Our parsha begins by saying that “Yaakov settled in the land of his father’s sojournings, in the land of Canaan.” The midrash (Bereishit Rabbah 84:4) on this pasuk teaches that much like Avraham engaged in the practice of converting idolaters, so did his son Yitzchak, and so too did Yitzchak’s son Yaakov. Rav Shalom Schwadron seems to explain that we learn from this that Yitzchak was the continuation of Avraham, and Yaakov was the continuation of Yitzchak, because both Yitzchak and Yaakov went in the ways of their fathers. Furthermore, he says that the Torah, by specifying that Yaakov settled in the land of his father’s sojournings which was “in the land of Canaan” is teaching us that Yaakov didn’t veer from his father’s ways and path in life in the slightest, not even with respect to the land that his father dwelled in.
While this shows how much Yaakov clung to his father’s lofty ways and path in life, Rav Schwadron contrasts this with Yitzchak’s other son, Esav, who not only abandoned his father’s dwelling place, but also his father’s ways and path in life. Rav Schwadron asks: Why, in fact, did Esav abandon his fathers ways? What caused Esav to rebel so much?
In last week’s parsha, it states: “Esav took his wives, and his sons, and his daughters, and all the members of his household—his livestock and all his animals, and all the possessions he had amassed in the land of Canaan—and went to a land because of his brother Yaakov.” It seems from here that Esav left Canaan and went to a different place to dwell “because of his brother Yaakov.” But what was it about Yaakov that seemingly prompted Esav to dwell elsewhere rather than in Canaan? Rashi explains: “‘Because of Yaakov’ [means:] Because of the contract of debt of the decree of ‘that your offspring shall be sojourners,’ (i.e., the decree of exile), which was placed upon the offspring of Yitzchak. [Esav] said, ‘I will get myself away from here. I [want to] have no portion, [neither] of the gift which has been given to him (Yitzchak), [i.e.,] this land, nor of the payment of the contract.’ And because of the embarrassment of having sold his birthright.”
At first glance, it seems that Rashi is presenting two distinct reasons why Esav left Canaan to dwell elsewhere: 1) to avoid the decree of exile and 2) out of embarrassment for having sold the bechora, birthright.
However, Rav Schwadron seems to explain that the two reasons are essentially one reason, and based on this understanding, he seems to answer his question above: The main reason why Esav left Canaan to dwell elsewhere was because of the embarrassment of having sold the bechora, and it’s this that caused him to forgo the promised land. As long as Yaakov wasn’t in Canaan, Esav’s feelings of embarrassment were dormant, but once Yaakov returned to Canaan, Esav’s embarrassment of having sold the bechora to Yaakov emerged and was overwhelming. Due to these feelings of embarrassment, Esav wished to leave Canaan and dwell elsewhere, and his justification for leaving Canaan was “because of the contract of debt of the decree of ‘that your offspring shall be sojourners,” meaning, because of his “calculation” that the promised land is not worth it if it means having to first undergo the decree of exile.
Hence, Esav left Canaan because of the embarrassment he endured once Yaakov arrived there, and his “reason” and calculation—that it’s not worth undergoing the exile for the sake of having the land—was only his attempt to excuse himself and justify his departure from there. Ultimately, because of those feelings of embarrassment, Esav not only left Canaan, but he also abandoned his father’s ways and path in life and ran away from all holiness (Lev Shalom, Vayeishev).
It can be suggested that the implication from Rav Schwadron’s insight perhaps is that if, theoretically, when Yaakov returned to Canaan, Esav would not have suffered from the embarrassment of having sold the bechora, then Esav might have actually remained in Canaan and may have not abandoned his father’s path in life. However, once he dwelled in proximity to Yaakov and would perhaps have to face him occasionally, his embarrassment of having sold the bechora to him sprung up and overwhelmed him, causing him to leave Canaan, his fathers ways and all holiness.
When Moshe Rabbeinu was close to his passing, he rebuked Bnei Yisrael. Rashi comments: “From whom did he learn [to do this]? From Yaakov, for he did not rebuke his sons except immediately before [his] death. He said, “Reuven, my son, I am telling you why I did not rebuke you all of these years. [It was] so that you should not leave me and go join up with Esav, my brother.’” Rashi continues to say that, “Because of four things we do not rebuke a person except immediately before death,” and one of those things that Rashi lists is, “so that his friend (whom he has rebuked) should not see him and be embarrassed in front of him.”
It may be suggested from this Rashi that if Moshe and Yaakov would have rebuked their audience earlier in their lives, those whom they were rebuking would have suffered from embarrassment while dwelling in their proximity and might have eventually left the proper path in life (so much so, that in Yaakov’s case, Reuven may have even joined up with Esav) and therefore, they waited until right before their passing to deliver the rebuke. In this way, their audience wouldn’t suffer the embarrassment of dwelling in their proximity on a continuous basis and the potentially negative effects of the embarrassment on their spiritual decisions.
The effects of embarrassment—how it might impede one’s spiritual growth and decisions— may also be seen from the Midrash HaGadol (Shemot 4:13) which seems to say that when Rebbe Akiva’s journey to begin learning Torah began, originally he was reluctant to go and begin learning Torah because he was concerned that they would laugh at him for being 40 years old and not knowing anything. (Ultimately, his wife succeeded in persuading him to go learn by employing a certain method which helped him overcome his concern of being mocked).
It can be suggested that this midrash perhaps implies that because of potential embarrassment, Rebbe Akiva may have been deterred from ever embarking on his Torah education endeavor and ultimately might not have ever become the great and holy Rebbe Akiva!
From all the above, we can perhaps learn how deep the feeling of embarrassment is and how it might negatively affect one’s decisions regarding one’s spiritual affairs, and thus how careful we must be to avoid embarrassing others. By being cautious in this area, we may be giving the space for others to grow spiritually and succeed in their spiritual endeavors.
Binyamin is a graduate of Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan, and Wurzweiler School of Social Work.
