...so the Prince of Egypt tells our ten intrepid travelers that they dare not return to the land of the River g-d without their youngest brother firmly in tow. Okay, that's a problem because Father does not let said brother out of his sight. Great tension ensues.
The question is...why? Why such worry? Why all the grand statements by everyone involved? What's the big deal - simply grab some kid, throw a pair of tzitzis and a yarmulka on him and pass him off as the younger brother. How hard could it have been to pull off such a ruse? They don't know that it's Yosef back in Mitzrayim. As far as they know it's a crazy ruler who for some reason is picking on them.
So why not pass off another as Binyomin, it would seem to be a no brainer way to solve all the problems at hand.
---Yes, there is a clear answer---
Shimon was locked up and they would have a line-up and ask him to identify the brother, if he couldn't, they would be obvious liars and they would be killed.
The midrash connects it to the "magical goblet" that Binyamin is later accused of stealing. According to Chazal, when the brothers come down the first time Yosef is constantly "consulting" the goblet, pretending to confirm the details of their story. As a result, they believe that he'll see through any ruse they try to pull.ReplyDelete
Ezzie - BzzzzzzzReplyDelete
Anon - That is the answer that I saw in the Bais HaLevi - as for "obvious", you would be surprised.
GI - Never heard/saw that answer but it works, thanks.
No normal person would try to fleece a master 'dream interpreter' and predictor of famines.ReplyDelete
Also, similar to Anon's point, there are many easy ways to interrogate the parties involved to ensure that they are telling the truth.
And if the prince start asking questions Mr Benyamin Phony can't answer?ReplyDelete
they are in awe of the egyptian, and fear that he will see thorough their ruseReplyDelete
When floods do occur, The North Face Sale the water, though turbid for the time, subsides rapidly and soon becomes clear again. Below Hertford, floods are liable to act injuriously, the water remaining longer on the adjoining marsh lands. Mr. Beardmore stated that heavy floodings had taken place in May 1824, in November 1852, and in October 1857, and that at such times large areas of land were, laid under water for several days. Skechers Shoes The marsh-lands on both sides of the lower Thames are not subject to such flooding, as the embankments are found to be sufficient to shut out the tides, and the primitive sewers, marsh-ditches, and tidal outlet-sluices regulate the delivery of flood waters so as to prevent injury to land. The marsh districts on both sides of the lower Lee are now subject to the double evil of flooding and droughts; during long continued dry weather the surface cracks until there are fissures several feet in depth. Flood water is passed much more rapidly down the valley of the Lee in consequence The North Face Sale of the improvements made of late years in the navigation by dredging the channels. Much, however, remains to be done which would improve the conditions of the marsh-land and the health of the people.The evidence as to the water-mills proves that in many instances the dams and ponds act injuriously by preventing land drainage and impeding floods. However useful Discount G Star Sale water-power may have been in former times, when these mills were first established, that use has now been greatly reduced in relative value, and, wherever there is sufficient trade to The North Face Sale make grinding corn a profitable occupation, steam-power has to be brought in as an auxiliary, the improved navigation and railway accommodation facilitating the delivery of coals so as to give an advantage to steam over the constantly alternating and uncertain flow of water. Water-power having diminished in commercial value, and land for agricultural purposes having greatly increased in value, injury to the adjoining lands may be shown to cause an annual money loss to the district Shape Ups Boots. To this money loss must be added injury to health by the retention of large areas of undrained land. Water-mills and mill-dams are proved to be injurious to local properties, but we have no evidence as to any serious pollutions being caused by these mills, other than so far as they cause a partial stagnation in the water and accumulations of mud by ponding.ReplyDelete