Kommentar zu Bereschit 28:26

ויקרא ..ויברך אתו, the text of the blessing commences with the words: וא-ל שדי יברך אותך (verse 3).

Yitzchok called. Yaakov was embarrassed to come to Yitzchok on his own after having deceived him. By calling him Yitzchok conferred his retroactive approval of Yaakov’s deed.

ויברך אותו, nun freiwillig und mit vollem Bewusstsein. Rebekkas Heilmittel hatte ihm völlig die Augen geöffnet.

Set out and go. This was a veiled warning that he should flee for his safety.

It is written in the Midrash "Taking one of the stones of that place", in the beginning there were many stones and for Jacob they became one stone. And it is therefore said "[Jacob] took the stone" (see there).

פדנה is the same as לפדן to Padan;

קום לך, the word קום is not to be understood literally as “rise!,” but as an instruction to go about the task to be fulfilled with speed, without delay.
פדנה ארם, we explained this as meaning “to Charan.”

Any word that requires a ל prefix... It does not mean just any word, as we find this rule applies only to names of places and countries, such as בבלה and חברונה, and sometimes to vessels, such as המזבחה.

Wo eine Frau wie deine Mutter geboren und trotz eines Laban erzogen worden ist, da ist es auch möglich, dass du die entsprechende Frau findest.

ביתה בתואל is the same as לבית בתואל to the house of Bethuel. To every word requiring a ל prefixed you may attach a ה as a suffix (Yevamot 13b).

ואל שדי AND GOD ALMIGHTY —He who has a sufficiency of blessings שָׁדִּי for those who are blessed by Him, יברך אתך MAY HE BLESS THEE.

May the Almighty … bless you. With riches.

He who has sufficient blessings... Otherwise, why is this particular Name of Hashem mentioned here?

Du brauchst nichts mit dir zu nehmen als Gott, der wird dich segnen, d. h. dir die Mittel geben, einen Hausstand zu gründen und dann dir die Kraft geben, Kinder zu erzeugen und sie in deinem Sinne zu erziehen, dass du dich in ihnen vervielfältigst, und du wirst, was mir nicht gelungen ist, עמים haben, verschieden geartete Kinder, Wurzeln der künftigen verschieden gearteten Stämme, aber sie alle werden ein קהל, eine einheitliche Gesamtheit bilden, es wird kein פסול unter ihnen sein.

ואל שדי, “and the G-d known also as Shaddai;” the G-d Who has said of Himself that none of His creatures needs any other power to help him. (Compare Rashi on Genesis 17,1) “He will bless you.”Rabbi Eleazar in B’reshit Rabbah 67,12, says that a divorce decree becomes valid only after its signatories have appended their seals to it. This is why Yitzchok was not content with the blessing he had already given Yaakov which had commenced with the words: ויתן לך, in 27,28.

Make you fruitful. With offspring.

And multiply (or “magnify”) you. May He magnify your stature

את ברכת אברהם THE BLESSING OF ABRAHAM, (i. e. the blessing which He gave to (Abraham) to whom He promised, (12:2) “and I will make of thee a great nation”, and (26:4) “and all the nations shall bless themselves by thy seed”: may these blessings have been said regarding you — may that great nation and that blessed seed issue from you.

לרשתך את הארץ, seeing that you cannot take a wife from the daughters of the Canaanites as Avraham had commanded Yitzchok because they are slaves, (cursed.)

ויתן לך את ברכת אברהם, when He had said (12,2) “become a source of blessing!” This involves his teaching people about monotheism, the acceptance of which would result in tangible blessings for those people from G’d. This in turn would make the people regard Avraham as responsible for the blessings they receive. לך ולזרעך אתך לרשתך, if the children would also be following in the footsteps of their parents acting as spiritual instructors to the people around them, their claim to this land would be reinforced. This would become an irreversible sanctification of the name of the Lord. Isaiah 49,3 described this as G’d saying: ישראל אשר בך אתפאר, “Israel in whom I am glorified.” This is also an example of what David had in mind when he said in Psalms 104,31 “G’d delights in His handiwork.”

וא-ל שדי...ויתן לך את ברכת אברהם, which G’d pronounced concerning you and your descendants, for just as I was a special seed to my father, though he had other children beside me, you are my special seed and will be the bearer of this promise/prophecy.

May that nation descend from you as well as that blessed seed. Otherwise, [if it simply meant that Yaakov should be blessed as Avraham was,] it should say ויתן לך ברכת אברהם. But את ברכת אברהם implies taking Avraham’s blessing and bequeathing it to Yaakov. Why does Rashi not relate ברכת אברהם to inheriting the Land, saying that Yaakov, over and above Yitzchok’s other sons, should receive the Land? Because inheriting the Land is a gift, not a blessing. (Re’m)

אתך, nicht אהריך, nicht erst aus deinen späteren Nachkommen wird sich ein einheitlicher Kern für das künftige Volk entwickeln. Keines deiner Kinder wird sich dir entfremden, alle bei dir und mit dir Erben der dem Abraham gewordenen Verheißung sein. —

לרשתך את ארץ מגוריך, “to give you as an inheritance the land in which you presently are sojourning.” Seeing that you must not take a wife from the present occupiers of this land, Yitzchok had to reconfirm this. Not only that, he implied that seeing the Canaanites, ever since having been cursed by Noach, were a nation of slaves, slaves could not claim legal title to any possessions.

ארץ מגוריך, the land of Canaan in which you dwell at the present time.

Vergleicht man den Inhalt dieses dem Jakob bewußtvoll erteilten Segens mit dem oben Esau zugedachten, in welchem keine Spur von der abrahamitischen Bestimmung enthalten ist, so dürfte unsere Auffassung desselben gerechtfertigt erscheinen. Das Siegel aber des Ganzen ist das in Raw Hirsch on Genesis 28: 6 f. enthaltene: Als Esau sah usw. und dass er, indem er ihn segnete, usw. usw. erst nachdem er alles dies gesehen, kam ihm ungefähr das Bewusstsein, dass die kanaanitischen Frauen seinem Vater nicht recht sein müssen — also von all dem Herzleid und Kummer, die seine Frauen bis jetzt den Eltern gebracht, hatte Esau keine Ahnung, und nun jetzt, nachdem ihm davon eine Vorstellung aufdämmerte — was tat er? Entfernte er seine kanaanitischen Frauen? Nein! Er nahm sich noch eine Frau zu seinen Frauen zur Frau, על נשיו לו לאשה! So wenig Sinn und Verständnis hatte Esau für das, um was es sich eigentlich im Hause Abrahams handelte, und hat eben damit Rebekkas Beurteilung seiner Befähigung für die künftige Leitung und Vertretung dieses Hauses vollkommen gerechtfertigt.

אם יעקב ועשו MOTHER OF JACOB AND ESAU — I do not know what the addition of these words is intended to tell us.

THE BROTHER OF REBEKAH, JACOB’s AND ESAU’s MOTHER. Because it stated²⁶³It is obvious that Ramban has in mind the words of Rashi, whose comment upon the expression, Jacob’s and Esau’s mother, was, “I do not know what this intends to tell us.” Ramban then proceeds to offer an explanation. that Isaac commanded Jacob to get a wife from the daughters of Laban, his mother’s brother, Scripture mentions that he was also the brother of Esau’s mother. It would have been proper for Isaac to have commanded Esau likewise, but since he knew that the blessing of Abraham would apply only to Jacob and his seed, he did so only to Jacob. Now Scripture further mentions that Esau heard that his father had commanded Jacob not to take a wife from among the daughters of Canaan²⁶⁴Verse 1 here. and that he should go to his mother’s brother Laban. He [Esau] heeded his father’s will that one not take a wife from among the daughters of Canaan, but he did not act properly and take a wife from the daughters of Laban, despite his [Laban’s] being his mother’s brother. Scripture further mentions that he took her²⁶⁵Mahalath, the daughter of Ishmael. (Verse 9 here.) besides his former wives, and he did not divorce the evil wives since he followed his heart’s desire more than he followed the will of his father.
Vayeitzei

וישלח יצחק, Isaac sent away, etc. Why is Laban described as Rebeccah's brother, something we have known for a long time? Why is Rebeccah described here once more as both Jacob's and Esau's mother?

וישלח, he sent him off to proceed in the direction he had instructed him. Yaakov complied with his father’s instruction, as the Torah continues וילך פדנה ארם, he took with him sufficient supplies of money and food to last him until he would arrive there. His parents knew that once he would be at his uncle Lavan he would not be short of any of his needs.

אחי רבקה, אם יעקב ועשו, “the brother of Rivkah, who was the mother of Yaakov and Esau. Nachmanides explains that the reason why Rivkah is described here by the Torah as “the mother of Yaakov and Esau,” [something that we all know perfectly well, Ed.] is because Yitzchok had commanded Yaakov to select a wife from among the daughters of Lavan, “the brother of your mother.” The Torah is at pains to remind us that Lavan was also the brother of Esau’s mother, and because of this it would have been appropriate for Yitzchok to command Esau also to take a wife from among his uncle’s daughters. However, seeing that the seed of Avraham would be carried on only through Yaakov, there was no point in Esau marrying someone from Lavan’s family. Other commentators feel that the Torah was at pains to give Yaakov precedence over Esau who was biologically his senior, as soon as Yaakov had secured the blessing of his father. The Torah’s mentioning “Yaakov and Esau” in that order, serves as proof that the blessing was indeed fulfilled, and that Yaakov would henceforth be deemed as senior to his brothers, i.e.הוי גביר לאחיך as we read in All of this, in spite of the fact that after Yitzchok’s death the Torah reverts to mentioning Esau first when it reports Yitzchok’s funeral. This was because Esau had never left the land of Israel, attending to his father’s needs, whereas Yaakov had been outside the Holy Land for over 20 years. [I find this difficult as Esau had voluntarily left the Holy Land (Genesis 36,6), not because of his life being in danger and his father having sent him out of the land to get a wife without giving him a dowry, 11 years before his father died. Ed.] Some commentators say that the reason why the Torah repeats these details about Yaakov’s genealogy is in order for you not to be dismayed that from two such righteous parents as Yitzchok and Rivkah, a wicked person such as Esau could have been produced. The Torah does not want us to forget for a moment that Rivkah herself had a brother who was everything but righteous. Our sages have established a rule (based on empirical knowledge, Ed.] according to which most children have a tendency to develop in accordance with their mother’s brother(s).

I do not know what this teaches us. Some ask: What is Rashi telling us — that he does not know? If he does not know, let him not comment! The answer is: Rashi knew a number of answers that could be given, but did not know which is true according to the simple meaning of Scripture. (Kitzur Mizrachi; see Tzeidah L’Derech)

אם יעקב ועשו, “mother of Yaakov and Esau.” The Torah had to repeat this although the reader knows it, as the reader might wonder how a couple such as Yitzchok and Rivkah had produced a person as wicked as Esau. If Rivkah had not been the sister of a wicked person such as Lavan and daughter of a wicked person such as Betuel, the question would have been more serious.[Personally, I think the verse is important as the Torah’s mentioning Yaakov first, i.e. confirming that he was the firstborn legally, having purchased that status from his brother. Moreover, we know that from the marriage of King Chizkiyah to the daughter of the prophet Isaiah the great prophet, a Jewish rasha came forth, so that such phenomena are not strange seeing we have been given the freedom of choice. Ed.] Our sages, not basing themselves on the DNA factors, stated in Baba Batra 110, that most children reflect the character of their maternal uncles. An alternate exegesis: the reason that mention is made of their mother here is that the Torah wants the reader to know that Rivkah did what she did for the benefit of both her children. This is in line to when she said: “why would I have to lose both my children in one day?

אחי רבקה, Rivkah’s brother. He had ample reason to go there if he had to flee some place, seeing his uncle was a brother of his mother. In this phrase Yaakov is mentioned ahead of Esau, although he was the younger, because his relationship to Rivkah who was also his mother was much closer than that of Rivkah to Esau her older son. Everyone of her family in Padan Aram was aware of their sister Rivkah’s special fondness for Yaakov.

Actually, the Torah found it necessary to explain why Isaac would send a pious son to a person such as Laban, seeing the latter was known to be wicked. True, Abraham had despatched Eliezer to take a wife for Isaac from the house of Bethuel; however, Bethuel was not a well known רשע, an evil person such as Laban. Besides, Abraham had never told Eliezer in so many words to go to the house of Bethuel whereas he had named Laban specifically as Jacob's destination. He instructed him to marry a daughter of the wicked Laban. By repeating that Laban was after all a brother of the pious Rebeccah the Torah alerts us to the probability that one or both of Laban's daughters could be just as pious as Rebeccah who stemmed from the house of Bethuel. One must not assume that the children and grandchildren of a wicked father or grandfather will automatically turn out to be of evil character. The Torah hints at this by reminding us that even Rebeccah was the mother of both a pious person such as Jacob and an evil person such as Esau.

You have to appreciate that in the period under discussion [prior to the revelation at Mount Sinai in which all the holy souls participated Ed.] the holy souls had not yet been separated from the regions in which they were imprisoned. Seeing that Abraham's family was recognised as a region where holiness had found a foothold, both he and Sarah being the first proselytes, anyone who would subsequently convert to Judaism would be called either Abraham if a male or Sarah if a female. It is a fact that holy members of a holy species look for other members of the same species. Abraham was still incomplete in this regard as neither he nor his son Isaac had as yet produced female offspring, i.e. holy female souls. Perhaps this is even the reason that we are told in Genesis 25,19: "Abraham begat Isaac," to remind us that he had succeeded only in producing a holy male soul. This situation still existed when Isaac sent out Jacob to secure a wife. The holy female souls had not yet been separated from their place of imprisonment. Isaac therefore had to send Jacob to search for his lost mate, i.e. the girl in whose body such a holy soul was imprisoned.

It was only during subsequent generations that Jews were no longer forced to roam the world to find their mates amongst the Gentiles. If nonetheless some "sparks" of holiness (holy souls in captivity) still exist amongst the Gentiles they will eventually convert and then be recognised as holy souls returning to their home (the Jewish people).

This raises the question of Abraham's insistence that Isaac not marry someone of Canaanite descent. Isaac also instructed Jacob not to marry a Canaanite. Bereshit Rabbah explains this prohibition to marry girls of Canaanite descent as being due to that tribe being cursed whereas Abraham's seed was blessed. Actually the words of the Midrash are somewhat obscure. In light of what we have written Abraham may have meant that Canaan [Noach's grandson] had been denied holy female souls amongst his seed as a result of Noach's curse. Hence there was no chance of finding the girl who possessed a holy soul amongst that tribe. This is the deeper meaning of Noach's curse, i.e. that Canaan would be denied access to holiness.

Whereas it is a fact that even nowadays we still experience conversions to Judaism amongst the Gentiles, it is remarkable that we have no record of members of the Canaanites ever converting to Judaism as did some Romans and other nationals, for instance. This proves our theory. This may also have been the real reason that the Torah commanded the Jewish people not to allow a single Canaanite soul to survive [in the campaign to capture the land of Israel] as we know from Deuteronomy 20,16. The Torah may have stressed the word "soul" in that verse to indicate that none of these people had a holy soul worth preserving. This was the difference between the Canaanites and nations such as Ammon and Moab.

Since G'd has revealed all this to us we must try and understand what purpose our subjugation by Canaanite tribes served (compare Judges 4,2), seeing that the purpose of exile is to extract the sparks of holiness that are scattered amongst the Gentiles, and there are no such "sparks" amongst the Canaanites. Our sages have told us in Pessachim 119 that "our forefathers did not depart from Egypt until they had turned Egypt into a trap that did not contain any bait and into a deep pool of water devoid of fish." The scriptural proof cited is Exodus 12,36: "they emptied Egypt." The Ari zal in his שער הגלגולים explains that it was necessary to empty Egypt of any such stray holy souls to make a return by the Jewish people in the future pointless. In view of all this, what purpose could subjugation of the Jewish people by the Canaanites have served if there was not even a chance to save some stray holy soul through all our suffering?

We find in לקוטי תורה פרשת מקץ that there are two different "sparks" of holy souls which are imprisoned in the קליפה. One is the type of soul which is freed through being "born," i.e. through entering a human body at birth. Examples of such souls are: Abraham, Sarah, Rebeccah, Rachel, as well as the soul of Rabbi Chaninah ben Tradyon which emanated from Shechem's having slept with Jacob's daughter Dinah. Ruth the Moabite and Naamon the Ammonite are also examples of such souls. The other type of holy soul imprisoned in the קליפה is one that is firmly attached to its קליפה and is not capable of exiting from its source unless its קליפה causes anguish to Israel. When that happens the holy soul trapped within the קליפה is released and able to return to its origin. Now we understand why there is a purpose to Israel being subjected to exile at the hands of such people [representatives of such קליפות Ed.]. The prophet Ovadiah said concerning such an exile: "This sickening exile for the children of Israel under the Canaanites as far as Tzorfat (Ovadiah 1,20)." This verse which uses the term החל must then be understood similarly to Daniel 8,27: נהייתי ונחליתי, "I was broken up and I was sick." Such an exile achieves its objective in a manner different from all other exiles of the Jewish people. When Ovadiah speaks of כנענים instead of בכנענים when describing that exile, as well as describing Canaan in the plural instead of in the singular as is the case with other nations where Israel was exiled, this may be a veiled reference to the "sparks" of holiness still hidden within the קליפה of Canaan which are known as כנענים. In short, Ovadiah describes the purpose of that exile as being the chance of "rescuing" holy souls that were still identified with כנענים prior to the ultimate redemption, thus enabling those souls to participate in that redemption.

וירא עשו כי ברך יצחק את יעקב, Esau realised that in the blessings which Yitzchok had given Yaakov the land of Canaan as his heritage had been included, and that Yitzchok also had given Yaakov specific instructions to get a wife from amongst the daughters of Lavan, the brother of his mother, and on no account to marry a local Canaanite girl. Esau therefore arrived at the conclusion that he had been deprived of his share in the land of Canaan as a penalty for having married Canaanite girls and that this was the reason why Yaakov had been successful in stealing the blessing of Avraham from him. He therefore decided to marry into Avraham’s family, i.e. a descendant of Ishmael. He thought to himself that perhaps by doing this he would restore his claim to Avraham’s heritage.

וירא עשו כי ברך יצחק, we see from here that in spite of Esau’s noting that his father had sent Yaakov all the way to Charan to prevent his marrying one of the Canaanite girls, as this was not in keeping with his blessing, he did not pay much attention to this, except that when he saw to what extent his father was unhappy about this כי רעות בנות כנען בעיני יצחק אביו, he thought that it was due to his wives opposing his parents’ lifestyles, etc., as documented I 26,35. In order to appease his parents he then went to Ishmael to marry Machalat. One of the reasons the Torah reports these details is to show that had Yitzchok objected to Esau’s marrying Canaanite girls in the first place his objection would have been effective. If Rivkah’s intervention was effective now when she remonstrated with her husband there is no reason to believe that it would not have been effective when Esau was about to get married.

וירא עשו כי ברך יצחק את יעקב, Esau saw that Isaac had blessed Jacob, etc. This verse does not seem to tell us anything new. If it were meant to tell us that this was the reason Esau took an additional non-Canaanite wife, verse eight would have sufficed for that purpose.

וירא, seeing that the sense of sight is a more reliable sense of perception than any of the other 4 senses, the Torah describes Esau’s realisation of what had transpired as being visual.

לקחת לו משם אשה, the fact that Yaakov was fleeing from Esau’s wrath had not become known, everyone thinking he had left to select a bride for himself.

We must therefore look for some meaning beyond the mere words of the verse. Esau was aware of Jacob's' departure and of its nature, i.e. that he thereby fulfilled both a commandment by his father and mother and the commandment to look for a wife. Knowing that Isaac had blessed Jacob to complete his undertaking successfully, Esau did not bother to pursue Jacob, realising that under such circumstances he would not succeed. Although Esau is reputed to have sent his eldest son Eliphaz to catch up with Jacob and to kill him (according to Rashi on Genesis 29,11), it is possible that he merely wanted to test his ability to vanquish Jacob on his journey. This scenario may have been re-enacted when the descendants of Esau (Amalek) attacked the Israelites after the latter had crossed the sea of reeds. Esau considered his son's ability to pursue Jacob successfully as greater than his own ability to do so.

וישמע יעקב AND THAT JACOB HEARKENED — This is to be connected with the proceeding statement, (v. 6) thus: And when Esau saw that Isaac had blessed Jacob and that he had sent him away to Padan-aram … and that Jacob had hearkened to his father and had gone to Padan-aram and that the daughters of Canaan were evil … then he also determined to take a wife from his own family and went to Ishmael.

וירא עשו כי רעות בנות כנען, Esau realised that the Canaanite daughters were displeasing in the eyes of his father. The Torah tells us here that Esau's only concern was the effect his Canaanite wives had on his father's sensibilities. The fact that these women were evil by nature did not bother him. His soul did not despise them. Subsequent events teach that the fact that Isaac disapproved of these women did not produce any results other than that Esau did not marry still more Canaanite girls. He did not consider divorcing these wives. Perhaps Esau's only concern was that his father's blessing would not be applicable to children born to him by his Canaanite wives, and that is why married a daughter of Ishmael to insure that his father's blessing would remain effective for his descendants.

וישמע, Esau also heard that Yaakov had obediently followed his father’s instructions to get himself a wife from that far away He “saw” now that רעות בנות כנען, that the daughters of the Canaanite whom he had married were considered as evil in the eyes of his father Yitzchok. Even though he had been fully aware of this already previously, seeing that his father had already protested his marrying these girls at the time, he had not made it a major issue to forbid him to marry them as he knew that his major seed would not be Esau. Now Esau realised how deeply his father resented these daughters-in-law seeing he had sent Yaakov such a long way to get himself a wife from Charan. This is why he went to Ishmael.

אחות נביות THE SISTER OF NEBAIOTH — By a logical inference from what is stated that she was “the daughter of Ishmael” would I not know that she was the sister of Nebaioth? But the words are added to tell us that Ishmael died after he had betrothed her to Esau and before her marriage, and that her brother Nebaioth gave her away in marriage And we may learn, also, that Jacob was at that period sixty-three years old For Ishmael was seventy-four years old when Jacob was born — since Ishmael was fourteen years older than Isaac, and Isaac was sixty when they (Jacob and Esau) were born, making seventy-four and his (Ishmael’s) years were one hundred and thirty seven — as it is said (25:17) “And these are the years of Ishmael etc.” — consequently when Ishmael died Jacob was sixty-three years old. We learn from this that he (Jacob) concealed himself in Eber’s School for fourteen years and only after that did he proceed to Haran. For before Joseph’s birth he had stayed in Laban’s house only fourteen years, as it is said (31:41) “I served thee fourteen years for thy two daughters and six years for thy flock”, and he received the sheep as wages only after Joseph was born, for it is said (30:25) “And it came to pass when Rachel had borne Joseph etc. [that Jacob wished to leave Laban and he agreed to remain with him on condition of receiving certain sheep as wages]. Now Joseph was thirty years old when he became ruler in Egypt, and from then until the time that Jacob came down to Egypt was nine years — seven of plenty and two of famine — and Jacob then said to Pharaoh (47:9), “The days of the years of my pilgrimage are a hundred and thirty years”. Go and calculate: the fourteen years he passed with Laban before Joseph’s birth, and the thirty years of Joseph’s life before he became ruler and the nine years from when he became ruler until the time that Jacob came to Egypt make fifty three years from the time he joined Laban until the time he came to Egypt But when he parted from his father he was sixty-three years old, as shown above, so that you have 116 years as his age when he came to Egypt, on the assumption that the fifty-three years he spent with Laban etc. began immediately after he had left his father. But he (Jacob) himself said to Pharaoh, “[I am] one hundred and thirty years”. So you see that fourteen years are missing on this assumption. Thus you learn that after he had received the blessings he concealed himself in Eber’ School for fourteen years (Megillah 17a). But he received no punishment for them (these fourteen years) on account of the merit of having studied the Torah in Eber’s School during that period For Joseph was separated from his father only twenty-two years — that is, from the age of seventeen to that of thirty-nine - corresponding to the twenty-two years during which Jacob was separated from his father and could not perform the duty of honouring him (by actively attending to his needs), viz, the twenty years he spent in Laban's house and the two years he passed in travelling home - for it is written (33:17) with regard to his journey homewards, "And Jacob built him a house and made booths for his cattle", and our Rabbis, of blessed memory, inferred (Megillah 17a) from this verse that during his travels he passed eighteen months at Succoth, since a house means a dwelling for the rainy season, and "booths" means for the summer time. And this statement that the study of the Torah protects one from punishment fits in with the calculation which we made above, based upon the Sacred Text, regarding the period from when he left his father until the time when he went down to Egypt at the age of 130 years, where we found a surplus of 14 years, so that he must have been absent from his father for 36 years. But we may regard it as certain that when on his journey to Laban he concealed himself in Eber's house it was for the purpose of studying the Torah with him and that because of the merit of studying the Torah he received no punishment for them (those fourteen years) so that Joseph was separated from him only twenty-two years "measure for measure"(Megillah 17a). Thus far (beginning at "But he received no punishment") is found in an old Rashi text.

אחות נביות, seeing that Nevayot was the oldest of Ishmael’s children the Torah calls Machalat “the sister of Nevayot,” (instead of merely “the daughter of Ishmael”). We find something parallel to this in Exodus 15,20 ותקח מרים הנביאה אחות אהרן, “Miriam the prophetess, sister of Aaron, took, etc.” The reason she is referred to in that fashion is that she was older than Moses but younger than Aaron. On the other hand, in a verse where both Moses and Aaron are mentioned together with Miriam, (Exodus Numbers 26,59) she is referred to as “their sister.” The Torah employs the same formulation in Genesis 36,22 where Timna is described as the sister of Lotan, seeing that Lotan was the oldest of his brothers as we know from verse 20 in that chapter, i.e. לוטן, ושובל, וצבעון, וענה.

וילך...אחות נביות. This Nevayot was an extremely well known personality, and so was his sister. (25,20) Compare also the formulation in Genesis 10,21 which shows that Yaphet was a well known personality.

We learn from this that he hid in the house of Eiver for fourteen years and afterwards went to Charan. Question: Why does Rashi here mention [only] Eiver, while when explaining the verse “She went to inquire of Hashem” (25:22), he mentions [only] Sheim, and when explaining the words “They clashed” (ibid), he mentions [both] Sheim and Eiver? The answer is: “They clashed” is a blanket statement. When she would pass houses of Torah study, Yaakov would agitate and rush to come out. Sheim and Eiver had different study halls, as it is written (25:27): “Yaakov was a man without fault, dwelling in tents,” [in the plural form. See Rashi there.] Assumedly, Scripture means that Yaakov agitated by both tents. But regarding “She went to inquire of Hashem,” Rivkah went to [only] one of them, and surely she went to Sheim, since he was the grandfather of Eiver, and greater than him. While here, Rashi mentions only Eiver because, by this time, Sheim had already died.

וילך עשו אל ישמעאל, “Esau went to Yishmael;” Our sages in the Talmud Baba Kamma 92, refer to a popular proverb saying that palms that do not produce fruit are usually found near other non fruitbearing trees. Rashi understands the proverb as an allusion to wicked people keeping company with other wicked people. Our verse describing Esau as going to Yishmael to choose another wife is quoted as the Scriptural source for this proverb. We have a similar verse in the Book of Prophets Judges 11,3 where Yiftach is described as having kept company with common criminals. A third verse confirming this is found in Scriptures where we are told that birds keep company with other birds of the same species, and human beings with like minded other human beings. (no source specified) Apparently the verse is found in the book ben sirs, a text often quoted by the Talmud but not part of the Holy Scriptures. ויקח את מחלת בת ישמעאל, “he married Machalat daughter of Yishmael.”Esau reasoned as follows: Yitzchok promised Yaakov the land of Canaan as the land of Israel in his second blessing. He also told him to take a wife from his own family but not from the Canaanites. Now that I married such women, this nullified my claim to the land of Canaan in the future. The only way he saw to overcome this obstacle was by marrying a descendant of Avraham, i.e. a daughter of Yishmael.

על נשיו BESIDES HIS FORMER WIVES — He added wickedness to wickedness for he did not divorce his first wives (Genesis Rabbah 67:13).

על נשיו, he married Machalat in addition not instead of his other wives. She was to represent a higher level of spirituality in Esau’s household. His other wives now occupied a socially inferior status.

ויצא יעקב AND JACOB WENT OUT— Owing to the fact that it was because the daughters of Canaan were evil in the eyes of Isaac, his father, that Esau went to Ishmael, Scripture broke off the narrative contained, in the section dealing with Jacob, and wrote (verse 6 till verse 9), “Now Esau saw that Isaac had blessed [Jacob] etc., that the daughters of Canaan were evil in the eyes of Isaac and so he went to Ishmael” and when it finished this (the account of Esau’s further marriage) it resumes the previous subject.

וילך חרנה, in order to go to Charan.

ויצא יעקב. Jacob departed. The reason that the Torah did not content itself with reporting Jacob's setting out for Padan Aram (28,5) and repeats his departure at this point is to allude to the encounters he had on the way. This, of course, raises the question why the Torah had first reported Jacob as already on the way to Padan Aram. This is especially curious in view of the encounter Jacob had on the way occurring before he even came close to Charan. Why did the Torah report events in a chronologically inverted manner? Besides, why did the Torah speak about חרנה instead of about Jacob being on the way לחרן? While it is true as we learn from Bereshit Rabbah 68,8 that any word which requires a letter ל as a prefix may instead have the letter ה as a suffix, the Torah surely does not employ these variations arbitrarily!

ויצא יעקב מבאר שבע וילך חרנה, it is the custom of Scriptures to first tell us the beginning and the end of something before elaborating on what occurred in the interval. Other examples of this literary style of the Scriptures are found in Genesis 24,10 ויקם וילך אל ארם נהרים, something that did not all occur on the same day. Similarly, we find the phrase צמח בלי יעשה קמח, “it grew without developing into flour,” without mentioning all the intermediary stages before relating the outcome. (Hoseah 8,7) The reason we have such formulations is because the author hastens to get to the point of the story.

ויצא יעקב...וילך חרנה. He set out with the destination Charan in his mind. Before he reached this destination the following incidents occurred.

ויצא יעקב מבאר שבע, ”Yaakov left Beer Sheva, etc. “ According to allegorical commentaries, the earth literally contracted beneath his feet so that the words וילך חרנה mean that he arrived at Charan on the same day. According to the plain meaning of the text, the verse described that Yaakov was headed for Charan. Other commentators understand the words וילך חרנה as telling us where Yaakov would take up residence from now on, the Torah then filling in what happened on the way before Yaakov reached his destination, his nocturnal encounter with the angels climbing the ladder, etc.

When it finished it went back to the previous subject. I.e., Rashi’s original question was: Why does Scripture need to repeat the point and write, “Yaakov left,” when it had already written (28:5), “Yitzchok sent Yaakov on his way”? Rashi answers: Since the narrative of Yaakov was interrupted by the subject of Eisov—and proceeds to explain why it was interrupted: since [Yitzchok sent Yaakov away,] Eisov understood that Yitzchok considered the daughters of Canaan evil, so Eisov went to Yishmael. After explaining why the narrative was interrupted, Rashi goes back to complete his explanation of why Scripture repeats the point: “When it finished...” (Kitzur Mizrachi, see there)

Obgleich es schon oben Raw Hirsch on Genesis 28: 5 heißt: וילך פדנה ארם so wird doch hier mit diesem Ausgang aus väterlichem Hause wieder begonnen, weil eben damit die selbständige Geschichte Jakobs sich einleitet.

ויצא יעקב, “Yaakov departed;” Yaakov is described as if he had been totally alone when leaving his father’s home, although no doubt he had taken along a dowry for his future wife (as had Eliezer at the time). The Torah avoided mentioning this as he was fleeing from the hatred of his brother and did not wish to make his departure public. [I have reconstructed the commentary, as the way it stands, the author claiming that this paragraph had not been written separately from the previous one, does not make sense, as in none of our versions of the Chumash is it not written in the normal manner, leaving space for several words both before and after this paragraph. Ed.]

ויצא יעקב, “Yaakov departed;” Rashi comments on these words that Yaakov was forced to leave the Holy Land on account of the women in that land being so unsuitable for him to marry. He means that the Torah had inserted matters in the story that were not connected to Yaakov starting with verse 6 of our chapter. Esau had not previously realised how opposed his father and mother had been to his wives. Now it resumes the story of Yaakov. If not for that, the name Yaakov would not have been needed at the beginning of this verse. Seeing that Yaakov left his home without fanfare, like a thief in the night, the Torah needed to refer to his departure as having been a fact. [The manner in which this paragraph is written in the Torah scrolls reflects the fact that it was not drawn to the reader’s immediate attention by a new line or new paragraph having been started. It begins at the end of a line after space has been left open for only three letters in the same line. All other portions, with the exception of Vayechi where there is only room for a single letter between the conclusion of the previous portion. Ed.] and the beginning of the new one, commence after a more distinct separation from the previous portion. One reason for this absence of a separation is to hint that Yaakov hid himself to study for fourteen years in the yeshiva of Ever. Another reason is to point out that his departure was hidden from Esav. An additional reason for the slim separation from verse is the fact that the story had been interrupted with telling us that his father had sent him to Padan Arom in order to take a wife there from Rivkah’s family. The departure is mentioned a second time, on account of the dream with the ladder, and his proceeding to his destination.

ויצא [AND JACOB] WENT OUT—It need have written simply “And Jacob went to Haran’’; why then does it mention his departure from Beersheba? But it intends to tell us that the departure of a righteous person from his city makes an impression. As long as a righteous man is in his city he is its glory and splendour and beauty; when he leaves it, there depart also its glory, its splendour and its beauty. This, too, is the meaning of (Ruth 1:7) “And she went forth out of the place”, stated in reference to Naomi and Ruth (Genesis Rabbah 68:6).

It had only to be written: “And Yaakov went to Charan...” [Rashi knows this] because it is written in another place, “Yaakov... went to Paddan Aram” (28:5), without writing beforehand, “Yaakov left.” Perforce, if he went to Paddan Aram, he left Beer Sheva! Here too, Scripture should have written only, “Yaakov went.”

The Torah intended to relate all that happened to Jacob from the time he left his home. The Torah reports that initially all Jacob did was depart, i.e. ויצא. This did not involve any travelling on his part. The person who walked i.e. וילך, was someone called חרנה. This "Charanah" set out from his home to come and welcome Jacob.

Wenn Abraham die Wurzel des jüdischen Volkes ist, Jizchak die Fortsetzung zum Stamm, so ist Jakob der eigentliche Stamm selbst. Darum sprach auch Jizchak zu ihm: ׳ויתן לך את ברכת אברהם וגו. Ist ja Jakob derjenige, der dem künftigen Volk Namen und Geschick vererben soll. Wir heißen nicht Abrahams Volk, sondern: Jisrael! Jakob sehen wir daher wie Abraham ein zweites לך לך erfüllen, sehen ihn, unsern nächsten Stammvater, auf den die ganze Geschichte von Abraham bis Jizchak hingearbeitet hätte, gleichfalls isoliert hinausziehen; jedoch ganz anders als Abraham. Abraham zog freilich in die Isolierung aus der Heimat; aber als Hausherr, mit Weib und Genossen, Ver wandten und Vermögen. Jakob aber sehen wir durch Verhältnisse bewogen, freiwillig hinauszuziehen, ohne das mindeste mit sich zu nehmen. Er ließ vielmehr alles dem älteren Bruder zurück, damit dieser erkennen konnte, es habe sich bei der בכורה um keinen materiellen Vortheil gehandelt.

באר שבע, a site especially suited for the swearing of oaths. According to a midrash, Yaakov avoided staying at that place so as not to afford Avimelech an opportunity to extend the validity of the oath Avraham had sworn and which Yitzchok had confirmed for another generation or more. The באר שבע mentioned he is located close to Chevron, not to be confused with the modern B’eer Sheva, located far more to the south. It was the באר שבע in which Avraham had sojourned for many years. It was very near קרית ארבע. The fact that the Torah reports Avraham returning from the Akeydah and settling in B’eer Sheva in 22,19 and 6 verses later that Sarah died and he went to Kiryat Arba to bury her, certainly suggests that these two locations could not have been far apart.

וילך חרנה means he went out TO GO TO HARAN.

This tells us that the departure... makes an impression... [Rashi is answering the question:] Why did Scripture write two departures, so to speak? It says, “Yaakov left,” and also, “He went towards Charan,” [which itself implies that he left.] Perforce [the answer is]: One teaches that his person departed, and the other teaches that the brilliance, splendor and glory departed. (Re’m) Maharshal comments on this: Re’m’s explanation differs from Bereishis Rabboh (68:7), which says: It is written ויצא (singular), and not ויצאו. But did not also camels and other animals leave with him? Perforce, it teaches: “Its brilliance has departed....” [Maharshal continues:] It seems that we need both the explanation of Re’m and of Bereishis Rabboh, as follows: Since it is written “Yaakov left” and also “He went,” it is appears to be redundant. Perforce, it comes to say that he left and not another. This raises a question: Did not also camels leave with him? Perforce, [it speaks specifically of him] because when Yaakov left, the glory and brilliance departed—which would not be so if someone else had left.

It also possible that the Torah meant to convey to us that Esau's anger חרונו, departed from him the moment Jacob departed from Beer Sheva. This is expressed by the words: וילך חרנה.

Jakob zieht hinaus, um ein jüdisches Haus zu gründen, und nimmt dazu nichts als sich, als das mit hinaus, was in seiner eigenen Persönlich- keit liegt — das ist das Faktum, mit welchem hier eingeleitet wird; denn alles, was fortan folgt, bewegt sich nur um die Gründung des Hauses. War ja Jakob der erste, der es aussprach, wie Gott vor allem im Hause zu suchen sei, der erste, der den großen Gedanken dachte: ׳בית אלקים ,בית א, Gottes Haus, der eben nichts anders sagt, als: dass der Kreis, wo die Menschenseelen keimen und blühen, wohin der Mensch das trägt, was er erwirbt und es in Menschenleben bauende Tätigkeit umsetzt, die größte und nächste Stätte der Gottes- offenbarung sei.

וילך חרנה, “he walked in the direction of Charan.” According to our sages in Sanhedrin 95 this means that he arrived in Charan still on the same day. He had travelled a number of days from Kiryat Arba. According to our sages it was17 days’ walk from Kiryat Arvaba to Charan, a distance which Yaakov covered in 12 hours.

While a righteous person is in the city, he is its glory... I.e., when a tzaddik is in the city, the men and people are also righteous because they are ashamed of him [and do not sin]. Also, because he reproves them.

According to the tradition quoted by our sages that Esau sent his son Eliphaz after Jacob, the words וילך חרנה may allude to Eliphaz hurrying after Jacob full of anger, i.e. בחרון. Perhaps the next verse in which Jacob is described as encountering a certain site, ויפגע במקום, is a hint that Jacob felt endangered and took refuge in prayer.

Was schon Noa bei der neuen Grundlegung der Menschengeschichte prophetisch geschaut, dass, wenn es der japhetischen Kultur gegeben ist, die Menschen für das Schöne zu gewinnen, und dadurch veredelnd auf sie einzuwirken, es Sem vorbehalten sei, "Hütten zu bauen, in welchen Gott wohnt", das trat zuerst durch Jakob in die Verwirklichung ein. Wenn jüdische Weisen den großen, die ganze Weltanschauung umwandelnden Satz gesprochen: עיקר שכינה בתחתונים, die Haupt- und ursprüngliche Stätte der Schechina ist auf Erden; oder: wenn Menschen gottselig ihre Augen himmelwärts drehen und meinen, Gott oben suchen zu müssen, lachen die Engel sie aus und nennen sie Distelköpfe ( 18 ס"ח); oder: wer im Freien wandert und lernt, und sich von dem Lernenl 1 seiner Lehre unterbricht und spricht, wie schön ist dieser Baum, wie schön ist dieses Feld — wer also in der Anschauung der gotttreuen Entwickelung eines Menschenlebens nicht eine alles andere verdunkelnd überstrahlende Herrlichkeit findet, so dass ihm dabei noch ein Auge für die Herrlichkeit der Natur bleibt — der hat fast sein Leben verwirkt (Aboth III 9), solche und ähnliche Aussprüche verdanken wir dem Geiste Jakobs. Unter dem Einfluss der japhetischen Kultur flüchtet man sich aus dem "prosaischen", "gewöhnlichen" Leben in die "Poesie" der schönen Natur. Jakobs Erben finden Gott und alles Herrliche am ersten und nächsten im Hause. Das ist der Gegensatz jüdischen und nichtjüdischen Wesens.

חרנה, Charan and Padan Arom are both the same town. They were known by two different names; one name is used in connection with its being the town where Lavan resided, (Genesis 27,43) and immediately afterwards the Torah called it Padan Arom (28,2).

Once he has left there, its glory has departed... I.e., the people of the city commit sins. We need not object that Yitzchok was still there, as Bereishis Rabboh already answered: The righteousness of one tzaddik is not like the righteousness of two tzaddikim.

So ging also Jakob von Beer Scheba nach Charan. באר שבע, das für Jizchak so bedeutungsvoll war, wo er inne geworden, wie mit ihm, wenngleich nicht עבדות, so doch schon גרות begonnen, wo er aber, als er sich freiwillig isoliert hatte, nicht bloß Ruhe, sondern auch Anerkennung gefunden, dieses Beer Scheba der Ruhe und der Ehren gab Jakob freiwillig auf und wanderte nach Charan.

“And she left the place,” which is written concerning Naomi and Ruth. Question: Why does Rashi bring a proof from Ruth, when in Ruth, he brings a proof from here? The answer is: Without the proof from Ruth, we might think that the two leavings written here are (1) the departure of his person and (2) the departure of his money, flock and cattle which left with him. Thus, Rashi brings proof from Ruth that the departure of a tzaddik makes an impression—as there, it cannot refer to the departure of their property. For it is written there that she said (Ruth 1:21), “Hashem has brought me back empty,” indicating clearly that she had no property. And in Ruth, Rashi brings a proof from here, because we might think that it makes an impression only if no tzaddik remains behind, as was the case there. But where there are tzaddikim, how do we know that the departure of a tzaddik makes an impression? Thus Rashi proves it from here, as Yitzchok and Rivkah remained, yet Yaakov’s departure still made an impression. (See Tzeidah L’Derech, who offers a lengthy explanation.)

He left in order to go to Charan. Rashi is answering the question: וילך חרנה seems to imply that he came to Charan. But how can this be? It is written after the verse, “He reached the place [of Mt. Moriah],” which occurred before he came to Charan! It is difficult to say that וילך means what it sounds like, that he got to Charan, and then Scripture goes back to explain the place he reached while traveling—this is not the norm of Scripture. Thus Rashi explains: “He left in order to go to Charan” [but he did not get there yet].

ויפגע במקום AND HE LIGHTED UPON THE PLACE — Scripture does not mention which place, but by writing בַּמָקוֹם the place it refers to the place mentioned already in another passage, viz., Mount Moriah of which it is stated (Genesis 22:4) “And he saw the place (המקום) afar off”.

ויפגע במקום, on his way he had an encounter in or near a town known as Luz.

And he arrived at the place and lodged there because the sun had set. Our Sages said (Chullin 91b) that this was Mount Moriah, as it says about it “…and he saw the place from afar.” (Bereshit 22:4) That place was called ‘the place’ without any specific name. Every place has an identifying name, derived from the name of its owner or its nature, but in this it was separate from all other places – the essence and name of this place was hidden as I explained above in the portion of Vayera (22:14). Therefore it is called simply ‘the place,’ because it has not yet received the name which will distinguish it from all other places.

ויפגע במקום, it happened that he came to a place he had not intended to go to at all. The meaning of the word המקום is that it was a place designed to accommodate travelers overnight. Every town had such an inn in its public square. This is also why the angels who came to Lot said (19,20) כי ברחוב נלין, “we will sleep in (the inn) in the public square. The same expression is also used in connection with the פלגש בגבעה in Judges 19,20 where we read רק ברחוב אל תלין “only do not spend the night in the public inn.”

And he arrived at the place – the word place is used three times in this verse, which is a hint to the three pilgrimage holy days on which his children would come up to that place in the future (see Chullin 91b)

ויפגע במקום. He encountered the site. The plain meaning of the verse is that Jacob arrived at an inhabited place. This is why the Torah concludes the paragraph by telling us that the town where Jacob found himself spending the night had previously been named Luz. The site had been a town then, and Jacob spent the night there.

יפגע במקום, while on his way Yaakov encountered one evening a site less than a day’s walk from Beer Sheva. Since it was already evening, the sun having set, he decided to spend the night there as he was too tired to walk any further. The reason why the letter ב in במקום is spelled with the vowel kametz, suggesting that the place was known, is that the location was known as a site where travelers from Beer Sheva would often spend the night.

ויקח מאבני המקום, “he took from the stones of that place, etc.” According to the plain meaning of the text, he took a single one of these stones. The sages explaining the allegorical meaning of the text, say that Yaakov took quite a number of such stones, but that these stones miraculously all became fused into a single stone.

וישכב במקום ההוא, ”he lay down in that place.” All the Torah had to write was: “he lay down,” just as the Torah wrote וילן שם, “he spent the night there.” Why did the Torah add the words: “in that place?” The words במקום ההוא are restrictive. The Torah means that all he did in that place was to lie down. But in another place, i.e. at the academy of Ever he spent 14 years studying Torah before journeying on to Charan and to Lavan.

Scripture does not identify which place... Rashi is answering the question: The verse is written to explain, not to be indefinite. Why then does it not specify the place? Thus Rashi explains: “It refers to the place mentioned elsewhere.”

ויפגע במקום kann nicht wohl heißen: er traf an einen Ort. Es müsste dann erstens heißen בְמקום, nicht פגע ב־ ;בַמקום heißt ferner nie ein bloßes Begegnen, sondern stets ein solches Zusammentreffen, bei welchem der eine auf den andern einen bedeutenden Eindruck macht. Daher ja auch das absichtlichste Aufsuchen mit Waffen oder Bitten: angreifen, oder in Jemanden dringen. Es muss also auch hier der Ort ein solcher gewesen sein, der ihn bedeutsam angezogen und gefesselt hat.

ויפגע במקום, “he prepared to pray intensely at a certain location (known to him as a suitable location for prayer);” according to our author, these words mean that he prepared to offer a prayer, and that we find this expression for preparing to pray also in Jeremiah 7,16: i.e. ואל תפגע בי, “and do not pray to Me (on behalf of your people)” According to the Talmud tractate B’rachot, folio 26, Yaakov “invented” the daily evening prayer preparing himself shortly before sunset before doing so. The recital of the k’riyat shma is to await the visibility of three stars in the sky before it may be recited.

וילן שם, “he spent the night there.” He was forced to do so by the prevailing conditions seeing that the sun had set. Concerning that line, כי בא השמש, Rav Yehudah (Pessachim 2) stated that a person should make it a rule to commence any journey on Tuesdays, the day of which the Torah writes twice that G-d saw that what He had created on that day was “good.” (Genesis 1,913) If the sun had not set unexpectedly, Yaakov would have kept walking to put more distance between himself and Esau.

ויפגע AND HE LIGHTED — similar are (Joshua 16:7) “and it reached (ופגע) unto Jericho”, and (Joshua 19:11) “and reached (ופגע) to Dabesheth”. Our Rabbis explained it in the sense of “praying”, just as (Jeremiah 7:16) “Neither make intercession (תפגע) to me”. Thus we may learn that Jacob originated the custom of Evening Prayer. Scripture purposely changed the usual word for “praying”, not writing יתפלל, “And he prayed” (which would have been the more appropriate word, but ויפגע which means to hit upon a place unexpectedly), to teach you also that the ground shrunk before him (the journey was miraculously shortened) as it is explained in the Chapter גיד הנשה (Chullin 91b).

כי בא השמש, and there had not been time enough for him to enter the town and find lodging while it was still daylight, as Rabbi Yehudah (Pessachim 2) says a person setting out on a lengthy journey should always select Tuesday as the day of his departure. [the relevance of this statement is provided by Rashi on that folio who adds that the traveler has to look for lodging before the sun sets. Ed.]

Another reason why it is called simply ‘the place,’ is because this is the place of the world. This is both because the foundation stone, from which the world was founded, is located there, and that even now the whole world rests on it because from there the Divine abundance pours out to the world. Ya’akov sensed that this would be the place of the Holy Temple when he saw that the sun set upon him before its proper time, because this holy place dims the sphere of the sun and does not require the sun. On the contrary - the sun needs it, as the Sages taught ‘R’ Avin said, we find that one who wants to make windows makes them wide on the inside and narrow on the outside in order to draw in the light from outside. But the windows of the Holy Temple were wide on the outside and narrow within – why? In order that the light would go out from the Temple and illuminate the world, as it says “…and the earth shone from His glory,” (Yechezkiel 43:2) and it is written “As a Throne of Glory, exalted from the beginning, so is the place of our Sanctuary.” (Yirmiyahu 17:12) See the version of this midrash in Yalkut parshat Tetzaveh 378. This is a proof that the sun does not light the Holy Temple, therefore the light of the sun dimmed immediately upon reaching this holy place, “…and it shall come to pass that at eventide it shall be light,” (Zechariah 14:7) because Gd shined the supernal light from this holy place until He appeared to Yaakov in a vision that night.

מאבני המקום, which had been placed there for the travelers to eat on and to sit on.

ויקח מאבני המקום, one of the stones of the place, for he had not entered the town to spend the night there but preferred to spend the night in the open field.. To that end he placed the stone under his head to serve him as a pillow and lay down there.

As in, “And it reached Jericho”... There it means to come to rest, not to meet.

The reason the Torah mentioned that the sun had set is simply that Jacob would have continued on his way in order to get closer to his eventual destination had it not been for the fact that nightfall required him to make camp. Bereshit Rabbah 68,9 explains that the definite article under the letter ב in the word במקום is an allusion to the site being Mount Moriah, the mountain destined for prayer and the eventual site of the Holy Temple. They base this on Genesis 22,4 where Abraham is reported as having recognised that site as the place where he was to offer up his son Isaac as a total offering to G'd. This is, of course, a homiletical approach. We naturally accept the words of our sages as absolutely true insights and they do not contradict our own explanation at all. Rashi has already explained that Mount Moriah had been transplanted for the occasion so that Jacob could offer up his prayer at that holy site.

Er geht ohne alle Mittel hinaus in die weite Welt, noch dazu zu einem Laban, dessen Charakter ihm wohl bekannt gewesen sein dürfte, geht, um sich eine Frau zu holen, war deshalb in seinen Gedanken ganz in Charan, dem Ziele seiner Reise, — da "ward er von dem Orte betroffen", festgehalten; die Bedeutung des Ortes, den er zu verlassen im Begriffe war, fesselte ihn. — "Er übernachtete dort, denn die Sonne war untergegangen". Der Eindruck, den der Ort auf ihn gemacht, war doch nicht ein so bedeutender, dass er dort geblieben wäre, wenn nicht die Sonne untergegangen wäre. Da nahm er von den Steinen des Ortes und setzte sie zum Schutze seines Kopfes zurechte, um während des Schlafes nicht von Menschen oder Tieren betreten zu werden. Es war dies das erste Haus, das er sich baute. Und obgleich er von der Bedeutung des Ortes lebhaft berührt gewesen — er war an der Grenze des Landes seiner Zukunft so schlief er doch an diesem Orte.

ויקח מאבני המקום, “he took some of the stones lying around on that place” (to make some kind of headrest for himself). According to tradition these stones had been part of the altar on which his father Yitzchok had been bound on the occasion of the Akeydah. According to Rashi, during the night these stones fused so that when he awoke there was only one stone. We have a tradition also that the meaning of this phenomenon was that Yaakov’s children as opposed to those of his father and grandfather, would all remain true to their father’s religious outlook. Some commentators (Rash’bam) claim that Yaakov had taken only a single stone and that this is the reason why the Torah wrote immediately after these words: (after he awoke) “he took the stone which he had placed as his headrest.”

כי בא השמש BECAUSE THE SUN WAS SET — It should have written, “The sun set and he tarried there all night”, but the words “he tarried there all night because the sun set”, imply that the sun set unexpectedly — not at its proper time — just in order that he should tarry there over night).

ויקח מאבני המקום, he took one...

There is another hint in what it says in the midrash Yalkut Shimoni 118, that the sun set two hours before its time. Why precisely two hours? There is a hint in this about the future, that so too will Israel’s sun set two years before its time. As Rashi explained in the Torah portion of Va'etchanan (Devarim 4:25) Gd brought the exile two years early, as its says “And the Lord hastened with the evil…” (Daniel 9:14) If this is so, then the Holy Temple which will be built in this place is destined to be destroyed two years before its sun has set. Therefore this hint came to Yaakov through the early setting of the sun, that there would be a sign in his hand that in the future the Holy Temple would be destroyed two years early. Therefore “…and he took some of the stones of the place and placed [them] at his head…” (Bereshit 28:11) They said in the midrash, brought by the Rama in Orach Chaim 555:2, that the pious and holy ones were accustomed to place a stone under their heads when they laid down on the night of Tisha B’Av. He said that they have a support from this verse “…and he took some of the stones…” because Yaakov saw the destruction. And who told the writer of this midrash that Yaakov saw the destruction? Certainly they learned this from the fact that the sun set two hours early, as I said.

The Sages explained it as a term for prayer... Accordingly, במקום means “to Hashem,” Who is called מקום (“Place”) since He is the world’s place. (Re’m)

וישכב במקום ההוא. He lay down on that site. The Torah reports that Jacob dreamed and wants us to know that it is not the lying down that inspired the dream but במקום ההוא, the nature of the site.

וישכב במקום ההוא, “he lay down in that place.” The Torah emphasises that he lacked the normal means to ensure a good sleep, i.e. sheets, cushion and a blanket to cover his body, even though he was very close to a town which could have furnished these items. This is why the Torah bothers to inform us that the name of that town used to be Luz when it was first founded. He was not forced to “rough” it, but seeing that he intended to get up early in the morning to continue on his journey, he chose to do this. We have proof of this when the Torah continued after relating his dream (18), with the words: וישכם יעקב בבקר, “Yaakov arose early in the morning.” If he had stayed at an inn in the town, he could not have left that early as the gates of the town were not yet open. An alternate exegesis: the reason why he stayed outside of the town overnight is that he did not know where the entrance to the town was located as we know from Judges 1,24, where it is written concerning Luz: הראנו נא מבא העיר, “please show us where the entrance to the town is located.”

וישם מראשתיו AND PUT THEM FOR A RESTING PLACE FOR HIS HEAD — He arranged them in the form of a drain-pipe around his head for he was afraid of wild beasts (Genesis Rabbah 68:11). They (the stones) began quarrelling with one another. One said, “Upon me let this righteous man rest his head”, and another said “Upon me let him rest it”. Whereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, straightway made them into one stone! This explains what is written (Genesis 28:18), “And he took the stone that he had put under his head” (Chullin 91b).

... of the stones lying around in that location, as testified to in verse 18 when the Torah speaks of את האבן, “the stone.”

and he took some of the stones of the place and placed them at his head - After it was known to him that this place would be the House of Gd which dims the sphere of the sun, therefor he took some of the stones of the place and set them as a guard to his head in order to show how he cherished their sanctity as it says “For Your servants desired its stones…” (Tehillim 102:15) He took twelve stones parallel to the twelve tribes as it says in the midrash (Bereshit Raba 68:11) that the stones argued, each one saying ‘let the righteous one rest his head on me!’ until they became one stone. This was a hint for the future as the writer of the Guide to the Perplexed wrote, that this is why the Holy One hid this place which would be the location of the Holy Temple and the King’s palace – in order that there not be argument between the tribes, each desiring that holy place to be theirs. Also for the sake of peace, as it says “But only to the place which the Lord your God shall choose from all your tribes…” (Devarim 12:5) And it is written “But only in the place the Lord will choose in one of your tribes…” (Devarim 12:14) How is this? When David purchased the threshing floor from Aravna the Yevusi, he collected the money from all of the tribes, as Rashi explains there (see Shmuel II 24:24). If this is so, then the argument between the stones which ended in their becoming one stone was sign for the future, that so too will be the argument between the crown jewels, the twelve tribes of Gd, that each tribe will say let the righteous One of the world rest His head upon me, referring to the Holy Temple as it says “As a Throne of Glory, exalted from the beginning, so is the place of our Sanctuary.” (Yirmiyahu 17:12) In the end they were made as one stone when David collected the gold from all of them. About this stone it is said regarding the building of the Second Temple “Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you sink to a plain! He will bring out the stone of the main architect, with shouts of grace, grace to it.” (Zechariah 4:7) When it says that He will bring out the stone of the main architect (even rosha) it means the stone which was at the head (rosh) of Yaakov. Bring it out to build the foundation for the Palace of Gd. Yaakov made a bed from it to lie upon in order that it be a sign that this will be 'the bed which is to Shlomo' (Song of Songs 3:7) – the king to whom peace belongs, as Rashi explained in Shir HaShirim on the verse “Behold the bed of Shlomo…”

Scripture used an alternate word and did not write ויתפלל to teach you... [Rashi is answering the question:] In the verse אל תפגע בי, it is understandable [that it says תפגע], as it conveys: do not come to Me to entreat. But for [Yaakov praying to] Hashem, this meaning does not fit, so why does Scripture use the alternate word? [Rashi answers:] Perforce, because פגיעה also means to meet, thus teaching that the earth shrank [and Yaakov “met” Mount Moriah which came toward him]. But if our verse would have said ויפגוש [the usual word for “meet”], we would not have learned anything about prayer. Therefore the verse writes ויפגע, which conveys both meanings. (Maharshal)

The wording also alludes to what we are told in Chullin 91, that the earth under Jacob folded up, i.e. that Jacob lay down on that whole strip of earth from Moriah to Luz. This is what G'd referred to in verse 13.

וישכב במקום ההוא AND [HE] LAY DOWN IN THAT PLACE —The word ההוא, that, has a limitative force: in that place he lay down to sleep, but during the previous fourteen years when he sat under his teachers in the School of Eber he never slept at night for he was incessantly engaged in the study of the Torah (Genesis Rabbah 68:11).

It should have said “And the sun set” and he “spent the night there”... Although there is no difference [in meaning] between ויבא השמש וילן שם and וילן שם כי בא השמש, [Rashi is saying that] it should have been in [chronological] order, as in (Shoftim 19:9) it is written: “Behold, now the sun has waned and it is setting. Please remain overnight.” Perforce, our verse conveys that the sun set suddenly. A further explanation: It is written, “He spent the night there because the sun set,” implying that otherwise he would have traveled on. This proves there still was much daytime left. If so, why did the sun set [early]? Perforce, “The sun set... so that he should stay there overnight.” This is Rashi’s explanation in Sanhedrin 91b.

He made them in the form of a drainpipe around his head... Otherwise it should say, “He took a stone.”

They began to argue with one another... [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, the verses contradict one another. Here it is written, “He took some of the stones of that place,” i.e., many stones. But then it is written (v. 18), “And he took the stone.” Perforce, at first there were many stones, but “they began to argue....” You might ask: How does Rashi know he took many stones? Perhaps he took one stone from among (מאבני) the stones of that place, and that is why it is written later, “And he took the stone.” Tosafos answer this in Chulin 91b: then Scripture should have written ויקח אבן, as in (Shemos 17:12) ויקחו אבן וישימו תחתיו . This is because our verse is written to explain, not to be indefinite. Perforce, since it is written מאבני without further explanation, it means [he took] many stones.

עלים וירדים ASCENDING AND DESCENDING — It states first ascending and afterwards descending! Those angels who accompanied him in the land of Israel were not permitted to leave the Land: they ascended to Heaven and angels which were to minister outside the Land descended to accompany him (Genesis Rabbah 68:12).

AND BEHOLD A LADDER SET UP ON THE EARTH AND THE TOP OF IT REACHED TO HEAVEN; AND BEHOLD THE ANGELS OF G-D ASCENDING AND DESCENDING ON IT. In a prophetic dream, He showed Jacob that whatever is done on earth is effected by means of the angels, and everything is by decree given to them by the Supreme One. The angels of G-d, whom the Eternal hath sent to walk to and fro through the earth,¹Zechariah 1:10. would not do anything minor or major until they return to present themselves before the Master of the whole earth, saying before Him, “We have traversed the earth,²See ibid., Verse 11. and behold it dwells in peace, or is steeped in war and blood,” and He commands them to return, to descend to the earth and fulfill His charge. And He further showed him [Jacob] that He, blessed be He, stands above the ladder, and promises Jacob with supreme assurance to inform him that he will not be under the power of the angels, but he will be G-d’s portion,³Deuteronomy 32:9. and that He will be with him always, as He said, And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee wherever thou goest⁴Verse 15 here. for his [Jacob’s] excellence is superior to that of the other righteous ones of whom it is said, For He will give His angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.⁵Psalms 91:11.
And in the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer the Great⁶Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, 35. this vision was akin to the one seen by Abram at the time of the covenant “between the parts”⁷Above, 15:9-18. for He also showed Jacob the dominion of the Four Kingdoms,⁸See Ramban above, 14:1 and 15:12. The Four Kingdoms represent the great world powers seen in a vision by Daniel (Chapter 7), who in succession will subject Israel until such time when Israel’s final and complete deliverance will be effected by the Messiah. The power of the fourth kingdom, that of Rome, is still in sway. See Ramban further at the beginning of Seder Vayechi. Jacob, like Abraham, was thus shown the events that will happen to his descendants during all the generations of their exiles. their ascent and descent. This is the meaning of angels of G-d (mentioned here), just as it is said in the visions of Daniel: the prince of the kingdom of Greece,⁹Daniel 10:20. and the prince of the kingdom of Persia.¹⁰Ibid., Verse 13. Similarly, the angels mentioned in the verse before us are to be understood as the representatives of the various nations. And He promised him that He, exalted be He, will be with him wherever he will go among the nations, and He will guard him and rescue him from them. Thus the Rabbis have said:⁶Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, 35. “The Holy One, blessed be He, showed him the Four Kingdoms, their dominion and their destruction. He showed him the prince of the kingdom of Babylon ascending seventy rungs¹¹Symbolic of the seventy years of the Babylonian exile. and then descending the ladder. Then He showed him the prince of the kingdom of Media ascending one hundred and eighty rungs¹²See my Hebrew commentary, (p. 158, n.12), which asserts that the correct reading is: “He showed him the prince of the kingdom of Media going up fifty-two rungs and then descending. And He showed him the prince of the kingdom of Greece going up one hundred-eighty rungs and then descending.” The number of rungs represent the amount of years that these kingdoms held sway over Israel. and then descending. And then He showed him the prince of the kingdom of Edom ascending and not coming down. Jacob then said to the prince of Edom, Yet thou shalt be brought down to the nether-world.¹³Isaiah 14:15. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to [the prince of Edom], Though thou make thy nest as high as the eagle, etc.”¹⁴Obadiah 1:4. And though thou set it among the stars, I will bring thee down from thence, saith the Eternal.

מוצב, which had been erected by others. When the Torah later speaks about ה' נצב in verse 13, the meaning is that He supported Himself, had not been placed there, [although the letter נ at the beginning of that word suggested a passive mode. Ed.] We encounter similar formulations with the words מוקטר offered as incense by others, or מוגש, presented by others in Maleachi 1,11 whereas the words נגש אל הערפל in Exodus 20,21 mean that Moses approached the cloud under his own initiative. Also the expression אשר אתה מראה בהר (with the vowel kametz under the letter א) is also referring to someone else showing Moses the image. (Exodus 25,40) On the other hand, the expression נראה in Genesis 12,7 refers to a vision generated by G’d Himself.

ויחלום והנה סולם, And he dreamed that there was a ladder, etc. Inasmuch as many dreams contain matter without significance, the Torah added the word והנה to indicate that in this dream every detail appeared to Jacob as especially vivid and significant. He had total recall of everything he dreamed and referred to each detail later on. This is why the word והנה is repeated before every segment of the dream. The Torah thereby characterises the dream as a prophetic revelation.

ויחלום, והנה סלם, there are many different opinions among our sages how best to explain this dream, as well as among other readers of the Bible. Some say that this was a preview of the revelation at Mount Sinai and that the numerical value of the letters in the word סלם equals that of the word סיני (130)

והנה מלאכי אלוקים עולים ויורדים..והנה ה' נצב עליו, this foreshadowed the future when the “angels of G’d” the superpowers who had become very powerful in our world would begin their decline and end up at the bottom of the rungs of the ladder. The Lord G’d Who stood above the ladder is the symbol of the promise that G’d will never abandon the Jewish people, as we know from Jeremiah 46,28 כי אעשה כלה בכל הגויים ואותך לא אעשה כלה, “even when I utterly destroy all the gentile nations, I will not destroy you.”

ויחלום, והנה סולם מוצב ארצה, “he dreamt, and here in his dream there was a ladder which had been placed on earth, etc.” There are numerous allegorical explanations which our sages have offered in explaining the purpose of this phenomenon in Yaakov’s dream. Some say that the ladder represents Mount Sinai, and that the angels ascending and descending on it symbolise Moses and Aaron. Others believe that the ladder represents an altar and that the angels represent the priests, who in real life, ascend and descend from the altar. I believe that the correct explanation is that G’d showed Yaakov by means of a dream, that whatever occurs on earth is engineered by angels carrying out G’d’s will, and though G’d had known long in advance whatever would come pass, He showed Yaakov an image purporting the angels telling G’d that they had now carried out His will. Moreover, He wanted Yaakov to know that although the angels are His messengers, carrying out His will, this did not mean that G’d personally, left the earth and the angels to their own devices, but that He took an ongoing interest in the affairs unraveling on earth, and was ever ready to intervene when the need would arise. Thus He assured Yaakov of His ongoing protection on the journey fraught with danger that he had undertaken. In Bereshit Rabbah 68,13 we are also told that the angels ascending and descending represented the ascent and subsequent descent of the 4 super powers which ruled over the Jewish people in their respective exiles.

It states עולים first and יורדים afterwards... Rashi is answering the question: Why does it not say “descending” first, since the angels dwell in heaven?

סלם von סלל und ם als Bildungsbuchstabe, wie שָׂפָם ,חנם ,ריקם (von סלל (שפה: ihinaufsteigen. Es wird ihm also סלם, eine Leiter gezeigt, also, dass überhaupt eine Verbindung von der Erde aufwärts sei; — und sie ist: מֻצב, sie ist gestellt, sie ist nicht von selbst und nicht zufällig da, sie ist durch eine höhere Macht gestellt, und zwar אַרצָה zur Erde, also die Macht und der Wille, die sie gestellt, befinden sich nicht auf Erden, sondern in der Höhe, sie ist aus der Höhe hinab bis auf die Erde gestellt; — וראשו מגיע השמימה, ihre Bestimmung ist gleichwohl nicht zunächst nur vom Himmel zur Erde, sondern: von der Erde aufwärts zum Himmel zu steigen; — dies ist die eine Gedankenreihe, die ihm gezeigt wird! Also zuerst überhaupt, dass das irdische Gesamtleben, somit auch das des Menschen, somit auch das seine, sein Ziel nicht in der Ebene, — nicht von Beer Scheba nach Charan, — sondern in der Höhe und aus der Höhe habe; dass alles Irdische von oben geladen sei, sich zu einem himmlischen Höheziel emporzuarbeiten; dass dieses Ziel und dieses Aufwärtsstreben zu ihm kein von Menschen erfundenes Märchen, kein auf Erden entstandener Wahn sei, sondern die wesenhafteste, vom Himmel selbst gestellte Realität habe und unmittelbar auf Erden anzustreben sei. (Vergl. die Sätze 13סולם זה סיני — ,סולם זה כבש מוצב ארצה זה מזבח :ב"ר und חולין ‎91 b. רחבו של סולם שמנה אלפים פרסאות , also weit über die irdische Welt hin reicht die Leiter und überall ist ihre unterste Sprosse zu ersteigen.)

והנה סלם, “and here there was a ladder;” the numerical value of the letters in the word סלם=130, the same numerical value as the letters in the word סיני, “Sinai;” This was a hint that the Jewish people would receive the Torah at Mount Sinai. (B’reshit Rabbah, 68,12)

עולים ויורדים בו, “ascending and descending on it.” They first ascended and then descended; afterwards they remained at the bottom. They behaved like a human being who climbs the ladder in his house to get to the loft, and then descends on it again. This is what led Yaakov to understand that this location was intended to become G-ds house on earth. He surmised that for the time being this was the residence of the angels he had seen. Angels, servants of the Lord, must have their residence in G-d’s house. If G-d was to establish a residence on earth also, they would have to ascend to heaven first in order to accompany their Lord to His alternate residence. If these angels were meant to only briefly remain on earth, the Torah should have described their movements as יורדים ועולים, “descending and then ascending, “(back to their residence) The Jerusalem Targum understands the function of these angels as having been to accompany Yaakov from here on in wherever he went. The reason that they ascended was to relay their messages to other angels in the celestial spheres that they had been assigned to descend to earth. They were to show them that there was a human being of the stature of Yaakov on earth. They would recognise him at once as a likeness of his features had long been engraved at the base of G-d’s throne.

עולים ויורדים, according to the plain meaning of the text there is no need to read any special message into the word עולים, “climbing,” appearing before the word יורדים, “descending.”

מוצב ארצה וראשו מגיע השמימה, at the revelation of Mount Sinai the angels and the Jewish people were of the same spiritual level, even though Moses and Aaron are described as ascending towards heaven, whereas the angels were descending towards earth. [the thought that Aaron too was ascending toward heaven is quoted in Shemot Rabbah 19,3. Ed.]

והנה eine zweite Gedankenreihe: er sieht מלאכי אלקי׳, sieht Engel Gottes, Boten Gottes, Wesen auf Erden, die auf Gottes Geheiß Wirkungen im irdischen Leben hervorrufen, sieht sie hinaufsteigen und herabsteigen, sieht sie sich oben die Weisung für ihr Wirken hier unten holen, und sieht sie: בו wider ihn herabkommen (— wie es nach einer Auffassung bedeutet, die uns durch das Folgende gerechtfertigt scheint —). Er sieht, dass sich das Geschick des Menschen nicht auf Erden durch die sinnliche Welt vollzieht, sieht Boten Gottes und gewahrt, dass diese Gottesboten hinaufsteigen und schauen dort das Bild, das Ideal des Menschen, wie er sein sollte, und steigen hinab und vergleichen damit das Bild dessen, was und wie er ist, um nach diesem Maßstabe ihm — freundlicher — feindlicher — zu begegnen. Und so waren sie auch — um mit den Worten der Weisen zu sprechen — עולין ומסתכלין בדיוקנו של מעלה ויורדין ומסתכלין בדיוקנו שלמטה בעו לסכיניה (Chulin 91 b.) hinaufgestiegen und hatten das Bild von ihm in der Höhe betrachtet, und waren hinabgestiegen und betrachteten sein Bild nun hier unten, wie dies in ב"ר weiter ausgeführt ist: ישראל אשר בך אתפאר את הוא שאיקוניך חקוק למעלה עולין למעלה ומוצאין איקונין שלו ויורדין למטה ומוצאין אותו ישן, "sie fanden oben das Bild von ihm als Gott verherrlichender Israel und stiegen hinab und fanden ihn schlafend" — schlafend an der Stätte, die ihm den Gedanken an diese Bestimmung und ihn mit diesem Gedanken hätte wachrufen und wach halten müssen — "sie wollten ihn darum gefährden", מיד והנה ד׳ נצב עליו, sofort:

והנה סולם מוצב ארצה , “and (in his dream) he saw a ladder planted on the earth;” at the burning bush, where Moses had his first communication from G–d, the fire from that bush rose to the heart of the heavens. At that time Moses was told specifically that the Israelites, Yaakov’s descendants shall worship G–d there.

והנה מלאכי אלוקים, “and lo, prophets of G–d,” i.e. Moses and Aaron, would climb up and down there.

והנה ה' נצב עליו, and lo, the Lord was standing on top of it. This is what is meant when in Exodus 19,20, the Torah writes that the Lord descended to Mount Sinai.

'ויאמר אני ה, “He said: I am the Lord, etc.;” this parallels what Hashem said at the beginning of the Decalogue in Exodus, 20,2. An alternate interpretation; the word סולם is to be understood literally, as “ladder;” the words: והנה מלאכי אלוקים, describe G–d as showing Yaakov the spiritual representative of Egypt in the celestial spheres, (as also stated in the commentary by Nachmanides) and how that empire after first rising to great heights was brought down completely. A third interpretation: these angels were the angels that had come to Sodom to rescue Lot, and had been demoted by G–d after describing themselves to Lot as initiating the destruction of Sodom, by telling Lot that they had come to destroy Sodom, as if they had the power to do this instead of simply carrying out G–d’s command. (Genesis 19,14,) They had also revealed some of G–d’s secrets without having permission to do so. According to tradition, their punishment had been to be banned from the celestial regions. Now, 138 years later, they had been allowed to return to their places in the celestial regions.

נצב עליו STOOD ABOVE HIM to guard him (Genesis Rabbah 69:3).

הארץ אשר אתה שוכב עליה לך אתננה ולזרעך, if you were to say that this promise entails so very little, I am adding that your descendants will spread out in all directions of the globe.

הארץ אשר אתה שוכב עליה, a reference to the region currently known as “the land of Canaan,”

והנה ה׳ נצב עליו. And here G'd was standing upon it. The word עליו also refers to Jacob, i.e. that he perceived G'd as standing above him. This is in line with what Bereshit Rabbah 82,6 tells us that the patriarchs were the carriers of G'd's presence. Inasmuch as Jacob was the fourth "leg" of that מרכבה [perceived here as a chair G'd is transported on, Ed.] G'd leaned more heavily on Jacob than on the other three "legs." The singular עליו is justified then.

והנה ה' נצב עליו, this would be a reference to Exodus 19,20 where we read וירד ה' על הר סיני, “the Lord descended on Mount Sinai.” Others say that G’d showed Yaakov details of the sacrificial service in the Temple, the ladder serving as a model of the function of the altar.

והארץ אשר אתה שוכב עליה, “and the earth that you are lying upon, etc.” What did G’d’s gift amount to, seeing that Yaakov occupied only 4 cubits square of earth on the spot he lay on? Bereshit Rabbah 69,4 quotes an opinion according to which G’d had compressed the entire surface of the Land of Israel beneath Yaakov at the time when he had this dream. He meant to show him that the conquest of the land would not be difficult at all when the time came. My sainted father, the רא'ש, explained the plain meaning of our verse as follows: the location where Yaakov was sleeping was in fact the site of the future Temple, as pointed out by the Midrash; whereas Avraham had described that site as הר, “mountain,” i.e. something not easily accessible, Yaakov viewed it as בית, a house, a place where everyone can feel at home, in this instance the אבן השתיה, stone covering the orifice in the earth, the “navel” of the earth in the parlance of our sages, leading to the innermost part of earth, a site covered by the altar in the future. Seeing that whatever blessing there is on earth is distributed centrifugally to all parts of the earth, Yaakov was in fact lying on the entire earth. (By the way, Yitzchok had viewed the site of the temple, i.e. G’d’s manifestation on earth as שדה, as we know from Genesis) [whereas originally, G’d walked on earth just as did man; He withdrew after Adam’s sin, and He kept withdrawing until Avraham reversed the process, beginning with viewing His manifestation while on earth, yet not easily accessible. Ed.] G’d’s blessing comparing Yaakov’s offspring to the dust of the earth, meant that just as dust scatters all over the globe, so Yaakov’s offspring would scatter all over the globe at one time or another.

והנה ה’ נצב עליו “and here the Lord was standing above it, etc.” According to the plain meaning of the text the word עליו refers to the ladder. A kabbalistic approach: the word עליו refers to Yaakov, i.e. G’d appeared to Yaakov as if He were standing above him.” What the Kabbalists are trying to tell us is that Yaakov viewed himself in this dream as the carrier of the שכינה, the Divine Presence, and its entourage. The Torah would thereby have compared Yaakov to one of the cherubs of whom it has been said וירכב על כרוב ויעוף, (Samuel II 22,11) “He mounted a cherub and flew.” The patriarchs are the true מרכבה, the “chariots” supporting the שכינה, the benevolent Presence of G’d. They performed a task on earth which the angels perform in the celestial spheres. Kabbalists (True scholars, i.e. the sages of the Talmud) have expressed this thus when speaking about the כרובים, cherubs: The face of a human being is considered the major “face,” whereas the face of the cherub is considered as the “minor” face. (compare Rashi, Sukkah 5B where the cherubs on the lid of the Holy Ark are discussed). According to Kabbalists it was this idea David referred to in Psalms 104,25 where he referred to חיות קטנות עם גדולות, “small and large חיות.” Let me enlighten you on this subject. We already mentioned that Yaakov’s facial features are engraved on G’d’s throne (Bereshit Rabbah 68,12 and that the angels descended to compare Yaakov’s sleeping countenance with that engraved on G’d’s throne). This was the reason the Torah describes him as יושב אהלים, “dweller in tents,” (25,27) i.e. he was “at home” both in a celestial residence as well as in a terrestrial one. This idea is expressed even more forcefully in connection with the revelation at Mount Sinai where the “nobles” of Israel (Exodus 24,10) are described as having a vision of אל-הי ישראל ותחת רגליו, “of G’d, and Israel who is at His feet.” This is also what Yaakov had in mind when he said to Rachel who had demanded that he make children for her (30,2) התחת אל-הים אנכי. This statement was not a rhetorical question but he explained to Rachel that he was not G’d-like, but his image was inscribed below, i.e. beneath the throne of G’d who has the power to bestow children.

To guard him. [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, what does נצב עליו mean? [“Above the ladder.” But this cannot be, as] the whole world is filled with His Glory! Perforce, it refers to [guard] Yaakov. You might ask: Why did Hashem need to guard him now, and not before? The answer is: Yaakov’s image is inscribed on the Throne of Glory. The angels now saw Yaakov and realized that it was his image [inscribed on the Throne]. They were jealous of him, as he was closer to the Throne than they were, and wanted to harm him. Thus, Hashem protected him. Another answer: The angels of the Land were ascending, and the angels of outside the Land, descending. In between [the changing of the guard], while no angels were with him, Hashem guarded him. (Re’m)

והנה, eine dritte Gedankenreihe: ד׳ נגב עלין. Man nimmt dies gewöhnlich für: stand auf ihr, auf der Leiter, und das gibt dann ein recht schönes, dramatisches Bild: der schlafende Jakob zu Füßen der Leiter, die auf- und absteigenden Engel an der Leiter und die Gottesherrlichkeit hoch oben über der Leiter. Allein נגב על־ bezeichnet fast überall in תנ"ך nicht die räumliche Basis, auf welcher jemand steht, sondern das Objekt, auf welches er seine geistige Tätigkeit, seine Aufmerksamkeit gerichtet hat. 1) הנצבים עליו. B. M. 24, 13) נצב על עין (das. 45, 1) נגב בליך (2. B. M. 18, 14) 4) נגב על עלתו. B. M. 23, 6) נגב עליהם (Sam. I. 19, 20) und sonst, bezeichnet das Stehen neben einem Gegenstand mit auf denselben gerichteter Aufmerksamkeit. נצב selbst ist nicht das einfache Stehen, sondern mit geweckter Kraft und Energie irgendwo stehen, daher מצב: Posten. Ferner scheint hier ׳ה im Gegensatz zu ׳אלקי in מלאכי אלקי׳ zu stehen. Die Engel sind Gottesboten der Weltordnung, die er geschaffen und erhält und in welcher alles mit dem Maßstabe des Rechts gemessen und gewogen wird. Ihnen ist jeder und jedes nur das, was er im Augenblick darstellt (— vergl. 2. B. M. 23, 21. לא ישא לפשעכם כי שמי בקרבו). — Aber ד׳ steht bei ihm, ה׳ , jene Liebe, die sich vor allem in Erziehung des Menschen offenbart, die nicht nur Vergangenheit und Gegenwart vor Augen hat, sondern auch die Zukunft schaut und schafft, und in jedem gegenwärtigen Menschen den künftigen Menschen erkennt, und wenn sie in ihm einen reinen Keim erblickt, diesen Keim erhält und entwickelt.

והנה ה' נצב עליו; we do not find that either Avraham or Yitzchok had been granted such a vision of Hashem. On this verse Rabbi Simmon comments that it is not the custom for a king to personally supervise the plowing of his field or its being sowed with seed. He does not do so until the corn has been harvested. Avraham had been told by G–d to move to the land of Canaan (Genesis 12,1); of Yitzchok we have been told that he sowed seed in the land of the Philistines (Genesis 26,12). Now that the time had arrived for G–d to “harvest” what He had planted, Yaakov was made aware of this. Compare: Jeremiah, 2,3: קרש ישראל לה', ראשית תבואתה, “Israel was holy for the Lord, the first of His harvest.” (Tanchuma, parshat Miketz, section 5)

אברהם אביך, “your father Avraham;” we learn from here that grandchildren are to treated as if they were one’s children.

ואלהי יצחק AND THE GOD OF ISAAC — Although we do not find in the Scriptures that God associates his Name with that of the righteous whilst they are yet alive by writing, “The God of so-and-so”, — because it is said (Job 15:15) “Behold He putteth no trust even in His holy ones” — here, however, He associated his Name with that of Isaac because his eyes had become dim and he was confined to the house, so that he might be regarded as dead and as though the evil inclination had already passed away from him and he was unlikely to sin any more (Midrash Tanchuma, Toldot 7).

לך אתננה, so that you will be considered as a “prince of G’d,” as was your grandfather (23,6) as well as your father (26,28)

וראשו מגיע השמימה, an allusion to the smoke from the sacrifices rising from the altar in the Temple, especially that of the daily incense offering. These would be received with goodwill by the Lord.

אני ה’ אלוקי אברהם אביך ואלוקי יצחק, I am the Lord G’d of Avraham and the G’d of Yitzchak.” According to the plain meaning of these words G’d here assures Yaakov that He will give the land to Yaakov and his descendant, that he will be with him and will protect him in all his undertakings, similar to Psalms 91,11 כי מלאכיו יצוה לך לשמרך בכל דרכיך, “for He will command His angels to protect you on all your paths.” The reason that the pronoun אני is used is to show that the angel who appeared to Yaakov wanted him to understand that he was acting as G’d’s messenger, i.e. was part of the Divine establishment. It is as if G’d had said: אני חלקך ונחלתך, (Numbers 18 20) “I am your share and your heritage.” The Priests were informed that they are an integral part of the Divine. Similarly, we have a statement (Deut. 32,9) describing the whole Jewish nation in similar terms, i.e. כי חלק ה’ עמו יעקב חבל נחלתו, “For His people are part of G’d, Yaakov is a portion of His heritage,” and not merely a portion of the angels which had been mentioned.

Hashem folded the entire Eretz Yisrael beneath him... Otherwise, what was so great about giving him the land he was lying on, which was just four cubits? Thus Rashi explains, “Hashem folded...” Question: Why did Hashem fold it beneath him? The answer is: To make the whole land as easy to conquer as the four cubits he was lying on, as all of Eretz Yisrael was included in it. This is similar to (Melachim II 13:17): “And Elisha said, ‘Shoot!’ And he shot. And he said, ‘This is an arrow of salvation from Hashem....’”

אלוקי אברהם אביך, "the G'd of your father Abraham." The reason the Torah added the superfluous word "your father," as well as the reason why Abraham is described as Jacob's father without the addition of Isaac was intended to emphasise that Esau had no share in the heritage of Abraham. The Torah here made Jacob the sole heir of Abraham. This heritage did not come to Jacob via his father Isaac but directly from his grandfather Abraham. I have already explained in chapter 16,21 that there was never a question of Ishmael sharing in Abraham's inheritance since Ishmael was legally a slave and as such could not inherit anything from anybody. Ishmael was pointedly described as "the son of this slavewoman" not as Abraham's son (21,13). Esau was precluded from claiming any part of Abraham's inheritance.

Oder, wenn das בו nicht feindlich "wider ihn", sondern "an der Leiter" verstanden wird: Er sieht alle Kräfte, wenn sie Gott suchen wollen, aufwärts steigen, er aber braucht Gott nicht im Himmel zu suchen, er findet Gott bei sich. Es ward ihm da klar, was die Weisen mit den Worten festhielten: האבות הם הם המרכבה, reine Menschen wie die Väter sind die Träger der göttlichen Herrlichkeit; will sie doch zunächst auf Erden ihre Stätte haben, עיקר שכינה בתחתונים. — Fasst sich ja der Inhalt dieser ganzen Offenbarung in der Wahrheit zusammen, dass ד׳ נצב עליו.

הארץ אשר אתה שוכב עליה, “the earth that you are lying on, etc.;” “I shall give you this particular piece of earth; you will spread out through your own efforts in all directions and conquer vastly more land. This is just like when a king allocates a parcel of land to one of his knights, and the knight proceeds to conquer more land adjacent to his.

הארץ אשר אתה שוכב עליה, “the earth that you are lying on;” what does the Torah tell us here that we did not know? G-d tells Yaakov that seeing that at this time he is receiving a minute amount of earth, this is symbolic of the fact that in due course his descendants will expand in all four directions of the globe. “You, i.e. they, will conquer all the land that is presently around you.” It was a well known practice in those days that kings who wished to reward their most important subjects would do so by symbolically giving them a token of the real reward. The recipients would then be free to personally, or with the help of their servants, conquer the lands the king had assigned for them. Rashi here describes G-d as symbolically folding the whole of the land of Israel beneath Yaakov’s head. All this G-d showed him in the dream in which he saw the ladder.

שכב עליה THE LAND WHEREON THOU LIEST — The Holy One, blessed be He, rolled together the entire Land of Israel under him, thus intimating to him that it would be as easily conquered by his descendants (Chullin 91b) as a piece of land four cubits in length, which is the space covered by a person lying down (see Rashi, Chullin 91b, and the note of the ב"ח thereon).

והנה מלאכי אלוקים עולים ויורדים בו, a reference to the priests who offer the animal offerings and the incense. We also find among the explanations given by our sages for this dream (compare Rashi on verse 11 and 17) that Yaakov viewed himself during this dream as standing on Mount Moriah as he was familiar with the appearance of the location from both the description he had heard from his father and from his grandfather Avraham. This is why he said that this place would become the House of G’d in the future and the gateway to heaven (verses 22 and 17). The reason was that this place on earth is directly opposite the throne of G’d in the celestial regions. As to the reason he named the site בית א-ל, this was because he saw in a prophetic vision [seeing that he had been granted the vision there, Ed.] that the site itself was holy, not only the Temple that would be erected on it. This is why he immediately built an altar there. I have also found among the sayings of the sages on these verses that the ladder had 4 rungs. According to that Midrash the width of the ladder was such that 4 angels could simultaneously ascend and descend on it. When they would pass each other on their respective ascent and descent they would occupy the full width of the rung. Each angel symbolised one “governor” of the world as we know from Daniel 10,6 וגויתו כתרשיש. “its body” the size of Tarshish (another term for the “governor.”) These Rabbis have a tradition that Tarshish is one of three such “governors” of the universe. We have to understand what is so important in this interpretation. According to the superficial meaning the width of the ladder would have been wide enough to accommodate 4 such governors, something that seems hard to understand. Maimonides has shown us a window through which to understand what was meant by this statement of Daniel. [the author does not necessarily adopt the views expressed by Maimonides in Moreh Nevuchim section 2, chapters 9 and 10, but employs a similar concept, explaining what occurred on the ladder during Yaakov’s dream. Ed.] He explained that the universe consists basically of three phenomena, the third one being the angels (abstract disembodied intelligent creatures. Moreh Nevuchim 2,10) The four ”rungs” of the ladder would be understood as 4 כדורים described in Moreh Nevuchim second part chapter 9 as a condensation of the nine planets to merely four, some being absorbed to become part of the domain of others. In that scheme of things G’d assigned specific functions to specific planets such as the sun (in charge of fire, heat) and the moon (in charge of water, to wit its influence on the tides), various orbiting planets creating the motion resulting in rain or wind respectively. At any rate, the concept of G’d having assigned 4 distinct such “angels,” i.e. agents of His to run the physical “lower” universe would be what G’d showed Yaakov in the dream of “angels” ascending and descending. Whereas these forces are portrayed in constant motion, such motion by definition cannot be constantly in a single direction. They are therefore portrayed as “ascending” or “descending.” This naturally involves their passing each other at a certain point. Symbolically speaking, the “ladder” the framework within which they operate, must be wide enough to allow this. This is possibly what the Midrash quoted in Maimonides has in mind. [Our editions of the Midrash do not have this paragraph. Ed.] [Another way of looking at the ascending and descending “angels” is that they represent the quest of man for wisdom regarding G’d and His universe, i.e. ascending, and the agents of G’d meeting man halfway in providing him with such knowledge, i.e. “descending.” Alternatively, after man has ascended to receive divinely inspired insights he returns to earth “descends,” to incorporate the newly gained insights in his world view. Akeydat Yitzchok. Ed.] G’d being portrayed as “standing” on top of the ladder is a reminder that the knowledge obtained by man is not from independently powerful phenomena but that these apparently powerful forces are only carrying out His instructions.

While it is true that the fact that a son is a heretic does not disqualify him from inheriting his father's estate (Kidushin 18), in this instance the gifts and blessings bestowed upon Abraham by G'd were given him with the express understanding that they be handed down to Jacob afterwards as we know from Genesis 21,12 that his seed would be known only through Isaac (Nedarim 31). Although the expression זרע does not imply that such seed must be morally fit in order to qualify for that description and therefore for the right to inherit, the fact that all the blessings of Abraham were transferred to Jacob excludes Esau as an heir. It is true that in connection with people who offer their children to the idol Moloch we find in Sanhedrin 64 that the term זרעו is used by the Torah, and that it includes children who have not turned out properly. The fact remains that usually the word זרע refers to children who follow in the footsteps of their fathers. When the Talmud Kidushin 18 quotes Deut. 2,5 as proof that Esau did inherit, this is in connection with Esau's children receiving an inheritance from their father; it does not mean that Esau himself was qualified to inherit from his grandfather Abraham.

Es scheint hier mit großer Bedeutsamkeit 1/אביך אברהם und dabei יצחק ohne solche Bezeichnung zu stehen. Es dürfte dies wohl nie wieder vorkommen, dass der Großvater Vater genannt wird und gleichzeitig der Vater nur wie ein Fremder dabei steht. Es kann daher unmöglich von der leiblichen Abstammung die Rede sein. Vielmehr war Jakob in dieser Wendung alles gesagt. Jakob war Abrahams Sohn, Jizchak nur das Mittelglied. Geistig war Abraham Jakobs Vater. "Du bist der Sohn dessen, zu dem ich gesprochen: התהלך לפני והיה תמים, sei dessen Sohn und Erbe!" In Jakob, dem ersten Erbauer eines ganzen jüdischen Hauses, gewinnt auch die abrahamitische Zukunft den ersten Anfang der Verwirklichung.

והנה ה' נצב עליו, the meaning of the word עליו is not clear. It could refer to G’d on top of the ladder, but it could also refer to Yaakov, meaning G’d was providing Yaakov with new insights originating from the wisdom available in the celestial regions, i.e. the top of the ladder. If so, the reason this is described sequentially as an ascent followed by a descent is that the ascent describes man’s learning process, something concentrated in the head, the mind. Once he has absorbed the new knowledge he has to use it, transmit it to the lower parts of his body, which carries out the lessons learned. The reason why the words עולים and יורדים appear in the plural mode is that both the שכל and the פועל, [theoretical pure reason and the practical reason have to absorb these lessons. My wording. Ed.] The descending “angels” describe the two basic elements in G’d’s supervisory scheme of guiding the history of the universe, the direct and indirect supervision and intervention by G’d known as hashgachah peratit, and the general supervision by G’d’s agents the כדורים or גלגלים known in everyday language as mazzalot. Since Yaakov was fleeing from his home, and no doubt his mental and spiritual equilibrium had been traumatised somewhat by recent events, G’d showed him these insights to not only repair the damage, but to provide him with knowledge he had not yet possessed previously. He promised to give him the land that he was presently running away from, and reassured him that it was well within the Supreme Power, the Lord, to accomplish all this when the time would be ripe. He reassured him that he, Yaakov, indeed was Yitzchok’s real descendant and that all the promises made to Avraham would bear fruition through him and his descendants.

אביך, although Avraham was not your biological father he was like your father to you and not to the other grandchildren he had from other sons. Avraham’s inheritance would devolve only on Yaakov.

והנה...אשר אתה שוכב עליה, the meaning is not that Yaakov would be given only the tiny piece of earth he was lying on at that time, but G’d referred to the tiny sample of the land of Israel Yaakov was lying on at that type as being a symbol of the land of Israel of the future. We have a similar construction in Genesis 13,15 where G’d speaks of “all the land Avraham can see.” If He had meant that Avraham’s descendants would inherit only what was within Avraham’s range of vision at that moment, the promise would have been meaningless. G’d used the piece of land he stood on as a symbol of what He would give to his descendants in the future. Concerning the Midrash (mentioned by Rashi) that G’d had “folded” the whole of the land of Israel beneath the tiny piece of earth occupied by Yaakov at the time when He made this promise, surely the meaning of the Midrash is that G’d’s promise is to be understood “as if he had folded, etc.”

ופרצת means AND THOU SHALT BECOME STRONG, like (Exodus 1:12) “the more they became strong".

ונברכו, an expression meaning “refining and improving thereby.” It means that these nations will be improved through intermarriage with your family. כל משפחות האדמה. The word is in a passive, weak mode as I have already explained on the same phrasing in Genesis 12,3

והיה זרעך כעפר הארץ, ופרצת, after your descendants will have multiplied so that they are as the dust of the earth, numerically speaking, you will spread out. The expression is to be understood as similar to Isaiah 51,23: ותשימי כארץ גוך וכחוץ לעוברים, “so that you made your back like the ground, like a street for passers by.” Precisely when the Jewish people will have reached a seeming low point in their collective experience (downtrodden by the Egyptian taskmasters, or in later exiles) they will expand and become powerful in a measure never before seen on earth. ימה וקדמה צפונה ונגבה, when that time arrives Bileam’s prophecy in Numbers 24,17 וקרקר כל בני שת, “it will smash the foundation of all mankind.” The final redemption of the Jewish people will come after they have suffered the low point in their history. (Compare Sanhedrin 95: “if you see a generation experiencing so many persecutions and setbacks that it appears a raging river is inundating them, wait for the ending for the prophet Isaiah in his description of the redemption writes of it immediately after having described the very opposite in chapter 59, 19-20”)

ונברכו בך כל משפחות האדמה, "and through you all the families of the earth will experience blessings." We find that this blessing was fulfilled when Jacob was in Aram. Bereshit Rabbah 70 records that until Jacob's arrival there the people suffered from a shortage of water. As soon as Jacob arrived those people were blessed with an abundance of water. Similarly we find that the famine stopped as soon as Jacob arrived in Egypt i.e. the Nile overflowed its banks again to irrigate the fields.

והיה...ופרצת, you and your descendants.

“You will become strong,” as in וכן יפרוץ. The meaning is not as in פן יפרץ בם (Shemos 19:25), where it means destruction.

בך — ובזרעך (ebenso zuvor לך ולזרעד), "durch dich sollen alle Familien der Erde gesegnet werden und durch deinen Samen". Ganz entschieden scheint hier der Segen, der von ihm ausgehen soll, ein doppelter zu sein. Kann ja überhaupt der Gesamtmenschheit ein Mensch und ein Volk nur durch geistige Einwirkung und durch eine mustergültige Lebensentfaltung Segen werden, bis sich erfüllt: בימים ההמה אשר יחזיקו עשרה אנשים מכל לשונות הגוים והחזיקו בכנף איש יהודי לאמר נלכה עמכם כי שמענו אלקי׳ עמכם "in jenen Tagen, dass, wenn zehn Männer aus allen Zungen der Völker einen Halt suchen werden, sie einen jüdischen Mann an seinem Gewand fassen werden und sprechen: wir wollen mit euch gehen, denn wir haben gehört, Gott ist mit euch". (Secharja 8, 23.) Ein solcher Segen soll Jakob als Familienvater und sollen seine Nachkommen als Volk werden. Jakob zeigt das erste jüdische Haus und lehrt, wie man ein Familienleben, ohne נחלת אבתיו, ohne ererbtes Vermögen, getragen von dem Segen und der Würde der מלאכה, der Arbeit, mit all seinen Sorgen, Plackereien und Bekümmernissen, bauen und durchleben könne, und doch ד׳ נצב עליו, und doch Gott in seinem Leben nicht vermissen. Also: ein Familien- und Volksleben, rein getragen von der göttlichen Gnade und vollendet nach göttlichem Willen, das haben die Menschen von dir und deinem Samen zu lernen.

ונברכו בך, on your account and on account of your descendants all the families of the earth will experience Divine blessings. The reason for this is that He who performs G’d’s commandments and thereby acknowledges His existence and power, deserves that the world exist on his account. Everyone else who is alive and well on earth therefore owes his well being to the Jews keeping the Torah.

ונברכו בך כל משפחות האדמה ובזרעך, the same type of blessing mentioned in Isaiah 61,6 i.e. because you will then be known and revered as the priests of the Lord, they will receive their Divine blessing through you.

The reason the Torah added the word ובזרעך, was that Jacob's descendants too were to confer blessings on the whole of mankind. As long as the Temple stood the seventy nations of the world enjoyed G'd's blessings because the Israelites offered sacrifices on the festival of Sukkot on their behalf (Sukkah 55). Even while the Jewish people are in exile the continued existence of the other nations is due to the Jewish people as we know from Song of Songs 1,5: "when my mother's children were angry at me they appointed me keeper of the vineyards (of the idols)." [The "mother" is mother earth in this context. Ed.]

If we look for allusions we can find that the whole paragraph alludes to man as a species. Zohar 1,147 understands the words ויצא יעקב as describing the soul when it first departs from the higher world and takes up residence within a body. This body is called יעקב on account of the evil urge which constantly tags along, at our heels, so to speak.

The words מבאר שבע, from "the well of the oath," is a reference to the source the souls come from which is known as "the well of living waters." The word שבע refers to the oath G'd makes every soul swear when it departs from heaven that it will not violate Torah laws while inside a human being (compare Niddah 30).

The words וילך חרנה are an allusion to the statement of our sages in Sanhedrin 91 that the evil urge enters man from the moment he leaves his mother's womb. This is based on Genesis 4,7 that "sin crouches at the entrance"

The words ויפגע במקום are a reminder that man has to invoke G'd's help through prayer, G'd being the מקומו של עולם, the site of the universe.

When the Torah continued וילן שם כי בא השמש, this is a reminder that man has to conduct himself properly all his life until he dies, i.e. "until his sun sets." This is why our sages said in Avot 2,4: "do not be certain of your righteousness until the day you die."

The Torah continues: "He took from the stones of that site;" this is analogous to the statement by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish in Berachot 5 that a person should constantly strive to provoke his good urge i.e. criticise himself by struggling against the evil urge. Should he fail to overcome his evil urge he should busy himself with Torah study as suggested by David in Psalms 4,5. When the Torah refers to מאבני המקום, that Jacob took from the stones of that site, this refers to the בנינו של עולם the building blocks by means of which the world is built, i.e. Torah. These words may also relate to the stones used to kill the evil urge and its representatives. This is what the Talmud means in Sotah 21 when we are told that Torah saves one from the evil urge not only when one is actively engaged in its study but even when one is temporarily not busy with Torah.

The Torah goes on: וישם מראשותיו, "he placed these stones under his head," to allude to the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish that when one fails to vanquish the evil urge one should resort to reciting the קריאת שמע which is recited at night, seeing David speaks of על משכבכם, on your bed, in Psalms 4,5.

The words וישכב במקום ההוא he lay down in that place, allude to the final statement on the subject by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish that if one fails to overcome one's evil urge one should think of the day when one is going to die. This is why the Torah preferred to use the word וישכב to the word ויישן, he slept, since that word implies a lying down from which one may not get up again. Having employed all those means to try and overcome one's evil urge one may be confident of success.

After all this, the Torah shows that Jacob had become worthy of having a prophetic revelation in a dream. It is worth while to study the dreams of Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach which are recorded in the Zohar 1,139 and in the Zohar Chadash לך לך section 25.

The ladder is the mystical aspect of the human soul, something that is not entirely uprooted from the body at the time he is asleep. Part of that soul remains in the body. When the Torah speaks of the ladder being rooted in the ground with its head in the heavens, it refers to these two parts of the soul. The proof of all this is that when man sleeps he subsequently awakens by moving his sleeping body; if the entire soul had previously departed from him he would not be able to experience these motions of his body. The picture drawn for us by the Torah therefore is that of a sleeping person who is not detached from either heaven or earth but remains in contact with both. During his sleeep the evil urge is not able to act as a barrier between man and G'd seeing that part of man's soul is in direct contact with heaven.

The מלאכים עולים ויורדים, the angels described as ascending and descending in Jacob's dream are an allusion to the good deeds which man attempts to perform in this world and which enable his soul to transmit light of a supernatural dimension to the source his soul emanates from. These are called מיין נוקבים, "feminine waters" in the Zohar 1,18. Another name for these lights is מלאכי אלוקים, "angels of G'd." In Avot 4,11 Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov calls the products of each good deed פרקליט, advocate. When these advocates rise heavenwards they in turn activate "masculine waters" to descend. [The concept is that just as there is an interaction between the waters in the heavens and those beneath on earth or below, without which nature cannot function and produce vegetation, there is a parallel process of a spiritual nature. In our Midrashim this interaction is compared to the sexual intercourse between man and woman which results in conception. Ed.] The Torah refers to that impact on what descends on man's soul in the words ויורדים בו, "they descend upon him."

The Torah continues והנה ה׳ נצב עליו to tell us that after such an interchange of spiritual forces man becomes capable of prophetic insights. This means that G'd will no longer speak to such a person only in a dream but that he will experience a divine revelation. Jacob's experience during that night then made every Jew in the future a potential vehicle for prophecy, for divine revelation. This is also mentioned by Maimonides who states in chapter 5 of his Hilchot Teshuvah that in principle not a single Israelite is unable to become a vessel for prophecy.

אנכי עמך I AM WITH THEE — God promised him this because he was in terror of Esau and Laban.

כי לא אעזבך, on the journeys,

כי לא אעזבך, when I said that after the exile you will expand in all directions of the globe, know no boundaries, this is possible only because even during the long years of exile I did not abandon you, as stated explicitly in Leviticus 26,44 לא מאסתים ולא געלתים, “I will not have rejected them, nor will I have abhorred them.”

והנה, even though you are presently fleeing, do not be afraid for אנכי, I will be with you, ושמרתיך בכל אשר תלך, both on your way out and eventually, on your way home.

והנה אנכי עמך, “and here I am going to be with you, etc.” Onkelos translated these words as והא מימרי בסעדך, “and this word (promise) will assist you.” When the Torah writes in Exodus 3,12 ואהיה עמך, “and I shall be with you,” (G’d encouraging Moses to accept the role of leader) Onkelos translates this as ארי יהי מימרי עמך, “behold My promise will be with you” The (apparently minute) difference in the way Onkelos renders G’d’s promise to Moses reflects the difference between the spiritual level of these two men at the time G’d communicated with them. Seeing that in verse 13 the Torah wrote והנה י-ה-ו-ה נצב עליו ויאמר אני י-ה-ו-ה, Onkelos was forced to use the description בסעדך similar to when the Talmud in Shabbat 89 quotes G’d as telling Moses he should have assisted Him when he saw G’d write the crowns on the Torah. Yaakov was on a level where G’d applied to him the attribute of שדי, G’d as Master of nature. Whatever assistance Yaakov would receive would not be by means of נסים גלוים, the kind of miracles which upset the laws of nature. Moses, on the other hand, was already being addressed by the Ineffable Name, by a higher attribute of G’d. Yaakov only dreamed; Moses was wide awake when he saw the burning bush. If you were to challenge my explanation by pointing out that in 46,4 Onkelos translates the words אנכי ארד עמך as אנא איחות עמך, indicating that Yaakov was on a level not inferior to that of Moses, the context of that verse forced Onkelos to translate it in the way he did. The purpose of G’d’s message at that time was to reassure Yaakov that even in exile G’d’s Presence would be with the people, i.e. the שכינה would descend to Egypt with the Israelites.

Because he feared both Eisov and Lavan. Otherwise, why does it say, “I am with you,” which implies, “I will protect you”? Yaakov was afraid on his way there, lest Eisov pursue him, and on his way back, lest Lavan do so, as it actually happened. That is why the verse continues, “I will guard you wherever you go, and I will bring you back.” (Nachalas Yaakov) אם

והנה אנכי עמך, Ich, (die den Menschen tragende Liebe), bin mit dir, und wenn du auch nichts mitnimmst als deinen Stab, so hast du Mich. Dem Abrahams- enkel wird nicht ואברכך ואגדלה שמך wie dem Abraham verheißen; er geht ins Galuth, שמירה, Schutz und Beistand wird ihm zugesagt und einstige Rückkehr. Ganz wie einst seinem Volke, als es denselben Boden verlassend ins Exil wanderte. — לא אעזכך. Ich werde so lange an dir arbeiten, so lange mich mit deinem Geschicke beschäftigen, bis du das geworden bist, was du werden sollst, und dann durch dich alle Familien der Erde gesegnet werden.

ושמרתיך, “I will guard you;” this was necessary because of Esau’s threat to kill Yaakov. והשיבותיך אל האדמה הזאת, “I will bring you back to this soil;” this promise was fulfilled as stated in Genesis 35,27: וישב יעקב אל יצחק אביו “Yaakov returned to his father Yitzchok.”

עד אשר אם עשיתי UNTIL I HAVE DONE — The word אם is here used in the sense of כי (cf. Gittin 90a).

עד אשר עשיתי את אשר דברתי עליך. to bring you back to this part of the earth, for while you are journeying, traveling, you are in need of special protection of My angels, as we know from Psalms 91,11 כי מלאכיו יצוה לך לשמרך בכל דרכיך, “for He will command His angels to protect you on all your travels.”

כי לא אעזבך עד אשר אם עשיתי, so that in effect I will never abandon you. This promise was to stand by him and his descendants during his entire life, as well as during that of his children.

עד אשר אם עשיתי, as long as I have not carried out what I have said to you now. (i.e. the part commencing with ופרצת). There are occasions when the word עד is used in the sense of בעוד, such as Song of Songs 1,12 עד שהמלך במסבו, ”while the king was on his couch.” Or, Proverbs 8,26 עד לא עשה ארץ וחוצות, “while G’d had not yet made earth or even clumps of dust.” However, once G’d would have performed this great salvation, not only would He continue to treat His people with loving kindness by not abandoning them, but He would add a new dimension to it by walking among them, as promised in Leviticus 26,12 והתהלכתי בתוככם, “I will be walking amongst you (constantly).”

, here, is used in the sense of כי. Rashi is answering the question: “I will not forsake you until” implies He surely will not forsake him until then. So why does it say אם, which implies uncertainty? Thus Rashi explains that אם means כי, which conveys certainty. Rashi is saying that since כי can mean אם, it follows that אם can mean כי.

כי לא אעזבך, “for I shall not abandon you;” on this way. את אשר דברתי לך “what I have said to you;” to bring you back to this soil. People always need protection when on a journey. For proof the author cites: Psalms 91,11: לשמרך בדרך, “to guard you while you are on the way.”

דברתי לך means I have spoken in thy interest and concerning thee: whatever I promised to Abraham regarding his seed it was in reference to you that I promised it and not in reference to Esau, for I did not say to him “Isaac shall be called thy seed” (which would have signified that all Isaac’s descendants would be regarded, also, as Abraham’s) but I said (21:12) ביצחק “In Isaac” and not all the issue of Isaac”. In the same way wherever לי or לך or לו or להם are used after a verbal form of דבר, they are used in the sense of “concerning”. This verse proves that this is so, since it cannot mean “I have spoken to thee” as He had never spoken to Jacob before this occasion.

אשר אם, this apparently superfluous repetition is meant to reinforce the promise.

For He had not spoken to Yaakov prior to this. You might ask: Perhaps אשר דברתי לך refers to what He just spoke to Yaakov: “I am Hashem...” (v. 13)? The answer is: If it referred to what He just spoke, it should have said כל אשר אני מְדַבֵר עמך, rather than דִבַרְתִי which is past tense. This is because it is one prophecy, and everything was in one dream; Yaakov did not wake up in between.

ואנכי לא ידעתי AND I KNEW IT NOT — for had I known it I would not have slept in such a holy place as this.

אכן יש ה' במקום הזה, contrary to what I thought when I lay down here that this is a totally secular place, devoid of sanctity. Every time the expression אכן occurs in Scripture it means that the person exclaiming it had to revise an opinion previously held. A well-known example is Exodus 2,14אכן נודע הדבר, when Moses made the devastating discovery that his having slain the Egyptian had not remained a secret.

אכן יש ה' במקום הזה, there can be no question that this is a location from where the gift of prophetic insights is dispensed, seeing that I have been granted such an insight without even having expected it or prepared myself for it spiritually. It is a fact that the characteristics of a person undergo changes in the land of Israel just as the climate and very air in this country are different, contribute to one’s mental and spiritual progress. Our sages have phrased this (Baba Batra 158) as “the very air of the Land of Israel makes one wiser.”

וייקץ יעקב, Jacob awoke, etc. What did Jacob mean by the word אכן in this verse? It appears to mean that something concealed had been revealed to him. Why would he then express surprise at having been unaware of such knowledge, i.e. ואנכי לא ידעתי? Did he have to be aware of everything that is hidden?

'וייקץ..אכן יש ה, he concluded that this site was a site chosen for revelations, seeing that he had become the recipient of such great and wonderful visions in his dream with the ladder.

For had I known I would not have slept... Rashi is answering the question: What difference does it make that he did not know?

יקץ ,ויקץ und קוץ heißen beide: erwachen, letzteres im הפעיל. Grundbedeutung von קוץ: Überdruss, Ekel bekommen an dem, woran man bis dahin mit Begierde hing. Wie der Sommer קיץ als diejenige Zeit heißt, in welcher die Früchte die bis dahin mit Begierde getrunkenen Säfte des Bodens verschmähen und die vollendete Selbständigkeit erlangt haben, so wird auch mit קוץ und יקץ der Moment bezeichnet, in welchem der Mensch sich schlafend "vollgesogen", hat an dem Busen der ihn regenierenden. Natur und, sich von ihr "losreißend", zum selbständigen Dasein wieder ersteht. —

ואנכי לא ידעתי, if I had realised the special distinction of this site I would have prepared myself mentally for receiving these Divine insights.

ואנכי לא ידעתי, if I had known that this was a holy site I would not have chosen this site to sleep on. It is possible that this dream represented the beginning of Yaakov’s prophetic visions. This is why he had not been aware of the sanctity of the site until after his dream, seeing that this was the first time G’d had revealed Himself to him in any manner.

Perhaps we may explain this by referring to Chulin 91 where the words "for the sun had set" are interpreted to mean that Jacob personally experienced an unusually early sunset on that day. This was designed to force him to spend the night at that site. What Jacob meant then was that at the time when the early sunset occurred he had not understood its meaning. He did so now only with the help of the dream he had dreamt.

ויאמֶר ist nicht so getrennt, wie später וירא ויאמר, dass die Rede eine neue Tätigkeit beginne, es ist vielmehr das, was er im Erwachen sprach, somit der erste Eindruck, den das im Schlaf Erlebte auf ihn machte: Hier also ist Gott! Er bezieht bescheiden die Gottesnähe nicht auf sich, sondern auf den Ort. Also nicht im Himmel ist Gott zu suchen, sondern wo ein schuldloser Mensch sein Haupt niederlegt, da ist Gott! Dies sein erster Gedanke. Und sein zweiter: Und ich habe bis jetzt dies nicht gewusst! Nicht gewusst, dass Gottes Herrlichkeit ihre Stätte hienieden bei dem Menschen suche!

When Jacob said: יש השם במקום הזה, that G'd is in this place, he meant that G'd is present at this site all the time, in contrast to other sites. This is why G'd wanted him to spend the night there in order to communicate with him there. Jacob apologised for not having prepared himself for a divine revelation; had he been aware of the significance of that site he would surely have done so. Prophecy requires the recipient to first prepare himself mentally. Perhaps if Jacob had prepared himself to become the recipient of a message from G'd he might have prophesied while awake instead of while dreaming. This may have been what he bemoaned in this verse. Rashi explains simply that Jacob meant that if he had known the holy nature of that site he would not have allowed himself to go to sleep there. If that were the only meaning of Jacob's words we could say to him (Rashi) that Jacob then would not have experienced all the promises G'd made to him during his dream. We therefore need to include what I have just written in order to explain the verse satisfactorily.

כי אם בית אלהים THIS IS NONE OTHER THAN THE HOUSE OF GOD —R. Eleazar said in the name of R. José the son of Zimra: “This ladder stood in Beersheba and [the middle of]) its slope reached opposite the Temple” (Genesis Rabbah 69:7). For Beersheba is situated in the South of Judah, Jerusalem in the North of it on the boundary between Judah and Benjamin and Bethel in the North of Benjamin’s territory, on the border between the land of Benjamin and that of the children of Joseph. It follows, therefore, that a ladder whose foot is in Beersheba and whose top is in Bethel has the middle of its slope reaching opposite Jerusalem. Now as regards what our Rabbis stated (Chullin 91b) that the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “This righteous man has came to the place where I dwell (i.e., the Temple at Jerusalem, whilst from here it is evident that he had come to Luz) and shall he depart without staying here over night?”, and with regard to what they also said, (Pesachim 88a) “Jacob gave the name Bethel to Jerusalem”, whereas this place which he called Bethel was Luz and not Jerusalem, whence did they learn to make this statement (which implies that Luz is identical with Jerusalem)? I say that Mount Moriah was forcibly removed from its locality and came hither (to Luz), and that this is what is meant by the “shrinking” of the ground that is mentioned in the Treatise (Chullin 91b) — that the site of the Temple came towards him (Jacob) as far as Bethel and this too is what is meant by ויפגע במקום, “he lighted upon the place” (i.e., he “met” the place, as two people meet who are moving towards each other; cf. Rashi on Genesis 5:11). Now, since Jacob’s route must have been from Beersheba to Jerusalem and thence to Luz and Haran and consequently when he reached Luz he had passed Jerusalem, if you should ask, “When Jacob passed the Temple why did He not make him stop there?” — If it never entered his mind to pray at the spot where his fathers had prayed should Heaven force him to stop there to do so? Really he had reached as far as Haran as we say in the Chapter גיד הנשה (Chullin 91b), and Scripture itself proves this since it states, “And he went to Haran”. When he arrived at Haran he said, “Is it possible that I have passed the place where my fathers prayed without myself praying there?” He decided to return and got as far as Bethel where the ground "shrank” for him. This Bethel is not the Bethel that is near Ai (cf. Genesis 12:8) but that which is near Jerusalem, and because he said of it, “It shall be the House of God”, he called it Bethel. This, too, is Mount Moriah, where Abraham prayed, and it is also the field in which Isaac offered prayer as it is written, “[Isaac went out] to meditate (i. e., to pray; cf. Genesis 24:63) in the field”. Thus, too, do we read in the Treatise (Pesachim 88a) in a comment on the verse Micah 4:2: “[O come ye and let us go up] to the mountain of the Lord (i.e. the mountain upon which the Temple is built) and to the house of the God of Jacob”. What particular reason is there for mentioning Jacob? But the text calls the Temple not as Abraham did who called it a mount, and not as Isaac did, who called it a field, but as Jacob did who called it Beth[el]—the House of God. (To here from “This Bethel” is to be found in a certain correct Rashi-text)

THIS IS NONE OTHER THAN THE HOUSE OF G-D, AND THIS IS THE GATE OF HEAVEN. This refers to the Sanctuary which is the gate through which the prayers and sacrifices ascend to heaven.
Rashi comments, Rabbi Elazar the son of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra said, ‘This ladder stood in Beer-sheba and its slope¹⁵“Its slope.” In our text of Rashi: “the middle of its slope.” Ramban will explain later that the reference is to “the end” of the slope, which is the head of the ladder. reached unto the Sanctuary in Jerusalem. Beer-sheba is situated in the southern part of Judah, and Jerusalem is to its north on the boundary between Judah and Benjamin, and Beth-el was in the northern portion of Benjamin’s territory, on the boundary between Benjamin’s territory and that of the children of Joseph. It follows, therefore, that a ladder whose base is in Beer-sheba and whose top is in Beth-el has its slope¹⁵“Its slope.” In our text of Rashi: “the middle of its slope.” Ramban will explain later that the reference is to “the end” of the slope, which is the head of the ladder. reaching opposite Jerusalem. Now regarding the statement of our Rabbis that the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘This righteous man has come to the place where I dwell, [namely, the Sanctuary in Jerusalem, and shall he depart without spending the night?’],¹⁶Chullin 91b. and with regard to what they also said, ‘Jacob gave the name Beth-el to Jerusalem’¹⁷Pesachim 88b. this place which he called Beth-el was Luz and not Jerusalem! And whence did they learn to say so, [implying that Luz is identical with Jerusalem]? I therefore say that Mount Moriah [the Temple site in Jerusalem] was forcibly removed from its place and came here to Luz, and this movement of the Temple site is ‘the springing of the earth’ which is mentioned in Tractate Shechitath Chullin.¹⁸“The slaughtering of unconsecrated beasts.” This tractate is now generally called Chullin (Unconsecrated Beasts). 91b. It means that the site on which the Sanctuary was later to stand came towards Jacob to Beth-el. And this too is what is meant by vayiphga bamakom (and he met the place):¹⁹Verse 11 here. [as two people meet, who are moving towards each other]. If you should ask, ‘When our father Jacob passed the site of the Sanctuary [on his way from Beer-sheba to Haran] why did He not detain him there?’ The answer is: If it never entered his mind to pray at the place where his fathers had prayed, should Heaven make him stop there? He had journeyed as far as Haran, as we say in the chapter of Gid Hanasheh,²⁰“The sinew of the hip.” It is the seventh chapter of Tractate Chullin (see Note 18) 91b. and Scripture itself helps us clarify this point by saying, And he went to Haran.²¹Verse 10 here. When he arrived at Haran he said, ‘Is it possible that I have passed the place where my fathers prayed without praying there myself?’ He decided to return and had returned as far as Beth-el, whereupon the ground of the Temple site sprang for him until Beth-el.”
All these are the words of the Rabbi.²²Rashi. See also Note 139, Seder Bereshith. But I do not agree with them at all for ‘the springing of the earth’ which the Rabbis mention in connection with Jacob is like that which they have said happened to Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, namely, that he reached Haran in one day. As they have said in Tractate Sanhedrin,²³95a. “The earth sprang for three persons: Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, our father Jacob, and Abishai the son of Zeruiah.”²⁴II Samuel 21:17. In coming to the rescue of David, a miracle occurred, and he reached him at once though he was far away from him. And the Rabbis explained: “Eliezer, the servant of Abraham — for it is written, And I came this day unto the fountain,²⁵Above, 24:42. which teaches that on that very day he embarked on his journey. Jacob — for it is written, And he met the place.¹⁹Verse 11 here. When he arrived at Haran he said, ‘Is it possible that I have passed the place where my fathers prayed without praying there myself?’ As soon as the thought of returning occurred to him, the earth sprang for him, and immediately he met the place.” Thus the Rabbis explicitly say that as soon as the thought to return occurred to him in Haran, the earth sprang for him and he met the place where his fathers prayed, but not that he returned to Beth-el, nor that Mount Moriah sprang and came there to Beth-el. In Bereshith Rabbah²⁶59:15. the Rabbis further equated them both [Eliezer and Jacob] with respect to “the springing of the earth.” Thus they said: “And he arose, and went to Aram-naharaim²⁷Above, 24:10. — on the very same day. And I came this day unto the fountain²⁵Above, 24:42. — this day I embarked on the journey, and this day I arrived.” With respect to Jacob the Rabbis interpreted in a similar vein: “And he went to Haran²¹Verse 10 here. — the Rabbis say on the very same day.” And furthermore, what reason is there for Mount Moriah to “spring” and come to Beth-el, as Rashi claims, after Jacob had troubled himself to return from Haran to Beth-el, a journey of many days?²⁸If such a miracle was to be performed, why did not Mount Moriah spring all the way to Haran? Moreover, Beth-el does not lie on the border of the Land of Israel which faces towards Haran for Haran is a land which lies to the east [of the Land of Israel while Beth-el lies in its western part].²⁹Above, 12:8. Additionally, the middle part of a ladder is not referred to as its “slope.”³⁰Thus Rabbi Elazar who said that “its slope” reached to the Sanctuary did not refer to its middle, as Rashi has it. And, finally, what reason is there for the middle of the ladder to be opposite Beth-el, [where, according to Rashi, the side of the Sanctuary had been transported], when the middle part of an object does not possess significance beyond that of its whole?
There is, however, another intent to these Midrashim. The Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah,³¹68:6. “Rabbi Hoshayah said, ‘It has already been stated, And Jacob hearkened to his father and his mother, and was gone to Paddan-aram.³²Above, 28:7. What then does Scripture teach by repeating, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba?²¹Verse 10 here. Rather, the redundancy teaches us that Jacob said, “When my father desired to leave the Land of Israel, at what location did he seek permission for it? Was it not in Beer-sheba? I, too, shall go to Beer-sheba to seek this permission. If He grants me permission, I shall leave, and if not, I shall not go.” Therefore Scripture found it necessary to state, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba.’”²¹Verse 10 here.
The intent of this Midrash is that the Rabbis were of the opinion that Jacob was blessed by his father in Hebron, the land of his father’s sojournings, and it was to Hebron that he came when he returned to his father from Paddan-aram, as it is said, And Jacob came unto Isaac his father to Mamre, to Kiriath-arba — the same is Hebron — where Abraham and Isaac sojourned.³³Further, 35:27. Now if so, the verse stating, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba²¹Verse 10 here. teaches that when his father commanded him to go to Laban³⁴Above, 28:5. he went to Beer-sheba to receive Divine permission, and that is the place wherein he spent the night and saw visions of G-d, and it was there that He gave him permission to exit from the Land of Israel, even as He said, And I will keep thee wherever thou goest and will bring thee back unto this land.⁴Verse 15 here. And the ladder which he saw, in the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, he saw with its feet in Beer-sheba, in the very place where he lay, and with the end of its slope which is the top of the ladder reaching to a point opposite the Sanctuary. It was supported by heaven at the gate through which the angels enter and exit. The revered G-d stood over him, and therefore he knew that Beer-sheba was the gate of heaven, suitable for prayer, and the Sanctuary was the house of G-d. And in the morning Jacob continued his journey from Beer-sheba and arrived at Haran on the same day, and this was “the springing of the earth” mentioned with respect to Jacob.
This is the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra who said in Bereshith Rabbah,³⁵69:5. “This ladder stood in Beer-sheba and its slope reached to the Sanctuary, as it is said, And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba;¹⁹Verse 11 here. And he was afraid and said, How fearful is this place.”³⁶Verse 17 here. And the stone which he erected as a pillar³⁷Verse 18 here. he did not erect in the place where he slept, for Beer-sheba is not Beth-el and it was in Beth-el that he erected it, and there he went upon his return from Paddan-aram, as it is said, Arise, go up to Beth-el … and make there an altar unto G-d who appeared unto thee, etc.³⁸Further, 35:1. But he erected it [after carrying the stone from Beth-el to Jerusalem]³⁹Thus comments Rabbi David Luria (R’dal) in explanation of Ramban’s words. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 160. opposite the slope, at the place where the head of the ladder stood, which he had called the house of G-d, and this is the city which had previously been called Luz.⁴⁰Verse 19 here.
Thus in the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, Luz was Jerusalem which Jacob called Beth-el.⁴⁰Verse 19 here. Possibly this may be so, according to the verses in the book of Joshua.⁴¹The source intended is not clear to me. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 160, for further discussion of this matter. It is certainly true that it is not the Beth-el near Ai⁴²Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz. for that Beth-el was originally so named in the days of Abraham⁴²Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz. and prior to that.
But Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon differs there⁴³Bereshith Rabbah 69:8. with Rabbi Yosei the son of Zimra, and he says: “This ladder stood upon the Sanctuary site and its slope reached to Beth-el. What is his reason? And he was afraid, and said,³⁶Verse 17 here. etc. And he called the name of that place Beth-el.”⁴⁰Verse 19 here. Thus in the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon the verse stating, And he lighted upon the place,¹⁹Verse 11 here. means Mount Moriah. And he tarried there all night, because the sun was set for him not at its proper time [so that he should spend the night there], for as our Rabbis have stated:¹⁶Chullin 91b. “[The Holy One, blessed be He, said], ‘This righteous man has come to the place where I dwell. Shall he then depart without staying there over night?’” And so Jacob saw the ladder with its feet standing in that place, and its slope, which is its top, reached to a point which was opposite that particular Beth-el [which was mentioned in connection with Ai during Abraham’s era],⁴²Above, 12:8. Whereas the Beth-el referred to here had previously been called Luz. and that was the city of Luz. And Jacob said that the very place where he spent the night was the house of G-d, and the slope of the ladder was the gate of heaven, thus Mount Moriah is excellent for prayer, and Beth-el also is a suitable place for the worship of G-d. And he erected the pillar in Beth-el, for in the opinion of all Rabbis he erected it opposite the slope of the ladder.
The opinion of Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shimon, [i.e., that Jacob slept on Mount Moriah, and he erected the pillar in Beth-el], is in agreement with the Midrash in the Gemara of the chapter concerning Gid Hanasheh,²⁰“The sinew of the hip.” It is the seventh chapter of Tractate Chullin (see Note 18) 91b. and that of Chapter Cheleck,⁴⁴“Portion,” i.e., in the World to Come. This is the tenth chapter of Tractate Sanhedrin, 95b. which states that Jacob left Beer-sheba and came to Haran, and when he reconsidered and decided to return and pray at Mount Moriah, the place where his fathers had prayed, then the earth “sprang” for him and he lighted immediately upon Mount Moriah. Perhaps it is the Rabbis’ opinion that the earth “sprang” for him both when going from Haran to Mount Moriah and when returning from Mount Moriah to Haran. This would be in agreement with the opinion of the Rabbi who says:⁴⁵Bereshith Rabbah 68:9. “And he went to Haran²¹Verse 10 here. — on the same day. And he lighted upon the place¹⁹Verse 11 here. — at once, very suddenly.”
I found it more explicitly in Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer Hagadol:⁴⁶Chapter 35. “Jacob was seventy-seven years of age when he left his father’s house,⁴⁷He was sixty-three when he was blessed by his father (Megillah 16 a), and for the following fourteen years he was secluded in the house of Shem and Eber for the purpose of studying Torah. This makes Jacob seventy-seven years old when he left Haran. The Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer refers to it as “when he left his father’s house,” but the intent is as explained. (Rabbi David Luria.) and he followed the well that travelled before him from Beer-sheba to Mount Moriah, a two-day journey, and he arrived there at midday, etc. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, ‘Jacob, you have bread in your travelling-bag, the well is before you, enabling you to eat and drink and lie down in this place.’ Jacob replied, ‘Master of all worlds, the sun has yet to descend fifty stages, and shall I lie down to sleep in this place?’ Prematurely, the sun then set in the west. Jacob looked and saw that the sun had set in the west, so he tarried there all night, because the sun was set.¹⁹Verse 11 here. Jacob took twelve stones from the stones of the altar upon which his father Isaac had lain bound as a sacrifice⁴⁸Above, 22:9. and put them under his head. By the fact that his resting-place contained twelve stones, G-d informed him that twelve tribes were destined to be established from him. But then all twelve stones were transformed into one stone to inform him that all twelve tribes were destined to become one nation in the earth, as it is said, And who is like Thy people, like Israel, a nation one in the earth?⁴⁹II Samuel 7:23. In the morning Jacob awoke with great fright, and said, ‘The house of the Holy One, blessed be He, is in this place,’ as it is said, And he was afraid, and said: How fearful is this place!³⁶Verse 17 here. From here you learn that whosoever prays in Jerusalem is considered as if he prayed before the Throne of Glory, for the gate of heaven is open there to receive the prayer of Israel, as it is said, And this is the gate of heaven.³⁶Verse 17 here. Jacob then wanted to collect the stones [which he had used as a resting-place for his head in order to build an altar], but he found them all to be one stone, and so he set it up as a pillar in that place. Thereupon oil flowed down for him from heaven, and he poured it on top of the stone, as it is said, And he poured oil upon the top of it.³⁷Verse 18 here. What did the Holy One, blessed be He, do? With His right foot He sank the anointed stone unto the depths of the abyss to serve as the key-stone of the earth, just as one inserts a key-stone in an arch. It is for this reason that it is called Even Hashethiyah (The Foundation Stone),⁵⁰On this stone, the Ark of G-d, which contained the two Tablets of the Law, rested in the Holy of Holies in the Sanctuary in Jerusalem. (Yoma 53b.) for there is the center of the earth, and from there the earth unfolded, and upon it stands the Temple of G-d, as it is said, And this stone, which I have set up for a pillar, shall be G-d’s house.⁵¹Verse 22 here. The use of the present tense in the Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer — “and upon it stands the Temple of G-d” — may either be a reference to the remains of the ancient Sanctuary and its environs, which were still visible in the days when the Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer was composed, or it may preferably indicate that although the Temple is now in ruins the place thereof is still deemed sacred as in the days when the House of G-d was firmly established on the sacred mountain. From there he [Jacob] went on his journey, and in the twinkling of an eye he arrived in Haran.” Thus far [extends the quotation from the Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer Hagadol].
Thus, all Midrashim — despite some minor differences among them — acknowledge that “the springing of the earth” occurred to Jacob through which he travelled a journey of many days in the twinkling of an eye. It is possible that all Midrashim concede to one another, and that on all these journeys of his — when going from Beer-sheba to Haran, when he desired to return to Mount Moriah, and when he left there to go to Haran — the earth “sprang” for him. But there is not one of all these Midrashim which says, as Rashi said, [that Mount Moriah was forcibly removed from its location and was transported to meet him in Beth-el].

He was afraid. Because of the disrespect he had inadvertently shown by sleeping there.

"Shaken, he said..." He felt that his heart was moved to fear on its own, and gave a reason for this when he said "this is none other than the abode of God." He was careful to use the Divine name Elohim, because this is the source of fear, as it is written "...and God (Elohim) made it so that they fear Him." (Kohelet 3:14) It is known that the name Elohim strikes fear in the heart of man.

ויירא ויאמר, he was concerned for himself fearing that he might have done something which one is not allowed to do in a holy place. Perhaps while he had been asleep and unable to control his movements, he had behaved in a manner unbefitting such a sacred location.

אין זה כי אם בית אלוקים,וזה שער השמים, “this must be the House of G’d, and at the same time the gateway to heaven.” This is a reference to the eventual Temple, the site from which the prayers of mankind will ascend to heaven without making any detours. The reason why prayers ascend more swiftly towards heaven from here, is the fact that they accompany the fragrance of the smoke of the various sacrifices. Rashi explains that according to the view of Rabbi Yossi ben Zimra, the feet of the ladder were standing in Beer Sheva, whereas its head was above Bet El, whereas the middle point of its slope was directly above the site that would become the site of the Temple. When Yaakov eventually returned to the land of Israel, and he remembered that he had not prayed at that site, he retraced his steps as far as Bet El to make up for that failure. The site of the Temple, Mount Moriah “jumped” to meet him. This is what our sages described as קפיצת הארץ, “a jump by the earth.” (a contraction of the earth’s surface) Nachmanides queries that the Talmud Sanhedrin 95 appears to attribute the earth’s “jump” both to Eliezer and to Yaakov, seeing we are told there that there were three individuals for whose benefit the earth’s surface contracted in such a manner, the three being Eliezer, Yaakov, and Avishai. The meaning is not that the earth repeatedly jumped to yet another location, but that just as it had accommodated Eliezer, whose purpose had been lofty, so it accommodated, facilitated Yaakov’s journey. Yaakov, being angry at himself for passing a holy site without offering a prayer there, set out to retrace his steps to make up for his omission. Before he could do so, the earth moved in his direction to forestall his having to turn back. Nachmanides speculates that although, apparently there is a divergence of opinions as to where precisely the feet of the ladder in Yaakov’s dream were anchored, it is possible that all the sages agree that Yaakov experienced three occasions when the earth contracted to enable him to fulfill a meritorious deed more easily. The three occasions were: when he went from Beer Sheva to Charan and wanted to turn back in order to pray at Chevron where his fathers had prayed. Similarly, on his return from Charan. to Mount Moriah, and his return from there back to Charan after having prayed there. [the speculative nature of how to reconcile conflicting interpretations is due to the apparent contradiction of where precisely Yaakov spent that night, seeing that the text speaks of Luz, i.e. Beyt El, neither of which can be identified with Moriah.

This ladder stood in Beer Sheva... Rashi is answering the question: Yaakov said, “This is... בית אלהים,” implying he was in Beis Eil, as it is written later (v. 19): “He named that place Beis Eil.” This indicates that the ladder stood in Beis Eil. Yet, Scripture implied before that the ladder stood in Beer Sheva. For it is written (v. 12), “He dreamed, and behold, a ladder was set up on the earth.” And since it does not state the location of the ladder, we interpret it as referring to the place mentioned just before, which is Beer Sheva. If so, the verses appear to be contradictory. Thus Rashi explains that the ladder was standing in Beer Sheva, as Scripture implies, and the middle of its slope reached opposite the Beis Hamikdosh, which is Yerushalayim. And its top was in Beis Eil, as the verse also implies. It cannot be that the top of its slope is opposite the Beis Hamikdosh, for then Yaakov would be outside of the ladder. This is because Beer Sheva is in southern Yehudah, while the Beis Hamikdosh is in its north. If so, by what merit would Luz, [far away in northern Binyamin,] be called the House of God and the gate of Heaven? Neither the foot nor the top of the ladder is there! Thus Rashi explains that the middle of its slope is opposite the Beis Hamikdosh, and the top of the ladder is opposite Beis Eil, which is Luz. Maharshal writes: It seems to me that the verse and Rashi’s commentary on it mean as follows. Rashi says, “Our Sages have stated... ‘This righteous person has come to My Dwelling Place.’” [Rashi is saying that this raises the question:] Hashem’s “Dwelling Place” is Yerushalayim. Yet, Scripture implies here that Yaakov slept in Beis Eil, [not in Yerushalayim! Rashi continues:] “And they stated furthermore: ‘Yaakov called Yerushalayim, Beis Eil.’” [Rashi says that this raises the question:] “Yet, this place that he called Beis Eil was Luz, not Yerushalayim!” [Rashi knows this] because it is written (v. 19), “But Luz was the original name of the city.” And even if we answer it all by saying that Luz is Yerushalayim, [Rashi continues that] a question remains: “From where did they derive that [this was the site of the Beis Hamikdosh, and it is all the same place?” Rashi then rejects the idea that Beis Eil is Yerushalayim, and explains:] “I say that Mount Moriah was uprooted and came here, [to Beis Eil].” Accordingly, Yaakov gave the name of “Beis Eil” to both places at once: to Luz, which was the original name of the city, and to Yerushalayim, which came there. This properly explains the statements of our Sages [quoted by Rashi]. This explanation opposes the approach of Re’m, [who writes that Rashi is answering two questions: 1.Perhaps Luz is Yerushalayim? 2.How did our Sages know Luz that is not Yerushalayim?] In our text of Rashi it is written that Yaakov called Yerushalayim, “Beis Eil,” but according to Re’m, this is not needed. Furthermore, Re’m says that the phrase, “Yet this place was Luz and not Yerushalayim,” is part of the Sages’ statement—but we do not find it written anywhere. Furthermore, even according to Rashi’s answer [that the ground “shrank”] the question would remain: Perhaps Luz really is Yerushalayim, and when Yaakov reached half way there, it came to him. It is without doubt that Rashi was always certain that Yerushalayim is not Luz. This is evident from the verses, as I explained.

ויירא. Nichts wohl, als dieses neue Bewusstsein und die neuen Anforderungen, die es mit sich bringt, dass der schwache Mensch Träger der Gottesherrlichkeit auf Erden werde — konnte dieses überwältigende Gefühl der Furcht in ihm hervorgerufen haben: wie furchtbar ist dieser Ort! Was mir hier gezeigt worden, ist ja nichts anderes als: "Haus Gottes" und dies zugleich: "Pforte des Himmels!" Haus Gottes, Haus, in welches Gott einzieht, dass das irdische Leben ein solches werden könne und solle, dass, wenn die aufsteigenden Engel Gott im Himmel suchen, sie ihn auf Erden bei dem Menschen finden. Und ein jedes solches Haus, in welchem ein solches Leben gelebt wird, ist "Pforte zum Himmel", Pforte, durch welche wir zu Gott kommen, somit die vollständigste Vermählung des Irdischen mit dem Himmlischen. —

אין זה כי אם בית אלהים. “this must surely be the house of G–d.” Seeing that I observe the angels first ascending and then descending and then remaining down on earth this spot on earth and the region in the heavens above must belong to one entity. The angels ascend within this “house” and descend, just as human beings ascend to the upper floors in their houses when the occasion demands it, and then come down again remaining there.

אין זה כי אם בית אלוקים, “this can only be the house of G-d.” Rashi explains this exclamation as follows quoting Rabbi Elazar in B’reshit Rabbah 69,7: “the foot of the ladder was in B’eer Sheva. It stood at an angle so that the halfway mark was precisely above the site where the Temple would be built in the future; its top would have been above Bet El.” [Bet El being the northernmost point and B’eer Sheva the southern most point. Jerusalem would be at the half way mark. Ed.]

מה נורא HOW FEARFUL — In the Targum it is translated by “How דחילו is this place!” דחילו is a noun, like סוכלתנו which is the Targum of תבונה “understanding” (Deuteronomy 32:28), and [וכסו [למלבש which is the Targum of ובגד ללבש “and raiment to put on”) (Genesis 28:20)

This is none other. The place that he saw in his dream was the site designated for the Beis Hamikdosh.

ויאמר מה נורא המקום הזה, since he had seen an awe-inspiring vision here he concluded that the whole place may have been an awesome place, not to be approached except in a state of ritual purity.

Should you ask: When Yaakov passed the Beis Hamikdosh why did He not detain him there? This is a quote from the Gemara, and is posing a question: Why did Hashem not detain him? The Gemara answers: “If it did not enter his mind... should Heaven detain him?” I.e., since Yaakov did not pray of his own accord, why should Hashem detain him? Hashem does not force a person to perform a mitzvah.

When Yaakov said "this is the gate..." he meant that the place aligned with it above is the gate of heaven. This is why he used the word 'this' (zeh) twice.

אין זה כי אם בית אלוקים, “this can only be (the location of) the House of G-d.” Rashi endeavours to find the source for the statement by the sages that G-d had said that it is intolerable that a righteous person of the calibre of Yaakov who needed a place to spend the night, should be unable to find more than a stone to lay his head on. Also why would Yaakov call the place that had been known as Luz “Yerusalem,” i.e. the house of G-d? Furthermore why afterwards does he refer to “Beyt El,” a place much further north? Clearly there appears to be some contradiction here! Our sages themselves seem to have had second thoughts when they said that Yaakov renamed called Luz as Beyt ElBeing aware of these difficulties, Rashi says; “therefore I say that Mount Moriah had been moved and Yaakov had arrived there, i.e. as far as Beyt El, (all on the same day)[If any reader finds all this as strange, I remind him that if G-d enabled Eliezer, Avraham’s servant, to cover a similar distance with his 10 camels when he went to look for a wife for his master in the course of one day, then Yaakov’s experience can certainly not be considered as so unbelievable. Ed.] There is also the problem that Yaakov instead of walking from B’eer Sheva to Charan would be travelling from west to East, as testified to by Isaiah 9,11 ארם מקדם ופלשתים מאחור, “Aram to the East and the land of the Philistines at the back.” (to the west) Moreover, we (our author) had previously explained that Aram and Charan are one and the same. (compare verse 10). According to what we have read here Yaakov was traveling from the south to the north according to what Rashi explained earlier. We have to say that Yaakov travelled the same route that his grandfather Avraham had traveled when coming from Charan, southward after having left both Ur Casdim and Charan on his way to the land of Canaan. He had proceeded southward in stages all the way to B’eer Sheva. Both he and Yitzchok had taken up residence in towns on this route from time to time as we have read in previous portions of the Torah. The route was well known and they were familiar with it. This is the reason why Yaakov also used this route. As to Rashi quoting Yaakov as having said that possibly he had failed to stop at a place where his father and grandfather had offered prayers to G-d, this must have referred not to Mount Moriah, for he had prayed there repeatedly as stated by our sages in B’reshit Rabbah at the end of chapter 78,16, where we are told that no one can properly appreciate how many libations Yaakov had offered at Mount Moriah, but to Beyt El, for Avraham had prayed there and built an altar as recorded in Genesis 12,78. Our sages in Sanhedrin 44 are on record that if Avraham had not prayed between Beyt El and Ai, the Jewish people would long ago have perished completely (Joshua 7,25 when they were defeated there during the first encounter They were saved only due to the merit acquired by the prayers Avraham had offered in that region.) The reason that this location is referred to as Beyt El is on account of the prayers offered there in the future, for in Yaakov’s time it was still known as Luz. Yitzchok had also offered prayers at that altar which his father Avraham had built. Even though we do not possess a written record of it, it is quite plausible to assume that he used this altar on numerous occasions in order to offer prayers. Yaakov, on the other hand, had not had an opportunity to offer prayers at that location up until now. This is also why he said: “is it possible that I simply passed by this place without stopping to offer up a prayer?” He therefore decided to retrace his steps after coming to Charan, and to go back as far as Beyt El to offer a prayer there. In response to Yaakov’s determination to do so, G-d folded the earth beneath him to expedite matters. What this meant in practice was that the town known as Luz was transported to the vicinity of Charan, saving him many days of walking. G-d’s motivation was that the prayer of a righteous person such as Yaakov should preferably be said in a Temple or other sacred site. As a result, the mountain of Moriah was immediately uprooted and removed as far as Charan. After having prayed there Yaakov continued on his way. When G-d saw that, He said: seeing that this righteous person has taken so much trouble to come to My residence, how can I allow him not to have shelter for the night? This is why He arranged for the sun to set prematurely so that Yaakov would spend the night there. During that night he dreamt the dream reported in detail in our chapter where it became clear to him that the place he had slept was destined to become a Temple in the future. Realising that this was the meaning of the dream, he called the site “house of G-d,” renaming the town of Luz to be known as Beyt El. (House of G-d). This is the meaning of the line: “he called that site Beyt El, the site being that which had previously been known as the town of Luz. The stone which had served as Yaakov’s “pillow,” which had come from Mount Moriah, remained at that site. Yaakov anointed it with oil as a symbol of its future significance. As soon as he had done this, he proceeded on his trek to Charan. It would be wrong to understand the verse as meaning that Yaakov arose in the morning in the town of Charan. This is clear from the Torah telling us in 19,1 that Yaakov then set out in the direction of the people residing in the land of the Orientals. When he met the shepherds huddled around the well he asked them where their home was and they told him that their home was Charan. When Yaakov, 20 years later, was on the way from Lavan to the land of Canaan, he passed this location and he named the site Beyt El and erected a monument at the site. (Genesis 35,7, and 15)[This is a unique exegesis, as, normally, Yaakov is understood as having had to return to that site after having already settled in the land of Canaan and having overlooked his promise to erect a Temple at that site so that G-d had to remind him. (compare chapter 33,18 30) Ed.]

וזה שער השמים AND THIS IS THE GATE OF HEAVEN — a place of prayer where their prayers would ascend to heaven (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 35). The Midrash states (Genesis Rabbah 69:7) that the Heavenly Temple is situated immediately opposite the Earthly Temple (so that the Temple at Jerusalem-Bethel may be styled “the gate” to the Heavenly Temple)

The gate. The ladder signified that it was from that place that prayers ascend to heaven.

אין זה כי אם בית אלוקים, this place is suitable only for becoming a House of G’d, a temple of sorts. a place wherein to pray and to offer sacrifices to G’d. Another explanation of Yaakov’s exclamation could be that he concluded that the only reason he had been shown the vision was to stimulate him to erect a House of G’d there.

The Targum translates it: How דחילו is this place... Rashi is proving that the word דחילו, which is Onkelos’ translation of נורא, [is a noun. It means “awesome.” Despite the ו, it] is not a plural [verb]. Rather, it is Onkelos’ way [to add a ו], such as with the noun תבונה (understanding), which Onkelos translates as סוכלתנו. And so he translates the noun בגד (garment) as וכסו. This shows that it is usual for Onkelos to do so.

He also intended to explain the lofty status of the place by saying that this is the House of God, a physical place preceded by the knowledge that God had chosen a place to cause His name to dwell. He said 'this is that place!' He proved further that this was the chosen place when he said 'this is the gate of heaven.' Yaakov said this because he saw angels rising and descending, and he already knew that the sacred place below was aligned with the gate of heaven:

וזה שער השמים, “and this is the gateway to heaven.” According to Rashi, Yaakov referred to the Temple in heaven which is understood to be “opposite” the terrestrial Temple. If, you the reader were to ask how it is possible that the Temple in heaven is opposite that on earth, seeing that the site of that Temple had been moved by G-d, as we have explained?The answer is that it had been moved to be next to Yaakov. When Yaakov had traveled, the site of the terrestrial Temple had always moved with him, as the miracle had been performed for him and not for a piece of earth.

וזה שער השמים, an expression analogous to Chronicles II 30,27 ותבא תפלתם למעון קדשו לשמים, “their prayer reached the residence of His Holiness, to heaven.”

Its Midrashic ... the Heavenly Beis Hamikdosh is situated directly... It seems that the Midrash is not disagreeing. It is explaining why this is the place where prayers ascend: because it is right below the Heavenly Beis Hamikdosh. Nonetheless, “the gate of heaven” is allegorical; heaven has no gate or window. (Nachalas Yaakov)

AND HE SET IT UP FOR A PILLAR. Our Rabbis have explained⁵²Yerushalmi Abodah Zarah IV, 5. the difference between a pillar and an altar by saying that a pillar consists of one stone while an altar is composed of many stones. It further appears that a pillar is made for pouring libations of wine upon it and for the pouring of oil upon it, but not for sacrifices and not for offerings, whereas an altar is for bringing Burnt-offerings and Peace-offerings thereon. When Israel entered the Land, the pillar was prohibited to them⁵³Deuteromony 16:22. because the Canaanites had established it as an ordinance of an idolatrous character to a greater extent than the altars. Even though it is written concerning the altars, Ye shall break down their altars,⁵⁴Exodus 34:13. [since the altars were not as prevalent as pillars among the Canaanites, He did not prohibit the Israelites from making their own altars]. It may be that He did not want to prohibit all sacrifices, and so He retained the altar as fit for libations and sacrifices.

ויצק שמו על ראשה, he anointed it to sanctify it and to make it ready to offer sacrifices on it when he would return to that site. We have such formulations in connection with the sanctification of the various materials donated for the Tabernacle (Numbers 7,1) as well as in Genesis 31,13 and again in verse 22 in our chapter here.

וישם אותה מצבה, he sanctified it as an altar which he would erect on his return from Charan. The Torah testifies in Genesis 35,14 that this is indeed what Yaakov did on his way home to the land of Canaan. ויצב יעקב מצבה במקום אשר דבר “Yaakov established an altar on the site where he had said.”

וישכם יעקב....וישם מצבה, he erected the stone to its full height.

ויקח את האבן אשר שם מראשותיו, “He took the stone which he had made into a pillow for his head.” This was in spite of what we learned in Zevachim 116 that it is forbidden to construct an altar made of matter which has already been used secularly. When it concerns a new structure that one built oneself for the purpose, it is acceptable for a layman to do so.

וישם אותה מצבה, “he set it up as a pillar.” He did not erect this pillar at the site where he slept, i.e. Beer Sheva, but at Bet El which is Jerusalem, the site where the ladder’s top reached Heaven.

מצבה besteht aus einem Stein, מזבה ist eine von Steinen zusammen gebaute Erhöhung, מצבה ist von der Natur gereicht, מזבח von Menschen geschaffen. Vor מתן תורה war die Waltung Gottes zunächst nur in den Gängen der Natur und des Menschenschicksals offenbar, also in dem, was dem Menschen aus Gottes Händen wird; dem entspricht מצבה: der aus Gottes Schöpfung genommene Stein zum Denkmal an eine Gottestat. Mit מתן תורה will Gott nicht sowohl in dem, was von Ihm dem Menschen wird, sondern in dem, was der Mensch mit dem von Ihm Gewährten schafft, offenbar werden, die Menschentat soll Gottverherrlichung werden; das ist ja eben Bestimmung der Gesetzgebung; seitdem ist מצבה verworfen. —

ויקח את האבן, “he took the stone;” according to the sages in Pirkey de rabbi Eliezer, chapter 35, this stone was the one known in later generations as the even shetiyah’ symbolising the navel of the globe a mystical stone at the site where the Holy Ark had stood in the Holy of Holies during the first Temple. This stone, if removed, would expose a hole going down to the center of the earth. It is supposed to have served G-d as the first piece of solid material of what would be the globe on which we live.

ויצק שמן על ראשה, so that he would recognise this stone on his return from Charan. Oil stains on a stone remain for many years and do not disappear. He planned to erect an altar at this site when he would return from Charan. It is also possible that the pouring of oil on that stone was equivalent to pouring a libation of wine on the altar. In fact, when he did return to this site he is reported as doing exactly this (Genesis 35,14) All of this was to be a visible reminder that the Jewish people would take possession, inherit the land promised to them by G’d. Just as Avraham and Yitzchok during their time had treated the land as if it already belonged to them, Yaakov now did the same, albeit it in a miniscule, symbolical way. Once Yaakov had made a monument out of this stone no one had the right to use this stone for his private needs. The fact that some 34 years later he built an altar there using this stone as its foundation, shows that no one in the interval had disputed what this stone had represented. The Torah would not bother to mention that Yaakov had called this site Bet El unless the local people had been informed of this and had not objected to the name change. Clearly, just as the local population had to go along with the wells dug by Avraham and Yitzchok and the names given to these wells because G’d made them respect these patriarchs, so now G’d inspired the local residents to go along with what Yaakov had done there. The attitude G’d inspired in the local population is best described by David in Psalms 105 15 אל תגעו במשיחי ולנביאי אל תרעו, “do not dare touch My anointed, nor do harm to My prophets.”

שמן על ראשה: entweder als Weihe des Steines, wie das Salben der Tempelgeräte mit Öl, wodurch — wie Öl sich mit keiner anderen Flüssigkeit mischt — so der gesalbte Gegenstand aus den übrigen geschieden und emporgehoben wird. Oder: im Sinne der Gussopfer. Wie später Wein hingegossen wurde zum Ausdruck, dass jede Freude von Gott stamme und ihm geweiht bleibe (יין משמח אלקי׳ ואנשים), oder im höchsten Nationalgussopfer: Wasser hingegossen wurde zum Ausdrück, dass nicht nur außergewöhnliche Erlangungen, sondern jeder Tropfen Wasser Gottesspende sei und wir uns durch jeden Tropfen Wasser mit Gott verbunden fühlen: so hier Öl — beim späteren Opfer der Ausdruck der Gesundheit, des Wohlbefindens (להצהיל פנים משמן) —: dass er seine Erhaltung und sein Wohlbefinden aus Gottes Händen erwarte und als Gott geweiht bleibende Gottesspende genießen wolle.

ויצק שמן על ראשה, “he poured some oil on top of it;” he anointed it in order to make it suitable to serve as an altar for sacrifices when he would return from Padan Arom. We know that later on when the Jewish people built a Tabernacle in the desert in Moses’ time, every vessel that was used in that Temple had to be anointed with a special type of oil in order to qualify for such use. (Numbers 7,1) When G-d told Yaakov to return to this site in Genesis 31,13, He made reference to Yaakov having already anointed this stone when he was fleeing from Esau. An alternate exegesis: he poured oil on this stone as a mark by which to recognise this stone on his return when he would fulfill his vow to make it part of a Temple. (Ibn Ezra)

ואולם, but, לוז שם העיר, the Torah refers to the site where Yaakov had slept by the same name as the town nearby.

ואולם לוז שם העיר לראשונה, “however, the name of this town used to be Luz.” The place they called Bet El at that time is Jerusalem now. Why did the Torah bother to tell us that at a still earlier point in history the town had been known as Luz? What benefit do we derive from such information? Perhaps the Torah wanted to hint that the name Luz had been the starting point of the earth rejuvenating itself. It was the site at which earth first started to develop into the globe as we know it. The words לוז השדרה, (Vayikra Rabbah 18,1) mean the place in the spine from which the tissue is able to regenerate itself at the time of the resurrection. Just as the coming into existence of the physical universe out of nothing was something miraculous, so the resurrection when it occurs will be a miracle of similar dimensions. King David had already alluded to this phenomenon when he described the creation of soul, body as well as the eventual resurrection as originating in the “centre” called Zion. He phrased it thus in Psalms 3, 1-3: אל אלוקים ה' דבר, ויקרא ארץ ממזרח שמש עד מבואו. מציון מכלל יופי אלוקים הופיע. “G’d the Lord spoke and summoned the world from east to west.. From Zion, perfect in beauty, G’d appeared.”

Während diese Stätte von Gott gewürdigt wurde, der wichtigste Ausgangspunkt auf Erden zu sein, an welchen sich das Heil der Gesamtmenschheit knüpft. hat man früher an diesem Orte gar nichts gefunden, nannte die Stadt nach einem Haselnussbaum: Haselnussstadt.

ואולם לוז שם העיר לראשונה, “however, the name of the town was Luz, originally. The town was now renamed (probably at the time when the Jewish people conquered that region) on account of the important historical figure Yaakov who had spent the night outside it.

אם יהיה אלהים עמדי IF GOD WILL BE WITH ME — if He will keep for me these promises which He has made me that He would be with me, even as He said to me (v. 15), “Behold, I am with thee” (Genesis Rabbah 70:4),

IF (‘IM’) G-D WILL BE WITH ME. Rashi comments: “If He will keep for me these promises which He made to me.” The reason for the condition is lest the sin cause the abrogation of the promises. And so the Rabbis said in Bereshith Rabbah,⁵⁵76:2. “Rabbi Huna said in the name of Rabbi Acha, ‘And behold, I am with thee,⁵⁶Verse 15 here. and yet it is written, If G-d will be with me! However, from here you infer that there is no assurance to the righteous in this world.’”
In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it is further possible that the word im does not indicate a doubt in the matter, but such is the way of Scripture when referring to future events, such as: until ‘im asithi’ (I have done).⁵⁶Verse 15 here. And so also: ‘Ve’im’ there shall be the jubilee of the children of Israel.⁵⁷Numbers 36:4. In all these cases it means if there will come a time when the condition is satisfied, then the deed will be fulfilled, that is to say, ve’im does not mean “if it occurs,” but rather “when it occurs.”

אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, to remove from me all the pressures which I am under, pressures which prevent man from giving his attention to matters which should receive his attention, i.e. to G’d and what He expects from man. What troubled Yaakov was what our sages in Eyruvin 41 described as the three problems which are liable to unbalance someone’s mind as well as his relationship to his Creator. They are: gentiles, being involved personally in natural disasters, and excessive poverty.

וידור יעקב נדר לאמור. Jacob made a vow saying. The word לאמר is to remind us that unless a vow has been verbalised it is not valid. Mere good intentions do not rate as a vow.

וידר, the vow Yaakov made at this point was a conditional one. The conditional nature did not mean that Yaakov doubted the promise G’d had made to him and G’d’s ability to fulfill it; rather he was afraid that just as all of G’d’s promises presume that the recipient remains worthy of them, so Yaakov was also afraid that some errors he might commit in the future, sinful conduct, would invalidate G’d promises. This is the only reason that he prefaced the vow with the words: “if G’d will be with me, etc.” He was afraid that if he would commit a sin or sins he might never see his father’s house again so that he would be unable to fulfill the vow he was about to make.

אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, “if G’d will be with me, etc.” He referred to G’d’s personal promise to him that He would not become a victim of the way of the righteous who are forever fearful of not possessing sufficient merit, and therefore consider any assurance to them by G’d as only conditional, i.e. אם. [the problem in the text is how did Yaakov dare to apply the word “if” to G’d’s promise. Ed.] Another view of this line is the reason why Yaakov prefaced this line with the word אם, “if,” is not that he conditioned his continued righteous way of life on G’d’s protection, but that seeing it was based on a dream, he could not be sure that this was a divine revelation rather than wishful thinking on his part. Divine promises experienced in a dream may be just that, a dream without substance. Still another interpretation of this verse is that it was an oath. “Just as I am certain that G’d will be with me and that I will return safely to my father’s house, so I am certain that after that I will erect a house of G’d on this site.” Nachmanides states that the word אם does not necessarily have to mean a conditional “if.” An example of such a different meaning of the word אם is found in Numbers 36,4 ואם יהיה היובל לבני ישראל, where it means: “and when the Jubilee year will arrive for the Children of Israel, etc.” Yaakov refers to what he will do as soon as G’d’s promise to him has been fulfilled.

וידר יעקב נדר לאמור, “Yaakov vowed a vow, saying, etc.” Bereshit Rabbah 70,1 concentrating on the apparently extraneous word לאמור, wants to know the need for this word. The answer given is that Yaakov wanted to teach his future offspring that the time to make vows is when one finds oneself in difficulties one does not know how to extricate himself from. Although, as a general rule, the Torah frowns on the making of vows, when a person vows due to finding himself in distress this is perfectly permissible. This why David said (Psalms 119, 106) “I have sworn an oath and I mean to keep it.”

If He will keep these promises that He promised me... Rashi is answering the question: Is not the verse repetitive? It is written אם יהיה אלקים עמדי, which is the same as ושמרני. Thus he explains that אם יהיה אלקים עמדי refers to keeping the promises. You might ask: How could Yaakov Avinu have been in doubt whether Hashem would keep His promise? The answer is: Yaakov was afraid his sins might cause Hashem not to guard him. Another answer: Yaakov thought the promise might be a [mere prophetic] dream, and every dream includes some nonsense (Berachos 55a). Therefore he said, “If He will keep these promises...” You might ask: Since Rashi is showing where the promises are written, where did Hashem promise Yaakov “clothing to wear”? The answer is: If Yaakov was promised bread, surely he was promised clothing. For Chazal say (Bava Metzia 52a): “Exploit for your back, but only its worth for your belly.” This means: exploit (i.e., misuse) your money to buy overpriced clothing [if necessary]. “But only its worth for your belly.” For your stomach, do not pay more [for food] than it is worth. It also says in Chulin 84b: “A person should always eat below his means, but dress above his means.” So if Hashem promised him food, surely He promised him clothing as well. Otherwise, Yaakov would have to cut down on food in order to buy clothing, and would not have [sufficient] food to eat — yet, Hashem promised him [sufficient] food! (Mahara’i)

נדר verwandt mit נתר: springen, jedoch nicht in die Höhe, sondern: von einem Ort zum andern, also: durch Überspringen des zwischenliegenden Raumes sich rasch nach einem andern versetzen; und mit נטר, welches nicht bloß bewahren, verbergen, bedeutet, denn מטרה heißt: Ziel, somit מ, der Punkt, den man נטר, auf den man aus der Ferne im Herzen hinblickt. לא תטר את בני עמך "du sollst keinen der Söhne deines Volkes als zu treffendes Ziel im Herzen tragen: es wird die Zeit schon kommen, wo ich dir vergelte!" Wie nun נתר räumlich sich irgendwohin durch Überspringen des in der Mitte liegenden Raumes, נטר sich in Gedanken in ein fernliegendes Ziel versetzen heißt: so auch גדר. (Vergl. die rabbinischen Ausdrücke: קפץ ונדר ,קפץ ונשבע) Jeder Gelobende versetzt sich schon jetzt in einen Zeitpunkt, der noch nicht vorhanden ist, und bestimmt, was von ihm in demselben geschehen solle.

אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, “as surely as G–d will be with me;” the plain meaning of this verse is not that Yaakov spelled out a condition, but that he swore an oath to G–d.

וידר יעקב נדר, “Yaakov made a vow;” if you were to ask that according to the Talmud in Chulin, 2 (based on Kohelet 5,4) that it is better not to make any vows than to make vows and not pay them on time, so why did Yaakov make such a vow? The word: לאמור which follows the quote above was added in the Torah to show that Yaakov, who was in dire circumstances, made the vow due to his desperate situation; we are to learn from this that in such circumstances G-d even welcomes a vow, as it is proof that the person making it has turned to Him for help.

ושמרני AND IF HE WILL KEEP ME — even as He said to me (v. 15) “And I will keep thee whithersoever thou goest”, (Genesis Rabbah 70:4)

ושמרני, from wicked gentiles who would force him to change his lifestyle;

לחם לאכול ובגד ללבוש, he did not ask G’d for anything but the bare necessities of life. He did not need to ask for water as people find enough water to drink all over on earth.

אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, "If the Lord will be with me, etc." The word אם in this case is not to be understood as something conditional but is similar to the אם כפר יושת עליו in Exodus 21,30, or the אם in Exodus 22,24: אם כסף תלוה את עמי. In both those instances the meaning is "when," i.e. something that will definitely occur (compare Baba Kama 4,5 and Mechilta on Parshat Yitro)

Und eben darin, in dem Antizipieren der Zukunft, die ja noch dazu völlig unbekannt ist, liegt das Sündhafte des גדר. Es gehört schon sehr viel dazu, jeden gegenwärtigen Moment ganz zu übersehen, recht zu würdigen und treu auszufüllen; was im nächsten Moment Pflicht und gut ist, werden wir auch ohne besonders gelobenden Vorsatz zu leisten haben; was Unrecht ist, trotz gelobenden Vorsatzes nicht tun dürfen. Für Gutes und Schlechtes sind somit Gelübde überflüssig. Nur Gleichgültiges bliebe übrig, es ist aber wohl mehr als Torheit, Gleichgültiges zu einer ernsten Pflicht, noch dazu für eine unbekannte Zukunft, zu erheben. Nur in außerordentlichen Fällen, בשעת צרה, wo, wie hier, nicht die Zukunft antizipiert, sondern umgekehrt der gegenwärtige Moment so bedeutend ist, dass er als eine Grundlage fürs kommende Leben in dieses hinübergetragen werden soll, ist ein Gelübde gestattet und kann auch מצוה sein, wie hier bei Jakob. —

אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, “if G’d will be with me;” what made him doubt that G’d would be with him? After all he was on an errant for his father to fulfill the commandment to take for himself a suitable wife? Answer: he was afraid that before being able to carry out his mission he might have become guilty of some sin so that he would forfeit that the protection that being on a mitzvah errand would normally afford him. Some commentators prefer to understand the whole verse as an oath, meaning: “I swear to do this in order that G’d will listen to my prayer. [The reason for this interpretation, I believe, is that otherwise the conditional word אם, “if” in the vow sounds as if he presented G’d with an ultimatum, that he would acknowledge G’d as his G’d only on these conditions first having been met. Ed.]

ונתן לי לחם לאכול AND IF HE WILL GIVE ME BREAD TO EAT — even as He said (v. 15) “For I will not forsake thee” (Genesis Rabbah 70:4), — for one who has to beg his bread is called “forsaken”, as it is said (Psalms 37:25) “I have not seen the righteous forsaken and his seed begging bread”.

ונתן לי לחם לאכול, so that I will not be forced to violate both my own integrity and that ordained for me by my Maker.

Jacob also included the attribute of Justice in his vow. So far G'd had spoken to him only in His capacity as Hashem, the attribute of Mercy. He undertook to tithe his acquisitions provided that also the attribute of Justice would prove to be with him. This is why he chose the expression אלוקים and not השם when formulating his vow.

Rätselhaft ist das Wort עמדי. Während עם, von עמם, nur eine parallele Begleitung bedeutet, scheint עמדי, von עמד, eine noch innigere Teilnahme zu bedeuten, so dass einer durch den andern seinen Stand erhalte und behalte. Auffallend ist nur, dass diese Präposition nur mit dem Suff. der 1. Person sius. vorkommt. —

ושמרני וגו׳. Indem hier — nicht wie in יברכך וישמרך :ברכת כהנים — die Bitte um Schutz der Bitte um Segen: Brot und Gewand, Nahrung und bürgerliche Stellung, vorangeht, kann sich der hier erbetene Schutz nicht auf zu wahrende äußere Güter beziehen, die er ja noch nicht hatte, sondern auf die Erhaltung der geistigen und sittlichen Güter, die er in seiner Persönlichkeit trug, und die allerdings "auf dem Wege den er ging", um so leichter gefährdet werden konnten, je ärmer er an äußeren Gütern war. Seitdem die Pforten des Paradieses zugefallen, ist die Gewinnung eines selbständigen Herdes, das נתן לי, ein so schwieriges, von so vielfach künstlich verschlungenen Zuständen und Verhältnissen Abhängiges geworden, dass es des ganzen göttlichen Beistandes bedarf, dass man nicht um dieses Stückchen Brot sein ganzes besseres Selbst einbüße. Wer will die Menschen zählen, die vor dem "Betreten des Weges zu Brot und Nahrung" sittlich rein waren, und um des Brotes und der zu gewinnenden bürgerlichen Stellung willen, Leugner an Gott wurden, Sittlichkeit preisgaben, des Nächsten bis in das Kleinod seiner Ehre nicht schonten usw. usw.? Nicht umsonst zeigt das Wort der Weisen, wie in diesem "Wege" לה"ר ש"ד ,ג"ע ,ע"ז liegen. Jakob, der bis jetzt יושב אהלים war, und nun dahinwandert, um ein Weib, und Brot für ein Weib und eine Familie zu gewinnen, schaut diese Gefahr so tief an, dass er zuerst Gott um Schutz seiner Persönlichkeit bittet, dass er nichts einbüße an geistiger und sittlicher Untadel- haftigkeit.

Untadelhaftigkeit ist daher das erste, welches der erste Jude auf dem Wege zur Hausesgründung sich wünschte, und dann ׳לי וגו, mir, d. h. selbständig Brot zum Essen und Kleid, um in der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft anständig auftreten zu können, also: Nahrung und bürgerliche Stellung; und das dritte, das in der Brust des Juden lebt und leben soll, ist: שלום, der Wunsch nach Frieden, und endlich: בית אב, die unverwüstliche Anhänglichkeit an die Familie.

Wenn Gott dies mir gewährt: והיה ד׳ לי לאלקים, dies ist auch ein Gedanke, der von nun an weiterleben soll und auf den noch die späteste גאולה zurückblickt. Wenn Gott in diesem Kampfe den Menschen schützt und segnet, dann hat sich Gott als ׳ד, in seinem מרת הרחמים, gezeigt — und eine solche Beziehung Gottes zu uns wünscht sich jeder. Allein nur der Jude spricht והיה ה׳ לי לאלקים dann soll Gott, der mich mit seiner segnenden Liebe überschüttet, mir ein Gott sein, der nicht nur spendet, sondern, der mit allem Gewährten seinen Willen gefördert wissen will. Gott als Gesetz- geber und nicht bloß als Spender zu huldigen, sich von ihm die Richtung jedes Pulsschlages und die Verwendung jedes Groschens gestalten lassen, das heißt: ד׳ לי לאלקים. So spricht Gott zu Jakobs erlösten Enkeln: ich habe euch erlöst: להיות לכם לאלקי׳/, idamit ihr nun euer gewonnenes menschliches und bürgerliches Leben nach meinem Willen gestaltet und vollendet.

ושבתי SO THAT I RETURN — even as He said (v. 15) “I will restore thee again into this land” (Genesis Rabbah 70:4),

THEN THE ETERNAL SHALL BE MY G-D. This is not a condition, as Rashi would have it. It is rather a vow, and its purport is as follows: “If I will return to my father’s house, I will worship the proper Name of the Eternal in the Chosen Land at the location of this stone which will be for me a house of G-d, and there I will set aside the tithe.” There is in this matter a secret relating to that which the Rabbis have said:⁵⁸Kethuboth 110b. “He who dwells outside the Land of Israel is like one who has no G-d.” [Thus, according to the meaning of the above quotation, the Eternal will be Jacob’s G-d only when he returns to the Land of Israel.]

ושבתי בשלום, in accordance with G’d’s promise in verse 15.

ושבתי בשלום, from all the problems besetting man, i.e. a reference to what the Talmud had called רוח רעה.

והיה ה׳ לי לאלוקים. "Then Hashem will be my Lord." This sounds, G'd forbid, as if until now Hashem had not been Jacob's G'd. Rashi explains that Jacob meant that G'd would not find any of his children as morally unfit. I do not know where such a thought is alluded to in Jacob's words. [actually Rashi quotes a Sifri in Parshat Va-Etchanan section 31. Ed.] Besides such a promise, i.e. that his children would be morally fit, is at best a conditional promise [seeing that the matter lies within the will-power of the children, Ed.]. When would the stone then be able to serve as a monument for this encounter Jacob experienced during his dream? The proper explanation of what Jacob said is that he was prepared to conduct himself in such a way that G'd would consent to associate His name with him even during his lifetime. He had previously done this with Abraham after the latter's death and with Isaac only after he had become blind and therefore beyond the reach of the evil urge (compare verse 13). The words לי לאלוקים are clear evidence of Jacob's intention. This was a tremendous undertaking by Jacob. You will find in Genesis 33,20 that G'd reminded him of that undertaking and that Jacob then fulfilled this vow by erecting a monument in G'd's honour.

ושבתי בשלום, with his wife and children, for without them neither he, his father, or his mother would consider themselves at peace, seeing that he was forbidden to marry one of the Canaanite girls.

והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, “the Lord will then be even my G’d as attribute of Justice.” According to Rashi, these words are a continuation of those that preceded them, i.e. the words אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, so that Yaakov is saying that once the Lord will be his G’d in practice, having displayed His personal benevolent providence to Yaakov by extending His protection to him, he will convert this stone into a house of worship for that G’d where he will bring the tithes that he spoke about. Some commentators understand the words ושבתי בשלום אל בית אבי, “and I will return hale and hearty to my father’s house, etc.,” as the source of the halachic ruling that travelers, while engaged on their journeys, are relieved from the need to perform certain commandments that would make their getting home safely more difficult.

ושבתי בשלום אל בית אבי, “and I shall return in peace to my father’s house, etc.” We notice that every detail which formed part of Yaakov’s vow and whatever he mentioned was fulfilled for him. When he asked G’d ושמרני בדרך, “and He will watch over me on the journey,” G’d most certainly watched over him and protected him. As to his request for לחם, bread or food, this was a reference to the women whom he married. The term לחם to describe someone’s wife is used by Joseph (Genesis 39,6) when he told the wife of his master Potiphar that the only thing in his household Potiphar had withheld from him was הלחם אשר הוא אוכל, “the bread which he eats.” Another instance where לחם, bread, is used to describe someone’s wife, is found in Exodus 2,2 where Yitro tells his daughters to invite Moses so that “he may eat bread.” He did not mean to invite him merely to eat bread but to let him marry one of his seven unmarried daughters.
As to Yaakov’s request for clothes to wear, this was part of his wealth when he had large flocks of sheep which provided him with wool. His request to return to his father’s home safely and in good health was answered when we read in 33,18 ויבא יעקב שלם, “Yaakov arrived home safely.” As to Yaakov fulfilling his part of the bargain and making אלוקים his G’d [ to make the attribute of Justice the yardstick by which G’d would measure him; Ed.] this is referred to in the Torah in 33,20 where we read: ויקרא לו קל אלוקי ישראל, “Yaakov called G’d the G’d of Israel.”

Completely free from sin... This too was part of Hashem’s promises. He said (v. 15), “...Until I have done what I spoke to you,” on which Rashi explains: “In your interest and concerning you.” And if Yaakov would not be free of sin, but would learn from Lavan, then Hashem’s promises surely would not be fulfilled. For all Hashem’s promises are on condition that sin should not cause [their nonfulfillment]. (Nachalas Yaakov)

בשלום IN PEACE, perfectly free (שלם) from sin, not having learnt evil from Laban’s ways,

והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, to assist me in all my undertakings.

והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, then G’d will be a judge, and He can examine to see if I did not fulfill my vow to the best of my ability. The letter ו at the beginning of the word והיה, [where we would perhaps have expected Yaakov to use an ordinary future tense such as יהיה, Ed.], may be in lieu of the word הנה, meaning that Yaakov would already from now on act on the assumption that G’d would provide him with the necessities he had asked for and therefore he was willing to be judged by the attribute of Justice, not relying on the attribute of Mercy.

והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, this was the gist of the vow, meaning that he would concentrate on the service of the Lord and minimise any mundane activities. Furthermore, he vowed that he would build an altar on the place where he had slept on the stone which he had just anointed.
יהיה בית אלוקים, he would build a Temple and altar there so that anyone worshipping the Lord could come there and pray and offer his sacrifices on that altar. It would be a Temple for the G’d in heaven only. Another way of understanding these words could be that he would instruct his children to build a Temple there in the future when they would take possession of the land of Israel.
A further vow Yaakov made at this time was: וכל אשר תתן לי עשר אעשרנו לך, I will give a tithe of all the acquisitions including the cattle which You will give me. I will distribute this tithe to needy people in order to encourage them to switch to monotheism. According to Bereshit Rabbah 70,7 the vow included tithing one of his future children to G’d, i.e. appointing him as a servant of the Lord representing the other sons. [As an interesting aside, the Midrash there claims that assigning only one of 12, respectively 14 sons, if we add Ephrayim and Menashe, Yaakov did not “tithe” i.e. give 10% of his children to the Lord, he is reported as having replied that seeing that each of his four wives had one firstborn, someone whose duty it was as a firstborn to devote himself to spiritual matters without his father “donating” him to G’d for such a task, he Yaakov had done well to additionally assign Levi as a “tithe” for the remaining 10 “children.” Ed.] As to the formulation:

והיה ה' לי לאלהים AND IF THE LORD WILL BE MY GOD, in that His Name shall rest upon me from the beginning to the end: that no unworthy person shall be found in my descendants (Sifré, ואתחנן 31) — just as it is said (v. 15), “I will do that which I spake concerning thee”; and this promise He made to Abraham, as it is said (17:7) “To be a God unto thee and unto thy seed after thee”,

עשר אעשרנו לך, as a grammatically unusual formulation, this is an accepted formulation as we find it also confirmed in Deuteronomy 11,13 with the same verb, or in Deuteronomy 14,22 שמור תשמרון with a different verb. There are many similar examples of this kind of repetition for emphasis. Our sages in Ketuvot 50 use the formulation used in this verse as teaching that even if one wants to be generous in his donations to charity and holy causes, one should not give away more than 20% of one’s wealth in order not to become an object of charity himself because of carelessly squandering wealth given to one by G’d. The wordsעשר אעשרנו are understood by the Talmud there as applying to two such tithes of 10% each.

והאבן הזאת THEN THIS STONE — This is how you should explain the ו of והאבן: if He will do these things mentioned in Genesis 28:15 as He promised, then I, also, will do this:

עשר אעשרנו לו, to present to Him a burnt offering.

והאבן הזאת, and concerning this stone, etc. According to Zohar 1,72 the stone in question is the אבן שתיה, the stone G'd used as the foundation of the Holy Temple and which He had buried in the interval in the depths of the abyss at the "navel" of the earth. According to Tanchuma Parshat Terumah, Jacob prepared the shittim wood for the Tabernacle in the desert at this time. Perhaps this is what G'd referred to in Exodus 25,8 when He said: "They shall make for Me a Sanctuary;" G'd referred to this wood from which the Israelites were to construct this Sanctuary. When the Torah there continued: "and I shall dwell amongst them," G'd may have referred to preparations made by Jacob for both the Tabernacle and the Holy Temple.

עשר אעשרנו לך, “I will give two tithes of it to You.” Yaakov kept his promise to give a tithe of everything that was his, including even his children. [This has been discussed in connection with 27,19. Ed.] Our verse forms the basis of a Talmudic statement in Ketuvot 50 that even someone who dispenses charity very generously should not disburse more that one fifth of his wealth so as not to risk becoming a charge on charity himself. Yaakov serves as the example seeing he tithed 20% of his wealth.

As it is translated ... And he, indeed, did so upon his return... Rashi says, “And he indeed did so...” so that we will not ask: How does Onkelos know that “become a House of God” means specifically that Yaakov will serve Hashem on this monument, [i.e., will bring offerings on it?] Rashi answers: We see that Yaakov brought offerings in the end. Evidently, this was his intention from the beginning. The phrase, “And Hashem will be my God” (v. 21), is part of the condition [that Yaakov set for his vow,] not part of [his promise in] the vow. Therefore Onkelos says here, “I shall serve Hashem upon it,” implying: Even if Hashem does not keep His promise, I surely will bring offerings to Him—but not on this altar. You might object: It says וכל אשר תתן לי עשר אעשרנו לך, implying: “And if You do not keep the promise, I will not give You a tenth.” The answer is: [The ו of וכל denotes “but”. Accordingly,] this phrase means: “But of all that You give, I will surely give a tenth to You, even if You do not keep the promise.” However, the Maharshal writes: It seems that Yaakov was saying as follows: “If You keep the promise—עשר אעשרנו, I will give two tenths. And if not, I will give one tenth.” And so he did.

— und so wird dieser Stein, den ich jetzt mir zum Denkmal für diesen Moment gesetzt, wo ich als ärmster Mann auf kahler Haide mit Hinausblick in eine solche ganze gottgesegnete Zukunft dastehe, zu einem Hause ausgebaut werden, in welchem Gott ein solches Leben gelebt wird, dass Gott darin einziehe. Nur dadurch. dass ד׳ uns לאלקי׳ wird, kann eine irdische Stätte zum Gotteshause werden. Auch dies kehrt eine verkehrte, oft am meisten mit ihren Gotteshäusern prunkende Zeit um, baut, wie das der Prophet (Jecheskeel 43, 8) nennt, ספם את ספי "ihre Schwelle neben meiner Schwelle", dass jedes sein besonderes Gebiet, "Gott auch ein Haus", aber beileibe nicht unser Haus zu dem seinigen habe! Besuchen Gott in seinem Hause, aber verbitten sich den Besuch Gottes in ihrem Hause — wo seine Gegenwart mit seinen Anforderungen freilich unbequem sein dürfte!

'וכל אשר תתן לי וגו, “and all that You will give to me, etc.;” Yaakov promised to tithe all the money (material goods) that he would acquire with the help of G–d. (B’reshit Rabbah, 70,7) A heretic once asked Rabbi Yoshua son of Levi, where the Torah reported that Yaakov kept this promise. He was answered that Yaakov declared this tithe “sacred,” i.e. he gave it to the treasury of religious institutions. Thereupon the heretic wanted to know what this tithe consisted as precisely seeing that Yaakov was not a wealthy man. He was told that Yaakov made all his newly born animals pass under a gate, and every tenth animal he declared as holy, i.e. not to be used for secular needs. In the Talmud this procedure is called: מעשר בהמה, “tithe from livestock.” [Since Yaakov did not plant crops, not owning any arable land in the land of Canaan (except one small field near Sh’chem from which he moved away before it could produce a crop), he could not tithe his crops. The version in my edition of B’reshit Rabbah is slightly different but the point is made that Yaakov certainly did not default on his vow. Ed.]

והאבן הזאת literally: “and this stone,” but the meaning must be: “I will offer sacrifices and separate tithes on this stone (altar).” The letter ו at the beginning of the word: והאבן, appears superfluous.

והאבן הזאת אשר שמתי מצבה THEN THIS STONE WHICH I HAVE SET UP FOR A PILLAR etc. — Explain it as the Targum translates it: “I shall serve the Lord upon it” This, indeed, he did on his return from Padan-aram, when God said to him, (Genesis 35:1) “Arise, go up to Bethel”. What is stated there? “And Jacob set up a pillar … and he poured out a drink-offering thereon” (Genesis 35:14).

Nicht also wards bei dem allerersten Grundstein zu dem ersten "Hause Gottes" gedacht! Die Gottesheiligkeit der Häuser ist Bedingung der Gottesheilig- keit des Gotteshauses, das nicht מקדש heißt, weil dort die der קדושה angewiesene Stätte sei, sondern weil von dort aus die Heiligkeit in alle menschlichen Verhältnisse und Räume dringen soll, deren Mittelpunkt es ist. ועשו לי מקדש, heißt es einst von dem auf Grund dieses Steines auszubauenden Menschen- und Volksleben der Jakobsenkel, heißt es selbst vom ,ד׳ אלקיך מתהלך בקרב מחנך ;והתהלכתי בתוככם ,ושכנתי בתוכם Kriegeslager, und das Ziel der mit diesem Steine beginnenden Entwicklung heißt: והיה כל סיר בירושלים וביהודה קדש לד׳ צבאו׳ "jeder Topf in Jerusalem und Juda soll Gott heilig sein (Secharja 14, 21).

Auf diesen Stein schaut Jakob noch in seiner Sterbestunde als auf den Anfang und Grundstein Israels hin, und spricht von Gott aus: משם רועה אבן ישראל, dass Er von da an diesen Stein als Hirte überwachend und schützend zu seinem Ziele führe. Von diesem Stein vielleicht heißt es in Secharja 3: על אבן אחת שבעה עינים, dass über diesen einen Stein sieben Augen, somit die Fülle der göttlichen Vorsehung wache, er der אבן הראשה, der erste Eckstein sei, der mit dem Bau des zweiten Tempels wieder aufs neue zu legen war, dem aber תשנאות חן הן לה, die rauschendste Fülle der Vollendung gesichert ist. Von diesem Steine heißt es daher sinnig in פרקי דר"א: Gott habe diesen Stein als fortsetzendes Zubehör der Erdgestaltung angefügt: עשה אותה סניף לארץ; denn auf dem mit diesem Steine beginnenden Bau "menschlicher Häuser für Gott" beruht die ganze Bestimmungszukunft der Erde. Er ist der אבן שתיה, der Grund- oder Begründungsstein. Siehe שרשים ,רד"ק, Rad. שות.

עשר אעשרנו לך‎ (siehe oben zu Kap.14:20)