Parshat Vayechi answers

VaYechi 5722
Alef.

1.  With respect to Yaakov, we are told that while his sight might have been somewhat impaired, he could still see to some extent. For this reason he saw that Yosef’s sons were present (48:8); he initially was unable to recognize exactly who they were. Furthermore if the reversal of his hands was deliberate (v. 19) that implies that he could see sufficiently to tell the difference between the two boys and decide which hand to place upon whom. Yitzchak on the other hand, was unable to see altogether and therefore could be misled by Yaakov into thinking that he actually was Eisav.

2. In chapter 48, Yaakov’s difficulty in seeing is only a part of the entire story of his blessing Yosef as if Yosef is the Bechor. He clearly intended to do this all along and carried out his intention. His eyesight issues led Yosef to believe that his father had erred with respect to placing his hands, something that Yaakov clarifies he actually deliberately placed his hands as he did, further indicating that his sight was not totally impaired. Yitzchak’s blindness is what makes the entire story in Beraishit 27 is predicated on Yitzchak’s not being able to see, so that one son can masquerade as the other.

Beit.

 1.  Klee Yakar suggests that Yaakov was too modest to associate himself with Avraham and Yitzchak. Furthermore, whereas he saw HaShem as the object of worship of his predecessors, his own experience with HaShem was one whereby he felt that he had been protected and provided with sustenance. Since these are two separate Divine Modalities, he differentiates between them.

2.  From the perspective of Avoda, HaShem is Passive and those worshipping Him are active. From the perspective of providing sustenance, HaShem is active and the recipient of His Largesse is passive.

3.  Due to Yaakov’s difficult life experiences, i.e., running from Eisav; dealing with Lavan; meeting Eisav once again; grappling with the tragedy of Dina; losing Yosef, then Shimon and possibly Binyamin; struggling with the famine; worrying about what was going to happen to him and his family once they would take up residence in Egypt, he could have been wondering whether HaShem would Live up to the request that he makes at the beginning of Parashat VaYetze (28:20-1)—

בראשית פרק כח

(כ) וידר יעקב נדר לאמר אם יהיה אלקים עמדי ושמרני בדרך הזה אשר אנכי הולך ונתן לי לחם לאכל ובגד ללבש:

(כא) ושבתי בשלום אל בית אבי והיה יקוק לי לאלקים:

      It is only now at the end of his life when he has the perspective to recognize that HaShem has indeed Kept His end of the bargain.

4.  Klee Yakar associates protection from evil, as opposed to Avoda and Parnasa, with a Malach, i.e., a Divine Intermediary, rather than HaShem’s direct Involvement. Consequently, Yaakov invokes a Malach when he is praying that his grandsons will be protected from all evil.

5.  Benno Jacob might be extending Klee Yakar’s idea, i.e., Yaakov will require considerable protection from all sorts of adversaries and the visions of angels that he saw both upon departing from Canaan and then again returning served as reminders that HaShem constantly “Had his back.”

בראשית פרק כד

(ז) יקוק אלקי השמים אשר לקחני מבית אבי ומארץ מולדתי ואשר דבר לי ואשר נשבע לי לאמר לזרעך אתן את הארץ הזאת הוא ישלח מלאכו לפניך ולקחת אשה לבני משם:

While Avraham attributes to HaShem the “Big Picture” issues of coming to Canaan and Planning to Give the land to Avraham’s offspring, with respect to Eliezer who has been given the finite mission to find a wife for Yitzchak, HaShem’s Protection will be needed and this form of Divine Intervention is associated with an Angel.

Gimel.

1.  It seems to me that they are both addressing two different problems, i.e., R. Avraham ben HaRaMBaM is bothered by the appearance that Yaakov is praying to a Malach as opposed to HaShem directly, and Sephorno is concerned that although Yaakov first references Elokim, when it comes to actually blessing the boys, he apparently asks a Malach to do so.

2.  By adding the second person singular pronoun whose antecedent is Elokim, Sephorno is demonstrating that Yaakov is leaving open the possibility that not the Malach but HaShem Himself will Impart the blessing. It is only if the boys are not worthy of receiving a blessing from HaShem that a secondary request is made that an angel should nevertheless bless them.

3.  Since clearly it is preferable to receive a blessing directly from HaShem rather than via an intermediary, the only justification for having an Angel bless the boys is if there is something disqualifying them from a higher level of blessing. One instance where we see a tension between a blessing issuing from an Angel as opposed to one coming from HaShem Himself is when Yaakov is renamed.

בראשית פרק לב

(כז) ויאמר שלחני כי עלה השחר ויאמר לא אשלחך כי אם ברכתני:

(כח) ויאמר אליו מה שמך ויאמר יעקב:

(כט) ויאמר לא יעקב יאמר עוד שמך כי אם ישראל כי שרית עם אלקים ועם אנשים ותוכל:

(ל) וישאל יעקב ויאמר הגידה נא שמך ויאמר למה זה תשאל לשמי ויברך אתו שם:

בראשית פרק לה

(ט) וירא אלקים אל יעקב עוד בבאו מפדן ארם ויברך אתו:

(י) ויאמר לו אלקים שמך יעקב לא יקרא שמך עוד יעקב כי אם ישראל יהיה שמך ויקרא את שמו ישראל:

(יא) ויאמר לו אלקים אני קל שקי פרה ורבה גוי וקהל גוים יהיה ממך ומלכים מחלציך יצאו:

(יב) ואת הארץ אשר נתתי לאברהם וליצחק לך אתננה ולזרעך אחריך אתן את הארץ:

The fact that the Angel’s blessing did not suffice, but was repeated by HaShem, suggests that this is a higher level blessing.

Another instance in Rabbinic literature where the “level” of individuals causes a diminution in Divine Influence and Spirit is when Yaakov attempts to tell his children what will occur in the end of days.

בראשית פרק מט

(א) ויקרא יעקב אל בניו ויאמר האספו ואגידה לכם את אשר יקרא אתכם באחרית הימים:

(ב) הקבצו ושמעו בני יעקב ושמעו אל ישראל אביכם:

However, when one looks at the blessings themselves, no predictions appear to be made regarding specifics about the distant future.

רש"י בראשית פרק מט פסוק א

(א) ואגידה לכם - בקש לגלות את הקץ ונסתלקה שכינה ממנו והתחיל אומר דברים אחרים:¹

Although the Talmud in Pesachim 56a recounts how Yaakov wondered whether the reason why prophecy was removed from him was that someone among his sons was not a proper believer, and they all responded with a statement to the contrary, just because they say they were on the proper level does not necessarily mean that this was the case.

Daled.

1. “Shem”:

   Ibn Ezra: The name by which the entire people will be referred, as in Yirmiyahu 31:19 “הבן יקיר לי אפרים.”

   RaMBaN: There will be an association between Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov  with them because of their behavior down through the ages.

   R. Maimon: The overall behavior and self-discipline that they will apply to themselves will obviously connect them with Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov, as opposed to some other personalities or entities.

   R. Avraham ben HaRaMBaM: A form of blessing, i.e., I hope that the attributes of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov will be transferred to them.

2.   הושע פרק ז

(א) כרפאי לישראל ונגלה עון אפרים ורעות שמרון כי פעלו שקר וגנב יבוא פשט גדוד בחוץ:

In this verse it is clear that Ephraim is only a portion of the people, with “Shomron” being the manner in which the rest of the people are described. If Ephraim and Menashe are being equally blessed, then both of their names should be employed.

תהלים פרק פ

(ב) רעה ישראל האזינה נהג כצאן יוסף ישב הכרובים הופיעה:

In this case, neither Ephraim nor Menashe are mentioned, but rather the Jewish people in its entirety is referred to as Yosef. So the issue of one of Yosef’s sons being more important than the other is avoided.

Yirmiyahu 31:19 uses Ephraim as representative of the entire people, without mention of Menashe.

3.  In Beraishit 46:15, when Leah’s name is mentioned, she is not described as the wife of Yaakov, whereas in v. 19 Rachel is described as Yaakov’s wife. Ibn Ezra accounts for this by noting that had Lavan not tricked him, Rachel would have been Yaakov’s only wife, and for this reason she deserves being referred to in this manner in contradistinction to Leah.

4.    דברים פרק כה

(י) ונקרא שמו בישראל בית חלוץ הנעל: ס

This verse would appear to support Ibn Ezra’s approach re Beraishit 48:16. This individual who refused to perform Yibum with his brother’s widow will be known by this approbation from then on.

רות פרק ד

(יג) ויקח בעז את רות ותהי לו לאשה ויבא אליה ויתן יקוק לה הריון ותלד בן:

(יד) ותאמרנה הנשים אל נעמי ברוך יקוק אשר לא השבית לך גאל היום ויקרא שמו בישראל:

In this case, R. Avraham ben HaRaMBaM’s interpretation, i.e., that this is a language of blessing, would fit the best.

Heh.

1.   בראשית פרק מח

(טז) המלאך הגאל אתי מכל רע יברך את הנערים ויקרא בהם שמי ושם אבתי אברהם ויצחק וידגו לרב בקרב הארץ:

R. Eliezer infers from the present tense, “HaGoel” (Who is Redeeming), that the redemption is ongoing, rather than being a one-time event in the past.

2.     בראשית פרק מח

(טו) ויברך את יוסף ויאמר האלקים אשר התהלכו אבתי לפניו אברהם ויצחק האלקים הרעה אתי מעודי עד היום הזה:

The previous verse would appear to be the proof to this contention since there it is stated with regard to “shepherding” (which could involve occasional saving the flock from calamity, but much more often simply providing food-Parnasa—for the animals under the shepherd’s supervision) that it has been going on from well before until this very day.

3.  R. Shmuel bar Nachman is stating a counter-intuitive truth. One would assume that when a Divine Intervention occurs by which someone is saved from disaster, a greater miracle is required and therefore HaShem Himself is involved. Comes this Rabbinic authority  to state that it is in fact the opposite, i.e., for miracles of salvation, an Angel is dispensed; however with respect to providing ongoing food and sustenance, this is something that HaShem Reserves for Himself. Either this is actually a greater miracle than saving someone, or because HaShem Wishes to manifest His Goodness, providing sustenance is so significant that He, as it were, Refuses to delegate the responsibility to anyone else, but rather Sees to it Himself.

Vav.

R. Eliyahu Mizrachi explains that since Yaakov thought that Yosef had been devoured by a wild animal, it wasn’t only that he hadn’t thought that he would ever see him again, but it never dawned on him to begin to think about seeing him once again, the idea was so preposterous and remote from him.