창세기 36:24의 주석

ואיה וענה literally, AND AJAH AND ANAH — The ו in ואיה is redundant, so that the words are equivalent to איה וענה Ajah and Anah. There are many examples of this in Biblical Hebrew: (Daniel 8:13) “to give (וקדש וצבא) both the Sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot”; (Psalms 86:7) “they are cast into a deep sleep (ורכב וסוס) the riders also and the horses”.

AND THESE ARE THE CHILDREN OF ZIBEON: AND AJAH, AND ANAH. The letter vav in the word v’ayah — (and Ajah) is redundant. Similarly: Thy father’s servant ‘va’ani’ (and I) have been in time past, so ‘va’ani’ (and I) will now be thy servant.²⁹⁰II Samuel 15:34. In both cases the vav is redundant, and the meaning of the word is ani (I). And there were the heads of their fathers’ houses: ‘va’epher’ (and Epher), and Ishi²⁹¹I Chronicles 5:24. — here too the vav is redundant. And there are many others like them.
Now this Zibeon was the third son of Se’ir the Horite,²⁹²Verse 20 here. and he begot these two children, Ajah and Anah, and Scripture relates that this Anah, Zibeon’s son, was that same Anah who found the mules in the desert as he fed the asses of Zibeon his father, to differentiate between him and his uncle Anah,²⁹²Verse 20 here. the brother of his father, Zibeon. This Anah, Zibeon’s son, was Esau’s father-in-law.²⁹³Verse 2: Oholibamah the daughter of Anah.

ואיה וענה, I believe that the real names of these people were “Veayah” and “Veanah,” not “Ayah” and “Anah.” The same is true of Numbers 13,14 where the letter ו is part of the name itself, i.e. ופסי, just as it is in Esther where the letter ו is part of the name of Queen Vashti, i.e. ושתי. Even though these sons of Tzivon are also referred to by the names Ayah and Adah in Chronicles I 1,40, we need not attribute too much meaning to this, as there are numerous instances when such names are not accurately reported. (Examples of such inaccuracies are Genesis 10,23 where the letters ו in the words וחול וגתר (names) clearly are not part of the names themselves. The same is true of Chronicles I 1,17 where all four of these names are introduced with the letter ו. Clearly, the two versions cannot both be correct. Anyone who interprets the letter ו in the words (names) ואיה וענה to be connective letters ו, must surely answer the question of what prompted the Torah to write such connective letters ו here when it did not seem to be called for. Why would just these sons have been selected by the Torah to be linked to one another by the connective letter ו and not numerous other sons who appear in this chapter? [the author challenges his grandfather Rashi’s interpretation. Ed.] The proofs cited by such commentators for their interpretation are not convincing at all. The very letters ו whom these commentators quote as support for their thesis are themselves not connective letters For instance, in Samuel II 13,20 the line ותשב תמר ושוממה בית אבשלום אחיה, the word ושוממה means the same as שבי, as in שבי אלמנה בית אביך, (Genesis 38,11) where Yehudah tells his daughter-in-law (also) called Tamar to await Shelah’s growing up by remaining like a grieving widow in her father’s house. The word ותשב in Samuel II 13.20 has two meanings. It tells us that Tamar henceforth was isolated, lonely, an outcast. The word בודדה for “lonely,” is implied but not spelled out, and the whole line must be understood as if the prophet had written ותשב תמר בודדה ושוממה, “Tamar lived lonely and abandoned in the house of her brother Avshalom.” Psalms 76,7 מגערתך אלוקי יעקב נרדם ורכב וסוס, must be understood as מגערת אלוקי יעקב נרדם חיל שונאינו, at Your blast, O G’d of Yaakov, horse and chariot (with our enemies) lay stunned.” The reference is to the army mentioned in the preceding verses. The word אנשי חיל, “the soldiers,” which appears in verse 6 of that chapter is presumed as also applying to verse 7. If this were not so, the verse would make little sense. We find that a similar verse to that in Psalms 77,7 is found in Exodus 15,1, where the Torah includes the riders of the cavalry as having been tossed into the sea, as their survival would hardly have constituted an overwhelming victory by G’d.