וַיְהִ֣י ׀ כְּמֵשִׁ֣יב יָד֗וֹ וְהִנֵּה֙ יָצָ֣א אָחִ֔יו וַתֹּ֕אמֶר מַה־פָּרַ֖צְתָּ עָלֶ֣יךָ פָּ֑רֶץ וַיִּקְרָ֥א שְׁמ֖וֹ פָּֽרֶץ׃
E aconteceu que, quando ele recolheu sua mão, eis que seu irmão saiu, e ela disse: "Como rompeste uma abertura para ti!" E ele chamou seu nome de Peretz.
Midrash BeChiddush
וַיְעַנּ֑וּנוּ Va’yanunu:“And oppressed us.” One should know that the actions of Pharaoh and the Egyptians were planned with great shrewdness. God’s words to Abraham in the Covenant of the Pieces were not ignored , “And they shall be enslaved and oppressed.” (Gen. 15:13) Therefore they began to fulfill God’s word by placing heavy taxes and tributes upon them so that they would become impoverished. The possessions of the entire nation were reduced, similar to what the sages stated, “Like a lily among thorns…” (Song 2:2) “Just as a lily, when it is situated among the thorns, a north wind blows and tilts it and the thorn pierces it, a south wind blows and tilts it and a thorn pierces it, a west wind blows and tilts it and a thorn pierces it, and so with the four directions…”115 See Vayikra Rabbah 23:4 and Song of Songs 2:2 for two variations on this Midrash. It strikes me, that Rabbi Foa was quoting these texts from memory both here and elsewhere in the commentary and so he changes the actual version of the Midrash So, it was with the people of Israel; they made their homes subjugated among the nations. These ones said to them, “Give us taxes (פִּיסִּים)!”116[distributions, cmp. Lat. tributum,] taxes, esp. pissim, pissin, name of a Roman tax laid on the community and distributed by the latter according to assessments, Jastrow. and these ones said to them, “Give us your appointed service (זימון)!” and these ones said to them, “Give us your tribute!” and these ones said, “Give us your head tax.” (גִּלְגּוּלֵ). Thus, they were like a lily among the thorns. Similarly, when they rented them houses they charged them ten times the amount compared to what they would charge gentiles. They did the same with anything they sold them.
(Akh) “They neither know nor understand, they go about in darkness,” (Ps. 82:5) God said, first, “They shall enslave them,” and afterwards, “They shall oppress them.” (Gen. 15:13) (Because they did it the other way around - first oppressing and then enslaving) the Egyptians never succeeded. They did just the opposite.117Instead of enslaving and oppressing the Israelites as is stated in Genesis 15:13, first Egyptians oppressed them and then they enslaved them. The more they oppressed them, “the more the Israelites increased and spread out.” In other words the more they oppressed Israel the more the Egyptians enriched the Israelites.” The word yifrotz יִפְרֹ֑ץ comes from the verse, “the man grew exceedingly prosperous פְרֹ֥ץ הָאִ֖ישׁ,” (Gen. 30:43) which is said about Jacob. The Egyptians then saw that their decrees did not have an effect and their actions turned against Egypt. The wealth that they took from the Israelites actually destroyed the wealth of the Egyptians, as is written, “the more they increased and spread out,” (Gen. 1:12) this is to be interpreted, “The more the Israelites’s wealth increased and the more the possessions of the Egyptians were lost,” based on the verse,פָּרַ֖צְתָּ עָלֶ֣יךָ פָּ֑רֶץ “What a breach you have made for yourself!” (Gen. 38:29) This was especially true for Pharaoh who had the intention of building a treasury, and it turned into garrison cities עָרֵ֤י מִסְכְּנוֹת֙118Some translate the expression as store cities. Here Rabbi Foa plays on the connection between miskenot, מִסְכְּנוֹת֙ and sakanah, which means danger. which became a danger to the Egyptians. As a result, “the [Egyptians] came to dread the Israelites,” (Ex. 1:12) that is, the loss of their wealth caused the Egyptians pain that was like thorns in one’s flesh.
Therefore, the Egyptians took counsel and decided to leave their wealth and only to enslave them. As it is written, “The Egyptians ruthlessly imposed slavery upon the Israelites and they made their lives bitter with hard labor…” (Ex. 1:13-14) From this point forward, the Egyptians only imposed hard labor and slavery are mentioned. It also says, “The Israelites were groaning under the bondage and cried out… their cry for help from the bondage rose up to God.” (Ex.2:23) And if you say, “, “I have marked well the oppression עֳנִ֥י of My people in Egypt…” (Ex. 3:7),119 He just said that “Oppression” wasn’t mentioned once they enslaved him and yet here we do find mention of the oppression brought upon the Israelites. I have already answered this question in Goren Arnon: two explanations of the word עֳנִ֥י are offered. One is imposed upon them. עֳנִ֥י is an allusion to exile besides the exile experienced in Egypt, as God said, “I will be what I will be,” (Ex. 3:14) which the sages explained as, “I will be with them in this exile and I will be with them in other exiles.” See what I wrote there at length.
And even if it was their intention to do this evil to Israel by oppressing them, they were not able to, “oppressed us,” since the Holy One combines thought with action…and even more so when the thoughts involve action.120I am uncertain about the last section of this passage. Possibly, Rabbi Foa is saying that thoughts of oppression are the same as actual oppression because they lead to action, and therefore the Egyptians were punished for their “thoughts.”
(Akh) “They neither know nor understand, they go about in darkness,” (Ps. 82:5) God said, first, “They shall enslave them,” and afterwards, “They shall oppress them.” (Gen. 15:13) (Because they did it the other way around - first oppressing and then enslaving) the Egyptians never succeeded. They did just the opposite.117Instead of enslaving and oppressing the Israelites as is stated in Genesis 15:13, first Egyptians oppressed them and then they enslaved them. The more they oppressed them, “the more the Israelites increased and spread out.” In other words the more they oppressed Israel the more the Egyptians enriched the Israelites.” The word yifrotz יִפְרֹ֑ץ comes from the verse, “the man grew exceedingly prosperous פְרֹ֥ץ הָאִ֖ישׁ,” (Gen. 30:43) which is said about Jacob. The Egyptians then saw that their decrees did not have an effect and their actions turned against Egypt. The wealth that they took from the Israelites actually destroyed the wealth of the Egyptians, as is written, “the more they increased and spread out,” (Gen. 1:12) this is to be interpreted, “The more the Israelites’s wealth increased and the more the possessions of the Egyptians were lost,” based on the verse,פָּרַ֖צְתָּ עָלֶ֣יךָ פָּ֑רֶץ “What a breach you have made for yourself!” (Gen. 38:29) This was especially true for Pharaoh who had the intention of building a treasury, and it turned into garrison cities עָרֵ֤י מִסְכְּנוֹת֙118Some translate the expression as store cities. Here Rabbi Foa plays on the connection between miskenot, מִסְכְּנוֹת֙ and sakanah, which means danger. which became a danger to the Egyptians. As a result, “the [Egyptians] came to dread the Israelites,” (Ex. 1:12) that is, the loss of their wealth caused the Egyptians pain that was like thorns in one’s flesh.
Therefore, the Egyptians took counsel and decided to leave their wealth and only to enslave them. As it is written, “The Egyptians ruthlessly imposed slavery upon the Israelites and they made their lives bitter with hard labor…” (Ex. 1:13-14) From this point forward, the Egyptians only imposed hard labor and slavery are mentioned. It also says, “The Israelites were groaning under the bondage and cried out… their cry for help from the bondage rose up to God.” (Ex.2:23) And if you say, “, “I have marked well the oppression עֳנִ֥י of My people in Egypt…” (Ex. 3:7),119 He just said that “Oppression” wasn’t mentioned once they enslaved him and yet here we do find mention of the oppression brought upon the Israelites. I have already answered this question in Goren Arnon: two explanations of the word עֳנִ֥י are offered. One is imposed upon them. עֳנִ֥י is an allusion to exile besides the exile experienced in Egypt, as God said, “I will be what I will be,” (Ex. 3:14) which the sages explained as, “I will be with them in this exile and I will be with them in other exiles.” See what I wrote there at length.
And even if it was their intention to do this evil to Israel by oppressing them, they were not able to, “oppressed us,” since the Holy One combines thought with action…and even more so when the thoughts involve action.120I am uncertain about the last section of this passage. Possibly, Rabbi Foa is saying that thoughts of oppression are the same as actual oppression because they lead to action, and therefore the Egyptians were punished for their “thoughts.”
Ramban
AND IT WAS AS THOUGH IT BUDDED AND ITS BLOSSOM WENT UP. “It seemed as though it budded. And it was as though it budded, i.e., it seemed to me in my dream as though it budded, and after the bud its blossom shot up, and after that it brought forth the clusters and then the ripe grapes. Onkelos translates: ‘And, when it buddeth, it brought forth sprouts.’ These words are the translation of the word porachath alone.”265The Hebrew states: V’hi keporachath althah nitzah. Rashi’s intent, in quoting the Targum, is to say that Onkelos’ words, apeikath lavlevin (brought forth sprouts), is an expression which Onkelos appended to his translation of the Hebrew word porachath. Ramban will later differ with this opinion, holding that it constitutes Onkelos’ rendition of the Hebrew word althah, and signifies: “And it, when it budded, immediately brought forth sprouts.” See below, Note 271. Thus far the words of Rashi.
This is not correct. If he is speaking in terms of appearances because they are matters of a dream, he should say, “Behold, like a vine was before me, and on the vine like three shoots.”266Instead, Scripture states: “Behold, a vine was before me. And on the vine were three shoots.”(Verses 9-10.) This kaph of comparison is found neither in the dream of the chief of the bakers nor in the dream of Pharaoh. Why then should the chief of butlers use the comparative form more than the others? Instead, in all three dreams it says v’hinei (and behold).267Verse 9, in the dream of the butler; Verse 16, in the dream of the baker, and in Chapter 41, Verse 3, the word v’hinei is used in connection with Pharaoh’s dream. It is this word which indicates comparison, for its meaning is “as if.”
But the explanation of the verse before us, And it was ‘keporachath’ its blossoms shot up, is that he saw that immediately as it budded, its blossoms shot up and its clusters ripened into grapes. This was to indicate that G-d was hastening to do it. This is how Joseph recognized that the “three shoots” indicated three days, and not months or years, and he himself deduced that on the same day the two will be summoned before the king. It may be [that this was also indicated by the dreams] because both of them dreamed in one night. Thus there is no need for the words of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, who says that Joseph knew of Pharaoh’s birthday.
This usage of a kaph to indicate immediacy is found in many places: And it came to pass, ‘k’meishiv’ (as he drew back) his hand;268Above, 38:29. ‘k’vo Avram’ (as Abram came);269Ibid., 12:14. ‘uk’eith’ (and at the time) of her death the women that stood by her said,270I Samuel 4:20. and many others.
Onkelos’ rendition into Aramaic stating, “And when it budded, it brought forth sprouts,” [means to say that the expression “brought forth sprouts”] is a translation of the Hebrew word althah, meaning that it immediately brought forth sprouts of the vine. That is, as soon as it budded, it brought forth large sprouts, its blossoms shot up, and its clusters ripened into grapes.271Rashi is of the opinion that Onkelos’ expression, va’aneitzath neitz, (not mentioned by Ramban, but appearing in the Targum, following apeikath lavlevin, mentioned above in Note 265), is the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew althah nitzah. Ramban however says that it is the translation only of the word nitzah, for althah (shoot up) could not refer to nitzah (sprouts). This is why, according to Ramban, Onkelos translated the word althah as apeikath lavlevin (it brought forth sprouts). In brief, according to Rashi’s understanding of the Targum, the Hebrew v’hi keporachath is rendered by the Targum as kad aphrachath apeikath lavlevin. The Hebrew althah nitzah is rendered va’aneitzath neitz. In the opinion of Ramban, v’hi keporachath is rendered by the Targum as kad aphrachath; the Hebrew althah is rendered apeikath lavlevin, and the Hebrew nitzah has its equivalent in Onkelos’ va’aneitzath nitzah. Onkelos would not apply the word althah (shoot up) to nitzah (sprouts), as they do not “shoot up.”
This is not correct. If he is speaking in terms of appearances because they are matters of a dream, he should say, “Behold, like a vine was before me, and on the vine like three shoots.”266Instead, Scripture states: “Behold, a vine was before me. And on the vine were three shoots.”(Verses 9-10.) This kaph of comparison is found neither in the dream of the chief of the bakers nor in the dream of Pharaoh. Why then should the chief of butlers use the comparative form more than the others? Instead, in all three dreams it says v’hinei (and behold).267Verse 9, in the dream of the butler; Verse 16, in the dream of the baker, and in Chapter 41, Verse 3, the word v’hinei is used in connection with Pharaoh’s dream. It is this word which indicates comparison, for its meaning is “as if.”
But the explanation of the verse before us, And it was ‘keporachath’ its blossoms shot up, is that he saw that immediately as it budded, its blossoms shot up and its clusters ripened into grapes. This was to indicate that G-d was hastening to do it. This is how Joseph recognized that the “three shoots” indicated three days, and not months or years, and he himself deduced that on the same day the two will be summoned before the king. It may be [that this was also indicated by the dreams] because both of them dreamed in one night. Thus there is no need for the words of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, who says that Joseph knew of Pharaoh’s birthday.
This usage of a kaph to indicate immediacy is found in many places: And it came to pass, ‘k’meishiv’ (as he drew back) his hand;268Above, 38:29. ‘k’vo Avram’ (as Abram came);269Ibid., 12:14. ‘uk’eith’ (and at the time) of her death the women that stood by her said,270I Samuel 4:20. and many others.
Onkelos’ rendition into Aramaic stating, “And when it budded, it brought forth sprouts,” [means to say that the expression “brought forth sprouts”] is a translation of the Hebrew word althah, meaning that it immediately brought forth sprouts of the vine. That is, as soon as it budded, it brought forth large sprouts, its blossoms shot up, and its clusters ripened into grapes.271Rashi is of the opinion that Onkelos’ expression, va’aneitzath neitz, (not mentioned by Ramban, but appearing in the Targum, following apeikath lavlevin, mentioned above in Note 265), is the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew althah nitzah. Ramban however says that it is the translation only of the word nitzah, for althah (shoot up) could not refer to nitzah (sprouts). This is why, according to Ramban, Onkelos translated the word althah as apeikath lavlevin (it brought forth sprouts). In brief, according to Rashi’s understanding of the Targum, the Hebrew v’hi keporachath is rendered by the Targum as kad aphrachath apeikath lavlevin. The Hebrew althah nitzah is rendered va’aneitzath neitz. In the opinion of Ramban, v’hi keporachath is rendered by the Targum as kad aphrachath; the Hebrew althah is rendered apeikath lavlevin, and the Hebrew nitzah has its equivalent in Onkelos’ va’aneitzath nitzah. Onkelos would not apply the word althah (shoot up) to nitzah (sprouts), as they do not “shoot up.”
Siftei Chakhamim
It seemed as if it budded... Rashi is explaining that the כ of כפורחת denotes “similar to.” It does not denote “when” (כאשר), for such a כ occurs only with a gerund (a type of noun), but not with a verb. But ויהי כמשיב ידו (38:29) [raises a question. Is it not a verb, and yet it has such a כ? The answer is: It] means, “it appeared as if he put back his hand.” He did it unintentionally. However since he put out his hand, the midwife tied on the scarlet thread, and then he immediately pulled it back, it seemed as if he had done so intentionally. Therefore Scripture describes it as such. Onkelos, who translates כפורחת as כד אפרחת, “when it budded,” is rendering a non-literal meaning. The proof is that he renders the present-tense verb פורחת as אפרחת, which is in the past tense. (Re’m)