https://pixabay.com/photos/horses-roman-arena-historic-race-1976554/
To read this post in Spanish, click here
To read this post in French, click here
וַיַּרְכֵּב אֹתוֹ בְּמִרְכֶּבֶת הַמִּשְׁנֶה אֲשֶׁר־לוֹ וַיִּקְרְאוּ לְפָנָיו אַבְרֵךְ וְנָתוֹן אֹתוֹ עַל כָּל־אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם (בר’ מ”א, מ”ג)
He had him ride in the chariot of his second-in-command, and they cried before him, “Abrek!”… (Bereshit 41:43)
What do you do with a word from the Torah that nobody precisely understands? Torah is the word of God, so it stands to reason that we should make every effort. An early midrash (Sifrei Devarim 48) says: כי לא דבר רק הוא מכם – דבר שאתם אומרים ריקן הוא, הוא חייכם! ‘It is not empty for you’ (Devarim 32:47), that part, that you say is empty, it is your life! This is echoed in the talmudic rendition (Talmud Yerushalmi Peah 1:1, p. 15b): כי לא דבר רק הוא מכם – ואם הוא ריק – מכם שאין אתם יגיעין בתורה כי הוא חייכם אימתי הוא חייכם כשאתם יגיעי’ בו. “‘It is not empty for you,’ and if it is empty, that’s from you because you didn’t labor to understand the Torah. ‘For it is your life,’ when is the Torah your life? When you labor in it.” No part of the Torah is insignificant, and if it seems insignificant, that’s only because you haven’t spent enough time unraveling it.
But what about a mysterious word that evades our every effort to discover its definition? The word, “Abrek!” that is shouted before Joseph’s chariot appears nowhere else in the Torah and has confounded scholars going back to the Talmudic era. What’s more, sharp words are exchanged regarding how we should determine the meaning. The Midrash (Sifrei Devarim 1) says:
דרש רבי יהודה וירכב אתו במרכבת המשנה אשר לו ויקראו לפניו אברך, זה יוסף שהיה אב בחכמה ורך בשנים, אמר לו רבי יוסי בן דורמסקית, יהודה ברבי, למה אתה מעוית עלינו את הכתובים, מעיד אני עלי שמים וארץ שאין אברך אלא לבירכיים אבריכם [אל ברכים] שהיו הכל נכנסים ויוצאים מתחת ידו כענין שנאמר (שם) ונתון אותו על כל ארץ מצרים
R. Yehudah expounded “and they called before him ” Abrek.”: This is Joseph, who was a father (“av”) in wisdom and young (“rach”) in years — whereupon R. Yossi b. Dormaskith said to him: Yehudah… why do you distort the verses for us? I testify by heaven and earth that “avrech” signifies (bending of) the knees (“birkayim”) for everyone came and went by his command as it says, “and he set him over all the land of Egypt”.
R. Yehuda’s approach looks like typical midrashic word-play. What reason could R. Yosi b. Dormaskith have for accusing him of distorting the verse? I suggest that since the precise meaning of Abrek is not sufficiently clear, R. Yosi b. Dormaskith feels threatened by the immediate jump to word play. Before you start with midrash, he might argue, you need to have a solid basis in the simple meaning of the word.
Yet R. Yosi b. Dormaskith’s more “rigorous” definition, based, it appears, on context alone, is not standard in the sages either. Targum Onkelos, roughly contemporaneous with the Sifrei above translates Abrek as: דין אבא למלכא, ‘this is the father of the king’. This may be based on context. Joseph, in his communication with Jacob (Bereshit 45:8), reports that God has made him אב לפרעה, the ‘father of Pharaoh.’ There may also be an attempted etymology here from the combination of the Hebrew “אב,” ‘father’ and the Greek “rex,” king. The Gemara (B”B 4a) also reflects this translation. Interestingly, the Palestinian Targumim give both “father of the king” and “father in wisdom and few in years” a combination of Targum Onkelos and R. Yehudah from the Sifrei.
Modern scholarship largely accepts that “Abrek” is based on the Akkadian abbarakku, the chief steward of a private or royal household (same in Assyrian). However, numerous Egyptian etymologies have been suggested as well: b-r-k, ‘attention’; a-bor-k, ‘prostrate yourself’; aprek, ‘head bowed’; ap-rex-u, ‘head of the wise’; ab(u)-rek, ‘your command is our desire’; or even ab-rek, ‘rejoice!’ Neither Talmudic sages nor modern scholarship even consider the “obvious” connection to ברכיים, ‘knees’ proposed by R. Yosi b. Dormaskith.
Where does this leave us? I offer two comments. First, the accusation of twisting or distorting texts may be tempting, especially when we believe that we have a more rigorous approach. It is important for even the most rigorous among us, to recall that even “obvious” solutions can sometimes be wrong, and remember to treat with generosity interpretations with which we disagree.
Second, let us recall that no part of the Torah is insignificant. The cryptic word “Abrek” seems to challenge that. Isn’t it sufficient to know that people ran ahead of Joseph’s chariot crying something? Is it so crucial that we know what they cried? Rav Sampson Rafael Hirsch offers (Bereshit 41:41-43):
Before an egyptian majesty one did not proclaim ברכו “on your knees”, but אברך, “I – i.e. The majesty who is appearing amongst the people – command that ye kneel”. To a true king only spontaneous show of respect is an honour. To the dictator-king voluntary show of respect is too plebeian and not servile enough.
Rav Hirsch points to a difference between true kingship, i.e. that of God, and the kingship of a “dictator-king”. The true King gives people the freedom to choose respectful and reverent reactions to God’s presence while the dictator king commands it. Not only does this teach us about God, it supplies a model for our own leadership.
Note, however, that Rav Hirsch has chosen to interpret “Abrek!” as related to knees, the interpretation to which neither the Talmud, Targumim, nor modern scholarship gave any credence! Considering, however, that the story of Joseph is full of riddles, dreams, and hidden meanings, I wonder if the truest interpretation is not the one that adds the most meaning to our lives. What would R. Yosi b. Dormaskith say about that?
Daf of the Day
