Return To TorahWeb.org Homepage
"Va-yare eilav va-yipol al tzavarav va-yeifk al tzavarav od". The Torah's (Bereishit 46:29) depiction of the climactic reunion between Yaakov and Yosef (intentionally?) leaves us to wonder and speculate about who took the initiative. While the Ramban insists that logic (and other indications) dictates that the elderly and long-bereaved Yaakov initiated contact, Rashi, citing a remarkable midrash, declares that while Yosef embraced his father, Yaakov refrained from any emotional display until he was able to first recite the passage of keriat shema. Rashi's (and the midrash's) perspective certainly attests to Yaakov's extraordinary self-discipline and admirable religious commitment, but does not explain why it was necessary to display this feat at this unlikely moment.
Yaakov's puzzling behavior assumes greater mystery when one considers that Yaakov was certainly not indifferent to Yosef's absence or unenthusiastic about the prospect of their reconnection once he overcame his disbelief regarding the news of his survival (45:26-28). The Torah emphasizes (37:34,35) that he mourned excessively (yamim rabim), that he was fundamentally committed to being inconsolable (va-yemaein le-hitnachem), further triggering a state of sobbing (va-yeifk oto aviv). Moreover, an analysis of the aftermath of Yosef's absence demonstrates that an emotionally distraught Yaakov withdrew from active leadership of Klal Yisrael. His diminished role is reflected by the near absence (with a single exception - the decision to send Binyamin) of the name Yisrael that signified his singular balance and capacity to integrate the demands and opportunities of both spiritual and material life (ki sarita im ha-Elokim ve-im ha-anashim va-tuchal). Elsewhere[1] I have suggested that while Yosef was willing ultimately to forgive his brothers their crime against him, they could not be absolved of the impact of having denied Klal Yisrael and the world extra years of Yisrael's leadership. Indeed, "vatechi ruach Yaakov avihem"(45:28) is immediately followed by the full return of "Yisrael"- "vayomer Yisrael rav od Yosef beni chai eilchah ve-erenu be-terem amut" (46:1). Why then this demonstrable restraint in embracing the return of the prodigal Yosef?
However, perhaps it is precisely this rejuvenation of Yisrael, characterized, as noted, by the harmonious blending of human-material and Divine-spiritual motifs, also symbolized by the quality of tiferet, the integrated product of both "Elokei avichah Avraham"(28:13) and "Pachad avi Yitzchak" (31:53)["Elokei avi Aavraham veilokei avi Yitzchak" (32:10)] that mandated a timely affirmation and articulation of keriat shema. Even as Yaakov experienced the apex of human emotional attachment, he instinctively invoked religious commitment thereby integrating it with and putting it in context of ahavat Hashem and kabalat ol malchut shamayim.
The restored fullness of his unique religious persona did not, chas ve-shalom, detract from or blunt his emotional reunion with Yosef, but sanctified and intensified it by elevating it from being merely an undirected emotional outburst. [Yaakov's capacity and propensity for keriyat shema at a moment of raw, ecstatic emotionality somewhat parallels (though also in reverse) Avraham's akeidah experience, in which he and Yitzhak bond as father and son(av...beni...vayeilchu sheneihem yahdav...) precisely in the yirat Elokim challenge of sacrifice and loss.]
It is perhaps no coincidence that keriyat shema is central to Yaakov-Yisrael's final legacy to his children in Vayechi, as well, as Chazal note (Pesachim 56a, and especially according to Rambam's rendition- Hilchos Keriyat Shema 1:4). Indeed, the very themes of keriyat shema reinforce this analysis. Not only the aforementioned foundation of kabalat ol malchut shamayim as the prism which informs and defines the religious persona of Yisrael in all endeavors (consistent also with Rashi and the midrash view of the importance of the agalot-45:27), but also the very theology of yichud Hashem, which establishes Hashem as the unity of all constructive forces and impulses, no matter how seemingly varied. The idea of a valid dichotomy between human obligation or emotion, and Divine authority or religious demand is absolutely incompatible with Divine Unity, as expressed succinctly yet powerfully in the first line of keriyat shema. Thus, keriat shema constitutes an appropriate expression of thanksgiving to Hashem and especially of acknowledgement of the religious significance of Yosef's return to Yaakov and to Klal Yisrael. The reconstituted shevatim configuration reaffirmed the ambition of Yisrael with its sweep and range, as well as its common aspiration. [See, also, Bereishit 49:28 and Rashi]
The reunion between Yaakov and Yosef was no less emotionally satisfying because of the Divine pause. On the contrary, a reinvigorated Yaakov-Yisrael once again established a compelling paradigm for the nation that takes his name. Divine Unity and kabalat ol malchut Shamayim must refine, regulate and direct human impulses and interactions no less than more straight forward interactions with Hashem.
It has become fashionable in recent times for non-believers to disparage the role of religion in society, and even to suggest "God-neutral faith" substitutes that might provide some of the social, emotional, and communal benefits of religion without being hampered by obligations and authority claims. [See, for example, T.M. Luhrmann, "Religion Without God"op ed., NYTimes, Thursday December 25, 2014]] Even well-intentioned observant religionists often emphasize the psychological and social credentials of religious affiliation, and even of belief. While these pragmatic benefits are undeniable, they obviously are not and should not be the foundation of authentic and idealistic religious commitment. Moreover, even the pragmatic benefits are extremely tenuous when they are not integrated with authentic belief, responsibility, and commitment to the authority of God and religious law. The Tosefta (Shavuot 3:5) explains that absent religious belief, any crime, even the most heinous, may be justified. The commentators explain that Pirkei Avot begins with a rendition of the mesorah precisely because it primarily is devoted to moral and ethical issues lest one misconstrue that these values are not contingent upon a system of beliefs and norms that provide guidelines and that embed the sensibilities into objective laws (halachah). History has demonstrated time and again that high cultural attainment, intellectual achievement, and even emotional awareness do not guarantee a moral or even a sane society. The mamlechet kohanim ve-goy kadosh ideal of Judaism is one in which ethical, moral, and emotional sensitivity stems from the principles encapsulated in keriat shema, as our father Yisrael-Yaakov established.
[1] Mitoch HaOhel: Essays on the Weekly Parsha From the Rabbis and Professors of Yeshiva University, 2010, pp. 109-114 Parshas Miketz: Yosef's Complex and Comprehensive Reconcialition With His Brothers