Hishtadlus & Bitachon

Well, that's what we mentioned yesterday, apropos of the contrast of Abraham and the Ramban in beginning Parshat Vayishlach. So let's see there. Niteiv haParsha hazot, the encounter of Yaakov with Esav,

להודיע כי הציל הקדוש ברוך הוא את עבדו וגאלו מיד חזק ממנו. וישלח מלאכים יעקב לפניו אל עשו אחיו, ולמדנו עוד שהוא לא בטח בצדקתו והשתדל בהצלה בכל יכולתו. ויש בה עוד רמז לדורות כי כל אשר אירע לאבינו עם עשו אחיו יארע לנו תמיד עם בני עשו, וראוי לנו לאחוז בדרכו של צדיק.

So in light of the of כל מה שאירע לאבות סימן לבנים, so what the Torah, the description the Torah provides of how Yaakov Avinu reacts when facing the threat coming from Esav is normative. It's not just a historical narrative but it's something which is normative,

וראוי לנו לאחוז בדרכו של צדיק, שנזמן עצמנו לשלושה דברים שהזמין הוא את עצמו, לתפילה ולדורון ולהצלה כדרך מלחמה,

or biderech milchama? Anyone have biderech milchama? No. u'livroach u'l'hinatzel. So it's interesting, the Ramban in the hakdama, so he writes that Moshe Rabbeinu, take a look at the hakdama, Moshe Rabbeinu, take a look at the hakdamat haRamban, משה רבינו כתב הספר הזה מפי הקדוש ברוך הוא. v'hakorov, what seems most likely, what makes the most sense to me, says the Ramban, she'katvo b'Har Sinai.

כי שם נאמר לו עלה אלי ההרה והיה שם ואתנה לך את לוחות האבן והתורה והמצוה אשר כתבתי להורותם. כי לוחות האבן יכלול הלוחות והמכתב כל עשרת הדברות והמצוה מספר המצוות כולן עשה ולא תעשה.

So what does Torah then mean? אם כן והתורה יכלול הסיפורים מתחילת בראשית. And why are they referred to as Torah? Stories are Torah? No, כי הוא מורה אנשים. Torah is lashon instruction, right? Hora'ah means to instruct. כי הוא מורה האנשים בדרך בעניין האמונה. The Ramban says that the overarching lesson or area of Torah which the stories of Sefer Bereishit relate to is emunah. But emunah means, it certainly means what to believe, but emunah also means how to translate belief and how to act on belief. So over here, again with the words of the Ramban in the hakdama resonating, so ul'lamdenu od, when the Ramban writes שהוא לא בטח בצדקתו והשתדל בהצלה בכל יכולתו, that's a lesson in emunah. It's a lesson in what the implications of emuna are, how to translate emuna. And translating emuna means that to, despite one's knowledge and firm conviction and belief that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is kol yakhol and the sequence here of these two limudim in the Ramban, right? What does the Ramban say? The first limud from parshas Vayishlach is

להודיע כי הציל הקדוש ברוך הוא את עבדו וגאלו מיד חזק ממנו וישלח מלאך ויצילהו.

So the Ramban begins and says limud number one from the parsha is what? What saved Yaakov Avinu? Was it the doron? Was it the preparation for milkhama? No, Hakadosh Baruch Hu saved him.

להודיע כי הציל הקדוש ברוך הוא את עבדו וגאלו מיד חזק ממנו וישלח מלאך ויצילהו.

And then the Ramban turns around and says and limud number two is that all that notwithstanding, limud number two is that we're supposed to do the same thing Yaakov Avinu did. The sequence of the two limudim, if anything, I don't know, you would have thought sort of sequentially the way they emerge from the parsha, so number one happens first in the parsha and number two happens later. And the Ramban bedafka inverts the sequence because the Ramban is underscoring no, even after limud number one, even after limud number one that obviously, obviously, ultimately everything is siyata d'shmaya. No, but Hakadosh Baruch Hu said the siyata d'shmaya is going to be when you exert yourself to the maximum in terms of doing what you can do. So even after learning the lesson, excuse me, le-hodia, even after learning that lesson להודיע כי הציל הקדוש ברוך הוא את עבדו, even after learning that lesson, lesson number two is presented. And there's more here in this Ramban also rabosai. The Ramban clearly implies, there's a very clear implication, unmistakable, that to do differently than Yaakov Avinu, like how does one not be משתדל בהצלה בכל יכולתו? I mean it's not enough, the belief that the Ribono Shel Olam is kol yakhol is not enough because there are always two variables. One variable, one's not a variable, there are always two factors. One's a constant, one's a variable. The constant is that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is kol yakhol and the variable is how deserving the person or the people are who are she-shruyim be-tzara. And hayos that there are again alongside the constant of Hakadosh Baruch Hu, there's this variable. Ramban clearly implies that it's a yuha to think that this can happen she-lo kederekh hateva. That my Torah, my tefilla, or our Torah, our tefilla suffices and the whole thing can happen she-lo kederekh hateva. No, the way the Ribono Shel Olam chooses to run the world with exceptions, but bederekh klal things happen bederekh hateva. Even things which are obviously only happening because of Hakadosh Baruch Hu, but they happen couched in derekh hateva. For a person to an individual or or group to imply in word or in deed that we don't need to be mishtadel behatzala bechol yocholtenu for them bemetzius hauvda because that means being boteach lo. We're holding that that the yeshua can come entirely shelo kederech hateva without without our doing whatever's available to us on a natural level. Now it's true that later at the end of Parshas Mikeitz Chazal fault Yosef HaTzadik right? ולא זכר שר המשקים את יוסף וישכחהו. But I think the Chazon Ish I think I think again there are two approaches there in Chazal and I think I'm not confusing who says which but but look it up please and double check for me. I think the Chazon Ish has in his little little sefer Emuna Bitachon he says that the indictment is not on on Yosef for doing something for making hishtadlus but it's in some microscopic sense as opposed to engaging in hishtadlus because that's what we're mechuyav to do, he was being boteach on the hishtadlus. Again in some microscopic sense that that is inappropriate for for Yosef HaTzadik. And lakhora the Ramban certainly I mean this Ramban would certainly indicate such an approach that that it's not that Chazal are implying that that Yosef should have been totally totally passive. Again totally passive on the derech hateva level. In general Halacha which is the way we're supposed to be living it says you're mechallel Shabbos if you have a חולה שיש בו סכנה. Mechallel Shabbos. Right so we don't say

לא לא לא באמבולנס ולא ברופא כי אם ברוח השם צבאות.

No, mechallel Shabbos. And we say that if a person hesitates he's a shofech damim for not being mechallel Shabbos. Halacha operates on a natural plane. That that's whatever whatever theory of hashgacha pratis a person subscribes to Halacha operates on a natural plane. And that's what this Ramban is saying also Halacha operates on a natural plane. Again not that we ever mistake it for kochi veotzem yadi which was why of course of course tefilla is is part and and maybe that's why maybe it's... See it's interesting. See even though it seems from the seder hapsukim when Yaakov Avinu divides his his family into shnei machanos, so lichora that's part of the preparation for milchama. And it's only after that that, right? So in Pasuk Ches,

ויירא יעקב מאד ויצר לו ויחץ את העם אשר אתו ואת הצאן ואת הבקר והגמלים לשני מחנות ויאמר אם יבוא עשו אל המחנה האחת והכהו והיה המחנה הנשאר לפליטה

and only that is ויאמר יעקב אלקי אבי אברהם ואלקי אבי יצחק only then is is the tefilla. But the Ramban lists tefilla first. Does that mean that the Ramban thinks that there was also tefilla beforehand that the Torah doesn't record? Or even if there wasn't, lichora the point is that at whichever point the tefilla happens, so the Ramban is underscoring that yes, of course we recognize that everything is Siyata D'shmaya, which is why the tefilla is really the basis for the doron and the milchama as well. We know that it's not going to be kochi v'otzem yadi in milchama, and we know that it's not going to be, you know, superior diplomatic skills and in sending the doron. We realize that it's going to be the Siyata D'shmaya. So again, I don't know sequentially when. Naniach that we just go with the seder hapesukim and part of the hachana lemilchama happens before the tefilla. But the point is that that the tefilla is sort of not a separate component, but it's tefilla, you know, that which which underlies one's one's efforts. But that notwithstanding, again, as is the case with all of halacha, halacha functions naturally. halacha functions on on a natural plane. Well, what's the lashon HaRamban here?

שנזמן עצמנו לשלושת הדברים שהזמין הוא את עצמו התפילה והדורון וההצלה בדרך מלחמה.

Why what does the Ramban say shenizamen atzmenu? Why doesn't it just say we should do? Ra'uy lanu then, right? I think we wouldn't have noticed anything if the Ramban would have written

וראוי לנו לאחוז בדרכו של צדיק שנעסוק בשלושת הדברים שעסק הוא תפילה דורון ומלחמה.

Why why does the Ramban talk about the the preparation for as opposed to the the actual doing? You know, so maybe that's again, maybe two thirds of it is hem hem hadvarim that we were just talking about, that there needs to be a certain context or framework for each of the shlosha devarim. The tefilla has to recognize the magnitude of the eis tzara. So a person can't just daven. Person has to to daven properly, a person has to appreciate what it is he's davening for. If a person thinks he's davening for an inflammation, which is why there's a swelling There has to be an understanding of what the tefillah is for and then as we just said before there has to be mazmin atzmo for in what vein he's engaging in the doron and the hatzala of the milchama, not that he thinks it's going to be kochi v'otzem yadi. But me'idach gisa, even though it's not going to be kochi v'otzem yadi, it's a yuhara to think that we can ask HaKadosh Baruch Hu that he should do it shelo k'derech hateva. Okay, that's a matter of dikduk but maybe we'll leave it at that for now. Okay.