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. 

Coming of Age Properly

Parshat Vayishlach

by Rabbi Avi Billet

I recently overheard two fathers of teenagers comparing their approaches to their sons' shul attendance on Sundays and other "days off." One of them came to me afterwards to discuss his related concerns about "texting on shabbos."

With a little insight from Parshat Vayishlach, perhaps there is a simple answer to both questions. I accept that I may be hopelessly naïve. But the stand I propose at the end of this will not be, if followed, what turns your children away from Judaism. Much bigger issues bring about such a result. Having said that, let us see how we can find parenting-inspiration from our forefather Yaakov.

One theme in Vayishlach is the coming-of-age of Yaakov's children.

Unlike in Vayetze where they appear as backdrops in the narrative of events in Padan Aram, in Vayishlach, we see an entirely different story. Consider: Reuven and Bilhah, Shimon and Levi in Shechem, all the brothers dealing with the prince of Shechem, and Yosef being singled out as the last son to meet Eisav. Even Dinah's experience in Shechem, while tragic, is arguably her initiation into the "real world." The brothers, collectively, plunder the city of Shechem and are later asked by their father to remove the idols that they have from their midst.

Yaakov's role as parent is fascinating, at times very active, and at times quite passive.

Immediately after dividing into two camps, Yaakov prays to the God of his fathers (32:10-12). Through remembering his roots in front of his children, he is demonstrating his understanding of why he is in this situation and the expectation he has from the God Who promised to watch over him and his children.

           

Whether Yaakov was crippled (end of Ch. 32) in order that he may: experience the promise God made to him (Chizkuni), be shown he would not be defeated (Radak), or ultimately win in a confrontation (Yalkut Shimoni), all help Yaakov realize that you can't run from your fears. In facing his brother with one unified camp, scrapping the two-camps plan, he models and teaches his children that if you boldly face what you think is your greatest fear, you may find that the only thing you really feared, if I may borrow from FDR, was fear itself. Facing one's destiny is more important than running like a coward. 

           

When his injured "gid hanasheh" prevented him from running, he became emboldened and confronted his brother in the open field. Abstaining from eating this nerve of an animal could be a reminder that cowardice is unbecoming of those who are God-fearing.

            

Yaakov takes the sidelines in allowing his sons to deal with Shechem. They speak "b'mirmah" – using tricks – (as did their father to Yitzchak (see 27:35)) and they bring justice against those who defiled their sister (34:27). Their father is disappointed in their choices, but they literally get the final word (34:31). It seems that they take the teachings of their father – to use trickery, to stand up to those who oppress you or who want to make your life miserable – and they run with them. And while they may not be entirely correct, their actions are somewhat justified by the context of the perpetrated deed.

            

In the final tale, when God tells Yaakov to go to Bet-El to make an altar to his God, Yaakov tells his sons to remove the idolatrous images they have (35:2). They listen! They give them to him, and he buries them under a tree!

            

Yaakov has modeled a line of behavior for his children. They learn from his example, they take his lead. They are not perfect, and they make choices he doesn't like. But when he tells them to give him precious items because they conflict with the prayers he will soon engage in, or because they don't fit in to the mood of the household, they acquiesce – no questions asked.

            

Parents of children who are coming of age certainly notice the changes they go through. Hopefully parents give children the freedom to make choices (and to make mistakes!), but hopefully both parents and children respect one another and have the ability to communicate with one another in general and about what is important to them.

Claiming you don't want to make your child go to shul for a 9am (or later!) minyan on a Sunday because you're afraid of losing your relationship with your son seems silly to me. Your kid davens (or attends davening) in school every day of the week. Sunday is the day you show your kid that you daven too! And that it isn't a day off for him or for you!

            

Finally, if Yaakov could convince his sons to give up golden images and jewelry which did not jive with the home he was building, I see no reason why the texting on shabbos "problem" is a problem. Every home can have an "off-limits-on-Shabbos" box, and every cell phone, tablet, etc. in the house is placed there before shabbos.

            

The same parents who pay their kids' cell-phone bills and give their kids credit cards should have every say as to when the phone is on and off-limits.

            

Yaakov buried objects which were far more precious, for the sake of preparing for serving the God that protected him and his family through the years. Shabbos is the day we serve the God that has protected and sustained our families through the years. If we are afraid of our children or can't bring ourselves to put up simple guidelines that brings the family on the same page in terms of prayer and Shabbos, we are doing something very wrong as parents.

            

Despite all the problems, "Yaakov's sons were twelve." (35:12) With God's help, and properly standing for what "our family believes in," we should merit to raise children who not only follow our examples for the good, but who surpass our expectations in their observance of the Torah, their relationships with God, and their religious experiences.

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.

The Music of Katonti

Parshat Vayishlach

By Rabbi Avi Billet

Four times every year the word “katonti,” which appears once in all of the Bible (32:11), is read in the synagogue to much pomp and circumstance. It is typically recited by the congregation before the reader says it, as it has somehow developed its own cultish following.

What is unique about this word, which is Yaakov’s way of saying, “I have become humbled” from all the kindnesses G-d has shown me, is that its cantillation mark, the symbol that tells the reader what music to apply to the word, is up for debate.

Reuven and Bilhah

Between husband and wife, and father and son 

 Parshat Vayishlach 

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

 Our tradition maintains that one merit Yaakov had over his father and grandfather is that all of his sons were righteous – no Eisav or Yishmael in the lot – allowing him to be the one after whom the Jewish nation is named – B’nei Yisrael, the children of Israel. 

 With this in mind, Bereishit 35:22 leaves us scratching our heads. “While Yaakov was dwelling [undisturbed] in the land, Reuven went and lay “et” Bilhah, his father’s concubine, and Israel heard about it… and Yaakov’s sons were twelve [in number].” 

 What happened with Reuven and Bilhah? Did he or didn’t he? Two factors need to be considered: 1. What is the meaning of the word “et”? 2. How well do we understand the words in the Talmud when explaining a seeming passage of narrative in the Torah? 

 Rabbi David Fohrman shares an important discussion of the meaning of the word “et” in his book, “The Beast that Crouches at the Door” (Devora Publishing, 2007, p. 117-124). Sometimes it means “with,” but sometimes it is a grammatical tool used to connect a verb to a direct object. Certainly the verse is not as simple as it seems. 

 The Talmud (Megillah 25a) goes so far as to say the verse should be read and not translated, due to the difficult nature of understanding the almost clear facts of the case. But the Talmud says elsewhere (Shabbat 55b), that anyone who claims Reuven sinned is mistaken, because the verse concludes saying Yaakov had twelve sons – meaning none of them were rejected. Instead, we are to understand that Reuven mixed up beds, and the Torah only “makes it seem as if” he had relations with his father’s wife/concubine, even though he did not. 

However, the Talmud also says (Shabbat 56a) that anyone who claims King David sinned is mistaken. But King David himself admitted that he sinned (Samuel II 12:13 and 24:10). 

If we assume, as the Talmud implies, that King David was correct in his actions with Batsheva and the census, according to King David we are mistaken. So let us assume for a moment that Reuven’s actions here are a faux pas. Having said that, what happened? 

 Ramban suggests Reuven was fearful of Yaakov fulfilling God’s command of 35:11 to have more children, because he thought he would lose out more of his inheritance. His “older” mother was no longer fertile, Rachel was dead, as was Zilpah. So he switched the beds around, which worked because Yaakov did not subsequently have more children.

Without apologetics, Bchor Shor and Ibn Ezra claim Reuven did what the Torah says he did. Chizkuni, Rabbi Samson Rafael Hirsch and others suggest, most likely on the coattails of the Tanchuma, that Reuven lay in the room, which discouraged Yaakov from going there. (Ro”sh says he slept on her bed many nights to discourage his father from coming back, even though he did not sin in the way we’d generally suspect.) Once that happened, Yaakov chose to remain celibate for the rest of his days. 

 The Sha’kh defends Reuven saying Yaakov understood Reuven’s sincere intentions, to keep the family unit intact, and to maintain the requisite number of children required to begin a new nation. Nachor, Yishmael, and Eisav combined with Seir each had twelve sons. Now that Binyamin was born, Yaakov had twelve sons. Perhaps Reuven thought, “If he has more children, some of his original 12 will be rejected. Perhaps he’ll start by rejecting some of Leah’s children.” So he took matters into his own hands to avoid the creation of more siblings. 

 Maskil L’David has the most innovative interpretation. Following the line of Reuven mixing the beds, causing his father to spend his evenings with Leah, he says the Torah is indicating the switch through the specific words it chooses. Mix around the letters of “Vayishkav” (וישכב) and you have “Vayachabosh” (ויכבש) (and he cornered). Mix around “Pilegesh” (פילגש) (concubine – an odd choice because Bilhah is elsewhere called a “wife”) and you have “She’pileg” (שפילג) (that he caused a rift). In other words, he cornered Bilhah, and caused a rift between her and his father, causing Yaakov to seek companionship elsewhere. In this vein, Reuven was punished “measure for measure.” Since he switched around beds, the letters in the Torah were “switched around” to make him look worse. 

 No matter how we look at Reuven’s deed, what he did was not nice. Whether Bilhah was now prohibited to Yaakov is one question, but that Yaakov chose celibacy as a course of reaction was his own free will – not Reuven’s fault. 

 Why did Yaakov get angry, as evidenced from the way he spoke to Reuven in Bereishit 49:3-4, “for having moved the beds,” particularly if his intentions may have been noble? Because no one has the right to cause a rift between a husband and wife. The relationship between spouses is holy and sacred. 

Not only should they view it that way, but everyone who meets them needs to understand boundaries in relating to a couple. Particularly when it comes to relating to a married person of the opposite gender, it is important to bear in mind the holiness of the person’s “kiddushin” and to respect space, privacy, and the individual’s personal commitment to the holy bond of matrimony.