At the end of last parsha we are already told Yaakov left, so why does it repeat it at the beginning of our parsha?In last weeks parsha, the Torah doesn't put emphasis on Yaakov's leaving, rather on where he was going: וַיִּשְׁמַ֣ע יַעֲקֹ֔ב אֶל־אָבִ֖יו וְאֶל־אִמּ֑וֹ וַיֵּ֖לֶךְ פַּדֶּ֥נָֽה אֲרָֽם. In this week's parsha it emphasis the leaving: וַיֵּצֵ֥א יַעֲקֹ֖ב מִבְּאֵ֣ר שָׁ֑בַע. Why is the emphasis changed from going to leaving? There are two types of Yaakov. There is the Yaakov of Parshas Toldos and then there is the Yaakov of Vayetzeh. The Yaakov of Toldos is the son of Yitzchak. We are introduced to him as the son of Yitzchak. He is the איש תם יושב אוהלים, the timid son one who learns Torah and only under his mothers tutelage emerges as the son that will carry on the legacy of the Avos. Then Yaakov is forced to leave with his parents wishes and must travel to פַּדֶּ֥נָֽה אֲרָֽם, but he doesn't leave the old Yaakov behind, his goal is merely to get to point B and he even takes a 14 year detour to learn in Yeshiva before heading out toward his final destination. In our parsha we are introduced to a new Yaakov. This Yaakov leaves behind the old Yaakov, he leaves בְּאֵ֣ר שָׁ֑בַע. He is no longer Yaakov the son of Yitzchak, he is now Yaakov, his own man building his own life. That is why the Torah repeats that Yaakov left, for in Toldos we are told he was going at his parent's request to Lavan's house. In our parsha, we learn that he leaves behind his past and goes forward as his own man. In the words of Rav Hirsch: יצא יעקב מבאר שבע – על אף שהכתוב כבר אמר: ״וילך פדנה אדם״ (לעיל פסוק ה׳), הוא פותח שוב: ״ויצא יעקב מבאר שבע״; מכיון שביציאה זו החלה פרשה חדשה, אשר כל עיקרה: חייו העצמאיים של יעקב.
Many of the Chassidic books point out that the numerical value of צא is 91, which is the numerical value of the שׁם הוייה (26) and שׁם אדנות (65) combined. The Yaakov of Toldos is the Yaakov of שׁם הוייה. He is living for the most part aloof from the world involved in the ד אמות שׁל הלכה. The Yaakov of Vayetzeh is involved in the שׁם אדנות, in the טבּע of the world. He now works as a shepard and has to put up with the schemes of Lavan.
Rashi says that Elifaz took away all of Yaakov's possessions and he came to Lavan empty handed. Why was Yaakov forced to come to Lavan in such a lowly state? We find in this parsha that Yaakov is very devoted to sheep, there is almost no mention of other animals. Yet, we see at the beginning of next parsha that indeed, he owned many types of animals. So, why is Yaakov so connected to sheep?
In order to ready himself to shed his old self and not get derailed from, his connection to Hashem, Yaakov had to be completely devoid of any personal hope that he may have and be forced to rely completely upon Hashem. It is this recognition that allows Yaakov to change his role in the play of life. This is symbolized by the sheep of Yaakov. The word צאן is related to the word צא. [To steal two sentences from the weekly email I receive on etymology of hebrew words from Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein (posted online here.) "Like seh, the word tzon is also a general term which refers to both goats and sheep, most commonly to an entire flock or herd. Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim of Breslau (1740-1814) traces the root of tzon to the letter TZADI, which means “goes out.” This refers to the fact that, in contrast to other domesticated animals, the dainty ovicaprids tend to always “go out” of the barn even in the winter (while the heavier bovines tend to stay inside when it is cold)."] What allows Yaakov to complete the צא is the צאן. It is the docile nature of the sheep, that submissiveness to every situation Hashem put him in that Yaakov wished to emulate. (Largely based upon Likutay Sichos volume 15, here in English.)
The Or Hachayim says that the journey of Yaakov can be read as a parable for the journey of the soul into this world. Tucked cozily under the כסא הכבּוד the soul is enjoying the the life of שׁם הוייה. Suddenly its thrust into the world of the שׁם אדנות and must find the sheep to avoid getting lost on the windy pah of life.
The word is etymology. Entymology is the study of doughnuts which never go bad or insects.
ReplyDeleteEntymology isn't a word. It's entOmology And I want a source for that doughnut thing. Maybe the etymology of it.
Delete