En mukdam u-meuhar in Biblical Literary Interpretation

The talmudic dictum, “There is no earlier or later in the Bible,” though cited in the Bavli only once, became a methodic principle in Midrash exegesis. In medieval interpretation it drew closer to peshat, being used to explain juxtaposition (semikhut parshiot) in biblical legal codices (ibn Ezra) and to serve as the true explanation for the order of the biblical text (Nahmanides). In the modern period some commentators thought that concern with the order of pericopes was not serious scholarship. S.D. Luzatto (1800-1865) wrote in his introduction: “Likewise as concerns the order in which the Giver of the Torah arranged His stories . . . it would be fine if we could offer explanations, providing we do not interfere with the true meaning of the verses.” M.D. Cassuto (1883 – 1951) brought juxtaposition back into the limelight in the shape of associative arrangement.

In recent times, the question of order has become central to literary interpretations. Robert Alter begins his book on biblical narrative with the story of Judah and Tamar, in order to explain why the story was placed between two parts of the Joseph story. Meir Sternberg wrote a chapter about Temporal Discontinuity, and Yair Zakovitch saw semikhut parshiot (juxtaposition) as inner-biblical interpretation. We wish to illustrate through several examples how questions of order influenced the literary interpretation of biblical stories.