Oxford Jewish Thought - Essays by Rabbi Eli Brackman
Parsha and Manuscript – 'Vayishlach: Esau's departure from Jacob'
Thursday, 3 December, 2020 - 2:46 pm
Posted by Rabbi Eli Brackman
In the Torah portion of Vayishlach, it discusses the reconciliation of Jacob and Esau and the subsequent parting of ways between them. The Torah states:[1]
And Esau took his wives, his sons, and his daughters and all the people of his household, and his cattle and all his animals and all his property that he had acquired in the land of Canaan, and he went to another land, because of his brother Jacob. For their possessions were too numerous for them to dwell together, and the land of their sojournings could not support them because of their livestock. So Esau dwelt on Mount Seir Esau, that is Edom.
The reason the Torah gives for the departure of Esau is because:[2] 'their possessions were too numerous for them to dwell together, and the land of their sojournings could not support them because of their livestock.' The Midrash, however, offers two further opinions for the reason for the departure of Esau:[3] 1. Rabbi Elazar says, it was because of the note of obligation of the decree: 'that your seed will be strangers in a foreign land,'[4] which was put upon the descendants of Isaac. Esau said: "I will get out of here. I have neither a share in the gift-for the land has been given to him, nor in the payment of the debt." 2. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says the reason was because of the shame that he felt because he had sold his birthright to Jacob. In summary, three different reasons are given for the departure of Esau: 1. Too much livestock between them. 2. Not to be subject to exile from the land, as promised to Abraham. 3. Shame for selling the birthright. As there are three reasons provided in the biblical text and the Midrash, the commentary of Rashi also brings three reasons: Rashi comments:
And the land of their sojournings could not: 1. provide sufficient pasture for their animals. 2. The Midrash Aggadah,[5] however, explains "because of his brother Jacob," as follows: Because of the note of obligation of the decree: "that your seed will be strangers,"[6] which was put upon the descendants of Isaac. Esau said, "I will get out of here. I have neither a share in the gift-for the land has been given to him-nor in the payment of the debt." 3. He left also on account of the shame that he felt because he had sold his birthright.
In the manuscript copies of Rashi, there are two variants in this comment. In almost all of the manuscripts, the version is as the printed edition above. In MS. Oppenheim 35 (1408),[7] however, it introduces a question before presenting the third reason concerning shame for Esau selling the birthright. It states: 'and for what reason did he say so' (u-mip-nei ma a-mar ken). This question is referring to the statement by Esau that he wishes to leave the land of Canaan so not to be subject to exile.
A further variant, that appears to be a scribal error, is found in MS. Opp. 34 (1201-1225),[8] where it writes for the second midrashic reason for Esau's departure: 'on account of the document (starr) that he had sold his birthright to Joseph.' The selling of the birthright to Joseph refers to the transfer of the birthright by Jacob from his oldest son, Reuben, to Joseph, after Reuben sinned by moving Jacob's bed from Zilpa's tent into Leah's.[9] This reference is problematic, however, because the birthright of Reuben was not sold to Joseph. The Talmud and Rashi clarifies this by making a distinction between Esau, who willingly sold his birthright, while Reuben had it taken from him against his will.[10] In theory, one can say that this distinction between Reuben and Esau is part of the reason for the shame that Esau had; the fact that he sold his birthright, with contempt, as opposed to having it taken from him by force, as what happened with Reuben. Certainly, however, the simple meaning of the textual variant that a reason for the departure of Esau from Canaan was due to a document of sale of the birthright to Joseph is incorrect, since, as mentioned, there was no sale of the birthright from Reuben to Joseph. In the margin, therefore, there are two corrections: the word 'document' is changed to 'shame' and the word 'Joseph' is changed to 'Jacob,' in line with wording found in the other versions of Rashi.
Two ways to understand the text of Rashi
The additional question found in MS. Oppenheim 35 (1408), however, does seem intentional. This may be explained in the context of two ways to understand the text of Rashi in relation to its source in the Midrash. In the Midrash, the two reasons: the debt of exile, and shame for selling the birthright, are presented as a dispute between two sages, Rabbi Eleazar and Rabbi Joshua ben Levi. This is also how Rabbi Shabbetai Bass (1641-1718) understands the way the two opinions appear in the commentary of Rashi – as two different reasons.[11] Similarly, Rabbi Elijah Mizrachi (1455-1525) writes that they are two distinct interpretations and the reason that Rashi brings both in his commentary is because they are both close to the literal reading of the biblical text.
A further way to understand the Midrashic text in the Rashi commentary is that it is not in fact two alternative interpretations but is being reworked in a way that they are part of the same interpretation. The justification for this understanding is due to an ambiguity in the way Rashi presents the third reason; Rashi does not bring the third interpretation in the form of an alternative interpretation with the usual term: 'others say' or 'another interpretation.' Instead, it states: 'And on account of the shame that he had sold his birthright.' This implies the two interpretations in the Rashi commentary are not alternative interpretations, but complimentary. This view appears to be the reason for the variant in MS. Oppenheim 35 (1408), where it states: 'and why did he say so,' before proceeding with the third interpretation about the shame of Esau for having sold his birthright.
Rationale for first and second reasons
The rationale to see the third interpretation as complimentary to the second is based on a similar argument made regarding to correlation between the first and second reason for the departure of Esau to the land of Seir. The second reason (from the Midrash) does not represent an objection to the biblical reasoning – not enough pasture for both their cattle – but rather assists the biblical reasoning by giving additional context. Rabbi Judah Loew (1520-1609) delineates the biblical and midrashic reasoning as explaining the timing of the departure of Esau: the biblical reasoning explains the practical and immediate circumstances for Esau's departure, due to the lack of sufficient pastureland for both of them, while the second reason regarding concern for the exile is an underlying reason for Esau desiring to leave in any event, but would not have done so at that particular time, were it not for the immediate reason - the lack of sufficient pastureland.
A further way to combine the first two reasons – lack of pastureland and exile – is, as the Lubavitcher Rebbe argues,[12] that they are addressing two aspects of the departure of Esau: the first explains why Esau was unable to live next to Jacob – due to lack of sufficient pastureland - but he could have potentially stayed living in the land of Canaan further away. The second reason, from the Midrash, explains why Esau moved away to another land, outside the land of Canaan completely. This was because he did not want to be subject to the exile that was promised to Abraham, that his decedents will inherit the land but will then be subject to an exile in a foreign land for four hundred years. Accordingly, the first two reasons are complimentary, as they explain different aspects of Esau's departure.
Rationale for second and third reasons
Similarly, one can explain that the third reason offered for Esau's departure is explaining an additional aspect of the departure of Esau that is not addressed in the first two reasons: why Esau felt compelled to leave the land because of Jacob's arrival. This addresses the biblical text that states that Esau 'went to another land, because of his brother Jacob.' The two reasons: lack of sufficient pastureland and exile is not something that is related specifically to Jacob's presence - one has to do with his cattle; the other has to do with a promise from G-d to Abraham. This aspect is addressed by the third reason, concerning Esau's shame that he had sold the birthright to Jacob.
Love or shame
The implication of these two approaches – whether the reasons are alternative or complimentary - is how we perceive the nature of the relationship between Jacob and Esau at this juncture in their lives: after Jacob returned from Haran, after marrying and having children, and the subsequent reconciliation with Esau. The Abravanel (1437-1508) argues that Esua's departure from Canaan, leaving Jacob to inherit the land, was an expression of Esau's love to Jacob. Similarly, one can say, the reason of leaving the land to allow Jacob to have ample room for his cattle is a sign of generosity and his affection for Jacob. This would indeed make sense if one sees the first reason for Esau's departure due to insufficient room for their cattle, as well as the other reasons, as alternative reasons. When the first reason stands alone, it can be interpreted as a sign of affection from Esau to Jacob. Following, however, the approach that the three reasons are symbiotic, addressing different aspects of the reasons for Esau's departure, one cannot separate the third reason, concerning Esau's shame for having sold his birthright, from the first – his concern for Jacob's livestock. In this regard, while the first reason may be interpreted as showing empathy, this is undermined by a very different sentiment: the feeling of shame of Esau due to having sold his birthright to Jacob. These two feelings are very different and perhaps conflicting.[13]
We presented three reasons for the departure of Esau from the land of Canaan: the biblical reason for lack of sufficient pastureland, the first reason from the Midrash, due to the promise that the offspring of Abraham who inherits the land will be subject to found hundred years of exile and oppression, and the third midrashic reason, due to the shame of Esau for having sold his birthright. While Rashi brings these three reasons in his commentary, he does not appear to present the third reason as an alternative reason, as found in the midrash, but rather a continuation of the second reason. We argued that the reasons may be understood as explaining three different aspects of Esau's departure: 1. the timing of his departure due to lack of sufficient pastureland, 2. the reason for Esau departing entirely from the land of Canaan - due to the exile. 3. why Jacob personally was a catalyst for his departure – Esau's shame for have sold Jacob the birthright. We argued that the compatibility of the reasons for Esau's departure, as opposed to their contradictions, is the intention behind the version found in MS. Oppenheim 35 (1408), where it adds: 'and why did he say so' before presenting the third reason. It is aiming to clarify the above point that the third reason, as the second, is a part of and further explaining a further aspect of the reasoning why Esau departed the land of Canaan after Jacob's return from Haran.
[1] Genesis 36:6-8.
[2] Genesis 36:7.
[3] Genesis Rabba 82:13.
[4] Genesis 15:13.
[6] Genesis 15: 13.
[7] Fol. 22. https://digital.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/objects/93d6929b-c498-4f3d-86b5-31d7618cf76b/surfaces/a3643e30-8824-4b45-af32-acf9a24a6832/.
[8] Fol. 21. https://digital.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/objects/4a83e8ab-6ca2-45c2-b24d-7a53736a5d13/surfaces/5bcfe474-b8cf-41ed-80a8-9c1557370481/.
[9] I Chronicles 5:1.
[10] Talmud Berachot 7b. Rashi on Genesis 29:32.
[11] Siftei Chachamim on Genesis 36:7: V'od ta-am acher.
[12] Likkutei Sichot 10:112.
[13] See Likkutei Sichot 10:113, footnote 25. This may be connected to the two views about the degree of sincerity to which Esau kissed Jacob when they reconciled (Genesis 33:4). Rashi comments: 'There is controversy concerning this matter in a Baraitha of Sifrei (Beha'alothecha 69). Some interpret… that he did not kiss him wholeheartedly. Rabbi Simeon ben Yochai said: It is a well-known tradition that Esau hated Jacob, but his compassion was moved at that time, and he kissed him wholeheartedly.'
Comments on: Parsha and Manuscript – 'Vayishlach: Esau's departure from Jacob'
Some HTML tags may be used - <b>, <i>
E-mail (will not be made public)
Please enter the security code that appears to the left (code is case sensitive).
This site was established, due to popular demand, to make available Rabbi Eli Brackman's lectures, articles and essays on Jewish thought delivered at the Oxford University Chabad Society.
For more information, please contact [email protected]
History of the Upshernish: a medieval custom?
Chanukah essay: Lighting one lamp from another on the Chanukah Menorah - Tribute to Rabbi Lord Sacks
'As the Hart that panteth after the water brooks (Psalm 42:1): Jewish New Year reflections on an Oxford college coat of arms'
Moses of London: Insight into Oxford's Jewry through his legal teachings and recent archaeology
'Rashi on Ruth in the supercommentary of Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson'
The dispute about mentioning the Exodus at night in the manuscripts
A Passover Essay: Rashi commentary on the Haggadah in the supercommentary of Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson
Maimonides on equality and the problem of expensive tastes
Conference: 'Social Vision: The Lubavitcher Rebbe's Transformative Paradigm for the World'
Parsha and Manuscript – 'Vayetze: The reasons for the name Reuben'
Parsha and Manuscript: Toldot - 'Do not go down to Egypt'
Parsha and Manuscript: Nitzavim and Vayelech - 'G-d in Exile'
Parsha and Manuscript: Ki Tavo – Treasured and holiness: promise or commandment?
Parsha and Manuscript: Re'eh – 'Imitatio Dei'