Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Isaac:

What this refers to is that Potiphar left the running of his estate so much in the hands of Joseph that he didn’t know what was in his own estate. All he knew was that his personal needs were taken care of. The rest was in Joseph’s hands.

I think the context makes that fairly clear.

Karl W. Randolph.

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu> wrote:

1. It is a good point, and is possibly what prompted Rash"i to equate wife and bread.

2. Sorry, but I can not accept the poisoning argument (yet I admit that it is a decision of the heart not of the head). I just can not believe that the Hebrew bible would hint, even remotely, as to the possibility that the noble Joseph (the son of Jacob and Rachel!) harbored an intention to harm his master. It appears that the Master had also an unlimited confidence in his Hebrew servant. He did not even believe the fabricated accusations of his wife. Had he thought his venomous wife speaking the truth he would have undone the boy right there and then, but instead merely took him into protective custody.

3. So, 

 ולא ידע אתו מאומה כי אם הלחם אשר הוא אוכל

remains enigmatic. One may say that it refers to the master going over with Joseph over the daily menu (a variation on the combination of humus + tahini + pita + fish?), but even this, I feel, is tenuous.

Isaac Fried, Boston University