To Lead or Not to Lead? The Repentance of Reuven

If you would like to sponsor future installments of Midrash HaShavua or any of our ongoing learning series or classes, please contact us at rjmaroof@ydvh.org. Your support is greatly appreciated!

And Reuven returned to the pit.” Where was he? Rabbi Eliezer said from his sackcloth and fast, when he finished he returned and looked into the pit, as it is written “And Reuven returned to the pit” (Beresheet Rabba 84:19)

This Midrash centers on Yaaqov Avinu’s eldest son, Reuven, and his role in the unfolding saga of the sale of Yosef and eventual reunion of the family in Egypt. When the brothers initially plot to murder Yosef in cold blood, Reuven intervenes and suggests the less violent alternative of leaving him for dead in a nearby pit. Unbeknownst to them, his plan is to return to the site later in secret and rescue his brother.

The brothers agree and seize and cast Yosef into a deep hole in the ground. Satisfied that their mission has been accomplished, they then proceed to share a meal; in the meantime, a caravan of traders passes by, and Yehuda proposes that they sell their brother into slavery rather than just abandon him. His suggestion is enthusiastically accepted and Yosef is quickly pulled out of the pit and sold to Midianite merchants for twenty sheqalim.

There is one detail of the narrative, however, that does not fit well with the flow of the story, and this is the problem confronted by our Midrash. Immediately after Yosef is purchased and carried off by the Midianites, we are told that Reuven comes back to the pit (ostensibly to retrieve his brother) and is shocked and dismayed to discover that Yosef is missing. Yet the Torah tells us that the brothers, as a group, extracted Yosef from the pit and handed him over to the Midianites for sale. How is it possible that Reuven was unaware of this development? Where was he at the moment that this fateful decision was adopted and implemented?

The Midrash explains that Reuven left the scene of the crime, so to speak, because he was busy fasting, donning sackcloth, and repenting for a grave sin he had previously committed. In Parashat Vayishlach, the Torah informs us that, after the death of Rachel, Reuven cohabited with Bilhah, the concubine of his father. According to some of the Sages and traditional commentaries, this does not mean that Reuven literally engaged in relations with her; rather, the text employs hyperbole to convey the idea that Reuven meddled with the marital life of his father, and it was “as if” he had been intimate with his father’s wife. Whatever the case may be, Reuven was certainly considered to have transgressed in an egregious manner. While preoccupied with introspection and penance for his improper actions, Reuven temporarily separated from his brothers, so he had no idea what transpired in his absence, and was genuinely shocked when he realized that Yosef was gone.

While we can easily understand the Midrashic mandate to resolve an obvious plot hole in the Torah text, it is not at all clear why the Rabbis saw fit to connect Reuven’s separation from his brothers with his prior indiscretion. Why would the Sages portray Reuven, precisely at such a critical moment, as pulling himself away from the group to reflect upon a sin that had occurred several years previously?

In order to appreciate the profound lesson that the Rabbis of the Midrash wish to convey here, we must investigate the true significance of Reuven’s improper behavior with Bilhah. It is easy to dismiss the episode as a case of poor judgment, a regrettable but momentary surrender to the overwhelming force of passion. However, the Sages suggest to us that there is much more to Reuven’s error than at first meets the eye. Indeed, Reuven’s sin reveals a problematic aspect of his character that, once understood, helps us make sense of many of his subsequent statements and actions as well.

As the first born son, Reuven would naturally have been entitled to inherit his father’s position as patriarch of the family at some point in the future. Most likely, he incorrectly saw the death of Rachel, the primary Matriarch of the household, as a signal that the era of Yaaqov Avinu was drawing to a close, and believed that it was his time to rise to greatness. Reuven’s involvement with Bilhah – whether taken literally or figuratively – was an exercise of dominance in the home, a signal that “there was a new sheriff in town”, but a premature, ill-advised, and frankly inappropriate one. Reuven had a strong ambition to lead but lacked the self-restraint necessary to temper his passion, redirect his energies, and delay the gratification of his desires until the time was right and his father was ready to “retire.”

From the moment that Reuven overstepped this boundary, it seemed that there was no turning back – he had effectively lost the right to inherit the position of the firstborn son. This entitlement was passed on to Shimon and Levi (the second and third sons, respectively), who likewise lost it as a result of their violent actions against the inhabitants of Shekhem, and was finally transferred to Yehuda (the fourth son of Leah) who would ultimately share the title of bekhor with Yosef, the firstborn of Rachel.

Reuven must have immediately felt the gravity of the fallout from his impulsive behavior. Indeed, he was probably enthusiastically awaiting the day that he would be able to finally demonstrate his capacity for genuine leadership and thereby regain favor in the eyes of his father and brothers. The incident with Yosef presented him with just such an opportunity, and he quickly intervened in the murderous plot, hoping to emerge from the situation a celebrated hero and beloved son.

The Rabbis therefore offer us the image of Reuven fasting and praying, repenting for the sin with Bilhah, even as Yosef was languishing in the pit. Reuven prayed that valiantly rescuing his younger brother from certain death would offer convincing evidence that he was indeed deserving of the title of firstborn, and would at the same time prove his sincere devotion to and respect for his father, despite past indiscretions that may have indicated otherwise. He was sure that his bold and decisive action, defending his younger brother and protecting his father, would serve to rectify the error he committed in attempting to seize the position of family patriarch too soon.

In the heat of the moment, however, Reuven was not able to overcome the fundamental flaw of character that had led to his downfall in the first place. Caught up in dreams of atonement, reconciliation and restoration of dignity, he was too quick to believe he had already saved the day and so he dropped the ball, assuming that the game was over. Reuven was so focused on the exciting outcome he expected from his noble deed that he neglected to attend to the actual process at hand with the vigilance it demanded. Simply stated, because of his lack of self discipline, Reuven’s attempt at heroism failed miserably.

Nevertheless, Reuven did not let go of his dream of demonstrating that he had repented for his sin with Bilhah and deserved the honor to which a firstborn is entitled. The Torah testifies to Reuven’s yearning to regain his position of favor in the family numerous times. When the brothers are imprisoned on suspicion of espionage in Egypt and attribute the terrible turn of events to their own mistreatment of Yosef years earlier, Reuven responds with the classic ‘I told you so’, “Behold, I told you not to sin against the boy and you did not listen – now his blood is being avenged.”

Clearly, there is no practical advantage to be gained in revisiting the conversations that took place at the time Yosef was initially accosted and sold. Yet Reuven feels compelled to point out that, had the brothers heeded Reuven’s advice not to lay hands upon Yosef, they would have been much better off…In other words, he drew their attention to his own wisdom, insight, and leadership ability, qualities he wanted them to acknowledge and respect.

Reuven’s quest to provide evidence of his bona fides as a future patriarch did not stop there. When the brothers return to their father in Canaan, they inform him that they will not be able to procure any more food from Egypt – let alone secure the release of Shimon from the prison in which he is being held – unless they bring their youngest brother, Binyamin, along with them. Yaaqov refuses to permit Binyamin to be placed in harm’s way.

Reuven, hoping to portray himself as a masterful problem solver and the courageous savior of the family, tries to persuade his father to entrust him with the immense responsibility of bringing Binyamin back and forth from Egypt. To this end, he promises, “you may kill my two sons if I do not bring him back to you – place him in my charge, and I will return him to you.”

The Torah does not record any response from Yaaqov to this shocking proposal. It appears to have been summarily dismissed or ignored. The Midrash, however, offers a rather scathing assessment of this statement of Reuven: “Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] said that [Yaaqov thought to himself] ‘this is a foolish firstborn son. Are they your sons and not mine?’”

In other words, what grandfather would take comfort in the idea that, if his beloved child is somehow lost, his grandchildren will then be executed as an atonement? It should have been obvious that such a grotesque guarantee would provide no reassurance whatsoever to a grieving and anxious Yaaqov. Why, then, was Reuven moved to utter it? We have no choice but to conclude that, desperate to prove his worthiness as firstborn regardless of the cost and as soon as possible, Reuven got ahead of himself and made a statement off the cuff that even our Sages regarded as pure foolishness.

In his commentary on the Torah, the Ralbag develops the Rabbinic critique of Reuven even further:

“Reuven said something crazy here, and for that reason Yaaqov did not say a word in response. Nevertheless this comes to teach us that Reuven was not a wise person, therefore he disgraced himself with indecent marital relations as the Torah recounts, for he had lain with Bilhah, concubine of his father – for a wise person’s heart would not be seduced by such indecent behaviors.”

Yehuda, by contrast, manifests the quality of careful calculation, self-restraint and discipline that is crucial for prudent decision making and principled action. He wisely chooses to wait until the conditions of the famine worsen, the cupboards are empty, and the sheer urgency of circumstance will force his father to reconsider his refusal to allow Binyamin to travel. In the words of the Midrash, after hearing Reuven’s outlandish words, Yehuda commented, “leave the elderly man alone until the bread runs out.” In the end, it comes as no surprise that it is not Reuven, but Yehuda, who is selected as “firstborn” from the Matriarch Leah.

Indeed, even on his deathbed, Yaaqov critiques Reuven’s impetuous character and identifies it as the primary reason why he was unfit for any position of leadership in the family:

“Reuven, you are my first born, my might and the first fruit of my vigor, worthy of superior rank and worthy of superior power. [But] rushing like water, you shall have no advantage, from when you mounted the bed of your father you brought disgrace…”

Reuven was a person with tremendous energy and exceptional ambition, but who lacked the wisdom and patience to engage in the complex and frustrating work of translating his dreams into reality. While the values that inspired him were noble, he behaved recklessly and impulsively when it came to actually achieving his objectives. Reuven’s story exemplifies the idea that having the right goals in life is necessary but is often not sufficient for true success. Leadership and accomplishment belong to those like Yehuda, possessed of foresight and self-restraint, who toil thoughtfully and diligently in order to bring their plans to full fruition.

ajax-loader