Midrasz do Rodzaju 37:2

And Jacob sat in the land (Gen. 37:1). Whenever Scripture uses the expression and he sat (also translated “and he dwelt”), it connotes misfortune: And Israel sat in the land of Egypt, in the land of Goshen, … and the time drew near that Israel must die (Gen. 47:29); And the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to make merry (Exod. 32:37); And there fell of the people on that day three thousand men (Exod. 38:28); And they sat down to eat bread; and they lifted up their eyes and looked, and, behold, a caravan of Ishmaelites (Gen. 37:25); And Judah and Israel sat safely (I Kings 5:5); And the Lord raised up an adversary against Solomon (ibid. 11:14); And Israel sat among the cedars, etc., and the people began to commit harlotry (Num. 25:1). You may explain every other use of “and he sat” with this negative implication. In this instance And Jacob sat is followed by and Joseph brought evil report of them unto his father (Gen. 37:2).

Another comment on These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph, etc. (Gen. 37:2). Was not Reuben actually the firstborn? He was, but since he defiled his father’s couch (I Chron. 5:1), his birthright was given to the descendants of Joseph, the descendants of Israel. However, they are not actually accounted as the firstborn in the genealogy of the people. Another explanation. These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph. You find that Joseph resembled his father in every way, and that everything that happened to Jacob also happened to Joseph. Jacob’s brother was envious of him, and Joseph’s brothers were envious of him; Jacob was exiled to Haran, and Joseph was exiled to Egypt; Jacob said: Whether stolen by day or stolen by night (Gen. 31:39), and Joseph said: For indeed, I was stolen away (ibid. 40:15).

And Joseph was seventeen years old, and he still continued to regard himself above his ‎brothers and to exalt himself above them. And at that time Joseph dreamed a dream, and he ‎came unto his brothers to tell them of his dream, and he said unto them: I dreamed a dream, ‎and behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and lo, my sheaf arose and also stood ‎upright, and behold your sheaves stood round about and made obeisance to my sheaf. And ‎his brothers said unto him: What is the meaning of this dream that thou didst dream? Dost ‎thou think in thine heart to govern and to rule over us. And Joseph came also unto his father ‎informing him of his dream, and Jacob heard the words of his mouth and he kissed him and ‎Jacob blessed Joseph. And when the sons of Jacob saw that their father had kissed and ‎blessed Joseph and that he loved him so dearly, they became jealous of him and they hated ‎him still more. And afterwards Joseph dreamed another dream and he related it unto his ‎father in the presence of his brothers, and he said unto his father and brothers: Behold, I have ‎dreamed another dream, and lo, the sun, and the moon, and eleven stars bowed down ‎before me. And Jacob heard the words of Joseph and his dream, and he saw that his brothers ‎hated Joseph on account of these words, and Jacob rebuked Joseph in the presence of his ‎brothers, saying: What is the meaning of this dream which thou hast dreamed that thou ‎exaltest thyself over thy brothers who are greater than thou. Thinkest thou perhaps in thine ‎heart that we will come, I and thy mother and thy eleven brothers to bow down before thee, ‎that thou speakest these words. And his brothers were jealous of him concerning his words ‎and dreams and their hatred against him increased. And Jacob observed and kept the dreams ‎within his heart.‎

Our sages interpreted the verse Instead of thy fathers shall be thy sons (Ps. 45:17) to mean that everything that occurred to Jacob likewise happened to Joseph. Jacob was born circumcised, and so too was Joseph, as is said: These are the generations of Jacob, Joseph (Gen. 37:2). The former was called The son of my firstborn, Israel (Exod. 4:22), and the latter was spoken of as the firstborn was Joseph’s (I Chron. 5:2). The former was exiled to Haran, and the latter to Egypt. Jacob was exalted through a dream, as it is said: And He dreamed, and behold, a ladder set upon the earth (Gen. 38:22). Joseph interpreted Pharaoh’s dream. R. Simeon the son of Gamliel said: Joseph was rewarded for his actions, for his mouth did not kiss in sin. Thus, according to thy mouth shall all my people be ruled (ibid. 41:40).

(Gen. 37:1-2:) NOW JACOB DWELT < IN THE LAND >…. THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH. What is written on the matter above (in Gen. 36:15)? THESE ARE THE LORDS OF THE CHILDREN OF ESAU. When Jacob saw them, he became alarmed and said: Who can stand against these?⁸Gen. R. 84:5; Tanh., Gen. 9:1. To what is the matter comparable? To a goldsmith who would sit and ply his trade. His apprentice raised his eyes and saw a lot of camels who were loaded with straw. He began to say: Who can stand against these? His master said to him: If a spark went out of this furnace, it would burn all of them. So in the case of our father Jacob, when he saw all of Esau's lords, he began to be afraid and said: Who can stand against these? The Holy One said to him: Look at what is written below (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH. By your life, someone shall spring from Joseph, < a person > who shall burn all of them, as stated (in Obad. 18): THE HOUSE OF JACOB SHALL BE A FIRE, AND THE HOUSE OF JOSEPH A FLAME, AND THE HOUSE OF ESAU SHALL BE STRAW; < THEY SHALL BURN IT >…. R.Hanina said: It is written (in Is. 47:14): SEE, THEY HAVE BECOME LIKE STRAW; FIRE CONSUMES THEM. It is therefore written (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH.

Another interpretation (of Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH. < The interpretation is > that Jacob's face was like Joseph's.⁹As Rashi informs us (ad loc.), the midrash needs to explain why Jacob’s generations are being ascribed to Joseph. Cf. Gen. R. 84:6, which argues that one should expect any discussion of Jacob’s children to begin with Reuben. Where is it shown? Where it says so (in Gen. 37:3): NOW ISRAEL LOVED JOSEPH [MORE THAN ALL HIS SONS BECAUSE HE WAS THE CHILD OF HIS OLD AGE. But look, Benjamin was younger than < Joseph >; yet it says: < Joseph was > THE CHILD OF HIS OLD AGE. It is simply that he had features¹⁰Gk.: eikonion. which resembled him. Ergo (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH]. Just as Jacob raised up tribes; so did Joseph raise up tribes. It is so stated (in Gen. 48:5): EPHRAIM AND MANASSEH SHALL BE MINE LIKE REUBEN AND SIMEON. Ergo (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH.

Another interpretation: Just as Jacob hid from his father for twenty-two years, so did Joseph hide from his father for twenty-two years. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH.¹¹So Rashi with considerable explanation on Gen. 37:34. R. Levi said: Rabbi Johanan said: Wherever it says, HE WAS, the HE saw three worlds.¹²Cf. Gen. R. 30:8; Esth. R. 6:3. It is written of Noah (in Gen. 6:9): HE WAS PERFECT. He saw the world when it was inhabited before the flood came, he saw it destroyed, and he saw it afterwards in its restoration. It is therefore said of him: HE WAS. In the case of Moses, it is written (in Exod. 3:1): HE WAS TENDING < THE FLOCK OF HIS FATHER-IN-LAW JETHRO, THE PRIEST OF MIDIAN >…. He saw Israel before the bondage tightened its grip, he saw the bondage, and {they} [he] saw them when they had been redeemed. [Of Mordecai it is written] (in Esth. 2:5): THERE WAS (literally: HE WAS) A CERTAIN JEW IN THE CITADEL OF SHUSHAN. He saw them (Israel) before they were enslaved at the hand of Haman, he saw them under the edicts which had been decreed against them, and he saw them in their redemption. Of Job it is written (in Job 1:1): THERE WAS (literally: HE WAS) A MAN IN THE LAND OF < UZ >, and he saw three worlds. He was whole, he suffered afflictions, and he was healed. So also in the case of Joseph, HE WAS is written of him (in Gen. 37:2): THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH AT THE AGE OF SEVENTEEN WAS (literally: HE WAS) TENDING < THE FLOCK WITH HIS BROTHERS >….

He was righteous (Gen. 6:9). This suggests that he was one of the seven men born circumcised.¹⁰Tradition differs as to the number of men born circumcised. Buber Tanhuma, Noah 6 mentions ten, Midrash on Psalms 9:7 lists thirteen. Adam and his son Seth were born circumcised, as it is written: He begot a son in his own likeness after his image, and he called him Seth (Gen. 5:3). Noah was born circumcised, as it is written: He was righteous (lit. “perfect”) in his generations (ibid. 7:1); Jacob was born circumcised, for it is said: And Jacob was a quiet (lit. “perfect”) man (ibid. 25:27); Joseph was born circumcised, for it is written: These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph (ibid. 37:2) because he resembled his father; Moses was born circumcised, as it is said: And she saw that he was a goodly child (Exod. 2:2); and Job was born circumcised, as it is written: A wholehearted (lit. “just”) and upright (“perfect”) man (Job 1:1).

All the things which happened to Jacob happened to Joseph. It is written in connection with Jacob (in Gen. 31:39): SNATCHED BY DAY. Also in the case of Joseph, it is written of him: FOR I WAS SURELY SNATCHED. Jacob had < his brother > Esau persecute him; and Joseph had his brothers persecute him. Jacob was enslaved to Laban, and Joseph was enslaved in Egypt.¹³Gen. R. 84:6 has a longer list of parallels. It is therefore written (in Gen. 37:2) THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF JACOB: JOSEPH.

(Gen. 37:2:) AND JOSEPH BROUGHT BAD REPORTS OF THEM < UNTO HIS FATHER >. What is the meaning of BAD REPORTS? That he had said something slanderous against his brothers. And what slanderous thing did he say against them? R. Judah said: He said against them that they would cut a limb from a living animal and eat it.¹⁴yPe’ah 1:1 (15d-16a); Gen. R. 84:7. The Holy One said to him: You have said something slanderous against the tribes. Tomorrow, by your life, you are going down to Egypt. Then you shall invite them to eat with you, but they shall suspect you there in regard to the ritual slaughtering. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 43:32): THEY SERVED HIM BY HIMSELF, < AND THEM BY THEMSELVES >…. R. Me'ir says: He said to him: My brothers have set their eyes on Canaanite women. The Holy One said to him: You have said something slanderous against your brothers. Tomorrow, by your life, you are going down to Egypt. Then that woman (Potiphar's wife) shall say (in Gen. 39:17): THE HEBREW SLAVE < WHOM YOU BROUGHT TO US > CAME UNTO ME < TO FONDLE ME >. Ergo (in Gen. 37:2): AND JOSEPH BROUGHT < BAD REPORTS OF THEM UNTO HIS FATHER >.

(Fol. 36) GEMARA: How is the word (Josh. 8, 33) V'hachetzyo (and the other half of them) to be explained? Said R. Cahana: "This means that just as they were divided here at Mts. Gerizim and Ebal so were they also divided in the same manner upon the stones of the Ephod. An objection was raised from the following Baraitha: Two precious stones were fixed upon the shoulders of the High-priest, one stone on one shoulder and the other stone on the other shoulder. The names of the twelve tribes were inscribed, thereon, six on one stones and six on the other stone, as it is said (Ex. 28, 10) Six of the names on one stone and the remaining six names on the other stone, according to their birth. This means that the second stone was according to their birth, but the first stone was not according to their birth, because Juda preceded the others. Fifty letters were there altogether, of them twenty-five were on one stone and twenty-five on the other. R. Chanina b. Gamliel says (Ib. b) "They were placed upon the Ephod not in accordance with their division mentioned (Num. 1, 5), but they were placed in an Ephod in accordance with their division mentioned in (Ex. 1, 1-5). How so? The children of Leah were placed in accordance with their age. Then came the children of Rachel, one on one stone, and the other on the other stone. The children of the hand-maids were placed in the middle. As to the question how can the passage, According In their order of birth, be upheld? We must explain it that it was inscribed with the names as they were called by their father and not with the names they were called by Moses — Reuben but not Reubeni, Shimon but not Shimoni, Dan but not Dani, Gad but not 'Gadi.' Hence this will refute the above statement of R. Cahana, [because none of the above opinions is in accordance with the arrangements of the Ephod]. The refutation is indeed sustained. If so, then what is the meaning of V'hachezyo? We are taught in a Baraitha that the half that was placed opposite Mt. Gerizim was more than the half placed opposite Mt. Ebal, for, the Levites were below the hill. On the contrary, since the Levites were below the hill, hence the number of tribes facing Mt. Gerizim was less? We must therefore say; Although the tribe of Levi were below the hill, nevertheless the sons of Joseph were with thim, and completed the amount, as it is said (Josh. 17, 14) And the children of Joseph spoke unto Joshua, saying 'Why hast thou given me, but one lot ... ... ... and Joshua said unto them, if thou art a numerous people, then get up to the wood country, etc. He said to them, "Go and hide yourselves in the forest so that no covetous eye may afflict you." Whereupon they answered him, "We are the descendants of Joseph whom a covetous eye cannot afflict, as it is written (Gen. 29, 22) Joseph is a fruitful bough by a spring, and R. Abahu explains thus: "Do not read Aleh Ayin (by a spring), but read it Ole Ayin (above the covetous eye.'" R. Jose b. Chanina said: "From this it may be inferred that Joseph's children are not subject to the affliction of a covetous eye, (Ib., 48, 16) And let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth. This [the word grow used by Jacob which has the derivation of Dog (fish) is to mean that just as the fishes in the sea because of their being covered by water, no eye can afflict them, so also are the children of Joseph not subject to the affliction of a covetous eye." But how do you say above that there were fifty letters in the inscription of the Ephod. Behold there were only fifty letters less one? Said R. Isaac: "The fiftieth letter was used as an extra letter to the name of Joseph, as it is said (Ps. 81, 6) He appointed it in Joseph for a testimony, when he went out over the land of Egypt." R. Nachman b. Isaac raised an objection: "The passage says that it was in accordance with the names of birth, and this is not so." We must therefore say that the extra letter was inserted in the name of Benjamin, which is spelled in the entire Torah with only one Yud, but here in the Ephod, Benjamin, is spelled with two Yuds, as it is written (Ex. 25, 18) But his father called him Benjamin [with two Yuds]. R. Chama b. Bizna said, in the name of R. Simon the pious: "Joseph, who sanctified Heaven's name in secret was rewarded with only one additional letter of the name of the Holy One, praised be He, but Juda, who sanctified Heaven's name publicly was rewarded so that his entire name was equal to that of the Holy One, praised be He." What happened with Joseph? as written (Gen. 39, 11). And it came to pass on a certain day ... ... ... We are taught in a Baraitha, Joseph was destined to produce twelve tribes, just as they were by his father Jacob, as it is said (Gen. 37, 2) These are the generations of Jacob, Joseph, however, they were produced through his brother, Benjamin. They were nevertheless called after the name of Joseph, as it is said (Ib. 46, 21) And the sons of Benjamin, Bela, Mecher, Ashbel, Gera, Na'aman, Achi, V'rosh, Muppim, Chuppim and Ard; i.e., Bela because Joseph was swallowed (lost) among the other nations; Mechcr, because he was the first born of his mother; Ashbel, because he was captured with the consent of God; Gera, because he lived in inns (having no settled home); Na'aman because he was very sweet Achi V'rosh, because he was my brother and leader; and Chuppim, because he did not see my wedding canopy nor did I see his; and Ard, according to some because he was driven among idolatrous nations, and according to others because his face was like a rose.

R. Chelbo questioned R. Samuel h. Nachmeni: "What is the reason that Jacob took away the privilege of the first-born from Reuben and gave it to Joseph?" You ask for the reason? Does not the Scripture state the reason When he defiled his father's bed? "What I ask, is this: Why did he give it to Joseph?" and he rejoined: "I will tell you a parable to which this case is similar: There was one who had raised an orphan in his house. At a later period the orphan became rich, and thought, I will recompense my benefactor." R. Chelbo said to him: "And how would it have been had Reuben not sinned? Then Jacob would have given nothing to Joseph?" R. Samuel b. Nachmeni replied: "Your teacher, R. Jonathan, did not explain it so, but as follows: The first-born was destined to come from Rachel, as it is written (Ib. 37) These are the generations of Jacob and Joseph. But Leah was preferred by virtue of her prayers. Nevertheless, because of Rachel's discretion, the Holy One, praised be He! returned it to her." And in what consisted Rachel's discretion? As it is written (Ib. 12) And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother, and that he was Rebekah's son. The brother of her father? Was he not the son of her father's sister? It was thus: He asked her whether she would marry him. She said, "Yea, but my father is very shrewd, and you cannot persuade him." And to the question: "What does it mean?" She answered: "I have a sister who is older than me, and my father will not give me to you while she is not married." Then he said: "I am his brother in shrewdness." She then asked him: "Is it, then, allowed to the upright to be shrewd?" And he answered: "Yea, as (II Sam. 22, 27) With the pure thou wilt show thyself pure, and with the perverse thou wilt wage a contest." And then he furnished her with some signs, that when she should be brought to him he would ask her for these signs, and he might be sure that she was not exchanged for Leah. Thereafter, when Leah was about to be brought to him instead of Rachel, the latter said to herself: "Now my sister will he ashamed." She went and confided the signs to her. And this is what is written (Gen. 29, 25) And it came to pass that in the morning, behold, it was Leah. From which it is to be inferred that until the morning he did not know that she was Leah, because of the signs which Leah received from Rachel.

R. Berachia said: "There may be a dream which thought in part fulfilled, yet is impossible of being entirely fulfilled. We can derive it from Joseph, for it is written (Gen. 37, 9.) The sun and the moon and the eleven start. — Shall we indeed come, I and thy mother, and thy brothers (Ib. b). And at that time his mother was dead." R. Levi said: "A man should look forward to the realization of a good dream even for as long as twenty-two years; as it is written (Gen. 37, 2.) These are the generations of Jacob, Joseph was seventeen years old [when he had the dreams], and it is written also (Ib. 41, 46.) And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh. From seventeen to thirty are thirteen years, to which add the seven years of plenty and the two years of famine, will make the total of twenty-two years." R. Huna said: "To a good man bad dreams are shown, and to a bad man good dreams." We have also a Baraitha to the same effect: "During all the years of David he never dreamed a good dream, and during all the years of Achitophel he never dreamed a bad dream." R. Bizna b. Zabda, in the name of R. Akiba, who spoke in the name of R. Panda, who, in turn, spoke in the name of R. Nachum, who quoted R. Birim, said: "A venerable man by the name of R. Bana'ah had told him there were twenty-four places in Jerusalem for the interpretation of dreams; that once he had a dream and went to each one of these places; each one gave a different interpretation and each was fulfilled." This establishes what is written: "Every dream is in accord with its interpretation." Is this a passage? Yes, as R. Elazar said, for R. Elazar said: "Whence do we learn that every dream is realized according to its interpretation? It is written (Gen. 41, 13.) And just as he interpreted it, so it was."

(Deut. 25:18, cont.:) And he cut off (rt.: znb) all who were lagging behind you. He smote them with a blow to the tail (rt.: znb).⁵¹The word can also denote the penis. See PR 7:3; 12:10, 13; 13:1. And this agrees with what R. Hanina bar Shilqa, said, “What did the House of Amalek do to Israel?⁵²Below, section 14. They cut off their penes and flung them heavenward, as they said, ‘This is what You have chosen, take for Yourself what You have chosen.” As Israel did not know what the nature of spit was, until Amalek came and taught them, as stated (with reference to Ezek. 8:17), “here they were sending the spit in their faces.” From whom did he learn it? From his grandfather Esau, as stated (in Gen. 27:36), “And he said, ‘Is he not (hky) rightly named Jacob?’”⁵³Gen. R. 67:4. He rubbed (rt.: hkk) his throat and brought out the spit. (Deut. 25:18), “All who were lagging behind you.” R. Judah, R. Nehemiah, and the masters [differed]. R. Judah said, “They said, ‘If He is master over all of out deeds, we will serve Him; but if not, we will revolt against Him.’” R. Nehemiah said, “They said, ‘If He furnishes us with our food like a king who is living in the province, such that the province lacks nothing at all, we will serve Him; but if not, we will revolt against Him.’” And the masters said, “They said, “’If we have a thought in our hearts and He knows what we are thinking, we will serve Him; but if not, we will revolt against Him.’” R. Berekhyah said in the name of R. Levi, “In their heart they had a thought, and the Holy One, blessed be He, granted them their request.” And what is the evidence? (Ps. 78:18:) “They tested God in their heart by asking food for themselves.” See what [else] is written there (in vs. 29), “So they ate and were very full.” Another interpretation (of Deut. 25:18), “all who were lagging behind you”: R. Judah, R. Nehemiah and the masters [differ].⁵⁴PRK 3:12; PR 12:13, cont.; PRE 44; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Exod. 17:8 and Deut. 25:18. R. Judah says, “Whoever was overcome was discarded.” R. Nehemiah says, “Whomever the cloud vomited up was discarded.” And the rabbis say, “It was the tribe of Dan that the cloud vomited up, [as] they all served idols, as stated⁵⁵The reference is to the idol which the Danites took from Micah. See Jud. 17–18. (Deut. 25:18, cont.), ‘when you were tired and weary, and did not fear God.’” [You were] tired from thirst and weary from the road, and you did not fear God.⁵⁶Above, Gen. 7:15; 8:5; 12:13; Tanh., Gen. 12:14; Deut. 6:10, cont.; PRK 3:13; PR 13:4; Gen. R. 73:7; cf. BB 123b. R. Pinhas said in the name of R. Samuel bar Nahman, “It is a transmitted aggada [that] Esau will fall at the hand of the children of Rachel (Joseph and Benjamin), as stated (in Jer. 49:20), ‘Surely the youngest of the flock shall drag them away.’ Why does it call them the youngest of the flock? Because they were the youngest of the tribes.” Hence, Moses said to Joshua (Exod. 17:9), “Choose men for us.” As he was [descended from] Joseph, about whom it is written (Gen. 42:18), “I fear God.” And about Esau, it is written (Deut. 25:18), “and did not fear God.” Youth is written with reference to the one and small is written with reference to the other (i.e., with reference to Esau). Youth is written with reference to the one (in Gen. 37:2), “since he (Joseph) was a youth with the children of Bilhah [and with the children of Zilpah].” And small is written with reference to the other (in Obad. 1:2), “I will surely make you (Edom) smallest among the nations.” The one (Esau) grew up with two who were righteous (i.e., with Isaac and Rebekah) and did not learn from their deeds, while the other grew up with two who were wicked (i.e., Potiphar and Pharaoh) and did not learn from their deeds. The one received the birthright as a result of his good deeds, while the other lost his birthright from his evil deeds. The one supported his brothers, while the other sought to kill his brother. The one fenced himself away from sexual immorality and from the spilling of blood, while the other sullied himself with sexual immorality and the spilling of blood. The one conceded to the revival of the dead, as stated (Gen. 50:24), “God will surely remember you”; while the other denied the revival of the dead, as stated (Gen. 25:32), “Behold, I am going to die.” The one offered his life for his mother’s honor, as stated (Gen. 33:7), “and after, Joseph and Rachel came forward and bowed”; while the other sought to kill his mother, as stated (Amos 1:11), “and he destroyed his uterus.”⁵⁷This is a homiletical translation of the verse, which would otherwise be translated as, AND HE REPRESSED HIS PITY. Therefore, the one (Esau) will fall by the hand of the other (Jospeh). And R. Johanan said, “All of the ministering angels sought to battle with the ministering angel of Esau, but he would not fall by their hand, as he would remove each and every one with a response: To Reuben, he says, ‘You were suspected about your father’s concubine.’ To Simeon and Levi, ‘You also killed [the inhabitants of] Shekhem.’ To the other tribes, ‘You sold your brother and sought to kill him.’ To Judah, ‘You were also suspected about your daughter-in-law, Tamar.’ To Benjamin he said, ‘You were suspected about the concubine in Giveah.’ When the ministering angel of [Joseph] came and battled with him, he immediately fell in front of him, as he had no response to answer him. This is what is written (Obad 1:18), “And the House of Jacob shall be fire, and the House of Joseph flame, and the House of Esau shall be straw.”

And they brought the tabernacle unto Moses (Exod. 39:32). It is written elsewhere in reference to the verse: He withdraweth not His eyes from the righteous; but with kings upon the throne He setteth them forever, and they are exalted (Job 36:7). What does this verse signify? That the Holy One, blessed be He, does not deny the righteous man the realization of his plans. Therefore He withdraweth not His eyes from the righteous. You may know this to be so from Abraham, who begot Isaac, who resembled him closely, as it is said: These are the generations of Isaac, Abraham’s son: Abraham begot Isaac (Gen. 25:19). And Jacob begot Joseph, who resembled him, as is said: These are the generation of Jacob: Joseph (ibid. 37:2). Reuben, Simeon, et al., are not mentioned here but only Joseph. It says also: Because he was the son of his old age (ibid., v. 3).¹⁷Word-play on zikunim (“old age”) and kunim (“features”). Hence, He draweth not His eyes from the righteous.

(Deut. 25:18, cont.:) WHEN YOU WERE TIRED AND WEARY, AND HE DID NOT FEAR GOD. <You were> TIRED from thirst AND WEARY from the road, AND HE DID NOT FEAR GOD.⁶⁸Above, Gen. 7:15; 8:5; 12:13; Tanh., Gen. 12:14; Deut. 6:10, cont.; PRK 3:13; PR 13:4; Gen. R. 73:7; cf. BB 123b. R. Pinhas said in the name of R. Samuel bar Nahmani: It is a transmitted aggada <that> Esau (i.e., Rome) will fall at the hand of the children of Rachel (Joseph and Benjamin), as stated (in Jer. 49:20): SURELY THE YOUNGEST OF THE FLOCK SHALL DRAG THEM AWAY. Why does it call them THE YOUNGEST OF THE FLOCK? Because they were the youngest of the tribes, for YOUTH is written with reference to the one and LEAST is written with reference to the other (i.e., with reference to Esau). YOUTH is written with reference to the one (in Gen. 37:2): SINCE HE (Joseph) WAS A YOUTH WITH THE CHILDREN OF BILHAH <AND WITH THE CHILDREN OF ZILPAH>. And LEAST is written with reference to the other (in Obad., vs. 2): I WILL SURELY MAKE YOU (Edom, i.e., Rome) LEAST AMONG THE NATIONS. The one (Esau) grew up with two who were righteous (i.e., with Isaac and Rebekah) and did not learn from their deeds, while the other grew up with two who were wicked (i.e., Potiphar and Pharaoh) and did not learn from their deeds. Therefore, the former will come and fall by the hand of the latter. The former, of whom it is written (in Deut. 25:18): AND HE DID NOT FEAR GOD, will come and fall by the hand of the latter, of whom it is written (in Gen. 42:18): I FEAR GOD.

Another interpretation (of Gen. 39:1): WHEN JOSEPH WAS TAKEN DOWN TO EGYPT. There were three natures within him. < He was > a Torah scholar, a prophet, and one who nourished his brothers. < He was > a Torah scholar, for it is so written (in Gen. 37:3): BECAUSE HE WAS THE CHILD OF HIS OLD AGE (ZEN).⁶⁶ZQN here is interpreted in the Talmud as an abbreviation (notarikon) for Zeh Sheqanah Hokhmah, which means, “This is the one who has acquired wisdom.” See Qid. 32b. See also Targum Onqelos, Gen. 37:3: BECAUSE HE WAS A WISE SON TO HIM. It is also written (in Deut. 32:7): ASK YOUR FATHER, AND HE WILL INFORM YOU; [YOUR ELDERS (rt.: ZQN), AND THEY WILL TELL YOU]. And where is it shown that he was prophet? Where it is stated (in Gen. 37:2): SINCE HE WAS A YOUTH WITH THE CHILDREN OF BILHAH…. It is also written (in Exod. 33:11): HIS ATTENDANT, JOSHUA BIN NUN, A YOUTH. Again it is written (in I Sam. 2:21): AND THE YOUTH SAMUEL GREW UP.⁶⁷Since prophets like Joshua and Samuel are called youths, the designation must mean that Joseph also was a prophet. And where is it shown that he fed his brothers? Where it is stated (in Gen. 50:21): SO NOW, FEAR NOT; I WILL NOURISH YOU….

Rabbi Ishmael said: Every son of the old age || is beloved of his father, as it is said, "Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age" (Gen. 37:3). Was he then the son of his old age? Was not Benjamin the son of his old age? But owing to the fact that (Jacob) saw by his prophetic power that (Joseph) would rule in the future, therefore he loved him more than all his sons. And they envied him with a great envy, as it is said, "And his brethren saw that their father loved him more than all his brethren; and they hated him" (ibid. 4). Further, because he saw in his dream that in the future he would rule, and he told his father, and they envied him yet more and more, as it is said, "And they hated him yet the more" (ibid. 8). Moreover, he saw the sons of his father's concubines eating the flesh of the roes and the flesh of the sheep whilst they were alive, and he brought a reproach against them before Jacob their father, so that they could not see his face any more (in peace), as it is said, "And they could not speak peaceably unto him" (ibid. 4). Jacob said to Joseph: Joseph, my son ! Verily I have (waited) many days without hearing of the welfare of thy brethren, and of the welfare of the flock, as it is said, "Go now, see whether it be well with thy brethren, and well with the flock" (ibid. 14). And the lad was wandering in the field, and the angel Gabriel met him, as it is said, "And a certain man found him, and, behold, he was wandering in the field" (ibid. 15). (The word) "man" (here in this context) is Gabriel only, as it is said, "The man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision" (Dan. 9:21).

......

"Joseph was seventeen years of age, etc" (Genesis 37:2), and it further says "He was a youth" (ibid.), rather that he did youthful things. He touched up his eyes, he picked up his heels, he fixed his hair. "He was a shepherd... he brought negative reports [of his brothers, to his father]" (ibid.). What did he say? Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon [offered explanations]. Rabbi Meir said, [he said to his father Ya'akov] "Your sons are suspect regarding [the consumption of] a limb of a living animal". Rabbi Shimon said "They cast their eyes on the daughters of the land". Rabbi Yehuda said "They scorn the sons of the maidservants and call them slaves". Rabbi Yehuda son of Simon said, on his words [??] he was struck -- "honest scales and balances are the LORD's" (Proverbs 16:11). The Holy Blessed One said to him, "You said "Your sons are suspect regarding a limb of a living animal" -- by your life, even in a time of corruption they never did anything but slaughtered and [then] ate, (Genesis 37:31) "They slaughtered a kid"! You said they scorned the sons of the maidservants and called them slaves -- (Psalms 105:17) "Yosef, sold into slavery". You said they cast their eyes on the daughters of the land -- by your life, that I will stimulate in you the bear [??], (Genesis 39:7) "And his master's wife cast [her eyes upon Yosef]".

AND IT CAME TO PASS FROM THE TIME THAT HE APPOINTED HIM, etc. (XXXIX, 5). R. Simeon b. Yohai taught: Wherever the righteous go, the Shechinah accompanies them. Thus when Isaac went down to Gerar, a blessing went with him, as it says, And Isaac sowed in that land...and the Lord blessed him (Gen. XXVI, 12). Jacob went down to Laban, and a blessing went with him: And the Lord hath blessed thee whithersoever I turned (ib. XXX, 30). Joseph went down to Potiphar, and a blessing went with him, and it says, AND THE LORD BLESSED THE EGYPTIAN'S HOUSE FOR JOSEPH'S SAKE.

"He and Hoshea the son of Nun": Is it not written (Numbers 13:16) "And Moses called Hoshea the son of Nun 'Yehoshua'"? Why, then, is it written here "he and Hoshea the son of Nun"? To teach us the righteousness of Yehoshua. I might think that his head "swelled" with his new-found authority; it is, therefore, written "he and Hoshea the son of Nun" — in his righteousness (i.e., his humility). Even though he was appointed to be the leader of the congregation, he remained "Hoshea" in his righteousness. Similarly, (Shemoth 1:5) "And Yosef was in Egypt." Do we not know that Yosef was in Egypt? — The intent is to apprise us of Yosef's righteousness. (Bereshith 37:2) "Yosef … grazed the sheep with his brothers," and even though he became a king in Egypt, he remained in his (original) righteousness. Similarly, (I Samuel 17:14) "and David was the smallest (i.e., the youngest)." Do we not know that David was the youngest? — The intent is to apprise us of David's righteousness. (I Samuel 16:11) (David was) "tending the sheep" of his father, and even though he became the king of Israel, he remained "David" in his smallness.