Chasidut for Sotah 72:20
אמרו לו א"כ יהא יודע בשבעים לשון בא גבריאל ולימדו שבעים לשון לא הוה קגמר הוסיף לו אות אחת משמו של הקב"ה ולמד שנאמר (תהלים פא, ו) עדות ביהוסף שמו בצאתו על ארץ מצרים (שפת לא ידעתי אשמע) ולמחר כל לישנא דאישתעי פרעה בהדיה אהדר ליה
'And there was none of the men of the house etc. — is it possible that there was no man in a huge house like that of this wicked [Potiphar]! — It was taught in the School of R. Ishmael: That day was their feast-day, and they had all gone to their idolatrous temple; but she had pretended to be ill because she thought, I shall not have an opportunity like to-day for Joseph to associate with me. And she caught him by his garment, saying etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 12. ');"><sup>18</sup></span>
Kedushat Levi
Another approach to the first sentence in Yehudah’s plea for the release of Binyamin: Why did Yehudah add the plea that Joseph not become angry at his trying to spare his brother from becoming a slave in Egypt? The very mention of Joseph’s becoming angry at him seems most undiplomatic, as hearing this Joseph would presume that Yehudah would make an unacceptable request. Moreover, in his entire speech Yehudah did not once say anything that could be interpreted as capable of arousing Joseph’s anger. He only appeals to Joseph’s compassion throughout his lengthy speech. Rashi also already noticed this, and this is why he may have interpreted the whole speech of Yehudah as a single long accusation. Nonetheless, I prefer to explain the speech according to the peshat, the plain meaning of the text as well as the words כי כמוך כפרעה, words that have presented great difficulties to many other commentators.
I believe that Yehudah was concerned throughout to awaken any feelings of mercy that Joseph, i.e. the ruler who claimed to have been convinced that Binyamin was not only a thief but had stolen something of great value to him, possessed. [If Yehudah had considered Binyamin guilty of the accusation, something that the Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 92,8) does believe, as it quotes the brothers saying that just as Binyamin’s mother stole the idols of her father, her son had now done something similar, seeing that Joseph had used his silver goblet in a manner similar to Lavan’s using his teraphim, at the time, his entire speech would have been a farce. Ed.] He had to give the impression that he thought Binyamin was indeed guilty, but that his punishment would cause other innocent parties great grief, all of which would be Joseph’s fault. He did not believe Joseph guilty of planting the goblet in Binyamin’s sack. He was convinced that, as our sages are fond of saying, דברים היוצאים מן הלב נכנסים ללב, “words spoken sincerely, clearly emanating from the heart and not merely from the lips, find their way to the heart of the person or persons to whom they are addressed. [not found in the Talmud, but something similar is found in B’rachot 6. Ed.]
I believe that Yehudah was concerned throughout to awaken any feelings of mercy that Joseph, i.e. the ruler who claimed to have been convinced that Binyamin was not only a thief but had stolen something of great value to him, possessed. [If Yehudah had considered Binyamin guilty of the accusation, something that the Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 92,8) does believe, as it quotes the brothers saying that just as Binyamin’s mother stole the idols of her father, her son had now done something similar, seeing that Joseph had used his silver goblet in a manner similar to Lavan’s using his teraphim, at the time, his entire speech would have been a farce. Ed.] He had to give the impression that he thought Binyamin was indeed guilty, but that his punishment would cause other innocent parties great grief, all of which would be Joseph’s fault. He did not believe Joseph guilty of planting the goblet in Binyamin’s sack. He was convinced that, as our sages are fond of saying, דברים היוצאים מן הלב נכנסים ללב, “words spoken sincerely, clearly emanating from the heart and not merely from the lips, find their way to the heart of the person or persons to whom they are addressed. [not found in the Talmud, but something similar is found in B’rachot 6. Ed.]
I believe that Yehudah was concerned throughout to awaken any feelings of mercy that Joseph, i.e. the ruler who claimed to have been convinced that Binyamin was not only a thief but had stolen something of great value to him, possessed. [If Yehudah had considered Binyamin guilty of the accusation, something that the Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 92,8) does believe, as it quotes the brothers saying that just as Binyamin’s mother stole the idols of her father, her son had now done something similar, seeing that Joseph had used his silver goblet in a manner similar to Lavan’s using his teraphim, at the time, his entire speech would have been a farce. Ed.] He had to give the impression that he thought Binyamin was indeed guilty, but that his punishment would cause other innocent parties great grief, all of which would be Joseph’s fault. He did not believe Joseph guilty of planting the goblet in Binyamin’s sack. He was convinced that, as our sages are fond of saying, דברים היוצאים מן הלב נכנסים ללב, “words spoken sincerely, clearly emanating from the heart and not merely from the lips, find their way to the heart of the person or persons to whom they are addressed. [not found in the Talmud, but something similar is found in B’rachot 6. Ed.]
I believe that Yehudah was concerned throughout to awaken any feelings of mercy that Joseph, i.e. the ruler who claimed to have been convinced that Binyamin was not only a thief but had stolen something of great value to him, possessed. [If Yehudah had considered Binyamin guilty of the accusation, something that the Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 92,8) does believe, as it quotes the brothers saying that just as Binyamin’s mother stole the idols of her father, her son had now done something similar, seeing that Joseph had used his silver goblet in a manner similar to Lavan’s using his teraphim, at the time, his entire speech would have been a farce. Ed.] He had to give the impression that he thought Binyamin was indeed guilty, but that his punishment would cause other innocent parties great grief, all of which would be Joseph’s fault. He did not believe Joseph guilty of planting the goblet in Binyamin’s sack. He was convinced that, as our sages are fond of saying, דברים היוצאים מן הלב נכנסים ללב, “words spoken sincerely, clearly emanating from the heart and not merely from the lips, find their way to the heart of the person or persons to whom they are addressed. [not found in the Talmud, but something similar is found in B’rachot 6. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 29,11. “Yaakov gave Rachel a kiss, etc;” [note that the Torah does not refer to Rachel’s physical appearance until verse 17 after Yaakov had already worked for him for over a month. Ed.]
Genesis 29,17. “and Rachel was shapely and beautiful.” At first glance it is surprising that the Torah appears to link Yaakov’s falling in love with Rachel in verse 18, ויאהב יעקב את רחל, “Yaakov loved Rachel,” to the description of her physical assets in verse 17. Is it possible that Yaakov, the most highly admired of our patriarchs, was attracted by Rachel’s physical features, and that this is why the Torah reports matters in this sequence? Our sages called our attention to Yaakov’s message to his brother Esau in Genesis 32,4 where he told him עם לבן גרתי, ”I have remained a stranger while with Lavan, etc.” The numerical value of the letters in the word גרתי, equals 613, the number of commandments in the Torah. Yaakov reminded his brother that during the entire period that he spent in Charan he had observed the Torah, and therefore had little to fear. A man who could make such a statement certainly did not marry Rachel because he was smitten by lust to possess her shapely body. Anyone who observes the 613 commandments is well aware of the statement by Solomon in Proverbs 31,30 that שקר החן והבך היופי, that external attributes such as physical beauty or even a graceful walk, etc., are deceptive and offer no clue to the owner’s character.
We must look further for the reason why the Torah made a point of mentioning Rachel’s physical attributes. I have heard from my revered teacher the Maggid of Mezeritch Dov Baer, of sainted memory, that we must understand this as follows. We know that the principal attribute used by Yaakov in serving the Lord is the attribute known as תפארת, harmony, located in the center of diagrams of the 10 emanations, ספירות. Any physical matter on earth, containing a “spark” from this emanation, is spiritually elevated by the presence of this spark, regardless of how secular it is by nature. Through this spark of the attribute of תפארת, its host is brought closer to its roots in the celestial regions, and engages in some degree of service to the Lord.
We must look further for the reason why the Torah made a point of mentioning Rachel’s physical attributes. I have heard from my revered teacher the Maggid of Mezeritch Dov Baer, of sainted memory, that we must understand this as follows. We know that the principal attribute used by Yaakov in serving the Lord is the attribute known as תפארת, harmony, located in the center of diagrams of the 10 emanations, ספירות. Any physical matter on earth, containing a “spark” from this emanation, is spiritually elevated by the presence of this spark, regardless of how secular it is by nature. Through this spark of the attribute of תפארת, its host is brought closer to its roots in the celestial regions, and engages in some degree of service to the Lord.
When the Torah (Genesis 39,13) reports that Joseph וינס ויצא החוצה, “fled and went “outside,” to escape the efforts of Potiphar’s wife to seduce him, he did so because he realized that that woman had used her mode of dress to lure him into a sinful relationship (Yuma 35). She had employed whatever holy spark she possessed in a reverse manner, instead of a means to come closer to her Creator. When Joseph escaped from her presence he took with him this “holy spark” thereby serving his Creator and paving the way for this “spark” that had escaped from the Shechinah to find its way back to its roots.
It is known that Joseph, though, of course also serving the Lord, did not do so by using principally the attribute of harmony as his father was in the habit of doing. However, at this critical juncture, in his fateful seclusion with the wife of his master Potiphar, he resorted to the attribute of תפארת as the means to avoid sinning.
It is also known that every tzaddik who serves the Lord, regardless of which of the attributes in the diagram of the emanations he uses as his primary model, will be granted a vision of the tzaddik who had made that attribute his primary role model in serving the Lord. When the Talmud Sotah 36 relates that at the critical moment before the seduction, Joseph had a vision of his father, it is a vision of the emanation of תפארת that the Talmud refers to as having been seen by Joseph.
Genesis 29,17. “and Rachel was shapely and beautiful.” At first glance it is surprising that the Torah appears to link Yaakov’s falling in love with Rachel in verse 18, ויאהב יעקב את רחל, “Yaakov loved Rachel,” to the description of her physical assets in verse 17. Is it possible that Yaakov, the most highly admired of our patriarchs, was attracted by Rachel’s physical features, and that this is why the Torah reports matters in this sequence? Our sages called our attention to Yaakov’s message to his brother Esau in Genesis 32,4 where he told him עם לבן גרתי, ”I have remained a stranger while with Lavan, etc.” The numerical value of the letters in the word גרתי, equals 613, the number of commandments in the Torah. Yaakov reminded his brother that during the entire period that he spent in Charan he had observed the Torah, and therefore had little to fear. A man who could make such a statement certainly did not marry Rachel because he was smitten by lust to possess her shapely body. Anyone who observes the 613 commandments is well aware of the statement by Solomon in Proverbs 31,30 that שקר החן והבך היופי, that external attributes such as physical beauty or even a graceful walk, etc., are deceptive and offer no clue to the owner’s character.
We must look further for the reason why the Torah made a point of mentioning Rachel’s physical attributes. I have heard from my revered teacher the Maggid of Mezeritch Dov Baer, of sainted memory, that we must understand this as follows. We know that the principal attribute used by Yaakov in serving the Lord is the attribute known as תפארת, harmony, located in the center of diagrams of the 10 emanations, ספירות. Any physical matter on earth, containing a “spark” from this emanation, is spiritually elevated by the presence of this spark, regardless of how secular it is by nature. Through this spark of the attribute of תפארת, its host is brought closer to its roots in the celestial regions, and engages in some degree of service to the Lord.
We must look further for the reason why the Torah made a point of mentioning Rachel’s physical attributes. I have heard from my revered teacher the Maggid of Mezeritch Dov Baer, of sainted memory, that we must understand this as follows. We know that the principal attribute used by Yaakov in serving the Lord is the attribute known as תפארת, harmony, located in the center of diagrams of the 10 emanations, ספירות. Any physical matter on earth, containing a “spark” from this emanation, is spiritually elevated by the presence of this spark, regardless of how secular it is by nature. Through this spark of the attribute of תפארת, its host is brought closer to its roots in the celestial regions, and engages in some degree of service to the Lord.
When the Torah (Genesis 39,13) reports that Joseph וינס ויצא החוצה, “fled and went “outside,” to escape the efforts of Potiphar’s wife to seduce him, he did so because he realized that that woman had used her mode of dress to lure him into a sinful relationship (Yuma 35). She had employed whatever holy spark she possessed in a reverse manner, instead of a means to come closer to her Creator. When Joseph escaped from her presence he took with him this “holy spark” thereby serving his Creator and paving the way for this “spark” that had escaped from the Shechinah to find its way back to its roots.
It is known that Joseph, though, of course also serving the Lord, did not do so by using principally the attribute of harmony as his father was in the habit of doing. However, at this critical juncture, in his fateful seclusion with the wife of his master Potiphar, he resorted to the attribute of תפארת as the means to avoid sinning.
It is also known that every tzaddik who serves the Lord, regardless of which of the attributes in the diagram of the emanations he uses as his primary model, will be granted a vision of the tzaddik who had made that attribute his primary role model in serving the Lord. When the Talmud Sotah 36 relates that at the critical moment before the seduction, Joseph had a vision of his father, it is a vision of the emanation of תפארת that the Talmud refers to as having been seen by Joseph.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy