Parshat Vayishlach Weekly Dvar Torah Self-Assessment
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Parshat Vayishlach 16 Kislev 5776 / November 28, 2015 Daf Yomi: Sotah 33; Nach Yomi: 2 Divrei Hayomim 18 Weekly Dvar Torah A project of the NATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL SPONSORED BY THE HENRY, BERTHA AND EDWARD ROTHMAN FOUNDATION ROCHESTER, NY,CLEVELAND, OHIO, CIRCLEVILLE, OHIO Self-assessment Rabbi Lawrence Teitelman Mara D'atra, Young Israel of New Hyde Park There is a popular academic joke about three scientists: a physicist, a biologist, and a mathematician. They are sitting in a cafe staking out a nearby residence when they see two people enter the house. But a while later, three people emerge. The physicist declares: "Experimental error, we counted wrong." The biologist announces: "They reproduced." The mathematician concludes: "If exactly one person will now go into the house, the house will be empty." Each year as I read Parashat Vayishlach I am reminded of this story of the three scientists, and recall an insight from Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch. Upon his return to Eretz Yisrael, Yaakov Avinu remarks (Bereshit 32:11): Katonti mikol hachasadim umikol haemet asher asita im avdekha, ki bemakli avarti et hayarden hazeh veata hayiti lishnei machanot – I have become too small from all the kindness and all the faithfulness that You have rendered to Your servant, for with [only] my staff I crossed this Yarden, and now I have become two camps. Rav Hirsch comments: I [Jacob] am not praying and appealing for myself; I have already received from You so much that I am unable to thank You for it all; I am diminished from all the kindness. One’s stature is not measured by the absolute amount of his accomplishments, but by the relative magnitude of his accomplishments compared to what he received. The more a person has, the greater the danger he will become diminished in merit. Like our anecdotal scientists, Rav Hirsch recognized that every individual must account for the differential between what comes in and what goes out. Yaakov was now meeting up with his savage brother Esav, and the Heavenly Court of Judgment was in session to decide the outcome of that encounter. At this vulnerable juncture in his life, Yaakov reckoned how the great bounty he had accumulated in the last two decades compared to that which he actually deserved. Unlike the case of the scientists, Yaakov wondered whether perhaps more had come in than gone out. Yaakov’s considerations are particularly striking in the context of his self-assessment just a few verses earlier. Yaakov states seemingly without reservation (32:5): Im Lavan garti – I have sojourned with Lavan. This is famously interpreted in the Midrash cited by Rashi: vetaryag mitzvot shamarti – I have observed all 613 Commandments. Yaakov herein affirms – at least to himself – that, despite living with the wicked Lavan for the past two decades, he managed to perform everything that could have been required of him. He even anticipated and fulfilled the Torah that would only later be given at Har Sinai. Nevertheless, Yaakov was still duly concerned about whether, by virtue of those actions, he had accumulated sufficient merit to justify the extensive family and material wealth he had amassed. Apparently Yaakov recognized that, aside from certain objective standards for the Jewish people – an allegiance to the entire corpus of Torah Law – there are also subjective expectations of the individual Jew that are a function of various factors rather than held constant. An earliest instance of this phenomenon is Noach, about whom it is said, “tamim haya bedorotav – he was perfect in his generation.” While the Talmudic rabbis are divided as to whether Noach would have been “more perfect” or “less perfect” had he lived in another generation, there is an understanding that “perfection” is not defined in an absolute fashion but rather relativistically. This comparison applies not only in the broader context of society but also more specifically to one’s family. The Midrash expresses this, albeit somewhat rhetorically, as “ad matai yagiu maasai lemaaseh avotai – when will my own actions approach those of my ancestors." The intention is that, aside from compliance with a fixed set of requirements, we would do well to look to our parents – and, more generally, the earlier generations – and ensure that we have reached their level of commitment. Despite the common temptation to chart out new territory in terms of religious behavior, we should not sacrifice in the process the lessons inevitably learned during our formative years. Yet, perhaps the most significant benchmark is neither contemporary society nor our past lineage, but rather ourselves. Included in the “ethical code” of Pirkei Avot is the expectation that “one’s actions exceed his wisdom – maasav merubin me-chokhmato.“ Notwithstanding the issue of how he can conduct himself beyond that which he understands, it is clear that the projected range of maasim expands with increased knowledge. In Hilkhot Teshuva, Rambam notably advises us to see ourselves as benonim – “average” individuals who are straddling the fence between tzidkut and rishut, righteousness and wickedness. Though we usually – a priori – consider these two categories as polar opposites, by assuming our position on a hairline separation, we are in fact more likely to succeed on the immediate opportunity. Along these lines, the famed Mashgiach of Ponovich Rabbi Eliyahu Dessler, in his Michtav Me-Eliyahu, notes that one’s nekudat ha-bechira – point of free choice – is a moving target, analogous to the front lines in classical warfare. The past hurdles that we have already overcome, and any future hurdles, are both somewhat irrelevant in terms of the current playing-field. The fact that, for others, either of the same choices may be their points of departure, does not affect our personal mandate. By virtue of his self-assessment vetaryag mitzvot shamarti, our patriarch Yaakov teaches that it is healthy to have internal pride in our religious actions and convictions. Yet, this must also be complemented by Katonti − whether cantillated with an azla geresh or a revia – the reminder that despite those achievements, we should wonder whether we have in fact accomplished enough. In charting our future course, we should derive inspiration from those around us − family legacies, good fortune, as well as our own latent potential. And in this fashion, the mitzvot that continuously emerge from our house will ensure that it really is “full.” We may thus confuse the scientists but we will, indeed, make our Creator proud. Shabbat Shalom The Weekly Parsha "The Profundity of Mikra" Rabbi Moshe Greebel Associate Member, Young Israel Council of Rabbis At times, the comparison of expressions in Mikra (Scripture) can yield some rather interesting and unexpected results. A case in point exists in this week’s Sidra, wherein Ya’akov instructs his emissaries how to respond to his brother Aisav: “Then you shall say, ‘They (flocks and herds) are your servant Ya’akov’s; it is a present sent to my master Aisav; and, behold, also he is behind us.’” (B’raishis 32:19) Now, the term ‘is sent’ in LaShon HaKodesh (holy tongue) is ‘Sh’lucha,’ which appears two other times in Mikra: 1. “And when I looked, behold, a hand was sent out to me (signifying punishment); and, lo, a scroll of a book was in it.” (Y’chezkel 2:9) 2. “Naftali is a hind sent loose; he gives goodly words.” (B’raishis 49:21) In the text M’lay Ha’Omer (Rav Aryeh Leib Zunz 1768- 1833 of blessed memory) these three examples of ‘Sh’lucha’ are very fascinatingly tied together in the following manner. We begin with Yosef asking permission of the Pharaoh to inter the recently deceased Ya’akov in Eretz Canaan: “My father made me swear, saying, ‘Behold, I die; in my grave which I have dug for me in Eretz Canaan; there shall you bury me.’ Now therefore let me go up, I beg you, and bury my father, and I will return.” (B’raishis 50:5) Now, In LaShon HaKodesh the term for ‘I have dug’ is ‘Karisi.’ That is the simple explanation of what Ya’akov dug. However, the Midrash B’raishis Rabbah 100-5, and the Tanchuma (Warsaw), Vay’chi, chapter #6, which is cited by Rashi, interprets the term ‘Karisi’ as ‘Kari’ which can be ‘a stack of money’: “….. It is to instruct you that when Yitzchak passed away, Ya’akov said (to himself), ‘Is it possible that Aisav the wicked will eventually be interred with the righteous (in the subterranean cave in Chevron)?’ What did he do? He brought all his gold and silver (that he made at the house of Lavan), and piled them into a stack. He then said to Aisav, ‘What do you prefer? This stack? Or, your eventual burial here?’ Aisav then took the stack, and Ya’akov took the burial.” Now then, continues Rav Aryeh Leib, while Aisav agreed to take the stack instead of his share in the cave of Chevron, after his brother Ya’akov died, Aisav still wanted to see the written proof of Ya’akov’s ownership of the cave, as we see from the Gemarah in Sotah 13a: “…..He (Aisav) said to them (at Ya’akov’s funeral), ‘Produce a document (of sale, which actually existed) for me’. They replied to him, ‘The document is in the land of Egypt. Who will go for it? Let Naftali go, because he is swift as a hind’; for it is written, “Naftali is a hind sent loose, he gives goodly words.” (B’raishis 49:21)”’ Rabbi Avahu said, ‘Read not ‘goodly words,’ but rather, words of a document.’ Among those present was Chushim, a son of Dan, who was hard of hearing; so he asked them, ‘What is happening?’ They said to him, ‘Aisav is preventing (the burial) until Naftali returns from the land of Egypt’.