We read Genesis 42:36-43:10
How does this family communicate?
How is Judah “different”?
How does this family communicate?
How is Judah “different”?
RASHI:
ALWAYS ME YOU BEREAVE! The inference is that he suspected them of having slain or sold him (Simeon) as they had done to Joseph (Genesis Rabbah 91:9)
RADAK:
two of my sons. [he had four. Ed.] Reuven said something foolish in even suggesting that his father might kill his own grandsons. Yaakov responded: (not in text) “you are a foolish firstborn what makes you think that your sons are not also my sons?” Seeing that Reuven’s suggestion was so foolish, Yaakov did not even bother to formally reply to it.
NAOMI STEINBERG[1]:
I will be responsible for him. Heb. e’ervenu, based on the same root (e-r-v) as eravon (“Pledge”), found in the Bible only in Genesis 38 (vv. 17, 18, 20). The use of such a rare term suggests a deliberate link to the Tamar and Judah story in Genesis 38— and to Judah’s earlier, hasty responses in that episode. If so, the author may imply that Judah’s more mature behavior results from his encounter with Tamar at “the entrance to Enaim”
(38: 14), a locale that also can be read as “the opening of the eyes.” The transformation of Judah from a callous son in Genesis 37 to a responsible man who can rise to leadership can be understood, then, as a consequence of his eye-opening experience with Tamar.
ALWAYS ME YOU BEREAVE! The inference is that he suspected them of having slain or sold him (Simeon) as they had done to Joseph (Genesis Rabbah 91:9)
RADAK:
two of my sons. [he had four. Ed.] Reuven said something foolish in even suggesting that his father might kill his own grandsons. Yaakov responded: (not in text) “you are a foolish firstborn what makes you think that your sons are not also my sons?” Seeing that Reuven’s suggestion was so foolish, Yaakov did not even bother to formally reply to it.
NAOMI STEINBERG[1]:
I will be responsible for him. Heb. e’ervenu, based on the same root (e-r-v) as eravon (“Pledge”), found in the Bible only in Genesis 38 (vv. 17, 18, 20). The use of such a rare term suggests a deliberate link to the Tamar and Judah story in Genesis 38— and to Judah’s earlier, hasty responses in that episode. If so, the author may imply that Judah’s more mature behavior results from his encounter with Tamar at “the entrance to Enaim”
(38: 14), a locale that also can be read as “the opening of the eyes.” The transformation of Judah from a callous son in Genesis 37 to a responsible man who can rise to leadership can be understood, then, as a consequence of his eye-opening experience with Tamar.
Rabbi Suzanne Singer[2]
Then, in the face of their father’s fear for Benjamin’s life, Reuben offers his own sons’ lives in pledge for Benjamin’s (42: 37). This is an impulsive and ill-conceived gesture— yet a marked change for the man whose idea it was to throw Joseph into the pit (37: 22).
Finally, Judah, who had convinced his brothers to sell Joseph to the Ishmaelites (37: 27), offers to take personal responsibility for the life of his youngest brother (43: 9). Clearly, Judah is the brother who has matured and evolved the most. He and his brothers have made peace with their father’s favoritism.
Then, in the face of their father’s fear for Benjamin’s life, Reuben offers his own sons’ lives in pledge for Benjamin’s (42: 37). This is an impulsive and ill-conceived gesture— yet a marked change for the man whose idea it was to throw Joseph into the pit (37: 22).
Finally, Judah, who had convinced his brothers to sell Joseph to the Ishmaelites (37: 27), offers to take personal responsibility for the life of his youngest brother (43: 9). Clearly, Judah is the brother who has matured and evolved the most. He and his brothers have made peace with their father’s favoritism.
[1] Rabbi Suzanne Singer in “The Torah: a Woman’s Commentary.” Rabbi Singer is Rabbi and Educator of Temple Beth El in Riverside, CA.
[2] Naomi Steinberg in “The Torah: a Woman’s Commentary”” Dr. Steinberg is Professor, Religious Studies at DePaul, Chicago.
We read Genesis 44:14-16
What is Judah's standing now within family?
How has experience changed him?
and
What is Judah's standing now within family?
How has experience changed him?
and
AVIVA GOTTLIEB ZORNBERG[3]
Judah stands personally responsible for Benjamin, though all the brothers take him down to Egypt. When the goblet is found in Benjamin’s sack, the midrash relates: “Each of the other brothers turned his face aside. And who stood against Joseph? The guarantor— ‘Then Judah went up to him.’ ” Implied in the guarantor position is an ability to “stand against,” to resist: to summon up resources of anger, irony, and menace in protection of that with which one is identified.
RABBI NEAL LOVINGER:[4]
MIdrash Tanchuma; a collection of midrashic stories dating from talmudic times, offers an imaginative possibility. Noticing that the story of Judah and his daughter-in-law Tamar immediately follows the story of the presentation of Joseph’s bloody garment to Jacob (37: 31-35), the midrash posits a connection. In this midrash, it was Judah who convinced Jacob that Joseph was dead; in response, God said to Judah:
“You have no children now, and you do not know the pain of children. You have troubled your father and caused him to mistakenly believe that his son Joseph is torn, all torn up. By your life, you will marry a woman and then bury your son, and [then you will] suffer the grief that comes with children.” (Midrash Tanhuma, Vayigash 9)
(THIS gave Judah insight into Jacob and now when faced with possibility of losing Benjamin, he could not put his father through what he knew, personally, was barely-endurable pain)
Judah stands personally responsible for Benjamin, though all the brothers take him down to Egypt. When the goblet is found in Benjamin’s sack, the midrash relates: “Each of the other brothers turned his face aside. And who stood against Joseph? The guarantor— ‘Then Judah went up to him.’ ” Implied in the guarantor position is an ability to “stand against,” to resist: to summon up resources of anger, irony, and menace in protection of that with which one is identified.
RABBI NEAL LOVINGER:[4]
MIdrash Tanchuma; a collection of midrashic stories dating from talmudic times, offers an imaginative possibility. Noticing that the story of Judah and his daughter-in-law Tamar immediately follows the story of the presentation of Joseph’s bloody garment to Jacob (37: 31-35), the midrash posits a connection. In this midrash, it was Judah who convinced Jacob that Joseph was dead; in response, God said to Judah:
“You have no children now, and you do not know the pain of children. You have troubled your father and caused him to mistakenly believe that his son Joseph is torn, all torn up. By your life, you will marry a woman and then bury your son, and [then you will] suffer the grief that comes with children.” (Midrash Tanhuma, Vayigash 9)
(THIS gave Judah insight into Jacob and now when faced with possibility of losing Benjamin, he could not put his father through what he knew, personally, was barely-endurable pain)