Thursday, November 25, 2010

JHI Dvar Torah on Parshat Vayeshev

This Dvar Torah is being sponsored by Ms. Helen Bauer of France in memory of her aunt Taub bat Berel whose yahrtzeit is the 26th of Kislev.


PARSHAT VAYESHEV - EXTREME PIETY

Parshat Vayeshev contains one of the most dramatic stories of the Chumash (Bible) - the temptation of Yosef (Joseph). Yosef was then a slave in the household of Potifar, a high-ranking minister of the Egyptian king. Though a slave, Yosef was extremely talented, and Potifar entrusted him with the management of the entire household.

Yosef was extremely handsome. As a result, Potifar’s wife began to ceaselessly entice him to sin with her. On the day of a major Egyptian celebration, Potifar’s entire household left to join in the rejoicing save his wife who feigned illness and remained at home. Yosef then entered the house, and almost succumbed to her temptations. The image of his father Yaakov (Jacob) then miraculously appeared threatening that if he sinned, Yosef would be eternally severed from his heritage. Yosef then seized control of himself and fled.

The Midrash Rabbah on Shir Hashirim, as explained by the Commentary of Etz Yosef, writes that Yosef’s intention in coming to the house on that day was to do his regular work. This devotion to his duties was indicative of Yosef’s great piety and integrity.

To quote the original texts: “Rabbi Nechemiah said, It was a day of tiatron of the Nile, and they all went to see, and he [Yosef] entered to do his work, to calculate the accounts of his master” (Midrash Rabbah Shir Hashirim 1:1).

The Commentary of Etz Yosef on the Midrash explains – “To me it appears that it was the day that the Nile burst forth from its banks to rise upon the entire land of Egypt, [and therefore] they made on it [that day] a rejoicing in the land of Egypt. And that is what Rabbi Nechemiah concludes: “and they all went to see and he [Yosef] entered to do his work.” According to this, it is understandable that the scripture [took the trouble and] taught that he came to the house to do his work. For this is significant in that it demonstrates the chassidus (extreme piety) of Yosef. For even though all the servants and maidservants were subordinate to him, and they all went to be present at the merriment, nevertheless, he did not go with the counsel of the revelers, nor did he sit with scoffers. But he faithfully came to the house to do the work of his master.”

Much is written in the Torah describing Yosef’s G-dly stature. Yosef’s brothers were all people of enormous holiness. Yet, Yosef was apparently the most pious of them all. He is referred to in Torah literature as Yosef Hatzaddik — Yosef, the supremely righteous man. Yosef was also a great scholar of Torah. By age 17, he had already mastered all of the Torah that Yaakov had acquired over a 14 year period during which Yaakov did not even interrupt his study in order to sleep (Rashi, Bereishit 13:3). Furthermore, although Adam, Noah, and the patriarchs had already lived, it was the merit of Yosef fleeing from the temptation of Potifar’s wife that caused the Red Sea to ‘flee’ from before the Jews and split at the time of the Exodus when they were being chased by Pharaoh’s soldiers and chariots (Midrash Yalkut Shimoni on Tehillim 114:3).

The Midrash came to reveal an additional and heretofore unknown dimension to Yosef’s piety. What could eclipse all of Yosef’s other spiritual accomplishments? What deed demonstrated yet greater piety than that which is otherwise known about Yosef? This Midrash provides the answer…Yosef worked most faithfully for his master Potifar.

Evidently, extreme integrity in matters of money requires consummate righteousness and sanctity. Thus, Yosef’s being a faithful employee demonstrated an additional level of piety that would not have been otherwise evident, notwithstanding all of his other G-dly attributes.

Many people who do not work in Torah-related fields are troubled by the nagging feeling that their daily labors do not involve spiritual growth. The Midrash and Etz Yosef are teaching that in fact, virtually any workplace presents a unique opportunity for such. Working with absolute integrity as Yosef did can beget exalted holiness. Of course, “Absolute integrity” at work connotes far more than basic job performance. It means, for example, that unless permission is granted, one should work during every minute for which he is paid; one must never pocket anything from the business, however small, such as a paper clip, a pencil, and so forth.

It is very disappointing to hear reports of outwardly devout Jews being implicated in major financial wrongdoing. The (incorrect) impression given by such news is that devout Orthodox Jewish observance can coexist with ongoing financial misconduct. As this Dvar indicates, little could be further from the truth.

The following quote from the Kav Hayashar (a great 17th Century work on Torah ethics and the service of G-d) chapter 52 strongly emphasizes this Torah ethic. “One should not rely on what he sees with his eyes — that [the person observed] is acting with perfection, for one man does not know what is in the other’s heart. Always remember this principle: He who does not wish to have benefit from the money of his friend and certainly does not wish for stolen money, and [one whose] financial dealings are with integrity — he is certainly a man that is a tzaddik (truly righteous person) and is just. But when one sees another Jew kissing tefillin and praying and not dealing with money with integrity, one must distance himself from him with all forms of distancing. For the fundamental fear [of G-d] and piety is [expressed] in matters of money. And every man that maintains his piety in financial matters, he is the consummate tzaddik.”

2 comments:

  1. Other commentaries state that the "work" that Yosef wanted to perform was to llive with Mrs. Potifar. He was not interested in accounting matters at all but was ready to succomb to the evil intention to have an affair.

    A miracle occurred and he saw the breastplate of the high priest with precious stones on tyhenames of all his brothers, but his name was blank without any stone at all, He could not bear to have this shame on himself and his offspring, so he fled from the c lutches of Mrs. Potifar. Chaim Meyer Ehrman

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear Dr. Ehrman,

    It is indeed true that the Talmud brings two opinions on why Yosef came to the house on that day. One is that he faithfully came to do his work. The other is that he came to sin.

    I imagine that the point you are raising (or implying) is this: “Why should we be inferring moral lessons from those who say that Yosef came to do his accounting? This version of what happened ‘isn’t necessarily so.’ According to other views he came to sin!

    My answer is that the Talmud and the Midrashic works are filled with differing views on topics. Yet, when studying Torah, always analyze both sides of the issue. Even when we say that the law follows one view, we attribute sanctity of the Torah to the opposing view as well. We apply the idea of “Eilu vieilu divrei Elokim Chaim – both views are the Living Words of The Almighty. Both are a part of the Oral Torah that was presented to Moshe at Mt Sinai.

    It is only in the realm of actual halachic practice that we adopt one of the views exclusively. For example, if the matter debated in the Talmud is a question of kashrut, we cannot rule that it is both kosher and unkosher at the same time. But the logic behind the view that is not adopted in halachic practice remains as sanctified and correct as the other view.

    The same applies to Agaddah, the areas of the Talmud that deal with morality. If there are two interpretations of an incident described in the Torah, both are true. Hence, the moral lessons of each version of the incident are not mutually exclusive.

    Furthermore, unlike as with halacha, there is no imperative to choose one interpretation over the other. Both versions are true and we deduce whatever moral lessons we can from each of them.

    The fact that one view disputes the other one’s version of the incident might mean nothing more than the fact that they are debating whether the words of the Scripture support one interpretation over the other. But every other aspect of the logic behind the other view and the lessons that it can teach us remain a part of the Eternal Torah.

    ReplyDelete