short review
Parshas Vayigash
1. On the verse "ולאביו שלח כזאת עשרה חמורים נשאים מטוב מצרים ועשר אתונות גו'" ("And to his father he sent like this: ten donkeys carrying of the best of Egypt, and ten she-donkeys…")1, Rashi quotes the words "שלח כזאת" ("he sent like this") and explains: "כחשבון הזה, ומהו החשבון עשרה חמורים וגו'" ("According to this count. And what is the count? Ten donkeys, etc.").
At first glance one could say2: Rashi is troubled by the verse because the word "like this" is superfluous — it should have said simply "And to his father he sent ten donkeys, etc." Therefore he explains that the word "like this" means "according to this count, etc." That is, the verse thereby emphasizes that it was according to this count — "ten donkeys, etc." — no less and no more (and also not other gifts that are not mentioned in the verse)3.
But this explanation is very difficult: what would be the initial supposition that Yosef sent something other than the count stated explicitly in the verse, so that the verse needed to emphasize and add "like this — according to this count"? Even had "like this" not been written, but only "And to his father he sent ten donkeys, etc.," we would know that he sent "according to this count"4!?
The commentators wrote5 regarding Rashi's intent that the superfluous word "like this" indicates that Yosef did not send his father ten donkeys; rather, this is what the verse means: "And to his father he sent, in the wagons, like this, etc." — that is, "according to this count," which is the load of ten donkeys, etc.6
But in its simple sense it is impossible to interpret Rashi this way, for he emphasizes in his wording "according to (this) count (and what is) the count," and "count" means a number. Had Rashi's intent been to explain that he did not send donkeys but only the load of ten donkeys, etc., he should have said not "according to this count" but "according to this load."
Especially since the plain wording of the verse, "he sent like this: ten donkeys carrying, etc.," implies actual donkeys. Had Rashi, who explains the plain meaning of Scripture, intended an interpretation that takes the verse out of its plain meaning, he would have written it in a style that is clear even to a five-year-old beginning Chumash7.
We also need to understand:
a) Why does Rashi quote from the verse also the word "he sent"? He comes only to explain the superfluousness of the word "like this" in the verse.
b) After Rashi writes "according to this count," he continues (in the form of a question), "And what is the count? Ten donkeys, etc." Seemingly he should have said briefly, "according to this count: ten donkeys, etc."?
2. Afterwards Rashi quotes the words "מטוב מצרים" ("of the best of Egypt") and explains: "מצינו בגמרא ששלח לו יין ישן שדעת זקנים נוחה הימנו, ומדרש אגדה גריסין של פול" ("We find in the Gemara8 that he sent him aged wine, which the elderly find pleasing9; and a Midrash Aggadah10 says: split beans").
This needs clarification:
a) It is known11 that when Rashi gives two interpretations of one matter, it is because one of the interpretations does not suffice to settle the verse according to its plain meaning in all its details; what is difficult according to the first interpretation is not difficult according to the second; and the first interpretation is the one closer to the plain meaning of Scripture. In our case: why did Rashi need to give two interpretations of "the best of Egypt," and in what way is the first interpretation ("aged wine") closer to the plain meaning of Scripture than the second interpretation ("split beans")12?
b) Rashi's way, in most places, when he brings an interpretation from the Midrashim of Chazal, is to write "ורבותינו דרשו" ("and our Rabbis expounded") and the like (and when he adds a second interpretation, he writes "דבר אחר" ("another explanation") and the like), without indicating the source of the interpretation (whether Gemara or Midrash, etc.)13. Here, however, he adds for both interpretations that their sources are "the Gemara" and "a Midrash Aggadah."
From this it is understood that knowing the source of each interpretation here adds understanding to the interpretation. This must be clarified: what does citing the sources of his interpretations add to the understanding of the interpretations themselves?
c) Also needing clarification is the change of wording in Rashi when he brings the interpretations from the Gemara and from the Midrash Aggadah:
(a) In the first interpretation Rashi adds the reason why Yosef chose to send "aged wine (— which the elderly find pleasing)"14, whereas in his second interpretation he does not explain why he sent "split beans"15?
(b) In the first interpretation he writes "We find in the Gemara," and seemingly "we find" is superfluous (as he writes in the second interpretation simply "and a Midrash Aggadah"); or at least he should have said, in the usual wording, "they explained in the Gemara"16 and the like?
(c) Why does Rashi quote from the Gemara also the words "that he sent him (aged wine)"? After all, this is the explanation of the words "of the best of Egypt," as mentioned, and the explanation is (only) "aged wine" (just as he writes in the other interpretation, "and a Midrash Aggadah: split beans").
3. The explanation of all this: What troubles Rashi in the verse is not only the superfluousness of the word "like this," but (also) a general question about the story that Yosef sent his father ten donkeys carrying of the best of Egypt, etc.:
In our Parsha it is related that Yosef told his brothers, "מהרו ועלו אל אבי ואמרתם אליו וגו'" ("Hurry and go up to my father and say to him, etc.")17, (and afterwards) "ומהרתם והורדתם את אבי הנה" ("and hurry and bring my father down here")18. Likewise, when "והקול נשמע בית פרעה גו' לאמר באו אחי יוסף" ("the report19 was heard in Pharaoh's house… saying, 'Yosef's brothers have come'"), then ("ויאמר פרעה גו' זאת עשו גו' ולכו בואו ארצה כנען וקחו את אביכם גו' ובואו אלי" ("Pharaoh said… 'Do this… and go, come to the land of Canaan, and take your father… and come to me'") — that is, Pharaoh too wanted them, immediately after coming to the land of Canaan, to return to Egypt with Yaakov their father; and therefore) he commanded Yosef to tell them, "זאת עשו קחו גו' עגלות לטפכם ולנשיכם ונשאתם את אביכם ובאתם" ("Do this20: take… wagons for your little ones and for your wives, and carry your father and come"). He also added, "ועיניכם אל תחוס על כליכם כי טוב כל ארץ מצרים גו'" ("And let your eyes not pity your belongings21, for the best of all the land of Egypt…"), in order to remove anything that could delay their speedy coming to Egypt.
Since their return to the land of Canaan was only for a short time, on condition that they hurry back to Egypt, they had no need for a large quantity of grain, only enough as provisions for the way and for the short time they would stay until fulfilling "קחו את אביכם ואת בתיכם" ("take your father and your households") (which is much less than the quantity of grain they took when they returned to Canaan the first time — when they too needed provisions for the way).
Accordingly there is a difficulty: the verse states22 that Yosef gave his brothers everything Pharaoh had told him ("טענו את בעיריכם גו'" ("Load your animals…"), and Rashi explains: grain), and also provisions for the way; and afterwards he added still more and sent his father "ten donkeys… and ten she-donkeys carrying grain and bread and food…." Since they were to return to Egypt within a short time — for what need did he send all this cargo?
4. To answer all this, Rashi explains "according to this count." His intent is that the word "like this" does not refer to what is said later in this verse, but "according to this count" — a count already known, that is, from what is related in Scripture before this23. Accordingly, Yosef's reason for sending his father "ten donkeys, etc." is resolved.
The explanation: In the preceding verses it is related that Pharaoh commanded Yosef, "אמר אל אחיך זאת עשו טענו את בעיריכם" ("Say to your brothers: do this — load your animals"). That is, Pharaoh, upon hearing that they were Yosef's brothers, was moved toward them with something like his feeling toward Yosef24, and therefore told Yosef to give his brothers grain to load onto their animals — a gift to Yaakov and his household.
Accordingly it is understood: if Pharaoh, at the time he heard that "Yosef's brothers have come" and that Yosef had a father in the land of Canaan, was so moved that he sent such gifts to Yaakov, then all the more so24* would Yosef, at this time, send gifts to his father — and greater than Pharaoh's.
This is the meaning of the verse: "And to his father he sent" (Yosef on his own — apart from Pharaoh's command) "like this" — "according to this count," that is, according to the same count that Pharaoh sent: ten donkeys. And in addition to sending according to Pharaoh's count, he also sent (and in the same count) ten she-donkeys25.
[However, all this was as a gift, not for sustenance, for they did not need such a shipment for their sustenance26, as mentioned in Section 3.]
Therefore Rashi quotes from the verse also the word "he sent," for thereby he emphasizes that this was a gift that Yosef "sent" on his own27.
5. Rashi continues with precision: "And what is the count? Ten donkeys, etc." His intent is this: according to the above, that "this count" is the count of Pharaoh's gift, it is not understood — all of Yosef's brothers (including Binyamin) were then in Egypt, so they had eleven donkeys to load with grain; and when Pharaoh told Yosef, "Say to your brothers… load your animals," they loaded eleven donkeys by Pharaoh's command. If so, how can we interpret "like this" as "according to this count" that Pharaoh sent — it is explicit that Yosef sent only a count of "ten" (and not eleven)?
Therefore Rashi writes, "And what is the count? Ten" — to emphasize that this is the count; that is, Pharaoh sent only "according to this count" (ten donkeys), and Yosef's gift matched Pharaoh's (count).
But it is difficult, as mentioned: there were eleven brothers, and they had eleven donkeys; why did Pharaoh command to load only the donkeys of ten of them and not the donkey of the eleventh? Moreover, the plain wording "Load your animals" (without qualification) implies that he commanded to load the animals of Yosef's brothers without distinction28?
However, the explanation of this is understood from the earlier verses, and it is so simple that Rashi has no need to explain it:
In Parshas Mikeitz it is related that the first time Yosef's brothers went down to buy grain in Egypt, Yosef detained Shimon with him. Since there was famine in the land of Canaan, it is understood that although he detained Shimon, this was only as a kind of pledge, and there was no reason to detain his donkey. Certainly he did not detain his donkey; rather, he loaded the donkey with food for the sustenance of his father and household (and his brothers took it with them29). And when Yosef's brothers went down to Egypt the second time, they were only ten (and their donkeys ten), so Pharaoh's command "Load your animals" meant ten donkeys30.
6. Now, according to the above — that Yosef sent all this to his father as a gift and in his honor, etc., and not as something necessary to sustain him in the famine — it is understood that, in order for the honor to be complete, he sent something which in itself shows that his intent was to honor his father, etc.
Therefore Rashi explains (in his first interpretation) "of the best of Egypt" as "he sent him aged wine, which the elderly find pleasing." That is, he sent something of gratification and pleasure (and not something necessary to break his hunger).
However, although this interpretation fits the general content of the verses — and accordingly Yosef's reason for sending this gift to his father is well understood — it does not fit so well with the meaning of the words "of the best of Egypt": we do not find that the land of Egypt was praised for wine, to the point that it would be called "the best of Egypt"; on the contrary, it was praised not for trees but for seeds31.
Therefore Rashi writes that the source of this interpretation is the Gemara, whose subject is primarily the explanation of halachos. Accordingly it is understood why he sent aged wine (although it does not fit so well with the meaning of the words "of the best of Egypt") — for from the standpoint of the halacha of honoring one's father, it was fitting to send "aged wine."
And Rashi elaborates in his wording, "We find in the Gemara that he sent him, etc." (and does not simply write that "the best of Egypt" is aged wine, as stated explicitly in the Gemara), thereby hinting that this is not an explanation of the words as is usual everywhere, since these words ("of the best of Egypt") are difficult to interpret this way. Rather, from the general content of the verses — from the fact that Yosef sent his father many gifts — it must be that this involved honoring one's father.
Therefore Rashi writes (regarding this interpretation) that (only) "we find in the Gemara" that his gift ("of the best of Egypt") was aged wine32. He also adds the words "he sent him," for with this reason it is explained (not only what "the best of Egypt" was, but also) the intent of "he sent him" — that is, that in this item the reason for the entire sending of gifts to his father is evident.
7. However, since ultimately this interpretation does not fit so well with the meaning of "of the best of Egypt," as mentioned, Rashi brings another interpretation: "and a Midrash Aggadah: split beans," according to which the meaning of "of the best of Egypt" is well settled, for "split beans" are seeds. — It should be noted that this in particular was an important food in Egypt33, and it is also understood why he sent him this item34 (for this is the pride of Egypt), so Rashi does not need to explain it.
But on the other hand, this interpretation, that "the best of Egypt" was an item of food, does not fit so well with the content of the overall matter, that the sending of the gift was for his father's honor, etc. Therefore Rashi brings it as a second interpretation, and the first and primary interpretation is that "he sent him aged wine, which the elderly find pleasing," for this fits better with the general content35 of sending the gift to his father, as explained at length above.
8. Now, also according to the interpretation "split beans," it is reasonable to say that Yosef chose this specifically not only because it is "the best of Egypt," but because it also has a connection to the content of the message that Yosef sent to his father.
Therefore Rashi specifies that this interpretation is from a "Midrash Aggadah" (and did not write "another explanation" and the like), to hint that in the manner of Midrash and allusion one can find a connection between "split beans" and Yosef's message to his father.
The explanation of this: Yosef knew that when his brothers would return to Canaan and bring his father the news that "עוד יוסף חי" ("Yosef is still alive"), this good news would also cause him a feeling of pain, for through it he would learn that his brothers had sold him36; and certainly Yosef endeavored as much as possible to prevent, or at least to lessen, his father's pain.
And even if you say that they would not reveal to Yaakov that they had sold him — even then Yaakov would be pained over the time that Yosef had been separated from him and from his brothers — Yosef endeavored to lessen this pain.
It may be said that it was also for this purpose that Yosef told them to say to Yaakov36: "כה אמר בנך יוסף שמני אלקים לאדון לכל מצרים גו'" ("So says your son Yosef: G‑d has made me master of all Egypt…") — that is, G‑d did this, and Yosef has no complaint at all — for he became master…, etc.
Therefore Yosef sent his father "split beans," for thereby he hinted37 to his father that he should not be pained38 over his sale to Egypt39.
The reason: "split beans" are a food of legumes split into parts40, and specifically this food was very important in Egypt. With this Yosef hinted to his father that there are things that bring great benefit specifically through being divided and separated.
Similarly in our case — specifically through Yosef's brothers selling him to Egypt and separating him from everyone, the good came about: "כי למחיה שלחני אלקים לפניכם" ("for G‑d sent me before you to preserve life")41. So Yaakov should not worry about the sale, since it brought about this great benefit42.
[Accordingly, it is all the more understandable why Rashi did not write, in this interpretation, a reason why he chose this (important) item specifically: by writing that the interpretation is from a "Midrash Aggadah," he hints that there is an aggadic matter (and reason) here43, as mentioned.]
9. From the "יינה של תורה" ("wine of Torah") in Rashi's commentary:
Seemingly there is a difficulty with the interpretation that he sent him aged wine: when a person sends a gift to his friend in order to honor him and give him pleasure, he tries to send something his friend does not have44; then the item is precious to his friend and gives him pleasure. In our case, however, how did Yosef know that Yaakov had no (aged) wine in the land of Canaan45?
It is understandable if he sent him "split beans," which is an important food — Yosef knew that in a time of famine it would be dear to them. But according to the interpretation that he sent him "aged wine," how did Yosef know that specifically this would be dear to him, etc.?
However, this is answered by what Rashi explained earlier on the verse46 "(וישתו) וישכרו עמו" ("(They drank) and became intoxicated with him"): "From the day they sold him, they had not drunk wine, nor had he drunk wine, and on that day they drank" — that is, for twenty-two years. It is understood that if his brothers did not drink wine all this time, and Yosef too did not drink (from which it is understood that this was not as an act of teshuvah but because of pain), all the more so Yaakov, who mourned…, did not drink wine for twenty-two years. Thus the "pleasure" Yaakov would have is understood — when Yosef proposes drinking and sends "aged wine."
Accordingly one can give yet another reason, according to the "wine of Torah" (besides that "the elderly find it pleasing"), why Yosef chose "aged wine": with this he hinted to Yaakov that even while he was in Egypt he did not lose his trust in G‑d that he would yet see his father again. Therefore (although he did not drink wine), wine was kept stored with him for a long time — until it became aged wine — so that it would be ready when the time came.
From this there is a lesson in the Divine service of every person:
Even when a person is in a situation where the straits (meitzarim, a play on Mitzrayim, Egypt) and limitations of the world — his material preoccupations and those of his surroundings — hinder him from the service of G‑d, he must not despair, etc. On the contrary, he must strengthen himself with complete trust in G‑d that he will certainly succeed in his material affairs in a way that they will not obstruct his matters of Torah and mitzvos.
Another lesson from this — like Yosef's gift to his father, which was not by the command of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, but of his own accord (as above, Section 4), and we do not find that he asked Pharaoh's permission for it47. That is, when it came to a matter of a mitzvah — the mitzvah of honoring one's father — Yosef took no account whatsoever of Pharaoh, and fulfilled the mitzvah in the most beautiful manner, etc.
So it is in the service of every person: when a matter of Torah and mitzvos comes his way, he must take no account whatsoever of the "straits" and limitations of this world, and he should fulfill the mitzvos in the most beautiful manner (b'hiddur).
Through this conduct, not only will he succeed in his service in Torah and mitzvos, but all his material affairs will also succeed.
(From the sicha of Shabbos Parshas Vayigash, 5732)
Notes
1) Our Parsha, 45:23.
2) This is the explanation of the Hagahah in our printed editions of Rashi; Maskil LeDavid; and elsewhere.
3) The Re'em and the Dvek Tov wrote that Rashi meant to explain that "like this" refers to what follows — according to the count of ten… — to exclude the possible supposition that it refers to the previous verse, "To all of them he gave…" (as Sforno and others explain). Their reason: if it referred to the previous verse, then instead of "ten" it should have said "and ten" (see Ohr HaChaim: "According to the words of our Sages… the verse would be missing a vav"; see also Sefer HaZikaron (by R. Avraham Bakrat HaLevi)).
However, it is forced to say that this is Rashi's intent. In addition to the fact that, if so, Rashi should also have quoted the word "ten" (or at least alluded to it with "etc."), since this word (written without a vav) is the basis of his interpretation, it is not reasonable to say that Rashi would note the absence of one letter and not explain the superfluousness of an entire word ("like this"). (Especially since according to Sforno's interpretation the missing vav is not difficult; it is difficult only for the interpretation that "like this" refers to what follows.)
As for why he did not explain like the Ra'avatz [OCR reading, uncertain], the Ohr HaChaim and others, that "like this" refers to what precedes — i.e., that "the best of Egypt" was "of the kind mentioned just before, garments and silver vessels" (the meaning of the verse being that he sent ten donkeys… carrying "the choicest found 'like this,' of this kind, in Egypt" — according to which the questions of the Re'em and Sefer HaZikaron mentioned above also do not arise) — it is because this does not fit the plain meaning of Scripture, for according to this the verse should have written the words "of the best of Egypt" (which describe the garments, etc.) immediately after the word ("like this") that refers to the garments, etc.
4) One cannot say that there was even a supposition, as the commentators in the previous note hold, that he also sent garments, etc., and that this is what Rashi excludes — for the question is: if the word "like this" were not written in the verse, there would be no room for this supposition.
5) The Hagahah in the above-mentioned Rashi, the Dvek Tov, and elsewhere.
6) Accordingly they also explained why it says "כזאת" with the kaf of comparison (seemingly, if it simply referred to the count below, it should have said "And to his father he sent this…").
But see Ramban, who wrote on this that it is the manner of speech to say so, like… "כדברים האלה עשה לי" ("according to these things he did to me"). See also Gur Aryeh: "This kaf is called the kaf of measure, as in 'about thirty men.'" However, what Gur Aryeh writes — that this is Rashi's intent, to say that it is not the kaf of comparison (but "the kaf of measure") — is forced according to the plain meaning, since accordingly Rashi would not be resolving the difficulty in the plain meaning of Scripture (that the word "like this" is superfluous), as mentioned above in note 3.
7) As for the proof they brought from the fact that later in Scripture (45:27) it says "And he saw the wagons," and donkeys are not mentioned — this is no proof, for there is no place to mention the donkeys there. The verse explicitly speaks of seeing "the wagons that he had sent to carry him" (which shows the greatness of Yosef's longing to see Yaakov), while the donkeys carrying of the best of Egypt were not for carrying him. Especially according to Rashi's commentary there, "And he saw the wagons" refers to the "sign" [OCR unclear] (which applies specifically to wagons).
8) Megillah 16b.
9) Because the elderly are by nature chilled, and wine warms them (Maharsha, Chiddushei Aggados, Megillah ibid.).
10) Bereishis Rabbah 94:2.
11) See also Likkutei Sichos vol. 5, p. 209 ff.; vol. 6, p. 47; and elsewhere.
12) In the Dvek Tov: "He was troubled — heaven forbid that Yosef would do something Pharaoh had not commanded, for he did not say to send him of the best of the land of Egypt; therefore he explained that he sent him only what is good for the elderly, and it was not more than what he had commanded him… And since he took it out of its plain meaning, one may say that it is wine, which is called 'good,' as it says, 'וחכך כיין הטוב' ('and your palate like the good wine') (Shir HaShirim 7:10)."
But (in addition to the difficulty of interpreting the words "of the best of Egypt" in the verse this way, and that Rashi should then have explained that (aged) wine is called "good"), the plain meaning of Scripture implies that Yosef sent this on his own, beyond what Pharaoh said, as explained below in the main text and in note 27. See also below, end of Section 9.
13) See Rashi on Lech Lecha 17:1; Vayeira 18:21; 19:18; Chayei Sarah 25:6; Toldos 25:22; and elsewhere.
14) The Sifsei Chachamim wrote on "which the elderly find pleasing, etc.": "He sent him according to what was good for Yaakov" — meaning that this is also the explanation of the words "of the best of Egypt" (and this is also implied by the interpretation of the Dvek Tov cited in note 12). Accordingly one could say that Rashi added a reason in order to explain how this interpretation ("he sent him aged wine") fits into the verse.
But this is not so, for (in addition to the fact that the plain wording of Rashi does not imply that this is his intent) this interpretation of "of the best of Egypt" does not depend on Rashi's reason. Even had he not written this reason, we could interpret "of the best of Egypt" as the thing that is good for Yaakov — whether for this reason, or because it is good for weakness (and consequently for old age), as Rashi explains on Lech Lecha (14:18), and not because the elderly find it pleasing. And it is forced to say that these are one and the same. See note 9.
15) One cannot say that there is no reason for this, since the reasons the commentators gave for it are simply understood [see Divrei David: "It says in the Midrash (ibid.) that it dispels worry… (and also) because it brings sleep… which is relevant to an old man, since his sleep is not proper." And in the Dvek Tov: "That is to say… a soft food, good for the elderly"]. So why does Rashi not bring them? Nor can one answer that they are reasons understood by themselves (to a beginning student?!), for if so, why did he need to explain the reason of the first interpretation, "which the elderly find pleasing, etc." (see the previous note)?
16) Similar to Rashi on Noach 8:21; Vayeira 18:21; Vayeishev 37:25.
17) 45:9.
18) Ibid., 13.
19) Ibid., 16–20.
20) See Sforno on the verse "Do this": "And to achieve this purpose, that your father not refuse to come — take for yourselves, etc."
21) See Daas Zekeinim of the Baalei HaTosafos: "Because he knew of his father that he was particular about his belongings and spared them, as our Sages said, 'And Yaakov remained [alone]…'; therefore he cautioned them about this."
22) 45:21.
23) Ramban wrote on Rashi's commentary, "and it is not correct" (see Re'em). The Nimukei Shmuel wrote (cited in the notes to the Ramban's commentary, Chavel edition) that the Ramban's intent is "it is not correct that it alludes to the count" stated afterwards, for "like this" refers only to what was said before (and not as the Re'em explained; see also the commentary of the Ra'av, and what he answered there is forced). However, according to what is explained in the main text, for Rashi too it refers to what was said before.
24) See Ohr HaChaim on the verse: "He means by saying 'Do this' that it is desirable to him — not that he merely consents… but that he desires the matter and says 'Do this.'"
24*) Accordingly, it is also all the more understandable why Yosef sent all this without asking Pharaoh's permission (see above, note 12) — for Pharaoh himself, by sending gifts to Yaakov, "compels" Yosef to send as well, and even more.
25) One cannot object that he should have sent something great in quality (rather than a great quantity, which would be a burden for them to bring back with them) — for according to what is explained in the main text, one can simply say that it is not befitting Yaakov's honor that Yosef's gift should (even) appear smaller than Pharaoh's gift (see Gur Aryeh and Maskil LeDavid here, that there are allusions in Yosef's sending in the number ten).
One can also say that since it was then a time of famine, food, etc., was among the most valuable things also in quality.
26) As for what is written, "bread and food for his father for the way" — this is in addition to the main shipment of the best of Egypt, grain, etc., for it is obvious that "for his father for the way" there is no need for the load of ten she-donkeys….
27) One cannot say that Yosef sent all this by Pharaoh's command, for Pharaoh told him only a) "Say to your brothers" (see also Rashi 45:19), and b) "Load your animals" — ten donkeys (and that they take wagons). Here, however, it is written a) that Yosef sent to his father, after his brothers had already fulfilled Pharaoh's command — "And the sons of Yisrael did so"; and b) that he sent donkeys ("carrying of the best of Egypt") and also she-donkeys, which are not included in what Pharaoh commanded. Especially since Yosef's fulfillment of Pharaoh's command is already written before this: "And Yosef gave them wagons according to Pharaoh's word, and he gave them provisions for the way." It is very forced to say that all of this — "To all of them he gave… and to Binyamin he gave… and to his father he sent…" — is included in "according to Pharaoh's word."
28) In Midrash Lekach Tov: "Yehudah did not bring Binyamin back to our father Yaakov; rather, he remained with Yosef in Egypt, for otherwise he would have given Binyamin too the load of a donkey, etc." See also Torah Shleimah, §80.
However, according to the plain meaning of Scripture this is difficult to say: a) there is no implication or hint in the verse that Binyamin remained in Egypt — and see Ohr HaChaim (our Parsha 45:24): "And he sent his brothers away — meaning all of them, including Binyamin." b) It is explained in the verse at the beginning of our Parsha that Yehudah told Yosef, "his soul is bound up with his soul… (therefore) when he sees that the lad is not there, he will die." Since there is concern that immediately upon seeing that the lad is not there he will die — a concern of danger to life — it is obvious that Yosef would not detain him.
The Rashbam, the Tur HaAruch and others wrote that he sent only ten donkeys because he did not want to burden Binyamin. But according to the plain meaning, it is difficult to say that such a thing would be a burden for Binyamin (whom his father loved, etc.); on the contrary.
29) [OCR unclear in part:] One of them had two donkeys to lead; and further, in our Parsha there were also animals to lead in addition to "your animals." See Moshav Zekeinim (ibid.): "He did not give them the donkeys to ride on, but… that is, each one had his donkey, to drive behind them." See also Chizkuni there.
30) Although they had already set out together with Shimon for Canaan — and not with the intention of returning immediately (as related at the end of Parshas Mikeitz), so that seemingly one must say that Shimon bought a donkey for himself, as each of his brothers had, and accordingly the question returns — nevertheless, from the plain meaning of the verses (Mikeitz 43:23–44:1) it is evident that from the time he brought Shimon out to them until he filled the sacks of the tribes (which were loaded on the donkeys), they did not leave Yosef's house*.
*) Accordingly, Rashi's wording (Mikeitz 44:10) is also understood: "Ten — since the theft was found in the hand of one of them" — although they were eleven men, because they had only ten sacks. There is no need for the forced explanation that "ten" is not exact [OCR unclear]. In the Rashi text found in Bereishis Rabbah (92:8) it says: "three people, etc." Perhaps it is a printer's error.
31) Rashi, Lech Lecha 13:10. It should be noted that he sent the wine to the land of Canaan, which indeed was praised for wine, as it is written, "ארץ חטה ושעורה וגפן" ("a land of wheat and barley and vines") (Eikev 8:8), and it would not be possible to call it "of the best of Egypt" relative to the land of Canaan.
32) The meaning of "of the best of Egypt" is the best (and most fitting) thing that was in Egypt — as a gift for Yaakov.
33) See Torah Shleimah, §90.
34) See also above, p. 80, note 7.
35) See Ohr HaChaim on our Parsha, 45:26. This is also implied by Rashi on Vayechi 49:6, 9 and 50:16, that in the end Yaakov learned that he had been sold by his brothers. But see Ramban on our Parsha (45:26), that Yaakov was never told, all his days, that his brothers had sold Yosef, for his brothers did not want to tell him of their sin, fearing that he would be angry with them. He writes that Yaakov thought Yosef had wandered in the field and those who found him took him and sold him to Egypt — consistent with what the tribes said about the coat, "This we found," i.e., in the place where they were shepherding (except that it became clear that he had not been torn by an animal, but that those who found him struck him, or the like).
36) Our Parsha, 45:9.
37) Similar to Rashi on our Parsha (45:27): "He gave them a sign, etc."
38) It should also be noted from the Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah 94:2, also cited above in note 15): "This is split beans, which is for distress of the soul" — that split beans have a natural property of dispelling sorrow. See Matnos Kehunah there, and Torah Shleimah cited in note 33.
39) It may be added that thereby Yosef also removed the concern that Yaakov might curse his brothers when he learned that they had sold him; see note 35. It should also be noted from Levush HaOrah (cited above, p. 134, note 33) that one may not suspect Yaakov that, out of his anger on account of Yosef alone, he would, heaven forbid, curse all his sons and bereave himself of all of them; see there.
40) In Gur Aryeh here: "The term 'split beans' refers to beans broken into parts, as it is written, 'ויגרס בחצץ' ('He has broken [my teeth] with gravel')." See also Rashi, Moed Katan 13b (s.v. "vegerusos"); Niddah 62a.
41) Our Parsha, 45:5.
42) One cannot ask, accordingly, regarding the first interpretation, why Yosef did not try to lessen Yaakov's pain, for: a) he did tell them to say to Yaakov in his name, "G‑d has made me…," as mentioned above; b) also according to the first interpretation one can say that among the food he sent there were also split beans (and accordingly it is all the more understandable that the two interpretations do not disagree about the facts), and the difference between the two interpretations is only as to what "the best of Egypt" refers to.
43) And the fact that he mentioned a reason in the first interpretation is also primarily to emphasize that this is the kind of thing (of pleasure) that befits a gift, as in the main text, Section 6.
44) Accordingly, what Rashi writes in Chayei Sarah (24:53) is also explained: "And delicacies (he gave to her brother and her mother)… fruits of the Land of Israel." Seemingly, how does he know that the delicacies were from the Land of Israel? The explanation is as in the main text: a gift (even a gift given only to her brother and her mother — see above, p. 65, note 9) deserves its name specifically when it is something not found among them; therefore he explained that the fruits were from the Land of Israel.
45) Especially since what is written in Parshas Mikeitz [OCR: 41:13; apparently 43:11] — that Yaakov told his sons, "Take of the choice produce of the land and bring down to the man a gift… pistachios and almonds" — implies that the famine did not affect every kind of produce, and even during the famine there were in the land of Canaan several things that were not found even in Egypt, which is why Yaakov sent them as a gift to Yosef; as in the main text.
46) Mikeitz 43:34.
*) As for Yaakov telling his sons to take a gift to the ruler of Egypt, a tribute of "balm… pistachios and almonds" (Mikeitz 43:11) — i.e., fruits — the verse (there) states that they were "of the choice produce of the land," not ordinary fruits of the Land of Israel (see Sforno there); especially since there was then famine in all the land, including the land of Egypt.
47) See Tur HaAruch (our Parsha 45:19): "'And you are commanded' — he said it in the form of a command, because Pharaoh recognized in Yosef that he would not lay a hand on his money at all… he would not want to send anything to his father, etc." That is, (although Yosef was the ruler and governor and had the power to do as he wished, nevertheless) in general his conduct was not to send anything on his own initiative.
Key Lesson
Yosef kept aged wine ready throughout his years in Egypt, trusting in G‑d that he would yet see his father again. So too, when the "straits" of worldly life weigh on a person, he must not despair but strengthen his trust in G‑d; and when a mitzvah comes his way, he should fulfill it beautifully without regard for the world's limitations — and then his material affairs will succeed as well.