Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Genesis 44:5

[Is] not this [it] in which my lord drinketh, and whereby indeed he divineth? ye have done evil in so doing.

5. whereby he indeed divineth ] “Divineth,” Heb. naash: see Gen 30:27; Deu 18:10, “useth divination”; 1Ki 20:33 marg. The word shews that the silver cup was a sacred one, by means of which Joseph sought and obtained oracles. Some have inferred that he must have been admitted into the priests’ guild, in order to be able to practise divination. It appears that water having been poured into a vessel or cup, gold or silver or precious stones were thrown into it, and the oracle or divination was derived from the rings, ripples, or sparkles, which appeared. The name given to this class of magic was “hydromancy,” , or (Jamblichus, De Myst. iii. 14; Varro in August., De Civ. Dei, vii. 35). LXX renders .

Driver quotes from the Travels of Norden (circ. 1750 a.d.) a passage in which a Nubian Sheikh says: “I have consulted my cup, and I find that you are Franks in disguise, who have come to spy out the land.”

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Verse 5. Whereby – he divineth?] Divination by cups has been from time immemorial prevalent among the Asiatics; and for want of knowing this, commentators have spent a profusion of learned labour upon these words, in order to reduce them to that kind of meaning which would at once be consistent with the scope and design of the history, and save Joseph from the impeachment of sorcery and divination. I take the word nachash here in its general acceptation of to view attentively, to inquire. Now there has been in the east a tradition, the commencement of which is lost in immemorial time, that there was a CUP, which had passed successively into the hands of different potentates, which possessed the strange property of representing in it the whole world, and all the things which were then doing in it. The cup is called [Persian] jami Jemsheed, the cup of Jemsheed, a very ancient king of Persia, whom late historians and poets have confounded with Bacchus, Solomon, Alexander the Great, c. This CUP, filled with the elixir of immortality, they say was discovered when digging to lay the foundations of Persepolis. The Persian poets are full of allusions to this cup, which, from its property of representing the whole world and its transactions, is styled by them [Persian] jam jehan nima, “the cup showing the universe” and to the intelligence received by means of it they attribute the great prosperity of their ancient monarchs, as by it they understood all events, past, present, and to come. Many of the Mohammedan princes and governors affect still to have information of futurity by means of a cup. When Mr. Norden was at Derri in the farthest part of Egypt, in a very dangerous situation, an ill-natured and powerful Arab, in a threatening way, told one of their people whom they sent to him that “he knew what sort of people they were, for he had consulted his cup, and found by it that they were those of whom one of their prophets had said, that Franks (Europeans) would come in disguise; and, passing everywhere, examine the state of the country; and afterwards bring over a great number of other Franks, conquer the country, and exterminate all.” By this we see that the tradition of the divining cup still exists, and in the very same country too in which Joseph formerly ruled. Now though it is not at all likely that Joseph practised any kind of divination, yet probably, according to the superstition of those times, (for I suppose the tradition to be even older than the time of Joseph), supernatural influence might be attributed to his cup; and as the whole transaction related here was merely intended to deceive his brethren for a short time, he might as well affect divination by his cup, as he affected to believe they had stolen it. The steward therefore uses the word nachash in its proper meaning: Is not this it out of which my lord drinketh, and in which he inspecteth accurately? Ge 44:5. And hence Joseph says, Ge 44:15: Wot ye not-did ye not know, that such a person as I (having such a cup) would accurately and attentively look into it? As I consider this to be the true meaning, I shall not trouble the reader with other modes of interpretation.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Amongst the several kinds of divination in use among the Egyptians and other heathens, this was one, to do it by a cup or bason, which they filled with water, and put in them plates of silver, or precious stones, in which certain characters were engraven, by which, and some words they used, they called upon the devil, who gave them answer. Joseph did not use this course, nor was a diviner, but the people thought him such a one, and the steward might represent him as such, for the better covering or carrying on his design. But this sense agrees not with Gen 44:15, Wot you not, & c. Which words show that he speaks of something which they all might easily know; but they did not know that Joseph was a diviner, much less that he divined by that cup, whereas that kind of divination was generally performed by a glass, not by a cup. Others observe, that the Hebrew word ofttimes signifies not to divine, but only to observe and discover a thing, as Gen 30:27; 1Ki 20:33, and render the place thus, whereby he will certainly observe or discover, to wit, what you are and do. But this also seems not to consist with Gen 44:15, and the supplement is too large and remote. The true sense then is this, the Hebrew bo is not to be rendered by which, but concerning which, as the particle beth is oft used, and it notes not the instrument whereby, but the object about which, he did divine, and the words must be rendered, concerning which he can or would certainly divine. And this agrees well with Gen 44:15; q.d. Did you think you could deceive my master? Did not you and all others know that he could divine, and discover secret things, whence he had both his name and preferment? And this cup being much prized and used by him, you might easily judge that he would use his art to recover it.

Ye have done evil, i.e. very evil, unjustly, unthankfully, and foolishly.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

5. Is not this it in which my lorddrinkethnot only kept for the governor’s personal use, butwhereby he divines. Divination by cups, to ascertain the course offuturity, was one of the prevalent superstitions of ancient Egypt, asit is of Eastern countries still. It is not likely that Joseph, apious believer in the true God, would have addicted himself to thissuperstitious practice. But he might have availed himself of thatpopular notion to carry out the successful execution of his stratagemfor the last decisive trial of his brethren.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

[Is] not this [it], in which my lord drinketh,…. Which was for his own particular use, and so the more ungrateful in them to take it,

and whereby indeed he divineth? according to our version and others, Joseph is here represented by his steward as a diviner or soothsayer, and so he might be thought to be by the Egyptians, from being such an exact interpreter of dreams, foretelling things to come, and that he made his divinations by the silver cup; and we are told that the Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Egyptians, used to fill basins with water, in which they put plates of silver and precious stones, marked with certain characters, and pronouncing certain words, called to the devil, who uttered a voice in the water like an hissing, and returned answers to the things inquired about i: a like practice is used by the Africans now k; which method Andronicus took to know who would be his successor, but was reckoned among the most infamous and scandalous parts of the magic art l wherefore, as Joseph never practised any thing of this kind, so neither would he dissemble, or make as if he did; though it must be owned that the Arabs m in Egypt at this day pretend to consult with the cup and divine by it: but the words will bear another version and sense, for it may signify to tempt, to try, to make an experiment, and by experience to know a thing, as in Ge 30:27; and so the Arabic version, “and indeed he hath tried you by it”: so Aben Ezra interprets it of his trying of them by it, whether they were thieves or not, whether they were a parcel of light fingered filching fellows: the cup, he pretends, was set before them, and he turned himself another way, either Joseph or the steward, and they took the opportunity of carrying it off; or else, as others think, he tried them by drinking in it very freely and liberally, what sort of men they were, how they would behave themselves in their cups, when truth is commonly spoke, the wit being out when the wine is in: but of these two senses the former is to be preferred; though it seems best of all to understand this not of the cup as the instrument by which he tried, searched, and inquired into things, but as the object searched after and inquired of; for the word signifies to inquire, and make a strict observation of things, and thereby make shrewd guesses and conjectures, as in 1Ki 20:33; and so the sense is, either according to R. Jonah n, that his master would diligently inquire of the soothsayers concerning it, in order to find out who took it away, and so Ben Melech; for the words may be rendered, “for which he certainly makes”, or has made, or will make “divination”, which agrees with Ge 44:15; for if the cup was gone, how could he make divination with it? it must be for it; or indeed they might well conclude themselves, that as such a thing would soon be missed, diligent inquiry would be made after it, and it would be at once conjectured that it was taken away, not by any of the household, but by those strangers that had dined with Joseph; and a man of his sagacity and penetration would soon find it out, and therefore it was madness and folly to do such an action, and think to get off clear:

ye have done evil in so doing: both a mad and foolish action, and a base, wicked, and ungrateful one, as well as what was infamous and scandalous; for nothing was reckoned more so than for a guest at a prince’s table to carry away a cup, or anything of that kind, with him: so Claudius the Roman emperor, a guest of his, the day before, having taken away a golden cup, as was supposed, ordered an earthen one to be put in its place o, which was a putting him to public shame and reproach: Dioxippus the Athenian, being at table with Alexander the great, a golden cup was taken away privately, by some that envied him; and the hint being given as if he had done it, all eyes were turned on him as the thief, which he could not bear, but went out, and wrote a letter to the king, and then killed himself p.

i Julius Serenus de fato, l. 9. c. 18. apud Rivet. Exercit. 165. p. 808. k R. Leo. African. Descriptio Africae, l. 3. p. 335. l Nic. Choniates in Andronico, l. 2. m Norden’s Travels in Egypt, vol. 2. p. 150. n Apud Aben Ezram in loc. o Suetonius in Vita Claudii, c. 32. p Curtii Hist. l. 9. c. 7.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

5. Whereby indeed, he divineth (171) This clause is variously expounded. For some take it as if Joseph pretended that he consulted soothsayers in order to find out the thief. Others translate it, “by which he has tried you, or searched you out;” others, that the stolen cup had given Joseph an unfavorable omen. The genuine sense seems to me to be this: that he had used the cup for divinations and for magical arts; which, however, we have said, he feigned, for the sake of aggravating the charge brought against them. But the question arises, how does Joseph allow himself to resort to such an expedient? For besides that it was sinful for him to profess augury; he vainly and unworthily transfers to imaginary deities the honor due only to divine grace. On a former occasion, he had declared that he was unable to interpret dreams, except so far as God should suggest the truth to him; now he obscures this entire ascription of praise to divine grace; and what is worse, by boasting that he is a magician rather than proclaiming himself a prophet of God, he impiously profanes the gift of the Holy Spirit. Doubtless, in this dissimulation, it is not to be denied, that he sinned grievously. Yet I think that, at the first, he had endeavored, by all means in his power, to give unto God his due honor; and it was not his fault that the whole kingdom of Egypt was ignorant of the fact that he excelled in skill, not by magical arts, but by a celestial gift. But since the Egyptians were accustomed to the illusions of the magicians, this ancient error so prevailed, that they believed Joseph to be one of them; and I do not doubt that this rumor was spread abroad among the people, although contrary to his desire and intention. Now Joseph, in feigning himself to be a stranger to his brethren, combines many falsehoods in one, and takes advantage of the prevailing vulgar opinion that he used auguries. Whence we gather, that when any one swerves from the right line, he is prone to fall into various sins. Wherefore, being warned by this example, let us learn to allow ourselves in nothing except what we know is approved by God. But especially must we avoid all dissimulation, which either produces or confirms mischievous impostures. Besides, we are warned, that it is not sufficient for any one to oppose a prevailing vice for a time; unless he add constancy of resistance, even though the evil may become excessive. For he discharges his duty very defectively, who, having once testified that he is displeased with what is evil, afterwards, by his silence or connivance, gives it a kind of assent.

(171) “ Jamblichus, in his book on Egyptian mysteries, mentions the practice of divining by cups. That this superstition, as well as many others, has continued even to modern times, is shown by a remarkable passage in Norden’s Travels. When the author, with his companions, had arrived at Dorri, the most remote extremity of Egypt, or rather in Nubia, were they were able to deliver themselves from a perilous condition, only through great presence of mind, they sent one of their company to a malicious and powerful Arab, to threaten him. He answered them, ‘I know what sort of people you are. I have consulted my cup, and found in it, that you are from a people of whom one of our prophets has said, There will come Franks under every kind of pretense to spy out the land. They will bring with them a great multitude of their countrymen, to conquer the country and to destroy all the people.’” — Egypt and the Books of Moses. p. 40. — Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

Gen 44:5. Whereby indeed he divineth This cup, which the Septuagint call , kondu, the AEgyptian name for a cup, was a goblet or bowl, it is thought, with a great belly. It is plain, this was a cup used for common purposes; for the steward says, is not this it in which my lord drinketh? It is evident also, from Gen 44:15 that to divine signifies to know or foretel things which are beyond the reach of common understandings: it is therefore probable, that there was some sort of divination by cups then in use among the AEgyptians. The Greeks and Romans, who had much of their religion from AEgypt, practised this method of divination, particularly, by observing the sparkling of the wine in their libations. It does not however follow, that Joseph really practised any such art; the steward may be supposed only to ask this question, to make the brethren think that he did so; and perhaps, from his being a known interpreter of dreams, the people might fancy that he was skilled in divination. Some interpreters, of good authority, think, that as the original word sometimes signifies simply to try, or make experiment, ch. Gen 30:27. 1Ki 20:33 the passage might be expounded thus, and whereby indeed he would make trial, namely, of your honesty. Others, who refer the word it, not to the cup, but to the theft, would read, will he not, by making trial, search it out? i.e.. do you imagine that your theft can be concealed from one who is so sagacious in discovering secrets? But as Joseph, in the 15th verse, speaks in the character of an AEgyptian, still desirous to conceal himself from them, I should rather think he refers to some custom or method of divination among the AEgyptians. The author of Observations on Passages of sacred Scripture observes, that “when Mr. Norden was at Derri, in the farther part of AEgypt, or rather in Nubia, in a very dangerous situation, from which he and his company endeavoured to extricate themselves by exerting great spirit; a spiteful and powerful Arab told one of his people whom they sent to him in a threatening way, that he knew what sort of people they were; that he had consulted his cup, and had found by it that they were those, of whom one of their prophets said, that Franks would come in disguise, and, passing every where, examine the state of the country, and afterwards bring over a great many other Franks, conquer the country, and exterminate them all.” Nord. Voy. vol. 2: p. 150.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

The Egyptians were much given to the use of divination. Perhaps the steward had such ideas of his master.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Gen 44:5 [Is] not this [it] in which my lord drinketh, and whereby indeed he divineth? ye have done evil in so doing.

Ver. 5. And whereby indeed he divineth. ] Junius reads it thus – Et nonne ipse experimento certo didicerit per illum, quales sitls? q.d., Hath he not by this fact of yours, found out your fraud and false dealing; whereby ye have hitherto sought to delude him? Is it not plain ye are spies and naughty-packs? The Jerusalem Targum seemeth to tax Joseph here for a soothsayer; or, at least, a seeker to such; which God forbade. Deu 18:10 Calvin also thinks he did grievously offend in pretending to be such a one; and did impiously profane the gift of the Spirit in professing himself a magician. But, pace tanti viri, this is too heavy a censure, and a forcing of the text, saith Junius. All that Joseph did was to sift his brethren, and to try their affection to Benjamin. And if he took upon him to be a diviner, he did it not seriously; but made use of that conceit the vulgar had of him: like as St Paul made use of that superstitious custom among the Corinthians, of baptizing over the dead, to prove the resurrection. a

a 1Co 15:29 . Scalig. Not.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)