LET’S STUDY ONKELOS

A Guide for Rabbis, Teachers and Torah Students to Study and Teach the Parashat
Hashavua through the Eyes of its Most Important Translator

By Stanley M. Wagner and Israel Drazin

Based on the five volume, Onkelos on the Torah (Genesis-Deuteronomy), Understanding the
Bible Text, by Israel Drazin and Stanley M. Wagner, published by Gefen Publishing House,
Jerusalem/New York, 2006-2010.

STUDY GUIDE

SHEMOT (CHAPTER 1:1–6:1)

SUMMARY OF THE TORAH PORTION

Joseph dies and a new Pharaoh arises who enslaves the Israelites; Hebrew male
infants are condemned to die; Moses is born and rescued by Pharaoh’s daughter; Moses
encounters God at the burning bush; Moses is appointed by God to liberate the
Israelites with Aaron as his spokesman; Moses and Aaron urge Pharaoh to allow
Israelites to worship God in the wilderness; Pharaoh refuses and intensifies Israelite
suffering.

PROTECTING THE DIGNITY OF ISRAELITE ANCESTORS

We have had occasion to point out that one of the stylistic changes the targumist
makes in his translation relates to his efforts to protect the dignity of Israelite
ancestors. In our parashah we have a number of such examples that provide an
excellent and wider orientation to this type of targumic deviation from the text:
In 1:7 (pages 3 and 4),1 in describing the remarkable growth of the Israelite nation
in Egypt, Scripture informs us, literally, that they were “fruitful, prolific (vayishretzu),
were abundant, and became very, very strong.” Our commentary, “GAVE BIRTH,” notes:
The targumist is apparently uncomfortable with the biblical term “vayishretzu,”
regarding it as an undignified description of the Israelite growth in population. It
1
All page numbers refer to the Onkelos on the Torah volume.
1
 conveys a reptilian imagery and implies that they were multiplying like “creeping
things.” Again, while Midrashim suggest that there was an unusually high number of
multiple births in the Israelite camp, our translator disregards this story, because he
avoids legendary elaborations and is more interested in preserving Israel’s honor.

In 1:8 (pages 3 and 4), rather than accept the biblical statement that “A new king
arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph,” which implies a belittling of Joseph’s
contribution to the welfare of the Egyptian society, the targumist transforms the
statement into “(the king) did not fulfill Joseph’s decree.”
In 1:11 (pages 3 and 4), we are told concerning the Israelites that, “(the Egyptians)
placed (or put, vayaseemu) over them evil-doing taskmasters.” Because the Hebrew
verb suggests a demeaning handling of Israelite ancestors, the targumist replaces it
with “appointed.” And to ensure that his readers comprehend that the Israelites did not
merit the harsh treatment they were to receive, the Onkelos translator also adds the
word “evil-doing” to describe the activity of the taskmasters.
In 2:23 (pages 8 and 9), the Torah describes the emotional response of the Israelites
to their existential condition: “(They) groaned because of the servitude (work).” One
might conclude from this statement that they were simply complainers, even shirkers,
when they were assigned reasonable work loads. Hence, the targumist adds, “that was
heavy upon them,” to dispel that demeaning notion. Their “heavy” burdens were
genuinely difficult to bear.
Another example is 3:10, God charges Moses to “bring forth My people, the
Israelites, from Egypt” (3:10), but Moses demurs in 3:11, questions his ability to
convince the Israelites in 4:1, and in 4:13 (pages 18-21) pleads to God, shelach na beyad
tishlach, which literally means, “Please Lord, send in the hand of (whomever) you will
send.” This statement sounds as if Moses is saying, “send anyone as long as it is not me.”
Since the targumist did not want to have Moses seem disrespectful or rebellious, he
renders the phrase, “send through someone who is fit to send.” Moses, thus, is not
shirking his responsibility but suggesting that, perhaps, there is someone more fit for
the task.
These five examples in our parashah of additions to or modifications of biblical texts
to protect the dignity and honor of Israelite ancestors are among the dozen and a half
verses in Exodus that Onkelos reconstructs to achieve this goal.

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS

ON ONKELOS

It is clear that, in order to achieve his goal of preserving the honor of Israel’s
ancestors, the Onkelos translator avoids midrashic fanciful interpretations, such as that
of Rashi, based on Tanchuma, who, on 1:7, explains vayishretzu, which, as stated above,
2
denotes reptilian-type births (Onkelos: “gave birth”), as “they gave birth to six children
at a time.” However, he concurs with the Midrash when, as in 4:13, it offers a comment
that fits the passage’s plain meaning, as when Exodus Rabbah explains Moses’ statement
to God: “One must not think that Moses refused to go, he only wanted to pay respect to
Aaron for Moses said: ‘Before I arose, my brother Aaron prophesied to them for eighty
years.’”
While our targumist is generally concerned about the honor of Israel’s ancestors,
sometimes the Talmud, Midrash, or a commentator may not feel compelled to protect
their honor. Our appendix on 1:8 (page 329) provides an example:
The thirteenth- and fourteenth-century biblical commentator Gersonides (in his
commentary to this verse) states that Pharaoh “did not know him personally.” The
Babylonian Talmud (Sotah 11a and Eruvin 53a) reports that Rav and Shmuel
interpreted this verse differently. “One said that he was really new, while the other
said that his decrees were made new.” The latter felt that “who did not know Joseph”
suggests that since he persecuted Joseph’s people, he appeared as if he never knew
him.

Do you feel that the targumist is overly sensitive when he chooses to translate the
phrase “a new king . . . who did not know Joseph” in a manner that is clearly not literal?
Should he have left more to the imagination of the reader and remain more consistently
literal in his translation rather pursue his subjective goal? Also, isn’t it more instructive
to realize that even biblical figures make mistakes and sometimes act improperly as we
do?

GENERAL DISCUSSION

The proliferation and strengthening of the Israelite community in Egypt caused

great concern to the Egyptians who “dreaded” them. This xenophobia resulted in the
enslavement and harsh treatment of the Hebrews. We discern in Jewish history, and
even in contemporary attacks on the Jews (“they control the banks,” “they control the
news media,” “they are too powerful,” among other accusations), attempts to single out
the Jews, living as minorities everywhere, and malign them with spurious accusations
to justify anti-Semitism. What causes anti-Semitism? What makes Jews a target of
hatred? Is Pharaoh’s treatment of the Hebrews and example of anti-Semitism? Is anti-
Semitism a symptom of a something wrong with the anti-Semite? What is it that is
wrong?
Moses believes himself to be unfit for leadership and for the daunting challenge of
liberating the Israelites from Egyptian bondage. The Bible suggests that he had a speech
impediment and that he was very humble, qualities not normally associated with
leaders. What attributes did Moses possess that qualified him to become a liberator and
law giver? Was Moses chosen because he was an unlikely candidate to emphasize the
centrality of God’s role in Israel’s redemption?

3
 FOR FURTHER STUDY

1. See 2:8 and commentary, “GIRL” (page 7). A translation can sometimes make a
theological difference.

2. See 3:14 and commentary, “EHYEH ASHER EHYEH” (page 15). Is it a Hebrew phrase or
God’s name?

3. See 4:16 and commentary, “TEACHER” (page 21). An unusual targumic translation of
Elohim.