“And Yehuda he sent ahead of him to Yosef to prepare [le-horot] for him in Goshen, and they came to the Land of Goshen.” Yaakov has experience with wandering. It is not for nothing that his symbol is the staff that he used to cross the Jordan. We can learn from him how to prepare for transition periods. He agrees to go to Egypt with his big family to the house of Yosef, but he does not hurry into it haphazardly. Yaakov deals with planning and preparations, not only with those deriving from the immediate needs of packing and leaving. For example, he fills the journey itself with meaningful content, and does not relate to it merely as a necessary intermediate stage, as we can learn from his offering sacrifices in Beersheba (Genesis 46:1). Similarly, Yaakov takes an additional step: he sends Yehuda ahead of him (46:28). Sending Yehuda ahead of him can be interpreted very simply – on the level of interpersonal relations and etiquette:
When people travel to a new place, it is proper practice to have other people go ahead of them, as the Torah states (Genesis 46:28) ‘And Yehuda he sent ahead of him…’ (Arvei Nahal, Bemidbar Shelach 1).
A person who respects himself does not come to a new place without preparing the groundwork for his stay. According to this idea, “to prepare [le-horot] for him in Goshen” means that Yehuda was given the task of announcing and preparing the way for Yaakov’s impending arrival – as a guide for Yaakov. “That he should set out before they entered the city so as to guide them where to go and what to do” (Radak, ibid.); and the Pesikta states, too: “’ to prepare [le-horot] for him in Goshen’ – to tell him ‘your father has made it to Goshen’” (Pesikta Zutrata, Vayigash 46).
The midrash presents this interpretation as subject to a dispute between Rabbi Hanina son of Rabbi Aha and Rabbi Hanina: “’And Yehuda he sent ahead’ – Rabbi Hanina son of Rabbi Aha and Rabbi Hanina [debated,] – one said ‘to set up place to live’ and the other said “to set up a meeting place so that he could teach Torah, so that the tribes would study ther” (Midrash Rabbah, Vayikra 95).
According to one opinion, Yaakov sent Yehuda ahead to set up a dwelling-place. This interpretation follows from the explanations presented above. Yehuda was sent to prepare for Yaakov’s stay, so that Yaakov would not find himself homeless and vulnerable on the streets. And so he is instructed to find somewhere appropriate for Yaakov’s needs, prepare the surrounding community, and set up the necessary groundwork; thus paving the way for Yaakov to acclimatize successfully.
This interpretation, though, did not gain much traction relative to the second interpretation which explains that Yehuda was sent to set up a meeting-place where Yaakov would teach Torah. According to this other opinion, Yehuda was sent to establish a Yeshiva before Yaakov set out for Egypt – to prepare the place where it would be possible to delve into the study of Torah. Although this can serve as a source attesting to the importance already ascribed in ancient times to the education system in Israel, we will be focusing on the significance of the Yeshiva being a vital need of prime importance.
“’And Yehuda he sent ahead of him’ – to set up a house of study from which instruction would come. A moral lesson from this is that for every action that a person does- first of all, he should plan as part of this action something for a higher purpose. Someone who merits to build a house should first plan in his mind which room in the house will be designated as ready for him to seclude himself for Torah study, prayer, and hitbodedet and a place ready to be meeting-place for Sages, and afterward plan things for his own needs. (Sh’lah, Derekh Hayyim Tokhahat Mussar, 78).
The Sh’lah wishes to learn something from Yaakov’s actions and the establishment of the Yeshiva in Egypt before he himself arrived there. The moral lesson is about priorities in building. The main purpose of a house is to be the spiritual centre of its inhabitants. It is the place from which emanates one’s unique light of Torah. Therefore, all preparations for a home need to be such that it will be comfortable to study and delve into Torah there – whether it is preparing a spot for a library and computer, setting aside a quiet corner for study and prayer, or making the place convenient and able to have an influence on the rest of the house. The remaining rooms in the house and their use are already secondary to it being a meeting-place of study and thought.
Other source went further, in light of this Midrashic approach, to discuss the importance of Torah study specifically on the eve of exile, as a formula for the preservation of Israel’s identity and connection to God during times that are shrouded in darkness.
These interpretations constitute opposing viewpoints about the question of how Yaakov prepared to go to Egypt. The form of preparation is apparently derived from a general estimate of what the expected social or spiritual challenges would be; what was the most basic pressing need – comfort and having a base, or intellectual blossoming. But there is no debate over whether sending Yehuda to Egypt was part of the preparations for moving there. And thus the two interpretations emphasize the importance of preparing and organizing – whether material or spiritual – in anticipation of what is coming. As Tiferet Shlomo explains about our parasha: “lehorot” – in the sense of the word herayon [pregnancy].
Hassidic thought ascribes special emphasis on the importance of preparation, in the footsteps of the original pious ones (Hassidim) who would spend an hour in reflection and personal preparation before prayer. Preparation is meant to focus one’s environment, to ensure that the vessels are appropriate for what they need to receive and contain. But the main innovation is that preparation is not merely a time whose content and design is only focused on the future. There is an understanding that preparation is an opportunity to focus on the process as one with intrinsic value that requires scrutiny and scrupulousness. A school is a preparation stage for intelligently contending with future situations, but has intrinsic value; acquiring an academic degree is a preparation stage for specializing and finding employment, but the experience of the student is one of fulness and significance; our lives are merely “vestibules of the banquet hall” – nevertheless, we take them seriously and ascribe great importance to them.
Yehuda, who is sent to lay the groundwork, is revealed as someone talented in plowing the field and preparing the furrows. His greatness is not manifest in impressive operations, bearing fruit, or standing at the forefront of the action. His majesty is present in the ability to facilitate processes and establish them. He is the presenter (mangish) – just as Yehuda approaches Yosef and, with his wit, saves the people of Israel (Vayigash), so does he save the people of Israel in his going to Goshen and softening the exile (Goshen).
In relating to Yehuda’s actions, the Midrash suggests an interesting angle: as Kohelet notes, people who work “behind the scenes” laying the groundwork are forgotten quickly; generally speaking, people do not pay attention to them. The main part of their task is to do it without leaving traces of their efforts. People would not have known the names of the Maccabiah bridge-builders if the work had been carried out properly (and if it had not collapsed). Nobody remembers who invented the wheel, but many accomplish great things because of the wheel’s existence.
This vantage point of the Midrash paves the way for a third interpretation – not one that is humanistic-societal, and not one that is spiritual, but a mystical interpretation. This viewpoint is connected to the view of a division of labor that creates a full picture, one that sees the processes from above as completing one another. Some people plow, and some plant. At the end, the combined efforts produce the full process. Joined with this is the idea of “the deeds of the forefathers are a sign for the sons,” which ascribes hints about the future and the processes that they will represent in the future redemption: Yehuda is sent because there is a higher purpose for a meeting between Yehuda and Yosef, in the sense of “and the wolf will dwell with the lamb”: “And Yehuda he sent ahead of him” – it is written (Isaiah 65) “wolf and lamb will graze as one and the lion, like cattle, will eat straw” (Genesis Rabbah, Vayigash, 95). The lion is Yehuda, and the cattle- the ox – is Yosef. The unity of the two brothers is necessary to embed meaningful processes in history to prepare for the future redemption.
