Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld's
Weekly
Parasha-Page

I am proud to present to you this week the work of a guest contributor, Rabbi David Lichtman.
Rabbi Lichtman, former rabbi of a synagogue in Calgary, Alberta, left a profound impact on the Jewish community there. At present he is a member of the faculty of Yeshivat Or Yerushalayim, and lives in Kiryat Sefer.

Vayeshev 5755

MAINTAINING THE ORDER

The drama of Joseph and his brothers, as depicted in the Torah, is clearly among the most sophisticated suspense motifs in the history of narrative. To this, even Shakespeare conceded. As literature, it is difficult to find a parallel to match its brilliance. Indeed, it is the compelling nature of this story which has unfortunately, and unwisely, been used to attack and misconstrue the nature of its source, the Torah.

Bible critics argue that the Torah is a composite of literary fragments of many authors, which were, composed over long periods of time and in different places. These fragments, they claim, were redacted together somewhat haphazardly, to form the Five Books of Moses. Among the examples of Biblical narrative tendered in evidence of the above thesis is the abrupt disruption of the drama of Joseph by the story of Judah and Tamar (Genesis, Chap. 34). Joseph is sold to Egypt; Jacob is in mourning -- and we are left in suspense. The use of interlude to create a sense of suspense is a legitimate, time-honored literary tool. The interlude in this case, however which is the story of Judah and Tamar, seems to be disjointed entirely from the main story.

The following is an excerpt from the commentary of E. A Spieser, one of the most prominent of Bible critics, that is meant to drive this point home:

This narrative is a completely independent unit. It has no connection with the drama of Joseph which it interrupts at the conclusion of (Joseph's sale to Egypt).... Once again it becomes self-evident that the narrators acted in the main as custodians of diverse traditions which they did not attempt to coordinate and harmonize when the respective data appeared in conflict.
(The Anchor Bible, Genesis, p. 299)

Alas, the choice of this narrative to substantiate the Bible critics' thesis is as unfortunate as it is unwise. As will be demonstrated, the interlude of Judah and Tamar is not only in complete harmony with the story of Joseph, but also subtly reflects themes intrinsic to the Book of Genesis as a whole.

II

As Joseph is sold to Egypt, the brothers contrive a plan of deception for their father Jacob. "They took the shirt of Joseph, slaughtered a goat ('Seir Izzim'), and dipped the shirt in its blood" (Gen. 37:31). The blood-soaked shirt was then sent to Jacob. "We have foundthis; please identify it ('Hakker Na') -- is it the shirt of your son or not? Jacob recognized it ('Vayyakkirah')" (Gen. 37:32-33).

The interlude story of Judah and Tamar carries most striking parallels to the above. We read that Tamar is offered a *kid goat* ('Seir Izzim') as payment for her relations with Judah (Gen. 38:17). As collateral for the goat Tamar is given Judah's personal seal, cord and staff (the ancient equivalent, perhaps, of today's credit cards) -- which she absconds with, never returning them in lieau of the goat that was promised to her.

Later, these personal effects save Tamar's life. As she is being brought out for execution by order of Judah, for alleged immoral behavior, Tamar plays her trump card. She produces the above items and declares, "It is from the man to whom these items belong that am I pregnant... *Please identify* them ('Hakker Na')...". "Judah recognized them ('Vayyakker Yehudah')" and confessed (Gen. 38:25-26). The conclusion of this episode is clearly reminiscent of the sale of Joseph, where Joseph's personal coat was used to identify its owner.

The intrigue of these parallels is heightened when we consider the underlying message they suggest. Robert Alter, in his book "The Art of Biblical Narrative", treats these features as clever thematics. He notes that the uses of the term 'Hakker Na' ("Please recognize or identify") and the goat were employed by the brothers (Judah in particular, who devised the scheme) to deceive their father. It was these very same articles ('Hakker Na' and a kid goat) which were used to later deceive Judah -- or, as Alter puts it, to "unmask" the deceiver.

III

In Midrashic terminology, the above device is termed 'Midda Keneged Midda', meaning "measure for measure" -- man is punished in a way which parallels in some way the sin he committed. In our case, the deceiver is himself deceived, precisely through his very own vehicles of deception. In fact, the Midrash itself draws the very parallels that we have cited between the selling of Joseph and the story of Judah and Tamar, attributing them clearly to the device of 'Midda Keneged Midda' (Talmud Bavli, Sota 10a; Breishit Rabba 85:2,11). Alter appropriately credits the ancient Midrash for clearly taking note of these links many centuries ago. Alter, a champion of the unity of Biblical narrative, condemns the Bible Criticism establishment for its smugness and lack of literary objectivity. The Midrash, because it saw the Torah as G-d's word, unified and harmonious, explored and discovered gems where the Bible critics saw only useless rubble and disarray.

In fact, the Midrash detects the above theme in other places in Genesis germane to the overall story. Jacob used goats to deceive his father Isaac, who falsely identified him as Esau, in the episode of the birthright blessings (Gen. 27:9-23 -- 'Vlo Hikkiro'). Jacob himself was ultimately deceived by the goat-blood soaked shirt of Joseph, which he readily identified and misinterpreted ('Vayyakkirah') -- initiating the measure for measure cycle (Zohar I:185-6) . Also, because "Joseph was brought down, (or lowered -- 'Hurad') to Egypt" (Gen. 39:1), Judah was punished with "Judah went down ('Vayyered Yehuda') from his brothers" (Gen. 38:1) -- his status was lowered (Tanchuma Yashan Vayeshev Ch.8).

We may add that the brothers' use of recognition and identification revisited them as they met Joseph in Egypt for the first time: "Joseph recognized ('Vayyakker') his brothers, but they did not recognize him ('Lo Hikkiruhu')" (Gen. 42:8). Because they deceived their father and had him "recognize" something that was actually false, they themselves failed to correctly identify their own brother, when they found him as viceroy of Egypt.

The interlude of Judah and Tamar is hardly evidence of sloppy redaction. It is testimony to G-d's clear control of the events of man's life and the recording of those events in the Torah!

Visit the
Dafyomi Advancement Forum