Comentários de Citação sobre Gênesis 31:47

into a heap in the field Heb. לְעִי הַשָּׂדֶה. Jonathan renders: לִדְגוֹרִין דְּחַקְלָא, an expression of heaps. Cf. (Gen. 31:47) “יְגַר שַׂהֲדוּתָא, the heap of the testimony.”

גורל אחד לה' וגורל אחד לעזאזל, “one lot for the Lord and one lot for Azazel.” Ibn Ezra, [at the conclusion of his commentary on this verse, Ed.], writes that when we get to thirty three, we will be able to understand the meaning of this procedure. [At the beginning of his commentary, he had already hinted that there is a mystical element, kabbalah, in all this. Ed.] What he meant was that when we count the next thirty three verses in the Torah and we get to Leviticus 17,7, the Torah will explain that the procedure described here is meant to teach us not to sacrifice to Satanic forces in the universe anymore. These Satanic forces are symbolised by the scapegoat. Just as the bird released into the air by the priest performing the ritual of the person afflicted with tzoraat is perceived as taking away his former sins, so the scapegoat is supposed to do this on behalf of the whole Jewish nation on the day of Atonement. Ibn Ezra understands the word עזאזל as a combination of two words, similar to גלעד in Genesis 31,47 or to בנימין in Genesis 35,18 or ראובן in Genesis 29,32, and many others. Whereas the first male goat is offered to the Lord as a burnt offering, the second one is symbolically tendered of the Satanic forces, the complete destruction of that animal pointing at the uselessness of idolatry The two words לעז אזל, “it went to waste, to destruction ” symbolise this concept.

I say that the meaning of the words מן הוא is simply: “whose is it?” Seeing that this is an Egyptian expression, and in that tongue the meaning of מן is the same as the meaning of מה “what,” in Hebrew, the reason why Moses used the Egyptian term is simply because there was no comparable Hebrew word for that phenomenon. It is not so out of character for the Torah when quoting people, to describe what they said in the language in which it was said. Examples are: Genesis 31,47 where the words יגר שהדותא for the monument erected by Lavan and called Galed by Yaakov, is repeated verbatim in the local language Lavan spoke. When, in the Book of Esther 3,7 we read about a פור, which means “lots” in English, but is the Persian equivalent, this reflects what was familiar to people in that region and at that time. Esther and Mordechai did not have to use this Persian term at all. All they had to write was what they did write in explaining the meaning of the word, i.e. הוא הגורל, “that is the lot.” After all, the entire Book of Esther with the exception of a couple of words is written in Hebrew. However, if the Book of Esther had not first mentioned the word פור we would not have understood why the festival was called פורים. The word מן therefore is quite understandable in light of the circumstances.

and he named the right one Jachin although the moon is smaller than the sun, i.e., that it shou ld help him like an established moon, but not like a diminishing moon. Said Solomon, “If the Holy One, blessed be He, compares my kingdom to the sun and the moon, I too shall make an established and enduring thing, namely, large copper pillars.” Another explanation: Huram, who was one of the sons of Dan, made the pillars. He called one Jachin after his father Samson, about whom Scripture states (Jud. 16:29): “And Samson grasped the two pillars of the center, etc.” And Solomon called the second one Boaz after his grandfather, Boaz. A similar instance is (Gen. 31:47): “And Laban called it Yegar Sahadutha.”