posts so far for parashat Vayigash

2013

1. ACH in אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף -- an expression of certainty, doubt, or reduction? Famously, אך and רק midrashically come only to exclude, to be memaet. And this isinteresting because according to Biblical scholars, this usage of אך is only in Rabbinic Hebrew, while in Biblical Hebrew it means "surely", or "indeed". If so, this is an anachronistic sort ofderasha, and so one reads in alternate meanings to what would have been intended by the Biblical author. You could argue and say that the meaning in Rabbinic Hebrew is also the meaning in Biblical Hebrew. This would require analysis of how it is used across Tanach. There is an אך in Vayigash that caught my eye...

2. As a followup, Connecting אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף and וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו עַד הֵנָּה with a vav -- I saw a nice idea in HaKsav VeHakabbalah, by R. Ya'akov Zvi Mecklenburg (1785-1865). See my previous post about the word אך in אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף, and whether the expression is one of certainty or doubt. Part of the calculation there is how one should relate this statement in the reisha to the statement in the seifa, of וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו עַד הֵנָּה. Is the seifa meant as an elaboration and proof to the reisha (see e.g. Ibn Ezra)? Or does the presence of seifa serve to demonstrate to us a lack of certainly in the reisha (see e.g. Ibn Janach)? In this context, here is an explanation of the vav in וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו by Rav Mecklenberg...

3. How could Yosef ask "Is my father still alive?" Yehuda had made it clear that Yaakov was alive! The Torah Temimah presents two ways of understand Yosef's question, "I am Yosef. Is my father still alive?" I like the first one as peshat and not just midrash. And at the end of the post, I give a novel interpretation of the utterance which looks forwards rather than backwards.

4. YUTorah on parashat Vayigash

2012

1. How many daughters did Yaakov have? Ibn Ezra grapples with the plural mention of Yaakov's daughters and granddaughters, in light of the reference to only one of each in the ensuing genealogy. It can be plural banot to mean a single bat, or a reference to maidservants. I analyze what might be guiding Ibn Ezra in this, explain his reference to Michal bat Shaul, and have some suggestions of my own -- that there were indeed other daughters.

2. YUTorah on Vayigash

3. Who sold Yosef?  In parshat Vayigash, there is fairly straightforward evidence that the brothers sold Yosef. Not the Midianites. Namely, we see in Vayigash that Yosef explicitly says that his brothers sold him. And a simple peshat reading of the pesukim in question in Vayeshev would be that Yehuda suggested that they sell him to the coming Ishmaelites, and then, when the Ishmaelites, who were the same as the Midianite traders arrived, the brothers carried out their plan. Now the midrash / documentary hypothesis / Rashbam as pashtan / 'close reading' which is really neo-midrash but bills itself as peshat  --  declares that the brothers did not sell, but rather that Midianites came, pulled Yosef out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites, all without the brother's knowledge. I do not believe this to be a correct peshat in the pesukim in question.

4. And then, as a followup, where did Reuven go? Since in the prior post I was focused in that post only on the pesukim directly related to Yosef's sale, I did not address other issues indirectly related to whether the brothers sold Yosef. For example, Reuven disappears. Where did he go, and what does it mean that he returned?

5. As a further followup, How plausible is a Midianite / Ishmaelite switchoff? Pretty plausible. For instance, see Shofetim perek 8 pasuk 22 and 24, where Ishmaelites are exchanged for Midianites without second thought. But then, addressing many different facets of this question. Thus: Q: Why would the Torah refer to these traders sometimes as Midianites and sometimes as Ishmaelites? We should expect the Torah to choose a single term and stick with it! Q: OK, the Torah will sometimes switch off language. But here, it is extremely confusing! Why would the Torah deliberately confuse us so? We only know that Midianites can be referred to as Ishmaelites from one small segment in sefer Shofetim. Q: Ishmaelite is most often used in Tanach to mean Ishmaelite, and Midianite is most often used to mean Midianite. To seize upon the one rare usage and assert that this is what it means represents an incredible kvetch. Q: Is it too early to say Ishmaelite for Midianite? Q: What purpose does the switch-off between Midianite and Ishmaelite serve? If it serves no purpose, then the switch-off does not make any sense! Q: What about the Medanites who appear later? And I think I give pretty good answers to these.

6. As the final post in this series, Medanites, Midianites, and Ishmaelites. And how one defines peshat. Quickly, in Yosef's sale, Midianites == Medanites == Ishmaelites. Therefore, the brothers sold Yosef to the Midianites. There is good evidence for this. Within the story, a number of pesukim make it clear this is so. Outside the story, pesukim in Shofetim show that Midianites == Ishmaelites is possible. And while there are "difficulties" in that one needs to equate different words, I do not deem these to be peshat difficulties. And the alternative peshat interpretations have a number of more severe difficulties, which are true difficulties. It all comes down to how one defines peshat. I can put my definition in the most starkest terms: Do not make a big deal of minor differences.

2011

1. Why no 'famous' derasha on Isha Ki Tazria?  Maybe there is. Regardless, what about the law of conservation of derashot? Update: The Rashi ktav yad I cited often brings in many other sources, so I would not attribute it to Rashi. The rest of the analysis still stands.
   .
2. Vayigash sources -- 2011 edition
   .
3. Proximate vs. ultimate cause in the sending of Yosef --  How Ibn Caspi understands Moreh Nevuchim. I think...
   .
4. How was Yosef's milah different from that of the Egyptians? A seeming, or very real, contradiction between two Rashis. If Yosef compelled the Egyptians to circumcise themselves, how could he present his own circumcision to his brothers as proof of his Hebrew identity? Rav Chaim Kanievsky suggests priyah or that the brothers were previously unaware of Yosef's decree. I suggest, based on another midrash Tanchuma, that Yosef's aposthia would be different than any sort of milah, since there would be no scar. And finally, I consider what midrash contradicts what other midrash, whether contradictions in Rashi are troubling, and establish for myself that I like the question but will dislike any answer.
   .
5. YU Torah on parashat Vayigash

2010

1. Vayigash sources -- expanded. For example, many more meforshei Rashi.
   .
2. How did Yehuda want to speak in Yosef's ear? Three possibilities. If so, where Rashi takes the middle road, is he choosing apeshat or a derash route?
   .
3. In answer to a ponderous parasha point
   .
4. Parsha questions --  From Junior's school parsha sheet, questions on the parsha for Shabbos table discussion. And my answers.

2009

1. The Gra's famous peshat on Vayigash -- The Vilna Gaon has a famous devar Torah interpreting the opening trup on Vayigash. Considering the idea of it, and whether it is compelling..
2. Vayigash sources -- more than 100 meforshim on the parsha and haftorah, clustered into categories such as masorah and supercommentators of Rashi. Plus links to an online Mikraos Gedolos, by perek and aliyah.
   .
3. How many are the days of your life, as question or exclamation? There is a dispute whether kama is a question or exclamation. Ibn Caspi has a nice exchange with an elderly man about this, and also tries to claim that this is what the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah meant when they placed a gaaya {=zakef gadol} on the word. I investigate.
   .
4. Is the trup on veEt Achecha dispositive? Ibn Caspi and Chizkuni each read a pasuk in Vayish differently, Ibn Caspi with the division indicated by trup and Chizkuni against. Except that Chizkuni explains why the trup isn't really against him.
   .
5. Ralbag on Yocheved's birth -- All about Ralbag asserting that on a peshat level, the 70 includes Yaakov, and that of course Yocheved wasn't actually born just as they entered, though there is a deep meaning to that midrash. This can help us understand the approach of this and other Rishonim towards midrash, "arguing" withmidrash, and whether miracles must be explicit.
   .
6. A patach in la`ish, according to Chizkuni -- A brief discussion of a troubling Chizkuni, about the nikkud under a certain letter. And the inclination to emend Chizkuni to make everything all right, which we should reject. This might relate to the idea of lectio difficilior, the "rule" that the more difficult word is more likely original.
   .
7. The deeper meaning of Yocheved's birth between the walls -- In an earlier post, I discussed Ralbag's position -- the midrash that Yocheved was the 70th, and was born between the walls, was al derech derash, but was not intended historically or literally. I would like to explore what deep meaning this midrash might contain, in terms of Yocheved as the 70th, orChushim ben Dan, or Serach bat Asher, or Yaakov himself, or Hakadosh Baruch Hu.
   .
8. The Torah of Rabbi Meir -- What are we to make of the midrashic reference to the variants found in the Torah of Rabbi Meir? In Vayigash, it is uven Dan Chushim. Are these commentaries in a separate book? Explanations written on the side of the sefer Torah? A variant reading? Deliberate variants to accord with midrash, or with what seems to be good peshat. It is unclear. But it is still something to consider. In the end, I side with the idea that it was a variant text to our accepted Masoretic text, and that our Masoretic text is preferable.

2008

1. Did Yosef actually ask about their father and brother, as Yehuda claimed? Just as it interested me last year, it interested me this year. (And I forgot I addressed it last year.) Here, with some new sources addressing it (e.g. Chizkuni), and an expansion on some of the ideas.
   .
2. Some great Chizkunis on Vayigash. Such as why Yosef had the brothers sent off to Goshen; a reparsing of the pasuk as to where Yaakov and the brothers went; and whether one can argue on an etnachta, and so on. Check it out, and the comment section.
   .
3. Anshei Chayil: Warriors or Capable Men? And a contradiction in Rashi, says me.
   .
4. The trup on "rav", and why Shadal correctly changes the tevir to a zakef gadol.
   .
5. 70 souls? But there are only 69?! It could be Yaakov; it could be Yocheved; or else it could be that it really was only 69, but the Torah keeps the nice round number.
   .
6. Ramses vs. Raamses -- the same place? different?
   .
7. Vayigash sources -- links to a Mikraos Gedolos, and many meforshim on the parsha and haftara. Very useful for preparing the sidra.
   .
8. From Jan 2009, with a Miketz crossover - Why in the world did Yosef compel the Egyptians to circumcise themselves? I try to figure it out based on the context and meaning of the original midrash, which Rashi has seen. To quote myself, "The idea behind it, at least as spoken out here, is that Yosef's intention was somehow to be mekarev the Egyptians to his religion."

2007

1. Have you a father or a brother? But where did Yosef ask this question? In 2008, I address this as well, from other sources, and some of the same, but from a slightly different perspective.
   .
2. The trup and nikkud on bevechi -- and how one appears at odds with the other, and Shadal's suggestion.
   .
3. From Vayechi: How big a gap between Vayigash and Vayechi (see pt i, ii, iii).

2006

1. When Was Yosef Sold? We consider the possibility that it was before Rachel's death, and attempt to harness evidence in that direction. There is some evidence the other way (the account of, and the place of Rachel's death), but this is perhaps resolvable.
   .
2. The Ambiguity of וְעָזַב אֶת-אָבִיו וָמֵת -- Ibn Ezra wonders why this is not one of Issi ben Yehuda's five ambiguously parsed pesukim. Vamet can either corefer with Yaakov or with Binyamin. We compare with Issi ben Yehuda's five, and show how they are ambiguities of parsing rather than coindexation. Avi Ezer, a supercommentary on Ibn Ezra, wonders (and resolves) how Ibn Ezra could be so chutzpadik to challenge Chazal in this way. And I give my answer as well.
   .
   Finally, Rashi decides in favor of a coreference to Binyamin. We give several reasons for this, as well as several reasons for a coreference with Yaakov.
   .
3. Issi Ben Yehuda's Five (And Rav Chisda's One) As Disambiguated by Trup -- As a followup to the aforementioned post. Issi ben Yehuda gives five examples of ambiguous parsings of pesukim. Rav Chisda has an additional one. As we know, trup serves as syntactic markup and may well disambiguate each of these examples. In each case, what does the trup tell us? How does Rashi disambiguate in each case? Also, from a certain Rashi, it would seem that if we decide in the end that a narrative happened in a specific way, or that halacha is a certain way, we should emend the trup we read in shul to accord with that reading!

Dec 2004

1. Jewish Might  -- Rather than polite, humble and supplicative, some midrashim cast Yehuda's response (and that of his brothers) as a display of Jewish might. Yehuda's speech is understood in three different strains: appeasement, prayer, and threat of war, much as is Yaakov's approach to Esav. I go into a bit of detail on this.
   .
2. The Three Approaches -- Continuing the idea mentioned above, Chazal show how each of these three approaches are meanings of the word "vayigash" throughout Tanach.
   .
3. Yehuda's Threat -- of leprosy and death. And the specific textual prompts. "Speak a word in my lord's ear" implies a hidden message. Leprosy is derived from "you are as Pharaoh." The parallels drawn to Yaakov's curse and Shimon and Levi's destruction of Shechem might find purchase in אֲדֹנִי שָׁאַל, אֶת-עֲבָדָיו לֵאמֹר: הֲיֵשׁ-לָכֶם אָב, אוֹ-אָח.

Dec 2003 - Jan 2004

1. Pesukim That Imply That Binyamin Is Young -- Some neutral. He is called hakaton, but this might mean youngest as opposed to young. But then, the supposedly 22 year old Binyamin is called the naar, or lad. He is also called yeled zekunim katon, which I think is the strongest that he is fairly young.
   .
2. The trup of the first pasuk -- Contrary to the Vilna Gaon, does not mean that, even on the level of simple translation. Revii does not mean fourth but rather "lie down." And this is not coming to convey some secret message, but is mechanically produced by syntactic rules of division.
   .
   
3. Are Reuven's Children Tribbles? -- Accounting for their sudden doubling from 2 to 4, in such a short time span. I suggest the census in Egypt was taken at a later date.
   .
4. Treatment of הַבָּאָה מִצְרַיְמָה a -- And in order to maintain that this census was taken at a later date, in Egypt, I have to explain habbaah mitzrayma as of the generation that came down to Egypt, as opposed to those who left. I show this needs be so, compelled by the fact that Yosef did not physically move to Egypt together with his father, yet is counted there. Rather, it is the census of the generation which moved into Egypt, opposed to the census when the Israelites leave, and indeed is there to show this contrast and the fulfillment of Divine promise.
   
   As a side benefit, a lot of chronology can work out, since there is time for Reuven to have more sons, for Binyamin to grow up and have ten sons, etcetera.

Connecting אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף and וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו עַד הֵנָּה with a vav

haKsav vehaKabbalah

I saw a nice idea in HaKsav VeHakabbalah, by R. Ya'akov Zvi Mecklenburg (1785-1865). See my previous post about the word אך in אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף, and whether the expression is one of certainty or doubt. Part of the calculation there is how one should relate this statement in the reisha to the statement in the seifa, of וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו עַד הֵנָּה. Is the seifa meant as an elaboration and proof to the reisha (see e.g. Ibn Ezra)? Or does the presence of seifa serve to demonstrate to us a lack of certainly in the reisha (see e.g. Ibn Janach)?

In this context, here is an explanation of the vav in וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו by Rav Mecklenberg:

"וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו -- this vav serves like the word 'because' for it is for the purpose of giving a reason. Just as in (Mishpatim 23:9)

ט  וְגֵר, לֹא תִלְחָץ; וְאַתֶּם, יְדַעְתֶּם אֶת-נֶפֶשׁ הַגֵּר--כִּי-גֵרִים הֱיִיתֶם, בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם.

9 And a stranger shalt thou not oppress; for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

וְאַתֶּם יְדַעְתֶּם אֶת-נֶפֶשׁ הַגֵּר which is a giving of a reason to that which preceded it, namely וְגֵר לֹא תִלְחָץ. "For you know..." And his meaning here is that I agreed [with my sons' suggestion] to say that he was torn, for until now I have not seen him, and had he been alive, he would not have refrained from endeavoring to appear before me. (Da ich nicht -- "because I do not".)

How could Yosef ask "Is my father still alive?" Yehuda had made it clear that Yaakov was alive!

The Torah Temimah presents two ways of understand Yosef's question, "I am Yosef. Is my father still alive?" I like the first one as peshat and not just midrash. And at the end of the post, I give a novel interpretation of the utterance which looks forwards rather than backwards.

The first is based on the midrashic take, I think a famous one:

He wants to know what the connection is between "I am Yosef" and "Is my father still alive?" And further, they had pretty explicitly said that Yaakov was alive, so why is he asking?

The first approach is that this was said כמתמיה. The midrash understands Yosef's words as a Tochacha, a rebuke, to which the brothers are unable to answer.

Thus, Yehuda had said (Bereishit 44:31):

לא  וְהָיָה, כִּרְאוֹתוֹ כִּי-אֵין הַנַּעַר--וָמֵת; וְהוֹרִידוּ עֲבָדֶיךָ אֶת-שֵׂיבַת עַבְדְּךָ אָבִינוּ, בְּיָגוֹן--שְׁאֹלָה.

31 it will come to pass, when he seeth that the lad is not with us, that he will die; and thy servants will bring down the gray hairs of thy servant our father with sorrow to the grave.

and in this way saying that a report of Binyamin's death would kill Yaakov. And Yosef was very affected by this (Bereishit 45:1-2) and sent everyone out, and then proclaimed to them (45:3):

ג  וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹסֵף אֶל-אֶחָיו אֲנִי יוֹסֵף, הַעוֹד אָבִי חָי; וְלֹא-יָכְלוּ אֶחָיו לַעֲנוֹת אֹתוֹ, כִּי נִבְהֲלוּ מִפָּנָיו.

3 And Joseph said unto his brethren: 'I am Joseph; doth my father yet live?' And his brethren could not answer him; for they were affrighted at his presence.

His brothers being unable to answer him כִּי נִבְהֲלוּ מִפָּנָיו would mean that they had no answer to his rebuke.

The Torah Temimah puts it as follows, as a rhetorical question (a):

"Is there still in him strength to bear a burden after his suffering {?} and pain from my loss, such that he is still alive?"

And with this was the implicit accusation, and the calling to their mind all that Yosef's brothers had done to him. This also explains how it connects to "I am Yosef". All this is an accusation.

Another way I might cast the tochacha is: (b) "Why are you thinking of my father's suffering at the loss now? You were callous about his suffering back then!" Another way: (c) "How can you present to me that he cannot bear the loss of a child? He was able to bear it back then when you caused me to be lost to him."

I like this rhetorical approach. And though it is recorded in a midrash, that midrash is tapping in to a deep and plausible peshat reading of the text.

Perhaps one can find fault with some of the ways of spinning this tochacha. After all, the brothers in the past (e.g. Bereishit 45:27-29) had stressed the loss of Yosef, and that it was the loss of both sons of Rachel which would cumulatively add up to Yaakov's death in sorrow. But this would only be a rejection of (c), not (a) or (b).

But then he presents another explanation al derech hapeshat:

"And as peshat, one can interpret the intent of the question 'Is my father still alive?' is that after he saw that they lied to him regarding his existence, for they said that he died, and as Rashi said in the beginning of this parashah (pasuk 20) that they had a reason for doing so, he was no longer certain about what they said to him until now that their father was still alive. For perhaps they also had a reason [for lying] about this, perhaps in order to stir up mercy in Yosef regarding his old age, or some other reason. And therefore, now, when he made himself known, he asked about him [Yaakov] that they should tell him the truth."

Here is a my own explanation. Stop looking backwards, to Yehuda's mention of Yaakov saying X or Y, or of Yehuda's fear of Yaakov dying. You are supposed to look forwards, to Yaakov's reaction to the good news. Bereishit 45:28:

כח  וַיֹּאמֶר, יִשְׂרָאֵל, רַב עוֹד-יוֹסֵף בְּנִי, חָי; אֵלְכָה וְאֶרְאֶנּוּ, בְּטֶרֶם אָמוּת.

28 And Israel said: 'It is enough; Joseph my son is yet alive; I will go and see him before I die

Even if Yosef did not say it (pretend for a moment, for my rhetorical point), it would be fitting to have put these words in Yosef's mouth, HaOd Avi Chai. Because the literary point is the mutual excitement regarding the reunion. And so it matches Yaakov's statement of Rav, Od Yosef Chai.

Now know that Yosef did say it. And it has some meaning that presumably can be resolved with Yehuda's earlier statements which make clear that Yaakov was alive. But first, the resolution to that apparent conflict is irrelevant, and beside the point. And stress to much on this, and you will end up missing the point. And second, perhaps say that it was an excited rhetorical utterance to himself.

YUTorah on parashat Vayigash

Download the YUTorah Parsha Reader for Vayigash 5774  Audio Shiurim on Vayigash Rabbi Elchanan Adler: Ochzin - Being Active or Passive Rabbi Hanan Balk: Yosef Hatzaddik and the Power to Forgive Rabbi Eli Belizon: Can my Rabbi paskin based on kabbala? Rabbi Reuven Brand: Wagons and Walking Rabbi Asher Brander: Yehuda and Yosef : A Collision that Changed History Rabbi Chaim Brovender: Yehuda, King of Israel Rabbi Aryeh Cohen: Three Weapons in Defeating the Yetzer Hora Rabbi Avishai David: Hypocrisy! Rabbi Dovid Ebner: What Was Yaacov Afraid of? Rabbi Ally Ehrman: Discussing Torah On The Way Rabbi Chaim Eisenstein: The Best Mussar Shmooze--Yours! Rabbi Gil Elmaleh: Sensitivity Rabbi Joel Finkelstein: Joseph and Modern Zionism Rabbi David Fohrman: The Epic Confrontation Between Judah and Joseph Rabbi Efrem Goldberg: Yosef's Catharsis Rabbi Yehuda Goldschmidt: Two Ways to Survive Galus Rabbi Ephraim Greene: Putting G-d First Rabbi Shmuel Hain: Yosef and the Brothers: Halakhic and Philosophical Reflections on Teshuvah Rabbi Shalom Hammer: A Perfect World Rabbi Aryeh Hendler: Jews of Lechatchila Rabbi Jesse Horn: Looking at Yosef and his religious message Rabbi Shimon Isaacson: Ki Hem Chayeinu Veorech Yameinu Rabbi Yisroel Kaminetsky: Yosef's Revelation Rabbi Eliakim Koenigsberg: A Clear Vision Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz: Constant Crying Rabbi Eliezer Lerner: The Leadership of Yehuda Rabbi Ben Leybovich: Passionate Superheroes Rabbi Meir Lipschitz: Yehuda's Monologue Rabbi Shmuel Marcus: Seeing God's Hand Rabbi Dovid Miller: Haroeh es Hanolad Mrs. Zemirah Ozarowski: Yosef and his Plot What were his goals Dr. David Pelcovitz: Yosef and his Brothers: Insights on Forgiveness from Positive Psychology Rabbi Yosef Zvi Rimon: Is it the thought that counts? Mrs Ilana Saks: When is a wagon more than a wagon? Rabbi Hershel Schachter: Yaacov's Fear of Going to Mitzrayim Rabbi Avi Schneider: The Sound of Silence Rabbi Avraham Shulman: Miracles and Emunah Rabbi Baruch Simon: Balancing the Traits of Yosef and Yehudah Mrs. Shira Smiles: Royal Revelation Rabbi Aaron Soloveichik: The Value of Life Rabbi Elly Storch: Patience, Donkey, Patience Rabbi Moshe Taragin: Reeling in the Years Rabbi Michael Taubes: Three Steps Before and After Shemoneh Esrei Rabbi Ya'akov Trump: Chanukah and the Sons of Yaakov Rabbi Moshe Tzvi Weinberg: Endless Striving Rabbi Andi Yudin: One Family United! Rabbi Ari Zahtz: Yosef's Teshuva Rabbi Eliezer Zwickler: Levayah For The Living Articles on Vayigash Rabbi Etan Moshe Berman: The Jewish Attitude to the Challenges of Life Rabbi Shlomo Einhorn: Stealing a Memory Rabbi Ozer Glickman: Yaakov Avinu and the Tragic Sense of Life Rabbi Shmuel Goldin: A Disappointing Encounter? Rabbi Meir Goldwicht: Why did Yosef cry over the Churban? Rabbi Avraham Gordimer: Lessons from Beer Sheva Rabbi Dovid Gottlieb: Learning the Lesson Before It’s Too late Rabbi Maury Grebenau: Ordinary Miracles Rabbi Mordechai Greenberg: נולדה בין החומות Rabbi David Horwitz: The Magnificent Transformation of Yehudah Rabbi Avigdor Nebenzahl: Yosef Prevents Assimilation Dr. Charles Snow: וישכון יעקב בטח בדד עין יעקב Rabbi Reuven Spolter: Showing the Good Parsha Sheets on Vayigash HALB: D'Varim HaYotzim Min HaLev Student Organization of Yeshiva (YU): Einayim L'Torah YU-Torah miTzion Toronto Beit Midrash: Toronto Torah YULA Boys High School: Likutei Ohr Shiurim on the Haftorah of Vayigash Rabbi Ari Kahn: The merger of Yehudah and Yosef Rabbi Avraham Rivlin: עץ יוסף ... ואת עץ יהודה Rabbi Zvi Romm: The Role of Yosef Rabbi Jeremy Wieder: Laining for Parshat Vayigash See all shiurim on YUTorah for Parshat Vayigash

New This Week Bugs and Chanukah Rabbi Eli Belizon Do I Need to Wash?  Defining Mezonot Rabbi Reuven Brand Using Chanuka to  Understand Chinuch  and Find the Chein in  our Children and Ourselves Rabbi Efrem Goldberg Weddings on Chanukah Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz Lighting Candles in  Apartments, Hotels,  Parties, Dorms & Tanks Rabbi Uri Orlian Chanuka and Tehillim  Perek 30 Rabbi Zvi Romm Observing Chumros in our Lives Rabbi Hershel Schachter Should We Observe  NINE Days of Chanukah?!? Rabbi Shay Schachter The Tapestry of the  Tanach and Chanukah Rabbi Allen Schwartz Mesiras Nefesh for  Limud Torah: The  Secret of Chanukah Rabbi Zvi Sobolofsky Torah min Hashamayim: What We Believe Rabbi Reuven Taragin Medical Halachah:  Medical Malpractice Rabbi Mordechai Torczyner Cases where one  must give up their  life other than the "big three" Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank Chanukkah: The  Moment of Truth for  the תורה שבעל פה Rabbi Dr. Jeffrey Woolf The Pach Shemen  in Each One and Every One of Us Rabbi Andi Yudin

ACH in אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף -- an expression of certainty, doubt, or reduction?

Famously, אך and רק midrashically come only to exclude, to be memaet. And this is interesting because according to Biblical scholars, this usage of אך is only in Rabbinic Hebrew, while in Biblical Hebrew it means "surely", or "indeed". If so, this is an anachronistic sort of derasha, and so one reads in alternate meanings to what would have been intended by the Biblical author.

You could argue and say that the meaning in Rabbinic Hebrew is also the meaning in Biblical Hebrew. This would require analysis of how it is used across Tanach.

There is an אך in Vayigash that caught my eye. Yaakov relates the loss of Yosef, in Bereishit 44:28:

The one went away from me, and I said, "He has surely been torn to pieces, and I have not seen him since."

כח. וַיֵּצֵא הָאֶחָד מֵאִתִּי וָאֹמַר אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו עַד הֵנָּה:

Or HaChaim is therefore impelled to interpret it as an exclusion:


"ACH TAROF etc.: He hints, by saying אך, that it is a reduction of טָרֹף טֹרָף, for he [Yosef] is not in the distress of servitude nor in the distress of prison. And that is why he concludes וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו עַד הֵנָּה, behold he is relating that he does exist, but he has yet to see him until now.

Further is intended by אַךְ טָרֹף טֹרָף etc. to explain that אך is a reduction specifically in the tearing [טָרֹף], but regarding that which he said 'a wild animal ate him", which they za'"l said was intended as a reference to the wife of Potifar, in this, there is no reduction, for he was already [????] that which she caused him [Yosef] to lose 10 seons, for he had been destined to raise 12 tribes, as they za'l said, and via this wickedness [??] ten drops [of semen] fell from him and thus only two [Ephraim and Menashe] came from him."

OK, not exactly what I would call peshat, even though it comes from the Or HaChaim. But this sort of close reading / midrashic reading makes a great deal of the Rabbinic understanding of אך.

Onkelos translates this אך as ברם. But is he saying "only" or "indeed"?

Look at Jastrow, who shows that in Aramaic it has both meanings:

Though maybe we should restrict our investigation to Targum.

Rabbenu Yonah Ibn Janach writes as follows, taking this אך as a doubt -- thus, perhaps, a miut -- as opposed to the usual "surely":

"The word אך here does NOT come to relate that it is a certain thing, as it meant in [Bereishit 29:14, Lavan speaking to Yaakov]

יד  וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ לָבָן, אַךְ עַצְמִי וּבְשָׂרִי אָתָּה; וַיֵּשֶׁב עִמּוֹ, חֹדֶשׁ יָמִים.

14 And Laban said to him: 'Surely thou art my bone and my flesh.' And he abode with him the space of a month.

but rather for a doubt. And a proof to this is [the end of the pasuk] וְלֹא רְאִיתִיו עַד הֵנָּה. And had it been the case in truth, it would not have been correct to say this." (Sefer HaShorashim 28)

Presumably, Ibn Janach's reason is that "I have not seen him" indicates some uncertainty. Well, I haven't seen him, so presumably he is dead. And why say this if you saw his bloody clothing? Of course you would not be expecting to see him after this.

But one (meaning Josh) could argue in the opposite direction. For instance: Yaakov is saying that this was what he was convinced of, based on the evidence, at the time. Yes, maybe Yosef could have lost the clothing and survived the attack. But Yaakov is further convinced that his interpretation of Yosef's death was true because Yosef never did surface.

Moreover, one should not ignore the emotion of the statement. This loss / disappearance of Yosef profoundly affected Yaakov, and a grieving father confronted with this loss would say, emotionally, surely this has happened. Whether or not there is absolute hard evidence.

Ibn Ezra, I think, says much of the same thing, though projecting the certainly to the present day:

אך טרף טרף. והעד כי לא ראיתיו עד הנה:

He has אך [certainly] been torn. And the evidence of this is that I have not seen him until now.

Meanwhile, Rabbi Yosef Ibn Caspi argues, and introduces a safek into the proceedings:

"The import is 'I said, and estimated [J: back then] that he was torn, though this had an element of doubt. But regardless, I have not seen him until now.' And see [says Ibn Caspi] the difference between my position and that of the Chacham Ibn Ezra who said 'and the evidence is לא ראיתיו עד הנה. For this is no evidence at all!"

Chanukkah To-Go 5774

You can visit their website here, to see previous years' entries.

Individual Articles download Rabbi Kenneth Auman - "From Darkness to Light" Rabbi Assaf Bednarsh - "Chanukah-The Chag of Torah SheB'al Peh" Rabbi Yosef Blau - "The Complex History of the Hashmonaim" Rabbi Joshua Flug - "Practical Halacha Supplement: Yemei Hallel V'Hoda'ah: The Recitation of Hallel and Al HaNissim on Chanukah" Rabbi David Pahmer - "Let There be Points of Light" Rabbi Ezra Schwartz - "My Chanuka while the Beit Hamikdash Stood" Professor Marcy Stern - "Zecharia's Prophecy: The Haftarah for Shabbos Chanukah" Rabbi Dr. Meir Soloveichik - "God's Providence and the United States: A Thanksgiving Reader on Judaism and the American Idea"