Kol Rina An Independent Minyan Parashat Miketz Shabbat Rosh Chodesh Chanukah December 8, 2018 *** 30 Kislev, 5779

Transcription

1 Kol Rina An Independent Minyan Parashat Miketz Shabbat Rosh Chodesh Chanukah December 8, 2018 *** 30 Kislev, 5779 Kol Rina An Independent Minyan, is a traditional egalitarian community. We are haimish (homey/folksy), friendly, participatory, warm and welcoming. We hold weekly services in South Orange as well as holiday services and celebrations which are completely lay led. We welcome all to our services and programs from non-hebrew readers to Jewish communal and education professionals. Today's Portions 1: 43: p : 43: p : 43: p : 43: p : 44:1-6...p : 44: p : 44: p. 269 On Shabbat Rosh Chodesh Chanukah 8: Numbers 28: p. 930 maf: Numbers 7: p. 808 Haftarah:Shabbat Chanukah Zechariah 2:14-4:7....p Miketz in a Nutshell Joseph s imprisonment finally ends when Pharaoh dreams of seven fat cows that are swallowed up by seven lean cows, and of seven fat ears of grain swallowed by seven lean ears. Joseph interprets the dreams to mean that seven years of plenty will be followed by seven years of hunger, and advises Pharaoh to store grain during the plentiful years. Pharaoh appoints Joseph governor of Egypt. Joseph marries Asenath, daughter of Potiphar, and they have two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim. Famine spreads throughout the region, and food can be obtained only in Egypt. Ten of Joseph s brothers come to Egypt to purchase grain; the youngest, Benjamin, stays home, for Jacob fears for his safety. Joseph recognizes his brothers, but they do not recognize him; he accuses them of being spies, insists that they bring Benjamin to prove that they are who they say they are, and imprisons Simeon as a hostage. Later, they discover that the money they paid for their provisions has been mysteriously returned to them. Jacob agrees to send Benjamin only after Judah assumes personal and eternal responsibility for him. This time Joseph receives them kindly, releases Simeon, and invites them to an eventful dinner at his home. But then he plants his silver goblet, purportedly imbued with magic powers, in Benjamin s sack. When the brothers set out for home the next morning, they are pursued, searched, and arrested when the goblet is discovered. Joseph offers to set them free and retain only Benjamin as his slave. Haftarah in a Nutshell: Zechariah 2:14-4:7 Nutshell.htm

2 This haftorah contains a vision of the golden Temple Menorah, whose daily kindling is discussed in the opening of this week's Torah reading. This prophecy was communicated by Zechariah shortly before the building of the Second Temple. The haftorah opens with a vivid depiction of the joy that will prevail when G-d will return to Jerusalem: "Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion, for, behold! I will come and dwell in your midst, says the L-rd." The prophet then describes a scene in the Heavenly Court: Satan was seeking to incriminate Joshua, the first High Priest to serve in the Second Temple, because of the "soiled garments" (i.e. sins) he was wearing. G-d himself defends the High Priest: "And the Lord said to Satan: The Lord shall rebuke you, O Satan; the Lord who chose Jerusalem shall rebuke you. Is [Joshua] not a brand plucked from fire?" I.e., how dare Satan prosecute an individual who endured the hardships of exile? "And He raised His voice and said to those standing before him, saying, 'Take the filthy garments off him.' And He said to him, 'See, I have removed your iniquity from you, and I have clad you with clean garments.'" G-d then proceeds to outline the rewards awaiting Joshua if he and his descendents follow G-d's ways. The ultimate reward is, "Behold! I will bring My servant, the Shoot, " an allusion to Moshiach, the Shoot of David. Zechariah then describes a vision of a golden seven-branched Menorah. An angel interprets the meaning of this vision: "This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel [descendent of King David, one of the protagonists in the building of the Second Temple], 'Not by military force and not by physical strength, but by My spirit,' says the Lord of Hosts." Meaning that Zerubbabel's descendent, Moshiach, will have no difficulty in his task, it will be as simple as lighting a menorah. FOOD FOR THOUGHT The Universal and the Particular: Miketz 5779 by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks The story of Joseph is one of those rare narratives in Tanach in which a Jew (Israelite/Hebrew) comes to play a prominent part in a gentile society the others are, most notably, the books of Esther and Daniel. I want here to explore one facet of that scenario. How does a Jew speak to a non-jew about God? What is particular, and what is universal, in the religious life? In its approach to this, Judaism is unique. On the one hand, the God of Abraham is, we believe, the God of everyone. We are all Jew and non-jew alike made in God s image and likeness. On the other, the religion of Abraham is not the religion of everyone. It was born in the specific covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. We say of God in our prayers that He chose us from all the peoples. How does this work out in practice? When Joseph, son of Jacob, meets Pharaoh, King of Egypt, what concepts do they share, and what remains untranslatable? The Torah answers this question deftly and subtly. When Joseph is brought from prison to interpret Pharaoh s dreams, both men refer to God, always using the word Elokim. The word appears seven times in the scene,[1] always in biblical narrative a significant number. The first five are spoken by Joseph: God will give Pharaoh the answer He desires God has revealed to Pharaoh what He is about to do God has shown Pharaoh what He is about to do The matter has been firmly decided by God, and God will do it soon (Gen. 41:16-32). The last two are uttered by Pharaoh himself, after Joseph has interpreted the dreams, stated the problem (seven years of famine), provided the solution (store up grain in the years of plenty), and advised him to appoint a wise and discerning man (Gen. 41:33) to oversee the project:

3 The plan seemed good to Pharaoh and all his officials. So Pharaoh asked them, Can we find anyone like this man, in whom is the spirit of God? Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, Since God has made all this known to you, there is no one so discerning and wise as you. You shall be in charge of my palace (Gen. 41:37 39) This is surprising. The Egypt of the Pharaohs was not a monotheistic culture. It was a place of many gods and goddesses the sun, the Nile, and so on. To be sure, there was a brief period under Ikhnaton (Amenhotep IV), when the official religion was reformed in the direction of monolatry (worship of one god without disputing the existence of others). But this was short-lived, and certainly not at the time of Joseph. The entire biblical portrayal of Egypt is predicated on their belief in many gods, against whom God executed judgement at the time of the plagues. Why then does Joseph take it for granted that Pharaoh will understand his reference to God an assumption proved correct when Pharaoh twice uses the word himself? What is the significance of the word Elokim? The Hebrew Bible has two primary ways of referring to God, the four-letter name we allude to as Hashem ( the name par excellence) and the word Elokim. The sages understood the difference in terms of the distinction between God-as-justice (Elokim) and God-as-mercy (Hashem). However, the philosopher-poet of the eleventh century, Judah HaLevi, proposed a quite different distinction, based not on ethical attributes but on modes of relationship[2] a view revived in the twentieth century by Martin Buber in his distinction between I-It and I-Thou. HaLevi s view was this: the ancients worshipped forces of nature, which they personified as gods. Each was known as El, or Eloah. The word El therefore generically means a force, a power, of nature. The fundamental difference between those cultures and Judaism, was that Judaism believed that the forces of nature were not independent and autonomous. They represented a single totality, one creative will, the Author of being. The Torah therefore speaks of Elokim in the plural, meaning, the sum of all forces, the totality of all powers. In today s language, we might say that Elokim is God as He is disclosed by science: the Big Bang, the various forces that give the universe its configuration, and the genetic code that shapes life from the simplest bacterium to Homo sapiens. Hashem is a word of different kind. It is, according to HaLevi, God s proper name. Just as the first patriarch (a generic description) was called Abraham (a name), and the leader who led the Israelites out of Egypt (another description) was called Moses, so the Author of being (Elokim) has a proper name, Hashem. The difference between proper names and generic descriptions is fundamental. Things have descriptions, but only people have proper names. When we call someone by name we are engaged in a fundamental existential encounter. We are relating to them in their uniqueness and ours. We are opening up ourselves to them and inviting them to open themselves up to us. We are, in Kant s famous distinction, regarding them as ends, not means, as centres of value in themselves, not potential tools to the satisfaction of our desires. The word Hashem represents a revolution in the religious life of humankind. It means that we relate to the totality of being, not as does a scientist seeing it as something to be understood and controlled, but as does a poet standing before it in reverence and awe, addressing and being addressed by it. Elokim is God as we encounter Him in nature. Hashem is God as we encounter Him in personal relationships, above all in speech, conversation, dialogue, words. Elokim is God as He is found in creation. Hashem is God as He is disclosed in revelation. Hence the tension in Judaism between the universal and the particular. God as we encounter Him in creation is universal. God as we hear Him in revelation is particular. This is mirrored in the way the Genesis story develops. It begins with characters and

4 events whose significance is that they are universal archetypes: Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Noah and the Flood, the builders of Babel. Their stories are about the human condition as such: obedience and rebellion, faith and fratricide, hubris and nemesis, technology and violence, the order God makes and the chaos we create. Not until the twelfth chapter of Genesis does the Torah turn to the particular, to one family, that of Abraham and Sarah, and the covenant God enters into with them and their descendants. This duality is why Genesis speaks of two covenants, the first with Noah and all humanity after the Flood, the second with Abraham and his descendants, later given more detailed shape at Mount Sinai in the days of Moses. The Noahide covenant is universal, with its seven basic moral commands. These are the minimal requirements of humanity as such, the foundations of any decent society. The other is the richly detailed code of 613 commandments that form Israel s unique constitution as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exodus 19:6). So there are the universals of Judaism creation, humanity as God s image, and the covenant with Noah. There are also its particularities revelation, Israel as God s firstborn child, and the covenants with Abraham and the Jewish people at Sinai. The first represents the face of God accessible to all humankind; the second, that special, intimate and personal relationship He has with the people He holds close, as disclosed in the Torah (revelation) and Jewish history (redemption). The word for the first is Elokim, and for the second, Hashem. We can now understand that Genesis works on the assumption that one aspect of God, Elokim, is intelligible to all human beings, regardless of whether they belong to the family of Abraham or not. So, for example, Elokim comes in a vision to Avimelekh, King of Gerar, despite the fact that he is a pagan. The Hittites call Abraham a prince of God [Elokim] in our midst. Jacob, in his conversations with Laban and later with Esau uses the term Elokim. When he returns to the land of Canaan, the Torah says that the terror of God [Elokim] fell on the surrounding towns. All these cases refer to individuals or groups who are outside the Abrahamic covenant. Yet the Torah has no hesitation in ascribing to them the language of Elokim. That is why Joseph is able to assume that Egyptians will understand the idea of Elokim, even though they are wholly unfamiliar with the idea of Hashem. This is made clear in two pointed contrasts. The first occurs in Genesis 39, Joseph s experience in the house of Potiphar. The chapter consistently and repeatedly uses the word Hashem in relation to Joseph ( Hashem was with Joseph Hashem gave him success in everything he did [Gen. 39:2, 5]), but when Joseph speaks to Potiphar s wife, who is attempting to seduce him, he says, How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against Elokim (Gen. 30:9). The second is in the contrast between the Pharaoh who speaks to Joseph and twice uses the word Elokim, and the Pharaoh of Moses day, who says, Who is Hashem that I should obey Him and let Israel go? I do not know Hashem and I will not let Israel go (Exodus 5:2). An Egyptian can understand Elokim, the God of nature. He cannot understand Hashem, the God of personal relationship. Judaism was and remains unique in its combination of universalism and particularism. We believe that God is the God of all humanity. He created all. He is accessible to all. He cares for all. He has made a covenant with all. Yet there is also a relationship with God that is unique to the Jewish people. It alone has placed its national life under His direct sovereignty. It alone has risked its very existence on a divine covenant. It testifies in its history to the presence within it of a Presence beyond history. As we search in the twenty-first century for a way to avoid a clash of civilisations, humanity can learn much from this ancient and still compelling way of understanding the human condition. We are all the image and likeness of God. There are universal principles of human dignity. They are expressed in the Noahide covenant, in human

5 wisdom (ĥokhma), and in that aspect of the One God we call Elokim. There is a global covenant of human solidarity. But each civilisation is also unique. We do not presume to judge them, except insofar as they succeed or fail in honouring the basic, universal principles of human dignity and justice. We as Jews rest secure in our relationship with God, the God who has revealed Himself to us in the intimacy and particularity of love, whom we call Hashem. The challenge of an era of conflicting civilisations is best met by following the example of Abraham, Sarah and their children, as exemplified in Joseph s contribution to the economy and politics of Egypt, saving it and the region from famine. To be a Jew is to be true to our faith while being a blessing to others regardless of their faith. That is a formula for peace and graciousness in an age badly in need of both. 1] The word appears nine times in Genesis 41, the last two in the later episode in which Joseph gives names to his two sons. 2] Judah HaLevi, Kuzari, book 1v, para. 1. Chanukah: A Special Nation by Rabbi Jay Kelman One of the painful realities of Jewish life is that the Jewish people are often judged by a double standard. What in other cultures is done with impunity often causes an uproar when it is the State of Israel doing the exact same thing. While frustrating and unfair, it is a burden we should be most proud of. The nations of the world have an innate ability to grasp the uniqueness of the Jew. How else to explain the fixation of the world on a people who make up less than one-fifth of one percent of the world's population? It was Bilaam who best described the centrality and modesty of a Jewish home. What might be unnoticeable to us makes a deep impression on others. The Jewish people have spent the last 3,500 years teaching the necessity for the highest of ethical standards, of the obligation to go beyond the letter of the law, of putting the needs of others on par with our own. Judaism has been a beacon of light in a world filled with much darkness. No wonder the rest of the world judges us by standards to which they may not even aspire. As we recite Al Hanissim, we thank G-d for the victory of "the mighty into the hands of the weak, the many into the hands of the few, the impure into the hands of the pure, the wicked into the hands of the righteous and the immoral into the hands of those involved in Torah". While the miracle of the few defeating the many and the weak defeating the strong is readily apparent, of what relevance is the pure defeating the impure or of those who study Torah defeating the enemy? How does the fact that Jews study Torah make winning a war more miraculous? A number of years back, I heard Rav Ahron Soloveichik, zt"l, explain that when the righteous and the pure fight a war, winning is truly that much more difficult. We will not and dare not use the tactics of our enemies: intentionally killing civilians, targeting women and children, and attacking hospitals, schools or places of worship. Jews would rather fight with honour and valour, even at great risk to their lives than adopt the immoral tactics of the enemy. And while fighting with a hand tied behind one s back makes winning much more difficult, to do otherwise would make winning meaningless. Unlike other Jewish holidays, the essence of Chanukah was unclear, leading the Talmudic Sages (Shabbat 21b) to ask "Mai Chanukah, What is Chanukah? Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are serious days of introspection; the Yamim Tovim of Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkot celebrate our national history and destiny; and Purim is a celebration of Jewish survival. But what is Chanukah? The seemingly obvious explanation for Chanukah, the victory in the war and the rededication of the Temple, might explain the historical narrative of the Chanukah story but does little to explain why we still celebrate it today. The miracle of the oil, the rededication of the Temple and the

6 military victory were all rendered irrelevant with the destruction of the Temple in the year 70CE. Yet the rabbis understood that Chanukah had a deeper message, that of "praise and thanksgiving", manifested in the singing of Hallel and the recitation of Al Hanissim. Chanukah teaches that we must maintain our dignity and morality in the face of the inhumanity that has so often surrounded us. While we must cry at that inhumanity, we are to be grateful that we have managed against all odds to thrive in any and all circumstances while trying to live up to a "double standard". The miracles of bayamim hahem, in those days, have much impact b zman hazeh, in these days. And for this we are most thankful. As we sing the Hallel and praise the miraculous events in our history, we also "call out from the depths unto G-d", and cry out, "Please, G-d, save us now". Unfortunately, the world has yet to internalize the message of Chanukah. Nonetheless, we end Hallel with "Give thanks to G-d, His kindness endures forever". In emulating G-d we, too, must ensure that our kindness endures forever, despite the hardships we may face. Interpretation to Solution by Rabbi Andy Shapiro Katz BuKYs/edit "Pharaoh told them his dreams, but none could interpret them ( או ראין פו רתר ר או םתם ם ) for Pharaoh." (Genesis 41:8) The rabbinic tradition takes a somewhat skeptical stance toward dreams. Though we are told in Brachot 57b that dreams are 1/60th of prophecy, we read in Brachot 55b that "dreams follow the mouth." What happens depends entirely on how one interprets them. And we read in Brachot 55a that "a dream not interpreted is like a letter not read." As long as it is not interpreted it cannot be fulfilled. So a dream may be 1/60th prophecy, but it is mostly, or even entirely, self-fulfilling. Given that, it has always bothered me that Pharaoh could not find anyone to interpret his dreams. If all of the dreams' power lays in their interpretation, then why wouldn't his servants, magicians, and advisors have just made something up to give them some positive spin? It turns out that numerous commentators, similarly bothered, reread the verse to mean that interpretations were offered, but Pharaoh found none of them convincing. Sforno suggests that the proffered interpretations mistakenly treated the two dreams separately. But Pharaoh rejected these interpretations because he had already intuited that the dreams were really the same. Rashi, summarizing Midrash Rabbah on this verse, says that Pharaoh's magicians interpreted the dreams to be about daughters Pharoah would father or cities he would build or conquer sometime in the future. But Pharaoh intuited that his dreams were really a message with immediate relevance to him, so these unconvincing interpretations failed to "enter his ears." But the view I find most compelling is that of Shadal, Shmuel David Luzzatto (Italy ) that many interpretations were offered Pharaoh, but none provided any benefit to him or his nation. Shadal says: Because that is what Pharaoh desired, that they will understand from his dream the future thing that would befall his nation so that the Egyptians would know it before it happened, because he believed that it was not for nothing the God sent him these dreams...for if you don't say thus, what prevented them from saying to him any interpretation that occurred to them? And based on this it will be understood why Yosef got into giving advice to the king, for what was indeed desired was not to know the future, but to know how to guard against it. In other words, Pharaoh wanted more than an interpretation - he wanted a solution.

7 Could this be why the Biblical word for dream "interpretation" (פתרון) in modern Hebrew means "solution?" On some basic level, dream interpretation is like solving a riddle or breaking a code. But on a deeper level "solving" the dream means more than just figuring it out - it means figuring out what to do about it to make a different outcome possible. So I find it remarkable that the Aramaic translation of interpreted dream, חלום" "פתר is " Aramaic. in (פשר) in Hebrew becomes Peh Shin Resh (פתר) Peh Taf Resh ".פשר חלמא And Peh Shin Resh has two other meanings besides "interpret." The first is "to melt/thaw" and the other is "to compromise." The connection between the two may be that when something melts, it is now in the middle between cold and hot, neither frozen nor boiling. And when two parties reach a compromise (פשרה) both sides feel "lukewarm" about it. And lastly, פשר is also connected to the word,אפשר which means "possible!" By reading all of this back into the story, we see that this is about so much more than dream interpretation. When we, like Pharaoh, are faced with a troubling vision of the future, the goal is not only to understand it, but also to come to grips with it without being paralyzed. This requires making a compromise between idealism and pessimism, between the future we hoped for and the dark truth in front of us. In that space, we may be blessed to find a solution that transforms what had appeared to be frozen and immutable, and makes possible a different future. (Rabbi Katz is the Conservative Yeshiva Director of N.A. Engagement) Two Side of Hanukkah by Rabbi Mordechai Silverstein BuKYs/edit Hanukkah is known as a holiday which champions the victory of Judaism's unique particular vision and way of life over the Greeks and their universal vision which sought to eradicate Jewish distinctiveness. The message of the opening prophecy of this week's special haftarah for Shabbat Hanukkah seems at odds with this message: "And many people will join themselves to the Lord on that day [messianic times] and shall be My people and I [God] will dwell in your midst" (2:15) How does this universal vision fit in with Hanukkah's championing of Jewish particularism? Rabbi Yitzhak Hutner (20th century US), Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Chaim Berlin and author of the monumental work Pahad Yitzhak, attempted to tackle this anomaly to create a spiritual message for Hanukkah: "There are two sides to the relationship between Judaism and Hellenism. On the one hand, darkness over the depths - this refers to Greek Hellenism which sought to bring darkness to the eyes of Israel; on the other hand, [the Sages decreed that] 'the Holy Scriptures cannot be written (translated] into any other language but Greek...There is something beautiful about Greek dwelling together with that which is Jewish. But there is also something unusual about Greek thinking which is the source of this dual [and sometimes problematic] relationship between Judaism and Hellenism" (adapted from Pahad Yitzhak Hanukkah 4:3) Hutner posits two divine revelations, one stemming from creation, fixed and universal; and the other, dependent on the Sinai revelation (Torah), which is freedom based and particular. The first, he identifies with Hellenism and the latter, with Torah. These two approaches will always be at odds with each other, with the potential for both positive and negative implications. The former has the potential to flatten or destroy the later or they can work in tandem and complement each other. (Hanukkah 4:4-5) The message of the haftarah, according to Hutner, stems from this complementary approach where both forms of revelation work together. Then "And many people will join themselves to the Lord on that day [messianic times] and shall be My people and I [God] will dwell in your midst". This explains the permissive attitude toward translating the Tanakh to Greek. (Hanukkah 7:8) Of course, this makes Hanukkah a celebration of the juggling act which is so much a part of living as a Jew in the world. Just how much and how will we combine these two divine

8 revelations and maintain a sense of who and what we are? This internal and external struggle will always be with us. Time to celebrate the dialectic.(rabbi Silverstein is on the faculty at The Conservative Yeshiva in Jerusalem) Parashat Miketz: Dreams that shape reality by Chana Assis The story of Joseph and his brothers is one of the most moving and rattling accounts in the Bible. We can answer the question of why Joseph was sold into slavery in Egypt on several different, yet parallel levels. The first level asks us to explore the circumstances that resulted from the shaky relationships in Jacob s household: Joseph s sense of self-importance, the brothers jealousy, their willingness to commit a crime by selling their brother, their kinsman, and Joseph s sons willingness to cause their father distress. The Torah suggests another level of looking at the story of the sale of Joseph: when Joseph re-encounters his brothers, they are very fearful of Joseph s reaction, and are worried that Joseph would taking revenge on them for what they had done. Joseph, who sensed their distress, turns to them, and says the following to them: do not be sad, and let it not trouble you that you sold me here, for it was to preserve life that G-d sent me before you. (Genesis 45:5) Thus, Joseph gives his harsh story a divine interpretation: he was sold as part of a divine plan to alleviate the hunger plaguing Joseph s family. If we revisit the Brit Bein Habetarim ( The Covenant of Parts ) between Abraham and G- d, we ll discover another level that gives the story of the sale of Joseph an even more profound significance: And He said to Abram, You shall surely know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them, for four hundred years. And also the nation that they will serve will I judge, and afterwards they will go forth with great possessions. (Genesis 15:13-14) This covenant reveals a divine plan to implement the covenant between the people of Israel and the Holy One, Blessed Be He. The sale of Joseph to slavery in Egypt is just part of a larger and more extensive divine plan to cause Israel s subjugation at the hands of the Egyptians, after which they would leave as a nation, receive the Torah, and enter the Promised Land as G-d s chosen people. We thus have three different explanations for the sale of Joseph, which are completely independent of each other. The first level is physical: Joseph was sold into slavery in Egypt because of the human circumstances surrounding the state of affairs between the members of Jacob s household. The second level is the divine plan to save Jacob s family from the pangs of hunger. Joseph only comes to sense this level after becoming viceroy to the Pharaoh of Egypt. The third level, which also concerns divine plans, is revealed to Abraham in the Covenant of the Parts, but nothing indicates that Jacob s sons were aware of this while in Egypt. The physical level of the story of the sale of Joseph is independent. Hashem is closely watching what is transpiring, and steering the events so that they lead up to the sale of Joseph, but Jacob s sons are nonetheless responsible for their actions, and guilty of selling their brother. The divine levels of this story are clearly distinct and independent as well. The various interpretations of the story of the sale of Joseph are also reflected in the various dreams we encounter in other weekly portions. Each of the exegetical levels of the story of the sale of Joseph is expressed in a dream. Joseph s dreams in Parashat Vayeshev reflect the circumstances in Joseph s household. Joseph divulges his dream to his brothers, in which his brothers sheaves of wheat appear to be bowing down to his own. In another dream, he tells his father and brothers of how the stars, sun and moon were bowing down to him. These dreams incensed them, and fueled their envy, and it was this envy and rage that ultimately led to the terrible episode in which Joseph was sold.

9 Pharaoh s dreams, which are related in this week s portion, reflect the divine plan for the immediate future, the plan that would lead Egypt to greatness. The thin cows that devour the handsome cows, and the shriveled sheaves that consume the full and healthy sheaves, drive Pharaoh to seek an interpreter of dreams. This search leads to his meeting with Joseph, who would end up saving Egypt and Jacob s family from the pangs of hunger. Abraham s dream during the time of the Covenant of the Parts expresses the broadest level of the story of the sale of Joseph, when the Holy One, Blessed be once again promises to give Abraham the Land of Israel, and many descendants. It is no coincidence that each of these layers of reality involving the descent of the sons of Jacob to Egypt is reflected in a dream. Dreams express our innermost passions and reveal our latent hopes, our intentions and our desires. The revelation of the Holy One, Blessed be He through dreams conveys an educational message, one that reflects something about the importance of dreams. Dreams are vital for people and nations to grow and flourish. Dreams are the beacons that guide people toward attaining their goals and aspirations. What makes them important is that they reflect a person s inner self, and guide that person down the path of growth and development. Sometimes, dreamers create their own dreams, while at other times, others (in this case, the Holy One, Blessed Be He) partner with the dreamers to create those dreams. One familiar type of dream is embodied in the idea of the Utopia, which Bloch comments on: Utopia is the tools that people use to create themselves. They use them to try to anticipate something that hadn t occurred in reality, but exists in human imagination the role of the Utopia is to raise awareness of something we aren t yet aware of, and indicate which direction humanity needs to head in, to fulfill its needs and dreams (Rachel Elboim-Dror, Yesterday s Tomorrow, p. 15) As parents and educators, it is incumbent upon us to explore our children s and students dreams, and at times, to help create those dreams ourselves. The creators of reality and those who have the greatest influence on that reality are visionaries that are guided by dreams: Abraham, Moses, King David, Maimonides, R. Yosef Karo, R. Alkalai, R. Kalisher, R. Mohilever, Herzl, David Ben Gurion, Menahem Begin, the Zionist movement, and the Jewish People as a nation. Indeed, we were as dreamers (Chana Assis is Principal (on sabbatical) of OTS's Jennie Sapirstein High School in Ramot, Jerusalem) Miketz 5779 by Rabbi Shlomo Riskin Efrat, Israel And Pharaoh said to Joseph, I had a dream last night, and no one is able to interpret it. (Gen. 41: 15) There is an unusual symmetry in the portion of Miketz as well as in Vayeshev, both of which deal almost exclusively with the rise and fall (in Vayeshev) and the fall and rise (in Miketz) of Joseph. Vayeshev begins with an introduction to Joseph. Not only is he talented, brilliant and handsome, but he is the beloved son of the beloved wife, Rachel. As the apple of his father s eye, physically as well as spiritually, he can do no wrong. Little wonder that his father adores him and adorns him with the much-prized cloak of many colors. Yet, by the end of the portion, Joseph is in prison. It is the final degradation in a series of degradations that began shortly after earning the hatred of his brothers for his loose tongue and provocative dreams as a result of which he was cast into a pit and sold into slavery in Egypt. Miketz ends with Joseph still in prison, but almost immediately we witness his miraculous rise and emergence as a world leader. The former seventeen-year-old dreamer becomes

10 Grand Vizier (second only to the Pharaoh) and Secretary of Treasury, Labor and Agriculture all rolled into one. Pharaoh may be the symbolic head of Egypt, the god of the Egyptian pantheon, but because of his total trust in Joseph, the son of Jacob now effectively rules the land, a prime minister without the possibility of anyone casting a noconfidence vote against him. Rabbi Isaac Bernstein ingeniously suggests the method behind the symmetry. The favored and beloved Joseph is doomed to begin his downward descent because, although he dreams grand dreams, he is totally self-absorbed; his sole interest lies in communicating his dreams of self-aggrandizement to others. By the beginning of Miketz, however Joseph is listening to the dreams of others and using them to help the others. Once one begins listening to other people s dreams one is ready to ascend upwards and achieve true leadership. I would develop this idea further by suggesting that the real key to Joseph s interpretation lies in his new-found ability to carefully listen. Remember that the prophet Elijah receives a vision from the Almighty at the end of his life teaching him that the Divine Presence is to be found in a small silent voice, Kol demama daka. How can a voice be silent? The adviser s voice must be silent in order to listen very carefully to the words of the supplicant. Proper advice which has God s own stamp of approval can only emerge from careful listening to and empathizing with the individual who speaks out of desperation and travail. Only when one understands what the questioner really wants, can one offer him/her proper advice. Prophecy is based in no small measure upon one s ability to listen. When the wine steward revealed his dream and dreams are always a key to the hidden and often subconscious thoughts and aspirations of the dreamer of squeezing grapes into Pharaoh s cup, and then placing the cup in Pharaoh s hand [Gen. 40:11], it became clear to Joseph that the wine steward only wanted to continue to serve his master, that he had no trace of a guilty conscience, and so he would be found innocent and returned to service. The chief baker s dream, on the other hand, is very different. He dreams of birds snatching the loaves of bread from the basket on his head. The birds, or nature, are out to get him and often people who suffer from paranoia have reason to feel guilty. Joseph listened well and surmised that the chief baker was indeed guilty and so would be hanged within three days. Similar was the case of Pharaoh s dream. Joseph understood that Pharaoh s chief concern was the economic well-being of Egypt, and this subject had to be the point of a dream which repeated itself so often to the man most responsible for Egypt s well being. And if Pharaoh was frightened of economic disaster by the way, a cyclical occurrence in Egypt which Joseph was certainly aware of the best way for Joseph to overcome that concern was to present a plan of prevention: Now therefore let Pharaoh seek out a man understanding and wise, and set him over the land of Egypt in the seven years of plenty. And let them store up all the food of those good years that come, and pile up corn under the hand of Pharaoh that the land shall not be cut off through the famine. And the thing was good in the eyes of Pharaoh (Gen. 41:33 37) The Joseph of Miketz did not shout his dreams to others whom he saw as his servants; he rather listened carefully to the dreams of others, and was ready to be of service to them wherever possible. Only this changed Joseph could be expected to rise and remain on top. The content of Joseph s earlier dreams is also an important piece in understanding his downward turn. Joseph s dream is predicated to a certain degree upon his father Jacob s dream, the dream of a ladder standing on the ground, its top reached up toward heaven God s angels were going up and down on it. Joseph, too, dreams of the two elements in his father s dream, the earth and the heavens. His first dream is of the earth

11 stalks of wheat and his second dream is of the heavens sun, moon and stars. But there are two major differences between the dreams of father and son. Jacob s dream is one: he yearns to connect heaven and earth. Joseph has two separate dreams. In Jacob s dreams, God and the angels are at its center; in Joseph s dream he himself is at the center, with the eleven stalks of wheat and eleven stars, sun and moon bowing down to him. God is absent from Joseph s subconscious; he, Joseph, wishes dominion on earth and even in the heavenly cosmos. But as the Joseph stories develop, a much chastened Joseph, as well as his repentant brothers, learn invaluable lessons. The brothers learn that they should have tried to teach not tear away their errant and supercilious brother. Joseph learns that his abilities of economic and administrative leadership must serve the higher power of God and Torah. Joseph s dreams are realized in Egypt when his family must bow to him as Grand Vizier of Egypt. But in the greater dream of Israel, the vision of the Covenant between the Pieces and the ultimate goal of world peace and redemption, Joseph will serve Judah, the guardian of tradition and Torah. Jacob only gives Joseph the blessing of a double portion; the birthright of spiritual leadership and direction is granted to Judah [Gen. 49:8 10]. When Joseph truly understands his proper position, he is able to rise above his fall into the pit and take his place as the heir to the blessing, but not as the heir to the birth right, as leader of the family-nation. Hearing the Scream: Miketz by Eliezer B. Diamond Perhaps no scream is more famous than the one portrayed in Edvard Munch s painting popularly known simply as The Scream. The irony is that almost none of us is aware of the scream that Munch intended to portray. The original full title of the painting is Der Schrei der Natur, The Scream of Nature. According to Munch, the scream comes from the blood-orange/red sky. He describes the inspiration for the painting as follows: I was walking down the road with two friends when the sun set; suddenly, the sky turned as red as blood. I stopped and leaned against the fence, feeling unspeakably tired. Tongues of fire and blood stretched over the bluish black fjord. My friends went on walking, while I lagged behind, shivering with fear. Then I heard the enormous infinite scream of nature. The figure who seems to be screaming is actually reacting to another scream, and he is striving not to hear without success covering his ears in a vain attempt to block out the shrieks that assail him. His mouth is open wide with shock and terror. But though he can convey that sense of horror he cannot make his friends or us hear nature s scream; he alone is trapped with it inside his own head, held in, as it were, by the same hands that struggle to fend it off. His cries must seem to others to be those of a madman, because they are oblivious to the cause of his terror. Munch brilliantly expresses this by using a visual medium to depict an aural event. We can imagine the scream, but we can never hear it; a wall of silence stands between us and the anguished figure in the foreground of the painting. In Parashat Miketz we read of another cry that was not heard. Upon recognizing his brothers, Joseph accuses them of being spies. He first threatens to jail all but one of his brothers and send the remaining one to bring back Benjamin with him. He then relents and requires only one of them, Simeon, to remain as hostage while the others bring food to their families and then return with their youngest brother. After their release the brothers ruminate on the cause of their adversities. They said to one another, Alas, we are being punished on account of our brother, because we looked upon his anguish, yet paid no heed as he pleaded with us. That is why his distress has come upon us (Gen. 42:21).

12 As he pleaded with us. We are thunderstruck: we, like the brothers, never heard Joseph s pleas. We accepted the narrative as it was recorded in Genesis 37; the brothers strip Joseph of his clothes, cast him into a pit, consider letting him die and finally sell him into slavery. We hear not a word from Joseph. And yet, if we think for a moment, we realize that of course Joseph must have spoken. He must have protested, screamed, begged, perhaps even cursed. Although rendered in the style of the omniscient narrator, the Genesis 37 narrative is in fact told from the brothers perspective. Joseph is a thorn in their side that needs to be removed. How? Sale? Murder? Slow death? No need to consult your prospective victim. And after casting him naked into a pit you can always decide upon his ultimate fate over a satisfying lunch then they sat down to a meal (v. 25). Joseph s screams are just background noise for the brothers; they hear it but it does not stir them. In Genesis 38, the brothers, after so many years have passed, finally open their ears to Joseph s cries. It is as if the sounds have been frozen in time and now come rushing in to fill the brothers ears. The aural experience of hearing happened long ago; now the listening begins. To truly hear those cries must have been unbearable for the brothers; in that act they were acknowledging Joseph s humanity and therefore their own inhumanity in being indifferent to his suffering. And we finally hear Joseph s screams as well, inserting them into the narrative we know so well. And we acknowledge that we are co-conspirators in our willingness to imagine the story of Joseph s sale without the inclusion of Joseph s voice. And so now we must tell ourselves the story in a new way, one that includes Joseph s heartrending cries. To tell the story this way is almost unbearable, and it helps us understand why the brothers had to edit Joseph s screams out of their collective memory. Some cries, like those of a child with loving parents, are heard at once. Some are resisted for a short time and then acknowledged, as when lovers quarrel. Some cries are left unheard for years, even decades, like those of Joseph. Some cries, like Munch s scream, remain frozen in time, always being sounded, never being truly heard. And yet it is Munch s cry of nature that we most need to hear in this dangerous hour. Melting ice caps, bizarre weather in so many ways the earth calls out to us, You are killing me! We may choose not to hear it. But I shudder when I think of the day upon which we will look at a devastated planet and say if we are still alive to say it Alas, we are being punished because we looked upon our planet s anguish, yet paid no heed as it pleaded with us. (Eliezer Diamond is the Rabbi Judah Nadich Associate Professor of Talmud and Rabbinics at JTS)

13