In the Torah portion of Vayeshev it discusses the return of Jacob in Canaan after dwelling in the house of Laban for twenty years and his encounter with Esau. The Torah states:[1] ‘Jacob dwelt in the land of his father's sojournings, in the land of Canaan. These are the generations of Jacob: when Joseph was seventeen years old, being a shepherd.’ The story of Jacob follows a complete chapter about the sojournings of Esau, and his sojournings, whereby it states:[2] And these are the generations of Esau, that is, Edom, followed by his family, concluding with: ‘So Esau dwelt on Mount Seir Esau, that is Edom.’[3] It then proceeds to detail the family of Esau:[4] ‘And these are the generations of Esau the progenitor of Edom, on Mount Seir,’ followed by the kings that reigned:[5] ‘And these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the children of Israel.’
There doesn’t seem to be however any coherent connection between the sojournings of Jacob and the previous chapter that records the sojournings of Esau in detail, other than the telling of each of their families in turn. Furthermore, it seems to be a repetition of what has already been said previously that Jacob came to Canaan:[6] ‘And Jacob came to his father Isaac, to Mamre, Kiriath Arba, which is Hebron, where Abraham and Isaac dwelt.’
Connection between Esau and Jacob
There are several approaches to understand the context of the verse: ‘Jacob dwelt in the land of his father's sojournings, in the land of Canaan:’ a. There is no connection at all with the previous chapter about the generations and sojournings of Esau. ‘Dwelt’ merely signifies a prelude to suffering and is connected not to the earlier chapters but to the following verse regarding the story of Joseph and his brothers.[7] b. It is connected not to the immediate proceeding chapter about the sojournings of Esau but to the prior chapters about Jacob’s sojournings in the house of Laban and his encounter with Esau. In this context, the Midrash Tanchuma states that Jacob sought to dwell in tranquility after many years of distress, however, the troubles of Joseph sprang upon him.[8] c. There is a connection with the immediately proceeding chapter.
In connecting the verse: ‘Jacob dwelt in the land of his father's sojournings, in the land of Canaan’ with the immediately proceeding chapter that discusses the sojournings of Esau, there are two approaches: it is in comparison with Esau that while Esau settled in the land of Seir, Jacob dwelled in the land chosen by G-d.[9] Furthermore, Jacob could not have settled in Canaan until Esau parted from him and settled in Seir.[10] A further idea is to highlight that while Esau settled in his land of Seir, Jacob, despite his desire to begin the period of settlement for the Jewish people in the land of Canaan, he remained a sojourner, as promised by G-d to Abraham that his descendants will be foreigners in a land that is not theirs for a period of four hundred years; this included also the sojournings of Jacob.[11] Both those interpretations make a comparison with Esau regarding their sojournings, thus explaining the juxtaposition of the chapters, but not directly in connection with their morality.
A further interpretation of the reason for the juxtaposition between the sojournings of Esau and Jacob is not only to compare their sojournings but to contrast their states of morality: while Esau lived incestuously, Jacob was righteous, in the image of his father, Isaac. In this context – contrasting the righteousness of Esau and Jacob - there are two Midrashic teachings:
Midrash Tanchuma - a pearl lost amongst sand and pebbles
The Midrash compares the brevity of the Torah in detailing the life of Esau in contrast with the lengthy elaboration of the life of Jacob to a pearl hidden amongst sand and pebbles:[12]
Why did the Holy One, blessed be He, concern Himself from the very beginning of time with the genealogies of the nations? This may be likened to a king who dropped a pearl into sand and pebbles. The king was compelled to search the sand and the pebbles to recover the pearl. As soon as he recovered the pearl, however, he discarded the sand and the pebbles, for he was only interested in retrieving the pearl. Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, devoted Himself superficially to the earlier generations, and then ignored them. He mentioned Adam, Seth, Enoch, Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared, etc.,[13] and also the second ten generations, Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah, etc.,[14] so that a child could take the Bible and read about the ten generations from Adam to Noah at a single sitting, and also about the ten generations from Noah to Abraham at one time. But when he reached the section dealing with the pearls, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, he would have to apply himself diligently in reading about them. That is why the section on Elephaz the son of Esau is included in this chapter.
A second midrashic teaching is found in relation to the following verse:[15] ‘These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph.’ The Midrash contrasts Joseph and Esau through a parable of a bundle of flax (the negativity of Esau) that need not instil fear as it can be consumed with a single spark - the righteousness) of Joseph, the son of Jacob. The Midrash states:[16]
Now Jacob dwelt in the land. These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph. What is written on the matter above? These are the lords of the children of Esau.[17] When Jacob saw them, he became alarmed and said: Who can stand against these? To what is the matter comparable? To a goldsmith who would sit and ply his trade. His apprentice raised his eyes and saw a lot of camels who were loaded with straw. He began to say: Who can stand against these? His master said to him: If a spark went out of this furnace, it would burn all of them. So in the case of our father Jacob, when he saw all of Esau's lords, he began to be afraid and said: Who can stand against these? The Holy One said to him: Look at what is written below: These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph. By your life, someone shall spring from Joseph, a person, who shall burn all of them, as stated: The house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau shall be straw; they shall burn it.[18] R. Hanina said: It is written:[19] See, they have become like straw; fire consumes them. It is therefore written: These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph.
Rashi – the parable of the pearls amongst the sand and pebbles
In the printed edition of Rashi, both these Midrashic teachings are quoted:
Jacob dwelt: Scripture described Esau’s settlements and his generations, briefly, because they were not distinguished nor important enough to elaborate on how they settled and the order of their wars, or how they drove out the Horites. In contrast it elaborates at length on the settlements of Jacob and his generations, and all the events that brought these about, since they were important to the Omnipresent to dwell upon at length. Similarly, you find regarding the ten generations from Adam to Noah: So-and-so begot so-and-so, but when it reached Noah, it dwelt upon him at length. Likewise, with the ten generations from Noah to Abraham, it dealt briefly with them, but when it reached Abraham, it dwelt upon him at length. This can be compared to a pearl that falls into the sand: A person searches in the sand and sifts it with a sieve until he finds the pearl, and when he finds it, he casts the pebbles from his hand and keeps the pearl.
Rashi – the parable of the flax
Another interpretation of “Jacob dwelt:” The camels of a flax dealer entered a town, laden with flax. The blacksmith wondered, “Where will all this flax go?” One clever fellow answered him, “One spark will come out of your bellows, which will burn it all.” So did Jacob see all the chieftains of Esau mentioned above.[20] He wondered and said, “Who can conquer them all?” What is written below? “These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph,” only, and it is written: “And the house of Jacob shall be fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau shall become stubble.”[21] One spark will emerge from Joseph, which will destroy and consume them all. From an old Rashi.
Parable of the pearl
In the parable of the hidden pearl there are four variations: a. In the Midrash, it discusses the pearl that is hidden amongst both the sand and pebbles. b. In the printed edition of Rashi and most of the manuscripts, it mentions first the pearl hidden in the sand but when the pearl is found, it writes the pebbles – not the sand - are cast away. c. In MS Opp. 35, it writes: ‘all the pebbles are cast away.’ d. In MS. Oppenheim Add. 4° 188, fol. 28 (130-1400), it writers: ‘he casts away the sand,’ without changing it to pebbles
Parable of the flax
The parable of the flax is found in the Midrash Tanchuma and also in the printed edition of Rashi, as a text from Rashi Yashan. In all the Oxford manuscripts, the parable of the flax consumed by a spark is omitted. The question, we would like to pose is a. what is the significance of the differences in the parable of the pearl and b. what is the reason for the omission of the parable of the flax in the manuscripts?
Interpretations of the parable of the pearl
There are four interpretations of the parable of the pearl: a. the thrust of the parable is to say that sand – the generations of Esau - is of no significance compared to the pearl – the righteousness of the life of Jacob. The casting away the pebbles is merely part of the parable but not intended to suggest anything in particular regarding the contrast between Jacob and Esau.[22] b. The sand refers to the generations that are insignificant to the life of the patriarchs, while the pebbles are aspects of the generations that are connected in some way to the patriarchs, like parts of the life of Esau, as the brother of Jacob. This explains the reason for stating both sand and pebbles.[23] c. The sand refers to the generations that precede the mention of Jacob, while the pebbles that are cast away refers to the abandonment of those generations from being mentioned once Jacob is mentioned.[24] d. The sand and pebbles refer to two aspects of the generations of Esau: the sand conceals the pearl but is not harmful to the pearl. This reflects the unholy that may be transformed to good by Jacob. The pebbles however reflect the unholy that is irredeemable and must be cast away, similar to pebbles that can damage the pearl.[25]
Based on the above interpretations we can explain the variations in the text of the parable in the original Midrash and the various versions of the manuscripts of Rashi. The Midrash that uses both, sand and pebbles, throughout the text, indicate there are two aspects of Esau’s generations but does not distinguish between them when contrasted with the righteousness of Jacob. The two aspects of Esau refer to parts of Esau that is connected with the life of Jacob and parts that are not connected.[26] Both, however, are insignificant in relation to the righteousness of Jacob.
The Rashi MS. Oppenheim Add. 4° 188, fol. 28 (130-1400) that mentions only sand throughout the text, including the end of the text: ‘he casts away the sand’ - instead of pebbles - suggests it is referring to, not two aspects of Jacob, but the singular generations of Esau. The parable then is indicating that while they are mentioned before the generations of Jacob, they are not mentioned afterwards.[27] There are no difference aspects to the generations of Esau itself.
The printed versions of Rashi and the manuscripts that change from sand to pebbles at the end of the parable - he casts away the pebbles - indicates that, like the original text of the Midrash, there is a distinction between two aspects of Esau - sand and pebbles, but the fact that only pebbles are cast away, suggests that aspects of Esau may not be irredeemable and should not be cast away. This may refer to the aspects of Esau’s life that is connected with Jacob and may not be negative or refers to the idea that Esau, as all nations, will ultimately recognize G-d in the messianic era, as indicated in the commentaries on the last verse in Obadiah:[28] And saviors shall ascend Mt. Zion to judge the mountain of Esau, and the Lord shall have the kingdom.[29]
The omission of the parable of the flax
We may thereby also explain the reason why in all the Oxford manuscripts of Rashi’s commentary it omits the Midrashic parable of the flax. The idea of a duality in Esau, with parts that are as pebbles – to be cast away – and other aspects that are as sand – redeemable – is inconsistent with the parable of the flax – Esau - that is completely consumed by the fire, referring to Joseph, exacerbated by, as the parable elaborates in the Midrash, air pumped from a bellow. For this reason Rashi may have omitted the parable of the flax.
Footnotes
[1] Genesis 37:1-2.
[2] Genesis 36:1.
[3] Genesis 36:8.
[4] Genesis 36:9.
[5] Genesis 36:31.
[6] Genesis 35:27.
[7] Midrash Tanchuma Vayeshev 1.
[8] Rashi on Genesis 37:2: It is further expounded upon [as follows]: “dwelt” (verse 1) When Jacob sought to dwell in tranquility, the troubles of Joseph sprang upon him. The righteous seek to dwell in tranquility. Said the Holy One, blessed be He, “What is prepared for the righteous in the world to come is not sufficient for them, but they seek [also] to dwell in tranquility in this world!”
[9] Ibn Ezra on Genesis 37:1.
[10] Midrash Tanchuma 1:1.
[11] Genesis 15:13. Midrash Tanchuma 3:1. See Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:1.
[12] Midrash Tanchuma Vayeshev 6-7.
[13] I Chronicles 1:1-2.
[14] Ibid. 1:24.
[15] Genesis 37:2.
[16] Tanchuma Vayeshev 4:1; Midrash Rabba 84:5.
[17] Genesis 36:15.
[18] Obadiah 1:18.
[19] Isaiah 47:14.
[20] Genesis 36:15-19, 40-43.
[21] Obadiah 1:18.
[22] Mizrachi on Genesis 37:1.
[23] Maskil l’David on Genesis 37:1.
[24] Maharal on Genesis 37:1.
[25] Likkutei Sichot 15:305.
[26] This would follow Maskil l’David on Genesis 37:1.
[27] This would follow Maharal on Genesis 37:1.
[28] Obadiah 1:2.
[29] Ibn Ezra, Radak on Obadiah 1:21.