Vayishlach

 

Dinah

 

We have here in chapter 34 an account of a massacre of men, women and children, the inhabitants of a whole town.  Was such a deed justified?  Was it justified as retaliation for the abominable crime referred to in the question of Jacob’s two sons Shimon and Levi, “should one deal with our sister as with an harlot?”.. If the deed was justified why did Jacob angrily reprimand them at the time….(and on his deathbed, when he says to them), “cursed be their anger, for it was fierce, and their wrath, for it was cruel.”

Nechama Leibowitz (20th Century)

 

Among the criticisms that the Sages level at Jacob, perhaps the most unexpected is his responsibility for the fate of Dinah.  This, specifically, according to Rashi, happened because (when he met Esau) he did not show him Dinah?  He placed her in a box and locked it, so that Esau should not lay eyes on her.  For this, Jacob was punished, for withholding her from his brother – perhaps she would have redeemed him?  - and she fell into the hands of Shekhem.

Aviva Zornberg ( Contemporary)

 

Had Shimon and Levi killed only Shekhem and Hamor, they could hardly have been blamed for that act.  But they did not spare the unarmed, defenseless men  who were at their mercy.  They went even further:  they looted the city.  They made all the inhabitants of the place pay for the crime that had been committed by the lord of their manner, as it were.  For this there can be no justification…The feelings that motivated Shimon and Levi, the lord of the manor would never have taken such liberties if the maiden in question had not been a foreign, friendless “Jew –girl.”  This had made Shimon and Levi realize that there would be times when even the family of Jacob would have to take up the sword in defense of purity and honor….

Samson Raphael Hirsch (19th Century)

 

Scripture does not mention what happened to her after her rescue from Shechem’s house.  In line with the simple meaning of scripture, she stayed with her brothers, “shut up, living as widows,” as she was considered defiled in their sight…Our rabbis have differed on this matter.  The most feasible opinion is that of he who says that Shimone cared for her and upon her death he buried her in the land of Canaan…Her grave is known by tradition to this day as being in the city of Arbel with the grave of Nitai the Arbelite.

Nachmanides (13th Century)

 

Until now, the Torah has identified Dina as the offspring of Leah and Yaakov in the story…From this point forward in the text, however, The Torah refers to Dina solely based upon her relation to her siblings.  She becomes "their sister"; they become "Dina's brothers."  Even their statement "we will take our daughter"

(v. 19) reflects the extent to which they have assumed Yaakov's place.  To the brothers, Yaakov's silence now signifies something more grievous – it is a sign that his indifference to Dina's fate.  What could lead them to this conclusion?  The Torah alluded to it at the beginning of the story – she is Dina, the daughter of Leah.  Despite the previous demonstration of unity shown towards Lavan, despite their adoption of the corporate identity of Israel, the familial rifts that existed in the previous generation between the sisters have not healed.  The brothers interpret Yaakov's silence as disinterest, and find themselves forced to act in the place of their absent father.  We can then interpret the brothers' response, that 'they answered with guile’ as referring not only to Chamor, but towards Yaakov as well[i]  …we simply have to ask, "Would Yaakov have reacted stoically had Dina been the daughter of Rachel?"  Instinctively we, like the brothers, sense not.

Yaakov Beasley