## Ibn Ezra on Genesis Chapter 40

###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:1:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:1:1)

**חטאו.** חטא מוסר המלוכה,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
OFFENDED. They committed an offense (*chet*) in a matter of state.¹

footnotes:
¹ According to Cherez. Weiser suggests rendering: They committed an offense punishable by the state.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:2:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:2:1)

בעבור שלא ישתנה סמ"ך סריסיו הוא לאות כי היה הרי"ש ראוי להדגש ונקמץ הסמ"ך בקמץ גדול לחסרון הדגש:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
The fact that the *samekh* of *sarisav* (his officers) retains its *kamatz* is proof that the *resh* of *saris* (officer) should have received a *dagesh*, and since it cannot the *samekh* was vocalized with a long *kamatz* to compensate for the missing *dagesh*.² beneath their first letter in the singular are vocalized with a *sheva* under their first letter in the plural; i.e., *nagid* becomes *negidim*. *Saris* does not follow this rule. Its plural is *sarisim*, not *serisim*. Hence the word presents a problem. I.E. suggests that *saris* belongs to the group of nouns vocalized *pattach-chirik*. The latter retain their *pattach* in the plural; i.e., *kabbir* becomes *kabbirim*. I.E. points out that *saris* should have been vocalized with a *pattach* beneath the *samekh* but due to the fact that a *resh* cannot receive a *dagesh* (a *dagesh* usually follows a *pattach*), the *samekh* was vocalized with a *kamatz* to compensate for the missing *dagesh*. Hence *saris* retains its *kamatz* in the plural.

footnotes:
² Words vocalized with a kamatz


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:3:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:3:1)

**במשמר בית שר הטבחים.** מקום שיהי' שם נשמרים בעבור שלא יברחו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND HE PUT THEM IN WARD IN THE HOUSE OF THE CAPTAIN OF THE GUARD. A place where they would be guarded so they would not escape.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:4:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:4:1)

**ויפקד שר הטבחים.** והנה כאשר הושמו אלה הסריסים בבית שר הטבחים, פקד את יוסף, והטעם זכר דבריו והביאו אל ביתו, ושמהו בבור והוא המשמר וזאת דעת המדקדק הגדול ולפי דעתי שבית הסהר היה בבית שר הטבחים, ושם היה יוסף והעד מקום אשר יוסף אסור שם, וצוה שר הטבחים להיות יוסף אתם לשרת אותם, כי מעלה גדולה היתה להם בבית פרעה, כי שרים היו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND THE CAPTAIN OF THE GUARD CHARGED. When these two officers were put in a ward in the house of the captain of the guard, the latter remembered (*pakad*)³ (charged) is translated as remembered. Thus according to this interpretation, *And the captain of the guard charged* (va-yifkod) *Joseph* is to be rendered: And the captain of the guard remembered (*va-yifkod*) Joseph. Joseph; i.e., he recalled his abilities⁴. and brought him to his house⁵ and placed him in a dungeon⁶ which is the ward spoken of in our verse. The latter is the opinion of the great grammarian.⁷ However, I believe that the prison was in the house of the captain of the guard and Joseph was there to begin with. Proof of this is Scripture’s explicit statement, *And he put them…into the prison, the place where Joseph was bound*. What our verse relates is that the captain of the guard commanded (charged)⁸ as charged. Joseph to be with the butler and baker and serve them because they had high status in Pharaoh’s palace insomuch as they were officers of the king.

footnotes:
³ In this interpretation va-yifkod
⁴ He remembered that Joseph was able to relate to nobles (Weiser). Filwarg interprets: remembered the Jospeh episode, i.e., that Joseph, like the butler and the baker, offended his master. Krinsky explains: he remembered Joseph’s words protesting his innocence and decided to place him in a prison whose conditions were better. The Hebrew reading of I.E. is zakhar devarav
⁵ According to this interpretation Joseph was originally in a different prison and was now brought to the one in the home of the captain of the guard.
⁶ Cf. verse 15.
⁷ Jonah Ibn Janah.
⁸ I.E. so translates va-yifkod


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:5:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:5:1)

**ויחלמו.** כטעם איש כפתרון חלומו כי ראה כל אחד בחלומו מהו פתרון חלומו לעתיד, ומה שאירע לו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND THEY DREAMED. The meaning⁹ rather than *ke-ta’am* (Filwarg, Krinsky). The aforementioned is borne out by *Vat. Ebr*. 38 which reads, *ve-ta’am*. of *each man according to the interpretation of his dream* is that each one of them saw in his dream details that could be interpreted to foretell what would happen in the future.¹⁰. 38). Our printed texts read, “Each one saw the interpretation of the dream and what happened to him” The problem with this reading is, if they saw the interpretation of their dream in their nocturnal vision why, then, did they turn to Joseph for its interpretation? Hence we have translated according to *Vat. Ebr*. 38.

footnotes:
⁹ Reading ta’am
¹⁰ There was no part of the dream that did not allude to something. There was no nonsensical part in the dream. Every part of the dream had a meaning and was interpretable (Filwarg based on the reading of I.E. quoted by Nahmanides which is borne out by Vat. Ebr


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:6:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:6:1)

**זועפים.** מתרעשים כטעם "ויעמד הים מזעפו" (יונה א טו):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SAD. *Zo’afim* (sad) means agitated, as is the meaning of the word *zapo* (its rage) in *and the sea ceased from its raging* (mi-zapo) (Jon. 1:15).¹¹

footnotes:
¹¹ Both words come from the same root.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:6:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:6:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:6:2)

**ויבא אליהם.** יתכן שבלילה היה לן בבור:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND JOSEPH CAME IN UNTO THEM. It is possible that Joseph used to sleep in the dungeon at night.¹²

footnotes:
¹² The prison had a number of levels. Joseph’s quarters were in the lowest. He spent his nights in the dungeon and his days with the other prisoners (Krinsky).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:8:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:8:1)

**וטעם הלא לאלחהים פתרונים.** כי פתרון החלומות לשם הוא כי הוא יודע העתיד, והראה בחלום מה יהיה למי שירצה ואם אני אפתור אותו לטוב או לרע, לא יועיל ולא יזיק, ואחר שהדבר כן, ולשם פתרון כל החלומות אל תחושו שתספרו חלומותיכם לי, וכל החלומות הולכים אחר הפה דברי יחיד הם:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[DO NOT INTERPRETATIONS BELONG TO GOD.] Its meaning is that the interpretations of dreams belong to the Lord because He knows the future. He has revealed what is going to come to pass in a dream to one whom He selected and it therefore makes no difference whether I interpret the dream for good or ill. Since this is so, and all interpretations belong to God, do not be concerned about telling me your dreams.¹³ The Rabbinic statement that all dreams follow the interpretation is the opinion of an individual sage.¹⁴ 55b. According to the latter a dream’s meaning depends on its interpretation. This contradicts I.E. Hence, I.E. says that Rabbi Elazar’s opinion is not binding.

footnotes:
¹³ The point is, only God knows the future and what He knows will come to pass. Hence my interpretation can in no way influence the outcome of your dream. What will be, will be.
¹⁴ Rabbi Elazar in Berakhot


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:10:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:10:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:10:1)

**עלתה נצה.** כמו "הנצו הרמונים" (ש"ה ז יג):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
ITS BLOSSOMS SHOT FORTH. *Nitzah* (its blossoms) is the same as *henetzu* (be in flower) in *And the pomegranates be in flower* (hanetzu) (Cant. 7:13).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:10:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:10:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:10:2)

**הבשילו אשכלותיה.** הפך הבוסר, וכמוהו כי בשל קציר (יואל ד יג), ואם הם שני בנינים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND THE CLUSTERS THEREOF BROUGHT FORTH RIPE GRAPES. *Hivshilu* (brought forth ripe) is the oppposite of *boser* (sour grapes).¹⁵ *Bashal* (is ripe) in *For the harvest is ripe* (bashal) (Joel 4:13) is similar. The two words are similar even though *hivshilu* in our verse and *bashal* belong to different conjugational paradigms.¹⁶ is in the *hifil, bashal* is in the *kal*. Both mean ripened.

footnotes:
¹⁵ I.E. could not find a synonym for ripe. The only way he could define it was by contrasting it with its opposite.
¹⁶ Hivshilu


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:11:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:11:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:11:1)

**ואשחט אותם.** כמו שוחטי הילדים (ישעי' נז ה) ולא כאשר פי' הגאון:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND PRESSED THEM. *Va-eschat* (pressed) is similar to *shochate* (slay) in *That slay* (shochate) *the children in the valleys* (Is. 57:5). Saadiah Gaon’s interpretation of *va-eschat* is wrong.¹⁷ does not mean to press or squeeze as Saadiah Gaon says (this interpretation is accepted by J.P.S. and all others) since the word is not found elsewhere in the Bible. The word *sachat*, meaning to squeeze, is found in Rabbinic literature, but there it is spelled with a *samakh* and not with a *sin*. I.E. notes that the word *shachat* spelled with a *shin* or *sachat* spelled with a *sin* as in our verse means the same, to cut, hence to slay by cutting the throat. Thus our verse should be rendered: And I cut the grape so that its juice ran. It is also possible that in I.E.’s copy of Isaiah *shochate* was spelled with a *sin*, i.e., he read *sochate*, and what I.E. is doing is noting that *va-eschat* is like *sochate*. For additional interpretations see Cherez and Weiser.

footnotes:
¹⁷ This is a very difficult comment to unravel. The most acceptable interpretation is offered by Filwarg. According to Filwarg, I.E. maintains that va-eschat


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:12:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:12:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:12:1)

**פתרונו.** פירושו, ולא מצאנו מלת פתרון כי אם עם החלום,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THE INTERPRETATION OF IT. *Pitrono* (the interpretation of it) means its explanation. The term *pitrono* is not found in Scripture except in reference to a dream.¹⁸

footnotes:
¹⁸ Hence it means the interpretation of a dream. It cannot he used in any other context (Cherez).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:12:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:12:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:12:2)

יש שואלים מאין ידע יוסף כי שלשה שריגים הם ימים ולא חדשים או שנים, ויתכן יום הולדת את פרעה כמו היום שנולד בו, כי הנה היום יש מלכים שיעשו משתה ביום תקופת שנתם ויקראו לכל עבדיהם ויתנו להם מתנות או יתכן שהגבירה היתה הרה, והראשון קרוב אלי:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
Some ask, how did Joseph know that the three branches refer to three days and not to three months or three years? Because *yom hulledet et paroh* (v. 20)¹⁹. possibly means the day on which Pharaoh was born.²⁰ For today there are kings who make a party on their birthday and invite their servants and distribute gifts to them. It is also possible that the queen was pregnant.²¹ means the day that a child was born to Pharaoh. It was known that the queen was in her ninth month and Joseph reasoned that the “three branches” referred to the days left till she delivered. The first interpretation appeals to me.

footnotes:
¹⁹ Translated according to Filwarg, Weiser and Cherez. According to Krinsky the question raised in I.E. is not answered. The way Krinsky read I.E. is: I.E. asks, “How did Joseph know that the three branches refer to three days?” He then goes on to explain the meaning of the clause yom hulledet et paroh
²⁰ Joseph knew that Pharaoh’s birthday would be in three days and it was obvious to him that the branches referred to this festive event (Filwarg, Weiser, Cherez).
²¹ And that yom hulledet et paroh


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:13:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:13:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:13:1)

**ישא פרעה את ראשך.** ירים, הנכון שהוא בדרך מספר, והעד "וישא את ראש שר המשקים, ואת ראש שר האופים בתוך עבדיו" (בראשית מ כ) ובפ' כי תשא אפרש זה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SHALL PHARAOH LIFT UP THY HEAD. *Yissa* means shall lift up.²² In its correct sense, *yissa* means to lift up by counting. ²³ Proof of this is Scripture stating, *and he lifted up* (va-yissa) *the head of the chief butler and the head of the chief baker among his servants* (v. 20).²⁴ must mean and he counted because Pharaoh did not exalt the chief baker. I will explain this term in my comments on the Torah portion *Ki Tissa* (Ex. 30:12).²⁵

footnotes:
²² Pharaoh will raise the chief butler from his fallen state.
²³ See note 25.
²⁴ Here the term va-yissa
²⁵ In his short commentary on Ex. 30:12, I.E. points out that one who counts people lists them in a row and places the most important at the top. Thus when Pharaoh will count his servants he will have a list of his butlers and bakers made. The name of the chief butler will head the list of butlers and that of the baker the list of bakers. Thus to “lift up” means to count. However, it does so only in a specific sense. It is not a mere synonym for counting. It should be noted that some commmentaries maintain that I.E. is of the opinion that to lift up is another way of saying to count. Cf. Krinsky and Cherez.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:13:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:13:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:13:2)

**כנך.** משמרתך הראשונה, ומכונתך ומתכונתך, ויתכן להיותו מן גזרת כן, וכמוהו "ועמד על כנו" (דניאל יא כ):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THINE OFFICE. *Kannekha* means thy previous station, thy place,²⁶. Compare, *mekhunatah* in Zech. 5:11. thy state.²⁷. Compare, *matkunto* in II Chron. 24:13. I.E. is saying is that *kannekha* (thine office) is similar to *mekhunatah* and *matkunto*. However, I.E. changes the pronominal suffixes. *Kannekha* most likely comes from the same root as *ken* (a base, a pedestal) (I Kings 7:29). The word *kanno* (in his place) in *Then shall stand up in his place* (kanno) (Dan. 11:20) is analogous.

footnotes:
²⁶ Hebrew mekhunatekha
²⁷ Hebrew matkuntekha


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:15:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:15:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:15:1)

**מארץ העברים.** אפרשנו בפסוק כי תקנה עבד עברי (שמות כא ב), ואחר כל חלום במקרא מלת הנה טעמה כאילו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
OUT OF THE LAND OF THE HEBREWS. I will explain this in my comments on *If thou buy a Hebrew servant* (Ex. 21:2). When the term *hinneh* (behold) is found in Scripture following a dream, its meaning is *as it were*.²⁸ (behold) applies to something real. However, when used to describe what one saw in a dream it means: as it were, as if. Cf. Gen. 28:12; 37:7-10; 41:2-6, 18-23.

footnotes:
²⁸ Hinneh


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:16:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:16:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:16:1)

**סלי חורי.** אמר הגאון שהוא לחם לבן כמו,"חורי יהודה" (נחמי' ו יז):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THREE BASKETS OF WHITE BREAD. Saadiah Gaon says that *chori* means white bread, as in *the nobles* (chore)²⁹ (literally, the white ones) because they are metaphorically speaking as the color white which resembles light.” *of Judah* (Neh. 6:17).

footnotes:
²⁹ Cf. I.E.’s comment on Gen. 36:20 where he writes, “Nobles are called chorim


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:19:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:19:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:19:1)

**בעוד.** בטרם עוד וטעמו לא יעבור עוד כך זמן עד שיהיה זה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
WITHIN YET. *Be’od* (within yet) is to be translated before again.³⁰ means again. The *bet* prefixed to it means before. Thus *be’od* means before again (within yet), and the meaning of *be’od sheloshet yamim* (within yet three days) is before three days again pass. I.E. makes this point because Onkelos translates *be’od*, after yet. Thus Onkelos renders *be’od sheloshet yamim* at the end of three days. Its meaning is: such a time³¹ will not again pass without this happening.

footnotes:
³⁰ Od
³¹ Three days.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:19:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:19:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:19:2)

**ישא פרעה את ראשך מעליך.** ישאנו ממקומו, וטעמו יסירנו או ירימנו על עץ:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SHALL PHARAOH LIFT UP THY HEAD FROM OFF THEE. He will lift it up from its place. It means he will remove it or raise it up on a pole.³² may mean to remove or to raise up (Cherez).

footnotes:
³² The point is that the Hebrew word yissa


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:20:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:20:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:20:1)

**הלדת.** שם הפועל מהבנין שלא נזכר שם פועלו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BIRTHDAY. *Hulledet* (birth) is an infinitive in the *hofal*.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:21:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:21:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:21:1)

**על משקהו.** שם, כי "אשר היית משקהו" (בראשית מ יג) פועל:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
UNTO HIS BUTLERSHIP. *Mashkehu* (his butlership) here is a noun.³³ means his drink. The meaning of our verse is: And he restored the chief butler back to being in charge of his drink. In verse 13 it means, gives him to drink. However, *mashkehu* in *when thou wast his butler* (mashkehu) (v. 13) is a verb.

footnotes:
³³ Here mashkehu


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:23:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:23:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:23:1)

**ולא זכר שר המשקים.** לא הזכירו בפה אל פרעה, וכן "ומשא ד' לא תזכרו עוד" (ירמי' כג לו) "זכר את ושתי" (אסתר ב א):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
YET DID NOT THE CHIEF BUTLER REMEMBER JOSEPH. He did not verbally mention him to Pharaoh.³⁴ (usually translated remembered) here means mentioned, as in *make mention of me* (ve-hizkartani) *unto Pharaoh* (v. 14). The words *tizkeru* (shall ye mention) and *zakhar* (he remembered), in *And the burden of the Lord shall ye mention* (tizkeru)³⁵ *no more* (Jer. 23:36) and *he remembered* (zakhar) *Vashti* (Est. 2:1), are similar.

footnotes:
³⁴ According to I.E. zakhar
³⁵ Literally, shall ye remember.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:23:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 40:23:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/40:23:2)

וישכחהו. בלב

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BUT FORGOT HIM. In his heart.³⁶

footnotes:
³⁶ Thus the verse tells us that the butler not only failed to mention Joseph to Pharaoh, he totally forgot about him.