Selected and Adapted by Rabbi Dov Karoll

Quote from the Rosh Yeshiva Yaakov, in preparing for his meeting with Esav, readies himself not only for battle, but also for an attempt at reconciliation, an opportunity to restore a lost soul to the spirit of Judaism, and to rehabilitate the fraternal love between himself and Esav, his brother. -Harav Mosheh Lichtenstein Taken from: https://www.etzion.org.il/en/encounter-between-yaakov-and-esav

Parashat Vayishlach What Yaakov Told Esav Based on a Sicha by Harav Yehuda Arnita I zt"I

Based on: https://www.etzion.org.il/en/what-yaakov-told-esav

"And I have oxen and donkeys ... - 'oxen' refers to Yosef, as it is written: 'the firstling of his herd, grandeur is his' (Devarim 33) ; 'donkeys' refers to Yissakhar, as it is written: 'Yissakhar is a strong donkey' (Bereishit 49); 'sheep' refers to Israel, as it is written: 'But you my flock, the flock of my pasture .. .' (Yechezkel 34); 'and servants' refers to David, as it is written: 'I am Your servant, son of Your handmaiden' (Tehillim 115); 'and maidservants' refers to Avigayil. .. " (Bereishit Rabba 75:12) Our Sages taught: '"oxen' refers to the anointed one of war... 'donkeys' refers to Melekh HaMashiach." (ibid. 7) What the mid rash seems to be saying is a far cry from the "pshat" of the text. What does the mid rash mean, and what is the real significance of Yaakov's statement, "I have oxen and donkeys, sheep and servants and maidservants ... "? This midrash needs to be understood in light of another midrash which appears later in the parasha: '"Let my lord, I pray you, pass over before his servant, and I shall lead on slowly, according to the pace of the cattle that goes before me and the children, until I come to my lord to Se'ir.' - When will he come? In the days of Mashiach, as it is written, 'And the saviors will ascend to Har Tzion to judge the mountain of Esav.. ." ' (ibid. 78:17) When Yaakov tells Esav that he is on his way to meet him at Se'ir, he isn't referring to the immediate present. Yaakov doesn't mean to go right now to Se'ir; he is referring rather to acharit ha-yamim, when the time comes and the hour is right, and then "the saviors will go up to Har Tzion .. .." Until then, Yaakov says, "I shall lead on slowly" - there is no need to hurry. We learn (Bereishit 36:31), '"These are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned a king over the children of Israel ' - there were eight of them, and Yaakov established (his own) and cancelled the kingship of Esav in their days" (Rashi). Yaakov has an historical perspective. He doesn't live for the moment; rather, with every action he behaves in light of the perspective of the future - there is no need to hurry now, because the kings of Israel will have their hour after the kings of Esav, and hence "let my Lord, I pray you, pass on before his servant." This, then, is the deeper significance of Chazal's words in their explanation of the pasuk, "I have oxen and donkeys, sheep, servants and maidservants .... " Yaakov shows Esav what he has achieved, what is destined to develop from him and where his strength lies - in Melekh HaMashiach, in the anointed one of war, in Yosef and Yissakhar. Chazal are teaching us that we should not view this as a private battle between Yaakov the man and Esav the man, but rather between two nations: the nation of Yaakov - Israel, and the nation of Esav - Edom . This battle will continue through the years and throughout the generations, and Chazal point out to us the message behind Yaakov's strategy - in dealing with his challenges his strategy isn't merely pragmatic, based on the contemporary reality, but rather historic and future-oriented: what will the ramifications of my present actions be for Israel? The expression "ma'aseh avot siman la-banim" is well known, but in light of the above its meaning can be sharpened: we are not referring simply to a pattern or sign, signifying that what happened to our forefathers will also happen to us. There is a profound significance here - the forefathers knew that they were founding a nation, and their sense of mission and responsibility in each and every action was enormous. There is no doubt that when Yaakov went out to engage in a battle against Esav, he weighed his future strength, comparing his descendants and his contribution to the world with those of Esav. Only against the background of such a view could he be confident in the justice of his way and his actions. He would certainly survive and be saved, for he was destined to bring Yissakhar, Yosef and Melekh HaMashiach to the world! A lesson for our daily lives may be learned from this. During our many years of exile, Am Yisrael felt no sense of responsibility towards our history. With the establishment of the State, however, it becomes our obligation and responsibility to understand the historical significance of every step we take. In the course of our contemporary lives we determine the future of the nation and the State! (Originally delivered Shabbat Parshat Vayishlach 5750. Summarized by David Tee, Translated by Karen Fish.)

Parashat Vayishlach Coming Home By Rav Yair Kahn

Based on: https://www.etzion.org.il/en/parashat-vayishlach-coming-home

1. Yisrael Shall Be Your Name The renaming of Yaakov when he returns to Bet-El (see Bereishit 35:9-15) is strange. After all, Yaakov's name was already changed after wrestling throughout the night with some mysterious being. In dealing with this question, the Ram ban comments: "Your name is Yaakov- means that now you are still called Yaakov, even though the [heavenly] minister of Esav changed your name, since he wasn't sent to you to change your name. However, from now on, your name will not be called Yaakov, but rather Yisrael will be your name." There is an additional, similar, difficulty that must also be addressed. "And Yaakov set up a pillar in the place where He spoke with him, a pillar of stone, and he poured out a drink-offering thereon, and poured oil on it. And Yaakov called the name of the place where God spoke with him Bet-El." Isn't this redundant as well? Didn't Yaakov already erect a pillar in Bet-El after the ladder dream? Hadn't he already renamed Luz as Bet-El when running away from Esav? Why was it necessary to name the location Bet-El a second time? It's not possible that the name was forgotten during the years Yaakov was in Padan Aram, as the name Bet-El is used in the previous section, right before Hashem appears to Yaakov and blesses him (see verse 6). The Ramban deals with this difficulty as well and comments: "He called it that time and time again, to notify that it is true and correct, that this is a house of God, and the Shekhina always resides there." The Ram ban offers local solutions to deal with each of the difficulties. But since the two problems are similar, insofar as both deal with a redundancy, we should at least consider the possibility of a broader solution that takes both repetitions into account. In fact, if we broaden our focus, we will notice that repetition is quite common in the Yaakov story. Indeed, it is so full of repetition that we would almost be surprised if Yaakov were named Yisrael only once. The Torah records Yaakov going to Lavan twice: (see 28:5, 10). Yaakov receives two divine messages calling upon him to return to his homeland (see 31:3; 11-13) . The account of Yaakov running away from Lavan is repeated (see 31:17-18; 21). Of course, one can explain each of the above repetitions independently by suggesting a separate solution to each alleged case of repetition. If successful, this would lead to the conclusion that there is no tendency towards repetition in the Yaakov story. On the other hand, we may concede that there is a trend. If so, we should search for a global solution that could explain the entire trend. We will tread upon the second path.

2 2. Two Independent Missions The dualism that we noticed throughout the Yaakov story seems to be rooted in a section found at the conclusion of Parashat Toldot. In the aftershock of the berakha episode, Esav plans on killing Yaakov. These plans become known to Rivka, who sends Yaakov to the house of her brother Lavan. In order to explain to Yitzchak why Yaakov must leave, Rivka claims to be upset about the Canaanite wives of Esav. An unassuming Yitzchak calls Yaakov in and sends him to the house of Lavan in search of a bride. Based on this reading, the primary reason Yaakov goes to Lavan, is to run away from Esav; the search for a bride is merely camouflage. We may suggest an alternative reading, however. Perhaps the search for a bride is not only camouflage. Maybe there are two independent purposes for Yaakov's journey - Yaakov is sent both to escape Esav and also to find an appropriate wife. In fact, the Torah describes the destination differently for each. Rivka instructs Yaakov to flee "to my brother, to Charan" (27:43), while Yitzchak sends him to "Padan Aram , to the house of Betuel, your mother's father" (28:2). Of course, Charan is a city in Padan Aram , and both Rivka and Yitzchak are referring to the same destination. Nevertheless, this distinction may be a method of giving independence to each purpose of Yaakov's journey. This would explain why the Torah records Yaakov's departure twice. The first account has Yaakov traveling to Padan Aram and corresponds to the quest for an appropriate bride: "And Yitzchak sent Yaakov away and he went to Padan Aram to Lavan .... " (28:5). The ensuing verses, which record Esav's reaction to this quest, consistently refer to the destination as Padan Aram (see 28:6-9). The second account describes Yaakov as traveling to Charan: "And Yaakov left Beer-sheva and went toward Charan" (28:10). By repeating the departure of Yaakov, the Torah is stressing the dual nature of his journey. The destination of Charan is a clear reference to refuge for the fleeing Yaakov. The ensuing verses describe the first Bet-El encounter, recording the dream of the ladder and contain a divine promise. It is a promise addressed to a fugitive, vulnerable and alone. God will be with Yaakov to protect him throughout the journey and will eventually bring Yaakov back to the promised land. Notably, not a word is mentioned about a wife or children. At this point, Yaakov erects a pillar, anoints it with oil, and renames Luz Bet-El. Let's sharpen the difference between the two purposes of Yaakov's journey. The necessity to flee Esav is a direct result of the berakha episode. Esav is thirsty for revenge because Yaakov stole his blessing, and Yaakov is forced to run away. Might this be punishment for fooling his father and taking advantage of his vision impaired by age? Isn't Yaakov made to pay for his actions when Rachel , the younger daughter, is switched by Leah, the elder daughter? In a broader sense, we may consider the flight of Yaakov as paradigmatic of exile, based on the dictum "ma'aseh avot siman la-banim" - the actions of the fathers are a sign for the children. In contrast, the need for a wife and the inappropriateness of a Canaanite spouse is independent of the berakha episode or any possible wrongdoing on Yaakov's part. Just like Yitzchak before him, Yaakov must find a bride in Aram . These two themes continue in the house of Lavan. On the one hand, it is there that Yaakov marries and raises his children. On the other hand, it is a time of tension and struggle with Lavan, who tries to exploit him . Moreover, in last week's shiur, we tried to show that the threat of Lavan was one of assimilation, one of the classic threats facing the Jew in exile. The message delivered by the angel demanding that Yaakov return to Canaan makes reference to the pillar Yaakov anointed in Bet-El and the vow he made there (see 31:11-13) . The mention of Bet-El is a clear reference to Yaakov the fugitive; the time is ripe for Yaakov's exile to end. Perhaps the other divine message calling upon Yaakov to return relates to other purpose of Yaakov's journey - to find a wife and build a family: "And Hashem said to Yaakov: 'Return unto the land of your fathers, and to the land of your nativity and I will be with you."' (31:3) The first account of Yaakov leaving the house of Lavan makes reference to Yaakov's wives and children. It refers to Padan Aram and the return to Yitzchak (see 31:17-18). It clearly refers to the mission on which his father had sent him . In these verses, there is no hint of fear or flight. Yaakov takes his family and possessions and simply heads back home. The second account is totally different: "And he fled with all that he had; and he rose up, and passed over the River, and set his face toward the mountain of Gilead" (31:21). Yaakov is fleeing once again; he is trying to escape Lavan. He manages to escape only by virtue of divine intervention.

3. Completing The Journey When Yaakov parts with Lavan, he meets angels - malakhim. In the very next verse, he sends messengers - malakhim - to Esav.

3 The malakhim sent to Esav are certainly connected to the theme of flight and return. Does the reference to his meeting malakhim come to again show the dualistic theme of the journey? The nocturnal struggle with the mysterious being, identified by our Sages as the heavenly minister of Esav, is also connected to the theme of fleeing Yaakov. He wrestles till the break of dawn and although he suffers injury, he survives. He is given the name Yisrael, "for you have striven with God and with men, and have prevailed" (32:29). Likewise, he survives his encounter with Esav himself. However, this aspect of his journey is not over until he withstands the episode of Dina and Shekhem. Finally, his long weary exile is over. He must fulfill the vow taken at Bet-El and then he can return to his mother: "And God said to Yaakov, 'Arise, go up to Bet-El, and dwell there; and make there an altar unto God, who appeared to you when you fled from the face of Esav your brother:" (35: 1) They purify themselves of all the alien influences of their exile and travel to Bet-El, where Yaakov builds an altar. Then they mourn the passing of Devora, the nurse of Rivka. The Pseudo-Yonatan comments that they were informed that Rivka herself had passed away. Although the story ends on a somber note, the long journey of exile and coming home, of flight and return, is finally over. Yaakov has completed the Rivka part of the journey. The time is ripe to complete the Yitzchak aspect ofthejourney: "And God appeared to Yaakov again, when he came from Padan Aram, and blessed him. And God said to him, 'Your name is Yaakov: your name shall no longer be called Yaakov but Yisrael shall be your name," and He called his name Yisrael:" (35:9-10). Yaakov is once again called Yisrael, but his time within the context of the journey to and from Padan Aram, the purpose of which was to raise a family that would continue the tradition. He is blessed: "Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of you, and kings shall come out of your loins; and the land which I gave to Avraham and Yitzchak to you I will give it, and to your seed after you will I give the land:' (35:12-13) He is named Yisrael again. Once more he erects a pillar and anoints it with oil. He names the house of God Bet-El anew. However, the context is totally different. The first time he was renamed, it was within the framework of Yaakov's flight from his brother; it came as a promise for support and protection. This time, it is from the perspective of the journey to build a family. It comes afterYaakov's return home, when most ofYaakov's children have already been born. Yaakov does not actually return to Yitzchak until Binyamin is born. Only when the Torah announces, "Now the sons of Yaakov were twelve ... these are the sons of Yaakov that were born to him in Padan Aram" (35:22-26) - only then is the Yitzchak aspect of the journey complete and Yaakov can finally return to his father. The Structure and Meaning of the Daily Prayer Shiur #08: Pesukei De-Zimra By Rav Ezra Bick

Based on: https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-08-pesukei-de-zimra

We have now reached Pesukei De-Zimra, the psalms recited at the beginning of the daily prayer. It would be fair to say that we have finished the introduction to the daily prayers and are now commencing the actual Shacharit service. Despite my efforts to explain the place of each section, there was no real connection between the previous sections and the Shacharit prayer itself. They belonged more to the "order of the day" than to the "order of the prayer:' As we shall see shortly, Pesukei De-Zimra is understood to be a necessary introduction to prayer itself. This is most easily exemplified by the halakha that one may not interrupt the prayers from the beginning of Pesukei De-Zimra until after the completion of the Shemoneh Esrei. Two differentTalmudic sources are cited as the source for the recitation of Pesukei De-Zimra, the "verses of song:'The first is more explicit and uses the term we are familiar with: R. Yossi said: May my lot be with those who finish the Hallel every day. Is that so? Did not the master teach: He who recites the Hallel every day is blaspheming and scoffing? [R. Yossi explained:] What I meant was Pesukei De-Zimra. (Shabbat 118b) It is unclear from the text of the gemara what exactly is meant by "Pesukei De-Zimra:' Rashi explains that it refers to 2 chapters in Psalms that begin with the word "Hallelu' (which are 2 of the chapters we recite). Other Rishonim explain that it means the completing chapters of

4 Psalms ("finish hallel'') - Ashrei to the end. In any event, this corresponds with what we call Pesukei De-Zimra. On the other hand, based on this source, we would draw two conclusions. The first is that this recitation is not obligatory, as R. Yossi recommends the practice. He expresses his hope to be one who completes "hallel'' every day. Second, it does not seem to be related to the daily prayer. It is recommended as a desirable daily practice, but there is no hint of a connection to Shacharit. On the contrary, it sounds like a custom to recite Tehillim, as many people do regularly. The Rif cites a different source. The gemara in Berakhot 32a quotes R. Simlai, who said: "One should always arrange the praise of God and only afterwards pray:'The Rif, in citing this text, connects it to two other statements in the Talmud. The Rif associates the gemara in Shabbat that speaks of reciting Pesukei De-Zimra daily with a requirement to precede prayer (meaning supplication, making requests) with praise. This places Pesukei De-Zimra firmly in the context of the daily prayer. It is a preliminary step before making requests of God, following in the footsteps of Moshe, who first praised God's might and glory and only afterwards presented his request to be allowed to enter the Land of Israel. The essential dictum is the one in Berakhot (the actual locus of the Rif) that one must precede request with praise. The Rif adds that the content should be Ashrei (because of the additional statement that it is a good idea to recite Ashrei every day), and then the chapters known as Pesukei De-Zimra, based on the recommendation of R. Yossi in Massekhet Shabbat. Aside from those recommendations, however, there is a binding rule that one should "always" precede prayer with some sort of praise. The Rif's interpretation of the passage in Berakhot is not the only possibility. The Rambam (Hilkhot Tefilla 1:2) states that the structure of the Shemoneh Esrei - first praise, then requests, then thanks - is Biblically mandated. The Kesef Mishne, searching for a source, chooses this passage in Berakhot, which derives the rule of preceding prayer with praise from a verse in Deva rim about Moshe. Accordingly, the passage is not about Pesukei De-Zimra, but about the first three blessings of the Shemoneh Esrei. In fact, the Rambam's reference to Pesukei De-Zimra (Hilkhot Tefilla 7:12) simply states, "The Sages praised one who reads songs from the Book of Psalms every day, from Tehilla Le-David until the end of the book:'This is clearly a reference to R. Yossi's statement in Shabbat and preserves the nonobligatory nature of that recommendation. Apparently, the Rambam did not view the recitation of Pesukei De-Zimra as deriving from the passage in Berakhot, and this supports the Kesef Mishne's suggestion. In short, according to the Rambam, Pesukei De-Zimra is a recommendation to recite psalms every day; according to the Rif, it is part of the protocol of how to pray. The idea that one must precede prayer with praise may strike modern man as unworthy, as though we believe that it is necessary to flatter God in order to get Him to do what we want. But the origins of this practice should be seen not in the practical art of sycophancy, but in the protocol of royalty and loyalty. God is not an ATM. We can appeal to him not because He gives things away to anyone who asks, but because we are His subjects and He is our King. All men are judged according to their just deserts. If you wish to ask for something more, if you wish to make an appeal, then it is because He is your King and it is to Him that His subjects turn to meet their needs. The praise before request is no more than a proclamation of loyalty, or- to use a more medieval word - fealty. Indeed, we do have to turn back to a long-forgotten world of kings and allegiance to understand this relationship. It is a breach of protocol - it is simply impolite - to rush in to the king and enter straight into a list of requests, as one could do in a grocery store. The view of the Rambam leaves more unexplained. Why is the recitation of Psalms, or of portions of Psalms, recommended so highly every day? What is the purpose of th is recitation? This question becomes even more perplexing when viewed in the context of the gemara in Shabbat. R. Yossi had praised those who complete the Hallel every day. The gemara then cites a statement that reciting Hallel daily is blasphemy. The answer is that here we do not mean Hallel, but Pesukei De-Zimra. But what is the difference? According to the Rif, the answer is the context. Independent recitation of praise is problematic; as an introduction to request, it is praiseworthy. But what is the distinguishing point according to the Rambam? It cannot be simply that different chapters from the Book are Psalms are meant. There is no hint in the text which chapters are meant, and in any event, both selections, the Hallel and the psalms that we know to be the Pesukei De-Zimra (from Tehilla Le-David to the end) are basically general paeans of praise. Rashi explains the negative appraisal of one who recites Hallel daily as follows: He is blaspheming and scoffing: For the early prophets enacted that one should recite psalms for praise and thanksgiving, as we find in the chapter Arvei Pesachim, and this one who reads it regularly and not in its proper time is like one who sings a melody and jokes. Hallel is a song of praise for God, enacted to celebrate special occasions, great miracles, or exceptional revelations of Divine presence and favor. To recite it daily is to trivialize the experience of God's presence in our lives. Hallel is meant to represent our response to the unusual,

5 a reaction to an occurrence which impinges on our daily schedule and opens our eyes to the hidden yet ultimately true reality, to the special, to the uniqueness of the moment. Reciting it daily is the exact opposite; it turns it into a jingle, and hence a joke. If Pesukei De-Zimra is to be different, it must be because it is not trying to be a hymn of response to God's unexpected intrusion in our lives, but something else. It is clear that according to the Rif, Pesukei De-Zimra is addressed to God. One is talking to God when one recites the psalms, just as Moshe spoke to God when he said: "Hashem God, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness and Your mighty hand." One praises God before one beseeches Him. According to the Rambam, this is not necessarily true. One is told to finish "Hallel," but it is not clear why or what one is doing exactly. This opens the possibility that the difference between Hallel and Pesukei De-Zimra is that the first is addressed to God while the latter is self-reflexive; one reads these psalms in order to absorb their content and to affect oneself. Hallel is addressed to God; Pesukei De-Zimra is addressed to oneself. Reciting the former daily belittles its contents by making the extraordinary mundane. The latter, a process of self-discovery and enlightenment, can only be more meaningful the more regular it becomes. This point is the central theme of a lecture by Rav Soloveitchik printed in Shiurim Le-Zekher Abba Mari. Among other proofs, the Rav pointed out that the morning psalms are called Pesukei De-Zimra - verses of song - and not Pirkei De-Zimra. Hallel consists of whole chapters, for that is the nature of hymns, and it also entails a requirement of formal recitation. Pesukei De-Zimra, on the other hand, is not an exercise in "The heavens recite the glory of God," but an experience of learning, a kind of ta Imud Torah . Learning can be done verse by verse, each individual one having something to convey. The Rav listed other differences between Hallel and Pesukei De-Zimra, including the blessing ("Yehalelukha" vs. "Yishtabach"), and I strongly recommend reading the original article. It makes a lot of sense that this exercise in learning about the greatness of God should come before prayer; not that it is a necessary preliminary to prayer, but in the sense that the general benefit of daily learning about God serves a purpose in preparing one for prayer. And so, although according to the Rambam's reading of the gemara in Shabbat, Pesukei De-Zimra is not an integral part of the order of prayer but part of the normal day, it is customary to recite it before praying. One should have a clearer idea of whom one is praying to before one prays to Him. And so, the Rambam writes: The Sages praised one who reads songs from the Book of Psalms every day, from Tehilla Le-David until the end of the book. And it is already customary to read verses before them and after them, and (the Sages) enacted a blessing before the hymns, which is Barukh She-amar, and a blessing after them, which is Yishtabach, and afterwards he recites the blessings on the Shema and reads the Shema. (7:12) The Ra Ibag basically explains the gemara in Berakhot in this manner. Commenting on Moshe's prayer, which serves as the basis for the gemara's statement that one should precede prayer with praise, the Ralbag explains that prayer depends on one's relationship with God. According to the philosophic model to which the Ra Ibag subscribes, God's providence flows naturally to those who cleave unto God, and so prayer will be answered only if one has a close connection with God. Hence, he claims, before one prays and makes requests, one should improve one's inner relationship with God, and this is accomplished by "praise before request." Although there is a specific Aristotelian flavor to this theory that is not popular today (rightfully so), it does illustrate the approach the Rav described. Praise before prayer is an exercise in self-education, changing oneself to better be able to pray. Translating (and modifying) the Ralbag's point into contemporary terms, prayer is not merely sending God a message, but rather an encounter. When one prays, one is in God's presence, not writing emails. It is undoubtedly helpful to come to this experience with a clear intellectual and emotional appreciation of the greatness of God and His providence, not only to be better informed, but to enable the encounter itself, to be one who is cleaving unto God when one begins to talk to Him . There is an unfortunate but widespread tendency to come late to tefilla. The halakhic way to deal with the problem this creates for praying be-tzibbur is to skip parts of Pesukei De-Zimra. In extremis, the halakha is clear that one should skip all of Pesukei De-Zimra if there is no other way to join in with tefila be-tzibbur. I hope I have convinced you that that would be a great loss. Arriving a few minutes earlier in the morning is a small price to pay for a chance to approach God in full appreciation for the encounter that is about to take place.

To subscribe, or for comments, questions or sponsorship opportunities, please write us at: [email protected] Dedicated in memory of R. Mordechai (Marcel) Weber, z"I, 'nm omn V\!m,, p ,,,,n :i,n

6