Pharaoh’s Strategy, Miriam’s Watchfulness, and Divine Retribution: Talmudic Interpretations of Exodus 1:8-10 (Sotah 11a)
This is a new series, in honor of the upcoming holiday of Passover.1
This sugya discusses the early oppression of the Israelites in Egypt and its repercussions. It dissects Pharaoh’s policies, his role in initiating oppression, and the divine justice meted out against him and his people.
One of the most striking elements of this Talmudic analysis is the mystical reading of Miriam’s watchfulness over her infant brother Moses at the Nile. R' Yitzḥak reinterprets Exodus 2:4 as an elaborate allegory for the Shekhina guarding Moses. By linking each phrase of the verse to biblical passages describing God’s attributes, the Talmud reframes Miriam’s vigil as a theological statement about divine providence.
Beyond this allegorical layer, the passage also discusses the political and ethical dimensions of Pharaoh’s rule. The debate between Rav and Shmuel over whether the “new king” of Egypt was truly a different monarch or simply the same ruler with a revised anti-Israelite policy reflects a broader concern with how regimes justify oppression.
Pharaoh’s calculated strategy for subjugating the Israelites, his specific choice to employ water as an instrument of destruction, and the eventual measure-for-measure retribution that befell the Egyptians all illustrate the Talmud’s engagement with moral causality in biblical history.
Finally, the passage connects the theme of divine justice to a wider biblical framework, referencing Isaiah’s vision of fire and sword (Isaiah 66:15-16), the Flood narrative, and the Red Sea drowning of the Egyptians. The midrashic interplay between these texts reinforces the idea that Pharaoh’s fate was not arbitrary but rather an exacting response to his own methods of persecution.
Outline
Mystical Interpretation of Miriam’s Watchfulness (Exodus 2:4): a Seven-Part allegory for the Shekhina watching over Moses 2
The "New King" Over Egypt (Exodus 1:8) 3
Pharaoh’s Initiative and Its Consequences (Exodus 1:9, 7:29) 4
Pharaoh’s Strategy Against Israel and Divine Retribution (Exodus 1:10): Singular Language in Pharaoh’s Statement; Debate Over the Method of Punishment; Choosing Water as a Means of Destruction; The Egyptians’ Own Water-Based Punishment 5
Fire (Isaiah 66:15-16) 6
Sword (Isaiah 66:16) 6
Water (Isaiah 54:9; Exodus 14:27) 6
Egyptians’ Measure-for-Measure Punishment Through Drowning (Exodus 18:11; Genesis 25:29) 7
Appendix - Measure for Measure: Miriam’s Reward for Watching Over Moses (Exodus 2:4; Numbers 12:15; Mishnah Sotah 1:9)
The Passage
Mystical Interpretation of Miriam’s Watchfulness (Exodus 2:4): a Seven-Part allegory for the Shekhina watching over Moses
R' Yitzḥak interprets the verse describing Miriam standing by the Nile as an allegory for the Shekhina watching over Moses.
He links each phrase of Exodus 2:4 to various biblical verses that describe God's actions and attributes:
“And his sister stood (תתצב)” parallels I Samuel 3:10, where God "stood" (יתיצב) before Samuel.
“His sister” (אחותו) connects to Proverbs 7:4, where wisdom is metaphorically called a sister.
“From afar” (מרחוק) reflects Jeremiah 31:2, describing God's presence from afar.
“To know” (לדעת) corresponds to I Samuel 2:3, which describes God as omniscient.
“What” (מה) echoes Deuteronomy 10:12, which questions what God requires.
“Would be done” (יעשה) aligns with Amos 3:7, where God’s actions are foretold.
“To him” (לו) matches Judges 6:23, where God reassures Gideon.
״ותתצב אחותו מרחוק״,
אמר רבי יצחק:
פסוק זה כולו על שם שכינה נאמר:
״ותתצב״ — דכתיב: ״ויבא ה׳ ויתיצב וגו׳״.
״אחותו״ — דכתיב: ״אמר לחכמה אחותי את״.
״מרחוק״ — דכתיב: ״מרחוק ה׳ נראה לי״.
״לדעת״ — דכתיב: ״כי אל דעות ה׳״.
״מה״ — דכתיב: ״מה ה׳ אלהיך שאל מעמך״.
״יעשה״ — דכתיב: ״כי לא יעשה ה׳ אלהים דבר״.
״לו״ — דכתיב: ״ויאמר לו ה׳ שלום״.
With regard to Miriam’s deed the verse states: “And his sister stood afar off, to know what would be done to him” (Exodus 2:4).
R' Yitzḥak says:
This entire verse is stated in reference to the Divine Presence, i.e., each phrase alludes to the Divine Presence watching over Moses.
“And his sister stood”; as it is written: “And YHWH came, and stood” (I Samuel 3:10).
“His sister”; as it is written: “Say to wisdom: You are my sister” (Proverbs 7:4).
“Afar off”; as it is written: “From afar YHWH appeared to me” (Jeremiah 31:2).
“To know”; as it is written: “For YHWH is a God of knowledge” (I Samuel 2:3).
“What”; as it is written: “What does YHWH your God require of you” (Deuteronomy 10:12).
“Would be done”; as it is written: “For YHWH your God will do nothing” (Amos 3:7).
“To him”; as it is written: “And YHWH said to him: Peace be with you” (Judges 6:23).
The "New King" Over Egypt (Exodus 1:8)
A dispute between Rav and Shmuel arises over the meaning of the “new king” (=Pharaoh) in Egypt:
One argues he was literally a new ruler, while the other contends he was the same king but enacted new decrees against the Israelites.
The phrase “who knew not Joseph” is interpreted not literally, but as describing a deliberate rejection of Joseph’s legacy.
״ויקם מלך חדש וגו׳״.
רב ושמואל:
חד אמר: חדש ממש,
וחד אמר: שנתחדשו גזירותיו.
מאן דאמר חדש ממש — דכתיב ״חדש״,
ומאן דאמר שנתחדשו גזירותיו,
דלא כתיב ״וימת וימלוך״.
״אשר לא ידע את יוסף״,
דהוה דמי כמאן דלא ידע ליה כלל.
The Gemara proceeds to discuss the sojourn of the Jewish people in Egypt. The verse states: “And there arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph” (Exodus 1:8).
Rav and Shmuel disagree about the interpretation of this verse.
One says that this means he was actually a new king,
and one says that this means that his decrees were transformed as if he were a new king.
The one who says that he was actually a new king holds that it is because it is written “new.”
And the one who says that his decrees were transformed holds that it is because
it is not written: “And the previous king of Egypt died and a new king reigned.” This indicates that the same king remained.
According to this interpretation, the words: “Who knew not Joseph” (Exodus 1:8),
mean that he was like someone who did not know him at all. Although he certainly knew Joseph and his accomplishments, he acted as if he didn’t.
Pharaoh’s Initiative and Its Consequences (Exodus 1:9, 7:29)
Pharaoh was the one who initiated the plan against the Israelites, as stated in Exodus 1:9: “And he said to his people: Behold, the people of the children of Israel are too many and too mighty for us.”
Since Pharaoh was the originator of the scheme, he was the first to be afflicted (לקה) by the plagues, as seen in the plague of frogs: “And the frogs shall come up both upon you, and upon your people, and upon all your servants” (Exodus 7:29).
״ויאמר אל עמו הנה עם בני ישראל״.
תנא:
הוא התחיל בעצה תחילה
לפיכך לקה תחילה.
הוא התחיל בעצה תחילה —
דכתיב: ״ויאמר אל עמו״,
לפיכך לקה תחילה —
כדכתיב: ״ובכה ובעמך ובכל עבדיך״.
The next verse states: “And he said to his people: Behold, the people of the children of Israel are too many and too mighty for us” (Exodus 1:9).
It was taught (Tosefta 4:11):
He, Pharaoh, initiated the proposal.
Therefore, of his people, he was stricken first.
He initiated the proposal,
as it is written: “And he said to his people.”
Therefore, he was stricken first,
as it is written: “And the frogs shall come up both upon you, and upon your people, and upon all your servants” (Exodus 7:29).
Pharaoh’s Strategy Against Israel and Divine Retribution (Exodus 1:10): Singular Language in Pharaoh’s Statement; Debate Over the Method of Punishment; Choosing Water as a Means of Destruction; The Egyptians’ Own Water-Based Punishment
Pharaoh’s use of “him” instead of “them” prompts the Talmud to suggest that he was referring to God, the “savior (מושיען) of Israel”, rather than the Israelites as a whole.
Pharaoh’s advisors discuss how to destroy the Israelites without suffering divine retribution (in the following sections).
״הבה נתחכמה לו״.
״להם״ מיבעי ליה!
אמר רבי חמא ברבי חנינא:
באו ונחכם למושיען של ישראל —
במה נדונם?
The next verse states that Pharaoh said: “Come, let us deal wisely with him [lo], lest he multiply, and it come to pass that when there befalls us any war, he will also join our enemies, and fight against us” (Exodus 1:10).
The Gemara comments: He should have said in plural: With them [lahem], rather than the singular: “With him.”
R' Ḥama, son of R' Ḥanina, says that
Pharaoh was saying: Come, let us deal wisely with regard to the savior of Israel, referring to God.
His advisors asked: With what form of death shall we judge and decree upon them?
Fire (Isaiah 66:15-16)
Killing the Israelites using fire or the sword (חרב) are rejected because God is described as using these for judgment (Isaiah 66:15–16).
נדונם באש —
כתיב: ״כי הנה ה׳ באש יבא״,
וכתיב: ״כי באש ה׳ נשפט וגו׳״.
If we shall judge them with fire,
perhaps we will be punished measure for measure by fire, as it is written: “For behold, YHWH will come in fire” (Isaiah 66:15),
and it is written in the verse that follows it: “For by fire will YHWH contend” (Isaiah 66:16).
Sword (Isaiah 66:16)
בחרב —
כתיב: [״ובחרבו את כל בשר״].
Similarly, we cannot judge them with the sword,
as it is written in the continuation of that verse: “And by His sword with all flesh” (Isaiah 66:16).
Water (Isaiah 54:9; Exodus 14:27)
The advisors assume that since God swore not to bring another Flood (מבול) upon the world (Isaiah 54:9), they can safely drown the Israelite babies.
However, they fail to realize that while God will not flood the world, He can still punish a single nation (אומה) through water. Alternatively: God won't bring a flood, but they may drown.
The Talmud notes that the Egyptians ultimately perished in the Red Sea, fulfilling a principle of measure-for-measure justice. This is supported by Exodus 14:27, which describes their drowning.
אלא בואו ונדונם במים,
שכבר נשבע הקדוש ברוך הוא שאינו מביא מבול לעולם,
שנאמר: ״כי מי נח זאת לי וגו׳״.
והן אינן יודעין שעל כל העולם כולו אינו מביא,
אבל על אומה אחת הוא מביא.
אי נמי:
הוא אינו מביא, אבל הן באין ונופלין בתוכו.
וכן הוא אומר: ״ומצרים נסים לקראתו״.
Rather, let us come and judge them with water, by drowning the Jewish babies.
God will not punish us with water, for the Holy One, Blessed be He, already took an oath that He will not bring a flood upon the world,
as it is stated: “For this is as the waters of Noah unto Me; for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth” (Isaiah 54:9).
The Gemara comments: And Pharaoh’s advisors did not know that He will not bring a flood upon all the world,
but He may bring destruction by water upon one nation.
Alternatively, there is an additional way to punish the Egyptians with water:
He does not bring a flood upon them, but they may come and fall into water,
and so it says: “And the sea returned to its strength when the morning appeared; and the Egyptians fled toward it; and the Lord overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea” (Exodus 14:27), indicating that the Egyptians fell into the water.
Egyptians’ Measure-for-Measure Punishment Through Drowning (Exodus 18:11; Genesis 25:29)
R' Elazar interprets the verse in Exodus as referring to the concept of divine justice: just as the Egyptians drowned Jewish babies, they were themselves drowned in the Red Sea.
The Talmud questions how the word “zadu” (זדו) can imply a pot and answers by citing Genesis 25:29, where the root appears in the phrase “Jacob simmered a pot.”
והיינו דאמר רבי אלעזר:
מאי דכתיב ״כי בדבר אשר זדו עליהם״ —
בקדירה שבישלו, בה נתבשלו.
מאי משמע דהאי ״זדו״ לישנא דקדירה הוא —
דכתיב: ״ויזד יעקב נזיד״.
And this is what R' Elazar says:
What is the meaning of that which is written: “Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods, for in that which they conspired [zadu] against them” (Exodus 18:11)?
The phrase means: In the pot in which they cooked, they themselves were cooked, as they were punished through drowning, measure for measure, for drowning the Jewish babies.
The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that this word “zadu” is a term meaning a pot?
The Gemara answers: As it is written: “And Jacob simmered a pot [vayyazed Ya’akov nazid]” (Genesis 25:29).
Appendix - Measure for Measure: Miriam’s Reward for Watching Over Moses (Exodus 2:4; Numbers 12:15; Mishnah Sotah 1:9)
Mishnah_Sotah.1.9 (=Sotah.9b.8)
The Mishnah emphasizes that just as punishment is given measure for measure, so too is reward.
Miriam waited for a short amount of time by the Nile to watch her infant brother Moses, as described in Exodus 2:4.
In return, when she was afflicted with tzara'at (skin disease), the Israelites delayed their journey for seven days to wait for her recovery, as stated in Numbers 12:15.
וכן לענין הטובה:
מרים המתינה למשה שעה אחת,
שנאמר: ״ותתצב אחותו מרחוק״ —
לפיכך נתעכבו לה ישראל שבעה ימים במדבר,
שנאמר: ״והעם לא נסע עד האסף מרים״.
The mishna continues: And the same is so with regard to the reward of good deeds; a person is rewarded measure for measure.
Miriam waited for the baby Moses for one hour at the shore of the Nile,
as it is stated: “And his sister stood afar off, to know what would be done to him” (Exodus 2:4).
Therefore the Jewish people delayed their travels in the desert for seven days to wait for her when she was smitten with leprosy,
as it is stated: “And Miriam was confined outside of the camp seven days; and the people journeyed not until Miriam was brought in again” (Numbers 12:15).
Compare my recent series on the Book of Esther, in honor of the holiday of Purim. I’ve created a monograph based on that series, available at my Academia.edu page: “Exile, Redemption, and the Hidden Hand of God: The Talmud's Commentary on the Book of Esther in Megillah 10b-17a“.