SO JACOB DREW NEAR TO ISAAC HIS FATHER, AND HE FELT HIM, AND HE SAID, "THE VOICE IS THE VOICE OF JACOB, BUT THE HANDS ARE THE HANDS OF ESAU."

 

The Alternative Scenario

As for Isaac's thinking: it seems to me that he wanted to bless Esau to make him his favorite because [his] game was in his mouth. He wanted to reserve more blessing and success for him than for his brother, as he said you shall be a master over your brothers. He had no intention to bless Jacob at all, because he thought to himself: Jacob will live with Esau and together they will inherit the land given to Abraham, and Abraham's blessing will be realized in both of them, since they are both descendants of Isaac and of the favorite wife. Abraham's blessing will apply to them both of its own accord without his [Isaac's] blessing him [Jacob]. However, it was necessary to bless Esau to give him an advantage over his brother, making him master over him. Even though Esau would be the master over Jacob, Abraham's blessing would be realized in them both, they would both be the blessed of God and they would live together in peace, since he knew that Jacob was an innocent man, dwelling in tents, a tolerant and humble person. That is why in the blessing that he gave Jacob – thinking he was Esau – he made no mention of Abraham's blessing or of the land God gave to Abraham as he did in the end. The blessing which he {Isaac] gave first was specially intended for Esau, but Abraham's blessing applied to them both.

(ShaDaL on Bereisit 27:1)

 

The Wells of Isaac: Diggings and Signs.

Pinchas Leiser

In a dispute over cultural superiority, a denizen of Rome proudly proclaimed to a Jerusalemite, "Did you know that in excavations at Rome they found underground wires?!" "Nu, so what?" The Roman responded in a victorious tone: "It shows that in Rome, 2,000 years ago, they already had the telephone..." The Jerusalemite responded, "And do you know what they found in Jerusalem excavations?" "What?" "Nothing." "So what?" was the Roman's response. "It shows that in Jerusalem, 2,000 years ago, they already had wireless..."

A fascinating field of biblical exegesis and of the philosophy of history is the attempt to learn about the present and future from the past. Yet this area is incredibly complex and filled with problems, so that it sometimes seems that the message gleaned is nourished at least as much by the exegete's world-view as by the reading of the text.

RaMBaN, in his commentary on the Torah, briefly formulates the exegetical principle of "the acts of the forefathers are a sign to the children":

And Abram passed through the land to the place of Shekhem: This important rule, which should be understood in all the following portions dealing with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, was concisely mentioned by our Rabbis (Tanhuma 9): "All that happened to the forefathers is a sign for the children;" therefore the Bible dwells on the story of the journeys and the digging of wells and the rest of the events. Though one might think that these are extraneous matters with no purpose, they all come to tell the future. For whenever something would happen to one of the three forefather-prophets, he would learn from it what had been decreed to happen to his descendants. (RaMBaN Genesis 12:6)

Rabbi Shlomo Efraim of Lontshitz, the author of the Kli Yakar commentary, applies this principle to the story of Isaac's digging of the wells in our weekly portion:

And Isaac's servants dug in the valley, and found there a well of spring water. RaMBaN and Toldot Yitzchak and Menorat Hamaor wrote, "since all that happened to the forefathers was a sign for the children," therefore they found it appropriate to expound the stories of these wells as being about the three Holy Temples that were called wells of spring water: Just as they quarreled about the two wells and called the third Rehovot, so with the First and Second Temples the nations fought against Israel until they destroyed her, and the Third, may it be built speedily in our days, was called Rehovot...

And they did not quarrel over the third well, for the Third Temple will be built by the king Messiah of whom it is said (Isaiah 9:6): for the increase of the realm and for peace without end, for there will be only peace and truth in his time. Thus was it called Rehovot, for then the Lord will expand (yarhiv) their borders. When there is strife or two Hebrews fighting, even in a city as large as Antioch, there is not enough room for them both even in a very great area, the lack of space oppresses them, as is the case even today, due to our sins. The opposite is the case when there is peace among Israel. Even though we multiply and the Land's inhabitants are numerous, nevertheless it is expansive for them and there is no oppressor... Therefore it says for the Lord has made room (yarhiv) for us even though we be shall be fruitful in the land, and its inhabitants will be numerous, nonetheless the land will be expansive before them. Moreover, we know that many left the land during the Second Temple because of conflict caused by the wickedness of its inhabitants. That is why Isaac said that when peace arrives we shall be fruitful in the land for we will not need to leave it. (Kli Yakar Bereishit 26:19)

RaShBaM, in his interpretation of the first verse of the Binding of Isaac (akeda), gives an interesting twist to the idea of a trial and sees in the akeda a sort of punishment meted out to Abraham for having ceded control of Philistia by entering into a covenant with Abimelech:

And it came to pass after these things: Any time it says after these things, it is connected to the previous section... Here too: after {these things, i.e. that] Abraham signed a treaty with Abimelech, obligating Abraham's children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren as well, and gave him seven lambs, God was angry about this, since the land of the Philistines was given to Abraham, and in the book of Joshua, too, the cities of the five Philistine lords are entered in the lottery as included in the borders of Israel, and God had commanded them you shall save alive nothing that breathes. Therefore God tested [nissa] Abraham: he provoked him and caused him anguish, [as we see in other verses where the verb nsh connotes provocation.] It was as if God said, "You were so proud of the son I gave you that you entered a covenant between yourselves and their children. Now go and bring him as a sacrifice and see what good your treaty-signing does."

Similarly I found later in the midrash on Samuel: And the ark of the Lord was in the country of the Philistines seven months. It says [in the story of Abraham and Abimelech], These seven ewe lambs you shall take of my hand. The Holy One, Blessed be He said to him, "You gave him seven lambs, I swear by your life that his children will make seven wars on your children and vanquish them." Alternately, "By your life, his children will kill seven righteous men from among your children: Samson, Hofni, Pinhas, Saul and his three sons." Alternately, "By your life, his sons will destroy seven sanctuaries: the Tabernacle, Gilgal, Nob, Shiloh, Gibeon, and two Temples." Alternately, "Because the Ark will remain in the country of the Philistines seven months." (RaShBaM Bereishit 22:1)

In other words, God is angry with Abraham and therefore provokes him and causes him pain.

Of course the devotees of the Whole Land of Israel in our days heartily enjoy this interpretation of RaShBaM and learn from it that there is a prohibition on signing agreements with Gentiles involving concessions in the Land of Israel, which was divinely promised to us.

Yet it goes without saying that most of our commentators throughout the generations (excepting Hizkuni, who copies RaShBaM's words on this verse) do not hold that the akeda, the final and most difficult of Abraham's trials, was a punishment. Even if we want to expound on the adjoining of the sections of after these things and find a causal connection between this section and the preceding one (according to the exegetical rule invoked by RaShBaM himself), given that these things were not specified, the reader could connect the adjoining of the section of Ishmael's exile to the akeda just as logically, and thereby come to a completely different understanding of the akeda. We will suffice with this comment, given that out purpose here is not a deep understanding of the akeda section, but in examining the idea of an agreement with a Gentile.

In chapter 26, the Torah tells us of Isaac's dwelling in Gerar, in Philistia, with Abimelech. God there repeats his promise to Abraham and tells him, Sojourn in this land, and I will be with you, and will bless you; for to you, and to thy seed, I will give all these countries and I will perform the oath which I swore to Abraham your father (26:3). We read later in this section (verses 15-23) about the breach of this agreement between Abraham and Abimelech by the latter's servants and about the conflict between the shepherds of Gerar and Isaac's shepherds concerning the water in the wells dug by Isaac.

The Torah tells that these wells were stopped up. The author of the Sforno commentary explains the phrase the Philistines had stopped them up: "Since they feared Abimelech's order not to harm Isaac, they stopped up the wells in their hate-filled jealousy." It seems, according to this approach, that the making of peace between Abimelech and Isaac was not to the liking of some Philistines, and these dissatisfied ones were those who broke the agreement.

Verse 22 tells of the other well, over which the shepherds of Isaac and Gerar did not fight, and in verses 28-31 Abimelech and Isaac enter another agreement, following the suggestion of Abimelech. The author of Hizkuni explains: Let us make a covenant with you: even though Abraham and Abimelech already swore for three generations, Abimelech nevertheless wanted to establish a new covenant between them, since he had breached the agreement [both] in the matter of the wells and by sending him away." (Hizkuni, Bereishit 26:28)

The Torah relates that Isaac agreed to renew the covenant, despite its breach in the past, perhaps from awareness that there are ups and downs in any process and from a preference for accord over hostility.

If we examine the above-cited words of the Kli Yakar on these verses, according to the principle of "the acts of the forefathers are a sign to the children," we learn that:

The Third Temple, hinted to by Isaac's third well, Rehovot, will be built only in the days of peace, and expanded borders are largely dependent on the ability of people to live together in peace, with no one clipping the other's wings.

For whatever reason, the signs that the children see in the acts of the forefathers are largely dependent on the values they wish to embrace and pass to the following generations.

Pinchas Leiser, editor of Shabbat Shalom, is a psychologist

 

The Sword Brings Hurban (Destruction)

And I say that the reason for the commandment (But if you make for Me an altar of stones, do not build it out of hewn stones; for by wielding your sword upon them you have profaned them - Shemot 20:22) is that iron is a sword (herev) and it destroys (mahriv) the world and so it is named. Esau, who is hated by the Lord (Malachi 1:3) inherited the sword, for he [Jacob] said to him, by your sword shall you live (Bereishit 27:40), and the sword is his power in heaven and on earth, for in Mars and the bloody constellations the sword shall prevail, and in them its valor shall be seen. Therefore, it will not be brought to the house of the Lord. That is the reason why Scripture explicitly mentions do not build it out of hewn stones, since by wielding any iron [implement] to make them so, you wielded over them your murderous sword which kills many, and have profaned it. That is why there was no iron in the Tabernacle. Although it would have been preferable to make its stakes out of iron, they were made of copper. Similarly, none of the vessels of the Temple were made of iron, except for the knives, since the actual slaughter is not considered part of worship, and scripture only prohibited building with stones hewn with iron tools, because it referred to wielding your sword upon them, and included in this is do not wield an iron tool over them (Devarim 27:5).

(RaMBaN Shemot 20:22)

 

By your sword shall you live - Since his [Esau's] occupation was that of an outdoors man who hunts in the wilderness and in ruined and desolate places, it was appropriate for him to receive the blessing of the sword, and the planet Mars which is associated with the spillers of blood has great power over destruction and the sword, so Esau's seed inherited the sword. His sar [patron angel] is the killing power with whom the sword is associated. For this reason the Torah prohibited the sword and iron in the Tabernacle and Temple. In regard to the Tabernacle, it is written, gold, and silver, and copper (Shemot 25) and there was no iron there what-so-ever. In regard to the Temple, it is written no hammer or ax or iron tool was heard in the house while it was being built (I Kings, 6), since iron is for swords and it destroys the world, while the Temple preserves the world. And you shall serve your brother - when Jacob is worthy. But when you grow restive - when he is not worthy - you shall break his yoke from your neck. And that is the intention of Onkelos when he translated it, "When his children transgress the words of the Torah [you shall break his yoke...]."

(Rabeinu Behayei 27: 40)

 

God Shows No Favoritism

Rabbi Hanin said: Whoever says that the Holy One, Blessed Be He, is lenient (with the righteous) – may his intestines be torn out. The Holy One is forbearing, but eventually he collects his debts. Know that this is so, for Esau cried one scream because of Jacob, as is written, He cried out with a very great and bitter cry. And where was he repaid? In Shushan, as is written, And he (Mordecai) cried out with a great and bitter cry.

(Esther Rabba 8)

 

In Esther Rabba they (the Sages) said that our father Jacob was punished for causing Esau to "cry a very great and bitter cry", resulting in Mordecai's crying "a great and bitter cry". There seems to be a difficulty – why was he (Jacob) punished for Esau's scream more severely than was (pained) his righteous father Isaac, who "trembled with very great trembling/? [Trans. note – the adjective "bitter" appears only with reference to Esau's cry, not to Isaac's trembling]. . It seems to me: Jacob performed his transgression in good faith (lishma). He derived no pleasure from Isaac's trembling; he was certainly sorry about that, but he was coerced (by his mother Rebecca) to sin. This was not the case with regards to Esau's cry; he was happy about that, and therefore he was punished, because he had brought it about by the sin of lying, and one may not derive any pleasure from that.

(NetTziV, Harhev Davar, Bereishit 27: 9, note 1)

 

And God Seeks the Pursued (Kohellet 3): Rav Huna said in the name of Rav Yosef: and God seeks the pursued – always. You find a tzaddik [righteous person] pursuing a tzaddik, and God seeks the pursued; a wicked person pursues a tzaddik, - and God seeks the pursued; the wicked pursues the wicked, - and God seeks the pursued; even when the tzaddik pursues the wicked – in any event: and God seeks the pursued.

(Vayikra Rabba, 27)

 

A Blessing Cannot be Inherited. Rather, a Person Must be Worthy of it.

The Lord blessed Abraham that his seed would be chosen to be the nation that He chose as a heritage, so that God would be their Lord and place His presence within them, and they would inherit the land and be holy to their God. Abraham did not pass this blessing on to Isaac, because it is not within human power to bequeath it to one's children, because it depends on the sanctity of the people and the goodness of their actions, Only after the death of Abraham did God give this blessing to Isaac, and Isaac did not intend to bless his sons with the blessing of Abraham, because he knew that his blessing would not be effective, for only someone ready for it can be blessed that way by God.

(Malbim on Bereishit 27,1).

 

 

 

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $700
• English edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel, checks made out to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made through:

New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD, Great Britain

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS UNDER $100.

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project.

 

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

5,000 copies of a 4 page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom's educational forums draw people of different backgrounds, secular and religious, who are keen to deepen their Jewish knowledge and to hear an alternative religious standpoint on the subjects of peace and social issues.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom fills an ideological vacuum in Israel's society. Committed both to Jewish tradition and observance, and to the furthering of peace and coexistence, the movement is in a unique position to engage in dialogue with the secular left and the religious right, with Israeli Arabs and with Palestinians.