REUNIONS - VAYIGASH

Parshas Vayigash is characterized by a number of dramatic reunions between Yosef and his family. It is instructive to analyze the actions and attitudes of the great people who were involved in these emotional occasions. The most powerful of all the reunions was clearly that of Yosef with his father Yaakov. Yaakov surely felt indescribable joy at seeing his beloved son after twenty two years of separation, having believed that Yosef was no longer alive. What did Yaakov do when he finally saw Yosef? Rashi tells us that he said the Shema. Some commentaries understand that he was fulfilling one of the two daily obligatory recitations of the Shema; they discuss why he chose this point to fulfill his obligation of Shema. However, the Maharal writes that Yaakov was not fulfilling the daily obligation of Shema. Rather he was saying Shema as an expression of his great connection to HaShem at this joyous time. Instead of focusing purely on the joy of seeing his son, he tried to direct all his happiness to love of HaShem. He chose Shema in particular, because this represents an acknowledgement of how everything HaShem does is ultimately for the good. Moreover, it involves kabbalas ol Malchus Shamayim, which means that as a result of one’s recognition of HaShem one totally subjugates himself to HaShem’s will. The most striking fact about Yaakov’s actions is that, even on an occasion of such great natural emotion, he strove to connect all his natural joy to HaShem and emphasize his subjugation to HaShem.
The Torah writes further that Yosef acted very differently in this same reunion. The Torah states: “Yosef harnessed his chariot and went up to meet his father, to Goshen; and he appeared to him, fell on his neck, and he wept on him excessively.” Rashi explains the clause, “and he appeared to him,” to mean that Yosef appeared to Yaakov. The Ramban asks, that these words seem superfluous – once we know that Yosef fell on Yaakov’s neck it is obvious that Yosef appeared to his father. Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l explains the significance of the fact that Yosef appeared to Yaakov: He notes that it is evident that Yosef himself felt great joy at the prospect of being reunited with his beloved father after so many years. However, Yosef approached this reunion with only one intent – to provide his father with as much joy as possible in being reunited with his son. Therefore, Yosef made a conscious effort to ‘appear’ or ‘make himself seen’ by his father when they met . He disregarded his own desire to see his father at that moment of reunion, and his single goal was to provide his father with as much joy as possible . We see from this explanation that Yosef had a very different intent from his father in this joyful reunion. Yaakov focused purely on his connection with HaShem at this time, whereas Yosef concentrated on the Mitzvo of kibud av v’eim (honoring one’s parents) to the greatest degree possible. The common denominator between the two was that the intent of both was purely to do what they perceived to be HaShem’s will at this time. This shows a tremendous level of constant awareness of HaShem, and a permanent desire to do his will, even at the height of one’s own natural emotions.
We learn similar lessons in this vein from the earlier reunion in the Parsha between Yosef and Binyomin. The Torah tells us: “Then he [Yosef] fell upon his brother, Binyomin’s neck and wept; and Binyomin wept upon his neck.” Chazal tell us that the two brothers saw through ruach hakodesh future calamaties that would take place in their portions of land in Eretz Yisroel: Yosef cried over the destruction of the two Temples that would be in Binyomin’s portion whilst Binyomin mourned the destruction of the Mishkan of Shiloh that would be in Yosef’s portion.
Rav Aharon Yehuda Leib Shteinman shlita, discusses why they had such a vision at this time in particular. He explains that their thoughts and emotions were constantly directed to spirituality. Thus, despite the great emotion they felt at this time, their concerns were only spiritual. Had they only been focusing on their personal feelings, they would not have merited to receive ruach hakodesh. The fact that they did receive it at this time, demonstrates their lofty thoughts even at the heights of this powerful reunion. This is another example of how tzaddikim approach moments of great joy. There is a further lesson in how the two brothers reacted to their sad vision. It is noteworthy that they did not cry over the future destructions that would take place in their own portions, rather over the loss in the other brother’s portion. This shows, that, even in the midst of receiving ruach hakodesh, the brothers maintained a very high level of selflessness and sensitivity for others.
We have seen the great righteousness of Yaakov, Yosef and Binyomin, in how they conducted themselves at the height of their emotions. This demonstrates their constant sense of connecting to HaShem and doing His will. Whilst their level seems unattainable for us, there are a number of ways in which we can strive to emulate them in our daily lives. Indeed, halacha (Jewish law) dictates that even at times of great joy, we direct our happiness to HaShem. For example, on the occasion of the birth of a child we say the bracha (blessing) of shehechiyanu or hatov vehametiv. Likewise, we say one of these blessings when we acquire a new item that gives us great joy.
We can also emulate the heightened sense of bein adam lechaveiro that Yosef and Binyomin demonstrated at their reunion. Even at a time of great joy, they thought about other people more than themselves. A common example where this can be emulated is when a person is celebrating some kind of happy occasion. At such a time, one can easily become totally absorbed in his own joy and not notice other people. Yet this is an apt time to make the guests and well-wishers feel good by showing them that we are really happy to see them. This gives them a sense of importance and being appreciated. May we all merit to emulate the great personalities in the Torah, by serving HaShem even at times of great emotion.

THE THREAT OF ESAV - VAYISHLACH

The beginning of the Parsha is dominated by Yaakov’s famous encounter with Esav. On a simple level, the threat that Esav posed was a physical one – that he would destroy Yaakov’s family with his four hundred soldiers. However, the commentaries point out that there was a second, even more pernicious, threat that Esav posed.
The Beis HaLevi discusses this at length. He begins with a novel explanation of Yaakov’s prayer to HaShem before the encounter. “Please save me from the hand of my brother, the hand of Esav.” Why did Yaakov use a repetitive language to describe Esav. He should have said, “save me from Esav”, or “save me from my brother”, what was the significance of both terms? The Beis HaLevi explains that Yaakov was fearful of two different dangers posed by Esav; one was that Esav would act with enmity towards Yaakov and thereby threaten his physical survival. The other danger was that Esav would now act with brotherliness towards Yaakov. Why would he be fearful of Esav’s friendliness? Yaakov did not want Esav to negatively influence Yaakov’s family by the two having friendly relations. Thus, Yaakov had a two-pronged fear – of the physical risk of meeting an antagonistic Esav, and the spiritual danger of encountering Esav as his ‘”brother”. In this vein, the Beis HaLevi explains another repetitive verse in the Parsha; “Yaakov was afraid and distressed…” What do the two similar expressions of fear refer to? The Beis HaLevi writes that Yaakov was afraid of the possibility that Esav may kill him, and was distressed about the risk that Esav would become close to him.
The Malbim continues this theme in his account of Yaakov’s battle with Esav’s Malach (Angel). He writes that Yaakov’s battle with the Malach (angel) was not primarily a physical one, rather it was fought on a spiritual plane that would have repercussions for the future of all of Yaakov’s descendants. In this battle, Yaakov was striving to free himself completely of physicality, and the taivas (desires) connected with it, so that he could totally connect with HaShem. The Malach was trying to prevent him from doing this, by causing him to be bound up in his physicality. He failed in this task, due to the fact that Yaakov had elevated himself to such a high spiritual level. However, the Malach was able to inflict some damage by striking Yaakov’s gid hanasheh . This, the Malbim explains, is because the gid hanasheh is the point of connection to physicality, and even Yaakov was unable to strip himself of that connection. This damage of the gid was the cause of the spiritual weakness in future generations of Jews who would leave Judaism.
We have seen that Esav’s threat to Yaakov was as much, if not more, on the spiritual level than the physical. However, thus far it would seem that Esav’s threat was that he would completely remove Yaakov and his descendants from any connection to G-d and the Torah. The Beis HaLevi brings a Medrash that shows that Esav’s threat was, in fact much more subtle: When the brothers finally met up, Esav’s heart softened towards Yaakov, and he offered for the two of them to travel together. The Medrash elaborates on Esav’s offer: “Esav said to him [Yaakov] that he should make a partnership with him [Esav] of the two worlds – Olam Hazeh and Olam Haba.” The Beis HaLevi explains that Esav was suggesting that they join together by both of them compromising somewhat on their lifestyles. Esav was prepared to accept upon himself the foundations of Torah, and in return Yaakov should give up a little bit of his pure focus on spirituality, and be more involved in this worldly activities for their own sake. Thus, Esav did not necessarily desire to totally uproot Yaakov from Torah, rather, just to dilute his pure devotion to Avodas HaShem.
We see in Yaakov’s earlier words to Esav that he also recognized the more subtle, spiritual threat posed by Esav. He famously tells Esav, “I lived with Lavan, the evil one, and I kept the 613 Mitzvos, and I did not learn from his evil ways.” Rav Yitzchak Hutner zt”l points out that the last part of Yaakov’s message, that he did not learn from Lavan’s evil ways, seems superfluous. Once Yaakov has said that he kept the Mitzvos, it should be unnecessary to say that he did not learn from Lavan’s evil ways – if he kept the Mitzvos, surely he didn’t learn from Lavan’s evil ways?! The answer is that it is possible to keep the Mitzvos, and yet be influenced by someone like Lavan; a person can ‘keep’ all the Mitzvos and yet have values that are not based on the Torah, rather on those of the outside world. Accordingly, Yaakov was telling Esav that Lavan was completely unable to dilute Yaakov’s Avodas HaShem. So too, Yaakov alluded to Esav that he would also be unable to influence Yaakov.
We learn from Yaakov’s momentous encounter with Esav that the spiritual threat posed by Esav was not limited to destroying Yaakov physically, or to fully diverting him and his descendants away from the Torah. Rather, Esav offered to merely dilute Yaakov’s pure Avodas HaShem with external values. Yaakov’s firm refusal of this offer teaches us that just as one must strive to observe all the Mitzvos, so too he must strive to espouse values that are totally concurrent with Torah do not derive from external influences. This lesson is extremely pertinent today, when the myriad influences of the Western world threaten to greatly affect the outlook and observance of Jews everywhere. For one person, it may mean that whilst he strongly identifies as a Jew, his observance is greatly compromised by the need s to be involved in the secular world, such as the necessity of working on Shabbos or eating in non-kosher establishments. For another, he may consider himself something of a ‘Shabbos Jew’ – someone who keeps Shabbos and some other Mitzvos, but when he is in the workplace, or striving to make money, Torah values take a poor second place to the desire to succeed in his business. For another, the influences may be even more subtle, and he may strive to keep all the Mitzvos, but his true desires are more in line with those of the Western world than those of the Torah. Whatever level we are on, may we all merit to emulate Yaakov Avinu by not learning from Esav’s evil ways.

SUKKOS AND YAAKOV AVINU

The sefarim tell us that each of the shalosh regalim of Sukkos, Pesach and Shavuos correspond to the three forefathers (avos). Pesach corresponds to Avraham Avinu, Shavuos to Yitzchak Avinu, and Sukkos to Yaakov Avinu. The scriptural source for this is the passuk in Vayishlach, which tells us that after Yaakov's encounter with Esav, he went to a place called, 'Sukkos' and he made sukkos for his animals. This teaches us that there is some kind of connection between Yaakov and the festival of Sukkos. What is the link between the two?

In order to answer this, it is instructive to examine an interesting feature of Sukkos. On Sukkos, even the most mundane activities, such as eating and sleeping, become Mitzvos. The mere act of sitting the in the Sukkah turns these activities that are normally devarim shel reshus into mitzvos, that obligate one to say the bracha of 'leysheiv basukkah'. Therefore, a person who spends most of his time in the sukkah, is constantly performing the mitzvo of living in the sukkah. In this way, Sukkos has a tremendous power in that it elevates a person's daily activities into acts of great kedusha (holiness).

This aspect of Sukkos can help understand some differences between Sukkos and the other chagim. The Kol Bo notes that one says the bracha for being in the Sukkah throughout the whole chag. In contrast, on Pesach, the Kol Bo holds there is also a mitzvo to eat Matzo for the whole 7 days, and yet we only say a bracha on the first day- why do we not say every day? He answers that when a person eats matzo on the later days of Pesach, it is not apparent that he is doing so because it is a Mitzvo. He could be eating the matzo simply because he is hungry and has no option to eat bread. In contrast, on Sukkos, there is no practical reason to eat in the sukkah, one could equally easily eat in his home. The fact that he davke eats in the sukkah indicates that he is doing so purely for the sake of the mitzvo. He can say a bracha throughout the whole of Sukkos, because he demonstrates that he is only performing the normally mundane acts in of sleeping and eating because it is a mitzvo to do so in the sukkah.

The Ben Ish Chai applies the concept that merely living in the sukkah is a mitzvo to answer a different question about Sukkos. Unlike Pesach and Shavuos, Sukkos is described as zman simchaseinu,(the time of our joy). The other chagim also represent times of great happiness, so why is Sukkos considered more joyful than them? He answers that the extra joy of Sukkos is because of the mitzvo to sit in the sukkah that applies throughout the whole festival. This constant ability to perform mitzvos for the honor of the festival arouses a great sense of joy. He writes that this on the other festivals there is no essential difference between a person's daily life from the rest of the year. Accordingly, one may not have the constant awareness of the festival that he has on Sukkos, resulting in a lower level of joy. This is the reason that Sukkos in particular is mesugal for simcha. Thus, we see that Sukkos is unique in that it elevates normally non-holy activities into mitzvos, and enables us to have a constant awareness and joy of the festival.

How is this aspect of Sukkos connected to Yaakov Avinu? Of all the avos, Yaakov Avinu was the one who was most required to be deeply involved in the daily vicissitudes of life such as dealing with dishonest people, spending long hours at work, and bringing up a large family. For many years he was forced to deal with areas of reshus, unable to devote all his time to learning and prayer. One aspect of Yaakov's greatness is that he was able to live in such an environment and elevate his daily activities into acts of holiness. This is what he declares to his brother, Esav, when he returns from his long years in exile. "I lived (garti) with Lavan". Chazal tell us that the word, garti, spells, taryag, which represents the 613 mitzvos. Yaakov was alluding to the fact that he had remained steadfast in his avodas Hashem, despite living in adverse conditions.

It seems that many aspects of Yaakov Avinu relate to the fact that he was able to elevate the mudane into kedusha. Chazal tell us that the avos desribed the Beis Hamikdosh, (and avodas Hashem by extension), in different ways. Avraham described the Beis Hamikdosh as a har (mountain), Yitzchak as a sadeh (field), and Yaakov as a bayis (house). These various descriptions represent the different ways that the avos related to avodas Hashem. Why does Yaakov describe it as a house? A house is the location of all the mundane activities that a person performs throughout his daily life, including eating, sleeping, and forms of work. Yaakov elevated all such activities because he saw them all as opportunities for holiness. Accordingly, he viewed a house as a vehicle of avodas Hashem.

In a similar vein, the avos represent the three daily prayers. Avraham corresponds to shacharis, Yitzchak to mincha, and Yaakov to maariv. Maariv is different from the other prayer services in that it is described as a reshus, a non-obligatory prayer. Why is Yaakov, in particular associated with an optional prayer? In light of the aforementioned explanation of Yaakov's ability to turn non-obligatory activities into mitzvos, we can also understand why maariv corresponds to Yaakov It represents the fact that a person wants to connect to Hashem even though he is not obligated to do so.

Yaakov also corresponds to the third bracha in the shemoneh esrei, that of kedusha. This also fits in with the above explanation. The Torah definition of kedusha is not merely avoiding the physical world, rather it is sanctifying it so that it too can be used a tool of avodas Hashem.

With this understanding of Yaakov and Sukkos, their connection is obvious. Both represent taking optional activities and making them holy. It is easier to feel pious when involved in obviously spiritual activities such as learning and praying. However, it is far more difficult to connect to Hashem whilst eating, sleeping and working. Sukkos is the only time of the year when such actions become mitzvos merely by doing them in the sukkah. Of course, this does not mean that we can indulge in gluttony and over-sleeping whilst being in the sukkah. Rather it obligates us to focus on the fact that our mere dwelling in the sukkah is a great opportunity to help us develop our awareness of Hashem and to be more lishma in our going about our daily lives. If we do this, then we can take the recognition that mundane acts are great opportunities for kedusha, into our daily lives even when the festival has left us.