Yosef arranged that Binyamin be arrested for stealing his goblet, and when the brothers were accused by Yosef’s official, they eagerly opened their sacks to prove their innocence, only to find that the goblet was in Binyamin’s sack. The midrash (Bereishit Rabbah 92:8) relates that when the goblet was found in Binyamin’s possession, the brothers said to him: “[You are] a thief, the son of a thief!” The brothers were essentially telling Binyamin that he is like his mother (Rachel) who stole her father’s teraphim. The Midrash Tanchuma adds that the brothers were calling him this and were also hitting him on his shoulders, and and because of those hits that Binyamin endured upon his shoulders, he merited that the Shechina (Divine Presence) rest upon his shoulders, as it states, “Of Binyamin he said: May Hashem’s beloved dwell securely by Him; He hovers over him all day long, and rests between his shoulders.” Interestingly, the Midrash Tanchuma concludes without recording any response from Binyamin to his brothers. Rav Mordechai Druk asks: Why did Binyamin keep quiet and not try to exonerate himself and claim his innocence to his brothers?
Rav Druk seems to explain as follows: The brothers didn’t just call Binyamin a “thief,” but rather “a thief, son of a thief,” thus calling out and including Binyamin’s mother as a thief as well. Binyamin was concerned for the honor of his righteous mother, so when the brothers referred to Binyamin as “a thief, son of a thief,” if Binyamin would have claimed, “I am not a thief!,” he would inherently be implying that although he is not a thief, his mother is a thief. This would be a disgrace to his mother, Rachel. Therefore, Binyamin preferred to remain silent and not respond at all. And because of this, he merited that the Shechina rest upon him (Drash Mordechai, Miketz, 44:12).
It perhaps emerges from Rav Druk’s insight that had Binyamin spoken up and denied being a thief, then he wouldn’t have been hit by his brothers; but only because he chose to remain silent in order to uphold Rachel’s dignity and not cause her disgrace, did he then receive those hits, thus meriting that the Shechina rest upon him. Hence, it would perhaps seem from here that although Binyamin could have gotten out of it, nevertheless, Binyamin “took the hit,” in order to spare and not infringe on his mother’s dignity, ultimately meriting that the Shechina rest upon him because of those hits he endured.
This idea may also similarly be gleaned from another story in the Torah: Rashi notes that the number of Bnei Yisrael that ended up leaving Mitzrayim was only one-fifth of them, as the other four-fifths perished during the ninth makkah, the reason being that they were wicked people who did not want to leave Mitzrayim. Interestingly, the Targum Yonatan Ben Uziel (Beshalach 14:3) seems to teach that Datan and Aviram did not leave Mitzrayim when the rest of Bnei Yisrael did during the Exodus, but instead remained in Mitzrayim [temporarily]. Rav Yehoshua Leib Diskin (Maharil Diskin Al HaTorah, Beshalach) asks: If Datan and Aviram did not want to leave Mitzrayim together with the rest of Bnei Yisrael, why then didn’t they also perish during the ninth makkah along with the rest of the wicked people who did not want to leave Mitzrayim?!
In Mitzrayim, there were two layers of authority over the Jewish slaves: There were the Jewish foremen, and over them were the Egyptian taskmasters. The taskmasters set the quota that the slaves were to complete and the Jewish foremen were responsible for enforcing compliance. The Torah states, “The foremen of Bnei Yisrael, whom Pharaoh’s taskmasters had appointed over them, were beaten.” Why were the foremen beaten?
The midrash (Shemot Rabbah 5:20) teaches that these foremen “sacrificed themselves for the sake of [Bnei] Yisrael, and they endured lashes in order to ease [the burden of labor] from upon them (Bnei Yisrael). Therefore, they merited Ruach HaKodesh (Divine Inspiration).” Fascinatingly, the midrash further on teaches that Datan and Aviram were also foremen!
Based on this midrash, Rav Diskin explains that since Datan and Aviram sacrificed themselves for the sake of Bnei Yisrael and endured lashes in order to ease the burden of labor from upon Bnei Yisrael, although they did not merit Ruach HaKodesh since they were revilers and blasphemers, they did earn the merit to be spared from perishing during the ninth makkah.
From this it can be suggested that we can learn the great merit that may be gained by “taking the hit” in order to spare others from harm: The foremen (besides Datan and Aviram) merited Ruach HaKodesh because of it. And even Datan and Aviram, who in the future would constantly fight with Moshe and oppose him (Shemot Rabbah 1:30, with Etz Yosef’s commentary), who were revilers and blasphemers (Bereishit Rabbah 5:20), who possibly even later joined forces with Pharaoh by obeying his wishes to incite Bnei Yisrael to return to Mitzrayim (see Maharil Diskin Al Hatorah, ibid), and who the Midrash Tanchuma (Shemot 10) says, were people who “remained steadfast in their wickedness from beginning to end,” since they “took the hit” by choosing to suffer to spare other Jews from harm and pain, they earned the merit to have their very lives be spared.
Binyamin is a graduate of Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan, and Wurzweiler School of Social Work.
