4

Jesse was called by four names.

In Midrash Tanchuma, Ki Tisa 13 he is named as one of only 7 men who had multiple names.

But the text doesn't elaborate on Jesse. Are the four names explained anywhere else?

I know that one of the names is Nachash (if indeed that is the same person). But not the others.

7
  • In the last verse in Ruth, he's called both יִשָׁי and יִשַׁי
    – Double AA
    Commented Sep 23 at 19:58
  • Nachash is from Aramaic Targum to Ruth 4:22 sefaria.org/…
    – Y DJ
    Commented Sep 23 at 20:10
  • 1
    @DoubleAA That's not a grammatical thing?
    – shmosel
    Commented Sep 23 at 20:15
  • @DoubleAA I agree that doesn't count. But the name is spelt אִישַׁי in 1 Chron 2.13. That might. Commented Sep 23 at 20:17
  • 1
    @shmosel Midrash can play off grammar too, but yes I'm mostly joking.
    – Double AA
    Commented Sep 23 at 20:25

1 Answer 1

5

According to the parallel version brought in Shemot Rabbah 40:4, the word "ישי" (Jesse) in Tanchuma is a scribal error and should be "יש" (there is):

"יֵשׁ שֶׁנִּקְרְאוּ לוֹ אַרְבָּעָה זֶה אֵלִיָּהוּ"
"There is one who had four names, this is Elijah."

This is also evident from the next paragraph (in both texts), which begins discussing the list with Elijah, then continues to Bezalel, who was the main focus of this midrashic exposition.

This was also the version that was before Rabbi Avraham Helin (Hebrew Wiki) in his commentary Yedei Moshe and Rabbi Chanoch Zundel in his commentary Etz Yosef.1

It's possible that the scribal error in some versions arose from the fact that at the end of the list Elijah seems to be mentioned once again as having four names, however this is an erroneous reading of the text. Here Elijah is mentioned again as a dibbur hamatchil, a starting quote before the next section of exegesis, which discusses the origins of Elijah. And then the midrash moves to discussing Elijah's four names.


1 Note that the linked printed edition which features the Etz Yosef has the same scribal error; the Etz Yosef himself used a different edition, and perhaps also saw manuscripts.

2
  • Omitting Jesse would fix it to 7, in both texts (which would support your persuasive argument). That assumes we treat Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah as one... Commented Sep 23 at 21:29
  • Etz Yosef suggests that option, but notes that the in the Yefeh Toar commentary the version is "nine men", meaning each was counted separately.
    – Harel13
    Commented Sep 23 at 21:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .