Once the years of plenty in Egypt, that were predicted in Pharoah’s two dreams (41:1-7, 25-32), are concluded, the years of famine begin (Beraishit 41:54). Not only does the lack of food affect the surrounding areas, including Canaan, but the residents of Egypt proper starve as well (41:55). While the measures imposed by Yosef with regard to food distribution in Egypt during the extreme food shortages are only hinted at in Parshat Miketz (41:56), they are spelled out in great detail in Parshat VaYigash (47:13 ff.)
A cursory reading of the verses in question would lead us to conclude that Yosef exploits the situation to transform practically the entire Egyptian population, with the exception of the priestly class (47:22, 26) into slaves serving Pharoah. The Egyptians’ desperation to obtain food causes them to in turn hand over their money (47:14-15), their livestock (47:16-17), their land, and finally their very selves (47:18-26).(1) It is difficult to comprehend why, if the enslavement of the Jews by the Egyptians, as described in Shemot 1 ff, is considered so reprehensible, that Yosef, HaTzaddik (the righteous) no less, would be the instrument to enslave the Egyptian people. The fact that Yosef’s actions predate those of the Egyptians could lead one to think that the principle of Mida KeNeged Mida (a perpetrator of sin receives punishment in accordance with the type or effect of his/her sin) is being applied by the Egyptians to the Jews as soon as the tables are turned, and they regain the power to do so.
RaShI on 47:21, commenting on Yosef’s assigning the Egyptians to relocate to cities stretching from one end of Egypt to the other, suggests that such practices, as unsavory as they may seem to be, are all designed to assure that Yosef’s immigrant family would not be looked upon askance by the native population. How could there be discrimination against those who have only recently come to Egypt, when the entire Egyptian population has been turned into displaced persons who no longer reside in the immediate area in which they were raised from childhood? RaShI’s approach to Yosef’s demands in Chapter 47 is consistent with the Midrashic position that he assumes in 41:55. In this earlier verse, Pharoah instructs the Egyptian people to do whatever Yosef asks of them. Rather than assuming that this was part of the general mandate that Pharoah had already given to Yosef in 41:44, the Midrash posits that Pharoah is being appealed to by the Egyptian people as the result of what they consider an untenable demand by Yosef. The Midrash attributes to Yosef the prerequisite of circumcision before he gives food out to anyone.(2) While RaShI describes the discussion between the Egyptians and Pharoah, leading him to command them to follow any and all of Yosef’s orders, whatever they may happen to be, the rationale for Yosef making such a requirement is not discussed by the commentator. The Midrashic commentary Yefat To’ar (3) suggests that Yosef’s demand was a reaction to the disregard with which the Egyptians held peoples who were circumcised; in order to win respect not only for his family, but even for himself, the newly promoted Egyptian leader engaged in social engineering designed to make circumcision the standard practice of the culture, rather than allow it to be a stigma that would separate immigrants from the native born.(4) But in light of what takes place in the beginning of Shemot, it is questionable whether even if there was a short-term benefit in terms of the acceptance of the Jews coming to Egypt ad living in Goshen, that resentment against what Yosef had orchestrated did not fester and ultimately resulted in a most hostile backlash against the Jews in the coming generations.
RaMBaN and Meshech Chachma believe that Yosef in fact did not allow the Egyptians to become slaves to Pharoah. They reach this conclusion by a particularly close reading and comparison of the verse in which the people offer themselves as opposed to the description of Yosef’s response to their offer. In 47:19, the Egyptians tell Yosef, "...Acquire us and our land in exchange for bread, and we and our land will be in servitude to Pharoah...", but the text continues (47:20) "And Yosef acquired all of the land of Egypt for Pharoah, because each man of Egypt had sold his field... and the land became Pharoah’s." And although Yosef subsequently states (47:23) "...And I have acquired you and your land for Pharoah this day..." his instruction (47:24) that 1/5 of what they grow on the land be given to Pharoah, while they are to keep 4/5 suggests that they are sharecroppers, rather than slaves. RaMBaN further explains that typically, the ratios would be reversed, with the sharecropper keeping the smaller share, and the bigger percentage turned over to the owner. However, Yosef was determined to deal kindly with them, not only in terms of refusing to allow them to become enslaved, but also with respect to the amount that they would be allowed to retain as a result of their agricultural efforts.
Meshech Chachma is even more adamant regarding Yosef’s refusal to impinge upon the Egyptian people’s personal liberties, and suggests that while the land would belong to Pharoah, the people were being hired as "day workers"—(47:23) "...And I have acquired you and your land for Pharoah this day...", i.e., only for a circumscribed period of time, as one would hire a laborer for a specific job and assure him a proper wage. Furthermore, the commentator asserts that such an arrangement accounts for Yosef’s transferring the Egyptians to cities, to prove to all that the only entity that permanently belonged to Pharoah was the land, but not the people. They would not be given the same legal status as had been attached to the land, i.e., Pharoah’s property.
The differing approaches to the question of Yosef’s far reaching intent with regard to the manner in which he distributes food, over and above simply providing food for starving people, revolves around the question of whether slavery is a means, however disagreeable, to a desired end, in this case trying to make the course of Jewish history as palatable as possible, despite the necessity for them to live in an alien land for a considerable period of time, or is the institution of slavery to be viewed as so heinous, that alternate means must be found, regardless of the direct and indirect social and economic benefits that slavery may offer. And what sort of sensibility should be attributed to Yosef? Was Yosef a particularist or a universalist? After all, he personally had been a slave, imprisoned, slandered, and generally treated badly. Therefore, he may have wished to spare his family from such difficulties. Or precisely because he had undergone such experiences, he did not want anyone else to be subjected to them, even Egyptians. What do you think?
Shabbat Shalom, and let us care about our people as well as all people, hopefully without having to choose one value at the expense of the other.
(1) The circumstances under which the Egyptians "sell" themselves to Pharoah is reminiscent of the manner in which Yaakov "purchases" the birthright from his brother Eisav (25:31-34). Aside from the question of whether a birthright can be bought and sold, taking advantage of someone else’s fears of imminent death due to starvation (25:32) in order to extract from him something that he values very much and otherwise would not be expected to willingly give up, would appear to be morally questionable. While the Talmud (Bava Batra 47b) concludes that if a person is made to sell something under duress ("Talyuhu VeZavin"), as long as he is properly compensated in the end, the sale is legal, this would appear to be in compliance with the letter rather than the spirit of the law.
(2) Another story to which the Midrashic assumption harks back is the negotiation with the inhabitants of Shechem (34:15). However, whereas in the case of the Shechemites, it appears that the objective was for them to refuse and thereby supply a pretense for the recovery of Dina, Yosef appears to want the Egyptians to go through with this ritual.
(3) The comment is made in connection with R. Aba bar Kahana’s view cited in Beraishit Rabba 90:6.
(4) Midrash HaGadol speculates that Yosef made a different request: when people would come to obtain food, he would tell them that they must deny belief in their idolatrous gods, and instead give thanks to the true God who is responsible for the food with which they are being provided. The precursor of such a story is the activities of Avraham that are described in association with the "Eishel" that he establishes in Be’er Sheva. See RaShI on 21:33. Pharoah’s ratification of Yosef’s demand for the Egyptian people to become monotheistic, says the Midrash, earns for Pharoah length of days, until he becomes excessively arrogant (Shemot 1:8, with the assumption that this is the same Pharoah with new policies, rather than a successor to the throne—see the disagreement between Rav and Shmuel cited by RaShI on this verse) and eventually dies (2:23).