Yaakov heard that his daughter Dina had been mistreated and abducted. His immediate reaction was- no reaction.

וּבָנָיו הָיוּ אֶת־מִקְנֵהוּ בַּשָּׂדֶה וְהֶחֱרִשׁ יַעֲקֹב עַד־בֹּאָם׃

And his sons were in the field with his cattle, Yaacov kept silent until they came home. (34:5)

Seforno in his commentary explains that Yaakov remained silent from going out and confronting the perpetrators until his sons returned and found out what happened. In that way they could protect themselves from those they needed to confront their adversaries. This implies that as soon as Yaakov heard what happened he should have reacted. We see this also from the next verse:

וַיֵּצֵא חֲמוֹר אֲבִי־שְׁכֶם אֶל־יַעֲקֹב לְדַבֵּר אִתּוֹ׃

Then Chamor, the father of Shechem (who mistreated Dina) came out to Yaacov to speak to him. (34:6)

Here Seforno comments that seeing no reaction from Yaakov, Chamor was concerned that Yaakov was planning retribution. Therefore he took the initiative and approached Yaakov. Again we see how the expectation was for Yaakov to immediately react.

So why didn’t he? Because even in this stressful situation Yaakov remained level headed and deliberate. Because of that he realized that the smarter and safer way to approach this was together with his sons.

Here’s an illustration about not rushing into a decision. A troubling event once took place and everyone’s reaction was, "Something has to be done!" My Rosh HaYeshiva, Rabbi Elya Svei, of blessed memory commented with the following parable. A person saw a house catch fire with people trapped inside. He knew that he had to do something fast. He grabbed the closest container with liquid and he quickly doused the fire with it. To everyone’s shock and dismay, the fire erupted into an inferno. That container contained gasoline! Something may need to be done. But acting hastily can make the problem even worse.

There’s another important lesson in the parsha about how to react to challenging situations.

For mistreating their sister, Yaakov’s two sons, Shimon and Levi, did the following:

וַיְהִי בַיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי בִּהְיוֹתָם כֹּאֲבִים וַיִּקְחוּ שְׁנֵי־בְנֵי־יַעֲקֹב שִׁמְעוֹן וְלֵוִי אֲחֵי דִינָה אִישׁ חַרְבּוֹ וַיָּבֹאוּ עַל־הָעִיר בֶּטַח וַיַּהַרְגוּ כׇּל־זָכָר׃

On the third day, when they were in pain, Shimon and Levi, two of Yaakov’s sons, brothers of Dinah, each took his sword, came upon the city securely, and slew all the males. (34:25)

Yaakov chided his sons for doing this at the end of this part of the parsha and before he died.

We know that Shimon and Levi were Yaakov’s sons. Why does the Torah mention that here? The Midrash answers to teach us that although they were Yaakov’s sons they did not seek his guidance before carrying out their decision.

The Midrash is also troubled by the words שְׁנֵי־בְנֵי־יַעֲקֹב, the two sons of Yaakov. Without saying this we know that they were two! The Midrash answers that the Torah means to convey that they didn’t talk over their plans with each other. Thus they were two, meaning they didn’t come together as one to talk over their plans.

Clearly each one was comfortable with his decision and they were in agreement as to what to do. So why the need for discussion? The answer is that a common decision does not mean that both people went through the same thought process. Through discussion different insights are shared that can shed new light on the whole situation and change our way of thinking. Therefore there was a purpose for talking it over with each other. As the saying goes, two heads are better than one.

Challenging situations make thinking clearly and acting deliberately very challenging. But meeting that challenge will yield the best decisions and results for challenging situations.

Shabbat Shalom!
Yitzchak