פירוש על בראשית 37:29

וישב ראובן AND REUBEN RETURNED — When he (Joseph) was sold he had not been present, for it was his day (his turn) to go to attend to his father (Genesis Rabbah 84:19). Another explanation is: he had not sat with them at the meal because he was occupied with his sack-cloth and fast in penitence for having disturbed his father’s couch (Genesis Rabbah 84:19).

וישב ראובן אל הבור, Reuben returned to the pit, etc. What was Reuben's argument when he complained to the brothers ואני אנה אני בא, "where shall I go?" Would Joseph not have been lost even if his own suggestion to throw him into a pit had been carried out? After all, the Torah itself testified that Reuben had never told his brothers that he intended to save Joseph and to restore him to his father! When Yehudah said to the other brothers: "what profit is there in killing our brother, etc," does this not prove that Joseph's remaining in the pit was meant to result in his death? How then could Reuben complain to his brothers?

וישב, he returned from wherever he had gone to his brothers, going back to the pit to see if he could rescue Joseph without his brothers finding out, and to return him to his father. There is a discussion in Bereshit Rabbah 84,19 as to where Reuven had been in the interval. According to some, it had been his turn to attend to the needs of his father, whereas according to Rabbi Eliezer he was engaged in doing penance, etc., for having slept with Bilhah, his father’s concubine.

וישב ראובן, “Reuven returned;” According to Rashi, Reuven reverted to wearing sackcloth and observing fasts as penitence over his indiscretion with Bilhah, even though he had not made a public confession until after he had heard his brother Yehudah publicly confess his sin against Tamar. (Genesis 38,26)

He was not present when he was sold, for his day had arrived to go and attend to his father. [You might ask:] What forced Rashi to say this? Perhaps he went to take care of business. And the same [question can be asked] according to the alternate explanation, that “he was occupied with his sack-cloth and fasting.” The answer is: If he had gone for mundane business, how was he allowed to leave? He knew his brothers wanted to kill Yoseif. Why did he not fear they would kill Yoseif when he left? Perforce, he went for a mitzvah, as his day had arrived, etc. There is a question [on the first explanation]: Why does it say he “returned” (וישב)? It should say he “came.” Therefore Rashi brings the alternate explanation, [according to which וישב is] an expression of repentance (תשובה). And the second explanation is insufficient on its own, as he should have waited for another day [to do repentance], because of [the danger to] Yoseif. Thus Rashi explains that “his day had arrived...” and he could not delay. (Maharshal)

וישב ראובן אל הבור, “when Reuven returned to the pit, etc.” Rashi, in answer to the question we should have asked about where Reuven was in the interval, answers that he had been preoccupied with trying through fasting and wearing sackcloth, to obtain forgiveness for his indiscretion in removing evidence of Bilhah sleeping with his father. [one of two explanations which Rashi suggests, the more likely correct one. Ed.] This explanation is difficult, seeing that the Talmud in tractate Makkot folio 11, arrives at the conclusion that Yehudah had been the first person ever to have done real penance by admitting his sin publicly, so that his brother learned from him when admitting being the father of the fetus his daughter-in-law Tamar was carrying in her womb. (Genesis 38,26) From that statement it is clear that at this stage Reuven had not felt the need to do penance. He did so only after Yehudah had set the example, which clearly had been some time after the sale of Joseph. Possibly, in order to solve this problem, perhaps the Talmud meant that until Yehudah had confessed publicly, Reuven had only done penance in the privacy his own house. He had been wearing sackcloth in his house already at this point.

ויקרע את בגדיו, “he rent his outer garments.” When his father heard about Joseph’s apparent death, the Torah describes the rending of his garments with the words ויקרע שמלותיו, “he rent his (under)garments.” When mourning parents or children, one rends all of one’s clothing, whereas when mourning siblings one only rends outer garments. The word שמלה appears as covering for one’s skin” (Exodus 22,26)

Another explanation: He was occupied with his sack-cloth... Rashi deduces this because it is written here, “Reuvein returned to the pit,” and it says, “Mordechai returned to the king’s gate wearing sack-cloth” (Esther 6:12). Just as “returned” over there refers to sack-cloth and fasting, so too here. Reuvein must have done his repentance secretly, and thus he was absent at the time of Yoseif’s sale. Otherwise it would contradict Rashi’s explanation of וזאת ליהודה (Devarim 33:7), that Yehudah’s confession over the incident with Tamar was what influenced Reuvein to confess and repent over the incident with Bilhah. Therefore it must be that Reuvein first repented secretly and later he did so publicly.

Actually, Reuben argued that inasmuch as he was the oldest, his father would charge him with leading the search for the missing Joseph from one end of the earth to the other. If Joseph had remained in the pit, he would have brought Joseph's remains to his father and explained to him that wild beasts had killed him. This would have been the end of his involvement. Now he could not do this. This is why he said: "where shall I go?" As a result the brothers hit on the idea of slaughtering a male goat and dipping Joseph's tunic in its blood, etc. By returning the tattered and blood-soaked remains of Joseph's striped coat they made it unnecessary for Reuben to start a search for Joseph.