Pt2 Joseph’s Bones in Exodus 13 and Joshua 24: Honor, Completion, and Consequences (Sotah 13a-b)

This is the second and final part of a two-part series. Part 1 is here; the outline of the series can be found at Part 1.

Questioning the Delegation of Joseph’s Burial to Moses and the People (Joshua 24:32): Doubt Regarding Moses’ Role; The Role of Joseph’s Descendants

The Talmud questions whether Moses was uniquely responsible for Joseph’s burial. It points out that the people of Israel themselves are credited with bringing Joseph’s bones from Egypt and burying them in Shechem after Moses’s death.

Further, the Talmud asks why Joseph’s own children did not handle the burial. Since Shechem became their inheritance, the text implies they were present and had the means to do so.¹

ואי לא עסיק ביה משה,

ישראל לא הוו מיעסקי ביה?!

והכתיב:

״ואת עצמות יוסף

אשר העלו בני ישראל ממצרים

קברו בשכם״!

The Talmud asks: And if Moses had not dealt with the burial of Joseph,

would the Jewish people not have dealt with it?!

But isn’t it written that after Moses died:

“And the bones of Joseph,

which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt,

they buried in Shechem” (Joshua 24:32),

which indicates that the Jewish people completed the burial of Joseph?

ותו:

אי לא איעסקו ביה ישראל,

בניו לא הוו מיעסקי ביה?!

והכתיב: ״ויהיו לבני יוסף לנחלה״?!

And furthermore,

if the Jewish people had not dealt with Joseph’s burial,

would his children not have dealt with it?!

But isn’t it written in that same verse: “And they became the inheritance of the children of Joseph,”

as Joseph was buried in Shechem, which was then given to his descendants. Therefore, the question arises: Why did Joseph’s descendants initially leave the task of his burial to the Jewish people and Moses?

• אמרו: הניחו לו —

  • כבודו במרובים יותר מבמועטין.

• ותו אמרו: הניחו לו —

  • כבודו בגדולים יותר מבקטנים.

The Talmud answers:

• They said: Leave Joseph for others —

  • It is more of an honor for Joseph to be buried by the many than by the few, and therefore it is better that the Jewish people be involved in the burial.

• And furthermore, they said: Leave Joseph for others —

  • It is more of an honor for Joseph to be buried by one of the great men like Moses than by lesser ones like us.

R’ Ḥama b. Ḥanina - Burial in Shechem as a Moral Return (Joshua 24:32)

Joseph was buried in Shechem, the place from which his brothers had kidnapped him.

This is interpreted as a symbolic restitution: his lost body was returned to where he was lost.

״קברו בשכם״.

מאי שנא בשכם?

אמר רבי חמא ברבי חנינא:

משכם גנבוהו,

ולשכם נחזיר אבידתו.

In the aforementioned verse it states: “And the bones of Joseph, which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt, they buried in Shechem, in the parcel of ground that Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of money” (Joshua 24:32).

The Talmud asks: What is different about Shechem that they specifically chose to bury Joseph there?

R’ Ḥama, son of R’ Ḥanina, says that the Jewish people said:

His brothers kidnapped him from Shechem (see Genesis 37:12–28),

and to Shechem we should return his lost body.

Incomplete Mitzvot and Their Consequences (Exodus 13:19; Joshua 24:32; Genesis 38:1, 38:12; 46:12): Contradictory Verses on Joseph’s Bones; Credit Given to the One Who Completes the Act; Demotion and Personal Loss as Punishment for Incomplete Mitzvot

The Talmud notes a contradiction between Exodus 13:19, which credits Moses with taking Joseph’s bones, and Joshua 24:32, which credits the children of Israel.²

קשו קראי אהדדי:

• כתיב:

  • ״ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף עמו״,

• וכתיב:

  • ״ואת עצמות יוסף אשר העלו בני ישראל וגו׳״

The Talmud comments: The verses contradict each other:

• as it is written:

  • “And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him” (Exodus 13:19),

• and it is written elsewhere:

  • “And the bones of Joseph, which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt” (Joshua 24:32).

Who in fact took Joseph’s bones?

R’ Ḥama b. Ḥanina

R’ Ḥama ben Ḥanina resolves the contradiction by asserting that one who completes a deed is given credit as if they had performed the entire act.³

אמר רבי חמא ברבי חנינא:

כל העושה דבר ולא גמרו,

ובא אחר וגמרו —

מעלה עליו הכתוב על שגמרו כאילו עשאו.

R’ Ḥama, son of R’ Ḥanina, says:

Anyone who performs a matter but does not complete it,

and then another comes and completes it,

the verse ascribes credit to the one who completed it as if he had actually performed the entire act.

Due to the fact that the children of Israel completed Joseph’s burial, the Torah ascribes them credit as if they had performed the entire act.

R’ Elazar - Genesis 38:1

R’ Elazar teaches that failing to complete a mitzva when able leads to a loss of status. He supports this with Judah, who began saving Joseph but did not finish the act and was subsequently demoted (“lowered”) by his brothers (Genesis 38:1).

רבי אלעזר אומר:

אף מורידין אותו מגדולתו,

דכתיב:

״ויהי בעת ההיא

וירד יהודה״.

R’ Elazar says with regard to one who initiates performance of a mitzva but does not complete it when capable of doing so:

He is also demoted [moridin] from his position of greatness,

as it is written:

“And it came to pass at that time,

that Judah went down [va-yered] from his brethren, and turned in to a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah” (Genesis 38:1).

Usage of the term “went down” indicates that the rest of Judah’s brothers had demoted him from his position of greatness because he began the process of saving Joseph, but he did not complete it.

R’ Shmuel bar Naḥmani - Genesis 38:12; 46:12

R’ Shmuel bar Naḥmani adds that one who starts a mitzva but fails to complete it will ultimately be divinely punished and suffer personal tragedy.

This is proven from the fact that Judah, who did not complete the rescue of Joseph, lost both his wife and two sons (Genesis 38:12; 46:12).

רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר:

אף קובר אשתו ובניו,

1. דכתיב:

   1. ״ותמת בת שוע אשת יהודה וגו׳״,

2. וכתיב:

   1. ״וימת ער ואונן״.

R’ Shmuel bar Naḥmani says:

The episode with regard to Judah also indicates that one who initiates performance of a mitzva but does not complete it will also bury his wife and children as Judah did,

• as it is written:

  • “And in process of time Shua’s daughter, the wife of Judah, died” (Genesis 38:12),

• and it is written further:

  • “And the sons of Judah: Er, and Onan, and Shelah, and Perez, and Zerah; but Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan” (Genesis 46:12).

Rav Yehuda citing Rav - Why Joseph Was Called “Bones” During His Lifetime (Genesis 50:25, 43:28; 44:31)

Rav Yehuda says in the name of Rav that Joseph was referred to as “bones” (i.e. a dead body) even while still alive because of a failure to defend his father’s honor (meaning, it was used as a slur).

Joseph’s brothers, unaware of his identity, repeatedly referred to their father Jacob as “your servant” when speaking to Joseph, the Egyptian viceroy (Genesis 43:28; 44:31). Joseph remained silent and did not correct or protest this humiliation.

Due to this silence, Joseph was metaphorically reduced to “bones” (emphasizing the spiritual or moral consequence of not standing up for Jacob’s dignity).

אמר רב יהודה, אמר רב:

מפני מה נקרא יוסף עצמות בחייו?

מפני שלא מיחה בכבוד אביו,

דקאמרי ליה ״עבדך אבינו״,

ולא אמר להו ולא מידי.

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says:

For what reason was Joseph called “bones” even during his lifetime, as he had his brothers take an oath that “God will surely remember you, and you shall carry up my bones from here” (Genesis 50:25)?

Because he did not protest for the honor of his father,

as the brothers said to Joseph while unaware of his true identity: “Your servant our father” (Genesis 43:28, 44:31),

and Joseph said nothing to them in protest that they referred to his father Jacob as Joseph’s servant.

Rav Yehuda citing Rav (or: R’ Ḥama b. Ḥanina) - Joseph’s Early Death Attributed to Authoritative Behavior

Joseph died before his brothers because he acted with authority (רבנות) over them.⁴

ואמר רב יהודה, אמר רב,

ואיתימא רבי חמא ברבי חנינא:

מפני מה מת יוסף קודם לאחיו?

מפני שהנהיג עצמו ברבנות.

And Rav Yehuda says that Rav says,

and some say that this was said by R’ Ḥama, son of R’ Ḥanina:

For what reason did Joseph predecease his brothers, as is indicated from his requesting of them to take care of his burial needs?

Because Joseph acted authoritatively, and such behavior can reduce one’s life span.

R’ Elazar - Joseph “Brings Down” Pharaoh’s astrologers (Genesis 39:1)

R’ Elazar interprets “hurad” (”was brought down”) in Genesis 39:1 not passively, but actively—“horid”—suggesting Joseph lowered the status of Pharaoh’s astrologers by outperforming them in dream interpretation.⁵

״ויוסף הורד מצרימה״.

אמר רבי אלעזר:

אל תיקרי ״הורד״,

אלא ״הוריד״,

שהוריד איצטגניני פרעה מגדולתן.

After describing that Judah “went down” from his greatness, the Talmud discusses a similar term employed with regard to Joseph, as the verse states: “And Joseph was brought down [hurad] to Egypt” (Genesis 39:1).

R’ Elazar says:

Do not read the word as “hurad,” meaning that he was passively brought down,

but rather read it as horid, meaning: He, Joseph, brought down others,

as Joseph brought down the astrologers [itztagninei] of Pharaoh from their position of eminence because he knew the interpretation of Pharaoh’s dreams when they did not.

Rav - Potiphar’s Desire and Divine Castration (Genesis 39:1).

Rav asserts that Potiphar purchased Joseph for sexual purposes.⁶

The angel Michael consequently castrated Potiphar,⁷ and Gabriel further mutilated him.⁸

The textual shift from “Potiphar” to “Potiphera” reflects this physical transformation.

״ויקנהו פוטיפר סריס פרעה״,

אמר רב: שקנאו לעצמו.

בא (גבריאל) [מיכאל] וסירסו,

בא גבריאל ופירעו.

• מעיקרא כתיב

  • ״פוטיפר״,

• ולבסוף

  • ״פוטיפרע״.

The continuation of that verse states: “And Potiphar, an officer [seris] of Pharaoh’s, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, bought him from the hand of the Ishmaelites, who had brought him down there” (Genesis 39:1).

Rav says: He purchased the handsome Joseph for himself, for the intended purpose of homosexual intercourse,

but was unable to fulfill his desires, as the angel Gabriel came and castrated Potiphar [seireso].

Then Gabriel came again and further mutilated him [fero] in the same part of his body.

This is alluded to in the verses that write Potiphar’s name differently:

• Initially it is written

  • “Potiphar” (Genesis 39:1)

• and in the end it is written

  • “Potiphera” (Genesis 41:45). The change in his name indicates that a part of himself was mutilated.

Appendix - Homiletic Readings of Verses from Exodus and Joshua regarding Joseph’s Bones: Organized by Verse

This sugya weaves together interpretations about Joseph’s burial, emphasizing themes of honor, divine reward, and the moral importance of completing good deeds.

Genesis

Genesis 38:1 - Consequences of incomplete mitzvot: R’ Elazar teaches that failing to complete a mitzvah leads to demotion, using Judah as an example (Genesis 38:1). R’ Shmuel bar Naḥmani adds that one who begins a mitzvah but doesn’t complete it may suffer personal tragedy, as Judah lost both his wife and two sons.

Genesis 39:1 - “And Joseph was brought down to Egypt”

• Reinterpretation of “brought down”: R’ Elazar says don’t read “hurad” (“was brought down”) but “horid” (“brought down others”), suggesting Joseph actively lowered Pharaoh’s astrologers from their positions by outperforming them.

• Potiphar’s purchase: Rav interprets that Potiphar bought Joseph for sexual purposes, but was divinely prevented when Michael castrated him and Gabriel further mutilated him. This explains the name change from “Potiphar” to “Potiphera” in later verses.

Genesis 43:28, 44:31 - Joseph’s brothers referring to Jacob as “your servant”

• Joseph failed to protest when his brothers called Jacob “your servant” before him (when he was disguised as the Egyptian viceroy).

• This failure to defend his father’s honor caused Joseph to be referred to as “bones” even while still alive.

Genesis 50:13 - “For his sons carried him into the land of Canaan”

• Though Jacob’s sons helped with the burial, Joseph took primary responsibility because “there is more honor for our father to be prepared for burial by royalty than by common people.”

Exodus

Exodus 13:19 - “And Moses took with him the bones of Joseph”

• Moses’s devotion to mitzvot: While all Israel was busy collecting plunder, Moses focused on retrieving Joseph’s bones, fulfilling Proverbs 10:8, “The wise in heart will take mitzvot.”

• Finding Joseph’s remains: Serah bat Asher (who survived from an earlier generation) informed Moses that the Egyptians had placed Joseph in a metal casket in the Nile for blessing. Moses went to the riverbank, invoked God’s oath of redemption and Joseph’s oath, causing the coffin to miraculously rise.

• Alternative tradition: R’ Natan says Joseph was buried in a royal crypt. Moses went there, invoked the same oaths, and Joseph’s coffin trembled among the others, identifying itself.

• Honor in burial: Moses took responsibility for Joseph’s remains because “it is more honor for Joseph to be buried by one of the great men like Moses than by lesser ones.”

Exodus Desert Journey (not a specific verse)

• The two arks: During the Israelites’ desert wanderings, Joseph’s coffin traveled alongside the Ark of the Covenant. When questioned, the people explained: “This one [Joseph] fulfilled everything written in that one [the Torah].”

• Miracle of floating: The passage argues that Moses could make Joseph’s metal coffin float through a kal vachomer (a fortiori) argument: If Elisha could make iron float (2 Kings 6:5-6), certainly Moses—who stands higher in the prophetic hierarchy—could do so more easily.

Joshua

Joshua 24:32 - “The bones of Joseph, which the Israelites had brought up from Egypt, were buried at Shechem”

• Contradiction resolution: This verse contradicts Exodus 13:19 (which credits Moses with taking Joseph’s bones). R’ Ḥama ben Ḥanina resolves this by teaching that one who completes a deed receives credit for the entire act. Since the Israelites completed the burial, they are credited with the whole process.

• Burial location significance: Joseph was buried in Shechem because “His brothers kidnapped him from Shechem, and to Shechem we should return his lost body” – a symbolic restitution.

1. The central issue raised is why the responsibility for burying Joseph was initially left to Moses and the broader community, rather than being fulfilled directly by Joseph’s descendants (similar to what was stated earlier about Joseph burying Jacob, as opposed to anyone else doing so).

2. See my intro in Part 1 of this series, where I quote both verses.

3. Since the Israelites completed the burial, they are credited with the whole process.

4. Compare the famous exhortation to “hate authority (rabanut)” in my “Pt1 Tripartite Aphorisms: From The Men of the Great Assembly to Rabban Gamaliel’s Dynasty (Mishnah Avot 1:1-2:4)“, section “Shemaiah - Love work; hate authority; avoid rulers (1:10)“:

שמעיה אומר:

1. אהב את המלאכה,

2. ושנא את הרבנות,

3. ואל תתודע לרשות

Shemaiah says:

1. love work (מלאכה - i.e. labor),

2. hate authority (רבנות)

3. and do not attempt to draw near (תתודע) to the ruling authority (רשות)

More broadly, this reflects a common theme throughout Talmudic literature: a critique of domineering leadership and arrogance, paired with a strong moral expectation that leaders remain humble and view their authority as a form of service rather than self-aggrandizement.

For just one representative example from many, see my “Pt1 ‘When a King Sins’: Sin, Reward, and Responsibility in Talmudic Theology (Horayot 10a-b)“, sections “ “Independent house” implies that before the affliction the king was in servitude to the people“ and “Rabban Gamliel - Appointment to leadership isn’t prestigious, it’s actually servitude - 1 Kings 12:7“.

5. Compare also the story later in the tractate of Joseph surpassing Pharaoh in terms of the number of languages he could speak, to Pharaoh’s embarrassment.

6. Compare the extensive Talmudic discussions of the biblical story of Joseph and Potiphar’s wife, in these pieces of mine:

• Later in the tractate, two-part series, “The Temptation and Trial of Joseph in Genesis 39: From Potiphar’s House to the High Priest’s Ephod (Sotah 36a-b)“, final part here.

• “Extreme Poverty, Wealth, and Attractiveness as No Excuse Not to Study Torah: The Examples of Hillel, Elazar ben Ḥarsum, and Joseph (Yoma 35b)“, section “Part 3: Extreme Handsomeness as No Excuse: The Case of Joseph“.

7. סירסו - to prevent Potiphar from acting on his homosexual intentions towards Joseph.

For another instance in which coercive homosexual behavior is attributed to a major wicked biblical figure, see my “ ‘That Wicked One’: A Grotesque Talmudic Portrait of Nebuchadnezzar Based on the Parable against the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14 (Shabbat 149b-150a)“, section “Rabba bar Huna - Explains “ḥolesh” (Isaiah 14:12) as casting lots, linked to homosexual exploitation by Nebuchadnezzar - Isaiah 14:12; R’ Yoḥanan - All kings “rest” from such exploitation (symbolic end of abuse) - Isaiah 14:18“.

On this general tendency of the Talmud to interpolate additional sexual elements into biblical narratives, see my two-part series “Talmudic Elaboration of Sexuality and Love in Biblical Narratives“, final part here.

8. פירעו.

On this word (in the context of the penis), see Jastrow (modernized), פָּרַע, sense #3:

to uncover the corona, to split the membrane and pull it down.

Mishnah Shabbat 19:2. Bamidbar Rabbah 11:7; and frequently.

And see Wikipedia, “Brit milah“, section “Ritual components“, sub-section “Uncovering, priah“:

At the neonatal stage, the inner preputial epithelium is still linked with the surface of the glans.

The mitzvah is executed only when this epithelium is either removed, or permanently peeled back to uncover the glans.

On medical circumcisions performed by surgeons, the epithelium is removed along with the foreskin, to prevent post operative penile adhesion and its complications.

However, on ritual circumcisions performed by a mohel, the epithelium is most commonly peeled off only after the foreskin has been amputated.

This procedure is called priah (Hebrew: פריעה), which means ‘uncovering’.

The main goal of “priah” (also known as “bris periah”), is to remove as much of the inner layer of the foreskin as possible and prevent the movement of the shaft skin, what creates the look and function of what is known as a “low and tight” circumcision.

According to Rabbinic interpretation of traditional Jewish sources, the ‘priah’ has been performed as part of the Jewish circumcision since the Israelites first inhabited the Land of Israel.