Justifying the Just -- Introduction, p. II

A famous example of a misunderstood biblical passage is B'Reshith (Genesis) 35:22:

"When Israel (i.e. Yaakov/Jacob) dwelt in that land, Reuven (Reuben) went any lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine, and Israel heard. The sons of Yaakov were twelve."

This verse is remarkable for a number of reasons. Firstly and most obviously, it is shocking that Reuven, the first-born son of Yaakov, the third of the triad of righteous forefathers Avraham (Abraham), Yitzchak (Isaac) and Yaakov, could and would commit such an unprecedented act. We find no prior mention of any such misconduct on the part of Reuven, sexual or otherwise. All the moreso is such conduct shocking when it involves his own righteous father's consort! Additionally, this most severe act receives but minor mention in the greater context of the text, namely, half a verse, with no prelude beforehand nor any details thereafter. The second half of this verse already begins the next section of text, the enumeration of Yaakov's progeny. The only other mention of this event is in Yaakov's final words to his sons before his death (B'Reshith 49:3-4):

"Reuven, you are my first-born, my might and the first of my strength, excellent in elevation, excellent in power. [Because of your] haste like water you will not excel (i.e. certain priveledges of the first-born have been taken away from you -Rashi), for you ascended your father's couch, then you defiled the One who ascended my bed (i.e. the Divine Presence was manifest upon Yaakov's bed -Rashi)."

Even this passage raises difficulties. What haste is this verse referring to? No details were given in the above account as to the context of the episode. Information is clearly missing.

Additionally peculiar about the former passage regarding this act of Reuven is that, as mentioned, the narrative seems to completely switch gears within the very same verse, beginning what appears to be a completely unrelated topic. "Reuven (Reuben) went any lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine, and Israel heard. The sons of Yaakov were twelve." Indeed, if one examines the Hebrew text, one finds that there is a gap in the text in the middle of the verse before the words, "The sons of Yaakov were twelve." This sort of gap is common in Scripture, generally denoting the end of one section and the beginning of another. For this sort of gap to appear in the middle of a verse is extremely rare and therefore highly significant.

Let us examine the commentary of Rashi on this verse:

"'Reuven went and lay with Bilhah' - Since [Reuven] rearranged [Yaakov]'s couch, Scripture charges him as though he lay with her. Why did he rearrange and [thereby] desecrate [Yaakov]'s bed? Because when Rachel died, Yaakov took his bed, which was regularly placed in Rachel's tent and no other tent, and placed it in Bilhah (Rachel's handmaiden)'s tent. Reuven came to lay claim against this affront to his mother (Leah). He said: '[Even] if my mother's sister (Rachel) was a rival wife to my mother, should my mother's sister's maid be a rival wife to my mother?' Therefore he rearranged [Yaakov's bed]."

A little background to understand this comment of Rashi. As related in B'Reshith 29:1-30:24, Yaakov, during his sojourn in Padan Aram with his swindling uncle Lavan, encountered Lavan's two daughters, Rachel and Leah. Yaakov quickly fell in love with Rachel, the younger sister, and asked Lavan for his daughter's hand in marriage. Lavan agreed, but tricked Yaakov into marrying Leah, the older daughter, first. Yaakov ultimately wed both sisters, who competed with one another to bear him more children, each one hoping that this would cause Yaakov to prefer her over her sister. Rachel was unable to bear Yaakov children, while the fertile Leah bore him six sons and a daughter, Reuven the first-born of these. Rachel gave her handmaiden, Bilhah, to Yaakov as a concubine, hoping that she would bear children to him that Yaakov would consider like Rachel's own. Bilhah bore Yaakov two sons. Leah likewise gave her handmaiden, Zilpah, to Yaakov for the same purpose, and she bore him another two sons. Eventually, Rachel, too, bore a son to Yaakov. All this is clear from the text.

Our sages have further taught us in the Talmud, Tractate Shabath 55B, that despite the vast superiority of Leah over Rachel in this child-bearing contest, Yaakov's initial and fierce love for Rachel was never dulled, and he always preferred her over her sister and rival Leah. Therefore, while each wife had her own tent, Yaakov's bed held its most constant place in Rachel's tent. This unbalanced favoritism against Leah aroused Reuven's ire, although he never acted upon it. When Rachel died, Reuven's hope was that his mother's proper honor would finally be realized, with Yaakov fixing his bed in Leah's tent, but this never materialized. Instead, Yaakov, because of his love for Rachel, moved his bed to Rachel's handmaiden Bilhah's tent because Yaakov's close association of Bilhah with her mistress Rachel. In Reuven's eyes, this was an affront to his mother that he could not bear. He therefore took the initiative to move his father's bed from the handmaiden's tent to that of his own mother Leah.

According to Rashi, this disruption of Yaakov's relationship with Bilhah is described as though Reuven himself actually lay with Bilhah, although this certainly did not literally take place. The verse merely uses figurative language, or if you will, exaggerated terminology, in describing this act.

It must be pointed out, that Rashi's comments here are all based on a discussion recorded in the Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Shabath) as mentioned earlier. Rashi is not inventing details or conjecturing. The Talmudic source predates Rashi by several centuries. While this is not the forum for the complex discussion of just what the Talmud is, suffice it to say that while the Talmud was put into its final written form in the 5th and 6th centuries CE, the teachings within it are far older as the Talmud is mainly a collection of oral traditions. Therefore the Talmudic tradition of the proper understanding of these verses that Rashi cites here claims authenticity as the ancient and accurate meaning of the original Biblical verse.

Let us examine Rashi's comments on the latter part of the verse:

"'Yaakov's sons were twelve' - ...Our Sages (Shabath ibid.) expounded: [These words] come to teach that all were equal and all righteous, for Reuven did not sin."

In other words, this anamoly of the new section discussing the progeny of Yaakov beginning at the end of this verse describing Reuven's act is to indicate the Reuven did not distinguish himself from his brothers in so doing. He remained of comparable stature to all his brothers. If so, since the other brothers were all righteous, so was Reuven. Scripture here mitigates its own harsh statement in the earlier part of the verse. A criticism is certainly aimed at Reuven, but it is immediately modified.

So far we have explained how the Torah could indicate that Reuven committed such an act (he didn't), we have explained why the verse ends with the statement, "The sons of Yaakov were twelve," and now we can also explain the verse in Devarim quoted above that refers to Reuven's haste. Reuven was angered by what he saw as a slight to his mother's honor and he acted hastily to right this wrong. However, it was inappropriate for him to interfere in the marital affairs of his father and for that he is reprimanded.

The main point to be taken from this study, however, is that it is irresponsible to superficially read Biblical verse without taking into account the larger context of the verse as well as the traditions surrounding it. We have concluded that Reuven was indeed a great and righteous individual on par with his brothers and in keeping with what we would expect from the first-born son of a great man such as Yaakov and from one whom HaShem chose to sire an entire tribe of the people of Israel.

The fact that the Torah uses such strong terms to describe Reuven's act, which was actually a much more minor act, is indeed the most puzzling detail of this explanation. I intend to address this point in my next post (G-d willing). Stay tuned.