Vayeshev:  Ruthless. 

This is a parsha of the fight for ascendancy. Who would rule? Who is the favorite?What rights are conferred by acts that are declared emancipatory?¹

Jacob has conferred a uniquely privileged position of  leadership upon Joseph, marked by the coat of many colors.  When Joseph relates his dreams, the envy and hatred precede the information. Joseph tells his brothers that he had a dream, and they already hate him more.  When they hear the content of his dreams of  subjugation,  the hatred, that was already present, is justified. The hatred of envy precedes the rational justification.  When Cain killed Abel, he just wanted to talk with him..

וַיֹּ֥אמֶר קַ֖יִן אֶל־הֶ֣בֶל אָחִ֑יו וַֽיְהִי֙ בִּהְיוֹתָ֣ם בַּשָּׂדֶ֔ה וַיָּ֥קָם קַ֛יִן אֶל־הֶ֥בֶל אָחִ֖יו וַיַּהַרְגֵֽהוּ׃

Cain said to his brother Abel … and when they were in the field, Cain set upon his brother Abel and killed him.

The kindness was gone, talk could not dissuade the murder of Hevel, nor the abuse of Joseph. 

Joseph was thrown into a pit.  The pit is a character  in the parsha.  Jacob talks about descending to the pit of death in mourning.  After his sale as a slave to the Egyptian executioner, Joseph descends to the pit of prison because of the false accusation of his master's wife. 

Two years ago I visited the pit that was at the crux of my parent's survival.  The remnant of a hole in the ground, the hiding place my parents used to escape their pursuers.  Like the Joseph story, it was their alternative to death. 

What does it mean to live in a pit?  It means something akin to be being buried alive.  The insects and rodents see the person as a source of food that has invaded their space, fair game.  The moisture and the dirt are part of the integration of the body into a circumstance below human dignity, acceptable only because of the lack of alternatives. Cold. darkness, dirt, rodents, insects, pain and itch are the new normal.  The supporters and the sustainers agree that the pit is the best alternative, under the circumstances.  Now the coat is  the many colors of filth. 

The pit cannot be forgotten. Its memory forever colors the sweet purification of  the ascent.  

---

1 see reports on Marc Lamont Hill ^↩

Vayishlach: What is an Angel

Vayishlach: What is an Angel

Strange.  Jacob sends Malochim, messangers,  to Esau. In the common, current usage of melachim,  it means  angels. A short time later, in the same episode, he battles with an ish.  Ish means a man, but in this case ( as with Abraham and Lot concerning Sodom),  it is understood to mean an angel, a divine emissary.  Why this planned confusion? 

Perhaps the distinction is not so clear.  In the Torah,  Jacob seems to have the most extensive experience with angels. They ascend and descend the ladder of his dream, they teach him tricks of animal husbandry,  they encounter him as he leaves Charan for Canaan.  In every case they are called melachim.  Shockingly, the first verse of the parsha reports that Jacob sent melachim.  Now these messangers have a human sender.  Are they still angels? The commentators differ.  Rashi says  מַלְאָכִים מַמָּשׁ     actual angels! Onkelos ( the official translation)  renders this instance  of the word:    אִזְגַּדִּין   [human] messangers,whereas he translated the previous  appearance  as   מַלְאֲכַיָּא   angels.  Clealy there is some ambiguity here.  

In Latin, the word homo - man- and vir have overlapping meanings.  They can each be translated as man, but homo means a regular person, whereas vir means a person of substance, someone to be addressed as Sir. Homo would be called by "hey you:.  I would translate ish as vir, not homo.  When the anashim ( pleural of ish)  are detected by Lot in Sodom, he recognized that these were not ordinary people, 

What is important difference between  a human and an angel? It is in the capability of the latter. The angel can perform miracles, acts that are outside the scope of earthly capability.  It is a moving target. Hank Morgan, in A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court  would seem to fit the bill. Does Elon Musk? Moses? I would certainly address each of them as Sir.

I come to think that the divine designation is not important.  It is a way of dealing with limited capability.  In the parsha, the divine nature of the ish emphasizes the impossibility of victory in Jacob's struggle and reinforces the lesson of perseverance, even when the odds of success are terrible. 

Through invention we have outstripped the angels of old. Through self-reinvention we can strive to become divine like angels. 

Vayetzeh: cheating

Vayetzeh: cheating

Cheating is a major theme of this week's parsha. Lavan cheats Jacob. Jacob uses clever tricks to multiply his wealth, based upon Lavan's capital. Lavan devalues Jacob's labor, etc. 

What is cheating?  It is not quite stealing, but it is certainly not honorable. Cheating is dealing with another in a manner that leaves a sense of unfairness, but fails to rise to  the level of crime. The wronged party curses the cheater, and may feel justified in treating him in a prejudicial manner, but the malfeasance is insufficient to  sue for recovery. Sometimes, there is difference between the parties in the interpretation of their agreement.  This is the stuff of lawyer's work. Sometimes, the huge difference in outcomes ( incomes) generates the charge of cheating. The call for greater equality in wealth includes an implication of cheating. 

 Can the bilked party  now justify tricking the adversary?  Every instance is different.  There is never an equivalent  situation. Opportunities for gain are unpredictable. But deception leads to a reclassification.  The partner becomes the competitor, sometimes the enemy.

The feeling of swindled can have various levels of justification. It can be a disagreement  about entitlement. As societies become more complex, the compensation schemes become subject to point of view.  The increase of the sheep was the product of Jacobs ideas and labor. But all the sheep came from Lavan's founding flock.

In the daily prayer we ask for tzedek and mishpat, righteousness and justice.  To an extent, this is a recognition of the variations in what is called justice.  To an extent, it calls for mercy to mixed with justice, so that the judged can survive

A legend of cheating envelops the Jew. There is a long history of the gentile extorting from the Jew.   The generalizations justify more of the same.  There are  large element of envy and entitlement 

Le secret des grandes fortunes sans cause apparente est un crime oublié, parce qu'il a été proprement fait.

Behind every great fortune there is a great crime

Those who spend too fast never grow rich.

Honoré de Balzac

Toldoth: Antisemitism

Toldoth: Antisemitism

After the mass murder at the Tree of Life synagogue, a patient asked me about the sources of antisemitism.  He  wondered why the antisemites,  people who look so similar to Jews, can bear a murderous hatred  for them.  One of the earliest stories in the Bible, Cain and Abel, tells us that  envy between brothers is a deadly force. There is no stronger competitive force than that between siblings.

I also wonder about the nature of antisemitism.   Such a strong and ancient  prejudice probably has  historical basis, a foundational story that has been distorted into this evil tradition.  This weeks parsha, Toldoth, Legacy, gives our side of the story.  Yes, antisemitism is an important part of  the legacy of the Jew

The Jew, Jacob and the enemy of the Jew, Esau, are brothers. We are told that Esau was red at birth, a basis for calling him Edom, red in Hebrew, the red of blood.  But he acquires the name Edom only after he asks to devour this red, red  stuff, this adom, adom .  For this (al cain) he is called Edom.  The appellation Edom comes from his interaction  with the man who will eventually be called Israel.

The red empires are identified with Esau: Rome, the Catholic church, the Soviet and Communist empires, the German flag (red and black), the Red, White and Blue....places where the descendants of Jacob/Israel lived under the domination of his brother.  Here is the foundational story of the relationship between these "brothers."

That interaction is an archetype of Jew baiting. Esau pronounces something between a request and a command when he sees the porridge that Jacob is cooking . Given my ultimate impression of Esau, as he later  expresses his murderous intent, I imagine that Jacob felt somewhat threatened by his brother, Tony  Rosso (red in Italian). Jacob, keeping his head, makes the interaction into a purchase.  He buys the right to call himself the firstborn  in exchange for the meal.  Esau, tired and starving, sells his title, an item that has no value at the moment, for the red stew.  .Who got the better of the deal?

When Isaac decides to convey the blessings, he tells Esau to bring him a meal so that his soul will bless him.  Rivka understands that  it is the meal that will generate the feelings of satiety and gratitude that induce the blessing...regardless of its bearer.  She will help Esau honor his bargain with Jacob.  Now is the time for Jacob to redeem Edom's debt. Jacob and Rebecca resort to subterfuge and disguise.  Isaac suspects the guile, but conveys the blessing to Jacob, anyway.  When Esau confronts him, Isaac affirms the validity of the blessing that Esau claims was misdirected.

From Jacob's perspective: a deal is a deal. 

From Esau's point of view: Jews cheat. He even says so:
וַיֹּ֡אמֶר הֲכִי֩ קָרָ֨א שְׁמ֜וֹ יַעֲקֹ֗ב וַֽיַּעְקְבֵ֙נִי֙ זֶ֣ה פַעֲמַ֔יִם אֶת־בְּכֹרָתִ֣י לָקָ֔ח וְהִנֵּ֥ה עַתָּ֖ה לָקַ֣ח בִּרְכָתִ֑י

[Esau] said, “Was he, then, named Jacob that he might supplant me these two times? First he took away my birthright and now he has taken away my blessing!” 

Thus is born antisemitism.

Should we change our ways? 

Chaiai Sarah: guidelines

Chaiai Sarah: guidelines

I am interested in how people follow guidelines.  What does a doctor mean when she says she is following guidelines? How strict is the adherence? How strict should it be? 

In this week's portion, we have the story of  Abraham giving his servant guidelines regarding finding a mate for his son, Isaac.  Abraham tells the servant that, above all, he wants a woman from  the family, from the old country.  He does not like the locals and does not want to obtain rights of settlement in the land through marriage.  The servant is to go back to Charan, Terach's  ultimate place of encampment, and find someone from the family for Isaac to marry. The servant asks about the potential obstacles in his quest ( What if the woman won't come to the wilds of Canaan? ) and goes.

The servant then concocts a test, a way to identify the appropriate  mate for his master.  She must be a person that anticipates the needs of others and fulfills them, before she is asked .  Seeing a good looking woman approaching the well, he tries his test...

This is not the criterion that Abraham  specified.  This is a new  standard.  Maybe it is a better standard, it evaluates a (possibly) desirable quality. The servants plot would identify a quality that is highly desirable...especially in servants.  But it is not Abraham's specification.  And we do not know the basis of Abraham's decisions. The servant is using a new criterion.

The woman, Rebecca, passes the servant's trial, and he bestows the betrothal gifts upon her, after that, he asks about her heritage ( what Abraham was interested in).  When he retells the story of the episode, he asks  about her background before he gives her the gold. Did he follow  the guidelines? Should he have?

The story ends well. Rebecca literally  falls in love with Isaac and they become the monogamous founding couple. Whose criteria led to this fortunate outcome? Both? Neither?

It is the results that matter.  Following the guidelines can increase the chances of a good outcome, but there are no guarantees.