Vayishlach
וישלח יעקב מלאכים לפניו אל עשו אחיו ארצה שעיר שדה אדום. ויצו אתם לאמר
כה תאמרון לאדני לעשו וגו' עם לבן גרתי וגו'. ויהי לי שור וחמור וגו' ואשלחה להגיד
לאדני למצוא חן בעיניך וגו'. וישובו המלאכים אל יעקב לאמר באנו אל אחיך אל עשו
ויחץ את העם ויירא יעקב מאד ויצר לו. עמו וגו' וגם הולך לקראתך וארבע מאות איש אשר אתו וגו'. ויאמר אם יבא עשו אל המחנה האחת והכהו והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה וגו'. הצילני נא מיד אחי מיד עשו וגו'(לב, ד-יב)
Yaakov sent messengers before him to his brother Eisav, to the land of Se’ir, the field of Edom. He commanded them saying: So shall you say to my master, to Eisav… I sojourned with Lavan… I acquired oxen and donkeys… and I have sent to relate to my master, to find grace in your eyes… The messengers returned to Yaakov, saying: we came to your brother, to Eisav, and he is even travelling towards you, together with four hundred men… Yaakov was exceedingly afraid and distressed, and he divided the company that was with him… Save me now from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Eisav…
Rashi provides two interpretations for the peculiar statement גרתי לבן עם. One is that Yaakov was emphasizing that he had spent his years by Lavan as a stranger; he had not risen to prominence as the blessings had promised. The other is that Yaakov had maintained his commitment to all of the 613 mitzvos even while in the spiritually corrosive environment of Charan. Now, the first approach is understandable. But what is the significance of the second?
Rashi also explains the words עשו מיד אחי מיד נא הצילנו to mean “save me from Eisav, who is not acting like my brother.” How can we interpret the text in a manner diametrically opposed to its apparent meaning?
In general, the question demands to be raised: Why did Yaakov instigate a potential conflict with Eisav? As the Midrash* puts it, this would seem a violation of the wisdom of Mishlei,** לו לא ריב על מתעבר עבר כלב , באזני מחזיק Like one who grasps the ears of a dog is one who mixes into a quarrel not his.
And, as always, we are left to figure out what relevance this narrative has for us personally.
Taking our cue from the Olelos Ephrayim,*** we will treat the ladder of Yaakov’s dream as symbolic of This World, which is a preparation for the World to Come. The two angels upon the ladder are representative of the two fundamental components of existence – chomer, matter, and tzurah, form. The nature of these elements could not be more different: chomer is associated with the Yetzer HaRa, longing for the physical and coarse; while tzurah is associated with the Yetzer HaTov, attracted to that which is spiritual and fine. Eisav represented chomer, while Yaakov represented tzurah. The two had opposite attitudes towards their stay in This World. Eisav sought permanent residence there, while Yaakov viewed himself as passing through, on his way to the Next World. Hence, their names: יעקב is derived from עקב, heel, his eye on the end of the journey; עשו is derived from עשיה, performance, his focus on This World, the world of action.
Thus, our parashah is the tale of the competition between these two forces – the tale of every person.
לפניו מלאכים יעקב וישלח, the Tzurah (played by Yaakov) dispatched messengers – actual angels, as Rashi says, i.e., the Yetzer HaTov and the Yetzer HaRa – before him, i.e., to This World, to prepare itself for the Next World. אחיו עשו אל, in this pursuit, the Chomer (played by Eisav) is the Tzurah’s partner, as it is through engaging the physical world that Man achieves his perfection. שעיר ארצה
אדום שדה, this is a description of This World: an environment inhabited by demons (שעירים (and the forces of the Dark Side, which are colored red (אדום(.
What message does the Tzurah send to the Chomer? יעקב עבדך אמר כה לעשו לאדני תאמרון כה, I come to engage This World for the goal of 'ה עבודת, service of Heaven. I have no aspiration for power and prominence here, rather to be a sojourner here – גרתי לבן עם.
Additionally, שמרתי מצוות ג"ותרי גרתי לבן עם, the Yetzer HaRa is called ל"נב, the disgusting one, and by fulfilling all of the mitzvos despite the temptation not to, one converts it from ל"נב into ן"לב.
וחמור שור לי ויהי, I overcame the Dark Side, which is depicted as an ox and a donkey.****
בעיניך חן למצוא לאדני להגיד ואשלחה, this project is to the benefit of the chomer, to elevate it into the realm of holiness. This approach is relevant for each individual – his tzurah seeks out the partnership of his chomer to elevate it, and for the world – the anshei tzurah, the righteous, who are the collective form of humanity, seek the cooperation of the anshei chomer, the masses, to edify them through Torah and mussar.
we ,explains Rashi as ,וישובו המלאכים אל יעקב לאמר באנו אל אחיך אל עשו .be to not was it ,However approached the chomer with your overtures, attempting to treat it as “your brother,” but it insists on acting as Eisav. לקראתך הולך וגם, it is acting against you, making efforts to ensconce itself in this world, enjoying all of its pleasures. עמו איש מאות וארבע, this alludes to the imperfections of the world, salvageable only through ק"ש) the equivalent of four-hundred), sackcloth, i.e., repentance.
This reaction was unsettling for Yaakov. לו ויצר מאד יעקב ויירא, as Rashi explains, he was “fearful” lest he be killed, and he was “distressed” lest he kill another. For our purposes, this means that he was fearful that he would succumb to the seduction of his desires, and that he was distressed that he may need to destroy his chomer in self-defense. For, ideally, the goal is to elevate and sanctify it.
'וגו אתו אשר העם את ויחץ, the Zohar***** takes the term מחנה as a reference to the organs of the human body. There are two types of organs – those that man can control and those that he cannot control. Yaakov was indicating that even in the event that an assault from his chomer would cause him to sin in those areas which were beyond his immediate control (והכהו האחת המחנה אל יבוא אם(, he would fight back in those areas that were within it (לפליטה הנשאר המחנה והיה(.
(This would seem to be the meaning of the interpretation in Shabbos****** that the troops that returned from the battle against Midyan claimed that none of them had succumbed to sin, yet they needed to achieve atonement for thoughts of sin. Isn’t sinful thinking itself a sin – worse, in fact, than a sinful act?*******
The answer is that their claim of sinlessness was in regard to the first category, those that are in one’s direct control, not the second. Indeed, the language there indicates as such: את נשאו עבדיך hands our under soldiers the counted servants your ,********ראש אנשי המלחמה אשר בידינ"ו ולא נפקד ממנו איש and no one is unaccounted for, the term בידינו a reference to those sins which are actively committed.)
However, even those organs which are difficult to control can be brought in line with prayer. As Dovid prayed, שוא מראות עיני העבר, turn my eyes from seeing vanity.********* As the Tur explains,********** this refers to being subjected to situations in which images are sprung on oneself. One can pray that he be spared such things. Thus was the nature of Yaakov’s prayer here. אחי מיד נא הצילני, save me from those sins that I can control, עשו מיד, and from those that I cannot.
Regarding these latter words, we can offer another three explanations. There are three types of exile that the Jewish People are subject to: that of the nation at the hands of the gentiles; that of the scholars at the hands of the ignorant; and that of the sincere scholars at the hands of the insincere ones. As the Sefer Chassidim writes,*********** these exiles are a process. It is only through the internecine squabbling amongst the scholars that the ignorant are disdainful for them; and it is only through the inner conflict of the Jewish People that the gentiles learn to accost them.
עשו מיד אחי מיד, in regard to the first conflict, one can invoke the parable used by the Midrash:************ when metal was created on the third day of Creation, the trees began to tremble, foreseeing the axes that would fell them. The metal calmed them, pointing out that without the contribution of a handle from the trees, no axe would be functional. Similarly, if the Jews would simply maintain peace amongst themselves they would have no need to worry about oppression from external sources. Hence, first אחי מיד, and as a result עשו מיד.
Regarding the second conflict, that of the ignorant against the scholars, it should be recalled the manner in which the scholars are maneuvered into sinning. Unlike the masses, who are simply confronted with temptations, the scholars need to be convinced that what is actually sin is a mitzvah. Hence, אחי מיד, save us from that which seems appropriate – ersatz mitzvos, עשו מיד, which is, in fact, the Yetzer HaRa under guise.
And regarding the third, אחי מיד, save me from the Torah scholars who are, in reality, עשו מיד, charlatans out do evil.
______________________________________
* Bereishis Rabbah 75:3.
** 26:17.
*** 166.
**** See Zohar to this verse, 166b.
***** Noach, 76a.
****** 64a.
******* Yoma 29a.
******** Bamidbar 31:49.
********* Tehillim 139:47.
**********OC 1. See Bach, ad loc.
*********** 209.
************ Bereishis Rabbah 5:10.