(Verse 14) And he sat at the gate of Enaim, which is on the road to Thamna. The Hebrew phrase Enaim (), is translated as 'in the eyes.' Therefore, it is not a place name, but rather a description. He sat at a crossroads or a junction where a traveler must carefully look to choose the right path.

When Shelah had become a young man and Judah did not wish to bring her back to his house, Tamar thought, “How can I make the Hebrews realize that it is not marriage for which I am hungering, but rather that I am yearning for the blessing that is hidden in them? Although I am able to have relations with Shelah, I would not be able to make my faith victorious through Shelah. I ought then to have relations with Judah so that by the treasure I receive, I might enrich my poverty, and in the widowhood I preserve, I might make it clear that I did not desire marriage.”

Because Tamar was afraid lest Judah find out and kill her in vengeance for his two sons of whose deaths she was accused, she, like Eliezer, asked for a sign saying, “Let your knowledge not condemn me for this act of desire, for you know that it is for what is hidden in the Hebrews that I thirst. I do not know whether this thing is pleasing to you or not. Grant that I may appear to him in another guise lest he kill me. [Grant] also that an invitation to lie with him might be found in his mouth, so that I may know that it is acceptable to you that the treasure, which is hidden in the circumcised, might be transmitted even through a daughter of the uncircumcised. May it be that, when he sees me, he will say to me, ‘Come, let me come into you.’ ”

So, buoyed up with these promises Tamar sat in her father’s house, the text says, waiting for her father-in-law’s promise to take effect. When she saw that Judah was not prepared to honor his promise, for a while she accepted it mildly, forbearing to have relations with another man, being content with her widowhood and waiting for a suitable opportunity. She was anxious, you see, to have children by her father-in-law. When she saw her mother-in-law die and Judah make for Timnah to shear the flocks, she wished to obtain by stealth intercourse with her father-in-law and desired to have children by him, not out of incontinence—perish the thought—but to avoid appearing to be some nameless person. As a matter of fact, what happened was by divine design, and the result was that her scheme took effect.

Let no one who hears this, however, condemn Tamar. As I said before, she was carrying out the divine plan, and hence neither did she incur any blame, nor did Judah lay himself open to any charge. I mean, as you proceed along from this point, you will find Christ tracing his lineage from the two children born to him. In particular, the two children born to him were a type of the two people, prefiguring Jewish life and the spiritual life. For the time being, however, let us see how after Judah’s departure a short time elapsed and then the affair came to light; Judah admitted his own involvement and acquitted her of any guilt. So, after Tamar had achieved what she wanted, she once more changed her dress, the text says, left the spot and returned to her home. Judah, of course, was aware of none of this; he kept his promise by sending a kid so as to recover the pledge given by him, but the woman was nowhere to be found, and the servant returned informing Judah that no word of the woman could be had anywhere. Learning this, Judah said, the text goes on, “Let’s hope we are never condemned for being thought ungrateful.” He was unaware of what had happened, you see.

The purpose and intention of the divinely inspired Scripture is to describe to us the mystery of Christ through countless facts. And with good reason some have compared it with a magnificent and illustrious city that does not have a single statue of its king or imperator but many statues placed in a most frequented spot, where everybody can admire them. See how Scripture does not omit any fact that refers to such mystery but rather describes at length any and all of them. Even though sometimes the text of the story does not seem to be very suitable, this does not prevent Scripture at all from rightly constructing and accomplishing its proposed demonstration. Its purpose is not to relate the lives of saints (this is not the case at all) but rather to instruct us in the knowledge of the mystery of Christ through facts, which can make our speech about him true and manifest. Therefore it cannot be criticized as if it were wandering from the truth. And in Judah and Tamar the mystery of the incarnation of our Savior is again described to us.

Grant that whenever I become aware of the sins of another who has fallen, I may suffer with them, not rebuking them with pride, but mourning and weeping, so that by weeping for another, I may also mourn for myself, saying, "Tamar has been more righteous than I."

Perhaps a young woman may have been led astray, deceived, and swept away by circumstances that often lead to sin. After all, we who are older also fall into sin. Within us, too, the desires of the flesh often conflict with the intentions of our minds, making us prisoners of sin, leading us to act against our better judgment. Her youth provides some excuse, but I have none, for she is still learning, while we should know better. In this case, Tamar has shown herself to be more righteous than I.

When we criticize someone else's greed, we should reflect on whether we ourselves have ever acted out of greed. If we have, since greed is the root of all evil and works within us like a serpent hidden beneath the ground, let each of us admit: Tamar has been more righteous than I.

Let's not be afraid to admit that our own fault may be more serious than the fault of the person we feel we need to correct. This is what Judah did when he reprimanded Tamar. He remembered his own wrongdoing and said, "Tamar is more righteous than I am." This statement holds a profound lesson and moral teaching: Judah's offense wasn't counted against him because he confessed his guilt before others could accuse him.

(Verse 26.) But Judas acknowledged and said: she is more righteous than I, because I did not give her to my son Selom. In Hebrew, it says, she has been justified by me: not that she was just, but that in comparison to her, I have done less evil, not seeking base immorality, but seeking children.

He then said, “She is more innocent than I,” that is, “She is more righteous than I. What great sinners my sons were. ‘Because of this, I did not give her to my son Shelah.’ She is innocent of that evil suspicion that I held against her and [for which] I withheld my son Shelah from her.” She who had been cheated out of marriage was justified in her fornication, and he who sent her out on account of his first two sons brought her back for the sake of his last two sons. “He did not lie with her again” because she had been the wife of his first two sons; nor did he take another wife, for she was the mother of his last two sons.

What is the meaning of “She has more right on her side than I”? In other words, she is guiltless, whereas I condemn myself and without anyone to accuse me I confess—or rather, I have sufficient accuser in the pledge given by me. Then Judah goes on to supply a defense for Tamar by saying, “because I did not give her to my son Shelah.” Perhaps, however, this happened for the reason that I am about to give. I mean, Judah thought that it was through her fault that death fell on Er and Onan. For fear of this he did not give Shelah to her despite promising to do so. Accordingly, so as to prove in fact that she was not responsible for their death but rather that they were punished for their own wickedness (“God took his life” the text says, remember, and again, “he put him to death,” in reference to the second one), Judah himself had intercourse with his own daughter-in-law all unawares. He learned by later developments that, far from it being her fault, those men’s wickedness made them liable to suffer punishment. So Judah admitted his own sin, delivered her from punishment and, the text says, “had no further relations with her,” showing that he would not previously have had intercourse with her if he had not done so in ignorance.

In the first place it must be said that, even though there are some famous characters who are discovered to be guilty of acting in a not entirely honest way, however, since God in the holy Scriptures produces through them something useful for our salvation, let us drive away from us what may offend. If we take good care of our wisdom and intelligence, we are not unaware of what regards our profit. Let us consider how the blessed prophet Hosea took a prostitute as his wife, nor [did he refuse] a notorious marriage and was called the father of hateful sons, whose names were “Not my people” and “Unpitied.” I will not hesitate to declare what this means. In fact, after those who were the nobles and the princes in Israel opposed the preaching of the prophets and the divine word was unpleasing to them, in the meantime God acted through his saints so that they might see the future from what was happening as if it was magnificently and expressly depicted in a picture. God did this so they might rededicate their minds to understanding their hope and might look with the strongest application for what would have been salutary to them and might also persuade others to do the same. And they learned that they would not have been the elected people anymore but would have been received among those who show no mercy, if they behaved with hardness and immoderation. Were not they afflicted by evils and overwhelmed by them everywhere?… Since we now understand the criterion and direction of the divine plan in those times, we will not condemn anymore the adultery of Tamar and Judah, but rather we will say that their union occurred in the divine plan. In fact, the former was in need of the seed of procreation as her legitimate husband was lacking it. The latter was guilty of a slight fault since he was free after his first wife had already died. So this union and generation teach us about our spiritual union and the rebirth of our mind. The human mind cannot be drawn to truth in a more appropriate way.

What is one to say of Tamar, who brought to birth the twins Zerah and Perez? Their separation at the moment of birth was like a wall that divides the two peoples, and the hand tied with the scarlet ribbon already then speckled the conscience of the Jews with the passion of Christ.

Observe in this, I ask you, a mystery and a prediction of what is to come. You see, after the midwife bound the scarlet thread around his hand to make Zerah recognizable, then “he drew his hand back, and his brother came out.” He yielded precedence to his brother, it is saying, and the one thought last came out first, and the one thought first emerged after him. “The midwife said, ‘What a breach you have made for yourself!’ He was called Perez.” The name, in fact, means “breach” or “division,” as you might say. “After him came his brother with the mark on his right hand; he was given the name Zerah,” which means “sunrise.”It was not idly or to no purpose that these things happened; rather, it was a type of things to come, revealing the events themselves. You see, what happened was not according to natural processes. I mean, how would it have been possible, after his hand was bound with crimson, for him to draw back again and give way to the one after him, unless there were some divine power arranging this in advance? It was also prefiguring, as if in a kind of shadow, the fact that right from the outset Zerah, which means sunrise (he is, after all, a type of the church), began to peer ahead; as he moved gradually forward and then retired, the legal observance denoted by Perez made its entrance. After that had held precedence for a long time, the former one—I mean Zerah, who had retired—came forward, and the whole Judaic way of life in turn yielded place to the church.

In Pharez, let us rightly divide and rightly offer to the Lord, avoiding the wicked example of his parricide, and let us distribute the inheritance to those in need and restore to parents what belongs to them.

(Ver. 29.) And behold, his brother came out, and said, why is the wall divided because of you? And he called his name Phares. Concerning the wall, Aquila and Symmachus translated it as division, which in Hebrew is called Phares (). Therefore, he received the name of division because he divided the curtain of the second (also called placenta). Hence the Pharisees, who had separated themselves as if they were righteous from the people, were called the divided ones.