Showing posts with label Vayishlach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vayishlach. Show all posts

Thursday, December 12, 2024

The "Sin" Of Reuvain

The Gemarah Shabbas (55b) says כל האומר ראובן חוטא אינו אלא טועה.  So why does the Torah write that Reuvain did a grave sin?  Rav Ruderman (Yeshuran volume 17) explains that every issur contains many layers to the prohibition.  There is the actual translation of the words prohibition and then there are degrees and levels to the prohibition.  As an example he says there is an issur not to kill and Chazal equate embarrassing another person to killing them.  In other words, to a degree, embarrassing a person is included in the issur of killing.  With this idea he answers a contradiction.  Rashi in the parsha (37:7) says וכן לא יעשה שהאומות גדרו עצמן מן העריות ע"י המבול.  He says even gentiles were careful about arayot.  But the Midrash  (V'zos Haberacha) says that Amon and Moav didn't take the Torah because they couldn't accept לא תנאף, but they kept the issur of arayot?  They kept the basic law of not having a forbidden relationship but all the extensions of the issur, הרהור, הסתכלות, וכו that they did not keep.  This is the peshat in the story of Reuvain as well.  According to his level his act was an act that was a degree of the issur of לשכב פילגש אביו.  He says this is the yesdo to explain many of the sins mentioned in Tanach.  

Rav Neventzal is מדייק the Gemarah doesn't say האומר ראובן חוטא טועה, that person is wrong for thinking Reuvain sinned but the Gemrah is very verbose and says  האומר ראובן חוטא אינו אלא טועה, why the extra words אינו אלא?  He explains the Gemarah is telling us that one is not just making a mistake in understanding a possuk but one's entire philosophy, one's entire outlook on understanding Tanach is wrong.  אינו אלא טועה means the entire person, his whole approach is mistaken.  Why?  Because it is self understood that such great people can not stumble in such a depraved an immoral sin.  Reuvain, who's name in engraved on the choshen, could not possibly have violated such a great sin.  Someone who doesn't understand that does not know how to read Tanach properly.  So, why does the Torah write it in such a manner?  He gives a משל from a precious diamond that even a small scratch makes the value diminish greatly since the more precious the item is, the greater the perfection demanded from it.  One will tolerate a small scratch in a regular stone but in a precious diamond than more is at stake.  So too for the great figure of Tanach, even there small miscues are cast as great sins for according to their level any lack of perfection taints to the level of a great sin for an ordinary person.     

Tuesday, December 10, 2024

The Dot In The Middle

In honor of the yima geulah of the month and connected to the parsha. 

Gemarah Berachot (8a)

כתיב פדה בשלום נפשי מקרב לי וגו' אמר הקב"ה כל העוסק בתורה ובגמילות חסדים ומתפלל עם הצבור מעלה אני עליו כאילו פדאני לי ולבני מבין אומות העולם.  

How are these things as if one is redeemed?  The Maharal explains (Netzach Ch. 10, Or Chadash 4:16) that golus means separation as Haman said מפוזר ומפורד, a state of division, a lack of cohesiveness.  On the national level that means that Klal Yisrael is not together but is scattered among various nations.  There is a lack of a concentration of everyone being together in the same land.  On an individual level it means פיזור הנפש where one is not able to put all of one's efforts concentrated into a task but instead one is always distracted by other nags and worries.  As the Chovot HaLevavot writes (into. to Shaar Habitachon) the pious one prays הרחמן יצילני מפיזור הנפש for that is the biggest distraction from being able to live properly in the present.  The antidote to golus, the פדיון, is joining together.  That is the tefillah bitzibbur, when a congregation can come together in prayer that is the opposite of golus.  Gemilas chasadim as well is an act of joining together with another individual to help them out.  Learning Torah is the antidote to פיזור הנפש, throwing one's self into the study of Torah purifies man's mind and allows him to see things in a clearer light (see Maharal himself who explains gemilas chasadim and Torah differently.)      

The root of all division and separation comes from the very forming of the world itself.  The Midrash (2:4) relates the words תהו ובהו חושך על פני תהום as a reference to the 4 גליות.  This means that the root of all the separations of golus stem from the very creation and concealment that exists from the very fact that the world is in existence. The existence of separation from one's source is an outgrowth of  the world's apparent separation from Hashem.  The world was created with a ה.  That is the 4 directions plus a middle point.  The 4 directions are the points of separation from the middle which was the point connected to Hashem and from there the world expands into the 4 directions of concealment to cover over the middle point. 

Esau's essence was to be lost in the world of the concealment.  Esau is Edom.  He sees red and that is taken in by it.  He is taken in by what meets the eye.  Yaakov's face was similar to that of Adam's.  His essence was compared to the essence of Adam, the צלם אלוקים reflected in man.  Esau takes the בגדי חמודות, he is taken in by the external glory of man, he doesn't grasp there is an internal beauty underneath.   

This is why Esau took along 400 men with him in order to combat Yaakov.  He wishes to bring the full power (4*10) of degrees of separation from the midpoint, the extreme of expansion, to drown Yaakov in being מפוזר ומפורד.  This is the קש of Esau (קש = 400.)  He is enthralled by the קד, the externality, the expansion of the physical world.  

The gematria of the word נשים is 400.  Woman take the seed of man and expand it.  They are given the creative capability of expansion.  That is why there are 4 אמהות to properly harness this power of expansion and tie it back to its source. 

The antidote to the number 4 of separation is the connection to the middle point, the number 5.  The ה inside עולם הזה.  The number 5 corresponds to the 5 levels of the neshama.  The greatest level is that of יחידה, the point of unification.  The yechida is the driving force behind action of mesiras nefesh.  To give own's self over totally to Hashem comes from the point of the soul that retains a connection despite all the concealments and that is the yechida.  When one uses mesiras nefesh then not only is the yechida accessed but all the levels of the neshama and the person himself throughout any great state of פיזור one may be in become illuminated by the light of the yechida.  The Gemarah cites the possuk of פדה בשלום.  Shalom is the point of unification of warring factors when they become united as one.  When the acts of Torah, chesed, tefillah bitzubbur are done, it elevates a person beyond the golus and then one is able to unite the concealment of the 4 directions of the world with their middle point. And the Rebbe adds in a maamer (Padah Beshalom 5741) every act of service of Hashem is also connected to mesiras nefesh and the yechida, 

ועפ"ז יובן הקשר דפדי' שבדרך מלחמה [העבודה שמצד חי', ולמטה יותר העבודה שמצד נר"נ] לפדה בשלום נפשי (יחידה), כי בכל עבודה ועבודה יש בה (בהעלם) המס"נ שמצד יחידה. וכדאיתא בתניא דעסק התורה והמצוות והתפלה הוא ענין מס"נ ממש. דכיון שאמיתית הענין דמס"נ (מס"נ ממש) הוא המס"נ שמצד יחידה, הרי נמצא, שבכל ענין דתורה ומצוות [אפילו הענינים הפשוטים דתומ"צ שאלמלא ניתנה תורה (ח"ו) היו למדים אותם מבהמת הארץ] יש כח המס"נ דיחידה.        

Sunday, December 8, 2024

Self Defense

וַיִּירָ֧א יַֽעֲקֹ֛ב מְאֹ֖ד וַיֵּ֣צֶר ל֑וֹ.  What was he so afraid and worried about?  Rashi says וַיִּירָא שֶׁמָּא יֵהָרֵג, וַיֵּצֶר לוֹ אִם יַהֲרֹג הוּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים.  The Moshav Zekanim asks why is Yaakov afraid that he may kill, he can kill first in self defense?  He answers that he was afraid that he could have saved himself by merely inflicting damage and he may kill instead. 






The Mizrachi however is clear that in regard to Esau himself, who that was coming to kill Yaakov, there would be no limitations on Yaakov to try to avoid killing Easua for the rule of השכם והורגו gives free reign to kill the assailant.  He cites a Midrash that Yaakov was worried that if he kills Esau that his father would curse him, not because of the act of killing itself.  He adds that for the soldiers approaching with Esau however, he indeed would only have been allowed to maim them to protect himself as they were not coming solely to kill Yaakov.  According to the Mizrachi there seems to be a dispensation due to the rule of השכם והורגו that one who is being threatened to be killed is not bound by the rules of rodaf to limit the damage to the attacker but is given free reign to kill the attacker.  What is it about השכם והורגו that allows one to represe an attacker in self-defense without making any effort of avoiding killing? 

Rav Shmuel Rozovsky elaborates on this idea in Zichron Shmuel siman 83 and develops that there are two distinct parshios regarding stopping an attacker.  One halacha is that of a rodaf which obligates anyone that can to step in and save the attacked in order to save the individual being attacked.  This is not due to the rodaf forfeiting his life due to his act of attack but rather it is totally a law to protect the chased (see Rav Chayim law of Rotzeach Ch. 1.)  In regard to this law, there is no heter to kill the rodaf, it is only if it is the only means available to save the person under threat.  However, the law of השכם והורגו derived from בא במחתרת says that when an individual finds himself under threat, he has no issurim to worry about when employing self defense.  In other words, the attacked has no restrictions in place when using self defense and hence he doesn't have to make calculations to diminish the damage used in protection.  Or in the words of Rav Kook (Mishpat Konan siman 139,) using Talmudic language, for the attacked, the life of the rodaf is הותרה, he has no issurim when employing self defense but for the others the life of the rodaf is merely דחויה to save the attacked.  

Another area where we find a difference between the chased vs. a bystander is regarding if the rodaf needs to be warned before one kills him.  Although the Gemarah has a debate if the rodaf needs to be warned (Sanhedrin 72b-73a,) and the Rambam (Rotzeach 1:7) says one should attempt to warn the rodaf, the Rivash (Teshuva #238) suggests the one being attacked does not need to extend any warning against his attacker.  This is cited in Mishne L'meelch Choval (8:10) and see the words of the מגיה there.  The Achronim wish to explain the words of the Rivash in the same vein that for a defendant of his own life there are no rules involved.  However, it is noteworthy that the Rivash does not just say it is a whole other parsha of  השכם והורגו distinct form rodaf, but employs a practical sevarah that when one's life is in danger they do not think clearly.  In which case he may not go so far as to agree to the Mizrachi.  This point is noted by Rav Ovadia in Yabia Omer volume 4 Choshen Mishpat teshuva 5, although he seems to suggest the same sevarah as an explanation of the din of the Mizrachi.  (צ"ע does the practical sevarah function all in the same parsha of rodaf or is why one's self defense would be a separate parsha.) 

Rav Yosef Engel (Beis Haotzer Klal א אות טו cited in Teferes Yosef on the parsha,) is unsure whether the din of השכם והורגו should apply to a gentile or it is a chiddush din said for a Jew.  And if it is said only for a Jew why would the Mizrachi employ the sevarah to Yaakov's benefit?  He cites a proof from Tosfos Avodah Zarah (10b ד"ה חד) that it does apply even to a gentile and R.Y.E. says it must since השכם והורגו is a severah, even though it is derived from a unique parsha in Torah, it applies even to a gentile.  However, in Gilyonai Hashas Sanhedrin (72a) R.Y.E. ends with a צ"ע on the Tosfos if the din is derived from a possuk why would it apply to a gentile?  R.Y.E. there cites two possible sources for the law.  One is בא במחתרת as Rashi Berachot (58a) says but he also cites a Chizkuni Pinchas (25:18) that says כי צררים הם לכם מכאן אמרו אם בא להרגך השכם להרגו (based upon the Midrash there.)  Either way, in Gilyonai Hashas, R.Y.E. understands it is a chiddush din and should not apply to a gentile.  

The Rambam (Melachim 9:4) says בֶּן נֹחַ שֶׁהָרַג נֶפֶשׁ אֲפִלּוּ עֵבָּר בִּמְעֵי אִמּוֹ נֶהֱרָג עָלָיו. וְכֵן אִם הָרַג טְרֵפָה אוֹ שֶׁכְּפָתוֹ וּנְתָנוֹ לִפְנֵי אֲרִי אוֹ שֶׁהִנִּיחוֹ בָּרָעָב עַד שֶׁמֵּת. הוֹאִיל וְהֵמִית מִכָּל מָקוֹם נֶהֱרָג. וְכֵן אִם הָרַג רוֹדֵף שֶׁיָּכוֹל לְהַצִּילוֹ בְּאֶחָד מֵאֵיבָרָיו נֶהֱרָג עָלָיו. מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל.  The Raavad disagrees: א"א קשיא ליה אבנר. עכ"ל.  The Kesef Mishne explains his question:  והענין הוא דאמרינן בסנהדרין פרק נגמר הדין (סנהדרין דף מ״ט) ויטהו יואב אל תוך השער אמר ר״י שדנו דין סנהדרין אמר ליה מ״ט קטלתיה לעשאל עשאל רודף הוה היה לך להצילו באחד מאיבריו לא יכילי ליה ופשטו של מאמר זה מורה כדברי הראב״ד.  (See what he answers.)  Rav Kook (ibid) puts everything together and says when a Jew kills his assailant even when he could have stopped him by merely wounding him, he is exempt because his heter of השכם והורגו allows him to take the life of the assailant.  However, a gentile does not have the parsha of בא במחתרת, does not have the heter of השכם והורגו and hence, if he kills his assailant when he could have protected himself by merely wounding him, then he gets killed. 

I don't really understand the whole application of the laws of rodaf to the story of Yaakov and Esau in the parsha.  If there is a war, does a soldier need to start making calculations as to how to minimize damage to his attackers, the enemy?  Presumably, not, at war, one kills the enemy in all circumstances.  So, if Esau is coming to do battle why is Yaakov worrying about abiding by the laws of rodaf?  Perhaps, this was not considered a war as no fight had actually occurred yet, it was just a spot of great tension, וצ"ע.

Thursday, November 30, 2023

Where Is Your Head

גַּרְתִּי: לֹא נַעֲשֵׂיתִי שַׂר וְחָשׁוּב אֶלָּא גֵּר, דָּבָר אַחֵר גַּרְתִּי בְּגִימַטְרִיָּא תרי"ג, כְּלוֹמַר, עִם לָבָן גַּרְתִּי וְתַרְיַ"ג מִצְוֹת שָׁמַרְתִּי וְלֹא לָמַדְתִּי מִמַּעֲשָׂיו הָרָעִים.  Rashi has two interpretations if  גרתי means a stranger of a reference to the תרי"ג mitzvot.  The Chassidic masters (Likutay Sichos volume 3, Sfas Emes) say these are not two different interpretations but they go hand in hand.  How did Yaakov manage to keep the mitzvot, the way of his forbearers?  Because he viewed himself as a stranger in the house of Lavan, not belonging there and therefore he did not get affected by the Lavanik ways.   

That is the idea of why Yaakov set up erev techumim to indicate that his head was not necessarily where his body was (as mentioned in the past.)

Monday, December 12, 2022

Celebrate The Struggle

After Yaakov fights with the angle, he names him Yisrael כי שרית אם אלקים ואנשים ותוכל.  If the point is that Yaakov was able to even be victorious over angles, he should have been named תוכל for he was victorious? Rav Leibel Eger explains that the point isn't the victory, the point is the battle.  Klal Yisrael is named for the fact that they are willing to put up a fight no matter what stands in the way. 

The Tanya Ch. 27 says וְלָכֵן, אַל יִפּוֹל לֵב אָדָם עָלָיו, וְלֹא יֵרַע לְבָבוֹ מְאֹד, גַּם אִם יִהְיֶה כֵּן כָּל יָמָיו בְּמִלְחָמָה זוֹ, כִּי אוּלַי לְכָךְ נִבְרָא, וְזֹאת עֲבוֹדָתוֹ לְאַכֽפָּיָא לְסִטְרָא אָחֳרָא תָּמִיד.  One who spends their entire life having to fight against the impulses, desires and urges of the yetzer harah should not feel bad for that is one's avodah.  One is put in the world in order to fight against the yetzer harah.  

The Tanya (which is finished today by those that follow the yearly cycle,) champions the battle of the banyoni.  It is not only the victory that one must celebrate but the fact that one puts up a fight and struggles against the yetzer harah is itself worthy of celebration. 

Thursday, December 8, 2022

The Place Of Connection

ויבא יעקב שלם עיר שכם אשר בארץ כנען בבאו מפדן ארם ויחן את פני העיר.  The Gemarah Shabbat (33b) says אמר רב מטבע תיקן להם ושמואל אמר שווקים תיקן להם ור' יוחנן אמר מרחצאות תיקן להם.  Why was this the first thing Yaakov did after his fight?  

Rashi Vayetze (28:17) says the ladder that Yaakov saw hit in the middle opposite Yerushalayim.  Why is that the point that is the middle of the ladder?  The Maharal explains that the Mikdash is the meeting place between the gashmi and the ruchani.  The Mikdash is a physical place for the most intense spirituality in the world to rest.  It is the meeting place of gashmi and ruchani in this world.  Yaakov is given a message that the gashmiut and ruchniut of Yaakov go hand in hand.  His pursuit of marriage is not separate from that of his years in Yeshiva but they go together.  

The angel of Esav thought he had an opening to attack Yaakov because of the wealth and possessions he accumulated.  He thought that the gashmi of Yaakov was a contradiction to the ruchani of Yaakov and hence he could attack (see Kli Yakar.)  However, for Yaakov the gashmi was יש לי כל, it was what Hashem gave him to complete his mission.  Therefore, after the battle, Yaakov demonstrates that the gashmi needs of the city can go together with his spiritual state and תיקן להם, he made a תיקון for their gashmi needs as well.  Rav Kook says this was בדיוק in שכם for Shechem is the place of the split form malchut Beit David.  Rav Kook views that as a split from the Beit David way, the Torah law, to create a social law and Yaakov was setting up the tikkun for this by combining the two.     

The first Shem Mishmuel in Vayetze says it is Yaakov that established arvit for the kaparah of the korban is in the blood which is an avodah which must be done in the day.  The blood atones for the  nefesh כי הדם הוא הנפש.  The other parts of the animal correspond to the guf so there was no tefillah of arvit where they may be burnt.  Only Yaakov raised himself that even his guf, his geshem, is ruchani and established the prayer of arvit. 

Friday, November 19, 2021

Nothing But the Struggle

Harav Hagaon Yosef Elefant Shlita

In this week’s parashah Yaakov Avinu battles the Sar of Eisav, and tells him that he will not let him go until he gives him a brachah. Yet we don’t find anywhere that the Sar of Eisav actually gave a brachah; all he did was change his name from Yaakov to Yisrael: כִּי שָׂרִיתָ עִם אֱלֹהִים וְעִם אֲנָשִׁים וַתּוּכָל. Where exactly is the brachah? And what is the significance of the name change?

This event, and the name change of Yaakov to Yisrael, was unquestionably a defining moment for Klal Yisrael. We are named after this event, and it gives us our identity. So we certainly want to understand what happened here.

There’s a famous question that the baalei mussar ask: Why is it that Klal Yisrael is named after the battle, rather than the victory? The name Yisrael reflects the word שָׂרִיתָ, fighting the enemy, but shouldn’t we be named after the וַתּוּכָל, vanquishing him? The baalei mussar explain that our job is to struggle, to fight against the yetzer hara; the victory is in Hakadosh Baruch Hu’s hands. The struggle is what defines us, so that’s our name.

Perhaps we can add some more depth to our understanding of why we are defined by the struggle, as opposed to the victory.  In Shaarei Teshuvah, Rabbeinu Yonah uses the phrase: ולא מהרו לגעור בים התאוה ויחרב, describing the yetzer hara as a surging sea: yam hataavah. At times, the yetzer hara comes up against a person forcefully, yet the person can shout back at the yetzer hara and say no, and this sea of temptation suddenly dries up — a private Krias Yam Suf.  We have all experienced this phenomenon, that when we give a yell at the yetzer hara, he disappears. He comes back afterwards, obviously, but for now he disappears. Why is that? How does this surging tidal wave of the yam hataavah just dry up?

When Yaakov asked the malach for his name, he answered: לָמָּה זֶּה תִּשְׁאַל לִשְׁמִי. What is the significance of the Sar of Eisav avoiding giving his name? What he really meant was that he, the yetzer hara, really has no agenda, no content, and no reality. He really has nothing to offer. The entire essence of the yetzer hara is only to create a nisayon for a person, but the moment he does that, he no longer has any power. The moment the person overcomes the nisayon, the yetzer hara disappears. He’s not a real enemy, who continues to exist even if you win the battle. His entire existence is only to place you into a nisyayon, and the minute you’re victorious, the yetzer hara has already achieved its purpose, so he disappears. He has no metzius other than the nisayon itself.  Accordingly, when the Sar of Eisav answered לָמָּה זֶּה תִּשְׁאַל לִשְׁמִי, he was conveying that he has no reality of his own — all he has is the ability to bring a nisayon upon you. Other than that, the yetzer hara has no power.

Rav Wolbe, in Alei Shur, cites Chazal’s statement that until Avraham Avinu came along, the yetzer hara was like a highway robber who stood on the roads and robbed people: “Your money or your life!” When Avraham Avinu entered the scene, he called the yetzer hara’s bluff: “Hey, you’re a fraud! You don’t have a real gun — it’s only a water gun! There’s nothing to you!”  Avraham Avinu’s chiddush was that he recognized that the yetzer hara is nothing more than a hollow threat. He seems menacing, but really there’s nothing to him.

Indeed, Chazal teach that when Avraham Avinu was on the way to the Akeidah, the Satan placed all sorts of obstacles in his path: a river that almost drowned him, an iron wall. The Midrash Tanchuma states that Avraham declared, “I’m going through anyway” — and the moment he said that, all the obstacles disappeared, because the Satan has no reality and no real existence other than the ability to set up the nisayon. Once the person recognizes the nisayon for what it is and withstands it, then the Satan disappears, because he’s accomplished his job.

The reason Klal Yisrael is named after the struggle — שָׂרִיתָ, and not the victory, is that there really is nothing more than the struggle. The וַתּוּכָל is an inevitable result of the שָׂרִיתָ, since the moment a person stands up to the yetzer hara, he wins.

That explains why, immediately after the battle with Yaakov, the Sar of Eisav said, “I need to go” — to say shirah, Rashi explains. A malach says shirah after it does its job, and here, the Sar of Eisav finished its job, which was to place Yaakov into a situation of nisayon. Once Yaakov defeated him, the malach’s job was over. The Satan’s job is not to win, but just to create the nisayon. Once he does so, he can go say shirah.

Rav Wolbe notes that twice in Parashas Bereishis the Torah uses the term teshukah, once regarding the woman: וְאֶל אִישֵׁךְ תְּשׁוּקָתֵךְ, and once regarding the yetzer hara: וְאֵלֶיךָ תְּשׁוּקָתוֹ. What is the teshukah, the desire of the yetzer hara? The Maharal explains that everything that was created in this world, all material beings, yearn to be utilized and channeled for their correct purpose. The yetzer hara’s desire is to fulfill its tachlis, which it accomplishes by placing a person in a nisayon, so that he can overcome it: וְאַתָּה תִּמְשָׁל בּוֹ. The teshukah of the yetzer hara is not to get the person to do bad, but rather simply to create the nisayon so that the person can triumph over it.

Klal Yisrael is named after the battle because truthfully there is nothing more than the ability to struggle against the yetzer hara and say no: לגעור בים התאוה ויחרב.

The Chovos Halevavos (Shaar Yichud Hamaaseh ch. 5) explains that the whole intention of the yetzer hara is to prove that sheker is emes. If a person manages to identify this weakness of the yetzer hara, and expose his dressing up sheker as emes, then overcoming the yetzer hara is simple. In other words, the chink in the yetzer hara’s armor is the ability to recognize that his whole show is a lie. The minute you recognize that he has no metzius — not just that he happens to be saying something false, but that his whole show is a farce — then he unravels.

We now have an understanding of the nature of the battle between the emes of Yaakov and the sheker of Eisav. The job of Yaakov Avinu is to recognize that Eisav is לָמָּה זֶּה תִּשְׁאַל לִשְׁמִי — he has no reality to him, and the battle with yetzer hara lasts only as long as the person lends credence to it. The minute a person recognizes that the yetzer hara is purely a fraud, and that there’s nothing to him, he collapses, and it’s easy to break him.  The Satan presents the sheker of Olam Hazeh as if there’s really something there, when there isn’t.

Regarding the words וַיֵּאָבֵק אִישׁ עִמּוֹ, the Gemara teaches that the dust of this battle between Yaakov and the Sar of Eisav rose all the way up to the Kisei Hakavod. The Sfas Emes explains that this means that as a person climbs higher in life, he might think that he has already vanquished the yetzer hara — but the truth is that at every level, a person faces another battle with the yetzer hara, another challenge. There’s no life without challenge — at every step along the way up to the Kisei Hakavod, a person is challenged to distinguish truth from falsehood. And the way to overcome challenges, at every level, is to recognize that this is a nisayon, and that the yetzer hara behind it is pure falsehood, with no reality to it.  That’s the meaning of the name Yisrael — שָׂרִיתָ. What defines Klal Yisrael is our ability to take a truthful look at the world and recognize what’s emes and what’s sheker.

The brachah that the Sar of Eisav gave Yaakov, then, is that he revealed to him his own limitations, by disclosing that he has no power beyond presenting the person with the nisayon and the struggle.

Wednesday, November 17, 2021

Here And Not Here

ויחן את פני העיר.  The Midrash says נכנס עם דמדומי חמה וקבע תחומין מבעוד יום.  What is the emphasis on Yaakov setting up eiruv techumim if the Avos kept the entire Torah?  And the Midrash continues that because of this Yaakov gets a greater reward than Avraham who merely kept Shabbos.  Why is eiruv techumim worthy of such a reward? 

The Nitziv comments on the possuk ויחן את פני העיר – לפי הפשט — לא נכנס לדור בעיר, אלא חנה מחוץ לעיר ונקרא ״פני העיר״. והוא כמדתו של יעקב להיות בדד ולא מעורב עם אומות העולם.  According to the simple understanding the possuk alludes to the fact that Yaakov was separate and not part of the general community.  On the other hand, the Malbim has a diametrically opposing comment.  "ויחן את פני העיר, שלא חנה שם כמו בסכות, ששכן במקום בפ״ע נבדל מן העיר ואנשיה, כי פה חנה לפני העיר מתערב עם אנשי העיר, כי קבע דירתו שם."  How are we to reconcile these two opposite approaches?  

The idea of an eiruv techumim Rav Amiel explains, is that a person is another place from where their mindset is.  A person can keep Shabbos as a day that is an oasis from the days of the week, a break from the craziness of life.  However, a deeper level is to infuse Shabbos into the week.  To be living during the week, but having a Shabbos mindset.  That is the chiddush of Yaakov over Avraham.  Yaakov was living amongst the people but his mindset was apart.  He established eiruv techumim, he was able to rise above the troubles in his life because his mind was elsewhere. 

Saturday, December 5, 2020

Reaching The Throne

The Gemorah in Chullin (91) says on the possuk of ויאבק איש עימו עד עלות השחר that אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי, מלמד שהעלו אבק מרגלותם, עד כיסא הכבוד.  Why do Chazal say the dust went up to the כסא הכבוד?  And what is the point of knowing how much dust they raised?  I was thinking over Shabbos b'derech derush to connect this Chazal with a different place Chazal use the term עד כסא הכבוד.  The Gemorah Yoma 86a says  אמר רבי לוי: גדולה תשובה, שמגעת עד כסא הכבוד, שנאמר (הושע יד, ב): "שובה ישראל עד ה' אלוהיך.  The fight between the שר of עשו and Yaakov was not just a one-time fight but is the fight through all generations of the future.  The story in the Chumash is merely round one.  What is the guarantee that Klal Yisroel will survive through the final rond, how do we know they will emerge victorious?  The answer is תשובה.  Teshuva is a gift given only to Klal Yisroel.  We may become soiled in the dirt of Esev, but eventually we will will because of the power of teshuva.  That is why Chazal say the dust reached the כסא הכבוד. Up until where teshuva is accepted, the dust, the dirt of Esev will rise, but it stops there, at that point teshuva will redeem a person. 

The Gemorah in Shabbos (98b) says that after the malachim complained how can Torah be given to mankind, Hashem told Moshe אחוז בכסא כבודי וחזר להם תשובה.  The Or Gedalyahu says that this was Moshe's answer.  The advantage of man over the malachim is that man has the ability to reach the כסא הכבוד through teshuva.  Such great heights can never be reached by a malach.  It is this power of tesuva that gives us the advantage of the malachim and gurantees victory over Esev.  

Thursday, December 3, 2020

The Malachim

וַיִּשְׁלַ֨ח יַעֲקֹ֤ב מַלְאָכִים֙ לְפָנָ֔יו.  The word לפניו seems extra, obviously the malachim went before him?  Why does Yaakov tell Lavan תריג מצות שמרתי?  The Lev Eliyahu says that לפניו means that Yaakov sent the malachim that went before him, those created by his own actions.  A person's mitzvot create malachim and it was those malachim that Yaakov sent.  That is the message of תריג מצות שמרתי, that the malachim were a product of the mitzvot.  Why does it matter what type of malachim Yaakov sent?  What Yaakov was trying to do was not merely to deflect Esev but to see if he could arouse from within him his genetic traits from the Avos.  By sending mitzva malachim, Yaakov was hoping that there would be a magnetic pull to Esev's innards and he would repent.  It was not a complete failure as Esev let him go peacefully in their encounter (see Shem M'Shmuel.)  

Why did Esev come with 400 men?  4 is the number of פירוד.  The number 400 is 4*100, the most extreme פירוד.  That is reflected is Esev's statement, יש לי רב.  He viewed his possessions as many things, they were separate items.  Yaakov sees everything as one yesod.  Everything in the world is a reflection of the ultimate יחוד and hence he says יש לי כל, it is one complete unit (see Or Hachaim and Sfas Emes.)  That is the message of the stones under Yaakov's head combining into one rock.  

A quick thought on 19 Kislev.  The gematria of אדם is 45.  The gematria of  the name of Hashem is 26.  The bridge is 19.  It is chasidic thought that describes in great detail the concept of yichud Hashem.  That is part of the celebration of 19 Kislev.   

Born Again

 Rashi at the end of Vayishlach points out the discrepancy in the name of the daughter of Yishmael, Esev's wife, if its Machalas of Basmas.  Rashi says (36:3)  בשמת בת ישמעאל – ולהלן קורא לה: מחלת (בראשית כ״ח:ט׳). מצאתי בהגדה מדרש ספר שמואל (מדרש שמואל פרק י״ז): שלשה מוחלין על כל עוונותיהם: גר משמתגייר, והעולה לגדולה, והנושא אשה. ולמד הטעם מיכן, לכך נקראת מחלת, שנמחלו עוונתיו.  The most understandable of the three is the convert for they become like a new person, but why do the other two get their sins annulled? 

Dayan Fisher suggests that one who gets married or is promoted to a position also has a certain element of becoming a new person. 




Wednesday, December 18, 2019

Window Of Opportunity

In his formidable adolescent years, Yosef in thrust into a pit, soled into slavery, tempted by his master's wife, thrown into jail  and endures plenty of other hardships.  After such events, one would expect Yosef to become jaded with life.  However, we don't see that at all, quite the contrary, he remains faithful to his family and never shows any signs of depression.  How was Yosef able to maintain his feelings for life after going through such hard times?

The Gemorah in Sanhedrin (99b) says ת"ר (במדבר טו, ל) והנפש אשר תעשה ביד רמה זה מנשה בן חזקיה שהיה יושב ודורש בהגדות של דופי אמר וכי לא היה לו למשה לכתוב אלא (בראשית לו, כב) ואחות לוטן תמנע ותמנע היתה פלגש לאליפז (בראשית ל, יד).  Why is it this possuk specifically that he makes fun of, there are plenty of pessukim of names at the end of Vayishlach?

The Meor Einayim explains that there is a specific message in this possuk that Menashe picked up on and was bothered by.  He says that תמנע is related to the word מניעה, if a person says that I can't keep the Torah because I have too many difficulties, that is a פלגש לאלפז, it is just an opening to the evil forces.  Menashe felt that his many מניעות were indeed an excuse for his evil actions.  Hence, he was very bothered by this possuk.  He is mistaken, says the Meor Einayim, for the מניעות aren't there to derail a person, they are there to bring the person even closer to Hashem.  The extra effort isn't meant as a deterrent, its meant to raise a person's commitment to Hashem,.  It is up to the individual to see the window of opportunity that God is opening up for him/her.  As someone once said, "when God closes a door he opens a window."

When Yosef is talking to his brothers Vayigash (45:5,) he says וְעַתָּה אַל תֵּעָצְבוּ וְאַל יִחַר בְּעֵינֵיכֶם כִּי מְכַרְתֶּם אֹתִי הֵנָּה כִּי לְמִחְיָה שְׁלָחַנִי אלקים לפניכם.  He views his journeys in Egypt not as a slave sentence placed upon him because of his brothers actions, he views it as a mission of Hashem, as a שליחות.  Yosef understood that all the roadblocks placed in his path weren't there to derail him from being Yosef Hatzaddik, it was to make him into Yosef Hatzaddik.  It was this attitude that gave Yosef the power to survive through all of his journeys. 

Wednesday, December 11, 2019

Two Approaches To Evil

Last year this blog mentioned that their are conflicting views between the midrash and Zohar if Yaakov's greeting of Esav is to be viewed in a positive or negative light.  These two paths way be reflective of how our view of the yetzer harah/evil should be.  As discussed on this blog here  there are two ways to view the evil forces.  The simple approach is to say that it should be avoided at all costs, not touched with a 10 foot pole.  If we take that view, one indeed would be critical of Yaakov for starting up with Esav.  The other approach is a more complicated rout and that is to find the light even within the evil forces.

According to the Kabbalists, Esav was an example of an evil that contained inside of him tremendous light.  As mentioned a few weeks ago, Esav was the ancestor of many of the scholars that were converts.  Rebbe Akiva was indeed one of those descendants.  This blog discussed in the past that Rebbe Akiva is of the view that there is no true evil, one just needs to pry free the hidden good from within.  In light of his roots, it is no wonder then that Rebbe Akiva is of that school of thought for that is where he came from!  The Gemorah in Chagigah (14b) says that Rebbe akiva warned those entering the Pardes, אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: כְּשֶׁאַתֶּם מַגִּיעִין לְאַבְנֵי שַׁיִשׁ טָהוֹר, אַל תֹּאמְרוּ מַיִם מַיִם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: דֹּבֵר שְׁקָרִים לֹא יִכּוֹן לְנֶגֶד עֵינָי  When you approach pure marble stone, do not say, “Water! Water!” as it is said (Psalms 101:7), “He who speaks falsely will not be sustained before My eyes.”  Rebbe Nachman (Likutay Moharan #51) explains that warning was not to separate between the מים עליונים ותחתונים, between the realm of טמא פסול ואסור and the realm of טהור כשר ומותר.  In the Pardes one must see the truth that there is no difference, they all stem from the same place.  The other members that entered the Pardes weren't able to hold onto this message and stumbled along the way.

It is Rebbe Meyer, a student of Rebbe Akiva that internalized this message.  It is Rebbe Meyer that had written in this Torah כתנות אור in place of עור (Berashis Rabbah 20:12.)  In the world of Rebbe Meyer, the עור can be stripped off and the אור revealed. ר' מאיר דייק בשמא (Yoma 83b,) it is ר' מאיר (light) that sees the light in everything (see idea from Maggid on this Chazal here.)  That's why it is Rebbe Meyer that can take the good from inside Acher and bring it to fruition.  Acher's fault was in his inability to distinguish between the his outside self which had become tainted and his inner core which remained the talmid chacham.  Just as he got confused in the Pardes, so too he was confuded about himself.  The Bavli records that Elisha ben Avuyah told Rabbi Meir he can’t do teshuva because he heard from a bas kol everyone should do tesuva except for Acher.  If the bas kol said that he can't do teshuva, what was to be expected from Acher and how is it possible that his teshuva wouldn't be accepted, teshuva always works?  The answer lies in a slight change between this story and the version of the Yerushalmi (Chagiga chapter 2 law 1 pg. 9b.)  There it says Elisha heard everyone can do teshuva except Elisha ben Avuyah.  Why the switch from Acher as is recorded in the Bavli to his name, Elisha in the Yerushalmi?  Furthermore, what’s the debate, which one did he hear, Acher or Elisha ben Avuyah?  Rav Solevetchik (5 deroshes, derush 5 part 9, pg. 124-129 in Hebrew edition) explains that Elisha really heard except for Acher.  This event, the Yerushalmi says, occurred on Yom Kippur that coincided with Shabbos when he was riding a horse behind the Kodesh Hakadashim.  Elisha felt hirhuray teshuva on this day of Yom Kippur and the bas kol came to aid him.  Elisha thought the Dr. Jekyll side of himself and the Mr. Hyde side of himself were one and the same.  He couldn’t differentiate between Acher, the apostate and Elisha, the holy Tanna.  The bas kol was saying Acher can’t do teshuva but Elisha can, it was a reminder that at his core he remained that holy Tanna.  The Bavli is recording what was actually said.  The Yerushalmi on the other hand is recording the perception of Elisha.  Elisha didn’t get the message.   He failed to make the distinction between his two personalities and understood the bas kol to mean that Elisha can’t do teshuva.  Rebbe Meyer on the other hand was able to make this distinction and took the holy Tanna, Elisha ben Avuyah part from out of its husk of Acher.     

According to the Kabbalists, Yaakov was quite aware of the great power that existed within Esav and by meeting him he was attempting to extract this power and bring it forward.  By accomplishing this, joined together with Yaakov, the final redemption would be brought.  This view of attempting to take out the good from within the evil is championed by the Zohar that looks at the inner dimension.  The peshat goes with the straight view that the evil is bad and must be avoided at all costs and hence is critical of Yaakov.

The Real Fight

The Sefer Hachinuch says about the mitzvah not to eat the gid hanesheמשרשי מצוה זו, כדי שתהיה רמז לישראל, שאף על פי שיסבלו צרות רבות בגלות מיד העמים ומיד בני עשו, יהיו בטוחים שלא יאבדו, אלא לעולם יעמד זרעם ושמם, ויבא להם גואל ויגאלם מיד צר. ובזכרם תמיד ענין זה על יד המצוה שתהיה לזכרון, יעמדו באמנתם ובצדקתם לעולם. ורמז זה הוא לפי שאותו מלאך שנלחם עם יעקב אבינו, שבא בקבלה (בר''ר עח) שהיה שרו של עשו, רצה לעקרו ליעקב מן העולם הוא וזרעו ולא יכול לו, (שם לב כו) וצערו בנגיעת הירך. וכן זרע עשו מצער לזרע יעקב, ולבסוף תהיה להם תשועה מהם. וכמו שמצינו (שם שם לב) באב שזרחה לו השמש לרפאתו ונושע מן הצער, כן יזרח לו השמש של משיח וירפאנו מצערנו ויגאלנו במהרה בימינו, אמן.  According to the Chinuch the point of the mitzvah is to strengthen our faith in Hashem by remembering that Yaakov was victorious over the angel of Esav that came to kill him.  Rav Bakshi-Doron asks if this is what we are supposed to be remembering, why would we choose an event from the fight with the angel of Esav and not the fight with Esav himself?  The fight with the angel is shrouded in mystery and from the text we don't even see the man that Yaakov fought with has anything to do with Esav?  Furthermore, Yaakov gets wounded in this fight but in his "fight" with Esav he comes out completely unscathed, seemingly that is more fitting to strengthen our faith?  And why is the whole fight with the angel of Esav unclear from the Chumash and even from the commentary of our sages its still unclear what was going on?

He explains that the Torah is teaching us what is the true fight against Esav.  If Esav is coming with an army its easy to recognize the danger that awaits.  There isn't much room to debate that maybe he has just come to offer his assistance and means no harm.  However, when the angel of Esav comes it is much harder to see the danger ahead.  When he comes with promises of education, enlightenment, arts, sophistication, technology and money it is very difficult to see the danger in it.  Esav says this well help you.  We will bring you out of poverty and the entire world will be opened before you.  We have hidden our knives in the kitchen and will invite you into our house.  This danger is indeed shrouded in mystery.  Has Esav actually had a change of heart, has he let the past be past and decided to actually act as עשו אחינו or is it a ploy to attempt to take the Jew out of the Jew?  This is why remember the fight with the angel of Esav for this danger requires more of a reminder.  The reminder is where Yaakov was hit in order to show the main test is when the going gets tough we must not forsake our faith and must keep in mind that tomorrow the sun will shine again and we shall be healed in its rays.
The following excerpt is from עובדות והנהגות לבית בריסק עמ' יז.
     

Tuesday, December 10, 2019

Gid Fat

The Gemorah in Chullin (92b) says that the fat attached to the gid hanashe it technically permitted but ישראל קדושים נוהגין בו איסור.  The Rambam rules in Maacholos Assuros (8:2) that one who eats this fat receives מלקות מרדות.  The Netziv in his commentary to the Sheiltos points out that we see the Rambam holds even though the Gemorah refers to the prohibition as a mere minhag, it became established as a full fledged Rabbinic prohibition.  There are two ways that we can understand this minhag/prohibition.  Either its a new issur on the fat of the gid or its too extend the issur of igd hanashe to the fat as well.  This matter seems to be a debate between two opinions in Tosfos Chullin (97a) בתוס ד"ה שאני חלב דמפעפע בע"ד וא"ת אם כן במתניתין איכא שומן הגיד דמפעפע ואפילו נצלה נמי ליתסר כוליה ונראה לר"ת דשמנו של גיד אינו מפעפע והרב ר"מ מפרש כיון דשומן הגיד לא מיתסר אלא מדרבנן דגזרו ביה אטו הגיד כשאין הגיד אוסר גם בו לא החמירו.  According to Rabbenu Tam, the fat of the gid is its own issur and will follow its own parameters.  According to the Ram, the prohibition of the fat is only an extension of the issur gid and hence it can't cause more of a prohibition than the gid itself.  (They go לשיטתם in the beginning of the perek (89b) בתוס ד"ה אם יש בה בנותן טעם אסורה - תימה דילמא אסורה משום שמנו של גיד אבל בגידין אין בהן בנותן טעם ולפירוש הר' מאיר אתי שפיר דפירש דאין להחמיר ולאסור בשומן שבגיד כיון שהגיד עצמו אינו אוסר ור"ת מפרש דלשמנו של גיד לא הוה קרי גיד סתמא.

Based upon this idea we can explain the Rambam.  In Koban Pesach (10:11) he says כְּשֶׁאָדָם אוֹכֵל אֶת הַפֶּסַח חוֹתֵךְ הַבָּשָׂר וְאוֹכֵל וְחוֹתֵךְ הָעֲצָמוֹת מִן הַפֶּרֶק וּמְפָרְקָן אִם רָצָה. וּכְשֶׁיַּגִּיעַ לְגִיד הַנָּשֶׁה מוֹצִיאוֹ וּמַנִּיחוֹ עִם שְׁאָר הַגִּידִים וְהָעֲצָמוֹת וְהַקְּרוּמוֹת שֶׁיּוֹצְאִין בִּשְׁעַת אֲכִילָה. שֶׁאֵין מְנַקִּין אוֹתוֹ כִּשְׁאָר הַבָּשָׂר וְאֵין מְחַתְּכִין אוֹתוֹ אֶלָּא צוֹלִין אוֹתוֹ שָׁלֵם. וְאִם חֲתָכוֹ חֲתִיכוֹת חֲתִיכוֹת כָּשֵׁר וְהוּא שֶׁלֹּא יֶחְסַר אֵיבָר.  The Raavad asks א''א בחיי ראשי אין איסור גדול מזה שיצלה הפסח עם גיד הנשה ועם שמנו ועם תרבא דתותי מתנא ועם קרומות שבראש ואם אזכה ואוכל פסח ויביא לפני כזה הייתי חובטו בקרקע לפניו.  How can the Rambam allow you to roast the Pesach together with the forbidden fats; they will impart their forbidden taste to the whole lamb?  The Kesef Mishne says י''ל שלא עלה על דעת שרבינו מתיר לצלותו עם חלב האסור מן התורה אלא גיד הנשה שאין בגידין בנ''ט ושמנו שאין בו איסור אלא שישראל קדושים נהגו בו איסור ובפסח לא נהגו כדי שלא יבא לחתך בו אבר אבל חלב האסור מנקרים אותו ואפילו החוטים והקרומות האסורים משום חלב מסירים אותם אע''פ שאין אסורים אלא מדרבנן כמבואר בפ''ח מהמ''א דייקא נמי דקתני שאין מנקין אותו כשאר הבשר דמשמע שמנקין אותו אלא שאינו כשאר בשר.  He explains that the Rambam agrees the forbidden fats must be removed, its only the fat of the gid which is only a minhag that doesn't have to be removed.  The difficulty with this is that we already have shown that the Rambam holds the gid fat isn't just a minhag, its a Rabbinic prohibition?  However, based upon the principle of the Ram we understand that the gid fat can't effect an issur more than the gid itself.

However, this understanding  runs contrary to what the Rambam says elsewhere. In Maacolos Assuros (15:17) he says וְכֵן שֻׁמָּן שֶׁל גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה שֶׁנָּפַל לִקְדֵרָה שֶׁל בָּשָׂר מְשַׁעֲרִין אוֹתוֹ בְּשִׁשִּׁים. וְאֵין שֻׁמַּן הַגִּיד מִן הַמִּנְיָן. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשֻּׁמַּן גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. הוֹאִיל וְגִיד הַנָּשֶׁה בְּרִיָּה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ הֶחְמִירוּ בּוֹ בְּאִסּוּרֵי תּוֹרָה.  We see the Rambam holds even though the gid itself doesn't impart taste, the fat of the gid that does impart taste will prohibit, not like the Ram in Tosfos that the fat of the gid can't prohibit more than the gid itself.  So why in the Laws of Pesach will the fat of the gid not prohibit the Pesach?  I know that you can do some fancy lomdus footwork to explain this but it doesn't resonate well with me so I leave it to the reader to decide how to reconcile these halochot in Rambam.

The Emrei Emes (5694) says the idea of the minhag to dig out the fat of the gid represents that we must dig out even the roots behind the middos that been Esavized (made up that word.)

Thursday, November 22, 2018

Yaakov Vs. Yisroel

Avrohom had a name change and went from Avrom to Avrohom.  Yaakov on the other hand, had his name switched to Yisroel but he retains his original name of Yaakov.  Why the double name?  What is the meaning behind the two names?  Yaakov is the name for when there is a fight against Esav, it is the name of being active in the world, grabbing onto the heel of Esav.  It is the name that represents the fight one must have to be successful against the yetzer harah.   Yisroel is the name when things are going smoothly, when there isn't a fight and ruchnious comes easy.  There are times when a person in a Yaakov mood and sometimes when a person is in a Yisroel mood, primarily it is the difference between the week and Shabbos.  However, both are messages in a person's life, we life with both the times when it’s hard to be holy and the times when it’s easy, we must wear two different garments to make it through life (based upon Likutay Sichos volume 3.)

On a national level, a Yaakov nation is a nation like all others, enlightened but still a regular nation.  It is a nation that struggles with internal issues like all others.  Yisroel is a holy nation, a nation that is like no other. It is a majestic, pure and righteous nation.  Rav Yeruchim Olshin points out that the Greeks told Klal Yisroel to write that they have no connection to the god of Yisroel.  In Al Hanissim in the bima portion when it comes to Purim, we say כשעמד עליהם, in Chanukah we say כשעמדה וכו' על עמך ישראל, the focus is on Yisroel.  Why the focus here on Yisroel?  It is the aforementioned idea, the Greeks didn't mind an enlightened nation, they were out to destroy a spiritual nation.  They said you can be Yaakov, not Yisroel.  The victory of Chanukah is the victory of Yisroel, the celebration of being an עם קדוש.     

Chitas

This week's parsha (35:5) says ויהי חתת אלקים, the Tzemech Tzedek said he saw in a dream this is a hint to learn daily Chumash=ח, Tehillim=ת, and Tanya=ת.  Of course its always great to start keeping this practice.  Chumash is to be learnt an aliyah a day. Tehillim to finish monthly and Tanyeh according to the divisions allocated by the Freidiker Rebbe.  All you do is add it to your daily learning of Bavli, Yerushalmi, Tosefta, Mechilta, Midrash, Rambam and whatever else you have a daily shiur in.  The new cycle of Tanya will start on 19 Kislev.  If you want shiurim from non-Chabadnik's see here.  From Chabadnik's in Hebrew and Yiddish see here.  In English see here or here

The Techum Of Yaakov

The midrash on the possuk (33:18) וַיִּ֖חַן אֶת־פְּנֵ֥י הָעִֽיר  says that Yaakov came to the city right before Shabbos and set up his location so that he wouldn't have a problem of leaving the techum on Shabbos.  Rav Yosef Engel (בית האוצר ח"א כלל כ') discusses why is it Yaakov who sets up the techum of Shabbos and not Avrohom.  However, in derush we understood that techum represents boundaries (see Meshech Chachma.)  The other Avos weren't challenged to separate themselves from the rest of the world, their actions made them unique and separate from everyone.  Yaakov on the other hand was challenged by his brother, Esav.  Esav wasn't unceremoniously thrown out of the family like Yishmoel, he remained the brother of Yaakov.  Specifically because of this, it was imperative for Yaakov to set up boundaries.  His family had to know that we aren't in any way related (in terms of outlook in life) with Esav.  It is well known the idea of the Beis Halevi that Yaakov prayed "save me from my brother, Esav" it is sometimes that brotherly feeling that is the greatest harm.  The Gemorah in Chullin 91a has an opinion that the angel of Esav came to Yaakov in the form of a talmud chacham.  The Avnei Nezer explains that sometimes the yetzer harah tries to convince us to do something through an entire shiur klali about why it’s right.  The only way to protect against that is to have fixed boundaries so that it is intuitive that those lines won't be crossed.  The midrash derives from the language of the possuk (34:26) ויקחו את דינה, not ויצא דינה that the brothers had to drag Dina out of Shechem.  How could it be that Dina who was coerced by Shechem wouldn't want to leave?  We see the dangers of coming too close to those that are antithetical to Jewish beliefs.  They are very incising and when one gets sucked in it's hard to come out.  That is why it's of utmost importance to not become attached and accepting of evil outside views and influences (see Rav Yeruchem.)
I never understood while in yeshiva the importance of adopting the distinct look of a penguin.  Why must we emulate those birds of the Southern hemisphere?  But I subsequently understood that it is when one who (c"v) isn't found within the walls of the Beis midrash, when he is wondering around the many Esav's of the world, that it is important to have those boundaries as a reminder that Esav may be a kin brother, but not a brother in heart.

The Return Of The Yaakov

In last week's parsha we learnt that Yaakov called Luz Bais Kel (28:19) so I don't understand why in this week's parsha (35:6) the Torah remindes us that Luz = Beis Kel and furthermore, the Torah says in verse 7 that Yaakov called it Kel Beis Kel and he erected a mizbaoch there.  Why did he erect a mizbaoch if in last week's parsha he already erected a matzevah?  And why the new renaming ceremony?  The Rashbam says last week's parsha was dealing with the city itself and Yaakov called it Beis Kel.  Here he is outside the city and is calling it Kel Beis Kel.  The Or Hachaim understands its the same place but now Yaakov decided to call it Kel Beis Kel for Hashem indicating Hashem didn't just appear to him there but shall constantly rest His Presence there.  Based upon the Or Hachaim we can understand that the Torah repeats the name was Luz for yes, Yaakov had transformed it to Beis Kel, but it didn't make a permanent impression.  When Yaakov left Eretz Yisroel he called it Beis Kel so that Hashem should protect him on his journey.  It marked his point of departure from kedusha into another world but after his short stay the kedusha vanished.  As he is returning, he will make it a permanent place of kedusha, hence the new name, Kel Beis Kel.  It is the return of Yaakov, not as a single man, but as Yisroel, a nation that will bring kedusha to the land they tread upon.  As to why the mizbaoch instead of matzevah,  I would suggest that we know from Rashi (Shoftim 16:22) that a matzevah is one stone as opposed to a mizbaoch which is many.  Only after Yaakov has given birth to the shevatim, Klal Yisroel, is there a merging of numerous talents together.  Previously each Av found his niche in one path of the service of God, it only with the formation of tribes with unique traits and qualities that there is a merger represented by the many stones coming together.

Different Realms

The midrash in this week's parsha is critical of Yaakov for waking up the sleeping bear, Esav and sending him gifts etc.  On the other hand the Zohar has an opposite spin and explains how the actions of Yaakov worked to break the power of Esav.  The Chidushai Harim (Sefer Hazechus) says that its not a contradiction.  The Gemorah says Yaakov didn't die and it learns it out from a possuk.  What does the Gemorah  mean, Yaakov is no longer with us?  The Rim says that on the physical plane he isn't here but his existence in the higher realms is still intact.  Similarly here, in the realm of how things seem here the midrash is right for admonishing Yaakov.  However, in the higher realms the actions of Yaakov accomplished great things.  I don't understand the application of the Rim in our parsha, how can it be that an action in this realm isn't a reflection of the upper realms.  The Kabbalah in many places understands this world is a reflection of the upper worlds, there not working in different directions?  Can this idea be used to explain the activities of some?  To put it bluntly, possibly the actions of some Hassidic masters, thought to be out of line by their opponents, were justified because they were doing things that were on a different plain?  I confess ignorance, וצריך לעשות רב בדבר     
Update: Check here where my uncle elaborates on this theme of the Rim.