1

Literary Approaches to Rabbinic Literature (RELJ 522) Dennis Beck-Berman

Jacob’s Ladder

The midrashic passage I have chosen to explicate using the analytical tools studied in class is

from Genesis Rabba (beg. 5th c.; henceforth, GenR). This passage comments upon the famous story

of Jacob’s dream on that fateful night after leaving his family enroute to Haran (Gen. 28:12 ff.). To

facilitate discussion, I have divided the text of GenR 68:12 (ed. Theodor-Albeck, 2:784-89) into six

sections, each a different thematic unit. In the comments to each section and in the final analysis, I

will examine this passage using the approaches of Boyarin, Fraade, and Kugel. Ginzberg (The

Legends of the Jews 1:350) summarizes the theme of this passage as a “night of marvels.” But our

analysis will reveal that there is much beneath the surface.

There are several generative factors for these midrashim (Kugel). Early interpreters would find

it puzzling that God shows Jacob a dream, rather than simply speak to him, as He does to Abraham

and Isaac. And a stairway with angels ascending and descending seems to have no connection to the

divine promise that follows. It is also puzzling that when Jacob awakens he is afraid; there seems to

be nothing frightening in the dream or the divine promise. In addition, Jacob’s dream is the first

one in the Bible, and the only one without an explicit interpretation (Boyarin). Hence, interpreters

conclude that it should be interpreted allegorically, as any dream, but not necessarily as referring to

his own immediate future. It is a divinely revealed prophetic vision, hence it refers to events destined

to occur in the distant future to Jacob’s descendants. Another textual irritant (Kugel) is that the

word sulam, “stairway,” is a hapax legomenon in Scripture, motivating rabbinic homilists to explain

its meaning and providing them with ingenious interpretations through polyphony (Boyarin,

Kugel, Fraade).

A. Dreams are symbolic [A-1] And he dreamt (a dream) (Gen. 28:11). R. Abbahu said: Words of dreams do not cause one

to ascend or cause one to descend. [A-2] A certain person went before R. Yosi ben Chalafta. He said to him: That man [referring

euphemistically to himself] was told in a dream, “Go and bring your father’s labour [possessions] from Cappadocia.” He [R. Yosi] asked him: Did your father [ever] go to Cappadocia in his day [i.e. lifetime]? He replied: No. He said to him: Go and count twenty beams in the ceiling of your house and you will find it [the hidden paternal treasure]. He replied: But there are not twenty [beams] in it. He said to him: If there are not twenty, count from the beginning to the end and back to the beginning, and if you find [you can count to] twenty, you will find it.

He went, did so, and found it. [A-3] And whence did R. Yosi ben Chalafta deduce this? From [the word] Cappadocia.

2

Section A begins with a comment on Jacob’s dream attributed to R. Abbahu (d. 309 CE),

who states that dreams have no influence whatsoever. His saying is not original; he invokes an adage

in rabbinic literature whose normal meaning is: “Pay no attention to dreams.” But the compiler

selects it to open our passage (Fraade) because it alludes to the verse (“Dreams do not cause one to

ascend or descend” — And he dreamt … ascending and descending). He recounts an incident about

R. Yosi ben Chalafta (mid 2nd c. CE) in which R. Yosi cleverly interprets a man’s dream through the

techniques of anagram and gematria, widely employed in antiquity. He divides “Cappadocia” into

two words: kappa, a Greek letter whose numerical value is “twenty,” and dokia, “beams.”

The homilist uses this tale to transform the meaning of a rabbinic adage in a novel way: While

dreams in their literal form may be completely disregarded, nevertheless, a sage can discern their true

symbolic significance. The belief in the oracular power of dreams was widespread in the ancient

world. In rabbinic lore, dreams are often considered a form of prophecy. The homilist suggests that

the Words of God in Scripture are divine prophecy and must therefore be carefully interpreted.

Another possible reason this tale is selected to begin the passage is a play on the Hebrew sulam,

“stairway,” and the Greek selma, “beam.”

Since R. Abbahu was not the author of this adage, and the compiler regularly cites traditions

anonymously, it is possible that he uses here an original midrash on the verse by this sage. Indeed, R.

Abbahu is known for his Greek puns, which required no explanation for his sophisticated Cesarean

audience. Other versions of this midrash appear to be later (Kugel).1

B. Jacob’s Dream Alludes to the Temple [B-1] Bar Kappara taught: There is no dream that does not have its interpretation. [B-2] He dreamt a dream: And look, a stairway (Gen. 28:12) — this is the ramp; [B-3] Stationed on the earth — this is the altar, as it states [in Scripture], An altar of earth you shall

make for Me (Ex. 20:21); [B-4] And its top reached the heavens — these are the sacrifices, whose aroma ascended to heaven; [B-5] And look, angels of God — these are the high priests; [B-6] Ascending and descending on it — who would ascend and descend on the ramp;

1 Cf. TP Ma’aser Sheni 4:10, which has a shortened, somewhat corrupted version. Lamentations Rabba 1:17 appends to A-3 an explanation for later readers unfamiliar with Greek. Elsewhere in Lamentations Rabba 1:1 (ed. Buber, 54), it (A-2) appears in a litany of dream interpretation tales attributed to R. Aqiva, who explains that Cappadocia signifies Aramaic kofa, “beam,” and Greek deka, “ten.” The version of this tale in TB Berachot 56b has the same explanation, but appears in a litany of tales attributed to R. Ishamel. The addition of the explanation and the partial shift from Greek to Aramaic suggest a later form of the tale.

3

[B-7] And look, the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon it (Gen. 28:13) — I saw the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon the altar (Amos 9:1).

In B, Bar Kappara, also known as R. Eleazar Ha-Qappar (beg. 3rd c.), applies the principle

that dreams should be understood symbolically. The compiler, following up on the preceding

comment, brings a tradition (Fraade) that explicitly claims every dream has an allegorical

interpretation. Unlike A-1, this statement is not a well-known aphorism; it appears nowhere else in

rabbinic literature. But, similar to the allusive nature of R. Abbahu’s saying above, Bar Kappara’s

may also have a double meaning: There is no [other] dream [in Scripture] that does not have its

interpretation [made explicit]. The midrash would then address a scriptural irritant (Kugel): Jacob’s

dream is the first one in the Bible and yet the only one without an explicit interpretation.

The compiler chooses first to bring a midrash which interprets the dream as an allusion to the

Holy Temple. B-2 thru B-6 follow a deictic form (Fraade), while B-3 cites a prooftext and B-7

juxtaposes two biblical verses.2 Most of these symbolic identifications are fairly straightforward.3

The phrase the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon it alludes to the divine presence on the altar, because of

the identical phrase in another verse: I saw the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon the altar (and He said:

Strike the capitals so that the thresholds quake,… and I will slay the last of them with the sword) (Amos

9:1). Since the homilist already connects Gen. 28:12 with the altar (B-3), he is making an additional

point by juxtaposing this prooftext, which speaks of terrible divine judgement upon Israel. And

indeed, the parallel passage in Sifre Numbers (ca. 3rd c.) explains this clause (B-7) with the gloss:

“And the divine presence (shekhinah) departs.” The homilist alludes here to another midrash which

claims that the divine presence removed itself from the Temple in 10 stages, one of which is

designated by Amos 9:1. This adds a dimension of pathos (Fraade) to the midrash: God shows

Jacob the glory of the Temple and its subsequent destruction; this is why he awakens in fear.

C. Jacob’s Dream Alludes to the Theophany at Sinai The Rabbis interpreted it [a stairway, etc.] [in reference] to Sinai: He dreamt a dream: And

look, a stairway — this is [the theophany at] Sinai; stationed (mutzav) on the earth — And they stationed themselves (vayityatzevu) at the bottom of the mount (Ex. 19:17); and its top reached the heavens — And the mountain burned with fire to the heart of the heavens (Deut. 4:11); And look the angels of God — this is Moses and Aaron; ascending — And Moses ascended (to God) (Ex. 19:3); and

2 This midrashic form is similar to a cotext (Boyarin), but here the intertext is between a Torah verse (itself not seemingly problematic) and the complex rabbinic understanding (not made explicit) of a Prophetic verse (itself not problematic). Yet the homilist does create a kind of dialogue between the verses. 3 Stationed on the earth alludes to the fact that the ramp of the altar, in order to avoid indecency, has no steps, as Scripture states, An altar of earth you shall make for Me (Ex. 20:21) … Do not ascend My altar by steps (Ex. 20:23).

4

descending — And Moses descended the mountain (Ex. 19:14). And look, the Lord stationed upon it — And the Lord descended upon Mount Sinai (to the top of the mountain) (Ex. 19:20).

This midrash, attributed to the “rabbis,” takes Gen. 28:12 allegorically as a prophetic

reference to the theophany at Mount Sinai. It is not a syntagmatic form, nor cocitation (Boyarin).4

The rabbis identify sulam (סלם) with “Sinai” (ynys), since both are equivalent to 130 by gematria.

They then explain each phrase as an allusion to a specific event at Sinai. Most of the connections are

fairly obvious.5 The final phrase, And look, the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon it, is juxtaposed with:

And the Lord descended upon Mount Sinai (to the top of the mountain) (Ex. 19:20). The connection is

not clear. A possibile explanation is offered in Tanchuma (ca. 5–7th c.), which connects the

theophany of Jacob’s dream and the theophany to Israel at Mount Sinai by their beginning with

similar expressions.6 Possibly, early copyists confused And the Lord descended (Ex. 19:20) with an

originally different prooftext: And the Lord descended in a cloud and He stationed himself

(vayityatzev) with him there (Ex. 34:5). The homilist would then draw a connection from the nearly

identical verbs used in both theophanies. If so, then this midrash is a counterpoint (Fraade) to Amos

9:1 in the midrash above (B-7), since Exodus 34 refers to God’s pardoning Israel for the sin of the

Golden Calf followed by the revelation of the attributes of divine compassion to Moses at Sinai. The

vision of the sin of the Golden Calf would explain why Jacob awakens in fear. The homilist has

God reassure Jacob and the people Israel that despite the destruction of the Temple, the Lord would

always forgive the sins of Israel and be their God.

D. Jacob is the Third and Final Patriarch [D-1] Shalomaynay [said] in the name of R. Shimon ben Laqish: He showed him a throne7 of

three legs. [D-2] R. Yehoshua of Sikhnin [said] in the name of R. Levi: [God said to him]: You are the third

leg. [D-3] That is [indeed] the view of R. Yehoshua in the name of R. Levi [who said]: For the portion

of the Lord is His peoplc, (Jacob the cord of His inheritance) (Deut. 32:9) — Just as this cord cannot be woven of less than three strands [so there could not be less than three Patriarchs].8

4 Cf. Boyarin, Intertextuality, 113-115, where he analyzes a midrash that also alludes to the revelation at Sinai. There is no attempt here to explain gaps, etc. in Scripture, or to correlate Writings (non-historical) with historical events. 5 The plural verbs allude to Moses and Aaron, who are both described as angels. Scripture describes Aaron ascending (Ex. 19:24, Ex. 24:9). Apparently, the homilist assumes that Aaron, too, must have descended Mount Sinai. 6 Tanchuma (ed. Buber, 1:149 f.) VaYetzey §7: The Lord stationed upon it — And the Lord descended upon Mount Sinai (Ex. 19:20); and He states, I am the Lord, God of your father Abraham (Gen. 28:13), and it is stated [in Scripture] about Sinai, I am the Lord your God (Exodus 20:1). MS Vatican 30 reads: And Moses and Eleazar descended the mountain; the copyist corrects the preceding prooftext from Num. 20:28 to Ex. 19:14 because similar verses were confused. 7 I read teronos, “throne,” following MS British Museum Add. 27169, ed. prin., Constantinople 1512, ed. Venice 1545, and Yalqut Shimoni; MS Vatican 30 and other witnesses read tarchos, an obvious corruption due to similarity of נ and כ. 8 The second clause is not found in most MSS, including Vatican 30.

5

D begins with a comment in the name of R. Shimon ben Laqish (mid 3rd c.) by Shalomainai

which interprets sulam with a play on the Greek selma (or Latin solium), “throne.” But this throne is

missing one of its legs. This is based on the fact that the word sulam (a hapax legomenon) is written

in defective form (slm), without the vav (swlm). In his dream, God shows Jacob a throne standing

upon three legs, symbolizing the three Patriarchs, the pillars of the world. A throne with three (or

four) legs can stand firmly (cf. Eccl. 4:12), as it states, stationed [firmly] on the earth. God reveals to

Jacob that he is chosen as the third — and presumably final — Patriarch of the Jewish people.

Indeed, this perfectly fits the context of the divine promise vouchsafed is his dream (Gen. 28:13-15).

The compiler creates a segue (“You are the third leg”) to connect D-1 with the midrash (D-3)

of R. Yehoshua of Sikhnin (mid 4th c.) in the name of R. Levi (end. 3rd c.) on Deut. 32:9, Jacob [the

People Israel], the share of His inheritance. The verse is taken literally but out of context: Jacob [the

Patriarch], the cord of His inheritance. This does not mean that Abraham and Isaac are insignificant,

that Jacob [alone is] the cord of His inheritance; rather Jacob [is] [the third and final] the cord of His

inheritance. This midrash was apparently so well-known, that the earliest witnesses omit the

conclusion (“so there could not be less than three Patriarchs”). Jacob is destined to be the third

Patriarch. Why this emphasis on a seemingly obvious detail of biblical history? The point is that

Jacob — and later readers — may have thought that Esau would also be a Patriarch, a fourth leg of

the throne, whose descendants would, like Israel, be a divinely chosen people. This explains why

Jacob awakens in fear. The homilist assures his readers that Esau, who symbolizes the Christian

empire in rabbinic literature, is not a Patriarch and that Christians are not a chosen people.

E. Examining Ascending and descending on it/him (bo). [E-1] R. Berekhya said: He showed him a world and a third of a world. [Angels of God] ascending

— for ascending cannot be less than two [angels], and descending cannot be less than two [angels]. An angel is a third of a world [in size]. And from where [in Scripture] do we know that an angel is a third of a world [in size]? As it is stated, His body also was like tarshish, and his face as the appearance of lightning, etc. (Dan. 10:6).

[E-2] R. Hiyya the Elder and R. Yannai [disagree]. One [the former] said: [Angels of God] ascending and descending on the stairway. The other said: Ascending and descending upon Jacob. The one who said: Ascending and descending on the stairway, [his position] is easy! The one who said: Ascending and descending upon Jacob, [his position] is [that] some [were] raising him up, some putting him down, some leaping on him, some jumping on him, some scoffing at him.

[E-3] Israel with whom I will show My glory (Isa. 49:3) — [The angels said:] You are the one whose whose bust is engraved on high. Ascending they see his bust [above]; descending they see him sleeping.

6

[E-4] [A parable:] It is like a king who would sit and judgement in the courtyard;9 people ascend to the basilica and find him sleeping,10 they descend to the courtyard and find him sitting in judgement.11

[E-5] The angels who escort a person in the Land of Israel, do not escort him outside the Land. [Angels of God] ascending — those [angels] who escorted him in the Land of Israel; and descending [on his behalf ] — those who escorted him outside the Land.

[E-6] Above12 [in heaven], whoever speaks in his [Israel’s] merit ascends, in his guilt, descends. Below [on earth], whoever speaks in his favour descends; in his guilt, ascends.

In E-1, R. Berekhya (mid 4th c.) wonders: Scripture tells us the stairway reached from earth to

heaven in length, but it does not inform us of its width. Midrash often tries to fill in the gaps of the

Bible (Kugel, Boyarin). He cleverly has Scripture itself answer this question in the next verse. Since

both verbs ascending and descending are in the plural, they must each refer to no less than two angels.

He ingeniously demonstrates how the width of the stairway can be deduced using rabbinic

interpretations of Scripture and common folklore.13

The next group of midrashim focus on: And look, angels of God ascending and descending on it.

The compiler presents the opposing views (E-2) of R. Hiyya the Elder (beg. 3rd c.) and R. Yannai

(mid 3rd c.) concerning the Hebrew word bo, either “it” or “him.” The former reads on it, referring

to the stairway, which presents no difficulty, since it simply follows the biblical storyline. The latter,

however, reads on him, referring to their treatment of Jacob. Some angels were exalting Jacob, while

others were degrading/attacking him. He vividly describes the angels leaping on (hitting?) him,

jumping on him, scoffing at him. This explains why Jacob awakens from his dream in fear.

The compiler then brings a related tradition (Fraade) to explain the strange behavior of the

angels. In midrashic fashion the homilist renders the verse:14 And [some angels called out:] Look! An

9 Later printed eds. and Yalqut Shimoni Gen. §119 omit: “in the courtyard.” 10 Later printed eds., Yalqut Shimoni and Yalqut Mekhiri read: “and find him sitting in judgement.” 11 MS Vienna and the printed eds. read: “and find him sleeping.” Yalqut Shimoni, Yalqut Mekhiri omit: “they descend to the courtyard and find him sitting in judgement,” and add: “So they would ascend above and gaze upon his figure, [and] they would descend below and gaze.” 12 E-6 appears after E-5 in most witnesses (incl. MS Vatican 30); Yalqut Shimoni omits. Ed. Theodor-Albeck follows MS Paris 149 and later printed eds. which place it after E-4. 13 The rabbis understand tarshish as “the sea,” especially the Mediterranean Sea, which according to rabbinic folklore was 2,000 parasangs wide. Hence, an angel, like tarshish, is 2,000 parasangs wide, which is a third of a world in size, for in rabbinic lore the world is 6,000 parasangs wide. The stairway spans 8,000 parasangs, since it is wide enough for four angels: two angels ascending side by side passing by two angels descending side by side. Thus, the stairway God shows Jacob in his dream is one and a third worlds across. 14 Taking sulam as tzelem, “engraved image;” rosho as “his head/bust;” magi ‘a, “reached,” as Aramaic mage ‘a, “strikes,” in an extended sense of making an impression, “engraved” (chaquqim) [cf. Aramaic neganei, “depressions”]; ascending and descending are active participles, which in Biblical Hebrew are usually durative, refering to activity that continues over time; bo, “on him,” as “on his account” [cf. Kugel (114, 124 n. 38)]. Kugel (114-119) has a somewhat different understanding of the midrash.

7

image [an engraven bust] [of one] lying [sprawled] on the earth [asleep], but his [Jacob’s] head strikes

[engraves] the heavens [= the divine throne]; And look! [called out] angels of God [who were

continuously] ascending and descending on account of him.

E-3 is probably an expanded version of a popular midrash circulating in antiquity (Fraade)

which connects Gen 28:12 with the idea of Jacob’s “bust” (iqonin < eikonion) engraved on the

heavenly throne. The rabbis use this specific term here for several reasons.15 An allusion to this

motif is back-referenced (Kugel): Israel [i.e. the Patriarch Jacob] with whom [i.e. with whose bust]16 I

will show My glory [on the heavenly throne] (Isa. 49:3). In his dream, angels inform Jacob that his

bust is engraved on high. The angels ascending gaze on Jacob’s bust in heaven and exalt him,

whereas the angels descending to see Jacob on earth gaze upon him sleeping and attack him,

apparently because they are shocked by the disparity of the glorious heavenly image and the face of a

sleeping mortal sprawled on the ground, or perhaps because they are shocked to see such an

“angelic” man sleeping in such a holy, awesome place. Some medieval commentators suggest the

angels are jealous of Jacob. If so, the homilist is hinting that the nations of the world (symbolized by

their various guardian angels) are jealous of Israel and thus attack him on earth. In the Conclusion I

will treat the reconstructed history of the “Saw Father’s Countenance” motif.

A parable (E-4) is made to a king [=God] who would sit in judgement in the courtyard

[=earth]; when people [= angels] ascend to the basilica [=heaven], they find him sleeping, but when

they descend to the courtyard, they find him sitting in judgement. At first glance, the parable is

unclear (cf. the variants in nn. 9-11). Assuming it may be related to similar midrashim, the parable

continues the line of interpretation in E-3 with the next verse: And look, the Lord stationed

[protectively] over him, to shield Jacob from the angels.17 The parable highlights the surprising

behaviour of the king. Normally, a human king would sit in judgement in the basilica and take a

15 The word eikonion (diminutive of eikon) refers specifically to an engraved “bust,” based on Hebrew rosh, “head,” rather than Hebrew panim = Greek prosopon, “face, countenance,” partzof in rabbinic literature. The midrash takes sulam as tzelem (image)(cf. Kugel, 124 n. 43), then uses a Greek word, possibly because Hebrew words for “image” are associated with idolatry (tzelem, pesel, semel) or the divine image (demut, tzelem). GenR 68:13 explicitly plays on sulam and tzelem, but as an idolatrous image! Cf. Ezek. 23:14: images (tzalmei) of Chaldeans engraved (chaquqim). Ezek. 1:5, the ultimate source of this motif, uses demut. The specific choice of eikonion here is probably reflected in TP Avodah Zarah 3:1: Why are busts (iqoniyot < bfhlka) forbidden? Because they offer incense before them when they ascend. R. Yochanan said: It is permitted to view them when they descend. Saul Lieberman, Tosefta Kifshutah (8 vols.., New York, 1955-73), 3:281, explains that the busts were raised up on pedestals when the emperor ascended the throne, but were overturned (went down) when he was defeated (went down). What better term to use to play on the theme of ascending and descending? 16 Mirkin (3:87) notes the midrash connects etpa’er, “I will show my glory,” with tiferet, “bust,” in Isa. 44:13. 17 GenR 69:3 (ed. Theodor-Albeck, 2:792): And look, the Lord stationed [protectively] over him. Cf. TB Chullin 91a.

8

nap in the courtyard. But this king does the opposite. The homilist probably means that when the

angels ascend to heaven and exalt Jacob, they find God pays no attention to them, but when they

descend to earth and attack Jacob, God leaps to his defense. This is implicitly contrasted with a

mortal king, who sits in the palace and pays rapt attention to the courtiers’s flattering comments

about his nobles, but when the same nobles need his protection (from the courtiers?) out in the

provinces, he is home asleep, unconcerned for their welfare.18 While most parables consist of a

narrative (mashal) followed by an application (nimshal), E-4 does not.19 Though lacking the normal

bipartite structure, the mashal fits Stern’s functional definition; it suggests a meaning, but requires

its audience to deduce the message.20 While not intended to be enigmatic, it may seem so to us.21

E-5 addresses a puzzling detail (Kugel) in Gen. 28:12: Angels of God ascending and descending.

Since angels are normally in heaven, Scripture should have stated that the angels were descending and

ascending. The Bible implies that somehow there are already angels on earth with Jacob, and for

some reason they leave him and ascend to heaven, while other angels descend to earth. In addition,

Jacob is met again by angels upon his return to Israel (Gen. 32:2). To resolve these problems, the

anonymous homilist takes into account the context of the story (Jacob is departing the Land of

Israel) and the ambiguity of the word bo, “on it/him,” which he understands as on his [Jacob’s]

behalf. He explains that the angels who escort a person in the Land of Israel, do not escort him

outside the Land. Hence, those angels were first ascending, then the angels who would accompany

Jacob outside the Land of Israel were descending. This tradition may arise from a hermeneutic

impulse (Boyarin), but it may well address the contemporary plight (Fraade) of Jacob/Israel: When

the Jewish people departs the holy land, God sends His angels to watch over them even in exile.

18 Cf. GenR 69:3 (ed. Theodor-Albeck, 2:792): The one who said upon him, on Jacob, [his position] is [that] He stood protectingly over him. Rabbi Jochanan said: The wicked stand over their gods, as it states, And Pharaoh dreamt: and look, he stood over the river [the Nile, an Egyptian god] (Gen. 41:1); but the God of the righteous stands over them, as it states, And look, the Lord stationed on him, etc. Idolaters stand over and protect their gods, whereas God protects His adherents. 19 The printed eds. and Theodor-Albeck, place E-6 here after E-4, perhaps in response to this lacuna. But it belongs below and is unrelated to the parable. 20 D. Stern, Parables in Midrash, 51. E-4 falls into his typology of “Violations of norms” (79 ff.) 21 Cf. Boyarin, Intertextuality, 106 f. Boyarin (81 ff.) argues that the bipartate mashal is a closed text, but here the absence of an application (nimshal) renders the narrative an open text. It is not generated here to make handles for common people to grasp a problematic Torah text, but to grasp a difficult rabbinic midrash on a Torah text, one which some rabbis considered “easy.”

9

In E-6, the homilist offers a rather complex interpretation:22 And look [at the ways of God

below]: a stairway [of promotion and demotion] stationed [established] on the earth [below] and one’s

full accounting one acquires [in] the heavens [above], but look [at what happens above]: angels of God

[who are] raising him [Israel] up [are] ascending [above] on his account [and the converse] but

[descending the stairway, those raising Israel up are] descending [on earth] on his [Israel’s] account.

Above, angels who are olim, raising up Israel, who speak in their favour, olim, are continously

ascending, promoted on his account; but reversing direction and descending to the bottom of the

stairway, those below who are raising up Israel are always descending, demoted on his [Israel’s]

account. The converse is then presumed: yordim, angels in heaven who are putting down Israel are

yordim, descending, while on earth those who are yordim, putting down Israel are olim, ascending.

This often seemed an historical reality for Jews, but it was a strange way for God to deal with

His beloved chosen people. In this midrash the compiler has reversed the strange behavior of God in

the parable: God appears to be judging fairly in heaven but sleeping on earth. The point is that

God’s stairway, His established policy of promotion and demotion, may appear unjust in this world,

but one’s full accounting is truly acquired in the next world. The compiler seems to intend this as a

counterpoint (Fraade) to the opening remark: While dreams do not cause one to ascend or descend

in this world, God will ensure that one who causes Israel to ascend on earth will ascend in heaven.

F. Who are the Angels [F-1] R. Levi [said] in the name of R. Shemuel ben Nachman: The ministering angels, because

they revealed the secret (mysterion) of the blessed Holy One, were banished from their [heavenly] precincts a hundred and thirty-eight years.

[F-2] R. Tanchuma expressed it in the word qelach, “[water] jet.” [F-3] R. Hama ben R. Hanina said: [They were banished] because they boasted and said, For we

will destroy this place (Gen. 19:13). When did they return? Here: ascending and afterwards descending.

Naturally, the rabbis want to know the identity of these angels. The comment (F-1) by R.

Levi (end. 3rd c.) in the name of R. Shmuel ben Nachman (end 3rd c.) resolves this mystery along

with several other scriptural problems by cleverly connecting several passages.23 This interpreation is

22 He makes a double pun on olim (“ascending” and “raising up”), yordim (“descending” and “putting down”), and bo (“him [Jacob/Israel]” and “on his account”); rosho becomes “one’s full accounting;” magi ‘a become “acquires.” He uses chiasmus (ascending and descending the stairway!) to relate this clause with the first, both of which begin with And look. 23 As in the midrash above (E-5), he addresses a puzzling detail in Gen. 28:12. Since angels are normally in heaven, it should state descending and then ascending. The verse implies that there are already angels on earth with Jacob, who for some reason leave him and ascend to heaven at Bethel. While there are several references in the Torah to an “angel,” the plural “angels” only appears on three occasions: When two angels arrive in Sodom to rescue Lot (Gen. 19:1,15; albeit they appeared to Abraham as “men” in Gen. 18:2), when Jacob sees the angels of God on the stairway (Gen. 28:12), and when

10

not invented by R. Shmuel ben Nachman. It is an older, popular oral tradition (Fraade) also found

in the Targums (see below, n. 39). The two angels who come to Sodom sin when they reveal God’s

secret plan to destroy the cities to Lot.24 God punishes them by banishment from heaven. Finally,

after escorting Jacob to the borders of the Land of Israel, they are permitted to ascend, and other

angels descend to escort Jacob outside Israel. According to rabbinic tradition, their earthly stay lasts

138 years.25 This tradition, like several others above, is expressed in a form so brief it is obscure,

which suggests that the compiler is referring to a well known midrashic tradition. R. Tanchuma

(mid 4th c.) appends to this tradition a humorous mnemonic (F-2), the Hebrew word qelach, which

in gematria equals 138, and means a “jet” whose waters, like the angels, are continously ascending

and descending. The final comment (F-3) by R. Hama ben R. Hanina (mid 3rd c.) offers a different

reason than R. Levi (F-1) for the banishment of these angels. It was because they had the audacity to

say: For we will destroy this place (Gen. 19:13).26 They appear to boast to Lot that they, rather than

God, will destroy Sodom. They are granted permission to return to heaven on this occasion, since

Scripture first speaks of angels ascending to heaven and afterwards descending. This tradition may

simply arise from a hermeneutic impulse (Boyarin), but it may well address the contemporary plight

(Fraade) of Jacob/Israel: The reason that the Jewish people suffer exile is hubris; but the exile is only

temporary.

Conclusion

This passage contains numerous traditions and is multi-layered, with narrative, deictic and

dialogic elements (Fraade). It addresses numerous theological issues.27 While these midrashim reflect

Jacob encounters angels of God on his return to Israel (Gen. 32:2). In fact, the expression angels of God occurs in the Bible only in these two verses. Furthermore, the Bible never relates what happens to the angels who rescue Lot. 24 See For we will destroy this place, because the outcry against them before the Lord has become so great that the Lord has sent us to destroy it (Genesis 19:13). Cf. Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? (Gen.18:17), suggests that God’s plan to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah is a secret, which He decides to reveal to Abraham for several reasons (Gen. 18:18 ff.). And even after learning this, Abraham does not send a warning to Lot, further suggesting to the rabbis that it is a divine secret. 25 See GenR 50:2 (2:524 f.) and notes in Theodor-Albeck ad loc. Cf. Midrash Leqach Tov to Gen. 28:12 (ed. Buber, 1:142) for details of this calculation. Perhaps the number is based on gematria: And look, a stairway [SuLaM = 130] stationed on the earth … ascending and descending on it [BoW = 8], with the first and last words of the dream represent the duration of their banishment 26 Note that Lot properly ascribes the destruction to God (Gen. 19:14). The rabbis also note the unusual missing yod — an abbreviation for God — in the word masch[i]tim, “we will destroy.” 27 In the course of the passage, the compiler addresses the themes of: Israel’s distress over the destruction of the Holy Temple; the Revelation at Sinai; God’s steadfast love and forgiveness of Israel despite their sins; Israel — not the Church — is God’s chosen people; the vastness of Creation (stairway’s width); God so loves Israel that his bust is engraved on heavenly throne, evoking angelic admiration — and perhaps jealous attacks on Israel by the Gentiles on earth; God always leaps to Israel’s defense; God watches over the Jewish people even in Exile; while Israel’s enemies seem to prosper and her

11

the rabbinic impulse to connect one verse to another, there is no evidence of a canonizing concern,

of back-referencing verses from the Writings (Kugel). An analysis of the composition of the entire

passage (Fraade) reveals that this is not simply a collection of random traditions haphazardly

arranged. It appears to be a conscious composition. All attributions are to Palestinian Amoraic sages

from the 3rd through the mid 4th century. The compiler has carefully selected more contemporary

midrashim that reflect a later stage of development, which explains why many involve complex

hermeneutical processes and discourse in a more sophisticated and involved fashion (Kugel).

Apparently, because these midrashim are more familiar to the audience, their complex exegesis is not

usually articulated, often to the point of obscurity. Several sections appear to relate dialogically with

previous sections. The homilist plays both explicitly and below the surface with a recurring theme of

ascending and descending. Perhaps the text is deliberately compiled to be obscure for pedagogic

reasons, to force students to ponder and erxplain the midrashic interpretations and demonstrate

their knowledge of traditions.

I agree with much of Kugel’s reconstruction of the history of the motif “Saw Father’s

Countenance,” but I suggest a somewhat different reconstruction of the history of this tradition.

Ancient interpreters surely wondered about the image of a human in the fiery center of the Throne

of Glory in Ekeziel’s vision (1:5-10). It is natural that it would be one of the Patriarchs. Why not

Jacob, namesake of the people Israel, who sees the divine realm in his dream, wrestles with angels,

sees an angelic camp, etc. His vision of God above a stairway in heaven readily suggests a divine

throne.28 The earliest form of this motif is Ladder of Jacob 1:3-4 (ca. 1st c.): “and the top of the

stairway was the face as of a human, carved out of fire,” taking its top (reaching to heaven) as his

head, apparently Jacob’s head. Eventually, rabbinic homilists made more elaborate plays on Hebrew

and Greek, and cleverly imagined Jacob’s bust (iqonin) on the heavenly throne, playing on his head,

sulam and tzelem, the ascending and descending of (imperial) busts (eikonion), and another midrashic

motif (F-1) which explains the ascending and descending of the angels.29 This became popular in the

friends suffer, in the next world God will reward Israel’s friends and punish her enemies; the suffering of the Jewish people in Exile is due to hubris; the Exile is only temporary. 28 Kugel thinks the idea of a heavenly image of the earthly man is read into this verse. He thinks it is “parked” here because the verse itself (his head reached the heaven) originally suggested the connection (249 f.). 29 Kugel’s “transfer of affects” here is puzzling. He argues that the motif is transferred from his head [bust] reached the heavens to another biblical text which supports the idea, ascending and descending on/for him. But these are one and the same verse! He can still argue that the transfer of affects is true for the Joseph passage, but then he is not certain in which

12

Jewish oral circulatory system (Fraade) and appears in the Targums. In GenR this motif is further

elaborated (E-3) by playful midrashic exegesis: Jacob’s bust (iqonin) is engraved (chaquqah) on the

heavenly throne (E-3), and cleverly connected to yet another prooftext, Isa. 49:3 (playing on tiferet

as “bust”). Through a transfer of affects, this motif became attached to midrashim on Jacob being

renamed Israel: For you are a prince (sar ata) [whose bust is engraved] with God (Gen. 32:28) — It is

you whose bust is engraven on high (GenR 78:3); Jacob, whose bust is engraved on My throne

(GenR 82:2); Who formed your [image] (yotzerkha), O Israel (Isa. 43:1) — For I have, as it were, set

(qava ‘ty) your bust on My throne (Numbers Rabba 4:1). Similarly, it appears in a midrash on

Israel’s exile (also playing on tiferet): “The blessed Holy One said: Does not Israel provoke Me

because [you take advantage] of the bust of Jacob which is engraved on My throne? Here, it is

thrown down [in your face]! Hence, He cast down from heaven to earth the beauty [bust] (tiferet) of

Israel (Lam. 2:1)” (Lamentations Rabba 2:1, ed. Buber, 96).

Another ancient tradition arose concerning Joseph, first appearing in Joseph and Asenath 7:5

(ca. 1st c. CE), which explained that his exemplary ability to resist temptation was because “Joseph

always had the face (prosopon) of his father Jacob before his eyes.” There is nothing explicit here

about a bust on the divine throne.30 But this motif later was embellished by a tranfser of affects

from the midrash on Jacob’s dream: “He saw the bust of his father” (GenR 98:20; TP Horayot 2:5;

TB Sotah 36b), suggesting Jacob’s bust on the divine throne. As Kugel points out, this was effected

by a clever midrashic interpretation of Gen. 49:24, By the hands of the Mighty One, Jacob, because he

sees the stone (even) [image] of Israel. By itself, however, “stone” would not be taken as Jacob’s “bust”

on the divine throne.31

direction the transfer happens, if at all (116). I think the use of the unusual term “bust” strongly supports the Jacob’s ladder tradition as the origin of this motif, since its use elsewhere is difficult to explain. 30 It may be based on an interpretation of the inscrutable name given Joseph, tzafnat pa’ne’ach (Gen. 41:45), taken as tzafan et p’ne av, “he saw the face of (his) father.” 31 Kugel (111) cites Midrash Psalms 15:1 (ed. Buber, 116): “His rock (sal ‘o) (Isa. 31:9) — these are the busts.” But the midrash does not take “rock” (סלע) as “bust.” It is based on (The precious children of Zion) valued (mesula’im < סלא) as fine gold (Lam. 4:2), which the Targum renders: “whose busts are compared to fine gold.” Kugel (113, 115) also misses the midrashic connection of Lam. 2:1 and Isa. 49:3 with Isa. 44:13.