בַּיהוָ֣ה בָּגָ֔דוּ כִּֽי־בָנִ֥ים זָרִ֖ים יָלָ֑דוּ עַתָּ֛ה יֹאכְלֵ֥ם חֹ֖דֶשׁ אֶת־חֶלְקֵיהֶֽם׃ (ס)
Mereka telah berkhianat terhadap Yang Mahakekal, sebab mereka telah melahirkan anak-anak asing; sekarang suatu bulan akan melahap mereka beserta bagian-bagian milik mereka.
Shemot Rabbah
“Joseph died along with all his brothers and that entire generation” (Exodus 1:6).
Teaching that as long as one of those who descended to Egypt was alive, the Egyptians did not enslave Israel.
“The children of Israel were fruitful, propagated, increased, and grew exceedingly, and the land filled with them” (Exodus 1:7).
“The children of Israel were fruitful, propagated…” Even though Joseph and his brothers died, their God did not die, but rather: “The children of Israel were fruitful, propagated…”15It was His Providence that ensured the continuity of the children of Israel.
Alternatively, each and every one gave birth to six in each womb, as it is stated: “The children of Israel were fruitful, propagated, [increased, and grew exceedingly, and the land filled with them.]” Some say: Twelve, as it is written: “Were fruitful” – two, “propagated” – two, “increased” – two, “grew” – two, “exceedingly [bimod meod ]” – two, “and the land filled with them” – two, for a total of twelve.16All the verbs are plural, the double language bimod meod indicates another two, and the land filled with them indicates another two. The first opinion derives one from each of those words and phrases.
“Grew [vayishretzu],” some say: “Six17According to many commentaries, the correct wording here is “sixty.” in each womb,” and do not wonder, as a scorpion, which is one of the swarming creatures [sheratzim], gives birth to sixty.18Some versions of the Hebrew text have “seventy,” but others have “sixty,” which is the version preferred by most commentaries. Rabbi Natan says: “And the land was filled with them,” like fields of reeds.
“A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph” (Exodus 1:8).
“A new king arose.” Once the Egyptians saw this, they issued new decrees against them; that is what is written: “A new king arose.” Rav and Shmuel, one says: [He was] actually new, and one says: He [was not new, but] issued new decrees, as he brought new decrees and calamities upon them. The reason of the one who says actually new, is that “new” is written. The reason of the one who says he issued new decrees, is that “he died” and “he reigned” is not written. “Who did not know Joseph” – according to the opinion of the one who says new, it works out well. But according to the one who says that he issued new decrees, how does he interpret it? It is because he was like one who did not know Joseph at all.
The Rabbis say: Why did it call him “a new king”? Was it not Pharaoh himself? Rather, the Egyptians said to Pharaoh: ‘Come let us confront this nation.’ He said to them: ‘You are fools. Until now we have been eating from what is theirs, how can we confront them? Were it not for Joseph we would not be alive.’ Because he did not heed them, they dethroned him for three months, until he said to them: ‘Anything that you want, I am with you.’ Then they restored him; therefore it is written: “A new king arose.”
The Rabbis introduced [this matter] with this verse: “They have betrayed the Lord, for they have begotten foreign children; now a month will devour them with their portions” (Hosea 5:7), teaching that when Joseph died, they abrogated the covenant of circumcision. They said: ‘Let us be like the Egyptians.’ From here you derive that Moses circumcised them upon their exodus from Egypt. Once they did this, the Holy One blessed be He transformed the love that the Egyptians felt for them into hatred, as it is stated: “He changed their hearts to hate His people, to harass His servants” (Psalms 105:25). This is the meaning of what is written: “Now a month [ḥodesh] will devour them with their portions” – the new [ḥadash] king, who issued new decrees against them.
“Who did not know Joseph.” Was he unfamiliar with Joseph? Rabbi Avin said: This is analogous to one who stoned one beloved by the king. The king said: ‘Behead him, because tomorrow he will do the same to me.’ That is why the verse wrote [this] about him, as though to say: Today [he acts as one], “who did not know Joseph,” tomorrow he is destined to say: “I do not know the Lord” (Exodus 5:2).
Teaching that as long as one of those who descended to Egypt was alive, the Egyptians did not enslave Israel.
“The children of Israel were fruitful, propagated, increased, and grew exceedingly, and the land filled with them” (Exodus 1:7).
“The children of Israel were fruitful, propagated…” Even though Joseph and his brothers died, their God did not die, but rather: “The children of Israel were fruitful, propagated…”15It was His Providence that ensured the continuity of the children of Israel.
Alternatively, each and every one gave birth to six in each womb, as it is stated: “The children of Israel were fruitful, propagated, [increased, and grew exceedingly, and the land filled with them.]” Some say: Twelve, as it is written: “Were fruitful” – two, “propagated” – two, “increased” – two, “grew” – two, “exceedingly [bimod meod ]” – two, “and the land filled with them” – two, for a total of twelve.16All the verbs are plural, the double language bimod meod indicates another two, and the land filled with them indicates another two. The first opinion derives one from each of those words and phrases.
“Grew [vayishretzu],” some say: “Six17According to many commentaries, the correct wording here is “sixty.” in each womb,” and do not wonder, as a scorpion, which is one of the swarming creatures [sheratzim], gives birth to sixty.18Some versions of the Hebrew text have “seventy,” but others have “sixty,” which is the version preferred by most commentaries. Rabbi Natan says: “And the land was filled with them,” like fields of reeds.
“A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph” (Exodus 1:8).
“A new king arose.” Once the Egyptians saw this, they issued new decrees against them; that is what is written: “A new king arose.” Rav and Shmuel, one says: [He was] actually new, and one says: He [was not new, but] issued new decrees, as he brought new decrees and calamities upon them. The reason of the one who says actually new, is that “new” is written. The reason of the one who says he issued new decrees, is that “he died” and “he reigned” is not written. “Who did not know Joseph” – according to the opinion of the one who says new, it works out well. But according to the one who says that he issued new decrees, how does he interpret it? It is because he was like one who did not know Joseph at all.
The Rabbis say: Why did it call him “a new king”? Was it not Pharaoh himself? Rather, the Egyptians said to Pharaoh: ‘Come let us confront this nation.’ He said to them: ‘You are fools. Until now we have been eating from what is theirs, how can we confront them? Were it not for Joseph we would not be alive.’ Because he did not heed them, they dethroned him for three months, until he said to them: ‘Anything that you want, I am with you.’ Then they restored him; therefore it is written: “A new king arose.”
The Rabbis introduced [this matter] with this verse: “They have betrayed the Lord, for they have begotten foreign children; now a month will devour them with their portions” (Hosea 5:7), teaching that when Joseph died, they abrogated the covenant of circumcision. They said: ‘Let us be like the Egyptians.’ From here you derive that Moses circumcised them upon their exodus from Egypt. Once they did this, the Holy One blessed be He transformed the love that the Egyptians felt for them into hatred, as it is stated: “He changed their hearts to hate His people, to harass His servants” (Psalms 105:25). This is the meaning of what is written: “Now a month [ḥodesh] will devour them with their portions” – the new [ḥadash] king, who issued new decrees against them.
“Who did not know Joseph.” Was he unfamiliar with Joseph? Rabbi Avin said: This is analogous to one who stoned one beloved by the king. The king said: ‘Behead him, because tomorrow he will do the same to me.’ That is why the verse wrote [this] about him, as though to say: Today [he acts as one], “who did not know Joseph,” tomorrow he is destined to say: “I do not know the Lord” (Exodus 5:2).
Ruth Rabbah
“It was during the days when the judges judged, there was a famine.” “The path of a man is erratic [hafakhpakh] and strange, [but as for the pure, his conduct is upright]” (Proverbs 21:8) – this is the wicked Esau [Rome] who would erratically [mithapekh] assail Israel with [evil] decrees. ‘Did you steal?’ ‘We did not steal.’ ‘Did you kill?’ ‘We did not kill.’ ‘You did not steal, who stole with you?’ ‘You did not kill, who killed with you?’ They would confiscate from them and impose monetary penalties upon them: Bring your property tax, bring your head tax, bring your state tax. “Man” – this is the wicked Esau, as it is stated: “Esau was a man who knew hunting” (Genesis 25:27). “And strange” – as he made himself estranged from circumcision and estranged from mitzvot. “Pure” – this is the Holy One blessed be He, who treats him in upright ways and gives him his reward in this world, like a laborer who performs labor in good faith with his employer.
Another interpretation: “The path of a man [ish] is erratic [hafakhpakh] and strange” (Proverbs 21:8) – these are the nations of the world who constantly [mehapekhin] assail Israel with [evil] decrees. “A man” – they who descend from Noah, who was called “a man” (Genesis 6:9); “and strange” – as they worship idols. “But as for the pure, his conduct is upright [yashar]” – this is the Holy One blessed be He, who treats them in an upright manner. Rabbi Aḥa said: “The path…is erratic” – this is Israel, as it is stated: “As they are an erratic generation” (Deuteronomy 32:20). “A man [ish]” – “The men [ish] of Israel took an oath” (Judges 21:1).12It is difficult to ascertain what is meant by this reference. Perhaps the midrash seeks to connect “the path of a man is erratic” to the tragic events surrounding the concubine of Giva recounted in Judges, chaps. 19–21. “And strange [vazar]” – because they estranged themselves from the Holy One blessed be He, as it is stated: “They betrayed the Lord, as they begot foreign [zarim] children” (Hosea 5:7). “But as for the pure” – that is the Holy One blessed be He, who conducts Himself with uprightness in this world and gives them a complete reward in the future, like a craftsman who performs his labor in good faith with his employer. At that time, the Holy One blessed be He said: My children are recalcitrant; to eliminate them is impossible, to return them to Egypt is impossible, to exchange them with another nation, I am unable. What shall I do to them? I will afflict them with suffering and will refine them with famine during the days when the judges judged. That is what is written: “It was during the days when the judges judged, there was a famine in the land.”
Another interpretation: “The path of a man [ish] is erratic [hafakhpakh] and strange” (Proverbs 21:8) – these are the nations of the world who constantly [mehapekhin] assail Israel with [evil] decrees. “A man” – they who descend from Noah, who was called “a man” (Genesis 6:9); “and strange” – as they worship idols. “But as for the pure, his conduct is upright [yashar]” – this is the Holy One blessed be He, who treats them in an upright manner. Rabbi Aḥa said: “The path…is erratic” – this is Israel, as it is stated: “As they are an erratic generation” (Deuteronomy 32:20). “A man [ish]” – “The men [ish] of Israel took an oath” (Judges 21:1).12It is difficult to ascertain what is meant by this reference. Perhaps the midrash seeks to connect “the path of a man is erratic” to the tragic events surrounding the concubine of Giva recounted in Judges, chaps. 19–21. “And strange [vazar]” – because they estranged themselves from the Holy One blessed be He, as it is stated: “They betrayed the Lord, as they begot foreign [zarim] children” (Hosea 5:7). “But as for the pure” – that is the Holy One blessed be He, who conducts Himself with uprightness in this world and gives them a complete reward in the future, like a craftsman who performs his labor in good faith with his employer. At that time, the Holy One blessed be He said: My children are recalcitrant; to eliminate them is impossible, to return them to Egypt is impossible, to exchange them with another nation, I am unable. What shall I do to them? I will afflict them with suffering and will refine them with famine during the days when the judges judged. That is what is written: “It was during the days when the judges judged, there was a famine in the land.”
Ein Yaakov (Glick Edition)
Said Raba b. b. Ghana: "Whoever marries a wife who is not fit for him is considered by Scripture as if he plowed the entire world and sowed it with salt; for it is said (Ib., ib., ib) These were they who came up from Tel-melach, Tel-Charsa." Rabba b. R. Adda said in the name of Rab: "Whoever marries a wife because of her wealth will have degenerate children, as it is said ( Hos. 5, 7) Against the Lord have they dealt treacherously; for strange children have they gotten. You will perhaps think that the money for which such a man married will endure. It is therefore said in the same passage, One month shall devour them together with their possessions. And, if thou wilt think that it refers only to his possessions and not to hers, it is therefore said their possessions. And if you will think that this might take a long time, it is therefore said during one month." How is one month to be understood? Said R. Nachman b. Isaac: "This means literally, that during the time when one month will come and one month will go their wealth will be lost." Raba b. R. Adda said further, and according to others R. Salla said it in the name of R. Hanmuna: "Whoever marries a wife that is not suitable for him, Elijah binds him and the Holy One, praised be He, flogs him." We are taught in a Baraitha: On every case above mentioned Elijah writes and the Holy One, praised be He, affixes His signature to the following: "Woe unto him who disqualified his children and who discredited the reputation of his family through marrying a wife who is not fit." And whoever disqualifies others is a disqualified person and he does not speak on the praiseworthy side of the world. Samuel adds: "That in whatever thing he disqualifies others, from the very same thing comes his own disqualification."