Parshas Vayeishev
1. On the verses "ויאמר לו (ישראל) לך נא ראה את שלום אחיך גו' וישלחהו גו' ויבא שכמה" ("And he [Yisrael] said to him [Yosef], 'Go now, see to the welfare of your brothers...' And he sent him... and he came to Shechem")1, Rashi pauses on "ויבא שכמה" ("and he came to Shechem") and explains: "מקום מוכן לפורעניות כו'" ("A place prepared for calamity, etc." — as will be cited below, section 3).
We need to understand: What is difficult in the plain meaning of the verse, on account of which Rashi needs to explain that Shechem is "a place prepared for calamity, etc."2?
The commentators3 explain that since it already says earlier4, "הלא אחיך רועים בשכם" ("Are not your brothers pasturing in Shechem?"), there is no need for the verse to spell out again "(and he came) to Shechem"; it should have said only "ויבא שמה" ("and he came there")5 (and we would have known that it means Shechem). From the fact that the verse emphasizes "and he came to Shechem," it is implied that what is meant is the well-known "Shechem," the one prepared for calamity6.
According to the plain meaning, however, it is difficult to say that this is what Rashi is coming to address, because7:
(a) We find in several places that the verse repeats the name of a place and does not suffice with the word "there." For example, in our parsha8: "ויתנהו אל בית הסהר .. ויהי שם9 בבית הסהר .. את כל האסירים אשר בבית הסהר גו'" ("And he placed him in the prison... and he was there in the prison... all the prisoners who were in the prison..."). That is, in the way of plain meaning it is no wonder at all that the verse speaks clearly and repeats the name of the place once again.
(b) If this were difficult for Rashi, as above, he should have addressed it in the previous verse10 — "ויאמר ישראל .. הלוא אחיך רועים בשכם גו'" ("And Yisrael said... Are not your brothers pasturing in Shechem...") — where already, seemingly, there was no need to spell out "pasturing in Shechem," since it already says earlier11: "וילכו אחיו לרעות את צאן אביהם. בשכם" ("And his brothers went to pasture their father's flock in Shechem")12 (and here too it would have been sufficient had he said13 only "לכה ואשלחך אל אחיך" ("Come, and I will send you to your brothers"), or the like).
(c) According to this, Rashi should have quoted in the caption only the word "Shechemah" ("to Shechem") — not (also) "vayavo" ("and he came").
2. Other commentators14 explain that Rashi is coming here to explain why the words "and he came to Shechem" need to be written at all — what difference does it make where the "וימצאהו איש וגו'" ("and a man found him...") took place? So Rashi explains that this is because Shechem is "a place prepared for calamity, etc."
But this explanation too is not readily understood: Since the verse relates that Yosef's brothers were in Shechem, and that Yaakov sent Yosef to them15 — it is obvious that it is the way of the verse to relate that Yosef went where he was sent15 — to Shechem.
Moreover: In the following verses16 it is related how Yosef was "תועה בשדה" ("wandering in the field") and said to the "man," "את אחי אנכי מבקש" ("I am seeking my brothers"), and "ויאמר האיש נסעו מזה גו'" ("And the man said, 'They have traveled from here...'"). It is obvious that for the continuation of the story, the verse must first mention that Yosef arrived in Shechem (otherwise the continuation — "wandering in the field... I am seeking my brothers" and "they have traveled from here" — does not fit).
3. Rashi continues: "שם קלקלו השבטים שם ענו את דינה שם נחלקה מלכות בית דוד שנאמר17 וילך רחבעם שכמה" ("There the tribes went astray; there they violated Dinah; there the kingdom of the House of David was divided, as it says, 'And Rechavam went to Shechem'").
We need to understand:
(a) The order of the "calamities" in Rashi's commentary: The event of "they violated Dinah" took place earlier than "the tribes went astray." Rashi should therefore have arranged them according to the chronological order in which they occurred18.
(b) Moreover: The source of this commentary of Rashi is in the Gemara19 and in the Tanchuma20, and there they are indeed listed in the order in which they occurred ("they violated Dinah" comes first). Why does Rashi change and reverse the order?
(c) In the Gemara and in the Tanchuma the wording is "בשכם מכרו (אחיו) את יוסף" ("In Shechem [his brothers] sold Yosef"). What is the reason that Rashi changes this and writes "there the tribes went astray"?
And seemingly, on the contrary: The expression "went astray" (kilkelu) is appropriate even for a matter that is not severe [similar to what Rashi says earlier21 regarding Reuven, that "אפילו בשעת הקלקלה קראו בכור" ("even at the time of his going astray he called him the firstborn")]. Since what is being discussed here is the sale of Yosef, which was a grave matter22, why does Rashi say that "there the tribes (merely) went astray"?
(d) We find in the Prophets (before the account of "and Rechavam went to Shechem") another calamitous event that took place in Shechem: "וילך אבימלך בן ירובעל שכמה .. ויהרוג את אחיו גו'" ("And Avimelech son of Yerubaal went to Shechem... and he killed his brothers...")23. Why does Rashi not cite this calamity24?
[One cannot say that this is because it was not a calamity for the Jewish people as a whole — because "they violated Dinah" also concerned only an individual.]
(e) On the other hand — we find that good things also took place in Shechem, as Rashi already cited earlier25, that in Shechem "קבלו ישראל שבועת התורה" ("the Jewish people accepted the oath of the Torah") [and as related in the Prophets26, that Yehoshua made a covenant with the Jewish people in Shechem for the fulfillment of Torah and mitzvos]; there Avraham heard from G‑d the "בשורת הזרע" ("tidings of offspring") and the "בשורת א"י" ("tidings of the Land of Israel")27. So what compels the plain meaning of the verse to say that Shechem is specifically a place prepared for calamity?
4. The fact that Rashi says "there the tribes went astray" and not "(his brothers) sold Yosef" can be explained by saying that Rashi here follows his own approach in his commentary on the Torah:
On "נלכה דותינה" ("Let us go to Dosan")28, Rashi explains: "לבקש לך נכלי דתות שימיתוך בהם, ולפי פשוטו שם מקום הוא ואין מקרא יוצא מידי פשוטו" ("To seek legal pretexts against you by which to put you to death. According to its plain meaning, it is the name of a place, and a verse does not depart from its plain meaning"). The fact that Rashi adds, after both explanations, "and a verse does not depart from its plain meaning" — which we do not find (at all) in other places where he brings two explanations (one according to "Aggadah" and one according to "its plain meaning") — his intention is to explain29 that even according to the first explanation, "a verse does not depart from its plain meaning," and Dosan is "the name of a place." That is (as the commentators30 explain), in "Let us go to Dosan" both matters are present: (a) it is the name of a place — Yosef's brothers went away from Shechem to the place Dosan; and (b) their going was "to seek legal pretexts against you, etc."
It follows that according to Rashi's approach in his commentary on the Torah — the plain meaning of the verse — the sale of Yosef (according to both explanations) did not take place in Shechem31 but in Dosan. Consequently, Rashi cannot use the same wording as the Gemara and Tanchuma — "In Shechem (his brothers) sold Yosef."
[In his commentary on the Talmud32, Rashi addresses this difficulty and explains: "ודותן דכתיב בקרא היינו כפר הסמוך לשכם ונקראת על שם שכם" ("And Dosan, which is written in the verse, is a village near Shechem, and it is called by the name of Shechem")33. Not according to its midrashic interpretation, that they were judging him to kill him (and as he explains elsewhere34 that (according to the midrash) "דותן אינה מקום" ("Dosan is not a place")) — but according to the plain meaning of the verse, Dosan "is the name of a place"35. And it is not reasonable that Shechem should be "prepared for calamity" on account of calamities that took place in a village near Shechem (also: since the verse emphasizes that this was a second place — "נסעו מזה גו' נלכה דותינה" ("they have traveled from here... let us go to Dosan") — it is difficult to say in the plain meaning of the verse that this was (a "village near Shechem," which is) "called by the name of Shechem"36).]
Therefore Rashi explains that "there (in Shechem) the tribes went astray" — not the sale itself, but a matter of going astray (lesser than that).
We must understand, however: Since the sale of Yosef took place (not there, but) in Dosan, what does Rashi mean by "there the tribes went astray"?
5. The explanation of all this is as follows:
In the simple sense, one would understand the saying of our Sages, "a place prepared for calamity," to mean that Yosef came to a place that was "prepared for calamity" in general (as in the continuation of the statement, which enumerates the calamities that took place there), and therefore something calamitous also happened to him there — his sale.
To preclude the idea that this is his intention in the meaning of "a place prepared for calamity," Rashi changes the order of the calamities and places at the beginning "there the tribes went astray," which is indeed the "calamitous event" being discussed here in these verses with regard to Yosef —
By this Rashi makes clear that by "a place prepared for calamity" he means it with regard to a particular individual — only in relation to Yosef, in connection with his sale. That is, upon coming to Shechem, (the preparation for) his calamity began there37, because "there the tribes went astray" (as will be explained below, section 6).
[And from this it is understood that the other two calamities that Rashi cites (there they violated Dinah; there the kingdom of the House of David was divided, etc.) are also connected with Shechem being a place of calamity for Yosef, as will be explained below, section 7.]
6. What compels this interpretation is the difficulty that arises in the words that Rashi quotes — "and he came to Shechem":
From the fact that the verse ("And he said to him, 'Go now...' and he sent him...") concludes with the words "and he came to Shechem," and only in the following verse do the details of the story of what happened there begin — "and a man found him..." — it is implied that Yosef's coming to Shechem is in itself a principal matter in the story (of the sale of Yosef). That is, his coming there is not an incidental matter; rather, it is relevant to know that he arrived there.
This is not understood: Yosef's brothers were no longer in Shechem at that time, but in Dosan (as above, section 3), and consequently Yosef's coming to Shechem was only in passing, as he went (from there onward on his way) to his brothers in Dosan. It is understandable that for the continuation of the story it must be related (as above, section 2) that Yosef arrived in Shechem — but why is it necessary to single out his arrival there as a matter in its own right38? The verse could have said, "וימצאהו איש בשכם והנה גו'" ("And a man found him in Shechem, and behold...") (the emphasis "and he came to Shechem" is seemingly superfluous).
On this Rashi says, "And he came to Shechem — a place prepared for calamity; there the tribes went astray, etc.": Yosef's arrival in Shechem is not an incidental detail in the story of the sale of Yosef, but a principal matter in its own right — this is the place where his calamities began, because "there the tribes went astray." It is true that the sale of Yosef took place only in Dosan, but the "going astray" of the tribes had already taken place (when they were) in Shechem: there they had already begun to plan and prepare the "calamity" for him — "to seek legal pretexts against you by which to put you to death"39.
7. The connection of the following two calamities (there they violated Dinah; there the kingdom of the House of David was divided, etc.) with Shechem being "a place prepared for calamity" for Yosef:
Rashi explained earlier40 that Yosef "הי' מגיד לאביו שהיו אוכלין אבר מן החי ומזלזלין בבני השפחות לקרותן עבדים וחשודים על העריות ובשלשתן לקה על אבר מן החי וישחטו .. ועל דבה .. לעבד נמכר .. ועל העריות .. ותשא וגו'" ("would tell his father that they were eating a limb from a living animal, and disparaging the sons of the maidservants by calling them slaves, and were suspect of immorality; and for all three he was punished: for the limb from a living animal — 'and they slaughtered [a goat]'; ... and for the slander [of calling them slaves] — 'he was sold as a slave'; ... and for immorality — 'and [his master's wife] cast [her eyes upon him]'").
Since Yosef's punishment is connected with three matters — (a) a limb from a living animal; (b) disparaging the sons of the maidservants by calling them slaves; (c) being suspect of immorality — we must say that Shechem, where the preparation and beginning of his calamities and punishments took place, is "prepared for calamity" — for three kinds of calamity, corresponding to the three matters in Yosef's words against his brothers:
On account of the going astray of the tribes — "to seek legal pretexts against you by which to put you to death," a matter of bloodshed — it is a "preparation" for the calamities for his having said that they were not careful about a limb from a living animal41 — "and they slaughtered..."; on account of "there they violated Dinah"42, it is prepared for the calamities for his having said that they were suspect of immorality — "and she cast..."; and on account of "there the kingdom of the House of David was divided" (which indicates disparagement and diminution of the kingship of the House of David — and through Yeravam, of the tribe of Ephraim, son of Yosef), it is prepared for the calamities for the disparagement of the sons of the maidservants "by calling them slaves" — "he was sold as a slave..."
Accordingly, the difficulties (raised above, section 3) fall away on their own — that we find other calamities that took place in Shechem, and also good things — because according to the plain meaning of the verse, Shechem is prepared for calamity only in connection with Yosef43, not so for the entire Jewish people — especially since there Yehoshua made a covenant with all the Jewish people for the fulfillment of Torah and mitzvos.
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Vayeishev 5736)
Notes
1) Our parsha, 37:14.
2) In the Ra'av here: "He expounds 'Shechemah' as if it were 'shichmah,' from the expression (Hoshea 6:9) 'on the road they murder by consent (shichmah),' which is an expression of calamity" (and see Midrash Sechel Tov here); and in the Biurei Maharai (cited also in Tzeidah LaDerech: "he derives it from the meaning of the word itself...") that Shechem is an expression of a portion, as Rashi explains in Parshas Vayechi ... and every division is prepared for calamity. But according to the plain meaning: a) there must be something compelling in the plain meaning in order to expound the name [as is proven in this very case — for Rashi did not explain "a place prepared for calamity" above, verses 12–13]; b) the verses of Hoshea etc., and that every division etc., are not alluded to at all in Rashi's commentary.
3) Re'em, Gur Aryeh, Devek Tov, and others. And see Minchah Belulah here.
4) Verse 13.
5) And in Levush HaOrah here: "Why is 'Shechemah' written with a hei at its end ... it is superfluous, for 'vayavo Shechem' would also have meant 'he came to Shechem,' etc." See there.
6) The wording of the Re'em. And see Levush there.
7) And there is still a difficulty with the Levush's answer (in note 5): in most places where a hei is written at the end of a word (or a lamed at its beginning), even without that hei (or lamed) it would have meant "(he came) to...". And see Rashi, Vayishlach 33:18.
8) 39:20–22. And see below, verse 17: "and he found them in Dosan"; verse 29; and in many places.
9) That is, not only does it not suffice with "there," but it says both — "there in the prison"!
10) And in Lekach Tov above, on verse 12: "In Shechem — a place designated for calamity."
11) Verse 12.
12) However, this can be answered, with a preface: Why does the verse relate that Yosef's brothers were pasturing in Shechem*? The explanation is that this resolves the question: Why did Yaakov send Yosef to see to his brothers' welfare specifically now — after all, all pasturing of flocks is at a distance from the city, especially since Yaakov had many flocks (and see above, 36:7: "and the land... could not bear them because of their livestock")? This is resolved by the emphasis that they were pasturing in Shechem, which was a place of danger for Yaakov and his sons, as related earlier (Vayishlach 34:30; and see there 35:5), and out of concern etc. he sent him to see to their welfare, as the commentators write (see Ibn Ezra, cited in Rabboseinu Baalei HaTosafos — Hadar Zekeinim; Rashbam; Chizkuni; Ralbag; and others). And it may be said that according to Rashi's approach this is so obvious that it needs no explanation [and it may be said that this is emphasized in the very wording of the verse, "Are not your brothers..." — for seemingly the word "halo" ("are not") is superfluous]. Therefore the verse adds here too (along with Yaakov's words, "Come, and I will send you...") "your brothers are pasturing in Shechem."
*) This is not truly a question — for one may say that this is the way of the verses. Similar to below, section 2.
13) And although these are Yaakov's words (and not the verse's narrative), in the simple sense not every detail of what was said was written in the Torah, only what is relevant to the story.
14) Maharshal, cited in Sifsei Chachamim; Divrei David (by the Taz).
15) See Chayei Sarah 24:10; Toldos 28:5; and elsewhere. And see Ohr HaChaim here.
16) Verses 16–17.
17) II Divrei HaYamim 10:1. It requires some further study why Rashi did not cite the verse (that precedes it) in I Melachim 12:1, as in Sanhedrin 102a*. And in Tanchuma on our parsha (2), it cites the verse "ויבן ירבעם את שכם גו'" ("And Yeravam built Shechem...") (I Melachim ibid., 25). Perhaps this is to emphasize that there too it says "Shechemah," which indicates that it is a place prepared for calamity (especially according to the Levush's explanation cited above, note 5).
*) And Dikdukei Sofrim on Sanhedrin there cites a version in which the Gemara too cites the verse from Divrei HaYamim.
18) In addition to its not being in chronological order, seemingly: (a) It would be more fitting to begin with the calamity that actually took place before "and he came to Shechem" and the sale of Yosef — "they violated Dinah" — on account of which it was (already) a place prepared for calamity. (b) One cannot say that the sale of Yosef took place in Shechem because it is a place prepared for calamity, when the first proof of this (that it is prepared for calamity) is that the calamity of the sale of Yosef took place there!
19) Sanhedrin ibid.
20) Ibid.
21) Vayishlach 35:23. And in Rashi there, verse 22 (in the second explanation): that Reuven did not sin.
22) And in the wording of the verse (Vayechi 50:17): "the transgression of your brothers."
23) Shoftim 9:1 ff. And see there the entire chapter.
24) The same question can be asked as to why it is not cited in Sanhedrin and Tanchuma there. However, the answer in Rashi's commentary must be according to the plain meaning.
25) Lech Lecha 12:6. And see also Rashi, Re'eh 11:30.
26) Yehoshua 24:1 ff. And see there 8:30 ff.
27) The wording of Rashi, Lech Lecha ibid., verse 7. Note that this is the first time it says "וירא ה' אל אברם" ("And G‑d appeared to Avram").
28) Below, verse 17.
29) As written in Divrei David there.
30) Ramban there; Divrei David there. And see Abarbanel there.
31) In Rashi on Yehoshua (24:32): "From Shechem they stole him, etc." [and this is based on the saying of our Sages, Sotah 13b]. But as has been discussed several times, Rashi on Nach is not as precise about following the plain meaning as in his commentary on the Torah. And note Rashi on Vayechi (48:22): "And I too have given you an inheritance in which you will be buried. And which is it? Shechem, etc." Accordingly, there is no need for the answer "from Shechem they stole him, etc.," since from the outset there is no room for the question (in Sotah there), "Why (was he buried) in Shechem?"
32) Sanhedrin ibid., s.v. "BiShechem."
33) And so it is in Yad Ramah, Sanhedrin ibid.; Gur Aryeh below, verse 17 (it requires some further study why he did not cite Rashi on Sanhedrin there).
34) Sotah 13b, s.v. "MiShechem genavuhu."
35) And see also Yad Ramah ibid.
36) And in the Rosh below, on verse 17: "And the place Dosan was in another district." And see Toras Kohen.
37) Similar to Rashi on Shelach (13:18): "There is a land that raises, etc." And see Chizkuni at the end of that parsha.
38) Note that Rashi also explains "(and he sent him) מעמק חברון" ("from the valley of Chevron") — [not according to its plain meaning, for what would it be teaching us (see Maskil LeDavid there)] — as "מעצה עמוקה כדי לקיים מה שנאמר כי גר יהי' זרעך" ("from the deep counsel, in order to fulfill what was said, 'your offspring shall be strangers'").
39) And see Divrei David here: "Although the going astray was carried out in Dosan, nevertheless the plan for it was made in Shechem."
40) Our parsha, 37:2.
41) See Bereishis 37:2 and Rashi there.
42) Note Rashi on Vayeitzei (30:21): "Dinah ... Leah passed judgment, etc.," and afterwards: "And G‑d remembered..." and Yosef was born. See there [OCR unclear].
43) Note Rashi on Vayechi (48:22) — in the first explanation — that Yaakov gave Yosef the actual city of Shechem.
Key Lesson
Rashi teaches that Shechem was "prepared for calamity" not in general, but specifically for Yosef: there his brothers began planning against him, and each calamity tied to Shechem matched one of the three things Yosef had reported about them. Every detail in the Torah's narrative, even an arrival that seems to be only in passing, carries meaning — and what befalls a person is measured precisely, measure for measure, against his own conduct.