וְעַל־חַרְבְּךָ֣ תִֽחְיֶ֔ה וְאֶת־אָחִ֖יךָ תַּעֲבֹ֑ד וְהָיָה֙ כַּאֲשֶׁ֣ר תָּרִ֔יד וּפָרַקְתָּ֥ עֻלּ֖וֹ מֵעַ֥ל צַוָּארֶֽךָ׃
At sa iyong tabak ka mabubuhay, at paglilingkuran mo ang iyong kapatid; ngunit mangyayari, kapag ikaw ay nagdamdam, na babaklasin mo ang kanyang pamatok mula sa iyong leeg.”
Akeidat Yitzchak
So far then Jacob's efforts provided him with useful information about how to approach Esau when he would meet him. Jacob's fear did not concern his own death at the hands of Esau, but he was concerned about the possible death of members of his family, concerning whom no promise from G-d had been received. The wording of the promise at Bet El in the dream of the ladder, had been directed only at Jacob alone. (3) Jacob divided the camp so that he could not be faulted for having neglected a chance to ensure partial survival. No doubt, the camp mentioned last, was positioned in such a way that Esau would encounter it first. Should Esau want to vent his rage by destroying Jacob's camp, and his anger could be assuaged by such a pogrom, Jacob's stratagem would have worked since that camp contained no one especially dear to him. If there had been only one camp and that had been attacked, all might have been lost. Jacob's prayer at that point acknowledged both the assistance received thus far and the promises made; it made the point however that all G-d’s promises made to Abraham and Isaac would come to nought if he and his family were not saved at this time. Jacob indicated that he did not think that he personally had any merit to entitle him to ask for favors for himself, seeing that when he had first set out on his quest he had only had a walking staff to call his own, and he had received so many favors from G-d that he was a wealthy man by now. He appealed for help, since, though assured of victory, in a battle involving so many, even victory might involve heavy casualties. G-d had not yet promised that no harm would come to any of them. Jacob was certainly entitled to feel alarmed at that point in his life. At the conclusion of his prayer, he looked for a sign that his prayer had received a favorable hearing. This is why he chose to spend the night at the site where he had offered his prayer. Since Jacob's efforts to save himself had not yet included a financial sacrifice, G-d withheld reassurance until he had done his share in that respect. It was the absence of a response from G-d then that galvanized Jacob into rising early on the following morning to arrange for the gifts to be sent to Esau. There are times when preoccupation with worldly matters-- which are after all only our second most important concerns-- exceeds what is reasonable and is apt to be misinterpreted. Jacob's encounter with the spiritual counterpart of Esau is an example of this. Since Jacob had risen during the night in order to carry insignificant belongings across the river Yabbok, this had been misinterpreted by Esau's guardian angel as evidence that Jacob was excessively concerned with worldly goods. This provided said angel with the opportunity to challenge Jaob's moral superiority over Esau (Chullin 91). Jacob recovered quickly enough from this momentary lapse, and the angel had to acknowledge Jacob's claim to morally high standards, by revealing to him that he would henceforth be known as "Israel." Nonetheless, the momentary weakness displayed and referred to by the Torah euphemistically as "dislocation of the hip joint," is frequently found among Jacob's descendants, and gives Esau/Amalek opportunities to attack the Jewish people's claim to moral leadership. Already Isaac had warned against this weakness in his blessing to Esau, when he told the latter, that he, Esau, would be able to shake off the yoke of his younger brother whenever the latter would fail to live up to his standards (Genesis 27,41). (7) The angel's request to let him go, is simply another way of saying to Jacob, "Why do you waste your time detaining me, when you should be busy preparing gifts for Esau."
Akeidat Yitzchak
(1) The first message from G'd to Moses was to tell him, that although on occasion, death can be due to the concept of bi-krovay ekadesh, that death need not occur due to a mortal sin, there had been mortal sin in the case of the death of the sons of Aaron. The cause had been the sin as spelled out in the Torah at this point. The second communication by G'd to Moses, though related to him at a later stage, is coupled here with the former, in order to make the point that access to the holy of holies is restricted even to the High Priest, and that G'ds Presence does not appear in public, only wrapped in a cloud. (2) Even amongst the good people, the physical usually outweighs the spiritual. The High Priest who personifies the most favourable mix of the physical and the spiritual, is nonetheless mostly matter. His sin offering is described already in Leviticus 4,4, and consisted of a bull. Most of this bull was burned outside Jerusalem, only a small part being offered on the altar, (verse 12 there) The ram, symbolising man's spiritual part, which becomes olah, a total offering, i.e. fit for consumption by the altar in its entirety, is the other half of the High Priest's offering. Since the majority of the people are guilty of very fundamental errors, due to their yetzer hara, evil urge, the he-goat for the azzazel does not qualify for being offered on the altar itself. The fact that even the he-goat was presented in front of the tabernacle first, alive, is to show that even the kind of person represented by this he-goat will be granted forgiveness on the Day of Atonement. This is a tribute to the fact that a good part of their erroneous conduct had been due to the nature of the human condition, i.e. their being physical beings, something over which they had not had any control initially. The lots to be drawn symbolise the very fact that no choice existed prior to one's having being born into this world. (3) Use of the device of drawing lots to determine anything at all, appears to be an outright denial of G'ds Providence, since the result that emerges after the drawing of lots will be viewed as coincidence. The fact is however, that the cumulative effect of the lot falling again and again on the same person, lends it significance. If until the time of Shimon the Just, the lot "for the Lord" was always drawn by the he-goat placed on the right, that surely tells us something about the meaning of the word "right." (the time frame under discussion is about fifteen hundred years!) Indeed, once that pattern had been broken, due to the fact that the Jewish people could not produce a High Priest who was a tzaddik, and whose merits would counterbalance the sins of the masses, the lot would have become meaningless even if it had fallen on the he-goat that had been placed on the right. When Pharaoh had dreamed the same dream twice, that fact told Joseph something about whether the dream had any significance, or whether it was merely a matter of coincidence. The very repetition enabled Joseph to draw some conclusions. This is even more so, when the repetition occurs more than once. This is the reason the sailors "threw lots" (plural) and not just one "lot" before they were satisfied that the storm that threatened to sink their ship was really on account of Jonah. (Jonah 1,7) Since the lot fell on Jonah each time they repeated the procedure, they were certain that they were not condemning an innocent person on the basis of a "chance" lot. There is an element of chance concerning which person turns into a sinner, since natural endowments have a great deal to do with the likelihood of someone being able to overcome such strikes against him as he has been born with. Hence, if the he-goat for the azzazel becomes the scapegoat by means of the lottery, we might all breathe a sigh of relief and say "here but for the grace of G'd, go I." For that reason, the halachah, Jewish law, requires that the two he-goats must look so totally alike, that they are indistinguishable from one another. When the Tanna Ben Heh Heh says that reward is in accordance with the pain and effort incurred in securing an objective, (Avot 5,23), that he who has to overcome strong natural impediments rates a special reward, he does not mean that lack of this special effort totally forfeits one's chance of rehabilitation. The "scapegoat," though unfit to be presented on the altar, does accomplish this rehabilitation even for persons who have not made a special effort to surmount handicaps they were born with. (4) The procedure of offering incense, required a special skill, and therefore the full concentration of the High Priest during its performance. The reason for this could have been the need to counter the natural tendency to get "a glimpse" of the shechinah, Divine Presence. After all, the Torah did say "for in the cloud, I will become visible on the lid of the holy ark." (Leviticus 16,2) The Talmud tells of a High Priest, who was a member of the sect of the Sadducees, who when performing the rites of incense, put same on the pan prior to entering into the holy of holies, (contrary to hatachah ) and who boasted about having seen the shechinah. He died shortly after coming out of the sanctuary .The Pharisees saw in this a punishment for his disobedience. The Saducees felt that it was bad manners to enter the holy of holies without having everything ready, whereas the interpretation of the Pharisees of the verse "for through having made the cloud, My Presence over the lid can become revealed" was that they considered the exact composition of the correct quantities and ingredients of the incense as being vital. Placing of the incense on the pan, however, is to take place only "in front of G'd," as per verse 13. The sprinkling of the blood inside the holy of holies was to atone for errors concerning the laws applying to the temple itself, whereas the placing of the hands on the he-goat was to atone for other sins. The fact that the he-goat was used, also demonstrated that it was not a deity, (as some nations believed) This is the reason there had to be a special injunction "they shall no longer sacrifice to the he-goats." (Leviticus 17,7) There was no better date to proclaim the unity of G'd symbolically, and the futility of worshipping anyone or anything else, than the Day of Atonement. This symbolic statement helped to obtain forgiveness for other sins also. Whoever would observe that the scapegoat was thrown from the rock, would realise that it had not been an object of worship. Even Satan, the perennial accuser before the throne of G'd, would have to admit that the Jewish people were quite unequivocal in their service to the Lord. This is the meaning of a statement in Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer that we should present a bribe to Satan on that day. The sacrifice of the original Passover lamb in Egypt, was a similar statement of unequivocal commitment to G'd Therefore, the "great Sabbath," the Sabbath preceding the Passover holiday is conceptually related to the day of Atonement. For that reason Yom Kippur is also called Shabbaton The order of the confession, which according to the view of Rabbi Meir mentions the unintentionally committed sins first, and the intentionally committed ones last, was quoted in that order by Moses after the sin of the golden calf, when he remonstrated with G'd. Since Israel, at that time, had already done penitence, Moses made the point that due to the repentance, intentional sins had already been reduced to the status of unintentional sins. However, the normal process as found in the Bible on many occasions, is to first confess the intentional sins, including the ones that represent acts of rebellion against G'ds authority.
Akeidat Yitzchak
The Midrash quoted by Rashi on the verse is well known. (3) When the Torah admonishes in Ki Teytze "remember what Amalek did to you," that warning is a reminder of the conditions under which an Amalek feels encouraged to pounce upon Israel. Israel's own conduct is a provocation . When Joshua is told to choose anashim, i.e. tzaddikim, this is to serve as evidence that there are people amongst Israel who by dint of their lifestyle can face an Amalek without fear, secure in the knowledge that they can count on G-d’s support. Moses assured Joshua that on the morrow he would add the power of prayer to that of the courage of the tzaddikim (5) The visible evidence of Moses’s hands raised in prayer was a psychological prop to the warriors engaged in battle. When Moses’s hands were resting, due to fatigue, this prop was absent inducing fear amongst the Israelites, thus giving Amalek the advantage. Moses’s own physical strength was affected by the knowledge of the weakness of Israel's moral case, as demonstrated by their most recent behaviour. (4+6) Therefore Moses was in need of a physical prop to convey the illusion of superhuman strength and endurance. Viewing Moses’s posture, the Israelites realised that only Moses’s prayer ensured their ascendancy at that particular moment in history. The Talmud Rosh Hashanah 29, compares this happening to the incident with the copper snake, which had the power to heal when the Israelites looked at it. (Numbers 21,6-10) That look also symbolised one's faith in G-d and did not mean that the snake had any power at all. (7+8) For the reasons cited, Israel could not achieve more at that time than to weaken Amalek, not destroy it. This campaign could not be compared to the conquest of the Canaanite nations, since here the warriors had to rely on their own strength, though G-d assisted indirectly in order not to ignore Moses’s prayer. On the one hand G-d wanted to prove to Israel that they had been wrong in questioning His Presence; on the other hand, G-d wanted Israel to know that He was still angry at them. For that reason He commanded Moses to "write this in a book and tell Joshua." Only the latter was deemed worthy at that juncture to be told that the ongoing fight against Amalek was indeed G-d’s fight, and that He would not forsake Israel when the latter would come under attack by Amalek. (9) The revelation that Hashem Himself would in future destroy Amalek, warranted that Moses would build an altar which he named "G-d is My banner." This served as proof that G-d had approved the manner in which Moses had acted on his own when Amalek attacked. The very thing that G-d approved of was Moses’s taking the initiative. G-d was aware that if Israel would be left to its own devices, they would not complete the destruction of Amalek, just as they did not complete the destruction of the seven Canaanite nations despite G-d’s warning that leaving any of them alive or in the country, would prove a destabilising influence to Israel's society. (Numbers 33,55) It was Moses who proclaimed "for as long as there is a hand raised against the throne of G-d, He will be at war with Amalek." (Exodus 17,16) It was Moses’s conviction that the importance of wiping out Amalek warranted that G-d personally would continue to take an active part in such endeavours until they would be crowned with total success. This is the reason we read in Samuel I 15,30, after Saul's failure that "Israel's eternity will not be denied." The ultimate success does not depend on any particular leader of Israel who may or may not carry out G-d’s wishes wholeheartedly. (10) Although G-d commands Israel to wage this war of extermination against Amalek, He Himself will complete whatever has not been accomplished by Israel. This is also the meaning of Bileam's statement "Amalek is the first of the nations, therefore its end must be utter destruction." (Numbers 24,20.) When referring to "nations," Bileam means the first nation to rebel against G-d as a nation. Another reason may be that Amalek committed two wrongs 1) They disregarded the agreement made between their respective ancestors Jacob and Esau. 2) They attacked G-d’s chosen people at a particularly sensitive moment. In the words of the Midrash, Amalek put his hands on a scaldingly hot bathtub, meaning right after a clear demonstration of G-d’s power on behalf of Israel. Therefore, both G-d and Israel would share in the task of punishing Amalek. In Parshat Ki Teytze we read about Israel's part, whereas in Parshat Beshalach we read about G-d’s part. These two portions are complementary to one another. This brings us back to our opening Midrash. Once the Messiah will come, Israel will no longer display the usual human inadequacies, i.e. fulfilling G-d’s will only in part. At that time we will be granted G-d’s direct guidance, and will not have to be led by men, who, though G-d’s instruments, are chosen for their relative merit only. In those latter days the salvation will endure eternally, because intermediaries no longer need to be employed by G-d.