A.
On his deathbed, Ya’aqov, gripped by the spirit of prophecy, addresses his sons for the last time: שמעון ולוי אחים כו' כי באפם הרגו איש וברצונם עקרו שור (“Shim’on and Levi are brothers... For in their rage they killed men and in their willfullness they uprooted an ox”; XLIX, 5-6).
Rashi interprets the poetic, prophetic mode of speech, telling us that the first indictment concerns the vengeance taken by these two brothers on the prince and citizens of the city of Shchem for the rape of their sister, Dina, and the citizens’ subsequent failure to bring the rapist to justice (cf. Genesis XXXIV), and the second because רצו לעקור את יוסף שנקרא שור, שנאמר "בכור שורו הדר לו" (“they wished to uproot Yosef who was called ‘ox’, as it is said, 'First-born, his ox is a splendour to him;’” Deuteronomy, XXXIII, 17).
However, a little reflection reveals the difference between these two events: In the case of Shchem, Shim;on and Levi really did kill every male citizen of the town for their transgressions, whereas (as Rashi himself brings out) they merely wished to be rid of Yosef; as we have seen over the past few weeks, Divine Providence had other plans, and Yosef came out on top, as the ruler of Egypt. It is a well-established principle that מחשבה רעה אין הקדוש ברוך הוא מצרפה למעשה (“The Holy One, Blessed is He, does not consider an evil thought as the deed;” קידושין מ.); one actually has to do something in order to be judged and punished for it.
So, in what way did they “uproot’ their brother? And why is this laid particularly at the door of Shim’on and Levi?
B.
How does one “uproot” a human being?
If we consider the root of the Hebrew verb which we have translated “uproot,” îqqér, we encounter the word âqar, “barren, childless;” for instance, in Genesis XXV, 21, Yitzchaq prays in the presence of his wife, Rivqa, ki âqara hi, “because she [was] childless.” Hence, one can presumably translate the verb îqqér in connection with a human being as “render childless.”
But wait! The sharp-eyed reader who has been paying attention the last few weeks will note that Yosef married Osnath in Egypt, who bore him two fine sons, Menashe and Efrayim, fit to be counted themselves as tribes of Israel. In what way, then, was Yosef rendered childless?
In our discussion of parshath Va-Yéshev, we noted that Ya’aqov showed his great affection for Yosef by appointing him his bechor, his “first-born.” Aside from his father’s approbation, Yosef was vouchsafed prophetic dreams in which his brothers were seen to bow down to him (cf. XXXVII, 5-11), clearly an indication of Yosef’s superior status in Divine eyes.
The Talmud tells us how deep this superiority ran: הי' ראוי יוסף לצאת ממנו י"ב שבטים כדרך שיצאו מיעקב אביו שנאמר "אלה תולדת יעקב יוסף" (“Yosef was fit to have twelve tribes descended from him, as descended from his father Ya’aqov, as it is said, ‘And these are the offspring of Ya’aqov, Yosef' [Genesis XXXVII, 1];” סוטה ל"ו:). Yet, as we know, this did not happen; Yosef had only the two “tribes,” Menashe and Efrayim. Why?
The gmara explains by referring us to the incident of the degenerate wife of the Egyptian priest, Potifar, who had purchased Yosef from the Yishm’elim when they arrived in Egypt. Yosef quickly rose to a position of trust, responsible for all the affairs of his master, but his master’s wife could not keep her eyes off him, and pursued him relentlessly.
So relentlessly, continues the Talmud, that he nearly gave in: אותו היום יום חגם הי' והלכו כולם לבית עבודת כוכבים שלהם והיא אמרה להן חולה היא (“That day was [an Egyptian] religious holiday and all of them had gone to their temple, and [Potifar’s wife] had told them she was sick”). Thus, she was alone in the house with Yosef.
ותתפשהו בבגדו “and she seized him by his garment...” XXXIX, 12). באותה שעה באתה דיוקנו של אביו ונראתה לו בחלון, אמר לו, יוסף, עתידין אחיך שיכתבו באבני האפוד ואתה ביניהם. ברצונך שימחה שמך ותקרא רועה זונות, דכתיב "רועה זונות יאבד הון" (“At that moment the image of his father came and appeared to him in the window, and told him, Yosef, your brothers are destined to be inscribed on the stones of the breastplate [Exodus XXVIII, 6-21], and you among them. Is it your wish that your name be erased, and you be called a shepherd of harlots? For it is written, ‘A shepherd of harlots will lose wealth’ [Proverbs XXIX, 3]”)
.
Yosef’s resistance stiffened: מיד נעץ אצבעותיו בקרקע (“Immediately he dug his fingers into the ground”), until the passion passed. But it was already a little late, and the fatal attraction was at its height. As a consequence, Yosef lost ten of the twelve sons which he had been destined to sire (עשרה בנים פחתו לו ליוסף כנגד מעשה עשר אצבעותיו, ע"ע בגמרא וברש"י שם). Only Menashe and Efrayim would be born.
Now, when Ya’aqov beheld Yosef’s torn and bloody coat, he exclaimed חי' רעה אכלתהו (“An evil, wild animal has eaten him!” XXXVII, 33), and Rashi reveals that at that time נצנצה בו רוח הקדש, סופו שתתגרה בו אשת פוטיפר (“A spark of prophecy glimmered in [Ya’aqov] that eventually [Yosef] would be challenged by Potifar’s wife”). Ya’aqov was not permitted to see what was actually going on, but he knew that Yosef would face a potentially fatal challenge to his modesty, and that the challenge would be due to the actions of the brothers. Hence, in a very real sense, by placing Yosef unnecessarily in this compromising situation, they had rendered him an âqar, losing ten of the offspring which had been allotted him by Divine Providence.
But that was due to the actions of nine of the brothers; so why does the Torah pin it on Shim’on and Levi?
C.
When we examine Yosef’s ordeal and triumph through the lens of the Oral Torah, it becomes clear that Shim’on was the prime instigator of the brothers’ animosity. In a revealng comment on Genesis XLIX, 24, Rashi says of Shim’on: הוא השליכו לבור, הוא שאמר ללוי הנה בעל החלומות הלזה בא (“It was he who threw [Yosef] into the pit, he who said to Levi, 'Behold, that master of dreams is coming'”). Why should there have been bad blood particularly between Shim’on and Yosef?
It has already been noted that Ya’aqov appointed Yosef his bechor. Yet, in the end, Yosef’s bechora proved sharply limited and circumscribed. As Rashi says, Re’uven was Ya’aqov’s בכור לנחלה בכור לעבודה בכור למנין, ולא נתנה בכורה ליוסף אלא לענין שבטים, שנעשה לשני שבטים (“bechor for inheritance, for Divine service, and for the count, and bechora was given to Yosef only in the matter of ‘tribes’, for he was made into two tribes;” comment on XXXV, 23).
Now, talmudic sources tell us that Yosef’s wife, Osnath, was not, in fact, an ethnic Egyptian, but had been adopted by Potifar; she was in reality Dina’s daughter, product of the rape by Chamor ben Shchem עיי' סוף מסכת סופרים)). It is a matter of Talmudic principle that if one wishes his children to resemble him (in character, as well as physically), one should marry his niece; indeed, most sons tend to resemble their maternal uncles (עיי' יבמות ס"ב. תוספות שם ד"ה והנושא בת אחותו, ובבא בתרא ק"י., חתם סופר שם ד"ה רוב בנים). Thus, it was a foregone conclusion that Yosef’s sons would, in fact, tend to resemble himself and his brothers, and therefore be of the caliber of shivtei Qah.
But this was not only true of Yosef.
Commenting on XLVI, 10, Rashi informs us that, when Shim’on and Levi rescued their sister from Shchem, she was so mortified and shaken by her experience that לא היתה דינה רוצה לצאת עד שנשבע שמעון שישאנה (“Dina did not want to leave until Shim’on swore that he would marry her”).
If Yosef’s sons were of “tribal” calibre because he was married to his niece, then so were Shim’on’s, whose wife was Dina herself. Herein, I believe, lay the source of the rivalry between Shim’on and Yosef.
D.
The story of Yosef affords us a vital lesson in the real and apparent mechanisms which operate in the world.
Yosef himself told his brothers: אל תעצבו ואל יחר בעיניכם בי מכרתם אתי הנה כי למחי' שלחני אלקים לפניכם (“Don’t be sad or angry with yourselves that you sold me hither, for it was to keep [you] alive that G-d sent me before you;” XLV, 5). It had always been planned in advance that Israel would pass through the crucible of Egypt, or something very like it, on their way to being forged into the Torah nation, as Avraham had been told many years before (cf. XV, 13-14).
But did it have to happen in the way that it did, with all of the attendant suffering for Ya’aqov and Yosef, indeed, for the world, which had to endure the seven year famine?
At every stage in events, there were choices made and actions taken which had consequences: Ya’aqov did neglect communicating with his parents whilst he was in yeshiva and afterwards in Paddan Aram with Lavan; his sons, in consequence, did not take honoring him with the full seriousness the mitzva requires; Ya’aqov did show favoritism to Yosef, who did tell lashon ha-ra about his brothers, who did sell him into slavery.
Even though it all came out well, and there was general forgiveness (as we have seen), nonetheless facts came into being in the physical world, whose logic had to be played out, as the result of these choices.
Similary, 60 years ago a great miracle happened, and against all odds the Jewish people achieved sovereignty in their homeland. That this was a miracle cannot be gainsaid, and is as plain as sunlight at noon. But, one can ask, did it have to happen the way it did? Were the World Wars necessary, and all the suffering incurred by Israel’s subsequent wars, and the current bitter relations with the Muslim world?
And in response, one can also ask: Was the haskala necessary? The Reform movement? The dalliance of so many Jews with Communism, and the secular nationalist Zionist movement?
The Yosef story provides us with grounds for hope and faith that all will turn out well. It also lets us know that there is a price for our choices.
No comments:
Post a Comment