ייִדישער מחשבֿה אויף בראשית 25:11

At the creation, we find no evidence that birthright was part of the rules guiding the affairs of man. Proof lies in the random order the names of Noach's sons are referred to on different occasions. This was changed when Abraham appeared on the stage of history. His descendants were to play a leading role due to their being descendants of Abraham. In effect G-d had said, "Until now I have bestowed blessings, henceforth I grant Abraham the authority to bestow and direct blessings" (Genesis 12,3). Abraham debated with himself if he were to bestow this power to bless on others. Since he was not certain that he might help weeds to sprout (promote the power of wicked people), if he took it upon himself to transfer this power to bless, he decided to leave well enough alone (Bereshit Rabbah 61). He waited for G-d to make His will known in the matter. G-d did bless his son Isaac (gave him the power to bestow blessings). Since Abraham had two first born sons, he would have had to bestow the blessing (power to bless) on both of them. He was afraid to err; on the other hand, the trait of "chessed," kindness, for which he was famed would not allow him to deprive Ishmael of a share in favor of Isaac. This in spite of the fact that he knew that his descendants would be known primarily through Isaac. Therefore, considering himself as the manager of the Almighty's orchard, he decided to leave this decision to the owner of the orchard. After Abraham's death, the owner chose Isaac, and thus we come to point two in our parable. When twins were born to Isaac, the older of whom exhibited signs of unfitness, problem three in our parable, this had to be dealt with. Isaac, true to his characteristic of pachad, din, i.e. justice, which our sages have credited him with, did not dare deviate from the principle of transferring power in accordance with birthright. When Jacob says some time later that "the One whom Isaac feared was on my side" (Genesis 31,42), this grants us an insight into the matter. An examination of all the instances in which a direct relationship or communication between G-d and Isaac is described reveals that the term used for "G-d" is invariably elokim, i.e. the attribute of justice. The only exception is the instance when G-d tells Abraham that Isaac is not to be slaughtered after all. This latter instance which taught Abraham that rachamim, mercy is one of G-d’s attributes, is the only time when this factor emerges as playing a role in the relationship between G-d and Isaac. It is understandable then that Isaac of all people would not deviate from the pattern of nobility of birth decreed from above. Isaac's own position as Abraham's heir was due to this very system. Add to this that Isaac personally had not observed any misconduct in Esau, and it becomes clear why he chose Esau to bestow the blessing on. Jacob himself had been very careful never to tell his father of the sale of the birthright, since he had kept hoping that he would secure his father's blessing by virtue of his superior moral conduct, plus the influence of his mother. He did not want to benefit by exposing his brother's unworthiness. This trait of Jacob was very laudable. Leviticus 25,36 tells us, "Your brother shall live alongside you." Our sages explain that this wording teaches that one's own life takes precedence over that of one's fellow man in a situation where only one of the two lives can be saved. If the object of one's quest for Divine help is personality growth rather than the acquisition of worldly goods, then competing for the attainment of that goal is permissible. Aristotle also states in his Ethics that self-love, when its objective is perfection of self, is virtuous. Our sages, when describing jealousy as a negative trait, do approve of jealousy when it involves envying scholars who know more (Baba Batra 25). The same idea is reflected in Bereshit Rabbah 71 in connection with Rachel's jealousy of her sister Leah (Genesis 30,1). She envied Leah her good deeds. This is why our sages can consider that kind of jealousy a positive quality. On the other hand, "good" character traits employed for a base purpose are viewed as a negative quality (compare Chapter 27 on Dinah). Our problem is to determine whether jealousy under the circumstances described is permitted even when the attainment of one's own purpose involves something detrimental to one's competitor. Consider the definition by our sages of the commandment "Love your fellow man like yourself." The Talmud Shabbat 31 explains this to mean " do not do to others that which is hateful to yourself." Aristotle defines it in a similar vein. In other words, we should want for our fellow man what we want for ourselves. We certainly do not need to want for our fellow man what he wants for himself. This is especially so, when our fellow man is wicked or a criminal. In Psalms 139,21, David expresses it in these words: "Must I not hate those who hate You O Lord, and quarrel with those who rise up against You?" Clearly the word "fellow man" referred to in the Torah means someone sharing the same objectives in life that we ourselves believe in. Since Jacob's motivations corresponded to the ones stipulated by our sages, the verse we quoted from Psalms may be applied to him. Having established this point, we return to item four in our parable. The problem is how to restore the position of leadership to those qualified for it. It does not suffice to deny G-d’s special blessings to the undeserving, rather action is needed to channel those blessings to those who deserve them. When Jacob blessed his grandsons prior to his death, he reversed his hands to ensure that Ephrayim would be the recipient of the greater blessing. Er, the firstborn son of Yehudah, is described as unfit, unworthy. Peretz and Zerach respectively, are not treated according to what the order of their birth would call for. Reuben, Jacob's firstborn, is not accorded the privileges his birthright calls for. David was not Yishai's firstborn, neither was Solomon the senior of the surviving sons of David when he was assured that he would be his father's successor. To prove that birthright as an automatic claim to the succession was not practiced at the time of the Exodus, see Numbers 3,3. G-d says, "The day I smote all the firstborn of Egypt, I established an exclusive claim on all the firstborn of Israel." Obviously, if succession by birthright had been the norm at that time, there would have been no need for G-d to underline that only from that day on would G-d claim the firstborn of Israel as especially beholden to Him. We see then that the practice of succession by birthright had been discontinued at some time, only to be re-introduced at the time of the Exodus. Later, after the episode of the golden calf, when this method of succession had again been found unreliable, the privileges of that group were transferred to the tribe of Levi which had proved its worthiness. This then is the fifth rule that we learned from our parable. Now we understand what the Midrash quoted at the beginning of our chapter had in mind. Since Jacob may well have been aware that the privileges of the firstborn would be abolished once the tabernacle was to be erected, why did he risk his life merely in order to hasten that event? The question is even more justified when we consider that Jacob derived no practical advantage from all his machinations. There is no mention of Jacob ever having offered sacrifices in his capacity as firstborn, and if he had done so, the fact would no doubt have come to the attention of his father. His father could not then have been surprised when he heard from Esau some forty-eight years later, that the latter had traded away his birthright. The Midrash wishes us to know that if Jacob's actions had been motivated by materialistic considerations, this would have been most dishonorable; since he was guided by the desire to secure for himself a higher spiritual level, however, such purpose was laudable. Jacob was aware that the heter bamot, permission to erect altars for G-d wherever one wanted, in order to draw down G-d’s blessing, could lead to grievous abuse if the excercise of the priestly functions was left in the hands of the unworthy. Such abuse would lead to G-d’s blessings being channelled to those who were undeserving, something that could not be pleasing in the eyes of G-d. Therefore, he hastened to restore the source of blessing to those who were fit for it for as long as the condition "wherever I allow My name to be mentioned, I will come and grant My blessing," existed (Exodus 20,24). He realized that at a later stage a central site for the residence of the shechinah, Divine Presence, would be established, and that then the function of priesthood would be performed only in that central place (tabernacle or temple) and only by priests who had to meet exacting criteria of physical and moral fitness.

(1) "It happened when Isaac had become old, and his eyesight weakened from seeing," describes a process not only related to physical eyesight. Achievement of a person's maximal spiritual power is closely related to his physical state, and the proper functioning of all his senses. Of all senses, eyesight is so important that the Bible frequently equates the ability to know and comprehend with the ability to see (I saw them in my heart,” Kohelet 2; "Man cannot see Me, " Exodus 33; “I saw the Lord," Isaiah 6). In a lesser degree we find this applied to the sense of hearing, i.e. "Hear O Israel" (Deut 6). In a still lesser degree the sense of smell serves as a medium for comprehension and perceptions of the mind. "From afar he can smell war." (Job 39,25) "He lets him smell the fear of the Lord." (Isaiah 11) The foregoing leads our sages to state in Sanhedrin 93 that there is substance to smell (though it is not tangible). The sense of taste is ranked still lower among the list of our senses (see commentary on the tree of knowledge in Chapters Seven and Nine), but even it can confer on people perceptions of the true state of affairs. At the lowest rung of the ladder of our senses, re their usefulness as a means of perception, is the sense of touch. The knowledge conveyed by it, is the most unreliable of all our five senses. For that reason, we find that he who relies on it is considered a fool, "You will be groping in the dark at noon as the blind gropes in the dark" (Deut 28,29). Even Aristotle points out that reliance on one's senses cannot be considered sinful except reliance on one's sense of touch. When man's sense of sight functions at optimal efficiency, it hardly ever deceives him, even while his other senses do not function at their respective best. G-d presumably withdrew good eyesight from Isaac at this time to enable him to make the error necessary to prevent Esau from receiving this blessing. The story illustrates the length to which Isaac went to compensate for his failing eyesight by employing all his other senses. Jacob, on the other hand, made every effort to neutralize the powers of perception of these senses of Isaac. Despite Isaac's failing eyesight, he was not altogether blind to Esau's behavior and his unworthiness of the blessing that he as the elder brother should be the recipient of. Therefore, Isaac instructed Esau to perform a mitzvah as a result of which he would qualify for the blessings Isaac had in mind. The reason Isaac lists several activities related to hunting, is to make the performance of each activity the fulfilment of a separate mitzvah of "honor your father." Even the hunted animal itself will be considered like a sacrifice, seeing it had been killed as an act of obedience to a father's command. The reason Isaac added, "so that my soul can bless you," was to explain that only this would give him the right to bestow his blessing on Esau. (2) The addition of the words "before I die," was to let Esau know that unlike Isaac himself who had received the blessing of Abraham by G-d after the death of his father, Esau would not receive it unless it was given to him by his father. For that reason, Isaac did not add the words "before G-d" when he offered the blessing. After all, Esau would receive the blessing only by reason of the power to bless which had been bestowed on his father Isaac, not because he had inherent merit entitling him to the blessing. That, too, is the reason he introduced the blessing with the words, "May the Lord grant you." Isaac knew full well that, so far, he did not have heaven's approval for what he was about to do. When Jacob appeared on the scene, and Isaac smelled him, he could not understand that the odor seemed to be the one associated with people blessed by G-d. (4) The exclamation "Behold the odor of my son" must be understood as an expression of wonderment. This then prompted the "May the Lord grant you" as a prayer which Isaac hoped would lead to a confirmation of his assessment of the situation. Because he had felt uncomfortable about what he was going to do, he had not confided in either Rebecca or Jacob; he was not aware that he had been overheard. The mention of delicacies "which I have loved" is in fact a reference to his son Esau "whom I have loved." The fact that Rebecca "overheard" as distinct from "heard" must be mentioned. Had Isaac thought that she had "heard" him, he would never have given Jacob the benefit of the doubt, since he would have concluded that Rebecca had conspired with Jacob in the duplicity. The Torah stating that "Esau went into the field to hunt," is to alert the reader to Esau's total insensitivity to all the considerations which had motivated Isaac. Else, the Torah would have merely written "he did so," to indicate that Esau had tuned in to his father's wavelength. When Rebecca told Jacob what she had overheard, she was at pains not to let Jacob know that the blessing would be contingent on the one who would bring the food, otherwise Jacob would have considered the whole charade as completely futile. When she added that Isaac had said "I will bless before the Lord," she implied that the blessing was connected to the recipient's merit. Thus she encouraged Jacob to feel that his lifestyle up to that point gave him an advantage in his efforts to obtain the blessing. (3) Though aware that his voice was different from that of his brother, Jacob thought that he could imitate it sufficiently well to pass his father's inspection. However, he was far from certain that he could escape detection if the touch test would be applied. Isaac's sense of taste was neutralized by the food being prepared in the manner he was known to like. The goatskins neutralized his sense of touch.

"Abraham returned to his servants, they arose, and walked together to Be'er Sheva..." (Gen. 22:19)  Where did Isaac go? He went to Be'er Lachai Ro'i, as it says "Isaac had just come back from the vicinity of Beer-lahai-roi, for he was settled in the region of the Negeb." (Gen.24:62)  Isaac went and fled fraught about his father, his mother, and his God.  How did it happen that he was bound, that they saw fit to do it, and why do it to him.  He went to the wilderness, to a place where no man passed or dwelled.  They said, "no man," but a woman did pass there, and it was Hagar - Be'er Lachai Ro'i (the well of life's shepherd) is Hagar's well.  Isaac stood at the well until he remembered Ishmael who had played with him when he was a baby.  He remembered Hagar who had walked away with a jug of water on her shoulder.  Isaac sat there with Hagar and Ishmael, cried with and shared anger with them for many days.  One day, he stood at the well opening and behold, the living God saw him, the living God heard his voice in the moment, and Isaac was comforted.  He arose, took Hagar, and brought her back to his father, as it says, "Abraham too another wife, and her name was Keturah." (Genesis 25:1) Keturah is Hagar whose cries rose like the smoke (ketoret) on the altar. He also arose and took Ishmael and returned him to his father, as it says, "His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him" (Gen. 25:9) "He shall reconcile parents with children and children with their parents" (Malachi 3:24). Afterwards, Isaac returned to that welland settled there, as it says "After the death of Abraham, God blessed his son Isaac. And Isaac settled near Beer-lahai-roi."(Genesis 25:11)  This is why it is said about him that he re-dug old wells and brought out of them living water.