Parashat Vayigash (5760)

With God’s help, on the eve of the holy Sabbath of Parashat Vayigash, 5760

The Descent to Egypt: the Gestation of a People and a Spiritual Return to the Womb

Our portion concludes with the verse: “And Israel settled in the land of Egypt, in the land of Goshen…” (Genesis 47:27). This is the end of

the long and winding saga of the conflict between Joseph and his brothers, which begins in Parashat Vayeshev and continues through

three portions, and at its conclusion, as described in this week’s portion, the people of Israel (seventy persons at that time)

gained a foothold in the land of Egypt.

The Five Books of the Torah deal primarily with the process of the formation of the people of Israel, and in light of this one may

perhaps say that the central axis of the Book of Genesis is the description of the unfolding of Israel’s descent to Egypt,

which concludes in Parashat Vayigash. Parashat Vayechi, which concludes the Book of Genesis, already describes the dwelling

of Israel in Egypt, and opens the Book of Exodus, which comes immediately after it. The books that follow describe

the consolidation into a people, from the Exodus from Egypt up to the threshold of entry into the land. Only in the books of the Prophets does the

people of Israel already appear as a consolidated nation living on its own soil. In Maharal’s language, at the beginning of his book Gevurot

Hashem, this process is described in the terminology of birth and maturation. Israel’s stay in Egypt

was the gestation in which the people of Israel were formed; the birth was the Exodus from Egypt, childhood was the journey

in the wilderness, and adulthood was dwelling in the land. According to this, our portion describes the (metaphysical) union between

our patriarchs and the land of Egypt, from which the people of Israel were born.

After the exodus from Egypt, the Torah commands us never again to return by this route

—to Egypt—forever (Deuteronomy 17:16), and so too Maimonides rules in halakhah (though he himself lived in Egypt, and this difficulty

has already been raised against him). On the other hand, we are commanded: “You shall not abhor an Egyptian, for you were a stranger

in his land” (Deuteronomy 23:8). It is quite clear that this is not gratitude in the ordinary

sense, for we did not receive all that much good in Egypt. It is more plausible that the intention

of the commandment is to recognize the foundational and central place of Egypt in our existence as a people. This is a

formative experience in our coming into being as a nation, one that we are meant to undergo only once,

and no more. The whole content of the experience is negative; we passed through Egypt in order not to return there again.

Also in the section of first fruits, mentioned in the Passover Haggadah, it says, “An Aramean sought to destroy my father, and he went down to Egypt” (Deuteronomy 26:5),

and the Sages expound: “‘And he went down to Egypt’—compelled by the divine word” (Passover Haggadah on Deuteronomy 26:5),

that is, Jacob too, when he went down to Egypt, did so against his will, at God’s command; otherwise he would not have gone

there. It seems that the expression of the fact that Jacob was compelled by the divine word is precisely that same winding path of quarrel and reconciliation between

Joseph and his brothers that leads to settlement in Egypt. Israel’s descent to Egypt is an act that runs counter to

the nature of Israel, and therefore it is carried out in such a winding and crooked fashion. It is difficult to bring

Israel to corrupt Egypt, which is the complete opposite of Israel, and therefore the Holy One, blessed be He,

as it were, required so many efforts in order to do so. In paraphrase of the Sages’ saying, one may say that the union

between these opposites was as difficult as the splitting of the Red Sea (cf. Sotah 2a).

One must understand why precisely corrupt Egypt is the “womb” in which the people of Israel were formed, and why this

must be a negative and one-time experience; why the experience of “returning to the womb” is denied us,

that is, why we are forbidden to return to Egypt.[1]

From one parent alone, nothing essentially different from that parent itself can emerge; every creation of something new

must come from a combination of two different things. The creation of something new must combine what already exists

with another being different from it, so that the combination of the two yields a new result that gathers within itself components

from both its “parents.” When the Holy One, blessed be He, wishes to create a people of a new kind, He must unite the three

patriarchs, who constitute the root of the people of Israel, with a “womb” of an utterly opposite kind, and that is Egypt.

As stated, if the thesis and the antithesis are identical to one another, no truly new synthesis can emerge.

The phenomenon of duality that prevails in the world, expressed in the existence of good and evil, which has aroused not a few theological

perplexities (how can two opposites emerge from the one good God), exists in order

to make possible the creation of new things in the world. Evil is intended in order to make the good still better, or

into a different and renewed good. Evil has a positive role, if one uses it correctly and does not cling to it

for its own sake. The human being’s “evil” inclinations as well, which can lead to bad and ugly behavior,

are in their essence intended for the improvement of the world and of the human being. Desires such as sexual desire, honor, and power are

the strongest engines of activity and creativity in the world. Incorrect and excessive use of these drives

leads to moral and physical ruin, but in themselves they are intended for the repair and improvement of the world

(the term “inclination” derives from the same root as “creation”). “To serve Him with all your heart” (Deuteronomy 11:13), the Sages

expound, means “with both your inclinations” (Berakhot 54a); we are to serve God

with the good inclination and with the evil inclination. The role of corrupt Egypt is to serve as the opposite womb

that creates a people of a new type. From the thesis (= the patriarchs), and the opposing antithesis (= Egypt),

a new synthesis is created.

The prohibition against returning to Egypt is an expression of the prohibition against clinging to evil as such. Evil is to be used

in order to create an improved good, and afterward one must not return to it. It has an important role, but that does not

legitimize it in itself. After we have finished using evil, we must abandon it and regard

it as a negative experience.

Have a peaceful Sabbath

It may be placed in the repository for sacred writings in any synagogue or house of study. Comments are welcome.

———————–

[1] The people of Israel in the wilderness do indeed long for that womb, expressed in the desire to return

there: “We remember the cucumbers and the melons” etc. (Numbers 11:5), despite all the bondage and suffering.

This is a psychological reconstruction that idealizes the stay in the womb, a kind of longing

for the mother’s warm embrace, despite the dependence and the problems of being there. Longing for the security of the parental home

is also a symptom of returning to the womb, and there is something of that too in the words of the people of Israel here.

Biton16.doc