Vayechi Questions

http://www.nechama.org.il/pages/313.html

Vayigash Questions and answers

http://www.nechama.org.il/pages/1430.html

VaYigash 5731

Alef.

בראשית מז

(א) וַיָּבֹא יוֹסֵף וַיַּגֵּד לְפַרְעֹה וַיֹּאמֶר אָבִי וְאַחַי וְצֹאנָם וּבְקָרָם וְכָל אֲשֶׁר לָהֶם בָּאוּ מֵאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן וְהִנָּם בְּאֶרֶץ גּשֶׁן:

(ב) וּמִקְצֵה אֶחָיו לָקַח חֲמִשָּׁה אֲנָשִׁים וַיַּצִּגֵם לִפְנֵי פַרְעֹה:

(ג) וַיֹּאמֶר פַּרְעֹה אֶל אֶחָיו מַה מַּעֲשֵׂיכֶם וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֶל פַּרְעֹה רֹעֵה צֹאן עֲבָדֶיךָ גַּם אֲנַחְנוּ גַּם אֲבוֹתֵינוּ:

(ד) וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֶל פַּרְעֹה לָגוּר בָּאָרֶץ בָּאנוּ כִּי אֵין מִרְעֶה לַצֹּאן אֲשֶׁר לַעֲבָדֶיךָ כִּי כָבֵד הָרָעָב בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן וְעַתָּה יֵשְׁבוּ נָא עֲבָדֶיךָ בְּאֶרֶץ גּשֶׁן:

(ה) וַיֹּאמֶר פַּרְעֹה אֶל יוֹסֵף לֵאמֹר אָבִיךָ וְאַחֶיךָ בָּאוּ אֵלֶיךָ:

(ו) אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם לְפָנֶיךָ הִוא בְּמֵיטַב הָאָרֶץ הוֹשֵׁב אֶת אָבִיךָ וְאֶת אַחֶיךָ יֵשְׁבוּ בְּאֶרֶץ גּשֶׁן וְאִם יָדַעְתָּ וְיֶשׁ בָּם אַנְשֵׁי חַיִל וְשַׂמְתָּם שָׂרֵי מִקְנֶה עַל אֲשֶׁר לִי:

(ז) וַיָּבֵא יוֹסֵף אֶת יַעֲקֹב אָבִיו וַיַּעֲמִדֵהוּ לִפְנֵי פַרְעֹה וַיְבָרֶךְ יַעֲקֹב אֶת פַּרְעֹה:

(ח) וַיֹּאמֶר פַּרְעֹה אֶל יַעֲקֹב כַּמָּה יְמֵי שְׁנֵי חַיֶּיךָ:

(ט) וַיֹּאמֶר יַעֲקֹב אֶל פַּרְעֹה יְמֵי שְׁנֵי מְגוּרַי שְׁלשִׁים וּמְאַת שָׁנָה מְעַט וְרָעִים הָיוּ יְמֵי שְׁנֵי חַיַּי וְלֹא הִשִּׂיגוּ אֶת יְמֵי שְׁנֵי חַיֵּי אֲבֹתַי בִּימֵי מְגוּרֵיהֶם:

(י) וַיְבָרֶךְ יַעֲקֹב אֶת פַּרְעֹה וַיֵּצֵא מִלִּפְנֵי פַרְעֹה:

(יא) וַיּוֹשֵׁב יוֹסֵף אֶת אָבִיו וְאֶת אֶחָיו וַיִּתֵּן לָהֶם אֲחֻזָּה בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם בְּמֵיטַב הָאָרֶץ בְּאֶרֶץ רַעְמְסֵס כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה פַרְעֹה:

(יב) וַיְכַלְכֵּל יוֹסֵף אֶת אָבִיו וְאֶת אֶחָיו וְאֵת כָּל בֵּית אָבִיו לֶחֶם לְפִי הַטָּף:

(יג) וְלֶחֶם אֵין בְּכָל הָאָרֶץ כִּי כָבֵד הָרָעָב מְאֹד וַתֵּלַהּ אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם וְאֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן מִפְּנֵי הָרָעָב:

(יד) וַיְלַקֵּט יוֹסֵף אֶת כָּל הַכֶּסֶף הַנִּמְצָא בְאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם וּבְאֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן בַּשֶּׁבֶר אֲשֶׁר הֵם שֹׁבְרִים וַיָּבֵא יוֹסֵף אֶת הַכֶּסֶף בֵּיתָה פַרְעֹה:

(טו) וַיִּתֹּם הַכֶּסֶף מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם וּמֵאֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן וַיָּבֹאוּ כָל מִצְרַיִם אֶל יוֹסֵף לֵאמֹר הָבָה לָּנוּ לֶחֶם וְלָמָּה נָמוּת נֶגְדֶּךָ כִּי אָפֵס כָּסֶף:

(טז) וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹסֵף הָבוּ מִקְנֵיכֶם וְאֶתְּנָה לָכֶם בְּמִקְנֵיכֶם אִם אָפֵס כָּסֶף:

(יז) וַיָּבִיאוּ אֶת מִקְנֵיהֶם אֶל יוֹסֵף וַיִּתֵּן לָהֶם יוֹסֵף לֶחֶם בַּסּוּסִים וּבְמִקְנֵה הַצֹּאן וּבְמִקְנֵה הַבָּקָר וּבַחֲמֹרִים וַיְנַהֲלֵם בַּלֶּחֶם בְּכָל מִקְנֵהֶם בַּשָּׁנָה הַהִוא:

(יח) וַתִּתֹּם הַשָּׁנָה הַהִוא וַיָּבֹאוּ אֵלָיו בַּשָּׁנָה הַשֵּׁנִית וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ לֹא נְכַחֵד מֵאֲדֹנִי כִּי אִם תַּם הַכֶּסֶף וּמִקְנֵה הַבְּהֵמָה אֶל אֲדֹנִי לֹא נִשְׁאַר לִפְנֵי אֲדֹנִי בִּלְתִּי אִם גְּוִיָּתֵנוּ וְאַדְמָתֵנוּ:

(יט) לָמָּה נָמוּת לְעֵינֶיךָ גַּם אֲנַחְנוּ גַּם אַדְמָתֵנוּ קְנֵה אֹתָנוּ וְאֶת אַדְמָתֵנוּ בַּלָּחֶם וְנִהְיֶה אֲנַחְנוּ וְאַדְמָתֵנוּ עֲבָדִים לְפַרְעֹה וְתֶן זֶרַע וְנִחְיֶה וְלֹא נָמוּת וְהָאֲדָמָה לֹא תֵשָׁם:

(כ) וַיִּקֶן יוֹסֵף אֶת כָּל אַדְמַת מִצְרַיִם לְפַרְעֹה כִּי מָכְרוּ מִצְרַיִם אִישׁ שָׂדֵהוּ כִּי חָזַק עֲלֵהֶם הָרָעָב וַתְּהִי הָאָרֶץ לְפַרְעֹה: 

(כא) וְאֶת הָעָם הֶעֱבִיר אֹתוֹ לֶעָרִים מִקְצֵה גְבוּל מִצְרַיִם וְעַד קָצֵהוּ:

(כב) רַק אַדְמַת הַכֹּהֲנִים לֹא קָנָה כִּי חֹק לַכֹּהֲנִים מֵאֵת פַּרְעֹה וְאָכְלוּ אֶת חֻקָּם אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לָהֶם פַּרְעֹה עַל כֵּן לֹא מָכְרוּ אֶת אַדְמָתָם:

(כג) וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹסֵף אֶל הָעָם הֵן קָנִיתִי אֶתְכֶם הַיּוֹם וְאֶת אַדְמַתְכֶם לְפַרְעֹה הֵא לָכֶם זֶרַע וּזְרַעְתֶּם אֶת הָאֲדָמָה:

(כד) וְהָיָה בַּתְּבוּאֹת וּנְתַתֶּם חֲמִישִׁית לְפַרְעֹה וְאַרְבַּע הַיָּדֹת יִהְיֶה לָכֶם לְזֶרַע הַשָּׂדֶה וּלְאָכְלְכֶם וְלַאֲשֶׁר בְּבָתֵּיכֶם וְלֶאֱכֹל לְטַפְּכֶם: 

(כה) וַיֹּאמְרוּ הֶחֱיִתָנוּ נִמְצָא חֵן בְּעֵינֵי אֲדֹנִי וְהָיִינוּ עֲבָדִים לְפַרְעֹה:

(כו) וַיָּשֶׂם אֹתָהּ יוֹסֵף לְחֹק עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה עַל אַדְמַת מִצְרַיִם לְפַרְעֹה לַחֹמֶשׁ רַק אַדְמַת הַכֹּהֲנִים לְבַדָּם לֹא הָיְתָה לְפַרְעֹה:

(כז) וַיֵּשֶׁב יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם בְּאֶרֶץ גּשֶׁן וַיֵּאָחֲזוּ בָהּ וַיִּפְרוּ וַיִּרְבּוּ מְאֹד:

(כח) וַיְחִי יַעֲקֹב בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם שְׁבַע עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וַיְהִי יְמֵי יַעֲקֹב שְׁנֵי חַיָּיו שֶׁבַע שָׁנִים וְאַרְבָּעִים וּמְאַת שָׁנָה:

(כט) וַיִּקְרְבוּ יְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לָמוּת וַיִּקְרָא לִבְנוֹ לְיוֹסֵף וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ אִם נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ שִׂים נָא יָדְךָ תַּחַת יְרֵכִי וְעָשִׂיתָ עִמָּדִי חֶסֶד וֶאֱמֶת אַל נָא תִקְבְּרֵנִי בְּמִצְרָיִם:

(ל) וְשָׁכַבְתִּי עִם אֲבֹתַי וּנְשָׂאתַנִי מִמִּצְרַיִם וּקְבַרְתַּנִי בִּקְבֻרָתָם וַיֹּאמַר אָנֹכִי אֶעְשֶׂה כִדְבָרֶךָ:

(לא) וַיֹּאמֶר הִשָּׁבְעָה לִי וַיִּשָּׁבַע לוֹ וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל עַל רֹאשׁ הַמִּטָּה:

1.  a. 47:1 Yosef mentions that his family have herds, something that was anathema to the Egyptians who worshipped domesticated animals.

b. Ibid. 2 Yosef takes only some of his brothers to meet Pharoah, with the intention to make a certain impression.

c.  Ibid. 3 The brothers identify themselves to Pharoah as shepherds (see a. ).

d.  Ibid. 4 The brothers state that they have only come to Egypt temporarily for as long as the famine affects Canaan, and that they are already settled in Goshen, an area relatively isolated from the rest of Egyptian society.

e.  Ibid. 7, 10 Yosef arranges that Yaakov comes to bless Pharoah.

f.  Ibid. 11 Yosef settled his family in the land that Pharoah said they could live.

2.  a. Ibid. 19, 25 Yosef acquires all of the Egyptians as possessions/slaves to Pharoah, in contrast to the status of his family.

b.  Ibid. 20, 21 Yosef bought all of the Egyptian land, and resettled the people in central locations, which in turn separated them even more from the rest of the people.

c.  Ibid. 23 Yosef ordered the people to engage in agriculture, in contrast to herding that was his own family’s occupation.

Despite all of Yosef’s efforts, the beginning of the book of Shemot describes how in the generations following his and his siblings’ deaths, the Jews were turned into slaves of the Egyptians. Furthermore, according to some views, when the opportunity came to leave Egypt, the overwhelming majority—4/5, 49/50, or 499/500—opted to remain in Egypt, suggesting a high level of assimilation and acculturation into Egyptian society, despite Yosef’s original efforts. According to Meshech Chachma, the restrictions regarding not changing names, language, clothing styles and either against intermarriage or not reporting upon one another to the government were rulings imposed already by Yaakov prior to the descent into Egypt in order to preserve Jewish identity. These practices are identified by the Midrash as the reason why the Jews were ultimately redeemed from Egypt.

Beit.

1.  Why should Pharoah have cared exactly how old Yaakov was? What difference does it make to him? And if that is the meaning of the word, then why doesn’t Yaakov answer him?

2.  Ibn Kaspi thought that the word “כמה” couldn’t be used as an exclamation; only as a quantitative query.

3. 

(שמואל ב' יט:לה) וַיֹּאמֶר בַּרְזִלַּי אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ כַּמָּה יְמֵי שְׁנֵי חַיַּי כִּי אֶעֱלֶה אֶת הַמֶּלֶךְ יְרוּשָׁלָם:

And Barzillai said unto the king: 'How many are the days of the years of my life, that I should go up with the king unto Jerusalem?  I am this day fourscore years old; can I discern between good and bad? can thy servant taste what I eat or what I drink? can I hear any more the voice of singing men and singing women? wherefore then should thy servant be yet a burden unto my lord the king?

)תהילים עח:מ) כַּמָּה יַמְרוּהוּ בַמִּדְבָּר יַעֲצִיבוּהוּ בִּישִׁימוֹן:

How oft did they rebel against Him in the wilderness, and grieve Him in the desert! And still again they tried God, and set bounds to the Holy One of Israel. 

(איוב יג:כג) כַּמָּה לִי עֲוֹנוֹת וְחַטָּאוֹת פִּשְׁעִי וְחַטָּאתִי הֹדִיעֵנִי:

How long, O LORD, wilt Thou forget me for ever? How long wilt Thou hide Thy face from me? Wherefore hidest Thou Thy face, and holdest me for Thine enemy? 

(שם כא:יז) כַּמָּה נֵר רְשָׁעִים יִדְעָךְ וְיָבֹא עָלֵימוֹ אֵידָם חֲבָלִים יְחַלֵּק בְּאַפּוֹ:

How oft is it that the lamp of the wicked is put out? that their calamity cometh upon them? that He distributeth pains in His anger? That they are as stubble before the wind, and as chaff that the storm stealeth away? 

Only the first of these verses utilizes “כמה” as a quantitative question. The others support the interpretation mentioned by Ibn Kaspi.

Gimel.

Beno Jakob answers the Akeidat Yitzchak’s question in the following manner:

a) By virtue of HaShem Taking the Jews out of Egypt, He “Acquired” them—Shemot 15:16 “Terror and dread falleth upon them; by the greatness of Thine Arm they are as still as a stone; till Thy People pass over, O LORD, till the people pass over that Thou hast Gotten,” paralleling Pharoah acquiring the Egyptians via Yosef and due to the famine.

b)  Since the people “belong” to HaShem, the land to which He Brings them also belongs to HaShem and there are restrictions vis-à-vis owning such land. So too Yosef acquires the Egyptians’ land due to the famine and now Pharoah owns all property.

c)  The people belong to HaShem to the extent that they cannot be sold by and to one another. So too the Egyptian people were made slaves to Pharoah due to the famine and they now had to do his bidding.

d)  If Pharoah is the owner of the people, he can control what they do and to whom they owe obeisance. So too the Jewish people, at best they can be sold into temporary slavery, but subject to HaShem’s Rules.

e)  Just as the people had to give to Pharoah a percentage of their produce, since he owns them and their land, so too HaShem can Demand a percentage of the produce that Jews grow in the land of Israel and that it be dedicated to whatever uses He See fit, including the support of those who do the service in the Tabernacle/Temple.

f)  Just as Pharoah does not change the ownership of the land that belongs to the Priests, the Kohanim and Leviim also don’t get their own portion of the land per se, but rather a portion of land that belongs to others since in fact their first responsibility and loyalty is to HaShem rather than their land or possessions.

In effect, what takes place with respect to the famine is a type of Ma’asei Avot Siman LaBanim, presaging the eventual relationship between the Jews and God once they reach the land of Israel.

Daled.

One could read 47:13 “there was no bread throughout all of Egypt”, but there was bread in some places, i.e., the storage/collections cities that Yosef had set aside for this purpose. Consequently, there was food for not only the Egyptians but also those in surrounding countries. But it was available only in certain places in the land of Egypt.

Heh.

1.  RaShBaM: Yosef, by relocating the people,  was looking to assure that there not be rebellions against his rule.

HaEmek Davar: Yosef was careful to relocate the people en masse from a particular city to a new location so that the social infrastructure would not be adversely affected. 

2.  A possible support for ShaDaL’s interpretation is the verse that immediately precedes v. 21:

47:20

So Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine was sore upon them; and the land became Pharaoh's.

In order to illustrate Pharoah’s control of the land, Yosef made the people to relocate, not to disperse them and their social units, or to force them to live in a particular place, but rather in order to demonstrate that the land no longer was under their control.

Vav.

1.  a)  Despite the proposal of the people in v. 19 that Yosef should acquire not only their lands, but themselves (19--…buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land will be bondmen unto Pharaoh…), Yosef in the next verse purchases only their land (20--So Yosef bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine was sore upon them; and the land became Pharaoh's).

      b) If the people in fact had become slaves, why do they get to keep any part of their produce? The fact that they are allowed to keep 4/5 as long as they contribute 1/5 suggests a sharecropper rather than slave relationship with Pharoah. (24--And it shall come to pass at the ingatherings, that ye shall give a fifth unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones.'”

      c) In v. 25, they repeat their request to become Pharoah’s slaves, implying that it has not as yet officially taken place (And they said: 'Thou hast saved our lives. Let us find favor in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh's bondmen.') And again in response, Yosef only legislates concerning control of their land, but not of the people themselves (26--And Yosef made it a statute concerning the land of Egypt unto this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth; only the land of the priests alone became not Pharaoh's.)

2.  Meshech Chachma comments on verse 19 that the terminology “(כג) וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹסֵף אֶל הָעָם הֵן קָנִיתִי אֶתְכֶם הַיּוֹם..., suggesting that the relationship of master to slave has a time limit, i.e., for as long as it is necessary to deal with the famine, but not beyond.

Zayin.

1.  Siftei Chachamim #50 states that the letters א, ה, ו, י in fact interchange in various texts.

2.  Siftei Chachamim #60 infers from the usage of the plural rather than the singular with respect to the word “שוברים” that the purchasing would not transpire via Yosef alone, but rather that the Egyptian people will sell the food to prospective buyers, and then turn over funds received to Yosef on behalf of Pharoah.

3. א)  Just because the Egyptian people no longer have money or animals does not necessarily mean that Yosef has them. Perhaps the animals died and perhaps they spent the money on other things. Therefore RaShI states that in fact the money and the animals are now in Yosef’s hands.

ב)

ברא' לח:יב

וַיִּרְבּוּ הַיָּמִים וַתָּמָת בַּת שׁוּעַ אֵשֶׁת יְהוּדָה וַיִּנָּחֶם יְהוּדָה וַיַּעַל עַל גֹּזֲזֵי צֹאנוֹ הוּא וְחִירָה רֵעֵהוּ הָעֲדֻלָּמִי תִּמְנָתָה:

רש"י

(יב) ויעל על גוזזי צאנו - ויעל תמנתה לעמוד על גוזזי צאנו:

Just as in Beraishit 47:18 it is unclear where the money and animals have gone, necessitating RaShI to explain it, so too in 38:12, the text states that Yehuda went up, but does not say where. RaShI therefore provides that information, i.e., to Timna.

Miketz

http://www.nechama.org.il/pages/1430.html

Miketz Answers

MiKetz 5725

Alef.

1. With respect to secreting Yosef’s cup among the sacks of the brothers, Yosef wanted a pretense by which he could accuse them of criminal activity and ingratitude, as well as to impress upon them his divining powers, i.e., that they couldn’t hide their crime from him.¹

     The return of the money in their sacks would make them feel that something outside of their control was taking place. (This is reminiscent of many portions of Tom Stoppard’s play, Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.) While it is possible that they were afraid that Yosef was framing them,² we see that the brothers also attribute the manipulation to God Setting them up for punishment due to their having sold Yosef those many years before. ³

2.  Placing Yosef’s cup specifically in Binyamin’s sack would create a situation whereby Yosef could legally insist that Binyamin become his slave, thereby creating the dilemma of whether or not the brothers would leave him behind, further causing grief to their elderly father who was reticent to send Binyamin in the first place.

Beit.

1.  The difference between the three interpretations is the association of the cup with   divination.

RaMBaN: The cup was not the medium of divination, but rather if it is in the hands of others, Yosef will have to use diviners to establish its whereabouts, something that Yosef did not wish to do  because it would be beneath his dignity.

HaMishtadel:⁴ What happens to the cup, e.g., if it drops from one’s hand, if it breaks, if it is lost, etc., are omens regarding what will happen to its owner.

Ben Amozeg:⁵ The commentator mentions various religious practices among different cultures where cups are used: a) Greece—copper cups are struck with one another to produce sounds that are interpreted as predicting the future; b) Tibet—the future is predicted by inspecting a cup overflowing with water; c) Egypt—a cup would be placed next to the deity Irmis,⁶ and then the future would be predicted.

2.  RaMBaN wishes to explain why Yosef instead of simply stating that he uses the cup for divination, says, “…Know ye not that such a man as I will indeed divine?” Why mention a whole category of men if what is intended is that Yosef is a diviner?

3.  The loss of his cup is explained by ShaDaL to indicate a bad omen for Yosef. But Yosef’s comment in 44:15 (see above, question 2) does not refer to something bad that might happen to him, but rather that he is a diviner, implying that he not only uses the cup for predicting the future, but also has other devices by which he was able to discern that one of the brothers had illicitly taken the cup.

4.  Concerning Beraishit 44:8, “Behold, the money, which we found in our sacks' mouths, we brought back unto thee out of the land of Canaan; how then should we steal out of thy lord's house silver or gold?”, Ohr HaChayim states:

 וכנגד מה שנתחכמת לומר כי למרמה נתכוונו בהשבת הכסף, הן אמת כי דבריו יוצדקו אם היה הגביע נחשב אצלם לפעולתו לנחש יהיו הדברים כטענתו, אבל כפי האמת הוא אצלם כשאר כסף בעלמא כי לא ינחשו וגם לא ידעו לנחש בו ואינו אצלם אלא כשאר כסף, והוא אומרו ואיך נגנוב וגו' כסף וגו', פירוש אינו אצלנו הגביע אלא בגדר כסף…

  i.e., we do not attribute any importance to a divining cup. At best, it is merely another piece of silver. And we have shown our honesty by returning the original silver that had been placed in our sacks. Why should we now take additional things?

Gimel.

1.  א) By saying that HaShem “Found” the transgression of your servants, according to Onkelos, this is too much of an anthropomorphism. Consequently, Onkelos interprets that this has gone out “from before HaShem”.

     ב)  Beraishit 44:16—“…God hath Found out the iniquity of thy servants…”, perhaps for RaShI this suggests that somehow HaShem Conducted some sort of investigation and Discovered that the brothers had sinned. However, according to the premise of HaShem’s Omnipotence, He has always “Known” what transpired and therefore the verb “Matza” would appear inappropriate. Consequently RaShI connects the verb with Finding a means by which the brothers can finally be properly punished, rather than Discovering that they had sinned in the first place.

      ג)  It would appear that Ben Amozeg is following the lead of Targum Onkelos, when he says that the verse connotes that what is happening to the brothers is due to some previous transgression rather than anything that is taking place in the present.

2.  Ohr HaChayim offers two interpretations for the phrase (Beraishit 44:16) “Ma Nitzdak”  (lit. how can we justify; fig. how shall we clear ourselves)?

According to the first interpretation, even if we appear before actual judges, we will not be able to emerge judged innocent since HaShem is Behind the events.

According to the second interpretation, the reference is to the original justification that was given to demonstrate that the brothers were honest, i.e., (Ibid. 44:8) “Behold, the money, which we found in our sacks' mouths, we brought back unto thee out of the land of Canaan; how then should we steal out of thy lord's house silver or gold?” If it is Binyamin who stands accused, he did not accompany us on our first trip to Egypt, and consequently, no money was originally secreted in his sack for him to return on the second visit.

Daled.

The Midrash in Beraishit Rabba 92, commenting upon Beraishit 44:16

…הָאֱלֹקים מָצָא אֶת עֲוֹן עֲבָדֶיךָ... ,

puns on the word “מצא” replacing  it with “מצה” which can mean “exhaust, empty”. Consequently the Midrash understands the verse as describing how the sin of the brothers had been preserved for a long time (as if “in a barrel”), and the time had now arrived for the barrel to be emptied out and punishment applied.

Heh.

ברא' מא:נז וְכָל־הָאָ֨רֶץ֙ בָּ֣אוּ מִצְרַ֔יְמָה לִשְׁבֹּ֖ר אֶל־יוֹסֵ֑ף כִּֽי־חָזַ֥ק הָֽרָעָ֖ב בְּכָל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃

1. א) Onkelos is the only one of those listed who changes the preposition “אל” to “מן”. The others keep the preposition as is and reverse the order of the words: “אל יוסף לשבור”. ShaDaL posits that the surrounding nations came to Egypt not to see Yosef; but since the food could only be obtained via Yosef, they had to see him.

ב) The Ta’amim indicate that “לשבר אל יוסף” is a unit separated from “וכל הארץ באו מצרימה”, supporting Onkelos and ShaDaL, as opposed to RaShI, RaShBaM and Ibn Ezra.

ג) RashI, RaShBaM and Ibn Ezra, in order for the Ta’amim to support them, would have had to have had to connect “לשבר” with “באו מצרימה” rather than with “אל יוסף”.

2. 

ברא' מג:כז וַיִּשְׁאַ֤ל לָהֶם֙ לְשָׁל֔וֹם וַיֹּ֗אמֶר הֲשָׁל֛וֹם אֲבִיכֶ֥ם הַזָּקֵ֖ן אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֲמַרְתֶּ֑ם הַֽעוֹדֶ֖נּוּ חָֽי׃

            כח וַיֹּֽאמְר֗וּ שָׁל֛וֹם לְעַבְדְּךָ֥ לְאָבִ֖ינוּ עוֹדֶ֣נּוּ חָ֑י וַֽיִּקְּד֖וּ וישתחו (וַיִּֽשְׁתַּחֲוֽוּ)׃

The two questions that Yosef asks are:

1) What is the welfare of your elderly father?

2) Is he still alive?

The brothers answer in the affirmative to both questions.

The Ta’amim on v. 27 by means of an Esmachta under “אמרתם” clearly break up the questions into two separate parts. However the Ta’amim on v. 28, by virtue of putting the Etnachta under the word “חי” suggest that it’s only one answer, i.e., “Your servant our father is well, in the sense that he is still alive.”

Perhaps the Ta’amim reflect the lack of readiness on the part of the brothers to state that Yaakov was in a good frame of mind. After all, not only had he lost Yosef for whom he appears to continue to mourn, but he also did not know the whereabouts of Shimon who Yosef had kept as a hostage, as well as what might happen to Binyamin whom he only reluctantly allowed to accompany the brothers to Egypt on the second trip since this seemed to be insisted upon by Yosef. Granted that Yaakov was alive, and therefore if “שלום” is limited to a physiological definition, they have answered honestly. But if “שלום” means “to be at peace”, then Yaakov could hardly be described as that.

¹ Beraishit 44:15

And Yosef said unto them: 'What deed is this that ye have done? Know ye not that such a man as I will indeed divine?'

² Ibid. 43:18

And the men were afraid, because they were brought into Joseph's house; and they said: 'Because of the money that was returned in our sacks at the first time are we brought in; that he may seek occasion against us, and fall upon us, and take us for bondmen, and our asses.'

³ Ibid. 42:28

And he said unto his brethren: 'My money is restored; and, lo, it is even in my sack.' And their heart failed them, and they turned trembling one to another, saying: 'What is this that God hath Done unto us?'

Ibid. 35

And it came to pass as they emptied their sacks, that, behold, every man's bundle of money was in his sack; and when they and their father saw their bundles of money, they were afraid.

⁴ ר' שמואל דוד לוצאטו (שד"ל), איטליה (1800-1865)

מחכמי איטליה במאה ה-19, פרשן המקרא, בלשן ומשורר. כבר מנעוריו נודע כתלמיד חכם שקנה לו ידע רב בשפות האירופיות השונות. בהיותו בן 22 פרסם פירוש באיטלקית לסידור התפילה.

⁵ ר' אליהו בן-אמוזג (אם למקרא), איטליה (1822-1900)

רב ופילוסוף, כתב פירוש למקרא. בן למשפחה ששורשיה בפאס שבמרוקו. למרות שגדל ללא הורים (נפטרו בהיותו בן 4), הצליח לרכוש השכלה רחבה וכבר בגיל 18 הוסמך לרבנות, ושימש כרב העיר ליוורנו במשך כחמישים שנה.

בהגותו ביקש להדגיש את היסוד האוניברסליסטי שלטענתו משתקף מהדת היהודית (למשל בספרו "ישראל והאנושות"). ניתן לזהות בכתביו נסיונות להתמודד עם רעיונותיהם של קאנט, הגל, פיכטה, ופילוסופים אחרים.

⁶ J.G. Forlong, Rivers of Life, Pt. II: Sources and Streams of Faith of Man in All Lands Showing the Evolutions of Faith from the Rudest Symbollisms to the Latest Spiritual Development, p. 514.

“Nebo was the inventor of letters corresponding to Toth and Hermes, whom Babylonians called Irmis, and said was ‘the deity of the Temple Towers.’”