Subject: Biblical Narrative: Jacob and Esau (Part 6)
Reply-to: heb_roots_chr@geocities.com
From: JUICE Administration <juice@virtual.co.il>
To: story@virtual.co.il
Subject: JUICE Biblical Narrative 6
==============================================================
World Zionist Organization
Student and Academics Department
Jewish University in CyberspacE
juice@wzo.org.il birnbaum@wzo.org.il
http://www.wzo.org.il
==============================================================
Course: Literary and Artistic Aspects of the Biblical Narrative
Lecture: 6/12
Lecturer: Yoel Duman
Jacob
Regarding Jacob, once again we have an extremely rich corpus of material,
which cannot possibly be done justice in one lecture. In light of this
situation, I will try to concentrate on issues of characterization this
time, as promised in the last lecture.
I think that the first thing to keep in mind regarding Jacob is that he is
Israel, the eponymous ancestor of the people of Israel. His sons are the
eponymous ancestors of the tribes. It is therefore abundantly clear that we
must relate to these stories not only as reflections on the individuals
involved in them, but as expressions of national and tribal
self-perceptions. Jacob's characteristics are the characteristics of the
people of Israel; the interaction between Jacob and his sons, and between
his sons and themselves, are indicative of the social and political behavior
and status of the tribes and the nation. And all of the above is true for
many of the other characters in the Jacob stories, including Esau=Edom= the
Edomites and Laban the Aramean= the Arameans.
Given this basis, we might expect Jacob and his sons to be described as
saints and scholars. I think that an unbiased reading of these stories
reveals instead a group of very human personalities, who are often portrayed
in both physical and social conflict and who frequently resort to unsavory
means for achieving their objectives. If you are convinced that such is the
case, at the end of this lecture, we will have to ask the question: What is
the political/educational/religious motive for such an "uncomplimentary"
self-analysis of the national character? But let us first proceed to a look
at some of the major aspects of Jacob's personality and behavior.
Our first meeting with Jacob takes place while he and his twin brother Esau
are still in the womb.
"Isaac was forty years old when he took to wife Rebekah, daughter of Bethuel
the Aramean of Paddan-aram, sister of Laban the Aramean. Isaac pleaded with
the Lord on behalf of his wife, because she was barren and the Lord
responded to his plea, and his wife Rebekah conceived. But the children
struggled in her womb, and she said, 'If so, why do I exist?' She went to
inquire of the Lord, and the Lord answered her:
'Two nations are in your womb,
Two separate peoples shall issue from your body;
One people shall be mightier than the other,
And the older shall serve the younger.'
When her time to give birth was at hand, there were twins in her womb. The
first one emerged red, like a hairy mantle all over; so they named him Esau.
Then his brother emerged, holding on to the heel of Esau; so they named him
Jacob. Isaac was sixty years old when they were born." Genesis 25:20-26
We have in these few verses many of the most important techniques and motifs
of the Biblical narrative. First of all, we encounter the motif of the
barren wife. This is not the first time this motif has appeared in Genesis;
even before the onset of the stories of Abraham's relationship with God, we
are told that Sarai, his wife, was barren (Genesis 11:20). Later, we will
find that Jacob's beloved Rachel is barren for many years, as is Samson's
mother and a number of other Biblical women. While it is possible that this
phenomenon is no more than a difficult physiological fact, it seems much
more likely that bareness, with its psychological, social and theological
implications and its dramatic power in the Patriarchal narratives, is also a
key literary device here. It engenders dramatic tension, it is the cause of
a variety of plot structures, it raises the issue of divine judgement and
influence. But most of all, when the matriarch's bareness is finally
overcome, the resulting birth attains the character of a supernatural
occurrence.
Regarding Jacob, not only does Rebekah become pregnant after Isaac's plea to
God; she conceives twins. The figure of twins has an important place in
many world cultures and literatures - it is perhaps remarkable that the
Bible never mentions identical twins, but only, as in our present case,
fraternal twins who are very different in all respects. In the case of
Jacob and Esau this difference expresses itself even before their birth -
the twins struggled in Rebekah's womb, causing her such anguish that she
questioned the value of her life. Rather than a visit to the obstetrician,
Rebekah consulted an oracle, who informed her of the coming birth of twins,
as an explanation for her pain. The oracle also revealed, in scanned verse,
that this twin birth would produce the progenitors of two nations, whose
relationship would be marked by struggle and the unexpected dominance of the
younger twin/nation. Thus we are once again faced with the motif of the
preferential status of the younger brother, as in the cases of Cain/Abel and
Ishmael/Isaac.
As in many other cases, the account of the birth itself is accompanied by
naming legends. A close examination of these folk etymologies reveals more
than just the usual imaginative derivations. The first twin is born red
(adom)and covered with hair(se'ar) and therefore is called Esau - even in
Hebrew, the word play is obscure, unless one is aware that Esau is also
known as Edom (from adom) and as Seir (from se'ar). The second born emerges
holding onto the heel (akev) of the older, so he his called Jacob (Ya'akov).
But in the continuation of this cycle, we find additional derivations of
these two names: Esau is later said be known as Edom because of the story of
sale of his birthright for a mess of red (adom) lentils; in the story of the
theft of Esau's blessing by Jacob, the distraught Esau responds as follows:
"When Esau heard his father's words, he burst into wild and bitter sobbing,
and said to his father, 'Bless me too, Father!' But he answered, 'Your
brother came with guile and took away your blessing.' [Esau] said, 'Was he,
then, named Jacob (Yaakov) that he might supplant me (yaakveni) these two
times?" Genesis 27:34-36
This JPS rendering of Esau's pathetic words seems to me less apt than the
blunter translation in E. Speiser's great commentary:
"Did they name him Jacob so that he should cheat me twice?"
One of the strongest supports for this interpretation may be found in Hosea
12:4:
In the womb he (Jacob) tried to supplant/cheat his brother.
According to this data, we should render the name Jacob as Cheater. Is it
possible that such an uncomplimentary name is a true characterization of the
Patriarch?
The first story in which Jacob appears after the birth legend is the already
noted "sale" of the birthright account:
When the boys grew up, Esau became a skillful hunter, a man of the outdoors;
but Jacob was a mild man who stayed in camp. Isaac favored Esau because he
had a taste for game; but Rebekah favored Jacob. Once when Jacob was
cooking a stew, Esau came in from the open famished. And Esau said to
Jacob, 'Give me some of that red stuff to gulp down, for I am famished' -
which is why he was named Edom. Jacob said, 'First sell me your
birthright.' And Esau said, 'I am at the point of death, so of what use is
my birthright to me?' But Jacob said, 'Swear to me first.' So he swore to
him, and sold his birthright to Jacob. Jacob then gave Esau bread and
lentil stew; he ate and drank and he rose and went away. Thus did Esau
spurn the birthright." Genesis 25: 27-34
Clearly, the exposition sets up a dichotomy between the two brothers. But
what is the exact nature of this dichotomy? Jewish traditional commentary
viewed Esau as a lout, if not thoroughly evil. But this interpretation is
certainly based to a great extent on the late equation between Edom and
Rome, the hated oppressor. What does the text itself convey? The JPS
translation is, in my opinion, quite correct in simply pointing out the
different proclivities of the two, without favoring either. In addition, we
are informed that Isaac favors his firstborn for no better reason than that
Esau, the outdoorsman, brings him tasty game. Rebekah's preference for
Jacob is not given any concrete basis. Note that this editorial comment on
the parents has no direct continuation in the present story, but will only
become relevant in the story of the blessings (Genesis 27). Esau comes into
camp, worn out and hungry and in a rather rough but brotherly enough manner,
asks Jacob for some of the stew the stay-at-home is making. Rather than
simply giving Esau the stew, as one would expect on the basis of the Middle
Eastern hospitality that we know from the stories of Abraham, Jacob takes
advantage of his brother's exhaustion, and drives a hard bargain, insisting
on an absurdly high price for the grub and an oath of payment. Esau,
according to the JPS translation, agrees and thus "spurns his birthright".
How do we react to this scene? How did the Biblical listener react? Did he
see Esau as the gross lout of later tradition and Jacob as the spiritual
paragon? Or do we have here the portrayal of two lifelike figures? Esau,
the man of nature, the uncouth but friendly innocent, cannot be bothered
with great matters nor can he take seriously his brother's outlandish
bargaining - "Ok, I'll give you a million dollars", he says, "just feed me."
Jacob is mild, retiring - a momma's boy, a couch potato. He sees an
opportunity to take advantage of his simpler, older brother and plays the
lawyer, in order to insure his victory. How many of you identify with
Jacob, how many of you with Esau?
In the next story, Jacob's theft of the blessing of the firstborn, deception
becomes the overt subject of the narrative. Isaac is (perhaps willingly)
deceived. Jacob, coached at each step by Rebekah, wrests the crucial
blessing from Esau by taking advantage of his father's infirmities. It is
hard to feel anything but contempt and outrage toward Jacob, who is not even
man enough to run the scam by himself. Esau, on the other hand, is an object
of pity and arouses our understanding, if not our support, when he expresses
his desire for revenge on Jacob, the cheat and the liar.
This sinister aspect of Jacob's character was not entirely ignored by
traditional commentary. For example, there is general agreement that
Jacob's handling by his uncle Laban is well deserved. Much maligned in the
Bible, as well as in later Jewish tradition, Laban the Liar ( a pun on his
title, the Aramean) manages to exact 21 years of labor out Jacob, and foists
on him a less than stunning older daughter. But all of this is understood by
many commentators as the punishment for Jacob's duplicity with regard to his
brother.
But Jacob has several other sides to him and is a character who, like
Abraham, undergoes development and maturation. Jacob is a visionary.
Eventually, he will come face to face with God, or His emissary, and even
successfully grapple with the Divine for high stakes. But even at an early
stage, soon after his flight from Esau, he happens on the cultic site of
Bethel and is granted a vision of the mystical nature of the place as the
"gate of heaven". Like his father and grandfather before him, Jacob is
promised that the nation he will sire will inherit the land of the
Canaanites. His reaction to this vision is characteristic of Jacob's dual
personality: he is genuinely awestruck by the experience, on the one hand
(Genesis 28:16-17); on the other, he makes his acceptance of God's covenant
conditional on his safe return from his exile (Genesis 28:20-22).
Perhaps the finest evocation of Jacob's changing and many-sided personality
is to be found in the story of his first encounter with the beloved Rachel.
"Jacob resumed his journey and came to the land of the Easterners. There
before his eyes was a well in the open. The stone on the mouth of the well
was large. When all the flocks were gathered there, the stone would be
rolled from the mouth of the well and the sheep watered; then the stone
would be put back in its place on the mouth of the well.
Jacob said to them, 'My friends, where are you from?' and they said, 'We
are from Haran.' He said to them, 'Do you know Laban the son of Nahor?'
And they said, 'Yes, we do.' He continued, ' Is he well?' They answered,
'Yes, he is; and there is his daughter Rachel, coming with the flock.' He
said, 'It is still broad daylight, too early to round up the animals; water
the flock and take them to pasture.; But they said, 'we cannot, until all
the flocks are rounded up; then the stone is rolled off the mouth of the
well and we water the sheep.'
While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with her father flock;
for she was a shepherdess. And when Jacob saw Rachel, the daughter of his
[mother's brother] Laban and the flock of his mother's brother Laban, Jacob
went up and rolled the stone off the mouth of the well, and watered the
flock of his mother's brother Laban. Then Jacob kissed Rachel, and broke
into tears. Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's kinsman, and that he
was Rebekah's son; and she ran and told her father. On hearing of his
sister's son Jacob, Laban ran to greet him; he embraced him and kissed him,
and took him into his house...." Genesis 29:1-13
As Robert Alter has pointed out, this is a prime example of the Biblical
type-scene of the "meeting by the well", which precedes betrothal. Alter's
detailed comparison of other examples of this type-scene (Genesis 24, Exodus
2:16ff.) with Genesis 29 reveals the special nature of Jacob's story: Jacob
is portrayed as particularly emotional - this is a true example of a love at
first sight situation. In addition to the overt references in the story to
emotionality (embracing, kissing, weeping), there are two more subtle means
by which this aspect of Jacob's character is conveyed. First, Jacob is moved
by the sight of Rachel to insist that the shepherds be off - when he fails
to convince them to water their flocks and give him some privacy, he gathers
super-human strength (not at all what we expect from the stay-at-home)to
move the rock covering the well's opening, in order to impress his comely
cousin. Secondly, the author of this story uses the classic technique of
repetition in order to stress the newfound importance of family ties for the
exiled Jacob: in verse 10 the phrase "Laban, his mother's brother" is found
three times. Surely, this repetition is highly significant, especially in
light of the troubled fraternal relationship so central to Jacob's story.
Thus, on the basis of this sample of stories from the Jacob cycle, we find
that the nation's progenitor is portrayed as anything but a saintly paragon.
He is rather a schemer and an opportunist who is forced to flee for his life
and fines himself confronted with a serious of difficulties which test his
mettle and refine his character. In some ways, he is similar to the Homeric
Odysseus, the brilliant schemer and wanderer who becomes a major culture
hero of ancient Greece. While way me be surprised to find such a figure
representing the nation of Israel, we may also come to the realization that
just such a self-view is most appropriate to ancient Israel, which was
indeed faced with the struggle to survive in a far from easy environment.
For lack of space, I have not dealt here with several of the later stories
of Jacob, including the episode of his wrestling with the angel (Genesis
32:25-33) and his reunion with Esau (Genesis 32:4-24, 33:1-17). I invite
you to send me your own literary observations on these stories.
Bibliography
R . Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, ch.3
Y Zakovitz, An Introduction to Inner-Biblical
Interpretation (Hebrew),pp.13ff.
Suggested reading for next lecture, on Joseph
T . Mann, Joseph and His Brothers
N. Sarna, Understanding Genesis, pp. 211ff.
*************************************************************************