An "Ezer" Against Him

Parshat Beresheet

by Rabbi Avi Billet

After describing the Tree of Knowledge and the instruction for how it is to be treated, the Torah describes God as saying, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make for him an "ezer" opposite him." [In the interest of being politically correct, we will not translate the word "ezer" right now.]

One would expect that the "ezer" would be created immediately. However, there is a strange interlude during which God fashions all of the animals of the earth, and the birds of the heavens to see what the man would name them. After naming the animals, we are told he did not find an "ezer" opposite him. In other words, after meeting all the animals, he felt none had been made as a partner for himself.

Only after this discovery does the Torah continue where it left off with God's "thought process" as it describes the process of how woman was formed.

Why the interlude? Was the post-creation party meant to assert who was created first? The dominion of man over animals? Was it meant to make clear how much Adam was missing in not having an "ezer"?

The Netziv describes the difference between the "ezer" that Adam was missing, and the companions he saw in all the animals. What Adam saw was that every animal's partner was essentially a partner for procreation, while there was no partnership or companionship beyond the achievement of that goal of reproduction.

Humans, on the other hand, have a need for companionship that goes beyond a simple, physical act. In a sense, this is what we call the "human connection" in which a real bond beyond words and physical acts makes a relationship special.

The interpretation of Rashi that "If a man merits, she is an 'ezer,' and if he does not merit then she is 'opposite him,'" is known. However, Netziv explains, the Torah is not describing two options, that she can either be an 'ezer' or she can be against him.

Rather, it is to be understood that her "opposition" can help him. A man with a temper can have his wife "help him." Either his temper helps him feel good, or his wife steps in to cover his ineptitude when his temper overtakes his emotions. In this way, she is his "ezer." (supporting a bad character trait) However, when the mood passes, Netziv explains, his guilt is even worse on account of the fuel his wife poured on the fire of his emotions, and that works against him.

On the other hand, if she opposes his anger from the beginning and brings him to calm down, even though she is acting against him, this is the true form of what it means to be an "ezer."

The Netziv's message is that the concept of a wife being an "ezer" and against him puts a tremendous amount of pressure on the woman to help her husband become a better person. Does it always work? Is her ability to discern when he is wrong a perfect ability? Depends who you ask. (I'm going to get it for this one!)

But the fact remains – in Netziv's approach – that sometimes being "against him" is a way of being his "ezer," helping him to improve his ways and become a better person. Or a more fulfilled person.

This is why the interlude is so important. Adam needed to understand the animal kingdom and to see that he and they are very different. We live in a world in which people see their pets as children and value their animals' lives, in some cases,  more than the lives of human strangers.

So Adam's first lesson is – "You are not an animal. You may share certain characteristics, but the bottom line is that you can never achieve with an animal what you can achieve with another human being." And a human being must be treated on a much higher level than how you will treat an animal.

Adam's second lesson is – "Don't view every confrontation that you have with a spouse as the end of the game. It is merely a means of helping you draw closer to one another."

It is this second lesson which is so difficult for partners who squabble to remember. There are some people who do not know how to move past a fight. They don't talk to each other for days and weeks, and may bring about divorce or worse if they don't see their fights are meant to bring them closer together.

But those whose attitude is, "I am in this for the long haul and will stick through this" must also realize that while adults will argue and fight, if their running theme is that they are on the same team, as opposed to adversaries, then even the fights can bring them closer together as their relationship is improved through the strengths they each bring to the table.