by D Marcus · Cited by 3 — catchwords which are attached to many Masorah parva (Mp) doublet notes. Most Mp doublet notes are Deuteronomy (Marcus2007-x05-Deuteronomy.pdf).

125 KB – 21 Pages

PAGE – 1 ============
1 1 Doublet Catchwords in the Leningrad Codex David Marcus Jewish Theological Seminary ABSTRACT One of the most remarkable features of the Masoretic notes in the Leningrad Codex (L) which up till now have never been published, are the catchwords which are atta ched to many Masorah parva (Mp) doublet notes. Most Mp doublet notes are simply marked by the numeral bO Òtwo,Ó which indicates that an identical word or phrase occurs somewhere else in the Hebrew Bible (HB). The reader is given no indication as to where t hat parallel doublet might occur. However, a special group of over 500 doublets have catchwords attached to the numeral indicating in what specific verse the parallel doublet occurs. In effect, the catchwords serve as memory aids explicitly reminding the reader where the second form of the parallel doublet is to be found. These catchwords are written in the margins of L but surprisingly were never included in previous editions of Biblia Hebraica (neither in BHK 3 nor in BHS ). They will be published in the new BHQ , the first fascicles of which are in print but, until the culmination of BHQ , the complete list of catchwords are offered here in print for the first time. The list contains 504 catchwords and their parallel references. It also includes all Masoret ic notes at the parallel references, including those which have larger Masorah magna (Mm) notes. The Introduction analyzes these Mp catchwords, discusses their location in the various books, how they are used, their relationship with the Mm notes, and thei r possible practical usages for biblical studies. 1. One of the well -known characteristic features of Mp notes is that they highlight minority or less common forms (Breuer 1976: 204). This major characteristic of the Masoretic notes was already pointed ou t by the sixteenth century grammarian Elias Levita (Ginsburg 1867:146), and this typical Masoretic feature was often noted by the nineteenth century neo -Masorete Christian David Ginsburg. Ginsburg frequently stated that such and such a note was included for comment because the Masorah Òsafeguards the exceptions,Ó 1 or because the Masorah Òrecords the minority.Ó 2 The most frequent minority form is one that occurs only once

PAGE – 2 ============
2 2 (Dotan 1986:158), and is indicated in the text by a Mp note lO, which stands for tyl’ , lit Òthere is not (another form),Ó a hapaxlegomenon. 3 2. The second most frequent Mp note is one indicating doublets. Doublets are far more useful for biblical exegesis than hapaxlegomena. For whereas hapaxlegomena only occur once, doublets occur elsew here, thus enabling comparisons with other texts. 4 In L, Mp notations for doublets are indicated by the letter bO, signifying Òtwo,Ó thereby informing the reader that there is another reference to the same word or phrase somewhere in the HB. However, a n umber of these Mp notes occur with simanim or catchwords 5 which explicitly direct the readerÕs attention to that reference (see Fig. 1 for an illustration how the catchwords are written in the Codex). When the Masoretes note that words or phrases occur onl y twice, 6 unless one is familiar with the parallel text, it is necessary to consult a concordance to find the other text. But when the Masoretes actually write out the catchwords, then the interconnections between the text are made more obvious. In effect , these catchwords serve as memory aids reminding the reader where the parallel text occurs. Fig. 1. Two examples of Masorah Parva doublet catchwords from Gen 34:1 and 2. 3. How catchwords work . Here is an example how the catchwords work (the numbers re fer to the accompanying ÒSample CatchwordsÓ chart on

PAGE – 3 ============
3 3 Fig. 2 ). In ¤1, the form w%hbowF w%hto is a doublet because it occurs only twice, once at Gen 1:2 and once at Jer 4:23. But the Masoretic notations for this doublet are different at the two references. A t the Jeremiah reference, there is a Mp note indicating that the form occurs twice ( bO), but the note does not give any indication where that form might occur. However, at the Genesis Fig. 2. Sample Catchwords.

PAGE – 4 ============
4 4 reference, in addition to the numeral ( bO), the catchwords w%hto -hn%”hiw: are added to alert the reader that the word w%hbowF is found in the verse where these catchwords w%hto -hn%”hiw: occur. This verse is Jer 4:23 where the text reads w%hbowF w%hto -hn%”hiw: , so the catchwords serve as a kind of m emory aid for the reader of the Genesis verse. 4. Previous publication of these catchwords. There are slightly over 500 catchwords attached to doublets in L and, although they are written in its margins, up to now they have never been published. Even in the third edition of Biblia Hebraica (BHK 3) (Kittel 1937) , these catchwords were included only in isolated instances. 7 In BHS (Elliger and Rudolph 1997) these catchwords are not printed at all. Instead, where the manuscript contains catchwords, BHS provid es the biblical reference as to where these catchwords occur (Elliger and Rudolph 1997: xvii). But the BHS system has many limitations. In the first place, it is inconsistent. It does not incude all the doublets. There are doublets that have catchwords fo r which no references are cited in BHS ,8 and there are references cited for doublets that have no catchwords. 9 Secondly, there is no way the reader can tell on which doublet the catchwords can be found, nor whether the catchwords occur with both doublets. Thirdly, whenever a Mm note occurs with one of these doublets, a reference is given not to a biblical verse but to WeilÕs companion Mm volume (Weil 1971). In these cases there is no way one can know that catchwords also exist in the parallel doublet. 10 It should be noted that one of the new features of the forthcoming fascicles of BHQ 11 will be to print all the Mp catchwords in the margins of the text but, until the time that all of BHQ appears, this present publication represents the first time that all th e Mp catchwords in L will have been published. 5. Location of the catchwords . There are slightly more than 500 examples of catchwords attached to Mp notes in L. 12 These catchwords occur with different degrees of concentration in different books. Almost thr ee-fifths of the total number (303) appear in the Torah. The book which has the most amount of catchwords, almost a fifth of the total, is Genesis with 122, followed by Exodus with 62, Deuteronomy with 43, Numbers with 42 and Leviticus with 34. Ketuvim ha s the next highest concentration of catchwords with 174, about a third of the total. In this section, catchwords are most prevalent in Psalms (41), Job (30), Megillot (26), and Proverbs (25). The prophetical sections have the least amount of catchwords. There are none whatsoever in the books of 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, nor

PAGE – 5 ============
5 5 Ezekiel. There are only 11 catchwords in the Former Prophets, 6 in Joshua, 3 in 1 Samuel and 2 in Judges. In the Latter Prophets, there are only 16 occurrences, 9 in Isaiah, 6 in Jer emiah, and 1 in the Twelve. There is no obvious discernible connection of catchwords between any two books of the Bible. For example, catchwords in Genesis parallel every book except Daniel including Genesis itself. Of the other books, perhaps the most notable book parallels are of Numbers and Deuteronomy with Psalms, of Leviticus and Proverbs with Isaiah, and of Daniel with Nehemiah. 6. Analysis of the catchwords . An analysis of these 500 plus catchwords shows that they exhibit the following characteristi cs. Most of them consist of one or two words, e.g., ykn)w (¤13), wht hnhw (¤1) and #$dqh Nyb (¤2). 13 A lesser amount have three words, such as drpy wh(rm ldw (¤3) or My#n yt# wlw (¤4), and some have four words, e.g., #O(h Nm dx) )ybhl (¤8). Catchwords ten d to be contiguous, and either follow or precede the doublet they illustrate. An example of catchwords following the doublet is at Gen 1:18 on the doublet lyd@Ib;haljw% (¤2), referring to the parallel verse Lev 10:10 which reads #$dEq@oh Nyb lyd@Ib;haljw% . The catchwords given at Gen 1:18, #dqh Nyb , are those which follow the doublet lyd@Ib;haljw% . An example of catchwords preceding a doublet is at Gen 34:2 on the doublet hfn%E(ay:wA (¤10, and see fig. 1), referring to the parallel verse 2 Sam 13:14 which r eads hfn%E(ay:w hn%Fm@emi qzAxvy,EwA . Here the catchwords given at Gen 34:2, hnmm qzxyw , precede the doublet hfn%E(ay:wA . Sometimes the doublet, or part of the doublet, is included with the catchwords as at Gen 2:10 (¤3), where the doublet dr”p@fyI is wr itten with the catchwords, drpy wh(rm ldw , or at Gen 1:2 (¤1) where part of the doublet w%hbowF w%hto is written with the catchword wht hnhw . Occasionally a word or two is omitted between the catchwords and the doublet, as at Lam 1:20 (¤13), where the wo rd )lo, found in the parallel Isa 50:5 text ( ytiyrImf )lo ykinO)fw: ), has not been written between the catchword ykn)w and the doublet ytiyrImf . In one case the catchword refers, not to a specific form in the parallel verse, but to a major character promin ent in that verse, 14 and in another the catchword refers just to the parallel book itself. 15 7. Occurrence of the catchwords . Catchwords may occur in one or both doublet references, with or without parallel numeral references, and with or

PAGE – 6 ============
6 6 without parallel M m notes. There are four possible combinations when a catchword appears with the first occurrence of a doublet: (1) There may only be a numerical note ( bO) to indicate the doublet in the second reference (¤1, ¤8, ¤9); 16 (2) There may be no Masoretic note in the second occurrence of the doublet (¤4, ¤10). These cases are indicated in the lists by the notation ÒNo MpÓ; (3) There may be a catchword or catchwords in the second reference, 17 see ¤3, where there is a catchword listed at the second occurrence of the doublet dr”p@fyI at Prov 19:4 as well as at the first occurrence at Gen 2:10; (4) There may be a Mm note in the second reference (¤2, ¤7, ¤12). In these cases the catchwords, of both parts of the Mm note are presented in the lists separated by a dot (.) The same four possible combinations occur when a catchword appears in the second occurrence of the doublet: (1) There may only be a numerical note ( bO) to indicate the doublet in the first reference (¤5); (2) There may be no Masoretic note in the first oc currence of the doublet (¤11); (3) There may be a catchword or catchwords in the first reference (¤3); (4) There may be a Mm note in the first reference (¤6). The accompanying lists of all 504 doublets present both occurrences of all the doublets. They are arranged according to the layout of the books in L, and then chronologically at the appropriate chapter and verse reference. 18 8. Relation with the Mm . What is noteworthy about the Mm notes and the catchword doublets is that they do not occur together. 19 A doublet that has catchwords in a Mp note will not have a Mm note on the same doublet. Where the Mm note occurs it is always on the doublet without the catchwords (see the sample catchwords chart at ¤2, ¤6, ¤7, and ¤12). Also the wording of the catchword s in the Mp note tends to be similar to the wording of the catchwords in the Mm note For example, see ¤2 where the catchwords #dqh Nyb in the Mp note on Gen 1:18, referring to Lev 10:10, are the same as in the Mm note to Lev 10:10. Also at ¤6, where the catchword Mydx) in the Mp note on Qoh 5:6, referring to Gen 11:1 is the same as in the Mm note to Gen11:1. 9. This observation can often be helpful in understanding some difficult catchword combinations. Whenever it is suspected that some error has occur red in the Mp catchwords, one can often took to the Mm note for help in restoring the correct text to the Mp note. For example, at Gen 17:5 the Masoretic note states that )r”q@fyI -)low: (¤7) is a doublet, and gives the

PAGE – 8 ============
8 8 but wh ich actually occurs three times in the first chapter of Ruth, and the correct enumeration of ÒthreeÓ is given at the other two occurrences, in verses 11 and 12. 26 11. Another type of oddity involves those few cases where the catchwords do not seem to match the text of the parallel verse. We have already mentioned two cases of this type (¤7 and ¤12), where the Mm note helped guide us to the correct catchwords. Another example is at Ruth 1:8 on hnFb;#$o , a doublet mentioned above (¤14), which has an incorrec t enumeration. In addition to this inaccuracy, the catchwords listed for the alleged doublet, ytnb ytnb , do not occur in any of the two other verses, at Ruth 1:11 or 1:12. In both of these verses only one form of ytanOb; occurs, ytanOb; hnFb;#$o . It is pe rhaps possible to explain the duplication of the catchword by the closeness of the two verses which led the Masorete to give catchwords for both verses. But by doing so, he in effect negated his notation of the lemma as a doublet. 27 12. Purpose of the catc hwords . Nearly all the doublets containing catchwords can be shown to conform to the regular Masoretic concern for preserving the text (e.g. by protecting specific vocalization of words, by the presence or absence of the definite article, of the waw conjun ction, or of a preposition, etc.), and for highlighting significant forms or phrases. Here are examples from the sample catchwords (see fig. 2) of each of these categories. 13. Preserving the text . a. Vocalization . The doublet dr”p@fyI (¤3), a niphal imperfect, is marked to distinguish it from the hiphil imperfect form dyrIp;yA , which is likewise marked (at Prov 18:18 and Ruth 1:17) as a doublet with catchwords to distinguish it from dr”p@fyI b. Definite article . The doublet hrF#&f(jhf (¤8) is marked t o distinguish it from the overwhemingly more numerous forms of hrF#&f(j (143 times) which occur without the definite article. c. Preposition . The doublet twOnb;b@i (¤9) is marked to distinguish it from the common plural construct form twOnb; , which occurs over 40 times.

PAGE – 9 ============
9 9 d. Waw conjunction . The doublet MyrIbfd:w% (¤6), with the waw conjunction, is marked to distinguish it from the more numerous forms of MyrIbfd: without the waw conjunction. 28 By designating these forms as doublets the Masoretes attempted to preserve the text and protect it from change or from alternate readings as, for example, the changes suggested in BHS for the doublets w%hbowF w%hto (¤1) at Jer 4:23, and for lyd@Ib;haljw% (¤2) at Lev 10:10. 14. Highlighting significant forms. Apart from protecting the text, the next major function of Masoretic doublets is to highlight signficant words or phrases. The significance of highlighting of the doublets w%hbowF w%hto (¤1), hfn%E(ay:wA (¤10), and lka)f )lo Mxele (¤11) will be discussed below. 15. Exegetical use of catchwords . The original purpose of these catchwords eludes us. We do not know why specific doublets were selected to bear catchwords and what usage the Masoretes made of these catchwords. Israel Yeivin has suggested that they may have originated for pedagogical reasons for Òoral learning and teaching.Ó(Yeivin 1980: ¤126). Indeed the occurrence of so many of these catchwords in the Torah section, three -fifths of the total (303/504), would tend to support this suggestion. Nevertheless, whatever the original usage, it would seem that a modern reader, interested in the area of intertextual exegesis, 29 would have good reason to make use of these catchwords. Because when two forms of a lemma occur only in two texts it is possible that the tex t in which one form occurs may elucidate the second text. Masoretic notes have often been used to ascertain the text and for grammatical purposes, 30 but few scholars have utilized them to compare biblical passages exegetically. The only medieval Jewish com mentator who regularly used the Masoretic notes in such as fashion was Jacob ben Asher 1269 -1343 (known as Baal Turim). Ben Asher did not cite the catchwords, but he often included in his commentary instances of where the Masorah noted a doublet, and then compared the parallel verses for homoletic purposes. 31 The only modern scholar that I am aware of who has used Masoretic notations in his exegetical work is James A. Sanders, as exemplified in his presidential Address to the Society of Biblical Literature o ver 25 years ago in New Orleans. 32

PAGE – 10 ============
10 10 16. Some exegetical suggestions . It is my belief that many of these Masoretic catchword doublets may be useful in intertextual exegesis. To illustrate the possibilities for their exegetical use, I offer suggestions on five of the catchwords listed on the accompanying ÒSample CatchwordsÓ chart (fig. 2). 17. The catchwords on the doublet w%hw%bowF w%hto in Gen 1:2, wht hnhw (¤1), connect the Genesis verse with that of Jeremiah 4:23, which is part of a pericope of doom again st Judah. Commentators have noticed the sharp linguistic links, especially of the phrase w%hbowF w%hto , between Jeremiah 4:23 -30 and the creation story at the beginning of Genesis. 33 JeremiahÕs oracle foretells that the day of judgment will mean that the st ory told in Genesis 1 will be reversed and primeval chaos will return (Bright 1965: 33). But the Masoretes, by placing catchwords at the Genesis passage rather than at the Jeremiah passage, apparently noted a relevance of the Jeremiah passage for the Gene sis story, and read both of them together. One exegetical possibility is that the reference to the Jeremiah oracle at Gen 1:2 served as a warning that failure to heed the prophetic admonitions could cause the earth to revert back to the condition it was in before creation. 18. The catchwords on the doublet hrF#&f(jhf at Gen 18:32 #O(h Nm dx) )ybhl connect the Genesis passage with Neh 11:1, which reads: Òthe rest of the people cast losts for one out of ten to come and settle in the holy city of Jerusalem, and the other nine -tenths to stay in the towns.Ó The context of Genesis 18 is AbrahamÕs plea that God should not destroy Sodom if ten righteous people are to be found in it. The Masoretes connect this passage with NehemiahÕs plan to bring one out of ten of the population of Judah to settle in Jerusalem. By connecting the two texts containing the number ten, the Masoretes may possibly be suggesting that the Judeans of NehemiahÕs time were akin to the ten righteous people of patriarchal times. 19. The catc hwords on the doublet twOnb;b@i at Gen 34:1, Kyx) twnbb Ny)h (¤9 illustrated on fig. 1), connect that passage with Judg 14:3. The Masorah makes the connection between Dinah going out to meet the daughters of the land and SamsonÕs father protesting SamsonÕs decision not to marry one of the daughters of his own kin. The possible implication of this interconnection is that, just as SamsonÕs act is explicitly disapproved of, so

PAGE – 11 ============
11 11 also DinahÕs act of going out with the daughters of the land is similary subject to a tone of disapproval. 20. The catchwords on the doublet hfn%E(ay:wA at Gen 34:2, hnmm qzxyw (¤10 also illustrated on fig. 1), connect that passage with 2 Sam 13:4. The Masoretic connection here invites the reader, while reading the story of the rape of Dinah, to take into consideration the story of the rape of Tamar, where the same verb in exactly the same form is used. The possible implication of the connection is that the rape of Dinah is to be considered similar to that of the rape of Tamar. 34 21. The catchwords on the doublet lka)f )lo Mxele at Ezra 10:6, )rz(w h#$m (¤11), connect that passage with Exod 34:28 that describes Moses on Mt Sinai. In Ezra 10:6, Ezra, having being informed of the toleration of intermarriage by the Golah community, spends th e night praying, confessing, and fasting: Òhe ate no bread and drank no waterÓ (htf#$f -)lo MyImaw% lka)f -)lo Mxele ). For his part, Moses on Mt Sinai, prior to receiving the Ten Commandments, also fasted albeit for forty days and forty nights. Nevertheless he too Òate no bread and drank no waterÓ (htf#$f -)lo MyImaw% lka)f -)lo Mxele ). By connecting the two texts, the Masoretes seem to compare Ezra to Moses. As Moses Òate no bread and drank no waterÓ so too Ezra does likewise. This Masoretic interconnection suggests to the reader that Ezra might be considered as a second Moses, as indeed Rabbinic tradition perceived him. 35 22. These are just five of many other possible exegetical possibilities for these doublet catchwords. They offer literary interconnections between passages from a source, which up till now has been almost completely neglected. It is hoped that, by making the biblical field aware of these Masoretic doublet catchwords, biblical scholars will take note of this rich, previously hidden, source of intertextual connections in their future research. Endnotes Notes 1 Ginsburg 1880 -1905: IV, 100, ¤813; 101, ¤827; 104, ¤851; 105, ¤855, ¤858; 106, ¤8 68, ¤870; 108, ¤886; 110, ¤908; 111, ¤916, and passim .

125 KB – 21 Pages