He’s Alive

Most of this week’s Parsha is devoted to the final portion of the life of Yaakov Avinu. The Pessukim tell us about the various conversations he had with Yosef, and the Brachos he gave to Yosef, his grandsons Ephraim and Menashe, and subsequently to each of his sons. There is one Passuk that follows these interactions that describes the Petira of Yaakov, and which includes details that seem to be extra. We can be assured, however, that there is a lesson to be learned from even the minutiae that the Torah chooses to include. The Passuk tells us: “Vayechal Yaakov L’Tzavos Es Banav VaYeasef Raglav El HaMittah.” After giving the Brachos, Yaakov issues some final instructions to his sons, and then the Torah says that he drew his feet onto the bed, “Vayigva Vayeasef El Amav.”

There is of course a simple way to understand these words: the Meforshei HaPshat explain that while speaking to his sons, Yaakov sat up, with his feet on the floor, and it was only now that he drew them up onto the bed itself. But it seems that the very inclusion of this one detail is really noteworthy on three levels.

First, on the simplest level, we can ask why this is important for us to know at all? What can we learn from this seemingly ordinary action?

When taken in the broader context of Sefer Beraishis, however, the question becomes even a bit stronger. As we know, the Torah chooses exactly which parts of the Avos lives need to be recorded in the Torah, and which can be left to Chazal to reveal. As a result, there are many stories which we are familiar with that do not appear in the Torah at all, but only in Medrashim, and this is certainly true of the basic actions and movements of the Avos Hekdoshim. In this vein, the Torah includes no description of the final moments of either Avrohrom of Yitzchok, and mentions their respective Petiros almost in passing. Why then, when it comes to Yaakov Avinu, did the Torah deem it necessary to add a detail as seemingly mundane as “VaYeasef Raglav El HaMittah”?

Lastly, when thinking about these words we must take into account a Gemarah in Taanis that is mentioned by Rashi here. The Gemarah begins with a simple statement: “Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes”, Yaakov did not die, on further discussion, after questions of the practical aspect of this statement are raised, the Gemrah concludes, based on a Drasha: “Mah Zaro B’Chayim Af Hu BaChayim,” as long as his children are alive, Yaakov Avinu is as well. Leaving aside for a moment the implications of the Gemarah, it certainly appears that, in some way, Yaakov did not undergo a typical Misah. This is why, as Rashi points out, the word Misah itself is not found here, only “Vayigva Vayeasef El Amav.” If so, it certainly seems interesting that the Torah would choose to relate the story of his Petirah, including the fact that he placed his feet upon the bed. Why are we provided with extra details about a Petirah, that in some sense, didn’t really happen?

Although it may seem as though the Gemarah is speaking metaphorically, it appears that, at least on some level, Chazal understood the Gemarah in a literal sense. For example, the Ramban here notes that the Passuk later on says “Vayar Achei Yosef Ki Mes Avihem”, and asks why the Lashon of Misa is used there if in reality “Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes”? The Ramban concludes that the Shevatim themselves did not sense that this was the case, and so they assumed that their father had in fact passed on. Now, if the entire concept of Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes is allegorical, of course the Passuk uses the term “Mes Avihem” in the literal sense, negating the question of the Ramban.

It appears, then, that the when Chazal say “Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes”, there is some level of reality to the statement. This is something that we must certainly understand if we hope to gain a level of clarity in the Pessukim here.

The Sefer Meor V’Shemesh notes that the Passuk earlier in the Parsha did use the term Misah in reference to Yaakov Avinu: “Vayikrivu Yimei Yisroel LaMus”. In this case we cannot assume human error, as the Ramban does with regard to the Shevatim, and so how are we to reconcile this Passuk with the Gemarah? If it is true that “Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes” why does the Passuk use the term Misah? The Meor V’Shemesh approaches this question by examining the makeup of Yaakov Avinu.

As we know, the Bechir ShebiAvos had two names: Yaakov and Yisroel. In truth, however, these were not just two names, but really two Bechinos or planes of existence. The name Yaakov, the one he received at birth, denotes a level closer to this world, one of a more mundane existence, while Yisroel connotes a higher, more Ruchniasdik, level. Without trying to understand concepts that are beyond us, the Meor V’Shemesh explains that there was an almost physical manifestation to these two names as well. Therefore, he concludes, it is true that Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes, but this does not apply to the Bechina of Yisroel, which did in fact depart this world.

While somewhat esoteric, this approach fits very well with the Passuk cited above, “Vayikrivu Yimei Yisroel LaMus”, as the Torah only uses the term Misah in reference to Yisroel and not to Yaakov. It can also perhaps allow us to understand the Gemarah and therefore our Pessukim.

The statement “Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes” is met with a question: the Torah relates that the Rofim in Mitzrayim embalmed Yaakov Aviu, and there was a period of widespread mourning—if he was not Niftar, why was any of this necessary? The Gemarah seems to ignore these questions because there is a Drasha that tells us “Mah Zaro B’Chayim Af Hu BaChayim”, but really the question remains—if he was not Niftar why were the steps mentioned in the Pessukim necessary? Based on the approach of the Meor V’Shemesh we can explain that there was a Misah of sorts as the existence of Yisroel came to and end, but it is the Bechinah of Yaakov that lives on, because “Mah Zaro B’Chayim Af Hu BaChayim.” As long as we, Klal Yisroel, are in existance, the Bechina of Yaakov persists, and will not and has not leave this earth.

Perhaps it was just this message that Yaakov was communicating to his sons at this time.

As we noted, the Passuk begins with the words “Vayechal Yaakov L’Tzavos Es Banav.” The use of the word “Vayechal” seems noteworthy—there are many ways terms that mean “complete”, and so if the Torah chooses this specific one there must be a reason. As we know, this word first appears in Parshas Beraishis at the advent of Shabbos: “Veyechal Elokim BaYom HaShevii Melachto Asher Asah”, and it is its meaning there that can help us understand its true implications.

R’ Hirsch, there, explains that the root of the word “Vayechal” is “Kilah”, which would seem to have two competing connotations: complete or destroy. Although these seem contradictory—how can the same word denote that something has both been completed and brought to an end—but R’ Hirsch resolves this conflict with his signature insight.

In truth, he explains, nothing can be truly complete without some level of destruction—if one wishes to reach a Madreiga of Shelimus in a specific area, such that he will truly be complete in that realm, he must leave aside all other pursuits. One who strives for completion in many areas at once can reach a lower level in all, but completion in none—he will be the proverbial jack of all trades, and master of none. Only if one has a single-minded-focus on a specific area of life can he hope to reach completion—but then he reaches the pinnacle of Shleimus, which is expressed by the term “Vayechal”. When one ignores all else in pursuit of a objective, and reaches that goal, the term “Vayechal” is appropriate because he has in a sense destroyed, by leaving other pursuits aside, but he has therefore reached his goal.

When Yaakov spoke to his sons at the end of his natural life, the Torah tells us “Vayechal..L’Tzavos Es Banav”. The Meforshim include the Brachos in the Tzivuy referred to in the Passuk and not just the final instructions and so it seems that the term Vayechal includes the Brachos as well. This being the case, we can perhaps understand that this refers not only to the words spoken in our Parsha but to the life’s work of Yaakov Avinu.

As he prepared to leave this world, Yaakov spoke to each of his sons, explaining the Tachlis that each represented, and how this would manifest itself in their offspring. At the end of these Brachos, the Passuk tells us “Vayechal,” that Yaakov reached completion. Though not everyone could rise to the level of Yisroel, Yaakov had worked his whole life to inject his own essence, the Bechina of Yaakov, into the Shivtei Kah. This was his focus to the exclusion of any other goals—to endow his children and their offspring with the Hashpa’ah of the Avos Hakedoshim, and now this job was complete. He had explained to each one exactly what aspect they should focus on, and how they would contribute to Klal Yisroel as a whole, and could now be ensured that Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes, because Mah Zaro B’Chayim Af Hu BaChayim, they could carry on the Bechina of Yaakov even as that of Yisroel passed from the world.

The words VaYeasef Raglav El HaMittah relate to this idea as well.

The Torah seems to be telling us that Yaakov himself chose to lift his feet onto the bed, and it was at that moment that his Petirah occurred. It is clear from Rishonim, including the Sforno brought in Shiurei HaSforno, that Yaakov himself knew that his end was approaching and that this would be his final action, and that he did so only when he was ready. By doing so, by lifting his feet onto the bed, he therefore showed that his work was complete—that he had reached a level of Vayechal. Confident that his children could bear his legacy, Yaakov was prepared for his Petirah, knowing that Mah Zaro B’Chayim Af Hu BaChayim.

The Torah therefore provides this extra detail, not in spite of the circumstances surrounding Yakov Avinu’s departure from this world, but because of them. Though Yisroel left the world at that moment, Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes, because “Vayechal Yaakov L’Tzavos Es Banav”. Because his lifelong mission of inuring his children with his Kochos was complete, the Petirah of Yaakov Avinu was different from all others, and so the Passuk wishes to highlight it by including details that may otherwise seem unnecessary if not for the true meaning that they hold.

As we go through life, clinging to Shemiras HaTorah V’HaMitzvos, we must walk with our heads held high. Each of us is Kiyum of “Mah Zaro B’Chayim Af Hu BaChayim”, because we embody the Bechina of Yaakov. Only because we continue in the Derech of the Avos Hakedoshim, learning from their ways and striving to reach their heights, can the legacy of Yaakov Avinu live on—the reality of Yaakov Avinu Lo Mes perpetuated by our every step.