Appeasement in its time

(1) Looking up, Jacob saw Esau coming, with a retinue*retinue See note at 32.7. of four hundred. He divided the children*children Heb. yeladim, referring here only to Jacob’s sons (see 32.23) in anticipation of their becoming the progenitors of Israel’s tribes; and so through v. 14. among Leah, Rachel, and the two maids, (2) putting the maids and their children first, Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last. (3) He himself went on ahead and bowed low to the ground seven times until he was near his brother. (4) Esau ran to greet him. He embraced him and, falling on his neck, he kissed him; and they wept. (5) Looking about, he saw the women and the children. “Who,” he asked, “are these with you?” He answered, “The children with whom God has favored your servant.” (6) Then the maids, with their children, came forward and bowed low; (7) next Leah, with her children, came forward and bowed low; and last, Joseph and Rachel came forward and bowed low. (8) And he asked, “What do you mean by all this company which I have met?” He answered, “To gain my lord’s favor.” (9) Esau said, “I have enough, my brother; let what you have remain yours.” (10) But Jacob said, “No, I pray you; if you would do me this favor, accept from me this gift; for to see your face is like seeing the face of God, and you have received me favorably. (11) Please accept my present which has been brought to you, for God has favored me and I have plenty.” And when he urged him, he accepted. (12) And [Esau] said, “Let us start on our journey, and I will proceed at your pace.”

אכפרה פניו I WILL APPEASE HIM — I will remove his anger. Similarly, (Isaiah 28:18) "and your covenant with death shall be annulled (וכפר)”; (Isaiah 47:11) “Thou shalt not be able to put it away (וכפרה”. I am of the opinion that wherever the verb כפר is used in association with iniquity and sin and in association with anger (פנים), it always signifies wiping away, removing. It is an Aramaic expression occurring frequently in the Talmud: “He wiped his hand off (כפר ידיה)”, and (Gittin 56a) ‘‘he wants to wipe (לכפורי) his hands off on this man” (i.e. he desires to put the responsibility upon me). In Biblical Hebrew, also, the bowls of the Sanctuary are called, (Ezra 1:10) "כפורי of gold” — and they are so called because the priest wiped his hands on them — on the rim of the bowl (Zevachim 93b).

At the moment that Jacob called Esau “my lord,” the Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘You abased yourself and called him “my lord” eight times. As you live, I will establish eight kings from his descendants before your descendants,’ as it is stated: “These are the kings who reigned [in the land of Edom, before the reign of a king for the children of Israel]” (Genesis 36:31).

(1) AND THOU SHALT DO THAT WHICH IS RIGHT AND GOOD IN THE SIGHT OF THE ETERNAL. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture the verse says, “Keep the commandments of G-d, His testimonies, and His statutes, and, in observing them, intend to do what is right and good in His sight only.” And [the expression in the verse before us] that it may be well with thee is a promise, stating that, when you will do that which is good in His eyes, it will be well with you, for G-d does good unto the good, and to them that are upright in their hearts.311Psalms 125:4.

Our Rabbis have a beautiful Midrash on this verse. They have said:312Mentioned in Rashi. See Baba Kamma 100 a. “[That which is right and good] refers to a compromise and going beyond the requirement of the letter of the law.”313Literally: “within the line of justice,” or the application of the dictates of conscience beyond the strict line of the law. The intent of this is as follows: At first he [Moses] stated that you are to keep His statutes and His testimonies which He commanded you, and now he is stating that even where He has not commanded you, give thought, as well, to do what is good and right in His eyes, for He loves the good and the right.

Now this is a great principle, for it is impossible to mention in the Torah all aspects of man’s conduct with his neighbors and friends, and all his various transactions, and the ordinances of all societies and countries. But since He mentioned many of them — such as, Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer;314Leviticus 19:16. Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge;315Ibid., Verse 18. neither shalt thou stand idly by the blood of thy neighbor;314Leviticus 19:16. Thou shalt not curse the deaf;316Ibid., Verse 15. Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head317Ibid., Verse 32. and the like — he reverted to state in a general way that, in all matters, one should do what is good and right, including even compromise and, going beyond the requirements of the law.313Literally: “within the line of justice,” or the application of the dictates of conscience beyond the strict line of the law. Other examples are the Rabbis’ ordinances concerning the prerogative of a neighbor,318Baba Metzia 108 a. This is the right of pre-emption — that a neighbor has the primary right to purchase an adjoining property before, or in preference, to others. and even what they said [concerning the desirability] that one’s youthful reputation be unblemished,319Taanith 16 b. This is given as one of the requirements of the deputy, who leads the congregation in prayer. and that one’s conversation with people be pleasant. Thus [a person must seek to refine his behavior] in every form of activity, until he is worthy of being called “good and upright.”

Once the verdict of the judgment has been issued, it is not permitted for you to mediate a dispute.

The Gemara presents a mnemonic device alluding to the names of tanna’im in the coming discussion: Samekh, reish, mem, shin; beit, nun, kuf, shin. The Tosefta cites several statements of tanna’im related to compromise and the term botze’a.

Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, says: It is prohibited to mediate a dispute; and anyone who mediates [habotze’a] a dispute is a sinner; and anyone who blesses the mediator is cursing God. And of this, it is stated: “And the covetous [botze’a] blesses himself, though he despises the Lord” (Psalms 10:3). Rather, the judge must assure that the true judgment will prevail at all costs and metaphorically pierce the mountain, as it is stated: “For the judgment is God’s” (Deuteronomy 1:17). And similarly, Moses would say: Let the judgment pierce the mountain. But by contrast, Aaron, whose role was not that of a judge, was a lover of peace and a pursuer of peace, and he would apply peace between one person and the other, as it is stated: “The law of truth was in his mouth, and unrighteousness was not found in his lips; he walked with Me in peace and uprightness, and turned many away from iniquity” (Malachi 2:6). The Tosefta cites several other interpretations of the above-mentioned verse from Psalms.

Rabbi Eliezer says: If one stole a se’a of wheat and ground it and baked it and separated ḥalla from it, i.e., separated the portion of the dough that must be given to the priests, how can he possibly recite the blessing on the mitzva of ḥalla? He is not blessing; rather, he is cursing God. And of this offense it is stated: “And the covetous [uvotze’a] blesses himself, though he despises the Lord,” interpreted homiletically as: And whoever blesses upon breaking [botze’a] the bread despises the Lord. Rabbi Meir says: The term botze’a employed in that verse was stated only with regard to Judah, as it is stated: “And Judah said to his brothers: What profit [betza] is it if we slay our brother and conceal his blood? Come, and let us sell him to the Ishmaelites” (Genesis 37:26–27). And consequently, anyone who blesses Judah for this act is cursing God, and of this it is stated: “And the covetous [uvotze’a] blesses himself, though he despises the Lord,” interpreted homiletically as: “And whoever blesses the profiteer [botze’a] despises the Lord.”

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa says: It is a mitzva to mediate a dispute, as it is stated: “Execute the judgment of truth and peace in your gates” (Zechariah 8:16). Is it not that in the place where there is strict judgment there is no true peace, and in a place where there is true peace, there is no strict judgment? Rather, which is the judgment that has peace within it? You must say: This is mediation, as both sides are satisfied with the result.

And similarly, with regard to David, it says: “And David executed justice and charity to all his people” (II Samuel 8:15). And is it not that wherever there is strict justice, there is no charity, and wherever there is charity, there is no strict justice? Rather, which is the justice that has within it charity? You must say: This is mediation.

(1) If two people came to court holding a garment, and this one, the first litigant, says: I found it, and that one, the second litigant, says: I found it; this one says: All of it is mine, and that one says: All of it is mine; how does the court adjudicate this case? This one takes an oath that he does not have ownership of less than half of it, and that one takes an oath that he does not have ownership of less than half of it, and they divide it. If this one says: All of it is mine, and that one says: Half of it is mine, since they both agree that half of the cloak belongs to one of them, the conflict between them is only about the other half. Therefore, the one who says: All of it is mine, takes an oath that he does not have ownership of less than three parts, i.e., three-fourths, of it, and the one who says: Half of it is mine, takes an oath that he does not have ownership of less than one-quarter of it. This one takes three parts, and that one takes one-quarter.