Jacob and Esau: Reconciliation? Or Rejection?

I gave a version of the following drash this morning at Temple Shaaray Tefila.

===

This week’s Torah portion contains the famous reunion between Jacob and Esau. I very intentionally choose to label this encounter a reunion, because the word reunion makes no assumption—positive or negative—as to the nature of their encounter. Our traditional understanding of the text might cause us to assume that their meeting is a reconciliation, a peace offering between these estranged twins. But a more careful examination of the text reveals more subtle dynamics at play. A different reading of the text might suggest that their meeting is in fact a rejection, a agreement not to kill one another, but without any subsiding of their long-established rivalry. This is the very nature of a reunion—its outcome cannot be predicted in advance. Prior to the actual moment of meeting, there’s a looming ambiguity as to whether this reunion will constitute a reconciliation or a rejection.

The word panim—Hebrew for “face”—appears repeatedly in this week’s Torah portion. And coming “face-to-face” is exactly what happens in a reunion. The Hebrew word panim is in the plural form—it ends with the yod-mem suffix that indicates the masculine-plural. And a plural form—an ambiguity, an uncertainty—reflects perfectly the uncertainty of Jacob and Esau’s reunion. Which of these plural options will they experience: a reconciliation, or a rejection?

Throughout the Torah, we find examples of how face-to-face meetings can result in either a reconciliation or a rejection. On the one hand, take the famous verse from the Priestly Benediction: “May the light of God’s face shine upon you and grant you peace” (Num. 6:26). This face-to-face meeting clearly indicates a positive encounter—a reconciliation. In a modern idiom, we might call this “face-time” or “dialoguing.” On the other hand, take the famous verse in which God responds to Moses’s plea to see God’s face firsthand: “You cannot see My face, for no person sees God and lives” (Ex. 33:20). This face-to-face meeting clearly indicates a negative encounter—a rejection. In a modern idiom, we might call this a “faceoff” or “going nose to nose.”

In the context of this week’s parshah, we see both types of face-to-face encounters. Upon seeing his brother Esau for the first time in years, Jacob exclaims: “Seeing your face is like seeing the face of God” (Gen. 33:10). Jacob seems to be pleased upon seeing Esau’s face. It provides him joy. This expression seems to represent a reconciliation.

But Jacob also experiences a face-to-face encounter that feels more like a rejection. In the previous chapter, Jacob had wrestled with a mysterious man in the night and had had his name changed from Yaakov to Yisrael. In the morning, Jacob/Israel renames the place in which he wrestled “Peniel,” meaning “I have seen the face of God.” Although Jacob was victorious in his wrestling, he leaves that struggle wounded, his hip having been dislocated by his mysterious aggressor. Jacob recognizes the danger inherent in a face-to-face encounter, specifically in a face-to-face encounter with God, and says “I have seen the face of God, and yet my life is spared” (Gen. 32:31).

So we see that like the word panim, which is in the plural form, the prospect of a face-to-face encounter holds the possibility for multiple outcomes—reconciliation, or rejection.

How does Jacob do at holding this ambiguity? Is he able to embrace the uncertainty inherent in his reunion with Esau?

For evidence, let’s look at another place in this week’s parashah in which the word panim appears many times. It’s the day before Jacob is to meet Esau, and he sends “ahead” of him (lifnei) his servants, all the wealth he has amassed, his sons, and his wives—in an effort, it seems, to impress or butter-up Esau before their meeting. The word lifnei (“before, ahead of”) is very closely related to the word panim (“face.”) The one key difference is that lifnei doesn’t include the final mem, the very letter that makes panim a plural word. It seems that rather than embrace the plurality of outcomes inherent in their face-to-face meeting (panim—plural), Jacob chooses to send ahead of himself (lifnei—singular) gifts to Esau in order to affect the outcome.

Jacob can’t hold the plurality of outcomes, and so he disregards the plurality (the mem of panim) in order to try and affect the outcome in advance (lifnei). This disregarded letter mem has the value (in the system of Gematria) of 40. Forty, in Jewish tradition, is a perfect round number. It is the number of days during which Moses received the Revelation. It is the number of days of the Flood. It represents the World to Come. (There are 39 [“forty minus one,” in the language of the Mishnah] categories of forbidden work on Shabbat. The World to Come will be an even more perfected vision of Shabbat, in which all 39 categories will be condensed into a fortieth category, creating complete harmony and perfect rest.) In dropping the plurality of outcomes (panim)—and hoping instead to affect the outcome in advance (lifnei)—Jacob gives up the letter mem. Jacob gives up the perfect number 40. Jacob gives up Revelation, the cleansing waters of the Flood, and the World to Come.

How does it work out in the end? Although we tend to think that Jacob and Esau’s meeting is a reconciliation (after all, they don’t kill each other, as Esau had threatened at their last encounter) a closer look brings this assumption into question. While they don’t kill each other, they also don’t seem to fully forgive one another. They meet and part ways in the span of just 13 verses. Each brother encourages the other to accept gifts from him, and each brother refuses. Moreover, if you take a careful look at the Hebrew text in the first moment of reunion (Gen. 33:4), you’ll find the word vayishakeihu with six little asterisks written above it. These asterisks indicate the possibility of a textual error, an uncertainty as to the proper vocalization (placement of vowels) of this Hebrew word. The word vayishakeihu is typically translated as: Esau “kissed (nashak)” Jacob. But with different vowels placed underneath it, we could just as easily translate the word to mean: Esau “weapon-ed (neshek)” Jacob. Rashi (citing Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 76:2) says that Esau’s kiss may not have been genuine—that in fact, rather than kissing Jacob, he may have bitten him.

I’d like to suggest that had Jacob not tried to affect the outcome of this encounter beforehand (lifnei)—had he instead embraced the plurality (panim) of possible outcomes—maybe there wouldn’t be those pesky asterisks over the word vayishakeihu. Maybe the brothers wouldn’t have again parted ways after only 13 verses. Maybe the brothers would have accepted one another’s gifts. Then, perhaps, we could with certainty call this reunion a reconciliation and not a rejection.

Ambiguity and uncertainty (panim) abound in our lives. Whether it’s reuniting with a long lost family member, meeting a new acquaintance, setting out on any creative endeavor, giving a presentation to a group, or even just stepping outside the doors of your house—there’s no situation we can face in which we’ll know the outcome in advance. My wish for all of us is that we work to embrace ambiguity and uncertainty in our lives, and focus less on affecting outcomes in advance. Truly then will we be worthy of the name Yisrael—one who struggles with life’s uncertainty.