A Tale of Two Compromises
Some compromises are necessary. We must do whatever can forestall a Jew’s spiritual demise. However, there is never a point when we allow the compromise to be “institutionalized.”
Two Attitudes
Who were the brothers of Joseph who acted to save Joseph from death? The Torah records two attempts to save Joseph’s life; yet our Sages take a different attitude towards them.
When Joseph’s brothers decided they were going to kill Joseph, Reuben was the one who suggested that they throw him in a pit. Reuben’s intention was to return later and bring him back safely to his father.
For this Reuben receives kudos from our Sages in the Talmud (Tractate Makkos 10). There the Talmud explains the reason why of all the Cities of Refuge — designated for the protection of a person convicted of unintentional murder — the first such city was situated in the territory of Israel that was apportioned to the tribe of Reuben. The reason was that Reuben, was the first to begin the effort to save Joseph.
Let us now see how the saga of Joseph unfolds and the role Judah played. Judah convinced his brothers that there would be no gain if they would kill their brother. Rather, he counseled, “let us sell him to the Ishmaelites.” Judah’s quick thinking appeared to have saved Joseph’s life. Yet, Judah gets no recognition for his life saving intervention. Instead he receives harsh criticism from our Sages in the Tractate Sanhedrin:
“Whoever blesses Judah [for his saving of Joseph, insults [G-d].”
Why, we may ask do the two brothers, both of whom made attempts, albeit unsuccessful — to save Joseph’s life, receive contradictory reviews?
Moreover, it would have made more sense to criticize Reuben who had Joseph thrown into a pit. That pit, the Torah states, had no water in it. From this the Talmud infers that it was indeed infested with snakes and scorpions.
The Key Word
To understand the different treatment these two brothers received, we should examine the key word in the case of Judah. Judah said, “What gain” would there be if they kill Joseph. The Hebrew word for gain “betza” also has the connotation of a compromise. What Judah did was to compromise his brother Joseph. Instead of killing him Judah advised that they sell him. While saving someone from death is preferable to the alternative, it did not bring him closer to his father. It was thus a far cry from the approach that was expected of Judah, the leader of the twelve tribes and the ancestor of the Davidic dynasty and the Messiah. This half-baked compromise might have been considered a positive act for someone of lesser stature but not for Judah, the symbol of leadership, Pragmatic Reuben True, Reuben also made a compromise by not insisting that they retune him to his father immediately. Nevertheless, Reuben’s compromise was based on two factors and therefore justifiable First, Reuben was concerned that his brothers would not go for his request to totally free Joseph.
Second, the Torah states that Reuben’s intent was to return him to his father. In other words at no time did Reuben forget what the goal was: returning him to his father.
By contrast, Judah did have the authority to insist that Joseph be returned to his father. And, furthermore, Judah’s compromise did nothing to ensure the realization of that objective.
On the contrary, by selling Joseph to merchants who were traveling to Egypt, he would be removing him from his father even more.
“Out-Reach”: How far out?
These two forms of compromise represent two attitudes that can be applied to our own day and age with respect to our attitude towards Jewish “out-reach.”
Every Jew has been likened to Joseph. In our generation, unfortunately, there are many millions of “Joseph’s” who are in danger of losing their Jewish identities and will be totally lost to their Father in Heaven.
There can be two approaches to saving them from spiritual destruction. Both approaches may employ a compromise. The first approach, the Reuben approach is to do whatever can forestall the Jew’s spiritual demise. However, there is never a point when we allow the compromise to be “institutionalized.” Reuben never had the intention to leave him in that pit with the argument that it was better than outright killing him. Rather, Reuben’s intention was to keep him alive long enough so that he can be returned to his father.
TheReuben Approach”
The Reuben approach to “outreach” is to patiently expose our assimilated brethren, step by step, to their heritage that they have lost, thereby getting them closer to returning to their Father.
In truth, the attitude is not of “out-reach” but of “in reach.” We are merely enabling every Jew to discover his or her inner Jewish soul. Once a Jew is exposed to who he or she really is he or she is on the way to a full Jewish life of observance and commitment.
In truth, then, this approach is not a compromise because of two reasons:
First, we do not suggest for a moment that we are planning to stay at the entry level.
Second, the approach that appeals to the other’s inner soul, carries within it the entire process that will follow. It is there in a potential state. Hence, within the compromise is the full and unequivocal attachment to G-d.
The Judah Approach
The Judah approach is to provide a watered down version of Judaism that sends him to Egypt While some may argue that this approach is better than nothing because it saves Joseph from certain death, it is still not becoming of Judah to “enshrine” the compromise by permanently distancing the “Josephs” from their Heavenly Father.
Connection to Chanukah
The story of Chanukah is also about the refusal of the Jewish people who liberated the Temple to use “compromised” oil for the lighting the Menorah. While they were prepared to use the lone flask of oil for the first night and then not light the Menorah for seven days, that compromise was only a temporary one and one that left them no alternative.
Then G-d performed the miracle that they did not have to rely on any compromise. They were deserving of this miracle because they refused to accept an adulterated Mitzvah.
Moshiach’s Rectification of Judah’s Compromise
Moshiach who is a descendant of Judah has the responsibility to correct his ancestor’s mistake. And since Moshiach’s coming is hastened by our behavior, it behooves us to resist the institutionalized and permanent compromises. No Jew should ever be regarded as lost to our people. And no matter how small the odds of success, we must always seek to return every Jew to his Father. If it means one step at a time, so be it.
When G-d will see that our efforts our sincere He will crown them with success and bring us Moshiach who will usher in the age of Redemption, when we will not have to a compromised world of goodness, but unmitigated and unadulterated goodness.
From the book Light from the Future: Parshas Vayeishev by Rabbi Heschel Greenberg, published by the Jewish Discovery Center.
