A Thought on Parshas Miketz

"...u'la'Yosef yulad shnai banim b'terem tavo shnas ha'raav..." "...and to Yosef were born two sons before the famine came..." (41:50) The Torah recounts how Yosef had two sons prior to the famine which struck Egypt and the surrounding lands. Rabbeinu Avigdor notes that the Talmud derives from our verse that a person must not engage in procreating during a famine. We can understand this at a values level, in that a severe shortage of food makes it impractical and perhaps unethical to continue having children. Rabbeinu Avigdor asks, however, how Yosef's brother Levi did not adhere to that ethic. When the family of Yaakov came to Egypt, we know that Yocheved was born en route. Clearly, Levi had remained procreative during that famine year. If you will answer that only Yosef, who had Divinely guided foresight, was aware of the impending enduring famine but that Levi had not known about this, then this would mean that only those who are prophetic should have to adhere to this restriction! Would Chazal have dictated that ethic (actually a halacha) only to those who are able to anticipate that a famine will last, but not to others? They should have said as much in the Talmud, rather than wording it as an absolute. Rabbeinu Avigdor then suggests that we might answer that Levi had had no children until that point and was thus exempt from the ethic. Those who have not fulfilled the mitzvah of being fruitful and multiplying are permitted to procreate even during a famine (as we see with Yitzchak (see 26:8), as stated in the Talmud (Taanis 11a). He then observes that from the Torah passages, it is apparent that Levi had children prior to the birth of Yocheved, so we are back to our original question: if Yosef followed the rule and only had children before the famine, how did Levi continue to have children despite the dismal times that the peoples of that region were facing? Rabbeinu Avigdor answers that Yosef was aware of the struggles of the Egyptians as food ran out, and he also assumed that the famine was rampant, even reaching the land of his father Yaakov. Meanwhile, Yaakov was aware of the encroaching Egyptian famine but was not at that time as affected by it back in Kanaan. Levi lived with Yaakov and also saw that there was still sustenance at home (see 42:1), even though Yaakov sent his sons to seek additional provisions down in Egypt. With this presentation of the verses, thus, Rabbeinu Avigdor traces the halacha which encourages abstinence during a famine, and the corollary that this applies only when the famine is both present and severe. It is important to note that the halacha is brought in Shulchan Aruch in Orach Chaim 240 and 574. Regarding the fact that Levi did not abstain, many views are brought by the poskim. The closest I have seen to the view of Rabbeinu Avigdor is one brought by the great Chi'da in the name of his father, who ruled that the halacha does not apply as long as people are still able to purchase food. It is clear from our parsha that Yaakov and his sons were able to buy food. This would explain why their situation was not considered a famine at that time. Good Shabbos. D Fox