In Parashat Vayigash, Yosef reveals himself to his brothers and bids them to bring their father and families to Egypt where he will support them through the devastating famine. When ordering their return to Canaan to bring Yaakov, Yosef says, "Quickly, go up to my father… " (45:9). Rashi here cites the famous comment of Chazal that "Eretz Yisrael is higher then all other lands."
The question arises, why did Rashi wait until this point to make this comment? The Torah has employed expressions of ascent regarding trips to the Land of Israel, and descent for travel in the opposite direction, many times earlier in Sefer Bereishit. Did Rashi simply forget about Chazal's explanation until he reached Parashat Vayigash?
Some have explained that Rashi wished to highlight the greatness of Yosef as manifest through this single word, "alu" (go up). In Egypt, Yosef became effectively the second most powerful man in the world. Or, given his responsibility for providing grain for the entire Middle East, he may well be considered the single most powerful person in the world at the time. He had achieved wealth, fame, power, prestige, respect and glory. Yet, he could still view his homeland, where he suffered the scorn, contempt and hostility of his brothers, as "higher" than the land of Egypt. Despite his success in Egypt, he always considered Eretz Yisrael the "holy land," the place where one can achieve the closest possible relationship with the Almighty, and the center of his nation's destiny. Rashi here tells us not only of the unique quality of Eretz Yisrael, but also of Yosef's heroic recognition of this quality even after having risen to power in Egypt. (This perspective expresses itself in next week's parasha, too, as Yosef bids his brothers to bury him in Canaan.)
This understanding teaches us two important lessons. First, we learn about the need to maintain a broad, national and historical perspective above and beyond our personal accomplishments. One must never become too overwhelmed by his own success to consider national concerns and think about the larger destiny of Am Yisrael as a whole.
Additionally, a second, somewhat less obvious lesson emerges from this analysis of Rashi's commentary: when one says something is often as significant as what he actually says. As we have seen, Rashi's decision to wait until this point to cite Chazal's comment reveals a beautiful insight into Yosef's remarkable character. A truly wise commentator knows not only what to say, but when to say it.