BY THE ‘YE’OR’ (RIVER). With the exception of the Nile, none of the other rivers is called ye’or, a word signifying “canal,” because the entire country consists of artificially constructed canals, and the waters of the Nile¹ flow into them. This is the language of Rashi. Onkelos however did translate the word ye’or here as “river,” but in the book of Exodus he translated al ye’oreihem² as “on their canals,” as he had to distinguish between nahar and ye’or since they are both mentioned in the same verse: ‘al naharotham ve’al ye’oreihem’ (on their rivers and on their canals). Thus, according to Onkelos, all rivers are called ye’orim, with the large ones being called both n’haroth and ye’orim while those canals constructed by man are also called ye’orim.³ applies only to a natural river, while the word ye’or applies to both a natural river and a man-made canal. Thus we find that the Tigris, besides being called nahar, is also called ye’or, as it is written, I was by the side of the great ‘nahar’ (river), which is Tigris… and behold a man clothed in linen,⁴ and it is further written there: And, behold, there stood other two, the one on the bank of the ‘ye’or’ (river) on this side, and the other on the bank of the ‘ye’or’ on that side. And one said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the ‘ye’or’ (river).⁵, 12:5-6. In my opinion the fact is as Onkelos said,⁶ and nahar are both terms for rivers. as both ye’or and nahar convey the same concept, both being an expression for orah (light). The rain, likewise, is called or (light), as it is said: *He spreadeth ‘oro’ (His light) upon it;*⁷ *He spreadeth abroad the cloud of ‘oro’ (His lighting);*⁸, 37:11. and as Rabbi Yochanan said,⁹ “All verses in Elihu’s speech in the book of Job containing the word orah refer to the coming down of rain.” Perhaps this is because the rains are influenced by the luminaries,¹⁰ (light) on account of the small luminary (the moon), since its movements, by command of the Creator, cause the rain.” An identical explanation is also found in R’dak’s Sefer Hashorashim, under the root or. and the rivers which are formed by the rains are thus related to their first cause,¹¹ (light), since the rain is caused by the movement of the luminaries, as explained above. the luminaries.

footnotes: ¹ “Rain does not fall in Egypt, but the Nile rises and irrigates the land.” (Rashi, Exodus 7:17). ² Exodus 7:19. ³ Thus the word nahar ⁴ Daniel 10:4-5. ⁵ Ibid. ⁶ When he said that ye’or ⁷ Job 36:30. ⁸ Ibid. ⁹ Bereshith Rabbah 26:18. ¹⁰ “Luminaries.” In his commentary to Job 36:30, Ibn Ezra writes: “For the rain is called or ¹¹ This explains why rain is referred to in Elihu’s speech as or

AND BEHOLD, THERE CAME UP OUT OF THE RIVER. Since the land of Egypt is irrigated by the river, and it is from the river that abundance or famine befalls them, the king saw the cows coming up out of the river. The cows symbolize plowing, and the ears of corn symbolize the harvest, just as Joseph said, in which there shall be neither plowing nor harvest.¹² He saw that the river rose only slightly and there would thus be no plowing, and the little which will be planted in moist places, a wind blowing from the east, a wind from the Eternal¹³ would burn them, even as he saw the ears of corn parched with the east wind.¹⁴ It would appear to be implied in the verses that the abundance was only in the land of Egypt, even as it said, *Seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt;*¹⁵ likewise the verse, And he stored up all the food of the seven years which was in the land of Egypt.¹⁶ But the famine, on the other hand, was in all the lands. And so did Joseph interpret it when he said, And there shall arise after them seven years of famine,¹⁷ and did not mention the land of Egypt. It was for this reason that in the other countries they were unable to store up food even if they had heard about it, as they undoubtedly did, for the matter was well known throughout their lands. Perhaps this was alluded to in the dream since with respect to the fat cows, it mentions, And they fed in the reed-grass, for it was there in Egypt that they fed and stood, but the lean ones, after they consumed the fat ones, walked to and fro through the earth,¹⁸ and Pharaoh did not know where they had gone.

footnotes: ¹² Genesis 45:6. Thus it is obvious that Joseph understood the characters in the dreams — i.e. the cows and the ears of corn — as symbolizing plowing and harvesting. ¹³ Hosea 13:15. ¹⁴ Verse 6 here. ¹⁵ Verse 29 here. ¹⁶ Verse 48 here. ¹⁷ Verse 30 here. ¹⁸ Zechariah 6:7.

BA’ACHU. Meaning “in the marshy land,” as in the verse, *Can ‘achu’ grow?*¹⁹ This is the language of Rashi. This is not correct, as achu is the name of the grass which grows, [and not the land upon which it grows, as Rashi explained it], just as in the verse, Can the rush shoot up without mire, can the ‘achu’ (reed-grass) grow without water? It withereth before any other herb.²⁰, Verses 11-12. Thus it is obvious that the word achu is not the marsh land. Perhaps Rashi’s intent is that the grass which grows in the marsh-lands is called by the name of the land upon which it grows. The correct interpretation is that achu is the generic name for all vegetation and grass which grow on the banks of the rivers and the marsh-lands. In that case, the letter beth in ba’achu would be as the beth in the verse, Come, eat ‘b’lachmi’ (of my bread), and drink of the wine which I have mingled,²¹ is the name of the grass, as he said in attempting to vindicate Rashi’s explanation, the verse before us should have said achu, rather than ba’achu. But if achu is a generic name, the term ba’achu is correct, and the verse would mean that they fed in the green foliage or vegetation which was upon the bank of the river. for they were feeding on the bank of the river, just as it is said, near the cows upon the bank of the river.²² Now perhaps the word achu is a derivative of achvah (brotherhood), since many varieties of grass grow together.

footnotes: ¹⁹ Job 8:11. ²⁰ Ibid. ²¹ Proverbs 9:5. Ramban’s intent is to say that if achu ²² Verse 3 here.

AND THEY STOOD BESIDE THE COWS. I.e., by their side and near them. This was a sign that there would be no lapse of time between the years of plenty and the years of famine even though Pharaoh did not relate this to Joseph.²³ But perhaps the vision which Pharaoh saw and the relating of the dream to Joseph were really alike, except that Scripture did not concern itself [with mentioning all the details Pharaoh told Joseph], just as it added into the story [details not mentioned in the actual dream, as for example], And it could not be known that they had eaten them up,²⁴ and also, the ears of corn came up on one stalk,²⁵ which was a sign that the seven years will occur consecutively.

footnotes: ²³ See Verse 19 here. ²⁴ Verse 21 here. ²⁵ Verse 5 here.

AND THE COWS ATE UP. In my opinion²⁶ this is a sign that the years of famine shall consume the years of plenty. It is from this that Joseph inferred that he should tell Pharaoh, And let them store up all the food of those good years,²⁷ And the food shall serve as a reserve for the land against the seven years of famine,²⁸ as he saw that the healthy cows and ears of corn were absorbed by the lean ones.²⁹ This was no mere counsel which Joseph proposed, for was he appointed to be a counselor of the king?³⁰ It was only in connection with the interpretation of the dream that he said thus: And the plenty shall be forgotten,³¹ And the plenty shall not be known.³² These words of Joseph constitute the interpretation of: It could not be known that they had eaten them up, their appearance being bad as previously,³³ for Joseph saw that by their consumption of the fat cows, the lean ones did not become fine and plump. They served them for subsistence only, for had they not eaten them they would have died in their lean state. This is unlike Rashi, who says that the plenty shall be forgotten³¹ is the interpretation of the eating itself.³⁴, are the interpretation of the aspect of the dream expressed by: It could not be known that they had eaten them up.

footnotes: ²⁶ Ramban’s interpretation differs from Rashi, who writes that the eating up of the fat by the lean indicates that all joy occasioned by the years of plenty would be forgotten in the days of the famine. His own opinion is presented in the text. ²⁷ Verse 35 here. ²⁸ Verse 36 here. ²⁹ The fact that the fat ones were absorbed by the lean ones was a sign to Joseph that the food from the seven years of plenty should be kept as a reserve for the years of famine. ³⁰ See II Chronicles 25:16. ³¹ Verse 30 here. ³² Verse 31 here. ³³ Verse 21 here. ³¹ Verse 30 here. ³⁴ But according to Ramban, Joseph’s words, And the plenty shall be forgotten

SPRUNG UP AFTER THEM. Not that he saw them springing up —[although the word tzomchoth is actually in the present tense] — for he saw ripe ears of corn. But the verse is to be interpreted as if it said “they sprang up,” [i.e., tzamchu, which is in the past tense], suggesting that no sooner did he see the full ears than he immediately saw the thin ones coming up after them, for he saw the sign of immediacy in all facets of the dream.

AND PHARAOH AWOKE, AND, BEHOLD, IT WAS A DREAM. The meaning thereof is that “there was a complete dream before him.” Thus the language of Rashi. In my opinion³⁵ the verse alludes to the fact that Pharaoh lay awake, thinking about his dream, wondering whether he will see yet a third manifestation, and when he arose in the morning and had not dreamed again, his spirit was disturbed. This is the meaning of the verse, And it came to pass in the morning that his spirit was troubled.³⁶ In the case of Nebuchadnezzar, however, it says, And his spirit was troubled, and his sleep broke from him,³⁷ for even the night brought no rest to his mind. The verse mentions, And Pharaoh awoke, in order to indicate a matter stated in the Book of Sleep,³⁸ fell down,” thus indicating that books dealing with this topic were prevalent even in Talmudic times. i.e., that a dream which is followed in the same sleep by another dream with different content is not fulfilled. Therefore the verse says that when he awoke it was a dream fit for fulfillment. Yet he thought about it till morning, that perhaps he will have his dream a third time in the manner in which it had been repeated. But Pharaoh himself realized that the two dreams had the same content. This is why the verse states, And behold, it was a dream. So, likewise, did Pharaoh state it: I have dreamed ‘a dream,’ and none can interpret it,³⁹ and he did not refer to the plural form, “dreams.” This is also the sense of the verse, And I saw in my dream.⁴⁰ Scripture however states, But none could interpret ‘them’ to Pharaoh,⁴¹ meaning that none could interpret even one of them.

footnotes: ³⁵ Ramban finds a difficulty in Rashi’s interpretation. If the sense of the verse is that Pharaoh felt that an entire dream had been presented to him, why was he not troubled until the following morning? Ramban therefore presents his own interpretation. (Aboab.) ³⁶ Verse 8 here. ³⁷ Daniel 2:1. ³⁸ Apparently this book by some unknown medieval author dealt with the art of interpreting dreams. But see Tractate Berachoth 56 a, in connection with a man called Bar Hadya, whose profession was interpreting dreams, where the Talmud relates: “As he went away, his book ³⁹ Verse 15 here. ⁴⁰ Verse 22 here. ⁴¹ Verse 8 here.

TO EACH MAN ACCORDING TO HIS DREAM. He interpreted it in accordance with the dream and consistent with its contents. Thus the words of Rashi. A more correct interpretation would be for Rashi to say that “he interpreted it in accordance with the truth of the dream as it was destined to befall him, for as he interpreted it, so it befell us.” Similar in thought is the verse, Every man according to his blessing he blessed them,⁴² i.e., according to the blessing which was destined to come upon him. But in my opinion there is no need for this. Instead, the verse is stating that “he interpreted his dream for each man, and as he interpreted it to each one, so it came upon us.” The chief of the butlers is thus saying that these were different dreams with different interpretations, as he would explain, so that Pharaoh should not think that the two [the butler and the baker] dreamed one dream having one interpretation. In my opinion, a similar thought is conveyed in the verse, Every man according to his blessing he blessed them,⁴² meaning that he did not bless them with one blessing common to all, but with a unique blessing for each one, as he explained to each son and spoke to him.

footnotes: ⁴² Further, 49:28. In the case of Jacob’s blessing to his sons. ⁴² Further, 49:28. In the case of Jacob’s blessing to his sons.

‘TZ’NUMOTH,’ THIN. Tz’numa is Aramaic for “a rock.” That is, they are like wood without sap and hard as rock. But Onkelos translated, natzan lakyan (their blossom is stricken), i.e., there is nothing in them but their withered blossom because they were empty of grain. Thus the language of Rashi. But ears of corn when empty of grain have no blossoms! Pharaoh also did not see the ears of corn when they blossomed; he saw them full and good,⁴³ and thin, and parched with the east wind.⁴⁴ Likewise, Rashi’s interpretation deriving tz’numoth from tz’numa as signifying “rocky” is also not correct. Thin ears of corn are not as hard as rocks. But the meaning of tz’numoth is “separated,” [fragmented] into many pieces. It is the Rabbinic word:⁴⁵ “Bread hatz’numa in a bowl requires the blessing of hamotzi,”⁴⁶ the word hatz’numa meaning “cut bread,” or more exactly, pieces of bread⁴⁷ in a bowl upon which he pours soup, and each part is eaten without any other bread. This likewise is the meaning of the Targum, who uses the word natzan, which signifies “cut and deficient.” The usage of the word natza is similar to that in the saying of the Rabbis:⁴⁸ “If one transfers dirt from a malya into malya or natza into natza, it does not constitute taking possession,⁴⁹ but if he takes malya and throws it into natza, it does constitute an act of taking possession.” Now a high place in a field solidly filled with earth is called malya, and one in which there is an appreciable shortage of earth is called natza.⁵⁰ to another, or from one natza to another, he has not improved the land. Hence it does not constitute an act of taking possession. But if he took earth from a malya and filled in a natza, he has performed a constructive act, and it therefore constitutes an act of taking possession. Here likewise the opposite of “full ones” is tz’numoth, and (the singular) natzan is the opposite of malyan (a full one). The situation described here in the verse is that the ears were not full of grain but that there were empty spots without grain in them, and in other places, higher up on the stalk, the ears were wind-beaten and empty. This was why Joseph used the word reikoth (empty ones),⁵¹ instead of tz’numoth as there were there places on the ears which contained no grain whatever.

footnotes: ⁴³ Verse 22 here. ⁴⁴ Verse 23 here. ⁴⁵ Berachoth 39a. ⁴⁶ The standard blessing for bread. ⁴⁷ Rashi, however, in his commentary to Berachoth, translates it as “hard pieces of bread.” This is consistent with his interpretation here. ⁴⁸ Baba Bathra 54a. ⁴⁹ In order to take legal possession of a field, the buyer must perform some constructive act indicating ownership, such as fixing a fence, etc. But this particular act, as explained further, contributes nothing to the field. ⁵⁰ Thus if the buyer took earth from one malya ⁵¹ Verse 27 here. Compare Verse 23.

THEY SHALL BE SEVEN YEARS OF FAMINE. Since plentifulness in the land of Egypt is not a great novelty since the country is as the garden of the Eternal,⁵² Joseph first mentioned the interpretation concerning the bad events, for it was this that constituted the novelty and the purpose of the dream. G-d in His mercy showed the famine to Pharaoh to save life for a great deliverance.⁵³ This is the sense of the verse, And the seven years of famine began to come, according as Joseph had said,⁵⁴ for the truth of Joseph’s words was not realized until the years of famine.

footnotes: ⁵² Above, 13:10. ⁵³ See further, 45:7. ⁵⁴ Verse 54 here.

AND FOR THAT THE DREAM WAS REPEATED UNTO PHARAOH TWICE. The verse is explaining the reason for the repetition of the dream — i.e., that it occurred twice in one night⁵⁵ — although it would have been possible for both the cows and the ears of corn to be shown in one dream and make known that there shall neither be plowing nor harvest.⁵⁶ Yet He showed them in two separate dreams, one after another, in one night — an unusual circumstance for dreamers in order to make known that the matter is prepared, and G-d hasteneth to do it. This is the meaning of the word pa’amayim (twice) as the dreams concerning the cows and the ears of corn were not presented at one time. But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explains that the repetition of the theme of the dream — through the medium of the cows and the ears of corn — attested to the fact that the matter is set and established. And the fact that the dream occurred twice in one night attested that G-d hasteneth to do it. But if so,⁵⁷ could have been accomplished by repeating the same dream. we would say that the dream concerning the ears of corn would have been sufficient since that dream informed Pharaoh of the famine.

footnotes: ⁵⁵ Ramban’s intent is to point out that there are two aspects to the dreams. They depicted two subjects — the cows and the ears of corn — and they were shown in two separate dreams although they might have been shown to Pharaoh in one continuous dream. Ramban will explain that these double aspects indicated two things: the fulfillment of the dream and its speedy realization. ⁵⁶ As Ramban explained above, at the beginning of Verse 2, the cows symbolize the plowing, and the ears of corn the harvest. ⁵⁷ That is, if both the cows and the ears of corn symbolize, as is the opinion of Ibn Ezra, that the matter is set and established, and not as Ramban has it, i.e., that the cows symbolize that there will be no plowing, and the ears of corn that there will be no harvest, what was the necessity of the dream about the cows? The dream concerning the corn would have indicated the impending famine, and showing that G-d hasteneth to do it

NOW THEREFORE LET PHARAOH FIND A MAN UNDERSTANDING AND WISE. Joseph told Pharaoh that he will need an understanding and wise man who will be appointed to administer the entire land, and he in turn will appoint overseers under him who will go through the land and gather all the food since the ruler cannot travel throughout the entire land. He told him that the man must be understanding and wise. Understanding, in order to know how to support the people of Egypt from his hand with bread, in accordance with their family requirements, to supply them with their sustenance, and sell the balance to other countries in order to accumulate wealth and money for Pharaoh. Wise, in order to know how to preserve the produce so that it should not rot, by mixing with each kind some natural preservative such as the salty substances used for the preservation of wheat, which our Rabbis have mentioned,⁵⁸ and some raw silver dust, which prevents the grain from getting mothy,⁵⁹ and similar things. Thus the Sages said in Bereshith Rabbah:⁶⁰ “He mixed the grain with earth and sawdust, things which preserve the grain.” Joseph mentioned all this so that they should choose him for this task, for the wise man’s eyes are in his head.⁶¹

footnotes: ⁵⁸ Shabbath 31a. ⁵⁹ Machshirin VI, 1. Rashi, Shabbath 88b. ⁶⁰ 90:50. ⁶¹ Ecclesiastes 2:14.

AND THE FOOD SHALL SERVE AS A RESERVE FOR THE LAND. Joseph said that the food should be kept in reserve under the charge of Pharaoh’s officers for the needs of the land during the seven years of famine, and they should not be used for other purposes lest the land be consumed by the famine just as the cows in the dream did not die on account of their leanness.

CAN WE FIND SUCH A ONE AS THIS? Because he was a Hebrew, the members of which race were repugnant to the Egyptians, who would not eat of the things the Hebrews touched, or have any contacts with them as they considered them unclean, Pharaoh did not want to appoint Joseph viceroy without their permission. Therefore he said to them that they would find no Egyptian comparable to him, as the Spirit of G-d is in him. After they admitted it, he said to Joseph, Since G-d has made all this known unto thee,⁶² for since the interpretation met with the approval of Pharaoh and all his courtiers,⁶³ they regarded everything he had said as if it had already been fulfilled. It is possible that the expression, all this, alludes also to that which the chief of the butlers told Pharaoh. A similar case is the verse, And he [Jacob] related to Laban all these things,⁶⁴ meaning the blessings bestowed upon him by Isaac mentioned before. Pharaoh thus said: “Since G-d has imbued you with this great wisdom, thus enabling you to interpret all secret and hidden dreams, and not a word of yours has failed, there is none so understanding and wise in all matters as you are, and you are therefore fit to assume authority and rulership and to be second to me.”

footnotes: ⁶² Verse 39 here. ⁶³ Verse 37 here. ⁶⁴ Above, 29:13.

AND PHARAOH TOOK OFF HIS RING FROM HIS HAND. The giving of the king’s ring is a sign that the person to whom he hands it is to be second to him in rank. Thus the language of Rashi. The correct interpretation is that the king’s ring contains his seal, just as it is said, And sealed with the king’s ring.⁶⁵ The king thus gave Joseph his seal so that he should be a leader and commander⁶⁶ of the entire government, and seal with the king’s ring whatever he desires.

footnotes: ⁶⁵ Esther 8:8. ⁶⁶ Isaiah 55:4.

‘B’MIRKEVETH’ (IN THE CHARIOT) ‘HAMISHNEH.’ I.e., in the chariot second to his own chariot, which travelled next to his own. Thus the language of Rashi. Now according to this interpretation, the word hamishneh refers to the noun, [“chariot,” meaning that this was the chariot of second rank]. The same applies in the verses: *the priests ‘hamishneh’ (of the second order);*⁶⁷ ‘eth mishnei’ (a copy) of this Torah.⁶⁸ The correct interpretation is that the word mishneh is adjectival,⁶⁹, of he who was second in rank. just as: *And I shall be to you ‘l’mishneh’ (as a second one);*⁷⁰ For Mordecai the Jew was ‘mishneh’ (the second) unto king Ahaseurus.⁷¹ Similarly, the expression, keseph mishneh,⁷² (the money of the mishneh) is adjectival and is to be understood as “the money of the ‘second’ purchase.” Now the grammarians⁷³. have already brought a proof to this thesis⁷⁴ here, and in the other three cases mentioned, (see Notes 70-72), all have the meaning ascribed to them by Ramban. since in all these cases the letter nun in the word mishneh is vocalized with a segol, [which does not indicate the construct state as would tzeirei], while mishnei hatorah⁶⁸ and all nouns are vocalized with a tzeirei, as is the rule in the construct state. The sense of the present verse is that the king had a chariot known to be his, even as it is said, And the horse which the king rideth upon,⁷⁵ and there was another chariot known to be for his second in rank, and another one for the third in rank.

footnotes: ⁶⁷ II Kings 23:4. ⁶⁸ Deuteronomy 17:18. ⁶⁹ Meaning that this was the chariot of the mishneh ⁷⁰ I Samuel 23:17. ⁷¹ Esther 10:3. ⁷² 43:12. ⁷³ Reference is to R’dak who mentions this point in his Sefer Hashorashim (Book of Roots), under the root shana ⁷⁴ That the word mishneh ⁶⁸ Deuteronomy 17:18. ⁷⁵ Esther 6:8.

‘TZAPHNATH PA’NEI’ACH.’ Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said, “If this is an Egyptian word, we do not know its meaning, and if it is a translated one [from Yoseiph, the Hebrew name for Joseph], then we do not know the meaning of the name Yoseiph, [that is, the aspect of the name which has this translation]. But according to the opinion of earlier scholars, who say that it means “explainer of secrets” and is a Hebrew expression, it is possible that Pharaoh called him by this honorable name in accordance with the language of Joseph’s country after he asked him,⁷⁶.” or the king may have known the language of Canaan, which was adjacent to Egypt, and its purport is that “he reveals concealed matters.” So also did Pharaoh’s daughter name Moses our teacher in the language of his people, for out of the water ‘m’shithihu’ (I pulled him).⁷⁷ Now do not wonder why Egyptian writers called Moses, “Munyos,” for they changed the names into the language they understood or used, as the Targum Onkelos does in some cases, as for example, Between Kadesh and Shur,⁷⁸ which he translated as “between Rekem and Chigra,” and similarly with many names. And in some places Onkelos does not change them at all, just as in the case of Sichon king of Cheshbon and Og king of Bashan, and many others like them. This is because in his times they were called thus in Aramaic.⁷⁹

footnotes: ⁷⁶ I.e., Pharaoh asked Joseph, “What is the expression, in the Canaanitish language, which means ‘one who reveals secrets?’” and Joseph told him, “It is tzaphnath pa’nei’ach ⁷⁷ Exodus 2:10. ⁷⁸ Above, 20:1. ⁷⁹ And therefore Onkelos wrote down the equivalent Aramaic name by which they were known in his time, which coincided with the way they were referred to in Scripture.

THE DAUGHTER OF POTI-PHERAH ‘KOHEIN’ (PRIEST OF) ON. He is indentical with Potiphar.⁸⁰ He was called Poti-phera⁸¹ connotes “uncover and pull down.” See Ramban above, 39:19. because he had been emasculated on account of having purchased Joseph for sodomy. Thus the language of Rashi, and it is actually a Midrash of our Rabbis.⁸² On account of this Midrash, Rashi was forced to say in explanation of kohein On⁸³ is found further in his commentary on 47:22. that “the term kohein always means one who ministers to Deity with the exception of this one, i.e., kohein On, which denotes one of high rank since he was the chief of the slaughterers of the king’s animals, and similarly, kohein Midian.”⁸⁴ But I say that according to the words of our Rabbis, [who said that Poti-phera is identical with Potiphar, and was called Poti-phera because of his emasculation, as explained above],⁸⁵ does not mean, as Rashi explained, “one of high rank,” or “the chief of On,” but rather “the priest of On.” Potiphar was an officer of the king, and later when he became physically castrate, on account of which they called him “Poti-phera,” he was embarassed and retired from his office. He then entered a temple of idol-worship and became a priest therein, for such was the custom among the nobility, and it is possible that On was the name of his idol. Likewise, kohein Midian⁸⁶ means “priest of Midian,” just as they said, concerning Jethro,⁸⁷ that he used to fatten calves for the idols. Now the truth of the matter is that the term k’hunah means ministry, but not to the Deity alone, for it is stated, *And David’s sons were ‘kohanim,’*⁸⁸ and in the book of Chronicles,⁸⁹ in the same connection it says, And the sons of David were chiefs at the side of the king.⁹⁰ in the book of Samuel means “chief ministers.” Similarly we find in the following verses: He leadeth ‘kohanim’ barefoot,⁹¹ referring to ministers of the king; *‘y’chahein pe’eir,’*⁹² (he has clothed him in splendor as a ministering priest), meaning that they will make him garments unlike those of the rest of the people, for glory and for splendor. Also similar is the verse [II Kings 10:11], And his familiar friends ‘v’kohanav’, meaning his chief ministers.

footnotes: ⁸⁰ Above, 37:36. ⁸¹ The word pera ⁸² Bereshith Rabbah 86:3. ⁸³ Rashi’s explanation of kohein On ⁸⁴ Exodus 3:1. Meaning the chief of Midian. It could not mean “the priest” of Midian since Jethro had already abandoned idolatry. ⁸⁵ Ramban’s intent is to state that even though Potiphar is identical with Poti-phera, and Potiphar was an officer to the king, he later became a priest, so that kohein On ⁸⁶ Exodus 3:1. ⁸⁷ Sanhedrin 82b. ⁸⁸ II Samuel 8:18. ⁸⁹ I Chronicles 18:17. ⁹⁰ It is thus clear that kohanim ⁹¹ Job 12:19. ⁹² Isaiah 61:10. Translated: “a priestly diadem.”

‘LIKMATZIM’ (HANDFULS). They stored up the grain handful upon handful, fist by fist. This is the language of Rashi. Onkelos translated it as, “into store houses,” since excavations made in the earth for storage or other purposes are called ‘kmatzim.’ He is hid now in one of ‘hap’chothim’ (the pits),⁹³ Jonathan translated, “in one of the kumtza.” Similarly, he always translated the term pachath as kamtza, which is related to the expression, He that diggeth ‘gametz’ (a pit),⁹⁴ as the letter gimmel serves here as kuph, just as it serves as a kaph in the following verses: Never lacking in ‘hamazeg’ (mingled wine),⁹⁵ the word hamazeg being derived from the term, *‘Mas’cha’ (She hath mingled) her wine;*⁹⁶ ‘v’chano’ which Thy right hand hath planted,⁹⁷. But Ramban explains it as: “And of the garden, etc.” which is like ganoh (garden); ‘vayisachru’ the fountains of the murmuring deep,⁹⁸ which is like vayisagru (and they were closed); *To their native land (‘m’churatham’);*⁹⁹ 16:3 (m’chorotayich). *Thy origin (‘m’chorothayich’) and thy birth;*⁹⁹ 16:3 (m’chorotayich). And I will give over (‘v’sikarti’) Egypt.¹⁰⁰ In all of these cases the kaph and the gimmel are alike. The kuph and the kaph are often alike, as in kova and chova, (both meaning “hat”);¹⁰¹; 17:5 (chova). ‘tikein’ (he set in order) many proverbs,¹⁰² the word tikein being like the term sichein in the verse, *Who has directed (‘sichein’) the spirit of the Eternal?*¹⁰³ Our Rabbis have said in connection with the term jewelry: tachshitim and takshit. Similarly, it is said, ‘Vayatziku’ (And they set down) the ark of G-d — but Abiathar went up — until all the people hath passed out of the city,¹⁰⁴ and the Targum translates: “And they put down the ark,” thus making vayatziku as vayatzig, just as it is said concerning it, And they brought in the ark of the Eternal, ‘vayatzigu’ (and set it) in its place,¹⁰⁵, 6:17. the word being derived from the expressions, ‘atziga’ (let me place) with thee,¹⁰⁶ and ‘v’hitzagtiv’ (And I will set him) before thee.¹⁰⁷

footnotes: ⁹³ II Samuel 17:9. ⁹⁴ Ecclesiastes 10:8. ⁹⁵ Song of Songs 7:3. ⁹⁶ Proverbs 9:2. ⁹⁷ Psalms 80:16. Translated: ‘And of the stock’ which Thy right hand hath planted ⁹⁸ Above, 8:2. ⁹⁹ Ezekiel 29:14 (m’churatham); ⁹⁹ Ezekiel 29:14 (m’churatham); ¹⁰⁰ Isaiah 19:4. ¹⁰¹ I Samuel 17:38 (kova) ¹⁰² Ecclesiastes 12:9. ¹⁰³ Isaiah 40:13. ¹⁰⁴ II Samuel 15:24. ¹⁰⁵ Ibid. ¹⁰⁶ Above 33:15. ¹⁰⁷ Further, 43:9.

AND HE STORED UP ALL THE FOOD. “He” refers to Joseph mentioned above.¹⁰⁸ The same applies to the following verse: And Joseph piled up grain… until he ceased numbering.¹⁰⁹ The pronoun “he” refers to Joseph, who was mentioned. Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that the phrase, all the food, is not to be understood literally, for otherwise they would have died of famine immediately. A similar case is the verse, And all the lands came into Egypt to Joseph to buy grain.¹¹⁰ The meaning of he stored up all the food is only that Joseph stored up all the food which he could. It appears to me to be correct that Joseph gathered all food under his control, and he gave enough of it every year for sustenance to the Egyptians, so that they should not squander it. This is the intent of his statement, And let them store up all the food of those good years that come, and pile up corn under the hand of Pharaoh… and hold it there.¹¹¹ (food) and bar (corn). At the end of the paragraph, he will mention that Onkelos makes no distinction between them. Now in view of the fact that it says, And let them store up all the food… and pile up corn,¹¹¹ (food) and bar (corn). At the end of the paragraph, he will mention that Onkelos makes no distinction between them. and [here in the verses before us] it says, And he stored up all the food… And Joseph piled up grain, this would indicate that he gathered whatever is eaten by man; corn, bread, and all food essential to life, even figs, fresh and dried, and similar things. He piled the corn — meaning the produce which is brought under a winnowing shovel and fan for fanning and cleansing — under the hand of Pharaoh, and he laid up in the cities enough of all the fruits for sustenance. Thus all the food was held in need for the years of famine to be drawn upon to the degree essential for life, and the balance of the corn he preserved in the storehouses. It is possible that Joseph paid them money from the royal treasures at a low market price. This was why the corn belonged to Pharaoh, and he sold it to them in the years of famine, just as it is written, And Joseph collected all the money that was found in the land of Egypt.¹¹² It is possible that the king took it by force, saying: “I preserved it.”¹¹³ Onkelos, however, translated both ochel (food) and bar (corn) alike.¹¹⁴. See Note 111.

footnotes: ¹⁰⁸ In Verse 46: And Joseph was… ¹⁰⁹ Verse 49 here. ¹¹⁰ Verse 57 here. This verse is also not to be understood in its literal sense since Jacob and Benjamin did not come to buy grain. ¹¹¹ Verse 35 here. Ramban thus makes a distinction between ochel ¹¹¹ Verse 35 here. Ramban thus makes a distinction between ochel ¹¹² Further, 47:14. ¹¹³ For were it not for the king’s dream, the food of the seven years of plenty would have been squandered. ¹¹⁴ Calling them ibur

AND THE FAMINE WAS IN ALL LANDS. That is, which surrounded Egypt. Otherwise, what could the distant lands do if there was such a famine in them?¹¹⁵ Thus did the Sages say in Bereshith Rabbah:¹¹⁶ “The famine was in three lands: Phoenicia, Arabia and Palestine.”

footnotes: ¹¹⁵ They would not be able to come to Egypt to ease the famine and would have perished. ¹¹⁶ 90:6.

AND HE SOLD GRAIN UNTO THE EGYPTIANS, AND THE FAMINE WAS SEVERE IN THE LAND OF EGYPT. The verse states that Joseph did not throw open the contents of the storehouses until the famine had become severe in the land, but not as soon as they cried to Pharaoh,¹¹⁷ as people would cry even when they have a small amount of sustenance, and it was his desire that nothing remain to them before he opened the granaries. This is the meaning of the verse, And the famine was over all the face of the earth, meaning that before he had opened his storehouses the famine was over the entire face of the earth, and then the verse proceeds to explain that he did not sell them food until the famine had become severe upon them. Perhaps it is possible that the verse is magnifying the famine by stating that it was a “famine accompanied by panic.”¹¹⁸

footnotes: ¹¹⁷ Verse 55 here. ¹¹⁸ See Aboth V, 8.