Once I was already at R' Sacks' website, I read some other articles. He writes [Toldot 5755]:
If so then it is possible all four people acted rightly as they understood the situation, yet still tragedy occurred. Isaac was right to wish Esau blessed as Abraham sought for Ishmael. Esau acted honourably toward his father. Rivka sought to safeguard the future of the covenant. Jacob felt qualms but did what his mother said, knowing she would not have proposed deceit without a strong moral reason for doing so.
Do we have here one story with two possible interpretations? Perhaps, but that is not the best way of describing it. What we have here, and there are other examples in Genesis, is a story we understand one way the first time we hear it, and a different way once we have discovered and reflected on all that happened later. It is only after we have read about the fate of Jacob in Laban’s house, the tension between Leah and Rachel, and the animosity between Joseph and his brothers that we can go back and read Genesis 27, the chapter of the blessing, in a new light and with greater depth.
There is such a thing as an honest mistake, and it is a mark of Jacob’s greatness that he recognized it and made amends to Esau. In the great encounter twenty-two years later the estranged brothers meet, embrace, part as friends and go their separate ways. But first, Jacob had to wrestle with an angel.
That is how the moral life is. We learn by making mistakes. We live life forward, but we understand it only looking back. Only then do we see the wrong turns we inadvertently made. This discovery is sometimes our greatest moment of moral truth.
For each of us there is a blessing that is ours. That was true not just of Isaac but also Ishmael, not just Jacob but also Esau. The moral could not be more powerful. Never seek your brother’s blessing. Be content with your own.
In other words - Yaakov made a mistake when he took the Brachos. Where does the text say that? Where does any Medrash say that. Any commentator?? R' Sacks fails to enlighten us. But since in his world view Esav must be loved as well - Yaakov was wrong. When someone has a world view they often tend to interpret texts based on what they WANT it to say rather than on what it actually says. R' Sacks does this quite a bit. Brilliant? Yes. Knowledgeable in philosophy and the social sciences? Extremely. A riveting orator? Incredibly. But he twists and manipulates texts to fit with his Weltanschauung [say that on a date and impress the young lady!!] quite often - and THAT is dangerous. So I respectfully call him out for it. [I once wrote him an email pointing out one such infraction and received an automated response that the good rabbi's calender is full for the next year so he is not available to speak at any more events. Impressive. My calender is quite open actually. Bring me in as a scholar in residence and I promise to make people laugh interspersed with some Torah].
"The moral could not be more powerful. Never seek your brother’s blessing. Be content with your own."
Not. The blessing was intended for the Bechor and Yaakov bought the Bechora fair and square. We don't see Yitzchak retracting the Bracha and we don't see Yaakov expressing regret. Rivka told him to "deceive" his father into giving him the Bracha [as instructed by Nevuah as per Unkelos] and he did it. What happens with Lavan is no proof that he was mistaken. Ditto the battle with the angel [although I have a very good Hispanic friend named Angel and I would never wrestle with him - he would whoop me]. He final meeting with Esav did not make them friends and to illustrate this Esav's descendants have been killing Yaacov's for the last 5000 years.
