Dear friends
There are many reasons I love our traditions and this week’s Parshat Toldot is one. Right at the onset we are told three distinct stories about Yaakov (Jacob), none of which are particularly flattering.
The first story involves the very human experience of Yaakov’s mum’s – Rivkah (Rebecca) – difficult pregnancy which was driving her mad. She went and enquired with the local Shaman and apparently he knew a thing or two about obstetrics because he explained to her she was carrying twins. Apparently these brothers weren’t waiting to compete on the outside but began their tumultuous rivalry within the womb. This culminated in a race at birth with Esav just managing to come out first with Yaakov holding onto the heel of his brother. In fact the name Yaakov in Hebrew has the root of ‘akev’ which means heel, immortalising this fierce competition.
It is important to understand who Yaakov is to the Jewish People. It would not be an overstatement to claim that every reference we have to our culture and religion, originates with him. Yaakov at a later stage has his name changed to Israel, making him the ‘father’ of the Children of Israel. The land of Israel and the People of Israel are thus named after him. The twelve tribes of Israel begin and are named after his children. Even the term Jewish, Yehudi in Hebrew, comes from Judah, who is the son of Yaakov.
To therefore have an origin story about our most important ancestor, the one from whom we forged our identity, in which he comes out second best of two, is surprising to say the least. It runs contrary to all other human mythologies whereby the ancestors are practically gods who absolutely dominate their rivals.
But it gets even more fascinating. In the second story Yaakov and Esav are grown men. Esav is a hunter and Yaakov is a homebody. As most hunts in nature are unsuccessful, Esav comes back from the hunt exhausted and totally famished. It so happens that Yaakov was simmering an aromatic red lentil stew at exactly that moment of Esav’s entry. This precipitates Esav begging of his brother to ‘funnel down my throat from this redness’.
Instead of following the example of his grandfather Avraham who runs to throw a massive feast for three hungry absolute strangers, Yaakov was like ‘sure, you can have some. On one condition, that in exchange you sell your birthright to me’.
Unlike the cuteness of the previous story, here Yaakov’s behaviour is less-than-perfect by any measure. It is indeed questionable whether the deal would even be legally upheld since there was duress. Ultimately that would come down to how starving Esav really was. If he hadn’t eaten for a week one would think that he could plead temporary insanity and extenuating circumstances to get out of the deal. The extremely unequal nature of the deal would be of great support in his defence.
Putting aside the legalities though, from a moral standpoint, we are repulsed. How could someone treat a stranger like that, let alone one’s own brother?! Surely, the immediate primal physical need of another human would touch us all in a way that we would do what we can to alleviate it, especially when we can do so with so little effort. Without asking of the needy to sign their house or car away for a mere bit of food! Clearly Yaakov was taking advantage of the vulnerable making him look extremely opportunistic at best.
Just as we think it can’t get any worse, the third story is a full-blown conspiracy between Yaakov and his mother to deceive his dad Yitzchak and cheat Esav in the most direct way. Yitzchak had told his son Esav to go out and hunt some game and prepare it ‘in the way you know I like it, so that I will bless you before my death’. To us blessings don’t mean much more than good vibes, to them though blessings were everything especially from a patriarch who was seen as divinely ordained. And blessings once given, cannot be rescinded.
Esav goes on his merry way anticipating the great blessings he will receive. Meanwhile, Rivkah – his mother – had heard the entire exchange and ran to get Yaakov to tell him of her scheme to steal the blessings. Rivkah told Yaakov that she will prepare the dish exactly as she knew Yitzchak loved it, and Yaakov will then deliver it in exchange for the blessings. Important to note that Yitzchak was blind by this point, which is why the plot could have any chance of success.
Yaakov doesn’t object to the deceit of a blind father, his only concern was that he will be discovered. ‘What will happen if my father feels me up and recognise that I am not Esav?’ You see, Esav was very hairy, Yaakov was not. Rivkah said not to worry, she will put the skins of the dead animal on Yaakov so that he will feel hairy when his father touches him who will then bless him thinking Yaakov is indeed his firstborn son Esav.
All goes exactly to plan. Though Yitzchak was a bit suspicious even commenting ‘the voice is the voice of Yaakov but the hands are the hands of Esav’, Yaakov does get the blessings which would have him reign supreme. Esav, comes in at some point with the dish in hand and very quickly he and Yitzchak work out the deception. Esav howls begging his father to bless him as well, which he does with a second rate blessing. Esav then vows to kill Yaakov, leading Yaakov to run away for over twenty years.
Whilst in the previous story there might have been some argument of supply and demand and business is business, this story is pure fraud. Premeditated, unadulterated fraud.
What is the moral of the story and why have I spent so long recounting it at a point in time when the world is burning and we are facing an existential crisis on multiple fronts?
To me the answer is clear and simple. Jewish culture and religion is one which directs us to look at our past with clear eyes. Our greatest heroes, the very people responsible for our physical existence as well as our spiritual identity, can also be people with severe character flaws. There is no other way to read the above stories other than Yaakov was a bit of a scoundrel.
Whilst he had many extraordinary traits and later evolved to be the father of a great family then becoming a great people, this doesn’t stop the Torah from telling us the origins of things the way they were. In the rivalry between Yaakov and Esav, the Torah gives a fair account of Esav’s justified grievances against Yaakov. Even though Yaakov was the father of the Jewish People, the main concern of the Torah, the Torah does not whitewash the history.
This attitude has led many Jews and Israelis over a long time to recognise that even though we believe wholeheartedly in the truth and right of the Zionist dream to create a Jewish country in our ancestral homeland, this doesn’t mean that everything our heroes did along the way was perfect and beyond reproach.
And so the momentum did rightly build toward a recognition of the legitimacy of the Palestinian narrative culminating in the Oslo Accords and the subsequent peace initiatives.
Despite all the above, today in the war of Israel against Hamas I don’t think there is any room for seeing the ‘other side’. Again, this is not because the Zionists always behaved with the highest morality. Nor is it because justice for Palestinians isn’t a fair cause. Rather, it is because Hamas represents nothing but death and destruction to all involved. It is a nihilistic political movement shrouded in religious fundamentalism. It cares nothing for its victims. Not for the innocent babies they barbarically kill in the most sadistic manner, nor the Palestinian people whom they see as 2 million potential human sacrifices.
I understand and feel very strongly the tragedy happening in Gaza with all the dead innocent children especially. What I don’t understand is why the critique has been entirely aimed at Israel. Where is the outrage against Hamas for creating this scenario? With the October 7 massacre of course but also the 17 years it had to build something for the Palestinian people in Gaza which they used entirely toward tunnel building under the most vulnerable civilian institutions!
Where is the outrage against Iran for funding these beasts? Or ironic sarcasm aimed at Turkey and Syria for their lectures on human rights?
The fact is that all the arguments against Israel are ludicrous in this war. Genocide? Really? How come there are still 2.2 million Palestinians left, the vast majority children?
The greatest proof for me that the arguments are not made in good faith is because these same people making these arguments with frothing at the mouth in righteous indignation have never ever before made it against anybody else. What an extraordinary reality! Israel is the worst country in the world in the last 75 years.
But I do want to humour one more piece of nonsense. The argument from proportionality, which I find extremely intellectually dishonest.
Firstly, what should Israel do, respond in kind to the massacre?! Really?!
Secondly, since when is proportionality an element of war? You go to war to vanquish the enemy not to go back to square one, unless you’re Israel of course in which case you’re never allowed to deal with your enemies who want your annihilation in a decisive way.
Thirdly, since when is the number of dead bodies the calculus of right and wrong. Once in a while in history when the good guys do win, they do so by inflicting disproportionate casualties on the other side. In this case of course the civilians are hurt directly as a result of how Hamas has spent close to two decades embedding itself in the civilian infrastructure and yes using the Palestinian population as human sacrifices.
Lastly, I want to ask these same people who demand proportionality from Israel where they were in 2011 when Israel was forced to hand over 1,100 Palestinian terrorists in exchange for one Israeli soldier who was kidnapped 5 years before? Did they think that was a fair deal? Do they know that amongst those prisoners given back was Yahya Sinwar who was the mastermind for October 7 massacres? Or does proportionality only work in the one direction?
I’m honestly done listening to all the anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish protests out there. The new low of having schools get involved was particularly infuriating. This Parsha goes a long way in reminding us that we have no problem with legitimate debate and criticising our most sacred heroes. What we won’t put up with is hatred masked in righteousness.
Shabbat shalom