Parshas Vayigash- Communal Suffering
As Yosef had predicted, Egypt experienced seven years of excess and plenty. The following seven years of famine were cut short with the arrival of Yaakov in Mitzrayim. Only two of these years were ultimately fulfilled. With Yaakov Avinu’s entry, beracha enveloped Egypt and the famine ceased to exist (Rashi 47:19).
In Parshas Miketz, the pesukim (41:50) emphasize that Yosef’s children were born prior to the years of famine. The Gemara (Taanis 11a, Rashi on the verse) teaches that it is prohibited for a person to have marital relations during years of famine. One should suffer when the world is under duress and hardship. Thus, the verses specifically state that the children were born prior to the famine. During the ensuing years, having relations was prohibited, and therefore Yosef bore no children.
After hearing that Yosef was alive, Yaakov and his descendants descended to Egypt. The pesukim record an extensive list of the children of Yaakov. The total number of offspring per wife is provided as well. The verse states that the total sum of the descendants of Leah was thirty-three (46:15). Rashi finds this troubling as only thirty-two names are recorded. He explains that Yocheved, the daughter of Levi, was the thirty- third descendant. Her conception was in Eretz Canaan, and her birth was in Mitzrayim. Thus, she is included in the lump sum, but not listed. Only those born prior were listed by name.
Tosfos (Taanis 11a, asur l’adam) question the aforementioned Gemara. If Yocheved was born upon entry into Egypt, Levi must have engaged in relations during the years of famine. This would seem to contradict the idea that is derived from the emphasis of Yosef Hatzaddik’s children being born prior to the years of famine.
Multiple answers are provided in order to resolve this difficulty:
Tosfos answer that in truth the prohibition is not for everyone. Only those acting in the manner of chassidus would be restricted by this ban. Yosef acted with extra piety, and therefore did not engage in relations. Levi did not, and disregarded this dictum.
The Ohr Hachaim HaKadosh finds this answer problematic. At the end of Moshe Rabbeinu’s life, he blesses the tribes separately. Shevet Levi is refered to as “ish chasidecha” (Devarim 33:8). The tribe that is specifically identified with chassidus is the tribe of Levi. Logically, the offspring are reflective of the parents. It is fair to conclude that Levi acted in a manner of piety.
Furthermore, we find that Noach engaged in this restriction. The verse (7:7) records the men and women who entered the teiva, separately. Rashi states that this was due to the prohibition of relations, while the world was suffering its demise. It would appear logical, that a restriction kept by Noach and his family, would also be fulfilled by Levi.
The Ohr Hachaim suggests an alternative explanation. In truth, Yosef and Levi were not bound by this prohibition. The Gemara states explicitly, that one who is lacking children is allowed to engage in relations during such years. The baseline obligation of the mitzvah of reproduction is bearing a boy and a girl. Thus, they were both allowed to have relations during the years of famine. The restriction is only when the Jewish populous is suffering. Yaakov and his family still had food the first year, and therefore Levi had no reason to desist. Yosef would have refrained, because he would have assumed that his family was suffering. Regardless, he did not, because he had not fulfilled the commandment of pru u’rivu. The teaching of the Gemara is therefore based on the emphasis, but not how Yosef actually acted.
A third answer is provided by the Da’as Zekeinim m’Baalei haTosfos (in the name of Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid). The only one restricted by this dictum is a prophet who receives the message from Hashem. Others bear no such responsibility. Yosef interpreted Pharaoh’s dreams and was bound by this prohibition. Levi did not, and therefore was unsure of the reality. Thus, he was not required to refrain from relations.
The Da’as Zekeinim suggests a final answer. The different approaches of Yosef and Levi were contingent on a machlokes between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel. The Mishna (Yevamos 6:6) teaches that one can only cease to engage in reproduction, when he has fulfilled the commandment of pru u’rivu. Beis Shammai holds that this is satisfied with having two boys. Beis Hillel requires a boy and a girl. The Gemara permits one who has not fulfilled this obligation, to engage in relations in order to fulfill this mitzvah. Levi held in accordance with Beis Hillel. Since he had not yet birthed a daughter, he was permitted to have relations. Yosef held like Beis Shammai. After producing Menashe and Ephrayim, he was exempted from the mitzvah. Thus, he refrained from relations.
The idea of refraining from relations during years of famine is recorded in Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 574:4, 240:12). The Rama writes that a similar restriction would exist during other types of world hardships. A number of exceptions are provided. The Shulchan Aruch writes that on the night of tevilla, and one who has not yet fulfilled pru u’rivu, are excluded from this restricion. The Mishna Berura adds that one who has children who are unfortunately michalilei Shabbos, and wants to bear appropriate offspring, is also permitted to do so during such years. Finally, one who finds that his inclination is overcoming him, and it may result in hashchasas zera l’vatala, may be lenient as well.
When others suffer, it is incumbent on the individual to participate in their sorrow. In doing so, one shows that he does not disregard the pain of others, but rather engages in it, and attempts to assist however he can. The Gemara (Taanis 11a) states that such a person will merit to see the comfort of the public as well. May we all merit this, in the ultimate way, speedily in our days!
Please email yshifman1@gmail.com with questions, comments, or to be placed on the mailing list