Narrative Demarcation, Part IV - Dynamic Boundaries
LITERARY STUDY OF BIBLICAL NARRATIVE
By Rav Dr.
Yonatan Grossman
****************************************************************
This series is dedicated to the refuah sheleimah of
our dear mother
עטל רחל בת פעראל
by Frieda and Dovid Wadler
****************************************************************
Lecture #17:
Narrative Demarcation, Part IV
Dynamic Boundaries
In this lecture, our final lecture on narrative demarcation in Tanakh,
we will confront an intriguing variation on this theme. Despite the clear sense that every
narrative has its natural boundaries, sometimes Scripture may play with these
borders. I do not refer to the
phenomenon analyzed by Perry and Sternberg, in which the boundaries of the unit
are dynamic and change in light of the readers seeking out different subjects
through which the narrative may then be organized in different ways. My intent
is rather to examine cases in which the subject of the narrative is agreed-upon
and obvious, but nevertheless a number of parallel demarcations are tenable, and
all of them are encouraged by the verses themselves.
In order to examine this phenomenon, we will analyze the story of the
theft of the blessings in (and possibly around) Bereishit 27. This is a narrative that, in my
humble opinion, allows the reader to recognize how Scripture creates different
demarcations, significantly influencing ones assessment of the characters
within the narrative.[1]
Before we begin this analysis, we must note that the narrative of the
theft of the blessings has many facets, and it is not feasible in the current
framework to dissect it in a comprehensive way.
My intent here is not to present a close reading of the narrative, but to
present certain facets that are uncovered by the determination of the storys
boundaries, thereby outlining a general approach only.
THE STORY OF THE THEFT OF THE BLESSINGS
The question of character assessment in a narrative is an extremely
gripping question, particularly when the narrator shies away from any direct
judgment. As Avishur puts it:
In a story this dramatic, the narrator succeeds in
maintaining maximum objectivity and does not reveal a position: does the
narrator condemn the actions by Rivka and Yaakov or praise them?[2]
What are the boundaries of the unit under discussion? There is a general
consensus that the end of the story is Yaakovs departure from his house
(character dispersal) and Esavs marriage to Yishmaels daughter (28:9).[3] As we
have already noted (see Lecture 15), Langton, in his division of the chapters,
feels that Yitzchaks sending Yaakov to Charan is the beginning of a new story.
However, his approach is difficult, because Yitzchaks summons and command
(28:1) are both presented by the narrative as direct responses to Rivkas
desperate declaration to Yitzchak in the immediately preceding verse (27:46): I am disgusted with my life because of
Hittite women. This statement is in turn informed by her
concern about Esavs desire to kill Yaakov (27:42-45), so that it is difficult
to disassociate Yitzchaks words to Yaakov from the natural chain of the
development of the plot (concatenate structure).[4]
Thus, most commentators and critics agree that the story does not end
until 28:9. But where does it begin? Unlike the conclusion of the narrative, its
starting point is a matter of contention and divergent views.
The Minimalist Reading (27:1-28:9)
The minimalist reading sees the beginning of the story at the start of
chapter 27, namely with the description of time at its opening: And it was (Va-yehi)
when Yitzchak grew old (v. 1). This is a classic introductory formula for a new
unit, alluding to the possibility that a great deal of time may have passed
since the previous episode in this case, Esavs marriage to two Hittite women
at age forty.[5]
Furthermore, at first glance, Esavs nuptials seem to be divorced from the plot
of the theft of the blessings. In this aspect, Langton and the Masoretic text
are in accord, as Esavs marriage is in a different chapter as well as a
different paragraph, so that Va-yehi opens a fresh narrative.
According to this demarcation, Esav (just like Yitzchak) is presented as
a tragic figure whose mother and brother lead him down the garden path. While he
is fulfilling his fathers command, his brother stealthily steals the blessing
that his father had designated for him. The verse does not allude to a special
impetus for the theft of the blessings, and the reader has no choice but to feel
that Rivkas preference for her younger son is tied to her unique love for him
(in light of 25:28). A reading such as this naturally judges Rivka and Yaakov
harshly.
There are additional foundations in the narrative to support this
approach. Consider the lack of a dialogue between Rivka and Yitzchak about the
intended recipient of the blessings and Yaakovs concern that the ruse will be
uncovered, resulting in a curse for him instead of a blessing (27:11-12) and
his lack of concern about the ruse itself.
These facts are integrated into the negative assessment of Rivka and
Yaakov, while on the other side the reader finds the old man Yitzchak and the
older son Esav, the characters who are led astray.[6] The
language of Esav (e.g., Here I am; 27:1) and his marriage to Yishmaels
daughter in order to appease his father encourage a positive assessment of the
character and identification with his pain. This reading is buttressed,
naturally, by the description of Yitzchak when he uncovers the ruse, And
Yitzchak trembled with an exceedingly great trembling (27:33), and the
description of Esav in this scene, And Esav cried an exceedingly great and
bitter cry (27:34).
It is difficult not to feel the narrators sympathy for these tragic
figures. The reader is drawn at this point to an evident negative evaluation of
Yaakovs acts; although it is said by Yitzchak, it leaves a great impression:
Your brother came with guile, and he took your blessing (27:35).[7]
Thus, the inevitable conclusion of the reader is that the guileless,
innocent Yitzchak and Esav are the ones who touch our hearts here, not the
guileful Rivka and Yaakov, who succeed in their malfeasance.[8]
The Expansive Reading (26:34-28:9)
Although both the chapter and paragraph divisions point to Yitzchaks
advanced age as signaling the opening of the story, it appears that the
narrative structure of the unit points to Esavs marriage to Hittite women as
the starting point.[9] The
issue arises because of the inclusio created here: Esavs marriage (to Hittite
women) introduces the tale, and in the end, the issue of Esavs marriage (to
Yishmaels daughter) resurfaces.[10]
Moreover, it may be that this literary envelope is only the shell of a
fuller chiastic structure:[11]
A. Marriage of Esav to Hittites
(26:34-35)
B. Yitzchak sends Esav to the field and
wants to bless him (27:1-4)
C. Rivka hears of Yitzchaks desire and
commands Yaakov to act and trick Yitzchak (And now, my son, listen to my
voice) (27:5-17)
D. Yaakov, disguised as Esav, comes to
his father to receive the blessing (I am your firstborn Esav) and is blessed
(27:18-29)
D1. Esav comes to his father to receive
the blessing (I am your son, your firstborn Esav) and is blessed (27:30-41)
C1. Rivka hears of Esavs desire to kill
Yaakov and commands Yaakov to act (And now, my son, listen to my voice)
(27:42-46)
B1. Yitzchak sends Yaakov to Paddan Aram
and blesses him (28:1-5)
A1. Marriage of Esav to Yishmaels
daughter (28:6-9)
Indeed, within the story, there is a utilization of the fact of Esavs
marriage to Hittite women as justification for Rivkas desire to send Yaakov to
Paddan Aram (27:46): I am disgusted with my life because of
Hittite women; if
Yaakov takes a wife from Hittite women such as these, from the women of the
land, what good is my life to me?
According to this demarcation, one must view Esavs marriage to Hittite
women as the background of the story of stealing the blessings. These marriages
have an obviously negative evaluation, even if it stated from the point of view
Yitzchak and Rivka: And they embittered the spirit of Yitzchak and of Rivka
(26:35). As we have said, Rivka restates this as the plot progresses.
Beginning the narrative at this point encourages the reader to view Esav
as a son unworthy of blessing. Coupled with the fact mentioned immediately
afterward Yitzchaks failing vision the reader is drawn to a metaphor of
willful blindness: despite Esavs marriage to the Hittites, Yitzchak still wants
to bless him. As the Abarbanel (ibid.) states:
Love breaks all the
rules
Perhaps for this reason it says,
And his eyes were too dim to see the eyes of his intellect and intuition
were dimmed, and he did not observe or perceive his actions appropriately.[12]
A fact mentioned in the introduction to the narrative is very important,
and in our context, the reader can determine (in light of the marriage of Esav
to the Hittite women) the reason for Rivkas actions. Thus, this small paragraph
leavens our negative assessment of Rivka in the narrative, alluding to the
possibility that indeed Esav does not deserve Yitzchaks blessing.
The Maximalist Reading: The Story as Part of a
Narrative Cycle (25:19-28:9)
There is an additional reading of which the reader must be aware as well.
Zakovitch stresses that after one determines the boundaries of the narrative,
one must clarify if it is an independent literary unit
or perhaps the
narrative is written as part of a wider framework on which it sheds light and
which sheds light on it.[13]
This is realized in full in the narrative before us. In the narrative of
the theft of the blessings, there are hints to preexisting frameworks in the
story, and the reader is compelled to take them into account as well:
1.
In response to the revelation that his brother has stolen the blessing
intended for him, Esav declares (27:36): Indeed,
he was named Yaakov, for he has deceived me (va-yakeveni)
these two times: he took my birthright, and now, behold, he has taken my
blessing! Esav refers to the scene of
selling the birthright (bekhora) (25:29-34). There is also a literary link between
the two scenes: in both of them, the status of firstborn is determined in the
context of eating and drinking, and in both of them, the day of death is
mentioned as an impetus for the action. At the selling of the birthright, Esav
says: Behold, I am going to die, and what good is a birthright to me? (25:32);
in the story of the blessings, Yitzchak says: Behold, I have grown old; I do
not know the day of my death (27:2).[14] In
addition, the similarity between bekhorati (my birthright) and
birkhati (my blessing) stresses in a unique way the relationship between the
two frameworks.[15]
2.
An additional framework referred to in the narrative is the prophecy
that Rivka received when she went to seek God while pregnant (25:22-24). Both in
the blessing that Yitzchak gives to Yaakov and the blessing that, at the end of
the day, Yitzchak gives to Esav, servitude is mentioned (27:29, 40) Nations
will serve you; And you will serve your brother. Due to this proximity, it is
logical that the verse alludes to the prophecy that Rivka has received, which
deals with these two brothers: And the older will serve the younger (25:23).
These two episodes take the reader out of this unit and allude to its
place within the greater whole of the entire narrative cycle.
In terms of E. M. Forsters literary distinctions, we have a coherent
literary plot before us, and the reader must interpret every stage in the
development of the plot in light of the previous stages. As Aharoni puts it:
Many words and
verses in this narrative of ours receive a deeper significance only with the
completion of an analytical reading of all three acts. This is because every
scene in the narrative sheds light on the others, demystifying and clarifying
vague and obscure points in its subsections.[16]
Indeed, there is clear thematic continuity between the narrative of the
theft of the blessing, the prophecy to Rivka, and the sale of the birthright, as
all of them are dealing with the question of the birthright and the struggle
between the brothers.
We should note that at the beginning of Yaakovs narrative cycle, the
verse states: And Yitzchak was forty years old when he took Rivka, daughter of
Betuel the Aramean from Paddan Aram, the sister of Lavan the Aramean, for
himself as a wife (25:20). It is logical that, as the Abarbanel (ibid.) already
points out, Lavans identity as Rivkas brother is an expositional fact that
will receive its full meaning only when Yaakov flees to Charan, to Lavan, his
mothers brother. This fact serves
as another proof that Scripture views all of these acts and scenes as one
continuous story, and the reader is required to read one small unit against the
backdrop of its adjacent passages.
In an expansive reading such as this, the negative assessment of Rivka
and Yaakov is noticeably reserved, as each of them has hidden motives. Rivka
acts in light of the prophecy she has received, and her preference for the
younger son thus receives a stamp of divine approval. Yaakov similarly acts in
light of the birthright that he purchased from Esav. Moreover, the reading of
Esavs words accusing his brother Yaakov can even arouse some measured criticism
of Esav, in light of the sale of the birthright:
When he says
I am your son, your firstborn Esav (32)
he denies his absolute relinquishment and forswearing of the birthright (25:33),
and he does not have any foundation to indict Yaakov for taking the birthright
by deceit (36) because he sells his birthright with full knowledge![17]
The Dual Assessment
As each of these readings is textually and thematically valid, it makes
sense that the verses itself encourages a number of parallel demarcations of the
same narrative, in which each narrative carries within it a different assessment
of the characters acting in it. What is the contribution of the dual assessment
in this story? Why do the verses demand that the reader judge Rivka and Yaakov
harshly for the very act of stealing the blessing and then lighten this negative
assessment in light of the expansive story?
It appears to me that Buber anticipated this question with his analysis
of the greater context.
In the narrative of the Book of Bereishit,
the essential purpose is to explain the development of the generations of Israel
according to their previous selection; this selection must be repeated and
reiterated in every generation. Here too, it was ordained to present the
distancing of the firstborn as an act of Divine Providence; naturally, this
could not be spoken of as injustice
Nevertheless, one cannot deny the quintessence of the secret of theology and
biblical history, which says that the divine direction leaves some freedom for
human actions and responsibility for those actions.[18]
In other words, Scripture presents the selection of Yaakov as a divine
selection; however, at the same time, it wants to intimate some criticism of his
methods in acquiring the blessing. The ambivalent message is tied here to the
view (which can be found in the evaluation of King Yehu as well) that the end
does not justify the means; a man even if chosen by God will be forced to
pay the piper for his immoral acts (even if in these acts he is realizing the
divine decree).
Naturally, it is not surprising that the reader is destined to return to
this story through the continuation of the reading of Yaakovs narrative cycle,
which assimilates much subliminal criticism of Yaakovs acts.[19] The
reader may be frustrated by this. As Aharoni puts it:
At times, one is struck dumb upon witnessing the emotional
and sometimes physical devastation that Gods ways bring upon the heroes woven
into the tapestry of His plans. But, as it is said, Gods ways are hidden, His
thoughts are not our thoughts, and His ways are not our ways.[20]
With this, we have almost completed our analysis of narrative
demarcation. The next lecture will be dedicated to what is called the imaginary
conclusion, and with this we will conclude our analysis of this issue.
[1] What appears below
is a summary of my doctoral thesis. Readers interested in delving into this
matter are welcome to read it: "Kefel Mashma'ut
Be-Sippur Ha-Mikra'i U-Terumato Le-Itzuv Ha-Sippur (Bar-Ilan University,
5766).
[2] Y. Avishur,
Bereishit (Olam Ha-Tanakh; Tel Aviv, 1993), p. 171.
[3] See, for example,
J. P. Fokkelman, Reading Biblical Narrative: An Introductory Guide
(Leiderdrop, 1999), p. 47
[4] As we have already
pointed out, there is also a common semantic field in the narrative of the theft
of the blessing and Yitzchaks sending Yaakov to Charan.
[5] It may be that a
case of inclusio exists according to this demarcation, because the narrative
opens with Yitzchaks eyes And it was when Yitzchak grew old, and his eyes
were too dim to see (27:1) and ends with them as well And Esav saw that
the daughters of Canaan were evil in the
eyes of
Yitzchak his father (28:8). However, I have my doubts about this.
[6] Zakovitch is
justified in his claim that there is unique effort on the part of the verse to
salvage Yaakovs honor and to put the main responsibility for the theft of the
blessings on Rivkas shoulders; see Y. Zakovitch, Akbat Yaakov, in B.Z.
Luria (ed.), Sefer Dr. Baruch Ben-Yehuda (Tel Aviv, 5741), p. 131.
Despite this, for the purposes of our analysis, I seek to focus on the question
of the assessment of the two parties in the household: Yitzchak and Esav on one
side Rivka and Yaakov on the other.
[7] This is
particularly notable because the idea of guile (mirma) shows up again in
the narrative cycle, when Yaakov complains that Lavan has tricked him (Bereishit
29:25).
[8] Z. Adar, Sefer
Bereishit Mavo Le-Olam Ha-Mikrai (Tel Aviv, 5727), p. 77.
[9] Dillmann already
points this out; see A. Dillmann, Genesis: Critical and Exegetically
Expounded, trans. B. Stevenson (Edinburgh, 1897), vol. 2, p. 210. This is
particularly prominent in his subtitle for this unit: He is blessed by Isaac:
Ch. xxvi, 34 xxviii, 9."
[10] The fact that the
description of Esavs marriage opens with the word Va-yehi further
encourages this reading.
[11] Fokkelman and Fishbane
discuss the chiastic structure of the narrative; however, they demarcate the
narrative using the minimalist option, so that the narrative is structured to
open with Yitzchaks command to his older son to go out to the field and to
close with Yitzchaks command to his younger son to go out to Charan. J. P.
Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis (Assen and Amsterdam, 1975), p. 98;
M. Fishbane, Text and Texture: Close Reading of Selected Biblical Text
(New York, 1979), p. 49.
[12] Rashi, who (following
the midrash) ties the blindness of Yitzchak to the idolatrous smoke of
the Hittite wives, is responding practically to the expansive demarcation. He is
seeking to interpret the significance of the blindness in light of this
preceding fact.
[13] Y. Zakovitch, Mavo
Le-Farshanut Penim Mikrait (Even-Yehuda, 1992), p. 57.
[14] See Zakovitch, n.6
above, pp. 130-1.
[15] Translators note: This link and its implications are discussed in Lecture #09. As we noted there,
although "birthright" is probably the best translation of
bekhora, it is directly related to the term "bekhor," which
refers to the male firstborn of the family.
[16] R. Aharoni, Yaakov
Ve-Esav: Machazeh Be-Shalosh Maarakhot, Beit Mikra 23 (5738), p.
327.
[17] Zakovitch, n.6 above, p.
132. There are other approaches to understanding the selling of the birthright.
See, for example, the Ramban (ad loc.), who maintains that the sale revolves
around the issue of inheriting the fathers status only, not the issue of
receiving the blessing.
[18] M. Buber, Darko shel
Mikra (Jerusalem, 5724), p. 291.
[19] This is already
mentioned in Midrashic sources (e.g., Tanchuma Yashan, Parashat Vayeitzei,
11). See N. Leibowitz, Iyunim Be-Sefer
Bereishit (Jerusalem, 5727), pp. 224-5.
[20] Aharoni, n.15 above, p.
340, paraphrasing Yeshayahu 40:27 and 55:8.