Genesis 37:4

Gen 37:4 And when his brethren saw that their father loved him more than all his brethren, they hated him, and could not speak peaceably unto him.

Ver. 4. They hated him.] 1. There is a passion of hatred: this is a kind of averseness, and rising of the heart against a man, when one seeth him; so that he cannot away with him, nor speak to him, nor look courteously or peaceably upon him; but one’s countenance falls whea he sees him, and he oven turns away, and, by his good will, would have nothing to do with him. 2. There is a habit of hatred: when the soul is so soured with this leaven, so settled in this alienation and estrangement, that it grows to wish, and desire, and seek his hurt. And this is one difference between hatred and envy: whom men hate, they will harm; but sometimes men’s gifts are envied, against whom no hurt is intended.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gen_37:4

They hated him

Lessons

1.

Choice respects to any, from parents, above all others, usually make such favourites to be envied.

2. Flesh and blood usually hate that which grace affects and loves.

3. Sin, and envy specially, put men out of a capacity of doing duty to relations.

4. Where hearts are full of hatred, mouths speak not peace but bitterness and scorning. (G. Hughes, B. D.)

Causes of envy

Notice now what are the three things for which we are prone to envy others.

1. Their privileges. Joseph was envied because his father favoured him. Asaph was envious at the foolish, when he saw the prosperity of the wicked (Psa_73:3). Against this David warns us--Fret not thyself because of evil doers--Fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his way (Psa_37:1-7).

2. Their prospects. Joseph was envied because of the destiny foreshadowed by his dreams. Walter Scott envied his school-fellow the prize he seemed certain to win. This again, how common I Many a boy stands aloof from his comrades, and joins little and without heart in their sports, because he has fixed his hopes--his ambition if you will--on some object to be gained. Now the others will not envy him in the sense of wishing to be as he is; but they resent his presuming to have objects higher than theirs.

3. Their piety. Joseph was envied because he held aloof from his brothers sins. It is not so now? (E. Stock.)

Envy

The happiness of other men is poison to the envious man. The odious passion of envy torments and destroys ones self, while it seeks the ruin of its object. Beware of envy; you know not to what it tends. Beware of all its fruits; you will find them to be deadly, when they have time and opportunity to ripen. Josephs brethren did not proceed to extremes of cruelty when they were first seized with this baleful passion. They could not speak peaceably to him, but they entertained no thoughts of killing him, till their envy had by indulgence acquired a greater degree of strength. Their lust conceived and brought forth sin; and when their sin was finished, it brought forth death to Joseph in their intentions. They contracted the guilt of his blood, although they did not shed it. They were chargeable with intended murder in the sight of men, when they cast Joseph into the pit; but in the sight of God they were chargeable with this crime as soon as they began to hate Joseph; for he that hateth his brother in his heart is a murderer. (G. Lawson, D. D.)

The baleful nature of envy

Wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous; but who is able to stand before envy? (Pro_27:4). Even a brother is sometimes exposed to its influence. Like the wild tornado which, as it sweeps along, destroys the loveliest flowers, and leaves the garden desolate as the wilderness, it has cut down many a youth of promise, and turned many a peaceful home into a scene of sadness and distress. We may say of it as Seneca says of anger, to which it is intimately allied: that it is a vice decidedly against nature; for it divides instead of joining, and in some measure frustrates the end of Providence in human society. One man was born to help another; envy makes us destroy one another. Nature unites, envy separates; the one is beneficial, the other mischievous; the one succours even strangers, the other destroys the most intimate friends; the one ventures all to save another, the other ruins himself to undo another. (Thornley Smith)

Envy hateful

When Sir Walter Scott was a boy at school, his efforts to gain a prize seemed all to no purpose, on account of the superior memory of one of his companions, who never failed to say his lessons perfectly. Walter did well, but now and then he would make a slip. In vain he strove to be first; he was always second, but could not oust his schoolfellow from the top place. One day, watching his rival repeating a long task without mistake or hesitation, Walter noticed that his fingers were perpetually fidgeting a particular button on his waistcoat. A thought struck the envious lad. Could it be? He would see. An opportunity soon occurred, and he cut off that button from that waistcoat while its owner was asleep. Next day the class stood up. Number one began, and as the first words left his lips, his fingers might be seen feeling for the familiar button. They felt for it in vain; and the hapless boy stopped, then stammered, then stopped again, and broke down altogether. Utterly unconscious of the cause, he racked his memory in despairing amazement, but he could not remember a line, and Walter stepped to the top of the class. Not a very serious trick, many boys will say. I choose it on this very account, as an illustration of what envy will lead to. Our object in this lesson should be to show envy at work in ordinary daily life, working all manner of mischief, just because its wickedness is not appreciated. An illustration of some murderer, whose crime was instigated by envy, would not answer our purpose. Our Sunday scholars would condemn the sin with horror, utterly failing to see the less glaring, but in Gods sight not less hateful, fault of their own hearts and tongues and lives. Our illustrations should be such as will enable us effectively to say, like Nathan, Thou art the man! Mutato nomine, de te fabula narratur. But it is not enough to show the hideousness of envy. We must show the beauty of the charity which envieth not. Thus: What should Walter Scott have done? Let the button alone? Yes; hut more than that. He should have honoured his companion, and rejoiced in his success. Ah, that is hard! (E. Stock.)

Envy soon finds an opportunity

When envy has fully formed its purpose of cruelty, it very speedily sees and seizes an opportunity for carrying it through. The great dramatist, indeed, has represented one of the most unscrupulous of his characters as excusing himself after this fashion: How oft the sight of means to do ill deeds makes ill deeds done; but then it is only the envious and malicious man who is on the outlook for means to do ill deeds, and therefore it is to him only that the perception of them offers a temptation. If King John had not been wishing to make away with Arthur, the presence of Hubert would not have suggested to him that he had found a fit instrument to do what he desired. Just as love keens the vision to such a degree that it sees ways of service that are invisible to others, so hate quickens the perception, and finds an occasion for its gratification in things that would have passed unnoticed by others. The brothers of Joseph, therefore, being filled with envy towards him, soon had an opportunity of working their will upon him, and they seized it with an eagerness which showed how intensely they hated him. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

37:4 Jacob’s favoritism toward Joseph inflamed his other sons’ hatred of their brother. Just as Isaac’s and Rebekah’s favoritism had separated their family, Jacob’s favoritism would separate him from his son Joseph.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

could not speak peaceably unto him--did not say "peace be to thee" [Gen 43:23, &c.], the usual expression of good wishes among friends and acquaintances. It is deemed a sacred duty to give all this form of salutation; and the withholding of it is an unmistakable sign of dislike or secret hostility. The habitual refusal of Joseph's brethren, therefore, to meet him with "the salaam," showed how ill-disposed they were towards him. It is very natural in parents to love the youngest, and feel partial to those who excel in talents or amiableness. But in a family constituted as Jacob's--many children by different mothers--he showed great and criminal indiscretion.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 4. And could not speak peaceably unto him.] Does not this imply, in our use of the term, that they were continually quarrelling with him? but this is no meaning of the original: ולא יכלו דברו לשלם velo yachelu dabbero leshalom, they could not speak peace to him, i. e., they would not accost him in a friendly manner. They would not even wish him well. The eastern method of salutation is, Peace be to thee! שלום לך shalom lecha, among the Hebrews, and [Arabic] salam, peace, or [Arabic] salam kebibi, peace to thee my friend, among the Arabs. Now as peace among those nations comprehends all kinds of blessings spiritual and temporal, so they are careful not to say it to those whom they do not cordially wish well. It is not an unusual thing for an Arab or a Turk to hesitate to return the salam, if given by a Christian, or by one of whom he has not a favourable opinion: and this, in their own country, may be ever considered as a mark of hostility; not only as a proof that they do not wish you well, but that if they have an opportunity they will do you an injury. This was precisely the case with respect to Joseph's brethren: they would not give him the salam, and therefore felt themselves at liberty to take the first opportunity to injure him.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

And when his brethren saw that their father loved him more than all his brethren,.... Which they perceived by various things in his behaviour to him, by his words, his looks, his gestures, and particularly by the coat he had made him, which distinguished him from the rest:

they hated him, and could not speak peaceably unto him; they not only inwardly hated him, but they could not conceal their hatred, but betrayed it by their speech unto him; they could not speak to him on any occasion, but in a cross, surly, ill natured manner; they could not salute him, or give him the common salutation, Peace be to thee, as Aben Ezra suggests.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Could not, through envy, which caused them to notice every little distinction shewn to Joseph. They perceived he was the most beloved. His accusing them, and insinuating by his mysterious dreams that he would be their lord, heightened their rage. (Haydock)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Their hatred was so deep and keen, that they could not smother it, as for their own interest they should have done, but discovered it by their churlish words and carriages to him.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

4. Could not speak peaceably — “Hebrews, could not bid peace to him; could not greet him with the ordinary salutation, ‘Shalom,’ ‘Peace be unto thee.’ It may be that Joseph was unwise and unkind to accept this distinction, and to report to his father evil rumours concerning his brethren; but we are hardly to expect that he, a child, would set up his judgment against that of his father, and he everywhere appears as a frank and guileless child.” — Newhall.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And when (literally, and) his brethren saw that their father loved him more than all his brethren, they (literally, and they) hated him, as Esau hated Jacob (Gen_27:41; cf. Gen_49:23) and could not speak peaceably unto him literally, they were not able to speak of him for peace, L e. they could not address him in such a way as to wish him well; they could not offer him the customary salutation of Shalom, or Peace.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

ולא יכלו דברו לשלום AND THEY COULD NOT SPEAK PEACEABLY TO HIM — from what is stated to their discredit we may infer something to their credit: they did not speak one thing with their mouth having another thing quite different in their hearts (Genesis Rabbah 84:9).

דברו means TO SPEAK TO HIM.

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

ולא יכלו דברו לשלום, any conversation with Joseph did not revolve around peacefully discussed matters of common interest, but concerned only matters of dispute between them.

Radak on the Tanakh — English translations: “Sefaria Community Translation” (CC0 1.0 (public-domain dedication)); “Eliyahu Munk, HaChut Hameshulash” (CC BY 4.0); “Rabbi Mike Feuer, Jerusalem Anthology” (CC BY 4.0); and “R. David Kimhi on the first book of Psalms, Translated by R.G. Finch, London, 1919” (public domain). Text via Sefaria.