Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Vayigash answers

VaYigash 5728
Alef.
    1.  Beraishit 45:16-20 indicate that Pharoah even before the family comes to Egypt, approves of Yosef supporting them, thereby refuting the contention that Yosef first wanted to create “a fact on the ground” before informing Pharoah and thereby influencing him to allow what had already been begun to continue.
    2.  It is possible that Yosef did not want the general population to become familiar with the story of how he had been “sold” by his brothers and come to Egypt originally as a slave. See “Yosef’s Egyptian Makeover” http://text.rcarabbis.org/parashat-miketz-yosefs-egyptian-makeover-by-yaakov-bieler/ for the lengths to which Pharoah went to try to give Yosef a new identity which would be more palatable to the Egyptian people.
    Beit.
    1.  RaShI: “LeChol HaNitzavim”—due to all of those who were standing in his presence. Yosef did not wish to reveal himself while non-family members were present.
         Ibn Ezra: “LeChol HaNitzavim”—until all those standing in his presence (had left on their own). Yosef could not wait to reveal himself to his brothers. But it was taking so long for all those present to leave that he had to order them to exit.
    2.  The problem with RaShI’s interpretation would seem to be the implication of “Hotzee’u” in 45:1. If everyone was to leave except for his brothers, then instead of saying “Hotzee’u” implying that some officials were the ones who removed everyone else, but they in the end would remain and could hear Yosef’s revelations as well as witness the brothers’ embarrassment, it should have said “Yeitzu”—imperative of leaving implying that everyone should leave.
    Gimel.
         In 43:27, before the incident with finding Yosef’s cup in Binyamin’s sack, when Yosef first sees the brothers on their second visit to Egypt, he already inquires about their father. Consequently, it does not make sense that he should now ask again at the time when he reveals himself. Therefore, the commentators have to find some additional meaning in Yosef’s question to justify his repeating it.
    Daled.
    The phrase “Asher Machartem Oti Mitzrayma” would appear to be superfluous. Once it is established that he is Yosef their brother, they know all too well what transpired more than two decades before. Consequently Sephorno has to supply a rationale to account for the additional identifying phrase.
    Heh.
    1.  45:8 and 9 don’t seem to be saying the same thing—how did Yosef come to his position? Was it Pharoah’s appointment or God’s Doing? The commentator finds a way to integrate both verses into the explanation being sent to Yaakov.
    2.  Since this is Yosef’s first communication with his father for over twenty years, he does not wish to give the impression that he has forgotten his traditions and faith. Therefore after stating generally what his position involves, he quickly amends the statement with essentially what he told his brothers, i.e., that in fact God has Orchestrated everything that has occurred and it is God’s Plan that is being played out within the events that have taken place in and to the family.
    3.  In 45:10, before even knowing Yaakov’s reaction to the proposal to come to Egypt, Yosef already states that he plans to settle his family in Goshen. In 46:28, Yaakov sends Yehuda ahead to make the land of Goshen ready for the family’s arrival, suggesting that he approved of Yosef’s original suggestion.
    Vav.
    1.  RaShI, RaMBaN, Bei’ur:  become poor.
         Ibn Ezra, ShaDaL: become cut off, i.e., you will die.
         RaShBaM: become exiled from the land.
    2.  The interpretation of “lest you become exiled” makes no sense since Yosef is proposing that very thing, that Yaakov and everything that he has leave the land in order to wait out the famine in Egypt.
    3.  ShaDaL feels that poverty is a condition that affects humans but not their possessions. Consequently since Yosef includes herds of sheep and cattle in v. 10, he has in mind something that will physically happen to them rather than a description of their economic condition.
    4.  The condition of poverty is not what threatens Yaakov’s welfare in Canaan, but rather starvation due to a lack of food.  When there is no food to be had, it does not matter how much money one has!
    Zayin.
    1. The Midrash inferred from the fact that it does not say that all of Pharoah’s servants were thrilled about the rest of Yaakov’s family coming to Egypt, that there were some who were complaining that each one who comes replaces a high ranking Egyptian in a status position.
    2.  R. Hirsch was very patriotic with respect to Jews living in Germany. He felt that they could be accepted as “good citizens”. So too Yaakov’s family in Egypt; despite their being immigrants, the Egyptians welcome them with open arms since Yosef, and potentially the rest of Yosef’s family, will prove so beneficial to the society-at-large.
        

    No comments:

    Post a Comment