REUVEN VS. ESAV

"Reuven heard and rescued him from their hand; he said: 'we will not strike him mortally'" (Bereishit 37:21). Reuven heard that his brothers wished to kill Yoseph, so Reuven saved him and ordered the brothers not to kill him. Our Sages teach that the reason Leah called her firstborn son Reuven was because she said "'Reu' see - the difference between 'ben' - my son - and the son of my father-in-law (referring to Esav). For regarding the son of my father-in-law, even though he voluntarily sold his rights as the firstborn to Yaakov as it is written 'he sold his birthright to Yaakov' (Bereishit 25:33), see what is written about him: 'and Esav harbored hatred towards Yaakov' (Bereishit 27:41)

However, in regard to my son, even though Yoseph took the right of the firstborn from Reuven against his will as it is written: 'and when he defiled his father's bed his right of the firstborn was given to the sons of Yoseph' (Divrei HaYamim I 5:1), even so Reuven was not jealous of Yoseph, rather he tried to save his life as it is written 'Reuven heard and he rescued him from their hand'" (Brachot 7b).

Esav not only voluntarily sold his rights as the firstborn but we even learn that "Esav belittled the birthright" (Bereishit 25:34) he felt that he had gotten a very good deal, for it was not even worth the "bread and lentil stew" (ibid.) which he sold it for. However, when Yaakov received something for being the firstborn, mainly Yitzchak's blessing, then he began to harbor an eternal hatred for him: "he has kept his fury forever" (Amos 1:11). With Reuven, however, it was the exact opposite. Yaakov took the birthright away from Reuven and gave it to Yoseph without Reuven's consent, following his misjudgment in his actions toward Bilha. Not only did Reuven not harbor any feelings of jealousy towards Yoseph but he even saved his life.

SHARING A MOTHER / SHARING A SON

We can perhaps understand why the birthright was usurped from Reuven, but why was it given specifically to Yoseph? Chazal elucidate: "the birthright should properly have come from Rachel as it is written: 'these are the offspring of Yaakov, Yoseph' (Bereishit 37:2), but Leah preceded her through prayers for G-d's mercy. However, as a result of the great modesty that was present in Rachel, the Holy One Blessed is He, restored the birthright to her" (Baba Batra 123a). I would like to offer another suggestion for why Yoseph was the one specifically chosen to be given the birthright that had been taken away from Reuven. Reuven may have been Leah's son, but Rachel's giving Yaakov over to Leah gave Rachel a share in Reuven's birth. On the wedding night, Yaakov thought he was with Rachel, thus although in reality he was with Leah, his thoughts were with Rachel. By the same token, Yoseph may have been Rachel's son, but Leah gets some credit for this as well. Rashi cites from Chazal that Leah's daughter was named Dina because when she was pregnant "Leah made a judgment ("din") with herself, if this one is a male, my sister Rachel will not even be like one of the maidservants (i.e. she will have less sons even than the maidservants). She prayed over her fetus and it was transformed into a female" (Rashi Bereishit 30:21, Brachot 60a). It was Leah's prayers on Rachel's behalf that resulted in Rachel's giving birth to Yoseph. Yoseph began in Leah's womb even though it was Rachel who actually gave birth to him. We can therefore say regarding Yoseph as well that from a certain perspective he was the son of both Rachel and Leah and thus fitting to take the place of Reuven as the "bechor". Yaakov thus took the birthright from one who was the product of both mothers and gave it to another who was the product of the same two mothers.

The Torah describes for us the jealousy Rachel harbored towards Leah "Rachel became envious of her sister" (Bereishit 30:1). The jealousy, however, was not necessarily something negative as is seen from Rashi's commentary: "she envied her good deeds, she said 'were she not more righteous than I, she would not have been worthy of bearing sons'". Being envious of someone else's good deeds is not necessarily improper. Rachel, however, was the continuation of the trait of envy that first entered the world when the moon envied the sun. Rachel in this case can be compared to the moon, while Leah represents the sun. As with the sun, nowhere do we find Leah being envious of Rachel. On the contrary, as we just mentioned, Leah does her utmost to see to it that Rachel has a son, even foregoing an additional son for herself so that Rachel should have one. Rachel, however, is envious of her sister.

ETERNAL GIFTS

The Torah tells us that Leah had "tender eyes ('einayim rakot')" (Bereishit 29:17). Chazal ask: "what is the meaning of the word 'rakot', if you will say it means that, literally, is it conceivable that Scripture does not speak explicitly of the shortcomings of an animal that is 'tamei' as it is written 'of animals that are tahor and of animals that are not tahor' (Bereishit 7:8), yet Scripture speaks of the shortcomings of the righteous? Rather, R' Elazar said 'rakot' means that her G-d given gifts were larger ('arukot')" (Baba Batra 123a). Chazal here mean that the gifts received from Leah were eternal, while the ones we received through Rachel were not. Moshe Rabenu who brought us the eternal Torah, and Aharon, the father of the Kehuna which also is eternal, both descended from Leah. On the other hand, Yehoshua who brought us into Eretz Yisrael descended from Rachel, yet during certain time periods Eretz Yisrael was taken away from us it is not everlasting. There is one thing we have from Rachel which is eternal and that is the celebration of Purim, as our Sages teach us "all of the festivals will be nullified, but the days of Purim will never be nullified" (Yalkut Shimoni Mishle Remez 844). Leah however also has a share in Purim, for Mordechai is referred to as "ish yemini" which means that he is a member of the tribe of Binyamin (son of Rachel), yet he is also referred to as "ish Yehudi" which implies that he descends from Yehuda (son of Leah) (see Esther 2:5). Chazal explain that his father was from Binyamin while his mother was from Yehuda (see Megilla 12b).

As we mentioned above, Rachel was like the moon, at times it shines and at times it is covered from view. Leah's gifts, however, were longer lasting like the sun which shines constantly. Rachel's envy does not mean that, G-d forbid, she wishes to take anything away from her sister. On the contrary, the Midrash tells us that when Hashem wished to destroy the Beit HaMikdash and exile the Jewish people, the forefathers tried to intercede and pray on behalf of the nation. Hashem refused to accept their prayers and insisted that the Jewish people be exiled for the sins they had committed. "At that moment our matriarch Rachel appeared before the Holy One Blessed is He and said 'Master of the Universe, it is known to You that Your servant Yaakov loved me dearly and worked for my father for seven years in order to marry me. At the completion of those seven years, when the time came for him to marry me, my father plotted to substitute my sister for me. When I found out of his plans it was very difficult for me and I informed my husband and gave him a sign so that he should be able to distinguish me from my sister and he would not be able to substitute her for me. Afterwards I reconsidered and had compassion for my sister, fearing that she would be put to shame ... I overcame my desires and gave my sister the sign which I had given to my husband in order to have him think that Leah was actually me.'" (Midrash Eicha Ptichta 24).

Even so, the trait of jealousy remained. Moshe asks Yehoshua "are you being zealous for my sake?" (Bamidbar 11:29). Moshe Rabenu descends from Leah so he therefore does not possess the trait of "kina", while Yehoshua who descends from Rachel is sensitive to the affront to Moshe's honor. Although in this case the "kina" is clearly "leShem Shamayim" this trait which is passed down to future generations can at times manifest itself in a way which is not so meritorious.

JEALOUSY - A TRAIT GONE SOUR

Rachel's envy of her sister may have been very virtuous indeed, but this trait of envy which Rachel's descendants inherited from her did not always produce such positive results. Shaul, the first king of Israel, was from the tribe of Binyamin, son of Rachel, while his successor, David, descended from Yehuda, son of Leah. David harbored no jealousy towards Shaul, and tried to help him as best he could. Shaul, however, had tremendous envy for David and spent his entire life trying to kill him, even though David had time and again saved Shaul from the Plishtim. Even in the final war David attempted to save Shaul but the Plishtim did not allow him. David was not envious of Shaul, but Shaul was certainly envious of David, a tendency he inherited from Rachel.

Far be it for us to speak this way of our holy matriarch Rachel, Shaul too was a totally righteous person. Chazal comment on the verse "Shaul was one year old when he reigned" (Shmuel I 13:1), that he was "like a one year old who had not sampled the taste of sin" (Yoma 22b). Shaul is one of the eight "princes among men" who will lead the Jewish people in the future (see Sukkah 52b). The Gemara relates how one of the Amoraim mentioned Shaul's name and the heavens frightened him until he spoke of Shaul with the proper respect. When the Givonim mentioned "Shaul" a voice descended from heaven saying: "Hashem's chosen one" (Shmuel II 21:6). The fact that Shaul was so righteous and yet succumbed to envy shows us just how powerful and destructive envy can be.

We see that a "midda", a character trait, even when initially positively channeled, can over the generations develop into something negative. Similarly, we read the opening pasuk describing the incident with Dina and Shechem "Dina, the daughter of Leah, whom she had born to Yaakov, went out to look" (Bereishit 34:1). Chazal comment: "the daughter of Leah and not the daughter of Yaakov? But because of her 'going out' she is called 'the daughter of Leah', for Leah, too was one who would go out, as it says 'Leah went out to meet him' (Bereishit 30:16)" (Rashi citing Bereishit Rabba 80:1). Leah's "going out" was in order to perform a Mitzvah. Dina inherited this trait, yet she did not use it positively and ended up involved in the incident with Shechem.

EITHER ALL OR NOTHING

Another descendant of Rachel was Yeravam ben Nevat (from the tribe of Ephraim) and his envy led to terrible events. Chazal tell us that when Yeravam made the golden calves, the prophet showed him that his ways were wrong and Hashem showed him what was awaiting him if he would repent: "The Holy One, Blessed is He, seized Yeravam by his garment and said to him: 'return and then I, you, and the son of Yishai will stroll together in Gan Eden'" (Sanhedrin 102a). What can be better than to stroll with Hashem in Gan Eden? Should this not be what every person yearns for? This is the closest one can get to Hashem! What was Yeravam's reaction? He asks "Who will be at the head?" (ibid.) - will it be me or the son of Yishai? "Hashem replies: 'the son of Yishai will be at the head', 'if so', Yeravam says: 'I do not desire it'" (ibid.). Look at what envy can lead to! He is prepared to forfeit his entire share in the Next World rather than acknowledge that David is a more important king than himself. There is a view which states that had Yeravam agreed to repent he would in fact would have gone first in Gan Eden, for "In the place where 'baalei tshuva' stand, the completely righteous cannot stand there" (Rambam Hilchot Tshuva 7:4). Yeravam, however, wanted to hear from Hashem that he comes before David. His envy caused him to forfeit everything.

Envy here appears in a negative form. That same envy that in our matriarch Rachel was that of a righteous woman, in Yeravam is transformed into the jealousy of a wicked person. He elects to forego his place in Gan Eden and instead "merits" being counted among those who have no share in the World to Come (see Mishna Sanhedrin 90a), all because he is envious of "who will be at the head". Our Sages teach us that "envy, lust, and honor take a man out of the world" (Pirke Avot 4:21). In Yeravam's case he lost not only his share in the World to Come but he was taken out of this world as well, for we know that at a later stage his entire family was killed.

We find another example of envy involving descendants of Leah in this week's Parsha in the section telling of Yehuda's sons Er and Onan. Because Er died without any children, the Torah required his brother Onan to marry her, fulfilling the Mitzvah of "yibum" and thus continuing the name of his brother. The Torah however tells us: "but Onan knew that the seed would not be his; so it was, that whenever he would consort with his brother's wife, he would let it go to waste on the ground so as not to provide offspring for his brother" (Bereishit 38:9). His envious refusal to provide a "tikkun" for his brother's soul caused him to forego being the father of the kingdom of David and the Moshiach. Er lost the kingdom due to lust, while Onan lost it due to envy. Yehuda's test was his honor. Would he also forfeit the entire kingdom in order to save his honor? Yehuda stands up to the test and it is from him that the kingdom of David descends.

The most blatant example of envy in our Parsha is the opening incident involving Yoseph and his brothers. They accused him of being a "rodef" (lit. one who puruses them) wishing to take away from them the sanctity passed down from their forefathers as well as the Land of Israel. They saw that Avraham left this legacy only to Yitzchak and not Yishmael. By the same token, Yitzchak left this legacy for Yaakov and not Esav. They feared that Yoseph would be the only one to inherit from Yaakov and the rest of the brothers would be snubbed.

JEALOUSY REMOVES ONE FROM THE WORLD

The brothers put Yoseph on trial and judged him as a "rodef". Although their desire for sanctity made their motivation appear "leShem Shamayim", their underlying motivation was jealousy and this skewed their judgment. Had they,

G-d forbid, killed Yoseph then their jealousy would have served to remove from this world as well, for there would have been no one to sell them food during the years of hunger.

The story is told of a man who was tremendously jealous of others. One night an angel appeared to him and promised to give him whatever he wished, but on one condition "whatever I give you, I will give double that to your neighbor". The man thought and thought and finally responded "fine, poke out one of my eyes"! Envy can kill - it takes you out from this world and the Next World. Shaul should have been happy to see David succeed, for David had a tremendous love for Klal Yisrael and worked tirelessly for their sake. Shaul's envy, however, eventually brought about his downfall.

AM YISRAEL AS A UNITED WHOLE

The prophet tells us that in the future "the jealousy of Ephraim shall stop and the oppressors of Yehuda shall be cut off; Ephraim will not be jealous of Yehuda and Yehuda will not harass Ephraim" (Yeshayahu 11:13). When we realize that: "who is like Your people Israel, one nation on earth" (Divrei Hayamim I 17:21), that we are one people, then we will realize that there is no reason for jealousy. Each Jew has within him a spark of every other Jew. We are one body. If our left hand was to hurt the right hand, or our right hand was to hurt the left, there would be no one to be angry with. Is there jealousy among our limbs and organs? When there is hard work to do I use my hands, when there are distances to journey I use my feet, when there is delicious food available, I eat with my mouth. Is this justice? Is this a fair distribution of tasks? It is not the hands that work, nor the feet that walk, nor the mouth that eats. They are all part of one body, the body functions as one complete unit - IT works, walks, and eats. The body parts are specialized for carrying out their individual various tasks - they cannot be switched with each other. The entire Jewish nation is one individual, we are all intertwined. In the future there will be no jealousy because we will feel like one body.

JEALOUSY / ZEALOUSNESS FOR THE SAKE OF HEAVEN

In last week's parsha we read of another form of "kina" involving Shimon and Levi, fighting for their sister's honor. Yaakov told them that their actions were misguided, but Chazal teach us that they acted purely for the honor of heaven. Pinchas, who zealously fought for Hashem's honor was a descendant of Levi. The Torah tells us that his "kina" saved Klal Yisrael: "Pinchas son of Elazar son of Aharon the Kohen, turned back My wrath from upon the Children of Israel, when he zealously avenged My vengeance among them, so I did not consume the Children of Israel in My vengeance" (Bamidbar 25:11). There is a view that Pinchas was Eliyahu and he too zealously fought for Hashem's honor preventing the people from worshipping Avoda Zara. Although there is an opinion that Hashem was angry with Eliyahu for having gone too far, the "kina" itself was positive. His zealousness resulted in a fire descending from heaven and rainfall after three years of drought.

Generations later Matityahu, a descendant of Levi, arose. When the Greeks introduced their Avoda Zara culture into the Jewish nation, Matityahu got up and fought for Hashem's honor. Had it not been for his "kina", who knows what would have become of the Jewish nation?

Such zealousness is very praiseworthy. In the case of Pinchas there were those who claimed that he was motivated by personal considerations, for he descended from a Midianite woman as the Torah tells us "Elazar son of Aharon took for himself from the daughters of Putiel as a wife" (Shmot 6:25). I do not know whether I am permitted to say this, but one can ask where was Moshe Rabenu? Why did Pinchas who was on a lesser level than Moshe have to carry out this praiseworthy act? Chazal relate to us the disrespectful way in which Zimri spoke to Moshe "Son of Amram, is this woman forbidden or permitted? If you say that she is forbidden, who permitted to you the daughter of Jethro who is also the son of a Midianite woman?" (Sanhedrin 82a). Perhaps Moshe Rabenu was afraid that he would be motivated by personal considerations and his "kina" would not be purely "leShem Shamayim". Only "kina" that is purely for heaven's sake is permitted and commendable. Even had Moshe truly felt that he was acting "leShem Shamayim" perhaps he was worried that his actions would be misconstrued as being motivated by Zimri's insulting him. He thus feared a chillul Hashem. Pinchas should have been worried about the same problem, perhaps he would have been accused of being motivated by the Midianite in his own family lineage. Pinchas, however, was not afraid. His "leShem Shamayim" was on such a high level that he did not care what others would think.

I do not mean to take anything away from Moshe Rabenu, G-d forbid, but Pinchas' great virtue was in his having acted for heaven's sake in spite of the danger of people accusing him of doing otherwise. His sincere "leShem Shamayim" swept away all other considerations. In fact, Chazal tell us that later on the other tribes in fact did accuse Pinchas of having acted out of personal motivations. Similarly, the sincere "kina" of Shimon and Levi took precedence over any of Yaakov's suspicions of "you have discomposed me, making me odious among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanite and among the Prizi, I am few in number and should they band together and attack me, I will be annihilated I am my household" (Bereishit 34:30). Shimon and Levi were motivated purely by the honor of heaven.

Like many other traits, "kina" can be used for good and for bad. If it is for personal considerations then it is not positive, if it is for the honor of Hashem then it can save the Jewish nation from destruction.