According to Legends of the Jews, a monumental work compiled by Louis Ginzberg, the brothers spoke freely, thinking their words were veiled by the interpreter, Manasseh. Little did they know, Joseph understood every syllable of Hebrew. Can you imagine the tension, the suppressed emotions simmering beneath the surface as Joseph listened to them speak?
But why did Joseph choose to hold Simon hostage? The reasoning, as we find in Ginzberg's retelling, is layered with history and a touch of retribution. Joseph remembered the past. Simon, along with Levi, had advocated for his death all those years ago. Only the intervention of Reuben and Judah had spared him. This wasn't mere sibling rivalry; this was a brush with death.
But why not detain Levi as well? Joseph, ever the strategist, feared the combined might of Simon and Levi. The text suggests that if both remained in Egypt, their combined fury could bring devastation, just as they had once brought upon the city of Shechem. Remember that story? It’s a powerful one, demonstrating the strength, and sometimes ruthlessness, of these brothers.
There was another reason for choosing Simon. He wasn't as beloved as Levi. Joseph shrewdly calculated that the brothers would be less likely to violently resist Simon’s detention. Levi, their wise man and high priest, was indispensable. Depriving them of him might provoke a response that could destroy Egypt.
And finally, there’s the personal element. Simon, it was said, was the one who actually lowered Joseph into the pit. Imagine the years of resentment, the simmering anger Joseph must have felt. This wasn't just about justice; it was about a deeply personal wound. So, with Manasseh acting as interpreter, Joseph set his plan in motion, a plan woven with threads of the past, fear of the present, and a desire for some form of reckoning. It makes you wonder, doesn't it, how much of our past dictates our present actions, even when we think we've moved on?