Shemoth: Identity and Liberation in the Face of Oppression

 

Shemoth: Identity and Liberation in the Face of Oppression

 

The Book of Names opens with the children of Israel entering Egypt with both their individual and collective identities intact. These are the same brothers who had sold Joseph into slavery, now becoming slaves themselves. Their descendants face the  challenge of maintaining their otherness in the face of systemic oppression.

 

The Hebrews kept their collective identity, and this very distinctiveness marked them as a potential threat in Pharaoh's eyes. This is perhaps the first documented instance of replacement theory—the fear that a successful minority might somehow overtake the majority. The need for quotas and ghettos was born with Jewish identity and remained part of that legacy. This recognition of Jewish competition as a threat has unified Hebrew communities throughout history, from ancient Egypt to modern times.

 

The story turns on the production of bricks, mentioned at both the beginning and end of the parsha. These bricks create a symbolic connection between Egyptian bondage and the Tower of Babel—both massive projects that earned divine disapproval. The manufactured uniformity of bricks replaced the natural irregularity of stones, creating a lower class of brick makers and degrading the status of builders. Industrialization, the production of uniform, replaceable parts, is a tool of subjugation. It transformed the Hebrews into an exploited workforce. The altar was  built with uncut stones.

 

When Pharaoh orders the murder of Hebrew male infants he is reverting to the common method of dealing with a threatening foreign people.  Until the secret decree commanding the   drowning of the first born sons, the guest population was tolerated. The murderous turn of the host country against the guest Jews is a major theme in our history and a foundation of Zionism.

 

 Here, the story introduces its first heroes: the midwives who refuse to carry out this genocidal decree. Whether they were Hebrew (as the Talmud  and Rashi suggest) or Egyptian (Sforno, Kli Yakar, Malbim), their moral courage is an important model for  resistance against evil. They hide behind a flimsy excuse, claiming Hebrew women, being more animal-like than Egyptian women, give birth before the  midwives arrive; yet their rebellion is tolerated. Like the Germans who refused to participate in the Einsatzgruppen during the Holocaust, they demonstrated that standing up for good over evil can sometimes succeed and  without punishment.

 

Into this world comes Moses, saved by Pharaoh's daughter in an act of rebellion against her father's decree. An act that also  substantiates the kindness and sense of justice in some Egyptians. She knows exactly what she's doing when she rescues a circumcised (ibn Ezra) Hebrew child, and her actions, including returning him to his mother early in his life, shape Moses' development.  Moses grows up with an intertwined, dual identity: Hebrew by birth, Egyptian by upbringing, equipped to be both oppressor and oppressed; and understand neither.

 

When Moses kills the cruel overseer, he acts from this unique position. His attempt to make peace between fighting Hebrews reveals his true nature—they recognize him as different because anyone else would have enjoyed their battle or wagered on the winner. It is Moses’ behavior that betrays him as the killer. Moses must flee, becoming a stranger in Midian where he marries and names his son Gershom: "I was a stranger in a foreign land."  I was an Egyptian in Midian; I was a Hebrew in Egypt. What will I be if I go to the Promised land?

 

The divine revelation at the burning bush introduces a new mysterious appelation: a Gd whose name means "I will be what will be." This cryptic answer suggests that the future, in all its dimensions and possibilities, will happen. If you have the goal in mind, you can ride the waves of events. But all of the events that Gd has planned will come to pass.

 

Gd’s signs and wonders will convince Pharaoh to let the Israelites go.  Moses must convince  the Israelites  to leave their place of birth and employment. They had become invested in the great project, their life's work, and will  not leave until Pharaoh himself sends them away.

 

The Jews have continued to build names for themselves in great transnational human endeavors: in medicine with Paul Ehrlich and Jonas Salk, in science with Einstein and Bohr, in politics with countless others. This role in humanity's great projects is an aspect of Egypt that we carry with us.  Our connection to Torah prevents the work of achievement  from dominating our lives and enslaving us.

 

The story of Shemoth reminds us that resistance to evil is possible, that identity evolves over a lifetime, and that liberation requires not just freedom from external bondage but freedom from internal guidelines.. As the old masthead of the Jewish Daily Forward proclaimed: "The liberation of the workers depends upon the workers themselves." Choose your meaning.

 

Vayechi: Legacy, Continuity, and Compromise

  Vayechi: Legacy, Continuity, and Compromise

The title "Vayechi" (And he lived) appears in the past tense, though Jacob is still alive when the portion begins. This paradox encapsulates a deeper truth about survival and compromise. Jacob lived seventeen additional years in Egypt – the same span of time Joseph lived with his family before being sold into slavery. But these years of life came at a profound cost: the beginning of his people's subjugation.

The move to Egypt represented a dramatic reversal of Jacob's earlier struggles. He had settled in Canaan at great cost, wresting his birthright from Esau through a combination of consistent good behavior and guile, enduring twenty years of exile, confronting his brother's army, and navigating dangerous interactions with local inhabitants. The text emphasizes this settlement with the verse "Now Jacob was settled in the land where his father had sojourned, the land of Canaan." Yet famine forced him to abandon this hard-won territory for survival in Egypt, where his son Joseph had prepared for the crisis.

Jacob realizes he is the instrument of prophecy. The exile foretold to Abraham – "Know well that your offspring shall be strangers in a land not theirs" – is beginning to unfold through his family's settlement in Egypt. His response to this fate reveals the delicate balance between compromise and continuity: while accepting life in Egypt, he insists on burial in Canaan, refusing to let his legacy be fully subsumed into Egyptian heritage. He makes Joseph swear to bury him in the Cave of Machpela, understanding that this oath will pressure Pharaoh to permit Joseph's journey to Canaan for the funeral.

When Jacob blesses Joseph's sons Ephraim and Menashe, he seems to ramble, but his apparent digressions serve a purpose. He reiterates his attachment to Canaan as a gift not just to himself but to the "community of people" that are his legacy. Significantly, he speaks of burying Rachel, Joseph's mother, in a separate tomb rather than the Cave of Machpela. This appears to be both apology and insistence – asking Rachel's son to bury him with Leah while reinforcing that his legacy extends beyond Joseph to all twelve sons.

The word "asaf" (gather) appears repeatedly in key moments, carrying meanings of both harvest and completion. Jacob gathers his sons to tell them of the future. He "gathers his feet into the bed" before death, and is "gathered to his people." This bed is significant – earlier, Jacob had bowed at its head when Joseph swore to bury him in Canaan. The bed represents Jacob's legacy, and his bowing acknowledges both the compromise required for survival and the importance of maintaining connection to the promised land.

This parsha marks a transition in the biblical narrative. Previous stories focused on choosing a single heir – Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob. Now, all twelve sons share the inheritance, transforming the story from one of individual selection to one of collective leadership. Joseph, rather than becoming the next patriarch, assumes the role of provider, telling his brothers "I will sustain you and your children." Josephs dreams had the brothers bow to him, he did not abandon them.

The complex series of events – Joseph's dreams, his sale into slavery, his rise to power, the family's dependence on him – served a greater purpose: preserving the family through famine and establishing them in Egypt, where they would grow into a nation. Yet this preservation came with the price of future bondage. Joseph's final words acknowledge this: "God will surely take notice of you and bring you up from this land to the land that He promised."

Today, we still bless children with the words "May God make you like Ephraim and Menashe." We carry forward not just the blessing but its deeper meaning: the ability to maintain identity and purpose even in foreign environments, to make necessary compromises for survival while holding fast to essential principles and connections. The message of Vayechi endures: physical life may require difficult choices, but through these choices, we can maintain the thread of legacy and influence that continues through the generations, weaving individual stories into the greater narrative of a people's destiny.

Help from Calude

Vayigash: Origins of Power and Identity

 Vayigash: Origins of Power and Identity

 

Vayigash presents a pivotal moment in Jewish history when Jacob's family descends to Egypt, setting the stage for both the Egyptian bondage and eventual exodus. This migration, driven by famine, carries deep implications about power, assimilation, and the tension between survival and identity.

 The story begins with a confrontation. The Hebrew word "vayigash" means "approach," but carries undertones of trepidation and courage in the face of danger. When Judah approaches the Egyptian viceroy (his unrecognized brother Joseph) to offer himself in place of Benjamin, he displays the same courage Abraham showed in confronting God over Sodom's destruction. This is indicated by the use of the same word, vayigash, for both encounters.  Judah's vayigash confrontation leads to Joseph revealing himself to his brothers, choosing to embrace the family that had sold him into slavery , not  seeking revenge nor maintaining sole inheritance of Jacob's legacy.

 Earlier the  text had suggested Joseph might be Jacob's sole heir, as indicated by the verse, "These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph," where Joseph's name is set apart by the cantillation mark gershayim (literally meaning "divorces"). Instead of excluding his half-brothers, Joseph enables the formation of the twelve tribes, though his own position of power creates complex dynamics within the family.

The migration to Egypt itself reveals the  tension between assimilation and identity. Joseph instructs his brothers to present themselves as cattle-breeders rather than shepherds when meeting Pharaoh, knowing that shepherds are considered abhorrent to Egyptians. This suggestion to bend the truth for better social integration echoes through Jewish diaspora history. However, the brothers reject this advice, proudly declaring themselves shepherds like their ancestors. This tension between assimilation and tradition would play out countless times as Jews migrated to new lands.

This conflict between the newcomers and the assimilated plays out over the generations. When my parents came to America, the more assimilated American cousins tried to teach them how to be American: the right phrases and gestures. My parents were lost. The world of their childhood was a dreamlike legend to them and their American host-peers. Yiddish was now reserved for witticisms; otherwise, it was to be forgotten along with the traditions it recalled.

Settled immigrants and newer immigrants are in a  dance. Those who came earlier sacrificed their pasts and endured the hardships of pioneers. They were forced to adapt and found appealing aspects in the new ways. Those who prospered were  in a position to rescue their kin. Along with the welcome came a mixture of advice and dominance. The situation echoed the story of Joseph and his brothers.  The acclimatized, now naturalized citizens, want to keep the wealth and power they have acquired through assimilation. The newcomers dredge up the old resentments and antisemitism. They also remind the assimilated of things they may have lost. 

My parents tried to become American, but there were limits to how much they could change .  American non-kosher food was too foreign, they never lost their accents.  It is only now that I see how intelligently they selected from the menu of possible Americanisms, along with the clever rejections. Those choices are most of what I am. 

I married an Americainer, a woman whose roots were in the uppermost corner of the West coast, the most American place in America. Her American forebearers  stretch back to  the  colonization of Puget Sound by Europeans, five generations. Her parents spoke perfect English, no Yiddish. But the spark of the memory of the abandoned traditions was in her. She was sent to Jewish school, exposed to our history in a favorable light. She grew to love it.  Now our children have it, in their own, hybrid, ways. I am very hopeful for the next generation

The traditions are modified by the environment. The traditions color how we see the ambient culture and how we try to change it.

Chanuka celebrates the victory of Jewish tradition over the temptations of assimilation. A new tradition, the lighting of the menorah, comes to preserve the old portfolio of beliefs and practices. The Jews rejected becoming Greek, but they became proficient in many of the arts the Greeks developed. Chanuka is the paradigm of selective assimilation, a trick that is modeled  Vayigash. Chanuka is a renewed preparation for exile

 

The Israelites' decision to remain in Egypt even after the famine ends reflects a pattern seen throughout Jewish history. Like Abraham before them, they left the Promised Land during famine, but unlike Abraham, they stayed in Egypt due to their privileged position and connection to power. This choice sets up the eventual enslavement of their descendants, fulfilling God's prophecy to Abraham of 400 years of servitude.

The story of Vayigash thus presents multiple layers of meaning about power, identity, and survival. It shows how the need for survival can lead to compromises with identity, how economic necessity can transform into political subjugation, and how privilege can bind people to places that will ultimately prove dangerous to them. The brothers' refusal to hide their shepherd identity suggests that maintaining authentic identity might be as important as physical survival.

 

These themes continue to resonate in modern Jewish experience, particularly in diaspora communities. The tension between assimilation and tradition, the complex dynamics between established immigrants and newcomers, and the challenge of maintaining identity while adapting to new surroundings all echo the patterns first seen in Vayigash. The story reminds readers that the choices made for immediate survival can have long-lasting consequences for identity and freedom.

In the end, Vayigash is not just about Jacob's family moving to Egypt; it's about the perpetual tensions between survival and identity, between power and vulnerability, and between the promise of prosperity and the price of assimilation. These tensions continue to shape Jewish experience and broader human society to this day. It asks the ultimate question: who am I?

 

Aided by Claude

Miketz: guilt

Miketz: guilt

This year, I wonder about the great meeting of Joseph and his brothers.  

וַיֹּאמְר֞וּ אִ֣ישׁ אֶל־אָחִ֗יו אֲבָל֮ אֲשֵׁמִ֣ים ׀ אֲנַ֘חְנוּ֮ עַל־אָחִ֒ינוּ֒ אֲשֶׁ֨ר רָאִ֜ינוּ צָרַ֥ת נַפְשׁ֛וֹ בְּהִתְחַֽנְנ֥וֹ אֵלֵ֖ינוּ וְלֹ֣א שָׁמָ֑עְנוּ עַל־כֵּן֙ בָּ֣אָה אֵלֵ֔ינוּ הַצָּרָ֖ה הַזֹּֽאת׃ 

They said to one another, “Alas, we are being punished on account of our brother, because we looked on at his anguish, yet paid no heed as he pleaded with us. That is why this distress has come upon us.”

 This is the crux of the saga. The great world events: the international famine and  Pharoah's consolidation of power are all ancillary to this epiphany. The brother realize that they deeply wronged Joseph, they  damaged the concept of family. 

Why do they make the connection twenty years later? First, they went to Egypt. They knew that the caravan that had "bought" Joseph from them was headed for wealthy Egypt. It was highly likely that Joseph would be bought by someone  there. At some level, they were searching for their lost and betrayed brother: Joseph.

Although the text tells us that the brothers did not recognize Joseph, there may still have been some level of suspicion that, no matter how far fetched, this viceroy of Egypt was their long lost brother. The brother's surprise at the discovery is heightened by their secret suspicions

Being cast into a position of subservience reminded them of what they had done to Joseph. The brothers had used the strength that came from their unification against their hated sibling, cast him into a pit and sold him into slavery. Now they were subject to the far greater power of the Egyptian monarchy. This is what subjugation felt like: They were insecure, at the mercy of others, who had arbitrarily and incorrectly declared them enemies and spies.

I, the son of holocaust survivors and the grandson (and nephew) of Nazi murder victims, wonder how American Jews felt in 1949 when they read this verse.  Did it make them question whether they had done enough to rescue their siblings? The verse forces that question in every generation. Are we doing enough? Whose distress are we ignoring?

Designating the sons of Israel as dangerous spies for a foreign enemy was not without basis. These men had all been born in one country, Haran, and now dominated another,  Canaan. Soon after they  arrived in Canaan, they decimated Shechem. I suspect the news of  that clever conquest reached Egypt. The Israelites were a known regional threat. There is a kernel of truth in every great lie. Is it coincidence that Simon, the leader of the Shechem slaughter, was chosen for imprisonment? 

Casting their misfortune as a retribution reveals their worldview.  They believed in retribution for past sins. The simplest model for this involves Gd, but Gd is not specifically mentioned.  In the context of the Torah, this omission is not significant; in our modern world, we can note it. 

The brothers feel that they are being punished because a coercive power, far greater than their own, is threatening them. Like their great grandfather Abraham, two generations earlier, they went to the scary  land of the powerful monarch because of famine. The brothers were facing the terror and threats of the place that they had sent their brother. 

Egypt's economic dominance, in general was based upon the constancy of its water supply: the Nile.  Joseph had predicted ( and perhaps thereby generated) a famine. This prediction allowed the Pharaoh to place an all-in bet  on the future scarcity of grain.  Egypt became the source of grain for the region, thus increasing its wealth and power. 

Joseph's first dream had the sheaves of the brother: the symbol of their economic yield and the symbol of their sustaining cereal,  bowing to Joseph's. Joseph remembered his dreams.  Did the brothers?

The story illustrates how economic dominance plays upon the subjugated mind. Those in need review their past deeds seeking the transgression that brought them to this place. It is not the rationality  of logic , but the shame of guilt for past misdeeds that is evoked. Emotional manipulation  is important in preserving the structure that keeps the dependent enthralled. 

The enslavement of Israel started with the sale of Joseph. Be careful; you may, one day, stand before power.

Vayeshev: Editing

 Vayeshev: Editing

Vayeshev is among the most literarily  artistic chapters in the Torah. It  begins with dreams and ends with dreams. It begins with Joseph, age 17, supervising his brothers, training to ascend to power. It ends with Joseph enslaved and a prisoner, begging to be remembered to the monarch. The origin story of the tribe of Judah is sandwiched in  between, spiced by the temptation of Joseph. 

Joseph's transparent dreams of dominance  were supported, possibly generated, by the way his father, Yaakov, treated him. The patriarch, Yaakov, placed Joseph in a supervisory role. Yaakov  openly  loved  Joseph more than his brothers. His father dressed him regally. These actions implied that the legacy of Yaakov would have strata.  Yaakov's heir was to be the son of Rachel, the beloved wife. The children of Leah would be great in their own right, and the children of the handmaiden's would be the lowest stratum. Perhaps Abraham's legacy  was the model for this arrangement. Isaac, born to  Sarah in their old age, was appointed, by Gd, to be the true heir. Gd had reassured Abraham that  Ishmael, Sarah's handmaiden's son, would also be a great nation.  The children of Keturah ( a later wife) were given gifts and sent away. That is not how it turned out for the children of Jacob and this section of the Torah tells why. 

Murderous envy evolves from Yaakov's special treatment of Jacob. Envy as a motive for murder echoes the first pair of brothers and the fratricide that evolved from Gd's showing favor to one brother (Abel)  and not the other (Cain).  Is this  a hardwired, nearly unbreakable behavioral circuit: the less favored brother eliminates the favored one... with extreme prejudice?  Maybe. Should Yaakov have known better? Should he have learned from his own interactions  with Esau?  Perhaps  Yaakov did not know which model to follow. The story unfolds to correct him. 

The sale of Joseph, which substitutes his servitude for death, is the first great communal sin and crime of the  Children of Israel. We are reminded of the  lasting gravity of this heinous act every Yom Kippur when we read Eleh Ezkerah.  This graphic elegy to the 10 great rabbis martyred by the Romans, starts with the communal admission of guilt, with inadequate punishment, for the sale of Joseph. 

 The sacrificial rite of every communal holiday and every New Moon included a sin offering. That, never changing addendum to the otherwise distinctive ritual, was a single goat. Is that a reminder of the goat blood that was used  to stain Joseph's distinctive coat to deceive Yaakov into believing that Joseph had been mauled to death by an animal ( and not eliminated by his brothers)? Is that  sin offering of a goat a reminder of the danger that a communal gathering can  become a  populist lynching?

Having been treated as a prince, Joseph has the dreams of a prince. Joseph’s dreams are not merely flimsy wishes; they build his confidence; they  allow him to accept, and expect, the role of the ascendant. Accepting the dream as a goal is an important leadership characteristic. All of the dreams in this parsha deeply influence the dreamers and, thereby,  steer the course of events.

Jospeph's brothers and father criticize him  for his dreams. Were these dreams under  Joseph's control? Could he have dreamed otherwise?  Perhaps it was the reporting of his dreams that was the problem.  Speech,  the way we express ideas to other and ourselves, is  a  highly edited product. The path from the motive to the action goes through  numerous filters.  Some are conscious, others can be realized on reflection; (probably) most are obscure. Dreams have a different set of editors, maybe some of the proofreaders are asleep.  The personal reality of the dreamer is told as a novel instead of a news article; there are embellishments and revelations. The way the dream is described changes its meaning and its substance. 

Joseph’s dreams of domination do not abandon him, even after his sale as chattel. He takes charge of his master's house in Egypt.  When he is sent to prison, he rules the roost.  I am sure that Joseph was talented and Gd helped him, but the confidence that came from his dreams was part of his Divine aid.

Joseph’s interpretations of the dreams of the imprisoned wine steward and baker may have been manipulative. Everyone knew that Pharaoh’s birthday was three days away and that he would review his edicts then. By interpreting the wine steward’s dream favorably, he helped him appear confident -innocent and entitled- before the Pharoah on his (appointed) day of judgement. By delivering a damning interpretation to the baker, he made him anxious, and he probably looked insecure and guilty. The punishment fits the appearance.

The intertwined stories of Joseph and Judah have a dreamlike quality. Our long history can be seen emerging from this hazy origin  of competition, compromise, guilt and forgiveness. That story continues to emerge. Don't be fooled by irony. Be careful about how you narrate your dreams: to yourself as well as to others. 

 Vayishlach: dealing 

Jews see themselves as a nation that confronts a hostile world. Today's parsha is an important element of  our foundational story.  The interconnections  among  the perception of a shared threat,  national unification, and territorial claims are the core of this week's parsha. 

The observations  of the rishonim, the medieval commentators, on the first sentence of the parsha indicate an important variation in approach. 

וַיִּשְׁלַ֨ח יַעֲקֹ֤ב מַלְאָכִים֙ לְפָנָ֔יו אֶל־עֵשָׂ֖ו אָחִ֑יו אַ֥רְצָה שֵׂעִ֖יר שְׂדֵ֥ה אֱדֽוֹם׃ 

Jacob sent messengers ahead to his brother Esau in the land of Seir, the country of Edom,

The Hebrew word מַלְאָכִים֙ , malachim, fundamentally means messengers. However, it commonly means the special, Divine messengers: angels.  Rashi, famously, quotes the midrash Rabbah and says: 

וישלח יעקב מלאכים. מַלְאָכִים מַמָּשׁ

actually angels 

 The Ramban's comment on this verse includes: 

וֹ. וְיֵשׁ בָּהּ עוֹד רֶמֶז לְדוֹרוֹת, כִּי כָּל אֲשֶׁר אֵרַע לְאָבִינוּ עִם עֵשָׂו אָחִיו יֶאֱרַע לָנוּ תָּמִיד עִם בְּנֵי עֵשָׂו, וְרָאוּי לָנוּ לֶאֱחֹז בְּדַרְכּוֹ שֶׁל צַדִּיק, שֶׁנַּזְמִין עַצְמֵנוּ לִשְׁלֹשֶׁת הַדְּבָרִים שֶׁהִזְמִין הוּא אֶת עַצְמוֹ, לִתְפִלָּה וּלְדוֹרוֹן וּלְהַצָּלָה בְּדֶרֶךְ מִלְחָמָה לִבְרֹחַ וּלְהִנָּצֵל.

There is yet in this section a hint for future generations, for everything that happened to our father with his brother Esau will constantly occur to us with Esau’s children, and it is proper for us to adhere to the way of the righteous by preparing ourselves in the three things for which he prepared himself: for prayer, for giving him a present, and for rescue by methods of warfare, to flee and to be saved.

The perpetual nature of this mostly antagonistic interaction which the Ramban implies is hinted at by the ending of the parsha. The 43 verses that constitute chapter 36 involve the descent of Esau and the kings of Edom: rival nations. It is a reminder that this battle does not end until the Messiah ends it. 

Rashi casts the parsha into the  realm of angels. Outcomes are determined by Divine decision and carried out by beings that are beyond common human understanding.  The drama that unfolds involves forces that are not in our usual experience, with powers that we cannot fathom. 

There is textual basis for the assertion מַלְאָכִים מַמָּשׁ, that Jacob's  messengers are actually angels.  Two verses earlier, the very end of Vayetzeh, we are told that Yaakov is met by מַלְאֲכֵ֥י אֱ, messengers of Gd, angels. On this basis later commentators, like the Bartenura adduce that Jacob's messengers were, indeed, angels. 

Regardless of the (controversial) textual evidence, we are confronted with understanding this narrative as either a model for the efficacy of human ingenuity in the face of overwhelming threat, or another example of Divine rescue... or, perhaps, both. 

Shimshon Rafael Hirsch  (Who lived in Germany 1808-1888, and wrote in German) agreed with the Ramban, that the parsha was the model for interactions between the descendants of Jacob and Esau. To Rabbi Hirsch, the narrative  demonstrates the contrasting worldviews . 

Yaakov has nowhere to go.  He had left the land to which his grandfather, Abraham, had migrated, the land that his father, Isaac, never left He ran away  under the threat of violence from his brother, Esau. Jacob's claim to Canaan came, in part, from his devious acquisition of the blessing of Isaac. That scheme had ignited the wrath of brother Esau, a skilled killer of animals, and put Jacob's life in danger. He was forced to go into exile. 

Living in another people's land worked out well enough...for a while. The welcome ended when Jacob's success irked the host family, the sons  of Lavan. Jacob saw that a continued stay in Haran would come to a bad end. The stories of Jews in Germany and the Russian empire in the first half of the 20th century  are evoked. Jacob taught his descendants the advantage of leaving before the situation deteriorates further. 

When Haran became dangerous, Jacob had to choose his next home. That drove him  to stake the claim that devolved from his purchase of the birthright from his brother Esau.  He set out to return to the Promised Land, but he knew that meant  a confrontation  with Esau. 

The last Jacob  had heard ( 20 years ago), Esau was  planning on killing him. Jacob's (possibly angelic)  scouts now report that Esau has an  army of 400 at his side.  Jacob worried harder.  Things looked very bad. Jacob had to rescue his family

The likely outcome of a battle with Esau and his army was decimation. Jacob divided the family into two groups He hoped that a portion of the family will be saved.  Perhaps the escapees will rescue those attacked - or at least try.

Jacob sends a "tribute" to Esau.   It is a gift, a bribe, a tax to the prevailing authority.  It is a demonstration that there is more to gain from letting his people live and taxing their wealth, than there is from wiping them out.  The fortunate result of the gift is Esau's realization that his needs are met; he does not need to take Jacob's wealth, he does not need to take his life, he does not need this land.  The tribute is so enormous that Esau adjusts his perspective. 

Ultimately, Jacob says to Esau: קַח־נָ֤א אֶת־בִּרְכָתִי֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הֻבָ֣את לָ֔ךְ

Please accept my present  ( bracha/blessing) which has been brought to you,

Jacob says:  "Please, take my blessing."  Is this THE blessing that Isaac had bestowed, intended for Esau but conveyed to Jacob? Was  Jacob now giving that blessing to Esau?   This is an exercise in subtlety. 

Ultimately, Esau just left. 

וַיִּקַּ֣ח עֵשָׂ֡ו אֶת־נָ֠שָׁ֠יו וְאֶת־בָּנָ֣יו וְאֶת־בְּנֹתָיו֮ וְאֶת־כׇּל־נַפְשׁ֣וֹת בֵּיתוֹ֒ וְאֶת־מִקְנֵ֣הוּ וְאֶת־כׇּל־בְּהֶמְתּ֗וֹ וְאֵת֙ כׇּל־קִנְיָנ֔וֹ אֲשֶׁ֥ר רָכַ֖שׁ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ כְּנָ֑עַן וַיֵּ֣לֶךְ אֶל־אֶ֔רֶץ מִפְּנֵ֖י יַעֲקֹ֥ב אָחִֽיו׃ 

Esau took his wives, his sons and daughters, and all the members of his household, his cattle and all his livestock, and all the property that he had acquired in the land of Canaan, and went to another land because of his brother Jacob

The relationship between threat and a unified  national identity is evident in modern Jewish history.  Herzl's dream of a Jewish homeland is born out of the persecution of Jews in lands  that suddenly become not their home in times of trouble. We have seen what happened in  Germany, Poland, Iraq, Syria, etc. The vision of the Ramban, the ongoing struggle, seems to continue into the present.  The land of Israel unifies ( to a degree) the various camps  that constitute the Jews.

 May all people find their haven.

Vayetze: the Gd of Jacob

Vayetze: the Gd of Jacob

The unity of Gd is arguably the most fundamental principle of Judaism. The concept is emphasized because the Torah provides reason to question that premise.  In the core daily prayer, the Amidah, we begin by recognizing the Gd of Abraham, the Gd of Isaac and the Gd of Jacob. 

The Gd of Abraham gives orders: Leave your home and  go to Canaan; bring your son Isaac as a sacrifice. That Gd also quietly corrects errors: a disease make Sarah unavailable to Pharaoh; and a disease makes her unavailable to  Avimelech.  The Gd of Isaac delivers  a correction: do not leave  the Promised land. The Gd of Jacob interacts. 

When Jacob must leave Canaan, to escape the murderous wrath of his brother, Esau, Gd appears in a dream and reassures Jacob that his innumerable descendants will inherit the land that he lies upon. Jacob has made a decision, his dream of Gd and the angels validates it.

 Jacob is going to Haran. He is undoing Gd’s instructions to Abraham to settle in Canaan. Jacob is returning to  the people and practices that Abraham had rejected and moved away from. Jacob must confront this past and, by necessity, participate in it. He is going to a place forbidden to his father Isaac. Abraham was not secure that Isaac could resist assimilation into a culture that was so  similar, so comfortable, but would not spawn the monotheistic belief system that Gd had commanded to Abraham. For Isaac, alienation and isolation in Canaan was the safer course. Jacob had to leave. Jacob would need to maintain his differences surrounded by the temptations of the familiar and comfortable.  

When Jacob left Beer Sheva he was justified. He was fulfilling the parental request to find a wife from the family. He was to marry  someone that was  just like the girl that married dear old dad; not a local, like Esau had married. Jacob left Canaan to escape the threat of his brother, to fulfill the request of his parents.  As he undertook his journey,  Gd gave  a seal of approval. He saw the gates of heaven in a dream and he was reassured that Gd would support him  through this travail.  Jacob searches for a way to reciprocate.  He  promises the tithe, ten percent. At the time of the oath, that seems to be zero. 

As usual, Gd remains aloof for a long time. It is not until Jacob sees that Lavan is looking at him funny, and therefore decides it is time to move on, that Gd reappears to Jacob... and tells him to move on. For the preceding 20 years, Jacob had to figure things out for himself. He had a very complex family , with children born to three, and finally four women. 

He had to deal with the evolution of economic theory. How should labor be valued? Can capital be acquired?  Sheep beget sheep: how can the offspring belong to a new owner? In the end, Lavan says: 

וַיַּ֨עַן לָבָ֜ן וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֗ב הַבָּנ֨וֹת בְּנֹתַ֜י וְהַבָּנִ֤ים בָּנַי֙ וְהַצֹּ֣אן צֹאנִ֔י וְכֹ֛ל אֲשֶׁר־אַתָּ֥ה רֹאֶ֖ה לִי־ה֑וּא וְלִבְנֹתַ֞י מָֽה־אֶעֱשֶׂ֤ה לָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ הַיּ֔וֹם א֥וֹ לִבְנֵיהֶ֖ן אֲשֶׁ֥ר יָלָֽדוּ׃ 

Then Laban spoke up and said to Jacob, “The daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, and the flocks are my flocks; all that you see is mine. Yet what can I do now about my daughters or the children they have borne?

Retrospectively, Jacob recognizes that the wealth he has accumulated has come through the, mostly silent, Divine interventions that foiled the plans of his competitor. When Jacob explains to his family that they had best move, he points out that Gd had transferred the wealth to them. It had been an angel that showed him the magic  of the pealed sticks at the water trough  that maximized the sheep that he wanted.  Is economic theory a theological question?  If Gd created, and therefore eternally owns, the world, is private ownership theft? Is it idolatry?  Is wealth a gift from Gd? How should Gd's share  be recognized  in acquisition  and investment?

The parsha ends as it begins.  As Jacob leaves Haran, he is confronted by angels. He recognizes a  spiritual transition, an encampment  of angels. Does this mean that the promise in the vision, twenty years ago, when he left Canaan, has now been fulfilled? Is Jacob in his own again?

In Jacob's spiritual life, Gd appears at critical moments: leaving the Promised land, separating from Lavan, entering the holy land.  The Gd  of Jacob reinforces plans and actions that seem to be initiated by natural, albeit unusual and, often, dangerous, circumstances. This is closer to how I experience the Divine: as deliverance in times of need. It is different from the commanding Gd of Abraham, the correcting Gd of Isaac, and the unapproachable Gd of Moses. Jacob's Gd is practical.

Gd helps me every day. I tell myself that every day. I do not understand it. I just believe it.