Genesis 31:43-32:3

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



31:43: VA YA'AN LAVAN VA YOMER EL YA'AKOV HA BANOT BENOTAI VE HA BANIM BANAI VE HA TSON TSONI VE CHOL ASHER ATAH RO'EH LI HU VE LIVNOTAI MAH E'ESEH LA ELEH HA YOM O LIVNEYHEN ASHER YALADU?

וַיַּעַן לָבָן וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל יַעֲקֹב הַבָּנוֹת בְּנֹתַי וְהַבָּנִים בָּנַי וְהַצֹּאן צֹאנִי וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה רֹאֶה לִי הוּא וְלִבְנֹתַי מָה אֶעֱשֶׂה לָאֵלֶּה הַיּוֹם אוֹ לִבְנֵיהֶן אֲשֶׁר יָלָדוּ

KJ (King James translation): And Laban answered and said unto Jacob, Thesedaughters are my daughters, and these children are my children, and these cattle are my cattle, and all that thou seest is mine: and what can I do this day unto these my daughters, or unto their children which they have born?

BN (BibleNet translation): And Lavan answered. and said to Ya'akov, "The daughters are my daughters, and the children are my children, and the flocks are my flocks, and all that you see is mine. Now, what can I do today, either for these my daughters, or for their children whom they have borne?"

But what is the legal position? Are these things really all his? Has he not given them to Ya'akov in an earlier contract? Apparently not. Or is it simply that he is inviting a treaty of reconciliation?

It is the sheer force of Ya'akov's indignation that by this time makes us believe he isn't such a villain after all, but has been wronged by a bad employer (and unsympathetic uncle - don't forget, these are family). But has he been wronged? Is this not simply the methodology of the brazen thief? The fact that Lavan accedes seems to suggest that there have been wrongs. But it's a typical technique of Biblical story-telling, to keep us oblivious to key facts until the right time in the tale to introduce them; it manipulates the reader and keeps the author in control at all times.

RO'EH: "All that you see", but also, by aural word-play "all that you shepherd"; this pun has been used before (Genesis 31:5).

31:44: VE ATAH LECHAH NICHRETAH VERIT ANI VA ATAH VE HAYAH LE ED BEYNI U VEYNECHA

וְעַתָּה לְכָה נִכְרְתָה בְרִית אֲנִי וָאָתָּה וְהָיָה לְעֵד בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ

KJ: Now therefore come thou, let us make a covenant, I and you; and let it serve as a witness between me and you.

BN: "Let us make a covenant, I and you; and let it be for a witness between me and you."

Yet another covenant; this one appears to be the division of Aramaean lands between tribal units, much as Av-Raham and Lot agreed earlier. But were these really Ya'akovite Aramaeans: were they in fact Beney Yamin?

This appears to be the first ever deal struck by an employer with an employee as the result of a walk-out, and proof that it can be done without going to arbitration, requiring lawyers, or needing union representation. There is an essay to be written here on Jewish employment practices, and another on Ethical Capitalism - both of which have their roots in Ya'akov even before they find their substance in Mosheh!

ED: meaning "witness". It is from this, and the stone that consecrates the oath - that what until now has been called Gil'ad siuddenly turns into Gal-Ed: "the stone of witness", in verse 47 below. The Yehudit, without pointing, remains identical.

31:45 VA YIKACH YA'AKOV AVEN VA YERIM'EHA MATSEVAH

וַיִּקַּח יַעֲקֹב אָבֶן וַיְרִימֶהָ מַצֵּבָה

KJ: And Jacob took a stone, and set it up for a pillar.

BN: And Ya'akov took a stone, and set it up for a pillar.

Taking a stone for a pillar, rather than for a pillow as he did at Beit-El (perhaps we should remind ourselves again of Hertz's absurd remarks about that pillow! - see TheBibleNet commentary on Genesis 28:17) The baetylos is an orthostat, or lith, a large upright standing stone. In French Carnac the standing stones are known as menhirs (from Middle Breton: "men" = "stone" and "hir" = "long"). Sites like Stonehenge and Gil-Gal are made of groups of standing stones arranged in mesocosmic patterns (reflections of the perceived choreography of the heavens). A monolith is a single menhir; a megalith simply means an extremely large menhir. The erection of these stones was commonplace throughout the world, even in Belize and Guatemala and Colombia, and it was connected with the elaborate stele of the kings as well as the grave constructions known as dolmens. The menhirs were used as boundary-markers too, grave markers, covenant witnesses et al; grouped together they became shrines,and set in a circle they were the origins of the churches, synagogues, mosques etc of the modern world.

MATSEVAH: In Genesis 28:18, the pillow-stone was simply an EVEN, a regular stone, but " VA YASEM OTAH MATSEVAH - he set it up for a pillar", using YASEM there where the text uses YARIMAH here.

YERIM'EHA: Am I wrong to hear the name Jeremiah in here? Yirme-Yahu (יִרְמְיָהוּ) in the Yehudit. And no, it is not wrong, simply irrelevant. The root gives "exalt" or "uplift", from which both the name of the prophet and the verb used here are derived.

31:46 VA YOMER YA'AKOV LE ECHAV LIKTU AVANIM VA YIK'CHU AVANIM VA YA'ASU GAL VA YO'CHLU SHAM AL HA GAL

וַיֹּאמֶר יַעֲקֹב לְאֶחָיו לִקְטוּ אֲבָנִים וַיִּקְחוּ אֲבָנִים וַיַּעֲשׂוּ גָל וַיֹּאכְלוּ שָׁם עַל הַגָּל

KJ: And Jacob said unto his brethren, Gather stones; and they took stones, and made an heap: and they did eat there upon the heap.

BN: And Ya'akov said to his brethren, "Gather stones"; and they took stones, and made a heap. And they ate there by the heap.

GAL (גל): "heap of stones" or "cairn", but the English makes it sound like any old heap of stones, such as might be gathered to make a campfire or for a kids' game. The word, as we have seen previously, is connected to GIL-GAL (גלגל) - as in the Gil-Gal that Yehoshu'a established at the start of the conquest of Kena'an (Joshua 4:3-5:12). A Gil-Gal consisted of twelve dolmen or menhir; in the Yehoshu'a story the dolmen, which are flat stones, were used to make the bridge over the Yarden (Jordan) which the Kohanim used to carry the Ark without needing to risk getting wet, while the menhir were the upright stones, taller and thinner than the baetyl, which the tribes gathered on the other side of the Yarden to mark their places in the camp. The third type of "heap" is generally a cairn, and was normally reserved for the burial of a criminal (see the note to the burial of Av-Shalom below). Sociologically interesting that the big stone here serves as a dining-table as well as a sacrificial altar - compare Aslan! Compare King Arthur (please do not take the link seriously: Arthur's round table is not a courtly dining table!), who likewise sits twelve around his astrological table, and mythologically speaking the table at which Jesus and his disciples ate their last supper is worth comparing too! What do Lavan and Ya'akov kill for their ceremonial? The text doesn't say, but the most logical, and ironical in being so, would be a Rachel - a ewe.

AVANIM (אבנים): the stones (the word is definitely plural) in question are here the fourth type of "heap", specifically boundary cairns. What was really happening therefore was the definition of borders and boundaries between Lavan's and Ya'akov's territories. Usually five or six stones would have been enough, placed on top of each other; they are still used today to define field boundaries in Israel and Jordan. Deuteronomy 27:17 curses anyone who removes them. But clearly, from the word GAL, these stones were laid in a circle, and we can assume that they were not pebbles either: large stones, dolmens or menhirs, and set in a GAL, a circle. Do we know of any megalithic stone circles in this part of the Golan? Funnily enough, we do – at MITSPEH. See verse 49 below. See the books of Samuel, where all three places are central to the tales. So this may well also be a source-legend to explain the Gil-Gal there.

In 2 Samuel 18:17, after Av-Shalom (Absalom) has been killed, "And they took Av-Shalom, and cast him into the great pit in the forest, and raised over him a very great heap of stones; and all Yisra-El fled every one to his tent." The Yehudit here is "וַיַּצִּבוּ עָלָיו גַּל אֲבָנִים גָּדוֹל מְאֹד", GAL AVANIM GADOL ME'OD ",GAL translated as "heap" here, where at Gil-Gal and Gal-Ed it is clearly a "circle".

31:47 VA YIKRA LO LAVAN YEGAR SAHADUTA VE YA'AKOV KARA LO GAL-ED

וַיִּקְרָא לוֹ לָבָן יְגַר שָׂהֲדוּתָא וְיַעֲקֹב קָרָא לוֹ גַּלְעֵד

KJ: And Laban called it Jegarsahadutha: but Jacob called it Galeed.

BN: And Lavan called it "Yegar-Sahadutha"; but Ya'akov called it "Gal-Ed".

YEGAR-SAHADUTA (יגר שהדותא) - meaning what? The language here is Aramaic, not Yehudit - does that mean that Ya'akov was speaking Aramaic all this time, and therefore Yitschak and Av-Raham likewise? Note again that final Aleph (א) so characteristic of Aramaic. One blogsite tells me that it too means "the rock of witness" but I cannot vouch for the scholarship as it provides no background.

GAL-ED (גלעד): the pointing here is curious. In v21 and afterwards we are told that the hill is called Gil'ad, which is written identically; why then suddenly change the name in mid-story, as if to pretend it's somewhere else? Or is Gil'ad the incorrect version and Gal-Ed = "the heap/pile of witness", as stated in the next verse - the correct one. In Arabic Jalad means "strong" or "hard" and occurs in many Gileadite place names such as Jebel Jalad, Khirbet Kalad and Khirbet Jalud.

The variant names tell us that Lavan and Ya'akov also spoke different languages, which is odd if they are the same family - unless we simply read it that Ya'akov grew up in Kena'an and therefore learned the local language, like every immigrant in history. But it does present the question: what language did Le'ah and Rachel and their children speak? And: at what point did Aramaic and... let us call it proto-Yehudit begin to merge? It has always been dated by scholars from 586 BCE, when Nebruchadrezzar of Babylon took Yehudah into captivity and replaced it in Yisra-El with the Samaritans, though it just as likely came in with Sennacherib when he conquered the northern kingdom around 720 BCE. But perhaps it came in from Padan Aram centuries even before then?

31:48 VA YOMER LAVAN HA GAL HA ZEH ED BEYNI U VEYNCHA HA YOM AL KEN KARA SHEMO GAL-ED

וַיֹּאמֶר לָבָן הַגַּל הַזֶּה עֵד בֵּינִי וּבֵינְךָ הַיּוֹם עַל כֵּן קָרָא שְׁמוֹ גַּלְעֵד

KJ: And Laban said, This heap is a witness between me and thee this day. Therefore was the name of it called Galeed;

BN: And Lavan said, "This heap is witness between me and you this day." Therefore the place was named Gal-Ed.

This appears to be a textual error. The previous verse told us that Ya'akov called it Gal-Ed, and that Lavan was speaking an early form of Aramaic. Gal-Ed is Yehudit. Logically it should read, "And Ya'akov said..."

31:49 VE HA MITSPAH ASHER AMAR YITSEPH YHVH BEYNI U VEYNECHA KI NISATER ISH ME RE'EHU

וְהַמִּצְפָּה אֲשֶׁר אָמַר יִצֶף יְהוָה בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ כִּי נִסָּתֵר אִישׁ מֵרֵעֵהוּ

KJ: And Mizpah; for he said, The LORD watch between me and thee, when we are absent one from another.

BN: And Mitspah, for he said, "Let YHVH serve as watchman between me and you, when we are apart from one another.

Unfortunately telling this story isn't as straightforward as might at first seem, because there are not just two names for the place, but now three. The Aramaic one we can handle - it's the Aramaic after all. But do we call it Gil'ad (or its alternative Gal-Ed), or do we call it Mitspeh, or Mitspah with the Masoretic pointing, though actually you will find both are used interchangeably throughout the Tanach. Given the importance of Mitspeh later on (cf repeated occurrences in the Book of Samuel), the Redactor presumably felt impelled to include both names, and their aetiology. Hence the extra verse. But were they the same place? Beit-El is confused with Luz earlier.

A Mitspeh (מצפה) meant a "watch-tower", but so also did a Migdal (מגדל), as in Migdal-Eder, or Mary Magdalene's Magdala. The difference appears to have been the purpose. From a Migdal, military watchers looked out for enemies. From a Mitspeh, religious watchers looked out for the signs in the heavens. There were watchtowers of both sorts all over Yisra-El (though the former did no good when Sennacherib came, and no good either when Nebuchadnezzar followed), so why does the Redactor need to identify this Mitspeh with Gal-Ed? Possible answer - read the Sha'ul and David stories for evidence - he is confusing them and this verse is best treated as error.

And if the previous verse was spoken by Ya'akov rather than to him, so then must this have been.

This is not a covenant to resolve the differences that have been related; indeed they get no mention. This is a covenant to release Ya'akov from his indentured status, while also defining future responsibilities and territories. As if the Redactor has moved on to yet another scroll, yet another sermon.

31:50 IM TE'ANEH ET BENOTAI VE IM TIKACH NASHIM AL BENOTAI EYN ISH IMANU RE'EH ELOHIM ED BEYNI U VEYNECHA

אִם תְּעַנֶּה אֶת בְּנֹתַי וְאִם תִּקַּח נָשִׁים עַל בְּנֹתַי אֵין אִישׁ עִמָּנוּ רְאֵה אֱלֹהִים עֵד בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ

KJ: If thou shalt afflict my daughters, or if thou shalt take other wives beside my daughters, no man is with us; see, God is witness betwixt me and thee.

BN: "If you do anything to harm my daughters, or if you take wives beside my daughters, no man being with us... you will see, Elohim is the witness between me and you."

The logic of this sentence is not easy to deduce. There is an "if conditional" (American would call it a "whereas clause"), but with no concluding clause. What does he mean about taking other wives? Exogamy, or polygamy, or his retention of power? Is this a parallel to David being sacred-king at Chevron, but then taking the sacred-kingship at Yeru-Shala'im (and he had already held Tsiklag)? Is the chief of the Beney Aram allowing Ya'akov to form a sub-tribe, but still keeping it within his own demesne? Interesting if so. Either way it confirms the power of the matrilocal tradition, for clearly Ya'akov still belongs to Lavan at some formal and legal level, having married his daughters.

31:51 VA YOMER LAVAN LE YA’AKOV HINEH HA GAL HA ZEH VE HINEH HA MATSEVAH ASHER YARIYTI BEYNI U VEYNECHA

וַיֹּאמֶר לָבָן לְיַעֲקֹב הִנֵּה הַגַּל הַזֶּה וְהִנֵּה הַמַצֵּבָה אֲשֶׁר יָרִיתִי בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶךָ

KJ: And Laban said to Jacob, Behold this heap, and behold this pillar, which I have cast betwixt me and thee;

BN: And Lavan said to Ya'akov, "Behold this heap, and behold the pillar, which I have set up between me and you.

31:52 ED HA GAL HA ZEH VE EDAH HA MATSEVAH IM ANI LO E'EVOR ELEYCHA ET HA GAL HA ZEH VE IM ATAH LO TA'AVOR ELAI ET HA GAL HA ZEH VE ET HA MATSEVAH HA ZOT LE RA'AH

עֵד הַגַּל הַזֶּה וְעֵדָה הַמַּצֵּבָה אִם אָנִי לֹא אֶעֱבֹר אֵלֶיךָ אֶת הַגַּל הַזֶּה וְאִם אַתָּה לֹא תַעֲבֹר אֵלַי אֶת הַגַּל הַזֶּה וְאֶת הַמַּצֵּבָה הַזֹּאת לְרָעָה

KJ: This heap be witness, and this pillar be witness, that I will not pass over this heap to thee, and that thou shalt not pass over this heap and this pillar unto me, for harm.

BN: "Let this heap bear witness, and the pillar bear witness, that I will not pass over this heap to you, and that you shall not pass over this heap and this pillar to me, for harm.

Further reinforcing that Lavan makes the rules, and that a land division is being established. We are witnessing the ancient process of establishing a treaty.

Note the separation here of the stones and the pillar. From the archaeology of Stonehenge, Carnac in Brittany as well as the one in Egypt, from the U'wan and Muiscan megaliths in Colombia, we can envisage this as twelve stones in a circle, with the pillar in the centre. This is the same as Arthur's round table. This is the amphictyony, the 12 tribes, the zodiac, etc...

31:53 ELOHEY AV-RAHAM VE ELOHEY NACHOR YISHPETU VEYNEYNU ELOHEY AVIYHEM VA YISHAVA YA'AKOV BE PACHAD AVIV YITSCHAK

אֱלֹהֵי אַבְרָהָם וֵאלֹהֵי נָחוֹר יִשְׁפְּטוּ בֵינֵינוּ אֱלֹהֵי אֲבִיהֶם וַיִּשָּׁבַע יַעֲקֹב בְּפַחַד אָבִיו יִצְחָק

KJ: The God of Abraham, and the God of Nahor, the God of their father, judge betwixt us. And Jacob sware by the fear of his father Isaac.

BN: "The god of Av-Raham, and the god of Nachor, the god of their father, judge between us." And Ya'akov swore by the Fear of his father Yitschak.

How many gods does that make in total, or are they all synonyms? Interesting that LAVAN should swear by Av-Raham and Nachor's god, but Ya'akov by Pachad Yitschak (for which see my notes to Genesis 31:29 and especially 42); further evidence that Yitschak and Av-Raham were not actually father and son, nor even probably the same tribe or people or religion. But they mean it as "gods", not as any particular god.

It is intriguing to discover again that Lavan and Ya'akov did not worship the same god(s), given their family affinity. What does it mean exactly? The god of Av-Raham and that of Nachor are identified together, but Ya'akov declines to swear by them, preferring to swear by the god of Yitschak. Lavan is happy to swear by the god of Av-Raham because it is the same as that of his grandfather Nachor. But Ya'akov will not swear by the god of Av-Raham! Yet we are told more clearly than anything else in all Judaism that our god is the god of all the patriarchs. This is revolutionary!

Nachmanides obviously noticed this too. He says both swore by the god of their father. This merely ducks the issue. And anyway, Nachor wasn't Lavan's father, any more than Av-Raham was Ya'akov's; in both cases they were the grandfather.

31:54 VA YIZBACH YA'AKOV ZEVACH BA HAR VA YIKRA LE ECHAV LE'ECHOL LACHEM VA YO'CHLU LECHEM VA YALIYNU BA HAR

וַיִּזְבַּח יַעֲקֹב זֶבַח בָּהָר וַיִּקְרָא לְאֶחָיו לֶאֱכָל לָחֶם וַיֹּאכְלוּ לֶחֶם וַיָּלִינוּ בָּהָר

KJ: Then Jacob offered sacrifice upon the mount, and called his brethren to eat bread: and they did eat bread, and tarried all night in the mount.

BN: And Ya'akov offered a sacrifice on the mountain, and called his brethren to eat bread; and they ate bread, and they stayed the whole night on the mountain.

By the evidence of the above, the hill of Gilead or Gil'ad or Gal-Ed, and specifically the watch-tower or high place or MITSPEH, was a sacred shrine and a place of oaths, although the language suggests that it was a fairly ecumenical shrine, and everyone swore in the names of their own personal gods, or anybody else's gods for that matter - is this the same watchtower as the one Yechezk-El speaks about (Ezekiel 33:1-6), the one that became a source for Bob Dylan also?

Note that there is no mention of wine alongside the bread. At what point in history was the eucharistic wine introduced as a replacement for physical blood? And was sleeping all night on the mountain an important part of the ritual? Compare Mosheh at Sinai, and Sha'ul's coronation, et al.

End of seventh fragment. Maphtir. End of chapter 31, though the King James version has the next as 31:55 rather than 32:1; thereby pushing all the other verses forward by one.

✡

32:1 VA YASHKEM LAVAN BA BOKER VA YENASHEK LE VANAV VE LIVNOTAV VA YEVARECH ET HEM VA YELECH VA YASHAV LAVAN LIMKOMO

וַיַּשְׁכֵּם לָבָן בַּבֹּקֶר וַיְנַשֵּׁק לְבָנָיו וְלִבְנוֹתָיו וַיְבָרֶךְ אֶתְהֶם וַיֵּלֶךְ וַיָּשָׁב לָבָן לִמְקֹמוֹ

KJ (31:55): And early in the morning Laban rose up, and kissed his sons and his daughters, and blessed them: and Laban departed, and returned unto his place.

BN: And Lavan rose up early in the morning, and kissed his sons and his daughters, and blessed them. And Lavan departed, and returned to his place.

Without finding his teraphim; and without being able to swear his oath on his own teraphim either. Or is that why he chose to swear on the gods of Av-Raham and Nachor?

Sons (בניו): meaning, presumably, grandsons; he didn't surely leave his own sons behind?

32:2 VA YA'AKOV HALACH LE DARKO VA YIPHGE'U VO MAL'ACHEY ELOHIM

וְיַעֲקֹב הָלַךְ לְדַרְכּוֹ וַיִּפְגְּעוּ בוֹ מַלְאֲכֵי אֱלֹהִים

KJ (32:1): And Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him.

BN: And Ya'akov went on his way, and messengers of Elohim met him.

English translations usually add a definite article, implying these are all the angels that there are; the Yehudit does not, allowing it to be just some of the many angels. How many? See my essay on the subject here.

In brief, Ya'akov conceived the Milky Way in his vision of the "angels" - the stars which are the messengers of the gods - at Beit-El, at the start of his journey. The rest of the cosmos became elaborated through the next stages of the tale: the white moon Lavan, the four quarters of the heavens in the four wives, the twelve constellations, each set in their respective horoscopal hour, through the twelve sons, the new moon set to be born through the last child, Dinah, and the entire myth prepared for its generational rebirth with Yoseph and - next chapter - Bin-Yamin. All of which now being complete, and the current moon-god having handed over his blessing in the last verse, his birthright, through the covenant, and his authority, Ya'akov can now take over the sacred-king role, for which all that remains is the ritual immolation (usually the heel, but he is already the heel-god, so in his case the thigh) and the coronation with his new king-name. So those night-time messengers the angels now re-appear, and the only thing we do not know is: which one of them was chosen, and why, to wrestle with Ya'akov at Penu-El?

32:3 VA YOMER YA'AKOV KA ASHER RA'AM MACHANEH ELOHIM ZEH VA YIKRA SHEM HA MAKOM HA HU MACHANAYIM

וַיֹּאמֶר יַעֲקֹב כַּאֲשֶׁר רָאָם מַחֲנֵה אֱלֹהִים זֶה וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הַמָּקוֹם הַהוּא מַחֲנָיִם

KJ (32:2): And when Jacob saw them, he said, This is God's host: and he called the name of that place Mahanaim.

BN: And Ya'akov said when he saw them, "This is the camp of Elohim". And he named the place Machanayim.

VA YIKRA SHEM: As with the naming of the sons of Le'ah and the maidservants earlier, there is much disagreement inside the text as to whether or not the accusative indicator ET is required in this instance or not: is the verb transitive or intransitive? Here the ET is omitted.

MACHANAYIM (מחניים): literally meaning "twin camps", it was a town on the borders of Gad and Menasheh, on the east bank of the river Yarden (Jordan) in some texts, on the Yavok (Jabbok) river, east of the Yarden, according to others. Under Shelomoh (Solomon) it was one of the twelve capital cities. Graves notes that each stage of Ya'akov's wanderings is marked by his naming of a settlement: Beit-El, Mitspeh, Machanayim, Penu-El, Sukot, all deriving their names from one of his acts or sayings. In addition, unmentioned by the Tanach but included by Graves, is the Yavok, which he insists is from YE'ABEK (יאבק) = "to wrestle", though I can find no evidence to support this etymology; it would be extremely pertinent and significant if it were so, given the story that is about to follow his crossing of that very stream! The bridge that crosses the Golan at this point today is known as Jacob's Bridge.

The explanation of the name of the place that is given here makes little sense; nor does the arrival of the angels help clarify it. The inclusion of the line is for two reasons. First, the talismanism of mentioning familiar or famous names to hold the listener's attention. More significantly it is a literary device, known technically as foreshadowing, preparing the reader for what will follow; though in fact, in the Penu-El story, there will be no mention of angels (unless we once again have two versions). Ya'akov will wrestle with a "man"; obviously a metaphorical rather than a literal man, a man in inverted commas, an alter ego rather more than a physical being, and the establishment of Machanayim as the camp of Elohim's angels puts us in mind of this.

Pey break; end of scroll. Note the absurdity, yet again, of the chapter endings in the Christian version - here is where the Yehudit scroll ends, but the Christian version is already three verses into the next chapter.

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