Parashat Vayechi 5773 PDF

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 2

Weekly Thoughts

B"H. Shabbat Parashat Vayechi, 16th of Teves 5773

Who Is The King?

The kingship of Israel originally belonged to Reuben, Jacob's rstborn. But Reuben forfeited this right when he sinned by "violating his father's marriage bed," and the sovereignty was transferred to Judah. In his blessing to Judah, Jacob alludes to two virtues for which Judah merited the leadership of Israel:

a) When the other sons of Jacob plotted to kill Joseph, Judah saved his life by arguing that selling him into slavery would be a more "protable" solution (Genesis 37:26-27). b) Judah publicly admitted his culpability in the incident of Tamar, thereby saving her and her two unborn sons from death (ibid., 38:26). It would seem, however, that on both accounts, Reuben was Judah's equal, if not his superior. Regarding the plot to kill Joseph, it was Reuben who rst saved Joseph's life by suggesting to his brothers that, instead of killing him, they should throw him into the pit. The Torah attests that he did this "to save him from their hands, in order to return him to his father" (Reuben did not know that there were snakes and scorpions in the pit, and that he was in fact jeopardizing Joseph's life). The Torah also tells us that Reuben was not present when Joseph was sold and was shocked at not nding Joseph in the pit when he returned to take him out, and that he berated his brothers for what they had done. Judah, on the other hand, only suggested a more protable way of disposing of Joseph (the Torah says nothing about any hidden intentions), and was the cause of Joseph's sale into slavery. Indeed, we later nd the others accusing Judah: "It was you who told us to sell him. If you would have told us to return him to his father, we would have listened to you" (Rashi on Genesis 38:1).

As for Judah's public penance, here, too, Reuben excelled him. Reuben, too, admitted and repented his sin. And while Judah was faced with a choice to either admit his responsibility or cause the destruction of three innocent lives, the need for Reuben to publicly confess was far less compelling. Furthermore, Reuben's penance did not end with a onetime admission of guilt, but continued to consume his entire being for many years. Our sages tell us that the reason that Reuben was not present at the time of Joseph's sale-nine years after his sin-was that "he was occupied with his sackcloth and fasting" (ibid., 37:29). Indeed, as far as personal virtue is concerned, Reuben surpassed Judah, both in the purity of his intentions regarding Joseph and the intensity of his repentance over his failings. But Judah was the one who actually saved Joseph, while Reuben unwittingly placed him in mortal danger. In the same vein, Judah's repentance saved three lives, while Reuben's remorse helped no one-in fact, had he not been preoccupied with "his sackcloth and his fasting" he might have prevented Joseph's sale into slavery. Accordingly, Reuben retained his rights as Jacob's rstborn in all that pertained to him as an individual (see ibid., 35:23). But Judah surpassed him in the most basic prerequisite for leadership: that concern for one's fellow must always take precedence over one's own pursuits, no matter how pious and lofty these pursuits might be. Believing Joseph safe for the time being, Reuben rushed back to attend to his prayers and penance, in effect abandoning him to his fate.

Chassidic
While Reuben prayed and fasted, Judah acted. Judah earned the leadership of Israel because he recognized that when another human being is in need, one must set aside all other considerations and get involved. Even if one's own intentions are still short of perfection and one's own character is yet to be rened. Sometimes, one cannot afford to wait.

Thoughts
When Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch (1789-1866) was a child attending cheder, his teacher taught the verse, "And Jacob lived for seventeen years in the land of Egypt," according to the commentary of the Baal HaTurim -- that Jacob lived the best years of his life in Egypt. When the child came home he asked his grandfather, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi: How can it be that our father Jacob, the greatest of the Patriarchs, lived the best years of his life in pagan Egypt? Replied Rabbi Schneur Zalman: It is written that Jacob "sent Judah ahead of him... to show the way to Goshen" (Genesis 46:28). The Midrash explains that this was to establish a house of learning, where the sons of Jacob would study Torah. When one studies Torah, one is brought close to G-d, so that even in Egypt one can live a true "life .

Closing Agreement Under Pressure


Case: Case:The plainti (=pl) and defendant (=def) are neighbors in an apartment building who jointly planned the expansion of their apartments. Due to legal and technical considerations, it was possible for def to expand more than pl, but a disagreement arose regarding rights to a certain area. In the midst of negotiations, def presented his plans for the two of them to the municipal regulatory board, with the area in question apportioned to him. Pl raised an objection to the plans. At a meeting at the municipality, an ocial warned pl that if he did not sign on to the plans that def submitted, his building expansion would not be approved, and it takes signicant time until it would be considered again. Pl signed the plans, but later he claimed that he did so under duress and presented witnesses that he said in advance that he had sign only under duress.

Ruling:At rst glance, pl is bound by his signature on the plans. In general, an agreement under duress to sell is valid in regard to sales, although not for presents (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 205:1). Regarding sales, we say that under the circumstances, one realized that agreement is in his best interest. Since pl also gained from the approval of the plans, this case is like one of a sale. Informing witnesses that he will not be sincere in his agreement is called making a modaah (disclaimer) and this can work in cases of duress. However, that is only when the seller can prove there was unfair duress. The Shulchan Aruch (ibid. 12) says that duress that comes from his own needs does not count in this regard. The classic example is one who is forced to sell property because he wants to buy other property and needs the cash. In our case, the duress was that pl needed approval for his plans, which is thus related to pursuing his own needs. Therefore pls signing on the plans obligated him. It turns out that pl had, previous to defs presentations of the plans, tried to take def to beit din to rule on this dispute. Apparently, def stalled in signing an arbitration agreement until after the plans were approved so that there would, in eect, be nothing upon which to adjudicate. In order that def should not gain from this trickery, it is worthwhile to determine what beit din would have decided. It appears that beit din would not have prevented def from making his request before the municipal board. This is because municipal forums are not standard adjudication, where one is to go specically to beit din. Rather, it is a case of the sovereign authority deciding on the right to build in a non-legalistic setting. This is similar to the valid matter of "courts" within trade societies (see Pitchei Teshuva, CM 3:2). Also, in this case, def was not taking something that belonged to pl, but that they each were trying to be rst in getting something approved by a third party. If that party has reasons to give to def that which pl is not able to get, he may make eorts to secure what he can.

Note:One Should NOT derive any Halachik Conclusions from the above

You might also like