Weekly Torah Study: Vayeshev 2025/5786

"A major subtheme of the plot is the struggle for power between Re’uven and Yehuda. Its resolution has implications that are as much tribal as personal, for the tribe of Yehuda later became the historical force in ancient Israel as the seat of the monarchy." - Everett Fox
Reuben tried to save him from them: "by first of all preventing immediate action by the brothers, committing an act which would prove to be irrevocable. This would have been the kind of thing Solomon had in mind when he said in Kohelet 1,15 that מעוות לא יוכל לתקן, “there are things so twisted that they are beyond repair.” He referred to matters from which sometimes the righteous person can also not be saved." -Ibn Ezra

"G-d decided at that moment that because it was Reuven who had made the first move to save Joseph, the cities of refuge in Israel later on would begin with those in the territory allocated to the tribe of Reuven. (Bereshit Rabbah 84,15) This is also hinted at in Deuteronomy 4,43: את בצר במישור לראובני, “Bezer in the tableland to the members of the tribe of Reuven.” - Chizkuni
"וישמע ראובן ויצלהו מידם. מבואר שתחלה רצה להצילו לגמרי שלא יעשו לו מאומה, וזה ויצילהו פי' שהשתדל להצילו לגמרי, וכאשר לא שמעו לו ויאמר לא נכנו נפש, עכ"פ אל תהרגו אותו, שדי בעונש אחר, וכאשר לא שמעו גם לזה"
Malbim: Reuben wanted to completely save Joseph so the brothers would not do anything to him...but when they did not listen to him he said 'let's not kill him'...another form of retribution is sufficient..."
Two perspectives from Or Ha'Chaim
(1) This action was applauded by the Torah as man is a free creature possessing freedom of choice and able to kill people who are not guilty or have not been convicted, as distinct from wild beasts which do not kill humans unless the latter are guilty of death in the eyes of G'd. The words ויצילהו מידם mean that he saved them from the evil consequences of carrying out their freedom of choice to kill. By doing what he did Reuben nullified the brothers' statement: "we shall see what happens to his dreams."
(2) What Reuben meant was "let us not kill him outright ourselves but only cause his death indirectly." When he said later: "do not shed blood, throw him into the pit," this was his argument to his brothers. He only pretended to agree that Joseph's death should be caused because he could think of no other way of saving Joseph's life and restoring him to his father. He was quite certain in his own mind that no wild beast would harm Joseph, or any other of Jacob's sons for that matter. He himself would also not allow Joseph to remain in the pit long enough to die of hunger. Proof of Reubens' intention is that the Torah reports that he returned to the pit shortly after the brothers had sold Joseph in his absence. He had planned to take Joseph out of the pit.

ENCYCLOPEDIA JUDAICA, "REUBEN"
The attribution of primogeniture to Reuben may indicate that, originally Reuben headed the confederation of Israelite *tribes . He is mentioned first in the listing of the twelve (Gen. 46:8–23; Ex. 6:14–16; Num. 1:5–15, 20–42), and he enjoys a prominent position in the traditions of Israelite history prior to the conquest of Canaan in connection with the sale of Joseph (Gen. 37:21–22, 29–30; 42:22, 37) and rebellion against the leadership of Moses (Num. 16). The change that took place in the standing of the tribe is attributed to a sin of its ancestor; see Genesis 49:3–4;; and Genesis 35:21–22 for the incident to which they allude. In Genesis 49:3–4, Jacob rebukes Reuben for "mounting his (Jacob's) couch," by sleeping with Bilhah, Jacob's concubine, and curses him with the words paḥaz kamayim al totar, conventionally translated "unstable as water may you not be preeminent." This is interpreted by I Chronicles 5:1 to mean that Reuben lost his pre-eminent status as the first born. During the period of conquest and occupation, the tribe of Reuben lost the hegemony to the tribe of Joseph, which grew so that it split into the two tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, and it was Joshua from the tribe of Ephraim who led the conquest of the land; while in the period of the monarchy, it was the tribe of
Judah that was of prime importance.

The Holy Spirit (Scripture) bears witness for Reuben that he said this only for the purpose of saving his brother — that he would come afterwards and draw him up from there. He thought, “I am the first-born and the chief among them, and blame will attach to no one but myself” (Genesis Rabbah 84:15).
Does everyone agree that Reuben should be praised for the way he tried to intervene in Joseph's fate?
Shemirat Ha'lashon 2, 12:4, R. Yisrael Meir Ha'Kohen (Chafetz Chayim)
And the Midrash tells us that this statement of Reuven's [("You may kill my two sons, etc.")] was fulfilled in his sons, [i.e., descendants], Dathan and Aviram [(in the episode of Korach)]. And, in truth, he [Reuven] himself was the cause of this, by saying (Bereshith 27:32): "Cast him into this pit which is in the desert." The act was extremely evil, for which reason they [Dathan and Aviram] descended, living, to Sheol, to the midst of the pit. As to his intent, being good, as it is written (Bereshith, Ibid.): "in order to rescue him from their hands to return him to his father," he merited that one of his descendants, On ben Peleth, be saved, by returning in repentance to His Father in heaven (wherefore he was called "On," his being in aninuth ["mourning" (for his sin)] all of his life, as Chazal have stated.
Sefat Emet
Similarly, I heard from my father, my master, my teacher and mentor, the righteous one who should be remembered for life in the World to Come, about what the midrash says, that if Reuven had known that the Torah had written about him “in order to save him” (Genesis 37:22), he would have carried Yosef on his shoulders back to his father (Rus Rabbah 5:6, Vayikra Rabbah 34:8)
Looking ahead to Chanukah - Joseph & brothers as an INTERNAL conflict - CHANUKAH as a CIVIL CONFLICT among Jews
"Read in its historical context, however, the Hanukkah story is really about a revolt against the Hellenized Jews who had fallen madly in love with the sophisticated, globalizing superculture of their day. The Apocrypha’s texts make it clear that the battle against Hellenization was in fact a kulturkampf among the Jews themselves. Here is how the first Book of the Maccabees describes Jerusalem on the eve of civil war and revolt in the time of Antiochus (translation by Nicholas de Lange):

At that time there were some evil-doers in Israel who tried to win popularity for a policy of integration with the surrounding nations. It was because the Jews had kept themselves aloof for so long, they claimed, that so many hardships had befallen them. They acquired a following and applied to Antiochus, who authorized them to introduce the Greek way of life. They built a Greek gymnasium in Jerusalem and even had themselves uncircumcised.
Armed Hasmonean priests and their comrades from the rural town ofModi’in attacked urban Jews, priests and laity alike, who supported Greek reform, like the gymnasium and new rules for governing commerce. The Hasmoneans imposed, at sword’s edge, traditional observance. After years of protracted warfare, the priests established a Hasmonean state that never ceased fighting Jews who disagreed with its rule.