English translation — ויגש א

A.

At the beginning of the section, Rashi brings the words "Vayigash eilav.

Daber na b'oznei adoni" and explains: "Yikansu d'varai b'oznecha".

What is difficult in the words "Daber na b'oznei adoni" that Rashi answers with the explanation "Yikansu d'varai b'oznecha"?

Learning commentators<sup>1</sup>,

that the simple meaning of "באזני אדוני" is — "שבקש לדבר באזניו ממש"<sup>2</sup>

(The

meaning

to speak into

(only)

the ears of Yosef,

that no one should hear what he says)

; but here one cannot interpret thus,

because it is not respectful to speak into the ear of the second-in-command to the king.

Rashi therefore warns that the meaning of "דבר באזני אדוני" is — "יכנסו דברי באזניך".

This, however, is not understood<sup>3</sup>

: we find a similar expression several times <b>earlier </b>in the Torah — "וישכם אבימלך גו׳ וידבר גו׳ באזניהם"<sup>4</sup>,

"ויען עפרון גו׳ באזני בני חת"<sup>5</sup>,

"וידבר אל עפרון באזני עם הארץ"<sup>6</sup>

— that in all these places one cannot interpret that the speech was whispered into their ears,

; also the speech of Ephron was not <b>in a whisper </b>in the ears of the children of Chet —

<b>On the contrary</b>: his speech was to <b>Abraham's</b>,

but also the children of Chet heard his words.

And regarding this — the speech of Abraham to Ephron in the ears of the people of the land],

And nevertheless Rashi does not guard in all these places that the explanation of "באזני" etc.,

is "יכנסו דברי באזניך"

(וכדומה)

— why does Rashi need to guard it in our case?

Also it is not understood: why does Rashi quote from the verse also the words "ויגש אליו"?

"יכנסו דברי באזניך" is an explanation only on the words "דבר באזני אדוני".

because,

as discussed several times⁸

: if so,

Rashi would have had to begin <b>every</b> sedra with its first words,

and Rashi does not do so⁹

except when he is explaining the words].

B.

Further, Rashi dwells on "ואל יחר אפך" and explains: "מכאן אתה למד שדיבר אליו קשות".

Learn the commentators¹⁰,

that Rashi thereby warns: in the verse after this Rashi explains how Yehudah's words contained harsh words: on "for like you is like Pharaoh" Rashi brings several explanations

(from "its midrash")

that these are harsh words,

and likewise on "my lord asked" Rashi explains¹¹

"At first you came upon us with a pretext etc." —

Therefore Rashi says: one should not think that the <b>compulsion</b> for this is only from those words

on the contrary,

the simple meaning of the words is,

that they are <b>not</b> harsh words¹²],

but rather "<b>from here</b> you learn that he spoke to him harshly"; and since one does not find explicitly in the verse any harsh words,

Rashi must bring the explanation that those subsequent words were harsh words,

even when one must arrive at "its midrash".

One must, however, understand the verbosity of the language in Rashi "from here you learn":

If Rashi had said concisely "&lt;b&gt;it teaches &lt;/b&gt;that he spoke harshly to him"

(without the emphasis "from here")

— one would also understand that the necessity to interpret the subsequent speech as harsh words is from "and let not your anger be kindled".

For the language "&lt;b&gt;it teaches&lt;/b&gt;" indicates&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;,

that this is not a matter that is stated explicitly in the verse,

rather this is a thing that requires a &lt;b&gt;teaching&lt;/b&gt;.

If in the verse it had explicitly stated

( — according to the simple interpretation)

harsh words,

it would not be appropriate to say "&lt;b&gt;it teaches &lt;/b&gt;that he spoke harshly to him".

But as discussed several times¹⁴,

When Rashi adds "from here",

he means thereby to <b>negate</b> a second place from which one would seemingly have been able to derive the same matter,

So too here,

Rashi <b>negates</b> a second place from which one would seemingly have been able to derive

(Although in the commentary it is not stated explicitly,

as above)

that he spoke harshly to him¹⁵,

One must understand: What is Rashi negating with his statement "from here you learn"?

3.

The explanation in this:

In all these places mentioned above where the expression "be'oznay" appears

(and the like),

before we come to our verse,

it speaks about a speech in the presence of more than one person¹⁶.

And the word "be'oznay" comes to guarantee &lt;b&gt;in plain sense&lt;/b&gt; — that a multitude &lt;b&gt;heard&lt;/b&gt; the words.

As in the verses "And Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham be'oznay the children of Heth etc.",

"And he spoke to Ephron be'oznay the people of the land" — where the speech and negotiations were between Abraham and Ephron,

the verse says that he spoke it "&lt;b&gt;be'oznay&lt;/b&gt; the children of Heth",

"&lt;b&gt;be'oznay&lt;/b&gt; the people of the land": this was in the presence of the children of Heth,

the people of the land,

in a manner that

(&lt;b&gt;also&lt;/b&gt;)

they heard it,

and moreover — with intention.

And likewise in the verse "And he spoke etc. in their ears" which is by Avimelech,

"In their ears" emphasizes that Avimelech <b>himself</b>¹⁷

spoke "<b>to all </b>his servants",

spoke in a manner that they all <b>themselves </b>heard his speech

(<b>Therefore </b>it effected that "the men feared greatly"⁴).

By the verse "And Yehuda approached etc. and said etc. speak in the ears of my lord" it is however difficult: the speech was indeed only to Yosef,

and simply that Yosef had the speech —

Listen — so what is the verse emphasizing and innovating "&lt;b&gt;in the ears of &lt;/b&gt;my lord"&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;?

Based on this, it is understood why Rashi quotes from the verse also the words "and he approached him" — because this strengthens the question:

Were it not for the words "Vayigash eilav" one could answer

(with difficulty at least&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;)

that Yehudah spoke his words in a manner that also all those present there

(his brothers etc. and the Egyptians)

heard it.

And therefore Yehudah had to emphasize "yidaber etc. &lt;b&gt;be'oznai &lt;/b&gt;adoni" — that Yosef should specifically listen to his words

(although he does not speak only to him&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;,

rather so many people hear it).

Since however the verse emphasizes "&lt;b&gt;vayigash eilav&lt;/b&gt;",

i.

e.

that in addition to this that Yehudah and his brothers were already from &lt;b&gt;before &lt;/b&gt;standing before Yosef and speaking to him&lt;sup&gt;21&lt;/sup&gt;,

did Yehudah specifically draw near to Yosef — it is understood,

that Yehudah spoke to Yosef in a

special manner

(or — that <b>only</b> Yosef heard his words²²).

Then the difficulty returns to its place: what is the emphasis "in the ears of my lord"²³?

Rashi explains,

that there is an additional emphasis in the word "באזני" — "יכנסו דברי באזניך": the words should <b>enter </b>his ears²⁴,

and in the language of my father-in-law, the Rebbe²⁵

: not only <b>hear </b>but <b>discern</b>.

Yehudah wanted with his speech to effect upon Yosef to <b>change </b>his <b>decision </b>— and release Binyamin,

therefore he emphasized that Yosef should "discern" his words.

4.

After Rashi explains that "באזני אדוני" means "יכנסו דברי באזניך",

he continues "ואל יחר אפך — <b>מכאן </b>אתה למד שדיבר אליו קשות".

Were it not for the previous explanation,

one could learn that "he spoke harshly to him" from what Yehudah said "&lt;b&gt;Let your servant speak&lt;/b&gt; please, my lord, a word",

when Rashi already brings here the principle

(which &lt;b&gt;Rashi&lt;/b&gt; assumes in the plain sense of Scripture and brings &lt;b&gt;several&lt;/b&gt; times in his commentary&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;)

that everywhere

where it says "speech"

(not "saying")

it means a language of &lt;b&gt;harshness&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;.

Rashi negates this and says "from here you learn" — specifically from "and let not Your anger be kindled" can one learn this,

and not from the expression "he spoke etc."

And the reason for this is understood from his commentary preceding this "let my words enter Your ears",

as follows.

5.

The reason according to the plain meaning²⁸

for that speech is a harsh expression,

is because speech is also²⁹

from the expression "He subdues peoples"³⁰,

"one expression for a generation" for which "take a rod and strike their skull"³¹

— in the sense of forceful dominion³²

; and therefore,

when

One uses the term "dibur"

(not amirah)

It means a dibur with a content of dominion³³

— harsh words,

Ruling over that one.

According to this it turns out,

that every type of speech that can affect a person and influence him to &lt;b&gt;change &lt;/b&gt;his mind and &lt;b&gt;decision&lt;/b&gt;,

even when these are soft words and supplications,

also such words are called by the name speech&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;.

Because they have in them the content of dominion.

And accordingly it is understood that from that which it says "he will speak etc. thing" it is no &lt;b&gt;necessity &lt;/b&gt;

(completely)

that he spoke harshly to him: after Rashi interprets "speak in the ears of my lord — &lt;b&gt;let enter &lt;/b&gt;my words into your ears",

that the speech was in a manner that would make Joseph &lt;b&gt;hear &lt;/b&gt;the words and be affected by them,

then even if Yehudah had spoken softly and with supplications,

since he wanted with his words to change the mind of Yosef,

one can say about the words "he will speak".

Therefore, the necessity is on "speak harshly to him" from "and let not your anger be kindled."

Therefore Rashi emphasizes "from here you learn."

6.

The lesson from this in our service is:

When Yehudah wanted to act upon the viceroy of Egypt — thinking that he is an Egyptian — that he should free Binyamin,

he first of all began to speak with him <b>harshly</b>,

hard and severe words.

At first glance,

what place does this have in reason?

It could be that with softness one will accomplish more than with harshness.

So reason obligates,

that first one must try with soft words and supplications,

and if with soft words one does not accomplish,

only then does one begin with harshness³⁵,

(One cannot first try with harsh words and intimidate the other and then go over to supplications and good words).

But the explanation in this: as long as it concerns external matters,

money earnings and the like,

one conducts oneself according to logical calculations and one figures out what is more worthwhile.

When however it comes to a matter of “and his soul is bound up with his soul”³⁶,

a matter that touches the soul of Benjamin and the soul of Jacob,

then one does not make calculations of what is more worthwhile and one begins immediately with the whole storm,

and as the world says: when it hurts — one screams.

And in <b>these matters</b>³⁷

is on the contrary,

harsh words to convince the listener that this is truly relevant,

relevant to the soul — not that he means money,

a little bone,

honor and the like — this causes that "my words will enter your ears": he begins immediately with a storm,

he "bangs on the table",

and does not reckon with any diplomatic considerations,

the second person feels how the matter is relevant to the speaker in the innermost soul — it affects the second person that he should submit and give in,

until it becomes — with gentleness and willingness.

7.

And this is a directive and lesson — from here you <b>learn</b> — for all times and for all places:

When it comes to saving a Jewish child from being a slave in Egypt,

and even when the viceroy by the power of the king demands it³⁸

then it is not a time to gather committees of great scholars,

who will with deliberation and settled mind investigate the history of Israel in Egypt,

and afterwards set up a vote what is good and how much it should cost,

and consider what the Egyptians will say about all this — for this indeed requires a special committee of scholars who know the Egyptians well,

eating and drinking together with them etc. etc.,

One must <b>immediately</b> with the greatest alacrity begin with the greatest storm to save the child from the education and conduct of Egypt,

education contrary to the Torah,

which leads to assimilation — literally a matter of life and death.

And while one goes on the way,

this leads to this,

as it was by “And Yehudah approached him”,

that through the fact that Yehudah came out with a storm, not only was there not the matter of “slaves” and slavery, but on the contrary — <b>And Pharaoh said</b> etc. I will give you the best of the land of Egypt³⁹

And even before this,

“before him”⁴⁰

— one makes a “house of study from which goes forth instruction”⁴¹

in Egypt,

one educates that the students know clearly how the children of Yaakov must conduct themselves,

and know and are able to be halachic authorities,

decide a law to raise the tradition according to the halacha⁴².

Thus it is also regarding the influence from above of the aspect of Yosef the righteous above: When a Jew goes with a strength, as it were,

he asks and prays to the Most High with a force, as it were⁴³,

he effects that "And Yosef could not restrain himself"⁴⁴,

and from above they fulfill the wishes of his heart for good,

in all that he needs,

from His full, open, holy, and broad hand.

(From the sicha of Shabbos Parshas Vayigash 5725)