Primogeniture

 

One of the topics of this week’s parashah, “Toledot,” addresses is the rights of the Firstborn. In the Tanach, as was the case in the ancient Levant, those rights referred only to first born males.

“Primogeniture” is the Latin term that describes such practices. It reflects the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn male child to inherit the family estate, in preference to their siblings.

Some of the stories in the book of Bresheet surround the status of the Firstborn. We read about Cain and Abel competing over G-d’s approval of their respective sacrifices. We follow Sarah’s worries over Avraham’s inheritance, doing all that is in her power to ensure that it will go to her son Yitzchak rather than to Yishmael, his eldest son from Hagar. In this week’s Parashah, we encounter the struggle between Yaakov and his older brother, Esav, over the Birthright and the blessings of Yitzchak, their father.

In all three of the above examples, it seems that the Torah rejects the practice of primogeniture, which was prevalent in ancient times in the region, favours the younger sons and elects to endow them with that right. What, one may ask, is the purpose of such a, rather revolutionary, step?

In the first account, the decision was made by G-d. He chose Abel’s sacrifice over that of Cain.

In the case of Isaac and Yishmael, however, that preference of the former is embedded in the legal norms of that era, as reflected in the Hammurabi Code of Law, and which pertain to the inheritance rights of the son of a maid/slave, the status of Yishmael, Hagar’s son. That is this issue which is at the core of Sarah’s concern.

Article 170 of the Code states that if a man’s main wife bore his children as did his maid, the father shall bequeath all he owns to the children from his main wife, during his life. If the father passes away without declaring his rightful inheritors, his assets will be divided between all offspring regardless of who their mother was. Hagar was never the legal wife of Avraham. Sarah was. Hagar was a maid and a servant who bore a son to Avraham when Sarah thought that she was barren. Yishmael, though the eldest, was never the legal heir of Avraham. Sarah was his wife and Yitzchak, the younger son, was the legal heir.

In order to understand the choice of Yaakov over Esav, it is important to add that the term primogeniture, sometimes, also entails succession to power and office and not merely rights to tangible possessions. In other words, the Firstborn right can be onerous, demanding and carry responsibilities - a dutiful task suited for only a few selected ones. In early times, the Firstborn would substitute the father and was honoured accordingly. In ancient Egypt, for instance, Firstborns were revered and worshipped like gods. Hence the significance of the tenth plague, the plague of the Firstborn since according to our sages when G-d avenges upon a nation, He initially avenges upon its gods.

It is indeed true that when Yaakov asserts “I am Esav, your Firstborn,” (Bresheet 27:19) he not only lies, but he also commits fratricide and condemns Esav to oblivion both as a human being and his rights to inheritance as well.

Several Jewish commentators offer various justifications for Yaakov’s lie. Isaac Abrabanel, for instance, suggests that Yaakov lamented to Esav that the latter was never around the house, always roaming in the fields and not fulfilling his duties as the Firstborn while he, Yaakov, had to attend to their sick father, feed him and Esav when the latter returned from his hunting. According to Abrabanel, Yaakov went even further to suggest to Esav that if he were not ready to assume that role, he would gladly take his place and feed him as should the eldest brother address the needs of the younger one. Esav, explains Abrabanel, pondered in his heart and decided that he was better off relinquishing those duties. Yaakov took them upon himself and promptly offered Esav bread and lentil soup, as would the Firstborn do to his younger sibling.

Rabbi Shmuel Ben Meir (Rashba”m) provides a different rationale. According to him, Esav was willingly renouncing his Firstborn right claiming that his hunting activities often put him in harm’s way. Therefore, he reckoned, there was no point in him waiting for his father to die to qualify for that right.

Finally, Rabbi Sacks, who bases his interpretation on Rashi, suggests that as much as Esav tried to deceive Yitzchak, the latter “was not deceived as to the nature of his elder son. He knew what he was and what he was not. He knew he was a man of the field, a hunter, a mercurial in temperament, a man who could easily give way to violence, quickly aroused to anger, but equally quickly, capable of being distracted and forgetting. He also knew,” concludes Rabbi Sacks that Esav “was not the child to continue the Covenant.”

It is, therefore, not by accident that Yitzchak preferred Yaakov over Esav.

This week’s Parashah teaches us that leadership should not necessarily be granted to the Firstborn son but rather to the best one.

Shabbat Shalom

Vayera – A Lesson in Hospitality, Manners, and Personal Relationships

 

This week’s Parashah, “Vayera” recounts two stories. The first stresses Avraham’s humanness and kindness which is rewarded by the blessed promise of eternity. The second shares the tale of the wickedness and evil acts of the people of Sedom and Amorah followed by their punishment.

I elected to dwell on the first part which, I feel, has not been accentuated enough. I did it in the hope that its message and lesson will emanate and continue to fill our universe with every blessing.

The opening scene of the Parashah describes Avraham sitting at the entrance to his tent when G-d appears to him. The text mentions that it was an especially hot day. The purpose of G-d’s visit or what is being discussed is not mentioned. Some commentators suggest that G-d is performing the Mitzvah of “Bikur Cholim” (visiting the sick) to check on Avraham’s recovery after he had circumcised himself at the advanced age of ninety-nine (Chapter 17).

Suddenly, Avraham notices three men standing at a distance as if deliberating which way to turn. Avraham does not yet know that they are messengers (mala’chim) of G-d, nor does he know the purpose of their visit. To him, they are nothing but three strangers who seem stranded and lost. Nevertheless, despite his age, his, still, delicate physical condition, and the heat, he runs towards them, bows down, invites them into his tent and offers them food, drink, and respite.

Avraham’s words in Chapter 18 verse 3 “If I have found favour in your eyes, my Lord, do not pass your servant by,” can be interpreted, according to Rashi, in two ways.

The first, and most important, can be viewed as Avraham’s speaking to G-d with the intent of showing his respect to Him. G-d’s visit should be of top priority and attended to first. After all, it is not everyday one gets bestowed with such a great honour and such a privilege. To neglect G-d and attend to unfamiliar people would be rude and show lack of mannerism on the part of Avraham. He, therefore, excuses himself and apologizes to G-d before attending to the strangers.

There is, however, another angle of looking at this verse. This one points at Avraham’s hospitality and generosity. Avraham is almost begging the strangers to be his guests and enter his modest abode where he and Sarah welcome them warmly and affectionately. While Sarah is preparing and baking bread, the Torah tells us that Avraham “ran to the herd and selected a choice, tender calf and gave it to a servant, who hurried to prepare it. He then,” the account continues to share with us, “brought some curds and milk… and set these before them.” (18:7-8).

Moreover, as we are told, “While they ate,” Avraham, “stood near them under the tree. Now, do not Avraham’s conduct and attitude display the epitome of kindness?

But it is not only towards G-d and strangers that Avraham and Sarah show respect and thoughtfulness. They also demonstrate it towards each other, as the Parashah continues to unveil to us.

When the messengers ask to see Sarah to announce to her that she will bear a son in a year’s time, Sarah, who “was listening at the entrance of the tent, which was behind him…….laughed to herself as she thought, ‘After I am worn out and my lord is old, will I now have this pleasure?’” (18:10,12).

Evidently, Sarah did not know that G-d had already shared this news with Avraham earlier. In Chapter 17, G-d tells Avraham, “I will bless her and will surely give you a son by her.” (Verse 16). Upon hearing that, “Avraham fell face down; he laughed and said to himself, ‘will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?’” (Verse 17).

Both Avraham and Sarah respond by first describing themselves as old and worn out and only then mention that their respective spouses endure a similar existence. They assume responsibility for their condition first and do not point a blaming finger at the other, an instinctive trap that so many of us fall into easily. What a blessed connection and bond they share. What a wonderful example for a marital relationship, or for that matter, any relationship.

May we all continue to be blessed through Avraham, the father of many nations and Sarah, the mother of Am Yisrael our Jewish People.

Shavua tov, fellow Jews and a great week to all.

G-d, Parents and Children

 

Rosh Hashanah marks the beginning of the Jewish New Year. On that day are all supposed to be in a festive mood, dress in white and, of course, blow the Shofar (ram’s horn).

What many do not know is that, on Rosh Hashanah, we skip the magnificent Torah portion, “Ha’azinu” in Devarim (Deuteronomy) 32. Instead, we read from Parashat “Vayera” in Bresheet (Genesis).

Vayera, which is read, in parts, over the two days of Rosh Hashana, narrates the birth of Yitzchak, the son of Avraham and Sarah, the banishment of Hagar and her son, Yishmael, and ends with the binding of Yitzchak.

G-d, as we learn from it, remembers His promise to Sarah and blesses her and Avraham with a son, Yitzchak who is circumcised at the age of eight days.  Sarah, who is concerned about the future of her son demands that Avraham banish Hagar, her maid, along with, Yishmael, who Avraham sired. “Cast out this slave woman with her son, for the son of this slave woman shall not be heir with my son Isaac,” she tells Avraham in Bresheet 21:10. Avraham does not like it but listens to G-d who commands him to obey to Sarah. Avraham acquiesces and Hagar and her son end up in the desert and are, later, saved by an angel of G-d.

Many, myself included, have difficulties with this narrative. Although G-d stands behind Sarah’s decision, banishment into the desert is, still, a harsh verdict, particularly one that is executed by a parent, in this case Avraham.

Without underestimating or belittling the suffering of Hagar and Yishmael, which resulted from Avraham’s move, it is important to look at this episode in the context of practices in the ancient world where our narrative takes place. I am referring, particularly, to those pertaining to the inheritance rights of the son of a maid/slave in the circumstances of our story. These, as we learn, seem to be Sarah’s main concerns.

Rabbi Elchanan Samet suggests that for that purpose, we turn to the Hammurabi Code of Law which reflects the social and legal norms of that period, at least in Mesopotamia.

Article 170 of this Code states that if a man’s main wife bore his children and so did his maid, the father shall bequeath all he owns to the children from his main wife, during his life. If the father passes away without declaring the rightful inheritors, his assets will be divided equally between all of his offspring regardless of who their mother was.

Hagar was never the legal wife of Avraham. Sarah was. Hagar was a maid and a servant who bore a son, Yishmael, to Avraham when Sarah thought that she was barren.  Yishmael was never the legal heir of Avraham.  Now that Sarah has her son, she is the Lady of the house and wishes to secure her son’s future and ensure that he is the sole inheritor. Avraham is old, and Sarah, the worried mother, wishes him to affix it while he is alive. Banishing Hagar is removing last hurdle that stands between her and her goal.

Nevertheless, should Hagar and Yishmael be “cast out” after all those years?

Avraham does not really “cast” her out. In chapter 21 verse 14, the Torah tells us that Avraham “sent her away.” There is a softening of the verb “cast” by replacing it with the verb “send” which, in a way, mirrors Avraham’s sentiments and the nature of his actions. In Biblical context sending away generally means releasing or letting go. The same verb “send,” incidentally, is also used in the Torah pertaining to the releasing of slaves. Might it be possible that this is what the case is here?

I turn, again, to the Hammurabi Code. Article 171 of it does address an issue similar to the one discussed here. According to it, if, while he is alive, the father does not will anything to his offspring from his maids or mistresses, then they will receive nothing. Following his death, the release of the maid and her children will be secured, and the children of the main wife will not turn them into slaves.

Since Avraham has already decreed that Yitzchak is his sole successor, we would expect that Hagar and Yishmael  will be freed, accordingly. In the act of “sending them away” Avraham is, as it seems, in accordance with the customs as practiced in his world, the ancient world. As far as “the desert” scene is concerned, let us not forget that entire land of Canaan was  a desolate wilderness in those days.

On the second day of Rosh Hashanah, we read the account of the binding of Yitzchak. It tells us that G-d commands Avraham to sacrifice his son, Yitzchak, to Him.

Sacrificing the first-born son to Molech, an Amonite deity worshipped also in Canaan, was common practice in ancient times. The Torah strongly condemns and forbids such a act. Avraham, again, as in the case of Hagar, accepts the verdict without protesting or questioning it. It is clear from the text (Chapter 22:1) that G-d was testing Avraham and the extent of his dedication to Him. Still, why did G-d choose that specific experience to put to the test Avraham’s devotion to Him?

It seems that G-d’s directive was not aimed to see whether Avraham was ready to slaughter his son. As mentioned above, in the context of the times, the practice was common and everyone sacrificing their son to Molech would have done it willingly.

The underlying cause for that stems from the deepest levels of Avraham’s faith in G-d. Throughout the exchanges between G-d and Avraham, G-d repeatedly promises Avraham that he will have great and powerful posterity. If Yitzchak dies, those promises will never be kept.

In my view, it is not only Avraham that is put to the test. In Avraham’s eyes, it is also G-d that is being assessed. Yet, he never complains, never questions, or protests the decree.

His unconditional faith in G-d, regardless of whether G-d keeps His promise to him or not, is what Avraham is put on trial for in this episode. Avraham did not fail and was blessed for it. Just as he was about to put the knife to Yitzchak’s throat, an angel called Avraham from heaven telling him to stop. A ram appeared in the bushes nearby and was sacrificed to G-d instead of Yitzchak. That is the reason we use a ram’s horn to make the Shofar.

The lesson of this Parashah is clear. Life is going to present us with many challenges and rattling experiences where we will need to make hard choices. As long as we, old and young, parents and children adhere to our belief in G-d, choose Life, do Justice and practice Hope, we shall always prevail.

May we all have a great year padded with abundant health and only good news.