x-mailing-list: daf-disc...@shemayisrael.com
(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.)
_________________________________________________________________
THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
d...@dafyomi.co.il
[REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]
________________________________________________________________
Bereishis 045: Yosef's Proof from the Milah
Salomon Amar asked:
>>On the passuk that Yossef utter to his brothers "gesshu na elay" Rashi
Hakadosh quoting the midrach rabba that Yossef showed them that he was
Mahul?
(a) That may not prove that he was a bene Yaakov as Ishmaelim did the brit
at the age of 13 and most importantly Yossef instituted that anyone coming
to get food would need to get mal (the brit) before.
(b) Chizkouni and the Kli Yakar mentioned that there was a difference in
the brit of bene Yaakov in a way that they had the additional pri’a. this
contradict the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda in yevamot saying that the pria was
instituted with Yehoshua before entering EI on the passuk "mol et bene
Israel Chenit".
(c) I saw a pchat saying that there was a difference between mila chadasha
like the once done on the adult mitsrim and the mila yeshena that was done
on the 8th day on bene Yaakov. Yossef had a mila yeshena.
Please help me find the source for this if this is accurate.<<
The Kollel replied:
>>(a) The Mizrachi adds that the Bnei Keturah also had Milah, thus all of
Avraham's descendants had Milah. If so how does Milah prove that Yosef was
their brother. In addition, asks the Ramban, speaking Hebrew was not a
valid proof of family either, since the entire Eretz Kna'an spoke that
language.
The Mizrachi answers these two questions by proposing that the combination
of both having Milah and speaking the language of the Avos led to only one
possible conclusion, since Kna'anim didn't have Milah and Bnei Keturah
didn't speak Hebrew.
(Your point about Yishmaelim having Milah might weaken his answer, since
Yishmaelim clearly passed through Eretz Kna'an, such as the ones who bought
Yosef. However, see the Sforno here who writes that Yishmaelim passing
through Kna'an did not speak Hebrew.)
As for the other Mitzrim having Milah - the commentaries all conclude that
since their Milah was a sign of subservience, Yosef certainly would not
have had a Milah if not for the familial connection.
(b) Your question on the Chizkuni (I couldn't find the Kli Yakar) from
Yevamos is valid. It would appear that he is following his own opinion in
Lech Lecha (17:25), that even though Avraham was not commanded to perform
Peri'ah he did it by himself since he knew it would become a Mitzvah in
later generations (and presumably his children followed his ways).
(c) The explanation to which you are referring is that of the Chizkuni
himself (Bereishis 45:4), who writes (based on the Rashi in Lech Lecha
17:25 from the Midrash) that with a married person, it less necessary to
perform Peri'ah, since the Peri'ah membrane becomes looser and falls off on
its own after the circumcision.
Based on this he suggests that since Yosef had Milah as a baby, his Peri'ah
had to be performed by knife. This made it noticeably different from the
Peri'ah of the Egyptians (which happened spontaneously, without the use of
a knife).
(d) Personally, I think the answer to the Ramban and Mizrachi's questions
is much simpler.
Yosef found it necessary to prove beyond a doubt that he could only be the
long-lost brother of the Shevatim. To this purpose, he demonstrated that he
knew what makes the family of Yakov Avinu - and only that family - unique.
He did not just show that he had a Milah, but rather that Milah is a
respected sign of the family of Avraham Avinu due to its Kedushah. He did
not just show that he spoke Hebrew, but that Hebrew was the respected
language of Yakov Avinu's family due to its Kedushah ("Lashon ha'Kodesh").
This comprised irrefutable proof of his identity.<<
---
Chaim Mendelson comments:
1. With reference to your quoting of the Chizkuni's p'shat:
"(c) The explanation to which you are referring is that of the Chizkuni
himself, who writes (based on the Rashi in Lech Lecha 17:25 from the
Midrash) that the older the person, the less necessary it becomes to
perform Peri'ah. When a person is older, the Peri'ah membrane becomes
looser and falls off on its own after the circumcision. Based on this he
suggests that since Yosef had Milah as a baby, his Peri'ah had to be
performed by knife. This made it noticeably different from the Peri'ah of
the Egyptians (which happened spontaneously, without the use of a knife)".
To the uninformed, the implication of your quote is that older age
contributes to the Peri'ah membrane becoming looser and falling off
"spontaneously". I don't believe that this is accurate. While you may have
tried to avoid being graphic, but as far as Chazal have taught us, its
falling off is related to the the act of having "Tashmish" relations (see
Rashi ibid.). Thus, while generally speaking, an older person will not have
any need for "Peri'ah", this isn't because the the Peri'ah membrane fell
off "spontaneously" due to his advancement in age, rather due to the factor
of sexual activity.
2. Another point that I'd like to comment on, is your your quoting the
Chizkuni that the "Peri'ah" aspect of Yosef''s Milah, was performed by
knife:"Based on this he suggests that since Yosef had Milah as a baby, his
Peri'ah had to be performed by *knife*. This made it noticeably different
from the Peri'ah of the Egyptians (which happened spontaneously, without
the use of a *knife*)".
With all due respect, the Chizkuni (Bereishis 45:4) merely posits that
Peri'ah performed on a Jewish child at young age is recognizable as such,
even at a later age. However he makes absolutely no mention to Peri'ah
being performed by knife!
I feel that this point is noteworthy, because while in practice some
mohelim use a knife to cut off the Peri'ah membrane, this is actually
controversial. For reference, two of the most famous codifiers (Rambam,
Milah 2:2; Shulchan
Aruch YD 264:3) describe Peri'ah being done with the *fingernail* of the
Mohel (not a knife). Limitations of time and space prevent me from
elaborating on this debate, however quoting Chizkuni as saying that Yosef's
Peri'ah was performed by knife, would be unjustly clouding the topic.
3. Finally, I note that Chazal have stated that Yosef was born "Mahul"
[See: Avos De'Rebbi Nosson 2:5; Medrash Tanchuma (Noach, 5); ibid. (Miketz,
3); Bamidbar Rabbah (14:5)]. Based on this, I would venture to say that
Yosef never actually needed to be circumcised by knife, nor was Peri'ah
ever performed on him. At most, he may have had "Hatafas Dam Bris"
performed on him.
Chaim Mendelson
Yerushalayim
----------------------------------------------
The Kollel replies:
1. Yasher Koach Chaim. You understood correctly; after Tashmish the Peri'ah
membrane becomes looser and falls off on its own (i.e. spontaneously) after
the circumcision.
2. Thank you for pointing that out!
3. I assume that the Rishonim viewed that as a Midrash that conflicts with
the one cited by Rashi. If Yosef's Milah was natural, how would it prove
his relationship to the family of Yakov? (The Hatafas Dam Bris certainly
wouldn't have been visible.)
According to explanation (d) that I suggested, though, there is no need to
see the Midrashim as conflicting.
Thank you,
Mordecai Kornfeld
>>><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><<<
The *D*AFYOMI *A*DVANCEMENT *F*ORUM, brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf
Write to us at d...@dafyomi.co.il or visit us at http://www.dafyomi.co.il
Tel/Fax(US): 646-820-3315; Fax(Isr): (02) 591-6024; Tel(Isr): (02) 651-5004
_______________________________________________
Daf-discuss mailing list
Daf-discuss@shemayisrael.co.il
http://mail.shemayisrael.co.il/mailman/listinfo/daf-discuss_shemayisrael.co.il
