Parshas Vayishlach
1. One of the kings "אשר מלכו בארץ אדום לפני מלך מלך לבני ישראל" ("who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the Children of Israel")1 is "ויובב בן זרח מבצרה" ("Yovav ben Zerach of Botzrah").2 Rashi pauses on these words and explains: "בצרה מערי מואב היא, שנאמר ועל קריות ועל בצרה וגו', ולפי שהעמידה מלך לאדום עתידה ללקות עמהם, שנאמר כי זבח לה' בבצרה" ("Botzrah is one of the cities of Moav, as it says,3 'And upon Kerios and upon Botzrah etc.' And because it supplied a king for Edom, it is destined to be smitten together with them, as it says,4 'For Hashem has a sacrifice in Botzrah'").
What bearing does the fact that Botzrah "is one of the cities of Moav" have on the plain meaning of this verse?
The commentators5 understand that with this Rashi answers why the verse needs to tell us at all where he came from ("of Botzrah") — namely, in order to inform us that "it (Botzrah) is destined to be smitten together with them" because "it supplied a king for Edom."
But this explanation is, seemingly,6 neither understandable nor sufficient, because:
a) This itself is difficult — what relevance is there here in knowing that "it is destined to be smitten together with them"? Especially since the passage here does not speak at all about the time when Edom will be smitten (in the Future).
b) Mainly: for each of the kings of Edom listed (except one), the verse notes his place of origin, and Rashi does not pause on any one of them. Moreover: regarding the last king, the verse7 adds (not only "ושם עירו פעו" ("and the name of his city was Pa'u"), but) also "ושם אשתו מהיטבאל" ("and the name of his wife was Meheitavel"), and in addition further details — "בת מטרד בת מי זהב" ("the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Mei-zahav") — and Rashi does not explain why so many identifying signs are needed for one king8 [he only gives the meaning of "Mei-zahav"9].
From this it is understood that according to the plain meaning this is not a difficulty to begin with (since it is the way of Scripture to add details and identifying signs10). Why, then, does Rashi pause specifically on "of Botzrah"?
2. This will be understood by first explaining the verse in which the greatness (the kingship) of Edom and Israel is foretold:11 "שני גוים בבטנך ושני לאומים ממעיך יפרדו ולאום מלאום יאמץ ורב יעבוד צעיר" ("Two nations are in your womb, and two kingdoms will separate from your innards; and one kingdom will become mightier than the other kingdom, and the elder shall serve the younger").
On "(and one kingdom) will become mightier than the other kingdom" Rashi explains: "לא ישוו בגדולה, כשזה קם זה נופל וכו'" ("They will not be equal in greatness; when one rises, the other falls, etc."). But on the end of the verse, "And the elder shall serve the younger," Rashi offers no explanation at all. This is not understood: since "when one rises, the other falls," how does it fit that the verse concludes in an unqualified manner, "And the elder shall serve the younger," which implies that this is a permanent matter, in all times, and not dependent on any condition?
[The Midrash12 indeed says about this: "זכה יעבוד ואם לאו ייעבד" ("If he is worthy, [the elder] will serve; and if not, [he] will be served") — but Rashi does not cite it.13]
The explanation of this is: on "Two nations are in your womb" Rashi explains, "גיים כתיב .. אלו אנטונינוס ורבי וכו'" ("It is written geyim [proud ones]... these are Antoninus and Rebbi, etc."), and on "and two kingdoms" he explains: "אין לאום אלא מלכות" ("Le'om means nothing other than kingdom"). That is to say, "Two nations etc." and "and two kingdoms etc." are not a repetition of expression (for the sake of elegant phrasing and the like), but they refer to two distinct categories: "Two nations are in your womb" speaks of Yaakov and Esav and their descendants as private individuals; while "and two kingdoms etc." speaks of Yaakov and Esav as states — "kingdom."
Accordingly, it is understood that the two subsequent details in the verse — "and one kingdom will become mightier than the other kingdom, and the elder shall serve the younger" — follow, respectively, the two preceding categories. "And one kingdom will become mightier than the other kingdom" speaks of the kingdom of Israel (Yaakov) and the kingdom of Edom (Esav) — and in this the order is that sometimes "one rises (and the other falls)," and sometimes the reverse. Whereas "the elder shall serve the younger" speaks of Yaakov and Esav (and their children) as private individuals — and in this it is "the elder shall serve the younger" — always.
So too we find later with Yitzchak's blessings to Yaakov, that he blessed him "הוה גביר לאחיך גו'" ("Be a lord over your brother etc.")14 and did not mention any condition or limitation15 (that this would take effect only at certain times, and the like).
So much so, that for this reason Yitzchak said to Esav: "מה תועלת לך בברכה, אם תקנה נכסים שלו הם .. ומה שקנה עבד קנה רבו" ("What benefit is there to you in a blessing? If you acquire possessions, they are his... and whatever a servant acquires, his master acquires").16 It is only that "והי' כאשר תריד" ("And it shall be, when you are aggrieved") (when Israel transgresses the Torah), then "ופרקת עולו מעל צוארך" ("you will throw off his yoke from your neck").17 That is to say, even at the time of "when you are aggrieved," he will not be able to have the blessings, since even then he remains a servant to Yaakov; it is only that in actual practice he will then be able to throw off from himself the yoke of his servitude.18
3. According to this, however, the verse1 becomes difficult: "ואלה המלכים אשר מלכו בארץ אדום לפני מלך מלך לבני ישראל" ("And these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the Children of Israel"). Here the Torah relates how the matter of "and one kingdom will become mightier than the other kingdom... when one rises, the other falls, etc." was fulfilled: the kings of Edom "reigned etc. before any king reigned over the Children of Israel," and afterwards, when "a king reigned over the Children of Israel," he "ביטל מלכות עשו בימיהם" ("abolished the kingdom of Esav in their days").19 Since "the elder shall serve the younger" and "Be a lord over your brother" are a permanent matter with regard to private individuals, even at the time of "when you are aggrieved... you will throw off etc." (as above), how is it that the descendants of Esav had kings in their time just as the Children of Israel did in theirs, with no difference by which "Be a lord over your brother" would find expression at all times? [As stated above, "And it shall be, when you are aggrieved" means only "you will throw off his yoke" — merely the absence of actual subjugation, but not that Esav should be a "lord" and a king.]
The explanation of this is: the passage itself resolves it by adding, for each of the kings of Edom, the place or city from which he came — all of which places are not of the land of Edom.20 With this the Torah emphasizes that the kings of Edom did not come from the descendants of Esav, but from other (countries, and consequently from other) nations.
4. To this explanation, however, there is a contradiction from "Yovav ben Zerach of Botzrah," which implies that the king Yovav was indeed one of the descendants of Esav, because: (a) "Zerach"21 is one of the "chiefs" (heads of families) of the descendants of Esav;22 (b) in several places in the Prophets23 "Botzrah" is mentioned in connection with the land of Edom, which implies that "Botzrah" is a city in the land of Edom.24
Therefore Rashi must explain: "Botzrah is one of the cities of Moav"
[and he brings a conclusive proof for this — "as it says, 'And upon Kerios and upon Botzrah etc.,'" where all the cities listed are of the land of Moav,25 and as that verse concludes, "ועל כל ערי ארץ מואב גו'" ("and upon all the cities of the land of Moav etc.")].
This is also a proof that (Yovav ben) Zerach is not one of the descendants of Esav (for he stems from the land of Moav, and consequently from the descendants of Moav).
As for what we find in several places, that Botzrah is mentioned in connection with Edom — Rashi explains this in the continuation of his commentary: "And because it supplied a king for Edom, it is destined to be smitten together with them, etc." Therefore, in the places that speak of the retribution that the Almighty will bring upon Edom, "Botzrah" is also mentioned there, since "it is destined to be smitten together with them."
5. In light of the above — that with the words "And because it supplied... it is destined to be smitten together with them," Rashi intends [not simply to relate the connection of Botzrah to Edom, but] to explain why Botzrah is mentioned in several places together with Edom (although it belongs to the land of Moav), because "it is destined to be smitten together with them" — another fine point in Rashi's commentary is resolved:
In the proof that "Botzrah is one of the cities of Moav," Rashi cites the words of the verse "And upon Kerios and upon Botzrah (adding) etc.," while in the second proof (that "it is destined to be smitten together with them") he cites only the words "For Hashem has a sacrifice in Botzrah" (without an "etc."). Seemingly, the reverse would be more logical:
For the proof that "Botzrah is one of the cities of Moav," the words "And upon Kerios and upon Botzrah" alone suffice26 — just as "Kerios" is one of the cities of Moav,27 so too28 "and (upon) Botzrah" is one of the cities of Moav [and the continuation of the verse — "and upon all the cities of the land of Moav" (to which Rashi alludes with "etc.") — is only an addition to the proof].
By contrast, the proof that "Botzrah" "is destined to be smitten together with them" (together with Edom) comes [not from the words "For Hashem has a sacrifice in Botzrah" alone, where Edom is not mentioned, but] from the continuation and conclusion of the verse, "וטבח גדול בארץ אדום" ("and a great slaughter in the land of Edom")29 — yet for this proof Rashi does not add the word "etc."!30
The explanation of this can be said to be:
From the continuation of the verse, "For Hashem has a sacrifice in Botzrah and a great slaughter in the land of Edom," one could, seemingly, actually derive a proof contradicting Rashi's commentary (that "Botzrah" is "one of the cities of Moav," and that it is mentioned here only because "it is destined to be smitten" together with Edom). For it makes no sense to first tell of the secondary and derivative punishment — "For Hashem has a sacrifice in Botzrah" — and only afterwards (to add) the main punishment and its cause — "and a great slaughter in the land of Edom."
One can answer (in a forced manner, at least) — and this is how one must learn it according to Rashi — that the vav of "and a great slaughter etc." is not a conjunctive vav (in which case it would be difficult, as above), but a disjunctive vav.31 But since, according to the simple reading, the continuation of the verse poses a difficulty to Rashi's commentary, Rashi does not bring it, not even by way of allusion with an "etc."
6. Regarding the above point — that according to Rashi, "the elder shall serve the younger" was said for all times — one can raise a question from the beginning of the parsha:
There it is related how Yaakov sent messengers to Esav and instructed them: "כה תאמרון לאדוני לעשו, כה אמר עבדך יעקב גו' להגיד לאדוני למצוא חן בעיניך" ("Thus shall you say to my master, to Esav: Thus says your servant Yaakov etc. ... to tell my master, to find favor in your eyes").32 So much so, that as related later in the parsha, Yaakov sent a "gift" to Esav, "bowed down before him seven times,"33 and called him "my master" several times34 (and himself "your servant"35). Seemingly, all this is the opposite of "the elder shall serve the younger"!?36
According to the plain meaning, this is not a difficulty. For since, because of "שמא .. נתלכלכתי בחטא" ("perhaps... I have become sullied with sin"),37 Yaakov feared that the explicit assurance of the Almighty to him — "ואתה אמרת היטב איטיב עמך" ("And You said, 'I will surely do good with you'")38 — would not be fulfilled, all the more so did he fear that because of this the prophecy "the elder shall serve the younger," which was said to his mother (through Shem),39 would not be fulfilled.
Nevertheless, it is still not smooth:40 since the prophecy and blessing "Be a lord over your brother" is not bound up with the condition "And it shall be, when you are aggrieved etc." — because even "when Israel transgresses the Torah" there will only be "you will throw off his yoke etc." (as explained above at length) — how then did Yaakov nevertheless perform an act that is the extreme opposite of this prophecy and blessing, to the point of calling Esav "my master" and himself "your servant"?
In the Midrash41 we indeed find that because Yaakov sent messengers to Esav and called him "my master," etc., Yaakov was punished. However, as has been discussed many times,42 since the Avos were a chariot for the Supernal Will43 "כל ימיהם" ("all their days"),44 it is understood that with them the existence of evil, G‑d forbid, is not applicable, and consequently neither is sin, G‑d forbid; and those matters of theirs that appear to be "sins" are not sins in the simple sense, G‑d forbid.
And indeed, we see this in this very matter: although Yaakov was punished for his conduct toward Esav described above, as our Sages say, nevertheless we learn44 from this very conduct that "מחניפין לרשעים בעולם הזה מפני דרכי שלום" ("one may flatter the wicked in this world for the sake of the ways of peace").
7. In Chassidus45 it is explained that in his root Esav is higher than Yaakov (which is why he was the firstborn at birth), and through Yaakov's refining the aspect of Esav, a lofty light from the root of Esav (which is higher than the root of Yaakov) shines within Yaakov.
With this it is explained why Yaakov sent "מלאכים לפניו אל עשו גו'" ("messengers before him to Esav etc.") and said, "Thus shall you say to my master etc., Thus says your servant Yaakov etc." (and similarly the "gift" that Yaakov sent to Esav) — that with all this Yaakov intended (mainly) the root of Esav, which is higher than Yaakov.
However, since the Midrash says that with this Yaakov humbled himself before Esav below (and was punished for it), one must say that the interpretation (that Yaakov sent the messengers and gift to Esav as he is here below) is also maintained (as well) according to the inner dimension of the matters.46
8. The explanation of this is:
In overcoming evil and refining it there are, in general, two approaches:
One approach is through "revelation of light": the one who refines draws down upon the one being refined a great and lofty light of holiness, and through this light shining powerfully, the evil and darkness are repelled, and the sparks of holiness within it are refined and elevated.
A second approach is by way of investment (hislabshus): the one who refines lowers himself "to the place of the one being refined," and moreover, he invests himself "in the garments of the one being refined," and through engaging with it he transforms the evil into good.
Each of the two approaches has an advantage over the other:
With regard to the one who refines, the first approach has an advantage in that the refinement does not involve a descent of the one who refines, since the refinement takes place in a manner in which he stands separate from the one being refined. Whereas in the second approach, "המתאבק עם כו'" ("one who wrestles with [a soiled person, becomes soiled himself]"),47 the one who refines must be in a state of descent relative to his previous level, to the point that this may even cause a deficiency in him.
With regard to the one being refined, however, it is the reverse: in the first approach, since the refinement comes only through the "revelation of light" and is not accomplished within the one being refined from its own standpoint, the refinement is by way of repulsion and nullification. Whereas in the second approach, where the one who refines engages, by way of investment, with the one being refined in its own state and level, he effects in the one being refined itself that, in its very existence, it ceases to be an opponent to, and a concealment and hiding of, holiness.
9. The ultimate intent of the service of Torah and mitzvos is "(התורה ניתנה) לעשות שלום בעולם" ("[the Torah was given] to make peace in the world").48 The content of true peace is that the opponent is transformed and makes peace with him. The same applies to "peace in the world": the world (olam) is a concealment (helem) of G‑dliness, and one must make "peace in the world" — that the world be transformed to holiness.
Therefore, just as the Torah "נסעה וירדה" ("journeyed and descended")49 below, and clothed itself50 in matters of "אילנא דטוב ורע" ("the Tree of good and evil"), so that through this investment one may be able to refine the good from the evil51 —
so much so, that there is the matter of "וכל מלבושי אגאלתי" ("and I have soiled all My garments"):52 in order that the inner matter of "egalti" — in the sense of redemption (ge'ulah), the refinement of the kelipah (as it is written,53 "מי זה בא מאדום גו' מבצרה גו'" ("Who is this coming from Edom etc., from Botzrah etc.")) — be accomplished, there must be the matter of "egalti" in the sense of soiling, as it were: the descent of the Shechinah into the place of the kelipos —
so too with tzaddikim (who resemble their Creator54): they (at times) descend from their level and invest themselves in the garments of the one being refined (even to the point that afterwards a rectification etc. is needed for this descent), in order to carry out the Supernal intent of "making peace in the world."55
10. This is also the reason why Yaakov humbled himself before Esav (not only before the root of Esav, but before Esav as he is) below — even though it must be that "the elder shall serve the younger":
The complete refinement of Esav is when Esav, from his own standpoint, "acknowledges" that it must be "the elder shall serve the younger." And in order to accomplish this, there had to be (not only refinement by way of "revelation of light," but also) the investment of the one who refines in the garments of the one being refined, which involves a descent of the one who refines, to the point that a deficiency arises in him.
And this found expression (in our case) in Yaakov's humbling himself before Esav56 — and specifically through this he brought about that Esav said "יהי לך אשר לך" ("Let what is yours be yours") — "כאן הודה לו על הברכות" ("here he acknowledged to him [Yaakov's right to] the blessings"),57 including the blessing "Be a lord over your brother,"58 leading up to the refinement of Esav that will take place openly in the Time to Come — "עד אשר אבוא אל אדוני שעירה" ("until I come to my master, to Seir")59 — when "ועלו מושיעים בהר ציון לשפוט את הר עשו והיתה לה' המלוכה" ("And saviors shall ascend Mount Zion to judge the mount of Esav, and the kingship shall be Hashem's").60
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Vayishlach 5736, and the maamar beginning "Vayishlach Yaakov" 5731)
Notes
*) This Sicha was first published in 5739. — The Publisher.
1) Our parsha, 36:31.
2) Ibid., 33.
3) Yirmiyahu 48:24.
4) Yeshayahu 34:6.
5) Divrei Dovid (by the Taz). See also Sifsei Chachamim.
6) This can be said even if that is indeed how it stands in the final conclusion (see Sdei Chemed, vol. 9, p. 3670, and the sources cited there).
7) Verse 39.
8) Although Bereishis Rabbah on the verse expounds all of them — and from this it is evident that Rashi does not undertake to explain the reason for the titles etc., unlike what is written in Divrei Dovid there, that wherever we are able to explain, we do explain.
9) The reason, it can be said, is only in order to explain how one man is called by two names; this is not the place to elaborate.
10) For through these signs it is clearer who is being spoken about. And regarding a man who is not so well known, or where there is another person with this name and this one sign, the verse adds another sign etc. Or in order to increase his praise, and the like. See Bereishis 2:11–12, and in many places.
11) Toldos 25:23.
12) Bereishis Rabbah on the verse. Midrash Tanchuma (Buber edition) on the verse. And elsewhere.
13) See also Riva and Paane'ach Raza there (and Shelah 156a): "And the elder shall serve the younger" is a permanent matter, a blessing that endures forever. See also Chasam Sofer on the Torah there.
14) Ibid. 27:29.
15) It can be said that also according to Rashi on the verse (ibid., 28) "And of the dew of the heavens" — "if he is worthy etc." — that was only a reason not to give to you (to Yaakov), but it is not a reason to make Esav "a lord" etc. Compare Kli Yakar and Ohr HaChaim, Toldos there.
16) Rashi, ibid., 37.
17) Ibid., 40, and Rashi.
18) According to this, the question raised by Sifsei Chachamim there is resolved — that he did not find that Yitzchak gave the blessings to Yaakov conditionally.
19) Rashi on the verse there. See the commentators on Rashi.
20) See Bereishis Rabbah, Radak and Sforno* on the verse "And these are the kings." Shemos Rabbah 36:1. Moreh Nevuchim III, ch. 50. Unlike Abarbanel, Bachya and others there. And in Bamidbar Rabbah (14:10; see also Abarbanel on our parsha there) it distinguishes that three of them were from the descendants of Edom, and the rest "were from other places and from other nations."
*) In several editions of Sforno this does not appear.
21) According to what is explained in the main text, this resolves why Rashi copied in the heading of his comment also the words "Yovav ben Zerach," although he explains only the word "of Botzrah" — for the difficulty in the verse arises also from "Yovav ben Zerach," as in the main text. Also, "Yovav" (connoting one who causes wailing) alludes to Esav, who was ruddy — a shedder of blood (Rashi, Toldos 25:25).
22) Our parsha there, 13, 15 (and Rashi), 17.
23) Yeshayahu 63:1. Yirmiyahu 49:13; ibid., 22. Amos 1:12. See Rashi on (most of) the above, that it is the name of a city (and not from the term "fortress").
24) As written by Ramban and Bachya on the verse "And these are the kings." Bamidbar Rabbah there. See the commentators on Bereishis Rabbah here.
25) For the entire chapter (Yirmiyahu 48) speaks about Moav; see there.
26) In the first and second printings, and in most manuscripts of Rashi, "etc." does not appear. So too in Rashi on Yeshayahu there.
27) As stated explicitly in Yirmiyahu 48:41 (according to Rashi there; the second explanation in Radak). Amos 2:2.
28) This resolves why Rashi also copied the words "And upon Kerios."
But one cannot ask that it would have been preferable for Rashi to copy the words that follow — "(and upon Botzrah) and upon all the cities of the land of Moav" — in which it is explicit that the verse speaks of "the cities of the land of Moav" (and not merely to allude to it with "etc."). For then there would be room to err that "and upon all the cities of the land of Moav" is a separate item, and that "and upon Botzrah" is not included in "all the cities of the land of Moav."
29) In the second printing of Rashi, "etc." is added. And in several manuscripts of Rashi he cites explicitly the conclusion of the verse, "and a great slaughter in the land of Edom."
30) Especially since in the manuscript on the verse "etc." is added — even though the wording in the manuscript there is [not (as in Rashi's wording) "to be smitten together with them," but rather] "I have no business except with Botzrah."
31) Nevertheless, there is a proof that "it is destined to be smitten together with them" from the fact that they are written together. Compare the manuscript there: "I have no business etc. Said Rabbi Berachyah: nevertheless etc."
32) 32:5, 6.
33) 33:3.
34) Ibid., 8, 13, 14, 15.
35) Ibid., 5, 14.
36) See Rashi 32:5: "'Be a lord over your brother'... was not fulfilled in me." See Zohar I, 145a; Ibn Ezra (and others), Toldos 27:40.
37) Rashi 32:11.
38) Ibid., 13.
39) Rashi, Toldos 25:23.
40) Compare the Rambam's Introduction to his Commentary on the Mishnah (s.v. "And the second part"): "But that the Holy One, blessed be He, should tell a prophet to assure people of good tidings in an absolute statement, without condition, and afterwards it would not be fulfilled etc. — this is false and impossible etc."
41) Bereishis Rabbah 75:1–3; ibid., 11; and elsewhere.
42) See Likkutei Sichos, vol. 5, end of p. 63 ff.
43) Tanya, ch. 23 (28b).
44) Yalkut Shimoni on our parsha, remez 133. Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer, ch. 37* (cited in Ohr HaTorah on our parsha, vol. 5, 872b).
*) Omitted in the edition with the commentary of the Radal.
45) Torah Ohr and Toras Chaim on our parsha.
46) Similar are the two explanations in Toras Chaim there (sec. 11) regarding Yaakov's bowing to Esav: one, from below upward, to the root of Esav; and two, from above downward — that he lowered himself far down, to the place where the aspect of Esav is being refined below, in order to refine and elevate all the good etc.; see there at length.
It can be said that the same applies to what is explained in Torah Ohr and Toras Chaim there, that the sending of the messengers was to the root of Esav — that this is not only (as appears from the plain wording there) because he thought that Esav had already been refined, so that accordingly, after the messengers said that he had not yet been refined (as explained in Torah Ohr and Toras Chaim there), there was no longer room for raising mayin nukvin to Tohu etc. For since the Avos are themselves the chariot, error does not apply to them, and all their actions are true etc. Rather, it is a distinct service and matter in its own right.
See Toras Chaim there (sec. 8), that in "he is coming toward you" there are two matters (and explanations): a) that Esav came in his strength and insolence (in keeping with the simple meaning); b) that the supernal root of Esav was aroused etc.
47) Tanya, ch. 28.
48) Wording of the Rambam, end of Hilchos Chanukah.
49) Tanya, ch. 4.
50) See Yoma 72b; the Alter Rebbe's Hilchos Talmud Torah 4:3. And see the maamar beginning "Tziyon B'Mishpat Tipadeh" 5735 (Sefer HaMaamarim Melukat (Kehot, 5746), p. 155), note 47.
51) See at length Iggeres HaKodesh, sec. 26.
52) Yeshayahu 63:3. On all this, see the end of the maamar beginning "V'la'achoso HaBesulah" — Ohr HaTorah, Emor; Sefer HaMaamarim 5627 and 5629.
53) Ibid., 1.
54) Bamidbar Rabbah 10:5, and elsewhere.
55) Similarly, the descent into exile is in order to transform the darkness of exile itself. It can be said that this is the novelty and superiority of "ורב שלום (בניך)" ("and great shall be the peace [of your children]") over "making peace" (simply) "in the world": "peace" simply is the refinement of the world (— olam being (only) a term denoting concealment, helem), while "great peace" is the refinement of exile (which is also opposed to holiness).*
Accordingly, one can explain the sequence of matters in the maamar beginning "V'chol Banayich" 5689** (among the wedding discourses; Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, vol. 1): after citing there (ch. 1) that Torah scholars increase peace in the world, he cites (ch. 2) "שובי שובי השולמית וגו'" ("Return, return, O Shulamis etc."), and explains that this verse refers to "the time of exile," and they are called Shulamis — "a nation that made peace between Me and My world" — for the matter of increasing peace in the world comes about specifically through the refinements of the time of exile (see there briefly).
With this one will also understand what he cites there from the Midrash: "The nations of the world say to Israel: How long will you be killed and die for your G‑d etc.? Come to us etc. Israel answers the nations of the world: What do you see in Shulamis etc.? Do you have the power to give us of that distinction of Sinai etc.?" For seemingly: since it speaks of Jews in the ultimate elevation, as it says, "they are killed and die for your G‑d," and as the maamar there continues, that Jews are called Shulamis "because they surrender their souls for the sanctification of His Name, may He be blessed" — why do they need to answer the nations of the world at all? Because the self-sacrifice of the time of exile must be in such a manner that it refines the exile itself; therefore they must answer the nations of the world etc., so that through this, even the nations of the world "agree" to the self-sacrifice of the Jewish people.
*) It can be said that this is also the difference between the refinement of Lavan and the refinement of Esav (which is the level of harsher gevuros than Lavan — see Toras Chaim there, ch. 5; Ohr HaTorah on our parsha, 231a). See Likkutei Torah, Re'eh (30a), on the explanation of "and great peace": "'Great' (rav) is Esav... that from the level of multiplicity and separation of Esav there will be included... the level of the G‑dly unity."
**) "Fifty years earlier." Note that the Jubilee is called "olam" ("forever") (Kiddushin 15a, end; Seder Eliyahu Zuta [OCR unclear], ch. 6; Rashi, Mishpatim 21:6). See Zohar II, 140b.
56) See Toras Chaim there, sec. 11.
57) 33:9, and Rashi.
58) See Zohar, beginning of our parsha (166b): "Yaakov lowered his spirit before Esav so that afterwards he would be a servant to him and he would rule over him, and there would be fulfilled in him 'Peoples shall serve you... nations' etc."
59) Ibid., 14, and Rashi.
60) Ovadiah, at its end.
Key Lesson
There are two ways to overcome evil: overpowering it with a great revelation of light, or descending into its world and transforming it from within. The second costs the one who refines, yet only it brings the opponent itself to acknowledge the truth and make peace. Just as Yaakov humbled himself before Esav to bring Esav to concede the blessings, a Jew sometimes must step down from his own level to engage the world on its terms, so that the world itself becomes a willing partner in holiness.