As we approach Chanukah we need to start thinking about the meaning of and lessons to be learned from its story, particularly the roots of the story and its foundation. One question which should jump out at us is, why were the Maccabbees successful in their fight against the Seleucid-Greeks, having the ability to establish an autonomous Jewish state where they could serve Hashem and learn Torah in peace, and their descendants not successful, losing their autonomy and bringing about the destruction of the temple and exile at the hands of the Romans?

We know that the Maccabbees were great Tzdakim (Righteous People), completely dedicated to serving Hashem and learning His Torah and that this directly lead to their ability to succeed in defeating the Seleucid-Greeks. Their unwavering commitment to defend Judaism was what allowed them to prevail. But why did their descendants, the Chashmonaim, fall into the hands of the Romans? Why were they not able to maintain their stronghold – their commitment to Judaism and Torah learning? What was different between the Seleucid-Greeks and the Romans?

Their is a scary Ramban on Parshat Vayishlach, in which the Ramban comments on the story of Yaakov’s meeting with Eisav, the Ramban says:

…ואומר לו כה אמר עבדך יעקב ועל דעתי גם זה ירמוז כי אנחנו התחלנו נפילתנו ביד אדום כי מלכי בית שני באו בברית עם הרומיים ומהם שבאו ברומה והיא היתה סבת נפילתם בידם…
…and Yaakov said “So says your servant, Yaakov” and in my opinion, this is an allusion to the beginning of our fall into the hands of the Romans. Because later on in the times of the Chashmonaim, they made a pact with the Romans [against the Greeks] and this was the ultimate reason that we fell into Roman hands…

The reason that the later Chashmonaim fell apart, disconnecting themselves from the Torah, ultimately falling into Roman hands and losing our Holy Temple, is rooted in the exchange between Yaakov and Eisav so many years earlier. This exchange leads to all the destruction in the times of the Chashmonaim. But why?

In the beginning of our history, we are told about Adam. Adam has son whom he names Shet. Shet subsequently has son and names him Enosh. The Torah (Breishit 4:26) tells us,

ולשת גם-הוא ילד-בן, ויקרא את-שמו אנוש; אז הוחל, לקרא בשם יהוה
And Shet also had a son, and he named him Enosh; it was at that point that calling in the name of Hashem became profaned.

Rashi explains that this was the moment that Avodah Zarah (worshiping things other than Hashem) came into the world. Why?

My great Rebbe, Rav Nebenzahl, the chief Rabbi of the Old City and Senior Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Netiv Aryeh, explains that it was at the moment that Shet named his son Enosh that Avodah Zarah came into the world. The name Adam has a dual meaning, it means both “אדמה – soil” because man is taken from the soil and “אדמה לעליון – I compare myself to Hashem”. Adam’s name symbolizes balances the greatness of man and his humble beginnings. His son’s name, Shet, comes from the same root as “אבן השתייה – the Foundation Stone” representing the greatness of mankind as the foundation of creation. However, the name Enosh comes from the expression “ומכתי אנושה – a terrible wound” it focuses only on the lowliness of man. If we look at ourselves as being low, inferior beings we destroy our relationship with Hashem because we see ourselves as not being worthy and open ourselves up to all sorts of other forces that can take control over us.

When we see ourselves as inferior we bring all sorts of destruction into the world, this is what the Ramban is telling us and this is what happened to the Chashmonaim. Once the saw themselves as needing to make a pact with the Romans that was the beginning of their downfall. This is all rooted in the fact that Yaakov refers to Eisav as his “master” and himself as Eisav’s “servant” unnecessarily.

There is just one problem with this whole explanation: A few psukim later (32:11) Yaakov speaks to Hashem and says,

קטנתי מכל החסדים, ומכל-האמת, אשר עשית, את-עבדך
I am unworthy of all the goodness you have given me and of all the justice you have done with me, Your servant.

Didn’t we just get through saying that a person shouldn’t make themselves look inferior? That at the root of all destruction is the fact that Yaakov belittles himself? Why is no one bothered by the fact that Yaakov expressly belittles himself?

The answer is actually very simple, and adds a new layer of understanding to our whole idea.

In the face of other people, or other forces in the world, a person can’t belittle themselves. A person should have confidence in the gifts and abilities that Hashem has given them. We need to proud and strong in our beliefs and our convictions – when we recognize that Hashem is on our side and that we are being directly powered by Him we have no right to belittle ourselves. This was the secret of the Maccabees – they were able to defeat the Seleucid-Greeks precisely because they believed in themselves and the fact that they were purely serving Hashem. But when we are in front of Hashem, who is the Source of all, it is completely appropriate, in fact praiseworthy, to see ourselves as being nothing without Him.

This is the ultimate truth of this story. There is nothing besides Hashem, no source of power, no source of life or wisdom, nothing outside of Hashem. The more we recognize this and realize that we are אדמה לעליון able to have a relationship with Him the more confident we can be because nothing has power over us except Hashem.

We have no right to belittle ourselves or think we aren’t good enough. By doing so we are actually belittling Hashem and bringing all sorts of destruction into the world. This is, in fact, one of the worst things a person can do. We need to see ourselves for the great people that we are, with limitless potential and amazing abilities. If we don’t see that and, God forbid, cut ourselves down we allow all sorts of destructive forces to gain power over us and ultimately that type of thinking can lead to the destruction of the temple, removing God from our world and the exile of the Jewish people and Hashem’s Shechina.