## Or HaChaim on Genesis Chapter 38

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

**וַיֵּרֶד יְהוּדָה וְגוֹ׳.** רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה אָמְרוּ (סוטה י״ג) שֶׁהוֹרִידוּהוּ אֶחָיו מִגְּדֻלָּתוֹ, וְהַגָּאוֹן רַבִּי אַבְרָהָם אִבְּן עֶזְרָא אָמַר כִּי טַעְמוֹ כִּי הַבָּא מִפְּאַת צָפוֹן שֶׁל עוֹלָם לִדְרוֹמוֹ הוּא יוֹרֵד, עַד כָּאן. דְּבָרָיו צוֹדְקִים אִם לֹא הָיָה אוֹמֵר הַכָּתוּב תֵּבַת ״מֵאֵת אֶחָיו״, שֶׁמּוֹרֶה בְּאֶצְבַּע כִּי הַיְרִידָה הָיְתָה מֵאֶחָיו, עוֹד אָמְרוֹ **וַיֵּט עַד אִישׁ** וְגוֹ׳, וּלְדִבְרֵי רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה יָבֹא הַכָּתוּב עַל נָכוֹן כִּי ״וַיֵּרֶד״ לְשׁוֹן יְרִידָה יְכַוֵּן, וְתֵבַת ״וַיֵּט״ אִצְטְרִיךְ לְגוּפוֹ.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**38.1. וירד יהודה מאת אחיו, Yehudah descended and turned from his brothers, etc.** Our sages in *Sotah* 13 say that the brothers demoted him. Ibn Ezra says that anyone who comes from the northern part of the world to the South is considered as "descending." What he said is correct; it does not apply here, however, because then the Torah need not have added: "from his brothers." This clearly indicates that Yehudah's descent, i.e. demotion, was caused by his brothers. It also says: ויט עד איש, "he turned to a certain person, etc." Our sages are quite correct when they interpret the word וירד as a moral descent and the words ויט, etc., are integral to the verse.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:2:1
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:2:1)

**בַּת אִישׁ כְּנַעֲנִי.** פֵּרוּשׁ, סוֹחֵר. וְהַגָּאוֹן רַבִּי אַבְרָהָם בֶּן עֶזְרָא כָּתַב: ״וְיִתָּכֵן שֶׁהוּא כְּמַשְׁמָעוֹ״. וַאֲנִי אוֹמֵר כִּי לֹא יִתָּכֵן שֶׁיִּדְבְּקוּ בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב בְּדָבָר שֶׁהִקְפִּידוּ עָלָיו אֲבוֹתֵיהֶם שְׁלָשְׁתָּן יַחַד, וּכְאָמְרָם בִּפְסָחִים (פסחים נ.), וְהַכָּתוּב שָׁמַר אֶת הַדָּבָר בְּמַה שֶׁדִּקְדֵּק לוֹמַר ״בַּת אִישׁ כְּנַעֲנִי״ – פֵּירוּשׁ אָבִיהָ כְּנַעֲנִי וְלֹא הִיא כְּנַעֲנִית, וּבְאֵיזֶה אוֹפֶן יִהְיֶה הַדָּבָר אִם לֹא שֶׁתֹּאמַר סוֹחֵר. וְאִלּוּ הָיָה כְּנַעֲנִי מַמָּשׁ וּמוֹדִיעַ הַכָּתוּב כִּי עָשָׂה יְהוּדָה דָּבָר בִּלְתִּי הָגוּן, כֵּן הָיָה לוֹ לוֹמַר: ״וַיַּרְא שָׁם בַּת כְּנַעֲנִית״ אוֹ ״אִשָּׁה כְּנַעֲנִית וְשֵׁם אָבִיהָ שׁוּעַ״. וְאֵין בָּזֶה תּוֹסְפוֹת תֵּיבָה עַל הַמִּכְתָּב אֲשֶׁר כָּתַב, וּלְעִנְיַן גִּלּוּי מִלְּתָא כָּזֶה נֹאמַר לִשְׁתּוֹק, וְלִכְתּוֹב וַדַּאי.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**בת איש כנעני. the daughter of a Canaanite.** The word "Canaanite" means a trader. Ibn Ezra writes that it is possible that the word Canaanite is to be understood in the usual way, i.e. a local inhabitant of the Canaanite tribes. I maintain that it is impossible to imagine that any of the sons of Jacob would intermarry with the Canaanites, something which their forefathers had so strenuously opposed, as pointed out specifically in *Pessachim* 50. The Torah was careful to say "the daughter of a Canaanite man," meaning that she herself was not a Canaanite woman. This is only possible if her father was a merchant, not an actual Canaanite. Had she been a Canaanite, Yehudah would have been guilty of a great misdemeanour by marrying her. If this had indeed been the case the Torah would have indicated it by writing "he married a Canaanite woman whose father was called Shua," or something similar. It would not even have required an additional word to inform us of that fact. The Torah should not have let us surmise that Yehudah married a Canaanite woman but should have spelled it out clearly.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:2:2
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:2:2)

**וַיִּקָּחֶהָ.** פֵּרוּשׁ, כְּדִין לִקּוּחֵי אִשָּׁה.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**ויקחיה, he married her, etc.** He performed all the necessary legal requirements for marriage.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:14:1
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:14:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:14:1)

**כִּי רָאֲתָה וְגוֹ׳ וְהִיא וְגוֹ׳.** צָרִיךְ לָדַעַת לָמָּה הֻצְרַךְ לוֹמַר **וְהִיא** וְלֹא הִסְפִּיק לוֹמַר ״וְלֹא נִתְּנָה״ וְגוֹ׳, וְהַדָּבָר מוּבָן שֶׁעָלֶיהָ הוּא אוֹמֵר. וְאוּלַי כִּי שְׁנֵי דְּבָרִים אָמַר הַכָּתוּב: הָאֶחָד – כִּי רָאֲתָה כִּי גָדַל שֵׁלָה, וְהַדָּבָר מוּבָן שֶׁלֹּא נִתְקַיֵּם מַאֲמַר חָמִיהָ שֶׁאָמַר ״עַד יִגְדַּל״ וְגוֹ׳ כִּי עוֹדֶנָּה בְּבֵית אָבִיהָ, וְהַשֵּׁנִי – **וְהִיא לֹא נִתְּנָה** וְגוֹ׳ פֵּרוּשׁ שֶׁרָאֲתָה בְּרוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי שֶׁתִּנָּתֵן הִיא לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה, וְלָזֶה עָמְדָה וְעָשְׂתָה וְהִצְלִיחָה. וְצֵא וּלְמַד מַה יָצָא מִמֶּנָּה לָעוֹלָם – מִנָּשִׁים בָּאֹהֶל תְּבֹרָךְ.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**כי ראתה כי גדל שלה, for she saw that Shelah had reached marriageable age.** What is the meaning of the word והיא in our verse? Why did it not suffice for the Torah to say ולא נתנה לו לאשה? "and she had not been given as a wife to him" without the additional word והיא? Perhaps the verse wishes to inform us of two things. 1) She saw that Shelah had grown up and it was plain to see that Yehudah had not kept his promise when he asked Tamar to wait until such time as Shelah would grow up. 2) She saw through רוח הקודש, divine inspiration, that she was not destined to become Shelah's wife. This is why she could take up a position at Petach Eynayim and successfully seduce Yehudah. The long term results of Tamar's conduct speak for themselves. She deserved every possible credit.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:24:1
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:24:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:24:1)

**הוֹצִיאוּהָ וְתִשָּׂרֵף.** הַטַּעַם מִשּׁוּם דְּבֵית דִּין שֶׁל שֵׁם גָּזְרוּ עַל זְנוּת עִם הָאֻמּוֹת, כְּאָמְרָם (עבודה זרה לו:), וּמַשְׁמַע אֲפִלּוּ אֵין שָׁם אִסּוּר עֶרְוָה לֹא הָאֲסוּרָה לִבְנֵי נֹחַ וְלֹא הָאֲסוּרָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, אַף עַל פִּי כֵן גָּזְרוּ עָלֶיהָ. וְאוּלַי כִּי מָסֹרֶת הָיְתָה בְּיָדָם לִגְזֹר גְּזֵרוֹת וְלַהֲרֹג הָעוֹבֵר עַל הַגְּזֵרָה. וְלָזֶה כְּשֶׁיָּדַע כִּי עִמּוֹ הָיוּ הַדְּבָרִים נִפְטְרָה, כִּי הַגְּזֵרָה הָיְתָה עַל זְנוּת גּוֹי דַּוְקָא. וְאֵין בָּהּ גַּם כֵּן אִסּוּר עֶרְוָה כִּי כַּלָּתוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת לְבֶן נֹחַ. וּלְפִי דִּבְרֵיהֶם שֶׁאָמְרוּ (סוטה י:) ״וְלֹא יָסַף לְדַעְתָּהּ״ שֶׁלֹּא פָּסַק מִמֶּנָּה עוֹד, הֲרֵי זֶה מַגִּיד כִּי הָאָב הָיָה מְיַבֵּם לְכַלָּתוֹ.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**הוציאוה והשרף, "take her out and let her be burned!"** The reason for this is that it is the prescribed penalty for adultery amongst the Gentiles as we know from *Avodah Zarah* 36. It is clear from there that even if the sin did not involve a sexual union forbidden by Biblical law either to Israelites or to Gentiles, the tribunal headed by Noach's son Shem appears to have legislated that a woman who was destined for her brother-in-law was liable to death if she had relations with someone else. As soon as Yehudah realised that he had been her partner, he knew she was free from that decree as it applied only to Gentiles amongst Gentiles, not to partners in a levirate union. Since a father-in-law was not culpable for sleeping with his Noachide daughter-in-law, no crime had been committed seeing Tamar was Jewish. *Sotah* 10 understands the words ולא יסף עוד לדעתה to mean that Yehudah did **not** discontinue being intimate with Tamar. This proves that their relationship had not been sinful, i.e. that the father of the deceased could legally perform the rite of the levirate marriage with his daughter-in-law.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:26:1
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:26:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:26:1)

**צָדְקָה מִמֶּנִּי.** לְפִי מַה שֶׁכָּתַבְנוּ לְמַעְלָה, כִּי מַה שֶׁפָּסְקוּ דִּינָהּ לִשְׂרֵפָה הָיָה לְצַד שֶׁבֵּית דִּינוֹ שֶׁל שֵׁם גָּזְרוּ עַל זְנוּת הַגּוֹי. אַחַר שֶׁנִּתְגַּלָּה שֶׁעִם יְהוּדָה זִנְּתָה, הִיא יוֹתֵר צַדֶּקֶת מִיהוּדָה, כִּי יְהוּדָה לֹא יָדַע כִּי כַלָּתוֹ הִיא וּבְחֶזְקַת גּוֹיָה הָיְתָה וּבָא עָלֶיהָ וְעָבַר עַל גְּזֵרַת בֵּית דִּינוֹ שֶׁל שֵׁם, וְהוּא אָמְרוֹ ״צָדְקָה מִמֶּנִּי״. וְזֶה הוּא שִׁעוּר הַכָּתוּב: צָדְקָה בִּדְבָרֶיהָ, וּמִמֵּילָא צָדְקָה בְּדִינָהּ, וְעוֹד לָהּ שֶׁהִיא יוֹתֵר מִמֶּנִּי בְּצִדְקוּת מִטַּעַם שֶׁכָּתַבְתִּי. וְלֹא נִתְחַיֵּב יְהוּדָה עַל הוֹדָאָתוֹ שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ בְּחֶזְקַת גּוֹיָה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁכְּפִי הָאֱמֶת לֹא גּוֹיָה הָיְתָה, וְדָבָר זֶה דּוֹמֶה לְמִתְכַּוֵּן לֶאֱכוֹל חֲתִיכַת חֵלֶב וְעָלָה בְּיָדוֹ חֲתִיכַת שׁוּמָן.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**צדקה ממני, "she is more righteous than I."** As we have already mentioned the death penalty which had first been decreed upon Tamar was a man-made ordinance applicable to certain sexual offences by the Gentiles. Inasmuch as it was revealed that Tamar's partner had been Yehudah this made her more righteous than Yehudah. Tamar had known all along that she was permitted to sleep with Yehudah, whereas Yehudah, who had not known who she was at the time, had merely been fortunate that she had not been forbidden to him under existing regulations. The verse also means that Tamar had not only been righteous in the manner in which she conducted her defence, but had also been righteous in her conduct. Legally speaking, the episode is comparable to someone who intends to eat forbidden fat but who is fortunate enough to have exchanged the forbidden fat for some which is permitted.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:26:2
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:26:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:26:2)

וְאִם תֹּאמַר: סוֹף כָּל סוֹף בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבְּחֶזְקַת גּוֹיָה בָּא עָלֶיהָ, לָמָּה עָבַר עַל גְּזֵרַת בֵּית דִּין? לָזֶה כְּבָר תֵּרְצוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (בראשית רבה פרשה פ״ה) כִּי מֵה׳ מִצְעֲדֵי גָבֶר וְתִקֵּן עֲלִילוֹת לְהוֹצִיא לָאוֹר תַּעֲלוּמוֹת. וְצֵא וּלְמַד מַה שֶׁפֵּרַשְׁנוּ בְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְחִי בְּפָסוּק (בראשית מ״ט:ט׳) ״גּוּר אַרְיֵה״ וְגוֹ׳:

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
Should you question that at the time Yehudah was intimate with Tamar he thought that she was a Gentile; why then did he violate what he knew to be the local ordinance? Our rabbis have answered in *Bereshit Rabbah* 85,8 that G'd on occasion directs the steps of a man and corrects what was an evil intent in order that the end result should correspond to His plans. [This seems to mean that though Yehudah would have slept with **any** harlot at that moment when he felt a sexual urge, G'd directed that the woman he did in fact sleep with was ritually pure and permissible. Ed.] The *Midrash* rationalises this by referring to the line of kings that were to emanate from Yehudah. We suggest that the reader turn to our commentary on Genesis 49,9 גור אריה.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:26:3
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:26:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:26:3)

**כִּי עַל כֵּן לֹא נְתַתִּיהָ וְגוֹ׳.** פֵּרוּשׁ, לְפִי מַה שֶׁאָמַר ״צָדְקָה יוֹתֵר מִמֶּנִּי״, גָּמַר אוֹמֶר כִּי גַּם לֹא עָשְׂתָה פְּרִיצוּת, כִּי טַעְמָהּ עַל אֲשֶׁר לֹא נְתַתִּיהָ לְשֵׁלָה בְּנִי. רָאֲתָה כִּי אָבְדָה תִּקְוָתָהּ, לָזֶה עָשְׂתָה הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**כי על כן לא נתתיה לשלה, "since I did not give her to Shelah, etc."** Yehudah explained Tamar's behaviour as due to her having lost hope that she would become Shelah's wife. Hence there was no more זיקה, bond of marital attachment between her and Shelah.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:26:4
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:26:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:26:4)

**אוֹ** יִרְצֶה לוֹמַר כִּי הוּא הַגּוֹרֵם לָהּ לַעֲשׂוֹת כֵּן לְצַד שֶׁלֹּא נְתָנָהּ לְשֵׁלָה, וְהוּא אָמְרוֹ **צָדְקָה** הִיא בְּמַעֲשֶׂיהָ, **וּמִמֶּנִּי** פֵּרוּשׁ, מִצִּדִּי אֲנִי הָיִיתִי סִבָּה לָהּ כִּי לֹא נְתַתִּיהָ וְגוֹ׳:

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
Alternatively, Yehudah simply assumed the blame for having caused Tamar's behaviour seeing he had not given her to Shelah. The words צדקה ממני then should be translated: "she is righteous in her deeds; I was the cause of what she did."


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:28:1
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:28:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:28:1)

**עַל יָדוֹ שָׁנִי לֵאמֹר.** פֵּרוּשׁ, נִצְנְצָה בַמְיַלֶּדֶת רוּחַ הַקּוֹדֶשׁ וְעָשְׂתָה וְלֹא יָדְעָה מַה עָשְׂתָה. הִיא קָשְׁרָה עַל יָדוֹ שָׁנִי, וְזֶה רוֹמֵז כִּי הוּא שֵׁנִי לֹא רִאשׁוֹן, אֲבָל הִיא אָמְרָה כִּי זֶה יָצָא רִאשׁוֹנָה. וְהוּא אָמְרוֹ **לֵאמֹר** ״זֶה יָצָא רִאשׁוֹנָה״, פֵּרוּשׁ, הִיא אָמְרָה כֵן, אֲבָל כְּפִי הָאֱמֶת לְהֵיפֶךְ יַגִּיד שֵׁם הַסִּימָן, כִּי יֵשׁ אֵם לַמָּסוֹרֶת.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**על ידו שני לאמור, a scarlet thread on his hand, as though to say, etc.** The midwife had a sudden flash of Holy Spirit and did something without being aware of its true significance. By tying **Shani** scarlet thread around his hand she indicated that the baby was **Sheyni** the one born second, though it had left the womb first. The Torah adds the word לאמור, "meaning to say" that this one emerged first. Although the midwife said so the truth was the reverse. The red thread was to prove יש אם למסורת, that there is a distinct significance to the spelling of a text as well as to the accepted way of reading a text.


###### Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:29:1
[Or HaChaim on Genesis 38:29:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Or%20HaChaim%20on%20Genesis/r/38:29:1)

**מַה פָּרַצְתָּ וְגוֹ׳.** פֵּרוּשׁ, כִּי לֶהֱיוֹת שֶׁיַּד הָרִאשׁוֹן תַּגִּיד כִּי הוּא הַקָּרוֹב לָצֵאת קוֹדֶם אָחִיו, וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן דְּחָפוֹ זֶה לָרִאשׁוֹן וְסָתַר הַעֲמָדָתוֹ קוֹדֶם לוֹ, זֶה יַגִּיד הַדְרָגָה גְּדוֹלָה. וְהוּא אָמְרוֹ **מַה פָּרַצְתָּ** עַל דֶּרֶךְ אָמְרוֹ (תהלים קד:כד) ״מַה רַבּוּ מַעֲשֶׂיךָ״ וְגוֹ׳. וְאָמְרוֹ **עָלֶיךָ פָּרֶץ** מְפָרֶשֶׁת דְּבָרֶיהָ מַה הִיא הַפִּרְצָה שֶׁעָשָׂה, וְאָמְרָה ״עָלֶיךָ פָּרֶץ״, פֵּרוּשׁ, כִּי הַנּוֹתֵן יָד יַגִּיד כִּי הוּא בָּא עָלָיו בַּהַזְרָעָה, כִּי הַנִּכְנָס אַחֲרוֹן בַּזֶּרַע יוֹצֵא רִאשׁוֹן, וְאִם כֵּן הוּא בָּא עָלָיו וּפָרַץ גְּדֵרוֹ וְיָצָא רִאשׁוֹן. וְהוּא אָמְרוֹ ״עָלֶיךָ פָּרֶץ״ וְהָבֵן. וּכְפִי זֶה פֶּרֶץ רִאשׁוֹן בַּהַזְרָעָה וְרִאשׁוֹן בַּלֵּדָה כִּי לוֹ הַמְּלוּכָה נְסוּכָה תִּכּוֹן עוֹלָם.

**Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009:**
**מה פרצת עליך פרץ, "how did you burst your way out?"** Inasmuch as the hand of the first one indicated that he was about to emerge from the womb before his brother why did you push your way out past him thus blocking his becoming the first-born? The word מה, which normally means "what," must be understood here similarly to Psalms 104,24: מה רבו מעשיך, "**how** great are Your works, etc.?" When the Torah continues עליך פרץ, this explains the nature of this bursting forth. Normally, when twins are born, the one which emerges first is from the sperm that entered the womb last, the earlier sperm being blocked by the sperm injected later. In this instance the baby born first was formed from the sperm that had entered Tamar's womb first. This is why the kingdom rightfully belonged to Peretz, seeing he had been both conceived first and born first.