Wednesday, December 16, 2009

wisdom trumps all: R' Simcha Zisel on Pharoah's appointment of Yosef

Despite the unflattering description of Yosef by the Sar haMashkim as a na’ar, an educated boy, an Ivri, a foreigner, Pharoah still gave Yosef the chance to interpret his dream. As a result of Yosef’s correct interpretation he was appointed second in command of Egypt, and when the Egyptians complained to Pharoah that Yosef demanded that they perform milah before he would release the food stores, Pharoah dismissed their complaints and ordered them to obey Yosef. We see in this little episode an interesting clash of values. On the one hand, Pharoah would certainly be as inclined as the Sar haMashkim to be dismissive of this young Ivri foreigner. On the other hand, Ramban tells us that Pharoah was a man of great intelligence, someone who could not fail to recognize the superior wisdom of Yosef. Which trait won out? -- the trait of wisdom, earning Yosef his position. R’ Simcha Zisel (Chochma u’Mussar #140) writes that it is inherent in the nature even of a rasha who is a wise person to defer to what they recognize as true wisdom.

We see this reflected in Yosef’s words to his brothers, “VaYisimeini l’av l’Pharaoh u’ladon l’chol beiso” (45:8). Ibn Ezra explains the term av here means father of an idea, like “avi tofeish kinor.” We see from a careful reading of the pasuk the difference between Pharoah and all others. To the Egyptian populace Yosef was an “adon”, a master who must be obeyed willy-nilly, but to Pharaoh he was an “av”, a source of ideas and wisdom, someone whose advice should be followed because it was the wisest course of action.

I don’t have much familiarity with R’ Simcha Zisel’s writings so maybe it’s just me, but this idea seems to run counter to what I thought was classical mussar. Classical mussar as I perhaps misunderstand it addresses itself to the perfection of midos because chochma alone is not enough to direct behavior and attitude. Chochma can be led astray and corrupted. For example, R’ Elchanan explains that we are all capable to fulfilling the mitzvah of emunah because the intelligence to do is innate; the reason so many “intelligent” people fail the test and become atheists is because intelligence can be corrupted by desire and will. Yet, here R’ Simcha Zisel tells us that Pharoah, despite all his rishus (and R’ Simcha Zisel does call him a rasha), is able to overcome his distaste for Yosef precisely because love of wisdom trumps other values. Is this a contradiction? Maybe someone out there who knows more about R’ S.Z. has an explanation.

10 comments:

  1. Garnel Ironheart2:22 PM

    In contrast to Rashi's understanding, the Malbim brings a completely different interpretation. In his opinion, the chief butler was doing a selling job to help get Yosef out of prison - na''ar, and not an experienced sage who might have used his wisdom to understand our dreams. Eved, and not a person with freedom and wordly experience who might know a thing or two about dream interpretation. Ivri - and therefore not trained in magic and ooga-booga methods of interpreting dreams.
    In other words, if you think that maybe there's a good reason why he guessed at my dream and the chief baker's, then no - he doesn't have the right background. If he gives you an answer, you can be sure it has a Divine source.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Baley Mussor were criticized (in Brisk) for painting reshuim in a positive light. The strong emphasis on dakey dakos, even on the sins' of the wicked, means that we can demand subtelties from everyone. If it can be demanded, it means that it is attainable.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous8:33 PM

    A person can only recognize something as wisdom when it enables him to accomplish a goal. Pharoah might appreciate and follow wisdom, but only so far as his values will let him. He'll follow wisdom that enables him to run his country well. But wisdom that leads to moral accomplishments that he doesn't value, he won't follow.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Agree with anonymous..
    Think about any corporation, they all go on about being part of the team but really it's all based on commercial reality

    pc :-)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Maybe I did not convey the point well, but from RSZ's language I don't think that is his intent. You are making chochma subordinate to some other value; its function is utilitarian, for the benefit of state. RSZ seems to say that Pharoah and other chachamim by their nature value chochma as an end in itself.

    The historical model of Nazi Germany proves that hatred can override even intelligent governance, as resources that could have been used for the war were diverted to killing jews. Does this indicate a lack of chochma, or a challenge to RSZ's thesis? I can think of a bunch of similar examples. We have affirmative action laws because society recognizes that even intelligent people can be blinded by racism that prevents them from choosing the best candidate for a position even at the expense of their own economic gain. I am politically opposed to these type laws, but would not dismiss the argument as being without merit.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's interesting that despite his high position, he still seemed to be ostracized from the dinner set. When his brothers come, he invites them to dinner, and it is clear that the Egyptians disdain eating with Hebrews. Even Yosef, it appears, did not get invited to dinners.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous1:13 PM

    A constant theme in Misley is referring to evil people as fools (k'sil) and righteous people as wise (chocom)

    ReplyDelete
  8. That ostacization may have been limited to the lower classes, but not Pharoah, who was part of the intelligencia. I don't know if there is any way to know.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If Pharoh did not know that he was a bad person, which makes sense, (in fact he probably thought that he was a good person), then there is no reason for him not to value wisdom.

    What sort of foolish king would be seen not to value wisdom?

    The entire history of kings is full of wise men in the king's court. Nevuchadnezzar,who destroyed the Bet HaMikdash, also had 'wise men' in his court, including Daniel, Chananya, Mishoel and Azarya.

    pc :-)

    ReplyDelete
  10. You don't have to know you are a bad person to be one, and there are plenty of wise people whose ingrained hatred and biases overcame their intelligence and led to bad decisions.
    You are right -- other kings valued Jewish wise men even as they hated Jews, which lends more weight to R' Simcha Zisel's thesis.

    ReplyDelete