Vayishlach, take 1

 I need to write a dvar torah for Vayishlach and this was the first try. I don't like it so I'm just putting it here.

----------

As we wander through the world, we aren’t generally aware of all the impact we make on those around us for good and for bad. We serve as role models whether we want to or not, so it is important that what we impress on others is always the most positive message, and we have to be aware about how our actions can be taken and used as precedents even for the wrong things.

Ya’akov Avinu’s life is marked by deception, or at least, the use of hidden methods. He secures the birthright by impersonating his brother and he increases his flock by using a trick to impact the genetics of the sheep. Of course, this is because he is surrounded by others who also use underhanded means to get what they want. Lavan deceives him as to which daughter Ya’akov will marry first (and the two sisters conspire to keep this secret) and Rachel hides the teraphim that she took from Lavan. And yet, the meforshim work hard to recontextualize all of Ya’akov’s behaviors as defensible and hallmarks of his role as a paradigm of honesty! So he, surrounded by dishonesty and pursuing courses of honest which could be labeled as dishonest is assigned a position as the quintessence of uprightness. This makes sense as his role models (father and grandfather) each had to lie about their wives’ identities, and yet they are not accounted as liars.

This continues throughout Parshat Vayishlach. When pursued by Esav, Ya’akov presents a series of tributes but separates them to create the impression of a larger gift and appease Esav’s greed (כְּדֵי לְהַשְׂבִּיעַ עֵינָיו שֶׁל רָשָׁע according to Bereisheet Rabbah 76). He then presents children with their mothers in order to psychologically inspire the mothers (by invoking a strong maternal bond which would drive them to defend their own). At their parting, Ya’akov says he and his family are headed to Se’ir when that is not the case. What does such a constant practice of (apparent) dissembling and situational manipulation do to the children who grow up seeing it? Are they able to see the “good” in terms of motives or the underlying “honesty” which can only be discerned if one reads through the events with the lens of Ya’akov’s being an inherently truthful person?

At the time of the meeting with Esav, Re’uvein was a few days past his twelfth birthday according to the Ibn Ezra (he was born, according to the medrash Yalkut Shimoni 162, on the 14^th of Nisan 2195, with Shimon born a month and a half later, Levi 3 months after that and Yehudah, 2 months later). Six more children were born within the next 5 months so many were on the cusp of adulthood at that point, able to watch and learn from their world. But what is the next event to befall the family? The abduction of Dinah, which is resolved when Shimon and Levi take advantage of the incapacitated state of the Sh’chemite males and kill them. Even had there been no murder, the request that the males get circumcised was a trick to keep them from protecting Dinah so the other brothers could rescue her. When confronted with a challenge, the sons fall back on using deception (mirmah in 34:14), and Shimon and Levi capitalize even further on this situational manipulation and kill all the men but THIS upsets Ya’akov. There are many commentators who explain that their behavior was righteous under certain understandings but Ya’akov just sees that they took improper advantage through the deception. So while his actions need to be looked at in the most favorable light, he reacts to the killings in the most negative way, not giving his sons the benefit that is extended when understanding all of HIS actions!

There is a narrative gap – Binyamin is born (and Rachel dies) 13 years later and nothing really “happens”, but the next textual ”story” highlights another seemingly improper behavior. After Rachel dies and Re’uvein moves his father’s bed from Bilhah’s tent to Leah’s. While the text uses strong language to describe the behavior, again the commentators find ways to explain his behavior as properly motivated.

It seems that Ya’akov impacted his children at a series of formative moments. They were influenced to see that the solution to a problem was to use underhanded means and cover themselves – they sell Yoseif and lie about it to their father! Could Ya’akov have anticipated that his example would be so comprehensively followed? Maybe the lesson here is that even when our motives are proper, others can see our actions as examples which might lead to less than honorable ends.