"Балконы Падают" Vayechi 5783

(19) But Joseph said to them, “Have no fear! Am I a substitute for God? (20) Besides, although you intended me harm, God intended it for good, so as to bring about the present result—the survival of many people. (21) And so, fear not. I will sustain you and your dependents.” Thus he reassured them, speaking kindly to them.

If, on your behalf, the Holy One, blessed is He, performed a miracle [by saving your life] in a supernatural way and you see the place where this miracle took place, you say Baruch ata Adonoy Elokeinu melech ha'olam she'asa li neis bamakom hazeh, [Blessed are You, Hashem, our God, King of the universe, Who performed a miracle for me at this place]. Even a son or a grandson, even those who were born before the miracle occurred should also say the berachah.

ויבך יוסף בדברם אליו, “Joseph wept when they were speaking to him.” As soon as the brothers merely mentioned the name of their father Joseph already started weeping. This was due to the great love he had for his now departed father. This stirred his sense of compassion, especially seeing that his brothers asked his forgiveness. The Torah does not spell out that Joseph actually forgave his brothers. Our sages (Bava Kama 92) point out that if a person has wronged his fellow man and regrets this wrong and determines not to act in the manner which had offended his fellow man he is not forgiven by G’d until after he has made an effort to obtain forgiveness by the aggrieved party first. At any rate, the Torah is not on record anywhere that Joseph did forgive his brothers. This was the reason why the sin committed against Joseph resulted in the ten martyrs being executed by torture at the hands of the Romans.

[He ordered]: “decide this case objectively and don't distort it with intentional trickery, but rather bring it out to its true light: If a man was found to have kidnapped one of his brothers, from among the Children of Yisrael; treating him as a slave and selling him.”

They answered him: “The kidnapper should be put to death.” He then exclaimed “Where are your fathers, who sold their brother and dealt him to a caravan of Ishmaelites for pairs of shoes.”

You, therefore, must accept the law of God upon yourselves, for from the time of your fathers there has been none like yourselves For if they were still living, I would judge them before you, but now, you must bear the guilt of the sin of your fathers.

Do we follow his intention and hold him accountable, and this man, who was unaware at the time of its slaughter that the first animal was gaunt, intended to transgress the Shabbat prohibition by slaughtering the second offering? Or perhaps we follow his actions and exempt him from liability, as the first offering had been disqualified when he brought the second.

Rav Ashi said to Ravina: Isn’t this the same as a case subject to a disagreement between Rabba and Rava, and in fact both agree that in this case he is liable? As it was stated: If one heard that a child was drowning at sea, and he spread a net to raise fish and the result was that he raised only fish, he is liable for transgressing the Shabbat prohibition of trapping. If he intended to raise fish, and he raised both fish and the child, Rava says: He is liable, as his intention was to transgress a prohibition, and Rabba says: He is exempt, as his act saved a life and was therefore permitted on Shabbat.