A TRAGIC MISUNDERSTANDING

By Rav Yoel Bin-Nun

(Translated by Dov Lappin)

Seven hundred years ago, Ramban (Nachmanides, the legendary scholar and commentator) asked a biting question, a question that resonates to this day whenever and wherever people study the book of Genesis.

How is it that Joseph, after his many years sojourn in Egypt, having attained a high and influential position in the house of an important Egyptian official, did not send his father even one message to inform him (that he was alive) and comfort him? Egypt is only six days travel from Canaan, and respect for his father would have justified even a year’s journey!…(it would) have been a grave sin to torment his father by leaving him in mourning and bereavement for himself and for Shimon; even if he wanted to agitate his brothers a little, how could he not feel pity for his old father? (Ramban to Genesis 42:9)

Ramban answers his own question with an astounding answer: Joseph’s actions were all directed at making his dreams come true. Even after the first dream had been realized, he intensified the deception in order to fulfil the second dream:

…he did everything in its proper time so that (the dreams) would come true; he knew they would come true completely.

Abarbanel poses the same question, but more bluntly:

Why did Joseph hide his identity from his brothers and speak harshly to them? It is criminal to be vengeful and recriminating like a snake!…how, then, when his brothers were starving and far from home, with their families and their small children and, above all, his aged, worried and suffering father waiting for them, did he not show compassion, but instead added insult to injury by arresting Shimon? (chap.41 quest. 4)

Rabbi Yitzhak ‘Arama, in his commentary Akedat Yitzhak, find’s Ramban’s solution puzzling:

What did he stand to gain by having his dreams come true? Even had it been to his advantage, that would not have justified sinning to his own father! And as for the dreams, let the Giver of dreams provide their solutions. It would seem very silly to strive to make our dreams come true, since dreams do not come to us of our own free will (Akeda 29:9; see also Abarbanel, 41:6).

Professor Nehama Liebowitz takes issue with these last words, citing Gideon who hears a Midianite tell his dream, and acts upon it (Judges 7:13,14), and on the returnees to Zion (Ezra 1) who did not wait for Jeremiah’s seventy-year prophecy to mature, but returned before that time on their own initiative.

It seems, however, that her examples to not bear out her hypothesis: First, neither Gideon nor the Exiles were committing any grave offense by following their dreams. But following dreams does not override honouring parents, and certainly does not justify making them miserable.

Secondly, the Torah itself clearly differentiates dreams from prophecy:

Let the prophet who has a dream tell his dream;

And (the prophet) who bears my word

Speak my word truthfully;

What is straw to wheat?

The Lord has spoken. (Jer. 23:38)

As the Talmud puts it:

Rabbi Yohanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai: Just as wheat cannot exist without straw, there cannot be a dream without false elements. Rabbi Berechia said: although a dream may come partially true, the entire dream does not come true. How do we know this? From Joseph, as the Torah tells us: the sun (representing Joseph’s father), the moon (his mother), and eleven stars…and at the time, his mother was no longer (alive). (Berachot 55a)

Jeremiah tells us that dreams are the outer shell of prophecy, just as straw is the outer shell of wheat. The true prophet, says Jeremiah, knows how to separate the kernel from the straw and produce clean wheat for baking. It is dangerous to confuse different levels of spirituality to the point at which every man of spirit is considered a prophet or a seer; we could never know when we are receiving God’s word directly. We do not deny the existence of great visionaries or underrate their importance when we that they are, after all, not prophet’s. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob also received God’s word in dreams. But while the Patriarchs’ dreams seem to be pathways to divine revelation, Joseph’s dream seem sketchy and vague. In the Covenant between the Halves, Abraham first sleeps and has a vision, and then receives God’s word (Gen. 15:12,13,17,18). Jacob dreams and sees a ladder and angels, and then God speaks to him.

In Joseph’s dreams, on the other hand, there are no words of prophecy, nor does God reveal himself to Joseph that we know of. Even in Joseph’s dream solving, there is only a general awareness of prophecy:

Solutions (come) from God; please tell me (your dreams) (Gen. 40:8)

Not I (but) God (elohim) will answer for Pharaoh’s well being (Gen. 41:16).

After hearing the entire dream, Joseph is more confident:

God is committed to doing this, and God will do it soon (Gen. 41:39).

It is significant that Joseph uses God’s “general” name elohim (God), and not the name Y-H-V-H (the Lord), or El Sha-ddai, names God uses when He reveals Himself.

For all the comparisons the Midrash draws between Jacob and Joseph, the Torah itself clearly differentiates their respective dreams. This distinction draws a dividing line between the degree of revelation shown to the Patriarchs on the one hand and to Joseph on the other.

Clearly, Joseph’s dreams are prophetic, and not of those “which speak falsely”. However, they are a form of ruah hakodesh (holy inspiration), rather than nevu’a, prophecy (see Maimonides’ Guide to the Perplexed, part 2, chap. 5, on the “second level” of prophecy; see also Akeda ad loc.).

Jacob himself set the standard for Joseph’s dreams:

His father was angry at him and said: “What is this dream you dreamt? Shall I and your mother and brothers come and bow down to you?”…but his father awaited it (Gen. 37:11).

“Awaited”, according to the Midrash, means:

He took pen in hand and wrote down on what date, at what time, and at what place (Bereishit Rabba, 84:11).

Dreams like this are precisely the kind of experience about which the Akeda writes, “let the Giver of dreams provide their solution”. We are not expected to act on our prophetic dreams. Along with the experience of prophecy, these dreams grant us the power to wait. A dream that comes true without our involvement is a dream we can acknowledge, after the fact, as a prophetic dream. Only an outright prophecy, such as God’s words to Gideon, should lead to action without first waiting. Certainly, only an outright prophecy can preempt doing a commandment, and only as a temporary measure (see Rambam, yesodei hatorah, ch.9); it is unthinkable that a dream, the outcome of which is still uncertain, should preempt the fulfillment of a commandment even for a moment.

Ramban solves this problem by contending that these dreams are, indeed, full-fledged prophecies. This position is diametrically opposed to that of the Rabbis (Berakhot 55a).

Even if we accept the nature of Ramban’s position, we encounter our greatest difficulty in its content. The first dream came true when the brothers arrived in Egypt the first time:

Joseph was the ruler of the land; it was he who provided for all the inhabitants. Joseph’s brothers came and bowed to the ground before him (Gen. 42:6).

There were ten brothers then, excluding Benjamin who was at home; the sheaves (in the dream) represent the grain they will receive from Joseph.

The second dream comes true when they bring Benjamin, and meet with Joseph at his palace for the meal, to honour him and offer him gifts:

Joseph came home, and they brought him in the presents they had with them to his house, and bowed down to him (Gen. 43:26).

When all eleven stars had bowed down to Joseph for his own sake, as second to the king of Egypt, and without any direct connection to the grain, their father’s turn comes:

He greeted them and said: “Is your old father, whom you mentioned, at peace? Is he still alive?” They said: “your servant our father is at peace, he is still alive.” They bent down and bowed (Gen. 43:27-28).

This painful scene in which Joseph’s brothers prostrate themselves before him in their father’s name, and refer to him as “your servant our father”, is the fulfillment of the second dream, in which the sun and moon bow down to Joseph. The entire family (other than his mother, who was no longer alive) bowed down to Joseph, albeit without realising the import of their actions, or that some of their bowing was performed by emissaries. This scene will repeat itself when Judah begs for Benjamin’s safety and refers to Jacob – four times – as “your servant our father” (Gen. 44:24, 27, 30, 31).

As for the scene with the goblet, this happens after the second dream has come fully true – twice! As Joseph did not orchestrate the scene in order to break down and confess – he could not have foreseen Judah’s outburst – his motive could only have been top keep Benjamin behind.

The dreams had all come true by the time Jacob arrives in Egypt, including the dream in which he bows down to his son. He does not bow to Joseph in Egypt; in fact, none of the commentators suggest that he did.

The Torah does tell us that, when Jacob was on his deathbed, Joseph came to see him, and “Israel bowed at the head of the bed” (Gen. 47:31). But it is not clear whether his bowing is before Joseph or before God – the simple reading suggests the latter – and certainly, his bowing does not come about through Joseph’s initiative (Megillah 16b; Sifri Devarim 6). It is the verse that Ramban cites as proving that all Joseph’s questionable behaviour was motivated by his desire to fulfil his dreams which actually contradicts his theory:

Joseph recognised his brothers, but they did not recognise him. He remembered the dreams he dreamt and told them: “you are spies” (42:8-9).

Only at this point does Joseph remember his dreams, as he realises that the first dream has come true (see Rashi to 42:9).

We return, then, to our starting-point: since Joseph only remembers his dreams when his brothers are in Egypt, why did he not send word home before that? As ruler of Egypt, it was certainly within his capacity to do so.

Ramban writes that the ten brothers’ bowing down was not the realisation of the first dream, as all eleven brothers did not bow down to him. But the text does not bear this out, as Joseph’s first dream does not specify the number of brothers making sheaves. And Benjamin could not have been in the fields with them at the time, as he was only nine years old!

Even if we accept Ramban's assertion that these are actually prophecies, we cannot ascribe content to the dream which is not revealed in it. Following Ramban's line of reasoning, the second dream never came true, as Jacob himself did not bow down to Joseph, not to mention his mother Rachel, who had been dead for many years. The brother's economic dependence on Joseph was symbolised by the sheaves bowing down before him. This part of the dream never was intended to come true literally. Regarding the scene of the goblet, Ramban himself felt this stood apart from the story-line of the dreams:

The second affair, which he caused by means of the goblet, was not intended to trouble them. Joseph was afraid that they hated Benjamin, or were jealous of their father's love for him, ...or perhaps, Benjamin realised that they had (sold) Joseph and a quarrel had broken out. Joseph did not want Benjamin to go with them...until he had verified their love for him (Ramban 42:19).

Abarbanel agrees:

Even after Joseph had tested his brothers by accusing them of espionage, he was still not certain what their feelings were towards Benjamin, or whether they still hated Rachel's children, so he focused on Benjamin to see whether they would try to save him (chap. 42, questions 4,6).

And in the words of the Akeda:

Joseph's intentions were evidently to see whether they still hated him or they had changed their ways (chap. 42 question 2).

This second solution is no less problematic than the first. First of all, we cannot avoid the feeling that the exegetes are attempting to explain what seems to be an accidental outcome as a result of a preconceived plan. The Torah itself indicates that Joseph simply wanted to keep Benjamin behind with himself, after their brothers had gone home. Possibly, he feared that they would harm Benjamin at some point, as Ramban suggests, or he may have wished to reveal his identity to Benjamin alone and discuss with his brother a means of bringing Joseph to Egypt, or even force Jacob to come by holding Jacob hostage. It might be that he simply wanted to hear from Benjamin all that had transpired since he was sold. He may even have wanted Benjamin's cooperation in establishing the tribes of Rachel as a separate entity. What does not seem possible at all is that Joseph planned the affair of the goblet so that Judah would intervene, offer to be enslaved instead of Benjamin, force him into an emotional situation in which he could no longer keep his self -restraint, and divulge his identity. All of this indeed came about, but none of it was premeditated. Joseph's aim could not have been to test his brothers' attitude towards Benjamin. What would he have done in the more likely event that they accepted a tyrant's decree - and God's decree that their sin be recalled and punished - and left Benjamin with him as they left Shimon? Would it prove that either they were not sorry for what they had done to Joseph or that they did not love Benjamin? When Abraham agreed that Sarah be taken by Avimelech, did that mean he did not love her? We are not told that she herself objected to this unpleasant means of staying alive in a strange land (Gen. 12:10; see Ramban, Haamek Davar ad loc.). At no point in Judah's long speech is there any mention of the brothers' feelings towards each other, or towards Benjamin. Judah's expressed concern is with his "old father" whom they left behind, and who interested the ruler so much. Jacob is Judah's last resort, and it is on this note that Judah plays for all it is worth, hinting at all the while at Joseph's responsibility for any outcome. Can we be sure that, had Judah not committed himself to his father under the penalty of "eternal guilt", that this outburst would have occurred? It can certainly - and correctly - be taken as a sign of teshuva - repentance - in general. But it was not evoked by any of love or pity toward Benjamin or Joseph. The crux of our investigation is this: There are two explicit references in our story to the brothers' attitude toward Joseph. The first is during their first visit to Egypt; the second is after Jacob's death. Joseph hears his brothers express regret at their behaviour toward him, when they had only just arrived in Egypt. This regret is coupled with the realisation that all that is befalling them is a result of that behaviour:

They said to each other: this is our fault, because of our brother: we saw his suffering when he cried out to us and we did not listen that is why this misfortune came upon us (Gen. 42:21).

At this early point, when Joseph already knows that his brothers are regretful, Joseph is still capable of continuing his charade. This confession was elicited without any pressure whatsoever; they never imagined he could understand them "because the interpreter was between them". After Jacob's death, the brothers return to Joseph fearing retribution:

Joseph might wish to harm us (Gen. 50:15).

They even lied to him to save their skins (Rashi on 50:16; Ramban on 45:27). Their bowing to Joseph, at this point, knowing who he is, brings the dream full circle:

His brothers also bowed down to him and said: "We are your slaves" (Gen. 50:18).

In our attempt to understand Joseph's motivation for waiting so many years, and then deceiving his brothers, we have ruled out forcing the dreams to come true - as "dreams come to us without our consent" - and certainly do not justify torturing old and suffering parents. Furthermore, as we saw earlier, Joseph remembers his dreams only when his brothers appear before him in Egypt. Testing their regret could also not have been the reason, as he heard them express repentance in his presence, and he broke down and revealed himself only because he heard of his father. True, the brothers, especially Judah, were found to be repentant. And this was, indeed, part of the master plan. But the plan was devised not in Joseph's, but in a higher domain:

The brother were occupied with selling Joseph, Joseph was occupied mourning and fasting, Reuven was occupied with mourning and fasting, Jacob was occupied with mourning and fasting, And God was occupied with creating the light of the Messiah (Bereishit Rabba 85:4).

When Joseph does follow his own initiative and asks the chief cupbearer to intercede before Pharaoh on his behalf - he spends two years languishing in prison. In summation, our question outweighs all its proposed solutions.

The Solution:

We can now return to our original question and point out one fact which changes our entire outlook on our story:

Joseph had no inkling that his brothers had fooled his father with the coat, the blood, and the lie that Joseph had been devoured by wild animals, and the possibility may never have occurred to him!

Jacob was not the only tragic victim of this deception. Joseph spent thirteen years of slavery in Egypt and, afterward, his years of greatness wondering: “Where is my father? Why has no-one come to look for me?”

All the factors are now reversed, when seen from Joseph’s point of view. Egypt is, after all, close to Canaan, and Jacob was a rich, important and influential man, with international blood ties and connections. The Midianites who brought Joseph to Egypt were his first and second cousins; is it possible that no-one from that caravan could be located in all those years? Ishmael, Medan and Midian were all descendants of Abraham. Even after they had migrated to Eastern lands, they could certainly be located! Jacob had manpower enough to marshal herds and flocks for Esau; surely he had manpower to search for Joseph! Jacob, of course, does not do this, as he thinks his son is dead, but Joseph had no way of knowing this!

Joseph’s wonder at his father’s silence is accompanied by a dread suspicion which grows stronger over the years, as seasons and years pass by and no-one comes. Joseph’s anguish centers on his father. A voice inside him calls out: “where is my father?” and another, harsh voice chimes in: “why did my father send me to brothers that day? Why did they strip off my coat the moment I arrived and throw me in a pit? Didn’t he know how dangerous Shimon and Levi are, especially since I used to bring him bad reports about them? What did my brothers tell him when they returned? Can he really have no idea at all of what they had done?”

The voices resound and intertwine; they bring in their wake waves of fear and helplessness, then of anger and hatred, and finally comes a quiet acceptance of his fate. His brothers must have succeeded in convincing Jacob, and he was cast off, just as his relatives Ishmael and Esau had been cast off. Leah must have convinced Jacob that his vain and arrogant son, who dreamt of ruling over them all, had to be disposed of before he destroyed the household. Or perhaps it was God Himself who told Jacob that Joseph had sinned and had to be expelled.

Thirteen years of torment bring in their wake a grudging acceptance of his fate. He would live according to his father’s traditions but apart from his home. He would not sin even against a God who had rejected him; he would stay clear of his master’s wife. Years later, when Joseph rides in the viceroy’s chariot, when he shaves his beard and stands before Pharaoh, it occurs to him that God must have decreed tat his life be built separately from his family’s. He gives this feeling expression in the name he gives his eldest son:

…he called him Menashe, because God has made me forget (nashani) all my labour and my father’s house (Gen. 41:51).

To forget his father’s house!

He is more subdued when his second son is born:

…Efraim, because God has made me fruitful (hifrani) in the land of my poverty (Gen. 45:52).

Joseph’s entire world is built on the misconception that his father had forgotten him, while Jacob’s world is destroyed by the misconception that Joseph is dead. The Midrash pictures this as the Holy Inspiration leaving Jacob for al these years.

Joseph’s world is shaken when his brothers stand before him – not knowing who he is – and bow down to him. At that moment, he must question the new reality he ahs created for himself and

…he remembers the dreams he dreamt about them… (Gen.42:9)

and is thrown back into the past.

Stalling for time, he begins a line of inquiry – and action – which is geared to one end: to find out why his father had rejected him, if at all. He aims to keep Benjamin behind, so that his maternal brother can tell him all that has transpired. After the conversation with Benjamin, he can decide whether to keep his silence or to break it.

All Joseph’s actions from this point onward – including arresting Shimon – are with this aim in mind. He wanted, on the one hand, to get information (could Shimon have been interrogated in prison?) and on the other to force Jacob into sending Benjamin to Egypt and, a long year later, keep him there. The cup was planted in his sack not to test Judah – how could he have predicted his older brother’s outburst? – but just the opposite. Joseph assumed the brothers would not be able to save Benjamin, and this would be his means of keeping Benjamin – ostensibly as his prisoner – with him.

Judah’s extemporaneous plan was to obtain Benjamin’s release by harping on his old father and his obligation to him. In doing so, he tells Joseph – totally unintentionally – exactly what he wanted so desperately to hear:

Your servant our father said to us:

You know that my wife bore me two sons.

One has left me;

I said he was devoured and I have not seen him since.

(If) you take this son too and tragedy befalls him you will bring my old age down to She’ol in agony (Gen. 44:24-30).

All the plans of mice and men have been shattered, and Joseph needs to hear no more. He finally realises the naked truth that no-one has cut him off at all! Not God, not Leah, not his brothers and, least of all, his father. He was not forgotten!

Joseph could no longer restrain himself

before all who were standing before him,

and cried:

‘Have everyone leave me!’…

and he cried out loud…

and he told his brothers:

I am Joseph;

Is my father still alive?! (Gen. 45:1-3).

He still lives and he still cares! He has not forgotten! Can it be?!

Each of the players in our scene had a plan, and pursued that plan. But the plan which was finally revealed was a higher plan, geared at bringing Jacob’s family to Egypt and creating the Jewish people.

All the apparent forgetfulness is revealed to have been a tragic mistake. Even in his blindness, old Israel knew to take his hand off the hand of Menashe (forgetting) and place it on the head of Efraim (fruitful). Twelve brothers are we – and the one is here too!

The misunderstanding, however, does have its results. Joseph’s sons will replace him in the list of twelve tribes:

Now, your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt,

Efraim and Menashe

Shall be mine no less than Rueben and Shimon (Gen. 48:5).

Judah did not intend for anything other than to save Benjamin - though behold, God from his mouth to Joseph and sent him the message that Jacob's flock is complete, there are twelve sons. All of them. Furthermore, Jacob's favoured, beloved wife is Rachel, her two sons meet again because of Judah, even without his knowledge, and Menashe is redeemed and will no longer be forgotten (but rather a intrinsic part of the Jewish people)!

All the twists in Joseph's life and that of his offspring come as a result of a bitter mistake: twenty-two years of silent forgetting. All the denial, all the destruction, all the pain and reconciliation - the result of silent forgetting.

Judah's self sacrifice have - unintentionally on his part - transformed him into the channel for the word of God, to remove the mistake, forget the forgetting and to bring forth the redemption.

*     *     *

It appears that one cannot escape the fact that this explanation is the simple meaning if only for one reason, for it relies on the words of the Torah itself, the words of Judah that "broke down" Joseph when he revealed Jacob's mourning for his son - "I said he was devoured and I have not seen him since", and of the reason for the name given to Menashe by Joseph. This explanation does not suppose that Joseph meticulously planned everything out from the outset right through to its conclusion. The Torah testifies that what happened at the end was the springing forth of a complete surprise and total and revealed Divine Providence that disrupted Joseph's plan.

It appears that one cannot escape the fact that this explanation is correct from a historical perspective, as it explains the cycles of Jewish history that is portrayed in he prophecy of "Truly Efraim is a dear son to Me, a child that is dandled! Whenever I have turned against him, My thoughts would dwell on him still. That is why my heart yearns for him, I will receive him back in love - declares the Lord" (Jeremiah 31:19). Jewish history is full of the question of being forgotten by The Father, and on the other hand, the revelation of the mistake and repentance. We are twelve tribes - no-one is missing! Any exclusions are the fruits of a bitter mistake that is destined to be clarified!

It appears that one cannot escape the fact that this explanation is correct from a mystical point of view (the extent of Divine Providence over the world), for it clearly shows the difference between that which is revealed and that which is hidden, between the intentions of man, even the greatest of the righteous men, and that of the plans of Divine Providence For even through all the failings and mistakes, it creates the light of the Messiah and brings about the unification of all the tribes of Israel.

© Yeshivat Hakibbutz Hadati - Ein Tzurim,   5763/ 2002