Twitter

Sunday, December 3, 2017

Parashat Vayeshev -The Light of Mashiach

Explorations
Rabbi Ari Kahn

Parashat Vayeshev
The Light of Mashiach

Parashat Vayeishev begins with an almost-cryptic statement:

בראשית לז: א
וַיֵּ֣שֶׁב יַעֲקֹ֔ב בְּאֶ֖רֶץ מְגוּרֵ֣י אָבִ֑יו בְּאֶ֖רֶץ כְּנָֽעַן:

Yaakov settled in the land in which his fathers dwelled, in the land of Canaan.
(Bereishit 37:1)

Yaakov had come to the point in his life when he could finally settle down. The Hebrew term for “settled” is vayeishev, while the term for “dwelled” is megurei, from the word gur, rooted in the word ger, stranger.[1] In this short verse, then, we are told that Yaakov succeeded in settling where his father and grandfather before him only managed to dwell. Interestingly, in his later years, when Yaakov stands before Pharaoh and the latter asks him his age, Yaakov responds:

בראשית מז:ט
וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יַעֲקֹב֙ אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֔ה יְמֵי֙ שְׁנֵ֣י מְגוּרַ֔י שְׁלֹשִׁ֥ים וּמְאַ֖ת שָׁנָ֑ה מְעַ֣ט וְרָעִ֗ים הָיוּ֙ יְמֵי֙ שְׁנֵ֣י חַיַּ֔י וְלֹ֣א הִשִּׂ֗יגוּ אֶת־יְמֵי֙ שְׁנֵי֙ חַיֵּ֣י אֲבֹתַ֔י בִּימֵ֖י מְגוּרֵיהֶֽם.
The days of my dwellings are one hundred and thirty years, few and bad have been the days of my life, and they do not match the days of my fathers’ dwellings. (Bereishit 47:9)

Yaakov describes his life and times with the word megurei — dwellings - as opposed to the term with which the present parashah begins: Vayeishev, he settled. Did Yaakov, in fact, settle, or did he merely dwell?[2]

Rashi cites a midrash to explain the meaning of Yaakov’s “settling.”

רש"י, בראשית לז
וישב: ביקש יעקב לישב בשלוה, קפץ עליו רוגזו של יוסף. צדיקים מבקשים לישב בשלוה אומר הקדוש ברוך הוא לא דיין לצדיקים מה שמתוקן להם לעולם הבא, אלא שמבקשים לישב בשלוה בעולם הזה:
Settled: Yaakov wished to settle in tranquility, but the episode of [literally, the anger of] Yosef confronted him. The righteous wish to live in tranquility; God says, “Is it not sufficient for the righteous what is awaiting them in the next world that they [also] wish to live in tranquility in this world!?” (Rashi, Bereishit 37:2, based on Bereishit Rabbah 84:3)

This concept is quite puzzling. What does it mean that Yaakov wished to live in tranquility? Did Yaakov wish to “retire” from active patriarchal service and enjoy his “golden years”? Certainly, Yaakov’s life was difficult, but was this a reason to abandon his mission for the sake of “the good life”? There must be a deeper meaning to the “tranquility” Yaakov was seeking. Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt”l, suggested that what Yaakov was seeking was spiritual tranquility. When he returned to the Land of Israel, after overcoming the challenges presented by Lavan and Esav, Yaakov anticipated nothing less than the onset of Messianic Age. This would explain the midrashic reference to the World to Come: Yaakov sought spiritual utopia here on earth. This is reflected in God’s comment: Tzaddikim strive for spiritual perfection. They are not satisfied with what God has waiting for them in the World to Come; they desire perfection here and now as well.[3]

But how could Yaakov possibly think that a state of perfection or tranquility could be attained at that juncture in history? Had God not promised Avraham that his descendants would be enslaved for four hundred years?

בראשית פרק טו, יג-טז
(יג) וַיֹּא֣מֶר לְאַבְרָ֗ם יָדֹ֨עַ תֵּדַ֜ע כִּי־גֵ֣ר׀ יִהְיֶ֣ה זַרְעֲךָ֗ בְּאֶ֙רֶץ֙ לֹ֣א לָהֶ֔ם וַעֲבָד֖וּם וְעִנּ֣וּ אֹתָ֑ם אַרְבַּ֥ע מֵא֖וֹת שָׁנָֽה: (יד) וְגַ֧ם אֶת־הַגּ֛וֹי אֲשֶׁ֥ר יַעֲבֹ֖דוּ דָּ֣ן אָנֹ֑כִי וְאַחֲרֵי־כֵ֥ן יֵצְא֖וּ בִּרְכֻ֥שׁ גָּדֽוֹל: (טו) וְאַתָּ֛ה תָּב֥וֹא אֶל־אֲבֹתֶ֖יךָ בְּשָׁל֑וֹם תִּקָּבֵ֖ר בְּשֵׂיבָ֥ה טוֹבָֽה: (טז) וְד֥וֹר רְבִיעִ֖י יָשׁ֣וּבוּ הֵ֑נָּה כִּ֧י לֹא־שָׁלֵ֛ם עֲוֹ֥ן הָאֱמֹרִ֖י עַד־הֵֽנָּה:
[God] said to Avraham, “You shall know that your descendants will be strangers in a land which is not theirs. They will be slaves and abused for four hundred years. The nation which enslaves them will be judged by Me. They will subsequently leave with great fortune. The fourth generation will return here, for the sin of the Emori will not be complete until then.” (Bereishit 15:13–16)

How could Yaakov ignore the four hundred years of slavery stipulated in the Divine decree?

In fact, there are conflicting sources regarding the period of the Israelites’ enslavement in Egypt: From the text of the Haggadah (which, in turn, is taken from earlier rabbinic sources), we learn that God was lenient in the calculation, and after a mere 210 years the Israelites were liberated.[4] And yet, the Torah explicitly states that the Jews left Egypt “at the end of four hundred and thirty years.”[5] The contradiction among the sources was quite apparent to our sages, and they addressed this question in the midrash: Which was it - four hundred years, four hundred and thirty years, four generations? The answer provided by the Midrash reconciles the apparent contradiction by pointing out that God’s revelation to Avraham, in which both four hundred years and four generations were mentioned, took place thirty years prior to the birth of Yitzchak. God stipulated that Avraham’s descendants would be enslaved by a foreign power for four hundred years, and the clock was set in motion the moment Avraham’s son was born; the calculation of the four hundred years of oppression begins with Yitzchak’s birth. Thus, the Exodus came “at the end of four hundred and thirty years” – from the moment God made this covenant with Avraham, which was four hundred years from the moment Yitchak was born.[6] Yitzchak and Yaakov, as well as the 12 sons of Yaakov, were subject to foreign rule for one hundred and ninety years, followed by the period of actual slavery in Egypt which was 210 years in duration.

 What, however, is the significance of the four generations mentioned in God’s covenant with Avraham?

מכילתא דרבי ישמעאל בא - מסכתא דפסחא פרשה יד
אמר הקדוש ב"ה אם עושין תשובה אני גואלם לדורות ואם לאו אני גואלם לשנים.[7]
The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If they do teshuvah I will redeem them [after four] generations; if not, I will redeem them [after four hundred] years.” (Mechilta D’Rabbi Yishmael, Bo 14)

The details of the promise to Avraham were not etched in stone; they were flexible. The central idea was that Avraham’s descendants would be enslaved and abused, and would eventually leave the place of their oppression with great wealth. Apparently, Yaakov believed that this sequence had already occurred, that all these elements of God’s promise had been fulfilled in his own life story. He must have thought that his oppression at the hands of Lavan and the years of labor which ended in his return to Israel with tremendous material wealth had fulfilled God’s words to Avraham, and redemption could now take place. His children, after all, were the fourth generation of Avraham’s family.

And then, out of the blue, Yaakov’s worldview was derailed by the saga of Yosef and his brothers. “The anger of Yosef” shattered his illusions of tranquility and fulfillment.

When the enemy was Nimrod, Yishmael, Lavan, or Esav, confrontation was understandable, inevitable — even anticipated. But an internal struggle such as this did not seem to be part of the Divine Plan. Yaakov was certain that all the adversaries had been neutralized, and that the era of spiritual tranquility was dawning. With his sons at his side, Yaakov was confident that the Messianic Age had arrived. This new struggle was unanticipated, but the Messianic Age could not begin (nor can Sefer Bereishit come to an end) before this final intrigue within the family of Israel was played out. Thus, toward the end of the book of Bereishit when Yaakov meets up with Pharaoh, in his succinct retrospective of his life, he tells the Egyptian monarch that he had, in fact “dwelled,” but had not succeed in “settling.” He never achieved this sought-after tranquility.

The narratives that comprise the bulk of Sefer Bereishit are more than stories; the vicissitudes of the lives of our forefathers are far more than ancient tales. They are spiritual realities pregnant with meaning, which shape the contours of Jewish history. If we are to understand the significance of the teachings in Bereishit in general, and this parashah in particular, we must read them through the prism of “ma’aseh avot siman labanim:[8] “The actions of the forefathers serve as a portent for their descendants.” Put another way, ‘History repeats itself,’ or, in theological terms, ‘Jewish history is Jewish destiny.’

When Yosef and his brothers fight, the spiritual power for future domestic disputes is unleashed. It is no accident that the festival of Chanukah, which, at its core, marks the end of a tragic period of fratricidal conflict, is celebrated each year during the weeks when the Torah portions regarding Yosef and his brothers are read. The destruction of the Second Temple is attributed to the sinat chinam, unwarranted hatred between brothers – the very same hatred that underlies the plot of these Torah portions. The civil war fought by the Maccabees against the Hellenized Jews is seen as a repercussion — in the most literal sense of re-percussion, the repeated beating of the same drum — of the conflict in Parashat Vayeishev. The midrash that describes the deaths of the Ten Martyrs in the days of the Tannaim, a central part of the liturgy of Yom Kippur, is another far-reaching echo of Yosef’s story.

Once internal conflict arises, a new type of solution is required; the methods employed against external threats are of no use. This is the lesson of Vayeishev: Not only would tranquility not be achieved in Yaakov’s lifetime, but the insidious power of internal conflict would haunt future generations. The text of the Torah makes this clear in its unique way:

בראשית לז: לו
וְהַ֨מְּדָנִ֔ים מָכְר֥וּ אֹת֖וֹ אֶל־מִצְרָ֑יִם לְפֽוֹטִיפַר֙ סְרִ֣יס פַּרְעֹ֔ה שַׂ֖ר הַטַּבָּחִֽים:
The Midianites sold [Yosef] to Egypt, to Potifar, eunuch of Pharaoh, the Chief Executioner. (Bereishit 37:36)

בראשית לט: א
וְיוֹסֵ֖ף הוּרַ֣ד מִצְרָ֑יְמָה וַיִּקְנֵ֡הוּ פּוֹטִיפַר֩
Yosef was brought down to Egypt, where he was purchased by Potifar... (Bereishit 39:1)

Ancient and modern scholars alike have noted a difficulty in the text: The last verse of Chapter 37 and the first verse of Chapter 39 are almost identical. Between these two verses, time seems to stand still in the life of Yosef, while Chapter 38 recounts the life of Yehudah over many years: Yehudah marries and raises a family, and his children, in turn, marry - and die. The Torah finds it necessary to take us into the life and character of Yehudah before it can proceed to tell us about Yosef’s fate. Why?

To understand this peculiar ordering of the text, we must first recall the larger context: Yosef was sent by his father to look for his ten older brothers. When the brothers see Yosef approaching from afar, they plot to kill him. Reuven, who, as the eldest, would be held most responsible, suggests that they throw him into a pit; the “narrator” shares Reuven’s thoughts with us.
בראשית לז: כא-כב
וַיִּשְׁמַ֣ע רְאוּבֵ֔ן וַיַּצִּלֵ֖הוּ מִיָּדָ֑ם וַיֹּ֕אמֶר לֹ֥א נַכֶּ֖נּוּ נָֽפֶשׁ:וַיֹּ֨אמֶר אֲלֵהֶ֣ם׀ רְאוּבֵן֘ אַל־תִּשְׁפְּכוּ־דָם֒ הַשְׁלִ֣יכוּ אֹת֗וֹ אֶל־הַבּ֤וֹר הַזֶּה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בַּמִּדְבָּ֔ר וְיָ֖ד אַל־תִּשְׁלְחוּ־ב֑וֹ לְמַ֗עַן הַצִּ֤יל אֹתוֹ֙ מִיָּדָ֔ם לַהֲשִׁיב֖וֹ אֶל־ אָבִֽיו:
Reuven heard this and rescued [Yosef]. 'We will not take his life!' he said. Reuven said to them, “Do not commit bloodshed. Throw him into this pit [or cistern] in the desert, and do not lay a hand on him.' [His plan was] to rescue [Yosef] from [his brothers] and bring him back to his father. (Bereishit 37: 21-22)

In the hope of rescuing Yosef later, Reuven convinces his brothers to “let nature take its course.” What follows is one of the harshest scenes in the Bible: The brothers sit down to break bread as Yosef languishes in the pit.[9] At this point, Yehudah speaks (for the first time in the entire Torah):

בראשית לז: כו-כז
וַיֹּ֥אמֶר יְהוּדָ֖ה אֶל־אֶחָ֑יו מַה־בֶּ֗צַע כִּ֤י נַהֲרֹג֙ אֶת־אָחִ֔ינוּ וְכִסִּ֖ינוּ אֶת־דָּמֽוֹ:לְכ֞וּ וְנִמְכְּרֶ֣נּוּ לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִ֗ים וְיָדֵ֙נוּ֙ אַל־תְּהִי־ב֔וֹ כִּֽי־אָחִ֥ינוּ בְשָׂרֵ֖נוּ ה֑וּא וַֽיִּשְׁמְע֖וּ אֶחָֽיו:
And Yehudah said to his brothers, “What will we gain if we kill our brother and cover his blood? Let us sell him to the Yishmaelites and let not our hands be upon him, for he is our brother and our flesh.” His brothers acquiesced. (Bereishit 37: 26-27)

Yehudah takes responsibility and displays leadership; on the other hand, he also displays callousness and an almost Machiavellian cynicism. His conclusion, “Let us not kill him, for he is our brother and our flesh” -  while in the same breath he suggests that they sell him as a slave - is shocking.

With Yosef gone, the brothers are presented with a new problem: How are they to inform their father, Yaakov, of Yosef’s disappearance? They dip his coat of many colors in the blood of a slaughtered goat and present it to their father:

בראשית לז: לב
וַיֹּאמְר֖וּ זֹ֣את מָצָ֑אנוּ הַכֶּר־נָ֗א הַכְּתֹ֧נֶת בִּנְךָ֛ הִ֖וא אִם־לֹֽא:
…We have found this. Do you recognize it? Is it your son’s coat? (Bereishit 37: 32)

The brothers didn’t actually lie to Yaakov, they merely deceived him. According to the midrash[10], Yehudah was still the leader, and it was he who spoke. Yaakov, who immediately recognized the coat and assumed the worst, began to mourn for his son in a way that only a bereaved father can.

It is at this point that the narrative shifts its focus to Yehudah’s personal life story:

בראשית לח: א
וַֽיְהִי֙ בָּעֵ֣ת הַהִ֔וא וַיֵּ֥רֶד יְהוּדָ֖ה מֵאֵ֣ת אֶחָ֑יו

It came to pass, at that time, that Yehudah parted ways with [literally, went down from] his brothers… (Bereishit 38:1)

Rashi explains that Yehudah’s “descent” was the result of his lowered esteem in his brothers’ eyes. The brothers blamed Yehudah for their father’s bereavement, and therefore for Yosef’s disappearance.


רש"י בראשית פרק לח
אמרו אתה אמרת למכרו, אלו אמרת להשיבו היינו שומעים לך:
They said, “You are the one who told us to sell him! Had you said, ‘Return him to his father,’ we would have listened to you.” (Rashi, Bereishit 38:1)

Yehudah takes leave of his father’s house; he has lost his brothers’ respect, and he sets out to build a new family for himself. The midrash attempts to explain this seeming tangent in the narrative:

בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשת וישב פרשה פה
ויהי בעת ההיא: שבטים היו עסוקין במכירתו של יוסף, ויוסף היה עסוק בשקו ובתעניתו, ראובן היה עסוק בשקו ובתעניתו, ויעקב היה עסוק בשקו ובתעניתו, ויהודה היה עסוק ליקח לו אשה, והקב"ה היה עוסק בורא אורו של מלך המשיח ,קודם שלא נולד משעבד הראשון נולד גואל האחרון.
“It came to pass at that time” … The brothers were occupied with the selling of Yosef, Yosef was occupied with his sackcloth and fasting, Reuven was occupied with his sackcloth and fasting, Yaakov was occupied with his sackcloth and fasting, Yehudah was occupied with taking a wife for himself, and God was busy creating the light of the King Mashiach.... Before the first enslaver is born, the final Redeemer is born. (Bereishit Rabbah 85:1)

In its own words, the Midrash, in effect, asks a question to which we can relate: Where was God? How did He allow the sale of Yosef to proceed? The answer is nothing short of amazing: While this unspeakable travesty was unfolding, as the innocent and righteous Yosef was being abused, tortured and sold by his own brothers - which would eventually bring the entire Jewish People to Egypt, into the clutches of slavery and unspeakable suffering - God was busy creating the light of Mashiach. What are we to make of this bizarre response?

Yaakov sought tranquility, but God had a different plan. The slavery and redemption foretold to Avraham had not yet taken place, but God was busy planning the final redemption -  a plan that began with the sale of Yosef and was crystallized with the “descent of Yehudah.” Yosef, who was always uniquely capable of seeing the larger picture and visualizing long-term strategy, came to recognize the Divine Hand involved in the events of his life. It began, he eventually understood, when he wandered the countryside in search of his brothers.

בראשית לז: טו-יז
וַיִּמְצָאֵ֣הוּ אִ֔ישׁ וְהִנֵּ֥ה תֹעֶ֖ה בַּשָּׂדֶ֑ה וַיִּשְׁאָלֵ֧הוּ הָאִ֛ישׁ לֵאמֹ֖ר מַה־תְּבַקֵּֽשׁ:וַיֹּ֕אמֶר אֶת־אַחַ֖י אָנֹכִ֣י מְבַקֵּ֑שׁ הַגִּֽידָה־נָּ֣א לִ֔י אֵיפֹ֖ה הֵ֥ם רֹעִֽים: וַיֹּ֤אמֶר הָאִישׁ֙ נָסְע֣וּ מִזֶּ֔ה כִּ֤י שָׁמַ֙עְתִּי֙ אֹֽמְרִ֔ים נֵלְכָ֖ה דֹּתָ֑יְנָה וַיֵּ֤לֶךְ יוֹסֵף֙ אַחַ֣ר אֶחָ֔יו וַיִּמְצָאֵ֖ם בְּדֹתָֽן:
A man found [Yosef] wandering, lost in a field. The man asked him, “What are you seeking?” [Yosef] said, “I am seeking my brothers. Tell me, please, where they are grazing [their flocks]?” The man said, “They left here, for I heard them say, ‘Let us go to Dotan.’” Yosef went after his brothers and found them in Dotan. (Bereishit 37:15–17)

Yosef would never have found his brothers and would have returned to his father had this man not found him and directed him onto their path. God made sure that, one way or another, Yosef would find his brothers, that he would be sold, that he would end up in Egypt, and that his brothers would follow. Yaakov’s tranquility would have to wait.

Yosef eventually came to understand this encounter with the mysterious man in the field – as well as the entire chain of events that followed it - as an act of Divine Will. When he was reunited with his brothers years later, he attempted to explain to them the mysterious ways in which God takes an active role in human history:

בראשית מה: ה-ח
וְעַתָּ֣ה׀ אַל־תֵּעָ֣צְב֗וּ וְאַל־יִ֙חַר֙ בְּעֵ֣ינֵיכֶ֔ם כִּֽי־מְכַרְתֶּ֥ם אֹתִ֖י הֵ֑נָּה כִּ֣י לְמִֽחְיָ֔ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֱלֹהִ֖ים לִפְנֵיכֶֽם:כִּי־זֶ֛ה שְׁנָתַ֥יִם הָרָעָ֖ב בְּקֶ֣רֶב הָאָ֑רֶץ וְעוֹד֙ חָמֵ֣שׁ שָׁנִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֵין־חָרִ֖ישׁ וְקָצִֽיר:וַיִּשְׁלָחֵ֤נִי אֱלֹהִים֙ לִפְנֵיכֶ֔ם לָשׂ֥וּם לָכֶ֛ם שְׁאֵרִ֖ית בָּאָ֑רֶץ וּלְהַחֲי֣וֹת לָכֶ֔ם לִפְלֵיטָ֖ה גְּדֹלָֽה:וְעַתָּ֗ה לֹֽא־אַתֶּ֞ם שְׁלַחְתֶּ֤ם אֹתִי֙ הֵ֔נָּה כִּ֖י הָאֱלֹהִ֑ים וַיְשִׂימֵ֨נִֽי לְאָ֜ב לְפַרְעֹ֗ה וּלְאָדוֹן֙ לְכָל־בֵּית֔וֹ וּמֹשֵׁ֖ל בְּכָל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם:
Now do not be saddened and do not be angered that you have sold me here, for God has sent me ahead to be a source of sustenance. For these two years there is famine in the land, and for another five years there will be no sowing and harvesting. God sent me ahead of you to set aside for you a remnant of the land and to save your lives by great deliverance. And now, it is not you who has sent me here but God.... (Bereishit 45:5–8)

“Fate” – the Hand of God -  took the form of this mysterious man in the field. This seemingly insignificant event in the life of Yosef was in actuality the Will of God, guiding him to his destiny in Egypt. While this does not exonerate the brothers for their nefarious behavior, the Will of God is ultimately apparent in the world. Rashi tells us that the anonymous person in the field was none other than the angel Gavriel, whose very name denotes gevurah (strength), God’s attribute of Din (justice).

It is this “Hand of God” that the midrash describes: At the moment Yosef was being sold into slavery, God was occupied with weaving the mantle of Mashiach, while Yehudah was involved in his personal life. What does this mean?

When Yehudah’s oldest son, Eir, dies, one would expect Yehudah to gain some insight into his own father’s pain. He now knows intimately, firsthand, what his father feels and what it means to mourn one’s own child. When Yehudah’s second son, Onan, dies, we would expect Yehudah to be tormented with guilt; it would be a natural response for him to blame his own actions for the tragic deaths of his sons. We would expect Yehudah to approach his father, admit his guilt, and tell him, “Yosef is alive!” But Yehudah seems cold and indifferent.

When Tamar, Yehudah’s daughter-in-law, approaches him, he callously tells her to wait for his third son, despite having no intention of giving him to her for a husband. Some time later, Yehudah’s own wife dies, and he seeks illicit comfort in the company of the type of woman, who plies her trade, standing on the side of the road,  Unbeknownst to him, his daughter-in-law Tamar, who has come to realize that Yehudah has not been honest with her, has disguised herself as a prostitute as Yehudah is about to cross her path.

When she becomes pregnant, Yehudah, unaware of his paternity, orders that she be killed. She then presents Yehudah’s signet ring, staff, and coat, which she held as collateral, in lieu of the goat she was to receive as her wages. The Midrash points out that Tamar’s “wages,” a goat, also conveyed a powerful message:


בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשת וישב פרשה פה
א"ר יוחנן אמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא ליהודה אתה אמרת לאביך הכר נא חייך שתמר אומרת לך הכר נא.
Rav Yochanan said: God said to Yehudah, “You deceived your father with a goat. By your life, Tamar will deceive you with a goat.” (Bereishit Rabbah 85:11)

Tamar confronts Yehudah, presenting the personal effects of the man by whom she became pregnant:

בראשית לח: כה-כו
הִ֣וא מוּצֵ֗את וְהִ֨יא שָׁלְחָ֤ה אֶל־חָמִ֙יהָ֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר לְאִישׁ֙ אֲשֶׁר־אֵ֣לֶּה לּ֔וֹ אָנֹכִ֖י הָרָ֑ה וַתֹּ֙אמֶר֙ הַכֶּר־נָ֔א לְמִ֞י הַחֹתֶ֧מֶת וְהַפְּתִילִ֛ים וְהַמַּטֶּ֖ה הָאֵֽלֶּה: 
When she was being taken out [to be executed], she sent [the security] to her father-in-law with the message, 'I am pregnant by the man who is the owner of these articles.' She said [to Yehudah], ‘Do you recognize [these objects]? Who is the owner of this seal, this wrap, and this staff?' (Bereishit 38:25)

The Midrash explains:

בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשת וישב פרשה פה:יא
א"ר יוחנן אמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא ליהודה אתה אמרת לאביך הכר נא חייך שתמר אומרת לך הכר נא.
Rabbi Yochanan said: God said to Yehudah, “You said to your father, ‘We have found this. Do you recognize it? Is it your son’s coat?’ (Bereishit 37:32). By your life, Tamar will say to you, ‘Do you recognize...?’” (Bereishit Rabbah 85:11)

The Midrash draws a straight line from the relationship between Yehudah and Tamar to the relationship between Yehudah and his father; Yehudah’s earlier sin is rehabilitated by Tamar. When Tamar says the words, “Do you recognize,” Yehudah hears the echo of his own words all those years before, when he looked his father in the eye and shattered his father’s world by saying, “Do you recognize it? Is it your son’s coat?”[11] At last, Yehudah breaks through the walls of his own selfishness; he sees Tamar – and so much more. He sees himself, and he sees what he has done, the wrongs he has committed, against his daughter in law, and against his father. The next verse encapsulates his transformation:


בראשית לח: כו
וַיַּכֵּ֣ר יְהוּדָ֗ה וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ צָֽדְקָ֣ה מִמֶּ֔נִּי
Yehudah recognized, and said, “She is more righteous than I...” (Bereishit 38:26)

With these words, the idea of Mashiach is born: The capacity to recognize when we have sinned and to take responsibility is the starting point for both personal and national redemption. From this point on, Yehudah is a changed person, perhaps the first true baal teshuvah. From the relationship between Yehudah and Tamar, our kings emerge — David,[12] and his descendant, the Mashiach.  The midrash refers to this concept in its unique symbolic language: Tamar challenges Yehudah with his own staff:

בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשת וישב פרשה פה:ט
ומטך, זה מלך המשיח.
The staff [is the scepter] of the King Mashiach. (Bereishit Rabbah 85:9)

When Tamar asks Yehudah to identify his staff, she challenges him to find the courage to admit his guilt and take responsibility, to manifest the greatness which she sees within him. She challenges him to change, to step up, to become a man. This is the lesson that Mashiach will one day teach the world: Every person controls his or her own destiny. No matter what mistakes have been made, they can be fixed, redeemed, turned into tools for greater understanding and empathy, insight and courage.

Neither Yehudah nor David, the progenitors of the Messiah, were like Yosef, who heroically withstood temptation. Rather, they were both guilty of sin. This flawed personality, and not the perfect, superhuman ideal, is the Jewish prototype for the Messiah. Moreover, the lineage of the Messiah traces back to the incestuous relationship between Lot and his daughter, which resulted in the birth of Moav, the founder of the tribe to which Ruth, the great-grandmother of David, was born.

The seemingly unrelated, apparently tangential – and unmistakably sordid relationships recorded in Sefer Bereishit lead inexorably to the birth of David, and, eventually, the Messiah.[13] Yosef is perhaps the more obvious candidate for proto- messiah; Yosef certainly plays a key role – some might argue that his is the leading role - in the remainder of the book of Bereishit. Indeed, Yosef is the prototype for a second type of Messiah - known, appropriately enough, as “Mashiach ben Yosef.”[14] However, Yosef, who withstands temptation, is not the same as Yehudah, who sins - and acknowledges his own failure.

As a result of the episode of Yosef, the Jews were enslaved in Egypt; because of the teshuvah of Yehudah, the Jews will be redeemed at the End of Days, when a spirit of change will permeate the world, spearheaded by a descendant of Yehudah. History will reach its apex and the light of Mashiach, created all those years ago during the sale of Yosef, will shine bright. At that time, all the children of Yaakov, and with them all the people of the world, will finally achieve the tranquility Yaakov so eagerly hoped to find.



[1] Yaakov describes the time he spent in Lavan’s house with the word “garti” (Bereishit 32:5), implying that the time spent outside of the Land of Israel was a time of “strangeness” for him.
בראשית לב: ה
וַיְצַ֤ו אֹתָם֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר כֹּ֣ה תֹאמְר֔וּן לַֽאדֹנִ֖י לְעֵשָׂ֑ו כֹּ֤ה אָמַר֙ עַבְדְּךָ֣ יַעֲקֹ֔ב עִם־לָבָ֣ן גַּ֔רְתִּי וָאֵחַ֖ר עַד־ עָֽתָּה:
[2] Apparently, Yaakov here refers to all his days, including his sojourn in the house of Lavan, and his present stay in Egypt.
[3] I heard this idea in a lecture I had attended in 1983. Also, see Chumash Mesoras Harav Bereishis page 273, which cites a lecture delivered in Boston in 1974.
The same idea can be found in the writings of Rav Pinchas Horowitz, Panim Yafot Bereishit 37:1.
פנים יפות בראשית פרק לז
(א) וישב יעקב וגו'. פירש"י ביקש יעקב לישב בשלוה קפץ עליו רוגזו של יוסף [ב"ר פד, א]. ...איתא במדרש [ב"ר פד, ה] מגורי אביו בגימטריא רנ"ט, מיום שאמר הקדוש ברוך הוא לאברהם ידוע תדע עד שעה שנתיישב יעקב אבינו בארץ מגורי אביו, יש לפרש מה שאמר [שם] ביקש לישב בשלוה, דהיינו שחשב שכבר נשלמו הת' שנה שנגזרה בין הבתרים, דהיינו שחשב שנותיו ושנות אביו שהוא היה כשבא אצל אביו צ"ט שנה כדאיתא בפ"ק דמגילה [יז א] ממילא היה שנות אביו קנ"ח, ולפי שלא היו השנים שווים שהרי יצחק נולד בפסח ויעקב בתשרי והוי בצירוף רנ"ט כמספר מגורי, וחשב יעקב שנות הבנים המובלעים בשנות האבות עולים ג"כ בחשבון, וחשב מאה של אברהם שהרי בברית בין הבתרים היה בן ע"ה וכשמת היה קע"ה, וחשב ג"כ שנות ראובן שהיה בן ט"ו שנה כשבא אצל אביו, שהרי בן י"ג היה במעשה שכם דמיניה ילפינן [ב"ר פ, ט] דמקרי איש לי"ג שנה, וחשב הט' שנים שהיה אצל אביו עד שהיה יוסף בן שבע עשרה שנה, ג"פ לו וליצחק ולראובן היה הכל ת' שנה, לכך ביקש לישב בשלוה כיון דלדעתו נשלם הגלות:

[4] In the words of the Haggadah, God did a “calculation.”
הגדה של פסח - נוסח ההגדה:
בָּרוּךְ שׁוֹמֵר הַבְטָחָתוֹ לְיִשְֹרָאֵל, בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא חִשַּׁב אֶת הַקֵּץ לַעֲשֹוֹת כְּמָה שֶׁאָמַר לְאַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ בִּבְרִית בֵּין הַבְּתָרִים. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, וַיֹּאמֶר לְאַבְרָם יָדֹעַ תֵּדַע כִּי גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ בְּאֶרֶץ לֹא לָהֶם וַעֲבָדוּם וְעִנּוּ אֹתָם אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה. וְגַם אֶת הַגּוֹי אֲשֶׁר יַעֲבֹדוּ דָּן אָנֹכִי וְאַחֲרֵי כֵן יֵצְאוּ בִּרְכוּשׁ גָּדוֹל:
[5] Shemot 12:41.
שמות פרק יב פסוק מא
וַיְהִ֗י מִקֵּץ֙ שְׁלֹשִׁ֣ים שָׁנָ֔ה וְאַרְבַּ֥ע מֵא֖וֹת שָׁנָ֑ה וַיְהִ֗י בְּעֶ֙צֶם֙ הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֔ה יָ֥צְא֛וּ כָּל־צִבְא֥וֹת ה֖' מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם:
[6] See Talmud Bavli Rosh Hashana 10b-11a.
[7] The full text reads:
מכילתא דרבי ישמעאל בא - מסכתא דפסחא פרשה יד
ומושב בני ישראל וגו'. כתוב אחד אומר שלשים שנה וארבע מאות שנה וכתוב אחד אומר ועבדום וענו אותם ארבע מאות שנה (בראשית טו יג) כיצד יתקיימו שני מקראות הללו שלשים שנה עד שלא נולד יצחק נגזרה גזירה בין הבתרים. רבי אומר כתוב אחד אומר ועבדום וענו אותם ארבע מאות שנה וכתוב אחד אומר ודור רביעי ישובו הנה בראשית טז) כיצד יתקיימו שני כתובין אלו אמר הקדוש ב"ה אם עושין תשובה אני גואלם לדורות ואם לאו אני גואלם לשנים.
[8] See Midrash Tanchuma, Lech Lecha section 9, and Ramban, Bereishit 12:6.
מדרש תנחומא (ורשא) פרשת לך לך סימן ט
א"ר יהושע דסכנין סימן נתן לו הקדוש ברוך הוא לאברהם שכל מה שאירע לו אירע לבניו, כיצד בחר באברהם מכל בית אביו שנאמר אתה הוא ה' האלהים אשר בחרת באברם והוצאתו מאור כשדים ושמת שמו אברהם (נחמיה ט) ובחר בבניו משבעים אומות שנאמר כי עם קדוש אתה לה' אלהיך ובך בחר ה' אלהיך להיות לו לעם סגולה מכל העמים אשר על פני האדמה (דברים יד) לאברהם נאמר לך לך, ולבניו נאמר אעלה אתכם מעני מצרים אל ארץ הכנעני והחתי והאמורי והפרזי והחוי והיבוסי אל ארץ זבת חלב ודבש (שמות ג), לאברהם נאמר ואברכך ואגדלה שמך והיה ברכה ואברכה מברכיך, ולבניו נאמר יברכך ה' (במדבר ו), לאברהם נאמר ואעשך לגוי גדול ולבניו נאמר ומי גוי גדול (דברים ד) אברהם כתיב בו אחד היה אברהם (יחזקאל לג) וישראל ומי כעמך ישראל וגו' (ד"ה =דברי הימים= א יז), לאברהם נאמר ויהי רעב בארץ וירד אברם מצרימה לגור שם כי כבד הרעב בארץ, ולבניו כיון ששבו למצרים והרעב היה בארץ (בראשית מג), אברהם ע"י הרעב ירד למצרים ואף בניו על ידי הרעב ירדו למצרים שנאמר וירדו אחי יוסף עשרה לשבור בר ממצרים (שם /בראשית/ מב), אברהם כשירד נזדווגו לו המצרים ויראו המצרים את האשה כי יפה היא מאד, אף לבניו הבה נתחכמה לו פן ירבה והיה כי תקראנה מלחמה ונוסף גם הוא על שונאינו ונלחם בנו ועלה מן הארץ (שמות א), אברהם נזדווגו לו ארבעה מלכים אף לישראל עתידין כל המלכים להתרגש עליהם שנאמר (תהלים ב) למה רגשו גוים ולאמים יהגו ריק ואומר יתיצבו מלכי ארץ ורוזנים נוסדו יחד על ה' ועל משיחו, מה אברהם יצא הקדוש ברוך הוא ונלחם בשונאיו שנ' (ישעיה מא) מי העיר ממזרח צדק יקראהו לרגלו יתן לפניו גוים ומלכים ירד יתן כעפר חרבו כקש נדף קשתו, אף כך עתיד הקדוש ברוך הוא לעשות לבניו שנאמר ויצא ה' ונלחם בגוים ההם כיום הלחמו ביום קרב (זכריה יד).
רמב"ן, בראשית יב:ו
ויעבר אברם בארץ עד מקום שכם - אומר לך כלל תבין אותו בכל הפרשיות הבאות בענין אברהם יצחק ויעקב, והוא ענין גדול, הזכירוהו רבותינו בדרך קצרה, ואמרו (תנחומא ט) כל מה שאירע לאבות סימן לבנים, ולכן יאריכו הכתובים בספור המסעות וחפירת הבארות ושאר המקרים, ויחשוב החושב בהם כאלו הם דברים מיותרים אין בהם תועלת, וכולם באים ללמד על העתיד, כי כאשר יבוא המקרה לנביא משלשת האבות יתבונן ממנו הדבר הנגזר לבא לזרעו:

[9] While the brothers contemplate first the murder and then the sale of Yosef as they break bread, little do they realize that by selling Yosef as a slave, they have taken the first step toward the enslavement of their own children. How appropriate that when the Jews leave Egypt, they are commanded first to sit as a family and have a Passover seder – a family meal that includes the entire family.
[10] Bereishit Rabbah 84:19.
בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשת וישב פרשה פד סימן יט
וישלחו את כתונת הפסים וגו', א"ר יוחנן אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא ליהודה אתה אמרת הכר נא חייך שתמר אומרת לך הכר נא, ויכירה ויאמר כתונת בני, אמר לית אנא ידע מה אנא חמי כתונת בני חיה רעה אכלתהו וגו'.
[11] In 1975 Robert Alter published a brilliant analysis of this section in which he pointed out these connections, and lamented: “At this late date there exists no serious literary analysis of the Bible.” See “A Literary Approach to the Bible,” Commentary December 1st 1975. When this article was later expanded into a larger book, The Art of Biblical Narrative (Basic Books 1981), Alter noted (p. 10) that the Midrash had anticipated his analysis. “It is instructive that the two verbal cues indicating the connection between the story of the selling of Joseph and the story of Tamar and Judah were duly noted more than 1500 years ago in the Midrash.”
[12] David, too sinned, and had the courage to admit his mistake. See Shmuel II, 12:13.
שמואל ב׳ יב: יג
וַיֹּ֤אמֶר דָּוִד֙ אֶל־נָתָ֔ן חָטָ֖אתִי לַֽה֑'
[13] In the darkest days of the Holocaust, a formally anti-Zionist rabbi, Yisachar Shlomo Teichtal, came to the realization that God uses “broken vessels,” and that the rebuilding of Israel could well be accomplished by “sinful” non-religious Jews. Rabbi Teichtal came to understand that from sin, redemption may yet arise. See Eim Habanim Semeichah (and the masterful translation by Rabbi Moshe Lichtman in Kol Mevasar: Jerusalem 2000).
[14] See Talmud Bavli Sukkah 52a. According to the Vilna Gaon’s understanding, this second Messiah (Ben Yosef) is the central figure in the messianic process. See Kol Hator, ascribed by followers of the Vilna Gaon to their master.

Friday, December 1, 2017

Parasha Vayishlach 5759 Reuven

Parasha Vayishlach 5759
Reuven
Rabbi Ari Kahn


While Parashat Vayetzei told us about Yaakov’s marriage and fatherhood, Parashat Vayishlach unveils some of the problems which Ya’akov experiences with his family, beginning with the long-anticipated showdown with his brother. This is followed by the episode of Dena, in which Yaakov’s anxiety and the difficulties he experiences are detailed. Ultimately, the contemplated fratricide of Yosef becomes the defining action within the family. In this week’s Parasha there is a short episode which seems to be stated in clear terms, nonetheless the exegesis has been debated throughout the centuries.

And it came to pass, when Yisrael lived in that land, that Reuven went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Yisrael heard it
the sons of Jacob were twelve. (35:22)[1]

The verse has two difficulties- one in content, the other in form. How can we understand the tryst between a son of Yaakov and one of his wives? This type of behavior is looked upon askance, considered taboo in almost every society. How could Reuven have crossed this incestual boundary? The second question is not as striking, but disturbing nonetheless: After telling us of this deed, why does the Torah begin a new paragraph in mid-verse?

The Talmud is quick to answer one question while effectively solving the second:

R. Samuel b. Nahman said in R. Jonathan's name: 'Whoever says that Reuven sinned is merely making an error, for it is said, "Now the sons of Jacob were twelve", teaching that they were all equal.' (Shabbat 55b)

It seems fairly simple to state that the assumption that Reuven sinned is erroneous, but the text itself seems to state as much in black and white. The Talmud continues:

Then how do I interpret, and he lay with Bilhah his father's concubine? This teaches that he transposed his father's couch, and the Writ imputes [blame] to him as though he had lain with her. It was taught, R. Simeon b. Eleazar said: That righteous man was saved from that sin and that deed did not come to his hand. Is it possible that his seed was destined to stand on Mount Eval and proclaim, 'Cursed be he that lies with his father's wife,' yet this sin should come to his hand? But how do I interpret, "and he lay with Bilhah his father's concubine"? He resented his mother's humiliation. Said he, "If my mother's sister was a rival to my mother, shall the bondmaid of my mother's sister be a rival to my mother?" [Thereupon] he arose and transposed her couch. Others say, He transposed two couches, one of the Shechinah and the other of his father. Thus it is written, "Then you defiled my couch on which [the Shechinah] went up." (Shabbat 55b)

According to this passage Reuven acted in an inappropriate manner, but he was not guilty of the heinous crime of taking his father’s wife, merely involving himself unjustifiably in his father's personal affairs, is considered tantamount to actually have violated her.

His motivation as understood by Rav Shimon, was his mother's honor. It was one thing for his mother to have been displaced for Rachel, but quite a different matter to be displaced by her mother’s erstwhile servant. Deep inside, everyone including Leah, and her son Reuven knew that Yaakov loved Rachel more than anyone else. But once Rachel was in the grave, Yaakov should assume his rightful place in the tent of Leah. For some reason Yaakov disagreed, and with Rachel’s demise he moved his bed to the tent of Bilhah. Reuven set out to right this wrong, and earned eternal infamy for involving himself in “matters of the bedroom” which were not his business.

Despite this exoneration, the text does seem somewhat unequivocal. Additionally, Yaakov comments on this episode on his death bed in most unflattering terms.

Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, and the beginning of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power. Unstable as water, you shall not excel; because you went up to your father’s bed; then defiled you it; he went up to my couch. (49:3,4)

Reuven’s failure is attributed to this action, he is labeled "unstable", and his status as Yaakov’s primary heir was forfeited due to this indiscretion.

THE EXCELLENCY OF DIGNITY, AND THE EXCELLENCY OF POWER: the birthright should have been thine, priesthood thine, and royalty thine. Now that thou hast sinned, however, the birthright has been given to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and royalty to Judah. (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis XCVIII:4)

The Midrash goes further and spells out the sin, telling us that the plain reading of the text is indeed correct.

PAHAZ (E.V. ‘UNSTABLE’) AS WATER (XLIX, 4). R. Eliezer and R. Joshua [interpret it differently]. R. Eliezer interpreted it: Pahazta (thou didst hasten), Hatatha (thou hast sinned); Zanitha (thou didst commit adultery). R. Joshua interpreted: Parakta (thou didst throw off) the yoke, Hilalta (thou didst defile) my bed, thy passion did stir (Za’) within thee. R. Eliezer b. Jacob interpreted: Pasa'ta (thou didst trample upon) the law; Habta (thou didst forfeit) thy birthright; Zar (a stranger) didst thou become to thy gifts. (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis XCVIII:4)

There is another passage in the Talmud which points to a sin as having occurred:

The incident of Reuven is read but not translated. On one occasion R. Hanina b. Gamaliel went to Kabul, and the reader of the congregation read, ‘And it came to pass when Israel abode’, and he said to the translator, Translate only the latter part of the verse, and the Sages commended his action. The second account of the Calf is read but not translated. What is the second account of the Calf? — From ‘And Moses said’ up to ‘and Moses saw’. (Migilah 25b)

The purpose of the Targum was to explain to the masses the meaning of the text, here we find a type of censorship, the act of Reuven should not be explained. The question is why not? All types of indiscretions are mentioned and taught in the text. The “fall” of Yehuda, taught in next week’s Parsha does not seem qualitatively superior, yet it is taught in the Torah, taking up an entire chapter, and we don’t find later Midrashic hesitations.

It is also interesting to note that the Midrash, locally, on our verse does not comment on the episode of Reuven, ostensibly adhering to the ethic of not delving into this episode. Perhaps this would be included in the Mishnaic prohibition of discussing sexual matters, “Sitri Arayot[2]. Only later in Vayachi does the Midrash delve into the act of Reuven.

There is a second possibility as to the reluctance of using the Targum, it could be that this opinion in the Talmud, disagrees with the Targum. The Targum Onkolus translates the verse literally, thereby accusing Reuven of this outrage. The Targum [Pseudo]Yonatan, states as per the Talmud that Reuven had moved his fathers bed. Perhaps as we had seen in the outset, whoever says that Reuven has sinned is mistaken, therefore utilizing a “mistaken” text would be inappropriate.[3]

However perhaps even this text which says that one who says that Reuven sinned is mistaken, does not mean to say that he did not sin, rather talking about the sin is a mistake.[4]

R. Samuel b. Nahman said in R. Jonathan's name: Whoever says that Reuven sinned is merely making an error, (Shabbat 55b)

The Zohar which maintains that Reuven did not sleep with Bilhah, does introduce a different motivation for his actions:

Similarly, in the case of Reuben, we should not dream of taking literally the words “and he lay with Bilhah”. What he did was to prevent her from performing her conjugal duty to his father, and this was the object of his disarranging his father's couch; and, moreover, he did it in the presence of the Shekinah; for the Shekinah is always present whenever marital intercourse is performed as a religious duty; and whoever obstructs such a performance causes the Shekinah to depart from the world.[5] So Scripture says: “Because thou wentest up to thy father's bed; then profanedst thou that one that went up to my couch” (Gen. XLIX, 4). Hence it is written: “that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah, his father's concubine; and Israel heard of it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve”; that is to say, they were all included in the number, and their merit was in no wise abated.’ R. Eleazar asked: ‘Why do we find in this verse first the name Israel and then the name Jacob? The reason may be given as follows. Reuben said to himself: “My father was intended to raise twelve tribes and no more, yet now he is about to beget more children. Does he then wish to disqualify us and repiace us with others?” So straightway he disarranged the couch and prevented the intended intercourse, thereby slighting, as it were, the honour of the Shekinah that hovered over that couch. Hence it is written first “and Israel heard”, since it was by that name that he was exalted among the twelve hidden ones which are the twelve pure rivers of balsam, and then “and the sons of Jacob were twelve”, alluding to the twelve tribes by whom the Shekinah was adorned and whom the Torah again enumerated (176b) as before, implying that they were all of them holy, all of them considered by the Shekinah worthy to behold the sanctity of their Master; for had Reuben really committed the act mentioned, he would not have been included in the number. For all that, he was punished by being deprived of the birthright and by its transference to Joseph, as we read: “And the sons of Reuben, the first-born of Israel-for he was the first-born; but forasmuch as he defiled his father's couch, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph” (I Chron. VI). We see from this how all that God does is planned with profound wisdom, and every act of a man leaves its imprint and is preserved before the Almighty. For on the night when Jacob went in to Leah, all his thoughts were centred upon Rachel, and from that intercourse, and from the first germ, and under that intention Leah conceived; and we have affirmed that had not Jacob been unaware of the deception, Reuben would not have entered into the number[6]. It is for that reason that he did not receive a name of special significance, but was simply called Reuben (reu-ben=behold, a son). But for all that, the intended effect was produced, and the birthright reverted to the eldest son of Rachel, as originally purposed. Thus everything came right in the end, for all the works of the Almighty are based on truth and right.’ (Zohar, Bereishit, Section 1, Page 176a)

There are a number of issues of note in this passage, first, Reuven’s motivation is revealed, he is concerned about the twelve tribes. Knowing the story of the Rachel/ Leah switch, perhaps he feels inadequate. He realizes that he should not have been the first born and perhaps he even suspects that he should not be enumerated within the twelve sons of Yaakov at all. Ironically, due to this preemptive action he lost his birthright.

The second point of note, is that according to the Zohar, the second half of the verse is understood as well, out of concern that there be only twelve sons Reuven acted. Reuven’s concern with the number of children in the family could also be related to the fact that as first born he would receive a double portion, again ironically now that is lost, given to Yosef instead.

This is not the first instance where we see Reuven involved in an action which may relate to the number of children in the family.

And Reuben went in the days of wheat harvest, and found mandrakes in the field, and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, Give me, I beg you, of your son’s mandrakes. (30:14)

These mandrakes were said to have procreative abilities; therefore, the barren Rachel was so keen to procure them, and is even willing to exchange her conjugal rights with her sister. Again, we find Reuven involved in activities, which would impact the number of children which the family would number.[7]

There is one more issue which may allow us to have deeper understanding of Reuven’s actions. Our text tells us:

And it came to pass, when Israel lived in that land, that Reuven went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard it the sons of Jacob were twelve. (35:22)

The text clearly says that Reuven was with his father's concubine, on the other hand we were already told that Yaakov had taken her as a wife

And she said, Behold my maid Bilhah, go in to her; and she shall bear upon my knees, that I may also have children by her. And she gave him Bilhah her maidservant to wife; and Jacob went in to her.(30:3,4)

What was the relationship, was she a wife or a concubine? Evidently, Reuven saw her as merely his father's concubine. This may shed light on his actions. In Jewish law a king is permitted to take a concubine. Perhaps this was Reuven's way of staking his claim on the kingship. If this woman who was his father's concubine was now taken by Reuven, it would indicate his usurping of his father's power, and stature. The punishment which Reuven suffered was threefold he lost the birthright priesthood and kingship. As we saw above:

THE EXCELLENCY OF DIGNITY, AND THE EXCELLENCY OF POWER: the birthright should have been thine, priesthood thine, and royalty thine. Now that thou hast sinned, however, the birthright has been given to Joseph, the priesthood to Levi, and royalty to Judah. (Midrash Rabbah - Genesis XCVIII:4)

The tragedy of Reuven, reverberates throughout these Parshiot leading to the end of the book of Bereishit, instead of being a spiritual leader, his position is auxiliary, he lost the leadership, he was apparently seeking, he lost the double portion he was apparently seeking and he lost the priesthood.

In the end, we do not know what was the sin of Reuven, yet numerous sources speak of the Teshuva performed by Reuven Perhaps this is the reason we are not to discuss his failures. One thing is certain, greatness is not something which we are born into - it is not a birthright. Greatness must be earned. It cannot be arranged, nor acquired by deception. Perhaps, as his mother had used deception, and his father had used deception, Reuven felt that this was his mandate as well. That he had to go create his own destiny whatever the means, the ends always justify one's action. Unfortunately for Reuven, that is just not so.


© 1998 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved




[1] The text is written with this pagination, in the middle of a sentence a new paragraph begins.
[2] Mishna Chagiga 2:1, the term Sitrie (secret) is used in The Talmud on the same page.
[3] Parallel sources have instead of the word mistaken “Toeh” read “Chote”- sin, or “Shote” are foolish, this would lean in the direction that it is not a “mistaken” position, rather one which should not be stated. See Kasher in Torah Shlema note 93.
[4] I have often wondered what constitutes heresy believing an unacceptable position or stating it. See the Mishna in Chelek  “MISHNAH. All Israel have a portion in the world to come, for it is written, thy people are all righteous; they shall inherit the land for ever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands, that i may be glorified.’ but the following have no portion therein: he who says that resurrection is not a biblical doctrine, the Torah was not divinely revealed, and an epikoros”. The same term “HAOMER” is used.
[5] The verse begins “And it came to pass when Israel lived…” the Rambam in the Guide, associates this word “lived” “Bishachen” with the Shechina.
[6] This idea may also explain how Yaakov could have blatantly acted in a manner against a section of the Torah, which prohibits a father from disinheriting the son of the hated wife in favor of the son of the loved wife. Yaakov, when intimate with Leah, thought he was with Rachel. Therefore, the Zohar maintains that mystically the firstborn was destined to be a son of Rachel.
[7] There is a mystical tradition taught by the Arizal, that Yaakov was to have had fifteen children,(shivtie Yud Heh=15) but Reuven’s action frustrated the plan, therefore the two children that should have been born via the relationship with Bilhah instead were born to Yosef.