Our parasha tells the story of Ya‘aqov’s lonely nighttime struggle with a mal’ach on the banks of the river Yabboq. Rashi, following the midrash, identifies Ya‘aqov’s adversary as שרו של עשו, the “directing angel” of ‘Esav, as it were.
They fought throughout the night, and as dawn was about to break, the mal’ach cried out: שלחני כי עלה השחר ויאמר לא אשלחך כי אם ברכתני (”Release me, for the dawn has arisen; and [Ya‘aqov] said, I shall not release you unless you bless me”; XXXII, 27). Here, Rashi tells us that Ya‘aqov meantהודה לי על הברכות שברכני אבי שעשו מערער עליהם : (“Concede to me concerning the brachoth with which my father blessed me, for ‘Esav [still] objects to them”).
So here is the question: What did Ya‘aqov see, after all his years in exile, that led him to believe that ‘Esav through his mal’ach might actually concede to him those brachoth which Yitzchaq had bestowed on Ya‘aqov, thinking that he was ‘Esav?
B.
In a comment on the first verse in next week’s parasha, Rashi offers a striking metaphor concerning הפשתני הזה נכנסו גמליו טעונים פשתן הפחמי תמה אנה כל הפשתן הזה? הי' פיקח אחד משיב לו ניצוץ אחד יוצא ממפוח שלך ששורף את כולו. כך יעקב ראה כל האלופים הכתובים למעלה תמה ואמר מי יכול לכבוש כולן? מה כתיב למטה? "אלה תולדות יעקב יוסף" וכתיב "והי' בית יעקב אש ובית יוסף להבה ובית עשו לקש" ניצוץ יוצא מיוסף שמכלה ושורף את כולם (“A certain flax merchant’s camels enter [the market] laden with flax; the blacksmith is surprised: Whither all of this flax? A certain wit answered him: A single spark from your bellows will burn it all up! Thus did Ya‘aqov see all of the chiefs [of ‘Esav] written above [i.e., XXXVI, 1-43] and was surprised [and] said, Who is able to overcome all these? What is written below? ‘These are the descendants of Ya‘aqov, Yosef....’[XXXVII, 2, and it is written “And the house of Ya‘aqov will be fire, and the house of Yosef a flame and the house of ‘Esav will become straw” [Obadiah I, 18]; a spark coming out of Yosef eliminates and burns them all up”).
The midrash explicitly connects Yosef’s birth to the struggle with the mal’ach: "ויגע בכף ירכו" זה יוסף שהוא עיקר יוצאי ירכו (“‘And [the mal’ach] touched [Ya‘aqov’s] inner loin’ [v. 26], this is Yosef, who was the major fruit of his loin”; ילקוט ראובני, פרשתנו ). What is the point of this connection?
The holy Or ha-Chayyim, discusses why Yitzchaq had been so determined that ‘Esav should receive his brachoth; surely however blind he had been, both literally and figuratively through ‘Esav’s deceptions, he was nonetheless able to see the vast difference in quality between his two sons? He answers: כי חשב שבאמצעות הברכות יתהפך למידת הטוב ויטיב דרכיו כו' ואפשר שהי' מועיל ותמצא שאמרו ז"ל שנענש יעקב שמנע דינה מעשו שאפשר שהיתה מחזרתו למוטב הרי שאפשר לו לחזור למוטב (“that he thought that by means of the brachoth [‘Esav] might turn to the good and improve his ways.... And it was possible that it might be effective, for you will find that Chazal said that Ya‘aqov was punished for withholding Dina from ‘Esav, for it was possible that she would return him to the good, so [we see] that it was possible for him to return to the good”; תולדות כ"ז א' ד"ה בנו).
If we turn next to the Talmud, we shall find the next piece of the puzzle in the form of a famous dispute: א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן כל הנביאים כולן לא נתנבאו אלא לבעלי תשובה, אבל צדיקים גמורים, "עין לא ראתה אלקים זולתך". ופליגא דא"ר אבהו מקום שבעלי תשובה עומדין צדיקים גמורים אינם עומדין וגו' (“Said Rabbi Chiyya bar Abba, said Rabbi Yochanan: 'All of the prophets prophesied only for ba‘alei t’shuva, but complete tzaddiqim? "No eye has seen, G-d, apart from You" [Isaiah LXIV, 3; i.e., nothing is revealed to the prophets concerning tzaddiqim -- Rashi],' and there is a disputant, since Rabbi Abbahu said, '[In the] place where ba’alei t’shuva stand complete tzaddiqim do not stand'”; ברכות ל"ד: וע"ע סנהדרין צ"ט.).
In other words, Rabbi Yochanan appears to hold that tzaddiqim gmurim, those who have never had occasion to repent because they have never committed an actual transgression against one of the mitzvoth and hence never had to be addressed by the prophets, are superior in standing to ba‘alei t’shuva, whose shortcomings had been the subject of prophetic revelation and rebuke; whilst Rabbi Abbahu appears to hold that ba‘alei t’shuva, those who have fallen into error but managed to claw themselves up from the depths once again, have the superior status. Rabbi Abbahu, then, would be sympathetic to Yitzchaq’s view of ‘Esav’s potential, should it only be realised; Rabbi Yochanan, on the other hand, would see Ya‘aqov’s superiority as unquestioned.
C.
Reference to an additional Talmudic quotation will help clarify why this should matter. שופרי' דר' אבהו מעין שופרי' דיעקב אבינו (“The splendor/beauty [shufra] of Rabbi Abbahu is derived from the shufra of Ya ‘aqov avinu”), and שופרי' דר' יוחנן מעין שופרי' דיוסף (“Rabbi Yochanan’s shufra was derived from the shufra of Yosef”; בבא מציעא פ"ד.).
This is not a reference to some Talmudic beauty pageant. The sfarim ha-qdoshim (עיי' למשל ספר צדקת הצדיק סי' קי"ז) make clear that the Aramaic word shufra is referring to the beauty of their approach and method in Torah, since חכמת אדם תאיר פניו (“a person’s wisdom illumines his face”). As my lovely wife is wont to say of people she approves of, they are “beautiful inside and out,” that is, the beauty of their thoughts and qualities informs and radiates through their countenances.
The Maharal mi-Prag notes in his Netzach Yisra’él that whenever the Talmud records a dispute between Tanna’im or Amora’im, the dispute is deeper than the surface of the matter under discussion, and is traceable to the core formulation of each one’s knowledge and method, the way in which the Torah tradition was specifically imparted to each individual and how he interacts with it (פנ"א ד"ה ופליג בה, וע"ע דרך החיים למהר"ל פ"א מט"ו). Thus, Rabbi Abbahu’s reasoning can be traced to Ya‘aqov, whilst Rabbi Yochanan’s approach is that of Yosef.
D.
Now we can put this together.
We may conclude that down through all the years of Ya‘aqov’s enforced exile from his homeland and his sojourn with Lavan, שרו של עשן, ‘Esav’s personal mal’ach, was able to justify ‘Esav’s grudge and refusal to concede the matter of the brachoth, on the grounds that he might some day do t’shuva, at which point he would truly merit the brachoth that Yitzchaq had wanted to bestow on him. Rabbi Abbahu’s opinion concerning the superiority of ba‘alei t’shuva implies that Ya‘aqov himself did not argue with the implications of such a likelihood; he would accept the validity of the mal’ach’s reasoning.
However, with the birth of Yosef, the originator of Rabbi Yochanan’s appraoch came into the world, and he held that, no matter what ‘Esav might do, the right to the brachoth of a tzaddiq gamur would always carry more weight than that of a ba‘al t’shuva. Yosef, as the midrash cited supra notes, was the ‘iqqar, the “root” or “main focus” of the bnei Yisra’él, a status to which we find allusion in the Torah, which calls Yosef a בן זקנים (XXXVII, 3), which Onqelos renders בר חכים, “wise son.” As heirs to their father’s brachoth, they would never give them up to ‘Esav, even if he would repent completely of all that he had done. The mal’ach was forced to give in on the point, as Rashi explains.
B’siyya‘ta di-Shmayya, I believe that we can find an allusion to Rashi’s point on another level, too. In Talmudic literature, Rabbi Yochanan often bears the surname bar Nappacha, or “son of the blacksmith” (עיי' למשל סנהדרין צ"ו., בבא מציעא פ"ה:, וכתובות כ"ה:). Rashi tells us that his father was, indeed, a blacksmith, but then adds: ואית דמפרשי בר נפחט על שם יופיו (“and there are those who explain bar nappacha with reference to his beauty”; סנהדרין שם, רש"י ד"ה טבא).
To say the least, the remark is cryptic; our first consideration of male beauty is not usually to think of a blacksmith. However, if we think of the Hebrew word yofi, Rashi uses here in the same way as we have come to consider the Aramaic shufra, and consider the etymological relationship of nappacha to the Hebrew word for “bellows,” mappuach, which Rashi uses in his comment supra, perhaps we can discern in this surname an indirect reference to the “spark” or “flame” of Yosef’s way in Torah, which had spread to Rabbi Yochanan, and which he himself, in his rôle as rosh yeshiva, was dedicated to propagating amongst his talmidim.
No comments:
Post a Comment