What is the Difference Between a Mizbeach and a Matzeiva?

Parashat Vayishlach tells of Yaakov's return to Eretz Canaan. Upon his return, he revisits the city he named Bet-El, where God appeared to him when he had initially fled Canaan over twenty years earlier. There in Bet-El, Yaakov erects a mizbei'ach – an altar (35:7), as well as a matzeiva – a monument (35:14). Much later in Chumash (Devarim 16:22), the Torah strictly forbids erecting a matzeiva, calling it "despised" by God. The Sifrei there notes that a matzeiva is "ahuva la-avot, senu'a la-banim" – "beloved for the fathers, despised for the children." Meaning, erecting these monuments to God was an admirable practice during the time of the patriarchs, something "beloved" by the Almighty, whereas for future generations it is strictly forbidden and "despised."

What exactly is the difference between a mizbei'ach and a matzeiva, and why did the status of matzeivot change so drastically?

The Ramban, in his commentary to Parashat Vayetze (28:18), points to two differences between a mizbei'ach and a matzeiva, one structural, the other procedural. A mizbei'ach, as we know from other sources, as well, is made from many stones, whereas a matzeiva is a single stone. Secondly, the Ramban writes, matzeivot were used specifically for "nesakhim" – libations. Twice Yaakov erects a matzeiva in Bet-El, once during his departure from Canaan, and once after his return, and in both instances he pours oil over it (28:18, 35:14; in the second instances, it appears that he poured wine, as well). A mizbei'ach, by contrast, is used for animal and meal offerings, as well. The Ramban speculates that the Canaanites had institutionalized the use of matzeivot as part of their pagan worship to a greater extent than they did altars. For this reason, then, the Torah strictly forbade the use of matzeivot while it sanctioned – and in fact obligated – the building and use of altars.

Rav Shimshon Refael Hirsch, loyal to his general approach of attributing symbolic significance to the laws and prohibitions of the Torah, explains the difference between a matzeiva and a mizbei'ach by unearthing the symbolic meaning of each. As mentioned, a matzeiva consists of nothing more than a single stone. The human being does nothing to this stone other than designate it for ritual use. A matzeiva, then, symbolizes the acts of God, divine power, human passivity and futility in relation to the Almighty's unlimited control. The matzeiva therefore served as a means of expressing man's gratitude to the Almighty and his attribution of all his success to Him. By contrast, the mizbei'ach, which man creates, represents human input and manipulation of the natural world. It is used for sacrifices – the symbol of man's absolute, limitless commitment and devotion to the service of God. It turns out, then, that through a matzeiva one expressed feelings of gratitude and appreciation, whereas the altar was used to express one's commitment to the active service of the Almighty.

For this reason, Rav Hirsch explains, the use of matzeivot became entirely forbidden after the giving of the Torah. Among the central messages of the Torah is that there can be no separation between passive recognition of God and the active service of God. Benei Yisrael's acceptance of the Torah meant their transformation from admirers to servants; loyalty to the Torah means that one is not only cognizant of God's power and authority, but enthusiastically willing to sacrifice of himself towards the service of God. Therefore, after Matan Torah, all offerings – including libations, the "matzeiva offerings" – must be brought specifically on a mizbei'ach, for at this point, feelings of thanksgiving and gratitude must be accompanied by sincere devotion and commitment to sacrifice.

Volver al capítulo

Yaakov's Efforts and Preparations for Meeting Esav

Yaakov's confrontation with Esav in Parashat Vayishlach is often viewed as symbolic not only of Am Yisrael's encounter with its enemies (as discussed yesterday), but also, in a more homiletical sense, of a Jew's struggle against his internal foe - his yetzer ha-ra, or evil inclination, in whatever form it assumes. "Darshanim" have drawn insights from this parasha as to the methods by which one can and should deal and, hopefully, overcome man's tendency to sin.

Chazal, cited by Rashi (32:9), emphasize the three tactics Yaakov employs in preparation for his reunion with Esav: prayer, appeasement, and military strategy. Rav Shlomo Yosef Zevin sees within this program implemented by Yaakov an indication as to how the Torah recommends dealing with one's yetzer ha-ra. The first element is "appeasement," surrendering is some small measure to the evil inclination. In various contexts, Chazal frown upon excessive self-denial and asceticism. Some sources criticize a nazir for abstaining from wine, and in certain situations one who accepts a voluntary fast is considered a sinner. Yaakov's gift of appeasement to Esav, Rav Zevin suggests, represents the necessary "appeasement" to our own instincts, our allowing ourselves - on a limited scale - to indulge, live normal, happy lives, and enjoy the pleasures of the world. In this way, we assuage the yetzer ha-ra and help ensure that it does not overpower us. Indeed, Chazal comment that one who does not work for a living will ultimately resort to theft. If we surrender to the basic human desire for money by earning a living honestly and respectably, we can avoid yielding to the pressures to acquire money criminally.

However, this method is not appropriate in every circumstance. In many situations, the yetzer ha-ra must be confronted with "military means," with force, resistance, and firm opposition. Certain situations of religious challenge do not allow for reasonable compromise; outright opposition to our internal impulses is required. This is symbolized by Yaakov Avinu's military preparations for his meeting with Esav.

Finally, one must pray to God for assistance. We cannot endure this battle alone; we must invoke divine compassion and ask for His help.

Though Rav Zevin does not elaborate on the specific meaning of prayer in the context, perhaps the prayer to which he refers relates to the ability to identify the proper response to one's yetzer ha-ra in a given situation. Some circumstances warrant "appeasement," while other demand "war." How are to know which method to implement in a given situation? How do we know when capitulation to one's yetzer ha-ra oversteps the line and brings on an extended process of moral and spiritual deterioration? For this we turn to God and ask for the insight and "sixth sense" necessary to answer these questions. Only with His help and our sincere effort can we determine the proper and most effective means to defeat "Esav" in all its various manifestations.

Volver al capítulo

Kever Rachel - in Beit Lechem?

Parashat Vayishlach tells the tragic story of the death of Rachel as she delivers her second child, Binyamin (35:16-19). The Chumash then tells that Yaakov buried Rachel along the side of the road in Bet Lechem and erected there a monument to her memory. The verse concludes, "This is the monument of Rachel's burial site to this day." As we know, a time-honored tradition identifies Kever Rachel (Rachel's Tomb) with the shrine situated in modern-day Bet Lechem (Bethlehem), several miles south of Jerusalem. Many academic scholars, however, have questioned the authenticity of this tradition. Today we will take a brief look this controversy.

In this parasha, Yaakov and his family move southward from Bet-El, where Yaakov had erected on altar to God, towards Chevron, where he is reunited with his father, Yitzchak (see 35:16 & 27). This account alone would give us no reason to challenge the traditional identification of Kever Rachel. The north-south route running along the Judea-Samaria mountain ridge indeed passes from Shekhem (Nabulus) southward to Bet-El, through Jerusalem, south to Bethlehem, continuing through modern-day Gush Etzion (where this dvar Torah is being written) and onto Chevron. (Today, many people call this route "derekh ha-avot" - the road of the patriarchs). In fact, the original highway in modern-day Israel connecting Jerusalem to Chevron passed Kever Rachel. Therefore, the narrative in Parashat Vayishlach poses no difficulty to this tradition.

What more, the verses here emphasizes that Rachel is buried "along the road to Efrat"; the Biblical city of Efrat was clearly situated in the region of Yehuda, near Bet Lechem (see Mikha 5:1; Rut 4:11).

Among the more compelling challenges that have been raised originates from the story told in Sefer Shemuel I (chapter 10). The prophet Shemuel anoints Shaul as the first king over Israel and, to reinforce Shaul's belief in his appointment, gives Shaul three signs, events that he predicts will happen to him on his way back home. The first sign predicted that Shaul will meet two men "by Kever Rachel on the Benjaminite border, in Tzeltzach" (Shemuel I 10:2). Now Shemuel and Shaul speak here in "Har Efrayim" (see 9:4), known today as the Shomron, north of the Binyamin region, itself north of Jerusalem. Presumably, Shemuel here refers to the border between Binyamin and Efrayim. Apparently, then, it is here where Rachel was buried, not in modern-day Bet Lechem, which is in the northernmost region of Yehuda, south of Binyamin.

However, already Chazal, in the Tosefta (Sota 11:13), raise this potential challenge to the conventional understanding that Rachel was buried in Bet Lechem, in Judea. Chazal explain that "Kever Rachel" describes not where Shaul will meet these two men, but rather the current location of these two men. Shemuel informs Shaul that at this point, these two men are near Kever Rachel, in Bethlehem, heading northward. Shaul will travel southward, toward his home in Giva, and will meet them in Tzeltzach, along the Binyaminite border.

Dr. Yoel Elitzur argues that this interpretation of Chazal may very well be read into the peshuto shel mikra (the straightforward reading of the verse). In each of the three signs Shemuel gives to Shaul, he informs him of the number of people he will meet, some sort of a description of these people, and the location where this meeting will take place. The second sign will occur in Eilon Tavor, where Shaul will meet three men "ascending to God, to Bet-El" (10:3). Likewise, the third sign has Shaul meeting a group of prophets "descending from the Bama" in the city of Givat ha-Elokim (10:5-6). In the presentation of the first sign, however, Shemuel gives no description of the two men Shaul will meet. The parallel between the three signs can be complete only if we adopt Chazal's interpretation of "Kever Rachel" as a description not of the location where Shaul will meet the two men, but rather of their current location. Only "on the Binyaminite border, in Tzeltzach" refers to the site where Shaul will encounter these men.

Thus, these verses in Sefer Shemuel pose no challenge to the common theory as to the location of Kever Rachel.

Volver al capítulo

Yehudit, Yehuda and Leah

Parashat Vayishlach concludes with a presentation of Esav's lineage. This section begins by listing his wives, which include two Hittite women, Ada and Ahalivama (36:2). Rashi identifies Ahalivama as Yehudit, whom we met earlier, in Parashat Toledot, as one of Esav's Hittite wives (26:34). Rashi explains the discrepancy in her name by claiming that her real name was Ahalivama. Esav changed her name to Yehudit in order to mislead his parents into thinking that she rejected idolatry. Apparently, "Yehudit," which of course means "Jew," symbolizes the rejection of paganism. Obviously, this presents a serious problem. We call ourselves "Yehudim," Jews, because we descend from the Southern Kingdom that was led by the tribe of Yehuda, whose territory was thus named Judea. Now when Esav married Ahalivama, Yaakov had not even married yet, let alone begotten his fourth son, Yehuda. How, then, did the name "Yehudit" signify the opposition to paganism? (See Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky, in his "Emet Le-Yaakov.)

We have no choice but to explain that this term bore significance even before the birth of Yehuda. To identify the source of this significance, we need only to note the origin of Yehuda's name. Upon his birth, his mother, Leah, declares, "This time I will thank God" ("ha-pa'am odeh at Hashem" - 29:35). The name Yehuda thus means the expression of gratitude, or the recognition of the Almighty as solely responsible for evin the universe. From Rashi it clearly emerges that this very point lies at the heart of monotheism and marks the fundamental distinction between it and idolatry.

We may perhaps gain a clearer understanding of this point by considering the Gemara's comment in Masekhet Berakhot 7b. The Gemara there claims that no one ever thanked the Almighty until Leah did upon Yehuda's birth. Many commentators have struggled to understand the Gemara's intent. Could it be that no one ever expressed gratitude to God before Leah delivered her fourth child? On one level, this Gemara will always remain an enigma: it's hard to imagine that Leah introduced a new dimension of gratitude that Avraham, Yitzchak or Yaakov never expressed. Nevertheless, attempts have been made to identify this new dimension of Leah's thanksgiving. Some have claimed that whereas many of her predecessors thanked God for supernatural or extraordinary events, Leah represented a constant acknowledgment of God's kindness, as manifest even in ordinary occurrences. We may add that at all her other births, Leah issued a declaration explicitly referring to her status vis-à-vis Yaakov, she was thankful specifically for the "promotion" she earned as a result of her having borne children. This time, she makes no mention whatsoever of her husband's affection for her; she states simply, "This time I will thank God." It appears as though at this point Leah achieves a generic sense of appreciation for God's goodness, irrespective of any specific acts of kindness.

Volver al capítulo

Yaakov and Yisrael: The Struggle with the Angel

As we've mentioned on several occasions throughout our S.A.L.T. series, Chazal identify the mysterious man/being who attacked Yaakov in the middle of the night as "Saro shel Esav," Esav's heavenly angel. One source, however, appears at first glance to indicate otherwise. Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer 36 writes that when the angel changed Yaakov's name to Yisrael (32:29), he responded to Yaakov's request that the angel reveal his name (despite the fact that the Torah records this request as occurring only after the name change). The angel gave Yaakov his own name, Yisrael - this was the angel's name!!

So, who was this "Yisrael"? Was this not Esav's heavenly angel?

We can perhaps explain this Midrash by taking a closer look at the entire encounter. Assuming this was, in fact, Esav's "sar," what did he want? Why had he come? One direction taken on this issue suggests that this struggle involved the blessing that Yaakov had stolen from his brother. Recall that Yaakov had fled Canaan upon learning that Esav wished to kill him for seizing the blessing intended for himself. Now, in Parashat Vayishlach, Yaakov returns to Canaan without this issue having been resolved. What will happen? Has Esav forgotten and forgiven, granting Yaakov the birthright, or does he remain committed to his pledge to fight his brother to the death to retrieve the blessing? Esav's angel thus confronts Yaakov just as he crosses into Canaan. Yaakov overpowers the angel and does not let him free "until you bless me." What blessing does Yaakov want? He demands here confirmation of the blessing that he received from his father through deception. Esav's angel must now bring this conflict to an end, by formally conceding defeat and acknowledging Yaakov's right to the blessing. He therefore gives Yaakov his own name, the name of Yisrael. Many commentators explain that whereas "Yaakov" connotes trickery and deceit, "Yisrael" refers to straightforward dominion and authority. This authority that Esav had presumed to be his own, Yitzchak's blessing of, "you shall be master over your brother," is now formally transferred to Yaakov.

Yaakov therefore declares, "For I have seen God face to face, and my life has been saved" (32:31). This statement clearly corresponds to his prayer earlier in the parasha (32:12), "Please save me from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esav." Yaakov now realizes that he not only survived a late-night attack by a stranger, but his original prayer for deliverance from Esav has been answered. The issue of the birthright has been resolved, Yaakov has won the title of "Yisrael" that Esav had until now held as his own.

Volver al capítulo

I Have Seen Your Face Like Having Seen the Face of God

At the dramatic, conciliatory meeting between Yaakov and Esav in Parashat Vayishlach, Yaakov implores Esav to accept the gift he had prepared for him. Responding to Esav's initial refusal, Yaakov employs a peculiar expression, one which the commentators debate how to understand: "Please, no; if you would do me this favor, accept from me this gift, for I have seen your face like having seen the face of God, and you have received me favorably" (33:10). We present here several of the interpretations offered by the commentators.

Many writers understood "the face of God" as a reference to the angel with whom Yaakov had wrestled just prior to his reunion with Esav, whom Chazal identify as Esav's heavenly angel. Rashi, for example, explains that Yaakov expresses his sentiment that seeing Esav is as significant to him as the vision of the angel. Yaakov chooses this reference, Rashi explains, to warn his brother that just as he overcame his angel, so can he overcome him should Esav resume hostilities. The Radak explains along these lines, as well.

The Ramban argues, claiming that Yaakov actually compares his reunion with Esav to "seeing God." Yaakov invokes this analogy as part of his plea that Esav accept his gift. Just as the Almighty Himself accepts the offerings of those who come to see Him, so should Esav. Rav Yosef Shaul Nathanson (Divrei Shaul, Mahadura Revi'a) adds a noteworthy insight onto the Ramban's approach. Esav explained his refusal on the basis of "yesh li rav" - that he has plenty and does not need Yaakov's gift. Yaakov therefore reminds his brother that even the Almighty Himself, who is all powerful and owns everything in the universe, willingly accepts the gifts of those who seek His compassion and kindness. Therefore, Esav's fortune should not lead him to turn down Yaakov's gift. The Yismach Moshe explains similarly, adding that we bring offerings to God for our own benefit, rather than for His, as man cannot possibly "benefit" the Almighty. Yaakov thus indicates to Esav that he should accept the gift for Yaakov's benefit. Oddly enough, neither of these two Acharonim note that this interpretation is found already in much earlier writings, in the commentary of the Abarbanel. The Abarbanel also explains the beginning of this verse on the basis of this approach. Yaakov implores Esav, ".. if you would do me this favor, accept from me this gift… " Yaakov stresses that Esav should accept the gift as a favor to Yaakov, rather than for his own needs.

Rav Sa'adya Gaon posits yet a third interpretation of the word "Elokim" (literally, God) in this verse: respected people. Yaakov thus claims that he considers Esav a dignitary; he should therefore accept Yaakov's offering, as those visiting noblemen customarily bring gifts. This appears to be the understanding of Targum Onkelos, who translates here the word, "Elokim" as "ravrevaya," the Aramaic word for dignitaries. The Seforno, as well, adopts this approach.

Masekhet Sofrim (4:5) rules that the word "Elokim" in this verse is "chol," meaning, it does not refer to God and may therefore be pronounced as "elohim." Obviously, this halakhic ruling would accommodate only the first and third approaches. According to the Ramban, the word here in fact does refer to God and must therefore be pronounced, "Elokim.

Volver al capítulo

החותם של הקב"ה

"בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא נְאֻם ה' צְבָאוֹת אֶקָּחֲךָ זְרֻבָּבֶל בֶּן שְׁאַלְתִּיאֵל עַבְדִּי נְאֻם ה' וְשַׂמְתִּיךָ כַּחוֹתָם כִּי בְךָ בָחַרְתִּי נְאֻם ה' צְבָאוֹת" (חגי ב', כג)

ביום ההוא - אקחך להעלותך במעלה יותר ממה שהיית עד היום ההוא, ותרגם יונתן: 'אקרבינך'.

ושמתיך כחותם - הטבעת שחותמים בה הכתבים נקרא חותם וכן אמר "שימני כחותם" (שיר השירים ח', ו). והטבעת ההיא לא תסור מיד האדם לא ביום ולא בלילה, רצה לומר שתהיה השגחת האל תמידה עליו.

ואמרו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה: גדולה תשובה שמקרעת גזר דין שנאמר: "כתבו... האיש הזה ערירי" (ירמיהו כ"ב, ל), וכיון שעשה תשובה נהפך לו גזר דין לטובה ונולד לו בן בבית האיסורים. ואמר "חי אני נאם ה'... אם יהיה כניהו... חותם על יד ימיני" וגו' (שם, כד) וכיון שעשה תשובה נהפך לו לטובה ואמר לזרובבל בן בנו "ושמתיך כחותם" (חגי ב', כג) הפך מה שאמר לו "אם יהיה כניהו... חותם וגו'" (ירמיהו כ"ב, כד).

רד"ק - ר' דוד בן יוסף קמחי, חי בדרום צרפת בין השנים 1160-1235. התפרסם כדקדקן על ידי ספרו "מכלול", הרבה לעיין בפילוסופיה ובמדעים. כתב פירוש לתנ"ך לספרי בראשית, נביאים ראשונים, נביאים אחרונים, תהלים ודברי הימים. פירושו עוסק הרבה בענייני לשון, ניקוד, מסורה, ופירוש המילים. הוא עוסק גם בשאלת חיבור הספרים וזמנם של הנביאים, שאלות היסטוריות וגיאוגרפיות, ובויכוחים עם הפרשנות הנוצרית לכתוב.

Volver al capítulo

העיקר לבנות את המקדש

תאריכה של הנבואה הפותחת את פרקנו הוא: "בשביעי, בעשרים ואחד לחדש" (א). החודש השביעי הוא חודש תשרי, והעשרים ואחד בו הוא היום האחרון של חג הסוכות, היום הנקרא בפינו 'הושענא רבה'. התורה אינה מציינת את היום הזה במיוחד, ואינה קובעת אותו מקרא קדש, כמו את שביעי של פסח, אך אולי בתקופת חגי כבר החלו לציין אותו כיום מיוחד, כפי שנהוג היום, וסביב המזבח שבנו שבי ציון ניצב עם רב.

התאריך הוא ארבעה שבועות אחרי התחלת המלאכה. הנביא פונה אל זרובבל בן שאלתיאל פחת יהודה ואל יהושע בן יהוצדק הכהן הגדול ואל שארית העם, דהיינו אל הזקנים אשר זכו לראות בעיניהם את המקדש הראשון אשר בנה שלמה המלך, ואומר: "מי בכם הנשאר אשר ראה את הבית הזה בכבודו הראשון, ומה אתם רואים אותו עתה? הלוא כמוהו כאין בעיניכם" (ג).

הזקנים המשווים את הבית הנוכחי ההולך ונבנה, עם הבית הקודם שנחרב, יכולים לקבוע כי כבודו הוא כאין לעומת תפארתו של הבית הראשון. מתוך השוואה זו הם עלולים להגיע לכלל יאוש, או לזלזל חלילה בכבודו של הבית. ועל כן מחזק אותם הנביא: "ועתה חזק זרובבל נאום ה', וחזק יהושע בן יהוצדק הכהן הגדול, וחזק כל עם הארץ נאום ה', ועשו כי אני אתכם נאום ה' צבאות" (ד).

אמנם הבית אינו מפואר, אך אל תתיאשו, ה' ישמור את בריתו, ברית שכרת עם העם בהר סיני, ביציאת מצרים, וישכין את שכינתו גם בבית הזה: "את הדבר אשר כרתי אתכם בצאתכם ממצרים, ורוחי עומדת בתוככם, אל תיראו" (ה). דבריו רומזים ככל הנראה לנאמר בתורה בספר שמות פרק כ"ה: "ועשו לי מקדש - ושכנתי בתוכם".

תפקידו של העם אינו לפאר את המקדש כי אם לבנותו. אין חשיבות לגודלו של הבנין או לפארו, בנייתו היא החשובה. כאשר תושלם מלאכת הבניה יביאו הגויים את חמדתם וימלאו את הבית הקטן והדל כבוד, עד שכבודו אף יגדל מכבוד הבית הראשון. העושר שביד הגויים של הקב"ה הוא, וכשירצה יביאוהו הגויים לבית ה': "והרעשתי את כל הגויים, ובאו חמדת כל הגויים, ומלאתי את הבית הזה כבוד... לי הכסף ולי הזהב, נאום ה' צבאות. גדול יהיה כבוד הבית הזה האחרון מן הראשון אמר ה' צבאות..." (ז-ט).

דברי העידוד והחיזוק של חגי פעלו את פעולתם. והעם התעודד והמשיך במלאכת הבניה:

"ושבי יהודיא בנין ומצלחין, בנבואת חגי נביאה וזכריה בר עדוא, ובנו ושכלילו מן טעם אלה ישראל..." (עזרא ו', יד)

נערך ע"י צוות אתר התנ"ך

לקריאת המאמר המלא באדיבות אתר דעת

Volver al capítulo

Hoshea vs. Ovadya as the Haftara for Vayishlach

Just prior to his long-feared, though ultimately peaceful, reunion with Esav, Yaakov Avinu comes under attack by an unknown assailant, clearly an angel of sorts. As we know, Yaakov defeats the angel but suffers a debilitating blow to the leg. Commentators throughout the ages have uncovered for us the rich symbolism of this episode, the image of the Jew "left alone" (32:25) in exile, struggling against enemies and ultimately prevailing, regardless of the serious wounds inflicted. In the end, the "sun shines for him" (32:32), marking the end of the long darkness of exile and the dawning of redemption.

The centrality of this event within Parashat Vayishlach is perhaps indicated by one of the two customary selections for this parasha's haftara. Whereas some communities read the brief book of Ovadya on Shabbat Parashat Vayishlach, others have the practice of reading the section "Ve-ami telu'im" in Hoshea 11:7-12-12. (A third practice recorded is to read the immediately following section in Hoshea, "Va-yivrach Yaakov sedeh Aram.") The choice of Sefer Ovadya is rather clear, as it speaks entirely of the ultimate victory of Yaakov's descendants over those of Esav. Though the middle section of Parashat Vayishlach deals with Yaakov's experiences as he returns to Eretz Canaan, the primary theme, which dominates both the beginning and end of the parasha, involves his struggle with Esav. Thus, Sefer Ovadya appears as a natural choice for this parasha's haftara. The selection from Hoshea, however, bears but one parallel to Parashat Vayishlach: it briefly recounts the incident of Yaakov's wrestle with the angel. Why did the custom evolve to prefer this prophecy over the book of Ovadya? Rav Soloveitchik zt"l is cited as interpreting this practice on the basis of the centrality of this episode within Parashat Vayishlach. It forms the very backbone and establishes the primary theme of this parasha. Why?

The Rav explained that in Parashat Vayishlach Yaakov struggles against two enemies, who essentially are one in the same: Esav and the mysterious angel. On the surface, these two battles bear very little resemblance. Esav harbors enmity towards Yaakov, it seems, for a very clear reason: a rage of jealousy. Yaakov cheated him out of his birthright and father's blessing, and Esav wants revenge. This is how Yaakov and his parents approached Esav's threat from the very beginning. Rivka told Yaakov to flee until Esav's wrath has subsided, at which point she would call him back (27:44-45). The threat cannot last forever, since jealousy naturally fades with time. Yaakov likewise suspects that he can assuage his brother's hard feelings with a generous bribe (32:14-22) and respectful bows (33:3,6,7). The angel, by contrast, emerges from the dark and, without any discernible motive or goal, attacks. Yaakov valiantly responds, though he has no idea why or for what he must fight. However distinct these two battles appear, Chazal clearly view them as one and the same. The angel was none other than the "sar," the angelic representative, of Esav and his following. We learn here that even the clear battles against our enemies, those which appear to involve specific, tangible conflicts - theology, territory, resources, etc. - actually conceal a much more generic hatred, which the Jew will never understand but must somehow confront. Thus, the primary struggle in Parashat Vayishlach is the fight against the angel, as this confrontation reveals the true nature of the seemingly intelligible battle against Esav.

A famous Midrashic dictum claims that "halakha yedu'a hi she-sonei Esav le-Yaakov" - it's common knowledge that Esav despises Yaakov. Hatred for Am Yisrael has always existed, but in so many different forms. We do not and cannot understand why nor can we necessarily point to the proper protective measures to avoid it. All we can do is trust that ultimately the "sun will shine," and Yisrael, as Yaakov is here renamed, will prevail.

Volver al capítulo

Quietly Commemorating Overcoming a Challenge

Parashat Vayishlach tells of Yaakov's successful confrontation with the mysterious attacker. Recall that Yaakov suffered a serious wound to the leg over the course of the contest, which we commemorate, as the Torah writes, through the prohibition of eating the "gid hanasheh" (thigh muscle) of an animal.

Rav Moshe Feinstein raises an interesting question: why do we commemorate this miracle of Yaakov's victory over the angel through inaction, by refraining from a given activity? In two weeks we will celebrate the Hasmonean defeat over the Greeks through the observance of Channuka. This observance entails the recitation of hallel, lighting candles to publicize the miracle, and modes of festivity. On Purim, too, our commemoration of the miracle requires several rituals and active festivity. Why do we commemorate Yaakov's struggle with the angel by simply refraining from eating the "gid hanasheh"?

Rav Moshe suggests that this mitzvah commemorates a specific kind of miracle: overcoming challenges and trying circumstances. Although Rav Moshe does not elaborate, he implies that Yaakov's wrestle with the mysterious assailant symbolizes his struggles in exile and ultimate triumph. This type of miracle warrants a less enthusiastic commemoration. We pray every day (towards the end of "birkhot ha-shachar"), "Do not bring us to tests." We much prefer not to confront exile and grueling conditions, even if we eventually overcome these obstacles. Our ultimate triumph over adversity and trying times deserves commemoration, but a much different type of commemoration than other miracles involving the overthrow of our enemies. Yaakov's successful struggle with the angel is thus commemorated passively and somewhat subtly, through restrain and inaction, rather than active celebration.

Volver al capítulo

What is the Difference Between a Mizbeach and a Matzeiva?

Yaakov's Efforts and Preparations for Meeting Esav

Kever Rachel - in Beit Lechem?

Yehudit, Yehuda and Leah

Yaakov and Yisrael: The Struggle with the Angel

I Have Seen Your Face Like Having Seen the Face of God

החותם של הקב"ה

העיקר לבנות את המקדש

Hoshea vs. Ovadya as the Haftara for Vayishlach

Quietly Commemorating Overcoming a Challenge

Pages

📲 Instala nuestra App