A few weeks ago, the weekly Torah portion to be read in synagogues across the country dealt with the story of Jacob & Esau. Most of us know this story as a tale of deception—Rachel & Jacob plotting to fool Isaac into giving the eldest son’s blessing (which should have gone to Esau) instead to Jacob. But the full story gives even more insight into negotiation.
The Torah states that Isaac loves Esau while Rebecca loves Jacob (which we already know is a recipe for trouble.) There are numerous rabbinic explanations and understandings for this apparent favoritism; unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to help the relationship between the two brothers. The brothers, as we know, are quite different from one another.
One day, Esau comes from the fields and feels faint. He asks Jacob to give him the lentil stew that Jacob is cooking. Jacob offers to sell him some stew for Esau’s birthright (the blessing given to the first-born son.) Esau, apparently ravenous, impulsively swears to give his birthright to Jacob for this food. Then, later in the story, we witness the scheme whereby Jacob and Rebecca deceive Isaac into giving Esau’s blessing of the firstborn to Jacob instead. Esau is enraged over the loss of his birthright and threatens to kill Jacob. After all, can you blame him? Jacob—and Rebecca too—are incredibly manipulative and deceitful, taking advantage of Esau’s vulnerability.
But is Esau free of responsibility? He was weak with hunger and exhaustion when he sold his birthright, but it was his decision. Did Esau make a bargain he should be forced to keep? Was Jacob’s deception just enforcement? Negotiation scholars (myself included) often have trouble writing about power dynamics and unfair or unbalanced bargains. Soup for birthright? Are you kidding me? Yet they were adults—perhaps Esau knew Jacob would be the better leader?
So what do we think about Esau and Jacob? Hold Esau to his deal (and therefore allow Jacob a bit of deception to enforce) or acknowledge a bad deal in the heat of the moment. I would of course preferred they all talk about their family differences rather than deceive but the Torah does not work that way.
By the way, Jacob and Esau reconcile a few chapters later demonstrating the biological human tendency to forgive, but that’s for another posting.
One is reminded of Robert Nozick’s “Drowning Case” from his article Coercion. But instead of drowning, Esau is dying. And only one thing can save him. Delicious soup. Morally speaking, one looks to the norms of society (is Jacob morally obligated to rescue), range of Esau’s options (was it truly “soup or die”?), and the tastiness of the stew.
I know in my line of work, I often employ the deontological-utilitarian-scrumptiousness analysis.