Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Torah

GO UP TO BETH-EL AND ABIDE THERE, AND MAKE THERE AN ALTAR. I do not know the significance of the expression, and abide there. Now it is possible that G-d commanded him to abide there at first in order to purify the camp from the idols taken from Shechem or from the dead they had touched, similar to, And encamp ye without the camp seven days, since they had not yet been commanded concerning the Waters of Sprinkling,, 19:17-19. Used in purification from the defilement of touching a dead body. and afterwards they were to make the altar. But Jacob was zealous in observing the commandment to be purified before he came to Beth-el. It may be that Jacob’s words, And let us arise, and go up to Beth-el, actually preceded the purification mentioned in the previous verse. And perhaps the command, and abide there, means that he was to direct his thought to cleaving to G-d.

AND JACOB HID THEM. An idol and the things that pertain to it are not in the category of objects that require burial and for which burial suffices, but instead they are to be crumbled up and scattered to the wind or thrown into the sea. It appears to me that the sons of Jacob did not take the idols and the things that pertain to them from Shechem until they had been nullified and had thus become permissible to them, for a heathen can nullify an idol against its worshipper’s will,, 52b. thus making it permissible to them. Jacob, however, for the sake of the purity of holy things, commanded that they remove it so that they should be fit to worship G-d and sacrifice before Him, just as He had commanded them concerning immersion and the changing of garments. Burial was thus sufficient for the idols, and therefore he hid them under the terebinth in a location which will neither be tilled nor sown.

AND DEBORAH REBEKAH’s NURSE DIED. I do not know why this verse has been placed between the verse, And he called the place El-beth-el and the following verse, And G-d appeared to Jacob again. Scripture thus interrupts one subject which occurred at one time and in one place for when Jacob came to Luz, that is Beth-el, he built an altar there and he called the place El-beth-el, and G-d appeared to him there and He blessed him. Why then was this verse concerning Deborah’s death placed in the midst of one subject? A feasible answer is that which our Rabbis have said, namely that the verse alludes to the death of Rebekah, and therefore Jacob called the name of that place, Alon-bachut (the oak of weeping), for the weeping and anguish could not have been such for the passing of the old nurse that the place would have been named on account of it. Instead, Jacob wept and mourned for his righteous mother who had loved him and sent him to Paddan-aram and who was not privileged to see him when he returned. Therefore G-d appeared to him and blessed him, in order to comfort him, just as He had done to his father Isaac following the death of Abraham. With reference to both of them the Sages have said that He gave them the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners. Proof for this is that which is said below, And Jacob came unto Isaac his father to Mamre, for had Rebekah been there, Scripture would have mentioned “unto his father and unto his mother” for it was she who sent him. to Paddan-aram and caused him all the good, for Isaac commanded him to go there at her advice. Now Rashi commented: “Because the time of her death was kept secret in order that people might not curse her — the mother who gave birth to Esau — Scripture also does not make mention of her death.” This is a Midrash of the Sages. But neither does Scripture mention the death of Leah! Instead, we must say that the intent of the Sages was to explain why Scripture mentions Rebekah’s death by allusion, connecting the matter with her nurse. Since Scripture did refer to it, they wondered why the matter was hidden and not revealed. And the justification for the curse stated by Rashi is not clear since Scripture mentioned Esau at the death of Isaac, And Esau and Jacob his sons buried him. It is, however, possible to say that Rebekah’s death lacked honor, for Jacob was not there, and Esau hated her and would not attend; Isaac’s eyes were too dim to see, and he did not leave his house. Therefore, Scripture did not want to mention that she was buried by the Hittites. I found a similar explanation in Eileh Hadvarim Rabbah, in the section of Ki Theitzei Lamilchamah, where the Sages say: “You find that when Rebekah died, people said, ‘Who shall go before her? Abraham is dead. Isaac is confined to the house and his eyes are dim. Jacob is gone to Paddan-aram. If wicked Esau shall go before her, people will say, “Cursed be the breast that gave suck to this one.”’ What did they do? They took out her bier at night. Rabbi Yosei bar Chaninah said, ‘Due to the fact that they took out her bier at night the Scriptures mentioned her death only indirectly. It is this which Scripture says, And he called its name Alon-bachut, two weepings, [one for Deborah and one for Rebekah]. Thus Scripture says, And G-d appeared unto Jacob… and blessed him. What blessing did He give him? He gave him the blessing of consolation addressed to mourners.’” Thus far the Midrash. Now because Esau was the only one present at her burial, they feared the curse, and they did not view the burial as an honor to her, this being the significance of the Scriptural hint. Deborah was in Jacob’s company because after accompanying Rebekah to the land of Canaan, she had returned to her country, and now she was coming with Jacob in order to see her mistress. It may be that she was engaged in raising Jacob’s children out of respect for Rebekah and due to her love for her, and thus she resided with him. Now it is possible that she is not “the nurse” of whom it is said, And they sent away Rebekah their sister, and her nurse, but that she was another nurse who remained in the house of Laban and Bethuel, and now Jacob brought her with him to support her in her old age out of respect to his mother, for it was the custom among the notables to have many nurses. It is improbable that the old woman would be the messenger whom his mother had dispatched to Jacob [to have him return to the Land of Israel], as Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan would have it. eleventh century, Rabbi Moshe Hadarshan, compiled a collection of Agadic material on the book of Genesis. The book itself, which had a great influence upon Rashi and other writers, has been lost except for the quotations made by other scholars.

THY NAME IS JACOB. G-d is saying, “Now you are still called Jacob even though the lord of Esau has changed your name, Verse 24, that it was “the lord of Esau” who strove with Jacob and then finally blessed him. because he was not sent to you to change your name. However, from now on, thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name,” this being the meaning of the end of the verse, and He called his name Israel. It may be that it alludes to the fact that He called his name Israel in addition to the name Jacob, but not that it be forbidden for him to be called Jacob.

AND THE LAND WHICH I GAVE UNTO ABRAHAM AND ISAAC, TO THEE I WILL GIVE IT. “As I have given it to them so will I give it to you.” This alludes to an oath, for the land was given to them with an oath so that sin should not cause annulment of the gift, but to Jacob it was originally given without an oath. It is this which Scripture refers to when it says in all places, the land of which I swore unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. It may that the repetition of the prophecy, [mentioned above, 28:13, and repeated here], constitutes an oath, as I have already explained.

AND G-D WENT UP FROM HIM. I.e., just as it said with respect to Abraham, And G-d went up from Abraham. In both cases, it serves to inform us that this was no mere vision or prophetic dream alone, or something like, And it brought me in the visions of G-d to Jerusalem, but that the Divine Presence rested upon him in the place where he stood. And by way of the Truth, [that is, the mystic lore of the Cabala], “G-d went up from him,” from the place where He spoke with him, this being similar in purport to that which is said, Blessed be the glory of the Eternal from His place., 3:12. Scripture is thus stating that which the Sages have mentioned: “It is the patriarchs that constitute the Divine Chariot.”

AND JACOB SET UP A PILLAR. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained it as meaning: “And Jacob had previously, Verse 17. set up a pillar, and now he poured out a drink-offering thereon, and poured oil thereon.” This is correct.

AND JACOB CALLED THE NAME OF THE PLACE…BETH-EL (HOUSE OF G-D). He called it so time after time [since he had previously called it by that name]. This is to inform us that it is truthfully and properly a House of G-d, and there the Divine Presence will ever be. The same was true with the name of Beer-sheba, [which was so called by both Abraham and Isaac., 21:31; 26:33. Here too it could not refer to naming the city but rather to calling it by its name.]

A ‘KIVRATH’ OF LAND. Menachem ben Saruk. explained the word as having the meaning of kabir (much), i.e., great distance. A Midrashic explanation is: “At the time when the ground is full of holes like a sieve, when there was plenty of ploughed ground. The winter was past, but the dry season had not yet come.” This, however, cannot be the literal sense of the verse, for in the case of Naaman we find, And he departed from him a ‘kivrath’ of land, [which cannot possibly have this meaning since the sense there is that he had walked away but a small distance from Naaman when Gehazi immediately ran after him] . I think that it is a name for a measure of land. This is Rashi’s language. The correct interpretation is that which Rabbi David Kimchi has advanced, i.e., that the letter kaph in the word kivrath is the kaph of comparison and is not a root letter of the word, the basic word being as in the verses: They were their ‘levaruth’ (food); ‘Vethavreini’ (and give me to eat) bread, meaning a small amount of food in the morning., and here in his commentary. And here the meaning of kivrath is the distance a pedestrian covers from morning to the time of eating, for all travellers measure distances in this manner. This I originally wrote when still in Spain, but now that I was worthy and came to Jerusalem and Note 25 in Seder Lech Lecha. — praise to G-d Who is kind and deals kindly! — I saw with my eyes that there is not even a mile between Rachel’s grave and Bethlehem. This explanation of Rabbi David Kimchi has thus been refuted, as have the words of Menachem [ben Saruk, who said that there was a great distance between the grave and Bethlehem]. Rather kivrath is a name for a measure of land, as Rashi has said, and there is no adjectival part in the word but only a substantive as in most nouns, with the kaph serving a formative purpose to indicate that it was not an exact measure. And if the word be adjectival, modifying eretz, it is possible that brath is like bath, as in the expression, What ‘bri’ (my son)? and what “bar” (O son) of my womb? The word bath is thus the name for a small measure of land by which travellers measure the way, similar to the present day mile. It is called “bath of the land” for this small measure is as “a daughter” to the Persian mile or some other measure known in those days. And I have also seen that Rachel’s grave is not in Ramah nor near it, [as the plain meaning of the verse in Jeremiah, 31:15, would seem to indicate: A voice is heard in Ramah… Rachel weeping for her children]. Instead, Ramah which is in Benjamin is about four Persian miles distant from it, and Ramah of the hill-country of Ephraim is more than two days’ travel from it. Therefore, I say that the verse stating, A voice is heard in Ramah, is a metaphor, in the manner of rhetorical expression, meaning to say that Rachel wept so loudly and bitterly that her voice was heard from afar in Ramah, which was on top of the mountain of [the territory of] her son Benjamin. [She cried for her children who went into exile] because they were not there, and she was desolate of them. Thus Scripture does not say, “In Ramah, Rachel weeps for her children.” but it says that the voice was heard there. It appears to me that Jacob buried Rachel on the road and did not bring her into Bethlehem in Judah, which was near there, because he saw by the prophetic spirit that Bethlehem Ephrathah will belong to Judah, and he wished to bury her only within the border of her son Benjamin, and the road on which the monument over Rachel’s grave stands is near to Beth-el in the border of Benjamin. And so the Rabbis have said in the Sifre: “Rachel died in the portion of Benjamin,” as it is found in the Parshath V’zoth Habrachah. Now I have seen in the Targum of Yonathan ben Uziel, on the three Targumim of the Pentateuch. that he discerned this, and he translated: “A voice is heard high in the world.” [He thus interpreted Ramah, not as the name of a place, since Rachel was not buried in Ramah, as explained above, but rather on the basis of its root ram (high)], and he thus translated the whole verse as applying to the congregation of Israel rather than Rachel.

‘BEN ONI’ (THE SON OF MY SORROW). I am of the opinion that he was so called because he alone was born in the land of Canaan which lies to the south (yamin) as one comes from Aram-naharaim, just as it is said: In the south, in the land of Canaan; Going on still toward the south. Binyamin thus means a son of the south, just as in the verse: The north ‘v’yamin’ (and the south) Thou hast created them. For this reason the name Binyamin is here written “full” [with a yud after the mem to indicate that the name is derived from the word yamin (south)]. This is Rashi’s language. But I do not understand this claim that the Land of Israel lies to the south of Aram-naharaim for Aram is eastward of the Land of Israel, as it is written, And he came to the land of the children of the east, and it is further written, From Aram Balak bringeth me, the king of Moab from the mountains of the East, and Jacob crossed the Jordan which is to the east of the Land of Israel, and he returned by way of Edom which is south of the Land of Israel. Thus you find that Aram is south-east of the Land of Israel, and the Land of Israel is to its north. However, if Benjamin was born within the border of Bethlehem Ephrathah which is in the land of Judah — as it is written, Bethlehem in Judah, and it is further written, But thou, Bethlehem Ephratha, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah — this was in the south of the Land of Israel, and he was thus born between Beth-el and Bethlehem Ephrath. And if the place was in the hill country of Ephraim, then it is in the north of the Land of Israel, as it is written, Judah shall abide in his border on the south, and the house of Joseph shall abide in their border on the north. And if it was in the portion of Benjamin, it was also not in the south, for it is written, And their border was on the north side., Verse 12. Thus in any case there was no reason to call Benjamin “a son of the south.” The correct interpretation appears to me to be that his mother called him ben oni, and she meant to say, “the son of my mourning,” similar in expression to: bread of ‘onim’ (mourners); I have not eaten thereof ‘b’oni’ (in my mourning). And his father understood the word oni in the sense of “my strength,” similar in expression to: the first-fruits of ‘oni’ (my strength); And to those who have no ‘onim’ (power). And therefore he called him Binyamin, “the son of power” or “the son of strength,” for in the right hand (yamin) there is strength and success, just as it is written: A wise man’s understanding is at his right hand; Thy right hand shall overtake all those that hate thee; The right hand of the Eternal is exalted., 118:16. Jacob wanted to call him by the name his mother had called him, for all his children were called by the names their mothers had called them, and he thus rendered it to good and to strength. Now I have seen in Bereshith Rabbah: “Ben oni, ‘the son of my sorrow.’ And his father called him Benjamin, i.e., in the Sacred Language.” I do not know what this means for it is all the Sacred Language, and so are the names of all his sons in the Sacred Language. However, the Rabbis have alluded to that which I have said, namely, that Jacob rendered the expression so that it signified good.

AND ISRAEL HEARD OF IT. Scripture relates Jacob’s humility. He heard that his son had profaned his couch, but yet he did not command them to remove him from his house and from inclusion among his sons so that he should not inherit with them. Instead, he is counted among them, as it is written, And the sons of Jacob, were twelve, and he is counted first. It is for this reason that Scripture has combined the two sections of the Torah. Then a new section begins, And the sons of Jacob were twelve. Ramban explains why the Masorah combines them into one verse. through one verse. For although this is the beginning of a subject wherein Scripture commences to count the tribes now that they were all born, it hints that Reuben was not rejected on account of his deed. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it is possible that Reuben disturbed the couch of Bilhah [Rachel’s handmaid] because he feared that she might give birth again from Jacob, for he, being the first-born and thinking of taking two portions of the inheritance, would thus lose more than all the brothers. He had no fear of his mother for she was elderly. Zilpah had perhaps died, or it may be that he had concern for his mother’s honor, and since Zilpah was her handmaid, he did not disturb her. It was for this reason that the right of the first-born was taken away from Reuben, measure for measure. And this is the purport of the verse, And the sons of Jacob were twelve, meaning that he did not beget children after that.

AND THE DAYS OF ISAAC WERE. There is no strict chronological order in the narrative of the Torah. The sale of Joseph preceded Isaac’s death. This is Rashi’s language. Now I have already written that such is the customary way of Scripture with respect to all generations: it tells of a person and his children and his death and then begins with the account of the next generation even though the generations overlapped. Now it would have been proper for Scripture to present Isaac’s death prior to the experiences of Jacob, just as it did in the case of Abraham and all former generations. But by this delay, Scripture intended to state that Isaac died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years, 25:8. — [just as is said of Abraham] — after his blessed son Jacob, the inheritor of his high rank, returned to him, and his sons Esau and Jacob, great men of the world, buried him. It was not necessary for Scripture to mention that they buried him in the cave of Machpelah since it mentioned that Isaac was in the city of Hebron, and where should they bury him if not near the gravesite of his father?