There is a character in the Torah named Potiphar (G. 37:36). He purchases Joseph, who ends up running Potiphar’s household before Potiphar’s wife makes her #MeToo claim and gets Joseph imprisoned.
Joseph ends up marrying Potiphar’s daughter. But the text does something strange whenever it mentions her name. Instead of being “Osnot, the daughter of Potiphar” she is consistently (in all three cases – G. 41:45, 41:50, 46:20) referred to as “Osnot, the daughter of Poti Phera, priest of On.” Why create a space in the name “Potiphar?” And why refer to her father’s profession?
The answer is simple and quite elegant. The word “phera” has a specific meaning in the text. As it is used, it means “disconnected” or “no longer focused on the purpose.” Here are the first examples of this standalone word (after the three verses concerning Joseph’s wife)
But the king of Egypt said to them, “Moses and Aaron, why do you disconnect (phera) the people from their tasks? Get to your labors!” (E. 5:4)
Moses saw that the people were disconnected (phera) —since Aaron had let them get disconnected (phera). (E. 32:25 – when the people were so enthralled with the golden calf that they were no longer connected to G-d)
I think that the separation of the word phera in the case of Joseph’s wife is now self-explanatory. Yes, she was raised as the daughter of Potiphar, priest of On. But once she married Joseph, she was phera, disconnected from her father and from his idol-worship as the priest of the deity On.
I thought this was a pretty cool double-entendre, and it neatly explains what otherwise might be considered a meaningless change in the text.