וירא יעקב, he saw local inhabitants arriving with grain and fodder. He asked these people where they had bought it, and they told him that they had brought it all the way from Egypt. As a result, he told his sons what he had heard and wanted to know why they acted as if they did not need additional supplies.

?למה תתראו, “Why do you give the impression that you have adequate supplies of grain? Everybody else is going on a buying trip and you sit at home!”

וירדו אחי יוסף. The reason why the Torah describes them all of a sudden as “Joseph’s brothers” instead of as Yaakov’s sons, is that they went down to Egypt because of what had happened with Joseph so many years ago. The time had come for Joseph’s dream to be realised, and the Torah wants to alert the reader to this. In Bereshit Rabbah 91,2 the question is raised why there is a dividing tone sign, etnachta, under the word עשרה, as if the verse ended there. The answer given is that nine of the brothers only were concerned with finding Joseph and being good brothers, whereas the tenth, Shimon, joined them only in order to buy grain. [the basis of the Midrash is the number “ten” being mentioned. We all knew that only ten brothers went to Egypt, Yaakov not allowing Binyamin to join them. Hence, the Midrash reads additional meaning into the word “ten,” as well as into the tone sign under that word. Ed.]

ואת בנימין... אחי יוסף, he is mentioned once more as “Joseph’s brother” as he was the only full brother Joseph had, being a brother both from the same father and the same mother.

אסון, a mishap brought about either by man or by direct heavenly intervention, a natural disaster, for instance. Yaakov’s fear was based on a mishap having befallen Joseph at the time (as he had been led to believe). The Talmud in Ketuvot 30 describes mishaps caused by “man” as thorns and thistles, and the like. [based on Proverbs 22,5. The assumption appears to be that such “mishaps” are preventable by man being careful.] We may well ask why Yaakov was afraid of a mishap that might befall Binyamin while he was on the way more than he was afraid of a mishap which might befall him at home? The answer is that mishaps which befall people on a journey are statistically far more frequent than those that befall a person while he is at home. Wild animals, bandits, etc., are usually roaming on much traveled routes. Due to the likelihood of encountering such hazards while traveling, even righteous people who have no reason to fear G’d’s retribution for any wrongs they may have committed, need to be especially careful in any situation which is known to be especially hazardous, and they must not ignore such dangers by relying on G’d to keep them safe. Even if they would be saved from some danger through a miracle G’d would perform for them, their accumulated merits would be diminished thereby. Our sages have found an allusion to all this in Deuteronomy 6,15 לא תנסו את ה' אלוקיכם, “do not cause the Lord your G’d to have to perform a miracle for you.” We find proof that even an outstanding man such as the prophet Samuel when sent to anoint a successor to King Sha-ul and setting out on the way to Chevron to anoint one of Yishai’s sons, was afraid and said so to G’d. G’d Himself told him what precautions to take. (Samuel I 16,2) In view of the above it is not surprising therefore that Yaakov was especially concerned about Binyamin’s safety during the journey.

בתוך הבאים, they did not appear different although they were Hebrews. Seeing that it was a time of danger, i.e. famine, they mingled freely with all the other people traveling to Egypt for the same purpose.

ויוסף הוא השליט, the brothers had to appear before him personally as he was the seller, i.e. he authorised who could buy and how much. הוא המשביר. The term is only used transitively, someone who sells somebody else’s property to a third party. He gave instructions to his agents to sell. Initially, all potential purchasers had to be examined by Joseph personally. Although, no doubt this was a tedious procedure, Joseph had issued these instructions to make sure he would spot his brothers when they would arrive, as he was sure they must. As a result he would be able to confront his brothers.

וירא יוסף...ויכירם, our sages explain that the fact that Joseph had left home when he did not have a beard yet, whereas his brothers already had beards accounts for the fact that whereas they did not recognise him, he recognised them. (quoted by Rashi) It is possible that they would have recognised him in spite of his having grown a beard if they had not seen the man confronting them dressed in the uniform of the highest ranking nobles of the land. They could not imagine that this man could be Joseph even if there had been points of resemblance. The idea that someone who had been sold into slavery had risen to such power was too mind-boggling for them.

ויתנכר, Joseph moreover deliberately misrepresented himself to prevent their suspecting that it might be him.

ויכר יוסף, as we already explained on verse 7. The reason the Torah has repeated this is that the Torah wished to emphasise that he showed them brotherly love by not harming them or killing them, whereas they, at the time had not shown him any brotherly feelings in their treatment of him, first planning to kill him, then stripping him, throwing him into the pit, and subsequently selling him into slavery.

אשר חלם להם, for the dreams had really concerned the brothers, primarily. He realised now that they had hated him on account of his dreams; this is why when he remembered all that they had done to him instead of repaying them in kind, he only made them extremely uncomfortable for a while. [perhaps what the author means is that originally, Joseph had thought that the brothers resented his becoming a big shot in his dreams, whereas only now did he realise that what they really resented was the fact that they, the brothers, appeared as socially low ranking, slave like, in Joseph’s dreams. Ed.]

ועבדיך, the letter ו at the beginning of this word substitutes for the word אבל, “but”. In other words: “no my lord, not as you have said; but your servants simply came here to buy food.” The use of the letter ו instead of the word אבל is not unique, as it also occurs in Psalms 7,5 ואחלצה צוררי ריקם, “but I have rescued my foe without reward.”

כלנו בני איש אחד, if you claimed that the fact that we stick together is proof that we are spies, consider that the reason why we stick together is because we are all sons of the same father. This is why we always ask our questions in unison. We belong to the same family, and are honest upright people.

ויאמרו...בני איש אחד, they now felt the need to assert further that they were in fact honest and forthcoming by revealing that actually there were twelve of them, all sons of the same father, etc.

את אבינו, they had left one brother to attend to the needs of their father during their absence

איננו; the reason why they chose this ambiguous way of referring to the fate of their missing brother was to avoid being trapped. If they had said that their missing bother was dead, Joseph could have accused them of lying –in the event Joseph was alive and this ruler had knowledge of the fact.- They knew that Joseph had been sold to Egypt but had no knowledge beyond this. They had reason to fear that while a slave in Egypt and wanting to obtain his freedom he might have revealed his origins, implicating the brothers in having sold him. The fact that this slave, like they themselves was of Hebrew origin, may well have become known as he had been bought from Hebrews. Even the wife of Potiphar, when thwarted in her advances too him, suddenly refers to him in a derogatory fashion as “the Hebrew man her husband had brought into the house to belittle them, etc.” (39,14) The Chief of the cup-bearers had also referred to him as Hebrew slave. (41,12) However, while Joseph may have revealed or may not have been able to conceal that he was a Hebrew, it was by no means certain that he had also revealed details about his family, his father, etc. Neither would he have had reason to reveal how many brothers he had, etc. Therefore, when referring to him, they decided to use the non committal ואיננו, meaning that they had no knowledge of where he was if he was still alive.

הוא אשר דברתי, if you really spoke the truth that ten of you came as brothers, why did the eleventh not come also? As far as your claiming that he stayed home in order to attend to the needs of your father, what about your father’s wives and your own wives? Are they not able to cope with these chores during your absence?

if you indeed speak the truth, as you claimed when you said that you are כנים, truthful, above board.

ויאסוף, he caused them mental pain without touching their bodies or causing them financial loss.

את האלוקים אני ירא, therefore I will not detain all of you seeing that your families are starving and I would be to blame for this. I will only detain one of you in order to put your claim to the test.

שבר רעבון בתיכם, what will break the hunger, i.e. the harvest; this is why the harvest, תבואה is also called שבר, as we have already explained on 41,56.

ויאמרו, after Joseph had finished speaking with them and had left, the interpreter who had acted to preserve the impression that Joseph did not understand Hebrew also left the room where the encounter between Joseph and his brothers had taken place. In the absence of the interpreter the brothers acknowledged their sin against Joseph, seeing in their incarceration and in their position as accused, G’d’s punishment for their conduct against Joseph. They knew that they had been discriminated against by Joseph, knowing that they had been subjected to a far more intense questioning than other travelers who had come to Egypt to buy food. This is why they connected their present predicament to their behaviour against Joseph. However, they saw the nature of their sin not in their basic attitude to Joseph but

בהתחננו אלינו¸ their turning a deaf ear to Joseph’s pleas for mercy after he had been thrown into the pit. Joseph had started pleading already when they stripped him of the coloured coat his father had had made for him especially. The entire episode is described in detail by the Torah to teach the reader that if and when apparently undeserved troubles befall him, that he is to examine his past deeds to find out what sin, intentional or unintentional, could have caused G’d to bring this to his attention in such a manner so that he would repent his error. He is to exploit his troubles to ask G’d for forgiveness for his wrongdoing. [even if the major act of penitence has to be performed toward the person against whom he had sinned and from whom he must ask for a pardon. Ed.]

וגם דמו הנה נדרש, seeing that they believed that Joseph had died after he had been sold, they felt that G’d was also holding them responsible now for having shed his blood.

כי המליץ, we already explained the function of the interpreter.

ויבך. Overhearing the brothers confess their sin against him caused Joseph to weep.

את שמעון, he shackled him for it had been Shimon who had thrown him into the pit.

ויאסור, he brought him back to jail in front of their eyes. In Bereshit Rabbah 91,8 Rabbi Chani points out that the restrictive addition of the word לעיניהם, “in their presence,” means that Shimon remained tied up only while the brothers could see him. As soon as the brothers started their home-bound journey Shimon was released by Joseph. He fed him, bathed him, anointed him, in other words treated him like a V.I.P not like a suspected criminal.

ויצו יוסף, he instructed his servants, the ones who were selling the grain (completing the transaction once it had been approved) to fill the brothers’ containers with grain, which they did. וימלאו; this is one of many verses in the Torah which has been written in an abbreviated manner.

ולהשיב, he also instructed his servants at the same time to replace the purchase money the brothers had paid.

ויעש להם כן, these words refer to the restoration of the money and the brothers being given enough provisions for themselves for their journey. We had heard already that their containers had been filled with grain.

ויפתח האחד, one of them. According to a homiletic comment quoted by Rashi, the definitive article at the beginning of the word האחד is a hint that this was Levi, who, through his buddy Shimon having been detained by Joseph, was now “the one,” i.e. left alone without his closest companion.

בפי אמתחתו, Joseph had instructed that the money of one of them should be not just placed back in his sack, but should be placed near the top so that he would find it immediately he opened the sack. The money of the other brothers had been placed somewhere in the middle section of their respective containers, or even at the very bottom. If the money of all of them had been placed near the top of their bags they would see it as soon as they started giving fodder to their beasts, and they would turn around to Egypt pointing out that someone had made a mistake. They would be anxious to clear themselves of the danger of being accused of an additional crime, of being thieves. Joseph had therefore taken precautions that only one of them should find his money before they would get home. He had arranged matters in a way to cause them maximum worry.

ויצא לבם, as Joseph expected, discovery of the money was a major shock for them. The expression used by the Torah for this emotion is also found in Song of Songs 5,6 נפשי יצאה בדברו, “I fainted because of what he said.”

ויבאו, the words they told their father are quite clear, although there are minor variations, additions, omissions; changes; the basic subject was reported faithfully

ואת רעבון, the words are once more inverted and mean ואת שבר רעבון, “the food for the starving, etc.”

בשקו, in the actual text it does not say בפי שקו, as we already mentioned on verse 27.

וייראו; they now worried if the sellers of the grain had not deliberately replaced their money in order to set a trap for them when they would return when they would be accused of being thieves.

שכלתם, “you have bereaved;” a transitive mode, referring to a third person. The same construction appears when the prophet Samuel tells King Agag why he is about to kill him, saying שכלה נשים חרבך, “your sword has bereaved women” (Samuel I 15,33) Yaakov meant that “you my sons have caused me this problem with three of my sons.”

כלנה, all these problems.

את שני בני תמית, two of my sons. [he had four. Ed.] Reuven said something foolish in even suggesting that his father might kill his own grandsons. Yaakov responded: (not in text) “you are a foolish firstborn what makes you think that your sons are not also my sons?” Seeing that Reuven’s suggestion was so foolish, Yaakov did not even bother to formally reply to it. It did not deserve to be dignified with a serious answer. He just told him that he would not send Binyamin with him and the other brothers.

כי אחיו מת, not a statement of fact but an assumption. Yaakov reasoned that if Joseph were alive he would have heard from him at some time during the over twenty years that he had been missing.