Komentarz do Rodzaju 39:10

לשכב אצלה TO LIE BY HER — even without sinning (Genesis Rabbah 87:6).

TO LIE ‘ETZLA’ (BY HER). The meaning of this expression is as Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra interpreted it: “even to lie near her, each in their garment, or to be with her for general conversation.” This interpretation is correct since we do not find the word etzla (near her) in Scripture in connection with sexual intercourse, only the word ima (with her) or othah (with her), as for example: Lie ‘imi’ (with me);²²⁸Verse 12 here. And if any man lie ‘othah’ (with her);²²⁹Leviticus 15:24. And the women ravished (‘tishachavnah’).²³⁰Zechariah 14:2. In tishachavnah, the plural form of othah is implicit.

להיות עמה, Joseph was even careful not to find himself alone with Potiphar’s wife until there came a day when he was forced to be alone with her in the house as all the other members of the household were occupied outside the house. According to Bereshit Rabbah 87,7 all the other people on that day had gone to watch the river Nile flood its banks, an annual event.

לשכב אצלה להיות עמה, she lowered her demands, even to at least lie down on the same bed beside her, or merely keeping her company. Joseph refused all these suggestions. According to an aggadic interpretation, the apparent repetition of the line לשכב אצלה להיות עמה refers to intimacy in this world on earth, לשכב אצלה, and the spiritual equivalent in the world to come, i.e. להיות עמה. (Sotah 3)

לשכב אצלה, “to lie down beside her;” Ibn Ezra understands this as sitting beside one another on the same settee, fully clothed, engaging in idle chatter. The reason for Ibn Ezra’s explanation is that the term לשכב אצלה, is most inappropriate for intimacy involving sex, as the Torah would have used the word עמה, if it wanted to describe such an intimate physical relationship.

Even without intimacy. [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, why is it not written לשכב עמה, as it said before (v. 7), שכבה עמי? You might ask: If he would not lie next to her even without intimacy, why does it then say, “nor to be with her,” which Rashi explains as referring to the World to Come? For what would he be punished? [The answer is:] Perhaps the verse is saying he would not lie next to her even without intimacy because he feared his evil inclination might bring him to intimacy, and he would go to Gehinnom. (Nachalas Yaakov)

Now, as regards the next verse: (39:10): ‘And it happened, when she spoke to Joseph daily, but he paid no attention to her importunings’, I believe its correct interpretation is as follows: on the first occasion, Joseph did listen to her words, and replied to her, as she was his master’s wife; but subsequently, he became afraid that her continual advances would (ultimately) entice him; for repeated words or deeds can make a huge impression, so as to effect an alteration in a person’s conduct. Consequently, from then onwards, when she used to speak to him every day – our Sages indeed tell us that this went on for twelve months! – he would not listen to what she said, to avoid himself becoming seduced. Now she, as mistress of the house, would sit on the ground – as is customary for ladies of that rank – on a rug made of linen and embroidered wool – and high-ranking officials, when coming to converse with them, would (customarily) lie down on those very rugs to conduct their dialogue. She was accordingly continually urging Joseph to lie down beside her on the rug so that she could speak to him, but he (for his part) had no desire to approach her. This, then, is the (full) purport of the verse (found here) :(39:10): ‘But he paid no heed to her, to lie by her side, to be with her’. On perceiving that she would not accept his efforts to extricate himself (from her clutches), he chose to shut his ears and neither to listen to anything she said, nor, needless to say, to venture close to her in the place where she was seated.

להיות עמה TO BE WITH HER, in the world to come (Gehinnom) (Genesis Rabbah 87:6).