Text & Context DRAFT
Miketz
Rabbi Eliezer Shemtov
In this week’s reading, Miketz, [1] we encounter the story that gave birth to the well-known phrase “seven years of plenty and seven years of famine”: Pharaoh’s troubling dreams and his enthusiastic reaction to Joseph’s interpretation of them.
Let’s examine some intriguing details of this biblical story and Rashi’s commentary on it.
It is quite reasonable to think that dreams about cows and ears of grain suggest agricultural themes, especially since they were seen emerging from the Nile, the water source that irrigates Egypt’s fertile fields. Why, then, did Pharaoh’s advisors struggle to interpret the dreams and instead offer the explanation that “Pharaoh would have seven daughters born to him and would also bury seven daughters”?
Why does Rashi mention the specific interpretation of Pharaoh’s advisors, rather than just say that Pharaoh did not find their interpretation to be convincing? Why are the details relevant?
Why was Pharaoh so impressed by Joseph’s interpretation, given that it was the most obvious one?
Why does Joseph, after interpreting the dream, meddle in government affairs by offering Pharaoh advice on what actions to take as a result of the dream?
Why does Pharaoh praise Joseph’s wisdom as expressed in his counsel, rather than focusing on the main issue, namely the interpretation of the dream that had eluded and disturbed him so?
Since Rashi does not address these points explicitly, we must conclude that there is no need to because the answers are either evident in the text itself or can be inferred from an earlier commentary by Rashi.
The Explanation:
The challenge in interpreting Pharaoh’s dreams lay in the simultaneous appearance of the fat and lean cows and later regarding the fat and lean ears of grain. If the fat cows and ears of grain represent seven years of abundance, followed by seven years of famine represented by the lean cows and ears of grain, how is it that in Pharaoh’s dream they coexisted at the same time ?
It is for this reason that Pharaoh’s advisors dismissed the more obvious agricultural interpretation. The contradiction of two opposing events —abundance and famine— occurring simultaneously led them to discard it as an option.
Rashi, citing Talmudic sources, clarifies that Pharaoh’s advisors opted for an interpretation that sidestepped this apparent contradiction. They suggested that the seven fat and seven lean cows in Pharaoh’s dream symbolized the birth of seven daughters and the death of another seven. This explanation aligned neatly with the detail of the lean cows swallowing the fat cows: the sorrow of losing seven daughters overshadowed the joy of being blessed with the other seven.
Joseph’s interpretation stood out because it addressed the contradiction directly. He explained the dream in the most straightforward way: it was a prophecy about the country’s agricultural future. The coexistence of the fat and lean cows indicated that G-d was not merely revealing His plans to Pharaoh but also informing him of the action he must take. Joseph’s advice was not an unsolicited intervention but an integral part of the dream’s meaning.
By preparing for famine during the years of plenty —storing grain to be used during the lean years— the years of famine would, in a sense, be present during the years of abundance. Likewise, the stored grain from the years of plenty, feeding the population during the famine, would make the years of plenty present during the years of famine. This dynamic was vividly represented in Pharaoh’s dream by the simultaneous presence of the fat and lean cows and ears of grain.
This explains why Pharaoh praised Joseph for the solution he provided rather than focusing solely on the interpretation of the dream. The solution itself was a crucial —and the most practical— component of the dream’s interpretation.
The Mystical Dimension:
Pharaoh’s dreams and Joseph’s interpretation were instrumental in setting into motion the events leading to the Israelites’ exile and enslavement in Egypt, as well as their eventual exodus. It is reasonable to view these dreams as also containing lessons regarding exile and redemption in general.
Exile is likened to a dream state, because both often feature contradictions. In exile, spiritual contradictions coexist: one can feel love for G-d while simultaneously being preoccupied with material concerns. This duality is sharply reflected in the simultaneous appearance of the fat and lean cows. The fat cows represent expansive, spiritual vitality and love for G-d, while the lean cows symbolize spiritual contraction and impoverishment caused by worldly worries.
Joseph’s unique contribution was his explanation of the coexistence of opposites.
Why do dreams often feature contradictions and impossible scenarios?
Two explanations can be offered:
During sleep, consciousness and logic are suspended, allowing imagination —which does not adhere to logical rules— to take over. Imagination, not based on reality, can allow for contradictions.
When we are in a dream state, our mind transcends the limits of linear thinking and accesses non-linear modes of thought. Mystics refer to Igulim, “circular” realities, in contrast to Yosher, “linear” ones. In this non-linear dimension, opposites can coexist in ways that seem impossible in a linear reality.
Most people operate within the linear system of logic and order, where contradictions are rejected. There are two exceptions, however: 1) those who are not capable of understanding conventional logic; 2) those that operate within an alternate logical framework.
Joseph’s soul originated in the non-linear realm. His ability to interpret dreams correctly also reflected his capacity to communicate “non-linear” ideas within the “linear” systems of understanding the world. Joseph could explain the inexplicable. How does one explain the inexplicable? Isn’t that itself a contradiction? For most people, this would be impossible. For Joseph, this was not an irreconcilable contradiction but rather a paradox that made perfect sense within the non-linear dimension of reality. In Joseph’s perspective, paradoxes are bridges between the linear and non-linear realities.[2]
These ideas resonate deeply with us today. We are presently experiencing the darkest moments of exile, yet, as the Rebbe frequently emphasized, we are on the threshold of the imminent arrival of the Messiah. Each passing day of delay is at the same time one day closer to redemption—a profound paradox.
Joseph prepared us so that we not despair in the face of apparent contradictions. Instead, we are invited to view them as paradoxes, reflections of a reality that we can presently only accept but will soon perceive and appreciate with clarity.
—————————————
Genesis 41:1 - 44:17
A helpful example of this concept is the relationship between Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry. What may seem impossible in a two-dimensional world can work perfectly in a three-dimensional one. For instance, planting four trees so that each is equidistant from the others is impossible on a flat plane but achievable on a hill, a three-dimensional reality.
In Halachah (Jewish law), a similar concept arises when determining the direction to face during prayer when orienting towards Jerusalem. A straight line in a two-dimensional plane is not the same as a straight line on a sphere. The curved nature of the Earth introduces complexities that are resolved by understanding non-linear geometry.
For a clear explanation of how this principle applies in Halachah, see: Why Do We Face East When Praying? Or Do We?.
Synthesis of Likutei Sichos Vol. 15 pages 339-347
Comments