FOR VAYEITZEI
BALANCING FATHER, MOTHER, AND CHILD
One of my brothers-in-law called me this week to share and discuss an interesting dilemma. He had placed a somewhat costly Chanukah order with a friend in honor of the upcoming festival. The material was shipped through a well-known company in the United States.
A few days later, the package was nowhere to be found. My brother-in-law checked the tracking number on the website. It was recorded there that the package had, indeed, been delivered to his house a couple of days before. He had willingly chosen the option for the package to be delivered without a signature, so it was, therefore, not delivered into someone’s hand.
But the package was nowhere to be found.
He called his buddy who had sent out the package. He was hoping that the sender would have some idea. As expected, the friend had completed and fulfilled his part of the deal. It was now out of his hands.
The discussion between my brother-in-law and me was regarding responsibility: Can he expect the sender to assume any form of obligation for this disappeared package?
We both concluded that it would be impossible for the sender to be held liable. He had done his job by following all instructions given to him. In Jewish law (and according to common sense), once a seller follows instructions by the buyer, responsibility is no longer in the seller’s hands. The package’s arrival at the person’s yard is as though it were delivered into the receiver’s hands.
After hanging up the phone, my brother-in-law called me back within two minutes. He had found the package. It had somehow made its way beneath a trash can… End of problem.
This was an interesting, even fun dilemma to ponder. Discussing damages and responsibilities elicits getting down to the nitty-gritty. As with all matters pertaining to solving law, one must consider every detail and issue. The outcome and verdict is predicated on every single detail of what had transpired. It has to be the full scenario, and no details may be ignored. It is similar to a building, for instance: every single detail is relevant, even critical, to the construction and its continued existence.
At the same time, once all the details are in place and the law – or building – are completed, focusing on the details is no longer necessary for a person following the law or entering the building. Once the law and building are in place, the fact has been established. Unless one is studying the law, or the construction of the building, the details are basically unnecessary.
It is not so with other matters. When a person is, say, listening to a song, one connects and is moved by its flow. Unless one is studying the tune, one could easily enjoy the song due to some, but not all, details within it. This is because the heart is attracted to, and moved by, a specific element of the tune. The world of love is another example. Once people are truly in love, the love is then complete. Partners tend to overlook some details and focus on the overall feelings, which can overwhelm some of the details.
These two methods of life experience provide clarification on the contrast between the patriarchs – Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – and the sons of Jacob, later to become the tribes of Israel, whose births are recorded in this week’s Torah portion, “Vayeitzei.”
Abraham is introduced in the Torah after his marriage. Isaac, though, was miraculously born to Abraham and Sarah very late in life. His name, “Yitzchak,” means joy. This name was chosen by the Almighty, who instructed Abraham to call him by that name. The Torah relates that it was Abraham who called him by this name (B’raishis (Genesis) 21:3). Why this name was chosen should be obvious, as his birth generated such immense joy. The Torah, though, does not provide any reason for this name. The same is with the name Jacob. The name “Yaakov” means heel. It should be obvious why this name was chosen, since Jacob was born while holding onto his twin brother’s heel. The Torah, though, does not provide any reason for this name. Here, too, it was his father who called him by this name (25:26).
It is quite different, though, with the sons of Jacob. When the first son is born, it was his mother who named him “Reuben”, “because she said, ‘for G-d has seen (“Reu.” “Ben” means son) my affliction, since now my husband will love me.’” (29:32.) It was the same with the second son, Simeon. His mother named him, “since G-d has heard (Shomah).” (29:33.) And so it continues with all of Jacob’s sons and daughter, Dinah: the Torah records that each was named by his mother, and the meaning behind the name is also provided.
The contrast between the patriarchs – Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – and the twelve sons of Jacob, provides an important insight and lesson. The patriarchs, as the name suggests, are the Fathers of Judaism. Offspring must have a father; fathers have a choice whether to have children and how many to have. As such, fathers (including mothers), represent the most critical elements in life. Children, on the other hand are diverse and even contrasting from one another. The same parents can produce children that look differently, that think differently, and that behave differently.
In other words, fathers represents those complete institutions in life – such as the law and building examples mentioned previously – whose details, once they are set, do not continue to play a critical role. They operate in the general theme. This is why the Torah does not provide the reason behind the names pf the patriarchs. The details are not that relevant.
The sons of Jacob, the eventual heads of the tribes, represent the diversity, the details among people. Each one of the tribes represented a different detail (Reuben is seeing, Simeon is hearing, and so forth). Here, detail is very relevant. It is for this reason the Torah provides the reasoning behind their names. This is also the reason they were named by their mothers: By nature, females tend to be more attuned to the each individual detail.
People are inclined to worry about the malaises of the world, and how they change the world for the good. Those “father-like” concerns depend on the details: Change begins with each individual. It is all in the details. On the other hand, some may be motivated to focus only on the detail of themselves. That would be selfish. It is all about recognizing the balance of community verses the individual.
Practically speaking, if everyone would be devoted to their family’s needs, while keeping an eye on what is needed from them in the wider community, the world becomes a better place.
SUMMARY: Fathers, mothers, and children, and their names, provide insight into a productive and potentially world-changing life.