JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Yonathan Ben Yakov on October 15, 2008, 08:46:17 PM
-
i got to write an essay compare & contrast Itzhak-Ismael & Yaakov-Esof
-
i got to write an essay compare & contrast Itzhak-Ismael & Yaakov-Esof
Yonathan,
I will just inform you that from Torah perspective that these brothers represent the Jewish vs the Non-Jewish world.
Yitzak is a patriarch of the Jewish people while Ishmael is the patriarch of the Arab nations.
Yaakov is the patriarch of the Jewish people while Essau is the patriarch of the Edomite nations {Roman}.
Maybe you already realized this... If not you can use this as a starting point for your research.
muman613
-
Also, Isaac was the favorite to Abraham, and Jacob was the favorite to Isaac. Although, Jacob did steal Esau's birthright. It's a complicated essay. What are you planning to focus on?
-
thanks guys but i need to write a 3 page essay comparing both sets of brothers
-
Also, Isaac was the favorite to Abraham, and Jacob was the favorite to Isaac.
<snip>
actually the text suggests that Avraham cared alot for Yishmael, and Isaac. And G-d told him to send Yishmael away. G-d told him that his seed would continue through Isaac. Yitzchak's mother Sarai, naturally favoured Yitzchak. Avraham when he sent Ishmael away, was - I vaguely recall - reluctant, but G-d told him to listen to his wife.
the text does not suggest that avraham had a favourite. What is your evidence from the text that suggests he did?
Regarding Jacob
Jacob was not Isaac's favourite. If Isaac had a favourite, the text suggests that he favoured Esau. It was Isaac's wife Rivka that favoured Jacob, and had to fool Isaac into giving Jacob the better blessing.
So you certainly have it backwards there.
The text if it suggests that Isaac had a favourite, certainly suggests Esau was the favourite, not Jacob.
So I would say we see a similarity there. In that the wife favoured the son that would become father of the jewish people.
Also, it's not esaf!!!!! not in english or hebrew ESAV or perhaps ESAV/ESAW. OR Esau in english.
The F, is like saying Taf instead of Tav or Taw. Because W/V/F can become confused. W/V may have become confused. But let's not add F to the mix. I think some do say Taf but I doubt they claim that is correct.. It's certainly not esaf!!!
The reason these accidents can happen is because the letter is formed from the same part of the mouth.
-
Also, Isaac was the favorite to Abraham, and Jacob was the favorite to Isaac.
<snip>
actually the text suggests that Avraham cared alot for Yishmael, and Isaac. And G-d told him to send Yishmael away. G-d told him that his seed would continue through Isaac. Yitzchak's mother Sarai, naturally favoured Yitzchak. Avraham when he sent Ishmael away, was - I vaguely recall - reluctant, but G-d told him to listen to his wife.
the text does not suggest that avraham had a favourite. What is your evidence from the text that suggests he did?
Regarding Jacob
Jacob was not Isaac's favourite. If Isaac had a favourite, the text suggests that he favoured Esau. It was Isaac's wife Rivka that favoured Jacob, and had to fool Isaac into giving Jacob the better blessing.
So you certainly have it backwards there.
The text if it suggests that Isaac had a favourite, certainly suggests Esau was the favourite, not Jacob.
So I would say we see a similarity there. In that the wife favoured the son that would become father of the jewish people.
Also, it's not esaf!!!!! not in english or hebrew ESAV or perhaps ESAV/ESAW. OR Esau in english.
The F, is like saying Taf instead of Tav or Taw. Because W/V/F can become confused. W/V may have become confused. But let's not add F to the mix. I think some do say Taf but I doubt they claim that is correct.. It's certainly not esaf!!!
The reason these accidents can happen is because the letter is formed from the same part of the mouth.
Wow, that's pretty embarassing. I'm going to review this right now!
-
Shalom,
q_q_ is right in most of what he wrote here...
Abraham was very fond of Ishmael and had to be told by Sarah to put him and his mother out of Abrahams house. Only because Hashem told Abraham to listen to Sarah did he do so.
Also regarding Essau it is true that Yitzak loved Essau. And Rivka was involved with the fact that Yaakov got the birthright.
http://modzitz.org/torah/toldos.htm
The Mother of All Blessings
based on a ma'amar from Rebbe Yechezkel of Kuzmir, found in the appendix to Divrei Yisrael
"And he didn't recognize him, for his hands were hairy like the hands of Esav; and he blessed him" [Breishis, 27:23].
Our holy sefarim tell us that Yaakov Avinu had to take the brachos [blessings] away from Esav with cunning, since the blessings were taken away from Adam HaRishon with cunning [see Breishis, 3:1], when he was "tricked" into eating from the Tree of Knowledge. Our Sages [Baba Metzia, 84a] tell us that Yaakov Avinu's beauty was a reflection of Adam HaRishon's; therefore [as an inheritor of Adam], he took back the brachos.
The effect of Yaakov Avinu's receiving the brachos from his father Yitzchak was, that even at a time when the Jewish People would not be on a lofty spiritual level, they would still be able to receive all of the bounty and blessings of this [physical] world. This was accomplished when Yaakov's mother Rivka placed goatskins on Yaakov's arms and neck.
Rivka did this because she knew that although Yitzchak's physical eyesight was "dimmed", his spiritual vision was not. Yitzchak wanted to bless Esav with the blessings of this [physical] world, and Yaakov with those of Olam Haba - the World to Come, as our sefarim relate. She therefore clothed Yaakov with Esav's clothes and goatskins, so that he would "be" Esav completely. That is, wherever Yitzchak would feel and smell "Yaakov," he would detect "Esav". Yaakov was thereby blessed with the bounty of this world.
Another reason she did this is because she knew that it would be beneficial and fitting for both of her sons. Therefore, after each of the sons received all of the blessings that were truly fit for him, Rivka is referred to as the "mother of Yaakov and Esav" [Breishis, 28:5]. This was because she was truly the mother of both of them equally, and she effected the best for each one.
So this is not a simple issue. I dont think you should pay someone to write this essay Yonathan... A true scholar must learn his bible lessons and not pay someone else... Please learn from your lesson...
muman613
-
basically if anyone can write this for me ill pay you.
-
basically if anyone can write this for me ill pay you.
It doesn't seem very moral for a Jew to cheat on a Judaism essay. :o
-
Shalom,
q_q_ is right in most of what he wrote here...
Abraham was very fond of Ishmael and had to be told by Sarah to put him and his mother out of Abrahams house. Only because Hashem told Abraham to listen to Sarah did he do so.
Also regarding Essau it is true that Yitzak loved Essau. And Rivka was involved with the fact that Yaakov got the birthright.
I know you don't care for facts, but if you are going to say somebody is wrong, you should have the decency to state where.
You should care for facts regarding the Torah.
You should at least want accuracy in that area.
-
Also, Isaac was the favorite to Abraham, and Jacob was the favorite to Isaac.
<snip>
actually the text suggests that Avraham cared alot for Yishmael, and Isaac. And G-d told him to send Yishmael away. G-d told him that his seed would continue through Isaac. Yitzchak's mother Sarai, naturally favoured Yitzchak. Avraham when he sent Ishmael away, was - I vaguely recall - reluctant, but G-d told him to listen to his wife.
the text does not suggest that avraham had a favourite. What is your evidence from the text that suggests he did?
Regarding Jacob
Jacob was not Isaac's favourite. If Isaac had a favourite, the text suggests that he favoured Esau. It was Isaac's wife Rivka that favoured Jacob, and had to fool Isaac into giving Jacob the better blessing.
So you certainly have it backwards there.
The text if it suggests that Isaac had a favourite, certainly suggests Esau was the favourite, not Jacob.
So I would say we see a similarity there. In that the wife favoured the son that would become father of the jewish people.
Also, it's not esaf!!!!! not in english or hebrew ESAV or perhaps ESAV/ESAW. OR Esau in english.
The F, is like saying Taf instead of Tav or Taw. Because W/V/F can become confused. W/V may have become confused. But let's not add F to the mix. I think some do say Taf but I doubt they claim that is correct.. It's certainly not esaf!!!
The reason these accidents can happen is because the letter is formed from the same part of the mouth.
Wow, that's pretty embarassing. I'm going to review this right now!
And that.
Since "embarrass" is spelt with 2 Rs and 2 Ss.
(your spelling prob doesn't exist, but interestingly, Embarras, is a river in E Illinois)
Your post is not that embarrassing, since the last paragraph of correction that I wrote refers to a mistake Yonathan made, not you.. though you didn't correct him.
-
Shalom,
q_q_ is right in most of what he wrote here...
Abraham was very fond of Ishmael and had to be told by Sarah to put him and his mother out of Abrahams house. Only because Hashem told Abraham to listen to Sarah did he do so.
Also regarding Essau it is true that Yitzak loved Essau. And Rivka was involved with the fact that Yaakov got the birthright.
I know you don't care for facts, but if you are going to say somebody is wrong, you should have the decency to state where.
You should care for facts regarding the Torah.
You should at least want accuracy in that area.
q_q_,
Once again I edited this posting removing some of the feelings I had. I think this was a simple misunderstanding.
I was not saying you were incorrect in this posting. We have disagreed on other topics and yet I continued to be gracious with you.
I tried to help the original poster and support what you were saying about the relationship between the fathers and the sons.
muman613
PS: I am sorry if I said 'most of what he wrote here'. I realize it implies you are saying something which is not true. I apologize for that but it is not what I meant.
-
You wrote "q_q_ is right in most of what he wrote here..."
What was it in that post that was not right?
-
You wrote "q_q_ is right in most of what he wrote here..."
What was it in that post that was not right?
q_q_,
I am sorry I wrote most of what he wrote here. I agree 100% with what you said here...
I am sorry.
muman613
-
You wrote "q_q_ is right in most of what he wrote here..."
What was it in that post that was not right?
q_q_,
I am sorry I wrote most of what he wrote here. I agree 100% with what you said here...
I am sorry.
muman613
Why are you sorry?
What a silly thing to be sorry for.
No wonder you run from debate. You get deeply upset if you get something wrong.
-
basically if anyone can write this for me ill pay you.
:::D ("I'll pay you") lol
Yonathan- use modern day philosophies too. Maybe I am wrong, but Esau was a MURDERER- seems to me like Esau is Arab/Islam. G-d hated Esau- b/c he was a murderer from practically his beginnings. People tell me I am wrong about this all the time, but sorry I dont think so. This is a good writing on the subject:
http://www.jcpa.org/dje/articles/jacob-esau.htm
-
Yonathan, You need to work on this paper yourself. Nothing good will come from paying people to do your paper. I went to school when computers were used for not much other then record keeping. Doing a paper like that back then would have required going to one of the larger libraries to do the research. When I got there all the books would be out already. What a pain. You guys have the internet today with Tons of information at your finger tips. You can even pick peoples brain here in the forum. If we only had all this back then. Do your own paper you will do great and feel better about it in the process.
-
basically if anyone can write this for me ill pay you.
:::D ("I'll pay you") lol
Yonathan- use modern day philosophies too. Maybe I am wrong, but Esau was a MURDERER- seems to me like Esau is Arab/Islam. G-d hated Esau- b/c he was a murderer from practically his beginnings. People tell me I am wrong about this all the time, but sorry I dont think so. This is a good writing on the subject:
http://www.jcpa.org/dje/articles/jacob-esau.htm
we are on a potentially thorny issue here, because
the rabbis associate
yishmael with arabs/islam,
and esau with christianity/the west.
This showed incredible foresight.. Jews have been persecuted continuously since the birth of christianity, by christians, up to very recently.
So it was a very fitting association.
the association is also from the fact that , I think there is a rashi that points it out.. there is a link between Rome and Esau's ancestry. Rome is of course the seat of christianity. (or a big form of it anyway).
of course, yishmael has a good and bad side, and esau has a good and bad side.
I do think that we are living in times when Esau is showing his nice side.
Esau's evil since the holocaust has been largely restrained.
Now esau biggest threat is killing us with kindness.. jews assimilating.
A spiritual holocaust.
I would associate esau with the west.. western civilization.
We have seen in recent times, that Esau can be VERY cold.. whereas Yishmael is very Wild.
There is a midrash(not always literal, but they teach us lessons). It says that when Yaakov embraced Esau, Esau tried to bite his neck, Yaakov's neck turned to marble, and Esau broke his teeth.
what it shows is how cold Esau can be.. It symbolizes the nazis.
Arabs are just wild animals.. I know both esau and yishmael are wild in the tenach. But it is yishmael whome the tenach says is a wild man father of a wild people, his hand shall be against every man and every man's hand shall be against him.
And this is really great...
If you quote that to a muslim.. as I have. They will think you are quoting from a book written 200 years ago. They will not believe it's in the Torah! That a book that old could have predicted that. Or, their jaws drop. I've seen both reactions.
-
Yonathan, I would have helped write it for you (and I would have enjoyed it,) , but im extremly bissy this week. 3 midterms and a project due next week (during Hol Hamoed), and also some other writing but I will just have to hand it in late. and with the holiday going on now (guests, + Yom Tov, etc.)
when is the essay due? If after the 23rd, let me know, maybe I can direct you to some links for now.
-
basically if anyone can write this for me ill pay you.
:::D ("I'll pay you") lol
Yonathan- use modern day philosophies too. Maybe I am wrong, but Esau was a MURDERER- seems to me like Esau is Arab/Islam. G-d hated Esau- b/c he was a murderer from practically his beginnings. People tell me I am wrong about this all the time, but sorry I dont think so. This is a good writing on the subject:
http://www.jcpa.org/dje/articles/jacob-esau.htm
Paulette,
As I said in my initial post, according to Jewish tradition Ishmael is the patriarch of the Arabs. Essau is the patriarch of the Edomites, the Romans. There is no way that Essau is related to the Arabs as Ishmael is well established as the head of the Arab nations.
muman613
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edom
Edom (Hebrew: אֱדוֹם, Standard Edom Tiberian ʾĔḏôm ; "red") is a name given to Esau in the Hebrew Bible, as well as to the nation descending from him. The nation's name in Assyrian was Udumi; in Syriac, ܐܕܘܡ; in Greek, Ἰδουμαία (Idoumaía); in Latin, Idumæa or Idumea.
The Edomite people were a Semitic-speaking tribal group inhabiting the Negev Desert and the Arabah valley of what is now southern Dead Sea and adjacent Jordan. The region has much reddish sandstone, which may have given rise to the name "Edom". The nation of Edom is known to have existed back to the 8th or 9th century B.C.E., and the Bible dates it back several centuries further. Recent archaeological evidence may indicate an Edomite nation as long ago as the 11th century B.C.E., but the topic is controversial. The nation ceased to exist as a settled state with the Jewish-Roman Wars.
.
.
.
Later in Jewish history, the Roman Empire came to be identified with Edom, and specifically the remnants of Amalek. This can be seen in rabbinic and Pharasaic writings such as the Mishnah or the Talmud, the Spanish Rabbinic leaders Ramban and Ibn-Ezra, the French Rabbinic scholars Rashi (1040-1105) and Tosphoth, Babylonian Jewish scholars like Sa-adia Gaon and other Jewish exilarchs, the Lithuanian leader Rabbi Vilnius Gaon and Baal-Shem-Tov. They use "Edomite" to refer to Rome, the Byzantine Empire. In parallel, the Islamic world is referred to as "Ishmael".
PS: I think you meant that Essau was a Hunter, not a murderer. What is your source for calling Essau a murderer? In fact Essau was a very religious and observant man, not like you portray him.
Biblical description
The Bible depicts Esau as a hunter who prefers the outdoor life, qualities that distinguished him from his brother who was a shy, or simple man depending on the translation of the Hebrew word "Tam" (which also means "relatively perfect man").[1] According to the Bible, Esau is the ancestor of the Edomites.[1] In the Book of Genesis, Esau is frequently shown being supplanted by his younger twin Jacob (Israel).
Genesis 25:19-25 narrates Esau's birth. He emerges from the womb with Jacob grasping his heel. He is described thusly: "Now the first came forth red, all over like a hairy garment; and they named him Esau."
-
But whatever, I dont believe that Ishmael was favored, it was just a question of either keeping or kicking out the son. And he wanted to have him stay (because after all he was his son), but Sarah and G-d saw other-wise, and they sent out Ishmael. Also mention that during Avraham's lifetime he gave Ishmael and the other sons gifts, that did not include the land of Israel (which only belong's to Yitzhak and after him his son Israel).
http://torahanytime.com/Rabbi/Avraham_Tabibov/index.html - This is in Russian, the last one on the list, "Alexander the Great" Speaks of the Arabs and 2 other nations coming and
debating in front of Alexander the Great of who owns the land of Israel (obviously the Jews won, becuase they had logic on their side)- Listin to the Shiur, this is a very good Rav (My Rav actually, and I heard this before, in shul and this is brought down in the Talmud).
Also many say that Yitzhak did favor Esav, and it is a good point, BUT that is why the Torah says he was blind, he didn't see the deception made by Esav and the way he tricked him. The sages say though that Esav did have 1 great quality which was Respecting mother and father (and he did serve his parents well). Also another comparison was that Esav was a man of the fields and Yakov- one who dwelt in tents.
I beleive a Midrash (or maybe something I though of, or heard) says that Yitzhak Knew that Yakov was the one who dressed as Esav and was getting the blessing (he even says the voice is the voice of Yakov), but NOW he was ready to give him the blessing becuase he saw that Yakov was now able to survive in this world. Originally he wanted their to be a sort of pact between Esav and Yakov (a man of survival and a spiritual man respectivly), and that seeing Yakov as ONLY being a spiritual man, meant that maybe he could not survive in this "cruel" world (full of wars, etc.) BUT after using the "hands of Esav" Yitzhak could now see that Yakov acquired the necessary quality of survival that Esav has had and has both the "hands of Esav" and the "Voice of Yakov", both neccesary for the survival of the Jewish nation.
This is also connected to David and his general Yoav, Becuase Yoav fought the battles for Israel, David was able to learn Torah, and becuase David learned Torah, Yoav won the battles for Israel.
-
"As I said in my initial post, according to Jewish tradition Ishmael is the patriarch of the Arabs. Essau is the patriarch of the Edomites, the Romans. There is no way that Essau is related to the Arabs as Ishmael is well established as the head of the Arab nations."
Both of you are right in a certain sense. Although generally the Arabs are Ishmael, and Edom is Rome, their is written, that 10 nations (including some of Amalik, Moav, Edom) ran to the desert and intermarried with the Ishmaleites (not all of them, but a portion of 10 nations did, when Sanherib came and conqured the region, and displaced nations and interminglied them). But yes, mainly the Arabs are Ishmael, and their spiritual and cultural influence is Ishmael, while Europe is generally Esav.
-
Shalom,
Found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esau
Genesis 25:28 explains the conflict between the parents and their children: "Now Isaac loved Esau, because he had a taste for game, but Rebekah loved Jacob." (emphasis added).
.
.
.
Esau, naturally, is furious and vows to kill Jacob (Gen. 27:41). Once again Rebekah intervenes to save her youngest son Jacob from being murdered by her eldest son, Esau.
Therefore, at Rebekah's urging, Jacob flees to a distant land to work for a relative, Laban (Gen. 28:5). To engineer Jacob's escape unharmed, Rebekah invents a story about not wanting Jacob to marry a local Heth-ite woman (Gen. 27:46).
Esau married Canaanite women, but, upon hearing that this greatly displeased his parents, Esau married his cousin Mahalath, the daughter of Ishmael (Gen. 28:6-9). Esau thus demonstrates loyalty to his parents and their wishes. However, the Bible portrays Rebekah's expression of displeasure with the women of the region as actually being only a ruse to facilitate Jacob's escape from Esau's murderous threats.
So apparantly Tzvi was correct that there is a mix of Esaus descendants and the descendants of Ishmael.
muman613
PS: Esau wanted to murder Yaakov because he felt Yaakov had stolen his birthright {but in truth he sold it for a bowl of beans}. In the end Yaakov wrestles with the angel of Esau and prevails and the angel gives Yaakov his well-known name of Israel.
-
"PS: I think you meant that Essau was a Hunter, not a murderer. What is your source for calling Essau a murderer? In fact Essau was a very religious and observant man, not like you portray him."
Our sages say that Esav was a murderer. ( Actually both him and Ishmael- by Ishmeal see the comments of "Mesahek"- or playing- 3 interpretations- raping women, killing, and serving idolatry)
Esav- when he came from the field, the day Avraham Avinu Alav Hashalom died, our sages say he killed a person. At first he was "good" although already at the womb their was a battle between Esav and Yakov. Many say when Avraham died- Esav said, something to the point of, how could G-d kill a man as rightious as Avraham (his grandfather), so thus their is no justice and Judge on earth (G-d forbid), so then he became bad (at around 13 I believe, and on that day he murdered a person).
Yonathan- I also remembered- this http://www.torahanytime.com/Rabbi/Daniel_Cohen/index.html
"Dating and Marriage part 1). - (english) This Rav talks about the different personality traits (including Ishmael, Esav, etc.) Comparisons, etc. I believe this would be very helpful for your paper.
-
"PS: I think you meant that Essau was a Hunter, not a murderer. What is your source for calling Essau a murderer? In fact Essau was a very religious and observant man, not like you portray him."
Our sages say that Esav was a murderer. ( Actually both him and Ishmael- by Ishmeal see the comments of "Mesahek"- or playing- 3 interpretations- raping women, killing, and serving idolatry)
Esav- when he came from the field, the day Avraham Avinu Alav Hashalom died, our sages say he killed a person. At first he was "good" although already at the womb their was a battle between Esav and Yakov. Many say when Avraham died- Esav said, something to the point of, how could G-d kill a man as rightious as Avraham (his grandfather), so thus their is no justice and Judge on earth (G-d forbid), so then he became bad (at around 13 I believe, and on that day he murdered a person).
Yonathan- I also remembered- this http://www.torahanytime.com/Rabbi/Daniel_Cohen/index.html
"Dating and Marriage part 1). - (english) This Rav talks about the different personality traits (including Ishmael, Esav, etc.) Comparisons, etc. I believe this would be very helpful for your paper.
Interesting Tzvi,
I just listened to a shuir from TorahAnyTime and I remember the Rabbi {I cant recall his name now} said that Esau was a very religious and pious man. This is how he was able to fool his father. But it is possible that your explanation is true also. I have not heard this before. I will look into it...
Thank you,
muman613
PS: I found this on Aish.com which explains what you are talking about...
http://www.aish.com/torahportion/moray/Esau.asp
Parshat Toldot tells the tale of the two children born to Isaac and Rebecca, Esau and Jacob.
The Jewish tradition teaches much about the greatness of Jacob, who is known also by his other name Israel. Jacob is the symbol of fidelity to God, the symbol of goodness. Our entire people have assumed his identity.
But his brother Esau is seen as a demonic character. The very name Esau evokes images of mayhem and bloodshed. Though his midrashic reputation is unchallenged, when one reads the biblical text, one wonders if he really deserves it.
We know that Esau was a hunter, an occupation that, despite any ominous overtones, is not intrinsically evil. Perhaps it is the comparison with Jacob that has put Esau in a poor light, though does that alone justify the deep enmity for Esau transmitted across millennia?
We might claim that only due to his descendants -- most notably Amalek -- has Esau earned his inauspicious reputation. Alternatively, we may assume that the actions and attitudes of his descendants helped form the midrashic reading of the texts.
THE DESPAIR OF ABRAHAM
The Midrash actually records the antecedents of such an approach within Abraham himself, as he contemplates his own death:
Then I said in my heart: as it happens to the fool, so will it happen even to me. (Ecclesiastes 2:15). "I have been called 'king' and the wicked Nimrod is called 'king'. Both alike died; in that case, why was I then more wise? Why did I [Abraham] jeopardize my life for the sanctification of the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, and warn people, saying, 'There is no G-d like Him among those above or below'? Then I said further, For there is no remembrance of the wise man together with the fool for ever, seeing that in the days to come all will long ago have been forgotten. Why [should he have said so]? When adversity befalls Israel they cry, Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Thy servants (Exodus 32:13); but do the heathen nations [in their distress] cry, 'Remember the deeds of Nimrod'? That is what is written, So how shall the wise man die even as the fool!" (Midrash Rabbah - Kohelet 2:16)
Esau identifies with this articulation of despair more than any other "teaching" of Abraham. In this soliloquy, Abraham concerned himself with the world-view of the simple man, and not only the philosopher, and therefore considered the world from a superficial perspective. Abraham was worried that due to the human condition, with death in the world, he and his teachings would soon be forgotten, his deeds dissipated like so many other passing trends. Realistically, without Abraham, the world stood a serious chance of becoming a dark and ugly place again, sliding back into the dark age from which it had emerged. Indeed, on the day that Abraham dies, all hell breaks loose:
Rabbi Johanan said: "That wicked [Esau] committed five sins on that day. He dishonored a betrothed maiden, he committed a murder, he denied G-d, he denied the resurrection of the dead, and he spurned the birthright." (Baba Batra 16b)
The concept of resurrection, which his father Isaac had all but experienced, could have provided Esau with the hope he needed to continue in his fathers' path. Yet this concept, this comfort, eluded his tortured mind. Ironically, Esau with his philosophy of despair, helps extinguish the light of Abraham which had shone so brightly up to that very day.
-
Number one, its a scam if someone else writes
it for you and completely unethical and immoral
and number two you wont learn anything if
you dont research the topic and write your
findings in your own words.
If you do the research yourself there will
be a greater sense of understanding and learning
about the topic...not to mention experience in researching
evaluating and drawing your own conclusions.
-
Number one, its a scam if someone else writes
it for you and completely unethical and immoral
and number two you wont learn anything if
you dont research the topic and write your
findings in your own words.
If you do the research yourself there will
be a greater sense of understanding and learning
about the topic...not to mention experience in researching
evaluating and drawing your own conclusions.
I agree 100%... I dont presume that anyone should write this paper for him. But we should at least be able to point him in the proper direction for researching it.
I use the Kosher Search engine http://4torah.com . It is very good!
muman613
-
Shalom,
Here is a portrayal of the dynamic between the family members which reflects my original statements.
From Chabad site:
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/458116/jewish/The-True-Heir.htm
When Jacob outsmarted Esau and received his father Isaac's blessings, Esau was outraged. "He cried out a great and bitter cry, and he said to his father, 'Bless me too, O my father!'… And Esau raised his voice and wept." Esau had been anticipating these blessings for many years, and for decades long Esau had feigned religious observance because he wanted his father to believe that he was worthy of these blessings. He was utterly devastated when he realized that he, the on-the-ball, worldly hunter, had been outwitted by his religious "goody-goody" brother.
It is remarkable that this person who was a murderer, rapist and glutton was so eager to receive the blessing of a tzaddik (righteous person). Esau wasn't out for a large inheritance; after all, Isaac was an elderly, blind person who had nothing to offer other than his blessings. Rather, as someone who was raised in the households of Abraham and Isaac, he was well aware of the value of a tzaddik's blessing. Esau was a Jew who was born to a Jewish mother, and therefore possessed a Jewish soul which imbued him with a strong belief in G-d and the super-natural. His "Jewish heart," however, did not manifest itself in his immoral lifestyle, which was contrary to all he had learned in his father's home. He knew what was right, but was unwilling to make the necessary sacrifices to live an ethical, spiritual life.
The Divine plan determined that Jacob, not Esau, receive the blessings. For Jacob was a Jew not only at heart, but in practice as well. With faith alone we cannot accomplish the mission of revealing G-dliness in this world, and transforming ourselves and the world around us into a Divine abode. Only through actually practicing Torah and mitzvot can this goal be achieved.
In microcosm, many can relate to Esau's dilemma. Most people know what is proper, but oftentimes lack the strength and willpower to implement that which is proper into their daily lives. We must always remember that only the practice of Torah and mitzvot makes us a worthy receptacle for Divine blessings. Faith isn't a product of our labor; it naturally exists within every Jew due to our G-dly soul which was instilled within us. Blessings must be earned. Only the hard work of applying the faith in everyday life makes a person worthy of all of G-d's blessings.
-
Excellent starting point ideas here
-
"PS: I think you meant that Essau was a Hunter, not a murderer. What is your source for calling Essau a murderer? In fact Essau was a very religious and observant man, not like you portray him."
Our sages say that Esav was a murderer. ( Actually both him and Ishmael- by Ishmeal see the comments of "Mesahek"- or playing- 3 interpretations- raping women, killing, and serving idolatry)
Esav- when he came from the field, the day Avraham Avinu Alav Hashalom died, our sages say he killed a person. At first he was "good" although already at the womb their was a battle between Esav and Yakov. Many say when Avraham died- Esav said, something to the point of, how could G-d kill a man as rightious as Avraham (his grandfather), so thus their is no justice and Judge on earth (G-d forbid), so then he became bad (at around 13 I believe, and on that day he murdered a person).
Yonathan- I also remembered- this http://www.torahanytime.com/Rabbi/Daniel_Cohen/index.html
"Dating and Marriage part 1). - (english) This Rav talks about the different personality traits (including Ishmael, Esav, etc.) Comparisons, etc. I believe this would be very helpful for your paper.
I am reading how Esav became mean and hateful. Things on the earth Esav wanted more. I dont see anywhere that Esav's descendants were Romans here. Where do I find that the descendants of Esav were Roman, and where do the Arabs come in here-were all of the arabs Philistines?
-
OH I'm Sorry Muman- I see- Ishmael was a wild one- I see it, ok. But it says that Esav was bad too- He wanted to kill his OWN brother!! well, we are all bad anyway. I have heard LOTS of these crazy arabs say that they are the descendants of Ishmael, and some try to say Abraham. If they are saying "Ishmael" they ARE OUTRIGHT saying that Israel does NOT belong to them, right?
(I thought it was Esav----okkkk Sorry- I see.)
-
OH I'm Sorry Muman- I see- Ishmael was a wild one- I see it, ok. But it says that Esav was bad too- He wanted to kill his OWN brother!! well, we are all bad anyway. I have heard LOTS of these crazy arabs say that they are the descendants of Ishmael, and some try to say Abraham. If they are saying "Ishmael" they ARE OUTRIGHT saying that Israel does NOT belong to them, right?
(I thought it was Esav----okkkk Sorry- I see.)
The Arabs are descendents of Ishmael, but that does not prove that Israel belongs to them. Quite the opposite, expecially when they bring the Bible as proof (as also happened at the time of Alexander the Great). They bring the Torah and say see we are also descendents of Avraham, and we bring the Torah and say please read furthur on- Avraham gave his other children (Ishmael and the sons of Keturah) gifts, and sent them away from his home, and he gave Yitzhak (the father of Yakov- thus the Jews) the Land of Israel and his inheritence. Its plainly written in the Torah, so they have no case becuase Avraham Alav Hashalom settled this case in his life time, and even after he died, Ishmael eventually did tishuva (our sages say) and did recognize the importance and the status of Yitzhak Alav Hashalom. And went on his own path seperated from what would be the Chosen Nation (the nation of Israel).
-
OH I'm Sorry Muman- I see- Ishmael was a wild one- I see it, ok. But it says that Esav was bad too- He wanted to kill his OWN brother!! well, we are all bad anyway. I have heard LOTS of these crazy arabs say that they are the descendants of Ishmael, and some try to say Abraham. If they are saying "Ishmael" they ARE OUTRIGHT saying that Israel does NOT belong to them, right?
(I thought it was Esav----okkkk Sorry- I see.)
The Arabs are descendents of Ishmael, but that does not prove that Israel belongs to them. Quite the opposite, expecially when they bring the Bible as proof (as also happened at the time of Alexander the Great). They bring the Torah and say see we are also descendents of Avraham, and we bring the Torah and say please read furthur on- Avraham gave his other children (Ishmael and the sons of Keturah) gifts, and sent them away from his home, and he gave Yitzhak (the father of Yakov- thus the Jews) the Land of Israel and his inheritence. Its plainly written in the Torah, so they have no case becuase Avraham Alav Hashalom settled this case in his life time, and even after he died, Ishmael eventually did tishuva (our sages say) and did recognize the importance and the status of Yitzhak Alav Hashalom. And went on his own path seperated from what would be the Chosen Nation (the nation of Israel).
Right. I know- but thats why I also question Esav- b/c Esav was the same way as the islamos act today. They HATE that Israel will NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER belong to them, it drives them INSANE like Esav acted insane. This is also where I get crazed, b/c NO MATTER WHAT- Israel belongs to the Children of Abraham, NOT these Ishmaelites.. Even IF that were truth-they would DESTROY the place, and G-d does not give such things to a people that are hell bent on destruction.
-
<snip>
PS: I think you meant that Essau was a Hunter, not a murderer. What is your source for calling Essau a murderer? In fact Essau was a very religious and observant man, not like you portray him.
I already wrote that there is a famous midrash of Esau biting jacob's neck. I don't think that that would sound righteous to you. It didn't go in though, did it? The post was just 2 posts before the one where you wrote your post witth that ridicuous "ps" note!
contradictions mean nothing to you.
disagreements mean nothing,
facts mean nothing.
Look at the plain text, when Jacob greets Esau with lots of gifts, he is worried, he wants to calm esau down.
if there are midrashim of him being religious, i'd like to know which. But the plain text, and midrashim i've seen portraying him, portray him as a bad guy, and his nation as a bad nation.
religious? what is your source. Just that a rabbi told you? You should have said that then, and said it was weak like that. That you have no idea and you just heard.
observant? observing what?
Esau threatened to kill Jacob!!!!!!!! Jacob fled from Esau.
Gen 27:41
"And Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing wherewith his father blessed him. And Esau said in his heart: 'Let the days of mourning for my father be at hand; then will I slay my brother Jacob.'"
Is that righteous to you?
Rule number one, read the plain text.
If you had, and were logically consistent, you wouldn't have said he was religious and "observant".
Observant!! of what? hairy animals crawling around?
before he speared them!
It was Yishmael who the oral tradition says -became- religious later. And the written hints at this by saying he "expired". And more explicitly, shows that there was some level of peace, in that yishmael helped yitzchak bury their father avraham.
What you have to do muman, and the same as what every jew should do. And many here don't. Is know where you know things from.
In particular, at least know
if something is in the Written Torah, or if it is in the Oral Torah.
Sometimes midrashim disagree.
Plain text is stronger.
You write like you haven't even read the plain text.
You are listening to a dvar here and a dvar there.. I actually told you specifically that that is the problem with listening to all these shiurim.
If the rabbi himself that said it didn't even mention a source then don't bother listening to it! And if you don't remember the source clearly then don't bother remembering it so clearly. And if you haven't read the source yourself or verified it via google, then don't just say the source says it. You have to actually weigh your facts. What you know and what you've heard.
And hearing somthing once from one rabbi!!!!!!! That is nothing. Do you even remember the rabbi?
If you hear it from many different rabbis then it's more likely. But check these things before firmly remembering them!
-
<snip>
PS: I think you meant that Essau was a Hunter, not a murderer. What is your source for calling Essau a murderer? In fact Essau was a very religious and observant man, not like you portray him.
I told you of the midrash of Esau biting jacob's neck. I don't think that that would sound righteous to you. It obviously didn't go in though. Your 100% agreement obviously doesn't mean anything
Look at the plain text, when Jacob greets Esau with lots of gifts, he is worried, he wants to calm esau down.
if there are midrashim of him being religious, i'd like to know which. But the plain text, and midrashim i've seen portraying him, portray him as a bad guy, and his nation as a bad nation.
religious? what is your source.
observant? observing what?
Esau threatened to kill Jacob!!!!!!!! Jacob fled from Esau.
Gen 27:41
"And Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing wherewith his father blessed him. And Esau said in his heart: 'Let the days of mourning for my father be at hand; then will I slay my brother Jacob.'"
Is that righteous to you?
Rule number one, read the plain text.
q_q_,
I never said that Esau was righteous, I don't know where you come up with that. My point was that the 'evilness' of Esau was something which didn't really come to the fore till after he sold his birthright. In all Jewish understanding Esau became the evil one. But there is a back-story which explains why Isaac was fooled by Esau.
Esau went to great lengths to impress his father that he was a learned son. I will refer you to this so you can review:
The Personality of Esau
http://www.mesora.org/esau.html
Isaac admired Esau’s abundant energies. He respected his abilities as a conqueror. He was an individual whose countenance demanded respect. However Isaac made one miscalculation. He thought that Esau would exploit his abilities as a conqueror and assist Jacob in spreading the teachings of the Torah. The Torah likewise, in its description of Esau, recognizes and respects Esau’s unique abilities. The Torah appreciates the greatness embodied in the personality of the conqueror. There is a Midrash (allegory) that compares the personalities of the Grand Rabbi Judah the Prince, and the wicked Antiochos. They both reflect man’s ability of conquest. One excelled in the world of the ideational and one in the world of the physical.
From Chabad:
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/57475/jewish/Tamars-Twins.htm
The Torah relates that "The children struggled within her." The Midrash explains: "Whenever she would pass a house of prayer or house of study, Jacob would struggle to come out ... and when she passed a house of idolatry, Esau would struggle to come out." Rebecca, puzzled by the contrary strivings being exhibited by her offspring, "sought the counsel of G-d" and was told: "There are two nations in your womb; two peoples will separate from your innards."
There are, however, other Midrashic accounts that describe Esau and Jacob sharing a righteous childhood in the holy environment of their parents' home and under the tutelage of their saintly grandfather, Abraham, and that "only later did Esau ruin himself with his deeds." This supports our initial conception of an impeccable conception, pregnancy and birth, followed by a "deficient" progeny that is attributable solely to the fact that Esau, by his own free will, chose to follow a path of evil.
And one last example:
From Torah.org
http://www.torah.org/learning/jewish-values/distance4.html
With regard to the form of falsehood that is prohibited by the Torah there is one specific circumstance in which one may be permitted to lie; when another person is trying to trick or lie to you then you may be allowed to deceive him. This leniency is derived from the story in the Torah involving Jacob deceiving his father Isaac: Isaac had two sons, Esau and Jacob, Esau was the elder and was Isaac’s favorite. Isaac believed he was righteous and therefore wanted to give the main blessing to Esau and not Jacob. Isaac’s wife, Rebecca, knew that Esau was really an evil man and had deceived his father into believing that he was righteous. She knew that there would be a terrible consequences if Esau received the blessing. Therefore she persuaded her other son, Jacob, to pretend that he was Esau and thereby deceive Isaac into giving the blessing to him.
So, as you can see, there is good reason for Isaac to have believed that Esau was righteous. The truth is he was just acting in the way he believed he had to in order to get the blessing which he wanted.
muman613
PS: I just heard a shuir before Yom Kippur which explained in great length the things Esau did to prove to his father he was observant.
http://www.tfdixie.com/Parashat/toldot/002.htm
We must first begin by analyzing Esau. In one respect, Esau appears to be an upright, even righteous, individual. This aspect is illustrated by his strict observance of the commandment to honor his father, as well as his intense anguish at the discovery that he had lost his father's blessing. Conversely, the more well-known side of Esau's personality is that of his wickedness, demonstrated by his disregard for the birthright, his desire to kill Jacob, and the statement of our sages that says that on the day of Abraham's death, Esau committed five sins, among them some of the most heinouscrimes known to Mankind. How, then, are we to view Esau's enigmatic disposition?
-
<snip>
q_q_,
I never said that Esau was righteous, I don't know where you come up with that. My point was that the 'evilness' of Esau was something which didn't really come to the fore till after he sold his birthright. In all Jewish understanding Esau became the evil one.
you said he was religious, I suppose you meant he was religious and immoral.
you didn't mean anything.
even according to what you went on to quote, it said that there is a disagreement amongst midrashic sources. One midrash says he was brought up well.. Another that he was evil from the womb.
Not suprising. I don't see much of a contradiction there. But the article makes it look like one is saying he was born evil and the other that he became evil.
And the article says nobody is born evil.
For somebody that isn't chabad, it's Philosophical speculation. Opinions really, not facts, which is why you like it so much.
I wouldn't take articles too seriously when they don't even quote the midrashim verbatim, or reference it exactly.
<snip>
PS: I just heard a shuir before Yom Kippur which explained in great length the things Esau did to prove to his father he was observant.
http://www.tfdixie.com/Parashat/toldot/002.htm
We must first begin by analyzing Esau. In one respect, Esau appears to be an upright, even righteous, individual. This aspect is illustrated by his strict observance of the commandment to honor his father, as well as his intense anguish at the discovery that he had lost his father's blessing. Conversely, the more well-known side of Esau's personality is that of his wickedness, demonstrated by his disregard for the birthright, his desire to kill Jacob, and the statement of our sages that says that on the day of Abraham's death, Esau committed five sins, among them some of the most heinouscrimes known to Mankind. How, then, are we to view Esau's enigmatic disposition?
well done.
You said Esau is observant.. I said "observed what"
You came up with something. He honoured his father.
And you quoted a long paragraph to say it.
That's all you meant when you said "Observant". Very good.
of course you didn't have that in mind at the time.. you had nothing in mind.
You argued "I never said that Esau was righteous,"
I suppose you believe he is now, because you just quoted an article that says "...Esau appears to be an upright, even righteous, individual"
I know what you're trying to do.. And I don't have the patience for it.
You are just looking for excuses to throw in bits of torah here and there and everywhere.
-
q_q_,
I have quoted sources and heard from Rabbis that this is so. Just because you think something doesn't make it true. I don't know why you have such a great feeling about yourself because you do nothing but make yourself a pain in the but.
I have said the truth, as it is told in Torah. You dont want to believe me simply because don't want to learn. You have a learning block because you think you know it all. My friend, you certainly don't know it all. What I have stated about Esau is fact and I can even find more to back up my statement. But I think it is a waste of time to even talk to you because you have an agenda. You are not open minded and you are quite annoying.
Why, q_q, do you think that Isaacs favorite son {Esau} was his favorite? This is clearly because Esau was working hard on impressing his father. This is well know and as the articles I quoted makes clear, he was very interested in honoring his father. It seems you simply want to argue and continue your machlokes over your fiend Chamish with me. I suggest you ask a 'competent' Rabbi which you respect about what I am saying. I have heard this from Rabbis and seen it written. You are smart enough to do a 4torah.com search over it {as I did} and discover that maybe you don't really know it all...
You seem to discount the Chabad site? Thats Ok... What I am teaching here is not simply Chabad opinion. You seem to close your mind over just about everything. Do you really ever learn?
muman613
-
Sorry, but I must say my piece, b/c I have been reading this from Davids ben Moshe's Torah, from the 1930's. Look, Esau... He WANTED TO KILL his OWN brother. As q_q says- is THAT righteous?? NO--- It says SO in Genesis- PLAINLY. Then IT IS written in Malachi. Maybe I should not get involved being female, but I happen to love Torah. A LOT.
Malachi http://torah-online.com/ht/Torah/Malachi/Malachi1.html
Chapter 1
Malachi 1:1 THE BURDEN of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi.
Malachi 1:2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say: 'Wherein hast Thou loved us?' Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD; yet I loved Jacob;
Malachi 1:3 But Esau I hated, and made his mountains a desolation, and gave his heritage to the jackals of the wilderness.
The Above is ALSO WHY I believe that Esau is also Arab. Sorry- that is what I see.
-
Sorry, but I must say my piece, b/c I have been reading this from Davids ben Moshe's Torah, from the 1930's. Look, Esau... He WANTED TO KILL his OWN brother. As q_q says- is THAT righteous?? NO--- It says SO in Genesis- PLAINLY. Then IT IS written in Malachi. Maybe I should not get involved being female, but I happen to love Torah. A LOT.
Malachi http://torah-online.com/ht/Torah/Malachi/Malachi1.html
Chapter 1
Malachi 1:1 THE BURDEN of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi.
Malachi 1:2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say: 'Wherein hast Thou loved us?' Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD; yet I loved Jacob;
Malachi 1:3 But Esau I hated, and made his mountains a desolation, and gave his heritage to the jackals of the wilderness.
The Above is ALSO WHY I believe that Esau is also Arab. Sorry- that is what I see.
Shalom,
Yes, there is no doubt that his jealousy for his brother brought him to his evil state. I am not arguing against this or trying to change anything about understanding the evil of Esau.
But when looking at evil one must understand why it is there. I look at Esau and from what I have learned there is a reason for the way it turned out this way. Yes, from the womb they were mortal enemies. Yes, they were always at odds in their choice of lifestyles. Esau was a man of physical endeavors while Yaakov was a man of spiritual endeavors. We have discussed these aspects thouroughly.
The question one must ask oneself is why would Esau be so upset about not getting the blessing? This is one clue as to how Esau thought.
Regarding Esau being an arab this is not basically the Jewish belief. As I stated before all the Sages have said that Esau is the progenitor of the Romans. I realize AsheDina that you clarified your statement saying this is your personal belief and I respect that, but it may be worthwhile to understand what the Sages are saying:
http://www.aishdas.org/midrash/5765/vayishlach.html
Vayishlach 5765
Magdiel- this is Rome.[1]
The rabbinic identification of Rome with the Biblical figure of Esau is basic to the traditional understanding of much of the relevant sections of Chumash Bareishis. Esau's faults and shortcomings as well as his complex and tortured relationship with his brother Yakov was seen by the Rabbis through the prism of this identification, so much so that the conflict of these two brothers typifies the struggle for spiritual and moral supremacy between Rome and Jerusalem.
It is somewhat unclear, though, what supports this identification. The voluminous Roman chronicles do not appear to contain any awareness of descent from Esau[2], although a memory of such an ignoble descent certainly could have been lost[3] or suppressed. Our tradition does preserve the particulars of Roman descent from Esau.
"The great kingdom of Rome was built by Zepho, son of Eliphaz, son of Esau. Tirtat of the land of Elisha attacked him and killed him (Yelamdeinu, Batei Midrashos 160)."
The Malbim in his commentary to Obadia 1,1 suggests that in addition to genealogical descent, the identification of Rome and Esau is also based on the "founding of their faith by children of Edom, as R. Isaac Abarbanel wrote to Isaiah 34, with proofs."
This comment of the Malbim may lead us the supposition that identification of Rome as Esau rests on the very visible traits that Roman, and subsequently Western civilization, shares with the character traits of Esau as he is described in the Chumash. In fact, it is my impression that midrashic collections seem to highlight especially these cultural qualities when they discuss Esau. The limitations of space do not allow a full treatment of this subject, which in truth deserves a book length treatment; we can, however, manage to briefly focus on two or three of them.
Among such traits is the individualism and disdain for tradition and authority that is such an obvious feature of Western civilization and also of Esau who was a "self-made man". Esau willingly gave up his birthright in order to build his future with his own toil and effort. "Esau showed to others that (in his opinion) the institution of birthright is not morally correct. Rather one who is more talented, of his own right should be honored above others. Many great leaders of the nations of the worlds followed Esau 's opinion and disparaged the status of birth; rather, (they held) everything depends on the natural abilities of each individual (Netsiv, Haemek Davar to Genesis 23,34).
One trait of Esau that few will fail to recognize in the civilization and culture of the West is the emphasis on the image over substance, leavened with a good measure of hypocrisy.[4]
He (Esau) was a hypocrite (Shocher Tov 14,3).
Esau would hunt him (Yitshak) and deceive him with words (Genesis Rabbah 63,10).
Nevertheless, the emphasis on the appearances brings a certain measure of outward nobility and aristocratic bearing which is evident in the outside trappings of Esau's civilization, his architecture, art, music - the brilliance of classical Western culture. The Maharal writes: " The verse "two proud ones in your belly" alludes to the wide view of Israel and Edom, not just Rebbi and Antoninus alone (see our Midrash Toldos for a technical discussion of this statement) - that they possess a specific substance. They have a live force of substance and they comport themselves with worth in their eating. This means that there is one who eats like an animal, without raising himself in it but Israel and Esau do not conduct themselves so. They prepare a proper environment to make their eating more important. So also Esau comports himself in his clothing to this day to honor himself in his dress and to raise his self respect above that of other nations, also through great buildings. Not so Ishmael - they do not care about their clothing, cuisine, bathhouses[5].... this means that they (sons of Esau) have a self-worth in their life-force[6][7] (Gur Arye, Gen. 25, 24).
I realize that we will never fully agree on our understanding of these issues. Torah is learned on one hand, and experienced on another. My life experiences have a bearing on my understanding of the lessons of our Torah. I dont expect everyone to agree with my perceptions but I would like to share and learn what others understand. This is the way we can grow.
muman613
-
Why do you say it is not a Jewish belief? I am Jewish, I think Esau is modern day Arab, along with Ishmaelites- Where does it say that Rome is Esau? I dont know what other religions believe about this, and I dont care- but it pretty much plainly says it: Desolate. Jackals. What is desolate? Doesent that mean also Desert? Anyway, I'm not arguing, but it causes for questioning. Cain was Abels brother. He was a murderer also.
-
Shalom,
Here is more about Esau and Yaakov regarding our tradition of the Scapegoat on Yom Kippur:
http://www.aish.com/hhYomK/hhYomKDefault/Goat_for_Azazel.asp
TWIN GOATS
Other details of the service of Yom Kippur also take on new meaning when seen in contrast to the actions of Nadav and Avihu. The central worship of the day involved two goats -- one offered in the Sanctuary, the other sent into the desert.
This practice would seem to be a response to the different types of worship -- in the Sanctuary, for God, and the other that had no place in the Sanctuary, or even among the living at all, sent to a place of desolation.
This worship is quite bizarre. Why would we take a goat simply to reject it and send it away? The law seems to teach us about the stark difference between service of God which is accepted and beloved by God, versus the "scapegoat" which represents that which has been rejected by God. Yet there is more:
The two goats on Yom Kippur; the mitzvah is for them to be identical in appearance, size, and value, the two shall be chosen together. (Talmud - Yoma 62a)
The Talmud teaches that these two goats should look identical -- like twins. This seems strange. Why would the goats need to be identical, especially when their purpose is so different?
The idea of twins -- twins who are opposites -- is a familiar theme in the Torah. The most famous twins in the Torah are, of course, Jacob and Esau. They were complete opposites, one good, the other evil. No one could ever confuse them. On the other hand, perhaps they did possess some similarities. Rashi (Genesis 25:27) tells us that until the age of 13 they were indistinguishable, as does the Midrash:
Esau was worthy to be called Jacob and Jacob was worthy to be called Esau. (Midrash Zuta Shir HaShirim 1:15)
They were so similar that at times their similarity caused confusion. One dressed as the other, one spoke like the other.
It is strange that the divine plan required twins? Perhaps just being siblings would have been enough? Evidently the Torah wanted these two, Jacob and Esau, to be almost the same. Perhaps their similarity represents the thin line between acceptable behavior and idolatry, between good an evil.
Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner noted this parallel, and suggested that when things look alike from the exterior, it is a sign that one must look within -- at the essence -- in order to discern the difference (Pachad Yitzchak, Purim, p.43).
The idea of the two goats is intrinsically related to the personalities of Jacob and Esau, identical on the outside but so different in terms of their essence. The reason that we need to offer the second goat -- the scapegoat -- is that so often we find ourselves dressing up like Esau instead of behaving like the Jacob/Israel that we are.
The origin of the two goats themselves may very well be found in that famous episode when Jacob is persuaded by his mother to dress up like his brother. Rebecca instructs him:
"Go now to the herd and bring me two good goats..." (Genesis 27:9)
The Midrash expands on this idea:
How do we know that it was in the merit of Jacob [that we take the two goats]? These are the goats that his mother referred to "Go now to the herd and bring me two good goats..." Why are they called "good"?
Rabbi Brechia said in the name of Rabbi Chelbo: "They are good for you and good for your children. They are good for you when you enter, and take the blessings from your father, and they are good for your children, when they soil themselves in sin all year round. Then they will bring these two goats, and offer them and be cleansed." (Pesikta Rabbati 47)
Jacob's entrance to his father may be paralleled with the once-yearly entrance of the Kohen Gadol, the High Priest, into the Holy of Holies. Jacob prepared for this appearance with the two goats, as his descendents would in the future.
AisheDina, I say that it is not a Jewish belief because it was not taught by the Sages. One can have any opinion one wants, but it is not always right. Torah Scholars have read and investigated and written much on these things. It is one thing to say "I think this is so" and another to be able to say "Rabbi X said this is so, and Rabbi Y said it is so, but Rabbi Z says it is not". In order to be able to argue your point you should find some basis for your statement. This is what I have been trying to do in backing up my statements with articles, midrash, Torah, any supporting material for my position.
I quoted in my previous posting the Midrash which links Esau with Rome, not the Arabs. Once again :
"The great kingdom of Rome was built by Zepho, son of Eliphaz, son of Esau. Tirtat of the land of Elisha attacked him and killed him (Yelamdeinu, Batei Midrashos 160)."
Also, I have checked the interpretation of Malachi you have provided and it differs somewhat from the translation which I have. Specifically line 1:3 according to http://bible.ort.org it reads:
1:3 but I hated Esau; I destroyed his mountains and gave his heritage to the jackals of the desert.
1:3 Ve'et-Esav saneti va'asim et-harav shmamah ve'et-nachalato letanot midbar.
This would imply that Esaus mountain was destroyed and his heritage given to the jackals of the desert. Once again this implies Rome to me as we can see in our day that Europe is being overrun by the arabs {assuming jackals of the desert refers to the arabs}. This is my own new understanding of this verse.
I don't quite know what you have brought up the story of Caine and Abel for as it is a bit different. That {Cain/Abel} is a very interesting story in its own right. Our Torah has many stories of brothers who are at odds {Something I know a little about :) } .
muman613
PS: Here are some other interesting links which contain aspects of my point...
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/587261/jewish/Haftorah-in-a-Nutshell.htm
http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/solomon/archives/vayish63.htm
...
Obviously, as the Midrash (Tanhuma Yashan 6) relates, Jacob used all means to protect himself and his family from a fatal attack by Esau and his entourage. Yet had Esau really intended to murder Esau, he would have been unlikely to succumb to flattery - even in the form of presents. He was not short of worldly goods - as he said to Easu - "I have plenty" (33:9). Indeed, Jacob's attempts to appease him would have been counterproductive. His anger over Jacob's having deprived him of the birthright and the blessings would have been compounded by Jacob's insulting his intelligence in this way - in the same spirit as Chaim felt patronized by Uncle Shloymie.
This difficulty may be resolved as follows. Jacob's behavior was not flattery, but genuine. For Esau did have positive qualities. The Torah he relates that while Jacob was a 'simple man who lived in tents', Esau was 'a hunter, a man of the field' (25:27) - a person who took care that there would be good food in the household, and he used his skills to provide for his father Isaac in his old age. Indeed the Talmud in Hullin brings the tradition that Esau could use a bow and arrow with such accuracy that he could slaughter birds in flight. In this way, Esau was Jacob's master.
...
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/246619/jewish/Jacob-Receives-Isaacs-Blessing.htm
Although Jacob had gone to the academy of Shem and Eber to study the teachings of G-d, Esau refused to do anything of the sort. He led his life in his own way, and became more estranged from his father’s teachings. Yet, he honored his father and tried to appear an obedient and loving son, ready to comply with his father’s every wish, as long as it did not involve him in studying and learning. Isaac could not and did not see Esau’s G-dless behavior, for his eyes were dim with age, and he was confined to his tent.
Rebekah, however, saw everything. She observed the quiet and pleasing ways of Jacob, and watched with alarm the true nature of her first-born son Esau. For her there could be no doubt as to which of her children had chosen the right way.
After the death of Shem, Jacob returned to his father’s house, and Esau, too, came home from Seir. Isaac had grown old and weak and felt that the time had come for him to give his sons his last blessings.
Still believing that he could entrust Esau with the task of carrying on Abraham’s tradition, Isaac told Esau to hunt some deer meat, prepare a meal for him, and receive his blessings. Gladly, Esau took his bow and quiver and went out into the field.
http://www.meaningfullife.com/currentevents/israel/Esau_Ishmael_AND_Sinai.php
The nations continue to appeal by asking what evidence is there that the Jewish people were meticulous in their observance of Torah. After a series of back and forth arguments, the evidence finally comes from the nations themselves who bear witness to the Jews’ commitment. Nimrod bears witness that Abraham was G-d fearing, Laban bears witness that Jacob was ethical, etc.
Finally, the Talmud concludes that the nations request that G-d give them another chance to accept G-d’s commandments. And G-d gives them the chance. And adds, that it is only through your effort and preparation today that you can merit reward tomorrow. “If you do not prepare food before Shabbat, what will you have to eat?”
The relevance of this narrative today is powerfully evident. We are witnessing today the struggle of nations stemming from Esau – the Roman/Christian/Western world, and Ishmael – the Arab/Muslim world, and their confrontations are deeply related to Israel and the Jews, children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
This struggle can truly be understood only by retracing its roots. The story of Abraham and his children, and then the story of Sinai seven generations later tells us how these battles all began.
-
I know- my sister I have problems with, CONSTANT at odds. She does what is evil in the sight of G-d, I have tried to do what is right. I am not always right, of course NOT, but I SINCERELY TRY to do what is right.
I dont know why I brought up Cain. He had a mark right? What was that mark? Do u know?
LOL--- by now, this kid has his paper done. :::D
-
I know- my sister I have problems with, CONSTANT at odds. She does what is evil in the sight of G-d, I have tried to do what is right. I am not always right, of course NOT, but I SINCERELY TRY to do what is right.
I dont know why I brought up Cain. He had a mark right? What was that mark? Do u know?
LOL--- by now, this kid has his paper done. :::D
Shalom AsheDina,
Here is the portion from Bereshit which we are discussing:
Verse 9: Ad-noy then said to Kayin, "Where is your brother, Hevel?" [Kayin] said, "I know not, am I my brother's keeper?"
Verse 10: He said [to Kayin], "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood cries out to Me from the ground.
Verse 11: Now you are cursed from the ground that had to open its mouth to accept your brother's blood from your hand.
Verse 12: When you work the ground, it will no longer give you of its strength. You will be unsettled, and a wanderer on the earth."
Verse 13: Kayin said to Ad-noy, "My sin is greater than I can bear."
Verse 14: Behold, today You have banished me from the face of the earth, and from Your face I am to be hidden. I am to be unsettled and a wanderer on the earth; whoever finds me, will kill me."
Verse 15: Ad-noy said to him, "Therefore, whoever kills Kayin, revenge will be taken on him [Kayin] sevenfold." Ad-noy placed a mark on Kayin, so that whoever would find him would not kill him.
A quick search on 4torah.com came up with a good simple answer.
From http://ohr.edu/ask_db/ask_main.php/162/Q2/ the Ohr Somayach web site:
Yaakov from Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada wrote:
Dear Rabbi,
Is there any reference - Talmudic or otherwise - that tells us what the mark was that Hashem placed upon Cain to protect him (Genesis 4:15)?
Dear Yaakov,
Here are a number of opinions from Midrashic sources:
* Cain became a leper so people would avoid him.
* G-d gave him a dog to guard him.
* A horn grew out of his forehead for protection.
* G-d engraved a letter of His Name on Cain's forehead. This would remind people that G-d commanded not to kill him.
Sources:
* Bereishet Rabbah 22:28, Tifferet Tziyon
* Midrash Aggadah 4:15
According to our great sage Rashi the following is written:
Ad-noy placed a mark on Kayin.
He inscribed a letter from His Divine Name on his forehead. (Other editions of Rashi add: Another interpretation:] [The statement] "Whoever finds me will kill me" [refers to:] the animals and beasts. But there were not yet any humans from whom he had to fear except for his father and mother, and he had no fear that they would kill him. But, he said: "Until now the fear of me was upon all the animals as it is said: 'And your fear, etc.'263 And, now, as a result of this sin the beasts will not fear me and they will kill me." Immediately: "G-d placed a mark on Kayin" and fear of him reverted to all.)
This site is also interesting : http://www.jewishmag.com/parsha/oldparshas/tzav.htm
Sacrifice and Repentance.
by Michael Chessen
In general terms, Western Civilization has a misguided notion regarding the Torah's approach to individuals who have committed a sin. The popular understanding of "the mark of Cain" is the marking of an individual who was "branded" as the prototype first sinner. A simple reading of the text, however, reveals that God only marked Cain in order to protect him and help him to survive his punishment, not to shame him. His spiritual debt was exclusively a matter between him and God.
It is important to note that today's prayer liturgy, a continuation of the rites of sacrifice described in the book of Leviticus, treats sin and repentance as a collective rather than a private concern. Our recital of words of contrition is in the plural, rather than in the singular; for whatever an individual needs to seek specific individual forgiveness, he or she does so by way of silent additional thought and concentration.
We find the antecedents of the sinner's right to anonymous repentance in this week's Torah reading, Tzav. The book of Leviticus initially describes the procedure for bringing the burnt offering sacrifice. In Tzav, the Torah gives further elaboration concerning the sin offering, stressing that it is to be slaughtered in the same place as the burnt offering, thus ensuring that sin of deed need not be recognized or distinguished from sin of thought.
An apparent contradiction to this principle could be discerned in the language of the commandment concerning the offering for the priests' anointment. In the wake of the sin of the Golden Calf, Aaron explained to Moses that "this"(molten image) had emerged from the gold he had thrown into the fire. God now declares that "this" is the offering of Aaron (Leviticus 5:13) and demonstrates a very important principle in Judaism. By using Aaron's language God changes it and shows us how sincere repentance retroactively transforms misdeeds into positive commandments. Because of the need to convey this message, and because Aaron's repentance was really the repentance of the Jewish people as a whole, God necessarily made it public.
In our time, diligent study of the sacrifices serves to strengthen our intention in prayer and helps bring us closer to Aaron's level of complete repentance.
I hope that this information is useful in your search for answers to your Torah questions. It is very wonderful you have such an interest in studying the Torah of Emet.
muman613
-
Pauletta- Traditionally the spiritual culture and influence of Esav passed down to Rome, then those who took over Rome would be Catholicism, and from their the different branches of the Western World.
With Ishmael- tradition says Islam (even the lunatic (Mohammed) was a direct descendent of Kedar one of the sons of Ishmael).
Talmud, Zohar and other sources all speak of this- expecially the world being dominated by 2 forces (actually more, but they are at the forfront) - Esav- Western civilization and Ishmael- Islam.
Maybe I will bring you some sources to back what I am saying (some later time B'H).
- Also dont forget history didn't start today, or at 9/11 or something, traditionally Esav did a lot more harm to the nation of Israel, that is not to say that the physical descentents have to be on the same path (and their are even writings which speak of some of his descendents saying how foolish their father was- but I think they were the one's who converted to Judaism).
- Also unlike Ishmael- those of European descent are not necessarily from Esav, its just the spiritual/ cultural influence (they are more likly to be descendents of Yefet- one of Noah's sons.
- Also I just remembered something from the Talmud- speaking of the future and Esav's descendents (even saying the name- Germany). Ill post it in a minute.
-
ESAU [GERMANY] WANTS TO DESTROY THE WORLD
IT IS WRITTEN IN THE TALMUD (MEGILLAH 5)
And Rabbi Yitzchak said: “What is the meaning of that which it is written: “Grant not Hashem the desires of the wicked one, do not remove his nose ring, that they should be exalted, selah” (Psalms 140:9) Yaakov said before the Holy One Blessed be He: “Master of the World: Do not grant Esau the evil one the desire of his heart – Do not remove his nose ring- This refers to Germania of Edom, who if they would go forth, they would destroy the entire world. And Rabbi Chama bar Chanina said: “There are 300 crowned princes in Germania of Edom.”
The Maharsha commented to this verse that the preoccupation of Germania of appointing a leader prevented them from going forth and destroying the world and this is the nose ring that the verse above talks about.
NOW LOOK WHAT IS WRITTEN ABOUT THE HISTORY OF GERMANY
This volume is one in a continuing series of books prepared by the Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress under the Country Studies/Area Handbook Program sponsored by the Department of the Army. The last two pages of this book list the other published studies:
TO HAVE MORE FAITH IN G-D AND HIS TORAH 14
French occupation authorities also allowed many smaller states, ecclesiastical entities, and free cities to be incorporated into their larger neighbors. Approximately 300 states had existed within the Holy Roman Empire in 1789; only about forty remained by 1814. The empire ceased to exist in 1806 when Francis II of Austria gave up his imperial title. In its place, Napoleon had created the Confederation of the Rhine, made up of the states of western and southern Germany, under French direction. Austria and Prussia were not members. The confederation was to provide Napoleon with troops for his military campaigns. After his defeat, the confederation was dissolved.
In its long history, Germany has rarely been united. For most of the two millennia that central Europe has been inhabited by German-speaking peoples, the area called Germany was divided into hundreds of states, many quite small, including duchies, principalities, free cities, and ecclesiastical states. Not even the Romans united Germany under one government; they managed to occupy only its southern and western portions. At the beginning of the ninth century, Charlemagne established an empire, but within a generation its existence was more symbolic than real. Medieval Germany was marked by division. As France and England began their centuries-long evolution into united nation-states, Germany was racked by a ceaseless series of wars among local rulers. The Habsburg Dynasty's long monopoly of the crown of the Holy Roman Empire provided only the semblance of German unity. Within the empire, German princes warred against one another as before. The Protestant Reformation deprived Germany of even its religious unity, leaving its population Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Calvinist. These religious divisions gave military strife an added ferocity in the Thirty Years' War (1618-48), during which Germany was ravaged to a degree not seen again until World War II.
LYCOS
The Habsburgs muddled on until the devastating Thirty Years War (1618-48), sparked by ongoing religious and nationalist conflicts. Europe had been simmering ever since 1517 when Martin Luther tacked 95 suggestions for improved service to his local church door in Wittenburg. It took a bloody good stoush to settle everyone down and secure the rights of both Protestants and Catholics. Germany lost a third of its population in the process. Local princes assumed complete sovereignty over a patchwork of some 300 states, which made it all too easy for Napoleon to come along in the early 19th century and start adding them to his scrapbook.
TO HAVE MORE FAITH IN G-D AND HIS TORAH 15
Pbs.org
“During the American Revolution, Germany was divided into over 300 principalities. Many of these tiny countries supplied soldiers to the British army in its fight against America, but by far the largest group came from Hesse-Cassel. As a consequence, during the war and ever since, all of the Germans fighting with the British were lumped together and called Hessians.”
Schiller institute.org
A comprehensive political strategy for rebuilding Europe and Germany did not exist. The devastated German empire had turned into a veritable monster composed of 300 petty principalities, most of which had been ruined by the particular interests of the houses of Hapsburg and Brandenburg, and which in the West were threatened by France, in the East by the Turkish Empire.
National academy press
Remember that as late as 1800 there were still over 300 different principalities and powers in the German area.
HOW COULD THE RABBIS KNOW MORE THAN 1500 YEARS AGO THAT A NATION CALLED GERMANY WOULD BE MADE UP OF 300 PRINCIPALITIES AND THAT IF THEY UNITED THEY WOULD WANT TO GO FORTH AND DESTROY AS THEY ACTUALLY DID?
Israel613.com