English translation — וישלח א

Sicha 1<pg>137</pg>

A.

"And Yaakov called the name of the place Peniel because I saw God face to face etc. And the sun rose for him when he passed Penuel etc."<sup>1</sup>.

And already the commentators stood<sup>2</sup>

on the change in the verse,

that he changed the name of the place from "Peniel"

(with a yud)

to "Penuel"<sup>3</sup>

(with a vav).

And at first glance it is necessary to understand in Rashi's commentary on the Torah,

that he did not explain this matter in his commentary.

[And as has been explained several times,

that Rashi's way in his commentary on the Torah is to resolve every question that arises in the study of the Scripture,

as is proven from this that in many places in his commentary<sup>4</sup>

Rashi writes about a certain matter "I do not know"

(and the like),

from which it is understood,

that in all the other places where there is a difficulty,

at first glance,

in the verse,

and Rashi was silent and did not write "I do not know",

this is because according to his view this is not a question requiring explanation in the plain sense of the Scripture,

or that the question is already resolved by Rashi's commentary that precedes this].

And behold, ostensibly one could say,

that according to the simple meaning, this question does not require resolution,

for we are not precise in names.

And as is evident ostensibly from that which we find a change similar to this also earlier in Parshat Bereishit⁵

— "And Irad begot Mehujael and Mehijael begot Methushael",

that the Scripture changed from "Mehujael"

(with a vav)

to "Mehijael"

(with a yud)⁶

— and Rashi did not stand to explain this change.

And this approach is explicit in the Ibn Ezra who wrote "Do not seek precision in names"⁷,

"Names are not preserved like verbs"⁸,

meaning that one should not be precise in the letters and vowels of the name,

for there is no necessity that they be precisely in accordance with the reason of the name.

And based on this, one cannot raise a difficulty from the change of the name from "Peniel" to "Penuel"

(and as he brings⁹

further examples that the Scripture changes slightly in the

(spelling)

of the name from one place to another).

But at first glance it is difficult to resolve thus in our case,

for even though the verse is not precise in names,

and as above the change from "Machuyael" to "Mechiyyael"

(and many such instances)

— behold there is a great difference between ordinary names that are mentioned in the verse

(without explaining the reason for the name),

that in this one could say there is no precision in these names — in our case,

where the verse explains the reason for the name,

that in these names Rashi holds that one must be precise in the letters of the name as much as possible,

that one should choose a word whose meaning is in exact accordance with the reason for the name¹⁰.

And as Rashi explains on the verse¹¹

"And he called his name Noach saying, this one will comfort us etc.",

"will give rest to us from the toil of our hands etc. and if you do not explain it thus<pg>138</pg>

the meaning of the language does not fall upon the name and you would need to call his name Menachem",

behold that he holds that one is precise in names that they be in exact accordance with the reason for the name,

therefore one cannot say that "Noach" is an abbreviated name from the word "nechama" (comfort) but rather it is the language of "yaniach" (will give rest)¹².

And since so it is puzzling: after the verse explains the reason for the name "Peniel" — "I saw God face to face"

("Peniel" — "face of God"),

what place is there to change the name to "Penuel"?

[And although also regarding names whose reason is explained in the verse it is not forced that the letters of the name be exactly similar to the letters in the reason of the name,

and it is sufficient that they are similar in the main letters

(as proven from the names of the tribes¹³

and more)

— still this does not resolve the change in the verse here,

for after he already called the name of the place "Peniel",

which is exactly like the reason of the name,

what place is there to change to "Penuel"

(in which the meaning of the reason is not clear)].

2.

At first glance, one could say,

that the change from "Peniel" to "Penuel" is not a real change,

because the letter yud and the letter vav are interchangeable with each other¹⁴,

and as we find earlier

(in Parshat Bereishit¹⁵)

regarding the name "Chavah" — "And the man called his wife's name Chavah because she was the mother of all living",

and in Rashi "Chavah,

falls on the language of Chai (living) that she gives life to her offspring¹⁶,

as when you say 'what was to Adam'¹⁷

in the Holy Language".

And at first glance it seems that Rashi's intention is as the Ibn Ezra wrote

(and other commentators¹⁸)

there,

that "Chavah falls on the language of Chai (living)" because the vav and the yud are interchangeable¹⁹.

And thus also in our case it is not difficult,

because "Peniel" and "Penuel" is not a real change,

since the yud and the vav are interchangeable.

But in the language of Rashi there, it is understood,

that Rashi's intention is not

(as in the aforementioned commentators)

that the yud and vav are interchangeable — for the matter of interchange is not mentioned in Rashi there²⁰

— but rather this is in the manner of the distinction between the word "hay" and "haveh"

(as in the example in Rashi there)

:

The explanation of the word "haveh"

(in the verse "What haveh is for a person")

is — the word "hay" in the content of present tense,

for "hay" is past tense language,

and "haveh" is present tense language

[and in the manner of what is said²¹

"Behold the hand of Hashem haveh upon your livestock etc.",

and in Rashi "present tense language,

for thus one says in the feminine language: regarding the past it was and regarding the future it will be and regarding the present it is haveh like 'makes', 'wants', 'shepherds'",

and likewise in the masculine language,

for "regarding the present" we say "haveh"²²].

And this is also the reason for the name "Chavah,

for she was the mother of all life",

that the name "Chavah falls on the language of life" is because "Chavah" and "life" are&lt;pg&gt;139&lt;/pg&gt;

one root,

and the difference between the yud and the vav is only in the usage of the word&lt;sup&gt;23&lt;/sup&gt;

(like "Heh" and "Hoveh"&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;).

And the reason that Rashi was not satisfied with the explanation that the yud and vav are interchangeable,

one can say,

that it is in accordance with his aforementioned approach that when the reason for the name is explained in the verse,

one must be precise as much as possible that the letters of the name be exactly according to the reason for the name.

And based on this, an explanation is needed in our case,

that since according to Rashi's approach one must be precise in names as much as possible,

if so

[even if you say that the name Penuel "falls on the language" "I saw God face to face"

(face of God),

because the vav and yud are interchangeable,

nevertheless]

why does the verse change from "Peniel" to "Penuel"

(which is not precise)?

3.

And one can say,

that also "Peniel" and "Penuel" is in the manner of that which "Chavah falls on the language of Chayah",

that "Peniel" and "Penuel" are the same,

for the difference between the yud and the vav is not in the essence of the word but only in the usage of the word.

And Rashi does not need to explain the reason for the difference between the usage of the yud and the usage of the vav in the two names "Peniel" and "Penuel" — because it is understood from the verse itself:

In the meaning of the name "Peniel" it is said "for I have seen God face to face",

and it is found that two "faces" are here,

the face of Jacob and the face of God.

And based on this it is understood simply,

that the two names are about that same event,

except that when Jacob was in the place where he saw the face of God,

he called the place "Peniel" after the name "face of God",

and "when he passed" from the place,

it was called "Penuel" after his face

(of Jacob)

that saw God — "face of God"

[that "face of" falls on the language of "his face",

as if it were said "his face

(of)

God"].

And this explanation also fits with the inner explanation in this verse,

for it is explained in Ohr HaTorah of the Tzemach Tzedek&lt;sup&gt;25&lt;/sup&gt;,

that "Peniel for I have seen God face to face" is like the matter of what is said&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;

"To You my heart said seek My face, Your face, Lord, I will seek",

which is the service from the inwardness of the heart,

in which is revealed the aspect of "Your face, Lord",

the inwardness above,

to be in revelation "face to face".

And we find that there are here two matters: "Seek My face" — that the Holy One, blessed be He, "seeks" the inwardness of the person,

and "Your face, Hashem, I will seek",

that the person seeks and is drawn to the inwardness of above.

And they are the two matters of "Peniel" and "Penuel",

the inwardness of above

(face of God)

and the inwardness of the heart below

(face to God)²⁷.

<pg>140</pg>

4.

And behold, in Or HaTorah there²⁸

there is another explanation of the change from "Peniel" to "Penuel",

that "Peniel" is the essence of the service that comes from the inwardness of the heart as above,

and this is also what is said "Peniel" with a yud,

for the connection and attachment to the inwardness of Godliness is connected with the nullification of the existence of the lower being,

until nothing remains of him except a mere point,

like the point of the letter yud; however, the ultimate purpose of the service is — to draw down Godliness into the world,

and this is that after "Peniel,

for I have seen God face to face",

comes the matter of "and the sun rose for him when he crossed over Penuel",

with a vav,

which is the drawing down of Godliness into the world

(as is known that the letter vav "indicates

(and its form)

a drawing down from above to below"²⁹).

And the explanation of this,

that "Penuel" with a vav indicates the drawing down below into the world,

corresponds with the explanation of the Bachya

regarding the reason for the change from "Peniel" to "Penuel",

that "when his thought was roaming about the matter of the angel, he called the name of the place Peniel with a yud to hint at this angel who is the tenth among the ranks of angels called Ishim

and when he passed that place and was released from this thought, he returned as at first to the sensations of this world which are the six extremities, therefore he mentioned Penuel with a vav."

And similarly explained the Maggid,

that "at first when Jacob prevailed

[over]

the ministering angel of Esau, there was not yet revelation

[in the world]..

it is written Peniel with a yud,

in concealment,

and afterwards it is written 'and the sun shone for him when he passed',

that is, he passed a second drawing down to revelation and he had the strength to prevail over Esau

[not only over the spiritual "ministering angel of Esau",

but over Esau literally]

he called the place Penuel with a vav, because it was already drawn down into revelation."

And one can say,

that this distinction between "Peniel"

(with a yud)

and "Penuel"

(with a vav)

also corresponds with the distinction in the explanation of these two words — "face of G-d" or "turn to G-d": "face of G-d" means the inwardness of Divinity,

namely the Divine light that is above the world; and "turn to G-d" — from the language of turning³³

and inclining — meaning as the Divine light "turns"

(inclines)

and is drawn from above downward to illuminate in the world.

And simply it seems,

that this explanation of "Penuel" is the opposite of the aforementioned explanation

(section 63)

of "Penuel" which refers to the inwardness of the heart of the person

(which "seeks" the inwardness of above,

"Your face, O Lord"),

since according to this explanation it refers to the drawing down below into the world.

But since the two names "Peniel" and "Penuel" are of one place,

it is logical to say,

that according to all interpretations,

also the name "Penuel" belongs to the service that is from the inwardness of the heart.

5.

And this will be understood by prefacing the question on the above interpretation of "Peniel",

that it refers to the service from the inwardness of the heart in which is revealed the inwardness of G‑dliness

("Your face, Hashem")

— for seemingly,

how does this interpretation fit with the simple interpretation of the verse,

that "I have seen G‑d face to face" refers to Jacob's battle with the "angel of Esau",

that they are not only two different and opposite interpretations&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;,

but rather movements in the service of G‑d,

opposite from one extreme to the other.

&lt;pg&gt;141&lt;/pg&gt;

Behold, the difference between the service that is from the externality of the heart, which is connected with the externality of G‑dliness,

and the service of "Seek My face — Your face, O Lord, do I seek,"

is:

The service from the externality of the heart

is connected with contemplation of the greatness of G‑d as it is expressed in the creation of the worlds,

"How manifold are Your works, O Lord" and "How great are Your works, O Lord,"

this being the matter of the externality of G‑dliness,

namely, as the Holy One, blessed be He, constricts Himself, as it were, to create the worlds and to sustain them,

which is a degradation relative to the Holy One, blessed be He, Himself; but there is a more elevated service,

that a person "seeks" the innerness of G‑dliness,

the innerness of the Holy One, blessed be He, as He, blessed be He, is above all worlds — "and of His greatness there is no investigation,"

that the revelation of the innerness of G‑dliness is in the innerness of the heart and the soul.

And the practical lesson in actual service — that when a person "seeks" and reveals only the externality of G‑dliness,

that from the aspect of this level there is a place for worlds,

then his service is in the manner of war,

that he must overcome the obstacles and delays,

both from within

(from his evil inclination etc.)

and from without,

until he succeeds in vanquishing them etc.; but when there is revealed to him "Your face, O Lord",

the inwardness of G‑dliness that is above the worlds,

he is in the ultimate connection and attachment to Him, blessed be He,

in a manner that there is no possibility of any preventer or hinderer for him.

And based on this,

how does the above explanation of "I have seen G‑d face to face" fit,

that it refers to the service from the inwardness of the heart in which "Your face, O Lord" is revealed,

with the simple explanation that it refers to Jacob's struggle with the angel of Esau

(in the manner of "And he wrestled³⁵

a man with him",

in a way of wrestling with one another)?

And one could say,

that the mediation between the inner interpretation and the simple interpretation in "Peniel",

is understood according to the inner explanation of the two names "Peniel" and "Penuel",

that in its truth they are one matter

(just as they are names for one place),

for the difference between the yud and the vav in this name does not make a difference and division in the content of the name.

6.

The explanation of the matter:

This that the letter yud which is a point only,

and the letter vav which "indicates the drawing down from above to below",

they are two opposites from each other — that the nullification of the letter yud indicates the revelation of the innerness of G‑d,

that from its side there is no place for any thing besides Him, blessed be He,

whereas the vav indicates the Divine light as it is drawn down from above to below within the boundaries of the world — this is only from the aspect of the "revelations" of G‑d,

that the revelation of the innerness of G‑d is above the boundary of the worlds

(and it causes in them nullification,

the point of the letter yud),

and only the contracted revelation of the Divine light is drawn down into the reality of the worlds

(and it is the one hinted at in the letter vav)

;

But from the aspect of the innerness and essentiality of G‑d,

as He, blessed be He, is above the boundaries of "above" and "below",

He is drawn down in every place equally,

below like above.

And then there is no difference between the nullification of the letter yud and the drawing down of the letter vav,

that the nullification of the letter yud,

which is absolute nullification

(from the aspect of the revelation of G‑d which is above the worlds),

is drawn down into the reality of the world itself,

the connection of the letter yud and the letter vav.

And one could say,

that this matter is hinted at in the explanation of the two names "Peniel" and "Penuel" — "face of

G-d" and "turn to G-d":

on the verse³⁶

"And I will set My face against you" Rashi explains "like<pg>142</pg>

that is said regarding good³⁷

And I will turn to you so it is said regarding evil and I will set My face a parable: a parable of a king who said to his servants I turn away from all my affairs and I occupy myself with you etc.",

that from the simple meaning of Rashi's language it is understood,

that he explains the word "face" from the term "My face"³⁸

(like the expression "and I will turn"),

and its concept of "My face" hinted in the word "face"

(from the word face)

is — that "I turn away from all my affairs and I occupy myself with you",

that is "My face" in all His essence and selfhood³⁹

(therefore it is hinted in the word "face",

which indicates the inwardness and essentiality,

as Rashi explains on the verse⁴⁰

"My face will go" — "I Myself will go"),

that this "My face" is not connected with contraction etc.,

but this is as He, blessed be He, turns in all His essence to Israel.

And this "face" which is from His Essence, may He be blessed,

is drawn downward like upward,

the connection of the letter yud and the letter vav as above.

And this is also the mediation between the two interpretations of "Peniel" — the service that is from the inwardness of the heart,

and his battle with the "prince of Esau" — that they are not two different matters,

but rather they are identical,

for the perfection of the service of "Seek My face, Your face, Hashem, I will seek" is when the self-nullification that is from the inwardness of the heart is drawn forth openly in all its force in all his matters

(also in his externality),

and so it was with Jacob,

that his battle with the "prince of Esau" was in the power of his attachment to Hashem from the inwardness of the heart,

that even as he "descended" and was drawn to engage with the "prince of Esau"

(to overcome him and defeat him)

the level of his attachment and his self-nullification to Hashem was not diminished,

that he was in this absolute self-nullification in every situation.

that this is also what our victory over the angel of Esau was in a manner of "you have striven with God"⁴¹,

from the term dominion,

that the matter of the wrestling was only from the side of the "man"

(and a man wrestled),

the angel of Esau,

but from the side of Jacob the victory was in a manner of "dominion",

since his victory was through the power of his attachment to Divinity in a manner of "I have seen God face to face",

as above.

(From the talks of Yud Tes Kislev,

Shabbos Parshas Vayishlach and Shabbos Parshas Vayeishev 5741)