The Written Torah describes the creation of the world. It identifies biblical law and recounts the historical origin of the Jewish People. For many in the Orthodox Jewish Community, the entire Torah is written by the finger of God. Conservative Jews appear more inclined to describe the Torah as being divinely inspired. Those notions persist although the Torah itself cites God’s authorship only to the Ten Commandments (Exodus 31(18) and Deuteronomy 9(10)).
Modern scholars suggest that there were four distinct authors of portions of the Written Torah, which were ultimately assembled prior to the erection of the Second Temple in 515 BCE. Unless otherwise designated, all references herein are to the Written Torah, and not to the rabbinically scripted documents of The Talmud, which was completed about 500 CE,and which traditional rabbinical Judaism refers to as the “Oral Torah”.
The Torah is an incredibly candid document. It is not like an epic poem designed to exalt its heroes. On the contrary, it is often brutally frank about the character and motivations of all of its subjects, including God. The Torah identifies God as a jealous deity, one who will not hesitate to punish an individual who shows interest or fealty to other gods (Exodus 34(14) and Exodus 20(5)). The Torah also identifies God as a vengeful deity. In Deuteronomy 32(35), God declares that vengeance belongs to him. The Torah provides a number of examples of God’s vengeance for failure to serve his ordinance (Deuteronomy 28(47-48)).
The focus of this article deals with the Torah’s description of the faulted character of Jacob, a.k.a. Israel, the father of the Israelite people, including their surviving remnant, the Jews.
According to the Torah, Israelite people originate and descend from the seminal line of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Deuteronomy 34(4)).
In 1047 BCE, after the Israelite tribes (who descended from the 12 sons of Jacob) left slavery in Egypt and occupied Canaan, they combined into a single “Unified Monarchy of Israel”. That Monarchy, under Kings Saul, David and Solomon, lasted a little over 116 years. Substantial issues generated within the Unified Monarchy which then, in 930 BCE, divided into two separate Kingdoms: The Northern Kingdom of Israel which was comprised of eight tribes (and two half tribes) and the Southern Kingdom of Judah which was comprised of three tribes. Today’s Jews, with some exceptions, are the lineal descendants of the three Israelite tribes of the Kingdom of Judah (the tribes of Judah, Simon and Benjamin). Thus, the name Jews.
The bulk of the remainder of the Israelite people, nine full tribes and two half tribes comprised of the descendants of the sons of Joseph (Manasseh and Ephraim) constituted the Kingdom of Israel. They were overrun by the Assyrians in 722 BCE and were removed by the Assyrians to other areas of Assyrian Empire. That population is often referred to as the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. Segments of that lost population, like the Samaritans, (lineal descendants of the half tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh), have been identified and acknowledged by the state of Israel as Israelites and accorded Israeli citizenship. There is always the hope that by endogamy (tribal intra-marriage) other lost tribes could have preserved their genetic identity, and will be found and restored. The people of Israel truly want to be their brother’s keeper.
Firstborn
Primogeniture, the superior right of the firstborn son to inherit from the estate and title of his ancestor, is often thought to have originated in the Middle Ages. In truth, its origin is much earlier and stretches back to biblical times, where the firstborn son was entitled to a double share of the estate of a deceased parent, as well as the ultimate helmsmanship of the family.
The Torah recounts that after a number of years of marriage, Rebecca, wife of Isaac, gave birth to twin boys, Esau and Jacob. At that time, in the event of a multiple birth, the first male child to exit the mother’s womb was entitled to be designated the “b’chor” or firstborn male. Esau exited before Jacob, and thus was entitled to the “rights of firstborn”. The two boys grew up with significantly different interests. Esau favored the outdoor life of a huntsman, while Jacob’s life was more reflective and less physical.
In Genesis 25(28-34), the Torah describes a singularly selfish and morally bankrupt act that took place in the relationship of the twins. Esau was returning from a day of hunting in the field, famished from hunger. He came upon his twin brother Jacob who was in possession of cooked food. Esau asked his twin brother for some of the food to slake his hunger. Jacob refused Esau’s request.
Jacob did, however, indicate that he would provide the food, if Esau would transfer to him Esau’s right and entitlement as the firstborn son of Isaac. The famished Esau agreed. Only then did Jacob provide his brother with some of the food in his possession.
Within the tradition of the family, it was customary for an aged father to grant to the firstborn a special blessing. Isaac, then both old and blind, resolved to provide the blessing to his eldest son Esau.
Rebecca, mother of the twins, who preferred Jacob, conspired with Jacob for him to receive those blessings rather than Esau, to whom they were to be directed. Mindful of Isaac’s blindness, Rebecca prepared food which Isaac liked (Genesis 27(14)). She then dressed Jacob in the clothing of Esau (Genesis 27(15)). Rebecca saw to the covering of Jacob’s hands and arms with animal skins that would emulate the feel and texture of Esau, the outdoorsman (Genesis 27(16-17)). When he was totally prepared by his mother, Jacob appeared before his father, delivered the food that his mother had prepared, and announced, “my father, here I am” (Genesis 27(18)). Isaac responded, “who are you, my son?”. Jacob responded, “I am Esau your firstborn. I have done as you told me. Sit up and eat my game, that your soul may bless me”. Isaac then said to Jacob, “come near me, I pray thee that I may feel thee, my son, whether thou be my very son Esau, or not” (Genesis 27(21)).
Blind as Isaac was, his language, expressed doubt as to which son was addressing him. Isaac felt the covered arms and hands of Jacob and then exclaimed the now famous utterance expressing his inconclusiveness: “The voice is the voice of Jacob the hands are the hands of Esau” (Genesis 27(18-22)). Once again, Isaac said, “are thou my very son Esau?” Jacob responded, “I am” (Genesis 27(24)). Ultimately, Isaac concludes that it is Esau before him and after partaking of the meal presented, kissed him and blessed him.
Shortly after Jacob left, Esau appears with venison and is prepared to receive his father’s blessing. Isaac recounted to Esau what had just occurred, in response to which Esau issued a bitter outcry. Esau then requested an additional blessing for himself. Isaac responded, “behold, I have made him thy Lord and all his brethren I have given to him for servants; and with corn and wine I have sustained him” (Genesis 27(37)).
Esau hated Jacob for having taken from him both his rights of firstborn and the blessings to which Esau was entitled, and he resolved that he would slay his brother.
The Torah appears to suggest that notwithstanding Jacob’s fraud, the blessing delivered to him by Isaac cannot be amended, and thus the rights and priorities established thereby are unalterable. Both Isaac and Rebecca, fearful of fratricide between their sons, send Jacob off to Haran to live with Rebecca’s brother Laban.
Beth-El
While en route to his uncle’s home, Jacob dreams of a ladder set up on the earth with the top going into heaven. Angels are ascending and descending on it. He sees the image of God above it. God identifies himself as the God of Abraham and Isaac. God states that he will give to Jacob and his seed the land upon which Jacob is lying. God promises that Jacob will be the father of a great nation, and that God will be with Jacob wheresoever he goes (Genesis 28(12-15)).
Rather than elation and humility for the direct contact with God, and God’s commitments to Jacob, Jacob’s response is both transactional and conditional. “If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and raiment to put on so that I come to my father’s house in peace, then shall the Lord be my God” (Genesis 28(20-21)). The text appears to suggest that God must first prove his promises before Jacob would accept the God of his father and grandfather.
Interestingly, Jacob’s quid pro quo attitude towards the God of his fathers is compromised later in his life by the introduction of a single element: “fear”. Twenty years later, while en route to his father’s home, he is advised that his brother, who has sworn to kill him, is en route with 400 men. In Genesis 32(11), he prays: “Deliver me, I pray thee from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau. For I fear him, lest he will come and smite me”.
Haran
Jacob ultimately arrives at Haran, the community in which his uncle Laban lives. He falls in love with Rachel, the youngest daughter of his uncle and agrees to work for his uncle for a period of seven years to acquire Rachel as his wife. At the conclusion of that seven-year term, a wedding was arranged. The bride’s face was covered with a veil.
In the morning, after the veil was uncovered, Jacob discovered that he was married to Leah, Rachel’s older sister and not to Rachel (Genesis 29(25)). When he confronted Laban for having switched daughters, Laban responded that in his community a younger daughter may not be given in marriage before the firstborn daughter.
As with the deceptions done by Jacob to secure Issac’s blessing, the marriage ceremony, having been completed with a fraudulently placed person, appears to be unalterable. Laban then offered Rachel as a wife to Jacob in exchange for another seven years of employment to which Jacob agreed (Genesis 29(28-29)).
Like Rebecca’s fraudulent assistance to Jacob to secure the blessings of the firstborn from Isaac, candor and honesty were probably not outstanding genetic features of the Laban family, from which Rebecca originated.
Leah and Rachel
Leah is one of the more tragic figures of the story of Genesis. Her father deceptively substituted her for her younger sister in what was destined to be a loveless marriage. In Genesis 29(31), the Torah describes God’s pathos for Leah when God sees that Leah is hated by Jacob. In an effort to balance the equities, God opens Leah’s womb to the birth of Reuben, Simon, Levi, and Judah while, for an extended time, denying children to Rachel, her younger sister.
Out of frustration for lack of pregnancy, Rachel offers her handmaiden Bilhah to Jacob so that, at least, she could enjoy surrogate motherhood. Bilhah gives birth to two sons, Dan and Naphtali. After Leah’s children stop coming, she too offers her handmaiden, Zilpah to Jacob. Zilpah gives birth to Gad and Asher.
One of the most poignant and personally sensitive events ever described in the Torah occurs in this context. It is apparent that for some time, Jacob has enjoyed the love, companionship and proximity of Rachel while paying little attention to her older sister. It was obviously a situation that caused Leah significant pain and distress. During that period, Reuben, Leah’s firstborn son, came upon some mandrake roots and brought them to Leah. Mandrake roots were a delicacy of that time.
Rachel asked Leah for several of the mandrakes, to which Leah responded, “Is it a small matter that you have taken my husband and would you also take away my son’s mandrakes”?
Rachel, apparently understanding the sensitivity of Leah’s response, replied, “I promise, he shall lie with you tonight in return for your son’s mandrakes” (Genesis 30(15)). When Jacob came home from the field that evening Leah went out to meet him and said, “thou must lay with me; for surely I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes”. Jacob did lay with her that night (Genesis 30(17)). Eventually, following that episode, Leah gave birth to two additional sons and a daughter: Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah. Ultimately, Rachel herself became pregnant and gave birth to two sons: Joseph and Benjamin.
Jacob’s marriage to Leah was not Leah’s fault. Both she and Jacob were victims of her father’s deception. However, that did not justify Jacob’s hatred and indifference to Leah, and reflected poorly on the character of the man hailed as the father of the People of Israel.
In modern times the Reform Rabbinate, has sought to identify and exalt the contribution of matriarchs along with their spousal patriarchs, a reasonable and respectable goal. However, in identifying the matriarchs, rabbinical Texts often enumerate Rachel before Leah and omit Bilhah and Zilpah.
The mention of the matriarchs often appear in the birkat avot at the opening blessing of the Amida and read something like this: Praised are You, Adonai our God and God of our ancestors, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah.
While that matriarchal naming order may pay homage to Jacob’s first love, it is neither chronologically correct nor ethically appropriate. It pursues one of the less admirable aspects of Jacob’s nature. Leah was the elder of the two sisters. She was the first wife of Jacob. She bore .Jacob more sons than any of the other women with whom he mated and more children (six sons and one daughter) than the rest of his wives and concubines together. The entire Jewish people are named after one of her sons “Judah”. The priority of Leah in the relationship with Jacob should be respected.
More important, perhaps, is the rabbinical identification of only four matriarchs, when in fact there were actually six. Deliberately omitted were Bilhah, mother of two sons with Jacob, Dan and Naphtali, and Zilpah, the mother of two sons with Jacob, Gad and Asher. Given that biblical Judaism was a patriarchal society, these sons were of the same accepted stature and dignity as the other eight sons sired by Jacob with Leah and Rachel. Each of the 12 sons was an originator of one of the tribes of Israel. Why then were Bilhah and Zilpah not included in rabbinical Judaism’s identification of matriarchs. The classical response often heard is that they were handmaids and not wives, a notion challenged by the Torah itself. The word matriarch itself describes a relationship between a mother and child and not between a husband and wife.
Both Leah and Rachel had periods of their marriage to Jacob where they could not provide him with children, though they had a maternal desire and need to do so. What they did was to introduce their handmaids into their marriage relationship, as an additional party so that Leah or Rachel could be the surrogate mother of the progeny of that expanded relationship. The Torah tells us that this was not merely a practical way of expanding the number of children but actually enlarged each of the marriage relationships to three persons. Genesis 30(4, 9), referring to Rachel, states that she gave Bilhah to Jacob, “to wife.” Similarly, when Leah saw that she had left all bearing, she took Zilpah and gave her to Jacob “to wife”. Keep in mind, that these additions to the marriage were not meretricious relationships, but arose out of the consent of both the original husband and wife. The Torah confirms the marriage relationships with Bilhah and Zilpah in Genesis 37(2), where it provides, “At 17 years of age, Joseph tended the flocks of his brothers, as a helper to the sons of his father’s wives Bilhah and Zilpah.”
Any possible question concerning the genuine spousal relationship between Jacob and Bilhah is abandoned by Jacob’s response to the adultery between Ruben (Leah’s first son with Jacob) and Bilhah (Genesis 35(22)). In Genesis 49(4), while describing the future of his sons, he describes Ruben as “unstable as water, thou shalt not excel; because thou went to up to thy father’s bed; then defiledst thou it; he went up to my couch”.
Could it be that modern liberal rabbinical Judaism, while elevating the status of biblical women, has omitted Bilhah and Zilpah as matriarchs because of their diminished social or economic standing as handmaids or perhaps their coloration from what may have been Egyptian origin?
Laban
Jacob sojourned with his uncle/father-in-law Laban for 14 years, during which he married Laban’s two daughters. At the conclusion of his two seven-year commitments, he planned to leave with his family. Laban, recognizing the value of Jacob’s services as a skilled shepherd, suggested that he remain in Laban’s employment. Jacob agreed, but requested that he receive, as his compensation, all of Laban’s ringstraked, spotted, speckled and brown goats and sheep. Given the experience of both Laban and Jacob as husbandry men, animals with those markings could reasonably be anticipated to be a modest portion of Laban’s flock and thus suitable wages for his son-in-law. Laban agreed to Jacob’s proposal. What Laban did not know was that Jacob had learned how to produce those specific markings and colorations in the next generation of those animals.
In Genesis 30(37-43), the Torah describes how Jacob dealt with Laban’s livestock by placing uniquely peeled rods before the animals in the gutters of the watering holes. Mating occurred when the animals came to drink. The animals that conceived after being affected by the rods brought forth young that were ringstraked, speckled and spotted. He then took those animals and placed them into his own herds. Jacob’s flocks increased dramatically, while Laban’s were depleting.
Jacob began to hear that Laban’s sons were complaining that Jacob had taken all that was their father’s in building up his own wealth. Jacob also noticed that Laban’s attitude to him was changing (Genesis 31(1)). At or about the same time, God directed Jacob to return to Isaac, his father and his ancestral home. Jacob took his wives, children, and the wealth that he had amassed and fled from Laban’s home without telling Laban that he was leaving. When Laban became aware of Jacob’s secret exit, he took his kinsman with him and pursued Jacob a distance of seven days. He caught up with Jacob in the country of Gilead. Laban, however, decided to do nothing dramatic because God appeared to him in a dream telling him to be wary of attempting anything with Jacob, good or bad (Genesis 31(24)).
The Wrestling Match
Even the most token instruction in Jewish biblical history involves the story of Jacob’s victory in an all-night wrestling match with the person speculated to be the angel of God. As told, it concludes with Jacob’s demand of a blessing from his assailant and his receipt of a name change from Jacob to Israel, instead. The assailant explains in Genesis 33(28), “for as a prince hast thou Power with God and with men, and hast prevailed”. The number of scholars, rabbis and Torah authorities who have reflected on this portion is legion. Their conclusions are, however, diverse. It is therefore essential that we go back to the raw data provided by the Torah itself.
Jacob and his family are en route to his family home. He learns that his brother Esau, who had threatened to kill him, is accompanied by 400 men and heading in Jacob’s direction.
Genesis 32(24) commences with the following description “and Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man until the breaking of the day.” We are not informed as to the identity of the assailant or where he came from. Why did the two engage in a wrestling match? The assailant appears vanquished by Jacob, who refuses to release him without a blessing. Why would Jacob ask to be blessed by the assailant unless Jacob believed that the assailant was God or a representative of God? The assailant asks to be released because “the day cometh”. Does God, or his angels only function in the dark? Interestingly enough, the assailant was obliged to ask Jacob his name before he granted him the new name of Israel. Assuredly, if the assailant were God or his angel, they would have known the name of Jacob.
The most confounding aspect of the encounter is the explanation as to why the new name was granted: “for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and thou hast prevailed.” Does this mean that the creator, God, has been bested by his own creation and that Jacob has been granted a new name as a token of that victory? Such an acknowledgment of defeat by God, whose strength, pride and ego are spread throughout the pages of the Torah stretches credulity beyond the point of rupture.
In truth, we find a very frightened man, alone and in need of self- assurance. He is a person whose Torah reputation for candor, honesty and selflessness is more than a bit wanting. There appears to be a present and immediate need to garner courage for the encounter with his brother. After all, who can defeat and destroy a man who’s been victorious over God? Inasmuch as the identity of the assailant is unknown, the report of the event could only have come from Jacob himself. One is left with the question as to whether the report of the encounter and the granting of the name Israel are fact or fantasy.
Jacob ben Isaac “Father”
- The Torah tells us that Jacob loved Joseph, son of Jacob and Rachel, more than all of his children (Genesis 37(3)). In effect, he was carrying to the next generation the same destructive attitude that he brought to his marriages with Leah and Rachel. His preferred love for Joseph was not at all a secret from his other sons. To demonstrate his preferences, he gave to Joseph a coat of many colors, a kindness he did not share with any of his other children. Little did Jacob know, or perhaps care, how destructive was his overt preference for one son over his 11 others sons.
- Sadly, even the son who was the beneficiary of his affection, Joseph, was severely compromised by delusions of grandeur from his father’s attentions. Joseph foolishly recounted to his brothers his dream that there were twelve binding sheaves of grain in the field when suddenly Joseph’s sheaf stood up and remained upright while the sheaves of the other brothers gathered around and bowed low to his sheaf. He dreamed another dream, which he recounted to his brothers, in which the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to him. (Genesis 37(7-10)). Ultimately, it created a depth of jealousy in Joseph’s 11 brothers so deep that they designed to kill Joseph. It was only when Ruben, the eldest, suggested that Joseph be sold as a slave instead, that his life was preserved. The brothers soaked Jacob’s many-colored coat in animal blood and brought it back to Jacob, suggesting that Joseph had been killed by a wild animal.
Conclusion
Jacob is the Sire of 12 sons that evolved into the 12 tribes of Israel. The Children of Israel, and their descendants, the Jews, are not known as Abrahamites or even Isaacites but rather as Israelites, adopting the name given to Jacob, who is often identified as the father of the Children of Israel. In that capacity, he is respected by the Jewish community, who frequently name their male issue Jacob, Jack, Jake and derivations of that name. Though not the originator of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob he is viewed by many as the most important, and certainly the most prolific of the three.
Yet, this is the same Jacob, who, for a mess of pottage, swindled his starving twin brother Esau out of his significant rights and entitlement as firstborn. Then, conspiring with his mother Rebecca, created a charade of events and dress that defrauded his father, the blind Isaac, out of the blessing that was the entitlement of Esau, her other son.
It is the same Jacob who adopted a “show me first attitude” before making any commitment to the God who pledged that Jacob would be the father of a great nation and would receive God’s loyalty, support and protection.
Yes, this is the same Jacob, whose unjustified hatred for his first wife Leah, evoked God’s compassion to open Leah’s womb to Jacob’s children while, for a long time, rendering Jacob’s preferred wife Rachel childless.
Indeed, this is the identical Jacob who tricked his father-in-law Laban into a form of compensation which Jacob knew he could manipulate. When the situation became apparent to Laban and his sons, Jacob quietly stole away with his family, and ill-gotten gains.
We are talking about the same frightened Jacob, who reported a dream in which he won a wrestling match with an unidentified stranger who he presumed was an angel of God, or perhaps God himself. Jacob then reports that he asked for a blessing from his assailant and received instead a new name “Israel”.
That God in his omnipotence would lose a wrestling match with one of his own creations, is both bizarre and unthinkable. That God would then award the victor a new name to memorialize God’s defeat by his own creation, tests any limits of credibility. Rather, it is consistent with the anxieties of a man about to be confronted by a brother who has vowed to kill him and needs to garner his strength to confront that challenge.
Finally, how ironic it is that we ascribe the paternity of the entire people of Israel to a father who was so overtly prejudiced in his preference for one of his 12 sons, over the interests of his 11 other sons, that he drove them to the brink of fratricide.
The punishment meted out in the Torah for curiosity is often severe. Adam and Eve were thrust out of the garden the Eden, where they enjoyed continuous life and the benefit of God’s bounty, because they could not resist the curiosity about the fruit of the tree of knowledge, a.k.a. the tree of good and evil. Lot’s wife could not resist the curiosity of looking back upon the destruction of all the community in which she had resided, and thus was turned into a pillar of salt.
Given the ungracious history of the character of Jacob, who among us would not fear to express curiosity as to why he was chosen as the father of the people of Israel, a people designed to spread the morality of God’s code of laws.
Perhaps the answer will be suggested in some benign rabbinical gloss that presupposes that God was aware of a number of events of self-sacrifice and nobility in Jacob’s character, events that never reached the pages of the Written Torah. Perhaps….
Douglas Kaplan