וישק לו, he kissed him. The emphasis in this verse is on the word לו. Joseph kissed "him;" had Jacob been dead it would have been forbidden to kiss him seeing that the corpse exudes ritual impurity, and that impurity rises up to heaven and would harm the person who does the kissing. Inasmuch as Jacob had not died, however, Joseph was able to kiss him; Jacob simply appeared to be in a coma.

ויחנטו הרופאים את ישראל. The physicians embalmed Israel. Joseph initiated this procedure because of the honour due to his father. All men of stature were embalmed, especially those connected with royalty. Alternatively, Joseph arranged for the embalming in order that people should not say that Jacob had not died or that he had died but that his body did not putrify and they would idolise him as a result. Besides, if that were to happen he would never secure permission to bury his father in the land of Canaan. Had Joseph not ordered embalming, Jacob's "body" would not have putrified. It is interesting to read the story in Baba Metzia 84 concerning the body of Rabbi Eleazar son of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai which had lain in an attic for years without signs of decay.

It is also possible that ever since the Israelites who stood at Mount Sinai rid themselves of the residual pollution by the original serpent, the bodies of the righteous of our nation no longer putrified after their deaths (Shabbat 146). Accordingly, even the mould within their entrails simply dried out and turned to dust without leaving behind any offensive odour seeing it is only the pollution associated with the original serpent which causes the food within the entrails to become putrid. Although it is said of Jacob that he did not die, the mould inside his entrails which remained within his body was apt to turn putrid. Joseph was concerned about that aspect and that is why he had his father's body embalmed.

It is also possible that Joseph was unaware of these secrets when he ordered his father to be embalmed.

אל בית פרעה לאמור, to the household of Pharaoh to tell him, etc. This means that Joseph wanted the members of Pharaoh's household to tell the king not only the facts, but also the manner in which Joseph had related these facts. Joseph had pleaded with Pharaoh's advisers hoping that they in turn would assist him to have his wish approved. Alternatively, the Torah merely mentions the fact that Joseph asked the members of Pharaoh's household to speak to him because we learned in Yuma 4 that unless one gives express permission to relate something one has been told (even if not in confidence), it is forbidden to do so. We know this from when G'd Himself gave permission to relate what He had said (Leviticus 1,1).

אם נא מצאתי חן, "If I may have found favour, etc." In this instance the word נא means both "please" and a reference to a specific time frame. Joseph meant that if Pharaoh really wanted to show his affection for Joseph, the time was right then when Pharaoh did not want anything from Joseph in return.

דברו נא, "please tell, etc." The meaning is "immediately." Joseph did not want to be tardy in fulfilling the oath he had sworn to his father.

באזני פרעה לאמור, "in Pharaoh's hearing, saying, etc." The reason that the word לאמור appears here again was that Joseph wanted these advisers of Pharaoh to volunteer such an appeal, not merely to be Joseph's messengers.

השביעני לאמור, "has made me swear by saying, etc." Our sages in Sotah 36 have explained that Joseph used the word לאמור to forestall Pharaoh suggesting that Joseph have his oath voided. Joseph threatened that if this were possible, he would also have his oath not to reveal that Pharaoh did not understand Hebrew voided at the same time. The plain meaning is simply that inasmuch as Joseph described only the content of the oath, not its actual wording, he had to use the word לאמור.

A more homiletical approach would be this. Joseph wanted to head off Pharaoh's question why he had not consulted with him before swearing an oath which he could not keep without obtaining Pharaoh's consent. Joseph explained that there had not been time for such consultations as the oath had been sworn close to the time of Jacob's death. He indicated this by quoting his father as saying: "here I am about to die" (48,21). We have already discussed this in connection with 47,29.

וכל העולים אתו, and all those who had gone up with him, etc. The Torah tells us that not a single person who had been part of the funeral cortege failed to return to Egypt. The reason was that they had all gone only in order to perform the מצוה of burying Joseph's father. None of them returned before he had completed participating in that deed. The Torah also wants to inform us that because they were all שלוחי מצוה, charged with the performance of a good deed, none of them encountered any mishap either while going or while returning (compare Pessachim 8).

Alternatively, the Torah may be telling us something entirely different. When the Torah speaks separately of Joseph and all those who buried his father as returning to Egypt, and then repeats the words: "after he had buried his father," it may differentiate between those who waited with their return until after the burial and between those who used the opportunity to conduct whatever business they had in Canaan by joining the funeral cortege. The former all returned safe and sound without mishap because they were engaged in a מצוה. The people who were motivated by their personal concerns were not included in the statement that everybody returned without fail.

לו ישטמנו יוסף, "perhaps Joseph will hate us, etc." In this instance the word לו means "perhaps," though there is no other such instance in the Torah where the word לו is used in that sense. We need to understand why the Torah uses the word לו here in a sense which is the opposite of its regular meaning. Although it is quite impossible to mistake the meaning of this word in our context, why did the Torah not use such words as פן, or אולי if the intention was to describe the brothers as saying "perhaps?"

It seems that the Torah has the brothers express a subconscious desire for Joseph to pay them back for all they had done to him. If Joseph were to do that now and the brothers would experience a similar agony to that which they had subjected him to, they would no longer have to worry about paying for their sin against him at the end of the exile. Yalkut Mishley 929 describes that the 10 martyrs executed by Hadrian were in retribution for the failure to punish the brothers who had sold Joseph at the time. Shabbat 10 attributes the exile in Egypt to the coloured coat Jacob had made for Joseph and which resulted in the jealousy of his brothers.

ויצוו אל יוסף, they ordered emissaries to tell Joseph, etc. We again have to explore the meaning of the word לאמור in this context. If it means that the emissary were to speak to Joseph, the Torah should have added the words אל יוסף. Perhaps the brothers did not want the emissary to tell Joseph that the brothers had sent them but to tell him that he himself had overheard their father command the brothers to tell him of this conversation at the appropriate time. This would account for the word לאמור being used twice in this verse.

כי התחת אלוקים אני, "Am I then in G'd's place?" Joseph meant: "if you are guilty it is up to G'd to punish you; it is not up to me to revenge myself or to hold a grudge against you." Joseph may not have told the brothers that he had forgiven them because under Noachide law the matter did not depend on his forgiveness at all. Under Noachide law, once a person has committed the sin of kidnapping or robbery, he is guilty of the death penalty. The fact that the victim forgave the criminal is irrelevant to the penalty. Joseph added that he had to interpret the brothers' actions in a manner which reflected credit upon them.

ואתם חשבתם עלי רעה, והאלוקים חשבה לטובה, "what you had planned as harm for me, G'd planned it for good, etc." The whole matter is comparable to that of a person who plans to give his friend a poisoned drink in order to kill him, but who mistakenly pours him a cup of wine. Legally speaking, such a person is not guilty before a human tribunal. Similarly, the brothers were not guilty before Joseph though they were guilty before a Heavenly Tribunal. It is possible that the forgiveness of the victim even to a Jewish criminal would not free the criminal from the death penalty if the deed had been committed under circumstances warranting such a verdict.