창세기 41:45의 주석

צפנת פענח signifies "Explainer of hidden things". There is no other example in Scripture of the word.

‘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,⁷⁶I.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.” 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).⁷⁷Exodus 2:10.
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,⁷⁸Above, 20:1. 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.⁷⁹And 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.

צפנת פענח, as translated by Onkelos, someone who reveals hidden things. It is a name taken from the Egyptian language. It was a common practice to link the name of a newly appointed official to his office in some manner. Moses changed the name of Joshua when he became selected to be one of the twelve spies. (Numbers 13,16) Similarly, Daniel, when appointed to high office by the king was renamed בל טשצר, (Daniel 1,6 and Daniel 4,5).

ויצא יוסף על ארץ מצרים, he walked away from the interview in a manner which indicated that he was now the ruler over the whole nation

צפנת פענח, an Egyptian expression, similar to Nevuchadnezzar giving Daniel and his companions Chaldaic names when he appointed them to high office. (Daniel 1,7) Other commentators (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ram’ban) explain the name צפנת פענח as being Hebrew.

ויקרא פרעה שם יוסף צפנת פענח, “Pharaoh named Joseph Tzofnat paneach, “the one who reveals what was hidden.” It was customary to give special names to the king’s ministers, names that related to their office, their accomplishments, etc. We find that Daniel was renamed Belteshezzar when appointed to office (Daniel 1,6).

צפנת פענח, “the one who reveals secrets.” This word does not appear a second time in Scripture. We do, however, encounter this word in the נשמת prayer recited on Sabbath mornings where the expression is המפענח נעלמים, [the subject being G’d, not man. Ed.] This gives us reason to believe that the King (Pharaoh) was familiar with the language spoken in nearby Canaan. When Batya, a daughter of a later Pharaoh, named Moses משה, paraphrasing the Hebrew words כי מן המים משיתיהו “for I have pulled him from the water,” (Exodus 2,10) this also indicates that she was familiar with the language spoken by the Hebrews.

He is Potiphar and was called Poti Phera. Rashi deduced this from the fact that it is written, “Pharaoh gave Yoseif the name...and he gave him Osnas...” That is, Pharaoh gave Osnas to Yoseif. Now, what difference does it make that Pharaoh was the one who gave her to Yoseif? It must be that Poti Phera is Potiphar, and it makes a great difference, as follows: Pharaoh wanted to bestow greatness upon Yoseif and dress him royally. But he feared people would not allow Yoseif this greatness since he was a slave. Furthermore, the laws of Egypt stated that a slave may not rule nor wear prestigious garments. Thus Pharaoh [arranged that Potiphar] give Osnas to Yoseif as a wife. If a master gives his slave a wife, the slave is freed — and surely if he gives him his own daughter. From this we may conclude that Poti Phera is Potiphar.

צפנת פענה. Sucht man Analogien für diese wahrscheinlich ägyptischen Worte, so hätte man für צפן :צפנת, verbergen. Für פענת findet sich jedoch vielleicht nur das rabbinische פנח, bewahren (Jebamoth 115 b. לפנהיא שבקיה, siehe das. Raschi) und hieße es dann vielleicht: der, bei dem Geheimnisvolles bewahrt ist, der den Schlüssel zu Geheimnisvollem hat. — Zu Josefs Installierung gehört offenbar, dass er sich verheiraten musste; erst dann geht er hinaus an sein Amt. Im pharaonischen Staat muss ein Mann ohne Frau nur ein halber Mann gewesen sein. Zu dem Posten, den Josef ausfüllen sollte, gehörte ein ganzer Mann. Auch jetzt schenkt das Volksbewusstsein einem Junggesellen nicht volles Vertrauen. Fügen wir hinzu, dass die Aufgabe, die Josef wird, ganz besonders gefördert werden musste, wenn er selbst Haus und Familie hatte. Wenn das Volk in den sieben Jahren der Fruchtbarkeit sich weise beschränken wollte, so reichten sie fünfunddreißig Jahre aus. In sinnloser Verschwendung gingen fie dem Hungertode entgegen. Josef sollte diese heilsame und notwendige Kontrahierung üben. Den wohltätigsten Einfluss würde er durch das eigene Beispiel üben können, wenn er, der erste im Lande, mit dem Beispiele der Einfachheit in Familie und Haus vorangehen würde. Dazu war aber Familie und Haus notwendig, dazu bedurfte er der Frau. Der Mann ohne Familie und Haus hängt nicht in so inniger Weise mit den allgemeinen Angelegenheiten und Sorgen zusammen; allein mit Frau und Kindern, und wäre er ein Kaiser oder König, steht er mitten inne in den allgemeinen Sorgen des Volkes.

צפנת פענח, this name is an acronym, describing a person who is steadfast in the presence of strong urges to satisfy his libido through sleeping with partners legally forbidden to him. Potiphar had had no reason to believe that Joseph could not withstand such temptation. [Pharaoh wanted the world to know that Joseph had been completely innocent of any accusation. Ed.]

פוטי פרע — POTIPHERAH — he is identical with Potiphar. And he is called Potipherah (pherah meaning, disturbed or cut) as he became naturally castrated, since he desired Yosef for male intercourse (Sotah 13b).

THE DAUGHTER OF POTI-PHERAH ‘KOHEIN’ (PRIEST OF) ON. He is indentical with Potiphar.⁸⁰Above, 37:36. He was called Poti-phera⁸¹The word pera 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.⁸²Bereshith Rabbah 86:3.
On account of this Midrash, Rashi was forced to say in explanation of kohein On⁸³Rashi’s explanation of kohein On 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.”⁸⁴Exodus 3:1. Meaning the chief of Midian. It could not mean “the priest” of Midian since Jethro had already abandoned idolatry.
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],⁸⁵Ramban’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 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 Midian⁸⁶Exodus 3:1. means “priest of Midian,” just as they said, concerning Jethro,⁸⁷Sanhedrin 82b. 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,’⁸⁸II Samuel 8:18. and in the book of Chronicles,⁸⁹I Chronicles 18:17. in the same connection it says, And the sons of David were chiefs at the side of the king.⁹⁰It is thus clear that kohanim in the book of Samuel means “chief ministers.” Similarly we find in the following verses: He leadeth ‘kohanim’ barefoot,⁹¹Job 12:19. referring to ministers of the king; ‘y’chahein pe’eir,’⁹²Isaiah 61:10. Translated: “a priestly diadem.” (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.

פוטיפרע, this is not the Potiphar who had acquired Joseph as a slave.

ויצא יוסף, he now proceeded to take the reins of government into his hands

ויתן לו את אסנת בת פוטיפרע...לאשה, “He gave him Ossnat, daughter of Potiphera as a wife.” He did not give him as a wife the daughter of a member of the Egyptian political hierarchy, but the daughter of Potiphar, Joseph’s former master. This was a politically inspired move, designed to stifle any protest movement that might be sparked by Potiphar resenting that his former slave had now become the economic czar of the empire, with power over life and death. Seeing that he made Joseph Potiphar’s son-in-law by this astute maneuver, he was certain that the former master would now boast about being Joseph’s father-in-law. Rashi also agrees that the man called here Potiphera, was the one that used to be Joseph’s master and is known to us as Potiphar. The name change reflects that he had become castrated. The description by the Torah of the position of this man as “the priest of On,” prompted Rashi to give this commentary, as the word און is an expression of “greatness, strength,” as we know from Yaakov describing his first born son Reuven as ראשית אוני, “the first product of my virility” (Genesis 49,3). In his capacity as the chief executioner, Potiphar occupied a position of power. Nachmanides writes that the attribute כהן און, indicates that as a result of his castration Potiphar felt very embarrassed and decided to devote the rest of his life to a monk-like existence in a Temple, far from the eyes of the world. It is quite possible that the word “On” is the designation given to the specific deity whom Potiphar worshipped as a priest. The description of Yitro as כהן מדין, similarly describes the deity that Yitro used to serve in his position of priest. Our sages illustrate this when they said that he would offer fatted calves to this deity. (compare Yalkut Shimoni Judges 1) Some commentators claim that Potiphar took refuge in a monastery out of fear that Joseph would revenge himself on him for having thrown him into jail.

As a result of becoming castrated... His castration may be learned from the term פרע (torn), but not from פוטיפר. So it seems to me.

ויתן לו את אסנת, “he (Pharaoh) gave him Ossnat (as a wife) If you were to ask why Joseph who was Royalty would marry the daughter of a commoner, remember that Joseph had previously been a slave in the household of Potiphar. He therefore reasoned that if he were to refuse to marry Ossnat, the daughter of his former master, the latter would spread the word that Joseph was really a slave and that he had no business to have risen to such an exalted position. On the other hand, if he would agree and marry this woman, his former master would honour him henceforth, being proud that through this marriage he himself now had connections to the highest social circles in Egypt. There is an additional reason why he agreed to marry this woman, as she was actually a descendant of Yaakov, as Rashi has explained on Genesis, portion Vayishlach, quoting Pirke de rabbi Eliezer, chapter 38, according to which she was the daughter of Dinah from her rape by Sh’chem. According to that chapter, the angel Michael had transported that infant to Egypt where she had been adopted by Potiphar. This is why the Torah calls her the daughter of Potiphar. We find that Moses similarly was adopted by the daughter of Pharaoh, and that in Chronicles I 4,18 Calev is reported as marrying (also) Bityah-the daughter of Pharaoh, who had at the time adopted Moses. When Joseph was paraded throughout Egypt (Genesis 49,23,) and according to the Torah, all the young ladies threw flowers or jewelry at him, when Ossnat, did not have anything to throw, she threw her amulet, which she had worn around her neck at all times, at him. When Joseph looked at the inscription on it, he realised that the girl wearing it was descended from Yaakov, and he went ahead and married her.

ויתן לו את אסנת בת פוטיפרע, “he gave him (as a wife) Ossnat daughter of Potiphera;” according to Rashi, this is the same Potiphar in whose house Joseph had served for a year before his incarceration. If Joseph had married someone of higher rank, he was afraid that his children would be claimed by his former master as slaves, seeing he had owned their father as a slave. When he married his former master’s own daughter, he would be ashamed to say that her children were slaves. A different exegesis: he married her to prove that he had never slept with her mother as claimed. Still another interpretation: Joseph’s wife was called: “the daughter of Potiphar,” only because he had raised her. There was no biological connection with Potiphar. We find something similar in Chronicles I 4,18: אלה בני בתיה בת פרעה, ”these were the children of Batyah, daughter of Pharaoh, as pointed out in Torah Shleymah by Rabbi Menachem Kasher item 111 on this verse, quoting Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 38 according to which this was the daughter Dinah who had been raped by Sh’chem, her very name suggesting that she was the product of rape. Having been raised in the house of a high official such as Potiphar, and bearing his name, would help to remove any stigma from her. According to the Midrash, Yaakov, after her birth had expelled her, and placed a charm around her neck and hid her among some cactuses and similar prickly plants, so that when found she was named according to the location where she had been found, סנה, “thornbush.” The angel Gavriel brought her to Egypt, presented her to the wife of Potiphar where she was raised. When Joseph was paraded after his ascension to power and all the young women of Egypt crowded around him to admire his being so handsome (49,22), and throwing flowers at him, Ossnat, who had no flowers, threw her charm at him. When Joseph took a look at the inscription on that charm, he realised that she was the daughter of his half sister Dinah, and decided to marry her.

כהן און, a minister in the city of that name, as we know from Samuel II 8,18 ובני דוד כהנים היו, “the sons of David were priests.” [seeing that they belonged to the tribe of Yehudah, how could they have been priests (who were descended from Levi)? The meaning of כהן therefore, both in Samuel and in our verse, must be that they were in exalted positions.

Because he had lusted to sodomize Yoseif. You might ask: Earlier it is written, “Your slave did such things to me” (39:19), and Rashi explains there: “She told him this when they were intimate.” And this was well after he bought Yoseif. [Does this not imply that he was not castrated?] The answer is: He did not have actual relations, only an embracing and kissing. And this explains why Rashi used the phrase ענייני תשמיש כאלה (matters of intimacy such as these), i.e., but not actual relations. Another answer: The castration affected only his testicles and not his membrum, as the Radak explains.

פוטיפרע, according to Rashi, this was the same man as the one who had been Joseph’s master, but his name has been changed after he had become partially castrated so as to prevent him from carrying out his homosexual designs on Joseph. The word פריעה, almost identical with the name given Potiphar here, describes a condition permitting sexual intercourse with females but not with males. Unless you interpreted this in this way, we would not know how Potiphar was able to produce a daughter. Besides, according to the words of his wife who demonstrated to her husband how Joseph had supposedly raped her or tried to rape her, that line would make no sense. (39,19).

בת פוטי פרע, she was described as “daughter of Potiphar” because she had been raised in Potiphar’s house. She was so named in accordance with Sanhedrin 19 that anyone who raises an orphan in his home is deemed to have given birth to that person.”