Tafsiran yang Mengutip untuk Yosua 24:2

Originally our ancestors were idol worshippers: Earlier we explained the Talmudic dictum: in telling the story of the Exodus we should begin with genut, disgrace, and end with shevach, with praise. Rav says that we do this by beginning with, “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt,” and ending, “And He took us out from there…” while Samuel claims that we fulfill this dictum by beginning, “At first our ancestors were idol worshippers,” and continuing, “God has brought us near to serve Him.” We explained Rav’s opinion above; now we must explain Samuel’s opinion. Some questions arise: first what disgrace is there in the fact that Terach worshipped idols since this occurred before the giving of the Torah at Sinai? And second, Rashi explains that the praiseworthy conclusion to this statement is when we say: “Who redeems us and redeemed our ancestors.” This statement needs some explanation!
To understand Samuel, we must begin with the following statement from the Midrash: When God said to Moses, “I shall visit the sins of the ancestors on their children,”⁶⁸Exodus 20: 5 Moses said: ‘Wicked parents sometimes give birth to righteous children; why should good children have to bear the sin of their wicked parents? For instance: Terach was a maker of idols and yet his son, Abraham, was righteous! Should righteous children be flogged for their wicked parents? God said to Moses: By your life I will fulfill your words: “Parents shall not be put to death for children nor children for their parents.”⁶⁹Deuteronomy 2416 For the original source of this Midrash see: missing source?
This statement is troubling. We have two statements in the Torah which contradict one another: one that says that children are punished for their parents’ sins and the other that says they are not punished for the sins of their parents. The Talmud tries to reconcile these statements by saying one is speaking about a situation where children remain wicked like their parents and the other when children do not follow in their wicked parents’ footsteps – then a child is not punished for his parents’ sins. And yet we do see situations in which good children suffer for their wicked parents’ deeds. There is another reason for this.
A well known Midrash⁷⁰Shir Hashirm Rabbah 1:24 - Rabbi Meir said: When the Jews stood before Sinai to receive the Torah, God said to them: "I swear, I will not give you the Torah unless you provide worthy guarantors who will assure that you will observe its laws." The Jews responded, "Master of the world, our forefathers will be our guarantors!" "Your guarantors themselves require guarantors!" was God's reply. "Master of the world," the Jews exclaimed, "our prophets will guarantee our observance of the Torah." "I have grievances against them, too.’The shepherds have rebelled against Me' (Jeremiah 2:8)," God replied. "Bring proper guarantors and only then will I give you the Torah." As a last resort, the Jews declared, "our children will serve as our guarantors!" "They truly are worthy guarantors," God replied. "Because of them I will give the Torah." tells us that before God would give the Torah to the people of Israel, God insisted on some type of guarantee in lieu of the Torah. After several offers, Israel chose to make their children their pledge for the Torah. When good children suffer because of their parents’ wrong doings, it is not that they are being punished in lieu of their parents but because they were given as a pledge for the Torah. But this idea is also problematic. How can parents obligate their children when they are minors and are not free to choose or reject the offer? Isn’t Jewish law that a person cannot obligate someone else without him being present or in the case of a minor without his explicit consent when he has reached the age of obligation? And yet we see in the book of Deuteronomy that Moses says that the covenant of Israel was made not only for those who were present at Sinai but those who were not present.
And yet to be Israel’s guarantor for the Torah is not considered an obligation but a privilege, and in Jewish law we have a principle: zachin l’adam she’lo bifanav: “One can accept a privilege for someone even if he is not present” (or is not of age to accept it himself).” We are allowed to accept something for a another person that will benefit the other person even if they did not expressly give us permission to do so. For instance, one can immerse a non-Jewish minor for the purpose of conversion even though he is not yet old enough to accept this on his own. Similarly, even though the pledging of Israel’s children for the purpose of receiving the Torah entailed obligations (and even punishments) it was considered a privilege and not an obligation.
Returning to our original question regarding the contradictory verses in the Torah: the statement that, ‘children are punished for the sins of their parents’ troubled Moses. It refers to the period before the giving of the Torah. That is why the Haggadah begins “At first (that is, before the giving of the Torah) our ancestors were idolaters.” That is why Abraham’s descendents had to suffer in Egypt in payment for the sins of their idolatrous ancestors. After the giving of the Torah at Sinai, the operating principle changed: children were no longer punished for the sins of the parents.
Sometimes, however, children are still subject to the behaviors and consequences of their parents’ actions. But this is not punishment but a matter of being our parents’ guarantors. The Haggadah tells us not to be surprised that we went down to Egypt and had to spend time ridding ourselves of our idolatrous parents’ sins. After the giving of the Torah we no longer were subject to our parents’ wrong doing, but we still had an obligation that went along with the privilege of accepting the Torah and worshipping God.
We can now understand why Samuel’s telling begins with “At first our ancestors were idolaters,” and why it ends with the statement thanking God for redeeming us and our ancestors. A slave might not be free but he does not have to observe the sexual taboos and boundaries set by the law. One could argue, therefore, that a parent is really obligating his children by making them observe the laws of the Torah⁷¹You can’t have sex with whoever you want! However, the Midrash tells us that one of the reasons Israel was worthy of being redeemed is that they already observed many of these limitations – so this was not a new set of obligations. When we thank God, in the Haggadah, “who redeemed us and our ancestors,” we are making reference to this fact and proof that it was a privilege and not an obligation for Israel to now accept the Torah.
Returning to the earlier questions: Since Terach lived before the giving of the Torah, why should he be punished for not believing in God? The Midrash tells us that Abraham was 48 before he came to believe in God and that Terach did not convert until even later in his old age. Abraham was punished, therefore, for waiting so long to accept the existence of God. This might explain also why Job was punished: Job was none other than Uz, the grandson of Terach. He carried the guilt of his grandfather who waited so long to see the truth of God’s existence.
But why did Job have to pay for the guilt of his grandfather? According to the Kabbalists, Job held the transmigrated soul of Terach – so, in fact, through Job was Terach atoning for his sins!! Job, then, was not paying for his fathers’ or his grandfather’s sins but for his own sins which transmigrated with him into future generations. Abraham was fearful that he might have to atone for the sins of his father after having the vision of the pieces. He needed to be reassured that while he would have to atone for his own sins, he would not have to atone for the sins of his father
Abraham was actually very fearful that he thought that he would have to bear the suffering for his father’s reluctance to convert; God reassured him that Job had already been born and that he would bear this suffering instead of him. But Abraham’s descendents were still destined to suffer in Egypt for the sins of their ancestor, Abraham, for one of two reasons: either because he waited until he was forty eight to affirm his belief in God and as a result the Israelites in Egypt also continued to worship idols; or second, because he expressed a lack of faith in God’s promise when he said, “O Lord how am I to know that I am to possess it?”⁷²Genesis 15:8 God response to this statement was: “Know well that your ancestors shall be strangers in the land not theirs…”⁷³Genesis 1513
Both of these explanations for the sojourn in Egypt are problematic. It doesn’t seem right that the people of Israel should suffer because Abraham questioned whether God would fulfill His promise. The Israelites, in fact, showed great faith in God when Moses returned to Egypt to tell them that God would redeem them. If we presume that God only visits the sins of the fathers on his children when they fail to repent, doesn’t the Torah say of Israel: “And the people believed when they heard that the Lord had taken note…?”⁷⁴Exodus 4:31 On the other hand, if one argues that the reason for Israel’s sojourn in Egypt was Abraham’s failure to convert until he was forty eight, this too does not seem right. Then the purpose of the Exile was to purify the Israelites of the idolatry that they were still carrying in Egypt. Yet we know that the Israelites continued to worship idols until the redemption from Egypt!
We can now understand why the Haggadah continues with the statement, “Originally our ancestors worshipped idols.” This statement suggests that the reason for the descent into Egypt was Abraham and Terach. Abraham and Terach were idolaters and they were slow to affirm their faith in one God. As a result, we must bear the consequences of their actions and it was necessary for us to be purified of idolatry through the suffering in Egypt. Lest one say, ‘why should they suffer; didn’t they convert to monotheism,’ the Haggadah emphasizes the word ‘originally,’ to tell us that this is for their actions prior to their conversion. The text calls Terach ‘the father of Abram and the father of Nachor’ as a way of telling us that while we must bear the consequences of Abraham idolatry, Job (or Uz, as he is called) bore the consequences of Terach’s idolatry and late conversion to monotheism.
Finally we can return to the original question: in what way does this statement reflect our shameful origins? Because Abraham took so long to convert, we had to bear the consequences of his delay. In this way our story begins with genut, with shame. We also see that Israel suffered in Egypt not only because their forefather took so long to convert, but because our ancestors too continued to worship idols. Since they continued in the sinful ways of their ancestors, they were subject to the verse, “He visits the sins of the fathers on their children.” We can also understand the conclusion of this passage in which we bless God for redeeming us and redeeming our forefathers.” ⁷⁵Genesis 13:17 Israel helped to repair the sins of Abraham as well as their own sins through their time as slaves in Egypt.
And Joshua said…God led them through all of the land of Canaan (Joshua 24:2-4): This verse illustrates God’s great love for Abraham and his descendents. Normally one cannot acquire property by simply wandering through the territory. But God loved Abraham so much he allowed him to acquire the land of Canaan by simply ‘walking’ through the land. We see this in the verse, “Rise up and walk about the land, through its length and its breadth for I give it to you.” Similarly in the verse quoted in the Haggadah, Joshua tells the people that God led them through the land – thereby taking possession of the land. Only Jerusalem was in the territory bequeathed to Shem; the rest of the land of Canaan belonged to the descendents of Ham. By allowing Abraham and his descendents to walk through the land, they took possession of it.
One might ask: what benefit was there in this for Abraham since he did not really take possession of the land of Canaan? That is why the verse in the Haggadah says, “I took your father from the other side of the river and led him through all the land of Canaan and multiplied his seed and gave him Isaac⁷⁶Joshua 14:3.” Even though Abraham did not yet merit to take possession of the land, God gave him offspring so that there would be future generations to possess the land for him.
…and I multiplied his seed and gave him Isaac: How is it that Abraham was capable of inheriting the land of Canaan? The Midrash teaches us that when Abraham checked the stars,⁷⁷The whole subject of astrology and the influence of the astrological bodies on human destiny is one that has been discussed at length in Medieval thought. We also know from archeological finds from the classical period that there is much evidence of astrology in the archeology of synagogues from the late Roman and Byzantine period. It is not at all surprising to find that the Rabbis suggested that Abraham consulted the stars. he realized that he would not have children. (Children depend on the astrological signs and not human merit; this is an idea that might have been comforting for those who were unable to have children. It suggests that childlessness is not a punishment but a simple fact of destiny.) The Moharsha writes that even those things that are determined by astrological signs are overturned by the merit of the many.⁷⁸In other words nothing is determined by forces beyond our control. If the many merit it, they can overcome those things that are determined by the stars! The greatness of Abraham is that his merit is similar to that of the many; even though the astrological signs suggested that he would never have children, he was able to overcome his own astrological destiny. In a discussion Talmud Rosh Hashanah, we learn that even though Sarah was an individual, she was considered to be like a multitude because she was destined to give birth to a great nation. In discussing which verses could be included in the Zichronot, the verses of remembrance in the Rosh Hashanah service, the sages teach that verses which deal of visitation such as “God visited Sarah,”⁷⁹Genesis 22:1 could be included in the Zichronot service. This was the case even though we normally don’t include verses that talk about remembering or visitation when they are speaking about an individual. This is because of Sarah’s unique status as the mother of great nations. Since Sarah was compared to ‘many,’ so too Abraham was considered to be like the many. This is also suggested in the verse above. If the many were to come from Isaac then the verse should have said “I gave him Isaac and I multiplied his (Isaac’s) seed.” The verse in Joshua says: “I multiplied his seed and gave him Isaac” suggesting that Abraham was considered to be like the many. Abraham had only one worthy child; God, in fact, did not ‘multiply his seed.’ This expression would not seem to fit Abraham. What we learn here is that Abraham was meritorious because of the many that would eventually be born from his line through Sarah and it was the future generations that gave him the merit to overcome the astrological signs that suggested he wasn’t worthy of having children.⁸⁰The reasoning here seems to be a little backward – if it was written in the stars that Abraham would not have children, how could his future generations make him worthy of overcoming the deterministic fate written in the astrological signs. Could it be that Sarah was destined to be the mother of a great nation even though the stars did not favor Abraham?
And I gave to Isaac Jacob and Esau: Why does the verse mention Esau? This is a way of proving the genealogy of Isaac. Isaac and Rebecca gave birth to a righteous son (Jacob) and a wicked son (Esau). The righteous son was born to them because Isaac was a righteous man and the son of a righteous man. The wicked child was born to them because even though Rebecca was righteous, she was the daughter of a wicked father. The other nations had looked at the astrological signs and they saw that Abraham was not supposed to have children. When Sarah became pregnant they presumed that she was impregnated while she was in the house of Avimelech. By mentioning that Isaac and Rebecca gave birth to a righteous and a wicked child it became clear that Abraham was the grandfather of one and Rebecca’s father was the grandfather of the other. Had Avimelech been the father of Isaac then Isaac would have given birth to two wicked sons and not just one. The verse goes on to say: “I gave Esau Mount Seir as a possession but Jacob and his children went down to Egypt.” This was further proof of Abraham’s lineage. Jacob and his family went down to Egypt in order fulfill the debt of his grandfather: “Your offspring shall be strangers in a land not their own and they shall be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years.” If Jacob was not the descendent of Abraham he would not have had to go down to Egypt with his family and become enslaved. Similarly, God promised to give Abraham’s descendents ten nations. Seven were given to the children of Israel, one was given to Esau’s descendents, and two were given to Lot’s descendents. Even though Esau was unworthy of inheriting a land, he had to do so in order to fulfill the promise God had made to Abraham.

“.... And I gave Isaac, Jacob and Esau.” (Josh. 24:2-4) This verse is quoted here since the Maggid wanted to say afterwards, “Blessed is the one who keeps His promise…” If Israel complained, “Where is God’s promise which he made to our father, Abraham, in the Covenant of the Pieces that he would give them the land in which they were dwelling? Why did Esau inherit Mount Seir and they are still dwelling in their inheritance while Israel is in exile from their land. Therefore, the Maggid comfort Israel and says, “Blessed is the one who keeps his promise…”¹⁰³At first glance this comment appears to be backwards. The quote from Joshua, according to Rabbi Foa, is offered as an excuse to comfort Israel with the words, “Blessed is the one who keeps his promise.” The first of the verses from Joshua 24:2-4 appear to have been fulfilled by God - the last part has not been fulfilled - the Maggid reassures us by telling us that God keeps his promise and this too will be fulfilled. The verse then is a set up for us to say that even if it doesn’t appear to be so, God keeps God’s promises.

Continuing the earlier discussion regarding Laban, Horowitz relates this question to Lurianic Kabbalah. According to Isaac Luria, or the Ari as he is often called, Israel’s exile was necessary for the cosmic redemption of the world. Horowitz draws on the Lurianic myth of creation (tzimtuzum), the breaking of the vessels (shevirat hakeilim), and the redemption of the divine sparks (nitzotzot) which had an honored place in Hasidic thought as well. According to Luria, a cosmic catastrophe took place at the time of creation. God figuratively withdrew from the universe in order to make room for creation but allowed His sparks to be contained in ‘earthly vessels.’ The divine sparks, however, were too powerful and caused the vessels to shatter and the divine sparks to scatter throughout the world. Hidden amid the evil and darkness of the world, then, are divine sparks. It is the job of the Jewish people to redeem these sparks wherever they are found and to allow them to return to their divine source in order to bring redemption to the world. The exile of the Jewish people, then, is a necessary part of redeeming the sparks - nitzotzot. Sin causes the sparks to remain hidden in the world while mitzvot reveal these hidden sparks. What is interesting is that the myth of divine sparks is very specific and even mathematical – there are 288 sparks hidden in creation. Jacob’s exile in Aram and his descendents exile in Egypt were all part of the process of freeing the sparks. These numbers are arrived at through complex gematriot and numerical calculations. Horowitz will return to the Lurianic myth many times in his understanding of the Exodus. Israel’s servitude is all about redeeming the sparks that are trapped in Egypt.
Laban sought to exterminate all of them – even the females: When Laban confronted Jacob following his flight from Aram, Laban said: “The girls are my daughters and the children are my children…all that you see is mine!” (Genesis 31:43) God warned Laban not to harm Jacob but said nothing about Jacob’s offspring. Laban felt compassion for his daughters and their children but his intention was ultimately to destroy future generations of their children. This is implied by his statement above; he is saying, in effect, “Your wives and children are really mine and I can do with them as I wish!” Later, in Egypt, Laban’s son would become one of Pharaoh’s advisors who would suggest wiping out both the male and female Israelites. Balaam ben Beor³³The Midrash suggests that Pharaoh had three advisors regarding the Israelites: Laban’s son who called for the total destruction of Israel; Job who remained silent and did not advise Pharaoh one way or another; and Jethro who discouraged Pharaoh and then fled from Egypt to save himself. is really the son of Laban (Beor is another name for Laban).
Laban’s intentions had to do with the divine sparks which fill the world. According to the Kabbalists, there are 288 sparks that fell into the mundane world and were mixed in with the shards which were created at the time of creation. The role of Israel in the world is to redeem these sparks and to return them to their Divine source. Laban was intent on preventing Jacob from accomplishing this task. The gematriah of Rachel and Leah are 274; when we add the eleven sons of Jacob that were born in Laban’s house along with Jacob’s daughter, Dinah, as well as the two concubines, Bilhah and Zilpah, the number adds up to 288 – the nitzotzot, the divine sparks. This number is hinted at in God’s warning to Laban: “Beware of attempting anything with Jacob, good (tov) or bad (ra). The gematiah of these two words along with the two words as one expression is also 288; that is, God actually warned Laban not to interfere with the divine sparks that Jacob was in the process of freeing. It was for this reason that initially, Laban only wanted to give Jacob Leah (gematriah, 36) as a wife which would have left 252 sparks in his control, which is the gematriah of the word Arami. When he was forced to give Jacob his second daughter, Rachel, he was left with 14 sparks. This is hinted at in the expression, Arami oved Avi, Laban, the Arami, wished to destroy Avi, the last 14 divine sparks.³⁴If you do the math you will note that the numbers are off by one in several cases. This does not trouble practitioners of gematriah since the word itself is counted as one, thus increasing the value of the word.
What we see here in Jacob’s exile and later in the exile of the people of Israel to the land of Egypt, is that it ultimately served a good purpose. It is necessary for the people to be in exile to redeem the divine sparks hidden among the nations. God is entirely good but goodness is expressed through many different avenues. Also nothing happens without God’s decree. The divine sparks descended into the world because of the sin at the tree of knowledge, the sins of the generation of the flood, and because of the tower of Babel, as the Zohar and other sources explain. Despite the misfortune that resulted from these events, we are commanded to bless God for the good as well as the evil in our lives because what appears to us as misfortune ultimately serves a higher purpose that brings us closer to redemption. We must, therefore, give thanks for the exiles which we have suffered, just as we give thanks for the redemptions which have experienced.
It is for this reason that we begin the Seder by saying, “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt.” We praise God for having made us slaves just as we praise God, “who took us out of there.” Similarly, this is the reason we eat bitter herbs at the Seder to give thanks for the bitterness of slavery just as we give thanks for the freedom we gained. We also say, “At first our ancestors were idolaters…” to remind ourselves that the purpose of exile was to lift up the divine sparks which fell (into the world) through the sin of our ancestors.
We have pointed out elsewhere that the gematriah of rekhush gadol, great wealth³⁵The Torah tells us that Israel left Egypt with great wealth. Since the gematriah of this expression is the same as the Tree of Knowledge, the implication is that the great wealth was the sparks from the tree of knowledge through which Adam and Eve sinned!, is 569. When we add the number 70 (the number of people who went down to Egypt with Jacob) i t has the same gematriah as the expression “etz hada’at,” the tree of knowledge (639). Thus, when Israel left Egypt, they took with them the sparks that were scattered when Adam and Eve sinned by eating the fruit of the etz hada’at, tree of knowledge. There are many allusions to the redemption of the divine sparks when the Israelites left Egypt. The word “mitei” in the expression mitei mispar k‘mi’at, “few in number,” has the same gematriah as the words etz pri, “the fruit of the tree” (450) and the word mi’at, few, is made up of the same letters as the word ta’am, taste; this is an allusion to the teaching that the “fruit” of the tree of knowledge and the tree itself were both sweet in taste.³⁶This is an allusion to the idea that the tree of knowledge was not a tree at all but a source of enlightenment and knowledge.
The three signs which God gave Moses before he returned to the land of Egypt are also an allusion that the purpose of the Exodus was to redeem the lost divine sparks. The first sign was to turn his staff into a serpent – an allusion to the serpent in the Garden of Eden. The second sign was to make his hand leprous when he removed it from his cloak – an allusion to the tower of Babel. The sin of the tower of Babel was evil speech and leprosy was the punishment of those who gossip about others. And the third sign, turning water to blood, was an allusion to the flood. Through these three signs Moses would be able to convince the people of Israel that the Exodus was all about redeeming the sparks that were lost because of these three sins.
Why was Pharaoh’s intention to kill the males and not the females? First one must understand the hidden meaning of the terms used in this narrative. Male and female are allusions to the divine sparks. “Male” and “female” are references to khochma (wisdom) and binah (understanding), the masculine and feminine attributes of the divine in the sephirotic system. Jacob initially went down to Laban to redeem the lost sparks. The verse, “I took your father from beyond the river,” (Joshua, 24:2-4) is a reference to feminine aspect of the divine, binah, which is called a flowing river (since all the other Sephirot flow forth from it). The people on the other side of the river are called b‘nai kedem, since the kodem, precedes the river just as khochma precedes binah. Thus, the journey to the land of Canaan, across the river, by Abraham and then by Jacob, is really an allegory about the redemption of the divine sparks lost in the world. Laban represents, the kelipot, the husks, into which the sparks were mixed. His name is made up of two parts. The first two letters, lamed bet (gematriah, 32) are a reference to the 32 paths of khochma, wisdom, while the final nun, is a reference to the 50 gates of purity that are associated with the attribute of binah, understanding.
Jacob, in his great wisdom, overcame Laban’s deceit and redeemed the “thirty two paths of khochma,” wisdom, when he fled from Laban. However, he was unable to redeem the “fifty gates of” purity associated with binah.³⁷These two numbers are commonly associated with these two sephirot. The number 32 comes from Sefer Yetzirah and the number 50 is connected with the idea of there being fifty gates of impurity in Egypt. Therefore, he went down to Egypt to continue the redemption of the divine sparks. These fifty sparks had fallen into the deepest impurity, and until Israel descended into the impurity of Egypt, the sparks could not be redeemed. Thus we say, Laban, the Arami, sought to destroy Avi, but he went down to Egypt. Since Pharaoh already had control of the feminine sparks, he now sought to take control of the masculine sparks, the sparks of khochma, by killing the males. That is why the Torah repeatedly says that the heart (leiv) of Pharaoh was hardened. He sought to control the 32, lamed bet, paths of wisdom, khochma. How did Pharaoh plan to do this? By enticing the people of Israel to worship idols in Egypt, since idolatry would damage the attribute of khochma, divine wisdom. The turning point in the Exodus story comes with the fifth plague, cattle disease, since the Egyptians worshipped their cattle. Thus, when God struck their cattle, the divine sparks of wisdom we were redeemed from Egypt (because the Israelites would now see that the gods of the Egyptians were not gods at all). That is why the Haggadah says that the expression “With a mighty hand” is a reference to the fifth plague.³⁸See page ________ It is for this reason that the expression in the Torah changes during this plague from “Pharaoh’s heart was hardened” to “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart.” Although the battle was not over, Pharaoh was already defeated!
Pharaoh, then, did not decree against the females because it was unnecessary since they were already under the control of the Egyptians (since Jacob had not yet redeemed those sparks), but Pharaoh did make a decree against the males since he wished to have power over them. Moses, however, redeemed both male and female.
Another proof that Laban planned to kill both the male and females: Laban said to Jacob: “I have it in my power to do you harm; but the God of your father said to me last night, “Beware of attempting anything with Jacob, good or bad.””³⁹Genesis 31:29This verse suggests that God only warned Laban regarding Jacob and not his family. When Laban says “The girls are my girls and their children are my children,” Laban implies that it was his intention to kill the woman and men. Because Jacob was able to free the divine sparks that were in his power he planned even greater evil against the offspring of Jacob. This also made the subjugation of the Israelites even worse in Egypt. That is why Moses said, “Ever since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Your name, he has dealt worse with Your people, and You still have not delivered Your people.”⁴⁰Exodus 5:23 Initially, Pharaoh tried to subjugate them with a peh rakh, delicately; only later did he subjugate them with force.⁴¹After Laban or his son advised him to do so, according to the Midrash. The 288 divine sparks were mixed in with the husks of evil that were spread throughout the land of Egypt. The words Tov v‘Rah, good and evil, have the same gematriah. ⁴²The gematriah only adds up to 288 if one adds the ‘kollel’ the expression to the number. Thus, when Laban says I have it in my power to do good and evil – he is really speaking about the divine sparks. When Jacob separated the adarim, flocks, thus arranging to take some for himself from Laban, he is really arranging to take the divine sparks. Adar’im equals 274. We add to this number the 12 sons of Jacob and Dinah making 287. There is still one spark short in this accounting, just as there is one short in the gematriah of tov v‘rah. Similarly the word avi, as in “An Aramean sought to destroy avi, my father, is also 13, referring to the sons and daughter of Jacob.⁴³So where is the extra spark since all these numbers come to 287? This could suggest that even after the flight and redemption from Laban the process of redeeming the sparks was still not done.

At the start he was patriarch to Aram -- to the men of his country, for he was from the land of Aram, as it is said "Across the river dwelt your forefathers," and he said, "unto Aram Naharayim [lit. Of the Rivers] until the city of Naḥor."

who taunted My people When [the people of] Israel were being led into exile toward the land of the Chaldeans, and they were passing through Ammon and Moab, and they would see Israel weeping, sighing, and crying out, they would taunt them and say, “Why are you suffering? Aren’t you going to your father’s house? Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the river from earliest times.” (Josh. 24:2)

and your father’s house The idolatry that your fathers worshipped on the other side of the river.