Literary Approaches to Rabbinic Literature (RELJ 522)

Dennis Beck-Berman

Jacobs Ladder
The midrashic passage I have chosen to explicate using the analytical tools studied in class is
from Genesis Rabba (beg. 5th c.; henceforth, GenR). This passage comments upon the famous story
of Jacobs dream on that fateful night after leaving his family enroute to Haran (Gen. 28:12 ff.). To
facilitate discussion, I have divided the text of GenR 68:12 (ed. Theodor-Albeck, 2:784-89) into six
sections, each a different thematic unit. In the comments to each section and in the final analysis, I
will examine this passage using the approaches of Boyarin, Fraade, and Kugel. Ginzberg (The
Legends of the Jews 1:350) summarizes the theme of this passage as a night of marvels. But our
analysis will reveal that there is much beneath the surface.
There are several generative factors for these midrashim (Kugel). Early interpreters would find
it puzzling that God shows Jacob a dream, rather than simply speak to him, as He does to Abraham
and Isaac. And a stairway with angels ascending and descending seems to have no connection to the
divine promise that follows. It is also puzzling that when Jacob awakens he is afraid; there seems to
be nothing frightening in the dream or the divine promise. In addition, Jacobs dream is the first
one in the Bible, and the only one without an explicit interpretation (Boyarin). Hence, interpreters
conclude that it should be interpreted allegorically, as any dream, but not necessarily as referring to
his own immediate future. It is a divinely revealed prophetic vision, hence it refers to events destined
to occur in the distant future to Jacobs descendants. Another textual irritant (Kugel) is that the
word sulam, stairway, is a hapax legomenon in Scripture, motivating rabbinic homilists to explain
its meaning and providing them with ingenious interpretations through polyphony (Boyarin,
Kugel, Fraade).
[A-1]
[A-2]

[A-3]

A. Dreams are symbolic

And he dreamt (a dream) (Gen. 28:11). R. Abbahu said: Words of dreams do not cause one
to ascend or cause one to descend.
A certain person went before R. Yosi ben Chalafta. He said to him: That man [referring
euphemistically to himself] was told in a dream, Go and bring your fathers labour
[possessions] from Cappadocia. He [R. Yosi] asked him: Did your father [ever] go to
Cappadocia in his day [i.e. lifetime]? He replied: No. He said to him: Go and count twenty
beams in the ceiling of your house and you will find it [the hidden paternal treasure]. He
replied: But there are not twenty [beams] in it. He said to him: If there are not twenty,
count from the beginning to the end and back to the beginning, and if you find [you can
count to] twenty, you will find it.
He went, did so, and found it.
And whence did R. Yosi ben Chalafta deduce this? From [the word] Cappadocia.
1

Section A begins with a comment on Jacobs dream attributed to R. Abbahu (d. 309 CE),
who states that dreams have no influence whatsoever. His saying is not original; he invokes an adage
in rabbinic literature whose normal meaning is: Pay no attention to dreams. But the compiler
selects it to open our passage (Fraade) because it alludes to the verse (Dreams do not cause one to
ascend or descend And he dreamt ascending and descending). He recounts an incident about
R. Yosi ben Chalafta (mid 2nd c. CE) in which R. Yosi cleverly interprets a mans dream through the
techniques of anagram and gematria, widely employed in antiquity. He divides Cappadocia into
two words: kappa, a Greek letter whose numerical value is twenty, and dokia, beams.
The homilist uses this tale to transform the meaning of a rabbinic adage in a novel way: While
dreams in their literal form may be completely disregarded, nevertheless, a sage can discern their true
symbolic significance. The belief in the oracular power of dreams was widespread in the ancient
world. In rabbinic lore, dreams are often considered a form of prophecy. The homilist suggests that
the Words of God in Scripture are divine prophecy and must therefore be carefully interpreted.
Another possible reason this tale is selected to begin the passage is a play on the Hebrew sulam,
stairway, and the Greek selma, beam.
Since R. Abbahu was not the author of this adage, and the compiler regularly cites traditions
anonymously, it is possible that he uses here an original midrash on the verse by this sage. Indeed, R.
Abbahu is known for his Greek puns, which required no explanation for his sophisticated Cesarean
audience. Other versions of this midrash appear to be later (Kugel).1
[B-1]
[B-2]
[B-3]
[B-4]
[B-5]
[B-6]

B. Jacobs Dream Alludes to the Temple

Bar Kappara taught: There is no dream that does not have its interpretation.
He dreamt a dream: And look, a stairway (Gen. 28:12) this is the ramp;
Stationed on the earth this is the altar, as it states [in Scripture], An altar of earth you shall
make for Me (Ex. 20:21);
And its top reached the heavens these are the sacrifices, whose aroma ascended to heaven;
And look, angels of God these are the high priests;
Ascending and descending on it who would ascend and descend on the ramp;

Cf. TP Maaser Sheni 4:10, which has a shortened, somewhat corrupted version. Lamentations Rabba 1:17 appends to
A-3 an explanation for later readers unfamiliar with Greek. Elsewhere in Lamentations Rabba 1:1 (ed. Buber, 54), it (A-2)
appears in a litany of dream interpretation tales attributed to R. Aqiva, who explains that Cappadocia signifies Aramaic
kofa, beam, and Greek deka, ten. The version of this tale in TB Berachot 56b has the same explanation, but appears in
a litany of tales attributed to R. Ishamel. The addition of the explanation and the partial shift from Greek to Aramaic
suggest a later form of the tale.
2

[B-7]

And look, the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon it (Gen. 28:13) I saw the Lord stationed (nitzav)
upon the altar (Amos 9:1).
In B, Bar Kappara, also known as R. Eleazar Ha-Qappar (beg. 3rd c.), applies the principle

that dreams should be understood symbolically. The compiler, following up on the preceding
comment, brings a tradition (Fraade) that explicitly claims every dream has an allegorical
interpretation. Unlike A-1, this statement is not a well-known aphorism; it appears nowhere else in
rabbinic literature. But, similar to the allusive nature of R. Abbahus saying above, Bar Kapparas
may also have a double meaning: There is no [other] dream [in Scripture] that does not have its
interpretation [made explicit]. The midrash would then address a scriptural irritant (Kugel): Jacobs
dream is the first one in the Bible and yet the only one without an explicit interpretation.
The compiler chooses first to bring a midrash which interprets the dream as an allusion to the
Holy Temple. B-2 thru B-6 follow a deictic form (Fraade), while B-3 cites a prooftext and B-7
juxtaposes two biblical verses.2 Most of these symbolic identifications are fairly straightforward.3
The phrase the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon it alludes to the divine presence on the altar, because of
the identical phrase in another verse: I saw the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon the altar (and He said:
Strike the capitals so that the thresholds quake, and I will slay the last of them with the sword) (Amos
9:1). Since the homilist already connects Gen. 28:12 with the altar (B-3), he is making an additional
point by juxtaposing this prooftext, which speaks of terrible divine judgement upon Israel. And
indeed, the parallel passage in Sifre Numbers (ca. 3rd c.) explains this clause (B-7) with the gloss:
And the divine presence (shekhinah) departs. The homilist alludes here to another midrash which
claims that the divine presence removed itself from the Temple in 10 stages, one of which is
designated by Amos 9:1. This adds a dimension of pathos (Fraade) to the midrash: God shows
Jacob the glory of the Temple and its subsequent destruction; this is why he awakens in fear.
C. Jacobs Dream Alludes to the Theophany at Sinai
The Rabbis interpreted it [a stairway, etc.] [in reference] to Sinai: He dreamt a dream: And
look, a stairway this is [the theophany at] Sinai; stationed (mutzav) on the earth And they
stationed themselves (vayityatzevu) at the bottom of the mount (Ex. 19:17); and its top reached the
heavens And the mountain burned with fire to the heart of the heavens (Deut. 4:11); And look the
angels of God this is Moses and Aaron; ascending And Moses ascended (to God) (Ex. 19:3); and
2

This midrashic form is similar to a cotext (Boyarin), but here the intertext is between a Torah verse (itself not seemingly
problematic) and the complex rabbinic understanding (not made explicit) of a Prophetic verse (itself not problematic). Yet
the homilist does create a kind of dialogue between the verses.
3
Stationed on the earth alludes to the fact that the ramp of the altar, in order to avoid indecency, has no steps, as Scripture
states, An altar of earth you shall make for Me (Ex. 20:21) Do not ascend My altar by steps (Ex. 20:23).
3

descending And Moses descended the mountain (Ex. 19:14). And look, the Lord stationed upon it
And the Lord descended upon Mount Sinai (to the top of the mountain) (Ex. 19:20).
This midrash, attributed to the rabbis, takes Gen. 28:12 allegorically as a prophetic
reference to the theophany at Mount Sinai. It is not a syntagmatic form, nor cocitation (Boyarin).4
The rabbis identify sulam ( )with Sinai (ynys), since both are equivalent to 130 by gematria.
They then explain each phrase as an allusion to a specific event at Sinai. Most of the connections are
fairly obvious.5 The final phrase, And look, the Lord stationed (nitzav) upon it, is juxtaposed with:
And the Lord descended upon Mount Sinai (to the top of the mountain) (Ex. 19:20). The connection is
not clear. A possibile explanation is offered in Tanchuma (ca. 57th c.), which connects the
theophany of Jacobs dream and the theophany to Israel at Mount Sinai by their beginning with
similar expressions.6 Possibly, early copyists confused And the Lord descended (Ex. 19:20) with an
originally different prooftext: And the Lord descended in a cloud and He stationed himself
(vayityatzev) with him there (Ex. 34:5). The homilist would then draw a connection from the nearly
identical verbs used in both theophanies. If so, then this midrash is a counterpoint (Fraade) to Amos
9:1 in the midrash above (B-7), since Exodus 34 refers to Gods pardoning Israel for the sin of the
Golden Calf followed by the revelation of the attributes of divine compassion to Moses at Sinai. The
vision of the sin of the Golden Calf would explain why Jacob awakens in fear. The homilist has
God reassure Jacob and the people Israel that despite the destruction of the Temple, the Lord would
always forgive the sins of Israel and be their God.
D. Jacob is the Third and Final Patriarch
[D-1] Shalomaynay [said] in the name of R. Shimon ben Laqish: He showed him a throne7 of
three legs.
[D-2] R. Yehoshua of Sikhnin [said] in the name of R. Levi: [God said to him]: You are the third
leg.
[D-3] That is [indeed] the view of R. Yehoshua in the name of R. Levi [who said]: For the portion
of the Lord is His peoplc, (Jacob the cord of His inheritance) (Deut. 32:9) Just as this cord
cannot be woven of less than three strands [so there could not be less than three Patriarchs].8
4

Cf. Boyarin, Intertextuality, 113-115, where he analyzes a midrash that also alludes to the revelation at Sinai. There is no
attempt here to explain gaps, etc. in Scripture, or to correlate Writings (non-historical) with historical events.
5
The plural verbs allude to Moses and Aaron, who are both described as angels. Scripture describes Aaron ascending (Ex.
19:24, Ex. 24:9). Apparently, the homilist assumes that Aaron, too, must have descended Mount Sinai.
6
Tanchuma (ed. Buber, 1:149 f.) VaYetzey 7: The Lord stationed upon it And the Lord descended upon Mount Sinai
(Ex. 19:20); and He states, I am the Lord, God of your father Abraham (Gen. 28:13), and it is stated [in Scripture] about
Sinai, I am the Lord your God (Exodus 20:1). MS Vatican 30 reads: And Moses and Eleazar descended the mountain; the
copyist corrects the preceding prooftext from Num. 20:28 to Ex. 19:14 because similar verses were confused.
7
I read teronos, throne, following MS British Museum Add. 27169, ed. prin., Constantinople 1512, ed. Venice 1545,
and Yalqut Shimoni; MS Vatican 30 and other witnesses read tarchos, an obvious corruption due to similarity of and .
8
The second clause is not found in most MSS, including Vatican 30.
4

D begins with a comment in the name of R. Shimon ben Laqish (mid 3rd c.) by Shalomainai
which interprets sulam with a play on the Greek selma (or Latin solium), throne. But this throne is
missing one of its legs. This is based on the fact that the word sulam (a hapax legomenon) is written
in defective form (slm), without the vav (swlm). In his dream, God shows Jacob a throne standing
upon three legs, symbolizing the three Patriarchs, the pillars of the world. A throne with three (or
four) legs can stand firmly (cf. Eccl. 4:12), as it states, stationed [firmly] on the earth. God reveals to
Jacob that he is chosen as the third and presumably final Patriarch of the Jewish people.
Indeed, this perfectly fits the context of the divine promise vouchsafed is his dream (Gen. 28:13-15).
The compiler creates a segue (You are the third leg) to connect D-1 with the midrash (D-3)
of R. Yehoshua of Sikhnin (mid 4th c.) in the name of R. Levi (end. 3rd c.) on Deut. 32:9, Jacob [the
People Israel], the share of His inheritance. The verse is taken literally but out of context: Jacob [the
Patriarch], the cord of His inheritance. This does not mean that Abraham and Isaac are insignificant,
that Jacob [alone is] the cord of His inheritance; rather Jacob [is] [the third and final] the cord of His
inheritance. This midrash was apparently so well-known, that the earliest witnesses omit the
conclusion (so there could not be less than three Patriarchs). Jacob is destined to be the third
Patriarch. Why this emphasis on a seemingly obvious detail of biblical history? The point is that
Jacob and later readers may have thought that Esau would also be a Patriarch, a fourth leg of
the throne, whose descendants would, like Israel, be a divinely chosen people. This explains why
Jacob awakens in fear. The homilist assures his readers that Esau, who symbolizes the Christian
empire in rabbinic literature, is not a Patriarch and that Christians are not a chosen people.
[E-1]

[E-2]

[E-3]

E. Examining Ascending and descending on it/him (bo).

R. Berekhya said: He showed him a world and a third of a world. [Angels of God] ascending
for ascending cannot be less than two [angels], and descending cannot be less than two
[angels]. An angel is a third of a world [in size]. And from where [in Scripture] do we know
that an angel is a third of a world [in size]? As it is stated, His body also was like tarshish, and
his face as the appearance of lightning, etc. (Dan. 10:6).
R. Hiyya the Elder and R. Yannai [disagree]. One [the former] said: [Angels of God]
ascending and descending on the stairway. The other said: Ascending and descending upon
Jacob. The one who said: Ascending and descending on the stairway, [his position] is easy!
The one who said: Ascending and descending upon Jacob, [his position] is [that] some [were]
raising him up, some putting him down, some leaping on him, some jumping on him,
some scoffing at him.
Israel with whom I will show My glory (Isa. 49:3) [The angels said:] You are the one
whose whose bust is engraved on high. Ascending they see his bust [above]; descending they
see him sleeping.

[E-4]
[E-5]
[E-6]

[A parable:] It is like a king who would sit and judgement in the courtyard;9 people ascend
to the basilica and find him sleeping,10 they descend to the courtyard and find him sitting in
judgement.11
The angels who escort a person in the Land of Israel, do not escort him outside the Land.
[Angels of God] ascending those [angels] who escorted him in the Land of Israel; and
descending [on his behalf ] those who escorted him outside the Land.
Above12 [in heaven], whoever speaks in his [Israels] merit ascends, in his guilt, descends.
Below [on earth], whoever speaks in his favour descends; in his guilt, ascends.
In E-1, R. Berekhya (mid 4th c.) wonders: Scripture tells us the stairway reached from earth to

heaven in length, but it does not inform us of its width. Midrash often tries to fill in the gaps of the
Bible (Kugel, Boyarin). He cleverly has Scripture itself answer this question in the next verse. Since
both verbs ascending and descending are in the plural, they must each refer to no less than two angels.
He ingeniously demonstrates how the width of the stairway can be deduced using rabbinic
interpretations of Scripture and common folklore.13
The next group of midrashim focus on: And look, angels of God ascending and descending on it.
The compiler presents the opposing views (E-2) of R. Hiyya the Elder (beg. 3rd c.) and R. Yannai
(mid 3rd c.) concerning the Hebrew word bo, either it or him. The former reads on it, referring
to the stairway, which presents no difficulty, since it simply follows the biblical storyline. The latter,
however, reads on him, referring to their treatment of Jacob. Some angels were exalting Jacob, while
others were degrading/attacking him. He vividly describes the angels leaping on (hitting?) him,
jumping on him, scoffing at him. This explains why Jacob awakens from his dream in fear.
The compiler then brings a related tradition (Fraade) to explain the strange behavior of the
angels. In midrashic fashion the homilist renders the verse:14 And [some angels called out:] Look! An
9

Later printed eds. and Yalqut Shimoni Gen. 119 omit: in the courtyard.
Later printed eds., Yalqut Shimoni and Yalqut Mekhiri read: and find him sitting in judgement.
11
MS Vienna and the printed eds. read: and find him sleeping. Yalqut Shimoni, Yalqut Mekhiri omit: they descend to
the courtyard and find him sitting in judgement, and add: So they would ascend above and gaze upon his figure, [and]
they would descend below and gaze.
12
E-6 appears after E-5 in most witnesses (incl. MS Vatican 30); Yalqut Shimoni omits. Ed. Theodor-Albeck follows MS
Paris 149 and later printed eds. which place it after E-4.
13
The rabbis understand tarshish as the sea, especially the Mediterranean Sea, which according to rabbinic folklore was
2,000 parasangs wide. Hence, an angel, like tarshish, is 2,000 parasangs wide, which is a third of a world in size, for in
rabbinic lore the world is 6,000 parasangs wide. The stairway spans 8,000 parasangs, since it is wide enough for four
angels: two angels ascending side by side passing by two angels descending side by side. Thus, the stairway God shows
Jacob in his dream is one and a third worlds across.
14
Taking sulam as tzelem, engraved image; rosho as his head/bust; magi a, reached, as Aramaic mage a, strikes, in
an extended sense of making an impression, engraved (chaquqim) [cf. Aramaic neganei, depressions]; ascending and
descending are active participles, which in Biblical Hebrew are usually durative, refering to activity that continues over
time; bo, on him, as on his account [cf. Kugel (114, 124 n. 38)]. Kugel (114-119) has a somewhat different
understanding of the midrash.
10

image [an engraven bust] [of one] lying [sprawled] on the earth [asleep], but his [Jacobs] head strikes
[engraves] the heavens [= the divine throne]; And look! [called out] angels of God [who were
continuously] ascending and descending on account of him.
E-3 is probably an expanded version of a popular midrash circulating in antiquity (Fraade)
which connects Gen 28:12 with the idea of Jacobs bust (iqonin < eikonion) engraved on the
heavenly throne. The rabbis use this specific term here for several reasons.15 An allusion to this
motif is back-referenced (Kugel): Israel [i.e. the Patriarch Jacob] with whom [i.e. with whose bust]16 I
will show My glory [on the heavenly throne] (Isa. 49:3). In his dream, angels inform Jacob that his
bust is engraved on high. The angels ascending gaze on Jacobs bust in heaven and exalt him,
whereas the angels descending to see Jacob on earth gaze upon him sleeping and attack him,
apparently because they are shocked by the disparity of the glorious heavenly image and the face of a
sleeping mortal sprawled on the ground, or perhaps because they are shocked to see such an
angelic man sleeping in such a holy, awesome place. Some medieval commentators suggest the
angels are jealous of Jacob. If so, the homilist is hinting that the nations of the world (symbolized by
their various guardian angels) are jealous of Israel and thus attack him on earth. In the Conclusion I
will treat the reconstructed history of the Saw Fathers Countenance motif.
A parable (E-4) is made to a king [=God] who would sit in judgement in the courtyard
[=earth]; when people [= angels] ascend to the basilica [=heaven], they find him sleeping, but when
they descend to the courtyard, they find him sitting in judgement. At first glance, the parable is
unclear (cf. the variants in nn. 9-11). Assuming it may be related to similar midrashim, the parable
continues the line of interpretation in E-3 with the next verse: And look, the Lord stationed
[protectively] over him, to shield Jacob from the angels.17 The parable highlights the surprising
behaviour of the king. Normally, a human king would sit in judgement in the basilica and take a
15

The word eikonion (diminutive of eikon) refers specifically to an engraved bust, based on Hebrew rosh, head, rather
than Hebrew panim = Greek prosopon, face, countenance, partzof in rabbinic literature. The midrash takes sulam as
tzelem (image)(cf. Kugel, 124 n. 43), then uses a Greek word, possibly because Hebrew words for image are associated
with idolatry (tzelem, pesel, semel) or the divine image (demut, tzelem). GenR 68:13 explicitly plays on sulam and tzelem,
but as an idolatrous image! Cf. Ezek. 23:14: images (tzalmei) of Chaldeans engraved (chaquqim). Ezek. 1:5, the ultimate
source of this motif, uses demut. The specific choice of eikonion here is probably reflected in TP Avodah Zarah 3:1: Why
are busts (iqoniyot < bfhlka) forbidden? Because they offer incense before them when they ascend. R. Yochanan said: It is
permitted to view them when they descend. Saul Lieberman, Tosefta Kifshutah (8 vols.., New York, 1955-73), 3:281,
explains that the busts were raised up on pedestals when the emperor ascended the throne, but were overturned (went
down) when he was defeated (went down). What better term to use to play on the theme of ascending and descending?
16
Mirkin (3:87) notes the midrash connects etpaer, I will show my glory, with tiferet, bust, in Isa. 44:13.
17
GenR 69:3 (ed. Theodor-Albeck, 2:792): And look, the Lord stationed [protectively] over him. Cf. TB Chullin 91a.
7

nap in the courtyard. But this king does the opposite. The homilist probably means that when the
angels ascend to heaven and exalt Jacob, they find God pays no attention to them, but when they
descend to earth and attack Jacob, God leaps to his defense. This is implicitly contrasted with a
mortal king, who sits in the palace and pays rapt attention to the courtierss flattering comments
about his nobles, but when the same nobles need his protection (from the courtiers?) out in the
provinces, he is home asleep, unconcerned for their welfare.18 While most parables consist of a
narrative (mashal) followed by an application (nimshal), E-4 does not.19 Though lacking the normal
bipartite structure, the mashal fits Sterns functional definition; it suggests a meaning, but requires
its audience to deduce the message.20 While not intended to be enigmatic, it may seem so to us.21
E-5 addresses a puzzling detail (Kugel) in Gen. 28:12: Angels of God ascending and descending.
Since angels are normally in heaven, Scripture should have stated that the angels were descending and
ascending. The Bible implies that somehow there are already angels on earth with Jacob, and for
some reason they leave him and ascend to heaven, while other angels descend to earth. In addition,
Jacob is met again by angels upon his return to Israel (Gen. 32:2). To resolve these problems, the
anonymous homilist takes into account the context of the story (Jacob is departing the Land of
Israel) and the ambiguity of the word bo, on it/him, which he understands as on his [Jacobs]
behalf. He explains that the angels who escort a person in the Land of Israel, do not escort him
outside the Land. Hence, those angels were first ascending, then the angels who would accompany
Jacob outside the Land of Israel were descending. This tradition may arise from a hermeneutic
impulse (Boyarin), but it may well address the contemporary plight (Fraade) of Jacob/Israel: When
the Jewish people departs the holy land, God sends His angels to watch over them even in exile.

18

Cf. GenR 69:3 (ed. Theodor-Albeck, 2:792): The one who said upon him, on Jacob, [his position] is [that] He stood
protectingly over him. Rabbi Jochanan said: The wicked stand over their gods, as it states, And Pharaoh dreamt: and look,
he stood over the river [the Nile, an Egyptian god] (Gen. 41:1); but the God of the righteous stands over them, as it states,
And look, the Lord stationed on him, etc. Idolaters stand over and protect their gods, whereas God protects His adherents.
19
The printed eds. and Theodor-Albeck, place E-6 here after E-4, perhaps in response to this lacuna. But it belongs
below and is unrelated to the parable.
20
D. Stern, Parables in Midrash, 51. E-4 falls into his typology of Violations of norms (79 ff.)
21
Cf. Boyarin, Intertextuality, 106 f. Boyarin (81 ff.) argues that the bipartate mashal is a closed text, but here the absence
of an application (nimshal) renders the narrative an open text. It is not generated here to make handles for common
people to grasp a problematic Torah text, but to grasp a difficult rabbinic midrash on a Torah text, one which some rabbis
considered easy.
8

In E-6, the homilist offers a rather complex interpretation:22 And look [at the ways of God
below]: a stairway [of promotion and demotion] stationed [established] on the earth [below] and ones
full accounting one acquires [in] the heavens [above], but look [at what happens above]: angels of God
[who are] raising him [Israel] up [are] ascending [above] on his account [and the converse] but
[descending the stairway, those raising Israel up are] descending [on earth] on his [Israels] account.
Above, angels who are olim, raising up Israel, who speak in their favour, olim, are continously
ascending, promoted on his account; but reversing direction and descending to the bottom of the
stairway, those below who are raising up Israel are always descending, demoted on his [Israels]
account. The converse is then presumed: yordim, angels in heaven who are putting down Israel are
yordim, descending, while on earth those who are yordim, putting down Israel are olim, ascending.
This often seemed an historical reality for Jews, but it was a strange way for God to deal with
His beloved chosen people. In this midrash the compiler has reversed the strange behavior of God in
the parable: God appears to be judging fairly in heaven but sleeping on earth. The point is that
Gods stairway, His established policy of promotion and demotion, may appear unjust in this world,
but ones full accounting is truly acquired in the next world. The compiler seems to intend this as a
counterpoint (Fraade) to the opening remark: While dreams do not cause one to ascend or descend
in this world, God will ensure that one who causes Israel to ascend on earth will ascend in heaven.
[F-1]
[F-2]
[F-3]

F. Who are the Angels

R. Levi [said] in the name of R. Shemuel ben Nachman: The ministering angels, because
they revealed the secret (mysterion) of the blessed Holy One, were banished from their
[heavenly] precincts a hundred and thirty-eight years.
R. Tanchuma expressed it in the word qelach, [water] jet.
R. Hama ben R. Hanina said: [They were banished] because they boasted and said, For we
will destroy this place (Gen. 19:13). When did they return? Here: ascending and afterwards
descending.
Naturally, the rabbis want to know the identity of these angels. The comment (F-1) by R.

Levi (end. 3rd c.) in the name of R. Shmuel ben Nachman (end 3rd c.) resolves this mystery along
with several other scriptural problems by cleverly connecting several passages.23 This interpreation is
22

He makes a double pun on olim (ascending and raising up), yordim (descending and putting down), and bo
(him [Jacob/Israel] and on his account); rosho becomes ones full accounting; magi a become acquires. He uses
chiasmus (ascending and descending the stairway!) to relate this clause with the first, both of which begin with And look.
23
As in the midrash above (E-5), he addresses a puzzling detail in Gen. 28:12. Since angels are normally in heaven, it
should state descending and then ascending. The verse implies that there are already angels on earth with Jacob, who for
some reason leave him and ascend to heaven at Bethel. While there are several references in the Torah to an angel, the
plural angels only appears on three occasions: When two angels arrive in Sodom to rescue Lot (Gen. 19:1,15; albeit they
appeared to Abraham as men in Gen. 18:2), when Jacob sees the angels of God on the stairway (Gen. 28:12), and when
9

not invented by R. Shmuel ben Nachman. It is an older, popular oral tradition (Fraade) also found
in the Targums (see below, n. 39). The two angels who come to Sodom sin when they reveal Gods
secret plan to destroy the cities to Lot.24 God punishes them by banishment from heaven. Finally,
after escorting Jacob to the borders of the Land of Israel, they are permitted to ascend, and other
angels descend to escort Jacob outside Israel. According to rabbinic tradition, their earthly stay lasts
138 years.25 This tradition, like several others above, is expressed in a form so brief it is obscure,
which suggests that the compiler is referring to a well known midrashic tradition. R. Tanchuma
(mid 4th c.) appends to this tradition a humorous mnemonic (F-2), the Hebrew word qelach, which
in gematria equals 138, and means a jet whose waters, like the angels, are continously ascending
and descending. The final comment (F-3) by R. Hama ben R. Hanina (mid 3rd c.) offers a different
reason than R. Levi (F-1) for the banishment of these angels. It was because they had the audacity to
say: For we will destroy this place (Gen. 19:13).26 They appear to boast to Lot that they, rather than
God, will destroy Sodom. They are granted permission to return to heaven on this occasion, since
Scripture first speaks of angels ascending to heaven and afterwards descending. This tradition may
simply arise from a hermeneutic impulse (Boyarin), but it may well address the contemporary plight
(Fraade) of Jacob/Israel: The reason that the Jewish people suffer exile is hubris; but the exile is only
temporary.
Conclusion
This passage contains numerous traditions and is multi-layered, with narrative, deictic and
dialogic elements (Fraade). It addresses numerous theological issues.27 While these midrashim reflect
Jacob encounters angels of God on his return to Israel (Gen. 32:2). In fact, the expression angels of God occurs in the Bible
only in these two verses. Furthermore, the Bible never relates what happens to the angels who rescue Lot.
24
See For we will destroy this place, because the outcry against them before the Lord has become so great that the Lord has sent
us to destroy it (Genesis 19:13). Cf. Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? (Gen.18:17), suggests that Gods
plan to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah is a secret, which He decides to reveal to Abraham for several reasons (Gen. 18:18
ff.). And even after learning this, Abraham does not send a warning to Lot, further suggesting to the rabbis that it is a
divine secret.
25
See GenR 50:2 (2:524 f.) and notes in Theodor-Albeck ad loc. Cf. Midrash Leqach Tov to Gen. 28:12 (ed. Buber,
1:142) for details of this calculation. Perhaps the number is based on gematria: And look, a stairway [SuLaM = 130]
stationed on the earth ascending and descending on it [BoW = 8], with the first and last words of the dream represent the
duration of their banishment
26
Note that Lot properly ascribes the destruction to God (Gen. 19:14). The rabbis also note the unusual missing yod
an abbreviation for God in the word masch[i]tim, we will destroy.
27
In the course of the passage, the compiler addresses the themes of: Israels distress over the destruction of the Holy
Temple; the Revelation at Sinai; Gods steadfast love and forgiveness of Israel despite their sins; Israel not the Church
is Gods chosen people; the vastness of Creation (stairways width); God so loves Israel that his bust is engraved on
heavenly throne, evoking angelic admiration and perhaps jealous attacks on Israel by the Gentiles on earth; God always
leaps to Israels defense; God watches over the Jewish people even in Exile; while Israels enemies seem to prosper and her
10

the rabbinic impulse to connect one verse to another, there is no evidence of a canonizing concern,
of back-referencing verses from the Writings (Kugel). An analysis of the composition of the entire
passage (Fraade) reveals that this is not simply a collection of random traditions haphazardly
arranged. It appears to be a conscious composition. All attributions are to Palestinian Amoraic sages
from the 3rd through the mid 4th century. The compiler has carefully selected more contemporary
midrashim that reflect a later stage of development, which explains why many involve complex
hermeneutical processes and discourse in a more sophisticated and involved fashion (Kugel).
Apparently, because these midrashim are more familiar to the audience, their complex exegesis is not
usually articulated, often to the point of obscurity. Several sections appear to relate dialogically with
previous sections. The homilist plays both explicitly and below the surface with a recurring theme of
ascending and descending. Perhaps the text is deliberately compiled to be obscure for pedagogic
reasons, to force students to ponder and erxplain the midrashic interpretations and demonstrate
their knowledge of traditions.
I agree with much of Kugels reconstruction of the history of the motif Saw Fathers
Countenance, but I suggest a somewhat different reconstruction of the history of this tradition.
Ancient interpreters surely wondered about the image of a human in the fiery center of the Throne
of Glory in Ekeziels vision (1:5-10). It is natural that it would be one of the Patriarchs. Why not
Jacob, namesake of the people Israel, who sees the divine realm in his dream, wrestles with angels,
sees an angelic camp, etc. His vision of God above a stairway in heaven readily suggests a divine
throne.28 The earliest form of this motif is Ladder of Jacob 1:3-4 (ca. 1st c.): and the top of the
stairway was the face as of a human, carved out of fire, taking its top (reaching to heaven) as his
head, apparently Jacobs head. Eventually, rabbinic homilists made more elaborate plays on Hebrew
and Greek, and cleverly imagined Jacobs bust (iqonin) on the heavenly throne, playing on his head,
sulam and tzelem, the ascending and descending of (imperial) busts (eikonion), and another midrashic
motif (F-1) which explains the ascending and descending of the angels.29 This became popular in the

friends suffer, in the next world God will reward Israels friends and punish her enemies; the suffering of the Jewish people
in Exile is due to hubris; the Exile is only temporary.
28
Kugel thinks the idea of a heavenly image of the earthly man is read into this verse. He thinks it is parked here
because the verse itself (his head reached the heaven) originally suggested the connection (249 f.).
29
Kugels transfer of affects here is puzzling. He argues that the motif is transferred from his head [bust] reached the
heavens to another biblical text which supports the idea, ascending and descending on/for him. But these are one and the
same verse! He can still argue that the transfer of affects is true for the Joseph passage, but then he is not certain in which
11

Jewish oral circulatory system (Fraade) and appears in the Targums. In GenR this motif is further
elaborated (E-3) by playful midrashic exegesis: Jacobs bust (iqonin) is engraved (chaquqah) on the
heavenly throne (E-3), and cleverly connected to yet another prooftext, Isa. 49:3 (playing on tiferet
as bust). Through a transfer of affects, this motif became attached to midrashim on Jacob being
renamed Israel: For you are a prince (sar ata) [whose bust is engraved] with God (Gen. 32:28) It is
you whose bust is engraven on high (GenR 78:3); Jacob, whose bust is engraved on My throne
(GenR 82:2); Who formed your [image] (yotzerkha), O Israel (Isa. 43:1) For I have, as it were, set
(qava ty) your bust on My throne (Numbers Rabba 4:1). Similarly, it appears in a midrash on
Israels exile (also playing on tiferet): The blessed Holy One said: Does not Israel provoke Me
because [you take advantage] of the bust of Jacob which is engraved on My throne? Here, it is
thrown down [in your face]! Hence, He cast down from heaven to earth the beauty [bust] (tiferet) of
Israel (Lam. 2:1) (Lamentations Rabba 2:1, ed. Buber, 96).
Another ancient tradition arose concerning Joseph, first appearing in Joseph and Asenath 7:5
(ca. 1st c. CE), which explained that his exemplary ability to resist temptation was because Joseph
always had the face (prosopon) of his father Jacob before his eyes. There is nothing explicit here
about a bust on the divine throne.30 But this motif later was embellished by a tranfser of affects
from the midrash on Jacobs dream: He saw the bust of his father (GenR 98:20; TP Horayot 2:5;
TB Sotah 36b), suggesting Jacobs bust on the divine throne. As Kugel points out, this was effected
by a clever midrashic interpretation of Gen. 49:24, By the hands of the Mighty One, Jacob, because he
sees the stone (even) [image] of Israel. By itself, however, stone would not be taken as Jacobs bust
on the divine throne.31

direction the transfer happens, if at all (116). I think the use of the unusual term bust strongly supports the Jacobs
ladder tradition as the origin of this motif, since its use elsewhere is difficult to explain.
30
It may be based on an interpretation of the inscrutable name given Joseph, tzafnat paneach (Gen. 41:45), taken as
tzafan et pne av, he saw the face of (his) father.
31
Kugel (111) cites Midrash Psalms 15:1 (ed. Buber, 116): His rock (sal o) (Isa. 31:9) these are the busts. But the
midrash does not take rock ( )as bust. It is based on (The precious children of Zion) valued (mesulaim < )as fine
gold (Lam. 4:2), which the Targum renders: whose busts are compared to fine gold. Kugel (113, 115) also misses the
midrashic connection of Lam. 2:1 and Isa. 49:3 with Isa. 44:13.
12