Thoughts on the Weekly Torah Portion, with an emphasis on Ethical Lessons and Jewish Philosophy
Thursday, December 22, 2016
Parshat Vayeishev - The Measure of Holiness
In this week’s parsha we learn the tragic event of the selling of Yosef. Yosef shares his dreams of grandeur with his brothers and engenders negative feelings from them. Additionally, Yaakov gives Yosef a special coat signifying Yaakov’s love for him. Fearing Yosef to be a threat, the brothers decide to dispose of him, initially wanting to have him killed. But due to Reuven’s intervention, Yehuda and the brothers decide instead to sell Yosef to merchants heading down to Egypt.
Thus begins the the arduous exile of the Jewish people in the land of Egypt. Yosef is thrown into servitude in the house of Potiphar. Quickly proving himself to be capable, Yosef is appointed to a position of authority of the household. He draws the attention of Potiphar's wife who seeks to tempt him. As is known, Yosef overcomes this test, but in light of the wife’s accusations is nevertheless imprisoned.
There is a fascinating Gemara in Sotah (36b) which contrasts this with another episode from the parsha: that of Yehuda and Tamar. Yehuda, having been tricked by Tamar to father a child to her, openly admits to being the father. He does so despite severe embarrassment, having already sentenced Tamar to death for her actions and subsequently needing to retract his condemnation. Thus he was given the merit that his name יהודה be comprised of G-d’s ineffable name י-ה-ו-ה. The Gemara goes on to say that this differs from Yosef’s name, which only includes part of Hashem’s name: י-ה-ו (This is based on Psalm 81:6, the Gemara explains that the letter ה was added to Yosef's name, spelling יהוסף.) The Gemara then elaborates with great detail the story of Yosef and the wife of Potiphar, how difficult a challenge it was and the extent to which Yosef went not to succumb to temptation. In juxtaposing this with Yehuda’s act of strength, the Gemara seems to imply that Yosef somehow fell short. As such, he was not granted a merit as high as Yehuda’s. On the other hand, the Gemara appears to be praising Yosef for his great accomplishment. How then is that an explanation for why Yosef was not as meritorious?
In discussing the concept of “Yichud,” my esteemed Rosh Yeshiva Rav Aharon Lopiansky Shlit”a once quoted his Rebbe Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l (famed Rosh Yeshiva of the Mir in Yerushalayim) on the matter: When it comes to the world of avoiding עריות (licentious behavior), the measure of success is not based on falling prey in the moment or not. Rather, the true test is whether or not we have taken the necessary precautions beforehand, not to put ourselves in a precarious position to begin with. Thus, says the Rosh Yeshiva Rav Chaim, this is the depth of the prohibition of Yichud, for it guarantees that a person not even be placed in a challenging situation. One who is careful with these halachot has passed the test.
With this in mind we can now attempt to understand Yosef Hatzadik, who is known throughout rabbinic literature for his holiness and purity, and the Gemara’s apparent critique despite his having overcome his Yetzer Harah. For perhaps we can say (in our superficial understanding of his motives) that Yosef should not have been in the situation at all. The fact that he overcame the temptation, while showing great strength and surely deserving of praise, does not exempt him from making sure he does not find himself in a place where he is tempted. A true showing of success in this area would have been the extent to which he went to avoid such circumstances. This may be what the Gemara is addressing in telling us that Yosef was not so meritorious as to have his name fully reflect that of G-d’s. (In fact, the Gemara (ibid.) quotes an opinion that interprets the passuk, “And it was on that day that he entered the house to do his work” (39:11) – he went to fulfill his needs with her, i.e. to have relations with her. Meaning that he indeed went with the intention of sinning. Even according to the alternate opinion, that he went to do actual work, he still should not have been alone, having known Potiphar's wife had tried to seduce him in the past).*
It is important to reiterate that we cannot fully ascertain the true understanding of both the Gemara and Yosef's actions, but we can take this as lesson to internalize: we must not allow ourselves to be placed in precarious situations where we are likely to be tested. Post facto, if G-d forbid we have indeed succumbed, the correct course of action is not to wallow in sadness, for clearly, once in the situation, it is understandable that the challenge may be too great at that point. We should simply take it as a lesson for the future to make the proper precautions and סייגים to ensure that it will not happen again.
May Hashem grant us the strength to resist any negative temptations that come our way, and may we all have the wisdom to always put ourselves in places that will be conducive to growth, happiness and greater avodat Hashem.
*According the above, one could still ask: Yehuda himself also should not have put himself into the situation with Tamar! So what is the great praise of Yehuda, in comparison to Yosef? Seemingly, Yosef is even more praiseworthy, for he didn't succumb to temptation, while Yehuda did in fact “give in” in being with Tamar. Perhaps we then need to take into consideration the explanation of Yehuda’s actions according to the Midrash and the Da’at Zekeinim, which say that an Angel forced Yehuda, and that it was not by his own will. He is therefore not held accountable. The great act of strength we are highlighting about Yehudah is not whether he gave in to temptation of arayot, but rather the fact that he later admitted to his sin, and for that he is rewarded.