Moral lessons from parshat Vayishlach

Summary: Once again, focusing on the moral lessons one can derive from the parsha, selected from Ralbag's commentary. Because too much attention to dikduk, peshat and derash can leave us without inspiration. A very small selection from his lessons learned from Yaakov's confrontation with Esav, and then a "fun" one from the tale of Dinah.

Post: Regarding the meeting with Esav:

[1] The first purpose is in traits, and that is that it is fitting for one who has an enemy and wishes to remove the enmity from him, that he bring him close to him with all strength, and relate to him his interests. For this causes hearts to draw together, that he did not hold this back. For a person only informs of the details of his interests to his friend, and withholds this from an enemy. And this thus imprints in his heart that he is his friend, and so his heart will break and his enmity will go away from him. And therefore you find that Yaakov sent malachim to Esav to inform him of his interests, in order to place into his heart that he was his friend.

 [2] The second purpose is in traits, and that is that it is fitting for a person to be ever fearful and to judge matters as they can be in the worst case possible, in order to understand, to take counsel on how to escape it. Do you not see that Yaakov, when he heard that Esav his brother was traveling towards him, with 400 men with him, was afraid that they were coming to harm him. And this was even though this was preceded by Hashem's informing him that He would protect him, and be with him. And that is was possible, as well, to judge that he {=Esav} was coming to honor and guard him. And therefore he made himself wise to take counsel on this according to what was possible.  

And regarding the incident with Dinah:

[4] The fourth purpose is in traits, and that is that it is not fitting for a woman to go out of her house. Do you not see what happened of degradation to Dinah when she went out to see the daughters of the land, together with the fact that this was almost the cause for the destruction of the entirety of her father's house, if Hashem had not been there for them?

While these lessons can indeed be drawn from the parsha, I am hesitant to endorse them in all instances. Yes, [1] worked for Yaakov. Although some meforshim criticize Yaakov for even awakening Esav in the first place. But not every enemy should be informed of one's interests. While confiding in others, those distant to oneself, can help bring them closer, for some people this in absolutely the worst thing to do. It can give them enough information to bring about one's downfall. It absolutely depends on the person and the situation. And the danger of gleaning psychological insights from the parsha is that one might come to view it as absolute and apply it without discrimination.

Point [2] may seem like advice to be a pessimist, always planning for the worst. But this is not really expecting the worst, but rather trying to figure out all scenarios, including worst-case scenarios. And this can be good advice.

In terms of point [4], regarding Dinah, I would expect that some modern readers would take offense. And I think it is indeed a troubling lesson, and one that blames the victim. And despite midrashim on vateitzei Dinah, I am not convinced that the intent of the Torah was to criticize her. And note how Ralbag is talking about even leaving the house! On the other hand, he is coming from a very different culture. But back to the first hand, if these lessons can be so subjective, how can we really tell in the general case that these are coming from the text, or that these are really lessons that we are intended to learn from the Biblical narrative?