cf the Akeda); there is also the view that you cut the end of the penis in the same way you cut the growing stalk of the vine, to ensure that it runs to fruit. Which would make it yet another fertility symbol.
17:11 U NEMALTEM ET BESAR ARLAT'CHEM VE HAYAH LE OT BERIT BEYNI U VEYNEYCHEM
וּנְמַלְתֶּם אֵת בְּשַׂר עָרְלַתְכֶם וְהָיָה לְאוֹת בְּרִית בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם
KJ: And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
BN: "You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of a covenant between me and you...
NEMALTEM: As noted with the No'achic rainbow (Genesis 9:13), a covenant is not written but "cut" - so YHVH cut his multicoloured signature into the sky by means of a rainbow; so, here, the cutting off of the surplus foreskin.
ARLAT'CHEM (ערלתכם): The practice of circumcision appears to be connected with fertility and not hygiene or ritual immolation. Leviticus 19:23 speaks of the foreskin of the tree being unclean, a law which appears to mean the fruit of the first three years. Clipping the vine famously makes it run to fruit. In Exodus 6:12, Mosheh declares that he is "of uncircumcised lips" (ve ani aral sephatayim - וַאֲנִי עֲרַל שְׂפָתָיִם), meaning that he is not given to fluent public speaking, i.e. that his mouth is not verbally fruitful; a phrase that has been wrongly interpreted to mean he stammered or stuttered.
Can we presume from this verse that circumcision was not a normal practice among the Beney Yisra-El until this moment? If it were, it would not be sufficiently significant that it symbolised a covenant with their god. And yet female circumcision was known in Africa for millennia, and elsewhere for boys; however, in Africa, when women are circumcised, it is an equivalent of body tatooing or ring-wearing and has no fertility connotation.
The Midrash tells the story to explain ARAL SEPHATAYIM, but in fact all it does is elucidate the calling of Yesha-Yahu to the Prophetcy by false analogy; in that tale, as Yesha-Yahu himself tells it:
"In the year that king Uzi-Yahu [Uzziah - עֻזִּיָּהוּ] died, I saw my Lord sitting upon a throne, high and raised up, and his train filled the Temple. Seraphim were standing above him; each one had six wings: with one of the two it covered its face, with two it covered its feet, and with two it flew. And each called out to the others, saying: Holy, holy, holy, is YHVH, the Lord of the Hosts of the Heavens; the whole Earth is full of his glory. And the doorposts shook at the sound of their calling, and the Temple filled with smoke. Then I said to myself: Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I live in the midst of a people of unclean lips; yet I have seen the King, YHVH the LORD of the Hosts of the Heavens, with my own eyes. Then one of the seraphim flew towards me, with a burning coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar. And he touched my mouth with it, and said: Lo, this has touched your lips; and your iniquities are expunged, and your sin is expiated. And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying: Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then I said: "Here I am. Send me." (Isaiah 6:1-8)
OT: As suggested above, a mere symbol.
17:12 U VEN SHEMONAT YAMIM YIMOL LACHEM KOL ZACHAR LE DOROTEYCHEM YELIYD BAYIT U MIKNAT KESEPH MI KOL BEN NECHAR ASHER LO MI ZAR'ACHA HU
וּבֶן שְׁמֹנַת יָמִים יִמּוֹל לָכֶם כָּל זָכָר לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם יְלִיד בָּיִת וּמִקְנַת כֶּסֶף מִכֹּל בֶּן נֵכָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִזַּרְעֲךָ הוּא
KJ: And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
BN: "Every boy, when he is eight days old, shall be circumcised among you, every male, throughout your generations, he that is born in the house, or he who is bought with money from any foreigner, even if he is not of your own seed...
Why was it thought necessary to circumcise slaves and servants too? If this is the case, then it is not a denotion of being Beney Yisra-El - or does it render the bought servant Beney Yisra-El by formality? Compare what happened, or did not in fact happen, to the citizens of Gat when Sha'ul required 100 foreskins for his daughter Michal's bride-price; they did not cease to be Pelishtim and become Beney Yisra-El (1 Samuel 18).
Why do we not read KOL ZACHAR to include the animals as well as the people? This isn't as daft a question as it may at first sound, because the phrase MIKNAT KESEPH meaning "bought with money", uses the same word as that which is used for cattle: MIKNEH (מקנה). And if the objective is fertility, then this applies as much to sheep and goats and cattle as it does to vines and corn fields and human beings.
17:13 HIMOL YIMOL YELID BEIT'CHA U MIKNAT KASPECHA VE HAYETA VERITI BI VESARCHEM LI VERIT OLAM
הִמּוֹל יִמּוֹל יְלִיד בֵּיתְךָ וּמִקְנַת כַּסְפֶּךָ וְהָיְתָה בְרִיתִי בִּבְשַׂרְכֶם לִבְרִית
KJ: He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
BN: "He who is born in your house, and he who is bought with your money, must be circumcised; so my covenant shall be marked on your flesh as an everlasting covenant...
17:14 VA AREL ZACHAR ASHER LO YIMOL ET BESAR ARLATO VE NICHRETAH HA NEPHESH HA HI ME AMEYHA ET BERITI HEPHAR
וְעָרֵל זָכָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִמּוֹל אֶת בְּשַׂר עָרְלָתוֹ וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מֵעַמֶּיהָ אֶת־בְּרִיתִי הֵפַר
KJ: And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
BN: "But the uncircumcised male, he who has not been circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."
HA HI ME AMEYHA (הוא מעמיה): Why the feminine? Because the people, in Yehudit, like the motherland (rather than a fatherland), are always feminine.
All of which seems to confirm the connection between circumcision and fertility (if you don't do it, your seed will be cut off; if you do, you will father a great multitude); and thereby reinforces the Beney Yisra-El as a fertility cult.
17:15 VA YOMER ELOHIM EL AV-RAHAM SARAI ISHTECHA LO TIKRA ET SHEMAH SARAI KI SARAH SHEMAH
וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל אַבְרָהָם שָׂרַי אִשְׁתְּךָ לֹא תִקְרָא אֶת שְׁמָהּ שָׂרָי כִּי שָׂרָה שְׁמָהּ
KJ: And God said unto Abraham, As for Sarai thy wife, thou shalt not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall her name be.
BN: And Elohim said to Av-Raham, "As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her by the name Sarai any longer, but Sarah shall be her name...
This is presumably a transition verse added by the Redactor out of necessity. As with Av-Ram and Av-Raham the name goes with the god.
Sarai may simply be an older or dialect form of Sarah. A goddess named Sharit or Sharayat was worshiped at Batsrah in the Hauran; thus the marriage of Av-Raham and Sarah could reflect a cult-assimilation between an Aramaean patriarchal tribe under a priestly chieftain with a matriarchal proto-arab tribe led by a priestess-princess. On the other hand, its place conflicts with the Hagar/Av-Ram "new abode" theory.
It also more obviously means "princess" than did the earlier Sarai, and is even more obviously a dialect variation of the Aramaic Asherah.
Is it perhaps a dialect variation between tribes? Caitlyn, Kathleen, Katherine, Catherine, Cateline...all the same name, but changeable if you come from Ireland, Wales, France, Greece, England... Or search the Internet to work out why Guy and Bill are actually the same name!
17:16 U VERACHTI OTAH VE GAM NATATI MIMENAH LECHA BEN U VERACHTIYHA VE HAYETA LE GOYIM MALCHEY AMIM MIMENAH YIHEYU
וּבֵרַכְתִּי אֹתָהּ וְגַם נָתַתִּי מִמֶּנָּה לְךָ בֵּן וּבֵרַכְתִּיהָ וְהָיְתָה לְגוֹיִם מַלְכֵי עַמִּים מִמֶּנָּה יִהְיוּ
KJ: And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her.
BN: "And I will bless her, and moreover I will give you a son by her; yes, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall come out of her."
The text says she will be a queen to the Goyim and nations shall spring from her; which is not what the English translations give at all! Not surprising either, for this is the role of the triple goddess, whose princess or priestess Sarah now is. See my note on GOYIM at verse 4.
That the change of name should also go with the promise of nationhood and the birth of a son further proves who the god - or goddess - is. Fertility!
And just as Av-Raham was being crowned in the earlier verses, so is she being crowned - or more probably anointed - here.
But there is another significance, in נתתי ממנה לך - NATATI MIMENAH LECHA - "I will give you a son from her." Rashi, as noted earlier, argues, with specific reference to Yevamot 45b (click here for the Aramaic version with Rashi commentary, here for the English translation) that Jewish children get their identity from their mothers not their fathers, from the Jubilee laws governing the freedom of Kena'ani and Beney Yisra-Eli slaves, where the former cannot take their children with them, as these belong to the master, but the Beney Yisra-El iwomen can, because you do not break up a Jewish home. This is discussed in Yevamot 45b, with no agreement reached; Rashi endorses his own argument with a separate reference to Deuteronomy 7:4. However, it is quite clear from this verse that the child belongs to Av-Raham, and gets its identity from Av-Raham, who has the child "from" Sarah; she merely the birth canal.
Note that the annunication of Yitschak's conception is being given here, as an integral part of the covenant, and not when the three men appear to him by the terebinths of Mamre in the next chapter; or should we say there are two versions of the tale, with considerable variations, but the same outcome. And it is Av-Raham, in the next verse of this chapter, who pronounces his son's name as "laughter".
17:17 VA YIPOL AV-RAHAM AL PANAV VA YITSCHAK VA YOMER BE LIBO HA LE VEN ME'AH SHANAH YIVALED VE IM SARAH HA VAT TISH'IM SHANAH TELED
וַיִּפֹּל אַבְרָהָם עַל פָּנָיו וַיִּצְחָק וַיֹּאמֶר בְּלִבּוֹ הַלְּבֶן מֵאָה שָׁנָה יִוָּלֵד וְאִם שָׂרָה הֲבַת תִּשְׁעִים שָׁנָה תֵּלֵד
KJ: Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?
BN: Then Av-Raham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, "Shall a child be born to he who is a hundred years old? And shall Sarah who is ninety years old give birth?"
YITSCHAK (יצחק): the name his son will have - imagine that there was a verb in English "to isaac", equivalent of "to laugh", and here Av-Raham just isaacked.
Note that Av-Raham laughs at the idea of his fathering a child at this age as well as Sarah's bearing one. We tend to remember the story as Sarah laughing and forget Av-Raham. Yet other patriarchs had children at just such an age. Did the method of calculating age change between the time of No'ach and Av-Raham, and then change again by the time of Mosheh?
Lots of word games here. HA LE VEN (הלבן) could be HA LAVAN (הלבן), which is the goddess' moon-epithet, "the white one" (which will reappear as Laban, Ya'akov's - Jacob's - uncle, later on); but by treating the god as YHVH or ELOHIM this is lost. Av-Raham laughs, whence the boy's name; yet we will be told later that it was because Sarah laughed.
BE LIBO (בלבו) "in his heart", rather than saying them out loud. Does he imagine that his god only hears the spoken word? Is speaking in one's heart not precisely the technique of Jewish prayer? And don't forget that the heart was the locus of thought in those days, not the mind, or brain.
17:18 VA YOMER AV-RAHAM EL HA ELOHIM LU YISHMA-EL YIHEYEH LEPHANEYCHA
וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָהָם אֶל הָאֱלֹהִים לוּ יִשְׁמָעֵאל יִחְיֶה לְפָנֶיךָ
KJ: And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee!
BN: And Av-Raham said to Ha Elohim, "Oh that Yishma-El might live before you!
Meaning what exactly? The Yehudit has YICHEYEH (יחיה), from the verb "to live"; and not YIHEYEH (יהיה), from the verb "to be"; a subtle nuance of meanings, but the latter is the one from which the name YHVH itself is derived - so if there is any mythological or aetiological intention in the line, it goes to CHAVAH, the fertility goddess, whose name derives from YICHEYEH.
But probably the intention is human, not mythological. In the previous chapter we noted the root-connection of the name Yishma-El to the concept of obedience, and there may be something of that here; but I think that "Oy, what does all this mean for Yishma-El?" comes somewhat closer, because this is still the epoch before the Akeda, in which first-born sons are sacrificed, and it is somewhat odd that Yishma-El has made it to 13 (this the reason for my raising the 13 question some verses back) and only had the symbolic sacrifice of his foreskin and not the full ritual killing; and if this is Av-Raham's shocked response, then it is actually a remarkable thing that he says, as though he knows that he must now lose Yishma-El precisely because he is to have a son by Sarah; a hint about ultimogeniture and a prefiguration of Yishma-El's "sacrifice" in some alternate form of Akeda. And why would that be, unless the law of the sacrifice of the first born did apply - which allows it to be pointed out that Yishma-El's banishment echoes that of Kayin: he goes wandering away, eastwards of Eden (actually virtually into Eden, or Aden, which is in the Yemen, just south of Mecca), but for now into the Bedou desert, the nomadic land of wandering. Was Yishma-El in fact chosen, as a royal prince, to be the tribal scapegoat, and sent out to wander the desert? The story of Ismail in the Qur'an (37:99-109) finds him, not Yitschak, being offered for sacrifice in the tale of the Akeda (click here).
Though actually the inference of Av-Raham's remark reflects just as much in Esav's supplanting by Ya'akov. This will be endorsed in verse 20.
Note the use of Ha Elohim, the term for the full polytheon.
Then can we conclude by saying that Av-Raham's question is really rather human, a guilty awareness that he is about to do something very cruel to Hagar and Yishma-El, combined with an awareness that his very tough wife Sarah will have no such qualms? Elohim's answer in the next verse but one appears to recognise this, and to try to alleviate it.
17:19 VA YOMER ELOHIM AVAL SARAH ISHTECHA YOLEDET LECHA BEN VE KARA'TA ET SHEMO YITSCHAK VA HAKIMOTI ET BERITI ITO LI VERIT OLAM LE ZAR'O ACHARAV
וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֲבָל שָׂרָה אִשְׁתְּךָ יֹלֶדֶת לְךָ בֵּן וְקָרָאתָ אֶת־שְׁמוֹ יִצְחָק וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת בְּרִיתִי אִתּוֹ לִבְרִית עוֹלָם לְזַרְעוֹ אַחֲרָי
KJ: And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.
BN: And Elohim said, "No, indeed, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son; and you shall name him Yitschak; and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.
Suggesting that the birth is actually part of the covenant; but there is also a problem. Av-Raham has been promised this for his seed, and Yitschak is his seed; if Yitschak is getting the same promise, does it not in some way nullify Av-Raham's – because you cannot receive the same thing twice. And how does this promise fit in with the later decision to instruct Av-Raham to sacrifice the boy?
Is Elohim is being ironic here (can a god be ironic? A god of the Beney Yisra-El especially, who tends elsewhere to be a rather drily puritanical creature. Greek gods are regularly ironic. Wagner's Wotan hardly knows anything but irony).
Note that now the name Yitschak is being bestowed by Elohim, not by Av-Raham or by Sarah.
17:20 U LE YISHMA-EL SHEMA'TIYCHA HINEH BERACHTI OTO VE HIPHREYTI OTO VE HIRBEYTI OTO BI ME'OD ME'OD SHENEYM ASAR NESIY'IM YOLIYD U NETATIV LE GOY GADOL
וּלְיִשְׁמָעֵאל שְׁמַעְתִּיךָ הִנֵּה בֵּרַכְתִּי אֹתוֹ וְהִפְרֵיתִי אֹתוֹ וְהִרְבֵּיתִי אֹתוֹ בִּמְאֹד מְאֹד שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר נְשִׂיאִם יוֹלִיד וּנְתַתִּיו לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל
KJ: And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
BN: "And as for Yishma-El, I have heard you; behold I have blessed him, and will make him fertile, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he father, and I will make him a great nation.
Twelve princes, like the twelve tribes, like the twelve constellations, like the ... see the essay on the Number Twelve.
But if he is divinely blessed in this manner, why does he not have the same status in Judaism as Yitschak? Because he became Edom. Genesis 25:13-16 lists the twelve tribes, but also makes them different from just tribes: chieftains. Take a look at the Qur'an though – a very different version of the same events; an excellent essay comparing Biblical Yishma-El with Qur'anic Ishmail can be found here.
17:21 VE ET BERITI AKIYM ET YITSCHAK ASHER TELED LECHA SARAH LA MO'ED HA ZEH BA SHANAH HA ACHERET
17:21 VE ET BERITI AKIYM ET YITSCHAK ASHER TELED LECHA SARAH LA MO'ED HA ZEH BA SHANAH HA ACHERET
וְאֶת בְּרִיתִי אָקִים אֶת יִצְחָק אֲשֶׁר תֵּלֵד לְךָ שָׂרָה לַמּוֹעֵד הַזֶּה בַּשָּׁנָה הָאַחֶרֶת
KJ: But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.
BN: "But I will establish my covenant with Yitschak, whom Sarah shall bear for you at the appointed time next year."
As Av-Raham was a foreigner, the ancestry needed to be established in Kena'an, as a son born in the land has a genuine claim to land in that land; hence this deed of covenant. And, since Yitschak is properly the father of the tribe, the miraculous birth associated in all legends and myths with tribal ancestors belongs to him.
The birth will happen at a specified time; still more hints of the fertility ritual in this too: can we work out the date of the mo'ed? Sarah as high priestess is allowed to participate herself in the rite, despite her age and status, instead of some young slave girl or junior priestess. By doing this she becomes sacred queen politically as well as religiously. In a sense this is the most important verse in the whole story of Sarah.
Several dates are plausible: the conception would be in public ritual at a festival, and the birth nine months later obviously. Which festival? One of the three harvest/pilgrimage festivals, which are the two equinoxes (Pesach and Sukot) and the summer solstice (Shavu'ot), or the mid-winter solstice (eventually Chanukah, but not yet)? In the Jesus story it is mid-winter; in the Tammuz story mid-summer. Can we deduce anything from other parts of his myth? Since the Akeda ought not to be linked to Yitschak anyway, we can't use that. So...
In the next verse Av-Raham will ratify the covenant by performing the circumcision; so the mo'ed is this: the date of the covenant. July 4th, in Beney Yisra-El terms, whatever they were.
17:22 VA YECHAL LEDABER ITO VA YA'AL ELOHIM ME AL AV-RAHAM
וַיְכַל לְדַבֵּר אִתּוֹ וַיַּעַל אֱלֹהִים מֵעַל אַבְרָהָם
KJ: And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham.
BN: And he left off talking with him, and Elohim went up from Av-Raham.
No corporeal reality to be rejected as a psychotic delusion about this divinity! The suggestion is almost as if a spirit that had possessed him passed on; again hints of cultic rites and hallucinogenic drugs, or simply a metaphor for something decidedly internal. Is it the same occasion as his previous prophetic vision? Again note the different forms of communication, and that this is very different from the way in which Mosheh is described as communicating with YHVH, or indeed any other patriarch, king, priest or prophet, save only Sha'ul, on two occasions (1 Samuel 19:18-24 and 1 Samuel 28:3-24); and not surprisingly, as these experiences, like modern seances, tend to involve communication with the dead, or are spoken through skulls, through death-masks, by mediums and oracles, and Sha'ul was King of the Underworld, so this was his domain.
17:23 VA YIKACH AV-RAHAM ET YISHMA-EL BENO VE ET KOL YELIYDEY VEITO VE ET KOL MIKNAT KASPO KOL ZACHAR BE ANSHEY BEIT AV-RAHAM, VA YAMAL ET BESAR ARLATAM BE ETSEM HA YOM HA ZEH KA ASHER DIBER ITO ELOHIM
וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָהָם אֶת יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ וְאֵת כָּל יְלִידֵי בֵיתוֹ וְאֵת כָּל מִקְנַת כַּסְפּוֹ כָּל זָכָר בְּאַנְשֵׁי בֵּית אַבְרָהָם וַיָּמָל אֶת בְּשַׂר עָרְלָתָם בְּעֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אִתּוֹ אֱלֹהִים
KJ: And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him.
BN: And Av-Raham took Yishma-El his son, and all who were born in his house, and all who had been bought with his money, every male among the men of Av-Raham's house, and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskins on that very day that Elohim had spoken to him.
A man of visions and of actions! To perform the act of circumcision himself, rather than having someone priestly from the tribe undertake the action, suggests that he must himself have had a priestly role, which as sacred-king he would have done.
Have we in all this been witnessing his coronation (anointment) as king; and does it signify that other tribes have joined his, and it is their king that he is becoming, where he already was king over his own people?
17:24: VE AV-RAHAM BEN TISH'IM VE TESHA SHANAH BE HIMOLO BESAR ARLATO
וְאַבְרָהָם בֶּן תִּשְׁעִים וָתֵשַׁע שָׁנָה בְּהִמֹּלוֹ בְּשַׂר עָרְלָתוֹ
KJ: And Abraham was ninety years old and nine, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
BN: And Av-Raham was ninety-nine years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
An interesting age to have chosen - and very painful too. Thirteen for Yishma-El, in the next verse, which appears to have been the traditional age of initiation into manhood in most ancient civilisations; and remains as such in most contemporary ones as well. Does this allow us to see circumcision - male and female indeed - as having originally been an aspect of puberty, a preparation for procreation?
Given that he personally mohelled all the others, did he mohel himself, or did someone do it for him? Tradition in Judaism maintains that he did it himself, but the phrasing here is rather more passive than active, though still equivocal. The phrasing in verses 26 and 27 is less equivocal, more passive: NIMOL and NIMOLU are in the Niphal, the passive mode.
17:25 VE YISHMA-EL BENO BEN SHELOSH ESREH SHANAH BE HIMOLO ET BESAR ARLATO
וְיִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ בֶּן שְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה בְּהִמֹּלוֹ אֵת בְּשַׂר עָרְלָתוֹ
KJ: And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
BN: And Yishma-El his son was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.
Thirteen, of course, would become the age of Bar Mitzvah, the Jewish replacement for the aboriginal rites of initiation.
17:26 BE ETSEM HA YOM HA ZEH NIMOL AV-RAHAM VE YISHMA-EL BENO
בְּעֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה נִמּוֹל אַבְרָהָם וְיִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ
KJ: In the selfsame day was Abraham circumcised, and Ishmael his son.
BN: On the very same day, Av-Raham and Yishma-El his son were circumcised.
Why the repetition; clearly it was deemed significant that they were both circumcised on the same day. Why?
There must be some significance in the fact that the announcement of the birth of Yitschak with its inferred rejection of Yishma-El, should coincide with the circumcision and blessing of Yishma-El. As if, alongside the coronation of the king, the announcement also of the heir apparent.
17:27 VE CHOL ANSHEY VEITO, YELID BAYIT U MIKNAT KESEPH ME ET BEN NECHAR NIMOLU ITO
וְכָל אַנְשֵׁי בֵיתוֹ יְלִיד בָּיִת וּמִקְנַת כֶּסֶף מֵאֵת בֶּן נֵכָר נִמֹּלוּ אִתּוֹ
KJ: And all the men of his house, born in the house, and bought with money of the stranger, were circumcised with him.
BN: And all the men of his house, those born in the house, and those bought with money from a foreigner, were circumcised with him.
House presumably does not mean house, as in physical structure/place of residence; but house as in family/clan/tribe.
Pey break; end of chapter 17; end of scroll
Before we start the next scroll, keep in mind that we have just read the annunciation of Yitschak, with the laughter of Av-Raham; in the next scroll the tale will be repeated, and we will notice the similarities, but also the variations.
Surf The Site
Genesis: 1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4a 4b 4c/5 6a 6b 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25a 25b 26a 26b 27 28a 28b 29 30a 30b 31a 31b/32a 32b 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44a 44b 45 46 47a 47b 48 49 50
Copyright © 2020 David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press
No comments:
Post a Comment