Transcript

נכתבה הפרשה הזאת להודיע כי חסה הקדוש ברוך הוא את עבדו וגאלו מיד חזק ממנו וישלח מלאך ויצילהו ולמדנו עוד שהוא לא בטח בצדקתו והשתדל בהצלה בכל יכולתו.

So there were two lessons to be learned. Number one: the hashgacha that Hakadosh Baruch Hu exercises. Also that Yaakov Avinu engaged in the utmost of hatzala, of hishtadlus. The pshat is in the Ramban, not that there's two unrelated lessons that are to be derived, but they're really interlocked and interdependent. Don't misunderstand the existence of hashgachas Hashem, of Hakadosh Baruch Hu's protection; don't think that that translates into that a person can be totally passive, that there's no chovas hishtadlus. The two lessons are משלימים זה את זה. On the other hand, don't think that the hishtadlus b'derech hateva is what achieved the result; כי חסה הקדוש ברוך הוא את עבדו. Don't mistake what bitachon v'hashgacha implies. Don't mistake what chovas hishtadlus implies. Bitachon in Hakadosh Baruch Hu notwithstanding, there's the chiyuv to be משתדל בהצלה בכל יכולתו. The chiyuv to be משתדל בהצלה בכל יכולתו notwithstanding, it's Hakadosh Baruch Hu who was matzil es avdo. Bitachon is never a substitute for what one's mechuyav to do. Medinat Yisrael is supposed to have, supposed to have a Tzahal. If a person doesn't have parnassa, he should be looking for avenues to be able to earn a parnassa. There's individual danger to his life, so the person has to be mishtadel bechol yecholto of השמר לך ושמור נפשך מאד. It's possible that even though the yesod is true in all of those three contexts that we gave, but they're not all kachada machta. And it's possible that the description and definition here of the Ramban of hishtadel bechol yecholto to do the absolute utmost is when the hishtadlus is in response to where the Torah emphasizes the need for extraordinary measures: meod,

השמר לך ושמר נפשך מאד, השמר לך ושמר נפשך מאד.

Meod always means bechol meodecha, means with everything. Right, how does bechol meodecha mean bechol mamoncha? It means that a person gives everything he has. So that's not necessarily true of the chiyuv hishtadlus in other contexts. The chiyuv hishtadlus for parnassa, it has to be real hishtadlus, but I don't know if the Ramban would necessarily tell us that the chiyuv is bechol yecholto to leave, to use every ounce of energy and every possible tachbula and every, no, a person has to make hishtadlus. But when it's behatzala, so then the peshat, then the definition of the chiyuv hishtadlus as the Torah says meod, meod, is bechol yecholto. It's possible you see from the Ramban here that I think what I said back in parshas Lech Lecha in terms of why the Ramban, what's the peshat in Avraham Avinu's cheit in leaving Eretz Yisrael that the peshat I said then, it appears from this Ramban that that was wrong. So what's the difference between, clearly the Ramban is saying Yaakov Avinu reacted correctly, right? The Torah wants us to learn this lesson. So isn't that what Avraham Avinu was doing? Avraham Avinu was also being mishtadel bechol yecholto. There was a famine in Eretz Yisrael, he was going to starve to death. So he was going to, he was being mishtadel bechol yecholto. So half an answer, perhaps, is that maybe the Ramban understands HaKadosh Baruch Hu told him לך לך אל הארץ אשר אראך. Once HaKadosh Baruch Hu told Avraham Avinu to go to Eretz Yisrael, משל למה הדבר דומה, right? The Gemara says there's a din that if you have a davar shebeminyan צריך מנין אחר להתירו. If the Sanhedrin was nimnu vegamru and they assured something miderabbanan, so even though the taam for the gezeira seems no longer applicable, but צריך מנין אחר להתירו. And the Gemara derives this from the fact that HaKadosh Baruch Hu kodem matan Torah was אל תגשו אל אשה. But clearly the only reason for that was to היו נכונים ליום השלישי for kabbalas haTorah. But אף על פי כן, even though after kabbalas haTorah the taam was no longer relevant, HaKadosh Baruch Hu had to explicitly be matir לך אמר להם שובו לכם לאהליכם. So you see that a davar shebeminyan צריך מנין אחר להתירו. So maybe ke'ein zeh, that's what the Ramban meant back in parshas Lech Lecha, that HaKadosh Baruch Hu told him to go to Eretz Yisrael. Until and unless HaKadosh Baruch Hu said further, gave him further instructions, so that meant go to Eretz Yisrael and stay there. It didn't mean go to Eretz Yisrael on a tourist visa. No, it meant go to Eretz Yisrael and stay there. Ai, there was a famine, okay. So if Hakadosh Baruch Hu says go to Eretz Yisrael and again implicitly that means unless he says to leave that means stay there so then you have to have bitachon so Hakadosh Baruch Hu is going to figure out how I'm going to survive in Eretz Yisrael even even with a famine. If Avraham Avinu and his own had gone to Eretz Yisrael so then ein hachi nami it would have been the right thing to do to leave on account of the famine. Okay the Ramban also had the second cheit there was with Sarah Imeinu so you have to figure out what the pshat with that is. ויש בו זה עוד רמז לדורות. Whatever one's understanding and we're not talking about our understanding meaning in terms of the Chachmei HaMasora throughout the doros whatever one's understanding in terms of hashgacha is it's incontrovertible that halacha the Torah tells us that we're supposed to function on a natural level. We're mechallel Shabbos it's not chillul Shabbos but in quotation marks we're mechallel Shabbos if there's a sofek sakana. No we should just take out a we should just say Ribono Shel Olam will take care of everything. Okay maybe we should say a Kapitel Tehillim we give a klap and say a Kapitel Tehillim. No the din is that one is mechuyav to be mechallel Shabbos.

למדו תורה דרך ארץ ויאמר ימל אדם תורה ואחר כך ימל אומנות ואחר כך ישא אשה.

So what does he have to learn an omnus for? No יתפלל למי שהעושר שלו. So you see whatever the whatever the havana in terms of hashgacha pratis is and however one understands the interplay in terms of what a person practically is mechuyav to do a person is mechuyav to act on a natural level. That's clearly ad kedei kach the Rambam says okay so the Ramban tries to offer a different pshat. The Rambam says the simple pshat ad kedei kach okay this already speaks to how one understands hashgacha pratis. The Torah talks in natural terms about

מי האיש אשר בנה בית ולא חנכו ילך וישוב לביתו פן ימות במלחמה.

People get people killed in rachmana litzlan in a milchama. But okay so maybe there's a different pshat in those pesukim but it's incontrovertible that there's a chiyuv to act on a natural level to function to live to act on a natural level. השתדלות והצלה בכל יכולתו. That kimlo nima doesn't encroach upon the fact that it's never kochi v'otzem yadi it's never kochi v'otzem yadi. It's Hakadosh Baruch Hu הציל את עבדו וגאלו מיד חזק ממנו. With the השתדלות והצלה בכל יכולתו so the Ramban is emphasizing it was miyad chazak mimenu.

ויש בו זה עוד רמז לדורות. הגם שעת חזק ממנו

there's still the chiyuv to be mishtadel

השתדלות והצלה בכל יכולתו. ויש בו עוד רמז לדורות כי כל אשר עבר על אבינו עם עשו אחיו יעבור לנו תמיד עם בני עשו וראוי לנו לאחוז בדרכו של צדיק שנזמן את עצמו לשלושת הדברים שהזמין הוא את עצמו לתפילה ולדורון ולהצלה בדרך מלחמה

livroach ulehinatzel. Milchamah doesn't mean only looking to vanquish the other person. Sometimes milchamah means to run away.

וכבר ראו רבותינו הרמז הזה מן הפרשה הזאת כאשר אזכיר אל עשו אחיו ארצה שעיר בשביל שהיה נגב ארץ ישראל על ידי אדום ואביו יושב בארץ הנגב ויש לו לבוא דרך אדום

vekarov misham. Al ken pachad ulai yishma Esav

והקדים לשלוח אליו מלאכים לארצו. וכבר תפסוהו החכמים על זה אמרו בבראשית רבה מחזיק באזני כלב וגו'. אמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא לדרכו היה מהלך והיית משלח אצלו ואמר לו כה אמר עבדך יעקב.

And maybe this is where the idiom that we have even in English traces back to, but letting sleeping dogs lie. That's what machzik be'oznei kelev. Why are Chazal in light of what the Ramban just said in his hakdamah, Yaakov Avinu was משתדל בהצלה בכל יכולתו, so why are Chazal faulting Yaakov Avinu for this? So lekhora the answer is, again, that Esav was going to respond to Yaakov's plea was highly, highly unlikely. Ella mai, if the person is certainly in that predicament, so you try. There's nothing to lose. But over here where maybe there was a greater chance that Esav wouldn't be aware, from what Yaakov knew there was a greater chance that Esav would not be aware that he could make it successfully to Eretz Yisrael without Esav ever being aware, there was a greater chance of that happening than there was of Esav being swayed by the messages that Yaakov sent him. ועל דעתי גם זה ירמוז. Here too there's a remez ledorot. The same way that Yaakov Avinu erred in initiating contact with Esav, when itakhen he could have avoided that contact entirely.

ועל דעתי גם זה ירמוז כי אנחנו התחלנו נפילתנו ביד אדום.

We initiated our downfall biymai Bayis Sheni at the hands of the Roman government, Edom,

כי מלכי בית שני באו בברית הרומיים ומהם שבאו ברומא וזאת הייתה סיבת נפילתם בידם.

They invited the Roman Empire into their internal affairs. וזה מוזכר בדברי רבותינו ומפורסם בספרים. It's a pachad nora what's happening in Eretz Yisrael today. That the Jewish parties preferred to form a coalition with Arabs as opposed to creating a coalition just amongst Jewish parties is a pachad nora. It's a pachad nora. It's something which should be unthinkable. It's exactly what this Ramban is talking about. It's ayom venora. You can love Netanyahu or you can hate Netanyahu but you can't prefer והוא יהיה פרא אדם וידו בכל ויד כל בו, you can't prefer that party to Netanyahu. And you can love Lapid or you can hate Lapid, but you can't prefer, you can't have been willing to form such a coalition. For thousands of years of Jewish history since this happened, it was unthinkable that there was such a thing. And it's mavil al harayon that's happening in Eretz Yisrael. It's mavil al harayon. It's got nothing to do with whether one's politics are on the right or on the left. Nothing. It's not politics.

כה תאמרון לאדני לעשו כה אמר עבדך יעקב צוה אותם שיאמרו לאדני עשו אנחנו שלו או שלוחים אליו ולאמר לו כה אמר עבדך יעקב עם לבן גרתי ודומה לו בפרשה למי אתה או שקראו יעקב בפניהם אדני עשו להזהירם שלא יזכירוהו אפילו שלא בפניו רק דרך כבוד כי בראותם כי אדוניהם קורא אותו אדוני.

So the Ramban suggests two pshatim in the pasuk. Pshat number one is ויצו אותם לאמר כה תאמרון. Now open quotes, ladoni l'Esav. Ladoni l'Esav is part of what they're being commanded to speak to Esav. Right? So ויצו אותם לאמר כה תאמרון, ko somrun then colon or open quotes, sheyomru, this is the way you should address him. You'll be addressing Adoni Esav. Ko somrun, this is what you should say: ladoni l'Esav, it's we're shluchim to my master to Esav. That's pshat number one. Pshat number two no is ויצו אותם לאמר כה תאמרון לאדוני לעשו, now open quotes. According to that pshat, so why is Yaakov Avinu making a point of even shelo befanav as referring to... he's making a point of referring to Esav even shelo befanav as Adoni Esav because he's telling them, no, that should be your mindset, your attitude, because otherwise it's gonna come across when you interact with him. If shelo befanav you're gonna be mezalzel, you're gonna refer to him as the rasha, so then it's gonna be nikar when you interact with him. So even shelo befanav, the same way I shelo befanav am referring to Adoni Esav, so too you need to do the same.

ודע כי הכבוד הזה שהיה יעקב עושה לאחיו בפחדו לאמר אדני ועבדך בעבור כי המנהג בצעיר לעשות מעלה וכבוד אל הבכור כאילו הוא אביו כאשר רמזו לנו גם התורה לרבות אחיך הגדול כבד את אביך לרבות אחיך הגדול והנה יעקב לקח בכורתו וברכתו ועשו שוטם אותו עליהם ועתה היה מראה לו כאילו אין המכירה ההיא אצלו כלום ושהוא נוהג בו כבכור ואב להוציא את המשטמה מלבו.

So yitachen that what the Ramban here is coming to... how can Yaakov Avinu... is it obsequiousness that Yaakov Avinu is referring to Adoni Esav and כה אמר עבדך יעקב? Is it chanifa? So there is takeh one view in the medrash that Yaakov Avinu was wrong to address Esav that way, and that he was ne'enash for referring to Adoni Esav and avdecha Yaakov. So mistama we would have said the alternative is that the Gemara in Berachos says if you have a רשע שהשעה משחקת לו, you have a rasha who's flourishing, so then it's muttar lahchanif. But the Ramban seems to be giving a third approach. The Ramban seems to be saying no, that the leshonos that Yaakov Avinu was employing were not so exceptional, were not so unusual for a younger brother to refer to an older brother that way. And again to us it would just seem so over the top: Adoni Esav, avdecha Yaakov. And that's what the Ramban is saying no, you should know that this kavod that Yaakov was being oseh to his ach wasn't really extraordinary by the accepted standards. Ki haminhag, it wasn't really extraordinary by the accepted standards of how a younger brother related to an older brother. And if that's the case, then that's the Ramban's approach. It's not chanifa. It's neither a chanifa asura nor a chanifa mutteres. It wasn't chanifa. It wasn't chanifa. Would Yaakov Avinu have practiced that kavod were it not for the fact that he was afraid? No, ein hachinami he wouldn't have. But he sort of had this cover that it wasn't chanifa because it was those were the titles and that was the approach that a younger brother would have to an older brother.

ואשלחה להגיד לאדוני להודיע שאני בא אליך למצוא חן בעיניך שאני שלם עמך ומבקש אהבתך

lashon Rashi רצונו לומר שאינו מוסב למעלה, meaning va'eshlacha lehagid ladoni is, according to Rashi, the reason I, Yaakov, sent messengers to Esav is not to give you the update of im Lavan garti and ויהי לי שור וחמור, it's not because you haven't been subscribing to the family chat group. It's not to give you the update, but it's rather limtzo chen be'einecha. Right?

להודיע שאני בא אליך למצוא חן בעיניך רצונו לומר שאינו מוסב למעלה.

va'eshlacha ladoni doesn't refer to what was already said but rather what's about to be said. Aval yomar

ואשלחה להגיד לאדוני כי אני בא למצוא חן בעיני אדוני ולעשות ככל אשר יצוה אדוני.

So that's Rashi's pshat. Says the Ramban ויותר נכון שישוב למעלה. No, I think it's a better pshat in the pasuk that ein hachinami it is referring to what precedes.

ואשלחה להגיד לאדוני כי אני שלך ויש לי עושר נכסים וכבוד לעשות בך חפצך ורצונך.

You should know that I've struck it rich and all of that is at your disposal.

ירמוז שישלח לו דורון מהם או שיקח משלו מה שיחפוץ וכן אמר מי לך כל המחנה הזה אשר פגשתי ויאמר למצוא חן בעיני אדוני.

So you see there later that the למצוא חן בעיני אדוני refers to the putting at his disposal Yaakov Avinu's riches. Let's maybe skip to the Ramban here on pasuk tes, והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה. So the pasuk says im yavo Esav,

ויאמר אם יבוא עשו אל המחנה האחת והכהו והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה.

So seemingly Yaakov Avinu is saying well it's guaranteed that if I divide everyone into two groups, to two camps, so if he'll attack one, so the other will escape. So why is that guaranteed? So the Ramban says על דרך הפשט אמר זה באולי. It's... maybe it will be, halevai that it will be, אמר אולי ינצל המחנה האחד. How so? כי בהכותו האחד while Esav is preoccupied with attacking one camp, so maybe that will provide opportunity for yivarchu acherim, the others can escape. Or toshov chamaso, maybe that will vent his wrath and and he’ll and he’ll spare the remaining camp or ותבא להם הצלה מאת השם. So that’s sort of a funny, it’s not on the same level as the other two. So if ותבא להם הצלה מאת השם, meaning it’s not going to be that they’ll escape and it’s not going to be that Esav will spare them, so ותבא להם הצלה מאת השם. So so if it’s not sort of through the natural means, so what is Yaakov accomplishing with dividing them into into two camps? No, but that maybe that’s heim heim hadevorim that we, that we saw in the Ramban's hakdoma to the parsha, that there’s a chiyuv to be mishtadel bechol yocholto. At the end of the day, even with the hishtadlus bechol yocholto, it’s chozak mimenu. It’s not something which bederech hateva alone will prevail. So that’s what Yaakov Avinu said, this is the best I can come up with. More than this I can’t do. So even if on, on the natural level, this isn’t gonna, maybe one of those two scenarios will materialize, maybe they’ll escape, maybe Esav will spare them because his, his wrath will be spent. But even if not, once I make the hishtadlus, so then I can, then I can, I can hope, I can davven that ותבא להם הצלה מאת השם. But but if I don’t make the hishtadlus, I don’t do what the utmost that I can do, so I can’t ask Hakadosh Baruch Hu to to intervene.

וכן אמר בבראשית רבה לימדתך תורה דרך ארץ שלא יניח אדם כל ממונו בזוית אחת.

Don’t put all your money under one mattress. Spread it amongst several mattresses. וברש"י כתב והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה על כרחו. No, Rashi says not like what the Ramban initially suggest al derech hapeshat. No, it will be guaranteed. By subdividing into two camps, it’s gonna, it guarantees that that one camp will be spared, will survive. Ki elachem imo. התקין עצמו לשלושה דברים לתפילה לדורון ולמלחמה. Again, how it’s guaranteed so the Ramban has yet to explain within Rashi, but but he’s, he’s coming to that.

וראיתי במדרש מהסא זיינם מבפנים והלבישם בגדים לבנים מבחוץ והתקין עצמו לשלושה דברים.

Vechen ikar. Vehakavana baze, what does Rashi mean when he says that al korcho one camp will be spared? כי יעקב יודע שאין זרעו כולו נופל ביד עשו. He knows, כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע. And and he’s the, he and his children are the hemshech of Yitzchak and the kiyom of the havtacha to Avraham and Yitzchak. So Yaakov knows that that he can’t be totally wiped out at the hands of Esav.

כי יעקב יודע שאין זרעו כולו נופל ביד עשו. אם כן ינצל המחנה האחד על כל פנים. וגם זה

says the Ramban

רמז שלא יגזרו עלינו בני עשו למחות שמנו אבל יעשו רעות עם קצתנו בקצת הארצות שלהם. והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה.

So how is that, what’s the מעשה אבות סימן לבנים in that? That biydei Esav the tzaros will never engulf all of Klal Yisrael.

מלך אחד מהם גוזר בארצו על ממוננו או על גופנו.

However,

ומלך אחר מרחם ממקומו ומציל הפליטה. וכן אמרו בבראשית רבה אם יבוא עשו על המחנה האחת והכהו אלו אחינו שבדרום והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה אלו אחינו שבגולה ואף כי גם לדורות תרמוז זאת הפרשה.

Yeah, what was on katonti?

קטנתי מכל החסדים ומכל האמת נתמעטו זכויותי על ידי חסדים ואמת שעשית עמי ובכך אני ירא שמא משהבטחתני נתקלקלתי בחטא ויגרום לי להמסר בידי עשו לשון רש"י.

So just the Rashi itself, again this isn't this just in terms of trying to understand the pshat in the Rashi. The Rashi itself is hard to understand here. Rashi says katonti is I have been diminished, I have become smaller, right? Naaseisi katon. The Ramban will disagree with that. But for Rashi, katonti means niskatanti. I have become small, I've been diminished. Why? Because of everything that you've bestowed upon me. So then le'chora, if nismatu zechuyosai, so how does that connect with אני ירא שמא משהבטחתני נתקלקלתי בחטא? Yaakov Avinu is referencing the fact that nismatu zechuyosai, but then he's saying the reason he's concerned is shema yigrom hachet. שמא משהבטחתני נתקלקלתי בחטא. So what's it got to do with nismatu zechuyosai? And let's say all the chasadim and all the emes hadn't weren't memaet my zechuyos, still maybe niskalkal bachet. How do these two things integrate in Rashi? So le'chora again the question that Chazal already in Gemara Berachos were addressing that Rashi here is addressing is that Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised Yaakov, hinei anochi imach ושמרתיך בכל אשר תלך והשבותיך אל האדמה הזאת back in parshas Vayeitzei. So what's Yaakov Avinu worried about here? Yaakov Avinu is worried shema yigrom hachet. Fine. What's the relevance of nismatu zechuyosai? Le'chora the chet that we're talking about, what do you mean Rashi says שמא משהבטחתני נתקלקלתי בחטא? So make a cheshbon hanefesh and see whether niskalkal bachet or not. What do you mean שמא משהבטחתני נתקלקלתי בחטא? We're talking about the past. There's no why is it shema? Make a cheshbon hanefesh and Yaakov Avinu can ascertain whether niskalkal bachet or not. So the pshat is that Yaakov Avinu was concerned with chatoim beshogeg. Shgios mi yavin. Shgios mi yavin. Ela mai, when a person has zechuyos so Hakadosh Baruch Hu protects him from aveiros beshogeg. משל למה הדבר דומה, the Gemara says that אין הקדוש ברוך הוא מביא תקלה על ידי צדיקים. Okay, so that particular meimra Chazal says, Tosafos says is in particular about ma'achalos asuros. But אין הקדוש ברוך הוא מביא תקלה על ידי צדיקים means that that Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if a person has zechuyos, Hakadosh Baruch Hu protects a person. from inadvertent chet. shegios mi yavin because a person, okay, there were some shogeg that we can't protect ourselves from, but there are other shogeg, shegios mi yavin says Dovid Hamelech, m'nistaros nakkeini. So that, that's the pshat in Rashi. Shema, since נתמעטו זכויותי עדי החסד והאמת שעשית עמי, so I don't have that reservoir of zchuyos to protect me. So then shema nitkalkalti b'chet, shema mishebivtachtani nitkalkalti b'chet. Maybe I was nichshal in a chet b'shogeg that I'm not aware of, and that chet b'shogeg will be, will be ויגרמו לי להמסר ביד עשיו. ואיננו נכון בלשון הכתוב, meaning what? I think the Pnei Yehoshua explains here that the Ramban thinks katonti means I am small, not that I have been diminished, not that I've been made small, but that I am small. So he just thinks that that's not the right teitch in the word. So maybe just skipping several lines continuing in the Ramban here: אבל קטונתי לומר כי קטון הוא. What does the Ramban think katonti means? ki katon hu. I am, I am so puny, I am so small.

אבל קטונתי לומר כי קטון הוא מהיותו ראוי לכל החסדים שעשה עמו.

I'm so small and undeserving of everything you've done for me Hakadosh Baruch Hu.

וכן מי יקום יעקב כי קטון הוא, קטון מהיותו יכול לסבול כל הנגזר עליו. וכן אמרו בבראשית רבה קטונתי רבי אבא אמר איני כדאי.

So what's, okay now, what's

מכל החסדים ומכל האמת? והחסדים הם הטובה שעשה עמו בלא נדר,

without a prior promise, והאמת הטובה אשר הבטיח ואמת להבטחתו. And emmes refers to the promises that Hakadosh Baruch Hu made good on.

יאמר שאיננו ראוי שיבטיחנו ויעשה לו אותן טובות שהבטיח בהן ולא לטובות אחרות רבות שעשה עמו.

Okay, maybe we'll stop there.