Hello my dear fellow classmates,
This week we learned that Yitchkak and Rivkah of course had different perspectives on whom they think deserves the Bechora. I would like to focus on Yitchaks perspective. He believed that they were actually both chosen to receive the Bechora. Esav was the physical and wordly person whereas Yaakov was the spiritual person. I actually really liked this peaceful compromise and it made perfect sense to me. Therefore, i didn't completely understand why that compromise wouldn't have worked out. Why couldnt both sons be the chosen one and not have a Nidche at all? It makes me sad that there is this battle and fighting between two brothers. Why would God want to initiate this kind of fighting and competition over a Bracha?

A Middle Eastern Excuse?

In class we learned about Rabbi Tsarna's view on Yaakov and the bechora. What Yaakov did wasn't bad because that was accepted and the way of life in Middle Eastern societies of the time. Does this strike you as somewhat of an excuse? I mean, haven't we learned thus far that everything ethical monotheism stands for was revolutionary to the time? For example, perek aleph is a very organized, evolving, purposeful account of nature. It describes the creation of nature by G-d. G-d is in control of nature. This is revolutionary because other societies were so scared of nature. This is why this 'excuse' was a little disappointing to me because I loved seeing throughout Sefer Bereishit how the nivchar and ethical monotheism really changed the world. However, you may consider Sade's blog where she mentions Yaakov was only a child! Doesn't every child want to have more power or attention than their sibling? I mean that does seem pretty normal. In psychology we learned all about the Oedipus Complex when discussing Freud. Does it really seem so bad that Yaakov was fighting for some attention from his father? Or, as the nivchar, was he supposed to know and do better? What does everyone think about all these questions? I would love to know!

Payback?

We learned in Rabbi Sarna's article a unique approach to Yaakov's morally ambiguous actions regarding the Bechora. Instead of justifying Yaakov's actions in order to make it seem like Yaakov did nothing wrong, Rabbi Sarna explains that Yaakov in fact did not do the right thing and was punished for the rest of his life because of his deceit with Esev and with his father when he tricked him into giving him the Bechora. Although I really liked this article because it seems more realistic to me and does not try to stretch the events of the words of the Torah, it is a little concerning. Yaakov was punished for the rest of his life because of these actions he did when he was younger. First, he is forced to work 7 years for Lavan in order to marry his daughter. But he is tricked at his wedding by his soon to be father-in-law and has to work another 7 years. His favorite wife died during childbirth, he was tricked into thinking he lost his favorite child, and then he suffered again when he almost lost Binyamin (I guess his second favorite child?) All in all, he did not have the best luck. But is it fair to say that this was midah ceneged midah? Or is it just a form of payback? Is Yaakov tricked by Lavan because of the way he tricked his own father? Although we have learned about the concept of midah caneged midah many times since we were little, it seems to me like it is a bit unfair. Furthermore, did Yaakov ever try to do teshuvah or even recognize that he was wrong in tricking his father and taking advantage of his brother? There are so many questions we can ask about the morally ambiguous actions of Yaakov when dealing with his father and brother. This part of Bereishit is truly baffling!

Judging Yaakov

I am going to address two questions (which we asked and answered in class, but they still make for an interesting blog post).

Question One: How can Yaakov and Esau transfer the birthright? You are either born first, or you aren't. We read an article by Sarnum, and Sarnum brought proof from other ancient Mesopotamian documents that said one could transfer the birthright. It's important that he uses this as proof, because we need to remember while reading the Torah that times were different. Sarnum also brings proof from the Torah that shows us the people used to transfer the birthright, because the Torah states explicitly that you can't transfer the birthright. It would only tell the people not to do that if they had been doing, or if society allowed it.

Question Two: Did Yaakov do the right thing? Or was it the wrong thing? (Referring to the story of him bargaining for the birthright, as well as the trickery he later uses against his father). Sorna says that technically speaking, Yaakov was allowed to do what he did- it was perfectly legal in those days. But just because something is legal, it does not mean that it is the right thing to do. Sorna says that the fact that we hear this story in the context that G-d had already chosen him and that Yaakov had many negative experiences in his life afterwards shows us that it was not the moral thing to do, and so G-d punished him via the negative experiences.

MY QUESTION FOR YOU: If selling the birthright was legal in those days, do you think G-d should have punished Yaakov? Or do you not agree with Sorna at all. Additionally, what do you think about Esau in this story. He sold the birthright without hesitation- even after he was no longer hungry he didn't try to take back the deal....Do you think that Yaakov was justified from the start and never did anything wrong, as many commentaries say? Who's side are you on- the commentators, or Sorna?

Picking Favorites

It Seems Like People in Bereshit are Always Picking Favorites

Today I was thinking and I don't know why, but I started thinking that it seems like lately there has been a lot of  favorite-picking. Avraham picked Yitzchak as his favorite, Yitzchak picked Esav as his favorite, Rivkah picked Yaakov as her favorite... Later on, Yakov will pick Yosef as his favorite. 

My question is-what is the deal with people picking favorites? Usually parents will say that they don't have favorites even though they do, but here there is description about how all of these people so blatantly pick their favorite kids. What does this come to teach us? Is there a reason for this? Is the Torah telling us that it is okay for parents to outwardly have favorites?

I suppose Avraham picked Yitzchak as his favorite because Sarah was the one who had him, as opposed to Hagar. I'm still not over the whole Yishmael thing, just saying. Then we get to Esav and Yaakov. I don't know what the deal is with that. We discussed in class that maybe the parents had their favorites because they were attracted to their opposites. I am wondering how obvious it was,like did they get special treatment? Yaakov picks Yosef as a favorite later on, and that does not have good consequences. Did he learn from his mother to pick a favorite? It's funny how of all things, the Torah outwardly says that they picked favorites. Is it important?Maybe it's that the Torah isn't trying to hide something that comes naturally. A Time article written in October of last year discusses this issue and says that parents almost always have favorite children.

 "In one oft cited study, Catherine Conger, a professor of human and community development at the University of California at Davis, assembled a group of 384 sibling pairs and their parents and visited them three times over three years. She questioned them about their relationships and videotaped them as they worked through conflicts. Overall, she concluded that 65% of mothers and 70% of fathers exhibited a preference for one child, usually the older one. And those numbers are almost certainly lowballs, since parents try especially hard to mask their preferences when a researcher is watching." 

And just as parents have favorites, kids are usually able to see this. So maybe the Torah gives us this information because it was so obvious and the kids were able to tell. I wonder if the favoritism played a role in who they were later on. Probably. 

What do you think? Do you think it is in the Torah because it is an undeniable part of life? Do you think that parents pick favorites? 

Believe in yourself and you shall reach... a high level

We learned a new percpective in class, that Yaakov was actually wrong in all of his actions( the fact that he took advantage of Eaav and lied to his father about being Esav). He therefore ends up paying his whole life, having a difficult and sad life since he has to work for Lavan and (some would say this is mida keneget mida) he gets tricked by Lavan since he got married to the wrong sister and therfore had to work another 7 years to get the woman that he wanted.

This percpective is very interesting since it shines a whole different light on the story of Yaakov and his character. Since the torah is here to teach us lessons, I believe there is another lesson taught here.

Why would the Torah show us such a negative side of our zadik forefather Yaakov? Doesn't this show that he on some level did not have a great morality since he did not act in an ethical way, meaning Avraham would have never approved of such actions? Then why is this story here?

I believe that we can learn from this that even our great zadik forefathers had his faults, but he was still able to become a great person and a wonderful example for his descendents.

Let us take this story as an example for how we should view life. Even if we have sinned, or not lived exactly in the way a yadik would (by doing the little things such as gossiping for example) we should not give up and think that we do not have hope. I believe that Chasarat be tshuva is a very hard but nice thing to achieve and it is wonderful that the torah has such an option since it gives room for every person to improve, yes, even you!

hello my dear fellow classmates,
so im going to go back to the subject of the Akedah because i had a new question that i thought about with connection to the Akedah. We learned that there basically is no moral system that is independent of god,. Gos is the one that creates the moral system. With this information, i had a question that really started to bother me. This statement basically claims that we need god in order to have  a system of morality. However, there are numerous atheists and other who are very moral people without having a god. This causes a conflict with the statement above. In addition, is it fair to assume that people who dont have a god are immoral? I wonder what you guys will say in order to solve this problem.

Esav's Destiny

This past week we learned about the birth of Yaakov and Esav. Because of our hindsight bias, we automatically think that Esav was the bad brother. However, as we discussed in class, maybe he wasn't bad. After talking a little bit about the situation, it seems to be that the way the two sons turn out was predetermined by Hashem or else we might be learning the entire story with a different view. But, what if their lives were not already determined? Yaakov's temperament was more calm and simple, but that does not mean that he was going to be the better brother. Esav seemed to have equally, if not better, qualities. His temperament could have led him to become a great leader, or a politician rather than a manipulative person. He had good hunting and gathering qualities as well.

Think about anyone: If our lives were already going to be determined for us, would we act the way we are supposed to according to what we know our futures will become, or would we try to act differently. If Esav would have known that he was going to become a manipulative, powerful man, would he have changed his actions as a young man to become a better person, or would he have lived with what he knew his life was going to become, even if he did not like the outcome?

Too Sheltered?

Hello Everyone,
We recently learned about Avraham sending a messenger to find a wife for Yitzchak. At first glance, it seemed that Avraham was sheltering Yitzchak from the world by sending a messenger to find a wife for him. This reminded me of the discussion that we had at the Perl's on shabbos. To what extent should we shelter our kids from the world? When this topic was brought up, there were many conflicting ideas. I personally think that it depends on the specific situation. We learned that it wasn't that Avraham believed that his son was not strong enough to handle the outside world on his own, it was that Avraham wanted him to find a good wife. Like many parents, Avraham wanted this woman to be someone good for Yitzchak with good qualities and morals. But, there was more to it in this situation. This woman would have to take the challenge of leaving her birthplace and going to a strange land and have complete faith that this marriage would work out. Avraham's goal was to make sure that Hashem's promise of "Aretz" would be fulfilled, so it was crucial that Yitzchak did not stray. In today's Western society, we would not necessary do what our parents want us to do. Parents raise their children in the hope of them growing up to follow the same set of morals and religion that they taught, but it is completely normal for people today to break off from what their parents want and do what they want. This is not necessarily a bad thing in certain situations, but there was definitely a greater goal that Avraham was determined to achieve.


Do you think that Avraham should have done this or left his son to do what he wanted? Also, was it fair of Avraham to "force" this marriage upon his son? We never hear Yitzchak's point of view.

What Interested Me Last Week

This past week, when we had to read a handout in class with a partner, I read with Sharon. The article we all had to read was about Yaakov, Esav, Yitzchak, and Rivka. Something that we read really interested me- we read that they did not do a good job parenting Yaakov and Esev! Instead of looking at both of the boys and deciding what their temperaments were and what type of education would be best suited for them, they just had both of them sitting in a classroom learning (or whatever the equivalent of that was in those days). I found this interesting because in psychology class we talked about different parenting styles, and how every child has a different temperament. Not everyone is the same, and not all students should be given the same type of education/ not all kids should be raised in the same exact manner. Perhaps Yitzchak and Rivka should have realized that Esav was the type of kid who needed to be able to run around outside, and then his skills would have been developed in a healthy manner. Not that he was bad. Esev was a man of the field, and the commentary we read seemed to say that he spent his days in the field as a direct result of being cooped up inside all day.

What I really found interesting though is that this seems to imply that Rivka and Yitzchak were lacking as parents and did not communicate with one another well enough.

My question to you is: Do you think they had a good relationship? Do you think they did a good job raising Yaakov and Esev? Why do you think, in the end, Esev and Yaakov had a bad relationship? Did they?


(also something interesting that we read- Yaakov and Esev were apparently identical twins)

Brothers in the Torah

In Rav Hirsch's commentary it says that due to Yaakov and Esav's difference in personality, they should've been raised differently. Children should be raised according to the presumed path of life to which his tendencies lead. This could be why Yaakov and Esav grew up to be enemies, but it didn't really  have to to be that way. Their differences in personality could've complimented each other. While I was thinking about this on Thursday, I was thinking a lot about Yisaachar and Zevulun (sons of Yaakov and Leah), brothers in the Torah who had very different personalities but managed to use that to their advantage.

The relationship between Zevulun and Yissachar is truly remarkable and significant. Rather than competing, and literally facing one another in battle like Yaakov and Esav, they respect each other’s strengths and maintain a symbiotic relationship. In Bereishit perek 49 pessukim 13-14 it states, “Zevulun shall settle by seashores. He shall be at the ship’s harbor, and his last border will reach Zidon. Yissachar is a strong-boned donkey; he rests between the boundaries.” Rashi explains that Zevulun engages in commerce and provides for Yissachar so that he can be devoted to learning. As the Sforno elaborates, one cannot immerse himself wholly in Torah unless he has an income. I understand this to mean that their relationship is so unique because although they lead fundamentally different lives, they equally benefit from one other. Instead of fighting like Esav and Yaakov, we should unite like Zevulun and Yissachar. The Jewish nation can learn a lot from these brothers. Different Jews have different goals in this world, and those differences should be brought together to make a stronger nation. Perhaps Yaakov saw that his parents didn't raise him and Esav in the right way, so he made sure to raise his own children according to their own tendencies and personalities? 

Sympathy For Yishmael

Worried About Yishmael

I want everyone reading this to pretend that they have never read or heard the story of the Torah past Bereshit Perek 17.  Try to have an open mind and pretend like you don't know what is going to happen. Now let's look at a few things. 
Ever since the beginning, Hashem has been promising Avraham 2 central things: Zera and Aretz. They are two separate things but also connected because the zera is to inherit the aretz. 
After the whole Lot situation, Hashem made it clear to Avraham that Avraham's zera- and the person who would inherit the aretz, wasn't Lot- it was going to be a direct decedent of Avraham. This was probably shocking to Avraham because he was already so old and his wife couldn't get pregnant...
But then Sarah told Avraham that he should go to Hagar to have a child. And behold! Hagar had a child! Awesome. There's Avraham's zera, right? He is 86 years old and he's got a kid, it seems like this is it. Sure, it wasn't from Sarah, but it was from Sarah's maid-person-Sarah suggested it (even though she later got mad about it)- it seems all legitimate.
Could you imagine how excited he must have been? Avraham has his first (and presumably only) child whom he gets to teach to live according to the right path. He gets to teach him about the zera and aretz- that one day he (Yishmael) will inherit the land that was promised to Avraham's descendants.
Then all of a sudden we get news that Sarah is going to have a kid. She has a kid. Then they kick out Yishmael. How does Yishmael feel about this? I would not be happy. One second he and Avraham are best friends the next second, he's being exiled. How is he supposed to understand that? "Oh, sorry kid. Your mom wasn't good enough"? What's the deal? 


Look at this: 
Bereshit 17:25 And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old, when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.

So here Yishmael is considered Avraham's son.. Avraham gave him a bris just like Hashem commanded. Yishmael is a wonderful tzadik probably (it doesn't say he was a bad kid anywhere, does it?)...

Bereshit 22: 2 And He said: 'Take now thy son, thine only son, whom thou lovest, even Isaac, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt-offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.'  
Yes... Yitzchak is Avraham's only son. Because a few chapters ago, there wasn't somebody else in Avraham's life that would be considered his son... 




What do you guys think of all this?

The parents' mistake

When we read about the perushim of Yaakov and Esav, we learned that Yizchak and Sarah made a mistake in the way they treated their kids. Instead of giving them the attention they needed, they treated them both the same way. We know nowadays that this is not the right way to bring up children since each child has different weaknesses that need to be focused on and therefore must be given harsher parenting in some aspects.

Some say that this is the reason Esav turned out to be this black sheep because he was not brought up correctly. Could this teach us the importance of parenting? Or is this just an unfair factor of life?

It is also known that the parents favored their children, Yizchak liked Esav while Rachel liked Yaakov which shows another weakness of their parenting since it should have not been obvious that they each liked one better.

Perushim

A we read in partners about the Perushim on the story of Yaakov and Esav, it said that while the babies were in the stomach, one kept kicking when they were near an unholy place( Esav) and one kept kicking when they were near a synagogue.  We also learned about Esav being a hunter, where the perush then says that he was a very deceitful, tricky and harsh person) while Yaakov was a tentdweller, where the perush said that he was learning Torah all day being holy and good.
Mrs Perl then told us in class that these explanations are simply Perushim trying to give us insight, but might not be correct.

This made me think about the idea of perushim. I think that sometimes they can be perceived as negative since they paint for you a picture that you can never forget and you end up seeing the people in the Torah as the Perushim explained them. For example, all my life, while i was thinking of Esav, I saw him as this evil man, while Yaakov seemed to me like the person son, learning Torah and being good.

Yaakov also did tricky things, like taking advantage of Esav when he was hungry, or posing as Esav in order to get a Bracha, but since he was the Nivchar he was not judged as harshly in my opinion.

I think it is sometimes hard to decipher the Torah, but the persushim in my opinion could be very misleading.

Esav the Villain?

When we were younger, we were always taught that Yaakov is the good twin and Esev is the bad twin. Yaakov studies all day and is devoted to Hashem while Esev is a wild hunter. This is the classic story that we have learned which makes it all too simple: Yaakov is good and Esev is bad. However toay when we saw the text of the pessukim, I began to have difficulty with the classic tale that we have learned. No where in the pessukim does it state that Esev was evil or wild; he is called a man of the field, and it even says that Yitzchak loved him. Unlike the stories we were taught when we were little, Yaakov does not seem to be learning all day or intensely dedicated to Hashem. He is only described as an Ish Tam who sat in his tent. How did this show that he was a serious learner and therefore making him the good twin? Furthermore, one can even see Yaakov as the "evil" one in these pessukim. He seems to be trying to deceive Esev in order to take the Bechorah, and he seemingly takes advantage of Esev's fatigue from the field and his hunger. Where do these ideas that Esev was evil came from? How can we say that Esev was the bad one when it does not seem to say explicitly in the pessukim that Esev ever did anything wrong? The midrashim that discuss Esev seem to present a conflict to the actual text of the pessukim.

hello my dear fellow classmates,

So yesterday we learned about Yitchaks relationship with his bride Rivkah. Rivkah is one of our mothers taht we are supposed to look up to. However,when Rivkah first met her future husband she actually fell off her camel and covered herself up with her scarf because she felt so inferior to him and his great connection with Hashem since she saw him pray. Clearly, Rivkah has some severe self-esteem issues and thinks that shes inferior to her man. Is this a healthy way for women to view themselves? Should we really look up to her as a role model and also feel so inferior to our husbands? I think that she should have been confident. Although she may perhaps be a little behind with her spiritual connection with Hashem she should have been optimistic and confident that she will also achieve this. She shouldnt feel inferior and defeated. Thats not a quality i would want to look up to. What do you guys think?

hello my dear fellow classmates,

so basically we learned about the akedah. Its very interesting because its all so very focused on avrahams relationship with God. We ask all these questions about gods motif and whether he was testing Avraham. We also ask a lot of questions about avraham and whether he passed gods test. The questions about god and avraham go on and on. Even sarah has a bit of a role in the next parsha since she dies and the midrash says that she found out about her husband sacrificing her only son whom she waited for years to have. Who is missing here? The lovely son Yitzchak! I always wondered how he felt about this entire situation and there is not a word mentioned about him and his feelings. Did he know something was up? didnt he get suspicious? wasnt he super afraid if he did know his own father was going to kill him!?!?! Personally, i think that by the end of the little trip that avraham and yitchak took, yitchak knew taht something was going on with Avraham. I wonder if he knew but simply accepted his fate. I wonder why nothing is mentiones about Yitzchak. why do you think that is?

Conflicting Ideals

As many of you know I am a big fan of Rabbi Leibtag so I decided to read the article Mrs. Perl handed out to us after class on Thursday. I came out with some very interesting insights. I would love to share one of them with you.
You can look at the akeida as a conflict between two ideals. Natural morality is one ideal that we have talked about extensively throughout Sefer Bereishit. However, there is nothing more despicable to man's natural instinct than killing someone-especially your own son! On the other hand, from the perspective of man's relationship with G-d, there is nothing greater than the fulfillment of a divine command. In an ideal world, these two ideals should never conflict. How can G-d command us to do something that is immoral? However, in the REAL WORLD individuals often face situations where they are torn between conscience and religion. I think the Akeida can be seen as something that is kind of over our heads. When we were learning it in class, I did not see how it related to my life whatsoever. It was just giving me more insight into Avraham's exemplary character that I would never be able to live up to. However, after I read the article, I realized how the akeida can be seen as a very relatable story to our lives. We also go through these inner conflicts on a daily basis. Obviously, we are not asked to kill people, but we are faced with challenges and pressures. We have to be open to new situations and think of what we are really doing. This story also shows that not everything in life will seem or be 'ideal.' The ideal is something very difficult to achieve and even Avraham was faced with challenges to the ideal. Also, I think it is cool how the Torah gives us a real world situation. G-d understands that the real world is certainly different from the ideal world. This makes me feel good because it shows that G-d really does understand our struggles and doesn't think achieving the ideal is a 'piece of cake.'

Is God Meant to be Involved?

As we learned the mind boggling story of the Akeida, a huge question came up: Is there a system of morality and ethics independent of God, or is morality established only because God said so? This question was truly important to recognize because we learned that Avraham was willing to go everything he believed in to follow the word of God. We already knew that Avraham was a man who represented morality and ethics and Yirat Elokim. According to Soren Kirkegard, the Theologian, if God tells us to do something, we have to do it. Because God is moral and ethical. He wouldn't actually make us go through with such a thing like the Akeida because He knows that it's not right. This proves that morals and ethics stem from God. This was the biggest test to Avraham so far, and we must recognize how important God's decision was. If God was not moral, He might have let Avraham go through with the Akeida, destroying His promise of Zerah. However, we can see that this was not the truth. Avraham was willing to give up everything for God because he truly trusted in Him, and God realized that. He would never leave Avraham, the man who was meant to spread Ethical Monotheism and recognized God first, and ruin the Brit that they made together.

Poor Sarah

Imagine being an extremely old lady, and hoping all of your life that you are going to have a kid. One day, you are told by G-d that you are going to have a son and your heart is full of joy. Then a few years later, your husband disappears with your beloved child, off to do some sort of service to G-d. You continue on your usual schedule, unaware of what is really going on. Then a day or so later, someone tells you that your husband killed your son, sacrificing him to G-d.

Your heart sputters, stops, and you die. Isn't that awful?

If the midrash that says Sarah died because she thought Avraham had actually killed Yitzchak is true, that might be one of the saddest stories ever. And poor Avraham and Yitzchak, returning home to find Sarah dead.

(other opinions say that Sarah died after this whole story, and its simply the next important thing mentioned)