Tug of War with Yosef's Sons
And why I dislike calendrical interpretations
I get nervous with calendrical derashot, and a bit unhappy.
Let us take an exemplar, to show what I mean. Do you know that when Esav sold his birthright for some lentils, Yaakov had prepared that meal as seudat havra'ah for mourning for their grandfather Avraham, who had just died? This is not just because beans are round, representing the circle of life, and are a customary dish to serve at such mourning meals. (Bava Batra 16b made that connection to show it was a mourning meal for Avraham.)
It is also that Avraham is buried just above, textually speaking, in 25:9:
וַיִּקְבְּר֨וּ אֹת֜וֹ יִצְחָ֤ק וְיִשְׁמָעֵאל֙ בָּנָ֔יו אֶל־מְעָרַ֖ת הַמַּכְפֵּלָ֑ה אֶל־שְׂדֵ֞ה עֶפְרֹ֤ן בֶּן־צֹ֙חַר֙ הַֽחִתִּ֔י אֲשֶׁ֖ר עַל־פְּנֵ֥י מַמְרֵֽא׃
His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite, facing Mamre,
On top of that, maybe we can fix the time based on competing constraints. We know that Yitzchak was born when Avraham was 100 years old (Bereshit 21:5), and Avraham died at 175 years (Bereshit 25:7), making Yitzchak 75 years old at that point. Now, Yitzchak was 60 when Yaakov and Esav were born (Bereshit 25:26). At some point, Esav sold his birthright for lentils. That would make Yaakov and Esav about 15 years old. Note that after that, when Yitzchak was old and couldn’t see well (Bereishit 27:1) Yaakov stole the blessings, and a midrash (Megillah 17a) makes Yaakov 63 at that point.
I didn’t fully prove that it must have occurred at Avraham’s death, but with context and juxtaposition to / following a verse indicating the death, there are these fixed points in time, and we perform date arithmetic to determine what works. And so we can arrive at the idea that Yaakov and Esav were precisely 15 when this happened.
Great. Seems solid. So why am I unhappy?
In part, because this approach often seems less like literary analysis and more like mathematics. I am similarly uncomfortable with the use of gematria, especially to determine Biblical facts not otherwise deducible.
But more than that, (a) it makes assumptions that we are properly and fully understanding the implications of every pasuk, including some that upon reflection can be quite ambiguous. Simultaneously, (b) these literal deductions often introduce surprising facts into the historical Biblical record that are so important that they should have been explicitly mentioned. And, at the same time, (c) these calculations sometimes don’t work out either with chronology or expectations based on described facts, and rather than a bug, it becomes a feature, where we introduce an astonishing midrashic explanation to explain the disparity.
To expand on each point.
(A) It makes assumptions that we are properly and fully understanding the implications of every pasuk, including some that upon reflection can be quite ambiguous. There are plenty of assumptions at play. For instance, just because one item follows the other in the text doesn’t mean that they happened in that order. There is an idea that ain mukdam ume’uchar baTorah, events in the Torah aren’t necessarily recorded in chronological order. This isn’t a midrashic idea, but a peshat idea as well. For instance, see Ibn Ezra, a pashtan, on the Biblical account of Terach’s death despite the ensuing described events occurring prior to Terach’s death. I could give you a reason for this — what Biblical critics call P, the genealogical thread, gives details about lifespans and generations, and completes its words, but that is interwoven with what they call E and J, which zoom in and describe the precise details of those stories. So naturally some events would be out of order. Or there will be sagas in which we follow one character, such as Yosef, to some natural break point and then another character, such as Yehuda and his interactions with Tamar.
Also, when it says ויהי אחרי הדברים האלה, it isn’t always clear what other matters are being referred to, in which thread. When it says ויהי מקץ after Yosef interprets the dreams, it isn’t clear whether these full two years following his sale, imprisonment, or interpretation. When Yosef is described as 17 years old when grazing the sheep with his brothers, it isn’t clear that this is his age at the sale, as opposed to his age when he he receives favorable treatment from his father. When someone is described as a naar or naarah, that may or may not conform with our conceptions about that described age. And many others which are the like, which you can feel free to disagree with me about. But the point is, there is room to maneuver.
(B) These literal “deductions” often introduce surprising facts into the historical Biblical record that are so important that they should have been explicitly mentioned. I’m thinking, for instance, of Yocheved giving birth to Moshe when she was 130 years old. This is calculated based on her being born (midrashically speaking) while entering Egypt, but also because she is bat Levi, the daughter of Levi, and the length of the Egyptian exile, and Moshe’s age at the time of the exodus.
Ibn Ezra thinks giving birth at 130 is too miraculous, more so than Sarah giving birth in old age, which was explicitly mentioned. And Ramban responds that there is a tug of war with ages anyway, because the later you place Yocheved’s birth, the older you need to make Levi when he fathered her.
I’ve argued on parshablog that Amram marrying dodato could mean something other than his aunt, such as first female cousin, and that bat Levi parallels ish mibeit Levi, in that she is a member of the tribe of Levi, not Levi’s literal daughter. That relaxes some of the constraints.
That answers the particular point. But more generally, instead of using these calculations and global factoids, and imposing some amazing fact, we should most often look at the evident meaning of the story in its own place.
(C) These calculations sometimes don’t work out either with chronology or expectations based on described facts, and rather than a bug, it becomes a feature, where we introduce an astonishing midrashic explanation to explain the disparity.
I’m thinking, for instance, of Yitzchak at the akeida, described as a naar, a youth, yet according to Rashi being 37 years old. That is a disparity. Or Rivkah being three, despite her apparently acting much older.
Or — and here is a good one — in Megillah 17a, cited by Rashi to explain why the Torah went out of its way to specify how old Yishmael was when he died:
ואלה שני חיי ישמעאל וגו AND THESE ARE THE YEARS OF THE LIFE OF ISHMAEL etc. —R. Chiya the son of Abba asked: Why are the years of Ishmael enumerated? In order to trace through them the years of Jacob (i. e. the years in which the various incidents of his life happened). Calculating from the age of Ishmael (when he died) we may learn that Jacob attended at the School of Eber for fourteen years after he left his father and before he arrived at Laban’s house, for just when Jacob left his father Ishmael died, for it is said, (28:9) ‘‘So Esau went to Ishmael etc.”, as is explained in the Chapter Megilla Nikraath (Megillah 17a) (cf. Rashi on Genesis 28:9).
The calculations are even more complex than that. See inside in Megillah 17a, and see the internal contradictions which spark further explanations. For instance,
וּמְנָלַן דְּלָא אִיעֲנַשׁ — דְּתַנְיָא: נִמְצָא יוֹסֵף שֶׁפֵּירַשׁ מֵאָבִיו עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁפֵּירַשׁ יַעֲקֹב אָבִינוּ מֵאָבִיו, דְּיַעֲקֹב תְּלָתִין וְשִׁיתָּא הָוְיָין! אֶלָּא: אַרְבֵּיסַר דַּהֲוָה בְּבֵית עֵבֶר לָא חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ.
And from where do we derive that Jacob was not punished for the fourteen years that he was in the house of Eber, during which time he failed to fulfill the mitzva of honoring one’s parents? As it is taught in a baraita: It turns out that Joseph was away from his father for twenty-two years, just as Jacob our father was away from his own father for that same period of time. According to the previous calculation, however, the baraita is difficult, as Jacob was absent for thirty-six years. Rather, conclude from here that the fourteen years that he was in the house of Eber are not counted, as he was not punished for them.
Relaxing many of these constraints could perhaps help us understand that Reuven’s children were not tribbles, that Binyamin was not 22 years old yet described as a naar when going down to Egypt despite him being able to separate from his father, and that Rachel is alive during Yosef’s dream.
What sparked this post most recently was a question posed at Mi Yodea:
Q: Chumash- Yosef really strong?
Rashi explains Yosef was able to carry Ephraim and Menashe on his knees before giving them to Yaakov. How could Yosef carry them both on his knees if they were already old at that time? Is the pshat just that Yosef was really strong?
One good answer, which I just posted a few moments ago, is that Rashi says no such thing. I think Rashi says:
ויוצא יוסף אתם. לְאַחַר שֶׁנְּשָׁקָם הוֹצִיאָם יוֹסֵף מֵעִם בִּרְכָּיו, כְּדֵי לְיַשְּׁבָם זֶה לַיָּמִין וְזֶה לַשְּׂמֹאל לִסְמֹךְ יָדָיו עֲלֵיהֶם וּלְבָרְכָם: ויוצא יוסף אתם AND JOSEPH BROUGHT THEM OUT — After he (Jacob) had kissed them, Joseph brought them out from between his knees in order to place them one at the right and the other on the left in order that Jacob might thus lay his hands upon them and bless them
which doesn’t mean he was carrying them on his knees.
But despite thinking this is true (and the best answer often being to question the premises of the question), someone posted a great answer that perhaps Ephraim and Menashe were actually quite young at the time. This answer was:
Argh! Eventually, he did delete his own great answer because “pasuk pretty clearly says Yaakov was 147 before any brachos were given. Will leave this answer up for another hour before deleting in case someone can salvage.”
But the 147 is Yaakov’s age at death, not necessarily when he got sick and then recovered. That is mentioned as a P thread, that is, a genealogical statement finishing Yaakov’s toledot. That P-thread picks up again in Bereshit 50:23, about Yosef and his lifespan. And yes, there is slight juxtaposition, and the introductory phrase of וַיְהִ֗י אַחֲרֵי֙ הַדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה וַיֹּ֣אמֶר לְיוֹסֵ֔ף הִנֵּ֥ה אָבִ֖יךָ חֹלֶ֑ה. But what that puts the events after are וַיִּקְרְב֣וּ יְמֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל֮ לָמוּת֒ when he calls Yosef to make him swear that he won’t bury him in Egypt. Yes, Ramban puts that in Yaakov’s last year. But Radak says:
ויקרבו, שהרגיש בעצמו כי קרובה מיתתו, כי רבה חולשתו לרוב יגיעתו ולרוב צרותיו אשר מצאהו, ופחד שמא תבאהו המיתה פתאום וצוה ליוסף שישאהו ממצרים ויקברהו בקברות אבותיו.
Namely, that he felt himself close to death. Now someone can feel this and get better, or feel this for many years. It states וַיִּשְׁתַּ֥חוּ יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל עַל־רֹ֥אשׁ הַמִּטָּֽה, which might indicate gratitude but also perhaps illness, that he lay prone on the bed. But after Yosef arrives with Ephraim and Menashe, וַיִּתְחַזֵּק֙ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וַיֵּ֖שֶׁב עַל־הַמִּטָּֽה, he strengthened himself and sat on the bed.
Now, they are called nearim, lads, which could work well with them indeed being 17 to 19 years old at this point, just as Yosef was a naar at 17. But if the text, or Rashi, had indicated that they were younger, I am aggravated that a calculation, which relied on assumptions, will contradict this, and suddenly require that Yosef be super strong - an idea supported by another answer at Mi Yodea of him kicking a stone pillar and reducing it to pebbles.