לקוטי שיחות חלק ט״ו - תולדות ה

Parshas Toldos

1. On the verse^[1] "And Yaakov listened… and he went to Padan Aram," Rashi explains, on the words "And Yaakov listened":^[2] "This is joined to the matter above: 'And Esav saw that Yitzchak had blessed…,' and that he had sent him to Padan Aram, and that Yaakov listened to his father and went to Padan Aram, and that the daughters of Canaan were evil, and he too went to Yishmael."

Studying it plainly, Rashi is resolving this: one cannot say that by "And Yaakov listened…" the Torah means to relate the events, that Yaakov our father obeyed his father and went to Padan Aram, since this was already related earlier^[3] in the parsha ("And Yitzchak sent Yaakov, and he went…"),^[4] and the verses before and after "And Yaakov listened" speak about Esav. Therefore Rashi explains that "And Yaakov listened" follows from "And Esav saw" in the previous verse: the verse is listing another detail that Esav saw.

But this must be understood:

a) This point, that "And Yaakov listened" is "joined" to "And Esav saw," would be understood even if Rashi had said briefly, "'And Yaakov listened' is joined to the matter above, 'And Esav saw.'"^[5] Why does Rashi spell out all the details Esav saw, which are explicitly in the verse?

b) The verse relates another thing that Esav saw — "And he commanded him, saying, 'You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan.'" Why does Rashi omit this detail?

c) Among the details of the "matter above" to which "And Yaakov listened" is joined, it would seemingly be appropriate to list only those that precede "And Yaakov listened," but not the detail of "And Yaakov listened" itself, and all the more so not the detail "that the daughters of Canaan were evil," which comes after "And Yaakov listened."

d) Even more surprising is that Rashi concludes "and he too went to Yishmael" — which does not belong to the details Esav saw, but is the actual result of "And Esav saw": when he saw "that the daughters of Canaan were evil," he went off to Yishmael.

It cannot be said that by this conclusion, "and he too went to Yishmael," Rashi means to explain^[6] that all the details of "And Esav saw" led to "And Esav went to Yishmael" (and that is why Rashi lists all the details in the verse, including "and that he listened… and went… and that the daughters of Canaan were evil… and he went…"). For the point that "And Esav saw" is an introduction to and the cause of "And Esav went…" is understood by itself. Even with Rashi's explanation alone that "And Yaakov listened" is "joined to the matter above," one would have understood that all the details in the verse (besides "And Yaakov listened…") are an introduction to the conclusion, "And Esav went…"

From Rashi's placing this within his explanation "joined to the matter above," it is understood that it is connected with that explanation: only after Rashi's point that "And Yaakov listened" is "joined to the matter above" (with all the details Rashi lists) does the verse "And Esav went to Yishmael" become understood. That is why Rashi concludes, "and he too went to Yishmael."

2. This will be understood by first noting the following: after the verse has said once "And Esav saw [that Yitzchak had blessed… and sent him… and he commanded him…]," it repeats "And Esav saw [that the daughters of Canaan were evil in the eyes of Yitzchak his father, and he went…]." From this it is understood that the things Esav saw consist of two kinds, and each kind had a different (mode of) "seeing," which is why "And Esav saw" is written twice.

The difference between the two "seeings" is — along the lines of Rashi above (at the beginning of Parshas Vayeira^[7]) — "Why 'he saw' and 'he saw' twice? The first is as it sounds, and the second is an expression of understanding: he looked… and understood…." The first "And Esav saw" means that he saw (as it sounds) things that took place among others — between Yitzchak and Yaakov ("he blessed… Yaakov, and sent him… and he commanded him…"). But the second "And he saw" is "an expression of understanding": he became convinced ("he looked… and understood"^[7*]) that "the daughters of Canaan were evil in the eyes of Yitzchak his father." This "seeing" is something that concerned him and obligated him (as in the continuation of the verses, this "seeing" moved him) to go to Yishmael.

But this must be understood: the purpose of the whole account of "And Esav saw" is to explain the cause that led to "And Esav went to Yishmael and took…," and for this the detail of the second "And he saw" would have been enough — "And Esav saw that the daughters of Canaan were evil in the eyes of Yitzchak his father (and therefore) Esav went…" Why does the Torah relate at such length what Esav saw at the first "And he saw"?^[8]

[At most, it would have sufficed to relate the detail of "And he commanded him, saying, 'You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan,'" from which he "saw" — understood — that "the daughters of Canaan were evil…" and therefore "Esav went…" — and it is precisely this detail that Rashi omits, as above.]

3. The explanation of this: the Torah relates all this at length to resolve a wonder in the matter of "And Esav went to Yishmael":

That Esav went to take Yishmael's daughter, and did not take from the daughters of Canaan found in the neighborhood, was to show that he (was no less than Yaakov and he too) was fulfilling Yitzchak's will.^[9]

This is not understood: Yitzchak instructed Yaakov not only "You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan," but he also "sent him to Padan Aram to take a wife from there." And Yaakov fulfilled both the negative aspect and the positive aspect: he did not take from the daughters of Canaan, and he went to Padan Aram.

Why then did Esav only refrain from taking a wife from the daughters of Canaan, but did not go to Padan Aram^[10] to take himself a wife from there?^[11]

To resolve this wonder in Esav's conduct,^[12] the Torah says twice "And Esav saw":^[13] the things Esav saw were, as above, of two kinds, each of which comes to explain a different detail in "And Esav went to Yishmael." The first "And he saw" explains why Esav assumed that he need not go to Padan Aram; the second "And he saw" explains why Esav went to take a wife from Yishmael.

4. The explanation: the mission on which Yitzchak sent Yaakov to Padan Aram "to take a wife from there" was, in Esav's opinion,^[14] (not because Yitzchak held that only there was the proper match, but) a means and a vessel to receive the blessings with which Yitzchak had blessed him,^[15] as the verse emphasizes here again: "(And Esav saw that he had blessed…) and sent him to Padan Aram… when he blessed him…" Therefore he held that the matter of "(And Yaakov listened…) and went to Padan Aram" concerned only Yaakov,^[16] and had no connection to him, Esav — and that is why he did not go to Padan Aram.

Yitzchak's command "You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan," on the other hand: in this "Esav saw (understood)" that it was because "the daughters of Canaan were evil in the eyes of Yitzchak his father." Therefore it had a connection also to him, and that is why "Esav went to Yishmael…"

5. According to all this, the length of Rashi's commentary is understood:

After Rashi says that "And Yaakov listened" is (not a parenthetical statement but) joined to and a detail of "And Esav saw," Rashi comes to resolve why at the first "And Esav saw" (before the words "And Yaakov listened…") it says "And he commanded him, saying, 'You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan.'"

For seemingly, according to the explanation above, that the first "And Esav saw" comes to explain Esav's not going to Padan Aram (because he saw that these details had no connection to him), it follows that "And he commanded him, saying, 'You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan'" is connected with the second "And Esav saw," which comes to explain Esav's not taking a wife from the daughters of Canaan.

That is why Rashi explains that "And Yaakov listened" is "joined to the matter above"^[17] and spells out the details to which it is joined ("that Yitzchak had blessed… and that he had sent him to Padan Aram"), and he skips and omits the detail of "And he commanded… You shall not take…": by this he emphasizes that "And he commanded…" (in Esav's view) does not concern "And Yaakov listened… and went to Padan Aram" (the conclusion of the first "And he saw"), but belongs to the second^[17*] "And Esav saw" — "that the daughters of Canaan were evil (and therefore) he too went to Yishmael."^[18]

6. With this is understood the precision of Rashi's wording, in bringing the detail "and that the daughters of Canaan were evil" only after "and went to Padan Aram":

That "And he commanded…" is written in the verse at the first "And Esav saw" is (because in actuality it took place before he went to Padan Aram, and) because it also affected Yaakov, so that "he listened… and went to Padan Aram." But regarding Esav, since the verse (according to Rashi's commentary) wants to explain the two details in Esav's conduct (as above, sections 3–4), it belongs to the second "And Esav saw."

7. According to this it is also understood why Rashi brings (not only the details to which "And Yaakov listened" is joined, but also) "and that Yaakov listened to his father and went to Padan Aram, and that the daughters of Canaan were evil, etc.":

By this Rashi means to explain why "And Yaakov listened" is (joined only to "that he had blessed… and that he had sent…" and) not joined to "And he commanded…": for the place of the detail "And he commanded…" (which he expresses (by its reason) in the words "and that the daughters of Canaan were evil") is (according to Esav) only after the whole sequence of "And Yaakov listened… and went to Padan Aram"; it belongs to the "And he saw" that brought about Esav's going to Yishmael.

And therefore Rashi also brings the conclusion, "and he too went to Yishmael,"^[19] to make it clear that "And he commanded…" (according to its content — "the daughters of Canaan were evil") is not something "joined" to "And Yaakov listened… and went to Padan Aram," but part of the second "And he saw," which brought about Esav's going to Yishmael, as above.

8. That Rashi leaves out "And he commanded…" when listing the details to which "And Yaakov listened" is joined is not only because in "And he commanded…" Esav saw something that has no joining with the other details (as said earlier, that he saw "And he commanded…" as something connected also to him), but also because "And Yaakov listened" has (in Esav's view) no joining with "And he commanded": in Esav's opinion, Yaakov's aim in going to Padan Aram was specifically (to carry out Yitzchak's mission) in order to receive the blessings, and he did not do it because of the command "You shall not take…"

This too is an introduction to "And Esav went to Yishmael," which Rashi brings at the end of his commentary — "and he too went to Yishmael." In going to Yishmael, Esav meant to show (not only that he was fulfilling Yitzchak's will, but also) that he lacked nothing compared with Yaakov;^[20] on the contrary, he was even finer than him: for he, Esav, sought to fulfill Yitzchak's will although he had not been commanded to do so.^[21]

(From a talk of Shabbos Parshas Toldos, 5726)

Key Lesson

Esav did not ignore his father's wishes. He kept what he could reconcile with his own view of things, dismissed what he decided "concerned only Yaakov," and then took pride in being even finer than his brother, since he had not even been commanded. Rashi's precise wording exposes how selective observance can present itself as extra piety.