AND JOSEPH SAID TO

HIS BROTHERS, "I AM JOSEPH. IS MY FATHER STILL ALIVE?"… HASTEN AND

GO UP TO MY FATHER, AND SAY TO HIM, 'SO SAID YOUR SON, JOSEPH: "GOD HAS

MADE ME A LORD OVER ALL THE EGYPTIANS. COME DOWN TO ME, DO NOT TARRY. AND YOU

SHALL DWELL IN THE LAND OF GOSHEN… AND I WILL SUSTAIN YOU THERE FOR THERE ARE

STILL FIVE YEARS OF FAMINE LEST YOU BECOME IMPOVERISHED, YOU AND YOUR HOUSEHOLD

AND ALL THAT IS YOURS."

(Bereishit 45)

Exile

as a Contingent Constraint or a Formative Factor?

lest you become impoverished, you and your household and all that is yours – Joseph said this by way of

respect for his father. To his brothers he said, For

God did send me before you to preserve life, and to give you a remnant,

but to his father he did not want to say so. Instead, he said that, "if

you will delay in the land of Canaan you will be impoverished for I could not

send you much food from the royal storehouse as they will suspect me of selling

it there in order to accumulate treasures of money and then return to my

birthplace. But when you come here, and they will know that you are my father

and brothers, the king will give me permission to sustain you."

(RaMBaN Bereishit

45:11, Chavel translation)

"By the two selaim of silk" – as our Sages put it (Shabbat 10b) – that Jacob spent on the

embroidery of Joseph's coat the brit ben habetarim came to be

fulfilled. In Canaan the family of Jacob could hardly have developed into a

nation. As they grew in numbers they would have been scattered among the

inhabitants. To become a nation without intermingling, they had to come in the

midst of a nation, whose members, in principle as a nation, were opposed to the

whole nature of the Jews, and this was Egypt. In the same way the fanatic

bigotry which built the ghettos was the most active means in God's hands to

keep us far from the lack of culture of the Middle Ages, and in confined

circles to nurse the sense of family life and family happiness and the sense of

communal life in us…And finally, the first as well as the last Galut arose out of jealousy and causeless hatred which was

the reason for the fate of the harsh melting-pot which they all had to endure,

and become purified in the school of the bitterest suffering to feelings of

equality and brotherhood.

(Rabbi S.R. Hirsch on Bereishit 45:11,

following Levi translation)

Al tiragzu baderekh

Pinchas Leiser

After Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers and asked them to

bring their father he equipped them with wagon loads of food and clothing and

sent them off, telling them, Do not become quarrelsome[al

tirgzu] on the way.

The biblical commentators of various generations have attempted to

explain the meaning of this send off.

Following the RaMBaM, Rabbi Yitzhak Shemuel Reggio, a 19^th

century Italian exegete writes:

al tirgzu – this refers to fear, and it says that the

fact that they are carrying grain, bread, and food during a draught should not

lead them to be afraid of bandits on the road, and similarly during their

return [to Egypt] when they will be taking all of their possessions with them. They

should remember that he is the governor of all the land of Egypt and he holds

the life of all those lands in his hands. All will be in dread of his fearfulness,

and therefore they [Joseph's family] will come and go in peace.

RaShBaM interprets the word tiragzu similarly, but gives a different explanation

of why they need not fear:

al tirgzu – do not be afraid at all of

bandits on the road, because I am at peace from every direction.

Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch takes a similar approach:

Go on your way in good spirit and do not worry about the future.

What can assuage fear? Joseph's fearfulness? Peaceful relations? Faith and hope?

Perhaps each commentator chose the calming factor with which he was

acquainted. In contrast to these, Ibn Ezra

writes:

The meaning of al tirgzu

– lest each one be angry with his brothers because of his [Joseph's]

having been sold.

Rashi and others think that this is

the plain meaning of the text, but Rashi mentions two

midrashic explanations found in the tractate Ta'anit (10b) before explaining the plain meaning:

Do not quarrel on the way – Do not engage in a halakhic discussion lest the way cause you to stray.

Another explanation: Do not walk with large steps, and enter the city

while the sun is shining.

According to the simple meaning of the verse, we can say that since they

were ashamed, he (Joseph) was concerned that they would perhaps quarrel on the

way about his being sold, debating with one another, and saying, "Because

of you he was sold. You slandered him and caused us to hate him." (Judaica Press translation)

ShaDaL (Italy, 19^th century)

surveys the uses of the root ragaz throughout

Scripture and chooses Rashi's plain reading of the

verse.

If we consider the Joseph's words in their broader context, we can find

that the emotions aroused in the brothers when Joseph made himself known to

his brothers fall into a certain sequence. First:

…but his brothers could not answer him because they were startled

by his presence. (45:3)

The initial shock and panic arose, perhaps, from a combination of

anxiety, confusion, and guilt feelings. Joseph feels the need to address

these feelings of guilt and calms them:

But now do not be sad, and let it not trouble you that you sold me here,

for it was to preserve life that God sent me before you.

For already two years of famine [have passed] in the midst of the land,

and [for] another five years, there will be neither plowing nor harvest.

And God sent me before you to make for you a remnant in the land, and to

preserve [it] for you for a great deliverance.

And now, you did not send me here, but God, and

He made me a father to Pharaoh, a lord over all his household, and a ruler over

the entire land of Egypt. (45:5-7)

Joseph is telling his brothers: In fact, my sale was organized "from

Above"

Perhaps we may therefore perceive the shock and panic that develop into

feelings of guilt. The feeling of guilt can certainly arouse fear of

punishment, and the need to ward off strong feelings of guilt over the sale of

Joseph might generate reciprocal accusations amongst the brothers. Therefore it

is possible to view the various interpretations, beyond their philological

content, as relating to different points upon a continuum of emotions.

It is interesting to note that Rashi chose the

midrashic gloss, "Do not engage in a halakhic discussion" as his first and preferred

interpretation.

True, Rashi (on Bereishit

37:17) states that "a

Biblical verse never loses its plain sense, but sometimes – here, for example –

he mentions a midrashic interpretation before giving

the plain interpretation of a verse. Apparently, he does so because he believes

that here the Sages' midrash

has something of great importance to teach us.

On the one hand, we are left with the task of understanding Rabbi Elazar's dictum (from Ta'anit

10b) that Rashi cites; on the other hand, we must think about the

significance of the exegetical choices Rashi made in

connection with our verse.

What is the connection between engagement in halakhic

conversation and rogzat ha'aretz

In their commentaries on the Talmud, Rashi and

others (e.g., the Meiri) point out the need to pay

attention to the route of one's journey and warn that engagement in halakhic conversation might cause one to lose one's way. The

authors of the Tosafot mention an opposing derasha which points out the dangers of ceasing

to engage in halakhic discourse, and they write: "Do

not desist from halakhic discourse." The Gemara itself first brings a statement in the name of Rabbi

Elai that appears to contradict Rabbi Elazar's dictum and then attempts to strike a compromise

between the two opposing positions.

The MaHaRaShA, and Rabbi Adin

Steinsaltz in his wake, point out the possible danger

of halakhic disagreements leading to quarrels. Indeed,

one should not discount the possibility of a halakhic

controversy coming to take on a personal dimension; it may be affected by irrelevant

factors and influence the relationship between the parties to the disagreement.

The Talmud offers us explicit literary descriptions of this phenomenon, telling

us how the lives of Rabbi Yohanan and Resh Lakish ended in tragedy and

how the great Rabbi Eliezer was placed under a ban in

the story of Tanuro shel

Achnai'i.

True, we are all familiar with the braita

that is employed as a prayer and introduction to the Kaddish

DeRabbanan, which proclaims that "Torah

scholars increase peace in the world," but it may be assumed that this

describes an ideal that is not always realized. That is why Rabbi Elazar (perhaps the same Rabbi Elazar

ideal of "Torah scholars increase peace in the world" and who tried

unsuccessfully to reconcile and calm Rabbi Yohanan

after the death of his beloved student-colleague, Resh

Lakish) said: while on the way – do not engage in halakhic discussion. Journeying requires that people

walk together, and the unnecessary tension that halakhic

discourse can generate should be avoided. The tensions could harm the

possibility of walking together and accomplishment of the shared goal.

If so, what is the connection between this midrashic

dictum and the instruction Joseph gives his brothers? Did the Sages really

think that Joseph's brothers were yeshiva students who wrangled over a

difficult passage of Tosafot?

I think that Rabbi Elazar understood that in

every generation the greatest dangers arise from debates over "matters of halakha," that is to say, a discussion in which each

side is convinced that its position is correct and is unable to listen to and

accept any other position, especially when the issue involved is thought of as

a matter of principle that is beyond compromise.

That is why Rashi gave a midrashic

explanation that, while apparently removing Joseph's instructions to his

brothers from its "concrete" historical context, converts the

possible quarrel between the brothers into a calculus of ascribed guilt "in

accordance with Torah law."

We know that "Jerusalem was destroyed only because they settled

court cases according to [the strict letter] of Torah law." People who

debate over "justice" cannot walk together or solve a shared problem

when each party to the conflict is certain of the absolute justice of his

cause, especially when the conflict involves religious aspects.

As the poet Yehuda Amichai put it (in his

poem, "In the Place Where We are Right")

From

the place where we are right

Flowers will never grow

In the spring.

The

place where we are right

Is hard and trampled

Like a yard.

But

doubts and loves

Dig up the world

Like a mole, a plow.

And a whisper will be heard in the place

Where the ruined

House once stood.

(Chana Bloch & Stephen Mitchell,

translators)

Pinchas Leiser, Editor of

Shabbat Shalom, is a psychologist

And he fell on his neck, and he

wept on his neck for a long time – Tears of Joy,

of Pain, or of Regret?

Joseph

wept, Jacob did not weep. Joseph could still weep, Jacob was finished with

weeping, he had wept enough in his life. Joseph was

still weeping even after Jacob had already spoken to him – in such small points

the actual truth is mirrored. Since he had missed Joseph, Jacob had had a dull

monotonous life, had not ceased from weeping, his whole life of feelings had

been spent in grief over Joseph. In the mean-time Joseph had lived a life full

of changes, had had no time to give himself up so much to the pain of

separation, he was kept fully occupied with each of his different posts. Now

when he fell round his father's neck again, he felt all the more what the

separation had really meant to him, and lived once again through the past

twenty years. Jacob had already become Israel, Joseph still wept.

(R.abbi S.R. Hirsch on Bereishit 46:29, Levi translation)

For all shepherds are an abomination to Egyptians

Rabbi

Yeshua [a Karaite exegete]

said: [as for] the meaning of abhorrent to Egyptians, Moses wrote this

in order to deprecate idolatry, for instead of just saying to Pharaoh "the

gods of Egypt" he said abomination to Egypt, because their gods

took the form of a lamb, because they thought the constellation of the lamb

However, if that were true, why wouldn't they eat the flesh of cattle and

goats? In my opinion, the people of Egypt in Moses' day followed the opinion of

the Indian people, who constitute more than half the world's population. All of

them are Hamites and they do not eat meat to this

day. They also find shepherding disgusting, and so it is written, for all

shepherds are an abomination to Egyptians (Bereishit

46:34). And unto

this day they do not allow any person to eat meat in their land and if one of

them comes to a foreign country he will flee from any place where meat is eaten

and will not eat anything touched by a meat-eater, and they consider his

vessels to be unclean, and so it is written, the Egyptians could not feed

the Hebrews bread (Bereishit 43:32). And Joseph was put in charge

of everything when he was in Potiphar's house except

for the food he ate since being a Hebrew he could not touch it. And there is no

point asking why they had animal stock, since the people of India also have

animal stock, for the horses, donkeys, and camels are used as draught animals

and for riding, and the cattle are used for plowing, and the sheep for wool…

(Ibn Ezra Shemot

8:22)

When

Pharaoh summons you (Bereishit 46:33): It may be assumed that he

called you in order to choose warriors from amongst you. So, when he asks you, "What

is your occupation?" answer him, your servants are breeders of

livestock. It is not proper to speak of something that is abhorrent in the

eyes of the king. God forbid you should explicitly

mention something prohibited by his religion! If this were not so, why did Joseph not mention another

explanation of his own words, but rather he said [all shepherds] are

abhorrent to Egyptians… that is precisely the reason why he told them not

to say that they were shepherds. Of course, the king must understand that since

you are breeders of livestock, you certainly must all be shepherds.

(Keli Yakar

on Bereishit 46:33)

"On Prophecy"

The

haftarah (reading from the prophets) which goes with

the portion of Vayigash is a prophecy of the future:

the unification of Judah and Joseph and the political and spiritual

rehabilitation of the united people after it had split into two separate

nations. This prophecy was never fulfilled. We therefore need to study and

discuss the significance of prophecies of the future, of what appears in the

words of the prophets as foretelling what will happen. Ezekiel said these

things after the ten tribes and Judah had gone into exile… Hosea and Amos

too, who prophesied the destruction of the Kingdom of Israel, went on to

prophesy that Israel would return. This didn't happen. And in this instance, it

is also impossible to accept the Midrashic view of

prophecies that have not been fulfilled to this day – that they are prophecies

concerning the end of days, and are destined to be fulfilled. The ten tribes,

including those of the sons of Joseph, were wiped off the face of the earth,

apparently not through being physically exterminated but through spiritual

extermination; they completely assimilated into the peoples among whom they

were exiled, and there is no trace of them in historical reality. In the

Talmudic period, R. Akiva, who knew the prophecies

about the return of the ten tribes as well as we do, said: "The ten tribes

are not destined to return." He knew they were lost. His faith in the true

and righteous prophets was not undermined by this, because we understand that

their words do not tell us what will happen, but present the purpose and the

point of what will happen, and what should happen, which we ought to look

forward to and strive towards, even if no guarantee is given that it will come

about… it says in the Tosafot: "A prophet only

prophesies about what ought to happen, if there is no sin." The false

prophets down the generations have preached belief in the certainty of an unconditional

redemption – a redemption that comes even if man does not redeem himself from

sin.

(From

Professor Yeshyahu Leibovitz

z"l's He'arot

le'Parshsiyot ha'Shavu'a,

pp. 35-36)

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 made out

to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B.

4433, Jerusalem 91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for

local donations.

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 NEW ISRAEL FUND 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 should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project.

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.

5,000

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.