Friday, November 12, 2004

Dvar Torah for Young Members Shabbat

Tonight I’m holding a Young Members Shabbat dinner at my Shul for members in their 20’s and 30’s. It’s the second one we’ve done. I’ll be delivering a Dvar Torah. It’s based on the one I gave (and wrote about) last year when I hosted a Shabbat Dinner at home for my friends. Here it is…

This week we read Parashat Toldot. The portion is book ended by two stories that, on the surface, seem to portray Jacob taking advantage of others, an activity that is unbecoming of our Forefathers. We will see that when we delve deeper, not only is he not taking advantage of anyone, he is actually acting in a way that ensures the future of his people.

In the first account, we read “Now Jacob cooked a pottage, and Esau came from the field, and he was faint. And Esau said to Jacob, "Pour into [me] some of this red, red [pottage], for I am faint"; he was therefore named Edom. And Jacob said, "Sell me as of this day your birthright." Esau replied, "Behold, I am going to die; so why do I need this birthright?" And Jacob said, "Swear to me as of this day"; so he swore to him, and he sold his birthright to Jacob. And Jacob gave Esau bread and a pottage of lentils, and he ate and drank and arose and left, and Esau despised the birthright.”

The simple reading suggests that Esau was out hunting and came to Jacob “starving to death” and asked for some of the lentil soup that Jacob was making. Jacob sees an opportunity to get the birthright that usually goes to the firstborn, so he tells Esau that he will give him the soup in exchange for the birthright. Esau says “I’m starving to death here, what do I need a birthright for, give me the soup.” And the deal is made.

When studying a passage of Torah, there are always multiple levels of meaning to the text. The first level is to look at the straight reading of the text. At this level we have to ask a legal question; if Esau was starving to death, how can he enter into a contract? The key to understanding this is to remember the first fule of Torah study, the Torah is very stingy with words. Every word is there for a reason, and every word that is left out is left out for a reason. So here we have a deal to exchange a birthright for some soup, but then we read “And Jacob gave Esau bread and a pottage of lentils”, where did the bread come from? Surely the Torah doesn’t record every time someone eats bread with a meal, why record it here?

The bread is to resolve the legal dilemma. After agreeing to the deal, Jacob gives Esau some bread to satisfy his hunger. Then before giving the soup to seal the deal he asks Esau if he is sure, Esau agrees and the deal is done.

But on a deeper level, what’s really going on here?

Because of the division of the weekly readings, we loose some of the context of this episode. If we remember back to last week, the end of the parasha records the death of Abraham. This story immediately follows – this is all happening on the day of Abraham’s funeral. The lentil soup Jacob was making was the traditional food of mourning. Esau, with all his faults, was still a good person inside (story of his head), he was just confronted with the death of the greatest person he knew, when that happens, you often confront your own mortality. When he says “what do I need this birthright for, I’m going to die”, he wasn’t talking about an immediate death, he was talking generally. Esau’s live philosophy was “Eat, drink, for tomorrow we die” - a denial of the afterlife. The birthright is a spiritual blessing one that would not benefit him in his lifetime, but follow him for all eternity, what use does Esau have for that – he was interested in material goods. Going even deeper, Esau knew that the role of the first born was to be the family’s emissary in the Temple. The temple service required complete concentration – if your thoughts wavered for even a second, you would die on the spot. (That’s why there were so many High Priests in the Second Temple – they were never of good character and kept dieing on us.) Esau knew that if he (and his kin) was the family’s representative in the temple, he would not be able to do the job and would die. What does he need that tzuris for? What Esau was saying is that he has no use of the birthright; in fact he despises it and would happily sell it for even the smallest material gain (i.e. some pottage). Jacob knew that such a person could not carry on the mission of Abraham; such a person should not get the blessing of the firstborn.

Skip ahead to the end of the Parasha, and we come to the famous story of Jacob fooling Isaac into giving him the blessing meant for Esau. The simple reading is that Isaac wants to give a blessing to Esau, but Rebecca wants it to go to Jacob. Then Jacob and Rebecca conspire to take advantage of a blind, old Isaac and trick him into giving the blessing to Jacob. But this is Isaac we’re talking about, it’s hard to imagine being able to trick him.

The general understanding is that the blessing being fought over is the blessing of Abraham, to continue his mission. But let’s look at the blessing that are actually given. The text records two blessings; the first was intended for Esau (but went to Jacob), and the second was intended for (and went to) Jacob. The first blessing was: “And may the Lord give you of the dew of the heavens and [of] the fatness of the earth and an abundance of corn and wine. Nations shall serve you and kingdoms shall bow down to you; you shall be a master over your brothers, and your mother's sons shall bow down to you. Those who curse you shall be cursed, and those who bless you shall be blessed."

The second blessing was: “may the Almighty God bless you and make you fruitful and multiply you, and you shall become an assembly of peoples. And may He give you the blessing of Abraham, to you and to your seed with you, that you may inherit the land of your sojourning, which God gave to Abraham."

So we see that Isaac wanted to give Esau the blessing of physical strength, and give Jacob the blessing of spiritual strength. Rebecca wanted both to go to Jacob.

Isaac knew all along that Jacob was the one to carry on the mission of Abraham, but that mission would take more than just spirit, it would take strength. Isaac was afraid that if he would give Jacob the physical blessing it would corrupt his pure spirit. So Isaac’s plan was to give Esau the physical blessing and Jacob the spiritual one; they would work together to change the world. Rebecca knew that as long as Jacob was dependant on Esau, the mission would never get completed.

When Jacob comes before Isaac pretending to be Esau, he doesn’t fool his father; Isaac knows what’s going on. Isaac says “The voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau.” These are not the words of a confused old man. Voice represents the soul, the intellect, this was Jacob’s forte. Hand represent physicality, this was Esau’s strength. By taking it upon himself and acting to get both blessings, Jacob showed Isaac that he had both the spirit and the physical will to carry out Abraham’s mission. He didn’t need Esau. So Isaac decided then that his wife was right all along and gave both blessing to Jacob. He would be blessed with both the spirit needed to change the world, and the physical assets to do it.

A mission that we all inherit and are responsible for carrying out.

Shabbat Shalom.

Sunday, November 07, 2004

Does G-d change his mind?

At Shabbas Dinner last week, my brother posed a very good question. While reading Lech Lecha a few weeks ago, he read that G-d promised Abraham that Isaac would be made into a great nation; this promise was repeated in the next parashat when Sarah told Abraham to send Ishmael away. Why then, when G-d told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, did Abraham not know it was a bluff? Why would Abraham think that G-d would go back on his word to make Isaac a great nation?

So I did some research, and here’s the response I emailed him (and posted to his blog, where he first posed the question)…

This is one of those questions that jump out at you, which leads many people have tried to answer it. The most common answer is similar to the one given above; even if Abraham had sacrificed Isaac, continuing Abraham’s linage through Isaac anyway would hardly be the greatest miracle in the Torah.

Such an explanation seems to be counter to the Jewish practice of “not relying on miracles”. Torah commentators do not like to resolve apparent conflict by saying the G-d would perform a miracle to resolve things.

So I did some more looking, and I can across an interesting Dvar Torah from a few years ago by one of my favourate Rabbi’s, Rabbi Ari Kahn. The full article can be found here, but I’ll summarize the key points.

In typical Jewish fashion, we’ll answer a question with a question. Before we can address this issue, we need to understand what Abraham’s test was in this story. Abraham was known for his kindness and for his love of G-d. His credo was “I’m willing to live, and if necessary die, for the reality of G-d”. There was no doubt in anyones mind (including G-d’s) that he would do anything that G-d asked of him. If he could do it so willingly, what then was the test, what then was the challenge?

Rabbi Kahn postulates, “Perhaps Abraham's challenge lay in the fact that he had previously been told that Isaac would be his spiritual heir. If Isaac would die, he could not inherit Abraham's legacy, he could not lead. More importantly, Isaac's death would indicate that the word of God could not be trusted.”

Rabbi Kahn continues,
    “What God was asking of Abraham was not merely to sacrifice his son Isaac, but to sacrifice his own life's meaning. We can clearly appreciate that had the test been to entertain 50, 100 or 200 guests for dinner, Abraham would have risen to the challenge heroically, with a smile on his face and gladness in his heart. That would not have been a challenge. That would have fit within Abraham's world view as an act of kindness. Instead, God asked Abraham to perform the act which is the very antithesis of kindness, to kill his son. This may be the most difficult aspect of the story of the binding of Isaac. With one blow of the sword Abraham would be conceding to all his pagan neighbors that his mission had come to an end, and that instead of inspiring them to embrace his world-view, he was throwing in the towel and accepting their twisted rites and rituals. His life's meaning would perish along with Isaac.

    Only when we understand that the greatness of Abraham was his kindness, are we able to appreciate the significance of this test. The first step toward religious development is taking one's capabilities, one's natural gifts, and utilizing them for a divine mission. What God wanted Abraham to gain from this challenge was the appreciation that man can go beyond his natural tendencies and skills. Therefore God calls upon Abraham to perform an act which is antithetical ' the complete opposite ' of his natural instinct.”

So we see (as we often do when we really study a Torah portion) that the seeming conflict that Ian raised is actually the main point of the passage. It’s this very conflict that G-d was using as a lesson for Abraham and for all who follow.