| Religious Studies Unit 2002 | ![]() |
| Home > Religious Studies Unit | |
|
Also
See:
|
The
Story of Joseph
(A Jewish Perspective, by Rabbi Jeremy Milgrom)
It
is very good to be sitting around this seminar table with learned Christian
and Moslem colleagues to discuss the story of Joseph. Yet, this is hardly
an esoteric subject -- even the person in the street, be it a street with
Moslem, Christian or Jewish inhabitants, is acquainted with the topic of our
meeting. As I am not a Biblical scholar but a pastor principally interested
in the promotion of peace and justice with the help of the religious dimension
in the lives of people, my aim in this presentation will be to share with
you how your Jewish neighbors might read the Joseph story, and thereby to
provide a wider basis of understanding based on a compelling universal story.
Do Jews consider the Joseph story to
be religious literature?
The story
of Joseph runs for 14 chapters in the book of Genesis, from chapter 37-50[i],
making it, along with the stories of David, Samuel and Saul, one of the longest
stories in the Bible. Yet, one may ask, in what way is this story relevant to an observant Jew’s ritual
life? Are there any reenactments of the story or holidays[ii]
that recall its drama? The answer is no. One could say that the question is out
of place, since the entire book of Genesis is narrative and is hardly used in a
practical way in the oral tradition (Torah
sheb’al peh). Yet the Joseph story is much different than the rest of
Genesis, where the main characters -- Adam, Noah, Abr(ah)am, Isaac and Jacob --
as well many of the minor ones, such as Eve, Cain, Abel, Enoch, Sara(h), Hagar,
Ishmael, Avimelech, Abraham’s servant and Rebecca all interact with God. Joseph
does not speak with God, like a
prophet, but rather about God[iii],
and even that relatively sparsely.
One must
conclude that according to the Bible, except for the story of his chastity in
the face of temptation,[iv]
Joseph cannot be considered a religious hero in any conventional sense. Yet he
provides for the family-soon-to-be-nation[v],
and thus, as the archetypal redeemer[vi]
figure, he becomes a saintly[vii]
character in rabbinic literature.
It should
be pointed out that many Jews in Israel are almost completely unfamiliar with
rabbinic literature, and rather unappreciative of it (thus the image of Joseph
that we would pick up on the street would depend very much on the Israeli
neighborhood we choose to walk down!). Furthermore, allow me to mention, since
not everyone at this table follows the cultural discourse in Israel, that the
historicity of the Bible is fiercely debated currently, and during all of the
last century[viii], so that
for many, Joseph is a literary figure, but not a historical one, and perhaps
not one worthy of emulation.
Since the
story of Joseph is primarily a family story with national ramifications, we
might take a close look at the relations between Joseph and his immediate
family, primarily between Joseph and Jacob[ix],
and Joseph and his brothers:
When he
finally discloses his identity and is reunited with his brothers, Joseph tries
to give the entire saga some purpose and relieve his brothers' guilt for
selling him into slavery by saying that God willed his descent into Egypt. But
it is very hard to see Joseph's behavior towards his family as exemplary: he
allows his father, whom he ostensibly[x]
loves so much, to languish in mourning for him for many years, and the abuse to
which he subjects his brothers seems much more like revenge for what Joseph
himself endured than anything even approaching God's providence.
Many
Israeli readers will thus see Joseph not as an exemplary figure, but rather a troubled individual who is
struggling with his past as a pampered child and an unloved, abused brother.
They might see Joseph toying with his brothers not so much in order to prove
that they have recognized their guilt and have become unconditionally loyal to
a brother – thus another aspect of Joseph the righteous – but rather as his
subconsciously maneuvering his brothers into the same situation of the
potential abandonment of a younger brother, son of Rachel. It is as if Joseph
is creating a psychodramatic reenactment so that he would find it psychologically
safe to return to the same family setting as he left it, but this time assured
that his brothers won't repeat their behavior.
Here,
however, Joseph realizes the limits of his power, for with all his material and
political status, he cannot bring his brothers or even his father to trust him.
To the end[xi], they fear
him rather than love him, and have to fabricate their father’s final testament[xii],
while Jacob has to entreat[xiii]
Joseph and bind to an oath[xiv]
in order to have confidence that his last wishes will be carried out.
Not only on
the family level is the happy end of the story more tragic than it seems at
first; so, too, on the national level, the deliverance that Joseph brings Egypt
and his family will soon sour. The quasi slavery[xv]
and permanent economic oppression[xvi]
to which Joseph reduces the entire Egyptian people will become Israel's fate,
just as soon as a Pharaoh "who knew not Joseph[xvii]"
arrives and turns the tables[xviii]
on the favored Israelites. The text that describes the stages of impoverishment
of the Egyptians parallels perfectly the stages of poverty described negatively
in Leviticus 25[xix], where it
decrees[xx]
that the Israelites are not to be sold into slavery – they are rather God's
slaves, and God's slaves only. The text of the Joseph story might be seen then
as a universalizing text that raises the status of all people to that of the
chosen people – we are all God's people, and no economic solution that abuses
anyone can be considered God's will.
How many
Israeli readers universalize the story? How many of them are capable of seeing
the slavery around them in which both the dominated and the dominating are
trapped in an unhealthy cycle of fear? Currently there may not be many, but it
is my firm conviction that the power of good literature, and for me, that is
what the Bible is, first and foremost, to bring out universal, eternal truths
and bring us together into enlightenment and a better future should never be
underestimated.
[i] with only a single “break in the
action, with the story of Judah and Tamar in chapter 38, which has literary
connections to the main story – the motif of haker na – the false appearance motif that begins with Isaac not
recognizing Jacob who is standing in for Esau, continues with Jacob not
recognizing his wife on their wedding day, carries on with Jacob being tricked
with Joseph’s torn garment, Judah being tricked by Tamar, and Joseph not
disclosing his identity to his brothers; there is also a literary break in
chapter 46 for a genealogical update.
[ii] The only holiday in which there is
even a passing reference to Joseph is Sukkot (Tabernacles), when Joseph is
listed along with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron and David as symbolic
guests in the Sukkah; the Passover Hagaddah, which retells the story of the
Exodus from Egypt, mentions neither Joseph nor, more surprisingly, Moses.
[iii] and sometimes in ironic, almost
cynical ways (cf. Gen. 43: 29, where he wishes Benjamin God’s blessing just
before he puts him into great peril by hiding the silver goblet in his baggage.
[iv]which the text attributes to his
fear of God (Gen. 39: 9
[v] It is in this context that we find
Joseph most convincingly invoke God’s name three times in the space of five
verses (Gen. 45: 5-9).
[vi] So much so that in Jewish
apocalyptic literature, one of the two(!) messiahs who will come at the end of
days will be a descendant of Joseph.
[vii] Aficionados of
rabbinic literature will feel comfortable with Islamic tradition where
this tendency to smooth off the rough edges of biblical characters leaves no
trace of sin in essentially political figures who are revered as religious role
models and considered to be prophets.
[viii] Cf. Ahad Ha’am’s famous essay on Moses, written at the very
beginning of the 20th century, in which he claims that whether Moses
actually ever existed and did what the Bible tells us he did is less important
than the fact that the tradition has become central to Jewish identity.
[ix] According to the Bible (Genesis 35:
16-20), Joseph’s mother, Rachel, died while giving birth to his brother Benjamin,
presumably when Joseph was still in infancy, yet Joseph’s second dream finds
his mother, symbolized by the moon, bowing down to him (Genesis 37: 9-10),
which indicates that he has “unfinished business” with her.
[x] While one might see the reunion of
Jacob and Joseph as the most pivotal element in the entire story, and
especially as the desired result of Joseph’s manipulation of the brothers, the
name of his first son, Manasseh, is derived from the statement “God has made me
forget all my troubles, that is, everyone my father’s house (Genesis 41: 51)”!
[xi] Genesis 50: 15 ff.; the opening
word of that verse vayir’u has a
double meaning, “they saw/they feared concerning the death of their father
Jacob” .
[xii] yet another literary link to, and
chastisement of, Jacob’s deceiving Isaac (Genesis chapter 27), an act for which
Jacob is punished even after his death.
[xiii] Note the formulaic,
“If I have found favor in your eyes (Genesis 47: 31)”.
[xiv] Genesis 47: 29-31
[xv] Genesis 47: 19,25. The people plead
for slavery, a chant which will be echoed by the Israelites when they lose
faith during the years of wandering in the desert and choose the sheltered
nature of servitude over the
hardships of the liberation struggle (Exodus 5: 21; 14: 12; 17: 3, etc.).
Is it
actual slavery? Joseph is uncharacteristically wordless, and doesn’t act on
their request, as if to indicate that without doing anything more, he has
virtually subjected them to the fate he himself endured in Egypt before his
rise to power.
[xvi] Genesis 47: 26
[xvii] Exodus 1: 8
[xviii] The Ele Ezkera poem
in the Yom Kipppur suggests that the martyrdom of the ten rabbis executed in
the Hadrianic persecution during
Roman times is retribution for the sale of Joseph into slavery, but this
theme, going as far as theodicy for the exile itself (Genesis 47: 21), is
subtly introduced two millennia earlier.
[xix] my father, Jacob Milgrom, expanded orally on what he wrote in
his commentary on Leviticus (Anchor Bible, Doubleday) vol. 3, page 2192
[xx] Leviticus 25: 42, 55