A Top Ten Torah Portion: Vayeishev

The Torah Portion Vayeishev is a top ten portion as far as the Ten Commandments. Not only is it entertaining as it includes the story of Joseph and his Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat, it is a Decalogue conversation piece. It breathes life into their commandments and the role they play in everyday life.

oseph’s wonderful narrative includes many Decalogue-related issues. Nearly every part of the Vayeishev stories are richly laden with Commandments-related events. Thus, the portion can provoke wide-ranging discussions.

The Portion Vayeishev also provides a unique opportunity for educators to cover a multitude of commandments related matters on multiple levels. This post will survey many of these topics. The portion’s beauty is that it allows students to see how commandments play out within the stories. Sometime, the commandments provide positive results.

For starters, the survey begins with Joseph’s Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat.

Joseph’s Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat

Joseph’s sibling problem began in part with his father Israel’s behavior. Vayeishev notes: “And Israel (Jacob) had loved Joseph the most of all his children because he was a son of old age to him. And he made him a coat of many colors.” Genesis 37:3.

Joseph paid a heavy price for Israel’s favoritism. It was noted: “And his brothers saw that their father loved him the most of all his brothers. And they hated him.” Genesis 37:4. Besides hatred, they were also jealous of him. Genesis 37:11.

While this passage involves textbook coveting, is the Decalogue applicable?

Thou Shalt Not Covet

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife or his servant or his maid or his ox or his ass or anything that your neighbor has.”

Exodus 20:17.

To begin with, the Vayeishev passage illustrates the dangers of coveting and how it can precipitate into matters far more sinister. As the tale progresses, the coveting turns into jealousy, the jealousy into hatred, and the hatred into murderous desire.

As the story tells, however, Joseph did not help his own cause. He also enraged his brothers in other ways. His dreams and tattling on them infuriated his siblings.

One significant question is what the Coveting Commandment applied to this situation. Besides the fact the events preceded the Ten Commandments being delivered from Mt. Sinai, the words on the two tablets don’t necessarily align with the facts. The Decalogue’s coveting provision specifically applies to neighbors. Thus, the question is: “How is the Commandment to be interpreted?”

Legal interpretations vary. Statutes and laws can be interpreted either liberally or conservatively. Beyond that, one can search out other related authorities. For instance, other Torah Commandments could assist with the interpretation. Additionally, another commandment might be more on point.

Without doing a deep dive into Torah Law, arguably the commandment’s liberal interpretation would lead to the prohibition against coveting to apply to everyone against everyone; nobody should covet anybody else. With that, our legal dilemma is resolved.

The commandment’s conservative interpretation takes us down a different pathway. In that instance, it would be interpreted that it only applies to neighbors. This interpretation, however, is problematic.

Who is a neighbor? Does someone become one when someone agrees to the following proposition: won’t you be my neighbor? Or, is it something more land proximity based. Is a neighbor one’s next-door neighbor or is it someone who dwells in the particular city or village?

A legal solution to this definition problem would be to see if the term neighbor was defined elsewhere in the Torah.

With the conservative interpretation, a Pandora’s box of issues spring out on this topic.

With this issue covered, the portion next leads to the topic of murder.

Thou Shalt Not Murder

“You shall not murder.”

Exodus 20:13

The brothers’ hatred of Joseph led to them wanting to kill him. Genesis 37:18. Joseph’s life, however, was spared when one brother -Reuben intervened and said: “Let’s not take his life.” Genesis 37:21

While this passage does not address what exactly constitutes a murder, it speaks of a matter of extreme importance. A significant part of the story is the power of one. A supermajority of the brothers would have elected to have Joseph’s life taken. It took, however, one voice- that of Reuben- to be the voice of reason that prevented the fratricide. Thus, the passage’s takeaway is that even one righteous or reasoned voice matters in the world.

The next passage from the portion involves the brothers’ interaction with their father after Joseph was dispatched to Egypt to be a slave.

Honor Your Mother and Father

Honor your father and your mother

Exodus 20:12

Joseph’s brothers, after having him being sold or taken to become a slave, took his coat and covered it with blood. The brothers then presented the coat to their father Israel (Jacob.) In seeing the coat, Israel believed that Joseph has been killed by a wild beast. He then proceeded to mourn based upon the belief that his son has passed.

Were the brothers being honest with their father as to what happened with Joseph? While they used deception to suggest that his brother had died, Vayeishev does not indicate that they ever said anything to their father. Rather, they let their father assume the worst had occurred. They didn’t even suggest that Joseph could still be alive and that they would search for either him or his dead body. Both their actions and inactions dishonored their parent.

After Joseph is gone, the portion addresses another family matter.

Thou Shalt Not Use the Lord’s Name in Vain

You shall not bring up the name of the Lord, your God, for a falsehood

Exodus 20:7

Within Joseph’s novella, there is a departure from the story; there is the tale of Judah and Tamar. Tamar had been married to Judah’s oldest son. The son died. Then, Tamar was then to be with Judah’s second son. He also died. The reason being was that the second e refused to participate in the tradition, and eventual codified law, of the levirate marriage. The levirate marriage was a vehicle that appears to be intended to address family legacy inheritance.

The levirate marriage is explained in Deuteronomy: “When brothers will live together, and one of them will die, and he had no son, the dead man’s wife shall not be an unrelated man’s, outside. Her brother-in-law shall come to her and take her to him for a wife and shall do the brother-in-law’s duty for her. And the firstborn to whom she will give birth shall be signified by the name of his brother who died, so his name will not be wiped out from Israel.” Deuteronomy 25:5-6.

Judah was then faced with committing his third son to Tamar. He sent her away to live as a widow until his youngest son grew up. Genesis 39:11. Impliedly, with this act, Tamar may have sensed that Judah was not going to honor the rule.

In this instance, while there was not a vow, there was established law that required fulfillment. With respect to that law, Judah made representations to Tamar that implied that he was likely unwilling to fulfill his obligation.

As a result of this, Tamar, in a ruse, dressed like a prostitute and slept with Judah. As a result, she became pregnant with twins. Since she was not married, and was supposed to marry Judah’s youngest, Judah became enraged and led the way in accusing her of harlotry.

The Decalogue issue presented is whether Judah’s commitment was subject to the Ten Commandments. In this instance, while he did not evoke the Lord’s name, it appears that the Lord’s commandment was in play; the levirate marriage. Thus, the question would be whether evoking the Lord’s words is equivalent to evoking the Lord’s name.

Judah’s accusation would lead to the next Ten Commandments’ moment.

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness

You shall not bring up the name of the Lord, your God, for a falsehood, because the Lord will not make one innocent who will bring up His name for a falsehood.

Exodus 20:5

Once it was discovered that she was three month pregnant, Judah was told: “You daughter-in-law Tamar has whored, and, here she’s pregnant by the whoring as well.” And Judah said: “Bring her out and let her be burned.” Genesis 38:24.

When she was brought out, she produced evidence that it was in fact Judah who was the father. Judah, at that point, noted: “She’s more right than I am, because the fact that I didn’t give her to my son Shelah.” Genesis 38:26.

This passage surprisingly is about moral courage. Judah’s admission is powerful. It speaks to a society valuing the truth. Judah did not allow his ego to control his actions. Rather, he did the right thing.

The next part of the survey takes us to Egypt where Joseph is serving as a house slave.

Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery

You shall not commit adultery

Exodus 20:14

In Egypt, Joseph became a servant to Potiphar. Potiphar’s wife, seeing an attractive and handsome young man, said to Joseph: “Lie with me.” Joseph refused. He advised her that it would constitute a sin against God. Genesis 39:6-9.

This passage raises a multitude of issues. Jurisdiction is one of them. Does the Ten Commandments have any legal force in Egypt? In this instance, Egyptian Law would apply with respect to a charge of adultery. This fact pattern raises the issue of the universality of the Decalogue. Was it intended solely for the Promised Land? Or, was the Decalogue intended to extend beyond the Promised Land. Further, in modern times, how would this matter be viewed? Is it something that is a matter of religious law versus secular law?

Finally, this fact pattern follows the theme of individuals speaking up on Decalogue concerns. In this instance, Joseph’s actions prevented any moral violation.

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness

You shall not testify against your neighbor as a lying witness

Exodus 20:16

After Joseph rejected Potiphar’s wife, she falsely accused him of misconduct. She told her husband: “Your servant did things like these to me.” Genesis 39:19. As a result of the accusation, Joseph’s lord sent him to prison.

In this instance, jurisdiction matters. Joseph, at the time, lived in Egypt. He was subject to Egyptian law. Thus, the Ten Commandments did not apply to their society. They had their own rules concerning punishment for individuals who made false accusations. In this instance, essentially, she made a false charge. Joseph was not tried and there was no false testimony involved. Rather, as a slave, he was simply imprisoned based upon the false accusation. Would the Commandment apply in this circumstance?

In the end, The story tells of false testimony’s power. For Joseph, the consequences were imprisonment.

Conclusion

The Portion Vayeishev gives educators a unique opportunity for extensive and wide-ranging Decalogue discussions. Beyond the Joseph narrative presenting memorable Ten Commandments related fact patterns, it is also an opportunity to appreciate how laws do not always squarely fit with the facts. It is also an opportunity to discuss the concept of legal interpretation.

Beyond the legalities, Vayeishev addresses moral courage. Reuben, Judah, Tamar, and Joseph all serve as examples of how individuals’ moral beliefs matter. The portion shows that one individual’s moral voice can change minds, opinions and actions.

Be well!!

Please like, follow, comment or share