It appears that, according to the Bible, the connotations and associations of the name that either a parent or God Himself bestows upon a particular child or adult, could play a major role in the individual’s personality development and sense of self. Once such a correlation can be demonstrated, it is curious to reflect upon some of the names that Biblical figures give their children, and the possible adverse effects that these names might have on those who are fated to bear them. It is as if these individuals consider their offspring extensions of themselves, and therefore no more than platforms by which they commemorate their triumphs and/or painful experiences, regardless of what such names and the stories that underlie them might do to the psyches of their children. In this week’s Parsha, Leah gives several of her children names emanating from the personal anguish that her estrangement from Yaakov caused within her.
While names that are positive and optimistic can be readily understood to signify the hopes that parents have for their children’s futures, e.g., Chava (
Sometimes a name, because it brims with pride and arrogance, could be held accountable, at least in part, for the individual’s subsequent indiscretions and improper behavior. In “The Perils of the Number One Son” (Beraishit 2003), (1) Chava’s contribution to Kayin’s excessive self-esteem, i.e., her giving him a name that means according to the Tora (4:1) “’Kaniti’ (I have brought into existence) a man together with God”, was discussed as possibly contributing to Kayin’s subsequent intolerance of his younger brother’s major spiritual achievement, which in turn leads to fratricide. Within the same immediate context, the Bible does not even attempt to provide a rationale for the choice of the name “Hevel”; yet the basic translation of the word, i.e., vapor, steam, nothingness (4:2) would logically have the opposite effect of a “Kayin” type of name. On the one hand, Hevel could inspire continual humility and a sense of sobering mortality on the part of the person answering to such a name. But at the same time, someone saddled with this type of name may be adversely affected by its implications of nothingness, worthlessness, and lack of substance, always feeling inadequate and defeated. What sort of parent would potentially handicap his/her child so perversely?
Whereas the name Hevel does not have to call to mind negativity per se, but rather is problematic due to the vacuum of feeling and expectation that is implied, there are instances where the explanations provided by the Tora for certain names contain at least allusions to negative experiences, if not outright references to painful moments in the parent’s life.
Yishmael (and God Heard) is an inspiring sentiment that we all wish would be affirmed continually. Yet when the specific context is read carefully (16:11), the angel says to Hagar that Yishmael shall be the name of her child because “Ki Shama HaShem El ANYECH” (because God Heard YOUR AFFLICTION.” While it is certainly important that when one finds him/herself in dire straits, that prayers will then be heard, will the fact that his mother found herself in such a situation, and the circumstances surrounding how this came to pass, have an adverse effect on her son, when he learns about the events that precipitated his naming? I suppose that his mother could withhold such details from Yishmael. But did she? And as a result of learning about these matters, wouldn’t his resentment of Sara and her progeny thereby increase? Could this in some way have even been the very intent of this process?
The older of Lot’s two daughters names her child in a manner that makes it virtually impossible to cover up her father’s incestuous role in the child’s conception. (19:37) “…and she called him Moav, he is the progenitor of Moav until this day.”(2) Could this fact been lost upon the child? How would it affect him and his descendents? What could the mother have been thinking?
Although Yosef’s fortunes turn around, and he finds himself as Egypt’s viceroy, married to royalty and the father of two children, the names that he gives these children indicate that he hasn’t forgotten the series of events that preceded this more positive stage of his life. While the name that he gives his second son, similar to the example of Yishmael, invokes the negative past in contrast to the more positive present, (41:52) “And the name of the second he called Efraim, for God had caused me to be fruitful in the land of my affliction,” no such subtlety underlies the meaning of the name of his first son. (41:51) “And Yosef called the name of the firstborn Menashe, for God, said he, Has Made me Forget all my toil and all my father’s house.” Wouldn’t Menashe be expected to inquire why he was named “Forgetting”? And when he would learn about the sordid history of how his uncles had treated his father, what was he to think? What was Yosef’s motivation for doing this?
Moshe, when Tziporra bears a son, similarly incorporates within the son’s name his personal sense of exile and alienation: (Shemot 2:22) “And he called his name Gershom, because he said, ‘I was a sojourner in a foreign land.’” Of course, this is an empirical fact rather than a sensibility; nevertheless, it would appear to not be the sort of name that will allow this boy to be inspired or feel positive about his identity. Did Moshe assume that his family would be remaining in Midyan, and he therefore wished for his son to always recall his origins, thereby never feeling too comfortable in his current surroundings?
Returning to Parshat VaYetze, judging by her comments and actions in Beraishit 27:32 ff., Leah is extremely troubled by the nature of her relationship with her husband Yaakov. While Lavan, her father, justifies his misleading his son-in-law and exchanging Leah for her younger sister Rachel, by invoking local custom that insists that the older daughter marry before her younger sibling (29:26), one wonders whether or not Leah was a willing participant in this deception. Furthermore, even if we assume that the prospect of marrying Yaakov appealed to her,(3) would she have gone through with the plan had she known about the type of emotional coldness that lay in store for her?(4) The Tora goes out of its way to first emphasize that Yaakov loved Rachel more than Leah (29:30), immediately followed by a verse delineating how God Saw the situation, i.e., that Leah was for all intents and purposes hated by her husband (29:31). The names of the seven children that she bears serve as a chronicle of her hopes and frustrations regarding Yaakov ever reciprocating the love that she feels for him: (29:32) “…and she called his name Reuven, for she said, ‘Surely the Lord Has Looked upon my affliction, and therefore my husband will love me.” (29:33) “…and she said, “Because the Lord Has Heard that I was hated, He Has therefore Given me this son also,’ and she called his name Shimon.” (20:34) “…and she said, ‘Now this time my husband will be joined to me because I have born him three sons,’ therefore was his name called Levi.”(5) (29:35) “…and she said, ‘Now I praise the Lord,’ therefore she called his name Yehuda…”(6) (30:18) “And Leah said, ‘God Has Given me my hire, because I have given my maiden to my husband,’ and she called his name Yissachar.” (30:20) “And Leah said, ‘And God Has Endowed me with a good dowry; now will my husband dwell with me because I have born him six sons,’ and she called his name Zevulun.” (30:21) “…and called her name Dina.”(7)
The text clearly indicates that Leah’s children were exceedingly protective of their mother, and resentful of the children born to Rachel, particularly Yosef.(8) The question that arises in terms of the namings is to what degree was the rivalry and ultimate hatred further fueled by their mother’s overt disclosure of her resentment of her sister as well as her treatment at the hands of her husband via explaining the meaning of their respective names?
Beraishit Rabba 71:3 records a Rabbinic approach to the problematic discussed above. “…Those of whom could be said that their names are beautiful as are their actions, are the tribes (the sons of Yaakov). Reuven—see a son that stands out from among all of the sons; Shimon—he listens to the Voice of his Father in Heaven. R. Yose bar Chanina said: The names of the tribes are not ill fitting for them, but rather are perfectly appropriate for them.” Clearly the assumption is that what was offered for popular consumption as well as perhaps what was told to the sons themselves, were alternate interpretations for the names that would be inspirational and positive, in stark contrast to the bitter sentiments that originally inspired Leah to give these particular names to her children.
But even if we accept the Midrash’s premise that Leah never disclosed to her children her actual reasons for naming them as she did, the attitudes and emotions that she possessed regarding how she was being treated by Yaakov must have been conveyed either explicitly or implicitly to her progeny. Should we blame her for involving her children in a matter that was between their parents? Is Yaakov to blame for making Leah feel this way? Then again it was never his intent to marry Leah in the first place. But still in all, once he accepted Lavan’s demand that he marry the older daughter, shouldn’t/couldn’t he have tried to make Leah feel accepted, rather than an outcast? Why have children with Leah if Yaakov was so indifferent to her and her feelings? We even note how Yaakov’s preference for Rachel and her progeny does not cease with Rachel’s death!—see 37:3 as well as footnote 4 below.
Do these seemingly irrational and insensitive actions further confirm the hypothesis presented in “Free Agents and Automatons” (1), or are they descriptions of interrelationships that are hurtful, and rather than offering them for emulation, the Tora is informing us by anecdotal example that these types of family dynamics should be avoided in every possible way. What do you think?
Shabbat Shalom, and we should strive to not only treat one another via actions in a respectful manner, but also be careful to monitor our attitudes and feelings so that we do not even hint at or suggest in any other manner disrespect for those to whom we are closest.
(1) The essay can be accessed at www.kmsynagogue.org/Rabbi.htm
(2) RaShI: This one who was immodest made clear that the child was her father’s…
(3) RaShI quotes the Midrash on 29:17 that Leah’s eyes were “soft”, i.e., teary-eyed, as a result of her crying over thinking that she would have to marry Eisav, Yaakov’s older brother. This would certainly assume that she did everything in her power to marry Yaakov so that she could avoid becoming Eisav’s wife. However, there is nothing in the Biblical text itself that discloses her state of mind or the nature of her dreams and hopes at the actual time of her wedding.
(4) According to the Midrash, quoted by RaShI on Beraishit 35:22, the ultimate ignominy takes place upon the death of Rachel, when Yaakov moves into the tent of Rachel’s handmaiden, Bilhah, rather than placing his permanent bed in Leah’s abode. The Midrash is attempting to suggest a catalyst for the reference in the text to Reuven’s indiscretion in terms of actively interfering in some way with his father’s conjugal arrangements (35:22), and the consequent rebuke that Yaakov directs at Reuven, waiting to deliver it just before Yaakov dies (49:4). If Reuven felt so strongly that he had to protect his mother’s interests, this certainly indicates that Leah’s feelings had not been assuaged, even at this relatively late point in the story of Yaakov’s life.
(5) An alternate reading of this verse would contend that it wasn’t Leah who gave Levi his name, but rather that the name was proclaimed from Above, by an angel (see Tora Shleima, citations 109-110, pp. 1180-1. This would be in keeping with Levi’s role as the progenitor of Kohanim and Levi’im who engage in representing both the Jewish people and God in the Divine Service—Shluchai DiLan Oh Shluchai D’Shmaya.
(6) While of all the names, Yehuda’s appears to be the most positive, the subtle implication of “HaPa’am” (Now) suggests a desperate plea for the future as well as significant upset over the past concerning how she has been treated.
(7) Although for this last child, the Tora does not explain what Leah was thinking when she arrived at the name—RaShI suggests that there was an elaborate process by which the sex of the child was switched from a boy to a girl in order that Rachel would be able to contribute two boys, and thereby be no less of a contributor to the formation of the Jewish people than would be Bilhah and Zilpah, the two handmaidens—it is relatively straightforward to assume that God’s Judgement has something to do with Leah’s realization that she will never be truly reconciled with Yaakov. Dina’s naming then becomes a form of Tzidduk HaDin (declaring as righteous and just a difficult aspect of human existence.) It is possible that this is in recompense for her having agreed to trick her husband and cooperate with her father Lavan’s plan to substitute her for Rachel.
(8) While the biblical text does not reflect any specific hostility towards Binyamin, according to Beraishit Rabba 92:8, the brothers beat Binyamin whenYosef’s cup is discovered in his sack (44:12), and scream at him, “Thief, son of a thief,” referring to Rachel’s having earlier stolen Lavan’s idols before Yaakov and the rest of the family flee from Padan Aram (31:19 ff.) While Yehuda eventually offers to become Yosef’s slave in place of Binyamin (44:33), this appears to be motivated more by the adverse affect that Binyamin’s absence would have on Yaakov (44:31) as well as the fact that Yehuda had personally guaranteed Binyamin’s safe return to Canaan (44:32), rather than a particularly warm feeling towards Rachel’s second son.