GEN1316 The talmudic realia of filial “honor” focus on acts of service. Inasmuch as the rabbis contended that “Esau” was a paragon of filial piety, it is to be expected that filial service too, was not considered a uniquely Jewish institution (see infra on R. Gamliel and Esau), and, indeed, it is to be found in the traditional cultures of Greece and Rome…    The typical parental request in the discussion of the legists is, “Get me a drink of water.” See. e.g. Kiddushin 31a; see also Sotah 49a, Sifre Deuteronomy, sec. 218 (“light the candle”), and Nedarim 38b; Mekhilta d’RSBI, p. 47, 1, 21. Similarly, the Midrash states that Noah suffered in the Ark for want of a young son to serve him” Genesis Rabbah 36:11.   Again, the ethos of service (as that of reverence) was impressed upon Jewish society by heroic and extreme exemplars of attentiveness and zeal, as we recall from the filial behavior of Dama ben Netinah, R. Tarfon, and Abimi the son of R. Abahu. Biblical characters, too, were extolled as models of filial service, and the lesson was not lost on the students of the tradition: Naftali honored his father to an extreme. His father would send him wherever he wished, and Naftali eagerly fulfilled his father’s task. Jacob took pleasure in him, and found his words pleasing. … Numbers Rabbah 14:11   “ … Ruben came upon some mandrakes … and brought them to his mother Leah” [this verse]: This teaches how fully he honored his mother, for he did not taste them but brought them to her first. Reuben is elsewhere seen by the Midrash as zealous in his mother’s behalf; R. Simeon ben Eleazar and others (Shabbat 55b, cited in Rashi to Genesis 35:22) claims that Ruben did not actually lie with Bilhah, Jacob’s concubine, after the death of Rachel, as the biblical text states (see Genesis 35:22), but rather “defended the honor of his mother [Leah], saying ‘Though my mother’s sister shared my father with my mother, should the maidservant of my mother’s sister also do so?” And so he disarranged the bed.”   Genesis Rabbah 72:2  R. Simeon ben Gamliel said: “I served my father all my life, and when I would go to my affairs would change into clean clothes, but Esau always dressed as royalty to serve his father . …” Genesis Rabbah 65:16   Here, the Bible lesson [Esau] and biographical incident [R. Simeon b. Gamliel] reinforce each other, both teaching filial service in all its specificity. Furthermore, the point made by R. Simeon b. Gamliel is not to be taken lightly; he is concerned, not with the externals of the service per se, but what their precision in mirroring the centrality and significance of this service [and hence, of the person served] in the eyes of its performer. Is filial service dashed off ungracefully, resentfully—or is it performed nobly, winningly? Here, indeed, is the subtle yet substantial measure of true honor and regard. The rabbis found, in their attentively read Bible, the same lesson. The sale of Joseph is precipitated by the following incident: One time, when his brothers have gone to pastor their father’s flock at Shekhem, Israel said to Joseph, “Your brothers are pasturing at Shekhem. Come, I will send you to them.” He answered, “I am ready.” … So he sent him from the valley of Hebron.  When he reached Shekhem, a man came upon him wandering in the fields. The man asked him, “What are you looking for?” He answered, “I am looking for my brothers. Could you tell me where they are pasturing?” The man said, “They have gone from here. …” So Joseph followed his brothers and found them at Dothan. Genesis 37:12-17  The midrashic comments follow: Genesis Rabbah 84:13 (ed. Theodore-Albeck, II, pp. 1015-1016). The idea that Joseph’s filial piety was evidenced by his willingness to comply with his father’s demanding request is already found in Tannaitic literature; see Mekhilta Vayehi Petihta, 1 (e. Horowitz-Rabin, p. 29).   a. “Israel said to Joseph” – R. Tanhum in the name of R. Berekhia said, “He behaved toward him with the proper honor, as befits the reverential obligations of a son toward a father.” b. “He answered, I am ready’” – R. Hama b. Hanina said, “Our father Jacob would later remember these words, and feel his bowels cut up. ‘I know that your brothers hate you, and yet you answer, “I am ready.’”   The medievals understood the one midrashic comment to reinforce and interpret the other, and so Rashi writes: “Joseph answered, ‘I am ready,’ eager to fulfill his father’s wish, though he knew that his brothers hated him.” And Nahmanides finds additional evidence of this motif in the episode: “‘ … A man came upon him wandering in the fields. …’ Scripture tells this entire tale to show that though Joseph had a good cause to turn back, he suffered it all for the honor of his father.” Compare G. von Rad, Genesis, p. 347: “One is … surprised that Jacob so carelessly sent the defenseless youth to the camp of his brothers, whose hate, as just reported, had already reached such a menacing pitch. The way Joseph finally found his brothers … is told with strange minuteness. …”    The same lesson was taught in the many midrashic treatments of biblical material which we have cited elsewhere in our discussion. Rabbinic reflection on the Joseph-story could elicit even the more extreme demand that “a man’s father is like his king.”   Yalkut Shim’oni, sec. 153: “’ Joseph hitched his chariot and went to Goshen to meet his father Jacob’ (Genesis 46:29): Joseph heard that his brothers had reached the Egyptian boundary, so he took his retinue and went to greet his father. Now people go to greet the king; the king does not go to greet others. Thus we are taught that a man’s father is as his king.”   Midrash ha-Gadol, Genesis (ed. M. Margaliot, p. 785), concludes, “Scripture shows that Joseph did not go forth as ruler of Egypt, but as a son honoring his father.”   Indeed, one wonders whether this preoccupation with Joseph’s filial conduct did not grow, in part at least, out of the uncomfortable question posed by Joseph’s allowing his father to mourn him as dead all the years he was living as vice-regent in Egypt. In any case, the virtue of filial honor through personal service was exemplified by unimpeachable Biblical and talmudic models.   And the medieval moralist R. Israel Alnakawa systematically spells out the full (and realistic) dimensions of the services listed by the baraita: “Clothe them” – How is this to be done? He must clothe them as is the fitting, covering them from winter’s cold in a wrap befitting them, and giving them proper beds. “Lead them out” – How is this to be done? The son is obliged to accompany his father and mother, and not to turn back until they are out of sight. “Take them in” – How is this to be done? He is obliged to give them a fitting dwelling, or rent one for them. And when the father or mother enters the son’s home, he must rejoice in their coming and receive them happily.   Menorat ha-Ma’or, pp. 15-16.   BLIDSTEIN 51-53