Our Sedra, among other fascinating and dramatic episodes, details how Dina went out in search of the local young women.  Shechem, son of that city-state’s King, kidnapped and violated her.  The Passuk refers to Dina as Leah’s, and not as Yaakov’s, daughter (bas Leah, not Bas Yaakov). Rashi (based on the Medrash) comments that the Passuk is deliberately associating Dina with Leah. It is in effect conveying the message: “like mother like daughter”.  Just as Leah was a “יצאנית” so too was Dina a “יצאנית”. The word Yatzanis is probably best translated literally as “one who goes out”. The Medrash, however, clearly implies that the meaning of “יצאנית” is a provocative woman. It seems at first astonishing that the Torah should tell us that one of our Imahos Hakedoshos was in some way provocative. 

When we take a closer look at the context in which Leah is seen as being provocative, we find that Leah Imeinu not only did not do anything wrong but on the contrary acted in a praiseworthy manner.    The Torah tells us that Leah went out to meet Yaakov as he was returning home.  Chazal explain that she dressed in an extra attractive or even provocative manner in order to get Yaakov’s attention.  Leah Imeinu knew that Yaakov had planned to be with Rachel Imeinu that night and she knew that Yaakov Avinu was more attracted to Rachel; she therefore tried her best to make herself as attractive and seductive as possible to Yaakov Avinu.

While Dina may not have been acting completely virtuously in terms of her attire, she nonetheless had not intended in the slightest to be provocative. She had innocently gone out to see her peers.  Nevertheless she erred—she went out dressed in a provocative manner.

The Gemorah (Nida) discusses in several places the idea that there are certain practices that a woman must adhere to because of סרח בתה – so as not to cause her daughter to err. We may at times do things that are not only acceptable, but that may actually be good and even intended to promote virtuous behavior, without realizing their unintended consequences.  Our children, observing the mere actions, might take them out of context, or simply be unaware of their true context—and as a result, draw inaccurate conclusions and thereby act wrongly in full innocence.

Dina saw her mother dress in a provocative way, but she did not know that her mother was doing it in a very narrow and particular context. Dina took that as her model for appropriate, socially acceptable dress.

We must always take into account that while we may have a much bigger and sometimes even deeper picture of a situation than our children, our children may not see or be aware of that ‘big picture’, and therefore act on the basis of the incomplete picture. Our children only learn from us based on what they see and what they know; what they don’t know isn’t something they realize.  We must recognize this and we must make sure, no matter under what circumstances, to always show a clear example—an example that shows we are in close touch with the world of our children and the understanding capabilities they possess.

A very warm Good Shabbos, Rabbi Y. Dov Krakowski

This week’s edition is as a Zechus for the continued Refuah Shlaima of: Perel Shvartza Bas Chana.