Check out this controversial and powerful idea sent to me by Russ W:

My 8-year old daughter shared an insight she had learned in school about Parsha Vayeira. When Sarah learns she will have a child, she laughs at the prospect of she and her husband, given their respective old ages, having children. But when Hashem speaks with Avraham, mention of Avraham being too old is omitted. My daughter explained to me that this was, in essence, a white lie (of omission) by Hashem to spare Avraham’s feelings, omitting the reference to Avraham’s advancing years that would have been hurtful to Avraham. She took away from this story the supreme importance of taking care to avoid hurting somebody’s feelings, if at all possible.

I was wondering if this principle might apply to this week’s parsha, Toldos. Can we explain the events that transpire when Isaac is tricked into blessing Jacob instead of Esav as an effort to spare Esav’s feelings?

As both a son with two siblings, and a father of three children, I have learned that there is nothing more hurtful than the disappointment and disapproval of a parent. We want approval from our parents. And nothing is more hurtful than to be judged unworthy by a parent, especially as compared to another sibling, particularly a sibling with whom there is a bitter rivalry.

We learn in Genesis 25:28, “and Isaac Loved Eisav, and Rivka Loved Jacob” and in Genesis 27:33 “when Isaac realized that he didn’t bless Eisav, he got frightened a very big fear…” These words make clear that Isaac and Rivka each preferred different children, and that in order to elevate Jacob over Esav, Rivka engineers the deception of Yitzchak, seemingly without regard for the fact that it will fuel Esav’s hatred of Yakov.

As we review the story of the deception of Yitzchak by his wife and youngest son, we are told that Rebecca (the paragon of kindness, whose very selection as Isaac’s wife came about through her welcoming acts on behalf of Isaac’s servant Eliezer) has formed a plot to deceive her husband. She cooks two kids which Yitzchak is tricked to think is a wild animal caught by his son Esav and dresses Yakov in skins to further deceive Yitzchak. The narrative describes how Yitzchak hears Yakov’s voice and is wary, but Yitzchak’s suspicions are allayed by the hairy arms and neck and he proceeds to give blessings to Yakov which he intended to give to his firstborn Esav.

Does any of this make sense?

The beauty of these biblical stories is that they show the patriarchs and matriarchs at their best and at their worst. But this is pretty severe stuff. If true, it means that Rivka simultaneously has deceived her husband on a matter of utmost importance, undermined her eldest son and set her youngest son, Yakov, to be hated by his powerful, scary brother.

Does this seem in character for Rivka? Perhaps my incredulity is driven by the fact that I simply cannot conceive of my wife ever orchestrating such an elaborate con against me and my family. But Rivka could certainly rationalize this by viewing herself as an instrument of Hashem’s will. In fact, Hashem had told her in Genesis 25: 23 that “Two nations are in your womb;two regiems from your insides shall be seapratedl the might shall pass from one rigime to th oher, and the elder shall serve the younger.” And in 25: 33 “thus, Esav spurned his birthright.”

But what about Yitzchak? Maybe we can understand why Rivka would want to elevate Yakov over Esav, but why would Yitzchak do this to his favorite son who he loves? Should we assume that his physical blindness he was also blind to Esav’s deficiencies?

Yitzchak is a thoughtful man likely desperate to avoid scarring his son Esav the way he was affected by the near-death trauma of the Akeidah. Would this man of quiet contemplation, who we credit for creating the mincha prayer, be unaware that Yakov has greater merit than Esav? Has he been so swayed by his love of delicious game that he is blind to his children’s very different nature? Has he never spoken with his beloved Rivka about his children?

If the simple narrative is implausible what could explain the story and the events which follow? Could the entire back and forth between Yitzchak, Rivka and Yakov be part of a sham to deceive Esav? If so, why would Yitzchak and Rebecca hatch such a plan? Didn’t the parents understand the enmity that they would create between their sons?

Is it possible that this charade was orchestrated by both of the parents for the sole purpose of minimizing pain to Esav? Surely Yitzchak and Rivka must have agreed that Yakov was better suited to be the honored son who would lead the family forward, that Esav was unsuited. Eisav may be Yakov’s favorite son, but that does not mean he was blind to Esav’s deficiencies.

The text makes clear that Yakov was a thoughtful, sensitive and deferential young man. Esav was the opposite, an impulsive brute who reveled in the outdoors and who sold his birthright for a bowl of porridge; the opposite not only of tent-dwelling Yakov but also the opposite of his kind and thoughtful parents Yitzchak and Rivka.

Clearly Yakov and Rivka were faced with a dilemma. Esav was their firstborn. I can imagine them sitting over the dinner table speaking in hushed tones about Esav not being suited to lead the people forward, but as parents they must have wanted desperately to spare him the dual pain of rejection by his parents and the humiliation he would experience in their community if they elevated Yakov over Esav. What to do?

There were no neat solutions available, but I put forward that the best they came up with was an elaborate hoax to pin the blame for Yakov’s ascension on Yakov’s act of trickery. So they hatched this scheme, with the words of Rivka’s conversation with Yakov and Yakov’s conversation with Yitzchak precisely recounted, all for the purpose of easing Esav’s pain. While Esav would certainly be outraged, at least in this way Esav would not feel the pain of rejection from his parents and the community would not think less of Esav for being swindled.

Were the parents successful? If this interpretation of what actually took place is correct, then the outcome was successful from the parents’ point of view. Esav was outraged at his brother, but there is no mention of anger toward his parents. Esav does not view the chain of events as rejection by his parents. He bides his time, waiting for the day when he can get revenge on his brother. He is furious, but his spirit is unbowed. In short, he has been spared the pain and humiliation of rejection.

Thank you for considering this alternative interpretation.

Here is a posting from Arthur:  (let me know your thoughts)

Rabbi   ….  Why in the Torah when it refers to a famine in the land
does it always stress that it was not to be confused with the other
previous  famines ….why the need to always distinguish this famine
from the others.
Thanks in advance …not to be confused with my previous thanks to you
for answering the question about why Hashem sent a Malachto undue the
akeydah and didn’t undue it himself.

1. ” Don’t be sad,” says Finkelstein on his deathbed. ” I’ve had 80 good years.”
” But you’re 98!” says his wife.
” I know.”
2. ” Oy,” says Sophie.
“Oy Vey,” says Esther.
“Oy veyizmir.” says Sadie
” I thought we weren’t going to talk about the children,” says Mildred.
3. G-d agrees to grant Hyman a wish, with the condition that whatever he asks for,
his brother-in-law will get double.
” Okay,” Hyman says, ” I wish I were half-dead.”
4. Klein brags to Cohen about his new hearing aid:It’s the best one made-
I now understand everything!”
” What kind is it?” Cohen asks.
” 3:15.”
5. What does a Jew hope people will say about him at his funeral?
” Look! He’s moving !”

Hi there: here is a great post from Evan -
Great idea Rabbi!  The website looks great!
 
Here are two quick ideas that are always on my mind, and may make for a good sermon:
 
1) “Sameach B’chelko” (be satisfied with what you have): Much easier said than done, especially for one with ambition and desires for both spiritual and professional growth.  It’s quite common in our Jewish communities to look around at what others have and try to compete.  The “Keeping up with the Joneses” mentality is pervasive in the Jewish world and its communities, and is quite difficult to rid.  Many over-extend themselves trying to impress others, instead of living within their means and being satisfied, as Tradition teaches.  This is one of the fundamental tenets I try to live by, but it is much easier said than done.
 
2) Value of a Jewish Education: Is a Jewish day school education worth $25 k a year? (this is more of a major Jewish issue, not sure its well suited for a sermon, but i know many in the congregation are incredibly concerned about this issue, to the point where some people are pushing back having children, or planning on having fewer children than they would otherwise desire).
 
Sorry for the stream if consciousness.  Hope it helps!
 
Good luck with the project!
 
Evan

The Kee Teytzai Connection:

Desire, Romance, and Attachment, by Rabbi Ian Bailey, thesevenways.com

This article discusses the mechanism by which we from close relationships and marry, and provides psychological backing from contemporary sources for the Biblical injunction that a groom must spend extra time with his wife during the first year of marriage. It also underlines the the Torah-based mechanism for which couples can maintain romance in their relationships after the first few years of marriage, clearly dispelling common opinions and methods on the matter.

Psychologists discuss the underlying psychological and biological (“biobehavioral”) ways in which we form close relationships with the opposite gender. Once someone has found and spends time with the type of partner whom he or she prefers (correct temperament, mannerisms, background, etc.), that person is likely to develop fond feelings for the partner and find his- or herself with what is labeled as drive or desire for the other person. This is often coupled with or followed by what is called romantic love. The former is more deeply rooted in biology, but is connected to actions and thoughts, while the latter is something that may occur in such unhealthy ways as a quickly created obsession or, hopefully, grow healthily and naturally over time, as the couple spends time together and relates.

What is missing from this list is a third, well-known and intriguing biobehavioral system called attachment. When a couple initially connects, they may feel passionate feelings or the desire to connect physically, and these feelings can be healthy, proper feelings and lead to a healthy relationships and marriage, but they still are missing the healthy, true bond of attachment that is present in real relationships. This attachment is essential, because after this bond is created, the tone of the romance and desire components of the relationship are dictated by the quality of the relational bond of the couple (!). In other words, it is normal for intense feelings of romance to dwindle in a relationship, because those feelings by definition only last in relationships that have a real healthy bond. (All who want to work on themselves and their marriages will have more romance and love- it’s not something you can buy or order up!)

In their comprehensive but politically biased work on the family life cycle, McGoldrick, Carter and Garcia-Preto, (2011) discuss this bond, and explain that it is usually created after a year or two of a couple living together, specifically when romantic love wanes to near non-existence. This observation by well known psychologists – who clearly do not derive their psycholigical insight from Biblical sources – is the biobehavioral background for what Jews know centuries ago, “Shana Rishona” “The first year” that a couple spends together (based on Duet. 24:5). Newlyweds spend down-to-earth quality time together during this year, with the husband not traveling or risking his life in war, so that the couple can form a healthy bond (after that, risk away!). This quality time has been demonstrated to be essential to healthy marriages by Dr. John Mordechai Gottman, who has penned his findings in practical advice and digestible content in The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work (Gottman & Silver, 1999) and other books.

It is up to the couple to spend quality time together and rid themselves of unhealthy attachments, in order to properly connect.

“Therefore, a man will forsake his father and his mother and attach to his wife, and they will become one flesh.”

(Gen. 2:24)

This sentence, which many of us have heard and read on numerous occasions, has much significance, when understood in the light of Jewish tradition and contemporary psychological theory. The sentence does not read ‘a man will have left’ ‘ne’ezav’ in the passive, but ‘will forsake’. The sentence is saying that it is not a description of but an imperative for a man to forsake the unhealthy attachments from his youth, in order to actively form the bond with his wife “davak”.

Anyone who is married can attest to the fact that these attachments are what couples deal with for some time, especially at the beginning of marriage (Why do you need your food so badly? Why do you speak with your mother so often, it hurts our relationship? We need the money, why can’t I take this new job and move away from your family? We need to be independent). Also, new attachments are what each spouse picks up on in their partner and naturally rejects (Honey, you just quit smoking but replaced it with drinking caffeine. Is everything ok, since we moved away from your sister, you call me very often, when I am at work?).

There is a very interesting law that a Jewish soldier is allowed to take a women from a non-Jews enemy nation and perform a conversion process on her and marry her (Deut. 21:10-14). During her conversion process, he must have her look disheveled and mourn her former family. After a man marries such a woman, he may he may end up staying married to her, or if he finds himself

“…not desiring her, he can send her ‘self’ [lenafsha] away…”

Scripture heralds that [his] destiny is to hate her.

(Deut. 21:24, with Rashi)

The Torah and Rashi are explaining that when a man is compelled to send away a woman such as this, that his attachment to her was solely to her appearance. Lenafsha is an extra word here; it means her ‘self’ in a very deep way. It is the same word as soul, and is often used to describe something that is living (as in the story of Creation). In conjunction, the Torah did not use a more common word for desire ratza ‘to want something’, but chafetz, which has the connotation more of desiring an object (which is why the noun c’hefetz’ means ‘object’). He is essentially sending away an object that he was attached to, not the woman that she truly is.(1)

This soldier doesn’t really like her inner self, her true essence as a person. This section of the Torah, as has been said (Devarim Rabbah), is attempting to drive this woman away from the man, because, for some reason that needs explanation, our sages say that soldiers cannot help but desire these types of women during battle, and the Torah, consequently, made a mechanism to attempt to remove her from his life (Rashi, Talmud Kiddushin). With our understanding of attachment, this mechanism works quite well. It will dissolve this man’s attachment to her, through making her do these mournful actions and removing romantic love and desire; the couple has no real attachment, and, if they do, they will stay married (King David has many such wives, so one cannot fully disparage the idea). The analogy to relationships in life’s everyday interactions is clear. As with Amnon and Tamar, looks alone are not what form a healthy connection; they create but a romantic obsession.

May we all detach from unhealthy attachments and create healthy ones with healthy people and constructive concepts.

Ian Bailey
RabbiBailey@gmail.com
thesevenways@gmail.com

(1) Rashi sounds like he is saying that every person who does this will hate the woman. He may mean this quite literally: that anyone who actually succeeds in marrying her totally changed his attachment to the woman, but always ran the risk of hating or did hate her.

Bibliography

McGoldrick, M., Carter, B., and Garcia-Preto, N., (2011). The Family Life Cycle: Individual, Family, and Social Perspectives . Boston: Allyn and Bacon

Gottman, J., Silver, N. (1999). The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work. New York: Crown Publishers

Great idea and I, for one, love the idea of this experiment. No moving story but just a comment on today’s sermon about a different perspective.

I have observed that I am stuck on a problem – the best way to break through is to turn it around. Here is a picture to demonstrate my point that I happen to post just last week!

The power of the different perspective…
http://trenchwars.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/the-power-of-a-different-persepective/

Judy

So we officially have our first joke: thank you to therapydoc

It’s a great idea, rabbi. (I saw you on Twitter, somehow, social networking is weird). The best ones have the little stories in them, like the one about the kollelnik, who doesn’t make it to minyan. The R”K confronts him, says, “Nu, Yankel, you’re not making it to Shachrit anymore. What’s up?” Yankel tells him that there’s this woman in his building with four little kids, and she can’t get them off to school on time, and they are dawdling and crying and need lunches, and she’s overwhelmed, so he helps her.

“OMG,” shouts the R”Y (or something like that). “Who is this woman? We’ll try to help!”

“This woman, the young man replies,” is my wife.

Gut vach, Rabbi. I’ll follow your blog.

Hi all! We had a great talk today in shul. I shared with you my counterintuitive sermon. My words today were inspired by my amazing congregation that teaches me to think a second time.

So let’s get posting. For the next month comment on this main page with your best divrei torah. Send me the best Torah idea you ever heard. It doesn’t need to relate to any Torah portion specifically. Send me something your grandmother told you. Anything. Send me your best thoughts. Let’s get some discussion going. In a month or so – we’ll vote on the top divrei torah.

If you’re wondering how you can post:

1) Comment directly on the page by hitting the comment button.

2) Email me at Rabbieinhorn@gmail.com

See you in shul!

Dear friends,

It has been 6 years since I first walked into West Side Institutional Synagogue. From that moment, my family and I have enjoyed your wonderful support, commitment, and appreciation. We must say that we never expected this journey to turn out so amazing. But life proved that dreams become reality when you put your heart and mind into something and really push the limits.

Therefore we would like to thank everyone who has become a member at WSIS, or followed our classes, prayed with us, or enjoyed Kiddush with us. You are the major success factor behind these wonderful 6 years. We thank you for that!

As many of you know, sadly this is my last year at WSIS. I sat down and tried to think of a way to commemorate it in a manner that will involve everyone: You (the congregants), Us (WSIS), and everyone else who wants to be part of the celebration. How can we give back something to those who allowed us to share Torah for these meaningful years?

Therefore, I think that it’s time to let you be an active part of what I enjoy so much: creating sermons. And this is why I want to create a sermon with you!

I will be accepting your ideas for divrei torah, opening jokes, moving stories, content, style, etc. After you submit your suggestions (at their appropriate dates), people from all over the world will get to vote on their favorites. After the votes are cast, I will take the best and put them together in a organized and powerful sermon that I will deliver in WSIS on a specific Shabbos (soon to be determined). My friends, this has never been done before.

YOUR CONTENT – YOUR OPINIONS – OUR SERMON

Enjoy the ride,
Shlomo Einhorn