|
   |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
           |
|
|
|
1. PREPARATORY QUESTIONS Part I - Questions for the 'Shabbos Table' Trickery in Yaakov's life 2. In his struggle with the "malach", does Yaakov use trickery? The Showdown with Esav 4. In your opinion, was it proper for Yaakov to bow down seven times in front of Esav? Was he simply trying to appease Esav, or was this an attempt to indicate something more significant? Relate to 27:28-29, and see also Ramban on 32:4. 5. In Yaakov's prayer that God save him from Esav (32:9-12), he recalls
several earlier promises that God had made. Part II - Questions For Preparation (for weekly shiur) [It will be helpful for shiur preparation if you first answer questions 3,
4, and 5 in Part One above.] 2. In what manner is Yaakov's name change to Yisrael (see 32:28) similar,
and in what manner is it different than Avram's name change to AvraHam? [Be sure to note
at least two distinctions.] 3. Review 35:9-16. Here we find that Yaakov's name is changed once again
to Yisrael. 4. Recall that Yaakov made a "neder" before his departure to
Padan Aram (see 28:18-22). 5. Trace the chronological order of all of the events which take place in
Parshat Va'yishlach. (Make special note of its division into 'parshiot'.) 6. Read 35:1-8 carefully. 7. Now read 35:9-22 carefully. Did this take place immediately afterward
(i.e. after 35:1-8), at the same time, or possibly much earlier? 8. Note that 36:1 begins a new unit of "toladot" (Toldot Esav). Part III - Parshanut Shalem, Shalom, Shchem 2. Now, see how the various commentators approach this enigmatic pasuk. 3. In your opinion, why did Esav originally move from Eretz Canaan to Har Seir? [See 32:3, 33:14-17] Now, see 36:5-9!! [Compare also with 13:5-15!] Now, see Rashi, Rashbam, Ramban, Seforno, Radak & Chizkuni! How does each "parshan" solve this problem. According to each, WHEN did 36:6-8 take place? Be sure to see Ramban inside. [It is a classic example of his magnificent approach to parshanut.] 4. Review 35:22, noting how the pasuk (and the story) end abruptly with: "va'yishma Yisrael". In your opinion, what does this phrase imply, i.e. what did Yaakov 'hear', or what did he do? No matter what your answer is, why do you think that this pasuk is so ambiguous? First see Rashbam (35:22) on this phrase. Note how he relates this pasuk to what is later written in 49:4. Can you explain why? Next, see Seforno. How is his pirush different than Rashbam? Note as well how it is similar, in regard to the fact that this phrase can only be understood in light of another pasuk in Chumash. Finally see Radak. Note how radical his approach is! Note how he relates in his pirush to Yaakov's "neder" in 28:21! Can you explain why? In your opinion, is Radak's interpretation based on that pasuk, or does that pasuk simply provide support? 2. SHIUR ON PARASHAT VAYISHLACH Upon his arrival in Eretz Canaan, why doesn't Yaakov go straight home? After all, he has been away from his parents for over twenty years! Secondly, why doesn't Yaakov return immediately to Bet-el to fulfill his "neder"? Hadn't he promised God that 'should he return home safely' he would establish a 'Bet Elokim' in Bet-el (see 28:21-22)? However, instead of doing what we would have expected, it appears from Parshat Vayishlach that Yaakov prefers to settle down in Shechem. Then, only AFTER the incident with Dena, and only after God reminds him that he must do so, he finally returns to Bet-el. [See 33:18-35:1.] What's going on? In this week's shiur we suggest a very simple (but daring) answer, based on a rather intricate analysis. INTRODUCTION We begin our shiur by charting the topical progression from 'parshia' to 'parshia' within Parshat Va'yishlach. PSUKIM - GENERAL TOPIC A careful study of this series of events raises several serious questions:
HONOR THY FATHER... ONLY A 'SHORT STOP'? But this approach is difficult to accept for two reasons: 2) Even if Yaakov does plan to 'rest' in Shechem for a few days, why would he buy a parcel of land? Furthermore, the overall impression from chapter 34 is that Yaakov and his family have pretty much settled down in Shechem (see 34:7, 34:10, 34:21 etc.). In fact, when we consider everyone's ages according to "peshat," we are almost forced to conclude that the incident with Dena took place several YEARS after Yaakov's arrival in Eretz Canaan! Let's explain why: Furthermore, Dena - Leah's seventh child - could not have been older than six and most probably even younger! [Remember there was a break between Yehuda and Yisachar/ see 30:9.] However, from the story in chapter 34, Dena appears to be at least twelve, if not older. Even though Shechem does refer to her once as a "yaldah" (see 34:4), the Torah consistently refers to her as a "na'arah" (see 34:3,12). If these assumptions are correct, then it appears that Yaakov remained in Shechem for at least several years prior to the story of Dena's abduction. Even if Yaakov stayed in Succot for 18 months, as the Midrash claims (see Rashi 33:17), the problem still remains. Could the incident with Dena have taken place when she is in 'first grade' and Shimon & Levi had just celebrated their 'bar-mitzvahs'? Thus, the incident at Shechem must have taken place at least five years later! This conclusion strengthens our original question. Why would Yaakov remain in Shechem for over FIVE years without first returning to Bet-el, and without going home to visit his elderly parents! 'A CALL TO ORDER' It is important to note that "ein mukdam u'muchar" operates only at the 'parshia' level. This means that events WITHIN a given 'parshia' are always recorded in chronological sequence. Only a 'parshia' in its entirety may be presented before an earlier event or vice-versa. [This style is sometimes referred to as "smichut parshiot."] Let's see now if we can employ this principle to solve the problems raised in our shiur thus far. We'll start by taking a closer look at the various stages of Yaakov's journey, and how they relate to the division into 'parshiot' of Parshat Va'yishlach. IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF AVRAHAM AVINU The answer lies in the obvious parallel between Yaakov's return to Canaan and Avraham Avinu's initial journey from Aram to Eretz Canaan. He, too, first stopped in Shechem and built a MIZBAYACH: "And Avram passed through the land, to the place of SHECHEM... and God appeared to Avram and said: I am giving this land to your offspring; and he built there a MIZBAYACH to the Lord who appeared to him." (12:6-7) [Compare also 12:5 with 31:17-18!!] Correspondingly, Yaakov also makes Shechem his first stop, and he builds a MIZBAYACH specifically in that region (see 33:18-20). In contrast to Avraham, however, Yaakov ALSO invests in some real- estate - he buys a field (see 33:19). Soon we will explain why. If Yaakov is indeed following his grandfather's footsteps (as his arrival in Shechem suggests), then he too should continue directly to Bet-el, just as Avraham Avinu did (see 12:7-8). Of course, Yaakov had another reason to proceed directly to Bet-el - to fulfill his "neder." Then, we would have expected him to continue from Bet-el on to Hebron to see his parents. Why then does he stay in Shechem? Just because he bought some 'real-estate'? One could suggest exactly the opposite. Yaakov DID NOT STAY IN SHECHEM for more than several days! Instead, he stopped there only to build a MIZBAYACH, thanking God for his safe arrival, just as Avraham had done. To support this, note how the Torah describes his arrival in 33:18: "va'yavo Yaakov SHALEM". This most probably reflects the phrase in his original "neder" of: "v'shavti b'SHALOM et beit avi" (see 28:21). Furthermore, in 33:20 he calls this mizbayach: "Kel Elokei Yisrael", most likely relating to the phrases in his "neder" of: "im y'hiyeh ELOKIM imadi..." (28:20) and "v'haya Hashem li l'ELOKIM" (28:21). At that time, he also purchased a plot of land (most likely as an investment for the future), but most likely immediately thereafter, he continued to Bet-el, just as Avraham Avinu had, and just as he had promised in his "neder." However, for some reason (which we will soon explain), the Torah prefers to record this 'original' return to Bet-el, at a later time (in 35:9). [Before reading those psukim, I recommend that you see them inside a Tanach Koren, noticing that they begin a NEW 'parshia.'] "And God [had already /"od"? / or 'again'] appeared unto Yaakov UPON HIS ARRIVAL from Padan Aram, and blessed him ... then Yaakov set up a MATZEYVA at this site... and called the name of this site BET-EL. Then they traveled towards Efrat" [i.e. on the way toward Hebron], and Rachel gave birth with complications [& then died]..." (see 35:9-19) Our contention is that this entire 'parshia' (35:9-22) actually took place immediately upon Yaakov's arrival from Padan Aram (as its opening pasuk suggests/ compare 33:18!), several years BEFORE the incident with Dena in Shechem (i.e. 34:1-35:8). A very strong proof to this claim may be drawn from the words of Yaakov himself (to Yosef) before his death: "... when I was RETURNING FROM PADAN, Rachel died on the road, while still a long distance from Efrat, and I buried her on the way..." (see 48:7) Yaakov himself states that Rachel died during his original journey from Padan to Eretz Canaan. He would not have spoken of her death as having occurred "when I was returning from Padan" if she died only AFTER Yaakov had spent several years in Shechem. Furthermore, why was Yaakov traveling from Bet-el southward, towards Efrat? Most likely, he was on the way home to his father in Hebron! In other words, Yaakov DID return immediately to visit his father, just as we expected him to. [For some reason, the Torah never records the details of this encounter. But this question begs itself no matter how we explain the order of the 'parshiot.' Only in the final summary psukim (i.e. 35:27-19) are we told that Yaakov had returned to Yitzchak, and even there it appears to be only for Yitzchak's burial. Obviously, Yaakov must have gone to visit his father much earlier.] THE NEW ORDER [Recall that Yaakov owns many sheep, and Shechem is a prime area for grazing cattle, just as Yaakov's children later return many years later to the Shechem area to graze their cattle (see 38:1- 2**).] After buying a field in Shechem and building a mizbayach, Yaakov continues to Bet-el to fulfill his "neder." There, God confirms the blessing of "bechira" and changes his name from Yaakov to Yisrael (see 35:9-12). [According to this interpretation, Yaakov had been blessed and had his name changed by the "malach" only several days earlier!/ see 32:26-28]. Even though he cannot at this point build the actual Bet-Elokim that he promised, he re-affirms his promise by once again anointing the MATZEYVA and calling that site Bet-el (see 35:14- 15). [See Further Iyun section for a more complete discussion.] Next, Yaakov travels toward Hebron to see his parents. Along the way, Rachel dies and is buried on the roadside. Yitzchak then sets up tent in Migdal Eder (see 35:21), most likely in an area not too far from Yitzchak's home. It is here where the incident with Reuven & Bilha takes place. Although we may reasonably assume that Yaakov sharply criticized Reuven, the Torah for some reason abruptly curtails this story, right in the middle of a sentence! [See 35:22! / see also 49:4!] Some time later, maybe a year or two (or even five) later, Yaakov moves with his family to Shechem - after all, he did purchase a parcel of land there specifically for that purpose. By now, the children are older - old enough for the incident with Dena (as detailed in chapter 34) to occur. It also stands to reason that at this point the people of Shechem see Yaakov as a permanent neighbor, rather than a transient, and they therefore seek marital and economic ties with Yaakov's family. Finally, this also explains why specifically Shimon & Levi take leadership roles at this time. Reuven had most likely been 'demoted' from his position as firstborn after the incident with Bilha. After the brothers wipe out Shechem, Yaakov fears the revenge of the neighboring population. God therefore commands him to MOVE from Shechem to Bet-el for PROTECTION (see 35:1-7). Just as Bet-el had protected Yaakov when he was faced with the threat of his brother Esav, so will Bet-el protect Yaakov now from his latest crisis. [Note how specifically this point - danger from Esav - is mentioned over and over again in this 'parshia' (i.e. 35:1-8, see 35:1,3,7!). Note also that these psukim imply a recent, immense expansion of Yaakov's family and possessions (see 35:6 - "v'chol ha'AM asher imo" & 35:2 - "v'et kol ashe imo"). This may also explain why Yaakov must remind these 'newcomers' to rid themselves of their idols before ascending to Bet-el. (see 35:3-4). So Yaakov now moves his permanent residence to Bet-el, which had already been established as the site for his future Bet Elokim, and accordingly builds a MIZBAYACH (see 35;1,3,7). Let's use a chart once again to show the 'new order' of the parshiot: PSUKIM - GENERAL TOPIC Thus, by simply changing the location of a single 'parshia,' nearly all our questions are solved. However, our approach raises a much bigger question: WHY isn't this 'parshia' (35:9-22) recorded where it belongs? As stated above, the Torah will present events out of chronological sequence only when there is a compelling reason to do so. Therefore, we must look for a thematic reason for this 'change' in order. As usual, we will return to the primary theme of Sefer Breishit - the process of "bechira" & "dechiya" - to suggest an answer to this question. Recall from previous shiurim that the theme of Sefer Breishit progresses with each set of Sifrei TOLADOT. Throughout the progression, someone from among the "toladot" is 'chosen' while the others are 'rejected.' Recall also that in Parshat Va'yishlach we are still under the 'header' of "toldot Yitzchak" (see 25:19). The story of "toldot Yitzchak" clearly reaches its conclusion with the 'parshia' of 35:23-29 [(F) in the above chart], which describes Yitzchak's death. [Note also that "toldot Esav" (36:1) follow immediately afterward.] This 'parshia' 35:23-29 (F) MUST therefore appear at the conclusion of "toldot Yitzchak." But why was 'parshia' (E) transplanted from its chronological location to here, immediately preceding 'parshia' (F)? The answer lies in the somewhat innocuous though very telling statement
that introduces (F): This interpretation may also explain why 35:22 ends mid- sentence. It would seem that the pasuk should end with Yaakov's curse of Reuven, which becomes apparent in 49:4. However, because the whole point is to show that Reuven remains part of the 'chosen family,' the second half of the sentence is 'cut off.' Instead, the entire 'parshia' is attached to the statement, "and the children of Yaakov were twelve - the children of Leah: the firstborn of Yaakov = REUVEN, and Shimon, Levi..." (35:23-24). An alternate (and more simple) explanation could be that the Torah is simply keeping all of the stories relating to Shechem together. Hence, once the Torah informs us that Yaakov purchased a parcel of land in Shechem (33:19), Chumash continues with what later took place in Shechem as a result of this purchase (34:1-35:8). Then, after completing that story, Chumash returns to the story of Yaakov's first return to Bet-el (35:9-22), even though it in fact took place much earlier. In closing, it is important to note that there always remains the possibility that the parshiot are in chronological order. If so, we would either have to explain that these events indeed took place when Yaakov's children were indeed quite young, or that Yaakov intentionally did not return to Bet-el, either because he felt that the time was not yet ripe, or possbily because he was waiting for Hashem to command him to go there. [I admit to having some reservations regarding the conclusions of this shiur. However, hopefully it provides some 'food for thought' worthy of your consideration. Your comments are welcome!] shabbat shalom,
FOR FURTHER IYUN B. It is unclear whether Yaakov ever builds the Bet-Elokim as he had promised in 28:21. See the meforshim on that pasuk who deal with this question, as well as the meforshim here on 35:14. Nonetheless, anointing the MATZEYVA and calling that site Bet-el (see 35:14-15) clearly reveal Yaakov's intention to eventually build the Bet-Elokim, even though the final goal may not be realized until Bnei Yisrael conquer Eretz Canaan in the time of Yehoshua. See Devarim 12:8-12, "v'akmal". Even though Yaakov's name change to YISRAEL appears to be quite similar to Avram's name change to Avraham (compare 17:5 with 35:10), in essence, they are very different. In contrast with AvraHAm, where a single letter ["heh"] is added to his existing name - YISRAEL constitutes an entirely NEW name. Furthermore, 'Yisrael' serves as an ALTERNATIVE name for Yaakov, in contrast with AVRAHAM which became a replacement! In this week's shiur, we explain how the nature of this name change may reflect a very critical stage in development of the "bechira" process in Sefer Breishit.
INTRODUCTION We begin our shiur with the second event, as it establishes the connection between the name Yisrael and the "bechira" process the primary theme of Sefer Breishit. THE RETURN TO BET EL Now, upon his return, God appears unto Yaakov once again. Let's take a look at these psukim, noting how God not only confirms his "bechira" but also changes his name to Yisrael: "And God appeared again to Yaakov on his arrival from Padan Aram, and blessed him: You, whose name is Yaakov, shall be called Yaakov no more, but YISRAEL shall be YOUR NAME. Thus He named him Yisrael and God said to him: I am KEL SHADDAI, be fertile and increase... The LAND that I have given to Avraham and Yitzchak I give to YOU and to YOUR OFFSPRING to come... (35:9-16) Considering that this is the LAST time in Sefer Breishit where God confirms the "bechira" [i.e. the blessing of "zera & aretz"/ see 12:1-7, 13:14-16, 15:18, 17:7-8, 26:1-5, 28:13], we can conclude that there must be a thematic connection between this name change to YISRAEL and the conclusion of the "bechira" process! To understand why specifically this name - YISRAEL, we must return to the first event when Yaakov received this name, i.e. after emerging victorious from his struggle with the "mal'ach". WHAT'S IN A NAME? Up until this point, Yaakov's life was characterized by his need to employ trickery to acquire what was rightly his. During his life, Yaakov has become the expert at survival, but lacked experience in 'frontal combat', the trait that Esav was best at. It was for this very reason that Yitzchak had originally intended to bless Eisav, for he understood that in order to establish a nation, the traits of an "ish sadeh" are essential, i.e. the qualities necessary to provide leadership in worldly matters (see shiur on Parshat Toldot). During his youth, Yaakov, the "ish tam", lacked this character. Once it had been determined that Yaakov was to be the ONLY chosen son, it became necessary that he himself develop those traits as well. Now, as Yaakov finally returns to Eretz Canaan, he must confront Eisav. However, from Yaakov's strategy (see 32:13-21), it becomes quite clear that he still not ready to confront Eisav as an "ish sadeh". [One could even suggest that his plan attempts to show Eisav that in reality, he never received the blessing of prosperity and power which he had tried to steal. By bowing down to Eisav, Yaakov wishes to show his brother that the 'stolen blessing' of power and dominion over his brother ("hevei gvir l'achecha, yishtachavu l'cha bnei iy'mecha...27:29) was indeed awarded to Eisav. Ironically, Yaakov is using trickery once again, this time to show his brother that his original trickery used to 'steal' the brachot was meaningless.] REALISM OR LAZINESS A major controversy exists among the commentators as to whether Yaakov was correct in this total subjugation to his brother. Some hold that Yaakov should have openly confronted his brother while putting his total faith in God, while others maintain that due to the circumstances, his timid strategy was appropriate [this 'hashkafic' controversy continues until this very day]. Regardless of the 'political correctness' of his actions, the situation remains that Yaakov is unable to openly confront Eisav. Nevertheless, God finds it necessary that Yaakov prove himself capable of fighting should such a situation arise in the future. Yaakov must now demonstrate that his subjugation to Eisav stems from political realism rather than spiritual laziness. He must prove that, when necessary, he will be capable of fighting. [Sooner or later, confrontations with the likes of Eisav will be encountered when establishing a nation.] Possibly for this reason, God must test Yaakov's potential to engage in battle with his enemy BEFORE he meets Eisav. Yaakov finds this struggle with the "mal'ach" difficult, for he is untrained; the contest continues all night until the 'break of dawn'. [Possibly, night represents "galut"; 'dawn', redemption. See Ramban, al atar.] Although wounded and limping, Yaakov emerges victorious from this confrontation, thus earning his new name: "Your name shall no longer be Yaakov, but Yisrael, for you have FOUGHT with beings divine ("elokim") and human ("anashim") and TRIUMPHED". (32:29) Thus, the name Yisrael, reflects the character of one triumphant in battle. Yaakov's new name is significant for it reflects his capability to engage head on in battle. In order to become a nation, this trait - represented by the name 'Yisrael' is crucial. WHY TWICE ? Note the obvious parallel between these two blessings: FROM YITZCHAK, BEFORE DEPARTING FROM GOD, UPON ARRIVING (28:3-4) (35:11-12) [Go to Padan Aram...] [...Yisrael shall be your name] May "Kel Shaddai" bless you, I am "Kel Shaddai": make you fertile and multiply, Be fertile and multiply, so you become an assembly of peoples. An assembly of nations May He grant you the - shall descend from you... blessing of Avraham The Land that I gave Avraham... to you and your offspring ...to you and to your offspring that you may posses the Land... to come, I assign the Land. This comparison clearly shows that God's blessing to Yaakov at Bet El is a precise confirmation of Yitzchak's blessing to him after the incident of the stolen brachot. Hence, we may conclude that the name of Yisrael marks the conclusion of the "bechira" process, as well as a necessary character to later become God's special nation. THE FUTURE Throughout the rest of Chumash, the name Yaakov interchanges with Yisrael. This suggests that each name reflects a different aspect of his character. The are times when 'Am Yisrael' must act as Yaakov, the "ish tam", and there are times when the more active and nationalistic characteristics of Yisrael must be employed. Ultimately, as the prophet Ovadyah proclaims, the day will come when: "Liberators shall march up on Har Zion to wreak judgement on Har EISAV; and the KINGDOM shall be that of GOD." (1:21) Based on this understanding of the significance of the special name of Yisrael, one could suggest a reason for the necessity of the "bechira" process to continue one generation past Yitzchak. [Or re-phrased, why was it necessary for Eisav to be rejected, given the importance of his worldly traits?] Our original assumption, that both the traits of an "ish sadeh" and an "ish tam" are necessary in order to establish a nation, remains correct. Nevertheless, it is important that they are not perceived as equally important. The fundamental character of Am Yisrael must be that of an "ish tam" (Yaakov). Only once that characteristic becomes rooted, the traits of an "ish sadeh" can be added. Had Eisav been included in 'Am Yisrael', our perception of the relative importance of an "ish sadeh" may have become distorted. A disproportionate emphasis on 'nationalism' and strength - despite their importance - would have tainted mankind's perception of God's special nation. In the formative stage of our national development, our outward appearance as 'Yisrael' must stem from our inner character as 'Yaakov'. We must first speak with the 'voice of Yaakov' (see Rashi 27:22), only then may we don the 'hands of Eisav'. shabbat shalom
FOR FURTHER IYUN 4. Explain the argument between Yaakov and his sons regarding their militant reaction to the act of Chamor ben Shchem in relation to the main point of the above shiur. B. There is a Midrash that tells us 'Yaakov avinu lo meyt' - Yaakov never
died. C. Although Rachel dies prematurely, and Reuven behaves in a unfitting manner, the unit which began with "toldot Yitzchak" (25:19) now concludes with: "And the sons of Yaakov remained twelve in number ..." (35:23-29) 1. Explain the structure of the finale of this unit based on the above shiur. D. TOLDOT EISAV E. BRIT MILAH & GOD'S BLESSING TO YAAKOV 2. Compare carefully Yitzchak's bracha to Yaakov before he departs to Padan Aram (28:3-4) to God's blessing of Yaakov at Bet El (35:9-13)! Note that they are almost identical. Relate this to the last two shiurim. 3. Note that God's name bshem Havaya does not appear unto Yaakov from the time that he arrives in Eretz Canaan! Note also God's promise to Yaakov at Bet El, before he left to Padan Aram, (28:13-15) which was given bshem Havaya. Are any aspects of that "bracha" repeated in Bet El when Yaakov returned? If so, which? 4. Note the single use by Yaakov of shem Havaya in his prayer prior to his confrontation with Eisav (32:9-12). What promise does he remind God of that time? Where is the source of that promise. Relate to the relationship (bshem Havaya) between Brit Bein HaBtarim, the bracha at the Akeida, and this tfila. Note - "kochvei ha'shamayim" and "asher lo yisafer m'rov". How does this relate to the nationalistic aspect of these revelations, i.e. the concept of "yerushat ha'aretz". 5. Yaakov made a neder at Bet El. Upon his return, which part of that neder did he fulfill, and which part was left unfulfilled. Relate to 35:14-15, note Hashem's name in this perek! Can this explain why Yaakov did not build a Beit Elokim? 6. Read the Ramban on Breishit 12:8. He explains the significance of building a mizbayach and calling out bshem Havaya. The Ramban also explains why Avraham and Yitzchak did this, while Yaakov did not. Relate the Ramban's explanation to the above shiur. 7. Recall the previous shiur on the difference between Brit Bein Ha'btarim (shem Havaya) and Brit Milah (shem Elokim and Kel Shaddai). Note the nationalistic aspect of Brit Bein Ha'Btarim, and that it was to be fulfilled only after 4 generations and/or four hundred years. Use this background to explain why shem Havaya does not appear to Yaakov, and why the language of Brit Milah is emphasized instead. Use this to suggest a possible explanation of why Yaakov is passive in his confrontation with Eisav at this time. 8. Could one consider from a nationalistic perspective that even though Yaakov returned from Galut Aram, his stay in Eretz Canaan was only a short stopover on his way down to Galut Mitzraim? Relate this to "arami oved avi, va'yered mitzraim..." (Dvarim 36:3-10). Compare the language there to Brit Bein Ha'btarim! Why do Chazal interpret this pasuk as refering to Yaakov? Could the fact that Yaakov understood that the time for the fulfillment of Brit Bein Ha'btarim had not yet come, explain his timid behavior when he confronts Eisav? For more articles by Rav Menachem Leibtag, visit his web site, www.tanach.org
|
||||
|
||||||||
