Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Genesis 43:32
And they set on for him by himself, and for them by themselves, and for the Egyptians, which did eat with him, by themselves: because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews; for that [is] an abomination unto the Egyptians.
32. because the Egyptians with the Hebrews ] Egyptian exclusiveness was proverbial. Their priests were not allowed to eat or drink anything that had come from a foreign country (Porph. iv. 7). Herodotus (ii. 41) mentions that no Egyptian would use any utensil belonging to a Greek. It is noticeable in this passage that Joseph did not eat with the Egyptians. The natural reason for this is not, as some have supposed, because Joseph was a member of the family of a priest (Gen 41:45), or even because he was a Hebrew, but on account of his position as the Grand Vizier.
an abomination ] The technical term expressing that which was abhorrent and a source of ceremonial pollution. Cf. Gen 46:34; Exo 8:26. LXX ; Lat. profanum.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 32. They set on for him by himself, c.] From the text it appears evident that there were three tables, one for Joseph, one for the Egyptians, and one for the eleven brethren.
The Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews] There might have been some political reason for this, with which we are unacquainted but independently of this, two may be assigned.
1. The Hebrews were shepherds; and Egypt had been almost ruined by hordes of lawless wandering banditti, under the name of Hycsos, or King-shepherds, who had but a short time before this been expelled from the land by Amasis, after they had held it in subjection for 259 years, according to Manetho, committing the most wanton cruelties.
2. The Hebrews sacrificed those animals which the Egyptians held sacred, and fed on their flesh.
The Egyptians were in general very superstitious, and would have no social intercourse with people of any other nation; hence we are informed that they would not even use the knife of a Greek, because they might have reason to suspect it had cut the flesh of some of those animals which they held sacred. Among the Hindoos different castes will not eat food cooked in the same vessel. If a person of another caste touch a cooking vessel, it is thrown away. Some are of opinion that the Egyptian idolatry, especially their worship of Apis under the figure of an ox, was posterior to the time of Joseph; ancient monuments are rather against this opinion, but it is impossible to decide either way. The clause in the Alexandrian Septuagint stands thus, [ ], “For [every shepherd] is an abomination to the Egyptians;” but this clause is probably borrowed from Ge 46:34, where it stands in the Hebrew as well as in the Greek. See Clarke on Ge 46:34.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
They set on for him by himself; partly because the dignity of his place, and the custom of princes, required this state; and partly for the reason here following.
That is an abomination unto the Egyptians; not so much from their pride and disdain of other people, as from their superstition and idolatry; partly because they worshipped the creatures which the Hebrews and others did commonly eat; and partly because of some peculiar rites and customs which they had in the dressing and ordering of their diet. Whence Herodotus affirms, that the Egyptians would not use the pots nor knives of the Grecians about their food. Compare Gen 46:34. See there, Exo 8:26.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
32. Egyptians might not eat breadwith the Hebrews; for that is an abominationThe prejudiceprobably arose from the detestation in which, from the oppressions ofthe shepherd-kings, the nation held all of that occupation.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And they set on for him by himself,…. A table was placed and provisions set upon it in one part of the room for Joseph by himself; which was done either because he was an Hebrew, and the Egyptians might not eat with him, nor he with them; or rather for the sake of grandeur, he being the next man in the kingdom to Pharaoh:
and for them by themselves; another table was placed and spread for Joseph’s brethren by themselves, the reason of which is after given:
and for the Egyptians, which did eat with him, by themselves; a third table was laid for such Egyptian noblemen and others, who were at this time Joseph’s guests, or used to dine with him:
because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews, for that [is] an abomination unto the Egyptians; the reason of which, as given by the Targums of Onkelos and, Jonathan, is, because the creatures the Egyptians worshipped the Hebrews eat; but it is a question whether such creatures as oxen, sheep, goats, c. which were eaten by the Hebrews, were so early worshipped by the Egyptians though they were in later times, and particularly the Apis or ox, which is supposed by many to be worshipped on the account of Joseph, and so after his time; rather the abhorrence the Egyptians had the Hebrews in was on account of their being shepherds, on a political account, they having before this time suffered much by the insurrections and rebellions of such sort of persons among themselves, who set up a kingdom and kings of their own, called the “Hycsi”, or pastor kings: or else this difference made between the Egyptians and Hebrews at eating, was not on account of what they did eat, as of the certain rites and customs the Egyptians had peculiar to themselves in dressing their food, and eating it; and therefore would not eat with any of another nation; so that this was not any particular distaste they had to the Hebrews, but was their usage towards men of all nations; for so Herodotus says c, that
“no Egyptian, man or woman, might kiss the month of a Greek, or use a knife, or spit, or pot;”
that is, a knife a Greek had cut anything with, or a spit he had roasted meat on, or a pot he had boiled it in; and adds,
“nor might taste of the flesh of an ox, cut with the knife of a Greek.”
And indeed they would not eat nor converse with any of another religion d, be they who they would.
c Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 41. d Chaeremon apud Porphyr. de abstinentia, l. 4. sect. 6.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
32. Because the Egyptians might not eat, etc (169) Moses says they might not eat with the Hebrews, because they abhorred it, as being unlawful. For seeing that their religion forbade it, they were so bound, that they could not do what they did not dare to do. This passage teaches us how great was the pride of that nation; for, whence did it arise that they so utterly detested the Hebrews, unless because they thought themselves alone to be pure and holy in the world, and acceptable to God? God, indeed, commands his worshipers to abstain from all the pollutions of the Gentiles. But it behaves any one who separates himself from others, to be himself pure and upright. Therefore superstitious persons vainly attempt to claim this privilege for themselves, seeing they carry their impurity within, and are destitute of sincerity. Superstition, also, is affected with another disease; namely, that it is full of pride, so that it despises all men, under the pretext that they are vicious. It is asked, however, whether the Egyptians were separated from Joseph, because they regarded him as polluted: for this the words of Moses seem to intimate. If this interpretation is received, then they esteemed their false religion so highly, that they did not scruple to load their governor with reproaches. I rather conjecture, that Joseph sat apart from them, for the sake of honor; since it would be absurd that they, who disdained to sit at the same table with him, should be invited as his guests. Therefore it is probable that this distinct order was made by Joseph himself, that he might maintain his own dignity; and yet that the sons of Jacob were not mixed with the Egyptians, because the former were an abomination to the latter. For though the origin of Joseph was known, yet he had so passed over to the Egyptians, that he had become as one of their body. For which reason, also, the king had given him a name, when he adorned him with the insignia of his office as chief governor. Now, when we see that the church of God was, at that time, so proudly despised by profane men, we need not wonder that we also, at the present day, are subjected to similar reproach. Meanwhile, we must endeavor to keep ourselves pure from the filth of the world, for the Lord’s sake; and yet this desire must be so at tempered, that we may be alienated from the vices, rather than from the persons of men. For on this account does God sanctify his children, that they may beware of the vices of the unbelievers among whom they are conversant; and nevertheless may allure, as many as are curable, to a participation of their piety. Two things are here to be attended to; first, that we may be fully persuaded of the genuineness of our faith; secondly, that our excessive and fruitless fastidiousness may not entirely alienate many from the Lord, who otherwise might have been won. For we are not expressly commanded so to abhor the wicked, as not eat with them; but to avoid such association as may subject us to the same yoke. Besides, this passage confirms what I have before said, that the Hebrews had derived their name, not from their passing over the river; (as some falsely imagine,) but from their ancestor Heber. Nor was the fame of a single small and distantly situated family, sufficiently celebrated in Egypt, to become the cause of public dissension.
(169) “At the entertainment to which Joseph invited his brethren, they sat apart from the Egyptians, while Joseph was again separated from both. The author [Moses] shows the reason of this in the remark, ‘Because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews, for that is an abomination to the Egyptians.’ Herodotus also remarks, that the Egyptians abstained from all familiar intercourse with foreigners, since these were unclean to them, especially because they slew and ate the animals which were sacred among the Egyptians. The circumstance that Joseph eats separately from the other Egyptians is strictly in accordance with the great difference of rank, and the spirit of caste, which prevailed among the Egyptians.” — Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 39. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(32) By himself . . . by themselves.These caste distinctions were common in ancient times, and still exist in India. Joseph probably had his food served separately because of his high rank; but the word abomination shows that eating with foreigners was shunned by the Egyptians for religious considerations. Herodotus (ii. 41) says that the Greeks were equally the objects of their dislike, and that the use even of a Greek knife would render food, otherwise clean, polluted in the eyes of the Egyptians.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
32. For him by himself He thus maintained his distinction of rank and caste, and conformed to Egyptian ideas and customs .
Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews Herodotus (ii, 41) says: “No Egyptian, man or woman, will kiss a Grecian on the mouth, or use the knife, spit, or caldron of a Greek, or taste the flesh of a pure ox that has been divided by a Grecian knife . ” This same fear of contamination was doubtless held with regard to other nations as well as the Greeks . The Egyptians held in abomination those who slaughtered cows and oxen, animals which they held in highest reverence . Hence it was that they despised shepherds . Gen 46:34.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And they set on for him by himself, and for them by themselves, and for the Egyptians who ate with them by themselves, because the Egyptians are not allowed to eat bread with Hebrews, for that is an abomination to them.’
Joseph, as vizier and lord of Egypt eats at his own table. None may share with him for they are not of sufficient rank. The Egyptians who have been invited also sit at their own table. It would be ceremonially improper for them to mix with ‘foreigners’. Egyptians looked down on non-Egyptians, especially until they could speak Egyptian. They looked on them as not really human. And the brothers sat at their own table, separate from both.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Gen 43:32. And they set on for him by himself There seems to have been three tables; one where Joseph sat alone in state, a second for the Egyptian courtiers, and the third for the eleven brethren.
Because the Egyptians The LXX translate these words, because every shepherd is an abomination to the Egyptians: and the paraphrases of Onkelos and Jonathan, because the Hebrews eat the animals which the Egyptians hold sacred. See ch. Gen 46:34. and Exo 8:26. The latter is the most generally received opinion, though both, perhaps, might concur in the present case. The Egyptians were addicted to such a number of superstitious niceties, even in their eating, that they could not endure to sit at table with the people of any other nation. Their aversion was not peculiar to the Hebrews; they had the same, as Herodotus informs us, to the Greeks; they would not so much as kiss the mouth of a Greek, nor eat with his knife or other instrument, apprehending it might be polluted by cutting or touching the flesh of one of those animals which they held sacred. There are many, however, who think that these superstitions were later than Joseph’s days, and therefore resolve this abhorrence, not into a religious, but into a civil difference of manners between the two nations. Many learned men have thought, that the worship of the ox Apis was not only posterior to the times of Joseph, but that it was Joseph himself whom the Egyptians deified under the name of Apis, or the Father of his Country. See Vossius de Idolol. lib. 1: cap. 29.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Gen 43:32 And they set on for him by himself, and for them by themselves, and for the Egyptians, which did eat with him, by themselves: because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews; for that [is] an abomination unto the Egyptians.
Ver. 32. Because the Egyptians might not eat, &c. ] Such was their pride and superstition. Such was the hatred between the Jews and Samaritans: as is little less at this day between Papists and Protestants. If a Protestant give thanks at his food, though this chaseth not a Catholic from his dinner, which were to his loss, yet he must forbear to say Amen to it. As on the other side, some Roman Catholics will not say grace, though it be at their own table, when a Protestant is present; thinking it better to leave God unserved, than that a Protestant join in serving him. a They hold us no better than dogs, worse than Turks or Jews, damned heretics, cursed captives, unworthy to live on God’s ground, fit for nothing but fire and fagot. Certain it is, that whosoever in this new faith and service hath ended this life, is in hell most certainly, saith Bristow, in his 36th Motive. It cannot be that a Lutheran so dying can escape the damnation of hell, saith Coster the Jesuit; if I lie, let me be damned with Lucifer. b Are not God’s Hebrews an utter abomination now to these Romish Egyptians?
a Sandys’s Relation of West. Relig., sec. 32.
b Coster, Resp. ad Enchirid. Osiand., propos. 8.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
eat bread: Gen 43:16, Gen 31:54
for that is an abomination: The Chaldee Paraphrast renders this clause, “Because the Hebrews eat the cattle which the Egyptians worship.” But, as we learn from Gen 43:16, compared with this verse, that the provision for the entertainment of the Egyptians themselves was animal food, this reason cannot be just. The true reason seems to be that assigned by the LXX, “For every shepherd is an abomination to the Egyptians.” Gen 46:34, Exo 8:26
Reciprocal: Gen 14:13 – the Gen 29:8 – until Gen 39:6 – save Gen 44:2 – General Deu 33:16 – and upon the top 1Sa 9:22 – in the chiefest Pro 23:1 – General
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Gen 43:32. That is an abomination to the Egyptians The most generally received opinion has been, according to the paraphrases of Onkelos and Jonathan, that the reason of this was the Hebrews eating the animals which the Egyptians held sacred. To this must be added, however, that the Egyptians were addicted to such superstitious ceremonies in dressing and eating their victuals, that they could not endure to sit at table with persons of other nations. According to Herodotus, it was not only to the Hebrews that they had such an aversion, for he assures us they would not use the pots or knives of the Grecians about their food, lest these utensils should have been defiled with cutting or containing the flesh of those animals which they accounted sacred. There is some reason, notwithstanding, to think that these superstitions had not begun to prevail in Josephs days, and that the cause of this abhorrence must be sought for in the difference of the civil rather than the religious manners of the two nations.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
43:32 And they {h} set on for him by himself, and for them by themselves, and for the Egyptians, which did eat with him, by themselves: because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews; for that [is] an {i} abomination unto the Egyptians.
(h) To signify his dignity.
(i) The nature of the superstitions is to condemn all others in respect to themselves.