Shabbat Parashat Vayigash 5784

Parashat Hashavua: Arvut and its Meaning

The root of arvut comes up first in the Torah in three consecutive parshiyot: Vayeishev, Miketz, and Vayigash. Each time, Yehuda is involved. What can this teach us?

In Vayeishev, Tamar demanded of Yehuda to give an eiravon (collateral), his staff and signet, to get what he asked her for (Bereishit 38:17-20). Tamar used these identifiers of Yehuda to make him confront the truth. She used the phrase “haker na” (recognize this), which the brothers had used when presenting Yosef’s blood-stained cloak to Yaakov, and thereby facilitated Yehuda’s teshuva. Through Yehuda’s admission of responsibility, he merited to have Tamar’s babies, including Peretz, father of David and Mashiach. The Torah writes about the promise of Yehuda’s leadership, “Your brothers will admit (=cede leadership) to you” (see ibid. 49:8-9).

Yehuda continued to use the concept of arvut to further his leadership in Miketz and Vayigash. As the famine worsened and Yehuda tried to convince his father to send Binyamin with his brothers to Egypt, as the disguised Yosef had decreed, Yehuda said “Anochi e’ervenu” (I will be your guarantor) [for Binyamin’s safety] (ibid. 43:9).

In this week’s parasha, Yehuda used the account of his guaranteeing Binyamin’s welfare in his attempt to convince Yosef to free Binyamin (ibid. 44:32). At that time, Yehuda let the whole family know that the building of Klal Yisrael requires mutual responsibility from one Jew to another. This signals an about-face from the path the brothers took by selling Yosef as a slave. Yehuda’s full repentance ensured that there could be a unified leadership in the developing nation. The leadership must internalize that its task is to strengthen this mutual responsibility and avoid disunity. This entails Yehuda working in partnership with Yosef (see our last two articles).

If we are correct, we can uncover another related example of arvut. As David’s father, Yishai, sent him to what turned out to be his encounter with Goliat, Yishai told him to inquire about his brothers’ welfare and take “aruvatam” (Shmuel I, 17:17-18). In requesting this visit to the front, Yishai used the language Yaakov used to ask Yosef to visit his brothers and that his ancestor Yehuda used in showing his correct approach to his brothers. The midrash (Tanchuma, Vayigash 8) indeed says that Yishai told David that the time had come to use the guarantor status that Yehuda had adopted. The midrash continues that David took ultimate responsibility by challenging and killing Goliat. The midrash posits that since David did this to remove disgrace from the kingdom of Shaul, who came from the tribe of Binyamin, who Yehuda guaranteed and was willing to switch in Egyptian jail, David was given the Beit Hamikdash that was on the border of Yehuda and Binyamin. David, like his ancestor Yehuda, received the throne because he used Yehuda’s affinity toward arvut.

For us, we must remember that mutual responsibility is the way forward to the days in which Yehuda will reclaim its days of glory as the “lion” within the nation (see Bereishit 49:8-11). Those who do so deserve to see the return of Hashem to Zion and the rebuilding of Jerusalem as in days of old.

Top of page

Print this page

Send to friend