The issue of military power for the future Jewish nation cannot be underestimated. On the one hand, the legacy of Abraham is about spirituality. On the other, in the absence of military prowess, the nation and then tribes of Israel will leave themselves open to subservience, and even annihilation. The topic of power, or more specifically lack of power, is addressed in the Torah in the stories about Jacob and Esau.

Esau was the founder of the Edomite nation, and the nations of Judah and Edom will at times be in conflict with each other. These stories are prophetic in describing the origins of this conflict and its cyclical nature.

​

These stories also contain many wordplays. The explication of these wordplays, together with the literal meaning of the text (p’shat) and its midrashic interpretations adds considerable depth to the text.   

 

Esau, a hunter of redness

 

Rebecca and Isaac had been infertile for many years. Isaac prayed to God for a child, and Rebecca eventually conceived.  Her pregnancy, however, seemed unusual to her. She will discover that she is bearing twins, who even in utero are having difficulty being together with each other:

​

​And the children agitated within her, and she said, “If so, why am I thus?” And she went to inquire of YKVK. And YKVK said to her: “Two nations are in your womb: two peoples from your insides shall be separated: and one people will be mightier than the other (ule’om milom ye’emaz) (וּלְאֹם֙ מִלְאֹ֣ם יֶֽאֱמָ֔ץ) and the older/greater (rav) (וְרַ֖ב) shall serve the younger. (Genesis 25:22-23)

 

The JPS translation above of “and one people will be mightier than the other” does not do full justice to the Hebrew. More precise is that power will go from one people to the other, or one will overcome the other. As the Medieval Biblical commentator Rashi and 19th century biblical commentator R’ Samson Raphael Hirsch point out this is a prophecy about a cyclical transfer of power from one nation to the other.1 To maintain the symmetry of the verse, the end of the prophecy is often translated as “the older (rav) shall serve the younger.” However, the Hebrew “rav” does not mean older, but greater in number or power. Hence the meaning is “the more numerous will become subservient to the younger people.”  

 

At a basic level, the Jacob and Esau stories are about the relationship between two dissimilar twin brothers. However, the Torah makes it abundantly from the very beginning of the story, that these stories are more than about just the relationship between these brothers. Rather, they are also about the balance of power between two close neighbors Judea and Edom. 

 

But what was the significance of this prophecy that Rebecca received? Was it designed to provide her with enlightenment, and perhaps comfort, or will it constitute a call for her to ensure that her elder son does indeed become subservient to the younger son sometime in the future? The wording of the prophecy is not clear on this, although from the text Rebecca seems to take an active role in ensuring its fulfillment.  

 

The delivery of the twins is described in a passage full of wordplays:

 

When her term to bear grew full, then behold — twins in her womb. The first one emerged red (admoni) (אַדְמוֹנִי), all of him was like a hairy mantle (seir) (שֵׂעָר), so they called his name Esau. After that his brother emerged with his hand grasping onto the heel of Esau; and he called his name Jacob (יַעֲקֹב): Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them” (Genesis 25:24-26).

 

The name Esau comes from the root a-s-a (עשה), he made. Because of his ruddiness and hairiness, the newborn Esau looked “ready-made” and already like a mature person.2 But there is additional meaning to his redness and hairiness. As mentioned, Esau will be the progenitor of the nation Edom, which means red, and he will live in the land of Seir, which also has the meaning of hairiness. Part of the mountain range of Seir is red in color because of its iron ore content. Jacob is so named because he emerges from the womb grasping the heel (ekev) of his older brother. However, as will become clear as the story progresses, this name also has the connotation of “to trick.”   

 

What is the significance of these wordplays?  It very much sounds as if the Torah is pointing out that the characteristics and destiny of these twins were already determined prenatally, and that an inexorable momentum is about to be played out as they mature into adulthood. 

​

The theme of “redness” continues into the next episode. Why does the Torah place such emphasis on the word “red”?  One reason already mentioned is because Esau will become the nation of Edom, whose mountains are red. However, Rashi following a midrash, sees an illusion here to his murderous nature.3 This is not far-fetched. Esau will become a hunter. In the compensatory blessing he receives from Isaac he is told that he will live by the sword. These early stories are dripping with allusions to the blood Esau and his progeny will spill. 

 

The narrative continues:

 

​The lads grew up and Esau was a man who knew trapping, a man of the field; but Jacob was a wholesome man, abiding in tents. Isaac loved Esau for trapping was in his mouth, but Rebecca loved Jacob (Genesis 25:27-28).

 

Esau was a natural hunter. The text also tells us “… for trapping was in his mouth.” A midrash picks up on this unusual wording. In whose mouth was the trapping asked the Jewish sages? An obvious answer is that “his mouth” refers to the mouth of Isaac. Isaac enjoyed the food that Esau brought and appreciated his hunting skills. The midrash, however, sees here a hint that Esau was expert at deceiving his father as to his spirituality.4 

 

With this explanation, the midrash is preempting the question — how could Isaac have been so blind as to think that a person like Esau could become a successor to himself after his death? The Midrash’s answer is that Isaac was misled by Esau’s speech, i.e., the trapping that was in his mouth. 

 

The story continues to elaborate more on the character of Esau while also developing the plot. Jacob had boiled a stew, and Esau came in from the field exhausted. Esau said to Jacob:

 

“Pour into me now some of that very red stuff (הָאָדֹם הָאָדֹם) for I am exhausted.” He therefore called his name Edom. Jacob said: “Sell, as this day, your birthright to me.” And Esau said: “Look, I am going to die, so of what use to me is a birthright?” Jacob said: “Swear to me this day.” He swore to him and sold his birthright to Jacob. Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew, and he ate and drank, got up and left. Thus, Esau belittled the birthright (Genesis 25:29-33).

​

Esau is again described as being in the field hunting. He is attracted to the redness of the soup, this being another reason he receives the nickname Edom. When he requests the soup, he wants it poured down his throat. “Pour into me now some of that very red stuff.” There is no hint of sophistication in this person, who is driven by his physical desires. And when he sells Jacob his birthright “he ate and drank, got up and left,” and gave not a moment’s thought to what he had done. His birthright meant nothing to him.

​

Interlinked with the theme of destiny in these passages is the theme of the rights of the firstborn. Esau is the older brother, and should, therefore, be the recipient of the privileges due to the firstborn. Firstborn rights were widely held in the Near East at this time and can be broken down into three components – religion, money, and the possession of privilege and power. Historically, many of the rights of the firstborn were related to rites for a dead parent. The firstborn was also responsible for family members, especially the women, who had not been granted an inheritance. All this cost money, and this may be the reason that the firstborn inherited double that of the other siblings. However, the firstborn also inherited the prestige and power that went with looking after the family’s affairs. It could be that Jacob was interested in receiving this entire birthright package - its religious aspects, its monetary value, and the power that came with it. Rashi suggests, however, that it was the religious aspect of the birthright he most wanted:

​

Your birthright: Since the sacrificial service is performed by the firstborns, Jacob said: “This evil one is not worthy that he should bring up offering to the Holy One, Blessed is He.” And Esau belittled (the birthright): the verse testifies to his wickedness, that he belittled the service of the Omnipresent.5

 

A strong argument against this, is that the blessing meant for Esau, and for which Jacob deceives his father and takes for himself, mentions nothing about religious functions but only about status, prestige and power. Nachmanides also writes that it was the prestige of the firstborn’s position that was being contested here and his explanation seems very much in line with the plain meaning of the text.6 Both Jacob and his mother felt it vital that this not be given over to Esau. Furthermore, this blessing was bestowed upon Jacob via the name of God Elohim. Isaac is invoking here the God of international affairs and the God who will establish his son as a prestigious and powerful chief among the nations. 

​

In general, the Jewish sages had a very negative view of Esau, even though from the text one could consider Esau the guileless victim of plots rather than the epitome of evil. Nevertheless, by linking up phrases from this story to other passages in the Bible with similar wording, Esau comes out as a sexual violator, murderer and thief in the following midrash:

 

“And Esau came in from the field”: which means that he violated a betrothed maiden, as it says: “But if the man find the damsel that is betrothed in the field, and the man take hold of her and lie with her (Deut 22:25) …… while “And he was faint” signified that he committed murder………  R’ Berekiah and R’ Zakkai the elder said: He also committed theft, as you read’ “if thieves came to thee, if robbers (shodede) by night (ibid 1:5).7

 

​The plot that Rebecca concocts is well known. Isaac, who is blind, informs his oldest son Esau that he would like to bless him before he dies and asks Esau to hunt and prepare venison for him so that he will be in a good mood to bless him. Rebecca overhears the conversation, and disguises Jacob as Esau by placing goat’s hairs on his limbs and dressing him with Esau’s clothes. Isaac is suspicious that Jacob is before him, since the voice he is hearing sounds like that of Jacob. Nevertheless, the goats’ skins and clothes persuade him that it is Esau. He blesses Jacob with a blessing that has nothing to do with the tradition of Abraham, but a lot to do with prosperity and supremacy:

​

​He approached and kissed him, and he smelled the scent of his garments, and he blessed him and said: "Behold, my son's scent is like the scent of a field that YHWH has blessed. And may the Elohim give you of the dew of the heavens and the fatness of the earth, and much corn and wine. May the nations serve you, and may peoples bow down to you; may you be a lord over your brethren, and may your mother's sons bow down to you. May those who curse you be cursed, and may those who bless you be blessed” (Genesis 27:27-29).

 

How could Isaac have made such a mistake in inappropriately blessing Esau in this way, despite his being the firstborn? As we have seen, the explanation of Rashi is that he was not only physically blind, but blinded by the deception of Esau. R’ Samson Raphael Hirsch, however, raises another explanation, which has been taken up by modern commentators.8 Isaac knew full well the character of Esau. Nevertheless, he appreciated these characteristics and thought them essential ones for the future of the Israelite nation.

 

We know very little about Isaac from the Torah as he is not involved in any major episodes, except for his near-sacrifice by his father in the Akeida episode. Isaac chiefly saw his role as preserving the heritage of his father. He may well have been a spiritual person. He did, after all, submit himself to being sacrificed without protest. He also knew firsthand what it was like to be powerless in a hostile world.  

 

Set within the story of Jacob and Esau is an account of Isaac’s life in Gerar in the land of the Philistines (chapter 26). It is a chapter about the lack of power — lack of power in being able to prevent Abimelech, the king of the Philistines, from taking his wife into his harem, and lack of power in preventing Abimelach’s servants from stealing his wells. He is continually on the move until he reaches Rehovoth: “for now YHWH has granted us ample space” (Genesis 26:22). 

 

Isaac appreciated Esau not only because of the food he brought him from the hunt, but also because of the power he personified. Isaac may well have argued thus — why not join the physical prowess of Esau to the wholesomeness of Jacob and the twins could function as partners in bringing the heritage of Abraham to the world?  It also made sense within this arrangement that the firstborn Esau be the head of the family. 

​

Rebecca, on the other hand, came from a home in which conflict and scheming had been part of her environment. She appreciated the household of Isaac because its values were the very opposite from the home she had come from. She also knew that it was Jacob, and not Esau, who espoused these values, and these would be the ones promoted by the Jewish people. She also knew, because it had been revealed to her by prophecy, that the ideals of these two people would be in conflict, and that they were destined to struggle with each other through history. The granting of supremacy to Esau had to be prevented at all costs, and Isaac had to be disillusioned of his plan in the most forceful of ways. Her scheme of substituting Jacob for Esau was the only way this could be achieved. By doing this she would drive home to her husband that only Jacob was fit to continue the heritage of Abraham, and he was the one who should have supremacy.

 

Esau is completely distraught when he learns what his brother had done to him and cries out a great and bitter cry. His firstborn privileges had been spirited away from him twice. Jacob has lived up to his name Jacob (Ya’akov) and tricked him again —“he has outwitted me (vayakveyni) (וַיַּעְקְבֵנִי) twice” (ibid 27:36).

 

Isaac is also extremely upset; not only because he had been made a fool of and because his favored son had lost his birthright, but because his entire approach to his two sons and to the heritage of Abraham has fallen by the wayside. As the text tells us:

 

​Isaac trembled a great trembling and said: 'Who, then, was it who hunted the provision, and brought it to me that I should eat from all before you came, and I have blessed him? Yea, and he shall be blessed” (Genesis 27:33).

 

Isaac sees very clearly the consequences of what Rebecca and Jacob had done. The two brothers were not to be in partnership throughout history but in conflict:

 

“Behold, a lord have I made him over you, and all his kin have I given him as servants, with grain and wine have I supported him, and for you where — what can I do my son? . . . .”  So Isaac, his father, answered and said to him: “Behold, of the fatness of the earth shall be your dwelling and of the dew of the heavens from above. By your sword you shall live, but your brother you shall serve; yet it shall be that when you will be aggrieved (tarid) (תָּרִיד), you may remove his yoke from upon your neck” (Genesis 27:37-40).

 

This is neither a blessing nor a prayer, but a prophesy. But what does it mean that “when you will be aggrieved”? In what way is Isaac limiting his previous blessing to Jacob?

 

The Second Temple biblical commentator Onkelos writes as follows:

 

Yet by your sword you shall live, and your brother you shall serve. But it shall be that when his descendants will transgress the words of the Torah you will remove his yoke from your neck.9 

​

Rashi, based on the midrash Bereishis Rabba, explains the connection between being aggrieved and removing the yoke in a similar way: 

​

When you shall be aggrieved: the word is an expression of pain … as if to say [i.e., Isaac means to say] “when Israel will transgress the laws of the Torah, and you will have a claim to be aggrieved over the blessings that [Jacob] took “you may remove his yoke etc.”10  

​

According to this explanation, Israel will lose its ascendency if it becomes sinful, and Edom “will be aggrieved” by being subjugated by a nation that lacks the religious merit to do this.

​

A simpler, non-midrashic explanation is that Israel will remain ascendant unless it overdoes its dominion, in which case Esau “will be aggrieved,” resentful, and will be able to break out of its oppression.  

 

Whichever explanation, Isaac is recognizing here the cyclical nature of the conflict between the generations of Jacob and Esau. There will be times in history when Jacob will be supreme, and other times that Esau will have dominion.

 

At this stage it is worth asking the question — who does Esau represent?  Who are the generations of Esau that will be struggling with those of Jacob, and did this prophecy ever come about?  

​

The nation of Edom

Esau moved to the hill country of Seir, displacing or intermingling (it is unclear which) with the original inhabitants, the Horites (Genesis 36:8-9, 20-21). Thus, Seir became the heartland of the Edomites. It is a rugged, mountainous area located southeast of the Dead Sea, corresponding to modern-day southern Jordan. Southwards their territory may have reached as far as Eilat, which would have been their seaport. Over time they may have extended their territory to both sides of the Arava or Jordan Rift Valley. To the north of Edom was the territory of Moab and it bordered on the territory of Judah to the west.

​

There was continual warfare between the early Israelite kingdom and Edom. The Edomites were defeated by King David (2 Samuel 8:13-14). They subsequently gained independence, but faced renewed conflict under King Amaziah of Judah (2 Kings 14:7). At the time of Nebuchadnezzar, they assisted the Babylonians in plundering Jerusalem and slaughtering the Judeans, and this earned them the considerable ire of the prophet Obadiah. They subsequently moved northwards into the vacated territory of Judea, in what is now the Sh’fela, to form what was known as the province of Idumea during the Hellenistic period. The Nabateans took over their original territory.

​

At the time of the Second Commonwealth, the Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus took over this territory from the Greeks.11 The Idumeans were given the choice of either exile or converting to Judaism. Most accepted conversion, although this step was much opposed by the Pharisees. 

​

Antipater was a politically astute converted Idumaean general who became a power-maker in the struggle between the two Hasmonean brothers Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II for the Hasmonean throne. He allied with the Roman general Pompey, who intervened in the civil war between the two brothers, and was eventually appointed procurator of Judea by Julius Caesar. He was poisoned by a rival, but his political maneuvering laid the groundwork for his son, Herod the Great, to eventually become king of Judea, although he had to fight for his throne on behalf of Rome. In effect, he subjugated Judea to the rule of Rome, although he was sensitive to the religious requirements of the Jewish nation, and even rebuilt the Temple. He wiped out all the Hasmoneans, including his wife Miriam who was a Hasmonean and his two sons. Although Herod’s father was Jewish his mother was not. Thus it was that an Edomite achieved dominion over the Jewish people.

​

There is a Rabbinic tradition that a chieftain of Esau founded Rome.12 There is no corresponding tradition in Rome, although the beginnings of this city are obscure and different legends are related.  

The Roman Empire eventually morphed into the Christian empire, and because of their oppression by Christianity, the term Edom became a synonym in the Jewish world for Christian Rome and subsequently for Christianity in general.

​

A final question

A difficult question remains from the discussion so far. Jacob is one of the three forefathers of the Jewish people. To what extent should he be regarded as a role model for the Jewish people?  Or put another way, does the Bible condone trickery and deception, and is the Torah really a book about how to deceive a blind father? Whichever way one looks at it either Jacob acted correctly and the Bible is teaching us morally ambiguous behavior, or Jacob acted improperly and the Jewish people have a trickster as a forefather. 

​

The following is by no means the only answer to this question, but it attempts to put Jacob’s actions into perspective. The Bible is a prophetic book. Jacob spends much of his time both in and outside the Land of Israel. During this time, he has to deal with the likes of his uncle Laban and his brother Esau. In his final confrontation with Laban he complains that “I worked for you fourteen years for your two daughters and six years for your flocks and you changed my wage ten countings” (ibid, 31:41). On his return to the land of Canaan, Esau heads towards him accompanied by 400 men (ibid 32:7). Jacob lacks power and political influence. This is because the mission of the Jewish people is a spiritual one and not a military one.

​

The Bible is not shackling the Jewish people by demanding absolute straightforwardness in their dealings with their opponents. There is only one way for the powerless to deal with the powerful — this is not to confront them directly but to work around them. In other words, to be tricky. This is the legacy of Jacob and this characteristic is embedded in one of his Hebrew name Ya’acov.

​

However, deception and trickery have consequences. Against a recognized trickster, everyone’s defenses go up. Trickery begets trickery. The Torah recognizes there may be no option when dealing with a brother such as Esau, but it never definitively condones it. Jacob paid dearly for his deceptions, and was paid back for what he had done:

​

• Jacob was deceived by his uncle Laban at night and given Leah as a bride instead of his true-love Rachel.

• During his 20 years in Haran, he was subject to Laban’s deceptions.

• His own children trick him with the blood of a goat, instead of admitting what they had done to their brother Joseph.

• As a consequence of this, Jacob spent 22 years mourning the presumed death of his son.

 

The Bible does not condone trickery, but it also recognizes there are times when there are no other options. This is the ambiguous legacy that Jacob, who was nothing but righteous, bequeathed to the Jewish people. 

 

References

1. Rashi to Genesis 25:22. Also R’ Hirsch to 25:22 — “the whole of history is nothing else than a struggle as to whether spirit or sword, or as our sages put it, whether Caesaria or Jerusalem is to have the upper hand.”

 

2. Rashi to ibid 25:25.

 

3. Rashi to Genesis 25:25 and Bereishis Rabba 63:8.

 

4. Rashi to Genesis 25:27 and Bereishis Rabba 63:10.

 

5. Rashi to ibid 25:31 and Bereishis Rabba 63:13.

 

6. Nachmanides to ibid 25:34.

 

7. Bereishis Rabba 63:12.

 

8. Commentary to the Torah of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch on Genesis 27:1 and Dividing the Berakhot by Rav Ezra Bick in the Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash, Parshat HaShavua, Yeshivat Har Etzion (http://www.vbm-torah.org/archive/parsha66/06-66toldot.htm).

 

9. Onkelos to ibid 27:40.

 

10. Rashi to ibid 27:40, based on Bereishis Rabba 67:7.

​

11. The source of this information is from the writings of Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews book 13, chapter 9 and the Jewish War book 1, chapter 2).

​

12. See for example TB Avoda Zarah 10b and TB Megilla 6b and Bereishis Rabba 65:1 and 78:10. The following is a typical Talmudic statement that makes this point: “Vespasian sent Titus who said: “Where is their God, the rock in whom they trusted (Deut 3:25). This was the wicked Titus who blasphemed and insulted Heaven. What did he do? ..... A voice went forth from heaven saying: Sinner, son of sinner, descendent of Esau the sinner...” (TB Gittin 56b).