## Ramban on Genesis Chapter 40

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

**עַל שְׁנֵי סָרִיסָיו** הָיוּ אֵלֶּה הַשָּׂרִים שְׁנֵיהֶם סָרִיסִים, כִּי הָיוּ שָׂרֵי הַמַּשְׁקִים וְהָאוֹפִים גַּם בְּבֵית הַנָּשִׁים אֲשֶׁר לַמֶּלֶךְ, וְהַמְּלָכִים יְסָרְסוּ אוֹתָם. וְדַעַת אוּנְקְלוֹס (תרגום אונקלוס על בראשית מ':ב') כִּי סָרִיסִים – שָׂרִים וּגְדוֹלִים, אָמַר בְּפוֹטִיפַר (תרגום אונקלוס על בראשית ל"ז:ל"ו) "רַבָּא דְּפַרְעֹה" וְ"עַל תְּרֵין רַבְרְבָנוֹהִי", וְכֵן תִּרְגֵּם יוֹנָתָן (מלכים ב כ יח) "וְהָיוּ סָרִיסִים בְּהֵיכַל מֶלֶךְ בָּבֶל":

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
AGAINST TWO ‘SARISAV’ (OF HIS EUNUCHS). These two lords were both castrates, for as they also acted as the chiefs of the butlers and bakers in the women’s quarters in the royal apartments, the kings would customarily castrate them. Onkelos’ opinion though is that *sarisim* means lords and chiefs. Thus he says of Potiphar, who is called *sris par’oh*,²⁴¹ “the officer of Pharaoh,” and in the present verse he similarly translates, “against his two officers.” And so did the Targum Yonathan translate: *And they shall be ‘sarisim’ in the palace of the king of Babylon*.²⁵⁶

footnotes:
²⁴¹ Above, 37:36.
²⁵⁶ II Kings 20:18. Yonathan translated this as: “And they shall be officers.”


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

**אִישׁ כְּפִתְרוֹן חֲלוֹמוֹ** לְשׁוֹן "פִּתְרוֹן חֲלוֹמוֹת" הוּא הַמִּקְרֶה אֲשֶׁר יִקְרֵנוּ לֶעָתִיד, וְיִקָּרֵא הַמּוֹדִיעַ אוֹתוֹ הֶעָתִיד פּוֹתֵר. וְעַל דַּעַת רַבִּים (הראב"ע והרד"ק) כִּי פִּתְרוֹן הוּא פֵּרוּשׁ, וְטַעַם "אִישׁ כְּפִתְרוֹן חֲלוֹמוֹ", כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד חָלַם חֲלוֹם שֶׁדּוֹמֶה לַפִּתְרוֹן הֶעָתִיד לָבֹא אֵלָיו, זֶה לְשׁוֹן רַשִׁ"י (רש"י על בראשית מ':ה'). וּמָה טַעַם שֶׁיֹּאמַר שַׂר הַמַּשְׁקִים לְפַרְעֹה (בראשית מ"א:י"א) חָלַמְנוּ חֲלוֹם הַדּוֹמֶה לַפִּתְרוֹן, שֶׁיְּמַעֵט בָּזֶה חָכְמַת הַפּוֹתֵר, וְאוּלַי לֹא יִהְיֶה כֵן חֲלוֹם פַּרְעֹה וְלֹא יֵדָעֶנּוּ יוֹסֵף. וְרַבִּי אַבְרָהָם אָמַר (אבן עזרא על בראשית מ':ה') שֶׁרָאָה כָּל אֶחָד בַּחֲלוֹמוֹ מָה שֶׁהָיָה פִּתְרוֹן חֲלוֹמוֹ כָּל מָה שֶׁאֵרַע לוֹ בֶּעָתִיד, לוֹמַר שֶׁהָיָה חֲלוֹם אֱמֶת, לֹא בָּא בְּרֹב עִנְיָן שֶׁלֹּא יִתְקַיֵּם רַק הַמִּקְצָת, וְהוּא הַנָּכוֹן:

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
EACH MAN ACCORDING TO THE INTERPRETATION OF HIS DREAM. The expression “interpreting dreams” means relating the events which will happen in the future, and he who foretells that future is called *potheir* (interpreter). In the opinion of many scholars the word *pithron* signifies “meaning.”²⁵⁷ And the interpretation of the verse, *Each man according to the interpretation of his dream*, is that each dreamed a dream consistent with the interpretation²⁵⁸ which foretold the future that was to befall them. This is Rashi’s language.
Now what sense does it make for Pharaoh’s chief butler to say, “We have dreamed a dream consistent with the interpretation,” thereby minimizing the wisdom of the interpreter. Besides, Pharaoh’s dream [related later on] may not have been so, [that is, consistent with the interpretation], and Joseph would not know it.²⁵⁹
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra says in explanation of the verse that each saw in his dream the truth concerning the future as the interpretation would indicate, meaning that it was a true dream, not the kind which comes from many worries, of which only a part is fulfilled. This is the correct interpretation.

footnotes:
²⁵⁷ But it does not signify the foretelling of future events.
²⁵⁸ The butler dreamed of wine, the symbol of joy, while the baker dreamed of a bird snatching the food he was bringing to the king, an event which signifies grief. (Tur.)
²⁵⁹ Why then did he recommend Joseph as being able to interpret the king’s dream? The king had not yet related his dream, and it could be that that dream might not be consistent with its interpretation, as was the case in his own dream. Why then did he not fear for his life in recommending Joseph to the king?


###### Ramban on Genesis 40:7:1
[Ramban on Genesis 40:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ramban%20on%20Genesis/r/40:7:1)

**וַיִּשְׁאַל אֶת סְרִיסֵי פַרְעֹה אֲשֶׁר אִתּוֹ בְמִשְׁמַר בֵּית אֲדֹנָיו** הָיָה רָאוּי שֶׁיֹּאמַר הַכָּתוּב וַיִּשְׁאַל אוֹתָם לֵאמֹר, אֲבָל הֶאֱרִיךְ כִּי רָצָה לְסַפֵּר בִּשְׁבַח יוֹסֵף, שֶׁהָיָה נַעַר עֶבֶד וְשָׁאַל לִשְׁנֵי שָׂרִים גְּדוֹלִים וְהֵם בְּבֵית אֲדוֹנָיו אֲשֶׁר שָׂנֵא אוֹתוֹ, וְהָיָה כָּל אֶחָד יָכוֹל לְצַוּוֹת לָשֵׂאת אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ מֵעָלָיו, וְלֹא פָּחַד מֵהֶם מִלִּשְׁאוֹל אוֹתָם וְלֵאמֹר לָהֶם דַּעְתּוֹ בַּפִּתְרוֹן כִּי בָּטַח בְּחָכְמָתוֹ, שֶׁאִלּוּ נִמְלַט שַׂר הָאוֹפִים הָיָה תּוֹלֶה אוֹתוֹ:

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
AND HE ASKED PHARAOH’s OFFICERS THAT WERE WITH HIM IN THE WARD OF HIS MASTER’s HOUSE. It would be proper for Scripture to say; “And he asked them, saying.” Instead, Scripture speaks at length about it for its desire is to speak in praise of Joseph. Here is a servant lad who is enquiring of two great officers who are wards in the house of his master who hates him,²⁶⁰ him.” Ramban is here writing from the standpoint of the butler and the baker, who must have thought that Joseph’s master imprisoned him because he hated him, not being aware, as explained above, that he did so to protect his family’s reputation. and each of whom could command his hanging.²⁶¹ Yet he was not afraid of them, and asked them their dreams and told them his opinion with respect to the interpretation because he trusted in his wisdom. Had the lord of the bakers been saved and restored to his position by the king, he would have hung him for his false interpretation.

footnotes:
²⁶⁰ “Who hates
²⁶¹ If his interpretation of the dreams would turn out to be incorrect. Thus, as explained further on by Ramban, if the baker had been restored to his position, he would have seen to it that Joseph pay for his mistake with his life.


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

וְטַעַם **וּפוֹתֵר אֵין אוֹתוֹ** אֵין מוֹדִיעַ הֶעָתִיד מִמֶּנּוּ. וְיִתָּכֵן שֶׁשָּׁלְחוּ לִקְצָת הַחַרְטֻמִּים בַּבֹּקֶר, אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ אֲנָשִׁים עִמָּהֶם בְּבֵית הַסֹּהַר וְאֵין פּוֹתֵר אוֹתוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁאָמְרוּ וְאֵין בָּעוֹלָם פּוֹתֵר אוֹתוֹ כְּפִי דַּעְתֵּנוּ, כִּי נֶעֱלָם הוּא מְאֹד:

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
AND THERE IS NO INTERPRETER OF IT. The meaning thereof is that “there is no one to inform us concerning the future which can be derived from the dream.”
It is possible that they sent for some magicians in the morning, or that there were people with them in the prison, but no one could interpret it. It may be that they said; “There is no one in the world, in our opinion, who can interpret it, for it is very obscure.”


###### Ramban on Genesis 40:8:2
[Ramban on Genesis 40:8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ramban%20on%20Genesis/r/40:8:2)

**הֲלוֹא לֶאֱלֹהִים פִּתְרֹנִים** פֵּרֵשׁ רַבִּי אַבְרָהָם (אבן עזרא על בראשית מ':ח') כִּי יֹאמַר כִּי הַמִּקְרִים הָעֲתִידִים לָבֹא בַּחֲלוֹמוֹת לֵאלֹהִים הֵם, כִּי הוּא לְבַדּוֹ הַמַּחֲלִים וְהַמּוֹדִיעַ הֶעָתִיד וְהוּא הָעוֹשֶׂה שָׁלוֹם וּבוֹרֵא רָע, וְאֵין בְּדִבּוּרִי לָכֶם תּוֹעֶלֶת אוֹ הֶפְסֵד. וְזֶה אָמַר שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲנִישׁוּהוּ אִם תָּבֹא לָהֶם רָעָה, אוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּסַפְּרוּ אוֹתָם אֵלָיו וְלֹא יִבְזוּהוּ. וְאִם כֵּן אֵין לְמִלַּת "הֲלֹא" בָּזֶה טַעַם. וְאוּלַי יִהְיֶה פֵּרוּשׁוֹ כְּמוֹ "הִנֵּה", יֹאמַר הִנֵּה לֵאלֹהִים לְבַדּוֹ הַפִּתְרוֹנִים וְלֹא לָאָדָם הַפּוֹתֵר. וְהַנָּכוֹן בְּעֵינַי כִּי אָמַר הֲלֹא לֵאלֹהִים פִּתְרוֹנִים בְּכָל הַחֲלוֹמוֹת הַנֶּעֱלָמִים וְהַסְּתוּמִים, וְהוּא יָכוֹל לְהוֹדִיעַ פִּתְרוֹן חֲלוֹמְכֶם, וְאִם הוּא נֶעֱלָם בְּעֵינֵיכֶם, סַפְּרוּ נָא לִי, אוּלַי יִישַׁר בְּעֵינָיו לְגַלּוֹת סוֹדוֹ אֵלַי:

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
DO NOT (‘HALO’) INTERPRETATIONS BELONG TO G-D? Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained it as saying that “future events destined to come as indicated in dreams belong to G-d, for He alone brings on the dream and lets the future be known, and it is He *who makes peace, and creates evil*,²⁶² but in my speaking to you there is neither benefit nor loss.” This he said so that they should not punish him if evil should befall them, or so that they should tell him the dreams and not scorn him.²⁶³
But if so, there is no sense for the word *halo* (do not) in this context.²⁶⁴ is out of place. Perhaps its meaning is the same as that of the word *hinei* (behold). Thus Joseph is saying, “Behold, to G-d alone belong interpretations, but not to man the interpreter.”
In my opinion the correct interpretation is that Joseph is saying; “Do not interpretations of all dreams which are obscure and confined belong to G-d? He can make known the interpretation of your dreams. Now if it is obscure to you tell it to me; perhaps He will be pleased to reveal His secret to me.”

footnotes:
²⁶² Isaiah 45:7.
²⁶³ Thus far the comment of Rabbi ibn Ezra.
²⁶⁴ Since Joseph is stating it all in the affirmative; “dreams belong to G-d, etc.” the interrogative form of the word halo


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

**וְהִוא כְפֹרַחַת עָלְתָה נִצָּהּ** דּוֹמָה לְפוֹרַחַת, "וְהִיא כְפוֹרַחַת", נִדְמָה לִי בַּחֲלוֹמִי כְּאִלּוּ הִיא פּוֹרַחַת, וְאַחַר הַפֶּרַח "עָלְתָה נִצָּהּ", נַעֲשׂוּ סְמָדַר, וְאַחַר כָּךְ "הִבְשִׁילוּ", "וְהִיא כַּד אַפְרַחַת אַפֵּקַת לַבְלַבִּין", עַד כָּאן תַּרְגּוּם שֶׁל פּוֹרַחַת, לְשׁוֹן רַשִׁ"י (רש"י על בראשית מ':י'). וְאֵינוֹ נָכוֹן, שֶׁאִם הָיָה מְדַבֵּר כִּמְדַמֶּה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵם דִּבְרֵי חֲלוֹם, הָיָה אוֹמֵר וְהִנֵּה כְגֶפֶן לְפָנַי וּבַגֶּפֶן כִּשְׁלֹשָׁה שָׂרִיגִים, וְהַכָּ"ף הַזּוֹ אֵינָהּ בַּחֲלוֹם שַׂר הָאוֹפִים וְלֹא בַּחֲלוֹם פַּרְעֹה, וְלָמָּה יְדַמֶּה בָּזֶה יוֹתֵר מִכָּל הָאֲחֵרִים. אֲבָל יֹאמַר בְּכֻלָּם "וְהִנֵּה", וְהוּא הַדִּמְיוֹן, שֶׁטַּעְמוֹ "כְּאִלּוּ". אֲבָל פֵּרוּשׁ "וְהִיא כְפֹרַחַת עָלְתָה נִצָּהּ", שֶׁרָאָה בַּחֲלוֹמוֹ הַגֶּפֶן כִּי מִיָּד שֶׁפּוֹרַחַת עָלְתָה נִצָּהּ וְהִבְשִׁילוּ אַשְׁכְּלֹתֶיהָ עֲנָבִים, וְזֶה לְהוֹרוֹת כִּי מְמַהֵר הָאֱלֹהִים לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ, וּבָזֶה הִכִּיר יוֹסֵף כִּי שְׁלֹשֶׁת הַשָּׂרִגִים שְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים הֵם וְלֹא חֳדָשִׁים אוֹ שָׁנִים, וְחָשַׁב בְּדַעְתּוֹ כִּי בְּיוֹם אֶחָד יִשָּׂא רֹאשׁ שְׁנֵיהֶם, אוֹ בַּעֲבוּר כִּי בְּלַיְלָה אֶחָד חָלְמוּ. וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי אַבְרָהָם שֶׁאָמַר שֶׁהָיָה יוֹסֵף יוֹדֵעַ יוֹם הֻלֶּדֶת אֶת פַּרְעֹה. וּכְזֹאת הַכָּ"ף בִּמְקוֹמוֹת רַבִּים, "וַיְהִי כְּמֵשִׁיב יָדוֹ" (בראשית ל"ח:כ"ט), "כְּבֹא אַבְרָם" (בראשית י"ב:י"ד), "וּכְעֵת מוּתָהּ וַתְּדַבֵּרְנָה הַנִּצָּבוֹת" (שמואל א ד כ), וְכֵן רַבִּים. וְאוּנְקְלוֹס (תרגום אונקלוס על בראשית מ':י') שֶׁאָמַר "וְהִיא כַּד אַפְרַחַת אַפֵּקַת לַבְלַבִּין" תִּרְגֵּם עָלְתָה – שֶׁהֶעֶלְתָה לוּלְבֵי גְּפָנִים הוֹצִיאָהּ פֶּרַח וְהֶעֶלְתָה לוּלָבִין גְּדוֹלִים וְהֵנֵצוּ וְהִבְשִׁילוּ אַשְׁכְּלֹתֶיהָ עֲנָבִים, כִּי לֹא יָבוֹא לְשׁוֹן עָלְתָה בַּנֵּץ כִּי אֵינֶנּוּ עוֹלֶה:

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
AND IT WAS AS THOUGH IT BUDDED AND ITS BLOSSOM WENT UP. “It seemed as though it budded. *And it was as though it budded*, i.e., it seemed to me in my dream as though it budded, and after the bud its blossom shot up, and after that it brought forth the clusters and then the ripe grapes. Onkelos translates: ‘And, when it buddeth, it brought forth sprouts.’ These words are the translation of the word *porachath* alone.”²⁶⁵. Rashi’s intent, in quoting the Targum, is to say that Onkelos’ words, *apeikath lavlevin* (brought forth sprouts), is an expression which Onkelos appended to his translation of the Hebrew word *porachath*. Ramban will later differ with this opinion, holding that it constitutes Onkelos’ rendition of the Hebrew word *althah*, and signifies: “And it, when it budded, *immediately* brought forth sprouts.” See below, Note 271. Thus far the words of Rashi.
This is not correct. If he is speaking in terms of appearances because they are matters of a dream, he should say, “Behold, *like* a vine was before me, and on the vine *like* three shoots.”²⁶⁶ This *kaph* of comparison is found neither in the dream of the chief of the bakers nor in the dream of Pharaoh. Why then should the chief of butlers use the comparative form more than the others? Instead, in all three dreams it says *v’hinei* (and behold).²⁶⁷ is used in connection with Pharaoh’s dream. It is this word which indicates comparison, for its meaning is “as if.”
But the explanation of the verse before us, *And it was ‘keporachath’ its blossoms shot up*, is that he saw that immediately as it budded, its blossoms shot up and its clusters ripened into grapes. This was to indicate that G-d was hastening to do it. This is how Joseph recognized that the “three shoots” indicated three days, and not months or years, and he himself deduced that on the same day the two will be summoned before the king. It may be [that this was also indicated by the dreams] because both of them dreamed in one night. Thus there is no need for the words of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, who says that Joseph knew of Pharaoh’s birthday.
This usage of a *kaph* to indicate immediacy is found in many places: *And it came to pass, ‘k’meishiv’ (as he drew back) his hand;*²⁶⁸ *‘k’vo Avram’ (as Abram came);*²⁶⁹, 12:14. *‘uk’eith’ (and at the time) of her death the women that stood by her said*,²⁷⁰ and many others.
Onkelos’ rendition into Aramaic stating, “And when it budded, it brought forth sprouts,” [means to say that the expression “brought forth sprouts”] is a translation of the Hebrew word *althah*, meaning that it immediately brought forth sprouts of the vine. That is, as soon as it budded, it brought forth large sprouts, its blossoms shot up, and its clusters ripened into grapes.²⁷¹, (not mentioned by Ramban, but appearing in the Targum, following *apeikath lavlevin*, mentioned above in Note 265), is the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew *althah nitzah*. Ramban however says that it is the translation only of the word *nitzah*, for *althah* (shoot up) could not refer to *nitzah* (sprouts). This is why, according to Ramban, Onkelos translated the word *althah* as *apeikath lavlevin* (it brought forth sprouts). In brief, according to Rashi’s understanding of the Targum, the Hebrew *v’hi keporachath* is rendered by the Targum as *kad aphrachath apeikath lavlevin*. The Hebrew *althah nitzah* is rendered *va’aneitzath neitz*. In the opinion of Ramban, *v’hi keporachath* is rendered by the Targum as *kad aphrachath;* the Hebrew *althah* is rendered *apeikath lavlevin*, and the Hebrew *nitzah* has its equivalent in Onkelos’ *va’aneitzath nitzah*. Onkelos would not apply the word *althah* (shoot up) to *nitzah* (sprouts), as they do not “shoot up.”

footnotes:
²⁶⁵ The Hebrew states: V’hi keporachath althah nitzah
²⁶⁶ Instead, Scripture states: “Behold, a vine was before me. And on the vine were three shoots.”(Verses 9-10.)
²⁶⁷ Verse 9, in the dream of the butler; Verse 16, in the dream of the baker, and in Chapter 41, Verse 3, the word v’hinei
²⁶⁸ Above, 38:29.
²⁶⁹ Ibid.
²⁷⁰ I Samuel 4:20.
²⁷¹ Rashi is of the opinion that Onkelos’ expression, va’aneitzath neitz


###### Ramban on Genesis 40:14:1
[Ramban on Genesis 40:14:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ramban%20on%20Genesis/r/40:14:1)

**כִּי אִם זְכַרְתַּנִי אִתְּךָ** אִם תִּזְכְּרֵנִי כַּאֲשֶׁר יִיטַב לְךָ תַּעֲשֶׂה עַתָּה עִמָּדִי חֶסֶד וֶאֱמֶת וְתִזְכְּרֵנִי אֶל פַּרְעֹה. וְאִם יִהְיֶה נָא לְשׁוֹן בַּקָּשָׁה, כִּי אִם זְכַרְתַּנִי וְעָשִׂיתָ כְּחַסְדֶּךָ חֶסֶד עִמָּדִי תִּזְכְּרֵנִי אֶל פַּרְעֹה. וְטַעַם "אִתְּךָ" שֶׁתִּזְכְּרֵנִי לַעֲשׂוֹת עִמִּי בַּטּוֹב אֲשֶׁר יִיטַב לָךְ שֶׁיָּצָאתָ מִבֵּית הַסֹּהַר, אוֹ יִהְיֶה פֵּרוּשׁוֹ שֶׁתִּזְכְּרֵנִי בְּלִבְּךָ כְּאִלּוּ אֲנִי עִמְּךָ. וְהַזְּכִירָה אֶל פַּרְעֹה, שֶׁיְּהַלֵּל אוֹתוֹ אֵלָיו לֵאמֹר הִנֵּה בְּבֵית שַׂר הַטַּבָּחִים עֶבֶד יָפֶה, לִפְנֵי מְלָכִים יִתְיַצָּב. וְהַנָּכוֹן עוֹד בְּעֵינַי שֶׁיֹּאמַר, אִם תִּזְכְּרֵנִי לִהְיוֹת אִתְּךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר יִיטַב לָךְ וְתָשׁוּב לְמַעֲלָתְךָ וְתַחְפֹּץ לַעֲשׂוֹת עִמִּי הַחֶסֶד הַזֶּה, תִּזְכְּרֵנִי אֶל פַּרְעֹה לֵאמֹר בְּפָנָיו, זָכַרְתִּי נַעַר שֶׁהָיָה מְשָׁרֵת לִי בְּבֵית הַסֹּהַר, תְּנֵהוּ אֵלַי לִהְיוֹת לִי מְשָׁרֵת, וְהוֹצֵאתַנִי מִן הַבַּיִת הַזֶּה, כִּי חֵטְא גָּדוֹל הוּא עַל הַמַּעֲמִידִים אוֹתִי בְּכָאן. אוֹ יִהְיֶה טַעַם "וְהִזְכַּרְתַּנִי אֶל פַּרְעֹה", כִּי רָאָה אוֹתִי פַּרְעֹה בִּהְיוֹתִי עֶבֶד לַשַּׂר שֶׁלּוֹ וּפָקִיד עַל כָּל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ, מְשָׁרֵת לְפָנָיו, וְאִם תִּזְכְּרֵנִי לְפָנָיו תּוֹצִיאֵנִי מִכָּאן, כִּי אֵין בִּי עָוֹן אֲשֶׁר חֵטְא, וְרָאוּי לַמֶּלֶךְ שֶׁיּוֹצִיאֵנִי וְיַצִּילֵנִי מִיַּד עוֹשְׁקַי, כִּי כָּל דָּבָר לֹא יִכָּחֵד מִן הַמֶּלֶךְ אִם יַחְפֹּץ:

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
BUT HAVE ME IN THY REMEMBRANCE. “If you will remember me when it will be well with you, I now pray for the kindness and truth you will do to me by making mention of me to Pharaoh.” And if the word *na*²⁷². In the explanation above the Hebrew word *na* was understood in the sense of ‘now’: “If you will remember me then… I *now* pray for the kindness and truth you would show me.” But according to the second interpretation, the word *na* is understood as supplication, as explained in the text. is to be understood as expressing supplication, the sense of the verse is: “If you will remember me and would, in your mercy, do me a kindness, I beg that you remember me to Pharaoh.”
The sense of the word *itcha* (with thee) is that “you should remember to show me mercy in the very same way that it has been shown to you, i.e., that you went out from prison.” The interpretation may be that “you should remember me in your heart as if I am with you.”
The purport of mentioning him before Pharaoh is that he should praise him by saying, “Now in the house of the chief of the officers there is an excellent servant fit to enter the service of kings.”
It further appears to me correct that Joseph is saying: “If you will remember me to be with you when all goes well with you and you return to your high position, and you should want to do me this kindness, then make mention of me to Pharaoh, saying to him, ‘I remember a lad who served me in the prison; give him to me to be my servant.’ *And bring me out of this house* for it is a great sin to those who retain me here.”
It may be that the meaning of the expression, *And make mention of me to Pharaoh*, is that “Pharaoh saw me when I was a servant to his minister, in charge of all he had and performing my duties before him,²⁷³ and if you will remember me before him you will bring about my release from here. I have committed no sin, and it is befitting the king to release me and thereby save me from the hands of my oppressors, for *there is no matter hid from the king*²⁷⁴ if he desires.”

footnotes:
²⁷² V’asitha ‘na’ imadi chesed
²⁷³ Thus, the sense of the verse is to state that “all you need do is mention my name to Pharaoh, as he knows me already.”
²⁷⁴ II Samuel 18:13.


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

וְטַעַם **מֵאֶרֶץ הָעִבְרִים** מֵאֶרֶץ חֶבְרוֹן אֲשֶׁר גָּרוּ שָׁם אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב, כִּי אַבְרָהָם שֶׁהָיָה רֹאשׁ הַיַּחַס נִקְרָא אַבְרָהָם הָעִבְרִי (בראשית י"ד:י"ג), כִּי הָיָה מֵעֵבֶר הַנָּהָר וְגָדוֹל שְׁמוֹ בַּגּוֹיִם, כִּי נִתְקַיֵּם בּוֹ "וַאֲגַדְּלָה שְׁמֶךָ" (בראשית י"ב:ב'), וְעַל כֵּן נִקְרְאוּ כָּל זַרְעוֹ הָעִבְרִים, וְהֵם עַצְמָם יַחֲזִיקוּ אֶת שְׁמָם כֵּן, שֶׁלֹּא יִתְעָרְבוּ בְּעַמֵּי הָאֲרָצוֹת הַכְּנַעֲנִים, וְהֻחְזַק הַשֵּׁם הַזֶּה בְּכָל זֶרַע יִשְׂרָאֵל לְעוֹלָם. וְזֶה טַעַם "הֵבִיא לָנוּ אִישׁ עִבְרִי" (בראשית ל"ט:י"ד), כִּי יוֹסֵף אָמַר לָהֶם עִבְרִי אָנֹכִי, וְלֹא רָצָה שֶׁיַּחֲזִיקוּהוּ בִּכְנַעֲנִי. וְהִנֵּה אֶרֶץ מְגוּרֵיהֶם קְרָאָהּ "אֶרֶץ הָעִבְרִים", כְּלוֹמַר הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר הָעִבְרִים שָׁם, אוֹ שֶׁנִּקְרָא שְׁמָהּ כֵּן כִּי הֵם גְּדוֹלֵי הָאָרֶץ וַאֲצִילֶיהָ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית כ"ג:ו') "נְשִׂיא אֱלֹהִים אַתָּה בְּתוֹכֵנוּ", וּכְתִיב (תהלים קה טו) "אַל תִּגְּעוּ בִמְשִׁיחָי":

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
THE LAND OF THE HEBREWS. This means the land of Hebron, wherein dwelt Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Abraham, the head of the lineage, was called “Abraham the Hebrew”²⁷⁵ since he came from across the River Euphrates, and he was honored among the nations for in him was fulfilled the blessing, *And I will make thy name great*.²⁷⁶, 12:2. It is for this reason that all of his seed are called *Ivrim* (Hebrews). They hold on to this name in order not to intermingle with the various peoples in the Canaanite lands, and this name has been established as the name for all Israel’s seed forever. This is the meaning of the verse, *He hath brought in a Hebrew unto us*,²⁷⁷, 39:14. since Joseph told them “I am a Hebrew,” and he did not want them to take him as a Canaanite. And the land where they resided was called “the land of the Hebrews,” that is to say, the land in which the Hebrews are.²⁷⁸ It may be that it was so called because they were its leaders and nobles, even as it says, *Thou art a prince of G-d in the midst of us*,²⁷⁹ and it is further written, *Touch not My anointed ones*.²⁸⁰

footnotes:
²⁷⁵ Above, 14:13.
²⁷⁶ Ibid.
²⁷⁷ Ibid.
²⁷⁸ But not that it is theirs.
²⁷⁹ Above, 23:6.
²⁸⁰ Psalms 105:15.


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

**כִּי טוֹב פָּתָר** אָמַר אוּנְקְלוֹס (תרגום אונקלוס על בראשית מ':ט"ז) כִּי יָפֶה פָּתָר, וְכֵן "טוּב טַעַם וָדַעַת לַמְּדֵנִי" (תהלים קיט סו), וְכֵן "כִּי טוֹבוֹת הֵנָּה" (בראשית ו':ב'), יָפוֹת. וְהַטַּעַם לֵאמֹר כֵּן, כִּי הָאִישׁ הַזֶּה מְבַזֶּה עַל יוֹסֵף, חוֹשֵׁב בּוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יֵדַע לִפְתֹּר אוֹתוֹ לְעוֹלָם, וְלֹא יַגִּיד לוֹ הַחֲלוֹם אִם לֹא בִּרְאוֹתוֹ כִּי פָּתַר לַחֲבֵרוֹ יָפֶה וְכַהֹגֶן. אוֹ יֹאמַר, וַיַּרְא שַׂר הָאֹפִים כִּי לְטוֹבָה פָּתַר לוֹ, וְשָׂמַח וְהִגִּיד חֲלוֹמוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מִצְטַעֵר בּוֹ יוֹתֵר מֵחֲבֵרוֹ:

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
THAT THE INTERPRETATION WAS GOOD. Onkelos rendered it that he interpreted it well. A similar use is found in the verses: *Teach me fair discernment and knowledge;*²⁸¹, 119:66. *That they were ‘tovoth’ (fair)*,²⁸² which means “pretty.” The intent of the verse is to state that this man [the lord of the bakers] had scorned Joseph, thinking of him as not ever knowing how to interpret the dream, and he would never have told him the dream had he not seen that he interpreted for his friend in a fair and proper manner. It may be that the verse is saying: “And the lord of the bakers saw that he gave a favorable interpretation to the lord of the butlers and he rejoiced. He then told him his own dream which had caused him more anguish than that of his friend.”

footnotes:
²⁸¹ Ibid.
²⁸² Above, 6:2.


###### Ramban on Genesis 40:16:2
[Ramban on Genesis 40:16:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ramban%20on%20Genesis/r/40:16:2)

**סַלֵּי חֹרִי** סַלִּים שֶׁל נְצָרִים קְלוּפִים עֲשׂוּיִים חוֹרִים חוֹרִים, זֶה לְשׁוֹן רַשִׁ"י (רש"י על בראשית מ':ט"ז). וְהַגָּאוֹן רַב סְעַדְיָה פֵּרֵשׁ, סַלֵּי לֶחֶם לָבָן כְּלֶחֶם הַמֶּלֶךְ, מִלְּשׁוֹן "וְלֹא עַתָּה פָּנָיו יֶחֱוָרוּ" (ישעיהו כט כב), מִן הָאֲרָמִית שֶׁתֹּאמַר לְלָבָן – חִוָּר. וְהוּא הַנָּכוֹן, כִּי הָיָה בְּכָל הַסַּלִּים מִלֶּחֶם הַמֶּלֶךְ, וּבַסַּל הָעֶלְיוֹן מִכָּל מִינֵי מַאֲכַל פַּרְעֹה שֶׁהָיָה מַעֲשֵׂה אוֹפֶה. וּלְשׁוֹן רַבּוֹתֵינוּ בַּמִּשְׁנָה (ביצה ב ו), פִּתִּין גְּרִיצִים וְחִוָּרֵי. וְאָמְרוּ בַּיְּרוּשַׁלְמִי (שם), רַבָּנִין שָׁמְעִין לָהּ מִן הָדָא, "וְהִנֵּה שְׁלֹשָׁה סַלֵּי חֹרִי עַל רֹאשִׁי":

**Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976:**
BASKETS OF ‘CHORI.’”Baskets made of peeled willows, made so that they have many holes.” This is Rashi’s language.
Rav Saadia Gaon²⁸³ interpreted it as “baskets of white bread,” white as befits the king’s bread, with the word *chori* being derived from the Hebrew, *Neither shall his face now wax white (‘yechvaru’)*,²⁸⁴ as well as from the Aramaic where the word *chivar* means “white.” This is the correct interpretation, for all the baskets in the dream contained the king’s bread, and in the uppermost basket there were all manner of baked goods for Pharaoh.
You find it similarly in the language of our Rabbis in the Mishnah:²⁸⁵ “Large loaves and white cakes (*v’chivri*) [may be baked on a Festival Day].” And in the Jerusalem Talmud on this Mishnah: “The Rabbis [in discussing the permissibleness of baking extra fine white breads on the Festival Day even though they require more work than ordinary bread] derived the meaning of *chori* from this verse: *And, behold, I had three baskets of ‘chori’ on my head*. “²⁸⁶ in the verse and *chivri* in the Mishnah were considered by the Rabbis of the Talmud as identical. For just as in the case of the king’s bread it means “large and white,” as befits such bread, so does it have a similar meaning in the Mishnah. It is thus obvious that the Rabbis understood the word *chori*, as did Rav Saadia Gaon, to mean “white.”
Mikeitz

footnotes:
²⁸³ See the Commentary of Abraham ibn Ezra.
²⁸⁴ Isaiah 29:22.
²⁸⁵ Beitzah 2:6.
²⁸⁶ This establishes that the word chori