Some weeks I like to give a Dvar
Torah which shows the thought process of the commentaries as they commented on
the Chumash. I like to call these “How the Meforshim Work”. This is one of
those weeks.
“וַיְהִי אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה חָטְאוּ
מַשְׁקֵה מֶלֶךְ מִצְרַיִם וְהָאֹפֶה לַאֲדֹנֵיהֶם לְמֶלֶךְ מִצְרָיִם”
“It came about after these events that the cupbearer of the king of Egypt
and the baker sinned against their master, against the king of Egypt.” (Bereishis
40:1)
Parshas Vayeishev tells the famous story
of how Yosef was sold as a slave by his brothers and ended up in Egypt. After
being falsely accused of a crime, he winds up in jail for a total of three
years. After his first year in jail, he is joined by the chief steward and
baker of King Paroh. Rashi explains on this pasuk that the reasons they were imprisoned
were that the steward served a cup of wine to Paroh with a fly in it while the
baker served him a loaf of bread full of rocks.
Interestingly, if you look in the very
next pasuk, these two individuals are afforded a bit more respect than in the
first one. “וַיִּקְצֹף
פַּרְעֹה עַל שְׁנֵי סָרִיסָיו עַל שַׂר הַמַּשְׁקִים וְעַל שַׂר הָאוֹפִים”
“And Paroh was angry at his two officers, the chief cupbearer and the chief
baker.” (40:2) How come in this pasuk the baker and steward are called by
their official titles while in pasuk 1 they are just known by their jobs? The
explanation to this question shows us how much thought and logic really goes
into a commentary’s explanation.
Rashi’s explanation on pasuk 1comes from
a medrash in Bereishis Rabbah. That same medrash provides us with another
possibility as to the sin of these two men which is that they approached Paroh
about marrying his daughter, the princess. Why did Rashi pick his explanation
over this one?
The Kli Yakar answers both our questions
by examining the wording in pasuk 1. Pasuk 1 is the one which mentions that the
steward and the baker sinned while not mentioning their titles, only their
jobs. The sins which Rashi says happened-- that there was a fly in the wine and
rocks in the bread-- are actions that would be considered bad if done to people
of any station or prestige. Therefore, they have nothing to do with the fact
that these two people were at the top of their professions and serving the king,
just the fact that they were in these positions allowed this to happen. However,
the only way they could have even had a possibility of marrying the princess
was because of their high positions. However, as we mentioned, the pasuk which
mentions they sinned does not include their titles, only their jobs! Says Rashi,
it must be that their sins had no connection to their high positions and
therefore it must be that they let a fly fall in the wine and rocks fall in the
flour. This, says the Kli Yakar, is how Rashi knew to pick this explanation
from the medrash and not the other.
It is very easy for us to read a
commentary and assume any number of things; that they either made up their
explanation, or we do not understand how the explanation makes sense, or we do
not understand how commentaries can argue on each other. Reading Divrei Torah
like this gives us a deeper understanding and insight into the words of Chazal
and perhaps make it a little easier for us to understand and accept their words
for what they are, Toras Emes.
Shabbat
Shalom!
For any questions, comments, or to subscribe to our email list, please email us at AIMeMtorah@gmail.com.
Please check out our other AIMeMTorah project, Nation's Wisdom!
AIMeM
No comments:
Post a Comment