VAYEISHEV 37:1- 40:23
The
second verse of the Parshah (37:2) begins:
אֵלֶּה תֹּלְדוֹת יַעֲקֹב, יוֹסֵף
“These are the generations of Jacob, Joseph…”
The other eleven sons and one daughter are not cited, and indication as to how important this one son, Joseph was to his Father Jacob. Moreover, the Joseph narrative is longer than most. He is treated quite favorably and in essence, along with his sons Manasseh and Ephraim rises above his siblings.
---------------------------------------------------------------
In Parshat Vayeishev, we learn that Joseph tells his brothers two dreams both of them implying that he would eventually rule over them — and this increases his brothers' envy and hatred.
Did Joseph’s family make an error in thinking that Joseph’s dreams pertained to them?
In
the Parsha at 37:7 Joseph has a dream where there are sheaves of wheat bowing down to him:
“וְהִנֵּה אֲנַחְנוּ מְאַלְּמִים אֲלֻמִּים, בְּתוֹךְ הַשָּׂדֶה, וְהִנֵּה קָמָה אֲלֻמָּתִי, וְגַם-נִצָּבָה; וְהִנֵּה תְסֻבֶּינָה אֲלֻמֹּתֵיכֶם, וַתִּשְׁתַּחֲוֶיןָ לַאֲלֻמָּתִי.
"for, behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and, lo, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright; and, behold, your sheaves came round about, and bowed down to my sheaf.'
He has another dream where the Sun and the moon bow down to him. This not only disturbs Joseph's brothers, but also his parents.
Could
it be that the Egyptians who worshipped the Sun and the Babylonians who
worshipped the Moon, great empires, would depend on their rise to greatness
from Joseph the Jew?
----------------------------------------------------------
What crimes did the brothers commit when they threw Joseph into the pit?
------------------------------------------------------------
Had Joseph's brothers been arrested, the District Attorney would have charged them with having committed the crimes of kidnapping, attempted murder, assault and human trafficking.
At their arraignment where the criminal charges are read out which of the brothers would have pled guilty and which would if any would have pled not-guilty. Would Rueven and Judah have copped a plea?
These
are elements of the crimes for which the brothers were accused:
Kidnapping is the unlawful
carrying away and confinement of a person against their will.
Attempted
Murder
requires a demonstration of an intent to murder, meaning that the perpetrator
either tried to murder and failed or took a substantial step towards committing
a murder.
Assault is the act of
inflicting physical harm or unwanted physical contact upon a person.
Human Trafficking is the trade of humans for the purpose of forced labor, sexual slavery, or commercial sexual exploitation for the trafficker or others.
How
would you defend Joseph’s brothers?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In
this Parshat Vayeishev there is an interlude to the Joseph narrative from
38:1-30...sort of an informal breather.
It is the story of Tamar and Judah.
In one sense it is reminiscent of the extreme measures taken by the heroines of our Tradition, such as Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Hannah in order to have children so that the torch of Jewish people-hood is passed on from generation to generation.
In another sense it is a reminder of the humble if not ignoble origin of the men who ruled us when we were an ancient people.
-----------------------------------------------------------
In Parshat Vayeishev at 40:1 we learn that Joseph is doing hard time in the slammer along with fellow prisoners, the Butler and the Baker (but no Candlestick Maker). Joseph interprets their dreams: the Butler will be released, but the Baker is headed for the gibbet.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In this concluding Aliyah of our Parshah we are beginning to see a different Joseph. This is not the earlier Joseph whose dreams were about him, and where God was not in the equation.
In these verses, Joseph is asked to reach out
to others, to interpret the dreams of others.
He does so and explains that this gift comes from Hashem. Clearly, Joseph has matured and is on his way
to leadership.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This week’s Haftorah portion comes from the Prophet Amos, 2:6 - 3:8. Amos was active in about 760 BCE He was from the southern Kingdom of Judah but preached in the northern Kingdom of Israel. He spoke against an increased disparity between the very wealthy and the very poor. A major theme of Amos is social justice.
Social
justice is at the core of Amos's teachings. And it can be found in Martin
Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech:
"We will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream."
At 5:24, Amos says:
וְיִגַּל
כַּמַּיִם, מִשְׁפָּט; וּצְדָקָה, כְּנַחַל אֵיתָן
"and let justice rolls like water, righteousness like a mighty stream!".
Rabbi
Balk, my Rabbi in Cincinnati, performs a duet:
https://vimeo.com/160927873/d8644b455f
-----------------------------------------
As
per Rav Kook by Chanan Morrison:
“The root
of the disagreement among the brothers was in fact ideological. There were two
schools of thought in Jacob’s family, one championed by Joseph, the other by
Judah. Joseph stressed the mission of the Jewish people as “a light unto the
nations.” In order to fulfill this goal, Joseph felt that we must interact with
the nations of the world and expose them to the monotheistic teachings of
Judaism.
Judah, on
the other hand, was concerned about the negative influences when intermingling
with pagan cultures. He emphasized the separate sanctity of the Jewish people,
“a nation that dwells alone” (Num. 23:9). Judah feared that Joseph’s philosophy
of openness and integration would endanger the future of the Jewish people. But
how to safely neutralize this threat?
Simon and
Levy, who had already fought against assimilation when they decimated the city
of Shechem for kidnapping Dina, planned to simply kill Joseph. Judah objected,
“What profit is there if we kill our brother?” (Gen. 37:26). The true danger is
not Joseph, but his school of thought. Let us put his theories to the test. We
will sell Joseph to the Ishmaelites, and let him assimilate among the nations.
Then all will see where his ideas lead to”.
We see these points of view expressed in different ways
throughout our history, for example:
Hellenism versus the Pharisees,
Chabad outreach versus Satmar insularism,
Reform and Conservative Judaism versus Orthodoxy,
The late
19th century majority view that Zionism was a reprehensible sin versus the
minority belief that emphasized the Mitzvah of forming a Jewish state in the
historic Land of Israel
---------------------------------------------------------------
Chanan Morrison - The Tabernacle and the Temple –
AS
PER RAV KOOK:
These
conflicting views are reflected by the contrast between the Mishkan (Tabernacle)
in Shiloh and the Temple in Jerusalem. In Shiloh, offerings could be eaten
outside the walls, as long as the city of Shiloh was in sight. Temple
offerings, on the other hand, could only be eaten within the Temple walls. Why
this difference?
For
Joseph, the primary mission was to publicly demonstrate the sanctity of Israel
and educate the nations. Thus, the holiness of the Shiloh Tabernacle — in
Joseph’s portion — spread beyond its walls. The Temple in Jerusalem, however,
was located in the land of Judah and followed his view. It is necessary to
build walls and restrict the dissemination of Torah, in order to protect the
sanctity of the Jewish people.
-------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment