Hot answers tagged targum-translation
In Beraishis 41 (45) Osnat is mentioned as the daughter of Potifera. Rashi comments there on the change of name. He says: Poti-phera: He is Potiphar, but he was called Poti-phera because he became emasculated since he desired Joseph for homosexual relations. — [from Sotah 13b]. So we see that he was not emasculated until he desired Joseph.
It would seem that at the time of Yosef's employment Potiphor was NOT a eunich based on the pasuk and Rashi Breshit Chapter 39 Pasuk 19 :וַיְהִי כִשְׁמֹעַ אֲדֹנָיו אֶת דִּבְרֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲשֶׁר דִּבְּרָה אֵלָיו לֵאמֹר כַּדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה עָשָׂה לִי עַבְדֶּךָ וַיִּחַר אַפּוֹ Now it came about when his master heard his wife's report that she spoke to him, ...
The sefer Binyan Ariel explains that since the gemara in Sotah implies that Pharaoh did know Hebrew (Loshon Hakodesh), it was not the language of the land of Canaan, and so they were safe in assuming that the interpreter also only understood the Canaan language (the language which they had been using to speak to Yosef) but not Hebrew. Therefore they were not ...
Let's put aside all the midrashim for a moment. Pharaoh's officers are described as "sarisim." Ramban says that in fact, we don't know whether that always means "eunuch", or that because so many kings' officers were eunuchs in Biblical times that the Torah uses that word generically for a king's officers.
As a strict language question, that should be asked on Hebrew.SE, which is where I think the question is coming from. From a Jewish perspective, it refers to the "my people" in that sentence. From a strict language point of view, it could arguably be ambiguous (מו - the suffix is sometimes singular if the context indicates it), however according to all of ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible