## Ibn Ezra on Genesis Chapter 41

###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:1:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:1:1)

**ויהי מקץ.** לא פירש הכתוב תחלת זה החשבון וכן "ויהי מקץ ארבעים שנה" (ש"ב טו ז) וכן "ובעוד ששים וחמש שנה" (ישעי' ז ח), וכן "ויהי בשלשים שנה" (יחז' א א), ויתכן להיות שזה החשבון ליציאת שר המשקים מבית הסהר או לשבת יוסף שם

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND IT CAME TO PASS AT THE END OF TWO FULL YEARS. Scripture does not indicate the point from which these two years are reckoned. *And it came to pass at the end of forty years* (II Sam. 15:7), *And within threescore and five years* (Is. 7:8), and *Now it came to pass in the thirtieth year* (Ezek. 1:1)¹ are similar. However, it is possible that Scripture’s point of reckoning is the chief butler’s release from prison or the day that Joseph was put into prison.

footnotes:
¹ In all these verses Scripture doesn’t indicate the point from which the reckoning starts.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:1:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:1:2)

וטעם ימים כבר בארתיו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[FULL.] I have already explained the meaning of *yamim* (full).²

footnotes:
² Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 4:4.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:1:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:1:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:1:3)

**ופרעה חלם.** היה חולם, וכן ורבקה שומעת (בראשית כז, ה):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THAT PHARAOH DREAMED. That is, was dreaming. Compare, *And Rebekah heard* (Gen. 27:5).³), hence I.E.’s comment. See I.E.’s comments on Gen. 27:5 and the notes thereto.

footnotes:
³ The Hebrew literally reads: that Pharaoh dreams (u-faroh cholem


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:2:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:2:1)

**באחו.** י"א עמק שבו צמחים. וי"א שהוא שם צמח, הבי"ת נוסף כבי"ת השביעני, במרורים (איכה ג' טו) ועל שני הפירושים, כי הוא בין אחים יפריא (הושע יג טו) הוא אחיו בן אמו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
IN THE REED-GRASS. Some say that *achu* (reed-grass) means a valley with plants.⁴ Others say that *achu* is the name of a certain type of plant and⁵. 38. the *bet* of *ba-achu* is superfluous.⁶ as valley then the *bet* of *ba-achu* serves a purpose; it stands for “in the.” Thus *ba-achu* means in the growth covered valley. However, if *achu* is the name of a plant then the *bet* is superfluous, for one cannot say they fed in the plant (whatever plant *achu* might be). According to the latter interpretation our verse is to be translated: and they fed upon *achu*. It is similar to the *bet* of *va-merorim* in, *He hath filled me with bitterness* (va-merorim) (Lam. 3:15).⁷ rather than *va-merorim*. According to both of these interpretations *achu* here and *achim* in *For though he be fruitful among the reed-plants* (achim) (Hos. 13:15) are related and come from one root.⁸ in Hosea) is its brother (*achiv*) the son of his mother.” I.E. plays with *achim* (valley or plant) and *ach* (brother). His point is that both come from the same root, that our word is in the singular, and that in Hosea it is in the plural (Cherez).

footnotes:
⁴ Hence our phrase is to be rendered: they fed in the growth covered valley.
⁵ So Vat. Ebr
⁶ If we interpret achu
⁷ Hebrew usage requires the verse to read merorim
⁸ I.E. literally reads, “It (achim


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:5:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:5:1)

**שבלים.** לשון רבות נקבות ואם הוא במ"ם כמו נשים ופלגשים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
EARS OF CORN. *Shibbolim* (ears of corn) is a feminine plural even though it ends in a *mem*.⁹ It is similar to *nashim* (women) and *pilagshim* (concubines).¹⁰

footnotes:
⁹ Which ordinarily indicates that a word is a masculine plural.
¹⁰ Both of which are feminine plural nouns with masculine endings.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:6:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:6:1)

**ושדופות.** שארע שדפון מרוח מזרחית, כי נקרא מזרח קדם, בעבור צאת השמש בתחלה

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND BLASTED. *U-shedufot kadim* means they were blasted by a wind coming from the east for *kadim* means east. East is so termed because the sun rises there first.¹¹ means first. Cf. Is. 23:7; Ezek. 38:17. I.E. makes this point because *kedem* can also mean front. However, a circular object (the earth) has no front (Krinsky). *Shedufot kadim* can be rendered as blasted by the east. Hence I.E. points out that east refers to an east wind.

footnotes:
¹¹ Kedem


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:7:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:7:1)

וטעם המלאות כמו הבריאות

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
*Ha-mele’ot* (full) has the same meaning as *ha-beri’ot* (rank).¹² (rank and good). Similarly verse 7 reads, *ha-beri’ot ve-ha-mele’ot* (rank and full). I.E. points out that *beri’ot* when referring to ears of corn means full because the term *bari* (rank), which means fat, can only be used when referring to animals; i.e., one cannot speak of a fat plant. Hence I.E. points out that here *bari* means full (Filwarg). Thus *beri’ot ve-tovot* means the same as *mele’ot ve-tovot*. On the other hand I.E.’s comment may pertain only to verse 7. In this case I.E. is pointing out that the Bible there uses two synonyms, *mele’ot* and *beri’ot*, for full (Weiser).

footnotes:
¹² Verse 5 reads beri’ot ve-tovot


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:8:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:8:1)

**ותפעם רוחו.** מבנין נפעל, כמו "נפעמתי ולא אדבר" (תהלים עז ה), וי"א שהכל מן גזרת "הולם פעם" (ישעי' מא ז), והטעם שהרוח דומה לגוף המוכה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THAT HIS SPIRIT WAS TROUBLED. *Va-tippa’em* (was troubled) is a *nifal*. It is similar to *nifamti*¹³. The *nun* of the *nifal* is missing in *va-tippa’em* because it is an imperfect with a conversive *vav*, and the *nun* of the *nifal* is dropped in the future and is compensated by a *dagesh* in the first letter of the root. in *I am troubled* (nifamti) *and cannot speak* (Ps. 77:5). Others say¹⁴ that both *va-tippa’em* and *nifamti* come from the same root as *pa’am* (anvil)¹⁵ (that his spirit was troubled) thus is: that his spirit was beaten. in *that smiteth the anvil* (pa’am) (Is. 41:7). Its meaning is that his spirit was like a beaten body.¹⁶ (was beaten) can govern *rucho* (his spirit).

footnotes:
¹³ Which is a nifal
¹⁴ The “others” do not dispute what has been said until now. They explain the meaning of the word, whereas the first interpretation gave the conjugation of the word (Cherez).
¹⁵ The meaning of va-tippa’em rucho
¹⁶ It was pained and troubled. Spirit is immaterial and cannot be beaten. However, it may be compared to a beaten body. His spirit was beaten as if it were a body (Weiser). Hence the verb va-tippa’em


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:8:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:8:2)

**חרטומי.** מלה מרובעת ויתכן להיותה ארמית או מצרית, והם חכמי התולדה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
MAGICIANS OF. *Chartume* (magicians of) comes from a quadriliteral root.¹⁷. However, it is possibly an Aramaic or Egyptian word. It means a scientist.¹⁸

footnotes:
¹⁷ Its root being chet, resh, tet, mem
¹⁸ Weiser.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:8:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:8:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:8:3)

**ואת כל חכמיה.** במזלות ופתרון חלומות:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND ALL THE WISE MEN THEREOF. Men learned in astrology and dream interpretation.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:9:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:9:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:9:1)

**את חטאי.** אעפ"י שאזכיר חטאי:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
MY FAULTS. Even though I will recall my faults.¹⁹

footnotes:
¹⁹ It is not fitting to recall one’s offenses before the king. Nevertheless, in this case I must (Krinsky). I will tell you of an interpreter, even though I have to recall my faults (Cohen).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:10:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:10:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:10:1)

**פרעה קצף על עבדיו.** לפי דעתי כי אין פרעה שם עצם רק שם תאר, והוא מלשון מצרים, כמו חירם בצור, גם היום יקרא כל מלך גדול על ישמעאל נגיד המאמינים על כן מצאנו פרעה בימי אברהם ובימי יוסף, ומת פרעה וקם פרעה. וכן בימי ירמיהו, הלא תראה הכתוב יפרש מה טעם פרעה, כי הוא מלך מצרים, והעד חפרע שהוא שם העצם, וכן פרעה נכה (ירמי' מו ב), כי נכה שם העצם, ואל יקשה עליך דרש כסא שלמה כי לא לקחו מלך מצרים, ועד שני שאמר שר המשקים פרעה קצף, וכן אמר יוסף "אלהים יענה את שלום פרעה" (בראשית מא טז) "הראה את פרעה" (בראשית מא כח) "יעשה פרעה" (בראשית מא לד) ואין מדרך המוסר להזכיר עם המלכים שם העצם:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
PHARAOH WAS WROTH WITH HIS SERVANTS. I believe that Pharaoh is an adjective²⁰ (king). Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 1:1 and the notes thereto. and not a proper name. It is an Egyptian word. It is a title as Hiram in Tyre.²¹. We thus find a Hiram in the days of David (II Sam. 5:11) and in the days of Solomon (I Kings 5:15) (Krinsky). Similarly in our day all great Arab kings are called “prince of the believers.” Hence we find a Pharaoh in the days of Abraham and a Pharaoh in the days of Joseph.²² We also read that a Pharaoh died and a new Pharaoh arose.²³ Similarly we find a Pharaoh in the days of Jeremiah.²⁴ Do you not see that Scripture itself explains that Pharaoh is a term for the king of Egypt,²⁵ as evidenced by the terms Pharaoh Hophra and Pharaoh Neco,²⁶ wherein Hophra and Neco are proper nouns.²⁷ Do not raise any objection from the Midrash concerning Solomon’s throne,²⁸ 20, Pharaoh Neco means Pharaoh the lame. Thus *Neco* is an adjective. According to the Midrash this Pharaoh tried to sit on Solomon’s throne, which had been brought to Egypt by an earlier Pharaoh named Shishak, and had his leg bitten and broken by a lion, hence the name Pharaoh Neco, Pharaoh the lame. for the king of Egypt did not take it to Egypt.²⁹ Additional proof³⁰ is found in the statement of the chief butler, *Pharaoh was wroth*, and in Joseph’s statements, *God will give Pharaoh an answer of peace* (v. 16); *He hath shown unto Pharaoh* (v. 28); and *Let Pharaoh do this* (v. 34).³¹ It is not in keeping with proper etiquette to mention the king by name.

footnotes:
²⁰ What I.E. means by “adjective” is an adjectival noun, a descriptive term like melekh
²¹ According to I.E., Hiram is not a proper noun. It is a term like Pharaoh or melekh
²² They obviously were not the same person.
²³ Ex. 1:8.
²⁴ Jer. 44:30.
²⁵ The Bible in a number of places explains that Pharaoh is a king of Egypt. Cf. Ex. 6:13, 29; Jer. 44:30. Filwarg questions this reading and suggests emending it. According to Filwarg we should translate, “Do you not see that Scripture does not explain the term Pharaoh. It does not do so because Pharaoh is a title for the kings of Egypt.” According to Filwarg, I.E.’s point is that the Bible usually does not identify the Pharaoh because it is known to be a title for the king of Egypt. If Pharaoh was a proper name, king of Egypt would follow it.
²⁶ Jer. 44:30; 46:2.
²⁷ Therefore Pharaoh must be an adjective.
²⁸ According to the Midrash, Va-yikra Rabbah
²⁹ King Solomon’s throne was never brought to Egypt as it is not included among the spoil taken by Shishak. Cf. I Kings 14:25, 26.
³⁰ That Pharaoh is not a proper noun.
³¹ Thus these verses prove that Pharaoh is not a proper noun.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:10:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:10:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:10:2)

**אותי ואת שר האופים.** אמר אותי פעם שנית, כי כן דרך הלשון כמו "ואני אנה אני בא" (בראשית לז, ל):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
ME AND THE CHIEF BAKER. The word me is mentioned twice in this verse in keeping with Hebrew usage. Compare, *and as for me, whither shall I go* (Gen. 37:30).³².

footnotes:
³² See I.E.’s comments on Gen. 37:30 and the notes thereto. Our verse reads, and put me…me and the chief baker


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:11:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:11:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:11:1)

**איש כפתרון חלומו.** כבר פירשתיו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
EACH MAN ACCORDING TO THE INTERPRETATION OF HIS DREAM. I have previously explained this.³³ in his comments on Gen. 40:5.

footnotes:
³³ I.E. explains the meaning of each man according to the interpretation of his dreams


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:13:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:13:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:13:1)

**אותי השיב פרעה.** וי"א שהוא בדבור השיב ותלה או בפתרון:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
I WAS RESTORED. By Pharaoh.³⁴), him he hanged (*oto talah*). The question is, to whom does “he” refer. According to the first interpretation it refers to Pharaoh, according to the second, to Joseph. Or its meaning is, Joseph’s word³⁵ or Joseph’s interpretation restored me and hanged him.³⁶

footnotes:
³⁴ The verse literally reads: me he restored (oti heshiv
³⁵ Since Joseph said it, it was as if he had done it (Filwarg). Or Joseph’s saying it was the cause of it (Krinsky).
³⁶ Joseph, by so interpreting, caused it to happen (Krinsky).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:14:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:14:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:14:1)

**ויריצוהו.** שלוחי פרעה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND THEY BROUGHT HIM HASTILY. Pharaoh’s messengers.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:14:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:14:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:14:2)

**ויגלח.** המגלח:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND HE SHAVED HIMSELF. Someone shaved him.³⁷. If Joseph shaved himself Scripture would have used the *hitpa’el va-yitgallach* rather than the *pi’el va-yegallach* (Cherez), the meaning of which is, and he shaved. However, *va-yegallach* presents a problem. The subject is missing. Hence I.E. notes that it should be rendered: and someone shaved him. According to Krinsky, I.E. is of the opinion (for the aforementioned reasons) that our verse is abridged and the reader has to supply the subject. Our verse should thus be rendered: and the shaver shaved him. I.E.’s note consists of one word, *ha-megalle’ach* (the shaver).

footnotes:
³⁷ Our verse reads, va-yegakkach


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:16:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:16:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:16:1)

**בלעדי.** מלה אחת מורכבת משתי מלות והטעם שב אל תשמע חלום לפתור אותו, אמר יוסף בלעדי, פתרוני יענה אלהים את שלום פרעה וי"א כי טעמו בעבור שאמר לו כי אתה פותר חלום, אמר בלעדי, הוא הפותר, והוא אלהים שיענה את שלום המלך,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
IT IS NOT IN ME. *Biladai* (it is not in me) is a compound of two words.³⁸ (not) and *ade* (unto). *It is not in me* refers to *And I have heard say of thee that when thou hearest a dream thou canst interpret it* (v. 15). When Joseph heard Pharaoh say this he replied, *it is not in me, but God will give Pharaoh an answer of peace via my interpretation*.³⁹ (it is not in me) refer to. According to this explanation *biladai* refers to the power to interpret dreams. The power to interpret dreams is not in me, it comes from God (Cherez). Others say that when Joseph heard Pharaoh say, *thou canst interpret dreams*, Jospeh replied, I am not (it is not in me) the interpreter; God is, and He will give the king an answer of peace.⁴⁰ means not I, and refers to the interpreter (Cherez). It should be noted that I.E. is vague and that Krinsky, Kaputa and others interpret differently.

footnotes:
³⁸ It is a compound of bal
³⁹ The problem is what does biladai
⁴⁰ According to this interpretation biladai


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:16:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:16:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:16:2)

וטעם יענה שימציא תמיד, וכן "כי האלהים מענה בשמחת לבו" (קהלת ה יט) וכן "והארץ תענה" (הושע ב כד) והוא קרוב ממשמעו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[WILL GIVE AN ANSWER.] The meaning of *ya’aneh* (will give an answer) is, He will always provide. Compare, *ma’aneh* in *for God answereth him* (ma’aneh) *in the joy of his heart* (Eccles. 5:19), and *ta’aneh* in *And the earth shall respond* (ta’aneh) (Hos. 2:24). Nevertheless, the word is close to its primary meaning.⁴¹

footnotes:
⁴¹ Its primary meaning is to answer. When one provides, he, as it were, answers (Cherez). For an alternate translation see Weiser.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:19:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:19:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:19:1)

**הוסיף** דלות ותחת מראה אמר תאר כי זה קרוב מזה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[POOR AND VERY ILL-FAVORED.] In relating the dream Pharaoh added the word *dallot* (poor), and in place of *mareh* (favored) he used the term *to’ar* (favored) because their meanings are similar.⁴² (ra’ot mareh) *and lean fleshed* kine in his dream. In our verse Pharaoh describes them as *poor and very ill-favored* (ve-ra’ot to’ar me’od) *and lean fleshed*. I.E. says there is no discrepancy in the descriptions because adding a word or using a synonym does not change the meaning. He further expands on this point in his comments on Ex. 20:1 where he uses this argument to explain why there are two different versions of the Ten Commandments in the Pentateuch.

footnotes:
⁴² In verse 3 we read that Pharaoh saw ill-favored


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:21:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:21:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:21:1)

**ומראיהן.** ומראה כל אחת מהן רע ופה הוסיף לפרש חלומו שראה שבאו הפרות הטובות בקרב הרעות, והי' כאשר הי' בראשונה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BUT THEY WERE STILL ILL-FAVORED. Each one of the kine was ill-favored.⁴³ (favored) is a plural; *ra* (ill) is a singular. Thus *marehen ra* is a combination of singular and plural. I.E. explains this by noting that it means each one of the kine was ill-favored. This is how the medieval grammarians explained this type of combination (Weiser). Here Pharaoh expanded in his description of his dream and added that after the ill-favored kine had eaten the fat kine, *they were still ill-favored as at the beginning*.⁴⁴. Here, unlike verse 19, the addition is significant. The entire verse consists of Pharaoh’s elaboration of his dream.

footnotes:
⁴³ Marehen
⁴⁴ When the dream was first described in verse 4, it was not indicated that after swallowing the seven fat kine, the seven lean ones were still ill-favored as at the beginning


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:23:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:23:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:23:1)

**צנומות.** אין לו חבר במקרא, וטעמו כמו ריקות, וי"א שפירושו צלמים כי כן בלשון ישמעאל:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
WITHERED. The word *tzenumot* (withered) is not found elsewhere in Scripture. Its meaning is the same as that of *rekot* (empty).⁴⁵ (empty). In our verse they are described as *tzenumot*. According to I.E., Joseph substituted a synonym. I.E. explains these substitutions in his comments on verse 19. Others say that *tzenumot* means images,⁴⁶ as hard. for that is its meaning in Arabic.

footnotes:
⁴⁵ Joseph in verse 27 refers to the ears as rekot
⁴⁶ In a manner of speaking images are imitations. Similarly applying this concept these things were in the shape of ears but empty on the inside (Krinsky). Or images have no practical use, neither did these ears (Cherez). Weiser suggests that what I.E. says is that images are hard; these, too, were hard and could not serve as food. According to the latter interpretation I.E. agrees with Rashi who interprets tzenumot


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:29:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:29:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:29:1)

**שבע גדול.** שם כמו רעב על כן יטעה האומר בתפלת שבת ובשובע כלכלתנו בוי"ו, כי שובע שם הפועל הוא, והנכון ובשבע כלכלתנו בלא וי"ו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
GREAT PLENTY. *Sava* (plenty) is a noun. It is like *ra’av* (famine).⁴⁷ and *ra’av* are nouns. Hence the one who says in his Sabbath prayers⁴⁸ prayer. *u-ve-sova kilkaltanu* errs because *sova* spelled with a *vav* is an infinitive.⁴⁹ (ra’av) *thou didst feed us, and didst sustain us in plenty* (p. 419, *The Authorized Prayer Book*, trans. by J. H. Hertz). Plenty is parallel to famine. As *ra’av* is a noun so its parallel must be a noun. Hence the correct reading is *sava* and not *sova*. The correct way to read this prayer is without a *vav*, viz., *u-ve-sava* (and in plenty) *kilkaltanu* (thou sustained us).

footnotes:
⁴⁷ Both sava
⁴⁸ In the nishmat
⁴⁹ The prayer reads, during famine


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:31:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:31:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:31:1)

**וטעם ולא יודע השבע.** ממראיהן רע כאשר בתחלה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[AND THE PLENTY SHALL NOT BE KNOWN IN THE LAND.] Joseph based this on *but they were still ill-favored as at the beginning* (v. 21).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:32:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:32:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:32:1)

**ועל השנות.** בנין נפעל מגזרת שנים וטעמו הפרות והשבלים גם הוא לעֵד כי הדבר נכון הוא ובעבור היות שני החלומות בלילה אחד לעֵד כי ממהר האלהים לעשותו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND FOR THAT THE DREAM WAS DOUBLED. *Hishanot* (was doubled) is a *nifal*. It comes from the same root as *shenayim* (two). Its meaning is the dream coming twice, once with kine as its symbol and then with ears of corn as its symbol, also attests⁵⁰ that *the thing is established by God*. Furthermore, the occurrence of the two dreams in one night is proof that *God will shortly bring it to pass*.⁵¹. This appears redundant; hence I.E. explains *was doubled* came in two versions, *twice*, twice in one night. *It is because the thing is established by God* corresponds to *was doubled*; and *and God will shortly bring it to pass* corresponds to *twice*.

footnotes:
⁵⁰ Not only do the kine and the ears allude to seven years of plenty and famine, they also indicate that the decree is established by God; i.e., it is unchangeable.
⁵¹ The dream could have come on two different nights. The fact that it occurred twice in one night is proof that God is bringing it about soon. Our verse reads: The dream was doubled…twice


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:34:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:34:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:34:1)

**יעשה פרעה.** זו העצה או יקנה, כמו עשה לי את החיל הזה (דבר' ח יז),

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
LET PHARAOH DO THIS. *Ya’aseh paro* (literally let Pharaoh do) is short for let Pharaoh do according to the following council. Or *ya’aseh* (do) means get, like *asah* in *My power and the might of my hand hath gotten* (asah) *me this wealth* (Deut. 8:17).⁵² means let Pharoah get. Also according to this interpretation the object is missing. It should be read: Let Pharaoh get wheat (Weiser).

footnotes:
⁵² According to this interpretation ya’aseh paro


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:34:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:34:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:34:2)

וחמש שיקנה החומש:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND TAKE UP THE FIFTH PART OF THE LAND. Let him buy a fifth of the produce of the land.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:35:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:35:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:35:1)

**ויצברו בר.** הפקידים וי"א כי טעם בר להיותו עם שבליו, והנכון בעיני שנקרא בר אחר מלאכת לזרות או לחבר והאומר כי אויר מצרים לח בעבור היאור, ולא יעמוד שם דנן ז' שנים, יוכל לערבו עם דברים שיעמידוהו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND LAY UP CORN. The overseers. Some say that *bar* (corn) refers to corn in its ears.⁵³ However, I think that *bar* is the term applied to the corn after it has been fanned and cleansed.⁵⁴. 38 reads, fanned and cleansed. We have followed the latter. To the one who says that the Egyptian air is damp because of the Nile and it is impossible for corn to last there for seven years, we reply that it is possible to mix corn with preservatives.⁵⁵ 90:5 this is precisely what Joseph did.

footnotes:
⁵³ Grain that has not been purified from its stubble (Weiser).
⁵⁴ Grain whose impurities have been removed. I.E. is paraphrasing Jer. 4:11. Our texts read, fanned or cleansed. Vat. Ebr
⁵⁵ According to Bereshit Rabbah


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:38:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:38:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:38:1)

**הנמצא כזה.** בנין נפעל, והוא פועל עבר, כאומר הנמצא בעולם כזה, ויתכן להיות הנו"ן סימן המדברים, הנמצא אנחנו כזה דברי פרעה אל עבדיו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
CAN WE FIND SUCH A ONE AS THIS. *Nimtza* (we find) is a *nifal* perfect and the meaning of *ha-nimtza kha-zeh ish* (can we find such a one as this) is, was such a one as this ever found in the world. It is also possible that the *nun* of *nimtza* is a first person plural prefix.⁵⁶ is prefixed to the Hebrew root in the first person plural imperfect. According to this interpretation *nimtza* is a *kal*. In this case the word *ha-nimtza* (can we find) relates to what Pharaoh said to his servants.⁵⁷ can either be a third person singular *nifal* perfect or a first person plural *kal* imperfect. In the first instance it means was found, and relates to *kha-zeh ish* (such a one as this); in the second, it means we will find, and it relates to Pharaoh and his servants.

footnotes:
⁵⁶ A nun
⁵⁷ The meaning of the phrase is, can we find such a one as this. The point is that nimtza


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:40:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:40:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:40:1)

**אתה תהיה.** שר על ביתי:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THOU SHALT BE OVER MY HOUSE. Thou shalt be chief over my house.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:40:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:40:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:40:2)

**ישק.** דגשות השי"ן לחסרון נו"ן נשק והוא נגיד החיל, וי"א שהוא מגזירת נשיקה בדרך רחוקה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SHALL BE RULED. The *shin* of *yishak* (shall be ruled) has a *dagesh* to compensate for the missing *nun* of *neshek* (arms),⁵⁸ is a denominative of *neshek* (arms), and means will be armed. its meaning being Joseph will be commander of the army.⁵⁹ as, and according unto thy word shall all my people be armed. Hence Joseph will be chief of the army. Others say that *yishak* is related to *neshikah* (kiss).⁶⁰) (Filwarg). Krinsky suggests translating it, thy word shall all my people kiss. Literally, *pikha* means thy mouth. However, the latter is far fetched.

footnotes:
⁵⁸ Yishak
⁵⁹ I.E. translates and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled
⁶⁰ All the people will pay homage to Joseph by kissing him on the mouth (pikha


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:40:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:40:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:40:3)

**רק הכסא אגדל ממך.** ידוע כי אגדל פועל עומד וטעמו לא תהיה לי גדולה ממך רק גדולת הכסא ואין "כי מנעורי גדלני כאב" (איוב לא, יח) פועל יוצא, רק פירושו גדול עמי, ודרך "אגדל ממך" במקרא ידוע, כמו "נובלת עליה" (ישעי' א ל) "ותאבדו דרך" (תהלים ב יב):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
ONLY IN THE THRONE WILL I BE GREATER THAN THOU. It is known that *egdal* (I will be greater) is an intransitive verb. The meaning of *rak ha-kisse egdal mi-mekka* is, I will not be greater than you except for the dignity of the throne.⁶¹ being intransitive refers to Pharaoh and not the throne. The word *gedelani* (he grew up with me) in *Nay from my youth he grew up with me* (gedelani) *as with a father* (Job 31:18) is not a transitive verb⁶² was transitive it would disprove I.E.’s contention that *egdal* is intransitive since they are both *kals*. but an intransitive verb meaning he grew up with me. The juxtaposition of an intransitive verb (*egdal*) with the direct object (*kisse*) is found elsewhere in Scripture.⁶³ Compare, *For ye shall be as a terebinth whose leaf fadeth* (ke-elah novelet aleha) (Is. 1:30);⁶⁴ (fadeth) is intransitive, *aleha* (its leaves) is the object. I.E. renders *novelet alehah* as, which is withering with regards to its leaves. and *and ye perish in the way* (ve-tovedu derekh) (Ps. 2:12).⁶⁵ (you shall perish) is intransitive. *Derekh* (way) is the object. According to I.E. the meaning of *ve-tovenu derekh* is, and you shall perish with regard to the way. Similarly the meaning of our verse is, I will be greater than you with regard to the throne (Krinsky).

footnotes:
⁶¹ Egdal
⁶² Meaning, brought me up. If gedelani
⁶³ That is, found elsewhere in Scripture with a similar meaning, i.e., meaning, with regard to (Weiser, Krinsky). Usually only a transitive verb is connected to a direct object (Weiser). Hence I.E. points out that our verse is not unique.
⁶⁴ Novelet
⁶⁵ Ve-tovedu


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:41:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:41:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:41:1)

**ראה נתתי אותך.** שמתיך למעלה על כל ארץ מצרים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SEE, I HAVE SET THEE OVER ALL THE LAND. I have set thee above all the land of Egypt.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:42:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:42:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:42:1)

**בגדי שש.** מפורש בפרשת ויקחו לי תרומה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
VESTURES OF FINE LINEN. I have explained the meaning of *shesh* (fine linen) in my comments on the Torah portion *ve-yikchu li terumah* (that they take for me an offering).⁶⁶ is white linen made from a type of flax which grows in Egypt.

footnotes:
⁶⁶ I.E. in Ex. 25:4 writes that shesh


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:42:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:42:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:42:2)

**רביד הזהב.** כמו "מרבדים רבדתי ערשי" (משלי ז טז):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
A GOLD CHAIN. *Revid* (chain) is like *marvadim* (coverlets) in *I have decked my couch with coverlets* (marvadim) (Prov. 7:16).⁶⁷ (chain) to mean a coverlet (Krinsky, Weiser).

footnotes:
⁶⁷ I.E. explains revid


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:43:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:43:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:43:1)

**המשנה.** מגזרת שנים, כי המלך כאחד, ואחריו המשנה כמו שני לו ואחריו השלש כמו שלישי:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THE SECOND. *Mishneh* (the second) comes from the same root as *shenayim* (two). The king is like the numeral one, next comes the *mishneh* which means second to him, and afterward the *shalish* (adjutant) which means the same as *shilishi* (third).⁶⁸ means second in rank and *shalish* third in rank (Netter). *Mishneh* can be taken to refer to the chariot, as Rashi interprets. Hence I.E. points out that *mirkevet ha-mishneh* (the second chariot) is to be rendered: the chariot of the second in rank (Cherez).

footnotes:
⁶⁸ I.E. points out that mishneh


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:43:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:43:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:43:2)

**מרכבת.** עץ נתונה על ארבעה סוסים, ומרכבת שלמה לעדה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
CHARIOT. A wooden chariot pulled by four horses,⁶⁹ (chariot) to mean a horse or mule. Cf. Rashi. as is evidenced by the chariot of Solomon.⁷⁰ (merkavah) *came up and went out of Egypt for six hundred shekels of silver, and a horse for a hundred and fifty*. Now four times 150 gives 600. Hence each chariot had four horses.

footnotes:
⁶⁹ Some interpret mirkevet
⁷⁰ We read in I Kings 10:29, And a chariot


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:43:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:43:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:43:3)

**אברך.** כל אדם קורא לפניו אכרע ואשתחוה, זו המלה מבנין הכבד הנוסף, ויברך על ברכיו (דה"ב, ו, יג) מהקל וכלם מגזרת ברכים, ויאמר ר' יונה המדקדק הספרדי כי אברך שם הפועל, והאל"ף תחת ה"א כמו אשכם ושלוח (ירמי' כה ד) ולפי דעתי שאל"ף אשכם לשון המדבר:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
ABRECH. Every man called before him, I will bend the knee (*avrekh*)⁷¹ is a first person singular. However, the verb preceding it, *va-yikre*’u (and they cried), is a plural. Thus rather than *avrekh* we would expect *navrekh*, hence I.E.’s comment. and I will bow down. The word *avrekh* is a *hifil*. However, the word *va-yivrakh* in *and kneeled down* (va-yivrakh) *upon his knees* (II Chron. 6:13) is a *kal*. Both words come from the same root, *birkayim* (knees).⁷². Rabbi Jonah, the Spanish grammarian,⁷³ said that *avrekh* is an infinitive, with an *alef* taking the place of the *heh*,⁷⁴ is a variant of *havrekh*. This answers the question raised in note 70. According to this comment *avrech* is not a first person singular but rather an infinitive. The verse thus reads: and they cried before him, bend the knee (*havrekh*). This is also the opinion of Kimchi. as we find in the word *ashkem* in *sending them betimes* (ashkem) *and often* (Jer. 25:4).⁷⁵ is to be interpreted as if written *hashkem*. I.E. quotes Jer. 25:4, *sending them betimes and often*. However, in this verse the word for betimes is written *hashkem* with a *heh*. The reference therefore must be to Jer. 25:3 (speaking betimes and often) where the word for betimes is written *ashkem* with an *alef*. Either we have a scribal error or I.E. quoted from memory and erred. However, I believe that the *alef* of *ashkem* is a first person future prefix.⁷⁶ has not been substituted for an *alef*, its meaning being: I arose and spoke (Krinsky). Hence we cannot use Jer. 25:3 as an analogy for a *heh* being substituted for an *alef*.

footnotes:
⁷¹ Avrekh
⁷² Its root is bet, resh, caf
⁷³ Ibn Janah.
⁷⁴ That is, avrekh
⁷⁵ Wherein ashkem
⁷⁶ In other words a heh


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:44:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:44:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:44:1)

**אני פרעה.** אני לבדי המלך, ואין אדם שיהיה ברשותו זולתך,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
I AM PHARAOH. I alone am king and aside from you no one is permitted to act freely.⁷⁷

footnotes:
⁷⁷ I remain king. However, everyone else will be subservient to you (Cherez).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:44:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:44:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:44:2)

וטעם רגלו, לו רשות ללכת או על דרך משל,והוא הנכון:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[HIS FOOT.] The meaning of *his foot* is permission to go any place.⁷⁸. 38. The same applies to *his hand*; i.e., no one may do anything without your (Joseph’s) permission (Weiser). It may also be a figurative expression.⁷⁹ The latter is its correct meaning.

footnotes:
⁷⁸ Vat. Ebr
⁷⁹ His hand or his foot is not to be taken literally but means do anything significant or insignificant (Weiser).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:45:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:45:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:45:1)

**צפנת פענח.** אם זו המלה מצרית לא ידענו פירושה, ואם היא מתורגמת לא ידענו שם יוסף ויהיה פי' פענח כאשר תרגם המתרגם ארמית, והיא מלה מרובעת:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
ZAPHENATH-PANEAH. If this is an Egyptian word then we don’t know what it means.⁸⁰ On the other hand, if this is a Hebrew translation of Joseph’s Egyptian name then we don’t know what Joseph’s Egyptian name was. In the latter case⁸¹ is Hebrew. the meaning of *paneah* is in accordance with Onkelos’ translation,⁸² as revealed. He renders *zaphenath-paneah*, a man before whom all secrets (*tzefunot*) are revealed. and it is a quadriliteral.⁸³.

footnotes:
⁸⁰ Since we don’t understand ancient Egyptian we cannot unravel its meaning.
⁸¹ If Zaphenath-paneah
⁸² Onkelos renders paneah
⁸³ Its root being peh, ayin, nun, chet


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:45:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:45:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:45:2)

**כהן און.** עובד השם או עובד עו"ג, כי כהן בכל המקרא כי אם משרת על דעתי:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
PRIEST OF ON. The term *kohen* (priest) can be applied to one who serves the Lord or to one who serves idols, for I believe that when this term is used in Scripture it means one who ministers.⁸⁴ does not mean a priest of the Lord; it means any priest. Hence *kohen on* means priest of On.

footnotes:
⁸⁴ I.E.’s point is that kohen


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:45:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:45:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:45:3)

**ויצא יוסף.** יצא שמו, כטעם "ויצא לך שם בגוים" (יחז' טז יד) או יצא ועבר על כל מקום והכריזו עליו כדי שיכירוהו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND JOSEPH WENT OUT. His name went out, as in *And thy renown went forth among the nations* (Ezek. 16:14).⁸⁵ Or it means he went out and traveled throughout the land and they announced who he was that he might become known.⁸⁶ literally and not applying it to his name.

footnotes:
⁸⁵ That is, Joseph was renowned throughout the land. Literally: And thy name went forth among the nations. “Thy name” meaning thy renown.
⁸⁶ Taking And Joseph went out


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:48:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:48:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:48:1)

**את כל אוכל.** אין פי' כל כי הי' מתים ברעב, וכן וכל הארץ באו (בראשית מא נז) רק טעמו שקבץ כל אשר יכול:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
ALL THE FOOD. All is not to be taken literally, for if it were, then all should have starved to death. *All* in *And all countries came* (v. 57) is similar.⁸⁷ The meaning of *And he gathered up all the food* is: and Joseph gathered as much of the food as he could.

footnotes:
⁸⁷ It is not to be taken literally. It doesn’t mean each and every individual came.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:51:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:51:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:51:1)

**כי נשני אלהים.** טעמו כי אמר, ויאמר ר' יהודה המדקדק הראשון, כי נשני על משקל חנני, ויאמר ר' משה הכהן הספרדי כי הפתח תחת חירק:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
FOR GOD HATH MADE ME FORGET. Its meaning is, because he said *God hath made me forget*.⁸⁸ and *for God* etc. Cf. I.E.’s comment on Gen. 26:7. Rabbi Judah, the first Hebrew grammarian,⁸⁹ says that *nashani* (made me forget) follows the paradigm of *channani* (dealt graciously with me) (Gen. 33:11).⁹⁰ comes from the root *chet, nun, nun*. Similarly *nashani* comes from the root *nun, shin, shin*. They are both *kals*. However, Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen, the Spaniard, says that (in *nashani*) a *pattach* has been substituted for the *chirik*.⁹¹ is a *pi’el* coming from the root *nun, shin, heh*. Compare, *tzivvani* whose root is *tzadi, vav, heh*. The problem is that the first letter of a *pi’el* perfect is vocalized with a *chirik*, and *nashani* is vocalized with a *pattach*, hence Rabbi Moses’ explanation that a *pattach* has been substituted for a *chirik*. Thus *nashani* is a variant of *nishani*.

footnotes:
⁸⁸ This is an abridged statement as “because he said” has to be added between Manasseh
⁸⁹ Rabbi Judah ibn Hayyuj (c. 940-1010), the first Hebrew grammarian to put forth the idea that all Hebrew words come from a three letter root. He is considered the father of the science of Hebrew grammar (Weiser).
⁹⁰ Channani
⁹¹ According to this opinion, nashani


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:54:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:54:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:54:1)

**וַתְחִילֶנָה.** מבנין הקל פעל הכפל:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND THE SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE BEGAN. *Va-techillenah* is a *kal* and comes from a root whose second and third letters are identical.⁹². This comment presents difficulties. *Techillenah* is obviously a *hifil*. If it were a *kal* it would be vocalized *techullenah*. Futhermore, this word is never encountered in the Bible in the *kal*. The entire comment is missing in *Vat. Ebr*. 38. Similarly S.D. Luzzato had manuscripts of I.E. which omitted this comment. For an attempt to justify this comment see Krinsky.

footnotes:
⁹² Its root is chet, lamed, lamed


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:54:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:54:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:54:2)

**בכל הארצות.** סביבות מלכות מצרים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
IN ALL LANDS. All the lands adjacent to Egypt.⁹³ 90:6, *the hunger was in three lands, Phoenecia, Arabia and Palestine*. The point is that if the hunger was in lands far from Egypt, how did they survive since they couldn’t come to Egypt to buy food?

footnotes:
⁹³ Cf. Bereshit Rabbah


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:56:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:56:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:56:1)

**ויפתח יוסף את כל.** האוצרות שהיו עמם:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND JOSEPH OPENED ALL. The storehouses which they had.⁹⁴ (in them). I.E. interprets *ba-hem* to mean, had with them, i.e., their storehouses.

footnotes:
⁹⁴ The verse literally reads: And Joseph opened what was ba-hem


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:56:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:56:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:56:2)

**וישבור למצרים.** פירוש נתן שבר למצרים, וטעמו קנין:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND SOLD UNTO THE EGYPTIANS. It means he gave corn (*shever*) to the Egyptians.⁹⁵ (and sold) is a denominative of corn or grain. *Va-yishbor* refers to a corn purchase.⁹⁶ means, and he sold (Krinsky). *Va-yishbor* usually means, and he bought corn. This is the sense in which this root is used throughout Chap. 42 and in Is. 55:1. However, here *va-yishbor* seems to mean, and he sold corn. I.E.’s apparent solution to the problem is to explain that *va-yishbor* can apply either to the seller or to the buyer as the transfer of corn (*shever*) is effectuated by two individuals, the one giving (selling) the corn and the other buying it. The aforementioned is how Kimchi explains *va-yishbor* and it appears to be the meaning of I.E.’s comment (Cherez).

footnotes:
⁹⁵ Va-yishbor
⁹⁶ The Egyptians purchased the corn. Hence Joseph sold it. Thus va-yishbor


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:57:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 41:57:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/41:57:1)

**לשבור אל יוסף.** הפוך וכן הוא, וכל הארץ באו מצרים אל יוסף לשבור:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
TO JOSEPH TO BUY CORN. The clause is inverted⁹⁷ and must be understood as: And all the countries came into Egypt to Joseph to buy corn.

footnotes:
⁹⁷ It literally reads: to buy corn to Joseph.