Questions about the Jews

[stanley123]

Thank you Stillsmallvoice for the interesting details which you have kindly provided. I had a question for you on what you say are the:
“…7 Noahide Precepts. The 7 are: 1) To establish courts of justice; 2) No blasphemy; 3) No idolatry; 4) No incest/adultery; 5) Do not shed blood; 6) Do not steal & 7) Do not cut meat from a living animal.”
First of all, according to your belief, is it necessary for a non-Jew to obey these precepts in order to attain eternal bliss, or to put it another way, if a non-Jew violates one of these precepts, according to your belief, will that individual go to hell, or what will happen to him as distinguished from the individual who obeys these precepts.
Secondly, as far as (3) is concerned, according to your belief, is the Catholic religion in any way in violation of (3), or do you believe that an individual can be a Catholic and at the same time fulfill precept (3), according to the Orthodox Jewish belief. I can think of a couple of problematical areas here, since Judaism does not accept the Trinity.

 

[Ghosty]

romano: It seems you aren’t paying attention to me; I never said that Jesus was guilty of any crime. As for your quotes, why would I “explain away” statements I agree with 100%? You need to do some very serious re-reading of what I’ve said. Again, charity is in order. Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough in my initial post on this particular subject, but I think I’ve made it clear since then what I’ve meant.

Since you seem to want to persist in misreading me and ignoring my real intent despite my clarifications, I see no reason to keep responding to you unless you start challenging things I’ve actually said, and not just what you think/say I’ve said. This is getting off-topic from the thread at any rate.

 

[romano]

[snip]
romano: It seems you aren’t paying attention to me; I never said that Jesus was guilty of any crime.

Fine. Well then, If there was no crime there could be no criminal. And if there was no criminal, the execution of a non-criminal could in no way be considered valid.

In fact, so far as I can see, the actual law against blasphemy was itself invalid in that it made no provision for the appearance of the Messiah. No-one seemed to have noticed the obvious objection to such a law: “What if the Messiah appeared? Under present law we would have to condemn him!” It follows that any trial that invoked such a law would also be invalid.

Anyway, if we have drifted off topic perhaps we’d better let the matter rest here.

 

[Ghosty]

I just want to point out that no “Messiah” provision is needed because the Jews did not, and do not, believe that the Messiah will be God.

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Lessee here…

Reen12, one of my favorite drives here in the Holy Land is south on Road #70, through the western Galilee. You have the most magnificent view of Mt. Carmel (with the modern city of Haifa at its northwestern tip) rising almost straight up from the Esdraelon Valley. It is very impressive. I can see why Elijah picked it as the site of his showdown with the priests of Baal. 16 kilometers southeast of Haifa is a Carmelite (what else?) monastery at a site called Muhraqa. Tradition has it that that’s the spot of the great face-off. See bibleplaces.com/mtcarmel.htm.

Catholic Dude, to answer your questions:

1. I suppose by word-of-mouth & by copying down what he said, making more copies & circulating the copies.
2. See above.
3. Ah. Two passages from Deuteronomy solve this one.

Deuteronomy 13:1-6 says:

All this word which I command you, that shall you observe to do; you shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. If there arise in your midst a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto you, saying: ‘Let us go after other gods, which you have not known, and let us serve them’; you shall not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams; for the Lord your God is putting you to proof, to know whether you do love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. After the Lord your God shall you walk, and Him shall you fear, and His commandments shall you keep, and unto His voice shall you hearken, and Him shall you serve, and unto Him shall you cleave. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he has spoken perversion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to draw you aside out of the way which the Lord your God commanded you to walk in. So shall you put away the evil from your midst."

Thus, we see that not every miracle is necessarily from God. (Pharoah’s magicians could duplicate some of the plagues yet that hardly made them either divine or agents of God.) Our Sages comment on the juxtaposition of 13:1 (“All this word which I command you, that shall you observe to do; you shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it”) to the rest of the above-cited passage; at first glance, 13:1 would not appear to be relevant to the rest of the passage. But it is, it is very relevant. The miracle-working false prophet will use the miracles that he/she performs to support his/her claims to either add to, or subtract from, the Torah. But we are bidden to ignore him/her because “the Lord your God is putting you to proof…”

Deuteronomy 18:18-22 says:

I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto you; and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him. But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ And if you say in your heart: ‘How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?’ When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you shall not be afraid of him.

Our Sages comment on 18:22 in which God bids us not to fear the false prophet. At first glance, this would seem redundant, since one need never fear falsehood. But our Sages teach us that God is telling us that even though a false prophet may be very charismatic and may have many enthusiastic-to-fanatical followers, we still must not be afraid of him/her. We cling to the Torah of Moses our Teacher and do not need to fear such a one.

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

About your photo questions:

1. That would be a glass box designed to keep the memorial candles which people may place therein from blowing out.
2. No; his father Manoah (see Judges 16:31).
3. Those would be cohanim (i.e. priests; see ) giving the priestly blessing (see jewfaq.org/rabbi.htm#Kohein.) The blessing consists of repeating Numbers 6:24-26 word for word after a reader. They have pulled their prayer shawls (see jewfaq.org/signs.htm#Tzitzit) over their heads & are holding out their hands while making the Vulcan greeting (where do you think Leonard Nimoy, a Jew, got it from?), which is actually the next-to-last letter of the Hebrew alphabet (jewfaq.org/alephbet.htm), a shin, which is the first letter in one of the Names of God. In most parts of Israel, the custom is to do this every morning at morning prayers. Outside of Israel, the custom is to do it only on major holydays that do not fall on the Sabbath. This big thing at the western Wall is done once during the intermediate days of Passover & once during the intermediate days of Sukkot (Tabernacles).
4. As long as it is not on the Sabbath or major holydays when playong musical instruments is a no-no. Sure, we still play those instruments.

Hi Stanley123! Glad to make your cyberacquaintance!

Who gets punished in the world-to-come & for how long (yes, we believe in something akin to the roman Catholic idea of Purgatory) is up to God & God alone & is not for me or anybody else to say. Regarding #3, the Trinity is not so much a problem here I think, but the use of icons, statues, etc. could be. If you say that they are not images that you pray to, then there shouldn’t be a problem. See jewfaq.org/gentiles.htm & webpages.charter.net/chavurathbneinoach/index.html.

Howzat?

ssv

 

[stanley123]

Hello somesmallvoice:
Thank you kindly for your answers. However,
“If you say that they are not images that you pray to, then there shouldn’t be a problem.”
The fact is that Catholic pray to Mary, the Mother of God and to the Saints, not as Deities of course, but as intercessors. I would ask if an Orthodox Jew would not consider this to be a violation of (3) the third Noahide Law.
Also, from the Orthodox Jewish point of view, is heaven the same for Jews and non-Jews? For example, I think that I read somewhere, that an observant Jew who attains eternal bliss would be able to sit down at a discussion table with some of the best minds in the world.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Wow long break.

I had some q’s, but I only remembered a few:

1)What do the Jews think about the book Ecclesiastes? I looked on Jewishencyclopedia, but it seems nobody knows who wrote it, and that some didnt even consider it to be canonical. I like Chapter3:1-8, but thats just me.

2)How much of the scriptures are written by unknown authors?

3)Here is a big one. In Ex3:14 area why does God call Himself “I AM WHO I AM” and “I AM has sent you”? What is this supposed to mean? If Moses says “I am” hungry is that blasphemy?

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Catholic Dude, you asked:

1)What do the Jews think about the book Ecclesiastes? I looked on Jewishencyclopedia, but it seems nobody knows who wrote it, and that some didnt even consider it to be canonical. I like Chapter3:1-8, but thats just me.

I adore Ecclesiastes! It’s my favorite book in the Tanakh & I also tell everyone that it’s my favorite philosophy text. There is so much in it. If I figure just 10% of it out in this lifetime I’ll have done very, very well for myself. I have this edition (Hebrew-English, with commentary) tinyurl.com/5ujto at home & like it very much. I’ll try to remember to bring it with me tomorrow & quote you a few morsels.

We read Ecclesiastes in synagogue during our autumn holyday of Sukkot (Tabernacles); see jewfaq.org/holiday5.htm, We believe that it was written by King Solomon.

These (tinyurl.com/6zzwy & matan.org.il/oll/parsha_sukot.html) are two short commentaries on Ecclesiastes (Kohelet in Hebrew).

Ecclesiastes 7:9 says

Be not hasty in your spirit to be angry for anger rests in the bosom of fools.

. Ooooh, do I have a hard time with this one. Working on this is a lifelong struggle for me. I think about this alot.

I have always thought that 4:9-12 is a good tribut to the virtues of a loving marriage & that the sudden introduction of the number 3 (“a threefold cord”) tells us that a good, lasting marriage must be one in which there are 3 partners: the wife, the husband & God.

2)How much of the scriptures are written by unknown authors?

Well, we (orthodox Jews) believe that whereas the Torah (Genesis to Deuteronomy) has existed in its current form since God finished dictating it to Moses our Teacher, the other books of the Tanakh were codified and “canonized” by our Sages (see above). We believe that the authorship of the 39 books of the Tanakh is as follows:

Genesis to Deuteronomy: God dictated, Moses wrote it down.

Joshua wrote his own book.

Judges was written by Samuel.

I & II Samuel were written by Samuel and other prophets & chroniclers such as Gad and Nathan.

I & II Kings are compilations.

Isaiah wrote his own book.

Jeremiah wrote his own book.

Ezekiel wrote his own book.

Hosea wrote his own book.

Joel wrote his own book.

Amos wrote his own book.

Ovadiah wrote his own book.

Jonah wrote his own book.

Micah wrote his own book.

Nahum wrote his own book.

Habakkuk wrote his own book.

Zephaniah wrote his own book.

Haggai wrote his own book.

Zechariah wrote his own book.

There is disagreement about Malachi. The word “malachi” literally means “my messenger.” Some of our Sages say that such a man with such a name wrote the book. Other Sages identify Malachi with Ezra.

Psalms was written by King David, King Solomon, Asaph, Heiman, etc.

Proverbs was written by King Solomon, Agur and Lemuel.

The verdict is still out on Job. Some say it was written by Job himself. Others say that the book is a parable.

Song of Songs was written by King Solomon.

Ruth was written by Samuel.

Lamentations was written by Jeremiah.

Ecclesiastes was written by King Solomon.

Esther was written by Esther and Mordecai.

Daniel wrote his own book.

Ezra wrote his own book.

Nehemiah wrote his own book.

I & II Chronicles were written by Ezra.

The above is the order in which the books appear in a Jewish Tanakh.

The first 5 books are the Torah. The next 21 are the Prophets, or Nevi’im, in Hebrew. The next 13 are the Writings, or Ketuvim, in Hebrew. Hence the acronym Tanakh (which is what we call what you call the “OT”).

You posted:

3)Here is a big one. In Ex3:14 area why does God call Himself “I AM WHO I AM” and “I AM has sent you”? What is this supposed to mean?

It means, as far as I can tell, that God, simply, is (with no predicate). That He exists, i.e. that He is, is all such as we need to know.

If Moses says “I am” hungry is that blasphemy?

No. If Moses said, “‘I AM’ is hungry,” and he meant that God Himself was hungey then he would be in trouble.

Be well!

ssv

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Stanley123, you posted:

Thank you kindly for your answers.

You’re welcome!

"If you say that they are not images that you pray to

, then there shouldn’t be a problem."

The fact is that Catholic pray to Mary, the Mother of God and to the Saints, not as Deities of course, but as intercessors. I would ask if an Orthodox Jew would not consider this to be a violation of (3) the third Noahide Law.

I’ve heard that there are some Catholics who view Mary as a “Co-redemptorix”. That, I think, would be a violation of the third Noahide law. I don’t think seeing Mary, the Saints, etc. as intercessors would be a violation of the third Noahide law. We Jews are commanded to pray to God alone. When we visit the tombs of this or that holy person & pray there, we do not pray to that person. DW & I suffer from primary & wholly unexplained infertility, i.e. DW has never become pregnant, despite all he fertility treatments we did, & the doctors here have absolutely no idea why. When we were plowing through all the various fertility treatments, we visited Rachel’s Tomb (rachelstomb.org/) in Bethlehem & Samuel’s Tomb just north of Jerusalem (campsci.com/iguide/kever_shmuel.htm). We prayed that God might remember us in the merit of Rachel our Mother & the holy prophet Samuel; we certainly did not pray to Rachel & Samuel.

Also, from the Orthodox Jewish point of view, is heaven the same for Jews and non-Jews? For example, I think that I read somewhere, that an observant Jew who attains eternal bliss would be able to sit down at a discussion table with some of the best minds in the world.

I don’t know. What I do know is that our Sages teach that, “The righteous of all nations have a share in the world-to-come.” That there is reward & punishment in the world-to-come is a cardinal belief of my faith; the actual mechanics/nature of said reward and punishment is less important.

Howzat?

Be well!

ssv

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

I’ll tack on one postscript about Ecclesiastes. One of my favorite works of literarture is Omar Khayyam’s ***Rubaiyat ***(FitzGerald translation, 1st edition): arabiannights.org/rubaiyat/index2.html. I have a little paperback edition that I read & reread constantly. It reminds me so much of Ecclesiastes (which is probably why I like it so much).

Be well!

ssv

 

[Catholic_Dude]

SSV,

What do you think when someone says that the Jews were not supposed to have a king? I know that God didnt want them to have a king because He was all they needed, but they failed to see that. However, God did give them one and it led the Jews to their best years. It seems He wasnt against a king, but more about them not trusting in Him.
The person I am talking to also says that the Jewish government was the judges and they were supposed to act like a council, and this was the way it was supposed to be, this doesnt sound right. I told him they were temporary men, not supposed to be rulers, and that there was always a human in authority, not a group of voters.
I also believe that God’s ideal form of government is a monarchy.
So am I missing something?

 

[reen12]

Hello, stillsmallvoice,

Just stopped by on my way to take a nap and saw
your reference to Mary as Co-Redemptorix.
Now there’s a concept that drives me to distraction!

The current Holy Father, who is reffered to as a
Marian pope, I believe, has not in any way endorsed such
a concept, to my knowledge [do any Catholics here
have different information?]
Best regards, as always,
reen 12

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

What do you think when someone says that the Jews were not supposed to have a king? I know that God didnt want them to have a king because He was all they needed, but they failed to see that. However, God did give them one and it led the Jews to their best years. It seems He wasnt against a king, but more about them not trusting in Him.

The person I am talking to also says that the Jewish government was the judges and they were supposed to act like a council, and this was the way it was supposed to be, this doesnt sound right. I told him they were temporary men, not supposed to be rulers, and that there was always a human in authority, not a group of voters.
I also believe that God’s ideal form of government is a monarchy.
So am I missing something?

Catholic Dude, you are not missing anything. It’s your friend who’s missing something. What he is missing is Deuteronomy 17:14-21.

When you have come unto the land which the Lord your God gives you, and shall possess it, and shall dwell therein; and shall say: ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are round about me’; you shall in any wise set him king over you, whom the Lord your God shall choose; one from among your brethren shall you set king over you; you may not put a foreigner over you, who is not thy brother. Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses; forasmuch as the Lord has said unto you: ‘You shall henceforth return no more that way.’ Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away; neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. And it shall be, when he sits upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this Torah in a book, out of that which is before the priests the Levites. And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life; that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this Torah and these statutes, to do them; that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left; to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel."

One of my rabbis writes:

A king of Israel has awesome powers over his subjects. He therefore requires the “humbling force” and moral restraints of the Torah constantly before him. The Torah is his guide for proper rule. A king who is guided by Torah law and values is a great asset to the People of Israel. A king who isn’t, is our worst liability.

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

Rabbi Ely Braun writes:

The Talmud teaches that upon entering the Promised Land, The Bnei Yisrael [Children of Israel] were charged with three commands: to choose a king, to destroy Amalek and to build a Temple.

However, centuries later, when the people of Israel did in fact ask the prophet Shmuel [Samuel] to appoint for them a king, he responded with anger. Why would the navi [prophet] be so angry when the people were simply following Hashem’s mitzvah [God’s commandment]?

Because, the commentators point out, their exact words to Shmuel [Samuel] were, “Appoint for us a king to judge us, like all the nations.” Like all the nations-the people were motivated by the behavior of the other nations rather than the command of the Torah.

This intent is reflected in the verse, Rabbi Naphtali Zvi Yehudah Berlin, the Netziv of Volozhin, explains. The Torah’s words-“And you will say, ‘I will set a king over me’”-implies that Hashem [the Lord] is simply granting permission for, rather than commanding, the appointment of a king.

How are we to understand this perspective in light of Chazal’s [our Sages’] view that kingship over Israel is a Biblical requirement? Rabbi Yehuda Gershuni, zt"l [the late], points out that there are nations that thrive under the rule of a king and nations that do not. It all depends upon the willingness of the people to be under the rule of the king.

For the Jewish nation, there is another factor. Their king was one “whom Hashem [the Lord], your G-d, would choose.” The king of the Jews was not the ultimate national authority, but simply the handpicked representative of the King of kings, the Almighty Himself.

Perhaps for this reason, the king was required to have two copies of the Torah written for him. One was to be stored in private and the other was to accompany him at all times. Thus, the king of Israel was responsible to exemplify the Torah both in private and in public, both as a Jew personally and as the national leader of all Jews.

The success or, G-d forbid, failure of the Jewish nation would flow from their king. Historically, the Jewish people were steered toward good by good kings, and toward bad by evil kings. When they behaved “like all the nations,” led by a king who was no different from foreign sovereigns, then the appointment of that king was diminished. Only when the king acted properly, as a servant of G-d and as an example to the nation, did this mitzvah manifest itself as a Divine command.

With no king of Israel today, each of us can still do his part by fulfilling the 613th commandment, as listed by the Sefer Hachinuch [a medieval Jewish book on the moral aspects of each commandment], to write a Torah Scroll for himself. More important, each of us must observe all the commands contained in that scroll, privately, in one’s personal relationship with G-d, and publicly, as an example to others.

In this way, we will merit the coming of the final redemption and the leadership of the King Mashiach [King Messiah].

Link: ou.org/torah/ti/5760/shoftim60.htm

See also aish.com/literacy/jewishhistory/Crash_Course_in_Jewish_History_Part_16_-_King_Saul.asp.

You posted:

I also believe that God’s ideal form of government is a monarchy.

I agree. A Torah King was very much a constitutional monarch, with the Torah acting as the constitution, and the Sages (of the Sanhedrin) & prophets as a kind of Supreme Court.

Hi reen12!

Howzat?

Be well!

ssv

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Thanks SSV,

Also I know there are sections that talk about the Kingdom lasting forever. ( 2Sam7, Ps89:20-38 )

I also asked him this:
Catholic Dude:

There are the three phases of Jewish history: under the rule of Egypt and later the enemies in the Promise Land, then the Kingdom which they were on top of the world, then captivity and global dispersion. Which of these 3 phases was God most exalted?

He said:

The first, during the Exodus and the wilderness wandering. And also during the third, in their return from exile. One of the strongest and most repeated messages of Scripture is that when things were too easy and prosperous for them, they “grew fat and kicked.” The times of power and prosperity were times of injustice and greed and corruption*.*

I see what he is saying, but what about all those years of peace, the Temple, Psalms, Proverbs, Dynasty, etc. When the surrounding nations saw this they were envious, the True God and His People were displayed to the world and nations stood in awe. They were supposed to be in such a high position because God put them there, I dont know what else to say to him.
I told him the result of the fall was not because there was a king, but because of sin and they “…were steered toward good by good kings, and toward bad by evil kings…”, but I dont know how to answer the fact that the bad kings dominated in the end and God allowed the Jews to be taken away. What do the Jews consider the best years?

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi Catholic Dude!

Jerusalem & the temples were destroyed :crying: and we were exiled :crying: because of our sins. God merely carried out His promise to punish us if we didn’t live according to the Torah. But as surely as He punished us for our misdeeds, He will forgive us and bring us back to the Land, and allow us to rebuild the Temple. This is also His promise!

Our “best years”? Those are yet to come!

Be well!

ssv

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I was reading a few days ago about the two groups (Reuben and Gad) who didnt want to cross the river into the Promise Land but said they would fight in the army if they could go back. I was thinking about the Edom tribe. Wasnt that the same land that Reuben and Gad tribes wanted to stay?

I remembered some questions I had about Jacob and Esau, I thought I asked already, but I cant find them:

1)How did Jacob get the Birthright if it can only be given to the eldest son? I know that he tricked his dad, but isnt it impossible to give it to anyone but the eldest?

2)When the Birthright was sold did Esau know what he was saying?, it seems like he was just joking when he said that. The situation seems odd to me, he was about to starve to death and his own brother wouldnt feed him, and in the end Esau is the bad guy? I guess the situation was already prophesized about so what happened went as planned.

3)What is the difference between Birthright and the father’s Blessing? I thought they were the same in the end?

4)What did God intend for Esau? Was he to just sit at the sidelines and live his life? And what was the “religion” he was supposed to believe in, was his connection to God destroyed?
Do the Jews still go by a birthright system?

5)Does the Edom tribe still exist? I know there was hatred between the two groups, but what about now. Are they the arabs? Or is the Ishmael tribe the arabs?

6)What is the “Targ. Pseudo-Jonathan”? I see it on Jewish Encyclopedia when talking about Esau. I looked it up but it just brings back quotes from it.

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi Catholicdude!

Try this…

Rebecca, fearing that Isaac will confer upon loutish Esau the status of heir to the Abraham’s revolutionary concepts of belief in the One God & ethical monotheism, quickly presses Jacob into a subterfuge that would redound upon Jacob again and again throughout his long life. She dresses Jacob up as Esau and hurries him off to see Isaac & obtain blessing conferring upon him the aforementioned status. Esau, conveniently forgetting what ocurred over a bowl of lentil soup many years before, is horrified and vows vengeance on his brother. Rebecca gets wind of this and sends Jacob off to Uncle Laban, ostensibly to seek a bride (so Isaac believes) but really to flee his brother’s murderous wrath. She never sees her beloved younger son again. How soap opera-y can you get?

Adding to the tragedy, Rebecca was quite wrong regarding her husband’s intentions vis-a-vis the Abrahamic birthright. Isaac did not intend to confer it upon Esau. How do we know this?

Look at what Isaac says to Jacob (in Gen. 28:3-4) as the latter was about to head off for faraway Uncle Laban, ostensibly to seek a bride, Note that this is after Isaac has become aware of the previous subterfuge & of Jacob’s role in it.

And God Almighty bless you, and make you fruitful, and multiply you, that you may be a congregation of peoples; and give you the blessing of Abraham, to you, and to your seed with you; that you may inherit the land of your sojournings, which G-d gave unto Abraham.

This is an inherently spiritual blessing, in strong contrast to the physical blessing that Isaac gave Jacob, thinking that the latter was Esau, in Gen. 27:27-29. Rebecca goofed big-time. How was this possible? How could she & her husband be so out of synch regarding their twin sons?

The answer, I think, is two-fold & contains a great lesson to parents everywhere.

The first part of the answer is (as one of my rabbis pointed out) that the only recorded instance in their entire account of Isaac & Rebecca actually speaking to each other is in Gen. 27:46 when Rebecca complains to Isaac that Esau’s Hittite wives are driving her bonkers and that she is mortified that Jacob might marry a Hittite woman. Isaac & Rebecca did/could not communicate with each other. This lack of communication between husband & wife helped set the stage for the family tragedy. Our Sages suggest that Rebecca was in awe of her husband. After all, this was Isaac, Abraham’s son, who was bound on the altar staring up the opened Heavens, waiting to be offered to God. There may be a hint to this in the fact that Rebecca fell off her camel when she first caught sight of Isaac, see Gen. 24:64. Isaac was on such a rarefied spiritual level that he might have found it difficult to communicate with his wife about things that appeared mundane to him. Either way, Isaac and Rebecca didn’t communicate well enough.

The second part of the answer is in Gen. 25:28.

Now Isaac loved Esau, because he did eat of his venison; and Rebecca loved Jacob.

Note, whereas Isaac loves Esau because…(because of what is entirely beside the point), Rebecca loves Jacob***.*** See the difference? Rebecca loved Jacob unconditionally, she loved him for who he was. Isaac loved Esau because of something the latter did, his love for his son was not unconditional. As the proud parents of two little dynamos (Yohanan, who is 8 & Naor, who is 4), DW & I know that a) we cannot play favorites & b) we must love our boys unconditionally, simply for who they are.

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

Esau is remembered very poorly in our traditions. He is seen as a physical man, who lived for the pleasures & things of this world. He is seen as crude, coarse & selfish/self-centered. Look at Gen. 25:29-34, the bowl-of-lentil-soup story.

And Esau said to Jacob: ‘Let me swallow, I pray you, some of this red, red pottage; for I am faint.’…And Jacob said: ‘Sell me first your birth right.’ And Esau said: ‘Behold, I am at the point to die; and what profit shall the birthright do to me?’ And Jacob said: ‘Swear to me first’; and he swore unto him; and he sold his birthright unto Jacob. And Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentils; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way. So Esau despised his birthright.

In the original Hebrew, the first underlined word is ha’l’itani. This is the only time, in the entire Tanakh, that this word occurs. The l-a’-y root means something more akin to “guzzle down” or “devour” and implies an animal-like voracity.

The second underlined section, in the original Hebrew, reads: va’yachal, va’yesht, va’yakom, va’yalekh, va’yivez, “he ate, he drank, he rose, he left, he despised.” Like an animal, Esau ate & drank until he was satiated & then (also like an animal) got up and left. (This is why Isaac only asked to feel Jacob-pretending-to-be-Esau after Jacob had said, “'Because the Lord your God sent me good speed”. Such words were alien to Esau, who had no use for God, & Isaac knew it. Thus, he wanted to feel to find out just who it was who was speaking to him.

Genesis 25:34 has more verbs in it than any other verse in the Bible.

And we think dysfunctional families are a modern thing!

But crude & rude as he was, Esau didn’t deserve such shabby treatment. I repost the following from an old post of mine:

Our Sages note that an exactly identical phrase occurs in Genesis 27:34

When Esau heard the words of his father, he cried with a loud and bitter cry…

and Esther 4:1

Now when Mordecai knew all that was done, Mordecai rent his clothes, and put on sackcloth with ashes, and went out into the midst of the city, and he cried with a loud and a bitter cry

.

I quote from the Prof. Nehama Leibovitz’s (may her memory be for a blessing!) Studies in Bereshit/Genesis:

The derivation of some special lesson from analogous phrasing recurring in different parts of the Tanakh is one of the commonplaces of Rabbinic exegesis. Our Sages connected the above phrase, describing the cry of Esau, with the identical wording that is applied to the cry of Mordecai in the book of Esther, on hearing of Haman’s and Ahasuerus’s edict to exterminate his people.

Between the lines they read a lesson of sin and its retribution after a lapse of centuries. Let us quote the Midrash, Bereshit Rabbah, 67, on this theme:

Whoever maintains that the Holy One, blessed be He, is a foregoer of His just claims, may he forego his life! He is merely long-suffering, but ultimately collects His due. Jacob made Esau break out in a cry but once, and where was he punished for it? In Shushan the capital, as it says: “And he [Mordecai] cried with a loud and bitter cry.”

The punishment for wronging Esau did not follow immediately but remained suspended until the time was ripe.

(…).

The Almighty, who takes note of our tears, also takes note of those shed by the wicked Esau. They also are noted and cry out for retribution.

Now, I’m going to ask your indulgence & your patience. Today is the first-light-to-nightfall fast day (ou.org/chagim/roshchodesh/adar/thirteenth.htm) that precedes our jolly holyday of Purim (jewfaq.org/holiday9.htm), which starts at nightfall. So, my brain is going through caffeine-withdrawal & running kinda slow. I’m going to have to postpone the rest of my reply to your post until a bit later. Thank you!

Be well!

ssv