History That Rhymes

Why the Promise of Eikev Is Self-Fulfilling

Does history repeat itself?

Whenever the world feels uncertain—wars, political upheaval, economic crisis—we instinctively search the past for parallels. We ask whether we have been here before and whether history offers any guidance about what might happen next.

The familiar saying, often attributed to Mark Twain, is that history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. This week’s parsha suggests that the Torah anticipated something like that insight thousands of years ago.

Parashat Eikev begins with a deceptively simple verse:

וְהָיָ֣ה ׀ עֵ֣קֶב תִּשְׁמְע֗וּן אֵ֤ת הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים֙ הָאֵ֔לֶּה וּשְׁמַרְתֶּ֥ם וַעֲשִׂיתֶ֖ם אֹתָ֑ם וְשָׁמַר֩ ה׳ אֱלֹהֶ֜יךָ לְךָ֗ אֶת־הַבְּרִית֙ וְאֶת־הַחֶ֔סֶד אֲשֶׁ֥ר נִשְׁבַּ֖ע לַאֲבֹתֶֽיךָ׃

“In the future, as a consequence of your heeding these laws, and your guarding and fulfilling them, the Lord your God will guard for you the covenant and the kindness that He swore to your forefathers.”

—Deuteronomy 7:12

The parsha takes its name from the word eikev, usually translated as “because” or “as a consequence.” But the word also means a heel. It can suggest an ending, an eternity, a reward, something crooked or circuitous, and even a process of circling around.

Could this single word contain an entire philosophy of history?

Because, Heel and Consequence

Rashi famously hears the physical heel within the causal “because”:

וְהָיָה עֵקֶב תִּשְׁמְעוּן. אִם הַמִּצְווֹת קַלּוֹת שֶׁאָדָם דָּשׁ בַּעֲקֵבָיו תִּשְׁמְעוּן.

“If you will hearken even to the lighter commandments which a person usually treads upon with his heels—that is, those commandments which a person is inclined to treat lightly.”

—Rashi on Deuteronomy 7:12

Ibn Ezra, by contrast, connects eikev with the reward that comes at the end:

עֵקֶב. כְּמוֹ לְעוֹלָם עֵקֶב, שָׂכָר בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה.

“Eikev has the same meaning as eikev—reward—in ‘forever, reward’: a reward that comes at the end.”

—Ibn Ezra on Deuteronomy 7:12

Both interpretations are gathered together and radically expanded by Ramban. His commentary becomes a journey through the Hebrew language—and, I would argue, through the Jewish understanding of history.

Ramban’s Journey Through a Word

Ramban begins with the straightforward meaning of eikev: because. He then incorporates Rashi’s heel and Ibn Ezra’s ultimate reward:

טַעַם עֵקֶב, כְּמוֹ בַּעֲבוּר... וְהַמְּפָרְשִׁים אָמְרוּ כִּי טַעַם עֵקֶב שָׂכָר בָּאַחֲרִית... יֹאמַר וְהָיָה אַחֲרִית תִּשְׁמְעוּן הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים וְתִשְׁמְרוּ אוֹתָם שֶׁיִּשְׁמֹר הַשֵּׁם לְךָ אֶת הַבְּרִית וְהַחֶסֶד, וַאֲהֵבְךָ.

“Eikev means ‘because’ … And the commentators have said that the meaning of the word eikev is that ‘in the end’ there will be reward.… The verse is thus stating: ‘The end—the ultimate consequence—of your hearkening to the ordinances and observing them is that God shall keep the covenant and the mercy, and He will love you.’”

Ramban then makes a remarkable linguistic observation. Hebrew uses the human body to describe the movement of time:

כִּי יִקְרְאוּ בִּלְשׁוֹן הַקֹּדֶשׁ תְּחִלַּת כָּל דָּבָר בִּלְשׁוֹן רֹאשׁ... וְכֵן יִקְרְאוּ אַחֲרִית כָּל דָּבָר עֵקֶב, כִּי הַלָּשׁוֹן יִתְפֹּס דִּמְיוֹנוֹ בְּאָדָם, וְהָרֹאשׁ תְּחִלָּה וְהֶעָקֵב בּוֹ אַחֲרִית וָסוֹף.

“In the Sacred Language, the beginning of anything is called rosh, ‘head’ … Similarly, the conclusion of any matter is called eikev, ‘heel,’ because the language adopts figurative expressions from the human body. The head is the beginning, while the heel is the conclusion and end of the body.”

History has a head and a heel. It has a beginning and an end. The word eikev does not merely describe what follows an action; it points toward the ultimate destination of a process.

But Ramban does not stop there.

Onkelos translates eikev as chalaf, “in exchange for.” Ramban connects this word to turning, circling and moving by an indirect route:

וְאוּנְקְלוֹס תִּרְגֵּם חֲלָף... עֲשָׂאוֹ לְשׁוֹן סִבּוּב, נִגְזַר מִן וְהָיָה הֶעָקֹב לְמִישׁוֹר, הַדֶּרֶךְ הַמְּעֻקָּל הַהֹלֵךְ סָבִיב סָבִיב.

“Onkelos rendered the word eikev as chalaf, ‘in exchange for.’ Onkelos thus made it an expression of something roundabout—the end result of a series of events—derived from the verse in Isiah 40:4 and 45:2, ‘The crooked shall be made straight’: that is, at the end of history, the circuitous road that goes roundabout will become a straight, level path.”

Ramban then widens the semantic circle. Biglal, “on account of,” is connected to rolling a stone. Akeivah denotes rolling and circling. The crooked heart, Jacob’s apparent deceit, and arguments presented ba’akifin—indirectly or circuitously—all belong to this same family of words.

וְכֵן עַל דַּעְתִּי כָּל לְשׁוֹן עֲקִיבָה גִּלְגּוּל וְסִבּוּב... וְלָכֵן יִקְרְאוּ יַעֲקֹב יְשֻׁרוּן, כִּי הֵפֶךְ הֶעָקֹב מִישׁוֹר.

“Similarly, it is my opinion that every expression of akeivah denotes rolling or circling.… Therefore they called Jacob ‘Jeshurun,’ from the root yashar, straight and upright, because the opposite of the deceitful or crooked one is the one who is upright.”

The heel is the end of the body, but it is also rounded. A process may have an ultimate end without following a straight path to reach it. The crooked can become straight, but only after all the turns, detours and reversals have been lived through.

In one extraordinary commentary, Ramban gathers together:

cause and consequence, beginning and end, straightness and crookedness, exchange and return, circling and destination.

That sounds very much like a theory of history.

Neither a Circle nor a Straight Line

The ancient Greek understanding of history was largely cyclical. Empires rise and fall. Political systems move through recurring stages. Human nature does not fundamentally change, so the patterns of history repeat.

The modern Enlightenment offered a very different picture. History was increasingly imagined as a straight line of progress, driven by reason toward ever greater knowledge, freedom and civilization.

The Torah offers something more complicated.

Biblical history has a direction:

Creation → Covenant → Exodus → Sinai → Exile → Return → Redemption

But within that forward journey, events recur. The children repeat the lives of the parents. As Shai Held pointed out in this year’s Jerome L Stern Pre-Passover lecture, we say in Hallel הַיָּ֣ם רָ֭אָה וַיָּנֹ֑ס הַ֝יַּרְדֵּ֗ן יִסֹּ֥ב לְאָחֽוֹר The sea (red Sea) saw them and fled, the Jordan ran backward, The Jordan splits when the Israelites entered the Land of Israel as an updated version of the Red Sea splitting as a previous generation left Egypt. Exile recalls earlier exile; liberation recalls earlier liberation. The pattern returns, but never under precisely the same circumstances.

Ramban expresses this elsewhere through the principle:

כָּל מָה שֶׁאֵרַע לָאָבוֹת סִימָן לַבָּנִים.

“Whatever happened to the patriarchs is a sign to the children.”

Ramban explains that the Torah relates the journeys, wells and experiences of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob at length because they anticipate what will later happen to their descendants.

History repeats, but it also advances.

It is neither a circle nor a straight line.

It is more like a spiral.

Rabbi Sacks and Covenantal Time

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks describes Jewish time as a fugue in which two melodies are played simultaneously:

“Jewish time is both cyclical and linear. We are part of nature and its rhythms—the cycle of the seasons and of a human life—as we move from birth through maturity to age and wisdom.… But we are also part of history—time as a non-repeating sequence of events, a journey in which no stage is exactly like any that has been or will be. Jewish time is like a fugue between these two themes, the eternal and the ephemeral, the timeless and the timely.”

Sacks prefers to call this not merely linear time, but covenantal time:

“According to many anthropologists and historians, a quite new and different form of time was born in ancient Israel. Often, this is called linear time. I prefer the phrase covenantal time. The Hebrew Bible is the first document to see time as an arena of change. Tomorrow need not be the same as yesterday.

“There is nothing given, eternal and immutable about the way we construct societies and live our lives together. Time is not a series of moments traced on the face of a watch, always moving yet always the same.

“Instead it is a journey with a starting point and a destination, or a story with a beginning, middle and end. Each moment has a meaning, which can only be grasped if we understand where we have come from and where we are going. This is time not as it is in nature but as it is in history.”

Nature repeats. The sun rises and sets. Seasons come and go. But covenant creates the possibility of change. Human beings can respond, repent, remember, reinterpret and begin again.

Judaism does not abolish the natural cycle. It historicizes it.

Agricultural festivals become acts of collective memory. Passover is not merely spring; it is the Exodus. Shavuot is not merely the grain harvest; it becomes the giving of the Torah. Even Shabbat is attached to a historical and theological claim about Creation. Judaism takes nature’s recurring rhythms and places them inside a story.

Discovering Vico

This brings me to the thinker whose work became the great discovery of this week’s discussion: Giambattista Vico, the eighteenth-century Neapolitan philosopher who was later championed by Isaiah Berlin.

Vico rejected both a purely cyclical view of history and the Enlightenment belief in inevitable, rational progress. He described history through the phrase corsi e ricorsi: courses and recourses, advances and returns.

Civilizations develop. They decline. They return to earlier patterns—but they never return to precisely the same place.

Not circles.

Spirals.

Each age possesses its own language, mythology, institutions and forms of imagination. A culture cannot be understood merely by measuring it against a supposedly universal standard of reason.

This is what attracted Isaiah Berlin. Berlin feared monism—the belief that there is one objective and final answer to every human question, one perfect system by which all people should live. Such systems, Berlin argued, tend to become authoritarian. Once someone claims possession of the single solution to history, almost any act of coercion can be justified in the name of reaching it.

Vico offered another way. Different cultures create genuinely different visions of human flourishing. They may be intelligible without being reducible to a single model. This helped Berlin formulate his own philosophy of value pluralism.

But the most exciting aspect of Vico’s thought is not simply his spiral of history. It is his account of how history can be known.

Verum Factum: We Understand What We Make

Vico’s verum factum principle holds that the true and the made are intertwined. Human beings can understand history, society, law and culture because human beings made them.

We cannot comprehend the physical universe from within in the same way that its Creator can. But language, myth, government, ritual and society are human products. They are ours. We made them, and therefore we possess a distinctive capacity to understand them.

As summarized in our source sheet:

The Verum-Factum Principle: Humans can truly understand society and history because we made it ourselves, whereas only God can fully understand the natural physical world.

This resonates profoundly with the Jewish notion of history.

Jewish history is not simply a sequence of events that happened to Jews. It is a history that Jews continually make through memory, ritual, interpretation and action.

The Exodus becomes Jewish history not only because the sea split, but because every generation remembers the splitting of the sea. We tell the story. We eat the matzah. We ask the questions. We see ourselves as though we personally left Egypt.

History is not merely preserved. It is performed.

We do not stand outside the story as neutral observers. We enter it, relive it and add another layer to it. The story shapes us, but our telling also shapes the story.

History is lived—and because it is lived, it is made.

Fantasia: Entering Another Age

Vico’s second great insight is fantasia.

To understand the past, Vico argued, we cannot simply apply mathematical formulas or impose our own categories on earlier civilizations. We must exercise an active, empathetic imagination capable of entering their world.

Fantasia: To understand the past, we cannot use mathematical formulas. We must use active, empathetic imagination to enter the minds of past cultures. Berlin saw this as the true birth of modern social science, cultural anthropology and genuine historical sympathy.

Fantasia does not mean inventing the past. It means acknowledging that people in another age inhabited a different imaginative universe. Their words, symbols and institutions may have meant something very different to them from what they mean to us.

We must therefore resist the temptation to flatten history.

And that describes much of what we try to do every week on Madlik.

We begin with a word such as eikev. We encounter it in the biblical text. Then we listen as Rashi hears the heel beneath the consequence, Ibn Ezra hears the reward at the end, Onkelos hears exchange and Ramban hears the winding road that circles toward its destination.

Each commentator enters the text from within a different historical world.

Their interpretations are not discarded when a new commentary is added. They accumulate. The text becomes layered with meanings created in one generation, transformed in another and waiting to disclose something new to our children and our children’s children.

To study Jewish texts historically is therefore not to reduce them to artifacts of the past. It is to practice fantasia: to enter the imaginative worlds in which they were created while allowing them to illuminate the world in which we now live.

It requires sympathy without surrendering judgment, imagination without abandoning rigor, and openness to the possibility that a word may carry more history than any single generation can exhaust.

Eikev as a Self-Fulfilling Promise

We can now return to the promise with which the parsha began:

וְהָיָה עֵקֶב תִּשְׁמְעוּן... וְשָׁמַר ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְךָ אֶת־הַבְּרִית וְאֶת־הַחֶסֶד

“As a consequence of your hearkening to these laws, guarding them and fulfilling them, the Lord your God will guard for you the covenant and the kindness.”

Read through Rabbi Sacks’s idea of covenantal time, this is more than a promise of reward for obedience. It is almost a self-fulfilling promise.

The verse says, in effect: If you continue to inhabit this covenantal history—if you remember it, interpret it, argue with it, reenact it and carry it forward—then the covenant will carry you forward.

The promise that Israel will endure is fulfilled through Israel’s determination to live its unique history.

That history is not clean or linear. It includes exile and return, loyalty and rebellion, accomplishment and failure, direct progress and circuitous detours. It contains compromises, struggles and setbacks. But those very complexities become part of the memory that each generation inherits and reinterprets.

This is precisely what Ramban discovers inside the word eikev. The path may twist and circle. What appears crooked may eventually become straight. What appears to be a detour may become part of the road by which the destination is reached. That the world Eikev is a lowly body-part speaks to the raw humanity of history.

We tell the story of the Exodus not because we have remained forever free, but because the memory of liberation gives every later generation a language with which to confront bondage. We remember exile because exile teaches us how to imagine return. We preserve the arguments of our commentators because their disagreements teach us how a tradition survives change without losing its identity.

Covenantal history therefore moves in both directions. We sustain the covenant by living its memory, and the covenant sustains us by giving our lives a story larger than the present moment.

Eikev is the promise that, because we continue to walk the road—even with all its twists, compromises, struggles and setbacks—we will remain a people capable of reaching its next chapter.

The History We Make

Eikev means because.

It means consequence.

It means heel.

It means the reward at the end.

It evokes what is crooked, indirect, rounded and circuitous.

It suggests that history has a destination, but does not travel toward it in a straight line.

Jewish history moves through Creation and covenant, exile and return, destruction and rebuilding. Its patterns recur, but never mechanically. Every generation receives the inherited story under new circumstances and must decide how to respond.

That is why history can rhyme without constraining us.

The past offers patterns, not commands. It provides a vocabulary, not a script. We remain participants, not spectators.

Vico’s verum factum teaches that we can understand history because human beings make history. His fantasia teaches that we understand it only when we have the imagination to enter worlds other than our own.

Together, they offer a powerful description of Jewish learning—and of what we try to accomplish on Madlik.

We inherit texts created and interpreted across thousands of years. We enter the worlds of their authors and commentators. We listen to the echoes between their age and ours. And then we add our own voice to the conversation.

That act of interpretation is not separate from Jewish history. It is how Jewish history is made.

And this brings us back to the covenantal promise of eikev: because we continue to inhabit our history—with all its details, arguments, compromises, struggles and setbacks—we preserve the covenant that preserves us.

The promise is self-fulfilling, but it is not automatic. It depends upon each generation choosing to remember, reinterpret and continue the story.

History rhymes.

The covenant persists.

And we are among its authors.

Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/740924

Listen on Spotify: