The conflict between brothers is a recurring theme in the Torah. It starts with Cain and Hevel. The consequence of that conflict was murder. But from Avraham onwards there are almost constant sibling rivalries.

In the case of Yitzchak and Yishmael the rivalry begins with the mothers, but continues as Yishmael makes fun of Yitzchak. Despite everything that happens, they are reconciled in the end.

The conflict between Yaakov and Esav begins in the womb and continues throughout their lives, despite a kind of reconciliation when Yaakov returns from Lavan. Of course, in this case the parents, themselves, were split, favoring different children. So in both cases you could argue that the parents played a part in creating or perpetuating the conflict.

This is certainly so with Yaakov's children. You might have thought he would have seen the negative effects of favoritism, having suffered from it himself. But he had shown his favoritism from the start, in his preference for wives. He showed it again in the way he divided his camp before facing down Esav. Brotherly trouble emerged with the maverick actions of Shimon and Levy over Shechem and Dina, and then comes the Yosef saga.

Yosef was his father's favorite, as Esav was. It seems that this favoritism was blind in Yitzchak's case, both literally and figuratively. But what of Yaakov? It is clear that the colored coat was a sign of favoritism. And this time we know that the favorite is designated for greatness because of the dreams he gets.

Yaakov must surely have realized how much Yosef was hated by his brothers, because he knew that Yosef was talking to everyone about his dreams. Indeed, if most of the brothers had had their way, Yosef would, like Hevel, have been killed. So why did Yaakov send him off alone to them, a long way away from home? Surely he might have guessed that he was putting Yosef in an invidious position, that something might happen. Or did he, as most parents do, fail to recognize what he would rather not have seen?

The Torah says that his reaction to the dreams of Yosef was to "mark" the situation. Perhaps he felt that Yosef had a special mission and was merely carrying out a Divine plan. In which case he might have felt that God would protect him. There is another issue, however. If it is clear that one child is, indeed, suited to a specific role, shouldn't a parent encourage him or her even if it means showing some favoritism (so long as this favoritism is balanced by showing love for the other children in equal measure)?

The problem of brothers does not end with Yosef. The other brothers argue about how best to deal with him. Reuven and Yehuda are clearly jockeying for position as leader of the pack. It is clear later on, when Yaakov spurns Reuven's offer to deal with Yosef in Egypt but accepts Yehuda's, that he sees that his firstborn is not the ideal leader. And, indeed, at the end of his life he will perpetuate difference, both in his farewell blessings and in the way he switches Ephraim and Menashe, Yosef's two boys. It is almost as if Yaakov is intentionally rubbing in the idea that birth is not the issue so much as capacity and capability.

Nevertheless, the Torah will continue to send out mixed messages. Moses is elevated over Aharon. Yet the priesthood is hereditary. On the one hand, birth counts, for national and tribal identity. On the other, it is merit that decides on the prophets. We will go on praying for the return of the Davidic line, and yet also pray for our judges and scholars. Rabbinic scholarship and leadership is meritocratic. Two conflicting models are offered to us in the Torah.

Perhaps the essential message is that we should not become doctrinaire and that there is no single solution. Sometimes one is appropriate, sometimes another. We moderns tend to like perfect theories and favorite scientific explanations, but perhaps we should adopt more flexible attitudes.