Seforno on Yosef's Tears for his Brothers

We read in Parashat Miketz of Yosef’s harsh treatment of his brothers when they arrived in Egypt to purchase grain. He accused them of spying and ordered them to bring Binyamin from Canaan to prove their innocence, while one brother, Shimon, remained in prison in Egypt. The brothers, not realizing that Yosef understood their language, spoke to one another acknowledging that this crisis was wrought by God to punish them for what they had done to Yosef. Upon hearing the brothers speaking, Yosef turned away from them and wept (42:22).

Seforno offers a brief explanation for why Yosef was moved to tears: “Ka’asher ra’a be-tzaratam” – because he saw their distress. It was not the brothers’ expression of remorse for their crime against him that caused Yosef to cry, but rather the anguish and torment which was on display. According to Seforno, Yosef still cared deeply for his brothers, and it pained him to see them suffering, to the point where he was moved to tears.

Seforno’s comment becomes especially meaningful when we consider the fact that it was Yosef himself who brought this suffering upon his brothers. Different explanations have been given for why Yosef treated the brothers the way he did, including the claim that he felt obliged to see his dreams of leadership fulfilled (Ramban) and that he sought to lead his brothers to repentance and atonement (Abarbanel). Regardless, Yosef felt it was necessary under the circumstances to subject his brothers to this ordeal. And yet, according to Seforno, he was pained. He was not indifferent to their suffering, vitally necessary as he thought this suffering was. Irrespective of the circumstances, the fact remained that his brothers were in pain, and so he was in pain, too.

There are times when we need to cause people distress, particularly in the realms of childrearing and education, when parents and educators are compelled to deny many of a child’s requests, force the child to do things he or she does not wish to do, and occasionally to punish. There are also times when we need to offer constructive criticism which can cause a degree of embarrassment and discomfort. And sometimes difficult decisions need to be made that make people upset. Seforno teaches us that even when a decision is appropriate and warranted, we cannot remain apathetic to other people’s distress. When we need to punish or say “no” to a child, we must feel the child’s angst and empathize with him or her, no less as we would when the child needs to undergo a painful medical procedure. The fact that pain is necessary should not diminish from our feelings of empathy. We need to be genuinely sensitive and caring even when disciplinary measures are warranted, just as Yosef felt his brothers’ pain even when he felt it was necessary to inflict that pain.

(Based on a sicha by the Tolna Rebbe)

Volver al capítulo

בין צחוק לצחוק

"יוֹשֵׁב בַּשָּׁמַיִם יִשְׂחָק אֲדֹנָי יִלְעַג לָמוֹ" (תהילים ב', ד)

"וַתִּצְחַק שָׂרָה בְּקִרְבָּהּ" (בראשית י"ח, יב)

רמב"ן בראשית פרק י"ח פסוק טו

"ותצחק... בקרבה" (בראשית י"ח, יב) - ללעג

כמו "יושב בשמים ישחק, ה' ילעג למו" (תהילים ב', ד).

כי השחוק לשמחה הוא בפה, "אז ימלא שחוק פינו" (תהילים קכ"ו, ב),

אבל השחוק בלב לא יאמר בשמחה.

רמב"ן - רבי משה בן נחמן, נולד בגירונה שבספרד בשנת 1194 ונפטר בארץ ישראל בשנת 1270. שלט בכל מקצועות התורה, וחיבוריו כוללים פירושים לגמרא ולתנ"ך, פסקי הלכה ותשובות, ואף חיבורים בחכמת הקבלה ובמחשבת ישראל. כתב השגות על ספר המצוות של הרמב"ם. בגיל 73 עלה הרמב"ן לארץ ישראל, ביקר בירושלים ובחברון. חי ונפטר בעכו.

Volver al capítulo

הסבר לסרגל תהילים

בסרגל המוצג לפניכם מופיעות שתי רמות של חלוקה: הרמה השנייה מתייחסת, בדרך כלל, לכל פרק בנפרד, ואילו הרמה הראשונה מחלקת את ספר תהילים על פי חמשת הספרים השונים ועל פי מכנה משותף המאגד יחד כל קבוצת מזמורים.

חלוקת ספר תהילים לחמשה ספרים היא חלוקה קדומה והיא באה לידי ביטוי בגוף הספר: בכל סיום ספר מופיע נוסח דומה של ברכה ('ברוך ה'') והלל לה' (בסוף פרקים מ"א, ע"ב, פ"ט, ק"ו).

בנוסף לכך, רבים מפרקי תהילים מאוגדים בקבוצות עם מכנה משותף, כגון מזמורי הללויה, שירי המעלות, וכגון קבוצות פרקים הנושאים את שם מחברם: דוד, אסף, בני קרח ועוד. על עצם העובדה שהיו לדוד שותפים רבים בחיבור הספר כבר העירו חז"ל במסכת בב"ב דף יד ע"ב – טו ע"א: "דוד כתב ספרו על ידי עשרה זקנים: על ידי האדם הראשון, על ידי מלכי צדק, על ידי אברהם, על ידי משה, על ידי הימן, על ידי ידותון, על ידי אסף, ועל ידי שלשה בני קרח".

שני סוגי החלוקות שנזכרו עד כה הן חלוקות 'פנימיות', המתבססות על סימני חלוקה המפורשים בכתוב. מעבר לכך, הבאנו לידי ביטוי בסרגל גם קבצים של פרקים המשמשים כיחידות מוכרות בתפילה:

1. 'פסוקי דזמרה לימות החול' – פרקים קמ"ה-ק"נ נאמרים בכל יום לפני קריאת שמע וברכותיה. הגמרא במסכת שבת דף קיח ע"ב מזכירה את 'פסוקי דזמרה' ומספר ראשונים כדוגמת הרמב"ם במשנה תורה (תפילה ז' יב) מפרשים שהכוונה היא לפרקים הללו. על משמעותם של פרקים אלו כהקדמה לתפילה ניתן לשמוע בשיעורו של הרב פרופ' יהודה ברנדס המופיע באתר.

2. 'פסוקי דזמרה לשבת' – בשבת נוהגים להוסיף ב'פסוקי דזמרה' פרקים נוספים מספר תהילים. על מנהג זה אנו שומעים כבר בספרות הראשונים. מתוך רשימת הפרקים הללו, ישנה קבוצה של פרקים רציפים (צ'-צ"ג) הבאים לידי ביטוי בכותרת שבסרגל.

3. 'קבלת שבת' – המנהג לומר פרקי תהילים בליל שבת לפני תפילת ערבית מקורו במנהגם של חכמי צפת המקובלים בדורו של האר"י הקדוש. המנהג המקובל כיום הכולל את פרקים צ"ה-צ"ט מקורו במקובל רבי משה קורדובירו (הרמ"ק).

4. 'הלל' – עוד הדגשנו בסרגל, ברמה השנייה, את המזמורים המשמשים לאמירת הלל (קי"ג-קי"ח). המנהג לומר הלל בתפילה ובליל הסדר מוכר מהמשנה במסכת פסחים, סוכה ועוד. על מבנה פרקים אלו ועל משמעות בחירתם לאמירת הלל ניתן להאזין בשיעורו של הרב איתמר אלדר המופיע באתר.

Volver al capítulo

כפיות טובה

מלאכי פותח בתיאור אהבת ה' לעם ישראל, ומתארה כאהבה נצחית שלא תלויה במעשים. בניגוד לאהבה זאת מודגשת שנאתו לבני עשו, המתבטאת בנחלת עשו השוממה והמדברית.

הנחלה היא זו המסמלת את בחירת ה' ואת הירושה שירש יעקב -- ולא עשו -- מאברהם ומיצחק. הנביא מעודד את השבים לציון לשים לב לנחלה היפה אליה שבו, לבחירה המתמשכת בהם ובאבותיהם, לעומת השממה של יריביהם ורודפי נחלתם. השיבה לציון ובנינה מראים לעם באופן הכי ברור את בחירת ה' בהם.

אך אז ממשיך מלאכי ומתאר את היחס החוזר של העם לאלקיו: זלזול בה' והגשת קרבנות בזויים ומאוסים בעלי מומים. המצב כל כך קשה עד שעדיף כבר, מבחינת הנביא, שהעם לא יקריב קרבנות: "מִי גַם בָּכֶם וְיִסְגר דְּלָתַיִם וְלא תָאִירוּ מִזְבְּחִי חִנָם" (י).

יש להדגיש כי בתקופת מלאכי המקדש חדש, רק כעת נבנה; כך שאין מדובר בתהליך שחיקה כי אם בזלזול מובנה במקדש ובקרבנות, מיד עם תחילתם. (בניגוד להידרדרות ההדרגתית שקרתה בעבר, כמתואר בספר ישעיהו פרק א' ובספר שמואל א בפרקים ב' ו-ג').

החטא מתחיל מהאמירה: "שֻלְחַן ה' נִבְזֶה הוּא" (ז). הביזוי לא מתחיל במעשה של זביחת בעל מום, כי אם במקום עמוק יותר, כאשר בתודעת האנשים נמצאת המחשבה שבכל מקרה המקדש אינו מכובד ומהולל כשהיה, ואפשר גם לזלזל בקרבנות ולשמור את האיכות לצרכים האישיים.

הזובחים נותנים לה' פחות כבוד משהיו נותנים לאב, פחה או אדון, וזאת כאשר ה' הרבה יותר מכובד מכל אחד מהללו: "כִּי מִמִּזְרַח שֶׁמֶשׁ וְעַד מְבוֹאוֹ גָּדוֹל שְׁמִי בַּגּוֹיִם" (יא) -- כל הגויים בכל הארץ מכבדים את ה' ורק עם ישראל, אהוב ה', בועט במנחתו.

מלאכי מייצר הנגדה שמדגישה את כפיות הטובה: לנוכח אהבת ה' את עם ישראל, המוזכרת בתחילת הפרק, בולטת המאיסה הגדולה של ישראל את ה'.

הכותבים במדור זה הינם חברי ארגון נח"ת - נוער חובב תנ"ך - המהווה בית ללימוד התנ"ך בידי הנוער

Volver al capítulo

The Chafetz Chayim on Yosef's Success

The Torah tells us that throughout Yossef's term of service in Potifar's house, "God was with him, and he was successful" (39:2). This verse is usually understood as a cause and effect: because God was with him - meaning, He helped him -, Yossef had success. The Chafetz Chayim, however, reads the verse as follows: "God was with him, despite the fact that he was successful." Although success often leads one to forget his total dependence on the Almighty, this did not happen to Yossef. God remained with him, in his mind and heart, even as he rose through the ranks in Potifar's home.

The Chafetz Chayim adds in this context an insightful comment regarding the special prayer recited on "Shabbat Mevarchim" (Shabbat before Rosh Chodesh, such as this coming Shabbat). Twice in this prayer we beseech God for "yirat Shamayim" (fear of Heaven): "lives that have within them fear of God… lives that we should have love of Torah and fear of Heaven." The Chafetz Chayim explains than an additional petition for fear of Heaven becomes necessary after the request we submit in between these two clauses: "lives of wealth and honor." All too often material prosperity and high social ranking steer one away from Torah study and fear of Heaven. We therefore pray for the power of Yossef, the ability to retain our genuine love for God and His Torah, even when success threatens to blind us from our religious obligations.

Volver al capítulo

The Meshech Chochma's Explanation of the Baker in Jail

In the end of this week’s parasha, as Yoseif sits in jail in Egypt, God’s divine guidance develops an opportunity for him to attain his release. Par'oh's butler and baker and jailed together with Yoseif, and they each dream a strange dream. Yoseif interprets the dream of the butler to mean that the butler will be freed in three days’ time; this comes true, and sometime after the butler is released, he tells Par'oh of Yoseif’s skills, and Yoseif himself is released. As for the baker, his fate is not quite as positive. Yoseif interprets his dream to mean that he will be killed in three days, and that too comes true.

The Meshech Chochmah asks an intriguing question: we understand perfectly well why God directed events to be such that the butler would be jailed, for if he weren’t, Yoseif would not have been freed later on. However, why was it important that the baker, too, be jailed (or at least, why do we have to hear about it in the pesukim)? What does he add to the story? Wouldn’t Yoseif have been freed by the butler’s account to Par'oh anyway?

The Meshech Chochmah responds by explaining that had the baker not been there, Yoseif would have only interpreted one dream – the butler’s – and that interpretation would have been a positive one. The butler would have thought that Yoseif was giving him a positive interpretation simply to lift his spirits, and he would not have been convinced of Yoseif's abilities as an interpreter of dreams. Therefore, when Par'oh was later looking for someone to interpret his own dreams, the butler would not have thought to mention Yoseif. It was only because the butler saw the negative interpretation given to the baker that he knew Yoseif was speaking the truth and not simply trying to comfort them. Thus, when both interpretations came true, he felt confident recommending Yoseif's services to Par'oh, thus securing Yoseif's release.

Volver al capítulo

Yosef's Refusal and the Shalshelet Note

Parashat Vayeshev describes Potifar's attempt to seduce Yosef and his heroic resistance to her efforts. The verse states, "He refused; he said to his master's wife... How could I do this great evil, and I will have sinned against God?'"

Generally, the verse is understood as if a colon appeared after the opening word of the verse - "Vayema'en" ("He refused"). That is, the rest of the verse describes his refusal, expressed in his comments to Potifar's wife. However, Rav Itzele' of Volozhin notes that a "pesik" (separation mark) appears after the word "Vayema'en." Additionally, the unusual cantellation note, the "shalshelet," which dictates the tune to be chanted with the word "Vayema'en," sets the word apart from the rest of the verse.

Rav Itzele therefore suggests that the verse in fact tells of two different stages of Yosef's refusal to Potifar's wife. Firstly, he refused, no questions asked. His instinctive response was an unquestionable, unequivocal "No!" This reaction involved no thought process whatsoever; the act itself was so unthinkable that not a millisecond of hesitation was ever entertained. Thereafter, Yosef proceeded to explain to Potifar's wife why he could not satisfy her wishes.

If this interpretation is correct, then Yosef's response to Potifar's wife involved, first and foremost, instinct. Yosef's impulses had been conditioned by his moral sense and commitment to Torah, to the point that inappropriate behavior could not even be entertained.

For us, perhaps the lesson is the constant reinforcement of the ideals of Torah and mitzvot. By studying Torah, we learn what God expects of us, we learn what He deems appropriate and what not. This process conditions our characters accordingly, as we incorporate within us the values of the Torah. The more we learn and develop a sense of right and wrong, the more these principles become part of our natural instinct, and the more we will be naturally inclined to pursue mitzvot and avoid aveirot.

Volver al capítulo

Yosef's Loss of Compsure

Yosef's courageous defiance of Potifar's wife's advances renders him the paradigm of self-control and restraint. "Yossef HaTzaddik," as he is known, demonstrated how far will-power and spiritual consciousness can extend, to the point where one can overcome the strongest challenges, so long as he possesses sufficient resolve and determination.

Interestingly, however, specifically his inability to exercise self-restraint seems to have contributed to his decision to finally reveal his identity to his brothers. The verse states that just prior to his unveiling of his disguise, Yosef was unable "le-hit'apek." Rashbam explains this phrase to mean that whereas heretofore Yosef had the wherewithal to overcome his strong, fraternal emotions towards his brothers, at this point he simply broke down. He could no longer contain himself, and felt compelled to truly become their brother once again. (Other commentaries - most notably, Rashi - interpret the verse differently.)

Why is it that Yosef, the master of self-control, suddenly loses his composure and emotional discipline?

The answer seems to be that Yosef's emotions directed themselves in accordance with his value system. Fraternal love and affection earned a respectable place in his hierarchy of values; his physical attraction towards a gentile, married woman was clearly suppressed by his demanding moral code. Yosef HaTzaddik mastered the art of self-control; he channeled his emotions in the directions determined by his strict ethical standards. Regarding the virtuous emotion of brotherly love, his feelings overflowed beyond control. When it came to the sinful desires of a forbidden relationship, his feelings were kept in check.

Essentially, herein lies the secret of overcoming one's improper tendencies. The stronger the resolve, the more one reinforces within him the conviction to do what's right, and the more his temptation for sin will give way to his inner will to do good. Yosef's self-control could not help him overcome his affection towards his brothers; but it was his self-control that directed his emotion away from Potifar's wife and towards his righteous brothers.

Volver al capítulo

Zerubavel and the Menorah

Yesterday we discussed the haftara for Shabbat Chanukah, a prophecy from the book of Zekharya (2:14 – 4:7). Recall that Zekharya prophesied at the beginning of the Second Commonwealth, and this prophecy is conveyed as the Jews who had returned to Eretz Yisrael, under the political leadership of Zerubavel, resume the project of rebuilding the Temple. The final and perhaps most famous section of this haftara describes the prophet's vision of a menorah: "I see a menorah all of gold, with a bowl above it. The lamps on it are seven in number, and the lamps above it have seven pipes, and by it are two olive trees, one on the right of the bowl and one on its left" (4:2-3). The prophet here describes a menorah alongside two olive trees, which produce the oil in the bowl above the menorah, and the oil is carried through pipes to the seven lamps. Three verses later, we learn the underlying message behind this vision: "This is the word of the Lord to Zerubavel: Not by might, nor by power, but by My spirit – said the Lord of Hosts. Whoever you are, O great mountain in the path of Zerubavel, turn into level ground… " (4:6-7).

The obvious question arises, what connection is there between the vision and the message it seeks to convey? How does the image of the menorah show Zerubavel that he will succeed "not by might, nor by power," but rather with the divine spirit?

Rashi explains this prophecy to mean that just as the oil supply feeding the light of the menorah will eventually be depleted, so do Zerubavel and his people lack the strength, resources and wherewithal to complete this project independently. They do not have the "might" or "power" to build the Temple on their own. Therefore, God will provide for them His "spirit," meaning, He will put in the heart of the Persian king the desire to assist the Jews by supplying them with materials – as recorded in Sefer Ezra (chapters 6-8). In other words, responding to Zerubavel's frustration at the many challenges confronting his efforts to rebuild the Temple and Jewish homeland, the prophet confirms that indeed, Zerubavel is independently powerless to succeed in his formidable mission. But it is not his strength or power that will bring success, but rather the divine spirit God will infuse within the Persian government.

The Radak explains that this prophecy builds off the absence of any human effort in fashioning the menorah. The menorah simply appeared readymade in Zekharya's vision, as if it never required assembly. Similarly, the divine spirit is so indispensable to Zerubavel's project that in a certain sense the Temple, like the menorah, is built by itself, without any human effort.

A particularly fascinating approach to this prophecy is taken by Rav Shimshon Refael Hirsch, in his essay on the symbolism of the menorah ("Collected Writings of Rabbi Samson Rafael Hirsch," vol. 3, pp.223-224). According to Rav Hirsch, when Zekharya speaks of "My spirit," he refers to the description of "the spirit of the Lord" in a much earlier prophecy, of Yeshayahu: "A shoot shall grow out of the stump of Yishai… The spirit of the Lord shall alight upon him: A spirit of wisdom and insight, a spirit of counsel and valor, a spirit of knowledge and reverence for the Lord" (Yeshayahu 11:1-2). What Yeshayahu describes, Rav Hirsch writes, is, in fact, a menorah. The base of the menorah is the "stump of Yishai" – the Davidic line, from which a "sprout" – a leader - will grow. This "sprout," the spine of the menorah, will be endowed with "the spirit of the Lord," which divides into six categories: wisdom and insight, counsel and valor, knowledge and reverence. These six categories form the six arms of the menorah that extend from the "sprout," the leader, which, as stated, emerges from the menorah's base and fthe center rod. Rav Hirsch observes that Yeshayahu doesn't simply list the six qualities comprising this divine spirit, but arranges them into three groups of two. He suggests that the two members of each group belong on different sides of the menorah. For example, in the first group – "wisdom and insight," "wisdom" occupies the far right-hand arm of the menorah, whereas "insight" forms the far left-hand arm. And so on. It thus emerges that "wisdom," "counsel" and "knowledge" form the right side of the menorah, whereas "insight," "valor" and "reverence" form the right side. The right side of the menorah would then symbolize practical knowledge and know-how, while the left side represents the principles and ideals underlying this knowledge, the dichotomy Rav Hirsch describes as "theory and practice, perception and accomplishment."

For good reason, then, the vision of the menorah informs Zerubavel that he will succeed only with the "menorah" of the divine spirit, which consists of these six branches – the combination between firm religious principles and ideals on the one hand, and the practical sense to implement them, on the other.

Volver al capítulo

Reuven's Wrong, The Brothers' Judgment, and the Selling Yosef

As we discussed yesterday, Reuven, as told in Parashat Vayeshev, attempts to save the life of his brother Yosef, whom the other brothers had decided to kill. Reuven recommends to his brothers that they cast Yosef into a pit rather than kill him, with the intention that he, unbeknownst to his brothers, would later rescue Yosef. However, after Yosef is cast into the pit, Yehuda instructs his brothers to sell Yosef as a slave. When Reuven, who was apparently absent when Yehuda made his suggestion, returns to the pit to rescue Yosef, he is astonished to discover that Yosef is gone.

Where had Reuven gone, that he did not hear Yehuda's recommendation to his brothers? Rashi (37:29) cites one view from the Midrash that Reuven left to occupy himself in prayer and repentance over his sin of bringing Yaakov's bed out of Bilha's tent and into Leah's tent, a grave infringement on his father's honor (see 35:22 and Rashi).

(Rashbam explains this entire episode differently, claiming that the brothers sat at a distance from the pit and were unaware that Yosef was lifted from the pit by Midyanite merchants. Reuven never left his brothers, but rather returned to the pit upon hearing their plan to sell Yosef, to save him, only to discover that he was gone.)

What connection did Chazal see between the sale of Yosef and Reuven's sin of moving his father's bed? Why suddenly now does Reuven involve himself in repentance for this transgression?

Rav Soloveitchik is cited (by Rav Michael Shurkin, in his "Meged Giv'ot Olam") as offering the following explanation. Several Midrashim portray the ten brothers' decision to kill Yosef as a formal judicial ruling. They convened as a Bet-Din and reached the conclusion that Yosef was deserving of this punishment for having slandered them. Why, then, should they be criticized for their mistreatment of Yosef? If, indeed, they rendered an official ruling as a rabbinical court, then even if they were mistaken, they should not be punished for their error.

The answer, Rav Soloveitchik claimed, is clear: they did not consult on the matter with their father. Their hostility toward Yosef and objection to Yaakov's preferential treatment of him displayed an utter disregard for their father's judgment. They never even consulted with Yaakov on this matter, for they concluded on their own that he was in error and Yosef deserved to die. What allowed the sale of Yosef to occur was an attitude of disrespect towards Yaakov.

We can now understand the connection between Reuven's wrongdoing and the sale of Yosef. Reuven's infringement on his father's honor showed his brothers that decisions can be made without consulting a higher authority, that they are now independent of Yaakov and need not confer with him issues of major import. Upon seeing where this exaggerated sense of autonomy led, Reuven resumed his "fasting and sackcloth" over his transgression. He understood that his act had set a dangerous precedent for his younger brothers, who now considered themselves capable of independently deciding on matters of life and death without consultation with their father.

Volver al capítulo

Seforno on Yosef's Tears for his Brothers

בין צחוק לצחוק

הסבר לסרגל תהילים

כפיות טובה

The Chafetz Chayim on Yosef's Success

The Meshech Chochma's Explanation of the Baker in Jail

Yosef's Refusal and the Shalshelet Note

Yosef's Loss of Compsure

Zerubavel and the Menorah

Reuven's Wrong, The Brothers' Judgment, and the Selling Yosef

Pages

📲 Instala nuestra App