A Tale of Two Brothers

What sometimes seems to be an insignificant detail, sometimes may just turn out to be a hidden porthole to a much deeper level of understanding. Such a situation seems to exist with reference to Rebecca's command to her son Jacob to fetch TWO goats from the flock to bring to his father.

As you will recall, this was preparatory to Isaac's bestowing of the Patriarchal blessing, with all of its "chosen people" aura. The intended recipient of this benediction-legacy was to be Esav. Isaac had just send Esav to go to the fields and bring back some venison for him. Then he would give him the patriarchal blessing. Rebecca, however, had other plans. She thus orchestrated the deception that enabled Jacob to become the true bearer of the torch of Abraham and Isaac.

Now here is the detail. Rashi, the medieval commentator, explains that one of the goats was to be Isaac's Paschal lamb (as in Passover). This is very strange. Why was Isaac eating a Paschal lamb, when the events that imbued that sacrifice with meaning were still in the distant future? And further, we don't find that Esav was charged by his father to bring a second animal for a Passover sacrifice! Why did Rebecca tell Jacob to bring back two when Isaac had only asked Esav for one?

So here is what this passage says to me. I don't believe that Isaac was actually fulfilling the Passover offering (although we know from the Medrashim that the Patriarchs and Matriarchs observed the as-yet-ungiven Torah). Rather, this is the Medrash's way of showing us why Rebecca saw the absolute necessity of Jacob, and not Esav, receiving the blessing.

Firstly, let us quickly examine the message of the Paschal lamb. This was the sacrifice that the Israelites brought on the night of the slaying of the Egyptian firstborn. As a result of this sacrifice, God passed over the houses of the Israelites and delivered them from Egypt. The paschal lamb is a vehicle to underscore the fundamental difference between Egyptian society and Israelite society. Specifically, the Egyptians worshipped the present, and the Israelites worshipped the future. The Egyptians sanctified cows, lambs and the like, because they symbolized prosperity. At the same time, they were known to sacrifice their children to appease the gods if the present wasn't so great. Anything, even the future, was offered up to protect the present.

The Israelites were just the opposite. Sanctify the firstborn, the children, because they are the future. Sacrifice the animals, because they are only the present. We sacrifice the todays to insure great tomorrows, and thus we are eternal.

This was the difference between Esav and Jacob. You will recall, Esav sold the birthright, the future, for a bowl of soup. He had come back from the fields, tired, and saw Jacob preparing a bowl of soup. Jacob was prepared to give him some if he would sell him his birthright, allowing Jacob to be considered the legal firstborn. In Esav's words, "I am going to die, of what use is the birthright to me?"

Esav has nothing in common with the Passover offering. But Jacob, who recognized the need to devote one's life for building a Godly future of faith and morality, immediately demanded the birthright as his payment for the soup. To Jacob, it was the only thing that was worth anything.

This was what Rebecca saw as well, and that, I believe, is what Rashi is trying to tell us. Where we are today is much less important than where we are headed. The true blessing is on those that plant roots today for future generations to grow from.