Dinah - Origin

Origin

See also: documentary hypothesis and biblical criticism

The 19th century scholar Julius Wellhausen divided the Dinah story between two original texts, the Elohist, which tells of Jacob's purchase of land at Shechem and his erection of an altar, and the Jahwist, telling the rape-and-vengeance story which takes up the bulk of the narrative. Wellhausen believed that the Jahwist's story was designed to cast a bad light on the northern Kingdom of Israel, which had Shechem as its first capital, the Jahwist text itself originating in the southern Judah. The brief Elohist account of the purchase of land by Jacob in Genesis 33 represents the northern kingdom's more peaceable account of the origins of Shechem.

Later scholars have questioned Wellhausen's analysis, often drastically, but the general view is that Genesis does combine originally separate strands and does not pre-date the 1st millennium BC. Post-Wellhausian scholars have suggested two layers of narrative within Genesis 34 itself, an older account ascribing the slaughter of Shechem and to Simeon and Levi alone, and a later addition (verses 27 to 29) involving all the sons of Jacob. One contemporary biblical scholar, Alexander Rofé, has suggested that the verb describing Dinah as "defiled" was added at this time also, as elsewhere in the Bible only married or betrothed women are "defiled" by rape; the fact that Genesis 34 is the sole exception suggests that it reflects a "late, postexilic notion that the idolatrous gentiles are impure the prohibition of intermarriage and intercourse with them." The anachronistic preoccupation with racial purity indicates a date in the 5th or 4th centuries BC, when the restored Jewish community in Jerusalem was similarly preoccupied with anti-Samaritan polemics. It is not clear that Dinah was actually raped at all in the original story: the narrative is vague about what happened between Shechem and Dinah (the verb translated as "humbled" or "violated" can also mean "to subdue"), and the older version of Genesis 34 may therefore reflect a custom of abduction marriage.

However, Rashi (the major commentary on the Torah) notes that Dinah was indeed raped. He states that the phrase, "He (Shechem) lay with her," denotes in a normal manner of sexual relations, i.e., vaginal intercourse; and the phrase, "And he humbled (violated or abused) her," indicates in an unusual or abnormal manner of sexual relations, i.e., anal intercourse. (See Yoma 77b) Additionally, although according to Noachide laws, governing societal behavior after the Great Flood, it was not forbidden to have consensual relations with an unmarried girl. However, rape (non-consensual relations) was universally forbidden. And rape of a virgin was considered to be a particularly disgraceful and heinous act. As Genesis 34, verse 7 notes, "And such a thing was not done." Rashi explains this to mean, "to violate virgins, for the nations withheld themselves from immoral relationships as a result of the Flood."

Moreover, Rambam (Hilchos Melachim 9:14) explains that the whole town was held responsible for Shechem's actions and they were thus put to death. Since they did not bring Shechem to proper justice, as was incumbent upon them according to the Seven Noachide Commandments, they themselves were deserving of the death penalty (Gur Aryeh).