From: Yeshivat Har Etzion Office
To: yhe-parsha@etzion.org.il
Subject: PARSHA62 -06: Parashat Toldot
YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
*********************************************************
PARASHAT TOLDOT
And Now My Son Listen to My Voice (Bereishit 27:8)
By Rav Chanoch Waxman
I
We tend to think of Rivka as the hero of Parashat
Toldot. She saves not just the day, but the future as well.
In the core action of the parasha, Yitzchak decides to pass
on the precious family heritage, the blessings, to Eisav.
He loves Eisav, the respect Eisav gives him and the food
Eisav brings him (25:28). He is the first born, a perfectly
good son and a worthy heir. But Rivka knows better. She
recognizes Eisav for who he truly is. She loves Ya'akov and
remembers the revelation received during her pregnancy
(Rashbam 25:23, 27:13, Ramban 27:4,15). She takes action.
Without hesitation, she orders Ya'akov to help her prepare
an imitation "product of the hunt," to pose as Eisav and to
take the blessings (27:5-10). Overriding all opposition
from Ya'akov, she dresses Ya'akov in Eisav's clothing, gives
Ya'akov the food and sends him to Yitzchak (27:11-17).
Despite Yitzchak's suspicion, the plan succeeds (27:18-29)
and with a little bit of trickery, Ya'akov receives the
blessings. Tragedy is avoided and the covenant is saved.
The nationhood, land and blessing promised to Avraham's
descendants goes to a nation known as the Children of Israel
and not the Children of Eisav.
Reading Rivka as the heroine of the parasha places her
at a pivotal point in the development of a crucial theme in
Sefer Bereishit. Brotherhood, competition and preference
constitute one of the key motifs of the book. Throughout
Bereishit, we are presented with a succession of pairs of
brothers, an older and a younger. In each case, despite the
normal rule of primogeniture, (the primacy of the first
born), the younger, the not-first born is preferred. The
pattern begins with Kayin and Hevel (4:1-4) and continues on
in Yishma'el vs. Yitzchak (17:19-21), Eisav vs. Ya'akov
(28:1-4,13), Re'uven vs. Yosef-Yehuda (37:1-3, 48:22, 49:4,8-
10) and Menashe vs. Ephraim (48:13-20). This pattern of
switching, of going against the grain, connects with one of
the key themes of the Sefer. It is a sign of God's
providence. Not just the standard social pattern of
preferring the first matters. God's will and the persona of
the people involved matter even more.
As such, Rivka stands at a crucial juncture. Until
this point, the choice of the younger, the "switching," has
been done solely by God. It is God and God alone who
accepts the offering of Hevel as opposed to that of Kayin
(4:4-5). It is God alone who decides to establish his
covenant with Yitzchak rather than with Yishma'el (17:19-
21). But from this point on, in the latter part of the
book, the switch involves human initiative. It is Rivka who
replaces Eisav with Ya'akov, Ya'akov who prefers Yosef and
Yehuda over Re'uven and of course Ya'akov who crosses his
hands over the heads of Menashe and Ephraim. All of this
begins with Rivka. It is she who teaches her son and the
reader that sometimes divine providence requires a certain
amount of human action in order to be realized. It needs to
be worked for, steered, directed and dragged into the world.
Rivka is not just the heroine of the story of Chapter Twenty-
seven, the theft of the blessings. She is also the teacher
of a crucial lesson, the need for human vision, activism and
initiation as a necessary condition for proper realization
of the divine plan.
II
The marriage of Ya'akov and the marriage of Yitzchak
have much in common. Near the end of Parashat Toldot,
Yitzchak summons Ya'akov and forbids him to take a bride
from among the local inhabitants, "the daughters of Canaan"
(28:1). Rather he is to travel to (Padan) Aram to "take a
wife" from the house of Betu'el and Lavan (28:2).
Yitzchak's command clearly echoes the command given by
Avraham to his servant and the servant's accomplishment of
the command in Chapter Twenty-four. Avraham forbade the
"daughters of Canaan" (24:3) and commanded his servant to
"take a wife" (24:4) for Yitzchak from his land and
birthplace. This turned out to be the house of Betu'el and
Lavan in Aram (Naharaim) (24:10,23,24,50).
Moreover, in both stories the future bride is found at
a source of water. In what might be thought of as a groom,
bride and well scene, Ya'akov meets Rachel at a well
(29:2,10). This of course echoes the finding of Rivka at
the well (24:11-15). Serving as a kind of stand in for
Yitzchak, the servant meets the bride at the water.
In addition, the ends of the stories, the parting and
return sections, are eerily similar. In both cases, the
"groom" asks to be "freed" to return home (24:54, 30:25).
In each case, despite wanting to prevent the trip, Lavan and
his family are forced to accede to God's wish and are
consequently unable to comment whether the matter is good or
bad (24:50-51,55, 31:23,29). Finally, each story ends with
a blessing delivered by Lavan to his departing relatives
(24:55,60, 32:1).
The parallels between the bride search trip of the
servant and the bride search trip of Ya'akov should focus
our attention on a crucial aspect of Ya'akov's time in the
house of Lavan, - its duration. While the servant succeeded
and parted from the relatives in the course of a single day,
Yaakov's trip took him over twenty years. Not the brief
trip of the servant, not the brief trip probably expected by
Yitzchak, nor the "few days" necessary for the passing of
Eisav's anger (27:44-45) predicted by Rivka. Nor were these
easy years. The very verse that gives us the number twenty
also describes the quality of those years.
For twenty years I have been in your house, fourteen
years I served you for your two daughters and six years
for your cattle, and you have switched my wages ten
times. (31:41)
Years of hard work, treachery, trickery and switches.
III
Let us turn our attention to another blatant difference
between the marriage of Yitzchak and the marriage of
Ya'akov. Yitzchak succeeded in marrying Rivka almost
immediately. For Ya'akov, marrying the girl from the well
was not so easy. He first had to contend with the wiles of
Lavan.
The story is familiar. Rather than have Ya'akov work
for him for free, Lavan generously offers his own "flesh and
bone" a salary (29:14-15). Ya'akov and Lavan agree that
Ya'akov will work for seven years. As compensation he will
receive the hand of his beloved Rachel, Lavan's younger
daughter in marriage (29:18-19). But all does not go as
planned. On the night of the wedding, Lavan switches Leah
for Rachel, replacing his younger daughter with his older
daughter.
The story contains numerous echoes of the events of
Parashat Toldot and constitutes a reversal of many of its
key themes. Before even getting to the switch, let us
consider the original deal. Lavan describes himself as
Ya'akov's brother and immediately puts him to work,
described by the word for service, or slavery, the stem
ayin, bet, dalet (29:15). In place of the prediction of the
prophecy, "ve-rav YA'AVOD tzair", (and the older brother
shall serve the younger brother) (25:23), Rivka's motivation
for arranging the theft of the blessings, Ya'akov finds
himself in the reverse situation. He, the younger clansman
-"brother" - now serves his older clansman - "brother" -
Lavan.
Ironically, this situation has been arranged by Rivka
herself. In an attempt to save Ya'akov from the wrath of
Eisav, his biological brother, Rivka suggests that Ya'akov
seek refuge in the house of Lavan, her brother and Ya'akov's
clan-brother, for a "few days" (27:43-45). These "few days"
turn out to be a lot longer than a few days. In another
example of irony, the Torah uses this exact phrase, "yamim
achadim," in describing Ya'akov's perception of the seven
years of servitude that Ya'akov endured in exchange for the
hand of Rachel (29:20). They passed quickly for him as he
labored fora desired end. But did they pass quickly for
Rivka? In fact, the Torah never depicts Rivka as reuniting
with her beloved son Ya'akov. In sum, not her expectation
for the future of her son, nor her expectation for his
refuge in the house of her brother, nor her expectation for
a quick reunion with her son work out as planned. They are
all contradicted, ironically reversed.
This brings us to Ya'akov, Lavan and Leah. In Parashat
Toldot, in thieving the blessings, Ya'akov takes advantage
of Yitzchak's weak eyes, his darkness and eternal night, to
replace the older child, Eisav, with the younger child,
Ya'akov. Here, in the marriage, Lavan utilizes the darkness
of night to pull a parallel, yet reverse switch on Ya'akov.
He replaces the younger child, Rachel, with the older child,
Leah. Not just the switch is reversed but also Ya'akov's
role. While before, Ya'akov had been the beneficiary of the
younger-older switch, here he is the victim.
A quick look at the ensuing dialogue between Ya'akov
and Lavan the next morning should further strengthen this
line of thinking. Needless to say, Ya'akov was upset.
And it was the morning, and behold, it was Leah: and he
said to Lavan, What have you done to me? Didn't I serve
you for Rachel? Why have you tricked me ("rimitani")?
And Lavan said to him, it can not be done so in OUR
place, to put the younger ahead of the older. (29:25-
26)
Ya'akov describes Lavan's actions as "trickery," utilizing a
word based on the stem "reish," "mem," "aleph." This is the
exact verb stem and meaning used by Yitzchak in explaining
the situation and Ya'akov's action to a disappointed Eisav.
"Your brother has come with trickery ("b'mirma") and taken
your blessings"(27:35). What Ya'akov did onto others has
now been done onto him. In a certain sense, Ya'akov's naive
outrage serves as judge and jury on his own previous
actions.
Lavan's response takes all of this one step further. A
careful reading of Lavan's words reveals something like the
following. Perhaps in your place you switch around the
younger and the older, placing the youth before the first
born. But such is not the way in OUR place, a place of
civilized norms. To put the younger ahead of the older?
Perish the thought!
Does Lavan know what happened back in Canaan? Did
Ya'akov tell him when explaining his presence in Padan Aram
(29:13)? Has he heard it through the grapevine? Or is it
just God arranging Lavan's words for Ya'akov ears? Either
way Ya'akov is subject not only to the reversal of his very
own switch and a taste of his own trickery but also to the
additional humiliation of rebuke from his tormentor, the
moral paragon known as Lavan.
This entire complex of themes: ironic reversal, measure
for measure punishment and rebuke is captured perfectly by
Midrash Tanchuma Yashan. Reading against the grain of the
text, the midrash interprets Ya'akov's accusation of
trickery as directed not against Lavan, but as against Leah.
To fill in the resulting gap, the lack of response by Leah,
it provides us with the conversation on the morning after.
All night she conducted herself as Rachel. When they
stood up in the morning and behold she was Leah he said
to her: "Daughter of a trickster, why did you trick
me?" She replied: "And you, why did you trick your
father when he said to you "Are you my son Eisav?" and
you said to him "I am Eisav your first born" (27:19-
21). And now you ask "Why did you trick me?" And
didn't your father say "your brother has come with
trickery and taken your blessings" (27:35). (Tanchuma
Yashan Vayeitzei 11)
The pot cannot call the kettle black.
IV
The matrix of disappointed expectations, ironic
reversals, suffering, switches, measure for measure
occurrences and rebuke outlined above should force us to
reconsider the classical interpretation of the theft of the
blessings outlined earlier. If in fact, Rivka and Ya'akov
reap a bitter harvest, if in fact Ya'akov receives for
twenty years what he did onto Eisav, can we really maintain
the traditional interpretation? Can Rivka still be viewed as
the heroine of the story? Can Ya'akov be viewed as the
simple and deserving man doing just as he must?
It would seem that rather than linking to the theme of
older-younger switches and divine providence in Sefer
Bereishit, the theft of the blessings connects to an
altogether different pattern in Sefer Bereishit.
In commenting on the inclusion of the first eleven
chapters of Bereishit in the Torah, Ramban (1:1) maintains
that much of the material serves the purpose of establishing
a crucial pattern, the model of sin and exile. After
sinning, Adam is banished from the Garden of Eden.
Similarly, after killing his brother, Kayin is condemned to
a life of wandering, referred to by Kayin as banishment from
upon the face of the earth (4:14). Ramban argues that even
the destruction of the generation of the flood can be viewed
as part of this pattern. They are banished not just from
the Garden of Eden, not just from grounded existence, but
from the world itself. Although, Ramban does not make
explicit reference to the covenant of the pieces, one can
easily add the exile in Egypt to the list of sin-exile
occurrences in the book of Bereishit. Ramban himself
(12:10) claims that the exile constitutes retribution for
Avraham's abandonment of the land and sojourn in Egypt
during a time of famine.
For Ramban, this pattern serves as justification for
the future banishment of the Cananites from the Land of
Israel and as warning to the children of Israel as to the
conditions for remaining in the land. Sin can always lead
to banishment, exile and suffering.
If so, it would seem that the stories of Parashat
Toldot and Vayeitze, the theft of the blessings and the
banishment and exile of Ya'akov to Padan Aram, where he
suffers at the hands of Lavan, dovetail nicely with this
theme. The story of the blessings is not so much part of an
older-younger switching and providence theme but rather part
and parcel of a sin and exile theme. The story should not
be read as teaching the necessity of human initiative and
the requirement of guiding divine providence but rather as a
story of inappropriate activity, of error and sin.
V
Before considering committing to this new
interpretation, we must deal with an apparent logical flaw
in the error and sin approach. As pointed out earlier, we
tend to think of Rivka as the heroine of the story. She
prevents Yitzchak from committing an irreversible and tragic
error - from giving the blessings to the undeserving Eisav,
whom the Torah has already informed us cares little for the
family heritage. He is a man who transgressed the family
tradition by marrying a Canaanite women, thereby creating a
source of bitterness and aggravation to his parents (26:34-
35), a man who "scorned" the rights of the first born and
the family heritage, who sold it for a bowl of soup (25:34).
But if Rivka saves Yitzchak from a tragic error, how can we
view the story as one of mistake and sin? She did the right
thing.
In response, let us examine the assumption underlying
the question. Did Yitzchak in fact intend to pass the
family heritage to Eisav? Let us take a look at the Torah's
description of Yitzchak's parting words to Ya'akov.
Yitzchak "blesses" Ya'akov (28:1):
And Yitzchak called Ya'akov, and blessed him.and said
to him. And God Almighty should bless you and make you
fruitful, and multiply you, and you should become a
multitude of peoples. And he should give you the
blessing of Avraham, to you and your seed with you; to
inherit the land in which you dwell, which God gave to
Avraham. (28:1-4)
Yitzchak explicitly blesses Ya'akov with God's granting to
Ya'akov the "blessing of Avraham." The language of this
blessing closely parallels the language of the blessing
given to Avraham in the covenant of circumcision. There
too, the name of God is "God Almighty" (Kel Shakai) (17:1).
There too the blessing consists of being the father of a
"multitude of nations" (17:4-5), of being "fruitful" (17:6),
and of those children receiving "the land in which you
dwell" (17:8). But if Ya'akov has already stolen the family
has already irreversibly thieved the blessings, why does
Yitzchak now wish that God give the blessings of Avraham, in
both name and content, to Ya'akov?
The content of the blessings stolen by Ya'akov should
help complete the picture.
See the smell of my son, it is like the smell of a
field which God has blessed: therefore God should give
you of the dew of the heaven, and the fatness of the
earth, and plenty of corn and wine. Let peoples serve
you, and nations bow down to you: be lord over your
brethren and let your mother's sons bow down to you:
cursed be those that curse you and blessed be those
that bless you (27:27-29)
As Sforno points out (27:29), here there is no mention of a
multitude of descendents nor of possessing the Land of
Canaan. While the last line, the reference to the power of
blessing and cursing does echo God's first words to Avraham
(12:3), every other standard marker of the covenant between
God and Abraham is absent (see 12:7, 13:15-16, 15:18-21,
17:1-8, 18:18-19, 22:17-18, 26:3-4). The contrast with the
"blessings of Avraham" given to Ya'akov upon his departure
and their reference to the standard content of descendants
and Canaan highlights this point. The stolen blessings, the
"blessings of Eisav," seem to be about economic and
political success, the fat of the land, not necessarily
Canaan, and political power. These are blessings
appropriate for a warrior-hunter destined for future
nationhood. They are in no way the blessings of Avraham nor
necessarily connected to the blessings of Avraham. They are
no more than Yitzchak's personal wishes for his hunter-
warrior son whom he loves. The parting blessing of
Yitzchak, the man of the field, the land and the hunt
(24:63, 25:28, 26:12) for his son, the man of the field, the
land and the hunt (25:27, 25:29, 27:3-4,27); not the
blessings of Avraham.
In addition to the considerations above, the bestowing
of the blessings of Avraham upon Ya'akov at the end of the
parasha and the non-covenantal content of the blessings of
Eisav, I have always thought it highly unlikely that
Yitzchak ever imagined giving the blessings of descendants
and land to Eisav. Not so much due to his certain knowledge
of Eisav's true character, but more so due to his own
psychological connection to the heritage of Avraham. It is
no accident, that in parting from Ya'akov, Yitzchak refers
to "the blessings of Avraham" and wishes that God should
give them to Ya'akov. This is after all how they were given
to Yitzchak, by God (17:15-19, 26:2-5). Moreover, each time
God appeared to him to converse and remind him of the
covenant, God specifically mentions that Yitzchak's status
is due to the action of his father Avraham (26:5,24).
Yitzchak knows his possession of the blessings to be a
consequence of God's decision and knows his blessedness to
result from his father's relation with God. Can such a man
suddenly view himself as the owner of the blessings, to be
passed on to whichever son he so decides? This seems near
impossible.
If so, the final piece of interpreting the theft of the
blessings as part of a sin and exile pattern clicks into
place. Yitzchak never imagined nor intended to pass on the
blessings of Avraham to Eisav. He intends a personal
blessing, a father-son act. Rivka's plan saves nothing, not
the day nor the covenant. Rather it constitutes an error, a
tragic mistake, rebounding through the events and years of
her and her beloved son's lives. The story of the theft of
the blessings is not the story of right initiative, but
exactly the opposite. It is the story of wrong initiative.
Not the story of the necessity of human action for the
realization of divine providence, but the story of the
necessity of human withdrawal and passivity for the
realization of divine providence, the story of trespassing
on the divine role and usurping the prerogative of God.
VI
Before closing I would like to try to connect our two
readings of the theft of the blessings with the characters
of Rivka and Yitzchak. I have argued for the existence of
two distinct interpretations of the story. On the one hand,
we have the traditional interpretation, which views Rivka as
the hero, as someone who rightly understands the need for
human initiative and active participation in the realization
of divine providence in our world. Alternatively, we may
interpret the story as a story of sin and error, a story in
which Rivka plays the role of anti-hero. It is a story of
the tragedy of human initiative, of the tragedy of
interference in the workings out of God's plan and of
consequent punishment. It is a story that points to the
wisdom of restraint rather than the wisdom of action.
On some level these two readings and the values
highlighted by each match up with the characters of Rivka
and Yitzchak. Last week I claimed that God commands Avraham
in three distinct journeys, the journey in search of
nationhood, the journey of religious and ethical activism
and the Akeida, the journey of negation. Throughout, I
argued for identifying Rivka as the possessor of the
character necessary for the first two journeys. She is the
successor of Avraham in her vision, orientation to the
future, conviction, activism and willingness to go beyond
the conventional. But it is Yitzchak who is the successor
of Avraham in his third journey. He possesses the character
of negation, of withdrawal and self-nullification. What
happens when these journeys are not lived in chronological
order but in parallel, in real time? This is the story of
Parashat Toldot. Who is the hero? Is it Rivka and her
activism, initiative, breaking of the norms and steering of
divine providence? Or is it Yitzchak and his negation,
withdrawal and acceptance of the divine will be what it may?
This is, of course, the choice between the two readings
outlined above.
Which reading is correct? I would like to leave the
issue open. After all, the text is amenable to both
interpretations. Perhaps more importantly, taken together
the two readings reflect the problem of being granted free
will on the one hand but yet living in the shadow of a
divine plan on the other. When taken together the two
interpretations represent the problem of the balance between
initiative and withdrawal, between activism and negation, a
tension not amenable to simple resolution - not by Rivka and
Yitzchak, nor by ourselves.
YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH
ALON SHEVUT, GUSH ETZION 90433
Copyright (c) 2001 Yeshivat Har Etzion.
All rights reserved.
*******************************************************************