SAMSON’S îÎDÂ
by
AZZAN YADIN
University of Minnesota
This study suggests a new interpretation of Judges xiv, the episode
commonly known as “Samson’s riddle.” This passage has been the
subject of numerous interpretations, but what follows is a generally
accepted outline of the events: on the way to marry a Philistine woman
Samson slays a lion with his bare hands. Some time after that he dis-
covers bees hiving in the carcass of the lion and takes of the honey
they produced. At his wedding feast Samson challenges his Philistine
hosts to solve a riddle (úîdâ)—“Out of the eater came something to
eat, out of the strong came something sweet” ( Judg xiv 14). Unable
to solve the riddle, the Philistines bully Samson’s bride into enticing
the answer from him, which she does, reporting the answer to her
countrymen. As the deadline nears, the Philistines triumphantly pro-
vide the answer: “What is sweeter than honey and what is stronger
than a lion?” ( Judg xiv 18). Samson admits that this is the correct
answer and ruefully concedes defeat: “If you had not plowed with my
heifer you would not have found out my riddle” ( Judg xiv 18). In
what follows I argue that previous interpreters have failed to recog-
nize the relevant cultural context in which this exchange takes place
and, as a result, have been unable to provide a satisfactory reading of
the chapter. I will briey outline two diYculties: an inability to main-
tain the narrative coherence of the passage, and the philologically dubi-
ous assignment of the meanings ‘riddle’ to úîdâ, and ‘solve a riddle’ to
higgîd.
1. Presentation of the problem
The most common approach to Judges xiv has been to understand
Samson’s úîdâ as a reference to the events recounted in Judges xiv
5-9—the slaying of the lion and the honey in its carcass. The appeal
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2002 Vetus Testamentum LII, 3
Also available online – www.brill.nl