Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> Vayishlach ->


And Timna was a concubine to Elifaz, son of Eisav, and she bore Amalek to Elifaz. (36:12)

Rashi cites the Talmud Sanhedrin 99b which explains the Torah’s emphasis on Timna.  Avraham Avinu was held in such esteem that people were eager to associate in any way with his descendants.  Timna was the daughter of nobility; yet when she came to Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov to convert, she was not accepted.  Since she was so anxious to marry a descendent of Avraham, she said to Elifaz, Eisav’s son, “If I may not become your wife, at least let me be your concubine.”  This union produced our  archenemy–Amalek.  The commentators are all troubled by the Patriarchs’ reaction to Timna’s…

Continue Reading

“And he struck the socket of his hip, and Yaakov’s hip socket was dislocated.” (32:27)

The Zohar Ha’Kadosh interprets the “kaf yerech” as “tamchin do’oraisa,” referring to those who support Torah. The Chafetz Chaim explains that Eisav’s angel disputed Yaakov’s claim to the blessings, offering the argument that Eisav had as much right to the blessings as Yaakov did. Yaakov retorted that his descendants would one day receive the Torah to study. Although Eisav’s angel could not impugn this rationale, he nevertheless attempted to hurt Yaakov. He succeeded in weakening the financial support for Torah. In the “Ikvasa d’Meshicha,” the period of time close to the advent of Moshiach, Torah supporters will seek excuses to…

Continue Reading

“Therefore the Bnei Yisrael are not to eat the displaced sinew on the hip socket… because he (the angel) struck Yaakov’s hip-socket on the displaced sinew.” (32:33)

Rashi attributes the name given by the Torah to the sciatic nerve, Gid Hanashe, to the fact that the nerve was “nash’e,” “jumped” out of its place. When the angel struck Yaakov, he dislocated the sciatic nerve. Accordingly, the word nashe is defined as being removed from its original or usual place. Another meaning can be applied to the word “nash’e,” which sheds light upon the actual damage that resulted when the angel struck Yaakov.  Horav Avigdor Tzvi Nebentzhal, Shlita, cites the pasuk in Parashas Mikeitz (Bereishis 41:51) in which Yosef, upon naming his son Menashe, says, ki nashani elokim…

Continue Reading

“And he (Yaakov) built himself a house and for his livestock he made shelter; he therefore called the name of the place Succos.” (33:17)

One would think that when Yaakov assigned a name to a place, he would use a reason more meaningful than the fact that it had served as a shelter for livestock. The Ohr Ha’Chaim suggests that this was probably the first time anyone had cared for animals to the point that shelter was provided for them. This public display of compassion for animals was viewed as sufficient reason for naming the place Succos. Hence, people would take note and themselves show concern for animals. Horav Simcha Zissel Broide, Shlita, takes a novel approach towards understanding Yaakov’s reasoning. The pasuk states…

Continue Reading

“And Eisav took his wives… and all the members of his household… and went to a land because of Yaakov his brother.” (36:6)

The commentators suggest a number of reasons that Eisav suddenly decided to separate from Yaakov. Some of them posit that pure greed motivated this decision. He felt the land could not support him in the style to which he had become accustomed. Horav S.R. Hirsch, zl, contends that Eisav’s decision was a pragmatic one; he could not tolerate Yaakov’s presence. Despite their newfound relationship, the moral gulf that existed between them was loathsome for Eisav. He simply could not cope with his brother’s lifestyle. These various explanations notwithstanding, we still must address the reason that Eisav left. Why could he…

Continue Reading

“So you shall say unto my master Eisav, ‘So says your servant Yaakov, I have sojourned with Lavan and stayed until now.” (32:5)

Rashi explains that the numerical equivalent of the word h,rd is 613, which corresponds to the number of mitzvos in the Torah. Yaakov was proudly relating to Eisav that during his stay with Lavan he kept the entire Torah.  His sojourn in the harmful environment of the crooked Lavan had no adverse spiritual effect upon him. A number of issues regarding Yaakov’s dialogue with Eisav should be addressed. First, what did Yaakov imply with his assertion, “And (I) stayed until now”? Did he owe Eisav an excuse for returning so late? Is Eisav his “brother’s keeper” that he must be…

Continue Reading

“Therefore the Bnei Yisrael do not eat of the sinew of the thigh muscle… unto this day because he (Eisav’s angel) struck the hollow of Yaakov’s thigh in the sinew of the thigh muscle.” (32:33)

As Yaakov wrestled with Eisav’s angel, he was injured on that fateful night. As a constant reminder of that “conflict,” we are forbidden from eating the sciatic nerve of an animal.  In the Talmud Chullin 99b, Chazal comment that giddin, nerves, have no taste. It is, therefore, perplexing that the Torah would prohibit the consumption of a food which has no taste. The Torah ostensibly seeks to provide us with the opportunity for performing mitzvos.  Consequently, even if a mitzvah is reasonably simple to perform, it still presents a valuable opportunity for spiritual advancement. Horav Avigdor Nebentzal, Shlita, offers a…

Continue Reading

“Therefore the Bnei Yisrael do not eat of the sinew of the thigh muscle.” (32:33)

We may question the manner in which we commemorate Yaakov Avinu’s miraculous triumph over Eisav’s angel.  One would think that such an extraordinary achievement would be remembered through a positive act, rather than a negative one.  Horav Moshe Feinstein, z.l., infers a valuable lesson from the manner of eternalizing Yaakov’s monumental success over adversity. The abstention from eating the gid ha’nasheh addresses the fact that throughout history we are confronted by difficult situations which require Hashem’s interventions which is always there. Nonetheless, we would rather not be tested with such ordeals. In our daily tefillah, we implore Hashem “Do not…

Continue Reading

“And it came to pass as her soul was departing — for she died — that she called his name Ben Oni, but his father called him Binyamin.” (35:18)

In focusing upon the disparity between the names given to the child by his respective parents, the Ramban comments that Rachel sought to emphasize the pain and sorrow connected with his birth. In contrast, Yaakov wanted his son’s name to have an optimistic connotation. The word “oni” can be translated as “mourning” or “strength.”  Yaakov sought to preserve the name that Rachel had chosen, while giving it a positive undertone. In an article written in the winter of 1943, during the height of the slaughter in Europe, Horav Eliyahu Meir Bloch, z.l., used the words of the Ramban to encourage…

Continue Reading

“I have acquired oxen and donkeys, flocks of sheep, servants and maidservants.” (32:6)

When Yaakov sent messengers to Eisav, he emphasized that all that he had earned while working for Lavan did not result from his father’s blessings. They were neither from “the dew of the heavens” nor from “the fat of the land.” What prompted Yaakov to say this? Horav Noach Orlowek, Shlita, cites the Vilna Gaon who asserts that anger first originates in the mind; the angry person feels he has a legitimate reason to be angry.  It later develops into words which one expresses when he vents his anger. If uncommunicated, these “words” lead to actions which can, at times,…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!