0

In Beresheit 11:29 it reads:

And Abram and Nahor took themselves wives; the name of Abram's wife was Sarai, and the name of Nahor's wife was Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah and the father of Iscah.”

Who is this Iscah? Is it Sarai/Sarah?

Kazi bácsi
  • 7,609
  • 4
  • 23
  • 51
Ephraim77
  • 1,512
  • 8
  • 15
  • This is a pretty bad question post (to put it nicely). Why do you think Iskah is anyone but Iskah? And why would she also be Sarai of all people? Maybe Yiskah is Eliezer? Or Lot? Or Donald? Please [edit] in motivation for your question! See too https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1086/759 https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/q/306/759 – Double AA Oct 15 '18 at 21:23

1 Answers1

4

The Talmud in Megillah 14a states that Yiskah is Sarah:

ואמר ר' יצחק יסכה זו שרה ולמה נקרא שמה יסכה שסכתה ברוח הקדש שנאמר כל אשר תאמר אליך שרה שמע בקולה ד"א יסכה שהכל סוכין ביופיה

and R. Isaac said [on this]. Yiscah is Sarah; and why was she called Yiscah? Because she discerned [sakethah] by means of the holy spirit, as it is said, In all that Sarah saith unto thee, hearken to her voice. Another explanation is: because all gazed [sakin] at her beauty. (Soncino translation)

This identification is also made explicitly by Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on the verse in question, adding an additional two words at the end of the verse saying "she is Sarai":

ונסיב אברם ונחור להון נשין שום אתת אברם שרי ושום אתת נחור מלכה ברת הרן אבוי דמלכא ואבוי דיסכה היא שרי

Many of the standard biblical commentaries adopt this identification as well, some suggesting that if Yiskah was not Sarah there would be no point of introducing her in this verse.

Alex
  • 49,242
  • 3
  • 120
  • 228
  • We don't Paskin this way though – Double AA Oct 15 '18 at 21:46
  • @DoubleAA Paskin? – Alex Oct 15 '18 at 21:53
  • Yup. (I'm loath to post a good answer to such a bad question... Sigh.) – Double AA Oct 15 '18 at 21:58
  • Does Pesudo Jonathon even predate the Talmud? Why bother bringing it? – Double AA Oct 15 '18 at 22:35
  • @DoubleAA The consensus is that it does not predate the Talmud. But as opposed to the commentaries which almost certainly only identify Yiskah as Sarah because the Talmud did, it is possible (though not necessarily probable) that the Targum did not get it from the Talmud. As such it could theoretically be an independent source (perhaps based on earlier midrashic material that we may or may not have). Also, the Talmud says it as a tangential point while the Targum directly translates/explains the verse in question. That said, it's not that important and I have no problem removing it if need be. – Alex Oct 15 '18 at 22:53
  • Ah. In any event we have a source that predates both PJ and the Talmud – Double AA Oct 15 '18 at 23:30
  • 3
    @DoubleAA Which is? You can’t tease us like that, saying you’ve got a good answer and then not tell us what it is. :) – DonielF Oct 16 '18 at 08:45
  • Seder Olam ....? – sam Oct 16 '18 at 15:27
  • Do you feel the edits invalidate your existing uovoted answer? – Double AA Oct 16 '18 at 15:55
  • @DoubleAA I was actually just about to post a link to the Meta post about it. I don't think it makes much sense for an answer to simply state that the Talmud says it when the question already includes the fact that the Talmud says it, so it probably does invalidate it. – Alex Oct 16 '18 at 15:56
  • @DonielF I think he is referring to Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews, book I (probably the passage translated here), as is mentioned by the Hebrew Wikipedia article on "יסכה", footnote 4. – Tamir Evan Oct 16 '18 at 16:59
  • 1
    @DoubleAA I finally found what you're talking about, but is it really necessary to be so cryptic? Most people are more familiar with Rashi on Chumash than with the Kesef Mishneh. Before you know kol hatorah kulah you have to start somewhere, and for better or worse the standard place to start is Chumash with Rashi. – Heshy Oct 16 '18 at 19:04
  • @Heshy That's only according to the Kesef Mishneh's explanation. However, as per (Lechem Mishneh Yesodei Torah 9:1) Rambam can quote a pasuk as the source even when it's not the actual source used by the Talmud. In this case, the alternative Scriptural source is R. Eliezer's derivation that יעזב איש refers to your father's sister, and your own sister is then a fortiori prohibited. Additionally, in Sanhedrin 69b the identification of Yiskah as Sarah is also used for a halachic proof, and the proof is only rejected for a different reason. – Alex Oct 16 '18 at 21:45
  • In any case, a psak about whether it is permitted to for a Noahide to marry his sister doesn't speak to the actual historical reality. – Alex Oct 16 '18 at 21:46
  • @Alex If Iscah is Sarai, that makes her Abram's niece, not his sister or half-sister. – ezra Oct 17 '18 at 04:28
  • @ezra I know... – Alex Oct 17 '18 at 04:30