GEN1422 In this way, they employ trickery involving the seat of male reproductive power to despoil those who had despoiled their sister. The tale’s irony is grounded in themes of sexuality and vengeance. Sexual control, moreover, is a political matter. The brothers have restored the honor of Jacobs household and repossessed the woman, thereby rejecting Shechemite might overtures that would eliminated the difference between Israelite and Other, a contrast essential to the author’s self-definition. NIDITCH 109

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1423 The biblical account of the revenge taken by Simon and Levi against the people of Shechem, in retaliation for the dishonor suffered by their sister Dinah, illustrates the potential danger of a rash act. Jacob felt responsible for the security of his clan. He reacted with a sharp rebuke [this verse]. Simon and Levi stood accused of endangerment. People may be endangered by packs of wild dogs that roam the streets of the cities. It is the responsibility of the authorities to remove this hazard from inhabited areas. Prior to their settling in the Promised Land, the ancient Israelites were given the following assurance by God: “I will give peace in the land … and I will cause evil beasts to cease [their attacks] in the land” Leviticus 26:6.   According to Rabbi Judah (2nd cent.), God did not promise to change the nature of wild beasts to make them docile. To make the streets secure the wild beats would have to be physical removed (Sifre, Lev. 26:6).   The ethical obligation to correct dangerous conditions was enacted into biblical law. A person who digs a pit on property accessible to the public must cover it to prevent possible injuries Exodus 21:33-34. Flat-roofed homes must have parapets to protect visitors from falling off Deuteronomy 22:8. This law was broadly interpreted by the rabbis to include all dangerous conditions which pose a danger to innocent people. Hence the prohibition of harboring dangerous dogs in a home or of placing a broker ladder against the wall of one’s home Ketubot 41b.   Containers of medicine normally carry a warning label which reads: “Keep out of reach of children.” Consideration for the protection of children dictates reasonable preventive measures. However, it does not indicate a ban on medicine, which properly belongs in the home. What about poison, for which there is no common practical need? Does the occasional use of poison for exterminating purposes justify the risk which its presence entails? Josephus (1st cent.) was unequivocal in his objection. “Let no Israelite keep any poison that may cause death, or any other harm” (Antiq., bk. 4, 8:34). Poison may be used under proper safeguards to exterminate rodents. Whatever is left should be disposed of in a manner which will create no danger to man and animals alike. Does the same ethical prohibition apply to the possession of guns in a private home? Rampant crime has produced a growing demand for guns for reasons of self-defense. There are instances where guns have proved useful in driving off criminals. Unfortunately, there are may more instances of guns falling into the hands of minors which tragic results. In urban areas, where police protection is available, the possession of a gun is risk which should not lightly be assumed.   A rabbinic decree (2nd cent.) prohibited the sale of offensive weapons to individuals who are suspected of harboring a criminal intent Avodah Zarah 16b.  In modern societies licensing procedures have been instituted to keep guns out of the hands of criminal elements. Such procedures have proved woefully inadequate. There is a need tor stricter gun-control laws. Ethical considerations make such legislation imperative. BLOCH 106-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1424 [As a further example of Divine chesed, which we are to emulate], God appeared to Jacob when he returned to Padan Aram to pronounce the blessing of [consolation] the mourners after the death and burial of Deborah, Rebecca’s nurse (Rashi).   Genesis Rabbah 81:5; cp. Rashi on Genesis 25:11 AHAVCH 24

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1425 It was taught: “The mitzvah of procreation attaches to the man and not to the woman.  Whence do we derive this? R. Yosef said: From the verse: ‘And God said to him: “Be fruitful and multiple” [preh ureveh, (singular), and not pruh urevuh (plural)]” Yevamot 65b TEMIMAH-GEN 149

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1426 The halakhic discussions regarding the obligation to procreate are based on [this verse] where God tells Jacob to “preh urveh” – to be fertile and increase.” The Mishnah elaborates on this: “A man must not refrain from having children unless he already has some. The school of Shammai says: At least two sons [based on the example of Moses]. And the school of Hillel says: At least one son and one daughter, because it is written (in Genesis 5:2) “Male and female (God) created them” (M. Yevamot 6:6). Thus, the Halakhah, following the house of Hillel, requires a minimum of one son and one daughter. The obligation is so important in Jewish law that a man may even sell a Torah scroll in order to gain funds to marry a woman and have children Yevamot 61b. REFJEW 139

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1427 Here I want to call attention to the distinction between one who has attained purity and one who has attained holiness: For one who has attained purity, his corporeal deeds serve only his essential needs, and he himself utilizes them only out of necessity.  In this manner, they gain release from the ingredient of evil that exists within all corporeality and they remain pure.   However, they have not yet entered the domain of the holy, for if one could manage without them he would then be better off.   One who has attained holiness, however, and who cleaves to his God constantly and whose soul walks about [immersed] in thought regarding those matters that are [of a] transcendent [nature] in his love for his Creator and is fear of Him, is considered as if he were walking about before the Eternal in the “Land of the Living” [the world-to-come] while still in this world. And this kind of person is likened to the Tabernacle, the Beis HaMikdash, and the altar, and this is related to what our Sages of blessed memory commented Bereishis Rabbah 92:6: “’God’s Presence left him’ [this verse] means that the Patriarchs themselves are the Divine Chariot.”   PATH 177-8

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1428 See [[GEN833]] Genesis 15:2 childless OXFORD 321-2

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1429 … if [a man] wants to acquire the quality of Lovingkindness … the following are the types of benevolence: First, when man is born it is necessary to provide him with all his food. Man should therefore have the following in mind. When Understanding begats Beauty [The Sephirah of Beauty derives ultimately from the Sephirah of Understanding] and it comes to pass that she is in hard labor [this verse] because of the aspect of judgment, God forfend, then Beauty finds its exit towards the Powers [The Sephiroth on the Right are Wisdom and Lovingkindness, those on the Left are Understanding and Power. Beauty emanates from all of them and should ideally be found a little towards the Right. Then there is harmony among the Sephiroth. But if, as a result of men’s sins, strength is given to the Powers on the Left these will draw Beauty towards them and the harmony will be disturbed. The ‘birth’ of the Beauty is then with difficulty. When man performs acts of kindness to the new-born child he should have the intention of performing this tikkun for the ‘child’ in the world of the Sepheroth, namely, Beauty, so that it emerges towards the Right.] and her birth is with difficulty.  It is necessary for man to put things right there as possible so that the birth of Beauty be towards the Right in order that the child be born without blemish. As we say: ‘And bring forth our justice as the light, O Holy God,’ [A New Year Prayer, v. Festival Prayer Book, New Year, ed. Routledge, p. 157] that is, that Beauty ( = Justice) should emerge towards the light, [The Hebrew for ‘as the light’ is la’or and can mean and is so interpreted by C., ‘towards the light.’ The Hebrew for ‘O holy God’ is kadosh and can mean simply holy or separate. One of the symbolic names of Beauty is Justice because it is the Sephirah balanced between Lovingkindness and Power.   Hence C.’s mystical interpretation of the prayer is: ‘And Bring forth (from Understanding = “Mother’) our Justice (= Beauty) towards the light (= the Right and it will then be holy and separated from the Powers.’] which is the Right, and it will then be holy and separate from the Powers. In this is included that he intends, with the deeds he performs, to bind it [Beauty] constantly to Lovingkindness and to bring it forth from Understanding in the direction of Lovingkindness and the child will then be born well formed and of strong vitality. [A Talmudic expression used of the birth of a healthy child. Niddah 31a] Practically every provision of the Torah is included in this [The Rabbis divide the divine precepts into positive and negative commandments. C. here says that practically all the negative commandments have as their aim the prevention of the Powers being stirred up. That is to say, when man commits forbidden acts he causes the power of stern judgment to be removed from its lawful place, just as his acts are unlawful. And this has the effect of preventing the ‘easy birth’ of Beauty. It might here be mentioned that the Kabbalists do not think of the process of the Sephiroth as having taken place in past time but as recurring throughout time.], that the Powers do not stir up the power of stern judgment there so that God forfend, the birth be a difficult one.   CORDOVERO 92

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1430 We are told [this verse] of the burial of Rachel and of the setting of a tombstone on her grave. … [This] type [] of conduct constitute[s] gemiluth chesed [acts of lovingkindness], to keep the other person in mind for the purpose of doing good to him, and praise him to those having the power to help him.   AHAVCH 24

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

GEN1431 [While] the standard midrashic interpretations … See [[] this event as bound up with Rachel’s theft of her father’s idols [and] focus--as the Bible itself implies-on Jacob’s curse [“With whomsoever you find your gods, he shall not live” [Genesis 31:32]), the Zohar understands her death as a punishment for the distress she caused her father in depriving him of his idols, “though her intentions were for the best.” Zohar (Wilna: 1894), I, 164b. Similarly, Joseph’s not disclosing his whereabouts to his father constitutes a major problem for Nahmanides: “… for were it not for what we have written above, Joseph would have sinned mightily to cause his father anguish, and to leave him a mourner so many years … for one asks, since Joseph spent so many years in Egypt, and rose to such high office, how is it that he never sent even a single letter to his father, to tell him of his whereabouts and to console him, for Egypt is only a six-day journey from Hebron, and even were it a year’s journey it were fit that he notify him, because of the honor due his father. …” (Commentary to Genesis 42:9.) Cf. Midrash Tanhuma, Yayeshev 8, Sefer Hassidum (ed. J. Wistinetzki), sec. 941. Despite this gesture in the direction of the more usual antipathy towards idolatry [One thinks immediately, for contrast, of Gideon smashing his father’s Ba’al altar [Judges 6:25] and of the robust delight the Midrash takes in Abraham’s childhood demolition of his father’s idol shop!], the value scale of the Zohar is clear: the pain caused Laban by his daughter is the single most significant component of the episode. R. Isaiah Horowitz, the 16th century mystic, offers another instance: commenting on Joseph’s willingness to abide by Jacob’s wish that he search out as brothers though he knew that they hated him to the death, the Shelah the remarks, “… a man must sacrifice his life to do the will of his father.” R. Isaiah Horowitz, Shenei Luhot Haberit (Amsterdam: 1708), p. 303a.  BLIDSTEIN 80

SHOW FULL EXCERPT