Shabbat Parashat Mikeitz - 5781

Shabbat Parashat Mikeitz - 5781

Rabbi Hal Miller

And we said to my lord, we have an old father and a young child of old age,

his brother is dead, he alone is left to his mother, and his father loves him.

[Bereishis 44:20 in the beginning of parshas Vayigash]

Yes, our pasuk is actually from the very beginning of next week's portion, but

it is really a continuation of goings-on in our parsha. Note that in this verse is

the first time that Yehudah mentions a brother being dead. In 42:13, Yehudah

only tells Yosef, "We your servants are twelve brothers, the sons of one man in

the land of Canaan. The youngest is with our father today, and one is gone."

This was upon their first trip to Egypt for food. Why here did Yehudah switch

his reference? Something must have happened between these two verses to

convince Yehudah to do so. Yehudah, of course, knew that Yosef was alive

and in Arab hands the last time he saw him, so never knew if he had died.

What triggered this change?

All along Yaakov himself referred to Yosef as missing. It is only in 42:38

this week that Yaakov says of Binyamin, "for his brother is dead and he alone

remained." Is it possible that Yehudah, present for this comment, understood

Yaakov's prophecy to have confirmed Yosef's death? Perhaps, but then why

wouldn't Yaakov have known all along that Yosef had not died all those years

earlier?

Some commentators say that Yehudah was pretty certain that the viceroy

of Egypt was in fact Yosef and the two were jockeying for position in this

confrontation. But that does not fit with a declaration of Yosef's death, nor

does it act as a change in circumstances to prompt such a declaration.

Rashi calls it a mistake. Yehudah was in fear and let something false slip

from his mouth. Had he not said the twelfth brother was dead, he feared the

viceroy would demand that this brother also be produced.

Meshech Chochmah writes that Yehudah was now justified in assuming

Yosef dead because so many years had gone by without information, and

he was certain that if alive, Yosef would have done whatever he could to

reconnect with Yaakov. He cites the laws of assuming the death of a

woman's husband from overseas to allow her to remarry.

But none of these seem to indicate anything that would cause Yehudah to

change his tune. Perhaps, though, we can find something in our portion

this week.

At this point, it seems clear that Yehudah suspected something odd going on.

The viceroy had treated the brothers a couple of times in age order, something

that could not reasonably have been guessed, further it was also in order by

mother. The concern about Yaakov and Binyamin seems out of place for the

circumstances. But the cap is the viceroy's handling of punishment over the

goblet. One would have expected either all the brothers to have been enslaved

or all killed. The punishment only of the one in whose sack it was found, and

release of the others may seem normal in our modern thinking, but was quite

unusual for those times and that place. This could be the source of the opinion

that Yehudah knew the viceroy was Yosef, but our verse seems an odd

reaction to that.

Perhaps the answer can be found in 44:15, "Yosef said to them, what is this

deed that you have done? Do you not realize that a man like me practices

divination?" If we read this verse quickly in context, it appears to mean that

the viceroy saw through the brothers for stealing the goblet and that they were

actually spies. But in context of our discussion here, this verse can be read to

refer to the incident of selling Yosef, and that the viceroy could see what occurred

back then. In other words, Yehudah knew that this viceroy suspected that Yosef

was still alive, and he wanted to shut down that line of conversation, thus

proclaimed him dead. The viceroy, of course being Yosef, knew better. This

also explains why Yehudah was as surprised as the other brothers when Yosef

revealed himself.