Parsha # 12: “V’Yechi/And He [Ya’acov] Lived”
(Breisheet / Genesis 47:28 to 50:26 )
Edition: 15a03
“Peace At Last”
Greetings Sojourners, Friends, Guests and Other Readers! Welcome!
[Ed’s Note: Before I get into the story and reflection on this week’s Parsha, please allow me a few paragraphs to share some information I found about the overall segment itself. You may or may not find it of interest personally, but it was something that caught my imagination and motivated me to investigate the passage a little differently this week. If you wish to skip over this material, please proceed to Paragraph 7, below.]
This week’s Parsha is made up of the last chapters of the Book of Breisheet (Genesis). It is, in it’s production – that is, in it’s original hand-scripted format – unlike any other Parsha in the Torah. In order to see this difference, and verify it however, one would need to be viewing an actual Torah Scroll, as the Bibles or Chumashim from which we normally read do not indicate the difference. All proper Torah Scrolls however, will have continued this difference down through the years, because meticulous care is taken in the hand-done reproduction of the Scriptures. Even if one were to come across a Torah Scroll that is printed by machine (and I presume there are some of these around, though I have never – to my knowledge – seen one), if it is accurate, it will have reproduced this pattern as well. (If you are looking to purchase a scroll, and it doesn’t have this feature, do not waste your money, for there may be other errors as well).
So what is this unique feature of Parsha V’Yechi? In order to explain it, I have to note how all the Parshiot are printed. It involves the flow from one Sidrah (A New Word – see End Notes for explanation)[i] to the next. There are two attributes used in making the leap from one Parsha to the next. First, the beginning of the passage will always start on a new line. Second, that new line always will be separated by a space equivalent to the height of 9 letters. This is always the case, except in the transition from V’Yigash to V’Yechi. In this segue, there is no space what-so-ever[ii]
Now what possible reason could there be for this? Rashi claims that the Parsha V’Yechi is “closed” (setumah). He states that the reason for this is to ‘describe’ the “mood of Ya’acov’s children when he died. At that moment, the hearts of the children of Israel were closed in expectation of the suffering and despair of the impending bondage. [For] after his death the spiritual exile began,…” even though the actual servitude was still in the future. (SEASC pg 268). Another point which Rashi makes is that while “Ya’acov desired to tell his offspring about the ‘end times’ and the Messianic Age set to come about in God’s plan, he was kept from doing so because the prophetic Vision was concealed (i.e. ‘closed’) to him. (ibid) Still another interpretation of the spacing is offered by “the Sages in ‘Torot Kohanim’” which claim that the spaces indicate an opportunity given by Elohim for Moshé to reflect on the preceding passage, but that after Ya’acov’s passing, things (including the minds of the sons) were in much turmoil and they were unable to think through matters clearly, a state of mind indicated by the ‘closure’ of the passage. (ibid).
Personally, as I reflect on this “uniqueness” of V’Yechi, I suspect that the situation has been excessively ‘over-thought’ by the sages. Thus, I can see another possibility. I believe that the two Parshiot, namely V’Yigash and V’Yechi were originally one unit and were separated so as to solve an unrelated predicament – perhaps as simple as a shortage of Parshiot for the overall number of readings in the year. This would connect with the idea of the Sidrah being an “order of the pattern of things” such as events, or even simply sentences, in the telling of a story. Notice that the events in Ya’acov’s life pass very smoothly from the end of the V’Yigash into the beginning of V’Yechi, and do not break in their sense. Thus this break in the Parshiot can be seen as being ‘artificial’ or ‘convenient’. To keep the passages ‘connected’ by not having the usual spacing enables the reader to continue reading smoothly, and keeps the story (sidrah) complete and unified.
All this to say that our last passage in the book of Breisheet stands out as being different from the others. Whatever the reason, in my opinion, the truth of the reason for its uniqueness lies hidden, and shall remain so, in spite of the speculations of sages and authors over the centuries. So let us move on to the passage itself.
We have seen in previous passages, a few examples of the stories of the lives of the participants coming to an end before their lives are, in reality, finished. This is a technique used by the writers to move on with the over all story line of God’s plan and yet keep the events of one’s life as a unit. The telling of Avraham’s death is told in Breisheet 25:10, and yet he lived well on into the lives of his sons, his grandsons, and even would have seen some of his great-grandsons. Similarly Yitzchak lived on into the period of the sons of Ya’acov and even had some influence in their lives. Something similar is happening here in the opening of our Parsha for this week.
V’Yigash ends with the sentence “Thus Israel (Ya’acov [and his sons]) settled in the land of Egypt in the region of Goshen; They acquired property in it and they were fruitful and multiplied.” Then we open the next segment of readings with these sentences: “Ya’acov lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years and the days of Ya’acov – the years of his life – were one hundred and forty-seven years. The time approached for Israel to die, so he called for his son…” His actual death comes 2 chapters later, but we get the mistaken impression that 17 years passes in the blink of an eye. This is something to ponder, because I believe there is more here than simple words. While a father may reserve his blessing (and advice) to his children until the time of his passing, the inference of this passage is that in all of his seventeen years, Ya’acov never met the sons of Yosef. (see chapter 48:8) I think we may be reading about a number of separate events which are brought together now because of the impact of Ya’acov’s impending death. Let me try to un-pack these stories as I approach the passage – but keep in mind, this is just my opinion. You can decide for yourself how you think it may have ‘played out’ in reality.
First, we read that Ya'acov lived a further 17 years after his immigration to Egypt at the time of the famine. Finally he is able to live in some semblance of peace and quiet. All forms of ‘want’ are removed, the need for him to be actively working is passed – he can now retire, the inner turmoil over the loss of ‘his favourite’ son Yosef , is gone; his family is back together and his other sons seem to be settled and adequately matured, he even has met the Pharaoh and received his blessing. And all this took only 130 years to accomplish.
As a point of interest, notice that the story of Yosef begins when he “is seventeen years of age” (Breisheet 37:2) Now, as his story is coming to an end, along with the looming death of Ya'acov, we see the same number in play – “Ya'acov lived another seventeen years”. If nothing else, the use of this number in these places provide nice book-ends to the story. As we read the Scriptures, we should be looking for such hints as to “openings and closings”. Notice, for instance the opening of Genesis 1:1 and then 2:1. Again, compare Genesis 5:1 closing off Adam’s life story with Genesis 6:1 opening up Noach’s account, only hinted at in 5:32. Then look to see how the relating of offspring is used to close off the account of Noach. These “bookends” help us to follow the “sedarim”.
Getting back to our story, we learn that [at some point] Ya'acov calls for Yosef and has him swear an oath to take his body back to Mamre in the region of Hebron. The purpose of the oath is not that he didn’t trust Yosef to follow through, but to make sure that his son did not face any difficulty with Pharaoh in asking for the privilege of returning to his homeland to complete the task. The fact that it was an oath would be understood by the Pharaoh, and he would respect the honour involved in keeping that oath and not stand in his way. My suspicion is that this event could have occurred earlier in the seventeen years than it may seem to the reader. . It is only because one situation (of ill health) is written immediately before the second situation (of approaching death) that we presume the two are connected time-wise. Ya’acov was new to this land, and things may just have been starting to go well, and yet he knew that he was simply a sojourner in Goshen. Perhaps Ya'acov had an insight that his sons and their families might begin to feel ‘at home’ in this foreign land, and that they would forget that there was another land meant for, and promised to, them. The oath is thus a reminder that the children of Israel should not get too comfortable in this new dwelling place
[Ed’s Note: Before I get into the story and reflection on this week’s Parsha, please allow me a few paragraphs to share some information I found about the overall segment itself. You may or may not find it of interest personally, but it was something that caught my imagination and motivated me to investigate the passage a little differently this week. If you wish to skip over this material, please proceed to Paragraph 7, below.]
This week’s Parsha is made up of the last chapters of the Book of Breisheet (Genesis). It is, in it’s production – that is, in it’s original hand-scripted format – unlike any other Parsha in the Torah. In order to see this difference, and verify it however, one would need to be viewing an actual Torah Scroll, as the Bibles or Chumashim from which we normally read do not indicate the difference. All proper Torah Scrolls however, will have continued this difference down through the years, because meticulous care is taken in the hand-done reproduction of the Scriptures. Even if one were to come across a Torah Scroll that is printed by machine (and I presume there are some of these around, though I have never – to my knowledge – seen one), if it is accurate, it will have reproduced this pattern as well. (If you are looking to purchase a scroll, and it doesn’t have this feature, do not waste your money, for there may be other errors as well).
So what is this unique feature of Parsha V’Yechi? In order to explain it, I have to note how all the Parshiot are printed. It involves the flow from one Sidrah (A New Word – see End Notes for explanation)[i] to the next. There are two attributes used in making the leap from one Parsha to the next. First, the beginning of the passage will always start on a new line. Second, that new line always will be separated by a space equivalent to the height of 9 letters. This is always the case, except in the transition from V’Yigash to V’Yechi. In this segue, there is no space what-so-ever[ii]
Now what possible reason could there be for this? Rashi claims that the Parsha V’Yechi is “closed” (setumah). He states that the reason for this is to ‘describe’ the “mood of Ya’acov’s children when he died. At that moment, the hearts of the children of Israel were closed in expectation of the suffering and despair of the impending bondage. [For] after his death the spiritual exile began,…” even though the actual servitude was still in the future. (SEASC pg 268). Another point which Rashi makes is that while “Ya’acov desired to tell his offspring about the ‘end times’ and the Messianic Age set to come about in God’s plan, he was kept from doing so because the prophetic Vision was concealed (i.e. ‘closed’) to him. (ibid) Still another interpretation of the spacing is offered by “the Sages in ‘Torot Kohanim’” which claim that the spaces indicate an opportunity given by Elohim for Moshé to reflect on the preceding passage, but that after Ya’acov’s passing, things (including the minds of the sons) were in much turmoil and they were unable to think through matters clearly, a state of mind indicated by the ‘closure’ of the passage. (ibid).
Personally, as I reflect on this “uniqueness” of V’Yechi, I suspect that the situation has been excessively ‘over-thought’ by the sages. Thus, I can see another possibility. I believe that the two Parshiot, namely V’Yigash and V’Yechi were originally one unit and were separated so as to solve an unrelated predicament – perhaps as simple as a shortage of Parshiot for the overall number of readings in the year. This would connect with the idea of the Sidrah being an “order of the pattern of things” such as events, or even simply sentences, in the telling of a story. Notice that the events in Ya’acov’s life pass very smoothly from the end of the V’Yigash into the beginning of V’Yechi, and do not break in their sense. Thus this break in the Parshiot can be seen as being ‘artificial’ or ‘convenient’. To keep the passages ‘connected’ by not having the usual spacing enables the reader to continue reading smoothly, and keeps the story (sidrah) complete and unified.
All this to say that our last passage in the book of Breisheet stands out as being different from the others. Whatever the reason, in my opinion, the truth of the reason for its uniqueness lies hidden, and shall remain so, in spite of the speculations of sages and authors over the centuries. So let us move on to the passage itself.
We have seen in previous passages, a few examples of the stories of the lives of the participants coming to an end before their lives are, in reality, finished. This is a technique used by the writers to move on with the over all story line of God’s plan and yet keep the events of one’s life as a unit. The telling of Avraham’s death is told in Breisheet 25:10, and yet he lived well on into the lives of his sons, his grandsons, and even would have seen some of his great-grandsons. Similarly Yitzchak lived on into the period of the sons of Ya’acov and even had some influence in their lives. Something similar is happening here in the opening of our Parsha for this week.
V’Yigash ends with the sentence “Thus Israel (Ya’acov [and his sons]) settled in the land of Egypt in the region of Goshen; They acquired property in it and they were fruitful and multiplied.” Then we open the next segment of readings with these sentences: “Ya’acov lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years and the days of Ya’acov – the years of his life – were one hundred and forty-seven years. The time approached for Israel to die, so he called for his son…” His actual death comes 2 chapters later, but we get the mistaken impression that 17 years passes in the blink of an eye. This is something to ponder, because I believe there is more here than simple words. While a father may reserve his blessing (and advice) to his children until the time of his passing, the inference of this passage is that in all of his seventeen years, Ya’acov never met the sons of Yosef. (see chapter 48:8) I think we may be reading about a number of separate events which are brought together now because of the impact of Ya’acov’s impending death. Let me try to un-pack these stories as I approach the passage – but keep in mind, this is just my opinion. You can decide for yourself how you think it may have ‘played out’ in reality.
First, we read that Ya'acov lived a further 17 years after his immigration to Egypt at the time of the famine. Finally he is able to live in some semblance of peace and quiet. All forms of ‘want’ are removed, the need for him to be actively working is passed – he can now retire, the inner turmoil over the loss of ‘his favourite’ son Yosef , is gone; his family is back together and his other sons seem to be settled and adequately matured, he even has met the Pharaoh and received his blessing. And all this took only 130 years to accomplish.
As a point of interest, notice that the story of Yosef begins when he “is seventeen years of age” (Breisheet 37:2) Now, as his story is coming to an end, along with the looming death of Ya'acov, we see the same number in play – “Ya'acov lived another seventeen years”. If nothing else, the use of this number in these places provide nice book-ends to the story. As we read the Scriptures, we should be looking for such hints as to “openings and closings”. Notice, for instance the opening of Genesis 1:1 and then 2:1. Again, compare Genesis 5:1 closing off Adam’s life story with Genesis 6:1 opening up Noach’s account, only hinted at in 5:32. Then look to see how the relating of offspring is used to close off the account of Noach. These “bookends” help us to follow the “sedarim”.
Getting back to our story, we learn that [at some point] Ya'acov calls for Yosef and has him swear an oath to take his body back to Mamre in the region of Hebron. The purpose of the oath is not that he didn’t trust Yosef to follow through, but to make sure that his son did not face any difficulty with Pharaoh in asking for the privilege of returning to his homeland to complete the task. The fact that it was an oath would be understood by the Pharaoh, and he would respect the honour involved in keeping that oath and not stand in his way. My suspicion is that this event could have occurred earlier in the seventeen years than it may seem to the reader. . It is only because one situation (of ill health) is written immediately before the second situation (of approaching death) that we presume the two are connected time-wise. Ya’acov was new to this land, and things may just have been starting to go well, and yet he knew that he was simply a sojourner in Goshen. Perhaps Ya'acov had an insight that his sons and their families might begin to feel ‘at home’ in this foreign land, and that they would forget that there was another land meant for, and promised to, them. The oath is thus a reminder that the children of Israel should not get too comfortable in this new dwelling place
Furthermore, I firmly believe that Ya'acov would have met the sons of Yosef early in this final seventeen year period of his life in Egypt. There must have been times when Yosef would have made the journey to see his father, and no doubt, after such a long period of separation, he would have taken his sons M’nasheh and Efrayim along with him. He would want them to bond with his father as he had done so long ago. The blessing of the two boys could have been bestowed at any time during one of these visits. Although there are generally two times when such a blessing is fitting, in this instance a third possibility exists. The first, of course, would have been at the birth of each of the children. Unfortunately, Ya'acov was not present for this occasion. The second opportunity – related to this timing – would have been early on when Ya'acov arrived in Goshen, for this would have been like the time of their birth to him. It was, after all, the first time that their grand-father would have met them. Frankly, to my way of thinking, this is the time that makes the most sense. The great joy which Ya'acov must have felt would easily and understandably have bubbled over into the joy of being able to bestow a blessing on the two boys at the earliest moment possible. The third opening however also has some merit. That means we are to accept the story as it is written and place the blessing of the boys near the end of Ya'acov’s life, at a time when he may have been contemplating his death. He was old, and in ill health, but even so, he had plans for the children of his favourite son, and so he knew it was time to pass on a very special blessing to them.
No matter what the timing of the blessing, there are some points of interest which arise from this ‘sidrah’. The first is that Ya'acov ‘adopts’ the sons of Yosef as his own. This is of import, not just at this time directly, but also as it connects with generations later, when the promised land is being assigned to those descended from the sons of Israel. The adoption of M’nasheh and Efrayim first of all is tantamount to creating two new tribes out of one (that of Yosef). Ya'acov’s action here and now, ensures that each one of the boys (and thus their descendants) will receive a plot of land of their own. Note also that those who are further descendants (i.e. further sons) of Yosef are accounted for, either within the land given to the two boys, or through the fact that the area of Shechem, which has caused so much suffering for the tribes and for Ya'acov personally is, at this juncture, given directly to Yosef.
A second item of interest lies in the story of this blessing itself. It illustrates the power of listening and being obedient to Elohim. We note that Ya'acov is old and perhaps not too clear as to which grandson is which. So it is that Yosef manipulates the situation somewhat to make it easier for his father. M’nasheh, the elder of the two boys, is placed nearest to Ya'acov’s right hand. Efrayim, the younger, is placed to the left of Ya'acov. Ya'acov however crosses his arms to bless the boys, placing his right hand on Efrayim’s head, and his left hand on that of M’nasheh. When Yosef tries to correct things… “No, no father, you’ve got it mixed up. Your right hand should be on M’nasheh”…. Ya’acov insists that he has it correct. He states that it has been revealed to him by God that Efrayim would take precedence over M’nasheh in God’s plan for Israel, thus he elevates Efrayim over his brother, in a manner similar to Ya’acov being elevated over Esav and Yitzchak rising above Yishma’el in God’s eternal plan. Indeed, Efrayim’s offspring do rise to prominence. In later years, the name of Efrayim will be placed over all the tribes of Israel (that is, here meaning the Northern Kingdom) which will be taken into captivity in Nineveh (Assyria) and will eventually become known as the “Ten Lost Tribes”. Today, there exists a group of people known as Ephraimites who hold to a flawed understanding known as the “Two House Theory” which claims that the houses of Yehudah and Efrayim will come together to create “One New Man”. (see Ephesians 2:13ff) They claim it will thus initiate a new era of History for mankind. This is an erroneous theory however, based on the fact that, when the time is right, what began as the northern and southern kingdoms will be gathered together and united first, and that it is those who have been grafted into Israel through faith and acceptance of Y’shua as Messiah who will be joined together with the children of Israel and will result in the “One New Man” of Sha'ul’s prophetic writing. This is clearly the intent of what Sha’ul is predicting, if the passage is read without the ‘agenda’ of the Two House Theory proponents. [ Ed’s Note: Compare this concept with Kohelet / Ecclesiastes 4:9ff which reads: “Two are better than one, in that their cooperative efforts yield this advantage: if one of them falls, the other will help his partner up… again if two people sleep together, they keep each other warm; but how can one person be warm by himself? Moreover, an attacker [undoubtedly Satan] may defeat someone who is alone, but two can resist him; and a three-stranded cord in not easily broken.”]
The third article which tweaks my curiosity is the crossing of Ya'acov’s arms. It isn’t just an indication that the hands are placed as they are on the heads of two boys, but in addition, the crossing of the arms creates the ancient ‘image’ of the letter ‘Tav’ – today, to us, of course it would resemble the “X” of the English alphabet. I have heard it said that this letter (tav) came to stand for the ‘cross’ or the ‘accursed tree’ itself on which the Messiah of Israel and all humanity was destined to die. Thus, it is conceivable that Ya'acov, in crossing his arms in this fashion, was actually prophesying the manner in which the Hebrew Messiah would be executed. Placing this line of thought alongside Rashi’s commentary that Ya’acov desired to speak to his sons of the coming Messiah, the imagery makes for some very interesting trains of thought… wouldn’t you agree?
No matter what the timing of the blessing, there are some points of interest which arise from this ‘sidrah’. The first is that Ya'acov ‘adopts’ the sons of Yosef as his own. This is of import, not just at this time directly, but also as it connects with generations later, when the promised land is being assigned to those descended from the sons of Israel. The adoption of M’nasheh and Efrayim first of all is tantamount to creating two new tribes out of one (that of Yosef). Ya'acov’s action here and now, ensures that each one of the boys (and thus their descendants) will receive a plot of land of their own. Note also that those who are further descendants (i.e. further sons) of Yosef are accounted for, either within the land given to the two boys, or through the fact that the area of Shechem, which has caused so much suffering for the tribes and for Ya'acov personally is, at this juncture, given directly to Yosef.
A second item of interest lies in the story of this blessing itself. It illustrates the power of listening and being obedient to Elohim. We note that Ya'acov is old and perhaps not too clear as to which grandson is which. So it is that Yosef manipulates the situation somewhat to make it easier for his father. M’nasheh, the elder of the two boys, is placed nearest to Ya'acov’s right hand. Efrayim, the younger, is placed to the left of Ya'acov. Ya'acov however crosses his arms to bless the boys, placing his right hand on Efrayim’s head, and his left hand on that of M’nasheh. When Yosef tries to correct things… “No, no father, you’ve got it mixed up. Your right hand should be on M’nasheh”…. Ya’acov insists that he has it correct. He states that it has been revealed to him by God that Efrayim would take precedence over M’nasheh in God’s plan for Israel, thus he elevates Efrayim over his brother, in a manner similar to Ya’acov being elevated over Esav and Yitzchak rising above Yishma’el in God’s eternal plan. Indeed, Efrayim’s offspring do rise to prominence. In later years, the name of Efrayim will be placed over all the tribes of Israel (that is, here meaning the Northern Kingdom) which will be taken into captivity in Nineveh (Assyria) and will eventually become known as the “Ten Lost Tribes”. Today, there exists a group of people known as Ephraimites who hold to a flawed understanding known as the “Two House Theory” which claims that the houses of Yehudah and Efrayim will come together to create “One New Man”. (see Ephesians 2:13ff) They claim it will thus initiate a new era of History for mankind. This is an erroneous theory however, based on the fact that, when the time is right, what began as the northern and southern kingdoms will be gathered together and united first, and that it is those who have been grafted into Israel through faith and acceptance of Y’shua as Messiah who will be joined together with the children of Israel and will result in the “One New Man” of Sha'ul’s prophetic writing. This is clearly the intent of what Sha’ul is predicting, if the passage is read without the ‘agenda’ of the Two House Theory proponents. [ Ed’s Note: Compare this concept with Kohelet / Ecclesiastes 4:9ff which reads: “Two are better than one, in that their cooperative efforts yield this advantage: if one of them falls, the other will help his partner up… again if two people sleep together, they keep each other warm; but how can one person be warm by himself? Moreover, an attacker [undoubtedly Satan] may defeat someone who is alone, but two can resist him; and a three-stranded cord in not easily broken.”]
The third article which tweaks my curiosity is the crossing of Ya'acov’s arms. It isn’t just an indication that the hands are placed as they are on the heads of two boys, but in addition, the crossing of the arms creates the ancient ‘image’ of the letter ‘Tav’ – today, to us, of course it would resemble the “X” of the English alphabet. I have heard it said that this letter (tav) came to stand for the ‘cross’ or the ‘accursed tree’ itself on which the Messiah of Israel and all humanity was destined to die. Thus, it is conceivable that Ya'acov, in crossing his arms in this fashion, was actually prophesying the manner in which the Hebrew Messiah would be executed. Placing this line of thought alongside Rashi’s commentary that Ya’acov desired to speak to his sons of the coming Messiah, the imagery makes for some very interesting trains of thought… wouldn’t you agree?
Now we come to the latter segment of the storyline. Yosef has been summoned to the bedside of his father. If the aforementioned story of the bestowing of the blessing on the two sons of Yosef did indeed take place at this juncture, and also the bestowing of the property on them and on Yosef, then we see that it is brought to a climax with the arrival of the eleven brothers. They too, we presume, have been summoned, perhaps by Yosef himself, to the bedside. Ya'acov knows these are his last hours, and he knows it is time to pass on his blessing for all the sons, although as one reads them aloud, it seems like some of his words are more like curses. But it is the father’s role to bless the sons in his last hours. The words of Ya'acov will be studied and reflected on in a subsequent edition of this Parsha. Let us simply say that the 12 sons each had the opportunity to have their closure with their father, and to say their ‘good-byes’, and likewise, Ya’acov was afforded the privilege of saying good-bye to his sons, all 13 of his sons.
This story takes me back to the early summer of 1984. My sister was pregnant and expecting twins. It was a big occasion for everyone in our family, but none more so than for my father. He was eagerly awaiting their arrival. The advent of Sean and Ian would bring into the family the youngest of what would soon be eight grand-children for my parents, and the progeny of Father’s only daughter – so of course, it was a highly anticipated event. We all knew that it also meant the birth of the last grand-children father would live to see born.
My father was dying. For years he had done battle with a bad heart, but what was causing his present distress was cancer. Although we all knew it was there and getting worse, we tried our best to put our concerns “on a back burner”.
The twins, Sean and Ian, were born on Wednesday May 17th, 1984. It was an interesting day in history. They were the first “all Canadian” in-vitro babies. Their birth brought about quite a stir of publicity. In the subsequent Toronto Star newspaper, they shared their fame with the death of newsman and television personality Gordon Sinclair. A few days later, the local television studio learned of the birth of the boys, and they interviewed my parents. It was that interview that ‘forced’ me at least, to face my father’s illness and encroaching death. Under the television lighting, my father’s skin appeared to be a cross between lime green and khaki in colour. I realized then, that he had been dearly clinging to life in order to welcome Sean and Ian into the family. He was overjoyed by their becoming part of the family and his smile could have filled a large room. However, like Ya’acov, within a very short period (July 29th, in fact), father passed away in hospital. Although, to the best of my knowledge, he didn’t get a chance to utter a special ‘spoken’ blessing over Sean and Ian, it was clear that his pride and love for them knew no bounds, and that if he had had the words, he would have spoken them with gusto.
The point is this. To my thinking, (and certainly not to downplay the love of one’s mother), there is no richer blessing than simply to know the love of one’s father. Many people in this world are fortunate enough to experience this love, and certainly in our family, my siblings all had that good fortune. I think the next generation also knew this parental love and pride as well, although it may not have been spoken in so many words. I do know that when the depth of this type of blessing became real for me, one of the first things I did was to give a special blessing to my own children, and later, I did the same for my grand-children.
I feel sorry for those who have grown up without such a blessing in their lives. I suspect the numbers are staggering, and I know that they cover every age group. The effect of this emptiness in the hearts of some of these unfortunate people can be seen in so many different ways, generally in negative behaviours. One common trait among those who have lived in this ‘vacuum’ (for lack of a better word), is that those whose own ‘earthly’ fathers have not brought a blessing into their lives seem to have trouble identifying with Elohim as Heavenly ‘Father’; this in spite of Y’shua’s admonition to pray in words like these: “Our Father, who is in heaven…” and His referring to Elohim with terms such as ‘Abba’ (Daddy) and ‘Father’.
The fifth commandment given to the children of Israel on Sinai is “Honour your father and mother, so that you may live long in the land which Adonai your God is giving you.” It is the only commandment which comes with such a blessing ‘attached’. Certainly there is more to it than this, but when we can be at peace with our parents here and now, we will eventually know peace with our Heavenly Father, a peace which will start here and now, but also carry through into the eternal kingdom of God - the land we have been promised.
Over the next few days, during the span of this last Parsha of Breisheet, at least, let us pray that more and more children (of all ages) will come to know Adonai as ‘Father’, and be able to freely give Him their trust, and so come to feel the presence of His Divine Blessing in their lives.
Shavuah Tov! (Have a Great Week)
This story takes me back to the early summer of 1984. My sister was pregnant and expecting twins. It was a big occasion for everyone in our family, but none more so than for my father. He was eagerly awaiting their arrival. The advent of Sean and Ian would bring into the family the youngest of what would soon be eight grand-children for my parents, and the progeny of Father’s only daughter – so of course, it was a highly anticipated event. We all knew that it also meant the birth of the last grand-children father would live to see born.
My father was dying. For years he had done battle with a bad heart, but what was causing his present distress was cancer. Although we all knew it was there and getting worse, we tried our best to put our concerns “on a back burner”.
The twins, Sean and Ian, were born on Wednesday May 17th, 1984. It was an interesting day in history. They were the first “all Canadian” in-vitro babies. Their birth brought about quite a stir of publicity. In the subsequent Toronto Star newspaper, they shared their fame with the death of newsman and television personality Gordon Sinclair. A few days later, the local television studio learned of the birth of the boys, and they interviewed my parents. It was that interview that ‘forced’ me at least, to face my father’s illness and encroaching death. Under the television lighting, my father’s skin appeared to be a cross between lime green and khaki in colour. I realized then, that he had been dearly clinging to life in order to welcome Sean and Ian into the family. He was overjoyed by their becoming part of the family and his smile could have filled a large room. However, like Ya’acov, within a very short period (July 29th, in fact), father passed away in hospital. Although, to the best of my knowledge, he didn’t get a chance to utter a special ‘spoken’ blessing over Sean and Ian, it was clear that his pride and love for them knew no bounds, and that if he had had the words, he would have spoken them with gusto.
The point is this. To my thinking, (and certainly not to downplay the love of one’s mother), there is no richer blessing than simply to know the love of one’s father. Many people in this world are fortunate enough to experience this love, and certainly in our family, my siblings all had that good fortune. I think the next generation also knew this parental love and pride as well, although it may not have been spoken in so many words. I do know that when the depth of this type of blessing became real for me, one of the first things I did was to give a special blessing to my own children, and later, I did the same for my grand-children.
I feel sorry for those who have grown up without such a blessing in their lives. I suspect the numbers are staggering, and I know that they cover every age group. The effect of this emptiness in the hearts of some of these unfortunate people can be seen in so many different ways, generally in negative behaviours. One common trait among those who have lived in this ‘vacuum’ (for lack of a better word), is that those whose own ‘earthly’ fathers have not brought a blessing into their lives seem to have trouble identifying with Elohim as Heavenly ‘Father’; this in spite of Y’shua’s admonition to pray in words like these: “Our Father, who is in heaven…” and His referring to Elohim with terms such as ‘Abba’ (Daddy) and ‘Father’.
The fifth commandment given to the children of Israel on Sinai is “Honour your father and mother, so that you may live long in the land which Adonai your God is giving you.” It is the only commandment which comes with such a blessing ‘attached’. Certainly there is more to it than this, but when we can be at peace with our parents here and now, we will eventually know peace with our Heavenly Father, a peace which will start here and now, but also carry through into the eternal kingdom of God - the land we have been promised.
Over the next few days, during the span of this last Parsha of Breisheet, at least, let us pray that more and more children (of all ages) will come to know Adonai as ‘Father’, and be able to freely give Him their trust, and so come to feel the presence of His Divine Blessing in their lives.
Shavuah Tov! (Have a Great Week)
==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ===== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ====
End Notes:
[i] Sidrah (or Sidra). "Related to the word Sedar or Seder) which refers to 'order'". The term Sidrah thus indicates “a set of consistent patterns of things”. In my Stone Edition Art Scroll Chumash, it also seems to be comparable to a 'story-line', and if this is the actual case, it could be understood to mean 'the order or consistent patterns within a passage which relates to a single story', in this situation, the story line of the last days of Ya’acov’s life.
The plural form of the word is “Sedarim” or “Sedrot” depending on the source to which one may go for information. (To me the first form seems most logical). There is a reward (positive feeling) to the first person who proves to me which is the right form.)
[ii] It should be noted that there may be parshiot which have splits within their confines, or there may be different sedarim (sedrot?) within a parsha which have no split This however does not affect our comments about the unique character of V’Yechi as we are only referring to the link between passages. (Another point of interest which may be related is that a “Siddur” is a book which contains the 'Order of Prayers' used in the Synagogue Shabbat celebrations).
[i] Sidrah (or Sidra). "Related to the word Sedar or Seder) which refers to 'order'". The term Sidrah thus indicates “a set of consistent patterns of things”. In my Stone Edition Art Scroll Chumash, it also seems to be comparable to a 'story-line', and if this is the actual case, it could be understood to mean 'the order or consistent patterns within a passage which relates to a single story', in this situation, the story line of the last days of Ya’acov’s life.
The plural form of the word is “Sedarim” or “Sedrot” depending on the source to which one may go for information. (To me the first form seems most logical). There is a reward (positive feeling) to the first person who proves to me which is the right form.)
[ii] It should be noted that there may be parshiot which have splits within their confines, or there may be different sedarim (sedrot?) within a parsha which have no split This however does not affect our comments about the unique character of V’Yechi as we are only referring to the link between passages. (Another point of interest which may be related is that a “Siddur” is a book which contains the 'Order of Prayers' used in the Synagogue Shabbat celebrations).
==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ===== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ====
Acknowledgements
Wikipedia and other Internet sources for background information
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1770486/jewish/What-Is-the-Difference-Between-a-Sidra-and-a-Parshah.htm
Scherman, R. Nosson; and Zlotowitz, R. Meir; Editors, Stone Edition Art Scroll Chumash, Mesorah Heritage Foundation / Mesorah Publications, Ltd., Brooklyn, New York, 2008
Stern, David, The Complete Jewish Bible, Jewish New Testament Publications Inc, Clarkville, Maryland. 1998
Zodiates, Spiros, Exec Editor, The Hebrew Greek Key Word Bible (New American Version Bible) AMG Publishers, Chattanooga, TN 1977
Barker, Kenneth, General Editor, The New International Study Bible, Zondervan Corporation, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1985
Wikipedia and other Internet sources for background information
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1770486/jewish/What-Is-the-Difference-Between-a-Sidra-and-a-Parshah.htm
Scherman, R. Nosson; and Zlotowitz, R. Meir; Editors, Stone Edition Art Scroll Chumash, Mesorah Heritage Foundation / Mesorah Publications, Ltd., Brooklyn, New York, 2008
Stern, David, The Complete Jewish Bible, Jewish New Testament Publications Inc, Clarkville, Maryland. 1998
Zodiates, Spiros, Exec Editor, The Hebrew Greek Key Word Bible (New American Version Bible) AMG Publishers, Chattanooga, TN 1977
Barker, Kenneth, General Editor, The New International Study Bible, Zondervan Corporation, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1985
==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ===== ==== ==== ==== ==== ==== ====
This reflection ends our reading of the Book of Breisheet / Genesis. There is an ages old tradition amongst the children of Israel, when they come to the end of each of the Torah Books, to speak aloud this Prayer, in a way to bring encouragement to others….
Chazak, Chazak, V’nit'chazeik !
Which means:
“Be Strong! Be Strong! And may We Be Strengthened!”
Chazak, Chazak, V’nit'chazeik !
Which means:
“Be Strong! Be Strong! And may We Be Strengthened!”
