Don't Kill Him Yet - Vayishlach 5771

We know that this Parsha begins with Eisav out to kill Yaakov Avinu. Isn’t it strange, the last time we met Eisav, it was in Parshas Toldos, 27:41(וַיִּשְׂטֹם עֵשָׂו, אֶת-יַעֲקֹב, עַל-הַבְּרָכָה, אֲשֶׁר בֵּרְכוֹ אָבִיו; וַיֹּאמֶר עֵשָׂו בְּלִבּוֹ, יִקְרְבוּ יְמֵי אֵבֶל אָבִי, וְאַהַרְגָה, אֶת-יַעֲקֹב אָחִי) Eisav said in his heart, when my father dies, I will kill Yaakov. Did he mean that seriously that he is going to wait until his father dies? Rashi says, (יקרבו ימי אבל אבי: כמשמעו, שלא אצער את אבא. ומדרש אגדה לכמה פנים יש) Eisav was genuinely a Mechabeid Av V’aim and he wouldn’t kill Yaakov during Yitzchak’s lifetime because that would bring pain to him.

That being the case, the beginning of this week’s Parsha in Vayishlach, is so strange. Yitzchak at the time he gave the B’rachos was either 122 or 123. We know this from Rashi in Parshas Toldos 27:2 (לא ידעתי יום מותי: אמר רבי יהושע בן קרחה אם מגיע אדם לפרק אבותיו ידאג חמש שנים לפניהם וחמש לאחר כן, ויצחק היה בן מאה עשרים ושלש, אמר שמא לפרק אמי אני מגיע, והיא מתה בת מאה עשרים ושבע והריני בן חמש שנים סמוך לפרקה, לפיכך לא ידעתי יום מותי, שמא לפרק אמי, שמא לפרק אבא) Since he was within 5 years of the Petira of his mother who had lived 127 years. Since he was within 5 years of that, he was either 122 or 123 when he gave the B’rachos.  Subsequent to that, Yaakov learned in the Yeshiva Sheim V’aiver for 14 years and he spent 20 years at Beis Lavan which totals 34 years. If we add 123 + 34 we come out that Yitzchak was 157 years old. Yitzchak still lived another 23 years. What happened? Eisav had said that when Yitzchak passes away he would kill Yaakov and here we find him out to kill Yaakov before his father’s Petira?

Matzeiva: Altars & Monuments - Vayishlach 5771

35:20 (וַיַּצֵּב יַעֲקֹב מַצֵּבָה, עַל-קְבֻרָתָהּ--הִוא מַצֶּבֶת קְבֻרַת-רָחֵל, עַד-הַיּוֹם) We have in this week’s Parsha Rochel’s death, her being buried at a place that Jews will come to visit and pray at the side of the road, and we have here that a Matzeiva is built on the final resting place of Rochel. There is a single stone that is put as a resting place. (וַיַּצֵּב יַעֲקֹב מַצֵּבָה, עַל-קְבֻרָתָהּ) Yaakov put up a Matzeivah.

We find the word Matzeivah used in a different context. In Parshas Shoftim 16:22 ( וְלֹא-תָקִים לְךָ, מַצֵּבָה, אֲשֶׁר שָׂנֵא, יְרוָר אֱלֹקֶיךָ) We find that as a place from which to serve Hakadosh Baruch Hu, a Mizbaiach made of many stones in desired. A Matzeivah made of one stone is hated by Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Rashi in Shoftim says (אשר שנא: מזבח אבנים ומזבח אדמה צוה לעשות, ואת זו שנא כי חק היתה לכנענים. ואף על פי שהיתה אהובה לו בימי האבות עכשיו שנאה, מאחר שעשאוה אלו חק לעבודה זרה). Even though in the times of the Avos a Matzeivah was a suitable place from where to serve Hakadosh Baruch Hu, for generations it is changed. For generations it is a Mizbaiach. It is a little strange that we use the name Matzeivah which the Torah says Hakadosh Baruch Hu hates for the stone that we put on the Kevorim of the people that we love. Why use the word Matzeivah?

In the Darash Moshe in the first volume on Parshas Shoftim he has a very nice Kavanah in the Remez of Matzeivah and Mizbaiach, he is not talking about a Matzeivah at a cemetery, he is talking about a Matzeivah as a place from which to serve Hashem. If we learn this Rav Moshe we will have a tremendous insight into a Matzeivah in a Bais Hakvares.

Rav Moshe writes that a Matzeivah is a single stone and a Mizbaiach consists of many stones as a symbol. Something built of many stones symbolizes continued building. When something is made of many bricks one can continue to build it higher and higher. It’s something that has the ability to be extended and still retain its identity. It will be a Mizbaiach no matter how many additional stones are added to it.

A Matzeivah is made out of a single stone, it can’t be enlarged and still be a Matzeivah of a single stone. If you add stones it will become a Mizbaiach. Therefore, Matzeivah symbolizes an accomplishment while Mizbaiach symbolizes continuous accomplishments.

Before Matan Torah says Rav Moshe, if someone kept Mitzvos and kept the Torah, he had an accomplishment. Let’s say somebody (as the Avos did) keeps Shabbos for awhile, or keeps the Mitzvah of Kashrus, he has an accomplishment. If he does it for 10 years and then stops for the rest of his life, before Matan Torah whatever he did was a set accomplishment that he had symbolized by a Matzeivah.

After Matan Torah it is not that way. If somebody keeps the Mitzvah of Kashrus for 10 years, he hasn’t accomplished anything yet. If for the rest of his life he abandons it, then he does not have an accomplishment. When we keep the Mitzvos of Kashrus, Taharas Hamishpacha, Shabbos, Learning, Davening, any Mitzvah, we are adding stones to a building which we all ultimately hope will grow to great heights. All of our accomplishments can only be symbolized by a Mizbaiach. If it was before Matan Torah and there was no Chiyuv, where a person keeping Mitzvas had so to speak a Matzeivah, a set accomplishment which could not later be changed.

Says Rav Moshe, that is the reason why before Matan Torah it was (אהובה לו בימי האבות) it was something which was beloved, it was a set finished accomplishment. However, after Matan Torah, whatever we accomplish we have to see as a means to keep on building and keep on accomplishing. Ad Kan Divrei Rav Moshe, a tremendous insight into the symbolism of Matzeiva and Mizbaiach.

Let us take it to our discussion. Isn’t it strange that a Matzeivah would be put on a resting place of someone who passed away when the Torah says (וְלֹא-תָקִים לְךָ, מַצֵּבָה, אֲשֶׁר שָׂנֵא, יְרוָר אֱלֹקֶיךָ)? We can say no, it is not strange at all. During a person’s lifetime his accomplishments have to keep on growing and therefore the idea of a Matzeivah of being finished is inappropriate. When someone passes away, his lifetime is done and he has finished his accomplishments and we put up a Matzeivah as if to say, Leich B’shalom, go with what you have already accomplished.

As a matter of fact this is why there is a custom to place onto the Matzeivah etchings or writings which tell us about the person’s accomplishments, because that is a Matzeiva, a symbol of his accomplishments which indeed are finished once a person passes from this world he has no further ability to accomplish. That is the purpose of the Matzeivah.  

Perhaps we can add one more Nikuda which someone suggested so beautifully. There is a Minhag by Yidden that when you go visit a Kever, you place stones on the Matzeivah. Perhaps we can now understand it. The Matzeivah says that a person’s accomplishments are finished. We say no. If a person passed away and we learned from his actions, even after when he is the Olam Ha’emes, he can continue to accrue benefits, because the things he did in Olam Hazeh have now accomplished more and more good. So that we are putting stones on a Matzeivah as if to say the accomplishments are not finished. There are additional accomplishments (Zechusim) that can be added. When we go to a Kever of someone we love, we say we are going to learn from your Maasim and add Zechusim and perhaps that is symbolized by the adding of the stones to the Matzeivah. This is a thought regarding the Matzeivah which Yaakov put on the Kever of Rochel.

Jews in Booths - Vayishlach 5771

33:16 – 17 The Posuk says after the confrontation with Eisav (טז  וַיָּשָׁב בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא עֵשָׂו לְדַרְכּוֹ, שֵׂעִירָה יז  וְיַעֲקֹב נָסַע סֻכֹּתָה, וַיִּבֶן לוֹ בָּיִת; וּלְמִקְנֵהוּ עָשָׂה סֻכֹּת, עַל-כֵּן קָרָא שֵׁם-הַמָּקוֹם סֻכּוֹת) that afterwards Eisav went to Sai’ir and Yaakov went to a place called Sukkos. This seems to be an incidental part of Yaakov’s life that he went to a place called Sukkos. Yet we find that Yaakov is somehow identified with this place called Sukkos.

We know that the Sholosh Regalim are K’negged the 3 Avos. Pesach is K’negged Avraham as we find at the beginning of Parshas Vayeira. Yitchok who is Gevura is related to Shavuos. Yaakov is identified by Sukkos. The fact that this incident took place in Sukkos seems to be incidental and certainly needs explanation. 

In the Sefer Yismach Yisrael there is a beautiful explanation of the confrontation between Eisav and Yaakov and the fact that it ends (יז  וְיַעֲקֹב נָסַע סֻכֹּתָה). The Yismach Yisrael brings a Tanna D’vei Eliyahu Zuta, a B’raissa in Perek 19. Essentially, it says that Eisav and Yaakov divided the existence of Olam Hazeh and Olam Habah.  Eisav chose the benefits and pleasures of Olam Hazeh and Yaakov the Schar of Olam Habah. Yaakov was willing to forgo the pleasures of Olam Hazeh for the benefit of Olam Habah. That is what he has given to us, Klal Yisrael his descendents.

For that reason says the Tanna D’vei Eliyahu, every time Yaakov or his descendents begin to have success in the pursuit of Olam Hazeh or begin to seek pleasures of Olam Hazeh, there is a confrontation with Eisav or his descendents.  

Here too, Yaakov comes as a wealthy man and Eisav confronts Yaakov and says 33:8 (וַיֹּאמֶר, מִי לְךָ כָּל-הַמַּחֲנֶה הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר פָּגָשְׁתִּי) where do you get all of this, I thought Olam Hazeh is mine?

The response of Yaakov and it also has to be the response of the generations is a response that Olam Hazeh is a Tafeil, a means of serving Hakadosh Baruch Hu and getting to Olam Habah. The pursuit of Olam Hazeh as long as it is a pursuit of a nice car for the good feeling that it is a nice car, as long as the pursuit of money for the sake of being wealthy, as long as it is a pursuit of building a home of nice fancy windows and fancy homes, that is Eisav’s Cheilek in this world. We are intruding on Eisav and living the life of Eisav. To the extent that we are pursuing the benefits of Olam Hazeh as a means of serving Hashem, to the extent that we use the pleasures to bring us to a Matziv Haruach to serve Hakadosh Baruch Hu better, that is fine. The condition is that the pleasures of this world have to be a Tafeil. They have to be secondary. 

At the end of the confrontation (יז  וְיַעֲקֹב נָסַע סֻכֹּתָה) there is a Remez in the fact that he goes to Sukkos. The idea that the Sukka is a temporary hut. All of Olam Hazeh to Yaakov, all the material pursuits whatever he had, his wealth, was only a temporary thing. It is a means of going to Olam Habah. Indeed the Posuk says (וְיַעֲקֹב נָסַע סֻכֹּתָה, וַיִּבֶן לוֹ בָּיִת), for the human beings he built homes. For his flock and cattle he built Sukkos (וּלְמִקְנֵהוּ עָשָׂה סֻכֹּת, עַל-כֵּן קָרָא שֵׁם-הַמָּקוֹם סֻכּוֹת). Why is he naming the place based on a building that was built for the animals? The Sukkos is the source of the naming of the city, however, since the human beings lived in a Bayis the city should have been called Batim? Why is the city named Sukkos after what he put the animals (i.e. money) into?

The Teretz is that is the whole point. All of Yaakov’s material pursuits were Sukkos. In fact, throughout Tanach and even in the Siddur we find the word Sukkos meaning Olam Hazeh for Klal Yisrael. The Posuk in Amos 9:11 ( בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא, אָקִים אֶת-סֻכַּת דָּוִיד הַנֹּפֶלֶת; וְגָדַרְתִּי אֶת-פִּרְצֵיהֶן, וַהֲרִסֹתָיו אָקִים, וּבְנִיתִיהָ, כִּימֵי עוֹלָם). Even the Malchus Bais Dovid is a Sukka, a temporary thing, a means to an end.

Or in Tehillim 76:3 ( וַיְהִי בְשָׁלֵם סוּכּוֹ;    וּמְעוֹנָתוֹ בְצִיּוֹן).  (SEE MY NOTES ON THIS PASSUK - ER) We talk about the Sukka of Klal Yisrael in the Siddur by Maariv (וּפְרוש עָלֵינוּ סֻכַּת שְׁלומֶךָ). All of our pursuits of Olam Hazeh are seen as temporary and this is the legacy of Yaakov. This is why Yaakov’s name is known by the Yom Tov of Sukkos where this lesson is found. If so (וְיַעֲקֹב נָסַע סֻכֹּתָה) is a major event with which the entire confrontation with Eisav comes to an end.

Kevel Rochel Questions - Vayishlach 5770

35:19 Rachel is not buried in Me’oras Hamachpeila. Kever Rachel is south of Yerushalayim. Rashi in Parshas Vayechi in 48:7 tells us, Yaakov tells Yosef that (וַאֲנִי בְּבֹאִי מִפַּדָּן, מֵתָה עָלַי רָחֵל בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן בַּדֶּרֶךְ, בְּעוֹד כִּבְרַת-אֶרֶץ, לָבֹא אֶפְרָתָה; וָאֶקְבְּרֶהָ שָּׁם בְּדֶרֶךְ אֶפְרָת, הִוא בֵּית לָחֶם). Meaning, when I came from Padan, Rochel died on the road, when there was a stretch of land, before coming to Ephros, I buried her there on the road to Ephros. Why did Yaakov bury Rochel there on the road? Rashi says, (שתהא לעזרה לבניה כשיגלה אותם נבוזראדן). Meaning, so that Rochel might help her descendants when Nevuzaradon would send them into exile and they would pass by her grave. When the Yidden were going out of Yerushalayim to Bavel why would they pass Kever Rochel, Bavel was north or east and not south?  

Another problem is, the Ramban says in this weeks Parsha that Yaakov Avinu buried her there so that she should be buried in the Cheilek of Binyamin. The Cheilek of Binyamin was above Yehuda and as we know from the Gemara in Maseches Makkos, the dividing line was the Mizbaiach. So anything south of Yerushalayim is not Cheilek Binyamin it is Cheilek Yehuda. So how does the Ramban fit?

A third question is, there is another Ramban that says the Avos kept the Torah when they were in Eretz Yisrael. That is why when Yaakov Avinu came to Eretz Yisrael, he lost one of his wives. He had married sisters and that was fine for Chutz L’aretz, however, not for Eretz Yisrael. This is why when Hashem told Yaakov to leave the house of Lavan he had to ask Rishus from his wives, because he knew it was a Sakana to them, to be married to sisters in Eretz Yisrael.

The Ramban says that Rochel died when Yaakov Avinu entered Eretz Yisrael. Kever Rochel is not on the boundary of Eretz Yisrael at all. It is surrounded by plenty of Eretz Yisrael? Rochel was pregnant and was carrying Binyamin. We know from Parshas Shemos that Dinei Shamayim is not taken out on someone who is pregnant, the person doesn’t die and the baby is born. Perhaps, when she entered Eretz Yisrael there was a Din that she should die, however, she had to give birth first, and that is why her death occurred later.

Yaakov & Yisroel - Vayishlach 5770

The Chasam Sofer has a Gevaldige insight and Havana into the difference between the way Hashem and the Sar Shel Eisav gave the name. Yisrael is a name of Kedushah and Yaakov is the more Pashuta name. The 22 years that Yosef was away, since the Sh’chinah was not Sh’ruyah, Yaakov was called “Yaakov” the more Pashuta name. He starts to be called Yisroel, when he finds out that Yosef is alive.

In Parshas Vayigash in 45:27-28 (כז  וַיְדַבְּרוּ אֵלָיו, אֵת כָּל-דִּבְרֵי יוֹסֵף אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֲלֵהֶם, וַיַּרְא אֶת-הָעֲגָלוֹת, אֲשֶׁר-שָׁלַח יוֹסֵף לָשֵׂאת אֹתוֹ; וַתְּחִי, רוּחַ יַעֲקֹב אֲבִיהֶם כח  וַיֹּאמֶר, יִשְׂרָאֵל, רַב עוֹד-יוֹסֵף בְּנִי, חָי; אֵלְכָה וְאֶרְאֶנּוּ, בְּטֶרֶם אָמוּת) is when Yaakov is notified that Yosef is still alive, and that is when it says, (וַיֹּאמֶר, יִשְׂרָאֵל, רַב עוֹד-יוֹסֵף בְּנִי, חָי). There is a Gematria that Yaakov + Satan (meaning when Yaakov conquered the Satan) = Yisroel. Yisroel is Merameiz to Yeish Shishim Ribui B’Toirah, meaning Kol Hatoirah Kulai. Yaakov is Merameiz the Ayin Kuf Bais Taivos of the Aseres Hadibros. When the Sar Shel Eisav gives the name it is interesting, he says (לֹא יַעֲקֹב יֵאָמֵר עוֹד שִׁמְךָ--כִּי, אִם-יִשְׂרָאֵל). Hakadoish Baruch Hu adds something. If we would only have the Posuk of the Sar Shel Eisav we would only have Yisroel and Yaakov would no longer be a name for him.

The Gemarah Darshuns in Maseches B’rachois on 12b (bottom line) to 13a, that what does Hashem mean by, (לֹא-יִקָּרֵא שִׁמְךָ עוֹד יַעֲקֹב)? Even though he has the name Yisroel, he shouldn’t lose the name Yaakov, however, it is not the Ikur name. I would think that because of the higher Madreiga of the name Yisroel, that Hashem would only want the name to be Yisroel and Sar Shel Eisav should only want the name Yaakov?

When Klal Yisroel is Yisroel, it is a rare occurrence, as Klal Yisroel rarely has perfection. A person has to be a Yaakov also, because of times that he is falling in his Avoidas Hashem. In the Haftoirah for Parshas Sh’mois, found in Yeshayah, 27:6, it says, (הַבָּאִים יַשְׁרֵשׁ יַעֲקֹב, יָצִיץ וּפָרַח יִשְׂרָאֵל). Meaning Yaakov is the Shoiresh of the people who came down to Mitzrayim. Later when they reach a higher Madreiga, to bud and become beautiful, then the Darga of Yisroel is reached.

Heart In The East - Vayeitzei 5772

Eretz Yisrael is called the place that Einei Elokecha Ba Mairaishis Shana Ad Acharis Shana, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu’s eyes are Kavayachul on Eretz Yisrael and we too if our hearts are towards Eretz Yisrael it is as if we are there.

The Gemara in Maseches Kesuvos 75a (9 lines from the bottom) Darshuns the Posuk from Tehillim 87:5 ((תהילים פז) ולציון יאמר איש ואיש יולד בה והוא יכוננה עליון א"ר מיישא בר בריה דר' יהושע בן לוי אחד הנולד בה ואחד המצפה לראותה). The Posuk in Tehillim says regarding Tzion regarding Yerushalayim that the Goyim say all you are born there so the Gemara Darshuns not only one who is born there but someone who has in his heart a strong desire to be there and see Yerushalayim it is as if he was born there and is a citizen of Yerushalayim. Rashi says that (ולציון יאמר. משום דאיירי בה רבי מיישא נקיט לה ולציון יאמר איש ואיש יולד בה לעתיד לבא כשיתקיים מקרא שכתוב והביאו את כל אחיכם מנחה לה' וגו' כל מקום שימצאו שם ישראל יאמרו העמים זהו מבני ציון זה יולד בה נביאנו שם). Rashi says that in later days the Goyim will look at Yidden and whoever wants to be in Eretz Yisrael, whoever has a (Teshuka) a desire will be called Bnei Tzion. So this is the idea that where a person has his heart set, in a certain sense it is as if he is there.

Here too, Yaakov Avinu was now heading back to Eretz Yisroel and his heart mind was on Eretz Yisrael. He was eager to return even from a distance. At that moment the Malachim returned to him the Malachim of Eretz Yisrael came to him K’ilu (as if) he was actually there

Bli Neder - Vayeitzei 5772

We find that when Yaakov sleeps at Har Hamoriah 28:20 (וַיִּדַּר יַעֲקֹב, נֶדֶר לֵאמֹר: אִם-יִהְיֶה אֱלֹקים עִמָּדִי, וּשְׁמָרַנִי בַּדֶּרֶךְ הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי הוֹלֵךְ, וְנָתַן-לִי לֶחֶם לֶאֱכֹל, וּבֶגֶד לִלְבֹּשׁ). That he makes a Neder that if Hakadosh Baruch Hu is with him 28:22 (וְהָאֶבֶן הַזֹּאת, אֲשֶׁר-שַׂמְתִּי מַצֵּבָה--יִהְיֶה, בֵּית אֱלֹקים; וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר תִּתֶּן-לִי, עַשֵּׂר אֲעַשְּׂרֶנּוּ לָךְ) and this stone, which I have set up for a pillar, shall be Hashem’s house.

Rav Schorr in the Ohr Gedalyahu in Parshas Mattos writes an important Yesod. He says that there is a rule that any concept which is original in the Torah has its Chashivus, has its importance by the first place where it is mentioned.  This is a concept that Rav Schorr mentions in numerous places in the name of Rav Tzaddok. Nedarim, taking an oath, is mentioned here for the very first time. (וַיִּדַּר יַעֲקֹב, נֶדֶר לֵאמֹר).

And in line with Rav Tzaddok’s thought, the point Rav Schorr makes is that the purpose of the Parsha of Nedarim, the idea that there is a Parsha in the Torah regarding oaths, regarding swearing, regarding making promises, is because the purpose of the oath is for it to be done in the way that Yaakov did it. For it to be done in a manner that causes a person to be a Zariz in serving Hashem. It causes a person to be reminded and be reinforced in his commitment to serve Hakadosh Baruch Hu. That is the purpose of a Neder. As you know we don’t take oaths lightly, so the idea of taking an oath as a matter of business or the like is something we avoid. So where is the Parsha of Nedarim as a positive idea? Where is the thought of taking an oath as something constructive? (וַיִּדַּר יַעֲקֹב, נֶדֶר לֵאמֹר) When it is done in the manner that Yaakov Avinu does it here. This is the Yesod.

Rav Schorr adds that based on this we can understand this which we find in Tehillim 132:2 (אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע, לַירוָר; נָדַר, לַאֲבִיר יַעֲקֹב). When Dovid takes an oath he says I swore to Hashem, I took a Neder to the Lord of Yaakov Avinu. It doesn’t say L’avir Avrohom or L’avir Yitzchok, it says to the Lord of Yaakov Avinu. Why Yaakov? Because Yaakov started with making Nedarim and his Neder is an example of a Neder for a good reason.

If you look at Tehillim 132 it continues. When it says that Dovid Hamelech swore, what did Dovid swear, what oath did he take? 132:3 – 132:5 (ג אִם-אָבֹא, בְּאֹהֶל בֵּיתִי; אִם-אֶעֱלֶה, עַל-עֶרֶשׂ יְצוּעָי ד אִם אֶתֵּן שְׁנַת לְעֵינָי; לְעַפְעַפַּי תְּנוּמָה ה עַד-אֶמְצָא מָקוֹם, לַירוָר; מִשְׁכָּנוֹת, לַאֲבִיר יַעֲקֹב). He swore that he would have no rest until he found and acquired the place of the Bais Hamikdash. That Neder fits well with the Neder of Yaakov. Yaakov swore that if Hakadosh Baruch Hu would bring him back safely (וְהָאֶבֶן הַזֹּאת, אֲשֶׁר-שַׂמְתִּי מַצֵּבָה--יִהְיֶה, בֵּית אֱלֹקים). He swore to establish a house of Hashem and it fits beautifully that the next Neder the Neder that Dovid Hamelech mentions is also done in the same concept.

Rav Schorr adds more. He says that Parshas Mattos comes out during the 3 weeks and the Parsha of Nedarim doesn’t seem to have a connection with the 3 weeks but according to this it is good. The Parsha of Nedarim was made originally and again in the time of Dovid to establish a Beis Hamikdash and during the 3 weeks when we mourn the Beis Hamikdash it is very fitting that we should be reminded of this Parsha of Nedarim.

We find also that Dovid Hamelech said Nishbati V’akayeima Lishmor Mishp’tei Tzidkecha, I swore and will keep to observe the Mitzvos. Again this idea, the purpose of the Parsha of Nedarim is how we find it here. It is a bit difficult to know how to put this into practice. We are afraid to make Nedarim to take an oath even for a Dvar Mitzvah and rightfully so. So what does that leave us with, what can we do? One wonders, if I make a Neder but I say Bli Neder. If I promise to do something but I say Bli Neder because I am afraid that I may not keep it. Does that have any meaning at all?  

It is interesting, if I recall correctly, there is a letter in the first volume of the Kovetz Teshuvas from Rav Elyashiv where Rav Elyashiv and his son in law Rav Chaim Kanievsky disagree on the point, they are talking there about Kabbalos Taanis, about accepting a Tannis for the following day. Rav Chaim Kanievsky apparently holds that one can do so Bli Neder and Rav Elyashiv says that it is meaningless.

I believe that Rav Reuvein Grozovsky in the Chiddushei Reb Reuvein in Nedarim at the end of Siman 1 says that this is actually dependent on a Machlokes Rishonim. Be that as it may at least according to some Rishonim we have an idea of promising to do something with a Bli Neder. In other words, taking a Kabbalah on ourselves, it is not really an oath but it is a Kabbalah to do something. If we succeed and fulfill that Kabbalah it does have extra meaning. Perhaps, this is a Mehalech (an approach) for us to try to use this Parsha.