Tag: brothers

Blood Brothers

Posted on by jovial_cynic
<blockquoוַיַּעֲנ֨וּ בְנֵֽי־יַעֲקֹ֜ב אֶת־שְׁכֶ֨ם וְאֶת־חֲמ֥וֹר אָבִ֛יו בְּמִרְמָ֖ה וַיְדַבֵּ֑רוּ אֲשֶׁ֣ר טִמֵּ֔א אֵ֖ת דִּינָ֥ה אֲחֹתָֽם׃
Jacob’s sons answered Shechem and his father Hamor–speaking with guile because he had defiled their sister Dinah
Genesis 34:13 (Revised JPS, 2023)

Simeon and Levi get all the blame for the whole story of the massacre of Shechem, starting with the circumcision requirement, so why does the text tell us that “Jacob’s sons answered” and not just “Simeon and Levi” answered? In what way were they all “speaking with guile,” and not just the two offending brothers?

The rabbis explain that the trickery wasn’t intended to end in bloodshed. The trickery was that the brothers presented Shechem an impossible requirement: “You and all your men in your whole city must be circumcised.”
Who would agree to this?! But if Shechem refused, he would be forced to reject his claim to Dinah and return her to her family.

This seemed like a clever enough plot that Jacob didn’t object to it.

He didn’t assume Dinah’s blood brothers would be so aptly named.

Outrage in Israel

Posted on by jovial_cynic

וּבְנֵ֨י יַעֲקֹ֜ב בָּ֤אוּ מִן־הַשָּׂדֶה֙ כְּשׇׁמְעָ֔ם וַיִּֽתְעַצְּבוּ֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים וַיִּ֥חַר לָהֶ֖ם מְאֹ֑ד כִּֽי־נְבָלָ֞ה עָשָׂ֣ה בְיִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל לִשְׁכַּב֙ אֶת־בַּֽת־יַעֲקֹ֔ב וְכֵ֖ן לֹ֥א יֵעָשֶֽׂה׃
Meanwhile Jacob’s sons, having heard the news, came in from the field. They were distressed and very angry, because he had committed an outrage in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter – a thing not to be done.

One commentary notes something fascinating here. There is no “nation of Israel” yet. At this time in the narrative, Israel is not a place. Israel is a man named Jacob.

Yet we only see the outrage in the sons of Jacob, and not in Jacob himself. Jacob does not speak at at all in the text until the end of the chapter, when he complains that Simeon and Levi have brought trouble upon him by making him an enemy of the Canaanites.

A Thing not to be Done

Posted on by jovial_cynic

וּבְנֵ֨י יַעֲקֹ֜ב בָּ֤אוּ מִן־הַשָּׂדֶה֙ כְּשׇׁמְעָ֔ם וַיִּֽתְעַצְּבוּ֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים וַיִּ֥חַר לָהֶ֖ם מְאֹ֑ד כִּֽי־נְבָלָ֞ה עָשָׂ֣ה בְיִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל לִשְׁכַּב֙ אֶת־בַּֽת־יַעֲקֹ֔ב וְכֵ֖ן לֹ֥א יֵעָשֶֽׂה׃
Meanwhile Jacob’s sons, having heard the news, came in from the field. They were distressed and very angry, because he had committed an outrage in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter – a thing not to be done.
Genesis 34:7 (Revised JPS, 2023)

In the rabbinical commentary, there’s a discussion about what “a thing not to be done” indicates.

Rashi suggests that even the Gentiles, since the time of the Flood, understood that violating a girl was wrong; every nation at the time had outlawed such activity.

Nachmanides counters: the Canaanites did not consider it immoral, and the text is highlighting only what is forbidden to the Jews.

Either way, the reader is told to agree with the anger of the brothers. It was a thing not to be done.

Distress and Anger

Posted on by jovial_cynic

וּבְנֵ֨י יַעֲקֹ֜ב בָּ֤אוּ מִן־הַשָּׂדֶה֙ כְּשׇׁמְעָ֔ם וַיִּֽתְעַצְּבוּ֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים וַיִּ֥חַר לָהֶ֖ם מְאֹ֑ד כִּֽי־נְבָלָ֞ה עָשָׂ֣ה בְיִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל לִשְׁכַּב֙ אֶת־בַּֽת־יַעֲקֹ֔ב וְכֵ֖ן לֹ֥א יֵעָשֶֽׂה׃
Meanwhile Jacob’s sons, having heard the news, came in from the field. They were distressed and very angry, because he had committed an outrage in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter—a thing not to be done.
Genesis 34:7 (Revised JPS, 2023)

The text shows us two separate responses from Dinah’s brothers: distress and anger.

The distress (עָצַב) is the same word used to describe God’s heart before God flooded the earth. Grieved. In pain.

The anger (חָרָה) is the same word used to describe Cain before he killed his brother.

וְעַתָּ֣ה ׀ אַל־תֵּעָ֣צְב֗וּ וְאַל־יִ֙חַר֙ בְּעֵ֣ינֵיכֶ֔ם כִּֽי־מְכַרְתֶּ֥ם אֹתִ֖י הֵ֑נָּה כִּ֣י לְמִֽחְיָ֔ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֱלֹהִ֖ים לִפְנֵיכֶֽם׃
Now, do not be distressed or reproach yourselves because you sold me hither; it was to save life that God sent me ahead of you.
Genesis 45:5 (Revised JPS, 2023)

Much later, Joseph will encourage his brothers to be neither grieved nor angry at themselves for their actions against him. Same words. I can’t help but see a link here.

Dinah, in her weakness, suffers an injustice, and her brothers pour out wrath in her defense.

The same brothers treat Joseph unjustly, and Joseph, in his strength, withholds the justified wrath against them and encourages a new path.

There is a time for grief and wrath, and a time for healing and peace.

Favoritism

Posted on by jovial_cynic

וַיִּשָּׂ֨א יַעֲקֹ֜ב עֵינָ֗יו וַיַּרְא֙ וְהִנֵּ֣ה עֵשָׂ֣ו בָּ֔א וְעִמּ֕וֹ אַרְבַּ֥ע מֵא֖וֹת אִ֑ישׁ וַיַּ֣חַץ אֶת־הַיְלָדִ֗ים עַל־לֵאָה֙ וְעַל־רָחֵ֔ל וְעַ֖ל שְׁתֵּ֥י הַשְּׁפָחֽוֹת׃
Looking up, Jacob saw Esau coming, accompanied by four hundred men. He divided the children among Leah, Rachel, and the two maids,
וַיָּ֧שֶׂם אֶת־הַשְּׁפָח֛וֹת וְאֶת־יַלְדֵיהֶ֖ן רִֽאשֹׁנָ֑ה וְאֶת־לֵאָ֤ה וִֽילָדֶ֙יהָ֙ אַחֲרֹנִ֔ים וְאֶת־רָחֵ֥ל וְאֶת־יוֹסֵ֖ף אַחֲרֹנִֽים׃
putting the maids and their children first, Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last.
Genesis 33:1-2 (Revised JPS, 2023)

Genesis 33 starts with a looming confrontation between Jacob and Esau. In this meeting, Jacob divides his family based on Jacob’s relationship with the women, and not based on birth order: The maids, Leah, and then Rachel.

Also notable: Joseph is the only son that is mentioned.

This sets up the story of Joseph, Jacob’s favorite son. But it should also cause the reader to wonder about the implications.

Back in Genesis 25, we read that Jacob’s father did not favor him. The text plainly states that Isaac loved Esau. The consequence of favoritism lead to very obvious family division.

Now Isaac loved Esau because he had a taste for game; but Rebekah loved Jacob.
Genesis 25:28 (NKJV)

Here, starting in Genesis 33, we have the beginnings of another story with favoritism as a theme.

Beauty and Work

Posted on by jovial_cynic

Leah and Rachel are described as different in appearance. Earlier, the text had contrasted Jacob and Esau also on the basis of their respective occupations (25:27, where yoshev ohalim seems to mean “raising livestock”; compare 4:20).
The Torah; A Woman’s Commentary on Genesis 29:17

It is fascinating that the Genesis narrative of “two brothers and two sisters” tells us so much about… us.

While I don’t think *everyone* is inherently sexist and view the value of women in terms of appearance and men in terms of occupation, perhaps as a society, we do.

Prior to the fall, value isn’t assigned to occupation and beauty. There was one job for humanity, and all of creation was good. It was all beautiful.

In Genesis 6, the “sons of God saw that the daughters of man were Tov,” and we get a glimpse of the powerful being drawn to women and seizing them for themselves. This is echoed in Genesis 12, and even louder in Esther.

Somehow, a woman gets defined by her appearance. This appears to be a result of the fall.

But a man’s “value” is also be seen a result of the fall. The cursed ground becomes unfruitful, and the work is in vain. Yet we labor and labor, looking for worth.

My Jewish friends have a saying: “Torah is not our book about God. It is God’s book about us.”

In it, we should see ourselves. What happens when we value beauty over character? Or equate work with worth? When we take advantage of weakness? The text shows us. We must learn.

Rebekah’s Distress

Posted on by jovial_cynic

But the children struggled in her womb, and she said, “If so, why do I exist?” She went to inquire of יהוה,
Genesis 25:23 (The Contemporary Torah, JPS, 2006)

The Hebrew word used to express Rebekah’s distress in Genesis 25:22 is of uncertain meaning. It’s אָנֹכִי (anokhi), and it carries a sense of “why me?” and “it shouldn’t be this way,” but it also carries a meaning of existential crisis: “Why do I exist?”

At this point in the story, she doesn’t know that she’s having twins. She’ll learn about this in the next verse, where she’s told about the two nations that will emerge from her: one that God will love, and one that God will hate.

There are layers to the meaning.

If you believe God loves Jacob and hates Esau, the individuals, you’ll describe a God whose dedication to you is arbitrary: Maybe God will love you, and maybe not.

If Jacob and Esau are viewed as nations, the text describes a God who sees race and bloodlines. This is also abitrary and… racist? Does God love some nations and hate others, regardless of their actions?

But there’s another view.

Jacob/Esau are an echo:

Consider –

Abel/Cain
Isaac/Ishmael
(Perhaps Abraham/Nahor, the idolator?)

These are stories about brothers, one of which walks by the Spirit and trusts God, vs the other who walks by the Flesh and trusts works. But we’ve already learned that the flesh is cursed to die. Works will not work.

This is not merely a story about the people. These are parables.

This parable is about Rebekah’s internal and existential crisis: Why do I exist? Why me? Why is this happening?

This is the struggle in all of us: to walk by the Spirit or to walk by the Flesh. How will it end? Which “child” inside of us wins?

“The older will serve the younger.”

This is our hope.