DOVBEAR

What were the "tents" in which Jacob sat?

The traditional interpretation These were the tents of Shem and Ever who ran some kind of proto-yeshiva where Jacob studied. Each founder had his own tent, thus "Jacob sat in tentS" (Beraishis Raba, popularized by Rashi)

Sforno's interpretation Jacob had two different tents. One was his shepherd tent, where he lived while he was with the flocks; the other was a meditation tent where he studied and prayed.

The merit of Sforno's interpretation At first, I preferred this reading because it does not rely on new information. Instead of introducing somthing foreign to the story, and pre-supposing an ancient yeshiva, it responds to the words on the page. The word tents is plural, and Sforno tells us why without getting too creative (or falling back on the creativity of the Sages). However, I must point out that Sforno does mention the mythical Yeshiva later in his commentary. He seems to have believed it existed, and he he seems to have believed Jacob studied there. Unlike Rashi and the Sages, however, he does not agree that the multiple tents of our verse are a reference to that institution.

More Sforno later.

Search for more information about # at 4torah.com
Shop Wireless - All Verizon Phones Starting at a Penny

Shop Amazon's Toys - Black Friday and Cyber Monday Deals Week

Click to read the rest of this post >>

Permit me to pass the begging bowl, as we begin a special Monday morning edition of Parsha Notes (Parsha what?).

This week, I am encouraging you to thank my wife for the forbearance that makes this blog possible. Please help purchase her a gift on behalf of the blog, and support my pathetic annual telethon by purchasing an ad or a book. You can do either anonymously, and the ads can be purchased to promote your own blog, or your own ideas.

Thank you in advance.

>>Click to read my Parsha Notes on Va'Yigash

Click to read the rest of this post >>

I should have posted this last week. Apologies.

Allusions
The story of Tamar's rape in the Book of Samuel is the Joseph story told backwards. It begins with Amonon clearing the room using the same exact words Joseph used before he revealed himself to his brother. When Amnom attacks Tamar, he says "Lie with me" which recalls the language Potiphar's wife employed. Following the crime Tamar tears her ketonet pasim; likewise Joseph - the only other character in the bible to have a ketonet pasim - has his coat torn.

The first Tamar story (Judah's daughter in law) overflows with allusions to the rest of Genesis

 >> Read the rest of my parsha notes 

Click to read the rest of this post >>

These have all been added to the main Parsha Notes post.


A very clever gloss
Rashi, following the midrash, says just one of Lot's daughter's is deserving of praise. The other is criticized because she calls her son Moav, which puns on "from the father." Sforno disagrees (with Rashi and, ahem, CHZL) and says both women were sinners, both acted for the sake of heaven, and both women were rewarded with offspring who joined the Jewish people ( Na'amah of Ammon marries Shlomo; Ruth of Moav marries Boaz).* Rav Moshe Feinstein additionally credits the women for not claiming the child was fathered by a god. Instead of prefiguring the Christian claim they told the truth. In the merit of this honesty, the actual moshiach will be from Moav (i.e. the child "from a (human) father")

* This idea of sinning for the sake of heaven was a touchstone of the early Hasidim, i.e., the idea of "descent for the purpose of rising up."

Neat Ideas
- A heh hayediah (the letter hay as definite article) is used in the word ha'kivshan in Genesis 19:28 [He looked down toward Sodom and Gomorrah, toward all the land of the plain, and he saw dense smoke rising from the land, like smoke from the furnace.] Perhaps this is what pointed interpreters to Nimrod's furnace, and the famous story of Abraham's trial. [Support: Why does the midrash say Nimrod threw Abraham into davka a furnace, ie, a kivshan? Wouldn't it have made more sense to burn him at the stake?]

- Genesis says Sodom and the other cities were destroyed with gafris and ash (burning sulfur). When Moshe refers to the event in Deuteronomy 29 he says the cities were destroyed with gafris v'melach (salt and sulfur.) Could this be an early example of intra-biblical interpretation on the part of Moshe? In the Torah, salt is only mentioned in reference to Mrs. Lot.

Musar
- The men/angles were provided with food and water. The water was brought by someone else and Abraham offered only a small amount (Yukach noh m'at mayim); meanwhile the meal, which he prepared with his own hands, was superfluous. Lesson: Don't overwork people for your own glory.

- Abraham moves to the isolated southern part of Canaan in anticipation of his son's birth, yet he's also a resident of Grar. (Vayeshev bein kodesh u'vein Shur v'yagar b'Grar) Though he wishes to protect his son from Caananite influences, its not Abraham's plan or desire to entirely shield his child. From time to time they visit Grar. Lesson: You can't raise a child in a bubble. You have to show him the word, and teach him how to respond to it. [Source: SRH]

Bogus BibCrit
Did Abraham actually kill his son? Some solid observations on the part of the critics produce an altogether specious conclusion.

---

Search for more information about the parsha at 4torah.com.

Understanding Rashi
In a famous comment Rashi attempts to work out the dates of various events in Jacob's life; following a midrash, he says Jacob spent 14 years in the tents of Eiver. Shem is not mentioned*. Why? Basing himself on the verse, and "Jacob sat in tents" (plural) Rashi deduces that Shem and Ever each had their own academy. Shem, who survived the flood, was an opponent of the immoral behavior that caused it; Ever who lived during the time of the Tower of Babel was an opponent of the mistaken ideas about God that made such a thing possible. Jacob, who was on his way to live with an idol worshipper, went for fortification in the tents of Eiver. This, incidently, some say is why Abraham, the champion monotheist, is called an Ivri. (They're wrong, but its an intriguing idea)

*When Rivka goes to inquire about her pregnancy, some versions of Rashi exclude Eiver, but this is likely a scribal error; older versions say she went to them both.

What everyone should know
Our midrashim lament Jacob's theft of the brochot, and attribute later Jewish suffering to his crime, as follows: "Three tears did Eisav shed. One dropped from his right eye, one from his left and the third he kept back and that tear has salted our bread of exile with tears and made us taste tears in full threefold measure." (Tahnchuma); and "Anyone who says God is not particular with his pious ones deserves to have his inwards torn out. The forbearance of God grants long credit, but the debt needs to be paid in the end. One cry Jacob caused Eisav to make and that was repaid in Shushan when Eisav's descendant caused Jacob's descendant to cry with a 'loud bitter cry.'(Midrash Raba)

I've always considered these exquisite moral teachings.

Famous Argument
(1) Which mitzvos did the Patriarchs keep? This is a six-way disagreement, with Chizkuni, Rashbam, Rashi, Ibn Ezra, the Ramban and the Seforno all weighing in. Rashi alone says the Patriarchs lived like Rabbinic Jews; the others take a far more limited view. [Summary]

Most of this is from last year, but there are five or six new things You are strongly encouraged and absolutely permitted to print and distribute these discussions, preferably by leaving them on the shulchan at your favorite place of prayer.

Mostly from last year, but with some additions.

- Internal Parallels (and antithesis)
(a) The angles visit to Abraham vs. their visit to Lot
- The guest are eagerly welcomed and fed (duh) (p)
- Both men are sitting at an entrance when the guests appear (p)
- Abraham's guests arrive at midday; Lot's arrive at twilight (a)
- Abraham is at the tent flap; Lot is at the city gate (a)
- Abraham feeds his guests the best of the best; Lot serves the "poor man's bread" (a)
- Sarah laughs; the sons in law of Lot laugh (the same verb is used) (the laughter itself is a parallel, the reason for the laughter is an antithesis.) (Sarah laughs in disbelief; the sons in law laugh out of scepticism.)
- Following the visit Abraham asks God to spare a city and fails; Lot also asks for divine mercy but succeeds (a)

(b) The destruction of Sodom vs. destruction of the world
- The word himtir appears in both places; both are destroyed by precipitation (p)
- In each case, moral perversion is the reason given for the destruction (p)
- In each case, one family is marked for survival (p)
- In each case, the hero becomes drunk immediately afterwards, and is involved in an illicit act. (p)

(c) Yishmael's trip to the desert vs Yitzchak's trip to the mountain
- Abraham "rose early in the morning" both to send Hagar away, and to begin his trip with Yitzchakl (p)
- Both moments of mortal danger occur in the wilderness (p)
- Yitzchak is accompanied by his father; Ishmael goes with his mother (a)
- He first puts bread and water on Hagar; next he puts wood on Isaac (p)
- In each case an angel intervenes at the moment before death (p)
- At the last moment, eyes are opened. (p)
- The angel fondly refers to the boy as a na'ar in both cases (P)
- In each case the angel promises that the boy will produce a great nation (p)

(d) Abraham's grandson Yaakov has 12 sons: so do his brother Nahor (and his first son Yishmoel)

2- External Parallels
(a) The sin of Sodom vs the crime of Procrustes

(b) The Lord's visit to Abraham vs. Kothar's visit to Dan'el [*], a judge in the Ugaritic epic of Eqhat
- Dan'el sits by an entrance
- He "lifts up his eyes" to apprehend the divine visitor; and
- tells his wife to prepare a meal with the best of the best.

3 - Motifs
(a) This week we see the first of several annunciation scenes, all of which share a promise from a divine entity that a child will be born "at this season." The annunciation to Sarah is different in three ways: (1) The promise is delivered to the husband; (2) the woman is post-menopausal; (3) the child appears not in the very next scene but after the intervention of other events.

(b) The sister-wife motif returns this week. Based on discovered documents, Sarna argues that "sister-wife" was a category of marriage in the ANE, distinct from concubines, and ordinary wives.

(c) Important elements of the angelic visit to Sodom are echoed in the story of the Pilegesh b'Givah suggesting this is also a motif.

4 - Anomalies
(a) Gen 20:13: ויהי כאשר התעו אתי אלהים מבית אבי ואמר לה זה חסדך אשר תעשי עמדי אל כל־המקום אשר נבוא שמה אמרי־לי אחי הוא
- The verb is plural, suggesting Abraham is speaking not of God, but "the gods." This is, perhaps, a dodge in deference to his pagan host, but not something our modern sensibilities would expect. (Rashi notes the anomaly and explains it away)

(b) Gen 22:2 וַיֹּאמֶר קַח־נָא אֶת־בִּנְךָ אֶת־יְחִידְךָ אֲשֶׁר־אָהַבְתָּ אֶת־יִצְחָק וְלֶךְ־לְךָ אֶל־אֶרֶץ הַמֹּרִיָּה וְהַעֲלֵהוּ שָׁם לְעֹלָה עַל אַחַד הֶהָרִים אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיךָ׃
- Scholarship suggests the second term should be yadidcha (your favored one) rather than yechidcha (your only one) (a difference of one letter; the chet and the daled are similar in ktav ashuri.) Alter rejects this, following Rashi, and argues that in Abraham's mind each son is an "only" son of his own mother.

(c) Gen 22:13 וַיִּשָּׂא אַבְרָהָם אֶת־עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה־אַיִל אַחַר נֶאֱחַז בַּסְּבַךְ בְּקַרְנָיו וַיֵּלֶךְ אַבְרָהָם וַיִּקַּח אֶת־הָאַיִל וַיַּעֲלֵהוּ לְעֹלָה תַּחַת בְּנֹו׃
- The MT has achar (behind) Scholars argue achad (one) better fits the verse and the facts, and note that in ketav ashrui the raysh and the daled are similar.

5 - New understandings
(a) We were taught that Lot's wife became a pillar of salt. Following the grammar of the verse, the Ralbag argues it never happened.

(from last year with some modifications)

Moments of Majesty: The first creation story, with its grand symmetries. Lovely, timeless, powerful writing. [I like it better then the second creation story because parataxis is nicer than hypotaxis.


Things everyone should know:
(1) There are two creation stories, stories that differ in matters large and small. This, it must be noted, does not rule out the possibility of a divine author, but the fact that God is said to create (barah) in the first story and fashion (yotzar) in the second cries out for commentary. Among the many other differences: the theology of God (cosmic diety vs. hands on craftsmen) and the order of the creation itself (in Gen 1 man and woman are last; in Gen 2 man is first, before plants and animals, and the woman is last.)
(2) In this Parsha, Rashi announces his mission statement: (Genesis 3:8) "I have come only to teach the plain meaning of the passage and such Aggadah which explains the words of the Bible.” This is a useful reminder for those who treat Rashi like an anthology of midrashim.

Kefira moments:
(1) The first woman is called ChaVa, though ChaYA would be a better name for the mother of all things,אֵם כָּל-חָי. As I said here, ChaVa sounds like ChiVya, the Aramaic for serpent, and scholars have recognized an old Mesopotamian myth in which a serpent is imagined to be the progenitor of all things, or, in other words, the אֵם כָּל-חָי.
(2) The MT says (Gen 4:8) "And Cain said to Abel his brother" but doesn't tell us what was said. The LXX, Syriac and Aramaic all provide Cain's words: "Let us go out to the field."
(3) Enoch, the man who "walked with God" and "was no more" after God "took" him, is the seventh generation from Adam. In a list of pre-flood Mesopotamian kings, the seventh one is taken by the Sun God. In the Torah Enoch lives 365 years, the number of days in the solar year.
(4) The whole story of Abel's murder and Cain's subsequent curse is taken by scholars as a schematic tale written to explain why the Kenites, a rival tribe, were especially vicious. Perhaps the Kenites would kill seven enemies for every dead of their own? Alternatively, the Kenites may have worshiped the Israelite God and the Cain story is meant to tell us why. What seems odd is that after the murder Cain frets that "anyone who finds me may kill me" at a time when the whole world would have consisted of just him and his parents. This is an indication that the present pre-flood location of the story is artificial.

Cool beans:
(1) Lemach is the seventh name of the first genealogy list, and he is said to have lived 777 years. Seven, of course, is a magic number in Judaism, and elsewhere.
(2) In the second genealogy list ten names are given. Ten is also a magic Jewish number.


Follow me on Twitter

Yes, I'm late, but I'm sure there's a Hasidic sect somewhere that hasn't said Havdalah yet. As we conclude Sefer Berayshis, you're reminded and invited to contribute something to bedek habayis if you've found ParshaNotes edifying. [Click to see all of Berayshis at once]

Symmetry
As first remarked by R' David Kinchi Joseph spends the first 17 years of his life "in Jacob's lap"; likewise the last 17 years of Jacob's life are "in Joseph's lap."

Neat Rashi
On 48:16 the verse says "the lads" and Rashi helpfully points out that Ephraim and Menashe are intended. Why point out the obvious? Perhaps because the language Jacob employs leaves this less then obvious. He says "The angel who has redeemed me from all evil, Bless the lads." Ephraim and Menashe each had a descendant(1) who was rescued by an angel and was referred to as a "lad."(2) A reader who is aware of this, may presume that Jacob was speaking prophetically. Indeed the Midrash Raba (BR 97:3) says explicitly that "he shall bless the lads is a reference to these descendants. According to Avigdor Bonchek, Rachi's comment is meant to argue in favor of the plain explanation contra the Midrash.

Footnote
(1) Yehoshua bin Nun and Gideon ben Joash.
(2) Regarding them being rescued by angels see Joshua 5:13, Judges 6:12; regarding them being called "lads" see Exodus 33:11 and Judges 6:15.

Motif
The great Genesis theme of reversal of the primogeniture is depicted twice this week: After Ephtaim and Menashe are expressly made equal to (or better than) Reuven and Shimon, Ephraim is also put ahead of his older brother.

Historicity
Ritual adoption was part of ANE life, and the ceremony is described in various discovered documents. It included placing the child on the older man's knees, and such a rite is depicted in 48:12

The ideal Egyptian life span was 110 years (For us its 120.) Joseph is said to have lived 110 years.

The practice in Egypt was to moun royalty for 72 days. In 50:3 this has been rounded down to a more Jewish 70.

Against the crux
Many critics say the mention of Rachel during Jacob's last instructions to Joseph are evidence of a crux, or sloppy editing. Critics who believe Genesis is a literary whole argue that words about Rachel at this juncture fit Jacob's character. Rashi says Rachel is mentioned because Jacob is asking for his own body to be returned to a the family tomb, a kindness he was unable to perform for Joseph's mother. Alter says Jacob appears to have never reconciled himself to the early loss of his most beloved wife; now, as he is about to adopt two grandsons by her firstborn to compensate for the sons she never had, it seems reasonable that she would be on his mind.

Immediately after speaking the words "Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are" Jacob sees them and says "Who are they." Against those critics who say this is yet another crux, Alter suggests that this question is an opening formula in the adoption ritual. Alternatively, his eyesight, like his father's, may have grown dim.

Anomaly
For 48:15 the MT gives "ויברך את־יוסף ויאמר האלהים אשר התהלכו אבתי לפניו אברהם ויצחק האלהים הרעה אתי מעודי עד־היום הזה׃" The context does not support a blessing for Joseph alone, and other ancient texts (the Peshita and the LXX among them) give and "he blessed them" instead.

In Gen 48:16 Jacob appears to be praying to an angel. Such speculation, thought, is unfounded. The grammar suggests the angel is God himself (48:15 is an incomplete sentence, and the subject of that sentence is God) but the context suggests that Jacob is speaking of angels that God sent him previously (see 31:11) He seems to be asking God to continue to send angels to favorably intervene in the lives of his descendants

Style Alert
The life of Jacob (with the Patriarchal Tales behind it) ends with a long poem. The same is true of both Moshe and David. (Alter)

CHAZAK, CHAZAK, V'NISCHAZEK

---------
Buy my book. (please)
Buy the other guy's book. (please)
Buy my wife a gift (please)

Permit me to pass the begging bowl, as we begin another edition of Parsha Notes (Parsha what?) and encourage you to thank my wife for the forbearance that makes this blog possible. Please help purchase her a gift on behalf of the blog, and support my pathetic annual telethon by purchasing an ad or a book. You can do either anonymously, and the ads can be purchased to promote your own blog, or your own ideas.

Thank you in advance.

Famous Ramban
(1) In a furious post, I mean comment, the Ramban eviscerates the ibn Ezra's view on hidden miracles in general, and the identity of the seventy persons who went down to Egypt, in particular. The philosophical ramifications of their argument are too long to recount in this format, so perhaps a post after shabbos. Briefly, though, Ibn Ezra says that Jacob is included in the seventy, while the Ramban (following Rashi and the midrash) says the seventieth person is Moshe's mother Jocheved. The best bits? The Ramban's seemingly snide* reference to the Ibn Ezra as "that Chochem" and his belief that his answer to the Ibn Ezra was like "boiling gold poured down [the ibn Ezra's] throat."
(*It sounds snide to my late modern ears; I don't have any idea how it might have sounded 800 years ago.)

(2) In a much calmer comment, the Ramban attacks Rashi's apparent belief that Hebrew was a private language spoken by Abraham's family alone, arguing that Hebrew was "a Canaanite language" See here, here, and here.

Judah's speech
At the beginning of the parsha Judah completes the speech he began at the end of Miketz. If you read between the lines (ala Alter, et al) it's clear that this speech is "an expression of profound inner change" and that the man who allowed his resentment of his father's favoritism to get the better of him no longer exists.

16: And Judah said, What shall we say unto my lord? what shall we speak? or how shall we clear ourselves? God has found out your servant's crime
On the surface he refers to the crime of stealing the cup, but it's logical to presume he is also thinking of Joseph: earlier, when Shimon was detained, the brothers understood it as a punishment for what they'd done two decades earlier. It's likely the same thought is on his mind now, as well.

20: And we said unto my lord, We have a father, an old man, and a child of his old age, a little one; and his brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother, and his father loveth him.
Twenty years earlier, Judah and his brothers resented their father's favoritism toward Joseph - and acted on that resentment. Now Judah appears content with the fact that Benjamin is the best loved son.

22 And we said unto my lord, The lad cannot leave his father: for if he should leave his father, his father would die.
When they sold Joseph, the brothers displayed no concern for their father; that attitude, too, seems gone.

27 And thy servant my father said unto us, Ye know that my wife bare me two sons:
In the quote, Jacob is speaking as if Rachel was his only wife; by quoting his father's word without comment or change, Judah appears again to have accepted his father's favoritism.

33 Now therefore, I pray thee, let thy servant abide instead of the lad a bondman to my lord; and let the lad go up with his brethren.
The same Judah who conceived of the idea of selling Joseph, is now willing to sell himself to protect his father's favorite.

34 For how shall I go up to my father, and the lad be not with me? lest peradventure I see the evil that shall come on my father.
The cold indifference to his father's feelings that made the sale possible also seems to have evaporated.

What about the wagons?
Joseph sent his father wagons - to remind him, the midrash says, of Eglah Arufa --the last bit of Torah he and his father studied together. How so? The temptation is to say that wagon (agalah) puns on calf (egel) and that this pun served as a reminder of "Eglah Arufa." This is plausible, but superficial. "Eglah erufah" refers to a sacrifice brought by town elders who were negligent in protecting travellers. How exactly they were negligent is a matter of debate, but some say the basic requirement was to provide travellers with an escort between cities. Per the Kli Yakar, Joseph sent his father more than one wagon for the purpose of providing him with the protection of an escort. There is very good textual evidence that the custom of escorting guests was well established in Jacob's family - indeed the verse says Jacob provided Joseph with an escort when his son left on the fateful trip to see his brothers in Shchem. The wagons, therefore, were not a reminder of a final Torah study session, but of an important family custom, one that relates directly to "Egla Arufa" and one practiced by Jacob at the moment of his parting from his son.

Antithesis
At their reunion, Joseph gives his brothers garments, an act that stands in direct opposition to how his brothers stripped him of his coat at their original separation. (Alter)

Parallel
When Jacob begins his journey to Egypt, the Lord appears to him with words that are an exact verbal parallel to the words used at the beginning of the Akaydat Yitzchak story. This may suggest that the sojourn in Egypt, like the Akeida, is an ordeal that will ultimately have a good ending. (Amos Finklestein)

Two way Torah
(1) Rashi says that Joseph "fell on Jacob's neck and... [also] wept on his neck a very long while" while Jacob silently said the Krias shma. Ramban says it was Jacob who did the weeping, while Joseph stood quietly.

(2) Did Joseph (47:2) bring Pharaoh his five weakest brothers or his five strongest bothers? And who were they? Much disagreement on both questions among the commentators. Alter points out that five is a magic number in this story: Benjamin's receives a fivefold position at Joseph's table, and five changes of clothing. The Egyptians later pay a tax of one-fifth, and five is half the number of brothers who sold Joseph.

Historical Anomaly:
(1) Rashi claims Joseph proved his identity by revealing his circumcision, but earlier Rashi told us that Joseph had ordered every Egyptian to become circumcised. So what did it prove that the Egyprian regent was circumcised, too? Moreover, there is plenty of extrabiblical and biblical evidence that Egyptians practiced this rite. The least convoluted resolution of the contradition within Rashi is provided by the Chizkuni who says that Egyptians didn't practice p'riah, and that Joseph order was directed only at the poor.

(2) Gen 46:34 claims that "every shepherd is abhorrent to Egypt" but later (47: 6) we see Pharaoh had his own flocks. There is also no extrabiblical evidence that Egyptians opposed shepherding. Alter suggests that Joseph is not speaking of shepherds as a profession, but of semi-nomadic people in general. The claim that "every shepherd is abhorrent to Egypt" should therefore be understood as a statement of urban snobbery toward more rural people.

ArtScroll Anomaly
Twice in parshas va'yigash we're told that Yaakov did something to Pharoh. Both times the Torah uses the word va'yivorech. Both times ArtScroll translates it as "blessed." This puzzles.

Anachronism
Gen 47: 11 Then Joseph settled his father and his brothers and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded

Ramses is the city later built by the Israelite slaves. Perhaps this is foreshadowing.

Musar
Pharaoh asks Jacob his age, and Jacob answeres with a complaint. For this he was punished with a loss of years from his life. Lesson: A Jew can't be depressed.

---------
Buy my book. (please)
Buy my wife a gift (please)

Two new notes added

---------
Buy my book. (please)
Buy my wife a gift (please)

Not a heck of a whole lot to say this week, I'm afraid. Newbies are invited to consult earlier editions of the series. As a Shabbos Chanuka bonus I have, this week, included links to some ghosts of Chanuka's past. (Aside:I know some of you are sometimes reluctant to comment on old posts, but please don't be inhibited. Thanks to the "recent comments" widget, your remark will likely be seen; aside from that, I try to read all comments, too. You're also free to email me(yourfavoriteblogger@gmail.com) if you have something you want me to see.) (Note: The old posts often show 0 comments. This is a Haloscan glitch. Click and see (and remember: Comments are almost always better than the post)

New stuff in red

Bizarre Rashi (with twist)

After living in a dungeon for ten years, Yosef asked the king's butler to throw him a life line: כִּי אִם-זְכַרְתַּנִי אִתְּךָ, כַּאֲשֶׁר יִיטַב לָךְ, וְעָשִׂיתָ-נָּא עִמָּדִי, חָסֶד; וְהִזְכַּרְתַּנִי, אֶל-פַּרְעֹה, וְהוֹצֵאתַנִי, מִן-הַבַּיִת הַזֶּה/ But think on me when it shall be well with thee, and show kindness, I pray thee, unto me, and make mention of me unto Pharaoh, and bring me out of this house. Says Rashi: Because Joseph relied on him to remember him, he was compelled to be confined for two years, as it is said:“Praiseworthy is the man who made the Lord his trust and did not turn to the haughty (רְהָבִים)” (Ps. 40:5). He did not turn to the Egyptians, who are called רַהַב, haughty. I - along with many of the commentators - find it odd that Yosef might be punished with two extra years in jail, for exercising ordinary hishtadlut/effort.

Bonus twist: On the spot, the Kli Yakar puns on "who made the Lord his trust" Instead of sam he read shem ie, the name of the Lord was his trust. How? The Tetragrammaton makes use of the four letters with the lowest numerical value, and the name Yah has just two letters: Rather than choosing elaborate titles for himself, God, as it were, behaves modestly - a lesson for us all.

Loan Words
As Sarna tells us, some realism is added to the story of Joseph in Pharoh's court through the use of Egyptian loan words such as y'or, chartumim, 'ahu, taba'at, shesh, and most famously abrekh, a word which has never been satisfactorily translated.

Historical Accuracy
:: Joseph shaves before he sees Pharaoh. In the ANE, only Egyptians were clean shaven.

:: As attested to by several biblical and extrabiblical sources, circumcision was widely practiced in the ANE. Joshua (5:9) tells us that Egyptians thought lack of circumcision was a "reproach." Judges (14:3 etc.) is an example of the Philistines being depicted as "uncircumcised." No nation other than the Philistines are disparaged this way. In Jeremiah 9 other nations are said to pact ice this rite. On Gen 41:55 Rashi gives us a Just-So-Story for how this came to pass, saying that Joseph ordered the Egyptians to do it. (The LR says that just as Abraham circumcised his slaves and bondmen, Joseph had a halachic obligation to circumcise anyone under his control or power -an interesting, yet dangerous -almost fascist - idea.)

Anomaly
::The MT gives raqot (flat or hollow) on Gen 41:19; other ancient versions have daqot (meager)

:: On 41:56 the MT has וַיִּפְתַּח יוֹסֵף אֶת-כָּל-אֲשֶׁר בָּהֶם / and Joseph opened all in which there was. Something, obviously, is missing from this sentence, and Onkelos provides it, telling us that Joseph opened the "storehouses" in which there was "grain." (Alter)

Interesting Idea
When Joseph asked his bothers to bring him Benjamin, he was checking to see if he has been disposed of as well. In the ANE, as in other cultures, it was common from brothers to protect their inheritances by killing each other off, and a very young, half-brother would have been especially vulnerable. (Perhaps this thought is represented in the other commentaries, but I saw it in Alter)

Anti-DH
Bible critics say the MT's version of Joseph's sale is two different accounts knitted together. Their evidence includes the question of who sold Joseph, and that both Reuven and Yehuda appear as instruments of his sale. Oddly enough, these two men also appear later in Joseph's court as Benjamin's protector, suggesting they'd repented.

Musar

The seven fat years are this world, the seven lean years are the world to come. Here we have everything, and the means to aquire everlasting life. In the next world, our money is worthless, and there is no way to aquire spiritual merit. Lesson: Fill up your storehouses now.

BONUS POSTS

Oy Chanuka in which I explain why Chanuka isn't the festival of freedom, tell you the true origins of the dredal, and more.

Why does Chanuka has eight days? If you're not a newbie, you know the answer, but these are some Chanuka facts you may not know.

Where did the oil mircal come from? ExtraTorah rebuts. Josh Waxman embellishes

Chanuka = Sukkos in which I provide Torah sources for the idea, attested to in the book of Macabbees that the first Chanuka was really a delayed Sukkos.

Toys vs Turkeys explains why Chanuka presents should be abolished. (maybe)

Christmas for Jews is a grinchy post about Chanuka

No GOP Jew should sing Maoz Tzur.

Share some levivot with someone you love.

Remember Yus? (shudder) This Menorah post is where he first appeared, though under another name. When I explained why the Aish Hatorah Chanuka video sucked beans, he came back again, even nastier than before. Little known fact: I switched to Haloscan Comments solely so that I could ban him.

Put on your Yarmulka, its time for Chanuka discusses the dumb Adam Sandler song.

In which I laugh at the idea Shabbos Chanuka has "deep mystical powers"; two years later Bray showed he believes in that crap.

Chanuka ends explains why Chanuka has an unhappy ending. Same point, made a little differently here.

A poorly named post, in which I moan about the stupid dreidal song.

Chanuka in Baghdad, is a short, thin post that knocks Cheney.

President Panderer is a bit more substantive and takes what I still think was a legitimate and well deserved shot at Bush. (Heh. When I wrote it he was "President Forty Percent.")

And because no trip down memory lane would be complete without an undressing of Cross Currents check out this discussion of Toby Katz's mistaken view of Chanuka, too

---------
Buy my book. (please)
Buy my wife a gift (please)