Our mother Rivkah suffered when she was pregnant with our father Ya’akov and his twin brother Eisav:
“Yitzchak prayed to Hashem in the presence of his wife - because she was barren - and Hashem answered him, and Rivkah his wife conceived. The sons struggled within her, and she said: If so, why am I thus? - And she went to enquire of Hashem. And Hashem said to her: Two peoples are in your womb, and two nations will separate from your innards; one nation will be stronger than the one nation, and the greater will serve the younger" (Genesis 25:21-23).
This deceptively simple narrative contains much that is ambiguous and puzzling.
Let us start with the Torah’s statement that “the sons struggled within her". The Hebrew word which we have translated here as “struggled" is וַיִּתְרֹצֲצוּ - an unusual verb-form, occurring nowhere else anywhere in the Tanach.
Targum Onkelos, Targum Yonatan, and Targum Yerushalmi all render the verb וַיִּתְרֹצֲצוּ into Aramaic using the root דחק, (Onkelos: וְדַחֲקִין; Yonatan: וְאַדְחִיקוּ; Yerushalmi: וְאַדְחַקוּ) connoting approximately “squeeze", “crowd", “pressure", “emergency" - hence, the sons were squeezing against each other, each one trying to crowd out his twin in his haste to emerge (first?) from his mother’s womb.
Rashi, the Rashbam, the Radak, and the Ibn Ezra all derive the verb וַיִּתְרֹצֲצוּ from the root רוץ, “run". This understanding is similar to the Targumim: each son was in a hurry to be born, each son “running" to emerge from Rivkah’s womb.
The Midrash (Bereishit Rabbah 63:6) cites two interpretations of the verb וַיִּתְרֹצֲצוּ:
Rabbi Yochanan said: Each one ran to kill the other. According to the Midrashic commentator Rada"l (Rabbi David Luria, White Russia, 1798-1855), Rabbi Yochanan interprets the verb וַיִּתְרֹצֲצוּ to be a cognate both of רוץ (run) and of רצוץ (smash to pieces).
Reish Lakish (Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish) said: Each one permitted what the other one forbade: Reish Lakish interpreted מִתְרוֹצֵץ as being a portmanteau of מַתִּיר צִיוּוּיוֹ, “permitting his decree".
The Midrash Lekach Tov cites the same opinions, and adds more details:
“‘The sons struggled’ - they were debating inside the womb...which is an omen for all the generations. Each one ran to kill the other, according to Rabbi Yochanan. And Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: Each one permitted what the other one forbade. What for example? - One forbade [work] on Shabbat, the other forbade [work] on Sunday; the one forbade pig-meat, the other permitted it. This is the meaning of וַיִּתְרֹצֲצוּ - it is [a portmanteau of] two words, וְיַתִּר צִיוּוּיוֹ (he permitted what he forbade)".
This is very intriguing, because it is a clear reference to Eisav as the progenitor of Christianity: Ya’akov forbade work on Shabbat, and his twin brother Eisav forbade work on Sunday; Ya’akov forbade pig-meat, and his twin brother Eisav permitted it.
And G-d’s explanation to Rivkah of what was happening is also deceptively simple: “Two peoples are in your womb, and two nations will separate from your innards; one nation will be stronger than the one nation, and the greater will serve the younger".
Obviously these two nations are Israel and Eisav, Israel and Rome, Jewish and Christian civilisations.
Does this mean that these two great civilisations were pre-destined to eternal conflict? Could there never be peace between them? Can Israel and Rome, meaning Judaism and Western civilisation, coexist in harmony?
The Torah gives us some tiny, subtle hints of what the future can hold.
“Two peoples are in your womb", said G-d, and there is a peculiarity here in the text: “peoples" is written here as גיים but read as גוים. That is to say, the כְּתִיב (written form) has a yud, while the קְרִי (the spoken form) is read as though written with a vav.
What does the כְּתִיב, the written form, גיֹיִם instead of גוֹיִם, connote?
Says the Talmud:
“Do not read גוֹיִם (peoples), but rather גֵיּיִם (proud ones). Rav Yehudah [1] cited Rav [2] as saying: These are Antoninus and Rabbi Yehudah" (Berachot 57b).
Antoninus was a Roman emperor who had a particularly warm and friendly and mutually-respectful relationship with Rabbi Yehudah the Nasi (“Prince", meaning Head of the Sanhedrin). To give just one of countless examples of the esteem in which Antoninus is held:
“‘Your Kohanim [Priests] will don righteousness, and Your devout ones will sing joyfully’ (Psalms 132:9) - ‘Your Kohanim’ refers to the Righteous among the Nations who are G-d’s Kohanim in this world, like Antoninus and his colleagues" (Yalkut Shimoni, Isaiah 429).
Now it is not clear just who Antoninus really was.
The two Roman Emperors named Antoninus who were chronologically closest to Rabbi Yehudah the Nasi were Antoninus Pius and Elagabalus (often called Heliogabalus, incorporating Helios, the Greek god of the sun, into his name), who took the name Marcus Aurelius Antoninus upon becoming Emperor.
However Antoninus Pius died in 161 C.E. after reigning for 23 years, when Rabbi Yehudah the Nasi was only about 26; and Marcus Aurelius Antoninus began his reign in 218, about a year after Rabbi Yehudah the Nasi died.
Not only do neither of these Roman Emperors fit chronologically, but also their proclivity for idolatry and sexual deviance would preclude them both from being recognised as חֲסִידֵי אֻמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם, the Righteous among the Nations of the world.
So it is likelier that our Sages took the name “Antoninus" more as a generic Latin name, implying that among the Romans there were genuine tzaddikim.
Now this is intriguing, because Esau became almost the epitome of evil, an evil which is compounded by his illustrious parentage:
“An evil person dwelt between two tzaddikim without learning from their deeds…this is Esau" (Yoma 38b), “who grew up between two tzaddikim, between Isaac and Rebecca, and did not act according to their deeds" (Sifrei Bamidbar, Pinchas 133).
In Midrashic homilies, the pig came to represent Rome (vide Bereishit Rabbah 65:1, Shemot Rabbah 35:5, Vayikra Rabbah 13:5, Avot de-Rabbi Natan 43:3 et al.).
Now this simile carries two connotations - the one negative, the other positive.
The first is that the pig represents the Roman Empire because of its hypocrisy:
The pig is the sole animal which has cloven hoofs but does not chew the cud. When it lies down, it stretches its feet out in front of itself, as if displaying its purity to the world. What makes it impure is its internal digestive system: it doesn’t chew the cud.
Similarly with Rome: what the Roman Empire presented to the world was its magnificent architecture, its impressive systems of transportation, roads, viaducts, aqueducts, bridges, warm baths, heating systems for its houses, its art, its culture, and so forth.
But what made Rome impure was its internal corruption and filth: its idolatry, its blood-sports, its mass slaughter of people and animals for entertainment, its sexual debauchery…the list goes on and on.
But the second connotation is far more positive. The Hebrew for “pig" is חֲזִיר, from the root חזר, meaning “return" or “repent". Hence the Midrash asks: “Why is it called חֲזִיר [chazir]? - Because in the future time to come, it will restore [לְהַחֲזִיר] Kingship to its rightful owner" (Kohelet Rabbah 1:1).
Thus the Ohr ha-Chayim (Rabbi Chayim ben Atar, Morocco and Israel, 1696-1743) specifies that in the future time to come, the pig will return (repent) to becoming kosher (commentary to Leviticus 11:7).
Now clearly the physiology of the pig won’t change in the days of Mashiach, so this does not mean that the pig will literally become kosher. It is rather a homiletic way of expressing the idea that Eisav, represented by the pig, will repent and become the Tzadik that he always had the potential to become.
I find support for this in the comment of the Moshav Z’keinim (commentary to Leviticus 11:7) that the gematria (numerical value) of וְאֶת־הַחֲזִיר (and the pig) is 637, equal to שֵׂעִיר וֶאֱדוֹם (Seir and Edom) - the two nations which descend from Eisav.
The Haftarah for Parashat Toldot is the beginning of Malachi’s prophetic vision (Malachi 1:1-2:7), contrasting Ya’akov and his descendants and their destiny with Eisav and his descendants and their destiny.
This is of course eminently apposite to the Parashah, which records the rivalry and hostility between the two twin brothers, beginning while they were yet in their mother’s womb.
But the Ba’al ha-Turim (Rabbi Ya’akov ben Asher, Germany and Spain, c.1275-1343) finds an additional allusion:
In his commentary to Exodus 36:7, he notes that the word דַיָּם (it sufficed them, or enough for them) occurs just three times in the Tanach:
The first time is in in the construction of the Mishkan (Tabernacle) and its accoutrements at Mount Sinai, when the people responded so generously and so swiftly to Moshe’s call to donate that “the work sufficed them (דַיָּם) for all the work that had to be done - and there was left over" (Exodus 36:7).
The second time is in one of Jeremiah’s many prophecies of the downfall of Edom (Eisav): “If grape-harvesters would come to you, would they not leave behind the gleanings? If thieves in the night, would they even damage after taking enough for themselves (דַיָּם)?" (Jeremiah 49:9).
And the third time is in Obadiah’s prophecy of Edom’s downfall: “If thieves would have come to you, even violent robbers by night, even if you were completely alone, would they not steal only enough for themselves (דַיָּם)?! If grape-harvesters would come to you, would they not leave behind the gleanings?" (Obadiah 1:5).
Jeremiah and Obadiah use the same imagery when castigating Edom: thieves, robbers, even violent plunderers steal what they want until they have enough for themselves - and then they leave.
Eisav/Edom has such vicious blood-lust and hatred of Ya’akov/Israel that even after plundering what he wants, he then destroys and murders solely for the savage joy of destruction and blood-lust.
And the Ba’al ha-Turim notes that this is the difference between the two twin brothers:
Ya’akov/Israel donates for the Mishkan, for sanctity, for our connexion with G-d, and even after satisfying all the Mishkan’s needs he continues to give.
Eisav/Edom, by contrast, rapes and pillages and murders, and even after satisfying all his needs, he continues to destroy.
And in this week’s Haftarah, says the Ba’al ha-Turim, the Prophet Malachi details Eisav/Edom’s measure-for-measure punishment for his untrammelled evil:
“When Edom said, Even though we have become impoverished we will yet return and rebuild our ruins - then Hashem, Master of Legions, said: They will build, and I will destroy! They will call them the boundary of evil, and the nation with whom Hashem is furious forever" (Malachi 1:4).
The Radak (Rabbi David Kimchi, France, 1160-1235) explains this to mean: “The entire world will call their land the boundary of evil, because it was destroyed for eternity because of the evil of its inhabitants".
In every generation we have seen the savage joy of those who exult in evil. And we are still reeling from the shock of its most recent and most naked incarnation - this time from Ishmael, the most savage and sadistic of murderers and torturers, not just exulting in their bloodlust but proudly displaying it, using the most modern technology to broadcast their savagery to the entire world.
Parashat Toldot concludes with Eisav marrying Machalat, daughter of Ishmael (Genesis 28:9). The fusion of Ishmael and Eisav is the most dangerous and destructive force that can be unleashed against Israel…as we see in our present generation.
But it doesn’t have to be. Eisav has the free-will to separate himself from Ishmael, to return and repent (לַחֲזוֹר), to become the Tzadik that he has the potential to be.
The choice is Eisav’s; the consequences as well.
Endnotes
[1] Rav Yehudah, not to be confused with Rabbi Yehudah the Nasi (Head of the Sanhedrin), who redacted the Mishnah. Rav Yehudah was the founder and Rosh Yeshivah of the great Yeshivah in Pumbedita in Babylon, which lasted more than 800 years, until the end of the era of the Ge’onim. The Talmud (Kiddushin 72b) records that he was born the same day that Rabbi Yehudah died.
[2] Rav was a first-generation Babylonian Amora, who died in 4006 (246 C.E.). His name was Abba, known as רַב אַבָּא אֲרִיכָא (Rav Abba the Tall). He was Rav Yehuda’s teacher and mentor (Kiddushin 81a).