Vayeshev 5770 – Gilayon #629
(link to original page)
Click here to
receive the weekly parsha by email each week.
Parshat Vayeshev
These
lamps are holy
and
we are not permitted to make use of them
but rather only to
see them
And we are not permitted to make use of
them, but rather only to see them, etc. And it says that the commandment is
to see the Hanukkah lamp. This means that the Hanukkah lamps give light
for each Israelite soul so that it will be able to see itself in the manner of
self-seeing needed by every human being, as it is said, "Look at three
things and you will not come to sin": the miracle of the lamps was to give
illumination to everyone whose eyes had grown too dark for seeing. The Gemara
states: "Lamp light is good for making an inspection" – i.e., lamps
are used for searching out things, for it is written, [Man's
soul is the Lord's lamp] which searches out all the innermost parts,
and see the first chapter of Pesahim. The innermost
parts refers to the point of vitality in each soul that comes from the
blessed Lord, as it is written, and He breathed into his nostrils the soul
of life – it searches the holes and cracks in a person's soul,
trying to find a proper place to spread out and give light. Thus is exactly
like the lamp-light searching for oil in the wick. And in the midrash [Pesikta] [the word hor – "hole"] is explained as deriving from the word
herut – "freedom" – as in send him free. For this point
[of vitality] – called the Lord's lamp – expels that which masks [thetruth]. Even if a person is enslaved to the evil inclination and is unaware of
the truth, he shall be able to see with the help of the Lord's lamp, which is
the commandments, which are called lamps.
(Sefat
Emet Hanukkah 5632)
With Eyes Closed and Befetah
Einayim – "At the Opening of Eyes"
Dalia Marx
Parashat Vayeshev is bounded by pairs of dreams.
It opens with Joseph's two dreams and concludes with the dreams of Pharaoh's
chamberlains. Not one of these dreams was born of a sound sleep and their
interpretations were all wrought with tension. At the very heart and center of
the parasha, interrupting the account of Joseph's adventures – which themselves
seem to have been borrowed from some nightmare – we find the story of Tamar and
Judah. Tamar waits for her father-in-law Judah befetah einayim, at the
cross roads or in some open space, but literally, "at the opening of
eyes." She hopes to be granted progeny and she hides herself behind a
scarf. Tamar waits hidden befetah einayim and the dream is her
inversion; the dream comes to reveal that which is hidden to the dreamer whose
eyes are closed.
An article I wrote about parashat Miketz1
dealt with two other dreams – those of Pharaoh. There I discussed how a dream
can open for its dreamer (and for those who are told about the dream) a rare
window into the dreamer's inner world. Now I would like to treat a different
aspect of dreams and dreaming, that of the dream as an interpretive act which
possesses a rhetorical dimension and represents particular interests.
Let us begin by examining the four dreams
told in our parasha: Joseph's first dream is naturalistic and it begins by
portraying a plausible situation: the brothers are binding sheaves together in
the field. Things soon turn surreal and unnatural in a way that invites the
brother's enmity: my sheaf arose and also stood
upright, and behold, your sheaves encircled [it] and prostrated themselves to
my sheaf (37:7).
Collecting sheaves in the field was a part of daily life, but something supernatural
happened when Joseph's sheave stood up and the other sheaves bowed down to it. Next
Joseph dreams a second dream, one involving the unnatural behavior of heavenly
bodies: Behold, I have dreamed another dream, and behold, the sun, the moon,
and eleven stars were prostrating themselves to me (37:9). How can stars,
the sun and the moon prostrate themselves, and to a human being, no
less? Joseph relates his dream, but it is his audience which says the stars are
his brothers and the sun and moon Jacob and Rachel. We readers are left only to
ask why Joseph chose to share his dream and whether he might have done so
innocently.
Now come the dreams of the chief cupbearer
and the chief baker. Their dreams portray seemingly natural and possible events
drawn from their respective professional lives. The atmosphere of the dreams
is, however, surreal. This is how the chief baker describes his dream: In my dream, behold, there were three wicker baskets on
my head. And in the topmost basket were
all kinds of Pharaoh's food, the work of a baker, and the birds were eating
them from the basket atop my head (40:16-17). The dream contains no
impossible detail, but as a whole it seems unreal.
The four dreams of our parasha are not
described directly by the biblical narrator, but rather by those who dreamt
them, as is also the case with Pharaoh and his dreams. Consequently, we are
given – from the very start – the dreamer's interpretation of the dream rather
than the content of the dream itself (allowing the contestable assumption that
"the thing itself" can be described verbally). Are the dreams
described accurately? Many of us find it difficult to put our dream experiences
into words; they are evasive and frequently non verbal. When describing our
dreams we restrain and limit them to the bounds of language and propriety (it
is not always pleasant to relate the details of an embarrassing dream). Sometimes
the special feelings that accompanied a dream are lost when it is translated
into words. According to psychoanalytic theory, the dream – as remembered by
the dreamer – is itself a product of processing and censorship. Even if we
assume it is possible to accurately describe dream experiences, could it be
that the three dreamers of our parasha exploit the retelling of their dreams for other
ends?
In one case Scripture almost explicitly
reveals the way a dream is manipulated in its telling: it was only after the
chief baker heard Joseph's optimistic interpretation of the chief cupbearer's
dream that he decided to tell his own story: Now the
chief baker saw that he had interpreted well. So he said to Joseph…
(40:16). The style of his account mimics
that of his predecessor, the chief cupbearer, apparently in expectation that
this might help him receive a favorable interpretation of his dream as well. That
expectation was, of course, dashed.
While Joseph interprets other people's
dreams, he seems incapable of interpreting his own. The meaning of his first
dream is obvious; Joseph explicitly stated that his brothers' sheaves
prostrated themselves before his own. However, the meaning of his second dream
is far from clear. Jacob scolds Joseph, What is this
dream that you have dreamed? Will we come, I, your mother, and your brothers to
prostrate ourselves to you to the ground? (37:7), but is Jacob's albeit likely identification of the
eleven stars, the moon, and the sun really incontestable? And on the other
hand, can we imagine Joseph innocently and tangentially relating the dream to
his family at the dinner table? Did he really count the stars as he dreamt?
What was the point of his sharing the dream? In other words – what is the
connection between what we see dreaming with our eyes shut and that which we
see awake and open-eyed? What is the connection between our experiences in the
enigmatic world of dreams and that which we choose to tell about our dreams (or
are able to tell about them) after we awaken?
Leaving aside the psychological issues and
the significance of how dreamers may interpret their own dreams, what might be
the rhetorical function of telling a dream to a particular audience, and what
might be the point of telling it in a certain way? Joseph could have talked
about "many stars" prostrating themselves before him, thus avoiding
the implication that his own family members would serve him. Are dreams simply
the "royal road to the unconscious," as Freud stated, or do the
telling, hearing, and interpretation of dreams also have social and even
political significance? Do dreamers exploit the telling of their dreams in
order to influence their audience in an apparently innocent fashion
("That's not what I think, just what I was shown in a dream")? Is there
something inherently manipulative in the way a dream is told and in the way the
dreamer chooses to remember it? Do dreamers have control over the way they
remember their dreams and do they shape the way dreams are told? Can a dream's
meaning be changed through its retelling?
For the moment let us leave aside the
political aspects of dream-telling and the way dreamers manipulate their
audiences when relating their dreams and instead turn to the way dreamers
manipulate themselves via their dreams. The Sages gave confused or
frightened dreamers tools with which to process their dreams. A millennium and
a half before Freud, a dictum presented in the name of R. Yonatan states:
"A person is only shown [in a dream] things from his own thoughts" (b. Berakhot 55b). At night people see the
things which they think about during the day; if they change their thoughts
they can change their dreams.2
Anyone who has ever awakened from a
frightening dream knows how troubling it can be. Sometimes the dream continues
to haunt the dreamer after its particular details have been long forgotten and
any chance of its realization has passed. The Babylonian Talmud suggests a
remedy for scary dreams, a ritual called hatavat halom [literally,
"the betterment of a dream"] that is performed before three people:
"R. Pedat said that R. Yohanan said: One who sees a dream and is
distraught should have it deciphered before three [people]" (Berakhot 55b).3 Three people and
the dreamer perform a ritual in which they repeat a formula that is supposed to
turn the dream into a good one. In it, the dreamer says, "I saw a good
dream" and the others say:
It is good and it will be good. May the
All-Merciful make it good. Let it be decreed seven times by Heaven that it
shall be good, and it will be good… (El-Am
translation)
The goal of this dialogic text, which
consists entirely of a system of speech and response by the dreamer and the
three attendees, is to transform the dream's meaning and to make it good in the
eyes of the dreamer. In their discussion of dreams and their interpretation,
the Sages offer an alternative method for dealing with such predicaments;
today, we would call it "positive thinking." That is, as soon as one
awakes one should link the dreamt scene to a positive biblical verse before any
alternative interpretations bubble up from the subconscious. For example:
R. Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who sees a
river in a dream should rise early and say: Behold I will extend peace to
her like a river (Isaiah 66:12); lest
another verse come to him first: for distress will come in like a river (59:19).
One who sees a bird in a dream should rise
early and say: As birds hovering, so will the [Lord of Hosts] protect (31:5), lest another verse occur to him first: As
a bird that wanders from her nest, etc (Proverbs
27:8). (Berakhot
56b, El-Am translation)
Many people dismiss these instructions as
expressing a kind of magical thinking that is inappropriate for rational
people, but it seems there is really something to them since our perception of
the world is itself an important part of our world. Even if we may criticize
the banality of the sentence "Think positively and things will turn out
positively," we cannot say it misses the mark. Those who have the wisdom
to interpret their experiences (both dreamt and wakeful) positively are happier
and healthier for it. Countless studies and personal anecdotes have proven that
"positive" people make there way through life's difficult events
better than those who do not share that attitude. It is not just a matter of
auto-suggestion, but rather a refusal to accept arbitrariness and determinism
in our lives and retention of the feeling of that we control our own lives.
Our lives are just like the parasha: they
begin with a dream and end passing like a dream. May the petah ha'einayim
– the "opening of eyes" – which we have been granted be valid and
worthy.
1. Dalia Marx, "To be of troubled spirit – and to
talk about it," Shabbat Shalom, Miketz issue, 5768.
2. We cannot here go into the Sages'
theory (or theories) of dreams; I will just mention that a wide variety of
opinions appears in the discussion from which I have drawn the Talmudic
quotations, ranging from "the dreams speak falsely" (based upon Zachariah 10:2) to the idea that dreams are a kind of minor prophecy.
In any case, it appears that the editor of the Talmud held that "all
dreams follow the mouth" (b. Berakhot
55b), that is to say; their significance
is determined by how they are interpreted. That is the position I take here.
3. The Jerusalem Talmud contains a similar formulation,
but there it seems to be intended to serve as a petitionary prayer that is
recited privately (Berakhot 5:1; 9a)
Dr. Dalia Marx teaches liturgy and
midrash at Hebrew Union College in Jerusalem
The Leader Must Not Have
Delusions of Perfection: King David (and, subsequently, the Messiah),
Descendent of Peretz and of Ruth the Moabite.
Rabbi Hama bar Hanina said: Why did Joseph die before his brothers? Because
he was domineering.
(Berakhot 55b)
R. Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel: Why was the kingship of Saul's
family discontinued? Because they were without blemish, for Rabbi Yohanan said
in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: One is not appointed leader over
the public unless he has a basket of impurities hanging behind him, so that
should he become self-satisfied, he can be told: "Look behind you."
(Yoma 22b)
Amram took himself Yokheved, his aunt, for a wife – The Holy One
acquiesced that a great person such as Moses should descend from a relationship
which was destined to be prohibited, because one is not appointed leader over
the public unless he has a basket of impurities hanging from his neck, lest he
be arrogant towards the people, as we found in the case of David.
(Hizkuni, Shemot
6:20)
It is proper to appoint as public official only one who is known to be
modest, humble, and patient. This is because he must deal with different people
in different and changing ways. He must love each according to his character.
If such [leaders] are not to found, but in any case brave and arrogant persons
must be appointed, they should be careful not to appoint people so
authoritarian as to feel that the appointment is theirs forever, that they are
more deserving than their neighbors because of their might; their realization
that they are assisted by their father's qualities causes their conceit and
arrogance to increase. [Rather, chose] people who know that there are persons more
deserving [to be leaders] in their society. If they deny this, someone should
be found to tell them the truth and to recall the past. As it is said in a light
and exaggerated vein, "One is not appointed leader over the public unless
there is a sack of impurities hanging behind him." This means, that even
though he himself is decent, should he become light-headed and behave haughtily
towards the public not for the sake of Heaven, we tell him, "Return and
judge yourself, and look behind you." Similarly, they said: "Why was
the kingship of Saul's family discontinued? Because it was without
blemish." – meaning a family blemish, and because of this they would behave
arrogantly toward the public – not necessarily for the sake of Heaven.
(From Beit HaBehira
of Rabeinu Menahem Hameiri, (1249-1315), on Yoma 22b).
And he answered and spoke to me, saying,
"This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel, saying: 'Not by military
force and not by physical strength, but by My spirit,' says the Lord of Hosts.
(Zechariah 4:6, from the
haftarah for the first Shabbat of Hannukah)
Just as you saw This means: that the stone was hewn from
the mountain by itself and not by human hands, and the iron was broken up,
etc.; so too will be the kingdom of the Messiah; it will not come by military
force and not by physical strength, but of its own self when the time comes.
(Metzudat David
Daniel 2:45)
And he answered…'Not by might and not by force…' –
Just as you saw the Menorah stand before you by its own accord, without any
person setting up the lamps or pouring oil into them, so too the Temple shall
be built without human effort but rather by God's spirit and will, and the
vision will be further explained to you in detail.
(ReDaK ad loc)
Peace is
not just a matter of an ethical tendency. Working for peace is a constant
cultural effort, sublime and powerful, work towards which all the most
productive forces of the nation should be directed.
(Iggrot HaRAYaH of Rav Kook, zt"l, letter 671)
Therefore the pure
righteous ones do not complain about wickedness but rather increase justice;
they do not complain about heresy, but rather increase faith; they do not
complain about ignorance, but rather increase wisdom.
(Harav Kook Ztz"l, Arpelei Tohar 27-28)
To all our readers and
supporters
We need your support in
order that the voice of a religious Zionism
committed to peace and
justice
will continue to be
heard through the uninterrupted distribution of
Shabbat Shalom
in hundreds of
synagogues, on the Internet and via email
in both Hebrew and
English.
Please send your checks
made out to “Oz VeShalom” to
Oz VeShalom-Netivot
Shalom
POB 4433 Jerusalem
91043
Please specify on the
back of the check that the contribution is for the funding of Shabbat Shalom.
For further details
(including the possibility of dedicating an issue, tax deductible status, etc.)
please contact Miriam Fine by email ozshalom@netvision.net.il or by
phone: at 0523920206.
Thank You
The Editorial Board of Shabbat
Shalom
Oz VeShalom – Netivot
Shalom
Shabbat Shalom is
available on our website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il
If you wish to subscribe
to the email English editions of Shabbat Shalom, to print copies of it for
distribution in your synagogue, to inquire regarding the dedication of an
edition in someone’s honor or memory, to find out how to make tax-exempt
donations, or to suggest additional helpful ideas, please call +972-52-3920206
If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards
its publication and distribution.
- Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $700
- English edition distributed via email $ 100
Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc.
Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in
advance to appear in the English email.
In Israel, checks payable to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz
VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043.
US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made
through:
New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA
New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD,
Great Britain
Please note that the NIF is no longer accepting donations under $100
PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations
should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite
607, New York, New York 10017 USA
All contributions to either the NIF or PEF should be marked as
donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project. For Donations
to NIF, please mention that Oz veShalom is registered as no. 5708.
About
us
Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of
a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of
tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to
Jewish tradition and law.
Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of
Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes
that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the
pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a
fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an
option but an imperative.
4,500 copies
of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are written
and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to over
350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is
www.netivot-shalom.org.il.