Parshat Vayeishev: No Rest for the Righteous?

BY: David Marks

א וַיֵּשֶׁב יַעֲקֹב, בְּאֶרֶץ מְגוּרֵי אָבִיו--בְּאֶרֶץ, כְּנָעַן. ב  אֵלֶּה תֹּלְדוֹת יַעֲקֹב, יוֹסֵף בֶּן-שְׁבַע-עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה הָיָה רֹעֶה אֶת-אֶחָיו בַּצֹּאן, וְהוּא נַעַר אֶת-בְּנֵי בִלְהָה וְאֶת-בְּנֵי זִלְפָּה, נְשֵׁי אָבִיו; וַיָּבֵא יוֹסֵף אֶת-דִּבָּתָם רָעָה, אֶל-אֲבִיהֶם

1 And Jacob dwelt in the land of his father's sojourning, in the land of Canaan.   2 These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph, being seventeen years old, was feeding the flock with his brethren, being still a lad even with the sons of Bilhah, and with the sons of Zilpah, his father's wives; and Joseph brought evil report of them unto their father.¹(Genesis 37:1-2)

The first verse in this week’s Sidra informs us that after his confrontation with Esau and his physical struggle with the angel, Yaakov settled in the land of his father’s sojourning. The name of the Sidra, Vayeishev (and he dwelt), follows Vayeitze (and he departed) and Vayishlach (and he sent), which connote continuous movement and action in which Yaakov did not have time to settle, either physically but also psychologically. Based off a midrash,² Rashi suggests an explanation for the interesting succession of the names of the parshiot. He writes:

עוד נדרש בו וישב ביקש יעקב לישב בשלוה קפץ עליו רוגזו של יוסף צדיקים מבקשים לישב בשלוה אומר הקב"ה לא דיין לצדיקים מה שמתוקן להם לעוה"ב אלא שמבקשים לישב בשלוה בעוה"ז

A further comment was expounded on this verse, “and (Jacob) settled”, Jacob sought to dwell in tranquility, but then, the ordeal of Yosef sprung upon him. The righteous request to settle in tranquility, but the Holy One Blessed Be He says ‘the righteous do not consider that which is prepared for them in the world to come to be enough for them rather, they request to dwell in tranquility in the world to come.³

This teaching is brought from a midrash which indicates that the righteous are not meant to rest in this world. Such an observation is astounding to us; traditionally, we associate inequity with sinners. As a result, we are shocked by the idea that someone who dedicates his life to godliness should suffer in this world.

I think the answer lies in the following idea. There is a concept within the Talmud⁴ that speaks of thirty six righteous individuals who keep the world turning; without them, the world would not exist. That is, it is through the efforts of individuals that the world exists, and it is through their acts of loving-kindness that the world is not destroyed by the opposing evil which persists. Whether we understand this figuratively or literally, there is a lesson to be learned here. The world always needs to progress. Those who espouse godliness must always seek to take the next step. Once they rest, the lack of turbulence in their lives will not allow for creativity.

A similar notion is described in the famous disputation of the Ramban (Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, 1194-1270) in 1236 with a Christian who had converted from Judaism named Pablo Christiani. In disputing the notion that the Messiah had already arrived, Ramban alludes to the fact that the prophecy of "Nation shall not raise sword against nation," (Isaiah 2:4) had not come into fruition. In fact, the world had been in such turmoil since the era in which he lived. Within the context of a polemic, the Ramban’s observation points to the fact that suffering in the world is part of a progression, and until the world reaches perfection, there is no rest for its inhabitants. Judaism does not view the world as perfect. It is the responsibility of every individual to improve the world. Not by warfare and bloodshed does the world progress, but by productive contributions. 

This idea seems to suggest that while the world is still not perfect, we are subject to its woes regardless of our own actions. We are not to rest, even if we are not causing the unwarranted harm. Thus people should not sit in tranquility and ignore the chaos around them. Such an approach to the question of theodicy can be controversial and unsettling; there is a value in appreciating the product of struggle. Stagnation is the antithesis of progression. Rough times enable and require a person to think in a forward fashion and to look for solution to solve problems.

A settled mind is not confronted with problems and therefore does not contend with them. Yaakov believed that the remainder of his life would be spent in rest; he thought his work would be completed once he reached the land of his forefathers. Perhaps he was guilty of not looking further to address other issues or to progress the lives of his family. While we are not the judges of such a man, we must consider the lesson taught here. Life is not meant to be lived in tranquility. If our goal is to fix the world, we must consider the fact that while it is “not incumbent upon [us] to complete the task, [we] are not exempt from attending to it.”⁵

1 JPS translation from Mechon Mamre, http://mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0137.htm#1

2 Midrash Rabba Parashat Vayeshev 34:3

3 Rashi, Genesis 37:1

4 Tractate Sanhedrin 97b

5 Pirkei Avoth 2:16

Parshat Vayeitzei: A Benzene-Like Journey

By TALIE LEWIS

I apologize to all of the non-science minds for the following metaphor, but in organic chemistry, Benzene (shown above) is an exceptionally stable compound. This stability comes from tiny particles moving along a circular path inside of its outer boundary and makes it difficult to break the bonds (represented by each line of the hexagon) that hold benzene together. Like organic chemists, we equate stability with strength and so we spend much of our time attempting to establish a place for ourselves, in which we feel comfortable and safe. The easiest way to establish such a place is to stay where we feel most comfortable and grow within those confines. The harder way is to leave this comfort zone, embark on a journey and eventually find a new place to establish ourselves.

Parshat Vayeitzei is the story of Jacob’s journey. It begins with his departure from Be’er-sheva, and leads into his journey to Haran. Upon his arrival in Haran, chapter 28: verse 11 states “and he [Jacob] was impressed by the place.” The expression “was impressed” (vayifga) demonstrates a passive experience. Haran is where God appeared to Jacob and made an impression on him.  Jacob was affected by Haran, and so Haran, the place, is identified as the active player. He then continues along his journey and settles down in Lavan’s house. Initially, he is a foreigner, but eventually, he builds a life for himself there. This building process was certainly not a smooth one, however Jacob overcame the challenges he faced. Towards the end of the Parsha, after Jacob left Lavan’s house, he was met by God and angels. As it says in chapter 32: verse 2: “And they [God and the angels] were impressed by him [Jacob].” The same Hebrew word is used here as was used in chapter 28 (va’yifgau), except here we see a role reversal. Prior to Jacob’s journey, he experienced the world passively. He allowed his environment to affect him. However, after leaving his home and establishing a new home, he no longer played this passive role. His experiences gave him the power to influence not just his environment, not just the people in that environment, but even God and angels.       

Just like Jacob, both Abraham and Isaac had experiences in foreign lands. All three of our forefathers were strangers among people who had very different values from their own, and all three established places for themselves in those lands. The story of the Jewish people is not one of simply remaining in our own communities where we feel stable and safe. Our story is about breaking out of that stability, embarking on a journey to somewhere new and re-establishing that sense of stability.

Returning to aromatic rings for just a moment. One might assume that because they are already so stable, they do not react. The common purpose of chemical reactions is to create a more stable product, so it would seem that there would be no reason for aromatic rings to react. However, they do react and consequently lose their stability temporarily, but then re-establish it by forming a new product. I wish all of us the strength to not be complacent with our own stability. We must break out of it, despite our fears or discomfort, so that we ourselves as well as the communities we influence can constantly be striving for greater stability.

Parshat Vayeitzei: Between Avinu and Rabbeinu – Contrasts Between Jacob and Moses

BY: Ariel Stein

בראשית פרק כט

וַיִּשָּׂא יַעֲקֹב רַגְלָיו וַיֵּלֶךְ אַרְצָה בְנֵי קֶדֶם:

And Jacob lifted up his feet and went to the land of the easterners. (Genesis 29:1)

With his brother out for blood, Jacob is forced to leave home and strike out on his own. Pausing for the night, he falls into a deep slumber pierced with a vision of an angelic ladder. Now awake and driven by the message given to him by God – that he is to be the father of children as numerous as the dust of the earth (Genesis 28:14) – he rises up to take hold of this destiny. In this week’s parasha, Vayeitzei, we find a Jacob that comes into his own as a patriarch. The creation and continued existence of his family becomes his primary value throughout his life, and Vayeitzei holds most of the examples that display this overwhelming aspect of his character.

Through the use of literary tropes similar to those which Robert Alter has characterized as “type scenes” (The Art of Biblical Narrative 47), we can reveal much about biblical characters. To demonstrate this theme in Jacob, our foil will be Moses, another future leader of the Jewish people, whose primary focus can be seen as justice and compassion for the weak. Both Jacob and Moses encounter similar situations in their lives.

The chart below details some of the common experiences that Jacob and Moses share and some slight differences in how they respond. Differences are identified with an asterisk (*).

	Biblical Story	Jacob	Moses
1	Reason behind fleeing from home:	Archenemy (Esau) wants him dead (Gen. 27:41-45	Archenemy (Pharaoh) wants him dead (Ex. 2:15)
2	First action upon arriving at destination:*	Meets and helps a woman at a well (Gen. 29:10)	Meets and helps women at a well (Ex.2:17)
3	Identifies himself as:*	The son of Rebecca (Gen. 29:12)	Egyptian (Ex. 2:19)
4	Marries:*	A woman he helped at the well (Rachel) (Gen. 29:30)	A woman he helped at the well (Tzipporah) (Ex. 2:21)
5	Profession in exile:	Shepherd (Gen. 30:31)	Shepherd (Ex. 3:1)
6	Employer:	Father-in-law (Gen. 29:15)	Father-in-law (Ex. 3:1)
7	Instructions from God	Return to his homeland (Gen. 31:3)	Return to his homeland (Ex. 3:10)
8	Response to God:*	Without protest – had already planned to go (Gen. 30:25)	Protests ("send someone else") (Ex. 3:11; 4:1, 10, 13)
	Manner of departure with family:*	ויקם יעקב וישא את בניו ואת נשיו על הגמלים (Gen. 31:17)	ויקח משה את אשתו ואת בניו וירכבם על החמר וישב ארצה מצרים ויקח משה את מטה האלהים בידו ( Ex. 4:20)

Upon arrival in Haran, Jacob comes to the town well. The town shepherds were waiting for everyone to arrive before uncovering the well, but when Rachel arrives, Jacob strides forward (ויגש), lifts the stone off the well, waters her sheep and kisses her. (Gen. 29:10) In contrast, when Moses arrives in Midian, Jethro’s daughters had begun to water their sheep when other shepherds come to drive them off. Moses rises up (ויקם) to save them and then waters their sheep (Exodus 2:17).

Jacob has a clear purpose for doing these actions: uniting with his family, especially the beautiful cousin he now begins to seek to court as his wife. He immediately identifies himself as the son of Rebecca and ingratiates himself in the family life of Laban’s household. Moses, on the other hand, swiftly rises up because of the injustice he sees (not unlike when he smites the Egyptian, see Exodus 2:11-12) and saves the women. They do not know his name – they assume he is just some Egyptian man – and it seems from the text that he only marries one of the women because her father specifically seeks him out. Therefore, whereas connection with family was primary in Jacob’s offer of assistance at the community well, the episode of Moses at the well highlights his attitude towards justice and helping those who are helpless.

Both become shepherds for their fathers-in-law, but eventually both are told to go back to their respective homelands. In Jacob’s case, he had already planned to leave Haran before God told him to leave. Jacob lived in Haran for many years, having many children and amassing much livestock for his father-in-law. But once Joseph is born – the son of the favored wife – Jacob is ready to go, as the verse states “and it was that when Rachel bore Joseph, Jacob said to Laban, send me and I will go to my own place, my land” (Genesis 30:25). Promised descendants by God, Jacob sees the culmination of this promise with the birth of Joseph and requests leave from Laban. It is only after getting sidetracked with his payment – the speckled and spotted sheep, which would be the livelihood in which to support his family – that God nudges him to return to the land of his fathers (Genesis 31:3).

Moses is called out of the wilderness by a burning bush to return to Egypt and save his brethren. He repeatedly expresses his concern that the job is not for him, inventing a variety of excuses. ¹ But God chooses Moses, becomes angry with Moses for his repeated excuses, and finally convinces Moses to go. There is no extended departure scene with his father-in-law and no talk of wages – it is purely about the mission.

As Jacob and Moses leave, the verses take care to tell us how they transported their family. While Moses saddles his wife and sons on the donkey (וירכבם), the verb used for Jacob’s transportation is a familiar one: he lifts them up (וישא). When Jacob starts out on his own after his dream of the heavenly ladder, in which he received God’s assurance, he raised himself up. Now, as he returns home, after again receiving divine assurance, he raises up his family as he travels to the next chapter of his life. The following verse adds that he also brought all the flocks he had amassed. The story of Moses has no similar use of the word וירכבם², but the second half of the verse states that he took the staff of God with him. Unlike Jacob’s construction of a large family dynasty, Moses simply walks alongside the donkey, alone with the staff of God on his mission to save the Jewish people.

Most of the parallels between the two characters end here. But Jacob’s focus on family can be seen in the future weekly parshiot. Next week in Vayishlach, Jacob splits his family into two camps, reasoning that even if Esau attacks, at least one camp will be spared. Following the abduction of Dinah, his focus is on building an alliance with Shechem, perhaps seeing a quick way to increase familial claims to the land he was promised. In Vayeishev, when Joseph is torn away from Jacob (or, as Jacob thinks, actually torn to pieces), Jacob is incredibly devastated. Not only was this the loss of the firstborn of his favored wife, but the loss of the son he saw as the reason to return to his homeland.

Moses similarly seeks justice for the Jews (while weathering their ingratitude). When their workload increases after he speaks to Pharaoh, he asks God why this happened. Later on, whenever the nation complains or does wrong, such as with the Golden Calf, Moses intervenes for the nation’s continued existence.³

While Jacob sought out his wives, livestock, and land, Moses sought to improve the lot of those in need. The names they have in Jewish tradition: Yaakov Avinu (Jacob our Forefather) and Moshe Rabbenu (Moses our Teacher), reflect the important differences in the way the Torah tells their story. Jacob focuses on creating a nation, but Moses takes care of the nation, becoming its leader and teacher.

Further thoughts:

• Rashi and the Midrash  note that the Torah writes that Jacob went with his children and his wives, but that Esau, in contrast, went with his wives and his children (Genesis 36:6), implying Esau was wicked for valuing the pleasure of his wives over the importance of his progeny. We find that in our verse with Moses, it is written that Moses goes with his wife and then his sons, just as it does for Esau. Should the Midrash connect here too, and if so, what does that say about Moses’s relationship with his wife and his sons? Rashi notes (Numbers 12:1) that Moses separated from his wife. The Midrash also states that the false priest of the idol of Micha (Judges 17-18) is a descendant of Moses. We know that Moses’s sons do not become leaders of the Israelites following Moses’ death, but that Joshua, his student and disciple, became the leader instead.
• Jacob had an unhealthy, strained relationship with Laban and left without asking permission. Moses had a loving relationship with Jethro and asked permission before leaving.
•  Genesis Rabbah (78:9) quotes Rav Yanai, who said when Esau and Jacob embraced, each cried. Jacob cried tears of joy, but Esau wept because he broke his teeth on Jacob’s neck, which had become “shayish,” marble. (He had attempted to bite Jacob’s neck.) Rabbi Abahu said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that we learn this from “your neck is like an ivory tower” (Songs 7:5). Similarly, Exodus Rabbah (1:31) states that Pharoah brought a sword unlike any other and hit Moses’ neck ten time, but Moses’s neck had become like an “amud shen”, a pillar of ivory, as it says, “your neck is like an ivory tower” (Songs 7:5). The same Rav Yanai, who just used the same pasuk to explain Jacob and Esau, disagrees with this interpretation. Both of these midrashic statements are brought together in Song of Songs Rabbah (zayin hay alef), with some additions and variations.
•  Do either of the Midrashim have any connection to the Jewish people being a stiff-necked nation (Ex. 32:9 and 33:3)? What does this say about this being a positive or negative trait?
• Both Jacob and Moses give blessings to the tribes at the end of their lives. How do these blessings reflect, or not reflect, their different guiding motivations?

 ^{___________________________}

1 Perhaps it is his previous experience with helping the Israelites that has discouraged him. After being raised in the Egyptian palace, he struck an Egyptian guard who was abusing an Israelite, killing him, and buried him in the sand. The next day, he saw two Israelites fighting and attempted to break up the fight. Instead of seeing him as a savior of the Israelites, they mocked him, asking who made him their leader and was he planning to kill them too? (Ex. 2:13-14).

2 Although there is the twice-used word of “vayeshev”, to settle, in Midian when he arrives there and the word “vayashav”, to return is used for his trip back to Egypt.

3 He even rejects a new nation founded on his own progeny (Ex 32:9-14) – all the more interesting in light of the parallels to Jacob.