Yesimcha Elokim k'Efraim v'chMenashe

Why is the bracha we give to our children is that they should become like Efraim and Menashe? It could have been a myriad of other things, so what is notable about them that they were able to inherit from Yakov a portion equivalent to the previous generation, their uncles?

My Zaide explains that Menashe and Efraim were worthy of being considered Yakov's own children and two of the 12 Tribes, and this is because of their being born and raised in Egypt. It is not such a blessing to say that they should become like Reuven, Shimon etc, as they were raised in Yakov's house; it's not so much a big deal to tread the path you're already on, but the fact that 2 boys, born in Egypt, to a father who was the viceroy of Egypt who had left his heritage at 17 (and we could understand if he'd sought to cut off ties with his past, the past that he'd been cut out of by his brothers), that is a massive chiddush, that people can rise from the 49th level of tuma and become one of the Shivtei Ka. This is truly inspirational, that each of us has unlimited potential. This is the blessing we give our children, that they should transcend all obstacles, just like Efraim and Menashe.

D explains this alternately, that Yaakov switched hands, and said that the younger son would become greater. Not a peep was uttered by either, and Yaakov blessed them. There was not a hint of jealousy or animosity to the other, they were content for their lot, and Menashe was happy for Ephraim to get what should have been his. And there was no gloating on Ephraim's part, there was merely acceptance. D explains that the blessing we give to our children is that they should have this relationship with each other (which perhaps leads on to what my Zaide says?).

Forgiveness - Big deal?

When the brothers apologise to Yosef, he rebutted this by saying "אַל תִּירָאוּ כִּי הֲתַחַת אלֹהִים אָנִי - "Don't be afraid, for am I instead of God?" (50:19). It is unclear what exactly he means, but certainly he is not annoyed.

The Baal Haturim (info here) suggests that this is is poetic justice as this is precisely what his mother had been told when his mother had begged for children from their father, at which point he said "הֲתַחַת אֱ־לֹהִים אָנֹכִי אֲשֶׁר מָנַע מִמֵּךְ פְּרִי בָטֶן - "Am I instead of God, Who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?" (30:2)

The Maharil Diskin (info here)wonders why a simple yes/no answer isn't enough, and we can (and have) explained that he did not actually forgive them, but did not say this. We can look deeper into his words: In Parshas Matos (30:7-9) the pasuk describes a woman who makes a vow, but then her husband annuls it. In an event where she did not know he had annulled it, and she thinks she is deliberately breaking it, the pasuk says "'והֹ יִסְלַח לָהּ" - "...and the Lord will forgive her." This is astounding - she has technically done absolutely nothing wrong - her vow had been annulled at the time of her actions, and yet there is a certain something that requires forgiveness! And the same thing was true here:

The brothers thought they had committed a horrendously evil act onto their brother, and even though circumstantially it turned out for the best in the end, and the family were reunited, just as in the case of a woman who circumstantially did nothing wrong, there was still a certain something that required forgiveness. The Maharil Diskin suggests an alternate explanation to that which the Baal Haturim suggested, that this is exactly what Yosef was saying here, that due to the turn of events they had done nothing wrong, but he was not in the place of Hashem, because as we said by the woman, they needed G-d's forgiveness.

Rabbeinu Bachaye (info here) shares a frightening thought that is not worth waiting until Parshas Bechukosai to share as it is so brilliant. He takes the concept of Yosef not forgiving his brothers a step further, and suggests says this resulted in the Asara Harugei Malchus, one of the greatest tragedies in Jewish history, and one died in lieu of each of the group who'd sold Yosef. Yaakov was not told as an oath was made as a group of 10 (a minyan) to not tell him, and such an oath cannot be annulled.

But why were there 10 martyrs then, as there weren't 10 men present at the sale? Binyamin was not there, Reuven had gone home, and we can't include Yosef as part of such a minyan? There is a concept that a minyan can take place with 9 as Hashem joins in - Hashem was the 10th member of this group.

We can expand the pasuk in Bechukosai - "וְכָל מַעְשַׂר בָּקָר וָצֹאן כֹּל אֲשֶׁר יַעֲבֹר תַּחַת הַשָּׁבֶט הָעֲשִׂירִי יִהְיֶה קֹּדֶשׁ לַהֹ - Any tithe of cattle or flock of all that pass under the rod, the tenth shall be holy to the Lord" (27:32)- and there is a deeper meaning to this pasuk, in reference to Rabbi Akiva - וכי למא מת עקיבא, שהוא רואה בקר וצאן הכֹּל אֲשֶׁר יַעֲבֹר תַּחַת הַשָּׁבֶט הָעֲשִׂירִי יִהְיֶה קֹּדֶשׁ לַהֹ - Why did Akiva die? He was just a shepherd! When he passed under the staff (judgement?) he was the tenth, holy for G-d.

There is another allusion to this I found on Google (it's awesome) here on Parshas Vayigash (45:15), (sorry it's late,) that "וַיֵּבְךְּ עֲלֵיהֶם - and he cried on them" - we can break up עֲלֵיהֶם and read it על י ה"ם - for the ten Harugei Malchus.

Scary stuff indeed.

To end on a lighter note, I can quote my Rebbi, R' Hartman, who has an Otzar HaChochma harddrive (it's a sforim library on a hardrive) that can search keywords on a sugya, a bit like Google - about which he said "If I knew Torah like this little machine..."

:)

Vayechi - Handy tips from יעקב

שכל את ידיו - he maneuvered his hands... (48:14)

I saw a stunning idea from R' Moshe Sternbuch in Ta'am Voda'as. We see that Yaakov switched around his right hand with his left, so that Ephraim was under his right hand. But why did he not just tell Menashe and Ephraim to switch places?

R' Chaim Volozhin explains that the nature of the average person is to talk down the positive attributes of his fellow, but when it comes to the negative side, he is ready to speak up and even exaggerate the other's bad traits. In this way, he will look like a tzaddik compared with his friend.

Indeed, when one stands opposite his fellow, one's left is the other's right and vice-versa. This hints to the fact that his friend's right, or stature, stands opposite his left, traditionally the one seen as weaker, i.e. weakening his friend's strengths (sorry to all those lefties out there - including half of my family!), whereas his friend's left, or weaker side, is opposite his right, i.e. making a bigger deal out of his weaknesses.

Yaakov, as we know, is the ultimate man of truth, not wishing to detract or embellish any point. So what does he do? He only crosses his hands - the result being that his right hand corresponds with the boys' right and his left with theirs!

It teaches us a really important Mussar point, says R' Sternbuch - how careful we must be when relating to the strengths and weaknesses of our friends (and others!), placing our right opposite their right...

He cites the Rambam (Hilchos Dei'os chapter 6 halacha 3) for further proof - ''it's a mitzva upon every person to to love his fellow Jew as himself as it says ואהבת לרעך כמוך. Therefore, he must tell of his praiseworthy points...as himself...'' Geshmack!

As an addendum, Gav C pointed out that the Ohr Hachaim says a beautiful idea associated with the above: it says שכל את ידיו כי מנשה הבכור - he maneuvered his hands because Menashe was the firstborn - surely Menashe being the firstborn would be reason to not cross hands!?
So he answers that just before, we were told that ''Yisrael's eyes were heavy from old age and he could not see''. This indicates that he couldn't see who was Menashe - the firstborn - and who was Ephraim. So when it came to blessing them, he knew who he wanted under his right hand. He worked out in his mind that Yosef would have placed Menashe on his right - therefore he crossed his hands because he knew where the firstborn was, and because Menashe was the בכור. Geshmack!