MODULE ONE

UNIT THREE JEWISH EXEGESIS

Judaism has always scrutinized Scripture. For Jews, the Tanakh contains the norm of their faith and
their action. The study of this text and its interpretation raised the problem of exegesis. As Robert and
Feuillet say, one should not speak of Jewish exegesis in terms of scientific knowledge, but in terms of
life proper to a culture.27
Christian and Jewish exegesis cannot be understood in the same way, since for the former it is a more
scientific work, while for the latter it is more in the realm of the symbolic and the experiential. In
principle, the same criteria and methods are not used to approach the text.
In this regard, Stefan C.'s contribution is interesting. Reif, who responded to Jon Barton's request to
write a chapter on the Jewish contribution to biblical interpretation for his book Interpreting the Bible
Today, clarifies that speaking of Jewish exegesis requires placing oneself at a different angle from the
understanding of biblical exegesis in the modern Western Christian world. Reif mentions the way in
which biblical studies are conceived within and outside the Christian biblical academy:
The study of the Bible in academic contexts is considered critical and scientific, while
traditional interpretations prior to the modern period are considered naive and at odds with
history [...]. Among Jewish scholars there is a conviction that there are seventy different
ways of interpreting the Torah, and there is certainly no confident assertion that one's own
form of exegesis is the only truly scientific one. It is not Christian exegesis that many
Jewish scholars disapprove of, but the apparent inability of many Old Testament scholars to
recognize that what appears to them to be critical and scientific Hebrew scholarship may be
anything but that to those who feel unable to share their theological convictions.28
Certainly there is talk of the difference between the Semitic mentality and the Western mentality,
between two ways of writing, reading and interpreting history and the action of God among humanity.
One cannot think of a serious study of the First or Second Covenant if one ignores the special nature of
Hebrew thought and the soil in which the two testaments had their origin. Every student of the Bible
must remember that Greek wisdom distances itself considerably from biblical thought. Risto Santala
points out this assumption as fundamental:
In one of his books, the well-known Jewish writer Schalom Ben-Chorin describes the
essential differences between Greek scholarship and biblical thought. The Greek world
strove to find orderly rules, a method that prevailed from Aristotle to Hegel. The details
were then arranged to integrate larger units and imposed on preformed structures. On the
other hand, Hebrew thought proceeds from details to principles, from concrete observations
to ideals. So the Bible knows neither dogma nor system as such. Rather, it displays two
typical basic objectives: a narrative and a law that serves as a guide for life. The
Pentateuch, the Psalms and the Prophets recount one by one the great works of God. Thus,
historical facts are preserved without alteration, even when their interpretation receives a
new nuance according to the requirements of each era. Nor does the sacred law, as revealed
in the commandments, change with changing fashions. Instead of the Greek fascination
with systematization, the Bible displays an associative reasoning in which each detail has
an immediate relationship to the whole and each of the parts is interdependent.29
Santala emphasizes that this associative principle is present in the entirety of rabbinic literature, even to
this day. The author explains how, in recent years, the text of the new covenant has been read with new
eyes that allow us to discover the richness of the midrash.

1
MODULE ONE

Recently, the NT has also been studied as a kind of midrash; as a creation similar to the
exegetical preaching of the synagogue, observing the Jewish laws of biblical interpretation.
One of the foundations of this method is the axiom that states that every detail of God's
revelation, the Torah, must be expounded and explained, both in relation to the subject
under consideration and as an independent entity, because the word of God never loses its
literal meaning. Furthermore, every argument must be supported with a word of Scripture
because men's opinions are worthless in themselves.
The midrash frequently repeats the Aramaic saying: Há bé-há tali, “This depends on this,”
forming internal bridges within the message of the Bible itself. Again and again we are told
that this or that wise man has said in the name of this or that other wise man, “as it is
written, va-gomer.
(and so on). Then only the first words of the Bible passage are given and the reader,
knowing the Scriptures by heart, recites the rest silently to himself. This use of AT provides
a certain “understandability” to the entire presentation and avoids philosophizing in an
overly subjective way. Even a short midrash might contain hundreds of OT quotations and
the names of hundreds of rabbis. Thus the entire presentation is anchored in the history and
tradition of the synagogue.30
Faced with the written text closed by the canon, the Tanakh, without exhausting its polysemy and
continually open to multiple readings, Judaism was forced to resort to new practices to make
comments. The main commentary is the Mishnah. Alongside this, other ways of commenting on the
Scriptures emerged, among which the Targum, the Peser and the Midrash stand out. Severino Croatto,
in his Biblical Hermeneutics, proposes a clear definition of these terms:
The Targum is the version of the Hebrew text into Aramaic but with some hermeneutical
liberties that introduce essential updates to the message. Elpéser is the commentary on a
biblical text verse by verse, or choosing specific passages. The verse is cited and the
commentary begins with the word peser, “the explanation of,” or pisró, “its explanation is.”
In the Dead Sea Scrolls it appears as a characteristic literary genre. It is a form of rereading
the canonical text. Midrash is the expansion of a biblical text expressed as a new story. The
event narrated in the text is recreated based on new situations.31
These biblical commentaries were born and continue to germinate in Judaism thanks to two institutions
in which the assiduous and judicious study of Scripture allows the updating of the Tanakh to remain
alive and reach Jews of all ages and times. These places are the Synagogue and the Yeshiva. The
Synagogue is above all a place of worship, often a place of education and a centre of social life. The
Yeshiva, which literally translates as session, meeting, is a center of higher learning where rabbinical
knowledge is manufactured. The Talmud is studied there above all. Initially it was called Bet Ha-
midrash, house of study, and later became the academy, both in Israel and in Babylon.
The Bet Ha-midrash is an institution distinct from the Synagogue, although at some point
(but not always) it physically coincided with the Synagogue. It emerged in the period
before 70, but was consolidated by the rabbinical movement and gave rise to the great
academies of Palestine and Babylon. This institution is the indispensable Sitz im Leben for
making possible the immense exegetical production and editorial activity of Rabbinic
Judaism.32
These academies gave rise to the compilation of the Talmud in its two versions: that of Jerusalem,
called Palestinian, and that of Babylon. Yeshivot, plural, are key places of training in the art of reading
and interpreting Scripture and the Talmud. Today there are yeshivot in Israel for both men and women.
THE MIDRASH
The main Jewish method of interpretation is the midrash. The word midrash (tiña) from the Hebrew
root tthn (darash), is translated as study or interpretation. Midrash is both the method of interpreting
the Torah and the relevant literature. Darash means to inquire, to search, to investigate, to expound, to
2
MODULE ONE

interpret and even to preach. To accept this diversity of meanings it is important to remember that in
Hebrew a word has more than one meaning. The aim of midrashim (plural) is to extract and explain the
deep meaning of biblical texts.33
[The midrash] seeks in the texts their value of life. To make this clear, the interpreter illustrates the
Scriptures using all the means at his disposal, in order to bring out beyond the words a meaning related
to the problems of his time.34
The term midrash appears in the Hebrew text of Scripture in the second book of Chronicles 13:22 and
in 24:27, translated in this case with the word “commentary.” 2Ch 13,22: The remaining deeds of
Obadiah, his conduct and his enterprises, are found written in the commentary of the prophet Iddo.
2Ch 24,27: For information concerning his sons, the numerous prophecies against him and the
restoration of the Temple, see the Commentary on the Annals of the Kings. His son Amasias succeeded
him on the throne.
Returning to Croatto, one can say:
.. .midrash is a part of rabbinic literature dating back to the time of Jesus, if not earlier. There are many
rabbinical midrashim. But the midrash is, in addition to a literary genre, a hermeneutical method used
to explore the deeper meaning of a biblical text. At this level it is called derásh,35
Some authors prefer the terms “derash” and “derashico” instead of midrash and midrashic. However, in
the present writing we opt for the latter, which are the most common terms in Judaism to speak of
biblical exegesis.
It has become common to replace the term midrash, which primarily defined the works
resulting from a particular exegetical process, with that of derash, which is more
appropriate for designating the method or attitude characteristic of this specific way of
approaching previous revelation, with a view to illuminating the present reality with it. It
was important to emphasize, as Le Déaut rightly observed in his critique of Wright, that it
is not so much a question of specific works (the so-called midrashim) as of a generalized
attitude that, with certain exegetical procedures or techniques, approaches the biblical text
or reworks the traditions of salvation history, updating them in accordance with new events.
Today, derásh and de-ráshico advantageously replace the terms midrash and midrashic,
which were very much in vogue until the 1970s, to designate that exegetical attitude so
widespread among the people of the Bible, when they approach the previous revelation, in
search of light to walk in the present moment, according to the beautiful expression of the
psalmist: “Your word is a lamp to my feet, a light to my path” (Ps 119:105).36
Croatto emphasizes that the midrash is not a translation of the Hebrew text, but above all a free creation
based on a biblical text. The result of this commentary is a literary work that contains a rereading of
facts, people or ideas found in the biblical text.
Notable examples may be, within the Alexandrian tradition, the re-reading of the Exodus
from the Book of Wisdom (11-19), the wrongly named apocryphal Genesis of Qumran,
which recounts the story of Abraham from Genesis 12-25, or in the New Testament, the
recreation of the figure of Melchizedek, in Hebrews 7. Short midrashim are also found in
the two infancy gospels, Matthew 1-2 and Luke 1-2. The episode of the massacre of the
innocents, for example (Mt 1:13-18), is modeled on the account of Moses' flight from
Egypt and his return, to indicate that Jesus is a second Moses.37

This Bible scholar concludes that the midrash has a common feature, that of updating and fulfilling the
texts consecrated by written tradition. According to Croatto, an already sacred text can feel distant in
the midst of recent communities that, due to time and geographical distance, are far from the great
tradition. The same can happen with communities that find themselves in circumstances or situations
very different from those that generated the original texts. The midrash would be a necessary tool for

3
MODULE ONE

more recent communities to approach the context in which the primitive communities gave rise to the
biblical texts.
One can also speak of "regions" of midrashic or interpretive activity in general, regions characterized
by minor or major external influences that prevent (in the first case) or facilitate (in the second) the
opening of the texts to new experiences. The remarkable thing is that many midrashim were preserved,
constituting a true midrashic library. Not counting the brief midrashim that are part of other books, as
happens in the New Testament.38
The great midrashic corpus, the work of the great rabbis, took shape over time, until it became a
support for the spiritual life of the people of Israel. Since the first centuries of our era, Rabbinic
Judaism has offered a set of masterpieces that help us better understand Scripture. Among these, we
can count the Mishnah, the fruit of the school of Yehuda ha Nasi and his disciples, to which reference
has already been made; and the Tosefta, which, based on biblical texts, offer Judaism a way of living in
accordance with the Torah.
The Tosefta, Knsoin, which literally translates as edition or supplement, is a compilation of the
Tannaitic texts that were not included in the Mishnah. 39 The text is written in the same order as the
Mishnah.
The tosefoí, msoin, in plural, which literally translates as additions or annotations, which
have been made to the Talmud. They are based on earlier commentaries, Rashi's
commentary being one of the most important. The Tosafot include explanatory analyses
and notes on particular Talmudic passages, with the aim of formulating and updating
Halakah, and do not in any way constitute a consecutive commentary (although they follow
the order of the Talmudic tractates). Those who made these annotations in the 12th to 15th
centuries in France and Germany are known as Tosafists; they include Rabbi Yacov ben
Meir and two of Rashi's other grandsons. In printed editions of the Talmud, Rashi's
commentary occupies the inside margin of the page, while the tosafot appear on the
opposite margins.40
The two great commentaries on the Mishnah, as mentioned above, the Jerusalem Talmud, whose final
edition can be thought to date from the 5th century, and the Babylonian Talmud, which was established
more or less two centuries later, are above all texts inscribed within the rabbinical movement that
reflect its spirituality and should not be thought of so much as texts of Jewish life in general.
Within rabbinical circles, other types of works were also created, the midrashim, which
consist of commentaries on the biblical text and which represented an important
contribution to the spirituality of Judaism. In general, they are based on rabbinic halakah
that originates from the biblical foundation. Among them we find works of different kinds:
from the halacic midrashim of the Mishnah period (and also somewhat later ones), through
the classic commentaries on the Torah of the 5th and 6th centuries, to the most popular
narrative or ethical midrashim of the 8th and 9th centuries. Finally, in the European Middle
Ages, this production comes to an end with the first parts of Exodus and Numbers Rabbah
and the midrashic compilations such as the Yalqut and the Midrash ha-Gadol.4]41
Umberto Neri offers a less technical and more spiritually rich definition of the meaning of midrash,
giving relevance to the dimension of searching, or the action of scrutinizing the meaning of the Lord's
will for the believer:

In biblical Hebrew, this term primarily designates the search for God, that is, turning to him with all
one's heart and soul, in the desire to know his will, to obtain his pleasure, to have one's supplications
addressed to him heard. Seek the Lord! It is, therefore, the formula of the great invitation to conversion;
in the search for the Lord, defined thus, his true people are distinguished, as opposed to other peoples
and the impious.

4
MODULE ONE

Searching for God also means waiting for a consultation, visiting the Temple, where the Lord reveals
his face, reading, reflecting and investigating his word and the wonders he has performed in the history
of salvation: “For great are the works of the Lord, sought after by those who delight in them.”
Therefore, the pious Israelite expresses his obedience to the fundamental precept of always having in
his heart the words dictated by God with the formulas: “Seek his precepts” or “seek his Torah.” From
here emerges the technical meaning of the midrash, as attentive listening to the Word of God, full of
love and spiritual wisdom: that is, turning one's gaze towards Him to be enlightened in the knowledge
of the profound meaning of the Scriptures.42
This chapter only allows us to unfold the history and richness of the midrashic or derashic method43,
and opens the door to a new way of entering into the biblical text. To better enter the world of midrash,
it is necessary to observe some techniques that help to understand the symbolic value of words and
numbers.
Hebrew is a Semitic language, in which every word, every verbal form, constitutes a variation around a
root generally formed by three letters: the interpretation of a word is based on the root and its multiple
meanings.
The Jewish sages insist on otis, pardes, literally the garden, an acrostic that brings together the four
initial letters of the four traditional methods according to which the believer comes into contact with
the senses of biblical reading. The first word is peshat (d) which means literal meaning, simple reading
of the text; the second is remez (n), which means allegory; the third is derush or derásh (n), which
means the homiletic meaning; and the last is sod (o) which means the mystical meaning.44 “These four
meanings together make up a symbolic fullness.”45
These levels of reading progressively lead to unraveling the passage and lead the believing reader to
enter into a deeper relationship with the text, moving from the letter to the spirit, until transcending it.
Since the first centuries, the Christian tradition adopted these senses of reading, giving them its own
style but very close to the Jewish tradition. The Catechism of the Catholic Church mentions them as
does the exhortation Verbum Domini.46
In the words of Paul Ricceur, one could say that the act of reading can be considered as a dynamic
activity that does not stop at repeating fixed meanings, but is located in the extension of itineraries of
meaning opened on the work of interpretation. In reading a text like the Bible, one sees a creative
operation constantly employed to decontextualize the meaning and to recontextualize it in today's Sitz
im Leben.47
As the great representative of Syriac literature, father of the Church, Ephrem of Nissibis, called the
Harp of the Holy Spirit, said, Scripture is a book colored by God with its many beauties, but to
discover them one must scrutinize them and know that, even if one beauty is found, there will always
be a thousand more to discover.
Who is capable, Lord, of penetrating with his mind a single one of your phrases? Like the thirsty man
who drinks from the fountain, we give up much more than we take in. Because the Word of the Lord
presents very diverse aspects, according to the different capacities of those who study it. The Lord
painted his Word with a multitude of colors, so that everyone who studies it can see in it what he most
pleases [...]. He who reaches into the treasure of this word should not think that it contains only what he
has found, but should think that of all the many things in it, this is the only thing he has been able to
reach. Nor should he consider this word poor and sterile and despise it because he has been able to
understand only this part; but, considering that he cannot grasp it all, he should give thanks for the
richness it contains. Be happy for what you have achieved, without being sad for what you have left to
achieve [...]. Be thankful for what you have received and do not be sad about excess abundance. What
you have received and obtained is your portion, what remains is your inheritance.48
26 Newman and Silvan, Judaism AZ, 66.
27 See Robert and Feuillet, Introduction to the Bible, 183.
28 Barton, Biblical Interpretation Today, 171-177.

5
MODULE ONE

29 Santala, The Messiah in the Old Testament in the Light of Rabbinical Writings, 24.
30 Ibid., 24-25.
31 Croatto, Biblical Hermeneutics, 76.
32 Aranda, Jewish Literature, 477.
33 Newman and Silvan, Judaism AZ, 152.
34 Robert and Feuillet, Introduction to the Bible, 185.
35 Croatto, Biblical Hermeneutics, 76.
36 Muñoz Iglesias, “You will give in Matthew 1-2,” 112.
37 Croatto, “The Hermeneutical Function of the Targum,” 113.
38 Ibid.
39 To understand the structure of the Talmud, see the outline of a page of the Talmud in Appendix 3.
40 Newman, Judaism AZ, 321.
41 Stemberger, “Overview of Rabbinical Studies Today,” 214-215.
42 Neri, The Song of the Sea, 19-20.
43 These two names can be used to refer to the same method, since - as has been said - the two words come from the same root: daresh. See
Caba, “L'esegesi tra teologia e prassi. Exegetical Methods in the Current Study of the New Testament”, 611-669.
44Newman, Judaism AZ, 182-183.
45Cerbelaud, “The Importance of Jewish Reading of the Bible for Christians,” 269.
46 See the Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church, 115-119; Benedict XVI, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini
37.
47 Ricceur, “La Bible et l'imagination”, 339.