Chapter Forty-Four

Joseph’s stratagem to test his brothers’ affection for Benjamin

Genesis 44:1–2. And he commanded the steward of his house, saying: “Fill the men’s sacks with food, as much as they can carry, and put each man’s money in the mouth of his sack, and put my cup, my silver cup, in the mouth of the sack of the youngest, with the money for his grain.” And he did as Joseph said. After friendly conversation and a solemn common meal with his brothers, Joseph prepares a severe test for them: for reasons that at first seem incomprehensible, Joseph orders his steward to place his silver cup in his younger brother’s sack—in order to have a reason to demand that Benjamin be left as a slave (v. 10) and thereby to test the degree of the brothers’ affection for Joseph’s full brother. At the same time Joseph orders his steward, as before, to return the payment for grain to each of the brothers (and Benjamin). This last detail, according to Jewish commentators, was intended to deflect suspicion from the brothers that Benjamin was actually guilty of stealing the cup: now the appearance of the cup in Benjamin’s sack would seem identical to the mysterious (second) return of the grain payment to each of Joseph’s brothers.

Genesis 44:4–5. When they had gone only a short way out of the city, Joseph said to his steward: “Go, follow after the men, and when you overtake them, say to them: Why have you repaid evil for good? [Why have you stolen my silver cup?] Is it not this from which my lord drinks and with which he divines? You have done wrong in doing this.” Joseph hastens his steward to pursue his brothers; otherwise they themselves might discover the foreign object in Benjamin’s sack and return it, and then Joseph’s plan would not be fulfilled. The brothers of Joseph were to be made aware of the particular ugliness of their action: • they allowed themselves to take the property of the man who had benefited them; • they took a thing necessary for Joseph’s daily life; and moreover, • from their own experience (Gen 43:33), they could have known that Joseph possessed the gift of foresight, and in particular, he “divines” with the cup he took (“nachesch jenachesch”—“habitually divines”): a very common practice of divination among the ancients—cup divination (κυλικομαντεία, κυαὕομαντεία), which consisted in observing the play of light rays on the surface of water poured into a cup, or hydromancy, when precious things were thrown into water and the future was divined by their gleam. It is possible that the steward and Joseph speak of divination in a somewhat jesting tone. The reference to divination was necessary only to give the accusation an air of certainty.

Genesis 44:8–9. Behold, the money that we found in the mouth of our sacks we brought back to you from the land of Canaan. How then could we steal silver or gold from the house of your lord? Whichever of your servants it is found with shall die, and we also will be slaves to my lord.” The brothers of Joseph logically refute the accusation by reference to the fact that they had returned to Joseph the payment for grain, a fact that demonstrated their honesty and incapability of the theft attributed to them. In the consciousness of their innocence, they themselves assign themselves excessively harsh punishment: death for the guilty party and slavery for all the other brothers (Gen 31:32)—neither of which was required by ancient Hebrew criminal law or that of other ancient peoples; collective responsibility for the guilty party was required by Mosaic criminal law repeatedly (Deut 21:1-9).

Genesis 44:10. And he said: “Even so; as you have said, so it shall be. He with whom it is found shall be my slave, and you shall be innocent. The steward accepts the brothers’ proposal only in the part where they suggested that a search be conducted among them (cf. v. 12): he mitigates the punishment they themselves proposed.

Genesis 44:12. Then he searched, beginning with the oldest and ending with the youngest, and the cup was found in Benjamin’s sack. The search, evidently to give it the character of regularity and unintentionality, begins with the oldest brother and, naturally, the cup is found only with the youngest. Ten sighs of relief escaped the hearts of those being searched, but all the more powerful was the impression of the result of the search of the eleventh brother.

Genesis 44:13. And they tore their clothes, and each loaded his donkey, and they returned to the city. With regard to the tearing of their clothes by Jacob’s sons, the Midrash notes that this was their retribution for once causing their father to tear his clothes (Gen 37:34). In any case, the fact of the repentance of Joseph’s brothers for their ancient crime is indisputable.

Genesis 44:14. When Judah and his brothers came into Joseph’s house—he was still there—and they fell before him on the ground. Judah is deliberately singled out from among the brothers as the one about to come forward as advocate for Benjamin and to speak for all the brothers, who evidently all shared in Benjamin’s fate.

Genesis 44:15. And Joseph said to them: “What deed is this you have done? Do you not know that a man like me can indeed practice divination? Joseph, wishing from his brothers precisely this attitude toward Benjamin, begins to accuse them not so much of baseness as of thoughtlessness: the brothers, already familiar with Joseph’s perceptiveness, could not, he says, think to hide the theft from him. As for his divination (cf. v. 5), blessed Theodoret notes (Question 107): “He said this, not actually practicing divination and sorcery, but applying words to the present circumstance. Yet his precision in words is worthy of admiration. Even feigning before his brothers, he did not consent to ascribe sorcery to himself, but ascribes it to another, clothed with the same power, for he did not say: I divine, but: by divination one divines a man like me.”

Genesis 44:16–17. And Judah said: “What shall we say to my lord? What shall we speak? And how shall we clear ourselves? God has found out the guilt of your servants; behold, we are my lord’s slaves, both we and he also in whose hand the cup was found. But he said: “Far be it from me that I should do so; the man in whose hand the cup was found shall be my slave, but as for you, go up in peace to your father.” Conscious of their innocence and that of their brothers, Judah nevertheless points out that tangible evidence of the theft had been found among them (corpus delicti), and therefore only the immediate action of God’s judgment can explain the fact of their guilt: thus Judah appeals not to justice but to the mercy of God and the compassion of Egypt’s ruler. But Joseph, repeating what his steward said (v. 10), insists on Benjamin’s remaining in slavery, while the other brothers are free to go unharmed to their father: this is the crucial point of their testing—there was a plausible opportunity to rid themselves of their beloved. But in this tense moment Judah comes forward anew with redoubled energy to defend Benjamin.

Judah intercedes for Benjamin and selflessly offers himself to Joseph as a slave in his place

Genesis 44:18. Then Judah went up to him and said: “Please, my lord, let your servant speak a word in my lord’s ears, and let not your anger burn against your servant, for you are like Pharaoh. Judah’s speech is one of the most elevated and beautiful speeches in the Old Testament, and at the same time one of the most selfless acts of love in Old Testament biblical history. With extraordinary sincerity and depth of feeling, Judah’s speech is distinguished also by special psychological subtlety and art, as well as by remarkable completeness in illuminating the main subject—the occurrence with Benjamin. Verse 18 forms an introduction and, besides requesting attention (cf. Gen 50:4), contains a skillful captatio benevolentiae.

Genesis 44:19–21. My lord asked his servants, saying: “Have you a father or a brother? And we said to my lord: “We have an aged father, and a child of his old age, the youngest; and his brother is dead, so he alone is left of his mother, and his father loves him.” We said to my lord: “The boy cannot leave his father, and if he should leave his father, he will die.” With the intention of depicting the deep sorrow of his father in case Benjamin is left in Egypt, Judah earlier (vv. 25-29) speaks of the spiritual suffering Jacob experienced even on the second journey to Egypt, and makes this journey itself dependent on Joseph’s command to bring Benjamin, deliberately emphasizing that it was not the brothers themselves who first spoke of him, but Joseph himself questioned them about him and about their family situation generally, and himself gave them to understand that he would receive Benjamin with affection (“seeing,” v. 21; cf. Gen 42:20)—which, it is presumed, stands in complete contrast to Benjamin’s present situation—and by strong pressure on them (confinement under guard for three days, Gen 42:17), he forced them to compel their father to send Benjamin.

Genesis 44:27–29. And your servant, my father, said to us: “You know that my wife bore me two sons. And one went out from me, and I said: “Surely he is torn to pieces,” and I have not seen him since. “If you take this one also from me, and harm comes to him, you will bring down my gray hair with sorrow to Sheol.” With special poignancy Judah depicts Jacob’s particular attachment to Benjamin in view, especially, of the loss of Joseph (this mention was to touch Joseph’s heart most keenly).

Genesis 44:30–31. Now therefore, when I come to your servant, my father, and the boy is not with us, then, as his life is bound up in the boy’s life, when he sees that the boy is not with us, he will die. And your servants will bring the gray hair of your servant, our father, down to Sheol with sorrow.” In Hebrew imagery, Jacob’s love for Benjamin is represented thus: Jacob’s soul is bound by unbreakable bonds to Benjamin’s soul (cf. 1 Sam 18:1), so closely entwined with it that with Benjamin’s disappearance, Jacob’s own life will perish. Such tenderness of parental love toward children was unknown in the pagan world. In saying that the brothers’ return to Jacob without Benjamin will result in their father’s death, Judah uses the same expression: “they will bring down... the gray hair of your father... to Sheol,” which Jacob himself used in his reply to his sons (Gen 42:38). By this expression Judah unwittingly and Joseph, unknowingly, includes himself among those responsible for Jacob’s future death. This last circumstance could most strongly have reinforced the impression of Judah’s speech on Joseph.

Genesis 44:32–34. For your servant became surety for the boy to my father, saying: “If I do not bring him back to you, then I shall bear the blame in front of my father forever. Now therefore, please let your servant remain instead of the boy as a slave to my lord, and let the boy go back with his brothers. For how can I go back to my father if the boy is not with me? I fear to see the evil that will come upon my father.” At this moment of highest tension Judah offers himself as a slave in Benjamin’s place on two grounds: • he took Jacob’s beloved on his own recognizance (v. 32) and will forever remain guilty before his father (v. 33); • he cannot be a spectator to the tragic death of his father, one of the causes of which he cannot but regard as himself. By these two fundamental ideas of his—the depiction of Jacob’s grief and suffering and the expression of noble courage and the determination for self-sacrifice—Judah finally wins over Joseph’s heart and mind, upon whose compassion everything now depended: he receives complete moral satisfaction in seeing that the brothers have repented, and profound emotional turmoil. All this impels him to reveal himself to his brothers, which he proceeds to do. Our Telegram channel