share torah logo

Genesis 38:22 - Where did Tamar disappear?

Genesis 38:22 - בראשית 38:22

Hebrew Text

וַיָּשָׁב אֶל־יְהוּדָה וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא מְצָאתִיהָ וְגַם אַנְשֵׁי הַמָּקוֹם אָמְרוּ לֹא־הָיְתָה בָזֶה קְדֵשָׁה׃

English Translation

And he returned to Yehuda, and said, I cannot find her; and also the men of the place said, There was no harlot in this place.

Transliteration

Vayashav el-Yehuda vayomer lo metzativah vegam anshei hamakom amru lo-hayta vazeh kdesha.

Hebrew Leining Text

וַיָּ֙שׇׁב֙ אֶל־יְהוּדָ֔ה וַיֹּ֖אמֶר לֹ֣א מְצָאתִ֑יהָ וְגַ֨ם אַנְשֵׁ֤י הַמָּקוֹם֙ אָֽמְר֔וּ לֹא־הָיְתָ֥ה בָזֶ֖ה קְדֵשָֽׁה׃
וַיָּ֙שׇׁב֙ אֶל־יְהוּדָ֔ה וַיֹּ֖אמֶר לֹ֣א מְצָאתִ֑יהָ וְגַ֨ם אַנְשֵׁ֤י הַמָּקוֹם֙ אָֽמְר֔וּ לֹא־הָיְתָ֥ה בָזֶ֖ה קְדֵשָֽׁה׃

🎵 Listen to leining

Parasha Commentary

Context of the Verse

This verse (Bereishit 38:22) appears in the narrative of Yehuda and Tamar, where Yehuda sends his friend Chirah the Adulamite to retrieve the pledge he had given to a woman he believed to be a harlot (קְדֵשָׁה). The verse describes Chirah's unsuccessful attempt to locate her and the testimony of the local men that no such woman existed in the area.

Rashi's Commentary

Rashi explains that the term "קְדֵשָׁה" (harlot) here refers specifically to a woman who engages in promiscuous behavior, as opposed to a zonah (another term for a harlot), which may imply a more general immoral woman. He notes that the men of the place truthfully testified that there was no public harlot in their area, as Tamar had disguised herself and acted discreetly (Bereishit Rabbah 85:8).

Midrashic Insights

  • Bereishit Rabbah 85:8 emphasizes that Tamar's actions were motivated by righteousness—she sought to uphold the lineage of Yehuda, knowing she was destined to bear his children (Peretz and Zerach).
  • The Midrash highlights the irony in the men's statement: while there was no public harlot, Tamar had indeed been present in disguise, fulfilling a divine plan.

Rambam's Perspective

In Hilchot Issurei Biah (Laws of Forbidden Relations), the Rambam discusses the prohibition of relations with a kedeshah, linking it to ancient pagan practices. This verse serves as a contrast—Tamar's act was not for idolatry but for a higher purpose, demonstrating that context and intent matter in halachic evaluation.

Halachic Implications

The Gemara (Sotah 10a) discusses the concept of kiddushin (betrothal) in this narrative, noting that Yehuda's pledge (signet, cord, and staff) functioned as a form of commitment. Though unconventional, Tamar's retention of these items later proved her righteousness and Yehuda's acknowledgment of his responsibility.

Moral Lesson

The episode teaches that appearances can be deceiving, and divine providence often works in hidden ways. Tamar's seemingly immoral act was, in truth, a vehicle for the continuation of the Davidic line (and ultimately Mashiach), as acknowledged by Yehuda himself: "צָדְקָה מִמֶּנִּי" ("She is more righteous than I," Bereishit 38:26).

📚 Talmud Citations

This verse is quoted in the Talmud.

📖 Sotah 10a
The verse is referenced in the discussion about Tamar and Judah, illustrating the moral and legal implications of their story.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the meaning of Genesis 38:22?
A: Genesis 38:22 describes Yehuda's servant returning to report that he could not find the woman (Tamar) whom Yehuda had sent him to locate. The men of the place also testified that there was no 'kedeshah' (a term often translated as 'harlot' but referring to a specific type of cultic figure in that era) in that area. Rashi explains that Tamar had removed her veil and returned to her father's house, making her unrecognizable to the servant.
Q: Why is the term 'kedeshah' used in this verse?
A: The term 'kedeshah' (קְדֵשָׁה) in this verse refers to a woman associated with certain idolatrous practices in ancient times, not a common harlot. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 82a) and Rashi clarify that this term denotes a specific role in pagan worship, which is why the men of the place denied its presence there, emphasizing that such practices were not part of their community.
Q: What lesson can we learn from Yehuda's actions in this story?
A: This verse is part of the larger narrative where Yehuda acknowledges his mistakes and takes responsibility (later in Genesis 38:26). The Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 85:11) highlights the importance of repentance and honesty, as Yehuda ultimately admits the truth. This teaches us the value of accountability and teshuvah (repentance) in Jewish tradition.
Q: How does this verse connect to the broader story of Yehuda and Tamar?
A: This verse sets the stage for Yehuda's eventual realization that Tamar was the woman he had encountered. The Ramban (Nachmanides) explains that this episode ultimately leads to the birth of Peretz, an ancestor of King David, showing how divine providence works even through seemingly difficult situations. It underscores the hidden righteousness of Tamar and Yehuda's growth in character.
Q: Why did the men of the place say there was no 'kedeshah' there?
A: According to Rashi and the Talmud, the men of the place truthfully testified that there was no 'kedeshah' in their area because Tamar had disguised herself temporarily and then left. Their statement reflects the fact that such practices were not common there, and Tamar's appearance was an exception. This detail adds to the narrative's tension and Yehuda's eventual recognition of his actions.