English translation — תולדות ב

1.

In connection with that which the verse¹

says "and the lads grew up" it stands in Yalkut Shimoni²

: "And Esau was included except that he corrupted his deeds."

That is,

that the meaning of "and they grew up" is

(not only growth in physicality,

in years,

but)

— greatness in spirituality,

and as the Yalkut says before that "the great man among the giants³..

the great one — these are Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who are called great ones."

And that which we find afterwards that Esau was

(not a "great one" in spirituality,

but on the contrary)

a wicked person,

is because "he corrupted his deeds."

Also the Zohar⁴

explains,

that "and the lads grew up" means a spiritual greatness,

and his language: "And the lads grew up,

the side of Abraham caused them to grow and his merits helped them,

he would train them in commandments ..

to include Jacob and Esau" — which is even more explicit and emphasized than according to the aforementioned explanation of Yalkut:

In Yalkut one can interpret

(with difficulty at least),

that the "Vayigdelu" which refers also to Esau,

does not mean spiritual greatness in actuality,

but only a <b>potential</b> to be a great one in spirituality,

"except that he corrupted his deeds".

In Zohar however it states explicitly,

that the "Vayigdelu" means that Jacob and Esau became great

(in spirituality)

In practice,

until the actual performance of the commandments — "he would educate them in commandments."

One must understand: how can one say that Esau

(in himself)

was worthy of being a great one in spirituality,

and moreover,

that he was in practice a great one

(only "afterwards" "he corrupted his deeds")

— when on the verse⁵

"and the children struggled within her" say our sages of blessed memory⁶

(and the Zohar itself⁷

brings this immediately after the aforementioned explanation in "and the youths grew"),

that already in his mother's womb Esau "tore himself" towards idolatry?

Even more: immediately after "and the lads grew" the verse continues "and Esau was a man who knows hunting, a man of the field",

i.e.,

that is,

that the "and he grew

(v)

" of Esau expressed itself in that "and Esau was a man who knows hunting etc." — now how can one say that the "and they grew" means greatness <b>spiritual</b>?

B.

At first glance one could answer

(the first question mentioned above)

Chazal⁸

say that a fetus in its mother's womb "they teach him the entire Torah ...

and when he comes into the air of the world, an angel comes and strikes him on his mouth <b>and makes him forget</b> the entire Torah",

(and one can say the essential reason — if he will not forget the entire Torah,

there will be lacking in his free choice — there must indeed be "I have placed⁹

before you ..

life and good and death and evil" in an equal manner).

From this it is also understandable regarding our topic,

that at the time of birth this "conduct"

(to "tear" oneself to idolatry)

<b>was forgotten</b> from Esau

(so that he should have free choice),

and the education of Abraham etc. had effect with all its force.

But this is not sufficient,

because after all, the conduct in his mother’s womb left an impression on him,

a nature of drawing himself to idol worship,

which brought about that he should separate himself to idol worship in his greatness; and as it is stated explicitly in the Zohar,

that his later separation to idol worship

(in his greatness)

came "because of this" that this is "his place that was shown to him"¹⁰,

from the aspect of his tearing himself away to idol worship in his mother’s womb.

that the learning of the entire Torah in his mother’s womb,

even though afterwards "he forgets the entire Torah",

is

(because the study in his mother’s womb leaves an impression on the child¹¹)

that he should afterwards "draw" himself to Torah].

Then the difficulty returns to its place: How does one say that "And Esav was included

(the "great ones")

except that he corrupted his deeds"?

3.

On the verse⁵

"And the children struggled within her" say Chazal¹²

another interpretation,

that the "struggling" and quarreling between Yaakov and Esav was "in the inheritance of two worlds",

"for this world and the World to Come".

Is puzzling¹³

: In what did the quarrel consist between Yaakov and Esav?

Esav wanted This World,

and Yaakov — the World to Come; they indeed had nothing to quarrel about!

One must say,

that Esav wanted not only This World,

and Yaakov — not only the World to Come,

but each of them wanted both worlds;

It is perplexing: why should Esau &lt;b&gt;the wicked&lt;/b&gt; want the World to Come&lt;sup&gt;14&lt;/sup&gt;?

D.

One will understand this by first introducing the explanation in the aforementioned statement of our Sages,

that already in his mother's womb Esau struggled toward idolatry — which at first glance is most perplexing:

The Patriarchs were a "chariot"¹⁵

to the supernal will,

as the Alter Rebbe explains in Tanya¹⁶

that "all their limbs ...

(and)

were not made a chariot only to the supernal will alone all their days"; it is thus simple,

that their descendants were born in the ultimate holiness,

and in them exists the "power of the father"

(and on the contrary,

the very essence of the father)¹⁷

— now how can it be that a son of Isaac should be drawn in his natural inclination to idolatry?

That Esau later grew up to be a wicked person,

is no question,

because "he corrupted his deeds" — every person has free choice to conduct himself as he wishes,

And Esau chose

(because of the environment,

the Canaanite in whose midst I dwell,

had to do with Nimrod¹⁸

etc.)

to corrupt through his deeds.

This, however, is “his dee<bold>ds</bold>” — the deeds that <bold>he</bold>

(by his choice)

had

(through them)

corrupted; it did not come from Yitzchak, heaven forbid,

but

(as per the precise language of our Sages¹⁹)

“Yitzchak

(that)

<bold>came forth</bold> from him Esau”,

Esau came out and separated himself — came forth <bold>and separated</bold>²⁰

— from the domain of Yitzchak.

Here, however, one says,

that <bold>before</bold> he was born — that is,

before the separation from the connection with

(Yitzchak and)

Rivkah — he already drew himself to idolatry!

that it caused

(as above from Zohar)

that he should separate himself to the side of holiness in his greatness].

5.

The explanation of this:

It is known²¹

regarding the matter of "the deeds of the fathers are a sign for the children,"

that "the deeds of the fathers" is the empowerment for the service of

("children")

the Jews.

From this it is understood,

that all the modes of service of Hashem which exist among the "children,"

also exist

(in the manner of a "sign" at least)

in the deeds of the fathers.

The Rambam in Eight Chapters²²

explains at length the two modes of service — "the superior pious one"

(who from the outset desires only good),

and "the one who conquers his

his evil inclination”

(which is “desirous of evil actions ..

and he subdues his evil inclination”).

An explanation is required: since “the Patriarchs are themselves the chariot,”

as above — where is the “sign for the children” from “the deeds of the Patriarchs” regarding the service of “one who subdues his evil inclination”²³?

Further: a "conqueror of his evil inclination" at the very least does not do any evil in practice; he only <b>desires</b> "evil deeds",

but in practice — "he does

(only)

good deeds".

But there exists among Jews the service of teshuvah,

to rectify a <b>deed</b> that is not good — how does the matter of teshuvah apply

(in the <b>simple</b> sense)

in "deeds of the Patriarchs",

that from this should become a "sign

(and giving of power)

to the children"?

6.

At first glance one could answer,

that although the Patriarchs had no obstacles from within, G-d forbid²⁴,

there were nevertheless obstacles from without,

from the surroundings

(as above),

which they had to "conquer".

It turns out,

that their service was divided into two types: the service of ascending from level to level in holiness itself; and that which they overcame also the obstacles from without — that the overcoming and "conquest" in the service of the Patriarchs is a giving of power

(a sign for the children)

also the service of "one who conquers his inclination."

But this is,

at first glance,

not a sufficient explanation.

Because in several details it is harder to be a "conqueror of his inclination"

(to overcome the obstacles from within)

than to overcome obstacles from without — and accordingly: how is it that upon the service of Jews there is a giving of power from the deeds of the Patriarchs?

One of the explanations in this: the virtue of “one who conquers his evil inclination” is in this,

that this “might”²⁵

against his inclination brings out how strongly he is bound to the Above — that although he desires evil actions,

nevertheless it does not weaken his will to obey the Above and do only good.

And likewise — and even more so — is the virtue of “might” of a baal teshuvah²⁶,

that despite the fact that he has fallen and committed a transgression,

with him the <b>inner </b>connection with the Above is with such intensity,

that this brings him to conquer the evil — to have regret over the past and to return to the service of G‑d.

And therefore "the deeds of the fathers are a sign for the children" also regarding the service of "conquering one's inclination" and the service of repentance — because this very strength of connection to the Above,

which <b>no thing</b> can weaken,

was inherited from the fathers,

who were always a "chariot" to the Above in a manner that in this there was not <b>relevant</b> any interruption "even one hour"²⁷.

And therefore,

although the "might" of the fathers expressed itself in practice only in relation to external obstacles,

nevertheless the <b>cause</b> of the "might" — which is the strength of connection to the Above — is a bestowal of power to the children regarding their internal obstacles²⁸.

7.

Since the service of the Patriarchs was divided into the two types mentioned above,

this was also reflected regarding their offspring: the Patriarchs had two types of "offspring,"

corresponding to the two types of service²⁹

— "the outstanding pious one" and "the one who conquers his inclination."

And in our matter,

these are the "offspring of Isaac" — "Jacob³⁰

and Esau mentioned in the portion"³¹

: Jacob is "a wholesome man, dwelling in tents"

— "the excellent chassid"; and Esav is "a man who knows hunting, etc." — corresponding to the service of one who conquers his inclination.

And this began already as "Toldos" — and they struggled within her womb.

The difference is however: by the Patriarchs,

who are the very Merkavah,

there is no place for a <b>reality</b> of evil G-d forbid; but by their descendants,

for descendants are indeed not "Patriarchs",

but <b>outside</b> of them,

a reality of evil is possible,

but being descendants of the Patriarchs it is

(not absolute and complete evil³²,

but)

in a manner that its existence is only in order to thereby evoke the matter of <b>conquering</b> one's <b>inclination</b>.

in the manner explained in the statement of our sages, of blessed memory³³

"I do not know in which of them He desires,

whether in the deeds of these

(the deeds of the wicked)

or in the deeds of these

(the deeds of the righteous)

" — for it is seemingly perplexing: what kind of assumption can there be that the Most High should desire the deeds of the wicked?

The explanation stands upon this³⁴,

that the concept of desire in the deeds of the wicked is — the desire in subduing the deeds,

the service of <b>repentance</b>; from the perspective of the Most High,

that "evil shall not sojourn with You"³⁵,

is the reality of "the deeds of the wicked"

(not the evil, heaven forbid,

but)

— the service of repentance that comes through this³⁶].

And likewise regarding Esau: that which he was and subsequently born with a nature of drawing himself to idolatry,

is this

(from the side of &lt;b&gt;Isaac&lt;/b&gt;)

was only in order to thereby carry out the service of conquering his &lt;b&gt;inclination&lt;/b&gt;;

But just as Esau was a possessor of free choice,

he "corrupted his deeds" and "went out from him" — he separated himself from

(the holiness of)

Isaac,

and brought,

on the contrary,

the evil from potential into actuality.

Ch.

Based on this, one will also understand the "running back and forth" and quarrel between Yaakov and Esav regarding "the inheritance of two worlds": since here it is about Esav as he is still in his mother's womb —

i.e.,

as he is still within the realm of holiness as mentioned above — it is understandable,

that his then-desire for this world is a matter in holiness,

<b>for the better</b>,

which comes as a result of the fact that he is "offspring" of Yitzchak —

One of the differences between the service of "the excellent chassid" and "one who conquers his inclination" is: by a "excellent chassid",

since his service is the ascent from level to level within holiness itself,

therefore it is heard by him,

that the main point and purpose is the perfection of the ascent — <b>the World to Come</b>

(which is a clear world,

without any

(mixture of good and)

evil,

entirely holy),

and for that he strives and desires;

But unlike by one who conquers his evil inclination, it is heard,

as the main virtue consists in the service &lt;b&gt;in this world&lt;/b&gt;,

where there are obstacles and delays and concealments and hidden things, and he overcomes them and conquers them.

And therefore the "running back and forth"

Between Yaakov and Eisav was regarding "the inheritance of &lt;b&gt;two &lt;/b&gt;worlds": each of the two modes of avodah also includes the other mode: also a "chossid hama'ulah" must do his avodah in This World specifically; and on the other hand,

a koveish es yitzro must ascend from level to level in holiness itself — he must tear himself away from This World

(even from the &lt;b&gt;avodah &lt;/b&gt;with This World — to clarify This World and transform it into holiness)&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;

and devote himself

(from time to time at least)

to the avodah of

("the World to Come" that is in This World)

"yoshvei ohalim".

The difference, however, is: by the chossid hama'ulah the descent into This World is for the sake of &lt;b&gt;the World to Come &lt;/b&gt;— to attain through This World the highest level in ascent in holiness; and by a koveish es yitzro it is the opposite: that which he engages in the matter of "yoshvei ohalim",

is so that his avodah with

(and in)

&lt;b&gt;This World &lt;/b&gt;should be in the ultimate perfection.

And therefore,

from the aspect of the essence of Yaakov,

"dweller of tents,"

his decision becomes that one must desire the World to Come,

and also this world is for the sake of the World to Come; but from the aspect of the essence of Esav is that the main thing is &lt;b&gt;this world&lt;/b&gt;

(the elevation that comes out through the service in this world),

and

(the service of)

the World to Come is for the sake of the service in this world.

9.

With this is also explained what our Sages, of blessed memory, say that "and the youths grew" means — spiritual greatness,

and the Zohar adds further that Avraham educated

(also)

Esav in the commandments until he should become a great one

(in spirituality)

&lt;b&gt;in actuality&lt;/b&gt;:

Abraham,

having the power of “he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, etc.”³⁸,

had an effect on Esau,

that he should be a conqueror of his inclination <b>in actuality</b>.

And this is what the verse continues,

that the “and the boy grew

” of Esau expressed itself in “and Esau was a man who knows hunting, a man of the field” — because also <b>the</b> matter

(as it is from the side of Abraham and Isaac)

is for the better:

Being a "man of the field",

that he does his service in the <b>world</b>,

is — in order to overcome and conquer the concealments and coverings of the "field",

Esau <b>had to</b> be a "knower of hunting",

as Rashi³⁹

"to hunt and to deceive" — as explained in several places⁴⁰,

that in order to carry out the service in the world one must come to the matter of "deception",

as it were: one must clothe oneself in "the garments of the clarified",

i.

e.

that the soul occupies itself with matters of the world

(like eating and drinking etc.)

which superficially have no connection to it,

and by doing these things for the sake of heaven etc. it refines the holy sparks which are found in these physical things.

All this, however, is only as the matter is from the side of Abraham and Isaac; in practice, however,

after his education ceased

from Abraham⁴¹

and Esau "went out",

had torn himself away from his connection to Isaac,

he corrupted and became "a man knowing hunting, a man of the field" <b>in its plain sense</b>,

went out to evil culture.

Yud.

The above explanation — that when Esau is born from Isaac he is good — is consistent and learned from the explanation of the old Rebbe⁴²

the reason why Isaac wanted to give the blessings to Esau,

that this is because Yitzchak looked at Esav as he is from the side of Resha

(<b>his root</b>),

which there is heard,

as above,

the good and superiority of the matter and order of service in the world — not to be affected by the concealments in this world,

and on the contrary,

to effect,

to subdue that the world itself should be refined and elevated into holiness.

Nevertheless, the blessings were given specifically to Yaakov,

because only he had the power to refine this world⁴³

; specifically through being a "dweller of tents"

(one has the power of the Torah)

can one afterwards refine this world and make from the world a dwelling place for Him, blessed be He.

11.

And this is also the directive in actual service:

Even though that Jews are children of <b>Jacob</b> — it does not mean that they need to content themselves with the service of "dweller of tents,"

And as our Sages, of blessed memory, said⁴⁴

Whoever says I have nothing but Torah, even etc.,

Rather, there needs to be by them also the service of "man of the field,"

Because also <b>the</b> service was given over to Jacob.

And as the hint

In Rashi's commentary on "And these are the generations" — "Yaakov and Esau mentioned in the parshah": a Jew must know that there must be <b>both</b> "generations"

(— types of avodah),

both

(the avodah of)

Yaakov and both

(the avodah of)

Esau,

but G-d forbid not as Esau was in actuality,

only in the manner that "are mentioned <b>in the parshah</b>" — as Esau

(and his avodah)

are according to <b>Torah</b>.

And in order to carry this out,

one must first precede the avodah of Yaakov — "a wholesome man, dwelling in tents"

that he <b>reverses</b> the order of birth and <b>precedes</b> Yaakov to Esau]

: First one must occupy oneself with the study of Torah,

and in a manner of "a <b>wholesome</b> man": learning Torah <b>with wholesomeness</b> — not to attempt to distort G-d forbid what is written in Torah,

to interpret one's "evil inclination" G-d forbid into Torah,

only to seek the <b>truth</b> of Torah.

Together with this one must know,

that by this one may not stop.

After the service of “dweller of tents”

one must do in “field”,

in order to “catch” game from matters of the world and from it make “delicacies” for the Most High⁴⁶,

our Father in heaven.

And although in order to carry out the service one must be a "yodeh tzid" — one must "don" oneself in the garments of the world,

and know in what world one "cooks",

when one speaks with a Jew who is, heaven forbid, in the "field",

and one needs to bring him close to Judaism — one cannot speak with him in the holy tongue and a style that is suitable for those who are "yoshvei ohalim",

rather one must speak in the language of the country and the content of the words is in a "garment" suitable for a "man of the field" and in the language of the Rambam⁴⁷

: he should urge him with things that are beloved to him in the smallness of his years etc. nuts etc. and when he grows —

nice shoes and when he is more complete in his intellect — money etc. they will honor you; and all this is repulsive but is necessary due to the smallness of man's intellect.

And although that meanwhile he speaks about the striving for nuts etc. — since that he does it <b>in the continuation</b> of his service as a “dweller of tents,”

this prevents him,

that his service in the field should be according to the ways of the Torah⁴⁸

; it is “the generations of Yitzchak ..

mentioned <b>in the parshah</b>.”

And through that which one conducts the service of “the generations of Yitzchak” in both types of service mentioned above,

one merits soon to the time when they will say to Yitzchak “for you are our father”⁴⁹,

in the true and complete redemption through our righteous Mashiach.

(From the talk of Shabbos Parshas Toldos 5741)