Bostoner Torah Insights Bostoner ‘Chassidus’ in Hebrew and English: Parshas Vayigash – 11 Tevet 5784
Bostoner Torah Insights - Yerushalayim
Bostoner Torah Insights
Bostoner ‘Chassidus’ in English
Parshas Vayigash – 11 Tevet 5784
Bostoner Rebbe shlit”a – Yerushalayim
Secretariat Email: bosto...@gmail.com
»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
At the end of last week’s Parsha, Yehudah tells the Egyptian Ruler, “We are ready to be slaves to my Master, both we and the one in whose hand the Gaviya was found”. The Egyptian Ruler answered, “Forfend that I would do such a thing. Only man in whose possession the Gaviya was found will be my slave, but as for you – go up in peace to your father” (Beraishis 44:17)
There is a Midrash that Yehudah was trying to impress upon the Egyptian Ruler that the Torah Law is “if a thief does not have he is sold according to his theft” (Shemos 22:2). Yehudah continues by stating that Binyamin “has money to pay” and therefore should not be taken as a slave. However, we must ask why Yehudah would expect the Egyptian Ruler to abide by Torah law.
The Yafeh To’ar explains that since Yosef brought Binyamin down to Egypt against his will simply to test if the brothers were telling the truth, he should be subject to the laws of the Torah, which are familiar to him rather than the laws of Egypt which he does not know. This is similar to how today certain diplomats have diplomatic immunity if they break the law of the country they are living in.
However, if we presume that Yehudah and Yosef agreed to go by Torah law since Binyamin did not admit that he stole the Gaviya when he was confronted, perhaps Yosef argued that Torah law would require paying Kayfel – double the value of the Gaviyah. Since Yosef claimed that the Gaviyah was a one-of-a-kind item that could be used to divine information, he suggested that it was priceless and Binyamin would never be able to pay enough to cover the Kayfel. Yehudah countered by offering the servitude of all the brothers to pay the cost of the Kayfel. Yosef, however, ruled that Binyamin’s servitude alone would be remuneration for what was owed and the brothers were free to go, but no monetary value could ever be paid to redeem Binyamin from his servitude.
One might ask why Yehudah didn’t present the Gemara (Kiddushin 18a) that a slave may only be put into servitude for the Keren (principal) of the theft and not for the additional payments of Kayfel (or 4 and 5 times for a sheep or ox). If he had, we can presume that Yosef would have argued to accept the Torah Laws based on the Torah Sh’B’Chtav, but not necessarily willing to accept the full extent of Torah Sh’B’Al Peh.
Once it was established that Yosef was willing to take Binyamin alone as a slave to cover the costs of the theft, Yehudah counteroffered for Yosef to take him in place of Binyamin. Since the Egyptian Ruler had already pronounced that Yehudah was free to go, Yehudah argued that he was a better and more trustworthy slave than Binyamin, which is how Yehudah ended his opening monologue to the Egyptian Ruler, “Now, therefore, please let your subject remain instead of the youth as a slave to my master and let the youth go up with his brothers, for how can I go up to my father if the youth is not with me, lest I see the evil that will befall my father” (Beraishis 44:33-34)
A final question that we can ask is what was meant by Yehudah when he said that Binyamin “has money to pay”. If Binyamin returned the Gaviyah he did not have to pay. If the Gaviyah was priceless he did not have enough money to pay the Kayfel. And if Binyamin was to be judged as a Ben Noach and not a Yisroel then he was worthy of the death penalty.
To understand this we must understand why the Torah law even suggests that a thief who cannot pay becomes the servant of the victim of the theft. Who would want to have a thief as a servant? The Torah presumes that ideally one only comes to a point of theft because they do not have their needs taken care of and instead of having faith in Hashem they resort to taking something that belongs to another. Thus, once the thief is taken in by the victim and provided with all of his needs there will no longer be an impulse to steal. The Torah requires that a master treat his servant so well that the Gemara (Kiddushin 20b) claims that one who acquires a servant in essence acquires a master. For example, if there is only one pillow available the master must give it to the servant to use.
Yehudah’s intention was to explain to the Egyptian Ruler that Binyamin had ample resources, so that if he was stealing it was not because of need, but because he was a kleptomaniac and theft was part of his essence, similar to his mother who stole the Terafim from her father (see Beraishis Raba 92:8). This was additional support for Yehudah’s larger proposal to convince the Egyptian Ruler to take Yehudah as a slave in place of Binyamin.
May the unity of Klal Yisroel bring a speedy end to their struggles and it did in those days at this time.
If you would like to be a sponsor:
HELP SUPPORT MOSDOS BOSTON IN ERETZ YISROEL