OzTorah

Jacob lays down to sleep, by José de Ribera, 1639

Eventually “he happened upon hamakom, the place”, “he took some of the stones of hamakom, the place” and “he lay down (to sleep) bamakom, at the place” (Gen. 28:10-11).

“Place” gets mentioned several times – not “a” but “the” place.” It was not any old place but a particular place, though we are not given details of who chose it and why. Realising that God had led him there, Jacob called the place Bet-El, “The House of God”.

In rabbinic commentary HaMakom, “the place”, is The One Who is in Every Place, i.e. God.

Nothing Jacob did was by accident. God guided him and accompanied him every step of the way, bringing him to a pre-ordained location. God who is everywhere had set His eye on this place. Hence Jacob said, “Surely God is in this place, and I didn’t know!” (Gen. 28:14).

It is one of the paradoxes of theology that HaShem is both the universal God of the world with a writ that runs across the whole of Creation, and yet is also in every individual place where we let Him in.

Q. Would a kohen who leaves Judaism and later returns be allowed to act as a kohen and duchan (pronounce the priestly blessing upon the congregation)?

A. This question was put to Rashi in the 11th century, at a time when the Crusades had led to problems of apostasy.

The issue was whether a person who left Judaism was to be considered a Jew or a gentile in the eyes of Jewish law, with the associated question of the former apostate’s status when he came back to Judaism. Rashi’s responsa on these and other subjects were gathered in 1943 by Israel Elfenbein.

Responsum no. 170 in Elfenbein’s collection rules that a kohen who has returned to Judaism may indeed duchan.

The analogy is given of a kohen who has a physical blemish; the Talmud says that he may not minister at the altar but may bless the people, unless the blemish is on his hands, which he raises to pronounce the blessing (Ta’anit 27a; Megillah 24b).

The kohen who was an apostate has a blemish on his record, but if he is now a believing and practising Jew he is permitted to utter the priestly blessing. Rashi adds that this applies all the more nowadays when there is no Temple and no sanctuary.

Rabbenu Gershom comes to the same conclusion and warns that people should not embarrass the kohen by saying to him, “Remember your previous situation”. This is not only “verbal oppression” but will also discourage people from repenting and returning.

Q. Where does the custom originate of throwing sweets on Bar-Mitzvah boys and bridegrooms in the synagogue?

A. In some places there once was a custom, on the Shabbat before a wedding, of showering the bridegroom with walnuts, almonds and dried fruits, symbolising the hope that the marriage should be fruitful and fulfill the commandment, “Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth” (Gen. 1:28).

The custom was later extended to Bar-Mitzvahs, not simply, one hopes, out of fun but to express the hope that the boy would be prolific in his observance of the commandments.

In places where unpackaged sweets or peeled nuts are thrown, Rabbi Chayyim David Halevi of Tel Aviv sees an infringement of the law of bal tash’chit – “you shall not destroy” (see Deut. 21:19 and Maimonides, Hilchot M’lachim 6:10). Rabbi Halevi says that when edible items are thrown, even in honour of a Bar-Mitzvah or wedding, much of the food becomes broken and wasted and is only fit to be thrown away.

He also criticises any use of food that makes it unfit for consumption, such as cutting vegetables and painting them, inserting vegetables as a decoration in an art work, or even using flour in order to make glue.

All of this is a form of bal tash’chit and should not be done if there is a practicable substitute.

Isaac and the wells, from a 1906 Bible card

Something similar is happening all over the Jewish world today.

I had a teacher who used to say, “If you want to reform Judaism, restore it”.

The restoration of Judaism seems to be going on everywhere these days. Jews are going back to the sources to delve into the old ideas, principles and practices.

The packaging is up-to-date. The technology of the 21st century is being utilised. But the content is traditional Judaism – Isaiah and Jeremiah, Hillel and Shammai, Rambam and Yehudah Halevi, Rashi and Ibn Ezra, Joseph Karo and the Chafetz Chayyim.

Don’t let anyone persuade you that Judaism is disintegrating or in danger of disappearance: it is the modern world which is under scrutiny and its laissez-faire relativism is being found wanting.

Jacob & Esau, by James Tissot c.1896

Jacob was the studious one who enjoyed his home and his books: The text says he loved his tents (Gen. 25:27), which Radak indicates means that wherever there was a tent of learning, that’s where one would find Jacob.

Esau, on the other hand, was the “cunning hunter” (Gen. 25:27). Rashbam takes this phrase literally: Esau was the prototype of the macho man who, in later parlance, went in for “huntin’, shootin’, and fishin’”.

Ibn Ezra thinks the idea of being not only a hunter but cunning is particularly important, since Esau exercised his wiles on deceiving the animal prey and making it easier to capture them.

But the way the story works out with Esau and Jacob vying to impress their father, it seems more likely that the phrase “cunning hunter” doesn’t only refer to animal targets. It conveys the sense of a man who could flatter and dissemble when it came to other human beings, especially Father Isaac.

Poor Isaac was old and losing his eyesight – a contrast to the later Moses who even at the end of his life was still vigorous and clear-sighted (Deut. 34). Isaac, on the other hand, was not only taken in by Esau’s wiles but probably wanted to be.

The boys’ mother Rebekah got Jacob to pretend to be Esau in a superb piece of see-through disguise because she knew how gullible Isaac had become, and she wanted to show that if a patent disguise that covered the smooth arms of Jacob could fool him, all the more so could he be taken in by the smooth talk of Esau.