The Israel Koschitzky
Virtual Beit MidrashThe Israel Koschitzky
Virtual Beit Midrash
Surf A Little Torah
Yeshivat
Har Etzion
PARASHAT VAYISHLACH
Rav David Silverberg
We read in Parashat Vayishlach that God revealed Himself to Yaakov in
Beit-El upon his return from Charan, just as He had spoke to him there as he
fled from
Rav Moshe Leib Shachor, in his Avnei Shoham, suggests a possible
explanation for this emphasis, claiming that the Torah wished to "downplay" the
significance of Beit-El as a site of divine revelation. The Torah anticipated that this
location, where God had twice appeared to Yaakov at critical junctures in his
life, to either promise him protection or predict the emergence of dynasties
from his progeny, might one day be looked upon as a shine of sorts. Indeed, when Yerovam ben Nevat led the
cessation of the ten northern tribes and established the
Why, in fact, did Beit-El not earn a special status, given the prophetic revelations that Yaakov experienced there?
It might be suggested that Jerusalem, rather than Beit-El, was selected
as the permanent "holy site" of Am Yisrael because of the theme of
sacrifice which it embodies. As the
Rambam famously writes in Hilkhot Beit Ha-bechira (2:2), the site of the
Mikdash in
******
We read in Parashat Vayishlach that at one point during Yaakov's return
to
Rav Yerucham Lebovitz explained that the quality of le-vado spoken of by the Midrash refers to independent capability. Among the fundamental properties of God is that His existence does not depend on any other entity; He is entirely and independently self-sufficient, capable of sustaining His own existence even if all other matter would cease to exist. In the context of a human being, Rav Yerucham explained, the notion of le-vado means the ability to achieve spiritual greatness irrespective of any external factors and conditions. The person who reaches the level of le-vado does not need any person or specific circumstance to succeed in avodat Hashem; he can do so independently.
Rav Yerucham cites in this context the famous Mishna in Pirkei Avot (4:1) that defines the qualities of wisdom, might, wealth and honor: "Who is wise? He who learns from all people Who is mighty? He who restrains his inclinations Who is wealthy? He who is content with his lot Who is honored? He who honors people." The common denominator between all these definitions, Rav Yerucham observes, is that they allow a person to achieve these qualities in all and any circumstances. A person can achieve wisdom even without being exposed to scholars; one can display might even if others are blessed with greater physical strength; wealth depends solely on one's perspective and attitude, regardless of how much or little he has in relation to others; and honor does not depend on how others look upon a person, but rather on how he looks upon others.
This Mishna thus conveys the lesson of le-vado, that we must strive for "independence" in our religious observance, to be able to succeed in all areas of avodat Hashem regardless of the circumstances and conditions in which we find ourselves.
******
The Torah in Parashat Vayishlach tells the mysterious story of Yaakov's
nighttime wrestle with an assailant as he makes his way towards
The Rashbam advances a particularly novel and unconventional reading of this incident, claiming that God dispatched the angel in order to prevent Yaakov from escaping from Esav. According to the Rashbam, Yaakov's nighttime crossing of the Yabok stream, which took place just prior to the assault (32:23), was intended as a secret escape route. The Rashbam refers us in this context to the verses in Sefer Shemuel II (17:21-24), which tell of King David crossing the Jordan River during the night to escape from the rebel forces led by his son Avshalom. Nighttime river-crossings thus appear to be associated with escape routes, and the Rashbam claims that here, too, Yaakov attempted to avoid his confrontation with Esav by escaping. God, however, who had promised to protect Yaakov and return him safely to Canaan, wanted to ensure that Yaakov would reunite with Esav and emerge safely from this confrontation, which would confirm the truth of the divine promise. He therefore sent an angel to delay Yaakov until dawn, at which point Yaakov would be no longer able to make an inconspicuous escape. For this reason, once morning arrived the angel wished to take leave of Yaakov ("shalecheni ki ala ha-shachar" 32:27); now that Yaakov could no longer escape along a secret route under the protection of the nighttime darkness, the angel's mission has been accomplished.
This approach of the Rashbam seems difficult to accept for a number of reasons, primarily, perhaps, because of its implications with regard to the name "Yisrael." The angel confers this title upon Yaakov because "sarita im elohim ve-im anashim va-tukhal' "you have struggled against angels and men and have prevailed" (32:29) presumably referring to Yaakov's triumph over the angel. According to the Rashbam's understanding of this episode, however, it is doubtful whether this triumph should be seen in a favorable light. As Professor Nechama Leibowitz noted, it emerges according to the Rashbam's approach that Yaakov's "victory over the angel implies that his weakness, his wish to flee from the Lord, his natural physical fears triumphed over his faith and trust." In the Rashbam's view, Yaakov's confrontation with the angel was necessitated as a result of his unjustified fear of his brother; this is hardly one of the great, heroic moments in Yaakov's life. It seems very difficult to imagine that the name by which his progeny is forever known Yisrael serves to commemorate a moment of spiritual weakness, an event in which Yaakov failed to display the confidence and trust in God's promise that we would expect from our great patriarch.
For this and other reasons, Professor Leibowitz expresses her strong preference for the traditional reading of this verse, as Rashi cites from the Midrash, that Yaakov's assailant was Esav's representative angel, and this incident alludes to the fact that Yaakov and his descendants will always emerge triumphant from their harsh confrontations against the hostile enemies that rise against them.
******
Parashat Vayishlach begins by telling of Yaakov's discovery that his brother, Esav, was approaching with an army of four hundred men. Yaakov's response is characterized by fear and dread, and he instantly divides his family and belongings, offers an impassioned plea to God for assistance, and sends his brother expensive gifts accompanied by a message of submission and appeasement.
Yaakov's apprehension about this anticipated confrontation with his brother seems to contrast sharply with the manner in which he had approached his conflict with his uncle and father-in-law, Lavan. Towards the end of Parashat Vayetze (31:36-55), we read of Yaakov's harsh exchange with Lavan, who responded by agreeing to a peaceful settlement. There Yaakov speaks with confidence, conviction and poise, as he forcefully presents his claims and grievances against his wily, conniving father-in-law. In his message to Esav, by contrast, Yaakov speaks with almost self-deprecating submission, repeatedly referring to himself as Esav's servant and to Esav as his master.
Rav Shimshon Refael Hirsch, in a brief but trenchant passage in his commentary, attributes Yaakov's different approaches to his two nemeses to the different circumstances surrounding these conflicts:
And how different is Jacob's attitude to Esau to what it was to Laban. We can recognize what strength the consciousness of innocence gives, and what an oppressive feeling even an appearance of guilt awakens. Twenty years endurance of a fight against wrong which you innocently have to bear do not have such a depressing effect as one minute's feeling towards somebody whom we know feels hurt by us, and who may not see the motive which, though it may not justify our action, can at least excuse it.
According to
Rav Hirsch, Yaakov's forceful, confident words to Lavan were spoken from the
unquestionable moral high-ground.
Both he and Lavan knew without doubt that he Yaakov was the innocent
victim of twenty years of devious schemes and machinations. In a sense, Rav Hirsch asserts, fighting
such a battle is far easier than the conflict Yaakov now confronts after taking
leave of Lavan his conflict with his vengeful brother. Yaakov knows full well that he bears
in Rav Hirsch's words at least "an appearance of guilt." Even assuming that his "theft" of Esav's
blessing was justified in light of
******
The Torah in Parashat Vayishlach tells the mysterious story of Yaakov's
nighttime wrestle with an assailant as he makes his way towards
The Rashbam advances a particularly novel and unconventional reading of this incident, claiming that God dispatched the angel in order to prevent Yaakov from escaping from Esav. According to the Rashbam, Yaakov's nighttime crossing of the Yabok stream, which took place just prior to the assault (32:23), was intended as a secret escape route. The Rashbam refers us in this context to the verses in Sefer Shemuel II (17:21-24), which tell of King David crossing the Jordan River during the night to escape from the rebel forces led by his son Avshalom. Nighttime river-crossings thus appear to be associated with escape routes, and the Rashbam claims that here, too, Yaakov attempted to avoid his confrontation with Esav by escaping. God, however, who had promised to protect Yaakov and return him safely to Canaan, wanted to ensure that Yaakov would reunite with Esav and emerge safely from this confrontation, which would confirm the truth of the divine promise. He therefore sent an angel to delay Yaakov until dawn, at which point Yaakov would be no longer able to make an inconspicuous escape. For this reason, once morning arrived the angel wished to take leave of Yaakov ("shalecheni ki ala ha-shachar" 32:27); now that Yaakov could no longer escape along a secret route under the protection of the nighttime darkness, the angel's mission has been accomplished.
This approach of the Rashbam seems difficult to accept for a number of reasons, primarily, perhaps, because of its implications with regard to the name "Yisrael." The angel confers this title upon Yaakov because "sarita im elohim ve-im anashim va-tukhal' "you have struggled against angels and men and have prevailed" (32:29) presumably referring to Yaakov's triumph over the angel. According to the Rashbam's understanding of this episode, however, it is doubtful whether this triumph should be seen in a favorable light. As Professor Nechama Leibowitz noted, it emerges according to the Rashbam's approach that Yaakov's "victory over the angel implies that his weakness, his wish to flee from the Lord, his natural physical fears triumphed over his faith and trust." In the Rashbam's view, Yaakov's confrontation with the angel was necessitated as a result of his unjustified fear of his brother; this is hardly one of the great, heroic moments in Yaakov's life. It seems very difficult to imagine that the name by which his progeny is forever known Yisrael serves to commemorate a moment of spiritual weakness, an event in which Yaakov failed to display the confidence and trust in God's promise that we would expect from our great patriarch.
For this and other reasons, Professor Leibowitz expresses her strong preference for the traditional reading of this verse, as Rashi cites from the Midrash, that Yaakov's assailant was Esav's representative angel, and this incident alludes to the fact that Yaakov and his descendants will always emerge triumphant from their harsh confrontations against the hostile enemies that rise against them.
******
We read in Parashat Vayishlach that as Yaakov prepared for his imminent
encounter with Esav, he lined up his family and then passed in front of them
bowing to his brother (33:3). The
Zohar (Vayishlach, 171b) questions the propriety
of Yaakov's bowing to Esav, who in Midrashic and Kabbalistic thought is often
associated with forces of evil and even depicted as the embodiment of these
forces. How, the Zohar asks, could Yaakov prostrate himself to
Esav, showing honor and respect to evil?
The Zohar responds by offering a most surprising
interpretation of this verse, claiming that Yaakov in fact bowed not to Esav,
but to God. When the Torah writes,
"Ve-hu avar lifneihem" ("He passed before them"), which is
generally taken to mean that Yaakov passed in front of his family, it actually
refers to the Almighty. God, as it
were, passed in front of Yaakov's family and stood in between them and Esav;
Yaakov thus naturally bowed out of respect and awe for the divine
presence.
Rav Eliyahu Dessler, in his Mikhtav Mei-eliyahu vol. 3 p. 156, explains this otherwise perplexing passage by demonstrating how the Zohar here actually complements rather than negates the straightforward reading of the verse. Superficially, it indeed appeared as though Yaakov surrendered and lowered himself in submission to his brother. On the surface, it seems that Esav has triumphed and Yaakov suffered defeat. In reality, however, this is not at all what occurred. Yaakov recognized that it was God who had issued the decree of exile and oppression, and ordained that he would have to bow before his brother. He bowed not in submission to Esav, but rather in submission to divine authority and justice. This was thus not a moment of shame and defeat, but a moment of triumph a moment of unwavering faith in, and sincere devotion to, God's rule over the earth.
Rav Dessler proceeds to show how the idea expressed by the Zohar has been manifest throughout the centuries of Jewish exile. There were unfortunately many occasions in which we were, as a people, compelled to "bow to Esav," humbly submit to foreign rule. We nevertheless succeeded in retaining our dignity, pride, and sense of purpose because this submission occurred only externally. Somehow we always managed to see the Shekhina "pass before them," and recognize the divine presence even in moments of anguish and despair. We thus bowed not to the oppressor, but rather to God, proudly if painfully expressing our faith, loyalty and devotion, which has allowed us to survive and flourish even in our history's darkest hours.
******
The haftara for Parashat
Vayishlach, the book of Ovadya, foretells the eventual downfall of the
Towards the beginning of this prophecy, Ovadya rhetorically asks, "Even
if thieves came upon you, nighttime marauders how were you destroyed? Wouldn't they steal only what they
needed? And even if vintagers came
to you, wouldn't they leave gleanings?" (1:5). The prophet expresses his astonishment
over the complete ruin of what was once a powerful and prosperous empire. Even when plunderers ransack a city,
they don't leave it empty; they take only that for which they could conceivably
have some need. And when vintagers
clean a vineyard of its grapes, they leave behind the undesirable produce. The Edomite kingdom, however, as the
prophet foresees, would be left in utter ruin, which nothing remaining. Ovadya expresses this bewilderment after
describing the kingdom's hubris and arrogant sense of security (verse 3). History would prove that
Rav Mendel Hirsch, in his commentary to the haftarot, draws an insightful distinction between
the two analogies drawn by the prophet in the aforementioned verse thieves,
and vintagers. The first analogy
involves people who have no legal right to the property they seize, who
lawlessly and forcefully capture the desired goods. The harvesters, by contrast, are of
course invited into the vineyard, summoned for the very purpose of removing the
produce. Accordingly, Rav Hirsch
suggests, the prophet here speaks of two groups of enemies that would visit
destruction upon the Edomite empire.
First, the kingdom would fall prey to the "nighttime marauders," people
with no prior association with