Just before revealing his identity to his brothers, Yosef calls for all of the Egyptians present to leave the room. Why did he not want the Egyptians present for this event?

A Political Agenda

An early 20^th century non-Jewish German commentator, Hermann Gunkel, suggests that Yosef was motivated by political concerns:

He feared that it would not find favor with Pharoah that he was about to bring immigrants from a foreign land into the country during a time of famine. He, therefore, conducted the affair at that time in private, so he would be able to present Pharoah with an already established fact.

Gunkel's suggestion of political manipulation is inconsistent with human nature, and certainly against Yosef's emotional nature as depicted in the Torah. One who is in the midst of such a moving experience would not be able to engage in cold political calculations. Furthermore, this interpretation does not correspond with other aspects of the story[1]. Pharoah learns independently of the arrival of Yosef's brothers, apparently because Yosef did not try to conceal that information. The esteem that Pharoah had for Yosef is subsequently reflected in his warm acceptance of Yosef's family when he heard of the arrival of the brothers:

ויתן את קולו בבכי וישמעו מצרים וישמע בית פרעה…. והקול נשמע בית פרעה לאמר באו אחי יוסף וייטב בעיני פרעה ובעיני עבדיו. ויאמר פרעה אל יוסף אמר אל אחיך זאת עשו טענו את בעירכם ולכו באו ארצה כנען. וקחו את אביכם ואת בתיכם ובאו אלי ואתנה לכם את טוב ארץ מצרים… (בראשית מה:ב,טז-יח)

And he (Yosef) wept aloud, and Egypt and the house of Pharoah heard…. And the report was heard in Pharoah's house saying: the brothers of Yosef have come, and it pleased Pharoah and his servants. And Pharoah said to Yosef: “Tell your brother to do this: load your beasts, and go to the land of Canaan. And take your father and your households and come to me, and I will give you the good of the land of Egypt… (Bereshit 45:2,16-18)

Thus, Pharoah, before even being approached by Yosef, knew of the brothers' arrival and invited Yosef's family to come to Egypt of his own volition. If, in fact, Yosef was not interested in concealing the fact that his brothers had come to Egypt, why did he dismiss the Egyptians from the room before revealing his identity?

Yosef Protects the Dignity of his Brothers

Rashi provides a different explanation of Yosef's actions:

ולא יכול יוסף להתאפק לכל הנצבים: לא היה יכול לסבול שיהיו מצרים נצבים ושומעין שאחיו מתביישין בהודעו להם.

And Yosef could not restrain himself before all that stood by him: He could not bear that the Egyptians would be standing and listening when his brothers would be embarrassed by his admission to them.

According to Rashi, Yosef dismissed the Egyptians in order to protect the dignity of his brothers. He did not want the Egyptians to know that they had sold him to Egypt.

The modern Jewish German commentator, Benno Jacob, finds this explanation self evident:

A Jewish child who learns Torah does not need the interpretations of Rashi, Ramban, Bechor Shor, Abarbanel, and the Biur in order to know what was the motivation of Yosef when he commanded to remove all of the Egyptians that were present.

Jacob finds it clear from the context of the narrative that Yosef did not want to “wash the family's linens in public.” He removed the Egyptians from the room when he knew that the embarrassing episode of his sale by the brothers would be raised.

Yet, Rashi characteristically does not base his explanation on context. Rather, he is reacting to linguistic and stylistic nuances within the text. Rashi interprets the word

“להתאפק” as “to bear”. This deviates from the usual understanding of the word, “to restrain oneself”. According to some commentators, the word “להתאפק” here means that Yosef was unable to restrain himself from crying, or to restrain himself from revealing his identity to his brothers. This would be consistent with the usage of the same term in Bereshit 43:30-31:

וימהר יוסף כי נמכרו רחמיו אל אחיו ויבקש לבכות ויבא החדרה ויבך שמה. וירחץ פניו ויצא ויתאפק ויאמר שימו לחם.

And Yosef hurried, for his mercy was kindled for his brothers, and he entered the room and cried there. And he washed his face and went out and he restrained himself, and said: “Put out bread”.

Interestingly, Rashi in his commentary on verse 43:31 interprets the word “להתאפק” as “להתאמץ” – “to make a strong effort”. Presumably, he is referring to Yosef's effort to restrain himself. Why, then, does Rashi interpret the phrase differently here?

Apparently, Rashi is relating to a linguistic difficulty in the text. The word “להתאפק” is usually a transitive verb that is preceded or followed by an indication of something from which the person is restraining himself. For example, the context in the previous use of the term (Bereshit 43:30-31) indicates that Yosef made an effort to restrain himself from his desire to have mercy on his brothers, or from crying. In our case, however, there is not a clear indication of what Yosef is unable to restrain. Benno Jacob solves the problem by suggesting that the word “להתאפק” here is an intransitive verb, meaning simply that Yosef could not control himself. Rashi, however, seems to relate, as well, to another linguistic difficulty – the fact that we do not find anywhere else in the Torah that the word “להתאפק” is followed by the preposition “to” (“ל”). Presumably, for these two reasons Rashi interprets “להתאפק” as “to bear” and interprets the “ל” in “לכל הנצבים” as “את” (“the”), a form that appears as well in Shemot 27:3. As such, according to Rashi, the verse reads: “And Yosef was not able to bear all of the people who were standing with him…”

Levush Ha'ora, a supercommentary on Rashi, offers an alternative explanation of Rashi's commentary. He claims that, in fact, Rashi does not interpret the word

“להתאפק” differently here than he does in Bereshit 43:31:

ותמהני עליהם מאד (על פרשני רש"י ), וכי שכחו האנשים האלה מה שפירש רש"י לעיל בפרשת מקץ (מג, לא)… ואיך יפרשהו במקומנו לשון סבל?! לכך אני אומר, שכוונת הפסוק מה שאמר כאן: ולא יכול יוסף להתאמץ עוד מלהתוודע לאחיו, כאשר התאמץ עד הנה שלא להתוודע בשביל כל הניצבים עליו, כדי שלא יתביישו. ולכך: "ויקרא הוציאו כל איש” ....

I wonder whether they (other commentators on Rashi) forgot Rashi's explanation in Parasha Miketz (43:31)? … How then can he in our instance attribute to it the meaning of bearing?! I therefore say that the meaning of our verse is: Yosef could no longer make an effort not to reveal himself as he did until then not to make himself known before all those present lest they (the brothers) be put to shame. Therefore, He cried out: “Have everyone withdraw from me…”

According to Levush Ha'ora, Yosef was ready to reveal his identity to his brothers at this point, but restrained himself in order not to embarrass the brothers in front of the Egyptians who were present. When he could no longer restrain himself, he called on the Egyptians to leave. The difficulty in the explanation of Levush Ha'ora is that it implies that Yosef was restrained from revealing his identity to his brothers earlier only by the presence of the Egyptians. This disregards the process of reflection that Yosef fostered in his brothers by not revealing himself earlier. Certainly, on a personal level, Yosef would have wanted to make his identity known earlier, but he was compelled to wait until Yehudah would manifest the sense of responsibility that had been absent when he had been sold.

Gur Aryeh, another supercommentary on Rashi, questions Rashi's claim that Yosef could not bear to see the embarrassment of his brothers before the Egyptians:

ועוד תימה לי, מה דוחקיה לרש"י לפרש ולא היה יכול להתאפק על הבושה שיגיע לאחיו בהתוודע אליהם, שזה לא נזכר, ולא פירש זה על הבושה שהיה מגיע אליהם כאשר חשד אותם בגניבה …

I wonder why Rashi interprets that Yosef could not restrain himself because of the shame the brothers would be put to when he reveals his identity, which is something that is not mentioned in the text, and does not say so for the shame they suffered when he suspected them of theft … (See Bereshit 44)

One could answer the question of Gur Aryeh by pointing to the fact that in the previous case, the servants of Pharoah were aware that the brothers had not in reality stolen the cup, as Yosef had asked them to place the cup in Binyamin's bag (Bereshit 44:2). Furthermore, there is a significant difference between the gravity of stealing a cup as opposed to kidnapping. Nevertheless, Gur Aryeh leaves the question open (in need of further investigation), perhaps because in a larger sense, the whole episode could raise questions about the relationship between Yosef and his brothers in the eyes of the Egyptians.

Ten More Hebrews!

Gunkel's interpretation mentioned previously, which implies that Yosef's dismissal of the Egyptians reflected a tenuous relationship with Pharoah, is not born out by the text. The Midrash Hagadol, however, suggests that the arrival of Yosef's brothers did not find favor in the eyes of Pharoah's staff:

אמרו: "מה זה שהוא אחד הורידנו מגדולתינו, הללו עשרה על אחת כמה וכמה."

They (the staff of Pharoah) said: “If this one (Yosef) who is only one individual brought us down from our greatness, how much more so will these ten.”

It would be natural for the ministers of Pharoah to be jealous of Yosef, but the claim of the midrash seems to contradict the plain sense of the text:

והקול נשמע בית פרעה לאמר באו אחי יוסף וייטב בעיני פרעה ובעיני עבדיו. (בראשית מה:טז)

And the report was heard in Pharoah's house saying: the brothers of Yosef have come, and it pleased Pharoah and his servants. (Bereshit 45:16)

The opinion of the midrash is based on a close comparative reading of a similar verse in Bereshit 41:37 relating to Yosef's plan to deal with the impending famine:

וייטב בעיני פרעה ובעיני כל עבדיו.

And it pleased Pharoah and all his servants.

The verse in chapter 41 relates to all of Pharoah's servants, while the verse in chapter 45 refers only to Pharoah's servants. From this difference, the midrash deduces that the news of the arrival of Yosef's brothers was not pleasing to some of Pharoah's ministers.

The Legitimization of Yosef

Nevertheless, Ramban and Sforno claim that the arrival of Yosef's family was viewed positively by the Egyptians, and explain why:

רמב"ן: כי היה יוסף מגיד לבית פרעה, כי יש לו אחים נכבדים בארץ העברים, כי גנב גונב משם, ועתה שמעו כי באו אחי יוסף כאשר אמר: "וייטב בעיני פרעה ובעיני עבדיו", כי היה הדבר להם לחרפה, שימשול בהם איש נכרי, עבד מבית האסורים יצא למלוך; ועתה בבוא אליו אחים נכבדים, ונודע כי הוא הגון להתייצב לפני מלכים, שמחו כולם בדבר.

Ramban: For Yosef told the house of Pharoah that he had respected brothers in the land of the Hebrews from where he was kidnapped. And now that they heard that the brothers of Yosef came, “it was good in the eyes of Pharoah and in the eyes of his servants”. For it was a disgrace to them that a stranger, a servant, from the prison should rule over them. And now that his respected brothers arrived and it was known that he was worthy to stand before kings, everyone was happy about it.

ספורנו: וייטב בעיני פרעה: שחשב שמכאן ואילך תהיה שגחת יוסף על הארץ לא כהשגחת גר מנהיג, אבל בהשגחת אזרח הושב לשבת בארץ הוא וזרעו - ולזה ישגיח בכל לב להטיב לארץ וליושביה.

Sforno: And it was good in the eyes of Pharoah: For he thought that from now on Yosef would supervise the country not as a stranger, but as a citizen residing in the land with his family – and he would therefore supervise with a whole heart for the benefit of the land and its inhabitants.

Thus, according to both Sforno and Ramban, the Egyptians were initially suspect of Yosef. The arrival of Yosef's brothers gave a greater sense of legitimacy to Yosef in the eyes of the Egyptians. This explanation gives credence to Rashi's interpretation, supported by Ramban, of Yosef's request that the Egyptians leave before he revealed his identity to his brothers. The disgrace of the brothers resulting from the revelation that they had sold Yosef would have a negative impact, as well, on the legitimacy of Yosef in the eyes of the Egyptians. The arrival of Yosef's family to Egypt was, thus, not only a wonderful personal fulfillment for Yosef, but also a boost to his position as a leader in the Egyptian society.

[1] Gunkel was a proponent of the documentary hypothesis and would claim that these texts are from different sources, although he wrote that it is difficult to distinguish between the sources in this particular chapter.