Some of the commandments we find in the Torah certainly seem to be related to earlier events, don’t they?
Take, for example:
If a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, and both the loved and the unloved have borne him sons…
This certainly seems to be connected to Jacob and his wives, as well as the sons who are not loved equally, does it not? And if so, is the Torah telling us “lessons learned” from earlier events?
Is this the rule, or the exception?
Some connections to earlier events are very obvious indeed:
You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your kinsman. You shall not abhor an Egyptian, for you were a stranger in his land.
Both of these commandments connect with what the Torah tells us of our history: Jacob and Esau, and our history with Egypt, for example.
Let’s look at other examples. We have the strange commandment of the “beautiful captive,” the inappropriate marriage to a woman captured in war. Certainly we don’t find anything like that earlier in the Torah, do we?
Or do we? After all, we describe the Jewish people in the Haggadah as being captured in war by G-d, “naked and bare.” (Ez. 16:7). Perhaps we are allowed to marry a woman captured in war, however ill-matched we might be, because G-d did exactly the same thing?
Indeed there seem to be other parallels: like the captive, we are given new clothes. And, like the captive, after a suitable duration, we go to Sinai and consummate the relationship.
Might the beautiful captive specifically be allowed (and not criticized in the text) because we are indeed supposed to emulate G-d’s own behavior, even knowing, as we do, that such marriages are tempestuous?
Let’s go further afield:
Below the surface, might there also be connections from later in the text to much earlier? For example, death by stoning is commanded if a man worships another deity, or a young woman whores, or a rebellious son is unable to form a relationship of any kind with his parents. All of these examples are about the fidelity of relationships: in marriage, adultery; in worship, idolatry; for a son, his parents. And for a loose girl, her own soul.
Why?
Could it all be connected to the first stones used by man? Those which Jacob took when he slept and dreamt of angels connecting to heaven?
He came upon a certain place … Taking one of the stones of that place, he put it under his head and lay down in that place. … Early in the morning, Jacob took the stone that he had put under his head and set it up as a pillar and poured oil on the top of it. (Gen 28: 11, 18)
G-d made him a promise:
Remember, I am with you: I will protect you wherever you go and will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you. (Gen 28:15)
Jacob wakes and makes a corresponding vow:
If God remains with me, if He protects me on this journey that I am making, and gives me bread to eat and clothing to wear, and if I return safe to my father’s house—the LORD shall be my God. And this stone, which I have set up as a pillar, shall be God’s abode; and of all that You give me, I will set aside a tithe for You. (Gen 20:20-22)
Is this the first stated two-party contract between man and G-d? If so, might we suggest that the stones are thus the central prop to a key event: stones are central to the first time G-d and Man swear fealty to one another, exchanging promises and bonding the descendants of Jacob’s people to G-d evermore?
Do the stones not represent what we should desire: the constant and conscious presence of G-d in our lives?
As the Torah says, the words recognizing G-d are to be said, “when you lie down and when you get up.” (Deut 6:7) Jacob lay down with the stone as his pillow, and rose up with it as well: the divine was on his mind.
If we have that mindset, then all of the situations where the perpetrator would be stoned (entirely rejecting our parents, squandering our sexuality outside of a committed relationship, idol worship and adultery) should all be impossible!
Is this consistent? Does the Torah consistently uses “stones” for building a relationship with the divine?
Here are some examples!
When Moses fights the nation of Amalek, the text tells us, But Moses’ hands grew heavy; so they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it, while Aaron and Hur, one on each side, supported his hands; thus his hands remained steady until the sun set. Moses’ foundation was the building block of the relationship between man and G-d.
The ten commandments were similarly made of stone, with the same underlying connection to Jacob’s stone pillow.
The altar, which is used to connect man and G-d, must be made of raw stone unshaped by tools, such as those Jacob found lying on the ground at Bethel. (Ex. 22:2)
So when we reach out to G-d with an offering, do we do so while simultaneously connecting to Jacob’s covenant in both words and deeds? And when there is a breach in the fidelity of a relationship are stones used to kill the violator precisely to remind us all what stones are supposed to represent, Jacob (and our) pact and contract with G-d?
Consider that Torah tells us that the stone Jacob slept is meant to become the foundation for G-d’s own house!
P.S. As a contrast, the Tower of Babel is built using bricks in place of stones – telling us that the relationship was not authentic.