[Avodah] The Sin Of Reuven

[Jay F Shachter]

In the ongoing discussion of Genesis 35:22, it has been noted that the
act that Reuven perform upon, or with, Bilhah, is described using the
Hebrew word sh-k-b.  It has accordingly been urged, with fair
justification, that Reuven and Bilhah must have lain together.  We all
know the homiletic explanation of the verse, but we also all know that
a verse, though it may be homiletically explained, never departs from
its straightforward meaning (of course, the straightforward meaning of
a verse -- "pshat" in Hebrew -- need not be its literal meaning;
Hebrew has idioms just like any other language, and when, e.g.,
Genesis 27:41 states that `Esav said something in his heart, the
"pshat" is that he thought it, not that his cardiac muscle was capable
of articulate speech).

Now, it is possible that the above-cited principle, that a verse never
departs from its straightforward meaning, is a general principle that
admits of exceptions.  Maybe there are some verses that just do not
have a straightforward meaning, verses whose only meanings are
homiletical.  Genesis 35:22 could be one such verse.

Another possibility is that the straightforward meaning of Genesis
35:22 is different from what we think it is.  This is the position
taken by the author of Hakkthav V'Haqqabala, a book whose single
purpose is to argue that the straightforward meaning of various verses
in the Torah is different from what we think it is.  Many of the
arguments are unconvincing, and the book is full of bogus etymologies,
but it is still, in my opinion, very much worth reading, at least once
(Hirsch's commentaries are also full of bogus etymologies, but that
does not mean that the commentaries are not worth reading).  Very
often Hakkthav V'Haqqabala will come up with something entirely
plausible.  For example, the book proposes that in Genesis 38:24 Tamar
was being taken out, not to be burnt alive, but to be branded.  I
think that that is quite probably the straightforward meaning of the
verse: the branding of criminals was a not uncommon practice among
Bney Noax, and this interpretation is, moreover, proposed by other
traditional Jewish sources.

Now, with respect to Genesis 35:22, Hakkthav V'Haqqabala has proposed
something a bit more of a stretch, but not entirely impossible.  The
root meaning of sh-k-b, it is proposed, is not "to recline", but "to
lower".  This is possible.  When you lie down to go to sleep, you
generally do so by lowering yourself from a standing position to a
reclining position.  If people normally slept in trees, maybe a
different word would have been adopted.  The use of sh-k-b as a
euphemism for copulation (since sh-g-l is obscene) is also quite
reasonable, since copulation generally involves grabbing your beloved
and pulling her/him down onto the bed.  Again, if people normally
copulated in trees, maybe a different word would have been used.

Thus, what Genesis 35:22 might be saying is that Reuven lowered
Bilhah, and that is exactly what he did, according to our traditional
explanation of the verse, which is thus seen not to depart from its
straightforward meaning.  If he moved his father's bed out of Bilhah's
tent, then he certainly lowered Bilhah, in the sense that he degraded
her, and the actual means used to degrade her might have been
deliberately left unspecified.  Although not the literal meaning, this
could very well be "pshat".


			Jay F. ("Yaakov") Shachter
			6424 N Whipple St
			Chicago IL  60645-4111
				(1-773)7613784
				jay at m5.chicago.il.us
				http://m5.chicago.il.us

			"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"