Komentaryong Sumisipi para sa Genesis 43:33

אמתחת הקטון מלא את אמתחות האנשים אכל…ואת גביעי תשים בפי. "Fill up the pouches of these men with food and place my goblet in the pouch of the youngest." We need to understand Joseph's motivations in all this. We can hardly assume that he wanted to cause his brothers anguish after he had invited them to his palace and had wined and dined them. Perhaps Joseph had three separate motivations. 1) He wanted that they should be able to atone for having stolen him at the time. By accusing them of theft they would feel the embarassment a thief feels when he has been found out. Once they experienced this feeling they could atone for the sale of Joseph. 2) He wanted to find out if the brothers would risk their lives for the freedom of Benjamin. This would enable him to gauge the degree of brotherliness they felt towards Benjamin. This in turn would enable Joseph to forgive them their sin against him. 3) He sent them a signal that there was somebody in the viceroy's palace who was thoroughly familiar with their past history. He had already made them curious about this on the previous day when he had seated them according to their respective ages at lunch (43,33).

Yehudah said: "please my lord" for three reasons. 1) He had to explain to Joseph why he alone kept speaking. This was especially so seeing Joseph had already demonstrated that he knew that Reuben was the oldest brother when he had seated the brothers according to their age (43,33). Joseph was liable to interrupt him at any moment demanding to know why Reuben was not acting as the spokesman. Yehudah therefore wanted to explain this before Joseph could become angry. He explained that Benjamin's detention concerned him most because of the guarantee he had given to his father. 2) He used a stratagem designed to free Benjamin by claiming that he himself had stolen the goblet but had hidden it in Benjamin's pouch, deflecting any suspicion from himself in the event that the goblet would be found. It was only proper then that he and not Benjamin should pay the penalty. Now the situation was that Benjamin denied being a thief whereas Yehudah confessed. 3) The word בי may be an allusion by the Torah to the present time when Joseph was the ruler; ultimately, however, authority would pass to Yehudah, i.e. the kingdom of David who was a descendant of Yehudah.

V. 24. וכי ירבה וגו׳. Diese wiederholt verklausulierte Voraussetzung, unter welcher die Auslösung in Geld statuiert wird, כי ירחק ,כי לא תוכל וגו׳ ,וכי ירבה, scheint anzudeuten, daß dem Hinaufbringen der Früchte in Natura jedenfalls der Vorzug gegeben sei, und daß die Umwandlung in Geld selbst nur ein Beweis des Gottessegens sein möge, der sich in dem reichen Ertrag, vielleicht auch in den weiten Grenzen des Landesgebiets ausspricht, die beide diese Umwandlung motivieren. Gleichwohl ist nach der Halacha die Umwandlung in Geld in jedem Falle zulässig, so lange sich die Früchte an einem Orte befinden, wo, oder in einem Zustande, in welchem ihr Genuss in Natura gesetzlich nicht möglich ist, also so lange sie außerhalb der Gottesstadt, oder selbst innerhalb, aber im טומאה-Zustande sich befinden, in welchem sie als מעשר שני nicht gegessen werden können. Nach Makkot 19b wäre darum im Texte der Ausdruck לא תוכל ,שאת שאתו gewählt, weil dieser Ausdruck (Bereschit 43, 33) auch vom Speiseauftragen vorkommt, es hier daher sowohl heißen könne, du kannst es nicht "hinauftragen", als auch du kannst es nicht auftragen (zum Speisen, weil es טמא geworden). מן התורה darf מעשר שני, selbst wenn es bereits לפנים מן החומה gewesen, wieder hinausgebracht und außerhalb ausgelöst werden, מדרבנן aber קלטוהו מחיצות לפדיון kann es, wenn es טהור ist, nicht wieder hinausgebracht und ausgelöst werden (daselbst 20a).