Shabbat Vayeytzey

“A wandering Aramean was my father, and he went down to Egypt” (Devarim 26:5). This is a well-known line from the Haggadah of Pesach that we read on the Seder night. But what or, more precisely, to whom is it referring?

In last week’s reading, Rifkah had engineered and ensured that Yaakov would get the blessing (which meant the spiritual heritage). As a result, Esav threatened to kill him as soon as their father was out of the way. She expressed her anxiety to Yitzchak and said that she wanted her son to find a wife not from the local Hittites (Bereishit 26:34 and 27:46) as Esav had. When in fact it was to escape from Esav’s clutches (Bereishit 28:2 and 3).  Why did she not say so? Was it to avoid besmirching or telling tales about his favourite?

Then in Bereishit 28:2, Yitzhak blesses Yaakov and tells him to go to Padena Aram, and this time he specifies that he should “Go to the house of Betuel the father of your mother and take a wife from Lavan’s daughters.”  In verse 5 it says that Yaakov went towards Padena Aram to Lavan the son of Bethuel, the Aramean.

Who is the Aramean? Is it Lavan or is it both Lavan and Betuel, his father? Most of the negotiations about the marriage are conducted by Lavan, not his father. Lavan is indeed later described as Lavan HaArami (Chapter 31:21). So, is Lavan the wandering Aramean who went down to Egypt and stayed there with a small number? Did a great, strong nation become (mentioned in 26:5)?

But there’s no reference to Lavan going down to Egypt, much less in small numbers that eventually increased to many. The person who went down to Egypt to stay there was Yaakov, who went down to Egypt with his twelve sons and daughter. Then, over time, they increased to hundreds of thousands.
So, who was the Aramean? One could say, then, it was Avraham. He, too, came from Padan Aram. And he wandered around the land of Canaan before going down to Egypt but then he came back out again. Or you might say that it was Yaakov who was the wandering Aramean who went down to Egypt and, in the end, died there.

So that you have two very different explanations of what this phrase of a wandering Aramean means. And who it’s referring to. Most of the time an Aramean is used it’s to describe Lavan, and yet Aram and Padan Aram is associated with Abraham and his generation. Naturally, as you would expect, this is something that our commentators love to disagree about.

Rashi (1040-1105) says it refers to Lavan. He would have killed Yaakov and his family for running away without warning him. But he was stopped by Divine intervention. On the other hand, Rashi’s grandson Rashbam (1085-1158) says it was the father of Avraham who left Aram first to” does not mean to kill but to wander. Sforno (1475-1549) says that Yaakov was the wanderer driven out of his home and living in exile with Lavan.

This is just a selection of different opinions. This amazing variation is, in my opinion, one of the wonders of the Torah that it lends itself to very different interpretations and explanations. You cannot say that one is right and the other is wrong! “These and these, both are the words of the Living God” (Eiruvin 13b).

Rabbi Jeremy Rosen lives in New York. He was born in Manchester. His writings are concerned with religion, culture, history and current affairs – anything he finds interesting or relevant. They are designed to entertain and to stimulate. Disagreement is always welcome.