ויירא יעקב מאד ויצר לו.
Rashi -
ויירא שמא יהרג (ב"ר ותנחומא) ויצר לו אם יהרוג הוא את אחרים
He asks, why was Yakov afraid? After all, (San 32) אם בא להרגך השכם להרגו! If Eisav is coming to kill you, then killing him is perfectly fine! Why would Yaakov be distressed? He should make a shehechiyonu! (The last line is not in his sefer.)
He answers that when Rivka had sent Yaakov away from home because she was afraid that Eisav would kill him, she said - and it turned out to be prophetic - למה אשכל גם שניכם יום אחד, why should I be bereaved of the both of you on the same day. As the Gemara in Sotah 13a says in the story of Chushim ben Dan, באותה שעה נתקיימה נבואתה של רבקה דכתיב למה אשכל גם שניכם יום אחד ואע"ג דמיתתן לא ביום אחד הואי קבורתן מיהא ביום אחד הואי. So Yaakov's worry was not about killing Eisav. That would be just fine! He was worried that since he was likely to die on the same day that Eisav dies, if he kills Eisav then he is sealing his own fate as well.
Besides the obvious grating difficulty, I simply can not understand how he thinks this is a legitimate pshat in the double expression of ויירא שמא יהרג and separately ויצר לו אם יהרוג הוא את אחרים , if both are the same fear of his own death, direct or indirect.
Here's another application of this approach. (Second paragraph.)
Rav Avrohom Wagner said an excellent pshat. I don't like the kashe in the first place. BUT, granting the validity of the question, he says an excellent pshat.
I would much prefer to say pshat based on R' Chaim Brown's most recent post, where he explains that עד שוב אף אחיך ממך refers to Yaakov's own resentment over Esav's behavior towards him. Yaakov had the capability to utilize כמים הפנים לפנים to ameliorate Esav's anger by tempering his own feelings. Indeed, Rashi tells פניו ותעבור המנחה על that Yaakov was upset at the need to appease Esav.
Regarding the din of הבא להרגך, we know that there is a condition that you must utilize other means to stop him, where possible. Even according to the Mishne Lamelech et al that the restraint of יכול להצילו באחד מאבריו does not apply to the nirdaf himself, that is only a ptur, not an actual desert of death to the rodef, as we see that קלב"מ does not apply.
As such, Yaakov was afraid lest he get killed. Even if he were to be victorious, and kill his brother, he was troubled by the fact that he had not been successful enough in his own self-mastery (obviously, on his madreigah!) to eliminate the conflict without resorting to such violence.
The Riddle, in two parts.
1. Tell me two instances that the Torah mentions Keruvim.
Answer to Question 1:
1. The giveaway is the Keruvim atop the Aron. The other one, the one that almost nobody remembers, is the Keruvim by Gan Eden. The former, like children. The latter, angels of destruction - Rashi- malachei chavala.
2. Now that you know that the name Kruvim refers once to benevolent and once to malevolent Malachim, give me another example of the Torah using one denomination to refer to two very different kinds of Malachim.
The word Ish. By Yaakov, ויאבק איש עמו - Sar shel Eisav. By Yosef in next week's parsha, וימצאהו איש - Gavriel HaMalach.
I would much prefer to say pshat based on R' Chaim Brown's most recent post, where he explains that עד שוב אף אחיך ממך refers to Yaakov's own resentment over Esav's behavior towards him. Yaakov had the capability to utilize כמים הפנים לפנים to ameliorate Esav's anger by tempering his own feelings. Indeed, Rashi tells פניו ותעבור המנחה על that Yaakov was upset at the need to appease Esav.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the din of הבא להרגך, we know that there is a condition that you must utilize other means to stop him, where possible. Even according to the Mishne Lamelech et al that the restraint of יכול להצילו באחד מאבריו does not apply to the nirdaf himself, that is only a ptur, not an actual desert of death to the rodef, as we see that קלב"מ does not apply.
As such, Yaakov was afraid lest he get killed. Even if he were to be victorious, and kill his brother, he was troubled by the fact that he had not been successful enough in his own self-mastery (obviously, on his madreigah!) to eliminate the conflict without resorting to such violence.
L'aniyus daati, and I say that sincerely in light of his gadlus, I don't like the kashe in the first place. Having to kill a brother is a tragedy, even if it's a mitzvah. But given the validity of the kashe, I like your answer much, much, better. I'm putting it in, and thank you.
DeleteThere is also always the cute vort (I can't remember from whom) that אחרים refers to R' Meir, who is called that in the Mishna, and who was descended from Edomite geirim.
ReplyDelete