Parashat Vayishlach: "And Ya'akov was Left Alone"
CHASSIDUT
Yeshivat Har Etzion
Parashat
Vayishlach:
"And
Ya'akov was left alone"
Rav Itamar
Eldar
In this week's parasha, we read about the marvelous struggle
between Ya'akov and the angel. As background information regarding this
struggle, the Torah describes a series of actions taken by
Ya'akov:
And he rose up that
night, and took his two wives, and his two maidservants, and his eleven sons,
and passed over the ford of Yabok. And he took them, and sent them over the
wadi, and sent over that which he had. And Ya'akov was left alone, and there
wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day (Bereishit
32:23-25).
Ya'akov sends his entire family across the ford of Yabok, and remains all
by himself on the other side.
Scripture does not
explain why Ya'akov remains by himself on the other side of the wadi. Are we
dealing here with one last thorough search of the abandoned camp to make sure
that nobody was forgotten or had forgotten anything? Or perhaps we are dealing
here with intentional seclusion meant to allow Ya'akov to prepare for something
– prayer, Divine revelation, or the like.
In any event, this
seclusion constitutes the background for the appearance of the angel and the
struggle with Ya'akov until the breaking of the day.
The expression, "And
Ya'akov was left alone [levado]," is similar to another expression found
in the prophesy of Yeshaya.
The lofty looks of man
shall be humbled, and the haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, and the Lord
alone [levado] shall be exalted on that day. (Yeshaya
2:11)
And the loftiness of man
shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low; And the Lord
alone [levado] shall be exalted on that day (ibid. v.
11).
The prophet Yeshaya describes the end of human government and the
appearance of God's kingdom in its place. This too is described by the word
levado, "alone." Chazal noted the similarity, expounding the
verses as follows:
"And Ya'akov was left
alone, and there wrestled a man with him." "There is none like the God of
Yeshurun, who rides upon the heaven to your help" (Devarim 33:26). R.
Berakhya said in the name of R. Yehuda the son of R. Simon: There is none like
God, and who is like the God of Yeshurun, the best and the most praised among
you. You find that everything that the Holy One, blessed be He, will eventually
perform in the future, he performed by way of the righteous in this world. The
Holy One, blessed be He, resurrects the dead, and Eliyahu resurrects the dead.
The Holy One, blessed be He, withholds rain, and Eliyahu withholds rain. The
Holy One, blessed be He, blesses a meager amount, and Eliyahu blesses a meager
amount. The Holy One, blessed be He, resurrects the dead, and Elisha resurrects
the dead. The Holy One, blessed be He, visits the barren, and Elisha visits the
barren. The Holy One, blessed be He, blesses a meager amount, and Elisha blesses
a meager amount. The Holy One, blessed be he, sweetens the bitter, and Elisha
sweetens the bitter. The Holy One, blessed be He, sweetens the bitter with
something bitter, and Elisha sweetens the bitter with something bitter. R.
Berakhya said in the name of R. Simon: There is none like God, and who is like
the God of Yeshurun. The elder Israel. Just as about the Holy One, blessed be
He, it is written (Yeshaya 2): "And the Lord alone shall be exalted," so about
Ya'akov is it written: "And Ya'akov remained alone." (Bereishit Rabba
77:1).
The midrash
paints a picture according to which many actions that God Himself will
perform in the future have already been performed in this world by righteous
men.[1] In this framework, the midrash likens Ya'akov's remaining alone
to the lone exaltedness of God in the end of days. Chassidic thinkers tried to
understand the connection between God's "aloneness" and that of Ya'akov Avinu.
We shall try here to examine these ideas.
"FOR MY OWN SAKE, FOR MY
OWN SAKE, WILL I DO IT"
There are two paths to
take to understand the connection between "And the Lord alone shall be exalted"
and "And Ya'akov remained alone."
On the one hand, we can try to better understand the vision and prophecy
describing the end of days in which God alone shall be exalted, and then see
what aspects of that prophecy may be found in the situation faced by
Ya'akov.
On the other hand, we can begin with an attempt to understand the
psychological state, the consciousness, and the situation that Ya'akov found
himself in as he stood on side of the ford of Yabok while his entire family and
household were already on the other side, and through that understand the vision
of Yeshaya.
R. Tzvi Elimelekh
Shapira of Dynov, the author of the Benei Yissachar, follows the
first path:
"Who is like the God of
Yeshurun." The elder Israel. Just as about the Holy One, blessed be He, it is
written: "And the Lord alone shall be exalted" (Yeshaya 2:17) so too
Ya'akov: "And Ya'akov remained alone" (Bereishit 32:25)." It seems to me,
as it is written with respect to God, blessed be He, "And the Lord alone shall
be exalted," that is, without [the] merits [of others], God forbid, and God,
blessed be He, will say: "For My own sake, for My own sake, will I do it"
(Yeshaya 48:11; see Yalkut Shim'oni, Yeshaya 507), so with
respect to Ya'akov, it is stated: "And Ya'akov remained alone." That is, he had
sent over all his sons, and when they had been together, their merits would also
offer protection. But today he remained alone, and he had only his own merits.
It is also possible [to explain]: "And Ya'akov remained alone," for regarding
the merits of Avraham and Yitzchak, they were also the fathers of Esav. But it
was his merits that stood for him (Igra de-Kala[2]
143a)
R. Tzvi Elimelekh Shapira sees God's exaltedness in the end of days as
coming at the expense of the fall of the Jewish people, God forbid, in the sense
of "Why when I came there was no man?" (Yeshaya 50:2). At first glance,
this is a prophecy of rebuke, for it is dealing with a time when, God forbid,
the merits of Israel will have come to an end. This is the most difficult and
frightening moment imaginable, the moment that the defense counsel rises to
plead Israel's case, searches and searches, but finds nothing to say in their
defense.
At that moment, it appears as if this is it for Israel, all hope is gone.
But then the other side appears, the more optimistic aspect of the prophecy,
according to the interpretation of the Benei Yissachar. "For My own sake,
for My own sake, will I do it," says God. Hope is never lost, declares the
prophet, because at the basis of the covenant between God and His people there
stands a solid column, one that cannot be undermined or altered. God desires the
existence of Israel, for they carry His name, and their fall, God forbid, is His
fall, as it were, and their rise is His rise. "Do it for Your own sake, if not
for our sake" – thus we turn to the Creator in prayer, when we know that "we
have no [good] deeds." God's "interest," as it were, that stands at the
foundation of Israel's redemption, is the rock of our existence. It provides the
consoling certainty that the daughter of Zion will not experience a fall from
which it cannot once again rise.
The Benei Yissachar now turns his attention to Ya'akov Avinu.
Ya'akov's aloneness isolates his own personal value from all the contexts in
which he lives. First, he is severed from his wife and children, but in the
continuation of the passage, it becomes clear that Ya'akov is cut off even from
Avraham and Yitzchak.
Ya'akov is all alone,
without a past or future, without a tradition or a destiny. His sons – the
future people of Israel – take no part in the struggle, just as his forefathers
are out of the game. This isolation forces Ya'akov to look inwards. He can rely
neither on his fathers nor on his sons. What is now being tested is what he has
inside, and the question is whether that is enough.
The words of the
Benei Yissachar pose the philosophical and existential question regarding
the tension between the individual and society. Does man find his essence in his
belonging to society or in his alienation from it? This is the way Rabbi Yosef
Dov Soloveitchik formulates the issue:
The question is not only
socio-economic, but also existential. Was the image of God, the human charisma,
bestowed upon man as an individual or as a society? In withdrawal from society
or in its company – where does man find his true essence? (Ha-Kehila, p.
225)
It is precisely Ya'akov's withdrawal from his social context that brings
him to the struggle with the angel, where he is forced to expose his essential
self, for this is all he has now. From the moment that this essence is exposed,
it struggles with the angel, and it is what prevails against him. Just as
Israel's falling to the point that they lose all their merits exposes the most
fundamental truth standing at the base of their existence – what the Benei
Yissachar calls "merit" [zekhut] – so too Ya'akov's remaining alone
and being forced to stand by himself against the angel, totally cut off from his
surroundings, expose his fundamental truth that is revealed in his new identity:
"Your name shall be called no more Ya'akov, but Yisrael."
Most of our lives we
stand in a historical context and in a situation of belonging to family, social,
and national groups. This belonging has great value, but sometimes it interferes
with our ability to stand up against the inner truth that is concealed by the
cover of social belonging.
The words of R. Tzvi
Elimelekh Shapira invite us to follow in Ya'akov Avinu's footsteps and remain
alone, with all the circles to which we belong standing on one side of the Yabok
ford and we on the other side. We should not fear aloneness, even if this
isolation leads to a difficult struggle. We must believe that we will prevail
and that we will emerge from the struggle with a new name that will accompany us
upon our return to all that belongs to us and to all that we belong
to.
ALONE - AN UNMEDIATED ENCOUNTER
The Benei Yissachar views "aloneness" as a situation in which a
person is cut off from his historical context and from his historical "merit,"
in order to bring him to stand up against his inner truth. Others, however,
relate to this position as one of man standing up against his God. Thus, we find
that R. Shemuel of Sochaczew writes in his Shem
mi-Shemuel:
According to what has
been said, we can understand that "And Ya'akov remained alone" is in the style
of "And the Lord alone shall be exalted." The verse "And Ya'akov remained alone"
teaches that he was alone without the mediation of the angles of song that were
created on the fifth day [of Creation]. And [the verse] "And the Lord alone
shall be exalted" teaches [that He will] be alone without the mediation of the
angels who bring down the bounty that were created on the second day [of
Creation]. For it is regarding this that the term "nisgav" (exalted),
which denotes leading and bestowing bounty upon the world, is appropriate. It
may be suggested that it is from here that Israel merits on Shabbat nachalat
Ya'akov, the legacy of Ya'akov, mentioned in the holy Zohar. For on
weekdays, the unity is through the mediation of an angel, whereas on Shabbat, it
is unmediated, but rather with the Righteous One, life of the universe (Shem
mi-Shemuel[3], Vayishlach, 1878).
In these words, the Shem mi-Shemuel describes states of mutual
connection and relationship between man and God.
The first is not direct, but assisted by mediation. In this situation,
man turns to God through "the angels of song," and God turns to and bestows
bounty upon man through "the angels who bring down the
bounty."
The second is unmediated. Man turns to God without angels and mediators,
with a feeling of unmediated conjunction, and God too bestows His bounty upon
man in direct manner. This is an experience of revelation that lacks, as it
were, all mediation.
The Shem mi-Shemuel assigns the first state to the days of the
week, and the second to Shabbat. The distinction between Shabbat and the
weekdays contributes to our understanding of the two states. It is evident on
various levels.
During the week, we live in the material world and accept it as part of
the system. We work, earn a living, travel, turn our eyes outward, toward
society, our surroundings, and the entire world. On these days, our standing
before God passes through our actions. These are days of action, and on these
days our deeds stand at the center of our religious
activity.
On weekdays, the world in which we live also has a prominent position in
our prayers. We stand in prayer before God, asking for a livelihood, for a cure
to illness, for wisdom and understanding. The angels of song are embodied in the
fixed text and repeated ritual of our prayers, the means through which we turn
to God. It is also through these tools, those of the world of action, that the
Divine bounty comes down to us. We know whether our prayers have been answered
and we have merited His nearness by way of the world of action and the bounty
that is given to us, or, God forbid, withheld.
As Shabbat draws near, we are asked to let go of all that we had held
fast to during the six days of the week. Our actions turn into prohibitions, and
the instruments of our actions are forbidden as muktze. A person is asked
to sever himself from the material world, the world of deeds, in favor of a
world that is entirely spirit, where even the material elements are spiritual.
On Shabbat we are asked to undergo the experience of turning inwards. It is
precisely in our modern lives that this psychological state is sharpened. The
technological means that have been developed in our time permit a person to go
beyond his immediate surroundings. Modern modes of transportation can take a
person far from his home. The telephone can connect him to distant places, and
the internet can bring him to places that he will never see. The demand to
refrain from all such activity on Shabbat turns us inwards, to our homes, our
family, and our fundamental place: "Remain every man in his place, let no man go
out of his place on the seventh day" (Shemot
16:29).
This is the experience of "aloneness." In such a world we stand
directly before the Creator of the universe. This is an experience of delight in
the very presence of holiness. The detachment and seclusion of Shabbat sharpen
this unmediated state and the communion with God that follows from
it.
The Divine bounty on this day also passes without any go-betweens. The
extra soul implanted within us on Shabbat brings the attentive person to stand
directly before his Creator and experience "Come, my friend, to meet the bride;
let us welcome Shabbat."
Shabbat is the absolute union of God and Israel, and in our day – as the
Ari writes in his piyyut for the third Shabbat meal – hamelekh
be-gilufin, the unclothed king.[4]
THE LORD IS ONE, AND HIS NAME IS ONE
The "aloneness" of the Shem mi-Shemuel means abandoning the world
of action, the profane world, for a world that is entirely
sanctified.
The following passage suggests that there are those who maintain that the
existential experience of "aloneness" does not demand of man that he cut himself
off from the profane world. Some argue that with absolute dedication to the
experience of "aloneness," the entire profane world can becomes harnessed to the
experience of communion and nearness. R. Moshe Chayyim Efrayim of Sudylkow, the
author of Degel Machane Efrayim, writes as follows:
This also alludes to
what I have already said[5] regarding the midrash (Bereishit Rabba
77, 1) on the verse (Bereishit 32:25), "And Ya'akov remained alone":
This is what is written (Yeshaya 2:11), "And the Lord alone shall be
exalted on that day" (see there). This is puzzling. And I said about this, in my
humble opinion, in accordance with the Gemara (Sanhedrim 37a): "Each and
every person must say: The world was created for my sake." When we consider the
words of the Gemara, [we realize] that they constitute profound advice regarding
the service of the Creator, may He be blessed. That is, when a person thinks
that the entire world was created for his sake, then he is the only person in
the world, and the rest of the world is subordinate to him, and the entire
foundation of the world depends upon him. If he improves his deeds, the world
continues to exist, and if not, the opposite…. And certainly when God, may He be
blessed, vindicates a person who has reached this level, then certainly all the
kelipot fall from Him and become subject to holiness and the
Shekhina, as it were. And His Divinity and unity are revealed, that He
alone is, and there is none other but Him. This explains the allusion in the
aforementioned midrash: "And Ya'akov remained alone," that is, when God
helped him come to the level that he is alone in the world, as stated above,
then he conjoins with God, one to one. "And the Lord alone shall be exalted,"
for all the kelipot fall away, and it becomes manifest and revealed that
God alone is king over the entire world. This also explains the allusion here:
"It is a people that shall dwell alone." That is, there will be a time that the
people of Israel will come to the level of "alone," i.e., that they are alone in
the world, and that the entire
world was created for them alone. And then, "And shall not be reckoned
among the nations," i.e., as stated above, he will have not a single thought
that keeps him from Divine service, and he can cleave to the Holy One, blessed
be He, one to one. And then the Lord will be one and His name one. Amen.
(Degel Machane Efrayim, Balak)
The existential experience, which R. Efrayim of Sudylkow refers to, is
the awareness that "the entire world was created for my
sake."
The Mishna in which this dictum is found notes the uniqueness of each and
every individual:
And to tell the
greatness of the Holy One, blessed be He, for man mints many coins with a single
mold, and they are all similar to one another. And the King, the King of kings,
the Holy One, blessed be He, stamped every man with the mold of the first man,
and not one is similar to his fellow. Therefore, each and every person must say:
The world was created for my sake" (Sanhedrin 4:5)
The general context of this passage in the Mishna indicates that the
Mishna wishes to emphasize the importance of each and every individual, and that
his belonging to society and to a community does not diminish his value as an
individual: "Therefore, man was created alone to teach you that whoever destroys
a single soul in Israel, Scripture regards him as if he destroyed the entire
world." But R. Efrayim of Sudylkow, focuses upon the individual's consciousness
that the world was created for his sake, and that he was created
alone.[6]
R. Efrayim describes two cognitive ramifications of this psychological
state:
The first relates to responsibility. A person who lives with the
awareness that he is the only person in God's world feels the full weight of the
responsibility cast upon his shoulders. Through his deeds, he will maintain the
world, or, God forbid, cause it to be destroyed.[7]
Later in the passage, however, R. Efrayim describes a far more profound
cognitive ramification, which at first glance is also much more dangerous. The
idea that a person has that the entire world was created for his sake evokes the
feeling that "the rest of the world is subordinate to him." We are dealing with
what appears to be an egoistic consciousness, in which a person is in a
psychological state in which he feels that he is the only person on stage, and
that the rest of the world is merely scenery in relation to him.[8] R. Efrayim's
novel insight is that that this singularity does not leave the individual in his
personal framework bound by his own individuality. This awareness stands him up
against God and God's perfect unity, in the sense of "Just as I am one, He is
also one."[9]
How does an
individualistic consciousness of this sort stand man up against
God?
It seems that this can
be understood based on a fundamental principle of R. Nachman of Breslov. This
principle is based on the assumption that the entire universe is a dialogue
between God and me, and everything that surrounds me are just pieces of the
game.
When my children don't
allow me to sleep, God is trying to tell me something. When the clerk behind the
counter refuses my request with inexplicable stubbornness, I don't have to turn
my attention to him. His conduct, his morals, his traits are his business, not
mine. I have to view the entire situation as an invitation to listen to the word
of God. From this perspective, that clerk is nothing but God's messenger. What
is the situation telling me? What is my test? What is the repair? What am I
being asked to do?
This conception is
severe in its individualistic perspective, and as we have stated, it assumes for
a short moment that there are but two beings in the world: God and me. All
others are nothing but pawns in the framework of the dialogue between
us.
When I behave in a
certain way towards my wife, I am trying to say something to God, to listen to
what He is demanding of me in the framework of my conduct towards her. Her
conduct towards me should be viewed in similar fashion.
This approach and way of
looking at the world have several far-reaching
ramifications.
First, they remove the
anger and rage that are liable to rise in one person towards another. "It is not
you," he will tell the other person when he comes to apologize for some
wrongdoing he had committed against him, "it is God trying to tell me
something."
Second, it turns the
entire world into a tool to be used for correction and progress. The more
attentive we become, the more able will we be to elevate ourselves by way of
everything happening around us.
Third, and here we come
back to the words of R. Efrayim, they provide us with a new experience of the
demand of "I set the Lord before me at all times." Recognizing that the entire
world is part of God's word directed at me, and only at me, creates an amazing
experience of cleaving to God, the world not distracting me for even a moment
from Him. Just the opposite is true. The world constantly reminds me, in every
event, even the most base and profane, that God is talking to me, as R. Efrayim
writes: "He will have not a single thought that keeps him from Divine service,
and he can cleave to the Holy One, blessed be."
Fourth, they sharpen and
intensify the experience of recognizing the unity of the Creator. For the world
is a world of plurality. We reflect upon the many, seemingly unconnected events
occurring in the world - different people, different events, different times.
This plurality constitutes a constant threat to Divine
unity.
This awareness, which
stands at the center of the R. Nachman's mode of worship, concentrates all these
events, all these people, all of reality around one point. The entire world
turns to me and constitutes the scenery around me. But a moment later this point
is joined by the One and Only – God, for the entire world does not revolve me in
and of itself, but as part of God's dialogue with and turning to me - I am one
and He is one, and these two ones meet. Thus R. Efrayim concludes with the
words: "And he can cleave to the Holy One, blessed be He, one to one. And then
the Lord will be one and His name one. Amen."
FOOTNOTES:
[1] We shall not be
dealing in this framework with the general import of this idea, for we wish to
examine here only one of the many examples brought in the midrash. It
should be noted, however, that this idea is rooted in the recognition that the
righteous, through their deeds, prepare the way for Divine
revelation.
[2] R. Tzvi Elimelekh
Shapira of Dynow (1783-1841) – disciple of the Choze and R. Menachem
Mendel of Rymanow. The Choze revealed to him that he descends from the
tribe of Yissachar, and so he named his book Benei Yissachar. The
Chassidut of Munkacs traces to him. His books include: Benei
Yissachar, Igra de-Kala, Derekh Pikudekha.
[3] R. Shemuel of
Sochaczew (1856-1926), son of R. Avraham of Sochaczew, author of Avnei Nezer
and Iglei Tal, who was the son-in-law and disciple of the Kotzker
Rebbe. R. Shemuel helped his father in the editing of his books, adding his own
comments to them.
[4] Gilufin is
the Aramaic term for "unclothed. It is used here in the sense of removal of
barriers.
[5] The Degel Machane
Efrayim brings this idea in his comments to our parasha, but expands
upon it when he repeats the idea in Parashat Balak. Thus, we cite the
passage from Balak.
[6] This approach
presents a polar ideal. We wish to note that R. Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, who was
greatly troubled by this issue and often related to it in his writings, cites
the idea that a person must go about with two notes in his pocket, the one
reading, "For my sake, the world was created," and the other reading, "I am but
dust and ashes." R. Soloveitchik, in contrast to R. Efrayim, wishes to maintain
the delicate balance between the consciousness that man stands at the center of
existence, and the consciousness according to which he is pushed to the side of
social existence. He writes as follows: "[Judaism] sees him [man] in his
individuality and as part of a community, a limb in the body of Kenesset
Israel. Regarding this issue there exists a continuous dialectic in Jewish
thought across the generations. The question of questions is: Does the
individual stand above the community and it falls upon the community to serve
the individual, or is the individual subordinate to the community… The
individual and the community, as it were, are set upon the two pans of a scale
and are dependent upon each other. We sometimes find that the community must
sacrifice itself for the sake of an individual, for example, in the case where
non-Jews lay siege on a city and demand that one person be handed over to them –
in such a case they must all die, rather than hand over to them a single soul of
Israel. And sometimes the individual is obligated to sacrifice itself for the
sake of the community. Never is an individual nullified by the community, and
never is the community lost because of an individual or individuals. Each has a
place of its own" (Al ha-Teshuva, pp. 86-87). Similar ideas may be found
at the beginning of "The Lonely Man of Faith," and in R. Solovetchik's article,
"Ha-Rav she-Chotamo Kedusha ve-Ahava" (in Divrei Hagut
ve-Ha'arakha, p. 207).
[7] This is reminiscent
of the Gemara in Kiddushin (40b): "R. Elazar ben R. Shimon says: Since
the world is judged after its majority, and the individual is judged after his
majority, if a person performed a single mitzva, he is fortunate, for he
has decided his fate and that of the world in favor of vindication. If he
committed a single transgression, woe to him, for he has decided his fate and
that of the world in favor of culpability."
This statement, like the
introductory words of R. Efrayim, are meant to prevent a person from releasing
himself from the great responsibility cast upon him not only in relation to
himself, but also in relation to the entire world. Sometimes a person allows
himself to be swallowed up by the masses and thus become released from the
responsibility for the community. These words are directed against such an
inclination.
[8] Let us note that
this psychological state constitutes one of the foundations of the modern school
of thought called ”existentialism," which seeks to sharpen personal experience,
and almost entirely abolish the value of objective reality. What exists is what
I see; everything else, if it exists, is irrelevant to me. The early advocates
of this position faced the question that follows from it regarding the very
existence of a real world, for in the absence of eyes that see it, according to
this view, it should cease to exist. Some have resolved this issue of the
continuity of existence by way of the eyes of God by power of which the world
maintains its consecutive existence (Berkeley). Others have reached the
far-reaching conclusion that the material world does not exist at all
(Hume).
This approach has many
ramifications for Jewish thought; it has effected a number of modern thinkers
who have dealt with this issue, including R. Nachman of Breslov, R. Yosef Dov
Soloveitchik, and others.
[9] It is brought in the
name of R. Bunim of Przysucha: "I sometimes think that every individual
is a solitary tree, a juniper in the wilderness, a single child of the Creator
of the universe, and that the Holy One, blessed be He, has in His world but one
person, just as He is One."
(Translated by David
Strauss)