English translation — וישב-חנוכה

Vayeishev — Chanukah<pg>169</pg>

A.

"And the man said, 'They traveled from here, for I heard them saying, "Let us go to Dothan," etc.'"<sup>1</sup>,

And Rashi explains

[Continuing from his previous explanation<sup>2</sup>

"And a man found him — this is Gabriel"]

"They traveled from here — they removed themselves from brotherhood"; "Let us go to Dothan — to seek for you schemes of laws (datot) by which they will put you to death.

And according to its simple meaning, it is a place name, and the verse does not depart from its simple meaning."

The Ramban copied Rashi's language and wrote "And the intention is not to our Rabbis that the man should explain to him his journey from this, from the brotherhood, and they went to arouse against you judgments and grievances, for if so, he would have refrained from going and would not have endangered himself.

But the intention to them is that the man Gabriel who told him told the truth and spoke a phrase that serves two meanings and both of them are true, and he did not understand the hidden aspect of it and followed the revealed aspect of it."

But from Rashi's commentary it is implied,

that according to the homiletic interpretation "they removed themselves etc. to seek for you plots of religious subterfuges etc.",

this is Gabriel's language to Joseph.

And so it is explicit in Rashi's commentary in the Talmud<sup>3</sup>,

"They drew him, they stole him, as it is written<sup>4</sup>

And he sent him from the valley of Hebron and he came to Shechem and there they were shepherding, and Dothan is not a place, and that which is written 'And the man said, They have journeyed from here etc.' so he said to him, You say<sup>5</sup>

I seek my brothers,

Journey from this brotherhood, and they do not hold themselves as brothers to you, for I heard them saying, Let us go and seek religious laws and judgments how to kill him if he comes to us."

And also according to the precise language of Rashi in his commentary on the Torah here,

that he concludes "

(And according to its simple meaning, it is a place name)

and a verse does not depart from its simple meaning" — from this it is implied,

that in study according to the simple interpretation,

the interpretation "they removed themselves from brotherhood..

to seek for you plots of deceit etc." does not come to negate that "Dothan" is a place name,

but rather there are two interpretations in this —

Nevertheless, it seems to me,

that ostensibly Rashi's intention in this is not like the words of the Ramban

[that the angel said only "Travel from here..

let us go to Dothan" but in these words he hinted that "they removed themselves etc. to seek for you plots of deceit etc." and Joseph "did not understand the hidden meaning in it"<sup>6</sup>]

— because from the general wording of Rashi "Travel from here — they removed themselves etc.; let us go to Dothan — to seek for you etc."

(and he did not write "he hinted to him that they removed themselves etc. to seek for you etc." and the like)

it is implied<sup>7</sup>,

that these words are included in the simple meaning of the things that were said to Joseph<sup>8</sup>

; and what he adds "And according to<pg>170</pg>

Its simple meaning is a place name, and "a verse does not depart from its simple meaning" is,

that even though the angel's intention was "to seek for you plots of deceit",

nevertheless Joseph's brothers went to another place

(whose name is Dothan),

except that from the precision of the words "they traveled from here" and the length of the language "for I heard them saying let us go to Dothan"⁹

it is understood that he also told him about the manner of their going, that it is "to seek for you plots of deceit that they may kill you etc."

And based on this, Rashi [explains] that Joseph went to seek his brothers even though he knew that they were seeking to kill him¹⁰.

[And one should add,

that even according to the Ramban,

the intent of the verses here is to emphasize that Joseph exerted himself in honoring his father and suffered much for this,

and as he explained on the verse⁴

"And he sent him from the valley of Hebron",

"the verse mentions the place from which he sent him to say that there was a great distance between them and therefore they did evil to him because they were far from their father, and to tell that Joseph for the honor of his father exerted himself to go after them to a distant place and did not say 'How can I go when they hate me'",

and on the verse²

"And a man found him and behold he was wandering in the field" he wrote "the verse lengthens in this to tell that many causes came upon him that would have been fitting for him to turn back, but he suffered all for the honor of his father".

But according to Rashi's commentary we find more than this,

that the verse comes to inform us,

that not only did Joseph "suffer for the honor of his father"

(as the words of the Ramban)¹¹,

but that he went to a place of danger¹²

literally in order to¹³

fulfill the will of Jacob].

2.

And one can say,

that the dispute of Rashi and the Ramban depends on the dispute of the early authorities regarding the law of "Let him transgress and not be killed":

It is a widespread law,

that regarding all the transgressions in the Torah except for idolatry, forbidden sexual relations, and murder, if they say to a person that he should transgress them or be killed, if it is in private he should transgress and not be killed¹⁴.

And if he wants to be strict with himself and be killed, the early authorities disagree about the matter: according to the Rambam¹⁵

"Anyone regarding whom it is said 'Let him transgress and not be killed' and he was killed and did not transgress, behold this one is liable for his own life",

but some say¹⁶

that what it says "Let him transgress and not be killed" means that "he has permission to transgress so that he not be killed",

and "many and numerous are of the opinion that if he was killed and did not transgress, righteousness will be accounted to him"¹⁷.

And based on this, it can be said that in this Rashi and the Ramban disagree in the interpretation of these verses: according to the Ramban, anyone whose law is that he should transgress and not be killed, if he is killed and did not transgress, behold this one is liable for his life¹⁸

;

And Rashi holds that it is permitted for him to transgress so that he not be killed, but if he is killed and did not transgress, "righteousness will be accounted to him."

And therefore in our case,

since the commandment of honoring father and mother is not among the three sins for which one should be killed and not transgress,

[and moreover, even at the time of the decree that the law is to be killed and not transgress even for other commandments,

some say that "they only said this for transgressing negative commandments, but not if they decreed to nullify a positive commandment"¹⁹],

it is obvious that there was no obligation upon Joseph to endanger himself; and therefore the Ramban explains that the angel's words were not said explicitly to Joseph, because if it had been known to him that there was danger in the matter, he would have been forbidden to endanger himself; whereas according to Rashi, even though he heard explicitly from Gabriel that they sought cunning plots to kill him, he went and endangered himself to fulfill his father's mission,

for even though according to the law one should transgress and not be killed,

this is only a permission²⁰.

And since if he is killed and does not transgress, it will be accounted to him as righteousness, he went even though there was danger in the matter²¹.

3.

And still there is to discuss this: according to Rashi in the Gemara that the brothers did not travel from Shechem

(for Dothan is not a place name),

but rather that at the place of his arrival he did not find them,

the reason is understood that even when Gabriel told him that they had removed themselves from brotherhood to seek for you cunning plots, he continued in fulfilling his father's command,

"Are not your brothers pasturing in Shechem? Come, and I will send you to them, etc. Go now, see the peace of your brothers, etc."²².

But according to Rashi on the Torah that no verse departs from its plain meaning,

that "Dothan is a place name" and his brothers had already traveled from Shechem and gone to another place,

his search for his brothers in another place was not a fulfillment of his father's mission and command

(since Jacob said to him "Are not your brothers pasturing in Shechem?").

Simply, it can be said that Jacob's mention of Shechem was only an indication of place to him,

and the command was "Go now, see the welfare of your brothers and the welfare of the flock"

(and as stated in Or HaChaim²³),

therefore the fulfillment of Jacob's words is when he finds them in whatever place they are.

<pg>172</pg>

And it is puzzling in all this going: after Yosef heard from Gavriel that they had distanced themselves from brotherhood to seek for him plots of laws to kill him,

behold in this that he went, not only did he place himself in danger in order to fulfill his father's mission,

but furthermore,

he placed in doubt the entire essence of the fulfillment of the command,

for Yaakov's mission was not about the actual going,

"Go now, see the peace of your brothers and the peace of the flock",

but the main thing is "and bring me back word",

and if so, what place is there to go when the command "and bring me back" will not be fulfilled&lt;sup&gt;*23&lt;/sup&gt;.

4.

And this can be explained based on what the poskim said&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;,

that even according to the Rambam that anyone regarding whom it is said "let him transgress and not be killed" means that it is forbidden to be killed in order not to transgress,

behold "if he is a great man and a pious G-d-fearing person and sees that the generation is breached in this, he is permitted to sanctify the Name and give himself over even for a light commandment so that the people will see and learn etc."&lt;sup&gt;25&lt;/sup&gt;.

And one could say,

that the obligation of mesiras nefesh in this situation is not for the sake of the particular mitzvah for which one is giving his life,

but rather to sanctify His name, to break the breaches of the generation.

And based on this, one could say

(according to Rashi's view)

that Yosef saw in the conduct of his brothers that they were lacking in honoring their father,

and not only from the events that had occurred

[such as that Shimon and Levi killed all the men of Shechem,

which was not according to Yaakov's will,

as Yaakov said²⁶

"You have troubled me, to make me odious among the inhabitants of the land...

and I am few in number"²⁷,

and also Reuven who disturbed his father's couch²⁸],

but rather in their hatred toward him,

for since their hatred of him came because of the love of Yaakov their father for him,

as it is said²⁹

"And Yisrael loved Yosef more than all his sons etc. And his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, and they hated him",

this was an affront to the honor of his father,

and therefore Yosef thought that the law applies to this, that when the generation is breached in this matter, one is permitted to give his life for it,

so that they would see that he is ready to give his life without any calculation etc. "and they would learn etc."³⁰.

And therefore he does not care if the command will not be fulfilled,

because the self-sacrifice in this situation is for the sanctification of the Name as above.

5.

Known are the words of the Shelah

(in Parshat Noach&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;),

that all the festivals of the year have a connection to the Torah portions that occur in them,

and it is explained there at length the connection of Chanukah to this story of our parshah "from the matter of Joseph's dealings with his brothers, that he went to see the peace of his brothers etc.',"

"And the matter of Joseph will also be in the Hasmonean kingdom in the days of Greece..

that then we were considered as sheep to the slaughter to sacrifice ourselves to sanctify His great Name,

and this is the flock of Joseph and Chanah and her seven sons, faithful witnesses to the holiness of the unique Name etc.'"

And based on this, one may add,

that also the manner of self-sacrifice of the aforementioned Yosef

(which he was not obligated in this according to law,

and furthermore this was above all calculation)

we find in Chanukah.

The Rambam wrote at the beginning of the laws of Chanukah: "In the Second Temple era, when Greece ruled, they decreed decrees upon Israel&lt;pg&gt;173&lt;/pg&gt;

And they nullified their religion and did not allow them to engage in Torah and commandments, and they stretched out their hand against their money and their daughters, and they entered the Sanctuary and breached breaches in it and defiled the pure things, and it was very hard for Israel because of them, and they oppressed them with great oppression.

And behold, from the plainness of his language it appears that the law of the situation of the days of Chanukah is like a time of decree,

that the Rambam wrote in Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;,

that the distinctions between the other commandments and the three transgressions; in public or in private etc. — they are only not in a time of religious persecution,

"But in a time of religious persecution&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;,

and it is when a wicked king stands like Nebuchadnezzar and his associates and decrees religious persecution&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;

upon Israel to nullify their religion or any one of the commandments,

let him be killed and not transgress even one of the other commandments."

And according to this, it is found that then Israel were obligated to give up their lives,

and especially that in addition to the decrees on circumcision, Shabbat, and the new month

(as brought in several places&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;)

they said&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;

"Write on the horn of the ox that you have no portion in the God of Israel."

But there is room for examination in this.

For even though in a time of religious persecution "let him be killed and not transgress" in any case — this is only that if they coerce him to transgress the commandments of the Torah he is obligated to give up his life and not transgress; but seemingly one cannot say that there is an obligation to go out to war against the wicked kingdom that decreed these decrees.

And furthermore: in our case, the Hasmoneans were few against many and weak against strong³⁶

(that according to nature there is no place that they would win),

and it is not applicable to say that they were obligated in this according to law.

For even if you say that going to war in general is not in the category of self-sacrifice,

since this is the essence of every war,

that they put themselves in danger

(and thus in this itself that the Torah permitted going to war

(even a discretionary war)

the law of war was removed from the laws of self-sacrifice³⁷),

nevertheless,

in this manner,

that there is no place at all in nature that they would win,

it is certain danger,

and seemingly there is no permission to go out to such a war³⁸.

But with the Hasmoneans there was self-sacrifice without measure and limit,

and consequently they went with self-sacrifice even in matters that according to the obligations of the Torah there is no place for this,

as in our case,

that they went out to war

(to certain danger)

against the Greeks

[in addition to the very fulfillment of the positive commandments of circumcision and the new month,

according to the opinions that said one should be killed and not transgress only for transgressing negative commandments and not if they decreed to nullify positive commandments,

as above].

6.

And based on this, we can explain what is said in the text of "Haneirot Hallalu",

that the salvations, miracles and wonders were "through your holy priests",

and likewise the Rambam³⁹ specifies

"until the God of our fathers had mercy on them and saved them from their hand and rescued them, and the sons of Hashmonai, the high priests, prevailed and killed them and saved Israel from their hand",

For at first glance, one must specify in this,

is there a practical difference in that the salvation was "through your holy priests",

"the sons of Hashmonai, the high priests"?

<pg>174</pg>

And it can be said,

that in this it is emphasized that the permission for such mesiras nefesh then,

and even in a manner of going out to open war against the Greeks

(not only mesiras nefesh to fulfill the mitzvos),

is because of this that they were "Your holy kohanim",

"the sons of Chashmonai, the great kohanim",

and their law was like "a great person and a pious G-d-fearing person",

who gives his life in every time and in every manner that it is,

even when it is not according to the obligations of mesiras nefesh according to Torah.

And for this same reason there were for our fathers salvations, miracles and wonders,

because through the power of the holy and great kohanim they reached through their mesiras nefesh above the definition of nature.

7.

And behold, this matter corresponds with what is explained elsewhere⁴⁰

the precise wording of the text of "And concerning the miracles",

that the wicked kingdom of Greece stood "to cause them to forget Your Torah and to cause them to transgress the statutes of Your will",

that the main part of their war was against the spirituality

(and G‑dliness)

that is in Torah and mitzvos⁴¹.

For this is specifically "to cause them to forget Your Torah",

that the Greeks did not care

(so much)

that Israel should study Torah,

rather they wanted that the study of Torah should be from the aspect of the intellect that is in the Torah,

"for it is your wisdom and your understanding in the eyes of the nations"⁴²,

and through this "to cause them to forget Your Torah",

to cause forgetfulness, heaven forbid, from Israel that the Torah is the Torah of G‑d.

And likewise with regard to mitzvos,

that the war of the Greeks was against the G‑dliness that is in the mitzvos,

that the mitzvos are His will, blessed be He,

this is "to cause them to transgress the statutes of Your will"

(specifically statutes and specifically Your will),

two matters in this:

(a)

that concerning the mitzvos of testimonies and judgments,

because they are rational mitzvos,

the Greeks agreed,

and the main part of their war was against statutes that are above reason.

(b)

In the statutes themselves,

they would agree if their fulfillment is from the aspect of some intellectual reasoning

[such as: that certainly there is a reason for the mitzvah as is explained in the Rambam⁴³,

because it is a command of the Holy One, blessed be He,

except that the reason is very deep,

but they rely on the Commander of the mitzvos that there is in this reason and intellect⁴⁴

etc.'],

and the main part of their war was against "

(statutes of)

Your will",

that the fulfillment of the statutes should be solely because this is the will of G‑d,

"A statute I have enacted, a decree I have decreed"⁴⁵

and "you have no permission to speculate about it"⁴⁶.

And with this will be understood the language of the Gemara

"When the Greeks entered the Sanctuary they defiled all the oils that were in the Sanctuary,"

for the meaning of the language is,

that when they entered the Sanctuary they endeavored to defile the oils — for at first glance they should have destroyed the oil,

and why did they only defile it?

And according to the above it can be explained,

that "oil" indicates wisdom,

and the Greeks agreed that the matter of wisdom should be

("oil")

with Israel,

but they wanted that this oil should be "defiled oil",

so that the G‑dliness would not be felt in it

that is in the Torah,

that the Torah is "Your Torah,"

the Torah of God,

and that the commandments are "the statutes of Your will."

And this is the greatness of the miracle of Chanukah,

that they found pure oil,

and furthermore,

that the oil was from a flask that was sealed "with the seal of the High Priest"⁴⁷.

For, behold,

according to the above

(in the intention of the Greeks)

it is understood,

that the war against this,

and all the more so the victory of this war,

comes specifically through the service of self-sacrifice,

and in this self-sacrifice itself,

such self-sacrifice that is above reason and intellect entirely

(the polar opposite of the Greek view that everything must be only according to intellect specifically).

And this is hinted at in the "flask of oil" sealed with the seal of the High Priest — for the High Priest,

who is called "Holy of Holies"⁵¹,

his essence is self-nullification to the Holy One, blessed be He, to the extent of self-sacrifice,

above reason and intellect entirely⁵².

And this is the victory of the days of Chanukah,

that they found a flask of pure oil sealed with the seal of the High Priest,

that this self-sacrifice was present among the Children of Israel

(through the Chashmonaim,

"Your holy priests"),

and with this power they defeated the Greeks.

And the above point regarding the war of the Chashmonaim against the Greek kingdom — that it was self-sacrifice above reason and intellect entirely

(even more than what is obligated according to the intellect of Torah)

— aligns with the content of the miracle of the lights,

that they found a flask of pure oil sealed with the seal of the High Priest and lit from it for eight days,

and they established these eight days of Chanukah to give thanks and praise to Your great name.

(From sichos of Shabbos Parshas Mikeitz 5724,

Shabbos Parshas Vayeishev 5743)