From Sermon to Commentary: Expounding the Bible in Talmudic Babylonia

7. A New King

b.‘Eruvin 53a, b. Sot· ah 11a: “Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph” (Exodus 1:8). Rav and Samuel— One says: “New” literally.1 And one says: “New” in that his decrees were rendered new. The one who says “New” literally—it is because it is written “new.” And the one who says “New” in that his decrees were rendered new—since it is not written “and he died, and he reigned.” And what is “which knew not Joseph”?2—That he resembled someone who did not know him.3 This exegetical debate between Rav and Samuel is found with virtually identical wording in Exodus Rabbah 1:8.4 As an explanation of the biblical narrative, the suggestion that this was anything other than a new Pharaoh in a fully literal sense is impossible to accept here.5 The Talmud’s attempt to provide a textual basis for the interpretation is unconvincing. More importantly, the effort does not bear any obvious homiletical fruit. The Talmud does not derive from it any religious or moral lessons, although it would not have been difficult to do so. A more satisfying variation on the same theme is to be found in several midrashic collections from the Tanh· uma family, including the standard Tanh· uma, Shemot, 5.6 This passage has come down in diverse forms, including a genizah fragment published by Louis Ginzberg in Ginze Schechter:7 41 7: A New King Tanh· uma “Now there arose up a new king over Egypt.” Said the Prophet: “They have dealt treacherously against the Lord: for > Tanh· uma, ed. Buber “Now there arose up a new king over Egypt.” Said the Prophet: “They have dealt treacherously against the Lord: for > Ginze Schechter Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish8 introduced it [wb xtp ]: “They have > Only in Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish’s discourse in Ginze Schechter is the unit introduced explicitly as a petih· ta, although the structure of all versions evidently implies a petih· ta.15 All versions agree that the “external” petih· ta verse is Hosea 5:7; however, the identification of the “local” verse (the beginning of the day’s scrip42 7 : A New King > Tanh· uma they have begotten strange children: now shall a month devour them with their portions” (Hosea 5:7). To teach you that when Joseph died they violated the covenant of circumcision. They said: We shall be like the Egyptians. When they did this,12 the Holy One transformed the affection with which they used to love them, as it says: “He turned their heart to hate his people, to deal subtilly with his servants” (Psalm 105:25).13 There arose the “new one” [h· adash] and imposed [h· iddesh] his new decrees against them. For this reason it is written “a new king.” > Tanh· uma, ed. Buber they have begotten strange children.” That they would bear children but not circumcise them. “Now shall a month devour them with their portions.” It is written “h· adash.” Therefore: “Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.” > Ginze Schechter dealt treacherously against the Lord: for they have begotten strange children.”! What is meant by “they have begotten strange children”?!9 —Rather, [that they did not circumcise their children, and they grew them] belurits.10 It is written: “And the children of Israel were fruitful, [and increased abundantly [vayyishres· u]” (Exodus 1:7). Scripture] made them “creeping things” [sheras· im] because they drew out their foreskins11 and grew belurit[s for them]. “They have dealt treacherously against the Lord ... with their portions.” What is “shall a month [h· odesh] devour them”?14 [—These are the decrees that] are constantly being inflicted anew [mit-h· addeshim] on Israel. Another interpretation: “now shall a month devour them.”—This is the new one [h· adash], as it is written “Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.” tural reading) is indeterminate. In the form in which it is cited in Ginze Schechter, the proem appears at first to be built around Exodus 1:1, since the expression “opened for it” implies that it is attached to the same verse as the previous unit, which is based on Exodus 1:1.16 It is at any rate possible that a new pisqa should be inserted just before Rabbi Simeon ben Laqish’s proem17 or even...