bds@homxa.UUCP (B.STERMAN) (12/14/84)
It bothers me sometimes when Bible scholars try to fit the text into their preconceived theories and formulations. Time and again I have seen critics claim that a certain piece of narrative or phrase is of different authorship than the surrounding text because, based on their understanding of the way the Bible should be organized, this particular text is in the wrong place, or uses the wrong language. Inevitably, upon closer examination, I have found that the Bible is quite sensible in its presentation, and the critics expend more energy in trying to fit their ideas than they do in trying to understand the text. Allow, if you will, a quite lengthy example. The story of Yosef and his escapades in Egypt is rudely interrupted with the insertion of another seemingly unrelated story of Yehudah and Tamar. The critics across the board say that the two stories have nothing in common and the insertion of the Tamar story into the Yosef narrative is an obvious example of a J. document intruding into E. territory. This is the assertion of Noth and Emerton to name but two. I disagree entirely. I have retold the story elsewhere though I highly recommend that it be read through (in the original if at all possible). The first point to be made is that there are many literary connections between the Tamar and Yosef stories. (I reference here an article by Chaim Gilad, "sippur yehudah v'tamar - k'pshuto", in Bet Mikra vol. 21 pp 127-138) Yosef goes out looking for his brothers but cannot find them, Yehudah sends Hira to find the prostitute but he cannot find her. Yoseph is found and is told, Hira asks and is told. The brothers kill a seir eezim, Yehuda promises Tamar a gedi eezim. Yaakov loses Yosef and refuses to be consoled, Yehuda loses two sons and a wife and is consoled. The brothers say to Yaakov do you recognize this coat (haker na), Tamar asks Yehuda if he recognizes his staff (haker na). Tamar asks for a pledge (eravon), Yehuda promises Yaakov that he will be the pledge for Benyamin's safety (anochi e'ervenu). This all from a purely literal comparison. In fact, I believe, the whole of the latter Genesis narrative must be perceived, not as the story of Yosef, but as the story of Yosef and Yehudah. The question is, which of the brothers will lead the Jewish nation. Reuven, the first born, makes a few feeble attempts, but basically the choice is between Yosef and Yehuda. From the stories of the two we learn about their personalities. I see three fundamental differences between the two personalities. First, Yosef is passive, things happen to him. Yehudah, however, makes things happen. Yosef is found by a man and directed to Dothan. Yosef is sold to Egypt, thrown in jail, taken out of jail, made viceroy, etc. Yehuda does. Yehuda tells the brothers what to do with Yosef, he goes to Adulam, to Timna, decides Tamar's fate. Yehuda goes down from his brothers (vayered yehuda), Yosef is taken down to Egypt (v'yosef hurad mitzrayma). Yehuda takes a wife, and takes a wife for his son, Yosef is given a wife. Second, Yehuda inspires loyalty and friendship where Yosef does not. Yehuda is trusted by the brothers. He is trusted by his father with Benyamin's life. He goes to a strange place and makes friends. Hira is willing to follow his orders though he recently met him. (Hira is called Yehudah's friend, a strange thing in the Bible) The townspeople are willing to take orders from Yehuda and kill Tamar. Yosef, on the other hand, does not inspire that same loyalty. He goes to a strange place and makes no friends. His master quickly turns on him, Paroh's butler forgets about him, the people have to be reminded that Yosef is in charge of the storehouses. Third, the Rav points out, Yosef never sins, Yehuda sins all the time but is able to recognize that he has and come back from it. One of the most dramatic scenes in all literature is when Tamar asks Yehuda to recognize his articles. And Yehuda recognized them... the tune there is a revi'i a very long sound to keep us in suspense. He could say nothing and not open himself to ridicule, disgrace, or even the possibility of punishment for his actions. Instead he admits honestly and valiantly, "she has been more righteous than I". The tension comes to a climax when "vayigash elav yehuda", Yehuda stood face to face with Yosef and demanded Benyamin back, and Yosef backed down. In the blessings of Yaakov at the end of Genesis this is clear. The other brothers are cursorily dismissed with a sentence or two each. Yehudah and Yosef, however, are examined in detail. Yosef is called "n'zir echav" separated from his brothers, holy but apart. Yehuda, though, is given the kingship. A king needs more than to be holy. This split or tension continues, in fact throughout the Bible. The tribes of Ephraim (Yosef) and Yehuda are the major characters throughout T'nach. In Judges, most of the stories are about someone who came from the mountains of Ephraim, or about the B'nei Ephraim. Later on Israel is divided into two kingdoms, Yehudah and Ephraim. In conclusion, the story of Yehudah and Tamar is not at all out of place or out of context. The Bible is trying to show something, but it takes a little searching on our parts. It's very easy to peremptorily dismiss things and fit your theories like a Polish bull's eye. A true scholar should look for the truth regardless. Baruch Sterman ihnp4!homxa!bds