^37:28So when the Midianite⁶² merchants passed by, Joseph’s brothers pulled⁶³ him⁶⁴ out of the cistern and sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver. The Ishmaelites⁶⁵ then took Joseph to Egypt.

^37:29Later Reuben returned to the cistern to find that Joseph was not in it!⁶⁶ He tore his clothes, ^37:30returned to his brothers, and said, “The boy isn’t there! And I, where can I go?” ^37:31So they took Joseph’s tunic, killed a young goat,⁶⁷ and dipped the tunic in the blood. ^37:32Then they brought the special tunic to their father⁶⁸ and said, “We found this. Determine now whether it is your son’s tunic or not.”

^37:33He recognized it and exclaimed, “It is my son’s tunic! A wild animal has eaten him!⁶⁹ Joseph has surely been torn to pieces!” ^37:34Then Jacob tore his clothes, put on sackcloth,⁷⁰ and mourned for his son many days. ^37:35All his sons and daughters stood by⁷¹ him to console him, but he refused to be consoled. “No,” he said, “I will go to the grave mourning my son.”⁷² So Joseph’s⁷³ father wept for him.

^37:36Now⁷⁴ in Egypt the Midianites⁷⁵ sold Joseph⁷⁶ to Potiphar, one of Pharaoh’s officials, the captain of the guard.⁷⁷

Read in Logos

Footnotes

62 On the close relationship between Ishmaelites (v. 25) and Midianites, see Judg 8:24.
63 Heb “they drew and they lifted up.” The referent (Joseph’s brothers) has been specified in the translation for clarity; otherwise the reader might assume the Midianites had pulled Joseph from the cistern (but cf. ).
64 Heb “Joseph” (both here and in the following clause); the proper name has been replaced both times by the pronoun “him” in the translation for stylistic reasons.
65 Heb “they”; the referent (the Ishmaelites) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
66 Heb “and look, Joseph was not in the cistern.” By the use of וְהִנֵּה (véhinneh, “and look”), the narrator invites the reader to see the situation through Reuben’s eyes.
67 It was with two young goats that Jacob deceived his father (Gen 27:9); now with a young goat his sons continue the deception that dominates this family.
68 Heb “and they sent the special tunic and they brought [it] to their father.” The text as it stands is problematic. It sounds as if they sent the tunic on ahead and then came and brought it to their father. Some emend the second verb to a Qal form and read “and they came.” In this case, they sent the tunic on ahead.
69 A wild animal has eaten him. Jacob draws this conclusion on his own without his sons actually having to lie with their words (see v. 20). Dipping the tunic in the goat’s blood was the only deception needed.
70 Heb “and put sackcloth on his loins.”
71 Heb “arose, stood”; which here suggests that they stood by him in his time of grief.
72 Heb “and he said, ‘Indeed I will go down to my son mourning to Sheol.’ ” Sheol was viewed as the place where departed spirits went after death.
73 Heb “his”; the referent (Joseph) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
74 The disjunctive clause formally signals closure for this episode of Joseph’s story, which will be resumed in Gen 39.
75 The spells the name of the merchants as מְדָנִים (médanim, “Medanites”) rather than מִדְיָנִים (midyanim, “Midianites”) as in v. 28. It is likely that the is corrupt at this point, with the letter yod (י) being accidentally omitted. The , , Samaritan Pentateuch, and read “Midianites” here. Some prefer to read “Medanites” both here and in v. 28, but Judg 8:24, which identifies the Midianites and Ishmaelites, favors the reading “Midianites.”
76 Heb “him”; the referent (Joseph) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
77 The expression captain of the guard might indicate that Potiphar was the chief executioner.