Parshat Miketz5 min read

Benjamin Named All Ten Sons for the Brother He Never Found

When the Egyptian viceroy asked Benjamin about his children, Benjamin listed ten names. Every one was a coded lament for a brother he thought was dead.

Curated by Arthur · Told by Maggid ·
Table of Contents
  1. The Brother Benjamin Did Not Recognize
  2. Ten Sons, Ten Names for One Missing Brother
  3. The Proof Joseph Demanded
  4. The Meal That Almost Broke Him Earlier

The Brother Benjamin Did Not Recognize

Twenty-two years had passed. Benjamin had been a child the last time he saw Joseph, small enough that the older brothers could move him aside like a piece of furniture when they were deciding what to do with the boy in the pit. He had not been there for the sale. He had grown up with a story about a torn coat and a father who never fully came back.

Now he was a grown man with sons of his own, standing in the hall of the Egyptian viceroy, and the viceroy was looking at his face with an expression Benjamin could not read. Joseph had been holding himself together since the moment he first saw his brothers file in from Canaan, and by now he had the discipline of a man who had survived fifteen years of Egyptian political life. He held it together now, barely.

He asked a careful question. The kind of question a foreign dignitary asks to fill silence. Do you have a brother from the same mother?

Ten Sons, Ten Names for One Missing Brother

Benjamin answered first: I had one, but I do not know what has become of him.

Joseph felt the floor move. He kept his face still.

He asked the next question. The polite question. Do you have a wife? Do you have children?

Benjamin listed his ten sons. Bela. Becher. Ashbel. Gera. Naaman. Ehi. Rosh. Muppim. Huppim. Ard. They are not beautiful names. They are not the kind of names you give children to celebrate anything. The midrashic tradition preserved by Ginzberg unpacks what each one means and finds the same word at the bottom of all of them: Joseph.

Bela, because his brother was swallowed up. Becher, because he was the firstborn of his mother. Ashbel, because God took him. Gera, because he was a stranger in a foreign land. Naaman, because he was pleasant and beautiful. Ehi, my brother. Rosh, because he was chief among them. Muppim, because he was from the mouth of his father. Huppim, because he did not see his bridal canopy, gone before he was old enough to marry. Ard, because he went down.

Every son Benjamin had was a word for the shape of the absence.

The Proof Joseph Demanded

When Joseph finally could not contain himself any longer, before the revelation, still testing, still pressing, he demanded proof that Benjamin's grief was real. How can I know that your oath about your brother is true?

Benjamin answered: from the names of my ten sons, which I gave them in memory of my brother's life and trials, you can know.

This was the testimony Joseph had not planned to receive. He had planned to test them with the cup in the sack. He had planned to see whether they would abandon Benjamin the way they had abandoned him. He had not planned to hear that his youngest brother had been naming children after him for twenty years, building a memorial in the only material he had available, which was the register of his own household.

The Meal That Almost Broke Him Earlier

Before the revelation, Joseph had seated them at a banquet. The brothers marveled at the arrangement of the seating, because the Egyptian governor had seated them in birth order, oldest to youngest, without anyone telling him how old they were. Then Joseph gave Benjamin five times the food he gave the others: his own portion, his wife Asenath's portion, and the portions of his two sons Ephraim and Manasseh.

The brothers watched and ate and did not understand what they were watching. Benjamin ate from four extra plates and did not know why the governor of Egypt was watching him the way a man watches a thing he thought he had lost. The breastplate of the Tabernacle, the tradition says, would later carry an onyx stone for Joseph and a jasper stone for Benjamin, side by side, the two sons of Rachel set back together in the high priest's vestments, the order restored in cloth and stone what had been torn apart in a field near Dothan.


← All myths

From the tradition

Sources

5 sources

The texts this telling draws on, in full. Open a card to read inline, or expand it for a wider, quieter read.

Legends of the Jews 1:253Legends of the Jews

Decades had passed since Joseph was sold into slavery, and now he stood as a powerful figure, face-to-face with his youngest brother. It's a powerful moment ripe with unspoken emotion.

The conversation, as the Legends of the Jews (Ginzberg) recounts it, starts quite practically. Joseph, still testing the waters, the loyalties of his brothers, begins with simple questions. He asks Benjamin if he has a brother from the same mother. Benjamin replies, sadly, "I had one, but I do not know what hath become of him." The weight of that unknown hangs heavy in the air. Can you imagine the pain and the years of searching implied in those words?

Then Joseph asks about Benjamin's family. "Hast thou a wife?" he inquires.

Benjamin replies by listing his sons, each name a tiny, poignant memorial: "Bela, and Becher, and Ashbel, Gera, and Naaman, Ehi, and Rosh, Muppim, and Huppim, and Ard."

Joseph, ever observant, is struck by the unusual names. "Why didst thou give them such peculiar names?" he asks.

And here, the dam of unspoken grief and longing begins to break. Benjamin explains, each name a whispered prayer, a lament for the lost brother, Joseph.

"Bela," Benjamin explains, "because my brother disappeared among the peoples." Bela hints at swallowing up or disappearance. Can you feel the sorrow, the feeling of Joseph being lost in the vastness of the world?

"Becher," he continues, "he was the first-born son of my mother." Becher means first-born, a constant reminder of the place Joseph held in their mother Rachel’s heart.

"Ashbel," he adds, "he was taken away from my father." Ashbel suggests captivity, the pain of separation etched into his very being.

"Gera," Benjamin says, "he dwells a stranger in a strange land." Gera means sojourner or stranger, a reflection of Joseph’s exile.

"Naaman," he murmurs, "he was exceedingly lovely." Naaman speaks of pleasantness and beauty, a memory of Joseph's inherent goodness.

"Ehi," Benjamin reveals, "he was my only brother by my father and my mother together." Ehi means "my brother," a simple declaration of their close bond.

"Rosh," he continues, "he was at the head of his brethren." Rosh signifies head or chief, recalling Joseph's natural leadership qualities.

"Muppim," Benjamin says, "he was beautiful in every respect." Muppim suggests brightness or beauty.

"Huppim," he whispers, "he was slandered." Huppim implies covered or protected, perhaps alluding to the false accusations Joseph faced.

And finally, "Ard, because he was as beautiful as a rose." Ard means to descend, to blossom, capturing Joseph's radiant spirit.

Each name is a brushstroke, painting a portrait of a lost brother, a evidence of enduring love and the indelible mark he left on Benjamin's heart. It’s a powerful reminder that even in the face of unimaginable loss, memory and love can bloom in the most unexpected ways. These names are not just labels; they are whispered stories, echoes of a life deeply missed, a life that, unbeknownst to Benjamin, stood right before him. It makes you wonder, doesn't it, about all the unspoken stories carried within the names we give, the names we remember.

Full source
Bereshit Rabbah 92:5Bereshit Rabbah

The scene: Joseph, now a powerful figure in Egypt, is reunited with his brothers, though they don't recognize him. He asks them, "Is all well with your father? Is the elder whom you mentioned still alive?" (Genesis 43:27). Their reply: "All is well with your servant, with our father; he is still alive.” (Genesis 43:28).

Rabbi Ḥiyya Rabba picks up on something subtle here. He recounts an anecdote about a Babylonian man, where a similar exchange reveals a deeper meaning. The man asks after Rabbi Ḥiyya's father, and Rabbi Ḥiyya responds by saying his mother sends greetings. The man is taken aback, pointing out that one inquires after the living, not the dead. The implication? Joseph's question about "the elder" – is he really asking about Jacob, or is he hinting at Isaac, who had already passed?

The brothers only answer directly about Jacob, who is alive. They conspicuously avoid mentioning Isaac. It’s a fascinating example of reading between the lines, noticing what isn't said.

Then, Joseph sees his brother Benjamin, his full brother, and says, “Is this your youngest brother whom you mentioned to me? God be gracious to you, my son” (Genesis 43:29). Rabbi Binyamin notes something beautiful here. We hear about grace being bestowed on the eleven tribes through Jacob's words, "The children with whom God has graced your servant" (Genesis 33:5). But Benjamin wasn't yet born then. Where does he receive his blessing of grace? Right here, in Joseph's words: "God be gracious to you, my son." It’s a subtle but significant inclusion.

The text continues, "Joseph hurried, because his mercy was aroused toward his brother and he sought to weep; he entered the chamber, and wept there” (Genesis 43:30). Can you imagine the emotional turmoil Joseph must have been experiencing?

And then we have the peculiar seating arrangement: "They sat before him, the firstborn according to his seniority, and the younger according to his youth, and the men wondered to one another” (Genesis 43:33). How did Joseph know to seat them in the correct order? According to the Bereshit Rabbah, Joseph used a goblet to create the illusion of divining their order. He proclaimed Judah, the kingly one, should sit at the head, Reuben, the firstborn, next to him, and so on.

But it doesn't end there. Joseph, noting that he and Benjamin share a similar history – both lost their mothers at birth – has Benjamin sit beside him. "I have no mother and Benjamin has no mother...Therefore, let him come and place his head alongside mine." This unusual gesture, this shared grief, only adds to the brothers' bewilderment.

Finally, "He gave gifts from before him, and Benjamin's gift was five times greater than the gifts of all of them. They drank, and became inebriated with him” (Genesis 43:34). The Midrash (rabbinic interpretive commentary) tells us that Joseph, Asenath, Manasseh, and Ephraim all contributed to Benjamin's generous portion. And Rabbi Levi adds a poignant detail: for the entire twenty-two years of separation, neither Joseph nor his brothers had tasted wine. Only in this moment of reunion, however fraught with underlying tensions, could they truly drink and become merry together. "With him, they drank, but other than with him, they did not drink.”

What can we take away from this intricate reading of a familiar story? It's a reminder to pay attention to the nuances of language, the unspoken emotions, and the small acts of kindness that can reveal deeper truths about ourselves and our relationships. Sometimes, the greatest meaning lies not in what is said, but in what is left unsaid, and in the shared experiences that bind us together, even after years of separation and pain.

Full source
Legends of the Jews 1:247Legends of the Jews

Can you feel the tension hanging in the air?

That's the scene as Joseph, now a powerful figure in Egypt, finally sits down to eat with his brothers – the very ones who sold him into slavery. According to Ginzberg's Legends of the Jews, it was a meal fraught with emotion.

The brothers, understandably, were a little bewildered. They marveled at everything happening around them. Then something extraordinary happened. Joseph, in a gesture laden with meaning, gave his own portion of food to Benjamin, his full brother. His wife Asenath followed suit. And then Ephraim and Manasseh, Joseph's sons, did the same! That meant Benjamin received not one, but four extra portions of food, on top of the share he got like all of Jacob's other sons. What could it mean? Was it favoritism? A test?

The surprises didn't stop there. Wine was served. Now, remember, these brothers hadn’t tasted wine in twenty-two long years. Why? Because they had taken upon themselves the life of Nazarites – a kind of self-imposed asceticism, a vow of abstinence from wine and other pleasures. They were mourning, atoning for the terrible thing they had done to Joseph. And Joseph himself? He had abstained, too, grieving for his father, Jacob, whom he believed to be lost to him forever. It was a collective act of penance, a silent acknowledgment of the deep wounds that time had, perhaps, begun to heal. But were they truly healed?

This moment, this meal, is more than just a family dinner. It’s a turning point. It's a taste – literally – of potential reconciliation. It’s a glimpse into the possibility of forgiveness, of moving beyond the past. But will they seize it? What do you think?

Full source
Legends of the Jews 1:304Legends of the Jews

Legends of the Jews turns to Benjamin Pleaded for Mercy and Joseph Could Barely Hold Back.

The story unfolds with Joseph, now a powerful figure in Egypt, testing his brothers who appear before him seeking grain. He's been putting them through the wringer, questioning them, and subtly accusing them. The tension is palpable.

The crucial moment arrives when Benjamin, the youngest brother, pleads for mercy. Joseph demands proof of their love for their lost brother, and Benjamin responds with a heart-wrenching testimony.

"How can I know that this oath of thine taken upon thy brother's fate is true?" Joseph asks, pressing him.

Benjamin’s reply is nothing short of extraordinary. "From the names of my ten sons," he explains, "which I gave them in memory of my brother's life and trials, thou canst see how dearly I loved him. I pray thee, therefore, do not bring down my father with sorrow to the grave." Benjamin named his children as living memorials to Joseph, a constant reminder of his brother’s struggles and, seemingly, his death. It's a powerful evidence of the enduring bond between them.

Hearing these words, Joseph could refrain himself no longer. The facade he’d so carefully constructed began to crumble. The weight of his secret – his true identity – became unbearable. He could not but make himself known unto his brethren.

And then comes the pivotal question, dripping with emotion: "Ye said the brother of this lad was dead. Did you yourselves see him dead before you?"

Their answer is a simple, yet damning, "Yes!" They stand by their story, oblivious to the man before them.

What a moment! Can you feel the anticipation, the shock that's about to erupt? Imagine being in that room, witnessing the brothers' bewilderment as Joseph finally reveals himself. What would they do? How would they react to the brother they thought was dead, now a powerful ruler before them?

Full source
Legends of the Jews 3:48Legends of the Jews

Each stone, according to tradition, wasn't just a pretty gem; it was a symbol, a story etched in mineral form.

Joseph, the dreamer, the charmer, the one who rose from the pit to become second-in-command in Egypt. His stone? The onyx. Now, the legends tell us this wasn't just any onyx. This particular stone had the power, the virtue, of bestowing grace upon its wearer. And wasn't that Joseph to a tee? He possessed an innate grace, a charisma that allowed him to find favor wherever he went. from Potiphar's house to the prison to the Pharaoh's court, Joseph's grace opened doors and softened hearts. The stone, in this way, wasn't just a symbol of his grace, but almost a source of it. What if wearing or holding certain objects can influence the way we treat each other and see the world?

Then we have Benjamin, the youngest, the beloved of his father Jacob after Joseph's disappearance. His stone was the jasper. But The legends say that this jasper wasn't a static, unchanging stone. No, this jasper changed color! Sometimes red, sometimes green, sometimes even black. And what did these shifting hues reflect? Benjamin's own turbulent emotions.

He was torn, you see. Part of him seethed with anger at his brothers for their terrible act of selling Joseph into slavery. Rachel, Joseph's mother, was also Benjamin's. This made the betrayal even more profound for the younger brother. He was so close to revealing their secret to Jacob, to unleashing the full force of their father's wrath.

But, another part of him, a stronger part, ultimately, held back. He couldn't bring himself to disgrace his brothers, to shatter their family even further. This inner conflict, this battle between anger and loyalty, is reflected in the ever-changing colors of his jasper. It's a powerful image, isn't it? The idea of a stone mirroring the inner turmoil of a human heart.

There's even a linguistic connection here. The Hebrew name for his stone, Yashpeh, alludes to this very discretion. It signifies "There is a mouth," implying that Benjamin, though he had a mouth, though he possessed the power to speak the truth, chose to remain silent. He swallowed the bitter words that would have exposed his brothers. What does it mean to have a mouth, but to hold back?

So, what do we take away from these stories of stones and brothers? Perhaps it's a reminder that even seemingly simple objects can hold profound meaning, reflecting the complexities of human character and the interplay of family relationships. And maybe, just maybe, it's an invitation to examine the "stones" in our own lives, the objects, the symbols, the stories. And consider what they reveal about us.

Full source