Parashat Vayeshev tells of Yosef’s imprisonment in an Egyptian dungeon as a result of false charges brought by the wife of Potifar, for whom Yosef had faithfully worked. The Torah describes how Yosef earned the admiration and trust of the prison warden, who assigned Yosef over the other inmates: “The officer of the prison submitted to Yosef’s authority all the prisoners in the prison, and everything that they did there – he would do” (39:22).
The final clause of this verse – “everything that they did there – he would do” – seems difficult to understand, and has been interpreted differently by the commentators.
Targum Onkelos translates this phrase to mean that everything the inmates did was performed “by his word,” meaning, under Yosef’s authority and supervision. Yosef held a position of authority over his fellow inmates, and thus all that happened in the jail cell took place by his command. This is the interpretation followed by Rashi and the Radak. Saadia Gaon offers a slightly different explanation, claiming that Yosef guided and directed the inmates (“hu haya ha-madrikham”). In his view, the Torah refers not to Yosef’s authority, but rather to his role as instructor helping his fellow prisoners with whatever they needed.
Ibn Ezra suggests rereading the first segment of this clause – “everything that they did there” – to mean “everything that they needed to do there.” The warden counted on Yosef to care for any needs that arose in the prison cell; he was entrusted with the prison’s maintenance and day-to-day operation. Ibn Ezra draws proof to this interpretation from the next verse, which speaks of how the warden felt no need to supervise Yosef, as he fully trusted him with everything that transpired in the jail cell.
Rav Shimshon Refael Hirsch suggests reading this verse to mean that “what previously a number of had to do, he did alone.” In other words, the Torah here testifies to Yosef’s talents, alacrity and efficiency, as he succeeded in achieving independently what had previously required the combined efforts of several people to accomplish.
We might also suggest a different interpretation, namely, that Yosef did not act any differently from the other inmates, despite his stature of prominence. Even though “the officer of the prison submitted to Yosef’s authority all the prisoners in the prison,” Yosef nevertheless did “everything that they did there.” He did not request, demand or expect special privileges on account of the authority invested in him; he did not abuse his “connections” with the prison warden to receive exemptions from the chores and labors assigned to the other inmates. With characteristic humility, nobility and sensitivity, Yosef ensured not to invite the envy or resentment of the other prisoners, and instead subjected himself to the same conditions that they were forced to endure.