Fear of the Unknown

Parshat Vayishlach

by Rabbi Avi Billet

Yaakov sends messengers to Eisav telling Eisav his story about having lived with Lavan and having amassed wealth. Perhaps Yaakov is indicating his intent to put the past behind them. “I am happy to share my wealth with you, and I hope you are well. I am your servant." It could be Yaakov hopes not to see Eisav at all.

The messengers come back with the news that “we ‘came’ to your brother, to Eisav, and he is ‘going’ to you accompanied by 400 men.” Alshikh explains “coming” implies closeness – how Yaakov’s servants intended to approach Eisav - while “going” implies distance, perhaps indicating the attitude Eisav was bringing to his encounter with Yaakov.

Where was Eisav coming from? Some suggest he was at home, with no intent to come until he heard Yaakov was on his way (Sforno, Ibn Ezra) But what was his intent? This is unclear: he’s simply “coming” (Ramban); he’s coming to fight because he hates you (Rashi and many others); he is happy about your return and is bringing 400 men to honor you (Rashbam, Chizkuni).

Certainly the indication of the verse is that Rashbam and Chizkuni are correct, and that the fear of battle was all in Yaakov’s mind. The encounter certainly includes no ill intentions, Eisav greets Yaakov warmly with hug and kiss, as he is gracious and magnanimous.

Why then was Yaakov afraid?

He may have been fearful for his life, or as Rashi, etc suggest, he had a concern either that he would be killed, or that he'd be forced to take a life in self-defense.

But the man had been promised by God that He would protect him and return him home safely! Where is Yaakov's faith in God?

If Adino HaEtzni (Shmuel II 23:8) killed 800 men by himself! Yaakov, who fought with an angel, is afraid of 400 men?! (R Chaim Paltiel)

The Midrash tells in the name of Resh Lakish and Rav Yanai that each of the 400  men was a “man” like Eisav – in charge of 400 men each. This suggests he had at least 160,000 people. This is reason to fear.

There are other suggestions of why Yaakov feared: Eisav had merits from honoring his father, Yaakov hadn’t fulfilled his promise to tithe in Beit El, or what Toldot Yitzchak suggests, that if Eisav seems to be coming to attack Yaakov, it must mean Yitzchak is dead. The fear that Yaakov is then experiencing is that he will never see his father again.

Of course, the most likely reason for Yaakov's fear follows that of the Chizkuni – the fear comes from the unknown – Yaakov did not know if Eisav's intentions are good or bad.

And this confusion is noted in Yaakov's language when he says, “Please save me from my brother, from Eisav” meaning, he is pretending to be my brother, but he remains Eisav the hunter and trapper.

I don't think we have to look at Yaakov's fear from the perspective of the numbers. On paper Goliath should have defeated David. On paper Israel should not have defeated Arab armies in most of the wars they fought. And yet, the unexpected happened, and the underdog survived the conflicts.

Fear doesn't come from numbers. It comes from the unknown.

Eisav may have nice intentions. And maybe, in the end, the niceness comes out. But the bottom line is that it cannot be assumed. Preparation needs to be made for the worst. Because, too often, the worst turns out to be the reality. Eisav, unfortunately, is unpredictable. We don't know what he is thinking.

We may be “coming” with love and with the dove of peace, but Eisav may still be “going” to his own destination, irrespective of where we stand on that journey.

When random people are murdered or stabbed in Israel simply because the attackers view all Jews as aggressors who deserve this physical assault, the fear that emerges from those at a bus station or a train station is that of the unknown. Will anything happen today?

Yaakov needs to carry his fears, because he does not know what his adversary is thinking or has going for him: the other side may be more worthy in the eyes of God, maybe we haven’t kept our promises to God, maybe we’ve strayed so far from our Father in Heaven that he is “dead” to us. We must take precautions that these not become true for us. Recommit to God, keep our word.

For the sake of survival, our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world surely must subscribe to the fear Rashi ascribes to Yaakov, “That I will be forced to kill someone in self-defense” – as Golda Meir articulated when she said, “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but we can’t forgive them for forcing us to kill their sons.”

But the rule of “when one comes to kill you, you must rise to kill him first” is essential for survival. Without it, we are all sitting ducks.

The Kli Yakar summarized Yaakov’s thought process: "May Hashem be with me and protect me from those who show themselves to be helpers and loved ones but who truly have hatred embedded in their hearts."

Facing the unknown can be frightening, even for the God-fearing, and even for those who are righteous in their ways. But when we feel those we encounter harbor hatred in their hearts, it becomes our challenge, like Yaakov, to be prepared for the worst, while we continue to hope for the best. 

Aftermath of Har Nof Terrorist Attack

I received a tremendous amount of good feedback for this speech. And much encouragement to post it to this blog. While I certainly don't have answers, and I continue to mourn with klal yisrael, if anyone finds comfort from these words, that is a blessing. 

Toldos: A Time To Mourn, a Time to Live

          This has been a very difficult week. For all of us. There were more people attacked yesterday. Who knows what today will bring?

          Who would ever think that just going to shul, a normal procedure for many of us on a daily basis, could become an act that we might associate with a horrifying tragedy? (so many possible links...)

          We must all take, teach and spread an important language lesson.

          When Jews are murdered because they are Jews, we don’t record with “profound sorrow” their passing. We don’t mourn the “death” of the deceased. And we certainly don’t say ברוך דיין האמת.

          We record with “horrifying pain” their murder. We mourn for the “evil crime perpetrated” against the murdered  and against all of כלל ישראל – we cry with their families, with 25 orphans, with tens of grandchildren who no longer have grandfathers, with 4 unexpectant widows. And with all of אחינו בני ישראל. And instead of Blessing the Dayan HaEmet, the true judge, we cry out HASHEM YINKOM DAMAM. May GOD AVENGE THEIR BLOOD!! That their murderers are dead is fitting. But their damage is done. And most sadly, it cannot be undone.

          I have a very hard time swallowing the idea that these murders are brought about by a דיין האמת. I believe terrorists have free will, and they behave independent of the Will of the דיין האמת. It’s a struggle to consider that life and death are written on Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur – is this really what God had in mind?

          We also mourn for a police officer – Zidan Sayif. Not a Jew. But an Israeli hero nonetheless. Who gave his life to save his fellow Israelis. Rav Ovadiah Yosef, Z”L in one of his later teshuvos – when asked if a prayer could be said in a synagogue for a Druze soldier who was killed in the line of duty in defense of the State of Israel – wrote the following:

          The Druze believe in one God. They are not idolators. They believe in the concept of the soul. They enlist in the IDF, and put their lives on the line to protect the citizens of Israel. They abide by the 7 Noachide laws. They are included in the righteous gentiles of the world. ABSOLUTELY PRAY FOR THEM.

          As one headline I saw said, “Israel’s latest hero isn’t even Jewish.”

          So let us save the blessings for the Dayan HaEmet for when He in His own ways ends a life. But when Jews are murdered, we MUST MUST MUST CALL EVIL FOR WHAT IT IS, AND DEMAND OF GOD TO ENACT VENGEANCE AGAINST MURDERERS and those who send them to perform their despicable acts. Just as we say for victims of the Holocaust, Hashem Yinkom Damam, and we say Y’mach Sh’mam V’Zichram about their murderers, the same appelations apply to victims of terrorist aggression and those who perpetrate the same. Who “excuse” their barbaric behavior as a “natural response to the occupation.” There is nothing natural about the use of meat cleavers and machetes. Any human being who excuses this kind of behavior has no credibility and no shred of humanity.

          My sister shared with me a note written by the widows of (Hashem Yinkom Damam) Rabbis Kalman Levine, Moshe Twersky, Aryeh Kopinsky, Mr. Avraham Goldberg,  imploring ALL OF ACHEINU BNEI YISRAEL to dedicate this Shabbos, Parshas Toldos, as a יום של אהבת חינם. A Day Of Baseless Love for our Fellow Jews. Charging us to avoid senseless quibbles, speaking lashon hara and rechilus – gossip and slander. Speaking ill of one another. I am sure this is something we can all do, as they put it – as an עילוי נשמת the souls of their murdered husbands, fathers, grandfathers.

          It shouldn’t take tragedy or a response to tragedy for us ALL to commit to this. But at least for today, let us honor this request.

          In our parsha today we read of two instances where someone was fearful for his life – each responded to the concern in a different way.

          Yitzchak was worried that if people found out he was married that they would kill him and take his wife as the prize.

          Rivkah was worried that Eisav would make good on his promise to kill Yaakov after having lost his intended bracha through seeming deception.

          Yitzchak lived amongst his enemies after discovering the threat to his life, and eventually moved to a town not too far away. Yaakov chose to run away, to let time heal the wounds, so that when he would eventually return, bygones would be bygones.

          The eventual confrontation, in both cases, went surprisingly well.

          In our parsha, after Yitzchak is first given asylum, then thrown out of Gerar because of his financial success, Avimelekh finally turns to Yitzchak to make peace. After Yitzchak counters “WHY ARE YOU HERE – YOU HATE ME?” Avimelekh explains his reasoning because, as he puts it, רָאוֹ רָאִינוּ כִּי־הָיָה יְקֹוָק עִמָּךְ. We see God is with you.

          In Parshas Vayishlach, if you ignore the Midrash for a moment, we see that Eisav is more than cordial at his reunion with Yaakov. He even appears to be magnanimous – telling Yaakov he doesn’t need the gifts Yaakov gave him, inviting Yaakov to live with him in Seir. It’s an incredible twist from what we’d expect.

          What happened? Why would these sworn enemies make peace? Did they get religion? Avimelekh mentions God. Eisav says יש לי רב – which probably doesn’t really mean “I got me a rabbi.”

          I think that for both of these men, TIME gave them the element of perspective. Avimelekh was able to see that fighting with Yitzchak was not to his benefit. If the Jew was successful financially and would only be contributing to his nation’s economy, maybe it wasn’t the best idea to expel him from [Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Palestine, Israel...] Gerar.

         

          Eisav took an honest assessment of his assets 20 years after Yaakov left and saw he had a significant family, his nation was well under way in its formation, and he had actually done well financially. He owed his success to the blessing he received, and of course, to his own prowess, strength and talents, which were best served at creating and building, rather than in complaining and destroying.

          The Jews in Israel are not going to move to an outskirt city – like Yitzchak did in moving to Nachal Gerar. They’re not going to leave the country, as Yaakov did in fleeing to Charan. The recognition of ראו ראינו כי היה ה עמך, and that יש לי רב have to be reached by the Arabs in the land. I believe that the policies of the State of Israel reflect that they recognize these truths about the Arabs. The Arabs aren’t going anywhere, and their religion (when practiced peacefully) is respected. But it takes two to tango. And we continue to wait for TIME to help them come around to the reality that our People are not going anywhere, and that Judaism is an honorable and peaceful religion, that Jews don’t resort to violence to make a point.

          But we will respond to provocative violence with force, because we must. As Golda Meir once put it - "I understand the Arabs wanting to wipe us out, but do they really expect us to cooperate?"

          Koheles says לכל זמן. And I think we can say that only time will tell what will be. Will the events in Har Nof be a turning point in terms of how Israel views its security concerns? Will the world recognize that they who have supported the Palestinians are on the wrong side – because this is what they are supporting?

          When CNN and the BBC can be called out over and over and over for their biased reporting on this story – equating the death of the murderers by police with the death of theirvictims, declaring the attack having taken place in a mosque, suggesting all Israelis (including babies) are like combat soldiers worthy of being targetedby terrorists in their struggle, telling Naftali Bennett that holding up apicture of a murdered Jew is offensive while they posted pictures – mostlystaged, fake, or lifted from Syrian conflicts – of dead Arabs throughout the summer – when normal media calls them out for their buffoonery and malice, this is an incredible turn. Will it be a turning point? For CNN – the Chamas News Network – probably not. But good people are taking notice.

          Most importantly, will the decent people in the Arab world take the perspective of the Druze – embrace their citizenship in Israel, be proud of their country, denounce terrorism, change their rhetoric, recognize that if they can only see what Avimelekh saw – that the Jews have lowered their infant mortality rate, have raised their life expectancy age, have improved their medical care, have brought great blessing to the Land, have made a wasteland much more than just inhabitable, have provided a free society where they can live, raise families, practice their faith and fulfill a human purpose on Earth of being a contributing member of society – will they oust the evil from within them?

          Only time will tell.

          While people who are hated are discussed in theoretical cases throughout the Torah, there are three individuals who are specifically hated using the word שנאה: Yitzchak is hated by Avimelekh. Leah feels hated as a wife. And Yosef is hated by his brothers. Before the sun sets on the book of Bereshis, all of these hatreds are resolved. Peace with Avimelekh is achieved. Yaakov has seven children with Leah and is buried with her. Yosef and his brothers reconcile.

          Hatred can lead to peace. It is possible.

          My sister who lives in Israel shared with me a nice story that perhaps is a demonstration of this: Someone she knows shared a tidbit from her morning on Thursday, when she was in a bakery in Jerusalem and noticed she was standing behind Natan Sharansky. She told him she had just cited from his book this week in a class she was teaching on Sefer Tehillim, sharing his inspiring story of how he had kept a tiny book of Tehillim with him at all times, even when he had to struggle with the authorities to get it back. At that point, Sharansky smiled, reached into his shirt pocket and pulled out a tiny (palm-sized) tattered book of Tehillim. Stunned, she asked him “Do you carry that wherever you go?” Sharansky didn’t even pause and he replied “Actually, it carries me!” We know his story. For him, hatred turned to peace when he was given his freedom and he was able to emigrate.

          My father went to Israel for half a day to make shiva visits to the four families in Har Nof. His report to his children written after his visits, which he sent to us via email, began: “I visited all four families. They each received me very nicely. These are very religious people who have a lot of trust and faith in God. Therefore they have accepted God's judgment with love.”

          Their letter expresses – through very broken hearts – this love. Love of God, and love of Am Yisrael. If Sharansky is right, that his Tehillim continue to carry him, then let us tap into that truth. If we can honor the request of these incredible families and love and cherish one another, and take their model as an example of how to embrace God even in the most troubling and challenging of times, we will be doing our part to bring peace to the world. And in that merit, may the blessing achieved for Yitzchak and Yaakov in their conflicts with Avimelekh and Eisav be heaped upon all of us when the Goeil Tzedek helps God fulfill the prayer of ופרוש עלינו סכת שלומיך as the understanding of these tragedies becomes clear, and the ultimate peace for our People throughout the world is achieved.

New View of Eisav's 400 Men

The Torah Temimah has the following comment:

The Medrash says that when Eisav was pursuing Yaakov with 400 men, he went and consulted with the customs collectors of Egypt… He took the tax responsibilities of Egypt and passed them on to Yaakov. This is difficult. How does it explain the 400 men? And why specifically from Egypt? Look at the insights of Rada"l… But the truth seems to be that the explanation for "customs collectors" is that Eisav sought permission to be a tax collector. And this hints to the idea that he sought permission specifically from Egypt because they were the ones to be enslaving Yaakov's family for 400 years – this is the reason for his having "400 men."
וע' במ"ר כאן על הפסוק וארבע מאות איש עמו, הלך ונטל [עשו] אגרומי ממצרים, ועמלו מאוד המפרשים בבאור זה, ופירשו שלקח מכס שנוטלין במצרים להטילן על יעקב, וכמה קשה באור זה, וגם מה זה הסבר על ד' מאות איש, ולמה דוקא ממצרים, ועיין בהגהות הרד"ל, אבל האמת נראה, כי הפי' אגרומי הוא רשות להיות מוכס, ורומז שלקח רשות ממצרים שעליהם הובטח לשעבד ביעקב ד' מאות שנה, וזהו הרמז מד' מאות איש:

And so I offer this new perspective. 

There are many possibilities as to what Eisav's intentions were when bringing 400 men. They boil down to greeting Yaakov with honors, coming to fight, and just that Eisav doesn't travel alone.

This Midrashic perspective, however, sheds an entirely different light. Perhaps Eisav, after having gone to Egypt and having learned about what was going on there, came to the realization that the exile promised to Avraham would be taking place there. And Eisav wanted no part of it.

So, when Eisav approaches Yaakov with 400 men, he is essentially saying, "I know you wanted the birthright and to be the spiritual heir of our father and grandfather. ENJOY IT! I don't want to be exiled to Egypt, I don't want 400 years away from my home. And I am bringing 400 men with me to indicate, without necessarily articulating this directly, that I am happy with the version of 400 I have (strong men)."

Therefore there never was a threat. The magnitude of the numbers accompanying Eisav was mostly for show - to indicate Eisav was happy to be a tax collector and to return to his land - not to be the ancestor of a slave people who would experience 400 years of exile, but as leader of a band of 400 men who would serve him honorably and symbolically as he pursued his own destiny, apart from his slavery-bound brother and his family.

Of Faith (and Animals)

Parshat Vayishlach

by Rabbi Avi Billet

Yaakov is on his return journey, homeward bound for the first time in either 22 or 36 years. His mother is dead (though he does not yet know that), and he is unsure of his status with his brother. Has he been forgiven?

            

He sends one group of messengers to Eisav with a warm greeting, "I've been away for awhile. I have made a decent living. I'm coming home – I hope I've found favor in your eyes."

            

The response is that Eisav is approaching with 400 men. (See also here on the number 400)

            

Not knowing his intent, Yaakov sends an appeasement gift to Eisav, which includes "200 she-goats, 20 he-goats, 200 female sheep and 20 rams." (32:15)

            

There were other animals as well, such as the 30 nursing camels who were either accompanied by their children (1 each) or by their male counterparts (many commentaries address the strange terminology in the verse), as well as 40 cows to 10 bulls, 20 she-donkeys and 10 he-donkeys.

            

The verse about the she-goats etc is unique, according to Rabbi Meir of Rothenberg (Maharam), because it is one of only two verses in the entire Torah in which all of the words end with a Final Mem.

            

The other verse is in Parshat Pinchas, Bamidbar 29:33, which describes a portion of the sacrifices of the 7^th day of Sukkot.

            

Maharam explains the parallel between these two unique verses.

            

God had promised Yaakov not to fear Eisav nor any other human being. By sending this gift to Eisav, he is demonstrating a lack of faith in God to the tune of 550 animals. This waste of animals is going to be the source for a payment Yaakov's descendants will have to make yearly to demonstrate their own faith in God.

The verse in Bamidbar is right before the obligations of Shmini Atzeret, so the korbanot of Shmini Atzeret do not count in the "payment."

How are there 550 korbanot? 2 for every Shabbos (52) is 104 animals. 11 for every Rosh Chodesh (12) is 132 animals. The animals for all of the holidays not including Shmini Atzeret account for the remaining 314 of the 550.

There is another approach to counting the animals. There are 2 animal sacrifices every day of the year (which they count as 360 days based on 12 months of 30 days each) equaling 720 animals. The korbanot of Rosh Chodesh and the holidays add up to 440. All together there are 1160 communal sacrifices.

Add up all the animals Yaakov sent – including the interpretation that there were in fact 60 camels – the nursing mothers and either their sons or their mates – and you have 580 animals. Double that number and you have 1160.

And so, according to the Maharam, Yaakov's punishment for his lack of faith gesture of offering Eisav 580 animals was that his descendants had to pay double that as offerings to God on a yearly basis.

As Rabbi Ephraim Buchwald of the National Jewish Outreach Program (NJOP) famously explained in his Crash Course in Basic Judaism, the tenet of Belief is a little different than Knowledge. When a person knows something, there is no doubt in one's mind. There is a fact, it can be proven, demonstrated, etc.

But "Belief" in its very nature carries with it a snippet of doubt. I believe this very much. But… I might be wrong. I can't prove it.

One can argue Yaakov had no excuse. He was a prophet. God communicated directly to him. God told him everything would be alright. While we certainly teach that one should not rely on a miracle, and one should make one's efforts, but Yaakov's approach seemed to disregard a direct promise. Some even interpret his fight with the angel as meaning to remind him that he is not supposed to even prepare to run from Eisav because everything will be alright. Either his wound prevents him from fleeing, or his victory over an angel demonstrates that he can certainly defeat Eisav.

We, on the other hand, don't have the luxury of God speaking to us in dreams and making promises. The promises were made a long time ago, and we are certainly left with a choice. We can abandon everything and say it's all nonsense.

Or we can claim our faith, declare our beliefs, and recognize that while we all have difficult moments and may even question why we do what we do, we can always fall back on the notion that we are the descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov, who knew what they knew and lived the way they lived, so their descendants could one day experience Revelation and receive the Torah at Sinai.

And, of course, we believe the promises for the future have yet to be fulfilled – but will be fulfilled!

In the scheme of things, maybe our People got off easy with the punishment for Yaakov's lapse of faith. Double the amount of animals he wasted on Eisav as payment to God in the Temple.

Can we afford the punishment for the lack of faith and belief that is so prevalent today? Can the blogging Apikores, and the self-hating Jews, and the online slanderers continue to only bring our People down?

Of course they can. That is what they are best at doing.

But the two Final-Mem verses remind us that events from long ago can have an impact on future generations, if all we do is exhibit a lack of faith in God.

May we be blessed to seek God in our lives, and to find and see God in as many life experiences as He makes Himself apparent. 

"Stolen" Blessings

Parshat Toldot

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

            

My best teachers taught that when a question bothers you, seek from everywhere you can until you find a satisfactory answer. This is one of the reasons why I have found real Chumash questions to be much better answered when learning what all the commentaries say, versus through just reading Rashi or Ramban. One of my rebbeim used to mock the idea that there could be a class on "Ramban Al HaTorah." As if to suggest that one commentary is the end-all in studying Chumash.

            

Please don't misunderstand. Every commentary has an approach, and every commentary can only write so much. This is more of a reminder to look beyond a small circle of learning and try to glean the full picture. And perhaps even come up with a novel interpretation – a chiddush!

            

An objective observer can't help feeling sorry for Eisav, standing and then perhaps falling to his knees before his father after being informed that his brother Yaakov has already come and taken the coveted blessings of the firstborn.

            

It's a sad, almost pathetic scene, in which a grown man, age 63, is weeping before his 123 year old father, screaming, crying, throwing the biggest fit, before resorting to threats to kill his brother when the old man dies.

            

Was Yaakov a thief and therefore in the wrong? Was Eisav wronged? Or, perhaps, are we going about this the wrong way? (Disclaimer: Ramban disagrees with most of what follows!)

            

The Hadar Zekeinim anthology notes that the way the Torah is transcribed makes the events seem consecutive, as opposed to simultaneous. In fact, at the same time that Yitzchak was lamenting his own flaws, trying to figure out how he could be duped into blessing his younger son, Eisav was thinking aloud, saying, "He took my birthright."

"Who took your birthright?" Yitzchak asked. Eisav answered, telling the story. Yitzchak now understood, and admitted that things panned out the way they were supposed to on account of that transaction from the beginning of the parsha, which until that moment had been unknown to him. And so he confirmed it, saying, "He too should be blessed."

That added line serves to support the notion that even without "tricking" his father, Yaakov was destined to receive those blessings (Rashi quoting Midrash), which Yitzchak upholds for a few reasons: because he's my son; because I said that whoever curses him is cursed and whoever blesses him is blessed; because he still had the taste of the food in his mouth, (or perhaps a piece of meat loosened from between his teeth). How inappropriate is it to curse someone while you are still enjoying the food they gave you? (Rabbi Chaim Paltiel)

[Perhaps that is a hint to Eisav not to curse Yaakov… a hint which goes right over his head.]

Taking Toldot Yitzchak's explanation of Eisav's complaint one could suggest Yitzchak felt vindicated on account of his unknowingly (or knowingly?) naming his younger son Yaakov instead of "Akev" (for holding Eisav's heel at birth). The name "Yaakov" was essentially given prophetically, because it is a future tense word, indicating he will one day pull a roundabout move on his brother.

Rashbam suggests Yitzchak realized the whole affair was Rivkah's idea, on account of her knowing that Yaakov was the son more worthy to receive the blessings.

            

Yitzchak even explains to Eisav, "I gave him the blessing before you arrived" indicating that it was heaven's decree that you should be delayed just long enough. Remember – it was just as Yaakov was leaving that Eisav walked in – really split second timing. (Midrash Sechel Tov and Radak))

            

Radak even paints Yitzchak as an accessory to the plot when he explains Yitzchak's trembling not as a fearful regret, but as a “show” for Eisav, an indication that he was upset, so Eisav would not perceive that his father was really in on the plot.

            

Kli Yakar examines the whole story noting that it is only Eisav who accuses Yaakov of stealing. (Yitzchak calls it "cunning.") However, did he not sell the birthright willingly? How is Eisav's moment of weakness - from almost 50 years earlier denigration-of-the-birthright Yaakov's fault?

            

Eisav was suggesting that the taking of the birthright was connected directly to this. When Yaakov was asked "Who are you?" He never could have "I am Eisav your firstborn" had he not made the purchase. He must have really said, "I am in the place of your firstborn Eisav, for I purchased the birthright from him," and without that purchase, he never would have tried to take the blessings.

            

Eisav further thought, "Maybe when Yaakov bought the birthright his intent was to steal the blessings." (Almost sounds like a ‘Zionist plot!’)

            

Eisav is therefore blaming Yaakov, suggesting that the birthright sale was a "Mekach Taus" a transaction made with faulty information. Eisav had originally thought it was purely a financial windfall – getting the double portion. Eisav thought at the time that his father might die penniless, so he sold the birthright for little money, thinking it was better to cash in at that time, not realizing that the birthright also included blessings!

            

Yaakov said "I am Eisav your firstborn" instead of just, "I am Eisav" because it is only on account of the birthright that these blessings were coming to him – and that is why he was able to take them.

            

In Eisav’s mind, the trickery is that “he took the birthright in the first place, because I had no idea that these blessings were for the birthright holder, and not for the natural first born.”

            

Ktav V'Hakabalah blames Eisav for accusing Yaakov of "taking" the birthright, when the truth was that they had a legitimate transaction. It was his own fault for denigrating and essentially making the birthright worthless, leaving it open for Yaakov to claim as his own.

            

Some view this as rewriting history, and some say, "Look at the whole picture." Far be it from us to lay the blame squarely on Yaakov, or even Rivkah, who sets him up, when Eisav was as much to blame for all that transpired the moment he indicated the birthright meant nothing to him.

In Defense of Yaakov's Purchase of the Bechora

Please note - an important follow up was made based on a question in the comments - be sure to read the comments as well!

Every time I've read the story of "Yaakov purchasing the Birthrite for a bowl of soup," it always left me with an empty feeling – something isn't right. How can this father of the Jewish people take such advantage of his poor, exhausted brother, essentially extorting a sale out of Eisav - one in which he did not wish to take part?

For starters there are a couple of hints in the Torah that Eisav really didn't feel cheated. Firstly, after eating the food the Torah tells us "And Eisav denigrated the birthrite." In other words, now that he no longer felt "exhausted" and "as if he were going to die," he still did not express any "seller's remorse." The "bechora" meant nothing to him at any time.

Secondly, when he complains in Chapter 27 that "Now I understand why his name is Yaakov, first he took my birthrite and now he took my blessing," he is tacking on a sale which never bothered him until that moment. He may have a legitimate complaint about the blessing being stolen, but that's Rivkah's problem (as she said in 27:13). His complaint about the Birthrite at that stage is similar to someone who gets fed up about something - i.e. someone always being late - who complains saying, "You're always late. And by the way, I never liked your car." The lateness is the problem, not the car. But you throw in something that never really bothered you because... why not?

      
Here is my new interpretation, inspired by the thoughts of some of the great Rishonim commentators on the Torah.

      
In 25:27, we are told two things about Eisav and Yaakov, respectively.

וַיְהִי עֵשָׂו אִישׁ יֹדֵעַ צַיִד אִישׁ שָׂדֶה וְיַעֲקֹב אִישׁ תָּם יֹשֵׁב אֹהָלִים:

* Eisav is a man who knows how to hunt; he is a man of the field

* Yaakov is an "ish tam", who is one who "dwells in tents"

      
* An "ish sadeh" – a man of the field – is a farmer.

* One who "dwells in tents" is a shepherd (based on the precedent of Bereshis 4:20)

Ergo, the first description of each refers somewhat to their respective personalities, while the second description refers to their professions.

In 25:29 -  וַיָּזֶד יַעֲקֹב נָזִיד וַיָּבֹא עֵשָׂו מִן הַשָּׂדֶה וְהוּא עָיֵף – Yaakov is cooking something when Eisav comes in from the field exhausted. A shepherd has a lot of free time, particularly when sheep are grazing. A farmer, on the other hand, has much more physical labor involved in his daily activity. That Eisav comes home exhausted – מן השדה – from the field - indicates he's been working hard.

He makes clear how exhausted he is through being unable to identify the food he asks to eat: Give me some "red red thing."

Eisav's exhaustion indicates an opportune time for Yaakov to discuss something he has wanted to discuss with Eisav. If Eisav's personality is a hunter, and a free spirit, we can suggest that in his free time from working in the field, he WAS a hard man to track down. He'd go out hunting, out for a hike, who knows?  But in other conversations with his twin brother, Yaakov knew Eisav didn't care much for the birthrite (Daat Zekenim). Chizkuni indicates Eisav had no interest in the "responsibility" side of the birthrite – serving in the Temple one day. What follows: all he was interested in was the monetary side – which is why Yaakov said to him, "Sell it to me."

While the Torah does not say explicitly that Yaakov offered him money, Radak, Chizkuni and the anthology called "Hadar Zekenim" indicate there was clearly a monetary compensation offer on the table.

      
In the words of the Hadar Zekenim commentary:

הדר זקנים על התורה בראשית פרשת תולדות פרק כה פסוק לד(לד) ויעקב נתן לעשו לחם ונזיד עדשים. וכי סלקא דעתך שעשו כל כך שוטה שמכר בכורתו ששוה דבר גדול בשביל דבר מועט. דנהי נמי שהעבודה שהיתה בבכורות היא קלה מ"מ יודע הוא שהוא בכור לירש ממון רב והוא מכר הכל כדאמרי' נהי נמי דבכירותיה זבין פשיטותיה מי זבין. וי"ל דיעקב נתן לו ממון הרבה בעבור הבכורה אך הלחם והנזיד לא היה אלא לקיים המכירה כדרך שעושין המוכרים ולוקחים זה מזה ונותנים פשוט או שנים ליין

Perhaps Eisav was in need for "Cash Now" (too bad JG Wentworth wasn't around yet). Maybe Eisav felt, why wait for my annuity to kick in? Who knows if Yitzchak will still have money by the time he dies (Ibn Ezra suggests the family was strapped for cash – though Ramban rejects the notion). In either case, finances are never guaranteed – and there were no trust funds or insurance policies to guarantee any value to the birthrite. Besides, if they were as young as 15 and were observing the death of Grandpa Avraham at age 175, they may be quite realistically believing that their father might not die for another 100 years (he ends up living 105 more years, outliving Avraham by 5 years).

Witnessing the reality of mortality may cause Eisav to say Ecclesiastically הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי הוֹלֵךְ לָמוּת וְלָמָּה זֶּה לִי בְּכֹרָה – if I'm going to die one day anyway, what's the purpose? I MAY AS WELL CASH IN NOW IF THE OFFER IS ON THE TABLE. Besides, if the Midrash that Eisav had just emerged from a fight to the death with  Nimrod is true, who's to say the next fight to the death with someone will go the same way for Eisav? He may honestly believe he'll never live to see that inheritance!

And then, the food which is shared (as indicated by the commentaries quoted here) is not the "price of the sale," but is the celebratory meal that seals the deal. Yaakov and Lavan have a similar meal at the end of next week's parsha. And it was common practice in those days to have such a meal.

      
Yaakov, therefore, did not dupe Eisav. He did not cheat Eisav. He paid him "Cash Now" for what would otherwise be his payoff when Yitzchak died. He bought Yitzchak's life insurance policy, buying out Eisav's rights as a beneficiary.

This explains why Eisav was upset later. His father is blessing him (Chapter 27) at a time that he (Yitzchak) declares "לא ידעתי יום מותי" – I don't know when I'm going to die. Since he indicates he may die soon (though he lives another 57 years), Eisav is feeling the pain of the money he spent in his relative youth, when he could have otherwise been getting it soon (or so he thinks) pending his father's imminent death.

As it happens, he sold those rights legitimately, without regretting it at the time, and his father continues to live anyway. He would not get a windfall, not now, and not in the future, and that reality comes back to bite him at a time when he is particularly vulnerable.

            
Next up, defending Yaakov's takingthe blessing

Being a Better Parent Than...?

Parshat Toldot

by Rabbi Avi Billet

            

The Torah describes one interaction between Avraham and Yishmael (his banishment in chapter 21), one interaction between Avraham and Yitzchak (the "Akedah" of chapter 22), and one interaction between Yitzchak and his sons in the blessing episode of chapters 27-28.     

            

From an objective perspective, judging only the human element without the divine instructions to listen to Sarah and to take Yitzchak to a mountain, Avraham's parenting skills don't pass muster.

            

Perhaps Yitzchak decided "When I am a parent, I will do things differently. I will not alienate my children. I will not do things that will cause them to resent me later in life." When any child becomes a parent, the opportunity to "prove" or live out such a notion comes when similar circumstances present themselves and the "enlightened" parent can make different parenting choices from those s/he witnessed or experienced as a child.

            

The parallels in the stories are too many to ignore.

            

In both circumstances we have: an elderly father, an older and a younger son, the latter being overly protected by his mother from the older one taking his inheritance, instruction for marriage to take place with people of Aram (or the family living there), references to hunting, a blessing for the older son to be a great nation.

            

The contrasts of parenting choices are notable as well.

            

Yitzchak modeled an age for marriage – and Eisav followed it, getting married at age 40. But Yitzchak did not instruct whom to marry – giving freedom of choice – which came back to bite him (26:34-35).

            

Yitzchak speaks with his older son. Instead of sending him out of his life, he sends him on a mission, to give him merits which will help him earn his blessing.

Whereas when he was the son Yitzchak initiated the only conversation with his father the Torah records, as a father he engages his son in conversation ("My Father," "Here I am, my son" becomes "My son," "Here I am").

Unlike at the Akedah when Avraham brought things that God did not tell him to take (knife, wood, fire), Yitzchak tells Eisav exactly what to take for his mission.

Instead of sending him out with food which may run out, as Avraham did to Yishmael, Yitzchak instructs Eisav to prepare and bring back food.

Eisav, the older son, does not need to see his mother abandon him at a distance of an arrow-shot, a memory which may have contributed to Yishmael's picking up the bow professionally (21:16,20). Yitzchak encourages Eisav's bow-wielding activities (27:3)

            

Hagar is shown the water which will help Yishmael survive, and he is saved because of his sincere prayer. Eisav cries out in a most heartfelt manner over the loss of the blessing taken by Yaakov, and he receives the blessing of "You will live by your sword."

            

Unlike in Yitzchak's case, where he never left home and did nothing to procure a wife for himself, it is decided that the younger son will be sent away for the time being, where he will actively pursue a mate.

            

Without Avraham's instruction, Yishmael marries an Egyptian (just as Avraham did in taking Hagar), avoiding the Canaanite women. Only after hearing Yitzchak tell Yaakov the qualities of a proper shidduch does Eisav (in a moment of irony closing the family circle) take the daughter of Yishmael as a wife.

             

The blessings given to Yaakov and Eisav are physical blessings, quite similar, and are unrelated to the blessing of Avraham, which it seems Yitzchak always intended to give to Yaakov.

Ironically, even Yitzchak's best laid plans backfire. When Yaakov enters, he too reproduces the conversation Yitzchak had with his father. "My father," "Hineni, who are you, my son?" "I am Eisav your first born, I've done as you ask, please rise to eat so you may bless me." "So fast?" "God helped me." "Let me feel you – are you really Eisav?... The voice is the voice of Yaakov, but the hands are Eisav's hands."

In the big picture, Yitzchak chooses to: stay out of shidduch advice until zero hour (failing with Eisav), be more sensitive to his older child than Avraham was to his (fail because Yaakov received the blessing), encourage the not-so-Jewish profession of hunting (fail - at least according to Chazal), try to create a system of equality between brothers (fail). While Yishmael's prayer was answered with a spring of water to help his survival, Eisav cried out (no prayer), and his father blessed him with survival-by-the-sword (is that the best "survival" we can hope for?). And Yitzchak plays favorites as well, giving the blessing of Avraham to Yaakov alone.

And so it seems even the best laid plans are not foolproof. And as much as people might think they'll be better parents than theirs' were, the fact is that each person has a unique personality, unique character traits, and does things differently. In some ways, we always hope we are improving on what was given to us. But hopefully we still respect our parents even though we don't agree with all their parenting choices. And while we hope we are doing a better job as well, we too are not perfect. And when our kids grow up (or if they've grown up) and they show us our imperfections, hopefully we'll stifle our urge to speak when we notice theirs as well.

Trial and error. Succeed and fail. Learn from mistakes, and hopefully do better next time.

But the Children...

Parshat Vayishlach

by Rabbi Avi Billet

Towards the end of the conversation Yaakov has with Eisav about their future, Yaakov's final insistence that he cannot accompany Eisav to Seir puts the blame where most of us might put it.

'My lord,' replied Jacob, 'you know that the children are weak, and I have responsibility for the nursing sheep and cattle. If they are driven hard for even one day, all the sheep will die. Please go ahead of me, my lord. I will lead my group slowly, following the pace of the work that I have ahead of me, and the pace of the children. I will eventually come to [you], my lord, in Seir.'

When he describes the "regel ha'yladim" (the feet (pace) of the children) as the culprit for his having to move much slower, Ibn Ezra, Seforno and Ramban believe he is referring to his own children, "the oldest of whom is 12 and a few days" (Ibn Ezra). This could be supported by the verse that opens the chapter, in which Yaakov's children are referred to as "y'ladim" twice.

Others, however, believe Yaakov is referring to the children of his adult sheep who are weak and unable to be pushed hard to travel. Chizkuni (33:13), for example, points out that Yaakov placed his wives and children on camels (referring to 31:17), implying that their (the children's) inability to walk would be a non-factor.

A number of Midrashim take the reference to the weak children as a metaphor for a different time and place. It either refers to Moshe and Aharon, with the sheep being the Israelite nation who might have died in the days of Andaryanus were it not for the mercy of God, or to David and Shlomo, with the sheep again referring to the Israelite nation who might have died in the days of Haman were it not for God's mercy (Bereshit Raba Vayishlach 78).

The Medrash Agada puts a different spin on what it is the children can't handle: the burden of Gehinnom. If you push them too hard one day, they'll have no hope.

Yalkut Shimoni has two accounts which include the children metaphor referring to Chananya, Mishael and Azarya on the one hand, and the Messiah on the other hand.

The Chizkuni's interpretation is most sensible to me. One has to imagine that wealthy Yaakov's children were riding on camels, and that there is no way he would force them to walk to the point that they would not be able to continue. Sheep, on the other hand, would be afforded no such luxury.

And, as compelling as the midrashic interpretations are, I can't imagine Yaakov really had such images in mind when addressing his brother Eisav.

If Yaakov's children were riding on camels, why then did Yaakov blame his intent not to join Eisav on his small children? It may be true, as the Midrash Sechel Tov points out, that their age demanded much attention. But why couldn't Yaakov just be up front with Eisav? Why couldn't he say, "I don't think your place is the right environment for me"? His kids might not have cared where they ended up! Why blame them, when it is Yaakov who wants no part of it?

Because, as many of us well know, the most important decisions we make in our lives are heavily influenced by our children and their needs.

I know one family who chose to raise their children in a small town close to where the specific Orthodox day school they admired was located. I know of families that have specifically sought jobs in larger Jewish communities - even though they preferred a smaller or "out of town" environment - where the special education needs of one of their children could be met.

I am sure you can think of countless examples when you or your parents made important life choices that were heavily influenced by the effect and impact it would have on children.

On the flip side, there are sacrifices we make on account of our children. Sometimes we come late to or miss events we would have liked to attend because "something came up." It may be a medical emergency, or a meltdown, or a tough night at the negotiating table (ie "you are going to bed right now, or else...").

In our society, when the "detained on account of child" excuse is real, we always hope those who were offended could be forgiving and understanding.

On the other hand, there may be times when people overuse the "child" excuse to the point they are no longer believed.

Was Yaakov being truthful in his blaming his inability to continue the journey on his children? Maybe yes, maybe no. But Yaakov knew that with the right person, and presented in the right way, it is hard to refute a fallback excuse that includes the words "My kids are small and incapable of making the journey."

This is one of the shared elements of the human condition – once we have children, our lives become inexorably linked to their immediate needs when duty calls.

Verbs, Verbs Everywhere

 Parshat Toldot

by Rabbi Avi Billet

There are two schools of thought regarding Eisav. Jews who study Torah regularly have a negative view of Eisav implanted in our brains from a very early age, as taught to us from the many teachings of the rabbis, midrash, Talmud, and even the works of the prophets.

The other perspective views Eisav as a victim: a victim of circumstance, of his brother's trickery, and of a family unit who misunderstood him.
Certainly the Torah itself does not paint Eisav in terrible terms. Most of the "bad" things he does can easily be explained away, if not justified.