SEDRAH SELECTIONS PARSHAS MIKEITZ 5774 BS"D

Ch. 41, v. 8: "V'ein po'seir osom l'Pharoh" - And there is no interpreter of them to Paroh - Rashi comments that his so called wise men offered numerous explanations, but none satisfied Paroh. Not a one of the explanations was connected to agriculture. One obviously does not need a DDD (Doctorate of Dream Divination) to realize that a dream of cows, who plow and thresh produce, and a dream about grain, the actual produce, which are both swallowed, refer to an agricultural calamity in the offing. Why didn't even one of the so called wise men figure this out? In a previous edition it was offered that they saw that there would only be two years of hunger, and the dreams told of sevens, so they themselves discarded such an explanation. Rabbeinu Bachyei offers that Hashem orchestrated that their abilities be obtuse, "Meishiv chachomim ochor v'daatom y'sa'keil" (Yeshayohu 44:25), so that Yoseif would be called to divine the dreams and bring to all that would ensue.

Ch. 41, v. 9: "Es chato'ai ani mazkir ha'yom" - My sins I recount today - The Holy Zohar writes that where the verse mentions "ha'yom" it refers to Rosh Hashonoh. The gemara R.H. 10b says that Yoseif left jail on R.H. The Beis Yoseif O.Ch. #584 writes that one is not to mention sin on R.H., yet we find the wine butler mentioning his having sinned. This can be explained as follows: The wine butler was standing directly in front of the king. The gemara R.H. says "Imru l'fonai malchiyos k'dai shetamlichuni a'leichem, uva'meh bashofar" - Say in front of Me verses of kingship so that you will accept me as King upon you, and with what, with a shofar." The Sfas Emes asks why the gemara asks "and with what." Why assume that there is a need for an accompaniment? Just the recital of verses of Kingship should be sufficient. He answers that since there is a requirement to recite the verses "l'fonai," the gemara questions "uva'meh," and with what, meaning and with what can we reach the level of being "l'fonai."

When we hear the shofar sounds of "m'yushov" we say a short prayer after the "TaRaT" set that contains the prayer that angels should bring the sounds of the shofar on high to facilitate "l'chapeir al kol chato'einu." We see that when we are directly in front of the King - through the shofar - we do mention our sins. We see this concept in our verse. The wine butler, when standing in front of the king, mentioned his sins even though it was R.H. (n.l. b'derech tzachus)

Ch. 41, v. 13: "Osi heishiv al kani" - He returned me to my position - Who returned him to his position? The obvious answer is that Paroh did this. However, the Holy Zohar writes that the wine butler was referring to Yoseif, who was the underlying cause for this through his divination, as the results of a dream are dependent upon he who interprets it.

Ch. 41, v. 43: "B'mirke'ves hamishneh" - In the second chariot - Rashi explains that it was common for the king to ride in a primary chariot and be accompanied by the second-in-command in a second chariot. This is "hamishneh," the second one. Ramban and Ibn Ezra explain that "hamishneh" means the second-in-command. Hence "hamishneh" refers not to the importance of the chariot, but rather, the importance of its occupant. Baa'lei Tosfos explain that until now only one horse was used to pull a chariot. The chariot that carried Yoseif had two horses pulling it. "Hamishneh" refers to the number of horses, two.

Ch. 42, v. 1: "Shever" - Grain - This is the pristine translation. Targum Onkelos adds "for purchase." Seichel Tov says that wherever we find "shever" referring to grain it always means that it is available for purchase during a famine. The word "shever" is used because even a wealthy person who would usually purchase numerous full measurements of grain would now only be able to purchase a "broken," incomplete measure (see Dvorim 4:6). Rabbeinu Bachyei says that this word is used here because it alludes to there being a shattering episode in the offing.

Ch. 42, v. 8: "Va'ya'keir Yoseif es echov" - And Yoseif recognized his brothers - The previous verse says "va'ya'kireim," so what is added with these words of our verse? Ibn Ezra answers that he first recognized them as his brothers in a group, but not each individual brother. Our verse says that he further recognized each one.

Ramban answers that the earlier recognition was through his officers, who told him that a group of ten people came from the land Canaan. He himself actually recognized them when they appeared in front of him. Rada"k says that our verse adds that "es echov," he recognized them with a brotherly attitude, not as they treated him.

Ch. 42, v. 8: "Va'ya'keir Yoseif es echov" - And Yoseif recognized his brothers - Why didn't Yoseif send a message to his father that he was alive and doing well? This question is not to be asked specifically here where Yoseif recognized his brothers, as even when he was enslaved by Poti Phera he had the opportunity to do so. Here, where his brothers were present he could have notified his father in a most convincing manner, as his brothers would relate that they saw Yoseif with their own eyes and that he was the viceroy of Egypt. The Ramban answers that all that he did including incarcerating his brothers, the toughness, etc., were all done to fulfill the prophecies that he received. Rabbi Yoseif Bchor Shor answers that since the brothers let him live and sold him as a slave, it was obvious that even as a slave he could send off a letter to his father, or even be sent on a mission by his future master and run to his father. They therefore made him swear to never go back to Canaan and in no manner or form convey to his father that he was alive (not even a simple email). According to Rashi it is because he was made to swear that he would not tell anyone about his being kidnapped and sold as a slave by his brothers, would he contact his father that he is alive a communication would ensue where Yoseif would be forced to tell his father that his brothers sold him.

Ch. 42, v. 9: "M'raglim a'tem" - You are spies - There was truth in this statement. "M'RaGLIM" is an acronym for "Mei'imi Rochel G'navtem L'Midyonim Yish'm'eilim M'chartem." (Mei'am Lo'eiz)

Ch. 42, v. 29: "Va'yagidu oso kol hakoros osom" - And they related to him all that happened to them - They carefully worded their happenings as "koros," simple happenings. "Motzos," also meaning happenings, has another connotation, happenings that are the results of something. Among themselves they said that all the false charges were the results of their not having mercy on Yoseif. This is something that they did not even want to intimate to their father. (Rabbi Avrohom ben hoRambam)

M.R. says that "koros" is an allusion to beams. They felt as if more beams were placed on their hearts by having to tell Yaakov that Binyomin was under arrest, and this after Yoseif was gone and Shimon was arrested.

A GUTTEN SHABBOS KODESH. FEEL FREE TO DISTRIBUTE BY COPY OR ELECTRONICALLY.

FEEDBACK IS APPRECIATED. TO SUBSCRIBE, KINDLY SEND REQUEST TO: SHOLOM613@ROGERS.COM

See also Oroh V'Simchoh - Meshech Chochmoh on the Weekly Parsha, Chasidic Insights and Chamisha Mi Yodei'a