Towards the end of Parashat Vayechi, the Torah tells us about the petirah of Yaakov Avinu, when Yaakov Avinu passed away, and then the pasuk says, קפיטל נ׳ פסוק י״ג, וישאו אותו בניו, that his children carried him, that they took the aron of Yaakov, the casket of Yaakov, ארצה כנען, to ארץ כנען. So Rashi and the midrashim explain, what was the way, the seder, that they carried him? Rashi there says it, and it's taken from Tanchuma פרשת במדבר י״ב, also in Tanchuma Buber there, in Bamidbar Rabbah פרשה ב׳, ח׳, רש״י also brings it in short in במדבר ב׳ פסוק ב׳, and different midrashim. So it says that the order was like this: קבע להם מקום, he established the place for them. He said ג׳ למזרח, three should carry him on the east side, וכן לארבע רוחות, the same would be to all four sides, three of the children should carry on each side. וכסדרן למסע מחנה שדגלים נקבעו כאן, the same way that later on in the desert the shevatim had the degalim, the flags, in the same order they carried the aron of Yaakov Avinu. And Rashi continues that Yaakov said, לוי לא ישא, לוי should not carry at all, שהוא עתיד לשאת את הארון, because he will in the future carry the aron, the holy ark which has the luchot. Because, as we learn later on, the obligation of carrying the aron with the luchot was put on Shevet Levi. So therefore, Shevet Levi should not carry the aron of Yaakov. ויוסף לא ישא שהוא מלך, יוסף should not carry because he's a king. Therefore, מנשה ואפרים יהיו תחתיהם, מנשה and Ephraim should be instead of them. Since there has to be twelve, and if two will not carry, we'll only have ten, so he said Menashe and Ephraim should carry instead of them.

The question that comes up right away is, how does this concept that he said יוסף לא ישא, יוסף should not carry, fit to what it says b'feirush in the pasuk earlier, in קפיטל מ״ז פסוק ל׳, that Yaakov made Yosef swear ונשאתני ממצרים, that you will carry me out of Mitzrayim? Which means that the main obligation of carrying the aron of Yaakov out of Mitzrayim was on Yosef. So l'chorah, he definitely should have participated in carrying the ארון כפשוטו. So why was it that Yaakov said that Yosef himself should not carry? Also, concerning Levi, that he said Levi should not carry, we need an explanation, because the fact that Levi carried the aron later on, that's something that wouldn't happen till many, many years later. And this was going to happen not through Levi himself, only through Levi's children. So why is it that because something that's going to happen hundreds of years later, because of that Levi should lose out the mitzvah of carrying the aron of a meis, especially carrying the aron of his father? Because we know carrying the aron of a meis is a mitzvah, as it says in the Gemara in ברכות דף י״ז עמוד ב׳, that נושאי הארון וחילופיהן פטורין מן קריאת שמע, that those that carry the aron and those that have to exchange them are patur, are exempt from the mitzvah of Krias Shema, etc. And the reason is because עוסק במצוה פטור מן המצוה, because when you're involved in one mitzvah, you're patur from another mitzvah, as the Shach explains in Yoreh Deah, the beginning of סימן שס״ח. And we find this in many other places, that the ones that carry the meis are considered that they are doing a mitzvah. Certainly when it's carrying the aron of one's father, which is the mitzvah of כיבוד אב, certainly it's a big mitzvah. So why is it that because Levi was going to carry the aron hundreds of years later, that's why Levi himself should lose out the opportunity of doing the mitzvah of carrying the aron, especially the aron of his father?

But the answer to this is very simple, that Rashi himself says that מנשה ואפרים יהיו תחתיהם, that Menashe and Ephraim should be instead of Yosef and Levi. So Rashi is trying to tell us here that not only did Yaakov say that Menashe and Ephraim should carry in order to have twelve, because if Yosef and Levi didn't carry, you would only have ten, but it's more than that. They are תחתיהם, they are instead of them, which means they are in their place. They are their shluchin, they are their agents, their messengers. And since the rule is that שלוחו של אדם כמותו, that the shaliach of a person is like the person himself, so since Menashe veEphraim were the shluchin of Yosef and Levi, so mimela it's as if Yosef and Levi themselves carried. So when he said that Levi and Yosef should not carry, he meant they shouldn't carry the aron physically with their body, with their hands, but nevertheless they did fulfill the mitzvah of carrying the aron of Yaakov through their shluchin, who were like them, that carried the aron. And this explains something else, because there's another question here. Rashi says that he said וישאו אותו בניו, his children should carry, ולא בני בניו, not his grandchildren. And right after that, Rashi says that Menashe veEphraim carried. Weren't they grandchildren of Yaakov? And even though Rashi does explain why why didn't he want any grandchildren to carry? Because the grandchildren were children of כנעניות, because the שבטים got married to כנעניות, so their children were the children of כנעניות and he didn't want that a child of a כנענית should carry. While Menashe and Efraim were not children of כנעניות, but nevertheless, Rashi says both sides. Rashi says that he didn't want the grandchildren to carry. The reason is there, but nevertheless, it didn't fit to the physical fact that he said that he doesn't want the grandchildren to carry. But based on what we said before, that Menashe and Efraim carried the aron because they were תחתיהם, they were only instead, they were sheluchim of Yosef and Levi, so really the carrying of Menashe and Efraim is not מיוחס, not relate to themselves, but it's related to Levi and Yosef, and therefore it's considered as if the grandchildren did not carry.

But then there is another question that the mefarshim ask on this Rashi and this Midrash. The Chizkuni asks this question, brought down in the Riva and the Moshav Zekenim, etc. Rashi says that he said לוי לא ישא שהוא עתיד לישא את הארון. Levi should not carry because he will in the future carry the aron. On the other hand, we find later on in Chumash, in the beginning of פרשת בשלח, קפיטל י״ג פסוק י״ט, that it says וייקח משה את עצמות יוסף עמו, that Moshe carried the bones of Yosef. Now Moshe was from שבט לוי. Now if it doesn't fit for a person from שבט לוי to carry the aron of a met because he is going to carry the aron, so certainly Moshe should not have carried the aron of Yosef. Especially that Moshe was from the children of Kehat, and the children of Kehat, they were the ones that actually carried the aron. Not only that the whole שבט לוי was connected to it, but within שבט לוי itself, the family that carried the aron was the family of Kehat, and Moshe Rabbeinu was a member of the family of Kehat. So certainly Moshe Rabbeinu shouldn't have carried the עצמות Yosef, carried the aron of a meis of Yosef. How does that fit to what Rashi says and the Midrash says, that Levi shouldn't carry the aron of Yaakov because he will carry the aron?

The explanation to this will be understood based on first explaining what is takeh the true meaning, why is it that Yosef should not have carried the aron of Yaakov because he's a melech and Levi because he carries the aron should not carry the aron of Yaakov? What is the connection? In other words, why couldn't Yosef as a melech nevertheless carry the aron of Yaakov, because after all it's a mitzvah of kibbud av which even a melech has? Also Levi, the fact that he is supposed to carry the aron, why is that a reason not to carry the aron of Yaakov? Carrying the aron of Yaakov is also a mitzvah. Now because he is going to do a very great mitzvah of carrying the aron, that's why he can't do the mitzvah of carrying the aron of Yaakov? So the explanation of this is based on what Rashi says in the beginning of the parshah: שכיון שנפטר יעקב אבינו נסתמו עיניהם ולבם של ישראל מצרת השעבוד שהתחילו לשעבדם, that when Yaakov Avinu passed away, that's when the eyes and the hearts of the Yidden got stuffed up from the tzarah of the shibud because they started being meshabed them. Which means like this: that Yaakov's being in Mitzrayim held back the צרת השעבוד, the troubles of the שעבוד of Mitzrayim, which means his being there did not allow that the galut of Mitzrayim should actually start. The only thing that started was that they changed places; instead of living in ארץ כנען, now they traveled, they went down to ארץ מצרים. But as far as the שעבוד, that did not start at all as long as Yaakov was alive, which means Yaakov's being in Mitzrayim held back the צרת השעבוד. When Yaakov was alive, not only didn't they have any שעבוד, the contrary, they lived in ארץ גושן and as he said: ואתנה לכם את טוב ארץ מצרים, he gave them the best of ארץ מצרים, חלב הארץ, the fat of the land, so they had everything okay. So it comes out that since Yaakov's being in Mitzrayim held back the צרת השעבוד, so taking Yaakov out of Mitzrayim, which means bringing him to kevurah in Eretz Yisrael, that was another step in the beginning of the שעבוד of Mitzrayim, which means that carrying Yaakov out of Mitzrayim was another stage in the galut of Mitzrayim. As we also understand this from the question that the Zohar asks in the first חלק, דף רכ״ב עמוד א', there it says that since Yaakov Avinu knew that they're going to have the שעבוד of Mitzrayim, why didn't he want to get buried in Mitzrayim and that zechut would be מגין on the Yidden in Mitzrayim? So we see from the Zohar's question also that his going out of Mitzrayim, taking him out of Mitzrayim, is connected to the שעבוד of the Yidden in Mitzrayim. Now, based on this, we'll understand why Levi and Yosef did not actually themselves participate in carrying Yaakov out of Mitzrayim, because we see that one of the common points by Yosef and Levi was that both of them were higher, beyond the inyan of שעבוד מצרים. Both of them had something within them that held back the shibud of Mitzrayim. Concerning Yosef, it says in the Midrash, in Shemos Rabbah פרשה א׳, ד׳, and it's in Tanchuma Shemos ג׳, that כל זמן שיוסף היה קיים, as long as Yosef was alive, לא היה להם משא של מצרים, they didn't have the yoke of Mitzrayim. מת יוסף, when Yosef died, נתנו עליהם משא. they put on them the משא, the yoke. לפיכך כתיב הבאים כאילו אותו היום נכנסו למצרים. That's why it says when Yosef died, the lashon of the Torah is הבאים, that they're coming to Mitzrayim, in the beginning of פרשת שמות, because it's as if when Yosef died, that's when they started coming to Mitzrayim. Concerning Levi, Rashi says in פרשת וארא, קאפיטל ו׳, פסוק ט״ז, למה נמנו שנותיו של לוי, why does the Torah count, tell us the lifetime of Levi, the age of Levi when he died? אלא להודיע כמה ימי השעבוד, to tell us how long the shibud was. Because שכל זמן שאחד מן השבטים קיים, as long as one of the shevatim was still alive, לא היה שעבוד, there was no shibud. שנאמר, because the פסוק says, וימת יוסף וכל אחיו, that Yosef and all his brothers died, ואחר כך ויקם מלך חדש, and then it says there was a new king and he started the shibud. But לוי האריך ימים על כולם, לוי lived the longest. So therefore, as long as Levi was alive, there was no shibud. Now even though there seems to be a contradiction here, on one hand it says that when Yaakov Avinu died, that's when the צרת השעבוד started, then it says when Yosef died, that's when they put the משא, the yoke on them, then it says when Levi died, the last one of the shevatim, that's when the shibud started. But the truth is it's not a contradiction, they were three different stages. When Yaakov died, the צרת השעבוד started, which means that was the beginning of the shibud, but they didn't actually do the שעבוד בפועל, they didn't make them work hard. When Yosef died, there was another stage called the משא, they put the yoke on. When Levi died, that's actually when the shibud started. But nevertheless we see that Yosef and Levi both had something in common: that they both had the koach, the power, to hold back the inyan of the גלות מצרים. And even though concerning Levi it doesn't seem it's because Levi did anything, it's only because Levi happened to be the last one to die, but nevertheless we understand that everything is hashgacha pratis, nothing happens by coincidence. There must be some connection between Levi and the fact that later on only after he died the shibud started, because obviously there is something in Levi that held back the shibud. So we see here that Yosef and Levi both had the koach of holding back the shibud. Not only that, concerning Levi we find even more: that not only Levi himself was so to speak beyond the shibud, he held back the shibud, but even after the shibud started, the שבט לוי, they were not part of the shibud. As Rashi brings in פרשת שמות, קאפיטל ה׳, פסוק ד׳, and also mentioned in the מדרש שמות רבה פרשה ה׳ ט״ז and in תנחומא וארא ו׳, that מלאכת שעבוד מצרים לא היתה על שבטו של לוי, that the melachah of the shibud of Mitzrayim did not go on Shevet Levi. Shevet Levi did not work in Mitzrayim. So we see clearly how Levi was beyond the inyan of shibud. So this would explain why Levi did not carry the aron of Yaakov, and why Yosef was not supposed to carry the aron of Yaakov. Because as we said, carrying the aron of Yaakov out of Mitzrayim was causing the shibud, as we said before, taking him out was a beginning of a stage in the shibud, and since Levi and Yosef were both people that they held back the shibud, so they did not participate in carrying the aron. And this fits with the reason given in Rashi and in the Midrash why they shouldn't carry. Levi, it says, shouldn't carry because he's going to carry the aron. Yosef shouldn't carry because he's a melech. And mefarshim explain, brought down in Tosafot in פרשת שמות קאפיטל א׳ פסוק י״ג, in the Chizkuni קאפיטל ה׳ פסוק ד׳, and the Rabboteinu Ba'alei HaTosafot there bring it from a Midrash. In Hadar Zekeinim of Tosafot it's not brought from a Midrash, but in the Rabboteinu Ba'alei HaTosafot it's brought from a Midrash. That this that the מלאכת השעבוד did not fall on Shevet Levi was because they were going to carry the aron. As it says there that שבטו של לוי חכמים היו ולא רצו לעשות עבודה, they didn't want to do the עבודה, לפי שידעו שעתידים לשאת ארון, ומתחלה היו בני חורין. The reason they were free in Mitzrayim was because they were carrying the aron. So it comes out that carrying the aron is a reason that not to be part of the shibud. And this is what Rashi means here: why shouldn't Levi carry the aron of Yaakov? Since the aron of Yaakov, carrying the aron of Yaakov out of Mitzrayim is a stage getting closer to the שעבוד, and since Levi is going to carry the aron, which is a reason to stay away from the שעבוד, therefore Levi cannot carry the aron of Yaakov. And the same is with Yosef. It says Yosef is a melech, that's why he shouldn't carry the aron. It doesn't mean because he's a melech and therefore it is not kavod for him to carry. If he's a melech, it's still kavod for him to do a mitzvah of carrying the aron of his father. What it means is, since he is a melech, so therefore he is able to hold back the שעבוד. And this is takeh the reason why before Yosef died there was no משא, there was no yoke of Mitzrayim on the Yidden, because he was the melech of Mitzrayim. So his being a melech is the reason why he is beyond the שעבוד and he holds back the שעבוד. And this is what it means: why shouldn't Yosef carry the aron of Yaakov? Because since carrying the aron of Yaakov out of Mitzrayim is another stage in the שעבוד, and Yosef is a melech who is beyond the שעבוד and is able to hold back the shiabud, that's why Yosef should not participate in carrying the aron of Yaakov.

So we understand stand right away why this is no contradiction to the fact that Moshe Rabbeinu, who was also from Levi, and from שבט from משפחת קהת, nevertheless he did carry the aron of Yosef. Because carrying the aron of Yosef out of Mitzrayim is not another stage in the galut of Mitzrayim, the contrary, this is a stage in the geulah of Mitzrayim. This is connected to the shevuah that Yosef made the Yidden swear before he died that פקוד יפקוד אלקים אתכם, השם will remember you, והעליתם את עצמותי מזה אתכם, you take my bones out from here, which means that taking his bones out is connected to the geulah. And therefore, who should be the one should do that, which means to take the bones of Yosef out of Mitzrayim, which is a stage in the geulah? Aderabah, a person from Shevet Levi, being that Levi was supposed to carry the aron, which is a reason for them to be beyond the shiabud of Mitzrayim, so therefore a person from Shevet Levi is able to take the bones of Yosef out of Mitzrayim, which is a stage in the geulah. And not only Levi, but the head of Shevet Levi, who is Moshe Rabbeinu, it was his obligation to take the עצמות יוסף out of Mitzrayim, because taking that out of Mitzrayim was a stage in the geulah, not like taking the aron of Yaakov out of Mitzrayim, which was a stage in the shiabud. It is just important to add regarding what we said in the beginning that Menashe veEfraim were like shluchim of Levi and Yosef, and even though Levi and Yosef themselves didn't carry, but it's as if they carried because Menashe v'Ephraim were shluchim, were messengers, agents of Levi and Yosef. One might ask that we have a rule אין שליחות לבן נח, that by a בן נח, a non-Jew, there is no דין השליחות, and according to many opinions, the Yidden at that time had a din of בני נח, m'meila there is no דין השליחות. So how could we say that Menashe v'Ephraim were shluchim of Levi and Yosef? But be'emes is that many poskim hold that even though אין שליחות לבן נח, but one בן נח could become a shaliach to another בן נח. And if all the Yidden at that time, the shevatim, etc., had a din of בני נח, so the ones that sent them, Levi and Yosef, also had a din of בני נח, so therefore there is a דין השליחות. And even according to those that argue and say that one בן נח cannot make a shaliach another בן נח, bifshitus this is only now when there is an inyan of Yidden, and then you have בני נח, so the din of שליחות only is by Yidden, not by בני נח. But before מתן תורה, when everybody was a בן נח, so then there was a din of שליחות between one man and another. Therefore,