Parshat Toldot
Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer

The story of Yaakov's "usurping" of the berachos intended for Eisav is always a point of great discussion. Although the Torah tells us why Yitzchak favored Eisav (25:28), we do not know why Rivka was more supportive of Yaakov. (Even though Rivka was told prophetically that Yaakov would rule over Eisav (ibid. v. 23), this vision should not have impacted on her feelings toward him.)

It is probable that Rivka's position on the matter was a reflection on her upbringing. Having grown up with Lavan, the "ramai" (deceiver) par excellence, Rivka readily perceived Eisav's insincerity. She thus saw through his verbal trickery and realized the inner virtues of Yaakov. Yitzchak, on the other hand, was not exposed to the likes of Lavan, and he thus determined that Eisav, who appeared to be fully committed to Torah, was the appropriate one to lead Bnei Yisroel and build the nation, for Eisav was active and aggressive, and such qualities are central in building and fortifying a people's future.

This idea may provide insight to another aspect of the parshah. The aliyos which intercede between the youth of Yaakov and Eisav and their conflict over Yitzchak's berachos focus on Yitzchak's stint in the land of Avimelech. Of particular mention are the "taking" of Rivka upon Yitzchak's explanation that Rivka was his sister, as well as Yitzchak's digging of the same wells as his father had initiated long ago and the subsequent entrance of Yitzchak and Avimelech into a covenant, designating the site as "Be'er Sheva". All of these events are clear replications of those which transpired in the days of Avrohom and Sarah, and the parallel is uncanny.

It would seem that the basis of this parallel is that Yitzchak was the builder of Avrohom's legacy. The reason that the Torah dedicates so much time to detailing the personal and business ventures of Yitzchak is to convey that the theme of the parshah as a whole is the building of Am Yisroel, and the son who was believed to best fit this role and carry forth in the path of the Avos would be chosen. Eisav's outer appeal seemed to indicate that he could replicate his father's and grandfather's lives, but Yaakov's inner essence made him uniquely suited to lead.

In line with this train of thought, let's take a look back at the betrothal of Yitzchak and Rivka. Rashi quotes Bereshis Rabbah on the verse (24:67), "And he brought her into the tent of Sarah his mother...", upon which Chazal comment, "And she became the visage of Sarah his mother. That is to say, and behold: She was Sarah his mother..." What does this mean? It seems to imply that Rivka was not only the embodiment of the middos of Sarah; rather, she was endowed with the status of Sarah, as the next of the Imahos. Thus, the Medrash continues, "for as long as Sarah was alive, a candle was lit from Erev Shabbos...and the dough was blessed, and a cloud (of holiness) was spread over her tent. When she died, these things ceased, but they returned when Rivka arrived." Rivka - who was chosen rather than born into the status - was thereby designated as the next of the Imahos, and Parshas Toldos similarly sets a precedent of choosing and appointing the next of the Avos.

This example is part of our mesorah as to the qualifications and qualities of our leaders. Although the future chiefs of Am Yirsoel need not be born into most of the positions which they aspire to hold, they must present their adherents with a vision of fidelity to the established paths of Torah. However, the external expressions of our manhigim can vary and are not per se subject to mesorah. Just like Yaakov was starkly different from Eisav in terms of his outer appeal to be the next of the Avos, his inner commitment and calling qualified him, to the extent that he is referred to as the "bechir ha'Avos" ("the choicest of the Avos") by commentators. May we merit to be lead by manhigim who follow in his paths.

Archive

www.ou.org