Komentarz do Rodzaju 38:25

הוא מוצאת WHEN SHE WAS BROUGHT FORTH to be burnt.

היא מוצאת, after she had taken out the pledges given to her by Yehudah and sent them to him via a messenger, she did not want to directly confront him, but said: ”I am pregnant for the man who owned these.”

היא מוצאת והיא שלחה, even at this late stage in the trial when she was already on the way to the site of her execution, Tamar did not despair, as she had a heart as stout as that of a lion.

היא מוצאת, she did not make the matter public even when she was on the point of being executed. Therefore she only hinted at the owner of the trinkets she wanted Yehudah to recognise without accusing him outright as having given them to her after he had slept with her.

היא מוצאת, “when she was taken out,” to be burned. We learn from this verse that a person should rather allow himself to be burned than to cause a fellow man to blanch from public embarrassment. Tamar reasoned to herself: “if he will admit his part in my pregnancy, all well and good; If not, I will rather allow myself to be burned in the furnace than to shame him in public.” Although the word מוצאת, has been spelled with the letter א, (whereas if it meant “being burned,” it should have been spelled without that letter) one may interpret it homiletically as being derived from הצתה, subjecting something to fire. Incidentally, the first letters in the words of the verse ו-יאמר י-הודה ה-וציאוה - ו-תשרף when read backwards yield the acrostic י-ה-ו-ה, the Ineffable Name of G’d. This suggests that at the time Tamar was concerned with saving Yehudah’s “face,” G’d was busy saving her life by invoking the attribute of Mercy.

From here they concluded: Better for a person to be thrown into a fiery furnace... You might ask: How did Chazal know this? Perhaps Tamar did not inform [that it was Yehudah] because she was not yet thrown into the fire, neither was it burning. But had the fire been burning she would have informed. The answer is as Rabbeinu Tam explains in Tosafos, Bava Metzia 59a: It is written here היא מוצת, missing an א, which is similar to, “He has kindled (ויצת) a fire in Zion” (Eichah 4:11). This implies that the fire was burning and still she did not inform. This is why Chazal concluded as they did.

היא מוצאת, our sages in Sotah 10 conclude from this verse that a person prefers to be thrown into a fiery furnace to being publicly embarrassed. They derive this from the words of Tamar, who said (to herself): “if he will own up to the truth, Ok, if not, I will rather allow myself to be burned at the stake than to shame him in public.” Even though the word מוצאת is spelled with the letter א in the middle, thus not being derived from the root הצת, to cause a conflagration, to set fire, one may explain it along that line here as being phonetically connected to Lamentations 4,11 ויצת אש ציון, “He set fire to Zion.”

והיא שלחה, “and she had sent;” the word is spelled with the letter י, [although usually we find it spelled with the letter ו, just like its masculine counterpart הוא, “he.” Ed.]

והיא שלחה אל חמיה SHE SENT TO HER FATHER-IN-LAW — she did not wish to put him to shame in public by saying “It is by thee that I am with child”, but she said only “By the man whose these are”. She thought: “if he is to acknowledge it, let him acknowledge it voluntarily, and if not, let them burn me and let me not put him to shame in public”. From this passage our Rabbis derived the teaching: Far better that a man should let himself be cast into a fiery furnace (even as Tamar was ready to be burnt to death) and let him not publicly put his fellow to shame (Sotah 10b).

לאיש אשר אלה לו, even though she was in extreme danger she did not want to publicly embarrass Yehudah. She is the person who inspired our sages to declare that one ought to prefer to be burned in public to publicly embarrassing a fellow human being (Sotah 10

לאיש אשר אלה לו, this prompted our ages in Sotah 10 to say that it is better for a person to throw himself into a burning furnace than to cause public embarrassment to a fellow human being. Tamar demonstrated this by the conduct the Torah attributes to her in our verse. The word לו, a reference to an unnamed third party left Yehudah the option to ignore her accusation, and for any future embarrassment on that score to be wiped out with her death.

Please recognize your Creator and do not destroy... She did not know there were three lives. Rashi says this because in truth it was so, but she mentioned only two lives. Maharshal, however, explains that Rashi knew this because it is written הכר נא. Why is נא written in the middle [of her plea]? It should be at the beginning or the end. From this Rashi deduces that she first said: “הכר (recognize) that I conceived from you,” [i.e., there are two lives]. Then she added נא, as if to say, “I have another request: Do not destroy the additional life.” I.e., do not destroy three lives.

הכר נא RECOGNISE, I PRAY THEE — The word נא is used as an expression of entreaty: Acknowledge (הכר) I beg of you, your Creator and do not destroy three lives (Genesis Rabbah 85:11).

ותאמר, this she said to the messenger she sent to Yehudah with the pledges that he had given her.

הכר נא, Bereshit Rabbah 85,11 notes how the Torah “plays” with people. She hinted to Yehudah that he had used the same words to deceive his father into believing that Joseph had been devoured by a wild animal. Now it was his turn to be deceived. The punishment matches the crime. (37,32) The Torah, knowing what was to happen in the future, smiled to itself thinking: “wait until you will be deceived by these same words.”