Od Yoseif Chai (Joseph is still alive!)
Part 5: Joseph reveals himself and is reconciled with his brothers
Commentary on Parashat Vayigash TORAH: Genesis 44;18 47:27 HAFTORAH: Ezekiel 37:15-28 December 12, 2001 7 Tevet 5762
© 2005
Maggid ben Yoseif
Introduction:
This is
the fifth of the six weeks of special commentary on the Torah portions
that record the birth, mission and death of Joseph. This commentary is
being written and disseminated to determine whether the Torah may allude
to or reveal outright a plan to Return the non-Jewish Assimilated House
of Joseph to be reunited with the Jewish House of Judah. In fact, we
submit that such a plan is mystically hidden in the circumstances
surrounding Joseph’s birth, life and interaction with his brothers,
including the reconciliation with them indicated in this week’s portion.
Such a return and reunion would naturally involve the biblical
inheritances of the House of Joseph (the historical/biblical borders of
Ephraim and Manasseh) together with the biblical territory of Benjamin,
who became part of the House of Joseph in last week’s portion. Since
these same territories define the
Shomron or Samaria, sought by the Palestinians to comprise the northern
2/3rds of their proposed state, Hashem may have plans for this region
other than a Palestinian state.
In this week’s portion, we especially note the phrase explaining why
Joseph was preserved in his personal exile for the sake of his brothers,
l’hachayot lachem lifleytah gedolah (to sustain you for a momentous deliverance). A deliverance in
this day by providing an alternative to a Palestinian state and another
lawless Lebanon on Israel’s borders would certainly qualify as
“momentous.”
Since last week’s haftorah was Chanukah I, but we wanted to
emphasize the fate of Benjamin being divided in half with haftorah
Mikeitz,
this week we are examining the profound truths of haftorah
Chanukah I and haftorah
Vayigash
as they relate to the Return of the House of Joseph.
Maggid ben Yosef
Portion
of the Kohen: Genesis 41:18-30
Vayigash
(“and he — Judah — approached”) explains how two
brothers who historically did not get along, reach a place of unity. In
fact, Tanchuma Vayigash refers to this unity with the phrase which ends
the
Shmonei Esrei
prayer, “He who makes peace in His heights
make peace upon us and upon all Israel.” Just who
comprises us and the rest of Israel is indicated at the beginning
of the
Shmonei Esrei
with the
Tzur Yisrael
(petition
to Hashem as the “rock” of Israel to arise to the aid of both
Judah and Israel. The reference is clearly to the Northern and Southern
kingdoms coming together again as a condition of the
geulah (redemption).
Mystically, the reference in verse 30 that Jacob’s soul is bound up
with Benjamin’s explains why the Southern Kingdom to whom most of
the tribe of Benjamin eventually gravitated, survives its exile. As
Judah explained “we cannot laredet (“go down” or a word
traditionally associated with exile or leaving Eretz Yisrael)
without him (Benjamin). If the youth (Benjamin) is missing, he
(Jacob) will die. The identity of Jacob’s soul with Benjamin,
therefore makes it necessary for Benjamin to become the connection
between Judah and Joseph today.
Portion
of the Levite: Genesis 44:31 — 45:7
The obligation that Judah has re: the welfare of Benjamin (which
translates to the soul of Jacob) is clarified to Joseph as being an
eternal obligation. What will become evident as the Torah portion
proceeds is that Benjamin is the link between Jacob and Joseph.
Mystically, Joseph knew this and mystically, so do his descendants
today. The assimilation of Benjamin within Judah is a major unifying
factor in the Return movement and at the same time has preserved Judah
for this reunion.
In 45:1, we see that the moment of the revelation of the identity of
Joseph to his brothers is a private thing between them. Joseph has all
bystanders removed. Yet he cries out in a loud voice, “ani Yoseif ha'od avi chai!
(I am Joseph. Is my father still alive?), which all of Egypt
heard. Similarly there is a revelation taking place privately between
the sons of Joseph and Judah today. What is today faint whispers in the
ear will one day be shouted from the mountains and will be anything
other than silent in the ear of the world.
As we alluded to in the introduction, Joseph explains his personal exile
as a means Hashem had chosen to sustain all of Israel for a momentous
deliverance — a
pleitah.
A future
pleitah
is alluded to in the prophet Obadiah (see Part 2). As we explained in
commenting on
haftorah
Vayishlach,
the
pleitah
there alluded to, is a function of the House of Joseph on Mount Tzion
which would vanquish the House of Esau at the time Jacob would reclaim
his possessions.
Third Portion: Genesis 45:8 — 45:18
Joseph makes a curious and seemingly superfluous comment alluding to
Benjamin. “Behold! Your eyes see — as do the eyes of my brother
Benjamin — that it is my mouth that is speaking to you.” But when we
remember how Benjamin’s and Jacob’s souls are one, this begins to take
on a new meaning. We can see that the later covenant between King David
(from Judah) and Yonatan (heir to the throne of Saul from Benjamin),
that this covenant sealed and commemorated each month on the occasion of
the renewal of the moon, is a reminder to
Judah
that the soul of Jacob obligates Judah to remember the House of Joseph.
It was David’s friendship and allegiance to Yonatan which endeared him
to the House of Joseph. Joseph may also be alluding to the lack his
father, Jacob, has suffered since the time of Joseph’s disappearance
which resulted in the inability of Jacob to experience the
Sh’chinah
for those 22 years. Similarly, not since the time of the exile of the
Northern Kingdom, has the
Sh’chinah rested on a United Israel and Judah.
Fourth Portion: Genesis 45:19 — 45:27
If we recall that when Jacob sent Joseph to look after the welfare of
his brothers, and send back word, we can understand why Joseph
sent 10 wagons with his brothers along with 10 he-donkeys and 10
she-donkeys. Only when Jacob sees these wagons (the
agulot) is he convinced that Joseph still lives. The Midrash
relates that this was a mystical message Joseph sent to his father
alluding to the last thing Jacob had taught Joseph, about the importance
of escorting a guest and the similarity of the word
agulot (wagons) and the
eglah (calf that had to be beheaded if a man was found
slain between two cities). The wagons for Joseph’s father and brothers
also were his reply to Jacob’s charge that he see to the welfare of
his brothers.
Fifth Portion: Genesis 45:28 — 46:27
In listing the 70 descendants of Jacob who went down into Egypt, we note
in verse 27 that the singular noun,
nephesh
(one
soul), is used to describe the entire family and includes the two
sons of Joseph born in Egypt.
Sixth Portion: Genesis 46:28 — 47:10
Of all the occupations the family of Jacob could have chosen, the most
offensive to Egypt would be that of shepherds, which means they
would grow to be detested by Egypt. This would result in them remaining
apart physically from the families of Egypt, which may have been
Hashem’s design with creating their first of many ghettos. The
vegetarian Egyptians revered their animals as gods. Many modern cultures
place more value on the lives of animals than human beings.
Seventh Portion: Genesis 47:11 — 47:27
The last verse of this portion relates that the children of Israel have
now settled in the land of Egypt in the region of Goshen. How? They
acquired property in Egypt and they were fruitful and
multiplied greatly.” The Midrash again relates that the land of
Egypt grasped the children of Jacob, implying that their possessions in
Egypt possessed them and prevented them from leaving Egypt. Possessions,
especially possession of lands and homes can have the same effect in our
culture today, which may explain why many Joes today are a more
transient people choosing to rent or lease rather than buy and living
more frugal lives anticipating doors suddenly opening to make this
return. Living in
galut (exile), many also are aware of their
responsibility as Hashem's Light to the Nations to Remedy the
Bread of Shame associated with His gifts to all of Israel.
Haftorah Vayigash: Ezekiel 37:15-28
Popularly known as the haftorah of the two sticks of Ezekiel coming
together, there is probably no more pointed reference to the return and
reunion of Joseph and Judah than this portion. Although it begins with
verse 15, verse 11 gives us the context by which to identity these two
with the analogy of dry bones that gather sinew and flesh and come to
life. Those bones are identified in verse 11 as the whole House
of Israel. In this same chapter, Ezekiel makes a distinction between
the House of Judah and the House of Israel. This means the whole
House of Israel refers either exclusively to the Northern Kingdom or at
least to an aggregate population comprising the Northern Kingdom along
with the Southern … in other words a reunion.
Since verse 12 begins with the transition "Therefore" and verse
16, the transition "Moreover," it is evident that Ezekiel 36:15
continues the same theme of restoration and reunion of the
Assimilation of the Northern Kingdom comprised primarily of the House of
Joseph.
The two sticks or tablets if you will, are identified in the one hand of
Ezekiel as the “stick of Judah and
b’nei
Yisrael, his
chaverah (companions of like mind) and in the other hand,
“Joseph, the stick of Ephraim and the
Beit
Yisrael,
his
chaverah.”
The reference to
Beit
Yisrael,
(House of Israel) because Ezekiel uses it earlier and later in
this chapter to describe the Northern Kingdom, would be the Assimilation
of the Northern Kingdom.
The
stick of Ephraim must change location to be gathered to the stick of
Judah in verse 19. Verse 21 spells out where this Assimilation of the
Northern Kingdom is located — from among the nations to which they
went and promises a return to their own soil — their biblical
possessions in Eretz Yisrael, which in the case of the House of
Joseph, is the region of the
Shomron.
Verse 22 says they will become one nation upon the mountains of
Israel. Most of the mountainous terrain in Israel today is in
Judea-Samaria, the unannexed territories sought by the Palestinians for
their state. Verse 22 further describes this return to one king and a
very clear reference to the healing of the rift between the two kingdoms
so that “they shall no longer be two nations, no longer divided into
two kingdoms again.”
Verse 23 also seems to allude more to the Assimilation of the Northern
Kingdom. Their
pesha (rebellious sins) are atoned for. The judgment of “Lo-Ami”
(Not My People), which Hashem first spoke through the prophet, Hosea,
declaring that He would not be their God and they would not be His
people) also finds remedy. Since only
Yom
Kippur
(the Day of Atonement) or the intervention of a
tzadik (see Isaiah 53) may deal with the category of sin known as
pesha,
this Assimilation is obviously a people who have returned to Torah.
Their
t'shuvah
(repentance) also evident from verse 24 where they clearly “go in My
ordinances (the
mishpatim
of Torah) and observe My
chukot (decrees) including the
yishmeru or safeguarding of them, which is another
way of saying they observe some form of
Halachah
(the interpretation of Jewish Law). Verse
25 is specific to the unannexed territories as well since Jacob dwelt
from
Sh’chem
(modern Nablus) and the border between Ephraim and Manasseh to Hebron in
Judah. This people who return from the Assimilation will similarly
inhabit these regions., “they, their children and their children’s
children forever.”
The covenant of peace alluded to in verse 26, is associated
either with Joseph directly (because he was initially construed by his
brothers to be an obstacle to
Shalom Ha-Bayis
or
peace in the household) or between Judah and Joseph. Again in verse 27,
Hashem reiterates that “I shall be for a God unto them, and they
shall be unto Me for a people,” the same words which in the negative
earlier judged not the Southern Kingdom but only the Northern
Kingdom. (See Hosea 1:7).
NOTE: Last week’s Torah portion,
Mikeitz, was read with
Haftorah Chanukah 1
instead of
Haftorah
Mikeitz.
Below is our exposition of the
Haftorah
Chanukah 1
as it relates to the theme of the Return of the House of Joseph:
Haftorah Shabbat Chanukah I: Zechariah
2:14 — 4:7
The “daughter” of Zion in verse 14 who should “sing and be glad,” is
mystically Joseph, since the gematria of
Tzion and the gematria of
Yoseif are both 156. The nations (goyim)
who attach themselves to Hashem on that day and become a people unto
Hashem do so by the intervention of a
tzaddik,
represented by the
tzadey.
A
tzadey
placed in front of the Hebrew word for Greece (Yavan)
converts it into
Tzion.
Judah is clearly favored by Hashem as Judah is given his portion in the
Holy Land by right of being taken as a heritage. Since the name Yehosua
is traditionally associated with the Ephraimite who led the children of
Israel in driving out the Cananite inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael, (and
this is a vision), we also have an initial indication of a mystical
portent related to Ephraim.
Satan is described as the accuser standing before Hashem. Mystically,
such accusations from the guardian prince aligned with
Sama’el,
the guardian of Esau, are possible only when Israel is not observing the
Torah and its safeguards (some form of
Halachah).
This is alluded to in verse 6, where Yehoshua is warned to walk in
Hashem’s ways and safeguard His charge. Only then would
Yehoshua also be permitted among the “standing ones.”
Hashem instructs his messengers to remove the soiled garments and place
on Yehoshua “machalazot,”
usually translated fresh garments. This is a most interesting
term which is formed from the same word as
chalutzim
(pioneers in modern Hebrew). But the word also shares a common
root with the verb describing the loosening of the shoe by which one
relinquishes his right to
yibum
(levirate marriage). The shoe earlier loosened is now the remedy
for this symbolic Yehoshua's spiritual malaise.
The
Yehoshua to which the vision refers also appears to be a very unusual
man with a very unusual following. He and those who
yoshvim (sit) before him (making him some kind of
rosh yeshiva
-- head of
a
yeshiva)
are all
mofet
hemah
(translated "miracle workers or men wondered at"). Certainly there
appears to be some kind of mystical quality to them which causes many to
take note.
Their instruction comes veiled in a mystical reference to a stone with
seven eyes or facets. Since the stone is mystical it is open to mystical
interpretation. One of the most intriguing interpretations I have come
across about this comes from Rabbi Avraham Raich, who identifies the
stone as Judah (the Jewish people) and six tribes that have
assimilated into this stone or perhaps the House of Joseph
joining with the tribes assimilated into Judah. This is indicated by
the allusion following to the vine (the House of Judah in
the prophetic imagery) and the fig tree (the House of Israel in
prophetic imagery) and each man inviting his fellow beneath both
or the restoration of the two kingdoms. Similarly the allusion to the
two olive trees standing beside the right and left of the Temple
menorah. Yet another symbol of unity and brought about not by power or
might but by the
Ruah ha-kodesh.
This
could mean that the coming together again of Judah and Joseph (both
containing part of Benjamin), will occur in the same way that Jacob’s
spirit was linked to Joseph —through Benjamin. Jacob’s revival also came
at the news that his son, Joseph, was still alive.
When Shabbat, Rosh Chodesh and Chanukah coincide, which almost occurred
this past Shabbat, this haftorah concludes with the first and last
verses of Shabbat Erev Rosh Chodesh and Shabbat Rosh Chodesh calling to
mind the covenant sealed between King David and Yonatan, which would
apply forever between the House of Judah and the House of Joseph.
Shabbat Shalom & Hashem's love & blessings,
Maggid ben Yosef
Note:
Ordinarily, we do not copyright our writings. The Od Yosef Chai
commentary series may be disseminated with permission via email from the
author. Each commentary must be disseminated in its entirety with no
editing or changes permitted. This is being done to ensure that this
material is not taken out of context.
|
|