When Ya'akov appeared before Pharoah, Pharoah apparently was shocked at how old he looked and asked Ya'akov his age (47:7-10). Ya'akov replied that the reason he looks so frail and old is because life had not been easy for him. Chazal tell us that since Ya'akov complained about the difficulty of his life, he was punished and had 33 years taken off his life (he lived 33 years less than Yitzchak), one year for every word in the pasuk. The Da'as Zekeinim m'Ba'alei Tosfos quotes the Midrash: Hashem said in response to Ya'akov's complaints, "Didn't I save you from Eisav? From Lavan? Didn't I deal with Dinah's attackers? And didn't I return Yosef to you? And you complain?!"
I don't understand what Chazal mean. True, Hashem saved Ya'akov from Eisav, from Lavan, he re-united him with Yosef, etc., but the happy ending doesn't mean there wasn't agmas nefesh, pain and suffering along the way. Being saved by Eisav at the end of the day doesn't erase the years spent in hiding from Eisav or the tension of dealing with the threat he posed. The fact the Ya'akov left Lavan's home whole does not mean he had any pleasure in the years he spent under Lavan's roof. The revelation of Yosef does not wipe away the 22 years Ya'akov suffered with the thought that Yosef was dead.
Chazal don't say Ya'akov is being punished for airing his complaints in public. Were that the case, I would have no question -- it would mean aliba d'emes life was lousy, but you don't need to tell others about it. But that's not what the Midrash says -- Hashem's response is that Ya'akov's life was good and he had no reason to complain at all. I'm stumped -- any ideas?
(Thanks to Great UnKnown for pointing out that this is discussed in the Sichos Musar of R' Chaim Shmuelevitz and I just found it discussed in Rav Gifter's sefer as well here.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
>>> 33 years less than Yitzchak
ReplyDeletethan Yitzchak! who not only did not
complain at the akeidah, but even
cooperated
>>> one year for every word in the
pasuk
nay, for every word in the pasukIM:
47:8 = 8 + 47:9 = 25, & therein is
an answer-- Yaakov's reply to Pharoah was not "al acharone acharone"(Avos, 5:9): Pharoah had
only asked for age, but got back
more than that...midah kneged midah
Yaakov, by that Particular Instance
of (otherwise understandable) complaint, got back (from Hashem)
more than (normally)warranted: 33
years deducted from his life!
& this: the name Yaakov appears 5
times in the meeting twixt Yaakov
& Pharoah(47:7-10), one time for
each letter in the name Yisrael!
during their meeting, Yaakov spoke
from the lower mode of his birthname-- name by which he might
permittedly complain-- rather than
from the higher mode of his acquired name-- name by which to complain is beneath it-- as befitted an introductory exchange between 2 kings...
See the שיחות מוסר of R' Chaim Shmuelevitz, מאמר אושר החיים, which is מאמר כ"ט in the current edition. He asks your question,starting on קכ"ד, and כדרכו בקודש underlines it, gift wraps it, and puts some bows on it. So much for the question.
ReplyDeleteHis answer, however, deals with a מדריגה beyond my grasp. Nevertheless, he gives an answer, and it must be seen from the perspective of a גדול הדור.
Anonymous may have hit upon something in his/her last paragraph.
I found this answer in Rav Gifter's Pirkei Torah:
ReplyDeletehttp://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=48051&st=&pgnum=145
(Ties in nicely with B's last post)
Oh, BTW, regarding the Jets, don't bother even waiting for next year. Just take it in the spirit of the sichos mussar.
ReplyDeleteAs Rex Ryan continuously illustrates -maybe that's his תכלית in the בריאה אל יתהלל חוגר כמפתח ־
& of course this: in both 47:7 & 10, "vivarech yaacov es-paroh"--
ReplyDeletewhat happened to Hashem?? we
know Malchitzedek was criticized for inverting the order of his
brochos for Hashem (blessed 2nd),
& Avra(ha)m, 14:19,20; here, Yaakov isn't said to bless Hashem even once, but Pharoah twice! what
happened, for example, to
"baruch...shenasan mik'vodo l'vasar v'dam"? ...so now, any
complaint in such a context-- without a blessing of Hashem-- renders that complaint relatively
G-dless (objectionable, unadulterated, unqualified,
unframed* complaining!)
*not set in a framework of Divine
overview/influence (as in
"baruch...dayan ha'emes")
"I don't understand what Chazal mean. True, Hashem saved Ya'akov from Eisav, from Lavan, he re-united him with Yosef, etc., but the happy ending doesn't mean there wasn't agmas nefesh, pain and suffering along the way ... "
ReplyDeleteSo why does Ya'aqov mention only the "agmas nefesh?"
Why should "the years spent in hiding from Eisav or the tension of dealing with the threat he posed" erase[ from his lips] any allusion to having been "saved[ from] Eisav at the end of the day?"
Why should the unpleasurable( to put it mildly) years Ya'aqov "spent under Lavan's roof"[ seem to] mean he did not leave Lavan's home whole?
Why should "the 22 years Ya'akov suffered with the thought that Yosef was dead" wipe away "[t]he revelation of Yosef[ being alive]?"
Where is Hakarat ha-Ṭov in his words?
Chazal aren't saying that Ya'akov should have said, "Yeah, life was hard, but there were also some good parts" -- Chazal are saying that Ya'akov never should have said life was hard. "Lamah atah misra'em" = why are you complaining, there's nothing to complain about.
ReplyDeleteAside from that, I don't think a once sentence summary of life needs to include hakaras hatov in that way. Imagine a guy stranded on a desert island for 22 years who doesn't know from one day to the next whether he will make it. Finally he is rescued. Someone asks him how his life was. What do you think the answer is going to be? Do you think he is going so say, "Life was great?" Do you think he is going to say, "Life was lousy, but had it's moments, like my rescue after 22 long years of day in and day out pain?" It's not reasonable to expect that. And it's even worse when you try to apply it to the nimshal, because we can justifiably say that Hashem created the tzaros in the first place. Lo heim v'lo secharam -- keep the tzaros and forget the thanks for the rescue. A better masahl would be a guy throws you in a dungeon for 22 years and then decides to let you out -- what do you think the reaction would be?
chaim b.: "... Chazal are saying that Ya'akov never should have said life was hard. "Lamah atah misra'em" = why are you complaining, there's nothing to complain about."
ReplyDeleteYes, they were saying it was wrong for him to complain about his hardships, but not that it was wrong to say anything at all about them.
chaim b.: "Aside from that, I don't think a once sentence summary of life needs to include hakaras hatov in that way. Imagine a guy stranded on a desert island for 22 years who doesn't know from one day to the next whether he will make it. Finally he is rescued. Someone asks him how his life was. What do you think the answer is going to be?"
The real question here is not 'what the answer is going to be'( people can be selfish and ungrateful, even at the best of times), but rather 'what the answer should be.'
chaim b.: "Do you think he is going to say, 'Life was lousy, but had it's moments, like my rescue after 22 long years of day in and day out pain?'"
Something like that.
Better would be: "The last 22 years were lousy, but thank God( or, if you want to maintain a stricter Mashal vs. Nimshal divide: 'thanks to my rescuers') it's all over now".
( 'All's well that ends well' and all that.)
chaim b.: "It's not reasonable to expect that."
Why not?
Isn't it reasonable to expect that somebody rescued after 22 years of being stranded on a desert island, would miss no opportunity to acknowledge his rescuers for the good they brought him, in the end?
chaim b.: "And it's even worse when you try to apply it to the nimshal, because we can justifiably say that Hashem created the tzaros in the first place ..."
Really?
Weren't Ya'aqov's Ṣarot with Esav, because he took, cunningly, the latter's intended blessings?
Weren't his Ṣarot with Lavan, because he had to flee( and remain in hiding from) Esav?
Wasn't the disappearance of Yosef( and the "evidence" of his untimely death) brought about through the jealousy of Yosef's brothers over the extra attention Ya'aqov gave Yosef( B.T. Shabbat 10b: "Raba b. Mehasia also said in the name of R. Hama b. Goria in Rab's name: A man should never single out one son among his other sons, for on account of the two sela's weight of silk, which Jacob gave Joseph in excess of his other sons, his brothers became jealous of him ...")?
Also, regardless of what is reasonable to expect of one man's attitude towards another man's actions, isn't Ya'aqov Avinu supposed to be above petty human emotions, especially vis a vis God, of whom it is said( Isaiah 55:8) "for My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways"?
Shouldn't Ya'aqov Avinu, of all people, have been able to recognize that all God does, even if he himself couldn't see it, is good? and acknowledge it?
And even if at the times of hardship themselves it was a lot to ask for, even from a great man such as Ya'aqov Avinu, why should it be so after everything turned out for the better?
Hi
ReplyDeleteI read the Rav Gifter piece a couple times and cannot seem to grasp it- can you summarize it in english?
Thanks.
Rav Gifter is saying that difficulties and challenges are what give us the opportunity to grow. Ya'akov should have realized (at least in hindsight) that he would not have become the person he was if not for the struggles he had to contend with. The deprivation of those 33 years of life is not a punishment, but an outgrowth of Ya'akov's attitude. If you do not appreciate the opportunity in this world to grow (even at the expense of struggles), then there's no point to being here.
ReplyDelete