The Role of the Interpreter in the Interpretation of Dreams
And Yosef answered Paroh: It is not me. G-d may provide an answer concerning Paroh’s fortune. (Beresheit 41:16)
Paroh has two dreams. Their meaning troubles him. Paroh learns that there is a Hebrew in prison that is skilled in the interpretation of dreams. This Hebrew is Yosef. Paroh commands that Yosef be brought to him. Paroh tells Yosef that he is aware of his reputation as a skilled interpreter of dreams. Yosef responds that Hashem provides the interpretations. Yosef had previously made a similar statement. Yosef was unjustly imprisoned. There, he was placed in charge of two very special prisoners. These were the Paroh’s butler and baker. On a single night, each had a dream. In the morning, both awoke deeply disturbed by their dreams. Yosef offered to listen to their dreams. However, he indicated that Hashem would provide the interpretation. In each of these incidents, Yosef agrees to interpret dreams. In each instance, he introduces his attempt with a disclaimer. He explains that the interpretation must come from Hashem. Why does Yosef introduce his endeavors at dream interpretation with this stipulation?
Ohr HaChayim suggests that Yosef is merely humbly acknowledging a truth. He does not wish to seize credit for a service that he is not truly providing. Hashem provides him with the interpretation. Yosef is not the source of the interpretation; he is Hashem’s conduit.
However, Nachmanides offers another explanation for Yosef’s disclaimer. Yosef is attempting to avoid responsibility for the content of the interpretation. In each instance, Yosef announces his disclaimer before hearing the dream. He does not yet know the content of the dream. He does not know if the dream brings good tidings, or is a harbinger of misfortune. He realizes that his interpretation may provide the dreamer with a portent of misfortune. The dreamer may become angry. He does not want the dreamer to blame him for the interpretation. Therefore, he prefaces his interpretation with a disclaimer. He cannot claim credit for a positive interpretation. He is not responsible for a negative interpretation. He merely communicates an interpretation provided by Hashem.
Yosef’s statement seems to make sense. However, it implies a specific fear. He was afraid that the particulars of the interpretation would be attributed to him. He would be blamed for any unpleasant news he delivered. What was the source of this fear? On the simplest level, Yosef could have been reacting to the tendency to blame and punish the messenger who brings evil tidings. However, Rabbaynu Ovadia Sforno suggests that Yosef was dealing with an actual belief that existed at this time. Apparently, the Egyptians believed that a dream is inherently subject to multiple interpretations. However, once the dream is interpreted, the meaning emerges as the only true interpretation. This interpretation will be actualized in the life of the dreamer. Therefore, the interpreter, through interpreting a dream, actually influences its meaning and impact. This places the interpreter in a dangerous situation. His role is not regarded as passive. He is considered an active agent in determining the meaning of the dream.
This explanation of Yosef’s disclaimer is supported by an interesting pasuk. As mentioned above, Yosef interpreted the dreams of the king’s butler and baker. He first interpreted the dream of the butler. The Torah tells us that the baker observed that Yosef had interpreted the butler’s dream well. He then related his dream to Yosef. How did the baker know that Yosef had interpreted the butler’s dream well? The interpretation foretold events that had not yet occurred. The accuracy of Yosef’s interpretation could not be immediately determined! In response to this difficulty, Sforno suggests an alternate translation for the passage. According to Sforno, the baker’s decision to relate his dream to Yosef was not motivated by his assessment of the accuracy of Yosef’s interpretation. The baker related his dream to Yosef because he saw that Yosef had provided a positive interpretation. The baker’s reaction indicates that he believed that the interpreter actually influences the meaning and portents of the dream. The baker observed that Yosef had offered a positive interpretation. This assured the baker that Yosef could be trusted to interpret his dream as a positive portent.
Yosef was arguing against attributing any power to the interpreter. He explained that a dream has a specific meaning. The interpreter attempts to discover this single true meaning. The interpreter and his interpretation do not play any role in shaping the dream’s message or its impact on the life of the dreamer. Hopefully, Hashem will communicate this interpretation to Yosef.
The Talmud makes an amazing comment on this issue. The Talmud asserts that, “all dreams follow the mouth.” This statement seems to mean that the verbal pronouncement of a particular interpretation does effect the meaning of a dream. This seems to confirm the belief of the Egyptians that the interpretation of a dream impacts its outcome and contradicts Yosef’s understanding of dream interpretation. Yosef insisted that he was not responsible for the interpretation. He could only provide Hashem’s response. The Talmud seems to posit that the interpreter is responsible for the meaning and significance of a dream. The interpreter’s explanation determines the meaning!
Gershonides offers an astounding insight into the Talmud’s comment. He explains that the Talmud does not contradict Yosef’s assertion. The Talmud is dealing with an entirely different issue. The Talmud agrees that the interpreter does not influence the meaning of a dream. What does the Talmud mean in the statement, “all dreams follow the mouth?” The Talmud is explaining that dreams express thoughts in a symbolic form. These symbols are based upon “the mouth.” The symbols use colloquial speech and expression. The Talmud is explaining that the interpretation of a dream must take into account the language patterns of the dreamer. In other words, the dream represents the thoughts of the dreamer. It communicates its message through visual symbols. The interpretation of the dream requires the analysis of these symbols. The symbols may be based upon figures of speech. Therefore, a proper interpretation of these symbols requires an appreciation of the colloquial expressions common in the language of the dreamer. This is because some symbols are merely visual representations of these colloquial expressions.
The Brothers’ Failure to Recognize Yosef Yosef saw his brothers, and he recognized them. He disguised himself and spoke to them harshly, and he said to them, “From where have you come?” And they said, “From the Land of Cana’an, to purchase food.” Yosef recognized his brothers, but they did not recognize him. (Beresheit 42:7,42:8)
Yosef was appointed by Paroh as Prime Minister. When famine struck Egypt and the surrounding region, he was personally responsible for the distribution of all provisions. Yosef’s brothers came to Egypt to purchase food. Yosef immediately recognized them and disguised his behavior so that they would not realize that he was their brother. His subterfuge was successful and he was not found out. Rashi explains that Yosef was much younger than his brothers. When they had parted, he did not yet have a full beard, whereas his brothers were mature adults. When the brothers arrived in Egypt, they were confronted with a bearded minister. They did not recognize their younger brother.
Rabbaynu David Kimchi – RaDaK provides an alternative explanation for the brothers’ failure to recognize Yosef. Strong psychological forces prevented the brothers from realizing that they stood before Yosef. The brothers had sold Yosef, and assumed that he was either dead or a lowly slave. They never doubted the effectiveness of their plan. Although they repented for the evil of their actions, they assumed that their destruction of Yosef had been complete. RaDaK explains, that at this initial meeting, the brothers observed a resemblance between the minister and their lost brother. However, they immediately rejected the implications of this observation. They just could not envision Yosef in a position of power and rulership. This prejudice provided Yosef with the opportunity to effectively disguise himself.
On a deeper level, it should be noted that the original reason for the brothers’ resentment of Yosef was because they perceived within him a boastful attitude. They could not accept that Yosef could be superior, or had a right to exercise control over them. Dominated by these feelings, they were now unable to recognize Yosef in the very relationship that they dreaded.
The RaDaK further explains that Yosef went to great lengths to assure that he would be reunited with his brothers. As senior minister in Egypt, he was not obligated to personally distribute provisions. He assumed this responsibility because he wanted to personally meet every individual requesting food. He knew that as the famine continued, his brothers would eventually be forced to travel to Egypt to seek provisions. Through personally distributing these supplies, he would be assured of meeting his family.