Parashat Vayishlach

Towards the end of our parasha, we find the genealogy leading from Esav to Amalek.

בראשית לו:יב וְתִמְנַע הָיְתָה פִילֶגֶשׁ לֶאֱלִיפַז בֶּן-עֵשָׂו, וַתֵּלֶד לֶאֱלִיפַז, אֶת-עֲמָלֵק

Breishit 36:12 And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz, Esau's son; and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek.

Amalek is the nation that tried to destroy b'nai yisrael  during our desert wanderings, and is our enemy.  So who is this Timna, Amalek's mother?  We know that chazal almost universally view Esav as evil, and therefore it makes sense that Amalek would come from the line of Esav.   We learn about Timna in the gemara:

סנהנדרין צט

היא בָעיָא לאִיגַּיוֹרֵי. בָאֲתָה אצל אברהם יצחק ויעקב ולא קִבלוּהָ. הלכה והיתה פילגש לאליפז בן עשו. אמרה מוטב תהא שפחה לאומה זו ולא תהא גבִירה לאומה אחרת. נפק מינה עמלק דצַעֲרִינהו לישראל. מאי טעמא? דלָא אִיבַעֵי להו לרַחֲקָהּ

רשי: לרחקה - מתחת כנפי השכינה שהיה להם לגַיירָה

Sanhedrin 99b:  Desiring to become a proselyte, she went to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but they did not accept her. So she went and became a concubine to Eliphaz the son of Esau, saying, 'I would rather be a servant to this people than a mistress of another nation.' From her Amalek was descended who afflicted Israel. Why so? — Because they should not have rejected her.

In this text, we learn that Timna wanted to convert to Judaism, but that when she approached our forefathers over the generations, they each rejected her in turn. Since the nation descending from Esav was destined to serve the Jewish people, she chose to become a concubine to Esav's son. She wanted to be close to the Jewish people, and serving the Jewish people was as close as she could get since she could not gain entry. She preferred this to living in another community altogether, even if she would have a higher status there. Our forefathers must have sensed something about her spiritual level to reject, her, right? Well yes, they clearly had their reasons, but was it the best decision to reject her? The Talmud teaches that there were grave repercussions; this rejection led to the birth of the nation of Amalek, leading to death and destruction in the Jewish community.
This theme of rejection is echoed another place in the gemara, although here it is about excluding students from Jewish education based on their spiritual level.  Rabban Gamliel had been the head of the beit midrash, and he was replaced by Elazar Ben Azaria.  We learn:

ברכות כח א

אותו היום סִלקוהו לשומר הפתח ונִתנה להם רשות לתלמידים ליכנס שהיה ר"ג מכריז ואומר "כל תלמיד שאין תוכו כברו לא יכנס לבית המדרש." ההוא יומא אִתוַספו כמה ספסלי. א"ר יוחנן פליגי בה אבא יוסף בן דוסתאי ורבנן: חד אמר אִתוַספו ארבע מאה ספסלי וחד אמר שבע מאה ספסלי. הוה קא חלשא דַעֲתיה דר"ג. אמר: דלמא ח"ו מָנַעתי תורה מישראל

Brachot 28a
On that day the doorkeeper was removed and permission was given to the disciples to enter. For Rabban Gamaliel had issued a proclamation [saying]: No disciple whose character does not correspond to his exterior may enter the Beth ha-Midrash. On that day many stools were added. R. Johanan said: There is a difference of opinion on this matter between Abba Joseph b. Dosetai and the Rabbis: one [authority] says that four hundred stools were added, and the other says seven hundred. Rabban Gamaliel became alarmed and said: Perhaps, God forbid, I withheld Torah from Israel!

In this talmudic story, we see a similar theme to the previous sugya, which hints at potential damage done with exclusionary practices in schools as opposed to exclusionary practices with converts.  Both of these stories point to the value of inclusion.  In fact, it's not just a "nice thing" to be careful when it comes to including people.  There can be terrible consequences to not including people.  Rabban Gamliel was in the practice of determining whether a potential student was the "same on the inside as on the outside," meaning his outward actions mirrored his inner character.  Clearly this would be difficult for a regular person to determine about a student, but Rabban Gamliel was a good judge, much the same as our forefathers were probably good judges of Timna.  Nonetheless, when Rabban Gamliel sees how many students came to study when the doors were more open, he laments his past ways.  The gemara goes on to assert that the new students should have, indeed, been previously considered worthy of entering the beit midrash.

Through these two stories, I hope we can all be inspired with a sense of good will to one another when it comes to working together in communities with people we might not otherwise be involved with.  We should remember that our actions can have grave consequences, and weigh our decisions towards our fellow human beings carefully.  It is my prayer that through treating one another in a more welcoming fashion, we can contribute to healing the many rifts in our community.