Chasidut על סוטה 72:21
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