What are the thoughts on why the names of all Pharaohs in the Torah are not given, while so many names of others, including enemies, are given? I understand that "Pharaoh" is an Egyptian word (presumably taken into Hebrew). Is it like "Shah" today meaning "King" but applying to anybody? Hence the constant reference to "Pharaoh, King of Egypt" as opposed to any other "Pharaoh"?
Thanks for any thoughts
Peter Leon

My personal understanding is that it doesn't matter who the Pharaoh was; what's important is that he was the ruler of Mitzraim - a vast land that may give temporary relief of hunger in hard times, but where a long-term stay is a bad idea unless you want to be a slave.

That said, I think Abram's soujourn in Egypt coinsided with the Hyksos period or not too long (in biblical terms) prior to it, while Joseph's becoming second-in-command probably fell into the short period of monotheism in Egypt (Amenhotep I ?). The Book of Shemot (Exodus) deals with a post-monotheistic-period pharaoh, presumably Ramses II or one of his heirs. The names of the cities of Pithom and Ramses, which the Hebrews built as slaves, may suggest some clues to who the Pharaoh was at the time. Here's a reference: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/P/PI/PITHOM.htm
That Pithom was a city buit as a "house of sun-god" suggests that the city was started during the late monotheistic period and not under Ramses II. According to Ron Wyatt - the archaeologist proving the accuracy of the Tanach narratives to those who doubt it and confirming to those who don't (see http://www.anchorstones.net/number3.html), the Pharaoh of the Exodus belonged to the 18th dynasty.

Another interesting reason for there not being a Pharaoh's name anywhere in the Torah is here: http://www.anchorstones.net/number3a.html. Thutmoses, Ramses, Amenhotep are titles, not names; just as Caesar (Kaiser, Tzar) is a title.

On the other hand, the same source says that it was Amenhotep III, a.k.a. Thutmoses IV, the father of the young crown prince known as Tutankhamen, who, being first-born, died very young. Amenhotep III was not a first-born son of the previous pharaoh, and so he survived the Tenth Plague. -- http://www.anchorstones.net/number3b.html

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Alex,

My thanks to Alex Masmid. It is all very interesting, but it does not directly answer my central question as to why the Torah gives no name to any of the Pharohs. However a clue may be found in the sentence "the greatest horror was to have your name destroyed" which is part of these explanations. We also lay great stress on remembering and saying the name of a loved one. As an opposite therefore maybe the Torah intentionally does not give the name of Pharohs (even the "good ones").

quote:

my central question as to why the Torah gives no name to any of the Pharohs.

Well, there are at least three possibilities (each not necessarily exclusive of the others) the way I see it:

1. pharaoh is a function of amalek - and we are commanded to blot out the name

2. pharaoh represents "something" essentially nameless

3. pharaoh comes from the hebrew root pey-reish-ayin, meaning to loosen - in physics and chaos theory this could refer to a state of coherence, which interestingly is a state similar to quantum "unity" - where an electron can be in more than 1 quantum state simultaneously (like being in more than 1 place simultaneously) - in consequence, how can "the place" of it be named?

Take your pick. Or not.

So, in other words, pharaoh kabbalistically, could be understood to represent the phenomenon called celestial darkness, as explained in the linked article.

Its my humble opinion as a mere poster/reader myself that the global yeshiva forum serves as an excellent learning opportunity if one is going to be spending time online. (the topic of whether one should be online or not is a discussion within itself...)

However, with the nature of the internet being such that one does not personally know the full history and nature of the audience receiving each of one's commentaries- there are certain things which should be monitored and kept on the lower end of the frequency spectrum- such as "deep" kabbalistic commentary by lay people.

The majority of the internet crowd is of the not completely frum standing- although the majority of the people who post on this website seem to be- but one never really knows who is reading all that one posts... throwing out kabbalistic ideas may not be the wisest idea to strenthen Torah and mitzvos of the common folk- rather it may serve as a distraction.

Bottom line: not all topics are for everybody, and not all topics should be shared publically by anybody.



My humble opinion.

quote:

throwing out kabbalistic ideas may not be the wisest idea to strenthen Torah and mitzvos of the common folk

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. On the other hand - it may ignite an avodah grown cold. It may also drive those to studying Torah in a rather shallow way to pursue Torah study in a more serious way.

Additionally, this is a yeshivah of sorts, not an "introduction to judaism" class, yes?

From the globalyeshivah's homepage:

quote:

thousands of people are interested in orthodox judaism, the wisdom of Torah, and the search for truth. So why not get them together? The result: the global yeshivah. We hope to help you uplift yourselves through our forums. Learn, teach, interact, grow ...

Some people need more than just the basics. Some of us are actually here to grow and "introduction to Torah" answers are just not enough. This is a yeshivah forum, not just a chatplace.

I agree with you to a certain extent that this is not an introduction to Judaism forum- as most of the people on here seem to have an idea of what Judaism is about- then again, maybe for others it IS.

But even that is not the point. Even a talmid chocham may never be ready to digest and discuss Kabbalah. And as with any realm of learning, it needs to be in the correct enviroment with the correct instructors. Otherwise, a person may walk away with very odd ideas of what they perceive Torah to be.

Just as a side comment- there are many communities in which women barely learn even Chumash- to have a woman who shares Kabbalastic ideas on a public forum would be at least a shock and very looked down upon.

Popular Kabbalah is not something that Judaism is based upon and true Kabbalah is something that the lay person doesn't touch.

As for growing- before Kabbalah can help anyone to grow in the correct manner- they should be buki b'shas, TaNaK, and have a great Mekubal to guide them in their journey.

Although you perhaps have reached such a level- I speak for myself alone when I say I am not on such heights and perhaps will never be. Not all of us are so inclined.

quote:

there are many communities in which women barely learn even Chumash

So? This means that I should stop learning because other women won't?

quote:

to have a woman who shares Kabbalastic ideas on a public forum would be at least a shock and very looked down upon.

So? I should stop learning because others might find it shocking that a woman can learn kabbalah? Nothing that I have shared on this forum is "shocking". My "kabbalah" is hardly "popular kabbalah". And I am disturbed that you refer to it in such a manner. My sources are well within traditional Judaism. My primary teacher has been Rabbi Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh (Gal Einai Institute). Maybe you would like to share with him that you find his kabbalah "shocking" and to be "popular" kabbalah. Nothing I have shared here is out of line.

Sorry, but I am not going to vegetate in my learning just because you don't like it.

quote:

As for growing- before Kabbalah can help anyone to grow in the correct manner- they should be buki b'shas, TaNaK, and have a great Mekubal to guide them in their journey.

blah blah blah, if Hashem wants me to have a teacher, hashem is just going to have to send me one

and in the meantime, I am not going to stop learning

quote:

Although you perhaps have reached such a level- I speak for myself alone when I say I am not on such heights and perhaps will never be. Not all of us are so inclined.

Ok. And some of us are so inclined. This forum is not just for those who aren't inclined to learn kabbalah. If you don't want to learn it, don't read the posts.

quote:

there are many communities in which women barely learn even Chumash

Sarah Imenu, a mistress of kabbalah, must be turning over with distress in machpelah to hear that.

to Sarah Imenu ... don't worry mother Sarah, I won't be intimidated.

Bracha,

I see from your profile that you are rather a young woman. Perhaps I could have responded a bit more softly to you. My apologies to you if I came across harshly.

Liorah

quote:

Originally posted by Bracha:
Bottom line: not all topics are for everybody, and not all topics should be shared publically by anybody.

My humble opinion.

We recently just made a new forum for members only at http://globalyeshiva.com/eve/forums/a/frm/f/1141010881

Guests cannot view these posts. Please feel free alert us of posts that you feel should be moved to this forum by clicking on the alert icon which can be found on the bottom right hand corner of every post and letting us know. The whole world wide web (wwww) does not need to see everything that is posted at the Global Yeshiva.

quote:

Originally posted by lori:
[QUOTE]to have a woman who shares Kabbalastic ideas on a public forum would be at least a shock and very looked down upon.

A funny thing happened on the way..
Although the Askenazic jews decided to limit the learning of kabbalah to men over fourty with a strong background, in Israel the Sephardic approach has become dominant. They teach children kabballah, certainly from age 14 or so. As we say once the package is broken, you can't put it back together so limitations on learning kabballah do not have the same force as they did. Actually the Italian sephardic jews also thought the kabballah should be restricted (Pachad Yitzchak). These prohibitions were in the aftermath of Shabtai Zvi and the conversions of several yeshiva students to christianity after exposure to the Ramchal's introduction of kabballah into the curricullum. Since these factors are pretty much out of our collective memory, the prohibition seems to have lost its force. The rise of Chassidut with its emphasis on torah hanistar also contributed to the popularization of the kabballah. When the Chassidim finally started their own high level yeshiva, Chachmei Lublin, (they were losing too many good students to Voloshin), torah hanistar was included in the curricullum (1870s).

torah hanistar = the hidden torah
Ramchal = Italian kabbalist who had to leave town and move to Amsterdam. Famous for his work "Path of the Rightgeous", a book consider part of the essential Jewish library.
Pachad Yitzchak - an encylopediac work of Jewish sources by an Italian physician in the 1700's.
Aryeh Shore

Under no circumstances do I imply you should stop learning Torah and limit yourself in your avodas Hashem Liorah, and by no means I meant to offend you. Please accept my sincere apologies for any grievance that may have been caused on my behalf.

Lori and Bracha;
I would like to add my 2 cents worth. I'm in agreement with Bracha. Perhaps she didn't articulate herself very well. Kabbala is Torah, but it's at a very high level. So when people who don't understand the basics of Torah dabble in kabbala it creates mystical problems. So the prohibitions are not made simply to oppress women or young people or anything of the sort. The sages presumed that most people would not have adequate Torah until certain ages and in the case of women, depending on the level of learning in their communities. So Lori, learn all you want, but Torah should come first, for without it kabbala is almost worthless if not dangerous.

rather than multiple posts, I hope this works:

(Rabbi)

quote:

We recently just made a new forum for members only

Good idea.

(Laurence)

quote:

In Israel the Sephardic approach has become dominant. They teach children kabbalah

Maybe it was divine providence, then, that I learned hebrew the Sephardi way. Because I think it's wonderful that children are taught kabbalah. It's as natural as breathing and not anything other than Torah. What is dangerous is not teaching it, and leaving those of us interesting in pursuing Torah study on a deeper level to starve.

(Bracha)

quote:

Please accept my sincere apologies.

No problem. I am somewhat sensitive about this issue, having had many attempt to "thwart" my study over the years.

(Moshe)

quote:

I am in agreement with Bracha. When people who don't understand the basics of Torah dabble in kabbalah, it causes mystical problems.

Mystical problems? Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I am not a mystic. And kabbalah is basic Torah. It is integral to Torah. What "mystifies" me is how anyone can study Torah without it.

quote:

So Lori, learn all you want, but Torah should come first.

So Moshe, I will. Kabbalah is Torah. It is just another way of looking at the same essence.

quote:

For without it, kabbalah is almost worthless if not dangerous

This does not compute. The only thing that is "dangerous" about studying kabbalah is other people who actively try to thwart one's study of it.