From Sermon to Commentary: Expounding the Bible in Talmudic Babylonia

15. Shiphrah and Puah

b. Sot· ah 11b: “And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives, of which the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah” (Exodus 1:15). Rav and Samuel— One says: A woman and her daughter. And one says: A woman and her daughter-in-law. The one who says A woman and her daughter—Jochebed and Miriam. And the one who says A woman and her daughter-in-law— Jochebed and Elisheba.1 It was taught [in a baraita] in accordance with the one who says A woman and her daughter; As it was taught: Shiphrah is Jochebed. And why was her name called Shiphrah?—Because she would cleanse [meshapperet] the baby.2 Another explanation: Because Israel were fruitful [shepparu] and increased in her days. Puah is Miriam. And why was her name called Puah?—Because she would call [po‘ah] to the baby.3 Another explanation: Puah, because she would call [po‘ah] through the holy spirit and say: My mother is destined to give birth to a son who will redeem Israel. The passage operates on two distinct but interrelated planes. The actual dispute between Rav and Samuel concerns the identification of the Hebrew midwives who disappear from the scriptural narrative after this episode, never to be mentioned again.4 This approach conforms to the widespread midrashic practice of minimizing the numbers of unknown minor characters by identifying them with more central ones.5 The choices of Jochebed, Miriam, and Elisheba cover virtually all of the available options, since no other prominent women figure in the events of that generation.6 75 15: Shiphrah and Puah The baraita consisting of midrashic etymologies on the names Shiphrah and Puah is not connected explicitly with this episode but presupposes that identi- fication.7 In Sifré on Numbers 78,8 a passage very similar to the baraita cited here is incorporated into a lengthy and complex discourse in praise of proselytes; this discourse was stimulated by the mention of Hobab-Jethro in Numbers 10:29.The Sifré discourse adduces examples of various biblical proselytes and God-fearers who merited divine help, each example concluding with the refrain “And behold, the matters can be deduced a minori: Just as they [who belonged to a rejected or forbidden nation]…because they brought themselves near, the Almighty brought them near—should this not be true all the more so of Israel, who observe the Torah!” The premise of this deduction is then challenged: And if you should say: In Israel it was not so— Behold, it has already been stated: “And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives , etc.” Shiphrah is Jochebed. Puah is Miriam. Shiphrah—because she is fruitful [shepparah] and multiplies. Shiphrah—because she cleanses the infant. Shiphrah—Because Israel were fruitful and multiplied in her days. Puah—Because she would call [po‘ah] and cry over her brother, as it says (Exodus 2:4) “And his sister stood afar off, to wit what would be done to him.” Other Palestinian midrashic compendia incorporate versions of this interpretation into homilies on the theme of the value of a good name, usually in connection with Ecclesiastes 7:1.9 By comparison, the bare exegesis in b.Sot· ah is not incorporated into any literary structure; nor does it teach an explicit lesson. The special character of this exegesis is particularly noticeable in connection with the identification of Puah with Elisheba, an arbitrary-looking view that has no parallel anywhere else in the rabbinic traditions and is not defended or justified.10 Notes 1 Some textual traditions suggest that the identifications were not provided by the Talmud at this stage in the presentation. See Liss’s edition, pp. 1:157–58, n. 123. At any rate, there does not appear to be any serious doubt about who was intended. See also Yefeh to’ar to Exodus Rabbah 1:13: “It would appear that Rav and R’Samuel bar Nah· mani [according to the reading in Exodus Rabbah] did not specify their names, but one simply said ‘a daughter-in-law and her mother’ while the other said ‘a mother and her daughter’; and the midrash provided the names of these women. And thus does it seem from the gemara in Sot· ah.” 2 See Preuss, 37, 404; cf. Shinan, Midrash, 57. 76 15 : Shiphrah and Puah 3 The...