Haftarah of Parshat Vayeshev - 5761

Introduction

The Haftarah that is read on Shabbat Parshat Vayeshev is taken, according to both the Ashkenazic and Sephardic Communities, from the Book of Amos, "Perek"/Chapter 2, "Passuk"/Verse 6 through "Perek" 3, "Passuk" 8.  The Book of Amos is included in the Collection of Books of Prophecy known as the "Trei Asar" (see below).

A Note on the "Trei Asar"

The "Trei Asar" were a group of twelve prophets ("Trei Asar" means twelve in Aramaic, which was the spoken language of the Jewish People in Talmudic times).  It refers to a group of prophets whose works were collected and bundled together as if one "Book" by the "Anshei K'nesset HaGedolah," the Men of the Great Assembly, a group of great Torah scholars who functioned at the beginning of the Second Temple era.  One of their accomplishments was the definition of the contents of the "TANAKH," the Hebrew Bible.

The reason for their bundling was that, although they were of Divine origin, and had profound meaning for all subsequent generations, there was fear that because of their relatively small size (they varied from one to fourteen chapters), they would be lost.

The twelve individual prophets were Hoshea, Yoel, Amos, Ovadiah, Yonah, Michah, Nachum, Chavakuk Tzefaniah, Chaggai, Zechariah and Malachi.

Who was the Prophet Amos?

Amos was a wealthy man, a cattle merchant and a sycamore inspector.  He lived in Tekoa, in the part of "Eretz Yisrael" allocated to the Tribe of Asher.  His period of prophecy was during the reign of King Uzziah in the Kingdom of Yehudah, beginning two years prior to the earthquake, that was caused by Uzziah's entering the Holy of Holies to offer incense, although he was not a Priest.  The King at that time of the Kingdom of Israel was Yeravam ben Yoash.

His prophetic mission was mainly to warn the King and the People of the Kingdom of Israel of the approach of great danger due to their sins and moral affronts to G-d and His Torah.  He also reproved the Kingdom of Yehudah, but to a lesser extent, because he was from the Kingdom of Israel, and because the danger was looming there considerably before it threatened the Kingdom of Yehudah.

Setting of the Haftarah

The setting, or context of the Haftarah is that it is the climax of a group of prophecies beginning, "For three sins of  a nation  I would forgive them, but that is the limit of My patience with them, and if they sin a fourth time, I cannot forgive them anymore.  The Prophet began with Damesek (Amos 1:3), proceded to Azah (Amos1:6), then Tzor (Amos 1:9), then Edom (Amos 1:11), then Amon (Amos 1:13), then Moav (Amos2:1), then, crossing the "Continental Divide" between the non-Jewish and the Jewish nations, but in this context there was no divide, Yehudah (Amos 2:4), and finally, in our Haftarah, culminating with Israel (Amos 2:6).

Selected Commentary on the Haftarah

Amos (2:6)

"…because they sell the righteous for silver…"

RASHI introduces the discussion of this sin by noting that it refers to the judges, who would accept bribes, and pervert justice by declaring the righteous person guilty, and the guilty litigant, who had provided the bribe, innocent.

RADAK  expands on this explanation by noting that in the context of the verse, "For three I would forgive, etc.," the meaning here is though the People of Israel violated the  three cardinal sins: sexual immorality, idol worship, and the shedding of blood, HaShem says that He would have forgiven them those sins.  But when they did "chamas,"  violence in a social context, taking violent advantage of the poor and perverting justice,  that was too much, even as it was at the time of the Generation of the Flood, where the text reads (Bereshit 6:11), "And the earth was corrupt before G-d and the earth was filled with violence."

"…and the needy for a pair of shoes."

Targum Yonatan explains the meaning as being related to the idea of locking a door,  or imposing a separation.  Thus, the rich judge would force the poor property owner who had a field that was between the fields of the judge, thus blocking the formation of a  large "estate," to sell that property to the judge at a low price so that the judge could control a larger and larger tract of land.

RADAK says that the moral level of the society was so low that judges would accept bribes even as small as a pair of shoes, and for that they were willing to pervert justice.

Amos 2:7

"Who desire that the dust of the earth should be on the head of the poor…"

RASHI explains this to mean that all the while that the judges would walk "on the earth," they would think of how they could extract additional money from the poor.

RADAK interprets the expression to mean that the so-called judges were ready to use  force to impose their unjust verdicts; if the poor were unwilling to pay, "police officers" would attack them and throw them to the ground, covering them with the dust of the earth, until they would accept the unjust decisions of the "judges."

"…and a man and his father would go unto the same engaged young woman in order to profane My Name."

Ib'n Ezra says that the moral standards of the society of Israel had fallen so low, that modesty had completely disappeared, allowing the abomination described in the verse to occur.

RADAK says that HaShem had commanded the Jewish People to "Be holy for I your  G-d am holy."  If you act in the obscene manner described in the verse you will be profaning yourselves and thereby also profaning the Name of G-d.

Amos 2:8

"And they lay themselves down beside every altar upon clothes taken in pledge…"

RASHI cites the Targum Yonatan who explains the verse as meaning that the "judge" would settle the case as a loan upon the poor, take their garments as pledges, make them into couches, and recline on them at the time of their meals.

Eliezer of Beaugency explains that they would recline in beds made from the garments of the poor even beside the altars of "bamot," altars made on a high place, for the service of HaShem (the construction of "bamot" was a practice in wide use in Biblical times.  They were used both for Divine Service and for the service of idols).

There was a time of "heter habamot," a time when it was permitted to worship HaShem using "bamot," but after a certain period, after the "Mishkan," the Tabernacle, the  temporary transportable Temple, moved to Shiloh, and certainly once the Temple stood  in Yerushalayim, there began the period of "Issur HaBamot,' in which "bamot" were prohibited even for the Service of HaShem. 

But they were so ingrained into the ritual life of the Jewish People that it was almost  impossible to eradicate their use, and the Bible would often comment about one of the  Kings who had been relatively good in terms of observance of the Torah, "but he could not eliminate the 'bamot.' "

"…and they would drink the wine of those who were fined…"

RASHI, RADAK and Metzudat David explain that they would exact money wrongfully from the poor and use it to purchase wine.

"…in the house of their god."

Malbim explains that they consecrated the garments they took as pledges to their gods, used them to sit on as they ate the sacrificial meat from the altars in the temples of their gods.  And they would drink from the libations of wine that they had purchased from the money gained wrongfully from the oppressed litigants.

Thus, according to the Malbim, we see the mingling of the sin of idolatry with the sin of oppression of the poor, a poisonous mix.

Amos 2:9

"But I destroyed the Emorite…"

RADAK explains that HaShem says that He destroyed the Emorites because of their depraved and inhuman practices; yet you chose to adopt those practices, despite the fact that you had been warned to steer clear of them.  And Amos mentioned only the Emorite because they were the strongest of the nations that HaShem removed from the path of the Israelites, as Amos says, "whose height was as the height of cedars and he was strong as the oaks."

Ibn Ezra adds that the Emorites were the most closely identified with the Land of Israel, as we see from the fact that HaShem had said to Avraham, in the "Brit bein HaBetarim," that He could not  deliver the Land to Avraham at that point "because the sin of the Emorite was not yet complete" (Bereshit 15:16).

"…his fruit from above and his roots from below."

RASHI explains that HaShem accomplished this by use of the "Tzirah," the wasp-like insect that pursued the Canaanites.  Its venom could apparently make one blind ("destroying their fruit from above") and also sterilize the men ("and its roots from below").

Amos 2:10

"…And I led you through the desert for forty years…"

RASHI and RADAK explain that the purpose of the forty year sojourn in the desert was for HaShem to teach the Jewish People the ways of the Torah, so that they would  appreciate its infinite worth and superiority over the ways of the Emorite and other nations they would encounter in Canaan.

Amos 2:11

"And I raised some of your children as prophets and some of your sons as Nazirites…  "

RADAK explains that HaShem is saying to the Jewish People that He did two other great favors to them that He did not do to any other nation.  The first was that He allowed His Divine Presence to rest upon their nation in such a manner that inspired some of their children to envelop themselves in the spirit of prophecy, allowing themselves to receive direct communication, as it were, from G-d.  And others to seek the spiritual heights of "nezirut," abstinence from wine and meat and other pleasures of the flesh (that is only holy in isolated cases).

Amos 2:12

"And you gave the Nazirites to drink wine, and you commanded the prophets not to prophecy."

RADAK explains that HaShem is criticizing the Jewish People that not only did they not pay attention in their own lives to the commands of G-d, but they also negated the holiness of those among them who had assumed a higher level of holiness.  Thus, they convinced the Nazirites that there was no point in accepting upon themselves the restrictions that they had assumed and, worse, they had  prevented their children from imbibing from the Holy Spirit by telling them forcefully not to prophecy, that they weren't interested in their warnings, nor in what G-d had to say to them."

In the interest of conserving space, we skip from Amos 2:13 through Amos 2:16.  In Chapter 3, Amos takes up essentially where he left off in 2:12, and continues to castigate the people of Israel for their rejection of Prophecy, their only direct link to HaShem.

Amos 3:2

"Only you did I love above all the families of the earth; therefore I will visit upon you your iniquities."

RADAK explains that HaShem says here to the People of Israel that it was only they whom He chose, and who witnessed all His miracles, as opposed to the other nations of the world.  Therefore, it is appropriate that HaShem punish Israel for its sins, just as a king of flesh and blood would tend to be angry and punish the servants who are always before him, as opposed to the villagers whom he hardly ever sees.

Amos 3:3

”Will two walk together unless that had agreed?"

RASHI relates this to prophecy, "Will a prophet speak out unless he was commanded to do so?"

Amos 3:4

”Will a lion roar in the forest if it has no prey?…"  

RASHI says that when a lion lays hold of prey, it usually roars, and it usually does not roar, if it has not found prey.  This is obviously a metaphor.  The reality it models is the mode of operation of the Prophet, who speaks no prophecy unless G-d has spoken to him, and if G-d has spoken to him, he almost has no choice but to speak out.

Amos 3:5

”Will a bird fall from the sky unless it is caught by a trap?  And if it is in the trap, is it not caught?"

RASHI continues the idea of the previous verse, relating the trap and the bird to the prophet and his message.

Amos 3:6

"Will a shophar be sounded in the city and the people not quake?…"

How could it be that an alarm (for example, a fire alarm or an incoming missile alarm) would be sounded in the city, and the residents of the city would not respond to it with great fear?

How then can the words of the Prophets, that are meant to be alarms for the people, not inspire fear?

Amos 3:8

"If a lion roars, who will not be afraid? If the L-rd G-d speaks a message, who could not prophesy?"

RASHI compares the roar of the lion to the call of G-d to the prophet to prophesy.  Just as it is impossible not to be afraid of the roar of the lion, so is it impossible for the prophet not to prophesy after being commanded to do so by Almighty G-d!

Connections

The main connection between the Parshah and the Haftarah is the selling of Yoseph:

• In the Parshah, we find that the brothers of Yoseph HaTzaddik sold their brother into slavery, because they could not tolerate his dreams, which clearly indicated his belief that he would one day rule over them.

In the Haftarah, we find the Prophet Amos bitterly criticizing the Judges of Israel for their willingness to take bribes of silver, thereby repeating the crime of the brothers of Yoseph, "selling the righteous for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes."

• In the Parshiyot of Bereshit, and later in Shemot, in connection with Moshe, who was a shepherd for the flocks of his father-in-law, Yitro, we find that most, if not all of the Avot and the Imahot, and their children, were shepherds.  Moshe, the leader par excellence of the Jewish People, is in fact called the "Roeh Ne'eman," the Faithful Shepherd, for his leadership of the People.

In the Haftarah, Amos is also a herdsman.  In fact, he is described, in the first chapter of his Book, as being "among the Nokedim of Tekoa."  That term is reminiscent of the negotiations between Yaakov and his father-in-law, Lavan, over his salary, when it was determined that Yaakov would receive the "Akudim, Nekudim U'Verudim" (Bereshit 31:10).

• In the Parshiyot of Shemot, Moshe is described as being a "k'vad peh," having some type of speech defect.

In the Haftarah, Amos as well is called "tongue-tied," and according to Rabbi Pinchas, whose opinion is not necessarily universally accepted, Amos was not his real name, but rather a somewhat nasty "nickname" applied to him by his enemies, meaning that he was "burdened ("amus") by his tongue.

• In Parshat Noach, the Generation of the Flood is condemned because, over and above all their other sins, their final achievement, that won for them the opportunity to be destroyed by a Flood, was their predilection for violence, as we see in Verse Bereshit 5:11.

In the Haftarah, after HaShem has taken a vow never to utterly destroy the World again, as we see in Genesis 9:12-17, we find violence again being the crowning "achievement" of the society of the Kingdom of Israel, for which HaShem declares that He will not forgive them.

• In the Parshah, we find an incident where a father-in-law, Yehudah, unintentionally impregnates his daughter-in-law, Tamar.

In the Haftarah, Amos makes reference to such intentional acts as being examples of desecration of the name of G-d.

• In the Parshah, Yaakov madfe reference in his debate with Lavan, to stealing of sheep of the flock by wild animals.

In the Haftarah, Amos begins his Book and uses the metaphor of a lion roaring and speaks of a lion and its prey, presumably sheep from the flock of a shepherd.

Conclusion

Returning to the major connection between the Parshah and the Haftarah, the unjust selling of Yoseph by his brothers, the consequences and implications of this terrible "aveirah," or sin, has pursued the Jewish People  down the ages.  In the penitential prayers of Yom Kippur and the Kinot of Tishah B'Av, we read the story of the "Asarah Harugei Malchut," the "Ten Martyrs," in which the account is given, poetically uniting the historically separated martyrdoms, of a judgment by the Roman governor against the  greatest of the Sages of the Talmud.

He said to them, "If one sold his fellow Jew into slavery, what is the law of the Torah?"  They answered that he must be put to death.  He then said, "The brothers of Joseph were never brought to trial for their sin of selling their brother into slavery.  So I will carry out their punishment upon you, for you represent the Torah."

In its account of the destruction of the Second Temple, the Gemara in Masechet Gittin tells a story of "Kamtza and Bar Kamtza," one a friend, the other an enemy, of a certain individual who made a party.  The servant of the Jew who made the party invited the wrong man with the similar name, but no matter what that poor individual offered the host, the latter insisted upon his forcible ejection from the party.  Since the great Rabbis of Israel were present, the victim had to assume that they acquiesced in his embarrassment.  And he turned around and informed falsely against the Jewish People to the Roman government and contributed to the destruction.

The sin of "sinat chinam," causeless hatred, or even "hatred for a cause" as was the hatred of the brothers for Yoseph, and the hatred of the humiliated partygoer who had been invited, and then  thrown out in the presence of the religious authorities of the Torah, is also a sin.  "You shall not hate your brother in your heart" (Vayikra 19:17) makes no distinction between "causeless" and "for a cause."

Similarly, it is destructive for us to adopt a strategy of anger and hatred for our misguided brothers in Eretz Yisrael, who deny the bases of our religion, our right to the Land of Israel, that there ever was a  Temple, the occurrence of the Holocaust, and other monstrous absurdities, that they utter.  We rather have to go to the root of their ignorance and teach them otherwise.  When their "chet," their sin of being wide of the mark of truth, is uprooted, in accordance with the conception of Beruriah, the great wife of Rabbi Meir, with regard to the misguided individual who was harassing her husband, then we will stand together as an "am echad ba'aretz," one nation in the Land, and earn the support and protection of the One G-d of the Universe.

Rabbi Pinchas Frankel