“Ascending Jacob’s Ziggurat” Parashath Wayetse, Bereshith #7 mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0128.htm#10 Welcome! I have been meaning to attend to my Torah commentary, but have not been able to devote enough time to it on a regular basis. This is a huge undertaking, and as such, each parasha I post will not encompass all of what will be discussed in the final edition. However, I am also posting these on this page so as to get feedback and suggestions for further research and subjects. Together we can acquire greater heights of wisdom than we could alone. Although there is much to discuss, this week I will focus primarily on the story of Jacobs dream concerning the well-known ladder. Although traditionally depicted as a ladder, I question the likelihood of this. First of all, angels descending and ascending on the same ladder, although possible, seems a little strange. Why wouldnt the heavenly hosts be a little better organized? Secondly, the Torah is filled with Near Eastern imagery which is borrowed and Hebraicized regularly. This would make a ramp or stairway both more likely and feasible. Thirdly, the root of sulam (סֻלָּם) denotes a more permanent structure like what would be used for moving up and down on a ziggurat. These three facts together would make a ziggurat-style ramp much more likely to be what Jacob saw in his vision, with angels ascending and descending in different lanes on the ramp. After all, it is often stated that a ziggurat is most likely what was discussed earlier in Bereshith with the Tower of Babel. Even though the Torah is a timeless document, it also gives us a look at the theological polemic of the fledgling Hebrews. The Tower of Babel story was meant to show the hubris of man attempting to bridge heaven and earth and how God rejected this notion. It is important to note here that the Sumerian word for a ziggurat dedicated to the god Marduk, Etemenanki, meant temple of the foundation of heaven and earth. After the Torah destroys the notion of these ziggurats being legitimate means to ascend to heaven, an ethereal vision is revealed to Jacob using an image he would be familiar with (If we use the maxim of R. Ishmael, that is. The Torah speaks in the language of man - דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם). The God of his forefathers is seated at the apex, where priestly functions would be conducted on the earthly structure. Kings in the ancient world often doubled as a type of high priest, and this positioning of God fits in the Hebrew view of having no king except God. Furthermore, as Jacob was traveling to the east at this point/time, he would see more of these structures. As these institutions were closely connected to the law of the cities hosting them, God wished to make it abundantly clear to the progenitor of the chosen nation that in fact the land of Canaan would become the location for the revealed Hebrew law. (See ch28:13 where God promises to return Jacob to the land his seed will inherit.) To someone reading the Hebrew scriptures as a complete unit, the narrative is clearly foreshadowing the future revelation at Mount Sinai. Unsurprisingly, Philo offers a much more allegorical explanation. He lists four different, though non-exclusive, possibilities for a deeper meaning behind it. The first explanation is that the angels represent souls descending and ascending from bodies. The second is that the ladder is the human soul and the angels represent Gods logoi (Hellenistic Judaism viewed the logoi as divine wisdom), pulling the soul up in distress and descending in compassion. The third is that he views it representing the ups and downs of a virtuous life fighting against sin. The fourth is that the angels depict the continually changing affairs of mankind. Interestingly, just as Jewish tradition views a non-anthropomorphic deity, we see Philo stating that Jacob did not see God in actuality, but rather the Logos in Jacobs later dream concerning the flocks of sheep. (See ch31:10-13.) Since Philo views the Logos (An avatar, so to speak, of Divine Wisdom) of this second dream as the image of God, F. H. Colson extrapolates that this is in fact his view on every occurrence dealing with a vision of God. Now, there are two unusual things going on here. One is in the text of the Torah, and one is in the text of Philo. In the text of the Torah, Jacob is the first Hebrew to have a prophecy which is explicitly in the form of a dream (חָלַם). Philo, however, does not make his usual mention of Moses being the author of the text. There are claims that Philo anachronistically used Hellenistic dream interpretation to reach his conclusions about the ladder, which is perhaps why he avoided the claim that this was the original understanding of Moses when he wrote the text. This would still be unusual, as generally in his commentary Philo sees Moses as not only the greatest prophet of Israel but also as a philosopher on par with the Hellenic greats. Despite the interpretation’s obvious Greek influence, this may actually be closer to the true meaning behind the shift in Gods conversing with Jacob. Prior to this dream, all previous divine dreams had been to non-Hebrews, such as Abimelekh. (See ch20:3.) With Abraham it was only ever implied that he was spoken to in a dream when he had a vision (חָזָה), and with Isaac it is only a tradition in midrash. For Jacob, upon receiving the name Israel, began the transition from individualistic tribal leader to the founder of an entire nation. This connects to Joseph, who much later became an interpreter of dreams for a foreign court. The similarities between Jacob and Joseph were noticeable before in the captivity (Jacob as a wage slave, Joseph as an actual slave), in the confusion between younger and eldest (Esau and Jacob, Manasseh and Ephraim), and in how both became national leaders. These similarities become even more obvious when we see the idea of dreams and foreign religious views each tied with the idea of leaving or being outside of the land given to them by God. It seems to me that dreams were considered to be a more normal communication for God and other nations, rather than it was for the patriarchs and God. The forefathers would more often receive visitations from angelic beings rather than simply dreaming. This comes together with the ziggurat as a way of letting Jacob know that no matter what the future might hold, God will be present with him and his descendants in all lands and all forms of divination. In conclusion, we see the idea of generational continuity from patriarch to future nationhood cemented in the text. Just as the patriarchs did not have a physical ziggurat from which to give thanks and offer sacrifices, so too the future generations would only have the mobile Ark of Covenant which would embody the the migratory nature and scattered altars of their ancestors.
Posted on: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 20:37:46 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015