The Phantom Yetzer Harah

Yaakov asked the maalach for his name and the maalach responded why are you asking for my name.  Why was Yaakov interested in knowing the name of the maalach and how was the maalach’s response an answer, was he Jewish and answering a question with a question?  The maalach continued that he had to say shirah and therefore had to leave.  Why at this moment did he have to say shirah?

We know from Chazal that this battle of Yaakov was against the yetzer harah.  Therefore, Yaakov wanted to find out the name of the yetzer harah in order to identify its essence so that he would know how to combat against it.  Its response was that its nameless for it has no essence, it’s a figment of one’s imagination.  The yetzer harah doesn’t offer anything real, it tempts a person with a phantom settlement.  The only real power of the yetzer harah is to be used for kedusha through being conquered.  (Rav Leev Chasmon.)  The Kochnetzer Maggid explains that a maalach says shirah when it fulfills a task.  The task of the maalach of Esav is to tempt Yaakov to sin and to be overcome.  Since Yaakov had just beaten him it was time to say shirah.  This wasn’t a separate statement of the maalach, rather it was part of the maalach’s answer as to what his essence is.  His essence is non existent, he is only there as a temptation.  The midrash draws a parallel between Yaakov remaining alone and the possuk which says vinisgav Hashem levado.  Just like in the future it will be revealed that the entire world is just a reflection of Hashem so too Yaakov was able to defeat the maalach.  By focusing on the knowledge that what the yetzer offers is such a concealment over the reality but that at its core the yetzer harah is nothing was how Yaakov defeated the maalach.  

This same process was used when meeting with Esav.  The Zohar says that when Yaakov bowed to Esav he really was bowing to Hashem.  By focusing on his connection to Hashem there wasn’t any true existence to the evil of Esav left and therefore he kissed Yaakov.    

The Rambamה"א   הל' שאר אבות הטומאה פ"וsays that we see in this week’s parsha when Yaakov says (35:2) “remove all the avodah zarah in your hands” a hint to the tumah of avodah zarah.  Why does the Rambam cites this hint when the Gemorah (Shabbas 82) gives other sources and the Rambam himself brings them in the ensuing laws?  The Rebbe (Likutay Sichos volume 30 sicha 2 in this week’s parsha) explains that the Rambam brings this hint to tell us the nature of the law.  Does the tumah of avodah zarah eminate from the cheftzah or is it merely a din in the gavrah that s/he should be distanced from avodah zarah?  The Rambam brings this verse which stresses removing the avodah zarah as a means of distancing from it to show that it’s the second way.  The reason of the Rambam for assuming this way is since that avodah zarah isn’t a reality, it is a mere rock or piece of wood that an individual decides to worship, it is of no significance as a cheftzah.  This a lesson for all of us as the Tanyah writes (chapter 20) that every averah is a small act of avodah zarah.  The root of existence of forbidden things isn’t an existence of their own accord, merely as a means to allow us to rule over them, to conquer them.    

[We see that the Rambam understand the verse like Rashi and Or Hachaim that it’s referring to literal avodah zarah.  However, the Ramban understands that it’s referring to avodah zarah that was already nullified, and he told them to remove it so that they will have pure thoughts.  A similar vein in the Sforno who says that if they retained the avodah zarah they might have had thoughts of serving it.  We see from these Rishonim that even for people on the great spiritual level of that of the family of Yaakov it still would be poison to keep around idolatrous objects.  We see from these Rishonim as well the importance of distancing completely from things that may poison the holy thought process a Jew must have (see Chidushay Halev.)  It is also interesting to note the language of the verse, בתוככם when it would seem to be more appropriate to say בקרבכם?  The verse is alluding to the fact that the removing that Yaakov was demanding wasn’t the mere physical actions of removing the idols and clothing, rather he was demanding the taharah of one’s actions and thought.  He was commanding taharah of their innards, not just their external garb (see Malbim, Kli Yakar.)]