## Kli Yakar on Genesis Chapter 37

###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:1:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:1:1)

**וַיֵּשֶׁב יַעֲקֹב בְּאֶרֶץ מְגוּרֵי אָבִיו בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן.** הָיָה לוֹ לוֹמַר ״וַיֵּשֶׁב יַעֲקֹב בְּאֶרֶץ יְשִׁיבַת אָבִיו״, אוֹ ״וַיָּגָר יַעֲקֹב בְּאֶרֶץ מְגוּרֵי אָבִיו״, וְעוֹד ״בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן״ לָמָּה לִי? אֶלָּא לְפִי שֶׁמַּאֲשִׁים אֶת יַעֲקֹב עַל שֶׁבִּקֵּשׁ לֵישֵׁב בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה יְשִׁיבָה שֶׁל קֶבַע, לִהְיוֹת כְּתוֹשָׁב בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה בִּמְקוֹם מְגוּרֵי אָבִיו, כִּי אָבִיו לֹא כֵן עָשָׂה, אֶלָּא הָיָה בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה כְּגֵר וּכְאוֹרֵחַ נָטָה לָלוּן, לְפִי שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא ״גּוּר בָּאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת״ (בראשית כו, ג). הִזְכִּיר לְשׁוֹן ״גּוּר״, כִּי רָצָה ה׳ שֶׁלֹּא יְבַקֵּשׁ יְשִׁיבָה שֶׁל קֶבַע בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה. כִּי אֵין לוֹמַר שֶׁלְּכָךְ הִזְכִּיר לְשׁוֹן ״גּוּר״ לְפִי שֶׁהָיָה בְּאוֹתוֹ פַעַם דָּר בְּאֶרֶץ לֹא לוֹ, וְהַדָּר בְּאֶרֶץ נָכְרִיָּה נִקְרָא ״גֵּר״, עַל זֶה אָמַר ״בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן״. וּבְאוֹתָהּ אֶרֶץ הָיָה יִצְחָק תּוֹשָׁב, כִּי שֶׁלּוֹ הִיא, שֶׁכֵּן אָמַר אַבְרָהָם ״גֵּר וְתוֹשָׁב אָנֹכִי עִמָּכֶם״ (בראשית כג, ד) – ״אִם תִּרְצוּ הֲרֵינִי גֵר, וְאִם לָאו אֶטְּלֶנָּה מִן הַדִּין״ כוּ׳, אִם כֵּן גַּם יִצְחָק הָיָה תּוֹשָׁב בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן, כִּי יְרֻשָּׁה הִיא לוֹ, וּמַהוּ זֶה שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא ״גּוּר בָּאָרֶץ״? אֶלָּא וַדַּאי שֶׁעַל גֵּרוּת הָעוֹלָם הַזֶּה אָמַר לוֹ כֵן, שֶׁלֹּא יְבַקֵּשׁ לוֹ יְשִׁיבָה שֶׁל שַׁלְוָה אֲפִלּוּ בָּאָרֶץ שֶׁלּוֹ, כִּמְדַיֵּר בֵּי דַיָּרָא (ראש השנה ט:). וְיַעֲקֹב לֹא לָמַד מִמֶּנּוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת כֵּן, עַל כֵּן קָפְצָה עָלָיו רָגְזוֹ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And Jacob settled in the land where his father had sojourned, in the land of Canaan.”** The text should have said “And Jacob settled in the land where his father settled,” or “And Jacob sojourned in the land where his father had sojourned.” Furthermore, why do I need [the phrase] *in the land of Canaan*? Rather, this comes to criticize Jacob for seeking to establish permanent residence in this world, to be like a permanent resident in this world in the place where his father had merely sojourned. For his father did not act this way, but rather was in this world like a stranger and like a traveler stopping overnight. This is because the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him [Isaac], *Sojourn in this land* (Genesis 26:3). He used the language of *sojourn* because God wanted him not to seek permanent residence in this world. And you cannot say that He used the language of *sojourn* because at that time he was dwelling in a land not his own [and one who dwells in a foreign land is called a stranger], for regarding this the verse specifically states *in the land of Canaan*. And in that land, Isaac was [actually] a resident because it was his, as Abraham had said, *I am a stranger and a resident among you* (Genesis 23:4) — [meaning] “if you agree, I am a stranger, but if not, I will take it by right…” Therefore, Isaac too was [technically] a resident in the land of Canaan, as it was his inheritance. So what did God mean by telling him to *sojourn in the land*? Rather, certainly He was speaking about the temporary nature of [life in] this world, that one should not seek a peaceful settlement even in his own land, like one who [permanently] dwells in a dwelling. And Jacob did not learn from him to do likewise, therefore the tribulation of Joseph jumped upon him.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:1:2
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:1:2)

דָּבָר אַחֵר, שֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר לְאַבְרָהָם ״כִּי גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ״ (בראשית טו יג), וְגַם יַעֲקֹב יֵשׁ לוֹ חֵלֶק בִּפְרִיעַת חוֹב זֶה, וְהוּא בִּקֵּשׁ יְשִׁיבָה שֶׁל שַׁלְוָה בִּמְקוֹם מְגוּרֵי אָבִיו. כִּי מִשֶּׁנּוֹלַד יִצְחָק הִתְחִיל הַגֵּרוּת, וְאַבְרָהָם וְיִצְחָק הָיוּ מַחֲזִיקִים אֶת עַצְמָם כְּגֵרִים וְהָיוּ נָדִים וּמְטוּלְטָלִים מִמַּסָּע לְמַסָּע, וְלֹא הָיוּ קוֹנִין נַחֲלַת שָׂדֶה וָכֶרֶם, וְהַכֹּל עָשׂוּ כְּדֵי לְשַׁלֵּם מְהֵרָה חוֹב ״כִּי גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ״. בִּשְׁלָמָא עֵשָׂו שֶׁהָלַךְ לוֹ אֶל אֶרֶץ, שַׁפִּיר קָאָמַר ״אֵין לִי חֵלֶק בַּמַּתָּנָה שֶׁל אֶרֶץ הַזֹּאת, וְלֹא בִּפְרִיעַת הַחוֹב״, כְּמוֹ שֶׁפֵּרַשׁ רַשִׁ״י סוֹף פָּרָשַׁת וַיִּשְׁלַח עַל פָּסוּק ״וַיֵּלֶךְ אֶל אֶרֶץ״ (בראשית לו ו). אֲבָל יַעֲקֹב הָיָה בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן, וְרָצָה לְקַבֵּל חֵלֶק בְּמַתְּנַת הָאָרֶץ, וְלֹא רָצָה לְשַׁלֵּם חוֹב ״כִּי גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ״, עַל כֵּן קָפְצָה עָלָיו רָגְזוֹ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף. לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן״, וְאִלּוּ לֹא בָּטְלָה מִיַּעֲקֹב יְשִׁיבָה שֶׁל מְנוּחָה, לֹא הָיוּ יָמִים אֵלּוּ עוֹלִים לוֹ לְמִסְפַּר אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה, וְהָיָה מִתְאַחֵר הַקֵּץ בְּהֶכְרֵחַ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**Another interpretation:** It was already said to Abraham *your offspring will be strangers* (Genesis 15:13), and Jacob also had a portion in paying this debt, yet he sought a peaceful dwelling in his father’s place of residence. For from the time Isaac was born, the period of being strangers began, and Abraham and Isaac considered themselves as strangers and were wandering and moving from journey to journey, and they did not purchase inheritances of field and vineyard. They did all this in order to quickly pay the debt of *your offspring will be strangers*. Understandably, Esau who went to another land — it makes sense when he said “I have no portion in the gift of this land, nor in paying the debt,” as Rashi explained at the end of Parshat Vayishlach on the verse *and he went to a land* (Genesis 36:6). But Jacob was in the land of Canaan, and wanted to receive a portion in the gift of the land, yet did not want to pay the debt of *your offspring will be strangers*. Therefore, the distress of Joseph jumped upon him. This is why it says *in the land of Canaan*, and if Jacob’s peaceful dwelling had not been nullified, these days would not have counted toward the 400 years, and the appointed end [of the exile] would have necessarily been delayed.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:1)

**אֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדוֹת יַעֲקֹב יוֹסֵף.** דָּרְשׁוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (בראשית רבה פד, ו) שֶׁהָיָה יוֹסֵף דּוֹמֶה לְיַעֲקֹב בְּכָל קוֹרוֹתָיו, וְדוֹמֶה כְּאִלּוּ הָיָה יוֹסֵף עִקַּר תּוֹלְדוֹתָיו. מִדְרָשׁ זֶה סוֹבֵר שֶׁרָצָה יַעֲקֹב לְתַקֵּן מַה שֶּׁלֹּא כִּבֵּד אֶת אָבִיו כָּל הַיָּמִים הַלָּלוּ, עַל כֵּן נִתְיַשֵּׁב בְּאֶרֶץ מְגוּרֵי אָבִיו וְחָשַׁב כִּי בָזֶה יְתֻקַּן גַּם הֶעָבָר, וּבִקֵּשׁ לֵישֵׁב בְּשַׁלְוָה. עַל כֵּן קָפְצָה עָלָיו רָגְזוֹ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף, לְקַבֵּל עֹנֶשׁ גַּם עַל הַיָּמִים שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה אָבִיו מְכֻבָּד מִבְּנוֹ שֶׁהוּא עִקַּר זַרְעוֹ, כְּמִסְפַּר הַיָּמִים הָהֵם יִהְיֶה יַעֲקֹב בִּלְתִּי מְכֻבָּד מִבְּנוֹ שֶׁהוּא עִקַּר תּוֹלָדוֹת שֶׁלּוֹ. לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״אֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדוֹת יַעֲקֹב יוֹסֵף״.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph.** Our Sages of blessed memory (Genesis Rabbah 84:6) taught that Joseph was similar to Jacob in all his experiences, and it was as if Joseph was his main offspring. This midrash holds that Jacob wanted to rectify his failure to honor his father during all those years, therefore he settled in the land of his father’s sojournings, thinking that through this the past would also be corrected. When he sought to dwell in tranquility, the turmoil of Joseph jumped upon him, receiving punishment also for the days his father was not honored by his son who was his primary seed. Corresponding to the number of those days, Jacob would not be honored by his son who was his main offspring. Therefore it states *These are the generations of Jacob: Joseph*.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:2
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:2)

וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב ״קָפְצָה עָלָיו רָגְזוֹ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף״. מַהוּ לְשׁוֹן ״קָפְצָה״? הָיָה לוֹ לוֹמַר ״בָּא לְיָדוֹ עִנְיָנוֹ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף״, וּמַהוּ לְשׁוֹן ״רָגְזוֹ״? וְלָמָּה יִיחֵס הָרֹגֶז לְיוֹסֵף? וְהַקָּרוֹב אֵלַי לוֹמַר בָּזֶה, שֶׁרָגְזוֹ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף הַיְינוּ חֶטְאוֹ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף, אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ הִרְגִּיז לֵאלֹהִים בְּמַה שֶּׁהֵבִיא דִּבָּתָם רָעָה עַל אֶחָיו, אֵיךְ שֶׁקּוֹרְאִין לַאֲחֵיהֶם עֲבָדִים, עַד שֶׁהָיָה הַדִּין נוֹתֵן שֶׁלְּעֶבֶד נִמְכַּר יוֹסֵף. וְאִם כֵּן, אַף אִם לֹא הָיָה יַעֲקֹב מְבַקֵּשׁ לֵישֵׁב בְּשַׁלְוָה, מִכָּל מָקוֹם הָיָה עֹנֶשׁ זֶה רָאוּי לָבֹא עַל יוֹסֵף, זוּלַת שֶׁיּוֹסֵף בֶּן שְׁבַע עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה הָיָה וְלֹא הָיָה בַּר עֳנָשִׁין עֲדַיִן בְּבֵית דִּין שֶׁלְמַעְלָה. וּלְפִי שֶׁנִּתְחַבְּרוּ לְרָגְזוֹ וְחֶטְאוֹ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף גַּם מַה שֶּׁבִּקֵּשׁ יַעֲקֹב לֵישֵׁב בְּשַׁלְוָה, עַל כֵּן מִהֵר ה׳ וְעָשָׂה לְיוֹסֵף בַּר עֳנָשִׁין קֹדֶם זְמַנּוֹ. וְזֶהוּ לְשׁוֹן ״קָפְצָה עָלָיו״, כִּי כָל קְפִיצָה מוֹרָה עַל דָּבָר שֶׁרָאוּי לָבֹא עַל כָּל פָּנִים וּמְמַהֵר לָבֹא קֹדֶם זְמַנּוֹ. כָּךְ חָפֵץ ה׳ לְהָבִיא עֹנֶשׁ עַל יוֹסֵף קֹדֶם זְמַנּוֹ כְּדֵי לְבַטֵּל יְשִׁיבָתוֹ שֶׁל יַעֲקֹב, וְהָא וְהָא גָּרְמָה. כִּי עֹנֶשׁ שֶׁל יוֹסֵף לְבַד לֹא יַסְפִּיק, כִּי לֹא הָיָה בַּר עֳנָשִׁין, וִישִׁיבָתוֹ שֶׁל יַעֲקֹב לְבַד גַּם כֵּן לֹא יַסְפִּיק לְהָבִיא בַּעֲבוּר זֶה עֹנֶשׁ עַל יוֹסֵף שֶׁלֹּא חָטָא.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**Regarding what [the Midrash] says “the distress of Joseph jumped upon him [Jacob]”:** What is the meaning of the term “jumped”? It should have said “the matter of Joseph came to him.” And what is the meaning of the term “his distress [*rogzo*]”? And why is the distress attributed to Joseph? The explanation that seems closest to me is that “Joseph’s distress” refers to Joseph’s sin — through which he angered [*hirgiz*] God by bringing evil reports about his brothers, [reporting] how they would call their brothers slaves, to the point where justice demanded that Joseph himself be sold as a slave. If so, even if Jacob had not sought to dwell in tranquility, this punishment was fitting to come upon Joseph. However, Joseph was 17 years old and was not yet of punishable age in the heavenly court. Because Joseph’s distress and sin coincided with Jacob’s desire to dwell in tranquility, God hastened to make Joseph punishable before his time. This is the meaning of “jumped upon him” — for any “jumping” indicates something that was destined to come anyway but is hastened to arrive before its time. Thus, God desired to bring punishment upon Joseph before his time in order to disrupt Jacob’s [tranquil] dwelling. Both factors together caused this — for Joseph’s punishment alone would not have been sufficient since he wasn’t of punishable age, and Jacob’s [desire for] dwelling in tranquility alone would also not have been sufficient to bring the punishment with Joseph, since [Jacob] had not sinned.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:3
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:3)

וְרַשִׁ״י מֵבִיא מָשָׁל, לְמַרְגָּלִית שֶׁנָּפְלָה בֵּין הַחוֹל כוּ׳. הִמְשִׁיל בֵּית עֵשָׂו לַחוֹל וּבֵית יַעֲקֹב אֶל הַמַּרְגָּלִית, עַל דֶּרֶךְ שֶׁמַּסִּיק בְּוַיִּקְרָא רַבָּה (ד ו) עֵשָׂו שֵׁשׁ נְפָשׁוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ וְהַכָּתוּב קוֹרֵא אוֹתָם נְפָשׁוֹת לְשׁוֹן רַבִּים, לְפִי שֶׁעוֹבְדִים לֶאֱלֹהוֹת הַרְבֵּה. יַעֲקֹב שִׁבְעִים נְפָשׁוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ וְהַכָּתוּב קוֹרֵא אוֹתָם נֶפֶשׁ, לְפִי שֶׁעוֹבְדִים לְאֵל אֶחָד עכ״ל. וּמִצַּד שֶׁהֵם עוֹבְדִים לֶאֱלֹהוֹת הַרְבֵּה, עַל כֵּן מְצוּיָה בָּהֶם תָּמִיד הַמְּרִיבָה וְאֵינָן בְּהַסְכָּמָה אַחַת מִצַּד רִבּוּי הַדָּתוֹת, וְאֵינָן מִתְאַחֲדִים וּמִתְחַבְּרִים כַּחוֹל זֶה שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִתְחַבֵּר זֶה לָזֶה. אֲבָל יִשְׂרָאֵל, מִצַּד שֶׁעוֹבְדִים לְאֵל אֶחָד, הַשָּׁלוֹם מְתַוֵּךְ בֵּינֵיהֶם, הֲרֵי הֵם כְּמַרְגָּלִיּוֹת הַחֲרוּזִים בְּחוּט שֶׁדְּבוּקִים זֶה בָּזֶה עַל יְדֵי הַחוּט שֶׁמְּחַבְּרָם, כִּי ״כְּחוּט הַשָּׁנִי שִׂפְתוֹתַיִךְ״ (שיר השירים ד ג) – שִׂפְתֵי דַעַת וְתוֹרָה הַמַּרְבִּים שָׁלוֹם בָּעוֹלָם, כְּחוּט זֶה הַחוֹרֵז הַמַּרְגָּלִיּוֹת.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And Rashi brings a parable** about a pearl that fell among sand, etc. He compares the house of Esau to sand and the house of Jacob to the pearl, following the explanation in Leviticus Rabbah (4:6): Esau had six souls in his household, yet the verse refers to them as “souls” [plural], because they worshipped many gods. Jacob had seventy souls in his household, yet the verse refers to them as “soul” [singular], because they worshipped one God. End quote. And because they [Esau’s household] worshipped many gods, strife was constantly present among them, and they lacked unity due to their multiple religions, and they do not unite and connect like this sand that doesn’t bind together. But Israel, because they worship one God, peace mediates between them, and they are like pearls strung on a thread, attached to one another through the thread that connects them, as it says *like a scarlet thread are your lips* (Song of Songs 4:3) — lips of knowledge and Torah that increase peace in the world, like this thread that strings the pearls together.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:4
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:4)

**וַיָּבֵא יוֹסֵף אֶת דִּבָּתָם רָעָה אֶל אֲבִיהֶם.** בְּכָל הַמִּקְרָא לֹא מָצִינוּ לְשׁוֹן הֲבָאָה אֵצֶל הַדִּבָּה, כִּי אִם לְשׁוֹן הוֹצָאָה. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ הַמְפָרְשִׁים שֶׁלְּשׁוֹן הוֹצָאָה שַׁיָּךְ בְּדִבָּה שֶׁל שֶׁקֶר, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (משלי י יח) ״וּמוֹצִיא דִבָּה הוּא כְסִיל״, וְכֵן (במדבר יג לב) ״וַיּוֹצִיאוּ דִּבַּת הָאָרֶץ״, וּלְשׁוֹן הֲבָאָה שַׁיָּךְ בְּדָבָר שֶׁהוּא אֱמֶת, מִכָּל מָקוֹם אֵין הַלָּשׁוֹן מְדֻקְדָּק כָּאן, כִּי מִדְּקָאָמַר ״דִּבָּתָם״ שְׁמַע מִינַהּ שֶׁהַדִּבָּה מְיוּחֶדֶת אֶל הָאַחִים, כְּאִלּוּ הָאַחִים הֵם הַבַּעֲלֵי דִבָּה. וְעוֹד קָשֶׁה ״אֶל אֲבִיהֶם״ – ״אֶל אָבִיו״ מִבָּעֵי לֵיהּ. וְעוֹד קָשֶׁה, לְהַלָּן נֶאֱמַר (בראשית לה כב) ״וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֶת בִּלְהָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ אָבִיו״, קְרָאָהּ פִּילֶגֶשׁ, וְכָאן נֶאֱמַר ״וְהוּא נַעַר אֶת בְּנֵי בִלְהָה וְאֶת בְּנֵי זִלְפָּה נְשֵׁי אָבִיו״, קְרָאָן הַכָּתוּב נָשִׁים מַמָּשׁ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And Joseph brought their evil report to their father.** Throughout the entire Scripture, we do not find the term “bringing” [*hava’ah*] used with an evil report [*dibbah*], but rather the term “bringing forth/spreading” [*hotzaah*]. Although the commentators have explained that the term “bringing forth” is appropriate for a false evil report, as it is written *He who spreads an evil report is a fool* (Proverbs 10:18), and similarly *They brought forth an evil report of the land* (Numbers 13:32), while the term “bringing” is appropriate for something that is true, nevertheless the language here is not precise. For when it says *their evil report [dibatam]*, this implies that the gossip belonged to the brothers, as if the brothers were the owners of the evil report. Furthermore, it is difficult [to understand why it says] *to their father* — it should have said “to his father.” Additionally, it is difficult that later it states *and he lay with Bilhah, his father’s concubine* (Genesis 35:22), referring to her as a concubine, while here it states *and he was a lad with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his father’s wives*, where the verse calls them actual wives.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:5
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:5)

אֲבָל וַדַּאי שֶׁכָּל הָאַחִים בְּנֵי הַגְּבִירוֹת, הָיוּ מְזַלְזְלִים בִּבְנֵי הַשְּׁפָחוֹת לִקְרוֹת אִמּוֹתָם פִּלַגְשִׁים וּשְׁפָחוֹת, וְאֶת בְּנֵיהֶם קָרְאוּ עֲבָדִים. וְיוֹסֵף לְבַדּוֹ הָיָה מִתְחַבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי בִּלְהָה וְזִלְפָּה, כִּי אָמַר שֶׁהֵם נְשֵׁי אָבִיו מַמָּשׁ. וּמִטַּעַם זֶה זִלְזֵל רְאוּבֵן בְּבִלְהָה בְּחָשְׁבוֹ שֶׁהִיא פִּילֶגֶשׁ וְאֵינָהּ אִשְׁתּוֹ, עַל כֵּן בִּלְבֵּל יְצוּעוֹ. וּמִכָּאן רְאָיָה בְּרוּרָה שֶׁכָּל בְּנֵי הַגְּבִירָה הוֹצִיאוּ דִּבָּה עַל בְּנֵי הַשְּׁפָחוֹת לִקְרוֹתָן עֲבָדִים. וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר ״וַיָּבֵא יוֹסֵף אֶת דִּבָּתָם רָעָה״ (בראשית לז:ב) – אוֹתָהּ דִּבָּה רָעָה שֶׁהוֹצִיאוּ אֶחָיו עַל בְּנֵי הַשְּׁפָחוֹת הֵבִיא אֶל אֲבִיהֶם שֶׁל בְּנֵי בִּלְהָה וְזִלְפָּה, כִּי הָיָה לָהֶם לָחוּשׁ לִכְבוֹד אֲבִיהֶם שֶׁלֹּא לִקְרוֹת לְבָנָיו עֲבָדִים. וְחָשַׁב כִּי אֲבִיהֶם יִתְבַּע עֶלְבּוֹנָם. וְזֶהוּ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וּבְטֶרֶם יִקְרַב אֲלֵיהֶם וַיִּתְנַכְּלוּ אֹתוֹ לַהֲמִיתוֹ״ (בראשית לז:יח), כִּי רָצוּ לַהֲמִיתוֹ מֵרָחוֹק עַל יְדֵי חֵץ הַמֵּמִית בְּטֶרֶם יִקְרַב אֲלֵיהֶם, מִדָּה כְּנֶגֶד מִדָּה, כִּי הוּא שָׁלַח בָּהֶם חֵץ לְשׁוֹנוֹ הַמֵּמִית אַף מֵרָחוֹק, עַל כֵּן רָצוּ גַם הֵם לַהֲמִיתוֹ מֵרָחוֹק עַל יְדֵי חִצִּים. וְזֶהוּ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית מט:כג) ״וַיִּשְׂטְמֻהוּ בַּעֲלֵי חִצִּים״ – הֵם אֶחָיו שֶׁרָצוּ לִשְׁלוֹחַ בּוֹ חִצִּים. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁגַּם הוּא סִפֵּר עֲלֵיהֶם לָשׁוֹן הָרַע, מִכָּל מָקוֹם ״וַתֵּשֶׁב בְּאֵיתָן קַשְׁתּוֹ״ (בראשית מט:כד), כִּי הוּא דָּרַךְ קַשְׁתּוֹ וַיְכוֹנְנֶהָ בְּאֵיתָן בְּצֶדֶק וּבְמִשְׁפָּט, שֶׁהֲרֵי מֻתָּר לוֹמַר לָשׁוֹן הָרַע עַל בַּעֲלֵי הַמַּחֲלֹקֶת (ירושלמי פאה פ״א ה״א), וְאֶחָיו הִתְחִילוּ בְּמַחֲלֹקֶת בְּמַה שֶּׁזִּלְזְלוּ בִּבְנֵי הַשְּׁפָחוֹת.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
Rather, it is certain that all the brothers who were sons of the matriarchs were disrespecting the sons of the handmaids by calling their mothers concubines and maidservants, and they called their sons slaves. Joseph alone would associate with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, for he said that they were truly his father’s wives. For this reason, Reuben disrespected Bilhah, thinking she was a concubine and not his wife, and therefore disturbed his father’s bed. From here there is clear proof that all the sons of the matriarchs spread evil reports about the sons of the handmaids by calling them slaves. Regarding this it is said *and Joseph brought their evil report* — that evil report which his brothers had spread about the sons of the handmaids — he brought to their father, [the father] of the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah. For they should have been concerned for their father’s honor by not calling his sons slaves, and he thought that their father would demand justice for their insult. This is what is meant by *Before he came near to them, they conspired to kill him.* For they wanted to kill him from afar with a deadly arrow before he came close to them — measure for measure — because he had shot them with his deadly tongue from afar, therefore they too wanted to kill him from afar with arrows. This is what is meant by *The archers grievously afflicted him* — these were his brothers who wanted to shoot arrows at him. And even though he too spoke *lashon hara* about them, nevertheless *his bow remained taut,* because he aimed his bow and established it firmly with righteousness and justice, as it is permitted to speak *lashon hara* about those who cause discord (Jerusalem Talmud, Pe’ah 1:1), and his brothers had initiated the discord by disrespecting the sons of the handmaids.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:6
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:6)

וּבַמִּדְרָשׁ אָמְרוּ עַל פָּסוּק ״וּבְטֶרֶם יִקְרַב אֲלֵיהֶם״ שֶׁשִּׁסּוּ בּוֹ אֶת הַכְּלָבִים. וְטַעְמוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר לְפִי שֶׁחֲשָׁבוּהוּ לְמוֹצִיא דִּבָּה וּבַעַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע. וְאָמְרוּ רז״ל (פסחים קיח.) כָּל הַמְסַפֵּר לָשׁוֹן הָרָע רָאוּי לְהַשְׁלִיכוֹ לַכְּלָבִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כג א) ״לֹא תִשָּׂא שֵׁמַע שָׁוְא״, וְסָמִיךְ לֵיהּ ״לַכֶּלֶב תַּשְׁלִיכוּן אֹתוֹ״. וְטַעְמוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר שֶׁכָּל הַמְסַפֵּר לָשׁוֹן הָרָע נִדְמֶה כְּכֶלֶב הַמְנַבֵּחַ וְחוֹרֵץ בִּלְשׁוֹנוֹ, וּלְפִיכָךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּמִצְרַיִם שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בָּהֶם לָשׁוֹן הָרָע, כְּתִיב (שמות יא ז) ״וּלְכֹל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא יֶחֱרַץ כֶּלֶב לְשֹׁנוֹ״, מִדָּה כְּנֶגֶד מִדָּה. וְזֶהוּ שֶׁאָמְרוּ ״נֵלְכָה דֹּתָיְנָה״, לְבַקֵּשׁ לוֹ נִכְלֵי דָתוֹת עַל פִּי הַתּוֹרָה אֲשֶׁר יוֹרוּךָ, לְהַשְׁלִיךְ לַכְּלָבִים כָּל מְסַפֵּר לָשׁוֹן הָרָע. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁלְּכָךְ שִׁסּוּ בּוֹ הַכְּלָבִים שֶׁיֹּאכְלוּ מִמֶּנּוּ אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי, לְשַׁלֵּם לוֹ מַה שֶּׁאָמַר עֲלֵיהֶם אֵיךְ שֶׁאָכְלוּ אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי. וּבְסָמוּךְ יִתְבָּאֵר פָּסוּק ״וּבְטֶרֶם יִקְרַב אֲלֵיהֶם״ בְּדֶרֶךְ אַחֵר.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And in the Midrash Yalkut Shimoni they said,** regarding the verse *and before he came near to them* that they set dogs upon him. The reason for this was that they considered him a spreader of evil reports and a slanderer. Our Sages of blessed memory said (Pesachim 118a) that anyone who speaks *lashon hara* [evil speech] deserves to be thrown to the dogs, as it is said *Do not spread false reports* (Exodus 23:1), and adjacent to it [is written] *throw it to the dogs*. The reason for this is that anyone who speaks *lashon hara* is likened to a barking dog that wags its tongue. Therefore, regarding the Israelites in Egypt who did not engage in *lashon hara*, it is written *but against the children of Israel, no dog shall whet its tongue* (Exodus 11:7). This was measure for measure. And this is what is meant by *Let us go to Dothan [nelkhah dotaynah]* — to seek religious pretexts [*nikhlei datot*] against him, based on the Torah’s instruction, to throw to the dogs anyone who speaks *lashon hara*. And some say that they set the dogs upon him so that they would eat a limb from him while he was alive, to repay him for what he said about them — that they had eaten a limb from a living animal. And shortly, the verse *and before he came near to them* will be explained in another way.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:7
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:7)

וְרַשִׁ״י פֵּרֵשׁ, שֶׁיּוֹסֵף הִגִּיד אֵיךְ שֶׁאָכְלוּ אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי, וְהָיוּ חֲשׁוּדִין עַל הָעֲרָיוֹת, וְהָיוּ מְזַלְזְלִין בִּבְנֵי הַשְּׁפָחוֹת. וְנִרְאֶה לִתֵּן קְצָת סֶמֶךְ לִדְבָרָיו, לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״הָיָה רֹעֶה אֶת אֶחָיו בַּצֹּאן״ (בראשית לז:ב). לָמָּה לִי? וְכִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ שֶׁהָיָה רוֹעֶה עוֹפוֹת אוֹ דָּגִים? אֶלָּא לְפִי שֶׁמָּצִינוּ לְשׁוֹן ״רוֹעֶה״ בְּאַרְבָּעָה עִנְיָנִים: א׳ סְתָם רְעִיַּת צֹאן, ב׳ בְּגִלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (משלי כט ג) ״וְרֹעֶה זוֹנוֹת יְאַבֶּד הוֹן״, ג׳ לְשׁוֹן ״רוֹעֶה״ שַׁיָּךְ בְּבַעֲלֵי הַשְּׂרָרָה וְהַנְהָגַת הָעָם, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (תהלים פ ב) ״רֹעֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל הַאֲזִינָה״, ד׳ שַׁיָּךְ לְשׁוֹן ״רוֹעֶה״ בְּהוֹלֵךְ לִרְעוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ וְאוֹכֵל מִן הַצֹּאן, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (יחזקאל לד ב) ״הֲלֹא הַצֹּאן יִרְעוּ הָרֹעִים״, וּכְמוֹ שֶׁפֵּרֵשׁ רַשִׁ״י נָקוּד עַל ״אֶת״. וּמִדְּקָאָמַר שֶׁיּוֹסֵף הָיָה רוֹעֶה אֶת אֶחָיו בַּצֹּאן, מַשְׁמָע שֶׁאֶחָיו הָיוּ רוֹעִים בְּכָל אַרְבָּעָה דְּבָרִים שֶׁשַּׁיָּךְ בָּהֶם לְשׁוֹן ״רוֹעֶה״, אֲבָל הוּא לֹא הָיָה בְּהַסְכָּמָתָם כִּי אִם בַּצֹּאן לְבַד, דְּאִי לָאו הָכֵי, לְעָרְבִינְהוּ וְלִיתְנִינְהוּ ״יוֹסֵף וְאֶחָיו הָיוּ רוֹעִים בַּצֹּאן״. אֶלָּא וַדַּאי שֶׁלְּשׁוֹן ״אֶת״ מְשַׁמֵּשׁ לְשׁוֹן ״עִם״, וּלְכָךְ הוֹצִיא אֶת יוֹסֵף מִן הַכְּלָל לוֹמַר לְךָ שֶׁהוּא לֹא הִסְכִּים עִמָּהֶם כִּי אִם עַל רְעִיַּת הַצֹּאן בִּלְבַד, אֲבָל אֶחָיו רָעוּ בְּכוּלָּם, כִּי הֵי מִינַּיְיהוּ מַפַּקְת לְמַעֵט, כִּי לֹא בָּא הַכָּתוּב לִסְתּוֹם אֶלָּא לְפָרֵשׁ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And Rashi explained** that Joseph reported how [his brothers] ate a limb from a living animal, were suspected of illicit relations, and degraded the children of the handmaids. It seems appropriate to provide some textual support for his words, because it states *he was shepherding his brothers with the flock*. Why is this [phrasing] necessary? Would we have thought he was shepherding birds or fish? Rather, it is because we find the term “shepherding” used in four contexts: 1. Simple shepherding of sheep, 2. Regarding illicit relations, as it states *one who shepherds prostitutes will lose wealth* (Proverbs 29:3), 3. The term shepherding applies to those in authority and leadership of the people, as it states *Shepherd of Israel, listen* (Psalms 80:2), 4. The term shepherding applies to one who goes to “shepherd himself” and eats from the flock, as it states *Should not the shepherds feed the flock?* (Ezekiel 34:2) And as Rashi explained, there is a dot over the word *et* [in the original verse]. And since it states that Joseph *was shepherding the flock with his brothers*, it implies that his brothers were “shepherding” in all four ways that the term can be used, but he did not agree with them except regarding the actual shepherding of sheep alone. If this were not the case, the verse could have simply stated “Joseph and his brothers were shepherding the flock.” Rather, certainly the word *et* serves as [the word meaning] “with,” and therefore singled out Joseph to tell you that he only agreed with them regarding the shepherding of the flock alone, but his brothers *shepherded* in all [four ways]. For which of these [interpretations] would you exclude to limit [the meaning], as the verse did not come to conceal but to explain.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:8
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:8)

וּמִכָּאן מָצָא רַשִׁ״י סֶמֶךְ לִשְׁלָשְׁתָּן, כִּי חֲשׁוּדִין עַל הָעֲרָיוֹת הַיְינוּ ״רֹעֶה זוֹנוֹת״, וְ״אָכְלוּ אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי״ שֶׁהַצֹּאן רָעוּ אוֹתָם, וְהֵמָּה הָלְכוּ לִרְעוֹת אֶת עַצְמָן מִן הַצֹּאן לֶאֱכֹל אֲכִילָה שֶׁל אִסּוּר, וְהַיְינוּ אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי שֶׁנֶּאֱסַר לִבְנֵי נֹחַ, אֲבָל שְׁאָר טְרֵפוֹת לֹא נֶאֶסְרוּ לָהֶם עֲדַיִן. וְהִנֵּה זֶה דָּבָר הַלָּמֵד מֵעִנְיָנוֹ: מָה רְעִיָּה שֶׁל זְנוּת, אוֹ שֶׁל שְׂרָרָה, שֶׁל אִסּוּר, אַף רְעִיָּה זוֹ מִן הַצֹּאן הִיא שֶׁל אִסּוּר. וְ״קוֹרִין לִבְנֵי הַשְּׁפָחוֹת עֲבָדִים״ כְּדֵי לְהִשְׁתָּרֵר עֲלֵיהֶם לִהְיוֹת עֲלֵיהֶם רוֹעִים וּמַנְהִיגִים, לוֹמַר: אֲנַחְנוּ בְּנֵי הַגְּבִירוֹת וְאַתֶּם עֲבָדִים לָנוּ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And from here Rashi found support for all three [accusations],** because regarding the suspicion of sexual impropriety — this refers to being a “shepherd of prostitutes,” and [regarding] eating a limb from a living animal — as the sheep were feeding them, and they went to “shepherd themselves” from the flock to eat forbidden food, namely the limb from a living animal which was forbidden to the children of Noah, although other non-kosher foods were not yet forbidden to them. And this matter can be learned from its context — just as there was shepherding related to promiscuity, or to domination, [both] involving prohibition, so too this feeding from the sheep involved prohibition. And [regarding] calling the children of the maidservants “slaves” — [this was] in order to Lord over them and be their shepherds and leaders, saying “We are the children of the mistresses and you are slaves to us.”


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:9
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:2:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:2:9)

וּלְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״אֶל אֲבִיהֶם״, לוֹמַר לְךָ שֶׁבְּכוּלָּם הָיָה לָהֶם לָחוּשׁ לִכְבוֹד אֲבִיהֶם, כִּי מַה שֶּׁקָּרְאוּ לַאֲחֵיהֶם עֲבָדִים הָיָה לָהֶם לָחוּשׁ לִכְבוֹד אֲבִיהֶם כַּמְבֹאָר לְמַעְלָה, וְהָעוֹסֵק בִּזְנוּת מְחַלֵּל גַּם כֵּן כְּבוֹד אָבִיו, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (ויקרא כא כט) ״אֶת אָבִיהָ הִיא מְחַלֶּלֶת״, וּרְאָיָה מִמַּה שֶּׁאָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (בראשית רבה פז ז) שֶׁעַל יְדֵי שֶׁנִּרְאָה לְיוֹסֵף דְּמוּת דְּיוֹקָנוֹ שֶׁל יַעֲקֹב הָיָה נִצּוֹל מֵאֵשֶׁת פּוֹטִיפַר, וַאֲכִילַת אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי מוֹלִיד אַכְזָרִיּוּת בְּגוּף הָאָדָם, וּבָזֶה פּוֹגֵם כְּבוֹד אָבִיו כִּי נִרְאֶה כְּאִלּוּ הָיָה הָאַכְזָרִיּוּת קִנְיָן דָּבֵק בּוֹ מִצַּד הַתּוֹלָדָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּעֶזְרַת ה׳ פָּרָשַׁת רְאֵה בַּפָּסוּק ״לֹא תֹאכְלֶנּוּ לְמַעַן יִיטַב לְךָ וּלְבָנֶיךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ״ (דברים יב כה), כִּי הַדָּם מוֹלִיד אַכְזָרִיּוּת וּמִתְפַּשֵּׁט גַּם לְבָנָיו, עַל כֵּן לֹא נֶאֱמַר ״אֶל אָבִיו״ וּכְתִיב ״אֶל אֲבִיהֶם״, לוֹמַר לְךָ שֶׁשְּׁלָשְׁתָּן נוֹגְעִים בִּכְבוֹד אֲבִיהֶם.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And therefore it states “to their father,”** to tell you that in all [these matters] they should have been concerned for their father’s honor. For when they called their brother a slave, they should have been concerned for their father’s honor as explained above. And one who engages in immoral sexual behavior also desecrates his father’s honor, as it is written *she profanes her father* (Leviticus 21:29), and proof [can be brought] from what our Sages said (Genesis Rabbah 87:7) that because Joseph saw the image of Jacob’s likeness, he was saved from Potiphar’s wife. And eating a limb from a living animal produces cruelty in a person’s body, and through this one damages his father’s honor, as it appears as if the cruelty was an inherited trait passed down through birth. As will be explained, God willing, in Parshat Re’eh regarding the verse *you shall not eat it, so that it will be well with you and your children after you* (Deuteronomy 12:25), for blood produces cruelty and it spreads also to one’s children. Therefore it does not say “to his [Joseph’s] father” but rather writes *to their father* to tell you that all three [accusations] affected their father’s honor.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:3:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:3:1)

**וְיִשְׂרָאֵל אָהַב אֶת יוֹסֵף מִכָּל בָּנָיו כִּי בֶן זְקֻנִים הוּא לוֹ.** אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית לז:ב) ״וְהוּא נַעַר אֶת בְּנֵי בִלְהָה״, שֶׁהָיָה עוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֵׂה נַעֲרוּת כְּמוֹתָם, מִכָּל מָקוֹם אֲהֵבוֹ יַעֲקֹב, לְפִי שֶׁבִּהְיוֹתוֹ אֶצְלוֹ הָיָה מִתְנַהֵג אֶת עַצְמוֹ כְּזָקֵן וְרָגִיל וּפִרְקוֹ נָאֶה, וְלֹא יָדַע הַנְהָגָתוֹ שֶׁעִם אֶחָיו. עַל כֵּן אָמַר ״כִּי בֶן זְקֻנִים הוּא לוֹ״, בְּמִלַּת ״לוֹ״ הוֹרָה שֶׁדַּוְקָא לוֹ הָיָה בֶּן זְקֻנִים וְלֹא לְאֶחָיו, לְפִי שֶׁבִּהְיוֹתוֹ אֶצְלָם עָשָׂה מַעֲשֵׂה נַעֲרוּת כְּמוֹתָם, וּבִהְיוֹתוֹ אֵצֶל אָבִיו הַזָּקֵן הָיָה עוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֵׂה זִקְנָה. וְאוּלַי לֹא רָצָה לְשַׁנּוֹת מִן הַמִּנְהָג וְיָדַע לְהִתְנַהֵג עִם הַנְּעָרִים וְעִם הַזְּקֵנִים, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״הוּא לוֹ״.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And Israel loved Joseph more than all his sons because he was a child of his old age to him.** Even though it is said *and he was a youth with the sons of Bilhah* — meaning he would act youthfully like them — nevertheless Jacob loved him because when Joseph was with him, he would conduct himself like an elder, was well-practiced [in proper behavior], and had a pleasant youth. Jacob did not know how Joseph conducted himself with his brothers. Therefore it says *because he was a child of his old age to him* — the word *to him* indicates that specifically for Jacob he was a child of old age, but not for his brothers. This is because when Joseph was with them, he would act youthfully like them, but when he was with his elderly father, he would act with elderly maturity. Perhaps he did not want to deviate from custom and knew how to conduct himself appropriately both with youths and with elders. This is why it specifically states *he was to him*.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:3:2
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:3:2)

יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים, שֶׁכָּל מַה שֶּׁלָּמַד מִן שֵׁם וָעֵבֶר מָסַר לוֹ. וְלָמָּה לֹא מָסַר לְכָל בָּנָיו מַה שֶּׁלָּמַד, אֶלָּא וַדַּאי לְפִי שֶׁכָּל בָּנָיו מָאֲסוּ בַּחָכְמוֹת וְלֹא נִתְחַבְּרוּ אֶל יַעֲקֹב לִשְׁמֹעַ מִמֶּנּוּ, אֲבָל יוֹסֵף ״בֶּן זְקֻנִים הוּא לוֹ״ שֶׁתָּמִיד הוּא פָּנָה לוֹ לְיַעֲקֹב וְנִכְסַף לִשְׁמֹעַ מִפִּיו מַה שֶּׁלָּמַד מִשֵּׁם וָעֵבֶר, עַל כֵּן אֲהֵבוֹ. וְתַרְגּוּמוֹ ״בַּר חַכִּים הוּא לוֹ״, כִּי בִּישִׁישִׁים חָכְמָה. זֶה שֶׁאָמְרוּ (בראשית רבה פד ח) שֶׁהָיָה זִיו אִיקוֹנִין דּוֹמֶה לוֹ, כִּי ״חָכְמַת אָדָם תָּאִיר פָּנָיו״ (קהלת ח יג). וְיֵשׁ רֶמֶז כָּאן לְמַה שֶׁאָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (קידושין מ:) נַעֲנוּ כֻּלָּם וְאָמְרוּ תַּלְמוּד גָּדוֹל שֶׁמֵּבִיא לִידֵי מַעֲשֶׂה, כָּךְ הִזְכִּיר כָּאן שְׁלֵמוּת שֶׁל יוֹסֵף בַּפָּסוּק ״הוּא הָיָה רֹעֶה אֶת אֶחָיו בַּצֹּאן״ (בראשית לז ב), לְמַעֵט כָּל מִינֵי רְעִיָּה הָאֲסוּרִים, וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן לֹא אֲהֵבוֹ כִּי אִם מִצַּד ״כִּי בֶן זְקֻנִים הוּא לוֹ״, בַּר חַכִּים, כִּי גָדוֹל הַתַּלְמוּד כָּאָמוּר.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**Some say** that [Jacob] transmitted to [Joseph] everything he had learned from Shem and Eber. And why didn’t he transmit what he learned to all his sons? Rather, certainly because all his sons rejected wisdom and did not connect with Jacob to learn from him. But Joseph was a *son of his old age to him*, as he always turned to Jacob and yearned to hear from him what he had learned from Shem and Eber. Therefore he loved him. And [Onkelos] translates [*ben zekunim*] as “a wise son to him,” for wisdom is found in the elderly. This is what they meant when they said that his facial features resembled him, for *a person’s wisdom illuminates their face*. And there is a hint here to what our Sages said, “They all responded and said: Study is greater because it leads to action.” Similarly, here it mentions Joseph’s perfection in the verse *he was shepherding the flock with his brothers*, excluding all forbidden types of shepherding, and nevertheless [Jacob] only loved him because he was a *son of his old age* — a wise son — for study is greater, as mentioned.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:3:3
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:3:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:3:3)

**וְעָשָׂה לוֹ כְּתֹנֶת פַּסִּים.** נִרְאִין הַדְּבָרִים, אַחַר שֶׁכְּבָר בִּלְבֵּל רְאוּבֵן יְצוּעֵי אָבִיו, נִטְּלָה מִמֶּנּוּ הַבְּכוֹרָה, וְעַכְשָׁיו מְסָרָהּ לְיוֹסֵף. וְעַל שֵׁם זֶה עָשָׂה לוֹ כְּתֹנֶת פַּסִּים, לְפִי שֶׁהָעֲבוֹדָה בִּבְכוֹרוֹת וְהָיָה הַבְּכוֹר כֹּהֵן לְאֵל עֶלְיוֹן, עַל כֵּן עָשָׂה לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְאֶרֶת כְּתֹנֶת זֶה, דּוֹמֶה לְבִגְדֵי כְּהֻנָּה שֶׁהָיָה בָּהֶם כְּתֹנֶת תַּשְׁבֵּץ. וְאוּלַי שֶׁעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר ״כִּי בֶן זְקֻנִים הוּא לוֹ״, כְּאִלּוּ הָיָה הוּא הַזָּקֵן וְהַבְּכוֹר שֶׁבְּכָל בָּנָיו, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״לוֹ״, כִּי בֶּאֱמֶת לֹא הָיָה הַזָּקֵן שֶׁבְּכֻלָּם. וְיוֹרֶה עַל זֶה הַכֶּפֶל שֶׁאָמְרוּ ״הֲמָלֹךְ תִּמְלֹךְ עָלֵינוּ, אִם מָשׁוֹל תִּמְשֹׁל בָּנוּ״ (בראשית לז, ח), כִּי הַבְּכוֹר נוֹטֵל פִּי שְׁנַיִם בְּכָל אֲשֶׁר יִמָּצֵא, וְאַךְ לוֹ הַמְּלוּכָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (בראשית מט, ג) ״רְאוּבֵן בְּכֹרִי אַתָּה, יֶתֶר שְׂאֵת וְיֶתֶר עָז״, הַיְינוּ מַלְכוּת. וְיִתְבָּאֵר זֶה בְּסָמוּךְ בְּפָסוּק ״מַה בֶּצַע״.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And he made him a coat of many colors.”** It appears that after Reuben had disturbed his father’s bed, the birthright was taken from him, and now it was given to Joseph. For this reason, he made him a coat of many colors, because the Temple service was performed by the firstborn, and the firstborn served as a priest to God Most High. Therefore, he made this coat for honor and glory, similar to the priestly garments which included a patterned tunic. Perhaps this is why it says *for he was a son of his old age to him* — as if he was the elder and firstborn of all his sons, which is why it specifically says *to him*, because in truth he was not the eldest of them all. This is further indicated by the double expression they used: *.Will you indeed reign over us? Will you indeed rule over us?* For the firstborn takes a double portion in all that is found and to him belongs the kingship, as it is written *Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might and the first of my strength* (Genesis 49:3) — referring to kingship. This will be further explained soon in the verse *what profit*.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:4:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:4:1)

**וְלֹא יָכְלוּ דַּבְּרוֹ לְשָׁלֹם.** יְכוֹלִין הָיוּ, אֲבָל אֵינָן רַשָּׁאִים, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְאַמְּתוּ כָּל דִּבְרֵי דִּבָּה שֶׁהֵבִיא עֲלֵיהֶם, וְיֹאמַר אֲבִיהֶם כִּי מִתּוֹךְ שִׂנְאָה דִּבֵּר כָּל זֶה. עַל כֵּן לֹא הָיוּ רַשָּׁאִים לְדַבֵּר בִּפְנֵי אֲבִיהֶם בִּדְבָרִים הַמְּבִיאִים לִידֵי שָׁלוֹם, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״לְשָׁלוֹם״.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And they could not speak with him peacefully.”** They were capable [of speaking peacefully] but they were not permitted to do so, in order to avoid confirming all the evil reports that he had brought against them. [They reasoned that if they would not speak peacefully with him,] their father would say that it was out of hatred that he [Joseph] had spoken all these [reports]. Therefore, they were not permitted to speak before their father with words that would bring about peace. This is why it specifically states *to peace* [using the word *leshalom* and not *beshalom*].


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:7:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:7:1)

**וְהִנֵּה קָמָה אֲלֻמָּתִי וְגַם נִצָּבָה.** רֶמֶז שֶׁמִּתְּחִלָּה יִמְשׁוֹל עֲלֵיהֶם וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִמְלוֹךְ, לְפִי שֶׁאֵין מֶלֶךְ בְּלֹא רִבּוּי עָם וְעַכְשָׁיו הָיוּ מְתֵי מִסְפָּר וְעַל מִי יִמְלוֹךְ, אֲבָל לְשׁוֹן מֶמְשָׁלָה שַׁיָּךְ גַּם עַל מְתֵי מִסְפָּר. לְכָךְ אָמַר ״וְהִנֵּה קָמָה אֲלֻמָּתִי״, רֶמֶז לִזְמַן קִימָה כִּי יָקוּם לִמְשׁוֹל, כִּי לְשׁוֹן קִימָה מְדַבֵּר בְּהַתְחָלַת הָעִנְיָן כַּאֲשֶׁר יָקוּם אִישׁ עַל רֵעֵהוּ לִמְשׁוֹל בּוֹ. ״וְגַם נִצָּבָה״ רֶמֶז לְמַלְכוּת, כִּי אָז יִהְיֶה לוֹ מַצָּב וְיִשּׁוּב וְאַךְ לוֹ הַמְּלוּכָה. וְאָמַר בְּדֶרֶךְ ״לֹא זוֹ אַף זוֹ״ לוֹמַר: שֶׁלֹּא זוֹ מֶמְשָׁלָה שֶׁיִּהְיֶה לִי, אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ מַלְכוּת יִהְיֶה לִי. וְהֵם הָפְכוּ הָעִנְיָן וְאָמְרוּ ״הֲמָלֹךְ תִּמְלֹךְ עָלֵינוּ אִם מָשׁוֹל תִּמְשֹׁל בָּנוּ״ (בראשית לז:ח), כִּי לֹא זוֹ מַלְכוּת שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה לְךָ, כִּי אֲפִלּוּ מֶמְשָׁלָה בְּעָלְמָא לֹא יִהְיֶה לְךָ בָּנוּ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And behold, my sheaf arose and also stood upright.”** This alludes that first he would rule over them and afterwards he would reign as king, because there cannot be a king without many people, and at this time they were few in number — over whom would he reign? However, the language of ruling [*memshala*] is applicable even over a small number of people. Therefore, it says *behold my sheaf arose* — alluding to the time of rising, when he would rise to rule, as the language of “rising” [*kima*] speaks of the beginning of a matter, as in “when a man rises against his fellow” to rule over him. And *stood upright* [*nitzava*] alludes to kingship, for then he would have stability [*matzav*] and settlement, and kingship would belong to him. And he spoke in a way of “not only this, but also that” — meaning not only would he have rulership, but he would even have kingship. But they reversed the matter and said *Will you indeed reign over us? Will you indeed rule over us?* — meaning not only would he not have kingship, but he wouldn’t even have mere rulership over them.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:8:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:8:1)

**וַיּוֹסִפוּ עוֹד שְׂנֹא אֹתוֹ.** נִזְכְּרוּ שָׁלֹשׁ שְׂנָאוֹת כָּאן, כִּי מִתְּחִלָּה שְׂנֵאוּהוּ עַל הֲבָאַת הַדִּבָּה, וּמֵאָז וָהָלְאָה לֹא רָצוּ לְדַבֵּר עִמּוֹ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (בראשית לז:ד) ״וְלֹא יָכְלוּ דַּבְּרוֹ לְשָׁלֹם״. וְאַחַר כָּךְ ״וַיַּחֲלֹם יוֹסֵף חֲלוֹם וַיַּגֵּד לְאֶחָיו״ (בראשית לז:ה), לֹא הִגִּיד לָהֶם עֲדַיִן נֹסַח הַחֲלוֹם, שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא נֶאֱמַר ״וַיַּגֵּד אוֹתוֹ לְאֶחָיו״, אֶלָּא שֶׁהִתְחִיל לְדַבֵּר עִמָּהֶם וְאָמַר לָהֶם ״שִׁמְעוּ כִּי חֲלוֹם חָלָמְתִּי״, מִיָּד ״וַיּוֹסִפוּ עוֹד שְׂנֹא אֹתוֹ״, כִּי הִתְחִיל לְדַבֵּר עִמָּהֶם בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁהֵם לֹא רָצוּ לְדַבֵּר עִמּוֹ. וּלְפִי שֶׁשִּׂנְאָה זוֹ הָיְתָה בַּלֵּב וְלֹא הִרְגִּישׁ בָּהּ יוֹסֵף, עַל כֵּן אָמַר דֶּרֶךְ בַּקָּשָה ״שִׁמְעוּ נָא הַחֲלוֹם הַזֶּה״ וְגוֹ׳ (בראשית לז:ו), אָז פָּתְחוּ פִּיהֶם בְּעַל כָּרְחָם וְאָמְרוּ ״הֲמָלֹךְ תִּמְלֹךְ עָלֵינוּ״ (בראשית לז:ח), לְפִיכָךְ ״וַיּוֹסִפוּ עוֹד שְׂנֹא אֹתוֹ עַל חֲלֹמֹתָיו וְעַל דְּבָרָיו״ (בראשית לז:ח) – לֹא זוֹ שֶׁשְּׂנֵאוּהוּ עַל חֲלוֹמוֹתָיו, אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ עַל דְּבָרָיו שְׂנֵאוּהוּ, כִּי רָצָה לְדַבֵּר עִמָּהֶם בְּעַל כָּרְחָם.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And they hated him even more.** Three instances of hatred are mentioned here. Initially, they hated him for bringing evil reports [about them], and from that point onward they refused to speak with him, as it is written *and they could not speak peaceably with him*. Then, *Joseph dreamed a dream and told his brothers*. He had not yet told them the content of the dream, as it does not say *and he told it to his brothers*, rather he merely began speaking with them saying *Listen, for I have dreamed a dream*. Immediately *they hated him even more*, because he began speaking to them when they had refused to speak with him. Since this hatred was in their hearts and Joseph did not sense it, he therefore made a request saying *Please listen to this dream, etc.* Then they were forced to open their mouths and say *Will you indeed reign over us?* Therefore, *they hated him even more for his dreams and for his words* — not only did they hate him for his dreams, but they even hated him for his words because he wanted to force them to speak with him.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:8:2
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:8:2)

וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים **עַל דְּבָרָיו.** כִּי כָל הַחֲלוֹמוֹת הוֹלְכִים אַחַר הַפֶּה (ברכות נה:), רוֹצֶה לוֹמַר מִמַּה שֶׁהָאָדָם מְדַבֵּר קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּישַׁן, מִזֶּה הַמִּין בָּא לוֹ הַחֲלוֹם, כִּי ״בָּא הַחֲלוֹם בְּרֹב עִנְיָן וְקוֹל כְּסִיל בְּרֹב דְּבָרִים״ (קהלת ה:ב), כִּי הַהֲבָלִים שֶׁהַכְּסִיל מַשְׁמִיעַ בָּהֶם קוֹלוֹ, הֵמָּה גּוֹרְמִים לוֹ רֹב חֲלוֹמוֹת שֶׁל הֲבָלִים. עַל כֵּן חָשְׁבוּ שֶׁמִּסְתָּמָא קֹדֶם הַשֵּׁנָה הָיָה יוֹסֵף מְדַבֵּר אוֹ מְהַרְהֵר בְּלִבּוֹ כִּי הוּא רָאוּי לַמְּלוּכָה, עַל כֵּן בָּא לוֹ זֶה הַחֲלוֹם. לְכָךְ שְׂנֵאוּהוּ עַל דְּבָרָיו שֶׁבַּפֶּה אוֹ עַל דְּבָרִים שֶׁבַּלֵּב.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And some say [it means] “because of his words.”** For all dreams follow the mouth (Berakhot 55b), meaning that whatever a person speaks about before sleeping, that is the type of dream that comes to him. For *the dream comes through much activity, and a fool’s voice through many words* (Ecclesiastes 5:2) — because the vanities that the fool voices cause him to have many dreams of vanities. Therefore, they [the brothers] assumed that presumably before sleeping, Joseph was either speaking about or contemplating in his heart that he was worthy of kingship, and that is why this dream came to him. Thus, they hated him for his verbal words or for the words in his heart.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:14:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:14:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:14:1)

**וַיִּשְׁלָחֵהוּ מֵעֵמֶק חֶבְרוֹן.** פֵּרֵשׁ רַשִׁ״י: מֵעֵצָה עֲמוּקָה שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ צַדִּיק הַקָּבוּר בְּחֶבְרוֹן. לְשׁוֹן עֵצָה וּלְשׁוֹן עֲמוּקָה צְרִיכִין בֵּאוּר, כִּי מִי יָעַץ זֹאת הָעֵצָה וּמָה עֹמֶק יֵשׁ בָּהּ? וְהַקָּרוֹב אֵלַי לוֹמַר בָּזֶה, לְפִי שֶׁאָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (בראשית רבה מד, כא): אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְאַבְרָהָם: ״בַּמֶּה תִּרְצֶה וְיִדּוֹנוּ בָּנֶיךָ, בְּגֵהִנֹּם אוֹ בְּגָלֻיּוֹת?״ וְאַבְרָהָם בֵּרֵר לוֹ הַגָּלֻיּוֹת. אִם כֵּן, זֹאת הָעֵצָה הַיְּעוּצָה אֲשֶׁר יָעַץ אַבְרָהָם לְבָרֵר הַגָּלֻיּוֹת בִּמְקוֹם הַגֵּהִנֹּם הַנִּקְרָא ״שְׁאוֹל עֲמֻקָּה״, כִּי בָּזֶה מְתוֹרָץ כְּשֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל חוֹטְאִים, לָמָּה אֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא דָּן אוֹתָם עַל אַרְצָם, וְלָמָּה יַגְלֵם לְאַרְצוֹת הָעַמִּים? אֶלָּא לְפִי שֶׁהַגָּלֻיּוֹת בִּמְקוֹם הַגֵּהִנֹּם הֶעָמֹק, עַל כֵּן הַדִּין לְהַגְלוֹתָם מֵאִיגְּרָא רָמָא לְבִירָא עֲמִיקְתָּא, כִּי אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל גָּבוֹהַּ מִכָּל הָאֲרָצוֹת, וּבְעֶרְכּוֹ כָּל הָאֲרָצוֹת עֲמוּקִים. זֶהוּ שֶׁאָמַר (בראשית מה, ט): ״רְדָה אֵלַי אַל תַּעֲמֹד״, כִּי בְּלֶכְתָּם לְמִצְרַיִם הָלְכוּ דֶּרֶךְ יְרִידָה כְּיוֹרֵד לִשְׁאוֹל עָמֹק, וְזֶה עוֹמֵד לָהֶם בִּמְקוֹם שְׁאוֹל עֲמֻקָּה. זֶהוּ שֶׁאָמַר: ״מֵעֵצָה עֲמוּקָה שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ צַדִּיק״, כִּי הוּא יָעַץ לִבְחוֹר בְּעֹמֶק אַרְצוֹת הָעַמִּים כָּאָמוּר.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And he sent him from the valley of Hebron.** Rashi explains [this refers to] the deep counsel of that righteous one who is buried in Hebron. Both the terms “counsel” and “deep” require explanation, for who gave this counsel and what depth is there to it? What seems correct to me is to explain this based on what our Sages said (Genesis Rabbah 44:21): The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Abraham, “Which would you prefer for your children — to be judged in Gehenna or through exiles?” And Abraham chose the exiles. Therefore, this was the advised counsel that Abraham gave — to choose exiles instead of Gehenna, which is called the deep pit. This explains why, when Israel sins, the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not judge them in their own land, and why He exiles them to the lands of the nations. Rather, it is because the exiles take the place of the deep Gehenna, therefore the judgment is to exile them from a high roof to a deep pit, for the Land of Israel is higher than all other lands, and in comparison to it, all other lands are deep. This is what is meant by *Come down to me, do not delay* (Genesis 45:9), for in going to Egypt, they went by way of descent, like one descending to the deep pit. This serves for them in place of the deep pit. This is what is meant by “from the deep counsel of that righteous one,” for he [Abraham] advised to choose the depth of the lands of the nations, as mentioned.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:15:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:15:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:15:1)

**וַיִּמְצָאֵהוּ אִישׁ וְהִנֵּה תֹעֶה בַּשָּׂדֶה.** זֶה גַּבְרִיאֵל, מִדְּקָאָמַר ״וַיִּמְצָאֵהוּ אִישׁ״ שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ שֶׁזֶּה הָאִישׁ הָיָה מְבַקֵּשׁ אֶת יוֹסֵף וּמְחַזֵּר אַחֲרָיו וְהוּא מָצָא, אֲבָל יוֹסֵף לֹא מָצָא. וְהָיָה בְּדַעְתּוֹ לְהַזְהִירוֹ שֶׁיִּהְיֶה נִשְׁמָר מִן אֶחָיו, כִּי רָאָה אוֹתוֹ שֶׁהָלַךְ בַּשָּׂדֶה תּוֹעֶה בְּדַעְתּוֹ, כִּי הָלַךְ לְשָׁלוֹם וְאֵין שָׁלוֹם לְאֶחָיו עִמּוֹ. וְאִם כֵּן וַדַּאי זֶה מַלְאָךְ, שֶׁיָּדַע מַה שֶּׁבְּלִבּוֹ, דְּאִם לֹא כֵן מֵאַיִן יָדַע אֵיזֶה אָדָם אַחֵר שֶׁהוּא הוֹלֵךְ כְּתוֹעֶה, שֶׁמָּא זֶהוּ דַּרְכּוֹ, כִּי בְּלִי סָפֵק שֶׁהָלַךְ בְּאֵיזוֹ דֶּרֶךְ אוֹ שְׁבִיל.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And a man found him, and behold, he was straying in the field.”** This refers to [the angel] Gabriel. From the fact that it says *and a man found him*, we can deduce that this man was searching for Joseph and seeking him out — he [the man] found, but Joseph did not find [him]. His intention was to warn him to be cautious of his brothers, for he saw that Joseph was walking in the field, wandering in his thoughts, as he was going [with intentions of] peace while there was no peace between him and his brothers. Therefore, this must certainly have been an angel, for how else would he have known what was in Joseph’s heart? If not [that he was an angel], how would any other person have known that he was walking astray? Perhaps this was simply his chosen path, for surely he was walking on some road or pathway.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:15:2
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:15:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:15:2)

וּמִדְרָשׁוֹ שֶׁטָּעָה בְּעִנְיַן הַשָּׂדֶה הַנֶּאֱמָר בְּקַיִן וְהֶבֶל (בראשית ד:ח), כִּי יוֹסֵף הָיָה לוֹ לָשׂוּם אֶל לִבּוֹ מַה שֶּׁקָּרָה לְהֶבֶל עִם קַיִן, שֶׁמִּצַּד הַקִּנְאָה הָרַג אִיש אֶת אָחִיו. וְיוֹסֵף סָבַר: בִּשְׁלָמָא קַיִן שֶׁהָרַג אֶת אָחִיו, הַיְינוּ לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וַיְהִי בִּהְיוֹתָם בַּשָּׂדֶה״ (בראשית ד:ח) – עַל עִסְקֵי שָׂדֶה, כִּי אָמַר: ״שָׂדֶה דְּאַתְּ קָאֵים עֲלֵיהּ דִּידִי הוּא״. אִם כֵּן הָיָה סִבָּה לַדָּבָר. אֲבָל אַחַי לָמָּה יַהַרְגוּנִי חִנָּם, כִּי קִנְאַת כְּתֹנֶת פַּסִּים אֵינָהּ דּוֹמָה לְקִנְאַת שָׂדֶה. זֶהוּ שֶׁכָּתוּב ״וְהִנֵּה תֹעֶה בַּשָּׂדֶה״ (בראשית לז:טו), כִּי שָׂדֶה זֶה הַנֶּאֱמָר אֵצֶל קַיִן הִטְעָהוּ, וְלֹא יָדַע שֶׁטֶּבַע הַקִּנְאָה מְחַיֶּבֶת שֶׁעַל דָּבָר מוּעָט יָקוּם אִיש עַל רֵעֵהוּ וּרְצָחוֹ נָפֶשׁ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And its Midrashic interpretation is that he erred regarding the matter of “the field,”** which was mentioned in the story of Cain and Abel. For Joseph should have taken to heart what happened between Abel and Cain, how through jealousy one brother killed another. However, Joseph reasoned: “I understand why Cain killed his brother, as it states *when they were in the field* — it was about matters concerning the field, for Cain claimed ‘this field that you are standing on is mine.’ Thus, there was a reason for the matter. But why would my brothers kill me without cause? For jealousy over a striped tunic is not comparable to jealousy over a field.” This is what is meant by *and behold, he was straying in the field* — for this *field* mentioned regarding Cain led him astray, and he did not realize that the nature of jealousy is such that even over a minor matter, one person will rise up against his fellow and murder him.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:23:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:23:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:23:1)

**אֶת כֻּתָּנְתּוֹ אֶת כְּתֹנֶת הַפַּסִּים אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו.** פֵּרֵשׁ רַשִׁ״י כֻּתָּנְתּוֹ זֶה חָלוּק, וְלָמָּה זֶה הִפְשִׁיטוּ כֻּתָּנְתּוֹ, וְאוּלַי יוֹסֵף בְּלֶכְתּוֹ אֶל אֶחָיו הָיָה מִתְיָרֵא פֶּן יִגְזְלוּ אֶחָיו מִמֶּנּוּ אֶת כְּתֹנֶת הַפַּסִּים, עַל כֵּן עָשָׂה מַעֲשֵׂה נַעֲרוּת וְהָלַךְ וְתָפַר וְחִבֵּר אֶת כְּתֹנֶת הַפַּסִּים אֶל סְתָם חֲלוּקוֹ, כִּי אָמַר מִסְתָּמָא לֹא יַצִּיגוּהוּ עָרוֹם וְכוּלֵי הָאי לֹא חֲשָׁדָם, עַל כֵּן הִפְשִׁיטוּ הֵמָּה גַּם אֶת חֲלוּקוֹ אַגַּב כְּתֹנֶת הַפַּסִּים, וְיִהְיֶה ״אֶת״ פֵּרוּשׁוֹ כְּמוֹ ״עִם״. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁיּוֹסֵף הֶחֱלִיף כֻּתָּנוֹתָיו וְהִלְבִּישׁ כְּתֹנֶת הַפַּסִּים עַל גּוּפוֹ מַמָּשׁ, וּסְתָם חֲלוּקוֹ הִלְבִּישׁ לְמַעְלָה כְּדֵי לְהַעֲלִים מִן אֶחָיו הַכְּתֹנֶת פַּסִּים, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״אֶת כֻּתָּנְתּוֹ״, כִּי מִתְּחִלָּה הִפְשִׁיטוּ סְתָם כְּתֹנֶת שֶׁל מַעְלָה, וְאַחַר כָּךְ אֶת כְּתֹנֶת הַפַּסִּים אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו עַל גּוּפוֹ מַמָּשׁ, וְלֹא מֵעַל דְּמֵעַל.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**His tunic, the striped tunic that was on him.** Rashi explains that *his tunic* refers to a regular garment. Why did they remove his tunic? Perhaps when Joseph went to his brothers, he was afraid that his brothers might steal his striped tunic from him. Therefore, he acted childishly and went and sewed and attached the striped tunic to his regular garment, thinking that surely they wouldn’t leave him naked — he didn’t suspect them of going that far. As a result, they stripped him of his regular garment along with the striped tunic. In this reading, the word *et* means “with.” Others say that Joseph switched his garments, wearing the striped tunic directly on his body and put the regular garment over it in order to hide the striped tunic from his brothers. This explains why it says *his tunic* — because first they removed the regular outer garment, and afterwards the striped tunic that was directly on his body [literally *on him*], not just the outermost layer.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:24:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:24:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:24:1)

**וְהַבּוֹר רֵק אֵין בּוֹ מָיִם.** אֲבָל נְחָשִׁים וְעַקְרַבִּים יֵשׁ בּוֹ. מָצְאוּ לָהֶם הֶתֵּר בָּזֶה כִּי חָשְׁבוּ אֶת מֵבִיא דִּבָּתָם לְבַעַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע, וּמָצִינוּ שֶׁבַּעֲלֵי הַלָּשׁוֹן נִדּוֹנִים בִּנְחָשִׁים כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (במדבר כא ה) ״וַיְדַבֵּר הָעָם בֵּאלֹהִים וּבְמֹשֶׁה״, וּכְתִיב (במדבר כא ו) ״וַיְשַׁלַּח ה׳ בָּעָם אֶת הַנְּחָשִׁים״, יָבֹא הַנָּחָשׁ שֶׁחָטָא בִּלְשׁוֹנוֹ וְסִפֵּר לָשׁוֹן הָרָע עַל בּוֹרְאוֹ (שמות רבה ג יב) וְיִפָּרַע מִבַּעֲלֵי הַלָּשׁוֹן כְּפֵרוּשׁ רַשִּׁ״י שָׁמָּה, שֶׁהַלָּשׁוֹן נוֹפֵל עַל הַלָּשׁוֹן, וּכְתִיב (קהלת י יא) ״אִם יִשֹּׁךְ הַנָּחָשׁ בְּלוֹא לָחַשׁ וְאֵין יִתְרוֹן לְבַעַל הַלָּשׁוֹן״. וּכְתִיב (קהלת י ח) ״וּפוֹרֵץ גָּדֵר יִשְּׁכֶנּוּ נָחָשׁ״. זֶה הַלָּשׁוֹן הַפּוֹרֵץ שְׁנֵי גְּדֵרִים, אַחַת שֶׁל בָּשָׂר וְאַחַת שֶׁל עֶצֶם, וְיוֹצֵא לַחוּץ לְדַבֵּר, עַל כֵּן הִגִּיד לָנוּ הַכָּתוּב שֶׁהָיוּ בַּבּוֹר נְחָשִׁים, לוֹמַר יָבֹא הַנָּחָשׁ שֶׁחָטָא בִּלְשׁוֹנוֹ עַל עִסְקֵי עֲרָיוֹת, כִּי בַּעֲבוּר שֶׁרָאָה אֶת אָדָם וְחַוָּה עֲסוּקִים בְּתַשְׁמִישׁ עַל כֵּן נִתְאַוָּה לָהּ, וְיִפָּרַע מִן יוֹסֵף שֶׁסִּפֵּר עַל אֶחָיו אֵיךְ שֶׁהֵם חֲשׁוּדִים עַל עֲרָיוֹת.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And the pit was empty, there was no water in it.”** However, it contained snakes and scorpions. They [the brothers] found justification for this because they considered him [Joseph] a bearer of evil reports, a slanderer. We find that those who engage in evil speech are judged through snakes, as it is written *And the people spoke against God and against Moses* (Numbers 21:5), and it is written *And God sent the serpents among them* (Numbers 21:6). Let the snake, which sinned with its tongue by speaking slander about its Creator (Exodus Rabbah 3:12), come and exact punishment from those who [misuse their] tongue, as Rashi explains there — that “tongue” corresponds to “tongue.” And it is written *If the snake bites before charm is spoken, there is no advantage to the charmer* (Ecclesiastes 10:11). And it is written *One who breaches a fence will be bitten by a snake* (Ecclesiastes 10:8). This refers to the tongue which breaches two fences — one of flesh and one of bone — and emerges to speak. Therefore, the scripture tells us that there were snakes in the pit, suggesting that the snake — which sinned with its tongue regarding matters of sexual impropriety [for it saw Adam and Eve engaged in intimacy and desired her] — should come and exact punishment from Joseph who reported about his brothers that they were suspected of sexual misconduct.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:26:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:26:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:26:1)

**מַה בֶּצַע כִּי נַהֲרֹג אֶת אָחִינוּ וְכִסִּינוּ אֶת דָּמוֹ.** בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנִּזְכַּר בַּמִּקְרָא לְשׁוֹן בֶּצַע מְדַבֵּר בַּהֲנָאַת מָמוֹן, וְכָאן מֵהֵיכָא תֵּיתֵי שֶׁיִּהְיֶה לָהֶם הֲנָאַת מָמוֹן בִּדְבַר הַהֲרִיגָה? עַל כֵּן נִרְאֶה לִי שֶׁכָּל עִקַּר הַקִּנְאָה הָיְתָה עַל הַבְּכוֹרָה, כִּי הִרְגִּישׁוּ הָאַחִים בִּכְתֹנֶת הַפַּסִּים שֶׁיִּתֵּן לוֹ הַבְּכוֹרָה כַּמְבֹאָר לְמַעְלָה (בראשית לז:ג). וּלְפִי שֶׁמִּשְׁפַּט הַבְּכוֹר לִקַּח פִּי שְׁנַיִם, עַל כֵּן הָלְכוּ לִרְעוֹת צֹאן אֲבִיהֶם לִשְׁכֶם, מָקוֹם מוּכָן לְפֻרְעָנִיּוֹת וְסַכָּנָה מִפְּנֵי הָאֻמּוֹת אֲשֶׁר סְבִיבוֹת שְׁכֶם, פֶּן יִגְזְלוּ צֹאנָם וּבְקָרָם מֵחֲמַת שֶׁבְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב לָקְחוּ צֹאנָם וּבְקָרָם כְּשֶׁבָּאוּ עַל שְׁכֶם. וְלֹא הִקְפִּידוּ הָאַחִים אַף אִם יָקוּמוּ עֲלֵיהֶם אוֹיְבִים וְיִקְחוּ כָּל הַמִּרְעֶה, בְּאָמְרָם: ״אִם הַקָּטָן שֶׁבָּנוּ יִקַּח פִּי שְׁנַיִם, גַּם לָנוּ גַּם לוֹ לֹא יִהְיֶה״, וְהָיוּ מִתְיָאֲשִׁים שֶׁיַּפְסִיד כָּל אֶחָד חֶלְקוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיַּפְסִיד יוֹסֵף שְׁנֵי חֲלָקִים, כַּמַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁל הַקַּנַּאי וְהַחַמְדָן שֶׁבָּאוּ לִפְנֵי שְׁלֹמֹה. וְכַאֲשֶׁר הָלְכוּ לִשְׁכֶם הִרְגִּישׁ יַעֲקֹב בְּתַחְבּוּלָתָם וְשָׁלַח אֶת יוֹסֵף לֵאמֹר ״לֶךְ רְאֵה אֶת שְׁלוֹם אַחֶיךָ וְאֶת שְׁלוֹם הַצֹּאן״ (בראשית לז:יד) מִן הָאוֹיְבִים אֲשֶׁר סְבִיבוֹתָם, וְיוֹסֵף אָמַר ״אֶת אַחַי אָנֹכִי מְבַקֵּשׁ״ (בראשית לז:טז) וְאֵין אֲנִי חוֹשֵׁשׁ אֶל הַצֹּאן. וְעַל כֵּן אָמַר ״הֲלוֹא אַחֶיךָ רֹעִים בִּשְׁכֶם״ (בראשית לז:יג), וּלְשׁוֹן ״הֲלֹא״ כָּךְ מַשְׁמַע: הֲלֹא מָקוֹם זֶה מְסֻכָּן וּמוּכָן לְפֻרְעָנִיּוֹת? וְלֹא אָמַר ״רֹעִים בַּצֹּאן״, נוּכַל לוֹמַר שֶׁהֵם רוֹעִים אֶת עַצְמָם וְאֵינָם חוֹשְׁשִׁין אֶל הַצֹּאן, מִן הַטַּעַם שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְמַעְלָה.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“What profit is it if we kill our brother and cover up his blood?”** Wherever the term “*betza*” [profit] appears in Scripture, it refers to monetary gain. Here, how would they derive monetary gain from the killing? Therefore, it seems to me that the core of their jealousy was about the birthright, as the brothers sensed from the striped coat that Jacob would give Joseph the birthright, as explained above. Since the firstborn’s portion is double that of others, the brothers went to shepherd their father’s flock in Shechem, a place known for danger and trouble from the surrounding nations, who might steal their flocks and cattle because Jacob’s sons had previously taken their livestock when they attacked Shechem. The brothers were indifferent even if enemies might rise against them and take all the pastureland, saying, “If the youngest among us takes a double portion, neither we nor he shall have anything.” They were willing to forfeit their own portions just to ensure Joseph would lose his double portion, similar to the story of the zealot and the greedy person who came before Solomon. When they went to Shechem, Jacob sensed their scheme and sent Joseph, saying *Go see to your brothers’ welfare and the welfare of the flock* from the enemies surrounding them. Joseph said, *I seek my brothers*wasn’t concerned about the flock. Therefore, Jacob said, *Are not your brothers shepherding in Shechem?* The word *halo [are not]* implies: “Is this not a dangerous place prone to trouble?” He didn’t say “shepherding the flock,” suggesting that they were only tending to themselves without concern for the flock, for the reason explained above.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:26:2
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:26:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:26:2)

וּמַה שֶּׁאָמְרוּ **לְכוּ וְנַהַרְגֵהוּ.** נִרְאֶה לְפָרֵשׁ שֶׁחֲשָׁבוּהוּ לְהוֹלֵךְ רָכִיל, וְכָל הוֹלֵךְ רָכִיל גּוֹרֵם שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (יחזקאל כב ט) ״אַנְשֵׁי רָכִיל הָיוּ בָךְ לְמַעַן שְׁפָךְ דָּם״. וְעוֹד אָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (דברים רבה ה י) ״לָשׁוֹן הָרָע תְּלָתָא קָטִיל״ כוּ׳. עַל כֵּן נֶאֱמַר ״וּבְטֶרֶם יִקְרַב אֲלֵיהֶם וַיִּתְנַכְּלוּ אֹתוֹ לַהֲמִיתוֹ״ (בראשית לז יח), לְפִי שֶׁהַבָּא לְהָרְגְךָ הַשְׁכֵּם לְהָרְגוֹ, זֶהוּ שֶׁאָמַר: וּבְטֶרֶם יִקְרַב הוּא אֲלֵיהֶם לְהָרְגָם, הִתְנַכְּלוּ לַהֲמִיתוֹ קֹדֶם, וּבְטֶרֶם יִקְרַב הוּא אֲלֵיהֶם. זֶהוּ שֶׁאָמַר ״וְעַתָּה לְכוּ וְנַהַרְגֵהוּ״ (בראשית לז כ), מַהוּ ״וְעַתָּה״? אֶלָּא עַתָּה תֵּכֶף וּמִיָּד, בְּטֶרֶם יִקְרַב הוּא אֵלֵינוּ, וְזֶה פֵּרוּשׁ יָקָר. וּלְמַעְלָה בֵּאַרְנוּ פָּסוּק זֶה בְּדֶרֶךְ אַחֵר בְּפָסוּק ״וַיָּבֵא יוֹסֵף אֶת דִּבָּתָם״ (בראשית לז ב). ״וַיִּשְׁמַע רְאוּבֵן וַיַּצִּלֵהוּ מִיָּדָם״ (בראשית לז כא), לְפִי שֶׁהָיָה מִתְיָרֵא פֶּן יִתְלוּ כָּל הַסִּרְחוֹן בּוֹ, כְּדֵי שֶׁתָּשׁוּב אֵלָיו הַבְּכוֹרָה שֶׁנִּטְּלָה מִמֶּנּוּ וְנִתְּנָה לְיוֹסֵף.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And regarding what they said “Come, let us kill him”** — it seems appropriate to explain that they considered him a gossiper, and every gossiper causes bloodshed, as it is written *There were talebearers in you to shed blood* (Ezekiel 22:9). Furthermore, our Sages said (Devarim Rabbah 5:10) “Evil speech kills three…” Therefore it says *Before he came near to them, they conspired to kill him*, because [of the principle that] if someone comes to kill you, rise early to kill him first. This is what it means when it says *before he came near to them* — to kill them — *they conspired to kill him* first, before he would approach them. This is what is meant by *and now, come let us kill him* — what does *and now* mean? It means now, immediately, before he comes near to us. This is a precious interpretation. And above we explained this verse in another way in the verse *And Joseph brought their evil report*. *And Reuben heard and saved him from their hands* because he was afraid they would pin all the blame on him in order that the birthright that was taken from him and given to Joseph would return to him.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:26:3
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:26:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:26:3)

**וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוּדָה מַה בֶּצַע.** שֶׁל מָמוֹן יִהְיֶה לָנוּ כִּי נַהֲרֹג אֶת אָחִינוּ וְכִסִּינוּ אֶת דָּמוֹ? בִּשְׁלָמָא אִם הָיָה לָנוּ רְשׁוּת לְפַרְסֵם הַדָּבָר, הָיָה כָּאן בֶּצַע מָמוֹן, כִּי מֵאַחַר שֶׁנִּלְקְחָה הַבְּכוֹרָה מִן רְאוּבֵן, אִם כֵּן רְאוּבֵן הַבְּכוֹר נִסְתַּלֵּק, וְיוֹסֵף מֵת, אִם כֵּן יַחֲזֹר חֵלֶק שֶׁל הַבְּכוֹר לְכָל הָאַחִים בְּשָׁוֶה. אֲבָל עַכְשָׁו שֶׁמֵּחֲמַת צַעֲרוֹ שֶׁל אַבָּא אֵין לָנוּ רְשׁוּת לְפַרְסֵם הַדָּבָר, וְכָל הַיָּמִים יִהְיֶה בְּסָפֵק שֶׁמָּא יוֹסֵף חַי וְנֶאֱבַד, אוֹ לְאֶרֶץ רְחוֹקָה נִמְכַּר, אִם כֵּן אֲפִלּוּ אַחֲרֵי מוֹת אֲבִיהֶם יִהְיֶה חֶלְקוֹ מֻנָּח בְּבֵית דִּין, עַד שֶׁיִּוָּדַע מֶה הָיָה לוֹ, וְעָלֵינוּ לְהָבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁנֶּהֱרַג, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁכְּבָר אָמַרְנוּ בִּפְנֵי אָבִינוּ שֶׁלֹּא נֶהֱרַג, וְאִם כֵּן אֵין כָּאן בֶּצַע מָמוֹן. ״לְכוּ וְנִמְכְּרֶנּוּ לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים״ – וְאָז יִהְיֶה לָנוּ בֶּצַע מָמוֹן, כִּי שָׁם יִהְיֶה עֶבֶד עוֹלָם, וְאִם כֵּן מַה שֶּׁקָּנָה עֶבֶד קָנָה רַבּוֹ, וּבְוַדַּאי אָבִינוּ יַעֲבִיר נַחֲלָתוֹ מִכָּל וָכֹל, כִּי מַה הֲנָאָה יִהְיֶה לוֹ אִם יַנְחִילֶנּוּ וְיָבֹא רַבּוֹ וְיִקַּח כָּל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And Judah said, ‘What profit…’”** [refers to] what monetary profit will we have by killing our brother and covering up his blood? If we had permission to publicize the matter, there would indeed be monetary profit, because since the birthright was taken from Reuben — thus Reuben the firstborn was removed, and [if] Joseph is dead — then the firstborn’s portion would revert to all the brothers equally. However, now, because of our father’s anguish, we don’t have permission to publicize the matter, and all the days there will be doubt whether Joseph is alive and lost, or sold to a distant land. Therefore, even after their father’s death, his portion would remain in the court’s custody until it becomes known what happened to him. And we would need to bring proof that he was killed, since we already told our father that he wasn’t killed, so there is no monetary profit here. *Let us sell him to the Ishmaelites* — and then we will have monetary profit because there he will be a permanent slave, and therefore whatever a slave acquires belongs to his master, and certainly our father will completely withdraw his inheritance, for what benefit would there be for him to bequeath to him when his master would come and take everything he has.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:26:4
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:26:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:26:4)

וּבְעִנְיַן הַמְּכִירָה לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים וְלַמִּדְיָנִים, נִרְאֶה שֶׁכָּךְ פֵּרוּשׁוֹ, כִּי הָאַחִים לֹא רָצוּ לְמָכְרוֹ כִּי אִם לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים לְבַד, כִּי אָמְרוּ שֶׁיִּשְׁמָעֵאל הוּא אֲחִי יִצְחָק וּמִצַּד הַקֻּרְבָה יְרַחֵם עָלָיו, וְאוּלַי שֶׁעַל יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמְרוּ ״כִּי אָחִינוּ בְשָׂרֵנוּ הוּא״ (בראשית לז:כז) מִלְּשׁוֹן ״כִּי אֲנָשִׁים אַחִים אֲנָחְנוּ״ (בראשית יג:ח). אַךְ שֶׁיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים אֵלּוּ לֹא רָצוּ לִקְנוֹתוֹ כִּי לֹא הָיוּ סוֹחֲרִים, וְכָל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה לָהֶם סוֹחֵר שֶׁיַּחֲזוֹר וְיִקְנֶה מֵהֶם תֵּכֶף מִיָּד לְיָד לֹא רָצוּ לִקְנוֹתוֹ. וְכַאֲשֶׁר אַחַר כָּךְ עָבְרוּ אֲנָשִׁים מִדְיָנִים סוֹחֲרִים, אָז רָאוּ הַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים כִּי יֵשׁ לָהֶם סוֹחֲרִים שֶׁיַּחְזְרוּ וְיִקְנוּ מֵהֶם, אָז נִתְרַצּוּ לִקְנוֹת. זֶהוּ שֶׁכָּתוּב ״וַיִּמְשְׁכוּ וַיַּעֲלוּ אֶת יוֹסֵף מִן הַבּוֹר וַיִּמְכְּרוּ אֶת יוֹסֵף לַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים״ (בראשית לז:כח), וּמִמֵּילָא שָׁמְעִינַן שֶׁהַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים מְכָרוּהוּ לַמִּדְיָנִים בְּלֹא רְצוֹן הָאַחִים, אוֹ בְּלֹא יְדִיעָתָם, וְהַמִּדְיָנִים חָזְרוּ וּמְכָרוּהוּ לְפוֹטִיפַר כוּ׳. וְכַאֲשֶׁר שָׁב רְאוּבֵן אֶל הַבּוֹר וְהַיֶּלֶד אֵינֶנּוּ, אָמַר ״וַאֲנִי אָנָה אֲנִי בָא״ (בראשית לז:ל), כִּי אִם מֵחֲמַת חֵלֶק הַבְּכוֹרָה הֲרַגְתֶּם אֶת יוֹסֵף, אִם כֵּן שֶׁמָּא גַּם לִי תַּעֲשׂוּ כֵן שֶׁלֹּא תַּחֲזוֹר לִי הַבְּכוֹרָה, ״וַאֲנִי אָנָה אֲנִי בָא״ כִּי אָנָה מִפְּנֵיכֶם אֶבְרַח. וְיָכוֹל לִהְיוֹת שֶׁמֵּחֲמַת יִרְאָה זוֹ רָצָה רְאוּבֵן לְהַצִּילוֹ מֵעִיקָּרָא.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**Regarding the sale to the Ishmaelites and Midianites,** it appears that this is its explanation: The brothers only wanted to sell him to the Ishmaelites alone, because they said that Ishmael is Isaac’s brother and due to this familial relationship he would have mercy on him. And perhaps it was about Ishmael that they said *for he is our flesh and blood*, using similar language to *for we are brothers*. However, these Ishmaelites did not want to buy him because they were not merchants, and as long as they didn’t have a merchant who would immediately buy from them hand-to-hand, they didn’t want to purchase him. And when afterwards Midianite merchants passed by, then the Ishmaelites saw that there were merchants who would buy from them, and then they agreed to buy. This is what it means when it says *they pulled and lifted Joseph from the pit and sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites*, and we consequently learn that the Ishmaelites sold him to the Midianites without the brothers’ consent, or without their knowledge, and the Midianites in turn sold him to Potiphar, etc. And when Reuben returned to the pit and the child was not there, he said *where shall I go*? meaning, if you killed Joseph because of the rights of the firstborn, then perhaps you will do the same to me so that the firstborn rights won’t return to me, and *where shall I go* because where can I flee from you? And it’s possible that because of this fear, Reuben wanted to save him from the beginning.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:33:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:33:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:33:1)

**חַיָּה רָעָה אֲכָלָתְהוּ.** רֶמֶז לִכְלַל הַשְּׁבָטִים שֶׁנִּמְשְׁלוּ לְחַיּוֹת אַרְיֵה, וְאַיָּלָה, וְנָחָש, וְהַכָּתוּב כְּלָלָם וְאוֹמֵר (יחזקאל יט ב) ״מָה אִמְּךָ לְבִיאָה בֵּין אֲרָיוֹת״. דָּבָר אַחֵר: ״חַיָּה רָעָה״ זוֹ הַדִּבָּה שֶׁהֵבִיא אֵיךְ שֶׁאֶחָיו אָכְלוּ אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי, זוֹ הַדִּבָּה רָעָה הָרְמוּזָה בַּחַיָּה הִיא אֲכָלַתְהוּ, כִּי רָצוּ לְהַרְאוֹת שֶׁאֵין הַדָּבָר כֵּן, אֶלָּא ״וַיִּשְׁחֲטוּ שְׂעִיר עִזִּים״. וְכָל זֶה מֵרוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ שֶׁנִּצְנְצָה בּוֹ, כִּי גַם לְפֵרוּשׁ רַשִׁ״י שֶׁפֵּרַשׁ ״חַיָּה רָעָה״ עַל אֵשֶׁת פּוֹטִיפַר, רוּחַ ה׳ דִּבֶּר בּוֹ. וְהִנֵּה עֲדַיִן עִנְיַן אֵשֶׁת פּוֹטִיפַר לֹא הָיָה, וְאֵיךְ יֹאמַר ״אֲכָלָתְהוּ״ לְשׁוֹן עָבָר, וְעוֹד מָה עִנְיָן זֶה לְכָאן, אֶלָּא הַנָּכוֹן הוּא כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַבְנוּ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“An evil beast devoured him.”** This alludes to all the tribes who were compared to animals — a lion, a deer, and a snake, and the scripture encompasses them all saying *What was your mother? A lioness among lions* (Ezekiel 19:2). Another explanation: *evil beast* refers to the evil report that Joseph brought about his brothers eating a limb from a living animal. This is the evil report alluded to in the *beast* that *devoured him* for they wanted to show that this was not true, rather *they slaughtered a kid goat*. All of this came from the divine inspiration [ruach *hakodesh*] that flickered within him, for even according to Rashi who interprets *evil beast* as referring to Potiphar’s wife, the spirit of God spoke within him. However, the matter of Potiphar’s wife had not yet occurred, so how could he say *devoured him* in the past tense? Furthermore, what relevance does this have here? Rather, the correct interpretation is as we have explained.


###### Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:35:1
[Kli Yakar on Genesis 37:35:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Genesis/r/37:35:1)

**וַיְמָאֵן לְהִתְנַחֵם.** פֵּירֵשׁ רַשִׁ״י דַּוְקָא עַל הַמֵּת נִגְזְרָה גְזֵרָה שֶׁיִּשְׁתַּכַּח מִן הַלֵּב, וְלֹא עַל הַחַי שֶׁהוּא סָבוּר שֶׁמֵּת. וְטַעֲמוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר הוּא שֶׁעִקַּר הַתַּנְחוּמִין הוּא כְּשֶׁיִּתֵּן הַחַי אֶל לִבּוֹ שֶׁזֶּה הַמֵּת זָכָה לְרֹב טוּב הַצָּפוּן לַצַּדִּיקִים, וְכִי הוּא נֶעְתַּק מִן עוֹלָם הָאָפֵל אֶל הָאוֹר הַנִּצְחִי, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (תהלים פד, יא) ״כִּי טוֹב יוֹם בַּחֲצֵרֶיךָ מֵאָלֶף״ וְגוֹ׳. וְיַעֲקֹב רָאָה בְּרוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ שֶׁיּוֹסֵף אֵינוֹ בְּגַן עֵדֶן, עַל כֵּן ״וַיְמָאֵן לְהִתְנַחֵם״. וְנָתַן טַעַם לַדָּבָר: ״כִּי אֵרֵד אֶל בְּנִי אָבֵל שְׁאֹלָה״. וְרַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה אָמְרוּ (עיין תנחומא ויגש ט) שֶׁאָמַר זֶה עַל שֶׁהָיָה מֻבְטָח שֶׁלֹּא יִרְאֶה הוּא פְּנֵי גֵיהִנֹּם כָּל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא יָמוּת אֶחָד מִבָּנָיו. וְקָשֶׁה עַל זֶה, דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמֵימַר ״כִּי אֵרֵד אָבֵל שְׁאֹלָה״, כִּי מִדְּקָאָמַר ״אֶל בְּנִי״ מַשְׁמָע שֶׁגַּם בְּנוֹ בִּשְׁאוֹל הַגֵּיהִנֹּם, וּמֵהֵיכָן לָמַד יַעֲקֹב לוֹמַר כֵּן? אֶלָּא וַדַּאי לְפִי שֶׁרָאָה שֶׁאֵין בְּנוֹ בְּגַן עֵדֶן, אָז חָשַׁב שֶׁוַּדַּאי הוּא בְּגֵיהִנֹּם, וְגַם אֲנִי אֵרֵד אֵלָיו שָׁם. עַל כֵּן ״וַיְמָאֵן לְהִתְנַחֵם״ אֲפִלּוּ עַל בְּנוֹ לְבַד. וְיֵשׁ מַקְשִׁים: אִם כֵּן לָמָּה לֹא הִרְגִּישׁ יַעֲקֹב בָּזֶה שֶׁהוּא חַי? וְנִרְאֶה שֶׁלֹּא קָשֶׁה מִידֵי, גַּם לְפִי פְּשׁוּטוֹ, כִּי יַעֲקֹב תָּלָה הַדָּבָר בְּיִרְאַת רְאִיַּת פְּנֵי הַגֵּיהִנֹּם שֶׁהוּא לְנֶגֶד עֵינָיו תָּמִיד, כִּי סִימָן נִמְסַר לוֹ שֶׁכָּל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא יָמוּת אֶחָד מִבָּנָיו בְּחַיָּיו לֹא יִרְאֶה פְּנֵי גֵיהִנֹּם. זֶהוּ שֶׁאָמַר ״כִּי אֵרֵד אֶל בְּנִי אָבֵל שְׁאֹלָה״. וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם, פָּסוּק ״נִשְׁכַּחְתִּי כְּמֵת מִלֵּב״ (תהלים לא, יג) מַשְׁמָע מֵת מַמָּשׁ. עַל כֵּן פֵּרֵשׁ רַשִׁ״י הַטַּעַם שֶׁהוּא לְפִי הָאֱמֶת, וְלֹא הַטַּעַם שֶׁהוּא לְפִי דִּמְיוֹנוֹ שֶׁל יַעֲקֹב.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And he refused to be comforted.”** Rashi explains that the divine decree that someone be forgotten from the heart applies specifically to the dead, not to someone living whom one believes to be dead. The reason for this is that the essence of consolation comes when a living person takes to heart that the deceased has merited the great goodness reserved for the righteous, and that he has been transferred from the dark world to eternal light, as it is written *For a day in Your courts is better than a thousand, etc.* (Psalms 84:11). Jacob saw through divine inspiration that Joseph was not in Gan Eden, therefore *he refused to be comforted.* He gave a reason for this, saying *For I will go down to my son, mourning, to the grave.* Our Sages said (see Tanchuma Vayigash 9) that he said this because he was assured that he would not see the face of Gehenna as long as none of his sons died during his lifetime. This explanation is difficult because he should have simply said *For I will go down mourning to the grave.* The fact that he said *to my son* implies that his son was also in Gehenna — how did Jacob come to say this? Rather, certainly it was because he saw that his son was not in Gan Eden, he then thought that he must surely be in Gehenna, and I too will go down to him there. Therefore, he refused to be comforted even just about his son alone. Some ask, if so, why didn’t Jacob sense that Joseph was alive? It seems this is not difficult to explain even according to the simple meaning, because Jacob attributed the matter to his fear of seeing the face of Gehenna, which was always before his eyes, as he had been given a sign that as long as none of his sons died in his lifetime, he would not see the face of Gehenna. This is what he meant by saying *For I will go down to my son, mourning, to the grave.* Nevertheless, the verse *I am forgotten as a dead man from the heart* (Psalms 31:13) implies actually dead. Therefore, Rashi explained the reason according to the truth, and not the reason according to Jacob’s imagination.