Most likely, Yosef was trying to re-create the situation which he thought had occurred when he was sold as the brothers would now be returning home without one brother (Shimon) and with money. Note that Yosef also gave the brothers food for the trip, 42:25, maybe in order that they would not have to open their bags right away which meant that they would only find the silver when it was too late for them to return to Egypt.
Bereshit 42:27 then records that when the brothers stopped at some place on the road home, one brother found the silver that he had used to buy the food. When he told this to the other brothers, they were all scared, and they stated, “what has G-d done to us?" 42:28. The brothers then continued on their way home, and upon arrival they told Yaakov about Yosef’s accusations and that Shimon was being kept as a hostage, 42:29-34. They did not mention anything about the silver. Instead, they opened their sacks, found the silver and they and Yaakov were scared, 42:35. What does it mean that they found the silver in 42:35, as they already knew about the silver in 42:27? Why were they scared a second time?
The traditional answer (see Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Radak on 42:27, Luzzatto on 42:35) is that initially only one brother found the silver and it was only when the brothers came home did all the other brothers find their silver. This approach is difficult for three reasons. One, 43:21 records that when the brothers returned to Egypt they returned the silver, and they told Yosef’s steward that they found the silver on their way home. Why should they have lied to the steward about where they found the silver? Two, it is more logical to assume that once one of the brothers found his silver, the other brothers would have searched their sacks as well. Three, this approach does not explain why the brothers did not mention to Yaakov that at least one of them had found the silver.
Sarna (1989, p. 296) suggests that the brothers “had prearranged to tell their father nothing of the money and to stage the discovery in his presence.” Similarly, Robert Altar (2004, p. 244) writes that maybe “the brothers deliberately acted out a discovery in the presence of their father in order to impress upon him how they were all at the mercy of a superior power.” With this idea, one of the brothers found the money in his amtahat, 42:27, and after he told the other brothers they also checked their packs and found the money in their respective amtahot, 43:21. The brothers then put the silver back in the bottom of the sacks with their food for the animals. Once they came home and reported to Yaakov what happened, they deliberately emptied their sacks in front of him to have Yaakov “find” the silver, 42:35.
A possible reason for this explanation is that this was the second time the brothers were returning home without a brother. On the first occasion, they returned home without Yosef, and now they returned home without Shimon. The brothers were very aware of this parallelism since when Yosef told them of his plan to hold one of them hostage, they immediately associated this with their actions with regard to Yosef, 42:19-22. Hence maybe they thought that it was better for Yaakov to “find” the money instead of them showing him the money since this would increase the chance that he would believe this crazy story that they had been accused of spies and Shimon was being held hostage. Or, maybe the brothers staged the discovery of the money instead of showing the money to Yaakov to break the parallelism between this return home and their previous return home without Yosef. The idea being that they thought that if they showed Yaakov the silver it would appear that they had sold Shimon, and this might have led Yaakov to suppose that they had sold or caused Yosef to be sold.
These ideas can explain why the brothers did not inform Yaakov about the silver they had found, but there is a simpler explanation as to how the brothers found the silver twice and were scared twice. When they were home speaking to Yaakov, the Torah, 42:35, does not state that the brothers found their silver, but that they found their money bag or purse/ wallet. One can simply understand that 42:35 means that the brothers found an empty money bag, and then 42:27 and 42:35 refer to two separate findings, one the brothers found their silver, 42:27, and one the brothers found their empty money bags, 42:35.
This means that when Yosef ordered a person to return the brother's silver to them, 42:25, this was done in two different ways, the silver was placed in their amtahat and the money bag was placed in the sack. Yosef had only said to put the silver in the sack, but either the person on his own separated the silver from the money bags or maybe it was obvious that this is what Yosef wanted.
How would Yosef have attained the brother's money bags, as when people pay for items they give their money/ silver but not their purses? While it could be that they handed over their bags of silver when they paid for the grain, it could also be that Yosef got the bags when he had the brothers in jail, 42:17.
The double finding, first of the silver and then of the empty money bags increased the effect of Yosef scaring his brothers. Furthermore, it is possible that had the money bag not appeared, the brothers would never have told Yaakov about the silver, but once the money bag appeared, then they had to explain that their silver had mysteriously returned to them. Maybe, this is why the money bag was separated from the silver to increase the chance that Yaakov would find out about Yosef returning the silver.
After discussing this idea in my synagogue, Oded Walk noted to me that the following verse, 42:36, records that Yaakov bewailed, "Me you have bereaved, Yosef is no more, Shimon is no more and Binyamin you would take!" (Altar, 2004 translation, pp. 244, 245). Yet, all the facts about Shimon and Binyamin was known before the brothers found their money bags, and hence Yaakov should have made this statement before the finding of the money bags, i.e. after 42:34 and before 42:35. Thus, it is clear that it was the finding of the empty money bags that caused Yaakov to make his statement in 42:36. Oded suggested that maybe the money bags had some relation to the special coat that Yosef had, as somehow it brought back a memory of the brothers showing Yaakov the coat when they returned home without Yosef, 37:32. My wife, Yonina, suggested that this could have happened if there was a family mark or insignia on the money bags.
It is also possible that the fear that resulted from the finding of the empty money bags was not related to the sale of Yosef but to the present predicament of the brothers and Yaakov. My son in law, Yuri Lubomirsky, suggested that when they found the silver, they might have thought that it was a mistake but when they found their money bags, then it was obvious that the returning of the silver was not a mistake. My son, Binyamin, suggested that if Yosef really got the brother's money bags when the brothers were in prison, then the finding of the money bags meant that Yosef was behind the return of the silver.
Bereshit 42:27 then records that when the brothers stopped at some place on the road home, one brother found the silver that he had used to buy the food. When he told this to the other brothers, they were all scared, and they stated, “what has G-d done to us?" 42:28. The brothers then continued on their way home, and upon arrival they told Yaakov about Yosef’s accusations and that Shimon was being kept as a hostage, 42:29-34. They did not mention anything about the silver. Instead, they opened their sacks, found the silver and they and Yaakov were scared, 42:35. What does it mean that they found the silver in 42:35, as they already knew about the silver in 42:27? Why were they scared a second time?
The traditional answer (see Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Radak on 42:27, Luzzatto on 42:35) is that initially only one brother found the silver and it was only when the brothers came home did all the other brothers find their silver. This approach is difficult for three reasons. One, 43:21 records that when the brothers returned to Egypt they returned the silver, and they told Yosef’s steward that they found the silver on their way home. Why should they have lied to the steward about where they found the silver? Two, it is more logical to assume that once one of the brothers found his silver, the other brothers would have searched their sacks as well. Three, this approach does not explain why the brothers did not mention to Yaakov that at least one of them had found the silver.
Sarna (1989, p. 296) suggests that the brothers “had prearranged to tell their father nothing of the money and to stage the discovery in his presence.” Similarly, Robert Altar (2004, p. 244) writes that maybe “the brothers deliberately acted out a discovery in the presence of their father in order to impress upon him how they were all at the mercy of a superior power.” With this idea, one of the brothers found the money in his amtahat, 42:27, and after he told the other brothers they also checked their packs and found the money in their respective amtahot, 43:21. The brothers then put the silver back in the bottom of the sacks with their food for the animals. Once they came home and reported to Yaakov what happened, they deliberately emptied their sacks in front of him to have Yaakov “find” the silver, 42:35.
A possible reason for this explanation is that this was the second time the brothers were returning home without a brother. On the first occasion, they returned home without Yosef, and now they returned home without Shimon. The brothers were very aware of this parallelism since when Yosef told them of his plan to hold one of them hostage, they immediately associated this with their actions with regard to Yosef, 42:19-22. Hence maybe they thought that it was better for Yaakov to “find” the money instead of them showing him the money since this would increase the chance that he would believe this crazy story that they had been accused of spies and Shimon was being held hostage. Or, maybe the brothers staged the discovery of the money instead of showing the money to Yaakov to break the parallelism between this return home and their previous return home without Yosef. The idea being that they thought that if they showed Yaakov the silver it would appear that they had sold Shimon, and this might have led Yaakov to suppose that they had sold or caused Yosef to be sold.
These ideas can explain why the brothers did not inform Yaakov about the silver they had found, but there is a simpler explanation as to how the brothers found the silver twice and were scared twice. When they were home speaking to Yaakov, the Torah, 42:35, does not state that the brothers found their silver, but that they found their money bag or purse/ wallet. One can simply understand that 42:35 means that the brothers found an empty money bag, and then 42:27 and 42:35 refer to two separate findings, one the brothers found their silver, 42:27, and one the brothers found their empty money bags, 42:35.
This means that when Yosef ordered a person to return the brother's silver to them, 42:25, this was done in two different ways, the silver was placed in their amtahat and the money bag was placed in the sack. Yosef had only said to put the silver in the sack, but either the person on his own separated the silver from the money bags or maybe it was obvious that this is what Yosef wanted.
How would Yosef have attained the brother's money bags, as when people pay for items they give their money/ silver but not their purses? While it could be that they handed over their bags of silver when they paid for the grain, it could also be that Yosef got the bags when he had the brothers in jail, 42:17.
The double finding, first of the silver and then of the empty money bags increased the effect of Yosef scaring his brothers. Furthermore, it is possible that had the money bag not appeared, the brothers would never have told Yaakov about the silver, but once the money bag appeared, then they had to explain that their silver had mysteriously returned to them. Maybe, this is why the money bag was separated from the silver to increase the chance that Yaakov would find out about Yosef returning the silver.
After discussing this idea in my synagogue, Oded Walk noted to me that the following verse, 42:36, records that Yaakov bewailed, "Me you have bereaved, Yosef is no more, Shimon is no more and Binyamin you would take!" (Altar, 2004 translation, pp. 244, 245). Yet, all the facts about Shimon and Binyamin was known before the brothers found their money bags, and hence Yaakov should have made this statement before the finding of the money bags, i.e. after 42:34 and before 42:35. Thus, it is clear that it was the finding of the empty money bags that caused Yaakov to make his statement in 42:36. Oded suggested that maybe the money bags had some relation to the special coat that Yosef had, as somehow it brought back a memory of the brothers showing Yaakov the coat when they returned home without Yosef, 37:32. My wife, Yonina, suggested that this could have happened if there was a family mark or insignia on the money bags.
It is also possible that the fear that resulted from the finding of the empty money bags was not related to the sale of Yosef but to the present predicament of the brothers and Yaakov. My son in law, Yuri Lubomirsky, suggested that when they found the silver, they might have thought that it was a mistake but when they found their money bags, then it was obvious that the returning of the silver was not a mistake. My son, Binyamin, suggested that if Yosef really got the brother's money bags when the brothers were in prison, then the finding of the money bags meant that Yosef was behind the return of the silver.
Bibliography:
Alter, Robert, 2004, The five books of Moses: A translation and commentary, New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
Sarna, Nahum (1923-2005), 1989, The JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis, Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society.