This Week in Learning

שמות כ:יג - לֹ֥א תַחְמֹ֖ד בֵּ֣ית רֵעֶ֑ך לֹֽא־תַחְמֹ֞ד אֵ֣שֶׁת רֵעֶ֗ךָ וְעַבְדּ֤וֹ וַֽאֲמָתוֹ֙ וְשׁוֹר֣וֹ וַֽחֲמֹר֔וֹ וְכֹ֖ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר לְרֵעֶֽךָ

Shemot 20:13 - You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, his manservant, his maidservant, his ox, his donkey, or whatever belongs to your neighbor.

ר' אברהם בן הרמב"ם שמות כ:יג

מאד יצמא השכל ויבקש לדעת למה פרט (ה') יתעלה את עשרת הדברים האלה ולא שאר המצוות כשהשמיע אותם לישראל; ועל זה שתי תשובות: אחת מהן כי זה מסודות החכמה [האלוהית], והתשובה השניה כי נראה מעשרת הדברים האלה שהם שורשי כל התורה תרי"ג מצות

Rabbi Avraham ben HaRambam - Commentary on Shemot 20:13

The mind thirsts and desires to know why Hashem the Exalted One specified these 10 items among all the other mitzvot he imparted to the Jewish people. There are two answers to this question: One is that this is part of the secrets of divine wisdom, and the second is that from these 10 items one can see foundation of the entire Torah system of 613 mitzvot.

Avraham ben HaRambam explains that the 10 items selected for the Decalogue are prototypical. Each item encompasses a foundational concept that reverberates throughout the entire Torah. The mitzvah of Shabbat is observed weekly, but the concept of differentiating between the ordinary and the distinct, the mundane and the special, the sacred and the profane, is universal. The commandment “You shall not murder” not only prohibits a specific action, but affirms the value the Torah places on human dignity, which lies at the root at many mitzvot. One example is the final item of the Decalogue, which commands us not to covet what belongs to our fellow. How can we understand this commandment? How can we be commanded to do something which seems to be out of our control?

אבן עזרא פירוש שני שמות כ:יג

לא תחמוד – אנשים רבים יתמהו על זאת המצוה: איך יהיה אדם שלא יחמוד דבר יפה בלבו כל מה שהוא נחמד למראה עיניו. ועתה אתן לך משל. דע: כי איש כפרי שיש לו דעת נכונה, והוא רואה בת מלך שהיא יפה, לא יחמוד אותה בלבו שישכב עמה, כי ידע כי זה לא יתכן. ואל תחשוב זה הכפרי שהוא כאחד המשוגעים, שיתאוה שיהיו לו כנפים לעוף בהם בשמים, כי לא יתכן להיות זה, כאשר אין אדם מתאוה לשכב עם אמו, אע"פ שהיא יפה, כי הרגילוהו מנעוריו לאמר לו שהיא אסורה לו. ככה כל משכיל שידע כי אשה יפה או ממון, לא ימצאנו אדם בעבור חכמתו ודעתו, רק כאשר חלק לו השם. ואמר קהלת: יתננו חלקו (קהלת ב':כ"א). ואמרו חכמים: חיי בני ומזוני לאו בזכותא תליא מילתא. ובעבור זה המשכיל לא יקנא ויחמוד. ואחר שידע שאשת רעו אסרה לו השם, יותר היא נשגבה בעיניו מבת מלך בלב הכפרי. על כן הוא שמח בחלקו, ולא ישים אל לבו לחמוד ולהתאוות דבר שאינו שלו, כי ידע מה שהשם לא רצה לתת לו, לא יוכל לקחתו בכחו ובמחשבותו ותחבלותיו. על כן יבטח בבוראו שיכלכלנו ויעשה הטוב בעיניו.

Ibn Ezra - Second Commentary Shemot 20:13

Many people are amazed at this commandment. They ask, how is it possible for a person not to covet in his heart all beautiful things that appear desirable to him? I will now give you a parable. Note, a peasant of sound mind who sees a beautiful princess will not entertain any covetous thoughts about sleeping with her, for he knows that this is an impossibility. This peasant will not think like the insane who desire to sprout wings and fly to the sky, for it is impossible to do so…The intelligent person will therefore neither desire nor covet. Once he knows that God has prohibited his neighbor's wife to him she will be more [distant] in his eyes than the princess is in the eyes of the peasant. He will therefore be happy with his lot and will not allow his heart to covet and desire anything which is not his. For he knows that that which God did not want to give him, he cannot acquire by his own strength, thoughts, or schemes. He will therefore trust in his creator, that is, that his creator will sustain him and do what is right in His sight.

The Ibn Ezra’s analogy demonstrates that our mind can create certain parameters on our desires. As Nehama Leibowitz summarizes, “man’s desires are controllable and do not overpower his reason. On the contrary, his feelings can be governed by his outlook and way of life…Man can train himself not only not to commit adultery or steal, but also not to covet and desire things not his own” (Leibowitz, 1996, p.349-350). The Rambam discusses how a disciplined mind is necessary to properly observe mitzvot:

רמב’’ם – מורה נבוכים ג:נא

ודע שמעשי העבודות האלו כולם כקריאת ה'תורה' והתפילה ועשות שאר ה'מצוות' אין תכלית כונתם - רק להתלמד להתעסק במצוות האלוה ית' ולהפנות מעסקי העולם וכאילו אתה התעסקת בו ית' ובטלת מכל דבר זולתו. אבל אם תתפלל בהנעת שפתיך ופניך אל הכותל - ואתה חושב במקחך וממכרך ותקרא ה'תורה' בלשונך - ולבך בבנין ביתך מבלי בחינה במה שתקראהו; וכן כל אשר תעשה 'מצוה' - תעשנה באבריך - כמי שיחפור חפירה בקרקע או יחטוב עצים מן היער מבלי בחינת ענין המעשה ההוא לא מי שציוה לעשותו ולא מה תכלית כונתו - לא תחשוב שהגעת לתכלית. אבל תהיה אז קרוב ממי שנאמר בהם "קרוב אתה בפיהם ורחוק מכליותיהם":

Maimonides - Guide for the Perplexed III:51

We must bear in mind that all such religious acts as reading the Law, praying, and the performance of other precepts, serve exclusively as the means of causing us to occupy and fill our mind with the precepts of God, and free it from worldly business; for we are thus, as it were, in communication with God, and undisturbed by any other thing. If we, however, pray with the motion of our lips, and our face toward the wall, but at the same time think of our business; if we read the Law with our tongue, whilst our heart is occupied with the building of our house, and we do not think of what we are reading; if we perform the commandments only with our limbs, we are like those who are engaged in digging in the ground, or hewing wood in the forest, without reflecting on the nature of those acts, or by whom they are commanded, or what is their object. We must not imagine that [in this way] we attain the highest perfection; on the contrary, we are then like those in reference to whom Scripture says, "Thou art near in their mouth, and far from their reins" (Jer. 12:2).

The objective of mitzvot is not exhausted in the performance of discrete physical actions. Those actions are designed to leave an impression on our mind. But the discipline of our inner world will determine the extent to which we are impacted by the experience of mitzvot.

In a lecture describing the multifaceted objectives of a Torah education, the Rav describes one such educational objective in the following terms:

Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik - “Concepts in Jewish Education”

There is a third kind of discipline which the av zaken, the old father, teaches the young child, namely a disciplined inner life. The Torah is not interested only in human physical actions, whether on an individual physiological level, such as eating, or on the social level, such as manufacturing or selling goods. No, the Torah is also interested in the inner activities of the Jew, in his emotional life. We think the Torah is only concerned with the Jew’s hands, legs, mouth, and digestive organs. True the Torah is concerned with these physical aspects, but it is also concerned with the Jew’s feelings, sentiments, and emotions. The Torah knew very well that some emotions that a person experience, such as hate and envy, are disjunctive, and the Torah requires that we disown such emotions, reject them, and drive them out of our personality. If an emotion is destructive, then man is capable of rejecting it (p.191-192).

It is a daunting task to change our patterns of thinking. But modern psychology, such as the field of cognitive behavioral therapy, has demonstrated that this is possible. It is not automatic or easy, but man is capable of adjusting how he experiences and interprets both his external and his internal world. This is an integral component the Torah’s aspirations for man, and the final item of the Decalogue.

References

Ibn Ezra, E., Strickman, H. N., & Silver, A. M. (1996). Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch =: Perush ha-Torah : Exodus (Shemot). New York: Menorah Publishing Company, Inc. Retrieved…

The final act of the exodus from Egypt is the miraculous splitting of the Red Sea. How do we relate to miracles in a scientific age? What is our approach to the miraculous?

תלמוד בבלי – שבת קיח עמוד ב

א״ר יוסי יהא חלקי מגומרי הלל בכל יום איני והאמר מר הקורא הלל בכל יום הרי זה מחרף ומגדף כי קאמרינן בפסוקי דזמרא.

Gemara Shabbat 118b

Rabbi Yosei said: May my portion be among those who complete hallel every day. The Gemara is surprised at this: Is that so? Didn’t the Master say: One who reads hallel every day is tantamount to one who curses and blasphemes God. He displays contempt for hallel by not reserving it for days on which miracles occurred. The Gemara answers: When we say this statement of Rabbi Yosei, we are referring to the verses of praise [pesukei dezimra], recited during the morning service, not to hallel (Psalms 113–118) recited on special days.

The Talmud quotes the opinion of Rabbi Yose, who states that he wishes to be among those who recite Hallel daily. A contradiction to this opinion is introduced in the text, stating that those who recite Hallel daily belittle and blaspheme [the Almighty]. The Talmud reconciles this contradiction by distinguishing between two distinct meanings of the term Hallel, praising the miraculous. Rabbi Yose was referring to the praise recited as part of the daily prayer service known as Pesukei de-Zimrah. The contradictory opinion was discouraging the recitation of the special praise reserved for holidays known as Hallel ha-Mitzri.

The Rav, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, elucidates these two types of Hallel or praise. The first type of praise, advocated by Rabbi Yose, refers to an appreciation of the awe-inspiring and miraculous natural world around us. The second type of praise, criticized as belittling, refers to the daily praise of miraculous departures from reality or suspensions of the natural order.

Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik - Seders of Denigration and Praise

Pesukei de-Zimrah…is the Hallel for the cosmic drama, for organic life and inorganic matter, the astral world, heaven and earth, the seas and forests—essentially, for nature. Hallel ha-Mitzri (recited on holidays), on the other hand, gives expression to our specific relationship with God, to the miracles that took place not in natural processes—the cosmic drama and the rules of nature—but in specific miracles that defeated cosmic causation. It refers to the miracles responsible for the emergence of the covenantal community and the unique, singular relationship between Israel and God—the exodus from Egypt and God’s revelation throughout our history.

A person who says Hallel ha-Mitzri every day is a blasphemer, because this indicates that he believes one can see God only through miracles, only when He acts contrary to the established cosmic order, while the natural world remains an empty mechanical affair. The daily recitation of Pesukei de-Zimrah, on the other hand, affirms that one finds God’s glory manifest and reveals through the cosmic order, through the regularity of nature and the harmony of the spheres, through the starlit heavens and the blossoming trees. (p.111)

Rav Soloveitchik notes that Judaism is not a religion founded upon singular miraculous experiences. A religion based on the supernatural cannot survive in the natural world. Only a religion that provides a framework for everyday reality can sustain itself from generation to generation. Thus the Talmud criticizes an overemphasis on the miraculous. Turning the miraculous into a religious philosophy is antithetical to Judaism. It belittles rather than glorifies, for the order present in the natural world is far more awe-inspiring than the intermittent suspension of this order.

What then is the import of the miraculous? The Ramban addresses this question in his commentary on the Torah, as he discusses the ideas behind the mitzvah of Tefillin.

רמב"ן שמות יג:טז

ומן הנסים הגדולים המפורסמים, אדם מודה בנסים הנסתרים שהם יסוד התורה כלה

Ramban Shemot 13:16

From the openly miraculous, a person comes to appreciate the subtly miraculous, which is at the foundation of the entire Torah.

The momentary suspension of a natural law ultimately elicits an appreciation of the miraculous character of the perfectly functioning system of nature. This inspired perception is a superior realization of the Divine role in the natural world. The ideal religious experience is reaching an understanding and awe of the natural laws of the universe. This is indeed the approach advocated by Rabbi Yose in the Talmud, which was codified into the daily morning service (in Psalms 145-150). King David’s portrayal of the awe that results from the observation of the natural world is indeed humbling and moving. Alternatively, as the Talmud points out, praising the miraculous occurs at intermittent intervals, only on specific celebrations such as Passover. A sprinkling of the miraculous can be inspirational, but it is not designed to be a primary basis of our religious philosophy. The response to the suspension of the laws of nature must yield to an appreciation of the vast and awesome systematic order present in the universe.

The Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynman beautifully describes the vast depth hiding just beneath the surface of the seemingly mundane:

Richard P. Feynman - The Relation of Physics to Other Sciences

If you look at a glass of wine closely enough, you will see the entire universe…The twisting liquid, the reflections in the glass, and our imagination adds the atoms. It evaporates depending on the wind and weather. The glass is a distillation of the earth's rocks, and in its composition, [we see] the secrets of the universe's age, and the evolution of the stars.

Anyone can be moved by witnessing the ten plagues or the splitting of the red sea. But it requires a different outlook to be moved by everyday phenomena. Our ultimate objective is an appreciation of the Divinity implanted within everyday life. The Torah does recount specific miracles. But these miracles in turn orient us towards the magnificence and elegance of the natural world in which we live, reminding us that it too is miraculous.

References

Feynman, R. (10/3/1961). The Relation of Physics to Other Sciences [Lecture Recording 52:20]. California Institute of Technology. Retrieved from: https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_03.html

Soloveitchik, J. D. (2006). Festival of freedom: Essays on Pesah and the Haggadah. Jersey City, NJ: Published for the Toras HoRav Foundation by KTAV Pub. House.

Translation of the Talmud from The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz Even-Israel (CC-BY-NC 4.0), digitized by Sefaria. Retrieved from: https://shas.alhatorah.org/Full/Shabbat/118b.4#e0n6

There are many details and facets of commemorating the exodus from Egypt. Even a casual attendee at a passover seder will note the complexity of the service. HaRav Aharon HaLevi in his Book of [Mitzvah] Education discusses why this mitzvah has so many elements, elucidating a sacred principle underlying our entire system of mitzvot.

שמות יב (מו) בְּבַ֤יִת אֶחָד֙ יֵאָכֵ֔ל לֹא־תוֹצִ֧יא מִן־הַבַּ֛יִת מִן־הַבָּשָׂ֖ר ח֑וּצָה וְעֶ֖צֶם לֹ֥א תִשְׁבְּרוּ־בֽוֹ׃

Shemot 12 (46) It must be eaten in one house; you shall not take any of the meat out of the house to the outside, neither shall you break any of its bones.

ספר החינוך טז משרשי המצוה. לזכר נסי מצרים כמו שכתבנו באחרות. וגם זה גזע מן השרש הנזכר, שאין כבוד לבני מלכים ויועצי ארץ לגרר העצמות ולשברם ככלבים, לא יאות לעשות ככה, כי אם לעניי העם הרעבים. ועל כן בתחלת בואנו להיות סגלת כל העמים ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש (שם יט ו), ובכל שנה ושנה באותו הזמן, ראוי לנו לעשות מעשים המראים בנו המעלה הגדולה שעלינו בה באותה שעה. ומתוך המעשה והדמיון שאנחנו עושין, נקבע בנפשותינו הדבר לעולם. ואל תחשב בני לתפש על דברי ולומר ולמה יצוה אותנו השם יתברך לעשות כל אלה לזכרון אותו הנס, והלא בזכרון אחד יעלה הדבר במחשבתנו ולא ישכח מפי זרענו? דע, כי לא מחכמה תתפשני על זה, ומחשבת הנער ישיאך לדבר כן. ועתה בני, אם בינה שמעה זאת, והטה אזנך ושמע (משלי כב יז), אלמדך להועיל בתורה ובמצות. דע, כי האדם נפעל כפי פעלותיו, ולבו וכל מחשבתיו תמיד אחר מעשיו שהוא עוסק בהם אם טוב ואם רע, ואפילו רשע גמור בלבבו וכל יצר מחשבות לבו רק רע כל היום, אם יערה רוחו וישים השתדלותו ועסקו בהתמדה בתורה ובמצות, ואפילו שלא לשם שמים, מיד ינטה אל הטוב, ומתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה, ובכח מעשיו ימית היצר הרע, כי אחרי הפעלות נמשכים הלבבות…ואמת שכל האדם נפעל כפי פעלותיו, כמו שאמרנו. ועל כן אמרו חכמים ז''ל (מכות כג, ב) רצה הקב''ה לזכות את ישראל לפיכך הרבה להם תורה ומצות, כדי להתפיס בהן כל מחשבותינו ולהיות בהן כל עסקינו להטיב לנו באחריתנו. כי מתוך הפעלות הטובות אנחנו נפעלים להיות טובים וזוכים לחיי עד. ורמזו ז''ל על זה (מנחות מג, ב), באמרם כל מי שיש לו מזוזה בפתחו וציצית בבגדו ותפלין בראשו, מבטח לו שלא יחטא, לפי שאלו מצות תמידיות, ונפעל בהן תמיד. לכן אתה ראה גם ראה, מה מלאכתך ועסקך, כי אחריהם תמשך ואתה לא תמשכם.

From the roots of the commandment is to remember the miracles of Egypt, as we have written in the other [related commandments]. And this is also a trunk from the root mentioned: For it is not honorable for the sons of kings and the advisers of the land to drag the bones and break them like dogs. Except for the impoverished among the people and the starving, it is not a proper thing to do this. And therefore, as we began to become the chosen of all nations, 'a kingdom of priests and a holy nation' - and in each and every year at that time - it is fitting for us to do acts that show the great stature which we achieved at that hour, about us. And in the act and reenactment that we do, this thing is placed in our souls for eternity. My son, do not think to pounce upon my words and say, "Why would God, may He be blessed, command us to do all of these commandments to commemorate that miracle; would we not remember it with one commemoration, [such that] it not be forgotten from the mouth of our offspring?" You must know that it is not from wisdom that you would [question] me about this, and it is your youthful thoughts that lead you to this. And now, my son, 'If you have understanding,' 'incline your ear and hear,' and I will teach you to benefit from Torah and the commandments: You must know, that a man is acted upon according to his actions; and his heart and all his thoughts always follow after the actions that he does - whether good or bad. And even he who in his heart is a complete sinner and all the desires of his heart are only for evil; if his spirit shall be enlightened and he will put his efforts and actions to persist in Torah and commandments - even if not for the sake of Heaven - he shall immediately incline towards the good. And from that which is not for its own sake comes that which is for its own sake [as opposed to being for personal gain]; for the hearts are drawn after the actions…For it is known and true that every man is acted upon according to his actions, as we have said. And the Sages, may their memory be blessed, said about this (Makkot 23b), "God wanted to grant merits to Israel, therefore he gave them many laws and commandments," to occupy all of our thoughts and all our deeds, to benefit us at our end [i.e. in the world to come]. Because from the good actions we are acted upon to be good and merit eternal life. And the Sages hinted at this (Menachot 43b) with their statement that anyone who has a mezuzah on his door, tsitsit on his garment and tefillin on his head is promised that he shall not sin - for these are constant commandments, and [so] he is constantly acted upon by them. Therefore, surely observe what [you choose] to be your craft and your dealings, since you will be pulled by them and you will not pull them…

The Sefer HaChinuch articulates what he says is a foundational principle about the benefit of observing Torah. Why do we have so many different mitzvot related to remembering the exodus from Egypt? Because each provides an opportunity. If our goal was simply to casually remember a particular event, so indeed a single token observance would be sufficient. But if we understand that the true value of mitzvot is that they ennoble and elevate us, that “our actions [over time] influence our character”, then we also see that every mitzvah offers another way to bring the fundamental ideas of the exodus into our lives. He quotes the following Mishna:

משנה – מכות פרק ג (טז) רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן עֲקַשְׁיָא אוֹמֵר, רָצָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְזַכּוֹת אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל, לְפִיכָךְ הִרְבָּה לָהֶם תּוֹרָה וּמִצְוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: יְיָ חָפֵץ לְמַעַן צִדְקוֹ יַגְדִּיל תּוֹרָה וְיַאְדִּיר (ישעיהו מ״ב:כ״א).

Mishna Makkot 3:16 Rabbi Ḥananya ben Akashya says: The Holy One, Blessed be He, sought to confer merit upon the Jewish people; therefore, He increased for them Torah and mitzvot, as it is stated: “It pleased the Lord for the sake of His righteousness to make the Torah great and glorious” (Isaiah 42:21).

פירוש המשנה לרמב"ם מסכת מכות פרק ג

רבי חנניא בן עקשיא אומר רצה הקב״ה לזכות את ישראל כו׳: מעקרי האמונה בתורה כי כשיקיים אדם מצוה מתרי״ג מצות כראוי וכהוגן ולא ישתף עמה כוונה מכוונת העולם בשום פנים אלא שיעשה אותה לשמה מאהבה כמו שבארתי לך הנה זכה בה לחיי העולם הבא ועל זה אמר רבי חנניא כי המצות בהיותם הרבה אי אפשר שלא יעשה אדם בחייו אחת מהם על מתכונתה ושלמותה ובעשותו אותה המצוה תחיה נפשו באותו מעשה וממה שיורה על העקר הזה מה ששאל ר׳ חנניא בן תרדיון מה אני לחיי עוה״ב והשיבו המשיב כלום בא מעשה לידך כלומר נזדמן לך לעשות מצוה כהוגן השיבו כי נזדמנה לו מצות צדקה על דרך שלמות ככל מה שאפשר וזכה לחיי העוה״ב ופירוש הפסוק (ישעי׳ מ״ב) ה׳ חפץ למען צדקו לצדק את ישראל למען כי יגדיל תורה ויאדיר:

Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishna - Makkot 3:16

Among the foundational principles of our faith in the Torah is that when a person fulfills a mitzvah from the 613 mitzvot properly and appropriately, and does not intermingle with it some extraneous worldly intention in any manner, but rather he does the mitzvah for its own sake out of love, as I have explained to you, behold he will merit through it life in the world to come. And this is what Rebbe Chananiah said, for given the abundance of mitzvot, it is impossible that a person will not do one of them properly and completely, and through doing that mitzvah, and he will give life to his soul through that action. And based on this foundational principle, Rebbe Chananiah ben Tradyon asked, what is my status with regard to the world to come? He was answered, “have no opportunities presented themselves to you?”, meaning have you been able to complete one mitzvah properly? He answered them that he had the opportunity to perform the mitzvah of charity in the most complete manner possible, and had thus merited life in the world to come. And this is the explanation of the verse, “Hashem desires for the sake of His righteousness” to make the Jewish people r…

There is a strange digression in the middle of the narrative where Moshe is commanded to approach Pharaoh. “So the Lord spoke to Moses and to Aaron, and He commanded them concerning the children of Israel and concerning Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, to let the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt” (Shemot 6:13). The next verse continues, “These are the heads of the fathers' houses: The sons of Reuben, Israel's firstborn…” (6:14) and then the Torah meanders through Reuven and his descendants and Shimon and his descendants. Finally, we get to Levi, the branches of his descendants, eventually arriving at the household of Amram and Yocheved, into which Miriam, Aharon, and Moshe are born. Then before returning to the narrative of Hashem commanding Moshe to address Pharaoh, we are confronted with a few out of place and seemingly redundant verses:

שמות ו (כו) ה֥וּא אַהֲרֹ֖ן וּמֹשֶׁ֑ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר אָמַ֤ר יְהֹוָה֙ לָהֶ֔ם הוֹצִ֜יאוּ אֶת־בְּנֵ֧י יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם עַל־צִבְאֹתָֽם׃ (כז) הֵ֗ם הַֽמְדַבְּרִים֙ אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֣ה מֶֽלֶךְ־מִצְרַ֔יִם לְהוֹצִ֥יא אֶת־בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מִמִּצְרָ֑יִם ה֥וּא מֹשֶׁ֖ה וְאַהֲרֹֽן׃

Shemot 6 (26) That is Aaron and Moses, to whom the Lord said, "Take the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt with their legions.” (27) They are the ones who spoke to Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, to let the children of Israel out of Egypt; they are Moses and Aaron.

If the Torah listed all the tribes and descendants that would be noteworthy. If it just listed Levi to Moshe and Aharon, that might be understandable. But a partial list of Reuven, Shimon, and Levi only is completely puzzling. The conclusion of the genealogical digression is also baffling. This is the 45th mention of Moshe and the 13th mention of Aharon; we know who they are at this point. What are we to learn from this section of the Torah? Rav Hirsch provides some assistance, articulating two takeaways from this peculiar narrative:

Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch - Commentary on Shemot 6:4-30

Now it is of critical importance to present an exact list of their lineage and relations, so as to attest thereby for all time to come that their origin was ordinary and human, and that the nature of their being was ordinary and human…This “certificate of origin” is meant to negate in advance and forevermore any erroneous deification, any illusion of incarnation of Deity in human form. It is meant to uphold this truth: Moshe, the greatest man of all time, was just a man, and the position he attained before God was not beyond the reach of mortal human beings.

The list of names is also meant to negate a second illusion, the opposite of the first and no less dangerous…For although the certificate of origin establishes as a fact the human nature of Moshe and Aharon, it might also have fostered the belief that everyone, without exception, is fit to become a prophet. A person who today is known as a complete idiot could tomorrow proclaim the Word of God. God’s spirit could suddenly descend upon an ignorant and uneducated person and teach him to speak in seventy languages. Indeed, this phenomenon of imagined or pretended prophecy is not uncommon in other circles. In their view, the more intellectually limited and empty-minded the prophet of today was yesterday, the more clearly this sudden transformation attests to a Divine call.

This dangerous illusion, too, is negated by the family register. True, Moshe and Aharon were men and nothing but men, but they were chosen. Had God wished simply to pick the first comer, there were other tribes…branches…houses…God, however, chooses the worthiest and most exemplary to be His emissaries who do His bidding. Before he receives his call, the human being must attain the heights of human virtue…One is chosen only if he has matured on his own to the point that he has become worthy of being chosen.

Rav Hirsch derives two distinct ideas from this narrative. Firstly, it provides context for understanding that the greatest of Jewish leaders are nonetheless human. We recognize the divinely implanted potential in man, but we do not confuse it with Divinity itself. Secondly, we learn that greatness is not random. Progress and development is the result of human initiative and effort, combined with divinely orchestrated opportunity and responsibility.

Rashi picks up on another anomaly in verse which first states “that is Aharon and Moshe” and concludes with “that is Moshe and Aharon” (6:26).

רש"י שמות ו:כו

הוא אהרן ומשה – אילו שהוזכרו למעלה שילדה יוכבד לעמרם, הוא אהרן ומשה אשר אמר וגו'. יש מקומות שמקדים אהרן למשה, ויש מקומות שמקדים משה לאהרן, לומר ששקולים שניהם כאחד.

Rashi Shemot 6:26

That is Aaron and Moses: Who are mentioned above [verse 20], whom Jochebed bore to Amram, [these two] are [the same] Aaron and Moses to whom the Lord said, etc. In some places, [Scripture] places Aaron before Moses, and in other places it places Moses before Aaron, to tell us that they were equal. — [from Mechilta, 7:1]

In what way were Moshe and Aharon equal? We know Moshe is the greatest of all prophets, “And there was no other prophet who arose in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (Devarim 34:10; see Rambam - Yesodei HaTorah 7:6). They cannot be equal in terms of prophecy. In fact, Aharon and Miriam made this mistake at the end of Beha’alotecha (see Bamidbar 12:1-13).

מלבי"ם שמות ו:כו

הוא אהרן ומשה – אחר שהשלים יחוסם אומר כי שני האחים האלה נשלחו לשני דברים: א] אשר אמר ה' להם הוציאו את ב"י מארץ מצרים, שהוא השליחות שנשלחו אל ב"י להוציאם מא"מ, וזה כולל בין המציאה הגופנית שיוציאו אותם על צבאותם להוליכם אל המדבר, בין היציאה הנפשיית שיבדלו מטומאת מצרים ומדעיתיהם, ובזה היה אהרן העקר ומשה טפל לו, כי הוא לבדי דבר אל ב"י והם נמשכו אחריו יותר שהיה אוהב שלום ורודף שלום, וכמ"ש חז"ל שלכן כתיב במיתתו ויבכו את אהרן וגו' כל ביח ישראל, וע"כ אמר הוא אהרן ומשה:

Malbim Shemot 6:26

Having now recorded their distinguished lineage, the narrative stresses once more that the brothers were dispatched on this mission for a double purpose. One, to bring out the children of Israel from the land of Egypt, which pertains both to the physical exodus: taking the Israelites out from amidst their host people, to send them into the wilderness, and to the spiritual exodus: setting them apart from the defiling practices of the Egyptians and their doctrines. With respect to the latter, Aharon was given the principal role, since he alone would be speaking to the Israelites, being a man who loved peace and always sought to make peace, and whose leadership was for this reason accepted. According to our Sages, that is made clear by Scripture later recording that in mourning for the death of Aharon, they wept ... all the house of Israel. Accordingly, the present verse places Aharon before Moshe.

The Malbim indicates that Moshe and Aharon had different roles. Moshe’s role was more primary when it came to leading the physical exodus from Egypt. But when it came to the spiritual exodus, Aharon was primary and Moshe was in a supporting role. Moshe lead the political exodus while Aharon lead the theological exodus. It’s not that their roles were identical. But they both fulfilled equally essential Divine missions.

The Rav offers a related and perhaps more expansive view of Moshe and Aharon’s respective roles:

Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik - “Engaging the Heart and Teaching the Mind”

A pattern of dual leadership seems to have prevailed during major periods of Jewish history…Both Moses and Aaron were teachers, but their methods and temperaments differed. The two major traditions of teaching may be called that of the king (malchus)-teacher, and that of the saint (kedushah)-teacher. Moses was the prototype of the king-teacher and Aaron represented the saint-teacher. Both of them enlightened minds, molded characters, and propagated the word of God. Both led their communities along righteous paths and made sacrifices for their welfare. Nevertheless, their methods, their approaches, and the media they employed were different. In terms of ulti…

שמות א (טו) וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ מֶ֣לֶךְ מִצְרַ֔יִם לַֽמְיַלְּדֹ֖ת הָֽעִבְרִיֹּ֑ת אֲשֶׁ֨ר שֵׁ֤ם הָֽאַחַת֙ שִׁפְרָ֔ה וְשֵׁ֥ם הַשֵּׁנִ֖ית פּוּעָֽה׃ (טז) וַיֹּ֗אמֶר בְּיַלֶּדְכֶן֙ אֶת־הָֽעִבְרִיּ֔וֹת וּרְאִיתֶ֖ן עַל־הָאׇבְנָ֑יִם אִם־בֵּ֥ן הוּא֙ וַהֲמִתֶּ֣ן אֹת֔וֹ וְאִם־בַּ֥ת הִ֖וא וָחָֽיָה׃ (יז) וַתִּירֶ֤אןָ הַֽמְיַלְּדֹת֙ אֶת־הָ֣אֱלֹהִ֔ים וְלֹ֣א עָשׂ֔וּ כַּאֲשֶׁ֛ר דִּבֶּ֥ר אֲלֵיהֶ֖ן מֶ֣לֶךְ מִצְרָ֑יִם וַתְּחַיֶּ֖יןָ אֶת־הַיְלָדִֽים׃ (יח) וַיִּקְרָ֤א מֶֽלֶךְ־מִצְרַ֙יִם֙ לַֽמְיַלְּדֹ֔ת וַיֹּ֣אמֶר לָהֶ֔ן מַדּ֥וּעַ עֲשִׂיתֶ֖ן הַדָּבָ֣ר הַזֶּ֑ה וַתְּחַיֶּ֖יןָ אֶת־הַיְלָדִֽים׃ (יט) וַתֹּאמַ֤רְןָ הַֽמְיַלְּדֹת֙ אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֔ה כִּ֣י לֹ֧א כַנָּשִׁ֛ים הַמִּצְרִיֹּ֖ת הָֽעִבְרִיֹּ֑ת כִּֽי־חָי֣וֹת הֵ֔נָּה בְּטֶ֨רֶם תָּב֧וֹא אֲלֵהֶ֛ן הַמְיַלֶּ֖דֶת וְיָלָֽדוּ׃ (כ) וַיֵּ֥יטֶב אֱלֹהִ֖ים לַֽמְיַלְּדֹ֑ת וַיִּ֧רֶב הָעָ֛ם וַיַּֽעַצְמ֖וּ מְאֹֽד׃ (כא) וַיְהִ֕י כִּֽי־יָרְא֥וּ הַֽמְיַלְּדֹ֖ת אֶת־הָאֱלֹהִ֑ים וַיַּ֥עַשׂ לָהֶ֖ם בָּתִּֽים׃

Shemot 1 (15) Now the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, one who was named Shifrah, and the second, who was named Puah. (16) And he said, “When you deliver the Hebrew women, and you see on the birthstool, if it is a son, you shall put him to death, but if it is a daughter, she may live.” (17) The midwives, however, feared God; so they did not do as the king of Egypt had spoken to them, but they enabled the boys to live. (18) So the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and said to them, "Why have you done this thing, that you have enabled the boys to live?” (19) And the midwives said to Pharaoh, "Because the Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women, for they are skilled as midwives; when the midwife has not yet come to them, they have [already] given birth.” (20) God benefited the midwives, and the people multiplied and became very strong. (21) Now it took place when the midwives feared God, that He made houses for them.

תלמוד בבלי – סוטה יא:

ותחיין את הילדים תנא לא דיין שלא המיתו אותן אלא שהיו מספיקות להם מים ומזון… ויהי כי יראו המילדות את האלהים ויעש להם בתים רב ושמואל חד אמר בתי כהונה ולויה וחד אמר בתי מלכות מ"ד בתי כהונה ולויה אהרן ומשה ומ"ד בתי מלכות דוד נמי ממרים קאתי דכתיב {דברי הימים א ב':י"ט} ותמת עזובה (אשת כלב) ויקח לו כלב את אפרת ותלד לו את חור וכתיב {שמואל א י"ז:י"ב} ודוד בן איש אפרתי וגו'.

Talmud Bavli – Sotah 11b

The verse concludes: “But they kept the male children alive” (Exodus 1:17). A Sage teaches: It is not only that they did not kill the children as Pharaoh had commanded them, but that they would even provide for them water and food, as the phrase “But they kept the male children alive” indicates…The verse relates the midwives’ reward: “And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that He made them houses” (Exodus 1:21). Rav and Shmuel disagree as to the precise interpretation of these houses: One says that God made the houses of the priesthood and the Levites descend from the midwives, and one says that God made the houses of royalty descend from them. The one who says that it is referring to the houses of the priesthood and the Levites is referring to Aaron and Moses, who were sons of Jochebed. And the one who says that it is referring to houses of royalty is referring to David, who also comes from Miriam, as it is written: “And Azubah,” the wife of Caleb, “died, and Caleb took to him Ephrath, who bore him Hur” (I Chronicles 2:19) and, as will be explained further, Ephrath is Miriam. And it is written: “David was the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehem in Judah” (I Samuel 17:12). Therefore, he was a descendant of Miriam.

Pharaoh instructs the Jewish midwives to murder every Jewish male infant born. They quietly refuse, risk their lives, and offer an excuse. Hashem protects them, as it says “God benefited them” (1:20, see Shadal and R’ Dovid Tzvi Hoffman) and “made houses for them” (1:21).

The Talmud tells us that Yocheved and Miriam are the progenitors of future Jewish leadership, both spiritual and political. They were put in a difficult position, and their lives were certainly in jeopardy. With that type of pressure, some might compromise on their principles. They might have given an excuse to others or themselves. But Yocheved and Miriam didn’t adjust their principles and refused change their behavior. They continued to go above and beyond, even providing food and water to families sustaining a new infant.

Rav and Shmuel disagree about which type of leadership is exemplified in the behavior of Yocheved and Miriam. They were able to maintain their principles despite outside pressure. One asserts that their resistance to external values is at the root of spiritual leadership, finding fulfillment in the future Kohanim and Leviim who served in the Temple. The other asserts that their resistance to compromising their values in the face of practical pressure is the hallmark of Jewish political leadership, finding fulfillment in the future kings and leaders of Israel. Rashi notably does not believe these ideas are mutually exclusive, and incorporates both approaches.

Later in Shemot we find another example of leadership. Pharaoh decrees that the Jewish workers will no longer be given straw to make bricks, but must nonetheless maintain the same quota of productivity. The Egyptian managers deliver the new expectations to the Jewish שוטרים –officers, who supervise the Jewish workers. There are two levels of middle management between Pharaoh and the Jews, one layer Egyptian and the other Jewish. The Egyptian managers have no problem passing this unfair arrangement on down the line. The Jewish supervisors act differently.

שמות ה (יד) וַיֻּכּ֗וּ שֹֽׁטְרֵי֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֲשֶׁר־שָׂ֣מוּ עֲלֵהֶ֔ם נֹֽגְשֵׂ֥י פַרְעֹ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר מַדּ֡וּעַ לֹא֩ כִלִּיתֶ֨ם חָקְכֶ֤ם לִלְבֹּן֙ כִּתְמ֣וֹל שִׁלְשֹׁ֔ם גַּם־תְּמ֖וֹל גַּם־הַיּֽוֹם:

Shemot (1:14) And the officers of the children of Israel whom Pharaoh's taskmasters had appointed over them were beaten, saying, "Why have you not completed your quota to make bricks like the day before yesterday, neither yesterday nor today?"

רש"י שמות ה (יד) ויכו שטרי בני ישראל – השוטרים ישראל היו, וחסים על חבריהם מלדחקם. וכשהיו משלימים הלבנים לנגשים שהם מצרים, והיה חסר מן הסכום, היו מלקים אותם על שלא דחקו את עושי המלאכה. לפיכך זכו אותן שוטרים להיות סנהדרין, ונאצל מן הרוח אשר על משה והושם עליהם, שנאמר: אספה לי שבעים איש מזקני ישראל, מאותם שידעת הטובה שעשו להם במצרים, כי הם נגשי העם ושטריו (במדבר יא:טז).

Rashi Shemot 5:14 And the officers of the children of Israel… were beaten: The officers were Israelites, and they had pity on their fellows, [and did] not press them. They would turn the bricks over to the taskmasters, who were Egyptians, and when something was missing form the [required] amount, they [the Egyptians] would flog them [the officers] because they did not press the workers. Therefore those officers merited to become the Sanhedrin, and some of the spirit that was upon Moses was taken and placed upon them, as it is said: “Gather to Me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Num. 11:16), of those about whom you know the good that they did in Egypt, “that they are the elders of the people and its officers” (ibid.). — [from Tanchuma, Beha’alothecha 13 and Sifrei, Beha’alothecha 92]

According to the Abarbanel, Pharaoh did not tell his Jewish workers about the new requirement directly. He was concerned about an open rebellion. Instead, he had his Egyptian middle management deliver the message. When the Jewish supervisors later appealed to Pharaoh, he demurred and explained he needed to support the decision of the Egyptian managers. He used his layers of middle management to obfuscate responsibility.

The Jewish supervisors did not shirk their responsibility. In the face of injustice, they didn’t just pass it on down the line to someone else. Jewish leadership does not only exist at the top of a hierarchy, but at every level. In an unjust society, people say, “sorry, I don’t make the rules”. In a just society, each individual takes on the responsibility of implementing צדק ומ…

At the end of his life, Yaakov gathers his children together, the brothers that would be the foundation of the tribes of Israel. He gives them each a unique blessing. Yehudah is identified with the future political leadership of the Jewish people.

בראשית מט:י

לֹֽא־יָס֥וּר שֵׁ֨בֶט֙ מִֽיהוּדָ֔ה וּמְחֹקֵ֖ק מִבֵּ֣ין רַגְלָ֑יו עַ֚ד כִּֽי־יָבֹ֣א שִׁילֹ֔ה וְל֖וֹ יִקְּהַ֥ת עַמִּֽים:

Bereisheet 49:10

The scepter will not leave Judah, nor a scribe from between his feet, until he comes to Shiloh, and to him the nations will be obedient (translation based on Ibn Ezra)

רמב"ן בראשית מט:י

ואיפשר גם כן שהיה עליהם חטא במלכותם מפני שהיו כהנים, ונצטוו: תשמרו את כהונתכם לכל דבר המזבח ולמבית לפרכת ועבדתם עבודת מתנה אתן את כהונתכם (במדבר י"ח:ז'), ולא היה להם למלוך רק לעבוד את עבודת י"י. [וראיתי בירושלמי במסכת הוריות (ירושלמי הוריות ג':ב'): אין מושחין מלכים כהנים. ר' יהודה ענתוריא על שם לא יסור שבט מיהודה.

Nachmanides on the Torah - Bereisheet 49:10

It is also possible that, [in addition to the Hasmoneans having sinned for assuming royalty when they were not of the tribe of Judah], they sinned in ruling on account of their being priests, who have been commanded: “Guard your priesthood in everything that pertaineth to the altar, and to within the veil; and ye shall serve; I give you the priesthood as a service of gift” (Numbers 18:7). Thus it was not for them to rule, but only to perform the Service of G-d. In Tractate Horayoth of the Jerusalem Talmud (3:2) I have seen the following text: “We do not anoint priests as kings. Rabbi Yehudah Anturya said that this is on account of the verse, ‘The sceptre shall not depart from Judah.’”

The Ramban explains that one error of the Hashmonaim, also known as the Macabees, was that they assumed the monarchy despite not being from the tribe of Yehudah (see Rambam, Melachim 1:8 who allows monarchs on a temporary basis from other tribes). But beyond this, they also tried to combine the monarchy with the priesthood. The source prohibiting this in the Jerusalem Talmud directly cites our verse.

The phrase “separation between church and state” was coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter from 1802. But we find a source for this concept in the separation of the spiritual and the political within the Torah system. That’s not to say we don’t aspire to have political leaders with spiritual depth. But we recognize that such a combination is rare.

תלמוד בבלי – גמרא גיטין נט

ואמר רבה בריה דרבא ואיתימא רבי הילל בריה דרבי וולס מימות משה ועד רבי לא מצינו תורה וגדולה במקום אחד.

Talmud Bavli - Gittin 49a

Raba the son of Rava, and some say it was Rebbe Hillel the son of Vallas, said: From the days of Moshe until Rebbe (Yehudah the Prince), we do not find Torah and greatness in a single person

The Gemara proceeds to question this statement. What about the great King David? The Gemara answers, that while he certainly embodied both spiritual and political greatness, there was someone in his generation who exceeded him in Torah.

It is indeed possible to have leadership and spirituality combined in a single individual. Moshe Rabbeinu and Rebbe Yehudah HaNasi were unparalleled in each sphere during their era. Rashi (Bereisheet 49:3) indicates that Yaakov’s firstborn son Reuven could have combined the priesthood and the monarchy. But he failed to live up to this possibility. Throughout subsequent Jewish history this combination has been elusive. It is thus important not to have too much power concentrated in one institution. We must leave room for greatness to evolve in multiple segments of society.

The late Rabbi Dr. Nachum Eliezer Rabinovitch brought these concepts forward into the modern state of Israel. In a recent article in the Torah U-Madda Journal discussing his political theology, Rami Schwartz writes: “While in his writings R. Rabinovitch unquestioningly endorses modern Israel’s democracy, his political theology does carry with it some pointed criticisms of the current system. Chief among these is that too often the State of Israel fails to maintain a proper separation between the civil and the spiritual” (Schwartz, 2021). Here is Rabbi Rabinovitch in his own words:

Thus the legal system of Torah consists of two parts. One, the proper jurisdiction of the government, deals with affairs of society. The other - the commandments between man and God - belongs to every Jew. This division has important implications. The rulers are charged with implementing the laws between man and his fellow men, and are granted wide legislative and administrative powers in this realm…The ultimate goals of spiritual welfare are to be achieved by means other than government (Rabinovitch, 1992).

Judah is given the mantle of monarchy. But he is not given the priesthood. Nor are the priests allowed to be monarchs. Each has its own sphere of influence. Government must concentrate on providing man’s physical needs, to sustain and preserve justice, peace, and security among men. It must be careful not to overstep. The Kohanim –priests, must maintain a degree of separation from this enterprise, for they must focus on man’s spiritual development. It is not that these endeavors cannot be combined, but due to the faults of men, they are best left to be pursued independently. Ultimately though, the efforts toward sovereignty and spirituality can work in concert and need not conflict.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties (Jefferson, 1802).

References

Thomas Jefferson (1802). Letter to Danbury, Connecticut, Baptist Association, January 1, with Copy. -01-01. [Manuscript/Mixed Material] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/mtjbib010955/ Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists: The Final Letter, as Sent. Library of Congress Information Bulletin, 51(6). https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

James Hutson. (1998). 'A Wall of Separation’ FBI Helps Restore Jefferson's Obliterated Draft. Library of Congress Information Bulletin, 57(6). https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html

Nahmanides & CB Chavel (1999). Commentary on the Torah. New York: Shilo. https://mg.alhatorah.org/Full/Bereshit/49.10#e0n6

Nachum L. Rabinovitch. (February 6, 1992). The Civil and the Spiritual. The Jerusalem Report. Retrieved from Nexis Uni®

Rami Schwartz. (2006). The Political Theology of Rabbi Nachum Eliezer Rabinovitch. The Torah U-madda Journal, 18, 1-32. Retrieved from: https://content.yutorah.org/viewer/2021/1053/1005707.pdf

In one of the most dramatic episodes in all of Tanakh, Yehudah stands up for his vulnerable brother Binyamin, correcting a past mistake of not standing up sufficiently for Yosef. Yosef finally reveals his identity, taking his brothers by surprise. Yosef and his brother Binyamin embrace after 22 years apart.

בראשית מה:יד

וַיִּפֹּ֛ל עַל־צַוְּארֵ֥י בִנְיָמִֽן־אָחִ֖יו וַיֵּ֑בְךְּ וּבִ֨נְיָמִ֔ן בָּכָ֖ה עַל־צַוָּארָֽיו׃

Bereisheet 45:14

He fell on his brother Benjamin’s neck, and wept, and Benjamin wept on his neck

רש"י בראשית מה:יד

ויפל על צוארי בנימן ויבך – על שני מקדשות שעתידין להיות בחלקו של בנימן וסופן ליחרב.

ובנימן בכה – על משכן שילה שעתיד להיות בחלקו של יוסף וסופו ליחרב.

Rashi Bereistet 45:14

And he fell on his brother Benjamin’s neck and wept: for the two sanctuaries which were destined to be in Benjamin’s territory and would ultimately be destroyed. [From Meg. 16b]

and Benjamin wept on his neck: for the Tabernacle of Shiloh, which was destined to be in Joseph’s territory yet would ultimately be destroyed. [From Meg. 16b, Gen. Rabbah 93:12]

Rashi’s comments, based on the Midrash, are difficult to understand. What movie is Rashi watching? What is the idea behind Rashi’s comment? How do his comments help us understand the essential narrative? This is especially difficult given Rashi’s famous comment about the objective of his commentary:

רש"י בראשית לג:כ

ואני ליישב פשוטו ושמועו של מקרא באתי

Rashi Bereshit 33:20

But I have come to establish the simple meaning of the verse.

The book of בראשית –Genesis, is the story of humanity unfolding across the landscape of time. It begins with man, human society, and then focuses in on Avraham. We witness the emergence of an ethical way of life, in stark contradistinction to the surrounding world. As the Rav, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, expressed it, Genesis “is the creation of the world, but also the creation of the ”כנסת ישראל”, the community of the Jewish people.

The Ramban famously highlights a concept expressed in the midrash by our Sages:

רמב"ן בראשית פרשת לך לך פרק יב:ו

כל מה שאירע לאבות סימן לבנים -תנחומא ט

Ramban Commentary on Bereisheet 12:6

All that occurs to the forefathers is indicative of [what will occur] to their children.

It is a difficult phrase to translate, but it conveys “All that occurred to our forefathers is symbolic of the future for us.” In the words of the Rav, it is “the blueprint of Jewish history for all days” (1968).

When our Sages read these parshiyot, they see more than the particular episode. The Haftorah which accompanies the parsha of Vayigash describes a prophecy of יחזקאל –Ezekiel.

יחזקאל לז

(טו) וַיְהִ֥י דְבַר־יְהֹוָ֖ה אֵלַ֥י לֵאמֹֽר׃ (טז) וְאַתָּ֣ה בֶן־אָדָ֗ם קַח־לְךָ֙ עֵ֣ץ אֶחָ֔ד וּכְתֹ֤ב עָלָיו֙ לִֽיהוּדָ֔ה וְלִבְנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל חֲבֵרָ֑ו וּלְקַח֙ עֵ֣ץ אֶחָ֔ד וּכְת֣וֹב עָלָ֗יו לְיוֹסֵף֙ עֵ֣ץ אֶפְרַ֔יִם וְכׇל־בֵּ֥ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל חֲבֵרָֽו׃ (יז) וְקָרַ֨ב אֹתָ֜ם אֶחָ֧ד אֶל־אֶחָ֛ד לְךָ֖ לְעֵ֣ץ אֶחָ֑ד וְהָי֥וּ לַאֲחָדִ֖ים בְּיָדֶֽךָ׃ (יח) וְכַֽאֲשֶׁר֙ יֹאמְר֣וּ אֵלֶ֔יךָ בְּנֵ֥י עַמְּךָ֖ לֵאמֹ֑ר הֲלֽוֹא־תַגִּ֥יד לָ֖נוּ מָה־אֵ֥לֶּה לָּֽךְ׃ (יט) דַּבֵּ֣ר אֲלֵהֶ֗ם כֹּה־אָמַר֮ אֲדֹנָ֣י יֱהֹוִה֒ הִנֵּה֩ אֲנִ֨י לֹקֵ֜חַ אֶת־עֵ֤ץ יוֹסֵף֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בְּיַד־אֶפְרַ֔יִם וְשִׁבְטֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל חֲבֵרָ֑ו וְנָתַתִּי֩ אוֹתָ֨ם עָלָ֜יו אֶת־עֵ֣ץ יְהוּדָ֗ה וַֽעֲשִׂיתִם֙ לְעֵ֣ץ אֶחָ֔ד וְהָי֥וּ אֶחָ֖ד בְּיָדִֽי׃ (כ) וְהָי֨וּ הָעֵצִ֜ים אֲֽשֶׁר־תִּכְתֹּ֧ב עֲלֵיהֶ֛ם בְּיָדְךָ֖ לְעֵינֵיהֶֽם׃ (כא) וְדַבֵּ֣ר אֲלֵיהֶ֗ם כֹּה־אָמַר֮ אֲדֹנָ֣י יֱהֹוִה֒ הִנֵּ֨ה אֲנִ֤י לֹקֵ֙חַ֙ אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל מִבֵּ֥ין הַגּוֹיִ֖ם אֲשֶׁ֣ר הָֽלְכוּ־שָׁ֑ם וְקִבַּצְתִּ֤י אֹתָם֙ מִסָּבִ֔יב וְהֵבֵאתִ֥י אוֹתָ֖ם אֶל־אַדְמָתָֽם׃ (כב) וְעָשִׂ֣יתִי אֹ֠תָ֠ם לְג֨וֹי אֶחָ֤ד בָּאָ֙רֶץ֙ בְּהָרֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וּמֶ֧לֶךְ אֶחָ֛ד יִהְיֶ֥ה לְכֻלָּ֖ם לְמֶ֑לֶךְ וְלֹ֤א [יִֽהְיוּ־] (יהיה) עוֹד֙ לִשְׁנֵ֣י גוֹיִ֔ם וְלֹ֨א יֵחָ֥צוּ ע֛וֹד לִשְׁתֵּ֥י מַמְלָכ֖וֹת עֽוֹד׃

Yechezkel 37

(15) And the word of the Lord came to me, saying: (16) And you, son of man, take for yourself one stick and write upon it, 'For Judah and for the children of Israel his companions'; and take one stick and write upon it, 'For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim and all the house of Israel, his companions.’ (17) And bring them close, one to the other into one stick, and they shall be one in your hand. (18) And when the children of your people say to you, saying, 'Will you not tell us what these are to you?’ (19) Say to them, So says the Lord God: Behold I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim and the tribes of Israel his companions, and I will place them with him with the stick of Judah, and I will make them into one stick, and they shall become one in My hand. (20) And the sticks upon which you shall write shall be in your hand before their eyes. (21) And say to them, So says the Lord God: Behold I will take the children of Israel from among the nations where they have gone, and I will gather them from every side, and I will bring them to their land. (22) And I will make them into one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be to them all as a king; and they shall no longer be two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms anymore.

The Northern Kingdom of Yosef and the ten tribes fell in 722 BCE. The Southern Kingdom of Yehuda and Binyamin fell in 586 BCE. The prophet is sharing a message of hope to the exiled Jews in Bavel that just like Yosef and Binyamin reunite in this week’s Parsha, the kingdoms of Yosef and Binyamin will reunite in the future. That is why our Sages chose this Haftorah to accompany this particular Torah reading.

When we read these parshiyot in this context, we get a broader and deeper picture of the events. We start with creation, humanity, and then focus down into the emergence of the Jewish people. Rashi is indeed watching the same movie, but he is watching it with a different lens. He’s read the book, seen the prequel, and the sequel.

Why were Yosef and Binyamin crying over the destruction of the future Temples? Because they understood that the strife between the brothers in their generation was a microcosm of the strife that would occur within the Jewish people for generations to come, ultimately resulting in the destruction of the Temples and the people’s exile. What can we learn from the story of Yosef and the brothers? Everything about the story of the Jewish people, past, present, and future.

References

Rosenberg, A. (1980). A new English translation of the Hebrew Bible text and Rashi, with a commentary digest. New York: Judaica Press. Retrieved from: https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/

Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik (1968). Lech Licha. Transcribed from a lecture given to the Rabbinical Council of America.

In somewhat uncharacteristic fashion, the Rambam begins his discussion of the laws of the Hanukkah by giving some historical background:

משנה תורה - ספר זמנים - הלכות מגילה וחנוכה

ג,א  בְּבַיִת שֵׁנִי כְּשֶׁמָּלְכוּ יָוָן, גָּזְרוּ גְּזֵרוֹת עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּבִטְּלוּ דָּתָם, וְלֹא הִנִּיחוּ אוֹתָם לַעְסֹק בַּתּוֹרָה וּבַמִּצְווֹת; וּפָשְׁטוּ יָדָם בִּמְמוֹנָם, וּבִבְנוֹתֵיהֶם; וְנִכְנְסוּ לַהֵיכָל, וּפָרְצוּ בּוֹ פְּרָצוֹת, וְטִמְּאוּ הַטְּהָרוֹת.  וְצַר לָהֶם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל מְאוֹד מִפְּנֵיהֶם, וּלְחָצוּם לַחַץ גָּדוֹל, עַד שֶׁרִחַם עֲלֵיהֶם אֱלֹהֵי אֲבוֹתֵינוּ, וְהוֹשִׁיעָם מִיָּדָם.  וְגָבְרוּ בְּנֵי חַשְׁמֻנַּאי הַכּוֹהֲנִים הַגְּדוֹלִים, וַהֲרָגוּם וְהוֹשִׁיעוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִיָּדָם; וְהִעְמִידוּ מֶלֶךְ מִן הַכּוֹהֲנִים, וְחָזְרָה מַלְכוּת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל יָתֵר עַל מָאתַיִם שָׁנָה--עַד הֶחָרְבָּן הַשֵּׁנִי

Mishne Torah - Order of Times - Laws of Megillah and Hanukkah

In [the era of] the Second Temple, the Greek kingdom issued decrees against the Jewish people, [attempting to] nullify their faith and refusing to allow them to observe the Torah and its commandments. They extended their hands against their property and their daughters; they entered the Sanctuary, wrought havoc within, and made the sacraments impure. The Jews suffered great difficulties from them, for they oppressed them greatly until the God of our ancestors had mercy upon them, delivered them from their hand, and saved them. The sons of the Hasmoneans, the High Priests, overcame [them], slew them, and saved the Jews from their hand. They appointed a king from the priests, and sovereignty returned to Israel for more than 200 years, until the destruction of the Second Temple.

I find the last line of the Rambam particularly perplexing. Why does he end his description of the Hanukkah victory in such an anticlimactic fashion? He could have simply concluded with the Hashmonaim having saved the Jews from the Assyrian Greeks. Why does he mention the sovereignty being returned to Israel, limited to a couple hundred years, followed by the destruction of the Temple?

Rav Soloveitchik points out that if the United States were to fall, we would no longer celebrate the 4th of July (Soloveitchik, 2007). Indeed there are a number of holidays listed in Megillat Ta’anit (see Rosh Hashanah 18b-19b) which were nullified after the destruction of the Temple. But Hannukah and Purim remain extant and observed to this day. There must be something timeless and universal in these days that necessitated their perpetuation, even in our modern context absent the Temple. Perhaps that Rambam is drawing out attention to the fact that while the military victory was worthy of celebration, its effects were not everlasting.

Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch – “Hellenism and Judaism” in Collected Writings Vol. 2 p.200

The festivities of these days reflect the values they seek to perpetuate. Rejoicing and banquets on Purim signify the miraculous chain of events which saved the people from physical destruction. The silent beam of friendly lights relates the victory of light over darkness and tell of the “pure” Menorah’s rescue from the clutches of Greek corruption. Chanukah recounts the rededication of the Sanctuary which had been despoiled by the Greeks. The celebration of the eight-day Feast of Light recalls the victorious survival of the Sanctuary, not the courage of the Maccabees. It does not commemorate the liberation of the Jewish homeland from the grip of enemy hands; it hails the never-ending power of the Jewish Light and of the Jewish Sanctuary.

Rav Hirsch notably deemphasizes the military victory. We have had many military victories in our more than three thousand year history as a people. They do not warrant a timeless holiday. It is the spiritual component of the Hanukkah victory that has relevance throughout the ages.

The Rambam mentions the military victory, and does give credit to the Hashmonaim. But he first mentions that “the God of our ancestors had mercy upon them, delivered them from their hand, and saved them”. He then continues, “The sons of the Hasmoneans, the High Priests, overcame [them], slew them, and saved the Jews from their hand”. Hashem’s involvement is central and contextualizes the political and military successes. This is similar to a message received by the prophet Zecharia.

זכריה - פרק ד

א) וַיָּשָׁב, הַמַּלְאָךְ הַדֹּבֵר בִּי; וַיְעִירֵנִי, כְּאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-יֵעוֹר מִשְּׁנָתוֹ. ב( וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי, מָה אַתָּה רֹאֶה; ויאמר (וָאֹמַר) רָאִיתִי וְהִנֵּה מְנוֹרַת זָהָב כֻּלָּהּ וְגֻלָּהּ עַל-רֹאשָׁהּ, וְשִׁבְעָה נֵרֹתֶיהָ עָלֶיהָ--שִׁבְעָה וְשִׁבְעָה מוּצָקוֹת, לַנֵּרוֹת אֲשֶׁר עַל-רֹאשָׁהּ.  ג) וּשְׁנַיִם זֵיתִים, עָלֶיהָ: אֶחָד מִימִין הַגֻּלָּה, וְאֶחָד עַל-שְׂמֹאלָהּ. ד) וָאַעַן, וָאֹמַר, אֶל-הַמַּלְאָךְ הַדֹּבֵר בִּי, לֵאמֹר:  מָה-אֵלֶּה, אֲדֹנִי. ה) וַיַּעַן הַמַּלְאָךְ הַדֹּבֵר בִּי, וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי, הֲלוֹא יָדַעְתָּ, מָה-הֵמָּה אֵלֶּה; וָאֹמַר, לֹא אֲדֹנִי. ו) וַיַּעַן וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי, לֵאמֹר, זֶה דְּבַר-יְהוָה, אֶל-זְרֻבָּבֶל לֵאמֹר:  לֹא בְחַיִל, וְלֹא בְכֹחַ--כִּי אִם-בְּרוּחִי, אָמַר יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת. ז) מִי-אַתָּה הַר-הַגָּדוֹל לִפְנֵי זְרֻבָּבֶל, לְמִישֹׁר; וְהוֹצִיא, אֶת-הָאֶבֶן הָרֹאשָׁה--תְּשֻׁאוֹת, חֵן חֵן לָהּ.

Zecharia Chapter 4

1) And the angel who spoke with me returned, and he awakened me as a man who wakes up from his sleep. 2) And he said to me, "What do you see?" And I said, "I saw, and behold [there was] a candelabrum all of gold, with its oil-bowl on top of it, and its seven lamps thereon; seven tubes each to the lamps that were on top of it. 3) And [there were] two olive trees near it; one on the right of the bowl, and one on its left. 4) So I answered and spoke to the angel who talked with me, saying, "What are these, my lord?” 5) And the angel who spoke with me answered, and he said to me, "Do you not know what these are?" And I said, "No, my lord.” 6) And he answered and spoke to me, saying, "This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel, saying: 'Not by military force and not by physical strength, but by My spirit,' says the Lord of Hosts. 7) Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you sink to a plain! He will bring out the stone of the main architect, with shouts of grace, grace to it."

Zecharia is shown a vision of the future. But he finds it incomprehensible. He is prompted by God to view his vision in a different context. It is not a result of only human courage and strength. But it is orchestrated by the Spirit of the Almighty.

Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik – “The Everlasting Hanukkah” in Days of Deliverance p.140

“What does the prophecy mean? In the Second Temple period, the Jews will develop a new sort of bravery, of self-worth, a new feeling of pride and importance that will not express itself in the political-military domain, the realm of the profane, as much as in the relgio-spiritual domain, the realm of the sacred. They will develop so strong a belief and stubbornness that through this bravery they will become an eternal people. This type of bravery is far more important than politico-military victories…If this bravery exists, political freedom will develop as a consequence. This bravery can vanquish the greatest hardships. Zechariah’s menorah is the Jewish eternal light, the everlasting Hanukkah that we celebrate.”

References

Hirsch, S. R., Rabbi Dr. Joseph Breuer Foundation., & Samson Raphael Hirsch Publications Society. (1997). The collected writings. New York: P. Feldheim.

Rosenberg, A. (1980). A new English translation of the Hebrew Bible text and Rashi, with a commentary digest. New York: Judaica Press. Retrieved from: https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/

Soloveitchik, J. D., Clark, E. D., Wolowelsky, J. B., & Ziegler, R. (2007). Days of deliverance: Essays on Purim and Hanukkah. New York: Published for the Toras HoRav Foundation by KTAV Pub. House.

Maimonides, M., Touger, E., Kaplan, B., Abramson, Z., & Silverstein, S. (2007). Mishneh Torah. New York: Moznaim Pub. Retrieved from: https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/682956/jewis…

משנה אבות א:טז

רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה אוֹמֵר, עֲשֵׂה לְךָ רַב, וְהִסְתַּלֵּק מִן הַסָּפֵק, וְאַל תַּרְבֶּה לְעַשֵּׂר אֹמָדוֹת

Mishna Avot 1:16

Rabban Gamliel said, make for yourself a Rabbinic authority, remove yourself from doubt, and don’t generally separate tithes based on (your own) estimation.

ספורנו על פרקי אבות

אף על פי שאמרו הרוצה לעשות כדברי בית שמעי עושה, כדברי בית הלל עושה, מפני שאלו ואלו דברי אלקים חיים, מכל מקום ראוי לך שתעשה לך איזה רב מיוחד, שתעשה לעולם כפי דעתו, ותורה כפי הוראתו, ובזה תסתלק מן הספק של מחלוקת באופן שלא יטה לבך לעשות לפעמים כדברי זה ופעמים כדברי זה, שעל כמו זה אמרו ז׳׳ל (עירובין ו:) ׳׳עליו הכתוב אומר, ׳והכסיל בחשך הולך׳׳׳ (קהלת ב:יד)

Sforno Commentary on Avot 1:16

Even though [our Sages] say “one that wants to follow the opinion of the House of Shamai may do, or follow the House of Hillel, because they are both words of the living God”, it is nonetheless appropriate to designate a specific rabbinic authority whose opinion one always follows and to whose halakhic decisions one implements. Through this, one will “remove oneself from doubt” of disagreements, in the manner of one who follows the leanings of his heart sometimes towards this opinion and sometimes towards that opinion. With regard to such a person, the Sages state (Eruvin 13b), “about him the verse says, ‘a fool walks in darkness’ (Kohelet 2:14)

What is the problem with shopping for different opinions? It is really inappropriate to seek out the opinion of different rabbis or experts? Why do the sages suggest that one who follows different opinions is like a “fool walking in darkness”?

I believe an analogy can help clarify the Sforno’s point. We consult doctors based on their expertise in medicine. On a practical basis, their expertise translates to helping us achieve greater health. Doctors, like experts in any field, can disagree. One doctor might be of the opinion that chocolate is healthy and red wine is not, while another doctor may hold the opposite. We can switch doctors to find someone we trust, whose advice we feel we can implement effectively. But if we simply pick and choose from the panoply of medical opinions available online, we are no longer implementing expert opinion. We’re just making up our own.

When this happens, the opportunity for expert consultation is thus wasted. Instead of pursuing greater health through consultation with one’s doctor, such a person is merely using the opportunity to reinforce their existing behavior. The doctor’s role has been reduced from giving advice on a healthy lifestyle, to rubber-stamping one’s current habits and behavior.

Judaism as a system tolerates differences of opinion. In fact, we codify these differences and study the intricacies of competing approaches. But in the realm of the practical, in the world of Halacha –Jewish law, we must choose a particular opinion to follow.

There is no inherent problem with consulting different rabbis. We may have different doctors based on their respective expertise, such as a general practitioner, a dermatologist, an ophthalmologist. But it would be different to always see two general practitioners and follow whichever opinion corresponded to our current lifestyle.

When we only accept opinions that fit our current values, we miss out and sidestep the potential impact of Torah on our lives. We study Torah and implement it in action with the aim of ennobling our values over time. We deny ourselves this primary benefit when we simply pick and choose.

In summary, we aspire to have a transactional relationship with Torah. We explore, investigate, and study its contents. We put these values into action whenever possible. It does require discipline, it does set boundaries, it does require sacrifice. But we hope that as a result, our ideas and opinions will evolve over time. Rabban Gamliel advises us to pick a specific authority and expert that we follow. Not because rabbis or human beings are infallible. But because the process of garnering expert consultation will benefit our development. We should utilize those with more experience and expertise, and not merely rely on our own personal estimation of what is correct (see Rashi and Rabbeinu Yonah). This will open us up to receiving Torah and the benefits implanted in it by our Creator.

רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָיָה אוֹמֵר, עֲשֵׂה לְךָ רַב, וְהִסְתַּלֵּק מִן הַסָּפֵק, וְאַל תַּרְבֶּה לְעַשֵּׂר אֹמָדוֹת

Rabban Gamliel said, make for yourself a Rabbinic authority, remove yourself from doubt, and don’t generally separate tithes based on (your own) estimation.

The relationship between parents and their children is complex. We see examples of children with similar characteristics to their parents, closely following in their footsteps and continuing their efforts and legacies. We also see examples of children paving their own path, sometimes appearing to move in an opposite direction from their family.

Yaakov and Eisav are opposing characters. One is a conquerer, a hunter and a man of the field. The other is an intellectual, a man of integrity and perfection, who dwells in houses of study. Judaism recognizes the contributions of nature and nurture in the formation of the human personality.

בראשית כה:כז

וַֽיִּגְדְּלוּ֙ הַנְּעָרִ֔ים וַיְהִ֣י עֵשָׂ֗ו אִ֛ישׁ יֹדֵ֥עַ צַ֖יִד אִ֣ישׁ שָׂדֶ֑ה וְיַעֲקֹב֙ אִ֣ישׁ תָּ֔ם יֹשֵׁ֖ב אֹהָלִֽים

Bereisheet 25:27

The boys grew up. Esav was a man skilled in hunting, a man of the field, while Yaakov was a man of integrity, a dweller in tents.

רש"י בראשית כה:כז

ויגדלו הנערים ויהי עשו: כל זמן שהיו קטנים לא היו נכרים במעשיהם ואין אדם מדקדק בהם מה טיבם, כיון שנעשו בני שלש עשרה שנה זה פירש לבתי מדרשות וזה פירש לעבודה זרה:

Rashi Bereisheet 25:27

And the youths grew up, and Esau was: As long as they were small, they were not recognizable through their deeds, and no one scrutinized them to determine their characters. As soon as they became thirteen years old, this one parted to the houses of study, and that one parted to idol worship. — [From Gen. Rabbah 63:10; Tanchuma, Ki Theze 4]

Interestingly, Rashi asserts that the difference in character between Yaakov and Eisav was not readily apparent, but would have been noticeable had it been examined more closely.

Rashi’s approach is based in the midrash:

מדרש רבה – בראשית סג:י

וַיִּגְדְּלוּ הַנְּעָרִים (בראשית כה, כז), רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר מָשָׁל לַהֲדַס וְעִצְבוֹנִית שֶׁהָיוּ גְּדֵלִים זֶה עַל גַּבֵּי זֶה, וְכֵיוָן שֶׁהִגְדִּילוּ וְהִפְרִיחוּ זֶה נוֹתֵן רֵיחוֹ וְזֶה חוֹחוֹ, כָּךְ כָּל י"ג שָׁנָה שְׁנֵיהֶם הוֹלְכִים לְבֵית הַסֵּפֶר וּשְׁנֵיהֶם בָּאִים מִבֵּית הַסֵּפֶר, לְאַחַר י"ג שָׁנָה זֶה הָיָה הוֹלֵךְ לְבָתֵּי מִדְרָשׁוֹת וְזֶה הָיָה הוֹלֵךְ לְבָתֵּי עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר צָרִיךְ אָדָם לְהִטָּפֵל בִּבְנוֹ עַד י"ג שָׁנָה, מִיכָּן וָאֵילָךְ צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר בָּרוּךְ שֶׁפְּטָרַנִּי מֵעָנְשׁוֹ שֶׁל זֶה.

Midrash Rabbah - Bereistet 63:10

And the youths grew up" (Bereishit 25:27). Rabbi Levi made an analogy to a myrtle and wild rosebush which grew next to each other; when they had grown, one gave forth scent and the other thorns. So too with these, for thirteen years they both went to school (beit hasefer) and came back from school, but after thirteen years this one went to study-houses (batei midrashot) and this one went to idolatrous temples (batei avodat kochavim). Rabbi Elazar said, until thirteen years a person needs to take care of their children - from this age onwards, they need to say "Blessed is the one who has exempted me from the punishment of this one."

The analogy is that these two plant species grow alongside one another at first, but over time their difference in nature becomes apparent to all. The midrash also implies that Yaakov and Eisav received a uniform education, “they both went to school and came back from school”. Rav Hirsch builds on these elements in explaining the evolution of their respective personalities:

Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch - Commentary on Bereshis 25:27

An observation made by our Sages indicates that the sharp contrast between the two grandsons of Avraham was caused not only their natural tendencies, but also by mistakes in the their upbringing (Bereshis Rabbah 63:10). As long as they were little, no one paid attention to the differences hidden in their natures; they were given the same upbringing and the same education. Their parents overlooked the cardinal principle of education, חֲנֹךְ לַנַּעַר עַל־פִּי דַרְכּוֹ —bring up each child in accordance with his own way (Mishlei 22:6).

Each child should be guided in accordance with the path intended especially for him, the path that suits the qualities and tendencies latent in the depths of his personality, and thus he should be educated, both as a man and as a Jew. The great Jewish task is basically one, but the ways of its fulfillment are manifold and diverse, as human character traits and paths of life are manifold and diverse.

Our approach to parenting must be flexible. We may have a uniform overarching objective, to support the development of the humanity in each person we nurture. But the methods, approach, and even the final product, must be as varied as each face and human personality.

גמרא ברכות נח עמוד א

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הָרוֹאֶה אוּכְלוּסֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, אוֹמֵר: "בָּרוּךְ חֲכַם הָרָזִים" – שֶׁאֵין דַּעְתָּם דּוֹמָה זֶה לָזֶה, וְאֵין פַּרְצוּפֵיהֶן דּוֹמִים זֶה לָזֶה.

The Sages taught in a Tosefta: One who sees multitudes of Israel recites: Blessed…Who knows all secrets. Why is this? He sees a whole nation whose minds are unlike each other and whose faces are unlike each other, and He Who knows all secrets, God, knows what is in each of their hearts.

When a group of the Jewish people gathers together, we make the blessing, “Whose wisdom knows all secrets”. God can see that the minds of the people are as diverse as their faces. It is apparent to God how they all fit together into a single nation. It may not be immediately apparent to us with our limited knowledge, but we must recognize the larger idea that the tapestry of Judaism has many roles and colors. There is room for contributions from the personality of Yaakov as well as someone with the raw characteristics of Eisav. The children’s nature could not be changed, but the nurture they received could have been different, tailored to the particular needs of each child. Therein lies the challenge for parents and teachers, to promote the maturation and blossoming of each unique individual.

References

Hirsch, R. S. R. (2008). Hirsch Chumash: Sefer Bereshis. Jerusalem - New York: Feldheim Publishers.

Rosenberg, A. (1980). A new English translation of the Hebrew Bible text and Rashi, with a commentary digest. New York: Judaica Press. Retrieved from: https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/

Translation of the Talmud from The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz Even-Israel (CC-BY-NC 4.0), digitized by Sefaria. Retrieved from: https://shas.alhatorah.org/Full/Berakhot/58a.2#e0n6

Translation of the Midrash Rabbah merged from Sefaria Community Translation, Rabbi Mike Refer, Jerusalem Anthology. Retrieved from: https://www.sefaria.org/Bereishit_Rabbah.63.10?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en