The Torah in Parashat Vayetze records the brief, tension-ridden exchange between Yaakov and Rachel in the wake of Rachel’s inability to conceive. Rachel, who remained childless while her sister, Leah, bore several children in immediate succession to one another, confronts Yaakov and demands, “Give me children, for if not, [it is as though] I am dead!” (30:1). Yaakov angrily retorts, “Am I in the place of God, who has denied you fruit in the womb?”
The Midrash (Bereishit Rabba 71) notes the parallel between Yaakov’s angry retort to Rachel and Yosef’s reassuring words to his brothers spoken after Yaakov’s death. Later in Sefer Bereishit (50:15-21), we read that the brothers feared Yosef would avenge their mistreatment of him, and they begged him for compassion, claiming that Yaakov issued an instruction before his death that Yosef should forgive them. Yosef, in his response, rhetorically asks, “Am I in God’s place?” (“Ha-tachat Elokim ani” – 50:19), reminiscent of Yaakov’s response to Rachel – “Ha-tachat Elokim anokhi.” The Midrash comments: “The Almighty said to him [Yaakov]: Is this the way one responds to women in distress? By your life, your children will in the future stand before her son, and he will say, ‘Am I in God’s place?’” Chazal here clearly criticize Yaakov for reacting insensitively to his anguished wife, though it is not entirely clear, at least at first glance, how the parallel to Yosef’s soothing words to his brothers sheds any sort of light on this critique.
In both instances, the speaker avows his limited capability, deferring to God’s omnipotence. When Rachel expresses her frustration to Yaakov and “demands” children, he responds by denying his ability to assist her, essentially saying, “This depends on God, not on me.” In Yosef’s situation, too, the brothers fearfully anticipated some kind of reprisal on Yosef’s part, but he informed them that retribution is God’s department, so-to-speak, not his.
Chazal, in their criticism of Yaakov’s response to Rachel, and by contrasting it with Yosef’s response to his brothers, perhaps seek to instruct when to step back and leave it to God, and when to stubbornly insist on our power and capability. In Chazal’s view, Yosef’s question of “Am I in God’s place” was valid, but Yaakov’s wasn’t. When we are victimized, as Yosef was, the appropriate response is “Am I in God’s place,” to leave the matter in God’s hands rather than seek vengeance. But in Yaakov’s situation, when we encounter a person in distress, it is improper to excuse ourselves by deferring to God.
Yaakov was undoubtedly correct that only God could grant Rachel fertility, but he was incorrect in professing powerlessness. Even if he could not make Rachel fertile, he could, at least, offer the emotional support and encouragement that she so desperately needed. When we come upon a person in need of assistance, “There’s nothing I can do” is not a legitimate response. We might not be able to cure the patient’s illness or find gainful work for an unemployed friend, but there is always something we can do to help. These situations call for bold, proactive initiative. Humble withdrawal and a sense of dependency on God should be reserved for Yosef’s situation, when we have been wronged and feel an instinctive desire for revenge. It is here where we should present the claim of “Am I in God’s place.”
The role of judge should be reserved for God, but the role of generous benefactor is one which we should keep for ourselves and refuse to relinquish to the Almighty. When it comes to helping people in need, we are, in fact, to see ourselves as assuming God’s role, to feel empowered and determined to offer assistance in any way we can.