Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> 5756 ->


“But Er, Yehudah’s firstborn was evil in the eyes of Hashem, and Hashem caused him to die.” (38:7)

The Matriarchs of the Jewish people were by nature barren. It is perplexing that the Jewish nation, which maintains a singular purpose in Creation should descend from women who by the laws of “nature” could not possibly bear a child. This phenomenon extends to Malchus Bais David, the monarchy of David Ha’melech, who is the sovereign of the Jewish nation. The individual from whom Moshiach will descend also had his roots in the most unnatural setting.  Yehudah was the chosen monarch over the tribes. His position was to transfer this role to his eldest son, Er, who was not suitable…

Continue Reading

“And the keeper of the prison put in Yosef’s hand all the prisoners… and whatever they did there he was the doer of it.” (39:22)

The pasuk implies that Yosef initiated everything that was accomplished by the prisoners. The redundancy of the text begs explanation. Obviously, everything they did he would do.  Horav Moshe Yechiel Epstein, z.l., interprets this pasuk homiletically. Yosef was teaching us a profound lesson in avodas Hashem, serving the Almighty. Yosef was not satisfied with the fact that he upheld all of the mitzvos. He was not complacent with his own mitzvah observance. He was driven to do more, to correct and complete what others had either denigrated or discarded. Yosef was not content simply to abstain from transgressing any aveiros,…

Continue Reading

“And the chief butler did not remember Yosef, but he forgot him.” (40:23)

Rashi comments that Hashem increased Yosef’s prison sentence by an extra two years. This was because he had placed his trust in the Sar Ha’Mashkim, by asking him twice to remember him before Pharaoh. What would have happened if Yosef had asked him only once? Would he have been punished with only a single year? This question was posed by Horav Shimon Shkop, z.l., to a group of his students during a session devoted to reproving them for behavior unbecoming a ben Torah. The economic conditions in the yeshivah of Grodno, in which Horav Shkop was Rosh Ha’Yeshivah left much…

Continue Reading

“Yosef was seventeen years old … and he was a youth with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah … and Yosef would bring evil reports about them to their father.” (37:2)

A number of questions regarding the text of this pasuk demand clarification. First, what is the meaning of “he was a youth,” and what purpose does it serve in the narrative? Second, the word “tchu,” “And he would bring,” doesn’t seem appropriate. One does not bring reports; rather, one relates them to others. Third, why does the Torah refer to Yaakov as “their father”? Was he not also Yosef’s father? Horav Yechiel Michel Rabinovitz z.l., the author of the Afikei Yam, derives the following important lesson from this pasuk.  One who sees his friend acting inappropriately may hope to prevent…

Continue Reading

“And Yehudah said unto his brothers, ‘what profit (is it) if we slay our brother and conceal his blood?'” (37:26) –

Chazal cite the above two pesukim as presenting two of the instances which merited Yehudah the role of monarch over his brothers and — eventually — over Klal Yisrael. In both cases Yehudah asserted himself, either by taking command of an ambiguous situation or by accepting blame for his own actions. Are these sufficient reasons for transferring the mantle of malchus, kingship, to Yehudah? Horav Chaim Shmuelevitz z.l., asserts that the greatness of a man is commensurate to the degree that he is inclined to assume and accept responsibility. One who shuns responsibility for his actions is not considered a…

Continue Reading

“And Yaakov rent his garments … and (he) mourned for his son many days … and he refused to be comforted.” (37:34,35)

Yaakov Avinu’s behavior seems to defy Chazal’s dictum concerning mourning. Chazal state that Hashem enables human beings to cope with death and that the image of the deceased will fade from the mind of the mourners after a period of twelve months. Yaakov refused to be consoled over Yosef’s disappearance. He continued to mourn him for many years.  Furthermore, we are taught that one should not overindulge in mourning. Why then did Yaakov continue to mourn Yosef, refusing to be consoled by his family? Horav Moshe Mordechai Epstein z.l., differentiates between personal loss and communal misfortune. When a person dies,…

Continue Reading

“And it happened that as she gave birth one put out a hand, the midwife took a crimson thread and tied it on his hand … And it was as he drew back his hand that behold his brother emerged: … Afterwards his brother on whose the hand was the crimson thread emerged.” (38:28 – 30)

Zerach tried to emerge first, but Peretz pushed ahead and was born first, fulfilling the Divine plan.  Rashi notes that the Torah’s mentions the word sh, hand, four times.  He cites the Midrash which interprets this apparent redundancy as an allusion to Zerach’s descendant, Achan, who committed four sacrileges. Other commentators say it refers to the four things which Achan took from the spoils of Yericho. This action on the part of Achan was prohibited. Thus, it greatly angered Hashem.  This statement is enigmatic!  What relationship is there between the unsuccessful action of an unborn infant and his descendant four…

Continue Reading

“And he restored the chief butler unto his butlership… but the chief baker he hanged, as Yosef had interpreted to them.” (40:21,22)

In what way did Yosef perceive a disparity between the two dreams?  Superficially, it seems that the chief baker and the chief butler dreamed similar dreams. What in the baker’s dream implied impending doom for him? What distinguishing feature of the butler’s dream alluded to life and restoration? Horav Elchanan Wasserman z.l., suggests the following insight. The baker’s dream did not represent actual activity on his part.  Baskets were filled with bread and food, the uppermost one resting upon his head while birds ate the bread. The baker seems to have played a theoretical part in this dream. He did…

Continue Reading

“These are the generations of Yaakov; Yosef.” (37:2)

Rashi cites the Midrash which draws a parallel between Yaakov and Yosef. Whatever happened to Yaakov similarly occurred to Yosef. The former was hated by his brother, and the latter was also despised by his brothers. The former’s brother sought to kill him, just as the latter’s brothers also sought to destroy him. Horav Elchanan Wasserman z.t.l.  advances this thought by applying the famous dictum of “Whatever happens to the “fathers” is a portent for their “sons.” The dilemmas confronting Yaakov in his “relationship” with Esov and Lavan are a presage for Klal Yisrael’s external relationship in galus, exile, among…

Continue Reading

“And lo, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright, and behold your sheaves came round about, and bowed down to my sheaf. And his brothers said to him: ‘Shall you indeed reign over us, or shall you indeed have dominion over us?’ And behold the sun and the moon and eleven stars bowed down to me.” (37:7,8,9)

At first glance, Yosef’s second dream is a repetition of the first. This design, which emphasized Yosef’s superiority. effected a response of hatred from his brothers. When he related the second dream, however, his brothers seemed to have reacted with silence. Indeed, their loathing of him increased in intensity. This hatred festered and developed into a state of physical violence.  Yet, the Torah does not record any semblance of protest toward the second dream. Why were they so passive in responding to this second dream? Horav Moshe Swift z.t.l. offers the following rationale. There is a marked difference between a…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!