I think that Yaakov acted uncharacteristically harsh towards Esav. He took advantage of the fact that Esav was very hungry and just casually got him to sell his birthright for a bowl of soup. How is that not wrong? Anyway, he did get the birthright. What were his consequences? In return for his misdeed, he got an abnormally harsh life. His daughter Dina was kidnapped. His son Yosef was sold into slavery. His favorite wife died. In other words, things weren't swell after that. So now the question is: was he wrong to buy the birthright? I honestly don't think he was. If Esav had gotten the birthright, the new nation of ethical monotheists would never have happened. Hashem might have had to start over with a new person, and that is if they ever showed up. In other words, history dictated that Yaakov needed to get the birthright and continue the nation of ethical monotheists. Manipulation is not the best way to get anything. Let this be a lesson to the rest of us. If we can get the thing we want through honesty, then we should not even resort to cheating. In Yaakov's case, there really wasn't another way. In retrospect, his not-so-perfect life led to the Jewish people, who are proud to have him as a forefather.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Yaakov's Character
Yaakov's personality is often misinterpreted by those who only read the text and do not put the information back in context. This week in class, we learned about and compared the characteristics of Esav and Yaakov. We learned that Yaakov was born pulling on Esav's heal. We also learn that he was an indoors kind of guy. He sat in tents (possibly studying Torah all day) where Esav was a hunter. The most important question about Yaakov's personality is: was he in the wrong to manipulate Esav? We clearly know he did, but was he wrong? Were there consequences?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You said here (like the article that we read in class) that all of יעקב's troubles later in his life came from his actions regarding the בכורה. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I don't think that this is necessarily true. I think that there was probably a reason for his troubles, after all I believe that there is not really such a thing as coincidence, but I don't like the idea of connecting the troubles with his way of getting the birthright. I also disagree with what you said about the way everything happened being related to the way we are now. Obviously if one factor is changed the whole situation can be mixed up, but I think that we would eventually have gotten to where we are today. I mean, 'ה had to go through difficult people and situations both before and after this incident to get to where we are now, but like I said before, I don't think that there is really such a thing as coincidence. So while 'ה must have wanted things to happen the way they did, even if they hadn't, 'ה would have made it so that things turned out the way they are.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Mirel about how everything would have turned out the way it has. If our forefathers were NOT our forefathers, then history would most definitely have been changed. There might still have been a chosen people of G-d, and ethical monotheism, but it may have turned up much later, or evolved very differently.
ReplyDelete