Parshat Vayeshev

And they sat to eat bread. They did not consider all that had transpired to be a mishap or obstacle worthy of disrupting their eating schedule. The proper reaction of taddikim such as themselves should have been like that of others who had caused misfortune. For example, the behavior of Israel after they killed the tribe of Benjamin, as is written: "And they sat until evening before the Lord and raised their voices and wept bitterly and said 'Why, Lord, God of Israel, did this happen in Israel etc.", and similarly when Darius threw Daniel into the lion's pit, as is written 'The king then went to his palace and spent the night fasting; no diversions were brought to him, and his sleep fled from him." The reason this happened to them is that they considered Yoseph to be a rodef - a pursuer, one whom it is meritorious to kill when there is no other way to rescue the pursued. On their way down to Egypt - For they were the owners of the camels, not merchants, and therefore with the bringing of merchandise to Egypt their work was completed.

(Sforno, Bereishit 37:25)

 

 They sat to eat bread - ...It is written in Midrash Tehillim (Psalm 10) "And they sat to eat bread", said the Holy One, You sold your brother during eating and drinking, as is written 'and they sat to eat bread', behold, your descendents will be sold in Shushan during eating and drinking, as is written (Esther 1:3) 'In the third year of his reign etc.,' as is written (ibid. 3:15) 'And the king and Haman sat down to drink etc.

(Rabbeinu Behayey, ibid. ibid)

 

 

Dreams good and bad

Daniel Epstein

From the beginning of Parashat Vayetse through the end of the Book of Bereishit, dreams fulfill an important - if not decisive - function in the process that leads from Abraham's departure from Ur Casdim till Yaakov's emigration to Egypt and the beginning of the formation of the Hebrew nation in exile.

The dream speaks not only of itself, as though it were addressed to some anonymous reader; it appears in a specific context, its content and meaning linked to the personality of the dreamer and the dreamer's ability to relate correctly to the dream, in keeping with the time and place it appears.

From this aspect, a comparison of Yaakov's dream during the night of his flight from his childhood home en route to Aram, and the dreams of Joseph who, together with the sons of the concubines, herds his father's sheep, is highly instructive.

 

These dreams have the grandeur of content in common.

In the first dream, "a ramp set against the ground with its head reaching the heavens" - the head of the ramp or the head of the ladder? - "messengers of God were going up and coming down it" - 'it' being the ramp or the dreamer? The vagueness of the verse serves to enhance the lofty impression. And as if this were not enough, God is poised at the head of the ramp and promises the dreamer sweeping guarantees, no less than a divine insurance policy.

Yoseph also dreams, dreams suitable for young man deeply concerned about his place among the brothers; he is the sheave standing the middle of the field, and the brothers' sheaves bow to him; he is the star to which the sun and moon and all the others bow down. In both cases, the dream strokes the ego of the dreamer, and, as Dr. Freud claimed, it expresses the heart's desires, both hidden and overt.

The great difference begins with the awakening. Yaakov awakes and says: "Indeed, the Lord is in this place, and I did not know".        The next passage describes Yaakov's attitude to his dream: "And he was afraid and he said: "How fearsome is this place, this cannot be but the house of God, and this is the gate of the heavens." The Sefat Emet (Bereishit, Vayetseh, 5634, s.v. "and Yaakov awoke") offers a wonderful explanation of Yaakov's somewhat surprising amazement:

This was written in praise of our father Yaakov, of blessed memory, for any other man would have been prideful, whereas fear and awe fell upon Yaakov. This is a sign that he was a man of truth.

Yaakov, who deceived his brother and his father, is termed 'a man of truth'; "You have given truth to Yaakov"'. But what is "a man of truth"? The Sefat Emet ["Emet" means "truth"] teaches us: A man of truth is one who does not deceived himself about himself.

Yaakov knows that the vision of the ramp with its top reaching the heavens does not describe his true situation as he flees his brother; he has yet to prove himself and cope with life's challenges before he can be called Yisrael. Therefore his dream fills him with awe, not with conceit. The man of truth cannot take pride in the great dreams which come to him. He is frightened by the presumptuous aspiration, dangerous to himself and others. Hence, adds the Sefat Emet:

As a result of this awe his descendents merited that this location would be the site of the Temple, as is written "the house of God" and it appears (Bereishit Rabba 89, 7) that He showed it [the Temple] to him both built and destroyed etc., for the existence of the Temple is dependent upon this awe.

The existence of the Temple is not dependent upon the holiness of the site nor upon divine pledge; it depends upon man's fear - if he is indeed a man of truth - of losing "the house of God"; it depends upon the trepidation of man who is aware of the gap between his heavenward aspirations and his human situation, between the head resting on the stone and the head hovering in the heaven of the ideal.

The site of the Temple is in this gap which is called "fear of God" [lit. "fear of heaven"], fear of the ontological gap that separates imagination from reality.

 

And now from Yaakov's dream to Yoseph's dreams

The dreamer in Parashat Vayeshev is a youth who informs his father of his brothers' misconduct. He earns his father's affection and takes pride in the amazing technicolor coat. He is the one whose brothers - and we well understand them - "cannot speak to him in peace".

It is noteworthy that in this story, no one "can":

The father, who longs for his loving wife, cannot help preferring her son over all the other brothers; the brothers cannot but despise their preferred and conceited brother, and Yoseph himself cannot keep from relating his transparent, hate-inducing dreams.

Each of the above is imprisoned within his inner world, each caged inside a world picture which he has created from inner conviction and solid proofs of his righteousness and his adversary's wickedness. In such a situation, no man can speak to his brothers in peace. Therefore the mission with which Yoseph is charged, "to see how your brothers fare and how the flocks fare" [Lit. "see the peace of ..."] is doomed to failure from the start.

A long road must be traversed before all can reach their true personalities as men of truth, able to recognize their situation and the gap between their distorted perceptions and reality. For each of them, the change will occur when the initial "cannot", based on blindness to the truth and misguided perception due to this self-incarceration, will be replaced by a different kind of "cannot", the "ethical inability" to which Emanuel Levinas refers when he says: I can (physically) murder the other, but I am unable (ethically unable) to do it.

We can only allude to the amazing transformation at the end of the story.

When Yoseph is tested in the seduction scene with Potiphar's wife, he says to her (39:9): "He is greater in this house than I, and he has held back nothing from me except you, as you are his wife" - the grandiose "I" is on the verge of returning - but, continues the passage: "I cannot do this great evil and give offense to God."

And at the moment of truth, when Yoseph says to his brothers: "I am Yoseph, does my father still live?" their reaction is: "His brothers could not answer him, for they were afraid of him." And Yoseph? "And Yoseph could no longer hold himself in check".        

That ethical inability - evolving from the demand for truth by the "God-fearing person" - is "the Gate of Heaven". It opens the gate of the heart, which is - in slightly hyperbolic language - the Gate to the Geula.

And through this awe, an opening is opened everywhere, as is written "and this is the gate of heaven" (Sefat Emet, ibid.)

Daniel Epstein is a rabbi and philosopher who teaches in Matan, in Midreshet Lindenbaum, and in various groups in Israel.

 

 

"Yaakov settled in the land of his father's sojournings" - Yaakov, too, had the patience to wait

Because the previous chapter had told us that his brother Esav inherited Mt. Seir by virtue of his father's merit, Scripture had to inform us of Yaakov's inheritance, saying: "Yaakov settled in the land of his father's sojournings". This is intended to make us aware of his fine quality, that he behaved as a stranger, even though he saw that Esav had already realized his inheritance. And the Lord had been careful to tell him that he alone would inherit this land, as I had explained in the earlier parasha on the passage "I will give it to you" (Bereishit 35:12) even so, he made no sign [of ownership], but dwelt as a stranger as did his father, in the land of Canaan. This means, that he behaved as though he were in a land not his own, but in the land of Canaan. Or, it can be said: Even though the Land of Canaan was given him as an inheritance, even so he was a stranger therein, until events evolved from the begetting of Yosef, as it is written: "These are the begetting of Yaakov, Yosef..." . And he was sold to Egypt, and our fathers went down to Egypt, and they were brought up from Egypt by He who promised to keep His promise regarding the Land, and they inherited their land.

(Ohr HaHayyim of Rabbi Hayyim ben Attar, Bereishit 37:1)

 

 Discrimination Brings Jealousy, Hatred, and Violence

And he made him a coat of many colors - Resh Lakish said in the name of R. Elazar ben Azaryah: A person should not discriminate between his children, since the coat of many colors which our father Jacob made for Joseph resulted in they hated him...

(Bereishit 37:4)

 

R. Simon ben Lakish said in the name of R. Elazar ben Azaryah: [It is written:] Go and see God's works (Tehillim 66:5), and later it is written, He changed sea into dry land (verse 6). Why was it that they hated him? So that [as a result of the historical process set of by their hatred they would enslaved in Egypt and eventually redeemed and] the sea would be torn asunder for them into passim [strips].

(Bereishit Rabbah 84:8)

 

That all this was not judicious or wise, that Jacob should not have listened to his tattle, that altogether to show favoritism to one child had only evil effects in the history of our forefathers, as indeed it has in any home, is stressed bitterly enough in the pernicious results which are shown in this story. They are weaknesses which occur only too frequently in people's lives, but are none the less weaknesses.

(Rabbi S.R. Hirsch on Bereishit 37:3, Levy translation)

 

And when his brothers saw that their father loved him (Bereishit 37:4) - Otherwise, they would have thought it was because he was the son of the beloved Rachel, that he loved her sons more than the rest. But when they saw that he was best loved of all the brothers, including Benjamin, they were sure that it was because of the ill reports that he would bring about them, their disrepute gaining him honor and prestige from their father. That is why they hated him - this is plain to see.

(Meshekh Hokhmah ad. loc.)

 

The grasping man reviles and scorns: An Act of Worship Becomes a Curse and a Desecration of the Divine Name.

When Joseph was sent by his father to visit his brothers, they thought about killing him, for it says They said to one another...let us kill him (Bereishit 37: 19) and they stood and threw him into the pit and said "let us eat and drink, and afterwards we'll pull him out and kill him." They ate and drank, and time came to say the grace after meals. Judah said to them: "We are about to kill, and we are blessing God? We are nothing but scorners!"

What does What do we gain by killing our brother mean? Judah told them: The grasping man reviles and scorns the Lord rather, come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites (Bereishit 37: 27).

(Pesikta Rabbati 10)

 

Yehuda and Tamar - the Moral Message

From the story of Judah a noble moral habit and equity in conduct may be learnt; this appears from [Judah's] words: Let her take it, lest we be put to shame; behold I sent this kid (Bereishit 38:32). The interpretation of this is as follows: Before the giving of the Torah sexual intercourse with a harlot was regarded in the same way as sexual intercourse with one's wife is regarded after the giving of the Torah. I mean to say that it was a permitted act that did not by any means arouse repugnance. The payment of hire that was agreed upon to a harlot was in that time something similar to the payment now of a wife's dowry when she is divorced, I mean that it was one of the rights of the woman with regard to which the man had to discharge his obligation... This is the excellent moral habit that we learn from this story. As for the precept of justice by which we profit, it is to be found in the word in which he answers that he is innocent of all violence with regard to the woman, that he does not go back on his word, and that he does not diminish the price agreed upon with her: Behold, I sent this kid, and so on. That kid was indubitably one that among those of its species was possessed of the highest excellence; therefore in referring to it he employs [the demonstrative pronoun] this. This is the justice that they had taken over from Jacob, Isaac and Abraham: namely, that one must not make changes in one's word or break one's promise; that all obligations must be discharged fully and integrally... and there is no difference between one who withholds the wages of a hired man and one who does this to his wife.

(RaMBaM, Guide of the Perplexed III:49, Pines translation)

 

"Taamei HaMikra" - Double Meaning ("Taamim" refers to the musical notation which punctuates the Bible; it also means "reasons" or "rationales)

"But he refused and he said...my master..." The cantillation of the word "And he refused" indicates the prohibition of the act and that he was totally prevented from doing so, for through the notes of the Torah we understand that which is not overtly recorded, similar to man's movements from we divine his thoughts.

(Rabeinu Bahaye, Bereishit 49:8)

 

...Meaning that through the notes which accompany the text, we can understand that which is not expressly written. The rabbi's intention is to say that a person has facial expressions and vocal nuances, which enables us to reveal and know something about his mood and mental-spiritual condition; mimicry and gesticulation of a person, and the shadings of his voice, help us know when is actually taking place in his inner consciousness.

In the narrative of Yosef and Potifar's wife who tries to seduce him, he withstands temptation and does not comply. The Torah expresses his restrained behavior with the term "and he refused". The term is accompanied with the very rare "shalshellet" note. (The shalshelet is a series of siren-like rising and descending tones.) 

The Massorah's assignment of this particular note to "and he refused" is hardly accidental. Through it, the massora wanted to let us know that in that situation Yosef conducted a very difficult struggle, an act involving tremendous spiritual courage, in order to withstand this test of temptation. Therefore, great is the merit of Yosef, termed by tradition "Yosef the Righteous", who emerged victorious from this conflict. His refusal is not at all a simple matter; it is "he refused" to the tune of a shalshellet, with its melodic line thrice ascending and descending, like a warning siren accentuating the merit of the Biblical figure who refused, who conquered his desires, Yosef the dreamer.

(Y. Leibovitz: Seven Years of Discussion of the Weekly Parasha, p.151)

 

Said the philosophers: One who rules over his soul - even though he performs good and important acts - he does so while inwardly desiring and longing for the forbidden acts, yet he conquers his desires; his actions contradict his desires, he does the proper thing. He suffers from the stormy conflict between his two inclinations.

The righteous person, however, is one whose actions follow from his desire and his attributes; he does good - his desire is to do good, and for that he longs. The philosophers all agree that the righteous man (who is free of the battle between his inclinations) is a spiritually more perfect man than one who subdues his inclination. - because the latter's very desire to do evil is a defective trait of the soul. King Solomon, may he rest in peace, said similarly: "The desire of the wicked is set upon evil." (Proverbs 21:10). And he spoke of the joy of the righteous in the good deed, and was saddened by the person who is not righteous in his actions: "Justice done is a joy to the righteous; to the evildoers, ruination" (Ibid., ibid., 15). This which is seen in the words of the prophet [David and Saul] is consonant with the views of the philosophers.

But upon examination of the words of our Sages on this subject, we find the following: One who desires sin and longs for it [yet does not sin] - he is more important and perfect than he who has no longing for sin, and suffers none by avoiding it. Our Sages said: the more important and perfect a person is– the greater will be his longing for sin, and the more acute his suffering at not satisfying his desire. They cited sources: "The more a person is greater than his companion, so is his inclination greater". They were not satisfied with this, and they added: The reward given one who conquers his inclination is proportionate to his pain in ruling over his inclination. They said "In proportion to the pain - the reward." Yet more, they encouraged man to desire sin; Let him not say: By nature I have no desire for this sin - even had the Torah not forbidden it to me. "Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says: Let man not say: 'I have no desire to eat meat with milk; I have no desire to wear shaatnez; I have no desire to have an illicit sexual relationship' - rather let him say: 'I desire, but what can I do? - my Father in heaven decreed!"

Cursory comparison of the words of the philosophers and of our Sages would seem to indicate contradiction - but such is not the case. Both are true, and there is no contradiction at all. The evils of which the philosophers spoke when they said that one who has no inclination for evil is more important than the one who has the inclination but conquers it - these are those matters universally considered to be "evils": such as bloodshed, theft, plunder, cheating, damaging someone without just cause, doing bad to one who has benefited him, disrespecting parents, etc. These are the commandments of which Chazal said "Even were they not written, they would have worthy of being written ("mitvot ha'sichliyot', rational commandments). Without doubt a soul which longs for these evils has a defective soul...But those matters of which the Sages thought when saying that one who conquers his inclination is more important - and receives greater reward - are the "torot shim'iyot", those prohibitions which, had the Torah not proscribed, would not at all have been considered bad.

(Rambam, Eight Chapters, Chap. 6)

 

 

 

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.

Shabbat Shalom is available on our website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il

For responses and arranging to write for Shabbat Shalom: pleiser@netvision.net.il