Parshat Vayigash 5766

The story of Joseph is one of the most dramatic or thought provoking passages not only in the Bible but in western literature. Rich in detail and complexity, it’s easy for us identify with Joseph because we’re not so different from him and his brothers. Joseph muddles through life just as we do. Unlike our forefathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Joseph never hears the voice of God nor is he privy to divine revelation. It is left to Joseph to discern the presence of God in his own life and to make decisions that will have far reaching implications not only for his family but for future generations. The ‘die’ of history is cast in the life of Joseph in ways he could not anticipate.

With that in mind, I’d like you to join me on an imaginary journey this morning. As we read the climax of Joseph’s story, let’s imagine a moment sometime between the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai and the canonization of the weekly Torah portions which we now read. Two men, a prophet and a sage, are discussing the advisability of reading the story of Joseph to the community. This was point in history when the Torah was not yet read on a weekly basis.

“It’s such a beautiful story,” says the sage, “When people listen to this story they will be inspired to realize that even when God is silent the holy one is present in our lives. Not only that, but Joseph is one of our greatest heroes – he save Jacob’s family from starvation during the great famine.”

“It’s true,” said the prophet, “but I am not so sure that it’s such a good idea to read the whole story of Joseph out loud. Joseph did a great deal for the children of Israel but he also left us a dark legacy.”

“A dark legacy: how can you say such a thing?” said the sage, “Why, were it not for Joseph not only would the people of Egypt have starved to death during the famine but so would the family of Jacob. Joseph was Hamashbir - the great provider - who saved an entire generation from famine!”

“Yes that’s true,” said the prophet, “But at what cost? Look at the story more closely. Joseph uses his power to nationalize and ultimately enslave the people of Egypt. Each year as the people came to him in search of grain, Joseph took more and more of their possessions: first their money, then their cattle, and then their land. In the end, Joseph said to Egypt: “Whereas I have this day acquired you and your land for Pharaoh here is seed for you to sow in the land. And when the harvest comes you shall give one-fifth to Pharaoh.’ Joseph gave Pharaoh absolute power over each and every Egyptian and set the stage for the enslavement of the Israel. While Joseph took care of his own family during his life time, we became slaves because of what Joseph did for Pharaoh! It’s no wonder the Egyptians hate us – they blamed the family of Joseph for Pharaoh’s great power!”

“I see your point,” said the sage, “But that is a historical truth, and we cannot deny what history and the Torah teaches us. Joseph’s legacy is an ambivalent one, but the truth is we would not be here today had it not been for Joseph’s controversial actions. And he’s not alone. Many of our greatest heroes left behind mixed legacies of good and evil. The Bible does white wash their stories. Our heroes are not saints – we must wrestle with what we learn from them and what we can learn not to do.”

So ends this imaginary conversation. As we read the story of Joseph’s agrarian policies this morning, it’s hard not to be troubled by its larger implications for the Jewish history. Joseph sets the stage for the enslavement and oppression of the Jewish people. Not only does he bring his family down to Egypt (something that God had already foretold in the time of Abraham) but he creates structures that would allow Pharaoh the political and economic power to enslave and oppress the children of Israel.

The events of this past week have me wondering about mixed legacy. We all create them – whether we realize it or not. We do so as parents, as colleagues and coworkers, as community leaders, or as national figures.

Whatever happens to Ariel Sharon in coming days, I think it is fair to say that his political career has now ended. From the War of Independence on in 1948, Sharon has been a controversial figure. He has been a fearless and often ferocious defender of Israel, but at the same time he has often made decisions unilaterally made military decisions that were controversial at best and criminally negligent at worst. When he was elected Israel’s prime minister five years ago many of us took a deep breath of dread – what would this mean for the future of the peace negotiations. No one ever imagined that he would become an equally tireless fighter for disengagement.

But isn’t that exactly why Israeli’s elected Ariel Sharon? Israelis might be ambivalent about some of his actions but about one thing there has never been any doubt – they knew that Prime Minister Sharon would do whatever was necessary to insure the survival of Israel. And that is what he did. When it became clear to him that Israel needed to get out of Gaza he made possibly the most controversial decision of his career – he unilaterally with drew from Gaza. Isn’t it ironic that the Hawk ended his career as a moderate?

Were his decisions good or bad? I suspect that we will be arguing about this for years to come. It will always be Sharon’s legacy and he will be both praised and condemned for his actions.

Fortuitously, Steven Speilberg’s newest movie, Munich, is also the story of an ambivalent legacy. I won’t comment on this movie since I haven’t had a chance to see it yet but it is most striking to me that this is also the story of compromise and consequence. The silence following the death of Israel’s athletes in Munich was deafening – Israel could not remain silent in the face of this horrific crime. Yet what could Israel do. In the advertisements for this movie we hear Golda Meir say, “Every civilization finds it necessary to negotiate compromises with its own values.” Israel’s actions created a terrible legacy –sometimes necessary actions create devastating results….

There is a statement in the Talmud that one who acts with mercy where harshness is called for will, in the end, act with harshness when mercy is called for. We live in a confusing times. We can only hope that our actions will not create a dark legacy.

Where do we draw a line? How do we know whether or not such compromises are for the good of others? We don’t – we live in a world of ambivalence and uncertainty – we make the best decisions we can and live with the consequences.

And that is also true in our lives. We are like Joseph, trying to discern the presence of God in the world and trying to do the best we can.

At this time we must pray for Ariel Sharon. More important we must pray for the welfare of the people and the state of Israel. He has created a hopeful vision in an uncertain world. Israel needs our support and we need to hold on to one another so that we are audah achat, we are one bundle, united in concern for peace, for security of the state of Israel and for a world where justice and truth will triumph.