ויהי אחר הדברים האלה, “it was after these events, (words), etc.” After the cursed woman had caused the subject of Joseph and his supposed misdemeanors to become the talk of the town, G’d wanted that subject to take a back seat. He therefore contrived to have the Chief of the butlers and the Chief of the bakers put in jail so that their fate would become the talk of the town, and in order that both these prisoners would have to turn to Joseph whose esteem in the eyes of his contemporaries would rise as a result of his ability to interpret the dreams of these two prisoners correctly.

חטאו שר המשקה מלך מצרים והאופה, “The chief butler of the king of Egypt and the baker sinned.” The Torah does not specify their sins, but our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 88,2 state that the Chief butler was guilty of allowing a fly to fall into the cup of Pharaoh, whereas the baker was guilty of a pebble which was found inside one of the rolls served to Pharaoh This is why Pharaoh was angry at both of them. The pebble in the roll was a clear case of negligence on the part of the baker, and this is why he was hanged. The fly which fell into the cup could not be accounted as negligence on the part of the butler as it fell into the cup after the butler had mixed the wine. It was an accident.

לאדוניהם למלך מצרים, “against their master, the King of Egypt.” Actually, the Torah should have added the word לפרעה, before the words למלך מצרים. In the next verse the Torah mentions Pharaoh as being angry without saying that “Pharaoh” and the “King of Egypt” were one and the same person. We may explain this apparent inconsistency in the syntax of the Torah as the Torah giving us a hint of what would be in store for the King of Egypt at the hands of the Israelites at a future time. This is why the Torah made a distinction between the Kingdom of Egypt as such and between the person of Pharaoh as an individual in his own right. You will find that the Torah makes a similar distinction at the time the Israelites were engaged in crossing the sea of reeds with Pharaoh in hot pursuit. In Exodus 14,5 the Torah writes ויגד למלך מצרים כי ברח העם ויהפך לבב פרעה, “the King of Egypt was told that the people had fled, and Pharaoh’s heart was completely changed, etc.,” whereas the Torah should have written ויגד לפרעה מלך מצרים, “Pharaoh the King of Egypt was told, etc.” The reason the Torah separated these two “titles,” was to hint that the individual Pharaoh would be deprived of his title “King of Egypt” at a future time. On the other hand, when the Torah describes Pharaoh’s obstinacy such as in Exodus 14,8 we read ויחזק ה' את לב פרעה מלך מצרים, “G’d strengthened the heart of Pharaoh the King of Egypt.” At that point in time, the Torah was intent on demonstrating that Pharaoh, though himself a powerful man as well as in charge of a powerful country, Egypt, was no match for G’d who proved that He was many times more powerful than the combined might of both Pharaoh and the Egyptian Empire. Solomon alluded to this in Proverbs 21,1 פלגי-מים לב מלך ביד ה', “the king’s heart is in the Lord’s hands like channels of water.” [According to Rabbi Moshe Alshich, kings do not enjoy the freedom of choice enjoyed by private citizens as they are G’d’s representatives on earth, not unlike angels who do not enjoy any freedom of choice for that very reason. Hence the words פלגי מים are a reference to “channels” within which water run; the waters must not leave the channels assigned to them. Ed.]

ויקצוף פרעה על שני סריסיו, “Pharaoh was angry at his two courtiers.” G’d contrived to make Pharaoh angry at his servants in order to rescue the righteous Joseph from the dungeon. We see that history repeated itself in Shushan when G’d contrived to make Achashverosh angry at Haman in order to save Mordechai and the Jewish people (Bereshit Rabbah 88,2). [I suppose the point of the Midrash is the superfluous word שני, “two,” before the word סריסיו. Ed.]

מקום אשר יוסף אסור שם, “the place where Joseph was kept imprisoned.” All of these “coincidences” were designed to bring about the descent to Egypt by Yaakov and his family in accordance with the prediction in Genesis 15,13 “for your descendant will be a stranger, etc.” [without overt interference with the free choice of either party. Ed.]

ויהיו ימים במשמר, ”they remained in custody for a year.” The word ימים meaning “year” appears in Leviticus 25,29 “its period of redemption is a full year.”

וישאל את סריסי פרעה אשר אתו במשמר בית אדוניו לאמר, He asked the courtiers of Pharaoh who were with him in the custody of the house of his master to tell, etc.” What was the need for the Torah to write this cumbersome introduction? Did we not know that these courtiers were in jail together with Joseph? All the Torah had to write was that Joseph asked the courtiers why they were so glum. It is possible to understand the wording of the Torah here in light of what had been written before in verse four that Joseph was with these courtiers in the same jail and that he who was in jail with them performed personal valet service for them; these services were rendered to these prisoners only because they were of such an elevated stature. Now that the boot was on the other foot, the Torah wanted to mention that they were with him, i.e. that they depended upon him to enlighten them. The Torah wrote: “the courtiers of Pharaoh who were with him,” to draw our attention to the fact that they were now secondary to Joseph instead of Joseph being secondary to them. Furthermore, the Torah wanted to explain why Joseph had the audacity to mix into the private affairs of such highly placed personages as the Chief of the butlers, etc. The Torah illustrates the point that when lowly prisoners, slaves, foreigners such as Joseph and highly placed personages such as these two courtiers find themselves in similar circumstances, i.e. in a dungeon, considerations such as their former status vanish and there is established a form of equality based on a common fate. This is what gave Joseph the courage to comment on the glum expressions of the Chief of the butlers and the Chief of the bakers. Joseph was concerned with their well-being although they were wicked people serving a wicked King.

הלא לאלו-הים פתרונים, ”are not the interpretations a matter for G’d?” Joseph meant that future events foreshadowed by dreams are something known only to G’d who is the One who sends the dream to the person whom He wants to warn through a dream. He is the only One who can reveal the future, make peace and initiate evil (Isaiah 45,7). Joseph wanted to reassure the two courtiers that they would neither profit nor suffer any harm by revealing their dreams to him, seeing it was G’d who would determine their future.

בחלומי, והנה גפן לפני , “in my dream- behold there was a grapevine in front of me.” It behooves a person to be extremely careful when he begins to relate a dream he has dreamt. You note that the Chief of the butlers prefaced telling his dream with the words: “in my dream.” The word בחלומי is an expression of “recovering from a sickness and an expression denoting good health.” The expression is related to Isaiah 38,16 ותחלימני והחייני, “You have restored me to health and You have revived me.” Following the opening remark of the butler it is not surprising that he was saved from the dungeon and restored to his position. The Chief of the bakers made the mistake of saying אף, before commencing to relate his dream. The word אף, of course, refers to anger. As a result he was sentenced to death and was hanged.

Bereshit Rabbah 88,5 writes that “four people began their comments with the word אף, and all of them perished. They were: the original serpent, the Chief of the bakers, the congregation of Korach, and Haman.” We have mentioned this already in connection with our commentary on Genesis 3,1 on the words אף כי אמר אלו-הים.

ובגפן שלשה שריגים, “and there were three tendrils on the grapevine.” The expression שריגים is equivalent to the word זמורות. We find it again in Joel 1,7 הלבינו שריגיה, “their tendrils turned white.” והיא כפורחת, “and it appeared as if it was blossoming.” The meaning is that as soon as it budded its blossoms opened up. This is equivalent to the expression סמדר, compare Song of Songs 7,13. He noticed that the clusters had immediately ripened into grapes. The thrust of the images in the dream was that G’d would hasten to bring about whatever the dream presaged. He pressed the juice of the grapes, extracted the wine and placed it in the cup of Pharaoh. Seeing that the butler had observed in his dream a whole sequence of natural developments condensed into a very small time frame, Joseph was astute enough to realise that the number three referred to three days within which the fate of the butler would change. This is why he did not suggest that it referred to three weeks or three months or even three years. The word שריגים is also one which occurs in Mishnaic Hebrew meaning שרגא,”light.” Similarly, the words שלשה סלי חורי, “three wicker baskets” mentioned as a feature in the baker’s dream also refer to a time frame of three days even though according to the plain meaning of the text the word חורי is similar to חררה, a large griddle cake, something which might have prompted Joseph to think in terms of a longer time frame such as three months or three years. The word חורי, also means “whitish,” i.e. that the baker saw in his dream three large white breads in the baskets. We have a verse in Exodus 33,23 וראית את אחורי, normally translated as G’d saying to Moses: “you will see My rear,’” which (according to the Zohar?) may mean that G’d would appear to Moses in a very bright light, almost white. The word חורי then is related to אור. We find it in this sense in Nechemyah 5,7 את החורים ואת הסגנים. Nechemyah appears to compare prominent, important people, to light. The insignificant people who have nothing distinguished about them are compared to darkness. Moreover, the numerical value of the words שלשת הסלים is equivalent to שלשת ימים הם, “they represent three days.” (1175 each).

Another reason that may account for Joseph interpreting both the three tendrils and the three baskets of white bread as signifying three days rather than three months or three years, is that he considered that the three grapevines and tendrils were equal to one another as were the three baskets. Three months or three years are never of identical length each. Only three days may be described as three units of time which are practically identical one to another. Hence Joseph concluded that the time frame to which the dream referred had to be days.

A Midrashic approach based on Chulin 92. The word גפן, grapevine is a reference to the people of Israel, Psalms 80,9 mentions גפן ממצרים תסיע, “You (G’d) have picked up a vine from Egypt,” an obvious reference to the Jewish people. The שלשת שריגים are a reference to the three festivals a year during which the Jewish people make their pilgrimage to the Temple in Jerusalem. The words והיא כפורחת, refer to the time when it is the turn to the Jewish people to blossom and spread out in all directions as do the buds which break out in blossoms. We find references to such development by the Jewish people in Exodus 1,6: “and the children of Israel were fruitful and there were swarms of them.” This means that the nation budded, broke out in blossoms. Isaiah, speaking about the time of redemption, says (Isaiah 63,3) “their life-blood (נצחם=wine) bespattered My garments.” This is a prologue to G’d redeeming Israel. The words הבשילו אשכלותיה ענבים, “its clusters of grapes were ripe,” mean that the time is ripe for Israel’s redemption, i.e. for Egypt to drink the cup of retribution. The word כוס, cup, occurs four times in this brief passage and refers to the four exiles Israel would experience. The fact that our enemies will have to drink four cups of retribution is alluded to in four separate verses in the Books of the Prophets and in the Hagiography. Compare: Jeremiah 25,15; Jeremiah 51,7; Psalms 75,9; Psalms 11,6.

The Talmud in Chulin 92 also explains the verse ובגפן שלשה שריגים, saying that גפן refers to the Torah, שלשה שריגים to the three miracles the Israelites experienced in the desert — the traveling well of water, the manna, and the protective shield (cloud) of G’d which enveloped the whole camp of the Israelites. The words והיא כפורחת עלתה נצה are understood by the Talmud there as a reference to the first ripe fruit offered to G’d by the Israelites, whereas the words הבשילו אשכלותיה are understood as an allusion to the drink-offerings (of wine) presented on the altar with most sacrifices.

כי אם זכרתני אתך , “if only you would remember me with you, etc.” Joseph made two requests of the Chief of the butlers. 1) That he personally should remember who had foretold him his good fortune. 2) He should bring Joseph’s plight to the attention of Pharaoh. It is because of these two separate requests that the Torah reported at the very end of our Parshah that 1) the Chief of the butlers did “not remember Joseph”, and 2) that “he forgot him (mentioning him to Pharaoh).” We must not commit the error of believing that Joseph placed his faith in the Chief of the butlers. He most certainly placed his faith exclusively in G’d. He only thought that G’d might employ the Chief of the butlers as a tool to bring about his release from the dungeon. He had some reason to believe this seeing that the dream the Chief of the butler had dreamt in jail in which Joseph was imprisoned appeared to him as part of a miraculous chain of circumstances. How do we reconcile this with the comment of Bereshit Rabbah 89,3 that Joseph had two years added to the time he had to stay in jail because he said the above-cited two words to the Chief of the butlers (as we pointed out in our commentary on 39,5) that he was punished for pleading with the Chief of the butlers to become the instrument of orchestrating his release? It was not fitting for someone of Joseph’s caliber to be on the lookout for an instrument that G’d should appoint to bring about changes in his fate. He should have been content to trust that G’d would be able to find such opportunities when He deemed the time right for this. G’d does not need Joseph or anyone else to prompt Him in such matters. Joseph’s conduct was accounted a sin only because he was on such a high moral level, and G’d is especially strict in His dealings with people who have attained such a level (Baba Kama 50). To illustrate how someone else behaved in similar circumstances, compare the situation of the prophet Elijah in Kings I 17,6. The prophet was hiding in an inhospitable part of the country and had no access to food. He was told by G’d to drink from the waters of the river Krit (there could not have been much water due to the drought) and G’d told him that He would summon the raven to bring him food. He followed G’d’s instructions. The instrument of keeping him alive, i.e. providing him with food, was the raven. It is also possible that the food the ravens brought Elijah came from the palace of Yehoshaphat, King of Yehudah (compare Vayikra Rabbah 19). In either event the provision G’d made for Elijah was of a miraculous nature. Elijah did not involve himself in bringing about means of sustaining himself in a natural way. At any rate, Joseph did not think of the butler as the source of his release from jail but as an instrument to be used by G’d to that end. He should not even have done this and this is why he was punished.

יום הולדת את פרעה, “Pharaoh’s’ birthday.” On that day a son was born for the king who was also named Pharaoh. It was a custom to make a feast on the anniversary of one’s birth.

וישא את ראש שר המשקים ואת ראש שר האופים בתוך עבדיו, “and he counted the Chief of the butlers and the Chief of the bakers amongst his servants.” The Torah enumerates the names of these two courtiers as amongst the servants of the King. The expression וישא is related to the expression כי תשא in Exodus 30,12 where it means “you will count.” Seeing that the Torah mentions these courtiers as included in the courtiers of Pharaoh, the Torah wanted to inform us about their respective fates telling us that Pharaoh took the opportunity of that feast to publicise the final disposition of the cases which had been pending against both the Chief of the butlers and the Chief of the bakers. The former was acquitted and restored to his position whereas the latter was found guilty and hung.

This apparently historically insignificant event contains an important lesson for all of us. It teaches that man must constantly be alert to the fact that all his activities are apt to be judged in light of the system of reward and punishment which the fate of mankind both collectively and individually is based on, and that everyone will have to render an account of his activities as well as of the omissions he has been guilty of before the One Who created this universe

The thrust of this paragraph is to tell us that it is proper to seek out the goodwill of the ruler and to be careful not to incur his wrath. This is also why Solomon warns in Proverbs 16,14 חמת מלך מלאכי מות, “the king’s wrath is a messenger of death,” and in 19,12 he says נהם ככפיר זעף מלך וכטל על עשב רצונו, “the rage of a king is like the roaring of a lion; but his favour like dew on the grass.” We also find a verse in Proverbs 16,15 באור פני מלך חיים ורצונו כעב מלקוש, “in the light of the king’s face there is life; his favour is like a cloud in the spring rain.” Solomon compared the king’s goodwill to the dew which is so essential in making things grow, whereas anger and wrath are harbingers of destruction. In all his comments Solomon wants us to apply the logic that if falling out of favor of a terrestrial king is a disaster of no small dimensions, how much more must we be on our guard so that we will not fall out of favor in the eyes of the Lord our G’d. This is why good sense alone should suffice to cause us to conduct ourselves in a manner which is bound to please the Lord. The prophet Amos ( 3,8) phrases it thus: “when the lion roars, who will not become afraid?” On the other hand, Hoseah 14,6 assures us that “ I will be like dew for Israel, it will blossom forth like a lily and strike roots like (the poplar in) Lebanon.”