A Thought on Parshas Vayetze

"...eid ha'gal ha'zeh..." "...this mound shall bear witness..." (31:52) Once Yakov and Lavan meet to agree upon peaceful coexistence from a distance, as they part ways, they erect a mound which will serve as a reminder that each should refrain from violating physical and geographical boundaries. The mound is referred to by both of them as a "witness." The Gan quotes Rabbeinu Shlomo ben Avraham of Troyes who introduced a rule for accurate interpretation of the Torah. His rule was that every place where the word "witness" (eid) is used in reference to a covenant or pact, that witness serves not only as a reminder of the agreement, but also becomes the source or force which will be used to mete out retribution to whomever violates that pact. Support for this interpretative principle comes from both TaNaCh and Talmudic references. The Gan writes that this Rabbeinu Shlomo was troubled, however, with our verse. We find that Lavan's later successor Bilaam broke the covenant (see Sanhedrin 105a), yet we do not find that Bilaam was punished through the agency of this inanimate mound! The Gan then relates that Rabbeinu Shlomo was deeply bothered by this apparent refutation of his interpretative principle until an answer was revealed to him in a dream. In his dream, he was told "go out and look in Bereishis Zuta." Now, Bereishis Zuta (which means "little Genesis" or "the lesser work on Genesis") does not seem to be a known or published volume. In fact, in my compendium of midrashim printed in 1915, there is no reference to such a volume. The Bereishis Rabba ("great midrash on Genesis") is well known as part of the famous Midrash Rabba. From the fact that we have a Bereishis Rabba one might conjecture that there is or was indeed a Bereishis Zuta. However, such a source is not known to us, nor was it known to Rabbeinu Shlomo or to the Gan himself. The Gan next reports that Rabbeinu Shlomo then searched and found some small sefer that states that when Yakov and Lavan formed their covenant, it was not only the mound that they established but they also agreed to stick a sword into that mound to symbolize "krisas bris" which means "the cutting of the covenant." Later on in the Torah, we read a passage where Bilaam injures his leg while passing by a wall along his path (BaMidbar 22:25). Further there, we read that Bilaam died of a sword wound (ibid. 31:8). When Rabbeinu Shlomo discovered that midrash, he was able to confirm the validity of his principle. Here too, the use of the word "eid" with regard to the covenant presupposes that one who violates his side of the pact will find that his "witness" will bring about his punishment. Our verse is no exception, based on the fascinating tale cited in that small volume. How did the Gan hear of this exciting interpretation? He closes by saying "this is what I heard from my teacher Rabbeinu Moshe bar Shneur zt'l." (I found that this sage was from the French town of Evreux and is cited by the Ramban.) Good Shabbos. D Fox