Vine Vignette
Summary by Channie Koplowitz Stein
If a picture is worth a thousand words, how many words is a dream worth? Parshat Vayeshev and the subsequent Parsha, Miketz are replete with dreams, first by Yosef and then by various Egyptians. We will focus today on the dreams of Pharaoh’s cupbearer and baker and the interpretation that Yosef gave to each.
While in prison, Yosef notices that his two fellow prisoners appear aggrieved and asks them what’s wrong. They tell him they had disturbing dreams and no one understands what they mean. Yosef replies, “Do not interpretations belong to God? Relate it to me, if you please.”
Immediately the cupbearer relates his dream in great detail: “Behold! There was a grapevine in front of me. On the grapevine were three tendrils; and it was as though it budded – its blossoms bloomed and its clusters ripened into grapes. And Pharaoh’s cup was in my hand and I took the grapes, pressed them into Pharaoh’s cup, and I placed the cup in Pharaoh’s palm.”
After Yosef interprets the dream, the baker appears satisfied with this interpretation and willingly presents his own dream for interpretation: “Behold! Three wicker baskets were on my head. And in the uppermost basket were all kinds of Pharaoh’s food – baker’s handiwork – and the birds were eating them from the basket above my head.” (Bereishit 40:9-17)
Our first question is what convinced the baker to now reveal his dream when he had been reluctant to do so before. But there is an even more compelling question; a cursory reading of the two dreams would suggest that the two dreams are similar and should have parallel and similar interpretations. However, Yosef understands things differently, and while he prophesies that the cupbearer will be released from prison and reinstated to his post in three days’ time, the baker will be hanged and die in three days’ time. What did Yosef understand that brought about these totally divergent interpretations?
First, Rashi explains that while each of Pharaoh’s servants had a dream that pertained to himself, they each also dreamt what would happen to his colleague. Therefore, when the baker heard that Yosef interpreted the butler’s dream as being returned to his position in three days’ time, he recognized its truth from and was now ready to divulge his personal dream.
But before the baker begins the account of his dream, Yosef adds a personal request at the end of the cupbearer’s interpretation. He asks that the cupbearer to remember him to Pharaoh and bring about his own release from the dungeon, implying that this entire scenario was orchestrated by Hakodosh Boruch Hu for the sole purpose of getting Yosef into Pharaoh’s government notes the Mayana shel Torah. Otherwise, either the servant would have been sentenced to death for his crime against the king, or this unpredictable occurrence of a fly falling into the king’s cup would have been totally ignored legally. Further, if he is pardoned, it is even more unlikely that he would be restored to his original position. Since he was reinstated, Yosef informed him that all this was so that he would remember him to Pharaoh and obtain his release.
Nevertheless, one could argue that either of these servants could have served the same purpose. How did Yosef know that the cupbearer would be saved and not the baker? Our first approach will be to look at how each reveals his personality through his speech. First, as Rabbi Tuviah Liskin notes in Kerem Tuviah, as soon as Yosef mentioned Hashem, the cupbearer was ready to trust Yosef with his dream, while the baker only shared his dream with Yosef after he was satisfied with how Yosef interpreted the first dream. The faith of the cupbearer signaled to Yosef that he was the one destined for life. Further, the Torei Zahav notes some subtle differences that indicate humility and remorse in the tone of the cupbearer while arrogance and entitlement seem to exist in the tone of the baker. The cupbearer related his dream, almost submissively, while the baker told it loudly. Building on this idea, Rabbi Nison Alpert reads into the account of the cupbearer an acceptance of responsibility for the entire wine making and serving process as servant of the king, while the baker considered his incarceration unjustified and the entire process of baking beneath him. He gloried in his high position rather than feeling happy to be in service to the king.
As rabbi Uziel Milevsky, writes in Ner Uziel, speech reveals the inner person. And when the dream interpreter puts his interpretation into words, it sets in motion the dynamics to make that interpretation real. The interpreter has tremendous power, but he bases his interpretation on the clues inherent in the facts of the dream and on the words the dreamer uses to relate them.
We now turn from the words to the details of the dreams. Rabbi Mordechai Ezrahi, basing his comments on the writings of the Dubno Maggid, writes that it is very clear that the cupbearer was destined for life while the baker was destined for death. The cupbearer was active throughout his dream culminating in the goal of serving the cup of wine to the king. In contrast, the baker was completely passive, dead, for if he displayed any signs of life, the birds would have scattered, not daring to peck at the bread in the baskets on his head.
Most people would argue that the baker was negligent in his duties, for a pebble remaining in the flour is emblematic of a careless sifting process, while the cupbearer could not be responsible for a fly flying into the cup he was carrying for the king’s immediate consumption. Rabbi Dinner, the Mikdash Halevi, however, sees things differently but still agrees with Yosef’s verdict. Rabbi Dinner posits that it would be virtually impossible for the baker to personally oversee every step of the baking process as performed by his subordinates, but the fly could easily be removed from the king’s cup as the cupbearer was carrying it. Therefore it would seem that the cupbearer was more at fault. But Yosef saw it differently, writes Rabbi Dinner. The baker was at fault because as the man in charge, it was his responsibility to impress upon his subordinates the importance of being careful for each step of the process. Even if he delegated the various steps to others, ultimate responsibility for the final result rested with him. On the other hand, a fly suddenly falling into the wine was an aberration out of the cupbearer’s control. The butler saw himself in the dream involved in the entire process, supervising every step, while the baker saw only the finished product. Even then, it was in unprotected baskets on his head. Yosef understood that the means toward the end is at least as important as the end itself, just as we, parents or teachers, must recognize that we cannot achieve the goal of raising and educating good, Torah observant Jews and human beings unless we are constantly involved in the process.
Both Rabbi Belsky in Einei Yisroel and Rabbi Ezrahi point to another reason for Yosef’s interpretation. They both recognize that growth comes mainly through hardship, through being“squeezed” as were the grapes in the cupbearer’s dream. This was the case with our ancestors, as with Judah to prepare him for royalty. The hardships are instrumental for growth, and therefore the blessing over squeezed wine is of greater importance than the blessing over grapes.
Now we can move on to more homiletic interpretations. Because both dreamers began their narrative with the exclamation “Behold!”, Yosef realized that these were not natural dreams and that they bore some message for himself, writes the Malbim. Yosef realizes that vines often refer to Bnei Yisroel and that he himself is referred to as a blossoming vine. Here the blossoming vines must allude to the eventual redemption in which he himself will be instrumental.
The Gemarrah cites the cupbearer’s dream with the word cup mentioned four times as one of the sources for drinking four cups of wine at the Seder. What’s the connection between the two? As Rabbi Rosenthal cites the Chibat Kodesh in Kimotzeh Shallal Rav, the cupbearer was caressing each step in the winemaking process, indicating his love of his service to the king and his yearning to return to that service. Similarly, while we thank Hashem for redeeming us from Egypt, our desire was to be in His service. Now too, as we find ourselves in exile, we yearn for redemption to return to His service. As Rabbi Frand points out, we want to reestablish our connection with Hakodosh Boruch Hu just as the cupbearer wanted to reestablish his connection to Pharaoh. Further, just as the cupbearer envisioned each step in the winemaking and cup bearing process as relevant in this relationship, so too must we elevate everything we do in our material and physical lives to that higher purpose. That is how we prepare for Moshiach. When we drink the four cups of wine at the Seder, we must think of it as a transformative process, for we are elevating that wine to Divine service.
Dreams are wondrous and mysterious, and while it may be dangerous to try to fully interpret our own dreams, we understand that even within our dreams there are elements of truth. May all our dreams and aspirations bring positive results and raise us to higher service, as did the dream of the cupbearer in Parshat Vayehev.