Spiritual and
Ethical Issues For the next number of weeks, Dr. Tamari's column will focus on an important and sadly neglected area of Torah Life. We hope that Dr. Tamari's words will not only be of academic value, but will also impact on a "Tachlis level" to help improve our behavior as individual Jews and as Klal Yisrael. Yosef and his Brothers [2] Apparently, this struggle is necessary for moral perfection and for the triumph of good. Without such struggle, mankind would sink into stagnation and indolence" (Rabbi Munk). Nevertheless, whereas Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel held that one who denies his wealth to undeserving sons is correct, the law is like the Sages who taught: "A man should never single out one child among his other sons, for on account of two sela's weight of the fine woolen garment that Yaakov gave to Yosef in preference to the others, his brothers became jealous and hated him; and because of this our fathers went down to Egypt" (Shabbat 10b). Rambam (Nachla'ot 6:13), when codifying this as halakhically binding adds, 'during his lifetime' after 'a man should never'. It seems that he would deem it permissible to distinguish between children when preparing a will, as did Yaakov when he deeded two portions of Eretz Yisrael to Yosef; this brought no censure from the Sages. Even though Yaakov's distinguishing thereby betweenhis sons transgressed no law, neither biblical nor rabbinical, nevertheless the Sages saw his deviation from correct behavior as something worthy of censure. "And Yosef would bring evil reports about them to his father." Since the verse reads brought and not "motzi", extracted evil reports, as it does with regard to the Spies (Bamidbar 13:32), we can understand that Yosef did not create or falsify their actions but rather brought reports of actions to Yaakov. The Baalei Hatosafot saw this as his reporting what he heard from people in the market place, according to Radak he told his father that they hated him and belittled him, while Ibn Ezra, taking the verse explicitly, explains that Yosef's evil report was that the brothers made him a servant to the sons of Bilha and Zilpa. "Rabi Meir taught that the report accused them of eating of the flesh of living creatures [eiver min hachai], Rabbi Yehuda taught that they treated the sons of Bilha and Zilpa as servants, and Rabbi Shimon taught that they cast their eyes on the daughters of the land" (Yerushalmi, Peah 1:1). "Why did consideration of these three things cause Yosef such concern and anger that he felt he had to bring them to the notice of Yaakov? He saw them as a rejection of the three hallmarks of the Abrahamic family - "merciful, modest, and doers of righteous deeds" (Yevamot 9a) - and therefore had to be eradicated" (Yalkut Yehuda). The Chassidic masters saw them as corresponding to the three sins - bloodshed, idolatry, and sexual immorality - that led to the destruction of the First Temple. There is no indication that the brothers actually did any of these things, rather there was a misconception on the part of Yosef who, through his youthful misjudgment, brought biased reports based on his own interpretation of his brothers actions that presented them as wrongdoers. They ate the flesh of calves born to mothers that had been ritually slaughtered but had died before they calved; he did not know that such calves did not require shechita. They had contact with the Cananite women during their trade and not as he envisaged it, for purposes of marriage. They made a distinction between the sons of Zilpa and Bilha and those of the Matriarchs that appeared to Yosef to be tantamount to treating them as servants. "Yehuda ben Pazi taught, "the scales of justice are the Lord's" (Proverbs 16:11), so Yosef was repaid, when the brothers slaughtered the goat to show their father's his blood soaked tunic, when he himself was sold into slavery, and when the wife of Potiphar cast her eyes on him" (B'reishit Rabba 84:7). "It is a negative mitzva not to hide our hate (mitzva 238) and a positive mitzva to admonish our fellows and help them to correct their ways (mitzva 239); as it is written; 'You shall not hate your brother in your heart, [The brothers to their credit could not talk peacefully to Yosef and thus hid their hatred and jealousyfor him], you shall surely admonish him' (Vayikra 19:17)" (Sefer Hachinuch). Avraham had upbraided Avimelech concerning the wells, Yaakov had openly spoken against Lavan's treatment despite the danger posed to him by the presence of Lavan's kinsmen, and Moshe had rebuked the Israelite who struck his fellow. The autonomous Jewish communities used the herem to show public displeasure of those individuals who broke the moral code; people who pleaded bankruptcy to avoid their creditors (Vaad Arba Aratzot, enactments of 1624; Be'er HaGola), while the public recitation of Mi Shepara is to be used against those who do not keep their contracts,verbal or written (Choshen Mishpat 204). Public disapproval and censure is the most powerful weapon against corruption, evil and immorality. "It was wrong for Yosef to bring these reports [irrespective of how we understand them] to Yaakov, their father. Rather he should have directly upbraided his brothers and thereby made them aware of their shortcomings and so lead to their spiritual improvement. Yosef was too humble to correct the brothers directly as he was the youngest of the sons and so felt inadequate to admonish them. In this, his humility was like that of Rabbi Zechariah ben Avkulas whose humility led to the destruction of Yerushalayim and the Second Temple (Gittin 56). That rabbi did not consider himself worthy of ruling that Bar Kamza should be put to death when he convinced Vespasian to send a sacrifice that he had blemished to make it unworthy for the Altar. That rejected sacrifice convinced the Romans that the Jews were planning rebellion and therefore they attacked and destroyed Yerushalayim; so Yosef's humility had led to his sale and the exile in Egypt" (Shem Mi Shmuel). [The Parshat No'ach Homepage]
|
