“And Y’huda approached him (Yosef)” (B’reishis 44:18). “Approached [him] to wage war, as it says (Sh’muel II 10:13), ‘and Yo’av and the people who were with him approached to wage war with Aram” (B’reishis Rabbah 93:6). Although Y’huda did try to reason with the Viceroy, his words were spoken in harsh tones (see Rashi), and apparently, had Yosef not revealed himself, Y’huda would have led his brothers into battle in order to bring Binyamin back home. Having guaranteed his father that Binyamin would return alive, Y’huda would have started a war with all of Egypt to make sure that he kept his word. However, if Y’huda was willing to use force to bring Binyamin home, shouldn’t he have done so earlier, when his odds were much better? Why wait until they were back in the Viceroy’s house, where he would have to defeat the entire Egyptian army, rather than as soon as the Viceroy’s officer insisted that Binyamin must return with him to become a slave, when he would only have to overcome the officer and whomever was with him?

Although this question could easily be brushed aside, as perhaps using force hadn’t occurred to him until afterwards (especially since, as I discussed last week, Yosef purposely kept his brothers’ stress level high in order to keep them off-balance, and their stress level had to have gone through the roof after the goblet was found in Binyamin’s bag), and they only left “the city” (see 44:4 and 44:18), which may mean that they were still inside Egypt, and would have have had to battle the Egyptian army in order to leave the country, a similar question is asked that can not be brushed aside as easily; by discussing possible answers to that question, this question may be answered as well.

After the goblet was found in Binyamin’s bag, Y’huda had offered that all 11 brothers would become the Viceroy’s slaves (44:16), but this offer was politely declined (44:17), with only Binyamin having to remain as a slave while the rest were free to return home. This was a much better offer (as either way Binyamin would be a slave; the only difference was the brothers’ status), making Y’huda’s threatening response quite puzzling. Why did he speak harshly with the Viceroy after he had countered Y’huda’s offer with a more generous one? Shouldn’t he have been thankful before (gently and calmly) asking for something else instead?

Or Hachayim (44:17) explains that if all the brothers had become slaves, it would have been understood as a punishment from G-d for having sold Yosef into slavery. However, when it became apparent that only Binyamin, who was not involved in the sale, would be a slave, Y’huda knew that it wasn’t a heavenly decree to punish them for selling Yosef into slavery, and he therefore confronted the Viceroy for wanting to keep Binyamin. Netziv (44:17) has a similar approach, while the Nesivos (Nachalas Yaakov, 44:18) adds that besides the sin of selling Yosef, the brothers thought that perhaps the exile into Egypt had begun. After being told that, except for Binyamin, they were free to return home, they realized that this wasn’t the case, and Y’huda took a more threatening stance. This would also explain why he didn’t “go to war” with Yosef’s officer, as he still thought that the Viceroy would be G-d’s vehicle to institute the appropriate punishment. When they returned with the officer and this didn’t happen, Y’huda felt that he had to resort to “war” in order to bring Binyamin back to his father.

[That the Viceroy would reverse the decision relayed by his officer was bolstered by their discussion with the officer, a conversation that needs an explanation. First of all, why did he first agree that the brothers’ offer (44:9), that they should all become slaves — except for the one whose bag the goblet was found in, who would be executed — was appropriate (44:10), but then insist that only the “thief” would be kept as a slave while everyone else went free? Why is there no “but” in the transition, making it seem as if this was their offer in the first place (and not his counter-offer)? Additionally, as Yitz Weiss pointed out to me last Shabbos, the officer made it seem as if Binyamin would be his slave, not the Viceroy’s. Both the officer (44:10) and the Viceroy (44:17) said “the one whom the goblet was found with shall be MY slave.” How could the officer be speaking as if he was the Viceroy, or claim that the slave would be his and not the Viceroy’s? However, the conversation can be easily explained as follows: The brothers said that if they have the goblet they would all be slaves, except for the “thief,” who would be executed. The officer responded that this punishment would be appropriate, if not for the fact that he had explicit instructions from the Viceroy that stated otherwise, specifically (quoting the Viceroy’s words) “only the thief shall be my slave.” Since he is quoting the Viceroy directly, the “my” in 44:10 refers to the same person as the “my” in 44:17, and since he transitioned from his own thoughts (agreeing with them) to quoting his boss’ thoughts, no other transitional phrase is needed. Getting back to our discussion, the officer agreeing that, according to Egyptian law, they really should all be punished (not just the thief), supported their belief that once they returned to Egypt this is what would happen. When it didn’t, which meant it wasn’t a punishment directed at them, the confrontation started.]

Nevertheless, had the Viceroy (or his officer) been the one who threatened to keep all of them as slaves, we can understand why they thought it was a divine punishment. However, they were told from the very beginning that only the one who had the stolen goblet would be kept as a slave. It was the brothers who first suggested that they should all be kept as slaves (44:9), and Y’huda who made that offer to the Viceroy (44:16). If it was only a suggestion/offer made by the brothers, and was never even considered by the Egyptians, how could they have thought that it was either a punishment from G-d, or the beginning of Egyptian servitude?

Another possibility is that the brothers were hoping that becoming slaves would atone for the sin of selling Yosef as a slave, but when that possibility was denied, they had to go to “plan B.” However, there is a discussion in the traditional literature whether self-imposed “y’surin” (afflictions) are a viable means of avoiding punishment. If one can avoid “y’surin” being decreed via self-imposed suffering, then the brothers might have tried to put themselves into slavery to atone for the sin of selling Yosef. If, however, such self-imposed suffering would not have removed the punishment that was due, this approach would face the same obstacle as the previous one.

The first conversation amongst the brothers about being guilty for the way they treated Yosef (42:21) didn’t take place when the Viceroy put them in prison (42:17), but after they were released. Or HaChayim (42:21) says that being forced to leave Shimon in prison while they returned home is what triggered this conversation. Originally, the Viceroy had said that all of them must stay in prison while one of them goes back for Binyamin, but when only one had to remain locked up while the rest went back, it reminded them of what they hade done to Yosef, abandoning him to be brought to a foreign land. Had the brothers now left Binyamin behind, they would have being doing to him what they had done to Yosef (and then to Shimon). [It is interesting to note that the two times Yosef couldn’t control his emotions were when the situations reminded him of being abandoned.] Having learned this lesson, the brothers were unwilling to do this a third time, and offered to also remain as slaves rather than leaving Binyamin behind all by himself. When the Viceroy refused, Y’huda put his foot down, and insisted that he be the one forced to stay in Egypt instead of Binyamin.

Until faced with actually having to leave Binyamin behind, and doing to him what they had done to Yosef (and Shimon), Y’huda wasn’t ready to start a war. Not before they returned to the Viceroy (even if the odds at winning the war were much better then), nor when told that they didn’t all have to become slaves. However, when the Viceroy told them to “go in peace [back] to your father” (42:17), which meant abandoning their youngest brother right then and there, Y’huda was going to whatever it took to make sure that didn’t happen, even if it meant going to war.