| Dear Yeshiva Family:
In this week's parshah, we can sigh in relief as Yosef finally reveals himself to his brothers! Rashi (45:12) explains that Yosef had to prove his identity by showing that he had a bris milah and was able to speak Lashon HaKodesh, something that apparently was unique to the shevatim.
However, both of these proofs are problematic. Earlier in the saga (41:55), Rashi explains when Yosef started selling produce to the Mitzrim, he forced all the Mitzrim to undergo a bris milah. If all of Egypt had a bris milah at that point, what was the proof of his own Bris? Secondly, whether or not Lashon HaKodesh could be used as a proof of identity or not seems to be a matter of contention. The Ramban questions Rashi's assertion that Lashon HaKodesh was used as a proof, because it could not have been such a big deal for a king to know the language of a neighboring country. What indeed was the proof? After all, many people are bilingual.
Yet, it seems that there is a reason to believe that only the Jews could understand Lashon HaKodesh. The Gemara in Masseches Sotah (36b) states that the night before Yosef ascended the throne, he had to learn all 70 languages, a prerequisite for being a leader in those days. The Gemara continues that Pharoah tested Yosef on all the languages and Yosef (having been taught them the previous night by the Malach Gavriel) responded correctly. Finally, Yosef conversed with Pharoah in Lashon HaKodesh and Pharoah was unable to respond. This seems to be a clear proof to Rashi that Lashon HaKodesh was unique to the Jews. But why? If Pharoah was able to master 70 languages, why could he not master the 71st language, one of a neighboring country?
To add to the confusion, the pasuk states (42:23) that a translator was required when the shevatim were speaking to Yosef. If it is clear that only Jews could speak Lashon HaKodesh, why were the brothers not stunned to find the interpreter speaking their native tongue? That should have been a sign right there that the interpreter, who happened to be Yosef's son Menashe, was a Jew.
To answer these questions, perhaps we can differentiate between Lashon Ivri, which was the language of Canaan, which Rashi earlier said the interpreter spoke, and Lashon Hakodesh, the language that was spoken by the shevatim and that Yosef used as a proof of his identity. The grammatical rules, phonics and words of the two languages may overall be similar to each other, but Lashon Hakodesh has an element of Kedusha to it. While the actual wording may not be so different, the reverence one uses, as well as the nuance one uses, can help define if one is speaking Lashon HaKodesh or plain Lashon Ivri.
We can now understand that the brothers had no problem observing an interpreter who understood what they were saying, for so long as he was not speaking the language with the kedusha aspects of Lashon HaKodesh , it did not reveal the interpreter's familial identity. Yosef's proof to the brothers was his use of the language in its highest form, using it with the reverence one uses with things that are kadosh. Pharoah's deficiency was in not being able to use the language with the finesse and majesty of someone who speaks with kedusha.
In fact, the Meshech Chochmah states that the real thing Yosef wanted to prove was not that he was Yosef, but rather that he still maintained his kedusha even though he was in Mitzrayim, which dovetails beautifully with what we are saying. It was not the language itself, but the kedusha with which it was spoken.
As an example of treating similar items with kedusha, one can look at the difference between the reaction one gets when a secular textbook book drops to the floor vs. a Chumash. Even though they are both ink on paper, a Chumash that falls draws a gasp and is immediately picked up with a kiss, whereas the textbook may remain on the floor longer or will just be picked up and casually put on a table. Both are, literally, "text books," but one has kedusha and one doesn't. (See the Sefer Mayan Bais Hashoevah where R' Schwab uses this idea to answer the original question about Bris Milah.)
Now we can understand another peculiarity in our parshah. At the beginning of the parshah, Yehudah comes to speak to Yosef "in his ear." Many Acharonim understand "in his ear" to mean without an interpreter. The question is raised, if at this point Yehudah thinks that Yosef does not understand his language, why would he attempt to talk to him directly? The Chasam Sofer explains that there are two possible ways to explain why Yosef would use an interpreter. One is if he didn't understand the language. A second reason is because it is unbecoming of a king to converse directly with a commoner. Up until now, the brothers did not assume Yosef had a status of a monarch in Egyptian society, perhaps he was just a powerful man in charge of Egypt's storehouses. Therefore, the reason he was using an interpreter was because he needed it practically, he simply did not know Lashon Ivri. Now, however, that he was exercising judicial authority, sentencing Binyomin and letting the other brothers go, they realized this man must be in a position of monarchy, so he must know Lashon Ivri, per the rule that the monarch must know all the languages. We can see that, at this point, Yehudah understood that this man must understand Lashon Ivri, yet it never dawned on him that this might be Yosef in front of him. This can only be if Lashon Ivri and Lashon HaKodesh are two separate languages as we explained, perhaps grammatically similar, but nuanced differently with the inflections of kedusha. Yehuda decided to go ahead and have a face-to-face, heart-to-heart with Yosef with the expectation that on some level Yosef would understand his plea.
One postscript we see from here is that if one intends to discuss topics where emotions play a large role, the best way to get the message across in its purest and most pristine manner is face-to-face, and not to rely on an interpreter. Yehudah wanted to make sure his message was conveyed in its purest form, from the heart, and was hoping the genuine raw emotion would affect Yosef. When saying, "I'm sorry" to someone we hurt, or when expressing positive or negative emotions to someone, the best and most effective way to deliver the message is face-to-face. Sending an "I'm sorry" text or email to someone we've hurt, which should come along with emotions of contrition, is generally not be the way to go. Instead, an open face-to-face conversation with healthy communication, where both parties can feel and process the emotion, will go much farther.
Hashem should continue to guide His nation in matters of kedusha, and we should treat all aspects of our lives with the appropriate reverence a nation of Kings should, as we are a nation of kedoshim!
Rabbi Moshe Revah Rosh HaYeshiva, HTC - Beis HaMidrash LaTorah moshe.revah@htc.edu | 
No comments:
Post a Comment