verb that opens 42:1, va’yar, means, not “learned,” as in Kaplan’s translation, but “saw.” Why the verb that seems to be appropriate, and that appears in 42:2, shamati, does not appear in 42:1 is not clear. Nor is it clear what the question that closes 42:1 means, because it is not clear that titra’u means fantasizing.
The assertion in 42:5 that the brothers journey to Egypt “because of the famine in Canaan” does not seem necessary, because it seems to repeat the assertion in 41:56 that “the famine was [also] growing more severe in the entire area.” At the minimum, “because of the famine in Canaan” should, it seems, be placed at the beginning of 42:1, the verse that immediately follows 41:56, so as to explain why Jacob speaks to his sons. But if it that were done, the seeming repetition would be underscored in an almost embarrassing fashion, because in the Hebrew (though not in Kaplan’s translation) 41:56 closes with the words “the famine was [also] growing more severe in the entire area,” and thus the altered text, 41:56-47:1, would read:
[56] People from all over the area came to Egypt to obtain rations from Joseph, since the famine was [also] growing severe in the entire area. [1] Because of the famine in Canaan, when Jacob learned that there were provisions in Egypt, he said to his sons, “Why are you fantasizing?”
Left where they appear, the words “because of the famine in Canaan” seem anti-climactic. Moved, they seem redundant. Thus, what purpose they serve is not clear.
When the brothers, having journeyed to Egypt, stand before Joseph, it is not clear why the text asserts twice, in 42:7-8, that he recognizes them.
[7] Joseph recognized his brothers as soon as he saw them. But he behaved like a stranger and spoke harshly to them. “Where are you from?” he asked. “From the land of Canaan—to buy food,” they replied. [8] Joseph recognized his brothers, but they did not recognize him.
Why “Joseph recognized his brothers” should not be removed either from 42:7 or 42:8 is not clear.
Nor is the dialogue about spying that unfolds clear; because it is not clear why Joseph charges the brothers with spying, or why they undermine their plausible defense by repeatedly offering more information than is asked for, and fail to note that Joseph reiterates, but does not support, his charge, and that satisfying his seemingly irrelevant demands will not exonerate them. Nor is it clear why they think they are in terrible trouble, or that the trouble is their punishment for having murdered Joseph, whom they last saw, years earlier, alive.
As will be seen, Joseph’s pretense for charging, in 42:9, the brothers are spies is, according to Midrash, that they entered the Egyptian city in which food was sold in a suspicious manner, and spent three days in a disreputable neighborhood. In fact, he levels the charge because “he remembered what he had dreamed about them.” But the cause and effect are not clear. As noted, he dreamed they would bow down to him. But why that memory, and its seeming actualization—in 42:5, “When Joseph’s brothers arrived, they prostrated themselves to him, with their faces to the ground”—should prompt the charge is not clear; if, indeed, they do prompt the charge. As will be seen, it is not clear that the memory has been actualized. And even if it has been, it is not clear that Joseph therefore decides the time has come for his entire family to be settled in Egypt. Nor, even if he has decided that, is it clear how his intent will be furthered by charging that the brothers are spies, because Joseph cannot know, when he levels the charge, that it will prompt the brothers to talk about Benjamin, and thus set in motion the elaborate charade that will reunite the family in Egypt.
Because the brothers appear before Joseph, in 42:5, together, their defense—that they have appeared openly for the innocent purpose of buying food—is plausible. But they undermine it by saying more than they should.
Their tendency to do so (which, as will be seen, many traditionalists argue, for the most part obliquely, is only apparent) appears in 42:7, and persists, to dangerous effect. In their response to Joseph’s first question, “Where are you from?” they say that they are from Canaan; and add, unasked, that they have come “to buy food.” The charge of spying against them repeated, in 42:11, they say, once again unasked, that they are “all the sons of the same man”; and repeat again, in 42:13, that they are “the sons of one man who is in Canaan,” and that “the youngest brother is with our father, and one brother is gone.”
It does not occur to the brothers that the proof Joseph demands of their innocence will prove nothing. One of them, he asserts in 42:16, is to return to Canaan, and bring Benjamin to Egypt. “This will test your claim and determine if you are telling the truth. If not, by Pharaoh’s life, you will be considered spies.” But how the appearance of Benjamin will prove they are not spies is not clear, because the two matters seem entirely unrelated. If he appears, Joseph will presumably acknowledge that he is their younger brother. But why he will therefore conclude they are not spies is not clear.
Nor is it clear why Joseph changes the conditions related to the test: why he asserts, in 42:16, that nine of them will remain imprisoned until the tenth returns with Benjamin, but three days later asserts, in 42:18, that only one of them will remain imprisoned, until the other nine return with Benjamin.
That the brothers should regard their predicament as punishment for the sin they committed against Joseph is understandable. But it is not clear why they regard the predicament as dire; why they seem convinced they murdered Joseph; or why Joseph, overhearing their conversation, weeps.
That conscience should afflict them in 42:21 is not difficult to understand. And Joseph does seem to threaten them with death, when he asserts in 42:20 that, if they return with Benjamin, “you will not die.” But because, to placate him, they must do nothing more than return with Benjamin, it is not clear why they seem convinced, in 42:22, that a “great misfortune” has come upon them. Nor is it clear why they seem to agree with Reuben, in 42:22, that “an accounting is being demanded for [Joseph’s] blood,” because, as noted, they have no reason to believe that Joseph is dead. And why Joseph cries is not clear.
Finally, the reaction of the brothers to a discovery they make at an inn on their way home to Canaan is difficult to understand. Having opened his sack to feed his donkey, one of them, in 42:27, sees his money, and exclaims, in 42:28, that it “has been returned . . .. It’s in my sack!” The other brothers seem profoundly shaken.
Their hearts sank. “What is this that God has done to us?” they asked each other with trembling voices.
It is not clear why each of them does not immediately search his sack (especially because each must feed his donkey); why they complete the journey home, report at length to Jacob what has happened, and only then, in 42:35, open their sacks, and discover that the money of each has been returned. It is not clear why—to say nothing of the terror they feel—not even curiosity prompts each of them to open his sack at the inn, or during the days—perhaps the many days—they are on the road home.
(Nor is it clear why, when they return to Egypt with Benjamin, they tell Joseph’s overseer, in 43:21, that at the inn “we opened our packs, and each man’s money was at the top of his pack.”)
According to Ramban, Joseph tends the family’s flocks with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah only. According to Abarbanel, all of his brothers merely supervise shepherds tending the flocks, and Joseph supervises all of his brothers. According to Sforno, Joseph instructs all of his brothers in shepherding. According to Rashi, Joseph tends the flock together with all of his brothers. Radak agrees; and adds that, because he is inexperienced, the brothers instruct him in shepherding. According to Daat Mikrah, the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah instruct him in shepherding. According to Rashbam and Chizkuni, Joseph tends the flock with the sons of Leah only. According to Malbim, Joseph shepherds his brothers spiritually—he instructs them in virtue—while they shepherd the flock.
According
