Jewish Studies at the Turn of the Twentieth Century, Proceedings of the 6th EAJS Congress - Toledo, July 1998, Volume 1: Biblical, Rabbinical, and Medieval Studies

JEWISH STUDIES AT THE OF THE TWENTIETH VOLUME I

TURN

CENTURY

JEWISH STUDIES AT THE TURN OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY Proceedings of the 6th EAJS Congress Toledo, July

1998

Volume I: Biblical, Rabbinical, and Medieval Studies

EDITED BY

JUDIT TARGARONA

BORRÀS

AND

ANGEL

SÁENZ-BADILLOS

VOLUME ONE

BRILL LEIDEN · BOSTON • K Ö L N

1999

Deutsche Bibliothek — CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Jewish studies at the turn of the twentieth century : proceedings of the 6th EAJS congress, Toledo, July 1998 / ed. b y j u d i t Targarona Borrâs and Angel Sàenz-Badillos. — Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : Brill ISBN 90-04-1 1559-5

Vol. 1. Biblical, rabbinical, and medieval studies. — 1999 ISBN 9 0 - 0 4 - 1 1 5 5 4 - 4 Vol. 2. Judaism from the Renaissance to Modern l imes. ISBN 9 0 - 0 4 - 1 1 5 5 8 - 7

1999

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is also available

ISBN ISBN

90 04 11554 4 (Vol. I) 90 04 11559 5 (Set)

© Copyright 1999 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS

To the memory of Prof. Shelomoh Morag

CONTENTS PART

ONE

HEBREW AND JEWISH

LANGUAGES

SHELOMO MORAG

The Revival and the Oral Legacy of Hebrew: Some Observations

3

JOSHUA BLAU

Judaeo-Arabic Studies after a Century of Gerçizah Research

12

LUBA CHARLAP

Three Views Regarding the Gender of Biblical Nouns in the Writings of Medieval Hebrew Grammarians

17

ARON DOTAN

Saadia Gaon—A Master Linguist

26

M O H A M E D ELMEDLAOUI

La traduction du Coran en Hébreu par J. Riveline. (Remarques sur la forme et le contenu)

31

JOAN FERRER

El primer dia de la creaciôn según el Tsene-Rene de Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi de Janow Luis F. G I R Ô N BLANC Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah en la Genizah de Cambridge

43 51

BENJAMIN HARY & M . ANGELES GALLEGO

La version espanola de Maqre Dardeqe

57

FRANCISCO J I M E N E Z BEDMAN

Lexical Analysis of the Copper Scroll from the Perspective of Mishnaic Hebrew

65

GEOFFREY K H A N

The Early Karaite Grammatical Tradition

72

O R A ( R O D R I G U E ) SCHWARZWALD

Trends of Foreign Influence on Modern Hebrew

81

CAROLE A . S H A W

Yiddish is alive and well and living at...? Ethnolinguistic Vitality Research & Attitudes towards Yiddish Use in London

90

S1FRA S Z N O L

El griego rabinico y el judeo-griego: Fuentes primeras y estado actual de la investigaciôn

99

PART

T W O

BIBLE, BIBLICAL V E R S I O N S A N D

EXEGESIS

F c o . JAVIER DEL BARCO

La acentuaciôn masorética en Arnos y su relaciôn con la division oracional y la estxuctura poética del texto

111

CARL S . E H R L I C H

Joshua, Judaism and Genocide

117

CLAIRE G O T T L I E B

Will the Real Moses Please Step Forward (An Interpretation of the Exodus Story)

125

TAPANI HARVIAINEN

Abraham Firkovich, the Aleppo Codex, and Its Dedication

131

ALBERT V A N DER H E I D E

Grammar, Meaning, Theology. Medieval Hebrew Lexicographers on the Verb nissa

137

ALBERDINA H O U T M A N

Textual Tradition of Targum Jonathan to Isaiah

145

S H I M O N LEVY

The Book of Esther: "...and she touched the top of the scepter..."

154

M E I R LUBETSKI

Lot's Choice: Paradise or Purgatory?

164

RABBI ALBERT PLOTKIN

Jeremiah's Concept of Covenantal Relationship

173

M E I R A POLLIACK

Medieval Oriental Exegesis on the Character of Jacob in Hosea 12

177

J o s E P RIBERA-FLORIT

Conceptos a través de los cuales se desarrolla la hermenéutica del Targum de Ezequiel

188

BENJAMIN RICHLER

Isaac Abravanel's "Lost" Commentary on Deuteronomy

199

GUADALUPE SEIJAS DE LOS RIOS-ZARZOSA

Semántica y sintaxis del paralelismo en el libro de Isaías

205

FLORIS SEPMEIJER

The Tenses in the Targum of Jeremiah

209

MIGUEL ANGEL TABET

"Hasta que venga shjlb" (Gn 49,10) en los principales exponentes de la exégesis judía medieval

214

Luis VEGAS M O N T A N E R Sintaxis del verbo hebreo biblico: Nuevas tendencias

221

PART T H R E E RABBINIC PERIOD HISTORY AND LITERATURE

F L O R E N T I N O GARCIA M A R T Í N E Z

Fifty Years of Research on the Dead Sea Scrolls and Its Impact on Jewish Studies

235

JUAN JOSÉ ALARCÔN SAINZ

Algunos apuntes sobre los Proverbios siriacos de Menandro

252

JACQUELINE G E N O T - B I S M U T H

La terminologie de la Loi à l'époque du Second Temple, archéologie d'un vocabulaire occulte: De l'anachronisme du terme "halakha"

260

LISA G R U S H C O W

Interpretation and Authority: a History of Sotah

268

M I R E I L L E HADAS-LEBEL

Hezekiah as King Messiah. Traces of an Early Jewish-Christian Polemic in the Tannaitic Tradition

275

A . PETER HAYMAN

The Mythological Background of the Wisdom of Solomon

282

WILLIAM HORBURY

Pappus and Lulianus in Jewish Resistance to Rome

289

H E L E E N M . KEIZER

Aiön in Philo of Alexandria: Biblical "Time" and Philosophical "Eternity"

296

ANDREAS L E H N A R D T

"Therefore they ordained to say it in Aramaic." Some Remarks on Language and Style of the Kaddish

303

C H A I M MILIKOWSKY & MARGARETE SCHLÜTER

Vajyiqra Rabba through History: A Project to Study Its Textual Transmission

311

MATTHIAS MILLARD

Two Cardinal Laws in Pretannaitic Times? Some Observadons about A Tannaiuc Tradition and Its Foundation in Biblical Texts

322

CARMEN M O T O S LÔPEZ

La mujer en Qohelet Rabbah

329

M I G U E L PÉREZ FERNÁNDEZ

La propuesta de paz de los Rabinos. Una lectura sincrônica de la tradiciôn

334

I. Ruiz M O R E L L Tosefia Sotak Sintesis de un estudio

342

OLGA

LIEVE T E U G E L S

New Perspectives on the Origins of Aggadat Bereshit. The Witness of a Geniza Fragment

349

PART FOUR M I D D L E AGES JEWISH HISTORY, LITERATURE A N D T H O U G H T

A M P A R O ALBA CECILIA

El Vidduy de Shem Tob Ardutiel

361

ESPERANZA A L F O N S O

'Abd al-Karim al-Magîlî. Un paralelo magrebí a los acontecimientos de 1066 en Granada

370

T O V A BEERI

Between Spain and the East: The Poetical Works of David ben ha-Nassi . 379 U L R I C H BERZBACH

The Varieties of Literal Devices in a Medieval Midrash: Seder Eliyahu Rabba, Chapter 18

384

AVIVA D O R O N

The Poet's Attitude in the Hebrew Poetry of Spain—Between Convention and Allusion

392

EDNA ENGEL

Hebrew Letters of Old Castile in the Cairo Genizah

398

U L F HAXEN

Saadya Gaon on Music: Melody or Rhythm?

406

KLAUS H E R R M A N N

The Reception of Hekhalot Literature in Yohanan Alemanno's Autograph Ms. Paris 849

414

M A R C I A N O DE HERVÂS

Movimientos antijudios en los territorios cacerenos de la Corona, Nobleza y Orden Militär de A1cántara: 1476-1491

424

ELISABETH H O L L E N D E R

Narradve Exegesis in Ashkenas and Zarfat: The Case of ?/}‫«׳)׳‬/-Commentary

429

JOSÉ LUIS LACAVE

Impuestos reaies sobre los judios de Navarra

436

MATTHIAS B. LEHMANN

The Jews of Muslim Spain and the Maghrib. Al-Wansharîsî's Collection of Fa/wâs as a Source for Jewish Social History

440

C E L I N A A . LÉRTORA M E N D O Z A

Recepciôn de la filosofia sefardi en la latinidad medieval: Ibn Gabirol y Maimônides

447

Z v i MALACHI

The Life of Matityah ben Moshe, the Author of Begidat baZman & Ahituv veTSalomon (Spain, Languedoc, Aix en Provence, 15th Century)

454

V1TTORIO M O R A B I T O

Les particularités de la communauté juive de Syracuse (Sicile) à la fin du XIVe siècle

459

ANGELES NAVARRO P E I R O

La version hebrea de Calilay Dimna de Ya'äqob ben El'azar

468

GERALD N E C K E R

The Sefer ha-Hajyim in Its Latin-Christian Environment

476

JOSÉ-VICENTE NICLÔS

La Obra Respuestas a los Imposions, atribuida a Profiat Duran

483

SÎLVIA PLANAS I M A R C É

Nuevos datos sobre las sinagogas de la comunidad judia de Girona

493

A N G E L SAENZ-BADILLOS

Todros frente a Todros: Dos escritores hebreos de Toledo en el siglo XIII

504

ANGELA SCANDALIATO

Gli Ebrei di Sicilia alla luce delle fond notarili del XV secolo

513

A R I E SCHIPPERS

The Hebrew Poets of Christian Spain and the Arabic Literary Heritage

521

D A V I D S I M H A SEGAL

Medieval Stylistic as Stylistic Exegesis. Gate 33 of Sefer Tahkemoni and Lamentations 2

530

HADASSAH SHY

AlKullijyat. The General Introduction to Tanhum haYerushalmi's Commentary on the Bible

536

J U D I T TARGARONA BORRAS

El Diwan de ŠC10m0h de Piera: Estado de la cuestiôn

541

CARLOS DEL VALLE

La Contradiction delHereje de Isaac Ben Polgar

552

Y o s E F YAHALOM

New Clues from an Encounter with Old Spanish

561

IRENE E . Z W I E P

Classical Knowledge in Bonafoux's Translation of Boethius' De Consolatiotie Philosopiae

PART

568

FIVE

THE STUDY OF

JUDAISM

MANUSCRIPTS, BOOKS, A N D

MEDIA

STEFAN C . R E I F

The Impact on Jewish Studies of a Century of Geniza Research

577

E D I T H LUBETSKI

Resources in Jewish Studies on Your Home Computer

609

JUDITH NADLER

Consolidated Vs Dispersed Collections: The Case for an Interdisciplinary Approach

615

M A U R O PERANI

A New Genizah for the New Century: Hebrew Manuscript Fragments in the European Archives. The New Findings of Girona

621

SILKE SCHAEPER

S'ride! Schocken—"Einbandfragmente" of Hebrew Incunabula and Postincunabula at the Schocken Institute for Jewish Research

627

PRESENTATION In July of 1998 the European Association for Jewish Studies celebrated its Sixth Congress in Toledo, with almost four hundred participants. This singular city, full of historical memories of Jewish life, offered a very attractive, unforgettable setting for a fruitful meeting of Jewish scholars from all over the world. In these Proceedings we have collected a significant portion of the papers and communications that were read during the Conference, including the opening lecture (by Sh. Morag), and the four general lectures (by F. Garcia, S. Reif, P. Schäfer and G. Sed-Rajna). By and large, the papers offer a broad, realistic perspective on the advances, achievements and anxieties of Judaic Studies at the turn of the 20th century, on the eve of the new millennium. Above all, they represent the point of view of the European scholars, enriched with notable contributions by colleagues from other continents that participated in our scientific meeting. The Congress was possible thanks to the collaboration of many individuals and institutions, whom we would like to thank here. First of all, the members of the Honorary Committee, which was presided over by H. M. the Queen of Spain, and included several significant personalities from political and academic life. The Executive Committee of EAJS (that fixed the main lines of the Congress). The fifteen distinguished scholars who agreed to prepare and coordinate the academic aspects of the different sections, and thereby earned our particular gratitude: M. Pérez, J. Rivera, L. Giron, M. Goodman, M. F. Garcia Casar, H. Trautner-Kromann, S. A. Goldberg, G. Abramson, R. Fontaine, M. Schlütter, G. Sed-Rajna, K. L. G. Salamon, U. Haxen, E.Romero and A. Sàenz-Badillos. The Organizing Committee also included F. Diaz Esteban, F. J. Fernández Vallina, R. Izquierdo and C. Carrete. We would also like to thank the institutions that offered financial support to the celebration of the Congress: the Fundaciôn Diâlogos, the Universidad Complutense de Madrid, the Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, the Spanish Ministry of Education and Culture, the Museo Sefardi of Toledo and BCH. All the individuals who contributed with practical means or personal help, including the staff and members of the Department of Hebrew and Aramaic Studies of the Universidad Complutense, Madrid, and of the Center for Advanced Judaic Studies of the University of Pennsylvania, as well as E. Alfonso, C. Boon and J. Goertz, who carefully corrected the proofs, have earned our deep gratitude. All of them have helped make the publication of these volumes possible. The original sections of the Congress have been reorganized for publication, the various contributions redistributed according to temporal and thematic criteria. This volume includes papers dealing with Jewish studies on biblical, rabbinical and medieval times, as well as with some general subjects, such as Jewish languages and bibliography. Another volume is dedicated to the Judaism of modern times, from the Renaissance to our days. Judit Targarona Borrâs and Angel Sàenz-Badillos

PART O N E HEBREW A N D JEWISH LANGUAGES

T H E REVIVAL AND T H E O R A L LEGACY OF H E B R E W SOME OBSERVATIONS SHELOMO MORAG The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel In an interesting paper, "Language Revival and Language Death," the late Professor Chaim Rabin dealt with the terms "Revival" or "Rebirth" as referring to the history of languages. 1 Rabin shows that the term "was first applied to languages in the 19th century to denote the efforts of ethnic groups without states of their own to create, in their own colloquial vernacular, literature and non-ficdon styles as part of their striving for recogniuon as nadons." Stress should be put on the last part of this statement, since quite a few of such languages, e.g. Czech, had been in literary use well before the revival took place. We have no evidence of languages that were revived after having been dead, in the sense that they had not been normally employed by their communides for the essendal purpose of everyday communication in speech. However, as is well known, this is the case of Hebrew. The term "revival" in reference to Hebrew is, however, not fully appropriate because all functions, with the exception of everyday speech, were extensively fulfilled by Hebrew in the Interim Period. I am using this term to denote the long period in which Hebrew was not the mother tongue of Jewish children. The boundaries of this period should not detain us here. It is accepted that Hebrew ceased to be spoken as native tongue about 200 C.E.; this, however, was not the case in all Jewish communities, but a full discussion of this theme would require a lengthy treatment. The starting of the revival is usually counted as from the eighties of the last century. We might perhaps mention in passing that we possess records of living, oral communications in Hebrew during the Interim Period. Several studies on this topic have appeared. 2 The evidence we have may be classified under two main categories: a) Formal or semi-formal communications. b) Occasional communications between members of communities not sharing a common spoken language. Under the first category come sermons (derashol) and ceremonial talks and addresses. Most common were such communications in the Yemenite community. In Yemen it was almost obligatory to deliver a ‫—דבר תורה‬which is called in Yemenite Hebrew ta'am and qi's'sur—on festive meals and on other occasions, such as days of mourning. 3 Needless to say, derashot were also held regularly in

1 2 ‫נ‬

Rabin 1986. Haramati 1992 and 1997 should be mentioned. See Kafih 1961: 175, 255, 256; Morag 1996. In the communities of Northern Yemen the term qiSfur is used in a special sense: it denotes the reciting by a child of specific text, Talmudic or

other communities, but we do not possess evidence for a formalized holding of derashot in Hebrew, in non-Yemenite communities, 4 a tradition that had been kept in the Yemenite communities for many generations. The second category, consisting of documented evidence of Hebrew communications between members of communities differing in their vernaculars, may be exemplified by the words of Rabbi Shelomo Ben Parhon, a grammarian of the 12th century. He says that Jews who live in Arabic speaking countries are not used to speak Hebrew—‫ מפני‬,‫ולא נהגו בני מקומנו לדבר בלשון ה ק ו ד ש כל כך‬ ‫ וכל האכסנאים )האורחים( הבאין‬,‫שכל ה מ ק ו מ ו ת של ארץ־ישמעאל לשון א ח ד יש להן‬ ‫ לפיכך לא הוצרכו ל ש מ ש בלשון ה ק ו ד ש להיות רגילין בו‬.‫אליהן יכירו את לשונם‬. O n the other hand, Jews who live in Christian countries (he uses the term ‫ )ארץ אדום‬are more accustomed to speak Hebrew when people who do not share the same ordinary language meet. These Jews ‫משונים לשונותיהם זו מזו וכשיבואו אכסנאים‬ ‫ לפיכך הם רגילים בו יותר‬,‫)אליהם לא יכירו דבריהם הוצרכו לדבר בלשון הקודש‬.5 As we see during the Interim Period spoken Hebrew 6 was mainly employed by scholars in their derashot and occasionally by ordinary members of the communities when circumstances dictated its use. 7 In both instances the potential to communicate in Hebrew had been realized. But for most members of the communities and in the large majority of circumstances it remained dormant. The Full Return to Hebrew ( 8 ( ‫ה ע ב ר י ת‬ ‫י ב ה ה מ ל א ה אל‬ active. In other words: the potential with which in the Interim Period scholars were endowed or which came to life only on special occasions, turned into an ability shared by the members of the new Jewish entity emerging, politically and culturally in pre-Israel Palestine. The concept the "Full Return" we have just mentioned, seems to me more fitting than "Revival." It more fully expresses the aspiration and its realization, the idea and the process of completing Hebrew with the dimension it lacked in the Interim Period, namely to establish it also as an all-purpose vernacular. The basic notion that Hebrew possessed the capacity and workability to make the Full Return a possibility, and the linkage between this Return and the Return to Zion were tellingly expressed by Eliezer Ben-Yehuda in his article She'elah L·ohatah ("A Burning Question") published in Ha-Shahar in 1879. The article primarily addressed not the topic of language but the issue of achieving a national, politically free, status for the Jewish people; language is a means towards this end. The words of Ben-Yehuda promoted the growth of linguistic consciousness. 9 Midrashic. The text, which may be of considerable length, had been learned by heart, and is recited word by word. See Ben-David 1997. 4 5 6

7

8 9

For derashot in Hebrew held in occasionally various times see Haramati 1997: 41-55. Ben-Parhon 1844: ‫ה״ע‬. For other similar records of the use of Hebrew see Morag 1956. The term Spoken Hebrew is somewhat misleading, especially with regard to the derashot, which were communicated in one type or another o f scholarly Hebrew. A special and most interested case of a normal, fluent, use of Hebrew in ordinary speech is that of Eldad Haddani (and most possibly by his community). For a description of Eldad's Hebrew and the problem of his provenance see Morag 1997. For the introduction of this concept see Morag 1993. For an analysis o f this article see Mandel 1993.

We now come to the ways in which information regarding the structure and vocabulary of Hebrew have been transmitted orally over the Interim Period. We may term this information the oral legag of the language. This legacy consists of two main corpora, the first containing data belonging to the reading the classical texts in public and to the teaching of these texts, the second comprising the Hebrew components integrated in Jewish languages, such as Yiddish, Judezmo or Judeo-Arabic dialects. We shall respectively call these bodies of information the Classical Corpus and the Integrated Corpus. The Classical Corpus contains the communal tradition for reciting Scripture, in particular the Torah, haftarot, the five Megillot, and the Psalms, and its relationship with the niqqud system accepted by the community; the communal tradition for reading vocally the Hebrew parts of post-biblical literature, especially the Mishnah—whether by itself of as part of the Babylonian Talmud; the phonetic and morphological tradition for saying prayers; and the linguistic and literary knowledge, i.e., the degree of grammatical and lexical understanding of, and the familiarity with, the written texts. Mastery of this Corpus depended to no small extent on the teaching methods the community employs to make its children acquire the art of reading the Bible and saying prayers, as well as on the relationship between text and music in the process of language acquisition. Another factor plays a role here, namely the requirements demanded from the adult member in performing the reading the classical texts in public. For an adult to be a good text performer, fulfilling all grammatical rules and those imposed by the vocalization and accentuation, is a must in the Yemenite community. To some extent it was a status trait also in the Aleppo and some other Sephardi communities, less so in the Ashkenazi. The Classical Corpus has not been immune from changes, some of them radical. Thus the Ashkenazi communities lost, in a process starting in the 12th century, their old tradition of Hebrew, the Pre-Ashkenazi. Imported from Italy and basically Sephardi in the vowel system, but still possessing certain peculiar features of its own, the Pre-Ashkenazi tradition has been forsaken. There grew in Ashkenaz a native form of reading Scripture, concomitandy with the emergence of Yiddish. The process was gradual. Another case of tradition-shift is evidenced in the communities of Persia. For centuries their way of reading Scripture was the one in use by Babylonian Jewry. Their old pronunciation forsaken at a time unknown, these communities adopted the Sephardi. There happened in Persia also a major shift in the text of the Siddur. Under the influence of Rabbi Yosef Maman (1752-1823), known also as Rabbi Yosef Hama'aravi, a scholar who came from Israel to Persia at the end of the eighteenth century, and who was highly regarded by the community, its members adopted a Sephardi text of the Siddur, leaving aside the one in use, a text which had much in common in Sa'dyah's Siddur.10 Considering the status of the CC in any community, its attitude regarding the teaching of grammar should also be observed. The theme is broad and

10

See Morag 1976.

would, therefore, deserve an extensive presentation. We must limit ourselves to a few words. Strict adherence to a framework of rules and instruction providing the pupil with an orally transmitted grammatical of pertinent traits in phonology, morpho-phemic and morphology (the last domain mosdy applying to post-biblical Hebrew) is a sine qua non for the Yemenite elementary teaching schedule. The same holds good, although with somewhat less rigidity, for certain Sephardi communities. There is evidence, recorded in the last decade, for the Djerba, Aleppo and Baghdadi schedules. We have to introduce here a note on our use of the term Sephardi. Our definition of the Sephardi communities is linguistic, not historical, based on the traditional pronunciation of the community, primarily on the vowel system. Generally speaking there is certain correlation between this system and the structure and text of the siddur in use by the community. Thus, the Izmir community, the ancestors of the majority of which members came from Spain, is Sephardi, and so are, e.g., the communities of Aleppo, the provenance only a part of which is Spanish, Baghdad and Kermanshah in Persia, the origins which are definitely non-Spanish. Among the Sephardi communities there is some variegation in the vowel systems: by and large, however, they disclose homogeneity. We shall now resume our brief survey of the status of the Classical Corpus in Jewish communities. There exists significant information, in literary and historical sources of the last centuries, regarding the attitude to teaching grammar in the Ashkenazi communities." The question is quite complicated and it is possible, therefore, to touch here only upon some aspects of the theme. It is, however, clear that in contradiction to the Yemenite and Sephardi communities, a negative attitude to the teaching of grammar was quite widespread in certain parts of the Ashkenazi society. We shall mention a few examples, for most of which I am indebted to valuable article by Iris Parush. 12 The Haskala Hebrew writer Abraham Ber Godober (1810-1899), who already in his youth showed interest in the grammar of Hebrew, writes of his melamed: ‫ודרכו חושך וחלקלקות כי לא ידע אף דקדוק האותיות והתנועות ושאר סימני‬ ‫הקריאה‬: "his way is darkness and slippery, since he did not know the grammar of letters and vowel signs and the rest of the vocalization signs." Moreover, he tells us that "at that time I studied with my late father the tractate Ketubot, when we reached the end of the sixth chapter, my father skipped the relevant passage in Rashi's commentary, wanting to conceal it from me... (when I asked my father the reason for this, he said) know, my son, we have no share in these words of Rashi and in vain we shall attempt to understand them (‫ולריק ניגע‬ ‫ ;)לפתור אותם‬those words of his are on grammar, which we do not know" (‫דברים‬ ‫)אלה דברי דקדוק הם אשר לא נדע אותו‬.!3 11

12 13

A considerable amount of material concerning the methods of teaching Hebrew over the generations is to be found in Assaf 1954. A comparatively recent study of these methods in Central and East-European Jewish communities is Stampfer 1988. Parush 1997. Parush 1997: 69, quoting 73 ‫ עמי‬,1976 ‫ ירושלים‬, ‫ מ ו ס ד ביאליק‬,‫ זכרונות ומסעות‬,‫אברהם בר גוטלובר‬.

‫‪) Weiss (1815-1905), the Talmudic scholar who opposed‬יצחק צבי( ‪Isaac Hirsch‬‬ ‫‪reform as well as extreme orthodoxy, writes in his memoirs: "In Hungary,‬‬ ‫‪learning science is regarded sinful... and also the knowledge of the theory of the‬‬ ‫‪Holy Tongue and its grammar, and studying its literature are considered to be an‬‬ ‫‪art of disbelief."14‬‬ ‫‪Needless to say, the views we have just brought, as well as many similar ones‬‬ ‫‪-to be found in literary sources and personal memoirs and correspondence, re‬‬ ‫‪fleet the opposidon to the Haska/a.‬‬ ‫‪Other voices were also heard in the Ashkenazi community. The great halak‬‬‫‪,(hie scholar and and-Shabbetean polemicist, Rabbi Jacob Emden (1697-1776‬‬ ‫פלטין בית ‪writes in the first half of the 18th century in the introducdon to his‬‬ ‫‪5‬י‪:‬אל‬

‫דבור הפה ומבטא השפה צריך להיות שלם בחיתוך הלשון כל מום לא יהיה בו באות בניקוד‬ ‫בטעם‪ .‬כהלכות לה״ק בכל תנאיו העד בעם‪ .‬מה נמלצו אמרי נועם‪ .‬וביחוד שלא לקחת לעיינין‬ ‫אלפין וכן ההין‪ ...‬וכ״ש להשמר מחילוף קריאת אותיות שאינן ממוצא א' ]חד[ כלל‪ .‬לא כמו‬ ‫שאנו האשכנזים עושים בקריות תיו רפויה כסמך לבשתנו‪ .‬אכן בתנועות אשרינו וטוב חלקנו‪ .‬לא‬ ‫כספרדים שאינם מבדילים בין קמץ לפתח‪ .‬ובזה הם עושים קודש חול‪ ...‬מלבד שגורעים מספר‬ ‫הנקודות הקדושות שנתנו בסיני ומבטלין מקצתן כי אין להם לא פתח ניכר‪ .‬והחולם לגמרי בטל‬ ‫אצלם ונעכר‪ .‬כמצוות בריות הברת חולם שלנו נעדר מעיקרו לחנם המציאו הטבע ובמוצאים‬ ‫הוקבע‪ .‬וכה עשו בסגו״ל וציר״י שהשוו הכרתם ואין למחלת לשונם צרי‪ .‬וכן בניגוני הטעמים‬ ‫יפה כחנו מהם‪ .‬מה נעים גורלנו בהבדילנו ביניהם‪ .‬צ״ל בשוא שאינו תנועה אלא גבול תנועה‪.‬‬ ‫ובזה משוגתנו אתנו חטאת קבועה‪ .‬שאין אנו מבדילין בין צירי לשוא‪ .‬אך שוא הוא להמיר זה‬ ‫בזה‪ .‬כלעג לשון ונבזה‪ .‬יזהר בת״ג)=תנועה גדולה( ותייק )=תנועה קטנה( בדגש ורפה וכמפיק‬ ‫ומפסיק הכשר‪ .‬ולחבר במקום הראוי לקשר ולרדוף אל המקום אשר יהיה שם הרוח‪ .‬או לעמוד‬ ‫ולנוח‪ .‬לא יימרון מלה בהלעטה כנס ונמלטה‪ .‬רק בנחת כמשפטה‪ .‬ולא יניח הנד ולא יניד הנח‬ ‫משפט החטפין לא יגרע‪ .‬ויזהר במלעיל ומלרע‪ .‬במי שאפשר לו ויודע הדברים אמורים‪ .‬אבל מי‬ ‫שלא הגיע לידי מדה זו בנעורים‪ .‬אי אפשר להטריחו בהנחת הטעמים שטירחו ירב ומייגע דבורו‬ ‫והפסדו מרובה משכרו‪ .‬לכן טוב שלא לבלבל הקורא אשר לא ניסה באלה במטבע תפלה‪.‬‬ ‫‪In a responsum Rabbi Emden writes:‬‬ ‫כיון שאין דרך להגיע לידיעת ל ה ״ ק )=לשון הקודש( על נכון כי אם ע"פ הכתובים אשר‬ ‫יורו באצבע על כללי הדקדוק‪".‬‬ ‫‪But theory and pracdce do not always coincide. In the Ashkenazi communities‬‬ ‫‪in general, less stress was placed on the transmission of the metalinguistic in‬‬‫‪formation regarding the Oral Legacy, namely the rules pertaining not only to‬‬ ‫‪pronunciation but also to grammar, than in the Yemenite and the Sephardi.‬‬ ‫‪In short, one may say that in the Sephardi communities, the adherence to‬‬ ‫‪ has been, and‬למידת לשון הקודש ‪Maimonides' statement regarding the stand of‬‬ ‫‪still is, stronger than that of the Ashkenazi. In his commentary to Mishna, Avot,‬‬ ‫‪") Maimonides writes:‬הוי זהיר במצוה קלה כבחמורה"( ‪Chapter 2, first Mishna‬‬

‫‪14‬‬

‫אייזיק הירש וייס‪ ,‬זכרונותי‪ ,‬הוצאת יעקב הכהן גינזבורג הכהן‪ ,‬ורשה תרנ״ה‪ ,‬עמי ‪ .30‬״ואף ‪Parush, ibid.‬‬ ‫‪ .‬גם הידיעה ב ח כ מ ת לשון הקדש ודקדוקה ובינת ספרותה ל ח כ מ ה אחרת תחשב‪.‬״‬ ‫‪ carries an absoludey negative meaning.‬ח כ מ ה אחרת‬ ‫‪15‬‬ ‫‪Emden 1745: Introducdon, 4a-d.‬‬ ‫‪16‬‬ ‫‪.‬י ‪Emden 1884: p. Γ; quesdon‬‬

‫צריך ליזהר במצוה שיחשב בה שהיא קלה כשמחת הרגל ולמידת לשון הקדש כמצוה שהתבאר‬ ‫לך חומרתה שהיא גדולה כמילה וציצית ושחיטת הפסח ושם סיבה זה שאין אתה יודע מתן‬ .‫שכרן של מצוות‬ Lack of care about grammar, some time looking as intentional, is quite common in Rabbinic Hebrew of the last centuries and earlier periods; deviadons in this genre of Hebrew from the standard norm of written Hebrew are widespread. 17 A significant way of transmitting the CC is prayer in public. There is a prominent difference between the Sephardi style and the Ashkenazi. In the former the hatççan reads every word in the text of the siddur, unless the congregation as a whole performs melodically a certain section. In the latter, the Ashkenazi a non-negligible part of the prayer is said individually, the hasgan reciting only the last sentences of the passage. Thus, in a Sephardi synagogue every word of the text of the siddur is being heard in its complete form by the whole congregation. This is not the case in an Ashkenazi synagogue. The difference is prominendy observable e.g., in the saying of ‫ קריאת ש מ ע‬and ‫שירת הים‬. We shall now turn to the other channel through which Hebrew has been transmitted during the Interim Period, a channel we have called "The Integrated Corpus," a Corpus of Hebrew (and Aramaic) elements every Jewish language contains. These Hebrew components, in which Jewish languages abound, are of two major categories: words which have basically retained their Hebrew form, for example !abbat (in the Sephardi communities) versus those who had been completely merged into the grammatical system of the relevant Jewish language. This is the case in forms such asyišebbet "(he) spends the Shabbat" in some Arabic speaking communities (recorded from a speaker of the dialect of Qābes, Tunisia) or ‫" שאטכענען‬to match a boy and a girl," derived from ‫( ש א ט כ ן‬Hebrew ‫)שדכן‬, in Yiddish. There are various degrees of merger. Certain Hebrew words of IC show slight changes while other disclose major ones. The degree of merger is gauged against the CC; a merged word is compared with its form in the traditional pronunciation and morphology of the traditional reading of the Classical texts. Let us give here a few examples of the Integrated Corpora, comparing Yiddish and Judezmo (Judeo-Spanish).18 Yiddish: ‫{ ייכעם‬yikhes): "aristocracy, genteel lineage"; ‫( טיינע‬tayne): ‫" טיינעס‬argument"; ‫{ מיילע‬mayle): "an advantage, high status"; ‫{ כוילע‬kháylé): "sick/ill (person)"; ‫( מעת־לעת‬meslés): "24 hours"; ‫" דאווער אכער‬a euphemism for non-kosher meat, of a special kind," {d0verákher)·. lit. "another thing," a euphemism for "pig's

17 18

See, e.g., Betser 1997 and Parush 1997: 79. Our examples for Yiddish are taken from Niborsky 1997 and from Weinreich 1968. The forms of the words are given as they are in "Standardized Yiddish" (in which IC the holam is [oy] and the sen is [ey]). For a dialectical description of Yiddish see Katz 1993. This paper, which is a most significant contribution to Yiddish dialectology, deals in great detail with the structure of the Hebrew components in this language. The Judezmo examples are taken from Bunis 1993. Cf. also Bunis 1981. A note on transcription: the back-palatal voiceless fricative (Heb. ‫ )כ‬is transcribed by kh. A note on pronunciation: Hebrew ‫ ח‬is pronounced kh by non-Arabic speakers o f Djudezmo, as a guttural h by bilingual, Arabic and Djudezmo, speakers. Also ‫ ע‬is pronounced as a gutural , b y the bilingual speakers.

meat" "an unscrupulous person"; ‫( לשון‬loin): "language"; ‫( חתן‬khosn): "bridegroom, fiancé"; ‫( כלה‬kálé): "bride, fiancée"; ‫( שיעור‬š/βή: "quantity, lesson". According to the rules of the Ashkenazi CC, that is, in the reading of the Bible, these words would be read: yixtis, taanö, meés leés, dovôr akhér, l0š0yn, khosön, kalö, šiyur etc. Judezmo: jixús, taána pl. atanôs, taanôt "argument" (also in the meaning of "difficult question," "explanation"), khoté umakhti "sinful and causes others to sin," kholé, kholénto "sickly," meét laéd "24 hours," Ιαΐόη "Hebrew," siur/Hur, "lesson," khatan "bridegroom," kalá "bride," šiur/siúr "limit, measure, amount." In the Sephardi CC of the Judezmo speaking communities these words would be read: yixus‫־‬, ta 'aná/ taanâ\ khoté umakhti/ hoté umabti; kholé/ho lé; me'ét le 'ét/ meet leet; laš0tr, khatán/ hatan‫־‬, kalá\ šiúr/ ši'úr. It is obvious that in a great number of words Judezmo discloses a greater degree of resistance to the impact of the spoken language on the originally Hebrew words than Yiddish.19 In other words, the extent of accord between the CC, the traditional pronunciation, and the CC, the form of the Hebrew words incorporated in the spoken language is greater in Judezmo than in Yiddish. A prominent feature dividing the two are the stress patterns, which in Ashkenazi IC totally differ from the CC. Another one is the formation in the Yiddish IC of final clusters, in forms like khosn, loin. Much has been written on the questione della pronun^a in the process of the Full Return to Hebrew. In adopting the so-called Sephardi pronunciation in the emergence of Modern Spoken Hebrew, several factors played their roles: an ideological attitude—the rejection of the Jewish-European culture, its language, Yiddish, being regarded as negatively representing what the second 'aliya and the following 'aliyot wanted to part with;20 the fact that in the 19lh century prior to the Zionist 'aliyot, Hebrew was occasionally spoken in Palestine in the Sephardi pronunciation. 21 Other factors were also involved. Non-negligible is also the fact that in Judezmo, and in other languages spoken by the Sephardi communities, the grammatical structure of Biblical Hebrew had been more clearly preserved, both in the CC and the IC, than in Yiddish. But the pronunciation of MSH is not fully Sephardi in its constituents. There are two major types of MSH:22 The so-called "Non-Oriental" or "General" and the "Oriental" ( 23 (‫ מזרחי‬the latter differing from the former in having the gutturals, bet and 'ayin. In the General type there is a fusion between the Ashkenazi and the Sephardi traditional phonological systems: it is in the main Ashkenazi its consonantal system, with one exception (the Ashkenazi pronunciation of the soft t as s) and Sephardi in its vowel system, with one major exception (namely the pronunciation of the 19

20 21 22

23

For the resistance o f the Hebrew components in Yiddish to the impact of the vernacular see Katz 1993: 60-67. For degrees of merger of the Judezmo components see Schwarzwald 1984. See Harshav 1993. Language in Time of Revolution. 153-166 and Morag 1993. See Parfitt 1992: 2 3 7 - 2 5 2 (contains an extensive bibliography), esp. 246. For the crystallization of the phonological systems of Modern Spoken Hebrew see Blanc 1964; Morag 1959. Also called "Sepharadi pronunciation" (‫)מבטא ספרדי‬.

šewa na'), which is a full vowel in the Sephardi tradidonal pronunciation but not always in the General type.24 This is a wonderful state of equilibrium: Ashkenazi elements in consonants, Sephardi in vowels; one exception in each. Is this phonological cohabitation a happy one? The answer to this question depends on one's point of view. Rabbi Jacob Emden would not have been positive on this point. We have seen above that in comparing the Ashkenazi and Sephardi he says with regard to the vowels: 25 ‫אכן בתנועות אשרינו ו ט ו ב חלקנו לא כספרדים שאינם‬ ‫מבדילים בין ק מ ץ ל פ ת ח ובזה הם עושים ק ו ד ש ח ו ל‬. He must have been exhilarated by the priority of the Ashkenazi pronunciation. In another passage he delightfully proclaims: ‫" את ה׳ בכל לבי ש ע ש א נ י יהודי אשכנזי בניבי ע ל כן ש מ ח לבי ו א ו ד ה‬therefore my heart rejoices and I thank G o d with all my heart for making me an Ashkenazi Jew in my pronunciation." 26 Certain citizens of Israel still take Emden's view, considering Ashkenazi pronunciation to be compulsory in reading the Classical texts and in prayer. The Oriental type which has gone through a process of withdrawal in the fifties and the sixties of this century is still vibrant in the speech of many citizens. But with the younger generation it seems to be dying out. T o end my talk on a less serious note, I would say that the General type of Modern Spoken Hebrew is the only domain in Israel in which the cultural legacies of Sephardim and the Ashkenazim are equally represented. The significance of this cannot be over estimated. O n e might wonder whether the boundlessly immense expansion of Modern Spoken Hebrew in its manifold varieties, formal, informal, slangish and other, is not to be related to the aforementioned Ashkesephardi cohabitation which became an non-dissoluble wedlock. This also proves the importance for Jewish life of peaceful cooperation between rival legacies...27

Bibliographic References Assaf, S. 1954. Meqorot le-toldot ha-hinu& be-lsrael. Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook. Ben-David, A. 1997. Ha-qiššur be-moreSet jehudey Sefon Teyman. Rehovot: ha-Agudah le-tipuah he]2rah we-tarbut, etc. Ben-Parhon, S. 1844. Mahberet he-'aru&. Ed. S. G. Stern. Pressburg : A. N. de Schmid. Betser, Z. 1997. "'Iniane diqduq bi-lson hašu"t be-hašpa'atah sel ha-yiddiš." Balšanut 'ifant 41-42, 21-33. 24

25 26 27

The pronunciation of the iewa na' as a vowel, not as %ero, in the General type depends on nature o f the preceding and following consonants. Thus, e.g. ‫" מ נ ה ל‬director" is menahcl while ‫גבי}ה‬ "cheese" is gvina. In comparing the General type to the traditional Ashkenazi pronunciation we should note that this type preserves the Ashkenazi tseyre (=ey) in certain phonological circumstances. There are some secondary consonantal features in which this type differs from the Ashkenazi traditional pronunciation: some varieties of this pronunciation the realization as y of alef (and cayin, which had disappeared also completely) as well as h, when the consonant follows a vowel, e.g. koyanim — .‫כהנים‬ Emden 1745: 4 a . Emden 1761. This paper is based in part on the work at The Hebrew University Jewish Oral Tradition Research Cen1er. The author gratefully acknowledges the support o f the Memorial Foundation o f Jewish Culture to The Jewish Oral Traditions Center.

Blanc, H. 1964. "Israeli Hebrew Texts." In Studies in Egyptology and Linguistics in Honor of H.J. Polotsky. Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society, 131-151. Bunis, D. M. 1981. "A Comparative Linguistic Analysis of Judezmo and Yiddish." InternationalJournal of the Sociology of Language 30, 49-71. , 1993. A lexicon of the Hebrew and Aramaic elements in modern Judezmo. Jerusalem: Magnes Press.

Emden, J. 1745. Palatin Bet "El. Altona. , 1761. Moru-Qsi'ah. Altona. , 1884. She'elat Ya'avets. Lemberg: Un Ze'ev Volf Salat. Haramati, S. 1992. 'Ivrit hayah bi-merusat ha-dorot. [Givatayim] : Masada. , 1997. Ivrit : mi"šiah šefatayim" le-lashon le'umit. Tel-Aviv: Yaron Golan. Harshav, B. 1993. Language in Time of Revolution. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. Kafih, Y. 1961. Halikbot Teyman; hayey ha-yebudim he-San'ah u-knoteah. Ed. Y. Yesha'yahu. Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute. Katz, D. 1993. "The Phonology of Ashkenazic." In Hebrew in Ashkena% Ed. L. Glinert. New-York-Oxford: Oxford University Press, 46-87. Mandel, G. 1993. "She'elah Nikhbadah and the Revival of Hebrew." In FJie^er Ben-Yehuda: A Symposium. Ed. E. Silberschlag. Oxford: Centre for Postgraduate Hebrew Studies, 25-39. Morag, S. 1956. " 'Ad 'ematay dibberu 'ihrit?" Lelonenu la-'am 7, 3-10. , 1959. "Planned and Unplanned Development in Modern Hebrew." Lingua 8, 247— 263. , 1993. "The Emergence of Modern Hebrew: Some Sociolinguisdc Perspectives." In Hebrew in AshkenaEd. L. Glinert. New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press, 208-227. , 1995. "Ha-migbaš ha-mešu1ah še1 ha-'ihrit." Te'udah 9, 183-208. , 1996. 'Tosafot ,ahadot." Pe'amim 65, 104-108. , 1996a. "Edah ulsonoteha: beyn masoret leveyn hidduš." Pe'amim 68, 139-151. , 1997. "Li-s'elat mosa'o sel 'Eldad ha-Dani; behinah 1eš0nit." Tarbiz 6 6 223-246 ‫י‬ . Niborsky, Y. 1997. Dictionnaire des mots d'origine hébraïque et araméenne en usage dans la langue yiddish. Paris: Bibliothèque Medem. Parfitt, T. V. 1992. "The Use of Hebrew in Palestine 1800-1882." JSS 17, 237-52. Parush, I. 1997. "Mabbat ‫׳‬aher 'al 'hayye ha-'ihrit ha-metah'." Alapqyyim 13, 65-106. Schwarzwald, Ο. 1984. "Ha-medadim lehitukan sel ha-millim ha-'ihriot ba-sefaradit ha-yehudit." Millet (‫ מלאת‬Publications of the Open University in Jewish History of Culture) 2, 357-367. Stampfer, S. 1988. "'Heder' study, knowledge of Torah, and the maintenance of social stratification in traditional East European Jewish society." Studies in Jewish Education 3, 271-289. Rabin, C. 1986. "Language revival and language death." In The Fergusonian Impact: in honor of Charles A. Ferguson on the occasion of his 65'b birthday. Ed. J. A. Fishman, A. Tabouret-Keller, M. Clyne, B. Krishnamurti, and M. Abdulaziz. The Hague, Paris. II, 543-554. Weinreich, U. 1968. Modern English-Yiddish, Yiddish-English dictionary. New York: Yivo Institute for Jewish Research.

JUDAEO-ARABIC STUDIES A F T E R A C E N T U R Y OF G E N I Z A H RESEARCH JOSHUA BLAU The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel It was on purpose that I dubbed my lecture "Judaeo-Arabic studies after a century of Genizah research," rather than "in the light of a century of Genizah research," since it is quite impracticable to separate studies based on Genizah material from those founded on other texts. Genizah texts are closely interwoven with other sources, and the same work has often been preserved both in manuscripts from the Genizah and outside it, and one source, however restricted, may shed light upon the other. Thus e.g. Maimonides's responsa have, in the main, survived in big manuscript collections outside the Genizah, yet the very few autographs preserved in the Genizah shed light on the original form of the questions addressed to Maimonides: In the mss collections the preambles addressing Maimonides have been abridged and their original forms have been preserved in the Genizah autographs only. The Pentateuch translation of Saadya Gaon, one of the fundamental works of Judaeo-Arabic culture, has, in the main, been preserved in Yemenite manuscripts. Nevertheless, M. Zucker has sueceeded in the late fifties, basing himself on a Genizah fragment consisting of two leaves only, to establish its original version, 1 which has now been verified by a ms. stemming from St. Petersburg (Ms. National Library EBR II CI), which, though fragmentary, contains the greater part of Saadya's Pentateuch transladon. Similarly, with the help of Genizah fragments, S. Abramson 2 has established the stemma of the mss. of Rabbenu Nissim's Hibburjaphe min Hajeshu'a, a book belonging to the genre called in Arabic al-faraj ba'd ash-shidda, "relief from misfortune," describing how people were affected by misery and relieved. R. Nissim, who was the head of the Jewish Law-Academy in Qairuwan, gave to this Arabic genre Jewish flavour by collecting stories of redemption from the Midrash. Nevertheless, the joint discussion of material stemming from the Genizah and outside it, does not save us from the difficulty inherent in the separation of Judaeo-Arabic from Hebrew. Most mediaeval Jewish languages (as Yiddish, Ladino) did not rise to become veritable cultural languages, yet in Judaeo-Arabic culture prose works and documents were composed in both Judaeo-Arabic and Hebrew, and it is sometimes rather one-sided to treat the two languages separately. Thus some works open with two introductions, one in Hebrew, the other in Judaeo-Arabic, as is the case with Saadya Gaon's Egrvn,1 being a Hebrew1 2 ‫ג‬

See Zucker, M. 1959. Rar Saadya Gaon's Translation of the Torah. (Hebr.) N e w York, 308 ff. See Abramson, Sh. 1955. R. Nissim Gaon LibeltiQuimque. (Hebr.) Jerusalem, 361 ff. Allony, Ν. 1969. Ha 'egron, Kita b usūlal-shi'r al-'ibn ni ly Rar Si 'adya Gaon. Jerusalem, 148-63.

Arabic dictionary. Moreover, 4 documents and judicial decrees were in the first half of the 11th century composed in Hebrew, to be changed in its second half to Arabic. Yet round 1200 Hebrew started being employed. The difficulty of artificially separating Judaeo-Arabic documents from Hebrew ones is highlighted e.g. by two judicial decrees from 1026/27, the first being written in Hebrew, to change after an interval of 13 months only to Arabic!5 The systematic analysis of such documents, both Hebrew and Judaeo-Arabic, including responsa, enabled scholars to reconstruct the history, culture and social structure of the mediaeval Judaeo-Arabic society on new lines. Thus arose S. D. Goitein's multivolumed monumental work A Mediterranean Society. Yet Goitein was preceded by scholars like J. Mann, 6 and followed by several of Goitein's pupils, like M. Gil7 and M. A. Friedman. 8 A plethora of literary works in the broadest sense of the word, including religious and philosophical literature, have been published in the 20th century and enable us to appreciate medieval Judaeo-Arabic culture more accurately; it is, of course, in the framework of a lecture, only possible to mention a few of them. Judaism has reached one of its peaks in medieval Judaeo-Arabic culture, since, stimulated by Islamic civilization, which it absorbed, it produced a surprisingly amount of great scholars in every field. It was ushered in by the great Saadya Gaon, who was the pathfinder of almost every facet of Judaeo-Arabic culture, and reached its culmination with Moses Maimonides. Crowning Judaeo-Arabic culture, Maimonides' works were rather well known even before the 20th century, yet he also is much better understood today, e.g. by the publication of his responses 9 and Rabbi Qafih's edition of his Mishnah commentary. 10 In the case of Saadya Gaon, the change was much more radical. Thanks to the publication of several of his works (as some of his Bible commentaries edited by the untiring Rabbi Qafih, 11 his Hebrew-Arabic dictionary Egron, mentioned above, his Book of Writs, to be published by N. Ben-Sason and Y. Brody, his Treatise ofBiblical Hapaxlegomena, edited by N. Allony,12 his grammar, edited by S. L. Skoss and re-edited by A. Dotan), 13 we have now a much clearer view of this great man

4

See Goitein, S. D. 1967-88. A Mediterranean Society. Berkeley, vol. 1,15. Thus pace Drory, R. 1988. The Emergence ofJewish-Arabic Literary Contacts at the Beginning of the Tenth Century. (Hebr.) Tel-Aviv, passim, who artificially attributed the use of Arabic exclusively to communicative, that of Hebrew to aesthetic purposes.

5

See A Mediterranean Society, vol. 3: 292. See e.g. his The Jews in Egypt and in Palestine... Oxford 1920-22; Text and Studies... CincinnatiPhiladelphia 1931-35. See e.g. his Documents of the Jewish Pious Foundations from the Cairo Centra. Leiden 1976; Palestine during the First Muslim Period. Tel-Aviv 1983; In the Kingdom oflshmael. Tel-Aviv 1997. See e.g. his Jewish Marriage in Palestine. Tel-Aviv-New York 1980-81; Jewish Polygyny in the Middle Ages. (Hebr.) Jerusalem-Tel-Aviv 1986. See Blau, J. 1957-86. R. Moses Maimonides, Responsa. Jerusalem. Jerusalem 1963-69. We mention here only his edition o f Psalms (1966), Job (1973), Proverbs (1976) and Daniel (1981), all published in Jerusalem. The commentary of Job was translated into English with notes by Goodman, L. E. 1988 The Book of Theodicy... N e w Haven. In Löwinger, S. et al., eds. 1958. Ignace Gotdqher Memorial Volume, vol. 2. Jerusalem, 1-48. Dotan, A. 1977. The Dawn of Hebrew Linguistics. (Hebr.) Jerusalem.

6

7

8

9 10 11

12 1‫נ‬

and can better appreciate his work and its decisive influence on Judaeo-Arabic culture. Maimonides' son, Abraham, known for his ascedc tendencies, wrote a comprehensive book on law and ascedcism entided Kifâjat al- 'âbidin, parts of which were edited by S. Rosenthal 1927 and 1938"· and by N. Dana 1989.‫ לי‬An important treadse on this book was published by N. Wieder in 1947.16 The ediuons of various works of Karaite scholars undertaken in the 20th century enable us to understand the history and structure of this important Jewish sect. I shall content myself with mentioning L. Nemoy's publication of Qirqisani's monumental Kitâb al-Anwâr, treating Karaite law,17 and S. L. Skoss masterly edition of the Bible dictionary of David al-Fâsî.18 Quite a unique book as to its theme is the treatise of Hebrew poetry by the great Spanish poet Moshe ibn Ezra (round 1100) Kitâb al-muhâdara walmudhâkara, edited in 1975 by A. S. Halkin.19 Among philosophical works I would like especially to mention the re-edition of Yehuda Halevi's Ku^ari by D. H. Baneth, because it highlights several aspects of the change that affected our approach to Judaeo-Arabic texts and their language, not in the least caused by Baneth himself. The Ku^ari was edited already as early as 1887 by H. Hirschfeld (Leipzig). Yet Baneth's réédition from 1977 (Jerusalem) reflects not only the result of joint painstaking philological work undertaken by scholars like I. Goldziher, S. Horovitz, I. Efros, G. Vajda and Baneth himself, but also a more careful approach to Judaeo-Arabic texts and a deeper understanding of their language. Similarly, in 1857, J. J. L. Bargès & D. B. Goldberg edited Jehuda ibn Quraysh's Epistle (Paris), the first work dealing with comparative Semitic philology. Since Arabic speaking Jews knew Arabic (both spoken and literary), Hebrew and Aramaic, they were the first who discovered the affinity of these languages. Yet since in the middle of the 19th century the knowledge of proper philological treatment of Judaeo-Arabic texts was restricted; it was therefore important that D. Becker re-edited this text in 1984, in accordance with the new approach to Judaeo-Arabic texts. It is now common knowledge that the language of Judaeo-Arabic texts must not be considered Classical Arabic corrupted by copyists but rather reflecting a language of its own, the so-called Middle Arabic, in which Classical Arabic, Post-Classical Arabic, dialectal (Neo-Arabic) features and pseudo-corrections alternate. This is proven by the existence of these features in autographs, as stressed by Baneth in his review of J. Obermann's edition of Rabbenu Nissim's Hibbur yaphe min Hajeshu <2.20 Accordingly, one must not "correct" deviations from classical orthography and morphology, also because these alterations ereate a mongrel text in which orthography and morphology have been, so to 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

The High Ways to Perfection. N e w York-Baltimore. Sefer ha-maspik... Ramat Gan. Islamic Influences on the Jewish Worship. (Hebr.) Oxford N e w York 1939-43. The Hebrew-Arabic Dictionary of the Bible... N e w Haven 1936-45. Jerusalem. Kiijath Sepher 11, 1935, 350-57.

speak, corrected, yet syntax remains definitely non-classical, since it can very often not be changed without altering the whole sentence structure, including word order. This understanding of the autonomous character of Judaeo-Arabic enables us to analyse its grammatical structure appropriately. I shall content myself51 with mentioning here its Neo-Arabic component only. As well known, the history of Arabic may be divided into two periods: Old-Arabic, with tendency towards the synthetic lingual type, is represented by literary (including classical) Arabic, and Neo-Arabic, represented by modern dialects. There is a gap of more than one millennium between Old-Arabic and Neo-Arabic, and it can be (partly) bridged by carefully collecting and assessing the Neo-Arabic elements contained in Middle Arabic texts, including medieval Judaeo-Arabic. Middle Arabic texts are therefore of utmost importance for the proper understanding of the history of Arabic. Since classical Genizah mosdy contains material from the first half of the second millennium and because of the utmost importance of the Genizah for Judaeo-Arabic studies, we possess very few Judaeo-Arabic texts written and copied in the (second part of the) first millennium. Such texts are therefore of great significance, since they enable us to reconstruct early Jewish culture and early Neo-Arabic. In the last 15 years Prof. Hopkins and myself are working on Judaeo-Arabic texts which reflect a hitherto unknown subculture from the first millennium. 22 Medieval Judaeo-Arabic is, as a rule, spelt in Hebrew characters, rather than in Arabic letters. Yet the standard Judaeo-Arabic orthography is nevertheless decisively influenced by the Arabic spelling, reflecting even idiosyncrasies, like the spelling of tâ marbúta in the absolute. Quite different is the spelling (also in Hebrew letters) employed by the subculture mentioned in the first millennium: it does not exhibit any influence of the Arabic orthography and is entirely phonetic. Thus, e.g., ^ in Arabic orthography is spelt with and so is employed ‫ צ‬in standard Judaeo-Arabic spelling; yet in phonetic spelling ‫ ד‬is used. In Arabic. In Standard Judaeo-Arabic spelling the definite article is spelt morphophonematically as in Arabic orthography, in the phonetic spelling however purely phonetically, so that it is often not recognisable. Moreover, phonetic spelling does not show any consistency in the use of vowel letters, contrary to Arabic and Standard Judaeo-Arabic orthography. This phonetic spelling disappeared in the tenth century. Therefore, texts written phonetically, though they are undated, may safely be attributed to the first millennium, and enable us to better understand Jewish culture during this critical period. Moreover, together with papyri and Early Melkite Christian Arabic, they enable us to reconstruct early Neo-Arabic from the second half of the first millennium. So far we have dealt with the achievements of Judaeo-Arabic studies in the last century. It will not be superfluous to finish with a prospect for the next century, the first century of the third millennium. Even before the libraries of 21

22

For details see my A Grammar of Mediaeval Judaeo-Arabic. 2nd edidon. Jerusalem 1980; The Emergenet and Linguistic Background of Judaeo-Arabic. 2nd edition. Jerusalem 1981. Cf., for the time being, our paper in Zeitschriftfur arabische Linguistik 12, 1984, 9-27.

the former Soviet Union have been opened, a plethora of Judaeo-Arabic texts waited for redempdon, the more now, after the treasures of these libraries have become available for the scholarly world. I do not exaggerate claiming that even generadons of scholars will not be able to exhaust the wealth of information hidden in Judaeo-Arabic manuscripts. The most conspicuous collection of such manuscripts is to be found in the Institute of Microfilmed Hebrew Manuscripts in the Jewish National and University Library at Jerusalem, which has also assembled the Judaeo-Arabic manuscripts, which are, as a rule, written in Hebrew characters. I am inviting the world of Judaists to utilize this unique opportunity of broadening our horizons with the help of Judaeo-Arabic manuscripts.

T H R E E V I E W S REGARDING T H E G E N D E R OF BIBLICAL N O U N S IN T H E W R I T I N G S OF M E D I E V A L H E B R E W GRAMMARIANS LUBA CHARLAP Bar-Ilan University, Israel In this article I would like to present three views regarding the gender of nouns found among some of the grammarians of the Middle Ages. We named these approaches: the accepted grammadcal approach, the "systemic-morphemic" approach and the "ungrammatical" approach. As it is known, in the Hebrew language, each noun—whether the name of a living thing, inanimate object or abstract noun—is defined by gender, "masculine" or "feminine" (or both, in some cases). It is generally thought that the definition of gender requires a morphological label.1 The masculine singular has no grammatical sign (morphological label 0). The feminine singular label is the suffix kamat^ hey, taph‫׳‬, segol, taph\ patach, taph\ kamat^j taph [ayala (doe), bat (daughter), ayelet (gazelle), shifat (company), nachalat (heritage)].2 The label for the masculine plural noun is the suffix jod, mem [eilim], and the label for the feminine plural is the suffix vav, taph [eilot]. This system has been perfecdy preserved in the adjectives and participles [tov, tova, tovim, tovot\, but in the rest of the nouns, as it is well-known, the situation is not at all systematic: among singular nouns are those masculine singular nouns with the suffix kamat·.ζ, hey [lajla], and feminine nouns with no grammatical indication whatsoever, as in em (mother), aton (ass, donkey), even (stone), eret^ (land). There are masculine nouns which in the plural end with vav, taph, such as avot (fathers), and the opposite, feminine nouns which in the plural end with jod, mem, such as nashim (wo men), pi lagshim (concubines). It is known that, as early as Rabbinic time, Rabbinic literature devoted considerable attention to the subject of the gender of nouns: both to clarifying the definition of Biblical nouns and to noting differences of gender between Biblical and Rabbinic language. These considerations arose in Talmudic disputes as in the example of the discussion in Bavli Kidushin 2, 2, on the gender of derech (way, means), following the Mishnaic saying: "A woman is acquired by three means" (see ibid., and see also Tosa/ot, ibid.). In the Middle Ages, Hebrew language grammarians also dealt with this subject, heeding these features and attempting to elucidate a method, formulate rules and explain the exceptions. See Gesenius, W. 1910. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar. Ed. E. Kautzsch and Α. E. Cowley, London 222-224, and see the extensive survey and inter-linguisdc comparison by Ch. Rabin, and the meanings of grammadcal forms in Biblical and modern language, Jerusalem, 1971, 65-71. Other more rare suffixes: kamat^aleph (according Aramaic), segol-hei, kamat^bei (without the tone), patah-yod (ibid., 224).

We have attempted to examine their opinions on this subject. In our research, we found the subject covered by the Andalusian school, from the incepdon of Andalusian grammar undl its twelfth century constituents: Dunash (Rabbi Adonim, Dunash vs. Sa'adia), Yonah Ibn Janach, Moshe Hakkohen Ibn Gikatilia and Abraham Ibn Ezra, and also by later grammarians (some of them "Ashkenazi") that we shall mention later on. We will begin with the accepted grammatical approach, examining how it is expressed by the medieval grammarians.

The Accepted Grammatical Approach Grammarians of this school regard defining the gender of nouns as a grammatical phenomenon. As is true of all areas of grammar, there are rules with many exceptions that are inseparable from the rule and from the phenomenon. This is the dominant stream among grammarians of the middle ages. Among those that I examined, this school is represented by Rabbi Adonim (Dunash vs. Rav Sa'adia), Moshe Hakkohen Ibn Gikatilia and Yonah Ibn Janach, while it is implicit in the works of Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra. Dunash (Responsa to Rav Sa'adia HaGaon, 150) commented on the forms of feminine gender which lack the feminine suffix, as in the name T%or (Tyre), found in Ezekiel (26, 4) in a feminine form, and the forms found in both masculine and feminine genders, such as eret^ (land), eish (fire),pa'am (time), seh (lamb), and forenames Israel and Kohelet. From the fact that he notes the exceptions in which there are two gender definitions, he seems to think that each noun usually has a specific gender definition. 3 Rabbi Yonah Ibn Janach wrote comprehensively and in utmost detail about the subject of gender (in four chapters in Harikma,4 39 (8) to 42 (41). His starting point is the assumption that the masculine gender is the foundation, the basis, and the feminine gender is the addition (Harikma, 38 (37), 377). He presented several examples of nouns without feminine suffixes, which appear in both masculine and feminine gender, for example, eret% (earth), eish (fire), ruach (wind, breath), shemesh (sun). In his opinion, these nouns are not truly feminine despite their feminine usage; this is the reason they appear also in masculine form (Harikma, 39 (38), 385).5 As for the plural form—the masculine plural suffix is jod, mem. However, if the masculine noun does not describe a living entity, it may also be found in the plural in feminine form with the suffix vav, taph, e.g. bar (mountain) - harim, harot-,ja'ar (forest) - je'arim, je'arot (Harikma, 39 (38), 380).6 Furthermore, the

See also his remarks on grammatical gender incongruency, ibid., paragraph 150. All the references will be brought from Se/er Harikma. Wilensky-Tene edition. Jerusalem 1964. An additional group o f nouns which appear in masculine and feminine forms are the collective nouns, as t^on (sheep), bakar (cows). Despite the substantial emphasis Ibn Janach places on the idea that nouns found in both masculine and feminine gender are names of inanimate objects, he also lists (Ibn Janach, Harikma 41 [40], p. 387) animals that are designated both masculine and feminine: gamal (camel), chaqr (pig), arnevet (hare), dag (fish), arbeh (locust), tor (turtledove) and t^por (bird). Wilensky notes

feminine plural suffix is vav, taph, but there are feminine plural forms (or plurals referring to a pair) with the suffix jod, mem. Examples of this are: jadajim (hands), einajim (eyes), pa'amajim (twice), raglajim (legs) or regalim (times) (Harikma, 39 (38), 380). Rabbi Moshe Ibn Gikatilia devoted an entire book to this subject: Kitab Attathkir U'attanith 7 is organized as a dictionary, with the words arranged according to the alphabet (not according to roots). It includes only Biblical words, and in Allony's opinion, only those words that contain an exceptional aspect (see Allony, Sinai 24, 1949, 36). The fragments available today seem to indicate that Ibn Gikatilia comments on a singular feminine that lacks the final feminine morpheme, as in oyen (ear), which he defines as feminine by usage rather than form. He relates similarly to the word ach (hearth - Jer 36,22) as well and to shemesb (sun), shen (tooth), level (universe). There are masculine plural words with the morpheme vav, taph, as in ov (wine-skins - Job 32, 19; Allony, 47); or shulchan (table), which appears in masculine form (Ez 41,22), while the plural appears in feminine gender (Ezekiel 40, 41; Allony, 55). The opposite also occurs: feminine plural words with the morpheme jod, mem, such as even (stone), and t'eina (fig) (Allony, 62). There is also a reconstruction of one singular form while the plural is found in two forms (ahalim [aloe-wood trees], in which the reconstructed singular form of ahalim and ahalot is ahala—Allony, 46). Examination of Ibn Ezra's treatment of the subject indicates he is definitely a representative of the accepted grammatical approach. Ibn Ezra, apparendy following Ibn Janach, thought that the masculine singular form is the basis (his interpretation of Lev 11, 3: "It is the way of the holy language to employ the masculine for both genders, as the feminine is included in the masculine"). He also generalizes that the masculine singular form lacks a suffix, and that the feminine form ends with bei or taph: "The masculine singular comes with no sign at its end, as ish (man), and gever (man) and eved (slave)" (Mo^na'im,* 33, 1), whereas "the feminine sign at the end (of a word) is bei or taph, as in isha (woman) or eshetj'fatto'ar (a beautiful woman)" (Mo^na'im, 34, 1). Nonetheless, he finds several groups of exceptions: (1) Biblical nouns without the suffixes hei or taph, which are found in both masculine and feminine forms. Examples are: aron (ark), eish (fire), bajit (house), jad (hand), peh (mouth), regel (leg), ruach (wind, breath), sbemesh (sun), t'hom (void) (T^achot, 35,

7

8

(Harikma, 387, note 10), that Ibn Janach refers to the species, which includes both the masculine and feminine members of the species. Rabbi Moshe Ibn Gikatilia, Kitab Attathkir W'attanith. Surviving fragments are published in an anthology by P. Kokovzow (ed. N. Allony) From Medieval Hebrew Linguistic Publications, Jerusalem 1970, 59-66. Ibn Ezra calls it Sefer Z'charim Unekevot (The Book of Males and Females) (Mo^na'im, 17, 2). Sections of the book were translated into English by Poznanski, S. "New Material on the History of Hebrew-Arabic Philology During the Tenth to Twelfth Centuries." ]QR n.s. 16, 237 ff. They were translated into Hebrew by Allony, N. 1949. Sinai 24, 34-67. As he observes, we have only a tenth of this book. The material that follows is taken from Allony 1949. This quotation and also all the references in this article are brought from Mo^na'im. Wolf Heidenheim's edition. The references from T^acbot are from Lippmann's edition.

2);9 (2) Nouns without the suffix bei or taph which are feminine in gender. Examples are: even (stone), shegal (concubine) (Moyna'im, 34, 2);10 and an adjective: mitwar (small) (the interpretation of Gen 19, 20)." As for the plural forms, Ibn Ezra establishes that the masculine plural is usually found with the suffix jod, mem (Mo^na'im, 34, 1), and the feminine plural with the suffix vav, taph (Moyna 'im, 34, 1), but there are three exceptions to this rule in his view: (1) Masculine forms which appear in the plural with the suffix vav, taph: luach (tablet), luchot, (2) Feminine forms found in the plural with the sufix jod, mem. isha-nashim (woman-women), pilegesh-pilagshim (concubine[s]) (T^achot 35, 2); (3) Forms that are found with the suffix jod, mem and with the suffix vav, taph\ n'fashim, n'fashot12 (souls) (l\achot, 35, 2); %'ro'ot, ro'im (arms) (Mo^na'im, 34, 1). And what is the normative gender usage for nouns in his time, or in our time?—Ibn Ezra determines "This is the rule: the nouns vary, and no man has license to say anything other than that which is found" (Mo^na'im, 34, 2); that is to say, we should adhere to the Biblical gender definition. It appears that Ibn Ezra follows in Ibn Janach's footsteps, although there are some differences between the two: (a) Ibn Ezra ignores Ibn Janach's emphasis and his stipulations that only undetermined nouns and those of unverified feminine gender may be used as both masculine and feminine; (b) Thus, Ibn Janach expands the number of exceptions and presents categories of exceptions that Ibn Ezra does not recognize: names of animals that are both masculine and feminine, forenames which are also both genders, other nouns which are interpreted as feminine. These categories are not found in Ibn Ezra; perhaps for lack of writing material or perhaps because he did not agree.

The Systemic-Morphemic Approach According to the "systemic-morphemic" approach the system of nouns in the historical Hebrew of the Bible was symmetrical, with four facets:

9

10

11

12

See also a partial list in Mo^na'im 33, 2, and see Tyachot, 35, 2, the cridque by Rav Sa'adia HaGaon, who interprets the verse in the first book of Samuel, 4, 17: " Vaaron HaElokim nilkachd' as referring to "letvat awn HaEtokim nilkachii'•, Ibn Ezra remarks: "There is no need" (for the word teivat). Other examples are found in his Bible commentaries—see ot (sign) (Gen 9, 12), gan (garden) (Gen 2, 15), lechem (bread) (Gen 49, 20) and more. In Tqachot 35, 2, Ibn Ezra provides examples of forenames—Abigail, Avinoam—which do not have the feminine suffix, but are feminine. Ibn Ezra does not remark on nouns with the suffix hei or taph which are masculine in gender, except forenames—see T^achot 35, 2: "And there is the name of a man in the feminine gender form, as Samlah o f Masrekah (Gen 36, 35)." We found such a comment about the forename Ohalibama (Gen 36,40). See also Ibn Ezra's arguments in T^achot 19, 2, against Ibn Janach, w h o interpreted the word alita ("deed") (Psal 66, 5) as an adjecdve alii with the addition o f hei. Ibn Ezra thinks this is feminine gender. Ibn Ezra remarks also on the feminine gender nouns with double feminine suffixes -at •ah "The aleph is connected to the tav as inyeshu'ata olatd' (Moyna'im 34,1). The form nefesh (soul) is found in the plural as n'fashim and n'fashot both in one verse (Ezek 13, 20). See T^ackot 35, 2, where Ibn Ezra negates the possibility that the forms amarim-amarot belong to this category.

masculine singular with no suffix [0]

masculine plural with suffix jod, mem

feminine singular with suffix her, taph (etc.)-feminine plural with suffix vav, taph This approach presents a complete system, in which the final morpheme is the gender indicator (= the gender label). For this reason we called this approach "systemic-morphemic." I encountered this view for the first time through Ibn Ezra's dissent from it in his interpretation of Genesis, Another Method, 1, 14, in the discussion of the word m'orot m'orot - masculine gender, witness the use of sh'nei ("and G-d made the two great lights") and hag'dolim ("the great ones") [in continuation of verse 16]. The tav is used for plurals of masculine gender, as in avot (fathers), and mem for feminine gender, as in nashim (women),pitagshim (concubines). And to infer the use of m'komah from m'komot (places) is incorrect. He expresses himself more sharply in Ex 1, 14, in relation to the word uvilevenim (and with bricks): The names of objects will be used only as found, as the singular of mo'edot is mo'ed (appointed time) rather than mo'edah. Whoever thinks himself clever and infers that the plural of makom (place) is m'komim and infers from m'komot the singular mekomah will perhaps perceive wisely that, if from bechor he derives bechorim, I'makeh mityayim b'bechoreihem ("Who smote the first-born of Egypt") (Psalms 135, 10), note u'bechorot bakarcha ("and the firstlings of thy herd") (Deuteronomy 14, 23), thus the singular would be bechorair, and also the singular of tevenim (bricks) is not /even but rather tevenah. In both of these instances, Ibn Ezra refers to an unidentified opinion, according to which there was an ancient system of four nouns: makom - m'komim·, m'komah — m'komot. From this, the Biblical text retained only makom and m'komot. Ibn Ezra does not accept this thesis. We do not know who Ibn Ezra refers to as "the person who considers himself clever," but from the presence of the refutation, we learn that this view exists. 13 It seems to me that this approach arose because relatively numerous exceptions exist in the Biblical gender system (and perhaps the approach was also influenced by the many exceptions found in post-Biblical Hebrew sources). In other words, this approach seems to us to be another interpretation of the existing situation. Instead of assuming that there is a rule with exceptions, a different understanding evolved: reality was regarded according to a diachronic approach, in which a broader historical substructure was presumed to underlie what remains in the Bible. Advocates of this approach apparendy believed that "language is broader than the Book"; in other words, that the linguistic substructure of Biblical Hebrew was more extensive than the Biblical text itself. Unlike others, however, they allowed themselves to reach practical conclusions from this perception and 13

Prof. G. Khan commented that, based on his research in the Diqduq of Yusuf Ibn Nuh, it is possible that this theory has origins in the East. He found that in his text Ibn N u h frequendy analyses plurals with the ending -ot but a singular without -ah, as having a theorerical base in -ah (see his article about the morphological theories of Ibn Nuh in journal of Semitic Studies 43, 1998, 265-286). I thank Prof. Khan for his comment.

to assume additional grammatical usage with no basis in the Biblical text. Echoes of this "liberal" approach may be found in grammadcal literature (not in relation to this subject). For example, as Menahem expressed himself against Yehuda Ibn Koreish, who interpreted Ivchat-charev (Ez 21, 20) as lb'at, which is derived from b'atah (terror), whereby Ibn Koreish coined a word that does not exist in the literature. Menahem writes: Those who would interpret, know that the entire language is not found in the book of our law, and if our language were complete, all the weak words would be found and we would be able to obtain them in all their breadth. They are not found because they have disappeared. Are they, therefore, an invention added to the holy language, expanding the short and making many of the few. If so, this must not be until a breath from above (G-d) infuses us. (Machberet, 12). That is to say, he thinks that, although language is more extensive than the "Book," the "Book" is all that is available to the linguist. Students of Menahem said similar things when they rebutted Dunash (see Students of Menahem, Responsa, 25-28, and see also Ibn-Ezra comment in this subject in Safa brura, 4,2). It thus appears that the proponents of the "diachronic-liberal" mode may be suspected of adhering to the systemic-morphemic approach. In any case, Ibn Ezra serves as a witness to the existence of the latter approach.

The Ungrammatical Approach The third approach, the "ungrammatical" approach, was expressed in the Middle Ages by the words: "Anything which has no breath of life, masculinize and feminize it." This formulation appeared in its present form in the book by Rabbi Samuel Archivolti, Arugat Habosem (Chapter 7, book 22; 19, 2), (written approximately 1600). The sentence appears in other, earlier, sources as well, with minor changes of formulation, such as in Profiat Duran's Ma'aseh Eifod (finished about 1403), in the Responsa of Rabbi David ibn Abi Zimra (Radbaz) (written approximately 1500), in the book Mikneh Avram by Rabbi Abraham de Balmes (printed 1523), and in other places. The meaning of this quote is: names of inanimate, non-living objects may be used with masculine or feminine gender, as you wish. This sentence relies on the many exceptions in the Bible (as the exceptions cited by the Andalusian grammarians) and it is appropriate to the realities of medieval language, when Hebrew was not a spoken language and gender definitions were utterly useless. According to this approach, rules and exceptions do not exist in the Bible; rather, there are no rules. Gender is freely interchanged and its usage in the text is coincidental. For this reason, we called the approach "ungrammatical." Much has previously been written about attempts to identify the author of the sentence and his origin, as well as the manifestations of the approach in the Middle Ages. We will mention principally Y. Reifmann, 14 M. Wilensky, 15 Ν.

14 15

"Various Remarks." (Hebr.) Bel Talmud. 1, 1881, 188-189. "Studies in Language and Literature." (Hebr.) Jerusalem, 1978, 116-119.

Allony,16 and most recendy, E. Goldenberg. 17 Goldenberg endowed us with a comprehensive and precise ardcle which examines all her predecessors' opinions and introduces new sources, showing the evoludon of the method and of the sentence in medieval literature, with illustrative data. Thanks to these works, we are exempt from presenting the various opinions and examining them. For the sake of the discussion, however, we will note that Goldenberg thinks (coinciding with our own additional examinations and interpretations of Ibn Ezra's known works, in project Responsa and other computerized projects), 18 that this saying is neither Ibn Ezra's, nor found in other earlier Hebrew sources. Goldenberg provided an innovation when she found a parallel version to this sentence in an Arabic language grammar devoted especially to the language of Arabic poetry, written by a grammarian by the name of Elkazaz (who lived in Kairowan, 1029) who himself relied on earlier Arabic linguistic sources. It seems, then, that this understanding came from Arabic grammar and penetrated the Hebrew. As we said, however, we do not know who was the first Hebrew grammarian who formulated this sentence, that appears in the work of Radbaz and others grammarians from his time. As Reifman said before (but did not explain), Goldenberg expressed the thought that this epigram may have a basis in the discussion by Rabbi Yonah Ibn Janach of feminine gender nouns appearing in masculine and feminine forms. This epigram is connected to the aforementioned deliberation of Ibn Janach, who said that some nouns are not truly feminine, as translated: "In that which has no feminine essence" and also, "that which has no womb" (HaRikma, 39 (38), 385), and these appear in masculine gender as well. Actually, in our opinion (as in that of Wilensky—see 118, note 6), Ibn Janach did not intend to support the ungrammatical approach when he expressed these ideas, as Goldenberg thought {ibid, 194). Ibn Janach tried only to explain the nouns that had double gender (as sbemesh (sun), ruach (wind)—see Harikma, 385—386—-and explained away the double gender of these nouns by claiming that their feminine gender was immaterial. However, his words may have been taken out of context, and perhaps they are the seed that generated the ungrammatical approach found in later grammatical literature. Despite the fact that Ibn Ezra is not the author of the sentence, Goldenberg believes (ibid, 194-195) that it would have been compatible with Ibn Ezra, from the standpoint of both style and content. In this way, she explains the persistance ot the attribution of the sentence to him by various sources. At this point, we would like to join Wilensky (117) and to disagree with Goldenberg. We shall add evidence which supports Wilensky's opinions negating the possibility that Ibn Ezra held this view:

16

17

18

"Anything which has no breath of life, masculinize and feminize it—a Grammadcal Epigram Attributed to Ra'ba." (Hebr.) L'shonenu 16, 1948, 29-33. In her ardcle "Studies of Language and Correct Hebrew in the Middle Ages." (Hebr.) L'shonenu 54, 1990, 190-216. I wish to thank my friend, Dr. G. Birenbaum, w h o performed the search in the Hebrew Language Academy Resources at my request.

a) Ibn Ezra does not write of free interchange of gender définirions of nouns. On the contrary, he presents rules and exceptions in his writings. In his essays and in his interpretations of Ex 1, 4, he writes: "It is known that the tav is the usual mark of feminine gender, and the mem is the mark of masculine." b) The exceptions that Ibn Ezra illustrates are not those without breath of life. At least one example is provided by Ibn Ezra of a feminine gender noun with the breath of life: shegal—which is a feminine form without the mark hei or tav (Moyia'im, 33, 2). c) Ibn Ezra's considerable concern with problems of grammatical congruency proves that he believes in gender definition of the Biblical noun. When the definition does not coincide with the grammar of the sentence, he intervenes and "completes" phrases or words to define the gender properly as it is usually ascribed. So, for example, he interprets the word shabbat in the verse: olat shabbat b'shabbato (Num 28, 10): b'shabbato—"Everyone that keepeth the sabbath day from profaning it" (Isa 56, 6)—Ibn Ezra adds the word jom, attempting to avoid ascribing a double gender definition to the word shabbat (which is clearly feminine in form). 19 And furthermore, when he accepts double gender definitions in his interpretations (Goldenberg cites the following: ot (sign), shemen (oil), gan (garden), etc.), it does not mean he ignores the problem of incongruency. Only someone very disturbed by the gender exceptions would be willing to devote so much effort to "intervening" and attempting to resolve the problems of these troublesome verses. In short, until we discover which of the early grammarians of the Hebrew language is the source of the authentic sentence, we will not know who of the Hebrew grammarians declared the epigram. In any case, as my predecessors have shown, the roots of the method that these words represent will be found in Ibn Janach's work, although his intention is different. And, in my humble opinion, this method has no connection to Ibn Ezra.

Summary We have presented three approaches to the understanding of gender definition of Biblical nouns. Those in the mainstream, Dunash vs. Rav Sa'adia Gaon, Ibn Janach, Ibn Gikatilia and Ibn Ezra, laid the foundations for the conventional approach to scientific grammar utilized today—a grammatical system built upon the rule and its many exceptions. The great contribution of Ibn Ezra was his

19

In this solution (the composition-interpretive solution) he treats nt?pah (floor), sh'eitah (question) (which are clearly morphologically feminine in gender) and also yom (day), 'am (people) (which are definitely masculine gender morphologically), in the same fashion—see Charlap, L. 1995. Innovation and Tradition in Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra's Grammar according to his Grammatical Writings and to his Bible Exegesis. (Hebr.) Doctoral Thesis, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 286-287. Regarding his rejection of the interpretation o f Rabbi Sa'adia Gaon to the verse "Vaarvn HaE/okim mlkachJ' (ISam 4, 17), which suggests "completing" the word teivat (T^achot 35,2) (See above note 7; cited by Goldenberg, 195) —true, it is difficult to understand why he rejected Rabbi Sa'adia Gaon's interpretation in this case, when he himself utilizes it in his interpretations. However, this case is not enough to determine that he opposes the method of completion.

clarification of the principle that each noun has a gender definition (masculine, feminine or both genders) attributed to it by its appearance in the Biblical text. We have seen that Ibn Ezra rejected the second approach we discussed, the systemic-morphemic, and he cannot belong to the "ungrammatical" school. He does not designate noun gender on the basis of its suffix, and does not hold that there is free interchange. These approaches had some standing among medieval grammarians, and echoes of the third approach, the "ungrammatical," are even found in the writings of later grammarians and in literature relating to Jewish law almost until our time.20

20

As we found it in Chatam-Sofer Rtsponsa (the 19lh century), part 4, Even Haeçer, Siman mem.

SAADIA G A O N — A M A S T E R L I N G U I S T ARON DOTAN Tel-Aviv University, Israel Although he preceded all grammadcal activity in Hebrew, Saadia G a o n managed to prove outstanding originality, which still remains detached from the mainstream of the later grammatical development. His two main linguistic works are the Sefer ha-egron "Book of Collection" 1 and Kitáb fasīh lughat al- 'ibrāniyyīn "Book of Elegance of the Language of the Hebrews." 2 From some other works too his linguistic theories can be gleaned, namely: Kitab al-sab'in lafga al-mufrada "Book of Seventy Isolated (Hapax) Words" 3 and his Arabic commentary of Sefer jesira "Book of Creation."•» Saadia's first linguistic work, the 'Egron, already has, in the Hebrew introduction, some important grammatical remarks (the division of the letters into functional groups, the ramification of the noun etc.). When he subsequendy translated the 'Egrvn into Arabic it became the first Hebrew bi-lingual lexicographical undertaking. T h e importance of Saadia's main grammatical work Kitāb fasīh lughat al'ibrāniyyīn cannot be exaggerated. Even in its fragmentary form it comprises a lengthy dissertation of Saadia's linguistic thought and practice. N o w published in a comprehensive critical edition, 5 it is the source of most of his grammatical theories. Today it is accepted as a self-evident phenomenon that Jews were initiators of language comparison, since the educated among them were polyglots, familiar with a minimum of three languages; they spoke Arabic as did any civilized person, and Hebrew and Aramaic fell to their lot as a private heritage. In this field, too, Saadia was the pioneer of language comparison, to be followed by Judah ben Quraysh, Dunash ben Labrat, Jonah Ibn Janāh and others. Saadia acquired from the Arabs the urge to write a grammatical description of Hebrew. He was completely familiar with the doctrines of language and with their grammatical tenets, both of practical grammar and of theoretical linguistic thinking, philosophy of language, and axiomatic questions concerning the origin of the language. 1

2

3

4

5

Allony, N. 1969. Ha 'Egron—Kitāb 'usūl al-shìr al-ibrāni by Rav Se'adya Ga'on. Jerusalem: The Israel Academy o f Sciences and Humanities. Dotan, A. 1977. The Dawn of Hebrew Linguistics—The Book of Elegance of the Language of the Hebrews by Saadia Gaon. (Hebr.). Vol. I: Introduction; Vol. II: Critical Edition, Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies. Henceforth: Kitab Fasih. Allony, N. 1958. "‫כתאב אלסבעין ל פ ט ׳ ה ל ר ב סעדיה גאון‬." Ignace Goldqher Memorial. Volume 2, Jerusalem, Hebrew Section, 1-48. Lambert, M. 1891. Commentaire sur le Sefer Yesira ou lim de la création par te gaon Saadia de Fayyoum. Paris; Káfih, j. 1972. ‫ספר יצירה ] כ ת א ב אלמבאדי[ עם פירוש הגאון רבנו סעדיה‬. Jerusalem. See note 2.

He saw the Hebrew language in the broad context of human language in general, even more than merely in the context of the languages with which he compared it direcdy. So, beyond language comparison Saadia took an addidonal step, in that he perceived not only the elements common to the languages he compared, but also linguistic universality. He ascribed certain properties to all human language that were common to the languages he compared, and made inferences from these findings about the universality of language. He was not only the first but practically the only Hebrew grammarian to do so. His desire to uncover the elements common to all languages and to examine the special mechanism of language as man's vehicle of expression, is evident at the outset of the discussion each time that Saadia treats a fresh grammatical subject. This is the case in the Hebrew introduction to Sefer ba-'egronb and in his Arabic commentary of Seferjesira,1 and also in the opening of some chapters of his Kitāb Fasib. For example, in the beginning of the third chapter he introduces the five principles that are fundamental to every language.8 One of these principles is the division of words into three categories: nouns, verbs, particles—a division originating in the thought of ancient Greece, and a basic precept of Arabic grammar. In the beginning of the fifth chapter he deals with the universal question of the definition of the various types of the syllable9—clearly a matter of general linguistics, and relevant to languages in general. In this endeavour, Saadia went beyond the conceptual framework of his Arab teachers and, in so doing, laid the foundations for the first steps of general linguistics. The question concerning the correspondence of the word to the idea signified had been transferred from Greek philosophy to Islamic scholarship. The ancient disputes, which had died down after more than a millenium (from the time of Plato and Aristotle in the fifth and forth centuries B.C.E.), recurred in full force in the ninth century C.E., and occupied an important place in the world of Arabic science, among scholars of language and among theologians and philosophers. Saadia dealt with the same questions. In two places in his linguistic work Kitāb Fasib he raises the question of the origin of the language.10 He disputes the view that the nouns (names of substantives) are determined by nature, and reveals his firm opinion that they were determined by convention (‫ )אצטלאח‬among people. The speakers of the language have received language forms as they are, and not as a matter of choice. Indeed, the choice (‫ )אלתיאר‬lay in the hands of the "institutor of the language" (‫)ואצ!ע אללגה‬. This concept, which, to the most Moslems, refers to Almighty God, for Saadia is certainly not a deity, but an 6 7 8 9 10

Ha- 'Egron (above note 1), 156-161. J. Kāf1h (above note 4), 74-75. Kitāb Fasib (above note 2), 338-339. Ibid., 442-445. Dotan, A. 1996. ".‫ "רב סעדיה גאון על ה ת ה ו ו ת הלשון‬Tarbi^ 6 5 , 2 3 7 - 2 4 9 .

anonymous being (a man or a group of men) from the time of the origin of the language. It was the "institutor of the language" who chose the names for objects in an arbitrary manner, about which consensus among people was achieved, and this consensus was transmitted from generation to generation. Tradition preserves the purity of the language. From here it is a natural progression to the concept of the arbitrariness of the linguistic sign, although of course we should not expect to find actual Saussurean terminology of this nature in his writing. The name is not, therefore, an inevitable outcome of the meaning of the object, for if the meaning of the object were to demand a specific name, there could be no difference between the languages of mankind, nor could an object be called by different names in different languages. Since every object has a different name in each language, there is proof that the names are not determined by any intrinsic meaning of the physical object, but are rather the result of consensus among people, and in every language a different name was agreed upon. Islamic scholars were interested mainly in the Arabic language and adhered to the Koran, whereas the writings of Saadia are formulated as generalizations and they apply to all languages, or to human language in general, and not to the Hebrew language in particular, although he saw in Hebrew the first language. In this oudook, he goes further and to a greater depth than the Arab school of ‫ אצטלאח‬which was bound by the dogmas of Islam. Since he was not limited by the shackles of Islamic religious beliefs he could follow paths which Arab scholars could not. With the help of the notion of tradition (‫)אנתקאל‬, Saadia redeemed the nodon of the convention in language from the realm of the present and enhanced it with the splendour of the ancient times, in order to preserve the language from possible harm and anarchy at the hands of its speakers. In the common description of the development of Hebrew linguistic thought in the middle ages, it is customary to belitde all that preceded Judah Hayyûj as beginners' endeavours, and regard all preceding grammarians as forerunners that announced the appearance of grammar. Hayyûj is considered as the one who established the foundations of "scientific" grammar, and he is the source and the origin of everything grammatical that developed since, even to the present day. This attitude should be re-examined, now that Saadia's grammatical work has become known to scholars. It becomes evident that Saadia's work was not an act of probing in hesitation and uncertainty, but that he was an independent thinker. In many respects Saadia has a completely independent approach which has not been continued by those who came after him, perhaps because these ideas, as all of Saadia's grammatical works, were not known to them. The concept of the root can serve as a good example. At the heart of this morphological discussion, Saadia chose to place a concrete concept, an existing entity, phonetically realizable, unlike the common abstract concept of the "root." 11 He borrowed the Arab concept ‫" אצל‬root," ground form of a word, a 11

Kitâb Fafih, 127-132.

definite structure of consonants and vowels as it practically exists, evidendy in the form of a noun, without being augmented by all kinds of affixes. This is the original concept common among the early Arab grammarians and lexicographers, as al-Khalll and Sibawayhi. Since "root" has a different connotation in modern grammatical use, the term "base" will be used in what follows, to translate the term asl, as well as all its Saadianic synonyms as ‫טביעה‬, ‫טבע‬, ‫דאת‬ ‫גוהר‬, ‫ענצר‬, ‫אס‬, (dätjawhar, ‫י‬unsur; 'uss, tabi'a, tab'). According to Saadia,12 the "base" is the minimal nominal unit serving as basis for derivation. In Hebrew this is not necessarily the masdar (infinitive), which is considered as such by the Arabs (especially by the Basran school), but any nominal form expressing action. Thus the ‫ אצל‬can denote regular infinitives or verbal nouns like ‫" נשיאה‬carrying," ‫" נתיקה‬disconnecting," it can also denote a type of nometi acüonis in a wider sense, as the substantives ‫" אמר‬utterance," ‫חפץ‬ "wish," ‫" חשק‬desire." All other forms are derived from the "base" by affixation, namely, forms of plural, construct and inflections, and the whole verbal system. The derived forms are ‫" ערץ‬accident" or ‫" פרע‬branch." The "base" may also alternate morphologically in other ways without changing meaning, by analogy, augmentation or contraction. Thus Saadia abstained from abstract entities and adhered to essentially extant forms as base form for grammatical treatment. Another demonstrative example would be Saadia's broad concept of affixadon. In his division of the twenty-two letters into eleven "radicals" and eleven "serviles," the "radicals" may occur as components of "bases" alone, the "serviles" may occur in this function, as well as affixes. This idea, with minor variadons in detail regarding the number of letters in each group, is maintained in the middle ages by Saadia's successors. What remains unique to Saadia and has no continuation after him, is his approach to the "servile letters." He did not distinguish between what we name derivational affixes and prefixes particles. When discussing the function of ‫זואיד‬ "appendages" he speaks about them together, as for example in describing the functions of the letter he which carries four functions: 1) definite article, 2) interrogative particle, 3) infinitive prefix (in nif'al and hif'il conjugations), 4) causative verbal prefix (in hif'il conjugations). Or, for example, the letter mem having two functions: 1) preposition, 2) participle prefix (in all conjugations except qat). This grouping of the letters made it possible or perhaps necessary for Saadia to describe the ramification of the "base" accordingly. This ramification of the "base" into derived forms, is not merely the result of the common morphological changes (turning into: plural, construct and inflexions, verb by involving tense), but is also achieved by annexing particles, such as prefixed prepositions, definite article etc. The terms ‫ ערץ‬and ‫ פרע‬therefore denote not only forms derived morphologically from the "base," as ‫ד ב רך‬, but also "base" forms with prefixed particles, as ‫ ב ד ב ר‬. Saadia, in principle, makes no distinction between the two types; they are both considered ramifications of equal level. He only marks a structural differentiating point between the two: affixes that change the shape, the vowel theme, of the "base" ( ‫ ) ד ב י ל‬and those that do not (‫)בדבר‬. 12

Ibid., 132-134.

The former are the inflexional affixes, morphological derivations, while the latter are the prefixed pardcles. New forms, ramifications of the "base," emerge, but they in turn may serve as the "base" for further ramifications. Thus the "base" ‫" דרך‬way" has the plural ramification ‫דרכים‬, which in turn is the "base" of its construct ‫ דרכי‬,and this is the "base" of the inflected ‫" דרכיך‬your ways." In all these cases Saadia uses the same term ‫אצל‬, which therefore is a relative concept. ‫ אצל‬is certainly the first "base," but it denotes also each stage of ramification which is the origin of the next stage. This approach of pursuing the "base" along its progressing ramifications gave Saadia the option of analysis in the opposite direction, from fully developed forms into their smallest components. 13 Thus he analyses a complex form in search of its "base": ‫" והמתנשא‬and the exalted piterally: the one who exalts himself]" (1 Chr.29:ll) is analysed into the "base" ‫ שא‬and the ramification -‫והמתג‬. The latter in turn falls apart into its components: ‫ ו‬conjunction, ‫ ה‬définite article, ‫ ת‬reflexive [‫]ללאצטראר‬, ‫ מ‬nominal [‫( ]ללאסם‬participle), ‫ נ‬omitted on affixation of preformatives. 14 It should be noted that he terms p v the whole augmented form ‫והמתנשא‬, and also the augmented part alone (‫ )והמתנ־‬is so termed. Similarly he analyses forms like ‫( וכתועבותיהן‬Ez. 16:47), ‫וממועצותיהם‬ (Prv. 1:31), where the ‫ ערץ‬is ‫תיהם‬- ,‫תיהן‬- (respectively), which, after neglecting the obvious particles ‫ ומ־‬,‫וכי‬, leaves the "base" (‫ )גוהר‬to either ,-‫ תועב‬-‫מועצ‬, or the consonantal skeleton ‫ מעצ‬,‫( תעב‬respectively). Saadia's linguistic work, in a mysterious way not yet satisfactorily explained, was hidden from the subsequent generations. It is inconceivable what shape Hebrew grammar would have taken if Saadia's "base" concept had gained control, what turn Hebrew grammar would have taken had Hayyûj and Jonah Ibn Janāh seen Saadia's grammar and how this would have affected the norms of Hebrew grammar that have crystallised since.

13 14

Ibid., 528-531. As, e.g., in ‫י^א‬.

LA TRADUCTION DU C O R A N EN H É B R E U P A R J . R I VELINE ( R E M A R Q U E S S U R LA F O R M E ET L E C O N T E N U ) MOHAMED ELMEDLAOUI Université de Oujda, Maroc

Introduction1 A moins de s'inspirer de l'approche dite "exégétique critique,"2 la traduction d'un texte conçu comme révélé, ne saurait être qu'une manifestation particulière d'une pratique herméneutique. Une telle manifestation se situe nécessairement sur un point donné de la gamme des degrés d'interprétations conçus dans la théorie herméneutique développée d'abord au sein de la pensée judaïque qui encode ces degrés sous le sigle kabbalistique "Pardes" (Cohen 1987: xxxvi), et adaptée par la suite, par les deux autres traditions herméneutiques du Christianisme et de l'Islam.3 Un fait significatif, au sujet de l'interconnexion entre exégèse et traduction est fourni par le lexique de la langue hébraïque, à laquelle le Judaïsme, fondement de toutes les Écritures Monothéistes, est inextricablement lié de fait si ce n'est par le dogme.4 Il s'agit de l'ambiguïté lexicale du verbe tirgem. Ayant à l'origine le sens de "traduire" (Chomsky 1957: 142-143), ce vocable finit par devenir ambigu, pouvant dire, selon le contexte, "traduire" et/ou "faire un commentaire exégétique." Ainsi le premier corps de commentaires canoniques compilés autour du T N K fut rédigé en Araméen et connu depuis sous le titre de Targum, un nominal dérivé du verbe tirgem et qui veut dire soit "traduction" soit "commentaire exégétique." C'est à partir de cette interconnexion entre "traducdon" et "interprétation," attestée de fait, mais aussi théoriquement défendable, que le présent travail pose un certain nombre de questions et fait un ensemble

1

2

3 4

Une première ébauche en Arabe de ce travail fut présentée au colloque «nadwatu tarjamati ma&aaniy 1qur?aani lkariym» (Fac. Lettres, Tétouan 17-19 avr. 1998). J'exprime Mes remerciements au Prof. A. Saenz-Badillos pour son aide en documentation et pour m'avoir invité au 6 e Congrès de l'EAJS, ainsi qu'aux Profs. Avihai Shivtiel, Shlomo Morag et Aron Dotan, qui m'ont permis de combler beaucoup de lacunes dans ma documentation. Je remercie également mon collègue Abelali Sabia d'avoir bien voulu réviser le texte du présent travail. Les transcriptions employées sont: / ? / coup de glotte, h et / & ( e ^ / pharyngales, sourde et voisée; / X / / R / uvulaires, sourde et voisée; / $ / / j / postalvéolaires; les emphatiques en majuscule; les interdentales soulignées; / @ / schwa. HB(Hébreu Biblique); !*NK(Tanakh); A.C0r.(Arabe coranique). Cette approche (ν. un historique dans Gilbert 1997: 29) a fini par faire appel non seulement aux principes de la philosophie rationnelle mais aussi à ceux des sciences humaines. Pour ce qui est du Christianisme, v. Gilbert 1997: 2; pour l'Islam, v. Blachère 1973:81-89. Voir W. Chomsky 1957; voir aussi (i) l'association nation-langue, fréquente dans le T N K et la Haggadah, (ii) les anges, sensés ne comprendre que l'Hébreu (v. Cohen 1987: 49, Lehnardt 1988) et (iii) l'épisode de Pierre à Joppé (Actes 10: 44—11: 1-30).

de remarques à propos de la traduction du Coran en Hébreu par Joseph Y. Riveline, traduction ayant pour titre Alq0rìaan (4e édition, Devir, Israël, 1987). Cette traduction a été faite dans un Hébreu manifestement Biblique comme nous le verrons. Et puisque le lexique de l'HB, ses tournures syntaxiques et ses locutions idiomatiques sont loin d'être neutres vis-à-vis des concepts et significations coraniques, le deuxième point considéré d'où partent les questions et les remarques du présent travail est l'impact éventuel sur la teneur et la forme du produit final de traduction, que peut avoir l'arrière plan du monde signifiant de la langue-interprète, ici l'HB considéré comme un système particulier qui structure d'une façon particulière l'espace "pile-et-face" universel du signifiant-signifié (v. sec. 4).

Résumé Le présent travail, qui n'a examiné en fait que certaines grandes premières "parashahs" (chapitres) d'AlqorPaan, consiste en les points a, b, c, qui suivent. a) Constatations générales: (i) la traduction a été faite dans un style hautement marqué comme style Tanakhique (v. sec 3.1), et (ii) le produit de la traduction reste inégalable de par son degré d'adéquation, comparé aux autres traductions dans d'autres langues (v. sec 3.2). b) Inférences et conclusions générales: premièrement, en plus du talent personnel du traducteur, la haute qualité de la traduction est due, d'une part au rapport typologique et génétique étroit entre les deux langues impliquées, et d'autre part à l'unité phylogénétique des deux systèmes sémiotiques de l'espace culturel que ces deux langues co-articulent et co-structurent, à savoir ce que le traducteur désigne dans son introduction comme haaroah ha$$amiit, i.e. "l'esprit sémite;" deuxièmement, il se dégage du corps de la traduction ainsi que des commentaires donnés en notes que l'exégèse critique moderne (v. note 2) constitue l'arrière plan épistémologico-théorique de l'attitude du traducteur vis-à-vis du Texte Coranique (v. sec 4). S'agissant du Texte Biblique en particulier, Gilbert 1997: 29 précise que "l'exégèse critique ouvrait une nouvelle époque en prenant le texte biblique d'abord pour ce qu'il est dans sa matérialité littérale, puis en l'intégrant à une histoire qui l'a produit et porté jusqu'à ses ultimes rédactions. 5 Pour cela cette forme d'exégèse aurait recours à tout ce que les autres sciences et arts pourraient apporter à sa compréhension." 6 C'est sans doute dans cette perspective anthropologisante et historicisante que, pour souligner la valeur du Coran, le traducteur précise dans son introduction que "de ses profondeurs, se dégage l'écho de cette aspiration vers l'Un, le Sublime et le Très-Haut, qui est commune à tous ceux qui professent le monothéisme depuis pa nuit] des temps. L'esprit de la Loi, aussi bien que sa lettre nous [y] rappellent également l'esprit et la lettre de la loi sémite, qui ont trouvé dans le Coran leur [pleine] expression, dans un style sémite authentique" [je traduis de l'Hébreu]. Une des manifestations majeures de cette attitude épistémologique est le postulat, implicite chez le traduc-

A comparer avec la dimension ?asbaabu nnu^uwt "les circonstances de la révéladon" dans la théorie exégédque musulmane (v. Arkoun 1970: 36). Pour un projet similaire en ce qui concerne l'exégèse coranique, v. Arkoun 1970.

teur, qu'il existe une sorte d'intertextualité entre le Coran et le TNK, du coup, le T N K se trouve considéré, implicitement également, comme arrière plan référentiel du texte Coranique à traduire. 7 c) Remarque générale: l'adoption par le traducteur de l'HB et le fait de considérer le T N K comme arrière-plan référentiel immédiat, contribuent beaucoup à l'adéquation de la traduction, notamment en plaçant la traduction AlqorPaan sur un registre équivalant à celui du texte d'origine. Cette mise sur un registre tanakhique est génératrice de beaucoup de valeurs de substance, de forme et d'égard particulier, que confère le Lashoon Qode$. Elle permet le transvasement de beaucoup de valeurs lexicales, stylistiques et prosodiques, qui caractérisent l'A.Cor (sec. 3.2.1). Il n'y a en fait que l'HB qui puisse transférer le maximum de cet ensemble de valeurs qui caractérisent le Texte Coranique. Ce-ci est dû aux rapports spéciaux qui relient les deux langues d'une part, ainsi qu'aux rapports étroits qui existent entre le Coran et le T N K d'autre part. Mais, d'un autre côté, cette même stratégie étymologico-référentielle produit parfois des effets pervers de signification, quand on l'adopte systématiquement. A cause des impératifs d'espace, ce dernier aspect ne sera pas développé ici.

Développement Du style tanakhique d'Alqor?aan Les traits Tanakhiques d'AlqorPaan peuvent être classés en deux catégories: (i) l'emploi dans la traduction d'éléments lexicaux, morpho-syntaxiques et idiomatiques propres aux textes du T N K , et (ii) des choix particuliers, opérés entre des synonymes offerts par le lexique de 1ΉΒ lui même, et dictés par le seul souci d'activer le registre tanakhique et de maximiser le rapport d'intertextualité dans sa lettre même. Du premier ordre relève l'emploi des éléments de 3.1.1., cités à titre d'illustration non exhaustive: Eléments lexicaux tanakhiques dans Alq0r?aan: Le relatif ou complétiviseur ?@$er (au lieu de Se); les pronoms toniques hemmaa "eux" et ?@nooXii "moi;" les modaux assertifs hen et hinnee (équivalant de l'A.Cor ?inna, selon Gesenius, v. F. Brown); le modal confirmatif ?omnam "décidément" (supplanté en Héb. Moderne par mammaS); le Vav Conversif, la déclinaison au destinatif (ex: miSrayimaa "vers l'Egypte"); des expressions idiomatiques comme ko ?amar, etc. Les passages abondent où le Coran souligne explicitement cette intertextualité: «Cet enseignement figure certes dans les Premiers Rouleaux, ceux d'Abraham et de Moïse» S87:18—19. Les phrases à tête «wa ?isi...» ("et lorsque ..."), qui abondent dans les grandes sourates faisant état des Fils d'Israël, notamment S2, sont autant de références implicites à la Bible. Pourtant, comme je l'ai souligné ailleurs (Elmedlaoui 1997), à part le précédent d'AssamawPal 1989 (v. biog. dans Khalil 1980), la pensée musulmane n'a pas développé de véritable science cridque des Ecritures: Ibnu-Hazm, par exemple, a écrit son fiSal en religion comparée sans connaissance de l'Hébreu (v. &abbaas 1981: 15), comme il écrit son émodf épître de controverse contre Ibn Nagrella (v. texte in &abbaas 1981: 41-70, v. aussi Saenz-Badillos & Targarona 1988 xi-xiii) sans même avoir lu l'œuvre de son antagoniste, comme il l'avoue lui-même (Ibnu-Hazm 1975: 42—43). Cette atdtude de la pensée musulmane se traduit encore de nos jours par l'absence de tout intérêt pour les Rouleaux de la Mer Morte, par exemple.

Dans ce qui suit, une série d'exemples qui illustrent certains emplois de cette première catégorie d'éléments. Les chapitres d , Alq0r?aan seront numérotés P: 'n' (Parashah N°), et ceux qui leur correspondent dans le Texte Coranique d'origine seront numérotés en S: 'n' (Sourate N ° ). (1) P2: 44 "b@nii yisraPel, zixruu et hattov ?@$er &asiitii itt@Xem va ?@$er hifleetii Pet@xem mikkol haa?adam." (2) P2: 4 "Pellee hemmaa @$er y@?u$5@ruu b@dereX P@loheehem v@?ellee hemmaa hammaSlihiim." (3) P2: 27 "ube?@mor P@loheeXa 1amma1?aXiim hinnee ?@noXii sam baa?areS miSnee Iii, vayoom@ruu h@tasiim bah et ?@Ser yaSbiit &aleehaa v@$afaX dam (nb. le vav conversif)." (4) P2: 96 "omnam dmSa?em d@vaqim bahayiim mikkol haa?adam" ("wa latajadí7wwhumuw PahraSa nnaasi &alaa hayaat" S2: 96). (5) P2: 58 "l@Xuu rtduu m1Sra1m<™ um@Satem |am et ?@$er $@?eltem." (6) P2 66: "ko Pamar, parah P@$er (...) ein mom bah." (v. TNK "$@moot: 11: 4 wayyomer mo$e ko Ìamar YHVH"). Voici maintenant certains exemples qui illustrent des choix lexicaux opérés à l'intérieur de l'HB lui même.

Choix lexicaux internes à l'HB Îorah mcySoriim; naahab au lieu de nahal. (7) PI: 5 "n@heenuu b@?orah meySoriim. " (8) TNK t@hillim 27: 11 "(...) un@heenii b@?orah meySor. " heqiim et meqqerev au lieu de $alah. et de mittooX. (9) P9: 129 "hinnee baa P@liiXem $aliah miqqerb@Xem. " (10) P62: 2 "huu @$cr heqiim bein haaPummoot $aliah miqqerbam. " (11) TNK d@variim: 18: 18: "navii ?aqiim lahem miqqerev P@heehem kamooxa, v@natatri d@varay b@fiyv, udibber P@lohiim et kol P@Sawenu." Remarques sur heeqiim et miqqerev: a) Le traducteur avait, en principe le choix dans (10) entre Saalah et heeqiim, comme il a bien souligné cela en note, mais le précédent tanakhique (11) fait que c'est heeqiim qui assure le plus haut degré d'intertextualité circonstanciée avec le réfèrent tanakhique présumé. b) Le traducteur avait également le choix dans (9) et (10) entre mibbeyn, mittooX et miqqerev, mais c'est le dernier qui entretient avec (11) le plus haut degré d'intertextualité basée sur la similarité circonstancielle: l'annonce d'un prophète. Les exemples (12)-(15) montrent que s'il n'y avait pas de souci d'intertextualité circonstanciée, un des vocables, mibbeyn ou mittooX, aurait bien pu servir. (12) TNK (13) TNK (14) TNK (15) TNK

b@ree$iit 49: 10 "(...) mibbein raglav." t@hilliim 104: 12 "(...) mibbein &@faa?iim." Jemoot 11: 4: "P@nii yooSee b@/00X miSrayim." y@huu$ua& 8: 9 "(...) b@toox haa&am."

c) Une autre manière de supposer une intertextualité entre (9)-(10) d'une part et (11) de l'autre, d'un point de vue certes différent, est celle de certains théologiens musulmans dont Assamaw?a1 Almaghribii (v. Khalil 1980 pour des éléments de biographie), qui produisent le verset (11) justement comme preuve de l'annonce du prophète Mohammad dans la Bible, puisque, trouvent-ils, les fils d'Ismaël, d'où descend Mohammad, sont des frères-cousins des fils d'Isaq. miSrayima ("Egypte," décliné au destinatif) (16) S2: 58 "l@Xuu rtduu miSrayimaa umSatem $am et ?@$er $@?eltem." (17) TNK b@ree$iit: 12: 10 " vajyeered Pavraham miSraymaa." (v. Folmer 1998 au sujet de la rection au destinatif en HB). moom au lieu de p@gamou ki&uur (18) P2: 66 "ko iamar, parah ?@$er (...) ein mom bah." (19) TNK Bammidbar: 19: 2 "Parah P@dummah ?@fer ein-bah mom." N'y eût-il pas le même souci de maximiser l'esprit et la lettre d'une intertextualité circonstanciée, le traducteur aurait bien pu employer p@gam "défaut" ou ki&uur "laideur" à la place de moom dans le verset (18) pour spécifier la génisse (v. N o m b r e 19: 2). naaSal au lieu de bestir (20) P20: 12 "moSe, P@nooXii PeloheiXa, Sa/&atta n@&al«Xe, ki ba&emeq hamqoddaS b@Tova h'mneeXä" (nb. la rime). (21) TNK Sh@moot: 2: 5 "Sa/ n@&caleiXa mee&al tagleiXa, ki hammaqom P@$er Patta &oomed &alav ad@mat qodeS huu." De l'aspect graphique Un autre aspect de mise sur registre, qui ne doit pas échapper à l'observation, est le côté graphique de ponctuation et de numérotation. A l'instar du Texte Tanakhique, les fins de versets d , Alq0r?aan sont marquées par deux points en colonne / : / , e t la numérotation y est faite en valeurs non profane de la guématria, tout en évitant, pour les nombres 15 et 16, les combinaisons qui interfèrent avec le tétragramme YHVH. De l'adéquation

générale de la

traduction

Grâce à la parenté entre l'A.Cor et l'HB d'une part, et à la communauté socioculturelle des concepts fondateurs qui sous-tendent le T N K et le Coran d'autre part, ces deux atouts étant en plus combinés au talent personnel de Riveline, traducteur affirmé et bien au fait de son domaine, AlqorPaan se révèle être d'une adéquation inégalable comme traduction. Deux ensembles d'exemples nous paraissent suffire pour donner une idée du degré d'adéquation atteint. De l'adéquation de la forme A part la traduction de Rivelaine, on a systématiquement tendance à mettre sous le boisseau le fait, que nul spécialiste n'ignore pourtant, que l'un des traits qui distinguent et singularisent le Texte Coranique, et sur lequel est fondé en grande

partie son défi littéraire d'inimitabilité miraculeuse ditc?i&jaa5* réside notamment dans sa teneur formelle (assonance, rime (surtout [iin] [iim] [uun], rythme, andthèse etc. v. Blachère 1973: 33-34,38,71-72; 1991: 169) à telle enseigne que la Révélation a dû contredire les détracteurs du Prophète, qui prenaient ce Coran pour de la poésie (v. Blachère 1973: 71), genre littéraire le plus influent culturellement à l'époque (S69: 41 " E t ce ne sont point des vaticinations d'un poète," S36: 69 "Nous ne lui avons point enseigné de la poésie; cela ne lui sied pas"). Cette tendance générale en traduction, qu'on peut qualifier de "substantialiste" prend implicitement pour acquis que cet aspect majeur du Texte Coranique est, d'une manière absolue, hors du domaine de l'action du traducteur. Pourtant, l'HB se prêtant à cela (v. Del Barco 1998, Kucherenko 1998 et Seijas 1998), Riveline a su explorer les possibilités prosodiques et rythmiques de cette langue, et il les a magistralement mobilisées pour dégager des valeurs de forme, équivalant à ceux du Texte Coranique d'origine. Prenons comme exemple la sourate "SI," la première du Mushaf (le Codex Coranique). Cette sourate s'appuie prosodiquement sur une rime clausulaire en [...iim]/[...iin], et en compte six occurrences (sur la rime coranique, v. Blachère 1991: 173). AlqorPaan en reproduit exactement six, qui alternent très précisément entre [...iim] et [...iin], et je présume que c'est pour dégager cette valeur phonique que le traducteur a préféré "Porah mey$ori/<w" à "Porah meySoj*' dans le 5e verset (v. les exemples (7)-(8) ci-dessus). Un autre exemple, tiré de la sourate "Taa-haa," en plein milieu du Mushaf cette fois; c'est l'exemple (18) reproduit ci-dessous en (22). (22) P20: 12 "moSe, P@nooXii PelohwXtf, $al &atta n@&aleiXa, ki ba&emeq hamqoddaS b@Tova hinneeXa." E n fait, la rime clausulaire [...eeXa], déjà présente en deux occurrences dans le Texte Tanakhique correspondant (v.(19)), et que le traducteur s'est évertué de dégager en trois occurrences, notamment en postposant l'élément hinn eeXa, est une compensation à une rime forte en [...aa], qui marque tellement les clausules de la sourate "Taa-haa" (S20) que celle-ci est devenue, avec la sourate "Yaa-siin" (S36) dont la rime est en [iin]/[iim], le texte standard des psalmodies coraniques en choeur au Maghreb au moins. Il est claire que c'est par souci de dégager ce genre de valeurs phonico-rythmiques par des moyens stylistiques proprement tanakhiques, que le traducteur procède parfois à certaines transformations pour obtenir ces structures imageen-miroir, qui caractérisent la poésie Biblique, et que Seijas (1998) appelle "paralelismo sintàctico.' Ce parallélisme prend la forme syntaxique 3 YZ et ZY 3 , où les deux occurrences de "Y" ou de " Z " peuvent éventuellement présenter une opposition aspectuelle s'il s'agit de verbes. C'est le cas par exemple de l'antéposition dont a fait l'objet la deuxième occurrence de rabbiim dans (24) cidessous qui est la traduction d'AlqorPaan pour (23). Ce parallélisme de l'HB, qui

C'est ce ?iújaa^ qui fut à l'origine de toute la rhétorique arabe (v. Blachère 1987: 73—74); ainsi le premier essai de rhétorique arabe fut celui d'Abou &ubayda Ma&maru Ibnu lmutannaa «?i&jaazu lqorPaani fly naDmih» "le défi du Coran de par son (style) de composition" (v. Elmedlaoui 1981).

apparaît dès les premiers versets de la Genèse (v. 25) n'est d'ailleurs pas étranger à la stylistique coranique ( w . 26, 27). (23) S2: 26 "(...) yuD‫ש‬u bihi kaxiyran wa yahdiy bihi kaîiyran." (24) P2: 24 "(...) yat&ee boo rabbiim urabbiim yanhee boo." (25) TNK b@ree$iit 1: 3 "(...) vayyiqraa ?@lohiim laaioor yoom ulaf20SeX qaraa laylah." (26) S33: 26 "fariyqan taqtuluwna wa ta?siruwna fariyqan." (27) S2: 89 "fafariyqan kaddabtum wa fariyqan taqtuluwn." (cf. Matthieu t@yass@ruu").

23:

34

"umeehem

taharguu

wtiSl@vuu,

umeehem

De l'adéquation du contenu Pour ne pas aller trop loin, revenons sur la même sourate " S I , " dite Alfaatihah, dont l'adéquation de traduction vient d'être examinée en ce qui concerne la forme. Deux syntagmes nominaux de cette sourate suffisent pour donner une idée de la nature optimale de la traduction de Riveline au niveau du contenu. Il s'agit des syntagmes suivants de (28) et (29). (28) SI: 1 rabbi t&aalamiin => tr. Riv.ribboonhaa&olamiim (29) SI: 3 maalikiyawmi ddiin —> tr. Riv. ?@doonyoom haddiin Il n'y a qu'à passer en revue ce dont on dispose comme autres traductions du Coran, pour s'assurer qu'il n'y a que l'HB, qui dispose d'un fond lexical phonétiquement et sémantiquement approprié, qui soit à même de rendre de tels termes coraniques sans avoir à imposer des emplois ad-hoc aux termes du lexique, mais en exploitant plutôt toutes les connotations sémantiques qu'impliquent les réseaux dérivationels et les grilles de champs lexico-sémantiques que ces termes structurent. A titre d'exemple, le moment (temporel, eschatologique ou absolu?) dit yawmi ddiin dans le Coran, participe de par les rapports dérivationels et étymologiques encore fort transparents de sa racine Ödyn à tout un réseaux de valeurs connotationelles: il résume, à travers ces rapports, toutes les particularités communes à l'Islam de Médine et au Judaïsme des Temps Bibliques, à savoir ce que, dans son introduction au "Jerusalem" de Mendelssohn, Altmann (1986: 24) caractérise pour le Judaïsme, comme "a unique inimitable , theocracy'." Pour cet auteur, "the mosaic constitution is not an ecclesiastical power system but a politico-religious one, a theocracy in its purest, a civitas Dei (...) in which the element of power derives not from religion as such but from religion as wedded to the state, God being the Sovereign."‫י‬ Ci-après des spécimens de concrétisation linguistique du syncrétisme séculoreligieux dans la pensée islamique, à travers les dérivés de Odyn en A. Cor 10 qui 9

10

Pour E. Kant, le Judaïsme, qui, selon lui, est une Loi "posidve" et "hétéronome," ne peut déboucher que dans un système ecclésiasuque ou dans une organisadon polidque (v. Rotenstreich 1984: 4-5). Même si, ce syncrédsme a fini par être érigé en dogme (v. Arkoun 1970: 33) et parfois même en slogan (ex. afíislaamu diynun wa dawlah "l'Islam fait office de religion et d'État"), il n'en demeure pas moins qu'il consrituait une réalité concrète de l'Islam de Médine comme en témoignent les

tournent autour de "commercer," "contracter une dette," "entrer l'étendard d'un État," "adopter une religion," "rendre un jugement." (30) kamaa tadijnu tudaan

sous

(notion de jugement)

"de la même façon dont tu juges [les autres] tu seras jugé." (31) alkayyisu man daana nafsahu"

(jugement)

"Le pondéré est celui qui se juge soi-même." (32) dijnan qayyiman millata Ìibraahiyma haniyfan12 (33) "Pinna ddiyna &inda LLaahi lPislaam; " Cor. S3: 19

(religion) (religion)

L'inexistence d'une conception manichéiste entre séculaire et religieux en Islam s'est d'ailleurs concrétisée historiquement dans la période fondatrice de Médine, sous une forme anecdotique très significative: une fois la cité arabique qui portait le n o m de Yathrib devenue le bastion-citadelle et la métropole du nouvel État émergeant, greffé sur la nouvelle religion de l'Islam après l'exode de l'Hégire, autrement dit: une fois cette cité devenue une véritable àvitas Dei (selon les termes d'Altmann), son nom devient madijnah (Médine), un dérivé de lieu à partir de la racine Ödyn; c'est à dire, en fin de compte, l'espace géo-constitutionnel où se réalise l'État-Religion au quotidien (v. Blachère 1973: 56-62, 102110).13 L'existence à Yathrib=Médine d'une forte communauté judaïque avec laquelle le premier pacte du nouvel État-Religion fut passé grâce notamment aux affinités des principes fondateurs (v. Blachère 1973: 53), laisse à présumer une intense interférence de termes et de concepts religieux et constitutionnels entre les deux communautés de la nouvelle Cité,14 dont notamment le terme madijnah-, car c'est justement la racine Ödyn qui a généré m@dijnah "État" en Hébreu; et parce que, pour la pensé judéo-hébraïque également, l'interférence lexico-conceptuelle entre séculaire et religieux est totale: d'une part, l'Hébreu Ödyn a donné lieu aux vocables daan "rendre jugement," dajyan "juge," bejt-diyn "cour de justice," m@dijnah "État," etc; d'autre part, même le mot ?elohiym est lexicalement partagé entre un sens commun, "juge," et le N o m de l'Eternel 'Elohim,' qui alterne dans la Bible avec l'ineffable tetragramme, Y H V H , pour désigner "Pehyee P@$er Pehyee," qui est ainsi, selon la langue et selon le dogme, le Souverain Suprême de la Civitas Dei, autrement dit, le maalikijawmi ddijn du Coran, par-

11

12

indices coraniques même (pour l'idée que l'Islam est la religion la plus proche du Judaïsme alors que le bouddhisme est celle qui en est la plus distante, v. D. Bambeger 1987). Le "mu&addith," Attirmidy, explique que /haasaba nafsahu/ veut dire "juger son âme et lui demander des comptes" (Sifatu lqiyaamad wa rraqaa?iqi wa lwara&). Coran, S6: 161. N B «millata ?ibraahiym», "Confession d'Abraham," doit provenir étymologiquement de l'HB «mutât ?avraham» "la Circoncision d'Abraham," qui scella l'Alliance (v. Genèse 17: 11).

13

14

Une tradidon exégédque rapportée par Ibnu Abbaas au sujet du verset coranique S22: 11

fakement traduisible en HB sous forme deribboonjoom haddijn et effectivement ainsi traduit par Riveline. Enfin, c'est ce syncrétisme conceptuel qui a fait que le mot dat, emprunté en Exil au jargon adminstrativo-legislatif persan, où il signifiait simplement "loi," "édit" ou "décret" (v. F. Brown, Ödt), ait fini par signifier "religion" dans la pensée judaico-hébraïque, une fois ce dernier concept détaché et singularisé par comparaison externe, après la disparition de l'Etat et l'apparition de nouvelles confessions monothéistes. On voit donc clairement que les traductions de maaliki yawmi ddiyn, de l'ordre de "Souverain au jour de la rétribution" (Kasimirski 1970), "Souverain du Jour du Jugement" (Blachère 1980), "Rey del Dia de la Retribuciôn" (Melara Navio 1417: Hégire) ou encore "The Only Owner (and the Only Ruling Judge) of the Day of Recompense" (Al-Hilâli & Khân 1417: Hégire) sont des traductions muselantes et sans âme, pour le moins que l'on puisse dire.

Aspects de référence tanakhique Je donne dans cette section trois exemples pour illustrer la référence tanakhique de filigrane, qui sous-tend l'approche d'exégèse critique qui guide la traduction de l'auteur.

La Génisse Rouge comme référent Alors que le Texte Coranique (S2: 69) parle sans ambiguïté interne d'une vache jaune: 15 "baqaratun Safraa?u faaqi&un lawnuhaa," qualificatif qu'AlqorPaan (PI: 64) rend d'ailleurs avec fidélité: "paraah S@hubbah S@hubbah m@?od," la note 1 d'AlqorPaan (2), relative à la provenance de la dénomination de S2 (suwrat albaqarah) parle plutôt d'une vache rouge: "&al $em sippuur happarah ha?@dummah hannizkarah bah" "à cause de l'histoire de la vache rouge qui y a été citée." L'arrière-plan de cette note explicative, n'est certes que le Nombre 19: 2. Cette attitude référentielle a été réitérée au même sujet, et d'une façon encore plus explicite, dans la note 1 d'AlqorPaan (10), relative au verset PI: 67-68. Ayant l'esprit branché sur le Nombre: 19: 2 et le Deut: 21: 1-9, en tant que référents intertextuels (authentiques), le traducteur fait la remarque suivante en note: "ef$ar fennithallafah luu paaraalat parah P@dummah b@&eglah &ruppah" "il se peut qu'il ait confondu le passage sur la vache rouge avec celui de la génisse égorgée." Notons au passage le pronom il (qui?).

Le Chef des Échansons comme référent Le contexte cette fois est l'histoire de Joseph dans sa version coranique. Introduisant l'intervention de l'un des co-prisonniers de Joseph, le Texte Coranique évoque anonymement "celui qui a échappé d'entre eux" ("wa qaala lladhiy najaa minhumaa waddakara ba&da Pummah ..." SI2: 45), chose qu'AlqorPaan rend également avec fidélité ("wa-yyoomer haa?ehad miSSneehem, ?@$er niSSal vayyizkor Pah@ree z@man rav ..." P12: 45).16 Mais le traducteur a tenu à préciser, en 15

16

C'est à dire: abstraction faite des ambiguïtés propres à certaines zones de la gamme des couleurs dans le lexique de l'A.Cor (v. Shivdel 19?? et réf. notamment Fisher 1965). D u caractère évocatoire et allusif de la narradon coranique, v. Blachère 1973: 40,51.

toute assurance, dans une note à l'intention du lecteur, que le personnage en question est le sar bammaSqiim "le chef des échansons." Le référent intertextuel pris ici pour évident est la Genèse 41: 9 "vay@dabber sar hamaSqiim et par&o le?@mor et hat@?ay P@nii mazkiir hayyoom ...."

Potiphar comme référent Dans le contexte de la même l'histoire, le Coran évoque encore une fois anonymement "celui qui l'avait acheté en Egypte" ("wa-qaala lladbii Staraahu min miSra 1imra?atih ..." SI2: 21), chose que la traducteur rend sous forme de "wa-yyoomer qooneehuu meebammiSriim l@?1$$@tu ..." P12: 21. Pourtant, arrivé au verset coranique SI2: 29, qu'il traduit fidèlement ainsi "yoosef, sur mizzee, v@hitpall@lii kii yissalah l@haTTaatekh, kii hayiit min haahooT@?iim" P12: 29 ("O Joseph! détourne-toi de ce [méfait]; et [toi, femme!] repens-toi de ton péché! tu as été parmi les fautifs"), le traducteur met une note à propos de l'identité de la voix qui émet l'injonction: "div@ree ?@lohiim ?u div@ree poTiyfar ..." "propos de Dieu ou de Potiphar...." Le passage pris ici d'évidence comme référent intertextuel est certainement la Genèse 39: 1 "wa-yyiqneehuu poTiyfar (...) miyyad hayyi$ma&eliim" "et Potiphar, (...) l'acheta des Ismaélites."

Conclusion On voit ainsi que le degré de proximité typologico-génétique des langues impliquées dans une traduction, ainsi que le degré de proximité des concepts culturels de base impliqués, sont deux facteurs capitaux qui déterminent la qualité de la traduction d'un texte de la dimension des Saintes Écritures. Ce qui est significatif au sujet de ce dernier point est l'attitude générale des Sages du Judaïsme vis-à-vis des différents aspects de traductions/commentaires portant sur le T N K . Il a été signalé au début de ce travail que le premier corps de targumim portant sur le T N K (Onkelos, Yerushalmi, Targum Jonathan ben Uziel) avait été fait en Araméen, une langue sémitique plus proche encore de l'HB que l'A.Cor. Des traductions plus anciennes telles celle d'un F. Joseph (v. note 17) ou la Version Grecque dite "Septante," conçue également comme un targum (targum ba$$iv&iim), ont pourtant fait l'objet d'un vigoureux rejet. Citant Max L. Margolis, ancien éditeur de la traduction Biblique de la Jewish Publicadon Society, W. Chomsky (1957: 12) écrit à cet égard: "Our Sages likened the day on which the Bible was translated into Greek to the day when the Golden Calf was made, 'for the Torah does not lend itself to an adequate translation." La raison à cela, selon Chomsky toujours, a à voir avec le "génie propre" d'une langue: "A language cannot be taken as a sort of currency or medium of exchange" (Ibid.) "Words in one language cannot be rendered by their equivalents in another language (...) words are set in the orbit of the experience of the people employing thenT (Ibid)·, et W. Chomsky de conclure ainsi: "Indeed, some Jewish scholars maintained that the deviations of Christianity from Judaism may be directly traceable to the translations of the Bible into Greek." (Ibid. 10).17 17

On ne peut dans ce sens que relever l'esprit déjà "chrisdanisant" (mise en exergue notamment des dimensions "Père" et "Amour") et prosélyte du prologue fait par ce personnage hellénisé

Par contre, peut-être pour le même ordre de raisons qui ont jusdfié les targumim araméens, d'autres traductions / commentaires du T N K , comme celle d'un Saadia Gaon, faite en Arabe transcrit en alphabet hébraïque (v. Zafrani & Caquot 1989), n'a pas du tout fait l'objet d'un quelconque rejet. L'œuvre de Saadia a plutôt été l'objet d'une grande estime de la part d'autres sages tels que le fameux Abraham Ibn Ezra (v. Avishur 1990). Tout ceci est riche d'enseignements sur les potentialités particulières que l'HB et l'A.Cor. ont, pour communiquer entre eux et assurer la plus haute fidélité possible dans le transfert mutuel des valeurs de forme et de contenu de leurs œuvres respectives.

Références &abbaas, Pihsaan, (éd.). 1981. KasaaÌilu bni ba^min al-Îandalusiy. Tome III.. Al-mu?assah l&arabiyah liddiraasaati wa nna$r. Beyrout. Altmann, A. 1986. "Introduction." In Moses Mendelssohn 1783 (translation by Allan Arkush, 1986's ed ).Jerusalem, or on Religious Power and Judaism. Hanover and London: Brandeis University Press, 3-29. Assamaw?a1 Ibnu Yahyaa Ibnu &abbaas AlmaRribiy (mort 570 Hégire) badlu Imajhuwdfiy iifhaami fyabuwd. Edition: &abdulwahhaab Tawiyla. 1989. Daaru Lqalam (Damas), Addaaru $$aamiyah (Beyrout). Al-Hilâlî, Mohammad Taqî-ud-D1n and Mohammad Muhsin Khan (1417 Hégire) Translation of the meanings of the Noble Qur'an in the English Language·, King Fahd Complex for the printing of the Holy Qur'an, Madinah, K.S.A. Arkoun, M. 1970. "Comment lire le Coran." (Introduction à Kasimirski ), 11-36. Avishur, Y. 1990. "The Attitude of R. Avraham Ibn Ezra to the translation and commentary of R. Saadia Gaon." In Abraham ibn Εΐζτα and his age. Ed. F. Diaz Esteban. Madrid: Association Espanola de Orientalistas, 17-24. Bamberger, D. 1987.Judaism and the world's religions. Behrman House. Blachère, R. 1973. Le Coran‫׳‬, PUF, Que sais-je? N°1245. , 1980. Le Coran; traduction. Paris: Maisonneuve & La Rose. , 1991. Introduction au Coran; Paris: Maisonneuve & La Rose. Brown, F. éd. (non daté) Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford: Clärendon Press. Chomsky, W. 1957. (8th ed. 1986) Hebrew, the Eternal Language. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America. Cohen, A. 1887. (éd. 1975). Evryman's Talmud. New York: Schocken Books. Del Barco, J. 1998. "La accentuacion masorética en Amôs y su relaciôn con la division oracional y la estructura poética del texto." En Targarona Borrâs, J. ed. 1998, 8. Elmedlaoui, M. 1981. "Les études littéraires arabes entre la rhétorique traditionnelle et la poétique moderne." Bulletin de la Faculté des Lettres et des Sciences Humaines-Oujda, 1, 46-58. , 1997. "Alma&rufatu bilkutubi waSSuhufi 1?uw1aa maa bayna rra?yi wa-lbayyinah: namuwdaju tahqiyqi kitaabi ssamawPal almaghribiy." ms. Table-Ronde sur les langues et civilisations orientales, organisée à Marrakech (22-25 mai 1997) par la Fac. des Lettres de Rabat et la Fondation Konrad Adenauer. qu'est Flavius Joseph pour sa traduction Grecque d'une parue de la Bible. O n remarque également, comment il a essayé de justifier ce prosélytisme en le faisant remonter à Eléazar, qui n'avait pas hésité, selon lui, à faire traduire la Loi Mosaïque en Grec pour le compte de Ptolémé

II.

Flavius Josephus (mort 1er siècle) (trad. fr. Arnauld D'Andilly 1968) Histoire ancienne des juifs <& la guerre des Juifs contre les Romains-, Editions Lidis. Folmer M. 1998. "Variadon in the Linking of Verbs of Motion to their Directional Element in Classical Hebrew: A Preliminary Report." En Targarona Borrâs, J. ed. 1998, 29. Gilbert, P. 1998. "Le sens des Ecriture." Sciences et Avenir (Les secrets de la Bible) 113, Dec. 1997-Janv. 1998, 24-29. Hegel, G. W. F. (trad. fr. Kostas Papaioannou, 1965) La Raison dans l'Histoire. Librairie Pion, col. 3103183, N° 235. Ibnu Hazm (mort 548 Hégire). 1975. Al-fiSalu fiy Imilali wa l?ahwaa?i wa nnibali. Daaru lma&rifati liTTibaa&ti wa nna$r. Beyrout. Kasimirski (traducteur) 1970. Le Coran. Paris: Garnier-Flammarion. Khalil, I. 1980. "Quelques éléments de l'œuvre mathématique de As-samwal Almaghribi, mathématicien marocain d'origine juive du 12e siècle." In Juifs du Maroc, Actes du Colloque International sur la communauté juive marocaine: vie culturelle, histoire sociale et évolution (Paris 18-21 déc. 1978). Grenoble: Éd. La Pensée Sauvage, 83-84. Kucherenko, A. 1998. "Image Paradigms in Biblical Poetic Language." En Targarona Borrâs, J. ed. 1998, 10. Lehnardt Α. 1998. "Therefore they ordered to say it in Aramaic,' Some Remarks on Language and Style of the Kadish." En Targarona Borrâs, J. ed. 1998, 18-19 Melara Navio, A. (1471 Hégire) El Noble Corany su traduction comentario en Lengua Espanola. Complejo del Rey Fahd para la impresion del texto del Corân. Saudi Arabia. Riveline, J. 1987. Alqoriaan\ hadd@fiisah r@vii&iit. (Turgam mee&araviit &al yad-) Israel: D@vir. Rotenstreich, N. 1984. Jews and German Philosophy: the Polemics of Emancipation. New York: Schocken Books. Sàenz-Badillos, Α. et Targarona Borrâs, J. eds. 1988. Semu'el Ha-nagid: Poemas I Desde el campo de batalla, Granada 1038-1056. Cordoba: Ediciones El Almendro. Seijas de los Rios-Zarzosa, G. "Semántica y sintaxis del paralelismo en el libro de Isaias." En Targarona Borras, J. ed. 1998, 13-14. Shivtiel A. "The Semantic Field of Colours in Arabic" in Kinga Dévényi & Tamas Ivanyi eds. Proceedings of the Colloquium on Arabic Grammar, the Arabist Budapest Studies in Arabic 3-4, 335-339. Targarona Borrâs, J. ed. 1998. Abstracts of the European Association for Jewish Studies. 6th Congress, Toledo 19-25 July 1998. Madrid. Zafrani, H. et Caquot, A. 1989. La version arabe de la Bible de Sa'adia Gaon: l'Eccle'siaste et son commentaire "le livre de /'Ascèse. "Judaïsme en Terre d'Islam. Vol. 4. Paris: Maisonneuve & Larose.

E L PRIMER DIA DE LA CREACIÔN SEGÚN EL T S E N E - R E N E DE JACOB BEN ISAAC ASHKENAZI DE J A N O W JOAN FERRER Universidad d e Barcelona, Spain

Introducciôn: la lengua yidish Lucjan Dobroszycki y Barbara Kirshenblatt-Gimblett incluyen en un libro magnifico titulado Image Before My Eyes (Schocken Books-YIVO, New York 1977), que constituye una historia fotogrâfica de la vida judía en Polonia antes del Holocausto, una fotografia impresionante (página 84) que muestra a una anciana judía de Vilna leyendo una vieja ediciôn del Tsene-Rene que dene la mayoria de las páginas desencuadernadas y con los márgenes hechos anicos. Este libro consdtuye un viaje impresionante en busca del dempo perdido, ο mejor dicho, del dempo expoliado del mundo judio de Ashkenaz, la Europa Central y Oriental, que hablaba en lengua yidish. El yidish naciô entre los siglos IX-X en la region renana de la Lotaringia, y fue durante más de mil anos la principal lengua de comunicaciôn popular entre las comunidades judias de Europa Central y Oriental. La lengua yidish es, segûn la definition de Max Weinreich, una lengua de fusion (shmeltsshprakh) formada sobre una base que procédé de los dialectos germânicos de la region de la Lotaringia a la que se suman elementos de las lenguas românicas de la zona nororiental de Francia y de la region septentrional de Italia; otro de los componentes del yidish son las palabras que proceden de la lengua santa: el hebreo y arameo de la Biblia y el Talmud, de cuya lectura, meditaciôn y comentarios se nutre la fe judia, y finalmente, la lengua yidish recogerà elementos que proceden de las diversas lenguas eslavas. Este conjunto de componentes de carácter lingüisuco en conjunciôn con otros de orden social y cultural, como la voluntad de las comunidades judias medievales de separarse de sus vecinos crisdanos con el objetivo de poder vivir juntos para delimitar un espacio fisico y simbôhco donde poder orar, estudiar y vivir de acuerdo con los preceptos de la Torà, trajo como consecuencia la formaciôn de la lengua yidish, que antes de la Shoah era hablada por unos once millones de personas. El arïo 1948 esta cifra se habia reducido a unos cinco ο seis millones de personas. En la actuahdad, el numéro de personas que denen el yidish como lengua materna no debe superar los dos millones, y las perspectivas de futuro son lamentablemente muy pobres, a pesar de que el mundo universitario, tanto en Israel como en los Estados Unidos de América, manifiesta mucho interés por el estudio de la lengua y de sus riquisimas manifestaciones culturales.

La literatura yidish antigua Las manifestaciones literarias escritas en lengua yidish entre la Edad Media y el siglo XVIII, muy poco conocidas hasta la publication de los grandes estudios de H. Shmeruk, H. Turnianski, M. Erik y j . Baumgarten, aparecidos entre 1978 y 1993, eran consideradas como una literatura para las mujeres y los ignorantes, es decir, las personas que prácticamente no tem'an acceso a la literatura "culta" de la sociedad judia escrita en lengua hebrea. Hay que tener en cuenta, sin embargo, que la literatura escrita en yidish tuvo un factor decisivo en la configuration de la personalidad colecdva del mundo judio, ya que estaba destinada en primer lugar a las mujeres, las primeras educadoras de toda colecdvidad humana. El tesumonio más antiguo de la lengua yidish es una frase que se encuentra en el Mah^or de Worms del ano 1272 y es una bendiciôn dirigida a un judio sencillo, probablemente un hombre "ignorante," encargado de transportar el libro de oraciones desde la sinagoga a la casa del propietario, y dice: "El que lleve este Mah^or a la sinagoga será gradficado con un buen dia." Es un testimonio precioso del carácter de la literatura en lengua yidish: desdnada a personas que sabian leer pero que no podian comprender la lengua hebrea que se udlizaba en la liturgia sinagogal. Desde el siglo XIII, en que aparecen los primeros tesdmonios escritos, hasta el siglo XVII, en que se publica la primera edition del Tsene-Rene, aparecen en lengua yidish un conjunto de obras que tenian como finalidad la vulgarization de los textos de la tradition canônica con el objedvo de luchar contra la ignorancia de una gran parte de la sociedad judia que se manifestaba en un desconocimiento de las costumbres judias y en una relajaciôn de las prácdcas religiosas. El libro más antiguo conocido publicado en lengua yidish es el Mirkevet haMishneh ο Sefer shel Rabbi Anchel (Cracovia 1534) que es una concordancia bilingüe de los 24 libros de la Biblia escrita en loshn qoydesh (hebreo) y en loshn ashkena£ (yidish). La literatura popular escrita en yidish supone una vuelta al papel central de la Biblia en la vida religiosa judia en contraposition al papel central del Talmud en la formation judia de los rabinos. A partir de la Bibha la tradition literaria en yidish conocerà el desarrollo de cantos de gesta versificados inspirados en las historias de los libros de Samuel y Reyes como el Shmuel bukh de Moshe Esrim Vearba (Augsburgo 1544) y el Melokhim bukh (Augsburgo 1543). La literatura antigua en lengua yidish conoce diversas obras destinadas a las mujeres con la finalidad de inculcar los mandamientos que todas las mujeres judias tem'an que respetar relativas a la nidah (impureza ritual), halah (separation de una cantidad de masa de harina) y hadlakat ha-ner (encendido de las vêlas del sàbado). Entre los libros de prescripciones rituales en yidish destaca por su antigüedad el que lleva el dtulo de Seyder mitiçwes noshim, eyn shoen froyenbuchlein (Venecia 1552). Los libros de moral (Muser sforim) y de conducta (Minhogim sf0rìm) tem'an la finalidad de presentar modelos de vida ética según la tradition judia que afectaba a todo el ciclo de la vida (nacimiento, circuncisiôn, matrimonio, funerales, etc.). La literatura en lengua yidish nace con un objedvo educativo,

de un contexto religioso judio, y dene como desdnatario a un publico especialmente femenino.

La literatura homilética: el Tsene-Rene El Tseenah u-Reenah de Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi de Janow (primera edition: Hanaul622) es la obra culminante de la tradition popular judia en lengua yidish. Su autor naciô probablemente en Janow del distrito de Lublin (Polonia) en una fecha desconocida del siglo XVI. Ejerciô la profesiôn de maggid, "predicador idnerante" y probablemente de vendedor de libros a domicilio. Rabi Jacob muriô en Praga el ano 1628. Han llegado hasta nosotros très obras de Rabi Jacob de Janow: el Shoresh Yaakov (Cracovia 1585), escrito en hebreo, que es una gran colecciôn de leyes judias ordenadas alfabédcamente, según aparecen en el Shulban Aruk, el Yoreh Deah i en los responsa rabinicos. El Melit^josher (Lublin 1622), escrito en yidish, que condene un conjunto de comentarios biblicos a la Tord, desdnados a judios que viven en lugares apartados y que corren el peligro de apartarse del cumplimiento de las normas de la vida judia. El Melit^yosher también se dirige a todos los judios que pueden escuchar las homilias sinagogales, pero que no denen ocasiôn en sus hogares de reflexionar sobre el contenido de estos comentarios. El Tsene-Rene es la obra más famosa de Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi de Janow. 1 Tsene-Rene es la pronunciation traditional en yidish de las palabras del libro del Cantar de los Cantares 3,11: Tseenah u-Rxenab "salid a ver, hijas de Siôn," que dan dtulo a la obra del rabi de Janow. El libro está constituido por un conjunto de comentarios al Pentateuco a las Ha/tarot y a las Megillot según el orden de las lecturas del ciclo sinagogal, y se convirdô en una enciclopedia popular de la vida judia que tuvo un éxito increible. La primera edition de la obra que nos es conocida es la de la ciudad alemana de Hanau (cerca de Frankfurt) del ano 1622. El dtulo de la edition princeps menciona otras très ediciones anteriores publicadas en Lublin 1615 y en Cracovia 1618 y 1620, que no han llegado hasta nosotros. Desde esta fecha hasta nuestros dias se han contabilizado más de 210 ediciones realizadas por las imprentas judias de Europa Central y Oriental y en los Estados Unidos, Argendna e Israel. El texto del Tsene-Rene no ha sido editado cridcamente. Esta empresa es quizás imposible puesto que los editores, a lo largo de más de 350 anos han adaptado el texto a las caracterisdcas lingüisdcas e ideologicas de los lectores a los que iba desdnado. La lengua yidish de las diversas ediciones refleja las caracterisricas del dialecto de la zona a la que los editores pensaban que podrian distribuir la edition. Por otra parte, a partir de la Haskalà, los maskilim modificaron el texto según sus criterios de modernidad, de modo que suprimieron las referencias a prácticas que ellos juzgaban supersdciosas ο mágicas y que consdtuian un

El Sefer ha-Maggid (Praga 1576), traducciôn en yidish de los libros biblicos de los Profetas y los Hagiôgrafos seguidos de comentarios se ha atribuido falsamente a Rabi Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi de Janow (Baumgarten 1987:15 n.23).

mágicas y que constituian un obstâculo para la promotion de la sociedad judia, según la ideologia de los ilustrados. El Tsene-Rene está escrito en forma de comentario al texto biblico a pardr de una gran biblioteca de fuentes de la tradition judia. Sorprende al lector moderno el grado de erudition del Rabi de Janow y su interesante criterio de formation cultural de la sociedad judia de su dempo, especialmente teniendo en cuenta a un publico femenino, y el resultado de alto contenido literario—juzgado desde una perspectiva moderna—de su trabajo. Por las páginas del Tsene-Rene aparecen el gran comentario a la Torà de Rashi de Toyes, el Midrás Rabbá, el Talmud de Babilonia y el de Jerusalén, y prácdcamente toda la biblioteca midrásica (tanto los midrasim halâkicos como los aggàdicos). Hay dos comentaristas que parecen haber servido de modelo al Rabi de Janow; se trata de Bahya ben Asher de Zaragoza (Rabbenu Bahja) e Isaac ben Josef Caro de Toledo (Toledot Yitzhak). El conjunto de fuentes que se han detectado en las páginas del gran comentario ashkenazita parece una recension de toda la cultura judia disponible a finales de la Edad Media. Además de las obras y autores citados aparecen: Shem Tob ibn Falkera, Salomon ibn Gabirol, Maimonides, Saadiah, los Kimhis, Rabbenu Hananel, Isaac Aboab, el Zohar, Moisés Cordovero y muchas otras obras y autores. El dtulo de la obra Salid a ver, hijas de Siôn ya indica que se trata de un libro popular desdnado especialmente a las mujeres. El autor, con gran habilidad narradva, desarrolla un tratado de formation religiosa y édca: trata de los mandamientos de la vida judia, los pecados que retrasan la redenciôn, el imperativo de la conversion, denuncia un largo catâlogo de supersdciones, que consdtuyen un espejo de la vida popular judia a finales de la Edad Media europea. Por otra parte, el Tsene-Rene, conuene un extensisimo conjunto narradvo lleno de tradiciones y leyendas que afectan a todo el àmbito de la vida: desde la conception a la muerte. La obra del Rabi de Janow dene la capacidad de converur en literatura prácticamente toda la existencia. Es comprensible que una obra de tanta difusiôn en el mundo judio desde el siglo XVII haya sido objeto de muchisimas traducciones: desde la version al ladn de los cinco primeros capitulos del Génesis realizada por J. Saubert (Helmstedt 1660) hasta las modernas traducciones al hebreo, inglés, fiancés y alemân. El fragmento que traducimos creemos que es la primera traduction espanola de un texto del gran comentario del Rabi de Janow. La traduction que ofrecemos, muy cenida al original yidish publicado por la Hebrew Publishig House de Nueva York (sin fecha de edition; probablemente de finales del siglo XIX ο principios del siglo XX), pretende reproducir toda la sencillez y el sabor popular de esta enciclopedia desdnada fundamentalmente a las mujeres judias de Ashkenaz.

El primer dia de la Creaciôn:Traducciôn de Génesis 1,1—s según el Tsene-Rene [Aqui se explicarà por qué la Torà empieza con la letra bet y la palabra Bereshit (Alprincipio)] Al principio creô 'Elobim !os cielosj la tierra (Gn 1,1). Al principio de la creation de cielo y tierra estaba la tierra desierta y vacia, y el trono de la gloria de Dios estaba suspendido en el aire encima del agua. ,‫׳‬Por qué empieza la Torà con bet? Para mostrar que así como una bet está cerrada por très lados y está abierta por el cuarto, asi también en el mundo el Santo, bendito sea, ha hecho très lados y por el lado del norte el Santo, bendito sea, alii no ha hecho cielo. Aún otra interpretation: Porque la bet es "bendiciôn" (berajâ) y el álef es "maldiciôn" ('αη/ή, por esto ha empezado el Santo, bendito sea, por la bet. El àlef volô delante del Santo, bendito sea, y le dijo: "Empieza conmigo la Tora ya que yo soy la primera letra del alfabeto." El Santo, bendito sea, le respondiô: "En la montana del Sinai yo daré los Diez Mandamientos y empezaré por el âlef: "Yo ('anoji) soy el Senor tu Dios" (Ex 20,2). Por esto empieza la Torà por la palabra Beresbit (A!principio) para ensenarnos que el mundo ha sido creado para que la Torà fuese llamada "principio de su Camino" (Pr 8,22). Rabi Yishaq dijo: ,;Por qué la Tora describe como Dios ha creado el mundo? La Torà es evidentemente solo mandamientos; ella tendria que empezar solo con mandamientos, pero las siete naciones de Canaan habrian dicho a Israel: "Vosotros sois ladrones pues cogéis la tierra de Israel de nosotros." Israel les responderia: "El Santo, bendito sea, creô el mundo y os lo dio antes a vosotros y hoy quiere dàrnoslo a nosotros." Nuestros sabios han dicho: "Sobre très cosas el Santo, bendito sea, ha creado el mundo: sobre la Torà que es llamada 'principio de su camino' (Pr 8,22); sobre los sacrificios que se sacrificaban en el Templo, llamado 'principio' porque fue creado antes del mundo; y sobre los diezmos que son llamados 'principio de tu trigo"' (Dt 18,4). Porque la Torà da testimonio sobre el Templo, por eso nos muestra también que el Templo será destruido. Por eso está escrito: La tierra era yermoj vacio (Gn 1,2). La tierra estará desolada pues la Sbejiηά se apartará de nosotros. Por eso dice: E/ espiritu de 'Elohim se cernia sobre la ba^ de las aguas (Gn 1,2). Esto nos prueba que la Tori no se apartará de nosotros y por eso dice también: Y dijo 'Elohim: "Hoya /«£‫( ״‬Gn 1,3). Esto nos prueba que el Santo, bendito sea, hará que Siôn sea luminosa y que enviará el Mesîas. Sobre él esta escrito: "Levántate, resplandece, pues llega tu luz" (Is 60,1) esto significa: "Levántate e iluminanos pues tu luz ha venido." Y dijo 'Elobim: "Hoya lu^" J bubo lu% (Gn 1,3). El Santo, bendito sea, ha creado dos lumbreras, el sol y la luna, para iluminar el mundo. Y aûn otra ha creado Dios para los justos, cuando vendrá el Mesîas. Esta lumbrera es totalmente grande y porque el mundo no ha merecido una lumbrera tan grande, por eso Dios ha escondido la lumbrera para los justos. Rabi Simeon dice: "Cinco veces escribe 'luz' en esta section en comparaciôn con los cinco libros que hay en la Tora, pues la Torà es comparada a una luz." La primera vez: "Haya luz" es en referencia al libro del Génesis. El Santo, bendito sea, ha creado el mundo con la luz. La segunda vez: "y hubo luz" es en referencia al libro del Exodo donde está escrito como Israel saliô del exilio de Egipto, de las tinieblas a la luz, por

eso está escrito: "Todos los hijos de Israel tuvieron luz en sus moradas" (Ex 10,23). La tercera vez dice: Vio 'Elobim que la lu% era buena (Gn 1,4). Esto es en referencia al libro del Levitico donde se habla de los sacrificios, porque el hombre necesita por medio de su sacrifxcio arrepentirse, de esta forma se ha hecho luz para él. La cuarta vez dice: Y estableciô 'Elohim separation entre la luz (Gnl,4). Esto es en referencia al libro de los Numeros donde está escrito como Israel fue separado de sus malas acciones y el Templo fue con ellos en el desierto y tuvieron ellos iluminaciôn. La quinta vez dice: 'Elobim llamô a la lu% din (Gn 1,5). Esto es en referencia al libro del Deuteronomio donde están escritos mandamientos y reglas que brillan como una luz. Con esto se nos hace saber que hay cinco luces. Una luz es aquella con la que el mundo fue creado. La segunda luz es la salvation que es comparada a una luz. La tercera es cuando uno hace penitencia y asi se toma brillante. La cuarta luz es el Templo. La quinta luz es la Torà y los mandamientos. El versiculo Hoya lu% (Gn 1,3) nos ensena que con la luz Dios creô el mundo, pues desde que Dios dijo "haya luz" empezô a hacerse la creation. La palabra jehi [baya) dene el valor numérico de 25. Esto muestra que el mundo fue creado el dia 25 de Elul. La Guemará dice que el primer hombre fue creado en Rosb ha Sbaná y esto fue, como es sabido, el sexto dia de los seis dias de la creation. Todo fue creado antes del primer hombre para que el hombre no se enorgullezca y piense que las bestias y los animales fueron creados antes que él. (Hay) aún otra interpretation que dice que el hombre fue creado después de todas las criaturas para que el hombre lo pudiera encontrar todo preparado para él. Έ lohim llamô a la lu% diay a las tinieblas llamô noche. Y atardeàôy luego amaneciô: dia uno (Gn 1,5). Dios ha llamado a la luz "dia" y a las tinieblas las ha llamado "noche" y es una tarde y una manana. Un dia.

Anâlisis del texto El fragmento del Tsene-Rene del comentario a Génesis 1,1-5, a pesar de su brevedad, contiene un conjunto de elementos de notable interés que constituyen una especie de microcosmos lingiiisdco, literario y religioso. a) Dos lenguas, dos funciones. Es interesante notar como, por una especie de procedimiento de hipertexto, el Tsene-Rene a partir del texto biblico escrito en hebreo, reescribe en yidish su comprensiôn del mundo y de la vida. El texto sagrado en hebreo consdtuye un pretexto a partir del cual se desarrolla la trama narrativa. Incluso en el ûnico versiculo en el que nuestro libro no présenta ningun desarrollo interpretativo, el texto hebreo se traduce al yidish, de m o d o que la lengua santa de la mano del autor-traductor-compilador révéla todos sus misterios reservados antes exclusivamente a un cerrado mundo masculino de iniciados. b) Eficacia narrativa. Un texto complejo de teologia de la creation del cosmos, como es Génesis 1,1-5, se ha convertido en un compendio de beilas historias. Recordemos solo los titulos: la historia de la primera letra de la Torà; la narration de la bet, que es bendiciôn, y de el álef, que es maldiciôn; la historia de

la letra álef, que pasô a ser la primera letra de la gran alianza que el Sefior estableciô con su pueblo Israel en el Sinai; la historia del dia de la creation: el 25 del mes de Elul (el doceavo mes del ano judio, entre sepriembre y octubre). Para un texto tan breve el conjunto narradvo que condene es muy importante cuandtarivamente y permite comprender el gran éxito popular de un libro que cuenta tan bellas historias. c) La Torà dene 70 caras. Este principio de hermenéudca rabinica se encuentra aplicado con gran eficacia dentro del comentario del Rabi de Janow; asi bereshit jusdfica la referencia a Proverbios 8,22, porque en los dos textos aparece la palabra reshit "principio." Esta régla permite realizar interesantes viajes textuales dentro del complejo mundo de la Escritura y permite adquirir un conocimiento interior de la Palabra divina, origen y fundamento de la experiencia espiritual (y también cultural) de Israel. d) La tradition viva. El Tsene-Rene permite a las lectoras (y lectores) que los sabios de Israel pasen a adquirir un lugar destacado en la vida de cada dia de las personas sencillas. Dentro de las dos primeras páginas del comentario del Rabi de Janow cobran vida Rabi Yitshaq, es decir, Rashi de Troyes; "nuestros sabios" en una referencia a Pirkei Avot 1,2; y Rabi Simeon (probablemente se refiere a R. Simeon el Justo, uno de los sabios de la Gran Asamblea [siglo III a.C.], citado diversas veces en el Pirkei Avot). e) El misterio de la Sbejinâ (la Presencia divina) ο la dimension espiritual. Constata el Tsene-Rene que la Sbejinâ se aparté de Israel porque el Templo fue destruido, pero Israel mandene el don de la Torà, que también es presencia del Dios santo de Israel. Las hijas de Israel que meditan el comentario del Rabi de Janow saben que han heredado un testimonio misterioso de la presencia del Santo que debe condnuar viva en la comunidad de Israel. Hay una condnuidad misteriosa entre el misterio de la Sbejinâ y la meditation de la Torâ. El objedvo del Tsene-P^ene es hacer posible la comprensiôn y la presencia viva de esta realidad espiritual. f) El misterio del Mesîas ο la gran esperanza. La afirmaciôn de Génesis 1,3 'Ήα)α lues la prueba, para el Tsene-Rene, de que el Sefior enviará a su Mesîas, luz para Israel. Hay una lumbrera escondida para los justos que se manifestant cuando vendrá el Mesîas. Quien lee y médita el comentario del Rabi de Janow pardcipa de este deseo de jusdcia y de la gran esperanza: la llegada del Mesîas. g) Eficacia simbôlica. Las lectoras y lectores del Tsene-Rene se sienten miembros de una comunidad viva, con una gran historia, bendecida por Dios con el gran don de la Torâ y que espera la salvation en la persona del Mesîas promeddo por Dios. A mi juicio la combination de estos factores de orden literario, espiritual y simbôlico explican el gran éxito del Tsene-Rene, el gran comentario a la Torâ, Haftarot y Megillot escrito en lengua yidish por Rabi Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi de Janow.

Bibli0grafìa Ediciones

utilizadas

Tseenah u-Reenah. Sin fecha. 2 Vols. New York: Hebrew Publishing Company. Tseenah u-Reenah. 1995. 3 Vols. Brooklyn N.Y.: Kaftor Publishing. Estudios Baumgarten, J. 1993. Introduction à la littératureyiddish ancienne. Paris: Cerf. , 1987. Le comentaire sur la Torah Tseenah u-Reenah. Traduction du yidich, introducdon et notes par ... Paris: Verdier. Erik, M. 1979. Di Geshikhte fun deryidisher literatur fun di eltste tsaytn bi% der haskole tequfe. New York: Congress for Jewish Culture. Hurwitz, I. M. 1985. Ze'enah U-Re'enah. Book of Genesis. Jacob ben Isaac Asbkenaq of Yanow. (Hebr.) Trans, with a Critical Commentary and Notes by... Ed. with an Introduction by J. P. Schultz. New York: Dropsie College. Smeruk, H. 1978. Sifrutyidish. Tel-Aviv: Peretz. Weinreich, M. 1973. 4 Vols. Geshikhtefun deryidisher sbprakb. New York: Y1WO.

SHIR HA -SHIRIM

RABBAH

EN LA G E N I Z A D E C A M B R I D G E Luis GIRÔN BLANC Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain E n el otono de 1996 tuve la ocasiôn de pasar dos meses en Cambridge en el marco del programa denominado Cátedra Fundaciôn Banco Bilbao-Vizcaya. Alii desarrollé un seminario sobre textos midrâsicos en la Facultad de Teologia de la Universidad, denominada al más puro estilo sajôn, Divinity School, y pude disponer de muchas horas de trabajo en la magnifica biblioteca de la Universidad. Me dediqué casi exclusivamente a leer y estudiar los manuscritos procedentes de la Genizah de El Cairo, que están idenrificados y catalogados como parte del texto del midrás Cantar de los Cantares Rabbah. Figuran en el catâlogo 6 fragmentos de Cantar Rabbah. Cinco de ellos estaban ya recogidos e idenrificados como taies en mi primera publicaciôn sobre el tema en la Misceláneaj y hay uno más, muy breve y de dificil lectura, sobre el que caben algunas dudas. El texto de dos de estos fragmentos quedô incluido como parte del aparato critico en dos publicaciones mias, la ya citada de Miscelánea y Mehqartm balason IV,2 pero enfonces lo fueron a partir tan solo de las fotografias que hay en Jerusalén, las cuales, si bien sirvieron en unos cuantos casos para modificar las lecturas que de algunos ellos habia hecho Rabinovitz y que habia publicado en su volumen Gin^e midraš (Tel Aviv, 1977), distaban mucho de la claridad que pueden ofrecer los originales, sometidos además a los infrarrojos cuando se hace necesario. El pasado ano, en el encuentro del G r u p o de Investigation de Granada, di cuenta de los trabajos preliminares y présenté dos de esos fragmentos. Hoy, terminado ya el trabajo, quiero presentar el fragmento que me résulta más interesante de todos, en aquello que parece ser lo ùnico que cabe esperar de estos textos y que es la ortografia ο más propiamente el ketib. Estos fragmentos de Genizah contienen en total 12 páginas de texto, de muy diferente tamano y conservation. Al que hoy me refiero tiene el n° de catâlogo TS F 17,57.3 Se trata de un gran pliego, todo él pautado para escritura, que se distribuye en cuatro páginas ο columnas, dos en cada cara del folio. Tiene marca vertical de haber estado doblado por el centro, posiblemente para encuadernaciôn, y 1

2

3

Girôn Blanc, L. 1991. "Aproximaciôn a la Lengua de Sir ha-Sirim Rabbah y modelo de ediciôn." Miscelanea de Esludios Arabes y Hebraicos 27-28, 249-272. Girôn, L. 1990. "A Preliminary Description o f the Language of Canticles Rabbah. Sample Edit i o n . " . 4 , 1 2 9 - 1 6 0 ‫מ ח ק ר י ם כלשון‬ El trabajo completo con la ediciôn facsimil de todos los fragmentos y el comentario aparecerâ prôximamente en una publicaciôn especializada.

tiene la curiosidad de que solo dos de las columnas, perfectamente simétricas en el haz y envés de una parte del folio pertenecen a Cantar de los Cantares Rabbah, concretamente CR 1,2. De las otras dos se dice en el catâlogo que es un texto de Talmud, pero no esta alli identifïcado. En la parte que nos ocupa las lineas oscilan entre 35 y 54 letras por linea. El grupo ‫ אל‬alterna su representation: cuando es un solo grafema lo presento subrayado, y cuando mantiene los dos grafemas, sin subrayar. El ketib permite una clara caracterizaciôn de texto palestinense, que confirma lo ya sabido, y que puede concretarse en lecturas como ‫ לעזר‬en vez de ‫ אלעזר‬que se encuentra dos veces (1,17/18 4 ) y en una de ellas es lectura única frente a todas las fuentes, ο2,11)‫ ) ק ר י י ה‬con doble yod y he' final. También muestra otras caracterisdcas palestinenses no solo de ketih, sino de estructura, como la especifïca presencia en dos ocasiones del pronombre personal de 3" persona en oraciones en las que el relativo actúa de sujeto, como2,10)‫ ) כ ל מ י שהוא ע מ ל‬ο ‫חרב שהיא‬ ‫( אוכלת‬2,11), caracten'stica ésta propia de los mejores manuscritos de CR. En las cuestiones de ‫ מ ל א \ ח ס ר‬es bastante consecuente con una clara tendencia a la escritura plena, aunque tiene alternancias; es senalado el uso de yod para sonido e tanto en silaba cerrada con acento, por ejemplo1,15)‫ ) י ע ק י ר‬, como en silaba abierta sin acento,1,4/6)‫ ) ל מ א ד י ם‬que aparece dos veces como lectura única, y2,29)‫ ) ח ם ; ר ו‬. Y en esta misma linea, la presencia de yod en silaba breve sin acento (shewa) como en 1,22) £^‫ )ללת‬ο la de waw en silaba cerrada sin acento donde la masora traería qamas hatuf, como en1,1)‫ ) ג ו ד ל ו‬ο2,10)‫ ) צ ו ר כ ן‬, esta ultima, lectura única. De otro tipo es la presencia de ‫ של‬siempre unida a la palabra siguiente ‫שליין‬ 1,18) - ‫( ש ל ה ל כ ה‬1,39/40) - ‫( שלאהרון‬2,3)) como es habitual en la manuscritos más antiguos. En el terreno consonântico hay que senalar la sustituciôn, no por conocida menos brutal pero a la vez interesante para la fonética, de bet por waw nada menos que en una cita biblica donde el ‫ גבים‬de Is 33,4 se repite dos veces ‫גוים‬ 2,18)) y2,19)‫ ) ג י ו י ם‬con waw que, por supuesto, son lecturas únicas frente a todas las fuentes. Samek. por sin en2,6)‫ ) ס י פ ת ו ת > י < ך‬y2,25)‫ ) ס ו ר פ ה‬. En lo que respecta a la alternancia mem/nun en la termination de plural masculino, se muestra inconsecuente como todos los textos conocidos, pero se puede detectar una cierta tendencia que iría en buena medida en contra de lo sugerido por M. Mishor después de su intento de sistematizaciôn, de forma que en los pronombres se distribuyen los casos a partes iguales, pero en los participios hay una clara inclination a la termination mem, en una proportion de 13 contra 1. E n el caso de los adjetivos si se cumple plenamente la tendencia esbozada por Mishor, no dândose ni un solo adjetivo en nun. Las variantes de morfologia lo son propiamente de ketib concretadas en la 2' masc. de perfecto con termination en ^ ' 2 , 5 ) ‫ ) ע מ ל ת ה‬, fenômeno que bin en otros dos textos fragmentarios de Cambridge (ver en la publication final T 1 3,7 y T 3 1,7); y el uso de ‫ את‬sin he ' final para el pronombre de 2a masculino Véase cl texto al final de la comunicaciôn; se cita entre paréntesis pagina y linea.

singular éste se produce t©das‫»־‬as veces (9) excepto en dos citas biblicas en que se mandene ‫אתה‬. Senalado es el caso de1,29)‫ ) י ו כ א ל ו‬de G n 32,33, que Rabinovitz en su ediciôn leia errôneamente como ‫יאכלו‬, y en el que quizá se pueda ver la intention de marcar una forma pausal de imperfecto, aparte del sonido ο de la preformadva. Las variantes de contenido son en este fragmento mayores que en los otros estudiados, aunque realmente no son importantes y se puede decir que sigue de manera bastante fiel el que podemos llamar textus receptus del midrás. E n la primera linea de página 1 hay una diferencia con respecto a los otros textos, en coincidencia casi total con el manuscrito de Oxford (0), 5 y que haría pensar en una tradition algo distinta, que precisamente Ο habría tratado de arreglar para asemejarse a la mayoria; pero en realidad résulta dificil saberlo porque al tratarse de la primera página nos falta el texto anterior donde estaria la clave. E n principio lo he tratado como una aplografia, pero podria no serlo: el texto, que en los demás testigos dice "si nos hubiera mostrado su gloria y su grandeza habriamos creido en él (‫)היינו מאמינים לו‬, pero puesto que no nos ha mostrado su gloria y su grandeza no creemos en El (‫)אין אנו מאמינים לו‬, para confirmar lo que está escrito 'no entres con tu siervo en juicio'," pierde en nuestro manuscrito desde 'pero' hasta 'en él' (2°), senalados en cursiva. El ms 0 es igual al nuestro en lo fundamental, pero introduce la negation ( ‫ ) לא‬delante de ‫היינו‬, al parecer tratando de acomodar el texto en parte a los otros tesdgos, pero dejàndolo poco inteligible: si nos hubiera mostrado su gloria y su grandeza (no) habriamos creido en él, para confirmar lo que esta escrito "no entres con tu siervo en juicio." E n la linea 30 de la página 1, anade nuestro fragmento un texto que nadie tiene en este lugar, pero que se repite varias veces en CR y en otros lugares de la literatura midrásica. Creo que en realidad tiene más sentido que lo que traen los demás textos: Abraham recibiô el mandamiento de la circuncisiôn, ..., Isaac inaugurô su cumplimiento al octavo dia Jacob recibiô el mandamiento de no comer el nervio ciâdco,..., Judá recibiô el mandamiento del levirato, ... e Israel comiô de todos los preceptos los (248) positivos y los (365) negadvos... Nuestro texto: ... Judá recibiô el mandamiento del levirato,..., y cuando mis hijos se plantaron ante el Monte Sinai y dijeron aquello de 'todo cuanto nos ordene Adonai' etc. se convirtieron en una nation y les fue dada toda la Torâ, 248 preceptos positivos y 613 preceptos negativos... E n la edition que hizo Rabinovitz de este texto se confundiô en la lectura y donde dice ‫מתיין‬, doscientos, sin 'alef y con nun final, él leyô ‫ מיין‬inventando una referencia a D t 33,2 que no viene al caso, ni tiene sentido ni cabe en el espacio disponible de un roto cuyo texto hay que conjeturar. 5

Bodleiana Seid. Sup 102 ( 1 6 4 / 2 del Catâlogo de Neubauer).

Una ultima diferencia de nuestro texto frente a todos los demás se da en las 1íneas 16-17 de página 2. E n este caso la aplografia, ο cualquier otro error de copista, es bastante clara, aunque bien sea en este manuscrito ο en el que le sirviô de base hubo un intento de arreglo pues, aparte de una diferente distribuciôn del texto, fruto de ese error, se introduce una cita de Jeremias que no está en los demás textos: E n los demás testigos, el texto dice más ο menos: la razôn de los Maestros es lo escrito "habia principes de sanddad (‫ )קודש‬y principes de Dios" (lCr 24,5); "principes de sanddad" son los àngeles servidores, como esta escrito "he profanado a principes de sanddad (‫( ")קודש‬Is 43,28); "principes de Dios" son los israelitas, como está escrito "yo me dije: dioses sois" (Sal 82,6), pues pueden ordenar... E n nuestro texto la cita de lCr, "habia principes de sanddad y principes de Dios," aparece cortada y falta todo lo comprendido entre "y" y el "Dios" de la repetition de la cita (en cursiva); sigue una cita justificativa distinta tomada de Jeremias (‫ ק ו ד ש לייי ישראל‬Je 2,3) y a continuation retoma l C r anadiendo "principes de Dios," y termina como los demás "pues pueden ordenar..." Aparentemente se ha producido la aplografia entre el ‫ ק ו ד ש‬de l C r y el de Is y una redistribution del texto. Ninguno de los testigos trae la cita de Jeremias.

Conclusiones Las conclusiones a que se puede llegar no son revolucionarias. Confirman mucho, prácticamente todo, lo que respecto al ketib y la fonética del hebreo rabinico se ha establecido. Pero todavia hoy estas confirmaciones tienen valor. Las diferencias de contenido son minimas y no permiten conclusiones en un texto tan breve. De todas maneras, he comprobado los alineamientos que nuestro texto muestra con otros testigos cuando se aparta de la unanimidad, y puedo decir que muestra la mayor cercania con el texto fragmentario de Cambridge Add. 1504 (no de genizah) con el que coincide en 35 casos y se asemeja en dos lecturas ûnicas; con Ο coincide en 30 casos y se asemeja en 3 lecturas únicas, y en 9 casos coincide con ambos frente a los demás. En 3 casos coincide con Κ 6 frente a todos y en 4 ocasiones con todos frente a Κ En 13 casos coincide con las ediciones (Pésaro y / ο Vilna) frente a V.

Texto Presento a continuation el texto del fragmento reproducido de la forma más fiel posible. Entre < > va el texto que está entre 1íneas; [ ] senalan el texto conjeturado; # representa letras no legibles ο de relleno a final de linea; los signos de interrogaciôn marcan las letras dudosas. Al final de la linea se senala la numeration

Mss. Vaticano 76, Cassuto, H. 1956. Bib/iothecat Vaticanat Codices Manuscript!... ex Aedibus Varicanis, 112.

‫‪de los párrafos según el orden de cuatro digitos empleado en mi ediciôn es‬‬‫‪panola del midrás, y el numéro de letras de cada linea.‬‬ ‫‪Pagina 1‬‬ ‫‪ 1‬ו א ת גודלו היינו מאמינים ל ו לקיים מ ה שני ואל ת ב > ו < א ב מ ש פ ט וגו׳‬ ‫‪ 2‬ר׳ יודן בשם ר׳ יהודה בירבי סימון רבי יהודה ור׳ נחמיה ר׳ יהודה אמי‬ ‫‪ 3‬בשעה ששמעו ישראל אנכי בסיני נ > י < ת ק ע ת ל מ ו ד תורה בליבם והיו‬ ‫‪ 4‬למידים ולא שכיחים באו א צ ל מ ש ה אמרו לו ר׳ מ ש ה העושה ‪#‬‬ ‫‪ 5‬פרוזביטז בינותינו דבר אתה עימנו ונשמעה ועתה ל מ ה נמות ומה‬ ‫‪ 6‬הניה י ש ב ) ^ ( באבידה שלנו חזרו להיות למידים ושכיחים אמרו מ ה משה‬ ‫‪ 7‬בשר ודם עובר אף תלמידו עובר בידו חזרו אצל משה אמי ל ו רבי מ ש ה‬ ‫‪ 8‬לויי יגלה עלינו פ ע ם שנייה לוויי ישקני מנשיקות פיהו לוויי כ מ ו ת‬ ‫‪ 9‬שהיה יהיה לווי יתקע תורתו בליבנו כ מ ו ת שהיה אמר להן אין זו‬ ‫‪ 10‬עכשיו לעתיד ל ב > ו < א היא ונתתי את תורתי בקרבם ועל ל ב ם וגו׳ ר׳ נחמיה‬ ‫‪ 11‬בשעה ששמעו ישראל לא יהיה לך בסיני נעקר יצר הרע מ ל ב ם באו‬ ‫‪ 12‬אצל מ ש ה אמרו לו רבי מ ש ה ה ע ש ה פרוזיביטנו דבר אתה עימנו ‪#‬‬ ‫‪ 13‬ונשמעה ו א ל ידבר עימנו אלהים פן נמות ועתה ל מ ה נמות ומה הנייה‬ ‫‪ 14‬יש באבידה הזו חזר יצר הרע ל מ ק ו מ ו חזרו אצל מ ש ה אמי לו ר׳ משה‬ ‫‪ 15‬לוויי ייגלה עלינו פעם שנייה לוויי ישקי׳ מנשי׳ כ מ ו ת שהיה לוויי יעקיר‬ ‫‪ 16‬יצר הרע מיליבינו כ מ ה שהי׳ אמי ל ה ם אין זו עכשיו לעתיד לבוא היא‬ ‫‪ 17‬והסירותי את ל ב וגו׳ עזריה אמי ל ה ר׳ לעזר ר׳ יוסה בן חנינה ר׳ יצחק‬ ‫‪ 18‬ורבנין ר׳ לעזר אמי ל מ ל ך שהיה לו מרתף שליין נכנס אורח ראשון‬ ‫‪ 19‬מזג לו כוס השני מזג ל ו כוס השלישי מזג לו כוס הרביעי וכיון שבא‬ ‫‪ 20‬בנו נתן לו את כ ל המרתןף[ כך אדם הראשון ניתנו ל ו שש מצות על‬ ‫‪ 21‬ידיו הדה היא ויצו ייי] אלהים [וגו׳ ר׳ לוי אמי אין ציו אלא עבודה זרה‬ ‫‪ 22‬כ מ ה דאת אמר כי ]הואיל ה[לך אחרי צו וגו׳ ייי ציוהו על קיללת השם‬ ‫‪ 23‬כ מ ה דאת אמי ונינקב שם ייי מ ו ת א[להים צוהו ע ל הדיינים כ מ ה דאת‬ ‫‪ 24‬אמר אלהים ל]א [תקלנל וגו׳ ע ל האד[ם צוהו ע ל שפיכות דמים כ מ ה דאת‬ ‫‪ 25‬אמי שופך] דם הא[דם וג]ו׳ לאמר[ ציוהו על גילוי עריות כ מ ה דאת אמי‬ ‫‪ 26‬ל א מ ר הן] ישלח [איש וג]ו׳ מ [ כ ל עץ הגן א כ ו ל ת א כ ל וגו׳ צוהו על הגזל‬ ‫‪ 27‬נוח נתוסף] לו א[בר מן ה]חי אך [בשר בנפשו וגו׳ אברהם מילה ויאמר‬ ‫‪ 28‬אלהים אל א]ברהם י[צחק ]חינכ[ה ל ש מ ו נ ה וימל אברהם וגו׳ יעקב‬ ‫‪ 29‬גיד הנש]ה כ מ ה דאת אמר ע[ל כן לא יוכאלו בני ישראל את וגו׳ יהודה‬ ‫‪ 30‬יבמה ויאמ]ר יהודה לאונן ?וגו׳ ? כיו[ן שעמדו בני לפני הר סיני ואמרו כ ל‬ ‫‪ 31‬אשר דבר יי]י נע[שו ל א ו מ ה א ח ת ניתנה ל ה ם כ ל התורה ‪#‬‬ ‫‪ 32‬כ ל ה מתיין וא]רבעים ו[שמונה מצוות עשה ושלוש מ א ו ת ושישים‬ ‫‪ 33‬ו ח מ ש מצוות לא ת ע ש ה אמי ר׳ יוסה בן חנינה ל מ ל ך שהיה מ ח ל ק‬ ‫‪ 34‬אופסוניות לליגיונותיו על ידי דוכסין ועל ידי איפרכין ועל ידי‬ ‫‪ 35‬איסטרלטין וכיון שבא בנו נתן לו מיד ליד אמי ר׳ יצחק למ׳‪#‬‬ ‫‪ 36‬שהאוכל)·«•;( פסטילין וכיון שבא בנו ש מ ט ה מפיו ונתנה לו כך כי ייי‬ ‫‪ 37‬יתן ח כ מ ה ל כ ל א ב ל מפיו דעת ותבונה לישראל ר׳ אייבו אמי לה‬ ‫‪ 38‬ר׳ יהודה ור׳ נחמיה ורבנין ר׳ יהודה אמי שני חברים שהן יושבים‬ ‫‪ 39‬ועסיקים בדיברי ה ל כ ה זה אומי בית א ב ש ל ה ל כ ה וזה אינו אומי‬ ‫‪ 40‬בית אב ש ל ה ל כ ה אמי הק׳ב׳ה׳ו משיקות הן עלי ר׳ נחמיה אמי אפילו‬ ‫‪ 41‬ה ב ל היוצא מ פ י ה ם היך מ ה דאת אמי ואיוב ה ב ל יפצה פיהו אמי‬

‫‪1.2.3.6‬‬ ‫‪1.2.4.1‬‬

‫‪1.2.4.2‬‬

‫‪2.4.3‬‬

‫‪2.4.4.‬‬

‫‪2.5.1.‬‬

‫‪1.2.5.2‬‬ ‫‪2.5.3.‬‬

‫‪1.2.5.4‬‬

‫‪1.2.5.5‬‬

‫‪1.2.5.6‬‬ ‫‪1.2.5.7‬‬

‫‪1.2.5.8‬‬

‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪47‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪39‬‬ ‫‪47‬‬ ‫‪48‬‬ ‫‪46‬‬ ‫‪51‬‬ ‫‪46‬‬ ‫‪48‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪46‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪54‬‬ ‫‪47‬‬ ‫‪46‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪48‬‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪47‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪46‬‬ ‫‪51‬‬ ‫‪35‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬ ‫‪50‬‬ ‫‪40‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪42‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪42‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬

‫‪Pagina 2‬‬ ‫‪ 1‬הק׳ב׳ה׳ משי יק ?ן עלי ורבנין אמי סוף שנפשותיהם עתידות ל ה י נ ט ל‬ ‫‪ 2‬בנשיקה היך מ ה ד א ת אמי ישקני מנש׳ פי׳ אמי ר׳ עזריה מצינו שניטלה‬ ‫‪ 3‬נפשו שלאהרון בנשי׳ הדה היא ויעל אהרן הכהן משה מניין וימת‬ ‫‪1.2.5.10‬‬ ‫‪ 4‬שם מ ש ה ע ב ד וגו׳ ושאר כ ל הצדיקים מניין ליש משיק פיה אם‬ ‫‪ 5‬ע מ ל ת ה בתורה ס ו פ ך להשיק לאחרים סוף שאחרים משיקים‬ ‫‪ 6‬לך סוף שדברך מיתנשקים סוף סיפתות<י>ך)«‪ (.<-‬מיתנשקות סוף ש ה כ ל‬ ‫‪1.2.5.11‬‬ ‫‪ 7‬נושקים לך ישקיני יזייניני יטהריני ידביקני ישק׳ יזיע׳ היך מ ה‬ ‫‪ 8‬ד א ת א׳ נושקי ק ש ת וגו׳ אמר רבי ש מ ו א ל בר נחמן מצינו שנמשלו‬ ‫‪ 9‬דברי תורה בזיין מ ה הזיין הזה מתקיים על בעליו כך דברי תורה‬ ‫‪1.2.5.12‬‬ ‫‪ 10‬מיתקיימים על כ ל מי שהוא ע מ ל בהן כ ל צורכן ר׳ חונה ב ש ם ר׳ א ח ה‬ ‫‪ 11‬ש מ ע לה מן הדן קרייה ר ו מ מ ו ת אל וגו׳ חרב שהיא א ו כ ל ת משני צדדיה‬ ‫‪ 13‬ר׳ יהודה אמי תורה שנאמרה ב פ ה א ח ד נאמרה ב מ א מ ר ו ת הרבה‬ ‫‪ 14‬ר׳ נחמיה אמי תורה ב פ ה ותורה ב כ ת ב ורבנין אומי גוזרין ע ל העליונים‬ ‫‪1.2.5.14‬‬ ‫‪ 15‬ועושים ע ל התחתונים ועושים ר׳ יהושוע דסכנין בשם ר׳ לוי ‪#‬‬ ‫‪ 16‬טעמהון דרבנין כי היו שרי קודש אילו ישר‪ ##‬קודש ישראל‬ ‫‪ 17‬לייי ושרי האלהים שהן גוזרים על העליונים ועושים ו ע ל התחתונים‬ ‫‪1.2.5.15‬‬ ‫‪ 18‬ועושים ישקי׳ יטהריני כמשיק שני גוים ]זה[ לזה והן טהורים‬ ‫‪1.2.5.1‬‬ ‫‪ 19‬זה מזה היך מ ה דא׳ כ מ ש י ק ) ^ ( ג י ו י ם ) ^ ( שוקק ב]ו[ ישקני ידבקיני היך‬ ‫‪ 20‬מ ה דא׳ א׳ וקול כנפי ה ח י ו ת משיקות ]א[שה אל א ח ו ת ה יוציא לי‬ ‫‪1.2.6.1‬‬ ‫‪ 21‬נשיקות מ ת ו ך פיהו תנינן אמי ר׳ ]יהודה[ שאל ר׳ י ש מ ע א ל את ר׳‬ ‫‪ 22‬יהושוע שהיו מ ה ל כ י ם בדרך ]מפני מ ה א[סרו את גבינת הגוים‬ ‫‪ 23‬אמי לו מפני שמעמידים אותה ] ב ק י ב ת הנבי[לה אמי לו ק י ב ת העולה‬ ‫‪ 24‬ח מ ו ר ה מ ק י ב ת נבילה אמרו כהן] שדעתו י[פ ?ה ? ש]ור[פה חייה מ ה הוא‬ ‫‪ 25‬סורפה)«‪ (/‬גמילה)·«‪ (/‬אמי ר׳ שמעון ?‪ ? ####]####‬בן ל[קיש ]עשו[ אותו כ ש ו ת ה‬

‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪45‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬ ‫‪40‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪49‬‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪46‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪52‬‬ ‫‪40‬‬ ‫‪49‬‬ ‫‪42‬‬ ‫‪42‬‬ ‫‪49‬‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬ ‫‪40‬‬ ‫‪42‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬

‫‪26‬‬ ‫‪27‬‬ ‫‪28‬‬ ‫‪29‬‬ ‫‪30‬‬ ‫‪31‬‬

‫בכוס חמי ק׳ר׳ה׳ אמי השתי בכו)«‪ (/‬זיהם)«‪ (/‬לא] נה[ני)«‪ (/‬ולא] מועיל [אמי לו מפני ‪44‬‬ ‫‪42‬‬ ‫‪1.2.6.2‬‬ ‫שמעמידים ב ק י ב ת עגלה עבוד]ה זרה[ אמי לו ]ר׳ ישמ[עאל אחי היך‬ ‫‪8‬‬ ‫אתה קורא כי טובים דודייך או כי] טובים [דודינך אמר לו[ אין הדבר כן‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪1.2.6.3‬‬ ‫שהרי חבירו מ ל מ ד עליו לריח ש]מניך טובים ו ל מ ה [לא גילה לו‬ ‫‪37‬‬ ‫מפני ש ב ק ר ו ב אסרוה ור׳ ישמע]אל היה קטן ר׳ ש[מעון בן‬ ‫‪39‬‬ ‫ח ל פ ו ת ה ) « ‪ ( /‬ר׳ חגיי בשם ר׳ ש מ ו א ל בר נחמ]ן כ׳ כב[שים ללבושיך‬

‫‪32‬‬ ‫‪33‬‬ ‫‪34‬‬ ‫‪35‬‬ ‫‪36‬‬ ‫‪37‬‬ ‫‪38‬‬ ‫‪39‬‬ ‫‪40‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬

‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬ ‫‪39‬‬ ‫‪39‬‬ ‫‪43‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬ ‫‪37‬‬ ‫‪39‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬ ‫‪41‬‬

‫כבשים כ ת ב כשתלמידיך קטנים הוי כוב]ש לפניה[ם דברי תורה‬ ‫היגדילו ונעשו תלמידי חכמים הוי מגל]ה ל ה ם סת[רי תורה‬ ‫תני ר׳ שמעון בן יוחיי אלה ה מ ש פ ט י ם אשר תשים ל]פניה[ם‬ ‫מ ה סימה אינה ניגלית אלא ליחיד כך לא תהא מ ג ל ה טעמי‬ ‫תורה ל כ ל אדם ר׳ חונייה בשם ר׳ ח מ ה בר ע ו ק ב ה ]אם[ ל ה פ ל י ג ו היה‬ ‫מ ב ק ש היה לו להפליגו מ ח מ ש הכרעות שבתורה ואלו הן שאת‬ ‫ארור מ ח ר משוקדים וקם שאת הלא אם תיטיב שאת אם לא‬ ‫תיטיב כי ב א פ ם הרגו איש וברצונם עיקרו שור ארור או‬ ‫ארור א פ ם כי עז ויאמר משה אל יהושוע ב ח ר לנו אנשים וצא‬ ‫ה ל ח ם ב ע מ ל ק מ ח ר או מ ח ר אנכי נצב על ראש ה ג ב ע ה ובמנורה‬

‫‪1.2.6.4‬‬ ‫‪1.2.6.5‬‬

LA VERSIÔN ESPANOLA DE MAQRE

DARDEQE

1

BENJAMIN HARY & MARÍA ANGELES GALLEGO Emory University, Atlanta, USA

Introducdon Maqre Dardeqe, "Instructor de ninos," es el nombre que recibe en la Edad Media un dpo de diccionario hebreo que se caracteriza por ofrecer traducciones y glosas de términos hebreos biblicos, agrupados por raices, a diferentes lenguas judias, etnolectos y variantes taies como judeo-francés, judeo-italiano, judeo-espafiol ο yiddish, además de explicaciones en hebreo rabinico. Las versionés italiana y espanola de Maqre Dardeqe conrienen asimismo glosas en judeo-àrabe. Con estos diccionarios se intentaba promover una mejor comprensiôn de las Escrituras, con dos objedvos principales: de una parte, un propôsito pedagôgico: servir de herramienta para aquellos estudiantes que se acercaban al texto biblico con un insuficiente conocimiento de hebreo. Por otro lado, exisda también una intencionalidad de indole sociolôgica y religiosa, en tanto que elemento de ayuda para que los intelectuales judios pudiesen responder con más facilidad a cristianos y musulmanes en las disdntas polémicas teolôgicas que mantuvieron en la Edad Media. La primera version y la más conocida de Maqre Dardeqe es la version italiana, que fue publicada en 1488, en Nâpoles, aunque su composition seguramente sea bastante anterior. El autor es Perez Trebot, del cual sabemos que viviô en Cataluna hasta 1391 y después se trasladô a Francia, estableciéndose finalmente en Italia. En esta version se ofrece la raiz del hebreo biblico, seguida de una traducciôn al judeo-italiano y otra al judeo-àrabe, asi como una breve explication en hebreo. Conriene igualmente glosas en judeo-francés de los comentarios de la Biblia de Rashi y Radaq. El Maqre Dardeqe espanol está fechado en 1634 y condene glosas en judeo-espanol en lugar de judeo-italiano. De nuestro estudio preliminar se desprende que las glosas en judeo-àrabe coinciden en su mayoria aunque no completamente.

Maqre Dardeqe en tanto que obra lexicogrâfica Desde el punto de vista de la lexicografia, Maqre Dardeqe representa escaso avance con respecto a lo que los filôlogos hebreos habian hecho en este campo aigunos siglos antes. Fue más concretamente el gramârico andalusi Yonah ibn Janāh Esta ponencia fue originalmente presentada con el dtulo " The Spanish Link of Maqre Dardeqe." Ha sido traducida del inglés al espanol por M. A. Gallego.

(s.X-XI) el que sentô las bases de la lexicografia hebrea en el Kitâb al-usûl ο "Libro de las raices." Esta obra fue muy pronto traducida al hebreo, con el objedvo de hacerla accesible a las comunidades judias del resto de Europa, que no conocian la lengua árabe. E n el siglo XIII David Qimhi compuso el Sefer ha-š0rašim, "Libro de las raices," que es en buena parte un resumen en hebreo de la obra de Yonah ibn Janâh. Los diccionarios hebreos compuestos en los siglos posteriores siguieron la disposition y clasificaciôn de raices establecida en estos trabajos previos. El conocimiento del hebreo biblico que se consiguiô en época medieval fue sin duda alguna muy importante, pero presentá aún algunas limitaciones. E n el caso de Maqre Dardeqe observamos incluso algûn retroceso con respecto a gramâticos como Ibn Janâh. Algunos ejemplos podrian ser la clasificaciôn de raices defecdvas c o m o raices de dos consonantes, como es el caso del sustandvo 'ab ("nube"), que aparece bajo el encabezamiento 'qyin, bet, en lugar de 'ayin, vav, bet·, ο de tsits ("flor"), clasificada c o m o perteneciente a la raiz tsade, tsade, en lugar de tsade,jod, tsade. O t r o ejemplo de anâlisis que no sigue la norma estándar es la consideration de mo^nayim ("balanza"), derivada de la raiz alef %ayin, en lugar de la esperada alef, %ayin, mem.

Las lenguas de Maqre Dardeqe Aunque Maqre Dardeqe no representa un avance significativo de la lexicografia hebrea, desde un*punto de vista lingüisdco y cultural se puede considerar un documento extremadamente valioso. N o s da una idea de la situation polilingüisdca de los judios en la Edad Media y de su uso peculiar de las distintas lenguas vernâculas. Las lenguas empleadas en este manuscrito en concreto son hebreo, judeo-espanol y judeo-ârabe. E n lo que se refiere al hebreo, hemos de senalar la utilization de al menos dos variantes en esta obra. De un lado, hebreo clâsico ο biblico, reflejado en las entradas léxicas y en las citas biblicas. Por otra parte, observamos el empleo de hebreo rabinico en las explicaciones de estas raices, tomadas de los comentarios biblicos de Rashi y Qimhi. Las otras dos lenguas de esta version de Maqre Dardeqe son judeo-espanol y judeo-ârabe, que podrian ser mâs exactamente definidas c o m o etnolectos. Entendemos por etnolecto una variante lingüistica utilizada por una comunidad lingüistica diferente, con su propia historia y desarrollo. 2 Las lenguas, etnolectos y variantes judias comparten ciertas caracteristicas tipolôgicas que podrian ser resumidas en siete. E n primer lugar, utilizan el alfabeto hebreo como un signo manifiesto de judaidad, al igual que las "lenguas musulmanas" emplean el alfabeto ârabe. 3 C o m o segunda caracteristica, hemos de senalar que las variantes judias han utilizado distintas tradiciones ortogrâficas en los distintos periodos de

2 1

Ver Hary, B. 1995. "Judeo-Arabic in Its Sociolinguisdc Setting." Israel Oriental Studies 15, 129-155. Otro ejemplo de empleo del alfabeto c o m o simbolo de adscripciôn religiosa lo encontramos en la andgua Yugoslavia, en la que las distintas comunidades religiosas udlizaban los alfabetos cirflico ο latino para escribir en serbo-croata.

su desarrollo. 4 En tercer lugar, las lenguas y etnolectos judios condenen elementos hebreos y arameos en el léxico, asi como en otras áreas gramadcales, que además son manifiestos y producdvos. 5 En cuarto lugar, las lenguas y etnolectos judios condenen dialectalismos inesperados, seguramente atribuibles a la migration judia.6 La quinta caracterisdca se refiere al "espiritu" 7 de las lenguas y etnolectos judios, que se basa en fuentes judias, escritas en hebreo y arameo. En sexto lugar, los hablantes de las disdntas variantes judias consideran que sus etnolectos son diferentes de la lenguas dominantes. 8 Finalmente, las lenguas y etnolectos judios cuentan con un género literario de traduction literal de textos sagrados, del hebreo y el arameo, a las disdntas lenguas judias (Jarh en judeo-àrabe, taytsh en yiddish, ladino en judeo-espanol, šar' en judeo-neo-arameo, etc.). Finalmente, la literatura escrita en lenguas judias trata normalmente sobre temas judios y suele estar escrita por y para judios. En lo que se refiere a la traduction del léxico de hebreo biblico al judeo-espanol, ha de ser estudiado como parte del ,fenômeno de traducciones de la Biblia a lenguas judeo-romances en época medieval. Esas traducciones podrian tener una fuente comûn en ladn post-clâsico, utilizada presumiblemente por los judios de la Roma imperial. Finalmente, aunque la caracterizaciôn del judeo-ârabe utilizado en esta obra es el objeto principal de nuestro estudio, hemos de hacer una breve introducciôn histôrica a Maqre Dardeqe, que a su vez nos ayude a entender las peculiaridades de este diccionario. Es muy probable que la primera version de Maqre Dardeqe9 fuese compuesta en Sicilia, según se deduce de la situation polilingüisdca de los judios en época medieval en dicha isla.

4

5

6

7

8

9

Para una description de las distintas tradiciones ortogrâficas del judeo-ârabe, véase Hary, Β. 1995. "Adaptations of Hebrew Script." The World's Writings Systems. P. Daniels y W. Bright (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 727-742. En judeo-ârabe egipcio de época tardía, por ejemplo, se utiliza Ha para marcar el objeto directo definido (resultado de la influencia del hebreo). Véase Hary 1995: 86,87; Hary, Β. 1992. Multiglossia in Judeo-Arabic. Leiden: Brill, y Hary, B. 1991. "On the Use o f "lia and Ii in Judeo-Arabic Texts." Semitic Studies in Honor of Wolf Leslau. Ed. A. Kaye. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, vol. 1, 595—608. También en judeo-italiano se aprecia la influencia morfolôgica y léxica del hebreo com o en paxad "tuvo miedo," paxadoso "timido" e impasadito "se asustô." Asi se observa, por ejemplo, en las formas niktib/niktibu udlizadas en judeo-ârabe cairota para la primera persona del singular y plural respectivamente. También en judeo-italiano existe un sistema de siete vocales y existe el lexema Ii donni "las mujeres" en un dialecto judio, pero no en varios dialectos, c o m o ocurre con los dialectos italianos normales. Entendemos por "espiritu judio" las citas y alusiones que se hacen de forma regular de fuentes judias c o m o la Biblia y el Talmud. Asi se desprende, entre otros datos, del hecho de que en Marruecos los judios se refieran a su lengua c o m o l-'arabiyya dyalna, en contrapartida a la que denominan l-'arabiyya d-l-msilmin (Stillman, N. 1988.The Language and Culture of the Jews of Sefrou, Morocco: An Ethnolinguistic Study. Louvain: University of Manchester, pg.9). También los musulmanes de Rabat y Fez se refieren al ârabe de los judios con un nombre especial: tahniyya (Brunot, L. y Malka, E. 1940. Glossaire judéo-arabe de Fès. Rabat: École du Livre, 21). Sobre la composition y detalles de la version italiana de Maqre Dardeqe, véase Tirosh-Becker, O. 1989. "The Arabie Glosses in the Italian Version of Maqre Dardeqe—What is Their Nature?" (Hebr.). Italia 9 (1-2), 37-77, esp. 42-45.

La historia de Sicilia en la Edad Media está marcada por la conquista de la isla por los sarracenos en la segunda mitad del siglo IX, permaneciendo bajo su dominio hasta 1061. Este fue un periodo prôspero para las comunidades judias, que se arabizaron de forma muy rápida y permanecieron arabizadas hasta mucho tiempo después de que los árabes fueran expulsados de la isla. Los intelectuales judios de este periodo en Sicilia sabian hebreo, italiano, griego y árabe, y algunos también latin. Gracias a ello desempenaron un relevante papel en la traduction de obras ciendficas, principalmente del arabe al hebreo ο latin. O t r o aspecto importante de la cultura judia en Sicilia, asi como de la cultura musulmana, es que manifiesta más afinidades con Espana que con Italia ο el norte de Africa.

Características dialectolôgicas de Maqre Dardeqe Estudio fonético y ortogrâfico 1. alef c o m o marca de a breve (à) ‫" מאלך‬poder," ‫" דואראן‬alrededor," ‫" דאוור‬volverse," ‫" מדאוור‬redondeado," ‫" קלאנאסה‬sombrero" E n algunas ocasiones alef puede indicar alargamiento ä > à ‫" מאד‬extender" Alef también puede indicar position acentual, como está atesdguado, entre otros, en dialectos andalusies: 10 E n verbos: "estar estropeado," ‫" חראק‬quemar" y en nombres: ‫" עסאל‬miel," ‫" מנגיאל‬hoz," ‫" חלאק‬pendiente" 2. D e forma frecuente, vav marca u breve, como es normal en judeo-ârabe tardio: ‫" קובאלת‬frente a," ‫" גומקה‬hûmedo," ‫" חופרה‬agujero," ‫" חוכם‬juitio," ‫" ידוב‬avanzar, extenderse" 3. Menos habituai es que jod marque i breve: ‫" זאריעין‬agricultores," ‫" ניצף‬mitad," ‫" באטיל‬inûtil" 4. Alif al-fäsila no suele estar representada en Maqre Dardeqe, como ocurre en general en judeo-ârabe: ‫" תתעווקו‬ser detenido" 5. ta marbûta aparece marcada con alef fenômeno apico de la ortografia hebraizada utilizada en los periodos tardios del judeo-ârabe: 11 ‫" מירא‬tien," ‫" מנעא‬resistencia," ‫" &רחא‬alegria," ‫" סתא‬seis," ‫" חגירא‬piedra," ‫קורא‬ "fuerza," ‫" חדבא‬jorobado," ‫" ברייא‬desierto," ‫" גיתא‬cadaver," ‫" שבכא‬red"

10 11

Véase Corriente, F. 1992. Arabe andalusiy lenguas romances. Madrid: Mapfre, 60, 61. Véase Hary 1995: 732 y Hary 1992: 8 9 - 9 0 , 266.

Infrecuente es el empleo de tav para senalar ta marbûta ‫" קובאלת‬frente a" Infrecuente es también la ortografia de ta marbûta con he·. ‫" שהווה‬pasiôn," ‫" חלאווה‬dulzura" 6. Es comûn la utilization de alef en lugar de alif maqsüra bisürati l-ya, fenômeno habituai de la ortografia hebraizada del judeo-ârabe tardio:12 ‫" עטא‬dar," ‫" אטקווא‬hacer un esfuerzo," ‫" אבא‬rehusar," ‫" אשתהאת‬anhelar" 7. La pérdida de ham^a en judeo-ârabe ocasiona disdntos cambios fonolôgicos: t'a > iyya : ‫" מייא‬cien," a! > ayyi : ‫" עגיאייב‬milagros" 'a > a : ‫" דל‬ser delgado" [da'al> däl* > däl* > dal) / ‫ > ׳‬ây:‫ > ( נאי‬m") "crudo" /' > /‫־‬:‫" דיב‬lobo" La desapariciôn de ham^a dene implicaciones morfolôgicas, como comentaremos más adelante. 8. Las semiconsonantes lyl y /w/ aparecen normalmente representadas con dos yods ο dos vavs, como resultado de la influencia de la ortografia del hebreo rabinico y como es habituai en ortografia hebraizada: 13 ‫" מייה‬tien," ‫" עייב‬estropear," ‫" כיילה‬medida," ‫" גייד‬disminuir," ‫" עגיאייב‬milagros," ‫דאוור‬ "darse la vuelta," ‫" אלוואח‬paneles," ‫" אוולאד‬ninos," ‫" אל אתל‬el primera,‫" כווכב ״‬estrella," ‫" חלאווה‬dulzura" 9. Cambios vocâlicos cualitativos en Maqre Dardeqe·. i > a : ‫ > ( זאק‬%qq) "odre."14 i> u : ‫ > ( מונשאר‬minšar) "sierra, (en marroqui menšār y en andalusi minšār) a > u : ‫ > ( קודאר‬qadār) "suciedad" Ha > u : ‫ > ( לודלאן‬xadlān) "abandonar" Observamos la pérdida de vocales iniciales, como es comûn en dialectos magrebies: ‫" תקוב‬agujeros" La ortografia de ‫" מיזן‬balanza" refleja probablemente scriptio defectiva, aunque también podria tratarse de abreviamiento de a [ā > â ) 10. Contrariamente a la version italiana, en las glosas en judeo-ârabe de esta version de Maqre Dardeqe se udlizan puntos diacn'dcos: xà' es representada como ‫ל‬: ‫" לסר‬perder" fa' es representada como b: ‫רחה‬£> "alegria" jim es representada como ‫גי‬: ‫" עגיאייב‬milagros" gayti no cuenta con ningún punto diacridco: ‫" גייד‬disminuir" 11. Las interdentales / / / y / d / del árabe andguo se convierten en / / / y /
Véase Hary 1996: 732 y Hary 1992: 87-88, 252-253. Véase Hary 1 9 9 2 : 9 1 , 2 6 4 - 6 6 . Véase Tirosh-Becker 1989: 68.

t > t : ‫" כתיר‬mucho," ‫" תלת‬tercio," ‫" תקול‬agujeros," ‫" תקיל‬pesado," ‫" גתא‬cadáver" d > d : ‫" קודאר‬sutiedad," ‫" דבח‬sacrifitio," ‫" מדבח‬altar," ‫" דביב‬mosquilla," ‫דהב‬ "oro," ‫" לודלאן‬abandonar" 12. Al igual que sucede en los dialectos magrebies, no es raro que se produzca algün cambio en las sibilantes, como s > / : ‫ > ( מוכנשה‬miknasa) "escoba" 13. Otro cambio fonédco e s f > tr. ‫ > ( בזע‬fa^a"), "temer." Este cambio ocurre en algunos dialectos árabes en el Magreb, asi como en el dialecto druso en Galilea.15 14. Se produce enfadzaciôn (tafxim) en el entorno de fonemas enfâdcos, en tanto que asimilaciôn parcial, reflejando la situation dialectal: t > t : ‫" אטקווא‬hacer un esfuerzo" (aunque también encontramos ‫)אתקיוא‬, ‫שאטם‬ "injuriar," ‫" נבאט‬plantas," ‫״ חוואטין‬Pescadores'' d > d : ‫" ראץ׳‬desear," aunque también la vocal posterior puede haber causado velarizaciôn. 15. Pérdida de enfadzaciôn ο tarqîq·. d > d : ‫" גייד‬disminuir," ‫" דייא‬iluminar," ‫" דל‬ser delgado," ‫" נדיף‬limpio," ‫חדן‬ "abrazo" s > s : ‫" סראם‬separar," ‫" כסאם‬disputar." Es interesante asimismo el cambio q > k en ‫" מ כ ט ף‬hoz." 16. Paso de sorda a sonora en / / / > / ( חוד‬hat) 17. El aroculo definido se escribe separado de la palabra a la que acompana como ocurre en textos adscritos a la tradition de ortografia hebraizada en judeo-àrabe tardio:16 ‫" אל תלת‬el tertio," ‫" אל אתל‬el primero" En algunas ocasiones, el aruculo definido se representa fonédcamente y no morfofonémicamente, fenômeno upico también de la ortografia del judeo-ârabe tardio:17 Delante de letras solares se pierde el lâm\ ‫ א ס ע א‬/ ‫" א ס ע ה‬ahora," ‫" ארבט‬atar" En ‫ בלאחקיק‬caben dos explicaciones: ο bien se ha perdido el alef del ardculo definido ο bien se ha producido una metátesis. Estudio 18. La pérdida de ham^a initial en algunas formas del plural indica un cambio del esquema morfolôgico af'âl > f'àl. Este fenômeno es usual en dialectos magrebies y andalusies:

15 16 17

Véase Tirosh-Becker 1990: 63. Véase Hary 1996:732. Véase Hary 1996: 732.

‫" וחאן‬pesos" (aw^àn > W(ārì), ‫" בואב‬puertas" (abwāb > bwâb), ‫( קדאח‬aqdāh > qdāb) "copas,‫" קואל ״‬dichos" (aqwāl > qwāl) Este cambio morfolôgico no siempre ocurre en Maqre Dardeqe·. ‫" אוולאד‬nifios," ‫" ארכאן‬vigas," ‫" אלוואח‬paneles" 19. Hallamos algunos nombres que siguen un esquema morfolôgico diferente al del árabe clàsico: ‫" כיילאן‬medida" (aunque también aparece ‫)כיילה‬,‫" זנייאן‬adulterio" 20. La pérdida de bam^a inicial en verbos hace caer en desuso la forma IV en todo el neo-àrabe y asi lo observamos en esta obra: 18 ‫" עטה‬give," ‫" ראץ‬desear" 21. Cambios fonolôgicos ocasionan también cambios en los verbos defecdvos, del dpo R 2 - w > R2=j:‫׳‬ ‫ > ( דייא‬dauwa') "iluminar." Lo contrario ocurre en el sustandvo ‫ > ( רקווא‬ruqya) "hechizo" 22. O t r o cambio fonolôgico es el que ocasiona que los verbos de tercera radical ham^a ( R 3 - ' ) pasen a ser defecdvos (RJ-j): ‫" אתלבא‬esconderse" (itxaba'a > itxabd) 23. La forma verbal itfa'al, comûn en los dialectos magrebies, aparece en esta obra: ‫" אטקווא \ אתקווא‬realizar un esfuerzo," ‫" אתכלם‬hablar," ‫" אתומיע‬ser doloroso," ‫" אתלבא‬esconderse," ‫" תתעווקו‬ser detenido" Es interesante asimismo la ortografia del verbo ‫" א ת מ א ד ד‬extender," que podria representar el esquema itfa'al, aunque también puede ocurrir que alef sea mater lectionis. 24. E n Maqre Dardeqe los verbos aparecen a menudo en la forma de infinidvo: El paradigma fa'lân se emplea frecuentemente en este texto, aunque no se corresponde normalmente con la forma udlizada en árabe clàsico: ‫" לסלאן‬desechar," ‫" לבייאן‬esconder," ‫אן‬0‫" חל‬jurar," ‫" כרהאן‬odiar," ‫" חרזאן‬guardar," ‫" רגעאן‬volver," ‫" גלקאן‬cerrar," ‫" חבלאן‬concebir," ‫" לודלאן‬abandonar," ‫" גנייאן‬volverse loco" También son abundantes los infinidvos de la forma tafīl: ‫" תסדיד‬cerrar," ‫" תסלים‬entregar," ‫" תסליף‬prestar," ‫" תגויז‬autorizar," ‫" תטייל‬alargar"

18

Blau (Blau, J. 1980. A Grammar of Medieval Judaeo-Arabic. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, esp. 73,74) considéra este fenômeno c o m o paso de forma IV a forma I. También se puede pensar, sin mbargo, que se trata de forma IV sin alef. Si dispusiésemos de formas en imperfecto de estos vabos, podriamos afirmar con seguridad si nos hallamos realmente ante una forma I ο una forma IV.

Estudio sintdctico 25. La desapariciôn de la marca de caso es normal en todo el judeo-ârabe. La pérdida de ·an adverbial, sin embargo, no es normal en judeo-ârabe, ni tampoco en los dialectos, aunque aparecen algunos casos en esta obra: ‫" כתיר‬mucho," (este caso es habituai también en dialectal) ‫" יאיים‬siempre" (dayma en marroqui) En el caso de ‫" גידה‬muy," tanwin -an es susdtuido por he. Un ejemplo de mantenimiento de la marca adverbial es ‫" קובלאן‬frente a" 26. La termination defecdva de indétermination -in aparece marcada en este texto con yod: ‫ > ( כאוי‬xāwirì) "hueco," ‫ > ( אוואני‬awānitì) "càntaros" Encontramos, sin embargo, un ejemplo de termination -in en raiz defecdva, cuya ortografia refleja su pronunciation ‫ > ( מגאזין‬magâtçn) "expedition militar" 27. La termination de plural oblicuo -in es la forma utilizada para todos los casos, puesto que éstos se han perdido: ‫" קאטעין‬cortar,"‫" זאריעין‬agricultores,"‫" כטור מרבוטין‬atados como pàjaros,"‫סתין‬ "sesenta," ‫״ חוואטין‬Pescadores," ‫" ראקדין‬dormir"

Estudio léxico 28. Algunos lexemas udlizados en Maqre Dardeqe reflejan usos dialectales marroquies ο andalusies, asi como especificos del judeo-ârabe: ‫לשן‬: En árabe clàsico se emplea con el sentido de "ser àspero ο tosco," mientras que en esta obra el significado se ha ampliado a "engordar," segûn refleja la taducciôn al espanol y la cita biblica en cuestiôn. ‫( רשעו‬glosa a la raiz hebrea ‫)זרע‬: En este ejemplo observamos la adoption de esquemas morfolôgicos del árabe adaptados a una raiz hebrea (‫" רשע‬debilitarse"). ‫גזלאן‬: Se emplea con el sentido de "robar," influido por la raiz hebrea ‫גזל‬. En dialecto marroqui hallamos igualmente^/a« l-lil en el sentido de "ladrones."

LEXICAL ANALYSIS OF T H E C O P P E R SCROLL FROM T H E PERSPECTIVE OF M I S H N A I C H E B R E W FRANCISCO JIMÉNEZ BEDMAN Huéscar, Granada, Spain The Copper Scroll, or 3Q15 as it is known in the official edition of Discoveries of the Juadaen Desert, could be considered as the first Mishnaic document yet. That's the way J. T. Milik defined such an awkward document, discovered in 1952 in Qumran, when he released the official edidon in 1962.1 Although there is no comprehensive agreement over the nature and origin as well as composition time, we can assume that it was written before the Romans swept Qumran in 68 AD. This assessment is supported by the palaeographical study by Frank Cross (Cross 1962: 217-221) and the conclusions drawn by the archaeological work fulfilled at the site by R. De Vaux and Β. Pixner.2 The document, as a whole, consists of 12 columns with an ever-changing number of lines—between 13 and 17—describing with the boldness of a shopkeeper book the locadon of 64 treasures probably belonging to the assets accrued by the Essene community. No further or additional "literary" scheme may be pointed out in the document but a recurrent sentence structure focused on the following items: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Locations where the treasures were hidden. Additional information on the location Indication to excavate or measure Number of cubits the addressee is supposed to dig or measure Brief indication of the nature of the treasure Additional information Scattered Greek letters.

N o matter how interesting the text content may be, we are convinced that its real interest lies on the linguistic features it displays. First of all, we should take into account that its enlarged share of Mishnaic lexical items, together with a great deal of Aramaic and Greek loan-words turn the document into an ipsissima verba sample of the Hebrew spoken at the end of the Second Temple period (Rabin 1976: 1018).

1

2

Milik, J. T., Baillet, M. & de Vaux, R. 1962. "Les 'petites grottes' de Qumran: Le rouleau de cuivre provenant de la grotte 3Q (3Q15)." Discoveries of the Judaean Desert. (D.J.D) Volume III. Oxford University Press, 198-302. Pixner, Β. 1983. "Unravelling the Copper Scroll Code: A Study on the Topography of 3Q15." Rj2 43, 323-361

Recently Prof. Elisha Qimron assessed that it was the lexical items displayed on 4 Q M M T what provided the manuscript with a pre-Mishnaic linguistic nature. 3 AU the more could be said on the Copper Scroll, since not only the lexical items, morphology, and phonology play their role but the syntax establishes a Mishnaic linguisric profile. Leaving apart the proper names and numerals, the list of vocabulary compiled by Prof. J. T. Milik consisted of 210 items (Milik 1962: 314-317). Among them a quarter are known to us by means of Mishnaic sources. Nevertheless, the study of its lexical items is beset by a number of difficuldes. Not only questions of vocalization and word-division are often debatable, but very frequendy also the identification of individual letters. Apart from the scriptio continua, and once a word-division task has been worked out, we have to face the great challenge of distinguishing between u>aw and jod, bet and kaf, he and het, dalet and resh. And last but not least, closing the text it seems that the scribe shifted to a more advanced form of alef, which looks like a Greek gamma, the so-called gamma-form alef, which is characteristic of very late Herodian handwriting. 4 As a result, scholars have issued a great variety of proposals involving the whole text. It is worth mentioning Piotr Muchowski's work 5 on the editions by John Allegro (1960-1964), J. T. Milik (1962), Ben Zion Lurie (1963) AI Wolters and M. Mishor (1988) in which he attested to no less than 245 different transcriptions. This figure gets its real rank when compared with the 248 words displayed on the Copper Scroll.6 From the very beginning of its official publication, Prof. J. T. Milik conceded that the manuscript included no less than 34 lexical items which are prèsent in Mishnaic Hebrew but absent from Biblical Hebrew. Among them we would like to point out the following ones: ‫ א מ ה‬, "aqueduct" I, II, I, etc. ‫ א מ צ ע‬, "middle " IV: 7, ‫" ב י ב ה‬drain" XII: 8, ‫" ד ר ו מ י ת‬Southern" III: 1-2; XI: 2, ‫ כ נ ה‬, "base" VI: 7, ‫ מ ד ף‬, "defilement" 111,12-13, ‫ מ ז ר ח י‬, "Eastern" II: 7, II5-6, ‫ מ ס מ א‬, "flagstone" XI: 6, ‫ ס ד ק‬, "crevice" V: 5 ‫ צ ו ק‬, "ravine" VIII: 8 IX: 14. ‫ ק ל ל‬, "pitcher" VI: 4 ‫רוח‬, "side" VII: 5, IX: 7,1: 13 ‫שלף‬, "fallow field" VIII: 10, etc. A very telling group of words consisting of Biblical lexical items with Mishnaic meaning may be traced in the text. Words such us ‫ נ פ ש‬, ‫גנה‬, ‫ ש ד ה‬, ‫ ד מ ע‬, are scattered over the text furnishing the document with additional Mishnaic linguistic features. 3

4

5

6

Qimron, E. and Strugnell, J. 1994 "Miqsat Ma'ase Ha-Torah." Qumran cave 4. DJD. X. Oxford, 102. "What, then, consdtutes the special nature o f the language o f MMT? The relative pronoun ‫ש״‬, and a number o f syntacdcal constructions, are insufficient in themselves to give the text the markedly MH appearence that it has. What lends it this appearence is above all the vocabulary." Wilmot, D. 1984. "Abstract of the Copper Scroll of Qumran (3Q15) and the Greco-Roman Temple Inventories." AAR/SBL Abstracts. Adanta: Scholars Press, 214. Muchowski, P. 1993. Zwöj Miedsjany (}Q15). Imp/ikacje Spornych Kivestii Lingwistyciych. [Copper Scroll 3Q15. Implications o f The Controversial Linguistic Problems]. Polonia, 33. Milik, J. T., Baillet, M. & de Vaux, R. 1962. "Les 'petites grottes' de Qumran: Le rouleau de cuivre provenant de la grotte 3Q (3Q15)." Discoveries of the Judaean Desert. (D.J.D) Volume III. Oxford University Press, 314—317. (He comes to a total of 248; 38 proper nouns out o f them).

A great deal of research has been carried out to interpret the hapax legomenon ‫ ד מ ע‬. As a rule, the term was addressed mainly from two semantic fields. Some scholars 7 considered it to be a derivation of ‫"( ד מ ע‬to weep"; cf. ‫ד מ ע ה‬ / d i m m a h / "tears"). Thus, ‫ ד מ ע‬is understood as designating some kind of juice, oil or wine. This is probably supported by the Septuagint, which translates ‫ד מ ע‬ in Exodus 22.28 as (ληνός) "winevat." For another group of scholars the term is considered to be closely connected with the ‫ ד מ ע‬in Samaritan Hebrew, which means "best part of, superior."8 Though both approaches were taken into account when the Copper Scroll was opened up, ever since most of the scholars, pace Milik,9 have supported the idea of ‫ ד מ ע‬closely connected with the Mishnaic Tërùmâh. John Allegro drew its meaning based on Tosephta, (Tosephta. Ter. 1016) pointing out the use of ‫ ב י ת ה ד מ ע‬as "the place in the barn set aside for Térûmâh" (Allegro 1960: 137). A similar stand was backed by Manfred Lehmann 10 and B. Z. Lurie.11 Although Kyle McCarter 12 derives the meaning of dema' from its association with ‫ ת ר י מ ה‬in Rabbinic literature, he advocated that this word does not only designate the priesdy tithe itself but in a wider sense all forms of contributions for Levites and Priests. Armin Lange13 addressed the analysis of ‫ ד מ ע‬in a freer way drawing the conelusion that in the Copper Scroll it conveys a meaning not only related to tithe but to any valuable object. Keeping on with this limited group of words we would like to refer the word ‫( ש ד ה‬I: 3 XII: 5) translated as "strongbox." In the Masoretic Text it is attested

7

8

9

10

11 12

13

Buhl, F. et al. 1962. Wilhelm Gesenius' hebräisches und aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament. Berlin/Göttingen/Heidelberg: Sprinter Verlag. 17th Edidon, 165. Brown, F. et al. 1979. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs—Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon with an Appendix Containing the Bibdeal Aramaic. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 199. Hoffmann, D. 1886. "Lexicographische Nodzen." Magasin fur die Wissenschaft des ]udenthums 13; Perles; F. 1912. Review o f Cowley, A. 1909. The Samaritan Liturgy 1:11. Oxford: Clarendon Press, en OLZ 15,218. Milik. J. T. 1962. DJD. Ill, 250. "Le mot ‫ ד מ ע‬revient quinz fois [...] Le plus souvent on dit: 'vase(s) de dema' ' suivi du nom d'une espèce de cette madère. Si nos identifications de certains, au moins, de ces espèces sont exactes, il s'agirait d"aromates, d'encens, de résine,' et sans doute de 'bois odoriférant.' Cinq fois on ne mentionne que les 'vases d'aromates' et une seule 'le dema" tout court. En i 9 el n'est pas clair s'il faut comprendre 'dema' de santal' ou bien 'aromates (et) santal' [....] Dans les cas où l'espècie de dema' n'est pas précisée el pourrait s'agir des aromates les plus répandus: encens (lebonah) et myrrhe [mot) [...]" Lehmann, M. R. 1964. "Identification o f the Copper Scroll Based on its Technical Termes." RQ 5, 97-105. Luria, B. Z. 1963. Megi/lat ha-nehoshet mi-midbar Yehudah. [Hebr.], Jerusalem: Kyriat Sefer. McCarter, P. K. 1994. "The Copper Scroll Treasure as an Accumulation o f Religious Offerings," Methods of Investigation of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Khirbet Qumran Site. Present Realities and Future Prospects. Ed. M. O. Wise et al. Annals of The N e w York Academy o f Sciences 722. N e w York: The N e w York Academy of Sciences, 461-463. Lange, A. 1996. "The Meaning o f DM' in the Copper Scroll and Ancient Jewish Literature." International Symposium on the Copper Scroll. The Manchester-Shefield Centre for Dead Sea Scrolls Research. September. 1996.

in Eccl. 2: 8 though in this particular case it is rendered as "concubines." Nevertheless, in the Midrasic Literature (M. Kelim 18: 3) we find many uses of ‫ש ד ה‬ conveying the meaning of "strongbox," large enough to hold even a person inside it. The next lexical item ‫( נ פ ש‬I: 5) is rendered in the Copper Scroll as "memorial edifice." Though some scholars think over that this meaning is attested in Genesis 12: 5 (Habermann 1956: 363-368) Kutscher assessed that the Mishnaic use of ‫ נ פ ש‬as "memorial edifice" is a loan translation from Aramaic which appeared as such only in the latter stages of Aramaic influence. Another telling lexical item is ‫( ג נ ה‬X: 17, XI: 6). It is quite interesting since it is a good example of changing the meaning by means of genre shifting. Most of the times it has been rendered as "garden" echoing the Biblical use, or as "orchard" It will be observed that neither "garden" nor "orchard" could fit with the general mood of the text, since a great deal of locations mentioned on the Copper Scroll are referring to burial places. Furthermore, the expression ‫צ ד ו ק ג נ ת‬ in column X is preceded by another one, just in the same column, ‫ ב ק ב ר צ ד ו ק‬. By doing so, it could be said that ‫ ג נ ת‬and ‫ ק ב ר‬could be closely connected from a semantic point of view. This proposal could be supported too by the fact that Romans were accustomed to calling the Jewish graveyards as "Hortus Judaeorum" — ‫ ג נ ת ה י ה ו ד י ם‬It has been suggested too that Jewish burial places were called that because of the trees surrounding those special sites (Abrahams 1986: 77). This list of Mishnaic vocabulary was enlarged by the proposals sumitted by different scholars. In his article "The Copper Scroll and the Vocabulary of Mishnaic Hebrew," 14 apart from focusing on the lexical items analysed by Milik, Allegro and Lurie, Prof. AI Wolters stressed new readings and translations based on a Mishnaic semantic approach. This bulk of Mishnaic words displayed on the Copper Scroll, no doubt is increased with the new proposals submitted by new studies. That's the case of the new transcription reading I have proposed recendy for the words ‫( ס נ ה ס ו ח‬XI: 4, 10).15 In short, our proposal ‫" ס י ) ע ( ה‬followers" and ‫" ס נ א‬adversaries" is based on the linguistic characteristics, both morphological and phonological, shared by the Qumran and Mishnaic Hebrew. From a palaeographical point of view the confusion between ‫ ו‬and ‫ י‬as well as ‫ ה‬and ‫ ח‬is attested to in the document, being one of the reasons for so long a list of readings mentioned above. On the other hand the drop of ‫ ע‬may be explained as the result of the weak pronunciation of gutturals. 16 This phenomenon, fostered by the influence exerted by the Greek language on the different Hebrew standards spoken at the time, can be traced in the Mishnaic and Samaritan Hebrew as well as in the Qumran Hebrew documents properly. In 1Q7/.

14 15

16

Wolters, A. 1990. "The Copper Scroll and the Vocabulary of Mishnaic Hebrew." RQ 14, 483. Jiménez Bedman, F. 1996. "Los Términos ‫ ס ו ח‬y ‫ ס נ ה‬en el Rollo de Cohn (3Q15)." Miscelánea de Estudios Arabesy Hebreos 45, 27-35. Murtonen, Α. 1963/64. "A Historico-Philological Survey of the Main Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Documents." Abr-Naharain 4, 56-95.

Kutscher pointed out a great deal of lexical items whose transcriptions displayed the influence of the weak pronunciation of gutturals. 17 Some cases showed a dropped guttural XLVIII 14 ‫ )ויעשה( ו י ש ה‬XXVIII 15 ‫ ;)יעבור( יבוו־‬on the other hand a small guttural is reinserted in the text so as to correct the spontaneous mistake IX 7 ‫ \ ע ק ו ב‬V 21 ‫ ב ע י נ י ה ם‬. Similar cases can be attested to in the Temple Scroll and in 1 QMilbamab, 1 QSerek Hajyahad, 1 QHodajot, \QPefer Habakuk, etc.18 It's quite interesting to notice, from a phonological approach, that both in the cases displayed in 1 Q I / and in our proposal ‫ ע — ס י ) ע ( ה‬is preceded or followed by ‫י‬. In the Copper Scroll we find several cases in which gutturals are dropped I 4 ‫ ש ב ע ש ר ה‬XI 14 (‫דמ)ע‬, XII 1 ‫מ)ע(רב‬, etc. In other cases a similar phenomenon could be inferred, IX 6 ‫ דמ)ע( א צ ה‬XI 14 ‫דמ)ע מ ( ל א ה‬. Furthermore, from the diachronic point of view, we must concede that although ‫ סי)ע(ה‬is an Aramaic word, it was widely used in Mishnaic Hebrew (Toseph. Dem. V, 5; Term. VII, 20) conveying the same meaning we proposed for the 3Q15. On the other hand, the second lexical item ‫ ס נ ה‬should be reinterpreted as ‫ ש נ א‬or ‫( ס נ א‬Targ. Ex XXIII, 5. Targ. II. Esth VI. 10). First of all, we should bear in mind that there is a widespread neutralization between ‫ ש‬and ‫ ס‬that could be traced not only in Mishnaic literature but both in Qumran Hebrew and in Qumran Aramaic (Qimron 1986: 29-30). In the Copper Scroll there is a general substitution of ‫ ש‬for ‫ ; ס‬these are the cases of I 10/11 ‫ מ ע ס ר שני‬, I 13 ‫ ס מ ו ל‬, or III 4 ‫ ק ס א ו ת‬. Secondly, the morpho-phonological change of ‫ א‬for ‫ ה‬is supported by the fact that in the Qumran documents similar changes can be attested. Two documents closely connected to 3Q15 from a linguistic point of view 4 Q M M T a n d the Temple Scroll displays the same radical substitution. For the time being, it needs to be stressed that the Copper Scroll enlarges more than 25% the list released by E. Qimron headlined "Words Mainly Attested in the D.S.S and in the Tannaitic and Amoraitic Literature" as part of his study on the Hebrew of the D.S.S.19 It is worth mentioning, just before finishing this section of lexical items, that both the Aramaic and Greek languages have their own share of vocabulary on the Copper Scroll. We would highlight the Greek loan-words that once again make the document really different from the rest of documents found in Khirbet Qumran. Among the ones proposed by the scholarly we would like to point out the following loans: ‫ פ ס ט ל ו ן‬, περιστυλιον, "peristyle," ‫ לגין‬λάγηνος/λάγυνος "flask," ‫ א כ ס ד ר ן‬, εξεδρα, "exedra," ‫ א ס ט א ן‬, στοά, "Portico" and probably ‫ל ב י ש‬ λέβης [lebes] "cauldron" and ‫ ד י ט א‬δίαιτα "court." 20

17

18 19 20

Kutscher, Ε. Y. 1974. The Language and Linguistic Background of the Dead Sea Scrolls (lQIs·). Leiden: Brill, 505-511. Qimron, E. 1986. Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Atlanta: Scholars Press. Qimron, E. 1986. Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Adanta: Scholars Press, 2 5 - 2 7 Puech, E. 1997. "Quelques résultats d'un nouvel examen de Rouleau de Cuivre (3Q15)." Revue de Qumrân 18, 163-190.

From a syntactic point of view, it is quite important to draw our attention to the fact that the particle ‫ ש ל‬is widely used. Though it is really difficult to know whether the particle is clung to the following word in a scriptio continua script, in the Copper Scroll we notice that in the final columns there is light separation among words. This new situation lets us realize the existence of uses of ‫ ש ל‬with clear-cut separation between the particle and the following word, no matter if the article is determined or not. XII: 4 ‫" ה מ ע ל ה א ש ל ה ש י ת ה ע ל י ו נ א‬the step of the upper cavern." XII: 6 ‫" ב פ י ה מ ב ו ע ש ל ב י ת ש ם‬in the mouth of the spring of Beth-Sam." Consequendy, Prof. Milik considered all the cases of the document as separated. From a semantic point of view, the roles played by the particle are quite similar to the roles it carries out in Mishnaic Hebrew. Thus, we can attest to combinations of ‫ ש ל‬with semikut: III: 2 / 3 ‫" כ ל י כ ס פ ו ז ה ב ש ל ד מ ע‬silver and gold vessels of tribute." Other cases displayed the use of ‫ ש ל‬ruling over a semikut: IV: 13 ‫" ביגר ש ל גי ה ס כ כ א‬in the cairn of Sekaka' gorge." On the other hand we can also attest the use of several ‫ ש ל‬in a chain of sequences. VI: 7 / 8 ‫" ב מ ע ר א ש ל ה כ נ א ש ל ה ר ג ב‬in the cave of the base of the rock." It is quite difficult to establish a clear-cut distincrion between the uses of ‫ ש ל‬and those of semikut in the Copper Scroll·, however, taking into account the frequency and the semantic roles played by each one, we could infer that ‫ ש ל‬is preferred to describe possession or belonging V: 8 ‫" ה ח ר י ץ ש ל ש ל ו מ ו‬Salomon's Canal," V: 6 ‫" כ א ל י ן ש ל ד מ ע‬vessels of tribute," and to describe the stuff something is made of VII: 10 ‫" ב ד י ן ש ל כ ס ף‬silver pitchers," while purpose is carried out by means of semikut I: 12 ‫" מ ק ר ת ה ט ב ו ל‬immersion fountain." Finally, the use of ‫ ש‬as the only relative pronoun in the Copper Scroll should rule out any doubt about the Mishnaic nature of this document. It is high time to draw some conclusion that could help us understand a little bit more about this mysterious document. Both the content and the Hebrew standard it was written in make a clear-cut difference with the rest of the bulk of documents ever found in Qumran. On the other hand, the explicit disdain that Qumran dwellers expressed about the Mishnaic Hebrew should be considered as the stand adopted by those who saw language as a theological and ideological vehicle. On the other hand, that striking variety of Greek loans, most of the time referring to architectural elements should lead us to urban environment, in which such elements could be as natural as the language they spoke, in all likelihood, Jerusalem.

Selected Bibliography.

Allegro, J. M. 1960. The Treasure of the Copper Scroti Londres: Roudedge and Kegan Paul. Second Edition 1964, in Garden City, N. Y: Doubleday. Beyer, K. 1994. "3Q15: Die Kupferrolle (kurz vor 70 η. Chr.)." Die aramäischen Texte vom Toten Meer samt den Inschriften aus Palästina, dem Testament Levis aus der Kairoer Genisa, der Pastenrolle un den alten talmudischen Zitaten. Ergänzungsband, (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht). 224-233. Cross, F. M. 1962. "Excursus on the Paleographical Dating of the Copper Scroll Document." DJD III. 217-221. Garcia Martinez, F. & Tigghelaar, E. 1997. The Dead Sea Scrolls. Study Edition. Vol. One. 1Q1^1Q273. Leiden, New York, Köln: Brill. Habermann, A. M. 1956. "Rachel Tomb and the Lexical Item ‫נפש‬." Tarbi^lS, 363-368. Jiménez Bedman, F. 1996. "Los Términos ‫ סורו‬y ‫ ס נ ה‬en el Kollo de Cobre (3Q15)." Miscelánea de Estudios Arabesy Hebreos 45, 27-35. Lefkovtis, J. K. 1993. The Copper Scr0ll-3Qì5, A New Reading, Translation and Commentary (3 vols.) U.M.I. New York University. Lehmann, M. R. 1964. "Identification of the Copper Scroll Based on its Technical Termes." Revue deQumrân 5, 97-105. Luria, B. Z. 1963. Megillat ha-NehoIet mi-midbar Yeudah. [Hebr.]. Jerusalem: Kyriat Sefer. Milik, J.T., Baillet, M. & de Vaux, R. 1962. Les ((petitesgrottes» de Qumran: Le rouleau de cuivre provenant de la grotte 3Q (3Q15) Discoveries of the Judaean Desert. (D.J. D) Volume III. Oxford University Press. Muchowski, P. 1993. Zwoj Miedqany (3Q15). lmplikacje Spornych Kwestii Lingwislyqych. [Copper Scroll 3Q15. Implications of The Controversial Linguistic Problems]. Poland. Pixner, Β. 1983. "Unravelling the Copper Scroll Code: A Study on the Topography of 3Q15." Revue de Qumran 11, 323-366. Puech, E. 1997 "Quelques résultats d'un nouvel examen de Rouleau de Cuivre (3Q15)." Revue de Qumrân 18, 163-190. Qimron, E. 1986. Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Adanta: Scholars Press. Rabin, H. 1976. "Hebrew and Aramaic in the First Century." In The Jewish People in the First Century. Ed. S. Safrai and M. Stern. Assen/Amsterdam. Vol. II. 1007-1039. Wilmot, D. 1984. "Abstract of the Copper Scroll of Qumran (3Q15) and the GrecoRoman Temple Inventories." AAR/SBL Abstracts. Adanta: Scholars Press. 214. Wolters, A. 1990. "The Copper Scroll and the Vocabulary of Mishnaic Hebrew." Revue de Qumrân. 14, 483.

T H E EARLY KARAITE GRAMMATICAL T R A D I T I O N GEOFFREY KHAN Cambridge University, UK The opening up of the Firkovitch collections of manuscripts in St. Petersburg to international scholarship has led to numerous discoveries of medieval Karaite grammatical texts. As is the case with a large proportion of the material in the Firkovitch collections, the Karaite grammatical texts in question originated in the Oriental Karaite communities. The most important of these grammatical texts were written in Arabic and are datable to the tenth and eleventh centuries. These texts, however, report traditions of earher generations of Karaite grammarians who must have been contemporaries of Saadya Gaon in the first half of the tenth century. We also have at least one text that contains an outline of Karaite grammatical thought in its embryonic state and is likely to pre-date the tenth century. T h e authors of some of the most important Karaite grammatical texts that are extant are 'Abū al-Faraj Hārūn in the first half of the eleventh century and his teacher Yūsuf ibn N ū h in the second half of the tenth century. Both of these scholars were based in Jerusalem and belonged to a tradition of Hebrew grammatical thought that developed in the Eastern Jewish world. This was distinct from the Western Spanish tradition of Hebrew grammar, which became the dominant one in the later Middle Ages and formed the basis of the textbooks of Hebrew grammar that are in use today. 'Abu al-Faraj Hārūn ibn Faraj was attached to a Karaite college that had been established by Yūsuf ibn Nūh, around the beginning of the eleventh century. It consisted of seventy Karaite scholars, who devoted themselves to various fields of learning in addition to that of grammar, including philosophy, law, exegesis and Bible translation. 'Abū al-Faraj's contemporaries at the college ineluded the philosopher Yūsuf al-Basir and Levi ben Yefet, who was the son of the exegete Yefet ben 'Eli. After the death of Yūsuf ibn Nūh, , Abū al-Faraj took over the leadership of the college. 1 'Abu al-Faraj Hārūn wrote several Arabic works on the Hebrew language. T h e largest of these is a comprehensive work on Hebrew morphology and syntax consisting of eight parts entided al-Kitāb al-muštamil 'alā al- 'usül wa-l-fusülfi allugha al-'ibràniyya ("The comprehensive book of general principles and particular rules of the Hebrew language"), which was completed in 1026 A.D. 2 He comIbn al-Hïtï, ed. Margoliouth, 433. For a summary o f the contents of thcal-Kitāb al-muStamil see Bacher, W. 1895. "Le grammairien anonyme de Jérusalem et son livre." Revue des Etudes Juives 30, 232-256, w h o publishes a few short extracts. Recent studies of aspects of grammar inal-Kitāb al-muÍtamil have been published by Maman, A. 1996.("‫ בין הקראים לרבנים‬:‫ " ה מ ח ש ב ה ה ד ק ד ו ק י ת בימי הבניים‬Language Studies!, 7 9 -

posed a shorter version of the work called al-Kitāb al-kāfì ("The sufficient book"). 3 A fragment of another work is extant entided Kitäb al-'uqüdβ tasārif allugha al-'ibräniyya ("Book of the pearl-strings on the grammatical inflections of the Hebrew language"), which appears to be an epitome of al-Kitāb al-kāfi.* He treated the pronunciation and accents of Biblical Hebrew in the separate work Hidāyat al-qārì ("The guide for the reader"), which he produced in both a long and a short version. 5 Some of the works of 'Abu al-Faraj Hārūn were known in the West in the Middle Ages. Abraham Ibn Ezra refers to him in the preface to his work Sepher mo^ne lélon ha-q0deš. Some other medieval scholars in the West knew his work, though often they exhibit a reluctance to acknowledge who the author was, no doubt on account of his affiliation to the Karaite sect. As we have already seen, 'Abu al-Faraj Hārūn was not the first Karaite grammarian. He was continuing a tradition of Hebrew grammatical thought that had been developed by earlier Karaite scholars. His teacher, 'Abu Ya'qüb Yūsuf ibn Nūh, the founder of the Jerusalem college, wrote an Arabic work on Hebrew grammar that was known simply as al-Diqdüq.6 This takes the form of a grammatical commentary on the Bible. The Diqdūq is mentioned by 'Abu alFaraj Hārūn in his own grammatical works. 7 Yūsuf ibn Nūh belonged to the generation preceding that of 'Abü al-Faraj Hārūn and active in the last few decades of the tenth century and the beginning of the eleventh. He is likely to be identical with 'Abu Ya'qûb Yūsuf ibn Bakhtawaih (or Bakhtawi), who is mentioned in some sources. It seems Bakhtawaih was some ancestor of Yūsuf before the generadon of his father. Yūsuf ibn Bakhtawaih is stated to have been a grammarian who composed a book called al-Diqdūq. He is also described as "the Babylonian" and "teacher of the diaspora" (mu'allim al-jālijd), which indicates

3

4

5

6 7

by Maman, A. 1996.("‫ בין הקראים לרבנים‬:‫ " ה מ ח ש ב ה הדקדוקית בימי הבניים‬Language Studies 7 , 7 9 96; "‫ "המקור ושם ה פ ע ו ל ה בתפיסת אבו אלפרג הרון‬In Studies in Hebrew and Jewish languages presented to Shelomo Morag. Ed. M. Bar-Asher. Jerusalem, 1996, 119-149. An edition of al-Kitāb al-muitamil is being prepared by A. Maman and D. Tene. See Skoss, 1928. The Arabic Commentary of Ali ben Suleiman. Philadelphia, Introduction 11-27, Gil, Palestine during the First Muslim Period I, section 938, and the references cited there. Extracts from al-Kitāb al-kāfi have been published by S. Poznanski ("Aboul-Faradj Haroun ben al-Faradj le grammairien de Jérusalem et son Mouschtamil." Revue des Études Juives 30, 1896, 197-213, M. N. Zislin ("Diaea 113 rpaMManiHecKoro coHimeiuiH aJ1-Kac^n A6y-;1-(|>apall>Ka XapyHa II6H aJl<J>apa_l>Ka." FlajiecmuHctcuù C60pnuK 7, 1962, 178-84; "A6y-.'l-Oapa.l>K XapyH ο cnpjDKemm EepeficKoro rJiaroJla." Kpamtcue C006UICHUX Hncmumyma Hapojoe A3uu 86, 1965, 164—177) and D. Becker,(‫שיטת הסימניס של ׳דרכי הפועל העברי׳ לפי המדקדקים הקראיים אבו אלפרג׳ הארק ובעל ׳מאור העין׳ ״‬." In Studies in Judaica. Ed. M. A. Friedman. Tel-Aviv, 1991, 249-75). Published by Hirschfeld, H. 1922—23. "An Unknown Grammadcal Work by Abul-Faraj Harun." Jewish Quarterly Review, N. S. 13, 1-7. The attribution of this work to 'Abu al-Faraj Hârūn has only recendy been established; cf. Eldar, I. 1994. The Art of Comet Reading of the Bible (Hebr.). Jerusalem, 40-43. I am at present preparing a critical edition of this work. Skoss, S. L. The Arabic Commentary of Ali ben Suleiman. 4—11 ; Bacher, Revue des Études Juives 30, 251. Another work, entided ‫ הניצונים‬or ‫ ספר הניצונים‬is attributed to Yūsuf ibn Nuh in some sources; cf. Mordecai ben Nisan, Dod Mordecai, Vienna, 1830, 25a, Pinsker, 1860 Lickute kadmoniot. Vienna, 106. Judah Hadassi, however, attributes this work to a1-Qirqisānī (EshkothaKofer. Gozlow, 1836, 258), so the reliability of its attribution to Ibn Nūh is in doubt.

that his career had begun in Iraq. 8 Yūsuf ibn Bakhtawaih is said to have had a pupil named Sa'Id Shīrān, who was also a grammarian. 9 The Diqduq of Ibn Nuh is the earliest extant text that can be identified with certainty as a Karaite grammatical work. We know, however that other Karaite scholars of his generation wrote grammatical works. Judah Hadassi, for instance, refers to a grammar book of Sahl ben Masliah, a contemporary of Ibn Nūh, though this is now lost.10 The scholars of Ibn Nuh's generation, moreover, were the recipients of a well-developed tradition of Hebrew grammatical thought. Some elements of this are found in the works of the lexicographer David ben Abraham a1-Fāsī and the exegete and translator Yefet ben 'Eli. Ibn Nuh himself refers to other anonymous scholars of grammar. A number of fragments of Karaite Bible commentaries written in Judaeo-Persian that are largely grammatical in character have been discovered in the Cairo Genizah. These are close in form to the Diqduq of Ibn Nūh and may be of a similar date. It is possible that they were written by Karaite immigrants from Persia to Palestine.11 Fragments of an anonymous Karaite grammatical work have been published by A. Harkavy, many of the terms of which are parallel to those used by Ibn Nūh. 12 Some of the anonymous scholars mentioned by Ibn Nuh may have been his contemporaries, yet some are referred to as deceased. 13 In one medieval Karaite source it is stated that the science of grammar began in Isfahan, 14 suggesting that Karaite grammatical thought found in the extant texts of Ibn Nūh and , Abu al-Faraj from Palestine belongs to a tradition that began further East, in the heardands of early Karaism. 'Abu al-Faraj, in fact, attributes some grammatical concepts to the teachings of earlier Karaite grammarians in Iraq. 15 Ibn Nūh like many of the Karaite scholars in Palestine, was of Eastern origin. The name Bakhtawayh, which was that of one of his forebears, suggests that the family was of Iranian background. It is clear that Hebrew grammatical thought developed at an early period in the history of their movement. After the time of , Abu al-Faraj Hārūn, Hebrew grammatical thought among the medieval Karaites did not develop with any great creativity. From the end of 8

9

10 11

12

13

14

15

Pinsker, Liekute kadmoniot, 62; Mann, Texts and Studies, 30. Note, however, that, according to Ibn al-HItl, Ibn Nūh lived in Jerusalem for thirty years (ed.Margoliouth, 433). The source published by Pinsker refers to a "Book o f Preceptá' ( ‫ )ספר ה מ צ ו ת‬o f Yūsuf ibn Bakhtawaih. This, however, is thought by some to be a mistake o f the authoç cf. Poznanski, S. 1896. "Aboul-Faradj Haroun be al-Faradj le Grammairien de Jérusalem et son Mouschtamil." Revue des Études Juives 30, 215, n. 4; Skoss, The Arabic Commentary of Ali ben Suleiman. Introducdon, 6 - 7 . S. Poznariski, 1895-96. "Karaite Miscellanies."/«*‫״׳‬,‫ )׳‬Quarterly Review 8 (Old Series), 699; Mann, Texts and Studies, 30. Eshkol ha-Kofer, 167, letter 173;‫ש‬,letter .‫צ‬ Cf. Shaked, S. 1982. "Two Judaeo-Iranian contributions." In Irano-Judaiea. Ed. S. Shaked. Jerusalem, 304-312. Harkavy, A. 1891. Studien und Mittheilungen aus der Kaiserlichen Oeffentlicben Bibliothek St. Petersburg V, St. Petersburg,.‫עד‬-‫פד‬ E.g. II Firkovitch Ev. Arab. I 4323, fol. 9a ‫" הדה ה ו מ ד ה ב בעץ א ל ע ל מ א ר ח מ ה א ל ל ה‬This is the opinion o f one of the sages, G o d have mercy upon him," where the blessing rahimahu allàh suggests that the man in question is diseased. The text in question is a Karaite commentary on Genesis, extracts o f which were published by J. Mann, Texts and Studies, 103-105. See the first passage cited below.

the eleventh century we have a Karaite grammatical work known as Me'or 'Ayin. This was written in Byzantium by an anonymous author who was largely dependent on the teachings of 'Abu al-Faraj.16 The system of Hebrew grammar presented by Judah Hadassi in the twelfth century abandons the Karaite tradidon and is based on the Spanish grammarians. A comparison of the works of 'Abū al-Faraj Hārūn and the earlier Karaite sources indicates that 'Abu al-Faraj, although inevitably dependent on the earlier Karaite grammatical tradition, differed from it in a number of respects. In some passages of his works he refers to some of the differences between himself and his predecessors. In this paper we shaU briefly examine one of these differences. According to 'Abū al-Faraj, the base of the inflection of a verb is the infinitive. He rebuts the view that the base of inflection is the imperative. He states that this last view was held by Arabic grammarians (al-nuháh) of the Kūfan school and also Hebrew grammarians in Iraq who he refers to by the term aldiqdūqiyyūna. It is clear that 'Abu al-Faraj is using the term diqdūqiyyūna to refer to earlier Karaite grammarians. This term is occasionally found also in the works of the tenth century Karaites David ben Abraham a1-Fāsī and Yefet ben 'Eli.17 Its derivation, of course, is from the Hebrew word diqduq, which had come to be used to denote "grammatical investigation" by the tenth century. The word diqduq, however, is found in sources predating the rise of Hebrew grammatical thought. In Rabbinic literature the verbal form diqdeq is used in the sense of attention to fine details of pronunciation 18 and also with the meaning of "investigating thoroughly" the content of Scripture. 19 We have seen that the grammar book of Yūsuf ibn Nūh was known by the tide of al-Diqdüq. 'Abu al-Faraj, however, did not use the term diqdūqiyyūna to designate all people engaged in the study of grammar. He makes an explicit terminological distinction between the Arabic grammarians (al-nuba) and the Karaite Hebrew grammarians {al-diqdūqiyyūná). Moreover, the way he uses the term diqdūqiyyūna in his writings implies that they were a set of scholars distinct from himself and that he did not regard himself as one of their number. He attributes some opinions to the earlier Karaite grammarians, for instance, by phrases such as "the statement of the diqdúqiyyūna that..." without qualifying the term diqdūqiyyūna by adjectives such as "other" or "earlier." 20 The implication of

16

17

18

19

20

See the edition o f M. N. Zislin, Moscow, 1990 and the review by Maman, A. 1994. Leione'nu 58, 153-165. See Skoss, S. L. ed. 1936-1945. The Hebrew-Arabic dictionary of the Bible known as Kitāb jāmi' al-'alfäξ (Agrön) of David ben Abraham al-Fāsi. N e w Haven, I, lxiii; II, 334. E.g. ‫" קרא ולא דקדק באותיותיה‬he read but did not pronounce its letters properly." Mishnah, Berakhot 2:3. E.g. ‫" ת ל מ י ד ח כ ם יושב ו מ ד ק ד ק בדברי תורה ו מ ב ר ר דברי ת ו ר ה ו מ ש ק ל ם‬a scholar sits and investigates thoroughly the Law, he clarifies the words of the Law and ponders them": Sifre to Deut 11:22, cited by Bacher, W. 1899. Die älteste Terminologie der jüdischen Schriftsauslegung. Leipzig, 23; cf. Finkelstein, L. ed. 1939. Siphre ad Deuteronomium. Berlin, 110 (variant reading). E.g. al-Kitāb al-Kāfi, MS II Firk. Εν. Arab. I 4478, fol. 34a: ‫א ל כ ל א ם פימא ידכרה אלדקדוקיון‬ ‫" פי א ל א ו א מ ר‬Discussion of the statement o f thcdiqdūq scholars concerning imperatives" (see the second passage cited below).

this is that 'Abu al-Faraj regarded himself as in some way independent of these earlier grammarians. He considered, it seems, that the nature of his own grammadcal invesdgadon was different in some respect. In an anonymous treatise on the lern published by K. Levy, which is datable to the tenth century, the earlier masoretic scholars are referred to as follows: ‫הקדמונים ה מ ל מ ד י ם ובעלי הקריאה והניגונים ו ה ט ע מ י ם והמסדות ואנשי הדקדוק‬

"the early teachers, the masters of reading, cantillation, accents and written tradition and the people of diqduq ( 2 ‫ה ד ק ד ו ק‬ ‫ ) א נ ש י‬. ‫ ' ״‬Here the phrase ‫וק אנשי‬ seems to have been used synonymously with "masters of reading" (‫)בעלי הקריאה‬ to refer to the scholars occupied with the compilation of rules for the vocalizadon and accents. The term diqduq is used in masoretic contexts also in the plural. It appears in the tide of the most famous collection of masoretic rules, the ‫דקדוקי ה ט ע מ י ם‬, compiled by Aharon ben Asher, and edited in a masterly fashion by Professor Aharon Dotan. 22 Here, it seems, the term ‫ דקדוקי‬refers to the rules established by detailed investigation of Scripture, rather than the investigation itself.23 This corresponds to the use of the term diqduq in Rabbinic hermeneutics in phrases such as ‫ דקדוקי התורה‬to refer to aspects of Scripture revealed by detailed investigation. A similar usage is found in the phrase ‫דקדוקי המקרא‬, which is used in one extant text to refer to a list of rules and principles for the study of Scripture. 24 The rules and principles mentioned in this text relate to various aspects of Scripture, which may be defined as masoretic, grammatical and rhetorical-exegerical.25 Early Karaite grammatical thought developed in circles closely associated with the masoretic tradition in the ninth or possibly late eighth century. The work of the Masoretes at this period involved the investigation of the principles of the Bible. Certain circles of masoretic scholars were concerned not only with the preservation and correct reading of the text of Scripture but also with exegesis and grammatical analysis. Their work was influenced to a certain extent by early Arabic thought and Qur'anic exegesis. It was from this wider discipline of masoretic investigation of the Bible that the early Karaite grammatical tradition developed. It is significant that the earliest Karaite grammatical works such as that of Yūsuf ibn Nuh and the Judaeo-Persian fragments published by S.

21 22

23 24

25

Zur masoretischen Grammatik, Stuttgart, 1936, .‫יד‬ Aharon ben Asher was active in the first half of the tenth century, though the material that he assembled together in the ‫ דקדוקי ה ט ע מ י ם‬was mosdy composed by earlier generadons o f Masoretes; see Baer, S. and Strack, H. L. 1879. Oit Dikduke ha-Teamim des Ahron ben Moscheh ben Ascher und andere alte grammatisch-massorttische Lehrstücke. Leipzig, xvi; Dotan, A. 1967. The Diqduqé ha-ß'amim ofAharon ben Mole ben Aíér. Jerusalem, 4. See A. Dotan, The Diqduqé ha-tl'amim, 31. Published by Allony, N. "‫ "רשימת מ ו נ ח י ם קראית מ ה מ א ה השמינית‬In ‫ קורנגרין ז״ל‬.‫ פ‬.‫לזכר ד״ר י‬ ‫כתבי ה ח ב ר ה ל ח ק ר ה מ ק ר א ב י ש ר א ל‬. Ed. Α. Wieser and Β. Z. Luria. Tel-Aviv, 1 9 6 4 , 3 2 4 - 6 3 . The use o f the term diqduq in the sense of "rule" is still found in Hebrew grammadcal texts from tenth century Spain, e.g. by Menahem ben Saruq, Dunash ben Labrat and their disciples; cf. del Valle Rodriguez, C. 1982. Die grammatikalische Terminologie der Frühen Hebräischen Grammatikern. Madrid, 60-62.

Shaked 26 are in the form of Bible commentaries that include exegedcal observadons in addidon to grammadcal analysis. The range of features that are discussed by Ibn Nuh in his Diqduq, in fact, corresponds closely to the range that is reflected by the aforemendoned list of Diqduqe ha-Miqra. As remarked, this is a list of rules and principles relating to the masoredc, grammadcal and rhetoricalexegedcal aspects of the investigation of Scripture. It is written in Hebrew and was regarded by N. Allony as originating in Karaite circles, on account of the mention of the ‫ בני המקרא‬in its introduction. Allony dated it as early as the eighth century. This dating may be too early, yet, the fact that it is written in Hebrew rather than Arabic suggests that it predated the tenth century. It was in the tenth century that Arabic generally replaced Hebrew in Masoretic texts and as it did in many other types of texts written by Jews of the Near East. The terminology used by Ibn Nūh in his Diqduq, moreover, is very close to that of the list of Diqduqe ha-Miqra. Indeed, much of Ibn Nûh's terminology is Hebrew, although he wrote his text in Arabic, and these correspond to the Hebrew terms in the earlier list. It should be noted, however, that Bible exegesis also developed among the Karaites as a separate discipline, distinct from that of grammar. We see this already in the Bible commentaries of Daniel a1-Qūmisī (second half of ninth century) and Salmon ben Yeruham (first half of tenth century), which do not contain any significant grammatical material. Moreover, alongside his Diqdiiq, Ibn Nūh himself also wrote a long Bible commentary that was compeletely exegetical in character. 27 This is, no doubt, one of the reasons why by the tenth century the term diqdiiq began to be used to refer specifically to the system of grammatical principles of Scripture. As has been remarked above, 'Abu al-Faraj Hārūn did not regard himself as one of the diqdūqiyjúna. He reserves this designation for the Karaite grammarians of earlier generations. This was probably because he regarded his purpose to be different from that of his Karaite predecessors. The purpose of Ibn Nuh and the early Karaite grammarians, following the masoretic tradition, was to investigate the Bible through grammatical analysis and exegesis. We have seen that the anonymous author of the tenth century treatise on the šewa uses the term ‫הקריאה‬ ‫ אנשי‬synonymously with the term ‫ בעלי הדקדוק‬to refer to the Masoretes who compiled general rules of Biblical reading. In a passage in the introduction to his Biblical dictionary, the Karaite David ben Abraham a1-Fāsī (second half of tenth century) states that religious study rests on the foundation of "the science of reading" ( 'iim al-qiraa) :

26

27

Shaked, S. 1982. "Two Judaeo-Iranian contributions." 1ran0-]udaica. Ed. S. Shaked. Jerusalem, 304-312. A manuscript of this work has been preserved in the Firkovitch collections.

the science of correct reading is the basis of translation, the science of translation is the foundation of exegesis and the science of exegesis is the support for religious law.28 In this list of disciplines there is no independent term for "grammar." This has been subsumed in the term ("science of reading"), which doubdess was intended to include grammadcal analysis as well as the study of correct pronundation. 'Abu al-Faraj, unlike the earlier Karaite grammarians, was direcdy concerned with an investigation of language as an independent discipline. He sometimes goes beyond a description of specifically Hebrew grammar and discusses general principles of language. In this respect the grammatical work of 'Abu al-Faraj is closer in spirit to the grammar book of Saadya Gaon than to that of Ibn Nuh. Saadya's grammatical work, known as Kitab fasih lugat al- 1bránijjina ("Book on the elegance of the Hebrew language") was a study of language, which was likewise concerned not only with the Hebrew language but also with the general principles of all languages known to him. 29 T h e Karaite scholars before 'Abū al-Faraj regarded the imperative as the most basic form of the verb, from which other forms, including the infinitive, were derived. Their system did not involve abstract morphological patterns such as pi'el, niph'al etc. The parsing of a verb involved crucially the identification of the imperative. Coundess examples of this are found in the Oiqdūq of Yûsuf ibn Nuh. A similar analysis of verbs is found also in the work of Yûsuf ibn Nûh's contemporaries such as Yefet ben 'Eli, David ben Abraham al-FâsP 0 and Sahl ben Masliah. 31 All of these scholars were active in Palestine in the second half of the tenth century. It is also found in the anonymous Karaite grammatical texts published by Harkavy 32 and Shaked, 33 which are no doubt datable to the same period. 'Abu al-Faraj's attribution of the notion of the primacy of the imperative to a circle of Iraqi grammarians suggests that these Palestinian scholars were continuing a grammatical tradition that was first developed in the original heardands of the Karaite movement in the East. This is in conformity with the tradition, which is cited in one extant medieval source, that grammatical studies among the Karaites began in Isfahan. 34 A large proportion of the Karaites who setded in Palestine were immigrants from Iraq and Iran. As we have seen, Yūsuf ibn N u h himself was of Eastern, possibly Iranian background. In his Diqduq he occasionally refers to features of the Persian language. According to 'Abu al-Faraj, the view that the infinitive was a derivative of the imperative was also held by the Kūfan school of Arabic grammarians. In the

28

29 30 31 32 33 34

‫( עלם א ל ק ר א ה אסם ל ל ת ר ג ׳ מ ה ו ע ל ם א ל ת ר ג ׳ מ ה ק א ע ד ה ל ל מ ע א נ י ו ע ל ם א ל מ ע א נ י ו ב א ה ל ל פ ק ה‬Kitābjāmi' αΙ-'αξάχ, ed. Skoss, 15). The passage was discussed by M. Polliack in her study o f Karaite Bible translation, Journal of ]ewsh Studies 47, 1996, 76-78. See Dotan, A. 1993. " ‫בלשן מ ח ד ש‬-‫סעדיה גאזן‬." Pe'amim 5 4 , 4 9 - 6 2 . See Skoss, Kitâbjâmi' al- 'alfā^. Introducdon, lxxxv. Cf. Pinsker, Lickute kadmoniot. 27. Studien und MiUhelungen V, .‫פד־עד‬ lranS-Judaica, 304-312. Mann, J. Texts and Studies, 103-105. See above.

ninth and tenth centuries divergent tradidons of Arabic grammadcal thought were mosdy classified as belonging to either the school of Basra or the school of Kūfa. By the ninth century the work of the grammarian Sibawayhi (d. 793) was established as the main source of authority for the Basran school and by the tenth century and eleventh century the Basran tradiuon had become supreme. 'Abu al-Faraj's contendon that the infinidve is the derivational base of the verb and also his argumentation to prove it correspond to the teaching of the Basran school, which represented the mainstream of Arabic grammadcal thought in his day. In his rejecdon of the imperative as the derivational base, therefore, 'Abu alFaraj was breaking with earlier Karaite tradition. He was led to the view that the various parts of a verb were derived from the infinidve by an argumentation based on logical and semantic criteria. Such logical and semandc criteria had played no role in the system of derivational morphology that had been developed by his Karaite predecessors. The earlier system was based solely on structural relations between forms. 'Abu al-Faraj was following the teachings of the Basran school of Arabic grammar, which were dominant in his day. The Basran notion that the infinitive was the base of the verbal inflections is found also in the grammatical writings of Saadya Gaon, who took the infinitive or verbal noun to be the primary form from which verbs were derived. In the system derivational morphology adopted by Ibn Nuh and 'Abu alFaraj the notion of an abstract verbal root as we recognize today did not play a direct role. The root of derivation was a real linguistic form, which existed, or could potentially exist, in the language, i.e. an imperative or infinitive. It should be noted, however, that the concept of an abstract root that underlies the real linguistic form is not completely absent in the writings of these Karaite grammarians. They refer to such an entity as the "essence" (Arabic: jawhar) of the word. This was distinct from the actual form that was the primary morphological base of derivation. It corresponded closely to the notion of the root that is found in the writings of the lexicographers of the tenth century such as Menahem ben Saruq,Judah ibn Quraysh and David ben Abraham al-Fasi. According to these scholars, any letter that disappears in the inflection of a lexical item is not to be considered part of its root. Such "stable letter" roots may consist of two or even one letter, e.g. the roots of ‫כתב‬, ‫ ידע‬and ‫ הכה‬are given as ‫כתב‬, ‫דע‬ and ‫ ך‬respectively. It is important to note, however, that the rules of Ibn Nûh's theory of derivation from imperative forms required him to posit the existence of weak letters and gemination in the abstract root of some verbal forms. 35 Whereas the concept of "stable letter" roots provided the lexicographers with a satisfactory tool for arranging the lemmata of their dictionaries, it was not found to be fully satisfactory by Ibn Nūh in his system of derivational morphology. Morphological differences between verbal forms necessitated assuming the existence of weak and geminated letters in the "essence" or abstract root of some

35

See Khan, G. 1998. "The book of Hebrew grammar by the Karaite Joseph ben Noah." journal of Semitic Studies 43, 265-286.

verbs. Neither he nor 'Abu al-Faraj, however, developed a theory of general triradicality in abstract roots. As is well known, the first to develop such a nodon in the framework of a systemadc theory of derivadon was Hayyûj in Spain at beginning of the eleventh century, though his predecessor Dunash ben Labrat already refers to weak letters. It is generally thought that Dunash was the first to introduce this nodon into Hebrew grammar. We see now, however, that it was in existence in Karaite grammadcal thought in the tenth century. The presence of a number of other parallels in terminology between Dunash and the early Karaites in the East casts interesdng light on Dunash's sources. Hayyûj's system of derivadon involved a greater use of abstracdons than is found in the system of Karaites. The abstract root for Hayyûj was the basis of derivadon. Weak and strong roots alike were assigned to a single series of morphological patterns, which were expressed by the root ‫פעל‬. By means of such abstracdons Hayyûj was able to make generalizations about Hebrew verbal morphology and systematize it into a relatively small number of patterns. The presentation of Hebrew morphology in modern textbooks is based in essence on the system of Hayyûj. I hope to have shown that the Karaite grammatical texts are now casting more light on the creative activity of the Hebrew grammarians in the East, much of which predated the publication of the works of Hayyûj.

T R E N D S OF F O R E I G N INFLUENCE ON M O D E R N H E B R E W ΟRA (RODRIGUE) SCHWARZWALD Bar Ilan University, Israel Foreign influence on Modern Hebrew can be measured from various aspects: 1. Linguistics: What is the linguistic influence of foreign languages on Hebrew? 2. History: What directions has this influence taken over the history of the language? 3. Sociology: What are the factors that allowed certain languages to influence Hebrew to a greater extent than others? These three aspects shall be examined individually in this paper, though some of them has been examined from various angles by numerous researchers (Sarfatti 1990; Kaddari 1993; Muchnik 1995 and the references therein; Schwarzwald 1998). This article is, therefore, a review of the foreign influence from a different perspective.

Linguistics In examining foreign influence on Hebrew from a linguistic point of view, a distinction must be made between lexical and grammatical influences.

Lexical Influence: There are two types of lexical influences: a) borrowing of foreign words and expressions; b) loan translations and loan shifts. a) The number of foreign words in Contemporary Hebrew is quite large. In examining a sample of nouns and adjectives in Even-Shoshan's Dictionary (1980), it was found that 6.4% were borrowings, and marked as such with a diamond (Cohen-Gross 1997). Examples are: golf (golf), herts (herz), teolog (theologian), festival (festival), model (model), etc. Recognizing that Even-Shoshan only marks the borrowed words in Modern Hebrew, the number is far greater. Loan words from previous periods, such as sandlar (shoemaker), pardes (orchard), itstadion (stadium), Jfog (sponge), and many others are not marked with a diamond. There can, therefore, be no doubt that the number of words borrowed into Hebrew throughout the ages is greater still, and, in my estimation, exceeds 10%—quite a considerable rate. b) As compared to the clear borrowings discussed in (1) above, the influence of loan translations or of loan shifts is less obvious. While speakers use Hebrew words, the structures and meanings are influenced by the meanings of the words in foreign languages. Gan yeladim is a loan translation of kindergarten, and y er ax dvaš is a loan translation of honeymoon. The word tnu'a took on the meaning of an "ideological group" from the meaning attached to the word movement in foreign languages. Emtsa'i (middle) was an adjective derived from the noun emtsa' (middle, mean). The meaning of

"a device" comes from a borrowing of the very shift in meaning that words such as "mean" or "medium" underwent in European languages. For more on the lexical influences, see Nir (1993).

Grammatical Influence: Grammatical influence is widespread in Hebrew in all areas of grammar, though speakers are not aware of it. Foreign influences played a role in the development of the phonological system of Modern Hebrew. Historical consonants are no longer pronounced in Modern Hebrew (Kof, Tet, and Vav are pronounced like Kaf, Tav and Bet Ra/a). Loan words introduced new consonants (/d%J, / / / / , / and the letter Tsadi (Zadiq) is pronounced ts and not / as is historically reconstructed. The chosen pronunciation of the plosive (Deguš0t) and fricative (Rafot) varieties of the letters Bet, Gimel, Dalet, Kaf, Pe, and Tav (Begedkefet) is based on the common distinctions between b-v, p-f and k-x. Neither the Ashkenazi pronunciation of the fricative variety of the letter Tav (as [J]), nor the Ladino (Sephardic) speakers' pronunciation of fricative Dalet (as [δ]) was chosen. Addidonally, consonant clusters possible at the beginning of words, for example, are influenced by those existing in Yiddish or Ladino and not by those in other languages, such as Russian or Judeo-Arabic. The vowel system is influenced primarily by Sephardic pronunciation (the five vowels i, e, a, 0, u), with occasional Yiddish influence of the diphthongal Tsere in words such as tei (tea), pei (the letter Pe), hei (the letter He). A large number of foreign suffixes were added to the morphological system. Some suffixes (+(ts)ya, +ikaj are customary in "scholarly" words and common in medium and formal registers, while others (+ tiik, +tšik, +iko, +le) are common only in the low, colloquial register. For instance, integratsya (integration), politika (politics); nudnik (pest), politurttik (furniture polisher), avramiko (nickname for Abraham), katantšik (tiny), xaveriko (buddy), xamudale (cutie). It is almost certain that the widespread use of the linear (continuous) dérivation system in Modern Hebrew (that coexists with the Semitic discontinuous derivation of compounding a root and a pattern), is the result of foreign influence. Foreign influence is responsible for the large number of compounds with prefixes, e.g., xad-mini (homogeneous), du-mašma'ai (ambiguous), ben-txumi (interdisciplinary), rav-goni (multicolored), batar-kongress (post-congress), etc. Despite the fact that discontinuous derivation is quite productive, I believe that linear (continuous) derivation is becoming the predominant method in the creation of neologisms. Generally, syntactic influence is less easily discerned. The tendency is to copy foreign structures into Hebrew and use Hebrew words. Unmarked dominant word order in a Hebrew verbal sentence is Subject-Verb-Object, such as M0še amar le-david (Moshe told David). During the classical periods, the dominant word order was Verb-Subject-Object, such as vayahlomyosef halom (Genesis 37:5) (Joseph dreamt a dream), raja haqadoi barux hu le^akot 'et israel (Abot 6:11) (The Holy One Blessed Be He wanted to make Israel worthy). In a sentence in which the verb was in the present tense, word order was Subject-Verb-Object.

In many European languages, word order in both nominal and verbal sentences is Subject-Verb-Object. It appears that the preferred structure in Modern Hebrew is influenced by the foreign structure. The majority of European languages are analydc, and the inflecdonal suffixes in nouns are only common to mark gender (masculine-feminine) and number (singular-plural). Inflections of pronominal possession and object are expressed through analydc means, by separate pronouns, and not by pronominal suffixes. Modern Hebrew, too, shows a preference for analydc means in possessive pronouns and pronominal objects, for example: hasefer kii (my book) and not sifri, ra'iti 'οίο (I saw him) and not re'itiv. The synthedc forms of the possessive (sifri) are found in very high literary registers, in collocations (la'amito hi davar [stricdy speaking], kulanu [all of us]), or in very narrow semandc areas ('avi [my father], 'axyotav [his sisters] are acceptable, but not mitbaxi [my kitchen], kirotav [his walls]). The synthedc suffix for the object (re'itiv) is less common than the possessive suffix and can be found mainly in the construct infinidves (biroto [when he saw]), and not in free distribudon (Oman 1968; Muchnik 1993; Schwarzwald in print).

History Hebrew is unique in that it was revived as a spoken language and emerged as a language with a large number of speakers in a matter of several generations. The revival of spoken Hebrew began primarily in Israel, though there were awakenings in Jewish communities outside of Israel as early as the nineteenth century (Haramati 1992). The actual revival of spoken Hebrew is associated with Eliezer Ben-Yehuda and his efforts on behalf of reviving the language, though he was not alone in this mission (Sivan 1979). While Ben-Yehuda and his colleagues were engaged in their mission, Palestine was under Turkish rule. The languages spoken there were the local Arabic dialect; Turkish as the language of the government; Ladino as the language of the Sephardic Jews, who were then the social elite and a relatively large group; French as the language of the cultural elite; Yiddish by groups of Ashkenazi Jews, and the languages of other ethnic minorities. The British Mandate which began at the end of 1917 along with the massive wave of immigration, from Eastern Europe in the years 1904 through 1914 (known as the Second Aliya) and the other waves of immigration that followed, changed the status of the various languages in Israel. The number of Yiddish speakers swelled and English, too, as the language of the ruling class, left its imprint, while the influence of French, Turkish and Ladino gradually declined. The end of the British mandate and the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, undermined the position of British English, Yiddish and Russian and firmly grounded the status of Hebrew. Though large numbers of immigrants poured into the state after its establishment, their languages were suppressed in the early years of independence due to the supreme status of Hebrew. Since the 1970's the influence of English has, once again, begun to seep into Israel. This time, however, it is American English, due to the prestigious position of the

United States. The vast number of Russian immigrants to Israel since the 1980's has brought about a new situadon: Russian is spoken in public in Israel, with signs and nodces in Russian now common. It is still too early to research or measure the influence of Russian immigration on Modern Hebrew. Likewise, it remains early to examine the influence of Amharic as a result of the large waves of immigration from Ethiopia since the 1980's. Fortunately for the fledgling Hebrew language, the driving forces behind it were people who learned Hebrew in their youth, as part of their religious education (Blau 1976). At the age of three or four, every Jewish boy would begin the course of Jewish study appropriate in the given religious community. The prayer books in Hebrew (Siddunm, Mah^orim), the weekly Parashah (Torah portion) and Haftarah (a portion of the Prophets read after the Parashah), the megillahs (scrolls) on hoLdays, and the Mishnaic tractates of Ethics of the Fathers (Pirke Avot), Sabbath, and Berachot were among the books familiar to all Jewish men from their childhood. Men, therefore, had no difficulty in adopting Hebrew, a language acquired in early childhood, for speech, even after they had become secular, as a result of Zionist ideology which strove to eradicate all reminders of the Gola (Diaspora). This was a more difficult endeavor for the women, as they had not been taught those Hebrew sources. Bar-Adon is, therefore, correct in his assertion that Hebrew was not the mother tongue of the children first born in Israel after the linguistic revival, but rather their father tongue, as men were more fluent in Hebrew than were women (Bar-Adon 1985; 1990). Ben-Yehuda and his colleagues began their work during the period of the First Aliyah (1882-1904). The mother tongues of these new speakers influenced the formation of the language. The speakers lacked a large number of Hebrew words, and they attempted to coin new words which were in keeping with the spirit of the times. Hundreds of words historically stemming from Latin or Greek and well-integrated into European languages came to Hebrew via Eastern Europe jewry: evolustya (evolution), indikatsya (indication), ximya (chemistry), geologya (geology), geografya (geography), etc. These words are familiar to speakers of all Slavic languages, with their pronunciations and stress remaining identical. They are not pronounced in this manner in other European languages (Moskovich 1980). Other everyday words were borrowed from the spoken languages. Not surprisingly, Ladino first, and then Yiddish, influenced the everyday, informal vocabulary of Hebrew speakers: burekas (filled pastries), xaminados (slowly cooked eggs), palavra (wisecrack), fasulya (wax beans), tarapapu (old as grandfather's grandfather), and others (Schwarzwald 1993, 1995); beygale (pretzel), xevreman (easygoing), kileh (hernia), klots (klutz), etc. (Harzshav 1990; Morag 1990). It is noteworthy that words of Hebrew origin which had become integral in Jewish languages, found their way back to Hebrew, albeit with different meanings: ben adam (human being > a person with humane positive qualities), gehinom (hell > a very difficult and desperate situation), mam^er (bastard > sly person), to name but a few.

French also influenced Hebrew to a small extent, in words such as: %aket (blazer), fyrnal (journal), baga% (trunk of a car), tualet (dressing table), dekolte (lownecked garment), omlet (omelet), etc. Turkish (and perhaps all languages of the Ottoman empire, such as the Balkan languages which include Ladino) contributed exhortations such as hayde/ayde (get the lead out), pejoratives such as tembel (fool) and buxmat (a curse), and foods including askedinya (loquat), musaka (moussaka) and others. British English made its largest contribution in the area of auto mechanics and military terms: stop (stop), klatš (clutch), pantkr (flat tire); pas (pass), kitbeg (kit bag), nesting (mess kit), after (free afternoon), etc. With regard to grammar, there is no doubt that more influential than all else were the grammatical structures familiar to the first speakers. They were largely native Ladino or Yiddish speakers, with knowledge of classical Hebrew. The grammatical-linguistic influences discussed above are due to these languages (Harshav 1990; Blanc 1968; Wexler 1990; Kutscher 1982: 270-281, and others). All of the researchers have systematically ignored Ladino, despite its indisputable and substantial influence on Hebrew grammar (Schwarzwald 1993). Upon the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, the situation changed, as Hebrew took its place as its official national language. During the first years of independence, similarly to the actual case since Milhemet Hasafot (The Language Batde in Palestine, 1913-1915), the social convention was to speak only Hebrew and to use it for all types of communication in Israel, allowing Hebrew to gain a strong position with the population as a whole. All children were raised with Hebrew as a first language, regardless of whether their parents had achieved full mastery of the language or not. The work of the Va'ad Halason Halmt (The Hebrew Language Committee) and later Ha'akademya halason Halirit (The Academy of Hebrew Language), along with the efforts of authors and journalists brought about the substitution of dozens of borrowed words or loan translations with Hebrew words and expressions (Sivan 1980; Bar-Adon 1978; Kutscher 1982 and others). The establishment of the Hebrew education system, which instructed solely in Hebrew, further strengthened Hebrew's standing and reduced foreign influence. The 1970's mark a turn around of sorts, with speakers now more certain of the status of Hebrew and the United States firmly established as a superpower. The natural result was a corresponding rise in status of American English and the entry of many American expressions into Hebrew. In some cases they are clear, as in loan translations such as biklipat 'ego% (in a nutshell; briefly), 10 kos hate kii (it's not my cup of tea; I don't like it), along with expressions such as: 10 in (that's not in), hadavarxašuv lareyting (it's important for the rating), be'emet kul (that's really cool), hu streyt (he's straight) and many others. American English words that contain the letter < r > are pronounced by many Hebrew speakers as they are in American English and not with a standard Hebrew uvular Resh. I also believe that the current trend of young people to add the word ke 'ilu is both a translation of the word 'like' used by young Americans as is the borrowed intonation of question in plain declarative sentences used by young people.

It is, however, clear that the history of Palestine since the revival of the language and the series of languages there, were significant in the foreign influence on Hebrew. The influences came from various direcdons and in waves, depending on the corresponding historical developments.

Sociology Languages in contact influence one another. As was discussed in the brief historical overview above, Hebrew came into contact with a number of languages. The relationship of the speakers to those languages affected the type and direcdon of influence. Not all borrowings are of equal status in Hebrew. Borrowings taken from the general European vocabulary pool—originating from Greek or Latin—have a respected position in Contemporary Hebrew and are found in all registers, formal, informal, spoken and written alike. Words such as banana (banana), ambulans (ambulance), telefon (telephone), radio (radio), avokado (avocado), korderoy (corduroy), d^rafa (giraffe), universita (university) and others that are standard in European languages, are used in all registers of Hebrew. Words such as obyektivi (objective), norma (norm), egotsentn (egocentric), bakterya (bacteria), tsentrefuga (centrifuge), and others are widespread in writing and in the register of formal and professional speaking. Words borrowed from Jewish languages, such as Yiddish, Ladino, JudeoArabic or other languages not held in high esteem by speakers, such as local Arabic, are common in the low colloquial register and will not be found in the medium written register: xrop (snooze), pekale (packages), balabuste (homemaker) from Yiddish, postema (idiot), kalavasa (carrot-top), spond^a (mop) from Ladino, frexa (tramp), f/ox (slob), mufleta (a Moroccan fried pastry dough) from JudeoArabic, and tši^bat (cock-and-bull story), tšilba (enemy), madfyun (crazy) from Arabic, are found solely in the low register and not in formal or medium language (Schwarzwald 1995). The attitude towards Jewish languages was always one of contempt and disdain. Even in the Diaspora these were languages spoken in the home and were not used for official matters, instruction or study. Once Hebrew was brought back to life and became influenced by Jewish languages, the clear effect was seen in words and expressions which became part of the colloquial register. The more latent grammatical influence, of course, took its course unhindered, without the speakers being aware of it at all. Although Arabic was the most widely used language in the area and was used by the majority of the non-Jewish population, its influence on Hebrew is stricdy limited to slang expressions and pejoratives. Prior to the establishment of the state, the relationship between the Jews and the Arabs was hostile, as was the attitude toward their language. It is, therefore, understandable that the Jews did not want to adopt any part of their language. After independence was declared, Arabic became the second official language of the State of Israel, though the attitude towards it did not change. Perhaps, if Arabic were a mandatory subject in the school system, speakers would come into more contact with it

and their attitude towards the language would change, as would the amount of contact between the two languages. Despite their having ruled over Palestine, Turkish and British English did not have a great influence over Hebrew. As the rulers were despised, all they represented, including their language, was rejected. Turkish was accorded an even lower status than British Enghsh. At that time nobody would have considered adopting Turkish terms, unless they had Arabic parallels which could be Hebraicized (such as rasmi [official] which became Hebrew rišmi). Despite the fact that English enjoyed a certain measure of prestige (less than that of French), it was generally rejected by speakers for ideological reasons—the desire to use Hebrew alone—and their desire to free themselves from the British, who were not particularly enthusiastic about the Zionist enterprise. The influence of American English on Hebrew stems from the prestige of the United States. Speakers, knowingly and wilfully, borrow words and expressions from American English in order to make themselves appear cosmopolitan and sophisticated, and not simply common folk who happen to have the poor fortune of living in Israel. It is interesting that a many of those who fill their speech with Americanisms cannot utter a complete sentence in English, much less write one.

Summary In the overview above, the types of foreign influence on Hebrew have been shown. The influence was examined in linguistic terms. Also examined were the languages which influenced Hebrew in various periods and the types of influence various languages had due to their subjective standing in the minds of speakers. There are two primary reasons for the clear foreign influences on Hebrew. One stems from true linguistic needs—filling a specific lexical void. The other is due to social concerns—either indicating the equal status of dialog partners or indicating the superior social standing of a single speaker. Both factors operate concurrendy and are indistinguishable. Many of the aforementioned words fill lexical voids and (still) do not have Hebrew equivalents. It is doubtful as to whether Hebrew equivalents will be coined. The word stay/ (style) has the Hebrew equivalent signon, though the meaning of signon is broader, while stay/ is limited to type of dress or particular social behavior. Not every duax (report) or %ixron dvanm (memorandum of undemanding) is a protokol (minutes). Kolektivi (adj. collective) does not mean the same thing as kibutsi (of the public). Pantler (flat tire; accident, mishap) carries with it far broader connotations than does its Hebrew equivalent teker (flat tire) or neker (puncture) and is not limited to car trouble. Today tarbut (culture) has replaced kultura, but not tsivili^atsya (civilization). There are Hebrew equivalents for the examples given above, but the scope of meanings of the Hebrew words is not the same, and that is precisely why these words fill a void. A high rate of foreign words from a specific language can be found in homogeneous communities whose members speak Hebrew to one another: Yiddish words among Ashkenazi Hebrew speakers, Ladino words among Sephardic

Hebrew speakers, Judeo-Arabic words among immigrants from North Africa, etc. Increased usage of such words marks the speaker as a member of a given community. T h e current trendy snobbery of using English words to impress is a means of giving speakers superior standing and showing that they belong to an elite group of sophisticates. Today, the use of foreign words in non-professional settings carries a clear social message: one belongs to an elite group that knows how to use foreign words instead of the ordinary Hebrew words. T h e latent influence, be it loan translations or grammatical influence, is not spread knowingly. Linguistic habits are transferred from a person's first or most used language to the acquired one. Hebrew was the acquired language, the second language, for the Hebrew revivers, and they transferred their linguistic habits to it. The second generation of Hebrew speakers, too, absorbed a Hebrew with foreign influences. At this stage, Hebrew slowly formed into a mother tongue, though the latent foreign influences which had previously entered the language had already firmly established themselves, thereby forming Hebrew with foreign influences. This continues today, as was stated above, due to American English there are both clear and latent influences on Hebrew. In spite of the massive influence of foreign languages in Hebrew, the language has not lost its Semitic characteristics, as justifiably argued by Bolozky (1994, 1996) and Goldenberg (1996). Although there are a large number of borrowings in Hebrew, and the language was indeed revived and formed under the latent influence of foreign languages, Hebrew was and continues to be a Semitic language.

References Bar-Adon, A. 1978. S.Y. Agnon Othiyat Halashon Ha'ivrit. Jerusalem: Bialik. , A. 1985. "Al trumatah shel ha'aliya hashniya lithiyat halashon ha'ivrit." Proceedings of the Ninth World Congress for Jewish Studies 4(1), 63-70. , 1990. "Ha'imahot hameyasdot' umnat helkan bathiya ha'ivrit behithavutah (18821914)." Lashon Ve'ivrit 3, 4-26. Blanc, H. 1968. "The Israeli Koine as an Emergent National Standard." In Fishman, J. Α., Ferguson, Ch. A. and Das Gupta, J. eds. Language Problems of Developing Nations. New York: Wiley and Sons, 237-251. Blau, Y. 1976. Tkiyat Ha'ivrit Utkiyal Ha'aravit Hasifrutit. Jerusalem: The Hebrew Language Academy. , "On the Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew." In Stone, A. & Zenner, W. P. eds. Critical Essays on Israeli Social Issues and Scholarship. 3(111), 63—85. Bolozky, S. 1996. "Ivrit yisre'elit kesafa shemit: geneologya vetipologya." Mekkarim Belashon 7, 121-134. Cohen Gross, D. 1997. Hamivne Hahavarati SheIShmot Ha'etsem Ushmot Hato'ar Be'ivrit. Ph. D. Dissertation, Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University. Even-Shoshan, A. 1980. Hamilon Ha'ivri Hameruka^. Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, Goldenberg, G. 1996. "Ha'ivrit kelashon shemit haya." Halashon Ha'ivrit behitpathutah uvhithadshutah. Jerusalem: The Israel National Academy of Sciences, 148-190. Haramati, S. 1992. Ivrit Hoya Bimrutsat Hadorot: MeRaSaG ad Teler. Rishon Letsiyon: Masada.

Harshav, B. 1990. "Masa al thiyat halashon ha'ivrit." Alpaytm 2, 9-54. Kaddari, M. Z. 1993. "Hala'az be'ivrit." Leshonenu IM'am 44, 99-109. Kutscher, Ε. Y. 1982. A History of the Hebrew Language. Jerusalem & Leiden: Magnes & Brill. Morag, S. 1990. "Ha'ivrit hahadash behitgabshutah: Lashon be'aspaklarya shel tarbut." Katedra 56, 70-92. Moskovitz, W. 1980. "Hahashpa'a haslavit al ha'ivrit beyamenu." Hakenes Hamada'i Ha'eropi Harvi'i Leheker Hasafa Ha'ivrit Vetarbutah. Warsaw: Brit Ivrit Olamit, 105108. Muchnik, M. 1993. "Hamusa hehavur ba'itonut." In Oman, U., Ben-Shahar, R. & Toury, G. eds. Ha'ivrit Safa Haya. Haifa: University Press, 119-128. Muchnik, M. ed. 1995. Psefas 2: Hashpa'ot hala'a^alha'ivrit. Tel Aviv: Open University. Nir, R. 1993. Dance Hajetsira Hamilonit Ba'ivrit Bat-Zmanenu. Tel Aviv: Open University. Oman, U. 1968. "Shimusham shel kinuye hakinyan hahavurim vehaprudim bilshon yamenu." Proceedings of the Fourth World Congressfor Jewish Studies 2, 117—122. Sarfatd, G. B. A. 1990. "Ha'ivrit ulshonot eropa hahadashot." Leshonenu La'am 40-41, 319-326. Schwarzwald, (Rodrigue) Ο. 1993. "Shki'e sfaradit-yehudit ba'ivrit hahadasha." Pe'amim 56, 33-49. , 1995. "Shki'e hamilon ha'ivri beyamenu." Hebrew Linguistics 39, 79—90 , 1998. "Word Foreignness in Modern HebrewHebrew Studies 39, 115-142. , In press. Prakim Bemorfologya Ivrit. Units 5-6. Tel Aviv: Open University. Sivan, R. 1979. "Eliezer ben Yehuda ufo'olo habalshani." In A. Ben-Yehuda. Habalom veshivro: mivhar ktavim be'inyene lashon. Jerusalem: Bialik. Sivan, R. 1980. The Revival of Hebrew. Jerusalem: Rubinstein. Wexler, P. 1990. The Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew: A Slavic Language in Search of Semitic Past. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

Y I D D I S H IS ALIVE AND WELL AND LIVING AT ...? E T H N O L I N G U I S T I C VITALITY RESEARCH & A T T I T U D E S TOWARDS Y I D D I S H U S E IN L O N D O N CAROLE A . SHAW University of London, UK It was a kingdom. It stretched from Amsterdam to Shklov and from Strasbourg to Odessa. It was the largest empire in the history of Europe and lasted for almost a thousand years. And all without a king or parliament, an army or civil service. In fact, it only existed in the minds and mouths of its speakers and they kept it a secret from everyone else. It was a language kingdom made up only of words. (Max Weinreich) In this paper, I hope to familiarise you with the aim, approach and significant results of my recendy conducted research into Yiddish under the supervision of D r Itesh Sachdev, leading to an MA Degree in Applied Linguistics. I will then return to the beginning and attempt to answer the question in the tide— Is Yiddish alive and well and, if so, where is it living?

Why study Yiddish? I did not start this research with the intention of studying Yiddish but, whilst examining the loss and maintenance of minority languages, my thoughts immediately turned to the Yiddish situation. I was reminded of a fictional story encountered several years ago, the reference to which cannot be traced. Despite the lack of authentication to its origin, it is pertinent to mention this story, as, interwoven with its comic intent, the story contains intentional and quite serious observations on Yiddish survival and the attitude shown towards it today. A large number of scholars and associated professionals are at an international conference on Esperanto, to promote the use of this international (but artificial) language and are all speaking to each other in Esperanto during the conference sessions. During the break, they congregate in a relaxed mode and are heard saying Ikh bin a%oy glicklekh dikh tsu %en (I'm so pleased to seejou) etc! In other words, the participants are all Jewish and they already had an international language through which they could communicate across all national boundaries, but one that was no longer seen as such, was in decline, in low regard and here they were promoting the use of another (artificial) one which they discarded immediately when talking non-professionally, intimately, in a relaxed manner. 1 This story is afforded greater irony by the fact that Zamenhof, the originator of Esperanto, was a Polish Jew and a nadve Yiddish speaker, who conducted research in Yiddish and wrote an unfinished grammar of Yiddish.

Secondly, during the above period, I was revisidng the area of my early childhood which consisted of the part of London inhabited by the largest concentradon of Ultra-Orthodox Jewry in the United Kingdom (Stamford Hill, London N16). I was unexpectedly starded to hear Yiddish being spoken freely amongst youngsters in a park and realised, in a way hitherto never consciously, that it was srill a language in common currency among a certain secdon of Jews. This led me to consider that Yiddish was a legidmate area of enquiry. If Yiddish were once so vibrant and had united millions of Jews, why had it decUned so much that it seemed the Ultra-Orthodox were its only users; would there be hope of resurrecung it and, if so, who would care? In order to study those factors that might contribute towards the survival, revival or otherwise of Yiddish, a research approach using the Ethnolinguistic Vitality Construct was adopted, which has been used in a large number of studies on minority language maintenance.

The Research Approach Ethnolinguistic Vitality Construct In an attempt to isolate the factors operadng in intergroup situations and mediating interethnic communication, Giles, Bourhis & Taylor (1977) developed the notion of ethnolinguistic vitality (EV)—"that which makes a group likely to behave as a distinctive and active collective entity in intergroup situations" (308). Giles et al. (1977) developed a taxonomy of 19 factors—structural variables—that describe the "context in which the dynamics of a particular intergroup situation operate" (308) and were hypothesised to affect the vitality and survival of ethnolinguistic groups. These variables were grouped under three main headings—demographic strength, institutional support and status. Demographic factors relate to number of groups members, their distribution in the area under study, birth rate, emigration/immigration and intermarriage rates. Institutional support factors refer to the representation of the group and their language in a variety of formal and informal institutions and settings—in economic, business and political matters and organisations, in schools, religious institutions, the mass-media and government services. Status variables concern the "prèstige" of the group, their wealth, pride in cultural achievements and the status of their language both locally and internationally. (See Fig. 1). Giles et al. suggested that these three types of variables "interact to provide the context for understanding the vitality of ethnolinguistic groups" and that "linguistic minorities can be meaningfully grouped according to this three-factored view of vitality" (309). Groups' strengths and weaknesses in each of these factors could provide a rough classification of ethnolinguistic groups as having low, medium or high vitality. Low vitaLty groups are most likely to assimilate linguistically or cease to exist as distinctive entities, whilst high vitality groups are more likely to survive as distinctive entities in multilingual settings.

Vitality

Status Factors

Institutional Support and Control Factors Demographic Factors

I

Economic status Social status Sociohistorical status within

Language status

1‫־‬

national territory concentration Distribution ‫ך‬ proportion

without Numbers

FIGURE I:

absolute birth rate mixed marriages immigration emigration

/‫־׳‬

formal

<

informal

A taxonomy of structural variables affecting ethnolinguistic

mass media education govt services industry religion culture politics

vitality

Whilst Giles et al.'s original formulations focussed largely on "objective" data from a variety of sociological, economic, demographic and historical sources leading to mainly descriptive analyses of vitality, they also stated: ... our discussion of vitality factors has been in more or less objective terms: whether group members perceive subjectively their situation along exacdy the same lines is an empirical question worthy of further exploration. Indeed, it could be argued that a group's subjective assessment of its vitality may be as important as the objective reality. (318)

Subjective Ethnolinguistic Vitality The notion of subjective ethnolinguistic vitality (SEV) was further developed by Bourhis, Giles and Rosenthal (1981) who argued that individual's subjective perceptions of vitality can influence group members' intergroup strategies, language attitudes, behaviours and degrees of group identification. For exampie, in the case of Quebec and Wales, group members who perceive their group vitality to be strong demographically but weak with regard to institutional support may be motivated to improve the representation and control of their group and its language in key institutions, such as the economy, the educational system and mass-media—leading to the adoption of Law 101 enforcing the exclusive use of French in public institutions etc in Quebec. It has thus been argued that group members' subjective assessment of ingroup and outgroup vitality may be as important in determining sociolinguistic and interethnic behaviour as the group's "objective" vitality.

The Subjective Vitality Questionnaire

(SVQ)

In order to assess individual's representadons of vitality which might influence ethnolinguistic behaviour, Bourhis et al. (1981) developed the Subjecdve Vitality Questionnaire (SVQ) based on the factors in Giles et al.'s (1977) original taxonomy and piloted for use with the Greek community in Melbourne. It asks respondents to evaluate the vitality of ethnolinguistic groups on different variables representing the 19 factors originally identified by Giles et al along a 7-point Likert scale. Examples of these questions from the original pilot include: "How highly regarded do you think the following languages are in Melbourne/internarionally" (Status Factors-Language Status); "How well represented are the following groups in the cultural life of Melbourne" (Institutional Support Factors-culture); "Estimate the proportion of the Melbourne population ma- de up of the following groups" (Demographic Factors-Distribution-proportion). Over the past 20 years, the ethnolinguistic vitality construct (with or without the SVQ), has been incorporated into a wide variety of studies, for exampie, into: cross-cultural communication; ethnic/social identity/relations in particular with Catalan and Friesian speakers; language acquisition; language attitudes, relations between the sexes,2 including, most interestingly for us, three studies conducted in Israel (Kraemer 1992; Kraemer & Olshtain 1989; Kraemer Olshtain & Badier 1994).

The Aims of the Study Within the framework of the EV construct, it appears that no studies outside of Israel have so far attempted to examine the Jews in intergroup situations. Moreover, the Israeli studies have looked at Jews in a majority situation, in their own land, with Modern Hebrew, their own majority official state language. N o studies have been attempted looking at Jews in Britain or in relation to Yiddish. The purpose of the current study was exploratory: to examine whether perceived group vitality, language use and language attitudes among Jews and those interested in Jewish studies might vary as a function of age and gender (intergenerational transmission is vital for the survival of languages and women play a particular role in this process and in the formation of language attitudes) and to elucidate which factors might contribute towards the survival or decline of Yiddish.

Participants There were 100 participants for the study consisting of: known speakers of Yiddish, either as a first or second language; students of Yiddish at all levels and those involved in Yiddish cultural activities; members of the London Holocaust Survivors' Centre Yiddish group; students and academics of Hebrew and Jewish Studies in London and Oxford; members of the Union of Jewish Students; those responding to posters placed at London Colleges; Full references to these can be obtained from the author

members of the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community in London; Jewish friends and acquaintances. There was no attempt to control or balance the number, gender or age of respondents from the different above-mendoned sources. It was hoped in this way that a general picture might emerge of the response on which possible more targeted research might later be based. Of the 100 respondents, 92 were from the London area and it was decided to analyse only this group. This figure and analysis does not include approximately 25 quesdonnaires returned by members of the Ultra-Orthodox community, which were misplaced. This is most unfortunate as this is the only community to use Yiddish on a daily basis. There was a comparable age distribudon among respondents to the questionnaire as obtained from a survey of the largest and most representadve sample of Brirish Jews, undertaken by the Institute for Jewish Policy Research (Miller et al 1996). For the purposes of statistical analysis of the interaction of age with other variables, it was decided to classify the respondents into two age groups 15-55 & 56 and over. By accident, these two groupings relate to the pre—and post—war generations which mark a natural divide. The gender distribution was exactly the opposite from the J PR study, indicating that women are more interested/involved in Jewish studies/Yiddish (figs 2, 3, & 4).

Procedure Participants completed a four-part Language Study Questionnaire in their own time and location. The first part of the questionnaire consisted of the Subjective Vitality Questionnaire (SVQ, Bourhis et al. 1981) adapted for Jewish people in the London setting. As there are influential centres of Yiddish study and research in Oxford, a second SVQ had the word London replaced by Oxford. This targeting of the location proved virtually meaningless for Oxford respondents, as there is extremely little Jewish life in Oxford outside the centres of learning, and it was decided to distribute a third version with the word UK substituted for London Participants were asked to rate Jewish, White non-Jewish and Black/Asian groups (using 5-point Likert scales) on 20 items measuring group vitality along the three dimensions of Demography (7 items), Institutional Support (8 items3 group-related, 5 language-related) and Status (5 items-3 group-related, 2 language-related). It also included three items to direcdy measure respondents' perceptions of "overall" ingroup-outgroup vitality—"how strong and active" these groups had been in the past/are in the present/will be in the future. There was an additional item on the degree of contact between Jews and the other two groups. The second part of the questionnaire consisted of a Sociolinguistic Questionnaire concerning self-reported usage, on 5-point Likert scales, of English, Hebrew, Yiddish and Other in eight different domains of public and private settings, i.e. at home; social gatherings etc. The third part of the questionnaire consisted of respondents' ratings of their attitudes (degree of agreement) towards such usage in the above domains.

The fourth part of the questionnaire dealt with biographical informauon, language skills, intergroup contact and group identification, most on 5-point Likert scales.

Some Significant Results3 The effect of Gender (but not Age) was significant at either p=<.001 or <.005 on almost all the Subjective Vitality measures, i.e. part 1 of the questionnaire, indicating that vitality perceptions are more susceptible to gender differences. The effect of Age (but not Gender) was equally significant on most of the nonSVQ measures, i.e. parts 2, 3 & 4 of the questionnaire involving language use, opinions on language use, language competence, degree of contact, group identification. The factors of gender and age were not significant in combination. In terms of subjective perceptions, women tended to gready exaggerate the numerical strength of the Jewish group in relation to its actual objective strength (over 3 times higher), indicating greater identification or involvement or in-group bias, whereas the men were more realistic. The subjective perceptions of the status of minority groups was higher than for their languages, which would reflect objective vitality and the primacy of English, whilst the reverse was true for the English language and the White non-Jewish group—i.e. the English language had higher status than the White non-Jewish group. The White non-Jewish group was perceived as having more vitality due to its Institutional Support, whilst the English language had higher vitality due to its Status Attitudes towards Yiddish were more positive among younger people and, for everyone, the desire to speak Yiddish was higher than its actual use. All age groups desired more regular contact with Yiddish speakers than with Modern Hebrew speakers. Both age groups also wished to increase their regular contact with Yiddish speakers over its present level, whereas it was only the older group who wished to increase their contact with Hebrewspeakers (figs 5. 6 & 7). Whilst this could be seen as somewhat promising for Yiddish, current usage is very low, and it is unlikely to have any real impact in ensuring Yiddish survival as an everyday vernacular. Most Jews classified selves as "non-observant but retaining sense of Jewish identity, " closely followed by "occasional attendee at synagogue. " Whilst these findings are not dissimilar to those of the JPR study, which uses a different catégorisation, they may also indicate that those interested in Jewish Studies/Yiddish are more secular (fig 8). Respondents identified themselves in descending order as Jewish, Englishspeaking, British, Yiddish-speaking, Hebrew-speaking. Jewish identity featured very strongly despite a self-defined low involvement in Jewish religious pracdee (fig 9). Furthermore, over a quarter of respondents were at pains to stress their Jewish identity in a section for additional comments and almost one It was hoped to present most results with an accompanying graph but space constraints have limited the number of graphs to only those considered the most interesting.

quarter gave further information about "race," including being English, European or American. The sense and strength of Jewish identity and the numbers of non or less observant Jews, reflect similar findings to the JPR study (Miller et al 1996). These findings echo a theme of Michael Chlenov's paper at the Congress entided "Patterns of Contemporary Jewish Identities" that, in the Western world, it is possible for a person to be both Jewish and to have another ethnic identity/nationality, whereas in Israel and Eastern Europe there is ethnic exclusivity. They do not recognise a multiplicity of identities. Identification as English-speaking was also rated highly by respondents as were the previously mentioned ratings on language use. This supports the view that for the first time in Jewish history, the Jews of the second half of the 20th century speak/are united by a non-Jewish language—English (Fishman 1991). Of further note is the fact that younger people's identification ratings were lower than the older generation on all items except Hebrew-speaking, which was interestingly rated the same as Yiddish-speaking. This is indicative of the shifting ground in modern society and a less assured sense of identity among younger respondents. This research has yielded much material for further study. Plans are underway to continue this into doctoral research with potential focus on: Yiddish within the Ultra-Orthodox communities and more specifically into conscious efforts within communities in the US to maintain the language; a further analysis of the current data by the variables of identity and degree of Jewish practice; a further examination of what constitutes Jewish identity and the relationship between ethnic identification and subjective perceptions of vitality and the implication of the former for Yiddish survival.

Is Yiddish alive and well and where is it living,? The fact that that I was able to carry out my research, that we are all here today, that two other speakers have presented papers in this session on Yiddish and ways of recording its riches for posterity, that Yiddish is spoken in Stamford Hill and elsewhere (Fishman 1991 claims that there are slighdy more than three million mother-tongue speakers throughout the world), that classes are held in various institutions right up to higher education in many countries—these are all indications that Yiddish is still alive in one way or another However, being alive should not be confused with being in good health and few can doubt that Yiddish is, in most places outside the Ultra-Orthodox circles, merely ticking over. It is highly unlikely, however strong any proYiddish feeling in particular amongst the young or any pro-Jewish perception amongst women, that it will survive as a living, creative language outside of the Ultra-Orthodox circles who use it on an everyday basis and transmit it to their children. Anything else would require secular Jews to make a conscious decision to preserve the language by passing it on to their children. The latter is most improbable. What one is likely to see is a strengthening of commitment to Jewish identity and cultural continuance in certain sections of the

community, evidence of this both with regard to Judaism in general and Yiddish in particular is quite abundant in the Jewish community in London. As Fishman says so aptly in his 1991 book Yiddish: Turning to Life: Yiddish will probably never again be the vernacular of almost all of Ashkenazic Jewry... It may be more intimately and preponderandy associated with Ultra-Orthodox thought, observance and daily behaviour in the future than it has been since the mid-19lh century, but there will always be a select few who wm utilise it as an instrument of modern Jewish secular creativity and an even larger periphery who will enjoy it in that connection, either in the original or in translation (8). Would Yiddish be dead if no one spoke, read, wrote or understood it, but lots of people still loved it? (332). The final word rests with Isaac Bashevis Singer: There are some who call Yiddish a dead language, but so was Hebrew called for 2,000 years. It has been revived in our time in a most remarkable, almost miraculous way... Yiddish has not yet said its last word. It contains treasures that have not been revealed to the eyes of the world. It was the tongue of martyrs and saints, of dreamers and cabalists—rich in humour and memories that mankind may never forget. In a figurative way, Yiddish is the wise and humble language of us all, the idiom of the frightened and hopeful humanity. From the text of the Nobel Prize lecture by Isaac Bashevis Singer, December 8, 1978. (New York Times, December 9, 1978).

Selected Bibliography Bourhis, R. Y., Giles, H. & Rosenthal, D. 1981. "Notes on the construction of a 'Subjective Vitality Questionnaire' for ethnolinguistic groups." Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 2, 145-55. Fishman, J. A. 1991. Yiddish: Turning to Life. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: J. Benjamin Pub. Giles, H., Bourhis, R. Y. & Taylor, D. M. 1977. "Toward a theory of language in ethnic group relations." In Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations. Ed. H. Giles. New York: Academic Press. Keiner, J. 1991. "The Yiddish Speech Community." In Multilingualism in the British Isles I. The Older Mother Tongues and Europe. Ed. S. Alladina and V. Edwards. 170-183. Kraemer, R. 1992. "Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions in Israel in the wake of the Intifada." Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 6, 487-503. Kraemer, R. & Olshtain, E. 1989. "Perceived ethnolinguistic vitality and language attitudes: the Israeli seixing." Journal ofMultilingual and Multicultural Development 10,197-212. Kraemer, R., Olshtain, E. & Badier, S. 1994. "Ethnolinguistic vitality, attitudes: and networks of linguistic contact—the case of the Israeli Arab minority." International Journal of Sociology of Language 108, 79-95. Landry, R. & Allard, R. 1994. "Ethnolinguistic Vitality: a viable construct." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 108, 5-13. Miller, S., Schmool, M. & Lerman, A. 1996. Social and Political Attitudes of British Jews: some keyfindingsof the JPR survey. London: Institute for Jewish Policy Research. Schmool, M. 1996. "100 Years of British Jewish Statistics." In Massil, S. W. The Jewish Yearbook 1996. London: Vallentine Mitchell.

Figure 2: Age of Respondents

ι

• Exact No.

,.11.4

1

‫־‬7 ‫ףי‬ ‫ ע‬Μ

ι Β

15-25

26-35

/2.8

‫י חי‬ 1«

• Valid %

Η

‫״‬

•

•

ρ

π—

36-45

•

‫פ‬

•

46-55

56-65

Male

IJ

•

• ‫כ‬ ΓΜΖ Γ • ‫כ‬ ‫־‬u t L • ‫ס‬

r

56

15-55

and

46%

*‫^ •ג‬

/ Y » ^ «/

Figure 6: Ratings of Language Use on 5-point Likert Scale

% % % % ·‫ ״;׳‬h \SS W SS \

>

%. "‫יי‬

Figure 7: Ratings of Contact with Other Speaking Groups on 5-point Likert Scale

t r i n i

‫נ ו ן‬ l l §

j r § 113

Figure 8: Self-Defined Religious Practice

/

··-< / κ*/ ‫׳‬

ft»

/ <‫י־‬ .
^

/

j I S I‫• ״‬Οs

I I I

12 1 2> -§ ‫נד‬

Figure 9: Ratings of Group Identification on 5-point Likert scale

37.6

Y

!s· V

Ferna le 57%

54%


Y V

yj»

Τβ

Not Stated

Figure 5: Ratings of Opinions on Language Use on 5-point Likert Scale

ψ •jF #

43%

over

• LJ Over 65

Figure 4: Gender of Respondents

l igure 3: Two Age Groups Used in Research Analysis

31.6

Ratings as Ratings as Ratings as Ratings as Ratings as British English- HebrewJewish Yiddishspeaking Speaking Speaking

v

E L GRIEGO RABÎNICO Y EL J U D E O - G R I E G O F U E N T E S PRIMERAS Y ESTADO ACTUAL DE LA INVESTIGACIÔN S1FRA SZNOL Jerusalem, Israel E n el primer volumen de su famoso diccionario Griechische und lateinische Lehnwörter im Talmud, Midrasch und Targum, Samuel Krauss presento una descripciôn gramadcal (fonética y morfologia) del griego rabînico. Krauss fue consciente no solo de la valiosa documentaciôn que este vocabulario ofrece al estudioso de la literatura rabinica, sino también de los importantes testimonios del griego rabînico para el estudio de la fonédea y de la morfologia del griego tardio y del moderno. Pese a las severas criticas con que su obra fue acogida, es este el primer intento, y hasta la fecha el ùnico, de ofrecer al estudioso una descripciôn ciendfica del vocabulario del griego rabînico. Una justa valoraciôn fue dada a esta obra por importantes estudiosos de la lengua griega como A. Thumb, E. Schwyzer y A. Debrunner. 1 S. Krauss defïniô "Griego rabînico" como el vocabulario griego recogido en la literatura hebrea y aramea intertestamentaria, en las traducciones arameas de la Biblia hebrea y en la literatura rabinica redactada desde los primeros siglos antes y después de la era comûn hasta la Edad Media. Pese a las diferentes corrientes literarias y periodos histôricos que esta definiciôn comprende, résulta vâlida para el estudio del griego rabînico hasta la fecha. El estudio filolôgico de este valioso vocabulario, que asciende a varios miles de palabras de origen griego y latino, comenzô en la Edad Media con la ediciôn del diccionario de Nathan ben Jehiel, Arukh (Roma, siglos X I - X I I ) , y continuô con el diccionario de Johannes Buxtorf (1564—1629), el Lexicon Hebraicum et Talmudicum, con los valiosos comentarios de Menahem de Lonzano (1550-1624), Maharikh y de Benjamin Musaphia (16016-1675), Musaf Γ arukh, con los diccionarios de David ben Isaac Cohen de Lara (1602-1674), Keter Kehunnah e Ir David, y otros trabajos filolôgicos de las escuelas rabinicas. Durante el siglo XIX y principios del siglo XX salieron a luz los valiosos diecionarios de J. Levy (1867), A. Kohut (1872-92), M. Jastrow (1886), S. Krauss (1898), G. Dalman (1922) e I. Loew (1924-1934). Todos ellos dedicados a la lexicografia rabinica y con una especial atenciôn al griego rabînico.

Krauss, S. 1898. Griechische und lateinisch Ijchnwörter im Talmud, Midrasch und Targum. Berlin: Calvary; Thumb, Α. 1900. Indogermanische Forschungen. Anzeiger XI, 96-99; Schwyzer, E. 1953. Griechische Grammatik. Munich: Beek, 1, 154; Debrunner, A. trad. 1969. Storia delta 1Jngua Greca. Napoli: Macchiaroli, 11,81. Para una cvaluaciôn de la obra de Krauss véase el ardeulo de Rosén, Η. Β. 1963. "Palestinian koinh in Rabbinic Illustration." ] 5 5 8, 56-72.

A partir de mediados de siglo XX surgiô un nuevo interés por esta importante rama de la filologia rabinica relacionada con los estudios clàsicos. En primer lugar debemos citar los importantes trabajos de S. Lieberman, 2 que con un gran conocimiento y una extraordinaria intuiciôn ciendfica abriô nuevos horizontes en el estudio de las fuentes rabinicas y ofreciô una mejor comprensiôn del marco cultural y politico en que estas se desarrollaron. Asi también debemos recordar las publicaciones de H. B. Rosén, en las que logrô testimoniar la importancia del griego rabînico para el conocimiento del griego helenîstico, especialmente oriental, y describir el panorama lingiiistico de Erez Israel y de las comunidades del Mar Mediterrâneo. A estos trabajos se han agregado los ardculos y las importantes monografîas de D. Sperber dedicados a describir y définir términos citados en las fuentes rabinicas. Especialmente su serie de estudios dedicados a determinadas áreas semánricas, 3 (términos legales y judiciales, términos relacionados con la náutica, con los sistemas monetarios, etc.). Por ultimo, podremos citar las publicaciones realizadas en Espafia en los Ultimos afios por L. F. Girôn Blanc, por J. J. Alarcôn y otros estudiosos, dedica-dos al estudio filolôgico de una obra literaria especifica. 4 El estudio de estos préstamos, que comenzô con un interés concreto por la etimologia griega ο latina de un término, ha dado paso a un estudio lingüisticosocial que incluye una mejor comprensiôn del marco cultural y politico en el que se desarrollô la cultura rabinica de Israel y de la Diàspora. Desde el periodo helenîstico hasta la Edad Media, el conocimiento de la lengua griega y su uso como lengua franca y lengua literaria en Erez Israel está ampliamente testimo-niado en la literatura intertestamentaria, (los libros apôcrifos y pseudoepigrâ-ficos), en las traducciones griegas de la Biblia, en los papiros griegos del desierto de Judea y en las inscripciones griegas de todos los periodos. La pregunta que aún está pendiente es en qué medida la lengua griega y su literatura estaban aceptadas y difundidas en el marco de las disdntas comunidades, de los distintos movimientos poliricos y de las disdntas corrientes religiosas de Judea y de la Diàspora. Los dramâticos cambios politicos y sociales que hubo en Israel durante el periodo helenîstico y el romano ofrecen una imagen compleja y ambigua respecto a la relaciôn de los sabios al estudio de la lengua y de la cultura griega.5 Durante los sangrientos afios de las guerras contra Roma y de las persecuciones religiosas hubo una clara prohibiciôn del estudio del griego y del uso de esta lengua. Esto ocurriô especialmente después de la gran guerra contra Roma (afios 2

3 4

5

Lieberman, S. 1942. Greek in Jewish Palestine—Studies in the Life and Manners ofJewish Palestine in the II—IV centuries C. Ε. N e w York: Jewish Theological Seminary o f America. Sperber, D. 1984. A Dictionary of Greek and Latin Legal Terms. Jerusalem: Bar Ilan University. Girôn Blanc, L. F. 1986. "Vocablos griegos y latinos en Exodo Rabbah I." Sefarad 46, 216-228; Alarcôn Sáinz, J. J. 1992. "Vocablos griegos y latinos en el Targum de Lamentaciones." Sefarad, 52, 15—19; Diez Merino, L. 1986. "Grecismos y latinismos en el Targum Palestino (Neôfiri)." En Salvaciôn en la Palabra. Volumen en memoria de Die% Macho. Madrid: Ediciones Crisdandad, 3 4 7 368; Sznol, S. 1993. "La lexicografia griega en la interpretaciôn rabinica de la creaciôn del mundo (Génesis Rabbah)." En IV Simposio Biblico Espanol Valencia-Granada: Universidad de Granada. Hallewy, E. E. 1972. "Concerning the Ban on Greek Wisdom." Tarbiz 1 ^ - 269-274; Fishel, H. A. "Greek and Latin Languages." EJ VII, 885-886.

66-70 d.E.C.), durante las persecuciones que precedieron a las revueltas contra Trajano y contra Adriano (Sota 9, 14) y después de la guerra de Bar Kohbà (Tos., A Z 1, 20). A partir de fines del siglo II d. E.C., con el apaciguamiento de la dominaciôn romana en Judea hubo un cambio en la acdtud de las autoridades rabinicas respecto a la lengua y a la cultura griega y en algunos casos una nueva valoraciôn de su importancia. Las ensefianzas del Talmud Jerosolimitano suavizan las prohibiciones declarando que el uso del griego solo se permite en el trato con las autoridades (TJ, Shabat 6, 7d), ο como una joya para las ninas (TJ, Pea 1, 15 a), etc. El más importante testimonio del uso del griego en la sociedad rabinica sigue siendo el amplio y rico vocabulario difundido en estas fuentes y al cual hemos dedicado esta comunicaciôn. La influencia de la lengua griega se ve reflejada no solo en la gran canddad de préstamos de esta lengua en el hebreo y en el arameo sino también en los cambios fonéricos, morfolôgicos y sintâcticos que el griego ha ocasionado a estas dos lenguas. Fenômenos que son caracterisdcos de las lenguas en contacto. En el piano fonético podremos senalar la apariciôn de nuevos grupos consonànticos, por ejemplo / p s / = ψ, ‫—פסילום‬ψελλός, ‫—פסיפס‬ψήφος, el débilitamiento en el uso de las guturales, etc. En la morfologia hay cambios en el uso del género, una reducciôn y cambios en el uso de los dempos verbales, un mayor uso de formas pasivas y reflexivas, etc. y por ultimo, en la sinta5ds hay un mayor empleo de preposiciones, una disminuciôn en el uso del caso constructo, construcciones impersonales, etc. En sus estudios lingüisdcos A. Ben David 6 ha dedicado también una especial atenciôn a los calcos de traducciôn. Por ejemplo, ‫ — ל ש ו ן הרע‬κ α κ ο γ λ ω σ σ ί α , ‫ — ב ט ל ן‬σ χ ο λ ά σ π κ ο ς , etc. Parte de los préstamos lingiiisdcos pasaron a ser una parte intégrante de la lengua con la formaciôn de nuevos verbos, como: ‫סרנגר‬, ‫קטרג‬, ‫פייס‬, derivados de συνηγορέω, κατηγορέω,

πείθω. En el marco del rico vocabulario de préstamos de las lenguas clàsicas en la literatura rabinica se incluyen también palabras de origen latino. Hasta los ûltimos decenios la mayoria de los estudiosos estaban de comûn acuerdo en que el conocimiento del ladn en el Oriente era infimo y que todos estos términos que han llegado a la literatura rabinica fueron préstamos anteriores al griego,7 y a través de esta lengua llegaron al hebreo y al arameo (matrona, dux, legion, familia, Cesar, etc.). Actualmente, gracias a las inscripciones latinas y especialmente a los papiros latinos de Masada y al estudio semântico más especifico de los préstamos larinos en la lengua rabinica hay una nueva valorizaciôn de la presencia del 1atín en el Oriente y su probable difusiôn en las comunidades hebreas y arameas. Debido a la importancia de esta documentaciôn y a su valor para el estudio e interpretaciôn de las fuentes rabinicas y la historia de las lenguas aramea y hebrea, la direcciôn de la Academia de la Lengua Hebrea ha dedicado una secciôn

6 7

Ben David, A. 1967. Biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew. [Hebr.] Tel Aviv : Dvir, 139-140. Fishel, ibid., 85.

especial a los préstamos de origen griego y ladno en el marco del proyecto del Diccionano Histôrico de la Lengua Hebrea. La investigaciôn de los préstamos del griego y del laan que se realiza en este proyecto se basa en el Corpus lingüistico que se élabora en la Academia de la Lengua Hebrea. Este Corpus y su base de datos fue recogido de la lectura de los mejores manuscritos y ediciones cientificas de la literatura rabinica y editado por el equipo de investigadores del Diccionam Histôrico. El numéro de los lemas griegos y latinos recogidos en la secciôn asignada a préstamos (lista n° 6), asciende actualmente a más de cuatro mil, y aún no se ha finalizado la lectura de los textos. Esta lista ofrece una clara imagen de la difusiôn del griego en Erez Israel y en la diàspora del Mar Mediterrâneo. Según una primera clasificaciôn de Samuel Krauss (Krauss 1898, I: 623-653) este vocabulario se expande en 40 áreas semánticas del arameo y del hebreo. Las más importantes son: adminis-traciôn, ejército, arquitectura, religion, utensilios de la vida diaria, nombres de plantas y animales, medicina, astronomia, términos juridicos, etc. Gran parte de estos términos han pasado a ser una parte integral de la lengua hebrea en la Edad Media y también en la época contemporânea. En el marco de este proyecto hemos preparado una base de datos en la cual se ha desdnado una ficha especial para cada lema.8 En la ficha se ofrece una primera identificaciôn de la transcripciôn del lema en griego rabinico con el griego clàsico. Esta identificaciôn se basa en los diccionarios ciendficos: LSJ y el Dicàonario Griego Espanol para la lengua clàsica y en los diccionarios de Sophocles y de Lampe para la lengua más tardia. Especial atenciôn en el estudio de estos términos se ha dado también a los diccionarios del griego medieval (Du Cange), y a los diccionarios del griego moderno (Criaras, Stravopoulos, Rocci, etc.). La identificaciôn de estos términos se basa asimismo en la rica documentaciôn del griego de la koiné, especialmente la de los papiros de Egipto y de los papiros del desierto dejudea. En esta misma ficha recogemos la primera identificaciôn realizada por estudiosos del griego rabinico desde el diccionario de Nathan ben Jehiel (siglo XI), hasta las obras realizadas en los ùltimos decenios del siglo pasado y principios del siglo XX: Jastrow, Levy, Kohut, Krauss y Dalman. El lema en griego es presentado en el griego clàsico (átic0), tal como es su uso comûn en los diccionarios ciendficos y en la literatura de investigaciôn. Para el lema en su transliteraciôn y transcripciôn en el alfabeto hebreo, seleccionamos la forma más difundida en las fuentes literarias de la literatura rabinica, por ejemplo, Sanhédrin y no Sunhedmn, la más cercana al griego clàsico y completamos una lectura de un lema con el testimonio de la koiné oriental (inscripciôn, papiro literario, etc.), por ejemplo, para la moneda; τροπαικός, he-

Para la description de la preparacion de este proyecto véase una breve nota en BJGS 21, 1997, 2 3 - 2 5 y el araculo: "The third dimension. From the lexicographer's desk of the Rabbinical Graecitas." Proceedingr of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting (Jerusalem, May 15 th, 1997). Jerusalem: Societads Linguistica Europaeae Sodalicium Israelense, 65-69.

breo: ‫ ט ר פ ^ י ק‬, y τροπαεικός, grafía testimoniada en los papiros del desierto de Judea (SB 10288.137, Palestina 125 d. E.C.). Pese a nuestras dudas y nuestras limitaciones en la reconstrucciôn fonédca del griego que se refleja en la mayoria de estas transcripciones, es indudable que la lengua reflejada en los caractères hebreos es la de la koiné oriental y se registran en ella los pasos caracterisdcos de la lengua clàsica a la helenisrica y a la lengua más tardia: iotacismo, contracciôn de diptongos, paso de mudas a sonoras, ausencia de aspiraciôn, etc. Algunos de estos fenômenos fonéticos confluyen con pasos paralelos en el hebreo y en el arameo. Para el estudio de cada lema hemos dedicado también una especial atenciôn a los trabajos realizados por comentaristas modernos en la preparaciôn de ediciones cientifïcas de los textos rabxnicos y a los arüculos publicados por disrintos especialistas de estudios rabinicos y clàsicos. En la preparaciôn de este proyecto contamos con el apoyo y con la orientaciôn ciendfica de nuestros colegas de la Academia de la Lengua Hebrea. Asi también, debemos reconocer la activa ayuda y soporte ciendfico que hemos recibido del equipo del Diccionario Griego Espanol de Madrid , especialmente de su director Francisco R. Adrados. Aunque hemos realizado un gran progreso en la preparaciôn de este proyecto debemos reconocer que la trayectoria por cubrir aún es larga y todavia no hemos llegado a las fases finales. En primer lugar debemos reconocer las dificultades creadas por el estado actual de los textos rabinicos y por las obras nuevas recogidas en los ûltimos decenios. Los nuevos manuscritos descubiertos, que son los más antiguos, nos ofrecen lecturas distintas de términos ya estudiados y elaborados anteriormente por generaciones de lexicôgrafos. Más aún, la apariciôn de nuevos textos que enriquecen nuestro conocimiento de la literatura antigua y medieval, (Sepher Ha Rœ^m, Sepher Yosiphon, ο ]0sephus Gononides), ofrecen un nuevo vocabulario que debe ser descifrado desde la primera linea. Este interesante y riquisimo material también exige una especial atenciôn al estudio de la lengua griega de distintos periodos y de distintos niveles y de su difusiôn en la cuenca del Mediterrâneo. Por ùltimo, gran parte de las dificultades que se nos presentan en la elaboraciôn de este material se debe a los trabajos preliminares realizados por filôlogos hebreos a partir de la Edad Media, especialmente los diccionarios y los glosarios y la influencia de los mismos en la transmisiôn de los manuscritos. El más famoso de estos diccionarios es el Arukh de Nathan ben Jehiel, que tuvo y aûn mantiene una amplia repercusiôn en los estudios rabinicos y en la ediciôn de textos. El estudio del griego de este diccionario y de otros glosarios medievales nos introduce al segundo tema de nuestra comunicaciôn: "El judeo-griego." 9

9

Para la definiciôn del judeo-griego véase los arüculos de Starr, J. 1939-1943, "Judeo-Greek." Universal Jewish Encyclopedia VI, N e w York cols. 254—255; Dalven, R. "Judeo-Grcek," Ε] X, cols. 425-427.

El judeo-griego, igual que otras lenguas judias (yiddish, ladino, judeo-ârabe, judeo-persa, etc.) se vertiô en caractères (consonantes) hebraicos; algunos manuscritos ofrecen también una vocalizaciôn. Estos caractères, y especialmente su vocalizaciôn, son de extraordinario valor para el estudio de las tradiciones fonédcas y gramaticales del hebreo, asi también como del griego bizandno y del medieval. A diferencia del griego-rabinico, cuyo estudio, salvo raras excepciones, comprende solamente términos aislados de préstamos griegos que llegaron a la literatura rabinica, el judeo-griego también incluye el estudio de lemas aislados, como por ejemplo los términos que aparecen en listas de contratos matrimoniales (Ketubboi), ο en los glosarios de literatura biblica y rabinica, etc. Mas sin lugar a dudas, su principal aportaciôn es textual: traducciones de la Biblia, de la liturgia, y la creaciôn de una literatura popular. El griego helenisrico fue la primera lengua en que se tradujo el texto de la Biblia (La Septuaginta) y el judeo-griego, asi como otras lenguas judias, sirviô como instrumento para la creaciôn de una nueva traducciôn de la Biblia hebrea' en la Edad Media.10 Los testimonios que tenemos de la traducciôn del texto biblico son fragmentarios y hasta la fecha no hay una respuesta al interrogante de si hubo una sola traducciôn comûn a todas las comunidades, ο si fueron varias las traduccionés que circulaban por disdntas Sinagogas. La más importante publicaciôn de esta traducciôn (o traducciones) fue la del Pentateuco de Constandnopla (1547), que comprende una traducciôn al judeo-griego y también incluye una traducciôn al ladino, la traducciôn al arameo de Onkelos y el comentario de Rashi. Esta traducciôn se publico en caractères griegos gracias a la importante labor de D. S. Hesseling11 que ofreciô asi los fundamentos para la invesdgaciôn ciendfica de la literatura judeo-greca en general y de las traducciones biblicas en particular. En judeo-griego nos ha llegado el testimonio de una traducciôn del libro de Jonâs 12 de la isla de Corfû, que corresponde a la Haftará de Yom ha-Kippurim, de traducciones fragmentarias de los libros de los profetas: Isaias,13 Jeremias, y de Daniel, de traducciones fragmentarias de los Escritos (Ktuvim): el libro de Ezra, 14 el Cantar de los Cantares, el libro de Eclesiastés. Los testimonios de las traducciones e interpretaciones del texto biblico comprenden también glosarios

10

11

12 13

14

Para una introduction a las traducciones de la Biblia véase el arnculo de Bádenas de la Pena, P. 1996 "Aproximaciôn a la historia de las versiones al griego vulgar." Trans 1, 10-37, especialmente las páginas 12—15. Hesseling, D. S. 1897. Les Cinq Livres de la Loi (Le Penta/euque); traduction en néo grec publiée en caractères hébraïques à Constantinople en 1547, transcrite et accompagnée d'une introduction, d'un glossaire et d'un fac-similé. Leipzig: O. Harrasowitz. Hesseling, D. S. 1901 . "Le livre de Jonas." ByZ 10, 208-217 . Sznol, S. 1997. "Haphtara Nahamu (Isaiah 40, 1-26) in Jewish Greek translation." Beit Mikra 151, 332-342. Articulo introductorio; el texto del manuscrito esta en preparaciôn para una proxima publicaciôn. Danon, A. 1914. ‫ ״ מ א י ר ת עיניים״‬Meïrath 'Enaim, version en néo-grec et en caractères hébraïques de Jérémie X, 11; de Daniel II, 5-VII, 28 et d'Esdras IV,7-VI, 26 du caraïte Élie Áfeda Béghi (1627)."JA 4, l i é serie, 5-65.

griegos del texto biblico hebreo. Entre estos glosarios podremos citar del libro de los Reyes, del libro de los Salmos, de los cinco Rollos,15 un fragmento de un glosario de la traducciôn de Aquila, etc. Gran parte de estos fragmentos (traducciôn de textos, glosarios y comentarios) fueron publicados ùltimamente por N. de Lange en una ediciôn especial de textos judios en griego de la Genizah. 16 Pese a que se pueden reconocer huellas del contacto entre los disdntos fragmentos biblicos, y entre ellos y los glosarios, es necesario recordar que aûn no tenemos una clara respuesta a la cuestiôn de si se trata de la elaboraciôn de un solo traductor ο de una escuela de traductores, ο son más bien traducciones que surgieron en disdntos periodos y en disdntas comunidades. Solamente una publicaciôn compléta de todos los manuscritos relacionados con los textos biblicos (traducciones, glosarios y comentarios) y un estudio riguroso del vocabulario, de la morfologia y de la sintaxis de estos textos podrà dar una respuesta satis factoria. El judeo-griego tuvo también su importante contribuciôn a los estudios rabinicos. En primer lugar, tal como hemos mencionado anteriormente, al diccionario de Nathan ben Jehiel17 que fue redactado en Roma (siglo XI). Este glosario ofrece por primera vez una clasificaciôn de términos en griego, en latin, en persa y en árabe de la literatura rabinica. En judeo-griego también se han hallado glosarios de la Mishnah (Kilajim-Shevi'it, Eruidn, Pesahim, Pe'ah). Esta lengua sirviô también para la creaciôn 1itúrgica y poética de las comunidades judeo-grecas, especialmente de las poesias relacionadas con las festividades. Parte de esta creaciôn fue recopilada en publicaciones especiales. La más importante de ellas es la colecciôn de I. Matsa, Poesia Hebrea de Janina (1953), editada por primera vez en su original griego y luego traducida al hebreo por R. Bonfil y publicada acompanada por un comentario literario.18 Los Pi^monim de Punm (las cantigas de Purim) han logrado un lugar especial en la tradiciôn de estas canciones populäres. Estas canciones fueron publicadas en 1875 y en 1925 y la ùltima publicaciôn fue en visperas de la Segunda Guerra Mundial (1931). Ofrecen un testimonio vivo de las tradiciones y de las costumbres de las diferentes comunidades griegas y de la evoluciôn del judeo-griego. Después de la expulsion de los judios de Espafia y la parcial radicaciôn de éstos en Grecia, esta creaciôn literaria se vertiô en dos lenguas: el judeo-griego y el judeo-espafiol. Actualmente se ofrecen al investigador versos bilingües. Una interesante colecciôn de estas poesias fue publicada por David Benveniste. 19 Por ultimo, es necesario mencionar los valiosos trabajos de R. Dalven y muy espe15

16 17

18

19

Altbauer, M.-Shiby, Y. 1981. "A Judeo-Greek Glossar)‫ ׳‬of the Hamesh Megillot." Sefunot 15, 367—421. D e Lange, N. 1996. Greek ]ewish Texts from the Cairo Geni^ah. Tübingen: Mohr. Una ediciôn científica fue preparada por Kohut, A. 1872-92. Aruch Completum, 8 vols. Viena: Menorah. Sobre la influencia que tuvo el Arukh sobre comentaristas de la literatura rabinica véase la lista de autores que citan este diccionario (21-40) en la introducciôn de Kohut a su ediciôn. Esta publicaciôn fue corregida y completada por Krauss, S., Geiger, Β., Loew, I. y Murmelstein, Β. 1937. Additamenta ad librum "Aruch Completum. "Viena: Qeren ha-Zikaron A. Kohut. Matsa, J. 1981. "Jewish Poetry in Greek. Compiled with an introduction by J. Matsa, translated by R. Bonfil." Sefunot 15, 235-366. Benveniste, D. 1981. "Muld- Lingual Hymns." Sefunot 15, 235-266.

cialmente N. de Lange 20 que han logrado despertar en los ûltimos decenios un nuevo interés para esta área entre los investigadores de estudios clàsicos y de estudios hebraicos. Esta área de estudios, que es actualmente casi desconocida, exige una merecida atenciôn en el marco de los estudios judaicos, especialmente europeos. Actualmente estamos redactando una bibliografia de publicaciones en judeo-griego (traducciones biblicas y literatura en general). Pero más aún, es urgentemente necesario hacer una lista detallada de todos los manuscritos en judeo-griego existentes en las bibliotecas importantes de estudios judaicos. En primer lugar la ediciôn compléta de estas dos bibliografias nos ofrecerà una visiôn general de la creaciôn religiosa y literaria de las comunidades griegas del Mediterrâneo y su contacto con las otras comunidades europeas en distintos penodos. El segundo paso a realizar es la publicaciôn sistemática de los manuscritos no editados. El estudio de los mismos nos podrà ofrecer un cuadro claro de la creaciôn cultural de las comunidades judeo-grecas, de sus relaciones con otras comunidades de la cuenca del Mediterrâneo y sin lugar a dudas, serán de gran importancia también para el estudio del griego en diferentes periodos y para un mejor conocimiento de diferentes dialectos. La ultima pregunta que aún exige una especial atenciôn es si el judeo-griego es una condnuaciôn del griego-rabinico o un nuevo dialecto que surgiô en la Edad Media. Los testimonios de las traducciones griegas y latinas de la Biblia que surgen en la literatura rabinica y en las traducciones medievales del judeogriego y un reducido vocabulario comûn entre estos dialectos atestiguan un contacto directo entre ambos. Más aun, se debe recordar la influencia que tuvo el judeo-griego sobre la tradiciôn textual de los manuscritos y su interpretaciôn a través de los glosarios medievales. Concluimos esta presentaciôn con la esperanza de que con el avance de la investigaciôn de estas dos importantes áreas de los estudios judaicos, especialmente europeos, sea posible dar una respuesta más detallada a este interrogante y a otros muchos más que el griego-rabinico y el judeo-griego ofrecen al estudioso.

Para una vision general de los estudios judeo-griegos véase los ardculos de N. de Lange 1989. "Shem and Yephet—On the Jews and the Greek Language." Pe'amim 38, 4—20 y "Judaeo-Greek Studies: Achievements and Prospects"(Extract from the opening address to the First Conference of Judaeo Greek Studies, Cambridge, 16 July 1995). BJGS 17, 1995, 27-34.

English abstract We call Rabbinical Greek the rich Greek vocabulary quoted in the Aramaic and Hebrew intertestamental literature, in the Aramaic Bible translations and in the Rabbinical literature from the early centuries until the Middle Ages. The study of this Greek vocabulary, which comprised more than four thousand words, started in the Middle Ages with Nathan ben Jehiel's famous dictionary, the Arukh (Rome XI century), and continued with the dictionaries of J. Buxtorf, Menahem de Lonzano, Benjamin Musaphia, David Cohen de Lara, etc. During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were published the dictionaries and linguistic monographs of M. Jastrow, J. Levy, A. Kohut, S. Krauss, I. Loew and G. Dalman. A new interest has arisen in the last forty years in this new area of studies and we may quote the important works of S. Lieberman, H. Rosén and D. Sperber, and in Spain the works of L. Girôn. The study of this vocabulary, which started, as a specific etymological and philological study of a word, developed into a socio/linguistic research, and this gives us a better comprehension of the cultural and political background in which the rabbinical literature developed in Israel and in the Diaspora. Because of the importance of the vocabulary and its influence on the history of the Hebrew language, the Academy of the Hebrew Language of Jerusalem has dedicated a special section for the study of these words in its Historical Dictionary of the Hebrew Language project. This project, in which we are involved, has the scientific advice of the staff of the Diccionario Griego Espanol and research collaborators of the Academy of the Hebrew Language. It is assumed by scholars as R. Dalven that the Dictionary of Nathan ben Jehiel is one of the earliest documents in Jewish-Greek. This language was in use in the Jewish communities in Greece and in the Mediterranean, as well as in the Karaite communities from the Middle Age until the Second World War. Jewish-Greek like other Jewish languages, is written in Hebrew characters, some of them with vocalisation. In this language was translated the Bible and the most important publication of this translation (or translations), the "Constantinople Pentateuch" (1547), included also a Ladino translation , the Aramaic Onkelos translation and the Rashi commentary. In 1897 D. S. Hesseling published this translation in Greek characters with an important introduction. This publication laid the foundations of the study of Jewish Greek. This language was also in use for the poetical and liturgical creations of the Greek-Jewish communities. After the expulsion of the Jews from Spain and their setdement in Greece, these creations developed into two languages; Ladino and Jewish-Greek. The important work in this area of research done in the last twenty years by R. Dalven and by N. de Lange has brought a new interest in this study. The last open question of this summary is if there is a connection between Rabbinical and Jewish Greek. From a few testimonies in common vocabulary we may assume that, yes, there is a relation, but only further study and serious research will be able to verify this question. Although we arc working today on the preparation of a detailed bibliography of publications related to these studies, we need a list of Jewish Greek manuscripts and their scientific publication. We conclude this communication with the hope that this new area of studies may attain the attention it deserves in the European Universities and in this association of European Jewish Studies.

PART

T W O

BIBLE, BIBLICAL VERSIONS AND EXEGESIS

LA ACENTUACIÔN MASORÉTICA EN A M Ô S Y SU RELACIÔN CON LA DIVIS10N ORACIONAL Y LA ESTRUCTURA POÉTICA DEL Τ Ε Χ Ί Ό F c o . JAVIER DEL BARCO Universidad Complutcnse, Madrid, Spain

Introduction Para el estudio de la sintaxis en el libro de Amôs, como en el resto de los profetas, la ayuda de los acentos es doble: nos ayudan a establecer la division de oraciones dentro de los versiculos y nos hacen comprender mejor la estructura poética del verso. Cuando la division acentual no coincide con ella, debemos pensar que existe algùn fenômeno sintâctico especial sobre el que los masoretas quieren que fijemos nuestra atenciôn. E n el caso de encontrarnos con un pasaje ambiguo ο de difïcil interpretaciôn, los acentos nos indicarán la opciôn preferida por los masoretas frente a otras interpretaciones posibles que por alguna causa han rechazado.

Los acentos separadores como limite entre oraciones: Resultados Generales Frecuencias de acentos disyuntivos que marcan division oracional, por jerarquia: (1) Osons 51,62% 37,36% (2) Reyes (3)Segundos 10,64% 0,36% (4) Terceros Frecuencias de acentos disyuntivos, que marcan division oracional, por tipo:2 (2) Zaqef 28,15% (1) Silluq 26,35% (1) Έtnqjta' 25,27% (2) Tipja'

8,3%

(3) Rebi'a (3) Ρaita' (3) Tbir (2) Segol (4) Gerel (2) Sattelet

6,67% 3,06% 0,9% 0,72% 0,36% 0,18%

Esta comunicaciôn es un resumen de un arüculo más amplio que sera publicado prôximamente en la revista Sefarad del Consejo Superior de investigaciones Científicas. Esta tabla analiza cada acento por separado. Entre paréntesis se indica el grupo al que pertenece cada acento con respecto a la tabla anterior. El porcentaje se refiere al total de casos en que un acento marca division oracional. N o se presentan los porcentajes relativos de cada acento porque es irrelevante: rungûn acento tiene c o m o funciôn especifica la funciôn delimitadora de oraciones. Por lôgica, los acentos de mayor jerarquia (césares y reyes) serán los que m i s aparezcan realizando esta funciôn.

Los acentos separadores como limite entre oraciones: encabalgamiento y sintaxis supraoracional Encabalgamiento El encabalgamiento consiste en "el desacuerdo, frecuente en el verso, entre unidad sintáctica y unidad métrica, que se produce cuando la unidad sintáctica excede los limites de un verso y continua en el siguiente o siguientes." 3 En la poesia hebrea, el hecho de que haya encabalgamiento no quiere decir que no haya un acento disyuntivo al final de verso. Asi pues, puede haber casos de encabalgamiento en que no haya ningún acento disyuntivo a final de verso, y casos en los que si aparezca un acento separador. Solo hay très casos en Amôs de encabalgamiento en los que el final de verso no esta marcado por ningún acento, lo que se podria denominar encabalgamiento fuerte·. son 4,13; 5,27 y 9,15. Son más numerosos los casos de encabalgamiento en que algùn acento disyuntivo marca el final de verso, si bien esa pausa refleja una division interna de la oraciôn. Un buen ejemplo de este tipo de encabalgamiento suave es 4,9. Puesto que es un caso que admite más de una interpretaciôn, nos vamos a encontrar con la division que los masoretas estimaron más correcta: Verso 3

Verso 2

Verso 1

[‫]הכיתי א ת כ ם בשדפון ובירק יךן ]הרכות גנותיכם וכרמיכם ותאניכם וזיתיכם י א כ ל הנזם‬

1/2

iii

h

1/8

1/16

ii

1/4

1

1/8

La division acentual muestra encabalgamiento entre los versos 2 y 3 y establece el limite oracional en la pausa de 1/4. Los masoretas, pues, interpretaron "Os golpeé con tizôn y anublo; la multitud de vuestros huertos y vinedos, vuestras higueras y olivos devorô la langosta." Si ignoramos la acentuaciôn podemos dudar entre esta interpretaciôn que acabamos de dar y la siguiente: "Os golpeé con tizôn y con anublo la multitud de vuestros huertos y viiïedos; vuestras higueras y olivos devorô la langosta."

Sintaxis supraoracional El senalar la sintaxis supraoracional es una importante funciôn de los acentos que se muestra operativa en dos sentidos: primero, muestra la division oracional preferida por los masoretas cuando existen varias posibilidades, como acabamos de ver en 4,9; y segundo, muestra la vision de los masoretas con respecto a las relaciones de dependencia entre oraciones. En 8,12 la acentuaciôn ofrece la division oracional considerada mas correcta por los masoretas:

Làzaro Carreter, F. 1968. Diccionario de términosfilolôgicos. Madrid, 157.

LA ACENTUACION MASORETICA EN AMOS

Verso 2

Verso 1

:‫ימצאו‬ ‫ו ל א‬: ‫ו ה‬τ‫ה‬:‫ב ר ־ י‬- ‫ ד‬:‫א ת ־‬v ‫ ש‬r•‫ב ק‬- ‫ל‬ξ. ‫ישוטטו‬ ‫ר ח‬τ ‫ז‬: ·‫ע ד ־ מ‬- ‫ו‬: I ‫צ פ ו ן‬Τ·‫י ם ו מ‬τ‫ע ד ־‬- ‫מים‬ ‫ונעו‬ τ:· : s τ· τ:

1/4

1/8

1/2

1/8

1/4

1/4

La interpretaciôn que se deduce de esta division acentual es: "Vagarán de mar a mar y de norte a oriente; irán errantes a buscar la palabra del Senor, pero no la encontrarân." En el caso de ignorar los acentos, cabe la posibilidad de hacer otra interpretaciôn: "Vagarán de mar a mar, y de norte a oriente irán errantes para buscar la palabra del Senor, pero no la encontrarân." Esta ultima interpretaciôn fue desestimada por los masoretas. Otros casos en que se marca la sintaxis supraoracional son 1,5; 1,14; 3,9; 4,1.

Acentos mas utilizados en los limites oracionales: 'etnajta 'y zaqef Anâlisis del uso de 'Etnajta ' Marca division oracional: N o marca division oracional: TOTAL:

140 (98,6%) 2 (1,4%) 142

A la vista de estos resultados, se puede decir que el acento disyundvo 'etnajta' marca casi siempre que aparece la division entre dos oraciones diferentes.

Anâlisis del uso de zaqef Marca division oracional: No marca division oracional: TOTAL:

156 (83,4%) 31 (16,6%) 187

Zaqef es el acento que en más ocasiones marca division oracional. De todas las ocasiones en que aparece, la mayoria de ellas es para indicar division oracional, pero en un numéro considerable de veces (16,6%) no indica division oracional, sino una division interna en una oraciôn. Cuando esto ocurre, se puede deber a varias razones, como veremos en seguida.

Casus pendens y topicalizaciôn Dos fenômenos parecidos y muy frecuentes en el hebreo biblico son los que se ha dado en llamar casus pendens y topicalizaciôn. Se puede définir al primero como "sintagma nominal que se encuentra al inicio de una oraciôn con el fin de ser enfarizado, y cuyo lugar natural dentro de la oraciôn ocupa un pronombre," 4 y al segundo como "énfasis de una parte de la oraciôn como resultado de haberla trasladado desde su lugar natural hasta el inicio de la oraciôn." 5 Cabria discutir 4

5

Es la definition que presentan Rodrigue-Schwarzwald, O. y Sokoloff, M. en su Hebrew Dictionary of Linguistics and Philology (Hebr.). Even-Yehuda, 1992, 32. Rodrigue-Schwarzwald, O.-Sokoloff, M. op. cit., 232.

cuàl es el lugar natural de las partes de la oraciôn en hebreo biblico, pero aceptaremos que el esquema más frecuente es VSO 6 (verbo-sujeto-objeto). Según la lingüisdca textual, la oraciôn en la que se produce uno de estos dos fenômenos ya no es una oraciôn verbal, sino una oraciôn nominal compuesta (ONC). El énfasis es el denominador comûn en ambos casos, énfasis que se pone de manifiesto con el traslado de una parte de la oraciôn desde su lugar natural hasta el inicio de la misma, dislocando el esquema VSO. Pero como ha puesto de manifiesto A. Niccacci, 7 no es el énfasis la única funciôn de la O N C . E n el nivel del texto la O N C dene la funciôn de marcar un nivel diferente ο dependiente de otra oraciôn con un verbo en posiciôn inicial, es decir, de otra oraciôn verbal (OV). E n 2,14-15 encontramos varios casos de topicalizaciôn del sujeto, en concreto cinco O N C tras una OV: Verso 2 (Hemistiquio 1°)

Verso 1

:‫ןל וחזק ליא־יאמץ כחו וגבור ליא־ימלט נפשו‬5‫ןאבד מנוס מ‬

I 1/4

IU UI

1/2

1/8

1/4

I

1/8

2,14: "Enfonces la huida se hará imposible al àgil, y el fuerte no ejercitará su vigor, ni el héroe salvarà su propia vida." Verso 3

Verso 2 (Hemistiquio 2°)

:‫ ע מ ד ו ק ל ב ר נ ל י י ליא י מ ל ט ר כ ב ה ס ו ם ל א י מ ל ט נפטזו‬: ‫ור פ ש ה ק ש ת ל א‬

1/8

1/4

1/2

1/8

1/4

1/8

2,15. "El que maneja el arco no resistirá, y el àgil de pies no lograrà salvarse, ni el montado a caballo salvarà su vida." E n la primera oraciôn, una OV, la division acentual mantiene juntos al verbo y al sujeto, que ocupan su situaciôn natural según el esquema VSO. E n las cinco

6

7

Cf. Jongeling, K. 1991. "On the VSO Character of Classical Hebrew." En Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic Syntax presented to ProfessorJ. Hoftij^er. Ed. K. Jongeling et al. Leiden, 106: "It is clear that, although not the only order, the VSO order is best considered to be the basic order of classical Hebrew." "On the Hebrew verbal system." En Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics. Ed. R. D. Bergen. Dallas, 1994, 122-123.

O N C que siguen, el sujeto esta separado del resto de la oraciôn por algùn acento, senalando un fenômeno lingiiistico—la topicalizaciôn—que disloca el orden natural según el esquema VSO. Zaqef no es el ûnico acento que marca este fenômeno, pero lo que si es cierto es que encontramos un acento disyuntivo entre la parte de la oraciôn enfatizada y el resto. Oraciones compartidas Se ha encontrado un caso en el que la pausa que marca spqef parece indicar un fenômeno sintâctico sumamente interesante: la atribuciôn de un elemento nominal (en este caso el sujeto) a dos verbos diferentes. 5,2: Verso 1 ‫לא־תוסיף קום ב ת ו ל ת י ש ר א ל‬

IT 1/2

II

‫וווו‬

1/8

1/4

‫נפלה‬

M I 1/8

"Cayô, no tornara a 1evantarse la doncella de Israel." El ^aqef se inclina por hacer una pausa que indique el fenômeno sintâctico al que nos referiamos antes (1/4). Pausa fuerte En varias ocasiones, el %aqef indica una pausa fuerte dentro de una oraciôn constituida por dos hemistiquios. Esa pausa coincide con la cesura (2,8; 2,13; 3,12; 9,8; 9,10). En otras ocasiones el verso no présenta cesura (3,7; 4,6; 4,10; 7,15; 8,10). En estos casos, el acento simplemente parece dividir la oraciôn en dos. Esa misma pausa fuerte aparece en dos ocasiones (1,1 y 7,10) dentro de oraciones en prosa, por lo tanto oraciones en las que la estructura poética no puede jugar ningún papel.

Casos de limite oracional no marcado por ningún acento En 11 de los 574 limites oracionales existentes no se ha encontrado ningún acento disyuntivo que marque ese limite oracional, lo que supone el 1,91% del total. Esto quiere decir que los acentos disyuntivos marcan limite entre oraciones en un 98,09% de las veces.

Oraciones compartidas Hemos visto como %aqef marcaba un caso en el que dos verbos compartian algùn elemento nominal, siendo que esos dos verbos no iban uno inmediatamente detrás del otro. Lo que encontramos en los siguientes casos supone el mismo fenômeno sintâctico con la diferencia de que aqui ambos verbos si van uno inmediatamente detrás del otro. Para indicar claramente que un elemento nominal se refiere a los dos verbos, es necesario sacrificar la pausa entre ellos. Esto ocurre en 3,13; 4,1; 5,6; 5,21; 7,12; 7,15; 8,8 y 9,10.

Introduction del estilo directe Las oraciones que dan paso al estilo directo, ya sean formulas u oraciones con el verbo ‫אמר‬, no son consideradas importantes a la hora de marcar la division acentual, ya que no consdtuyen el tema principal del versiculo, y no serán habitualmente marcadas ni con 'etnajta' ni con %aqef, porque a juicio de los masoretas este fenômeno no indica la pausa principal del versiculo. E n algunos casos, esa oraciôn que introduce el estilo directo no está separada de la siguiente, es decir, no hay ningún acento que indique el limite oracional entre las dos oraciones. Un claro ejemplo es 9,1:8 Verso 1 (Hemistiquio 1°)

T e x t o en prosa (introducciôn)

‫כ »ל ם‬s ‫בראש‬: ‫ובצעם‬ ‫הספים‬ ‫וירעשו‬ ‫הכפתור‬ ‫ך‬I ‫ה‬- ‫ויאמר‬ ‫על־המזבח‬ ‫נצב‬ ‫את־ארני‬ ‫ראיתי‬ - - ‫ו‬ ‫־ · ־‬ ‫ו י ו ן ״‬ ‫ ז‬- ν ‫ · · ־‬: · ‫־‬ τ · τ 1‫־‬ ν · · τ

1/4

1/32

1/16

1/32

1/8

1/16

"Vi al Senor de pie sobre el altar, y dijo: bate los capiteles y bamboléense los umbrales, quiébralos sobre la cabeza de todos ellos"

Conclusiones generates Los acentos de la masora establecen de una manera sistemática la division oracional de un texto, a menos que por alguna causa sintáctica determinada se sacrifique la pausa entre dos verbos. E n algunas ocasiones, los acentos no senalan el limite oracional entre una oraciôn que introduce el estilo directo y la siguiente. E n el caso de que las oraciones coincidan con la estructura poética del texto, la division acentual se décanta por indicar primero la division de los versiculos en versos, y después la division de éstos en hemistiquios. Pero si la division oracional no coincide con la estructura poédca, los acentos sacrificarán la estructura poética y senalarân siempre la division oracional. Es lo que ocurre, por ejemplo, en los casos de encabalgamiento. A nivel supraoracional, en los casos en que varias interpretaciones son posibles, los acentos indicarán tanto la division oracional como las relaciones de interdependencia entre oraciones consideradas más correcta por los masoretas. Los acentos que senalan un mayor nûmero de veces el limite oracional son silluq, 'etnajta'y ^aqef. Cuando no senalan division oracional, especialmente %aqef, pueden indicar la existencia de una estructura sintáctica determinada (atribuciôn de varios elementos nominales a dos verbos, casus pendens, topicalizaciôn) ο simplemente, en el caso del %aqef, una pausa fuerte dentro de la oraciôn. E n definitiva, no parece que la funciôn especifica de %aqef sea senalar únicamente el limite oracional.

E s t o m i s m o ocurre d o s veces en 6,10.

JOSHUA, JUDAISM, AND G E N O C I D E CARL S. EHRLICH 1 York University, Canada Many years ago I heard a presumably apocryphal story about D a m e Kathleen Kenyon, the doyenne of biblical archaeologists and the excavator of Jericho in the 1950's and of Jerusalem in the 1960's. As near as I can recall the tale, D a m e Kathleen, who was known as an anti-Zionist, at some point in her career wanted to write an essay entided "From Jericho to Deir-Yassin," implying an analogy between ancient and modern Jewish "invasions" of the land known variously as Canaan, Israel, Judah, Judea, Palestine and the Holy Land. More recendy, Keith Whitelam (1996) has published a book in which he has implied that the modern European imperialist Zionist Jewish movement has drawn its inspiration from the biblical conquest tradition, which has led once again in his view to the silencing of Palestinian history and of Palestinian claims to the land. 2 Parallels are thus drawn in Whitelam's thought between the genocidal Israelites presumably of Joshua's day and the racist Zionists of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and also between the ancient Canaanites and the modern Palestinians, 3 the latter pair of whom were silenced by a textually based Judaism with the collusion of a biblically based Christianity. Leaving aside any evaluation of Kenyon and Whitelam's attitudes toward Judaism and its political expression, the interpretations attributed to them of the place of the book of Joshua and its — f o r lack of a better term—genocidal account of Israel's emergence in the land that it claims as its own pose a challenge to Judaism. It thus behooves us to ask, in spite of the fact that the overwhelming consensus of modern scholarship is that the conquest tradition of Joshua is a pious fiction composed by the deuteronomistic school, how does and how has the Jewish community dealt with these foundational narratives, saturated as they are with acts of violence against others? As the examples above make clear, the book of Joshua and the theology that it contains have served and continue to serve as potent ideological weapons directed against the people for w h o m Joshua functions as part of its basic heri-

1

This paper is an abbreviated version o f an essay that has since been published in French as Ehrlieh 1998. I would like to acknowledge the invaluable assistance o f my wife, Rabbi Michal Shekel o f Temple Har Z i o n (Thornhill, Ontario), in researching and writing this article. My York University colleague, Professor Martin I. Lockshin, graciously read and c o m m e n t e d o n a draft o f this article. Professor Derek Penslar o f the University o f T o r o n t o was kind enough to provide m e with s o m e bibliographic leads regarding modern Israeli politics. A generous grant from the Centre for Jewish Studies at York University helped support my research.

2

For a critique o f Whitelam's methodology and views, see D e v e r 1998: 44—46. O n the political uses o f the exodus and conquest motifs in the Hebrew Bible and the various self-identifications with either the conqueror/saved or the victim/silenced, see Schwart2 1997: 153-159.

3

tage.4 In recent years a number of Jewish voices have also been raised calling into question those aspects of the Jewish tradition that are difficult to accept in the context of a liberal western intellectual climate.5 The question of how to deal with traditional texts that advocate violence against human beings who are different from the in-group writing the text, be they foreigners, women, homosexuals, etc., is one that motivates many of the modern struggles with the textual corpus of inherited tradition. 6 In addition, in light of the criticism of the book of Joshua both from a Jewish and a non-Jewish perspective, the questions arise, what role has the book played in the historical context of Judaism, and whether Jewish authorities have dealt with the disturbing issues raised by the texts. Among modern Jewish commentators, who have written from a variety of religious perspectives for a Jewish audience, the disturbing nature of Joshua has for the most part been passed over in silence. Ignoring the problems of the text, the late Chief Rabbi of the British Empire, J. H. Hertz (1981: 635), was content to mouth platitudes concerning the "outstanding character[ ]" of Joshua. From the opposite end of the Jewish spectrum, Gunther Plaut (1996: 536) in his Haftarah commentary derives the message of Joshua as being " D o God's will, and the land will be yours." In this context he avoids the question of the violence inherent in the conquest narrative by noting the fact that modern scholars have moved away from viewing Joshua as an accurate historical record (Plaut 1996: X X X I ) . On the other hand, in his Torah commentary Plaut (1981: 114) grapples with the "Morality of Conquest," only to conclude that "[t]he morality of the forcible displacement of the Canaanites was never raised by the Torah, and neither was the morality of war as such." Sidney Hoenig is one of the few relatively modern commentators writing from a traditional Jewish point of view who has raised the issue of violence in respect to Joshua, only to justify it as divinely ordained holy war.7 The very silence of our more or less contemporary sources on the subject of violence in Joshua, indeed the short shrift given to the

4

5

6

7

See Baron 1977: 2 3 - 2 4 for a discussion of how the text o f Joshua has been used to imply that Jews are by their very nature genocidal, in pardcular with reference to Soviet and-Zionist propaganda. See, e.g., Schwartz 1997. An interesting literary reflection o f this tension is to be found in Alicia Suskin Ostriker's poem "The Story of Joshua," in which she contrasts the command to love the stranger in one's midst (Ex 23:9; Deut 10:19) with the violent conquest as described in Joshua. See Ostriker 1994: 155-157. Max Apple (1987) has presented an image o f Joshua as one riven by doubts about the necessity o f killing Canaanites in order to protect the Israelites from idol worship. L. Daniel Hawk (1997) has brought attention to the ambivalence inherent in Joshua and the Deuteronomistic tradition in on the one hand decreeing "an ancient program of ethnic cleansing" (53) for the Canaanites, and on the other hand incorporating narratives which make admittedly marginal Israelites out o f Canaanites, namely out of Rahab and her family, and out o f the Gibeonites. "Sensitive readers are concerned about the brutality shown in Joshua, but one should not forget that it is a story o f a war—of a holy war. The theme is the obliteration of historically hated pagans and the batde is only in honor of God" (Hoenig 1969: VIII). In spite of its "holy" nature, the iconoclastic Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1987: 367) pointed out that "this war, with its immortal victories, is not commemorated by any day o f remembrance, festival, thanksgiving day, or day o f prayer, despite the fact that it was waged at God's behest by a servant o f the Lord."

book in most Jewish treatments, 8 would serve to indicate a certain measure of discomfort with the contents of the book. That this is not a solely modern atdtude will be documented in the next few pages. A stadsdcal glance at the proporuon of haftarot, the prophedc explications of the sinagogal Torah readings, taken from the book of Joshua only serves to emphasize its relative lack of importance in a Jewish liturgical setting. When compared with other books from the Prophets, from which the haftarot are taken, the book of Joshua is underrepresented. In addition, it is significant that in none of the three passages from Joshua that serve as haftarot is any text employed that deals direcdy either with the narrative of the conquest, which begins in chapter 6 with the capture of Jericho, or with the apportioning of the land in Josh 13-22. 9 It could be argued that the first midrash on the story of Joshua's conquest and contemporaneous extirpation of the Canaanites is to be found in the Hebrew Bible. As has long been noted, Judg 1:1-2:5 in effect deconstructs Joshua's account of a total conquest of the land and the slaughter of all of its inhabitants. Following direcdy on the book of Joshua, the beginning of Judges, in particular Judg 1:16 ff., details the lack of success that the Israelites had in their attempt to conquer the land.10 On the contrary, although the text does indicate that the aboriginal Canaanites were eventually subject to forced labor, the thrust of the passage is that the Israelites and the Canaanites dwelt alongside one another. Indeed, because of the commingling of Israelites and Canaanites an angel castigates the Israelites and effectively predicts the future course of the narrative of Judges, in which the Israelites would suffer oppression at the hands of the surrounding peoples (Judg 2:1-3). Notwithstanding the more nuanced conquest tradition of Judges, it is the narrative of the book of Joshua that has set the tone for traditional Jewish interpretations of the biblical story. And it is this account which apparendy discomfited at least some of the Rabbis. One can deduce from a number of midrashim that their authors were not satisfied with the explanation given for the genocidal conquest in the biblical text, namely that God had promised the Israelites the land. At least some of the Rabbis asked themselves the questions: What of the original inhabitants of the land? What had they done to deserve this punishment? In essence, their solution was to lay the onus of blame for the conquest and Joshua's extirpation of the Canaanites at the feet of the victims. It is related in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel (Simeon ben Gamaliel) that before 8

9

1Ό

See Sandmel 1972: 157-158, whose whole discussion o f Joshua is compressed into just over a page. See the extended discussion o f the information to be gleaned from an examination o f the haftarot in Ehrlich 1998: 98-100. Moshe Weinfeld has argued that the aim o f the narrative is to serve as a corrective to Joshua's account of the conquest, which gives credit to the Joseph tribes o f the north. According to Weinfeld, the narrative of Judges 1 attempts to contrast the success o f the tribe o f j u d a h ( w 1 20) with the lack of success of the northern tribes ( w 21-26). See Weinfeld 1993: 121-155. Weinfeld (152) also makes reference to certain verses in the latter half o f Joshua (15:63; 16:10; 17:1113), which would support the depiction o f the partial nature of the conquest according to Judges.

Joshua entered the land he sent a proclamation to all the Canaanites, in which he gave them the choice of leaving the land, surrendering to the Israelites, or waging war.11 The midrash goes on to relate that the Girgashites heeded the first part of the proclamation and setded in Africa, a land as beautiful as the one they left.12 The Gibeonites submitted to the Israelite yoke, albeit through a subterfuge according to the biblical account (Josh 9:3-27). The thirty-one kings of Canaan defeated by the Israelites (Josh 12) were the ones who refused to heed Joshua's warning and elected to wage war on Israel. In this manner this midrash makes the Canaanites responsible for their own demise. They were not innocent victims, but elected of their own free will to attempt to contravene the divine promise of land to Israel. The conscience of Joshua, and of his descendants, was clean.13 A tradition that underlines the fatal recalcitrance of the Canaanites and blames them for their own demise is the one according to which God apportioned the lands of the earth to different peoples. The Canaanites were given the land of Israel to care for until the time of the setdement of the Israelites in their promised land would arrive.14 It was, hence, divinely ordained that the Canaanites would then up and leave the land to the Israelites. The Canaanites, however, were wicked and refused to go when their time came. In the biblical formulation it is, after all, a land flowing with milk and honey. Joshua and the Israelites were thus forced against their will to wage war upon the Canaanites, who, contravening God, would not even cede an inch of land without a fight to the finish. This midrash also attempts to justify the fury and brutality of Joshua's holy war against the Canaanites. Once again the ones responsible for Joshua's war of conquest were the eventual losers. In this way, the Rabbis tried to assuage their own ambivalent feelings about the conquest narrative in Joshua. Nonetheless there is also a tradition preserved that Joshua was preordained since the creation of the world to be its first conqueror. 15 That not all Rabbis shared these feelings of ethical ambivalence about their ancestors' alleged genocidal war against the Canaanites is indicated by another midrash, 16 one of a number in which Joshua comes off looking quite feeble in comparison with his teacher Moses.17 According to this story God punished Joshua for his hubris at the time of his taking over the reins of leadership from Moses by causing him to forget three hundred laws and to be in doubt concerning another seven hundred. The Israelites were so outraged at his lack of 11 12

13

14 15 16 17

PT (Palestinian Talmud) Shevi'it 6:1, 36c. Although the Girgashites are mentioned as one of the (seven) aboriginal nations of Canaan (Gen 10:16; 15:21; Deut 7:1; Josh 3:10; N e h 9:8; 1 Chron 1:14), there is no account o f their defeat in the conquest narrative of Joshua (Josh 6-12). This has left the door open for the speculation that they were the one nation to heed Joshua's call to leave. It should be noted, however, that they are listed among the nations delivered into Joshua's hands by G o d (Josh 24:11). See also Leviticus Kabbah 17:6 and Deuteronomy Rabbah 5:14, in which this midrash is attributed to Rabbi Samuel ben Nahman. Sifra Qedoshim 10. Esther Rabbah Prologue 10. BT (Babylonian Talmud) Temurah 16a. See also BT Baba Bathra 75a.

learning that they wanted to kill him. Since there was no time to reteach him all that he had forgotten, the only way in which God could save Joshua was by diverting the attention of the people through a war. Thus the war of extermination against the Canaanites was begun earlier than planned as a diversionary tactic to save the life of one individual. It would appear that the author of this midrash was not all too concerned about the ethical implications of a God who sees nothing wrong with wiping out a whole nation just to save the life of a man whose life is threatened on account of an action of the deity. On the other hand, perhaps this midrash is telling us that its author viewed the justification for the conquest of the land as being spurious in the extreme. The broad consensus of Jewish tradition has been that the conquest of the land belongs to the distant past. In this manner, any discomfort with the anachronistic notion of genocide to be found in the Joshua narrative could be passed off as something that belonged to a certain time and place, not to be repeated. The restrictions on the waging of war in Maimonides and his biblical and rabbinic sources would seem to support this contention. 18 It is only with the rise of the modem state of Israel that the book of Joshua and its account of the conquest of the land has assumed a renewed importance within the context of Judaism. 19 It is ironic that the trend-setters in the employment of the Hebrew Bible in order to bolster Jewish claims to the ancient land of Israel were secular Zionists (Meir 1995: 6). After all, in their view postbiblical Jewish literature was the literature of exile. The Bible, on the other hand, presented the ultimate historical source detailing the story of the Jews at home in their own land. While the latter part of Joshua, namely the apportioning of the land, served to establish the topography of the land and gave at least one Utopian model for its shifting borders, it was the conquest narrative that was to serve as the major inspiration for establishing a Jewish claim to the land. David Ben-Gurion, who ushered in the state of Israel and was its first prime-minister, was interested in showing the continuity between the Israelites and the Canaanites (Kempinski 1989: 13-14; Silberman 1993: 260). In this manner, he wanted to show that the Jewish claims to the land were older than the conquest. While he supported the notion of a partial exodus from Egypt and a subsequent conquest of the land, in Ben-Gurion's view the Israelites were part of the abonginal mix of cultures in Canaan. Until the Arab refugee crisis developed as a consequence of Israel's War of Independence, it had been customary to view Arab culture romantically as reflective of the village life that had obtained in biblical times (Silberman 1993: 230-231). Once that culture had become characterized as the "Other" m the eyes of modern Zionism, the period of the Bible and specifically the recovery of a romanticized Canaanite culture became the focus of literary, artistic, and ar-

18

19

On the strict rules of conduct in war, which include the requirements to offer terms of peace and to enable the escape of noncombatants among others, see Mishnch Torah, I lilkhot Melakhim 6. See also the discussion of the rabbinic concept of war in Ehrlich 1998: 103-106. O n the use of the Bible in supporting Jewish national aspirations in Israel/Palestine, see Schwartz 1997: 122.

chaeological endeavor, all of which was fostered by Ben-Gurion and those influenced by a similar ideology (Kempinski 1989: 7-8). It was particularly in the field of archaeology that the ideological batde about Joshua was waged. It was felt that proving the veracity of the book of Joshua would in some way prove to be a justification of modern historical reality. In this manner, the batdes of Joshua were viewed as paradigmatic for the modem age, not—it should be noted—in the sense of prescribing genocide against nonJews, but in providing models for the reclamation of the land. The infamous batdes between Yigael Yadin and Yohanan Aharoni were not simply an academie disagreement regarding the interpretation of specific archaeological finds, but as has often been pointed out these batdes were based in large part on their respective proponents' understanding of Zionist ideology (see Kempinski 1989: 11-12; Silberman 1993: 236-243). Aharoni and Yadin's bitter differences were to split Israeli archaeology into two mutually exclusive and warring camps for a generation. The root of the problem lay in the interpretation of the finds from Yadin's excavations at Hazor (Tell el-Qadi), a large site in the north of Israel and the leading Canaanite kingdom according to Josh 11:10. Yadin, who was influenced by the American William Foxwell Albright's school of biblical interpretation, wanted to identify the destruction of Hazor at the end of the Late Bronze Age with the conquest of the site mentioned in Joshua. 20 In this he saw a model for his own military participation in the securing of the Zionist dream by force of arms.21 In contrast Aharoni, whose intellectual forebears were the German scholars Albrecht Alt and Martin Noth, preferred to view the so-called conquest of the land in more peaceful terms, as the gradual infiltration and setdement of nomads in the land.22 In this he was echoing the ideology of his labor Zionist movement, which advocated the development of the land and its reclamation through a gradual process of setdement building. Thus the interpretation of the book of Joshua served as the fulcrum for an acrimonious debate concerning the strategy of realizing the Zionist dream. In a provocative essay, Aharon Kempinski (1989) argued that Zionist ideology has influenced which archaeological finds have been deemed worthy of attention in the popular consciousness. Thus he decried the lack of attention given to some of the most important finds of recent years bearing on ancient Israelite religion, including the Kuntillet Ajrud inscriptions and discoveries concerning the Essenes, in favor of focusing attention on finds which help to establish Jewish "rights" to parcels of land on the West Bank. Whether or not one accepts his identification of the structure found at Mount Ebal near Nablus as a watchtower rather than as a sanctuary (see Zertal 1985; 1986; Kempinski 1986; 20 21

22

O n Yadin's interpretation of his finds from Ha20r, see Yadin 1975. According to Silberman (1993: 370-371), Yadin wanted to show (a) that the wars that he fought were reflective of those of the time of Joshua, and (b) that his ancestors were also warriors. For an example of a modern Israeli military analysis of the campaigns of Joshua, see Herzog and Gichon 1978: 25-45. O n Aharoni's views o f the transition between the "Canaanite" and "Israelite" periods, i.e., the Late Bronze and Iron Ages, see Aharoni 1982: 112-191.

Coogan 1987; 1990), his observations regarding the relative amount of attention given to the alleged discovery of the altar of Joshua (cf. Josh 8:30 ff.) surely raise some very important questions regarding the political and religious misuse of archaeological funding and evidence. 23 In recent years the book of Joshua has been rediscovered by the right wing of religious Zionism. Following in the footsteps of Nahmanides, the re"conquest" of the land has become a paramount religious concern. 24 The land itself has been raised to the level of a holy object, which, as some commentators have pointed out, 25 flies in the face of the dominant tendency of Jewish thought, which has been to view the land as holy not because of any inherent holiness, but because of the possibility of performing certain specific religious activities there. In effect then we have come full circle. The book of Joshua, which is a theological construct imposed upon ancient Israelite historical memory, 26 once again serves in certain circles as an ideological weapon in reclaiming the past according to an interpretation of the present. The majority of Jews continues to maintain an ambivalent distance from the book.

Bibliography Aharoni, Y. 1982. The Archaeology of the Land of Israel: From the Prehistoric Beginnings to the End of the First Temple Period. Translated from the Hebrew 1978 by A. S. Rainey. Philadelphia: Westminster. Apple, M. 1987. "Joshua." In Congregation: Contemporary Writers Read the Jewish Bible. Ed. D. Rosenberg. San Diego-New York-London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 61—69. Baron, S. W. 1977. "The Ancient and Medieval Periods: Review of the History." In Violence and Defense in the Jewish Experience. Ed. S. W. Baron and G. S. Wise. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society. Benvenisti, M. 1998. "Digging for the Myth." Ha'aret^ English Edition (June 11, 1998) http://www3.haaretz.co.il/eng/htmls/kat7_2.htm. Coogan, M. D. 1987. "Of Cults and Cultures: Reflections on the Interpretation of Archaeological Evidence." Palestine Exploration Quarterly 119, 1-8. , 1990. "Archaeology and Biblical Studies: The Book of Joshua." In The Hebrew Bible and Its Interpreters. Ed. W. II. Propp, B. Halpern and D. N. Freedman. Biblical and Judaic Studies from the University of California at San Diego 1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 19-32. 23 24

25

26

See also the views expressed by the maverick Meron Benvenisti (1998). Weissbrod 1982: 265-275. See also Meir 1995: 7, who is troubled by a recent emphasis in certain circles on the violent biblical traditions in place of the traditional and presumably more pacifistic Talmudic interpretations. See, e.g., Shilhav (1985: 121-122), who cites 773 llagiga 3b, 773 Hulin 7a, and Fosefot Yom Τον• Eduyol 8:7, in support of his contention that Rabbinic tradition viewed the conquest by Joshua as cancelled in favor of the partial reclamation of the land granted to Ezra and the other returnees from exile by the Persian authorities. Thus the need to conquer the whole of the land was abrogated and superceded by the later partial reclamation. 'ITie overall desirability of this historical process in Rabbinic thought is indicated according to Shilhav by the non-application of the laws of shmittah outside of the area of Jewish control, and hence the availability of food for the poor during jubilee years. See, e.g., Baron 1977: 23-24.

Dever, W. G. 1998. "Archaeology, Ideology, and the Quest for an 'Ancient' or 'Biblical' Israel." Near Eastern Archaeology (= Biblical Archaeologist) 61/1, 39-52. Ehrlich, C. S. 1998. "Josué dans le judaïsme." Foi et vie 97/4, 95-110. Hawk, L. D. 1997. "The Problem with Pagans." In Reading Bibles, Writing Bodies: Identity and The Book, 153-163. Ed. T. K. Beal and D. M. Gunn. London-New York: Routledge. Hertz, J. H. 1981. The Pentateuch and Haftorahs. 2nd Edition. London: Soncino Press. Herzog, C. and Gichon, M. 1978. Battles of the Bible: A Modern Military Evaluation of the Old Testament. New York: Random House. Hoenig, S. B. ed. 1969. The Book ofJoshua: A New English Translation of the Text and Rashi with a Commentary Digest. New York: Judaica Press. Kempinski, A. 1986. "Joshua's Altar—An Iron Age I Watchtower." Biblical Archaeology Review 12/1, 42, 44-49. , 1989. "Die Archäologie als bestimmender Faktor in der israelischen Gesellschaft und Kultur." Judaica 45/1, 2-20. Leibowitz, L. 1987. "Heroism." In Contemporary Jewish Religious Thought: Original Essays on Critical Concepts, Movements, and Beliefs. Ed. A. A. Cohen and P. Mendes-Flohr. New York: Free Press & London: Collier Macmillan, 363—370. Meir, M. 1995. "Talmud Out, Tanakh In." (Hebr.). Meimad 1995/4, 6-7. Ostriker, A. S. 1994. The Nakedness of the Fathers: Biblical Visions and Revisions. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Plaut, W. G. ed. 1981. The Torah: A Modern Commmentaty. New York: UAHC Press. Plaut, W. G. 1996. The Haftarah Commentary. New York: UAHC Press. Sandmel, S. 1972. The Enjoyment of Scripture: The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. LondonOxford-New York: Oxford University Press. Schwartz, R. M. 1997. The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. Chicago-London: University of Chicago Press. Shilhav, Y. 1985. "Interpretation and Misinterpretation of Jewish Territorialism." In The Impact of Gush Emunim: Politics and Settlement in the West Bank. Ed. D. Newman. New York: St. Martin's Press, 111-124. Silberman, N. A. 1993. A Prophetfrom Amongst You: The Life of Yigael Yadin: Soldier, Scholar, and Mythmaker ofModern Israel. New York: Addison-Wesley. Wein feld, M. 1993. The Promise of the Land: The Inheritance of the Land of Canaan by the Israelites. The Taubman Lectures in Jewish Studies 3. Berkeley-Los Angeles-Oxford: University of California Press. Weissbrod, L. 1982. "Gush Emunim Ideology—From Religious Doctrine to Political Action." Middle Eastern Studies 18, 265-275. Whitelam, K. W. 1996. The Invention ofAndent Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History. London-New York: Routledge. Yadin, Y. 1975. Ha^or The Rediscovery of a Great Citadel of the Bible. London-Jerusalem: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Zertal, A. 1985. "Has Joshua's Altar Been found on Mt. Ebal?" Biblical Archaeology Review 11/1,26-43. , 1986. "How Can Kempinski Be So Wrong!" Biblical Archaeology Review 12/1, 43, 4953.

W I L L T H E REAL M O S E S PLEASE S T E P F O R W A R D ( A N I N T E R P R E T A T I O N OF T H E E X O D U S STORY) CLAIRE GOTTLIEB Yeshiva University, USA The historical basis for the Exodus chronicle continues to be a favorite topic for researchers. The fact that the Bible is our only source for the story neither proves nor disproves it. However, it is here that Moses, probably the most pivotal individual in the Bible, is depicted as the leader of the Children of Israel and lawgiver par excellence. Without the Moses saga we would loose the canonical national epic of the exodus from Egyptian bondage, and the handing down of the law that is incorporated into the world's major religious faiths. This paper will examine portions of Exodus, Numbers and Deuteronomy in order to assess the Egyptian evidence for the role that Moses plays in the story. T o do this we must interpret the text as it is written, disregarding any preconceived ideas suggested by the commentators. T h e Exodus story is the prelude to the Israelites occupying the land of Canaan. It establishes their right of ownership of the land. This requires engendering a national hero, one who is larger than life. The histories of larger than life heroes are often shrouded in myth. T h e story of Moses is no different. Throughout the story G o d gives Moses mythical properties. Beneath the layers of the legend the historicity of the story still lies waiting to be revealed. Therefore the paper will deal primarily with the literary and linguistic aspects of parts of the story. It will focus on Moses, the man, his mission and his destiny. In telling the story the biblical author is painting a picture with words. We must read the Hebrew text carefully in order to see this picture. The author also employs cognate Hebrew and Egyptian terms and idiomatic expressions that reveal the Egyptian framework of the narrative. When we read the story we must visualize ourselves in the Egyptian milieu. We must "think Egyptian." The story of Moses and the Exodus is a literary gem. The miracle factor is an important part of the saga that is filled with tension and irony. As the story moves from one event to the next, the element of suspense takes over. It is a story of uncertainty and danger. Will the baby be rescued? If he is what will happen to him? The author uses poetic irony in that the infant is raised by the daughter of the very man who had decreed his death. It is not until the child has grown that we are told that he is given a name by Pharaoh's daughter. The name cannot be the same one given to him by his natural mother. This name is never revealed by the author. It is doubtful that an Egyptian princess would give the child a Hebrew name. It is more likely that the name would be an Egyptian one, revealing her aspirations for her adopted son or characterizing his future role in history. The name seems short for an Egyptian name and may be an abbreviation for a longer descriptive name or litanic formula. Names of gods, kings and

even ordinary people are known to have been shortened in both Egypt, Babylonia and Canaan. 1 If this is the case the Hebrew redactors would have tried to remove any trace of pagan derivation from the full name. We will return to the subject of Moses' name later. G o d appoints Moses to go to Pharaoh to ask him to let the children of Israel leave Egypt. Moses is reluctant to obey. He protests that the people will not believe him if he tells them "the G o d of your Fathers has sent me." They will want to know God's name. G o d answers Moses, giving His name by saying, ‫" א ה י ה אשר אהיה‬I Am W h o I A m " (Ex 3:14). The Egyptian parallel to this phrase is p3 nty wn-w-f, "The O n e W h o Is W h o He Is." 2 This is the epithet used by Wenamon to describe the Egyptian deity. 3 Some commentators prefer to transfer the Hebrew phrase to the causative mood, Yahweh asher jihjeh, " H e causes to be what comes into existence." 4 This is similar to another name that the Egyptians had for their supreme deity, Mrr.f irr.f, meaning "Whatever-helikes-he does." 5 This phrase is echoed in Ex 33:19: ‫ו ה נ ת י את־אשר א ח ן ו ר ח מ ת י את־אשר ארחם‬ I will be gracious unto whom I will be gracious and I will be merciful unto whom I will be merciful. In other words "I will do as I choose to do." Any of these interpretations of God's name would be clearly understood by those living in the Egyptian milieu. When Moses continues to demur Yahweh gives him three wondrous signs to use to convince the people that he has indeed received Divine instructions. T h e first and most important sign is the rod, which becomes a serpent when it touches the ground and reverts to its original state after Moses lifts it by the tail. (Ex 4:2—4). O n e does not normally hold a snake by the tail. Snakes are usually held by the head to prevent them from biting. Holding a snake by the tail is a distincdy Egyptian practice and is reflected in Egyptian art. The divine rod plays an important role throughout the Exodus saga. Even after having received the three signs Moses is still reluctant to heed God's wishes thereby incurring His anger. Yahweh then decides to appoint Aaron as the spokesperson for Moses. He informs Moses that he will be ‫" עמ־פיך ו ע ס ־ פ י ה ו‬with your (Moses") mouth and with his (Aaron's) m o u t h " (Ex 4:15). The association of " m o u t h " with the one who is in charge is used in the Bible only in this instance. It is an Egyptian concept denoting rank, for in Egypt

1

2

3

4

5

Albright, W. F. 1957, From the Stone Age to Christianity. New York: Doubleday & Co., 260-261. Also Griffiths, J. G. 1953. "The Egyptian Derivation of the name Moses." ] N E S 12/4, 227. This was demonstrated by Cyrus H. Gordon in a post-doctoral seminar. See Lubetski, M. 1995. "W. R. Smith's 'ehyh 'àier 'ehyeh." In William Robertson Smith—Essays in Reassessment. Ed. W. Johnstone. ]SOT Supplement Series 189. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 162. Gardiner, A. H. 1981. Late Egyptian Stories. Bruxelles: Édition de la Fondation Égyptologique, 69.2,27 end. Albright, Stone Age, 15-16; 259-261. Wildavsky, Α. 1984. The Nursing Father; Moses as a Political Leader. University, Al.: Univ. of Alabama Press, 36-37, 238, n. 15,16. See also Freedman, D. N. 1960. "The Name of the God of Moses." JBL 79,154. Gardiner, A. H. 1978. Egyptian Grammar. Oxford: Griffith Institute, 569.

the one who is the commander-in-chief or overseer has the ude imy-r, the one "in the mouth." 6 Egypdan imy (with alepb) can be cognate to Hebrew ‫( עם‬with V). In the transposition from Egyptian to Hebrew the Egyptian aleph sometimes comes into Hebrew as ‫ע‬. This also occurs with other Semitic languages such as Aramaic and Ugaritic. With regard to prepositions ‫ א‬always goes to ‫ע‬, and never the reverse. 7 Yahweh is the "Overseer" of both Moses and Aaron and Moses is the "overseer" of Aaron. It is here that we have the first indication of the apotheosis of Moses. G o d informs Moses that Aaron will be his spokesman, his " m o u t h , " but he will be as a god to Aaron (Ex 4:16). However, this is not enough. Moses later protests that Pharaoh, a king and a god, will not listen to a mere mortal? Moses must have equal rank if he is to command the respect of the Egyptian king. He must represent Yahweh on earth and also have the trappings of authority. G o d now performs another miracle and elevates Moses to be a god before Pharaoh and appoints Aaron as his prophet (Ex 7:1). Moses will now be G o d ' s mouth, and, as per God's instructions, will teach Aaron what he must say (to quote Cassuto) just as God instructs His prophet and inspires him, and as the king of Egypt, who is regarded as a divinity by his people, makes his wiE known through the medium of the officer who bears the honored tide of his "mouth." 8

The departure from Egypt What is the picture the Bible paints for us of the Exodus from Egypt? Ex 12:4CM1 tells us that after four hundred and thirty years ‫" כ ל ־ צ ב א ו ת יהוה‬the entire army of Yahweh" went out of the land of Egypt. Numbers 1 and 2 describe the divisions of the army. We read in Nu 11:21 that the number of people was 600,000 and they were mighty (Nu 22:3, 6). This was the element that had plagued Pharaoh from the onset. The Hebrews had become exceedingly powerful (Ex 1:7-8). Their military strength manifested itself after they had left Egypt. They subdued the Amorites (Nu 21:24—25) and easily mustered twelve thousand armed men for the war against Midian (Nu 31:5). The Hebrew root used to describe the Exodus is ‫יצא‬, the standard meaning of which is "to go out". The Egyptian cognate is W5. 9 In the extra-biblical sources the going out of Egypt is called ‫יציאת מצרים‬. The Egyptian cognate to ‫ יציאת‬is wdyt, meaning campaign or military expedition. 10 The root ‫ יצא‬is also used in the sense of military campaign in other books of the Bible." The interpretation reflected by this evidence portrays Moses as the leader of a people, already trained for batde, embarking on a military expedition from Egypt.

6 7 8 9 10 11

Faulkner, R. O. 1976. A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. Oxford: Griffith Insdtute, 18. Broadt, L. 1980. E^ekie/'s Oracles against Egypt. Rome: Pont. Biblical Institute Press, 19-21. Cassuto, U. 1974, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 51. Faulkner 1976: 75. See Gardiner 1978: 563. Also Faulkner 1976: 74. See Ju 9:35, 39, 42.

After the Israelites left Egypt they faced many dangers, both from within their own camp and from enemies along the way. Ex 17:8—14 and Deut 25:17—19 describe the war with Amalek. Amalek attacks Israel from the rear when her army is in a weakened condidon. The key phrase in Ex 17:12, ‫וידי מ ש ה כבדים‬, poses a difficulty in transladon. The popular interpretation is that Moses, the commander of the Israelite forces, was suffering the throes of senescence and could no longer hold up his arms. There are two problems with this. First, pairs of the body are feminine and the adjective here, ‫כבדים‬, is masculine. Secondly, this is not really what the Bible tells us. According to Deut 34:7 Moses died at the height of his powers showing no signs of aging. The text reads, ‫לא־כהתה עינו ולא־נס ל ח ה‬. This is usually translated as "his eye was not dimmed and his natural force had not abated." The crux is ‫ולא־נס ל ח ה‬. It has been suggested that ‫לח‬, a hapax, is cognate to Ugaritic Ihh meaning vigor.12 I propose that ‫ לח‬in Hebrew is polysemous and also corresponds to Egyptian rh meaning knowledge or understanding. Thus the verse means that at his death Moses still possessed the powers of a young man, perfect vision, vigor, and mental prowess unimpaired by age. We have here a picture of Moses, the general of the army, standing on top of the hill, holding the divine rod and directing the progress of the battle. How did one direct a battle in antiquity? By means of hand signals. Aaron, the prophet and representative of the priesthood, watched the enemy movements on one side while Hur, the military expert, assessed the enemy movements on the other side. The word ‫ יד‬is used to denote hand signals many times in the Bible and also in the DSS War Scroll.13 In Ex 17:15-16 ‫ יד‬is parallel to ‫נם‬. In Ex 17:15 Moses names the site of the batde ‫" יהוה נסי‬Yahweh is my signal." The Hebrew word ‫ כבדים‬is cognate to Akkadian kabtu which carries the meaning of power, weightiness or importance. 14 In Nu 20:20 we learn that Edom came out to meet the Israelites ‫" בעם כבד‬as a powerful nation." 15 Accordingly, the phrase should be interpreted as "Moses' hand signals were crucial" (crucial to the outcome of the batde). 16

The horns of Moses? The text informs us that when Moses came down from the mountain, after having received the tablets, he did not know that when he spoke to God

12

13

14

15

16

Albright, W. F. 1944. "The Natural Force o f Moses in the Light o f Ugaritic." BASOR 94, 32-35. For another opinion see Tigay, J. 1995. " ‫' ל א ־ נ ס ל ח‬He Had N o t Become Wrinkled' (Deuteronomy 34:7)." In Solving Riddles and Untying Knots. Ed. Z. Zvet, S. Gitlin and M. Sokoloff. Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 350. Yadin, Y. 1957. The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness. (Hebr.). Jerusalern: Bialik Institute, 93; 306, 8:5. See also Isa 13:2; Josh 8:19. See C A D p. Astour, M. C. 1992. "History of Ebla." In Eblaitica, vol. 3. Ed. C. H. Gordon and G. A. Rendsburg. Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 61, η. 371. The bet is bet o f predication or equivalence. See Gordon, C. H. 1981. "In o f Predication or Equivalence." JBL 100, 612-13. The translation could be "Moses' hand signals were powerful." However, 'crucial' is more appropriate to the context.

‫קרן עור פניו‬. This was an extraordinary occurrence and the phrase is repeated three times in Ex 34:29, 30 and 35. There has been a profusion of deliberation as to its meaning. 17 Does it mean "his face was horned," "the skin of his face sent forth beams," "the skin of his face shone," or something entirely different? The Hebrew root ‫ קרן‬is used many of times in the Bible meaning horn or horn shaped. It does not have the meaning to shine. There are many other Hebrew words used to connote radiance or shining. In Deuteronomy 33 Moses gives Joseph the attribute of being a prince, and speaks of his horns ‫( קרניו‬the symbol of royalty) with which he gores the enemy (Deut 33:16-17). 1 Sam 2:10 (Hannah's Song) says the Lord will "exalt the horn of his anointed." Hab 3 speaks of Cush and Midian, areas well known to Moses. Hab 3:4 describes the brightness of the Lord's light ‫( אור‬with ‫ )א‬and says He has horns ‫ קרנים‬on each side. Even at this later date horns represent divinity. The word ‫ קרן‬in ‫ קרן עור פניו‬is the verbal form. The verb also appears in Psal 69:32 in the participial hifil form ‫מקרן‬ meaning to be horned. Let us now consider the word ‫( עור‬with ‫)ע‬. This corresponds to the Egypdan word V meaning ascend or extend. 18 Thus the phrase appears to be an idiomatic expression, meaning, "his countenance became horned (or horns extended from his countenance) when he spoke to Him." We must remember the element of the miracle which is paramount to this part of the story. G o d had already bestowed divine status upon Moses. In Ex 34:10 G o d spoke to Moses and said to him: I will do marvels that have never been done before. All the people will see the work of the Lord. I will do an awesome thing with you. The tradition of the horned god is very early. Representations of the horned god have been found in Mesopotamia dating back to about 2500 B C E (Early Dynastic). 19 Portrayals of the king or different gods wearing the horned cap or crown can be found on seal impressions as well as on many of the stelae of the kings. 20 It was the custom in antiquity for a man to have three distinguishing attributes by which he could be identified. 21 Moses already possessed the divine rod. He had his prophet, Aaron. N o w , since the people were so impressed with the horned deity represented by the golden calf, Yahweh had given him the one remaining characteristic by which his unique position would be recognized and respected not only by pharaoh and by Aaron, but by the Israelites who still considered him only a man. He gave the man with whom he spoke "face to face"

17

18 19 20

21

The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. Supplementary Volume. 1976. Nashville: Abington Press, 419-420. Faulkner 1976: 45. Strommenger, E. 1964. The Art of Mesopotamia. London: Thames on Hudson, 5. Parrot, A. 1961. Sumer—The Dawn of Art. N e w York: Golden Press, figs. 213, 237-242. Also Strommenger 1964: figs. 65, 123. For history of representational art in the ancient world see Hallo, W. W. 1983. "Cult Statue and Divine Image: A Preliminary Study." Scripture in Context II Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1983, 1-17. Gottlieb, C., 1989. Varieties of Marriage in the Bible. Ann Arbor: U.M.I. Dissertation Information Service, 165.

the horns of divinity, visual proof of Moses' singular status, making him equal in rank to a king or god in the eyes of all who beheld him.

Moses' name This all brings us back to the subject of Moses' name. There has been much speculation concerning the meaning of the name Moses—‫משה‬. Is it Hebrew or is it Egyptian? Scholars have suggested both Egyptian and Hebrew etymologies such as "child" or "seed of the water" in Egyptian, and in Hebrew "savior," or "drawn from the water." 22 We have just demonstrated Moses' role as a military commander. We know that each Pharaoh had many tides. Both Ramses II and Ramses IV had the titular rank of imy-r mi', Commander-in-Chief of the army, while they were still young princes. 23 Egyptian mi' means multitude or army. We have already established that Moses was the Commander-in-Chief of a mixed multitude constituting a huge army. It has never been suggested that ‫ מ ש ה‬is cognate to Egyptian mi', warrior, However, we should consider that the Coptic language indicates that there were many Egyptian dialects. The 'ayin in Egyptian is weak, and does not come into Coptic except vestigially. Occasionally, the consonant is doubled to indicate an original 'ajin. Ms ' is MHHuj6 in Sahidic, and MH11| in Bohairic.24 We have shown above that Moses has the rank equivalent to Egyptian imy-r meaning commander-in-chief. I propose that the name ‫משה‬, Moses, is a descriptive tide denoting rank and a shortened form of its Egyptian cognate, ìmy-r mi'. The names that have been suggested by scholars are all plausible and are applicable at different times during the lifetime of our hero. A man of the stature of Moses cannot be described by just one appellation. Perhaps this is one of the riddles of the Bible that may never be satisfactorily solved unless an entirely new document surfaces. However, if imy-r mi' was the name chosen for Moses by Pharaoh's daughter for her adopted son, the one that would characterize his role in history, he certainly realized her goal but in a manner she could not have anticipated. How could she have known that Moses' destiny had been preordained? He had been adopted by Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, to be their instrument of delivery. The final touch of irony is that Moses, the warrior chieftain raised in the house of Pharaoh king of Egypt, championed the Israelite forces enabling the "Chosen People" of Yahweh to prevail.

22 23

24

Cassuto 1974: 20-21. Griffiths 1953: 225-231. Kitchen, K. A. 1985. Pharaoh Triumphant, The Life and Times of Ramses II. Warminster: Aris and Phillips Ltd., 24. Also Peden, A.J. 1994. The Reign 0fRamesses IV. Warminster: Aris and Phillips Ltd., 2. Spiegelberg, W. 1921. Koptisches Handwörterbuch. Heidelberg: Carl Winters, 68.

ABRAHAM FIRKOVICH, THE A L E P P O C O D E X , AND ITS D E D I C A T I O N TAPANI HARVIAINEN University of Helsinki, Finland In November-December 1863 Abraham Firkovich (1787-1874), the wellknown Karaite collector of Jewish manuscripts, visited Aleppo, where the Aleppo Codex was treasured in the Cave of Elijah owned by the Rabbanite synagogue. The visit of almost four weeks in duradon was part of his grand tour of the Near East, where he stayed from the beginning of October 1863 unul March 1865; during the journey, in September 1864, he celebrated his 77 ,h birthday.' Before his departure from Jerusalem to Syria, Abraham Firkovich, also called Eben-Reshef, 2 met the famous Jewish traveller and book-collector Jacob Sappir, with w h o m he was to maintain a reladon of friendship. Sappir wrote in his book Eben sappir "The sage Even Reshef, w h o m I mentioned above, travelled from Jerusalem to Aleppo. I gave him the copy made by Jacob b. Ze'eb so that there he [= Firkovich] could look to see whether the words were reliable. When he came back to Jerusalem, he returned the copy to me with a few variants which he had corrected on the basis of what was copied for him in Aleppo or on the basis of his own discretion (namely he did not see [it] with own eyes). And here I have also set out his corrections." 3 This note refers to the text of the dedication (haqdasha) at the end of the Aleppo Codex which Jacob Sappir published in Eben sappir (pp. 12b-13a) with his commentaries; the corrections transmitted by Firkovich are set out in footnotes. According to Sappir, the dedication published by him was copied by an Ashkenazi scholar, R. Jacob b. Ze'eb seven (or nine) 4 years earlier. As is well known, the dedication—often erroneously called a colophon—has been published several times by various persons: Jakob Berlin, Albert Harkavi, Hirsch Grätz, Meir Nehmad, Moshe Cassuto etc. Nevertheless, all of these 1

2 3

4

For Abraham Firkovich, his life, travels and collecting acdvides, see my ardcle "Abraham Firkovich as a Collector of the Manuscripts of Dispersed Minorities in the Light of Personal Archives in St. Peteresburg" (forthcoming in the Proceedings of the Twelfth World Congress of Jewish Studies, Jerusalem, July 29-August 5), and the book Karaim Avraam Firkovich written in novel form in Russian by V. L. Vichnovich (Sankt-Peterburg 1997); in this book his stay in Aleppo (146-148) is to a large extent an imaginary story based on very few facts. I am very grateful to Ms. Olga Vasilyeva and her staff in the Manuscript Department of the National Library o f Russia in St. Petersburg as well as to the Academy o f Finland and the Finnish Cultural Foundation for the support of these studies. Acronym of Abraham BeN Ribbi [in Karaim instead of Rabbi / Reb] Lemuel Firkovich. Eben sappir. Lyck 1866, 12b, note 2 (my translation). Abraham Firkovich wrote a haskama in Jacob Sappir's book on Wednesday the 1st o f Adar Sheni in 1864. Idem, 19b.

copies deviate from one another in a number of details, and this is also true concerning the copies of Harkavi and Nehmad, who expressis verbis maintain that they copied the dedication from the source by their own hands. A general view of different texts can be seen in the article Τyyunim bi-ktab ha-haqdasha shel Keter Aram Soba published by Nehemya Allony5 as well as in Amnon Shamosh's book ha-Keter—Sippuro shel Keter Aram-Soba.b The dedication is not preserved; obviously it was lost in the same disaster which also destroyed the Torah text of the Aleppo Codex almost completely. 7 Abraham Firkovich made a special collection of Jewish and Karaite manuscripts and other antiquities with excellent success on the shores of the Black Sea, Caucasia and the Near East over a period of several decades. He was rich, enjoyed the support of the Russian and Turkish authorities, and he had an excepdonal talent for convincing people to conclude contracts entitling Firkovich to receive a donation of ancient manuscripts. The case of the Samaritan manuscripts is an excellent example of the acquisition policy of Firkovich: in Nablus in April 1864 he was able to purchase more than 1,300 Samaritan manuscripts for which he separately rewarded the Samaritan Jacob al-Shelabi, who had been his secret agent among the Samaritans, the Samaritan priests and the Samaritan congregation. 8 Earlier Firkovich had acquired an invaluable collection of biblical manuscripts, which in 1862-63 he had sold to the Saltykov-Shchedrin Public Library; the well-known Codex Leningradensis is included in this First Firkovich Collecdon. Firkovich was entirely aware of the special value of the Aleppo Codex— the discussion with Jacob Sappir referred to above indicates that the Codex was one of the magnets which drew Firkovich to Aleppo where he spent almost four weeks. In personal letters to his friend Abraham b. Jehuda ha-Misri9 and the Karaite hakham Nahamu Babovich 10 Firkovich reported on his efforts, discoveries and observations in Aleppo and elsewhere in Syria. The letters were written in He-

5 6

7 8

9

10

Be ,er Sheba ' 2, 1985, 27-56. "The Story o f the Aleppo Codex" (Jerusalem 1987); the book is due to appear in English in 1998. Cf. also Harkavi, A. E. 1891. "Aram Soba Halab." In Hadashimgamyeshanim. 6 - 8 , 104-106; Kahle, P. 1927. Masoreten des Westens. I, Stuttgart (repr. Hildesheim 1967), 1 - 9 . Cf. O f e r , J. 1987. "Ti'uro ha-hi.soni shel hak-keter." In Shamosh 1987: 171-174. For the Samaritan collecdon, see Shehadeh, H. 1994. "Diwwuah rishoni 'al , osep kitbe hay-yad ha-shomroniyyim be-Sant-Petersburg." In Proceedings of the Eleventh World Congress ofJewish Studies. Division D , Volume I, The Hebrew Language, Jewish Languages, Jerusalem, 61-64. On earlier catalogues and other details, see Samaritjanskie dokymenty Gosudarstvenoj publichnoj biblioteki imeni M.E. Saltyikora-Shchedrina-Katalog (composed by L. H. Vil'sker och V. V. Lebedev. Ministerstvo kultury RSFSR. Gosudarstvennaja ordena trudovogo krasnogo znameni Publichnaja biblioteka im. Μ. Ε. Saltykova-Shchedrina. Sankt-Peterburg 1992), and Harviainen, T. and Shehadeh, H. 1994. "How Did Abraham Firkovich Acquire the Great Collection o f Samaritan Manuscripts in Nablus in 1864?" Studio Orientalia 73, 167-192; reprinted in A. B.—The Samaritan News - . ( ‫ ב‬.‫א‬ ‫ ח ד ש ו ת השומרונים‬633-636), Holon, 13.4. 1995, 180-158, and reviewed in Hebrew, ibidem, 6. Letter No. 478, 1 r (15 Elul = 16.9.1864) and its copy N o . 607, 4v, in the Personal Archive o f A. S. Firkovich (see below, note 11). Letters N o . 489 (22. Kislev 5624 = 3.12.1863), from Aleppo in Karaim with passages in Hebrew, and N o . 605, l r - 1 0 v (12. Kislev 5624 = 23.11.), in Hebrew with passages in Karaim.

brew and the Karaim language; copies of them are kept in the Personal Archive of A. S. Firkovich in the Nadonal Library of Russia in St. Petersburg." In letter no. 489 to Nahamu Babovich (lv-2r) Firkovich first related that upon his arrival in Aleppo he established contacts with the local Turkish Pasha (governor) who granted him, the people at his lodgings, his grandson Shemuel and his Karaite friend Simha a safeguard firman, and placed kawas soldiers at his disposal; the firman earlier granted to Firkovich by Sultan Abdül Aziz was very effecdve for establishing new contacts, too. 12 A couple of days later Firkovich went to Muslim places of worship (batte tiflot hay-yishme'e'km) which were former Jewish synagogues to search for ancient inscripdons—it is an excellent indicadon of Firkovich's reladons with the authorities that he could receive permission even for this inspection from the Pasha. N o doubt, he was known to be a mighty man in Aleppo. As for the Aleppo Codex, Firkovich wrote that Michael, the shammash (beadie) of the Rabbanite synagogue of Aleppo, had secredy (be-seter ham-madregaj shown him the Codex and the dedication (ha-reshima) at the end. O n the basis of the language of the dedication (mil-leshonab) and the names mentioned in it, he had realized that even this dedication was Karaite, resembling the dedication in the Bible (tana"kh) of the city of Cracow. 13 However, when the hakhamim of the congregation of Aleppo heard that the shammash had shown the Codex to Firkovich, they decided together that—I quote letter no. 605 to Nahamu Babovich (6v): It must not be shown to me further, lest I should investigate and find in it additional signs and signals that it came from a Karaite house (mib-bet haq-qara'im jasa') and [lest] I should take it away from them by the force of the authorities (be-khoah malkhut). Therefore I could not see it again with my own eyes; nevertheless, they fulfilled my request so that they gave an order to their sofer, and he copied for me the appendices (ha-reshimot) which are at the beginning and the end of the Bible together with the valuable articles, more precious than gold and silver, [viz.] the masoras and the differences of opinion (hap-pelugitot) between Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali etc. which are at its beginning and end. I paid his salary of four and a half bogen out of generosity.14 Also to the hakham ha-rab Moshe Sitehun15—may God preserve him—I gave three royal gold pounds (shetosha %ahab pul imperi'aä) as a gift, a remuneration for his trouble, because he had taken the trouble to acquire permission from the "eyes of the community" ('ene ha-'eda), who are sixty old hakhamim, the leaders of the congregation, and the hakham bashi at their head. It was almost impossible to receive permission to copy the appendices (ha-reshimot) from the Keter, i.e. the Bible, since according to their words it was under a ban (tahat ha-berem) that it was not to be taken out of the Cave of the Prophet Elijah, not even to the synagogue. In my opinion, it is nothing other than the very same reason as in 11 12 13

14

15

F. 946, Lichnyj arhiv A.S. Firkovicha. For Sultan's firman, see Harviainen-Shehadeh 1994: 174 and note 29. Jacob Sappir too refers to this manuscript, which was brought from Safed to Cracow; its colophon was published in ham-Maggid 1: 4 7 - 4 8 (Eben sappir, 13a-b). The originally German word Bogen refers to a paper sheet which was cut into eight leaves, i.e. 16 pages. The family name is vocalized by Firkovich in his letter as ]ΙΠϋφ.

the geniqa of Kara-Sub, viz. lest the secret should be uncovered because of which there was a ban—as I alluded to above. The message of this report seems to be quite easy to interpret. As was the case a few months later with the Samaritans, Firkovich started with a person who was of minor rank but enjoyed access to the attractive manuscripts. The shammash Michael—probably paid well in relation to to his income—was ready to carry out Firkovich's will: he showed him the Codex, which few visitors were allowed to see. Then Firkovich contacted the leaders, in this case the hakham R. Moshe Sitehun, who finally secured his permission to receive a large copy, 72 pages, of the most interesting parts of the Codex; Firkovich remunerated R. Sitehun and the sofer who produced the copies. However, Firkovich did not succeed in proceeding to the next step—by analogy with the Samaritan case I surmise that Firkovich would have promised to build or repair something very necessary for the benefit of the whole of the congregation, inclusive of women. The "eyes of the community" would not have remained without their lavish share. And, according to this scenario, as recompense for his troubles, Firkovich would have had one more early, very important Bible codex incorporated into his Second Collection. However, Firkovich made a mistake. At an early stage he revealed his joy at the signs and signals which in his opinion indicated that the Codex was originally a Karaite one; according to him the ban on taking the Codex out of the Cave of the synagogue was intended to conceal its Karaite origin. This alarmed the leaders of the congregation who were probably aware of Firkovich's methods in acquiring manuscripts from a number of Rabbanite synagogues. As mentioned above, Firkovich possessed a firman from the Sultan and he had secured his connections with the Turkish Pasha of Aleppo; thus there were many reasons for being apprehensive that Firkovich would demand that the manuscript be returned to the Karaites, i.e. to Firkovich, under compulsion from the Turkish authorities. We may further speculate that Firkovich, for his part, did not want to ruin his reputation by employing brutal methods during the initial stages of his important journey. Thus he was satisfied with the permission to receive a copy of the dedication and other important appendices of the Codex. I do not know what happened to the original copies. A m o n g the copies of his outgoing messages there are two copies of the dedication with his commentaries; both letters were addressed to Nahamu Babovich, the hakham of the Karaites. As is the case with other copies, the text of Firkovich's two letters is not identical, either. N o r do the texts of Firkovich agree with the corrections in the footnotes of Jacob Sappir's Eben sappir, which Sappir maintains having added on the basis of Firkovich's copy; e.g. Ben Yerubam does not occur in the copies made by Firkovich himself instead of Ben Buja'a, although in one of his notes Sappir expresses his surprise at this "correction" by Firkovich. 16 The texts of both letters, viz. no. 489: 2r-2v (22th of Kislev) and no. 605: 4r-4v (!2nd of Kislev) are enclosed below. Pay attention to the fact that Firk16

Eben sappir, 12b, note 2.

‫‪ovich does not know the erasures whereby, according to Nehmad, Cassutto etc.,‬‬ ‫;‪haq-qara'im was changed to ha-hakhamim and ba'ale ham-miqra' to ba'ale hab-bina‬‬ ‫‪ba'ale ham-madda'occurs also in Firkovich as in numerous other copies instead of‬‬ ‫‪ba 'ale ham-miqra '.17‬‬ ‫‪In this context I have no opportunity to present the details of differences‬‬ ‫‪between these two versions, nor to pinpoint their reladons to other copies pub‬‬‫‪lished by other scholars. I hope to be able to offer a comparative edition in an‬‬‫‪other version of this paper.‬‬ ‫‪Finally one more flight of imagination as an afterthought: had Firkovich‬‬ ‫‪succeeded in buying or otherwise acquiring the Aleppo Codex in 1863, it is very‬‬ ‫‪probable that today the Codex—the Crown—would be at our disposal in the‬‬ ‫‪National Library of Russia in St. Petersburg, safe and complete.‬‬

‫‪Hebrew Text of the Letters‬‬ ‫‪v‬־‪489: 2r2‬‬ ‫ז ה ה מ צ ח ף ה ש ל ם ש ל ע ש ר י ם ו א ר ב ע ה ספרים ש כ ת ב א ו ת ו מ ת א ו ר ב נ א ש ל מ ה‬ ‫ה נ ו ד ע ב ב ן ב ו י א ע א ה ס ו פ ר ה מ ה י ר ר ו ח ה תניחנו‪ ,‬ו נ ק ד ו מ ס ר א ו ת ו ב א ר ה י ט י ב‬ ‫ה מ ל מ ד הגדול ה ח כ ם הנבון אדון הסופרים ואבי החכמים וראש ה מ ל מ ד י ם‬ ‫ה מ ה י ר ב מ ע ש י ו ה מ ב י ן ב מ פ ע ל י ו ה י ח י ד ב ד ו ר ו ת י ו מ ר רב א ה ר ן ב ן מ ר ר ב א ש ר‬ ‫תהי נפשו צרורה בצרור החיים עם הנביאים והצדיקים והחסידים‪ .‬ה ק ד י ש אותו‬ ‫ה ש ר ה ג ד ו ל ה א ד י ר ה א ב י ר מ ר נ א ו ר ב נ א ישראל ת פ א ר ת כ ל י ש ר א ל ה ח כ ם ו ה נ ב ו ן‬ ‫ה ח ס י ד ה י ש ר ה נ ד י ב ירים ה ד ג ל ו ויציץ ציץ נזרו ו י ג ב י ה ע ו ז ו מ מ ד י נ ת בצרה ב ן‬ ‫מ ר רב ש מ ח ה בן מ ר ס ע ד י ה ב ן מ ר ר ב א פ ר י ם רוח ה ת נ י ח ם ‪ ,‬ל י ר ו ש ל ם עיר‬ ‫ה ק ד ש ע ל זרע י ש ר א ל ק ה ל ת י ע ק ב ע ד ת ישורון ב ע ל י ה מ ד ע ס ג ל ת ה ח כ מ י ם‬ ‫ה ש ו כ נ י ם ב ה ר ציון א ל ה י ם י כ ו נ נ ה ו )?( ע ד ע ו ל ם סלה‪ 1 8 .‬ק ד ש ל ה ל א י מ כ ר ו ל א‬ ‫י ג א ל ע ל מ נ ת ש ל א י צ א מ ת ח ת ידי ש נ י ה נ ש י א י ם ה ג ד ו ל י ם כ ב ו ד ג ד ו ל ת ק ד ו ש ת‬ ‫ה ו ד ה ד ר ה נ ש י א י א ש י ה ו ו ה נ ש י א י ח ז ק י ה ו בני כ ב ו ד ג ד ו ל ת ק ד ו ש ת ה נ ש י א ש ל מ ה‬ ‫בן ה נ ש י א ד ו ד ב ן ה נ ש י א ב ע ז נ פ ש ם צ ר ו ר ה ב ה ב ג ע ת ח ת ע ץ ה ח י י ם כ ד י‬ ‫ש י ו צ י א ו ה ו )?( א ל ה מ ו ש ב ו ת ו א ל ה ק ה ל ו ת ש ב ע י ר ה ק ד ש ]‪ [2 ν‬ב ש ל ש רגלים‬ ‫ח ג ה מ צ ו ת ו ח ג ה ש ב ו ע ו ת ו ח ג ה ס כ ו ת ל ק ר ו ת בו ו ל ה ת ב ו נ ן ו ל ל מ ו ד מ מ נ ו כ ל‬ ‫א ש ר י ח פ צ ו ו י ב ח ר ו ‪ ,‬ו א ם י ר א ו )יצאו( ש נ י ה נ ש י א י ם ה ג ד ו ל י ם מ ר רב י א ש י ה ו‬ ‫ויחזקיהו יחיים צורם בדרך ה צ ל ח ה שיפקידו אותו בידי שני אנשים צדיקים‬ ‫ונבונים ו י ד ו ע י ם יראי א ל ה י ם א נ ש י א מ ת ש ו נ א י ב צ ע ו י ע ש ו ב ח כ מ ת ם ו ב ח ז ק ת ם ‪,‬‬ ‫ו א ם י ח פ ו ץ א י ש מ כ ל זרע י ש ר א ל מ ב ע ל י ה ב י נ ה מהרבנים ב כ ל י מ ו ת ה ש נ ה‬ ‫ל ר א ו ת בו ד ב ר י יתר א ו ח ס ר א ו ס ת ו ר א ו ס ד ו ר א ו ס ת ו ם א ו פ ת ו ח א ו ט ע ם‬ ‫מ ה ט ע מ י ם ה א ל ו יוציאוהו אליו לראות בו ולהשכיל ולהבין לקרות ולדרוש וישיבוהו‬ ‫ל מ ק ו מ ו ו ל א ‪ ....‬בו א י ש אין ב ו א מ ו נ ה ‪ ,‬וה א ל ה י י ש ר א ל י ש י ם א ו ת ו ס י מ ן ט ו ב ס י מ ן‬

‫·‪Cf. Ben-Sebi, Y. 1960 '"Keter hat-tora' shel Ben-Asher." In Mebqarim be-Keter Aram-Soba. Ed. H‬‬ ‫•‪Rabbin. Jerusalem, viii and notes 22, 24; Barthélémy, D. 1992. Critique textuelle de l'Ancien Testa‬‬ ‫‪ment. T o m e 3 (Orbis Bib/icus et Orientalis 50/3), Fribourg-Göttingen, XIV, XVI-XVII.‬‬ ‫‪ .‬ב כ א ן לא נמצא שם הרבנים ‪In brackets between the Unes:‬‬

‫‪17‬‬

‫‪18‬‬

‫ברכה עליו ועל זרעו ועל כל ישראל ויתקיים עליו מקרא ש כ ת ו ב כי אצק מים‬ ‫ע ל צ מ א וכו׳ ו צ מ ח ו ב ב י ן ח צ י ר וגי ז ה י א מ ר לוז אני וג‪ ,‬ו כ ל ה ב ר כ ו ת ה א מ ו ר ו ת‬ ‫ב ו י ח ו ל ו ו י ב א ו ו י א ת י ו ו י א ג ו ר ו ע ל י ו ו ע ל זרעו ו ע ל כ ל ה נ ל ו י ם ע ל י ו ו ע ל כ ל מ י‬ ‫ש י ש מ ע ויאזין ו י ק ש י ב ו י ע ש ה כ ד ב ר י ם ה א ל ה ו ל א י ח ל י פ ם ו ל א י מ י ר ם ל ע ו ל ם‬ ‫ו ל ע ו ל מ י ע ו ל מ י ם ברוך ר ל ע ו ל ם א מ ן ו א מ ן‬ ‫‪605: 4r-v‬‬ ‫זה ה מ צ ח ף ה ש ל ם ש ל עשרים וארבעה ספרים ש כ ת ב אותו מ ״ ר ורבנא ש ל מ ה‬ ‫הנודע בבן בויאעא הסופר ה מ ה י ר רוח ה׳ תניחנו‪ ,‬ונקד ומסר אותו באר ה י ט ב‬ ‫ה מ ל מ ד הגדול ה ח כ ם הנבון אדון הסופרים ואבי ה ח כ מ י ם וראש ה מ ל מ ד י ם‬ ‫ה מ ה י ר ב מ ע ש י ו המבין ב מ פ ע ל י ו היחיד בדורותיו מר רב אשר ‪ ïûifth‬עם‬ ‫הנביאים והצדיקים והחסידים‪,‬‬ ‫ה ק ד י ש א ו ת ו ה ש ר ה ג ד ו ל ה א ד י ר ה א ב י ר מ ת א ו ר ב נ א ישראל ת פ א ר ת י ש ר א ל‬ ‫ה ח כ ם ה נ ב ו ן ה ח ס י ד ה י ש ר ו ה נ ד י ב ירים ה ׳ ד ג ל ו ויציץ נזרו ו י ג ב י ה ע ז ו מ מ ד י נ ת‬ ‫בצרה ב ן מ ר רב ש מ ח ה ב ן מ ר ר ב ס ע ד י ה ב ן מ ר ר ב א פ ר י ם ר ו ח ה ׳ ת נ י ח ם ‪,‬‬ ‫ל י ר ו ש ל ם ע י ר ה ק ד ש ע ל זרע י ש ר א ל ק ה ל ת י ע ק ב ע ד ת י ש ו ר ו ן ב ע ל י ה מ ד ע ס ג ל ת‬ ‫ה ח כ מ י ם ה ש כ נ י ם בהר ציון א ל ה י ם יכוננה ע ד ע ו ל ם ס ל ה ‪ ,‬ק ו ד ש ל ה ׳ ל א י מ כ ר‬ ‫ולא יגאל ע ל מ נ ת ש ל א יצא מ ת ח ת שני הנשיאים הגדולים כ ב ו ד גדולת ק ד ו ש ת‬ ‫ה ו ד ו ה ד ר ה נ ש י א י א ש י ה ו ו ה נ ש י א י ח ז ק י ה בני כ ב ו ד ג ד ו ל ת ק ד ו ש ת ה נ ש י א ש ל מ ה‬ ‫בן ה נ ש י א ד ו ד ב ן ה נ ש י א ב ע ז ‪ toìfth‬כ ד י ש י ו צ י א ו ה ו ה מ ו ש ב ו ת ו א ל ה ק ה ל ו ת‬ ‫ש ב ע י ר ה ק ד ש ב ש ל ש רגלים ח ג ה מ צ ו ת ו ח ג ה ש ב ו ע ו ת ו ח ג ה ס כ ו ת ל ק ר ו ת ב ו‬ ‫ולהתבונן ו ל ל מ ו ד מ מ נ ו כל אשר י ח פ צ ו ויבחרו‪ ,‬ואם יראו אלו שני הנשיאים‬ ‫ה ג ד ו ל י ם מ ר רב י א ש י ה ו ו י ח ז ק י ה ו י ח י י ם צ ו ר ם ב ד ר ך ה ה צ ל ח ה ש י פ ק ד ו א ו ת ו ע ם‬ ‫ש נ י א נ ש י ם צ ד י ק י ם ונבונים ו י ד ו ע י ם יראי א ל ה י ם א נ ש י א מ ת ש ו נ א י ב צ ע ו י ע ש ו‬ ‫ב ח כ מ ת ם ו ב ח ז ק ת ם ‪ ,‬ו א ם י ח פ ו ץ א י ש מ כ ל זרע י ש ר א ל מ ב ע ל י ה ב י נ ה מהרבנים‬ ‫ב כ ל י מ ו ת ה ש נ ה ל ר א ו ת ב ר ד ב ר י יתר א ו ח ס ר א ו ס ת ו ר א ו ס ד ו ר א ו ס ת ו ם א ו‬ ‫פ ת ו ח או ט ע ם מ ה ט ע מ י ם ה א ל ו יוציאוהו אליו לראות ולהשכיל ולהבין לו‬ ‫ל ק ר ו ת ו ל ד ר ו ש ו י ש י ב ו ה ו ל מ ק ו מ ו ו ל א י ת פ ר ד ב ו א י ש אין ב ו א מ ו נ ה ‪ ,‬ו ה ׳ א ל ה י‬ ‫י ש ר א ל י ש י ם א ו ת ו ס י מ ן ט ו ב ס י מ ן ב ר כ ה ע ל י ו ו ע ל זרעו ו ע ל כ ל י ש ר א ל ויקוים‬ ‫ע ל י ו מ ק ר א ש כ ת ו ב כי א צ ק מ י ם ע ל צ מ א ונוזלים ע ל י ב ש ה א צ ק ר ו ח י ע ל ז ר ע ך‬ ‫ו ב ר כ ת י ע ל צ א צ א י ך ‪ ,‬ו צ מ ח ו ב ב י ן ח צ י ר כ ע ר ב י ם ע ל י ב ל י מ י ם ‪ ,‬ז ה י א מ ר ל ה ׳ אני ו ז ה‬ ‫יקרא ב ש ם י ע ק ב ו ז ה י כ ת ו ב י ד ו ל ה ׳ ו ב ש ם י ש ר א ל יכנה‪ ,‬ו כ ל ה ב ר כ ו ת ה א מ ו ר ו ת ב ו‬ ‫י ח ו ל ו ו י ב ו א ו ו י א ת י ו ע ל י ו ו ע ל זרעו ו ע ל כ ל מ י ש י ש מ ע ויאזין ו י ק ש י ב ו י ע ש ה כ ד ב ר י ם‬ ‫ה א ל ה ו ל א י ח ל י פ ם ו ל א י מ י ר ם ל ע ו ל ם ו ל ע ו ל מ י ע ו ל מ י ם ברוך ה ׳ ל ע ו ל ם א מ ן ו א מ ן ‪.‬‬ ‫ע"כ לשון הרשימה‬

GRAMMAR, MEANING, THEOLOGY MEDIEVAL H E B R E W LEXICOGRAPHERS O N T H E V E R B NISSA ALBERT VAN DER HEIDE Rijk Universitcit L e i d e n , T h e N e t h e r l a n d s

In the story of David's confrontation with the Philistine Goliath (I Sam 17) we read that king Saul presented his armour to the young David. After David has put it on we are told: "Then he tried to walk, but he was not used to it (ki 10 nissa). And David said to Saul: I cannot walk in these, for I am not used to them (ki 10 nissiti). So David took them o f f ' (I Sam 17,39; JPS translation). We have here a perfecdy natural situation, in which a shepherd boy has to conclude that he is too young and too inexperienced to wear his king's armour. Yet for some ancient rabbis this situadon was apparently not so neutral and natural. Targum Jonathan translates: "But he did not want to walk, for he had not learnt [to do so]. And David said to Saul: I cannot walk in these, for there is no miracle in them" (am leit behon nissa). Rashi quotes this targumic reading, apparently with a measure of consent, and paraphrases the targumic version as: "There is not the praise of a miracle in this" (ein sbivho shel nes be-khakh). The obvious idea is that the miracle of David's victory over Goliath would be less impressive if it were won in full armour, instead of with a sling and a few flints.1 David Kimhi also quotes Targum Jonathan, but only to dismiss its reading as a derekh derash, and to stress that there is no reason to deviate from the real meaning, which is: "David was not used to (10 nissa) walk around in arms." And indeed there is no real difficulty in the use of the verb nissa here. Kimhi correcdy recognises its basic meaning as "to try."2 It is not difficult to discern the semantic pattern here: David never before tried to walk in full armour, so he was not used to it. There can be no doubt about it: nissa means "to try, to test." 3 This is confirmed by repeated parallels with the verb bahan (e.g. Ps 26,2: God tries man; Ps 95,9: man tries God), and only a very few of its occurrences in the Bible give any difficulty on the lexical level. This fact was also recognised in the classical rabbinic texts. In Bereshit Rabba, e.g., the first reaction on the verse

Note, however, that in Rashi's commentary a lashon aher follows which conveys the littéral meaning: "David wanted to walk and to try, but when he saw that they [the arms] were heavy on him he took them off." See below for his treatment of nissa in the Sefer ba-Shorashim.

Variant renderings of nissa/nissiti in modern transladons like RSV ("... and he assayed to go; for he had not proved [it] ... for I have not proved [them]"), and NEB ("But David hesitated, because he had not tried them, and he said to Saul: I cannot go with these, because I have not tried them"), are so many reflections of this pattern.

"After this God tried (nissa) Abraham," (Gen 22,1) is to quote "The Lord tests (jivhan) the righteous" (Ps 11,5). In the light of all this, what induced Targum Jonathan to his word play with the Aramaic version of the word nes—"miracle"? Is it a mere whim that he refers to the fact that there is no miracle in fighting Goliath with advanced weaponry?4 The meaning of the verb nissa in the Bible indeed poses no real difficulties. Its use, however, does. For the monotheistic views developed by rabbinic and medieval Judaism many instances of nissa are very problematical. 5 What is the problem? When the Bible tells us that the Queen of Sheba came to test Solomon with riddles (I Kings 10,1) there is indeed no difficulty. When we are repeatedly told that the Israelites tested God by saying: "Is the Lord in our midst or not?" (Ex 17,7) or similar words, it is indeed difficult to imagine how an almighty God can be the object of a test by mere mortals, and we have to conclude that this is a vain trial and a sinful expression of human arrogance. 6 But the Bible is also very outspoken on the possibility that God puts man to the test. In Ex 16,4 e.g. God says to Moses: "I will rain down bread for you ... that I may thus test them to see whether they will follow My instructions or not." And there is, of course, the famous case of Abraham's trial, which opens with the well known ominous words: "Sometime afterward, God put Abraham to the test." A trial from heaven can of course not be considered a vain trial. Coming from God it must have sense and purpose. But the problem is obvious. The monotheistic conception of an almighty and omniscient God makes it very difficult to see Him as the author of a test, to which His own creatures should be subjected. The Rabbis were just as keenly aware of this difficulty as they were aware of the basic meaning of nissa. But they found ways to deal with the dilemma. Their solutions will not be discussed here in detail, but in general they are based on an association with the word nes—"mast, banner," later also "miracle." The implication is that when God tries someone, He gives the one that is tried occasion to distinguish himself from his fellow men, he stands out as a mast (or as a miracle).7 Additionally we come across an association with the verb nasa—"to

4

5

6

7

Apparently, there is no parallel of Targum Jonathan's reading o f I Sam 17,39 in rabbinic literature. In his 1973 monograph Jaacov Licht very exhaustively analysed this situation for the Biblical and Second Temple period. Ps 95,8-11 is eloquent on this: " D o not be stubborn as at Meribah, as on the day of Massah in the wilderness, (9) When your fathers put Me to the test (nissum), tried Me (behanunt), though they had seen My deeds. (10) Forty years I was provoked by that generation; I thought, 'They are a senseless people; they would not know My ways.' (11) Concerning them I wrote in My anger, 'They shall never come to My resting place!'" In a different context Abraham Ibn Ezra also pointed out the futility of trying G o d (Commentary on Ex 17,7 and D t 6,16). We saw that a variant of this is used by Targum Jonathan in the story of Saul's armour: David should better do without it and not detract from the miracle that is about to happen. The connection between nissa and nes in the sense of miracle is strengthened by the use of the word massa in D t 4,34 (and 7,19; 29,2), which speaks o f "mass01, signs and wonders (0/01 u-moftim)". As we will see, this is also a point of concern for the medieval lexicographers.

elevate, lift up." Being tried by God means being elevated and being shown to others as an example of good behaviour. 8 In the Middle Ages these associadve etymologies became less acceptable. The progress of linguistic knowledge barred the easy exits of the Midrash, and the conceptual difficulty of an almighty God testing His creatures became even more acute. Other means of solving it had to be invented. Initially the lexicographers concentrated on the identification of verbal roots and their distinctions, but gradually also the question of meaning arose. A review of the major medieval grammars and lexicons on the verb nissa will elucidate this process. Characteristically Menahem ben Saruq in his ground breaking Mahberet, identified the same single letter root samekb for the verb nissa as well as for the noun massa. (Sàenz-Badillos 1986: 267*/...) He did so on the basis of Ex 17,7 and Ps 95,8-9, where the connection between these words is strongly suggested by the text.9 The controversy on Menahem's root identifications, begun by Dunash ben Labrat and pursued by others, also touched upon our point: Is it right to exclude the nun from the root of the verb nissa, and what then is the nature of the relation between massa and nissa? These discussions offer an interesting instance of the groping for a root theory in those days. Dunash, in his Teshuvot (Sáenz-Bad‫ש‬os 1980: 34*/41), sees no reason to remove the nun from the root. The noun massa is no proof for the fact that the nun is accidental, for he considers the iuxtaposition of massa and nassotam in Ex 17,7 as one of the many biblical etymologies based on similarity of sound which carry no linguistic weight. It is like the connection made between Noah andyenahamenu in Gen 5,29, or the one between Shemu'el and she'altiw in I Sam 1,20. According to Dunash the stem of nissa/nassotam is nun-samekh, and massa is linguistically not related. Menahem's pupils countered this argument (Benavente Robles 1986: 44*/71) by admitting that indeed the parallels for Noah and Samuel are not meant to give linguistic information; they merely contribute to the message of the biblical story. But the relationship between massa and nissa is of a different kind and too compelling to overlook; the instances of massa in Job 9,23 and Dt 7,19 are additional proof for this. And since massa and nissa do belong together, the nun has to be removed from the root. Yehudi ben Sheshet, a pupil of Dunash, (Varela Moreno 1981: 19*/40) defended his master's assumption of a biliteral stem for nissa and considers

The best known instance of this is the beginning o f Bereshit Rabba 55: the association o f nissa with Ps 60,6 (nts le-hitnoses) and the expression "as the mast o f a ship" (ke-nes shel sefina, cp. e.g. Licht 1973: 8 3 - 4 = par.81). The equation nassot — gaddei appears without any comment in Mekhilta de R Yishmael\ Yitro 9 (on Ex 20,17/20; Horovitz/Rabin 1960: 2 3 η ; see also below note 23. But Mekhiita de R.Shim'on bar Yohai (Epstein/Melamed 1955: 155) is explicit and also adds an association with nasa - "to elevate" as it is used in II Kings 25,27. Ex 17,7: Massa u-meriva ... 'a! nassotam et-ha-shem, Ps 95,8-9: ... ke-yom massa ba-midbar. Asher nissuni avotekhem, behanuni...

Massa—which, after all, also occurs as the name of a locality—as a derivation from nassotam by elision of the nun.w The discovery of the principle of the triliteral root by Judah Hayyuj exposed the essential futility of this discussion. Hayyuj's list of weak verbs 11 included the root nun-samekh-he (Jastrow 1897: 191; Nutt 1870: 87/101). He quotes four instances of its use (Gen 22,1; I Sam 17,39; Ps 95,9; D t 6,16) and adds the word massa, an indication of his conviction that the words are related. And indeed, in his introductory remarks on weak verbs beginning with a nun, he had already explicidy stated the root identity of nissa and massa and the absorption of the nun into the samekh (Jastrow 1897: 145-6; Nutt 1870: 66/77). 12 The meaning of the verb and its derivative noun is no issue yet. The reaction on this from his younger contemporary and eager student of his works Jona (Abu Ί-Walid) ibn Janah is interesting in several respects. 13 In his dictionary Kitâb al-Usûl, Ibn Janah has the following to say on the root nunsamekh-he (Neubauer 1875: 438-9; Bacher 1896: 307):14 This root was already identified in the "Book of the Letters of Weakness"15 and its meaning is "test" (Arab.: i&tibâr wa-tajriba wa-mihncr, Hebr.: behind). The noun massa is derived from it. The verb has a somewhat different meaning in the story of David (I Sam 17,39; and in Dt 4,34; 28,56; Eccl 2,1 as well); there it is used in the sense of "to be used to" because meanings like "test" or "trial" give no sense here.16 "Abu Zakkariyya" (Hebr.: Rabbi Yehuda) [which is Judah Hayyuj], did not make this distinction. But there is still a third meaning (ma'am tâlât / 'inyan shelishi) in nissa which is represented by its derivation massa, and

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Names, he says, can be derived by either elision (our case), addition (cp. Abraham, Gen 17,5), change (the case o f Noah?), or metathesis (I Chr 4,9). The difference between change (hiUuf) and metathesis (tahafukha) is not altogether clear. Kitâb (al-afâl dawát) Huruf ai-Lin. Ed. M. Jastrow, 1897; Hebrew translation by Moses Ibn Gikacilia (Sefer/ Mahberet Otiyyot ba-Noah we-ha-Meshekh. Ed. and transi. J. W. Nutt, 1870). Nutt 1870: 77: "In massa (Ex 17,7) nun is absorbed in samekh with daghesh: it is from nissa (Gen 22,1), tenassu (Deut 6,16); he marks the feminine, the third radical is lost." There is no complete certainty about the relation between Hayyuj and Ibn Janah. In spite o f the overall dependence o f the latter's books on the work o f Hayyuj they never seem to have met (Bacher 1885(1): 10, and see 4, 105; Derenbourg 1886: IV). The quotation is given here in paraphrase. Ibn Janah wrote a "Supplement" to Hayyuj's books on the weak and and geminate roots (Kitâb al-Mustalhiq, ed. J.and H. Derenbourg, 1880), which contains nothing on our verb. Ibn Janah's magnum opus is his Kitâb ai-Tanqih, which is divided into two parts, a) a grammar: Kitâb al-Luma' (ed. J. Derenbourg, 1886); translated into Hebrew by Judah Ibn Tibbon (Sefer ha-Riqma, ed. H. Wilensky, 1928-30), b) a dictionary: Kitâb at-Usûl (ed. A.Neubauer, 1875); translated into Hebrew by Judah Ibn Tibbon (Sefer ha-Shorashim, ed. W. Bacher, 1896). The grammar contains nothing on our verb. The Arabic text quotes the short form o f the correct tide (Kitâb Huruf ai-Lin)·, Ibn Tibbon's Hebrew refers here to a Sefer Otot ha-Rippayon. The usual Hebrew designation o f the book became Sefer or Mahberet otiyyot ha-noah (1ve-ha-mcshekh)·, see note 7. Abraham Ibn Ezra's short history of grammatical literature at the beginning of Sefer Moyiayim (Ibn Ezra 1791: fol.2a) already refers to a Sefer ha-Noah as one o f the four works written by "Rabbi Yehuda bar rabbi Dawid ma'aravi mimedinat Fas". Arab.: id lamya 'tad, Hebr.: 10 hirgalti. The Rouen MS o f the Arabic text adds the following to the explanation o f rnssiti in I Sam 17,39: "It is not right to say here: 'Since he did not try (yujarrib) and did not test (yafcjabir) and did not examine (yamtahin)', but rather: 'Since he was not used to it (ya'tad)'."

that is the meaning "miracle" (as in Dt 7,19 and 4,34), which makes the word synonymous with nes, nissim. Ibn Janah has to admit here that the words massot and nissim are apparendy not derived from the same root: Massot is from a root with a weak third radical, and nissim is from a geminate root. 17 But there is something which urges Ibn Janah to find a possibility to derive massot from the geminate root nss as well. There is indeed a nun to be assumed in massot, but this nun is not assimilated into the samekh, it is elided. This allows him to regard the stem nss as the root of both massot and nissim.™ It is not quite easy to follow Ibn Janah's line of reasoning, but the distinctive feature of his presentation is his almost desperate attempt to preserve the link between our verb nissa and the noun nes, a link so very prominent in rabbinic literature. Unlike his predecessors, Ibn Janah included a discussion on meaning and also tried to retain a link with rabbinic literature. As for the meaning of our verb we saw that Ibn Janah discerned three different aspects: "to try," "to be used to," and a third aspect which somehow links the verb nissa with the noun nes, "miracle." We also saw that he was aware of the fact that he was the first to introduce this distinction. Our next lexicographer is Solomon Parhon who, in his turn, also introduced a new element into the discussion. Although his lexicon Mahberet he-'Arukh, written in 1161, is for its most important part a Hebrew rendering of Ibn Janah's Kitâb al-üsül, he included a significant new feature. The stricdy lexical part of his lemma nun-samekh-he (Stern 1844: foI.41a-b) is merely a short recapitulation of Ibn Janah's position: The basic meaning of nissa is "to try/test"; it has a special meaning in the story of David (and in Dt 4,34; 28,56; Eccl 2,1 as well), which is: "to be used to" (leshon nihug u-minhag). In addition, the word massot in Dt 7,17 has the meaning "miracles" (otot). This lexical information is preceded by a lengthy discussion on the difficulties of the biblical use of the verb nissa when it is used in the sense that G o d tries man. This is not the place for a detailed analysis of Parhon's litde treatise on the concept of trial,19 but right at the beginning he makes it clear that, when the Bible speaks of G o d trying man, this expression should be considered as one of the many instances of "anthropomorphic" speaking: "The Torah speaks as human beings do." The important thing for us to note here is that the old problems regarding the use of the verb nissa are solved m a new way, the way of philosophy and

17 18

19

This, of course, was also the opinion of Hayyuj (J as trow 1897: 253; Nutt 1870: 113/131). The process is complex and implausible. It goes on the assumption of an original form *menassot derived form the root nss, parallel to meshammot (7 times in the Bible) from the root shmm. An elision of the nun has to be assumed comparable to the elision of alef in wa-ta^reni (II Sam 22,40). Cp. also Bacher's account of this (1885a: 21). The argument is rather difficult to follow. The editor, Gottlieb Stem, confesses in a note that he could hardly restrain himself from deleting this rambling piece o f text. In another context I hope to be able to analyse Parhon's views and his sources.

philosophical exegesis. It is no coincidence that Parhon is known to have derived many of his ideas from such scholars as Judah ha-Levi and Abraham Ibn Ezra. This soludon was also followed by the prince of medieval Hebrew lexicographers, David Kimhi. In his lexicon Sefer ha-Shorashim, the entry nissa also has a strictly lexical part, but it is enhanced by a philosophical observadon (Biesenthal/Liebrecht 1847: 439). The lexical part is interesting. Kimhi decidely turned down Jona ibn Janah's division into three different meanings for nissa, and returned to the position of Judah Hayyuj who indicated no subdivisions. 20 The meaning of nissa in all its manifestations, including the noun massa, is "to test" (ykullam 'inyan behind). Even in the case of David the meaning is "I never before tried to walk in these, therefore I don't know how to walk in them." Also in the case of Dt 7,19 the meaning of massa is "test": Great tests with which the Holy One tested the Israelites with His plagues to see whether they would persist in their wickedness or not. The theological difficulties of this linguistic opinion are obvious, and Kimhi is willing to do something about it. For the difficult verse "For God came in order to test/try you ... [so that you do not go astray]" (Ex 20,17/20) Kimhi quotes Maimonides' opinion (Guide of the Perplexed III,24),21 who very ingenuously shifted the emphasis of the trial from its subject (God) to its object (the people). 22 Finally, Kimhi obliges us by a noncommittal reference to "a Midrash" which connects the verb nassot of Ex 20,17/20 with the noun nes—an old rabbinic idea, too nice to be simply omitted. 23 The preceding description of the course of the lexicographical enterprise concerning the verb nissa allows us to delineate the following pattern: After establishing the correct root for the verb and its derivative noun massa, the grammarians turned lexicographers when they endeavoured to establish the exegetically correct meaning or meanings of these words. In the next stage, realising that the meaning of the verb entailed serious theological difficulties, they did two things to meet this problem: On the one hand they evoked theological arguments, on the other they pursued to play with the earlier rabbinic solutions which connected the verb nissa with the noun nes. Our lexicographers clearly stand in one continuous line of scholarly tradition. None of them, not even

20

21

22 23

Halaq R. Yona ha-shoresh ha-^e li-shelosha 'inyanim, we-enam ki im 'inyan chad ka-asber ketavam R. Yebuda. A problem here is that Hayyuj didn't bother with meaning at all, but we remember that Ibn Janah himself already mendoned the same point. In words which very much resemble Ibn Tibbon's transladon o f the Guide (Ibn Shmuel 1946: 457-8). This same passage, including the reference to "a Midrash" (see below), also appears in Kimhi's commentary on Ex 20,17/20. There can be no complete certainty whether it was Kimhi himself w h o included the references to Maimonides and the midrash into his entry in the Sefer ha-Shorashim. The possibility o f a later interpoladon, either in the dicdonary or in the commentary, cannot be ruled out. See e.g. the analysis in Heide, A. van der 1991: 307-309. " Yalqut be-shem Mekhitta, remeç 301" (in paraphrase; see Hyman/Shiloni 177-80: 473); the passage corresponds with the very succinct Mekhitta de-R. Yishmaet, Yitro 9 (Horowitz/Rabin 1960: 237); see note 8 above. Rashi adopted the same idea.

David Kimhi in his masterful synthesis of medieval grammar and lexicography, succeeded in blending these various elements into one coherent view.

Bibliography Editions and translations Abraham ibn Ezra 1791. (Sefer Moznayim), Mottle leshon ha-qodesh te-he-hakham ha-gadol r. Avraham b"r Me'ir ha-Sefaradi ha-mekhunne Ben E%ra. Offenbach: Zwi Hirsch Segal Spitz. Bacher, W. 1896. Sepher Haschoraschim. Wunglwörterbuch der hebräischen Sprache von Abulwalid Merwan Ibn Ganäh (TL Jona). Aus dem Arabischen ins Hebräische übersetz von Jehuda Ibn Tibbon. Berlin: M'kize Nirdamim (repr. Jerusalem 1966). Benavente Robles, S. 1986. Tesubot de los discipulos de Menahem contra Dünas Ben Labrat. Ediciôn del textoy traduction castellana. Granada: Universidad de Granada. Biesenthal, J. H. R, Lebrecht, F. 1847. Rabbi Davidis Kimchi Rxidicum Liber, sive Hebraeum Bibliorum Lexicon. Berlin: G. Bethge (repr. Jerusalem 1967). Derenbourg, J. 1886. Le livre des parterresfleuris,grammaire hébraïque en arabe d'Abou'l-Walid Merwan ibn Djanah de Cordoue. Paris: Bibliothèque de l'École des Hautes Études. Derenbourg, J., Derenbourg, H. 1880. "Kitab al-Moustalhik." In Opuscules et traités d'Abou Ί-Walid Merwan Ibn Djanah de Cordoue. Texte arabe publié avec une traductionfrançaise. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1-246. Epstein, J. N., Melamed, E. Z. 1955. Mekhilta d'Rabbi Simon b. Jochai. Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim/American Academy of Jewish Research. Horovitz, H. S., Rabin, I. A. 1960. Mecbilta d'Rabbi Ismael. Jerusalem: Bamberger & Wahrman. Hyman, Α., Shiloni, Y. 1977-80. Yalqut Shim'oni 'al ba-Tora le-Rabbenu Shim'on ha-Darshan. Sefer Shemot. 2 vols. Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook. Ibn Shmuel, Y. 1946. Doctor Perplexorum (Guide of the Perplexed) by Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (Rambam). Hebrew version of Κ Samuel Ibn Tibbon. Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook (rev. ed. 1981). Jastrow, M. 1897. The weak andgeminative verbs in Hebrew by Abû Zakariyyâ Yahyâ Ibn Dâwud of Fe% known as Hayyiig. The Arabic text now publishedfor thefirsttime.Leiden: Ε J.Brill. Metzger, M. 1889. Le livre des parterres fleuris d'Abou'l-Walid Merwan ibn Djanah, traduit en français sur les manuscrits arabes. Paris: Bibliothèque de l'École des Hautes Études. Neubauer, A. 1875. The Book of Hebrew Roots !y Abu Ί-Walîd Marwân ibn Janâh, otherwise called Rabbi Yônâh. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Nutt, J. W. 1870. Two treatises on verbs containing feeble and double letters by R. Jehuda Hayug of Fe% translated into Hebrew from the original Arabic by R. Moses Gikatilia of Cordova; ... with an English translation. London/Berlin: Asher & Co. Sàenz-Badillos, A. 1980. Tesubot de Dünas Ben Labrat. Edition critica y traduction espanola. Granada: Universidad de Granada. , 1986. Menahem ben Saruq, Mahberet. Edition critica e introduction. Granada: Universidad de Granada. Stern, S.G. 1844. Mahberet he-'Arukb. Salomonis ben Abrahami Parchon Aragonensis Lexicon Hebraicum. Pressburg: Anton E. von Schmid (repr. Jerusalem 1970). Varela Moreno, Ε. 1981. Tesubot de Yehudi ben Seset. Edition, traductiony comentario. Granada: Universidad de Granada.

Wilensky, M. 1928-30. Sefer Hariqma (Kitâb al-Luma') ab Jona Ibn Ganâh, lingua arabica conscriptus, bebraice vertit Jehuda Ibn Tibbon. 2 vols., Berlin: Akademie Verlag (repr. Jerusalern 1964).

Literature

Bacher, W. 1885.'Lebenund Werke des Abulwalid Merwan ibn Ganah (Rabi Jona) und die Quellen seiner Schrifterklärung. Leipzig: O. Schulze (reprinted in: Wilhelm Bacher, Vier Abhandlungen über Abulwalid ibn Ganâh ca.990-1050. Amsterdam: Philo Press 1970). , 1885a. Die Hebräisch-Neuhebräische Sprachvergleichung des Abulwalid Merwan ibn Ganâh (Rabbi Jona). Wien: Sitzungsbericht der philosophisch-historische Classe der kais. Akademie der Wissenschaften, Band CX. 175-212 (repr. in: Wilhelm Bacher, Vier Abhandlungen über Abulwalid ibn Ganâh ca.990-1050. Amsterdam: Philo Press 1970). Heide, A. van der. 1991. "Maimonides and Nahmanides on the concept of Trial (Nissayon)." In Sobre la viday obra de Maimonides. I Congreso internacional (Cordoba, 1985). Ed. J. Pelaez del Rosal. Cordoba: Ediciones El Almendro, 305—314. Licht, J. 1973. Testing in Hebrew Scriptures and in Post-Biblical Judaism (Hebr.). Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, The Hebrew University.

TEXTUAL T R A D I T I O N OF T A R G U M J O N A T H A N T O ISAIAH ALBERDINA HOUTMAN Universiteit Kampen, The Netherlands

Introduction Research on ancient texts is made or broken by its textual basis, the Targums being no exception. Within the framework of my study on the Targum to Isaiah, 1 I once more became conscious of diis golden rule. For Isaiah we are privileged with many extant early witnesses. From the literature, especially old catalogues, we know of 26 (almost) complete continuous manuscripts of Targum Isaiah as well as a few hundred fragmentary manuscripts and collections of haftarot.2 O f the 26 known continuous manuscripts, 22 are such that they can be used for stemmatological research. 3 The dark side of this otherwise luxurious situation is that we have only rules of thumb to find our way within this abundance of textual material. In summary, text witnesses of the Targum to the Prophets can be broadly classified into an Eastern and a Western tradition. The Eastern tradition can be subdivided into a "pure" Babylonian tradition and a Yemenite tradition based on the Babylonian tradition but gradually influenced by the Tiberian authority. T h e Western tradition may be further subdivided into an Ashkenazi and a Sefardi tradition. The Babylonian tradition is the oldest. This tradition, of which very little has survived, has been treated adequately by Josep Ribera Florit. 4 The Yemenite and the Western traditions, on the other hand, have as yet not been treated adequately. J o h n Stenning in his edition of 1949 made use of 11 Yemenite and Western manuscripts, of which only 5 were continuous manuscripts, and even those he did not treat exhaustively. 5 For some of these manuscripts he apparendy based himself on the work of others, particularly Samuel Landauer and Paul Anton de Lagarde. N o attempt was made to draw up a stemma to evaluate the significance of the variants. 1

2

3

4

5

The research project ''!Tie Targum of Isaiah' is supported by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). According to the unpublished catalogue which has been compiled by my colleague Dr W. F. Smelik on behalf of our team in Kampen and according to Klein, M. L. 1992. Targumic Mannscripts in the Cambridge Geni~ah Collections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. One MS is too much damaged to be used (MS Or fol 1210, Staatsbibliothek Berlin); one is lost (MS Kennicott 471, formerly Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Rome); one is not identifiable (MS Kennicott 570); and one is only available in the form o f a carbon block (MS A46, Sächsische Landesbibliothek Dresden). Ribera Florit, J. 1988. Targum Jonatan de !os projetas posterions en tradicion babilônica. Isolas. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas. Stenning, J. F. 1949. The Targum of isaiah. Edited with a Translation, Oxford: Clarendon Press (repr. 1953). See the reviews of Rowley, H. H. 1949. BiOr 6, 159-160; and o f McHardy, W. D. 1950 The Hibben Journal 48, 190-92.

Part of this critique also holds true for the critical edition of Alexander Sperber of 1962.6 He limited himself to 8 Yemenite and Western text witnesses, of which 7 were continuous, and his treatment of them was not reliable. Neither did he attempt to make a stemma. However, in Sperber's favour, he did classify them systematically into phonetic variants, which were expressed by differences in the vocalization or in the spelling, and in consonantal variants, even though he did not evaluate the significance of the variants. Another advantage vis-à-vis Stenning's edition is his apparatus of quotations by mediaeval authors. 7 There is some overlap in the witnesses used by Stenning and Sperber. Both took MS Or 2211 as base text. For their collation, they both utilized MS Or 1474 (Sperber sigil z, Stenning sigil L 1 ), Codex Reuchlin (Sperber sigil f, Stenning sigil R)8 and MS O r 1470 (Sperber sigil 5, Stenning sigil L3). That means that these two editions provide access to 15 text witnesses, i.e. 6 complete manuscripts; 3 printed editions and 6 collections of haftarot.'' All we know about these witnesses is that they are of Yemenite or Western provenance. As yet, we have no clue how they relate to each other and to the extant Babylonian fragments. Therefore the first thing to do is classify the text witnesses in a stemma, to allow evaluation of the variant readings.

Sample

Methodology

This is, however, easier said then done, with a bulky book that has survived in so many copies. We must therefore look for a way to create a reliable stemma without having to scrutinize all the textual material first. A possible way to do this is a sample survey. The sample must meet two conditions. -Firsdy, it must be representative of the whole manuscript. If, for example, the scribe of a certain MS used a different exemplar for the second half of his work, and the sample consisted of the first five chapters of each MS only, this complicated relationship of one MS based on two exemplars would remain unnoticed. —Secondly, the sample must be unbiased. If one is interested in discovering the source of a certain MS, it is better to avoid theologically controversial pericopes, because a copyist might be more inclined to tamper there with his sources. In the same vein, beginnings and endings of textual units have proven 6

Sperber, A. 1959-78. The Bible in Aramaic, 5 vols. Leiden: Brill. Reprinted in a paperback edition with a foreword of R. P. Gordon, Leiden 1992. See, for instance, the critical reviews of Van Zijl, J. 1965. "Errata in Sperber's edition o f Targum Isaiah." ΑΓΠ 4, 189-91; Idem, 1968-69. "A second List of Errata in Sperber's Edition of Targum Isaiah." ASTI 7, 132-34; and Gordon, R. P. 1973-74. "Sperber's Edition of the Targum to the Prophets: A Critique." JQR 64, 314-21. However, in his foreword to the paperback reprint of Sperber's edition, Gordon gives a much more lenient judgment of Sperber's undertaking.

7

See Sperber, The Bible in Aramaic. Vol. 3, viii-x. Stenning used D e Lagarde's edition of Codex Reuchlin (Prophetae Chaldaice). Sperber severely criticized the edition o f D e Lagarde and made for his own use a revised copy of Codex Reuchlin. See Sperber, The Bible in Aramaic. IVb, 18-19. Albeit with the noted drawback that none of the two editions seems to be quite reliable in their recording o f variant readings.

8

9

to be more often the object of later rewriting than the core of the same units and should therefore be avoided. 10 In the Targum to the Prophets, we face two sorts of textual units, the biblical chapter division, and the baftarot.u Therefore it is advisable to take a verse from the core of the hafiarah units that is preferably not the beginning or end of a chapter nor controversial. Fortunately the haftarot are fairly evenly spread over the book of Isaiah. Only 12 out of the 66 chapters of the book do not contain hafiarah readings. From these chapters, a verse from the middle is taken. In this way, the sample consists of material from all the chapters of Isaiah, with an overlap as large as possible with the hafiarah collections.

Number of witnesses A feasible start is to begin with the continuous text tradition. Because of the almost complete overlap between the witnesses of this tradition, this is the most substantial basis for the construction of a genealogical tree. For this part of collation, I decided to use all the available MSS supplemented with the two first Rabbinic Bibles. I decided moreover to include the Babylonian fragments collected by Ribera Florit, to provide a point of comparison with a markedly different tradition. 12 For practical reasons, I combined those fragments into one virtual MS representing the Babylonian tradition, although they stem from different sources. At the next stage, care must be taken of the drawbacks of this initial choice of textual material. Firsdy, there is the chance factor of tradition. An inferior text may have survived as a whole in a well readable manuscript, whereas a major ancient text tradition may have survived only in a badly damaged fragment. Therefore, if a variant reading were found in a fragment, we must try to place this fragment in the provisional tree on the basis of the recorded characteristics of the branches. Secondly, we must allow that the haftarot had a history of their own in liturgical use.13 Therefore a considerable number of haftarot will later be included in the research.

10

11

12

13

See D e n Hollander, A. 1997. De Nederlandse bijbeliertalingen 1522-1545. Nieuwkoop: D e Graaf, 138. Avigdor Shinan noticed the same phenomenon for the weekly reading o f the Torah. Shinan, A. "Sermons, Targums, and the Reading from Scriptures in the Ancient Synagogue." In Levine, L. I. 1987. The Synagogue in Laie Antiquity. Philadelphia: American Schools of Oriental Research, 9 7 - 1 1 0 , at 106-107; Idem, 1992. The Embroidered Targum; The Aggadah in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of the Pentateuch (Hebr.). Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 26-31. Though the biblical chapter division is not original, but a 13th Century Christian invention, it is mosdy based on the dynamics of the text, in this way formalizing a division inherent in the text. The Jews for convenience soon adopted this division. I have to acknowledge that I did not consult these fragments myself. They have been taken from Ribera Florit's edition of 1988, Targum Jonatan de los profetas posteriores. For the sigils and description of the various fragments I refer to that edition. It is conceivable that a meturgeman would produce a Targum with plenty of aggadah for the synagogue context, while the same meturgeman would produce a translation with little exegesis for the schoolroom. E.g. Chester, A. 1986. Diiine Rendition and Diiine Titles in the Pentateuchal Targumim. Tübingen: Mohr, esp. 253-259.

Collation Before one can start with any stemmatological construction, some groundwork must be done namely the collation of the witnesses. For this part of the process, I use the program Collate that was designed by Peter Robinson from Leicester University. 14 This sophisticated program is a great help in the dull job of collecting variant readings. One of the ways to present the output of the program is the "difference formula." Such a formula contains information about the variant readings and about the distribution of the variants over the manuscripts. For example, if we have ten manuscripts with the sigils a to j, the formula could look as follows:

first reading acf / first variant ghi / second variant bdej The variant readings recorded in this way are evaluated for their relevance. Although most orthographic variants and abbreviations can be filtered out in the process of automatic collation, there always remain a number that slip through the net. These are manually adapted to their common spelling or removed from the formulae. If, for example, there be a formula in which the abbreviated form of the name Israel occur, it can safely be changed into its full form. But if there be an ambiguous abbreviation, it is better to remove the sigil concerned entirely from the formula. Likewise variant readings that are obvious scribal errors are either standardized or removed from the formula. After this procedure, it sometimes turns out that there is in fact no difference at all that can be taken into account. The entire formula is then removed from the list. In this way, a reliable list of formulae is established that serve as the base for the construction of the tree.

Three-Step Method While the aim of textual scholars used to be to discover the "best text," they now focus more modesdy on charting the network of a text tradition. This difference has implications for the method used. For the former approach, only qualitative arguments were decisive, while for the latter a combination of quantitative and qualitative arguments is advisable. In the 1970s the Dutch stemmatologist Anton Dees developed his Three-Step Method,5‫ י‬which I adopted for my work on the targumic material. In the first step, the MSS are clustered into subfamilies on purely quantitative grounds. In the second step, MSS that might have been intermediary in the process of transmission are identified. 16 These two steps produce the chain of relationships

14

15

16

Robinson, P. M. W. 1994. Collate: Interactive Collation of Large Textual Traditions. Version 2. Oxford: University Centre for Humanities Computing. Dees, A. 1975. "Sur une constellation de quatre manuscrits." In Mélanges de linguistique et de littérature offerts à Lein Geschiere par ses amis, collèges et élèves. Ed. A. D e e s et al. Amsterdam: Editions Rodopi, 1-9; Idem 1976. "Considérations théoriques sur la tradition manuscrite du lai de l'Ombre." Neoplilologus 60, 481-504; Idem 1977. "Over stambomen en handschriften." Forum der Letteren 18, 63-78. If a MS has few unique readings, if any, it may have been intermediary between some other MSS.

that underlies the genealogical tree. At this stage, the nature of the relationships between the different memberships is setded, but not as yet the direction of the relationships. This must be determined at the third step, where the point of suspension, i.e. the root of the tree, is determined on basis of qualitative arguments. This last step is the most difficult one and all possible means must be employed to arrive at a well-founded decision, such as weighing of the variants, palaeographic and codicological data and historical information. In recent years, this Three-Step Method has profited gready from the development of a computer program that takes care of the first two steps. This program was designed and developed by Evert Wattel of the Department for Mathematics and Information Science of the Vrije Universiteit of Amsterdam. 17 Thanks to his program, which calculates the affinity between text witnesses, one can now work with large amounts of material. The program has been tested extensively in several projects and has proved its worth. What remains for the philologist is the challenge to evaluate the output and to interpret it in the light of circumstantial data.

Results Main division I will here present you with some tentative results from the comparison of the continuous text tradition according to the method summarized above.18 The first step of the computerized comparison of the difference formulae divided the witnesses into three large groups with several subgroups and a few loose elements. I will briefly discuss the groups and the position of the loose elements. The main division into groups is as follows: Group 1 Babylonian fragments Or 2211 Hébreu 1325

Solger First Rabbinic Bible Second Rabbinic Bible

Hébreu 18 Codex Reuchlin El. F.6

Gaster 673 Or 1474 Lutzki 239

Jews' college 116 Kaufmann A l 3 Hébreu 75 Opp. Add 4 7 6 Villa Amil 4

Urbinad Vaticano 1 Göttweig 11 B.H. V

Qafih 5

17

18

Group 3

Group 2

‫״‬

See his contributions in: Van Reenen, P. Th. & Van Mulken, M. 1996. Studies in Stemmatology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. The inclusion of the hafiarah collecdons goes beyond the scope o f this paper. The complete picture will hopefully be published in the autumn issue of 1999 o f the Journalfor the Aramaic Bible.

The first group contains the Eastern tradition. The second group contains broadly the Sefardi tradition (I will return to that) and the third group contains the Ashkenazi tradition.

Eastern tradition The program of Dr Wattel relates the MSS on the basis of affinity between the witnesses. So it appears that the Eastern MSS, encompassing the Babylonian fragments and the Yemenite MSS, make up a strong cluster that contains two recognizable sub-clusters, of which the internal connections are considerably stronger than the connections with the other members. Remarkably the Babylonian fragments do not form an independent branch but group with the Yemenite tradition, perhaps because I did not include vocalization in my research. If so, the distinction between the Babylonian and the Yemenite tradition is determined solely by vocalization One of the two sub-clusters consists of the BabyIonian fragments, MS Or 2211 (British Library, London) and MS Hébreu 1325 (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris), which are closely related. This must be noted in defence of Sperber, who was severely criticized for his choice of MS Or 2211 as the base text of his edition. His critics contended that he should have taken a genuine Babylonian text instead. 19 In my view, the fact that the extant fragments cover only about 20% of the book of Isaiah makes his choice of a closely related MS perfecdy reasonable. A thorough comparison of the Babylonian fragments with MS Or 2211 and MS Hébreu 1325 makes clear that MS Or 2211 is without doubt the next of kin.20 The second sub-cluster is also homogeneous, consisting of MS Lutzki 239 (Library of the JTS, New York), MS Or 1474 (Bntish Library, London) and MS Gaster 673 (John Rylands University Library, Manchester). It seems that MS Gaster 673 is a descendant of the older MS Or 1474. Within the sample there is an almost complete identity between the two. The last member of the group is MS 5 of the private collection of Yosef Qafih. Although this beautiful MS has sublinear vocalization, its consonantal text undisputedly belongs to the Yemenite text family. Dated 1900, it is one of the youngest sprouts, to be sure, but nonetheless valuable.21 All MSS discussed so far, including the Babylonian fragments, are not only textually close, but also have in common that they are trilingual, adding an Arabic translation to the Hebrew and Aramaic versions.

19

20

21

E.g. the reviews o f Diez Macho, A. 1975. JSJ 6, 217-236 at 221; Martin, M. 1962. "The Babylonian Tradition and Targum." In Le Psautier. Ses origines. Ses problèmes littéraires. Son infiuence. Ed. R. de Langhe R. Louvain: Publications Universitaires, 425-451, at 443; Barthélémy, D. 1992. Critique textuelle Je l'Ancien/ Testament. T o m e 3, É^échiel, Daniel et les 12 Prophètes. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, ccxi. That is as concerns the consonantal text. As concerns the vocalized text MS Or 1474 seems closer. See Diez Macho, A. 1971. Manuscritos hebreos y arameos de la biblia. Roma: Institutum Patristicum "Augustinianum," 175-177; Ribera Florit, Targum Jonatdn de los projetas posteriores. 10. Because of their uninterrupted circulation, Yemenite MSS should, in general, be evaluated very carefully. A date of completion is less important than the lineage of a MS. See Van der Heide, The Yemenite Tradition, 9-11.

Printed editions and Sefardi MSS The Western tradition is much more heterogeneous than the Yemenite tradition The group that I called Sefardi for convenience contains one exceptional subgroup. This consists of MS Solger (Stadtbibliothek, Nürnberg), the first Rabbinic Bible (Venice 1516/17), and the second Rabbinic Bible (Venice 1524/25). It belongs to the Western text tradition, but scrutiny of the place of this subgroup within this tradition does not disclose a clear kinship to either the Ashkenazi or the Sefardi tradition. Although there is an inclination towards the latter, I prefer for the time being to regard it as a separate group. 22 Many scholars before me have pointed out the close relationship between the first Rabbinic Bible and MS Solger.23 It has even been proposed that MS Solger served as the exemplar for the first Rabbinic Bible. This is, however, not confirmed by the data. It is more likely that the first Rabbinic Bible and MS Solger are indirecdy related through a common ancestor. 24 As for the relationship between the first and the second Rabbinic Bible, it has been suggested that, apart from some orthographic variation, there is hardly any difference. 25 My sample suggests that although they are closely related, there are still some significant differences. 26 The nature of these differences seems to indicate that the editor of the second Rabbinic Bible, Jacob ben Hayyim, made more use of the Sefardi MS traditions than his predecessor of the first Rabbinic Bible, Felix Pratensis. The remainders of the MSS of the second column of my table are all truly Sefardi MSS, i.e. MS 116 (Jews' College Library, London), MS Kaufmann A13 (Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest), MS Hébreu 75 (Bibliothèque National, Paris), MS Opp. Add. 4° 76 (Bodleian Library, Oxford), and MS Villa Amil 4 (Biblioteca Complutense, Madrid). The first three mentioned share the characteristic that they consist of the Targum text only, without the Hebrew original. MS 116 and MS A13 are both unvocalized, which accounts for some shared orthographic peculiarities such as plene spelling of ‫מאן‬. 22

23

24

25

26

This is in line with the observations of David Stec in his work on the Targum of Job, w h o did not, however, include MS Solger in his research. Stec, D. M. 1994. The Text of the Targum of]oh. Leiden: Brill, 5. Klein, M. L 1975. "The Extant Sources o f the Fragmentary Targum to the Pentateuch." HUCA 46, 115-37, at 126; idem 1980. The Fragment Targums of the Pentateuch According to Their Extant Sources. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, I. 26; Grossfeld, Β. The Two Targums of Esther. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 6-7; Beattie, D. R. G. 1994. "The Textual Tradition of Targum Ruth." In The Aramaic Bible; Targums in Their Historical Context. Ed. D. R. G Beattie. and M. J. McNamara. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 340-48; Smelik, W. F. 1995. The Targum of Judges. Leiden [etc.]: Brill, 150-53. See also Smelik, The Targum ofJudges, 150-53. The next few months I will be working on a more detailed comparison between MS Solger and the first Rabbinic Bible. I hope to return to the subject at the conference of the SBL in Helsinki in 1999. E.g. Ribera Florit, J. 1988. ElTargum de Isaias. Valencia: Instituciôn S. Jerônimo para la Investigaciôn Biblica, 19; Stec, D. M. 1994. The Text of the Targum of Job. Leiden: Bnll, 6. Within the sample, 1 encountered the following differences. In Isa 3:18, the second Rabbinic Bible has a unique reading ‫ ביומא‬against ‫ בעדנא‬in the other versions. In Isa 50:10, the second Rabbinic Bible has a long addition jointly with the Sefardic MSS MS Opp Add 40 76, MS Hébreu 75, MS Villa Amil 4 and Cod. Heb. A13. In Isa 65:19, the first Rabbinic Bible and MS Solger share the reading ‫ דצוחין‬against the reading ‫ מצוחין‬in the second Rabbinic Bible.

Ashkenazi MSS The last group consists of the Ashkenazi MSS. These MSS are by far not as closely mutually related as the MSS •within the other groups discussed. They were distinguished more through their difference from MSS of other groups than through mutual likeness. Nevertheless some connections can be observed. There seem to be two sub-groups, of which the first consists of the famous Codex Reuchlin (Badische Hof- und Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe), MS Hébreu 18 (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris) and MS El f.6 (Universitätsbibliothek, Jena). Codex Reuchlin, dated 1105/6, is the oldest text witness we have and is exceptional in two respects, firsdy because of the vocalization and secondly because of the numerous marginal glosses.27 MS Hébreu 18 is related to this MS in the first two thirds of the book. After that the link is much weaker, moving in the direction of MS El. f.6. The second sub-group has very loose internal links. It consists of MS Urbinati Vaticano 1 (Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Rome), MS Göttweig 11 (Stift, Göttweig) and MS B.H. V (Biblioteca Civica Berio, Genoa). From this subgroup MS Urbinati Vaticano 1 stands out for its excellent quality.

Irregular MSS Finally there are four MSS that do not fit in one of the groups defined, namely MS Hébreu 96 (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris), MS Or Fol. 2 (Staatsbibliothek, Berlin), MS Parma 3188 (Biblioteca Palatina, Parma) and M D Add. 26879 (British Library, London). It is difficult to account for the place of MS Hébreu 96. Although it was written in Spain in a Sefardi semi-cursive script with a sublinear vocalization, it is textually closer to the Yemenite than to the Sefardi text tradition. So we can not judge only by appearances. Probably this is an eclectic text, based on different exemplars. The occurrence of variant readings that are introduced by the formulae ‫ תרגום ירושלמי‬and ‫ תרגום אחר‬corroborates this assumption. MS Or Fol. 2 has the outward appearance of an Ashkenazi MS but its consonantal text does not conform to any of the groups defined. 28 Moreover, it contains so many errors that it can hardly be used for textual criticism. MS Parma 3188 and MS Add. 26879 are far apart from any of the other MSS. They are both carelessly written and contain many errors. Just like MS O r Fol. 2, they are too peripheral to be used for textual research. One can not exelude, however, that significant variant readings have somehow been preserved in any of these MSS. They can not therefore be dismissed out of hand, but will be checked cursorily for variant readings.

27

28

Wilhelm Bacher was the first to study these glosses. Bacher, W. 1874. "Kritische Untersuchungen zum Prophetentargum." ZDMG 28, 1 - 7 2 , 34 ff. Here as elsewhere, this situation may be restricted to only part of the MS. For the Book of Judges, for instance, Smelik has shown a relationship of this MS with Codex Solger, MS El. f.6 and MS Hébreu 18. See Smelik, The Targum of Judges. 142-147.

Conclusion Within stemmatological research, a strictly formalized procedure has a number of advantages. Firsdy, it forces the researcher to make design choices explicit, allowing replication and checking of the research by others. Secondly, it enables the researcher to zoom in on specific parts of a problem by changing the parameters. Thirdly, if it turns out that errors have been made, for instance in the text input or in evaluation of variants, they can easily be corrected. Specifically in the Targum to Isaiah, the procedure that has been developed by my countrymen Dees and Wattel has been of great help. It enabled me to process large amounts of data within a short time. The final result will be a detailed tree that completes the rough guidelines with which I started. With this tree the real work can start, that is selecting the best representatives of each tradition to establish a sound textual basis for research on the Targum to Isaiah.

T H E B O O K OF E S T H E R .. AND SHE TOUCHED THE TOP OF THE SCEPTER... " SHIMON LEVY Tel Aviv University, Israel The Book of Esther, one of the most dramatic, thrilling and comic scriptures in the Old Testament, has served as a basis for many Jewish and Christian plays in the last centuries, most of them adaptadons. The story of Esther is a dramatic plot, replete with theatrical effects from the very beginning. As drama, it is charged with conflict between (and finally reversal of) the private-personal realm and the ethnic-political one; between men and women; and between the strong and the weak. Esther contains similar materials and motifs to those found in some of the best known plays in world drama: political scheming, ambition, honor, sex and power; and existential questions of life and death, not only for the individual, but for a whole nation. The very structure of Megilat Esther (The Scroll of Esther) is easily recognizable as dramatic. The story is constructed in clearly discernible scenes, in which the intricacies of the plot are presented according to basic dramatic rules, such as characters, different spaces, rapid or gradual shifts of the scenes, etc. There are (relative to most biblical texts) many dialogues, which enhance its dramatic value as well as theatrical potential. Even a basic reading of Esther reveals it to be a complex and sophisticated text that, especially as a play, opens up not only artistic, but also numerous aesthetic and ethical interpretative possibilities. Each generation re-extended an invitation to interpret itself through Esther and viceversa, in the light of its own particular cultural and historical circumstances. The Megila continues to present relevant contemporary issues, like the forceful Jewish reaction to the threat of genocide which, to date, has a special meaning though it did not occur in the olden days; or the equally relevant attitude toward women. In this chapter I deal with the latter issue, concentrating on the "double talk" on women, as reflected in the dialogical text of Esther on the one hand, and the "stage instructions" on the other. Differing from research dealing with the Bible's influence on world and Hebrew (and Jewish) drama, and differing also from the excellent studies of the Bible as literature in the last few decades, this article proposes to read a particular biblical text as a play, in order to reveal the theatrical elements imbued in the text itself. Reading the theatrical potential of Esther, is based on a distinction between the dialogical text which the characters exchange among themselves, direcdy and indirecdy; and the "auctorial text," [Herta Schmidt] otherwise known as "stage instructions." The latter relates to space, time, movement, costumes, stage props, tone of speech and lighting—all those non-verbal elements which, together with the dialogical text, constitute each and every event of a live, immediate theater performance.

The splendor and pomp, power and affluence of King Ahasuerus are beaudfully exhibited by both the Persian King and the Jewish biblical playwright in the exposidon. This grandeur will, however, soon be understood as ironical. Irony has long been proven an efficient weapon in the hands and pens of the (polirically) weak, as well as an exquisite dramadc device, able to transmit potent subversive messages over the same "textual frequency." The immense Persian empire is described by means which can no doubt be regarded as epic, but they are also typically dramadc: huge geo-polidcal "dramade space," a long period of 180 days of feasdng, culminating with seven days of a feast, before peaking in one grand Finale on the last day at the beginning of the drama. The opening stage design features an extremely rich decor, expressed through numerous "props" of expensive materials, precious stones, silver and gold. The minutely described design ends with "drinking was by the flagons, without restraint, for the king had given orders to all the officials of his palace to do as each one desired." The stage is set to receive the dramatispersonae, waiting in the wings. The anticipated central figure in this big show is undoubtedly the king himself, but the playwright postpones his actual entrance. Between the 127 provinces stretching from India to Ethiopia, gradually narrowed down to the main celebration hall (but still hovering somewhere in an offstage space), and the "as each one desired"—the fascinating plot will take place. It will be played out by the main characters, a particularly interesting series of secondary figures, and the unique person of Esther, the protagonist. In addition to being a key narrative of "relief and deliverance" [‫{ ]רווח והצלה‬revah va'hat^ala) in the Jewish exile history, Esther is also a biographical quest-play of an individual transformed from a manipulated, passive and erotic doll into a brave, intelligent and independent woman. Toward the end she is willing to risk her own life in order to save her people, and accepts full responsibility. Once the main stage has been set, the playwright moves to the sub-plot, and tells of Queen Vashti's special "banquet for the women in the palace of King Ahasuerus." Obviously, the main party was meant for the men alone. The king sends seven eunuchs to bring the queen, in order to present the beauty of his wife to the "peoples and officials." These erotically harmless men are given the task of exposing her to less harmless men, who may also only look at her, and envy. However, the biblical playwright ironically shows that what had been planned, or perhaps merely arisen as an amusing idea "when the king was merry with wine," as a cherry to top the cream on the cake, turns out to be a complete fiasco. Vashti refuses the summons. The proud King Ahasuerus must consequendy suffer mot only a personal disgrace, as a result of his evident inability to master his very own wife, but also a total diplomatic failure, the public shaming of the strongest male in the ancient world of the period; a political disaster. Vashti deflates the king's hubris, together with the surrounding pomp, with her laconic, unexplained yet clearly understandable refusal. The tightly constructed dramatic text uses Vashti's behavior to anticipate the behavioral patterns of the two other women, Esther herself and Zeresh, Haman's wife. The sub-plot does

not really disappear—it moves to "offstage" where hovering there almost to the end, it serves to influence and activate the main plot of Esther. Vashti's highly theatrical refusal to expose herself as an erotic-diplomadc sex-object, is masterfully depicted. For example, the verse "to do as each one desired" [‫ ]לעשות כרצון איש־ואיש‬can now be interpreted in an ironic light, rather than how the writer had led the reader/spectator to believe only four verses back. Throughout the entire empire and particularly in the celebration for the king's third year on the throne, certain people are indeed trying to do "as each one desired," but the king himself, already at the outset, has proven to be bereft of true will-power, although he does act according to him. It is also shown that the first person to act according to "desire" in its more serious sense, is not "a man" but Vashti; and her replacement, Esther, will do so even much more. The major dramatic shift from displaying "the great wealth of his kingdom and the splendor and pomp of his majesty," to "at this the king was enraged and his anger burned in him," indicates in the opening how the plot will develop. Unlike the free, resolute and daring Queen Vashti, King Ahasuerus needs advice from his ministers and councilors, and is rapidly revealed as dependent, emotionally excitable and therefore arbitrary and rash in both thought and action. Many other characters in Esther are equally clearly depicted. Haman, Zeresh and Mordechai, for example, sometimes move between extremes of situations and moods. The spectator, consequendy, may empathize with their social and personal upheavals, and experience with them their fluctuations between the personal-emotional and the public-political realm, so typical of the Esther drama. Following Memucan's advice, Ahasuerus dethrones Vashti (the medieval Jewish scholar Rabbi Shelomo Itzchaki [Rashi], suggested that he had her killed because of the Hebrew term garçar that appears in the text) because "she has not performed the commandment of King Ahasuerus conveyed by the eunuchs." It is always rewarding to examine some of the uses biblical narrative makes of messengers. In Esther there are many such instances, mosdy due to the hierarchical structure of the court. Eunuchs rush back and forth, delivering messages and bringing people in and out. In a theatrical oriented reading, the messenger's role gains a unique status. The "messenger" device which may appear and-dramadc because it indirecdy "tells" rather than direcdy "shows," can nevertheless prove theatrically potent. For instance, when the king conveys his orders, the potential arises for the messenger/actor to choose a particular intonation. The discrepancy between the content of the message and the tone in which it is (or may be) delivered is indeed the essence of theater. Of particularly dramatic potential is the role of Hathach, who acts as a go-between for Esther in the palace and Mordechai who remains by the king's gate. The following analysis focuses on three scenes: Esther's invitation to the king and Haman for a private get-together, the first banquet and then the second one. These scenes highlight the theatricality of the entire book. They cause the peripeteia, and bring about a major change as well as a "recognition," an "anagnorisis" of sorts. Prior to the banquet, however, Vashti is disposed of, and Esther is introduced first into the story, and then into the king's harem. There she is duly

treated with cosmedcs, oils, perfumes and myrrh. Even Hegai, the women's keeper, likes her because of her proper behavior. During this one year of preparadon, not only is her body massaged, but her soul too is trimmed and modeled to become an obedient erotic slave who will follow the court etiquette with grateful subservience. Throughout this period, Esther not only conceals her origin, as Mordechai commanded her, but she does not speak much at all. Well trained and "softened," a year later she is chosen as the next queen, to replace her rebellious predecessor. Through Esther's later reaction we learn that even as the first lady and queen, she may not approach the king freely, but must wait for the summons of the golden scepter. In the meantime Mordechai has managed to prevent the assassination of King Ahasuerus. Chapter three of the book describes Haman's promotion and ascent to power, but while all the king's servants bowed to him and "did obeisance to Haman... Mordechai did not bow down or do obeisance." His deliberate disobedience, though stemming from different motivation, is clearly reminiscent of Vashti's refusal, as a reappearing motif of rebellion against the regime, dramatically enhancing the tension. The infuriated Haman plans to destroy not only the rebel. Understanding Mordechai's national-religious motivation for his disrespect, Haman proposes to annihilate all the Jews, Mordechai included. "When Mordechai learned all that had been done," he tore his clothes and put on sackcloth and ashes. In this latter scene, which brings us closer to Esther's banquets, and in the one to follow, a great deal of the action is delivered through a refined, certainly ritualistic, and thus also highly theatrical usage of costume. In ritual and theater clothes always signify a consciously externalized inner attitude, easily deciphered by members of the same culture group. Rather than indulging in psychological, perhaps sentimental, verbal descriptions, the biblical playwright prefers to let the (potential) audience draw their own emotional, sympathetic conclusions. Esther sends her uncle "proper clothes;" he refuses. But after the three days of his fasting, Esther puts on her own royal clothes, from which we learn that she too wore sackcloth. The Hebrew term ‫"( ותלבש אסתר מ ל כ ו ת‬and Esther wore royalty") may better reflect the metaphoric meaning of clothing: Esther "wore royalty" would be the literal English translation, as though for the first time she has become really resolved to behave like a queen. The costume is hence an external, theatrical sign of Esther's inner conversion. In this particular context, the "props" of food and drink can be explained in a similar way. Not only is fasting believed to cleanse both body and soul, but in refraining from eating, Esther, is simultaneously rejecting the bountiful food of the king's court, together with everything cruel and arbitrary that this food symbolizes, and identifying with her own people. The playwright having supplied the external conditions and the inner resolution for the protagonist to act, Esther is now ready to stand "in the inner court of the king's palace, opposite the king's hall." The dramatic as well as designed stage-space [Issacharoff] itself, no less than the costume and the props, is metaphoric of any scene's message. While Esther is standing outside, probably in a lit area, at one end of the courtyard, the king is sitting "on his royal throne

inside the palace opposite the entrance to the palace," in a shadowed area. Again, rather than indulging in emotional details pertaining to the characters' feelings, fears, expectations etc., the playwright makes the non-verbal elements speak an objective and clear language. Ahasuerus and Esther's body postures, the two different spaces they occupy and the space-gap of the courtyard between them, the lighting and the imminent movement are eloquent signifiers of the dramatic tension. "As soon as the king saw Queen Esther standing in the court, she won his favor"—which again draws attention to her way of standing, whether mysterious, obedient or erotic, but certainly expectant. The term "won his favor in his eyes" ‫ נשאה חן בעיניו‬implies that he may not have recognized her from far off, but that even from a distance she was impressive. "And he held out to her the golden scepter that was in his hand." This very regal act expresses power disguised as grace. On stage, the scepter is a heavily charged prop, which in this scene serves as the acute meeting point for the two characters. In the particular context of this scene within Esther's function in the royal court, we should definitely not ignore the phallic symbolism of this royal prop, an object with which the king chooses his ladies. The Hebrew verb is the same for owning both wife and property: ‫( לבעול‬Liv'ol) Esther approaches the scepter, silendy crossing the physical distance of the courtyard, and the perhaps greater distance from her resolution to the beginning of carrying it out—a magic theatrical moment. Now she touches the top of the scepter: indirect, subtle and humiliaring contact has been achieved. Despite her royal status, Esther cannot penetrate the palace, as the king's space, without being symbolically (and physically) penetrated by him. Knowing this all too well, she will use the dominant male power against itself, in a kind of judo throw, for her own purposes. This wonderfully effective stage prop is both the king's key to Esther, and her key to him. Their real intentions, obviously, are diametrically opposed. The first direct dialogue between them is about to begin, some nine years after the expulsion of Vashti, which Esther certainly retains as a very lively and personally potentially threatening memory. Whereas she is the first one to touch his symbol of pride, as a sign of submission, he is the first to talk—a sign of dominance. "What is it, Queen Esther? What is your request? for a private get-together with Haman and the king, it shall be given you, even to the half of my kingdom." From his words it is clear that her facial expression is not quite cheerful; he also perceives that she wants something. Perhaps her very being there implies her desire for something—unusual for Esther, who has been noted as asking for nothing at all. The king's liking for Esther is expressed with "even to the half of the kingdom"—or perhaps this is merely a typical royal idiom. Her answer is duly polite, almost laconic and likely to arouse curiosity: "If it please the king, let the king and Haman come today to a banquet that I have prepared for him." However, what does the "I have prepared for him ‫עשיתי לו‬ mean"? Firsdy, Esther has presented the king with a fait accompli, thus delicately pressing him to accept the invitadon. Secondly, is the "him" form a courteous 3rd person address to the king, or does it indeed refer to Haman, whom Esther

pretends to honor though in fact she intends to trap? Esther does not reply to the concerned and unsuspecting king's question: "What is it?"—more precisely "what is the matter with you?" ‫מה לך‬. He must have noticed that she is troubled (as ironically known, of course, to the spectator), yet she asks for nothing, but only offers a celebration. Theatrically, a discrepancy is created between her spoken, dialogical text, and her non-verbal behavior, correcdy deciphered by her partner to the scene. The two languages transmit opposite messages. On the other hand, Esther never expressly states that she does not have any request. Ahasuerus may tactfully assume she will tell him her wish in the intimacy of the prospective banquet, later that night. From Esther's point of view, remembering her predecessor's fate, it is surely better to dare her planned intervention in affairs of state in the privacy and relative security of her own space, rather than take a chance of (again...) embarrassing the king in public. Esther's scheme is clarified in retrospect. She designs a three-stage move to foil Haman's scheme for mass murder. First she invites the king and through him Haman. Then, on the first evening she does not yet reveal her cards, keeping them for the second banquet. She must be extremely careful, since the issue at stake is not only that of her own life. Another evidence of the playwright's subde irony is noticeable in Ahasuerus' response. He seems eager to attend the banquet, as we know from Esther's words to Mordechai that she had not been called to the king for the last thirty days. Ahasuerus immediately summons Ha‫״‬ man , probably not only to invite him to this special evening, but also to make the necessary preparations: "Hurry Haman to do what Esther said." ‫מהרו את המן‬ ‫לעשות את דבר אסתר‬. The next verse "So the king and Haman came to the banquet that Esther had prepared," is a bridge to the following scene. In the first banquet scene the set changes. N o longer the king's official audience chamber, it becomes the queen's personal chambers, her home base, a friendly space to her and therefore the best trap for the two most powerful men in the entire empire, one of them evil (at least from her point of view), and the other pompous and impressionable. She will use her reputation, her charms (already proven to have influenced the king), her excellent sense of timing—and a glass of wine or two, since the king likes to drink, and alcohol, as we have seen, affects his clarity of judgment. In this scene Ahasuerus repeats the formula of his previous question, with one slight but important variation: "What is your petition? It shall be granted. And what is your request? Even to the half of my kingdom, it shall be fulfilled." He no longer asks: "What's wrong with you?," since Esther must have made a special effort to look her best; neither does he repeat the formal appeal "Queen Esther," unnecessary in these less formal circumstances. Whereas the king's lines are a little shorter now, Esther, no longer under the scrutiny of the king's courtiers in the hall, allows herself a longer speech: "This is my petition and request: If I have won the king's favor, and if it pleases the king to grant my pedtion and fulfill my request, let the king and Haman come to the banquet that I

will prepare for them, and tomorrow I will do as the king has said." Esther's rhetoric is well thought of, witty and effective. She uses the king's own words (petition and request) twice, manifesting utmost respect for the almost "holy" words of the monarch, though biblical narrative often uses redundancy and deliberately excessive repetition as an ironic, even sarcastic means. We also learn, retrospectively, that her choice of grammatical tenses is deliberate: "I have prepared a banquet," is quite different from "I will prepare..." In her diplomatic judo throw, a brilliant and frequendy used dramatic strategy, in which one partner employs texts said by or about another partner, she knows that she has "found grace in his eyes." Moreover, he has already promised her "even the half of the kingdom," and yet another discrepancy is created between what dramatic irony conceals from the king and Haman, but the spectator already knows. Esther postpones her real request once more, but promises to raise the issue—now clear to all that there is one—on the following day. In the meantime she has succeeded in arousing both Haman's flattered hubris at having been invited to this special event, and the king's curiosity. Only one day goes by between Esther's first banquet and her second, but the plot of the Book of Esther gains velocity and intensity in a a series of six scenes and a short interlude. 1. O n his way out, Haman encounters rebellious Mordechai yet again. 2. At his home Haman boasts of his successes, especially of the banquet, "yet all this does me no good so long as I see the Jew Mordechai sitring at the king's gate." The idea of the hanging-tree arises at this meeting. 3. Unable to fall asleep, Ahasuerus finds an old report on the foiled assassination attempt, and wishes to reward Mordechai. Haman has just arrived, and is waiting outside in the exterior court, in order to get a permission to hang Mordechai. In this sarcastic scene Haman is ordered to honor his enemy: "Thus shall it be done for the man whom the king wishes to honor." 4. Following the typical Megilat Esther pattern of hubris/humiliation, Haman carries out the king's orders. 5. Mordechai is back at the king's gate, while Haman ‫נדחף אל ביתו אבל וחפוי ראש‬ "hurried to his house mourning and with his head covered." His wife Zeresh and friends promise Haman a "complete fall." 6. In a short but viciously funny interlude, the king's eunuchs arrived and "hurry" Haman to Esther's banquet. The main banquet scene opens with a hint to an even less formal evening than the night before. Not "And the king said to Esther at the wine-banquet," but "And the king and Haman came to drink with Esther" or as we might say today, "to have a drink or two" with her. The king turns to her, probably very curious by now to find out "what is your petition, Queen Esther, and it shall be granted; and what is your request? Even to the half of my kingdom, it shall be fulfilled." This third version con-

tains elements of both the previous ones. This time Ahasuerus uses a slightly more formal approach, perhaps to back up his former promise with a little more royal authority. Esther's answer is also based on her previous, almost excessively polite but intentionally vague message, which she now constructs differendy. She turns to the king using the second person singular—,‫אם מצאתי חן בעיניך‬ ‫ ואם על ה מ ל ך ט ו ב‬,‫המלך‬... ("If I have found grace in your eyes, oh king, etc.")— shifting back to the third person. It is a smart, manipulated rhetorical tactic to stimulate the king's sensitivities through alternately approaching and alienating him—verbally, at least. Instead of only "my petition and request" as she said the previous night, she fills the hollow, etiquette-ridden verbal formula (in a deliberately ridiculing way, as it may have been) with a most unexpected and very concrete plea. As far as the stage characters are concerned, these last words constitute a double shock. We know little about the king's mood, except that his curiosity regarding Esther's twice postponed desire has not yet been satisfied. Haman, in contradistinction, has had a ghasdy day and is in a miserable state. We can only guess whether he has any notion at all of what to expect tonight. Before going on, the actress playing Esther may take a litde pause to increase tension: "let my life be given me—that is my petition—and the lives of my peopie—that is my request." The banquet for three has turned into a theatrical pearl. It is thick with dramatic irony, extreme gaps between text, context and personal as well as political subtext. Esther goes on: "For we have been sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be killed, and to be annihilated." (Possible long pause!) "If we had been sold merely as slaves, men and women, I would have held my peace; but no enemy can compensate for this damage to the king." The immense tension between Esther's two listeners arises from Haman's devious plans being brought out into the open in a most precise way, and from the king's amazing moral indifference; when we remember what he had said to Haman—"The money is given to you, and the people as well, to do to them as it seems good to you." [3:11] Furthermore, the seemingly innocent word "good" now acquires horrid meanings, when employed so sarcastically under the circumstances. Esther's dilutes her crude and certainly un-diplomatic words "kill, destroy, annihilate" into the bitter but pseudo-polite "if we have been sold merely as slaves..."—a now established rhetoric typical of her character. Stunned Ahasuerus seems to stutter: "And king Ahasuerus said, and he said to Esther: who is he and where is he, who has presumed to do this?" Esther: "A foe and enemy, this wicked Haman." Haman has been a silent, though definitely very attentive partner in the scene. In two ingenuous stage instructions, the playwright describes the two men's non-verbal reactions, implicidy maintaining that they were indeed practically speechless, though for different reasons: "And Haman was terrified before the king and queen, the king rose from the feast in wrath and went into the palace garden." Haman's reaction is understandable, the king's—less so. But Ahasuerus's confusion and miserably poor reaction is nevertheless an exquisite peace of stage-craft, utterly commensurate with the king's normally irregular behaviour.

Dramatically it is important to get the king out. Firstly, to give him and the spectators an opportunity to digest the news. He himself has collaborated with Haman and now discovers that not only Mordechai his savior (which he knew), but also his wife is Jewish. He exits to enjoy his anagnorisis alone. Secondly, the playwright might have wanted to mock at Ahasuerus's condnued indecision, and so left the exact motivation for this wonderful "exit" somewhat unexplained. Thirdly, this royal exit is absolutely necessary to prepare the coup de grace for Haman as well as expose the king as a person whose final motive for independent action will be seen to be sexual jealousy. When Haman remains alone with Esther, he wants to plead for his life, but we may only guess at what she feels or desires. There is no mention of direct dialogue between the two, in this scene within a scene. It may be a silent one. Returning from his few moments alone in the garden, the king sees Haman falling on the queen's bed. Did she really trap him with erotic insinuations? Did she simply make him trip over the bed? Did the king misinterpret Haman's posture as an attempted rape? Did Esther "direct" such an ambiguous posture and plan it in advance? These and many other questions are not answered in the biblical text, and are open to a director's own intentions. However, Ahasuerus, perceived as stupid in Jewish exegedcal traditions, must indeed have been either quite drunk or overwhelmed by a combination of unpleasant feelings, to believe that Haman could possibly have dreamed of making a pass toward the queen at this particular moment. This magnificent scene ends with ‫"( ופני המן ח פ ו‬And Haman's face 'fell down' " or 'was covered') to show that sometimes one well aimed spotlight can do the job of many words. Esther is the only character in the Megilah who undergoes real change. She is transformed first from an orphaned refugee child to an object of pleasure, then to the frightened wife of a monarch; and finally she becomes a courageous, self-willed intelligent independent woman. While she was indeed subjected to the influence and pressure of Mordechai, her acts could nevertheless not have been performed without her own great resolution. The many highly theatrical events, as well as specific promises and decrees in the Megilah that function as virtual speech acts, are commensurate with the protagonist's own performance, theatrically and personally.

Selected

Bibliography

Alter, R. 1981. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books. Bachelard, G. 1969. The Poetics of Space. Boston: Beacon Press. Fokkelman, J. P. 1981. Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel. A full interpretation based on stylistic and structural analyses. Vol. I King David (IISam 9-20 & IKings 1-2). Assen, NL: Van Gorcum. Levy, Sh. 1996. Here, There and Everywhere. Space in Canadian and Israeli drama. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press. Schmid, H. 1973. Strukturalistische Dramentheorie. Kronberg TS: Scriptor Verlag. Sternberg, M. 1987. The Poetics of Biblical Narrative. Ideological literature and the drama of reading. Blooomington: Indiana Univ. Press. (1997)‫ תשנ״ז‬,‫ ירושלים‬,‫ הדרמה במקרא‬,‫ניסן אררט‬ 1997 ,‫ במארס‬23 ‫" הארץ‬,‫ " מ ש ח ק ה ה פ כ י ם ה ס מ ו י ש ל מ ג י ל ת אסתר‬,‫יוכי ברנדס‬ (1994),‫ ) " ל כ ל ו כ י ת " ( ת ל אביב‬,‫כ> המעשיות‬,‫ה א ח י ם גרים‬ 1997 ,‫ במארס‬21 ‫ " הארץ‬, ‫ " ה מ ר ד הנשי ה ר א ש ו ן‬,‫מ י כ א ל הנדלזלץ‬ ( 1 9 5 6 ) ‫ ת ש ט ״ ז‬,‫ המחזה העברי‬,‫אברהם ׳·צרי‬ 1997 ,‫ ת ל אביב‬,‫נסתר‬,‫נובח‬,‫מדבר‬,‫לוי‬ ‫שמעון‬ 1983 ,‫ ת ל אביב‬,‫שיע במקרא‬7,‫עדין שטיינזלץ‬

L O T ' S C H O I C E : PARADISE OR PURGATORY? MEIR LUBETSKI City University of New York, USA

‫ הירדן כי כלה משקה‬, ‫וישא לוט את עיניו וירא את כל ככר‬ ‫לפני שחת ה׳ את סדום ואת עמורה כגן ה׳ כארץ מצרים באכה צער‬ Lot looked about him and saw2 that the Jordan Plain was ‫— כלה משקה‬Before God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah— Like the garden of God, like the land of Egypt, until Zoar. (Gen 13:10) Thus, the narrator describes the type of land which Lot, the nephew of Abraham, selected. The affluence of Abraham and Lot posed a threat to family harmony. The Patriarch, therefore, took action while the discord was in its initial stages and suggested that their families part. He displayed a great nobility of character by giving up seniority and offering his nephew first choice of a share in the Promised Land. Lot accepted the offer and he chose the Plain of Jordan because it was ‫כלה משקה‬. Translators usually rendered the expression ‫ כלה משקה‬as "thoroughly watered," "well-irrigated".3 The root ‫ שקה‬in the sense of "give to drink" or "cause to drink," i.e. "to water" (ground, garden, plant) is prevalent in Scripture.4 Litde 1

Kikkar is perceived as a round shape. The word is used for metallic weights and bread. See Koehler, L. and Baumgartner, W. 1958. Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros. Leiden: Brill, 434—35. Ugaridc kakkar is cognate o f the Hebrew. See Gordon, C. H 1998. Ugaritic Textbook Glossary (Rev. Rep.) Roma: Ponrificio Isrituto Biblico, #19.1229. For other texts in the Hebrew Bible using the word, see Gen 19:17-29; Deut 34:3, lKgs 7:46. Cf. Harel, M· 1978. "The Pride of the Jordan." Biblical Archaeologist 41, 66 ff. For another explanation of the geographic feature see: Kii, J. 1997. The Book of Genesis. (Hebr.) (DaatMikra) Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 352 n.18.

2

For the structure o f the phrase, "PN looked about him and saw," in epic prosody, see. Cassuto, U. 1965. The Goddess Anath. (Hebr.) Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 30-31. See dictionaries: Koehler and Baumgartner, 1995. The Hebrew and the Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Leiden: Brill, 2.652 explanation # 2 . See also "wasserreiche Gegend " in Gesenius, W. and Buhl, F. 1915. Hebräisches und aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das alte Testament. Leipzig: F. C. W. Vogel, 473; Holladay, W. L. 1971. A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 222. Translations: Tanakh, (Philadelphia: JPS, 1985) "well watered"; The Holy Scriptures (Jerusalem: Koren Publishers, 1989) "well watered." The Vulgate renders it universa inrigabatur and Judeo-Aramaic texts as ‫ בית משקוי‬,‫ בית שקה‬,‫בית שקיא‬. For the English translation of the respective Targumim see Grossfeld, Β. 1987. The Targum Onqelos to Genesis. Wilmington: M. Glazier, 65; Mahar, M. 1987. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis. Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 54; Diez Macho, A. 1968. Neophyti I. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, 69; 527. Note that the Aramaic translations seem to contain the sense o f irrigated soil via pools and canals. The word the LXX uses is poti^omene, which is a participle, middle voice, feminine singular, from the root,poti^o, literally, "give to drink." Commentators: Wenham, G. J. 1987. Genesis 1-15. Waco: Word Books, 293; Keil, C. F. and Delitzsch, J. 1989. The Pentateuch, trans, by J. Martin. USA: Hendrickson, 200. The consensus seems to be that it connotes irligation.

3

4

T o wit: Gesenius-Buhl, 860; Koehler and Baumgartner, 652; Holladay, 382. Cf. also C A D letter š part II p.24 # 3 under šaqû Β.

attention, if any, was paid to the fact that the phrase was syntactically inaccurate, but it was never doubted because it suited a shepherd's needs. Critical commentaries viewed the rest of this verse as awkward and superfluous. Claus Westermann, in his monumental commentary on Gen 12-36, summarizes the opinions of many when he says:
5

6

7

8

9 10

Westermann, C. 1985. Genesis 12-36, trans, by J. ). Scullion. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 171-81, esp. 177. T o describe a region of the Land of Israel as fertile and well watered without the assistance o f heaven runs counter to the approach o f the Torah to the Promised Land. For further explanation see Deut 11:10-12 and Rashi to those verses. N o t e also Num. 13:22 and Rashi to the verse. In both cases he cites midrashic explanations to highlight the companson. Although the text praises the Land of Israel, it should be noted that from a practical viewpoint a peasant would prefer a well-irrigated field to one that depended on rain, which is unpredictable. Nevertheless the classical description of the fertility of the Land of Israel is tied to the beneficence o f the Creator as opposed to the Israelite's farming efforts. In post-biblical literature, an irrigated land is known as ‫ בית ה ש ל ח י ן‬m.Šeb. 2.2. Rashi to Gen 13:10. He relies though on Gen. Rub. Cf. loi. cit. The commentary of Sarna to this phrase. "...That is, fed by streams and brooks and therefore independent of seasonal rainfall for its fertility." Sarna, Ν. M 1989. The JPS Torah Commentary, Genesis. Philadelphia: J PS, 99. Finkelstein, L. ed. 1956. Sifra on Leiiticus. N.Y.: Jewish ITieological Seminary of America, Lev. 11:34. Cf. Ezek. 45:15; Note the identification of the liquid as wine in b.Pesah. 48a. See also Kimhi to this verse. Malbim stresses the fact that this verse speaks about wine for libadon since the former verse discussed oil for the sacrifices. Gordon, C. H. 1952. "Damascus in Assyrian Sources." IE) 2.3, 174—75. See Gen. 40:1; 2; 9; 20; 21; 23; 41; 9; Neh. 1:11. The butler dreams about grapes and the vine and then he returns to his position and serves the king wine. Cf. 1Kgs. 10:5; 2Chr 9:4; The verses describe the drinks served at King Solomon's meals and it is safe to assume that expensive drinks were imbibed.

active participle hiph'il', ‫כלה מ ש ק ה‬, as written in the text, connotes "abounding in wine." 11 It is not uncommon to merge these two meanings. The combined concepts of wine and water are found in late Bronze Age Ugaritic literature. Baal's messengers, who always appear together are gpn-w-ugr, an epithet of a divinity or divinities of wine and irrigated land, respectively.12 Further, the Bible is fond of the double entendre and uses the technique dubbed by the Arab rhetoricians, tawrijya, "concealment." 13 Indeed, this device was popular among ancient and medieval authors, and some exegetes noticed such dualities in the Bible as well. To wit: Ibn Ezra points out that in Job 7:6, ‫ימי קלו מני ארג ויכלו באפם תקוה‬, the word ‫ תקוה‬could be rendered, "hope," as in Prov 10:28, or "cord" as in Jos 2:8. Therefore the JPS translates the oft quoted agony of Job: "My days fly faster than a weaver's shutde and come to their end without hope." But the editor, unsure of the exact meaning, provides an alternative rendition of the last two words: "My days fly faster than a weaver's shuttle and come to their end when the thread runs 0ut."i4 The latter translation, using the same imagery of the metaphor seems even more suitable than the former. Yet, it is most probable that the poet intended to enrich the import of his lyrical expression by combining the meanings. The verse, then, could be construed: "My days fly faster than a weaver's shutde and come to an end when the thread runs out [leaving me] without hope" In another example, Jacob says to his sons on their return visit to Egypt, ‫( וכסף משנה ק ח ו בידכם‬Gen 43:12). They are told to take ‫כסף מ ש נ ה‬. How are we to understand the word ‫" ?משנה‬Double" as in Ex 16:5, 22 or "viceroy" as in Gen 41:3? The more likely translation is "double the money," yet the verse also harbors the hidden meaning of "viceroy." Hence, the duality hints that the doubled money is for the viceroy, i.e. Joseph. Similarly, it is more than likely that the narrator of the Lot episode intended to convey two ideas simultaneously: the Jordan Plain was flowing ‫משקה‬, both water and wine.15 Commentators and translators, by and large, either recognized only one meaning or made a choice, but the fact is that ambiguity is an integral part of biblical style. The Hebrew text is replete with subde meanings and the challenge to the

11

12

13 14 15

H o w to comprehend a word in the text of the Pentateuch was a question that the Talmudic sages dealt with even before the grammarians instituted the system o f the diacritical marks. The Babylonian Talmud discusses the issue many times: ‫יש אם ל מ ס ו ר ת‬, is primacy assigned to the written form o f the word? Or, ‫יש אם ל מ ק ר א‬, is primacy assigned to the pronounced form o f the word? There is an additional opinion that maintains that equal primacy is given to the received written form as well as the pronounced form o f the word. See b.Pesab.86tr, b.Sukk.6b, b.Qidd. 18b•, b.Sanh.4a\ b.Mak7b, b.Bek.34a; b.Ker.17b. In our case the root remains the same and the pronundation changes the mood o f the word from acdve into passive. It is similar to the explanation o f Rashi to b.SanbAb, the lines which begin with :‫ א מ ר ת יש‬: ‫ א ב ל ח ל ב‬respectively. ügaru "an irrigated land section." See Driver, G. R. 1956. Canaanite Myths and legends. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 134 esp. note 8. See Yellin, D. 1 - 1 7 (‫ )תרצ״ר‬5 ‫ ה ה ו ר א ה ב ת נ ״ ך תרביץ‬- ‫״ מ ש נ ה‬ Ibid., 15. See also Tanakh (Philadelphia: JPS, 1985) to Job 7:6 esp. note b - b . For other examples, see Yellin. The author brings twenty-one from Scriptures.

LOT'S CHOICE: PARADISE OR PURGATORY?

167

reader is to delve deeply into the multifaceted text and uncover all its manifold potentialities.16 Not taking into account the twin aspect of the word ‫ מ ש ק ה‬in Gen 13:10, the commentators saw only one plausible interpretation of the verse and therefore found the second half of it wandng. But they missed the point; they did not nodce the narrator's sublime artistry. Just as ‫ משקה‬can be understood on two levels, the two similes,'7 ‫ כגן ה׳‬and ‫כארץ מצרים‬, can be interpreted in two ways, each one matching the respective meaning of .‫כלה משקה‬ ‫ משקה‬in the sense of "well-watered," gains cogency from the metaphor in the continuation of the verse, ‫כגן ה׳‬. The expression, ‫" כגן ה׳‬like the garden of God," is found only one more time in the Bible, in a prophecy depicting the future rejuvenation of the Land of Israel. Isaiah, providing consolation for the Israelites who endured the trials of exile, says: ‫וישם מדברה כעדן‬ ‫וערבתה כגן ה׳‬ He has made her desert like Eden And her wilderness like the Garden of God (Isa 51:13) Envisioning the future of the Promised Land, the prophet declares a radical change in the landscape. "Eden," and the "Garden of G o d " will replace the "desert" and the "uncultivated wilderness," respectively. The second strophe citing a garden with all kinds of fruit-bearing trees reinforces and magnifies the future miracle. Accordingly, when the exiles return to their homeland, the country will become the re-creation of the heavenly garden, in a word, paradise. Leaving it to the imagination of the listener, the prophet did not volunteer a detailed description of Eden or ‫גן ה׳‬. By using the expression, the prophet hinted at the famous Garden in Eden where the heavenly river, irrigated and fertilized the land that then produced luscious fruits. 18 If ‫" כגן ה׳‬like the garden of God," brings to mind the heavenly river, then ‫כארץ‬ ‫" מצרים‬like the land of Egypt," alludes to the Egyptian Nile whose banks overflow with water for the fields.19 An alternate explanation of the two similes derives from understanding ‫ משקה‬as wine. The associadon of the Garden of God with Egypt suggests

16

18 19

Janus Parallelum in biblical literature has been recognized for quite some time. See Gordon, C. H. 1978. "New Direcdons." Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists 15, 59-60. Gordon, C. H. 1982. "Asymmetric Janus Parallelism." Eret%-Israel 16 (Jerusalem: Israel Exploradon Society) 8 0 81; Herzberg, W. 1979. Polysemy in the Hebrew Bible, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms; Raabe, P. R. 1991. "Deliberate Ambiguity in the Psalter." JBL 110,2, 213-216. Noegel, S. B. 1996. "Janus Parallelism in Job and its Literary Significance." JBL 115,2, 313-20. A similar term ‫ גן אלהים‬appears in Ezek 31:8 in a prophecy directed to the Egypuan king. The prophet uses it also in a prophecy to the king of Tyre. There, the phrase is: • ‫" בעדן גן א ל ו ה י‬in Eden the garden of God," hence placing the two terms in apposidon. Ezek 28:13. Gen 2:8-10. Egyptian bpy, the Nile, is perceived as die river that causes the inundation on Egyptian soil, but also as the heavenly river which waters heavenly places as well as the source of rain for countries outside Egypt.

Egyptian parallels. The hieroglyphic word for garden is k'n,20 which resonates as Semidc ‫גן‬, although there does not seem to be a philological link. Very early in Egyptian literature, in the Pyramid texts, k?n ntr connotes a heavenly garden where the dead royalty enjoy the next world. K'n ntr, "the garden of god," produces divine and venerated products for the inhabitants. While the produce of Pentateuchal ‫ גן עדן‬was never disclosed, there is a detailed description of the Egyptian counterpart in heaven: mk M pn ii n 'nh u/s iri.f hsmnw.f m d3b m irp imy k?n ntr Behold M is come for life and dominion And he makes his feast of breakfast from figs [And] on wine which are in the garden of god.21 The d}b, "fig," 22 in combination with irp, "wine," played a special role in ancient Egypt. Bliss in the hereafter consisted of feasting on the sycamore fruit and grape wine. It was the hope and desire of every Egyptian member of the extended Pharonic family to relish this treat. The funerary liturgy specifically lists figs and wine as the main heavenly sustenance of the deities and the dead monarchs who ascend "to the fields of the blessed." Hence, when the kings are resurrected, it is said that they enjoy: (

nh.w m d}b sur iw irp Living on figs and drinking wine23

The meal was important for an additional reason. Hsmnw, translated as "feast of breakfast," literally means "the purification of the m o u t h " or "dining." 24 T h e deceased king ate figs and drank wine in a preliminary ritual to achieve deificadon. The routine drinking of wine testifies to the resemblance between the departed king and the sun god Rec, whom he joins in heaven. Emphatically, the king exclaims: 20

21

22

23 24

See Faulkner, R. O. 1986. A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. Oxford: Griffith Institute, 284. K'nw is garden since Old Kingdom. Gardiner, A. 1973. Egyptian Grammar. (3"1 ed.) Oxford: Griffith Institute, 597. See also Erman, A. and Grapow, H. 1982. Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 5.107. Sethe, K. 1960. Die altägyptischen Pyramidentexte (4 vols.; Darmstadt: wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaff,) 2. line 1112, b, c, d. See S. Mercer, The Pyramid Texts (4 vols.; N.Y.: . Longmans, 1952) 3.553 lines 1112a-b. For the meaning of Λ/Γ, see also M. Lubetski, et. ai eds. 1998. Boundaries of the Ancient Near Eastern World. England: Sheffield Academic Press, 252; Gordon, C. H. 1982. "The International G o d E/ohim/Ntr." Hebrew Studies 23, 33-35.

D'b\ db>, the Egyptian fig (WB 5.417) brings to mind the Ugaritic dbtt, "a cake of dried figs" (UT #19.639) and biblical 2 ‫ ד ב ל ת‬K g s 20:7; Isa 38:21; ‫ ד ב ל ה‬Isa 30:12, plural ‫ ד ב ל י ם‬Isa 25:18; 1C 12:41. It seems that Egyptians did not differentiate between the fresh and the dry fig. The same word is used for both while the Bible makes a distinction between ‫ • ד ב ל‬or ‫ ד ב ל ת‬the dry fig, and ‫תאנה‬, the fresh fruit. It is possible to show a relationship between the Egyptian and the Canaanite/Hebrew words. Sethe, 2.1511. Cf. also 1.816b-c and 1882b-c. See Mercer, 2.44 lines 816b-c. Sethe, 2.1511. Cf. also 1.816b-c and 1882b-c. See Mercer, 2.44 lines 816b-c. See Gardiner, A. Egyptian Grammar. Sign list U.32, 520; Faulkner, R. O. Dictionary of Middle Egyptian, 178.

mw Τ m irp mr Re ' The water of Τ is wine like that of RēC 25 While the inhabitants of the Pentateuchal Garden of Eden were ejected, Egypuan k η ntr, "the garden of god," continually accepted new entrants to the abode of the glorified. It occupied the imagination of the Egyptians who borrowed the description of the garden's flora to portray heaven on earth. When a contemporary of the Pyramid scribes, the chief hunter to King Senefru (c.2613-2494 BCE), wanted to create a superb garden, he concentrated on "planting fig trees and vines... and in the middle of his garden, he planted a vineyard which yielded him a great deal of wine." 26 The layout of the garden emphasizes the vineyard and demonstrates how highly wine was esteemed. The vine and fig represent the ideal of a fruitful, cultivated land. K'n ntr, the Garden of god in heaven, was replicated by k'n kmt, the garden of Egypt upon earth. Indeed, later sources of the New Kingdom actually use the term, k'n kmt, "the garden of Egypt." 27 Pbes writes that the delta country was a veritable treasure trove of produce. In the detailed account of the fruits, the scribe identified the heavenly two-course menu: Dhw η 7 ht ìrpw ndm η k'n kmt iw iti hr bit Figs of the orchard (literally; the house of trees) sweet wine of the garden of Egypt (literally: the black land). It is better than honey.28 The pairing of the sycamore fig and wine was firmly anchored in the cultic practices and in the prevalent landscape of the ancient Egyptians. For them the divine and the human intermingled freely. K'n kmt, the garden of Egypt, contained the most delectable figs and the sweetness of its wine surpassed even honey. If an ancient Egyptian had to choose between a land abundant with figs and wine and a land flowing milk and honey, no doubt he would resoundingly vote for the former. The above ideal was not confined to Egypt proper. Sinuhe the Egyptian adopted his native land's approach to describe his country of asylum. He praises the features of the Syro-Palestinian region given to him by the governor: iw d'b im.fhri

i'rrt

wr n.jirp r mw itfVb'k.f ' ,w b dkrw nb hr htw.j iw itw im hri bdt 25 26

27

28

Sethe, 1.130c. A. Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt (trans. By H. M. Tirard, N.Y.: Dover Publicadons, 1971) esp. p. 196 note 1. See Papyrus Anastasi III, I 2.5-2.7 in Gardiner, A. H. 1937. Late Egyptian Miscellanies. Bruxelles: Fondadon Egytologique Reine Elisabeth, 22. Also Caminos, R. A. 1954. Late Egyptian Miscellanies. London: Oxford University Press, 74; 77. Ibid. For a similar version see Papyrus Rainer 53 lines 10-11 in Gardiner, A. H. Late Egyptian Miscellanies, 137-38. See also Caminos, 505.

Figs were in it and grapes. It had more wine than water. Abundant was the honey, plentiful its oil. All kinds of fruit were on its trees. Barley was there and emmer....29 Sinuhe's portrayal displays a striking similarity to Moses' delineation of the Promised Land: ‫ארץ ח ט ה ו ש ע ר ה וגפן ותאנה ורמון‬ ‫ארץ זית ש מ ן ו ד ב ש‬ A land of wheat and barley, wine figs and pomegranates, A land of olives bearing oil and honey.30 Apparendy, there was a stock formula or a literary tradition of praising the country by enumerating its prized produce such as grain, wine, figs, oil and fruits. 31 However, the list of the refugee, loyal to his Egyptian legacy, began with figs and grapes, rather than grains. 32 Then, he added an unusual expression. He described the land as having "more wine than water." The phrase is significant. For an Egyptian, the vineyard and the sycamore orchard are an integral part of a garden, and the extensive quantities of wine express wealth. While Sinuhe gives a graphic picture of the splendor and attractiveness of Yaa, an unidentified place in the Syro-Palestinian region, he sees the epitome of luxury and riches through the eyes of an Egyptian gendeman and therefore assigns an Egyptian's highest mark to it: wr.n.f irp r mw. "It had more wine than water." And so when the verse used repetition to describe Lot's viewing of the Jordan Plain, "Lot looked about him and saw..." it tells us that he had a two-fold vision. He saw the land, ‫כלה מ ש ק ה‬, well irrigated by rivers and streams, ‫ כגן ה׳‬, like the Garden of Eden, and ‫ בארץ מצרים‬, like the irrigation provided by the Nile. O n the other hand, Lot saw the land as ‫כלה מ ש ק ה‬, abounding in wine. Lot, who just returned to Canaan f r o m Egypt, views the land through an Egyptian lens. With Egyptian conceptions of k}n ntr or k3n kmt33 and the picture of a rich and fecund land filled with vines vividly in his mind, he chose a section that

29

30 31

32

33

"The Story o f Sinuhe," in Blackman, A. M. 1932. Middle Egyptian Stories. Brussels: Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca II, 23 lines 81-85. Deut 8:8 The inscription of Panamuwa I of Yaudi eighth century BCE in Northern Syria: 'rq s'ry [']rq hty w'rq šmy... 'rq wkrm, in Donner, H. and Rollig, W. 1971. Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften. Weisbaden: Harrassowitz, # 2 1 4 , 38; 214, lines 5 - 7 . Cf. Num. 16:13. When Datan and Abiram describe a good land they refer to Egypt as a land flowing with milk and honey. K'n, garden, and in later texts k'm, vineyard. K'ny, gardener, and in later texts, k'my, vinter, might be perceived as later forms of garden and gardener and the earlier terms were possibly of wider scope than k'mw. See Gardiner, A. H. 1947. Ancient Egyptian Onomastica (2 vols.) London: Oxford University Press, 2.215 #458. K'm is generally identified with Hebrew ‫כרם‬. See Erman and Grapow, 5.106. Hoch suggested that the Egyptian word is derived from the stem krm, in Semitic Words in Egyptian Texts of the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period. N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1994, 330.

replicates this vision, either metaphorically as the Egyptian ‫ גן ה‬or in reality ‫כארץ‬ ‫מצרים‬. Was the area he chose indeed so? There is good reason to answer in the afftrmadve. It was from this very same region that the spies in the time of Moses brought back unusually large clusters of grapes and figs. Because of its tremendous output, the wadi in the area was called ‫נחל א ש כ ו ל‬, Cluster [of grapes] Wadi (Num 13:23-24). Moreover, Sodom and Gomorrah before their destrucdon had been proverbially known as fertile. In fact the poem asserts that the region was famous for its vineyards and wine produce. It says: ‫כי מ ג פ ן סדם גפנם ו מ ש ד מ ו ת ע מ ר ה‬ For their vine is of the vine of Sodom and of the fields of Gomorrah (Deut 32:32) That the verse c o n d n u e s , ‫" ע נ ב מ ו ענבי רוש א ש כ ו ל ו ת מררת ל מ ו‬Their grapes are the grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter," reflects the dramatic change that occurred. 34 The people of the area were outrageous sinners, infamous for their wickedness. Thus the poem ascribes to the produce the evil characteristics of the people. The region, before its destruction, was renowned for its splendid grapevines, but the beautiful, fruit-laden vines turned sour. Gen 13:10, then, with its many double meanings, contains a number of messages for the reader. First, the technique of tawriyya leads the reader to believe that the usual meaning is the accepted one even though in reality it is not so. 35 In our own case, there was no question that the region was well watered. But the masoretic vocalization and the similes highlighted the concealed aspect of wine, and underscored, as Sinuhe once did, that "it had more wine than water." Literally, then, the Jordan Plain was overflowing with wine and water, and figuratively, like the Egyptian phrase, it connoted a lush and fertile region. Further, the duality signifies two stages in Lot's life, his retrospective and prospective aspirations. Lot, the nomadic shepherd, the owner of flocks of sheep, looked and saw the whole plain of Jordan as thoroughly watered. Looking to the future, Lot, the settler, gazed and saw the whole plain of Jordan as full of wine. Since it must have had both, it approximated God's own garden or the richness of the land of Egypt. Moreover, the linguistic method complements the narrative style that embodies more than one level of meaning. Beyond the simple story there is a di34

35

Buber, S. ed. n.d. The Earfy Midrash Tanhuma. Jerusalem: Eshkol, Parashat Vyr\ 19:5 (Hebr.), describes how the destroyed district of Sodom, especially the vineyards, will flourish in this area again. I would like to thank Zvi Malachi for this source. Nearly every composidon in Arabic rhetoric discusses the tauriyya, a word derived from the verbial noun warra, perceived as concealing. For example, the Koran in Sura 55:4:

The sun and moon run according to the rule, and the herbs and trees adore him. Najm has two meanings, "star" and "herb." Kumar, the moon, draws the former, while shajar, the tree, andcipates the latter. It is left to the listener to choose the proper sense. See also The Hoiy Qur'an, Muhammad Ali ed. 1973. Lahore: Ahmadiyyah Anjuman Isha'at Islam, 1014 n.2406.

dactic purpose in which the aggrandizement of Lot's portion plays a role. Abraham magnanimously left the choice of lands to his nephew. Lot did not defer to his elder. He was delighted to take advantage of the fortuitous opportunity and unhesitatingly selected what appeared to the human eye the finest portion, expecting great wealth. But his choice, with all its magnificent potential, did not guarantee riches because, the Bible teaches, it is God who determines success or failure. Lot may have selected superlative portion, but he also acquired the worst neighbors and ultimately his paradise became a purgatory. Abraham, on the other hand, remained with the less attractive portion, but since he put his trust in God, he was blessed wherever he went. And so, the seemingly dispensable comment, "before God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah," is no longer superfluous. It adumbrates the coming upheaval and the ironic twist of life. How was Lot to guess what future lay in store for the land blessed with bountiful water and wine?

J E R E M I A H ' S C O N C E P T OF C0VENANTAL RELATIONSHIP RABBI ALBERT PLOTKIN Arizona, U S A

Jeremiah had a deep and abiding love for his people. This love was the fulfillment of the love which God had for his people when he chose them to be a Covenant people. These were a people that had a special prerogatives and, because of these prerogatives, also had special responsibilities. Jeremiah never forgot that the Covenant, which God made with Israel, was structured on an historic basis. The Hebrew word for the idea of Covenant is the word Brit, which denotes primarily faithfulness to an obligation imposed by the Covenant. It was this obligation which Jeremiah insisted was the very basis of the relationship between God and Israel. Jeremiah understood the term Covenant to be identified with the Hebrew word chesed, a very rich word meaning faithfulness to obligations imposed by the Covenant. The term chesed may be used either of God or of the people: "I remember the devotion of your youth." In light of Jeremiah's belief in the Covenant and in chesed, we must learn to understand that the two were the foundation stones of his ideas. He believed that Israel had to be loyal to its Covenant. This could only be achieved through chesed, in which the love that God had for Israel and the love that Israel had for God would be fulfilled through their Covenant relationship and which was important in terms of Israel's future. Jeremiah also employed God's falling in love with his people for he was loyal in his love to his people. The people went after other lovers and made sacrifices to other gods. Jeremiah, nevertheless, felt that love was the very foundation stone for the idea of Covenant. God alone was Divine, Husband and Protector, and Israel was exclusively his. In the beginning, Israel was only with her God and the depths of her vows, as marriage vows, of loyalty, were expressed through chesed and through ahava, love. These two words were integral to Covenant as Jeremiah lived and understood it. He felt that the marriage took place in Israel's history. The prophet recalls the event as a solemn reminder of the word %ochor, memory, and the marriage vows as the most important factor in renewing the value of Covenant. Another figure is the metaphor of a journey: "How you followed me in the wilderness in a land not sown." The Covenant sign of the journey is like a beautiful honeymoon as Israel, the faithful bride, went through the Red Sea and wandered in the desert. There was in the desert, for Jeremiah's consciousness,

an ideal stage in which the people were steadfast and true to their God and to the Covenant. It was only when they entered into the land of Canaan that Israel became corrupt with the immoral practices of paganism. The desert, therefore, became a symbol of the Covenant's purity and one in which the Covenant itself must be reaffirmed again by the desert experience. Jeremiah understands the relationship between God and Israel by the term kadosh, holy, which has its root in the idea of being set apart and that is the meaning in the words: "Israel was holy to the Lord, the first fruit of his harvest." Jeremiah's description of Israel as being kadosh designates the fact that the first fruits were holy to God and could not be put to profane use. They were indeed very special and very sacred. Every Israelite in Jeremiah's time knew that a portion of the first fruits of the harvest were set aside as consecrated to the God of their father's. N o one was permitted to eat of this harvest except the Priests. Israel's early days showed great promise for God had chosen his people as his first fruits and the great harvest was to be in the making and fulfill itself into a beautiful way of life. Jeremiah held to the fact that in the desert the people truly came to know their God. There in the desert was another event, which solidified the Covenant. For out of nothing blossomed forth a rich harvest of Israel's first fruits. God would not allow anyone to interfere with his people for the Covenant was the fulfilled. As long as Israel was loyal to her God, God was loyal to his people. Kind and compassionate in all His ways, the God of Israel chooses to bind his people in a Covenant and in a reciprocal relationship of rights and obligâtions with Himself. God will, if their deeds disturb the Covenant, plead with them and go to all lengths to restore the People of Israel to their loyalty. He will protect them from all their enemies and make them realize that in their faithfulness to his Covenant, their enemies cannot overtake them: "All who would destroy him would be held guilty, punishment would come to them, saith the Lord." Jeremiah was no doubt influenced by the Deuteronomic reforms. Yet there is a difference between the Deuteronomic Code and the words which Jeremiah spoke. In his calling to his people, Jeremiah was primarily concerned with an event which the people had taken on upon themselves in loyalty and in love of their God. The Code of Deuteronomy used the word shamor which means to observe while Jeremiah used the words shema, to hear. Jeremiah admonished his people to listen to the words of the Covenant: "Hear you the words of the Covenant and speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem." For Jeremiah, the Covenant implied that Israel belongs to God and God belongs to his people and the relationship is maintained through obedience to the will of the God of their fathers. And thus Israel will always be interpreted in terms of the Covenant relationship. Those, however, who fail to observe the Covenant will be cursed: "Cursed be the man who does not heed to the words of this Covenant which I commanded your fathers when I brought them out of the land of Egypt. Listen to my voice and to all that I command you, so shall you be my People and I will be your God, that I may perform the oath which I

JEREMIAH'S CONCEPT OF COVENANTAL RELATIONSHIP

175

swore to your fathers, to give them a land flowing with milk and honey at this day." Here the prophet goes back to Mt. Sinai, the holy moment in the shaping of Israel. The Lord has established his Covenant with his People and it could be broken if the People failed to adhere to the Covenant. God revealed to Jeremiah, in great detail, how he was to proceed. He was to go to all the cides of Judah and to the open places in Jerusalem and proclaim to all who would listen to him the requirements which the Covenant laid upon them. The fathers of present Judea had failed to heed God's voice, even though clearly and often God, through his spokesmen, had called them to obedience. Everyone had stubbornly held to his own ways regardless of God's will. Thus the prophet saw an inevitable doom that would fall upon his people. Jeremiah held out the promise that the people could repent and return. Jeremiah was aware that the difficulties of his people centered in a disrupted Covenant relationship which brought about a spiritual condition likened to a sickness. This sickness had destroyed truth and knowledge. This "is a nation that did not obey the voice of the Lord then God did not accept the discipline, the truth has perished; it is cut off from their lips." For Jeremiah ignorance was not entirely due to the lack of facts but to a faulty reasoning power. Ignorance was the people's inability to see the inadequacy of their objects of trust. They failed to grasp the incongruity between their fundamental spiritual needs and their organization of all means and ends which support these needs and carried the seeds of destruction. Jeremiah saw it as his mission to bring the people back to the Covenant relationship which is the foundation of Israel's hope and faith. He never gave up his determination to reestablish that Covenant. He pursued this hope throughout his whole life. The remarkable part of Jeremiah's concept of the Covenant was that he rephrased it in terms of a new Covenant. By a new Covenant, he meant a new relationship and we now have to understand the conditions by which that relationship existed. We know from explicit statements that this new Covenant which was to be established was not to be written on stone but it was to be written on the inward parts of their hearts. The old Covenant was gone, but the new Covenant, which was specifically written in chapter 31 of Jeremiah, sees a new hope for the future. "Behold, the day is come," saith the Lord, "I will make a new Covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah, not according to the Covenant I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt for as much as they broke my Covenant although I was the Lord over them," saith the Lord. In this new Covenant Jeremiah saw a reestablishment of the relationship between God and his People. He saw further that the new Covenant would be the basis of a new return. The promise of the forgiveness of sin, and the knowledge of God was to give each human being a new incentive to obey His laws. Thus, in many ways, the new Covenant implied a relationship based upon inwardness: "For I will put my law in their inward parts." Second, the new Covenant implied universalism: "All of them shall know me." Third, the new Covenant implied the forgiveness of sins: "Their sins I will remember no more."

The central truths of the new Covenant are the inwardness of a true religion and the spiritual illumination of the individual mind and conscience in doing the will of God from the spontaneous impulse of a renewed heart. These became the distinctive features of the new Covenant, Jeremiah's ideals brought to the religious world. It was a unique concept which revolutionized Israel's thinking. The new Covenant was gave hope for the rebuilding a future that was not completely lost. This concept of the inward renewal is always evident in Jeremiah's call to his people, especially to the hope of the return and the rebuilding of its future. Jeremiah's concept of the Covenant was always primary to his religious thinking. He struggled with the people throughout his career to reestablish the Covenant. He always believed in the hope and the vision of an ideal community which would be restored and would be purified. In this idea he had a profound influence, not only upon Jewish thinking, but also upon Christian thinking. Many early Church fathers saw in the suffering and persecution of Jeremiah a forerunner of the tragedy and the crucifixion of Jesus. Thus, Jeremiah has played a very important role in the spiritual life of both Judaism and Christianity. In this Jeremiah was most unique, and he is always understood and remembered for the lasting contribution he made to religious and spiritual thinking.

M E D I E V A L O R I E N T A L EXEGESIS ON T H E CHARACTER OF JACOB IN H O S E A 12 MEIRA POLLIACK T e l - A v i v University, Israel

Introduction The figure of Jacob as portrayed in Hosea 12 forms an interesting touchstone for the study of typological approaches in biblical exegesis. This is due to Jacob's complex literary character, which inspired inner-biblical contemplation, and to his early and symbolic identification with the collective figure of the nation of Israel. This identification influenced the Jewish Sages and Church Fathers, as well as the medieval commentators of both traditions. This article is mainly concerned with the typological approach developed by the medieval Jewish commentators who lived in Muslim lands, between the 10th and 12th centuries, both Karaite and Rabbanite. Despite their individual differences, they shared in the intellectual horizons of Arabic culture, applying linguistic, philosophical and poetic argumentation in their scriptural works. Even when they or their families left Muslim Spain for Christian Europe, and adopted Hebrew in place of Arabic (i.e., Abraham Ibn Ezra, David Kimhi), these commentators still belonged to the wider stream of what may be deemed "oriental" Jewish exegesis; a generalizing term which will serve for the purpose of the following discussion.1 The oriental exegetes developed a linguistic-contextual approach to the biblical text (traditionally known as the peshat method), which was clearly distinguished from the non-contextual approach of Rabbinic Sages (the der ash method), on three basic levels of the discussion of Scripture, including those of language, literature and history: 1) Biblical Hebrew was generally explained as a manifestation of universal language, and the Sages' insistence on its Godly essence was abandoned, at least on the practical level. Lexical and grammatical theories were consequendy applied to the comparative study of biblical Hebrew, alongside Aramaic and Ara-

For general background on the medieval Jewish commentators of the Eastern (Palestine, Iraq, Yemen) and Spanish (Andalucia) schools, which are generally designated here as oriental in emphasizing the Judaeo-Arabic connection between them, see Greenberg, M. ed. 1983. jernsh Bible Exegesis, An Introduction. (Hebr.) Jerusalem, 15-68; Sàenz-Badillos, A. and Targarona Borrâs, J. 1997. Los judios de Sefarad y la Biblia. Exegesis hebrea medievaL Cordoba: El Almendro, 11-114, 1 3 7 196. For specific discussions on their interpretive methods see Polliack, M. 1997. The Karaite Tradition of Arabic Bible Translation. Leiden: Brill, 23-90; Cohen, M. 1995-96. '"The Best of Poetry'...: Literary Approaches to the Bible in the Spanish Peshat Tradition." The Torah u-Madda 6, 15-57. The oriental exegetes whose known works on Hosea or Genesis were surveyed for the purpose of this study include: Daniel al-Qumisi, Saadiah Gaon, Yefet ben 'Eli, Judah Ibn Bal'am, Abraham Ibn Ezra, David Kimhi, Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi (for specific editions see following).

bic, as a human device, based on an agreed set of conventions. These had to be mastered in order to reach a proper understanding of the biblical text and analyze it as a cohesive unit. 2) The Hebrew Bible was discussed, for the first time in Jewish hermeneutics, as the product of literary conventions. Its unique structures and genres were studied classified, including the rhetorical devices typical of them. 3) A growing historical consciousness concerning the social and material differences between the biblical period and the reality of medieval times, enabled these exegetes to distance and separate themselves from the biblical text, and to criticize the midrashic tendency to blur between the world of the exegete and the world of Scripture. In this novel and complex exegetical consciousness lies the contribution of the oriental exegetes to the development of Jewish Bible interpretation. Here it is mentioned by way of introduction to the discussion of selected passages from their commentaries on Hosea 12, 4—5 and 13-14, which are occasionally compared with modem commentaries in order to highlight general interpretive trends. In principle, both modem and medieval commentators accept that in Hosea's prophecy Jacob is described by a typological method of inner-biblical exegesis, meaning, a method which relates to certain biblical characters or events as archetypes of characters or events which are conceived of as operating in a later time zone. 2 Both groups of exegetes rely on linguistic and literary forms of analysis in reconstructing the background to Hosea's ambiguous allusions. These are usually traced to parallel words and expressions in the Jacob cycle (Gen 25—36), such as the aetiology of the name ‫ יעקב‬as deriving from ‫( עקב‬cf. Gen 25:23—26, 27:36; Hos 12:4), the verbal chain ‫ ויוכל‬... ‫( וישר‬cf. Gen 32:29 and Hos 12:4-5), the idiomatic phrase ‫( ע ב ד ב‬cf. Gen 29;18, 31:41; Hos 12:12), and the expressions ‫ שמר‬,‫ ארם‬,‫ ברח‬in their respective contexts (Gen 27:43, 28:5, 30:31 and Hos 12:13-14). On this basis, the oriental exegetes generally contend that Hosea creates a contrastive typology between Jacob and the people of Israel. While he views the Patriarch as a positive figure, his descendants—Israel of his own period—are depicted as unworthy of their ancestor's faith and endurance. Hosea's rhetorical aim is to rebuke his listeners, while holding up Jacob as a model for religious transformation, return and hope in God. In this context, it is best to apply M. Fishbane's definition o f typology in biblical Interprétation in Ancient Israel Oxford, 1988, 351, as consdtudng "a literary-historical phenomenon which isolates perceived correlations between specific events, persons, or places early in time with their later correspondents." Also cf. his discussion o f Hosea 12, under the category o f biographical typology (376-379). The typology in which Jacob symbolized the people of Israel and Esau symbolized their historical archenemy ( = E d o m , Rome or Christianity), was continued into post-biblical literature (Qumramc, Rabbinic, Intertestamental and further), see Cohen, G. 1967. "Esau as a Symbol in Early medieval Thought." In Jewish Medieval and Renaissance Studies. Ed. A. Altman. Cambridge, Mass., 19-48. The oriental exegetes, w h o were less apt to blur the gap between their world and that of Scripture, usually restricted the role o f typology to the hermeneutic sphere, emphasizing its rhetorical function, and did not apply it as a creative midrashic tool.

Modern commentators generally contend that the passages in Hos 12 create a straight-forward typology, analogous in nature, between Jacob's negadve attributes and failings and those of his descendants. Their rhetorical aim is to highlight an inescapable and inherited feature in Israel's nature, that of self-willingness and distrust in God, which shall ultimately bring the Israelite Kingdom to its downfall, unless it reforms and turns to the Lord as the only source for its well-being. 3 The apparent explanation for this dichotomy lies in the apologedc motivation of the medieval Jewish exegetes who did not wish to tarnish Jacob's figure in the name of the prophet, but could live, presumably, with an explanation which defends his figure and criticizes his descendants. This explanation has more relevance to the stance of Jewish exegetes who were aware of Jacob's role in anti-Jewish Christian polemic, such as Rashi (b. 1040, Troyes), than those who lived in Muslim lands or came from them. In their commentaries, the tendency to defend Jacob's dubious character is relatively mild, and sometimes lacking altogether. David Kimhi, for instance, criticizes Jacob in harsh terms in his commentary on Gen 27:35-36: "Is he not rightly named Jacob? For he has supplanted me these two timer. " In the name Jacob there are two meanings: heel and deceit (compare Jer 17:10, 9:3), and they were both in him. Supplanted me twice. Took away my birthright for a pottage of lentils when he found me hungry, and there is no deceit worse than this ( = ‫ )ואין ל ך מ ר מ ה ג ד ו ל ה מ ז א ת‬and now he has also taken away my blessing.4 The positive aspects that the oriental commentators uncover in Hosea's allusions should therefore be sought in their literary understanding of chapter 12, no less than in an apologetic stance. Let us delve therefore into some of their comments, while relying on the distinction drawn earlier between contrastive and analogous typlogy. Hos 12:3-5 ‫ ב ב ט ן ע ק ב את א ח י ו ובאונו‬:‫וריב לה׳ עם י ה ו ד ה ו ל פ ק ד ע ל יעקב כדרכיו כ מ ע ל ל י ו ישיב לו‬ ‫ וישר אל מ ל א ך ויכל בכה ויתחנן לו בית אל י מ צ א נ ו ושם ידבר ע מ נ ו‬: ‫שרה את א ל ה י ם‬. (RSV: The Lord has an indictment against Judah, and « ‫ ש‬punish Jacob according to his ways, and requite him according to his deeds. In the womb he took his brother by the heel, and in his manhood he strove with God. He strove with the angel and prevailed, he wept and sought his favor, he met God at Bethel, and there God spoke with him.)

Major modern arucles and commentaries reflecting this view include: U. Cassuto, "The prophet Hosea and the Books of the Pentateuch." (first published in Italy, 1933) biblical and Canaanite Literatures. I, (Hebr.) Jerusalem 1983, 118-134; Ginsberg, H. L. 1961. "Hosea's Ephraim, More Fool than Knave." JBL 80, 339-347; Mays, J. L. 1969. Hosea. London; Wolff, H. W. 1978. Hosea (translated from German by G. Stansell), Philadelphia; Andersen, F. I. and Freedman, D. Ν 1980. Hosea. New-York; McKenzie, S. L. 1986. "The Jacob Tradidon in Hosea XII." VF 36, 311-322; Davies, G. I. 1992. Hosea. Michigan. See Kimhi's commentary in Mikra'ot Gedolot. In the same vein, Abraham Ibn Ezra openly comments on the negadve allusion to Jacob in Jeremiah 9:3-5.

The interpretation of this passage hinges on the connection between verses 3 and 4. Most modern scholars interpret the words "in the womb he took his brother by the heel" in the light of the earlier verse "punish Jacob according to his ways", as a negauve allusion to Jacob. The medieval commentators disconnect verse 3 from the biographical sketch, in order to disqualify the possibility that the prophet is openly condemning the Patriarch. Nevertheless, this interpretadon may has a contextual sense provided Hosea's allusion to what happened in the womb (12:4) is understood to agree with the birth tradidon preserved in Gen 25:19-26. There it is related that Rebecca sought an oracle about the sons who "ran around" or "struggled" in her womb (Gen 25:22: ‫ ויתרצצו הבנים בקרבה‬and cf. vss. 23-24). The oracle's conclusion concerning the compeddve relationship between the twins is captured in the image of Jacob emerging second from the womb, his hand holding his brother's heel (Gen 25:26: ‫וידו אחזת בעקב עשיו‬ ‫)ויקרא ש מ ו יעקב‬. The aetiological explanation of Jacob's name is uncharged, and their is no moral voice in the story itself concerning the unworthiness of Jacob's act. The oriental commentators do not question the authenticity or editorial layers of the birth narrative, as do modern critics. Within the boundaries of their religious faith, they try to interpret Hosea's allusion as consistent with the symbolic imagery of the narrative. The Arabic translation of the Karaite exegete of Jerusalem, Yefet ben 'Eli (late 10th century), reflects two interpretive possibilities concerning this allusion: "in the womb he deceived his brother, and some say, he seized his heel". 5 Yefet's commentary, however, develops the second possibility, and reflects the argumentation typical of other oriental exegetes to this verse:6 5

6

‫ פי א ל ב ט ן ג׳רבז מ ע אכ׳יה וקיל אכ׳ד׳ ב ע ק ב אכ׳יה‬For the Judaeo-Arabie text see Brinbaum, Ph. 1942. The Arabic Commentary of Yefet ben Ali the Karaite on the Book of Hosea. Philadelphia, 184—185. The English translation and highlighted sections of the translation and commentary (see below) are my own. In his alternative commentary to Hosea, Abraham Ibn Ezra interprets this verse as an allusion to the stealing o f the blessing (Gen 27:36), which suggests a negative stance on the part of Hosea. In his c o m m o n commentary, however, Ibn Ezra holds the normative view, see Simon, U. 1989. Abraham Ibn Elba's Two Commentaries on the Minor Prophets, vol I; Hosea, Joel, Amos. (Hebr.) Ramat-Gan, 114, 287. T o my knowledge, the first Jewish exegete w h o openly interprets Hosea's allusion to Jacob as negative and ironical is D o n Isaac Abravanel (b. Lisbon 1437), w h o belongs to the pre-modern Renaissance tradition of biblical criticism (see Venice edition, reprinted in Tel-Aviv, 1 9 6 0 , 5 9 ) : ‫״ ו א מ ר הנביא כ מ ה ת ל ) ־ ב א י ר ו נ י ה ( שאולי ח ש ב ו בזה בני אפרים ל ה ד מ ו ת‬ ‫ כי הנה יעקב ב ב ט ן ע ק ב א ת א ח י ו ובאונו שרה א ת אלקים ב ה א ב ק ו‬. . . ‫ שרמז ל י ע ק ב א ב י נ ו‬... ‫ל י ע ק ב א ב י ה ם‬ ‫עם ה מ ל א ך ו א ת ם ל ל כ ת בדרכיו עשיתם גם כן ריב ו מ ל ח מ ה עם א ח י כ ם בני יהודה כ מ ו שהוא ע ק ב א ת א ח י ו‬ ‫׳׳‬.‫ועשיתם גם כן מ ל ח מ ה לה׳ ו א ת ם רוצים ל נ צ ח ו כ מ ו שיעקב אביכם שרה א ת אלקים‬ See Birnbaum ed., 184—185. Cf. the commentary by the Karaite Daniel al-Qumisi (late 9 th century): "And they did not remember in their hearts the covenant of Jacob their father w h o ‫ע ק ב‬ which means, who was wise with his brother in the womb in order to become a sign for those who fear God'... ‫ ו ב א ו נ ו‬in his strength . to become a sign for the righteous that they are worthier than angels in the eyes o f God", (see Markon, I .D. 1957. Pitron shneym 'asar. Jerusalem, 20; the English translation is my own); see also Saadiah Gaon's commentary on Genesis 25:26: "This (the holding of the heel) is without doubt a sign and miracle, and due to this they named him Jacob... the wonder o f a baby holding his brother's heel is a symbol (‫ )מתיל‬that eventually Jacob will have victory ..." (Zucker, M. 1984. Saadiah's Commentary on Genesis. New-York, 426; the English translation is my own).

His words ‫ ב ב ט ן ע ק ב‬are likely to allude to ‫ =( ו י ת ר ו צ צ ו ה ב נ י ם ב ק ר ב ה‬and the children struggled together within her, Gen 25:22), and Jacob overcame his brother while they were still in the womb.

It is also possible that they allude to the moment they emerged from the womb, in which Jacob came forth holding Esau's heel, as it is said ‫=( וידו אחזת בעקב עשיו‬and his hand had taken hold of Esau's heel, Gen 25:26), and this is a great sign demonstrating that the Lord, blessed and exalted, will give strength (in due time) to Jacob over Esau. And his

words ‫ ובאונו שרה את אלהים‬allude to his struggle with the angel, as it is said ‫ויאבק איש‬ ‫( עמו‬Gen 32:25), the word ‫ ובאונו‬meaning in the strength God gave him so that he could fight and overcome an angel. Truly, Jacob was a giant (‫ )ג׳באר‬in his strength, as we know according ... to the time when he rolled the stone off the well ... He (the prophet) mentioned these two verses (4—5) in this place for a special reason, for when he witnessed Israel's treachery in turning to Egypt and Assyria for help, be remonstrated with them: Woe you obstinate people! Who compelled you to make a treaty with Assyria and send gifts to Egypt and not to

trust in me, as it is said "and they did not look upon the Holy One of Israel (Is 31:1), for I am the one who gave strength to your father (Jacob) when he was still in the womb until he overcame his brother, I am the one who gave him strength to overpower angels, for he trusted in me. Your way should bave been to appreciate this grace and to trust and depend on me, and I would

have protected you from the hardships of your enemies and made you greater than them and made your hand reach over them (=‫ )אחז בעקב‬for I am capable of all this. Four basic features emerge from Yefet's analysis of this passage: a) The expression: ‫ ב ב ט ן ע ק ב את א ח י ו‬is explained as an allusion to the symbolic or miraculous nature of the birth story in Gen 25. b) The background to the allusion is reconstructed according to a detailed literary and linguistic comparison between both texts, including parallel words and roots. c) The remainder of the passage (verses 4-5) is analyzed consistently as alhiding to other stories within the Genesis cycle (25—33). d) O n this basis it is concluded that the prophet creates a contrastive typology between the Patriarch and the Israelites of his time. Most modern critics contend that Hosea deliberately satirized the popular and heroic birth tradition, or gave voice to a different version of this tradition, by presenting Jacob's underhandedness as already latent in the womb. This feature of his character was eventually to become apparent in the selling of the birthright (Gen 25:27-34) and the steeling of the blessing (chapter 27). These critics emphasize, nonetheless, that the birth story preserved in Gen 25 has no critical impetus concerning Jacob (unlike the latter two episodes). Irony is the key to their interpretations of the first stitch of vs. 5 (‫ובאונו שרה את‬ ‫)אלהים בכה ויתחנן לו‬, as an allusion to the story of Jacob's struggle at Jabbok (Gen 33:25-33). The striving with G o d reflects Jacob's arrogance which derived from his physical power or youth (,on), material wealth (reading hon instead of 'on) or moral corruption (reading 'aven). Accordingly, the crying (‫)בכה ויתחנן לו‬, which has no clear parallel in the Genesis account, refers to Jacob as a sobbing contender, begging for the blessing, rather than a hero putting up a fight with celestial forces and overcoming them. 7 7

For these interpretations see, for instance, Andersen and Freedman, 593, 607; Davies, 273; Mayes, 161; Wolff, 206, 212 (full details in note 3). For a different view see Holladay, W. L.

The opacity of the Jahbok episode inspired much debate by Jewish exegetes over the ages, as already noted by the Sages (Genesis Kabbah 77,3): ‫אין אנו יודעים‬ ‫ אם י ע ק ב‬, ‫ —( מ י נ צ ח אם מ ל א ך‬We do not know who won—whether the angel, or Jacob). T h e oriental commentators generally agree with Yefet in interpreting vs. 5 as a continuation of the positive allusion to Jacob's outstanding powers, awarded him by G o d due to his fatefulness. They attribute the crying to the man-angel who asked Jacob to be released before sunrise (Gen 32:27), as yet another indication of Jacob's moral and physical strength which eventually gained him the required blessing at Beth-El (cf. Gen 35:9). According to this contrastive typology the call for trust in God, not irony, is at the core of Hosea's message. The interpretations of verses 13-14 highlight a different aspect of the respective methodologies of medievalists and modernists, and further illustrate the literary consciousness of the oriental exegetes. Hosea 12:13-14 ‫ ובנביא ה ע ל ה ה׳ א ת י ש ד א ל‬: ‫ויברח י ע ק ב ש ד ה ארם ו י ע ב ד ישראל ב א ש ה ו ב א ש ה ש מ ר‬ . ‫מ מ צ ר י ם ובנביא נ ש מ ר‬ (RSV: Jacob fled to the land of Aram, there Israel did service for a wife, and for a wife he herded sheep. By a prophet the Lord brought Israel up from Egypt, and by a prophet he was preserved.) Consistent with their argumentation concerning verses 3 - 4 , most m o d e m scholars consider verse 13 as a negative allusion to Jacob, who is contrasted with Moses (vs. 14). T h e latter's impeccable moral character, as a messenger who serves G o d and his people, is highlighted against Jacob's self-serving tendencies. Moses is therefore Hosea's historical counterpart, a source of prophetic identification (cf. H o s 12:10-11, 15), whereas Jacob represents the nation who rejects the prophet's message. The reference to Jacob's servitude for a wife (Hos 12:13) is interpreted in this context as an ironic allusion to the stories of Jacob in Laban's household (Gen 29—31). Accordingly, the prophet relates to Jacob's enslavement in order to wed Rachel and Leah as the result of sexual appetite and self-indulgence, drawing a parallel with the Israelites' attraction to fertility cults. 8 1966. "Chiasmus, the key to Hosea XII 3-6." VT 16, 61-60, w h o considers the words ‫ב כ ה‬ ‫ ויתחנן ל ו‬as alluding to the story Jacob's encounter with Esau (see Genesis 33). For a detailed comparative study of ancient Jewish and Christian interpretations to Genesis 32:22-33 see Müler, W. T. 1984. Mysterious Encounters at Mamre and Jabbok. Chico (California), 97-138, 1 5 3 155. For the view of the oriental commentators (further discussed below) see the remarks by Yefet (above), al-Qumisi and Saadiah (note 5 above), and cf. the commentaries of Abraham Ibn Ezra and David Kimhi.. It suffices to quote from W o l f f s commentary (p.216), which, in this respect, is representative o f the m o d e m trend (cf. Mays, 170; Davies, 282; Cassuto, 247): "Jacob's servitude "for a wife" is not for the purpose of demonstrating his love, as in Gen 29:20, nor to legitimate this manner o f "obtaining" a wife (cf. Josh 15:16, 1 Sam 17:25). N o r does it represent an eaily stage of the patriarch's (or) humility ... Instead ... Hosea emphasizes Jacob's deceit of his G o d .. by Jacob's slaving "for a wife", emphasized by virtue o f its repetition. H o w would this repetition accent a reprehensible act after v. 12 unless it alludes to the sex rites practiced in the cult? God's deed (through Moses) stands in strict antithetical parallelism to Jacob's reprehensible deed."

The analysis of vss. 13—14 as a contrastive typology between the prophet and Israel and their respective parental representatives in Israelite tradition is generally convincing. Yet the interpretation of vs. 13 seems highly forced, parti- cularly in the context of a patriarchal society, in which the establishment of a family through the servitude for a wife would not be considered a reproacha- ble act. In light of the deep symbolism Hosea himself attaches to the bond between husband and wife, it is unlikely that such a puritan message could lie behind his allusion to Jacob and his wives. The oriental exegetes understand verses 13—14 as enfolding a parallelism between the figures of Jacob and Moses: Jacob overcame all personal hardships in order to establish the family which would form the nucleus of the nation, while Moses guarded the descendants of that family on their way to freedom and the Promised Land. Both characters are thus analogous, to be contrasted with Israel of Hosea's time, who despite their impressive models chose to deny God's grace with them and anger him (see H o s 12:14: "Ephraim have given bitter provocation ..."). Yefet's commentary to these verses is generally representative of the onental school: 9 His words ‫ ויברח יעקב‬allude to the time of hisfleeingfromEsau, as his mother told him.‫־‬ ‫( קום לך אל לבן אחי חרנה‬Gen 27:43) and it is said. ‫( בברחך מפני עשו אחיך‬Gen 35:11)... and his words•. ‫ ויעבד ישראל באשה‬allude to the words ‫ויעבד יעקב ברחל שבע‬ ‫( שנים‬Gen 29:20) for whom he made a bond in marriage, as he said to Laban ‫( אעבדך ברחל בתך הקטנה‬Gen 29:18), and his saying ‫ ובאשה שמר‬points to Lea, for whom he worked another seven years ... ‫ שמר‬relates to his observance of the period (of seven years), as Laban told him: ‫ונתנה לך גם זאת בעבדה אשר‬ ‫( תעבד עמדי‬Gen 29:27), and Jacob observed this, as it is said: ‫ויעש יעקב כן‬ ‫( וימלא שבע זאת‬Gen 29:28). His words ‫ ובנביא העלה ה׳‬point to our master Moses, the man of God, blessed be his soul, who brought Israel out of Egypt, as it is said: ‫( ועתה לכה ואשלחך אל פרעה והוצא את עמי‬Ex 3:10). His words ‫ ובנביא נשמר‬also point to our master Moses, and the word ‫ נשמר‬suggests they were kept from the plagues of Egypt, as it is said later on: ‫והפליתי ביום ההוא את‬ ‫( ארץ גושן‬Ex 8:18). And he (-the prophet) mentioned in these two verses his (=God's) favours towards the fathers: that Jacob, may he rest in pcacc, fled to Laban when he had nothing, as it is said ‫( כי במקלי עברתי את הירדן הזה‬Gen 32:11) and had to enslave himself to Laban forfourteen years, and could not do anything and had no bride gift to pay 9

See Birnbaum ed. (note 4 above), 192-195. Cf. Daniel al—Qumisi (sec Markon ed., 22): ‫״ויברח‬ ‫ ולא זכרו החסרים אשר עשיתי עמם וגם עם אביהם כי בברוח יעקב מן עשו והוא במקלו ל ב ד ו ולא‬:‫יעקב‬ ‫יכול ל ק ח ת אשה כי אם יהיה ע ב ד ל ל ב ן עד שנתן בנותיו לו לאשה וישיבהו ]ה׳ אל ביתו[ בשני מ ח נ ו ת‬ ‫ ובארבעים ו ח מ ש שנים הוא ל ב ד ו היה לשבעים כ כ ת ו ב ״בשבעים נפש ירדו‬. . ‫ויצילהו מ ל ב ן וגם מן ע ש י ו‬ ‫_וגם על ידי‬:‫( ובמאתים וגם מ ע ט שנים היו ל ר ב ב ו ת ככוכבי השמים ובנביא‬22 ‫אבותיך מ צ ר י מ ה ״ ) ד ב ר י ם י‬ ‫משה העלה אתם״‬. and the commentary attributed to Saadiah Gaon (see Ratzaby, Y. 1986. Sinai 98, 104-105: ‫ כ״ט‬0‫( לאחר אמרו ״אעבדך שבע שנים ברחל״ >ש‬20 ‫זה ששנה הכתוב ״ויעבד יעקב ברחל״)בר כ״ט‬ ‫ כאמרו‬,‫ כי כשנצרך עבד‬.‫( היא ת ו ס פ ת ל ש ם זהירות ולימדנו בזה השתדלותו בנישואין ושמירת דתו בו‬18 ‫ על פי‬,‫ והכוונה שמר צאן לבן‬- ‫ ( וכמו שאמר ״ובאשה שמר״‬13 ‫שם ״ויעבד ישראל באשה״ )הושע י״ב‬ ‫״‬.(31 ‫ הכתוב "ארעה צאנך אשמר״ )בראשית ל‬and cf. the similar stance in the commentaries of Abraham Ibn Ezra, Simon ed., 120, 289 and Tanhum ha-Yerushalmi (d. 1291, Palestine) in H. Shay's edition (Jerusalem, 1991), 44. For a detailed comparative study of common motifs to the characters of Jacob and Moses see Hendel, R. S. 1987. "Patterns of the Hero in Early Israel: Jacob and Moses." The Epic of the Patriarch, The Jacob Cycle and the Narrative Traditions of Canaan and IsraeL Atlanta, Georgia, 138-165.

him. Later he describes hou! they (—Jacob's descendants), when they went down to Egypt were overpowered and enslaved by the Egyptians, and they had no way of releasing themselves until the Almighty sent Moses, may he rest in peace, and he saved them. He (=the prophet) said to Ephraim: remember jour fathers' conditions and how I helped them and acknowledge this, as he (—God) commanded them to rente in this matteryear after year : ‫( וענית ואמרת לפני יוי אלהיך ארמי אבד אבי‬-"Andyou shall make a response before the Lord your God: Ά wandering Aramean was my father ) and he went down into Egypt and sojourned there, few in number; and there he became a nation, great, mighty and populous' " (Deut 26:5), and this is similar to his (Hosea's) saying here ‫ ובנביא העלה יוי את ישראל‬and he added •*ν ‫ ובנביא העלה‬to ‫ ויברח יעקב‬because it is comparable/parallel to it in meaning (‫)ישאכלה פי אלמעאני‬, that is, similarly to Jacob's servitude to Laban, Israel served Egypt and were their slaves, and as the Almighty brought Jacob out of Haran with much property, so he brought Israel out of Egypt, as it is said ‫( ויוציאם בכסף וזהב‬Psalm 105:37), and saved them from the hands of Pharaoh when he chased after them just as he saved Jacob from the hands of Laban when he chased after him... Three basic features emerge from Yefet's analysis of this passage: a) T h e endurance and development of the contrastive typology between Jacob and the nation of Israel identified in verses 4-5. b) The detailed linguistic and literary comparison between Hosea's wording and that of the Genesis tales. c) The additional proof concerning the prophet's analogy between Jacob and Moses is cited from the thanksgiving prayer of the bearer of first fruits (Deut 26:5-10). The 11 th century Rabbanite commentator, Judah ibn Bal'am , native of the city of Toledo, also cites the thanksgiving prayer as a comparative source in his linguistic commentary on Hosea: 10 ‫ ויברח יעקב שדה ארם‬describes the most poor amongst our fathers ... who served for a woman several years. Then he describes the matter of his (immediate) descendants who respected the prophets who saved them, as their mission, from Egypt. The Torah alludes to this (comparison) in parashat bikkurim (the pericope on the new fruits, Deut 26:5):‫וענית ואמרת לפני י״י אלהיך ארמי אבד אבי וירד‬ ‫מצרימה‬...the (subject) described by ‫ אבד‬is Jacob, about whom it is told that he was a poor wandering Aramean, in the sense that his beginning is that of weakness in Aram Naharayim, and similar to this sense we find. ‫( צאן אבדות היו עמי‬Jer 50:6) and ‫תעיתי כשה‬ ‫( אבד‬Ps 119:176). In these and other works of the oriental school Hosea's allusion to Jacob's establishment of a family serves as further proof of his faithfulness in fulfilling God's wish. This interpretation relies on the Genesis portrayal of Jacob's travails in the house of Laban, as a "corrective" experience, through which he leams the meaning of belief in God; Jacob thus plays out his part in a Divine plan whose outcome is unknown to him, to be followed by Moses, also a character in the grips of struggle and uncertainty.

10

See Poznanski, S. 1924/5. "The Arabic Commentary of Abu Zakariya Yahya (Judah ben Samuel) Ibn Bal'am on the Twelve Minor Prophets." JQR 15, 22. The English translation and highlighted sections are my own.

Both Yefet and Ibn Bal'am reflect are aware of the wider typology which influenced the fashioning of the Patriarchal and Exodus narradves according to the structural principle of ‫ =( מ ע ש ה אבות סימן לבנים‬the deeds of the fathers are a sign, i.e. pattern, for the children); an exegedcal rule formulated by Nahmanides in the 12th century, but conceptualized much earlier in Jewish exegesis.11 Accordingly, Jacob's servitude and fleeing from the house of Laban are but a precursor to Israel's sojourn in Egypt, the house of bondage, and their fleeing from it. Yefet and Ibn Bal'am interpret vss. 13-14 as forming a gradation between the missions of Jacob and Moses, which not echoes the Genesis and Exodus accounts, but also the thanksgiving liturgy preserved in Deuteronomy. The typology which unites these figures is engrained therefore in the long-standing tradidons which fed into the historical consciousness of the ancient Israelites. The identification of Jacob with the lost Aramean father enables Ibn Bal'am to go a step further by completing an elliptic element in vss. 13-14, that of the lost sheep, which functions as the hidden metaphor underlying the analogy between Moses and Jacob. On the literal level: both Jacob and Moses were shepherds. On the metaphorical level, they experienced loss of direction in various periods of their lives, and their flock were the twelve sons-tribes of Israel. The lost sheep symbolizes Jacob's destitution in Aram and that of Moses and the Israelites in Egypt, and so forms the cutting edge of the contrastive typology directed at the prophet's audience: those who trust in their own power and might should remember the frailty of their forefathers and their dependency on God, the ultimate Shepherd, for their deliverance.12

Summary Both modern and medieval commentators agree that Hosea interpreted known texts or traditions on Jacob in a typological manner in order to point to a vital connection between Israel's collective past and its socio-political present. Their main differences lie in defining the nature and the aim of the typology, whether as negatively analogous to the people of Israel, or highlighting the contrast between their evil deeds and the pure faith of their forefathers. The modern critics seem more convincing in their comprehensive analysis of vss. 3-5, while vss. 13-14 find more scope in the medieval commentaries. In evaluating these interpretive options, the possibility that Hosea's wording was deliberately ambivalent should be borne in mind, particularly since he uses une11

12

On this dictum cf. Fishbane, M. Biblical Interpretation (note 2 above), 350; Funkenstein, A. 1980. "Nahmanides' Typological Exegesis." (Hebr.) Zion 45, 50. Interestingly, amongst modern commentators, P. Ackroyd ("Hosea and Jacob" VT 13 (1963), p.246), who generally acknowledges his debt to medieval Christian commentators, arrives at a similar conclusion: "... both the flight to Aram and the acquiring of a wife represent the establishing of hope for the descendants of Jacob ... This interpretation would mean that Hos. xii 13 provides a counter-part to that element in the confessiofedeias found in Deut. xxvi which runs: A wandering Aramaean was my father where 'obed would appear to carry the sense both of "roaming about" and of "going astray" ... die emphasis on divine protection and providence, ensuring the future of the people, is then continued in Hosea—as also in the confessiofidei—inthe description of the Exodus and wilderness events in terms of prophetic guidance ..."

quivocal historical allusions when chastising Israel elsewhere (see the mention of Gibeah in chapters 9:9, 10:10 and cf. Jud 19-21). This ambivalence may have originally served the prophet's intendons to ereate bewilderment and inner-search for meaning amongst his audience, or it may have resulted from later hands which were active in the prophecy's literary formation. In any event, interpretation thrives on this type of ambiguity, which enables the argumentation to flow in alternative directions, depending on the mentality and personal preferences of the commentator. Of those modem critics who appear to conceive of Hosea as a new historian, bent on burning sacred cows, it should be asked whether this image fitted the social role of the ancient Israelite prophet, or was he more interested in activating his listeners rather than leading them to anger and resignation? The oriental commentators would argue that Hosea lured his listeners by retelling them the beloved stories on their heroic ancestor, Jacob, and thus encouraged them to reflect on their own deteriorated behavior, and change it while there was still some hope. His rhetoric device was not irony, satire and shock, but the jilting of collective memory, a common enough technique in classical prophecy. According to Yefet, the prophet indeed saw Israel's forefathers, Jacob and Moses "as grapes in the desert". In his historical geo-political setting, wherein the Israelite Kingdom was seeking help from the Egyptian and Assyrian Empires in turn, he was compelled to remind the people of the past and point out its relevance to their present, thus lighting the way to change and hope. This is no less a contextual reading of Hos 12, since it considers the core of the inner-biblical typology to lie in the model of re-education offered by Jacob's personal journey from boyhood to manhood, as it is told in the Genesis cycle, and reflected in the thanksgiving liturgy of Deuteronomy. The contribution of the oriental exegetes, both Rabbanites and Karaites, to later trends in Spanish and Provencal Jewish exegesis has not been sufficiendy acknowledged by biblical scholars. The above excerpts focus our attention on the need to translate and analyze the Judaeo-Arabic sources of biblical exegesis as an important link in the development of the peshat tradition and the pre-modem understanding of the Bible as literature. Common to the modem and medieval approaches is the tendency to subject both clusters of verses (12:4-5, 13-14) to the same interpretive logic, probably as part of the consistent argumentation expected of all those trained in a measure of Greek philosophy, whether in the Graeco-Arab tradition or that of the modem period. N o doubt, both interpretive trends enrich our reading of these passages by uncovering their varied linguistic and literary traits. Nevertheless, the pre-conception demanding that the prophet or his writings be as consistent as his commentators is somewhat forced, considering Hosea's highly poetic, associative and illusive style. The insight gained from this overall comparison may lead to a combination of both interpretive viewpoints: vss. 4 - 5 may be satirizing Jacob, closer in their intention to the analogous typology identified by modern commentators, while

vss. 13—14 may be describing him admiringly, closer to the medieval sense, as part of a contrastive typology. It appears to me that only in looking through both prisms we may come to a closer view of the ancient split in Jacob's literary character (also apparent in the Genesis narratives), and to a deeper appreciation of Hosea's ambivalent attitude towards Jacob, as the forefather of the nation he may have wished, as prophet, both to salvage and condemn.

C 0 N C E P T 0 S A T RAVES DE LOS CUALES SE DESARROLLA LA HERMENEUTICA DEL T A R G U M DE E Z E Q U I E L JOSEP RIBERA-FLORIT Universidad de Barcelona, Spain El método derâs, asi como la hermenéudca del Targum en general, se aplica a menudo en funciôn del tema que se trata, ya que su objedvo principal es emplear determinados recursos lingiiisticos y literarios adaptados a los conceptos que se encuentran en el texto hebreo para clarificarlos y hacerlos comprensibles al lector u oyente. Ese principio se aplica igualmente al Targum de Ezequiel. Por eso prefiero enfocar la exposiciôn de los recursos derâsicos usados por el Targum de Ezequiel (Tg Ez) según los conceptos más significadvos, tanto para el texto masorético (TM) como para el Tg.

El concepto de Dios El nombre de Dios, cuando se halla en su doble forma "el Senor Yahweh" (Adonaj Yhwh), el Tg lo cambia por "Yahweh Dios" (YYY Elohim), a fin de evitar, según la lectura rabinica, una tautologia (Adonaj Adonaj) y asi el Tg lee "El Senor Dios" (Adonaj Elohim 11,13).' Para resaltar que Dios no es simplemente el Dios vivo sino el Dios existente, el ûnico que existe, el Tg susdtuye haj por qajjam (5,11).2 El espiritu de Dios toma el calificadvo de "santo" cuando su misiôn es ayudar a la observancia de la Torâ (36,27) y, en la época escatolôgica, su infusion en el pueblo de Israel es signo de la presencia benéfica de Dios (la Šēkinah 39,29). E n otras ocasiones, cuando el espiritu inspira al profeta el Tg lo califica c o m o "proférico" y no como "santo." 3 La ideologia misrica de la merkabà, "el carro de gloria," que surge desde la época posbiblica, inspira también en el Tg lecturas de Ez relacionadas con esta doctrina. Los seres de 1,19 parece que el Tg los idendfica con los àngeles cuando parafrasea el T M ("... y cuando los seres se elevaban del suelo, se elevaban las ruedas") de esta manera: "y cuando los seres se alzaban como desde la tierra haáa 10 alto de los cielos, se alzaban las ruedas," serian los querubines que, según 10,19, se 1

2

3

En estos casos el Tg mantiene el término hebreo Elohim "Dios" en lugar del arameo Elah. Este recurso podria considerarse como una especie de al tiqre "no leas," cf. Ribera, J. 1992. Traducciôn de! Targum de Jeremias. Estella (Navarra), 39, nota 124. Para otros casos en el Tg cf. Smolar, L.-Aberbach, P. 1983 Studies in Targum Jonathan to the Prophets. Nueva York, 130; Ribera, Targum Jeremias, 40. Sobre el uso de "espiritu santo" en el judaismo antiguo cf. Schäfer, P. 1972. Die Vorstellung vom Heiligen Geist in der rahbinischen Literatur. Munich; cf. también Ribera, J. 1988. El targum de Isaias. Valencia, 42-43.

sitúan debajo de la gloria del Sefior. En 43,2, que trata del retorno de la gloria del Senor al templo, el Tg lo describe insinuando como si se tratara de la gloria merkabiana que desde el trono celeste desciende y "se manifiesta" en el templo e ilumina el pais con su esplendor mientras se percibe "la voz de los que bendecian su nombre que era como el sonido de las aguas caudalosas," es decir: los coros angélicos que entonaban los himnos evocados en la literatura de la merkabâ.4 Dios cuando habla decide, por eso el Tg no duda en cambiar la frase dibbarti we 'ašiti ("lo he dicho y lo he hecho") por gelant be-memn we-'eqayyem ("He decidido por mi Palabra y lo he realizado" 17,24...). Una de las preocupaciones evidentes del targumista es precisar el concepto de la jusricia divina sobre todo cuando se trata de imponer una sentencia negadva; de ahi que cambie el término mišpat/mispatim por pur'anut y pur'anut dinin (25,22; 28,2.). También el verbo špt reftriéndose a la divinidad se interpréta como 'itpara' ("castigar, vengarse" 21,36). Pur'anut implica la jusricia vindicadva, es el castigo merecido que procédé de un juicio y sentencia justos e incluye un sentido de reivindicaciôn de los derechos divinos soslayados, normalmente refiriéndose a Israel (5,8; 21,35...) pero también a las naciones (39,21). Por otra parte, los juicios del Senor son, según el Tg, decisiones de su voluntad (44,24).5 En la ejecuciôn de la venganza divina la espada es el instrumento que Yahweh coloca en manos de las naciones para que, con su poder militar, haga estragos tanto a Israel (21,15.20) como a las naciones enemigas de su pueblo (Egipto 32,10). Segûn esta imagen guerrera de Yahweh, la espada se idendfica a veces con su poder (30,25). El casdgo divino por excelencia, conforme al criterio targùmico, es el desrierro; asi "desparramar, dispersar" significa "desterrar," y se aplica tanto a Israel como a las otras naciones (22,15; 30,23.26; 36,19).6 En cambio, la salvaciôn divina el Tg la explicita completando la frase "me vuelvo" con la siguiente "con mi Memrd para haceros el bien" (36,9). Respecto a los antropomorfismos se sabe que se suelen evitar, como sucede en todo el Tg de los pro fêtas; los miembros humanos se vuelven atributos divinos (la mano y el brazo son signos de poder, gëburah, en 25,7.4; el ojo se transforma en Memrd en 7,4; 20,17; el rostro se convierte en Presencia divina, Šèk1nah, en 39,23; la planta de los pies es la morada de la residencia de la Šêkinah en 43,7), las acciones humanas (mirar y conocer, venir, entrar) se endenden en senddo pasivo ("es manifiesto ante El" 23,13; 20,5; 43,2). De la expresiôn simbôlica "he alzado mi mano" el Tg capta perfectamente su senddo real traduciendo "he jurado por mi Memrd" (36,7). El verbo "Moraré" sugiere al Tg la idea de la presencia de la Šèkinab·. "haré posar mi Presencia entre vosotros" (37,27; 43,9). La expresiôn caracterisdca de Ez "y posô sobre mi la mano del Senor" se convierte en "se posô sobre mi elespirituproféticoprocedente del Senor" (40,1); la frase "Dios está alli" parece limitar la omnipresencia de Dios por lo que el Tg parafrasea: "Están patentes ante el Senor los pensamientos del corazôn" (35,10). 4

5 6

Cf. Ribera, J. 1993. "La ideologia de la Merkabâ en el judaismo andguo y en el targum de Ezequiel." En IV Simposio Biblico-Espanol. Granada, vol. I, 307-322. Sobre el pecado y el justo casdgo divino cf. Smolar-Aberbach, Targum Jonathan, 187-221. Sobre la teologia targúmica del exilio cf. Levine, E. 1988. The Aramaic Version of the Bible. Nueva York, 173-180; cf. también Smolar-Aberbach, Targum Jonathan, 201 ss.

En algunos casos hay afirmaciones que son objetivamente inmorales. En 18,29 Israel afirma según el TM: " N o es recto el proceder del Senor Yahweh," lo que el Tg midga en " N o son evidentes los caminos del Senor." Otro ejemplo lo hallamos en 20,25, donde se dice: "Yo les propuse también preceptos no buenos," tal afirmaciôn es totalmente opuesta a la moral divina, por ello el Tg cambia el sujeto de la oraciôn atribuyéndolo a Israel "... y ellos cumplieron preceptos injustos." Asimismo, el afirmar que Yahweh es la heredad de Israel (44,28) es algo sorprendente para el Tg, por lo que transforma la frase de la manera siguiente: "los dones que Yo les he dado son su posesiôn" (44,28). En contraposiciôn a nuestro criterio sobre los antropomorfismos o antropopadsmos el Tg no considéra antropomôrfico la pasiôn de la ira ("desato mi enojo" 5,8..."lanzo mi furor contra ti" 3,3; 16,20 son frases exclusivas del Tg). En cambio el Tg considéra que los celos son una pasiôn indigna de la divinidad y en su lugar prefiere el enojo (16,38) o la venganza (36,5).7

La imagen de Israel Para resaltar el senddo de comunidad de fe una formula caracterisdca del Tg, pero no exclusiva de éste, es la expresiôn "congregaciôn de Israel," que anade o cambia por otras expresiones (16,20 23,42...). Igualmente le parece más adecuado al Tg transformar a menudo "casa de Israel" en "pueblo de Israel" (12,2...). El pais de Israel es la tierra de la Presencia divina, la Sëkinah (36,5.20); El Tg identifica la tierra de Israel con el pais de los vivientes del TM (26,20) o le anade el determinativo "pais de la vida" (20,40). La obtenciôn de la nahalah, de la herencia, no se efectúa por suerte (napal "caer en suerte," 27,14) sino por el reparto (pelag) ya que el Tg no considéra demasiado justa la distribuciôn por la suerte. 8 En el conocido cap. 16 de Ez el Tg lee todo el proceso de elecciôn divina en clave de fidelidad o infidelidad a la Alianza y asi, al hablar de la sangre en que se revolcaba la recién nacida, el Tg alude explicitamente a la sangre de la circuncisiôn y del cordero pascual, los grandes signos de la Alianza sinaitica (16,6).9

Personajes representativos de Israel. Uno de los más representativos es Abraham, que el Tg convierte de "solo" en "ùnico" (Jehad pasa ajëhida'j, 33,24), término que en la ideologia judia significa el escogido por excelencia.10 Otros personajes biblicos y extrabiblicos cuales son

7

8

9

10

Sobre el uso de los andantropomorfismos c o m o tendencia básica de los targumes oficiales cf. Ribera, Targum de Isaias, 39, nota 75, Smolar-Aberbach, Targum Jonathan, 137-143. En cambio se advierte en este aspecto una oscilaciôn entre los demás targumes del Pentateuco palesdnense y sobre todo en los targumes tardios de los Escritos; cf. Levine, E. Aramaic Version, 47-55. Cf. Ribera, J. 1996. "The Image of Israel according to Targum Ezekiel." En Targumic and Cognate Studies; Essays in Honour of Martin McNamara. Ed. K. J.Cathcart and M. Maher. Sheffield, 111-121. La Mekilta de Rabbi Ismae! en su comentario al Ex 12,23 y B Ker. 9a aducen las mismas causas respecto a la liberaciôn de Egipto. Con el significado de 'justo;' cf. Ribera, Tg. Is., 205, nota 1; Cathcart-Gordon, Minor Prophets, 234, nota 25.

Noé, Daniel y Job, 11 citados en 14,14, salvan su vida segûn el Tg no por su justicia (sidqatah) sino por su mérito (‫צ‬xçkutehon), cuyo concepto dene un espectro moral-juridico más amplio que el de justicia.12 La afirmaciôn masorética: "vuestra madré fue una hidta y vuestro padre un amorreo" (16,45), el Tg la interpréta evitando emparentar a sus antepasados con tales naciones paganas y cambia asi la frase " j n o estaba vuestra madré Sara entre los hititas y vuestro padre Abraham entre los amorreos?"; además el Tg apostilla: "no actuaron según sus obras ni segûn su conducta." Respecto al rey Sedecias el TM dice: "se velarà el rostro para no contemplar el pais con sus propios ojos," sin embargo el Tg expone la modvaciôn moral de la ceguera que el rey de Babilonia causô a Sedecias, aplicando la ley del talion "por cuanto pecô con la vista, no verá el pais" (12,12). Asimismo la frase "jQuitate la dara, depôn la corona!" (21,31) para el Tg se reftere a la dara del sacerdote Sarayah y a la corona del rey Sedecias, como obra del Senor: "voy a quitar...," y el Tg continua la glosa historiada, basândose en 2Re 25,18-26 y Jer 52,24-27.

El Israel justo La justicia del piadoso ο temeroso de Dios para el Tg siempre es verdadera (din diqš0t 18,5) y su corazôn y espiritu poseen el temor (dahul) 11,19 que Dios le infunde. Asi espiritu y corazôn nuevos en el Tg toman el cariz religioso de temerosos (dabei) (11,19,18,31). En el 11,19 leb chad del TM el Tg con otros mss. y Ρ lo lee leb hadaš y lo interpréta de la misma manera que en los otros casos: corazôn temeroso. En contraposiciôn, el corazôn de piedra es para el Tg "el corazôn malvado (riša'), duro como una piedra" (11,19; 36,26), que el Seiior lo cambia en corazôn de carne (basai), es decir en corazôn temeroso; entonces el Tg comenta el senddo del temor: "para cumplir mi voluntad." 13 La tesis de la responsabilidad individual proclamada en cap. 18, en contraposiciôn a la solidaridad en la culpa segûn la tradiciôn de la Torà (Ex 20,5), es acentuada en el Tg. Ahora bien, el Tg matiza afirmaciones del TM: en vez de "hijo salteador, atracador," el Tg prefiere una aftrmaciôn más genérica: "hijo malvado" (rašia18,10); también cambia "vivir" por "subsistir, continuar viviendo" (18,13).14

El Israel culpable El concepto de pecado en el Tg toma el cariz de "deuda" (hwb 23,27), todo pecado es un débito hecho al Senor.15 Cuando el Tg encuentra el término hebreo \·immah (que tiene un espectro semântico amplio, desde "plan, intriga" hasta "depravaciôn, fornicaciôn") el Tg lo interpréta en senddo inmoral genérico: höbe 11

12

13 14

15

Estos très personajes son considerados c o m o protoupos de del justo por excelencia a causa de una tradiciôn milenaria en el Proximo Oriente, cf. Levey, S.H. 1987. The Targum of Eye kiel. Edinburgh, 47, nota 7. En cuanto a la nociôn de mérito en el judaismo andguo cf. Marmorstein, A. 1968. The Doctrine of the Merits in Old Rabbinical Literature. Nueva York; Urbach, Ε. 1979. The Sages; their Concepts and Beliefs. Jerusalén, vol. I, 496-508. Cf. Ribera, Targum de lsaias, 45-46. Sobre la responsabilidad personal y colecdva en el pecado segûn la tradiciôn judia cf. Levey, Targum E^ekiel, 57-59, nota 1. Otros ejemplos en Ribera, Targum Jeremias, 46.

'esat hata' "las culpas del plan pecaminoso" (23,27). Sin embargo, es hâbito del traductor targumista midgar la acdtud de Israel con respecto a la Alianza sinaitica; en todos los lugares donde en el TM de los profetas aparece la expresiôn tajante hefer bent ("romper la alianza") se midga en "violar, cambiar la alianza" ('asna'ah qëjam) de lo que tenemos varios ejemplos en el cap. 17,15.18.16 Cuando el TM usa la imagen figurada del corazôn adultero, el Tg emplea un calificadvo más apropiado hablando de corazôn insensato (6,9) refiriéndose a la razôn. También en la constataciôn que hace el TM "cuan débil es tu corazôn" (mah amullah libatek) se cargan las dntas "cuán grave es la malicia de tu corazôn" (ma taqif hewah reša'libik, 16,3). El Tg compara explicitamente—comparaciôn ausente en el TM—las acciones perversas de Israel con las de los países y ciudades inmorales por antonomasia, según la Biblia, cuales son los cananeos, Sodoma y Gomorra (16,45). El Tg resalta a menudo la acdtud despreciadva de Israel con respecto a los profetas; los paganos, si se les enviara profetas, los atenderían mejor que el mismo Israel (16,27); Israel no solo no practica los mensajes proféticos sino que—acentúa el Tg—"no quieren practicarlos" (33,32).17 Al describir los pecados de la ciudad de Jerusalén el Tg précisa el derramamiento de la sangre que es "inocente," no cualquier derramamiento de sangre sino la vertida injustamente (22,2). "La ganancia injusta" del TM se concreta, de acuerdo con el Tg, en robar dinero violentamente (22,13). El juicio divino corresponderà a una conducta que es "mala" (bišatd), anade el Tg, y a unas acciones que son "pervertidas" (mëqulqalayah 24,14); de este modo el castigo divino aparece perfectamente justo. El pecado central de Israel para el Tg es el de la idolatria. El Tg detalla la vestimenta idolâtrica (13,18), ironiza sobre los excrementos de los idolos (6,4) y los altares a los idolos. 18 La raiz aramea t'y el Tg la emplea con gran frecuencia para expresar la acciôn idolâtrica de Israel. Es una raiz usada en tarte malma·. en su doble sentido de extravio y de culto idolâtrico; asi "va tras de los idolos" (ahare gilgulim libban holek) se interpréta "se extravia tras el culto de los idolos" (batarpulhan ta'ewatehon libehon ta'e, 20,16).19 A los términos yanut y ta^nut, "prostituciôn, fomicaciôn," el Tg le da siempre un significado idolâtrico evidente (ta'uf). Al Tg no le importa tanto si Israel fabrica idolos cuanto que les dé culto: palehin ta'ewatehon... (22,3). El objeto directo de la apostasia del pueblo no son los idolos sino el culto a sus idolos (pulhan ta'ewateh, 14,4). El Tg tiende siempre a anadir al TM las causas morales de las desgracias tanto como la finalidad de un objeto; asi sucede en 20,29 donde razona el uso idolâtrico de los lugares altos: en que "os entregáis a prácticas extáticas." El Tg précisa el significado idolâtrico del término "abominaciones," to'ebat, con el déterminante "culto" ("el culto de tus abominaciones" 16,58). El acto idolâtrico que, según el Tg, acrecienta la ira divina es la inmolaciôn de los primogénitos conforme al rito cananeo (16,20).

16 17 18

19

Cf. Ribera, The Image of Israelj 115, nota 15. Para otros pasajes semejantes cf. Smolar-Aberbach, Studies in Targum, 199, nota 449. El Tg usa el término agora' para referirse a los altares idolâtricos mientras el vocablo %ëbahin se refiere al altar de Yahweh, cf. Churgin, P. 1927. Targum Jonathan to the Prophets. Yale, 113. Adviértase de paso la rima que hay en arameo y que no existe en hebreo.

El culto y el temor al Senor {pulban y dablà) son sinônimos y de ellos el pueblo de Israel se aleja ο abandona (23,35). El verbo "alejarse" dene para el Tg un claro senddo moral, cultual; "alejarse del temor (dahla) al Senor" significa apostasia (11,15; 14,5), mientras "acercarse" implica una aproximaciôn moral, cultual, al servicio del Senor (lëpulbani "a mi servicio" 44,13). Por eso la verdadera conversion dene por objeto eliminar no los idolos sino su culto, y volver al Senor significa el retorno a su servicio (18,30.32).

Castigos impuestos al pueblo pecador La imagen "beber de la copa" con el complemento targûmico "del casdgo" resalta el valor simbôlico de la copa como recipiente del sufrimiento impuesto por la justicia divina (23,32.33).20 La frase genérica "seréis presos por la mano" (bakaf titapesii) al Tg le evoca el hecho histôrico de la conquista babilônica precisando la frase del TM: "seréis entregados en manos del rey de Babel" (21,29). En la metâfora de Israel como una cepa seca que escapa del fuego, pero que es devorada por él, el término repetido "fuego" sugiere al Tg dos imágenes contrapuestas: la del fuego del Sinai y la vehemencia de las naciones que, como instrumentos de la venganza divina, destruirán Jerusalén (15,6.7).21

El Profeta y su misiôn La misiôn del profeta tal como aparece en los retoques targùmicos es un tanto diferente de la del TM. El Tg considéra todas las acciones profédcas como mensajes e instrucciones inspiradas por Dios. Asi, en lugar de tener visiones el profeta suele transmitir mensajes proféticos, profetiza (12,23; 22,28) ο adoctrina de acuerdo con la ensenanza que procédé del Senor (12,27; 13,6).22 N o faltan ocasiones en que el Tg prefiere mantener el término "vision," como cuando se refiere a la vision del trono de gloria en cuyo caso se habla de he%ut nebu'ab ("vision profética," 1,1).23 La expresiôn comûn a los profetas "palabra del Senor" se califica siempre con el epiteto "profética" ("mensaje profético procedcnte del Senor" pitgam nebu'ab min qedam adonay 2,7).24 La frase tipica de Ezequiel dirigida al profeta: "vuelve tu rostro" toma la interpretaciôn derásica de "acoge la profecia" (21.2.7). Incluso el masal que pronuncia Ezequiel (24,3) es una profecia. Segûn este enfoque, la gente del pueblo que le escucha es, desde la perspectiva targûmica, como los discipulos que atienden a las palabras del maestro (33,31). En consecuencia, todos los verbos que se refieren a la vision ο al habla del profeta se identifican con profetizar (7,13; 11,25); en el cap. 37, donde se desarrolla

20

21

22

23 24

Para otras citas de esta expresiôn cf. Melammed, E.Z. 1984. Bib/ica Studies in Tests, Translations and Commentaries. Jerusalén, 318-319. En el Tg la repedciôn de una palabra en un versiculo siempre se compléta con una glosa; cf. Ribera, Targum de Isa/as, 32. Ribera, J. 1986. "El profedsmo segûn el Targum Jonatân y el Targum Palesunense." En Salvaàôn en la Palabra, Madrid, 489-501. Cf. Ribera, "La ideologia de la Merkabâ," 317. Anádase las palabras "vision" de 8,3 y "boca" de 29,21 interpretadas también por el Tg como "profecia."

el acto simbôlico de la resurrecciôn de los huesos, "contestar y decir" significa para el Tg vadcinar el futuro renovado de Israel (37,19.21).25 Una de las tareas nada placenteras del profeta, siguiendo el Tg, es la de reprender ('okab "reprende" 16,2, tokab "amonestarâs" 20,4) que susdtuye a otros verbos del TM menos incisivos ("haz conocer" y "juzga"). La finalidad de la amonestaciôn es anadida a veces por el Tg: "para que dejen de pecar ante Mi" (33,7); en general y, refiriéndose al malvado, "para que se aparte de su mala conducta" (33,9). Respecto al falso profeta, el despecdvo šiqra', que el Tg aiiade frecuentemente en el cap. 13, sirve para descalificar al profeta que no profedza en conformidad con la voluntad divina sino siguiendo los deseos (re'ut 10,2) y maquinaciones (barhur 10,3) de su corazôn. Una de las razones aducidas por el Tg es "porque profedzan falsamente y porque inducen a error" (13,10).26 Si los falsos profetas se asemejan para el texto hebreo a adobes de barro, el Tg compléta la imagen anadiendo el detalle "sin mezcla de paja" (13,10; 22,28).

El Templo y su seruicio El Tg dene muy présente que la imagen que Ez nos da del templo "ideal" y sus funciones corresponden a los ultimos dempos de la era escatolôgica. Es lôgico que la colina del Senor se endenda como su santuario (34,26). Uno de los receptâculos más sagrados es el sancta sanctorum·, en 41,21 nos habia del aspecto del sandsimo (ha-qodes) que el Tg idendfica con "el lugar de la expiaciôn" (bet kaporet) y compara su vision a la vision de la gloria divina.27 En otro lugar (9,3) nos dice el Tg que la gloria del Senor se eleva por encima del querubin "sobre el cual posaba la morada del Santo de los santos." Para el Tg está claro que la gloria del Senor pénétra este lugar, por cuanto el nuevo templo es un trasunto del trono de gloria celesdal y de la merkabá.28 Entre los utensilios del templo cabe mencionar la Mesa, cuya funciôn está precisada por el Tg: es la "del pan de la Presencia" (44,16).29

Las funciones sacerdotales en el templo La vestimenta sacerdotal se coloca de disdnta manera en el TM y en el Tg; el TM 44,18 dice: "no se ceriirán nada que provoque sudor," mientras la version aramea expone: "se cenirán sus corazones"; la razôn estriba en que ésta es la zona donde se évita, de acuerdo con la tradiciôn rabinica, la transpiraciôn. 30 25

26

27

28

30

En el Tg palestinense se refiere a la resurrecciôn final, cf. Rodriguez Carmona, A. 1978. Targum y Resurrecciôn; estudio de tos textos del targum palestinense sobre la resurrecciôn. Granada, 73-93. El TM usa en este caso dos veces la pardcula causal (ya'an ubeya'an hit'u) y emplea la raiz arameizante t'y, mientras el Tg glosa, segûn costumbre, la repericiôn de la pardcula causal. Sobre la importancia que toma el "dia de expiaciôn" a partir del exilio babilônico cf. "Day o f Atonement" en Encyclopaedia]udaica vol. V Qerusalén 1972) cols. 1376-1387. D. Munoz Leon en su obra Gloria de la Shekina en los targumim de! Pentateuco. Madrid 1977, trata exhausdvamente el concepto de gloria en los Tgs del Pentateuco, pero también se refiere a su uso en los profetas, cf. 258-260, 383-387. Se refiere a la ofrenda del pan de la proposiciôn o de la Presencia (lebempanim, !ehern 'appcryya ), cf. "Cuit" en Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalén 1972) vol. 5, col. 1161. Cf. B Z ? M 8 b

Otro detalle, cuyo derás targùmico es evidente, se encuentra cuando el sacerdote al salir del lugar sagrado se despoja de los ornamentos para asi "mezclarse con el pueblo" (44,19), ya que el contacto con el pueblo implica, en este caso, profanaciôn de lo vesddos sagrados. De ahi que en 46,20 el Tg diga que no deben sacarse las ofrendas a fin de que no tengan contacto con el pueblo ("se mezclen con el pueblo") que las profanaria. 31 Cuando el TM nos habla de que los sacerdotes han de cuidar del servicio divino, el Tg le da una version más moral que cultual: "cuidarán de la observancia de la Memrd" (44,16). Las diversas clases de ofrendas y sacrificios y su funciôn ritual varían segûn se träte del TM y del Tg. Asi, "un perfume de olor suave" en el contexto sacral se idendfica con "la ofrenda agradable" (20,41). Se habla en el Tg sistemádcamente de "sacrificios santos" (literalmente "degüello del sagrado" niqsat qudsehon), en lugar de "sacrificios pacificos" (šalmekem 43,27); se trataria de un degüello sacrificial entendido de forma más genérica que el sacrificio pacifico. También la frase del TM: "presentáis mi pan" résulta muy especifico para el Tg, por lo que prefiere la forma genérica "presentáis mi ofrenda" (qurbani 44,7). Un detalle que revela una determinada ideologia sacrificial del Tg es el hecho de que el pasaje: "el principe ofrezca por si y por su pueblo" (ba'ado 45,22), se cambie por bilufo we-hiluf 'amo es decir, "en lugar de él y de su pueblo" (45,22), lo cual sugeriria un sacrificio vicario.32 El gesto litürgico de "rociar con agua pura" del TM adquiere un claro valor moral en el Tg: "se perdonarân las culpas con el agua de aspersion" y—anade el Tg—"con la ceniza de la vaca inmolada por el pecado" (36,25).3‫נ‬ También en la época targúmica las sinagogas suplen al templo aunque temporalmente como constatamos en la interpretaciôn de 11,16: "les he dado sinagogas en susdtuciôn de mi santuario, pues son pocos en numéro" (TM dice enigmáticamente: "les he servido un poco para ellos de santuario"). 34

Las Naciones e Israel Las naciones en la ideologia biblico-judia representan a los enemigos de Israel. Aquéllas, a veces, son instrumentes de la justicia retributiva del Senor (pur'anut dinin) con las que castiga a su pueblo rebelde y, otras, son objeto directo de rechazo y casdgo divino por el maltrato infligido al pueblo elegido. En cuanto a las naciones como instrumentas del casdgo divino a su pueblo, la menciôn reiterada de la espada en 21,19 ss. sugicre al Tg que se trata de las naciones hostiles a Israel, que causan exterminio en el pueblo con su poder bélico.

31

32

33

34

El TM afirma que tal actitud "santifica" al pueblo mientras el Tg évita tal afirmaciôn y quiere resaltar que no se puede mezclar lo sagrado con lo profano. Se trata de una version singular y significadva, cf. también Onquelos y Pseudo Jonatan de Lev 9,7. Por una parte, parece una alusiôn polémica al bautismo crisdano (cf. Levey, Targum Eyekiet, 102) y, por otra, el valor purificador de las cenizas de ternera es una alusiôn clara a N u 19,17. La interpretaciôn targúmica causa la impresiôn de una esperanza a la reconstrucciôn cercana del templo, lo cual significaria que el nucleo de este Tg podria ser redactado antes del desastre de Bar Kosba, cf. Levey, Targum E^ekiel, 41, nota 5.

Al referirse a los enemigos de Israel ocupa un lugar destacado el rey Gog de Magog (cap 39). En la derrota de este adversario de Israel, el Tg matiza que su cadáver junto con los de los numerosos pueblos que le acompanan será arrojado a merced de las aves de rapina, dando asi una imagen mucho más gigantesca del desastre, que no ofrece el TM (39,4).35 Egipto representa también una de las naciones tradicionalmente hostiles a Israel. La imagen que ofrece el Tg es más negativa que la del TM; se lo compara a una cana que—anade el Tg—"está cascada" (qanya re'i'a'espada, 29,6); "su dia" es "el dia de su castigo" (yompur'anut misrayim, 30,3), frase que sugiere un castigo definitivo al estilo escatolôgico. La expresiôn targûmica usual para subrayar el destino final y humiliante de un pueblo y que se aplica a Egipto (32,4) y a Tiro (26,15), es, como al referirse al ejército de Gog, que sus "cadáveres serán arrojados" al campo para ser devorados por las aves de rapina. Al Tg le interesan las precisiones: "la carne de los muertos" (32,5), "la caida de las victima•s" (32,10), que se aplican a Egipto y a Tiro (26,15). En los orâculos contra Tiro, donde se exalta su grandeza y derrumbamiento, el targumista mitigar la frase que podria entenderse como si Tiro o su rey fuera realmente dios al usar el TM el término propio de la divinidad israelita en la frase " 'el, 'elohim 'am," "soy un dios" (28,2.9), y prefiere cambiarlo por un vocablo aplicado a los dioses paganos (dahla ' 'ena'); asimismo "la morada de los dioses" el Tg lo reduce a "la morada de los poderosos" (taqifin, 28,2). En este mismo orâculo el Tg endende perfectamente que el "querubin ungido" no es otro sino "el rey ungido" de Tiro (28,14); asimismo la fortuna del rey de Tiro para el Tg son sus tropas (28,5). Los acicalamientos con que se aderezaba Tiro para recibir mensajeros (TM 28,40) son para el Tg sus ricos mercados dirigidos por expertos comerciantes. Hay un trueque de sentido entre el TM, que usa la metáfora del silbido de burla de las naciones ante la destrucciôn de Tiro en 27,36, y el que le da el Tg, que habia de la desolaciôn de las naciones ante el triste espectáculo que présenta Tiro. "Los atravesados" no pueden ser otros en sentido targùmico que los "golpeados, heridos por la espada" (28,8). El Tg no acepta que los habitantes de Tiro infundieran terror como dice el TM 26,17 ("los que infundian terror..."), por lo que cambia totalmente la frase: "sus habitantes han sido entregados a la ruina." Otra naciôn que maltratô a Israel fue el pueblo edomita del que se vengé "con dureza," tal como acentúa el Tg (25,12). La gran confianza futura con atisbos escatolôgicos es que, según el Tg, los perversos gobernantes y reyes no expoliarân nunca más a Israel (28,24).

La Escatologia El Tg muestra siempre una predilecciôn por el enfoque escatolôgico de eventos anunciados proféticamente como futuros. El cap. 7 está taraceado de elementos referentes al tràgico fin de Jerusalén, que el Tg aprovecha para darles un cariz escatolôgico. Asi se habia de "la retribuciôn final" {pur'anut qisa') en vez de sim35

En cuanto a la idendficaciôn de G o g con Roma por parte del Tg y su cariz escatolôgico cf. Levey, Targum Eqekiel, 109, nota 10.

plemente el fin (ba-qes 7,6), ο también "el dia de la venganza" (yompur'anut 7,10), seguramente porque este término sugiere a menudo en el Tg de los profetas el momento del juicio-sentencia definidva de la divinidad. En 7,12 el Tg se preocupa de precisar la causa moral de la retribuciôn ("Ha llegado el uempo de la retribudön por lospecados, cerca esta el dia de la vengan^a por las culpa/'), ausente en el TM. Algo parecido encontramos en 22,3; mientras el TM habla de la llegada "de su dempo" refiriéndose a Jerusalén, el Tg detalla "el dempo de su desgracia" (tebara'). En este clima finalista "el dia" el Tg lo amplia a "el dempo" (39,11). La frase we- 'et 'awon qes "dempo de la culpa final" del TM 21,20 toma un cariz más definidvo con el cambio targumico: 'idan tuslamat hobohi, "el dempo de la retribuciôn por sus pecados," y en 35,5, al vadcinar la destruction de Idumea, el Tg anade la coletilla "cuando llegue su fin" (kad meta qisahon).6‫י‬ La idea de la vida eterna el Tg la relaciona con la observancia de la Tord ("despreciaron mis normas por las cuales si el hombre las cumple, vivirá en la vida eterna" 20,13.21). Del mismo modo, cuando el Tg habla de Israel como de "la tierra de los vivientes" (26,20) podria referirse a la idea escatolôgica de la vida eterna. 37 En contraposiciôn hay una expresiôn en el TM (yorede bor "los que descienden a la fosa" 26,20; 31,16), que en el Tg siempre dene una connotaciôn escatolôgica por lo que compléta la frase de esta manera: "Los que descienden a la fosa de la morada de perdiciôn," refiriéndose a la gehena, lugar de casdgo définidvo de los malvados. 38 Podria muy bien considerarse como una evidente declaraciôn de profecia mesiánica que el Tg cambie la palabra nasi "principe" por melek "rey" al tratar del David futuro ("... y mi siervo David será su rey para siempre," 37,25).

Sin tes is.y conclus iones El método derás usado por el Tg no es un recurso para presentar una interpretaciôn enigmática, simbôlica, del texto biblico, sino más bien un intento de dar un senddo llano (pelai) a la Biblia. De ahi el interés del targumista por desvelar con una vision "realista" las muchas alegorias que se hallan en el texto de Ezequiel. Además, permite percibir las tendencias ideolôgicas y morales, que el Tg intenta resaltar con los recursos propios de dicho método. En cuanto a la divinidad, el Tg inculca su unicidad absoluta, de ûnico existente, y su inmaterialidad, espiritualizando elementos de carácter antropomôrfico, sobre todo de indole corpôrea. Un senddo muy agudo de la jusdcia divina se manifiesta con el uso abundandsimo del término pur'anut. Asimismo, no oculta su predilecciôn por la misrica merkabiana.

36

37

38

Sobre la escatologia en el Tg cf. Ribera, J. 1987. "La escatologia en el targum Jonatân (Tg Jon) y su relaciôn con el targum palestinense (Tg Pal)." En II Simposio Biblico Espanol. Valencia, 487499. Una descripciôn de la vida posterior a la muerte en el judaismo antiguo lo hallamos en Cavallin, C.C. 1974. Life after Death. Sobre la gehena en el Tg de los Profetas cf. Smolar-Aberbach, Studies in Targum, 185-186; Levine: The Aramaic Version, 222-223.

Referente a Israel, el Tg acentúa la imagen de una comunidad de Fe con la frase consagrada "congregaciôn de Israel." Idealiza la tierra de Israel, como lugar de los vivientes. El cap. 16 se transforma en la historia de la fidelidad del Senor e infidelidad de Israel basada en la Alianza sinaitica. Como suele suceder en el Tg, se sublima la figura de los antepasados de Israel. La relaciôn entre Israel y su Dios se basa en el temor y el culto (dahla, pulhan)·, en este contexto el acercamiento o alejamiento fisico incluye un significado moral. Se insiste mucho en la idolatria como el mayor pecado de Israel. La raiz t'y es el recurso targùmico para resaltar el extravio cûltico de Israel y su adoraciôn a los idolos. La expresiôn "beber la copa" se convierte en el simbolo del castigo justiciero de Dios. El Profeta es el portador de mensajes procedentes del Senor (pitgam nëbu'ah min qëdam YYY) y también el maestro que ensena la instrucciôn, que no es otra sino la Torâ. Su tarea no es juzgar sino ensenar y reprender. Aparece también el falso (šiqra) profeta que profetiza según su voluntad y no la de Dios. El templo se identifica con la colina del Senor. La gloria del Senor cubre el sancta sanctorum, que es el lugar de expiaciôn. El templo es un trasunto del trono de gloria. La sacralidad de cuanto está relacionado con el culto exige no mezclarlo con el pueblo para no profanarlo. El sacerdocio cuidará más de la observancia de la Palabra de Dios (Memra) que de los sacrificios. Los actos litûrgicos tienen una funciôn moral: el agua de aspersion perdona los pecados. Se cargan las tintas en la imagen peyorativa que se da de las naciones, enemigas de Israel. Estas son, ya instrumentos de la divinidad para realizar la justicia vindicativa {pur'anut dinin) con el pueblo de Israel, ya objeto del castigo {pur'anut) divino por su conducta hostil hacia su pueblo. El Tg muestra una clara propension a dar un enfoque escatolôgico a los eventos futuros. La retribuciôn final {pur'anut qisa), como el tiempo de la retribuciôn de los pecados ('idan tašlumat hobin) son frases que evocan el juicio final. También la expresiôn: "los que descienden a la fosa de la perdiciôn" (nahate bor bet 'abdana) nos proyecta al castigo definitivo de los malvados en la gehena. Para obtener estos objetivos el Tg se vale de los siguientes recursos: el uso de 'al tiqre ("no leas"), del tarte mašma' ("doble sentido"); el cambio de abstractos en concretos y viceversa, la anadidura de calificativos, completando frases que le parecen inacabadas. Asimismo el Tg modifica vocablos, resalta la comparaciôn con la pardcula ke "como" y transforma las imágenes del reino vegetal y animal y de las fuerzas de la naturaleza, para darles una vision "realista," espiritual. Del mismo modo descubre una dimension moral, simbôlica, a los miembros y funciones del cuerpo humano, asi como a las funciones y oficios humanos. Con estos y otros recursos parecidos el Tg nos brinda una exégesis elemental pero genuina del texto biblico segûn las corrientes ideolôgicas del judaismo primitivo y, en este sentido, el Tg no hace sino seguir la trayectoria exegética de los escribas, que en las ultimas redacciones de la Biblia insertaron aquellos cambios y complementos que creian oportunos para una intelecciôn y actualizaciôn del texto que se convertiria en texto sagrado y canônico. 39 ,9

Sobre este proceso de reinterpretaciôn en el interior de la Biblia cf. Fishbane, M. 1985 Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford.

ISAAC ABRAVANEL'S " L O S T " COMMENTARY ON DEUTERONOMY BENJAMIN RICHLER The Jewish National and University Library, Israel In the introduction to his commentary on the Book of Deuteronomy which he completed on February 6, 1496 in Monopoli near Naples, D o n Isaac Abravanel described the long and tortuous gestation of this work from its initial conception in Portugal in the 1470's until the completion of a revised edition twenty years later: Twenty years ago in my youth when I was living in Lisbon in Portugal ... I undertook the task of writing a commentary on this book [Deuteronomy] ... but the angerfof the king] raged against me ... and he confiscated the last of all my possessions and I escaped alone to the Kingdom of Castille ... and all my labour on this book was lost or looted and I never saw the book again until now. Ten years later... God decreed that the Jews be exiled from Spain ... and I came to Naples ... and even there I could not find peace for God sent the King of France ... and his horsemen swept the land ... and I sailed for Corfu and settled here. And lo! God brought to me the commentary I had written and my soul filled with joy and happiness and it said I will add to it and enlarge it... D o n Isaac Abravanel diplomat, philosopher and scholar was b o m in Lisbon in 1437. His grandfather. Samuel, had fled from Spain to Portugal after he was forced to convert around 1391, and in Portugal he returned to Judaism. D o n Judah, Isaac's father, rose to prominence in the royal court as a financier, and Isaac followed in his footsteps and served as a financier and diplomat in the court of king Alfonso V. He was especially close to the princes of Braganza among the wealthiest nobles in Portugal and favourites in the court of Alfonso. After Alfonso's death in 1481, his s o n j o a o II succeeded to the throne and decided to break the power of the feudal lords. The nobles plotted a conspiracy against the king and Abravanel was suspected as being a party to the conspiracy. O n May 30, 1483, he was summoned to the king. O n the way he heard that the Duke of Braganza was arrested, and, fearing for his own life Abravanel crossed the border into Spain leaving behind his family and belongings. In Spain, Abravanel rose to prominence in the royal court but failed to convince King Ferdinand to repeal the decree expelling the Jews from Spain in 1492. Abravanel left Spain that year and settled in Naples. 1 Abravanel composed commentaries on the Pentateuch, the Prophets and the Book of Daniel. The first Biblical commentary he wrote was on the Book of Deuteronomy. He composed the commentary in the 1470's. In 1472 he wrote 1

Netanyahu, B. 1972. Don Isaac Abravanel Philadelphia: JPS, 31-32.

to Jehiel of Pisa that his commentary on Deuteronomy was still incomplete. In the introduction to his second redaction of the commentary written in 1496, he stated that the first redaction had been written some twenty years earlier. The manuscript of the early commentary on Deuteronomy was left behind when Abravanel fled Portugal and was considered lost. In 1495, after the French invaded Naples, Abravanel fled once again, this time to the isle of Corfu which was under Venetian rule. Here, miraculously, he found a copy of his commentary on Deuteronomy which may have been brought to Corfu by refugees from Portugal. Abravanel took it upon himself to revise and enlarge the commentary he had written as a young man. He returned to the Italian peninsula and setded in Monopoli in the Kingdom of Naples and devoted his time to revising and rewriting the commentary on Deuteronomy, a task that he completed less than a year later. The book remained in manuscript and was not published until 1551, more than forty years after Abravanel's death in 1508.2 The original draft of the commentary written in Lisbon was never published and no manuscript copy of it was listed in any catalogue or bibliography. In 1997, the Institute of Microfilmed Hebrew Manuscripts (IMHM) in the Jewish National and University Library received microfilms of several manuscripts that were recendy found in the Houghton Library at Harvard University. 3 The MS consists of 46 folios. It is incomplete; folios or quires are missing at the beginning and the end and the remaining folios are bound out of order. At first glance the text seemed to be an anonymous commentary on Deuteronomy. Initially, the cataloguers at the Institute determined that the commentary was probably written in the Iberian peninsula in the 15th century. However, further 2 In this edition the commentary bore the original dde assigned by the author, ‫ מ ר כ ב ת ה מ ש נ ה‬. The second edidon, published together with Abravanel's commentaries on the other Books o f the Pentateuch in Venice in 1579, served as the model for all future editions. This second edition is less complete than the first edition as passages were deleted in order that the text be approved by the Church censors. S. Z. Leiman printed the deleted passages in "Abarbanel and the CenSOT."JJS 19, 1968, 4 9 - 6 1 . The only verse (Deut 23:21) o f those listed by Leiman (n°. 17) found in the manuscript described in this paper is unexpurgated. MS Heb. 108. The MS was acquired by the Library in 1951. It is a m o n g a few manuscripts that were only recently found w h e n the last items from the 1951 acquisition were catalogued and thus were not included in the printed catalogue by Glatzer, M 1975. Hebrew Manuscripts in the Houghton Library of the Harvard College Library Cambridge, Mass. MS Heb. 108 had belonged to Osias (Yehoshua Heschel) Schorr, a leader o f the Haskalah movement in Eastern Europe in the second half o f the nineteenth century and a collector o f books and MS. H e published s o m e o f the MSS in He-Halutç, the journal he edited. During his lifetime he sold several dozen MSS to the Bodleian Library in Oxford and a few others to various other libraries and collectors. When he died in 1895, his library was bequeathed to the Israelitisch-theologische Lehranstalt in Vienna and later came into the possession o f the Israelitische Kultusgemeinde in Vienna when the libraries o f the two institutions merged in 1926. During World War II the library was confiscated by the Germans and its treasures were dispersed. This MS and several other MSS bearing the stamp o f the Lehranstalt library (but not o f the Kultusgemeinde) acquired by the H o u g h t o n Library were not included in the catalogue o f Hebrew manuscripts in Austria outside the Nationalbibliothek prepared by Schwarz, A. Z. 1931. Die hebraeischen Handschriften in Oesterreich. Vienna. In the preface to his catalogue, Schwarz surmised that not all o f the MSS from Schorr's legacy reached the Lehranstalt, but it may well be that some o f Schorr's books were misplaced in the library and never came to the notice o f Schwarz exactly the same fate that befell them decades later in the H o u g h t o n Library.

study showed that parts of the commentary displayed an affinity to the parallel passages in the printed commentary of Abravanel and that some paragraphs were identical except for a few minor changes in wording. There could be no doubt that the commentary in the MS was closely related to Abravanel's. It could only have been a revision or plagiarism of Abravanel's printed commentary, an anonymous commentary upon which Abravanel based his own work or an early draft by Abravanel himself. Since we know that Abravanel wrote two versions of his commentary, the printed one being a gready revised and expanded version of the earlier work, it seems most likely that this MS contains part of the text of the first version of the commentary. As it will become evident later in our paper, it is highly unlikely that the MS could have been written after the publication of the printed edition. The commentary in the Harvard MS covers parts of Deuteronomy chapters 12-27 {parashiyot ‫ ראה‬to ‫)כי תבוא‬. The text of the commentaries on the first extant part is often markedly different from the printed edition, but on ‫ כי תצא‬and ‫ כי תבוא‬the texts of the MS and the edition are much closer. The differences between the texts are usually a matter of phrasing and length. Very often both commentaries present the same ideas and sometimes whole sentences or paragraphs are almost identical, but it is obvious that the author heavily edited the earlier text. Rarely did Abravanel abandon his early interpretation and substitute an entirely different explanation but he often added or deleted material. In the commentary on Deut 22:5 found in the MS the author explained the prohibition for members of each sex to wear clothing worn by the other sex as a breach of natural order that may lead to sexual licentiousness. In the printed edition Abravanel added a graphic description of how married women used to dress in men's clothes in order to visit their lovers without being noticed. Abravanel's commentary on Deut 22:9 (‫ )לא תזרע כרמך כלאים‬may serve as an example of a text that is quite similar in both the manuscript and the printed text: MS Heb. 108 reads: ‫ אבל הוסיף הנה לומ׳‬4 ‫ה מ צ ו ה הזאת כבר בא ב מ ה שעבר שאמי שדך לא תזרע כלאים כו׳‬ ‫שאין הענין לבד אסור ב ש ד ה אבל גם ינהג האסור בכרם ולזה אמי שם שדך לא תזרע כלאים‬ ‫וכאן לא תזרע כרמך ועם זה יהיה האיסור כולל לשדה ולכרם והוסיף הנה עוד שאם יעשה‬ ‫זה לא די שיהיה אסור ב ה נ ה א ה תבואת הכרם היוצא מהכלאים שזרע אבל יאמר שהזרע‬ ‫ וז״ש פן תקדש ה מ ל א ה‬.‫שישלח על פני ה א ד מ ה וג״כ תבואת הכרם כל זה יהיה אסור בהנאה‬ ‫ ותבואת הכרם ר״ל פן יהיה קדש ה מ ל א ה בכלל שהיה הזרע אשר תזרע‬5 [‫הזרע ]אשר תזרע‬ ‫וגם תבואת הזרע היוצא הכרם כי שניהם יהיו ק ד ש וטע׳ ה מ צ ו ה הזאת ג״ב שיהיו הפעולות‬ ‫כלם נפרדות ש ל מ ו ת ו פ ש ו ט ו ת בלי עירוב וזיוף אבל כל דבר ודבר יהיה נזכר במינו בענין‬ .‫ש ה א מ ת לא ת פ ס ד לא תפסד[!] ולא תשתנה ויצא התכונה בשלמות וכפי הראוי לה‬

4 5

Leviticus 19:19. The copyist omitted the words in square brackets.

‫‪The printed edition reads:‬‬ ‫כבר נזכרה גם כן שדך לא תזרע כלאים וביאר כאן ה מ צ ו ה הזאת שאין האיסור בלבד בשדה‬ ‫אשר זכר ש מ ה כי ג״כ ינהג האיסור בכרם‪ ,‬ולכן לא תזרע כרמך וידענו עם זה שהאיסור כולל‬ ‫ל ש ד ה כ מ ו שנזכר כאן ו ב מ ש מ ע כל דבר הנזרע‪ ,‬וביאר בזה עוד כי אם יזרע הכרם כלאים לא‬ ‫די שיהיה אסור בהנאה תבוא׳ הכרם היוצאת מן הכלאים שזרע אבל גם הזרע שיזר‬ ‫והתבואה שיצא ממנו כלו יהיה אסור בהנאה וזהו שאמר פן ת ק ד ש ה מ ל א ה הזרע אשר תזרע‬ ‫ותבואת הכרם‪ ,‬ר״ל פן יהיה ק ד ש ה מ ל א ה שהוא הזרע אשר תזרע וגם יהיה קדש תבוא‬ ‫הכרם היוצאת מאותו זרע כי שניהם יהיו קדש‪ ,‬וטעם ה מ צ ו ה הזאת שיהיו ה פ ע ו ל ו ת כלם‬ ‫ש ל מ ו ת ו פ ש ו ט ו ת בלי עירוב וזיוף אבל כל דבר ודבר יהיה נכר במינו ה פ ש ו ט בענין שלא‬ ‫ת ה א ה א מ ת נעדרת ולא תפסד ולא תשתנה אל זולתה‪.‬‬ ‫‪) in the MS varies from‬לא יהיה כלי גבר על אשה( ‪The commentary on Deut 22:5‬‬ ‫‪the printed edition, as we noted above. The MS reads:‬‬ ‫ענין ה מ צ ו ה הזאת שיהיה כל דבר הווה בהוויתו ויעשה כל מ ע ש ה באופן שראוי שיעשה ולא‬ ‫בזיוף ושקרו ולז״א לא יהיה כלי גבר על אשה ל ה ד מ ו ת אליה‪ .‬ולא ילבש גבר ש מ ל ת א ש ה כי‬ ‫זה מ מ ה שירבה הזנות ו ה ח ט ולז״א כי ת ו ע ב ת יי׳ אלהיך כל עושה אלה ר״ל כי הבורא ית׳‬ ‫שברא האדם כל א ח ד בענינו יהיה תועבת לבו כאשר האיש שהוא ע ש ה ב ט ב ע הזכרות יעתק‬ ‫ענינו אל הנקבות ו ה א ש ה שתהיה ב ט ב ע נקביי ת ש ת ד ל להיות איש בחלוף מ מ ה ש ע ש א ה‬ ‫הבורא ית׳ לכן היה זה תועבת לבו לפי שהוא הפך הבריאה שברא‪.‬‬ ‫‪The printed edition reads:‬‬ ‫ענין ה מ צ ו ה הזאת ו ט ע מ ה ‪ :‬שלפי שהזהיר פעמים רבות ע ל איסור ערות א ש ת איש ועל‬ ‫איסור עריות הזכיר שלא יתחכמו בני אדם ללבוש ה א ש ה בגדי האיש כדי שתלך אצלו ואיש‬ ‫לא יכירה‪ .‬וזה ב א מ ת ימצא בנשים הנשואות כי כאשר ירצו ל ה ב ע ל לחשוקיהן וללכת‬ ‫לבקשם הנה ילבשו בגדי בעליהן כדי שלא ירגישו בהן וילכו כאיש ההולך לבקש חברו‪ .‬גם‬ ‫האנשים ה מ ב ק ש י ם מ ש כ ב הזכור ילבשו בגדי ה א ש ה ל ה ד מ ו ת אליה ולעורר ל ב חזונים ‪...‬‬ ‫ואפשר שנסמכה הפרשה הזאת למצות הטעינה לומר כי כ מ ו ש ל א יאותו כלי גבר ותכסיסיו‬ ‫ומנהגיו לאשה כן לא יאותו תכסיסי ה א ש ה ולבושיה לאיש גם לא דרכי האשה‪ .‬וידוע שאין‬ ‫דרך הנשים לעזור אל טעינות ופריקות מן ה מ ש א ו ת וכיוצא בזה ולכן יאות אל האדם שלא‬ ‫ינהג מנהג הנשים ודרכיהן לבלתי נתן זרוע לאחיו לעזור בזה אבל יאזור כגבר חלציו ויעזור‬ ‫למי שיצטרך אליו ש ל מ ה יהיה כעוטיה יושב ו ב ט ל ואחיו מצטער‪.‬‬ ‫‪One of the literary devices that Abravanel used in all his printed Biblical com‬‬‫‪ at the beginning of each‬ספקות ‪mentaries was to pose a number of questions or‬‬ ‫‪chapter or parasha. In his commentaries on the Prophets he limited himself to‬‬ ‫‪six questions, but in the commentaries on the Pentateuch he often asked more‬‬ ‫‪than a dozen questions about difficult readings throughout the parasha and then‬‬ ‫‪proceeded to resolve each question as he explained the relevant verses. In the‬‬ ‫‪Harvard MS Abravanel does not pose the questions at the beginning of the‬‬ ‫‪parasha. The beginnings of only two parashiyot are extant in the MS but neither of‬‬ ‫‪them include the questions. Sometimes, Abravanel poses the questions in the‬‬ ‫‪course of his commentary in the middle of the parasha and then resolves each‬‬ ‫‪difficulty in its place. Apparendy he had not refined the use of this device to the‬‬ ‫‪same extent that he had in his later commentaries.‬‬ ‫‪Abravanel has been accused of plagiarism. Meir Arama, the son of Isaac‬‬ ‫‪Arama, claimed that Abravanel copied long passages from his father's com-‬‬

mentary on Pentateuch, Akedat Yi^hak. Biographers of Abravanel and other scholars have dealt with this problem of literary borrowing by Abravanel, some accusing him of outright plagiarism and others taking a more apologetic stand. 6 We will not take a position on this question; we will simply point out that commentaries on two of the verses containing passages identical to the text in Akedat Yi^hak are found in our MS. They are Deut 22:5-6 ‫ כלי גבר‬and 7.‫ קן צפור‬In both cases the "plagiarized" paragraphs were not copied in the Harvard MS. They were added later by Abravanel. Arama wrote his Akedat Yi^hak in the 1480's, after Abravanel had completed his early version of the commentary on Deut and before he completed his revised edition in 1496. If the controversial passages were found m the early version of Abravanel's commentary the question of the alleged plagiarism would be resolved. Scholars writing on Abravanel have pointed out that Abravanel never quoted or mentioned Joseph Hayyun, chief rabbi of Lisbon at the same time Abravanel resided there. It is known that they were in contact and that Abravanel even aksed Hayyun for his opinion on the question of the authorship of Deuteronomy. The reply, called .‫ מ א מ ר ״מגיר משנה״‬was recendy published by A Gross 8 and he shows that Abravanel made use of the reply in the introduction to his printed commentary on Deut without acknowledging Hayyun's contribution. In MS Harvard, Abravanel quotes Hayyun one time on Deut 27: 2-8, but in the printed edition he copies parts of the quotation but substitutes a different explanation of the Biblical text.9 Why did Abravanel deliberately omit part of Hayyun's explanation and why did he excise his name from the commentary? We leave that question open for speculation. Is the Harvard MS, then, the same MS that Abravanel left behind in Portugal and later found in Corfu? Probably not. The Harvard MS is not an autograph, it was not written by Abravanel himself; there are too many errors that can only be ascribed to the carelessness of copyists. Obviously, the MS is a copy, possibly a copy of the original MS. It is written in a Sephardic style script and is undated. Watermarks, kindly copied for me by librarians in the Houghton Library in Harvard, are similar but not identical to watermarks found on paper used in the first quarter of the 16th century. The closest resemblance is to watermarks dated in the early 1520's. but there are also some similar types of watermarks dating to the last decade of the 15th cent. In all probability, then, the MS was copied just after 1500, that is after Abravanel had completed his revised second redaction of his commentary. One could say that if the Harvard MS was written after Abravanel had completed his second version then perhaps it is

7 8

Cf. Netanyahu, 296, note 92 and the sources he cited. Lemberg 1868 edn., ch. 97, f. 79a-79b. Gross, Α. 1989. "‫ יחסים אינטלקטואליים‬- ‫ "ר׳ יוסף חיון ור׳ יצחק א ב ר כ נ א ל‬Michatin, 23-33. The MS reads: ‫ו ה ח כ ם ר׳ יוסף ן׳ ח י ק אמי ש ה י ה ה ס ב ה בו ל פ י שיתנו ה ק ל ל ו ת אשר בהר עיבל ע ל כ ל ע ו ב ר ה מ צ ו ת‬ .‫ה כ ת ו ב ו ת באבנים ה ה ם יען רוב בני אדם ישמרו ה מ צ ו ת ל י ר א ת העונש מ ש י ש מ ר ו אותה ל ח ק ו ת השכר‬ The text in the printed edition reads: ‫אם ל פ י שיתנו ה ק ל ל ו ת בהר עיבל ע ל כ ל ע ו ב ר ה מ צ ו ת ה כ ת ו ב ו ת ש מ ה באבנים ואם לפייס את ה ש ב ט י ם‬ .‫שיעמוד ע ל ה ק ל ל ה בהר ע י ב ל בהיות ה מ ז ב ח והאבנים ו ה ת ו ר ה ב ת ו כ ם ואם היות ה ב ר כ ו ת ע ל הר גריזים‬

another revision made by Abravanel or another commentary by an early 16th century author based on Abravanel's work. These assumptions, however seem highly unlikely. If it were another revision by Abravanel why would he remove the ‫ ספקות‬from the introduction to each parasha and disperse them throughout his commentary when he continued to use this literary device in the other commentaries on the Bible written after 1496? If we were to uphold a theory that another author plagiarized Abravanel's commentary we would have to make some very unlikely assumptions, namely that the author had access to Abravanel's unpublished commentary, that he also had access to some otherwise unknown writings of Joseph Hayyun and that he recognized the parts apparendy pirated from Akedat Yi^hak which was only published in 1522, and deleted them. No, it seems much more reasonable to assume that a MS or few copies of the original commentary by Abravanel continued to circulate, perhaps until the revised edition was printed in 1551, among a small circle of Spanish or Portuguese exiles unaware that Abravanel had written a new edition of his commentary. One of these MSS was copied early in the 16th cent and parts of the copy are still extant in MS Harvard Heb. 108.10

I should like to thank the Curator of Manuscripts of the Houghton Library, Leslie Mortis, for the assistance granted me and for the permission to study and publish this MS. I hope to publish the text of this MS in a forthcoming volume of Kore^al-Yad.

SEMÁNTICA Y SINTAXIS DEL PARALELISMO EN EL LIBRO DE ISAIAS GUADALUPE SEIJAS DE LOS RÎOS ZARZOSA Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain

Introduction1 El propôsito de este articulo es analizar el fenômeno del paralelismo desde una perspectiva amplia procurando, en la medida de lo posible, prescindir de esquemas previos. Mi interés no se ha limitado a realizar una clasificaciôn de los casos que se pueden eriquetar bajo el epigrafe de paralelismo—ya que toda casuisrica corre el riesgo de encorsetar y reducir realidades de gran riqueza—sino constatar como emplea el texto de Isaias la lengua hebrea para expresar una misma idea ο imagen desde la pluralidad de sus aspectos. Dicho de otra manera, la forma en que se refleja en el texto la ardculaciôn multiple de la realidad. Nadie duda de que en el libro de Isaias (caps. 1-36) existe paralelismo, el paralelismo tal y como se menciona en los estudios clàsicos de poética hebrea. Valga c o m o ejemplo la definiciôn de Waxman: The basic idea and the oldest form of Hebrew poetry that we find, is the parallelism of thought according to which each verse is divided into two halves and where the thought of the second half runs parallel to the first except that it is expressed in different words. It is really a kind of rhyme, but not of words, only of thought.2 Ya en el s. XVIII R. Lowth 3 distinguia très tipos de paralelismo: sinonimico, andnômico y sintético. Esta clasificaciôn pronto fue puesta en tela de juicio y sigue cuestionada en la actualidad. 4 Asimismo numerosos investigadores 5 han criticado la necesidad de elaborar casuisticas pormenorizadas ya que bajo estos epigrafes se recogen un numéro muy reducido de ejemplos. A medida que he ido profundizando en el texto hebreo de Isaias6 he observado la existencia de bastantes casos en estrecha relaciôn con el fenômeno del paralelismo que no encajaban dentro de la aproximaciôn traditional. Veamos como ejemplo Is 4,1: "Siete mujeres se agarrarán a un solo hombre en aquel dia, diciendo: Nuestro pan comeremos y nuestro manto vestiremos, con tal de que seamos denominadas con tu nombre." 7 Entiendo que la secuencia "nuestro pan comeremos y nuestro 1

2 3 4 5 6 7

En estas páginas expongo de forma resumida la ponencia que présenté en el VI Congreso de la Asociaciôn Europea de Estudios Judios. Waxman, M. 1930-33. A History of Jewish Literature. New York, 20. Lowth, R. 1753. De sacrapoesi Hebraeorum. Oxford. Cf. Moria, V. 1994. Lihtvs sapiencialesy otros escritos. Estella. Véase entre otros Alonso Schäkel, L. 1987. Manual de poética hebrea. Madrid. Seijas de los Rios-Zarzosa, G. 1992. Anáhsis sintáctic0 de!libro de Isaias (cap. 1-39). Madrid, 201 ss. Las traducciones están tomadas de Cantera, F.-Iglesias, M. 1975. Sagrada Biblia. Madrid.

manto vestiremos" no debe encuadrarse bajo la étiqueta de paralelismo sinonimico. En estas dos frases se percibe la articulaciôn plural de una misma realidad, una sola idea expresada por medio de dos oraciones. Las mujeres ofrecen automantenerse, no ser un problema econômico para el hombre que las proteja y les dé descendencia. 8 Por todo ello considero que las definiciones más acertadas acaban siendo las más amplias y genéricas, es decir, aquellas que recogen el "espiritu" del concepto sin que el anâlisis de las estructuras empleadas condicionen el planteamiento de fondo.

Anâlisis Antes de proseguir he de hacer algunas consideraciones de orden prâctico. Mi aproximaciôn al tema parte no solo del anâlisis sintâcrico y semânrico de la oraciôn implicada en el paralelismo, sino también de las oraciones más prôximas, o sea, del denominado contexto inmediato. Esto permite acceder al texto con una vision global y multiple que se escaparía al tratarla desde una perspectiva puramente oracional. Por otra parte, he de mencionar que la dificultad del trabajo que emprendo reside en que, probablemente, no se podrân deducir reglas précisas que definan como es el comportamiento sintâctico y semântico de todos los textos con respecto al paralelismo. En cambio, si podremos obtener un conocimiento del mismo acorde con su riqueza, diversidad y dominio de la lengua. Este articulo analiza cuatro lineas de comportamiento sintâctico en relaciôn con el paralelismo: verbo sobreentendido, negaciôn, sintaxis compleja formada por más de una oraciôn y casos de especial interés.

Verbo sobreentendido El verbo de la primera oraciôn no solo ejerce su influencia en la oraciôn en que se inserta, sino también en la oraciôn inmediatamente posterior. En Isaias aparece un numéro considerable de veces con un comportamiento sintâcrico bastante definido. Las formas verbales más empleadas son el perfecto consecutivo (aparece en la mitad de los casos) y el imperfecto (en la tercera parte de los casos), normalmente en posiciôn no inicial, mientras que el perfecto y el imperfecto consecutivo se usan muy poco.

Negaciôn En principio fijé la atenciôn en oraciones muy breves agrupadas de dos en dos. Semánticamente repetían la misma idea, pero dada la brevedad del texto era muy dificil observar estructuras sintácticas idénticas. En varios casos nos encontramos simplemente ante dos verbos precedidos de negaciôn y coordinados mediante la conjunciôn waw siendo el valor prédominante el de la repedciôn, el énfasis sobre un determinado hecho o acciôn.

Alonso Schökel, L.-Sicre Diaz, J. L. 1980. Comentario a profitas. Vol I. Madrid, 131.

Uno de los casos analizados es Is 5,6: N - Y Q T L / wN-YQTL 9 " n o será podada ni binada". A mi entender estas oraciones no se presentan en el texto com o acciones sucesivas, sino como una misma acciôn o como acciones similares que pretenden subrayar el alcance, la magnitud de la medida tomada por Dios. Es más, dentro del contexto aún se percibe con mayor niddez: WYQTL-x N-YQTL w-N-YQTL WQTL-x

La trocaré en desierto no será podada ni binada Y brotarà cardos y abrojos

Los dos imperfectos junto con el perfecto consecudvo forman parte de la imagen "converdrse en desierto" y la importancia de'cada una de ellas queda diluida en el conjunto.

Sintaxis compleja formada por mds de una oraciôn Es posible que bajo este epigrafe encontremos textos en los que, desde un punto de vista semântico, se perciba con mayor claridad el paralelismo. Sin embargo, se constata que cada idea no está reflejada en una única oraciôn sino en el conjunto de dos oraciones. Algunos ejemplos son casos de protasis y apôdosis, c o m o en Is 1,15: Y cuando extendéis vuestras palmas, oculto mis ojos de vosotros; aunque multipliquéis las plegarias, no escucho. E n ambos versos se percibe la secuencia prôtasis/apôdosis aunque se emplean formas verbales disdntas. Existe una corrrelaciôn entre las protasis y la apôdosis de cada uno de los versos pero quedarnos ahi reduce claramente las posibilidades del texto, porque la idea que se repite es la que se refleja en la totalidad del verso y no en cada una de las oraciones que lo forman. Otro upo similar es el de las oraciones ampliadas por oraciones de reladvo o por oraciones finales. Revisten especial interés los casos en los que la vinculaciôn entre las oraciones que conforman la primera unidad del paralelismo no es sintácdca sino semándca, no exisdendo ninguna dependencia o subordinaciôn de una para con la otra. 10

Casos de especial interés E n este apartado estudio algunos textos—se podrian incluir otros—que no encajan dentro de ninguna clasificaciôn pero que, en mi opinion, manifiestan el elevado dominio de la lengua hebrea de la que hace gala el autor del libro de Isaias. Un ejemplo de la variedad y riqueza de las relaciones sintácdcas empleadas en este libro de Isaias es Is 13,10." El texto hebreo se dispone en dos versos: 9

10

"

Las abreviaturas utilizadas son: N (negaciôn), YQTL (imperfecto), w (waw), Q T L (perfecto), W Q T L (perfecto consecudvo), χ (elemento sintâcrico de la oraciôn, exceptuando el verbo) y W Y Q T L (imperfecto consecutivo). Is 5,7; Is 29,9 e i s 31,3 entre otros. Otros casos analizados con detenimiento en la ponencia son Is 6,11; Is 28,9 e Is 17,10-11.

φ-χ-Ν-YQTL QTL-x-x / w-x-N-YQTL-x Porque las estrellas del cielo y su constelaciôn de Orion no harán ya brillar su luz; se oscurecerà el sol en su orto y la luna no hará lucir su luz. Lo primero que destaca es la desigualdad en la longitud de cada una de las unidades. La primera oraciôn es excepcionalmente larga, mientras que las siguientes se adaptan a una disposition más clàsica en el primer y segundo hemisdquio con estructura A B C / B ' A ' C'. Es evidente que el paralelismo del segundo verso es más fâcil de detectar. Sin embargo, quedarse en este punto empobreceria y, en cierto modo, falsearia la correcta comprensiôn del texto ya que pasaria desapercibida la idea de conjunto expresada en la totalidad del versiculo. Se observan dos dpos de vinculaciones: a) Todo el versiculo forma una única secuencia. Es fundamental el que la pardcula kj initie el versiculo ya que agludna a las très oraciones. Prédomina la imagen de conjunto en la que el firmamento está formado por las estrellas, el sol y la luna. b) Un subconjunto, marcado mediante la asindesis, en el que el segundo imperfecto está en paralelismo con el perfecto initial asindético.

Conclusion A modo de resumen se puede a fir mar que una aproximaciôn al tema del paralelismo desde una perspecdva amplia, en la que se tenga en cuenta no solo el análisis de la oraciôn individual sino también el contexto proximo, nos permite apreciar multiples conexiones y vinculaciones, que pasan desapercibidas en un primer estudio del hebreo empleado en el libro de Isaias. Por otra parte, creo que ha quedado de manifiesto hasta qué punto la clasificaciôn traditional es insuficiente con respecto a este recurso estilistico, por no contemplar numérosos casos de gran interés.

T H E

TENSES IN

T A R G U M

OF

THE

JEREMIAH

FLORIS SEPMEIJER Theol. Univer. van de Gereform. Kerken, The Netherlands As a result of my contribution to A Bilingual Concordance to the Targum of the Prophets, the concordance to the Targum of Jeremiah was published last June. 1 Within this framework I examined the way in which the tenses and moods of the Masoretic text are translated in the Targum. I restricted myself to the Masoretic text and its Targum, excluding the paraphrases and the addidons. Other versions and textual interpretations are skipped. By means of database software agreements and differences are established.2 Hebrew Perfect = Perfect The translator of the Targum of Jeremiah translates the Hebrew perfect by a perfect: 1285 times whether both stative and active verb have the meaning of both present and past. The perfect is only translated 4 times 1 : 1 9 (twice) and 31 : 39 (twice) by an imperfect of ‫ ה ו ה‬and a participle and once 8 : 7 by a perfect of ‫ ה י ה‬and a participle, e.g.3 1:19

8: 7

MT ( 4 . Tg. MT Tg.

Though they attack you, they will not prevail ( ‫ו ל א ־ י ו כ ל ו‬ ‫ונלחמו אליך‬ They will dispute and fight before you ( 5 . ( ‫ו מ ג י ח י ן‬ But my people do not know (‫)ידעו‬. But my people have not known (‫)הוו ידעין‬.

‫יהון דינין‬

Hebrew Perfect = Imperfect In 185 cases the targumist translates the perfect by an imperfect expressing the future, e.g. 32 : 4

1

2 3

4

5

MT He will be surrended to the king... and will speak (‫)ודבי‬. Tg. But he shall surely be handed over into the power of the king... and he shall speak (‫)וימלל‬.

A Bilingual Concordance To the Targum of the Prophets. Volume Twelve, Volume Thirteen, Volume Fourteen, Jeremiah edited by Floris Sepmeijer. Leiden: Brill, 1998. I am most grateful to Peterjan van der Wal for preparing the database. The complicated word ‫ מ ב ל י ג י ת י‬in 8,18 is considered to be a verb and translated into ‫מ ל ע ג ץ‬ ‫על ד ה ו ו‬, see Koehler, L. und Baumgartner, W. 1974. Hebräisches und Aramäisches Lexikon %tm Alten Testament. Dritte Auflage. Lieferung II, 514 s.v. ‫ מ ב ל י ג י ת‬. Leiden: Brill. I made use of the translation: The Revised English Bible with Apocrypha, Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, 1989. I made use o f the translation: Hayward, R. 1987. The Targum 0f]eremiah. Translated, with a Critical

Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes. (The Aramaic Bible Volume 12). Edinburgh: T.& T. Clark.

Hebrew Perfect = Infinitive Only in 13 times the perfect is translated by an infinidve, e.g.

2:8

MT They had no real knowledge of me (‫)ידעוני‬. Tg. They (the teachers of the law) didn't study to know the fear of me (‫)איליפו למידע‬.

Hebrew Perfect = Participle The perfect is rendered 91 times by an acdve or passive pardciple referring to the present, future or past, e.g.

9 : 5 MT Tg. 18:23 MT Tg.

They refuse to acknowledge me (‫)מאנו‬. They refuse to know the fear of me (‫( )מסרבין‬acdve pardciple). Well you knŪw, Lord (‫)ידעת‬. But as for you, Ο Lord, it is known and revealed before you (‫)ידיע‬ (passive participle).

Hebrew Perfect = Noun The perfect is translated 27 times by a noun, e. g.

23 : 25 MT I have had a dream, I have had a dream (‫)חלמתי‬. Tg. The word of prophesy has been told to me in a dream (‫)בחלמא‬. Hebrew Imperfect = Imperfect The imperfect is rendered by an imperfect 797 times. Twice the imperfect is translated by a perfect of ‫ ה ו ה‬and a participle 5 : 28 and 13 : 12 and twice by an imperfect of ‫ ה ו ה‬and a participle 13 : 16 and 23 : 6 (= 33 : 6).

Hebrew Imperfect = Perfect The imperfect is rendered by a perfect 21 times, e.g.

20 : 9 MT I was weary with holding it under, and could endure no more (‫)אוכל‬. Tg. I was wearing of bearing them and I am not able to do so (‫)יכילת‬. Hebrew Imperfect = Infinitive Only 14 times the imperfect is freely rendered by an infinitive preceded by a conjunction or verb, e.g.

18 : 20

MT Is good to be repaid with evil (‫?)הישלם‬ Tg. Is it possible to repay evil for good (‫?)האפשר לשלמא‬

Hebrew Imperfect = Participle The targumist translates the imperfect by a participle expressing a durative aspect 107 times, e.g.

31 : 22 MT How long will you waver, my wayward child (‫?)תתחמקין‬ Tg. How long will you restrain yourselves from returning, o assembly (‫?)מתחסנא‬

Hebrew Imperfect = Noun The Targum has 17 times a noun instead of an imperfect: a free rendering of the imperfect, e.g.

18:6

MT Israel, can I deal with you (‫?)אוכל‬ Tg. Is there not power before me to do, ο house of Israel (‫?)יוכלא‬

Hebrew Inverted Imperfect = Perfect The inverted imperfect, expressing the past is translated by a perfect 451 times.

Hebrew Inverted Imperfect = Imperfect, Participle and Noun The Targum has 7 times an imperfect, 11a participle and twice a noun, e.g.

23 : 13 MT Tg. 5 : 7 MT Tg.

And they led my people Israel astray (‫)ויתעו‬. And they lead my people Israel astray (‫( )מתנבן‬active participle). And they committed adultery (‫)ינאפו‬. But they have turned back to become harlots (‫( )זנאין‬noun).

Hebrew Cohortative and Jussive The cohortative and the jussive are rendered by an imperfect because in Aramaic these moods do not exist.

Hebrew Imperative = Imperative The imperative is translated by an imperative 232 times.

Hebrew Imperative = Perfect, Imperfect, Infinitive and Noun The imperative is rendered by a perfect twice, by an imperfect 13 times, by an infinitive 4 times and by a noun 5 times, e.g.

14:19 14: 19 MT Tg. Tg MT 4:8 Tg. Tg6: 11 11 MT Tg. Tg10:24 MT Tg. Tg-

Wait for peace (mp). We hoped for peace (‫( )סברנא‬perfect). Therefore put on sackcloth (‫)חגרו‬. Because of this, let them gird on sack-cloth (‫( )ייסרון‬imperfcct). I must pour it out ‫ךח‬0‫)ש‬. I am not able to pour out (‫( טלמשפך‬infinitive). Correct me, Lord (‫)יסרני‬. The Lord has brought sufferings upon them (‫( )יסורין‬noun).

Hebrew Participle = Participle, Perfect and Noun Active and passive participles occur 506 times. The participle is rendered by a perfect 43 times. Since the participle also has a nominal meaning, the translation as a noun is used 82 times, e.g.

11:17 MT Tg. 50 : 12 MT Tg.

The Lord of Hosts, who planted (‫)הנוטה‬. And the Lord of Hosts, who has established (‫( )דקיים‬perfect). She, who bore you, will put to shame (‫)יולדתכם‬. Your country has been shattered (‫( )מדינתכון‬noun).

Hebrew Infinitive = Infinitive, Perfect, Imperfect, Imperative The rendering of the infinitive construct or infinitive absolute by an infinitive is found 386 times. Lacking an infinitive construct, the Targum sometimes renders it by a conjunction and a perfect: 37 times. The infinitive absolute as an equiva-

lent of the imperative followed by a perfect continuing the imperative is translated by an imperative and imperfect: 11 times, e.g. 1 :3

2:2

MT The inhabitants of Jerusalem were carried off into exile (‫)עד ׳גלות‬. Tg. And he (the king of Babylon) took the people into exile (‫( )ואגלי‬perfect). MT Go, make this proclamation ( ‫)והלך ו ק ר א ת‬. Tg. Go, and prophesy ( ‫( ) א י ז י ל ו ת ת נ ב י‬imperative, imperfect).

Hebrew Paronomasia = Paronomasia The infinitive absolute and a form of the finite verb of the same verb, the Targum corresponds to MT 53 times. Only twice the Targum deviates from the Hebrew text. This construction is rendered by an imperfect of another verb and an infinitive and suffix in 11 : 12 and by two passive participles in 31 : 18 11 : 12 MT But assuredly they will not save them (‫)והושע לא־הושיעו‬. Tg. Will they be able to deliver them ( . ( ‫ל מ פ ר ק ו ז י ן‬ ‫יכלן‬ 31:18 MT ι listened intendy ( ‫)שמוע ש מ ע ת י‬. Tg. The house of Israel is heard and revealed before me (‫)שמיע וגלי‬. Conclusion It appears that 17 % of the verbs in the Targum of Jeremiah, which is 762 of a total of 4443 verbs, deviates from MT excluding the other verbs, paraphrases and additions. The perfect and the imperfect are usually rendered by an active or passive participle to express the present, the future or the past or to harmonize with the preceding participle: 198 times. 6 The perfect is translated by an imperfeet to denote the present or the future: 185 times. It appears from the above-mentioned examples that the Targum paraphrases MT in order to make it understandable to the people. The Targum actualises MT to its audience, e.g. 14:19 MT Wait for peace. Tg. We hoped for peace. In accordance with exegetical rules the verbs were changed to avoid anthropomorphisms e.g. 18:23 MT Well you know, Lord. Tg. But as for you, Ο Lord, it is known and revealed before you. Verbs were added to sentences to clarify the meaning, in this case a converse translation e.g. 2 :8

6

MT They had no real knowledge of me. Tg. They (the teachers of the Law) did not study to know the fear of me.

See Smelik, W. F. 1995. The Targum of Judges. (Oudtestamentische Studiën, Vol. 36). Index o f Subjects s.v. 'harmonisadon.' Leiden: Brill.

Comparing the outcome of the research of Deutero-Isaiah to the research of Jeremiah it is to be concluded that consistendy the targumists translated the tenses and the moods of Jeremiah very closely.7

7

Korpel, M. C. A-de Moor, J. C-Sepmeijer, F. Consistency with Regard to Tenses: Targum and Peshitta in two Samples from Deutero-Isaiah (forthcoming). In his chapter on the Aramaic transladon of the Hebrew verbal form in the verbal clause in Genesis-2 Kings Bombeck formulated a number of rules which the translators o f the Targum carefully observed and those of the Peshitta to a lesser degree, see Bombeck, S. 1997. Das althebräische Verbalsystem aus aramäischer Sicht. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 59-60.

" H A S T A QUE VENGA SHYLH

(GN 49,10)

EN LOS PRINCIPALES EXPONENTES DE LA EXEGESIS JUDIA MEDIEVAL MIGUEL ÁNGEL TÁBET Pontificia Università délia Santa Croce, Roma, Italy

Introducciôn El término shylh es uno de los hapax legômena veterotestamentarios que ha atraido más la atenciôn de los exegetas judios y cristianos,1 sobre todo por encontrarse en un contexto considerado generalmente mesiânico desde época antigua, como lo ponen de manifiesto la version griega de los LXX y las diversas paráfrasis targúmicas al Pentateuco. 2 No es extrano, por esto, que los grandes exegetas judios medievales se interesasen por su mas exacto significado, al igual que los teôlogos cristianos.3 Nuestra finalidad en este trabajo ha sido la de exponer las interpretaciones que algunos de los más renombrados exegetas judios del periodo en estudio, concretamente Rashi de Troyes, Abraham ibn Ezra, Mosheh ben Nahman e Yishaq Abravanel, hicieron del término en cuestiôn. 4 Si comenzamos con Rashi, es porque parece indudable que el célébré exegeta de Troyes se deba considerar el primer gran comentarista judio medieval propiamente hablando. En él se encuentra el fruto maduro de una larga tradiciôn rabinica y su exégesis influirá en la interpretaciôn biblica posterior. La inclusion de Abravanel corresponde al hecho de que este sabio judio de inicios del renacimiento supo mantenerse en un continuo diâlogo con la tradiciôn exegética medieval, concretamente la de los grandes exegetas mencionados.

La interpretaciôn de Rashi de Troyes (ca. 1040-110$) En su breve comentario a Gn 49,10, Rashi senala sin ambages que las palabras de Jacob "hasta que venga shylh" alcanzan su cumplimiento en el Mesîas: "este es el rey Mesîas"—dice—"a quien pertenece el reino. Asi lo traduce el Targum." Para la etimologia de shylh, sin embargo, el sabio de Troyes parece preferir la del midrash haggàdico (Bereshit Rabbah, apéndice a Gn 49,10) "hasta que venga el Cf. especialmente Posnanski, A. 1904. Schiloh: ein Beitrag ^ur Geschichte der Messiaslehre. Leipzig: Hinrichs. Para una más amplia bibliografïa, cf. Tábet, M. A. 1991. Los comentarios de Abraham ibn Έ?ra, Mosheh ben Nachman e Yshchaq Abravanel a las Bendiciones ά Jacob (Gen 49, 1-28). Salamanca: Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca. Cf. Pérez Fernandez, M. 1981. Tradiciones mesidnicas en el Targum Palestinense. Valencia-Jerusalén: Inst. SanJeronimo, 97-169. Sobre la exégesis patrística a G n 49, además de la bibliografïa citada, cf. las diversas obras de M. Simonetti dedicadas a este tema. Para la exégesis de estos autores, cf. Sàenz-Badillos, A.-Targarona Borrâs, J. 1996. Los judios de Sefarad ante la Biblia. Côrdoba: El Almendro.

'tributo a él' (shay /0)," segûn las palabras del Sal 76,12: "aporten tributos al Terrible." Toda la frase tendria el siguiente senddo: a pardr de David, la tribu de Judá poseeria perennemente el cetro, conservândolo hasta los tiempos del Mesías, cuando vendrían los pueblos a ofrecerle dones y tributos. N o se trata evidentemente del "cetro real," que llegô a su fin con la desapariciôn de la monarquia; sino del "predominio" de Judá sobre sus hermanos, que séria el significado de las palabras: "No se apartará el cetro de Judá; ni el legislador5 de entre sus pies." La primera expresiôn, explica el exegeta de Troyes siguiendo una cierta tradiciôn rabinica (Sanh 5a), se refiere a los jefes del exilio en Babilonia, todos ellos de la tribu de Judá, "los cuales han gobemado el pueblo con el cetro recibido del soberano." 6 Respecto a la frase "Ni el legislador de entre sus pies, éstos serian "los estudiosos de la Tôrah. Los principes de la rierra de Israel" (cf. Hôrayot 2b), es decir, los jefes de lasyeshivot. Todos ellos también de la tribu de Judá.

La interpretaciôn de Abraham ibn Ezra (1089—1164 ca.) Ibn Ezra conocia bien la problemâtica existente en su dempo a propôsito del término shylh, mencionando en su comentario al Pentateuco 7 las cuatro explicaciones enfonces consideradas mas probables. La primera es la del "traductor arameo" (Onqelos), de indole claramente mesiánica: "hasta que venga el Mesias, cuya es la realeza, y a él se someterân los pueblos." Ibn Ezra senala que los que siguen esta exégesis (y tal fue el caso de Onqelos y de Saadya Gaôn), leen shylh como she-lô (aquél cuyo es). Es la interpretaciôn que desde la época patrisdca acogiô la tradiciôn crisdana. La segunda opinion hace denvar shylh de shilyah (secundinas, placenta), término que aparece en Dt 28,57: "y a las secundinas [que proceden de su seno]." Utilizando una imagen, el Dt habla del nino que sale con las secundinas de la mujer. En nuestro texto, Jacob diria: "hasta que venga su hijo envuelto en las secundinas de la mujer como todos los nacidos de hombre." En su obra gramatical Sefatyéter, ya ibn Ezra discutía desfavorablemente esta opinion, como también la de aquellos que relacionan shylh con el término rabinico shelîl, "feto, embriôn" (Hullin 77b), pues la derivation gramadcal no le parece clara. Mas probable le parece a ibn Ezra la cuarta opinion, la toponimica, que él mismo habia defendido en el Sefatyéter siguiendo la opinion de Saadya Gaôn. En esta interpretaciôn, shylh designara la ciudad de Silo, y el senddo de la frase "hasta que venga shylh" séria que el cetro recibido por Judá (en el momento de la bendiciôn de Jacob) lo poseeria aim con mayor plenitud cuando sobreviniera la ruina de la ciudad de Silo (cf Lv 22,7), ο hasta que fuera abandonada, segûn la expresiôn del Sal 78,60: "abandonô la morada de Silo," pues enfonces Dios elegiria "a David su siervo" (Sal 78,70). Aquí, como en la explication siguiente, 5

6

7

En la exégesis judia medieval es frecuente la traducciôn del término mehôqcq por "legislador" ο "escriba." Ix>s exilarcas ο jefes de los hebreos en el exilio, gobernaron con gran autonorru'a la comunidad hebrea, por concesiôn de las autoridades persas, hasta fines del tardo medievo, s. XI aprox. Cf. la ediciôn anotada de Weizer, A. 1977. Abral)am ibn Εςτα: Pen/she" ha-Târah, 3 vol. Jerusalem: Harav Kook.

se da por supuesto que el adverbio 'ad (hasta que) no hace referencia a un momento histôrico—el desdno tràgico de Silo (hacia el ano 1050)—después del cual cambiaría desfavorablemente la situaciôn de Judá, sino mas bien a que ese momento histôrico marcaria el inicio de una mayor posesiôn de lo que ya para Judá era présente. Por tanto, "hasta que venga shylh" habria que traducirlo asi: Judá aumentaria su poder cuando los hombres de Judá vinieran (es decir, llegaran) a los linderos de Silo, abandonando esa morada, según el Sal 78,60: "Lo oyô 'Elohim, y se encolerizô, y rechazô a Israel furiosamente; abandonô la morada de Silo, la denda en que habitara entre los hombres." Por encima de estas cuatro opiniones, ibn Ezra coloca una quinta, que considera mas exacta, en la que shylh es traducido como sinônimo de benô (su hijo). Esta exégesis se apoya en dos observaciones, vâlidas según ibn Ezra: en el hecho de que el término shylh, leido con waw en lugar de he (pronombre personal sufijo), como ocurre en casos semejantes (Gn 9,21), y el verbo shalah (sacar, extraer) proceden de una misma raiz, pudiéndose interpretar una palabra por la otra según las reglas hermenéuricas de la exégesis rabinica; y en que el verbo shalah, en el contexto del pasaje citado, 2 Re 4,28, donde significa "dar a luz," se puede considerar, por el paralelismo, sinônimo de ben (hijo). En 2 Re 4,28, en efecto, se lee la queja de la sunamita a quien Eliseo proferizô que tendria un hijo cuando ya no lo esperaba, pero que muriô poco después. En su dolor, la sunamita dijo a Eliseo: (‫׳‬Habia yo pedido un hijo (ben) a mi senor? (‫׳‬Acaso no dije: no me hagas dar a luz (tashleh)} Se nota el paralelismo entre ben y tashleh. Ahora bien, segûn ibn Ezra, este ben al que alude el testo biblico es David, no el Mesîas, por lo que, a propôsito del versiculo siguiente, que habia de la obediencia que le deberán todas las gentes, afirma: "Asi estuvieron muchos pueblos debajo del poder de David y de su hijo Salomon." Ibn Ezra précisa aquî, como dijimos, que 'ad, segûn opinion de los intérpretes, no indica un punto de la historia después del cual a Judá le séria quitado el cetro, sino la gloria que entonces tendria su hijo (ben), David. 8

La interpretaciôn de Rabi Mosheh ben Nahmân (ca. 1195-1270) En su comentario sobre shylh,9 Nahmánides comienza por rechazar taxarivamente la opinion de ibn Ezra, porque considéra que desde el punto de vista histôrico no es posible afirmar que la tribu de Judá poseyera un cetro real antes de David, al haber sido éste su primer rey segûn el querer de Dios. Antes de consdtuirse la monarquîa, en efecto, afirma Rambán: A pesar de que la tribu [de Judá] era respetada y marchaba en vanguardia (Nm 2,9), no poseyô un cetro real, pues el cetro solo corresponde a un rey o gobernante, como está escrito: "un cetro de equidad es el cetro de tu reino" (Sal 45,7).

8

9

Se ha senalado que ibn Ezra rechaza con esta opinion una cierta interpretaciôn cristiana segûn la cual con la venida de Jesus, designado c o m o sbylob, llegaria a su fin el fin del reino de Judâ y todo Israel. Cf. Chavel, C.B. 1970. Pervshê ba-Tôrab /e-Rabbêná Mosheh ben Nahmun (Ramban), 2 vol. Jerusalem.

Las palabras de Jacob a Judá, por tanto, se han de interpretar en un senddo diferente al que le dio ibn Ezra. Ellas contendrian un p r o f u n d o senddo mesiânico: shylh es el Mesias y el "cetro" del que se habla es el "cetro real" que recayô sobre la dinasda davidica. La explication del texto séria que una vez que Judá alcanzara el reino, lo que ocurriô con David, no lo pasaria de m o d o definidvo a ninguno de sus hermanos, entregândolo en su m o m e n t o en manos del Mesias. D e ahi su interpretaciôn de las palabras " N o se apartará el cetro de Judá:" no se trata de que no se apartaria nunca, pues esta escrito: "Adonay te hará ir a ti y a tu rey, a quien tu establecerâs sobre ti, hacia una nation que ni tu conocias ni tampoco tus antepasados" (Dt 28,36), y de hecho, estando ellos y sus reyes en el exilio no hubo [en Israel] más rey ni jefes; y durante mucho tiempo "no hubo rey en Israel" (Juc 17,6). Pues el profeta [Jacob] no asegurô a Israel que no irian jamás al exilio a causa de que reinaria sobre ellos Judá, sino que no se apartaria el cetro de Judá [para pasar] a uno de sus hermanos; pues, en el reino de Israel, el jefe de ellos séria [Judá] y no gobernana ningún otro de sus hermanos. Concluye por tanto Rambán: El texto insinua que Jacob estableciô [para reinar] a la tribu dejudà sobre la de sus hermanos, y dejô en herencia a Judá el gobierno sobre Israel. Y es lo que afirma David: "Adonay, Dios de Israel, me escogiô de entre toda la casa de mi padre para que yo fuera rey sobre Israel para siempre, pues eligiô a Judá por caud‫ש‬o, y en la casa de Judá a mi casa paterna, y entre los hijos de mi padre se complaciô en mi para establecer un rey sobre todo Israel" (1 Cr 28,4). Asentada esta afirmaciôn, très cuestiones necesita aclarar todavia Nahmánides: el porqué del reinado de Saùl, que era de la tribu de Benjamin, no de Judá; la existencia de reyes en el reino del Norte que no fueron de la dinasda davidica; y el reinado sobre Judá de los asmoneos, que eran de la tribu de Levi. a) Sobre el reinado prometido por Dios transitorio, que Dios rebeldia de su pueblo demás naciones:

de Saûl, Nahmánides précisa que éste no fue el rey segûn las palabras proféricas de Jacob, sino un rey concediô en su ira, mostrando asi su desagrado ante la que lo habia rechazaba prefiriendo un rey al estilo de las

Y dijo [Jacob] "no se apartará" para insinuar que reinaria otra tribu sobre Israel. Y en relation a Saûl, la causa [de que hubiera sido elegido primer rey de Israel] fue el hecho de que la petition [que hizo el pueblo] del reinado, en aquel momento, era reprobada por el Unico Santo, bendito sea El. No quiso [Dios] establecer sobre ellos [en esas circunstancias] un [rey] de la tribu de la que séria el reinado, de la que no se apartaria nunca jamás, y [por eso] les concediô un reinado transitorio [en Saûl]. b) Respecto a los reyes del Norte, Nahmánides senala que reinaron en contra del diseno divino, aunque al principio Jeroboam hubiera asumido el poder en virtud de una profecia:

Pero cuando [las 10 tribus de] Israel prosiguieron coronando reyes de las demás tribus, uno después de otro, no volviendo [bajo el dominio del[ reino de Judá, transgredieron el mandato del Patriarca [Jacob], y por ello fueron castigados, como afirmô Oseas: "ellos han establecido un rey sin mi intervenciôn" (Os 8,4). c) Por ultimo, respecto a los asmoneos que reinaron sobre el pueblo de Israel no siendo sus reyes de la tribu de Judá, Rambán explica que el contraste de este hecho con las palabras de Jacob se pone de manifiesto en el castigo que sobrevino sobre la dinastia: Y ésta fue [también la razôn] del castigo de los asmoneos, los cuales reinaron durante el segundo Templo. Ellos fueron los piadosos de 'Elyôn (Altisimo), y a no ser por ellos [el pueblo] se habria olvidado de la Tôrah y [de la observancia de] los mandamientos de Israel; sin embargo, fueron castigados con un gran castigo, pues cuatro hijos del anciano asmoneo [Matatias], hombres piadosos, que reinaron uno después del otro, a pesar de todas sus proezas y sus triunfos cayeron bajo la espada en manos de sus enemigos. Y al final sobrevino el castigo [mayor], por el que dijeron nuestros rabinos {Baba' Batra' 3b), su recuerdo sea para bendiciôn: "cualquiera que dijera: yo soy de la casa de los asmoneos, es un esclavo," pues todos ellos fueron exterminados por este pecado.

La interpretaciôn de Yishaq Abravanel (1437-1508) E n su amplio y prolijo comentario al Pentateuco, 10 Abravanel hace un elenco amplio y detallado de la tradiciôn interpretativa judia del término shylh. Su explicaciôn es diferente a todas ellas.

Las interpretaciones precedentes Abravanel divide las interpretaciones existentes en su tiempo en très grupos: la interpretaciôn davidica de ibn Ezra (shylh es el hijo de Judá, David); la toponimica (shylh como nombre de la ciudad de Silo); y la mesiánica, que présenta diversas modalidades. E n la exposiciôn mesiánica, que es la que seguirà, distingue entre la opinion de los que refieren la profecia de Jacob a un futuro mesiânico general (la permanencia del predominio de Judá sobre las demás tribus) de la de aquellos que la interpretan exclusivamente en relaciôn al Mesîas. A propôsito de esta segunda opinion afirma: [Asi] se dice en el Bereshit Rabbah y también en el Yelammedenû:n "No se apartará el cetro de Judá." Es el trono real, pues esta escrito: "tu trono, joh 'Elohim!, es por siempre jamas" (Sal 45,7). "No se apartará el cetro de Judá:" éste es el Mesîas, hijo de David, pues él esta destinado a régir [los reinos], como está escrito: "los régiras con vara de hierro" (Sal 2,9). "Hasta que venga shylh," es decir cuando venga al que corresponde el reino. "Y a él la debilidad

10

11

N o existe una buena ediciôn critica anotada de esta obra. Hemos udlizado la publicada en Jerusalem 1964. Cf. Btrtshit Kabbah XCVIII, 8; y Αρ. I a G n 49,10; Tanhuma, Wa-yehi 10.

de [los] pueblos," de aquellos pueblos a los que débilité sus dientes, pues está escrito: "pondrân mano sobre boca" (Miq 7,16). Antes de precisar su opinion, Abravanel discute otras dos opiniones: la de Nahmánides y la de Rav Nissim. Abravanel cridca la opinion de Nahmánides porque considéra que en la frase "no se apartará el cetro de Judá" "no hay prescription y advertencia para el resto de los hermanos, pues [la frase es exclusivamente] la confirmation y la promesa de un futuro [para Judá].." Además, se pregunta Abravanel: "por el hecho de que [según Rambán] los reyes de Israel actuaron contra esta [profecia], ,jacaso [por eso] habria cesado la promesa del Patriarca y no habria permanecido [ilesa] sino en los dias de David y Salomon]? 12 N o parece conveniente afirmar que [solo] para este reducido [intervalo de] dempo profetizô el Patriarca." Por eso, indica Abravanel, que ya el Rav Nissim habia sugerido otra interpretaciôn, que el Patriarca profetizô sobre lo que habria de suceder en tiempos de Salomon: por sus pecados se dividirian los reinos y se separarian las tribus [del Norte] de Roboam, su hijo. Y por eso le prometiô [a Judá] que de todos modos le quedaria a él una parte del reino, como está escrito: "solo que no le arrancaré todo el reino, en atenciôn a David, mi siervo, y a Jerusalén, a la que escogi" (1 Re 11,13). Conforme a esta opinion observa Abravanel: me pareciô más conveniente [que se dcbia) interpretar shylh como derivado etimolôgicamente de \shal (pecado, error), que aparece en las frases]: "[y le hablaré] a él con engano (ba-sheli)" (2 Sam 3,27); "y le hiriô alli por la falta (hashat)" (2 Sam 6,7), significando shylh [por tanto] transgresiôn y pecado. Diria [entonces Jacob] que "no se apartaria el cetro de Judá, hasta que viniera 'su pecado'," es decir la prevarication de Salomon; pues después de ese [pecado] se apartaria de Judá el cetro del reino sobre todo Israel. Aunque con todo, para él séria "la congregation de [los] pueblos," es decir, que quedarian con él dos tribus, Judá y Benjamin, a las cuales [Jacob[ designô con el nombre de "pueblos." Pero esta interpretaciôn, concluye Abravanel, "con todo lo que yo he reflexionado a favor de ella, no es cierta, pues, ,;como es posible que profedzara [Jacob] la remociôn del reino de la casa de David por el pecado de Salomon y no mencionara primeramente que el reino procederia de la tribu de Judá ο [estaria] en poder de David? Y si Jacob no proferizô que Judá alcanzaria el reino, (‫׳‬como habria profedzado la remociôn de su reino?"

La opinion de Abravanel Leamos el texto completo: Cuando considéré todas estas explicaciones retrocedi mis pasos (cf Sal 119,59), para ponderar el contenido de las palabras [de Jacob|. Y yo afirmo que las explicaciones de los sabios, su recuerdo sea para bendiciôn, y las de los 12

Pues es el unico période en que el reino no estuvo dividido.

Rabinos Mosheh ben Nahmán y Nissim, son la misma cosa para mi. Y la explicaciôn mas verdadera y mejor fundada es ésta: que Jacob, nuestro Padre, no mencionô expresamente un reino, como interpretaron los exegetas, sino que dijo "el cetro," es decir, [que Judá tendria] todo lo referente a la excelencia, gobierno y mando sobre el resto de sus hermanos. Y ya encontramos [dicha excelencia] de la tribu de Judá antes de reinar un monarca en Israel. Pues Judá sobresaliô sobre sus hermanos, también en los días de José, y por eso se guiaron por su consejo [...]. Y en la marcha de los estandartes, dice [la Escritura] que el pendôn de Judá partiría en cabeza (Nm 2,9). Y en la consagraciôn del altar, "Nahsôn, hijo de Amminadab, del territorio de Judá, presentô [su ofrenda] el dia primero" (Nm 7,10-12). Y cuando recordô [Moisés] los nombres de los hombres que heredarían la tierra de Israel, junto a Eleazar, el sacerdote, y a Josué bin Nun, recordô en primer lugar a [uno de la tribu] de Judá, a Caleb ben Yefunneh (Nm 34,16-19). Y asi [también] en la distribuciôn de la tierra y su heredad, [Dios] dio posesiôn, en primer lugar, a los hijos de Judá (Jos 14—15). Y también, en los días de Saûl, cuando [Saûl] empadronô al pueblo para ir a liberar a Yabes de Galaad, y los empadronô en Bézeq, dice [el escritor sagrado]: "resultaron los hijos de Israel trescientos mil y los hombres de Judá treinta mil (1 Sam 11,8), pues la tribu de Judá—a causa de su excelencia—no fue enumerada entre el resto de las tribus. Y del mismo modo cuando [Saûl] pasô revista al pueblo [en Telam] al subir contra Amalec, no nombrô a Judá entre el conjunto de las tribus, sino separadamente, mientras que al resto de las tribus las junto (1 Sam 15,4). Todo esto ensena que aquella tribu ha gozado siempre de excelencia sobre [las de] sus hermanos.

Conclusiôn La exégesis traditional de las palabras "hasta que venga shylh" era bien por los exegetas judios medievales, adoptando posiciones personales propia perspecriva. E n el caso de los autores examinados, ésta fue la taciôn davídica (según ibn Ezra) y la mesiánica (Rashi, Nahmánides vanel), entendida de manera diversa.

conocida según la interprey Abra-

SINTAXIS DEL VERBO H E B R E O BÎBLICO NUEVAS TENDENCIAS LUIS VEGAS MONTANER U n i v e r s i d a d C o m p l u t e n s e , Madrid, Spain

Uno de los temas más controvertidos de la sintaxis hebrea es el de los usos y valores del verbo en la Biblia. Durante siglos domino la teoria esbozada por los gramáde0s medievales a partir del s. X, quienes, basados en las gramáticas arabes y en el comportamiento habituai de los verbos en el hebreo rabînico, atribuîan un valor temporal al verbo. Pero cuando trataban de explicar el hebreo biblico constataban que qatal indicaba muchas veces futuro (sobre todo en conexiôn con la conjunciôn) y yiqtol tenia valor de pasado cuando aparecia en conexiôn con la conjunciôn fuerte. Desarrollaron por ello la teoria del "waw versivo," que se generalizô enormemente, siendo durante siglos la ûnica existente, hasta el punto de que sigue vigente incluso en nuestros dias en determinados circulos lingüisticos. La inconsistencia del valor temporal de los verbos y las dificultades inherentes a este sorprendente poder de la conjunciôn obligaron a buscar nuevas explicaciones más satisfactorias. Asi, en consonancia con los avances sintâcticos en el anâlisis de las lenguas indoeuropeas y el desarrollo de la teoria del valor aspectual de las formas verbales, a partir del s. XIX se desarrollaron y consolidaron nuevas teorias para explicar el verbo hebreo biblico, basadas en su valor aspectual y no temporal. En lugar de "pasado" y "futuro" se acunaron los términos de "perfecto" e "imperfecto," respectivamente. Por otra parte, la nociôn de "waw versivo" carecia ya de base y, entre las disdntas explicaciones del valor de la conjunciôn, prevaleciô la del "waw consecutivo": el verbo con este tipo de conjunciôn esta regido por un verbo anterior. Esta nueva teoria alcanzô gran popularidad y es la que figura actualmente en los principales manuales de hebreo biblico. Por ejemplo, Waltke-O'Connor (1990) aplican al hebreo la teoria aspectuai de Comrie y consideran que qatal yyiqtol expresan acciôn perfectiva e imperfectiva respectivamente. Muy interesante es su distinciôn entre "complete" y "completed," aunque a la hora del anâlisis de los ejemplos abandonan sus principios teôricos, basados en un sistema de oposiciones, y se sumergen en una casuistica descriptiva que ignora dichos principios y resta en gran medida utilidad a su obra. No tenemos tiempo para discutir los matices diferenciales que existen dentro de esta teoria aspectual, ni si se basa en la "Aktionsart" más que en el aspecto. Tanto la teoria temporal como la aspectual se basan en una aproximaciôn a las formas verbales tomadas individualmente, sin prestar suficiente atenciôn al contexto. Se suelen extraer conclusiones a partir del anâlisis de cada forma verbal, aduciendo muchas veces los diversos valores histôricos de la misma, sin considerar adecuadamente su relaciôn sincrônica con otras formas dentro del

sistema. Subyace una teoria sintáctica basada fundamentalmente en la oraciôn, en cada oraciôn individual, sin prestar ni siquiera atenciôn muchas veces al orden de palabras de la misma. N o se dene generalmente en cuenta (a no ser para introducir consideraciones de dpo estilistico ο poético, no exclusivamente sintâctico) si existe diferencia de valor cuando un verbo ocupa la primera posi-ciôn de su oraciôn ο está precedido por un sintagma nominal. A decir verdad, esto no résulta relevante para una sintaxis oracional, sino solamente, como vere-mos a continuation, para una sintaxis textual. El afio 1960 marca una inflexion con la publicaciôn de una tesis doctoral sobre la sintaxis de los Salmos por D. Michel, para quien el verbo hebreo no dene valor temporal, sino aspectual, aunque entendido de forma diferente: las acciones no son acabadas ο inacabadas, sino vinculadas ο desvinculadas del sujeto ο del contexto. El autor biblico, por tanto, selecciona entre las formas verbales siguiendo criterios textuales: mediante jv^/o/ présenta la action como inherente al sujeto ο vinculada al contexto, mediante qatal como accidentai res-pecto al sujeto ο desvinculada de la linea principal del contexto (con valor explicadvo, ο como indication de causas ο consecuencias de las acciones de la linea principal). La conjunciôn se emplea con un valor propio (no la inversion de tiempos, sino una mayor vinculaciôn a lo anterior). Una tesis muy parecida subyace en el anâlisis de Kustár (1972). Con todo, los avances de esta nueva aproximaciôn sintácdca no encontraron mucho eco en los circulos académicos en general. El hito decisivo lo constituye la gramárica de Schneider (1974), que aplicô al hebreo los principios teôricos de Weinrich (1964), quien pardendo del examen de textos literarios modernos disringuia dos grupos de tiempos, uno con funciôn de "comentario" y vinculado preferentemente a la primera ο segunda persona, y otro con funciôn de "narration" y vinculado preferentemente a la tercera persona. La funciôn primaria de las formas verbales, por tanto, no es ya indicar dempos ο aspectos determinados, sino caracterizar el dpo de texto ο mensaje que se emite: segûn Schneider, wayyiqtol es la forma básica de la narraciôn,yiqtol la del discurso. Dos apuntes son necesarios aqut. El primero, que afecta exclusivamente al hebreo, es que la oposiciôn básica ya no es yiqtol/qatal, sino wayyiqtol!yiqtol, que son las formas principales de la narration y el discurso, respecdvamente; qatal es la forma secundaria en ambos ripos de texto. El segundo apunte, que afecta a la lingûisdca en general, dene que ver con la terminologia: a partir de Schneider se ha implantado en el hebraismo la disdnciôn entre textos narradvos y discursivos, ο sea, entre narration y discurso. N o se sigue asi la linea mayoritaria en la lingüisdca, que habla de discurso en general, resultando la narration un dpo especifico de discurso. Lo que en gran medida justifica la présente comunicaciôn es que, aunque para una vision panorâmica de las mûldples teorias son cita obligada los estudios de McFall (1982) y Waltke-O'Connor (1990), en ambos falta el anâlisis de la teoria sintáctica que Weinrich denominô "lingûisdca textual." En el caso de McFall, porque la ediciôn de 1982 es reproduction anastádca de su tesis doctoral, veinte anos anterior, por lo que la ûltima teoria citada es de 1954; la bibliografia está actualizada, pero no udlizada en el texto. En el caso de Waltke-

O'Connor (1990), porque consideran que las novedades son muy recientes y todavia no suficientemente contrastadas. Como panorâmicas que si se hacen eco de las nuevas tendencias pueden consultarse, por ejemplo, los trabajos de Vervenne (1989) y Herranz (1995). En una extensa recension de la gramádca de Schneider, Talstra (1978, 1982) acepta plenamente el planteamiento de fondo (la prioridad corresponde a la descripciôn sintácdca—es decir, la funciôn de la forma en el texto, sobre la semándca—el sentido de la forma misma), pero aboga por una mayor valoraciôn de la semántica (y por tanto, de las gramáticas tradicionales), si bien con una funciôn auxiliar respecto a la sintaxis. Aunque todavia minoritaria en el hebraismo, esta nueva corriente sintáctica va ganando cada vez más adeptos (gracias, entre otros, a los trabajos de Talstra y de Niccacci, quien incluso ha editado una gramática de la prosa biblica, cuya version espanola verá la luz en breve). De ello da fe que en la présente década hayan aparecido monografias, como la de Dawson (1994), e incluso obras de conjunto sobre el anâlisis del discurso en la Biblia, como las editadas por Bodine (1992), Bergen (1994) y Talstra (1995a), que incorporan importantes contribuciones de MacDonald (1986), Longacre (1987, 1994, 1995), Van der Merwe (1994), Talstra (1995) y Niccacci (1994ab, 1995). Para los que seguimos en nuestra investigaciôn esta linea prometedora queda ya fuera de lugar preguntarse si un verbo concreto indica un tiempo o un aspecto determinado, pues la funciôn primaria del uso de los verbos es preseleccionar sintácticamente el tipo de texto en que se inserta el mensaje. Otras nociones, como la de tiempo, pueden aparecer como funciones secundarias del verbo, ligadas más al tipo de texto que a un supuesto valor temporal intrinseco de la forma verbal. Ello explica que una misma forma verbal pueda funcionar en la esfera del pasado ο del futuro, segûn el tipo de discurso en que se encuentre. Pero, incluso dentro de la sintaxis textual, no puede uno limitarse ya, como en las fases iniciales de la implantaciôn de esta teoria, a una simple oposiciôn entre textos narrativos y discursivos, pues cada vez se percibe con mayor claridad una multiplicidad en los tipos de discurso, caracterizado cada uno de ellos por un uso diferente de las formas verbales. Segûn la definiciôn de Weinrich 1985: 11, "un texto es una secuencia lôgica (es decir, inteligible y consistente) de signos lingûisticos situados entre dos interrupciones significativas de la comunicaciôn." Para él, una gramática que no reconozca una unidad superior a la oraciôn no puede percibir, y mucho menos resolver, los problemas más interesantes de la lingüistica. Este autor examina los textos narrativos desde très puntos de vista: actitud lingüistica, puesta de relieve y perspectiva lingüistica. Niccacci, siguiendo en parte a Schneider, ha aplicado esta teoria al hebreo. Véase el cuadro de Niccacci que adjuntamos, en el que hemos incluido los valores temporales que este autor propone para los distintos sintagmas (cf. especialmente Niccacci 1995). Un elemento destacable de los teôricos de la lingüistica textual es haber recuperado la clasificaciôn tradicional de las gramáticas árabes: oraciones verbales son aquéllas que comienzan por verbo finito, y nominales aquéllas cuyo predicado es un elemento nominal (oraciones nominales simples) o que denen un

verbo finito que no ocupa la primera posiciôn (oraciones nominales com-plejas ο compuestas). N o se trata meramente de una cuestiôn terminolôgica, sino de una diferencia funcional: las oraciones verbales senalan el nivel principal de la comunicaciôn y establecen conexiones en el texto, mientras que las oraciones nominales (simples ο complejas) senalan un nivel secundario de comunicaciôn y establecen rupturas en el texto. Otro elemento importante en el anâlisis de Weinrich es el de las "transiciones temporales," que pueden ser homogéneas (cuando se verifica el paso de una forma verbal a otra del mismo piano lingüisdco) ο heterogéneas (cuando el trânsito se produce entre formas verbales de pianos lingüisticos distintos). Las primeras garandzan la consistencia de un texto, su textualidad; las segundas, aunque aportan poco a la textualidad, son igualmente necesarias, porque modiftcan el estado de information del oyente. Un caso dpico de tran-siciôn heterogénea es el paso de narration a diâlogo, donde los personajes se expresan con los dempos propios del comentario. Con el fin de ilustrar los diferentes dpos de discurso tomaremos como base la sugerente exposition de Longacre (1992), presentaremos el estado de la cuestiôn sobre el tema y las opiniones mayoritariamente aceptadas, sin incidir en discrepancias puntuales por nuestra parte. Ofrecemos traducciones cuya funciôn es meramente auxiliar, sacrificando el estilo en aras de la reproduction literal del texto hebreo, cuyo orden de palabras se sigue estrictamente. Cuando este literalismo va contra el uso lingüisdco espanol se indica entre paréntesis la correspondencia adecuada en nuestra lengua (por ejemplo, cuando el "y" hebreo requiere "que" en espanol), ο se incluye entre barras (/y/) el texto hebreo que debe omitirse en espanol. Cada forma verbal hebrea queda claramente diferenciada mediante el uso de una tipografia específ1ca.

Discurso narrative (Gen 40,20—23) El discurso narrativo hebreo biblico (que, como en cualquier lengua, está orientado al agente y a la action) relata acciones y situaciones en el pasado. La linea principal está indicada por wayyiqtol, siempre en posiciôn initial de la oraciôn, y la linea secundaria por qatal. El hecho de que en la narration qatal no vaya en posiciôn initial, sino precedido de un sintagma nominal (sujeto u objeto) ο adverbial, permite que su oraciôn esté orientada al participante (en lugar de a la action) e indique acciones de trasfondo respecto a la linea principal. Este uso de qatal es muy frecuente en la narration para indicar simultaneidad: en lugar de introducir un segundo wayyiqtol, lo que supondria una acciôn sucesiva (y, por tanto, adicional) en la linea principal, el autor biblico se mantiene en la misma action (aunque ya no en la linea principal, sino secundaria), que afecta ahora a otro sujeto (u objeto) distinto, pero que se corresponde con el de la linea principal. Véase, por ejemplo, Gen 4,3-5a. Además de las dos lineas descritas, la narration biblica puede contener otras para indicar actividades de trasfondo no ordenadas linealmente (como los wayyiqtol)·. en este caso se utiliza yiqtol, para una actividad continuada en el pasado, ο el participio, como forma más explicitamente durativa. (Longacre).

Según Niccacci, wqatal puede aparecer para indicar acciones reiteradas, frente a qatal puntual.

Discurso predictivo (1Sam 10,2—7) Aunque para los pioneros de la sintaxis textual (y otros autores que no inciden en las diferentes variedades de discurso) la forma principal de los textos diseursivos es yiqtol, la forma básica de la linea principal del discurso predicdvo es weqatal, que présenta analogias con wayyiqtol narrativo: ambos están limitados a oraciones VSO (Verbo-Sujeto-Objeto) aftrmativas—es decir, entre la conjunciôn "y" y la forma verbal no puede introducirse nada (ni adverbios de negaciôn ni otras pardculas); ambos refieren acciones o sucesos secuenciales (y, segûn ciertos autores, puntuales); al igual que wayyiqtol da paso a qatal cuando se antepone un nombre o el adverbio de negaciôn, weqatal da paso ayiqtol en las mismas circunstancias. Semánticamente, sin embargo, hay un contraste: weqatal está proyectado hacia el futuro, wayyiqtol hacia el pasado. Yiqtol aparece como forma caracterisdca de la linea secundaria en el discurso predictivo (donde su funciôn es totalmente paralela a la de qatal en el discurso narrativo, segûn Longacre y Niccacci), con una referencia de futuro, opuesta a su referencia de pasado continuo en el discurso narrativo. Las formas qatal, por el contrario, son raras, aunque se dan y funcionan de forma muy parecida a weqatal con valor de "perfecto de certeza" (cf. Longacre 1992: 182). En el texto que sirve de ejemplo no se da ningûn caso, pues los qatal que aparecen tras "y te dirán" forman un bloque diferente, dentro de una secuencia en estilo directo al margen del hilo predictivo. Una vez dentro de la linea histôrica, los discursos predictivo y narrativo no son tan distintos. El participio puede usarse en ambos para explicitar la duraciôn. En ambos pueden utilizarse oraciones nominales y oraciones con el verbo "ser" (aunque con la diferencia de wayyiqtol "y sucediô" en el narrativo, frente a weqatal"y sucederá" en el predictivo).

Discurso deprocedimiento 0 instrucciones (Lev 4,1-12) El procedimiento propiamente dicho comienza con la apôdosis de la estructura condicional. A simple vista este discurso se parece mucho al predictivo. Ambos, por ejemplo, tienen una linea principal consistente en formas weqatal. Pero mientras que en el discurso predicdvo pueden darse formas yiqtol tanto en oraciones VSO—para marcar una linea secundaria, como en oraciones NV (Nombre-Verbo)—para marcar una acciôn o suceso relativos a un nombre, en el discurso de procedimiento yiqtol solo aparece en oraciones NV (x-yiqtol). La régla es, segûn Longacre (1992: 183), que los procedimientos principales (p. ej., cumplir los objetivos principales de un ritual) se marcan mediante oraciones VSO con weqatal, mientras que los procedimientos menores (p. ej.: los reladvos a partes del ritual necesarias, pero menos importantes) se marcan mediante oraciones NV con yiqtol. Esto ûltimo supone una topicalizaciôn de tipo débil, que afecta exclusivamente a la oraciôn sin implicar el comienzo de un nuevo tema desarrollado en el texto que sigue. Opinamos, sin embargo, que no

se puede ser categôrico acerca de la validez generalizada de esta regia. Por una parte, résulta discudble la aplicaciôn sintácdca de apreciaciones subjetivas sobre la mayor ο menor importancia de los procedimientos y, por otra parte, no son infrecuentes los casos en que sucede lo contrario, como podria incluso atestiguar—asumiendo una interpretaciôn diferente—la secciôn final del propio texto examinado: ruptura (más ο menos fuerte) con el contexto anterior mediante una topicalizaciôn (oraciôn NV con yiqtot) y desarrollo inmediato de diversas facetas del nuevo tema mediante una sucesiôn de weqatal. Una tarea de investigaciôn a este respecto es définir los diferentes niveles sintâcticos de las cadenas de weqatal dentro de un texto. Nôtese, por ultimo, que el quiasmo final sirve de marca separadora de segmentos textuales (y aqui, incluso, de dpo de discurso): la oraciôn condicional del v. 13 inicia un nuevo texto. Una clara muestra de que la oposiciôn entre formas verbales sirve para caracterizar tipos de discurso diferentes la encontramos, por ejemplo, en los capítulos 27 y 38 del Exodo: las mismas frases que en Ex 27 aparecen con weqatal de instruction ("y harás") se reproducen en Ex 38 con wayyiqtol narrativo ("e hizo").

Discurso exhortativo (persuasivo) (Gen 43,11-14; Gen 45,9-13) En este tipo de discurso, caracteristico de aquellas situaciones en las que una persona trata de imponer su voluntad a otra, la linea principal está constituida por imperativos, cohortativos y yusivos. A diferencia del discurso de instrucciones, donde los imperativos se dan aislados y siempre a comienzo de la oraciôn, en el discurso exhortativo se dan cadenas de imperativos y no necesariamente en position initial. Gen 43,11-14 es un texto tipico de discurso exhortativo. Por circunstancias sociales se puede mitigar la exhortation disminuyendo el numéro de imperativos, como en Gen 45,9-13, donde en lugar de una serie de imperativos aparece tan solo uno (a lo sumo dos) seguido de una serie de weqatal·. José, que se ha dado ya a conocer a sus hermanos, les da instrucciones en calidad de tal, y no como gran visir. En caso de una mitigation más generalizada el discurso exhortativo pasa a convertirse en predictivo. Otra variedad del discurso exhortativo es el discurso de deferenda, en el que para dirigirse a personajes como el Faraôn se usa un tratamiento de cortesia mediante construcciones de tercera persona (cadenas de yusivos y algùn weqatal ocasional para indicar el resultado). Véase, por ejemplo, Gen 41,33-36. Por apremio de espacio nos limitaremos tan solo a mencionar otros dos tipos de discurso: el discurso de exposidôn, que se basa en oraciones con el verbo "ser" y oraciones nominales, es decir, en elementos más estâticos (véase, por ejemplo, Gen 40,12-13; 42,22), y el discurso juridico, utilizado en los côdigos legales y sintácticamente basado en oraciones condicionales, con formas verbales que tanto en la protasis como en la apôdosis varian en funciôn de la realidad ο irrealidad de las condiciones y de si la protasis es simple ο compleja.

Concluimos asi esta breve panorâmica sobre diversos dpos de discurso en el hebreo biblico. Hemos presentado casos paradigmátic0s y en general homogéneos, pero han quedado también apuntados algunos ejemplos de transiciôn entre dpos diferentes. (Sobre las transiciones textuales véase, por ejemplo, Schneider 1982: 193-200, Niccacci 1986: 72-82 y Longacre 1994: 56-66). Muchas veces, en efecto, unos dpos aparecen inmersos dentro de otros, combinândose asi varios dpos textuales, por lo que detectar y formalizar los elementos sintâcdcos que sirven para delimitar los distintos componentes de estos textos hibridos es una tarea primordial en la actualidad, para cuyo éxito no podemos limitarnos ya a contemplar exclusivamente las formas verbales, sino que tanto los sintagmas oracionales como los plurioracionales deben ser considerados como "forma." Véanse a este respecto las importantes consideraciones de Taistra (1995: 170-1). Indiquemos, finalmente, que la practica totalidad de los anâlisis de sintaxis textual en la Biblia se ha basado en la prosa, por lo que el estudio sistemâtico de los textos poéticos résulta de gran actualidad y se impone como reto para los prôximos afios. E n este sentido se orientan algunos de nuestros Ultimos trabajos: Vegas (1993, 1998), Vegas-Seijas (1995).

Bibliografïa Bergen, R. ed. 1994. Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics. Dallas: Summer Insdtute of Linguistics. Bodine, W. R. ed. 1992. Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Dawson, D. A. 1994. Text-Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew. Sheffield: JSOT Press. Herranz, C. 1995. "Ultimas teorias sintácdcas sobre el verbo hebreo biblico. I: Estado de la cuestiôn." MEAH 44, 101-119. Kustár, P. 1972. Aspekt im Hebräischen. Basel: Reihardt. Longacre, R. E. 1987. "Discourse Perspecdve on the Hebrew Verb: Affirmaüon and Restatement." En Bodine 1992: 177-189. , 1994. "WeqatalForms in Biblical Hebrew Prose." En Bergen 1994: 50-98. , 1995. "A Proposal for a discourse-modular grammar of Biblical Hebrew." En Talstra 1995a: 99-103. MacDonald, P. J. 1986. "Discourse Analysis and Biblical Interpretation." En Bodine 1992: 153-175. McFall, L. 1982. The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System: Solutions from Ewald to the Present Day. Sheffield: Almond Press. Michel, D. 1960. Tempora und SattsteHung in den Psalmen. Bonn: H. Bouvier. Niccacci, A. 1986. Sintassi del verbo ebraico nella prosa biblica classica. Jerusalem: Franciscan Printing Press. Traducciôn inglesa de W. G. E. Watson. Sheffield 1990. , 1994a. "On the Hebrew Verbal System." En Bergen 1994: 117-137. , 1994b. "Analysis of Biblical Narrative." En Bergen 1994: 175-198. , 1995. "Essential Hebrew Syntax." En Talstra 1995a: 111-125. Schneider, W. 1974; 5a ed. 1982. Grammatik des biblischen Hebräisch. München: Claudius.

Talstra, E. 1978. "Text Grammar and Hebrew Bible. I: Elements of a Theory." BiOr 35, 169-174. , 1982. "Text Grammar and Hebrew Bible. II: Syntax and Semantics." BiOr 39, 26— 38. , 1995. "Clause Types and Textual Structure. An experiment in narrarive syntax." En Talstra 1995a: 166-180. Talstra, E. ed. 1995a. Narrative and Comment. Contributions presented to Wolfgang Schneider. Amsterdam: Societas Hebraica Amstelodamensis. Van der Merwe, C. H. J. 1994. "Discourse Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew Grammar." En Bergen 1994: 13-49. Vegas Montaner, L. 1993. "Sobre weqatal ς.η los Salmos." En IV Simposio Biblico Espanol\ Valencia-Granada: Fundaciôn Biblica Espanola, 121-132. , 1998. "Discoursive Texts and Perfect Tense in the Psalms." En Actes du 5ième Colloque International Bible et Informatique: Traduction et Transmission (Aix-en-Provence, 1-4 septembre 1997), Champion-Paris. Vegas Montaner, L.-Seijas de los Rios, G. 1995. "A Computer Assisted Syntactical Study of Poetic Biblical Texts." En Actes du 4ième Colloque International Bible et Informatique: Matériel et Matière (Amsterdam, 15-18 August 1994), Champion-Paris, 341-355. Vervenne, M. 1989. "Hebrew Verb Form and Function." En Actes du second Colloque International Bible et Informatique: méthodes, outils, résultats (Jerusalem, 9-13 Juin 1988), Champion-Paris, 605-640. Waltke, B.-O'Connor, M. 1990. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. Weinrich, H. 1964; 19854. Tempus. Besprochene und erzählte Welt. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Trad, espanola (1974): Estructuray funciôn de tos tiempos en el lenguaje, Madrid: Gredos.

Usos del verbo hebreo biblico segûn la lingüistica textual (EX NICCACCI, Sintaxis de la prosa blblica cldsica, Essential Hebrew

Syntax)

1) ACTITUD LINGÛÍSTICA: narrar, comentar. Narracion

Discurso

WAYYIQTOL WAW-x-QATAL

Formas volidvas O. Nominal Simple x - Y I Q T O L indicadvo weQATAL (x)-QATAL

2) PUESTA DE RELIEVE: primer

piano

("Foreground," "Vordergrund"), fondo

("Background,"

"Hintergrund").

NARRACIÔN

Primer piano

Fondo

WAYYIQTOL (narracion historica)

O.Nominal Simple O.Nominal Compleja weQATAL

(pasado)

DISCURSO (pasado) (pnsente) (futuro)

weQATAL indicadvo (futuro) (W)-(x)-YlQTOL yusivo (futuro) x-YIQTOL indicadvo (futuro) (x)-QATAL (pasado) (narracion oral) O.Nominal Simple (présente)

WAW-O.Nominal Simple (présenté) WAW-O.Nominal Compleja

3) PERSPECTIVA LINGÛÍSTICA: informaciôn recuperada ("retrovisiôn," "antecedente" del relato que sigue), grado cero (el nivel del relato mismo), informaciôn anticipada ("prevision," anuncio previo de la conclusion del relato).

Informaciôn recuperada (f)

NARRACIÔN

DISCURSO

WAW-x-QATAL

x-QATAL

Grado cero

(0)

Informaciôn anricipada (| )

WAYYIQTOL

YIQTOL

formas volidvas (x)-QATAL x-YIQTOL indicadvo O.Nominal Simple

YIQTOL

Tipos de discurso en hebreo biblico wayyiqtol

yiqtol

DISCURSO NARRATIVO (Gn 40,20-23) Ysucediô al tercer dia, el dia del cumpleanos del faraon, e (=que) bizo un banquete para todos sus servidores y elevô la cabeza del jefe de los coperos y la del jefe de los panaderos en medio de sus servidores. Y restableciô al jefe de los coperos en su cargo, y ( = quien) puso (de nuevo) la copa sobre la palma del faraon; y (=pero) al jefe de los panaderos COLGÔ, conforme HABÎALES DESCIFRADO José. Y (=pero) no SE ACORDÔ de José el jefe de los coperos, y se olvidô de él. Gen 4,3—5a Y sucediô al cabo de algùn dempo y (=que) presentô Cain de los frutos del suelo una ofrenda a Y H W H y Abel HIZO OFRENDA, también él, de los primogénitos del rebano y de la grasa de ellos. Yprestô atenciôn Y H W H a Abel y su ofrenda, y (=pero) a Cain y su ofrenda no HIZO CASO.

(EX LONGACRE)

weqatal QATAL qtol

Después de esto 11egarás a Gibat-Elohim, donde hay una guarniciôn de los filisteos, y sucederá. cuando entres alli en la ciudad, y (=que) te toparâs con una agrupaciôn de profetas que bajan de la altura precedidos de salterios, tambores, flautas y citaras y profedzando. Y te invadirá el espiritu de Y H W H y profedzarâs con ellos y quedarás mudado en otro hombre. / Y sucederá/ cuando te acaezcan estas senales,

Arç 10 que ?ç te ofrçzça a mano, pues Dios está condgo. DISCURSO DE PROCEDIMIENTO Ο INSTRUCCIONES (Lev 4,1-12) Y hablà Y H W H a Moisés, diciendo: "Habla a los hijos de Israel para decir: Si alguna persona hubierç peçadp por inadvertencia contra cualquiera de los mandamientos de YHWH reladvos a las cosas que no han de hacerse y HA HECHO una d e ellas;

DISCURSO PREDICTIVO (ISam 10,2-7) Al partir tu hoy de junto a mi /y/ hallaras dos hombres junto al sepulcro de Raquel, en la frontera de Benjamin, en Selsaj, y te dirán:

si (fuere) el sacerdote ungido (quien) ha pecado en detrimento del pueblo, / y / ofrecerà por el pecado q u e HA C O M E T I D O

un novillo sin defecto a Y H W H en sacrificio expiatorio."

" H A N s i D O HALLADAS las b u r r a s

q u e FUISTE a buscar,

y he aquí que SE HA DESENTENDIDO tu padre del asunto de las burras y ESTA INTRANQUILO por vosotros, diciendo: 'iQué haré_respecto a mi hijo?" Y pasarás luego más adelante y 11egarás a la encina de Tabor y te encontrarân alli très hombres que suben hacia Dios a Betel, uno portador de très cabritos, y otro portador de très tortas de pan, y otro portador de un odre de vino. Y te saludarân y te daran dos panes y ( - q u e ) aceptarás de su mano.

/ Y / conducirà el novillo a la entrada de la Tienda de reunion ante Y H W H y apoyarà su mano sobre la cabeza del novillo y degollarà el novillo delante de YHWH. Y tomarà el sacerdote ungido parte de la sangre del novillo y la Uevará a la Tienda de reunion y mojarà el sacerdote su dedo en la sangre y hará aspersion con la sangre siete veces ante YHWH, hacia el velo del Santuario. Y pondrà el sacerdote parte de esa sangre sobre los cuernos del altar del incienso ar0mátic0 delante de Y H W H , que está en la Tienda de reunion,

y toda la sangre [restante] del novillo derramará al pie del Altar del holocausto que esta a la entrada de la Tienda de reunion. Y toda la grasa del novillo del sacrificio expiatorio retirará de él, la grosura que recubre el intesdno y toda la grasa que hay sobre el intestino, y los dos riiiones con la grasa que hay sobre ellos, prôxima a los lomos, y el redano que cubre el higado, con los riiiones gç quUSrj de igual m o d o que se retira del toro del sacrificio pacifico, y los hará arder el sacerdote sobre el Altar del holocausto. Y en cuanto a la piel del novillo y toda su carne, con su cabeza y sus patas, con su intestino y su excremento, / y / se sacará todo el novillo fuera del campamento a sido puro, al vertedero de la ceniza, y se quemarâ sobre lena en el fuego; sobre el vertedero de la ceniza será

quçmadP• DISCURSO EXHORTATIVO (PERSUASIVO) (Gen 43,11-14) Ydijoles Israel, su padre: «Si asi ha de ser, esto baced. tomad de los mejores productos del pais en vuestras vasijas y bqiàdselos a aquel hombre c o m o obsequio: un poco de résina de lendsco y un poco de miel, tragacanto, lädano, pistachos y almendras.

Y el doble de dinero coged en vuestro poder y el dinero que os pusieron en vuestros sacos restituid por vuestra propia mano; quizá fue un error. Y a vuestro hermano tomad. y disponeos. volved a aquel hombre. Y Dios Todopoderoso os concéda misericordia delante de ese hombre y os devuelva libre al otro hermano vuestro y a Benjamin. Y en cuanto a mi. SI H E DE QUEDAR PRIVADO DE HIJOS, PRIVADO DE H I J O S Q U E D O . »

Gen 45,9-13 Daos prisa y mMii.adon
PART T H R E E RABBINIC PERIOD HISTORY A N D LITERATURE

FIFTY YEARS OF R E S E A R C H O N T H E D E A D SEA SCROLLS A N D ITS I M P A C T O N J E W I S H S T U D I E S FLORENTINO GARCIA MARTÍNEZ Qumrân Instituut, RUG, The Netherlands Contrary to married life, in which turning fifty is associated more with a "midlife crisis" than with joyous celebradons, the Fiftieth Anniversary of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has been universally acclaimed. 1 Obviously, a part of the celebration was a (more or less self-indulgent) retrospective look at the achievements of these fifty years. This was done last year in many ways and from many different perspectives. I think that every practitioner in the field of Q u m ran studies has written and delivered his or her own "Fifty Years of Research on the Dead Sea Scrolls" lecture during the past year. In any case I did so: I indulged in this "trip down memory lane" in a lecture given last year.2 I did it in Spanish, of course. But you need not worry. I am not going to deliver here an English translation of a lecture that I have already published and that you may read in Spanish, if you wish. What I intend to do in the first part of this lecture is to offer you some thoughts on the topic, which reflect the impressions I formed after a whole year of celebrations of this fiftieth anniversary. These thoughts can be summarized easily in two propositions and in a consequence: 1. Qumran studies have reached maturity as an independent academic discipline within the general field of Jewish Studies. 2. Qumran studies continue to impassion a large segment of the public outside the academia. 3. Therefore, Qumran studies are one of the main factors that have contributed to the flourishing of the general field of Jewish Studies in the second part of the twentieth century. In the second part of this lecture I will list, as indicated in the tide, some of the contributions of the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls to other areas of Jewish Studies.

I have retained the style of the oral presentadon o f this paper, adding only the indispensable references. As a model o f these joyous celebradons, I may refer to the main Congress organized by the Israel Antiquities Authority, the Hebrew University and the Shrine of the Book in Jerusalem on July 1997, on which I will comment later, and, within the publishing world, to the Jubilee volumes The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment, edited by P. W. Flint and J. VanderKam for E. J. Brill of Leiden. At the closing of the academic year of the "Centro de Estudios Judeo-Cristianos" de Madrid, published in ElOlivo 21, 1997, 23-44.

After my lecture, you may, of course, question the first and the second proposidon; and you may especially question the sort of causal relationship implied by the use of "therefore" in the third statement, a word which relates this third proposition as a consequence of the other two. But a basic objection needs to be dispelled from the start: does not the program of our own Congress completely disprove what I intend to show? At first sight, it does; but not upon reflection. While, in our Congress held in Troyes in 1990, was a large section on the "Littérature de la Période Gréco-Romaine" which included several papers on the Dead Sea Scrolls,3 there is no similar section here. If there are any papers on topics related to the Dead Sea Scrolls, they are hidden under the heading "Miscellaneous." 4 At first sight, this could imply that the impact of research on the Dead Sea Scrolls has been not been felt very strongly by our guild, or that the members of the European Association for Jewish Studies are not interested in the study of the Scrolls. Among the fifteen sections of our Congress there is none specifically dedicated to the study of the Jewish Literature of the GrecoRoman Period, nor to the Pseudepigrapha, Qumran, Apocrypha or Second Temple Period (to list only the relevant areas as they appear in the "Index of Scholars by Subject Area" of the Directory ofJewish Studies in Europe of our European Association for Jewish Studies)5. But, upon reflection, we cannot conclude anything from this. Obviously, we cannot conclude that the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls is not part and parcel of the general field of Jewish Studies (in which case we would also have to conclude that, for example, "Jewish Liturgy and Prayer," another subject areas not covered by a Congress section, does not belong to the general field of Jewish Studies). We also cannot conclude that the practitioners of Jewish Studies are no longer interested in the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls; the flood of publications on the Scrolls proves exacdy the contrary. 6 The latest Qumran Bibliography published in the Revue de Qumran, which only covers 1996-97, lists almost a thousand items (only scholarly articles and books, many of them written by members of the EAJS).7 Thus, we cannot measure the impact of Dead Sea Scrolls research on the general field of Jewish Studies by the number of sessions or papers presented to 3

4

5

6

7

See the proceedings of the Congress, edited by Sed-Rajna, G. 1993. R a r / 1 0 4 0 - 1 9 9 0/‫׳‬.Hommage à Ephraim Ε. Urbach. Patrimoines Judaïsme. Paris: Cerf. This was written when only the preliminary program was known. In the final program, there was a session on "Qumran, Rome and Judaism" within the section "Ancient Jewish History," with two papers on Qumran topics by M. Bockmuehl and P. Alexander. Another paper, on the Hebrew o f the Copper Scroll from Cave 3, was placed in the section on Hebrew Linguistics. Winkelmann, A. ed. 1998. Directory ofJewish Studies in Europe. Oxford: European Association for Jewish Studies. The listing o f the scholarly publications o f the last 25 years covers 560 pages in Garcia Martinez, F. and Parry, D. W. 1996. A Bibliography of the Finds in the Desert of Judah 1970-95. STDJ 29. Leiden: Brill. Garcia Martinez, F. and Tigchelaar, E . J . C. 1998. "Bibliography o f the Dead Sea Scrolls." RevQ 18, 459-90, 605-39.

our Congress, just as we cannot measure the extent and the intensity of the work of the members of our guild through the already quoted (and very useful) Directory ofJewish Studies in Europe. I f we were to believe this Directory, only one scholar in Europe is actually working on Josephus, and no one at all on Philo (to whom two full sessions are dedicated in our Program), for example. As Editor of the Journalfor the Study ofJudaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period I can confidendy assure you that this is not the case. If the fact that there are no specific sections in our Congress on the Jewish literature of the Greco-Roman Period and very few papers on the Dead Sea Scrolls in its different sessions has a meaning at all, this could well be that the study of the scrolls has developed as an independent academic discipline to such an extent that its practitioners prefer more specialized fora for the presentation of the research done. 8 And now that this preliminary objection has been dispelled, we can start with the first of the two impressions I formed after last year's celebrations. I A) The climax of the celebrations of fifty years of research on the Dead Sea Scrolls was, without a doubt, the international congress organized by the Israel Museum, the Israel Antiquities Authority, the Hebrew University and the Israel Exploration Society, and held in Jerusalem exacdy one year ago: July 20th to 25th, 1997. The organizers of the program of the congress managed to compress into the five days of the congress no less than 130 lectures. 9 Attending all these lectures was, of course, impossible, if not for other reasons, then at least because there were several simultaneous sessions. But reading through the program and the abstracts book, the thing that struck me most was not the variety of approaches nor the diversity of the issues dealt with by the lecturers, but the homogeneity of the whole. As a participant in the congress, I had the strong impression of witnessing to the unveiling of a new discipline in the academic world. The festive character of the Congress gave the impression an old fashioned "first ball" in which the new discipline was displaying its charms. In any case, it was not a new discipline which was hesitandy venturing its first steps in the world, but an already grown up academic discipline, conscious of its attraction and very self-assured, with its own corpora, its own tools for research, its own channels of publication, etc. I could have dismissed this impression as the result of the temporary euphoria of a very well-organized congress, but it was so strong that I decided to look into the matter more carefully. The occasion for doing so was given to me through a request to write a survey of the contributions of European scholarship for a panel on the study of the scrolls during the last fifty years organized by the American Society of Biblical Literature (SBL). In this paper, written

8

9

Such as the Congress of the International Organization for Qumran Studies (Groningen 1989, Paris 1992, Cambridge 1995 and Oslo 1998). The Proceedings, edited by L. Schiffman, Ε. Τ ο ν and J. C. VanderKam, with the collaboration of G. Marquis, are forthcoming by the Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem.

jointly with Professor Julio Trebolle and read by him at the meedng of the SBL in San Francisco, 10 we analyzed the contribution of scholars of four European countries (Germany, France, Britain and Holland). This survey of the data allowed us to extract the following as the most characteristic elements of the "European" contribution to the study of the Scrolls: 1. The publication of a whole series of bibliographies, concordances, dictionaries, translations, data-bases and monographs; in short, the production of the basic tools necessary for further research on the Scrolls.11 2. The creation and establishment of specialized periodicals (such as Revue de Qumran, Dead Sea Discoveries, The Qumran Chronicle) and book series dedicated exclusively to the study of the scrolls in all their aspects (such as Studies on the Texts of the Desert ofJudah, The Literature of the Dead Sea Scrolls)·, in short, the création of adequate vehicles for the dissemination and communication of research. 3. The creation of permanent structures within the University context (Research Institutes, Chairs of Qumran Studies, etc.) in which the research can take place without disturbing external influences and without being submitted to the grill of fashion, and the establishment of professional associations (such as the International Organization for Qumran Study) which provide for regular opportunities for interchange among professionals dedicated to its study. 4. The incorporation of the study of the Scrolls into the university curriculum at undergraduate, graduate and post-graduate level, as an important sector of Jewish literature of the Hellenistic and Roman Period, parallel to the study of the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament. These elements prove, in my opinion, that the impression I had during the Jerusalem congress was well founded. If one thing can be said to characterize research as rich and as varied as that carried out in Europe during these fifty years of study of the scrolls, I think that it is precisely the emphasis on gradual and progressive production of the tools necessary for a truly scientific study of these old texts. It is certain that in Europe, as in America or Israel, there has been no lack of brilliant analysis of specific texts, of acute and enlightening philological study, of discussion of the theological problems contained in the texts, of brilliant (or misguided) synthesis, of study of the scrolls for purely Christian motifs or from exclusively Jewish concerns. But when the whole thing is examined and weighed, what emerges most clearly is not hidden agendas or particular biases, but a constant and humble concern for creating little by litde the necessary equipment for arriving at a proper understanding of certain texts perceived as really important for "European culture," which is, by definition, a JudeoChristian culture. Combined with this is the wish to establish the study of the scrolls in the academic world as the best guarantee of its independence.

10

11

The paper will be published in Kugler, R. A. and Schuller, Ε. eds. 1999. The Dead Sea Scrolls at Fifty. Adanta: Scholars Press. All the bibliographical references are given in that ardcle.

Therefore, in the San Francisco panel presentation we were able to conclude that: Independent of the value, permanent or temporary, of the contributions of each of the researchers in the four countries we have mentioned and of all those whose names we have had to omit, we believe there are two elements which stand out as characteristically "European": the build up and institutionalization of this research on one hand, and on the other its implanting in the academic world in that they have given it a place of its own, thus guaranteeing its future development. The combined result of these two factors is the consolidation of Qumran research as a new academic discipline.12 What we concluded last year from the analysis of the data provided by our survey of the research done in Europe, can be stated, I think, as a conclusion on a more general level: Qumran studies have reached maturity. T h e first "proposition" of my lecture can thus be summarized for further discussion: In the fifty years following the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, research into these collections of Jewish writings from the Second Temple Period has developed to the point of reaching the status of a new academic discipline within the general field of Jewish Studies, a discipline now solidly anchored both in the Departments of Biblical Studies of the Theological Faculties and in the Jewish Studies Departments of the Arts Faculties. B) T h e second impression I had during the Jerusalem congress was that of taking part in a very "public affair," and not just in Jerusalem or in the rest of Israel. That the congress should become a "public affair" in Israel was logical to a certain extent: after all, the congress was opened by the Prime Minister and it was closed with a sumptuous dinner in what is now the Qumran National Park, in the Plateau of Qumran itself, between the ruins of the Khirbet and the mountains illuminated for the occasion, and with the interpretation of a specially commissioned musical composition "Sound of Light and Darkness." But I had the strong impression that it was also a "public affair" all over the world. I missed several interesting lectures because I was being interviewed by newspapers and television crews from Spain, France and The Netherlands. And the same happened to many other colleagues who became speakers for many other countries. I even missed the hors d'oeuvres of the closing banquet because I was taken aside for an interview with the Spanish National Broadcasting system which had followed us all the way down to Qumran to have it in situ, during the closing ceremony. Due to disruptive effects of these non-academic activities in the development of the Jerusalem congress, we used to designate it (only half joking) as "the Qumran circus." But the fact was that the congress itself was a news item, an item interesting enough to catch (and hold) the attention of the media. And if the media were interested in the congress, this was only due to the continuous interest for the Dead Sea Scrolls by a large audience outside the academia.

12

Op. cit.

The interest of the general public in all matters related to the Scrolls, and the many faces this interest can have, is apparent to whoever has "navigated" a little on the Internet, or has browsed in the huge number of web sites direcdy concerned with the topic.13 I am not concerned with the contents of most of these sites or home pages, nor with their relationship (or the lack of) with the real contents of the manuscripts. I mention them, as I could mention a good number of works of fiction,14 some of them real bestsellers only as a sign of the public's interest in matters related to the Scrolls, and as proof that the Scrolls are nowadays "public domain." This public's interest in the Scrolls is not new; on the contrary, it has been part and parcel of the Scrolls research since their discovery. I do not think it is an exaggeration to assert that the Dead Sea Scrolls have since their discovery attracted a continuous and pervasive public attention. Obviously, there have been peaks and downs in this public attention, but a surprisingly high degree of involvement of the general public in matters related to the Scrolls has always been present. Looking back to the fifty years of Scrolls research, it is easy to isolate two main peaks: one during the fifties, the other at the end of the eighties and beginning of the nineties. The series of articles by Edmund Wilson in The New Yorker and his book, The Scrolls from the Dead Sea,5‫ י‬can serve to characterize the public interest during the fifties; they reflect the excitement of the discoveries, the hopes raised by the new texts, the emerging general frame of interpretation of the context of the Scrolls and the first polemics among the scholars who served as informants for him. The "six-year campaign of the Biblical Archaeology Review to free the Scrolls" (to quote the words of Hershel Shanks, the Editor of BAR'6) can serve as an indication of the renewed interest at the end of the eighties, as can the book by Neil Asher Silberman, The Hidden Scrolls.17 The subtide of this book ("Christianity, Judaism, and the War of the Scrolls") indicates the shift of focus of the publie's attention. More than for the contents of the scrolls themselves, interest was aroused by what was called "The Batde over the Scrolls." I will quote a rather lengthy passage by Chaim Potok 18 because it illustrates perfecdy the change in perspective:

My first encounter with the Dead Sea Scrolls came about through the reporting of Edmund Wilson. In the late 1950s I studied some of those scrolls with Professor Jonas Greenfield in Los Angeles. The vaguest of pictures was then 13

14 15 16 17 18

I do not refer to the academic web sites dedicated to the study o f the Scrolls, such as the ones established by the Orion Center o f the Hebrew University, or the Universities o f Oxford, Pennsylvania, St. Andrews, Uppsala and many others, but to the more "esoteric" or popular web sites one can reach through the general search engines of the web. T o which was dedicated a whole session of the Jerusalem congress. Wilson, E. 1955. The Scrolls from the Dead Sea. N e w York: Oxford University Press. In Shanks, H. ed. 1992. Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls. N e w York: Random House, xxvii. Silberman, N. A. 1995. The Hidden Scrolls. London: Mandarin. From the "Foreword" he wrote to the book by Schiffman, L. H. 1994. Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls. Philadelphia-Jerusalem: The Jewish Publication Society, xi.

beginning to appear: something about a marginal sect of Second Temple Jews and the beginnings of Christianity. (And "Qumran" was becoming a word resonant with awe and apprehension, bringing some concern to historians of embryonic Christianity and slowly taking the gravity of myth.) Over the decades, the scrolls have produced a history of their own, some of it rather tawdry, as scholars took issue with one another over the translation and publishing rights, over the laggardly appearance of the scrolls before the public, over the self-aggrandizement of a small group of learned academics who appeared to be hoarding them, parcelling them out in tightfisted fashion to their own students, and seemingly deliberately holding back the unrestricted availability of that stunning treasure. In place of the actual scrolls came wretched journalism, tacky gossip, and the tiresome conjuring of the media, filling the void of secrecy and expectation. T h e years in between these two peaks have been described by Geza Vermes as "the lean years in Qumran studies." In Vermes' opinion: In the 1960s the editorial enthusiasm characteristic of the previous decade was steadily dying down. From the late 1960s to the 1980s it was replaced by a general slumber, only occasionally interrupted by the publication of an odd volume of the official series Discoveries in the Judaean Desert, lavishly and unhurriedly produced by Oxford University Press.19 Vermes refers, of course, to scholarly activity, not to the public perception of the Scrolls. And he may be right, although he seems to have overlooked some quite interesting developments that were taking place precisely in these "lean years in Qumran studies." His concern with the publications in the "official" series DJD has led him to forget the many publications of new texts which appeared precisely in this period. And I am thinking not only of the many small fragments edited in preliminary publications during this period, but also of such basic works as the publication of the Aramaic E n o c h fragments by Milik in 1976,20 the publication of the Temple Scroll by Yadin in 1977,21 the complete edition of the Sbiro t Olat ha-shabbat from Cave 422 and of the paleo-Hebrew Leviticus Scroll from Cave II 2 3 in 1985, or the edition of the Apocryphal Psalms from Cave 4 by Schuller in 1985,24 for example. But the public perception and interest in the scrolls seems not to have suffered during these "lean years." I still remember the excitement in Jerusalem when Yadin published the Temple Scroll, or the polemic reactions in the press when Allegro published his The Dead Sea

Scrolls and the Christian Myth in 1979.25 19 20 21

22

23

24

25

Vermes, G. 1998. Providential Accidents. An Autobiography. London: SCM Press, 188. Milik, J. T. 1976. The Books of Enoch. Aramaic Fragments ojQumrân Cave 4. Oxford: Clarendon. Yadin, Y. 1977. Megillat ha-Miqdash—The Temple Scroll. 3 vol + Supplementary Plates, Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society-The Hebrew University-The Shrine of the Book. Newsom, C. 1985. A Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition. Harvard Semitic Studies 27. Adanta: Scholars Press. Freedman D. N. and Mathews, K. A. 1985. The Paleo-Hebrew Leviticus Scrolls (1 IQpaleoLev). Winona Lake: American Schools of Oriental Research. Schuller, Ε. 1986. Non Canonical Psalms from Qumran: A Pseudepigraphical Collection. Harvard Semitic Studies 28. Adanta: Scholars Press. Allegro, J. M. 1979. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth. London: Westbridge Book.

If these years witnessed no peaks in the public interest for the Scrolls, neither were there "lean years." In fact, most of the elements noted above as leading to the establishment of Qumran Studies as an academic discipline were taking place precisely during this period, and these developments would not have been possible without public support. The reasons for this public interest are difficult to fathom, and I think many different factors may have played a role: the adventure and romance of the whole story of the discovery; the fascination with the "original" and the hope to achieve the ultimate truth; the attraction of materials which have not been altered by later orthodoxies, the quest for the "missing link" between biblical and rabbinical Judaism, between the Old and the New Testament, or between Judaism and Christianity etc. Hershel Shanks worded these reasons in the following way: The Dead Sea Scrolls are the greatest manuscript discovery of the twendeth century, certainly as concerns biblical studies. Amidst confusion and speculation, they have ignited the imagination of nonscholar and scholar alike. It is easy to understand why. A library of over eight hundred texts, they cast a direct light on the critical period more than two thousand years ago out of which both Christianity and rabbinic Judaism emerged.26 In my own lecture on "Fifty years of Qumran Research" I concluded that both Jews and Christians have been interested in the Scrolls and are still interested, but for the wrong reasons. But here we do not need to worry about the reasons. For me it is enough to note that this interest, peculiar as it may be, has been present all along and that the Scrolls research has always taken place under the spotlight. This fact has certainly produced its share of negative results, violent polemics, hidden agendas and all sort of by-products but it also has had very positive consequences: it has brought to the center of public interest the object of its research, the Judaism of the Second Temple Period. It is my contention that this public interest in the Scrolls has been an important factor in the growth of other areas of Jewish Studies during the last fifty years. This is the point to which I turn now, before direcdy illustrating the impact of Scrolls research on several areas of Jewish Studies. C) I confess I cannot offer hard proof for this third point. That Jewish Studies have seen an unprecedented growth during the last fifty years seems to me a plain fact, and your presence here in such a huge numbers offers the best proof. That this upward trend has been influenced by many factors also seems to me an indisputable fact, and I am sure other lectures during this congress will show some of the factors involved. That one of these factors has been the attention to the Judaism of the Second Temple Period brought about by the discovery and gradual publication of the Dead Sea Scrolls seems to me logic enough, but can hardly be proven when so many other factors are also involved. The contributions of Scrolls research to several areas of Jewish Studies that I will present in the second part of my lecture are indications of this positive impact, but fall 26

Shanks, H. Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls, xv.

short of being a proof. Therefore, I present this "conclusion" to the two precedent "premises" simply as my own personal convicdon, or, if you wish, as an educated guess. And because I consider it more a personal conviction than an unavoidable conclusion of the premises, I hope you will allow me to tell two personal anecdotes which have shaped this personal conviction. After graduating in Biblical Studies at the Pontifical Biblical Institute of Rome, I went to Jerusalem intending to write a dissertation at the Hebrew University on the Mekilta of Rabbi Johanan ben Zakai. I had the promise of a scholarship by a Spanish foundation, but, once in Jerusalem, I was notified that the review committee had found the topic of my dissertation too "esoteric" and that funding was not available for it. During the following summer vacation, I went back to New York to pursue the work at the Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary, although I was very seriously considering abandoning the whole project because of lack of money. In New York, I accidentally met one of my teachers of Hebrew at the Biblical Institute, the late Professor Luis Alonso Schäkel. In our conversation I told him of my problem and of my intention to abandon the work on the dissertation. His advice went right to the point. As I recall, he said to me something like the following: "We have nobody in Spain actually working on the Dead Sea Scrolls. You are already familiar with the languages of the period, and you will only need to advance a couple of centuries the historical context; the Scrolls cannot be more "esoteric" that your present topic and I am sure money will be available to work on the Scrolls." And so it was. Following his advice, I presented a research project on the Scrolls to another Spanish foundation and, indeed, the money came, and after the summer I moved from the Hebrew University to the École Biblique and started working on the Scrolls. Of course, this anecdote does not "prove" the point, but it shows you that in my case, the public fascination with the Scrolls (this was the reason why the March Foundation gave me the scholarship) has been a basic factor in my own dedication to Jewish Studies. My second example is only a litde less personal. It concerns the founding of

the journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period, the journal with which I have been direcdy involved during the last eighteen years and which is an important vehicle for publication of research in this area of Jewish Studies. As you know, the JSJ was founded in 1970 by Professor A. van der Woude. He wrote his dissertation on Die Messianischen Verteilungen der Gemeinde von Qumran in 1957,27 and starting in 1962 he was charged with the publication of the Dutch share of the manuscripts of Cave II; 28 he was thus one of the first generation of Qumran scholars. The founding of the Journal was a formal recogni27

28

Woude, A. S. van der 1957. Die messianischen Vorstellungen der Gemeinde von Qumran. Assen: Van Gorcum. Published in the Discoveries of the Judaean Desert series, after several preliminary edidons, in 1998: Garcia Martinez, F., Tigchelaar, E. J. C. and Woude, A. S. van der 1998. Qumran Cave II.II (11Q2-18, 11Q20-31). D J D 23. Oxford: Clarendon.

tion of the renewed interest in Judaism of the Second Temple period, provoked "in part due to the discovery of new manuscripts." as he himself put it in an editorial statement in the first issue.29 It was also the result of the problems van der Woude had been encountering in his study of the Scrolls. He recognized that the Scrolls could not be studied in isolation, and that they only could be understood within their own Jewish historical and literary context, the Judaism of the Greco-Roman Period. This crucial period was then only accidentally and very sporadically covered by other Periodicals, such as the Jewish Quarterly Review or the Journal ofJewish Studies. From the correspondence of van der Woude, both with the publishing house and with Father Carmignac, the Editor of the Revue de Qumrân (with whom van der Woude signed an agreement on the sort of materials that should be published in each one of the Periodicals), it appears clear that van der Woude wanted to create an adequate forum for discussion of all aspects of the Judaism brought to the fore by the discovery of the Scrolls in order to provide the Scrolls with an adequate historical, and literary context. It is not up to me to measure the results achieved by this initiative. But I see this example as a direct indication of the impact that research on the Scrolls has had on other areas of Jewish Studies.30 As I have already said, these examples do not "prove" the point, but they illustrate my personal conviction that research on the Dead Sea Scrolls and publie interest in the discoveries have been very important factors in the growth of other fields of Jewish Studies, at least of those dealing with different aspects of the Judaism of the Second Temple. II We can now move to the second part of this lecture, in which I intend to summarize some of the significant contributions of the Dead Sea Scrolls to other fields of Jewish Studies. In order to avoid making this second part of my lecture a simple bibliographical listing of contributions, 31 I have decided to limit myself to only the first four sections of our Congress and, within these sections, to be very selective, commenting only upon some of the key elements. Consequendy I will say nothing on such fascinating topics as the use or misuse of the Shirot Olot haShabbat in the discussions of Jewish Mysticism or the influence of the cave four materials of the Damascus Document or of the Aramaic Levi Document on the study of the corresponding Genizah materials, to mention only two topics which will be dealt with in the general lectures.

29 30

31

Woude, A. S. van der 1970. JSJ 1,1. That the force of this argument is not restricted to Spain or The Netherlands, the two countries which shaped my convicdon and o f which I can speak first hand, is demonstrated in the founding o f the Martin Buber Institute o f the University of Köln, an Institute in which all areas o f Jewish Studies are practiced. As Prof. J. Maier, its founder and former director, told me when I was lecturing there, the starting o f the Institute was greatly facilitated by the public interest in the Scrolls, his personal speciality. Easily available in Garcia Martinez, F. and Parry, D. W. 1996. A Bibliography of the Finds in the Desert of Judah 1970-1995. STDJ 19. Leiden: Brill.

The Hebrew Bible N o w that almost all the biblical scrolls from Qumran have been published in the DJD Series32 (with the exception of the manuscripts of the Writings from Cave 4, which are now sub press and will appear shortly in D J D 15, and the Samuel manuscripts, also from Cave 4, expected in the year 2000) and the whole range of the so-called "para-biblical" texts 33 are also available, it is easy to assess the impact they have had upon the study of the Hebrew Bible. Although the majority of the manuscripts can be classified as proto-Masoretic in textual character, there are enough manuscripts of other sorts to raise many and interesting questions for students of the Hebrew Bible. I will signal only four main areas of study which are deeply indebted to the evidence provided by the Scrolls: textual criticism, the history and evolution of the biblical text, the problem of the canon and the standardization and uniformity of the biblical text. That the practice of textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible has already been changed by the publication of the Scrolls hardly needs to be proved. A look at the editions of Isaiah and Jeremiah of the Hebrew University Project, or simply at the Biblia Hebraica Stuttagartensia, would suffice. In the Preface to his Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, Professor Emanuel Τ ο ν wrote: The centrality of the texts from the Judean Desert for textual research necessitated a detailed investigation of all their aspects, and it was only after completing an investigation in this area that 1 was ready to embark on the writing of this book. The impact of these scrolls is felt in every chapter.34 The change brought about by the availability of the new manuscripts evidence is the understanding of the evolution of the biblical text seem equally clear to me. The classical theory of the three basic text types which, through gradual development, were supposedly transformed into the Jewish, the Christian (the Septuaginta) and the Samaritan Bible respectively, had to be abandoned as soon as 1 lQpaleoLeviticus 3 , 4QpaleoExodus m , and 4QNumbers a were published. Everybody is now familiar with the theory of "local texts" put forth by Frank Cross, 35 with Shemaryahu Talmon's theory of the sociological origins of the three basic textual types, 36 with Tov's theories of the multiplicity of texts versus a unique text and the conservative versus innovative approaches of the scribes, 37

32

33 34

35

36

37

Besides the D J D volumes of Cave 1 (DJD 1), Murabba'at (DJD 2), the "Minor Caves" (DJD 3) and Cave 11 (DJD 4 and 23), which contain biblical and non-biblical texts together, the following volumes of D J D containing only biblical texts have been published: 8 (XII Prophets from Nahal Hever), 9 (Paleo-Hebrew and Greek Biblical manuscripts), 12 (Genesis to Numbers), 14 (Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Kings) and 15 (The Prophets). Published in D J D 13, 19 and 22. Τ ο ν , Ε. 1992. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. Minneapolis-Assen: Fortress-Van Gorcum, xxxix. Cross, F. M. 1975. "The Evolution of a Theory o f Local Texts." In Qumran and the History of the Biblical Texts. Ed. F. M. Cross and S. Talmon. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 306—315. Talmon, S. 1975. "The Textual Study of the Bible—A N e w Outlook." In Qumran and the Histoiy of the Biblical Text. Ed. F. M. Cross and S. Talmon. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 3 2 1 400. Τον, Ε. 1982. "A Modem Textual Outlook Based on the Qumran Scrolls." HUCA 53, 11-27.

and with Ulrich's theory of muldple literary edidons of the biblical texts.38 And everybody is aware of the advantages in some respects and of the inconveniences in others of each one of these new theories. If the new evidence has not yet led us to an encompassing new theory which could explain the totality of the data now at hand, it has at least made us aware of the real problems and of the importance of the period prior to the standardization of the biblical text. In view of the Qumran evidence, it seems clear that we cannot speak of a canon, in the sense of a well-defined number of holy writings, in the GrecoRoman Period, at least not for Judaism as a whole. 39 The absence of Nehemaiah (which could be purely accidental) and of Esther (which certainly is not) from the collection of sacred writings at Qumran, and the massive presence and authoritative use of books like Ben Sira, Tobit, Enoch or Jubilees, make it completely clear. This absence of a "canon" makes even more interesting the problern of the authority of sacred texts, and brings to the fore a whole series of manuscript—the so-called "paraphrases," "reworked pentateuch" etc.—of which we are not able to identify precisely the "biblical" or "non-biblical" character, and which I have called "borderlines texts." 40 The problems debated since the publication in 1965 of llQPsalms Scroll (with its characteristic mix of biblical and non-biblical psalms)41 are reinforced with the publication of these "borderline" manuscripts in 1994 for the Pentateuch. The last point that I wanted to note is the striking difference between the pluriformity of the biblical texts found at Qumran and the uniformity of the biblical manuscripts discovered at Masada, Murabba'at and Nahal Hever. In the later collections only manuscripts of the proto-Masoretic text type have been found or, as in the case of the Greek text of the Twelve Prophets from Nahal Hever, of a revision of a Septuagint tradition on the basis of a Hebrew text similar to the proto-Masoretic tradition. The problem is not only to explain how it was possible to go from one situation to another, but also to understand the status of the biblical text in both situations. Some specialists have tried to solve this problem by postulating a gradual development from pluriformity to uniformity in the textual tradition, which only would have been reached after 70 CE, when the Pharisaic gained dominance and imposed its textual tradition, progressively eliminating all others. 42 Others have postulated a different development: from uniformity obtained around the Temple well before the second 38

39

40

41

42

Ulrich, Ε. 1992. "Pluriformity in the Biblical Text, Text Groups, and Questions of canon." In The Madrid Qumran Congress. Ed. J. Trebolle Barrera and L. Vegas Montaner. STDJ 11,1. LeidenMadrid: Brill-Editorial Complutense, 23—41, and 1996. "Multiple Literary Editions: Toward a Theory of the History o f the Biblical Text." In Current Research and Technological Developments on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Ed. D. W. Parry and S. D. Ricks. STDJ 20. Leiden: Brill, 78-105. See, for example, Ulrich, Ε. 1994. "The Bible in the Making: The Scriptures at Qumran." In The Community of the Renewed Covenant. Ed. E. Ulrich and J. C. VanderKam. Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity 10. Notre Dame: University o f Notre Dame Press, 77-93. Garcia Martinez, F. 1995. "Biblical Borderlines." In The People of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Garcia Martinez F. and Trebolle Barrera, J. Leiden: Brill, 123-38. For a convenient summary, see Flint, P. W. 1997. The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Book of Psalms. STDJ 17. Leiden: Brill. Albrektson, B. 1978. "Reflections on the Emergence of a Standard Text of the Hebrew Bible." In Congress Volume Göttingen 1997. Ed. J. A. Emerton. VTS 29. Leiden: Brill, 49-65.

century BCE, to a progressive diversification of the textual tradidons excluded, such as the proto-samaritan and proto-septuagint. 43 Finally, others have postulated a co-existence of both tendencies. In this view, there was a uniform text tradition in the religious circles around the Temple of Jerusalem well before 70 CE, motivated by the Pharisaic belief that the prophecy had ended, with a consequent shift from authority outside Scripture to Scripture alone and which would lead to the canonization of the Hebrew Scripture. At the same time, according to this theory, there was a pluriform tradition elsewhere, as exemplified by the biblical texts found at Qumran, in which recourse to the authority of the Scripture was less needed due to a belief in the direct inspiration of the Teacher of Righteousness. 44

The Greek Bible I have just mentioned the scroll of the Twelve Prophets from Nahal Hever, a scroll made famous long before its official publication 45 by the monograph of Dominique Barthélémy, Les devanciers d'Aquila, in which he discovered the recension kaigé of the Septuagint.46 The importance for Septuagint studies of this manuscript is evident and has been widely recognized. Less interesting, because of their fragmentary character, are the Greek fragments of biblical books found in Cave 4 and published in 1992.47 But the significance of some Hebrew biblical manuscripts for Septuagint research can hardly be exaggerated. The famous 4QSamue1348 and the equally famous 4QJeremiah1349 and 4QJ0shua" 50 have provided us with fragments of a Hebrew text which correspond to the Vorlage of the Septuagint translation, a Hebrew Vorlage clearly different from the MT. In this way, these along with many other manuscripts of the proto-Septuagint type found in the different caves, have not only helped to solve the old dispute on the character of the Septuagint ("Translation versus Targum"), but have

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

Greenberg, M. 1956. "The Stabilization of the Text of the Hebrew Bible Reviewed in the Light of the Biblical Materials from thejudaean Desert." ]AOS 76, 157-67. Woude, A. S. van der, 1992. Pluriformitcit en Uhiformiteit. Overwegingen betreffende de tekstoverlevenng van bet Oude Testametn. Kampen: Kok. By Τ ο ν Ε. with the collaboradon of Kraft, R. 1990. The Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Nahal Hever (8HevXUgr). DJD 8. Oxford: Clarendon. Barthélémy, D. 1963. Les devanciers dAquila. Première publication intégrale du texte des fragments du Dodécaprophéton. VTS 10. Leiden: Brill. By Ulrich, Ε. 1992. In Qumran Cave 4.IV: Palaeo-Hebrew and Greek Biblical Manuscripts. DJD 9. Oxford: Clarendon, 161-97. Partially known since Cross publication of one fragment in 1955 (Cross, F. M. 1955. "The Oldest Manuscript from Qumran." BASOR 140, 27-33), and analyzed by Ulrich Ε. 1978. In The Qumran Text of Samuel and ]osephus. Harvard Semitic Monographs 19. Chico: Scholars Press. Originally published by Τον, Ε. 1989. "The Jeremiah Scrolls from Qumran." In The Texts of Qumran and the History of the Community. Vol I. Ed. F. Garcia Martinez. Paris: Gabalda, 189-206, and now included in DJD 15, 171-76. Originally published by Ulrich, Ε. 1994. "4QJ0shua" and Joshua's First Altar in the Promised Land." In New Qumran Texts and Studies. Ed. G. J. Brooke and F. Garcia Martinez. STDJ 15. Leiden: Brill, 89-104 and now included in DJD 14, 143-52.

brought strong support to the credibility of the procedure of retroversion used to reconstruct details of its Vorläget

The Aramaic Bible The evidence for Targumic material at Qumran is limited to the main Targum of Job from cave II, 52 and the small fragment of a Leviticus Targum and a second Job Targum from cave 4.53 But its influence on Targumic studies has been strongly felt, especially in the discussion on the Palestinian Targum. The antiquity of these Targumim and their Palestinian character have been used in discussions of the antiquity of the traditions contained in Neofiti and in the Genizah Fragments, and their language has been examined to better understand Palestinian Aramaic. Also other Aramaic and Hebrew compositions found at Qumran have also been gladly used by Targumists colleagues: Qumran halakhah has been used to prove the "pre-mishnaic" character of some halakhic traditions found in the Palestinian Targums, the haggadah of lQGenesis Apocryphon has been related to the haggadah of the Targumin, and theological ideas appearing in the Qumran manuscripts have been adduced to prove the pre-Christian character of some of the ideas of the Palestinian Targum. 54

Jewish Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphic Literature This is perhaps the field of Jewish Studies in which the influence of the Dead Sea Scrolls has been felt with the most intensity. That the study of the Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha has become a flourishing field in the last twenty years needs not be proven. 55 The signs of this flourishing are obvious enough: new critical editions of texts follow one another, 56 as do new commentaries on the main compositions; 57 new Periodicals have been created for publication of re-

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

All these (and many other) issues were treated in detail in a Congress dedicated to exploring the contribudons of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the study of the Septuagint, held at the University o f Manchester in 1990, see Brooke G. J. and Lindars B. eds. 1992. Septuagint, Scrolls and Cognate Writings. Papers Presented to the International Symposium on the Septuagint and its Relations to the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Writings. SBL Septuagint and Cognate Studies 33. Adanta: Scholars Press. Preliminary editing by Ploeg, J. P. M. van der & Woude, A. S. van der, 1971. L i Targum de ]ob de la Grotte XI de Qumrân. Leiden: Brill. It has been assigned the number 11Q10 in the D J D edition (DJD 23, 79-180). Published by Milik, J. T. 1977. In Qumrân Grotte 4.11. D J D 6. Oxford: Clarendon. Targum Levitique (4Q156), 86-89; Targum Job (4Q157), 90. See the Bibliography published by Aufrecht, W. E. 1987. "A Bibliography of the Job Targumim." Newsletterfor Targumic and Cognate Studies. Supplement 5. For bibliographical details, see Lehnardt, A. 1999. Bibliographie ?u den Jüdischen Schriften aus heilenistisch-römischer Zeit. JSHRZ VI.2. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus. For example, Greek Enoch (by Black, M. 1970), Ethiopie Enoch (by Knibb, M. 1978), Jubilees (by Vanderkam, J. C. 1989), Joseph and Aseneth (by Burchard 1979), Testaments of the XII Patriarchs (by de Jonge 1978), Assumption of Moses (by Tromp, J. 1993), Apocalypse of Abraham (by Rubinkiewicz 1987), 4 Ezra (by Klijn 1992), Ascensio Isaiae (by Norelli 1995). For example, 1 Enoch (by Black 1985), Testaments of the XII Patriarchs (by Hollander-de Jonge 1985), Liber Andquitatum Bilicarum (by Jacobson 1996), 4 Ezra (by Stone 1990).

search 58 as well as several new Series;59 and new collections of translations of the whole corpus 60 into a number of different languages such as English, German, Spanish, Italian, Danish, Dutch, Polish, Hebrew and French have appeared. 61 All this revival was stimulated, if not directly provoked, by the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. In the words of Michael Knibb, one of the major protagonists of this revival: "The most important factor that has affected, and will continue to affect, study of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha has undoubtedly been the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls."62 The reasons are easy to understand, and they are perfecdy summarized by M. Knibb: the Scrolls have provided remains of several of these compositions in their original languages, they have given us evidence of their being read and copied in the period of the Second Temple, they have provided an increased volume of comparative material for their understanding and they have provided an enlarged context for the interpretation of these writings, not as self contained corpora, but as part of the Jewish writings of the period. 63 His conclusion, "It is 58

59

60

61

62

63

Such as the Journalfor the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, edited by J. H. Charlesworth and published by Sheffield Academic Press. The new Supplements to the JSJ and the classic Studio in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha by Brill, the Supplements to the JSP and the Guides to the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Sheffield Academic Press, the SBL Early Judaism and Its Literature of the Scholars Press, for example. Formerly only available in English (in the good old Charles, from 1913) and in German (in the equally old Kautzsch, from 1900, and Riessler, from 1928). The French collecdon, edited by Dupont-Sommer, A. and Philonenko, M. 1987. La Bible: Ecrits intertestamentaires. Bibliothèque de la Pléiade. Paris: Galimard, has adopted the most elegant and pracdcal soludon o f printing in one single volume a very good selection o f apocryphal writings together with a very good selection of Qumran writings, underlying in this way the elements c o m m o n to all these Jewish writings from the Greco-Roman period. Knibb, M. 1998. "Perspectives on the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha: The Levi Traditions." In Perspectives in the Study of the Old Testament and Early Judaism. Ed. F. Garcia Martinez and E. Noort. VTS 73. Leiden: Brill 1998, 198. "At the most obvious level, the scrolls have provided us with fragments in the original languages, and from close to the time of their composition, o f works—for example Ben Sira, or Enoch, or Jubilees—for which in the past we were forced to rely on transladon into Greek, or on a daughter version of the Greek, or—exceptionally in the case o f Ben Sira—on medieval copies of the text in the original language. The evidence from Qumran for the writings o f the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha is limited in extent, and we are still heavily dependent on the translation into Greek or on the secondary translations. But the Hebrew or Aramaic fragments have brought us much more closely into touch with the writings o f the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha in the form in which they were originally composed, have enabled us to assess the quality and character of the translations, and in the cases of the book o f Enoch have shed light on the formation of a work that is best known to us in the pentateuchal form represented by the Ethiopie version, that is in the form that represents the final stage in its evolution. In addition to their significance from a purely textual point o f view, however, the Qumran discoveries are of fundamental importance for the study of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha because they have provided a considerably enlarged context for the interpretadon o f these writings. This has occurred at two levels. Sometimes specific discoveries have been o f relevance for particular writings o f the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, for example the texts associated with Levi in relation to the Greek Testament of Levi, or the Genesis Apocryphon in relation to tradidons of Jubilees. But more commonly the Qumran discoveries are of importance because they provide a gready increased volume o f comparative material for the assessment o f the literary genres o f the interpretation of the beliefs and ideas that occur in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, for example the Qumran wisdom texts in relation to the apocryphal and pseudepigraphi-

impossible for the future to conceive a serious study of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha in isoladon from the study of the texts from Qumran, just as the converse ought to be the case," seems to me perfecdy justified. Time does not allow me to deal with the impact of the research on the Dead Sea Scrolls on the other areas of Jewish Studies, as originally planned. In the case of "Hebrew Language Studies" it is generally acknowledged that the Scrolls have provided us with the missing link needed to follow the evolution of Hebrew from the late biblical Hebrew to the mishnaic Hebrew. 64 A look at the Materials for the Dictionary. Series I 200 BCE-3000 CEbi shows that practically all the sources available for this crucial period come from the finds in the Judean Desert. A reference to the work of Kutscher and of E. Qimron should be enough. 66 The same happened, and even more clearly, with the "Aramaic language." We have recovered at Qumran more than 100 manuscripts, some of them of sizeable dimensions, which reveal a phase of the language previously unknown and have provided a great impetus to the study of the Aramaic dialects. A reference to the work of Kutscher, Fiztmyer, Greenfield and Muraoka on 1QapGen, or to that of Sokoloff on 1 lQtgJob, and above all to the magnum opus of Klaus Bayer,67 make further comments unnecessary.. As is well known, there are practically no historical works at Qumran, nor documentary texts. But in other collections of documents from the Judean Desert we do find most interesting materials of this sort, and they have indeed attracted the attention of the colleagues of the section "Ancient Jewish History Studies." The history of the Second Revolt cannot be understood without the Bar Kochba letters from Murabba'at, Nahal Hever and Wadi Seiyal, nor can the economic and social history, the administration, law, family relations, etc. of this period can be grasped without the family archives recovered in the caves of all these wadis.68 I would have loved to say something on the impact of Dead Sea Scrolls study in "Early Rabbinics," if only because I recendy edited in the Revue de Qumran an article on 4QMMT written by Miguel Pérez, who was attracted by the language of the document and by the analogies with the Midrash Sifra.69 But it is

64

65

66

67

68

69

cal wisdom texts, or the various texts from Qumran with messianic beliefs in relation to the messianic passages in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha." Art. cit., 198-199. See Sáenz Badillos, A. 1988. Historia de la Lengua Hebrea. Estudios Orientales 2. Sabadell: Ausa, 136. Published in microfiches by the Academy of the Hebrew Language and the Historical Dictionary o f the Hebrew Language, Jerusalem 1988. Especially Kutscher, Y. 1974. The Language and Linguistic Background of the Isaiah Scroll (IQIsa'j. STDJ 6. Leiden: Brill [translation o f the original Hebrew of 1959] and Qimron, E. 1988. The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Harvard Semitic Studies 29. Adanta: Scholars Press. Beyer, K. 1984. Die aramäischen Texte vom Toten Meer, and 1994. Ergänzungsband. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, with the bibliographical references to the other studies. Published in the D J D Series (Murabba'at, D J D 2; Hever/Seiyal D J D 27) or elswhere (Nahal Hever: Lewis, N. 1989. The Documents from the Bar Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters. I: Greek Papyri. Judean Desert Studies 2. Jerusalem; Nahal Se'elim: Yardeni, A. 1995. NahalSe'elim Documents. (Hebr.) Judean Desert Studies. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Pérez Fernández, M. 1997. "4QMMT: Redactional Study." RevQ 18/70, 191-205.

already time to close. And besides, I am convinced that in this case the "impact" goes the other way around. It is not research on the Dead Sea Scrolls which has had an impact on the Study of Rabbinics, but expertise in Rabbinics which is making the research on the Dead Sea Scrolls flourish. It does not seems accidental that J. Strugnell requested the help of Ya'akov Sussman to elucidate the Miqsat Ma'ase ha-Torah,7° that J. T. Milik entrusted the edition of the 4QDamascus Document to J. M. Baumgarten, 71 or that some of the most exciting work on the Temple Scroll is coming from L. H. Schiffman; 72 these are three accomplished rabbinic scholars. I started my lecture contrasting the "midlife crisis" associated with turning fifty with the joyous celebration of fifty years of Qumran research, and I have tried to present, very briefly, some of the achievements of this research and its influence in other areas of Jewish Studies. My last sentence on Rabbinics leads me again to the image of marriage and to the fruits of a happy union. I am sincerely convinced that the Scrolls research has had a very positive influence in various areas of Jewish Studies. But I am also equally convinced that it is only thanks to the effort and the involvement of colleagues working in other areas of Jewish Studies that the Scrolls research has progressed in the past and can further grow in the future. Qumran studies is a grown up academic discipline, but no academie discipline can flourish in isolation. Would it not be wise for our EAJS to have a section dedicated to the Dead Sea Scrolls in each one of our congresses in order to enhance the interaction among the maoy grown up disciplines which form our field?

70

71

72

Sussmann, Y. "The History of the Halakha and the Dead Sea Scrolls," originally published in Tarbiz 59, 1989-90, 1 1 - 7 6 and included in English and in a modified form as "Appendix 1" in Qimron E. and Strugnell, J. Qumran Cave 4. V: Miqsat ma'ase ha-Torah. D J D 10. Oxford: Clärendon. 1994, 179-200. Baumgarten, J. M. 1996. Qumran Cave 4. XIII: The Damascus Document (4Q266^tQ273). D J D 18. Oxford: Clarendon. See his numerous publications on halakhic issues of the Temple .SYro//listed in Garcia Martinez, F. and Parry, D. W. A Bibliography of the Finds in the Desert ofJudah, 386-94.

A L G U N O S APUNTES SOBRE LOS PROVERBIOS

SIRIACOS DE

MENANDRO

JUAN JOSÉ ALARCÔN SAINZ Universidad C o m p l u t e n s e , Madrid, Spain

Descripciôn general de la obra Los Proverbios siriacos de Menandro (MenSir) son una colecciôn de máximas sapienciales que se incluyen entre los Pseudoepigrafos del Andguo Testamento. El texto se encuentra en un manuscrito siriaco del Museo Británic0 (BM Or. Add. 14.658, fols. 163v-67v), que puede datarse en el s. VII. La ediciôn del texto corresponde a J.P.N. Land (1862).1 Esta ediciôn fue corregida posteriormente por el propio editor (1868),2 y también por Wright (1863),3 Schultess (1912)4 y Audet (1952).5 Existen traducciones de la obra al ladn: Land 6 y Baumstark;7 alemân: Frankenberg, 8 Schultess9 y Riessler;10 francés: Audet;11 inglés: Baarda12 y neerlandés: también de Baarda.13 N o existe ninguna traduction de los Proverbios al castellano. La obra se encuadra dentro del género de la literatura sapiencial, pero desde un punto de vista eminentemente prâctico. No se trata de conocimientos filosôficos teôricos, sino fundamentalmente de cômo comportarse correctamente en la vida. Con seguridad no se sabe el numéro exacto de proverbios que se incluyen en la obra. Cada uno de los editores y traductores hace una division disrinta. Asi, Audet considéra que son 96; Schulthess 101; Riessler 103; Baumstark 153; Baarda, por su parte, procédé a una division en 474 1íneas más ο menos cortas. En este trabajo se citarán los proverbios según la division realizada por Audet.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8

Land, J. P. N. 1862. Anecdota Syriaca I. Leiden, 64, 21-73,18. Land, J. P. N. 1868. Anecdota Syriaca II. Leiden, 25. Wright, W. 1863. journal ofSacred Literature 4lh series 3, 115-30. Schulthess, F. 1912. "Die Sprüche des Menanders." 7LAW32, 199-224. Audet, J.P. 1952. "La sagesse de Ménandre l'Égypden." Rß 59, 55-81. Anecdota Syriaca I, 156-64; cf. también sus adiciones y correcciones en Anecdota Syriaca II, 17-19. Baumstark, A. 1894. "Lucubradones Syro-Graecae." Jahrbücher für Klassische Philologie, Supplement-Band 21, Lepzig, 473-90. Frankenberg, W. 1895. "Die Schrift des Menander (Land anecd. syr. I, S. 64ff.), ein Produkt der jüdischen Spruchweisheit." ZAXV15, 226-77.

9

Vide supra nota 4.

10

Riessler, P. 1928 [reimpr. 1966], Altjüdisches Schriftum ausserhalb der Bible. Heidelberg, 1047-57, 1328ss.

11

Vide supra nota 5.

12

Baarda, T. 1985. "The Sentences of the Syriac Menander." En The ΟId Testament Pseudoepigrapha. Ed. J. H. Charlesworth. New York, vol. 2, 583-606. Baarda, T. "De Spreuken van Pseudo-Menander." En De Pseudoepigrafen. Ed. P. W. van der Horst y T. Baarda. Vol. 3, 43-83.

13

Además de la obra compléta de los Proverbios de Menandro, existe un epitome, un resumen de todos ellos que también se atribuye a Menandro, y que se encuentra en el manuscrito de Museo Britânico BM Or. Add. 14.614, del siglo VIII ο IX, y publicado por Sachau.14

Autor, lugar y fecha de composiciôn. Dentro del propio manuscrito los Proverbios aparecen entre otras obras de autores y filôsofos griegos, por lo que se puede pensar que el autor del manuscrito consideraba a Menandro un autor griego, sin duda el famoso représentante de la Nueva Comedia de Atenas (c. 300 a.C.). N o se puede tomar en consideraciôn esta idea, aunque A. Baumstark 15 sugiere que tal vez se träte de un compilador que ha recogido los proverbios de las propias comedias del Menandro griego. En cuanto al lugar de composiciôn, el ûnico que ha tratado el tema ha sido Audet, para el que la menciôn del "agua" en MenSir 1 "agua y semilla, plantas e hijos, es hermoso culdvar plantas y honorable engendrar hijos," y una supuesta mala traducciôn en MenSir 65,16 le bastan para concluir que su origen fue Egipto. Pensamos que con tan pocas evidencias no se puede precisar ningún origen con exacritud. Tampoco se sabe con seguridad la fecha de composiciôn de la obra, por tratarse de una colecciôn de proverbios que pueden haberse ampliado con el discurrir del dempo. N o obstante, caben varias observaciones: -Lingüisdcamente, como apunta Baumstark, 17 el siriaco de nuestra obra es bastante arcaico. -Algunos estudiosos 18 apuntan el ano 400 d.C. como fecha de composiciôn más tardia posible, considerando el hecho de que las escuelas de gladiadores que se mencionan en MenSir 6, "y si m hijo sale de la infancia desvergonzado, rudo, insolente, ladrôn, falso y provocador, ensénale el oficio de gladiador," desaparecieron a partir de la época de Constandno. - L a fecha de composiciôn más temprana posible se consigue si tenemos en cuenta las fechas de promulgaciôn de las leyes de Adriano y Antonino, relativas al trato a los esclavos (alrededor del 150 d.C.). El dueno del esclavo no podia matarle. Estas leyes quedan perfectamente reflejadas en MenSir 24, "Odia al esclavo malvado, y rechaza al hombre libre que roba, pues del mismo modo que no puedes matar a un esclavo, tampoco puedes ejercer la violencia contra un

14

15 16

17 18

Sachau, E. 1870. Inedita Syriaca. Eine Sammlung syrischer Übersetzungen von Schriften griechischer Profanliteratur. Viena, 80,1-81,10. Cf. Baumstark, "Lucubrationes...," 483 ss. Cf. Audet 73 (nota 1) y 77, "l'auteur observe comme un fait de la plus commune expérience que la quesdon de l'eau vient au premier rang dans les préoccupadons des hommes, il nous donne clairement à penser qu'il vit en un pays agricole oû l'irrigadon des terres exige une attendon et des soins continus... Mais nulle part, à coup sûr, la remarque de Ménandre ne paraîtra plus naturelle qu'en Egypte, le granier de l'Empire... Cette indicadon est du reste confirmée par un détail du vocabulaire. Le syriaque suppose, à 65, la confusion νόμος, loi, et de νομός, province, nome... à l'époque romaine, seule l'Egypte désigne encore par ν ο μ ό ς ..." Cf. Baumstark, "Lucubradones...," 487. Cf. Audet 78, Baarda 585.

hombre libre." De donde se deduce que ya estaban vigentes cuando se compuso nuestra obra. 19 Resumiendo estos datos, pensamos que la composiciôn de la obra se situaría entre el 15CMK)0 d. C. Audet y Baarda20 hablan del s. III como fecha de composiciôn más probable.

Género literario y lengua original. Como ya hemos mencionado, la obra puede encuadrarse dentro del género sapiencial, aunque a diferencia de otras composiciones del mismo género, como por ejemplo el Ahiqar arameo, ο los libros biblicos didâcdcos de Job ο Tobias, no posee ninguna parte narradva, sino que tras la frase introductoria "Menandro, el sabio, dice," comienzan directamente los proverbios. Otra diferencia que cabe senalar es que mientras en Ahiqar nos encontramos con una literatura sapiential de dpo cortesano, para la instruciôn de principes y principales, en Menandro la sabiduria es más pragmática y popular. En cuanto a la lengua original de la composiciôn, hay opiniones para todos los gustos. La mayoria de los estudiosos considéra que se trata de la traduction de un original griego. Pero al tratarse de una colecciôn no se puede excluir que se anadiesen nuevos materiales a la colecciôn. También hay quien piensa que se trata de un original siriaco, cuyo autor recogeria en su obra los dichos de la sabiduria popular de su entorno. Tampoco en este caso se puede excluir la posibilidad de que utilizase colecciones en otras lenguas (arameo, hebreo, griego). Finalmente, W. Frankenberg 21 opina que la lengua original era el hebreo, basàndose en el paralelo que se encuentra en MenSir 55, " N o hay nada más hermoso que el silencio; hermoso es el silencio en todo momento; incluso si un tonto permanece callado, es considerado sabio," y el versiculo de Pr 17,28, "Incluso el necio que se calla es tenido por sabio, el que cierra sus labios por inteligente." Sin embargo, hay que considerar que podria tratarse de una adiciôn posterior, tal vez insertada por un traductor ο copista ciertamente cristiano y conocedor de la Biblia.22 Nosotros nos inclinamos a pensar, de acuerdo con la opinion más generalizada, que se trataria de la traduction de un original griego, aunque con muchas posibilidades de que se hubiera ampliado en alguna medida con el transcurrir del dempo.

19 20 21 22

Cf. Cf. Cf. Cf.

Audet 66, nota 3 y 77; cf. Baarda 585. Audet 78; Baarda 585. Frankenberg, 226 y 264. Baarda 586.

MenSir y los apôcrifos Existen diversos paralelos entre MenSir y el libro de Eclesiâstico o Ben Sira. Asi, MenSir 96 y Ben Sira 38,16-23: MenSir 96: Estas cosas buenas y malas se encuentran entremezcladas en la vida de los hombres, además de la fiebre, los temblores, las enfermedades, y [otros] grandes maies que son llamados "mensajeros de la muerte." Nadie puede elegir y tomar para si lo que es bueno, y alejarse de lo que es malo; sin embargo, los hombres caminan segûn la suerte que les otorga el Senor, durante el dempo que les da para vivir. Tampoco deben los hombres desesperar porque no puedan vivir más de lo que està decretado para ellos, ni protestar contra Dios por los males que nos han acaecido, pues cuântas veces, a pesar de los crímenes comeddos, se alcanza [después] honor y grandeza. Una persona no debe estar excesivamente triste cuando le alcanza una desgracia; al gémir, se produce un gran dolor a si misma, porque no supone ninguna ayuda para el muerto, aunque se haya hundido y haya sufrido [mucho] después de él. Pero aquel que es sabio, incluso cuando el muerto es muy querido para él, lo acompanarà hasta la tumba con 1ágrimas; pero una vez que el muerto haya sido enterrado, vencerá su dolor; que recuerde y comprenda que también él, sin duda, morirâ. Este [la muerte] es el lugar de reposo que ha preparado el Senor a los hombres para que descansen en él de los males que han conocido en sus vidas. Ben Sira 38,16-23: (16) Hijo, derrama 1ágrimas por el muerto, entona cl lamento fûnebre como el que sufre cosas terribles segûn su decision, cubre su cuerpo y no descuides su sepultura. (17) A g u d i z a tu a m a r g o llanto, f o m e n t a el l a m e n t o y haz el d u e l o que se merece: un dia o d o s para evitar la maledicencia, y c o n s u é l a t e p o r tu pena.

(18) Pues de la pena résulta muerte y la tristeza del corazôn abate la fuerza. (19) En la calamidad se prolonga la tristeza y la vida del pobre es maldiciôn del corazôn. (20) N o entregues tu c o r a z ô n a la tristeza, apàrtala a c o r d â n d o t e del fin.

(21) No lo olvides: no hay retorno. A él no le eres util y a d te perjudicas. (22) Recuerda su sentencia p u e s es t a m b i é n la tuya: "a m i ayer y a d h o y . " (23) C o n el d e s c a n s o del m u e r t o haz césar su r e c u e r d o , c o n s u é l a t e c o n él c u a n d o expira.

La similitud de ideas que se aprecian entre estos dos textos podria suponer una relaciôn directa con la literatura sapiencial judia. Pero en este punto surge otro problema. La literatura sapiencial judia está muy relacionada con la literatura sapiencial oriental, y también con la griega. Si nos fijamos en Ben Sira 8,7, " N o te alegres ante un muerto, acuérdate de que todos morimos," en MenSir encontramos un proverbio similar, el 18: " N o te regocijes por un muerto, por uno que está muriendo, pues todos los hombres van a la casa eterna"; pero también esta máxima se encuentra en las obras del

Menandro de la Nueva Comedia de Atenas: "Como eres mortal, no te alegres por ningún muerto." 23 También referido a esto podemos citar el Ahiqar arameo 24 B78: "Hijo, no te alegres de la muerte de tus enemigos, pues la muerte también pende sobre ti," ο la version siriaca de Ahiqar25 (AhiqSir) 79: "Hijo mio, no te regocijes del enemigo cuando muere."

MenSiry 105 pseudoepigrafos Existe otro paralelo muy notable entre MenSir y la version siriaca de Ahiqar. Asi, en AhiqSir 926 se dice: "Hijo mio, no cometas adulterio con la esposa de tu vecino, no sea que otros comentan adulterio con tu mujer." MenSir 38 dice: "Igual que no deseas que tu mujer cometa adulterio con otro hombre, de la misma forma, no quieras cometer adulterio con la mujer de tu vecino." Otra obra a tener en cuenta es la de los Proverbios de Pseudo-Foa'iides, un poema sapiencial judeo-helenistico, 27 con el que también se aprecian paralelos: PseudoFoctlides 109-110, "Si eres rico, no seas cicatero; recuerda que eres mortal. N o es posible llevarse las riquezas y el dinero al infierno," en MenSir 66 encontramos: "Si denes riquezas, si posees propiedades, sirvete de tus bienes durante el dempo que estés vivo... pues recuerda y considéra: Nadie puede utilizar sus bienes en el infierno, y las riquezas no acomparian [a nadie] a la tumba." Ideas similares se pueden encontrar también en Job 1,21 "jDesnudo sali del vientre de mi madré y desnudo volveré allà!" Pero también estas máximas aparecen en otras obras griegas y latinas.

MenSiry la literatura rabinica La idea expresada en MenSir 40 "Cualquier cosa que sea odiosa para ti, no quieras hacerla a tu vecino," se encuentra en diversas culturas, pero esta formulation negativa parece que apunta especificamente a una tradiciôn judia.28 Asi, un paralelo muy proximo lo encontramos en el Talmud Babil, Sabbat 31a, en las palabras de Hillel, "lo que es odioso para ti, no deberás hacer a tu vecino." Para algunos (W. Frankenberg) esto séria una evidencia del origen judio de MenSir, aunque hay que pensar que esta máxima era conocida en ambientes cristianos siriacos y persas del s. IV. 2 9

23 24

25

26 27

28 29

Cf. Jaeckel, S. 1964. Menandri Sententiae. Leipzig, 52. Cf. Conybeare, F. C., Harris, J. R. & Lewis, A. S. 1913. The Story ofAhikar. 2 ed., Cambridge, 64 y 108. Cf. Nau, F. 1909. Histoire et sagesse d'Ahikar l'assyrien (fils d'Anael, neveu de Tohie). Traduction des versions syriaques. Paris, 180. Cf. Nau, 157-158. Cf. Van der Herst, P. W. 1978. "The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides." SVTP 4, Leiden; cf. Collins, J. J. X991.]emsh Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age. Louisville, Kentucky, 158-177. Cf. Tobit 4,15, "Lo que aborreces, no se lo hagas a nadie." Cf. Kmosko, M. ed. 1926. Liber Graduum. Patrologia Syriaca, Pars Prima, Tomus terrius, Paris, col. 20, lin. 15.

MenSir y el Menandro griego Es muy posible que una de las fuentes en la composiciôn de MenSir fuera las colecciones de máximas griegas adscritas a Menandro y publicadas por Jaekel. 30 Podemos considerar, por ejemplo, la maxima griega "Nadie que sea justo se hará fâcilmente rico," con el paralelo en MenSir 87, "Magnifica y agradable es la riqueza, pero no es fâcilmente adquirida por el hombre bueno." También la máxima griega "Honra a tu padre y respeta a aquella que te dio a luz" se puede ver en MenSir 14 "Ama a tu padre más que a cualquier cosa, siente reverencia por él y hônrale. Y no desprecies ni deshonres a tu madré, pues durante diez meses te llevô en su vientre, y cuando te dio a luz, estuvo a punto de morir."

Temas en MenSir A conrinuaciôn paso a citar algunos ejemplos de MenSir atendiendo a la temárica que tratan. En primer lugar, los que se ocupan de los padresy lafamilia·. MenSir 2: A Dios se ha de temer, y al padre y a la madré honrar; de la vejez no [hay que] burlarse, pues a ella te diriges para quedarte; honra al que es más anciano que tu, que Dios te aumentará el honor y la dignidad. MenSir 4: Escucha las palabras de tu padre y de tu madré cada dia, y no busques herirlos ni deshonrarlos, pues el hijo que a su padre y a su madré hiere y deshonra, Dios determina su muerte y su desgracia. MenSir 5: Honra a tu padre como es debido, a tus amigos no menosprecies, a los que te honran, no deshonres. MenSir 13: No seas pendenciero, ni levantes tu mano contra el que es mâs anciano que tu, pues a Homero le preguntan sus companeros: "El que golpea a un hombre anciano, (·que le pasará?." El les contesta: "Sus ojos quedarán cegados." "Y el que a su madré golpea, ^qué le pasará?." El les contesta: "La derra no le aceptará, porque ella es la madré de todos los hombres." De nuevo le preguntan: "Y el que golpea a su padre,
Vide supra nota 23.

rápidamente queda deshonrado y despreciado; por tanto, cuando estés borracho, vete a casa. MenSir 11 : Odiosa es la costumbre de acostarse sin que sea la hora para ello; dormir lleva al infierno, el sueno nos situa al lado de los muertos. MenSir 20: No atravieses por una calle en la que hay una pelea; de lo contrario, si pasas, sufrirás algûn mal; si participas, serás golpeado, y tus ropas serán rasgadas, y si te quedas alli mirando, te citarán como testigo ante el tribunal. Odia ser golpeado y rechaza levantar falso testimonio. MenSir 21: Ama las posesiones, pero odia el robo; las posesiones son vida, pero el robo siempre significa la muerte. MenSir 31: No seas pendenciero, que las peleas no [te] conduzcan a la pobreza. Si mientes, al momento quedarás deshonrado, y si hablas con malas maneras, tu rostro empalidecerà; y si eres fanfarrôn, ni mismo te causarás perjuicio. MenSir 32: Si pasas la noche con desconocidos, no abras ante ellos tu boisa, ni les muestres lo que tienes; de lo contrario, te pedirán un préstamo, y no te lo devolverân; cuando se lo pidas, discutirán contigo y te gritarán agrias palabras; perderás lo tuyo y además te habrás convertido en [su] enemigo. MenSir 39: Si no te gusta perder nada, tampoco te gustará robar. MenSir 40: Cualquier cosa que sea detestable para ti, no quieras hacerla a tu vecino. MenSir 53: Odiosa es la locuacidad; la risa sin medida es un defecto [verdaderamente] malo. MenSir 55: No hay nada más hermoso que el silencio; hermoso es el silencio en todo momento; incluso si un tonto permanece callado, es considerado sabio. Otro grupo trata sobre la rique^aj la pobreza·. MenSir 45: La comida hace más agradable la compania, la riqueza multiplica a los amigos, pero si tropieza el pie de un hombre, todos sus amigos desaparecen. MenSir 46: Un regalo hace las palabras mucho mas agradables. MenSir 47: No comas todos los días con alguien que es más rico que tu, pues si tú vas de visita a su casa, te podrà agasajar con lo que gasta en un solo dia; pero si es él el que te visita en tu casa, gastarás por su causa lo que has ido ahorrando durante treinta dias, y te arruinarás. MenSir 64: Si tú tienes riquezas, si posees propiedades, sé humilde, amable, y generoso; no seas ostentoso; y si no posees propiedades, y eres pobre, inclinate y sé agradable; no te muestres orgulloso. La ostentaciôn y el orgullo son algo detestable para los hombres. Otro grupo trata de las relaciones con otras personas: los ancianos, !os esclaves, !os ettemigos, etc. MenSir 23: No comas junto al esclavo malvado, para que sus amos no te puedan acusar de que tu le estás ensenando a robar.

MenSir 24: Odia al esclavo malvado, y rechaza al hombre libre que roba, pues del mismo modo que no puedes matar a un esclavo, tampoco puedes ejercitar la violencia contra un hombre libre. MenSir 25: Dios detesta al esclavo malvado que a sus amos odia y deshonra. MenSir 26: Si ves a un esclavo malvado en una situaciôn indigna, no te apenes por él, sino que di: jQué pena por sus amos! jVaya propiedad! MenSir 27: Ama al esclavo diligente, que en casa de sus amos se muestra [muy] activo y [muy] aplicado. Otro grupo temâtico trata del adulterio; la mujer adultéray locua^ : MenSir 7: La mujer adultéra no camina con pasos firmes, porque engana al esposo honrado; y al hombre que no es honesto con su mujer, también Dios le detesta. MenSir 8: Aparta a tu hijo de la fornicaciôn, y a tu esclavo de las tabernas, porque tanto lo uno como lo otro ensenan a robar. MenSir 16: Y si tu quieres tomar esposa, antes [de todo] pregunta por su lengua, y solo entonces tômala, porque una mujer locuaz es [como] un infierno, y un hombre malvado es [como] la muerte. MenSir 37: Guârdate completamente del adulterio. jPor qué quieres comprar agua pûtrida e impura, cuyo comienzo es degeneraciôn, y su final ligereza y lujuria?. MenSir 38: Camina con recdtud, con la cabeza alta, y sé limpio de pensamientos. Recuerda y considéra: igual que no deseas que tu mujer cometa adulterio con otro hombre, de la misma forma no quieras cometer adulterio con la mujer de tu vecino. MenSir 60: La mujer parlanchina, no escuches sus palabras; si se te queja a d del marido, no la créas, porque él no le ha faltado, pero ella siempre le irrita con su lengua viperina. MenSir 86: La lengua conduce al mal. Otro grupo temâtico séria el que trata de Dios: MenSir 17: A Dios has de temer en todo momento, para que cuando estés angusdado puedas invocarle, y que Él escuche tu voz. MenSir 25: Dios detesta al esclavo malvado que a sus amos odia y deshonra. MenSir 28: Dios esclaviza a todo hombre malvado, pero todo hombre inteligente merece ser elevado a la gloria y a la grandeza. MenSir 69: La principal fuente de todas las cosas buenas es el temor a Dios; ello libra de todos los males y es un tesoro. Sin embargo, no por siempre perduran los asuntos de esos hombres, pues sus vidas se dedenen en la tumba.

LA TERMINOLOGIE DE LA L O I À L'ÉPOQUE DU S E C O N D T E M P L E , ARCHÉOLOGIE D ' U N VOCABULAIRE OCCULTE D E L'ANACHRONISME DU TERME "HALAKHA" JACQUELINE GENOT-BISMUTH Université d e la S o r b o n n e N o u v e l l e - P a r i s I I I , France

Préliminaires Le champ d'étude que j'ai annoncé est bien entendu trop vaste pour être traité en quelques instants, et je n'entends pour l'heure qu'ouvrir une piste. Je vais donc me limiter ici qu'à l'examen d'un de ses aspects. Celui de ce que certains ont qualifié de "Halakha sectaire" à propos du fameux texte de Qumran qu'on a mis si longtemps, et comme à regret, à nous lâcher: le 1.‫מקצת מעשי התורה‬ En tout d'abord en interrogadon initiale: "Sectaire" oui, mais par rapport à quelle idéologie dominante? En fait nous n'en savons rien. Car par une aberradon de méthode et un sophisme nous acceptons la vue du judaïsme religieux traditionnel qui est une pétition de principe: la Mishna et le Talmud, qui ne datent en fait que de tendances qui se sont imposées bien après 70 et ne représentent que l'idéologie dominante du Patriarcat palestinien (Ile—Ille), sont projetés sur l'amont par rien d'autre qu'un acte de foi. Pour ne pas parler de la valeur terminologique de ces deux mots, encore plus tardive.2 Scientifiquement, nous n'avons pas la moindre preuve, et la seule preuve pour l'instant identifiée et certaine, Flavius Joseph, ne nous reflète en rien ce prétendu judaïsme dominant avec sa sacro-sainte ‫הלכה‬. Donc par prudence de méthode n'utilisons le terme de "sectaire" qu'avec des guillemets, en manière de provision, afin de nous rendre à nouveau la pensée libre et l'esprit disponible à toutes les hypothèses alternatives qui nous permettront de sortir de la situation absurde de blocage où l'on est aujourd'hui et qui consiste à identifier l'amont par l'aval, et l'aval par l'amont, cumulant ainsi deux fautes de méthodes impardonnables: l'anachronisme et la tautologie.

‫ מ ק צ ת‬doit être entendu exactement comme l'équivalent du parddf "de" caractérisdque en paruculier des dtres d'ouvrage en latin, le De anima par exemple. Le sens en est donc "de quelques...," par opposidon au corpus tout ender. Pour la commodité du lecteur non forcément philologue, mais non moins averti, et pour faciliter la saisie informatique, la transcription de l'hébreu a été allégée et débarrassée des minuties excessives. ‫ משנה‬jusqu'à l'époque de la rédaction du dit Talmud de Jérusalem n'est en fait qu'un terme générique et flou qui désigne la matière traditionnelle juridique d'exclusive légitimité orale. Ce n'est encore qu'un dérivé de la racine ‫שנה‬, répéter verbalement une disposition d'usage traditionnelle, par opposition à ‫קרא‬, citer une loi dans sa formulation scripturaire

Un mot de la stratégie de recherche: en quels termes se posaient et se formulaient alors les débats sur la nature de la Loi (adaptabilité ou intangibilité, rédacdon écrite de codes, inspiration et refus de l'inspiration etc.)

Terminologie du raisonnement juridique et de la Loi dans ses traces antérieures au Ile—IIIe s. Nous prendront comme référence relative la terminologie légale propre à "Miq%at ma'aseh ha-Torah," DJDX, Oxford, 1994.‫ג‬ Mais au préalable, essayons à travers la LXX d'établir la terminologie dominante faisons consensus disons, très grosso modo, et sans entrer dans les arguties, vers 200 avant notre ère, en nous servant du grec pour reconstituer les champs sémantiques de l'hébreu. Celle-ci nous situe sans équivoque dans la problématique de la Loi et du Droit, du Droit Théorique et du Droit Pratique: a) Le vocabulaire du raisonnement juridique (un seul terme grec, λαλείν pour trois termes hébraïques): 1. ‫חשב‬: penser, estimer, déduire. 2. ‫פשר‬: interpréter un cas scripturaire en l'actualisant et en l'appliquant par analogie au cas à traiter. 3. ‫אמר‬: énoncer une jurisprudence en fonction du travail de raisonnement juridique. b) Le vocabulaire de l'activité judiciaire (νόμοί et κρίσιΐ en champ croisé): 1. ‫דבר‬: énoncer le jugement faisant fonction de norme. ‫ אמר‬est un synonyme apparent, mais il reste à chercher la nuance technique qui distingue ces deux termes. 2. ‫דין‬: prononcé du jugement au terme d'un raisonnement juridique. 3. ‫משפט‬: chose jugée, sentence ayant en jurisprudence force de loi. 4. ‫מצוה‬: norme impérarive. 5. ‫חוקה‬: législation, travail législatif. 6. ‫צדק‬, ‫צדקה‬: exercer l'activité judiciaire avec intégrité, dans le seul but de juger conformément à la vérité de l'énoncé du texte de la Loi Écrite. c) La jurisprudence en tant que telle: un cas de mise en parallèle de ‫דבר‬ et ‫ מעשה‬à travers deux termes grecs (πράγμα et πράξις) d) La loi et le droit, du plus général au plus pardculier (la hiérarchie est encore à établir et doit être objet d'enquête): ‫תורה‬, ‫חוק‬, ‫ מ ש פ ט‬, ‫דבר‬, ‫דין‬. On observera que le champ sémantique dont relève ‫ הלכה‬est quasiment absent et ne se retrouve qu'une fois, et incidemment avec l'usage du terme métonymique de ‫דרך‬, à valeur de synonyme de ‫ דבר‬et ‫( מ ש פ ט‬καθήκειν). La terminologie de la version grecque de Ben Sira (130 avant notre ère environ) est un repère utile dans la mesure où il peut servir d'attestation d'une manière de chaînon intermédiaire dans la tentative de reconstituer l'histoire de l'évolution du lexique juridique. On peut en retenir ces données essentielles: a) Construction en une même catégorie de ‫גמול‬, ‫ דרך‬et ‫( מ ע ש ה‬έργον) mettant l'accès le critère "d'utilité" de la mise en pratique de la Loi.

6 manuscrits lacunaires différents de la Grotte 4 permettant la reconsdtudon d'un texte composite de 130 lignes. Laissons ici de côté tous les problèmes d'édition critique (problèmes paléographiques, économie du texte, etc.). Les spécialistes là sont à leur affaire.

b) Construction d'un champ unique de la Loi, que celle-ci soit directement énoncée et qu'elle soit l'objet d'une application à la suite d'un raisonnement juridique: ‫דבר‬, ‫תורה‬, ‫מצוה‬, ‫ מ ש פ ט‬, ‫ חשבון‬constituent simplement "νόμος." c) Apparition de 4 ‫ הלך‬en valeur terminologique de "mettre en pratique, pratiquer." (πράσσειν). On constate aussi le développement du vocabulaire de l'activité législatrice qui distingue entre la Loi et les lois; ainsi κρίμα regroupe-t-il ‫חוק‬, ‫ מ ש פ ט‬, ‫ ד י ן‬, ‫דבר‬, ‫חוקה‬. Le retour à la terminologie légale propre à notre texte dit "sectaire" fait apparaître une série des plus simples qui démontre à l'évidence le caractère parlé, courant de ce discours d'oralité des débats, puisé dans un vocabulaire prosaïque. Ces termes sont: ‫חושבים‬, ‫אומרים‬, ‫ דברים‬pour l'expression du raisonnement juridique; ‫מעשה‬, ‫ מעשים‬pour la question de l'applicabilité et de la mise en pratique. L'arsenal argumentaire du métalangage juridique est tout aussi lapidaire; il se contente de raisonner par rapport à écriture qui est censé "dire" le droit: ,‫שכתוב‬ ‫משכתוב‬, ‫שאמר הכתוב‬, ‫ובספר כתוב‬. En outre s'inscrivant dans la longue lignée de l'activité institutionnelle de la justice par raisonnement juridique à partir de la Tora pour établir la norme jurisprudentielle, ce texte, et les magistrats qui sont derrière, élargissent le champ de la norme écrite puisqu'ils ajoutent à la Tora proprement dite Prophètes et Psaumes. Une autre de ses caractéristiques est de légitimer la mise par écrit de l'activité judiciaire. Il s'agit bien d'une école juridique nouvelle qui à la fois élargit le champ de la loi écrite en acceptant qu'elle ait évolué dans le temps de Moïse à David, en passant par les Prophètes; mais qui ne reconnaît que l'écriture comme source de légitimité, au point qu'elle se réfère à son propre code. La caractéristique de cette école juridique semble donc limiter la liberté d'interpréter en la contraignant à se formuler par écrit. C'est une information de taille par rapport à tout ce que nous ont seriné les théologiens: il est encore normal de coucher par écrit des dispositions prescriptives produites par jugement juridique et de les écrire, au nom de l'autorité ou l'école qui en est l'auteur: ‫ואף אנחנו כתבנו‬. ‫אנחנו‬ s'oppose à ‫ אתה‬/ ‫אתם‬, et implique que les uns comme les autres partagent ce principe; le ton d'adresse familier indiquerait qu'on serait simplement dans une discussion entre majorité et minorité au sein de l'organe institutionnel central de la Loi, la Geroussia (tout se passerait donc comme s'il s'agissait d'un procèsverbal de débat solennellement adressé pour prendre acte). Auquel cas s'il s'agit d'une mouvance qui ne connaît et ne reconnaît que Tora de Moïse, Prophètes et Psaumes, et juge tout acte religieux comme conforme et recevable uniquement que s'il s'agit d'une exacte mise en œuvre de la Loi de Moïse, des Prophètes et de David, c'est qu'elle s'oppose à un laxisme, et nous pouvons le calculer, le laxisme discrétionnaire du Grand Prêtre qui se prend pour un législateur discrétionnaire; ‫ אתה‬/ ‫ אתם‬désignerait simplement le Grand Prêtre et son clan qui tente, en l'occurrence, de passer en force. Il est aussi remarquable que les références ne soient pas à la loi "divine," mais à des auteurs humains et bien identifiables du passé, comme si on les opposait à des contemporains sans autorité: 4

Ben S ira 10,6

Moïse, les prophètes et David. Sur ce plan ce point de vue nous rappelle beaucoup celui de Joseph dans le Contre Apion? L'époque postulée est donc provisoirement celle de la fin du Second Temple, sans chercher à spéculer sur des datadons prétendument plus précises. Juste une remarque marginale: l'écriture ignore dans ces manuscrits l'existence de la forme finale des lettres. Observons que cette caractéristique se retrouve dans la tradition scribe de Crimée apparemment antérieure au IXe: on y trouve de nombreux cas de forme non finale en particulier dans la transcription des noms propres étrangers. Ici j'en profite pour faire incidemment une remarque; mon point de vue est exclusivement celui de l'historien: je prends donc la terminologie uniquement comme un moyen qui permet, ou pas, l'homologarion à d'autres terminologies contemporaines. Il n'est donc pas question dans ce court cadre d'entamer les questions de fond sur ce point.

L'enquête sur la terminologie propre aux generations d'avant 70 Essayons d'avancer dans notre tentative de passer d'un inventaire d'indices, à la reconstitution d'une véritable phraséologie d'école. Et pour ce faire, de quoi disposons-nous? Essentiellement du bilinguisme, nous venons de le voir. C'est le grec de traduction de la LXX ou du livre de Ben Sira qui peuvent nous fournir l'élément objectif de ce que j'appellerais une archéologie de la terminologie concernant la problématique de la loi à la fin du Second Temple. Compte tenu du légendaire conservatisme du jargon de la basoche, et cela de tout temps, la LXX et Ben Sira peuvent être considérés comme les témoins de la teneur des débats, et du vocabulaire terminologique par lequel ces débats se traduisent dans la réalité de la Geroussia, puis du Sanhédrin, et sans doute hors de ce cadre pendant la suspension probable de la Geroussia sous Hérode. L'idéal serait de prendre en contre-épreuve les propositions des traducteurs de la version grecque officielle du Patriarcat: Aquilas, Symmaque. La reconstitution de la terminologie ancienne à travers les jeux du calque bilingue, prouve bien l'existence de deux champs distincts de l'acrivité législatrice et légale, commune à toutes les mouvances du Hassidisme de Simon le Juste, qui garderont ce langage commun au moins jusqu'en 70, malgré leur division en

Les Psaumes sont même invoqués comme "votre Tora," ce qui doit à mon sens se prendre, non pas polémiquement, mais dans le sens positif: vous reconnaissez même les Psaumes sont valides du point de vue juridique; alors pourquoi légiférer en contradiction avec? Ici c'est l'incohérence de la majorité ou ses coups de force dissimulés en lois qui paraissent dénoncés. O n est encore très loin, en tout état de cause de la fameuse division des deux lois, que le Patriarcat attribuera à Hillel l'Ancien, et qu'Aqiva encore discutera (Sifra, behuqotay 8 122c; Shabat 31a). On en tire au moins l'information manifeste et certaine que la restriction de la Tora au Pentateuque strict est encore très loin dans les esprits. Cela donne une tout autre résonance à l'expression "La Loi et les Prophètes" qu'on ne croyait propre qu'aux Actes; c'était tout simplement la référence à la réalité universelle de la synagogue, comme institution couplée du Temple. D e même Paul, qui cite Isaie (28,11-12) comme étant la Nomos faisant consensus, n'est plus qu'un traditionaliste qui se réfère au code universellement répandu (1 Corinthiens \4,2\). Jean, lui, fait citer les Psaumes 3 Jésus, exactement dans le même contexte de prédication à un milieu qui oppose résistance, en les qualifiant de Nomos (Jean 10,34, Ps 82,6)

écoles, qui cependant dialoguaient encore entre elles, fut-ce pour polémiquer, et par conséquent pour se comprendre devaient partager un même vocabulaire. Pour en revenir à Miq^at Ma'aseh ha-Tora, la grande question est celle de l'énoncé général de la Loi, conçu comme le texte écrit qui englobe alors à la fois le Livre de Moïse, les livres des différents Prophètes et la mise en pratique de Moïse par David, prototype de la piété, dont attestent les Psaumes.6 Cette vue que reflète autant Flavius Joseph, que Paul ou le Jésus de Jean, il est impressionnant de la retrouver dans le document que j'ai découvert à St Pétersbourg et que je désignerais provisoirement comme 1,argumentaire khayare, nous allons y revenir. D'autre part la problématique de la Loi théorique et de sa praxis, ou la complémentarité ‫מעשה־תוו־ה‬, apparaît donc bien comme universelle dans toutes les tendances qui composent l'Israël doctrinal, de Magnésie à la chute de Jérusalem. C'est du reste ce qu'exprime une sentence d , A w t (1,17) qui est conservée comme la formulation synthétique de l'essentiel de la doctrine de Shimon ben Gamliel, second patriarche hillélite de Palestine, victime de la grande répression d'Hadrien, consécutive à la révolte de Ben Koziva et à son écrasement: Toute ma vie durant je n'ai grandi que parmi les docteurs (‫)חכמים‬, et pourtant je n'ai rien trouvé de meilleur au corps que le silence. L'exégèse (‫ )מדרש‬n'est pas le principal, mais la pratique (‫)מעשה‬, et qui travaille à multiplier les régiementations (‫ )דברים‬trace un boulevard à la faute (‫)חטא‬.

La terminologiepharisienne

d'avant la rupture de 135

Ainsi la langue du dernier patriarche de l'époque de Yavne défère à la phraséologie séculaire, et ‫ מ ד ר ש‬même est ici à prendre au sens classique qu'on lui voit déjà dans le livre d'Euro. Du point de vue de la philosophie du droit, il faut bien convenir qu'à sa manière Paul ne dit pas autre chose: c'est la Loi qui crée la faute (‫ )חטא‬puisqu'elle la définit. 7 Mais le groupe ‫ דברים־מעשה־מדרש‬implique explicitement la ‫תורה‬, et désormais semble-t-il ‫ תורת מ ש ה‬exclusivement: 8 c'est elle qui est l'objet de l'exégèse, de la mise en pratique, ou d'un développement de dispositions dérivées. C'est à l'évidence la trilogie terminologique du travail dit de "loi orale" des Docteurs, qui ne sont en l'occurrence que l'entourage savant du patriarche et en particulier les membres du collège du Sanhédrin. Ceux-ci, que ce soit au Sanhédrin (chambre de la Loi en fait) ou en académie ont en effet pour activité principale de produire de la loi dérivée, de l'explicitadon du texte écrit parfois très laconique, par l'énoncé verbal. Au sens strict les Docteurs sont des inflationnistes de la Loi. Sur ce point les textes (oraux à l'origine mais dont nous ne connaissons plus que la forme écrite) sont formels: ne reprocheront-ils pas en particulier à la législation proliférante des Vœux, propre aux Pharisiens de l'époque du Second Temple (‫ )נדרים‬de n'être que de véritables montagnes prenant appui sur une pointe d'épingle de la Loi Écrite.

6

7 8

C'est peut-être dans cette perspecdve qu'il faut reconsidérer la rédacuon en Palestine du "Midrash Tehillim." Baba Batra 14b Romains 7, 5—6. Cela reste à être confirmer par des enquêtes qui excèdent ce cadre.

La disproportion entre la minceur de la menuon biblique et la proliférauon de la loi de tradidon qui en est résulté a fait dire aux Docteurs eux-mêmes: "Les disposidons concernant Nedarim flottent dans le vide. Elles n'ont aucune base scripturaire sur laquelle prendre appui; au contraire tout sage ne peut en délier que selon sa propre sagesse."9 L'autocritique n'est pas mince, et rejoint à sa façon l'amère réflexion de Shimon ben Gamliel. Je ne dirais rien du stéréotype rabbinique terminologique "‫דברי תורה‬." Quant à ‫דברים‬, en ce cas, ne nous y trompons pas, le mot ne doit pas être pris au sens naïf de "propos," "paroles," mais au sens technique que l'analyse de la LXX et de Ben Sira nous a permis de mettre en valeur, et qui se retrouve dans des expressions caractéristiques comme par exemple "‫( "דין ודברים‬textuellement: disposition légale orale autoritative à la fois fondée sur le raisonnement juridique et l'usage traditionnel ancestral). Ce n'est autre chose que la transposition en milieu judéen du principe de droit romain de "jurisprudence" qui nous régit encore. La seule différence dent à ce que dans le droit judéen la jurisprudence est interdite d'écriture donc reste "‫ ";דברים‬et la source d'autorité ou de légitimité, doit obligatoirement être la personne vivante d'un Docteur garant, alors que dans le droit romain la jurisprudence s'écrit et ne devient autoritative qu'une fois cette écriture promulguée par lecture publique. D'où les sens techniques bien connus de ‫ אמר‬et ‫אומר‬, chez les experts; il s'agit bien non pas de logia quelconques mais de disposidons légales orales dont la source peut être aussi bien un docteur ayant double licence d'enseigner et de juger, que Dieu lui-même. On est en plein cœur de l'oralité. Pourtant pas une fois le soi-disant terme technique sacro-saint de " ‫ " ה ל כ ה‬n'est apparu. Et pourtant avec Shimon ben Gamliel nous allons au moins aussi loin que 135. Je laisse de côté la période de reprise d'activité d ' U S H A (à partir de 137/138) parce qu'un texte important de l'Argumentaire Khayare nous donne à entendre que Shimon ben Gamliel a figuré en tête des exécutions. Ce que je me réserve d'examiner de plus près plus tard. En marge, il convient de remarquer que l'expression terminologique "‫מעשים‬ ‫ "טובים‬n'a sans doute à l'origine rien à voir avec une vision dévote et édifiante de la bigoterie; elle réfère à la pratique de la Loi opposée à sa seule connaissance. Ce qui deviendra plus tard dans le jargon écolâtre: ‫ הלכה לעשות‬et ‫הלכה ללמוד‬, expressions tardives A cet égard, le recueil à'Avot paraît être une sélection, propre au Patriarcat Hillélite de la génération apparemment enfin installée à Tibériade, d'une vaste littérature commune qui dépassait largement les clivages entre tendances et remontait, pour l'essentiel, à l'époque de la réforme du premier Grand Prêtre de l'époque Séleucide, Shimon hazadiq, auteur d'une réforme religieuse dont atteste Ben Sira, et qui n'est autre que le premier des Hassidismes que va connaître le Judaïsme désormais, et périodiquement, tout au long de son histoire. Le manuscrit de Geniza de Pétersbourg dont je viens de parler en contient une version bien plus longue (5 Ρ sur un ensemble de 26 f°) et bien plus systé-

9

Un verset unique: Nbr 30, 2-17.

matique qui conserve une rhétorique de classement rigoureux caractéristique des scribes du Second Temple: les séries. Ce texte systématique et inédit ne porte rien de moins que le titre: Pereq Rabenu Haqadosh; et sa forme littéraire est celle bien connue des ‫ צואות‬ou "Testaments," eux aussi caractéristiques de la littérature savante de l'époque du Second Temple. Je voudrais en citer l'incipit parce qu'à lui seul il vaut toute la pénible démonstration que j'essaye de vous faire pour vous convaincre de l'insanité qu'il y a à s'accrocher au terme anachronique de "‫הלכה‬." Le voici: ‫ זה מ ע ש ה תורה שנאמרו על ידי הקדוש‬:‫( משם רבינו הקדוש‬torah, singulier avec accord logique du verbe au pluriel, ce qui en dit long sur la valeur terminologique séculaire de la locution). ‫ש ש ה דברים צוה רבינו הגדול את בנו בשעה‬ ‫שהיה נפטר לבית עולמו אמר לו בני אל‬. On observera que le nom est caché sous une épithète qui est en toute rigueur réservée aux martyrs. J'ai de forts doutes qu'il soit celui de Yehuda haNasi. Mais j'en ferai la démonstration ailleurs pour éviter les longueurs. Les noms qui sont ensuite cités, parmi les ‫( חכמים‬et l'expression ‫שנו חכמים‬ se trouve textuellement, f°5v) sont ceux de ‫( ר׳ זכי‬graphie hébraïque sans alef), ‫( ר׳ עקיבה בן יוחי‬même graphie sans alef), ‫ר׳ יהשע‬, fils d' ,‫עקיבה‬, ‫ר׳ שמעון‬ ‫ר׳ אליעזר בן יעקב‬, une liste précise des 10 martyrs du Patriarcat (136-137c), qui montre qu'il s'agissait bien de décapiter l'institution avec ‫ ר׳ שמעון בן גמליאל‬à sa tête, suivi de ‫ר׳ ישמעאל‬, ‫( ר׳ חוצפת‬sic),‫( ר׳ חנניה בן תדיו‬sic), ,‫ר׳ ישאב‬, ‫ר׳ עקיבה‬ ‫ר׳ יהודה בן בבא‬, ‫ ר ׳ יהודה הנחתום‬, ‫( בן ע ז א י ן‬sic) et ‫ר׳ טרפון‬. On trouve encore les noms de ‫ר׳ יהודה בן בתירא מנציבין‬, ‫ר׳ יוסה‬, et ‫ ר׳ אליעזר‬distinct apparemment de ‫ר׳ אליעזר בן יעקב‬. En fait il s'agit uniquement de la génération contemporaine de la révolte de Ben Koziva, des victimes de la répression et des rares rescapés. Le texte, même par ses traits linguistiques, date donc, selon mon hypothèse de 135137 (époque de la clandestinité et du judaïsme déclaré religio non Hâta). Pour poursuivre l'hypothèse, les manuscrits de Crimée, recoupés du reste par le témoignage indépendant de Jérôme, font état d'une déportation dans le Bosphore Cimmérien, à Phanagorie, d'une vague de bannis sous Hadrien. Il y a donc tout lieu de penser que ce texte a été importé par ces bannis et qu'il atteste, incidemment, du vocabulaire terminologique des ‫ חכמים‬d'avant l'entreprise de compilation de la ‫ משנה‬proprement dite. Le terme de " ‫ " ה ל כ ה‬y est complètement inconnu. Ce sera mon meilleur argument, et ma conclusion provisoire. Alors, cette fois, vraiment pour en finir, d'où vient "‫הלכה‬," et surtout son usage terminologique à quasi valeur de slogan? Un fait certain, et pour le reste des hypothèses. Le fait d'abord. La concordance de la langue de la Mishna et de la littérature antérieure au Talmud, établie par l'Académie de la Langue Hébraïque ne fait ressortir qu'un cas net où le terme désigne l'ensemble de la discipline juridique et jurisprudentielle, encore que cela se discute encore, et que de surcroît qu'on ne soit pas sûr d'une correction ultérieure.10 Pour le reste, nous avons à faire à un élément de la trilogie: ‫תורה‬, ‫הלכה‬, ‫דברי סופרים‬, comme source légitime du

10

‫ אכל מורה הלכה בפני רבו חייב מ ת ה‬,‫ספרא‬. Série de références: Milu'im 1,2,3,45.

droit pratique,11 où le sens est manifestement celui de "usage tradidonnel," ou droit de coutume, par opposition à la législation fondatrice du Pentateuque, et l'acrivité législatrice institutionnelle de l'époque des scribes dont le chef était le Grand Prêtre.12 Il semble qu'on en soit encore là lorsque à Tibériade Yohanan, en son académie, entreprend une sorte de mise à jour de la Mishna de Yehuda le Nasi, dont le développement va donner ce que nous appelons le Talmud de Jérusalem. Ainsi parmi les six fragments du Yerushalmi, du fonds Antonin de la Bibliothèque Nationale de Russie (St Pétersbourg), l'un d'entre eux permet d'établir que l'abréviation HL. suivie d'une lettre-chiffre fonctionne comme démarcateur du passage d'une disposition légale pratique à une autre. Ce pourrait être une création de mise en forme de la seconde moitié du Ille siècle, mais guère davantage qu'un marqueur formel. Les circonstances historiques générales vont avoir une conséquence imprévue. La route coupée entre monde romain et empire perse, plus rien ou quasi, ne passe plus, y compris les gens de Babylonie qui jusque là venaient acquérir haute instruction dans le grand centre de Tibériade. Nisibe n'est plus qu'un compte-gouttes et par la force des choses le centre babylonien va s'autonomiser en s'appauvrissant culturellement et en s'orientalisant. Son dialecte ne favorise pas l'abstraction, le vocabulaire se restreint et se fige, la terminologie écolâtre avec. Ainsi le mot ‫הלכה‬, sans doute ramené de Tibériade, va devenir passe-partout; il va tourner à la langue de bois. C'est l'époque où le compromis passé par Shemuel avec Shapur 1er commence à porter ses fruits. Les Juifs de Babylonie bénéficient désormais du même statut de tolérance que les autres minorités, mais en échange ils s'engagent à reconnaître la loi de l'empire dans les cours rabbiniques (Bet-Din), consentent à être assujetds à l'impôt (kargd) et à appliquer la législation perse en matière de droit de propriété; la formule si connue de "‫ "דינא דמלכותא דינא‬qui symbolise ce régime de circonstance qui va devenir un modèle "talmudique" général, n'est, on l'ignore généralement, qu'une expression en pahlévi reprise au langage officiel de la cour sassanide.13 " ‫ " ה ל כ ה‬s'est peut-être développée pléthoriquement pour se démarquer du "‫ "דינא‬des Perses. 11 12

13

Mishna, Orla 3,9: .‫מן ה ת ו ר ה ב כ ל מ ק ו ם ו ה ע ו ל ה ה ל כ ה והכלאים מדברי סופרים‬ Mishna Baba Meija 7,8: ‫שומרי פירות אוכלים מ ה ל כ ת המדינה א ב ל מן התורה‬. L'opposition claire de Tora et hitkhat hamedinah, loi d'usage, ou droit autochtone coutumier (droit indigène), rend manifeste et sans ambiguïté le sens restreint, limité et secondaire qu'eut longtemps le terme, dont la fortune n'est sans doute due qu'à l'usage figé qu'en firent les Babyloniens, surtout à partir du moment où la frondère entre empire romain et empire perse se ferma et coupa la colonie babyIonienne de sa source vive palestinienne. Cette fracture est contemporaine du renversement de la dynastie parthe et de la fondation de la dynastie sassanide. Nisibe va devenir le seul point de passage autorisé entre les deux mondes (300c). Ce qui correspond à la mort de Huna en 297, après 40 ans passés à la direction de l'Académie de tradition palestinienne de Sura, et sa succession assurée par Hisda (297-309), natif de Kafre, et successeur de Huna'. Jusqu'à la chute des Parthes, l'empire perse avait constitué le maillon ultime de la route de la soie, et une intense circulation avait animé la route qui partant de Sogdiane, à travers la Bactriane, la Parthie, la Médie, l'Hyrcanie et l'Adiabène, aboutissait à alimenter depuis 140 avant notre ère les grandes places d'Antioche, mais aussi Jérusalem et Petra, dont le grand commerce aboutissait à Alexandrie. Cf. témoignage des monnaies sassanides. cf. Mordtmann, A. D. 1880. "Zur Pehlevi-Münzkunde. IV. Die Münzen der Sassaniden." Zeitschrift der Deutchen Morgenländischen Gesel!schatj\ Lepzig, 1 162.

INTERPRETATION AND A

H I S T O R Y OF

AUTHORITY

SOTAH

LISA GRUSHCOW Oxford University, UK Today I am going to speak about the case of the sotah. "Sotah, " the wayward wife, is the name applied by the rabbis to the woman of N u m 5:11-31. This woman is suspected of adultery by her husband, who subjects her to a trial by ordeal. A variety of ancient authors occupy themselves with this passage, ineluding Philo, Josephus, and even the author of the second-century Chrisdan Protevangelium of James, in which Mary—and, strangely, Joseph—undergo the ordeal. The focus of this paper, however, will be on the early rabbinic writings on sotah. From amongst these writings, the most famous statement concerning the ordeal is the one found in m.Sot. 9:9 (Danby's translation): "When adulterers increased in number, the application of the waters of jealousy ceased, and R. Yohanan ben Zakkai abolished them." This paper will argue that the traditional translation and understanding of this passage needs to be reassessed, and that it is most important not for the light which it sheds on the ordeal, but rather, for the light which it sheds on the development of rabbinic authority. I will begin with a summary of the biblical passage, comment briefly on the early history of interpretation, and then discuss the disappearance of the ordeal and the development of the rabbinic traditions. According to the biblical account, the procedure is initiated by ‫ ר ו ח ק נ א ה‬a spirit of jealousy, which comes upon the husband. He suspects that his wife has committed adultery, but there are no witnesses to the alleged act. The husband brings his wife to the priest, along with a meal-offering of barley, which serves as a jealousy offering and as a memorial offering remembering sin. The priest brings her forward, mixes holy water with dust from the floor of the mishkan, dishevels her hair and places the offering in her hands, speaks to her about her actions, and makes her swear an oath. He then tells her that G o d will make her a curse and an oath, and that the water will make her thigh fall and her belly swell (if she is guilty). These words are written on a scroll and blotted out in the water, which the woman is made to drink. The priest offers the meal-offering. The woman drinks, and if she is defiled, she faces the consequences described, but if she is pure, she is acquitted and conceives. There is much debate, but little certainty, as to whether the rite ever occurred. Philo and Josephus describe the ordeal in the present tense, although this is no guarantee of anything. The version found in the Protevangelium of James, however fascinating, is primarily apologetic and rhetorical, and can not be used to assess the historicity of the rite. There is an entire tractate in both the Mishnah and the Tosefta dedicated to sotah, but statements elsewhere in the cor-

pus are few and far between. Only two substandal references to the insdtudon can be found in the Mishnah outside of m.Sot. One, in m.Yoma 3:10, describes a gold tablet inscribed with the relevant verses from Numbers which Queen Helena of Adiabene supposedly dedicated to the Temple. M.Eduj. 5:6-7 contains the question of whether a freed bondwoman or a proselyte would have been subjected to the ordeal. The case of Karkemith, who was made to drink by Shemaiah and Abtalon, is raised, and R. Akabya ben Mahalaleel argues that this was only in show, for a proselyte or a freed bondwoman would not have been made to drink. The bulk of Mishnah and Tosefta Sotah focuses on the details and problems of the ordeal, and related digressions. In contrast with other tractates, they are both closely connected to the biblical text and highly aggadic. The uncertainty inherent in the case results in many questions: What actions merit suspicion? Who may be subjected to the ordeal? What public purpose does it serve? How does the punishment fit the crime, and what if no immediate punishment is apparent? At what point may the woman's guilt be assumed? All of these are fascinating questions, but I will argue below that they are not relevant to the topic at hand: the disappearance of the ordeal. If we are to understand this disappearance, we need to see what is unique about it in comparison with other changed practices in the tannaitic corpus. Here, my interest is in explicit change, that is, instances where the rabbis state that something is significandy different than it was before. Three examples may be raised: taqqanot related to the destruction of the Temple and the rise of heretics; the case of the stubborn and rebellious son; and the mixing-up of the nadons. First, taqqanot. Many of the rulings related to halakhic change are known as taqqanot, because of the formula within which these changes are made.1 A series of such rulings is listed in m.KH. 4:1-4:4: the shofar is to be blown outside Jerusalem, the lulav is to be carried for seven days in the provinces in memory of the seven days it was carried in Jerusalem, and witnesses for the new month could be received every day. All of the changes are attributed to Yohanan ben Zakkai, and they are all related to the destruction of the Temple according to a formulaic statement:‫ מ ש ח ר ב ב י ת ה מ ק ד ש ה ת ק י ן יוחנן בן זכאי‬. These practices would, presumably, be reinstated with the re-establishment of the Temple, and this is made explicit in t.KH. 2:7: "These things Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai brought to pass in the world when the Temple was destroyed, and when it will quickly be rebuilt, these matters will return to their original condition." Another set of changes which follows a similar formula is in response to sectarianism: ... ‫משחלקלו המינים היתקינו‬. For instance, the testimony concerning the new month could only be accepted from known individuals, and not just anyone as before (m.KH. 2:1). Such changes are not connected with Yohanan ben Zakkai, but like the other taqqanot, they are related to specific occurrences.

This section draws upon M. Jaffee's detailed discussion of the taqqanah in tannaitic literature (Jaffee 1990: 204-25).

A second example is not at all explicidy related to historical circumstances, but it is a significant change. Deut 21:18-21, which calls for the stoning of a stubborn and rebellious son, is reshaped by m.Sanh. 8:1-5 in such a way that to carry out the punishment becomes impossible. There are even more limitations placed on who is to be eligible for this charge than there are for so tab, ranging from the creation of a three month window in which the son is open to be charged to very stringent specifications of how his stubbornness and rebelliousness must be expressed. The Mishnah seems to be satisfied with these restrictions, while the Tosefia goes further, making the following claim: "A stubborn and rebellious son has not existed and will not exist in the future (‫" ) ל א ה י ה ולא ע ת י ד להיות‬ (t.Sanh.W.2). This phrase appears in one other place in the tannaidc corpus: in t.Neg. 6:1, it is stated in reference to a house for those who have the plague ( ‫ ) ב י ת ה מ נ ו ג ע‬. The phrase seems to be a formula used to explain laws or institurions which the rabbis could not, or would not, imagine in operation. A final example is the changed understanding of Ammonites, and the halakhie implications of this change. M.Yad. 4:4 and t.Yad. 2:8 discuss the admissibility of Ammonites into the Jewish community. Judah the Ammonite proselyte came before the beit midrash in Yavneh and asked to marry a Jewish woman (thereby entering the congregation). Rabban Gamliel cited the biblical prohibition against such a move (Deut 23:2), but Rabbi Joshua countered him with the following argument: "Are Ammonites and Moabites still in their place? Sennacherib, King of Assyria, came up and mixed the nations..." Gamliel objects, but Joshua's opinion prevails: true Ammonites no longer exist, so the prohibition does not apply, and Judah the Ammonite could be accepted. In this situation, the rabbis are not issuing a taqqanah, but they are making halakhic changes explicidy in response to historical changes. Sotah is different from each of these examples. The comment in m.Sot. 9:9 is not an official change, like the taqqanot, but the attribudon to Yohanan ben Zakkai makes it more formal than the change concerning the Ammonites; it is not a claim that the practice had never existed, like the stoning of the stubborn and rebellious son, but it also does not open the door to future reinstatement. The only stricdy comparable situation is that of the eglah arufah, the heifer whose neck is to be broken when a corpse is found between cities and the murderer is not found. This situation is discussed within Mishnah and Tosefta Sotah, and its disappearance is explained in a very similar way. As such, it is to be understood in light of the treatment of sotah, and not the other way around. A comparative reading of the Mishnah and Tosefta on the cessation of sotah is required. The accounts of the cessation of the rite in the Mishnah and Tosefta are similar, with one key difference. M.Sot. 9:9 provides the following account (my translation): When murderers increased in number the rite of breaking the heifer's neck was nullified... When adulterers increased in number, the application of the waters of jealousy stopped (‫ ;)פסקי‬and R. Yohanan ben Zakkai stopped them (‫)הפסיקן‬, as it is said, "I will not punish your daughters when they commit

harlotry nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery; for they themselves..." (Hos 4:14). The proof-text from Hosea continues to state that they, the men of Israel, turn aside to whores. Here, the reason can be read as one of fairness: how can women be punished for adultery if men are not? However, it is more likely that the Mishnah is not criticizing the morality of N u m 5:11—31 as much as it is using Hos 4:14 as a proof-text to provide biblical support for the disappearance of the rite. This is in keeping with the rest of m.Sot. 9, in which the cessation of the rite is placed within a sequence of events of decline. 2 The Tosefta contains two passages which refer to the cessation of the sotah and eglah arufah. The first, t.Sot. 14:1-2, appears among examples of good things which ended in Israel. It explains the changes as follows (my translation): Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai says, When murderers became many, the rite of breaking the heifer's neck was nullified, for the heifer whose neck is to be broken is brought out only in a case of doubt. But now there are many who commit murder in public. When adulterers became many, the ordeal of the bitter water stopped (‫)פסקי מי מרים‬, for the ordeal of bitter water is performed only in a case of doubt. But now there are many who see their lovers in publie.3 The second, /.Jo/.14:9, provides an alternate account. This account appears among examples of the increase of bad things: "When there multiplied those 'who stretched forth necks and wanton eyes' (Is 3:16), the bitter waters increased. But they stopped (‫ ) א ל א שפסקו‬. " According to the first explanation, the increase in adulterers coincided with open impropriety and the absence of doubt, thereby negating the need for the ordeal. According to the second expianation, impropriety increased the applicability of the ordeal, but it stopped, without any reason given. There are two common denominators: an increase in immorality, and the cessation of the rite, but the connection between these factors is different. In both the Mishnah and Tosefta, the use of the verb pD2 deserves comment. This verb is used primarily in two ways elsewhere in the tannaitic corpus: to describe the cessation of rain, or to describe the interruption of prayer. T o my knowledge, in only one other place in the tannaitic corpus is it used to refer to the cessation of an institution or practice (t.Sem. 8:1), and even there it is in the passive, not in the active as in m.Sotah. The differences between the explanations given by the Mishnah and Tosefta and within the Tosefta itself are interesting, but the crucial issue concerns attribution. In the Mishnah, the teaching about the eglah arufah is anonymous, but the act of abolishing the sotah's ordeal is attributed to Yohanan ben Zakkai. In the Tosefta's M.Sot. 9:15, with which the tractate ends, is the most prominent expression o f this ethos of decline, listing all the qualides which have left the world with the deaths of great scholars. It is generally considered to be a late passage because of its reference to the death of Rabbi, although it is possible that only the sentence referring to Rabbi's death is a later interpolation. In either case, the theme of decline does appear in the chapter before 9:15. The final sentence of this passage is not in the Erfurt manuscript.

first account, there is an explanation in the name of Yohanan ben Zakkai for the abolition of the rite of the eglah arufah, and then of the rite of the sotah. The second account gives no attribudon. One possible reconstrucdon is as follows: an old tradition existed for the cessation, without attribution or explanation. The tradition made its way into the Mishnah as ‫ מ ש ר ב ו ה מ נ א פ י ן פסקו ה מ י ם ה מ ר י ם‬, and into the Tosefta as ‫מ ש ר ב ו‬ ‫ — ה מ נ א פ י ן פסקו מ י מרים‬t w o very similar phrases, with only minor variations in the manuscripts of each tradition. The Tosefta's first interpretation is loosely connected with the name of Yohanan ben Zakkai, and the second remains anonymous except by association with the first. The Mishnah's interpretation, in contrast appears to have transformed the passive cessation of the rite into an active annulment by Yohanan ben Zakkai. From a structural perspective, this transformation looks like an addition, because it is appended to the original statement which is shared with the Tosefta, and because the use of the word ‫ ה פ ס י ק ן‬is so unusual. Moreover, the textual evidence of m.Sot. 9:9 suggests that it is late, as it is not commented upon in the gemara. 4 Although the scope of this paper does not permit the halakhic midrashim to be discussed in depth, two points should be noted. First, neither Sifre nor Sif re Zutta, the two halakhic midrashim on Numbers, clearly indicate that the rite has stopped, despite placing numerous restrictions on its application. Rather, Sifre Naso 21 uses the same proof-text from Hosea which appears in m.Sot. 9:9 but it uses it to different ends, and in relation to a different verse from Numbers. Instead of emphasizing the cessation of the ordeal, it insists upon the need for husbands to be innocent; thus "the man shall be guildess from iniquity" (Num 5:31), ie that of prostitution, if the waters are to work. Second, in neither Sifre nor Sifre Zutta is Yohanan ben Zakkai in sight. The genre of the halakhic midrashim is different from that of the Mishnah and Tosefta, and exegedcal and practical divergences are understandable. However, the absence of any statement about the cessation of the ordeal or the involvement of Yohanan ben Zakkai may suggest that the mishnaic and toseftan versions were not widely known or accepted. If we take a step back at this point, we can return to the larger question of why the rite stopped and why the rabbis portrayed this change as they did, in the Mishnah in particular. Some of the secondary literature simply relies on the Mishnah's account, and assumes that Yohanan ben Zakkai did in fact abolish the ordeal. 5 Proponents of this reading emphasize the courage and farsightedness of Yohanan ben Zakkai, and his decisive actions in a time of crisis. Following the above discussion, however, I think there is more support for those who doubt the attribution. 6 From this perspective, we can focus upon the different descripdons of the ordeal and its disappearance, and ask why the Mishnah portrays the cessation of sotah as it does.

4 5 6

O n the late dating of m.Sot. 9:9, see Y. N. Epstein 1957: 400. E.g. L. M. Epstein 1948: 232, Destro 1989: 12, 22, 4 6 , 1 5 4 - 5 6 . E.g. Biale 1984: 188, Ilan 1995: 141, Neusner 1970: 50-51.

Two types of reasons are usually given: moral and political. The essence of the argument based on morality is that the rabbis were attempting to improve the status of women, and expressed their sympathy and desire for change via the abolition of sotah. Ultimately, this argument it is difficult to support because when one compares the Mishnah's discussion of the humiliation of the sotah and her punishment with discussions in Tosefta Sotah and the halakhic midrashim, one does not find a clear pattern of leniency or sympathy in the mishnaic arguments and decisions. To provide one brief example, the Mishnah follows Rabbi's insistence that merit can defer the punishment of the guilty woman (m.Sot. 3:4). It has been argued that this stance involves a moral critique of the rite, because the notion of deferred punishment negates the raison d'être of the test; that is, because the woman's guilt or innocence is still unknown if punishment is deferred, Rabbi's position succeeds in undermining the ordeal.7 However, this reading of m.Sot. 3:4 does not take seriously Rabbi's insistence that the guilty woman will die the prescribed death, only later. Moreover, it ignores the counter-argument which R. Shimon ben Yohai raises in the same mishnah: that the innocent wife is punished by the possibility of deferred punishment, insofar as she will remain under suspicion. When one considers these two points, it seems unlikely that the Mishnah is taking a moral stance against the rite or in favour of the woman by holding that merit defers punishment. Notably, both Sifre and Sifre Zutta give the last word to Shimon ben Yohai in this debate. The comparison of Mishnah and Tosefta Sotah shows that in many cases, the Mishnah is more restrained than the Tosefta in its description of the ordeal itself, or the details of measure-for-measure punishment; however, given the overall differences in length between the collections, this seems to be a function of genre rather than a reflection of mishnaic moral concerns. Without the moral argument, we are left to political explanations. Here, the primary argument is that attributing the end of the rite to Yohanan ben Zakkai was a Pharisaic move intended to close off an area of Sadducean authority in the Temple. 8 However, this argument seems to me to be misplaced. First, neither the Mishnah nor the Tosefta seem to imply that the rite would ever be restored, even under rabbinic authority. Second, the strict association of rabbis with Pharisees, and of Sadducees with priests, may not bear the weight of the argument. The suggestion of this paper is that another political argument can be made, one which focuses on the development of rabbinic authority. The comparison of m.Sot. 9 and t.Sot. 14 reveals the possibility that m.Sot. 9:9 is the latest version of the story of the cessation of sotah. If this is true, one sees not merely a choice of versions but the creation of a new version in the Mishnah, one which emphasizes the leadership of Yohanan ben Zakkai and his authority. Even if the toseftan version is later, as it is in most cases, this too would have implications for the development of rabbinic authority and the redacdon of tannaitic texts. 7 8

Hauptman 1998: 25. I lan 1995: 141, Neusner 1970: 50-51.

From the perspective of intellectual history, the comparison of these texts indicates that the authority of the Mishnah around the time of its redaction was not universally accepted. Rather, the tradition attributing an active abolition of the rite to Yohanan ben Zakkai exists only in the Mishnah, and its development may be traced from other sources. Despite modern assumptions to the contrary, this attribution does not appear to have been normative in the third century, and may not have been extant much before. As such, m.Sot. 9:9 may be read as part of the history of rabbinic authority, and its development through texts and over time.

Bibliography Biale, R. 1984. Women and Jewish Law. New York: Schocken. Destro, A. 1989. The Law of Jealousy: Anthropology of Sotah. Adanta: Scholars. Epstein, L. M. 1948. Sex Laws and Customs in Judaism. New York: Bloch. Epstein, Y. N. 1957. Mevo 'ot Le-Sifrut Ha-Tannaim. Jerusalem. Hauptman, J. 1998. Rereading the Rabbis: A Woman's Voice. Boulder and Oxford: Westview. Ilan, T. 1995. Jewish Women in Greco-Roman Palestine. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr. Jaffee, M. 1990. "The Taqqanah in Tannaitic Literature." JJS 41:2, 204-25. Neusner, J. 1970. Development of a Legend: Studies on the Traditions concerning Yohanan ben Zakkai. Leiden: Brill.

H E Z E K I A H AS K I N G M E S S I A H T R A C E S OF AN EARLY J E W I S H - C H R I S T I A N P O L E M I C IN T H E T A N N A I T I C T R A D I T I O N MIREILLE HADAS-LEBEL Sorbonne Nouvelle-Paris IV, France The first treatise we possess about Christian-Jewish polemic, the Dialogue with Trypho, dates back to the second half of the second century C.E.: it is supposed to be an account of the two-day reladvely courteous dispute between the author Jusrin and a Jew Trypho, who fled from Judaea during the Bar Kokhba revolt to an unknown city of the Mediterranean. From the Gospels to this treatise, all the anti-Christian arguments on the Jewish side are known through Christian texts, which means that they are viewed with Christian eyes. We find no Jewish texts whatsoever on Christianity for the decisive period when the new religion was consolidated and produced most of its founding literature i.e. the 70's or 80's of the first century C.E. It is precisely the time when the Jews who had suffered a terrible disaster reorganised their life under the leadership of a Pharisian master, Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai, head of the school of Yabneh. One of the sayings of this master, enigmatic as it is, might well contain some answers to Christian arguments drawn from the Holy Scripture. Here are four parallel versions of the ultima verba attributed to the famous rabbi on his death bed. ARN 3 25 He said: Clear the house of uncleanness and prepare a throne for Hezekiah, king of Judah

T) Sota IX 16, 24 c He said: Clear the court because of uncleanness and put a throne for Hezekiah, king of Judah

TJ AZ III, 1,42 c He said: Clear the house because of uncleanness and put a throne for Hezekiah, king of Judah

TB Berakhot 28 b At the moment of his departure he said to them: remove the vessels so that they shall not become unclean and prepare a throne for Hezekiah, the king of Judah who is coming

The first part of the message is clearly halakhic: the impurity of the corpse (Rabban Yohanan knows he is going to die) would defile all the vessels in the house of the deceased. The second part is more mysterious as it predicts the return of a long time deceased king, Hezekiah of Judaea.

According to Louis Ginzberg, 1 Yohanan "expected to be met at his death by the pious king whose life was devoted to the same ideals as his," but this is not at all convincing. All the less when we compare this saying of the late first century with an echoing one of the third century, that of Rabbi Hillel, younger brother of the patriarch Juda II Nesia: There shall be no Messiah for Israel because they have already enjoyed him in the days of Hezekiah (Sanhédrin 99 a). Here Hezekiah is clearly considered as a King Messiah. Could it not be already the case in the saying attributed to Rabbi Yohanân ben Zakkai? The main difference between the sayings of the two rabbis would then be that the first one, Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai, still expressed hope for the coming of a Messiah whom he names Hezekiah, and that his colleague of the third century, Rabbi Hillel, considered that the historical Hezekiah had already fulfilled the messianic hope although people had been unaware of it.

Hezekiah as "son of David" As clearly shown by Klausner, the most common appellation of the Messiah in the Tannaitic period is "Son of David": "This occurs frequendy not only as a descriptive tide but as an actual personal name," 2 the other usual designation being "Redeemer" (Goel). When Jesus, in the Gospels, 3 is called "son of David," it means nothing else than "Messiah." "The Messiah was not only an eschatological figure," as Mowinckel pointed o u t , but "always had a measure of political significance. The Messiah is he who shall restore Israel as a people, free her from her enemies, rule over her as King, and bring other nations under her political and religious sway." 4 For those of the Jews who did not accept Jesus as the Messiah, no "son of David" was in view at the end of the first century. After the destruction of the Second Temple however, the messianic hope is certainly one of the ideas which gave Judaism strength to continue. As we can see from the two Jewish apocalypses of that time, II Baruch an IV Esdras, 5 the Messiah was to inaugurate a limited period of bliss. He would avenge Israel from her enemies in this world and would restore peace and happiness, before the last Judgement and the end of the days. Yohanan ben Zakkai may not have evaded the messianic expectations of the aftermath of the revolt, if we assume that the above quoted sayings are really his and that Hezekiah is the name he gave to the Messiah to come who above all was to be an ideal king.

1

2 3 4 5

Cf. The Legends of the Jews VI, 365 n. 67. Philadelphia: J PS, 1959. Ginzberg's opinion is probably based on the encomium of Hezekiah in Sanhédrin 94 a. Klausner 1959: 461. Matt 20.30-31; 21.9 ; Luke 19.38-39. Mowinckel 1956: 7. IV Esd VIII 28-29, II Baruch 29-30.

Among the historical scions of David, few could claim to have been an ideal king. Solomon himself was disqualified because of his misconduct in his late age. Albeit Josiah was pious, he disobeyed God, so that he was killed in battle.6 On the contrary, Hezekiah deserved two miracles to be performed in his favour. As he was "sick unto death," 7 God gave him fifteen years more to live. Also during his reign, when the Assyrians besieged Jerusalem their army was annihilated in a single night by "the Angel of the Lord." 8 As a pious and just king protected by the Lord, Hezekiah was indeed the best possible model for the messianic king. Was this however sufficient to jusdfy the designadon of the "Son of David" as Hezekiah? The exegedcal arguments developed in Jusdn's Dialogue with Trypho can offer us a better explanadon. The famous passage of Isaiah chapter 7, known as the "Emmanuel prophecy" is quoted twice together with Psalm 110 which is related to it. For Jusdn, there is no doubt that the child "Emmanuel" born to a virgin is Jesus Christ. Trypho is deeply surprised: according to the Biblical context, should not this child be seen as the son of King Achaz, the future King Hezekiah? 9 Moreover he is born to a "young woman" not to a virgin. So we find here for the first time one of the well trodden topics of Jewish Chrisdan polemic. According to Jusdn, the Jews also used to apply to Hezekiah. Psalm 110,10 considered by the Chrisdans as a messianic psalm in which, if one follows the Greek translation of verse 3, dominion is promised to a child "begotten from the womb before the morning." The same psalm also said "Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek" and this was understood in accordance with the Episde to the Hebrews (generally dated before 70 C.E.) where Christ is the new Melchisedek. The use of the name Hezekiah by Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai could thus mean that in his time, some fifty years or more before Justin and Trypho, the Jewish Christian polemic had already begun to focus on those texts. Is it not precisely the moment when Matthew's Gospel (1, 23) for the first time related Jesus' birth to the "Emmanuel prophecy?" As in answer to it Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai affirmed he was expecting a new Hezekiah who would be no more than "a man among men" (άνύρωπος έξ ανθρώπων ) 1 1 in the next generation. As a consequence of such a belief, Rabbi Akiba later saw this Redeemer in Bar Kokhba. 12

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

II Chro 35, 22. So that Josiah is not overidealized (contrary to Laato 1992). II Kings 20, 1 ; Isa 38, 1. II Kings 19, 35 ;Isa 37, 36. Mowinckel 1956: 118. See discussion by Thompson ]SOT 24, 1982, 79-88. Psalm 109 in the Septuagint. On this royal psalm see Dürr 1929, Mowinckel 1956: 11. Dialogue 48, 4. Cf. Higgins, N T I X , 298-305. Cf. Oppenheimer 1997: 159 ; Horbury 1988: 82.

Hezekiah "who is coming" Additional evidence of the polemical context of Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai saying could be drawn from the formula found only in Berakhot 28 b: "Prepare a throne for Hezekiah, the King of Judah who is coming. " At the end of the first century C.E., more hecdcally than in any other period, both Jews and Chrisdans were awaidng "he that cometh."‫ יי‬The Jews awaited a Redeemer who would console them of their misfortunes. The Chrisdans awaited the "second coming" of Jesus-Christ so that he would fulfil all the expectadons linked to the Messiah according to the Jewish tradition: 14 the Jews would then have nothing to object to the Chrisdan Messiah and would accept him. The formula "who is coming" might be an echo of a Chrisdan belief which was very vivid in the second half of the first century. Had not Paul's, Peter's and James' episdes announced the imminent coming of Jesus-Christ? 15 The early Chrisdans were convinced they would see the parousia, the Second Coming, in their very days. Their "watchword" 1 6 was Maran Atha: "our Lord cometh." John's Revelation (22.20) invited them to get prepared for the advent of the Lord: " H e which tesdfieth these things saith, surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus." From the first verses of the Acts of the Aposdes (1.6) we may catch a glimpse of what was actually the authentic Jewish expectations among the disciples: "And when they were gathered together they asked him, Lord, dost thou at this time restore the Kingdom to Israel?" This is precisely what Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai and with him the Jews of this generation were awaiting: "the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel." But they had learnt a terrible lesson from the revolt against Rome: the armed force was of no use without the help of God. Why then evoke Hezekiah? Precisely because he was a virtuous king who benefitted from God's help in a very critical situation. In various circumstances, from the time of Juda Maccabee 17 on, we do see that in the midst of military dangers, the Jews expected G o d to perform a miracle to save them and that they then referred to the divine intervention in the days of King Hezekiah. From Josephus' speech to the besieged in Jerusalem we may infer with certainty that this was the very conviction of the Zealots: And after all this do you expect Him, thus outraged, to be your ally? Righteous suppliants are ye, forsooth, and pure the hands with which you appeal to your protector! With such, I ween, our king besought aid against the Assyrian, when God in one night laid low that mighty host! And so like are the deeds of the

13 14

15

16 17

Matt 11.3 ;Luke 7.20. See list o f this expectations in Charlesworth ed.. The Messiah 3—35: "From Messianology to Christology." I Cor 15.23 ; 16.22 ; I Thess 2.19 ; 3.13 ; 4.15-16 ; 5.23 ; II Thess 2.1,8 ;James 5.7-8 ; I Peter 1.13 ;II Peter 1.16 ; 3 . 4 ; I John 2.28. Klausner 1947: 404. I Mac 7.40.42 ; II Mac 8.19, ibid. 15.22-23.

Romans to those of the Assyrians that you may look for a like vengeance yourselves! (BJ 5.403-404). N o doubt on the contrary that the Zealots saw themselves as faithful Jews and God's soldiers ; thus they were convinced that they deserved God's help. As the Talmud worded it later, the generadons "who strengthened the yoke of the Torah upon themselves are therefore worthy of having a miracle wrought for them." 18 In year 70, misled by such a hope, the besieged in Jerusalem relied on a miracle which never came. Many a time and oft, must Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai have heard the name of Hezekiah during the siege. From the lenient atdtude attributed to him by later Jewish sources, 19 one may infer he was not in favor of taking arms against the Romans. Did not the taking of arms by itself express a lack of confidence in God's help? This is what Josephus also meant in his long speech to the Jerusalemites: When Sennacherib, king of Assyria with all Asia following in his train, encamped around this city, was it by human hands he fell? Were not those hands at rest from arms and raised in prayer while God's angel in one night, destroyed that coundess host? (BJ 5.387-388) As a true pious king living in a G o d fearing generation, 20 Hezekiah had deserved what Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai's generation had not. Was the founder of Yabneh School expecting some kind of parousia of Hezekiah? This mystical approach which is not unknown to Judaism, 21 does not match with the generally more realistic image we get from this sage. In his time, the downfall of Jerusalem might have already been taken by the Christians—as it is well documented later 22 —as an evidence of the abandonment of Jews by God. When Justin now says in the second century that the Christians are "God's people" and "the true Israel," this is probably not an innovation of his, but at his time, this kind of belief must of course have been strengthened by the new disaster brought to the Jews by their second revolt. The message of Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai to his disciples shows that for him the destruction of the Temple did not mean the end of history for the Jews. He expected next generation to be sufficiendy amended in order to deserve a new Hezekiah who would restore Israel and by so doing refute the Christian side. Both hopes, Jewish and Christian, were disappointed in the second century: the Second Coming did not occur and instead of a peaceful Hezekiah, there was a warrior named Bar Kokhba whose adventurous revolt led the Jews to delay 18

19

20

21

22

Sank. 94 b. In that same Talmudic page the case of Sennacherib's punidon for his blaspheme is discussed. A bot de Rabbi Nathan version A (ed. Schechter, 22-23), Β (ibid. 19), BT Gittin 56 a. Lamentations Rabba I, 5, ed. Buber, 33 a-b. That is why the Talmud (Sanh. 20 a) applies to him the verse of Prov 31.30: "She that feareth the Lord shall be praised." Henoch and Elijah ascended to Heaven. The coming o f Elijah was believed to precede that o f the Messiah. Cf. Schreckenberg 1992: 57-85.

indefinitely the coming of their Messiah. Some like Rabbi Hillel in the third century, may even have assumed that the messianic creed was null and void as the belief in "the world to come" made this stage unnecessary. If our assessment is correct, from Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai last saying, we may get an echo of the first exegedcal polemic between Jews and Chrisdans in an atmosphere of some imminendy coming victory of the truth of one side or the other. It so gives us a "picture of a lively conpulsatio between Jews and Chrisdans concerning the Messiah," 23 for which other evidence is direly lacking at that dme.

Bibliography Charlesworth, J. H. ed. 1992. The Messiah. Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Chrisdan Origin 1, Minneapolis. Clements, R. E. 1980. Isaiah and the Deliverance of Jerusalem. ]SOT, Supplement Series 13. Sheffield. Coppens.J. 1974. Le messianisme et sa relève prophétique. Gembloux: Duculot. Dürr, L. 1929. Psalm 110 im Lichte der Neueren altorientalischen Forschung. Münster. Ginzberg, L. 1959. The Legends of the Jews. Philadelphia: JPS. Goldfahn, A. H. 1873. "Jusdnus Martyr und die Agada." MGW] 22, 49-60, 104-115, 145153,194-202, 257-269, esp. 152 f. Grelot, P. 1995. "Celui qui vient (Mt 11,3 et Le 7,19)." In Ce Dieu qui vient. Mélanges offerts à Bernard Renaud. Paris: Cerf, 274-290. Hadas-Lebel, M. 1990. Jérusalem contre Rome. Paris: Cerf. Higgins, A. J. B. "Jewish Messianic Belief in Jusdn Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho." Novum Testamentum 9, 298-305, and in Landman, Messianism, 182-189. Horbury, W. 1988. "Messianism among Jews and Chrisdans in the Second Century." Augustinianum 28, 71—88. Klausner, J. 1947. Jesus of Nazareth, his Life, Times and Teaching. Transi, from the original Hebrew by H. Danby, 3rd impr., London. , 1955. The Messianic Idea in Israel Translated from the third Hebrew Edition by W. F. Stinespring, New York. Laato, A. 1992. Josiah and David Redivivus. The Historical Josiah and the Messianic Expectations of Exilic and Post exilic Times. Coniectanea Biblica, O. T. Series 33. Stockholm. Landman, L. ed. 1979. Messianism in the Talmudic Era. New York. Maier, J. 1982. Jüdische Auseinandersetzung mit der Christentum in der Antike. Darmstadt. Mowinckel, S. 1956. He that cometh. Transi, by G. W. Anderson. Oxford. Neusner, J. 1962. A Life ofRabban Yohanan ben Zakkai, ca. 1-80 C.E. Leiden. , 1970. Development of a Legend. Studies on the Tradition concerning Yohanan ben Zakkai. Leiden: Brill. , 1984. Messiah in Context. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. Neusner, J., Green, W., Frerichs, E. eds. 1987. Judaisms and their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 23

This is indeed the position held by W. Horbury 1988: 72 against those who rather underline disagreements on the subject on the law. Among them he quotes Sanders 1985: 281-286 but those pages seem to refer more to the first Jerusalem Church than to our period. The word conpulsatio is taken from Tertullian's Apologeticus (21.15): "nec alia magis inter nos et illos conpulsatio est quam quod iam venisse non credunt."

Oppenheimer, A. 1997. "Leadership and Messianism." In Eschatology in the Bible and in Jewish and Christian Tradition. Ed. H. G. Revendow. Sheffield. Sanders, E. P. 1985. Jesus and Judaism. London. Schreckenberg, H. and Schubert, K. 1992. Jewish Historiography and Iconograply in Early and Medieval Christianity. Compendia Rerum Judaicarum ad N. T. Assen-Minneapolis. Simon, M. 1946. Verus Israel. Paris.

T H E MYTHOLOGICAL BACKGROUND OF T H E W I S D O M OF S O L O M O N A. PETER HAYMAN University o f E d i n b u r g h , U K

In 1966 Alexander Di Leila wrote an ardcle endded "Conservative and Progrèssive Theology: Sirach and Wisdom." 1 His dde neady encapsulates the way in which these two late representatives of the wisdom tradition are usually viewed. Ben Sira seems to ignore the challenges of Job and Qohelet and revert to the values of the Book of Proverbs. The author of the Wisdom of Solomon, by contrast, has apparendy taken on board the challenge of Job and Qohelet and responded by drawing from his Greek cultural environment a new, dualistic view of human beings which allows him to blunt the acuteness of the problem of "the sufferings of the righteous" by asserting the immortality of the soul. There is a good deal of truth in this comparison and these assertions. Unfortunately, what gets obscured is the fact that in adopting a dualist solution Wisdom reaches back to a much older, both pre- and early Israelite, mythological view of God and the world, away from the much more monistic unitary view asserted by Ben Sira and Qohelet. Who is conservative and who progressive may be a lot less clear than at first sight. This is not the usual way of viewing the Wisdom of Solomon. Normally it is located at the end of the Old Testament wisdom tradition at the point at which, under Greek influence, it begins to mutate into philosophy. And indeed, with its choice of Greek literary genres and its use of the technical vocabulary of Greek philosophy it does look very different from the Book of Proverbs. But how far has it really moved from the complex web of mythology out of which the Jewish religion emerged? Qohelet and Ben Sira are uncompromising monists when it comes to confronting the problem of evil and suffering. For Qohelet there is no point in complaining about these things: "Consider the work of God; who can make straight what he has made crooked? In the day of prosperity be joyful, and in the day of adversity consider; God has made the one as well as the other, with the result that human beings cannot complain about him" (Qoh 7:13-14). 2 These human beings cannot "know the work(s) of God who does/makes everything" (Qoh 11:5). Ben Sira makes much the same points but at greater length in 39:12-35, while Sir 43:27 echoes Qoh 11:5: "We could say more but could never say enough; let the final word be: "He is the all." This monist position which makes God responsible for everything in the world, both good and evil is found earlier in the Old Testament (Is 45:7—especially according to lQIs a ) and

1 2

CBQ 2 8 , 1 3 9 - 1 5 4 . For the translation of the last clause of v. 14 see the commentaries of Rashi, Rashbam and Ibn Ezra. Sir 33:7-15 and 42:24 echo Q o h 7:13-14.

later in 1QS 3:25-4:1. In the latter text this position is often described as a "modified dualism" but the important point is that G o d is the creator of the Spirits of both Light and Darkness. This is the posidon most compatible with monotheism and the easiest to defend philosophically. But at this point the Wisdom of Solomon departs radically from its immediate predecessors in the Jewish wisdom tradition. Creation is not a theme which figures prominendy in the Wisdom of Solomon but there is one very significant off-the-cuff reference to it in 11:17-18. (17) For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter (έζ άμορφου ϋλης), did not lack the means to send upon them [the Egypdans] a muldtude of bears, or bold lions, (18) or newly-created unknown beasts full of rage, or such as breathe out fiery breath, or belch forth a thick pall of smoke, or flash terrible sparks from their eyes. Scholarly debate on this text has centred on the parenthetical relative clause in v. 17a "which created the world out of formless matter" and its relation to Greek philosophy contemporary with the author, but it has not significantly taken the broader context into account. This context concerns the potential power of G o d to punish sinners by means of terrible animals. But what kind of animals are these? Well, we know where we are with the bears and lions of verse 17 and can easily guess what biblical stories the author had in mind, but what about the animals of verse 18? Here we are in the realm of mythology and specifically the description of Leviathan in J o b 41:19-21: From its mouth go flaming torches; sparks of fire leap out. Out of its nostrils comes smoke, as from a boiling pot and burning rushes. Its breath kindles coals, and a flame comes out of its mouth. Why does the thought of creation, and in particular of Gen 1:2 bring to the surface of the author's mind images of such monstrous beasts? Could he be making the same mental connections between Gen 1:2 and Leviathan as we find in modern commentaries? Lurking beneath the surface is the issue of theodicy. Does God's power have limits? The author wants to answer in the negative but he has two problems: observable reality as the people of Israel (and the Jews in Alexandria) have experienced it and his inherited religious traditions. He believes that G o d could have destroyed all Israel's enemies with one blow (11:20) but has not actually done so because he wanted to give them an opportunity to repent (12:9). This argument "saves the appearances" by explaining why God allows his enemies to continue in existence. The trouble is that the author then goes on to say that some of these enemies, especially the Canaanites, were so incorrigibly evil from birth that they never could have repented (12:10). The same contradiction appears between the marvellous sounding verse 11:24 ("For you love all things that exist, and detest none of the things which you have made") and 12:3—4 "Those who lived long ago in your holy land, you hated for their detestable practices." And what about the Devil? (2:24). Does God not

detest him? If so, according to 11:24 he cannot have made him. The secdon 11:15-12:22 is the most muddled and illogical part of the book. What is the source of all this contradiction and muddle in what is supposed to be the most philosophical of the Jewish wisdom texts? Let us return to Wis 11:17a. M. Gilbert argues that this verse is saying exacdy the same as Gen 1:1-2 but "en utilisant un vocabulaire philosophe grec." 3 But this is not a straightforward re-presentation (relecture) of the Genesis passage. For, whereas Gen 1:2 is simply coordinated to the main verb of verse 1 ( ‫ ) ב ר א‬, Wisdom alters the syntactical relationship by making God create the world "out of formless matter" (έζ άμορφου ύλης). Wis 11:17 is undoubtedly an attempt to make sense of the difficult syntax of Gen 1:1—2 but it does so in such a way as to emphasize the pre-existence of the chaos. Larcher in his commentary also sees that it cannot be simply a case of restating Gen 1:2 in Greek philosophical terminology. 4 Chapter 19:6 shows that the notion of an underlying substrate of matter susceptible to reformulation was part of the author's mental furniture. Is this a created substance? The text does not say because its interest lies elsewhere. But Larcher cannot see how it could not be, given that God had apparendy created everything (11:24—25, 16:24). The presupposition of Larcher's argument is that the author's thought is logically consistent. Also, like most Catholic scholars working on the Wisdom of Solomon he assumes that the Old Testament presupposes a doctrine of creatio ex nihilo.5 But most recent studies have shown that such an idea cannot be demonstrated to be present in Judaism before at the earliest the third century C.E. and may have come in as late as the early Middle Ages.6 The most significant recent contribution to this discussion is Jon D. Levenson's book Creation and the Persistence of Evil,7 especially his chapter two entided: "The Survival of Chaos after the victory of God." Levenson argues that most O T and later Second Temple writers presuppose that the primordial chaos out of which the world was created continues to exist as a substratum of all reality, capable at any time of erupting into God's world and spoiling his handiwork. Levenson builds on the work of earlier scholars who have demonstrated that the Old Testament doctrine of creation was constructed out of building blocks provided by Canaanite religion and hence is at root mythological. Accordingly, I would suggest that what the Wisdom of Solomon provides at 11:17 is not a restatement of Gen 1:1—2 but a reformulation in Greek dress of the older creation mythology so widely attested in the O T whereby God creates the world out of "tohu and bohu/Leviathan/Rahab" (Ps 74:12-17, 89:5-12, Job 9:8,

3 4

5

6

7

"Gn 1 - 3 dans le livre de la Sagesse." La Création dans l'Orient ancient, Lectio Divina 127, 1987, 333. Larcher, C. 1983-85. Le livre de ta Sagesse ou la Sagesse de Salomon (3 vols.). Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 679. O n p. 680 at the conclusion of his exegesis of 11:17a he cites in support Tadan, Augustine and Origen. Winston, D. 1971. "The Book of Wisdom's Theory o f Cosmogony." History of Religions 11, 185202; May, G. 1978. Schöpfung aus dem Nichts. Berlin; Hayman, Α. P. 1993. "The Doctrine o f Créadon in Sefer Yesira·. Some Text-cridcal Problems." In Rashi 1040—1990: Homage à Ephraim E. Urbach. Ed. G. Sed-Rajna. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 219-227. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994 (1987).

26:7-13). 8 So the primeval chaos (άμορφου ϋλης), was present before creation. But what else was around lurking in the murky depths? O n e quotation from Levenson will enable us now to penetrate further into this mythological framework from which our author is unable to escape should he even have wished to try. Discussing that puzzling re-emergence of the old mythology in Isa 51:9-11 he says (p.12): " T o call upon the arm of Y H W H to awake as in days of old is to acknowledge that these primordial forces were not annihilated in perpetuity in primordial times. Rising anew, they have escaped their appointed bounds and thus flung a challenge at their divine vanquisher." N o w in the Wisdom of Solomon there is one figure who certainly challenges God's authority and who is specifically said not to have been created by him— Death. I12 13

14

15 16

Do not invite death by the error of your life, or bring destruction by the works of your hands; because God did not make death, and he does not delight in the death of the living. For he created all things so that they might exist; the generative forces [or: the creatures] of the world are wholesome, and there is no destructive poison in them, and the dominion [or: palace] of Hades is not on earth. For righteousness is immortal. But the ungodly by their words and deeds summoned death; considering him a friend, they pined away and made a covenant with him, because they are fit to belong to his company.

Amongst the many problems in this passage which have gready exercised scholars is what precisely the author means by death. Is the death here physical or spiritual (i.e. the death of the soul) or both simultaneously? In the context of the rest of the book it might refer to what the author of the Book of Reveladon calls "the second death" (Rev 2:11, 21:8)—the loss of a blessed immortality. Michael Kolarcik takes 2:24 as proof that what is referred to must be "ultimate death." 9 Since only those who belong to the devil's party experience it, it must be something other than physical death. However, what death means in Wis 2:23-34 must be seen in the light of the following verses. The δέ with which 3:1 begins signals the connection. I take 3:2 and the reference to αθανασία (immortality) in 3:4 to be saying that, despite what the wicked think, the righteous have not really died at all. They are still alive—in the hands of God. Only the wicked really die. The opposition is between physical death and immortality, not physical death and "ultimate" or spiritual death. What seems to have concerned the author's opponents is not an ethereal concept like spiritual death but the

8

9

See Day, J. 1985. Cod's Conflict with the dragon and the sea: Echoes of a Canaanite myth in the Old Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The Ambiguity of Death in the Book of Wisdom 1-6, AnBib 127; Rome: Pondfical Biblical Institute, 1991,77.

brevity and sorrow of human life and the utter finality of physical death (Wis 2:1-5). This is Death with a big D or, to give him his Canaanite name, Mot. It is the colourful mythological language in our text which accounts for a certain lack of logic in the argument. The words placed in the mouth of the wicked in 2:1 hardly make them friends of death and certainly very unlikely to want to summon him. Wis 1:16 and 2:1 can only be harmonised if we realise that before the author's mind rises up not some abstract theological concept but the old image of Death/Hades, the devouring monster, the opponent of all the order imposed on the world when Yahweh subdued the chaos. By holding the views they do the wicked, in our author's eyes, are allying themselves with all those primordial forces which are ever seeking to penetrate and lay waste the ordered universe. The statement in Wis 1:14 that "The dominion/palace of Hades is not on earth" would be a rather good summary of the last part of the Ugaritic Ba'al cycle.10 Especially is this true of the last episode in the cycle when Mot comes out "seeking whom he would devour," 11 fights Ba'al to a standstill, but retreats to the underworld when faced by the sun goddess Shapsh's threat of El's intervention (KTU I. 6 VI). The message of the myth is surely the same as that of the Wisdom of Solomon: death belongs in the underworld and not on earth. As J. C. L. Gibson puts it: Mot "has no rights in the upper world, though he may turn covetous eyes in that direction, but he rules permanendy in the realm of the dead underneath the earth." 12 The imagery of the dominion/palace of Death and his underworld city at Ugarit has been explored by many scholars.13 The fear of Death/Mot reaching out from this underworld kingdom to drag the living down into it is widespread in the Old Testament; see, e.g. Jer 9:21. At Ugarit this was expressed in dramatic terms: "[he extends a lip to the ea]rth, a lip to the heavens, [he extends] a tongue to the stars" (KTU I. 5 II 1-3). There are numerous parallels in the Old Testament to this picture of death as a devouring monster; see Prov 1:12, 30:16, Isa 5:14, Hab 2:5. Many commentators have seen links between the wording of Wis 2:1-5 and things said about death in the Book of Job. But one text which they have not utilised in this connection is Bildad's speech in Job 18 and his terrifying description of the insecure position of the wicked who is finally haled before the "king of terrors" (Job 18:14). What are these terrors and who is their king? The terrors are those of approaching death: disease, hunger, calamity and "the first-born of death"—‫( בכור מות‬Job 18:12-13). The king of terrors is the figure referred to in Psalm 49:15 as the "shepherd," that is, the king of Sheol. That the author of Wisdom was alert to this imagery can be seen from the reference in 16:13 to the "gates of Hades" which in Ps 107:18 are the "gates of death." The

10

11 12 13

The possible connection here with the Ugaritic text was first noted by Winston, D. 1979. The Wisdom of Solomon. AB 43; N e w York: Doubleday, 110. I Pet 5:8 and KTU I. 6 ν 20-21 Gibson, J. C. L. 1984. "The Theology of the Ugaridc Baal Cycle." Orientalin 53.2, 209. See Tromp, N . J . I 969. Primitive Conceptions of Death and the Netherworld in the Old Testament. Bib Or 21. Rome, 152-54 etc., and Wyatt, N. 1996. Myths of Power: a study of royal myth and ideology in Ugaritic and biblical tradition. Ugaridsche-Biblische Literatur 13. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 106-115.

statement in Wis 2:2 that "no one has been known to return from Hades" simply subsdtutes Hades for Sheol, "the land of gloom and deep darkness," in texts like Job 10:21. In Wis 1:14 the author juxtaposes "the generadve forces of the world" with the "destructive poison" and "dominion of Hades." The contrast draws on the Old Testament picture of Death and Sheol as the reversal of création. Death is the return to the meaninglessness and formlessness of Tohu and Bohu. See Isa 34 which primarily uses one of the major images for death and chaos in the Old Testament, namely, desert,14 but in verses 11-12 makes the association with Tohu and Bohu, the raw, chaotic material out of which the world was made (Gen 1:2). And so we come full circle, having started with creation out of Tohu and Bohu in Wis 11:17. In the Old Testament there are a number of texts which presuppose that Yahweh's power and presence does not extend into the underworld. 15 N. J. Tromp in his Primitive Conceptions of Death and the Netherworld states: "In a way Yahwism during the greatest part of the Old Testament period kept aloof from Sheol.""1 There are, of course, another set of passages which assert that God's power does reach into Sheol.17 The usual way of reconciling these contradictory sets of statements is presupposed in the quotadon from Tromp. Those in which Yahweh is absent from Sheol reflect an earlier set of beliefs inherited from Israel's Canaanite background, while those in which he is present mark the inexorable advance of monotheism as time went by. But here in the Wisdom of Solomon 1:12—16 the presumed earlier pattern is presupposed: God belongs with the wholesome generative forces of the world, Hades belongs below with the negative forces, especially Death. This dualistic picture of a realm of negativity and evil which can burst into and disrupt the upper world is certainly presupposed in Wis 2:24. Here for the first time in a Jewish text the fully fledged figure of the Devil appears, possibly identified with the serpent in the Garden of Eden, and certainly the source of death in the world. I do not see here any retreat from an earlier mythological pattern in favour of an ever more clearly defined monotheism. We just get new names for old figures. At this point we need to face the problem of the metaphysical status of this king of the underworld. At Ugarit Mot and Yam were primordial figures. In Greek mythology Hades is regarded as the brother of Zeus; Hesiod calls him "Zeus of the earth" (Works 465). He cannot be defeated by the super-terrestial gods, only bargained with as in the Demeter/Persephone myth. The Greek picture of Hades' subterranean palace with its great gate is closely parallel to the picture at Ugarit and, we may deduce, amongst the ancient Israelites. Here is where we link up with our initial observations on the concept of creation in the Wisdom of Solomon and in the Old Testament as a whole. For the king of the underworld, Mot, the Devil, is part of that primordial Tohu and Bohu which preceded the creation of the world and is coeval with God himself. 14 15 16 17

Tohu is applied to desert in Deut 32:10,Job 6:18, Ps 107:20. See Isa 38:18, 45:19, Ps 6:6, 30:10, 68:20?, 115:17, and, most dramadcaUy, Ps 88:6, 11,13. Tromp, Primitive Conceptions, 197. Jer 10:12—if there, as seems likely, "world" means "underworld," Am 9:2, Ps 95:4, Ps 139:8, Job 26:6, 38:17, Prov 15:11.

Wis 2:24 makes it quite clear that death entered the world from outside through the agency of the Devil and not through any human acdons. It is not created in the world; it enters it from outside. Death and evil pre-existed the creadon of human beings. So how did they come into existence if God did not make them? The answer has to be that they were always there in the person of their source, the Devil/Mot. The contrast could not be more stark with Wisdom's predecessor, Ben Sira, who straightforwardly states that God made death (Sir 11:14, 14:17, 17:2, 33:14-15,41:4). It is the failure to fully recognise and come to terms with its mythological dimension which accounts for the endless agonising of scholars over what precisely death means in the Wisdom of Solomon and how it relates to sin. The struggle of the exegetes to uncover the logical consistency which must underlie the text is misconceived. Despite its apparent pretension to compete in the world of the philosophers the Wisdom of Solomon is too much rooted in the mythical world view of the Old Testament to be overly concerned with such logical consistency. The work is primarily ad hominem polemic or apologia and funcdons much more on an imaginative, metaphorical and mythological level than on any appeal to rationality and logic.

PAPPUS AND LULIANUS IN JEWISH RESISTANCE TO R O M E WILLIAM HORBURY Cambridge University, UK Pappus and Lulianus are obscure but arresting figures in two neighbouring fields of study: Jewish martyrdom, and Jewish resistance to Rome. The widely attested complex of tradition about them sprang from narratives probably current before the compilation of the Mishnah. The present inquiry is concerned with the place of Pappus and Lulianus in resistance to Rome. Discussion has moved from describing them as leaders of Judaean revolt under Trajan or Hadrian (so, with differing historical reconstructions, Graetz 1866: 137-8, 141, 445-8; Derenbourg 1867: 406-22; Krauss 1895: 110-12; Krauss 1905; Smallwood 1976: 4 2 5 6) to the more modest view that they were dignitaries executed during Roman repression of unrest (Alon 1984: 420-3; Pucci 1981: 108-112), followed more recendy with emphasis on the limits of what can be learned from the sources (Stemberger 1983: 76-8, 104-5; Ayaso Martinez 1990: 56-61; such emphasis already in Smallwood 1976: 425). Here an attempt is made to locate their activity more precisely, through attention to their repute as martyrs and its topographical links. These aspects of the tradition show its significance for the Jewish cult of the dead as well as for the history and ethos of Jewish resistance to Rome.

Pappus and Lulianus in Martyrology A section of Ecclesiastes Rabbah (IX 10, 1-2) names some who fasted to obtain a dream-vision of the mighty dead. Those said to have done so include teachers from late third-century Tiberias. Among these Aha, who came from Lydda in the south, succeeded in dreaming of Alexandri, who was connected with Joshua ben Levi, a great teacher in Lydda at the beginning of the third century. In this dream (see text (VI) in the Appendix below) Alexandri himself spoke of Lulianus and Pappus in connection with "the slain of Lydda," a group of martyrs mentioned more than once without explanation of the circumstances of their death. Thus in the Babylonian Talmud "the slain of Lydda" figure in a dream like the one just noted, but in this case attributed to Joseph, the son of Joshua ben Levi, and without any reference to Pappus and Lulianus (Pes. 50a, B.B. 10b; Yalkut Shimeoni on the Prophets, 584, on Zech 14:6). The currency of such dream-visions recalls the ancient Christian cult of the saints, but it has deep roots in Greek and Jewish antiquity. Thus in older Jewish literature a "dreamer of dreams" ranks with a prophet (Deut 13:2), and Judas Maccabaeus has a dream-vision of Onias and Jeremiah which is regarded as significant (II Macc 15:11—16); and among the Greeks, Pythagoras is said to have recommended abstinence from beans as a way of encouraging reliable

dream-visions (Cic. Div. II 58, 119). Yet, although the roots of the practice described in Eccl. R. IX 10, 1 - 2 are deep, the focus of this midrashic material is on the heavenly status of the departed. This characteristic is one of a number which confer on the sources concerning Pappus and Lulianus a resemblance to Christian martyrology. Consequendy "martyr," although it is a Greek term with Christian associations, can here as often elsewhere be applied not unfittingly to those commemorated in Jewish Hebrew-language tradition in other terms such as "slain," or "those slain by the empire" (harugim, harugey malekhutb). One important setting in which Pappus and Lulianus were mentioned, therefore, was that of martyr-commemoration. To move beyond the passage from Ecclesiastes Rabbah in text (VI), such a setting is appropriate also to texts (V) and (VII), from the Talmud Yerushalmi and from a piyyut of Qalir, on a commemorative day, 12th Adar, kept in late Roman and Byzantine Jewish Palestine; to (IV) and (III), from Sifra and the Talmud Yerushalmi, each reproducing a topos of martyrology—the death of the persecutor and the temptation to outward compliance, respectively; and probably also to (II), from Sifra, where the association of Pappus and Lulianus with Lev 26:19 I will break is most natural if they died a violent death. The passage from Bereshith Rabbah in (I), concerning the road from Ptolemais (Acco) to Antioch, can also be ascribed to their martyr-legend; for like (IV), on their death in Laodicaea, it is strikingly linked with Syria. Antioch and Laodicaea-on-Sea were two of the four most notable cities of north-western Syria (Jones 1971: 241). All these passages thus seem like fragments or reflections of the "acts" of the martyred pair. The martyrological character of the tradition is underlined by the prominence of their day in spring, shordy before Purim; 12th Adar, formerly known (text (V)) as "the day of Tirion" (Meg. Taan. XII; Lichtenstein 1931-2: 321, 346), was followed on 13th by Nicanor's Day (II Macc 15:36) and on 14th by Purim itself ("Mordecai's Day," II Macc 15:36). It may be suggested that the extant Hebrew traditions ultimately depend on a lost martyr-legend. This would have been current in writing, probably in the vernacular and possibly in Greek as well as Aramaic, in various forms, as was the case with contemporary Christian acta martyrum.

Time, Place and Activity of the Martyrs First, as to time: the sources suggest in different ways that the narratives of Pappus and Lulianus were originally pre-Mishnaic. Thus, entirely different elements of their story appear in Sifra, in the Talmud Yerushalmi, and in Bereshith Rabbah; a legend about them will therefore have been current at least by the end of the fourth century, even if relevant passages are from the later material in Sifra as analysed by Stemberger (1997). Further, within these sources it is uniformly held that Pappus and Lulianus were pre-Mishnaic figures. Thus the compiler of Ber. R. LXIV 10, probably in early fifth-century Galilee, thought they could be placed in the days of R. Joshua b. Hananiah. Comparably, the martyrtradidon itself, as met in Sifra (text IV), makes Trajan responsible for their death. Again, in Ecclesiastes Kabbah as quoted in (VI), Pappus and Lulianus are put earlier

than "the slain of Lydda," who were themselves being commemorated in the early third century. Lasdy, the associadon of Pappus and Lulianus with Trajan will have helped to bring their commemoration to the "day of Tirion," now reinterpreted as Trajan's Day. Thus in Judaea and Galilee in the fourth and fifth centuries it was assumed that Pappus and Lulianus belonged to the second century. It is reasonable to follow this belief, particularly as a post-Mishnaic origin of the legend would make it harder to account for the widely dispersed independent references to Pappus and Lulianus found from the late third to the early fifth century. A link with the later years of Hadrian's reign in particular has often been found in text (1), on the assumption that imperial permission for temple rebuilding points to this reign, and because Beth Rimmon, named in the sequel, was remembered as the scene of a massacre in the Bar-Kokhba war (Lam. R. i 45, on i 16); but Jewish hopes for such rebuilding can be envisaged over a longer period, including the reigns of Nerva and Trajan, and the reference to Beth Rimmon is not unlikely to be a later homiletic addition to the narrative (see Schäfer 1981: 31,114-116). A firmer indication of time is offered by the legend that swift retribution overtook Trajan when a despatch arrived from Rome (text (IV), from Sifra). This story seems to be based (Stemberger 1983: 76-7) on the elimination of Lusius Quietus at the beginning of Hadrian's reign. One of four consulars then thought to be disloyal, he had been made governor of Judaea under Trajan, according to Eusebius, because of his success in the bloody repression of Jewish revolt in Mesopotamia during Trajan's Parthian war (Eus. Chmn. Trajan XVIII; H.E. IV 2, 5); dismissed by Hadrian, he was put to death on the way back from Judaea (Historia Augusta, Hadrian VII 2-3). Trajan's death in Cilicia during his return from Mesopotamia (117) will have been conflated with the execution of Quietus on his own way back not long afterwards. It is then possible, as is often noted, tentatively to associate events underlying this legend of Jewish martyrdom under Trajan with implications of the Hebrew phrase polemos shel Qitos, "war of Quietus," found in Seder Olam and in the Cambridge MS of the Mishnah at Sotah ix 4: "in the war of Quietus they forbade the crowns of the brides, and that a man should teach his son Greek." In its Mishnaic context this sentence can most naturally be understood as referring to a war which took place in Judaea between those which broke out in the years 66 and 132. At Hadrian's accession, according to Historia Augusta (Hadrian ν 2), Palestine was among the regions which were displaying a rebellious spirit. This notice suggests that "the war of Quietus" was indeed Palestinian (so Alon and Pucci, as cited above), despite interpretations of the Mishnah as referring to Mesopotamia or Egypt (reviewed for example in Stemberger 1983: 77-8) or as without topographical implications (Ayaso Martinez 1990: 54—6). A martyrlegend associated with Trajan, reflecting the death of Quietus, and referring in text (1) to Jewish entry from Syria into Judaea can reasonably be linked with a "war of Quietus" so interpreted. Secondly, then, as to place: a connection between Pappus and Lulianus and "the slain of Lydda," in Judaea, is evident in the tradition, for instance in text

(VI), below. This connection is probably also presupposed in text (ill), from the Talmud Yerushalmi, in which Pappus and Lulianus offer an exception to the rules for conduct under persecution which were said to have been framed in the upper room of a house in Lydda (Oppenheimer 1988: 123^1, citing a pardy parallel passage from the Babylonian Talmud, Sanh. 74a). One among the possible inferences from the accounts of both the "slain of Lydda" and these rulings would be that repression took place in Lydda under Quietus (Oppenheimer 1988: 124 notes the conjectural element in such reconstruction). In any case, Pappus and Lulianus themselves came to be identified as (representatives of) "the slain of Lydda," as noted by Graetz 1866: 447-8 from commentary on the Babylonian Talmud. This identification is probably responsible for the appearance in the textual tradition of Sifra (ed. I. H. Weiss, f. 99d) of the story of Pappus and Lulianus before Trajan in the form that he "arrested" (rather than "slew") them at Laodicaea. "Arrested" also appears, with the names Shemaiah and Ahijah, in the parallel in Babylonian Talmud, Taan. 18b; but contrast the early MS. of Sifra translated in (IV). The strength in tradition of this link with Lydda, in Judaea, and the possibility that it was indeed a place of martyrdom under Trajan, underline by contrast the references to north-western Syria already noted in texts (I) and (IV). This contrast suggests first of all that there were rival centres of the commemoration of Pappus and Lulianus, at Lydda and Laodicaea respectively; but there remains the possibility that one of these centres was indeed the place of their death. A number of historians (including Graetz, Derenbourg and Smallwood) have opted for Lydda, following the trend in early narrative just noted; but it seems more likely that the diasporan Laodicaea, which was known in rabbinic tradition for its wealthy Jewish community (Ber. R. XI 4, on Hiyya bar Abba's entertainment there at an opulent sabbath dinner) but was less celebrated martyrologically than Lydda, should also be accepted as indicating a place of martyrdom. It is easy to understand how a martyrdom should have been transferred to Lydda. Moreover, Laodicaea is commended by its coherence with Ber. Κ LXIV 10 (text I), on the road from Acco to Antioch, and by the consistency of each of the two midrashic references to north-western Syria with other information about this region in the early Roman imperial period. Thus milestones show that the Roman road from Andoch to Ptolemais (Acco), used by armies marching to repress Jewish revolt under Nero (Jos. B.J. II 500, III 29), had been constructed soon after a colony of veterans had been founded between the years 51 and 54 at Ptolemais; B. Isaac and A. Oppenheimer note that Ber. R. LXIV 10 agrees with these other indications of the importance of this route from Syria to Judaea (Isaac and Roll 1982: 8; Isaac 1992: 322-3; Oppenheimer 1991: 136). Again, Laodicaea is not far off the route of Trajan's return from his Parthian campaign to Cilicia (Cassius Dio LXVIII 33, 1 (Epitome); Herr 1978: 194). There is therefore a case for locadng events which gave rise to the martyrlegend of Pappus and Lulianus in Syria, at the time of the Jewish revolts which broke out under Trajan in Cyrenaica, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Cyprus, as Dio and Eusebius attest; moreover, these events can perhaps be connected with

Quietus and with the unrest in Judaea when he was governor which is not described, but is probably implied, in the Mishnah and Historia Augusta. Thirdly, acdvity leading to martyrdom can be inferred from texts (I) and (II) as the employment of wealth by eminent Jewish provincials to aid Jewish entry from Syria to Judaea; compare the stern disapproval of the encouragement of Jewish immigradon in Claudius's letter to Alexandria (P. Lond. 1912, lines 9 6 8). Execudon of wealthy provincials typified endeavours to repress unrest, as when Gessius Florus put upper-class Jerusalemites to death, or in Libya the governor Catullus executed rich Cyrenaican Jews (Jos. B.J. II 308; VII 442-8). The widely-used names Pappus and Lulianus are fully consistent with wealth (Horbury and Noy 1992, nos. 21, 126). Temptation to outward compliance (text III) is a martyrological topos, as noted above; but among the settings which could have been envisaged by those who used it here is the repression of Jewish revolt, with which attacks on Judaism were associated (Jos. B.J. II 152-3). Use of the motif also suggests that tradents endorsed the view that these martyrs were eminent persons, whose example might influence others.

Conclusions 1. The scattered references to Pappus and Lulianus probably reflect a Jewish martyr-legend known in Judaea and Galilee in the third and fourth centuries; it will have been contemporary with comparable Christian acta martyrum, and the passages which reflect it deserve notice in histories of Jewish and Christian cults of martyrs and saints. 2. At the root of this martyrology is a second-century tradition of the execution of eminent Jews under Trajan in Syrian Laodicaea, in connection with encouragement of Jewish entry from Syria into Judaea. Here therefore, as in Josephus, martyrology is part of the ethos of resistance to Rome. 3. This Syrian Jewish martyr-tradition coheres with interpretation of the "war of Quietus" as affecting Judaea; it also suggests that, to the north and east of Judaea, Jewish unrest under Trajan was found not only in Mesopotamia and Cyprus, as Dio and Eusebius attest, but also in the intervening region of Syria.

Appendix of Texts in English Translation (I)

Bereshith Rabbah LXIV 10, on Gen 26:29 [the Philistines have done to Isaac raq tov "nothing but good"] (J. Theodor & Ch. Albeck eds. 1927. Bereschit Rabba mit kritischem Apparat und Kommentar. II Berlin. Repr. Jerusalem, 1965, 710, quodng related texts; add Ε. Ε. Urbach, 1978. Sefer Pitron Torah. Jerusalern, 107). "Nothing but" is a limitation, teaching that they did not do him a complete favour. In the days of R. Joshua b. Hananiah, the empire decreed that the house of the sanctuary should be rebuilt. Pappus and Lulianus set up banks from Acco to Andoch, and supplied those who came up from the Exile . . .

(II)

Sifra, Behuqqothay, Pereq V 2, on Lev 26:19 And I w i l l break the pride of your power (I. H. Weiss ed. 1962. Sifra. Vienna, f. 11 Id). And I will break the pride of your power: This is the house of the sanctuary, as it is said, Behold, I will profane my sanctuary, the pride of your power (Ezek 24: 21). R. Akiba says: And I will break the pride of your power—these are the mighty in Israel, likejoab the son of Zeruiah and his companions. Others say: And I will break the pride of your power—these are the eminent, who are the pride of Israel, like Pappus b. Judah and Lulianus the Alexandrian and his companions.

(III) Talmud Yerushalmi, Sheb. IV 2, 35a; Sanh. Ill 5, 21b. [Despite the "ruling of Lydda" that only the weighder commandments need be kept under persecudon, in public even the lighter commandments must be kept]. ...as in the case of Lulianus and Pappus his brother, to whom they gave water in a coloured glass, but they would not accept it from them. (IV,) Sifra, Emor, Pereq IX 5, on Lev 22:32 but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel (Finkelstein, L. 1956. Sifra or Torat Kohanim according to Codex Assemani Ixvi. New York, 442). When Trajan slew Pappus and Lulianus his brother in Laodicaea, he said to them "If you are of the people of Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, your God will come and deliver you from my hands." They said to him, "Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah were upright, and Nebuchadnezzar was fit for a sign to be wrought through him; but as for you, you are a wicked king, and we are guilty of death in the eyes of Heaven. If you do not slay us, there are many demons before the Omnipresent, many bears, many lions, many leopards, many serpents, many scorpions; but in the end the Omnipresent will require our blood at your hand." It is said that Trajan had not moved from there before a despatch came from Rome, and they knocked out his brain with clubs. (V) Talmud Yerushalmi, Taan. II 13, 66a; Meg. i 6, 70c. Tirion's Day ceased on the day that Lulianus and Pappus were slain (VI) Eccl. R. on IX 1 [R. Alexandri appears to R. Aha in a dream and says].

There are none before the slain of Lydda in their division in the generation— they that did away the reproach of Lulianus.

(VII) Qalir, piyyut for 9th Ab Oboli eykhahgillu qedeshim, lines 43—4, in Fleischer, E. 1974. "Qompozitsiyyot qaliriyyot le-tish'ah be-Av." HUCA 45, 1-40 (23). ...ceiling and floor above were removed from the chamber, for Lulianus and Pappus were slain in Adar.

Literature Alon, G. Trans. & ed. G. Levi, I 1980, II 1984, reprinted 1989. The Jews in their Land in the Talmudic Age. 2 vols. Repr. Cambridge, Mass. Ayaso Martinez, J. R. 1990. Iudaea Capta. Biblioteca Midrásica 10. Valencia. Derenbourg, J. 1867. Essai sur l'histoire et la géographie de la Palestine. Paris.

Graetz, H. 1866. Geschichte der Juden, IV. 2nd ed. Leipzig. Herr, M. D. 1978. "Did Galilee take part in the War of Quietus or the Revolt of BenCosebah?" (Hebr.). In Jewish Rebellions in the Time of Trajan. Ed. D. Rokeah. Jerusalem, 191-7. (Reprinted from Cathedra IV, 1977) Horbury, W. and Noy, D. 1992. Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt. Cambridge. Isaac, B. 1992. The Limits of Empire: the Roman Army in the East. 2nd ed. Oxford. Isaac, B. and Roll, I 1982. Roman Roads in Judaea I. The Legio-Scythopolis Road. O x f o r d , BAR

International Series, 141. Jones, A. H. M. 1971. The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces. 2nd ed. Oxford.

Krauss, S. 1895. "La fête de Hanoucca." RE] 30, 24-43, 204-19. , 1905. "Pappus." JE 9, 512b. Lichtenstein, H. 1931-2. "Die Fastenrolle." HUCA 8-9, 257-351. Oppenheimer, Α. 1988. "Jewish Lydda in the Roman Era." HUCA 59, 115-36 , 1991. Galilee in the Mishnaic Period (Hebrew). Jerusalem. Pucci, M. 1981. La rivolta ebraica a! tempo di Traiano. Pisa.

Schäfer, P. 1981. Der Bar-Kokhba Aufstand. Tübingen. Smallwood, Ε. M. 1976, repr. 1981. The Jews under Roman Rule. Leiden. Stemberger, G. 1983. Die römische Herrschaft im Urteil der Juden. Darmstadt.

, 1997. "Historia de la redacciôn de Sifra." In M. Pérez Fernández, Midrás Sifra: El comentario rabinico alLevitico, I. Biblioteca Midrásica 19. Estella, 17-65.

Α Ι ΟΝ IN P H I L O OF ALEXANDRIA BIBLICAL " T I M E " AND PHILOSOPHICAL "ETERNITY"

HELEEN M . KEIZER Klassiek Seminarium U. v. A. Amsterdam, The Netherlands 1. Philo calls happy the one who inclines towards the good "through most of his life," since—he adds—for a mortal being to do so "all the awn" is impossible. "All the aiön," hapanta ton aiöna, that is: "all time," or: "all life long." 1 We have here an example of Philo using the word awn in unreflected, straigthforward speech. In this paper, however, I focus on the meaning Philo attaches to the noun awn and the derived adjective aiônios when the terms are object of his reflection. The research context from which this paper stems is what I would like to call the history "from aiön to eternity"—the subject matter of my doctoral dissertation in progress. Regarding this "history" I observe the following: - T h e meaning of the Greek word aiön in Greek literature from Homer onwards develops from "life/lifetime" to "all time." Its earliest meaning, "life," is never lost. - I n the Greek Old Testament the term is used as the translation of the Hebrew word 'olam—'olam, I hold, constitutes the temporal horizon of creation, and designates, practically speaking, "all time." - T h e New Testament speaks of the present aiön which is followed by the aiön to come—aiön, then, is translated "age." - I n Greek philosophy, notably Platonism, aiön is employed to convey a philosophical notion which we commonly denote as "eternity." Generally speaking, this is the most well-known meaning of aiön: i.e. "eternity." Ever since the early centuries of the christian era, biblical aiön has been in touch with philosophical "eternity." All the same I hold that it is important to be aware of the difference between the two. In my dissertation I explore the meaning of aiön in the Greek language, in both a philosophical and nonphilosophical context, and its meaning in the Greek Bible. Subsequendy I investigate the way Philo and early churchfathers have dealt with the term. In this paper I discuss Philo.

Mut 185: εύδαίμων δ' οτω έξεγένετο τόν πλείω του βίου χρόνον προς την άμείνω και θειοτέραν μοίραν ταλαντεΰειν· άπαντα γαρ τόν αιώνα άμηχανον, έπει και το άντίπαλον θνητόν άχθος εστίν ότε άντε'ρρεψε... "Happy is he to whom it is granted to incline towards the better and more god-like part through most of his life (bios). For it is impossible that it should be so with all the aiön, since sometimes the opposing load of mortality throws its weight into die scales..." (Translations primarily taken from the edition of the Loeb Classical Library, but frequendy adapted.)

Philo is the first author who is well known to us in whose work we see biblical exegesis and Greek philosophical nodons meet. In what follows I will show a) that in Philo's wridngs aiön is present as both a biblical and a philosophical term, and that the two are kept separate (the tide of my paper reveals as much); and b) that in Philo's work biblical and philosophical aiön have a common reference, namely God's creation (the created world) and time. Aiön (and aiönios) are most frequendy used by Philo in a straightforward way as terms that are meaningful but not thematized. We have already seen an example of this (at n° 1). Secondly, aiön or aiönios may be part of a biblical quotation and as such object of Philo's interpretation. Finally, aiön can be part of Philo's (philosophical) terminology, introduced and discussed by him when interpreting a biblical text. I list the three "domains" of aiön(ios) together with some figures. In Philo's extant Greek oeuvre 76 instances of aiön, 29 of aiönios. Domain A: Philo's own, unreflected speech [see e.g. above, n° 1], Domain B: Bible quotations which are object of his interpretation: 5 different quotations with aiön, 6 with aiönios [see below, nrs. 2 and 3], Domain C: (philosophical) terminology which he introduces and discusses when interpreting a text: 7 cases of aiön as a more (3) or less (4) philosophical term [see nrs. 4-8]. I now turn to Philo when he deals with aiön and aiönios as biblical terms (the second domain, B). Philo's interpretations of two particular texts are highly instructive; both concern the adjective aiönios. According to Philo the general meaning of aiönios in the LXX is: all time enduring, immortal (as a predicate notably of the Law).2 In two particular texts, however, the adjective pertains to God. 2. First there is Gen 21:33, which says that Abraham the Lord God eternal." Philo explains the title "Lord" power and the tide " G o d " as exhibiting his beneficent The following is Philo's exposition about " G o d "atome G o d " (Deplantation 89):

"called upon the name of as exhibiting God's ruling power. 1 eternal," i.e. theos aiönios,

The title "aiömc God," then, is equivalent to: He who is gracious, not only sometimes and at other times not so, but always and continuously; who is beneficent unintermittendy; who ceaselessly strings together the interlocking flow of his donations; who makes his gifts come round in mutual joining, knitting them together by unifying forces; who lets no opportunity of doing good go by; who is Lord, and so able also to hurt.4

2 3 4

See e.g. Post 123 and Ebr 141 - 2 . Plant 86. Plant 89: το δή "θεός αιώνιος"

ίσον εστί. τω ό χαριζόμενος ού ποτέ μεν ποτέ δέ οϋ, άει δέ και συνεχώς, ό άδιαστάτως εύεργετών, ό την τών δωρεών έπάλληλον φοράν άπαΰστως συνείρων, ό τάς χάριτας έχομε'νας άλληλών άνακυκλών δυνάμεσιν

We might perhaps expect Philo to explain the epithet aiönios as revealing something of God's own being, that it is "eternal." Philo interprets it, however, not as qualifying God's being, but as speaking about His doings directed towards His creadon. So while the dde " G o d " according to Philo indicates God's doing good, the qualification aiönios is taken to express God's incessantly doing good towards His creation. The meaning of aiönios as such is brought home to us emphatically and repetitively, both in terms of permanence ("always," "continuously," "unintermittendy"), and with terms that depict a cycle (in the remainder of the passage). 3. The other biblical text in which aiönios pertains to God is part of the momentous passage in which God reveals his name to Moses. Ex 3:15: "Say to the sons of Israel: The Lord God of your fathers, God of Abraham, God of Isaac and God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my atomc name and a memorial for generations." Philo comments as follows (De mutatione nominum 12):5 "This," [God] says, "is my aiomc name," being examined as it were in the manrelated aiön, not in that what is before awn, "and a memorial," not set beyond memory or apprehension, and again "to generarions," not to ungenerated beings. For those who have come to mortal birth must resort to some improper name for the divine...6 Here aiönios ("aiönic") is interpreted as "being examined in the man-related aiön" (literally "in the aiön concerning us"); that is, as the text continues to show: in time and life as we, generated human beings, know it. Our passage opposes "in the man-related aiön " to "in that (what is) before aiön." Thus we infer that aiön covers the time of the created world. This is precisely what we also learn from other Philonic explanations elsewhere, notably his comment on the phrase pro tou aiönos, "before the aiön" in Prov 8:22.7 When we now turn to Philo's use of aiön in what I called the third domain, we will observe a remarkable fact. Where Philo introduces the term aiön on his own account and discusses it as a special topic, he is prompted to do so by biblical time-indications which lack the word aiön. 4. For example the indication "today" makes him to state that "the truthful name of aiön is "today." 8 Aiön is meant here to designate the unchanging aspect of time.

5

6

7 8

ε ν ω τ ι κ ο ύ ς κ α θ α ρ μ ο σ ά μ ε ν σ ς , ό μ η δ έ ν α κ α ι ρ ό ν τ ο υ 7101eîv e u π α ρ α λ ε ί π ω ν , ό κ ύ ρ ι ο ς ών, ώς και β λ ά π τ ε ι ν δΰνασθαι. In this treatise Philo does not quote or discuss Ex 3:14: "God said to Moses, I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: '1 AM has sent me to you.'," for which see Dit 160, Mut\\,Somn 1.231. Mut 12: " τ ο ύ τ ο γ ά ρ μ ο υ " φησι'ν " ό ν ο μ α α ϊ ώ ν ι ο ν " ώ ς α ν έ ν τ φ κ α θ ' ή μ ά ς α ϊ ώ ν ι έ ξ ε τ α ζ ό μ ε ν ο ν , ο ύ κ έ ν τ ω π ρ ό α ι ώ ν ο ς , "και μ ν η μ ό σ υ ν ο ν , " ο ύ τ ό πε'ρα μ ν ή μ η ς κ α ι ν ο ή σ ε ω ς ί σ τ ά μ ε ν ο ν , και π ά λ ι ν " γ ε ν ε α ί ς , " ού φ ύ σ ε σ ι ν ά γ ε ν ή τ σ ι ς . κ α τ α χ ρ ή σ ε ω ς γ ά ρ ονόματος θ ε ί ο υ δεί τοις εις την θ ν η τ ή ν γ έ ν ε σ ι ν έλθούσιν... Ehr 31. Fug 57 (ad G e n 35:4"and Jacob hid [the strange gods] under the oak at Shechem and destroyed them unto today's day"): " σ ή μ ε ρ ο ν " δ' ε σ τ ί ν ό ά π έ ρ α τ ο ς κ α ι ά δ ι ε ξ ί τ η τ ο ς α ι ώ ν · μ η ν ώ ν γ ά ρ και έ ν ι α υ τ ώ ν και σ υ ν ό λ ω ς χ ρ ό ν ω ν π ε ρ ί ο δ ο ι δ ό γ μ α τ α ά ν θ ρ ώ π ω ν ε ϊ σ ι ν α ρ ι θ μ ό ν

5. Another biblical time-indication, "three days" for Philo symbolically stands for "the whole aiön" or in other words for "tripardte dme," i.e. past, present and future. 9 6. Elsewhere he comments once more on "three days," namely on the two times three days of God's work of creadon (Gen 1:3—13) {Quis rerum divinarum heres 165): The three days before the sun['s creation] have come to be equal in number to the three after it, the whole six being divided by equality for the poindng out of aiön and time (chronos). For God dedicated the three before the sun to aiön, and to time (chronos) the three after the sun, which is a copy of aiön.i0 This passage about aiön and chronos may seem to ring a Platonic bell, especially since it talks about the "copy of aiön." This, of course, calls to mind Plato's Timaeus (37d ff), also well-known to Philo, where time is declared to be the "image of aiön"—that is: time in the cosmos of matter depicts as far as possible what aiön is in the cosmos of mind. Our present passage in Philo, nevertheless, has a different line of thought. First, "copy of aiön" may text refer to "the sun" rather than to "time." More important, however, and without doubt this passage ascribes both aiön and the "copy of aiön" to the material world: aiön to the first days of its creadon, 11 time to days nrs. 4 to 6. Thus, unlike aiön in Plato's Timaeus, aiön here is not reserved for the paradigmatic, intelligible world. Aiön here is "undivided time," while chronos is "time measured in parts," divided by the movement of the sun. Aiön is "time seen as a whole." 7. The same idea of aiön as offering a higher view of time returns in a comment made by Philo about the biblical time-indication "in the other year" (De mutahone nominum 267): "other year" does not indicate an interval of time (chronos), which is measured by the revolutions of sun and moon, but that which is truly mysterious, strange and new, other than what is seen and sensed, being examined in the incorporeal and intelligible, the very thing which has obtained the model and έ κ τ ε τ ι μ η κ ό τ ω ν τό δ' άψευδές όνομα αιώνος ή σήμερον, ήλιος γαρ ούκ άλλαττόμένος ό αύτός έστιν άεΐ, ποτέ μεν ύπέρ γής ποτέ δέ ύπό γ ή ν ιών, παρ' δν ήμερα και

9

νΰξ, τα α ι ώ ν ο ς μέτρα, δ ι ε κ ρ ί θ η σ α ν . —"'today' is the limidess and exidess aiön; for periods of months and years, and generally of lengths of time (chrono;), are nodons of men who have attached high importance to number; but the truthful name of aiön is "today." For the sun does not change but is always the same, going now above now below the earth; and through it day and night, the measures of aiön, are distinguished." SacrAl (ad Gen 30:36, about the sons of Laban tending their flocks "a three days' journey away"

from Jacob): συμβολικώς άπαντα χωρισθέντες τόν αιώνα του σπουδαίου· τριεμερής γαρ ό χρόνος, έκ παρεληλυθότος και ένεστώτος και μέλλοντος συνεστώς—"according to the symbolic sense they were the whole aiön separated from the good; for time (chronos) is triparrite, compounded as it is of past, present and future." 10

Her 165: αϊ γε μην πρό ήλιου τρεις ήμέραι ταΐς μεθ' ήλιον ισάριθμοι γ ε γ ό ν α σ ι ν , έξάδος τμηθείσης ίσότητι πρός αιώνος και χρόνου δήλωσιν· αίώνι μέν γαρ τάς προ ήλιου τρεις άνατε'θεικε, χρόνω δέ τάς μεθ' ήλιον, δς έστι μίμημα αιώνος.

11

If we wish to bring Philo's statement here in line with his account in Opif., we should say that α ι ώ ν is related to the intelligible world created on "day one," and to the material world of which the creadon started on the second day.

archetype of time, aiön. Aiön describes the life (bios) of the intelligible cosmos, as time does of the perceptible.12 In the last sentence Philo makes an explicit analogy between aiön and time as well as an explicit definition of aiön as "life" (bios)·, the life of the intelligible cosmos. Describing aiön as "life" on a transcendent level, Philo is in good company: both Plato and Aristode have done the same. 13 The present text clearly has a Platonic character in speaking about "the incorporeal and intelligible" and even more so in referring to "the model and archetype of time." 8. The same holds true for our final passage, from the treatise " O n the unchangeableness of God." The biblical text at issue is Gen 6:6, "the Lord repented that he had made man on the earth." N o w according to Philo it would be the height of impiety to assume repentance on the side of the Lord, that is, "to suppose that the Unchangeable changes." 14 T o prove that God is without change, Philo demonstrates that to God there is nothing future. 15 He argues that time stands to God in the reladon of a grandson, since it is the son of the percepdble cosmos, God's younger son. 16 N o w I quote (Quod Deus immutabilis sit 31-33): To the elder son—that being the intelligible cosmos—He assigned the place of firstborn, and purposed that it should remain with Him. (32) Now this younger son, the perceptible, when set in motion caused the entity of time to shine and rise. Thus nothing is future with God, who has made even the boundaries of the times (chronoi) subject to Himself; there is, after all, [with God] not time (chronoi) but the archetype and model of time, /through which is their life (bios)/; and in aiön nothing is past nor will be future, but it is only in a present state. (33) I have now discoursed sufficiendy on the theme that Being does not experience repentance... I... I with emendation by Tumèbe: /aiön is their life/ with emendations by Turnèbe and Mangey: /aiön is His (his) life/ 17

12

13

14 15 16 17

Mut 267 (ad Gen 17:21, the promise of Isaac's birth "in the other year"): " έ ν ι α υ τ ό ν έ τ ε ρ ο ν " ού < τ ό > τού χ ρ ό ν ο υ μ η ν ύ ω ν διάστημα, ô ταΐς σ ε λ η ν ι α κ α ΐ ς ή ή λ ι α κ α ΐ ς α ν α μ ε τ ρ ε ί τ α ι π ε ρ ί ο δ ο ι ς , ά λ λ α τό έ κ τ ο π ο ν και ξ έ ν ο ν και κ α ι ν ό ν ό ν τ ω ς , έ τ ε ρ ο ν τ ω ν ό ρ ο μ έ ν ω ν και α ι σ θ η τ ώ ν , έ ν ά σ ω μ ά τ ο ι ς και ν ο η τ ο ί ς έ ξ ε τ α ζ ό μ ε ν ο ν , ό π ε ρ το χ ρ ό ν ο υ π α ρ ά δ ε ι γ μ α και ά ρ χ έ τ υ π ο ν ε ί λ η χ ε ν , α ι ώ ν α , α ι ώ ν δέ α ν α γ ρ ά φ ε τ α ι του ν ο η τ ο ύ β ί ο ς κόσμου, ώς αισθητού χρόνος. I hold that interpretation of α ι ώ ν in Plato's Timaeus, 37d ff, should start from its meaning "life" (see my forthcoming dissertation; cf. Böhme, G. 1974. Zeit und Zahl. Studien \•ur Zeittheorie bei Piaton, Aristoteles, Leibniç und Kant. Philosophische Abhandlungen Band 45, Frankfurt am Main: vittorio Klostermann, 68-98). Aristode in De caelo I 9 279a 2 2 - 2 7 and Met. XII 1072b 26-31 explicidy relates transcendent α ι ώ ν to "life" (ζ ωη).!χ> does Plotinus, Enn. Ill 7. Deus 21-22. Deus 29 ο ύ τ ε ά δ η λ ο ν ο ύ τ ε μ έ λ λ ο ν . Deus31. Deus 31-33: τ ο ν γ ά ρ π ρ ε σ β ύ τ ε ρ ο ν — ν ο η τ ό ς δ' έ κ ε ΐ ν ο ς — π ρ ε σ β ε ι ώ ν ά ξ ι ώ σ α ς π α ρ ' έ α υ τ ώ κ α τ α μ έ ν ε ι ν δ ι ε ν ο ή θ η . ο ύ τ ο ς ο ύ ν ό ν ε ώ τ ε ρ ο ς υιός ό α ι σ θ η τ ό ς κ ι ν η θ ε ί ς τ η ν χ ρ ό ν ο υ φ ύ σ ι ν ά ν α λ ά μ ψ α ι και ά ν α σ χ ε ί ν έ π ο ί η σ ε ν . ώ σ τ ε ο ύ δ ε ν π α ρ ά θ ε φ μ έ λ λ ο ν τω και τα τ ώ ν χ ρ ό ν ω ν ύ π η γ μ έ ν ω π έ ρ α τ α · και γ ά ρ ο ύ χ ρ ό ν ο ς ά λ λ α τό ά ρ χ έ τ υ π ο ν τ ο ύ χ ρ ό ν ο υ και π α ρ ά δ ε ι γ μ α , / δ ι ' ω ν ό β ί ο ς έ σ τ ι ν α ύ τ ώ ν / · έ ν α ί ώ ν ι δε ο ύ τ ε π α ρ ε λ ή λ υ θ ε ν

The crucial text segment (/.../) in this passage has been emended by scholars on essendal points. In my translation, however, I have kept to the original text of the manuscripts, which in my view can be defended. The text is intended to say that it is time and the model of time through which the life of the visible and the invisible world respectively comes to pass—so "their life" is "the life of the visible and the invisible world." Then Philo mentions aiön: in doing so he concentrâtes on that what comes closest to God. He connects aiön with "the archetype and paradigm of time" and with life: the life, I believe, of the intelligible world, as in our previous passage. As a matter of fact, also in its emended forms the text can still be understood in the just-mentioned way. Generally accepted, however, 18 is the reading "aiön is his life," taken to mean "aiön is God's life." In the light of Philo's views on aiön as we have seen them, and also in the light of Philo's way of speaking about God elsewhere, I contend that this reading is not acceptable. For Philo aiön is not the life of God but the life of the intelligible world (see at n° 7) which has been created, or generated, by God, namely as his elder son. Philo says that this elder son remains close to God: this is a metaphorical way of saying that the intelligible cosmos resides in the mind or Logos of God. In aiön, Philo declares then, nothing is past nor future but only present. Philo's point here, I believe, is not to develop a notion of, for example, "atemporal eternity," but to stress that "in awn" there is no change. All the more, then, God who is above aiön, i.e. above the life of his elder son, is farthest of all from change. In the last passage Philo draws heavily upon the Greek philosophical concept of the unchangeableness of God, which leads him to a rather bold departure from the biblical text. Aiön as "the life of God," however, is an unwarranted departure from both Philo's own and the biblical usage of aiön. We have observed that Philo does not offer his philosophical allegorizations in the context of biblical texts containing aiön(ios), but only with regard to other biblical phrases. When Philo does quote an aiön or aiönios text which might have led him to philosophical speculations, he interprets it otherwise. From this I conclude that Philo did indeed see the difference between biblical and philosophical aiön. Biblical aiön for Philo covers the time of the created world and so does aiönios, also when it is applied to God. Aiön as part of Philo's own language and terminology has in common with biblical aiön that it regards time (chronos). -Unlike the biblical term, however, Philo's more or less philosophical aiön regards time with a higher view. That is: aiön then is the unchanging aspect of

ούδέν ούτε μέλλει, άλλα μόνον ύφέστηκεν. Ίκανώς ούν διειλεγμένοι περι του μή χρήσθαι μετανοία το δν... /.../ with emendation by Turn'ebe: /αιών ό βίος έστιν αύτών/ with emendation by Tumèbe and Mangey: /αιών ό βίος έστιν αύτοΰ/ 18

See, e.g., Loeb translation (F. H. Colson), and Whittaker, J. 1971. "God Time Being. Two studies in the Transcendental Tradidon in Greek Philosophy." Symb. osl. Fasc. Suppl. xxiii, 39.

chronos, time "seen as a whole," free from division, time as it existed before the sun was created. -Accordingly, at those occasions that Philo brings Platonic views into his exegesis, aiön is assigned to the intelligible cosmos whereas chronos pertains to the physical world. This aiön is also defined by Philo as "life" (bios). - A s a matter of fact, "life" is the first meaning of aiön in Greek. This does not apply to biblical aiön, which, as a matter of fact, is the translation of the Hebrew word 'olam. Biblical aiön for Philo righdy is "all of time" while philosophical aiön, "eternity" if you like, is for him the higher "whole of time." In any case, Philo points out, aiön is part of God's creation.

"THEREFORE THEY ORDAINED TO SAY IT IN ARAMAIC" S O M E REMARKS O N LANGUAGE AND STYLE OF T H E K A D D I S H ANDREAS LEHNARDT Universität Tübingen, Germany The Kaddish, the well-known doxology giving praise to the great Name of the Lord which may only be recited with a minyan, a prayer quorum of ten male adults, is considered to be one of the most ancient components of synagogue worship. It is phrased largely in Aramaic, but some parts of its four (or five) main versions have been formulated in Hebrew, too. Although a lot has already been written on the origins of the Kaddish, the scholarly debate on this central text has been comparatively oblivious of the bi-linguality of the Kaddish and very often it has found more or less traditional explanations rather than explanations, based on a thorough investigation of the sources and the scientific theories concerning the literary and linguistic environment from which this prayer might have emerged. In the following pages I want to raise some questions which should, in my opinion, be discussed anew to get a more precise picture of the literary reception of the Kaddish in classic rabbinic (Talmud and Midrash) and early medieval Jewish literature. I shall therefore present first some of the traditional explanations of the use of Aramaic in the Kaddish mentioned above; then, in a second step, I want to give a summary of my analysis of some of the phrases of the "substance" of the Kaddish. And finally I intend to formulate some suggestions as to why Aramaic and Hebrew might have been used together in a prayer so central for the development of Jewish liturgy. Why the Kaddish, especially in its main forms—the half Kaddish as well as the full-Kaddish and also in its other forms like the Kaddish le-haddata—has been formulated in its bi-lingual form (with its long series of verbs in hitpa'elin its fourth part) and not like nearly all other prayers of the "regular" synagogue service, like the Amidah and the benedictions of the shema', in Hebrew, the holy tongue, has been discussed already by medieval commentators. In their commentaries to the Kaddish we find at least three statements that deserve our attention in this context. The first of this three explanations is found in the late 11 th century Machsor Vitry, the famous commentary by Simha ben Samuel from Vitry as well as in a commentary in the Bavli Berakhot 3a s. v. we-'onin on a famous baraita Berakhot 3a s. v. we-'onin mentioning the central doxological formula of the Kaddish—the yehe sheme rabba. In both texts, which are dependent on each other, we find (with only slight differences) the following explanation of the linguistic peculiarity of the Kaddish:

The world rests only on the Sidra de-Kedusha (i. e. the Kedusha de-sidra) and Ú1cjehe sheme rabba de-batar aggadata (i. e. the Kaddish after the aggadic explanations—cf. bSot 49a), because they were used to say Kaddish after the Derasha. And there (i. e. in Babylonia) were ‫׳‬Arne ha-arayot and they did not understand the "holy tongue." Therefore they ordained to say it in the language of the Targum ( = in Aramaic) so all may understand it, because it was their language. This explanation, of course, reminds us not only of the often cited assumption, that the Kaddish was originally recited after a study session or after a public sermon. It also reminds us of the assumption that from a form-critical point of view1 the Kaddish emerged from a pattern called by Heinemann "Prayers of Beth-Midrash origin." However, even though this explanation fits with some of the formal criteria of this pattern, like the use of the third person in addressing God, it does not explain, why the Kaddish has been introduced in a bi-lingual wording and why the Am ba-aret^ the "people without adequate knowledge" in Babylonia did not understand Hebrew, even though every Derasha must have been based on at least some verses from the Hebrew Bible, the Tora or the Prophets. Because this explanation is contradictory in itself, it should therefore be analyzed very cautiously: in addition to the logical problems one should consider, too, that very similar explanations were given for the reading of the Targum, the reciting of the Kedusha de-sidra (with its Targum of the Kedusha), the reciting of the shema' be-seter (i. e. alone) and the introduction of the Haft ara-reading (of the prophets) as well. This explanation becomes even more problematic when we turn to the next text found in the famous Italian halakhic compendium called Shibbole ha-Leqet, ascribed to the 13th century‫ ׳‬Zedekya Avraham Anav (ha-Rofe) from Rome (perhaps preserved in a more "original" version in the Sefer ha-Tanya, ascribed to his second cousin Yekhiel ben Yekutiel, Italy, 14lh century2). In this work, Sefer ha-Tanya,‫ י‬we find a very different answer to the question why Aramaic has been used in the Kaddish: What was the reason, that they ordained to say it in Aramaic? That's because in their days they enacted a prohibition, not to say shemo ha-gadol mevorakh (i. e. the doxological nucleus of the Kaddish). Therefore they ordained to say it in Aramaic, because the enemies should not understand it—and although the prohibition was abolished, they did not want to revert to saying it in Hebrew since they did not want to forget the miracles and wonders and they wanted to make it public. Although this text provides us with very little information on the reasons which led to the translation of the Kaddish—it emphasizes merely, that once there was "a prohibition" against saying sheme rabba mevarekh instead of shemo ha-gadol mevorakh—this text has already tentatively been interpreted by De Sola

1 2

3

Like Heineman J. 1977. Prayer in the Talmud: Forms and Patterns. Berlin-New York: DeGruyter. See most recently Ta-Shema, I. M., 1995. "The Book Shibolei ha-Leket." (Hebr.) Italia 11, 3 9 51. Ed. Hurwitz, Warsaw 1879, 6c.

Pool 4 as an echo of the "persecutions in the Byzantine Emperor Justinian in the 6 th century." Pool as well as Jacob Mann in his very well-known article on the "Changes in the divine service of the synagogue due to religious persecudons" assumed that since this Emperor forbade all Aggadic preaching (deuterosin) in the famous Novella 146 "Peri Ebraion" (enacted 553 C. E.) "it [was] extended perhaps also to the Kaddish, the doxology of the Aggada." However, as has recendy been pointed out by S. Reif, 5 referring to texts like these, one must "remain suspicious and sceptical when dealing with explanadons of a post-eventum nature" like this, since it is "a quite different matter from explaining the origin of customs in time of persecutions that have in themselves nothing to do with such suffering and are in no way a direct reflection of it." The post-event nature of the explanation cited above becomes evident, when we take a third explanation for the use of Aramaic in the Kaddish into consideration. This explanation is found in the Machsor Vit1yb too. There we read: Therefore our masters ordained to say it in Aramaic, because the Angels should not understand it. Since if the angels understood the Kaddish, when they say it down (on earth), they all would be upset and they would hinder it from ascending to heaven, because there is a lot of grief up there in the moment when they answeryehe sheme rabba mevarekb. Unlike all the other explanations this text is clearly based on a well known talmudic tradition. In Bavli Shabbat 12b and in a parallel in Bavli Sota 33a we find that whoever makes personal requests in Aramaic, the ministering angels pay no attention, since angels do not understand Aramaic. This tradition which might have originally been directed against the use of the Aramaic vernacular for prayers might be interpreted with J. Yahalom 7 "as part of the ongoing batde which the sages of Eretz Israel waged against the informal prayers of simpler Jews, who used their own heartfelt words to speak to the Lord rather than the formally prescribed Hebrew prayers of the scholars." In this medieval explanation the use of Aramaic is interpreted in an affirmative sense: in contrast to the idea which is found in the Bavli to prevent the formulation of prayer in Aramaic, this explanation assumes that because the angels do not understand Aramaic they cannot interrupt the intimate connection of Israel with G o d when saying yehe sheme rabba. Furthermore this explanation apparendy considers—deriving this from the above mentioned baraita in Bavli Berakhot—that the angels are angry, because they can not understand God's grief, when he is reminded of his people being scattered in exile and his temple being destroyed. Since this explanation only "re-uses" nothing but older haggadic traditions, it probably does not refer to any concrete circumstances of the introduction of Aramaic in the Kaddish. Thus, if we are looking for a historical core in all three explanations, cited here, the only conclusion which might be derived from all these texts is, that all

4 5 6 7

D e Sola Pool, D. 1909. The Old Jewish-Aramaic Prayer the Kaddish. Leipzig. Reif, S. 1993. Judaism and Hebrew Prayer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 21. Hurwitz 54 f. Yahalom, J. 1992. "Angels do not understand Aramaic: O n the literary use of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic in late Antiquity." JJS 57, 34.

of them agree that the Kaddish has been translated from the Hebrew to the Aramaic. Asking, therefore, whether these explanations contain any real historical core or not, seems to be legitimate, however only with regard to the fact that it has once been translated and not to the peculiar circumstances described in these later explanations. In trying to answer this question, we may now have to look upon the texts of the Kaddish itself. Only their language and style can reveal some clues which might spread some light on this problem. Before we turn to the Kaddish itself, it should be remembered, that in the scholarly debate on this question, other hints of the Kaddish being a translation have also been discussed: very often, for example, it has been stated that there can be found at least one prayer that might represent something of a Hebrew antecedent of the later Hebrew-Aramaic Kaddish. This prayer—called Al ha-kol is usually cited before the reading of the Tora. And it indeed resembles the Kaddish in many details, since it contains, for example, a remarkable series of verbs formulated in hitpa 'el. However, if one wants to refer to this often mentioned prayer, which is found in shorter and longer forms also in some Siddurim of the different versions, one has to consider that it is first mentioned only in the post-talmudic external tractate Sofrim 14,6.8 Since this tractate might have been composed in Palestine and finally redacted in Babylonia in post-talmudic times, this prayer might also be a significant example of a late post-talmudic Hebrew prayer. In my opinion, therefore, the Al ha-kol cannot serve as a reliable witness for a Hebrew predecessor of the Kaddish. It might be of a later date. Seeing that we have no other direct sources which might shed further light on the linguistic development of the Kaddish, I therefore want to consult, in the second part of this paper, the texts of the Kaddish itself in its varying forms. Does the wording of the Kaddish reflect any clue for being translated? Before we turn to the investigation of the linguistic characteristics of the Kaddish itself we should consider, however, that every linguistic and stylistic analysis of a very fluid textual form like the Kaddish-Prayer is confronted with problems, which are rooted in the history of its textual transmission. One of the problems is that a few words of its text in the standard forms cannot be identifled exacdy as belonging to one or another language—a problem which has already been discussed by medieval and early modern commentators who tried to vocalise the Kaddish. A more difficult problem is that the earliest datable text-forms of the Kaddish from the Geniza, like a well-known version mentioning (among others) the 11th century Palestine Rosh Yeshivat Gaon Yaaqov, Avyatar ha-Kohen, 9 reflect a fluidity in the textual transmission of the Kaddish, which makes all attempts to reconstruct something like an "original Kaddish" or "Ur-Kaddish" in Hebrew or in Aramaic very problematic and seems to me, even though the scholary hypothesis of the existence of an "Ur-Kaddish" still finds its defenders, nearly impossible. Every thorough comparison of the old text-witnesses and recen8 9

Higger 259. See Fleischer, E. 1988. Eret^-Israel Prayer and Prayer Rituals. (Hebr.) Jerusalem: Magness, 245.

sions of the Kaddish—like those found in the Geniza and medieval manuscripts—must lead to the conclusion, that there might never have been formulated something like an "Ur-Text." Another problem is that the literary relation between the different versions of the Kaddish, such as the Kaddish le-baddata (ashkenasic: le-ithaddata) or Kaddish yehe shlama, cannot simply be explained on the assumption that they developed out of expansions or additions to a fictitious short-form, as have very often been suggested. On the contrary, one should realize that, while some recensions of the Kaddish, especially those found in the Geniza, were phrased in Hebrew in parts which are usually worded in Aramaic. Other texts show that even main forms of the Kaddish have been merged into one another. See for example the fragment of a 13th century Palestinian Siddur (T.-S. 124.60) with a remarkable text of a Kaddish-baddata, a version recited after study as well as at funerals, that does not seem to me to be the product of a "copyist error," but rather a typical example for the mixture of phrases. By comparison with similar fragments of this version of the Kaddish it becomes even more obvious that, for example, the reading be-alma di-bara in these recensions of the Kaddish—which actually reminds us of the half-Kaddish—-was not so unusual that we have to excuse this wording as an "copyist error"—although these words are not found in regular and printed recensions of this version of the Kaddish le-haddata. When analyzing the style and language of a text like "the" Kaddish it should therefore always be kept in mind that we are dealing here with a very fluid variety of texts and recensions which first of all must be seen as individual witnesses rather than witnesses of a continuous development of different branches of the text growing out of a supposed "Ur-text." Furthermore it should be taken into consideration that every comment on language and style of a textual fluidum like the Kaddish-prayers is limited to its "substance" i. e. a smallest common denominator of its different recensions, which should not be mixed up with a hypothetical "Ur-text." When analyzing something like the linguistic "substance" of the Kaddish, we will, of course, focus only on some central Aramaic phrases of this "substance." With regard to the Aramaic found in the different recensions of the Kaddish, we have to consider that, since we cannot define an exact text, also the dialect of this substance cannot be determined exacdy. In addition to that we should take into consideration that even if we might identify in some recensions of the Kaddish a stronger influence of Babylonian (East) Aramaic than in others, the possibility that some words or endings, might be interpreted as indicators for a Palestinian origin, is limited by the fact that we always have to consider the influence of individual writing styles and local pronunciation customs. Thus the question, of whether the Kaddish was formulated first in Babylonia or in Palestine, cannot be answered definitely, since the grammatical and phonetic evidence differs from manuscript to manuscript. Certainly, de Sola Pool has already correcdy assumed that the Kaddish "is in grammar and vocabulary colorless enough to have been used harmoniously both in the East (with regard to the Onqelos) and in the West (with regard to the so-called Palestinian Targumim)." However, it should be emphasized in

addition that the Aramaic parts of the Kaddish can be formulated in different dialects. And therefore its wording cannot be related definitely to one or another Aramaic dialect, neither by comparing some of its wording with the wording in different dialects of the Targums nor by construcdng linguistic ties. Turning back to our initial question, if the "substance" of the Kaddish itself might reveal any signs of being a translation of an older (may be Palestinian?) Hebrew *Vorlage', we can only try to answer this question by means of stylistic analysis: Although some words of the substance of the Kaddish cannot even be identified as being Aramaic without referring to their (later provided) vocalisation, some phrases of the substance of the Kaddish do remind us of the somewhat "artificial" style of the Targumim. Since not all phrases of the Kaddish can be analysed word by word in this survey, I shall restrict myself to a number of very striking examples: a) A first example which clearly reminds of the language of the Targumim is the word Memra. This word—found for example in a Geniza-fragment of a 13th cent. Siddur published by Fleischer10 is, of course, a typical nominal substitute for God's name, used very often in the Targumim to obviate anthropomorphism. In some other recensions of the Kaddish, especially in yemenite (or oriental) recensions, we find also the words Ziw and Shekhinta—similar substitutes, well known from the targumic rendering of masoretic Bible texts. b) Another example which might reflect the special relationship of the Kaddish to the language of the Targumim is the phrase ‫"( תתקבל צלותהון‬may the prayer be accepted"; hebr. ‫ ) תקבל תפילתנו‬of the Kaddish titqabal.\ a version recited after the Kedusha de-sidra. c) Also the use of the preposition ‫"( קדם‬before"; hebr.‫ ) מלפני‬in the phrase ‫ קדם אבוהון דבשמיא‬in the Kaddish titqabal might reflect this intimate relationship with the Targumim. The use of this word ‫ קדם‬in the Targumim has been analysed by Klein.11 He suggested that it was used as a pseudo-anti-anthropomorphic preposition. d) Remarkable is also the use of the word ‫ עגלא‬in the phrase be-agala u-be-seman qariv in a temporal sense, since it is usually used only in regard to place and space. In its temporal meaning, however, it is found only in late Targumim such as the Targum Ester sheni or Targum Ijob or Mishle. e) Interesting in regard to similar targumic phrasing is also the use of the word ‫ עלם‬and the phrase ‫ דאמירן בעלמא‬in the Kaddish. In some recensions of the Kaddish, for example, the word ‫עלמא‬, in the sense of "eternity," is transferred into ‫עלמא‬, in the sense of "world." This typical example for the targumic rendering of the Hebrew word ‫ עולם‬can, for example, be found in an ashkenasic recension of a Kaddish in Macbsor Vitry:12 ‫לעילא מכל בדכתא שודתא תושבחתא‬ ‫ונחמתא דאמידן בעלמא הדין ודאיתמדן בעלמא דאתי‬.

10 11

12

Asufot 7, 1993,238-239 Klein. M. L. 1979. "The Preposition ‫'( ק ד ם‬Before"). A Pseudo-Anti-Anthropomorphism in the Targums." JTbS 30, 502-507. Hurwitz 247.

f) Aside from different extensions like these, other peculiarities in the wording of the Kaddish can clearly be interpreted as dependent on the language and style of the Targumim. Besides these direct references to some targumic phrases there are also indirect influences. Ashkenasi (western) recensions of the Kaddish le-haddata, for example, very often read the characteristic ‫ לחדתא‬in the Itpa al, thus reading ‫ לאתחדתא‬. This remarkable change to the passive can be followed up direcdy into the ashkenasic Targum-Manuscript tradition. There, we always find ‫ לאתחדתא‬instead of ‫( לחדתא‬see e. g. Targum Onqelos on Dtn 32,12 and Targum on Micha 7,14 and Targum on Habakkuk 3,2). And even if ‫לחדתא‬ seems to be more original than ‫לאתחדתא‬, as has already been suggested by De Sola Pool, this remarkable change clearly indicates (in another way) an intimate relationship, especially because in most of the Ashkenazic Targum manuscripts we find the same remarkable change from ‫ לחדתא‬to ‫ — לאתחדתא‬b e it under the influence of the Ashkenazic rendering of this version of the Kaddish, or vice versa be the Kaddish's use of the itpa 'al an indicator for the influence of the later Ashkenazic Targum manuscripts. On the other hand, however, it must also be emphasized that even if one adds further examples for the remarkable close relationship of the wording of the Kaddish to the Targumim, it should also be taken into consideration that there are some phrases in the substance of the Kaddish which can be clearly distinguished from the stylistic characteristics of the Targumim: For example, a plea like the central plea ‫"( וימליך מלכותיה‬may he establish his kingdom") is rendered in the Targumim always in a more indirect and more respectful way. Instead of ‫ וימליך מלכותיה‬in the Targumim we only would find the phrase ‫"( ויתגלי מלכותיה‬may he reveal his kingdom")—note for example Targum Ovadya 21 (Kim? hDi) or a Targum to Gen 35,9 in the margins of the Ntfo/zA'-manuscript. No direct pleas for the coming of God's reign can, as far as I know, be found in the Targumim. So, having on the one hand some remarkable points of contact and on the other hand a wording of the Kaddish that is not overall in a, so to speak, targumic garment, we should thus be very cautious drawing any conclusions from the textual evidence. The examples of a close relationship of the wording of the Kaddish with Targum listed above should not be explained as clues for the Kaddish being a translation. Especially those examples taken from the so-called "later additions" of the Kaddish might have been introduced under the regular use of the Targumim in the synagogue. Some of these characteristic phrases might indeed have been introduced to the wording of the Kaddish later, being rather a kind of "targumic-prayer-tosafot"—which means words and explanadons not direcdy based on a Hebrew 'Vorlage'—than a mere translation. If, therefore, the texts of the Kaddish themselves also do not give any hint of being a translation, one has to ask again now what the above cited commentaries on the Kaddish do reflect? Are they really only an etiological explanation? Or do they indeed reflect at least something of the intimate relationship between the stylistic peculiarities of the Kaddish and the targumic rendering of the Bible (even though some of them are not translations in the true sense of the word)?

First, one might say, that explanations like these do rather reflect the problems of explaining the use of Aramaic in the Kaddish in the 11th century (and later) than trying to give an exact explanation of the social and liturgical backgrounds which led to the use of Aramaic in a prayer (even if it might have been originally a prayer used after study). Furthermore, Stefan Reif (in his above mentioned book), for example, draws our attention to the fact that Aramaic was used (in later times) only when it had been associated with a particular prayer so long that it appeared to be an act of revolution to alter it. Taking this into account, we can interpret the fact that we find explanations of the use of the Aramaic language in later commentaries to the Kaddish as a reflection on the special form of composition of the Kaddish in the Siddur. However, with regard to these later explanations, we should therefore take into consideration that they might correcdy reflect the intimate relation between the Aramaic prayer and the language of the Targumim. Because some phrases in some recensions of the Kaddish clearly depend on the use in the Targumim, it can be assumed that these later explanations do indeed have a historical core. They might correcdy reflect the long ongoing process of the emergence of the Kaddish. And thus they might also correcdy reflect that the use of Aramaic in the academy as well as in the synagogue, although it was later (in the Middle Ages) thought to be the vernacular of the Am ha-aret^ was a special (maybe more personal or intimate) way of introducing a prayer; a mode which might have been influenced by the use of Aramaic translations and renderings in the Targumim.

VAYYIQRA RABBA T H R O U G H H I S T O R Y A P R O J E C T T O S T U D Y ITS T E X T U A L T R A N S M I S S I O N CHAIM MILIKOWSKY Bar-Ilan University, Israel & MARGARETE SCHLÜTER J. W. Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany For the past several years, the two authors of this paper have been directing a project, funded by the German-Israel Foundation, dealing with the textual tradition of Vayyiqra Rabba. The goal of this project has been to clarify the textual history of this text and to determine—when the matter is possible—the interrelationships between the extant textual witnesses of these texts. The primary significance of this project is that it will finally allow the user of the critical edition of this text to evaluate the merits of the variant readings ineluded in the apparatus of this edition correctly. 1 There can be no doubt that the production of this critical edition was of considerable significance for the study of midrashic literature—it gave scholars and students of midrash access to the great mass of variant readings found in the various manuscripts of Vayyiqra Rabba. N o one analyzing any passage in these texts would hazard to offer his conclusions without first scrutinizing the critical apparatus. However, there is one deficiency in this edition—and it is this deficiency which generated the need for this project. 2 Though Margulies was meticulous in noting the variants contained in the manuscripts and printed editions, and made a number of comments about the "families" of the manuscripts he used, he did not include a comprehensive analyses of the relationships between the manuscripts in his introduction. 3 Consequendy, any user of this edition can only make note of the mass of variant readings, but has no way of judging the value and importance of any specific reading. In this, Margulies did not deviate from the norm in editing rabbinic texts: for a variety of reasons, no rabbinic text—with one exception—published to date in a critical edition has had a comprehensive analysis of the relationships between the textual witnesses appended to it. T o give an additional example, the critical 1

2

3

The critical edition of Vayyiqra Rabba with introducdon and appendices was originally published by M. Margulies in five volumes which appeared between the years 1953 and 1960; we used the second edidon published in three volumes, Jerusalem 1972. In addiuon to the one deficiency which will be noted here, it is also true, as will be pointed out below, that a great deal of manuscript evidence has come to light since this edidon was produced. This of course should not be considered a deficiency of the edidon. We are simply fortunate in that more material has come to light during the past thirty years. This is not to say that there is no discussion at all of these matters. It is however sorely lacking. His descripdon of the manuscripts, which includes his analysis of their interreladonships, takes up less than two and a half pages in all (Introducdon, xxxvi-xxxviii).

edition of and introduction to Beresbit Rabba, which was published by Theodor and Albeck between the years 1902 and 1940,4 barely contain any analysis of the relationships between the various manuscripts. The introducdon, written by Albeck, contains a relatively complete description of the individual manuscripts, but the textual analysis takes up less than one page.5 The only exception to this generally accepted mode of operadon is the recent work by Robert Kirschner on the Baraita de-Melekhet ha-Mishkan,b which includes in the introducdon an attempt at the textual analysis of the manuscript tradition. In the context of this paper, it would not be appropriate to present a detailed survey of the principles of textual criticism nor of the history of rabbinic textual criticism; nonetheless, a short summary of the basic goals of textual criticism is essential to a proper understanding of this project. It is generally accepted among scholars who concentrate on the study and interpretation of texts originating prior to the diffusion of the printing press that a crucial component of their work is the analysis of the inter-relationships between the extant textual witnesses of these texts. One possible goal of this analysis is the conjectural reconstruction of as early a text as the evidence allows. In addition, the investigation of manuscript affiliations and the development of the tradition as a whole allows us to see what individual redactors, transmitters, and scribes constructed from the antecedent material and to trace the progrèssion of the dynamic text as it unfolds through time. One of the dominant methodologies of textual analysis is that of stemmatics or genealogical analysis. In this type of analysis, the scholar determines the relationships among the various manuscripts by locating the errors common to two or more manuscripts. After determining which manuscripts join together to form "families," i.e. derive from a common exemplar, the editor can use this information in order to conclude—in cases where more than one reading is theoretically feasible—which variants are supported by more than one "independent" textual tradition, and which are therefore of greater value in reconstructing as early a text as possible. At the very least, when the relationships among the manuscripts have been clarified, many readings—which cannot be disallowed on the basis of the internal criteria of cogency—can be firmly and unhesitadngly rejected. But when the editor of a text gives us no firm evaluation of the relationships among the manuscripts, he is, in effect, saying to us, "From my perspective, i.e. that of the editor, any one of these variants is as important as any other." Since Margulies did not include with his edition of Vajyiqra Rabba an analysis of the relationships among the various witnesses to the textual tradition, there is at present no tool with which the student of Vajyiqra Rabba can assess the importance and value of the different variant readings.

4 5 6

It was reprinted in Jerusalem, 1965. Vol. 3, Introducdon, 137. Kirschner, R. ed. and tr. 1992. Baraita de-Melekhet ha-Mishkatr. A Cridcal Edition with Introduction and Translation. Cincinnati.

Project Procedures and Methods It was decided at the onset that we will input into the computer all manuscripts and early print versions of selected chapters of Vayyiqra Rabba. These various textual witnesses will then be compared and collated by means of line-collation software. Subsequent to this comparison, we would analyze the variations among the manuscripts and would hopefully be able to reconstruct the textual history of these texts. For organizational purposes, the project was divided into five stages. The five stages will first be listed and then be described separately. -Itemization of all manuscripts of the two midrashim -Acquisition of photographs -Input of Text -Line-Collation -Textual Analysis

Stage 1: Itemization of Manuscripts As noted above, Margulies included in his edition of Vayyiqra Rabba all the manuscripts of this text which were known in his day. He also made various uses of a significant number of geniza fragments. The first stage of our project was to determine if additional textual witnesses to these texts were available.7 After considerable research and inquiry—using the resources of the Institute for Microfilmed Hebrew Manuscripts, the Hebrew Language Academy, the computerized database program of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, as well as the good offices of several helpful scholars—we discovered three major manuscripts of Vayyiqra Rabba which Margulies did not use and also seventeen fragments which were unknown to him.

Stage 2: Acquisition of Photographs This stage of the project is primarily of an administrative and technical nature. Photographs of the manuscripts and fragments were generally ordered through the photographic services of the National and University Library in Jerusalem, using the microfilm copies available at the Institute for Microfilmed Hebrew Manuscripts, though occasionally bromide prints or similar high quality photographs were ordered direcdy from the various libraries.

Stage 3: Text Input It is worth underscoring that this stage of the project is important in and of its own right, aside from the specific use which we have made of this input text in the context of our research project. It is clearly a general desideratum of rabIt is only proper for us here to acknowledge and thank the various libraries which allowed us access to their manuscripts for the purposes of this research project: Cambridge University Library, Cambridge Westminster College Library, Jerusalem Jewish Nadonal and University Library, London British Library, Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, N e w York Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Oxford Bodleian, Paris Bibliothèque Nationale, Parma Biblioteca Paladna, Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Center for Jewish Studies, St. Petersburg Saltkytov-Shchedrin Nadonal Library, Vatican Library.

binics research that as many documents as possible be entered into computer format. In the context of this project, we have input twenty chapters of Vajyiqra Rabba—out of the sum total of thirty-seven chapters.

Stage 4: Line-Collation In order to facilitate the analysis of the manuscript traditions, all of the versions of each text which were input were collated together in a line-under-line format, in what is often called a partitur text. The presentation of all textual witnesses in such a format allows the reader to immediately grasp basic divisions among the witnesses, and is an invaluable aid—it would not be an exaggeration to call it a quantum leap forward from previous methods—in determining manuscript relationships. The major thrust of the development of the collated text was borne by the program called Collate!, one of the Tseries of programs developed at the University of Tübingen. We also used the Line Collation program developed by the Saul Lieberman Institute for Talmudic Research of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America.

Stage 5: Textual Analysis Instead of discussing in general terms the preliminary conclusions from our analysis of the manuscript tradition of Vajyiqra Rabba, let us now turn to the analysis of two passages in Vajyiqra Rabba in order to demonstrate what it is that we are trying to do. The first passage we will look at (see appendix no. 1) is Vajyiqra Rabba 17,7. Chapter 17 of Vajyiqra Rabba deals with leprosy of the house. Pisqa 7 consists of a well-known midrash which interprets all the facets of the biblical laws concerning leprosy of the house as metaphorical allusions to and intimations of the future defilement and destruction of the Temple. Thus "he whose house it is" of Leviticus 14,35 is none other than the Holy One, blessed be He, and the priest to whom he comes is Jeremiah the prophet who was also a priest. Then the one whose house it is says to the priest, "there seems to be like a plague in the house," and the midrash interprets this as ‫ טינופת עבודה זרה‬or simply ‫עבודה‬ ^Tthe filth of idolatry" or "idolatry." Then comes the half of a line of text which attracts our interest. Margulies, who used as his base text MS London, simply printed ‫"( ויש אומרי׳ זה צלמו של מנשה‬and some say this was the image of Menasheh"). This text appears to be eminendy sensible. As we know from chapter 21 of Second Kings, Menasheh did indeed set up an idol in the Temple. However, if we assume that this text is the more original text of Vajyiqra Rabba, the other versions are entirely inexplicable. Let us look at these other versions: first of all we have two geniza fragments, G4 and G10, both from the 9 th -10 th centuries which read ‫"( ויש אומי זה פיסלו שלמיכה‬and some say this was the idol of Mikhah"), with no mention of Menasheh at all, and then we have four late Spanish manuscripts, Jerusalem 5977, Oxford Opp. add. 3, Oxford Opp. add. 51 and Sasson 920, all four of whom mention both Mikhah and Menasheh. The text printed by Margulies is coherent and logical, but, as we well know, coherency and logic are not necessarily the best criteria by which to judge tex-

tual matters. After all, if we assume that the more original text of Vayyiqra Rabba spoke of Menasheh, who lived not that many years before the destruction of the Temple, and whose acdons can very plausibly be connected to the defilement of the Temple before its destruction, then why should the scribes of these two geniza fragments change the text so that it no longer speaks of the idol of Menasheh but of the idol of Mikhah, who lived long ago during the time of the Judges in the north of Israel? If, however, we assume that the text of the two geniza fragments is more original, then the rationale behind the later metamorphosis of the text is obvious. Some scribe—obviously, a scribe quite sure of himself—saw that the text is referring to idol worship in the period preceding the destruction of the Temple, yet identifies that idol worship with the idol of Mikhah; this scribe convinced himself that this was simply a faulty text, and so he changed the text of Vayyiqra Rabba. His conclusion that this change was necessary was bolstered by the verse immediately cited by Vayyiqra Rabba, Ez 8,5, a verse which in several rabbinic contexts is explicidy related to Menasheh's idol. We therefore have facing us the following situation. If we assume "Menasheh" is the more original reading, like Margulies following MS London (as well as MSS Vatican, Munich, and Paris and also the editio princeps), then this reading makes perfect sense but we have no way to explain the reading of the two very early geniza fragments. If only the other hand, we assume that the "Mikhah" is the more original reading, then we can explain the change from this reading to that of MSS London, Vatican, Munich, and Paris, but we are left with the task of explaining the logic of this reading. So that is what we will do now. Indeed, this passage in Vayyiqra Rabba is one of only two passages in rabbinic literature which bear witness to a fascinating exegetical tradition which was almost completely lost—the idol that Menasheh placed in the Temple was none other than the idol of Mikhah. The other passage in rabbinic literature which presupposes the identification of these two idols is found in Seder Olam, chapter 24, "In the twenty-second year of Menasheh's reign he was exiled, he and the idol of Mikhah with him." We shall not deal here with the crucial question—how did this exegetical tradition develop?—but only note that its existence proves that the reading of the geniza fragments is the more original reading of Vayyiqra Rabba. The original homileticist or exegete who generated the midrash connecting the biblical passage on house leprosy to idol worship in the Temple and its subsequent destruction knew of the connection between the idols of Mikhah and Menasheh, and presumed that his audience would also know of the connection. Therefore it was only necessary to mention Mikhah's idol in the context of the Temple and everyone would know that he was talking about Menasheh's installadon of this very idol into the Temple. He made this identification just about explicit by then citing the verse from Ez 8,5. However, the scribe of the exemplar of Vayyiqra Rabba from which MSS London, Vatican, Munich, and Paris and the editio princeps stem, did not know of this tradition identifying the two idols, and since he was, as we noted above, a

scribe who was quite sure of himself, he simply expunged entirely the mention of the Mikhah and placed Menasheh in his place. Now we must turn finally to the four late Spanish manuscripts, who contain, as we can see, both readings. This is nothing but a conflated text. That is, the scribe of the exemplar from which all four of these manuscripts derive had in front of him two exemplars, one containing the original reading of this passage, that is "the idol of Mikhah," and the other belonging to the same family as MS London and containing the pseudo-corrected text, "the image of Menasheh." This scribe, not having much of a critical turn of mind, saw no reason to reject either of the readings and so he combined them in the text he was producing. He was completely unaware of the exegetical tradition claiming that these two idols were actually one and the same. Our tentative conclusions are therefore as follows: (1) G4 and G10 retain here the correct reading and there is no reason to conclude that they stem from a common exemplar. 8 (2) MSS London, Vatican, Munich, and Paris and the editio princeps all stem from a common exemplar and form what we shall call the Ashkenaz-Italian family. The scribe of the Vorlage of this family did not hesitate to perform radical surgery on the text of his Vorlage when he felt it to be necessary. (3) MSS Jerusalem 5977, Oxford Opp. add. 3, Oxford Opp. add. 51 and Sasson 920 stem from a common exemplar, and form what we call the Spanish family. The Vorlage of this family exemplar seems here to be based upon at least one manuscript from the Ashkenaz-Italian family and at least one manuscript which does not have the secondary readings of the Ashkenaz-Italian family of manuscripts. The second passage we will look at (see appendix no. 2) is Vajyiqra Rabba 18,1. This chapter of Vajyiqra deals with the biblical laws of the %av, a person who has a genital discharge, and the first pisqa of the chapter is an extended homily upon Qohelet chapter 12, verses 1 to 7. These verses of Qohelet contain a warning to all to remember their Creator before it is too late. Our focus is on part of verse 2, which tells us metaphorically what will happen when it is too late, "While the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars are not darkened, nor the clouds have returned after the rain." The crucial phrase for us is ‫( ושבו העבים אחר הגשם‬the clouds have returned after the rain). Vajyiqra Rabba interprets these phrases, as well as the following verses, as referring to aspects of the hubody which become decrepit as old age sets in. Concerning the clouds returning after the rain two interpretations are offered by Rabbi Levi, and we are especially interested in the first. According to the text printed by Margulies, again based upon MS London, with which MSS Vatican, Firkovitch and Paris as well as the editio princeps agree, the first interpretation of Rabbi Levi is, ‫( בא לבכות זלגו עיניו דמעות‬when he wishes to cry, his eyes flow with tears). Before we m m to the reading of the other manuscripts regarding this interpretation, let us look at the second interpretation offered by Rabbi Levi, regarding which there are no especially significant variants among the O f course, they may stem from a common exemplar. Our point is simply that their common reading does not support that conclusion.

manuscripts,‫( בא להטיל מים גללים מקדמי] אתו‬when he wishes to pass water, the excretion of feces takes place first). When we analyze this second interpretation we see immediately its exegetical thrust: the biblical verse refers to rain and clouds, and the interpretation, in a parallel vein, refers to passing water and feces. Rain introduces the image of dripping water and clouds introduce the image of things large and round, that is, passing water and excreting feces. Returning now to the first interpretation, we have then a problem. According to Margulies' text, the interpretation of the verse is severely lacking. The image of dripping water is present in the tears, but what do the clouds denote? With this question as background, let us now look at the evidence of the other manuscripts. G10 has ‫ בוכה ושיכני עיניו יורדים‬which we shall ignore for the moment, while two Spanish manuscripts have ‫בא לבכות ושתי עיניו יורדות דמעות‬ (when he wishes to cry, his two eyes let loose with tears). (The other two Spanish manuscripts agree with the reading of what we are calling the Ashkenaz-Italian family). This reading also contains no interpretation of the "clouds" of the verse, and so does not solve our problem. Let us return now to the reading of G10: ‫בוכה ושיכני עיניו יורדים‬. The problern, of course, is what is this ‫ ?שיכני‬This word, though rare, is attested some half dozen times in Hebrew and Aramaic, and means "eyelid." It is now clear what Rabbi Levi is saying, "When an old man cries he has no control over the muscles of his eyes and his eyelids fall of themselves." According to this text of Vayyiqra Rabba, the symmetry of the verse is complete: the rain is the tears and the clouds are the eyelids. In the light of this analysis, there can be no doubt that the reading of G10 is the more original reading of Vayyiqra Rabba. That scribe of the Vorlage of the Ashkenaz-Italian recension whom we discussed above, who had little hesitation in correcting the exemplar in front of him if he did not understand it, did not know the meaning of the word ‫שיכני‬, so he simply erased the entire phrase which he found in his exemplar, thought to himself, what specifically identifies the crying of an old man, and decided that the image must be the incessant flow of tears. Perhaps this scribe realized that his interpretation did not fit in that well with the verse, but he simply felt he had no choice. Several centuries later came the scribe of the Vorlage of the Spanish recension. As we noted above, he had in front of him at least one manuscript from the Ashkenaz-Italian family and at least one manuscript which does not have the secondary readings of the Ashkenaz-Italian family of manuscripts. He also did not understand the word ‫שיכני‬, so he hypercorrected it into ‫שתי‬, and then conflated the two textual traditions together and generated the new reading ‫ושתי‬ ‫עיניו יורדות דמעות‬. The analysis of this passage has confirmed the previous conclusions which were grounded in the analysis of the first passage. (1) MSS London, Vatican, Munich, and Paris and the editio princeps all stem from a common exemplar and form what we call the Ashkenaz-Italian family. The scribe of the Vorlage of this family did not hesitate to perform radical modification on the text of his Vorläge when he felt it to be necessary. (2) The Vorlage of the Spanish family stems

‫‪from at least two exemplars, one belonging to the Ashkenaz-Italian family and‬‬ ‫‪one not belonging to that family.‬‬ ‫‪We hope to continue our analysis of the textual traditions of Vajyiqra Rabba‬‬ ‫‪and hope that we will be able to further confirm these conclusions as well as‬‬ ‫‪generate more light on the history of the textual transmission of Vajyiqra Rabba.‬‬ ‫‪APPENDIX N.I‬‬ ‫ו י ק ר א ר ב ה יז‪ ,‬ז ) מ ה ד ו ר ת מרגוליות‪ ,‬עמי שפז(‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬

‫ארץ‬ ‫ארץ‬ ‫ארץ‬ ‫ארץ‬ ‫ארץ‬ ‫ארץ‬

‫אחוזתכם‬ ‫אחזתכם‬ ‫אחוזתכם‬ ‫אחוזתכם‬ ‫אחוזתכם‬ ‫אחוזתכם‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬

‫א׳‬ ‫ארץ‬ ‫ארץ‬ ‫ארץ‬ ‫ארץ‬

‫אח׳‬ ‫אחוזתכם‬ ‫אחוזתכם‬ ‫אחוזתכם‬ ‫אחוזתכם‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫שנא׳‬

‫הנני‬ ‫הנני‬ ‫הנני‬ ‫הנני‬ ‫הנני‬ ‫הנני‬

‫מחלל‬ ‫מחלל‬ ‫מחלל‬ ‫מחלל‬ ‫מחלל‬ ‫מחלל‬

‫את‬ ‫את‬ ‫את‬ ‫את‬ ‫את‬ ‫את‬

‫מקדשי‬ ‫מקדשם‬ ‫מקדשי‬ ‫מקדשי‬ ‫מקדשם‬ ‫מקדשי‬

‫גאון‬ ‫גאון‬ ‫גאון‬ ‫גאון‬ ‫גאון‬ ‫גאון‬

‫עזכם‬ ‫עוזם‬ ‫עוזכם‬ ‫עוזכם‬ ‫עוזם‬ ‫עוזכם‬

‫שנא׳‬ ‫שנא׳‬ ‫שנא׳‬ ‫שני‬

‫הנני‬ ‫הנני‬ ‫הנני‬ ‫הנני‬

‫מחלל‬ ‫מחלל‬ ‫מחלל‬ ‫מחלל‬

‫את‬ ‫את‬ ‫את‬ ‫את‬

‫מקדשי‬ ‫מקדש‬ ‫מקדשי‬ ‫מקדש‬

‫גאון‬ ‫גאון‬ ‫גאון‬ ‫גאון‬

‫עוזכם‬ ‫עוזכם‬ ‫עוזכם‬ ‫עוזכם‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫וב>‪ <.. .‬א ש ר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫ובא‬

‫ד״א‬ ‫ד׳ א׳‬ ‫ד״א‬ ‫ד״א‬ ‫ד״א‬ ‫ד״א‬

‫ונתתי‬ ‫ונתתי‬ ‫ונתתי‬ ‫ונתתי‬ ‫ונתתי‬ ‫ונתתי‬

‫נגע‬ ‫עע‬ ‫עע‬ ‫עע‬ ‫נגע‬ ‫עע‬

‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לו‬

‫צ׳‬ ‫צרעת‬ ‫צרעת‬ ‫צרעת‬ ‫צרעת‬ ‫צרעת‬

‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬ ‫הבית‬

‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫>‪<.. .‬‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫וגו׳‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬

‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זו‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬

‫מחמד‬ ‫מחמד‬ ‫מחמד‬ ‫מחמד‬

‫הקב״ה‬ ‫הקב״ה‬

‫יעו‬ ‫יען‬

‫הקב״ה‬ ‫הקב״ה‬ ‫הקב״ה‬ ‫הקב״ה‬ ‫הקב״ה‬ ‫הקב״ה‬ ‫הקב״ה‬ ‫הב״ה‬ ‫הב״ה‬

‫יעו‬ ‫יעו‬ ‫יעו‬ ‫יעו‬ ‫יעו‬ ‫יעו‬ ‫יעו‬ ‫יען‬

‫שנאמר‬ ‫ה׳‬ ‫שנא׳‬ ‫]שנאי[‬

‫ה׳‬

‫יעו‬

‫ביו‬ ‫בית‬ ‫זביתז‬ ‫בית‬ ‫בית‬ ‫בית‬ ‫בית‬ ‫בית‬ ‫ב״ה‬ ‫ב״ה‬ ‫בית‬ ‫ב״ה‬

‫עינם‬ ‫עיניכם‬ ‫עיניכם‬ ‫עינם‬

‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫‪<...‬תי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬ ‫ביתי‬

‫המקדש‬ ‫המקדש‬ ‫>‪< ...‬‬ ‫המקדש‬ ‫המקדש‬ ‫המקדש‬ ‫המקדש‬ ‫המקדש‬

‫המקדש‬

‫וגו׳‬ ‫ומשא‬ ‫וגו׳‬

‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬

‫‪319‬‬

‫‪T H R O U G H HISTORY‬‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬ ‫הוא‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫דברי ירמיהו בן חלקי‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫לי‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לו‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לי‬ ‫לי‬

‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬ ‫חרב‬

‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬ ‫בבית‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫וי>‪< ..‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫ויש‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪ JER1‬וי״א‬ ‫וי״א‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪ OX51‬ד״א‬ ‫וי״א‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫ואתם‬ ‫וג׳‬ ‫ואתם‬ ‫ואתם‬

‫רצים‬

‫איש‬

‫לביתו‬

‫רצים‬ ‫רצים‬

‫איש‬ ‫איש‬

‫לביתו‬ ‫לביתו‬

‫וגוי‬ ‫ואתם‬ ‫ואתם‬ ‫ואתם‬ ‫ואתם‬

‫רצים‬ ‫רצים‬ ‫רצים‬ ‫רצים‬

‫איש‬ ‫איש‬ ‫איש‬ ‫איש‬

‫לביתו‬ ‫לביתו‬ ‫לביתו‬ ‫לביתו‬

‫מן‬ ‫נ׳ו‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬ ‫מן‬

‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכה>‪< . .‬‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהנים‬ ‫הכהני׳‬

‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זו‬ ‫זו‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬

‫אומי‬ ‫אומי‬

‫טנופת‬ ‫טניפת‬ ‫טינופת‬ ‫טנופת‬ ‫מגיפת‬ ‫טינופת‬

‫טנופת‬ ‫טינופת‬ ‫טינופת‬ ‫טנופת‬

‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬

‫עבו׳‬ ‫עבודה‬ ‫עבודה‬ ‫עבודה‬ ‫ע״ז‬ ‫ע״ז‬ ‫עבדה‬ ‫עבדה‬ ‫ע״ז‬ ‫ע״ז‬ ‫ע" ז‬ ‫עיין‬

‫פסלו‬ ‫פיסלו‬ ‫פסלו‬ ‫פסלו‬ ‫פסלו‬ ‫פסלו‬

‫של‬ ‫של‬ ‫של‬ ‫של‬

‫‪VAYYIQRARABBA‬‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬ ‫והגיד‬

‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬ ‫לכהן‬

‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬ ‫אשר‬

‫בענתות‬ ‫בענתות‬ ‫ב>‪...‬‬ ‫בענתות‬ ‫בענתות‬ ‫בענתות‬ ‫בענתות‬ ‫בענת׳‬ ‫בענתות‬ ‫בענתות‬ ‫בענתות‬ ‫בענתות‬

‫לאמר‬

‫וכו׳‬

‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיה שנאי‬ ‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיה‬ ‫ירמיהו‬ ‫ירמיהו‬

‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫כעע‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫‪<..‬‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫כנגע‬ ‫כנגע‬

‫נר׳‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬ ‫נראה‬

‫זרה‬ ‫זרה‬ ‫זרה‬ ‫זרה‬

‫זרה‬ ‫זרה‬

‫שהיא‬ ‫שהיא‬ ‫שהיה‬ ‫שהיא‬ ‫שהיא‬ ‫שהיה‬

‫שלמיכה‬ ‫שלמיכה‬ ‫מיכה‬ ‫מיכה‬ ‫מיכה‬ ‫מיכה‬

‫שנא׳‬ ‫שנאמי‬ ‫שנא׳‬ ‫שני‬

‫מטמא‬ ‫מטמא‬ ‫מטמא‬ ‫מטמא]ה[‬ ‫מטמאה‬ ‫מטמא‬

‫ויאמר‬ ‫ויאמר‬ ‫ויאמר‬ ‫ויאמר‬

‫כנדה‬

‫בנגעים‬ ‫כנגעים‬ ‫זב‪/‬כזנגעי׳‬ ‫בנגעים‬ ‫בנגעים‬ ‫כנגעי׳‬

‫אלי‬ ‫אלי‬ ‫אלי‬ ‫אלי‬

‫בן‬ ‫בן‬ ‫‪Ρ‬‬ ‫‪Ρ‬‬

‫במשא‬ ‫במשא‬ ‫במשא‬ ‫במשא‬

‫אדם‬ ‫אדם‬

‫וגו׳‬ ‫וגו׳‬ ‫וגו׳‬ ‫וגו׳‬

‫‪320‬‬

‫‪C H A I M MILIKOWSKY & MARGARETE SCHLÜTER‬‬

‫ויש‬ ‫ויש‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫>‪<...‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫אומי‬ ‫‪ MUN‬ויש‬ ‫אומי‬ ‫ויש‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫אומרי׳‬ ‫ויש‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪ JER1‬וי״א‬ ‫וי״א‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪ OX51‬וי״א‬ ‫וי״א‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬ ‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬ ‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G4‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫או׳‬ ‫אומי‬

‫זה‬

‫צלמו‬ ‫צלמן‬

‫של‬ ‫של‬

‫מנשה‬ ‫מנשה‬

‫הה״ד‬ ‫הדה‬

‫היא‬

‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬

‫צלמו‬ ‫צלמו‬ ‫צלמו‬

‫של‬ ‫של‬ ‫של‬

‫מנשה‬ ‫מנשה‬ ‫מנשה‬

‫הה״ד‬ ‫הה״ד‬ ‫הדא‬ ‫ה׳‬

‫הוא‬ ‫הי‬

‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬ ‫זה‬

‫צלמו‬ ‫צלמו‬ ‫צלמו‬ ‫צלמו‬

‫של‬ ‫של‬ ‫של‬ ‫של‬

‫מנשה‬ ‫מנשה‬ ‫מנשה‬ ‫מנשה‬

‫הה״ד‬ ‫הה״ד‬ ‫שני‬ ‫הה״ד‬

‫ויאמר‬

‫והנה‬ ‫והנה‬ ‫והנה‬ ‫והנה‬ ‫והנה‬ ‫והנה‬ ‫והנה‬

‫מצפון‬ ‫מצפון‬ ‫מצפון‬ ‫צפון‬ ‫מצפון‬ ‫מצפון‬ ‫מצפון‬

‫והוא‬ ‫והנה‬ ‫והנה‬ ‫והנה‬

‫מצפון‬ ‫מצפון‬ ‫מצפון‬ ‫מצפון‬

‫אלי‬

‫בן א ד ם שא נא עיניך דרך צפונה ואשא עיני וגו׳‬

‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬

‫המזבח‬ ‫המזבח‬ ‫המזרח‬ ‫המזבח‬ ‫המזבח‬ ‫המזבח‬ ‫גו׳‬

‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬ ‫לשער‬

‫המזבח‬ ‫המזרח‬ ‫המזרח‬ ‫המזבח‬

‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬

‫הקנאה‬ ‫הקנאה‬ ‫הקנאה‬ ‫הקנאה‬ ‫הקנאה‬ ‫הקנאה‬

‫בביאה‬ ‫הזה‬ ‫בביאה‬ ‫הזה‬ ‫המ>‪<.. ..‬‬ ‫בביאה‬ ‫הזה‬ ‫בביאה‬ ‫הזה‬ ‫בביאה‬ ‫הזה‬

‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬ ‫סמל‬

‫הקנאה‬ ‫הקנאה‬ ‫הקנאה‬ ‫‪] 0‬הקנאה[‬ ‫הקנאה‬

‫הזה‬ ‫הזה‬ ‫הזה‬ ‫הזה‬ ‫הזה‬

‫בביאה‬ ‫בביאה‬ ‫בביאה‬ ‫בביאה‬ ‫בביאה‬

‫מה‬

‫הוא‬

‫בביאה‬

‫מהו‬ ‫מה‬ ‫מהוא‬

‫הוא‬

‫בביאה‬ ‫בביאה‬ ‫בביאה‬

‫‪APPENDIX Ν. Ζ‬‬ ‫ויקרא רבה יח‪ ,‬א ) מ ה ד ו ר ת מרגוליות‪ ,‬עמי שצא(‬ ‫‪ LON‬ושבו‬ ‫ושבו‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫ושבו‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪ MUN‬ושבו‬ ‫ושבו‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫ושבו‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫ו>״ <‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪ JER1‬ושבו‬ ‫ושבו‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪ OX51‬ו)באו()שבו[‬ ‫ושבו‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬ ‫העבים‬

‫אחר‬ ‫אחר‬ ‫אח׳‬ ‫אחר‬ ‫אחר‬ ‫אחר‬ ‫אחר‬ ‫אחר‬ ‫אחר‬ ‫אחר‬ ‫אחר‬

‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬ ‫הגשם‬

‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר׳‬ ‫ר״ל‬

‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬ ‫לוי‬

‫אמי‬ ‫אמר‬ ‫א׳‬ ‫אמי‬ ‫אמי‬ ‫אמי‬ ‫אומי‬ ‫אמי‬ ‫אמי‬ ‫אמי‬

‫בה‬ ‫בה‬ ‫בה‬

‫בה‬ ‫בה‬ ‫בה‬ ‫בה‬

‫תרתי‬ ‫תרתי‬ ‫תרתי‬ ‫תרתי‬ ‫תרתי‬ ‫תרתי‬

‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬

‫ת ר ת י אפי׳‬ ‫ת ר ת י אפי׳‬ ‫תרתי‬ ‫תרתי‬

‫חד‬ ‫חד‬ ‫חד‬ ‫חד‬

‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬ ‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬ ‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬ ‫‪LON‬‬ ‫‪VAT‬‬ ‫‪FIR‬‬ ‫‪MUN‬‬ ‫‪PAR‬‬ ‫‪ED‬‬ ‫‪G10‬‬ ‫‪JER1‬‬ ‫‪OX3‬‬ ‫‪OX51‬‬ ‫‪SAS‬‬

‫לחבריא‬ ‫לחברייא‬ ‫לחבריא‬ ‫ולחבריא‬ ‫לחברייא‬ ‫לחבריא‬

‫וחדא‬ ‫וחדא‬ ‫וחדיא‬

‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבוריא‬

‫וחדא‬ ‫וחדא‬

‫לבודרא‬ ‫לבוריא‬

‫לחברייא‬ ‫לחברייא‬ ‫לחבריא‬ ‫לחבריא‬

‫וחד‬ ‫וחד‬ ‫וחד‬ ‫וחד‬

‫לבורייא‬ ‫לבורייה‬ ‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבורייא‬

‫הרה דרש הדה מ י ל ת ה תרתין אפין דרש לה‬

‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬

‫לבכות‬ ‫לבכות‬ ‫לבכות‬

‫זלגו‬ ‫זלגו‬ ‫זלגו‬

‫בא‬ ‫בא‬

‫לבכות‬ ‫לכבות‬ ‫בוכה‬ ‫לבכות‬ ‫לבכות‬ ‫לב)ראת(]כות[‬ ‫לכסות‬

‫זלגו‬ ‫זלגו‬ ‫ושיכני‬ ‫ושתי‬ ‫ושתי‬ ‫וזלגו‬ ‫זלגו‬

‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫חדיא‬

‫לחבריא‬ ‫לחבריא‬ ‫לחבריא‬

‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫על‬ ‫חד‬ ‫חד‬ ‫]חד‬ ‫חד‬

‫לחבריא‬ ‫לחבריא‬ ‫חברייה‬ ‫> ‪ < . .‬דרש לה על חברייה‬ ‫בא‬ ‫לחברייא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫לחברייא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫לחבריא[‬ ‫בא‬ ‫לחבריא‬

‫עיניו‬ ‫עיניו‬ ‫עיניו‬

‫דמעות‬ ‫דמעות‬ ‫דמעות‬

‫עיניו‬ ‫עיניו‬ ‫עיניו‬ ‫עיניו‬ ‫עיניו‬ ‫ע>‪<...‬‬ ‫עיניו‬

‫דמעות‬ ‫דמעות‬

‫מים‬ ‫מים‬ ‫מים‬ ‫מים‬ ‫מים‬ ‫מים‬ ‫מים‬ ‫מים‬ ‫מים‬ ‫מים‬

‫יורדים‬ ‫יורדו׳‬ ‫יורדות‬

‫גללים‬ ‫הגללים‬ ‫הגללים‬ ‫הגללים‬ ‫הגללים‬ ‫הגלליו‬ ‫הגללים‬ ‫גלליו‬ ‫גלליו‬ ‫הגללים‬ ‫הגללים‬

‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫וחדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫על‬ ‫וחד‬ ‫וחד‬ ‫חדא‬ ‫וחד‬

‫דרש לה‬ ‫דמעות‬ ‫דמעות‬ ‫דמעו>‪<...‬‬ ‫דמעות‬ ‫מקדמין‬ ‫מקדמין‬ ‫מקדמיו‬ ‫מקדמיו‬ ‫מקדמיו‬ ‫מקדמיו‬ ‫קודמים‬ ‫מקדימין‬ ‫מקדימין‬ ‫מקדימץ‬ ‫מקדימין‬

‫אתו‬ ‫אתו‬ ‫אותו‬ ‫אתו‬ ‫אותו‬ ‫אותו‬ ‫אותו‬ ‫אותו‬ ‫אותו‬ ‫אותו‬

‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבוריא‬ ‫בוריי‬ ‫לבורייא‬ ‫לבורייא‬ ‫לבוריא‬ ‫לבוריא‬

‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬ ‫בא‬

‫להטיל‬ ‫להטיל‬ ‫להטיל‬ ‫להטיל‬ ‫להטיל‬ ‫להטיל‬ ‫>‪<...‬‬

‫להטיל‬ ‫להטיל‬ ‫ל>‪<...‬ל‬ ‫להטיל‬

T w o CARDINAL LAWS IN PRETANNAITIC T I M E S ? SOME OBSERVATIONS ABOUT A T A N N A I T I C

TRADITION

A N D ITS F O U N D A T I O N I N B I B L I C A L T E X T S

MATTHIAS MILLARD Bielefeld, Germany

The three cardinal laws in their context In several tannaitic and amoraic texts and traditions we can find the combination of three sins and the corresponding prohibitions in very different contexts: the prohibitions of spilling blood, of sexual offence, and of idolatry or—in other traditions—of cursing the name of God. Let us first examine different cases of the occurrence of the three cardinal laws. First: The most important case is the function of these three laws as a special kind of capital law: In view of the fact that all laws are given as laws for life, literally: as an instrument to live by (‫)וחי בהם‬,' normally there is no sense of martyrdom. You find the rabbinic part illustrating this decision in bSan 74a not as a baraita, but relating to tannaitic times (more exactly: the first half of the second century common era, about 120/140 c.e.) as well. parts (named by function) authorisation Situation of the decision general rule

exception

1

2

bSan 74a English (trans. Epstein2) R. Johanan said in the name of R. Simeon b. Jehozadaq By a majority vote, it was resolved in the upper chambers of the house of Nithza in Lydda that in every [other] law of the Torah, if a man is commanded: "Transgress and suffer not death" he may transgress and not suffer death, Excepting idolatry, incest, [which includes adultery] and murder.

Hebrew ‫אייר יוחנן משום‬ ‫ריש בן יהוצדק‬ ‫נימנו ונמרו‬ ‫בעלית בית נתזה ב ל ו ד‬ ‫כ ל עבירות שבתורה‬ ‫אם אומרץ ל א ד ם‬ ‫עבור ואל תהרג‬ ‫יעבור ואל יהרג‬ ‫חוץ מעבודת כוכבים‬ ‫ונילוי עריות‬ ‫ושפיכות דמים‬

Müller 1994: 52, takes this from Lev 18,5, cited in bjoma 85b (there within a discussion of ‫פיקח‬ ‫ נפש‬concerning a case of sabbadcal laws). Epstein, I., Trans., 1935 (repr.). The Babylonian Talmud. Seder Nesjkin in four volumes. Bd. Ill, London.

The structure of this text is clear: first the usual authorisation by rabbinical names, expanded by the concrete situation of the decision, and the decision itself, divided into a general case and the only accepted exception to this rule. One may ask whether the concrete decision only related to the exception, or if the general rule and the exception were decided together. As far as I see both alternatives are wrong. Within the troubles of the Hadrianic persecution in about 140 ce rabbies of the Aqiba-School took that decision as a general rule with three accepted exceptions. You see this from the following context because there are single objections within the school of Rabbi Jischmael. But as there are only single objections, you see that the general rule is more widely accepted than it would be as a single decision. Therefore the rule itself must be older than this decision, but as a general rule it is only established with the exceptions.3 The second case of the occurrence of the cardinal laws seems to be similar: As a special case of this function of the three laws, we can find them as the nucleus of the noachidic laws. In the present halacha these three laws are respected as capital laws for noachides, so bSan 57a. Also in this tradition these laws are regarded as exceptions to the general rule ‫וחי בהם‬: The prohibitions are so important that their offence also for Noachides is punished by the death penalty. But these three laws are also a firm part of minor traditions rather than the full arrangement of seven laws which occur as a baraita in bSan 56a.b and as a tannaitic tradition in tAZ 8 as well. You find the three cardinal laws with four other laws: a single positive commandment to establish courts connected with the prohibitions of robbery, desecration of the name of God, and—described as the special noachidic law—the prohibition of eating a part of a living beast. In younger amoraic traditions like GenR 34,8 (in the commentary to Gen 8:19), you find a variation that the list of all seven begins with the three cardinal laws. So the noachidic laws are considered in amoraic times as an extension of the unit of the three.4 But also smaller and therefore probably older units, as bjoma 67a, begin with the prominent three, and propose five of these seven laws as a kind of natural law; but that is not a genuine aspect of the tradition of the noachidic laws. Also the opinion that a unit of five is a historical link between the unit of three laws and the seven noachidic commandments is not well founded: the only parallel of the unit of five laws in bjoma 67b, Sifra Acbare 13 (page 86a, the commentary to Lev 18:4) does not show the three cardinal laws at the beginning, and Sifra must be regarded as older than the amoraic part bjoma 67b. However, the late amoraic opinion seeing the noachidic laws as an expansion of the cardinal laws with a special thematic aspect is not only a later interpretation but may also be correct in a historical view.5 The connection between the three cardinal laws and the noachidic laws is only one additional aspect of the application of these prohibitions. Other aspects are that everything is allowed to cure someone except committing these

The halacha is widely spread, here are some more parts: tSchab 15,17; jSan 3,6, 21b; \Schcb 4,2, 35a; bjoma 82a. Cf. The pre-rabbinic part Oracle of Sibytl 3,762-766. As a later example compare PesR 13 (55a). Compare Did 3,1-6: There you find five commandments with the three at the top.

three offences (bPes 25 a.b). In this function ‫( וחי ב ה ם‬Lev 18:5) is translated very literally: Observing the commandments of God is thought of as a remedy: Tora as medicine has to serve life and not to cause someone's death. So the definition of the tora describes the limits of their commandments. These three offences are also regarded as the reason for the absence of the schechina (Sifre Ki Tetse §254, the commentary to Dtn 23:10). These offences can also be thought of as the reason for the impurity of the land (Mek. Bahodesh 9, the commentary to Ex 20:21) and are therefore also named "great impurities" (bShebu 7b). These offences are regarded as the reason for the lost first JewishRoman war and the destruction of the temple. You see: The prominence of the three laws make them change in many different contexts. So these three are simply called: "great commandments."

Two theses Now I would like to discuss two theses: The first about one biblical foundation of the cardinal laws, the second about a special historical order within the three cardinal laws.

The three cardinal laws are founded in Genesis texts The tradition of the cardinal laws must be seen in the context of a tradition beginning with Genesis texts and traditions. Because the cardinal laws are part of the noachidic laws, they belong, in rabbinic thought, to Genesis texts. To prove this I offer you not a standard part e.g. from Genesis Rabba or much earlier from the Book of Jubilees, but an alternative part cited in tSotz 6,9: Ez 33:23-29. The text reports God's speaking and is opened like the following speech by the address of ‫ ב ך א ד ם‬. God draws a comparison that can be heard by the inhabitants of Israel. In this comparison the inhabitants try to understand the present bad situation by a reference back to the story of the ancestor Abraham. So in a biblical context the text seems to be a Genesis interpretation. The text explains the surprising fact that Abraham could possess the land as a single man observing six prohibitions: -eatingfiesh over blood —lifting up the eyes to idols —shedding of blood -depending on swords —committing abomination -defiling one's neighbour's wife. The six prohibitions are presented in two lines of three prohibitions in each line. The first row is written in PK-forms, the last one in AK-forms. So the described offences have a different time structure: The last three offences took place in the past, whereas the first three seem to describe problems more in the present. But all six prohibitions are connected with one another and therefore the structure of time is not emphasized: the connection of the last two offences is evident because ‫ תועבה‬especially means cases of sexual offence, but there are

also other connections, e.g. the motif connection with "blood" or the biblical connection of idolatry and sexual offence. If you compare the prohibitions that are respected as legal conditions to possess the land with the three cardinal laws, only the prohibition of eating flesh with blood is not part of the later combination of three laws. The connection of the cardinal laws and the prohibitions protecting the land against impurity in Ez 33 is drawn within tSota 6,9, but this part connects Ez 33 with the noachidic laws. tSota 6,9 (an explanation of R.Shimon ben Yochay against R. Aqiba)

1 2 3 4

Ez 33:25 f. ‫על־הדם תאכלו‬ ‫ועינכם תשאו אל־נלוליכם‬ ‫ודם תשפכו‬ ‫עמדתם על־חרבכם‬

5 6

‫עשיתן תוע בה‬ ‫ואיש את־ אשת רעהו ט מ א ת ם‬

legal ‫אבר מן החי‬ ‫ע ב ו ד ת כוכבים‬ ‫שפיכות רמים‬ ‫עינוי דין ונזל‬

term a part of a living beast idolatry shedding of blood aggravation of judgment6 and robbery ‫ משכב זכור‬homosexual intercourse ‫ גילוי ערוה‬incest (including adultery)

Comparing this exegesis of Ez 33:25 f. with the noachidic laws you find some differences: The term of ‫ נילוי ערוה‬for the rabbis normally contains ‫משכב‬ ‫זכור‬, so that the case of ‫ נילוי ערוה‬is present in no. 5 and 6. The opposite case you fmd in no. 4: Two commandments are attached with one biblical sentence. The only noachidic commandment you do not find in this explanation is the prohibition of desecration of the divine name, but this commandment is often connected with the prohibition of idolatry (ySan 7,11, 25b). This explanation can be found in tSota 6,9 within a discussion of different explanations of R.Aqiba. R.Aqiba thinks that Abraham has only to observe one commandment: to serve the only God, and he takes Ez 33:25 f. as a prooftext as well.7 What I take from the biblical proof Ez 33 is that the biblical part is connected with a tradition of Abraham, and therefore we have every reason to examine the Genesis text itself. The absence of one element is not surprising because there are several other prohibitions in the context of the cardinal laws which are regarded in some special circumstances as equal to the cardinal laws. E.g. the bad tongue (‫ )לטון הרע‬is compared in several aggadot to the cardinal laws (hAr 15b, parallels in GenR 70,4 and jPea 1,1/42, 15d), and the list of prohibitions protecting from impurity goes up to 11 single motifs (NumR 7,5; Tan Metsora 61b, TanB Metsora 10, 24b.25a), with the three cardinal laws almost at the top. So the first biblical part is not a clear proof of the tradition of the three cardinal laws, but of an tradition of very important laws in which the three cardinal laws play a prominent role, but neither an exclusive nor a sufficient one: all of them represent the whole 6

7

The meaning of ‫ עיניי‬is not certain. Dalman e.g. offers three different words ‫ עינוי‬with a variadon of "Quälerei, Kasteiung," "eine Art Totenklage" and "Verschärfung des Urteils." In the shorter, but later variation Sifre Din Wa-etchannan §31, Abraham has to observe only one commandment.

of—in amoraic tradition—613 commandments, the whole tora. So the explanadon of R.Aqiba has its right, and the explanation of R.Shimon ben Yohay as well. By the way: it is not unusual to find a combination of six passages in previous forms of the traditions of the cardinal laws. Let me give you two examples: the first literary example of the tradition of the three cardinal laws in the oracles of Sibyii, book 3, 762-766, present the tradition in three pairs of commandments; and also the only proof of the tradition of the cardinal laws in the oldest legal rabbinic text, the Mishna, present the tradition by differentiating between three specific cases which allow manslaughter as an emergency aid and three others which do not allow preventive manslaughter (mSan 8,7). So mSan 8,7 shows that there might be a historical order within the three cardinal sins.

A Historical Order within the three cardinal laws? I would like to discuss a thesis that the combination of the prohibitions of spilling blood and of sexual offence is earlier than the account of all three. I have two kinds of arguments: The first one within the rabbinic tradition, the second one within Genesis as the fundamental text of the tradition. First: The three prohibitions are quite different. The prohibition of spilling blood is a simple term with a simple meaning. The prohibition of sexual offence, ‫נילוי עריות‬, is a collective term with quite different meanings. The semande field of this term extends from forbidden sexual intercourse between members of the same family up to forbidden sexual intercourse with beasts. You see that a field of meaning is constructed with the extension of their proscription, and this is related to biblical times (Lev 18; 20; Deut 27). The last prohibition is uniform in meaning, but different in terms: you can find ‫ ע ב ו ד ת כוכבים‬and ‫ ע ב ו ד ה זרה‬as well. This is a different case from our second one, the summing up of a field of prohibitions under a single term. If you have a change in terms, the prohibition itself seems to be clearer than its coherence within the three. There is one more piece of external evidence: the discussion by R. Jishmael relates to the prohibition of the observation of other gods as a capital law (bSan 74a). Second: The fact that an examination of Abraham is part of the exilic Abraham-tradition in Ez 33 is quite surprising if you look at Genesis exegesis. Only a few approaches try to interpret the texts of Genesis itself in such a way. Let me give you an example that this is a possible way to explain biblical texts: Gen 20, the second variation of the motif of the surrender of the ancestress, is almost certainly a discussion between Abraham and the foreign ruler Abimelech and especially between God and Abimelech. The subject of these discussions is the guilt that is caused by the surrender of Sara. In the beginning of the story, Abraham expected that there was no fear of God in the land of the foreigners, by in the end Abimelech is without guilt at all. Abraham has been blamed, and there is an unexpected fundamental consensus between Abraham's family and the foreigners. This story claims a narrative finding of a basic religious and ethical consensus, and this concerns cardinal and noachidic laws.

You can find several stories with an ethical implication in Genesis, and one type of these stories tells cases of forbidden sexual intercourse. There is only one other theme which is often connected with Genesis texts: cases of actual murder (Kain and Abel) as well as cases of attempted murder in the conflicts between brothers of the following generations in Genesis. You may argue that although there are many narrative approaches connecting e.g. the several cases of conflicts between siblings in Genesis,8 but this approach is not evident as a part of an accepted historical approach to Genesis. I am not interested discussing the different diachronic approaches to Genesis here; however, it is true that this interpretation takes stories from different sources. Within a synchronic approach trying to describe the Genesis text in his final form of the biblical text, there is an evident sign which supports our interpretation of the final form: I think of Gen 49, the blessing by the dying Jacob of his twelve sons. In the final form of this text his sons' characters are examined. The first three sons do not find grace in the eyes of their father, because Ruben had sexual intercourse with one of his father's wives (Gen 35:22) and Simeon and Levi are accused as brutal murderers (Gen 34). Finally Juda was made his brother's ruler, but also the two ethical cardinal laws are recognized as the ethical standard looking at the ancestors and their stories in Genesis. The significance of Gen 49 cannot be overestimated, because this text is not only the summary of the last chapters of Genesis but the correlation to Deut 33 which closes the whole of the Pentateuch. So the two ethical laws are established in a very prominent text. One question is open now: Is there any signal how to get from a standard of two cardinal laws to three? Also to this question I can offer an answer interpreting Genesis texts. We have already seen that the intra-biblical interpretation of a Genesis tradition is an important missing link between the biblical story itself and the early Jewish tradition of cardinal laws. You can first find the missing third cardinal law in intra-biblical exegesis of Genesis, but also in old extrabiblical commentaries. One we have seen already: Ez 33, where idolatry is a prohibition in Abraham's times. But the more important intra-biblical exegesis is Jos 24 with its tradition that Abraham's exodus is a separation from the worshippers of other gods; the first postbiblical exegesis, the book of Jubilees, tells the story of Abraham destroying his father's foreign gods. Within Genesis you find this motif only as a part of the Jacob story: Jacob promises that his family will stop the adoration of other gods (Gen 35:1—4), and Jos 24 transfers the abolishment of the false veneration from the Jacob period back to the Abraham

Cf. Sykes, D. Κ. 1985. Patterns in Genesis. Diss. phil. New York (Yeshiva University); Turner, L. A. 1990. Announcements of Plot in Genesis. JSOT.S 96. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press; Steinmetz, D. 1991. From Father to Son. Kinship, Conflict, and Continuity in Genesis, Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville. Kentucky: Westminster/John Knox Press; Syrén, R. 1993. The Forsaken First-Born. A Study of a Recurrent Motif in the Patriarchal Narratives. JSOT 133. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press; Greenspahn, F. E. 1994. When Brothers Dwell Together. The Preeminence of Younger Siblings in the Hebrew Bible. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, and others.

story. Also the book of Jubilees makes this into the starting point of the whole Abraham story, filling the gap with more details.9

Summary The tradition of the cardinal laws shows that they are genuine capital laws, and this marks the special significance of these laws within the Jewish tradition. tSota 6 with the reference to Ez 33 leads us to Genesis texts as the basis of this tradition. My proposition is that a reading of Genesis texts as an order of subjects leads to two of the three cardinal laws. The third cardinal law is part of the intrabiblical re-reading of Genesis texts in Ez 33 and Josh 24 and the postbiblical exegesis from their beginning in the book of Jubilees as well. The later rabbinic exegesis includes the tradition of the cardinal laws in their interpretation of several Genesis texts: e.g. in Genesis Rabba these three laws are part of Jacob's oath, and Esau is blamed for the offence of all three. You can find single exegeses like these in many forms and contexts, and most of them seem to be rather unconvincing, but from our point of view these exegeses take their evidence from a context of intra-biblical Genesis interpretation. So also these aggadic midrashim are very literal exegesis, although in another sense: they are influenced by the development of the halacha, but their traditional reading of the Bible beginning in the Bible itself has also influenced the development of the halacha.

Some important literature: Müller, Κ. 1994. Tora für die Völker. Die noachidischen Gebote und Ansätze

ihrer Rezeption im

Christentum. Berlin: Institut Kirche und Judentum (Studien zu Kirche und Israel 15) Novak, D. 1983. The Image of the non-Jew in Judaism. Lewiston, New York: The Edwin Mellen Press (Toronto Studies in Theology 14).

9

/»/‫׳‬12,12-14.

L A M U J E R E N QOHELET

RABBAH

CARMEN MOTOS Universidad Complutcnse, Madrid, Spain Tenemos ante nosotros un verdadero collage literario, y es que Qohelet Kabbah présenta su forma actual gracias a muldtud de materiales de disdntas épocas y procedencias que se han amalgamado con el fin de comentar y explicar el texto biblico de Qohelet. En este trabajo no he pretendido atender a la cronologia para concluir, por ejemplo, con que la mujer judia del s. III es más ο menos valorada que la del s. V. Me planteo, en cambio, un reto disunto: situarme, como espectadora, ante el collage terminado, Qohelet Kabbah, y ver, en el resultado final de la obra, el tratamiento que se le da a la mujer judia. Acepto, con ello, que los disuntos materiales primigenios hayan sido manipulados por el redactor ο redactores que concluyeran la obra entre los s. VIIVIII: y es eso lo que me interesa, ver como han pasado por su tamiz, condicionado por la época y las circunstancias, todos estos materiales, y el resultado final. En una aproximaciôn global, no es fâcil captar la realidad que se esconde en una obra del dpo que sea. Por eso, el método de trabajo ha sido el siguiente: en un primer momento, extraer todas las referencias que de la mujer judia se hacen a lo largo de Qohelet Kabbah para después agruparlas bajo ocho epigrafes.1 Su estudio me ha permiddo ir sacando conclusiones en temas concretos, con las cuales he podido hacer un retrato robot de la figura de la mujer judia en la obra, que era el objedvo que me habia marcado. A conrinuaciôn presento un breve avance del trabajo. En él aparece el esquema que reparu en mi comunicaciôn acompanado de algunos ejemplos del grueso del trabajo, que ilustran mi estudio. Al final, recojo las conclusiones a las que he llegado. El trabajo completo aparecerá más adelante en alguna publicaciôn especializada.

La mujer justa2 V, 2—Ana, precediendo en orden de presentaciôn a David y a Daniel; VII, 1— Miriam, precediendo a Aarôn, Moisés y Josué; V, 11-mujeres gendles justas: Rajab y Rut (frente a esto, VIII, 10—se quita mérito a su conversion porque no fue de motu propio)·, I, 5-Sara y Rebeca; V, 6-Rajab; V, 6-la sunamita; III, 2 1 Abigail; VII, 1-las parteras de Israel. Endendo que toda clasificaciôn es discudble, y aún más en este caso, cuando disuntos episodios podian haber sido recogidos en más de un grupo de trabajo. Al decidirme por uno u otro, solo he querido resaltar el mauz que, en mi opinion, resultara más relevante en ellos. Tras las referencias de los disuntos episodios en Q0K, siguen los correspondientes resúmenes de su contenido.

El texto que he elegido como ejemplo dice: V, 6. R. Samuel bar Najmán opinaba: Ezequias volviô sus ojos hacia la pared [qir) de la sunamita según está escrito "un dia Eliseo pasaba por Sunam ... una mujer ... le invito a corner ... y le dijo a su marido: "vamos a prepararle arriba una habitaciôn pequena de mamposteria (φή" (2Re 4,8-10). Y Ezequias le diria a Dios: "Senor del mundo, aquella sunamita hizo una habitaciôn de mamposteria para Eliseo, y Tu reviviste al hijo; (cuànto más mérito tuvieron mis antepasados, que te hicieron toda esta alabanza!" A Ezequias se le ha anunciado que va a morir, y él inicia una serie de cuatro suplicas, intentando cambiar el curso de los acontecimientos. Dos de ellas denen como fundamento recordar los actos de personas que vivieron antes que él, y cuyas obras fueron recompensadas por Dios generosamente: en ambos casos, las protagonistas son mujeres, Rajab y la sunamita, aquélla que hizo una habitaciôn en su casa para Eliseo.3 Ezequias, en su sûplica, no tiene ningûn inconveniente en poner en la balanza el episodio protagonizado por la sunamita, con el protagonizado por sus antepasados, léase Salomon, constructor del Templo, a cambio de cuya acciôn, Ezequias reclama su vida.

La mujer y la cultura I, 7 y III, 21-la que le pregunta a un rabino por la explicaciôn de un texto concreto y recibe su contestaciôn; II, 8—mujeres jueces (ver también VIII, 17); II, 8— poétisas. El caso que comento a continuaciôn habia de ‫דיינין זכרים ודיינות נ ק ב ו ת‬. II, 8. Lo de "numerosas mujeres" (Qo 2,8) se refiere a los distintos jueces, hombres y mujeres. Ya otros han dicho que es difïcil saber a qué se refiere el texto, y mâs, cuando, por ejemplo, en TosNid 50a se descalifica a la mujer para desempenar funciones judiciales. Tampoco yo voy a dar la soluciôn, y me limito a aportar dos sugerencias: el autor no ha caido en esa limitaciôn y equipara la funciôn de mujeres y hombres en el àmbito legal, o, el término se refiere a algûn puesto intermedio, siempre relacionado con el mundo judicial, que si pudiera ocupar una mujer.

La astucia de la mujer II, 20-la mendiga de los higos (ver también VII, 26; frente a esto, VII, 7); IX, 18-la que enmienda a Joab; XI, 1-la viuda y Rabbi. Me detengo en el texto que dice: XI, 1. Cuando muriô R. Eleazar, Rabbi enviô recado pretendiendo a su viuda, pero ella le despachô diciendo: "(jcômo algo que se ha usado para lo santo, se va a usar para lo profano?" El preguntô: "jqué hacia él que yo no haya hecho igual?," y ella le contestô: "cuando se ponia a trabajar en la Ley, lo hacia con La s u n a m i t a esta c o n s i d e r a d a c o m o u n a d e las v e i n u t r é s m u j e r e s r e c t a s ν g r a n d e s e n jusdcia q u e h u b o e n Israel (cfr. T H E INSTITUTE FOR COMPUTERS IN JEWISH LIFE ed.. The CD-ROM

Classics Library. 1991-1995. Osar midraiim, Pinhas ben Ya'ir; 19.

Judaic

todas sus fuerzas, diciendo: 'jque todas las penas de Israel me vengan a mi!', y le venían. Además, cuando llegaba el momento de ponerse a trabajar, pedia: 'que todo el mundo se vaya a lo suyo'." El le dijo: "también yo haré lo mismo," asi que convocô a las penas a que vinieran, y vinieron, pero, al intentar que se fueran, no lo hicieron—hay quien dice que durante trece anos completos, tuvo dolor de muelas—enviô recado y se lo dijo, pero ella le contesté: "he oido que debemos crecer en santidad, y no menguar." Evidentemente, ella no piensa en un nuevo matrimonio, asi que rechaza los argumentos de Rabbi en dos ocasiones. En ambas, intenta resaltar que su difunto marido era superior al pretendiente, y valora todos los esfuerzos del primero. Aunque Rabbi intenta hacer lo propio, es decir, emular al difunto, las cosas no salen bien, y ella puede sentenciar con que "se debe crecer en sanddad, pero no menguar": sin quererlo, se ha converddo en "jueza" de los méritos de Rabbi, asi que "décréta" en su contra para poder seguir conservando su estado, que es, en definiuva, lo que quiere.

La mujer casada IX, 9; VII, 2—Dios engalana a las novias y bendice a los novios; IX, 8—siempre preparada para el marido; XI, 1-la mujer de R. Eleazar; III, 7—dolor del rabino por la muerte de su mujer. Recojo bajo este epigrafe cinco casos sin incluir el esmero que demuestran las mujeres de Salomon intentando ganar sus favores, porque no parece haber unanimidad en considerar esos matrimonios, si lo fueron, como ortodoxos dentro del judaismo. Y es que las opiniones varian al respecto: hay quien duda que Salomon se casara realmente con aquellas mujeres extranjeras; otros piensan que, aûn converudas al judaismo y casadas, no eran sinceras porque no les movia el amor a Dios, y otros piensan, en fin, que el problema de base fue que Salomôn se casara con ellas con la intenciôn de converdrlas, porque uno no se debe casar sin estar seguro de la piedad y virtud de su futura esposa...4

La mujer como madré V, 10—Dios, el padre y la madré como socios en la formaciôn de un embriôn; VII, 1-imposiciôn del nombre; X, 16—las mujeres del nino y Salomon; I, 8—la madré que quiere que su hijo aprenda lo mejor de los oficios; II, 2—Eliseba y sus hijos; IX, 7-Sara muere al oir lo de Isaac. Sirva como ejemplo el caso que aparece a conunuaciôn: VII, 1. Se ha ensefiado que a cualquier hombre se le imponen très nombres: uno, el que le imponen su padre y su madré; otro, el que le imponen los demás, y el ultimo, el que se le impone en el Libro de las Generaciones de la Creaciôn. El padre y la madré, a una, le imponen a su hijo uno de los nombres que 11cvará en adelante. Y no es que eso sea cualquier cosa: ya se sabe que poner nombre

4

Cfr. Ginzberg, L. 1968. The Legends of the Jews, Philadelphia, vol. VI, 281-2.

significa, en cierta manera, ser dueno o tener dominio sobre lo nombrado, y esa responsabilidad es compardda por ambos.

Valoraciôn de la mujer III, 8-Dios se compara con una comadrona; IX, 9—1ánzate a la vida con la mujer que ames; I, l-princesa=sabiduria (ver también VI, 6); XII, 7-la mujer hospitalaria; VII, 12-la mujer obedecida; VII, 8-las hijas de Eliseo ben Abuyá; XII, 14la limosna y la mujer de Rabbi; XI, 9—el pago al desprecio; IV, 9—mâs vale que el hombre y la mujer estén juntos, que cada uno por su lado (frente a esto, VII, 29—cuando fueron dos, se buscaron complicaciones sin fin). El primer caso trae a Dios comparândose con una comadrona que se encarga de las primeras atenciones a los recién nacidos. Dios se ocupa con igual cuidado de sus hijos, y el texto pone en Su misma boca esa confesiôn: "durante un instante, Yo fui (como) la comadrona (para Mis) hijos."

La mujer en el centro de la tradiciôn VII, 8-concertaciôn de matrimonios; IX, 9-los huérfanos; IX, 9 y XI, 6-el valor de los hijos en la vida social (ver también X, 2); III, 2-la mujer en el parto (ver también VIII, 5). Comento aqui el primer caso, que toca el tema de los compromisos matrimoniales y la intervenciôn de los padres en los mismos: VII, 8. Cuando un prosélito se ha converudo por el Nombre de los Cielos, es justo que algunas de sus hijas sean compromeddas en matrimonio dentro del (circulo) sacerdotal. Segûn la Miinah (Qid II, 1), tanto el hombre como la mujer pueden contraer esponsales personalmente o por medio de un intermediario; solo interviene en el asunto el padre de la mujer cuando ésta es una menor, es decir, cuando dene menos de doce anos: éste será el caso del episodio que recojo. Como está hablando de un prosélito que se convierte, la manera mâs efecdva y radical que dene éste para que sus descendientes formen parte de lo "selecto" del pueblo de Israel es comprometer a sus hijas menores con hombres del circulo sacerdotal, porque "la condiciôn del nacido del matrimonio será conforme a la del varôn" (Qid III, 12).

Aspectos negativos VI, 6-la mujer que no se muestra agradecida-el texto biblico especifica que se trata de la adultéra; VII, 8—la embarazada que sucumbe al olor (ver también VII, 13); II, 8-mujeres=diablesas (ver también II, 8, II, 10 y X, 7); VII, 28-hay mujer cabal?; V, 5—Miriam y Aarôn "conspiran" contra Moisés; X, 18—la mujer vaga; VII, 26—la mujer es funesta. Recojo bajo este epigrafe los siete casos que, en mi opinion, llevan objedvamente una carga negativa dentro del texto. Uno de ellos quiere explicar, por ejemplo, a qué se refiere el texto con lo de "numerosas mujeres (Jiddah we-

!iddot)" (Qo 2,8)· La interpretaciôn es que se refiere a "las numerosas diablesas (šeda' we-šedta') que mantenían el fuego en los banos." Pese a todo, prueba de que los términos son problemâdcos es que el mismo Talmud Babli, cuando los recoge, dice que asi es como se endende en Babilonia, pero que en Occidente, los mismos términos hacen referencia a "cajas."5 Es, sin embargo, el séptimo y ultimo caso el más claro ataque que he encontrado en Q0R contra la mujer. Del comentario de "descubri que la mujer es más funesta que la muerte" (Qo 7,26), se pueden extraer diversas conclusiones: —La mujer exige demasiado y termina por provocar una muerte funesta. —Una mala mujer es más penosa que todo lo que se pueda imaginar. - U n o está expuesto a las redes de la mujer siempre que no tema a Dios; si no, y a pesar de que se ha escri/o de ella que "liene las manos atadas, " sucumbirá. En Qo R he encontrado disuntos dpos de mujeres: la justa, la culta, la casada, la madré, la astuta, ... Aun en los casos más discudbles, creo que estoy en disposiciôn de afirmar quej20R trae a una mujer integrada plenamente en la sociedad, y valorada. Esa valoraciôn—que hace, por un lado, el propio Dios, y por otro, sus contemporâneos—abarca, más bien, cuestiones relacionadas con los comportamientos y los méritos: ésa es, en mi opinion, una de las grandes diferencias de la mujer de Q0R con respecto a la de la literatura árabe del momento. 6 Si me detengo en los casos concretos que reflejan lo que he dado en llamar "aspectos negauvos" con relaciôn a la mujer en Q0R, veo que, a veces, el mismo texto se encarga de presentar el hecho y su atenuante (la que no es agradecida es la mujer adultéra, ...), y que, otras veces, el texto présenta problemas de comprensiôn y eso hace que se muldpliquen las interpretaciones. Más dificil me résulta encontrar explicaciôn a lo que denominaba "el más claro ataque que he encontrado enQoR a la mujer," que aparece en Q0R VII, 26. Alli se defiende que solo caen en sus redes los que están lejos de Dios: (qué diferencia con lo que hemos visto hasta ahora! Me pregunto y dejo sobre la mesa lo siguiente: jes quizás en este punto donde sale a la superficie todo el bagaje de negadvidad que, de una manera ο de otra, se ha ido acumulando en contra de la mujer a lo largo de la Historia ...?

5

6

Cfr. TB Gil 68a. Véase también la interpretaciôn de Raši, que endende algo asi como "carruaje mixto." Alli se valoraba el aspecto externo, que ni siquiera se pardcularizaba, porque habia un concepto idealizado y universalizado de la Belleza, mientras que aqui no se encuentra ninguna alusiôn a caracterisdcas fïsicas, y se rcsaltan las morales.

LA PROPUESTA DE PAZ DE LOS RABINOS U N A LECTURA SINCRÔNICA DE LA TRADICIÔN MIGUEL PÉREZ FERNÂNDEZ Universidad de Granada, Spain Esta comunicaciôn dene su origen en un trabajo preparado para el Seminario sobre la Pa%j los Conflictos que funciona en la Universidad de Granada. En el mareo de las contribuciones de las culturas mediterráneas a la paz élaboré un amplio estudio filolôgico y literario de los textos clàsicos del Judaismo en torno al concepto de Shalom.‫ י‬Sobre aquellos textos quiero hacer hoy una lectura sincrônica para poner de relieve la contribuciôn decisiva que la lectura de esos textos puede aportar a la paz hoy. Confieso que esta verdente prácdca de mis estudios ftlolôgicos me estimula considerablemente. Hago unas observaciones inmediatas: a) La reflexion del Judaismo sobre la paz es una reflexion sobre la Biblia o, al menos, jusdficada a posteriori desde la Biblia. b) La reflexion del Judaismo sobre la paz adquiere una poderosa forma sapiencial que cuaja en dichos y aforismos rotundos, reveladores del paso a la cultura popular. Su integraciôn en la conciencia individual y colectiva es evidente. c) Estas formas de sabiduria popular se transmiten con una clarisima intenciôn didácdca. De aquí proviene su agrupamiento en colecciones como las de SDt 199, SNm 42, TanjB Tsaw 15, Lt‫׳‬R9,9, Pereq ha-Shalom, etc. d) Estos dichos y colecciones aparecen ya en la antigua literatura tannaidca y su transmisiôn anonima o su atribuciôn a maestros de los ss. I—IV se ha mantenido a lo largo de la tradiciôn. Ello prueba la conciencia persistente de una doctrina tradicional del Judaismo.

El hombre pacificador Ya en las anriguas cosmogonias mesopotâmicas y cananeas, el mundo ve la luz como fruto del enfrentamiento y la muerte de Ios dioses. Separaciôn, lucha y muerte son palabras claves en el ordenamiento del universo: la distinciôn y enfrentamiento entre lo de arriba y lo de abajo, lo superior y lo inferior, los cielos y los infiernos traspasa todas las representaciones cosmolôgicas de la andgüedad. Se trata de mitos que expresan la percepciôn profunda de la violencia como constitutivo y energia del universo. El mismo hombre se ve amasado con tierra y sangre de un dios rebelde. Por tanto no sorprende que los mensajes de salvaciôn en cualquier religion se formulen en términos de paz y reconciliaciôn y, en ultimo término, con una dimension cosmolôgica absolutamente realista e irrenunciable. Sin esta dimension cualquier mensaje résulta insuficiente: no respon-

"Shalom. El modelo rabînico de paz." En. Cosmovisiones de Pa% en el Mediterrâneo antiguo y medievval Ed. F. A. Munoz, y B. Molina Rueda. Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1998, 63-122.

de a la verdad angusdosa percibida en y a través de los mitos. En ese trasfondo leemos la creaciôn del hombre que cuenta LvR.9,9: Tan grande es la paz, que cuando el Santo, bendito sea, creô su mundo hizo la paz entre los seres de arriba y los de abajo. En el primer dia creô de arriba y de abajo, como está escrito: "En el principio creô Dios los cielos y la derra" (Gn 1,1); en el segundo creô de arriba, como está escrito: "Haya un firmamento" (Gn 1,6); en el tercero creô de abajo: "Y dijo Dios: Reúnanse las aguas" (Gn 1,9); en el cuarto, de arriba: "Haya lumbreras en el firmamento de los cielos" (Gn 1,14); en el quinto, creô de abajo: "Y dijo Dios: Pululen las aguas" (Gn 1,20); en el sexto vino a crear al hombre y dijo: si lo creo de arriba, los de arriba van a superar a los de abajo en una criatura. jQué hizo? Lo creô de arriba y de abajo: "Modelô Dios al hombre del polvo de la rierra" (Gn 2,7), de abajo; "Y le soplô en sus narices aliento de vida" (Gn 2,7), de arriba.2 Frente a las antropologias pesimistas, aqui se ve al hombre pacificado y pacificador. Es una comprensiôn optimista y dinamizadora que permite considerar al hombre no meramente como rey de la creaciôn sino como su servidor y reconciliador.

La dimensiôn côsmica de la paz La dimension côsmica de la paz se formula rotundamente en SNm 42: Tan grande es la paz, que pesa como toda la obra de la creaciôn.3 Lo que quiere decir que sin paz no hay creaciôn. La sabiduria del judaismo lo ha expresado rotundamente en el dicho popular: La paz es primogénito y gloria de la creaciôn. (ARN B 24,3) Ο en este otro más directo: Sobre très cosas se sostiene el universo: sobre la jusdeia, sobre la verdad y sob r e la paz. (Penq ha-Shalom, Abot 1,18)

Tiene, por tanto, la paz una dimension universal: la paz es necesaria en este mundo y en el de más allà, necesaria para los àngeles y para los hombres, necesaria para vivos y para muertos (Pereq ha-Shalom y SNm 42). Con trasfondo de leyendas populäres sobre la rebeliôn de los àngeles—que conocemos por la literatura apôcrifa apocaliptica—la sabiduria del judaismo formula que hasta en las alturas se necesitaba paz y Dios la puso (SDt 199, SNm 42, Lvl19,9, Pereq haShalom). Estas leyendas denen muldtud de variantes, por entre las cuales los sabios de Israel han sabido encontrar una interpretaciôn comprometedora y menos fantásrica del texto fuente de Job 25,2 ("[Dios] pone paz en las alturas"): Tan grande es la paz, que hasta los habitantes de las alturas necesitan paz, según está dicho: "Poder y terror con él, pero pone paz en sus alturas" (Job 25,2).4 Y advierte que aqui hay materia para una deducciôn a minori ad maius: 2

3

4

La base biblica de esta reflexion está en Gn 1,1-20; 2,7; 2,14. En los textos crisrianos cf. Le 2,14; Col 1,15-20. La base biblica es Is 45,6-7: "Yo, Yahweh y nadie más, que formô la luz y creô las tinieblas, realizo la paz y creo la desgracia," que coloca en paralelismo la obra de la creaciôn y la obra de la paz. Se endende que "paz en sus alturas" quiere decir "paz entre sus àngeles, los seres celesriales."

si donde no hay ni enemistad ni rivalidad ni odio ni gentes de guerra, se necesita la paz, jcuânto más donde si se dan tales condiciones! (SNm 42) Se baja de la altura de los mitos y en el lenguaje del trabajo de todos los días se dice bellamente y para que todos entiendan: La paz es a la uerra como la levadura a la masa. (Pereq ha-Shalom) Se puede y se debe concluir que sin paz no hay cielo ni derra, ni àngeles ni hombres.

El Dios de la paz Pero ni siquiera bastaba para un pueblo tan consciente de su Dios como es Israel la fundamentaciôn cosmolôgica y antropolôgica de la necesidad de paz. El ultimo fundamento está en la misma esencia de su Dios que se llama Paz: "Yahweh-Shalom" (Jue 6,24). De aqui surge con inusitada energía el imperativo de la paz para el adorador de Yahweh. Podria entenderse como mezquina pulcritud el negarse a saludar a nadie con la paz en los banos para no profanar el nombre de Dios en lugar tan poco adecuado: Dijo R. Yudan b. R. José: -Tan grande es la paz, que el Santo, bendito sea, es llamado con el nombre de la paz, como está escrito: "Y le llamô Yahweh-Shalom." (Jue 6,24) R. Tanjum bar Yudan dijo: -De aqui se deduce que está prohibido saludar a nadie con la paz en un lugar inmundo. (Lî‫׳‬R9,9) Pero también hay que deducir sin timidez que violar la paz con la guerra es profanar el Nombre Santo de Dios y que, positivamente, hacer la paz es santificar el Nombre de Dios. En la sabiduria de Israel abundan las historias que muestran ingenuamente a Dios al servicio de la paz, incluso contradiciéndose a si mismo, incluso sacrificando su propio honor en bien de la paz. Parece que la paz es el Dios de Yahweh, pero en realidad se muestra que Dios es fiel a si mismo. Por eso los rabinos se explican que Dios mindera en ocasiones y permidera que en la Torah se dijeran cosas que nunca fueron solo por poner paz entre los hombres: Tan grande es la paz que el Santo, bendito sea, exclusivamente en beneficio de la paz, escribiô en la Torah cosas que no fueron. Y son éstas: Cuando muriô Jacob y "vieron los hermanos de José que habia muerto su padre..." (Gn 50,15) ,;qué hicieron? Fueron a Bila y le dijeron: Reûnete con José y dile: "Tu padre dio instrucciones antes de su muerte diciendo..." (Gn 50,16). Pero Jacob jamás ordenô ninguna de estas cosas; fueron ellos [los hermanos de José] los que las dijeron por cuenta propia Y del mismo modo puedes encontrar con referencia a Sara. Tan pronto como los àngeles vinieron donde Abraham y le dijeron: "En el plazo senalado tornaré a u por esta época y Sara tendrá un hijo" (Gn 18,14), en ese mismo momento "se riô Sara en su interior diciendo..." (Gn 18,12). Pero el Santo, bendito sea, solo dijo a Abraham: ",;Por qué se ha reido Sara diciendo: (!es que de verdad voy a parir siendo ya anciana?" (Gn 18,13).
Solo quien conoce el respeto y el carifio que Israel profesa a sus Escrituras puede entender el alcance de esta interpretaciôn y admirar la exclamaciôn incontenida del escriba: Observa cuánta tinta ha sido derramada, cuàntos câlamos se han roto, cuântos ninos han tenido que ser casdgados, cuántas pieles se han estropeado jpara ensenar una cosa que no estaba en la Torah! [...] ϊ,Υ todo por qué? !En beneficio d e la paz! (TanjB T%aw 15)

Por poner paz entre el hombre y su mujer se explican los rabinos que Dios permitiera que su Santo Nombre se disolviera en las terribles aguas amargas que habian de probar la inocencia ο culpabilidad de la sospechosa de adulterio: Tan grande es la paz que Dios permitiô que su nombre, escrito en sanddad, se disolviera en las aguas5 para poner paz entre el hombre y su mujer.6 Esta interpretaciôn es adornada en LvR9,9 y TJ Sotah 1,16d con una anécdota aleccionadora: R. Meir se dejô escupir el rostro siete veces para asi poner paz en un matrimonio desavenido; cuando sus discipulos le preguntaron el por qué tolerar taies gestos él respondiô: "ςΝο es lo minimo que se pide a Meir el ser como su Creador?" R. Meir7 acostumbraba a sentarse a explicar [las Escrituras]8 el sàbado por la tarde. Habia alli una mujer en pie escuchândole. Se alargô la exposiciôn y ella esperô hasta que terminô y entonces se fue a su casa y encontrô que la vela se habia exünguido. Le preguntô su marido: Donde estuviste? Ella contesté: -Estuve sentada escuchando al predicador. Le dijo: -Asi y asi [me haga Dios],9 que no volverâs a la casa hasta que vayas y escupas al predicador en el rostro. Ella quedô [fuera] una semana, dos semanas, hasta très semanas. Sus vecinas le dijeron: -jAún estáis disgustados? Te acompafiamos donde el predicador. Tan pronto como las vio, R. Meir comprendiô todo por el espiritu de santidad,10 y preguntô:

5

6 7

8

9

Nm 5,23. Cf. SNm 16,3. El ritual de la ordalia de los celos incluia escribir el nombre de Dios en una tablilla y disolverla en el agua que se daba a beber a la mujer. Este dicho se recoge anônimamente en SNm 42. S. II, discipulo de Aqiba. La historia que sigue está toda escrita en arameo. Se encuentra también en el Talmud de Jerusalén, Sotah 1.16d, donde se ofrecen elementos aclaratorios. Posiblemente nuestro texto es una version abreviada que supone un relato ya conocido. La anécdota protagonizada por R. Meir se cuenta como un comentario al dicho de Yismael para obtener una moraleja aleccionadora: si por poner paz entre el hombre y su mujer el Nombre de Dios se deja disolver en el agua, |con cuánta más razôn por la misma causa se habrá de dejar el hombre hasta escupir en el rostro! Literalmente: "se sentaba y escrutaba;" es un modismo de lenguaje que expresa la autoridad del predicador. El término drsh, que en inicio se refiere al estudio y explicaciôn de la Escritura, se aplica después genéricamente a la predicaciôn. Formula de juramento.

-,;Hay entre vosotras alguna mujer experta en pronunciar conjuras contra los males de la vista?" Las vecinas de la mujer le dijeron: -Ve ahora, escùpele en el rostra y libéras asi a tu marido [de su juramento]. Pero cuando estuvo delante, se asustô y le dijo: -Rabbi, yo no soy experta en pronunciar conjuras contra los males de la vista. El le contestô: -Enfonces ponme saliva siete veces en el rostra y quedaré curado. Ella lo hizo asi. El le dijo: -Ve y dile a tu marido: tu me dijiste que lo hiciera una sola vez (y yo le he escupido siete veces! Sus discipulos le dijeron: -Rabbi, (asi avergüenzan a la Torah!12 ^No podias habernos pedido a uno de nosotros que te pronunciara el conjura? Les dijo: -,:No es lo minimo que se pide a Meir el ser como su Creador?13 Pues R. Yismael transmidô: Tan grande es la paz, que el Santo, bendito sea, dijo que el Nombre excelso escrito en sanddad se disolviera en las aguas, con el fin de poner paz entre el hombre y su mujer. (LrR9,9) La actitud pacifica y pacificadora es inexcusable adoraciôn e imitaciôn de Dios.

Paz y Torah ARN B 24,3 llega a formular como régla de oro que resume toda la Torah: La paz vale lo que todos los mandamientos que hay en la Torah. Y como nota disdntiva entre el imperativo de la paz y los demás mandamientos se hace observar que éstos se cumplen cuando se présenta la ocasiôn, pero la paz hay que buscarla y promoverla dondequiera que esté: Tan grande es la paz que para todos los mandamientos de la Torah se escribe: "Cuando veas..." (Ex 23,5), "cuando encuentres..." (Ex 23,4), "cuando suceda..." (Dt 22,6), "cuando construyas..." (Dt 22,8). Ο sea, que cuando un mandamiento viene a tus dominios, tú estás obligado a cumplirlo; pero (‫׳‬qué es lo que se escribe para la paz? "Busca la paz y siguela" (Sal 34,15), bûscala en tu propio dominio y siguela hasta el dominio ajeno. (Pereq ba-Shaloni)14

10

11

12

13

14

La version del Talmud de Jerusalén (Sot 1,16d) précisa que él mismo se hizo una herida en el ojo. Este detalle es esencial para la comprensiôn del relato. "Contra el mal de ojo" no séria, en mi opinion, version correcta. Parece que aqui se trata simplemente de algun ripo de dano fïsico (procurado por el mismo Meir, segûn aclaraciôn de TJ) o molesria ocular (llagas, cataratas...). Toda la escena se hace asi mâs comprensible: la saliva cumple su misiôn curadva respecto al ojo enfermo y vindicadva cumpliendo el juramento del marido irritado. Probablemente se refieren a ese dpo de juramentos, indignos del espiritu de la Torah, pero popularmente obligantes. En Sot l,16d: ";No sera la gloria de Meir como la Gloria de su Creador?" La analogia es fantástica: si para restablecer la paz entre el hombre y la mujer el Nombre santo de Dios se deja disolver en el agua, jcon cuánta mâs razôn se dejará escupir en el rostro el mismo R. Meir! LvR (2). Dicho semejante an ARN A 12,6 atribuido a Simon ben Elazar. Cf. ARN B 24.

Esta actitud es exégesis del Sal 34,15: "Busca la paz y siguela.." Obviamente no se trata aqui de una receta para aplicarla sin criterio, sino de una actitud que créa iniciativas y genera una dinámica pacificadora más allà de los propios intereses particulares. Esto sigue valiendo para los individuos, grupos y estados.

La paz en la representaciôn rabinica y sacerdotal El fuerte arraigo del sentimiento de paz en la profundidad del hombre obliga a Israel a integrarlo en su universo de representaciones religiosas. Una corriente sacerdotal interpréta que todas las bendiciones se sellan con la paz, vienen con la paz se dan en la paz: la paz es el continente donde se recibe todo lo que viene de Dios, la paz es condiciôn para que nada de Dios se pierda en el hombre: Tan grande es la paz, que solo la paz es el vaso que puede contener la bendiciôn, según está dicho: "Yahweh da fuerza a su pueblo, Yahweh bendice a su pueblo con la paz" (Sal 29,11).‫( לי‬SNm 42) En relaciôn con la paz se valora igualmente todo el ritual sacrificial: Los sacrificios pacificos ponen paz entre Israel y su Padre que esta en los Cielos. (TanjB Tsaw 15) La corriente rabinica, por su parte, asocia la paz a la Torah: solo cuando el pueblo estuvo unido y en paz mereciô el don de la Torah: Tan grande es la paz que en todas las marchas de Israel está escrito: "Parueron... y establecieron los campamentos" (Nm 33,5-49).16 Paru'an entre disputas y acampaban entre disputas. Pero cuando llegaron al Sinai montaron un solo campamento: "E Israel estableciô alli el campamento" (Ex 19,2).17 El Santo, bendito sea, dijo: "Puesto que los israelitas odian las diputas y aman la paz y se han hecho un solo campamento, ha llegado la hora en que les dé mi Torah." (Pereq ha-Shalom)18 Dialécdcamente también se afirma en la otra direcciôn: Solo quien ama la Torah y estudia la Torah y cumple la Torah merece la paz. (SNm 42 y Pereq ha-Shalom) En sintesis magnifica se afirma que la Torah es la fuerza del pueblo y la paz con que Dios bendice a su pueblo. (SNm 42)

15

16

17

18

Interpretaciôn novedosa de Sal 29,11, normalmente interpretado en la equivalencia "fuerza = Torah = Paz." La expresiôn del salmo "bendecir con la paz (be-shalom)" puede entenderse como "bendecir en la paz." Solo la paz (= la Torah) es, pues, el continente donde cabe la bendiciôn. Asi en LevR (1). La implicaciôn es que si la bendiciôn solo cabe en la paz, la paz es condiciôn previa e indispensable para recibir la bendiciôn. En este capitulo se repiten hasta 39 veces los verbos "partir" y "acampar," siempre en plural. El midrasista endende talcs verbos "denominadvamente": "hacer parddas y hacer campamentos," lo que es indicio de divisiones entre ellos; ,;por qué, si no, no hacer una sola partida de todos juntos y un solo campamento con todos juntos? La llegada al Sinai se express con el verbo en singular, en contraste con el plural del hemisdquio anterior, que define la marcha por el desierto: "Uegamn al desierto del Sinai y establecieron campamentos en el desierto; alli estableciô el campamento Israel frente a la montana" (Ex 19,2). También en LvR 9,9.

Esta formulation se obtiene como exégesis del Sal 29,11: "Yahweh da fuerza a su pueblo, Yahweh bendice a su pueblo con la paz."

Paz universal Yo tengo la conviction de que esta conciencia de Israel ni le limita para excluirnos a los demás ni nos limita a los demás para dejar de sentirnos beneficiarios de la bendiciôn de Dios en y con la paz. La reflexion y experiencia de Israel es patrimonio que se nos ofrece a todos los pueblos. Pues de la reflexion de Israel también aprendemos que la paz hay que hacerla con todo hombre sin limitation: ["Alce Yahweh su rostro sobre d] y te concéda la paz" (Nm 6,26): en tus entradas paz y en tus salidas paz, paz con todo hombre. (SNm 42) Que la paz se concede a los hombres buenos: Tan grande es la paz, que se concede a los que se convierten, según está dicho: "Les creo en los labios este canto: paz al de lejos, paz al de cerca" (Is 57,19).19 Tan grande es la paz, que se da como lote de los justos, segûn está dicho: "[El justo] entrará en la paz, reposarân sobre sus lechos [los que siguen el camino recto]‫( ״‬Is 57,2).20 (SNm 42) Que la paz se concede a los humildes y a los que obran la justicia y la verdad: Tan grande es la paz, que se concede a los humildes, segûn está dicho: "Los humildes poseerân la derra y disfrutarán de abundante paz" (Sal 37,11).21 Tan grande es la paz, que se concede a los que hacen justicia, segûn esta dicho: "La paz es obra de la justicia" (Is 32,17).22 (SNm 42) Y que: las très [justicia, verdad y paz] son la misma cosa, pues puesta la justicia, se cumple la verdad y se cumple la paz. Y las très se mencionan en un mismo versiculo, pues está dicho: "Verdad y justicia de paz juzgad en vuestros tribunales" (Zac 8,16).2‫ ג‬Dondequiera que hay justicia hay paz y dondequiera que hay paz hay justicia.24 (Pereq ha-Shalom)

Y que no se puede emprender una guerra sin antes hacer proposiciones de paz: Tan grande es la paz, que incluso en la hora de la guerra se necesita [proponer] paz, segûn está dicho: "Cuando te aproximes a una ciudad para combatirla, la invitarás a la paz" (Dt 20,10); "Desde el desierto de Qedemot despaché mensajeros a Sijôn, rey de Jesbôn, con propuestas de paz" (Dt 2,26); "Jefté despachô unos emisarios al rey de los ammonitas con esta embajada: jqué te he hecho yo para que vengas contra mi a hacer la guerra a mi pais? El rey de los 19

20 21

22 23 24

En el Nuevo Testamento Ef 2,11-21 usa el mismo texto de Isaias para cantar la obra de reconciliaciôn entre los de lejos y los de cerca que hizo Cristo "nuestra paz." Sentencia similar referida a los justos, en Pereq ha-Shalom. La cita del Salmo 37 es el colofôn que cierra Pereq ha-Shatom. La conexiôn entre "humildad-paztierra" esta también en las bienaventuranzas neotestamentarias: Mt 5,3-12. La conexiôn "paz-jusricia" se desarrolla en las sentencias de Pereq ha-Shalom. Esta cita se pone en boca de Simon ben Gamaliel en Misnah Abot 1,18. En Is 32,17 se apoya la sentencia básica de SNm 42: "tan grande es la paz, que se concede a los que hacen justicia."

ammonitas contestô a los emisarios de Jefté..."—cqué contesté?—"Ahora devuélvelas en paz Que 11,13)" (SNm 42; cf. también SDl 199, LvR9,9; Pereq haShalom)

Paz escatolôgica Para todos los creyentes la esperanza escatolôgica es motor que aviva ideales. En el judaismo la escatologia dene très polos, que pienso todo hombre puede asumir: -Jerusalén, que es y ha sido siempre un simbolo de una paz nunca conseguida, siempre anhelada y trans ferida al mundo futuro: Y en el mundo futuro, cuando el Santo, bendito sea, haga retornar a los desterrados de Jerusalén, los retornarà en paz, segûn esta dicho: "Pedid la paz para Jerusalén" (Sal 122,6).25 Y en el mismo senddo dice: "He aqui que yo dirijo a ella como un rio la paz" (Is 66,12). (TanjB Tsaw 15; cf. Pereq ha-Shalom y LvR

9,9) En nuestra historia actual la ciudad de Jerusalén es como la prueba que acrisola y purifica la verdad de todos los que dicen querer su paz. Aqui están implicados pueblos, religiones y estados. -El Mes/as, llamado el principe de la Paz, que anunciará la paz a todos Ios pueblos: Tan grande es la paz, que cuando el Rey Mesias venga, comenzarà por [el anuncio de] la paz, segûn está dicho: "jCuán hermosos son sobre los montes los pies del mensajero que anuncia la paz!" (Is 52,7). (LvR 9,9) Toda esperanza mesiánica, con ο sin Mesias, debe contemplar la paz entre los pueblos y la armonia con la creaciôn entera. La condiciôn pacificadora entre los de cerca y los de lejos la subrayô el himno cristolôgico cristiano de Ef 2,11-21: Cristo es nuestra paz, el que reconcilia a los de cerca con los de lejos, el que de la diversidad de pueblos hace uno. Tal himno es exégesis de Is 57,19, texto también contemplado en la reflexion judia de la paz (SNm 42). La acciôn pacificadora de dimension côsmica, tan caracterisdca del judaismo (LvR 9,9), es formulada en la tradiciôn cristiana bellamente en el himno de Col 1,15—20: es un canto al primogénito de la nueva creaciôn, al pacificador que obtendrà la armonia del universo y la reconciliaciôn de las criaturas de arriba con las de abajo. -La tierra nueva como herencia de los hombres pacificos y pacificadores: Y a quien ama la paz y persigue la paz, se andeipa con el saludo de la paz y devuelve el saludo de la paz, el Santo, bendito sea, le concede vida en este mundo y vida en el mundo futuro: "Los humildes poseerân la derra y disfrutarán de abundante paz" (Sal 37,11). (Pereq ha-Shalom)

25

Esta reflexion sobre la vuelta del desderro esta también en Pereq ha-Shalom. Pero en TanjB expresamente se resalta que ocurrirà en el mundo futuro.

TOSEFTA SOTAH SÍNTESIS DE UN ESTUDIO OLGA I. Ruiz MORELL Universidad de Granada, Spain Presento aqui una síntesis de mis investigaciones sobre Tosefta Sotah. La Tosefta, aunque se considéré como uno de los fundamentos en el judaismo clàsico, a mi entender ofrece aûn una amplia gama de posibilidades para su anâlisis. Se trata de una obra sobre la que desde un primer momento se han establecido presupuestos que la encuadran en un segundo piano dentro del corpus literario rabînico. Al delimitar el texto a analizar, desde el primer momento llamô mi atenciôn el tratado Sotah, y lo hizo por varias razones: desde un punto de vista antropolôgico, la estrecha relaciôn con prácticas de la antigua Mesopotamia del rimai en él descrito, su destacada cercania y ampliation de Misnah Sotah, la gran cantidad de textos paralelos con otras obras rabinicas, por el amplio material narrativo (incluso frente al resto de los tratados de Tosefta donde prédomina el esrilo halâkico). N o olvidemos tampoco que tanto en Misnah como en los Talmudim, el tratado Sotah résulta un tanto especial dentro de la norma habitual de cada obra (Misnah por la hagadah y los posibles anadidos posteriores; Talmud, por predominio de texto en hebreo y la narrativa). Esta naturaleza sugeria un estudio con muchas posibilidades. El objedvo era dilucidar la naturaleza de Tosefta. Admitiendo que se trata de una propuesta que puede llevar a conflicto, cabe la posibilidad, al menos, de ofrecer una serie de datos en el caso de Tosefta Sotah, que muestran una actitud o disposition de este texto. Además de un pequeno estudio sobre su contenido, incluido en la introducciôn y notas a la traducciôn, el estudio se compléta con unos anâlisis, mediante los cuales pretendo establecer las caracteristicas fundamentales de este Tratado.

Anâlisis lingiiistico El anâlisis lingüistico es imprescindible para conocer la lengua en la que estaba escrito el texto. la lengua puede reflejar una posible datation de su redaction, y asi mismo la falta de linealidad pudiera ser serial de un posible compendio. La intention de este estudio es destacar tan solo los elementos que considero mâs significativos, pues la lengua empleada se corresponde por completo con el HR. Se deben tener en cuenta los usos extranos al HR, que nos sugieren matizaciones del estadio de la lengua, asi como posibles anadidos. Para realizar dicho anâlisis, he procurado cubrir los principales campos lingüisticos: fonética-ortografia, morfologia y sintaxis. Al existir dos fuentes escritas del texto, Ms. Viena y Ms. Erfurt, además de fragmentos de la Genizah, se plantean unas posibilidades comparativas en dicho estudio.

Una sintesis de las conclusiones obtenidas en mi estudio son: La lengua de TosSot es un HR, puramente tannaíta, pero con diferentes manifestaciones, dependiendo del manuscrito. En el ms. V se ofrece una version más compleja y a veces confusa, con lo que résulta un texto más largo. En cambio, el ms. Ε cstá elaborado con una tendencia a las estructuras sencillas. La ortografia en cada unos de los mss. no mandene una linealidad regular, aunque en E es algo más constante. El ms. V ofrece un texto más interesante y probablemente más fiel en su redacciôn.

Análisis de las tradiciones La cercania de Tosefta a la Misnah es indudable. Pero, ipor qué se ha de repetir una serie de presupuestos ο datos, establecidos ya en la Misnahi
TosSot y Misnah Ordena el texto misnaico TosSot, más que describir el ritual, parece que trata de recoger cada uno de los elementos que se debaten acerca de esta ordalia, y ofrecerlos de una manera ordenada, evitando la confusion que en ocasiones se produce en MSot. Son varios los pasajes en los que TosSot reorganiza el texto misnaico de manera que recopila una serie de datos que éste nos da, incluyendo otras posibilidades.

Amp lia el texto misnaico Es habitual que TosSot amplie el texto misnaico incluyendo un debate donde MSot no lo ofrece, o, si lo hace, es de forma más resumida. Un magnifico ejemplo es TosSot 1,2-3/ MSot 1,3, donde de una sentencia establecida en la Misnah, se élabora una cadena de réplicas en la que se emplean dos formulaciones básicas de la exégesis rabinica como son din y Talmud lomar. Existen ciertos pasajes en los que parece que TosSot al desarrollar el texto de Misnah, está realizando una exégesis del texto misnaico, como en TosSot 2,2 / MSot 2,5, texto en el que se explican las palabras de R. Meir, citadas ya en la Misnah. Incluso se puede limitar a recoger una sola palabra de MSot para explicaria, como quiénes son los encargados de despertar y golpear en TosSot 13,9— 10/ MSot 9,10, Sobre un tema expresado en MSot, TosSot incluye otras posibilidades, sin rechazar sin embargo las ofrecidas por la Misnah. Reorganiza fragmentos de Misnah bajo un presupuesto, incluyendo otros ejemplos en la misma linea. Es notable especialmente la tendencia de TosSot a la inclusion de material hagàdico a partir de fragmentos de la Misnah. Podriamos casi atrevernos a avanzar que la mayor parte del material con el que Tosefta amplia la Misnah, es de caracter hagàdico. Omite fragmentos del texto misnaico TosSot no describe gran parte del rimai. Esto supone que, si no conocemos el texto de MSot, podriamos pensar en un proceso mâs sencillo de lo que realmente debia ser. En ciertas ocasiones son pequefios detalles, como el recipiente en el que se présenta la oblaciôn (MSot 2,1); o detalles ya de mayor importancia como es el soporte sobre el que se escribe la maldiciôn (MSot 2,4); incluso pasajes de tanta relevancia como cuàndo y como déclara el marido los celos a su mujer (MSot 1,2). Estas omisiones considero que se deben al propôsito condnuo de TosSot de no repetir innecesariamente fragmentos de la Misnah. En otras ocasiones parece omitir ciertos pasajes de la Misnah por no coincidir con ellos. Coincide literalmente con el texto misnaico Cuando TosSot coincide con MSot en algûn fragmento, se debe a que a continuaciôn incluye alguna novedad, aunque sea una breve expresiôn, (como en TosSot 1,7/ MSot 1,5, aunque paradôjicamente, y gracias al texto del Talmud, sepamos que tras dicha expresiôn existe un amplio debate). TosSot se limita a incluir la opciôn que cree adecuada a condnuaciôn del texto idéndco al de la Misnah, pero nunca repetirá una sentencia siquiera sin más. Otra de las ocasiones en las que TosSot y MSot coinciden literalmente es cuando a dicho texto, Tosefta le incluye un respaldo biblico, aunque éste se limite a ser un mero adorno.

Ofrece tradiciones diferentes a las del texto misnaico Puede ocurrir que cada obra opte por una tradiciôn diferente sobre un mismo tema. Puede tratarse incluso de diversas maneras de preservar una sentencia (TosSot 1,1/ MSot 1,1), lo que nos puede llevar a pensar en disuntas escuelas. Por otra parte, de una sola expresiôn hallada en la Misnah, TosSot élabora una exégesis diferente. El tema a desarrollar varia por completo, aunque parta de un mismo dato. En la mayor parte de estos casos es notable la importancia de conocer ciertos textos del Talmud y Midrasim para poder entender el desarrollo paralelo que realiza TosSot. TosSot y MSot elaboran textos de pardda muy semejantes con importantes variantes en el desarrollo, que los convierten en dos opciones casi contradictorias. Se puede variar desde el simple nombre de un maestro en una sentencia (TosSot 5,13/ MSot 5,2-3), hasta debates que comienzan de forma muy semejante a partir de unas mismas citas biblicas, pero que llevan a conclusiones diferentes por diferentes argumentaciones (TosSot 6,1/ MSot 5,5). Supone el texto misnaico En numerosas ocasiones ciertos pasajes de TosSot se nos presentan como algo oscuros ο complejos. Si nos dirigimos al texto de MSot, en la mayor parte de esos casos si comprendemos el senddo de dicho fragmento. Esto se debe a que con cierta frecuencia, Tosefta supone algûn texto de la Misnah, el cual cree conocido por parte del lector, por lo que ofrece una serie de explicaciones, ο conclusiones, sin que lleguemos a entender el origen de taies planteamientos, como cuando se debate la confianza que se debe ο no depositar en el marido en TosSot 1,2-3/ MSot 1,3, sin que se den más detalles acerca de este asunto, que los que encontramos en el texto de MSot. Una vez establecidas estas perspecdvas, se obdenen unas conclusiones básicas: TosSot depende de MSot, y esta dependencia se fundamenta en la estructura básica del tratado y en los temas en ella desarrollados. Aunque Tosefta depende de Misnah, no se somete a ella. Su naturaleza primordial parece ser la de completar y corregir el texto misnaico. TosSot évita repedciones innecesarias, no menciona datos, aunque sean importantes, si no puede proponer nada nuevo sobre el asunto. Evoluciona adquiricndo autonomia como obra fundamental del judaísmo clàsico; sea anterior ο posterior su redacciôn, por su lengua y estructura se pretendiô realizar una obra cercana a la Misnah. Por ultimo, existe una mayor preocupaciôn por las Escrituras en Tosefta.

TosSot y Midrasim SNm, SZj SDt conocen las mismas tradiciones que TosSot, pero no parece que las elaboren por igual. Ello también podria deberse a una procedencia de fuentes disdntas ο incluso de épocas diferentes. A su vez, en la elaboraciôn, se incluyen diferencias, dependiendo del tema al que se apliquen, y el contexto en el que se incluyan. TosSot representa en general un texto posterior a los midrasim, pues en ocasiones en las que éstos podrian perfectamente emplear ciertos datos de Tosefta,

no se hace. Sin embargo, TosSot si parece conocer desarrollos que se emplean especialmente en SNmj SDt y no solo los incluye, sino que los resume ο cornge· En ciertas ocasiones parece claro que TosSot emplea los textos midrâsicos, como creo ocurre con S OR, aunque en momentos posteriores de la redaction. En el cap. 12 de Tosefta se produce una extrana cercania al texto de i"OR.

TosSot y Talmudim TB y TJ incluyen pasajes literales de Tosefta, que situa en discusiôn con otros textos, ya sea frente a la Misnah, ya sea frente a otra tradiciôn sin determinar. Talmud y TosSot coinciden en los temas con desarrollos cuandtadvos diferentes. Lo usual es que las largas disquisiciones y debates sean talmudicos, mientras que en TosSot se ofrecen una redaction abreviada o fragmentada. De hecho, a veces, halakot sin justification en Tosefta, la encuentran en TB. Es frecuente un orden diferente en textos muy cercanos. Un mismo texto ο narracion presenta diferente orden en TosSot y Talmud, incluso parte de él se traslada a otro contexto. Existe un magnifico ejemplo en Sot 33b-37b, pasaje hagàdico con constantes y repetidos paralelos con TosSot 8, aunque la breve alusiôn a la avispa cruzando el Jordân, la encontramos en TosSot 11. En TB no se recoge gran parte del material hagàdico de Tos (lo cual résulta lôgico puesto que no es frecuente este tipo de material en el Talmud). No obstante cabe senalar que en este tratado se incluye una considerable proportion de este genero narrativo que coincide con Tosefta. Pueden variar los nombres de sabios en un mismo dicho; o se da autor en Talmud a citas anônimas de TosSot; incluso, por el contrario, a tradiciones anonimas de Talmud (tenu rabbanan) TosSot les da autor. Es habituai asi mismo, que las coincidencias de TosSot con el Talmud se den en tratados diferentes, no en Sotzh. Debemos destacar que es mucho y frecuente el material comûn coïncidente de TosSot con Sanhédrin, Baba Batra, Sebu'ot,... Debido a la cercania que hemos observado entre ambas obras, extrana que sin embargo en ambos Talmudim no se recojan todas las tradiciones de Tos. Esto obliga a considerar que ni TB ni TJ conocen Tosefta. Podemos concluir que Tosefta se elaborô fundamentalmente en un periodo anterior al Talmud, pero no debemos descartar que conste de una considerable cantidad de anadidos de épocas posteriores tomadas precisamente de fuentes talmudicas. El Talmud no emplea nuestra Tosefta como fuente. Aunque tuviese noticia de algunas de las tradiciones que en ella se recogen, no parece conocer Tosefta como la obra que nos ha llegado; Tosefta no debia ser obra difundida entre el judaismo de esta época. No solo no se cita como tal al ofrecer el Talmud un pàrrafo idéntico a algûn pasaje de Tosefta, sino que además en ocasiones en las que cabria suponer que se podria emplear un fragmento de Tosefta, no lo hace. Analizada la relation de Tosefta con la literatura rabinica, se nos plantean casi con toda seguridad diferentes momentos redaccionales de TosSot, algunos de los cuales se pueden situar en épocas considerablemente tardias. Es en estos casos

en los que debemos englobar ciertos pasajes midrâsicos y talmùdicos, (no de fuentes comunes) que fueran incluidos en Tosefta. Sot 3,4 Él solia decir: —Un piadoso tonto y un malvado listo, una mujer frivola y los golpes de los fariseos, he aqui que éstos destruyen el mundo.

TosSot 2,3 Si un nino es precoz, éste puede destruir el mundo.

Sot 22a Una mujer frivola, etc. Los rabinos ensenaban: Una virgen devota, una viuda revoltosa y un menor que no ha completado sus meses (un precoz), he aqui que éstos destruyen el mundo. (...) jQué es un menor que no ha completado sus meses? Asi lo explicaban: Este es un discipulo de los sabios que menosprecia a sus maestros. R. Aba dijo: "Este es un discipulo que no ha completado su instrucciôn y ensena," segûn Abahu dijo Rab Huna que dijo Rab: ",;Qué significan las Escrituras, porque a muchos ha hecho caer... (Prov 7,26). Esto es un discipulo de los sabios que no ha completado su instrucciôn y ensena, y el otro es un discipulo de los sabios que ha completado su instrucciôn y no ensena.

TJSot 3,4 Una mujer frivola, ésta es la que..., los golpes de los fariseos éste es el que..., una viuda revoltosa es quien..., un nino prtco^ es el que R. Halqyah en nombre de R. Simon (dice): "Este es el que es grande en (conocimiento de) la Torah desde su pubertad y desaira a los mayores que él." Dijo R. Yosi: "Este es uno de nueve afios pero cuyo miembro es como de uno de doce anos." Si éste dene relaciones sexuales con una mujer cualquiera de las que se consideran relaciones prohibidas en la Torah, ellas mueren a sus manos y él queda libre.

Análisis de la Escritura El objeto es dilucidar las razones y modos del destacado uso de las Escrituras en TosSot, y obtener una mayor informaciôn sobre la naturaleza de la obra. Para ello he seguido très pautas: El modo de referirse a las Escrituras y de citarlas. Esta terminologia puede manifestar una regularidad en su empleo, ο por el contrario, variaciones que manifiestan si se trata de copias ο trasvases de otros textos de verdadera naturaleza midrásica. El uso en cada uno de los mss. (Viena y Erfurt). El uso mismo de las Escrituras en TosSot, con especial atenciôn a las citas comunes con MSotàb, asi como las que no coinciden. Para ello he elaborado unos listados, (traducidos a proporciones, 7,6% comunes con MSot; 92,4% propio de Tos, no en M).

Es notable el uso que hace de las Escdturas. La extremada inclusion de citas biblicas senala un especial interés en respaldar con la Biblia todo el material halàkico posible. En cuanto a su modo de empleo y formulaciôn, se observa una falta tal de regularidad, que nos parece en ciertas ocasiones un mosaico élaborado de pasajes pertenecientes a otras obras, a modo de obra recopilaciôn. El casi exagerado uso de la Escritura obliga a observar su uso con mayor detenimiento, considerândose casi como una de las prioridades de TosSot en su elaboration: ilustrar Misnah con el texto biblico. TosSot es un compendio de fuentes incorporadas en diversos momentos, con la constante finalidad de ilustrar la halakah con la Biblia y destacar la hagadah.

Sintesis de Resultados De forma esquemádca presento las que me parecen conclusiones establecidas de mi investigation. 1. Respecto a la lengua, confirmo la preferencia por Ms. V: redaction de suyo mâs compleja y ortografia y caracteristicas mâs prôximas a la conocida como tradiciôn palestinense. El Ms. E, mâs constante en su escritura y simplificado en su sintaxis, es en mi opinion, un texto reelaborado. 2. Respecto a sus relaciones con el resto de la literatura clàsica del Judaismo: Es evidente que TosSot depende de Misnah Sotah, a la que compléta y reordena. Incluso cuando la omite, es porque la supone. El material que anade sobre el conocido por Misnah se encuentra por lo general en los Midrasim. Posiblemente hay que contar con que TosSot usa los midrasim ο quizá colecciones anteriores ya fijadas. En el caso de SNm y SDt puede decirse que ambos desconocen Tosefta. El recurso a fuentes comunes o a bloques premidrâsicos puede ser la explication mâs prudente y convincente. La reincorporation de material diverso en etapas de Tosefta puede ser la explication de no pocos anadidos a TosSot procedentes de SOR y del Talmud. Respecto a los Talmudim, creo poder decir que no conocieron nuestro texto de Tosefta, aunque si sin duda tradiciones comunes. 3. Es notable el uso que TosSot hace de las Escrituras. La exagerada inclusion de citas biblicas révéla un especial interés en respaldar con la Biblia todo el material halâkico posible e ilustrarlo con haggadah. La naturaleza de Tosefta es completar el texto de Misnah con ilustraciones biblicas. Pero las formas de exégesis son tan variadas que yo me inclino a formular que TosSot es una recopilaciôn de materiales exegéticos para completar, corregir e ilustrar Misnah.

N E W PERSPECTIVES ON THE O R I G I N S OF AGGADA Τ BERESHIT T H E W I T N E S S OF A GENIZA FRAGMENT LI EVE TEUGELS Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands This paper deals with a research project on the midrashic collection Aggadat Bereshit (AB). Up to now, research on AB has been very limited. Solomon Buber published the only "critical" edition in 1903. It has never been translated, and it is very rarely mentioned in studies on rabbinic midrash. My project consists of several parts: an English translation; commentary in notes; and text-critical work. The latter aspect is especially necessary because I have two manuscripts in addition to the one that Buber had for his edition, and these new manuscripts contain interesting variants. In this paper, I want to focus especially on the importance of one textual witness for AB, namely a Geniza fragment.

Introduction to AB Since AB is relatively unknown, a brief introduction to this midrash might be welcome. AB is a homiletic midrashic work, which means that each chapter is an independent literary homily. The work is structured in a unique way. It is divided in groups of three chapters or homilies. Each consists of a homily on the Torah (Genesis), a homily on the Prophets, and a homily on the Writings (Psalms). The homilies on the Torah follow the sequence of the book of Genesis. Between the three chapters of such a unit there seems to be a thematical unity, which results in what I have called, in the spirit of the Form-Analysis of Arnold Goldberg, an intermediate megaform, that is, an additional structuring form which operates between the macroform of each single homily and the work as a whole (Teugels 1998). The fact that the individual homilies are tided "Torah," "Nevi'im" and "Ketuvim," and not "Bereshit," "Nevi'im," and "Tehilli.nT— as is actually the case—is an indication that the unity of the tripartite Tenakh was a special concern of the composer of AB. The division of AB in groups of three homilies could best be explained by a link with a synagogue lectionary system (the triennial cycle) which included systematic readings from the Pentateuch, the Prophets and the book of Psalms. Snaith, Rabinovitz and others, concluded from the existence of entire homilies on Psalms in such midrashic collections as Midrash Tehillim and AB, that not only the Torah (Seder) and the Prophets (Haphtarah), but also the Book of Psalms must have played a role in the triennial cycle (Snaith 1933; Rabinovitz

1935—6; See however Stemberger 1996: 3221). The evidence of AB is, however, not very convincing in this respect: only 9 different Psalms are used in the 27 homilies on Ketuvim; which means that many are used repeatedly, some even as many as six times. 2 1 do not want to go into the details about the quest after the triennial cycle; but it is no secret that his quest has not yet yielded decisive resuits. As to the origins of AB: No serious efforts have been made to date AB precisely; but it is usually dated to about the tenth century (Herr, EJ: 366; Stemberger 1996: 312). Also its place of origin has not yet been established. AB shares much material with better known midrashim, especially Tanchuma Midrashim. The way in which the work deals with inherited material, is, moreover, very similar to the course of events in the Tanchuma Midrashim and other late-rabbinic compilations. That is, it borrows extensively from older midrash sources, but this material is reworked and rewritten in the form of new literary homilies and the editor or writer has added of what appear to be his own pieces of midrash. Before Buber, AB was known from the so-called "printed editions," which are all based on the first printed edition of AB in the work Steijadot, published in Venice in 1618 by Menachem di Lonzano. This edition can, e.g., be found in Jellinek's Bei ha-Midrash (Jellinek 1967: 4.1-116).‫ נ‬The manuscript on which the first printed edition was based, has been lost. Buber used, in addition to the text of the first printed edition, a manuscript that he discovered in the Bodleian Library: Ms. Oxford 2340 or Opp. Add. 8vo. This ms. contains some different readings and it has also an additional chapter, but as a whole it does not offer any radical variants. Buber's ms. has been dated, in the Neubauer catalogue, to the late 15th century and it is said to have originated from Spain or Northern Africa. Up to now, I found two other fragmentary manuscripts that contain some more promising variants. The first is Ms Oxford Mich. 410 ff. 89v-99v. This looks like an abbreviated form of AB; large parts are missing and it includes some of the chapters in a different order. This ms. is said to have originated in 15th century Spain. The second new ms. is Ms Cambridge TS Mise 36.121, a Geniza manuscript from the Taylor-Schechter collection. So far, it has neither been dated nor described in any of the works on the Geniza collections.

The Use of "ha-elohim" in the Geniza Manuscript I want to concentrate on the Geniza-manuscript, which I think we may safely accept to be the oldest witness presendy known of AB. It contains two fragments that cover part of chapters 67-68 and 79-80 of AB. The text of the relevant passages does not differ extensively from that of Buber's edition in length and content. However, the manuscript has one outstanding feature, namely in "Aggadat Bereshit might appear to suggest that the Psalms were used as the third reading in the Palestinian synagogue service, but this is not certain." I own this informadon to a seminar paper written by P. Rodman for Prof. I. Levine in the Schechter insdtute (1998): "?‫"האם היה מחזור קריאה במזמורי תהלים בציבור בימי קדם‬, which is based on AB. For the different printed editions of AB, see Buber 1903: XXX1V-XXXVI.

all but one instance, it has the name ha-elohim for God, where the printed ediuons and Buber's manuscript have ha qadosh baruch hu.41 refer here to the denotadon of God in the words of the rabbis, not in quotadons from Scripture, where ha-elohim is, of course, very common. The appearance of ha-elohim is important for two reasons: First, I see it as an indicadon that AB is related in some way to the Tanchuma-Yelamdenu literature. And second, it might also be a factor in daring and perhaps localising the work. Let me explain both hypotheses.

"Ha-elohim" and the relationship of AB to the Tanchuma-Yelamdenu midrashim. The divine epithet ha-elohim is certainly found in some rabbinic midrashim; but it is much rarer than the usual denotations ba-maqom and ha-qadosh-baruch-hu (Böhl 1977: 2—3). Ha qadosh-baruch-hu is the usual denotation in the classical midrashim, such as GenR, LevR and Pesiqta de Rav Kahana. Ha-qadosh baruch-hu is also wellattested in the printed editions of the so-called Tanchuma-Yelamdenu (T-Y) midrashim that comprise, next to the "ordinary" Tanchuma (Tan) and the Tanchuma published by Solomon Buber (TanB), also DeutR, parts of ExodR and NumR, Pesiqta Rabbati (PR) and other midrashim (See Stemberger 1996: 304). However, in some cases, we find ha-elohim in the current editions of those midrashim (Bregman 1991: 177 and note 44; Marmorstein 1930: 270-274). Abraham Epstein was the first to examine the occurrence of ha-elohim and he concluded that this divine epithet was a characteristic feature of T-Y midrashim (Epstein 1887: 62; 1899: 513; 1950: 415-6). A few years later, Wertheimer published a Geniza fragment in his Batei Midrashot, which he identified as a Yelamdenu fragment and which systematically has ha-elohim (Wertheimer 1950: 168— 172) This confirmed Epstein's hypothesis, as he himself wrote in a short article that was later included in Batei Midrashot (Epstein 1950).5 The divine epithet ha-elohim received renewed attention when the fragments from the Cairo Geniza, that were said to be remains of Tanchuma or Yelamdenu Midrashim, were studied. The fragments published by Louis Ginzberg in the first volume of his Gin^e Schechter, confirm the hypothesis of Epstein that haelohim is a characteristic feature of Tanchuma and/or Yelamdenu midrashim (Ginzberg 1928: 23-50; 449-513). It must be noted that Ginzberg makes a sharp distinction between Tanchuma and Yelamdenu midrashim. According to him, one Geniza fragment, a collection of 13 homilies or introductions to homilies, is the Ur-Yelamdenu. In this fragment, in addition to one other, ha-elohim is said by him

The two fragments have together 5 times ha-elohim and once ha qadosh baruch-hu. It should be noted that only one of the fragments that are called "Yelamdenu midrash" by Wertheimer has ha-elohim, the others have ha qadosh baruch-hu. In the enlarged and revised edidon of Batei Midrashot (1948-53), the fragment with ha-elohim is found on pp. 168-172. This fragment was already published in vol. 1 of the old Batei Midrashot (1893-97), next to two others that have ha qadosh baruch hu (pp. 167-8 and 173-5 in the new edidon). In the new ediuon, yet another manuscript that is called "Yelamdenu-midrash" by Wertheimer is added. Also this one does not have ha-elohim. This is somewhat confusing because it is not mentioned that Epstein, whose article already appeared in the old Batei Midrashot (vol. 3), only deals with one fragment; moreover the fragments are placed in another order than in the original Batei Midrashot.

to be the only denotation for God (Ginzberg 1928:28).6 Another fragment, which he calls a Tanchuma midrash, does not have ha-elohim but ha-qadosh baruch-hu. Because ha-elohim clearly appears much more frequendy in the ancient witnesses to T-Y midrashim, it seems to be a characteristic feature of an older stramm of this literature (Bregman 1991: vi, 176-77). Meanwhile, other T-Y fragments that contain ha-elohim have been discovered (Urbach 1966: 48-54; Bregman 1990: 117-119; 1991: iii, 97ff., and appendix 1). Apart from the use of ha-elohim, Epstein distinguished a number of other features which he claimed are typical of the T-Y midrashim. He called the homilies in these collections "learned drashot" or "rhetorical drashot" (‫)דרשות למה־יות‬, as opposed to the "simple drashot" found in, e.g., LevR and PRK (Epstein 1899: 512). I think this is a good name for this category of midrashim, because it throws light upon the composed, well-considered formal structure of the homilies and also on the rather artificial way of presenting comments, for example by means of rhetorical questions such as: ‫ למה‬or ‫ —מהו הדבר הזה‬features which also apply to AB. The characteristics of the "rhetorical drashot" according to Epstein are: a) The use of a pure Hebrew language; not a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic as we find in the "simple" midrashim. This is considered to be a preference for a "biblical language"—a kind of linguistic "renaissance." b) The use of "ha-elohim." This can also be considered as a return to a biblical language. c) The occurrence of many Greek loan words. d) The introduction of midrash with rhetorical questions. e) The addition of epithets to the names of the sages, e.g. R. Tanchuma bar Aba·, R. Pinchas ha-kohen bar Kama. Also this is a sign of the "learned" character of the midrash; the darshan apparendy wanted to show off his knowledge of rabbinics. f) Each homily starts with a halachic question introduced by jelamnedu rabbenu or halacha. The answer, which as a rule comes from a tannaitic source, is introduced by kach shanu chachamim or kach shanu rabbotenu or a similar expression. g) Then follows as a rule a petichta in the name of R. Tanchuma bar Aba. The occurrence of ha-elohim in the Geniza manuscript seems to be an indication that this belongs to the same early stramm of midrashim as the T-Y fragments that use ha-elohim. Without restricting ourselves to the Geniza fragment, AB shares the first four of Epstein's criteria of "rhetorical" midrashim: the use of ha-elohim (in the Geniza fragment); the use of pure Hebrew; the occurrence of many Greek loan words; and the rhetorical questions. However, the three last of Epstein's features are all missing: AB does not often add learned epithets to the names of the rabbis. It never includes the name of R. Tanchuma bar Aba; therefore it seems unjustified to call it a "Tanchuma midrash." And, moreover, AB has no single halachic introduction containing the expression jelamdenu rabbenu or Ginzberg considers the abbreviation '‫הק‬, that is found on the first page of this fragment, as an abbreviation for ‫האלהים‬, just as, ‫ אלי אי‬and ‫ אלה‬appear on the second page. See however, Bregman 1991: 267 note 43, who considers '‫ הלן‬as a later correction from ‫ האלהים‬to ‫הקדוש ברוך הוא‬.

halacha•, which makes its also difficult to call it a ‫ 'י‬Yelamdenu-midrash" in the full sense of the word. Thus: we learn from the presence of ha-elohim in the manuscript of AB, that the use of this divine epithet was neither restricted to midrashim with thtyelamdenu- form, nor to midrashim that feature rabbi Tanchuma. Moreover, there are many other examples of midrashim that are generally reckoned to the T-Y family that do not really suit the name T-Y midrash: some do not have the expresûon yelamdenu rabbenu, but halacha, such as DeulR, NumR (Bacher 1899: 507) and the Geniza fragments published by Ginzberg.7 Others do not have peticbtot in the name of Rabbi Tanchum but introduce their peticbtot only with the anonymus formula sheamar ha-katuv. The latter formula is only mentioned en passant by Epstein as an alternative for R. Tanchum patach in DeutR and NumR, but it is mentioned by Bacher as characteristic for Tanchuma Midrashim (Epstein 1899: 513; Bacher 1913: 29-34; Urbach 1966: 4). It is systematically found in AB and Midrash Tehillim (Bacher 1905: 62-63). The second part of ExodR, that is usually considered a T-Y midrash, has no halachic introductions at all. All this could be a good reason to reassess the family-relations between the midrashim that we are talking about, without immediately thinking in terms of "Tanchuma and / o r Yelamdenu1' midrashim. Questions that now need to be answered, are: (1) Can we say anything about the place of the "school" of darshanim who preferred the name ha-elohim and who were responsible for the oldest stramm of AB and some or all of the other "rhetorical midrashim"?; and (2) Can we say anything meaningful about its date?

Questions of date and place The discussion about ba-elobim was crossed from its early beginnings by another discussion, namely the one about the date of the T-Y midrashim. Both discussions have mutually influenced each other. Without going into unnecessary details, Bacher, Ginzberg, Buber and others all believed that they had found the Ur-Tancbuma or Ur-Yelamdenu in one or another manuscript, preferably one that they had discovered themselves (Bacher 1899: 504; Ginzberg 1928: 28; Buber 1885: 10 and passim). As to the use of ba-elohinr. it has been considered as both a sign of antiquity and of late origin (Böhl 1977: 1-3). The same holds for the use of Hebrew or Aramaic, and of Greek and Latin loan words. Bregman considers the appearance of Galilean Aramaic and Greek and Ladn loanwords in the Geniza fragment of a T-Y midrash, which he transcribes in his dissertation (TS Ci 46), as a sign that it belongs to an early stratum of this literature (Bregman 1991: vi). Against this background, Epstein's list might require some refining. Also with respect to AB, the investigation of its Greek and Latin loanwords might yield important results, because these can probably be divided into different linguistic layers, each testifying for a different date an place in the redactional history of the work.

Böhl 1977: 9 note 47 rightly points at the rather strange fact that Ginzberg nevertheless calls this fragment a Yelamdenu fragment. And the Ur-Ye/amndenu at that!

The many parallels that AB has with TanB, appear to indicate a direct dependency on this midrash. This seems particularly likely when we see that AB sometimes has the same mistakes as TanB.a However, there are other possibilities to explain such parallels. We should not forget that Solomon Buber highly influenced the debates about TanB and AB. It is known that Buber treated the works that he published almost as his own children; and one's children are normally closely related to each other. Thus, he also treated AB and TanB, which he both published with an interval of only 8 years, as close relatives.9 The fact that, in his introduction to AB, he gives lists of parallels with TanB and vice versa, without giving the parallels with, e.g., Tan, is misleading in that it steers one in a very specific direction. To be sure, many passages have direct parallels in TanB, but focussing too narrowly on these, might conceal the many passages that are without parallel in the extant midrashim, or that have parallels in midrashim other than TanB.]0 Moreover, the parallels with the Tanchuma Midrashim only hold for the homilies on the Torah, and not for those on Nevi'im and Ketuvim— some exceptions notwithstanding. Therefore, I would like to propose a different scheme to explain the relations between AB, TanB and the other works that Epstein called "rhetorical midrashim." I want to stress the hypothetical character of this experiment, but nothing venture nothing won. And at least I do not say that AB is the long expected Ur-Tanchuma. Imagine a large stream that branches into different tributaries, bigger and smaller rivers; some of them in turn branch into smaller streams, and some of them again flow together after a while; the whole looking like a delta-area. This delta represents the many flows of "rhetorical midrashim." Some introduce their halachic parts with halacha and others wixhjelamdenu rabbenu. Others do not have any halachic introductions at all. Some introduce their peticbtot with %ehu she'amar ha katuv and some with Κ Tanchuma patach. Many are written in relatively pure Hebrew, most of them contain a certain number of Greek and Latin loan words; and use the divine epithet ha-elohim in their early strata. To this delta also belongs AB, and when we focus on this small stream, we see that it shares its pure Hebrew language, its many Greek and Latin loan words, and its use of the expression ha-elohim with many other rivers. Like the second half of ExodR, it does not have halachic introductions of theyelamdenu or halacha-iotm. Like some of the other midrashim, it introduces its peticbtot with she'amar ha-katuv. Other midrashic streams have other elements in common which are not shared by AB. I would like to localise at least part of this delta in Southern Italy. This is not the first time that this place has been suggested for one or another branch of the 8

9

10

See, e.g., AB 31:1 and TanB Wayyera 40 : both have kach shanu rabbotenu, but what follows is not a tannaidc citadon but a citadon from Jeremiah. Buber's Oxford ms. of AB, however, does not contain the introducdon. See Buber, 1885: 109 note 215; 1903: 63 note 5. Another example is given by Ginzberg 1928: 507: AB 28 has the same mistake as in TanB Wayyera 30, while it is corrected in PR. See about Buber's attitude with regard to TanB, already the criticism of Neubauer 1886: 224. See also Mann I 1940: 57. See, e.g., the Heidelberg fragments published in Urbach 1966: 48-54. AB seems to have taken over certain passages from the text as it appears in this manuscript, see esp. 51-52, notes 27, 30, 42.

"rhetorical midrashim," but I think it is the first time it has been suggested as the cradle of AB. Neubauer mentioned the towns of Bad or Otranto, which had important rabbinic schools in the 10th and 11th centuries, as possible places of origin for the T-Y midrash (Neubauer 1886/13: 226). His arguments were that, in South-Italy, the triennial cycle, which is reflected in these midrashim, was still in use when other places had long made the switch to the annual lectionary cycle. The reason for this was the large socio-economic and cultural influence from Palestine on the Jews living in that region. South-Italy remained under Byzantine rule until the 11th century-the Byzantine colonies in South-Italy were called Magna Graecia—and Greek was its official language. This would explain the many Greek loan words in AB and other midrashim, which are often administrative terms. The date of 10th or 11th century should be regarded as a terminus ad quern. It is feasible that some currents from which the midrashim under consideration drew their midrashic material, and perhaps also such parts as the yelamdenu-introductions," already streamed in earlier centuries. It is also probable that certain midrashic streams ended up in other regions after having crossed South Italy. Thus, TanB is said by Bregman to be an Italian-Askenazi recension, which received final editing in northern Italy (Bregman 1990: 122; 1991: VIIVIII) !2.

The scheme of the delta explains the apparent relations between AB, the two Tanchumas and other related midrashim, without necessarily having to speak in terms of Tanchuma or Yelamdenu midrashim. As to the factors Tanchuma and Yelamdenu, I would like to suggest the following solution. I would consider the element yelamdenu in a formanalytical way, as a literary form of the midrashic homily, just like the petichta and the peroration, that could be used in a literary homily, but that could also be left out. In this way the forms of the rabbinic homilies have been approached by the students of Arnold Goldberg, such as Felix Böhl and more recendy Doris Lenhard, whose dissertation about the forms of the rabbinic homily is about to appear (Böhl 1977; Lenhard, Die rabbinische Homilie). As to the name of rabbi Tanchuma, I consider the fact that AB does not have the name of rabbi Tanchuma in a single instance as an indication that this name does not belong to the oldest stramm of the "rhetorical midrashim." My argument for this runs as follows. It is clear that AB has many features in common with TanB. Considering the common hypothesis that AB has borrowed all this parallel material from TanB as we have it, why did it not take over the name of Rabbi Tanchum? It is hard to imagine that the writer or compiler of AB had a personal problem with rabbi Tanchum, and only with him, and that he therefore erased his name from all his borrowed material. It appears rather more plausible that the name of rabbi Tanchum was added to some of the "midrashic rivers" which later became known as the Tanchuma 11 12

See, on thejeiwidenu-midiash, Böhl 1977: 89-92 Compare Bregman's view on TanB Vaera 15, in which the river Ticino is mentioned, to that of Townsend 1989: XIII. According to Townsend, this passage cannot have been written in Northem Italy, because it misrepresents the geography of that region. Bregman, on the other hand, affirms that the passage reflects the polidcal reality of Northern Italy in the Lombard period, whereby Tiber and Ticinus represented the two wicked kingdoms: Romans and the Lombards.

Midrashim in the strict sense of the word.' 3 The reason why rabbi Tanchum was chosen must have been pseudo-epigraphic, because he was one of the last of the Palestinian amoraim, and a renowned aggadist, and as such represented the zenith of the Palestinian aggadic tradition. 14 This need not mean, of course, that TanB borrowed from AB. It would mean, rather, that AB has taken water from the stream which later became TanB before it added the name of rabbi Tanchum to its peticbtot.

Bibliographical References

Bacher, W. 1899. Die Agada der Palästinensische Amoräer. Band 3, Strassburg. , 1905. Die exegetische Terminologie der Jüdischen Traditionsliteratur. Band 2, Leipzig (= Darmstadt 1965). , 1913. Die Proömien der alten Jüdischen Homilie. Band 2, Leipzig (= Darmstadt 1965). Böhl, F. 1977. Auflau und literarische Formen des aggadischen Teils im Jelamdenu-Midrasch Wiesbaden. Bregman, M. 1981. "The Triennial Haftarot and the Perorations of the Midrashic Homilies." JJS 32, 74-84. , 1986. ,Textual Witness of the Tanhuma-Yelamdenu Midrashim." (Heb.) Proceedings of the Ninth World Congress of Jewish Studies. Jerusalem, 46-56. , 1990. "Stratigraphie Analysis of a Selected Pericope from the Tanhuma-Yelamdenu Midrashim." (Hebr.) Proceedings of the Tenth World Congress ofJewish Studies. Division C, Volume 1, Jerusalem, 117-124. , 1991. "The Tanhuma-Yelammedenu Literature. Studies in the Evolutions of the Versions" (Hebr.). (Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy) Jerusalem. Buber, S. ed. 1885. Midrash Tanchuma. (2 Vol.) Wilna (= Jerusalem 1964). , 1903. Aggadat Berseshit. Krakau (= New York 1973). Epstein, A. 1887. ‫מקדמוניות היהודים‬. Vienna (^Jerusalem 1957). , 1899. "Eine Hypothese über die Entstehung der Tanchuma-(oder Jelamdenu-) Midrashim." In Bacher 1899: 512-514. , 1950. ‫לקונטרס ילמדנו‬. In Wertheimer 1950: 415-6. Ginzberg, L. 1928. Geniza Studies in Memory of Dr. Solomon Schechter (‫ )גנזי שעכטער‬I. Midrash and Haggadah. New York . See also his "Ma'amar al ha-Yelamdenu" on 449—513. Herr, M. D. "Aggadat Bereshit." In Encyclopaedia Judaica Vol. II, 366. Jellinek, A. 1853-1857. Bet ha-Midrasch. Sammlung kleiner Midrashim und vermischter Abhandlungen aus ckrälternjüdischen Literatur. 6 parts, Leipzig ( = Jerusalem 19673). Lenhard, D. Die rabbinische Homilie. Ein formanalytischer Index. (Frankfurter Judaistische Studien 10); Frankfurt (forthcoming). Mann, J. 1940. The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue. Vol. 1. Cincinnati. Marmorstein, Α. 1930. "Zur Erforschung des Jelamdenu-Problems." MGWJ 74,266-284. , 1931. "Die Gottesbezeichnug Elohim im Jelamdenu." MGWJ 75 ,377-379. Neubauer, A. 1886-7. "Le Midrasch Tanhuma et Extraits du Yelamdenu et de Petits Midrashim." REJ13, 224-238; 14,92-114.

13

14

Compare Urbach 1966: 3, where he defends the existence of a common source for the T-Y midrashim in a way similar to what has just been proposed. See Bacher 1899: 501-2. It must be noted, however, that Bacher was of the opinion that R. Tanchum himself compiled the Ur-Tancbuma.

Rabinovitz, L. 1935-6. "Does Midrash Tillim (sic) reflect a Triennial Cycle of the Psalms?" JQR 26, 349-368. Snaith, N. H. 1933. "The Triennial Cycle of the Psalter." ZA1W5Ì, 302-307 Stemberger, G. 21996. Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash. Edinburgh. Teugels, L. 1998. "Concern for the Unity of Tenakb in the Formadon of Aggadat Bereshit." In Sacred Books in the Ancient World. Pagan. Jewish. Christian. Ed. H. W.

Havelaar, P. W. van der Horst, L. V. Rutgers, L. Teugels. Louvain. See also: "Der Aufbau von Aggadat Bereshit und die Idee der Einheit des Tenakhs." PJB (forthcoming). Townsend, J. T. 1989. Midrash Tanhuma (S. Buber Recension). Hoboken, NJ.

Urbach, Ε. 1966. "‫שרידי תנחומא ־ ילמדנו‬." Qovet^ a! Y ad: Minora Manuscripta Hebraica 6, 1 54. Wertheimer, S. A. 1950. Batet Midrashot. Vol. 1, Jerusalem (= revised and enlarged edition by A.J. Wertheimer).

PART F O U R M I D D L E AGES JEWISH HISTORY, LITERATURE A N D T H O U G H T

E L VIDDUY DE SEM T O B A R D U T I E L 1 AMPARO ALBA CECILIA Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain

Sem Tob ben Yishaq Ardutiel, Don Santo de Carrion. Más conocido por su obra en lengua eastellana, Los Proverbios Morales, Sem Tob Ardutiel, rabino de la aljama de Carrion de los Condes (Palencia), es autor de otras obras en lengua hebrea que, en su mayoria, han sido escasamente estudiadas. Poco se ha avanzado en el conocimiento de los detalles biogrâficos sobre este personaje desde que, Baer2 identificara a Sem Tob ben Yishaq Ardutiel con "Santo, Judio de Carrion." 3 Sabemos que viviô en el s. XIV, desempenando el cargo de rabino en su comunidad y, quizás algùn cargo publico durante el reinado de Alfonso XI; en los Ultimos versos de su maqama Ma'aJeh ba-Kab (Debate del câlamo y las tijeras) el propio autor indica la fecha en la que término su composiciôn: En los diez ûltimos dîas del mes de Tammuz fue terminada del todo, en el ano 105 del sexto milenio de la creaciôn del mundo.4 Yo, Sem Tob ben Yishaq hice esto...5 Ante la falta de datos histôricos sobre su persona, muchos son los investigadores que han cedido a la tentaciôn de extraer conclusiones a partir de su obra,‫ ־‬sin embargo, por muy sugerentes que éstas puedan parecer, no dejan de ser especulaciones, mâs o menos posibles, pero sin valor histôrico. 6 El hecho de que, ya desde el s. XV, Sem Tob apareciera mencionado por autores cristianos y valorado como poeta en lengua eastellana, pudo influir en la

1

2

3 4 5

6

Para ajustarnos al numéro de paginas propuesto por los editores hemos suprimido la parte final del trabajo, reladva a las versiones castellanas del Vidduy. Baer, Y. 1935. "Seridim mi-meshorere Qastilia bi-me'ah 14." En Minhah le-David. (Homage to David Yellin) Jerusalén, 197-204. Sem Tob, Proverbios morales. Ed. S. Shepard. Madrid, 1985, 83. Es decir, el dia 20 del mes de Tammuz del ano 5105, que corresponde al mes de julio de 1345. Nini, Y.-Fruchtman, M. 1980. Ma'aseh ha-Rab (Mihemet ha- 'et weha-misparayini). Edited with Introduedon, Commentary and Notes by... Tel-Aviv University, 80. En uno de los ûltimos y mâs completos trabajos sobre los Proverbios Morales, Zemke, J. 1997. Critical Approaches to the Proverbios Morales of Shem Τον de Carrion: An Annotated Bibliography, Delàware, afirma en sus conclusiones: "On the historical person Shem Τον absolutely nothing is know with certainty except his writings; (...) This review has collaterally underscored that conclusions about a historical person made on the basis of fictional writings and unsubstantiated by others sources are flawed and unreliable." (230)

falta de interés que, tanto el personaje como su obra, despertaron, durante mucho dempo, entre sus correligionarios. Con la excepciôn del mencionado Debate entre el cdlamoy las tijeras, su obra en lengua hebrea, todavia no demasiado bien conocida, se compone principalmente de poemas religiosos.7

El Vidduy "Ribbono sel 'olam " La confesiôn de los pecados es la oraciôn caracterísdca del Dia de la Expiaciôn. Desde su formulaciôn en Le 16,21, ligada a la ceremonia de expiaciôn del Sumo Sacerdote, hasta la formulaciôn medieval, todavia vigente, un largo proceso creadvo se ha llevado a cabo. En la Biblia encontramos confesiones individuales8 ο comunitarias,9 expresadas de forma privada ο publica10 pero carentes de una formulaciôn fija. En la Misnah (Yom 3,8), sin embargo, encontramos ya una formula fija que debe pronunciar el Sumo Sacerdote: "Oh Dios, ofendi (,avity), transgredi (pasa'ty), pequé (bata'ty) delante de Ti, yo y mi familia; oh Senor, perdona las culpas, las transgresiones y los pecados con que te he ofendido, que he comeddo, con los que he pecado delante de Ti..." Parece que la formula acrôsdca de confesiôn denominada Ašamnu quedô fijada ya en el ultimo periodo de los amoraitas (s. VI), y aparece recogida en el Seder Rar Amran Gaôn, libro de oraciones compuesto a pedciôn de los judios espanoles, que data del s. IX. Esta formula, compuesta de, al menos, veindcuatro palabras ordenadas alfabédcamente, se ha conservado casi idéntica en todos los ritos y hasta nuestros dias. Desde la Edad Media, se conoce a esta formula con el nombre de Vidduy Zuta' (confesiôn breve)11 para diferenciarla de la otra formula de confesiôn que le sigue en la liturgia de Yom Kippur denominada Al He/ ο Vidduy Gadol (confesiôn larga) . También ésta oraciôn data de la época amoraita y también sigue el orden alfabéuco para formular una lista de faltas más ο menos larga, segûn los ritos.12 Cada linea comienza con la frase: "Por los pecados que hemos comeddo ante Ti..." expresada en plural, como Ašamnu, de manera que el perdôn alcance a toda la congregaciôn. El Vidduy de Sem T°b, conocido con el nombre Ribbono kl 'olam bir'oty, se encuentra mencionado entre las oraciones de los judios sefarditas13 e incluido en los mah^orim de tradiciôn sefardi para ser recitado en el Musa/ de Yom Kippur antes de la confesiôn comunitaria Ašamnu.

7

8

9 10 11 12

13

Sobre la descripciôn, contenido, ediciones, etc. de su obra en hebreo, véase el estudio citado de Zemke 1997: 25-32. Por ejemplo, en los Salmos 32, 42, 51 y 69, David reconoce y confiesa sus pecados y pide clemencia. Por ejemplo, en Esd 9,6. Por ejemplo, en 1S 15,24 Saûl confiesa su pecado ante Samuel. Mah^or Vitry, 374; SMur Rashi, 96. En el rito sefardi, un pecado por cada letra (22), aunque a veces se repite en orden inverso (44); en el rito askenazi, dos pecados por cada letra (44). Idelson, A. Z. 1967. Jewish Liturgy and Its Development. Nueva York, 242; Nulman, M. 1996. The Encyclopedia ofJewish Prayer. Londres, 278.

La atribuciôn de este vidduy a Sem Tob se encuentra en dos ediciones del s. una del texto hebreo: Maht(0r le-Yamim Nora'im [Saloniki: 1792], págs. 153156, con el encabezamiento: Vidduy le-musaf le Rabenu Shem Tob Arduti'el y otra de una version eastellana: Orden de las Oraciones de Ros-Ashanahy Kipur impresa en Londres en 1740, con el encabezamiento: Viduy de la Musaph del Dia de Kipur. De Rabenu Sem tob, hijo de Ardutiel. Se desconoce la fecha en que Sem Tob compuso esta obra. S. Shepard, 14 interpretando en senddo realista las primeras lineas que aparecen en el texto, y viendo una alegoria de la situation histôrica del reino de Castilla en otros pasajes, llega a la conclusion de que ésta fue, probablemente, la ultima obra de Sem Tob, compuesta entre los anos 1359 y 1369. XVIII,

jSefior del universo! Mientras observo el brillo, ya perdido, de mi juventud y mis miembros, que son todos como sombra (job 17,7), mis pecados, rojos como lagrana

(Is 1,18) y mis cabellos blancos como la nieve (Is 1,18) por los muchos anos

transcurridos en sadsfacer todos mis deseos.... Efectivamente, de la lectura de estas lineas, podria deducirse que habia un hombre viejo; pero de la lectura de estas lineas en todo el contexto de la obra, es igualmente legitimo, tomar esas frases como una de tantas figuras retôricas que adornan la obra; sin descartar ninguna de estas posibilidades, creo, sin embargo, que el tono vigoroso de la obra se corresponde mejor con la madurez que con la vejez. Si fue escrita después de 1345 (fecha en la que Sem Tob compuso su maqama), ο antes, es, hoy por hoy, imposible de saber.

Anâlisis formai A finales del siglo pasado Zunz 15 opinaba que este poema "adolece de la verborrea del estilo de la Melitsâ, que también está patente en el Debate entre el cdlamoy las tijeras y en otras producciones de esa época." Nini y Fruchtman en la Introducciôn al Ma'aseh ha Rab,ib tampoco dedican muchos elogios a esta obra: "Como ocurre con el Yam Qohelet, también este poema adolece de una excesiva Iongitud y un estilo ampuloso, aunque en algunos pasajes concretos se puede reconocer la capacidad del autor como poeta." Modestamente, creo que estas opiniones no hacen jusdeia a los valores literarios de esta obra ni al trabajo poédeo de Sem Tob. El siguiente estudio, que pretende poner de relieve algunos de los valores literarios de la obra, se basa en la edition del texto hebreo contenida en el Mah^or Ahale Ya'aqob (Seder Tefillot lë-Yom ha-Kippurim), de R. Ya'aqob ben Yishaqi, Jerusalén 1910, sec. 2' págs. 155-159, 17 formando parte del rimai del Musaf de Yom Kippur, precedido por la formula confesional 'Aiamnu y seguido del piyyut Ašamnu mi-kol 'am. 14 15 16 17

Shepard, S. 1978. Shem Τον, His World and His Words. Miami, 102. Zunz, L. 1865. Literaturgeschichte der synagogaten Poesie. Berlin. Nini, Y.-Fruchtman, M. 1980. Ma'ase-Harab, Tel-Aviv, 17. Davidson, I. Thesaurus... vol. III, 375, col.479 da una lista más amplia de Mah^orim y tratados que recogen esta oraciôn.

El Vidduy de Sem Tob es una composiciôn de unas cien lineas, escdta en prosa rimada muy cuidada, en general. Siguiendo la tradiciôn de los autores hispanohebreos, Sem Tob utiliza, como Ibn Gabirol en Keter Malkut, esta forma de expresiôn literaria que, aunque no llega a alcanzar la perfecciôn ardsdca de la poesia, requiere, por parte del autor, de buenas dotes poéticas, del dominio de la lengua y de la técnica para obtener unos buenos resultados. Como es caracteristico de los poetas hispanohebreos, Sem Tob inserta en su texto gran cantidad de citas biblicas, que forman el denominado "estilo de mosaico," a veces la composiciôn es una condnua concatenaciôn de citas, minimamente modificadas y adaptadas al nuevo contexto. La presencia de la Biblia no se limita, sin embargo, a lo que consideramos cita textual, sino que toda la composiciôn está imbuida de referencias y resonancias, al texto biblico. Sirvanos como ejemplo el siguiente pàrrafo: (...) pues el leôn es e!másfuerte de tos animales (Pr 30,30); la materia tiende a la debilidad y al disimulo; legusta el soborno (Is 1,23) tiene cuatro caras (Ez 1,6) busca lo que necesita, con malas artes (cf. Pr 10,9) y movili^a a sus adeptos, los nacidos en su casa (Ge 14,14) que son cuatro. Cada uno tira por un !ado (Is 47,15), nunca se dan por satisfechos (Is 56,11), pelean entre si (Is 19,2), la mayoria no son sabios (Job 32,9) tienen e! corazôn divididoy eso les costarâ caro (Os 10,2), no se dejan convencer por ninguno ni se ponen de acuerdo; cuando caminan se vuelven hacia las cuatro direcciones (Ez 1,17): uno desea sacar un tiypn de!brasero (Is 30,14) y el otro sacar agua del p0t(0 (Ibid.): avanyan como las canoas de papiro (Job 9,26); otro ventea el aire el aire como los chacales (Je 14,6) y el cuarto cava una fosa (Qo 10,8) para nichos; a mi me dan la espalday no la cara (Je 32,33); uno hace guardia, otro persigue, otro saquea y otro depreda; unogolpea a otro con unapiedra 0 con elpuiio (Ex 21,18),pues son una generation perversa (De 32,20) una villa derruiday desmantelada (Pr 25,28) ;jo hablo de ρα% pero ellos quieren la guerra (Sal 120,7): desolation y ruina jalonan sus vias (Is 59,7), a su alrededor no hay justicia (Is 59,8); sus ojos no pueden ver ni su corazôn comprender (Is 44,18). Y si yo no hubiera sido formado de su materia, no habria sido rebelde, no me habria echado atrás. (Is 50,5) Pero mis entranas son devoradas por el ardor (Sal seducen a éstos (Je 5,25); cada

38,8), jproclaman todo de mi (Je 12,6); mis iniquidades uno se engrie diciendo :yo reinaré ( IRe 1,5)...

Rima : El texto se nos présenta como una composiciôn muy equilibrada: consta de 101 secuencias rimadas; de ellas, las dos terceras partes (70 secuencias) están formadas por 3 miembros monorrimos, una tercera parte, (30 secuencias), por 2 miembros rimados entre si, y una secuencia por 4 miembros; los grupos fônicos riman en consonante, y presentan una gran variedad y riqueza de rimas: la rima a base de sufijos pronominales ο elementos gramaticales muy frecuentes en la lengua (plurales, femeninos, terminaciones verbales etc.) es relarivamente escasa, por lo que, siguiendo la terminologia tradicional18 podemos hablar en esta composiciôn de predominio de rima rica y consonante, que incluye, a veces, a la vocal anterior al ultimo grupo consonândco: por ejemplo: -adot en la secuencia formada por las siguientes palabras: ubehagadot - mehitvadot —yadot \ la rima femenina19 está présente, no solo en los casos de sufijos pronominales (ej.: këbodéka 18 19

Ducrot, O.-Todorov, T. Diccionario enciclopédico de las ciencias de! lenguaje. Argentina. Es decir, la que lleva el acento en la süaba paroxitona.

miyadéka - negdéka ) y finales eon patab furtivo ante 1aríngea (ej.: boréab - botéab) sino también en sustantivos segolados (ej.: vêtéša'- réša'- péša'). Hay muy pocos casos en los que la rima consonante no es perfecta, y de alguno de ellos, seguramente podriamos extraer consecuencias acerca de la pronunciation de determinadas consonantes en la época de Sem Tob, como la fet, las sibilantes samek, sin y iin y las guturales 'ayin, 'alef, bet y be'; éstos son los casos mâs representadvos: lëbefib - tašib - taqšib (rimando fet con lin) / lim'ol - limbol - lé bol (rima de 'ayin con bet) / niqleb - male'- 'eleb (rima de 'alef con be') I ο el siguiente, en el que samek rima con sin y 'alef con be'·, mitnase'-jenaseb - 'e'eleb; el ultimo caso de rimas consonantes anômalas que hemos detectado está formado por las très gumrales 'alef, bet y be' que riman entre si: vébas -jébas -jim'as. Figuras retôricas : La rima consonândca, tal como acabamos de ver, hace que la aliteraciôn sea una de las figuras retôricas mâs caracteristicas de este dpo de composiciones; pero además, al ser un recurso poérico utilizado ya en la Biblia, su presencia se muldplica a través de las numerosas citas biblicas. Aparte, por tanto, de la aliteraciôn, que se percibe en la mera lectura del texto, resenaremos, a modo de ejemplo, algunas de las figuras, principalmente de diction que configuran el carácter poérico de este texto: Antitesis:

"El dia es corto, la tarea, larga." "La boca que ata es también la boca que desata." Comparaciôn : "Mis pecados son rojos como la grana, mis cabellos, blancos como la nieve." "Aunque vierta 1ágrimas como aguaceros..." Hipérbole·. "No hay suficientes expresiones y palabras para nombrar (los pecados), ni libros y cuadernos bastantes para escribirlos; se acabarian los dias y las noches exponiéndolos y declarândolos y todavia quedarian por confesar diez veces mâs." Comparadôn + bipérbole: "Aunque ms pecados sean como las aguas del mar y su oleaje, y ms faltas como las estrellas del cielo y sus huestes..." Paronomasia·. Algunos de los ejemplos mâs claros son los siguientes: méšubab "infidelidad, apostasia" seguido de tëlubab·. "arrepentimiento;" na'im, part, pl. de nu'a : "que se mueven" seguido de na'im, adjetivo que significa "hermoso, agradable;" 'obil, forma verbal de yabal "confiar, tener esperanza" y méhilab, sustantivo acufiado en el HR que significa "perdôn."

La lengua·. Sem Tob utiliza el hebreo biblico casi en la misma medida que el hebreo rabînico; desde el punto de vista léxico, hay que tener en cuenta que una gran parte del vocabulario especifico de este dpo de poemas penitenciales está acunado en el Talmud; eso justifica la presencia de términos rabinicos, por ejemplo, en la dpificaciôn de los pecados: bëlogeg y bé^adon (referidos al pecado que se comete sin intention y al que se comete intencionadamente); también encontramos muchos giros y expresiones de tipo mâs coloquial propios del HR: ej.: laš0n ba-ra' (calumnia), nibelpeb (decir obscenidades), babilot babilot (en grandes cantidades). En menor numéro encontramos un numéro de términos propios del HM: por ejemplo: bel (brillo, fulgor), ma'âvab (pecado), kabas ve-kabad (debili-

dad y disimulo), sa'ef (con el significado de "pensamiento, opinion") mahal (perdon, enfermedad) ο merer (amargura, aflicciôn). Por lo que se refiere al sistema verbal, la gran afluencia de citas biblicas podria darnos una idea algo equivocada: las formas verbales con wau> conversivo son muy abundantes, podriamos decir que "saltan a la vista," precisamente, en las citas biblicas, pero su valor temporal está totalmente adecuado al contexto nuevo, y desprovisto, en la mayor parte de los casos, de los valores temporales que tenían en HB. La construcciôn rabinica de hayab con pardcipio aparece solo un par de veces. El uso del pardcipio ocupando la esfera del présente está generalizado. En lo reladvo a la sintaxis oracional, prédomina la construcciôn paratáctica; las pardculas ki e 'im son las más frecuentes, con los mismos valores que tertian en HB.

Estructura del texto y partes temâticas: El Vidduy de Sem Tob dene seis partes claramente diferenciadas: 1. Introducdon·. Reflexion previa al examen de conciencia del penitente en la que prima una vision pesimista desarrollada en torno a los siguientes temas: brevedad del dempo que le queda por vivir y abundancia y gravedad de los pecados: Mientras observo el brillo, ya perdido, de mi juventudj‫ ׳‬mis miembros, que son todos como sombra...mis cabellos blancos como la nieve por los muchos afios/ transcurridos en sadsfacer todos mis deseos y en transgredir todos los mandamientos, y que ya se ban consumido, sin esperanza,{..) pues el dia es corto y la tarea es mucha (...) jCômo podré confesar, en estas horas que me quedan, los pecados y delitos que he cometido ο mendonarlos con mis labios / si no hay bastantes expresiones y palabras para nombrarlos, ni libros y cuadernos suficientes para escribirlos?; se acabarian los días y las noches / exponiéndolos y nombrândolos y todavia quedarían por confesar die^ veces mâs. El poeta expresa su desconfianza en alcanzar el perdôn mediante la confesiôn oral, pues precisamente la boca es la causante de una gran parte de pecados. Con la reflexion sobre la inutilidad de la confesiôn si no hay un acto de contriciôn total, expresado mediante una pregunta retôrica, termina esta secciôn: ^hay, acaso, cura ο medicina en el mover lengua y labios, en agitarlos ritualmente mientras el corazôn guarda rencor y maquina intrigas y todas estas abominaciones? 2. La siguiente secciôn présenta una reflexion minuciosa al estilo del vidduy gadol 'Al het ("por los pecados que cometimos ante Ti"), expresada en primera persona del singular y en la forma mâs antigua (s. VII) que se componia solo de seis ripos de pecados: por el pecado que corned ante Ti sin intenciôn (...) por el pecado que cometi ante Ti intencionadamente (...) el pecado que cometi bajo coacciôn (...) el pecado que cometi ante Ti voluntariamente (...) el pecado que cometi contra Ti a escondidas (...) el pecado que cometi ante Ti pûblicamente.

Termina esta section eon la reflexion acerca de la omnipresencia divina que hace inûril todo intento de escapatoria del pecador. 3. Sigue un diâlogo del pecador consigo mismo, que comienza con la descripciôn de su estado emocional: Me sentia confuso y avergonyado con cl corazôn asustado y tembloroso, y el pensamiento agitado e inquieto, indeciso, entre libre y preso, entre imposible y posible, sin saber qué es lo mâs acertado, si quedarme o huir, si temer o tener confianza, dudando entre ideas opuestas: recordarlos u olvidarlos, decirlos o callarlos. El dolor por los pecados cometidos, expresado con dos imágenes tomadas, la primera de la Biblia: "inclino la cabeza como un junco," y la segunda de la poesia medieval hispanohebrea "mis 1ágrimas se unen de rojo por la sangre de mi higado," da paso a un interlocutor más optimista, que basa su discurso en la misericordia divina, superior a cualquier otra consideraciôn: (...) mis pensamientos me responden y me animan, diciéndome: "busca la redenciôn, pues todavia hay tiempo hoy, y aunque el juez sea temibley terrible, no desesperes de la compasiôn, porque todavia el sol está en el cieloj‫ ׳‬no se apresurarà a ponerse basta que pase un dia entera;tienesocasiôn de exponer tu sùplica, pues (siempre) hay una puerta abierta para tu oraciôn, para concederte tu peticiôn; y aunque en muchas ocasiones hayas obrado perversamente, el perdôn divino es mucho mayor, y su bondad, todavia mâs. Y aunque tus pecados sean como las aguas del mar y sus olas, y tus faltas como las estrellas del cielo y sus huestes, la misericordia de Dios es eterna; y aunque tu culpa sea inabarcable, su misericordia, que llega hasta el cielo, sera siete veces mayor" 4. Confortado de esta manera, el penitente initia ahora la confesiôn de los pecados segûn la formula del vidduy traditional acrôstico 'Ašamnu, bagadnu ... pero expresada, como la anterior 'al bet, en singular, y ampliada con citas biblicas y talmûdicas: HE PECADO, y mis pecados son abundantisimos: pecado de robo y pecado de traiciôn; HE SIDO INFI EL, y no me he quitado de encima ni de dia ni de noche las vestiduras sucias (Zac 3,4); HE ROBADO y no puedo restituir lo robado, pues es dificil restituir lo robado que ha sido consumido; HE HABLADO INJURIOSAMENTE con lengua enganadora y por diversion, como habia una necia (Job 2,10); HE TRASTOCADO todo lo justo, con mi boca lo deformo, todo 10 convierto en caos (Ez 21,32); HE OBRADO MAL y mi aima se regocijabay se a/egraba (Est 8,15) porque la conducta de los impios prosperaba (Je 12,1); ME HE ENGREÎDO y he sido amigo de rinas y peleas, y de! que las hace por arrogancia (De 17,12); HE SIDO VIOl.ENTO y mi boca contra el justo profiriô injurias aunque él no habia cometido violencia (Is 53,9); HE URDIDO EMBUSTES, y me compraba como esclavo el que da falso testimonio; HE DADO MAL CONSEJO y para transgredir los mandamientos de mi Senor he estado cavi/ando en mi alma (Sal 13,3); HE EN Ci A Si A DO y mi corazôn era como una fuente de agua de la que manaban jaisedady mentira (Pr 30,8); ME HE BURLA DO, y mi corazôn rechazaba la reprensiôn de los consejerosy daba la mano a los escarnecedores (Os 7,5); ME HE RKBELADO, y mi mano ha raspado de todo libro: no os rebeléis contra el Senor (Jos 22,19); HE PROFANADO, y mi corazôn, abiertamente y a escondidas, a/ardea, codicioso, de despre-

aar al Senor (Sal 10,3); ME HE SUBLEVADO e incluso he incitado a otros a subievarse; HE SIDO INJUSTO y mi corazôn, en su soberbia, se ha negado a endere^ar 10 que ha torcido (Qo 7,13); HE OBRADO INICUAMENTE, y me escogi como amigos a hombres perversos; HE ODIADO y he oprimido a todo aquel sobre el que tenia poder, siendo el enemigo que ataca (Nu 10,9); ENDURECÍ LA CERV1Z, y hablaba todo el tiempo, sin callar (Is 62,1) (omitir) las palabras más fuertes; HE SIDO PERVERSO, y mi alma envidiaba a los más perversos, buscaba al malvadoj a su ma/dad (Sal 10,15); HE DEVASTADO, pero no lo daba importancia: jo he creado al devastadorfunesto (Is 54,17); HE COMETIDO ABOMINACIONES y mi alma se consumia de deseo (Sal 119,20) por cometer abominaciones (De 7,26); ME HE DESCARRIADO; mi corazôn (estaba perdido) como el rebano sin pastor, perdido, al que encuentra un hombre (Ge 37,15); ME HE Β URLADO tratando a todo piadoso como a un loco,j yo quedaba ante él como un burlador (Ge 27,12). 5. Sigue una reflexion acerca de la naturaleza humana y de su inclinaciôn al mal por su propia consdtuciôn; a partir de la creencia medieval, basada en la filosofia neoplatônica, de que el hombre se compone, como el resto del mundo material, de la union de los cuatro elementos simples: tierra, aire, agua y fuego, se describe, con términos bélicos e imágenes extraidas de la Biblia, la lucha entre ellos por alcanzar el predominio sobre los demás. El desequilibrio y la falta de armonia entre ellos, es la causa de la inclinaciôn humana al pecado; la naturaleza humana, constituida por esos cuatro elementos, es representada por el ser ο viviente de la vision de Ezequiel, con cuatro caras: (...) la materia tiende a la debilidad y al disimulo; legusta elsoborno (Is 1,23) tiene cuatro caras (Ez 1,6) busca lo que necesita, con malas artes y movili^a a sus adeptos, !os nacidos en su casa (Ge 14,14) que son cuatro. Cada unotirapor un lado (Is 47,15), nunca se dan por satisfechos (Is 56,11), pelean entre si (Is 19,2),«0 son muy sabios (Job 32,9) tienen el corazôn divididoy eso les costarä caro (Os 10,2), no se dejan convencer por ninguno ni se ponen de acuerdo; cuando caminan se vuelven hacia las cuatro direcciones (Ez 1,17). Estos cuatro elementos, (fuego, agua, aire, tierra), que no aparecen mencionados expresamente, son claramente representados por imágenes biblicas: uno desea sacar un tiqin del brasero (Is 30,14) y el otro sacar agua delpo^p (Ibid)(..)·, el tercero ventea el aire el aire como los chacales (Je 14,6) y el cuarto cava unafosa (Qo 10,8) para nichos. El hombre es un mero espectador de esta guerra, sin capacidad para detenerla: (...) a mi me dan la espalday no la carar, uno hace guardia, otro persigue, otro saquea y otro depreda; unogolpea a otro con unapiedra 0 con elpurio (Ex 21,18),pues son una generation perversa (De 32,20) una villa derruiday desmantelada (Pr 25,28);yo hablo de pa% pero ellos quieren la guerra (Sal 120,7): desolation y ruina jalonan sus vias (Is 59,7), a su alrededor no hay justicia (Is 59,8); sus ojos no pueden ver ni su corazôn comprender (Is 44,18). (...) ^qué puede hacer un cordero entre lobos? ,:puede acaso prevalecer uno contra muchos? La repuesta a esta pregunta retôrica está extraída de la jurisprudencia rabinica: "[Cuando hay discrepancias] entre uno y muchos, la jurisprudencia es la que sostiene la mayoria."

Por lo tanto, concluye dando paso a la ultima consideration: es la propia namraleza humana la que impulsa al hombre a obrar mal: Y si yo no hubiera sido formado de su materia, no babria sido rebelde, no me habria echado atrds. (Is 50,5) Pero mis entranas son devoradaspor el ardor (Sal 38,8), j proclaman todo de mi (Je 12,6); mis iniquidades seducen a estos (Je 5,25); cada uno se engrte diciendo:yo reinaré (IRe 1,5); uno ruega, otro prueba, y yo no sé qué hacer(...) 6. Termina la obra con una nueva petition de perdôn divino. Ante la posibilidad de que su contrition no haya sido merecedora de ello, Sem T o b reclama el perdôn, no ya como individuo, sino como miembro de la comunidad de orantes, en cuya boca pone el piyyut 'Asamnu mikol 'am20 que viene a continuation: (...) hazlo por esta santa asamblea, pues cada urio de sus miembros derrama torrentes de sûplicas, tanto el chico como el grande, el gordo como el flaco ofrecen el fruto de sus labios y presentan como inmolaciôn, en vez de bueyes, sus plegarias, y hacen esta confesiôn ante Ti, diciendo: "Hemos pecado mâs que cualquier otro pueblo..."

20

Este pijryut, escrito en forma de acrôsrico alfabérico, es un poema penitencial incluido entre las selihot de Yom Kippur segûn la tradiciôn sefardi. Ya aparece en el Siddur Rav Amram Gaon (del s. IX) y con mucha frecuencia se encuentra dividido en dos mitades: la primera, desde la palabra que comienza por la letra kaf hasta la que comienza por datet‫׳‬, la segunda, en muchos casos no se conserva. Cf. Davidson, Thesaurus... vol. 1, 367, col. 8115 y IV, 281.

£

ABD AL-KARĪM AL‫־‬MAGĪLĪ

U N PARALELO MAGREBÍ A LOS A C 0 N T E C I M I E N T 0 S DE ΙΟ66 ΕΝ GRANADA ESPERANZA ALFONSO CSIC, Madrid, Spain Si la historia medieval del Magreb está marcada por la inestabilidad politica, en el siglo XV confluye un cuadro de variables que favorece especialmente la tension y la desintegraciôn social. La afluencia condnua de musulmanes y judios emigrados de la Peninsula Ibérica a raÍ2 de las persecuciones de 1391 en Castilla, Aragôn y Mallorca produjo un efecto psicolôgico y econômico considerable, al que se unia el retroceso territorial en Espana y la presiôn crisriana sobre las costas del Norte de Africa. Son anos de crisis y de poder inestable, una manifestaciôn extrema de lo que Henri Terrase caracterizô como "anarquia endémica." 1 En ese contexto, la pérdida de autoridad de los 1íderes polidcos fue acompanada de una influencia progresiva de los šurafā\ una elite religiosa de creciente prestigio. Abu ‫׳‬Abd Alläh Muhammad b. ‫׳‬Abd al-Karim b. Muhammad al-Magili alTilimsärii (824/1425-909/1504) es uno de los ejemplos más destacados y controvertidos entre las filas de este ultimo grupo. Nacido probablemente en Magila2 y criado en Tremecén, protagonizô uno de los episodios mâs violentos contra las comunidades judias establecidas en los oasis del Sahara, zona en la que estudio y predicô durante buena parte de su vida adulta. Fruto de esa acdvidad fue la destrucciôn de la sinagoga de Tamandt y el ataque contra la comunidad judia de Tuwât, un enclave sahariano fortificado, conquistado por los merinies en 1320, que hoy pertenece a Argelia.3 Estos hechos, bien conocidos, se pueden considerar como el punto cririco de una serie de incidentes contra los judios que se produjeron de forma ocasional a lo largo de las épocas merini y wattasi, en las que la comunidad judia habia disfrutado de condiciones favorables y de una prosperidad inusual. El incidente de Tuwät ha sido examinado fundamentalmente desde dos puntos de vista, prestando atenciôn al contexto socio-econômico de la persecuciôn ο a la controversia juridica que se produjo en el Magreb a raiz del mismo

Terrasse, H. 1949-50. Histoire du Maroc des origines à l'établissement du Protectorat français. 2 vols. Casablanca, II, 87. La nisba al-Magili puede hacer referencia exclusivamente a su origen tribal y no a su origen geogrâfico. Sobre el origen de estas comunidades, cf. Camps, G. 1982. "Réflexions sur l'origine des Juifs des régions nord-sahariennes." En Communautésjuives des marges sahariennes du Maghreb. Ed. M. Abitbol. Jerusalén: Institut Ben-Zvi, 57-67. Sobre la comunidad de Tuwât, cf. Bakchine-Dumont, S. 1975-6. Les juifs de Touat (14 et 15 siècles). Mémoire de Maîtrise d'Histoire présentée à l'Université de Paris, VIII.

sobre la legalidad o ilegalidad de la sinagoga de Tamantit. 4 En este arnculo me propongo subrayar el modo en el que al-MagiE usa la poesia como medio para aleccionar a la poblaciôn musulmana contra los judios y como ese uso pone de manifiesto el funcionamiento de la memoria literaria colecdva. De forma mâs o menos unánime se acepta que los meriníes, dinastia que gobierna el Magreb Extremo (al-Magrib al-Aqsà) desde la segunda mitad del siglo XIII hasta la primera mitad del siglo XV, favorecieron una de las etapas de mayor calma para los judios que vivian en su territorio.5 Es bien sabido que tenian conflictos de legitimidad y falta de apoyo entre amplios sectores de sus elites, de modo que recurren al grupo que les es mâs util tanto por sus conocimientos técnicos como por ser incapaces de recabar autoridad y ejercer presiôn sobre el gobierno de cuya protection dependen. Un signo de esa actitud es la gran influencia que varios miembros de la comunidad judia llegaron a tener en la corte a lo largo de esta etapa.6 Por aquel enfonces, los merinies habian iniciado una poliuca de acercamiento a Espafia y para ello utilizaron el servicio de los judios, que tem'an lazos muy estrechos con Europa. Se conserva una documentation muy abundante que confirma su participation en las cancillerias de los monarcas aragoneses, bien como traductores o como embajadores. 7 Por otra parte, y desde el punto de vista comercial, se aprovecha también su formation mercantil y su mucha experiencia, de modo que los manuales notariales espanoles y magrebies registran su presencia como intermediaries y representantes comerciales en las transacciones que se mantienen entre Espafia, Italia y el Norte de Africa.8 4

5

6

Esa discusiôn se conserva en el Mi'ydr de al· Wanfarisi. Ed. litograf. de Fez, 1 3 1 4 - 1 5 / 1 8 9 6 - 8 , 12 vols., II, 170-202. Cf. también Hunwick, J. O. 1985. "Al-MahiG and the Jews of Tuwāt: The Demise of a Community." SI 61, 155-83 y "The Rights of the dhimmis to maintain a place of worship: A 15th Century fatwā from Tlemcen." Al-Qantara 12, 1991, 133-155. Cf. Corcos, D. 1963-4. "The Jews of Morocco under the Marinides." JQR 54, 271-287; 55, 1964—5, 53-150. Reed, en Studies in the History of the Jews ofMorocco, Jerusalem: Rubin Mass, 1976. Hay dos casos que destacan sobre el resto: el de la familia de los Banū Waqqāsa (ο Ruqqása) cuyos miembros estuvieron al servicio de Yûsuf ibn Ya'qûb (685/1286—706/1307), y el de Hârûn, visir del ûltimo sultan merini, 'Abd al-Haqq II (824/1421-869/1465). Sobre los primeros, cf. Corcos, D. "The Jews of Morocco," 79; Shatzmiller, M. 1983. "An Ethnie Factor in a Medieval Social Revolution: The Role of Jewish Courtiers Under the Marinids." En Islamic Society and Culture. Essays in Honour of Professor Λφζ Ahmad. Ed. M. Israel and Ν. K. Wagle. Nueva Deli: Manohar, 156 y ss. Vs. franc, del arnculo en Abitbol, M. ed. Communautés juives, 295-302; sobre Hârûn cf. Garcia Arenal, M. 1978. "The Revolution o f Fas in 869/1465 and the death of sultan 'Abd al-Haqq al-Marini." BSOAS 41, 43-66; Shatzmiller, M. "An Ethnic Factor," 158 y ss.

7

Cf. espec. Régné, J. 1910. "Catalogue des actes de Jaime I, Pedro III et Alfonso III, rois d'Aragon, concernant les juifs." REJ 60, 161-201; 61, 1911, 1-43; 62, 1911, 38-73; 63, 1912, 245-68; 64, 1912, 67-88; 215-35; 65, 1913, 61-88; 196-223; 66, 1913, 252-62; 67, 1914, 53-81; 195-224; 68, 1914, 198-221; 69, 1919, 135-220; 70, 1920, 74-87; 195-208; "Catalogue d'actes pour servir à l'histoire des Juifs de la couronne d'Aragon sous le règne de Jaime II (1291-1327)." REJ 73,2, 1921, 195-209; 75,2, 1922, 140-178; 76,1, 1923, 58-93; 183-210; Dufourcq, Ch. E. 1966. L'Espagne catalane et le Maghrib aux XIIIe et XIl•* siècles. Paris.

8

Cf. Lopez Pérez, M. D. 1995. La corona de Aragon y el Magreb en el siglo XIV (1331-1410). Barcelona: CSIC-Insdtuciôn Milà y Fontanals, 358 y ss.; 362 y ss. Sobre la instalaciôn o reinstalaciôn de judios en la costa, en el sur y en las comunidades limitrofes con el Sahara, cf. Hirschberg, H. Z. 1974. A History of the Jews in North Africa. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, I, 372 y ss.

En esa época Tremecén, ciudad en la que se criô al-Magili, se convirtiô en el centro neurâlgico del comercio, junto con Fez.9 Otra de las zonas de mayor desarrollo es, precisamente, la de los oasis saharianos, entre los que se encuentra Tuwât. El porcentaje de participaciôn judia en estas zonas era notable, tanto en la costa como en la zona del Sahara, y se incrementará a lo largo de la etapa merini.10 Sin embargo, la imagen de tolerancia con la que generalmente se présenta la existencia de los judios en este periodo ha sido recientemente objeto de revision y cridca. En opinion de M. Shatzmiller, los meriníes no les favorecieron de modo especial y si se vieron obligados a recurrir a ellos fue exclusivamente por el problema de legitimidad de la dinasda y a causa de las malas relaciones que sostuvieron con sus sûbditos.11 Lo cierto es que a lo largo de la etapa merini se suceden también una serie de incidentes puntuales contra la comunidad judia.12 A ellos habria que anadir la actitud desfavorable de los lurafâ', que se habian visto perjudicados por la politica de 'Abd al-Haqq II y de su predecesor, Abū Sa'id 'Utmàn III (800/1398823/1420?). Aquellos que vivian del comercio sufrian una fuerte competencia por parte de comerciantes de origen judio, pues en Fez grupos de conversos al islam instalados en la Qaysâriyya, el principal nudo comercial de la ciudad, empezaban a exigir que éstos pagaran los impuestos, de los que estaban excluidos. En resumen, y como valoraciôn general de la situaciôn que se vive a lo largo del siglo XIV, voy a recurrir la descripciôn de J. S. Gerber, que habla de una marcada dicotomia entre la buena relation oficial con los judios y una fuerte y progresiva hosdlidad popular.13 Es fâcil imaginar que la presiôn econômica llevô a esgrimir argumentos teolôgicos y estereotipos capaces de excitar la animosidad popular contra los merinies y sus protegidos. Los enfrentamientos que acabo de mencionar entre los gobernantes y las elites religiosas hicieron que estas ùltimas utilizaran la inclusiôn de los judios en los cuadros de gobierno como instrumento de deslegitimaciôn de la dinastia. M. Garcia-Arenal ha examinado el modo en el que las fuentes árabes describen uno de esos episodios: la revoluciôn de Fez de 869/1465 en la que se vio implicado el visir Hārūn. 14 Creo que ha demostrado convincentemente que los šurafā' convirtieron el suceso en una version legendaria, gracias a 9

10

11 12 13

14

Sobre la comunidad judia de Tremecén, cf. Shatzmiller, M. 1978. "Les Juifs de Tlemcen au XIV e siècle." R E / 137, 171-7. En este ardculo se revisa la importancia del papel econômico de la ciudad en los siglos XIV y XV. Las responsa judias del siglo XV parecen demostrar que el centro comercial era Argel y no Tremecén. Sobre la naturaleza y caracterisdcas de este comercio transahariano a lo largo de los ss. XIV y XV, y la parricipaciôn de judios en el mismo, cf. Corcos, D. "The Jews o f Morocco." 73 ss.; Abitbol, M. "Juifs maghrébins et commerce transsaharien au Moyen-Âge." Communautésjuives, 248. Shatzmiller, M. "An Ethnie Factor." Cf. C û rcos, D. "The Jews o f Morocco," 58 y 147. Gerber, J. S. 1980. j eut sh Society in Fe% 1450-1700. Studies in Communal and Economic Life. Studies in Judaism in M o d e m Times, vol. VI. Leiden: Brill, 29. Garcia-Arenal, M. "The revolution of Fās." Sobre las fuentes hebreas que recogen el suceso, cf. Hirschberg, H. Z. A History of the jews 391 y ss.

situaciones y episodios que le eran familiares al publico musulmân y se aceptaban como estereodpos. El suceso pasa asi a formar pane de un ciclo de historias sobre judios poderosos que aparece recurrentemente en la historiografia magrebi. Ésa es la linea de anâlisis que yo voy a seguir en el incidente de la sinagoga de Tamandt, provocado por al-MagiE, en el que a continuation me voy a centrar.15 Las revueltas que habian marcado los ûltimos anos del gobierno meriní se repideron con la nueva dinasda. Asi, en 1517 hay un nuevo levantamiento andjudio en Tremecén, centro de los Banū Ziyän. Es natural pensar que tales acdtudes influyeron en al-MagiE, que paso parte de su juventud en la ciudad. Hacia 1447-8, y después de haber recorrido otros puntos del Magreb, éste se estableciô en el oasis sahariano de Tuwât, donde la comunidad judia, muy numerosa, parecia bien integrada con la poblaciôn local musulmana. Al-MagiE funda una %āwiya en la zona y, ante la ausencia prácdcamente total de autoridades religiosas, se siente en la necesidad de apelar a un mayor rigor en el cumplimiento de la fori'a y de predicar al-amr bi-l-ma 'arùjwa-l-nahy 'an al-munkar. En sus declaraciones pûblicas, marcadas por la intolerancia religiosa, anima a perseguir a los judios, llama a la jihâd contra el infiel, y termina recomendando destruir la sinagoga de Tamandt y matar a los musulmanes que traten de oponerse a ello. A lo largo de estos anos al-MagiE escribe unos veinte trabajos, entre libros y epistolas, en su mayoria de contenido religioso, de los cuales se conservan unos diez. Entre ellos hay uno dedicado integramente a la polémica y el ataque contra los judios. Lleva por titulo: Ta'liffi māyajib 'alà l-muslimin min iytindb al-kttffdr:6‫י‬ En esta obra sosdene que el amor al Profeta Muhammad exige a los musulmanes que odien a los judios y a cuantos les protegen (con ello hace referencia a la relaciôn de cEentela entre ambos grupos generaüzada en la zona de Tuwât). Este ataque contradice, en principio, la ley islâmica, que garandza a los dimmies protection y libertad de culto a cambio de un impuesto (ji%ya) y de la sujecciôn a un régimen juridico especial que los convierte en ciudadanos de segunda clase.17 Al-MagiE sosdene, sin embargo, que éstos han roto el pacto de la dimma, pues no pagan la ji^ya a las autoridades, sino a jefes tribales. En su opinion ese pago ni se ajusta a lo impuesto en el pacto de 'Umar, ni se paga con la debida humiliation (al-dull wa-l-sagar) que prescribe la ley, por lo que ha de ser considerado soborno (rišwa).

15

16

17

El trabajo mas completo sobre al-MagiE es, probablemente, el de Gwarzo, H. I. 1972. The Life and Teachings of al-Maghilt with particular reference to the Saharan Jewish community. Tesis doctoral inédita, University of London. Cf. también Slousch, Ν. 1906. "Etude sur l'histoire des juifs et du judaïsme au Maroc." Archives Marocaines 6, 150 y ss. Resumido por Vajda, G. 1962. "Un traité maghrébin 'adversos judaeos': Abkam ahl al-dhimma du šayh Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Karim al-MagiD." En Etudes d'Orientalisme dédiées à la mémoire de LéviProvençal. Paris, II, 805-13. Ed. y trad, al inglés en Gwarzo, H. I. The Life and Teachings. Hay otra ediciôn publicada del tratado: Bunar, R. 1968. Misba'h al-arwāh fi usù! alfalāh. Argel. Cf. Et, s.v., (Cl. Cahen); Fattal, A. 1958. Le statut légal des non-Musulmans en pays d'Islam. Beirut: Imprimérie Catholique; Tritton, A. S. 1930. The Caliphs and their non-Muslim Subjects: A Critical Study of the Covenant of 'Umar. Londres; sobre las circunstancias de la aplicaciôn del pacto de 'Umar en el Magreb, cf. Gerber, J. S. "The Pact of 'Umar in North Africa: A Reappraisal of MuslimJewish Reladons." En Proceedings of the Seminar on Muslim-Jewish Relations in North Africa. Nueva York: World Jewish Congress, 40-51.

Además de la regulation del pago de layi%ya, el tratado exige adoptar dos medidas suplementarias: la primera de ellas es rechazar comida que haya tenido contacto con los judios, lo que, en ultimo término, y desde un punto de vista econômico, supone su expulsion de los mercados. La segunda légitima la destrucciôn de la sinagoga de Tamantit que, segûn al-MagiE, habia sido construida en época islâmica y con ello contravenia lo exigido por la ley. Esa propuesta le lleva no solo a enfrentarse con la comunidad judia, sino también con las autoridades locales, con los 'ulamā' más tradicionales y con los propios gobernantes de Fez. Para llegar a proponer tales medidas al-Magill dene que actuar previamente sobre las emociones de la poblaciôn de la zona, y para ello utiliza una serie de medios que son habituales en otros tratados polémicos de similares caractérisacas. Uno de los que mayor difusiôn tuvo en época merini fue el panfleto escrito por ‫׳‬Abd al-Haqq al-Islàmi, un judio originario de Ceuta que se convirriô al islam a finales del siglo XIV. El tratado, escrito entre 1393-6, le fue encargado por un musulman, miembro de la familia al-Qabä'ifi (Abū Zayd c Abd alRahman), con el propôsito de utilizarlo en sus luchas contra judios influyentes de la corte.18 Este panfleto no es un caso aislado, al contrario, debe de situarse en el contexto de una creciente discusiôn interconfesional mantenida a lo largo del siglo y favorecida, probablemente, por las ôrdenes cristianas misioneras y la tension de la amenaza crisdana.19 A diferencia de al-MagiE, ‫ ־‬Abd al-Haqq propone que a los judios les sea redrada la condition de tributarios, pues en su opinion son idôlatras (mušnkūrì) y adoradores del fuego ( 'obde W, en hebreo). Da pruebas abundantes de las injurias y los insultos que profieren contra los musulmanes y sus gobernantes y recomienda, en ultimo término, raspar los restos de idolatria que aparecen en sus libros santos y no comprarles carne en ningûn caso. No obstante, y a pesar de las coincidencias ocasionales entre los dos tratados, nada confirma que al-MagiE conociera o utilizara el panfleto de 'Abd alHaqq. Hay, sin embargo, un elemento que sépara la obra de al-MagiE de otras similares, como la de ‫ ־‬Abd al-Haqq, y es el uso de la poesia como medio para incitar a la violencia.20 En varias ocasiones el autor inserta versos en los que anima a atacar las propiedades de los judios y a atentar contra sus vidas. Algunos de ellos aparecen citados junto a una larga ddliyya, en metro taunl, que se conserva en un ms. (Q 683) de la Bibliothèque Générale et Archives de Rabat. El poema, escrito en un tono muy duro, no se dirige a los judios, sino a los musulmânes, especialmente a aquellos que los apoyan. En un estilo insistente y obse-

18

19 20

Cf. 'Abd al-Haqq al-Islàmi, Al-sayf al-mamdudfi t-radd 'alà ahbâr al-yahùd. Ed. trad, e intr. E. Alfonso. Madrid: CSIC, 1998. ‫׳‬Abd al-Haqq al-Islami, Al-sayfal-mamdud 19-20. Sobre el uso de poesia como un medio de propaganda y de ataque personal y politico, cf. Wasserstein, D. 1985. The Rise and Fall of the Party Kings: Politics and Society in Islamic Spain 1002-1086. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 207; Lewis, B. 1973. "An Ode Against the Jews." In Islam in Histoiy: Ideas, Men and Events in the Middle East. Nueva York: The Library Press, 321, n° 28.

sivo, en el que cada verso termina repitiendo el nombre de Muhammad, subraya una sola idea: los judios se oponen al islam y a su Profeta y ello convierte a los musulmanes en enemigos suyos y de sus partidarios. Este poema trae inmediatamente a la memoria otro muy parecido, escrito unos siglos antes, el de Abū Ishâq de Elvira, que coincide con los ataques contra la juderia de Granada en 1066, en los que resultô muerto Yūsuf b. Nagrella.21 Ambos poemas son excepcionales en el contexto islâmico y responden a unas mismas constantes socio-polidcas. Aparecen en un momento de fragmentaciôn del poder: los reinos de taifas surgidos a raiz de la desintegraciôn del califato en al-Andalus y la division del estado almohade entre los Banū Hafs, Banū Ziyän y Banū Marin, respecrivamente. La fragmentation polidca favorece una mayor diversidad étnica y asi, en ambos casos, el gobierno, que teme el ascenso y la presiôn de algunos de esos grupos étnicos, acaba escogiendo como visir al miembro de una minoria que no supone ningún peligro real para él.22 En cuanto a la relation entre los propios poemas y sus autores, se dan también una serie de caracterisricas comunes, pues tanto Abu Ishâq como al-MagîD son juristas y ambos argumentan la legalidad del ataque contra los judios a partir de una supuesta violation del pacto de la dimma por parte de éstos. Sin embargo, ni la actitud del autor ni el tono y estilo de los poemas se parecen. En el poema de Abu Ishâq la naturaleza de la ruptura de la dimma está más desarrollada y mejor articulada, si bien el dpo de argumentos que utiliza se repite en tratados de polémica and-judia, incluido el de al-MagiE. Este ultimo, por su parte, apela a un registro emocional para convencer a una audiencia rural e ignorante. Aunque también hace referencia a la oposiciôn manifiesta que muestran hacia Muhammad, a su falta de humiliation frente a los musulmanes y su propôsito de imponerse a ellos, insiste sobre todo en que sentir odio por los judios es un signo de amor al Profeta; la necesidad de matarlos y esclavizarlos es una yihdd. Recurre, en suma, a los elementos bàsicos de la fe popular. Si Abū Ishâq insiste en que el asalto a las juderias y la expropiaciôn de bienes no atenta contra lo establecido en la ley islâmica, y da buen numéro de argumentos en favor de esa postura, todos ellos relacionados de una forma u otra con la superioridad econômica del grupo, al-MagiE atribuye el favor hacia los judios a la ignorancia, el desconocimiento del Corân y de la ley islâmica por parte de los musulmanes. El objetivo en ambos casos es el mismo, y también el 21

El texto del conocido poema fue editado por primera vez y traducido al francés por Dozy, R. 1881. Recherches sur l'histoire et la littérature de l'Espagne pendant le moyen-âge. 3 éd. Leiden: Brill. Aparece también incluido en Dozy, R. 1847-51. Histoire des musulmans d'Espagne. Nouvelle édition, revue et mise à jour par R. P. A. Dozy, Leiden: Brill. E. Garcia-Gômez lo incluye en su ediciôn del diwān de Abū I?haq conservado en El Escorial, anotando las variantes del texto del poema en la Ihâta de Ibn al-Jatib, en la que se basaba Dozy, y del A 'mât al-a'lâm, también de Ibn al-Jadb (García Gômez, Ε. 1944. Un alfaqui espanol. Ahū 1shcīq de Elvira. Texto ár. de su «diwān», segûn el ms. escur. 404, publicado por primera vez, con intr., anâlisis, notas e indices. Madrid-Granada: CSIQ. Cf. también la traducciôn inglesa y el comentario de Lewis, B. "An Ode Against the Jews" y referencias al poema en Wasserstein, D. The Rise and Fall of the Party Kings, 207-9.

22

Sobre la situaciôn de los judios en los reinos de taifas, cf. Wasserstein, D. The Rise and Fall, 190223. Cf. también Perlmann, M. 1948—9. "Eleventh Century Andalusian Authors on the Jews of Granada." PAAJR 18, 269-90.

argumento principal (el incumplimiento de la dimma), pero hay un uso distinto de la retôrica y los argumentos usados, uso que responde a dos audiencias diferentes. Por otro lado, Abū Ishāq se présenta como el musulmân, de recto procéder, que, movido por el amor a sus soberanos, los sanhāya, considéra que es parte de su deber religioso advertirles del peligro que para ellos suponen los judios. Ese deber religioso le lleva a darles consejo. Identifica, además, la asociaciôn de esta dinasda con los Ibn Nagrella a un pacto con el diablo, frente a su propio consejo, que sigue los mandatos de Dios: "jComo puedes confiar en un malvado y tomarlo por amigo—dice dirigiéndose a Bädis—cuando está en compania del diablo? / Dios, en sus revelaciones, advierte del peligro de asociarse con el malvado." La acdtud hacia los sanhāja, que apoyan a los judios, nunca deja de ser la amonestaciôn al "soberano bien amado." Varias de las "historias tipo" sobre judios en las fuentes árabes presentan este mismo carácter del musulmân virtuoso y en todas ellas éste acaba siendo recompensado por el soberano. Al-MagiE, sin embargo, que no se dirige a las autoridades merinies, sino a la poblaciôn rural de Tuwàt, equipara a los judios con aquellos musulmanes que les apoyan y establece una oposiciôn radical entre estos ûltimos y el auténtico creyente. Esa acritud responde a una situation social diferente, la de grupos tribales donde los jefes toman personalmente a su cargo, en relation de clientela, a un grupo de judios, se encargan de su protection y les cobran la ji^ya, sin que en ello intervenga el gobierno central.23 Responde, asimismo, a la gran oposiciôn a la que al-MagiE tiene que hacer frente entre los juristas de la época, contrarios a su actitud. En cuanto al efecto que pudieron tener ambos poemas, es muy discutible si el de Abu Ishäq fue o no escrito antes de los acontecimientos de 1066, pero en el caso de al-MagiE parece ser que reahnente fue anterior a la destruction de la sinagoga de Tamantit. Lo lôgico es preguntarse si hay una relation genética entre ambos textos, es decir, si al-MagiE conocia el poema de Abu Ishāq y éste pudo de alguna manera influir en él. Ese tipo de relaciones textuales siempre es muy dificil de determinar. En este caso, y dadas las diferencias formales entre ellos, no se puede hablar de un préstamo directo, pero a su vez hay ciertos elementos que parecen confirmar que al-MagiE pudo haber conocido el poema contra Ibn Nagrella. En principio cabria destacar que la primera fuente a partir de la cual se conociô dicho poema fue, precisamente, una crônica del s. XIV, la Ihdfa de Ibn al-Jatib.24 El poema aparece, asimismo, en otra de sus obras, A 'mal al-a 'lâm.2i No está de mâs recordar que el autor, visir e historiador de Granada, viajô al Magreb, pri-

23

24

25

Varios aru'culos sobre al-MagiE eoineiden en ineluir un pasaje de Leo Africanus donde se subraya que los judios llevaban incluso armas para proteger a sus patronos musulmanes. Cf., por ejemplo, Hunwick, H. O. "Al-Magilï on the Jews," 163. Sobre la protecciôn de los musulmanes, cf. también Slousch, N. "Étude sur l'histoire des juifs," 139 y ss. R. Dozy publico el texto arabe del poema a partir de un ms. de la ihâta, conservado en Berlin. Cf. no. 21. Ibn al-Jatib, Kitâb A'mà! al-a'tâm β man būyi 'a qabta l-ihtilàm min mulûk al-lslâm. Ed. Lévi-Provençal. Rabat, 1934, 265-7.

mero como embajador a las cortes meriníes, y más tarde como exiliado. Sus obras fueron escritas a raíz de esos viajes, e influidas sin duda, al menos en el aspecto que trato, por la situation magrebí contemporânea. A su vez, el poema se transmite también en un pasaje del Musnad, una crônica escrita por Ibn Marzūq, amigo del anterior, en 1370, cuando Abū Fàris 'Abd al-Az"1z (767/1366774/1372) conquista Tûnez.26 En él, el autor dice alegrarse de que el sultân Abu 1-Hasan (731/1331-752-1351), a quien dedica su obra, nunca ofreciese servicios de secretaria, registro y finanzas a los dimmíes, como era habitual hacerlo en el Magreb y en al-Andalus. Cita a este respecto, y recoge completo, el poema de Abū Isháq, previniendo contra situaciones parecidas a la que en 1066 se habia producido en Granada. Relata con detalle que un alfaqui se lo recitaba al califa con frecuencia, y que a éste "le gustaba mucho, y disfrutaba con él y pedia que se lo repidesen."27 Advierte que el sultân, sus hijos y sus descendientes denen la virtud de borrar las huellas de los enemigos de Dios y de sus enviados, es decir, su oposiciôn a los judios se interpréta como elemento del carácter virtuoso de los mismos.28 No son las únicas alusiones en los historiadores de la época a los sucesos de Granada y a los Ibn Nagrella. En la segunda mitad del s. XIII, hay referencias en Al-Bajan al-Mugrib de Ibn ‫׳‬Idâri a1-Marrākuši,29 y ya en el XIV, en Al-Mugrìbβ bulà al-Magrib de Ibn Sa'îd.30 En ellas se subrayan las consecuencias de la elecciôn de los Ibn Nagrella en el gobierno qjrt de Granada, es decir, se activa la memoria colectiva a la luz de la situation socio-econômica que se vive en el Magreb.31 Esos elementos conftrman, por una parte, que al-MagiE pudo muy bien haber conocido el poema. Por otro lado, y quizás más importante, ponen de reEeve la existencia de un depôsito de imágenes y estereotipos sobre los judios, a las que se recurre de manera sistemática en momentos de crisis socio-politica, imágenes de una fuerte capacidad evocadora, capaces de incitar a la violencia. En el poema de al-MagiE convergen, en deftnitiva, dos tendencias que se han venido manifestando en el Magreb de forma esporâdica, pero progresiva, a lo 26

27 28 29

30

31

Al-Musnad al-fahih al-basan fi maaiir mawlana Abi /-Hasan. Cf. Ibn Marzūq, Ε! Musnad: Hechos mémorables de Abu l-Hasan, sultan de los Benimerines. Estudio, trad., anotaciôn, indices anotados, M. J. Viguera, Argel: Biblioteca Nacional, 1981, y Madrid: Insrituto Hispano-Arabe de Cultura, 1977. Cf. también, Lévi-Provençal, E. 1925. "Un nouveau texte d'histoire, le Musnad d'Ibn Marzuq." Hesperts 5, 1-82,‫ ׳‬Shatzmiller, M. 1975. "Les circonstances de la composidon du Musnad d'Ibn Marzûq." Arabica 22, 292-9. Ibn Marzûq, El Musnad 312 y ss. Ibn Marzûq, El Musnad 3\5. Ibn 'Idāri a1-Marrákušī, A1-bayān al-mugrib fi ajbār al-Andalus wa-l-Magrib. Beirut: Dâr al-Garb alIslâmi, 1985, 228. Ibn Sa'id, Al-Mugrib fi bulà l-Magrib. Ed. S. Dayf. Cairo, 1953-5, 2 vols. Sobre Sëmu'el: II, 114-5; 132; 182. Sobre Yūsuf: II, 115. Sobre las representaciones de Sëmu'el y Yosef b. Nagrella, cf. Wasserstein, D. J. 1993. "Samuel ibn Nagrila ha-Nagid and Islamic historiography in al-Andalus." Al-Qantara 16,1, 109-125; Brann, R. 1997. "Textualizing Ambivalence in Islamic Spain: Arabie representadons of Ismail ibn Nagrilah." Languages of Power in Islamic Spain, Ed. R. Brann. Occasional Publications of the Department of Near Eastern Studies and the Program of Jewish Studies, n° 3. Bethesda, Maryland: CDL Press, 107-135. R. Brann prépara un nuevo libro en el que se tratan en detalle las representaciones de los Ibn Nagrella en las fuentes que he mencionado.

largo de los siglos XIV y XV. La primera es manifiesta en la historiografia. En este sentido, M. Shatzmiller ha senalado el esfuerzo consciente por parte de los historiadores merinies, partidarios del régimen, de evitar cualquier dpo de asodation entre los gobernantes y los judios. Ello les lleva a subrayar la poca simpada que Abu 1-Hasan senda por los miembros de esta comunidad, por ejemplo, o a silenciar la participation de los Banū Waqqàsa en los gobiernos de Yûsuf ibn Ya'qûb o Abu Rabi'. Aparece, asimismo, en las versiones que dan los šurafā' sobre la revolution de Fez de 1465, a las que he hecho alusiôn anteriormente. En segundo lugar, como también he senalado, los contactos interconfesionales y las discusiones entre Ios miembros de las très religiones, auspiciadas por las ôrdenes misioneras, generan una literatura de polémica, que cuenta entre sus mejores ejemplos con el panfleto escrito por ‫׳‬Abd al-Haqq al-Islämi. El tratado y el poema de al-MagiE son un exponente extremo de ese continuum.

BETWEEN SPAIN AND T H E EAST T H E POETIC W O R K S OF D A V I D BEN HA‫־‬NASSI TOVA BEERI T e l - A v i v University, Israel

The tenth and early eleventh centuries mark a cridcal period in the development of Hebrew poetry: the transition from the eastern center to Spain. Scholarly research during recent decades concerning the links between Hebrew poetic creation in the eastern centers and Spain during the tenth and early eleventh centuries has already elucidated many obscure points in this interesting process. However, the effort to fully grasp this process, in which the eastern tradition assimilated the new poetics of the Spanish school still awaits further inquiries. In this context we find very interesting and intriguing the poetical works of a highly gifted poet known among scholars by the name of: David ha-Nassi, or David ben ha-Nassi or David ben Rosh ha-Gola. David's name was first mentioned by Zunz.1 He noted four of Ha-Nassi's poems part of which he found in Byzantine sources. He therefore surmised that this author flourished in Byzantium, but provided no specific details or additional information. Zunz mentioned hundreds of poets in his book of whom only a small minority have gained scholarly attention. David ha-Nassi was among the neglected ones. The name of David ha-Nassi was marginally mentioned by Genizah scholars while reconstructing the history of the eastern Jewish communities during the tenth and eleventh centuries. A major event in the history of the Yeshiva in Erez Yisrael occurred in the last decades of the eleventh century, namely the attempt of David ben Daniel to dethrone the acting Gaon (Head) of the Yeshiva—Rabbi Ebyatar ha-Cohen—and proclaim himself as Gaon in his place. The details of this event are fully recorded in the famous epistle known as Scroll of Ebyatar which was found in the Cairo Genizah. This document has been published and has been studied by several historians. David ben Daniel belonged to the family of the Babylonian Exilarchs, who claimed descent from King David, and bore the tide of Nassi. The dispute over the gaonate broke out around 1079 and lasted for fifteen years.2 Meanwhile, as scholars continued to delve into the Geniza, the small corpus of poems attributed by Zunz to the author named David ha-Nassi grew impressively. Genizah documents yielded more and more piyyutim signed with the acronyms: David, David ben ha-Nassi, or David ha-Nassi. Some of them bore inscriptions attributing the poems to David ha-Nassi or David ben Rosh ha-Gola. The historians almost automatically identified the author of these poems with David ben Dan1 2

See Zunz, L. 1865. Die Uteraturgeschichte der synagogaten Poesie. Berlin, 371, 393-994. For the text and list of sources see: Gil, M. 1983. Palestine During the First Muslim Period. (Hebr.) Tel-Aviv, vol III, 391—413.

iel the usurper from the Scroll of Ebyatar. Although, as we shall see, this identification was erroneous, thanks to it attendon was called to the poems of David ha-Nassi. A fair sample of ha-Nassi's poems has been published over the years mainly by Marcus and Razhabi.3 All of them idendfied the poet as David ben Daniel. The texts aroused interest not only for their historical background but also for their poedcal qualides. In the 1950s, Menahem Zulay published two of David ha-Nassi's texts with a brief commentary. 4 He was the first to express doubts concerning the established idendficarion of the poet with the and-Gaon, David ben Daniel. Zulay also noted that some of David's poems were found in Karaite MSS, and that he did not find any allusions to talmudic and midrashic sources in the poems he examined. As for the period of Rav David's activity, Zulay gave a very broad timerange, suggesting that he flourished between the tenth and the twelfth centuries. David ha-Nassi's poems also drew the attention of Professor Ezra Fleischer. In an article published in 1970, dealing with the poetry of Rav Hai Gaon; he expressed the opinion that David the poet must have flourished much earlier than David ben Daniel, and at any rate no later than the mid-eleventh century.5 He based this view on the poetic patterns used by the poet and the scarce evidence of Spanish influence in Rav David's works. Some twenty-five years later he discovered a MS containing one of Rav David's poems that bore a clearly defined attribution by the copyist which read as follows: ‫לדוףד הנשיא בן א[דונינו יהזקיהו ראש הגולה‬. Thus it became obvious that the real author of the poems in question was none other than David ha-Nassi the son of Hizkiyahu, one of the outstanding Babylonian exilarchs who reigned, with short interruptions, for almost sixty years from around 1000 till about 1060. Rav Hizkiyahu was the foremost leader of his time and his fame spread throughout the Jewish world.6 He was also the addressee of Shmuel ha-Nagid's poem ‫נגילה ישרה בלי צניף ומצנפת‬, composed after a battle waged in 1055.7 In this poem ha-Nagid addressed Rav Hizkiya with all the due respect befitting a ruler, a descendant from the house of King David. Our poet, David ben Hizkiya, is also known from the documentary Genizah. We possess at least three letters addressed to him by leading dignitaries of the Academy of Eretz Yisrael dating from the third and fourth decades of the eleventh century.8 Rav David spent some years outside of Babylon wandering in Palestine and Egypt, later returning to his homeland where his son—Hizkiyah—

‫נ‬

4 5

6

7

8

J. Marcus published twelve of R. David's poems, see: Horeb 6, 1942, 2 7 ^ 0 ; Ibid. 7, 1943, 92-102; Ibid. 8, 1944, 49-57. Some of the texts are incomplete and fragmentary. Y Ratzaby published three additional poems in: Tarbi% 14,1943, 204-213. The poems were published in the literary supplement of Haare% Sept. 7, 1945; July 10, 1953. See Fleischer, E. 1970. "More about the Paytanic Heritage of R. Hai Gaon." (Hebr.) Sinai 67, 196 n. 24. Bibliography concerning Rav Hizkiya's activities see Gil, M. 1997. In the Kingdom of Isbmael. (Hebr.) Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem, vol. I, 110-114. The poem was published with translation into Spanish by A. Saenz-Badillos and J. Targarona Borras: Semuel Ha-Nagid Poemas I. Cordoba 1988, 175-180. SeeM. Gil (above, n. 2), 8-10.

took up the office of exilarch.9 We do not know the exact dates of David ha-Nassi's birth or death, but it seems that by the mid-1030s he was already a mature man and a suitable candidate for leading office. It seems quite plausible that Shmuel ha-Nagid addressed him too, in a poem composed circa 1041.10 In this laudatory poem stardng with the words: ‫ עליכם בני תורה ותופשיה‬ha-Nagid urges Rav David to go to Jerusalem and assume a leading post in the yeshiva there. He even implores him in figurative language saying: why do you shy away from high office when the office is in need of you? ‫ותקוץ ביין משרה והמשרה‬ ‫תאוה להשקותך בכוסיה‬.‫״‬ The extant corpus of David ha-Nassi's poems contains some forty piyyutim of which the majority are intact. It is worth noting that most of his poems can be found in an impressive number of parallel copies. They were thus widely read and/or performed during the classical period of the Geniza. This certainly attests to the public awareness of the high poetic merit of these texts. Only fifteen of his poems, however, have been published (some incomplete), and these are scattered in various periodicals. As of now, no critical edition of his work is available. A corpus of forty piyyutim may not seem a large output but most of Rav David's poems are very long indeed. The alphabetical sequence, which is a structural feature characteristic to most paytanic compositions, is used by Rav David mainly in its strophic form. Thus his poems entail a minimum of twenty-two quatrains, i.e., 22x4 lines (eighty-eight lines). Generally, however, Rav David adds to this basic number several strophes in which he signs his name David and his title Nassi or ben Nassi in the acrostics. In this fashion some of his poems reach a peak of thirty-two stanzas.12 Amazingly enough, we have not so far found him adding to his name the name of his father, though he has ample opportunity to do so. Indeed, this runs counter to the prevailing practice in traditional paytanic creativity. Omitting the parental name may, however, be a characteristic trend among Babylonian paytanim, as we find, for example, in the huge corpus of Joseph al-Baradani. Nevertheless, in the case of Rav David there could be other explanations for this phenomenon: both psychological and/or biographical. The poetic forms used by Rav David are generally similar to the common forms in use in the eastern piyyut." The poems are shaped in monorhymed four-lined stanzas. Only a few of his poems use a single rhyme throughout. These pieces are, of course, usually shorter in length. No exact meter can be detected in David ha-Nassi's poems. He generally follows the classical paytanic prosody, with a marked inclination toward pure stress meter ( = 1 4 . ( ‫ה ת י ב ו ת‬ His rhyming patterns display on the whole, the customary forms employed in 9 10

" 12 13 14

Ibid, (above, n. 2), 432. E. Shohat was the first to suggest this interpretation of the poem. See his collected articles: Mehkarim. Haifa 1982, 75-79. For the poem see: Poemas (above, n. 7), vol. II, 8-9. As we shall see all of his poems are selihot, a genre in which such length is rather uncommon. See Fleischer, E. 1975. Hebrew Liturgical Poetry in the Middle Ages. (Hebr.) Jerusalem, 284-288. See Fleischer, E. 1977. Hasifrut 24, 70-83.

‫משקל‬

late eastern piyyut, yet in numerous instances he makes use of the classical and highly prestigious Killirian rhyming technique that had already fallen into disuse.15 However, some special features of Rav David's poetry in the realm of forms should be pointed out. Two of his poems are structured after the typically Spanish quasi-muwwashah strophic pattern, known as ‫מעין אזורי‬. In this form the four lines of the quatrain present the rhyme sequence of: aaab; cccb and so on, 'B' being a fixed rhyme reoccurring at the close of each stanza.16 In two other piyyutim Rav David adopts a very complicated rhyme scheme. These poems seem to be written in monorhyme in such a way that only the last syllable of each rhyme is identical throughout the entire poem. Yet the texts are divided into four-line stanzas, each one possessing its own specific consonant that changes in every stanza according to the sequence of the Hebrew alphabet. Thus the first stanza rhymes with words ending ‫איה‬, the second stanza with word ending ‫ ביה‬and so forth. On other occasions David ha-Nassi is quite content to rhyme with words linked only by mere assonance. Rhyming with assonance was never fully accepted as a legitimate technique in medieval Hebrew poetry.17 The most astonishing feature in the extant part of Rav David's poetry is the presence of a poem scanned in the fashion of the Spanish-Hebrew quantitative meter. This poem is a ‫ בקשה שקולה‬beginning with the words: ‫אלהי אל תריבני‬ ‫כפשעי‬. In this instance, David ha-Nassi clearly modeled himself after the famous ‫ אלהי אל תדינני כמעלי‬by Rav Yizhak ibn Mar Shaul, a Spanish poet from the latter half of the tenth century.18 Rav David's corpus is amazingly uniform in its content. All of his extant poems belong to the realm of Selihot, i.e., penitential poems. This uniformity is rather unusual in the paytanic world. The literary output of all the known paytanim is far more varied. They all composed in different paytanic genres to meet the various needs of the liturgical praxis. Even more intriguing is the fact that many of Rav David's poems are not even regular selihot. They include more personal issues than was customary in the traditional eastern seliha, and they display a rather unusual perception of sin and repentance. The tone of rebuke used by the poet is often very harsh, and when addressing his soul he often preaches a non-typically Jewish asceticism. This may be the reason why the early copyists, or perhaps the author himself, marked these texts with a foreign term: %uhd or ^ubdiya. This term is well known in the Arabic literary context, meaning asceticism and renunciation of worldly things, yet it almost never occurs in paytanic usage except for Rav David's poems. The use of this foreign term may hint at some affiliation between those poems and the world of Arabic ascetic literary 15 16 17 18

See Hrushovski, B. Encyclopedia Judaica. Vol. 13, col. 1203-1223 s.v. Prosody, Hebrew. For detailed explanadon of this strophic form, see: E. Fleischer (above, n. 13), 349-355. See Hrushovski (above, n. 15), col. 1209-1211. This poem was published from the Genizah in a fragmentary form by Wertheimer S. A. in: Ginçei Jerusalem, II (1902), 22. The poem was jusdy attributed to David ha-Nassi by I. Davidson in his Thesaurus of Medieval Hebrew Poetry ( 4 3 6 4 ‫ ) א‬. For Ibn Mar-Shaul's poem see J. Schirmann's anthology: Hashira Ha'ivrit etc. Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv 19612, vol. I, 50-52.

trends. To be sure, Rav David could also draw upon ancient paytanic tohehot in his poems of rebuke, but it seems that he often relies on or prefers to borrow from the Arabic %uhd literature. Also apparendy Arabic-derived is his constant consciousness of his mortality, as well as the macabre descriptions of the decomposing bodies of the dead and the obvious renunciation of worldly pleasures and wealth which are often discernible in his poems. Exceptional in David ha-Nassi's poems are the harsh rebukes he evokes against the hypocrisy of those who seemingly lead a religious life while disregarding the basic laws of morality. He even harshly scolds the religious leaders of his community, a subject never encountered in traditional piyyut. All these themes are very common in the zuhd genre of Arabic poetry as found, for example, in the ninth-century works of Abū 1-'Atāhiya, and in the works of the famous Syrian poet Abu l-'Alä al-Ma'arri who was Rav David's contemporary. The poetic language of Rav David also displays qualities rarely found in tradidonal piyyut. The biblical component of his lexicon is more pronounced than the norm and he rarely uses hollow or obsolete paytanic coinages. At the same time he is fond of neologisms formed by reshaping biblical and talmudic roots. His language is powerful and has a special flavour to it, which is easily discernible even at first glance. Despite the length of his compositions one does not sense in them boredom or any weakening of poetic tension. All these features and others which we cannot elaborate upon in a short survey, suffice to mark Rav David as a unique poet in his generadon. There is no doubt that our poet was aware of the new trends in Hebrew poetry which developed in Spain. We have already mentioned his bakasha, scanned according to the new Hebrew-Spanish quantitative meter, and two of his poems fashioned after the muwwashah-like stanzas. Even for an eastern poet active in the first half of the eleventh century, these traces of Spanish influences are rather sparse. However, Rav David displays a new conception of poetry, and expresses a new sensibility and a new literary taste. These are unmistakably Spanish in essence. We can thus view David ha-Nassi's poedc creativity as portraying an authentic and daring attempt to absorb the new atmosphere of poetic art emanating from Spain, without betraying the age-old tradition of paytanic poetry. The struggle between West and East, between new and old in medieval Hebrew poetry, is thus illustrated once again in this modest, yet impressive and suggestive heritage of our poet.

T H E VARIETIES OF LITERAL DEVICES IN A MEDIEVAL M I D R A S H SEDER ELIYAHU RABBA, C H A P T E R 18 ULRICH BERZBACH Köln Unlike exegetical and homiledc midrashim, Seder Eliyahu Rabba (SER) is not structured according to an overt external structuring device such as a Biblical text or the cycle of the Jewish year. Yet the only word in the tide of the book I would not argue about is seder: We do not know the author, nor a text-internal reason why the book is called by the name of Elijah. We have only a talmudic legend to provide the connection to the prophet and an explanation for the partition into a rabba and a ψ ta part. Yet I have no doubt, that the text is structured according to a subde order, a seder as it were. The author of SER uses a multitude of different structuring devices many of which reoccur on different levels of construction, namely small units, complex passages, chapters and the 3 main parts of the work. This repetition of structural devices characterizes SER and defines its unity. The author of SER uses a wide variety of traditional contents and techniques. The richness of midrashic and literal techniques, employed skillfully in order to create a deceivingly simple and yet complex argumentation, is to be regarded as a sign of medievality. Chapter 18 of SER is outstanding in its length and has been subject to speculations ever since the first printed edition—Venice 1598—which supposedly was prepared from a lost manuscript dated 1186.' Perhaps the Venice printer found these chapter divisions in this manuscript or he separated chapter 18 into three chapters in order to fit the text into the Arukb's description of three parts and thirty chapters.2 The edition of Tanna debe Eliyahu by Haida in Prague 1677 followed this division.3 (Which ends up with 31 chapters for SEK) Haida printed a new version of his own, inspired by Elijah who—as he reports in his introduction—visited him only after intensive praying, fasting and studying the concordance. Haida's edition included next to his "new text" the "old text" of the Venice edition4 together with a huge commentary on the new text.

‫י‬ 2

3 4

‫ספר תנא דבי אליהו‬. Venedig: Jakob b. Gershom, 1598. Cp. Aruch completum. sive Lexicon vocabula et res, quae in libris Targumicis et Midraschicis continentur, explicans auctore Nathane filio Jechielis [...], edit Dr. Alexander Kogut. 2. Edition, Wien, Berlin: Menorah, 1926. Vol. 6, 27. ‫ ספרא סקוקין דנורא ובעורין דאשא‬ed. Samuel b. Moses Haida, Prag 1677. But he also altered the "old" text in several instances, e.g. subsdtuting ‫ בן דוד‬for ‫משיח‬, cp. Abraham Epstein, ‫כל כתבים‬, ed. Α. Μ. Habermann, Jerusalem: Mosad haRav Kook, 1947, vol. 1, 368-69.

About a century later popular editions started to appear containing the Haida-Text only. These tradidonal edidons tend to call that text ‫תנא דבי אליהו‬. Haida's quest for inspiration basically followed the example of the above mentioned talmudic legend in bKet 105b/106a. In the Talmud Rav Anan, a Babylonian teacher of the 3rd century, is involved (though indirectly) in the manipulation of a lawsuit. Because of R. Anan's inappropriate behavior Elijah stops to visit and teach him "Seder de-Eliyahu" and it is only after R. Anan's fasting and repentance that the prophet visits again. According to the talmudic story this interruption created the division into the two parts called Seder de-Eliyahu Kabbah and Seder Eliyahu Zuta. As the Zuta-yaxx. has its own independent text-history (two manuscripts), we turn to the only extant manuscript of Seder Eliyahu Kabbah edited by Meir Friedmann at the beginning of the 20lh century. (Codex Vatican ebr. 31 is dated 1073 and contains Sifra, Seder Eliyahu Kabbah and Seder Eliyahu ZutaS) In chapter 18 of Seder Eliyahu Kabbah the Vatican-manuscript shows erasure marks at two points—both where ‫ סליק פרקא‬has been erased (FR 110 and 112), as if the scribe had expected the chapter to end there (these two do indeed correspond to the beginning of the additional chapters in the Venice-edition). Friedmann argues in the introduction to his edition that chapter 18, 19 and 28 are not integral to SEK.6 While he ascribes the main body of text to Rav Anan, whom he supposes to be an adept of a "school of Elijah," he agrees with other theories that the "midrash" on Lam 2.19 (i.e. SEK 18 and 19) was written during a time of oppression. Yet he maintains an "Elijah adept" as author of this part which would include the claim of inspiration by the prophet. Opposing Friedmann I argue that the structural devices employed throughout SEK also operate in chapter 18 and create a structure both of form and of content. Chapter 18 is therefore to be regarded integral to SER. A short analysis of the macro-structure of the work will clarify my point: First, the Arukh's description of the work as containing three major parts7 has been accepted by most scholars. The first part contains chapters one through six, the second part chapters seven through seventeen. Friedmann argues that the third part contains chapters twenty through twenty-nine, with the exception of chapters 18, 19 and 28, which he assumes were inserted into the text in post-talmudic times. If we accept the definitions of the first two parts— and there are convincing reasons to do so—and include all chapters from eighteen to twenty-nine into the third part, we achieve a symmetry of growing length of the three parts: Part two is almost double the length of part one, and part three is about as long as part one and two together. This principle of "continuous expansion" is witnessed on all other structural levels of the text as well. Second, I propose a "principle of symmetry," or "the return to the starting point of a unit," exemplified by the fact that SER starts with an exegesis of Gen 3.24 and comes back to this verse at the end of the book. 5

6 7

The manuscript was published in a facsimile edidon: ‫ כ ת ב‬.‫תורת כהנים ]ספרא[ סדר אליהו רבה וזוטא‬ 31 ‫ וטיקן‬T.Jerusalem: Maqor, 1972. Cp. his introducdon, 90-91 and 101. Cp. Aruch completum, 27a, first entry for the keyword ‫סדר‬.

Third, I suggest a "dovetailing units" principle. That is, the linking of units within the parts of SER follows a pattern of interrupted groups of three or more units. Finally, one can find a "reversion of (expected) orders" principle. All of these principles operate in and on chapter eighteen as well as they do with the rest of SER, both on the macro-structural level and within the chapter. The principle of "continuous expansion" also governs the beginning of the three main parts of SER: The first five lines of the opening chapter of part I are an atomized exegesis of Gen 3.24. Atomized exegesis of Song of Songs 1.4 occupy nearly three columns of the opening chapter of part II, SER 7, and the first two chapters of part III, SER 18 and 19 are organized by the segments of Lamentations 2.19 and consist of about 37 columns, together nearly 20 percent of the text of SEK Now we turn to SER in the context of the structure of part three. Friedmann—and Theodor alike—have argued that chapters 18, 19 and 28 are later insertions, since they obviously are linked to each other. Chapter 18 contains 6 major units recognizable by commentary to the consecutive segments of Lamentations 2.19, and chapter 19 might be understood as a 7th unit concerning this verse. Each of the units is enlarged beyond the exegesis of the segments of Lam 2.19 by using different structural devices, thus creating the distinct texture of interrelated units and subunits that characterizes SER chapters 18 and 19. Chapter 28 is linked to these chapters in a dovetail-junction, since it contains a similar exegesis of Psalms 79 and is also characterized by the use of the Leitwort, ‫ בכה‬to cry. Figure 1

Chapters 20 and 21 deal with parashat ‫משפטים‬, chapter 22—though starting with an exegesis of Psalms 140.9, is linked to them, since it is dovetailed with chapter 20. This is an example of the reversed order. Chapter 23-25 is another group of three chapters, that deals with the Decalogue, again with a strong lineage between the first two chapters, that both start with Ex 20.1, and a follow-up on the fifth commandment in chapter 25, which includes a detailed treatment of Is 58.7. (With regard to the Parashot the 3-chapter-unit SER 23 to 25 refers to parashat Jitro while SER 20-22 refer to parashat mishpatim, again an example for the "reversion of expectable orders.") The last group of three chapters ( S E R 26, 27, 29) is again interrupted, all of which answer the question in SER 23 ‫במה קונה‬ ‫ אדם את אביו שבשמים‬with ‫ ( מתוך האהבה‬S E R 26), ‫( מתוך הרחמים‬SER 27), ‫מתוך‬ ‫( השלום‬SER 29).

There are several more links between single chapters and these groups of chapters. Since the principle of "dovetailing items" within groups of three (or more) operates in all three parts of SER and on all levels of structure, the fact that it connects into a group precisely those chapters that Friedmann excludes from the original text (SER 18, 19, 28) is not a reason to exclude them. On the contrary, this group and the position of its third chapter fulfil an important function in the architecture of the book. The 12 chapters of part three of SER are arranged in four units of three chapters and each of these 3-chapter-units is composed of a "couplet" plus a closely connected third chapter. This rhythm stresses the elegance with which the author handles the structure and form of his text. With regard to contents I argue that the seemingly disruptive positioning of the third item of the first group of chapters (SER 18, 19, 28) as last but one chapter of the whole text turns out to be a fine example of retardation before a "happy ending": the keynote of SER 18, 19, 28 "lamentation and weeping" is heard before the pereq ha-Shalom (SER 29) takes a look into the Garden Eden of the time-to—come. Before turning to chapter 18, I would like to underline the importance of creating and marking boundaries as a means to endow the text with both rhythm and continuity. Chapter endings for example, at which an exegetical unit is continued beyond this border, are characteristic of SER. This is one way to realize the principle of dove-tailing items, and it offers the possibility to create strong and complex links. This holds true also for the associative deviations from an exegetical unit that give rise to a re-appearance of the main verse of the exegesis when the interrupted unit is taken up again. Here the "principle of dove-tailing units" meets the "principle of returning to the beginning." This is well known from other midrashim, but SER makes use of this device in a unique way, combining it with dovetailed units and the crossing of borders. Chapter 18 is characterized by an atomizing exegesis of Lam 2.19. Following the expounded passages of Lam 2.19, I divide the chapter into six units. Figure 2 shows the subdivisions of the verse as it is quoted in the beginnings of each section and some of the main keywords. This exegesis of Lam 2.19 is continued in chapter 19, and since these two chapters are interlinked and since chapter endings seem to be one of SER's characteristic borders meant rather to strengthen the linkage than to separate, I will include chapter 19 in my analysis as the seventh unit of the exegesis on Lam 2.19. Chapter 19 is divided into four subunits, each centered around one keyword from the second half of the verse. Although—or maybe because—the author of SER is usually acutely aware of the atnah as dividing a verse, chapter 18 closes with a first exegesis of Lam 2.19b and chapter 19 starts with a second exegesis of the same passage. This links the two chapters definitively. (So does the analogous interpretation starting with ‫מיכן א מ ר ו‬.)

Figure 2 SER

18-1: Lam 2.19a

(al + ...) (... + .4)

( 4 (‫רוני‬x SER 18-2: Lam 2.19a1 SER 18-3: Lam 2.19a2 ( 7 (‫מים‬x SER 18-4: Lam 2.19a3 SER 18-5: Lam 2.19a4 SER 18-6: Lam 2.19b (bl & b2)(‫)עולליך‬ SER 19-1: Lam 2.19b ‫)עולליה‬ SER 19-2: Lam 2.19b4 (‫)חוצות‬ SER 19-3: Lam 2.19b4 (? ‫)בראש‬ (‫)רעב‬ SER 19-4: Lam 2.19b3

‫קומי רוני בלילה וגר‬ ‫נכח פני ה׳‬ ‫)דבר אחר( קומי רוני בלילה‬ ‫לראש אשמורות‬ ‫)ואומר( שפכי כמים לבך‬ ‫נוכח פני ה׳‬ ‫שאי אליו כפיך על נפש עולליך‬ ‫)דבר אחר( שאי אליו כפיך על נפש עולליך‬ ‫העטופים ברעב באש כל חוצות‬ ‫העטופים ברעב באש כל חוצות‬ ‫)ד״א( העטופים ברעב‬

SER often uses keywords to connect exegetical units into groups. In order to promote the keywords, they are usually introduced in a passage that is outstanding in its literary genre. A fine example for this technique is the interconnectedness of the secdon-endings in SER 18 and 19 by keywords and passages that are either prayers or , ‫^־‬S-passages, praising human qualities. SER 18—1 ends with an , ‫־‬WX-passage that includes four keywords that will be important in SER 18 to 19. ‫אשרי האדם שירא שמים מתוך שפל ברך מתך ענוה מתוך תשובה ומתוך‬ ‫הדין‬. The four "reasons" reappear in different sections of chapter 18 and 19. ‫ ש פ ל ברך‬and ‫ עניו‬are referred to explicidy and with quotations from Is 57.15 and other verses in an ‫אשרי‬-ρassage at the end of the third section, SER 18-3, FR 104, thereby providing a return to the beginning for this group of three connected exegetical units. The end of the fourth section, SER 18-4, deals with the 10 days of repentance and stresses the importance of ‫תשובה‬, and I would argue that the liturgical context of the days of repentance substitutes for the formal qualification of a literary genre. The forth keyword, ‫דין‬, is referred to twice: its opposite, ‫ רחמים‬is the center of the prayer at the end of the fifth section, while the sixth section concludes with a prayer and ] , Ts partly synonym ‫קנס‬. The topic of ] , ‫ ד‬is present throughout the sixth section, and again I would argue that the topic carries in itself enough connections to prayer and , ‫אשר‬-passages. The section endings in chapter 19 are connected to another, pardy parallel v ^ - p a s s a g e in chapter 18: ‫ ·אשר מי שהוא ירא שמים בסתר‬The first two ‫אשרי‬-passages in 18-1 discuss the fear of God, thus connecting it to the end of chapter 19. Thus the sections of chapter 18 are connected not only by the more or less continuous exegesis of Lam 2.19, but also by a network of close associations between the endings of the sections, recreating the unity of the verse and emphasizing the importance of humility, repentance and justice as foundations of the relation between man and God. The literary genres favored for section endings: prayer and ‫אשרי‬-passages, define this relation as one of the main topics of the chapter. A distinctively medieval literary device employed in the second section of chapter 18 is what I would term "masoretic association." 18-2 is structured by four ‫אלא‬-‫ אין‬interpretations of the keyword ‫( רני‬Lam 2.19). The first part of 18-

2 relates this form, that according to Masora parva occurs only once in the Masoredc Text, to words with related meanings. In addiuon to that the first few Bible-verses used in the exegesis are interconnected through the common key-word ‫תהילה‬. Furthermore the passage quotes all four biblical verses that contain the consonantal parallel to ‫ מ י‬resh nun jod, (Is 54.1; Zeph 3.14; Zech 2.14; Ps 32.7) starting with Ps 32.7 in reverse order of their appearance in the MT. While I would not argue that this literary device presupposes knowledge of the masora—I understand that a similar technique was used by the pre-masoretic paytan Elazar birabbi Qallir in his qedushta for shabbat ha-Hodesh—it does indicate a thorough knowledge and almost statistical interest in the biblical text. But while the paytan may have played at riddles with his educated audience, I assume that the educational inclination often displayed by SER points to another direction. If the example of the section-endings in chapter 18 bordered on liturgy because of the prayers and ‫אשרי‬-passages, the second section of chapter 18 is reminiscent of piyyut, since it is written in a very dense language, employs biblical quotations for the sake of certain keywords and includes a few verse-chains that emphasize the keywords.8 A similar example of "masoretic association" is the fact, that of six biblical occurrences of ‫עד‬-‫ עדי‬four are quoted within three pages of chapter 18 (SER 18-1, FR 90-92: Is 26,4; 65,18; Ps 132,13.14). In this case it can also be shown how these biblical quotations relate to a common expression within SER: Targum Is 26.4, the first occurrence of ‫עד‬-‫ עדי‬quoted in SER 18, translates the expression into ‫לעלם לעלמי עלמיא‬, which—retranslated into the Hebrew expression ‫—לעולם ולעולמי עולמים‬is often employed in SER. The Targum uses ‫עלם‬ for all occurrences of ‫עד‬-‫עדי‬. SER interprets ‫עד‬-‫ עדי‬as "this world and the world-to-come," and connects this to Torah study. And then ‫לעולם ולעולמי‬ ‫ עולמים‬is used in two divine speeches: In the first direct speech (FR 90) God says about himself that his day consists of three parts: one for study of Torah and Mishnah, one for justice and one for charity. A few paragraphs after that, he asks Israel to exercise justice, charity and study of Torah, so that God can enjoy Israel ‫לעולםולעולמי עולמים‬. Here the "masoretic association" is connected to a Hebrew expression often used in SER and to a concept discussed frequendy in the text, emphasizing its importance. One of the concepts also involved here is learning by imitation. Especially imitatio dei plays an important role from the first page of SER onwards. At the beginning of SER 1 God is shown in merciful forgetfulness when creating man and after the sin of the Golden Calf, and the reader is explicidy asked here to learn from God and from an example of Mordechai whose deliberate amnesia leads to amnesty. Divine and human conduct are in this case linked in a word-

Discussing style and language of SER with Yaakob Elman on the EAJS summer colloqium "Jewish Bible Exegesis in the Middle Ages," July 1996, in Oxford yielded the term "piyyudc prose."

play on ‫עבר‬, ajin, bet, resb. The same connection is repeated in SER 18—4 together with Lev 19.17: ‫ כשם שהקב״ה יהא שמו הגדול מבורך‬,‫ברוך המקום ברוך הוא שאין לפניו משוא פנים‬ ‫לעולם ולעולמי עולמים מגלגל ומעביר ואינו משמר קינאה ונקמה על ישראל בכל‬ ‫ כך יהא אדם מגלגל ומעביר ולא ישמור‬,‫מקומות מושבותיהן ודברי תורה לא מנע מהן‬ ,‫קינאה ונקמה בלבבו על ישראל בכל מקומות מושבותיהן ודברי תורה לא ימנע מהם‬ (‫שנאמר לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך)ויקרא י״ט י״ז‬ SER promotes an educadonal program that is usually summarized as Miqra, Mishnah, balakhot and aggadot, in addition to good deeds and moral conduct. This program is also mentioned in chapter 18, and in order to re-enforce it, the author of SER included examples from all parts of this program throughout his work. In 18-3 the interpretation of Lam 2.19a1 ends with a passage starting ‫לא‬ ‫ נתן הקב״ה ח כ מ ה בינה דיעה והסכל אלא ל ק ד ש ש מ ו הגדול‬inserting into this passage a verse-chain made of quotations from all three parts of the Tanakh, Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvim. 18—3 has also quite a few quotations from the Mishnah, another part of the educational program. Mesbalim and narratives, including first-person-narratives are dispersed throughout chapter 18, which also contains quotation and discussion of Halakha. In connection with the liturgical allusions it should also be noted that the ‫ ש מ ע ישראל‬is depicted as the minimum requirement. Another literary device, used in almost all midrashim, and employed very skillfully by SER are lists of three, five or seven items or interpretations. The best example in SER is the list of the seven things from the "world to come" which can be anticipated in this world, in SER 3, that governs the structure of SER 3 to 6.9 Chapter 18 and 19 in themselves may be understood as a listing of seven (or maybe 10) exegetical units, the middle unit, 18—4, itself starts with seven alternative interpretations of Lam 2.19a2 ‫שפכי כמים לבך‬. The same unit contains four occurrences of Lev 19.16 and five occurrences of the berakha ‫ברוך‬ ‫המקום ברוך הוא שאין לפניו משוא פנים‬, all berakhot in this unit adding up to seven. By placing a sevenfold list in the center of a sevenfold structure, the author of SER again chooses a sophisticated way of emphasis, this time on the importance of reconciliation. This central chapter and point stays in the flow of the text: the next unit, SER 18—5, has two sevenfold repetitions, namely of ‫ זכור‬and ‫אבי בשמים‬, in the prayer at the end of this fifth section. Recurring instances of lists and repetitions avoid an anti-climax after a strongly marked passage and transmit sevenfold structures into greater and smaller structural units. Finally, the multiplicity of literary genres employed by the author of SER must be emphasized. Chapter 18 contains—among others—prayers and ‫אשרי‬-passages, berakhot, pure exegetical passages, mesbalim, narratives, first- person-narratives, halakhic, aggadic and homiletic passages and quotations from Bible, Mishna and—I assume that they are rewritten "quotations"—from The commentary on this clearly ordered list throughout 3 1 / 2 chapters up to the end of part I of SER is a nice example of "reversion of expected order," that corresponds to the list of the qualides with which to gain the "Father in Heaven" that governs the last chapters of SER: SER 26, 27, 29.

midrashim. None of these genres is unique to SER, but the high degree of combination and the interwoven texture created by the constant employment of all of them might be considered unusual for a "classical rabbinical" midrash, together with the lack of a structure and organization that is obvious at first glance. All this might point to a "medieval-minded" author, who consciously employed all material and all literary devices available to him, in order to create an educational as well as literary work with a structure and a flavor of its own.

T H E POET'S ATTITUDE IN THE H E B R E W POETRY OF SPAIN BETWEEN C O N V E N T I O N AND ALLUSION AVIVA DORON University of Haifa, Israel In his book Esplendor de al-Andalus, Henri Peres writes: Los andaluces han amado la poesia con talfervor que en ocasiones llega a "verdadera pasiôn. " ("The Andalusian people had such a keen love of poetry that it sometimes reached a level of genuine passion." Peres 1983: 68). Pagis also notes the advanced standard and complexity of Andalusian poetry, stressing "the pivotal role played by the poet's attitude in the fabric of the poem, which is not only determined by the thematic genre but also influences its design and the manner of presentation and formulation of the theme." (Pagis 1970: 116). In the ongoing debate on the poet's attitude in the Hebrew poetry of Spain, which is formulated in accordance with the conventional motifs and is either reinforced or suffers reversal in the context of the biblical allusion, I plan to discuss here the literary manifestation which I will call: arriving at a different view of the poet's attitude upon an alternative reading of his poem or, in other words: how the poet's approach, which upon first reading appears to be an entirely conventional one, is perceived in a different light upon the second reading—when one is able to respond to the biblical references that are drawn into the poem through the allusions woven into the text. Thus a rather different attitude is revealed and may even be perceived as one that overturns the poetic conventions of the genre. The poetry of complaint (ha-tluna) of Ibn Gabirol in which personal expression is so marked, have been defined as "personal poems." In discussing this genre, we will consider the poem ani ha-ish. The poem begins in a tone of self-aggrandizement and evolves into a description of the moon at night with all its different connotations, and approaching to the end with the following verses: (22, 23) And God closes in on my thoughts. He barred my heart's desire from all sides. He bound my heart with ropes of darkness. Yet it arose like a warrior breaking out of a siege.

‫וסגר מחשבתי אל וחפץ‬ ‫לבבי משני פניו אסרו‬ ‫ונאסר בעבת חשך לבבי‬ ‫והתעורר כגיבור ממצורו‬

Schirmann interprets these verses to mean: "nevertheless he arose as a hero from the siege imposed upon him." (Schirmann 1961: Vol I, 187)

The poem ends with the following verses: (27 ,28) When a mortal wages war, his spear is beaten down; and when he tries to run, his steps falter. And even the man whose spirit dwells in the shining heavens misfortune overtakes him.

‫בהלחם אנוש חניתו יכת‬ ‫ועת ירוץ אזי ימעד אשורו‬ -‫וכן איש ידבקו אתו תלאות‬ ‫ולו ישים בבית נגה דבירו‬

Scholars generally consider these verses as a constituting a typical conventional philosophical ending. As opposed to these determinations I would like to show that the concluding verses of this poem should be seen as an integral part of the lyrical progrèssion of the poem and not as some external after-thought, and that the narrator of the poem has not freed himself of the siege imposed upon him. I would like to propose an alternative reading of the poem, and if we consider it in the context of biblical allusion, we will be led to view the poet's attitude in a different light. Joseph Margolis, in his book "The Logic of Interpretation," in the chapter "The problem of relevance in aesthetic criticism," discusses the validity of different interpretations of the same work of art. He maintains that widely different hypotheses concerning the same work of art-hypotheses that are not identical and do not even complement each other—may be perfecdy legitimate interpretations. However, he makes a distinction between what he calls "more and less acceptable" interpretations rather than "correct or incorrect" ones. In this context he points out that, when one determines that proposition A is correct, then the reverse must also be true—namely that the reverse of proposition A is incorrect. However if one determines that A is "reasonable," then the reverse of A may also be reasonable. (Tzur 1978: 7). Reuven Tzur, in his book Conventions and Rhetoric in Medieval Hebrew Poetry, suggests a distinction between "two different qualities which the reader can grasp—in alternative readings—of the very same description," because "even a single descripdon may leave room for two ways of cooperation by the reader, both of which are legitimate." (Tzur 1978: 7). If we accept the theory advanced by Margolis and Tzur, we can apply two alternative readings to the personal poems of Ibn Gabirol in general and to his poem ani ha-ish in particular. The first is the conventional interpretation: this reading illuminates the text on the basis of the expected convention in the conventional genres: the self-aggrandizement (ha-hitpaerut) or the complaint (ba-tluna) or a combinadon of the two genres. Let us consider the poem ani ha-isb which we are discussing here in this light. This poem opens with the expression "I am the man..." This expression, in Arabic ana ar-rajul... is typical of the conventional of self-praise as we can see, for example in the poem of Ben Abu Hababa el-Avadi (Diwan al-hamasa by Al-Buhturi, 1967: Poem 107 and the poems 66, 321 and others). The poet's assertion of self-praise in the poem is interwoven with a declaration of his deep aspiradon for wisdom—this too is a motif found in the convention ("the son of wisdom," "the father of wisdom" etc.). In Ibn Gabirol's poem, the poet describes himself as one "who chose wisdom even as a youth ... and will not desist until he fulfils his vow" (v. 3, 1) but

his path is strewn with obstacles which blind fate has placed in his way. Along side the description of the poet's struggle against the external forces rallied against him, the poet also writes of his inner conflict: Whose spirit scorned to dwell in his flesh (v. 2).

‫ונפשו מאסה לשכן בשרו‬

Along the process of the first reading, we find a description of the following elements: a) The narrator's struggle in the poem against blind fate and it's hardships "the crucible of time," "misfortunes." b) The inner conflict: heart against heart-the soul against the flesh. c) The portrayal of the moon: this is generally described as an important part of the poem, which symbolizes the struggle of the forces of light against the forces of darkness in their symbolic meaning. As can be seen by the method of the first reading, the elements in the poem run a parallel course throughout the entire poem, while others take separate courses and meet again only from time to time.1 As opposed to the method of the first reading, which presents separate poetic motifs, in the process of an alternative reading, that I suggest, the poem should be read as a unity, all of the elements of which are thus given an alternative role. In this way they integrate in the progression of the flow of the poem, and this brings me to a description of the dynamics of the poet's attitude: In this reading, all the metaphorical elements which touch upon the concept of blind fate (pieman) and its hardships, that is to say the descriptions of the forces that encumber man, signify metaphors for inner spiritual and material forces in his own personality: blind fate and its kin, the misfortunes, and certainly the awe are undoubtedly the same forces that are connected with the weaknesses of the flesh, fear and doubt and so on. The elements of nature also metaphorically represent the different parts of the soul: from the forces of light that are close to the philosophical "self" to the forces of darkness that are remote from it. In the poem, according to this reading, there is a description of a lyrical progression which evolves from the attitude of the narrator, who takes pride in and declares his total commitment to his purpose, and describes the clashes among the conflicting elements in his own personality, culminating in the narrator's dejection of defeat as the poem ends. The unifying thread that runs through the entire poem, according to this reading, is the pain of realization of man's frailties stemming from the weaknesses of man as a creature of the flesh. In Keter malkut, the poet expresses this

Such as: the conventional motifs from the subject-matter of self-aggrandizement (ha-hitpaerut) or the complaint (ha-ttuna), the two genres, upon which are superimposed descriptions of the poet's struggle against the circumstances of his fate, in striving to reach his chosen destination—the attainment of wisdom. The motif of the inner conflict (ha-prishut) and the genre of philosophical poetry (ha-hagut). The description of nature, which is represented as a symbolic and allegorical description.

psychological situation in his well-known verse "The cruel element of lust in me stands to my right—drawing me to evil," (‫ לשטני‬/ ‫)אבל יצרי האכזר ניצב על ימיני‬. In ani ha-ish we have a description of a complex interaction of forces in the poet's inner world: a) The "philosophical self "—the "self " who "chose wisdom," who "braced himself and will not desist until he fulfils his vow," who strives to attain "the highest degrees of wisdom and good," an element that is portrayed as the source of light and a guide—the moon "that led me in the paths of wisdom and, as he led me, instructed me in his light"—the moon, which is both the light and the master. b) The elements of the "self" of human weakness, the elements of lust and of the flash and of "the son of blind fate" which place obstacles before the intellectual, the philosophical "self"—portrayed as blind fate, 'hardship', the elements of nature which are portrayed as 'an armor-plate of darkness', heavy black clouds that overshadow the light, the ravens of the dark. c) The poetic "self," aware of the inner forces that hinder the possibilities of realizing the striving of the "intellectual self. " The 'poetic self knows how to describe the poet's fear, in the poem, of the intellectual aspect of his personality being overcome by the other aspects of his "self," for then he would be confined, with them, to darkness. Therein lies the terror of the situation: "And God closed in my thoughts." d) The poem ends with a situation in which the " s e l f " laments that the clouds... "deprived me of his light." Cut off from the "intellectual self," he awaits its revelation. "He barred my heart with ropes of darkness... I dare not hope...for the light." The poet's attitude at the end of the poem, which appears to contradict the convention and is surprising in terms of it,2 may be understood in terms of the biblical allusion, which is structured into thefabric : A. By way of a series of allusions, the following passage is drawn into the poem: I am the man that hath seen affliction by the rod of his wrath, ,‫אני הגבר ראה עני בשבט עברתו‬ He hath led me, and brought me into darkness, but not into light... - ‫אותי נהג ויולך חושך ולא א ו ר‬ He hath builded against me, and compassed me with gall and travail... - ‫בנה עלי ויקף ראש ו ת ל א ה‬ He hath hedged me about that I cannot get out... ..‫במחשכים הושיבני״גדר בעדי ולא אצא‬.. He hath inclosed my ways... (Lam 3,1-9) .‫ נתיבותי עיוה‬...‫גדר דרכי‬ The opening phrase of the poem: "I am the man who..." and in the commentaries on the verse from Lamentations, the phrase "I am the man who has seen affliction" is interpreted to mean "I am the man who has known and has suf2

For if it is a stylized poem of self-praise, there is no room for dynamics in the poet's attitude, and certainly not for any spiritual process concluding with a declaration of defeat.

fered agony." This phrase brings us back to the alternative reading of the poem—to studying it in terms of the biblical allusions—to those same verses from Lamentations which are echoed at the end of the poem: And God closed in my thoughts (v. 22) He hath hedged me... He hath inclosed my ways (Lam Ch. 3, v. 7-9).

‫וסגר מחשבתי אל‬ ‫גדר דרכי‬...‫גדר בעדי‬

He bound my heart with ropes of darkness...and deprived me of his light, (w. 23, 25) ‫ מנעו מני מאורו‬...‫ונאסר בעבת חשך לבבי‬ He hath led me, and brought me into darkness, but not into light. ‫אותי נהג ויולך חשך ולא אור‬ He hath set me in dark places... (Lam 3, 2, 6) ‫במחשכים הושיבני‬ He shall be afflicted by hardships (v. 28)

‫ידבקו אתו תלאות‬

He hath builded against me and compassed me with gall and travail (Lam 3, 5) ‫בנה עלי ויקף ראש ותלאה‬ Β. The poem opens with the affirmation "I am the man who braced himself"—echoing God's reply to J o b "Gird thy loins like a man"—and this is the key motif in the poem. The awareness of the "self" of the hardships facing him is expressed in the sentence: "and I was afraid, my friends, of what has come to me and what comes unto a man is that which he feared." Which is reminiscent of the phrase in J o b "and that which I was afraid of has come upon me" (Job 3,25); and in the same chapter in Job: "Why is light given to a man whose way is hid, and whom God hath hedged in?" (Job 3, 23). The deeper format is thus suggested already at the beginning of the poem through the biblical allusions. This format is also reflected in the rhetorical pattern. The conclusion of the poem is a response to the opening in a circular format. In the opening we find: I am the man who braced himself and will not desist until he fulfils his vow (v. 1)

‫אני האיש אשר שינס אזורו‬ ‫ולא ירף עדי יקים אסרו‬

And at its ending we have: When a mortal wages war, his spear is beaten down; and when he tries to run, his steps falter (v. 27).

‫בהלחם אנוש יכת חניתו‬ ‫ועת ירוץ אזי ימעד אשורו‬

Again, in the opening verses: (5,6) And the man, if he be not overtaken by misfortune his spirit wUl attain to the highest level of wisdom.

‫וגש לולי אשר תיקד תלאה‬ ‫לקצוי מעלות חכמה ומוסר‬

And at the ending: And even the man whose spirit dwells in the shining heavens—misfortune overtakes him. (v. 28) ‫וכן איש ידבקו אותו תלאות‬ Adi Zemach, discussing the ending of the poem, writes: "here the sorrow of the individual merges with the grief of the world" and he compares this text of gen-

eralization to the end of the poem melityati be-da'agati\ "He whose soul is afdieted will die in human agony," and says: "we leave human suffering behind us..." (Zemach 1973: 64). Levin also commenting on the ending of ani ha-ish, writes "His language is universal, as if he were writing of the utterly tragic nature of mankind's painful destiny" (Levin 1995: Vol I, 20). However, from the above we may learn that all the verses of the poem—right down to the last line—are alyricalexpression of the narrator's inner experience: the poem begins almost in an attitude ofpride; then we are led ty the poet along the paths of his intense inner struggles until at last he concludes with a sense of spiritual defeat. In the book of Beardsley-Monroe we find the assumption that there are three general criteria which may be applied in any positive evaluation of a work of art: unity, complexity and intense human quality. (Beardsley-Monroe: 1958: 465-469). Upon the alternative reading that have been presented here, we find that the poem does indeed meet these criteria: it is conceived as an artistic unity; it flows as a lyrical progression; the cycle format, in which the ending echoes and responds to the opening, is a further aspect of that unity. Furthermore, the poem does not end with the conventional empty phrases, but rather as the culmination of its lyrical progression.

In conclusion In discussing an example from the poetry of Ibn Gabirol, the possibility is suggested of a reading of the poetry that perceives the poet's attitude not only on its own terms, but also in terms of the tension between the convention and the biblical allusion. What is proposed here is a new possible, or alternative way, of reading the text, in the fabric of which we can trace how the poet's attitude draws its inner logic from the biblical allusion.

References Al-Buhturi, 1967. Diwdn al-hamasa. Ed. L. Cheikho. Beirut (reprint). Beardsley, M. C. 1958. Aesthetics, Problems in the Philosophy of Criticism. New York and Burlingame: Harcourt, Brace & World. Brody, H. and Schirmann, J. 1974. Solomon Ibn Gabirol, Secular Poems. (Hebr.) Jerusalem: Schoken. Doron, A. 1985. "The Two Levels of Shelomo Ibn Gabirol's Poetry." In Studies of Shelomo Ibn Gabirol's Poetry. (Hebr.) Ed. Z. Malachi. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 53—77. Levin, Y. 1995. The Embroidered Coat, the Genres of Hebrew Secular Poety. (Hebr.) Vol I. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuhad. Pagis, D. 1970. Secular Poety and Poetic Theory, Aloises Ibn E%ra arid his contemporaries. (Hebr.) Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik. Pérès, H. 1983. Esplendorde al-Andalus. (Traduction de Mercedes Garcia-Arenal de la segunda ediciôn, Paris, 1953). Madrid: Hiperiôn. Schirmann, J. 1961. Hebrew Poetry in Spain and Provence. (Hebr.) Jerusalem-Tel Aviv: Mosad Bialik and Dvir. Tzur, R. 1978. Conventions and Rhetonc in Medieval Hebrew Poety. (Hebr.) Tel Aviv: Daga. Zemach, A. 1973. Keshoresh Et%. Tel Aviv: Sifriyat Hapoalim.

H E B R E W LETTERS OF O L D CASTILE IN THE C A I R O G E N I Z A H 1 EDNA ENGEL The Jewish National and University Library, Israel In 1931, Jacob Mann published a Genizah document from the Cambridge Library collections. His publication treats fragment T-S 16.100 (Fig. la), 2 a letter about a woman in need (Letter A). Thirty-three years later, Professor Eliyahu Ashtor published a study treating several Spanish Genizah fragments, 3 one of which (T-S 12.532, Fig. lb) mentioned a similar predicament—a woman in trouble—though this aspect of his fragments was treated only in passing, and without his noting any possible link to the document Mann published in '31. Mann's fragment was republished in 1966 and 1969, by Professor Norman Golb of Princeton University.4 During my work at Cambridge University library in 1992, where I was looking for documentary material concerning the development of medieval Hebrew script, I was quite astonished to discover that the script, ruling, and ink of the two previously published documents were suspiciously similar. Later, after having noted this similarity, I came across a third document on the same theme in the Genizah collections of the library. This third piece of parchment (T-S NS 323.31) turned out to be a part of Ashtor's letter (Letter B), and helped fill out the details of a fascinating story. Thus it became quite clear that the two letters were written by the same scribe at the same place. Mann, Ashtor, and Golb each held different points of view with regard to the letters. In what follows, I will discuss these points of view, the connection between the letters, and issues relating to their dating and to the identification of the place where they were written. Mann's document—T-S 16.100—presents the story of a convert who settled in Narbonne, Provence, where she married a man who is referred to as R. David, most likely a relative of R. Todros HaNasi, the head of the Narbonne community in the eleventh century. On hearing that Christian members of the convert's family were pursuing her, the woman and her husband left Narbonne and took shelter in another Jewish community, where she gave birth to two sons and a daughter. A few years later, in a pogrom in that community, her husband 1 2

3 4

The full Hebrew version of the article is published in Sefunot 22. Mann, J. 1931. Texts and Studies in Jewish History and Literature. Vol. I. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 31-33. Ashtor, E. 1964. "Documentos espanoles de la Geni2ah." Sefarad 24, 44-47. Golb, N. 1966. "New Light on the Persecution of French Jews at the Time of the First Crusade." Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 34, 1-63. Reprinted in: Chazan, R. 1976. Medieval Jewish Life. New York: Ktav, 289-333. See also: Golb, N. 1969 "Monieux." The Proceedings of American Philosophical Society 113, No. 1, 67-94.

was killed and two of her children were taken capdve. The widow and her infant were then presented with this first letter from the Jewish community, explaining her predicament, and sent out to seek financial support for herself and her child. Ashtor's document, the second letter, also deals with a woman whose husband was killed, though this one appeals for funds to cover the cost of her having been redeemed from a neighboring community. At first glance, each of the letters seemed to me to be telling the story of a different woman. There is, however, ample evidence to support Professor Yahalom's claim that the two letters refer to the same woman. 5 To begin with, we have the material and textual resemblance of the documents, which tesrify to a close relationship between the letters.6 Both are written on a broad sheet of parchment in elegant calligraphic fashion, and both use a similar ruling technique and the same color ink. And of course both refer to a woman whose husband was killed. Furthermore, the second letter begins with an abstract of the story as it appears in the first letter, then mentions later events and presents another episode from the convert's life. The narrative then shifts to Najera, in the north of Spain. There, according to our reconstruction of the second letter's text, we find out that the members of the woman's Christian family were suecessful in their pursuit of her, and that they eventually caught her and condemned her to death. Thanks to the intercession of the Najera Jewish community, her life was spared. The Najera community contributed to the redemption of the widow, but a central role in the redemption of the woman was also played by the first community (where she had initially sought shelter and where her husband was murdered). She returned to this community after her redemption from Najera. We can reasonably assume that the first letter was written by a court scribe immediately after the woman's husband was murdered and before she set out in search of support. The second letter, then, would have been written by the same scribe at the same court, a year after her return. From the fact that the letters were found in the Cairo Genizah, it can be deduced that the widow traveled eastward to Fustat, hoping to obtain the support of that city's wealthy Jewish community. Both of the letters might accurately be categorized as "letters of solicitation" or "beggars' letters"; many letters of this sort were found among the Genizah collections. A beggar's letter is one that is written by a given Jewish community, usually for the purpose of helping an individual raise money. In contrast to most of the letters of this sort that we have, the two that we are concerned with here are signed by witnesses from the community, a fact that actually makes them a kind of testimony.

5 6

See J. Yahalom's article in this volume. Figs, la and lb.

The Parchment and the Script Both of the letters were written on the flesh side of a piece of parchment, and both were folded into three equal parts and mied with a hard point. The color of the ink is yellowish in both. The style of the letters' script is Sephardic. I will demonstrate the morphology of the Sephardic script by presenting several features of four letters. These features will be compared to those of a distinguishable Sephardic script found in a Ketubah, or marriage contract, written in Valencia in the second half of the eleventh century (Fig. 2).7 ALEF: Note the shape of the lower curve of the leg. BETH: Note the intersection of the vertical element with the base line. HE: The left leg of this letter is slanted and somewhat curved. AYIN: Its base line is long and slanted. This Sephardic style is known as a Half Square mode. This is a secondary mode that prevailed in Hebrew scripts during a limited period, when the Square script declined and the Semi-Cursive had yet to come into existence. In order to observe the evolution of Square script into Semi-Square script, I will highlight three letters: Alef, Mem, and Shin (Fig. 3): ALEF: In the Square Alef, the right components are made of two separate strokes. In the transformation to Semi-Cursive script, the separate strokes are joined and turned into a single stroke. The origin of this merger of the separate strokes is nicely demonstrated in the Alef of the letters. In the MEM and the SHIN, this evolutionary process is clearly expressed in the omission of heads and the minimization of calamus strokes. The Square Mem is written with four strokes; it has an upright stance and a protruding head. In the Semi-Square script the MEM gradually becomes a compressed letter, as the calligraphic head and the angular connectors between its parts are omitted. The SHIN reflects a similar process of simplification, as the four strokes of the Square letter become three strokes in the current script and in the SemiSquare letter. While taking part in this process, the lines of the SHIN become round and softer, replacing the angular strokes of the Square letter.

Dating and Identifying the Writing Place of the Letters Supported primarily by textual evidence, Jacob Mann dated the first letter to the eleventh century. Later on, Golb and Ashtor—without having entertained the possibility that the two letters were related—also suggested an eleventh-century provenance for the first and second letters, respectively. And indeed, the paleographical and physical elements involved lend firm support to their assumptions. Golb was correct in saying that the use of parchment for the letter was an early technique. After the eleventh century, parchment was no longer in widespread use. In fact, apart from marriage contracts (ketubot) and certificates of

Cambridge University Library T-S 8.268. Upper rows of Fig. 2-Ketubab, lower rows-the letters.

divorce igittin), documents written on parchment after the eleventh century are quite rare. Likewise the folding system employed in the case of our documents suggests an eleventh-century daring for the letters, as it is found in documents written before the second half of the eleventh century. The yellowish color of the ink is found in many Genizah documents, all of which were written before the end of the eleventh century. This kind of ink is also found in many Genizah fragments belonging to the earliest secrion of the Genizah—pre-tenth century documents. Moreover, hard point ruling on the flesh side of the parchment is also an early technique, one used in the earliest extant manuscripts written in the Orient. Moving on to the script of the letters we note that its style—the SemiSquare mode—dominates Sephardic and Oriental script during the eleventh century, further evidence in support of my predecessors' dating. One other important characteristic of the letters' script strengthens the claim for an eleventh-century dating: In addition to the clearly distinguishable Sephardie features of the script, there are still some traces of Oriental features as well (the serifs of the wide lines, for example). This would indicate a link between the Sephardic and the Oriental script. Based on records of early Sephardic script, from the tenth and eleventh century, it seems that this link gradually disappears toward the thirteenth century, when the Sephardic style is fully formed. Nevertheless, the script and the physical features of the documents, together with the historical arguments, produce strong evidence for an eleventh-century dating of the letters. The question that we must now ask is "what and where is the first community from which the woman was twice sent out?"—for this, it stands to reason, would tell us the provenance of the letters. On this matter, however, opinion is divided. Golb tried to prove that the letter he dealt with, the first letter, was written in Provence. The similarity between the two letters and their apparent direct relationship, along with the appearance of the name Najera in the second letter, rules out a Provençal origin for the first letter. The link between the two letters clearly suggests that they were both written in Spain. One particularly helpful clue in this regard is hidden in line 9 of the letter A. The scribe and the witnesses describe themselves there using the words ‫ממנו‬ ‫ קהל‬after which there is a stubbed word and then ‫צעירי הצאן‬. Mann suggested that we read the four letters of the stubbed word as ‫" אניו‬Anjou," the town in France. Golb offered a different reading. Seeing the first letter as a MEM, and not an ALEPH, he derived: ‫ו‬-‫מ־נ־י‬. My reconstruction of the missing parts of the letter proves that Golb read it correcdy, and that the only way to read line 9 of letter A is:‫( ממנו קהל מניו‬Fig. 4). If that is in fact the correct reading of the word, where is this community of ‫ו‬-‫י‬-‫נ‬-‫?מ‬ Golb identified the place as Monieux, in Provence, which is located 160 miles Northeast of Narbonne. It is highly unlikely, however, that the woman would have travelled Northeast from Narbonne to Provence and then turned

back in order to return to northern Spain. Far more probable is a hypothesis that would place the convert on a familiar route, one she knew from her Chrisdan past. Following out this line of thought we can picture her on the pilgrim's route to Santiago de Compostela. The number of pilgrimages from southern France and northern Spain to Compostela increased gready during the eleventh century, and travel on this road was safe and convenient. There was considerable commercial acdvity along the route, as well as numerous setdements. That many Jews had joined these setdements over the years only adds to the likelihood that our convert chose this route, her fears of her Chrisdan family notwithstanding. We can reasonably conclude, then, that the woman and her husband made their way from Narbonne, on the French part of the route, and found shelter in a small town in the region of Burgos, where they waited for an opportunity to enter Muslim territory. In that region, near Burgos, it happens that there was once a small medieval town whose name in Hebrew is identical to the mystery-town of our first letter: ‫מניו‬. According to several sources, already in the tenth century there was a setdement not far from the main route to Santiago de Compostela, some 50 miles from Najera, and the name of that town was Muno.

The References In a document found in the San Pedro de Cardena monastery, near Muno, a priest named Florez gives details about the Bishop of Muno—Basilio—who lived in 949.8 In his book Origenes del Espanol? Menéndez Pidal quotes from a document that was written in Castile and mentions the names of two bishops—one of whom is Velasco, assumed to be Belasius the Bishop of Vapuesta, and also of Muno. In spite of the slight difference between the names—Basilio and Belasius— he seems to be the same bishop who lived during the tenth century. A convincing evidence is giving in one of Baer's books.10 Dealing with the issue of the tax rate in Castilian Jewish communities, Baer refers to a document written in 1290 A.D. One of the communities noted by Baer in his book is the Jewish settlement of Muno. Muno, according to Baer and the Spanish Encyclopedia, is located in the Burgos region, along the southern route connecting Burgos with Valladolid, between two small towns (which also included Jews among their populations)—Lerma and Palenzuela. Comparing the tax rate paid by these three communities—Muno, Lerma, and Palenzuela—with that paid by the community of Burgos, we can determine that there was only a small number of Jews in these towns. While Burgos's rate was roughly 87,000 maravedis, the total rate of the three towns put together was only one thousand maravedis. A piece of information given in a colophon at the end of Ms. Paris 227, written in 1342, might strengthen the argument for the Jewish settlement of 8 9 10

Encidopedia Universal Uustrada, 1907-1930. Barcelona: Hijos de J. Espasa, 37, 412-413. Menéndez Pidal, R. 1968. Origenes del Espanol. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 32, 98. Baer, F. 1936. Die Juden in Christlichen Spanien. Vol. I. Berlin: Schocken, 81-88.

Mufio. According to this colophon, the manuscript in quesdon was written in a place called ‫ מנאו העליונה‬Upper Moneo. Considering the Sephardic characterisdes of the manuscript, several possible locations for Moneo might be suggested. One of these possibilities sheds light on the issue of Mufio: In a German adas11 published in 1910, there is a notation of a town named Moneo sitting on latitude 43, northwest of Burgos. (The town does not appear on other maps, and Muno, as we know it, was located south of Burgos.) Though we must take into account the possibility that the editors of the German adas simply made a mistake in indicating the town of Moneo in this precise location, the presence in that general area of a town with that name would seem to be further evidence in support of the existence of the eleventh-century Muno. Most likely, however, there were in fact two distinct, but nearby, towns at some point—with the northern town having been called Upper Moneo. All of these cross references might reinforce the idea that the mysterious place name of Letter A is in fact Muno, a town in old Castile that existed during the Middle Ages.

11

Scobel, A. 1910. Andreis Handatks. Wien, 91-92.

Fig. la: Cambridge, UL T-S 16.100

A part of letter a Ψ «

^

‫מוע‬

‫ ת ב‬V

^

‫י‬

T

W

W

^

.‫י‬

J^, ^',‫׳‬V.·.':‫׳‬

^

Í

^

^

^

.'.·‫ ״‬. ,‫״‬-V

W •

.

^

.'.. .

WRTW Η

‫י׳‬

::

Î

‫י«ז‬

‫^עייגו‬

‫)עפעוץ‬

Fig. lb: Cambridge, ULT-S 12.532

A part of letter b Λ1 > M ‫ליכול‬

^

ta

s í r 7 ) j ^

>

‫מ‬

‫ו‬

‫ת‬

‫ל‬

^

^

^

‫י‬

^

^ / ‫ ׳‬T ^ ^

ITRGY ^‫ו י ז כ נ י ׳ ופיס‬

‫ןודיו^נעו‬

'

V ^

‫ז מ ב‬

^

IT

7 S I W &

Fig. 2: Sephardic letters !

*

^

* 1

J*

‫בג‬

‫צ‬

3 ‫פ‬ »

•3

‫יד‬

‫מ‬

?‫י‬

‫ל‬ τ>

Y

J

>

Fig. 3: the evolution of square into semisquare Ό 'TP

SQUARE

j *

IG»

CURRENT SQUARE SEMI-SQUARE

3«

Fig. 4: reconstruction of the word ‫מניו‬ ‫^יייי י ג ע נ ד י‬ ‫ע ע נ ד י‬

M

V

V ^ ?

^

SAADYA G A O N ON M U S I C M E L O D Y OR RHYTHM? ULF HAXEN The Royal Library, Copenhagen, Denmark

Introduction The centuries between 800 and 1400 witnessed the rise of an impressive Jewish culture in Babylonia and Spain in close symbiosis with the ruling Arab class which furthered religion, philosophy, literature, the exact sciences and music. In Sefer Ku^ari Judah Halevi expresses his disapproval of the aspects of metrico-rhythmical music, still preferring the old psalmodie chant. Others felt differendy. A number of Spanish-Jewish writers, many wriung in Arabic, showed considerably more understanding of the musical demands of metrical poetry, calling the science of music "the last and best" of the exact sciences (e.g. Abraham bar Hiyya, Yosef ibn Aqnin and Shem Tob ben Yosef Falaquera). Few musical documents, however, have been preserved. The musico-poetic achievements of this period are summed up by A. Z. Idelsohn thus: After the rise of Islam and its conquests in the Near East, the Jews interested themselves in new artistic forms in poetry and music created by their neighbours, the Arabs, and began adding to their song metred verse and rhythmical music.1

Saadya Gaon It is not generally recognized that Saadya Gaon Al-Fayyumi (d. 942), whose production was concerned mainly with religious, exegetical, philological and philosophical subjects, alongside his paytanic activity, was also profoundly concerned with the science of music; not only with the theoretical aspects of music and music as an ethical and cosmological power, but equally so with music in performance. Steinschneider alluded to this fact stating that: Down to the 12th century, Saadya is the only [Jewish] writer, known to the author, of whom any fragment on the theory of music is extant; in fact the theory and expression of music (bochmat ha-musiqa), or sequence of sound

Idelsohn, A. Z. repr. 1975. Jewish Music in its Historical Development. N.Y.

(hochmat ha-qot), like all similar sciences, originally belongs to the Arabian school.2 Objections were raised to metred verse and rhythmical music in this period e.g. by Hai Gaon (d.1038), Ishaq al-Fasi (d.1103) and Maimonides (d.1204). The latter probably voiced public opinion rather than his own when he said "It is well known that as to the rhythms (jqaāt), all of them are forbidden." With Saadya, however, there is no bias against rhythmical music, which may indicate that this was legal in Mesopotamia in his time.

Saadya Gaon's treatise Kitab al-amanat wa-l-i 'tiqadat Saadya Gaon wrote his magnum opus, the religio-philosophical treadse "The book of beliefs and opinions," in 933 (in Arabic with Hebrew letters), endtled: Kitāb al-amānāt wa-1-i'tiqādāt.‫י‬ The treadse is the earliest systemauc attempt to interpret Judaism by means of Aristotelian philosophy and, in addidon, it is the earliest contribudon to the subject in Jewish literature; it furthermore marks a definite stage in the religious as well as the musical history of the Jews; and, finally, it furnishes a supplementary document for the study of Arabian cultural domination in the Near East in this period. The treatise is divided into ten chapters, nine of which are closely related; while the tenth and last chapter is unrelated to those preceding it. O n this ground it has been argued that it was a separate monograph. However, that is discounted by the fact that the tenth chapter which contains the treatise on music and its influences is mentioned as an integral part of Saadya's work in the bibliographical register Kitâb ai-Fihrist

The content of Chapter X The tenth chapter is entided, "concerning how it is most proper for man to conduct himself in this world." Saadya's introduction to the first subsection runs: "So I say here that there are eight alhān (literally melodies), and to all and each are measures (maqādīi) deriving from the tangbim (literally intoning)." Then follows his description of the eight modes. The second subsection is on modulation (Ar. intiqāi ; Gr. metabole) from one mode to another, or from one submode to another. The third subsection is on the arrangement of modes according to cognate metrical forms (i.e. where and if certain allied characteristics between rhythmic and metric patterns can be discerned); and the fourth section concerns the application of specific modes to certain hours of the day.

2

3

4

Steinschneider, M. 1902 repr. 1964. Die arabische Litteratur der Juden. Frankfurt am Main; Hildesheim. Landauer, S. ed. 1880. Kitâb al-amánât wa-l-iúqadát. Leiden. Based on Bodleian ms. Pocock, 148, fols. 189v-190. Ibn A1-Nadīm, M. 10th c., Kitâb al-Fihrist. Ed. G. Flügel, repr. Beirut, 1964.

The second division of Saadya's treatise deals with (1) the place of a particular mode in the doctrine of the ethos, (2) the constitutions of the colours, (3) the constitution of perfumes and (4) the sayings of the philosophers about music.

Ibn Tibbon's translation and other Hebrew versions Saadya's Kitāb al-amânāt is more widely known in the commonly recognized Hebrew translation by Judah ibn Tibbon (ca.1120-ca 1190), entided Sefer haemunot we-ha-de'ot (editio princeps 1186). Other editions: Constantinople, 1562, upon which 1647 (Amsterdam), 1787 (Berlin), and 1857 (Leipzig, ed. Fischel) are based; and the Leipzig edition (Slucki 1864: 160) most commonly referred to. Ibn Tibbon's literal Hebrew translation of above musical passage in Saadya's Arabic introduction to chapter ten runs: And we say that the neginot (other versions have nigguti) are eight, every one of them having a measure (shi'ur) [derived] from the notes (ne'imot). Subsequent translations and commentaries in European languages relied entirely on ibn Tibbon's version and faithfully transmitted the nodon of the "eight melodic modes (niggunim)," but frequendy "without observing the meaning of the text" (Farmer). s There are other Hebrew versions of Saadya Gaon's text all of which might be related to the original Arabic text: two paraphrases Pitron sefer ha-emunot [anonymous A], Pitron sefer ha-emunot [anonymous B]; and a passage by Abraham bar Hiyya, whose encyclopedic work Yesodey ha-tebunah u-migdal ha-emunah includes a section on the cjuadrivium educationis where music is discussed alongside geometry, arithmetic and astronomy. Abraham bar Hiyya's rendering of the musical passage (based on Saadya) is quoted in a later work by Ya'akob ben Hayyim Ferussol (d. 1424) in connection with a discussion of the Sefer Ku^ari by Judah Halevi. The terminological problem was developed further by Abraham bar Hiyya where the term tenu'ot denotes "rhythm," and niggun denotes "beating"; he says: "These rhythmic modes (tenu'ot) are eight, every one of them having a measure (shi'ur) derived from the beat/beating (niggun)." Tenu'ot for rhythm in Bar Hiyya's terminology is surmised to reflect a Spanish practice.

Farmer's first discovery (Al-Kindī as Saadya's source) In 1943 Henry George Farmer in his penetrating study, Sa'adyah Gaon-and the Influence of Music ascertained beyond any reasonable doubt that Saadya's presentation of the musical topic was in actual fact based on Al-Kindl, his older contemporary and compatriot and the most influential Muslim philosopher prior to A1-Fārābī (d.ca.950). And today Al-Kindfs Treatise concerning concise

5

An exception to the rule is Baron, S. W. 1958. A Social and Religious Histoiy of the Jews. 7, 208 ff. For further reference to Arabic and Hebrew musical sources see, Shiloah, A. 1979. RJSM; and Adler, I. 1975. RISM. München.

information on music (Risāla fi ij%ā' khabariyja al-mūsīqī) is generally accepted as being Saadya's source. The basic question which Farmer set out to resolve was to explain the use of the two conflicting musical terms (īqā' and lahn) in two near-identical contextual frameworks by Saadya and A1-Kindī respectively. Saadya states (as cited above): So I say here, that there are eight alhān (literally melodies), and to all and each are measures (maqādīt) [deriving] from the tanghim (literally intoning). And A1-Kindī states in his introduction of the first discourse: As for the rhythms (iqä'ät) which are genres (ijnds) to the rest of the rhythms, then they are divided into eight rhythms. As with Saadya, A1-Kindī also divides his treatise on music into two divisions (or chapters) of four subsections each. The first chapter of Al-Kindfs Risdla treats explicitly of: a) The 8 iqä'ät (rhythmic modes) named in Arabic: thaqtl al-awwal, thaqtl althäni, al-mâkhūrī (see below), khafif al-thaqil, al-ramal, khafif al-ramal, kbafif al-khafif, al-ha^aj. b) Modulations (intiqāl) from one rhythmic mode to another. c) The arrangements of rhythms according to cognate metrical forms. d) The application of specific rhythmic modes to certain hours of the day. In the second chapter he treats the four subjects related to ethical doctrines: a) The place of rhythm in the doctrine of the ethos. b) The constitution of perfumes. c) The constitution of colours. d) The dicta of the philosophers about music. Example of the third mode: Al-màkhūri (—Khafif al-thaqil al-thānī) according tofivesources Saadya, Kitdb al-amānāt wa-1-i'tìqādāt (Pocock 148; ed. S. Landauer, 317—18): And the third [rhythmic mode], its measure (miqddr) is two consecutive notes 1 .(nagmatirì)-there is not between them the time of a note (nagmah)—and one quiescent (note), and between its putting down and its raising up [...] and its putting down, is the time of a note (seaman nagmah). And this (mode) alone moves (the humour of) the yellow bile, and (the temperament of) courage and audacity, and what is like them. (Farmer 1943: 29-31) Al-Kindl: RisdlaJìij%ā' khabariyya al-mūstqī (SB 5530, fols.31b-35 ): And al-mākbūrì is two consecutive beats (naqratān)—there should not be between them the time of a beat (\amān naqrab)—and solitary beat, and between its putting down and its raising up, and its raising up and its putting down is the time of a beat. (Farmer 1943: 20—21) Anonymous (A): Pitewn (Bodleian Pocock, 17; Munich Cod. Hebr. 42, a.o.): The third (mode) has two consecutive beats (ni'nuoi)—without so much interval between them as the time of one sound (yebibab)—both being joined [and] one (beat) that is depressed and low, and between the putting down of

the niggun (rhythmic mode) and its raising up [....] and its putting down, there is an interval amounting to the time of one beat (ni'nu'ah)... (the ethos of the mode is wanting). (Farmer 1943: 40-42) Abraham bar Hiyya in Beit Ya'aqob (Ya'akob ben Hayyim Ferussol, 1422; ed. Steinschneider 1887): The third (mode): its measure is of two beats (neginot) one after the other, without another (beat) between them, and one quiescent (beat), and [between....] the raising up and the putting down is what equals the measure of a beat (neginah). This rhythmic mode stirs the yellow bile ... etc. (Farmer 1943: 50-52) Yehuda ibn Tibbon transi. Sefer emunot we-de'ot (e.p. 1186. Several print, eds.): The third (shi'ur), its measure is two adjoining notes (ne'imot), without the time of a note (ne'imah) between them, and one quiescent (note); and between every low and high [...] and low, is the time of a note. And that (mode) alone stirs (the strength of the humour of) the yellow bile ..etc. (Farmer 1943: 65-67).

Farmer's reasoning The Arab theorists invariably had the strings of the lute-instrument in mind when making définirions of musical theory (Ar. 'Um al-mùsiqī·, Hebr. hochmat hamusiqa), just as the Greeks had the kithara in mind when describing melodic and rhythmic patterns. When Al-Kindl (and subsequendy Saadya and his followers) describes the mdkhüri mode thus, "between its putting down and its raising up" and antithetically "its raising up and its putting down" he refers to the natural downward and upward strokes of the plectrum (midrdb)—and not to "low" and "high" pitch. On the lute, rhythm was effected by diversely timed "beats" (naqarat) made with a plectrum (midrāb) on the strings which, in turn, produced diversely measured "notes" (nagham/naghamāt). In other words "beats" were the cause, and "notes" were the effect. Or (according to the 10th c., Īkhwān al-Sqfā)·. "Melody [was] composed of notes, and notes arise from beats." It depends entirely on the point of view whether we say that rhythm is made up of "beats" (which is the cause) or "notes"(which is the effect). In Saadya's case, Farmer points out, the reason for using lahn (lit. melody) to express iqd' ("the effect" = rhythm ) was an opposite way of reasoning. Saadya's use of the term "lahn" to signify the rhythmic concept was accordingly in agreement with the terminology of 1khwān al-Sqfd'. The same duality in meaning (or ambiguity in terms) exists in Hebrew terminology where "niggun," which signifies melody or melodic mode, eventually came to be used for rhythm and rhythmic modes (e.g. with Abraham bar Hiyya). In Hebrew, however, there was a philological and etymological congruity of terminology, in as far as niggun belongs to the root "nagan" (to strike a stringed instrument: I Sam I, 16:16ff; 18;10). The Arabs followed a similar terminological trend using "daraba" "to strike"; "darba" (a stroke or beat on a stringed or percussion instrument); and ultimately "darb" denoting "a rhythmic mode."

Werner and Sonne It is interesting to note that the year in which Farmer (Edinburgh University) published his study on Saadya two other distinguished musicologists, Isaiah Sonne and Eric Werner of The Hebrew Union College, arrived at a similar conclusion independendy of Farmer's discovery, published in the co-study: "Medieval Jewish Music Theory." 6 And 20 years later, Eric Werner explicidy claims the precedence of rhythm to melody in medieval music and song, "if we ask which elements of music were supposed to possess the greatest ethical power, melody or rhythm, we must answer without hesitation: Rhythm!" and he adds; " O n this point Arabs, Greeks, and Jews agree completely." 7 Where Farmer studied Saadya's text from a textual comparative and practical viewpoint, Werner and Sonne approached Saadya's musical text in its historical and philosophical context with special regard to the ethos doctrine and its classic and medieval connection to the octoechos (Gr. for the 8 modes). 8

Summary and Perspectives In sum the two main issues raised by Saadya Gaon comprised primarily "lahn" as a rhythmic-modal concept (defined by Eric Werner as "a fixed pattern containing certain motives" = Ar. maqdm)•, and secondly "intiqāl" (modulations between the modes). Saadya claims elsewhere that the Levites of the Temple used a system of eight distinct modes for their rendition of the Psalms. It would, as Eric Werner righdy argues, be "almost a miracle if the Jews did not employ modes." One elucidating case in point is the controversial psalm superscription " A l hashminit" in Psalms 6 and 12. It has been explained as an allusion to a variety of the kinnor with eight strings. But Saadya's interpretation of the superscription as referring to the 8th rhythmic mode cannot be dismissed. As for the concept of "intiqàl " (modulation between modes) Saadya states "that kings were moved to diverse moods by listening to modes and the best musical result was achieved by a judicious blending of rhythmic modes." Saadya's contemporaries, the philosophical brotherhood 1khwān al-Safd' has this to say on the blending of rhythms: The musician....at gatherings, and banquets, and pardes should begin with the rhythmic modes (Here: alhanS) which strengthen the generous moral qualities, and nobleness, and liberality, like the heavy rhythmic modes (al-thaqil al-awwal etc.). Then he should follow them with the agreeable, joyful modes, such as alha%aj and al-ramal·, and in the dance (dastband) [he should use the rhythmic mode] al-māhkhūri., and so on. And at gatherings, if he fears disturbances,

6

7

8

Werner, E. and Sonne, I. 1942-43. "The Philosophy and Theory of Music in Judeo-Arabic Literature." HUCA 16-17, 511-573. Werner, E. 1965, "Greek Ideas in Judeo-Arabic Literature." The Commonwealth of Musk, London, 71-96. Werner, E. 1948. "The Origin of the Eight Modes of Music (Ochtoechos)." HUCA 21, 211.

excitement, and quarrelling, he should play the soothing, heavy, tranquilizing, and sad modes. For the simple reason that "the clever musician is he who, when the auditors are bored with a mode (lahn), changes...to another mode, either opposite to it or resembling it. In the passage (khurūj) from one mode to another, there are two methods... etc." (Farmer 1943: 87-88). How a musician passed (kharaja) from one mode to another in this mixing or blending of diverse modes "so that the changes are agreeable" is not explicidy explained by Saadya. But Al-Kindi demonstrates the procedure in his treadse. The final issue discussed by Saadya pertains to the question of rhythmic modes in relation to cognate metrical forms. The relationship between music and poetry and the interaction of the two constituent but mutually exclusive factors in medieval poetry, rhythmic modes and metric patterns, have been and still are topics of much controversy among philologists and musicologists in recent years. The inherent dichotomy of rhythm and metre Farmer rendered precise in stating that: "Rhythm (iqā) is quite distinct from metre (the Khalilian 'arūd) and could even seem to be in opposition to it" (Farmer 1965: xi).9 A seemingly opposite view appears in a statement of the aforementioned Ikhwan al-Safà'·. "The cannons of music (al-mūsīqÌ) are like the cannons of prosody (Ar. 'arūd)..." A statement that does not imply, however, that (quantitative) metre and (accentual) rhythm coincide in versemaking. O n the contrary! Medieval scholars were aware of the fact that the constituent components of poetico-musical rhythm were distinguishable from the components of the Khalilian meter (farūd) and that the two agents were complementary but mutually exclusive. We may speculate that even "the father of prosody," al-Khalll, was aware of this fact, and that the philosophic brotherhood Ikhwān al-Safā' was inspired by his work on rhythm, now lost, but the existence of which is known from Kitab al-Fihrist.

Conclusion In medieval Jewish paytanic and secular poetry metre and rhythm constitute the fundamental parameters as regards versification. Metre and rhythm were the dominant agents in the poet-musicians' aesthetico-artistic repertoire. And of these two agents, as Werner testifies, the dynamic rhythmic pattern claimed superiority. The opposition was strong against rhythmic music mainly for religious reasons as Judah Ha-Levi's and Maimonides' censorious attitude towards the secular strophic trend shows. Maimonides banned, as did the Muslim legalists, participation in dance—singing—and drinking parties where rhythmic music and song were performed. His prohibition was especially directed against the Arabic muwashshaha (Hebr. shir e%oi), popular among Arabs and Jews alike. 9

Farmer, H. G. 1965. The Sources ofArabian Music. Leiden: Brill.

But nothing could stop this development. In a study on the shirei e%or by Abraham ibn Ezra S. M. Stern (who was preeminent in the study of the genre) enumerates 20 superscriptions all of which carry musical references (β lahn) to Arabic, Hebrew or Romance models; and all of which (quoting Stern) "in spite of their limited number offer a great variety of problems." Stern was puzzled by the fact that the lahn or β lahn superscriptions of the poems had "irregular metres" which did not always comply with the quantitative pattern of the main text and often seemed in opposition to it. Stern, and especially the generation of scholars succeeding him, satisfied themselves by explaining the phenomenon with the rather fluid term of "melodic" contrafact. To quote the musicologist Amnon Shiloah "they succeeded in finding adequate technical terms, but in their writings as well as in those of the following generations, this terminology is fluid and often ambiguous." The ongoing "metric batde" concerning medieval poetry has hitherto been dominated by a philological and a pseudo-musicological approach mixing the classical "Khalilian doctrine" with a confused conceptual notion of music, melody and rhythm, and failing to distinguish metred psalmodie chant from musico-rhtythmic poetry and song. The result has been an unfortunate ambiguity of technical terms distorting the prosodie image of an entire poetic genre.10 Saadya Gaon's emphasis on the influence of rhythmic modes and on the importance of modulating rhythms in the versification of poetry and song is a welcome opportunity to reassess the prevailing theories as regards the prosodie structure of medieval Hebrew and Arabic poetry. As Haim Schirmann claimed "...one must not shrink from the experiment, for it is preferable to take a risk than persist with outdated methods." 11

10

11

Cf. Monroe, J. T. 1987. "The Tune or the Words (Singing Hispano-Arabic Strophic Poetry)." AlQantara 8, 265-317; and critique of this approach in: Lopez-Morillas, C. and Hitchcock, R. 1996. The Kharjas, A Critical Bibliography, 48. Schirmann, H. 1965. "Problems in the Study of Postbiblical Hebrew Poetry." Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences. Jerusalem, 1967.

T H E RECEPTION OF HEKHALOT LITERATURE IN YOHANAN ALEMANNO'S AUTOGRAPH

Ms.

PARIS

849*

KLAUS HERRMANN Freie Universität Berlin, Germany PART I

Heinrich Graetz and his Condemnation of Yohanan Alemanno To list Alemanno's uninspired and totally confusing writings wouldn't be worth the paper ... an omnium-gatherum of quasi-philosophy and mysticism thrown together. Assuredly no serious contemporary scholar would subscribe to Heinrich Graetz's judgement on Yohanan Alemanno (1433/34—after 1505), published in his famous Histoiy of the Jem more than a hundred years ago.1 When we evaluate the available editions of Alemanno's writings, however, we are obliged to concur with Graetz's judgement or rather his condemnarion still seems to be valid, as only in recent rimes has a fundamental change taken place. Up to this day none of his works has been published in its entirety; in other words, no scholar has tried to refute Graetz by publishing a complete version of Alemanno's work. This fact per se is somewhat astonishing since Alemanno is not seldom mentioned in secondary literature dealing with the Renaissance period. In this regard, his close relation to the Christian scholar Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463-94), with whom he was on friendly terms, according to his own testimony in the introduction to his commentary on The Song of Songs, had made him to a prominent figure among the Jews in Renaissance Italy. Of course, Graetz, too, referred to this important testimony on Jewish-Christian contacts in the Renaissance period: Pico della Mirandola, too, more scholar than thinker, felt the desire to descend into the bottomless pit of kabbalistic esoteric lore. He allowed himself to be led into the blind alleys of the Kabbalah by a mysric who had moved to Italy, Yohanan Alemanno, who, confused soul that he was, himself tried to have him believe that the secret lore was quite ancient and contained the most profound wisdom. Pico della Mirandola came to feel at home in the kabbalistic formulas, finding in them a confirmation of Christian dogmas, altogether more Christianity than Judaism ... among the 900 theses that the twenty-four-year

* 1

A more elaborated version of this paper is going to be published in Studies in Jewish Manuscripts. Ed. J. Dan and K. Herrmann, forthcoming. Geschichte der Juden, vol. VIII. Leipzig3 1890, 246, η. 1.

old claimed to defend ... was also the following: that no science provides more certainty about Christ's divinity than magic and the Kabbalah.2 Alemanno's interest in Kabbalah doomed any chances he might have had of receiving a balanced judgement in Heinrich Graetz' History of the Jews, imbued by an excessive, rather naive rationalism coupled with a vehement anti-mystical and anti-Kabbalistic tendency in its historical conception.

The Author and his Autographs With respect to the transmission of Alemanno's authentic writings we are fortunate: Most of his works have been transmitted as autographs whose handwriting expresses the Ashkenazic background of the family as clearly as his surname Alemanno does. Alemanno's masterpiece The Immortal has survived in a Mantuan manuscript (no. 21) in his original handwriting; his hand-written commentary on the Torah, entitled The Eyes of the Community is housed in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris (no. 270); his hand-written Notebooks (Uqqutim) found their way into the Bodleian Library in Oxford (lleggio 23). His commentary on The Song of Songs called The Delight of Solomon (‫ ;חשק שלמה‬according to I Kings 9:19), which consists of two parts, (1.) The Song of Solomon's Ascents entitled introduction emphasising the virtues of Solomon and (2.) the exegesis of the biblical text, has been transmitted in four manuscripts, of which one can be direcdy linked with the autograph.

Yohanan Alemanno in Florence In the introduction to his commentary on The Song of Songs Alemanno applauds the political circumstances under the reign of Lorenzo the Magnificant. Many passages of Alemanno's Hesheq Shlomo, in which he praises Solomon's virtues and highlights the city of Jerusalem under his rule, seem to be inspired by the appearance of Florence in Medici times. Therefore Solomon functions as a guide and model for the Jewish people then, in effect as a virtual Jewish Renaissance personality. As Cosimo de' Medici and Lorenzo the Magnificant engaged famed artists such as Botticelli, Donatello, Ghirlandaio, Verrocchio and others, to beautify the places in Florence so, according to Alemanno, had Solomon done in his time in Jerusalem. Alemanno's description of the Biblical Jerusalem is based on rabbinic traditions, especially the Aramaic Book of Esther (Targum Esther ha-Sheni), whereby he was quite conscious of affinities to his own period: "What these rabbinic sources say is not improbable, as anyone knows who is aware of what the ancients wrote and what is done in our times ..."‫ י‬Earlier, following his report on the construction of the Temple in Jerusalem, he had made the following observadon about Solomon's cultural policies: "Solomon also dispensed money for the 2

3

Geschichte der Juden, vol. VIII. Leipzig 1896, pp. 246f. In many publicadons only Alemanno's relationship with Pico della Mirandola was judged to be worth mentioning. Quoted according to the unpublished dissertation of Lesley, A. M. The Song of Solomon's Ascents by Yohanan Alemanno. Love and Human Perfection According to a Jewish Colleague of Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. Ph.D. diss, submitted at the University of California, Berkeley, 1976, 159.

idols of Ammon and Moab whom his wives worshipped, even though he did not believe in them. In this he acted like the typical nobleman, who indulges the wishes of his servants."4

Gershom Scholem and his Discovery of Yohanan Alemanno's Magical Hand in Ms. Paris 849 Another wridng by Alemanno was discovered by Gershom Scholem in 1927, who pointed out that the collection of philosophical, mystical and in the Paris Ms. 849 bears Alemanno's handwriting—the main topic of my paper.5 In his article Scholem describes the major sources of Alemanno's compilation constituting this untitled work. Apart from purely philosophical passages the whole work contains many magical as well as mystical traditions. The mystical writings in it are derived from the so-called Hekhalot literature and include works such as 3 Enoch, Ma'aseh Merkavah, Seder Kabbah de-Bereshit, Sar ha-Torah and Shi'urQomah. Among the most important writings on magic there are the Sefer ha-Tamar, the Sefer ha-Eevanah and a complete version of Sefer ha-Ka^m.

Daniel Capri and the Meaning ofRhetoric in the Renaissance At the beginning of the 70ties Daniel Capri published a short article dedicated to the Italian Jewish scholar Yehuda ben Yehiel, better known as Messer Leon (born between 1420 and 1425, died between 1497 and 1499).6 Messer Leon was one of the very few Jewish scholars who not only received a doctorate (in fact a double doctorate, in the liberal arts and in medicine ("Doctor artium liberalium et medicinae"), and was even allowed to confer such doctorates upon his students, at least on two occasions. One of those whom he granted the degree of doctor of liberal arts and of medicine was Yohanan Alemanno during the latter's sojourn in Padua on February 27, 1470. When Alemanno was his student Messer Leon seems to have composed his magnum opus, The Book of the Honeycomb's Flow (Sefer Nofet Zufim) which was already printed in 1475/6 in Mantua as one of the first incunabula. The aim and purpose of this work can by characterised as a "Rhetorik nach Aristoteles, Cicero und Quintilian, mit besonderer Beziehung auf die Heilige Schrift," as Adolf Jellinek subtitled Messer Leon's work in his edition of it. Messer Leon tries to prove that the classical rhetorical tradition, which so powerfully stimulated the development of the whole Renaissance culture, could be found in the Hebrew Bible, the chief basis of Jewish education, as well—or, to put it in his own words: "If you consider the Holy Scriptures, you will find that what Aristode and Quintilian said is undoubtedly true." The strong impact of Messer Leon's Sefer Nofet Zufim on his student Alemanno is clearly evidenced by the latter's inclusion of his master's work in his curriculum of learning, which we find in the aforementioned Eiqqutim together with other writings of rhetoric and grammar. 4 5 6

Ibid., 155. "An Unknown Treatise by Yohanan Alemanno." (Hebr.) KS 5, 1927/8, 273-277. Capri's article was first published in Hebrew in Michael 1, 1973, 277—301, and later republished in English under the ride "Notes on the life of Rabbi Judah Messer Leon." In Studi sull'ebraismo italiano in memoria di Cecil Roth. Ed. E. Toaff. Rome 1974, 37-62.

Moshe Idel and the Meaning of Magic in the Renaissance Alemanno's Curriculum of Study was the subject of a detailed analysis published by Moshe Idel in 1978/79. 7 The first part of the curriculum (from the age of four to thirteen years) is, of course, dedicated to the study of the Hebrew Bible and Mishnah with Maimonides' commentary, followed by the study of ten tractates of the Talmud together with Rashi and the Tosafot in the morning and, in the evening over the next seven years, secular works of the trivium (grammar, rhetoric, and logic) and most of the quadrivium (arithmedc, geometry, astronomy—art, music are not included). For the study of grammar David Kimhi's Sefer ha-Mikhlol, Profiat Duran's Ma'aseh Efod, and Immanuel of Rome's Sefer Even Boban are required. Training in the art of rhetoric is based on Aristode's Organon, Judah Messer Leon's Sefer Nofet Zufim, and another work by the same author dealing with poetics in the Prophets. The next stages of training up to the age of 35 (always arranged in seven-year phases) deal with philosophical, ethical, and political as well as medical writings.8 As Moshe Idel has pointed out, the final stages of the curriculum clearly indicate that the study of kabbalisdc and especially of magical traditions seem to be more important and even the climax of Jewish knowledge and therefore point in the same direction as Pico's writings do.9 The study of Kabbalah requires Menahem Recanati's Commentary on the Torab, the anonymous treatise Ma'arekbet ba-Elohut, and works of Abraham Abulafia several magical writings are mentioned just at the end and therefore have to be seen as the peak of the study program, among them the so-called Sefer Ra^j'el which was also known to him in the Hebrew retranslation from the Latin, Sefer Melekhet Muskelet, attributed to Apollonius, the Hebrew version of the Gbayat al-Hakim or Cicatrix, Sefer ba-Tamar, Sefer ba-Almandel, attributed to Solomon, and Sefer ba-A^amin, attributed to Abraham ibn Ezra. The climax of the whole study program is a Christian book on agriculture composed by Petrus de Crescentiis, which was important for Renaissance magic. We can say that Alemanno's Curriculum covers his own intellectual development, which clearly testifies to a tendency towards magic in his writings. Whereas in his earlier work magic does not play a significant role (and was indeed absent from the study program of his teacher Messer Leon), it is more predominant in his later writings, especially in the Paris MS.

Mystic, Magic and Rhetoric The scholarly works on Alemanno have shown the significance of two important aspects of Renaissance culture for him, rhetoric and magic. The aim of my contribution is the simple question: What happens when both come together: a high standard of eloquence oriented on the ideal of the Hebrew Bible in combination with all the demands of classical rhetoric and a deep rootedness in mystical-magical traditions. Alemanno's link to both areas, so central to Renaissance 7 8

9

"Yohanan Alemanno's 'Study Program'." Tarbi% 48, 303-331. As we have seen above Alemanno received a double doctoral degree in medicine and philosophy from his teacher Judah Messer Leon. Pico summarised his viewpoint in the famous conclusion: "Nulla est scientia, quae nos magis certificet de divinitate Christi quam magia et Cabbala." See above p. 415.

culture, is not at all a matter of course. Coincidentally his models and teachers in rhetoric were not outspoken opponents of mysticism. The authors of all the rhetorical texts used by Alemanno had nothing to do with magic and mystic. Alemanno's familiarity with both the magical-mystical as well as the rhetoric tradition raises the question how he could handle both. From a rhetorical point of view one could deal with magical and mystical texts—but only in order to demonstrate how one should not compose a text or, to formulate it more pointedly, as an antirhetorical work. There could be no better example to demonstrate this conflict than the Hekhalot literature. The whole corpus contradicts the rhetorical and textual rules as we can find them, for example, in Messer Leon's Sefer Nofet Zufim and its models in Antiquity. According to Cicero and Quintilian the art of rhetoric has to fulfil certain criteria which are classified as "invention," "arrangement," "style," "memory" and "delivery". The literary arrangement of the mystical and magical texts contradicts these requirements in many respects. The collection of mystical and magical texts which Alemanno included in the Parisian manuscript is, in its literary character far removed from the ideal of a smooth and beautiful text. Mystical language expresses a feeling for the irrational, that which Rudolf Otto called "the numinous." Such a language attempts to express the mystenum tremendum, the dreadful mystery, in words which constandy tend to be repetitive, redundant, prolix and based on numinous impressions. PART II In the following I would like to focus on one tradition of the Paris manuscript in order to illustrate Alemanno's acdve restructuring of the traditional mystical material according to his own linguistic aesthetic. Our textual example is the beginning of the so-called 3 Enoch. In most manuscripts of 3 Enoch the text is prefaced by a quote from Gen 5:24: Enoch walked with God. And he was not, because God took him—a verse used as evidence of the wildly proliferating apocalyptic Enoch traditions in the Second Temple period. There can be no doubt that 3 Enoch belongs to the traditions of the First (Ethiopian) and the Second (Slavic) Enoch Books—despite its much later date of composition and the assuredly post-Talmudic dating of its present form"1— nd that its description by Philip Alexander as "3 (Hebrew Apocalypse of) Enoch" is justified.11 The text indeed shows all the fundamental characteristics of an apocalypse: Metatron—Enoch now transformed into an angelic prince— escorts R. Yishma'el through the heavenly world and initiates him in his function as angelus interpres, into the secrets of the heavenly world. The sweeping angelology and cosmography are linked to a view of the coming judgement and the messianic period.

10

11

On the question of dating, see Übersetzung der Hekhalot-Uteratur. Ed. P. Schäfer and K. Herrmann, in collaboradon with U. Hirschfelder and G. Necker, Tübingen 1994, vol. I, L ff. A New Transladon and Introducdon by Ph. Alexander, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. I: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments. Ed. J. H. Charlesworth. London 1983, 223-315.

The beginning of this text runs in Alemanno's Vorlage (which seems to be very close to MS Florence Plut. 44.13) and his Paris autograph as follows: MS Florence Plut. 44.13 Vorlage) 1

. Δ Enoch walked with God. And he was not, because God took him. R. Yishma'el said: When I ascended to the heights to behold in my vision the Merkavah, I entered six palaces, chamber within chamber. When I reached the entrance of the seventh palace I passed in prayer before the Holy One, blessed be He, and lifted up my eyes on high and said: Lord of the Universe, I beseech you, that the merit of Aaron, son of Amram, lover of peace and pursuer of peace who received the crown of priesthood on Mount Sinai in the presence of your glory, be valid for me in that hour, so that prince Qaspi'el and the angels with him may not get power over me and may not throw me down from heaven. At once he summoned to me his servant Metatron, the angel, the prince of the Divine Presence, and he flew with his wings und with great joy came out to meet me, to save me from their hands; he grasped me with his hands before their eyes and said to me: May your coming be in peace for you, have been found pleasing by the high and exalted King to behold the likeness of the Merkavah.

MS Paris 849 (Alemanno) §1 These are the ways of those ascending to the Merkavah which they behold. R. Yishma'el said: When I ascended to the heights to behold the Merkavah, I entered six palaces. And at the entrance of the seventh palace I said:

Lord of the Universe, I beseech you, that the merit of Aaron, lover of peace and pursuer of peace, be valid for me, so that prince Qaspi'el and his angels may not get power over me to throw me down from heaven.

He summoned Metatron, the prince of the Divine Presence to me, and he flew with his wings to meet me. He saved me from their hands and said:

May your coming be in peace for you, have been found pleasing by the high and exalted King to behold the likeness of the Merkavah.

Instead of using the quotation from Gen 5:24 Alemanno prefaced his 3 Enoch with an introductory wording, whose form clearly fits the other headings of the Paris MS and whose content refers to the beginning of the text: "R. Yishma'el said: When I ascended to the heights to behold in my vision the Merkavah," whereby Alemanno smoothed out the phrase ... (‫"( )בצפייתי במרכבה‬in my vi-

sion"—whose else's point of view?!) in "to behold the Merkavah" (‫בצפיית‬ ‫)המרכבה‬.12 The introductory formula "R. Yishma'el said" is repeated in a stereotypical fashion and, after Metatron's self-reveladon about having been transformed into the angel-prince Enoch, is extended to "Metatron, the Prince of the Divine Presence, said to me," which is repeated 48 rimes. This form of textual organisation, which is clearly still a throwback to the individual traditions treated in 3 Enoch, is completely anathema to Alemanno's linguistic sense. The introductory formula of the first paragraphs stands for the whole text and is only expanded or replaced by subheadings where necessary, in accordance with the contents. When we compare the Vorlage with Alemanno's version, his cuts in the text are quite noticeable, as he left out the repeats and duplicates otherwise typical for Hekhalot texts and tried to avoid linguistic redundancies. Thus, his description of R. Yishma'el says quite simply that he entered six palaces and spoke his prayer. The fact that these palaces are each set up as a "chamber within chamber" is omitted just as the verbs of motion are eliminated, even though it is precisely these verbs which in 3 Enoch (as well as in Hekhalot literature generally) are used to underscore and dramatise the narrative movement. Because R. Yishma'el can only enter the palace once he has arrived there, the term ‫"( וכיון שהגעתי‬when I reached") seems superfluous for the course of the story; for the theatrical opening, "I passed in prayer before the Holy One, blessed be He, and lifted up my eyes and said," the Alemanno text simply reads, "I said." The following words, "Lord of the Universe, I beseech you ...," mark this text as a quick prayer by R. Yishma'el and therefore Alemanno left out the introductory formula: the contents are intended to be expressed in a literary form and therefore require no explanatory commentary. Also the prayer itself was subject to textual cuts: That Aaron is the "son of Amram" is just as unimportant for the narrative flow as the information that he "received on Mount Sinai the crown of priesthood in the presence of your glory." It is not his priesdy state, but, as stated here— evidendy derived from Mishna Avot 1:12 ("Hillel said: Be of the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace")—his striving for peace that is the subject of R. Yishma'el's request that he be granted peace in heaven. The omission of the expressions of time "in that hour" and "at once" is by and large typical of the textual reworking of 3 Enoch in the Paris MS. Apart from a few time elements, whose very use thus enhances their significance, with respect to Alemanno's textual understanding, such details are left out. All the various epithets—"servant" (‫)עבד‬, "angel" (‫ )מלאך‬and "Prince of the Divine Presence" (‫—)שר הפנים‬used to describe Metatron in the first paragraphs were evidendy too much for Alemanno. As the first one ‫ עבד‬is not explained undl §5, it does not really belong in the first paragraphs. As the "Prince of the Divine Presence" is by definition an angel, and thereby the term ‫ מלאך‬superfluous, Alemanno deleted it. Many phrases turn out to be saying the same thing twice, like e.g., "he flew with his wings and with great joy came out to meet me," or "to save 12

The various manuscript versions, however, are not uniform; see Übersetzung der Hekhalot-Uteratur, §1 with note 3.

me from their hands; he grasped me with his hands before their eyes ...," which is reduced to the fact of salvation in Alemanno's reworking "He saved me from their hands." The form of address, "May your coming be in peace," (‫)בואך לשלום‬, which we meet in the following context is reminiscent, because of the word sequence, of the evening prayer ‫"( בואכם לשלום מלאכי השלום‬Let your coming be in peace, Angel of Peace"). If Alemanno reversed the word order thus: ‫שלום בואך‬, then it was because I Sam 16:4 contains exacdy the same expression. Here we encounter a further important criterion for Alemanno's edition of 3 Enoch: his linguistic affinity to Biblical Hebrew. Further clues are already to be found in the first paragraphs. In Mishnaic Hebrew a continuing action in the past is expressed by ‫היה‬ plus participle, like the phrase at the beginning of §1: ‫"( הייתי נכנס‬I entered"). The Parisian manuscript has, in accordance with Biblical Hebrew, the verbum finitum: ‫נכנסתי‬. Alemanno changed ...‫שלא ישלטו בי קצפיאל השר ומלאכים שעמו ואל ישליכו‬ ("so that prince Qaspi'el and the angels with him may not get power over me and may not throw me ...") into ...‫"( שלא ישלוט בי קצפיאל השר ומלאכיו להשליכני‬so that prince Qaspi'el and his angels may not get power over me to throw me ..."); he replaced both of the finite verb forms, the first with ‫לא‬, the second now rendered negative with ‫אל‬, with a finite verb plus infinitive, which is certainly stylistically preferable. Characteristic for Mishnaic Hebrew is the dropped suffix of nouns, which, however, clearly re-emerges in Alemanno's text as in the previous example (‫)מלאכיו‬. Even a fleeting comparison of both versions reveals that Alemanno concentrates his rendering of the Vorlage on the essential points, avoids needless repetitions and redundancies, hereby clearly expressing his own linguistic feelings.

Summary In the course of the medieval transmission process the text of 3 Enoch like the entire Hekhalot corpus was subjected to manifold redactions. Indeed, 3 Enoch is a perfect example of the active reshaping of traditional materials in the circles of the haside ashkenay. Alemanno's editorial concept of 3 Enoch differs fundamentally from that of all of his predecessors in this regard: there is not a single paragraph, indeed, hardly a sentence that wasn't "corrected" and linguistically honed by him. This reworking clearly shows up Alemanno's response to the traditional material as being in the context of an individual intellectual world embedded in the expansive cultural backdrop of the Renaissance: whereby the idealist biblical Hebrew orientation of this Jewish humanist coupled with his passion for the orderliness of classical rhetoric was basic to his nature. Certainly the Hekhalot literature provides an especially impressive example here to demonstrate Alemanno's rootedness in the ideal of the art of eloquence, which left its characteristic imprint on the whole Renaissance period. In his Notebooks Alemanno described seven paths which mm out to be the hermeneutical key to understand his works. After emphasising the significance of

knowledge about "old" things for the "modern" world, he writes under the heading "Tasting of the Words of the Wise and of the Books That He Reads": Although a man may read and study and devote himself to learning Torah, and may have seen innumerable books and know what he has seen and read, he may not truly be called a wise man if he has no palate to taste what he has read and to sense in his intellect whether it is right or not, a lie or a falsehood, or established as true; as they said: Ά man should study and subsequendy understand.'15 This refers to the Tasting that comes after reading. He must be like the sieve, which retains the fine flour and expels the course14 in everything he reads in books of the wise. He should be like the one who eats and chews his food in his mouth, to savor what he eats, and not like the glutton, who chews and swallows and gobbles, or like the sponge,15 that absorbs everything without distinguishing bitter from sweet.16 Alemanno's work on the text of 3 Enoch clearly reveals his own tastes. His rendition of the text is anything but that of a mere copyist; it is a constant dialogue with the text source. Thus we can better appreciate Alemanno's ability to connect traditions as diverse as Hekhalot literature, magic, philosophy and Kabbalah together with the classical ideals of rhetoric, logic and eloquence into an overall concept—an integrative strategy that he shared with his Christian contemporaries. But at the same time, in his work of harmonisation and integration, he was ever conscious of the need to maintain a critical distance, which in turn, of course, could lead to a critique of tradition itself. In the end, after building up Solomon to be the perfect Renaissance man of the biblical era, he comments: "It sounds incredible, however, that King Solomon could have been wiser in the Torah than Moses himself." 17

13 14 15 16 17

bShab 63a. Cf. / ‫ ״‬Λ . 5 : 1 5 ‫׳־‬ Ibid. Quoted according to Lesley, The Song of Solomon ‫ י‬s Ascents, 16. Lesley, The Song of Solomon's Ascents, 450; cf. also id., 156: "And in holy deeds, Solomon was even more magnificant than Moses ..." See also I. Zinberg, A History of Jewish Literature. Trans, and ed. by B. Martin, vol. IV (part Five): Italian Jewry in the Renaissance Era. New York 1974, 31, who seems to be the only one poindng out the provocadve nature of these words.

‫‪3 Enoch‬‬

‫‪Alemanno‬‬ ‫כייי פריס‪ ,‬הספריה הלאומית ‪849‬‬ ‫)חבור בלתי נודע(‬

‫‪44.13‬‬

‫§‪1‬‬

‫§‪1‬‬

‫]‪ 110‬א[ ה ן א ל ה ד ר כ י ע ו ל י ה מ ר כ ב ה‬

‫]‪138‬א[ ו י ת ה ל ך ח נ ו ך א ת ה א ל ק י ם‬

‫הצופים בה ‪ I‬אמי ר' י ש מ ע א ל כשעליתי‬

‫ו א י נ נ ו כי ל ק ח אוי ‪ I‬ה א ל ק י ם ‪ I .‬א י ר '‬

‫המרכבה‪.‬‬

‫ישמעאל‬

‫כשעלית למרום להסתכל‬

‫נכנסתי ב ש ש ה ‪ I‬היכלות‪ .‬ובפתח ההיכל‬

‫בצפייתי‬

‫נכנס‬

‫ה ש ב י ע י אמרתי רבונו של עולם ב ב ק ש ה‬

‫ב ש ש ה היכלות חדר בתוך חדר וכיון‬

‫מ ל פ נ י ך ‪ 1201‬ש ת ע מ י ד ל י ז כ ו ת א ה ר ן‬

‫שהגעתי ‪ I‬לפתח היכל שביעי עמדתי‬

‫א ו ה ב ש ל ו ‪ ,‬ו ר ו ד ף ש ל ו ם ש ל א י ש ל ו ט בי‬

‫בתפלה‬

‫את‬

‫קצפיאל ‪ I‬השר ומלאכיו להשליכני מן‬

‫עיני כ ל פ י מ ע ל ה ו א מ ר ת י ‪ I‬ר ב ו נ ו ש ל‬

‫ו ז י מ ן ל י מ ט ט ר ו ן שר ה פ נ י ם‬

‫ב ב ק ש ה מלפניך שתגרום לי‬

‫למרום‬

‫השמים‪.‬‬

‫להסתכל‬

‫בצפיית‬

‫כ י י י פירנצה‪ ,‬לורנציאנה ‪Plut.‬‬

‫עולם‬

‫במרכבה‬

‫לפני‬

‫הייתי ‪I‬‬

‫היביה‬

‫ונשאתי‬

‫ופרח ‪ I‬בכנפיו כנגדי והצלני מידם ואמי‬

‫ב ש ע ה ה ז א ת זכות אהרן בן עמרם ‪I‬‬

‫ש ל ו י ב ו א ך ש נ ת ר צ י ת ל מ ל ך רם ו נ ש א ‪I‬‬

‫א ו ה ב שלום ורודף שלום ש ק ב ל כתר‬

‫להסתכל בדמות המרכבה‬

‫כ ה נ ה מ ל פ נ י כ ב ו ד ך ב ה ר סיני ש ל א‬ ‫י ש ל ט ו בי ‪ I‬ק צ פ י א ל ה ש ר ו מ ל א כ י ם‬ ‫ש ע מ ו ואל ישליכוני מן השמים‪ .‬מיד‬ ‫ז מ ן לי מ ט ט ר ו ן ‪ I‬ע ב ד ו מ ל א ך שר‬ ‫הפנים‬ ‫בשמחה‬

‫ופרח‬ ‫רבה‬

‫בכנפיו‬

‫ויצא‬

‫להצילני‬

‫כנגדי‬

‫מידם‬

‫‪I‬‬

‫ו ת פ ש נ י ב י ד ו ל ע י נ י ה ם ו א מ י לי ב ו א ך‬ ‫ל ש ל ו ם ש נ ר צ י ת ל פ נ י מ ל ך רם ו נ ש א‬ ‫להסתכל ‪ I‬בדמות המרכבה‪.‬‬

M O V I M I E N T O S ANTIJUDÎOS EN LOS TERRITORIOS CACERENOS DE LA C O R O N A , NOBLEZA Y ORDEN MILITÄR DE ALCANTARA i476-i49i MARCIANO DE HERVÁS Hervás, Spain

Dos décadas antes de promulgarse el decreto de expulsion de los judios resuena en el territorio de lo que hoy denominamos provincia de Cáceres un amplio movimiento eon adsbos sociales, polidcos, econômicos y religiosos, dirigido contra las comunidades hebrea y conversa establecidas en los solares regentados por la Corona, Nobleza, Ordenes Militares y Cabildos catedralicios de Coda y Plasencia, amén de Guadalupe incluida en el arzobispado de Toledo, propiciando el desarrollo de una historia excluyente que aisla a la comunidad hebrea con medidas marginales, no permite la asimilaciôn de los conversos imponiendo el filtro selectivo de los estamtos de limpieza, y persigue a los criptojudios estableciendo tribunales de la Inquisiciôn. El problema judio cobra especial significado en los territorios cacerenos a fines de la década de los 70 proyectado en diversos radios de acciôn. En 1478 los Reyes Catôlicos establecen en Cáceres la réclusion de los judios extramuros de la villa,1 andcipândose en dos anos a las leyes discriminatorias de las Cortes de Toledo. En la agenda del conflicto anota la realeza el oprobio y dafio que ocasiona en la fe la promiscuidad y el trato coddiano de la comunidad hebrea con los crisdanos. A esta circunstancia religiosa, agregamos las presiones poliricas ejercidas desde el Ayuntamiento y la corregiduria cacerena contra la colecrividad de la aljama, obligando a la Corona a extender su manto protector hacia los judios. Estas perturbaciones socio-politicas y religiosas reverberan también en el seno de la comunidad hebrea de Trujillo.2 Sus ordenanzas municipales despliegan entre 1437 y 1485 un mosaico de medidas restrictivas contra los judios que condicionan la adquisiciôn de alimentos y el marco de las relaciones comerciales.3 A este ambiente de contrariedades poliricas e inseguridades sociales, se suman los 1

2

1

AGS, RCS, 26 agosto 1478 fol. 30; y Suárez Fernandez, L. 1964. Documentas acena de la expulsion de los judios. Valladolid, 140-141. Sobre la comunidad hebrea trujillana véanse: Beinart, H.. 1980. Trujillo. A Jewish Community in Extremadura on the Eve of the Expulsion from Spain. Jerusalem; Lacave, J. L. 1980. "Sinagogas y juderias extremenas." Sefarad 40, 215-222; y Sánchez Rubio, Μ. Α. 1993. El concejo de Trujillo y su αξοζ en el trànsito de la Edad Media a la Edad Modema. Badajoz. Archivo Municipal de Trujillo [=AMT], leg. 2 carpeta 2: "Ordenanzas municipales (1415-1517)" fols. 36r, 38r, 41v-42r, 113v, 115r-115v, 120v, 122v y 128r-130; y leg. 2 carpeta 5: "Ordenanzas muy anriguas de la muy Noble y muy Leal ciudad de Trujillo (9 agosto 1434)" fol. 14r.

ataques perpetrados contra miembros de la colecdvidad hebrea trujillana en la década de los anos 70.4 En 1480 la Corona resuelve confinar a los judios en una barriada especial. La nueva juderia abarca las calles de la Rinconada, Aburria, Zurradores, Nueva y Tiendas, donde sitûan la nueva sinagoga.5 Previamente al apartamiento hebreo encontramos al judio Barçilay viviendo en la calle Gracia en 14346 y a Isaque Saboca en la Plaza del Arrabal en 1478.7 Semejantes disposiciones restxictivas avaladas por los jerarcas del Estado y del Ayuntamiento, a la que también se incorpora la orden monâstica de los dominicos, no hacen sino aventar la animosidad contra el judaismo t n ^ a n o , prodigàndose los ataques contra la vida comunitaria hebrea desde distintos frentes de acciôn. En el àmbito de las presiones politicas, un alcalde de la ciudad prohibe a los judios salir de la juderia después del anochecer amenazando con la expropiaciôn de la mercancia y el pago de una cuantía econômica. Asimismo, el Ayuntamiento aplica la ley regia que impone a los judios el uso de "senales coloradas y redondas en sus ropas," y la clausura de las tiendas de los judios los domingos y festividades cristianas, excepto en la juderia. Tampoco faltan pruebas de desafecto colectivo contra los judios, como el apedreo por los cristianos del lugar y forasteros a las casas de la juderia en la semana santa de I486.8 N o muy lejos de Trujillo se desarrolla la comunidad hebrea de Plasencia. Los conflictos desatados por la comunidad politica y la Nobleza de Plasencia contra los judios en 1491, toman como pretexto el establecimiento de la nueva juderia por cl conde de Plasencia en la calle Trujillo en 1477, ratificado por la Corona en 1480.9 El conde Alvaro de Zûniga expropia la sinagoga, situada en la Mota, en la calle Coria, para construir un convento dominico. 10 En compensation, el dignatario senorial facilita el acomodo de los judios en la calle Trujillo donde construyen la nueva sinagoga." Cabe resaltar que la juderia de la calle Trujillo no tiene el carácter marginal de los apartamientos hebreos de Cáceres y de Trujillo. Con la anexiôn por los Reyes Catôlicos de la ciudad de Plasencia en 1488, los Zúniga desaparecen del concierto de la vida social, politica y econômica aflorando a la superficie la animadversion contra los judios. Como arma arrojadiza, el municipio esgrime el incumplimiento de la ley sobre el apartamiento hebreo de 1480. Asi, el 7 de marzo de 149112 la Corona obliga a los judios a fijar su domi4 5 6

7

8

9 10 11

12

Beinart, Trujillo does. 10 y 16 y págs. 10-12; y Suárez, Documentes, 116-117. Beinart, Trujillo , 13-19; y Lacave, "Sinagogas y juderias extremenas." 217-222. Biblioteca del Seminario Diocesano de Plasencia, leg. Benavides Checa: "Notas del Cabildo de Plasencia." Munoz de San Pedro, M. 1965. Centenario de la ley del notariado: Rejlejos de siete siglos de vida extremena en den documentas notariales. II. Madrid, doc. 24, 559. AGS, RGS, 29 octubre 1490, fol. 248; y AMT, leg. 2 carp. 2: "Ordenanzas Municipales I (1415-1517)" fols. 128r-129r. AGS, RCS, 11 mayo 1491 fol. 86. Benavides Checa, J. Notas Histáricas. I, 160. A juicio del concejo, "en agravio e perjuisio de los vesinos de la dicha çibdad, aviendose animosamente con los dichos judios e queriendoles favoresçer e ayudar, les dexo [don Alvaro de Zuniga] las mejores casas e mas prinçipales calles de la dicha çibdad donde biven." AGS, RGS, 26 marzo 1491, fol. 48; y Suárez, Documentos, 358-359. AGS, RCS, 7 marzo, fol. 113; y Suárez, Documentos, 352-354.

cilio en la judería de la calle Trujillo. Très semanas después, los monarcas ordenan la revision del apartamento hebreo fijado por Alvaro de Zúniga.13 Sin embargo, arrecia el retesamiento andjudio bajo la cobermra del Ayuntamiento temiendo la aljama hebrea por su seguridad.14 Empero, la carta de amparo de la realeza cae en saco roto, al pretender el juez de residencia encerrar a los judios en un espacio muy reducido, precedido dicho encierro de injurias y secuestros, lo que motiva a la Corona la aplicaciôn de nuevas resoluciones proteccionistas.15 En el marco de las discriminaciones comerciales y profesionales, se desarrolla la prohibiciôn a los judios placentinos de tener tiendas de pescado, aceite y alimentos, asi como ejercer las actividades de boticario, especiero y cirujano, en publico ο en privado, en marzo de 1492.16 El programa de persecuciôn y aislamiento de los judios cacerenos se expande como una ola desde las principales ciudades controladas por la Corona a las aldeas del entorno administradas por la monarquia y la Nobleza. Desde la ciudad de Plasencia, el movimiento andjudio se propaga a la aljama hebrea de Cabezuela, la cual es confinada en un espacio muy restringido entre los anos de 1488 y 1491, "apartada del trato de las gentes [y] resçiben mucha fatiga e dano," en razôn de lo cual la aljama recurre al amparo de la Corona solicitando el traslado de la juderia a otro espacio mâs amplio.17 A los lugares de sefion'o también salpican los movimientos antijudios, si bien la Nobleza demora algùn tiempo la aplicaciôn de las disposiciones marginales. En las postrimerias del edicto de expulsion no parecen caminar en muy buena sintonia los judios y crisdanos de la villa de Granadilla, propiedad de la Casa de Alba. El 12 de enero de 1489 el senor de la casa de Alba decide atajar el problema mediante la aplicaciôn de una serie de "ordenes y mandos" enfocada primordialmente hacia las comunidades hebreas del senorio de Granadilla.18 Las medidas disciplinarias incluyen el apartamiento de los judios en barrios especiales, la obligatoriedad de usar senales en los hombros y la prohibiciôn de trabajar los domingos, pascua y otras fesdvidades religiosas cristianas excepto en sus casas, disposiciones que son pregonadas en Granadilla y Abadta. Por consiguiente, primero la Corona y luego la Nobleza aplican los apartamientos hebreos como medida restrictiva contra las aljamas de Cáceres, Trujillo y Plasencia, y las comunidades hebreas del senorio de Granadilla y de Cabezuela. Al sistemâtico aislamiento de las comunidades hebreas en barrios restringidos acompana un programa de desprestigio articulado en la injuria religiosa del apedreamiento por los judios a la cruz de Casar de Palomero en la semana santa

13 14 15 16 17 18

AGS, RCA, 26 marzo, fol. 48; y Suárez, Documentas, 358-359. AGS, RCJ, 18 mayo 1491, fol. 100; y 22 mayo 1492, fol. 96; y Suárez, Documentas, 362-363. AGS, RGJ, 8 junio 1491, fol. 47; y Suárez, Documentas, 370-371. AGS, R GS, 3 marzo 1492 fol. 185. AGS, RGS, 22 mayo 1491, fol. 96; y Suárez, Documentor, 367-368. Archivo de la Casa de Alba, leg. "Granadilla," num. 26; recogido por Escobar Prieto, E. 1905. "Granadilla." Revista de Extremadura 7, 379-388, págs. 386-388; y Leon Tello, P. 1991. "La juderia extremena de Granadilla." Exilioy Diaspora. Estudos sobre la historia del pueblo judio en homenaje alprofesor Haim Reinart. Jerusalén, 146-156, págs. 154-156.

de 1488.19 La calumnia religiosa del apedreo por los judios de Casar de Palomero, formulada sobre acontecimientos no documentados, cobra amplios vuelos en la region extremena a fines del siglo XVI: fr. Torrejonrillo 20 lanza el libelo a la esfera nacional en 1673 y R. Martin Santibánez21 lo revitaliza en la comarca cacerena y foro peninsular en 1870 y 1876. En lo que atane a la vida de los cristianos nuevos de Plasencia, de la mano del obispo converso Gonzalo de Santa Maria (1427-1446), hijo del que fuera rabino de Burgos, Selomô ha-Levi, se establecen en la ciudad del Jerte algunos de sus familiares conversos mâs directos, como su sobrino Diego Jiménez de Burgos,22 su hija Catalina Suárez de Villalobos,23 Alfonso Garcia de Santa Maria, quizá también familiar del prelado, que ejerce las funciones de arcediano de Trujillo en 1435 y de tesorero de la iglesia catedral entre los anos de 1445 y 1450,24 y un tal Garcia Jiménez, criado del obispo. 25 Hay noticias de las actividades de los conversos de Trujillo en una fecha posterior a los alborotos antijudios de 1391, y de su relaciôn con la comunidad hebrea en la segunda mitad del siglo XV. 2 6 También en La Puebla de Guadalupe habitan conversos desde los albores del siglo XV, que algunos historiadores relacionan con la campafia antijudia de 1391.27 Con anterioridad a 1476 se registra en La Puebla de Guadalupe un movimiento antijudio mitigado en parte con la conversion de judios al cristianismo, instruidos por fray Alonso de Oropesa y otros monjes del conventual jerônimo de Guadalupe. 28 Pero también cobra virulencia el movimiento anticonverso. En la fuente del conflicto brota el papel que ejercen los cristianos nuevos en los circulos econômicos y financieros del lugar, el control de las actividades artesanales y comerciales, de los organismos rectores monâsticos y de la administraciôn publica.29 N o es menester redundar en los sucesos acaecidos al colectivo converso que mantiene soterradamente su vinculaciôn con el judaismo en el cenobio jerônimo y en La Puebla de Guadalupe. Para acabar con las prácticas heréticas de los cristianos nuevos, la Inquisiciôn establece dos tribunales en Guadalupe en 1485, uno de los cuales opera en las causas de los monjes judaizantes del conventual 19

20 21

22 23

24 25 26 27

28 29

Véase mi trabajo 1996. "Calumnias antijudias cacerenas." Actos de las Jomadas Extremenas dt Estudios Judaicos. Badajoz , 205-248, págs. 206-225. Torrejoncillo, Fr. 1736. Centinela contrajudios. Madrid , 164-165. Martin Sanribánez, R. 1870. Historia de la Santa Cruç del Casar de Palomem. Plasencia; y 1876. "Un mundo desconocido en la provincia de Extremadura: Las Hurdes." La Defensa de la Sociedad 10, 229240. Archivo de la Catedral de Plasencia [=ACP], Actas del Cabildo [=AC]. Libro num. 1 fol. 152v. ACP. leg. 144 num. 1: "Imbentario de hazienda del cauildo [1537]" s. foliar; y Lopez Sànchez-Mora, M. 1974. Plasencia (siglos ‫א‬1‫ר‬y XIII). Plasencia, 146. ACP. AC. Libro num. I, fols. 83 y I42v; y Libro num. 3 fol. I95v. ACP. AC. Libro num. I fols. I29v y I30v. Beinart, Trujillo, 4, 76-80 y 90. Garcia, Fr. S. 1996. "Los judios en Guadalupe: Abraham Seneor y su famoso baudsmo el 15 de junio de 1492." Actas de las Jomadas lix/remenas de Estudios Judaicos. Badajoz, 49-76, 50. Rubio Cebrián, Fr. G. 1926. Historia de Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe. Barcelona, 389. Archivo del Monasterio de Guadalupe [=AMG], Côdice 128. Alhobera, Fr. P. 1641. Libro de la bacienda que esta Santa casa de Santa Maria de Guadalupe tiene en heredades, debesas, rentas, juros y otros aprovechamientos, 671; Rubio Cebriân, Guadalupe, 34; y Rovira, E. 1984. 'Très documentos inéditos de los Reyes Catôlicos en el Monasterio de Guadalupe." Guadalupe num. 668, 23-30: págs. 28-29.

mariano y el otro en las de los seglares de La Puebla y aledanos. De los procesos de fe celebrados contra los criptojudios de La Puebla, resultan condenados por el delito de judaismo numerosas familias conversas que sufren las vejaciones de presidio, reconciliaciôn, destierro, confiscaciôn de bienes y hoguera. Por su parte, la Inquisiciôn jerônima destapa en el conventual mariano un extenso ramillete de monjes conversos que manrienen su vinculaciôn con las prácticas mosaicas, planteando a la régla monâsrica seriös problemas de conciencia religiosa.30 El criptojudaismo de los monjes jerônimos es el caldo de culdvo que fomenta en el capitulo general de I486 la exclusion de los conversos para recibir el hâbito de la Orden monâsrica, respaldada por el Breve de Alejandro VI de 1495, que cierra el paso a los descendientes de judio dentro del cuarto grado.31 Si bien el cenobio jerônimo guadalupense es la primera instituciôn eclesial cacerena que exige a los pretendientes el requisito de las informaciones de limpieza, en cambio la Orden Militär de A1cántara es pionera en la materia estatutaria. En junio de 1483 Sixto IV concede una Bula a la Orden Militär32 para que nadie sea recibido como hermano ο soldado de dicha milicia si no ha sido engendrado de linaje de crisdano viejo de padre y madré.

30

31

32

De Ecija, Fr. D. 1953. Libro de la invencion de esta santa imager! de Guadalupey de la erecciôny Jundaciôn de este monasterioy de algunas cosas particulates y vidas de algurtos religosos de iL Cáceres; Fita, F. 1895. "La Inquisiciôn en Guadalupe." BRAH 13, 283-343; y Sicroff, Α. Α. 1996. "El caso del judaizante jerônimo fray Diego de Marchena." Homenaje a Rodrtgue^-Monino II. Madrid, 227-233. Véanse De Talavera, Fr. G. 1597. Historia de Nuestra Senoru de Guadalupe, Toledo, fols. 90v-91v; Sicroff, A. A. 1960. Les controverses des status de pureté de sang en Espagne du XVeme au XIII siècle. Paris, 78-79; Orfali, M. 1981. "Establecimiento del estatuto de limpieza de sangre en el monasterio de los jerônimos de Guadalupe." Actos de las Jomadas de Estudios Sefardies. Cáceres, 245-250; y Carrete Parrondo, C. 1992. Eljudaismo espanoly la inquisiciôn. Madrid. 113-127; y 1995. "Los conversos jerônimos ante el estatuto de limpieza de sangre." Maguen-Escudo. Venezuela, 50-62. Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid, ms. 621 : "Coleccion de bulas, breves y priuilegios reaies concedidos en disdntas epocas a la Orden Militär de Alcantara." Fols. 202-205v.

NARRATIVE EXEGESIS IN ASHKENAS AND ZARFAT T H E CASE OF / , /!‫׳׳‬FC/T-COMMENTARY ELISABETH HOLLENDER Gerhard-Mercator-Universität GH Duisburg, Germany

A preliminary remark: In this paper I will use the term "narrative" to denote any written reworking of a written or orally transmitted story, no matter whether it originated in Bible or Midrash or in an historic event. This reflects the assumption, that the narratives create their own facticity and that the medieval authors employed story-telling to reach their literary goals concerning both form and contents. Before going into detail, I will have to state some general assumptions about the genre of/)/}‫«׳)׳‬/-commentary: Piyjut-commentary was written from the 12th to the 19th century—one might even say it is a productive genre until today—but I will speak about medieval /)/}‫«!)׳‬/-commentary only. This is a genre that came down to us in about 150 manuscripts—dating mainly from the 13th to the 16th centuries.1 Almost every single manuscript contains a different text, though many passages occur in more than one manuscript. The reason for this is that /)/}‫«׳)׳‬/-commentary was regarded as "open text" by the editors and compilers of commentary-manuscripts, who each added to and removed from their sources in order to create commentaries that fitted their audience and its needs. Some manuscripts can be shown to have been compiled from several /)®‫׳‬///-commentaries, while others added to the commentary from midrashic sources, Bible commentaries, or grammar books. Different objectives of the compilations can be named as omnisignificance, "midrash-anthology," "catch-it-all," /)/^/-explanation, or source-index. The difference between the compilations most likely mirrors the different needs of different groups of readers, ranging from simple reminders of where the source is to be found in traditional literature to long quotes from popular and less popular midrashim, mixed with a multitude of lexical explanations.2 Many compilations—especially later ones—show an underlying tendency to dramatize the piyyutim and to resound their aggadic qualities by emphasizing the narrative aspect of /)/}‫׳)׳‬///-commentary. Commentaries in the tradition of Josef Kara, whose terse commentary-prose is saturated with lexical explanations, were later expanded into an often quite charming literature, uniting midrashic episodes, meshalim and narratives from other sources with paraphrases and a limited number of language explanations. 1

2

For my major research-project on /)^),«/-commentary I studied corresponding parts of 40 of these manuscripts, a corpus of ca. 700 printed pages. Cp. Elisabeth Hollender, "Compilatory Literature in the Middle Ages: P/jy«/-Commentary." Paper presented at 29. AJS conference (1997).

Elsewhere I have argued that this is a sign of shifting aesthetics: when the audience was less likely to appreciate the complicated intellectual beauty of classical piyyutim, that is, when the intertextual references carefully hidden by the payettanim were not that easily accessible to the audience, the sensuous enjoyment of piyyutim chanted in synagogue was enhanced by the intellectual pleasure of reading Midrashim, parables and narratives associated with and organized according to the piyyutim. The narrative commentaries took over part of the aesthetic value of the piyyutim.‫י‬ These narrative commentaries certainly intend to entertain, but I would argue that the underlying goal is that of edutainment, since references to traditional literature and aggadic Midrashim always convey learning as well. By turning the commentaries into "belle lettre" and assigning them an aesthetically value they do mirror a further aspect of the commented literature and move some of the aesthetic event of reception from poetry to narrative.4 Thus, the commentary gains status, since its study is enjoyable even if disconnected from the hearing of the piyyut. A tendency to extensively use midrashic material can already be witnessed in a few early commentaries, usually ascribed to Shemaya, the scribe/student of Rashi who is well known for his glosses to Rashi's Bible commentary. His vast knowledge of Midrashim enabled him to present midrashic sources and expianations for enigmatic piyyutim.5 Some of these ascriptions will have to be reexamined in light of the recognition of the compilatory quality of the sources.6 Since the texts we read are the result of several stages of editing, it is impossible to refer to the result as the work of an individual commentator. In the following, I want to give a few examples and will point out the medieval reworking of rabbinic sources. Narrative exegesis was used at various occasions. The smallest unit to be explained by a narrative is probably a word, i.e. the unusual usage of a word, as e.g. the kinnuy, the poetic description of a person, place or nation. The word apinon in Ct 3:9 has been interpreted as referring to the Temple within the allegoric exegesis of Song of Songs. With this meaning, it has been used by the payettanim. In a commentary, probably written in the circles of Haside Ashkena% on

‫נ‬

4

5 6

Elisabeth Hollender, "Eine permanente Renaissance? Zum status (quaesdonis) von PijjutKommentar." In Geschichte und Kultur der Juden in der Renaissance. Neue Wege der Forschung. Ed. G. Veltri and A. Winkelmann. (Forthcoming). A similar tendency has been observed in Mekhilta Shirta: "since the treadse is a commentary on a poem, and since its mood is as 1 have attempted to describe it by means of summary, Shirta statements on a number of occasions get infected by the quality of the very source being interpreted and its theme, and themselves become poedc expressions." (Goldin, J. 1971. The Song at the Sea. being a Commentary in Two Parts. New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 16.) Grossman, A. 1995. The earty Sages of France. Jerusalem: Magnes, 391. Synopdc comparisons of commentaries ascribed to Shemaya with other manuscripts show how difficult it is to reconstruct Shemaya's commentary. E.g. the commentary on Oryesha'me'usharim, yotser for Pesach by Salomo haBavli in Ms Parma 655, ascribed to Shemaya, compilâtes material from at least 3 different commentaries.

Meshullam b. Qa\or\ymos' jotser Afiq renen, this traditional explanadon receives a narradve embellishment: 7 A story about David when he was a shepherd: He went one morning on top of a Re'em, and David thought that it was a mountain. While he enjoyed it and while he was on top of the Re'em, the Re'em got up and stood on his legs. David went to the horns of the mountain and measured it (the Re 'em), and it was a hundred cubits. David got frightened. He said to the Holy One, blessed be He: "Save me from the horns of this Re'em and I will build for you a house of hundred cubits surround: twenty cubits to the right and thirty cubits to the left. That makes its perimeter one hundred cubits from inside." This /)/)‫«׳)׳‬/-commentary is not the only or first source for this narradve. It occurs three times in Midrash Psalms*—and is hinted at a forth time 9 —though it is never connected to the Song of Songs verse and is absent from the traditional explanations of Song of Songs. The version we know from Buber's edition of Midrash Psalms differs from the version in the /)^)‫«׳‬/-commentary in several details: The commentary tells a medieval story, not a rabbinic one. King David encounters one Re'em, as if there was more than one, like the dragons that king Arthur and his knights used to fight. Like a proper medieval shepherd he enjoys himself on top of the Re'em, producing a setting in between the pastoral idyll and the adventure-novel of the Middle Ages. When the mighty animal gets up, the medieval hero manages to measure it, unlike his predecessor in rabbinic literature who rode on the horns of the Re'em—a frightening experience indeed. And the medieval narrator supplies us with additional information about how the one hundred cubits will be measured when applied to the Temple, much like Christian novelists of his time who make their stories realistic by adding details about buildings, clothes or food. The details about the measurements of the Temple—while not connected to any of the traditional descriptions of the Temple—associate the episode to aspects discussed in rabbinic literature, e.g. Mishna Middot. Due to this addition, the commentary-episode includes into its entertainment some educational elements, being true edutainment. The additional information on details is perhaps the most medieval characteristics of the narratives used in piyyut-commentary. While most of the narratives are known from midrashic sources, they could be made more plausible by adding surplus information, both in the realm of realia and as far as psychological plausibility is concerned. Both realms belong to what I would term "real world phenomena"; i.e. they connect to the experience of the audience. What is the source of this "experience"? Here it is a vague recollection of rabbinic literature, reworked in order to fit the given number. 10 It is not first-hand-experience from the world we live in (nor from the world the medieval writers and their audience lived in). Unlike 7 8 9 10

Ms Parma 3025 (de Rossi 655). Midrash Psalms (Buber) Ps 22.28; Ps 91.1; Ps 92.9. Midrash Psalms (Buber) Ps 78.20. The usual measurements for the Temple in rabbinic literature are 60 χ 20 χ 30 cubits. Apart from MdrPss there is no traditional source about the Temple's circumfence measuring 100 cubits.

references to material culture in Bible commentaries or other medieval wridngs, the reworked midrashic narradves in medieval piyyut-commentary draw mosdy on tradidonal Jewish sources. There are a few excepdons to this rule, as e.g. two of the four different explanadons of the talmudic statement that the ox is never more repugnant than when eadng grass, but even in this case the other two explanadons clearly draw on tradidonal literal sources. On the whole I would argue that midrashic episodes and narradves were embellished with references to the real world in order to make them more plausible, but that the real world was described and perceived according to the Bible and tradidonal literature, and thus narradve elements had to comply with Biblical prescriptions or to repeat midrashic knowledge of the world, little as it may have been valid for medieval France and Germany." In order to explain such stanzas that contain allusions to more than one midrashic episode and to sketch the line of argumentation in a whole piyyut, the commentators had to go beyond the aggadic material as formulated in the known Midrashim. While combining material from different midrashic sources with their own narrative creativity the Northern-French and Ashkenazic scholars created a wealth of narradve exegesis, often telling elaborate stories where the payettanim had merely hinted at aggadic traditions. Some of these narrative commentaries go far beyond what modern commentators would consider being the midrashic source of the piyyut. Episodes were dramatized, stories were embellished with material and psychological motivation for the actions taken, and the art of story telling took precedence over the poetic self-constraint. For example, a midrashic nucleus found in CtR 1,4 and Mek Beshallah 6 was combined with similar traditions found in MdrPss 18 § 14 and Tan Shoftim 14, to account for the contradiction between Ct 1.9: I compare you, my love, to a mare of Pharaoh's chanots and Hab 3.15: Thou didst trample the sea with thy horses. This was developed into a narrative, that like Pharaoh, who chased Israel on a stallion first and then on a mare, God himself changed his steed. Reasons why a mare should be better suited to chase the Israelites were collected from different Midrashim, both her superior speed and the fact that she would arouse the stallions of the other Egyptians, and the information—incorrect as it may be in real life—that mares are faster than stallions because they pass their water while running. There is some indication that this last detail was collected from palestinian Talmud (yPes IV, 31a12), and it is a good example of how details were collected from seemingly unconnected sources—the talmudic passage deals with the selling of the first-born animal to gentiles. However, the passage collects three distinctions between stallion and mare, all of them in favor of the mare. As already mentioned, the commentators and compilers used tradidonal sources instead of contemporary experience when supplying the details and realia that furnished their narratives.

" 12

Cp. the similar description for Spanish Hebrew poetry by Bregman, D. 1995. "Realizm vMaqabriut b-shirat Shmuel ha-Naggid." Mthqari Yerusbalayim b-Sifrvt 'linit 15, 75-82. Transmitted also in yAZ I, 40a, there both explanadons are ascribed to Ben Bedra.

Other compilers dramatized the episode into a scene were Pharaoh asked his servants about the fastest horse available, and receives as an answer the praise of a multi-colored mare, whereas God himself asked his ministering angels about the fastest steed available for him and hears the praise of a speedy and light cloud. These compilers elaborated on a motif taken from Midrash Psalms. Even the explanation in Midrash Va-Yosha,™ that God sent an angel in the shape of a mare in front of the Egyptians to arouse their stallions, was medievalized by a commentator, who added the identification that this angel was Gabriel, whom God turned into a mare and on whom God rode. 14 Later commentaries ask why the Egyptian horses were drowned, informing us of their guilt as reason for this punishment, or they ask why the Egyptians did not m m back when they saw the miracles performed for Israel's salvation, and thus justify the use of a mare and the arousing of the Egyptian stallions as a means to lead them into the sea.15 The situation is only slightly different when we turn to piyyutim that are not based on biblical stories and their midrashic embellishments. Both Josef b. Salomo from Carcasonne's yotser 'Odka ki 'anaphta>b and Salomo haBavli's yulat Eyn Tsur belephv for the first Shabbat Hanukkah contain allusions to non-Biblical stories. While Salomo haBavli seems to have used mainly Megillat Antiochus, Josef b. Salomo used both Sefer Yosippon and a small Hanukkah-Midrash that contains different episodes, including the story of the hasmonean bride and that of Judith.18 The Judith-story did enjoy some popularity in Ashkenaz and Zarfat during the 10th to 12th century, but it never reached the status of the popular literature about the Maccabees. Some commentaries of the yotser do refer to a Midrash Hanukkah as its source and explain the piyyut with a kind of paraphrase of the Judith-story. It seems that this story was not universally known, and one commentary attributes it to Sefer Yosippon. When speaking about Judith cutting off Holofernes' head, the compiler adds his question to the realistic aspects of the story: Has veShalom that she did not bring with her a sword and lance and bayonet, because (Dt 22.5) "the gear of a man shall not be on a woman." I do not know how to understand this.19 Again, traditional sources define the realia that one may refer to. The Biblical prohibition of women wearing men's attire is easily associated, while the more practical solution to the problem, as we know it from the Judith-story—that is 13

Cp. Eisenstein, J. D. 1915. OtsarhaMidrashim. (reprint, New York: Grossman, 1956), I, 154. Ms Moskau Ginzburg 615, Ms JTS Adler 4469, Ms Parma 3507 (Stern 27), Ms Paris héb 709, and Ms Schocken 24100 (Nürnberg Mahzor, shortened version). 15 Cp. e.g. the ivri-teytsh piyyut paraphrase kavvanat hapayettan, printed in many Mahyor ediuons between 1661 and 1887. "‫ י‬Davidson, I. 1924-33. Thesaurus of Medieval Hebrew Poetry. Otsar haShira v-hapiyyut. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary (Otsar), A 1651. 17 Otsar A 3079; edited by Fleischer, E. 1973. Piyyute Shtomo haBavli. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 243-48. 18 Published by Jellinek, A. ed. Bet haMidrasch. Sammlung kleiner Midraschim und vermischter Abhandlungen aus der alternjüdischen Literatur. (Reprint Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1967) I, 132—136. 19 Ms Oxford Bodl. 1205, f. 274v. 14

Judith slaying Holofernes with his own sword—has no antecedent in tradidonal literature and is therefore not available to this commentary. Piyyut-commentary does not usually explain its methods or its point of view on literary criticism. Yet there is one example of a commentator explaining his view that piyyutim do tell a story. This commentator or compiler even dared to oppose someone else rather expressively while commenting on the jotser for Pesach by Salomo haBavli, Oryesha' me'usharim.2n It has been argued that the commentator was Shemaya and that he is opposing Josef Kara,21 but my opinion is that the state of compilation does not allow for clear-cut attributions. At some point in the commentary the commentator argues, that the traditional explanation of Song of Songs as underlying text of the piyyut ought be to used in a different way here, as the pajettan was telling a story in his piyyut and would not return to an earlier event after having described something that happened later in history.22 He voices his opinion in direct opposition to another explanation and says: The payettan orders his deeds according to their order in time. They left Egypt, crossed the sea, stood at Sinai, made the calf, made the tabernacle, came to Jerusalem, sinned, were exiled to Bavel. He continues and tells until the second Temple. You however stagger like a drunkard returning to the calf. Later in the same commentary we learn that a commentator—maybe even the same—had a teacher who intervened and told him that his interpretation of some stanzas was not acceptable, since some verses of Song of Songs had never been connected to the stories he wished to tell. After days and years my teacher told me: It is impossible to interpret the stanza Resh gley as referring to the time when they were in Exile, because the verse 'Amudav assah keseph (Ct 3.10) was never interpreted other than as referring to the Tabernacle. Also concerning sbittato·. we never find the expression shittim-vjooà, except when it concerns the Tabernacle. This introducdon is reason for the compiler to add a few other varying explanations of some stanzas—some of which support the teacher's attitude while some oppose it. A paraUel from another—less compiled—manuscript 23 shows that the commentator in question seems to have accepted the teaching, since in this tra-

20 21

22

23

Οtsar A 1962. Ms Parma 3205 (de Rossi 655). Cp. Grossman, op. cit., 393, and the catalogue of the Institute for Microfilmed Hebrew Manuscripts at the Jewish National and University Library, Jerusalem. While Simon b. Isaac was the first payettan to attempt a chronological order in his jotser for Pesach, as shown by Elisheva Hakohen, "Shir haShirim v-Shirav—"Iyyun b-phiyyute Shir haShirim b-Ashkenaz." In Sefer haYovel t-Rav Mordekai Breuer. Ed. M. Bar-Asher. Jerusalem: Akademon, 1992, 399—416, commentaries on Song of Songs faced chronological problems even after Rashi tried to interpret it as a narrative allegory, cp. Marcus, I. G. 1993. "The 'Song of Songs' in German Hasidism and the School of Rashi. A Preliminary Comparison." In Rashi 1040-1990, Hommage à Ephraim E.Urbach. Congrès européen des Études juives. Ed. G. SedRajna. Paris: Cerf, 265-72. Ms Oxford Bodl. 2276.

dition there follow a few short standard-explanations of these stanzas, without further deviations from the usual Song of Songs exegesis. O n the other hand, the compiler of this second manuscript may have agreed with the teacher, and may have collected these standard-explanations. In both manuscripts the commentary uses the narradve situation to explain why a derivation from the straight line of told time took place in the pijyut. The payettan speaks like a man who says "Let us return to the first (thing). I told you lira/ beyto ne'etselet and so forth, and Lo derekh k-biphtishi and so forth, but I did not tell you how all the nadons wondered. Translating this argument into modern terminology, we may say that the narrative discourse is interrupted at a certain point to provide information that was not inserted at its proper place in the narrative. Our commentator provides this discursive explanation since he wants the pijyut to tell a story, and a good one, too. To conclude: the natural affinity of pijyut and aggada opened the way for narratives to enter /»/^«/-commentary. While some early commentaries concentrate on lexical explanations and quote aggadic material only to solve complicated pajettanic riddles, many later commentaries savor every aggadic or narrative episode available and embellish midrashic episodes into medieval stories. Later changes involved the splitting of the commentary in up to three different levels, thus producing one level where the "belle lettre" was not hampered by the still necessary lexical explanations. Later commentaries in lashon Ashkena£ were usually narrative and had freed themselves from almost all lexical explanations. In many Mah?0rim they were printed together with Hebrew commentaries of rather lexical character, and were thereby defined as the enjoyable part of the commentary. Only in the 19lh century, when the piyyutim themselves were translated—some of them in poetic language—and re-assumed their role as "belle lettre" of the synagogue service, commentary was pushed out of this part and turned into source-index and grammatical tool again, thus loosing its narrative character.

IMPUESTOS REALES SOBRE LOS JUDIOS DE NAVARRA JOSÉ L. LACAVE CSIC, Madrid, Spain Los impuestos que pagaban los judios a los reyes de Navarra son bastante bien conocidos tras los trabajos de B. Leroy,1 B. R. Gampel, 2 Y. T. Assis-R. Magdalena 3 y J. Carrasco. 4 Resumiremos aqui brevemente su esquema general. El principal impuesto era el conocido por la pécha de las aljamas, una canddad anual que pagaba cada comunidad judia y que se fijaba para cada ano tras una negociaciôn entre los jurados de la aljama y los funcionarios reales. Aparte de este impuesto fijo anual, a las aljamas se les reclamaban con cierta frecuencia "ayudas" para gastos de la Corona de muy diversa indole: reparar ο restaurar una muralla, un viaje real, un matrimonio principesco, en fin, cualquier acontecimiento militar, diplomâdco , familiar ο personal que le supusiera un gasto extraordinario al monarca. Además están los tributos que se pagaban por derecho del sello sobre registro y validaciôn de documentos notariales en los que intervienen los judios en sus relaciones mercantiles; y los derechos de jusdcia, es decir, las multas que pagan los judios: calonas (agresiones, robos, etc.) y homicidios (escasos), el bedinaje ο penas pecuniarias impuestas por el bet-din ο tribunal rabinico; las cartas tornadas, llamadas en Tudela quenaces, es decir la penalizaciôn por no sadsfacer a su debido dempo el pago de una deuda, cuyo importe, de la penalizaciôn, se reparte a partes iguales entre el acreedor y el rey. Luego están los impuestos indirectos: el peaje, el portazgo, el censo de las casas de la juderia, el derecho de la muela (hornos), el alquiler del almudi, de la alcaiceria, de la carniceria rimai, la lezda de la carne, de las rinturas, el brazaje (trabajo de la moneda) y el veinteno y la alcabala, un 5% sobre las ventas realizadas de diversos géneros. Luego volveremos sobre estos dos ùltimos impuestos indirectos. Además, los judios pagaban impuestos que podriamos llamar locales. En Tudela, por ejemplo, hubieron de contribuir con 15 florines en 1493 para empresas de riego y canalizaciôn de las aguas del Ebro. 5 También habian de pagar esporâdicamente la guardia que se pusiera para su defensa en determinados momentos.

1 2 ‫ג‬ 4 5

The Jews 0JNavarre. J erusalem 1985, 80-92. The Last Jews on Iberian Soil. Navarrese Jewry 1479-1498. Berkeley-Los Angeles-Oxford, 1989, 61 ss. ‫יהודי נאבאברה בשלהי ימי־הביניים‬. Jerusalem 1990, cap. 6,89-99. Sinagogay mercado. Estudiosy textos sobre !osjudios del reino de Navarra. Pamplona 1993, 339-349. B. R. Gampel, op. cit., 66.

Aparte de todos estos impuestos, reaies y locales, los judios pagaban, como es bien sabido, a su propia aljama la sisa del vino y de la carne. Pero mi propôsito aqui es comentar dos dpos de documentos hebreos de Navarraft que denen que ver con los impuestos: los libros de registro personales y los libros del veinteno o la alcabala. Como hemos dicho antes, a cada aljama se le fijaba cada ano la canddad que tenia que pagar de pécha. Luego, la aljama tenia que distribuir esa canddad entre sus miembros. Para ello nombraba unos tasadores que dictaminaban lo que cada uno tenia que pagar en funciôn de su hacienda. Pues bien, para esto, para determinar la hacienda de cada individuo pechero o pagador de la pécha, era al parecer obligatorio elaborar los libros de registro personales. Libros en los que cada judio de la aljama anotaba la relaciôn de sus bienes y la relaciôn de los préstamos que habia cumplimentado con crisdanos de su ciudad o de otras poblaciones, pues el lucro obtenido con esos préstamos formaba naturalmente parte de su hacienda. Taies libros de registro se confeccionaban con bastante detalle, anotando el nombre y la residencia del deudor, la cuanda de la deuda, el plazo de amordzaciôn y el garante o los garantes, para que los tasadores, o inspectores—llamados tenedores—nombrados por ellos, los examinaran y sacaran sus consecuencias.7 Estos libros de registro, aunque son muy similares unos a otros, nos proporcionan algunos detalles de como se llevaba a cabo la evaluaciôn de la hacienda de cada miembro de la aljama, pues cada uno de esos miembros solia anotar las circunstancias personales que podian llevarle a pagar menos de lo que de sus bienes pudiera desprenderse. Como régla general, aunque en la relaciôn de bienes propios se recoge el ajuar, o bienes muebles de la casa, se alega que estos bienes no se denen en cuenta para calcular la hacienda, pues son bienes exentos de pagar impuestos. 8 En el libro de un judio anônimo de Tudela, el autor alega que aunque su hijo posee una casa en el barrio judio tudelano, no tiene, sin embargo que pagar impuestos "porque aún es un muchacho que va a la madraza o escuela rabinica."9 Abraham Farach alega en su libro que ninguna de las deudas que ha consignado que le deben en Larraga y en Miranda debe tenerse en cuenta para pagar el impuesto, pues "todos los deudores disputan por ellas conmigo en los tribunales de justicia" porque hay cartas de deuda que figuran como pagadas sin estarlo y

6

7

8 9

Todos los documentos hebreos de Navarra pueden verse, con traducciôn o transcripcion espanola, segûn los casos, en J. L. Lacave, Los judios del reino de Navarra. Documentos hebreos 1297I486. Navarra Judaica 7. Pamplona, 1998. Una parte de los documentos que ahora nos interesan fue publicada por Y. T. Assis-R. Magdalena, op. cit., 105-198; y todos ellos en otra obra de los mismos autores, Aljamia romance en t'os documentos hebraiconavarros (siglo XIV). Barcelona, 1992. Algunos de los libros de registro los habia publicado ya F. Baer, Die Juden im christlichen Spanien, I (Berlin, 1929), num. 588, 959-962. Una referencia a esos tenedores de libros de registro personales en J. L. Lacave, Los judios del reino de Navarra..., doc. 18, 130 (en hebreo) y 136 (en espanol). J. L. Lacave, Losjudios..., docs. 5 (52 hebr. ν esp.), 6 (53 hebr. y 54 esp.) 7 (58 hebr. y 62 esp.), etc. Ibid., doc. 15, 119 (en hebr.) y 121 (en esp.j.

hay deudores que ocultan bienes y afirman que no denen con qué sadsfacer la deuda.10 El mismo Abraham Farach, en el pàrrafo siguiente, hace diversas consideraciones por las que, segûn él, ha de pagar menos de lo que le quieren imponer: dene deudas con otros judios, ha pasado por prisiôn a causa de una multa y un anatema..." En otro lugar de su libro, Abraham Farach déclara que determinadas deudas, aunque están a su nombre, son en realidad deudas de Abraham Alfaquim. Al parecer, ambos habian llegado a un acuerdo por el cual Farach consignaria esas deudas en su libro de registre y pagaria por ellas el correspondiente impuesto hasta el dia de San Martin (afio 1323), y de alli en adelante lo pagaria Abraham Alfaquim.12 En bastantes ocasiones se déclara en estos libros de registre que determinadas cartas de deuda no denen valor alguno, pero que se consignan para que lo tengan en cuenta los tasadores de la hacienda al confeccionar la evaluaciôn personal del titular del libro. Por su parte, Juce Levi asegura que en algunas cartas de deuda consignadas en su libro, consta una cantidad mayor de lo que en realidad le debe su deudor, "pero—anade—yo no he escrito aqui sino lo que me deben ahora," después de cancelar una parte de esa deuda.13 Y Abraham bar Yosef Levi afirma que don Pere de Huart, carnicero de Estella, y su mujer le deben mâs de las 8 libras que figuran en la carta de deuda, pero se lo deja en esa cantidad "porque él debe mucho y no sé si podré cobrar la cantidad citada, pues yo soy de los ùltimos acreedores en cobrar." 14 A veces se alega que una carta de deuda ο una carta tornada, aunque existen, no se deben tener en cuenta para calcular el impuesto por ser mâs formales que otra cosa. Asi, Gento Evenayôn, de Puente la Reina, asegura que aunque él y su hermano Judas tienen una carta de deuda por 25 libras contra su otro hermano Abraham, en realidad éste no les debe nada, pues la carta se hizo porque Judas y él se habian constituido garantes por Abraham ante el reino a causa de una multa de 40 libras que habian impuesto a Juce, hijo de Abraham, la Carta de deuda estaba en manos de un àrbitro, Menahem Alborge, pues si el reino procediera contra ellos—Judas y Gento—por ser garantes, esa carta séria su arma para forzar a su hermano Abraham, ο a su mujer y sus hijos a pagar al reino lo que le debia.15 Por su parte, el judio anônimo de Tudela antes citado afirma tener una carta tornada contra su cunado Gento Evenayôn; pero alega que se debe a una confirmaciôn de la ketubà de la mujer de Gento, "y no tenemos costumbre de pagar

10

" 12 13 14 15

Ibid., doc.7, 57 (en hebr.) y 61 (en esp.). Ibid., ibid. Ibid., doc.7, 57 (en hebr.) y 60 (en esp.). Ibid., doc. 9, 78 (en hebr.) y 89 (en esp.). Ibid., doc. 10, 91 (en hebr.) y 94 (en esp.). Ibid., doc. 16, 122 (en hebr.) y 123-24 (en esp.)

tributo por los documentos de confirmaciones o estipulaciones matrimoniales." De todos modos, la carta está en poder de un àrbitro, Abraham Alfaquim.16 Unas palabras ahora, breves, referentes a los impuestos indirectos recogidos en los libros del veinteno y de la alcabala,17 ya comentados y publicados por Y. T. Assis y R. Magdalena.18 El veinteno y la alcabala eran en Navarra impuestos sobre las ventas de mercancias, pagàndose por cada 20 dineros vendidos, un dinero, es decir, el 5%. Una vez cobrados, se detallaban periôdicamente, quizá anualmente o en ciclos bianuales, en libros de registro llamados Libro del veinteno o Libro de la alcabala, si bien el cobro del impuesto y la recogida de testimonios sobre las ventas solia ser semanal. Los mâs interesantes de estos libros son los del veinteno de la carne, referentes a la venta en la carniceria judia. En él se recogian, por un lado, las declaraciones ante testigos de los carniceros acerca de lo que habian vendido en cada semana, y por otro, las declaraciones de los matarifes rituales sobre el ganado degollado para cada carnicero en cada semana.19 Además se confeccionaban también el libro del veinteno de la seda, cueros, pieles, zapatos, pergaminos...;20 el libro del veinteno de la plata y objetos metâlicos21 donde se recogia el impuesto cobrado por la venta de onzas de plata, marcos y tazas de plata, anillos de oro, pero también por ventas de azufre, marmitas, sartenes, bacines, objetos de estafio y de latôn ...; y el libro del veinteno de las embestasp que no he podido averiguar de que se trata. Tampoco es posible, al menos para mi, establecer la diferencia que quizá hubiera en Navarra entre el veinteno y la alcabala, pues esta ultima afecta a las ventas de todo dpo de mercancias,23 desde el cânamo, la seda o los zapatos a un odre de vino, unas algarrobas, unos polios, una sábana o un vesddo de mujer. Los libros del veinteno judiegos, que son los que aqui nos interesan, denen a su frente unos comisarios judios, que nombran unos recaudadores judios y éstos a su vez nombran unos cogedores igualmente judios. En cambio, los recaudadores de la alcabala judiega son dos crisdanos. De todos ellos, detallando sus nombres, dan cuenta los mencionados Y. T. Assis y R. Magdalena.24 Con esta ponencia he querido simplemente exponer con cierta claridad lo que los documentos hebreos que se conservan en el Archivo General de Navarra (AGN) nos ensenan acerca de algunos aspectos de los impuestos reaies en aquel reino medieval.

16

Ibid., doc. 15, 118 (en hebr.) y 120 (en esp.). Recogidos en J. L. Lacave, Los judios del reino de Navarra, does. 33-35, 37 y 39 (veintenos) y 36 (alcabala). 18 94-99.‫יהודי נאבאברה בשלהיימי־הביניים‬ y 159-198.

17

19 20 21 22 23 24

J. L. Lacave, Losjudios, docs. 33 y 34. Ibid., doc. 35. Ibid., doc. 39. Ibid., doc. 37. Ibid., doc. 36. Op. cit., 96-99.

T H E JEWS OF M U S L I M SPAIN AND THE M A G H R I B AL‫־‬WANSHARÎSÎ'S COLLECTION OF FATWAS AS A SOURCE FOR JEWISH SOCIAL H I S T O R Y MATTHIAS B. LEHMANN1 Freie Universität Berlin, G e r m a n y

Introduction Presumably we are quite well informed about the history of the Jews in Muslim Spain during the Middle Ages. Looking at what we know about Jewish life in Spain under Muslim rule it turns out, however, that still much work is needed. Research has generally focused on intellectual history and great personalides such as Hasday ibn Shaprut or Samuel ibn Naghrila (ha-Nagid). Important as they are and as well documented as their respecdve lives might be, the study of these persons and their work does not really provide us with too much insight into the structures of their Jewish contemporaries' daily life. One important and still much ignored source for studying the situation of Jews and other non-Muslims in Islamic Spain and North Africa is the collection of jatwâs—"responsa" in Muslim law—prepared by the North African jurist Ahmad al-Wansharisi (d. 1508). Among its approx. 6000 Jatwâs dating from a period between the tenth century and 1496, Wansharisi's monumental "al-Mi'jâr al-Mu'rib"2 includes some 125 cases dealing with Jews and Christians. They prèsent us with fascinating material ranging from conflicts over the construction of new synagogues to questions of trade and commerce to the extent of Jewish legal "autonomy." At the juncture of legal doctrine and practice, the fatwas, afford us an opportunity to learn much about the parameters of the JewishMuslim "convivencia" in medieval Spain and North Africa, which the study of legal doctrine alone does not provide. The legal interpretations of jurisconsults were collected in order to serve as precedents for the further development and adjustment of the legal doctrine to 1

2

The conclusions presented here are the result of research undertaken for my M.A. thesis submitted at the Freie Universität Berlin in 1997. I wish to thank Professors Peter Schäfer, Gudrun Krämer, and Lutz Richter-Bernburg for their comments.—A much more elaborated version of this paper will be published in Jewish Studies Quarterly 1999. Al- Mi'yâr al- Mu'rib wal-Djâmi' al-Mughrib ,an Fatâwi ZJlamâ' Ifriqiya wal-Andalus wal-Maghrib. 13 vols, Rabat 1981-1983; a selecdon of texts with a French translation or paraphrase has Amar, E. 1908. "Consultations Juridiques des Faqihs du Maghreb." In Archives Marocaines 12-13; a survey of cases dealing with non-Muslims was prepared by Idris, H. R. 1974. "Les tributaires en occident musulman médiéval d'après le 'Mi'yâr' d'al-Wansarîsî." In Mélanges d'islamologie. Ed. P. Salmon. Leiden, 172-196. More recendy, Vincent Lagardère has published an extremely useful collection of brief summaries of 2144 fatwâs from the Miyâr under the somewhat misleading dde: Histoire et société en Occident musulman au moyen âge: Analyse du Miyâr d'al-WanSarîsî. Madrid 1995.—In daring the cases I follow Idris and Lagardère.

changing social realities. The collection of al-Wansharîsî taken as a source for the following reflection on the legal status of the Jews put to the test of social reality is such a compilation of responsa intended as a basis for the development of substantive law.

Turbans and Girdles: The Use of the "Pact of 'Umar " The standard reference for the definition of the Jews' and Christians' place in Islamic law and society are the stipulations of 'Umar (shurût 'umarijya) which in the Muslim legal tradition are attributed to the second caliph, 'Umar b. al-Hattâb (rg. 634-644). 3 Al-Wansharîsî explicitly refers twice to this so-called "Pact of 'Umar": He cites it once in extenso in connecdon with a conflict about allegedly new (post-Islamic conquest) synagogues in the Maghribi region of Touât (second half of the fifteenth century).4 On another occasion, he quotes it in extract when referring to a charge of improper behaviour raised against a Jew in the city of Fez at the m m of the twelfth century. 5 The former case, which led to a pogrom against the Jews of Touât and the destruction of their synagogues, is the most extensively discussed conflict regarding Jews found in al-Wansharîsî's collection. Since it has been well documented in Emile Amar's French paraphrase of selected texts from the Mi'jar and also has been subject to historical analysis,6 we will confine us here to look at the less spectacular but nonetheless instructive case from Fez. A jurisconsult in Tanger 7 is presented with a complaint against the Jewish doctor (hakim) Ibn Qanbâl, from Fez, because the latter wears a turban and a ring, rides on a saddle on a beautiful riding animal and sits in his shop [hânût] without a distinguishing mark \ghtyâr\ and without a belt [^unnâr\, and he also walks around in the market streets without a distinguishing mark which would allow him to be recognized [as a dhimmi\. Rather he [wears] the most exquisite [garb], just as the Muslim notables or even better.

3

A vast literature exists on dhimma and the "Pact of 'Umar." It may suffice to mention here the recent overview presented by Mark R. Cohen, Under Crescent and Cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages. Princeton 1994 and the "classical" and very detailed work of Antoine Fattal, Le statut légal des nonmusulmans en pays d'Islam. Beirut 1958. A very important contribution to the study of the "Pact of 'Umar" is the fine article by Noth, A. 1987. "Abgrenzungsprobleme zwischen Muslimen und Nicht-Muslimen. Die 'Bedingungen 'Umars (al-Iunit al-'umariyyà)' unter einem anderen Aspekt gelesen." Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 9, 290—315.

4

Al- Miyâral- Mu'rib.

5 6

7

Vol. 2, 237 f. Al-Wansharîsî himself refers to Turtûshî as his source for the "Pact of 'Umar" in the Mi'yâr. Vol. 2, 232. Thirty-five minor variations exist between the text given in the Mi'yâr and the one given by Turtûshî (edition Cairo 1872, 229 f.), only one representing a deviation in content. An English translation of the shurût 'umariyya, based on Turtûshî's version, can be found in Lewis, B. 1974. Islam: From the Prophet Muhammad to the Capture of Constantinople. New York, vol. 2, 217 ff. Al- Mi'yâr al- Mu 'rib. Vol. 2, 254 f. Al- Mi'yâr al- Mu'rib. Vol. 2, 214-253; Amar, E. 1908. Consultations juridiques. Vol. 12, 244-265; Hunwick,J. O. 1985. "Al-Maghîlî and the Jews ofTuwât: The Demise of a Community." In S tudia Islamic a 61, 155-183. The name of the jurisconsult is not given but referred to simply as "Ν. Ν. X. son of Y..." Text in al- Miyâral- Mu'rib. Vol. 2, 254.

The text addressed to the mufd goes on to ask whether any relevant precedents are to be found in earlier times. The answer consists of two parts: 1. The mufd refers to a prophetic tradition which says: " D o not greet the [dhimmis] first and force them to the edge of the way [ilâ adyaq at-tariq8".[‫ ׳‬He goes on to explain that while some have understood the sentence figuratively as placing the dhimmh at a disadvantage at court, the correct interpretation should be the literal one, meaning that a non-Muslim should give way to a Muslim when they meet in the street. The equality of the Muslim and the dhimmi in the juridical decision according

to [the principles of] fairness is obligatory. That is part of Islam's dignity and its excellence. The Prophet [...] said: 'Humiliate them, but do not oppress them [...].‫>־‬

2. The mufti urges the jurists of Fez to remind the Jews of the 'Umarian stipulations; al-Wansharîsî then quotes passages from the "Pact," both referring to the prohibition to wear turbans or ride on saddles and—rather strange in the given context—"not to show our crosses or our pigs in the Muslim streets and markets." The text raises a key term in the definition of Muslim/non-Muslim relations: the imperative of "ghiyar," of "being distinguishable." The accusation against Ibn Qanbâl may be specified to include three levels of transgressing the dividing line between dhimmis and Muslims: a) He is accused of using symbols reserved for Muslims—notably, wearing a turban and riding on a saddle. The turban, as the same mufti goes on to explain, is seen as "the distinct form in which the Arabs and God's messenger cloth themselves," "the diadem of the Arabs and the splendour of Islam" and "one of the pillars" of Islam.10 The dhimmi is to be prevented from acculturating to the Muslim society without joining it by conversion; his inferior, humiliating status is expressed by symbolic devices. The horizontal line dividing the religious groups is to be enforced. 11 b) The stipulations of 'Umar do not, however, merely prevent the dhimmi from actively imitating the Muslims through outward signs symbolically reserved for them. The dhimmi also is required to actively distinguish himself from the Muslims by wearing a specific distinguishing symbol, the girdle or belt (^unnâr).12 Again, the horizontal line dividing Muslims and dhimmh must not be trans-

8

9 10 11

12

For this hadith see the fine article by Vajda, G. 1937. "Juifs et Musulmans selon le hadÎL‫ ״‬In journal asiatique 229, 57-127, here p. 110 which also gives the references in the hadith collections. Al- Miyâr al- Mu 'rib. Vol. 2, 254.—For the hadith see Vajda, juifs et Musulmans. 110. Al- Miyâr al- Mu'rib. Vol. 2, 255. On the "horizontal" as opposed to the "vertical" dividing line in Andalusian society, cf. Glick, Th. 1978. "The Ethnie Systems of Premodem Spain." In Comparative Studies in Sociology 1, 154— 171 and idem, 1979. Islamic and Christian Spain in the Early Middle Ages. Princeton, 135 ff.; 165-193. Albrecht Noth has argued that "çunnâr" is a word taken from the Greek "spnârion" and that this girdle or belt might have been a typical attire of the non-Muslims at the time of the Muslim conquest and that it was then made obligatory to continue wearing the piece in order to prevent the acculturation or assimilation of the different religious groups. Noth, "Abgrenzungsproblerne," 304.

gressed. The yunnâr is to ensure that Jews and Muslims act in their daily encounters as the hierarchy requires; everyone is to remain in his, or her, appropriate place. c) Unfortunately we are not informed about the person raising the complaint against Ibn Qanbâl or his motivations. In this context, however, a crucial point is made by claiming that the Jewish hakim clothed himself "as the Muslim notables or even better." The emphasis shifts from the horizontal line dividing the religious groups to a vertical class distinction. Ibn Qanbâl does not seem only to have transgressed the stipulations of 'Umar but seems, to his Muslim neighbours, to have usurped social prestige derived from his professional or economic standing. As other jatwâs assembled by al-Wansharîsî and the research undertaken by S. D. Goitein on the Cairo Geniza13 show, there is no evidence that the dress code actually was respected neither by the upper nor by the lower classes. Thus it appears that merely transgressing the ghiyâr imperative did not automatically lead to conflict. If the case of the Jewish doctor Ibn Qanbâl nonetheless became an issue, we can assume that a judicial conflict would arise not necessarily whenever a stipulation of the "Pact of 'Umar" was being ignored but rather when also other, namely economic, interests were involved. Moreover, we can distinguish two divergent trends in Muslim legal thought and practice concerning the dhimmis, exemplified in the jatwâ on Ibn Qanbâl's case by the Prophetic saying: "Humiliate them, but do not oppress them." On the one hand, jurists would insist on the humiliation of the dhimmis and any attempt on their part to escape from their humble status would be interpreted as a breach of the "Pact of 'Umar." On the other hand, the mutuality of obligations and the toleration of the non-Muslims which characterize the dhimma relation is underlined. These two trends do not merely represent competing opinions of different scholars but rather are inherent in the ambiguity of the very concept of dhimma itself.

Commercial Relations, Cultural Assumptions, and the Primacy of Pragmatism While researchers have stressed the crucial role played by Jews in the Mediterranean trade network, I have not come across even one jatwâ dealing with Jews as long-distance traders in al-Wansharîsî's collection. Rather Jews appear in the context of inner-Iberian trade. The reason for this might be that since the Muslim and Jewish merchants who had previously controlled Mediterranean trade had lost their position to emerging Christian traders (notably of the Italian states) in the course of the thirteenth century,14 al-Wansharîsî did not see the need to include jatwâs dealing with long-distance trade.

13

14

Goitein, Sh. D. 1967-93. A Mediterranean Society: The Jewish Communities of the Arab World as Portrayed in the Documents of the Cairo Geniza. 6 vols, Berkeley, Los Angeles, here vol. 2, 286. Constable, O. R. 1994. Trade and Traders in Muslim Spain: the Commercial Realignment of the Iberian Peninsula, 900-1500. Cambridge, 240-256.

The two earliest cases in the collection concerning commercial relations with Jews date from the tenth century and deal with the business partnership 15 known in Europe as commenda (Arabic qirâd), a device in Islamic law which aided in circumventing the strict Koranic prohibition on usury. Though Muslim jurists objected to inter-confessional business partnerships, in the present fatwâs the very fact that there is a Muslim investor and a Jew acting as his agent is taken for granted and not discussed at all. In both cases, a Jew is accused of having received cloth from a Muslim and not having paid the price; the former then claims to have been the agent (in a business partnership) and that he has only retained his commission. In the lengthy legal discussions in both cases, the primary concern is to protect the agent and thus to guarantee the function of the commenda as an economic device: The presumption is in favour of the agent claiming the existence of a business partnership. The religion of the conflicting parties is mentioned but not used in the argument. Here we clearly see the primag of economic pragmatism guiding the legal process. We have a fatwd from the eleventh century addressed to the Cordovan scholar Ibn Sirâdj (d. 1064) asking whether business with Jews (mu'dmaldt alyabûd), be it buying, selling or lending money on credit, is allowed. The mufti simply states that such business is allowed, provided there is no Koranically forbidden profit (ribâ ‫ )י‬derived from the transaction. 16 In the fourteenth century, Abu Sa'id b. Lubb (Cordoba, d. 1380) is approached with a similar question, which, however, is formulated quite differendy:17 "He was asked about business with Jews [i.e., whether it is legal], in light of the fact that it is known that all or most of their businesses are a form of illegal profit (ribâ ')." Here a negative assumption on the business practices of the Jews is interwoven into the question. The jurisconsult decides that such commercial relations with Jews are valid but requires the Jew's oath "for the sake of the Muslim." The doubt about the legality of Jewish business implicit in the question is acknowledged to a certain degree by going one step further than the precedence from the eleventh century simply stating that everything is assumed to be legal. Finally three cases, presumably from fourteenth and fifteenth century alAndalus, 18 deal with Jews presenting bills that confirm the debts of Muslims. All of these b‫ש‬s are quite old (10 to 30 years!) and the Muslims claim to have paid their debts long ago. The Jewish creditors claim that they have only been repaid part of the money. The first of these cases is clearly resolved by a presumption against the Jews: He answered: It is customary for the Jews—God may curse them—to regard the property of Muslims as an easy loot. [...] The jurists said that, if someone is known for breaking the law and for injustice, he is judged accordingly. If 15

16 17 18

Al- Miyâr al- Mu'rib. Vol 6, 227 f. and vol. 10, 452. The first case is also recounted in the earlier fatwâ collecrion by Ibn Sahl, ahkâm al-kubrâ. Vol. 2, 73-77. Al- Miyâr al- Mu'rib. Vol. 5, 244. Al- Miyâr al- Mu'rib. Vol. 6, 433. Al- Mi'yâr al Mu'rib. Vol. 5, 244 f.; 245 f.; 246. The dadng of the cases is somewhat difficult. Idris, Tributaires, and Lagardère attribute them to the fourteenth and fifteenth century.

someone accuses such a person, the plaintiff receives what he demands, if he takes the oath; and vice versa. He [the qâdi\ should judge in the case of the Jew that the Muslim takes the oath of not owing anything [to the Jew] [...].19 It is interesdng to see that in later jatwâs such as this one the mentioning of Jews is more and more often accompanied by a curse. More significant is that in the opinion of the jurisconsult it may legitimately be assumed that the Jews break the law and try to cheat the Muslims. The broadly shared cultural assumption that Jews are not to be considered honest when doing business with Muslims is accepted as a legalpresumption to their disfavour. 20 Though it is highly tenuous to infer any general development from the limited number of cases compiled in al-Wansharîsi's jatwâ collection, the situation of the Jews in Muslim Spain and the Maghrib seems to have deteriorated in legal practice, though not in doctrine, between the tenth and the fifteenth century— at least as far as inter-religious economic relations are concerned. We should briefly add two further aspects: In a responsum issued by Ibn Lubâba (Cordoba, d. 926) it can be seen that the jurisconsults were well aware of the fact that personal prejudices and cultural assumptions do influence the process of judicial decision-making. Thus Ibn Lubâba strongly rejects the view of another mufti forbidding Muslims to buy meat not fit for kosher use from Jewish butchers (such as the hindquarters of slaughtered animals, etc. 21 —an issue, by the way, that emerges time and again in both Muslim and Christian anti-Jewish polemics.) Ibn Lubâba calls that jurisconsult an "ignoramus" and insists that one should not follow "the people who give a jatwâ on something they do not know anything about. The giving of a jatwâ in ignorance is forbidden." He argues that this prohibition is not based on tradition but merely on the personal prejudice and disgust of the Maliki scholar Ibn al-Qâsim. In a similar manner, muftis rejected time and again complaints by Muslim neighbours who complained that they would not use the same water fountain with their Jewish neighbours. 22 Such, for example, we read in a jatwâ from eleventh century North Africa that the jurist al-Lakhmî (d. 1085) from Qayrawân is asked about the Jews, namely, if they should be prohibited from fetching water out of a river in the midst of a town of Muslims, who do their ritual abludons and wash themselves and their clothing therein.—He answered: I do not know any reason why one should forbid the Jews from fetching water from the river. [...]

19 20

21 22

Al- Mi'yâr al- Mu 'rib. Vol. 5, 244f. It is interesdng to record what Lawrence Rosen has observed in twendeth century Morocco as "an example how cultural assumpdons, legal approach, and substantive law are all deeply entwined. [...] In Morocco, there are records of cases in which qadi's courts have explicidy presumed that since it is the normal course of things for Jews to engage in the practice of usury, that may be presumed in any particular case until proven otherwise." The Anthropology of Justice: Law as Culture in Islamic Society. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989, 44. Al- Mi'yâr al- Mu 'rib. Vol. 5, 250. Al- Mi'yâr al- Mu'rib. Vol. 5, 208 f. (Cordoba, twelfth century); vol. 8, 433 f. (North Africa, eleventh century).

T h e river is [likewise] n o t affected or made dirty w h e n the Muslims wash their filth therein, w h e n their clothings are dirty. 23

Here, the popular attitude of not wandng to share the same water source with Jews is dismissed by the mufti. Having seen some forms of legal conflict resolution in such different cases as the use of common water sources and business relations, it is evident that the assumption of legal anthropologists "to view law as part of the larger culture, a system which, for all its distinctive institutional history and forms, partakes of concepts that extend across many domains of social life" (Lawrence Rosen)24 is eminendy useful to study the interrelation of law and social reality. At the same time, this assumption nonetheless appears too broad and too unspecific. From the cases briefly reviewed here, we might draw a distinction between three different kinds of assumptions which are very differendy related to in the legal discourse. Thus we have (a) personal prejudices (as in the case of buying treifa meat from the Jews) which cannot legitimately influence the legal decision making; (b) (negative) cultural assumptions on Jewish commercial activities which are increasingly admitted as legal presumptions, thus becoming part of the process of legal decision-making itself; and (c) popular attitudes (such as not wanting to share the same water fountain with non-Muslims) which, though apparendy quite widespread, are defined as having no legal significance whatsoever.

Conclusions This brief presentation of some selected material from al-Wansharisî's collection offatwâs was intended to show that the "Pact of 'Umar" was only one, though, it is true, the most important and authoritative, point of reference in delimiting the patterns of Muslim-Jewish convivencia. Pragmatic considerations as well as cultural assumptions translated into legal presumptions were other points of reference.

23 24

Al- Miyâr al• Mu'rib. Vol. 8, 433 f. Rosen, Anthropology ofJustice, 5.

RJECEPC10N DE LA F I L 0 S 0 F Í A SEFARDI EN LA LATINIDAD MEDIEVAL IBN GABIROL Y M A I M Ô N I D E S CELINA A . LÉRTORA M E N D O Z A

CONCIET-Bucnos Aires, Argentina

Introducdon La historia de las relaciones entre la filosofia sefardi y la latina en el Medioevo ha pasado casi siempre por un tercer àngulo consdtuido por la filosofia árabe. Dado que ésta ha sido una rica e insustituible fuente del renacimiento aristotélico desde el s. XII, no es extrano encontrar las referencias a la filosofia sefardi en este marco e incluso denominarla "filosofia judeo árabe" o "andalusi." Este enfoque, por supuesto, no es incorrecto y desde S. Münk, diversos historiadores de la filosofia sefardi le han asignado un papel—valioso—de intermediaciôn. En este trabajo, en cambio, procuro explorar otra via, y analizar dos casos de transmisiôn de aspectos originales de la filosofia sefardi (quiero decir, que aunque con aproximaciones, no denen exactos paralelos en la fdosofia árabe trasmidda a la ladnidad) y cuya recepciôn, si bien realizada en el contexto general de transmisiôn del corpus greco-àrabe, ha sido directamente asumida en el mundo ladno. Estos dos casos son la metafisica de Ibn Gabirol reelaborada por Domingo Gundisalvo, y la teologia natural de Maimônides, retomada por Tomâs de Aquino en algunos puntos decisivos (pruebas de la existencia de Dios y eternidad del mundo). Estos dos casos denen interesantes paralelos, más interesantes aún si consideramos la profunda divergencia teôrica que sépara ambas parejas culturales. Primeramente expondré los aspectos esenciales de ambos casos y luego analizaré las correlaciones.

Ibn Gabirol y Domingo Gundisalvo Ibn Gabirol, cuya aportaciôn a la cultura judia (y universal) es muy amplia,1 fue conocido (u ocultado) en la ladnidad con el nombre de Avicebrôn, y tomado

La bibliografïa sobre Gabirol es bastante numerosa. Una buena parte se refiere a la otra vertiente de su personalidad por la cual fue mâs conocido en siglos anteriores, sobre todo en su propia comunidad: la poérica. Aunque en rru trabajo no me referiré a este aspecto, como vision de conjunto senalo la obra de Millâs Vallicrosa, J. M. 1945. Selomô ibn Gabirol como poetajy filôsofo. Barcelona: CSIC, y mâs recientemente Sàenz-Badillos, A. 1992. El alma lastimada: Ibn Gabirol. Côrdoba: El Almendro, coïncidentes—con otros estudiosos—en que su aportaciôn poédca ha sido una de las mayores del "siglo de oro" medieval. En muchos puntos aprovecho y comparto las exposiciones histôrico-cridcas de la filosofia gabiroliana debidas a Bertola, E. 1054. Salomon ibn Gabirol (Avicebrôn). Vita, opere e pensiero. Padova: Celam; Schlanger, J. 1968. La philosophie de Salomon ibn

por árabe e incluso por cristiano,2 sobre la base de su obra Fuente de vida, la obra filosôfica mâs estricta y compléta que escribiô.3 A mediados del s. XII esta obra fue traducida al latin por Domingo Gundisalvo ayudado por el judio converso Juan Avendeath, 4 haciéndolo por encargo del Arzobispo Raimundo de Toledo, circunstancia que senalamos porque incide en nuestro planteo, como veremos. La traducciôn que corriô bajo el nombre arabizado de Avicebrôn tuvo inmediata aceptaciôn en el mundo ladno. Ayudô a esta rápida asimilaciôn el hecho de que a partir del s. IX el platonismo fue ensenado como un sistema adecuado para expresar las grandes verdades del mundo natural (comeddo que en el siglo siguiente pasará a manos del aristotelismo). Las ideas gabirolianas, repetidas por los maestros de la protoescolàsdca dieron lugar, ya en pleno siglo XIII, a una interesante controversia que he estudiado en otra ocasiôn.5 Ahora quiero senalar que si bien la obra de Gabirol, en si misma, tuvo en esta cuestiôn un papel central, hay otro elemento igualmente esencial, que es su difusiôn temprana a través de obras ciertamente crisdanas y que, como taies, afiadian el valor dogmâtico al especificamente teôrico, al ser usadas como autoridades intelectuales. Domingo Gundisalvo, además de traducir a Gabirol, asumiô sus ideas desarrollândolas en forma personal, pero manteniéndose muy proximo a su fuente. La metafisica de Fuente de vida puede caracterizarse como un monoteismo emanatista con "corte" ontolôgico a nivel de la Divinidad. Dios es el ser supremo e infinito que ha creado el mundo de la nada por su libre voluntad, él es el unico ente simple, todos los demás son compuestos de un principio de perfecciôn y un principio de limitaciôn (hilemorfismo universal). Estos seres se disponen en un orden de perfecciones que constituyen el orden natural del cosmos. Esta doctrina—a diferencia del neoplatonismo de las Enéadas—no es emanatista, y el uso del hilemorfismo generalizado évita el monismo universal. Como vemos, hay aspectos de esta doctrina que son compartidos por los très monoteismos occidentales: la trascendencia, infinitud y simplicidad absoluta de Dios, su radical diferencia con los demás seres que son sus creaturas, y el carácter libre de dicha creaciôn. Pero hay otros que son teôricamente especificos de una direcciôn platonizante: el hilemorfismo universal, el voluntarismo divino y el orden jerârquico-axiolôgico de la creaciôn cuya contrapartida intelectual humana es el orden epistémico.

2

3

4

5

Gabirol. Etude d'un néoplatonisme. Leiden: Brill; y Sirat, C. 1983. La philosophie juive au moyen âge selon les textes manuscrites et imprimés. Paris: CNRS. Salomon Münk supone que esta atribuciôn se debe al Utulo (en latin) de una de sus obras (De Verbo Dei agente omnia), expresiôn muy usada por los crisdanos de la época (cf. Mélanges de Philosophie Juive et Arabe. Paris, 1857, 291, nota 1) También circulô en Occidente su Tikkun Midot ba-Nefesb, traducido por Gundisalvo junto con el Tratado del alma de Avicena, con un prôlogo semejante. Tal vez por eso ο por su menor extension y temádca más acotada, haya pasado desapercibido para los investigadores posteriores. En todo caso, la resonancia que tuvo en su época fue muy inferior a la del Meqor Hir/yim. La idenudad de este ayudante, cuyo nombre recoge S. Münk, ha dado lugar a controversias en las que no voy a entrar porque no hacen al comeddo especifico del trabajo. Puede verse una sintesis en Kinoshita, N. 1988. Elpensamientofibsàfico de Domingo Gundisalvo. Salamanca: Universidad Ponrificia, 34 ss. "Ibn Gabirol: la fuente judia de una controversia escolâsdca." Davar 128, 1992, 372-382.

Domingo Gundisalvo asumiô con cntusiasmo sobre todo la doctrina del hilemorfismo universal. Ya he tenido ocasiôn de senalar6 que esta doctrina cumple una funciôn especifica en los monoteismos no emanaristas: asegurar una diferencia radical, un "corte ontolôgico" entre creador y creatura, de modo que el conjunto de los entes que se oponen a Dios conforme la dicotomia: créador/creatura denen una estructura comûn en cuanto creaturas que las diferencia esencialmente del Creador. En ese senudo, es una teoria isomorfa con el actopotencialismo aristotélico, que en Tomâs de Aquino y sus seguidores servira para senalar este "corte" ontolôgico. El "hilemorfismo universal" tiene una larga historia en el mundo arabe, pues la "materia universal" de Gabirol tiene un claro antecedente en la nociôn de "materia primordial" de Ibn Massarra,7 a su vez reelaboraciôn del hilemorfismo universal del Pseudo Empédocles, hoy una fuente reconocida del Meqor. El mérito de Gabirol es haberla desarrollado en un contexto metafisico completo, con la argumentaciôn pertinente y sin hacer apelaciôn a ninguna autoridad religiosa, lo que permitiô a los très grupos religiosos hacer uso de sus ideas. De las cinco obras originales de Gundisalvo que conservamos (De divisione phiiosophiae, De anima, De inmortalitate anima, De processione mundi y De unitate et uno) nos interesan especialmente las dos ultimas, pues el Fons vitae es base comûn a ambas. El breve tratado De unitate et uno fue atribuido a Boecio y quizá esa circunstancia le dio una notoriedad especial. Es una obra muy citada durante el s. XIII y su influjo se hizo sentir tanto entre los teôlogos seculares de la Universidad de Paris como entre los miembros de la primera Escuela Franciscana. El De processione mundi, mâs amplio y elaborado, fue también muy reconocido en dicha época, aunque mucho menos citado. Los paralelos textuales entre Fuente de vida y De unitate et uno muestran inequivocamente esta correlaciôn asi como el trabajo de asimilaciôn por parte de Gundisalvo, quien comparte con Gabirol la preocupaciôn por elaborar una metafisica compatible con el monoteismo creacionista sin recurrir a la autoridad de textos religiosos.

Maimônides y Tomâs de Aquino Además de ser el mayor pensador judio medieval, Maimônides puede ser considerado, por derecho propio, uno de los más grandes aristotélicos. Aunque no comentô la obra del Estagirita al estilo de Averroes o Tomâs de Aquino, uso sus teorias en forma ortodoxa (sin desvirtuarlas) y a la vez original, de modo que su sintesis, aunque no sea igual a la aristotélica (lo que es obvio, pues pertenecen a dos mundos culturales distintos) es—en filosofia—compatible con ella. Pero mâs, y esto es lo importante, es compatible con la tradiciôn religiosa que profesaba. Esta fue también la preocupaciôn de Tomâs de Aquino (preocupaciôn que al parecer no fue compartida, ο no con la misma intensidad, por Averroes), lo que explica que ambos, además de filôsofos aristotélicos, sean en igual grado autoridades teolôgicas y religiosas de sus respectivas comunidades. 6 7

"Ibn Gabirol: un aporte a la filosofia judeo-cristiana." Medievalia 5-6, 1994, 259-275. Cf. Asin Palacios, M. 1914. Abenmassarray su escuela. Madrid, 119 y también S. Münk, op. cit., 151 y 292.

La mayor dificultad para compatibilizar las ideas aristotélicas con las religiones creacionistas es la teoria aristotélica sobre el primer motor, que implica un Dios motor y no creador, inmanente a un orden cinético y un mundo eternos y necesarios. Negando ο declarando errôneas las argumentaciones de los libros VII y VIII de la Fisica y XII de la Metafisica aristotélicas, el edificio teôrico integro amenaza mina. La solidez y la trabazôn argumentariva de la obra de Aristoteles, expresiôn paradigmárica de los posmlados epistemolôgicos y metodolôgicos de Aristoteles (él mismo hizo lo que consideraba exigencia del saber ciendfico) impide rechazar partes y adoptar otras, pues en ese caso el sistema se hace inconsistente. Maimônides y Tomâs lo advirderon y ambos decidieron encontrar argumentos para jusrificar racionalmente todas las grandes tesis de Aristoteles, aún las que a la letra suenan contrarias a los dogmas religiosos. Maimônides se adelantô en un siglo a similares soluciones de Tomâs, que conociô y uso estas ideas, adaptândolas al marco teôrico propio del crisrianismo. Es sabida la soluciôn maimonidea (Guía II, c.2 y 3) sobre la alternadva mundo eterno/ mundo creado: eternidad (en el senudo de duraciôn infinita a parte ante) y creaciôn no se oponen contradictoriamente (senddo fuerte ο excluyente de la oposiciôn) pues lo que caracteriza a la creatura no es su duraciôn sino su dependencia en el ser. Por lo tanto, teôricamente, una creatura puede ser eterna (de duraciôn in finita) ο no, y no podemos decidir entre las dos posibilidades solo con argumentos racionales. En cambio sabemos por fe, porque lo dice el Génesis, que esa duraciôn es finita ("En el principio..." alude a un comienzo temporal). Averroes, el otro gran aristotélico del s. XII, contemporâneo de Maimônides, comentando a Aristoteles, habia defendido a ultranza la verdad no hipotédca sino positiva de los textos cruciales del maestro. Veamos ahora como juegan estas dos figuras ante la vista del otro gran aristotélico, ya en el mundo crisdano: Tomâs de Aquino. El Aquinate estudio profundamente la obra de Averroes, y aunque no coincide con él en algunos aspectos, en lineas generates sigue sus pasos. Es curioso constatar que—a pesar de la profunda divergencia religiosa que los sépara—las cuestiones dogmâticas no interfieren para nada en sus adhesiones ο rechazos a las tesis averroistas. Tomâs cita a Averroes unas 500 veces, lo que en el volumen general de sus citas (altisimo) no es cuantitativamente significativo.8 Pero es importante en otro sentido: el Aquinate se sirviô de los criterios hermenéuticos de Averroes sobre todo al comienzo de su carrera intelectual (por eso mâs de la mitad de estas citas corresponden a su Comentario a las Sentencias del Lombardo, al De veritate y a la Expositio in Boetii de Trinitate). Es en estos momentos cuando está forjando su propio perfil como pensador crisdano aristotélico. Con citas ο sin ellas, es evidente que acepta la interpretaciôn aristotélica de Averroes en cuestiones capitales de la metafisica, aquellas en las que también coincide con Maimônides: Dios es acto puro, en él coinciden todas las formas, la pluralidad de nombres divinos no supone multiplicidad en Dios, la actividad de Dios y de la creatura no son univocas.

8

Cf. Elders, L. J. 1994. "Averroès et Thomas d'Aquin." Medieva/ia 5-6, 219-230.

Pero Averroes, que habia sido llamado a ejercer una de las influencias mâs controverudas de la naciente escolàstica latina, era usado por los profesores de filosofia de Paris en un sentido y con un alcance inaceptables para los teôlogos y de alli derivaron no solo las sucesivas prohibiciones de "leer" a Aristoteles sino también una serie de condenaciones al aristotelismo, entre las cuales sobresale la de 1277 que alcanzô (aunque sesgadamente) al propio Tomâs 9 très anos después de su muerte. Pero sin duda el Aquinate tenia conciencia del peligro potencial de las tesis que iba defendiendo y por eso en algunos textos llcga a poner en duda la autoridad del Comentador ο quizá incluso le haya atribuido a propôsito "errores" de interpretaciôn para "salvar" a Aristoteles.10 Hay sobre todo dos teorias del Comentador sostenidas por los averroistas latinos (los aristotélicos sospechosos y luego heterodoxos de la crisdandad) que son pardcularmente conflicuvas: la eternidad del mundo y la unidad del intelecto agente. Tomâs escribiô sendos opùsculos para refutar a los averroistas dejando "a salvo" a Aristoteles. En De unitate intellectu contra averroistas, denuncia al Comentador como errôneo intérprete y sosdene que el texto de Aristoteles (el Libro III del De Anima) puede interpretarse "correctamente" (es decir, en forma compatible con el dogma religioso) en sentido contrario. El caso de la eternidad del mundo es más dificil porque los textos de Aristôteles son reiterados e inequivocos. En De aetemitate mundi contra murmurantes toma una decision teôricamente fuerte. Los "murmurantes" a que se refiere son los teôlogos que veladamente acusaban de hcterodoxia a los aristotélicos en virtud de este tema. Comprendicndo que los argumentos aristotélicos en este punto son esenciales y no pueden ser abandonados sin quiebra del sistema, los defiende "hipotéticamente" (o sea, en sentido absoluto o "de potentia absoluta Dei"). Para ello se sirve de la soluciôn de Maimônides. La razôn no puede resolver por si sola el tema porque los argumentos en ambos sentidos no son concluyentes en cuanto a la realidad. Esta tesis ha sido expuesta además en numerosos pasajes de su obra, pero la version mâs cercana a Maimônides es la de Sum.Tbeol. I, q. 46, a 1-2: no es necesario que Dios quiera algo eternamente mâs que a si mismo, y por tanto la proposiciôn "nada hay eterno fuera de Dios" (proposiciôn de fe conforme al Génesis) no es imposible, pero no se puede demostrar filosôficamente (que era la pretension de los impugnantes). Es importante senalar que el De aetemitate mundi tomista no es una obra de juventud. Algunos autores consideran que lo escribiô hacia 1270 (pocos anos antes de morir) en respuesta a las Quaestiones de Peckham en sentido contrario. Sin embargo Burowski propone una secuencia diferente y quizá más clarificadora. El franciscano Buenaventura (antiaverroista) sostenia la tesis finitista y es a él

9

10

Se ha diseutido sobre el alcance de esta condenaciôn por lo que atane a un futuro santo y Doctor Universal de la Iglesia. Dado que el texto no nombra a todos los autores sino que formula proposiciones, algunas de las cuales son de dificil atribuciôn, la tendencia actual de los invesdgadores es que aunque podian incluir también a Tornas (porque sostenia de hecho algunas de las tesis condenadas), al no ser expresamente aludido no fue directamente alcanzado sino implicado. Cf. Hissette, R. 1997. "L'implication de Thomas d'Aquin dans les censures parisiennes de 1277." Rfcherches de Théologie e/ Philosophie médiévales 64, 1, 3-31. Es la opinion de Elders 1994: 223 ss.

a quien responde Tomâs mientras que las Quaestiones peckhamistas son a su vez respuesta a este opûsculo.11 Si esto fuese asi, la conexiôn eon Maimônides quedaria mucho mâs clara. Hacia 1250 Buenaventura, cuya teoria metafisica se inscribe en la linea de la tradiciôn gabiroliana y gundisalvina, cuestiona varias tesis metafisicas centrales de Aristoteles, entre ellas ésta, produciendo una cierta conmociôn en la Universidad de Paris a favor de los "teôlogos" frente a los "ftlôsofos" en virmd de su propia autoridad intelectual. En esta época Tomâs está bajo el magisterio de Alberto Magno, que lo habia precedido en el camino de la "cristianizaciôn" de Aristoteles. Es Alberto quien varias veces cita a Maimônides a la letra, entre ellas al tratar precisamente este tema. Por lo tanto, la fuente ladna inmediata de Tomâs es ciertamente Alberto, pero en cuanto éste prácticamente ha copiado a Maimônides, el contacto se estrecha. En la Orden de Predicadores a que pertenecia Tomâs, la Gui'a de perplejos era conocida en la traducciôn ladna de la hebrea de al-Harizi. Tanto Alberto como Tomâs se inspiraron en Maimônides explicitamente en su teoria de los nombres divinos, cuesdôn interesante pero menos conflicdva. Quizá por esa razôn al tratar este tema las citas no son explicitas. Por otra parte, como ha senalado Laureano Robles, hay que considerar la influencia del Pugiofidei de Ramôn Maru, que leyô la obra de Maimônides,12 lo cual no significa necesariamente que el conocimiento y la influencia del Rambam sobre Alberto y Tomâs quede mediada por Mard, aunque si hay que conceder que los très usaron materiales comunes provenientes de la misma fuente.

Correlaciones Los dos casos mencionados presentan correlaciones signiflcativas. 1. En ambos la adopciôn de una fuente judia por parte de los crisdanos provino—además del interés personal de ellos—de una preocupaciôn institucional y general acerca de problemas teôricos que en ese momento no tenian soluciôn satisfactoria. En el s. XII, cuando tanto en la Espana crisdana (reconquistada) como en el resto del continente se inicia un fuerte movimiento de traducciôn del corpus greco-àrabe, la intelectualidad ladna se reconoce en inferioridad de condiciones y comprende que sus recursos teôricos tradicionales están agotados. La traducciôn de Gabirol fue encomendada por un obispo interesado en conocer y 11

12

Cf. Burowski, T. P. 1979. "J. Peckam, T. Aquinas et al. on the eternity of the world." Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et médiévale, 46, 216-221. Me ocupé del tema, en lo referido a Maimônides, en "La influencia de Maimônides en la filosofia ladna." Sefârdica 2, 4, 1985, 11-23. Sobre la relaciôn entre la filosofia de Maimônides y la tradiciôn judia, entre una abundante bibliograßa, senalo especialmente por la proximidad a mis ideas la obra de Barylko, J. 1985. La filosofia de Maimônides. Buenos Aires: Marymar. M. Cruz Hernandez ha insisrido en la necesidad de interpretar la obra del Rambam a partir de un complejo de elementos e influencias culturales que incluya la câbala, el kalam y la tradiciôn de los falasifa (cf. "Maimônides como Faylasuf." Sobre la vida y obra de Maimônides. Côrdoba: El Almendro, 1991: 79-93). Coincido con este autor en que el nûcleo del pensamiento de Maimônides es la preocupaciôn por superar las contradicciones entre creacionismo biblico y perennismo helénico por una parte, y por otra entre interpretaciôn racionalista ο alegôrica de los textos sagrados. Cf. "Tomâs de Aquino, lector de Maimônides." Sobre la vida y obra de Maimônides. Côrdoba: El Almendro, 1991,454.

asimilar la riqueza de los pensadores árabes para actualizar a su entorno cristiano. En el caso de Tomâs, fue el propio Papa quien le encomendô la tarea de "depurar" a un Aristoteles ya imprescindible en el movimiento cienrifico de la época. En ambos casos la preocupaciôn provino de hombres religiosos, que querian actualizar y comparibilizar la fe cristiana con la ciencia pagana en un contexto mucho mâs exigente que el de los siglos altomedievales. No es extrano entonces que en puntos capitales para cada uno de los casos, el guia haya sido un pensador judio, por lo que enseguida diremos. 2. La actualizaciôn intelectual de la cristiandad tenia la limitaciôn decisiva de los dogmas religiosos. A diferencia del islam ο del judaismo, la cristiandad siempre estuvo organizada jerárquicamente en cuestiones dogmâticas, y ninguna proposiciôn dudosa o errônea a criterio de las autoridades religiosas podia ser sostenida en ninguna parte, ni por ninguno de sus miembros. La asimilaciôn del pensamiento no cristiano debia estar mediada por un control religioso que "filtrara" los elementos espûreos desde el punto de vista de la fe. Gabirol y Maimônides estaban en esto mâs cerca de la preocupaciôn de Gundisalvo o Tomâs que Avicena ο Averroes (aun siendo ellos también profundamente religiosos, se conformaron con una "compatibilidad negativa"). La "compatibilidad positiva" que buscaron Gabirol y Maimônides es la misma que perseguian los maestros de los siglos XII y XIII respectivamente, ejemplificados aqui por Gundisalvo y Tomâs. 3. La tercera correlaciôn significativa es que, salvada la cuestiôn religiosa, la soluciôn teôricao filosôfica debia estar en consonancia con la linea de pensamiento mâs avanzada de la época. En la latinidad del s. XII la metafisica gabiroliana asumida por Gundisalvo representaba una version mâs compléta que las aportaciones no sistematizadas de Abelardo o San Anselmo en el siglo anterior. En el s. XIII el aristotelismo era una "revoluciôn teôrica" de includible consideraciôn. En ambos casos la asimilaciôn tenia sus riesgos. Se ha dicho que el "panteismo" de Amalrico del Bene estuvo inspirado en el neoplatonismo gabirolino. A mi criterio esto es inexacto y sucede precisamente lo contrario: es la direcciôn neoplatônica la que corre riesgo de monismo, lo que Ibn Gabirol soluciona con su hilemorfismo universal. En cuanto a los riesgos del aristotelismo ortodoxo o histôrico, las vicisitudes de los averroistas latinos muestran claramente la dificultad de conciliar a Aristoteles con la tradiciôn cristiana altomedieval (no con la fe, como se vio luego) en un ambiente de mutuas suspicacias.13 La aportaciôn judia ha representado para la latinidad una ayuda significativa en esta tarea de asimilaciôn con compatibilidad y ha permitido que ambas corrientes se desarrollaran después sin fricciones hasta los limites de sus propias posibilidades teôricas.

13

Es precisamente la existencia de un alto nivel de sospecha e inseguridad lo que—en las interpretaciones mâs recientes—condujo a la apresurada y extralimitada condenaciôn del obispo Tempier. Sobre esta neblinosa historia v. el trabajo de Blanco Caballero, Α. 1988. Averwismo de Paris: presupuestos epistemolôgicos y racionaturalistas en las condenaciones de 1270-1277. Madrid: Universidad Complutense, quien enuncia y discute las clàsicas invesugaciones de R. Hissette y concluye que la acciôn de 1277 iba en realidad dirigida contra el naturalismo filosôfico y no contra el "averroismo latino" (53—54). Por lo que hace al tema aqui mencionado, el principio de la infinitud del dempo esta atacado en las proposiciones 6 y 205 y una de sus consecuencias en la 101.

T H E LIFE OF MATITYAH BEN M O S H E H T H E A U T H O R OF BEGIDA Τ HAZEMAN

& AHITUV

VE TSALMON

(SPAIN, LANGUEDOC, ΑΙΧ EN PROVENCE, 15TH CENTURY) ZVI MALACHI Tel-Aviv University, Israel The book Begidat Hamernan by Rabbi Matityah was published a few times in the past, during the 16th and 17th centuries. The earliest print was in Tihingen (Germany) 1560. Then it was printed in Prague 1609; Amsterdam 1649, and Offenbach 1714. The texts of all these edidons follow the first ediuon. The Bodleian Library Oxford has a manuscript written in Bona, Netherlands, in the year 1602, possibly copied from the first print (1560). A second manuscript is in the British Museum. The most important manuscript is in Paris. It contains many important additions and different versions, and it might be that it was written before the printed edidons, i.e. in the 15th or the first half of 16th centuries. This manuscript includes miniature illustrations, as we find in manuscripts and prints of Meshal Hakadmoni and of Mishlei Shualim, and in the manuscript of the Maqama about Azah and Naamah.1 I cannot explain the grounds for the substantial differences between the two versions, but the hitherto unstudied Ms. will help us to solve the mystery of the author's life, his time and place. The book is a literary allegory in the style of the Hebrew maqama: it is written in rhymed prose, in the mosaic style of inserting & inlaying literary material of old sources (Biblical & Talmudic). Woven into it are metered poems in the style of the Hebrew-Spanish secular and moral poetry. The book has been attributed to Rab. Marityah ha-Yitshari, one of the participants of the dispute in Tortosa 1414. The story is a disguised moral work, which describes the course of life and the fate of a man who distorted his way, forsake his good and chaste wife and followed a seductive woman. She is the daughter of Zeman, the symbol of fate, who ridicules man. The couple enjoyed "wild life" for a while, but after he was attacked by a demon, his new wife abandoned him for a younger lad. His father in law, Time, gives him his second daughter for a wife. This third wife is an old rake, who oppresses him. He becomes an old man whose task is to treat his old nagging pest, to prepare for her pap and porridge—papa and tleirans or kleints, ‫—קלייריטש‬because she has no teeth. Begidat Ha^eman tells the story of the life of man who in his youth studied Torah and chochmot among chachamim (rabbinical scholars), then abandoned the See Malachi, Z. 1991-2. "Mavo‫ ־‬le-sippur Mish'al." Mahut 8-9, 50.

world of the book and went after his desires. But the vain world, the world of lies, betrayed him, his fate turned upside dawn, Time/fate mocked and abused him, and his goodness—like his adulterous wife—fled from him and turned to others. He remained empty-handed. Meanwhile he got older, Old Age (Seivah ‫ )שיבה‬became his spouse, and his daughters are ‫חולשה ומחלה‬, "Illness" and "Weakness". The allegorical story of man's life with three women (the three ages of man) combines also the personal story of the author's three worlds: Torah and literary creation (Melitsah ‫)מליצה‬, licentiousness and desirous life ( C b e f y bah ‫)הפציבה‬, and old age (Seivah ‫ )שיבה‬with repentance and recognition that there is no way back. Because of the personal account the story is told in the first person.

The plot "This is the book of ‫ " תולדות אדם‬the history of man, the history of a man. The author ‫ מתתיה‬says that he writes his book at fifty years of age. When he was 19 years old he left his country, the faithful city in the terrible southern country, the land of utter ruin (‫ )שואה ומשואה‬of the Jewish communities, and went into exile to a land in which he wandered for 3 years. In the third year he crossed the great river called ‫( מי מרום‬the Paris Ms. has ‫ )ארון‬and arrived in the Town of the Water, in the land of darkness. The town looks beautiful, and our young man stands before the closed gate and shouts: open the gates of justice! Two Jews come to open it: Menachem Hasofer, the scribe, and Eran the Eranite. Menachem represents the world of Torah, Jewish culture, Jewish life style and Jewish literary creation. Eran the Eranite is the active intellect, like ‫ חי בן מקיץ‬by Abraham ibn Ezra. Menachem hosts our hero in his home. The young man tours the town and meets groups of scholars learning Tora. He decides to join them. Menachem hangs an inkwell on his waist, teaches him writing and Torah, and they call his name ‫—מחוקק‬a writer, a lawmaker. He sits in Menachem's house for ten yeas, falls in love with his daughter ‫מליצה‬, sings love songs to her, and marries her. But after a short time he starts to strive for money and wealth, leaving his studies, as worldly life is surer than eternal life. For deciding the ‫ הלבה‬he has two small books,‫ספר מצוות קטן ושערי‬ ‫ איסור והיתר‬and they are sufficient for him... One day he meets a frightening man, the Zeman, who convinces ‫ מחוקק‬to leave Menachem's house, and to divorce his wife ‫ מליצה‬without her consent, as he is not bound to Rabbi Gershom's rules. ‫ מחוקק‬agrees to come and live in Zeman's palace. Later he falls in love with Zeman's daughter ‫ חפציבה‬and marries her without divorcing his first wife ‫מליצה‬, an act that again is against R. Gershom's rules, who forbade bigamy. Menachem discovers that his son-in-law is missing and sends for him. ‫ מחוקק‬refuses to return and sends a letter of divorce to ‫ מליצה‬dated 1430. Matityah was then around 30 years of age. Now Zeman changes ‫ מחוקק‬name to ‫פרד‬, as he departed ‫ נפרד‬from the town of the books ‫קרית ספר‬, from the inkwell and the literary creation, and be-

came like a mule ‫—פרד‬a mixture of two inclinations, good and bad. Zeman dresses him in a sword and a ‫ סליקה‬nice side bag, and marries him to his daughter ‫" = חפציבה‬My desire in her." The new wife is a "free woman." The couple take delight in love, have sex daily, and have two children: but Satan suggests to Zeman to m m the fate of Pered upside down which he does. Pered loses his wealth and stand. One day a demon assaulted (attacked) him and he was injured and lost his sexual desire. His wife disregarded him and went with young men. After the intervention of Zeman they arrived at an agreement: "every Samrday and New Moon my husband will put his head on me, but in the other days of the week I will go with my lovers..." This agreement was short lived: soon she met a beautiful reddish lad and fled with him. Zeman decided to compensate him and gave him his second daughter, ‫שיבה‬ Pered marries her in 1450 and his name is changed to Old Age ‫זקן‬. He gets to know all the deficiencies of old age: the noises of the chest, the winds, insomnia, and the life with an ugly and dominant wife. Now he regrets his way and tries to return to Menachem and to Melitsa, but there is no way back for he had sinned when he married two sisters—the daughters of Zeman. He must stay with his third wife, obey her, look after her, prepare every day papa and tleirans—kinds of porridge, and waste a lot of money on her food and jewelry. It seems that at this time, at the age of fifty, around the year 1450, Matityah wrote his work. So our Matityah can not identify with Matityah haYitshari from the Tortosa's dispute as he was then only fourteen years old. Begidat Ha^eman describes three ages of man—three periods in his life, as occurred in Matityah's life. So this is also a biographical account. In the beginning Matityah lived in Spain in a faithful city in the terrible country. He was acquainted with the Spanish Hebrew literature, its style and prosody, as we see from his work. When he was 19 years old he left Christian Spain heading to the north, to France, because of the persecutions of the Spanish Jews after 1391. He wandered in the towns of Languedoc known later for their Jewish communities, as Perpignan, Narbonne, Beziers, Carcason, Montpelier etc. Even in these places Jewish existence in the fifteenth century was very difficult because of Christian fundamentalism. To these days, watching in these towns the processions of the Sanch, with the dark and red hooded man, during Easter time can be a frightening experience for a Jew. So after three years of wandering in Languedoc, Matityah decided to cross the great river, that is the Rhone, from east to west, to Provence. There he arrived at the Town of the Water, which is the translation of the Roman name of Aix en Provence. In the town of the sages he studied Torah and ‫—מליצה‬Hebrew literary creation for ten years, then left for business. After 20 years, at the age of 50, the age of ‫ שיבה‬he regretted having abandoned the world of Torah and literature, leaving meantime the scribe in the days he was ‫ מחוקק‬. But old age is too late to mm back, as man's strength and spirit has left him and he must deal with all his physical problems: weakness and illness. One can only repent. Therefore he

decided to write his Begidat Placeman to show others which is the true world and which is the false, which are the right values and which are the wrong. To conclude: Mautyah wrote Begidat Haxeman in Provence, probably in Aix, in the year 1450, when he was 50 years old. A later reader of the book Begidat Haxeman wrote in his copy an interprétation of the allegory: Menachem symbolizes God; Melitsa the good and chaste wife is the Torah; ‫ חפציבה‬is the desires of ‫העולם הזה‬, which are ‫ עבודה זרה‬idolatry. Note that the names ‫מנחם‬, and ‫ חפציבה‬appear together in .‫מדרשי גאולה‬ ‫ חפציבה‬is the mother of ‫מנחם‬, the last redeemer, the ‫משיח‬. She will take part in all his future batdes and will kill four kings (‫ ) אוצר מדרשים קנח‬and in the Zohar ‫ במדבר שלח לך קעג‬we find:‫מבשרת ציון זו חפציבה אשת נתן בר דוד אמו של מנחם בן‬ ‫עמיאל‬. I cannot say whether there is any connecdon between our text and these texts, but our ‫ חפציבה‬is a negadve figure. The thirty years after the age of 22 our author lived in the French-Ashkenazi Jewish culture. He menuons twice that he does not accept the régulations of R. Gershom ‫ תקנות רבינו גרשום מאור הגולה‬from Ashkenaz. He mentions as sources of ‫ פסק הלכה‬two halachic books from France and Germany (‫)סמ״ק ושערי דורא‬ written in 13—14 centuries. The papa-porridge that he prepares for his old wife is mentioned only in the halachic books of two German-Jewish Rabbis: ‫מהרי״ל‬ ‫ומהרי ודיל‬. The tleirans is also a kind of porridge made of flour and water or milk, and it is mentioned in the French Tosafot on the Talmud. It seems that our ‫ מתתיה‬is also the author of ‫ ספר אחיטוב וצלמון‬which is a theological discussion like the Ku^ary of Jehuda Halevi. The story, in rhymed prose, tells about a queen who wanted to know the true religion. She sent three of her ministers to learn in the world. One returned a Christian, the second converted to Islam; the third ‫ אחיטוב‬became a Jew. After a long discussion the Jew convinced the queen and she converted to Judaism. It is interesting that there exist a manuscript with a much longer version of that story, written by ‫ מרדכי הסופר‬around the year 1476, ‫ בארץ מלחה וחרבה‬when he was 24 years old (might be still the life time of Matitya). At the end of this story ‫ אחיטוב‬marries the queen and becomes king. In the wedding, which description is very detailed, the king gives the queen a ring engraved with the sentence: "‫ חפציבה‬will your name be called..." I believe that both works were influenced by the disputes in Spain and the increasing number of Jewish Marranos and converts. Mordechai knew the work written by Matityah, and used its story as a frame to his own story. The author of Pardes Rimonim also plays a part in the narrative: he is the Scribe in the story, the adviser of the queen, the matchmaker of the queen and the king, etc. The Queen's Scribe composes poems with the acrostics of the author's name: Mordechai ben Yechiel. This is a very unusual feature, strange to Hebrew secular literature. This should be compared to the roll of the author in the plot of Begidat haZeman.

Mordechai lived in Southern Germany, and was influenced by the poetry and music of a famous Meistersinger, Muskatbluet, whose poedc forms he imitated, adapdng also the melodies of Muskatbluet's songs to his poems. It seems that Matityah was forced to leave Aix at the expulsion of the Jews from the town in 1436, and he left to live in Germany, where he became possibly a Rabbi and a head of a Yeshivah (Rabbinical school). There he composed his literary works and from there they were distributed to Prague etc.

LES PARTICULARITÉS DE LA COMMUNAUTÉ JUIVE DE SYRACUSE (SICILE) À LA F I N D U XIV E SIÈCLE V1TTORIO MORABITO Università di Catania, Italy

Les dispositions communautaires de 1363 Syracuse, la ville maritime de la Sicile orientale si proche de la Grèce, de l'Egypte, de l'Afrique du Nord et non loin du Moyen Orient, nous est bien connue grâce à son implication dans les événements les plus importants de l'histoire grecque, romaine, byzantine, chrétienne, arabe et aussi juive. Précocement, vers le II ou le IIIe siècle, la présence d'une communauté samaritaine spécifique, l'unique repérée en Sicile, la lie au judaïsme.1 En dépit de la discontinuité de nos indications, plusieurs indices assurent que des Juifs continuent à participer à la destinée de la ville de Syracuse et leur activité reste longtemps fort importante. Quant à la période moderne, le premier document en notre possession est daté de 13632 et concerne un acte officiel. A ce moment la communauté englobe les Juifs de la ville voisine de Ragusa (ou Raguse) et les représente auprès des autorités civiles. Ces prescriptions constituent les plus anciennes dispositions réglementaires des communautés siciliennes, après le statut de la communauté de Marsala daté de 1321. C'est en 29 mai 1363 que les responsables de la juiverie de Syracuse stipulent devant un notaire un acte, envoyé ensuite à la cour afin de recevoir du roi de Sicile, Frédéric d'Aragon, son assentiment royal. L'acte, rédigé sous forme de lettre, comporte seize prescriptions, nommées en latin notarial capitula, "chapitrès," ou ordinaciones, "ordonnances, prescriptions." Valables erga omnes, "pour tous," mais destinées à la communauté, ces dispositions juridiques demeurent globalement orientées vers le contrôle de certaines activités des Juifs locaux. Au lieu de régler positivement les comportements de la communauté, les ordres sont exprimés sous la forme négative d'interdictions, dont l'observance est garantie moyennant une sanction pécuniaire à verser aux administrateurs de la ville ou au roi. Souvent les Juifs sont aussi soumis à l'obligation de demander une

1

2

Morabito, V. 1990. "Orientali in Sicilia: i Samaritani e la sinagoga di Siracusa." ASSO 86, 61-88; Id., 1996. "The Samaritans in Sicily and the Inscripdon in a probable Synagogue in Syracuse." In New Samaritan Studies of the Société d'Etudes Samaritaines. Ed. A. D. Crown and L. Davy. Sydney, 236-256; Id., 1998. "Les Samaritains de Sicile." In Etudes sémitiques et samaritaines offertes à Jean Margain. Ed. C.-B. Amphoux, A. Frey and U. Schattner-Rieser. Prahins. Lagumina, B. & G., 1884. Codice diptomatico deigiudei di Sicilia. I. Palerme, 78-80. De cet ouvrage sont tirés les principaux documents siciliens signalés.

autorisation aux responsables de Γaljama, "la communauté," sous peine de nullité de leurs agissements et de payer une amende. a) Les autorités juives habilitées à gouverner la communauté et à accorder les autorisadons aux coreligionnaires sont au nombre de deux et semblent travailler conjointement: d'un côté il y a les dirigeants nommés prothi, nom dérivé du grec pour indiquer "les premiers, les sages." Normalement ils sont deux. De l'autre côté il y a douze personnes qui forment un "conseil" et sont désignées par le mot maiorenti ou maggiorenti, "supérieurs ou conseillers." Le principal responsable est défini en ladn presbyter ou sacerdos et en sicilien chassen; évidemment il s'agit du mot hébreu ba%%an, "le chantre," un personnage présent dans presque toutes les communautés siciliennes. Le document de Syracuse limite son indépendance. Il ne peut pas exécuter les cérémonies de fiançailles, le contrat de mariage ou le divorce, ni abattre rituellement les animaux, ni célébrer l'office liturgique s'il est privé de l'autorisation des deux autorités, les prothi et les maiorenti. De même, leur consentement est aussi indispensable pour permettre au sacristain de prêter les clefs et les objets de la synagogue. Appelé maniglorius en latin, le sacristain remplit grosso modo les fonctions du gabbai hébraïque. Et encore, ce sont les deux autorités qui permettent éventuellement de prononcer l'excommunication, soit sur l'autel soit au nom de la loi hébraïque. Les dispositions continuent et règlent aussi le cas d'un Juif qui insulte un dirigeant, un prothus. Le coupable sera condamné par l'autre dirigeant et par le conseil des maiorenti. b) D'autres dispositions mineures sont prévues dans l'acte. Pour l'aumône, personne ne pourra solliciter l'aumône destinée aux pauvres s'il n'a pas la licence des responsables aux aumônes nommés les elemonisinan, littéralement "les aumôniers." Seuls les "aumôniers," ou un dirigeant, un prothus, pourront accuser quelqu'un d'être susceptible de punitions. Ils pourront aussi, chacun pour ce qui le concerne, pendant les samedis et les jours des fêtes juives, se plaindre ou accuser un autre Juif au palais du gouvernement. c) Les soins, les points directifs et les avis de la communauté sont ceux exprimés à travers les conseilleurs, maiorenti. d) L'usure et les intérêts sont interdits selon les pénalités contenues dans l'acte. e) Enfin, deux normes attaquent la fraude dans le commerce. Les négociants juifs de "fruits et légumes," en ladn folia, ne peuvent vendre que la quantité de produits autorisée par les propriétaires. Les taverniers et les propriétaires de vin ne doivent ajouter dans leur vin ni eau ni vin différent.

Un changement dans le contrôle de la communauté Le document de 1363, censé réglementer l'existence de la communauté, comporte la centralisation de plusieurs pouvoirs entre quatre catégories de responsables: d'abord les dirigeants et les conseilleurs et ensuite, en demisubordination, les "aumôniers" et les sacristains.

Ne connaissant pas les modalités selon lesquelles 1,aljama de Syracuse était administrée antérieurement à ces décisions, tout laisse à penser que sa composition devait distribuer différemment les tâches de responsabilité parmi ces quatre dirigeants, ou d'autres dirigeants comme les hasgan. Il nous paraît que le document est de transition; il doit régir une situation de difficulté et de conflit entre de fortes personnalités. Des faits peuvent être mis ensemble et examinés par rapport à la discorde et à la destinée de la communauté. Nous discuterons ultérieurement de l'éclatement d'un conflit entre groupes rivaux à l'intérieur de la communauté. Pour le moment, contentons-nous de remarquer deux attitudes qui indiquent des difficultés de cohabitation: une disposition du roi de 1370 prône une protection accrue contre les abus dans les demandes de corvées réclamées à Y aljama de la part des délégués du pouvoir et une lettre de 1375 concernant la recommandation de protéger les Juifs tantôt à l'intérieur de la ville, d'où maintenant ils risquent de partir en masse, tantôt dans les procès, souvent injustes. Ces faits exogènes s'ajoutent aux difficultés internes à la gestion de la communauté, et provoquent une grave crise. A présent, un groupe plus ou moins compact, peut-être en partie celui, puissant, des conseillers, semble vouloir effectuer une opération de force dans le but de consolider son pouvoir sur la communauté et se porter garant vis à vis des nouvelles autorités hispaniques, au détriment de l'esprit communautaire et des fonctions honorifiques que le ha^an détient personnellement. La restriction et la délimitation de son prestige au sein de 1,aljama vont dans le sens de l'introduction d'une direction représentative et élitiste glissant vers l'autoritarisme. Les renseignements successifs nous aiderons à mieux le comprendre.

Les finances de la communauté En revanche, la situation économique se présenterait dans une meilleure posture. U aljama accepte à deux reprises, en 1370 et en 1377, les requêtes du roi de régler une année à l'avance les taxes et les impôts, gisia et agostale. L'argent réclamé en 1377 s'élève à un montant non négligeable, une somme de 43 onces. Par comparaison, trois ans auparavant, en 1374, la communauté juive de Trapani, étant plus riche et plus peuplée que celle de Syracuse, a déboursé davantage pour des impositions équivalentes: 60 onces, contre les 43 de Syracuse. Les données ultérieures confirment pendant une longue période l'excellente santé financière de l'aljama de Syracuse. Par exemple, en 1393 elle accorde au roi un don-cadeau de la valeur de 150 onces et en 1396 ses entrées fiscales sont de 72 onces annuelles. De grosses difficultés de paiement interviennent seulement en 1394. La récolte des impositions fiscales apparaît impossible vers les années 1395 et les obstacles se réfèrent aux troubles éclatés au sein de la communauté, comme nous le verrons pendant le marasme des années 1392—1396. Les informations analysées jusqu'ici nous ont permis d'entrevoir une esquisse du fonctionnement de la communauté. Pour établir le niveau le plus

étendu de son organisation, il faut aborder les dispositions formulées juste avant les années de crise.

Les dispositions de 1392 Un changement de loi, "un chef' et "un ordre" Le dimanche 22 juin 1392, la reine Marie de Sicile et le roi Martin avec son père, le duc Martin de Monblanc d'Aragon, approuvent en séance plénière du Conseil royal la pétition présentée au nom de la communauté de Syracuse par trois "syndics," en latin sindidï Un des syndics est Rays/ di Ragusa, les autres sont un rabbin Moyse et un certain, si la lecture est correcte, Marcuni Fraim [Efraim?]. L'office public ou privé de "syndic" est connu en Sicile et est destiné à qualifier un défenseur quand des circonstances particulières apparaissent dans la conduite d'un groupe. Les dix prescriptions contenues dans la pétition présentée en 1392 à l'approbation royale ont été toutes acceptées. Nous citons uniquement les clauses orientées essentiellement vers la vie collective, principal sujet de la présente communication. a) Une imposante directive s'avère essentielle pour comprendre la vie communautaire en cette année 1392. Elle commence par un constat de principe: "il est nécessaire d'éviter le désordre existant dans toutes les collectivités privées de chef" et continue en révélant que la juiverie de Syracuse possède six statuti, littéralement "statuts," lesquels statuti détiennent la pleine autorité d'ordonner et de conduire les actes de la communauté, de la représenter et surtout de déterminer ses comptes. Contrairement à l'apparence, ces "statuts" ne sont pas des règlements administratifs, mais des hommes. Sous la dénomination de statuti, si sa transcription se confirme exacte, nous trouvons à Syracuse les dirigeants élus par des membres de la communauté. Le mot statuti, du latin statûtum et statuére "établi, établir," prend la signification de "celui qui établi, celui qui dispose." Dans une certaine mesure, les six statuti remplacent les douze maiorenti présents à Syracuse en 1364. L'usage de cette terminologie, inexacte et inusitée, pour désigner des personnes chargées d'une fonction sociale, est unique et propre à Syracuse. Dans l'ensemble, la mention du terme statuti, à la place de termes plus courants ou incontestables comme par exemple prothi ou maiorenti, met en relief la précarité de la juiverie pendant une vingtaine d'années et sa faible cohésion. Toutefois, ce terme est très vite oublié. b) L'acte de 1392 nous dit que les six statuti sont élus chaque année par les membres des trois classes sociales: deux des riches, deux des moyens et deux parmi les pauvres. Cette division des Juifs d'une communauté en trois classes est fréquente en Sicile. A Syracuse, elle sen également à partager les redevances d'une façon proportionnelle à la richesse supposée de chacun.

‫נ‬

Ibid. 135.

c) Les statuti en exercice en 1392 ont élu un rabbin, en sicilien mastru di liggi. Par contre, les dispositions précisent que son successeur sera élu par la communauté endère. Au moyen d'une phrase incisive, la disposidon insiste sur le fait que le "maître de la loi," ou rabbin, de Syracuse est obligé d'appliquer "la loi mosaïque"; c'est sa tâche principale. Donc, celui actuellement en place est vraiment réfractaire à l'applicadon de cette loi et il exécute une autre loi. d) Le rabbin, conjointement [c'est nous qui soulignons] aux statuti, doit juger selon la loi mosaïque les quesdons nées de l'application du dotanu. Cette expression, difficilement compréhensible pour certains chercheurs, désigne la clause juridique par laquelle le mari réserve, en prévision de son décès, une fraction de son héritage à son épouse. Cette tradition sicilienne nous semble offrir aux Juifs de Syracuse la possibilité d'effectuer des détours contraires aux usages de la "loi mosaïque" et peut-être aussi aux intérêts de quelque proche ainsi lésé. L'emploi de l'expression "loi mosaïque," ici et en haut, ne nous apprend pas sa vraie nature. En Sicile, pendant un siècle, dans la période qui va jusqu'à la moitié du XVe siècle, nous avons constaté que la loi la plus signalée dans les documents est la "loi judaïque," elle est suivie aussitôt par la "loi mosaïque." Quelquefois la déclaration de la loi mosaïque est effectuée vraisemblablement en opposition à la loi rabbinique et à la loi orale.4 Le terme "mosaïque" dans notre contexte contient fort probablement l'indication qu'il s'agit de la loi rabbinique, peut-être la loi du Talmud. Une précision inscrite dans la même résolution le confirme: l'application de la "loi mosaïque" sera réalisée "malgré l'existence de tout autre constitution que la juivene a établie dans le passé et qui résulte ipso facto abrogée." De ce fait, le passage confirme que dans le passé la "loi mosaïque" n'était pas appliquée à Syracuse, ou n'était pas appliquée à des cas précis, et qu'une loi diverse de la "loi mosaïque" était largement en vigueur. Nous savons que les premiers statuts de 1369 acceptent un type d'excommunication solennelle susceptible d'être administrée selon la "loi hébraïque." La référence "hébraïque" de ce texte plus ancien renforce l'application de la loi orthodoxe rabbinique qui est constamment encouragée. La citation successive de 1392, que nous venons d'examiner, désigne aussi une ancienne constitution de la juiverie de Syracuse vivant en contradiction avec l'application de la loi talmudique que le rabbin doit assurer. Nous possédons ainsi une indication indubitable d'un changement de la loi à appliquer dans Γ aljama de Syracuse. Par contre, nous pouvons seulement supposer que l'ancienne loi était inscrite dans le précédent substratum religieux du judaïsme syracusain était antithétique à une loi talmudique ou babylonienne, comme par exemple chez les Samaritains et les Caraïtes. e) Une règle finale rappelle que puisque "tous les Juijs doivent vivre sous un ordre" il est interdit de chercher une exonération aux obligations communautaires; c'est-à-dire, en termes dits "méditerranéens," de chercher une "faveur" ou Morabito, V. 1998. "La comunità ebraica di Marsala e il giudaismo non rabbinico e caraita." In Bucaria, N. Gli Ebrci in Sicilia dal tardoantico a!medioevo. Palermo, 146—147.

"pistonnage" de la part du tuteur de son propre clan familial. Le thème initial de la discipline à faire régner sous "un chef' se complète aisément avec "un ordre." En conclusion, il faut à la communauté de Syracuse, ainsi qu'à toutes les communautés de l'île, une nouvelle règle de conduite et un personnage nouveau qui la fasse appliquer; pour cela un homme "providentiel" viendra expressément de la péninsule ibérique avec la suite royale.

Le marasme de 1392 à 1396 Les ordonnances de 1392 fondent l'espoir de tempérer les pénibles antagonismes qui retentissent parmi les notables de Xaljama. Pour apaiser les contrastes, une confiscation et un probable bannissement de l'un des chefs des clans rivaux prononcé par le roi tout de suite après l'approbation des chapitres ne suffisent pas. Le désir initial d'instaurer la paix ou le calme est en bonne partie balayé aussi dans les nominations des dirigeants. Les statuti sont vite dépassés car nous connaissons à nouveau l'existence en 1393 des prothi à Syracuse. Ils sont six et à eux s'ajoutent deux dirigeants, peut-être des "syndics." Le changement de composidon des cadres continue. L'instabilité et le désordre s'alimentent réciproquement et les difficultés augmentent très vite. En 1394 le roi Martin se préoccupe de l'absence de prothi à Χ aljama de Syracuse et, afin d'éviter d'autres gênes, ordonne la convocation d'un conseil des notables de la juiverie. Dans l'immédiat, l'ordre du roi semble réussir et obdent une précaire création de responsables, les prothi et les "syndics," en exercice pour un bref intervalle.5 L'année suivante, en 1395, la crise éclate au grand jour, obligeant le roi à intervenir au moins quatre fois dans la même année. Premièrement, il intervient dans la répétition d'une tentative de médiation confiée à un certain Iosef Abanafia, un homme destiné à une plus grande gloire; ultérieurement, il concède un "pardon collectif' afin d'oublier une humiliation imposée au pouvoir royal et une malversation de certains officiels de la communauté; ensuite, par l'ordre de réintroduire le gouvernement composé de douze prothi et non plus six ou deux; finalement, en prononçant l'annulation de cet ordre et renforçant en même temps l'apparente anarchie. A ce moment, la participation de la base à la gestion communautaire est presque inexistante. Les nominations des officiels sont remises en discussion continuellement par les exclus. Les efforts louables de quelques sages sont détournés vers des solutions rentables et personnalisées de courte durée. La situation à l'intérieur de la communauté a donc empiré des deux cotés: les chefs et l'élite évitent de se faire comprendre, la juiverie de son coté s'est montrée diffficile à diriger, à cause probablement du développement de son individualisme, et ses membres tentent d'abandonner la ville, ou le centre ville, l'île d'Ordgia, où ils vivent. Maintenant notre analyse doit se porter de l'autre côté et considérer également le comportement du pouvoir royal. Les autorités étatiques maintiennent un degré minimum de contrôle de Xaljama. La collaboration qu'elles obtiennent ne semble pas parvenir au niveau collectif et le contrôle reste 5

Lagumina 1884: 155.

superficiel, essentiellement limité à ce que la communauté doit verser pour payer "son dû" au roi. En compensation de ce manque de liens, la juiverie ne semble pas gagner une plus grande autonomie. Sa liberté coïncide avec l'étroit espace laissé derrière les intrigues et les combines des chefs, chefs de clan et d'une pratique rituelle. Le champ conflictuel que nous avons esquissé se nourrit et permet le développement d'attaches personnelles au roi et à la cour de la part de Juifs situés dans la moyenne et haute position sociale et religieuse. Les autorités soignent les relations personnelles et se font un point d'honneur de les maintenir. La conflictualité se maintient grâce au choix d'interlocuteurs privilégiés du pouvoir parmi les personnalités juives, qui entrent en concurrence dans le but de conquérir la plus grande considération; auprès du roi d'abord et des membres de Y aljama ensuite. En contrepartie, le roi en tire des bénéfices financiers, le don-cadeau entre autres, tout en renforçant son autorité. L'agitation provient aussi de ce type de comportement des autorités politiques. A la différence de ce que se passe dans diverses aljamas siciliennes, par exemple dans les structures démocratiques et électives de Marsala, les membres de la communauté de Syracuse restent dominés, dans l'ensemble, par de fortes personnalités et des structures élitistes. Vraisemblablement, l'introduction des nouvelles règles religieuses se fait à ce prix. Ce qui reste aux gagnants du marasme des années 1392 et 1396 est l'enjeu religieux.

Le Rays de Ragusa et le dayyan kelaly Iosef Abanafia Pendant les conflits, plusieurs habitants et plusieurs familles de la juiverie émergent: des Levi, des Cohen et des Sofer par exemple, faisant apparaître un ancien peuplement originaire de l'Afrique du Nord et du Moyen Orient. A eux se joignent désormais les ressortissants ibériques, le plus souvent une élite cultivée qui vise à s'affirmer. Notre attention doit se limiter à l'analyse des deux plus importantes personnalités de l'aljama de Syracuse dont nous avons déjà parlé, Rays de Ragusa et losef Abanafia. Le premier, Rays de Ragusa, ou Ragusia, nous l'avons rencontré parmi les syndics actifs en 1392 lors de la reconnaissance des chapitres de la communauté. La dénomination de rais est utilisée chez d'autres communautés siciliennes et est employée souvent en tant que synonyme de protu maiuri, "le premier des premiers." Le mot rais est arabe et l'origine du nom peut être trouvée en Egypte. Donc la fonction de Rays de Ragusa n'est pas entièrement définie d'avance. Ce dont nous sommes assurés c'est qu'il navigue en liberté, avec ou sans titre, dans les affaires de Xaljama et spécialement pendant ces années de troubles aigus, entre 1394 et 1397. Le rabbin Iosef Abanafia, un médecin nourri de la culture judéo-espagnole de Catalogne, suit, en qualité de "médecin du roi" la cour catalane dans son domaine sicilien. Le roi Martin en 1393 l'installe expressément à Syracuse et les raisons de cet acte restent inconnues ou plutôt inavouables; choix sans doute déterminé par la crainte de la communauté de la capitale royale, Palerme, à !'encontre d'un projet pensé conjointement par l'âpre roi et le pieux rabbin:

effectuer une réorganisation et la reprise en main des communautés "indisciplinées" de Sicile. Ils commencent par celle, cultivée, riche et composite, de Syracuse. Comme cadeau de bienvenue, le roi lui offre une maison et une boutique à l'intérieur du quartier juif. Dans sa maison il maintient son bureau où souvent il demeure pendant la nuit. A cause de sa surcharge de travail il obtient du roi la licence d'y installer sa synagogue. C'est une synagogue privée qui, par ordonnance royale, reste ouverte à "ses amis." Or, si nous pensons que Abanafia habite à côté de la synagogue publique, en réalité il dispose d'une synagogue de clan. Un pareil personnage ne peut pas rester longtemps inactif et en 1395 le roi lui confie une opération de médiation au sein de la communauté de Syracuse pour y ramener la paix et la concorde. En 1396, le 10 février, le roi le désigne dayyan kelaly ou en sicilien diencbeleli, "juge général," de toutes les aljamas et de tous les Juifs de Sicile. Sa tâche est enfin déclarée et comporte officiellement deux volets: imposer les activités traditionnelles de l'halakhah rabbinique en Sicile à travers l'unification des pratiques juives, souvent hétéroclites, et en même temps renforcer le pouvoir du roi. Ses dépenses de fonction sont compensées par l'octroi de la moitié des entrées communautaires de Syracuse, à savoir environ 36 onces. Ce système de financement peut porter des arguments aux opposants de son projet unioniste aussi à l'intérieur de Xaljama de Syracuse.6 Si Abanafia et Rays sont mêlés aux multiples épisodes de la vie de la juiverie de Syracuse, ils le sont séparément. L'unique connexion entre leurs activités passe à travers l'affaire de l'interdiction faite à Rays par le roi de se présenter à l'élection de tous les postes de Γaljama, à cause peut-être de ses intrigues et ses oppositions. Le personnage est si important que Abanafia même, probablement un des ses rivaux, devient son intercesseur auprès du roi et en 1397 obtient que la sanction soit remplacée uniquement par une suspension de trois ans. Cependant, avant l'expiration de sa punition, le roi Martin le nomme en 1399 adelantat à vie de Y aljama de Syracuse. Cette nomination s'est passée sûrement avec l'accord et le soutien de son "ami" Abanafia. Cet office est une copie en version siculo-catalane des adenanti, adenantado, adelandos et adelantatus en fonction en Espagne. Il nous paraît designer le terme d'origine araméenne de shadlan utilisé principalement en Pologne pour désigner "l'intercesseur" qui devait protéger la communauté moyennant ses relations sociales, économiques et politiques. Les motivations à sa nomination sont manifestes si nous la rapprochons d'une autre nomination extravagante, celle d'un juif syracusain remuant nommé "serviteur à vie du protbus de Syracuse." Le roi et le chef des Juifs siciliens, Abanafia, se servent de ces deux charges fraîchement inventées en Sicile, de "serviteur" et de adelantat, pour maîtriser et rémunérer dignement des notables turbulents. Ils empêchent, ainsi, tant une spéculation sur le mécontentement de la communauté que la conversion des deux hommes en aspirants tumultueux de postes de prestige, tels protbi ou "conseilleurs."

6

Morabito, "La comunità...," 137.

Les résistances de l'ancienne loi, en opposidon à la loi rabbinique ou talmudique, déjà constatées en 1363 et en 1392, s'ajoutent aux résistances survenues à la suite de l'introducdon de concepts et de pratiques halakhites de la part du dienchelele et sont exprimées sous le couvert de luttes politiques. L'activité du dienchelele auprès des principales juiveries siciliennes rencontre toute leur hostilité, vu que chacune désire garder farouchement son identité. Le dienchelele est sûrement considéré "providentiel" par le roi et par quelqu'un de ses contemporains; au contraire, parmi la quasi-totalité du peuple juif sicilien il semble discrédité comme "celui par qui le malheur arrive." C'est Syracuse, déjà préparée par l'imposition ancienne de nouvelles lois, qui serve comme base de lancement du projet d'implanter une puissante autorité centrale sous l'égide du judaïsme officiel rabbinique d'inspiration judéoespagnole et de Xhalakhah. Cependant, la tâche d'unification ne se solde pas par un échec total puisqu'elle sera poursuivie aussi, contre vents et marées, par les successeurs d'Abanafia. Les vicissitudes d'une aljama sicilienne nous ont permis de tracer un paragraphe inconnu et indispensable à expliquer l'axe central d'une histoire juive vers le début de l'ère moderne.

LA VERSIÔN HEBREA DE CALILA Y

DIMNA

DE Y A A Q O B BEN EL'AZAR ANGELES NAVARRO PEIRO Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain En el s. XIII se realizaron en Espafia dos versiones hebreas de la colecciôn de cuentos de origen oriental Calila y Dimna y asimismo la obra fue traducida al castellano. Actualmente los estudiosos del tema parecen estar de acuerdo en que la version eastellana del s. XIII procédé de un original árabe, al igual que ocurre con las dos versiones hebreas. Sin embargo, debido a la gran canddad de manuscritos árabes conservados que condenen notables variantes, se supone la existencia de disdntas versiones árabes de la obra difundidas por la Peninsula en el mencionado siglo XIII. Por lo tanto no podemos estar seguros de que los traductores medievales que nos ocupan tuvieran un mismo texto árabe delante. Lo mâs probable es que no. Lo que si parece cierto es que las très versiones de que tratamos, las dos hebreas y la eastellana alfonsi, remiten a una misma rama dentro de los manuscritos árabes, segûn la clasificaciôn que de éstos realizô Martin Sprengling en 1924, rama a la que designô con la letra E (cf. Cacho BlecuaLacarra 1985: 63). Las dos versiones hebreas fueron editadas por Joseph Derenbourg en Paris, en 1881, con el dtulo de Deux versions hébraïques du livre de Kalilâh et Dimnâh. La primera version hebrea es obra de R. Yoel, personaje del que nada sabemos. Se ha conservado en un solo ms. incompleto de la Biblioteca Nacional de Paris, el cual, segûn la descripciôn de su editor, Derenbourg, présenta un deplorable estado. Tiene abundantes lagunas y la ortografia es poco cuidada. Derenbourg suple las deficiencias mediante la traducciôn ladna que de esta version hebrea realizô Juan de Capua entre 1262 y 1278, version ladna de la que nacieron las traducciones a las diversas lenguas europeas. Por desgracia, la version hebrea de R. Yoel no se ha conservado compléta, pues el texto comienza al final del cap. Ill, que contiene el relato de los dos lobos cervales, Calila y Dimna, que dan atulo a la colecciôn. La otra version hebrea fue realizada por Ya'äqob ben El'azar de Toledo (finales s. XII y comienzos del XIII), el cual se disdnguiô como gramâtico, traductor y poeta. Fue editada asimismo por Derenbourg y el texto de la obra también se ha conservado incompleto. Las dos versiones hebreas presentan marcadas diferencias. Para Derenbourg fue suficiente la lectura de la lista de los capitulos conservados en cada una de ellas para deducir que se hicieron a partir de originales árabes diferentes. Sin descartar esta opinion, pienso que séria necesario un estudio mâs profundo para realizar con seguridad tal afirmaciôn. El tratamiento del texto es muy diferente en los dos traductores. El Calila de R. Yoel está redactado en prosa llana, lo cual

propicia una mayor fidelidad al texto árabe que tradujo. En R. Yoel encontramos, por asi deeirlo, una version simple, aun cuando se observen las adiciones, omisiones y modificaciones frecuentes en los traductores medievales. En cambio, Ya'äqob b. El'azar realiza una recreaciôn literaria del texto, que se manifiesta desde un principio por el esdlo elegido para su redacciôn: la prosa rimada, estilo de la narraciôn literaria hispanohebrea, y hace uso, segûn es propio de dicho estilo, de una lengua hebrea mâs biblica introduciendo abundantes alusiones y citas biblicas en la narraciôn. La version hebrea de R. Yoel aparece en la ediciôn de Derenbourg acompanada de una traducciôn francesa y, segûn mis nodeias, es la ûnica traducciôn compléta de la obra a lengua occidental. De la version de Ya'äqob ben El'azar no conozco ninguna traducciôn. Es posible que ello se deba a que la obra no ha suscitado el suficiente interés por parte de los traductores ο a la dificultad de la lengua utilizada por Ben El'azar, ya que lo mismo sucede con su obra narrariva original, el Sefer ha-méšalim (editado por Yonah David, 1992/93), de la que, hasta la fecha, tan solo se ha traducido algûn que otro fragmento. 1 La version castellana alfonsi del s. XIII se ha conservado en dos mss conocidos con las siglas A y B. Existen diversas opiniones acerca de la relaciôn existente entre ambos manuscritos. Parece que el ms. A représenta la version mâs anrigua, pero aûn quedan por resolver varias cuesdones reladvas a la dependencia del ms. B de la version reflejada en el ms. A. Sobre la discusiôn y problemàtica que encierran ambos manuscritos remito a la introducciôn de la que, segûn mis nodeias, es la ûltima ediciôn del texto castellano de Cailla e Dimna, basada en el ms. A, realizada por Cacho Blecua y Lacarra en 1985. Los mss. A y B fueron editados completos por J. E. Keller y R. W. Linker en 1967. En adelante cuando cite textos de la version castellana de la obra, serán tornados de la mencionada ediciôn de Cacho Blecua y Lacarra. Sin embargo, recordaré algunos datos que se refieren al llamado ms. P, la version castellana del Calila contenida en el manuscrito 1763 de la Biblioteca Universitaria de Salamanca, y que ha sido editada por Lacarra (1984) y Sola-Solé (1984). Acerca de los sucesivos pasos en el estudio de esta version remito a las dos mencionadas ediciones. Se trata de una version que difiere de la tradicionalmente conocida como version alfonsi (mss. A y B). Como expone Lacarra (1984: 681), las diferencias entre ambas versiones indican una fuente originaria disdnta. Los investigadores del tema coinciden, en mayor ο menor medida, en que la version del ms. Ρ procédé ο puede procéder de un original hebreo y, en concreto, de la version hebrea de Ya'äqob ben El'azar. Sola-Solé (1984: 103), rarificando a Galmés de Fuentes (1956: 21-61), afirma: "Que este texto del Calila procédé del hebreo no cabe la menor duda. Es algo que ya fue establecido por A. Galmés de Fuentes, quien, a base de una calicata de très pasajes, apuntô que se trataba de una version castellana del Calila hebreo del judio toledano del siglo XIII Jacob ben Elazar. De una comparaciôn mâs extensa y minuciosa se desprende que tal afirmaciôn es correcta." Lacarra (1984: 682-83) se muestra 1

Al castellano han sido verridos el cap. VI, por Diez Macho, A. 1952. La novelistica hebraica medieval. Barcelona, 39-45 y el capitulo VII por Navarro Peiro 1988: 209-228.

más cauta y después de senalar las afinidades entre ambas versiones y de marcar también las diferencias entre el ms. Ρ y el texto de Ben El'azar, concluye: "Todo ello induce a pensar que la version de Ben Eleazar es la mâs prôxima, al menos de las que conocemos, a P, pero no permite afirmar que estemos ante una traducciôn directa. Posiblemente hubo algun eslabôn intermedio o un cotejo simultâneo con algun otro manuscrito árabe, hipôtesis todas de dificil comprobaciôn." Ambos invesdgadores coinciden en la importancia del pàrrafo que aparece en el folio 143v del ms. Ρ donde se anuncia el ultimo capitulo de la obra: "El quinzeno capitulo es en dos maneras de aues que han nonbre en arauigo Haliun con la otra aue que ha nonbre en arauigo Marçan. E este capitulo non lo falle en ebiro." Efecdvamente tal capitulo no se encuentra anunciado en la version hebrea de Ben El'azar. Personalmente, tras un primer cotejo del texto del ms. Ρ con la version hebrea de Ben El'azar y con la salvedad de que posteriores reflexiones sobre el tema puedan variar mi opinion al respecto, creo que la version del ms. Ρ depende principalmente de la version hebrea de Ben El'azar, pero estoy complétamente de acuerdo en lo expresado por Lacarra en el sentido de que el traductor debiô contar con manuscritos de otras versiones, probablemente árabes, al realizar su propia version. Sobre esto volveré al tratar de la utilizaciôn de determinados términos hebreos por parte de Ya'àqob ben El'azar. La version eastellana del Calila del ms. Ρ nos ha llegado incompleta, tan solo se han conservado las très introducciones del libro: 1) Introducdon de Ibn alMuqaffa'; 2) la misiôn de Barzuyah (el Berzebuey de la version alfonsi), y 3) la autobiografia de Barzuyah. Incluye también el indice de todos los capitulos, gracias al cual, como indica Lacarra (1985: 60), se puede saber que se corresponde con el orden seguido por la version alfonsi (mss. A y B), las dos versiones hebreas y las ladnas de J. de Capua y de Biterris. Los fragmentos del Calila conservados en el ms. Ρ se encuentran también en lo que nos ha llegado de la version de Ben El'azar, debido a lo cual la comparaciôn entre ambos textos es posible. Un estudio compararivo completo de las versiones hebreas de Calilay Dimna con la eastellana del s. XIII y el texto árabe está aún por realizar. Tal comparaciôn requiere una labor de equipo, ya que séria conveniente considerar las opiniones de hispanistas, arabistas y hebraistas. En consonancia con ese posible y deseable proyeeto compararivo estoy realizando un estudio de las très introducciones del Calila de la version hebrea de Ben El'azar (taies introducciones no se han conservado en la version de R. Yoel) comparândolas con las de la version eastellana alfonsi y con las del llamado ms. P, version que ha sido considerada como traducciôn eastellana de la version hebrea de Ben El'azar. Lo que pretendo destacar ahora es—sobre la base de la mencionada comparaciôn—la judaizaciôn conceptual del texto por parte de Ben El'azar y la postura adoptada ante ello por el autor de la version reflejada en el ms. P. La version hebrea de Ben El'azar comienza con la dedicatoria de la obra a Benveniste bar Hiyya, médico, juez y poeta de Toledo, que viviô, al parecer, en

la segunda mitad del s. XII. 2 La dedieatoria empieza eon un poema en el que el autor juega con el nombre del personaje y el término hebreo tob, "bueno":

Como un profeta actuô el padre del principe Benveniste al llamarlo Benveniste, pues segûn sus obras asi es su nombre. El es bueno, portador de buena nueva, buenas son sus acciones, no hay bien que no realice Benveniste. Por eso es senor poderoso en su soberania y el Todopoderoso lo ha puesto por delante de todos los nobles y principes. (Derenbourg, 313) A condnuaciôn del poema sigue el texto con una alabanza del personaje en cuesdôn precedida de la formula introductoria dpica de la narraciôn literaria hispanohebrea: né'um Ya'äqob b. El'azar, "Relato de Ya'äqob b. El'azar." La alabanza de Benveniste va seguida de una alabanza a Dios. Todo esto, como es lôgico, no dene paralelo en la version castellana alfonsi y tampoco en la version conservada en el ms. P. A condnuaciôn, para cambiar de tema, el autor introduce de nuevo la formula nè'um Ya'äqob b. El'azar comenzando propiamente aqui la introducciôn de la obra, pero aûn sigue Ben El'azar exponiendo su pensamiento, en mi opinion no traduce todavia. Al igual que en las otras versiones sitûa el origen del Calila en derras de la India, pero la jusdficaciôn para la composiciôn de la obra es netamente judia, pues asi se expresa:

Cuando vieron los anûguos sabios de la India, los primeros inteligentes de las naciones, que caminaban a oscuras y en la tierra se habian perdido (cf. Ex 14,3), porque no tenian profetas para guiarlos, ni videntes y vaticinadores para instruirlos, porque no poseian una ley firme ni la vision profédca era frecuente (ISm 3,1), y como los corazones de los sabios de la India eran mâs agudos que la espada en todo dpo de sabiduria, se dijeron, afligidos, uno a otro: "Por qué vamos a quedarnos quietos? (2Re 7,3)." Hicieron correr a su corazôn por las plazas de la sabiduria y arrojaron sus pensamientos por las Calles de su inteligencia para encontrar luz para su dniebla, sendero recto para sus tortuosos caminos. Observaron el cielo y las nubes, el sol, la luna y las estrellas. Contemplaron la grandeza del orbe y sus maravillas, la tierra y todos sus retonos, pues a ninguno de los que habitan en ella le faltaba un companero. Se miraron asombrados unos a otros (Gn 43,33) y dijeron: "Quién creô todo esto y quién lo ha dispuesto, quién ha colocado a cada uno en su sido? Quién nos mostrarà al creador de los cielos, quién nos proporcionarà el conocimiento del que ha extendido la uerra sobre las aguas (Sal 136,6)? Ojalà viniera a nosotros uno de sus àngeles y nos ensefiara sus caminos (Miq 4,2)." Cuando vieron que se faugaban en vano por encontrar la puerta (cf. Gn 19,11), que estaban anhelantes, perplejos y casi completamente perdidos, se contristaron y se encolerizaron mucho (Gn 34,7). Dijeron: "Ea, hagâmonos un libro de cuentos escogidos, con toda clase de ensenanzas. Nos servira a nosotros y a toda la comunidad de ley y testimonio (Is 8,20)." E hicieron este libro que dichos hermosisimos profiere (Gn 49,21) y lo llamaron Calila y Dimna. Está compuesto con temas de instrucciôn (musai) y sabiduria (binab). (Derenbourg 313—314)

2

Véase por ej. Sâenz Badillos, A.-Targarona Borrâs, J. 1988. Diccionario de autores judios. Côrdoba: El Almendro, 37.

De nuevo aparece a continuation la formula introductoria [né'um Ya'aqob b. ΕΙ'α^αή y B. El'azar nos ofrece su teoria de la traducciôn: Traduje este libro de la lengua arabe y cambié algunas de sus palabras para que agradara, pues no es correcto ni apropiado traducir un libro de una lengua a otra letra por letra, pues la palabra se détériora cuando se saca de su lengua y disminuye su esplendor y su riqueza (Is 5,14). En algunos lugares abrevié las palabras y en otros las aumenté. Puse en todos sus temas una palabra dicha a su tiempo (Prov 25,11). Todo el que traduce un libro y no lo adorna al sacarlo de su lengua hace que mengüe su grandeza, se oscurezca su brillo, se seque su hontanar y se agote su manantial (Os 13,15). Por eso todo el que traduce un libro de una lengua a otra tiene que embellecerlo. Mantendrá asi su esplendor y no faltarâ a su palabra (Nm 30,3). (Derenbourg 214) A continuation es cuando, en mi opinion, comienza la traducciôn, muy adornada, por urilizar las palabras de Ben El'azar, pero aún asi se pueden establecer paralelos con la version alfonsi y percibir la judaizaciôn de la obra por parte de nuestro autor, como antes he indicado. A continuation senalaré algunos detalies—con el espacio del que dispongo no pueden ser muchos—que muestran esa judaizaciôn del texto. Además de la frecuente insertion de citas biblicas, la tendencia a la pureza del lenguaje biblico en la version del Calila de Ben El'azar se pone de manifiesto en muchas ocasiones en la election de los términos hebreos que utiliza. Por ejemplo, es curioso como évita Ben El'azar el uso del término " f i l ô s o f o f i l o s o f , ya incorporado al hebreo medieval, pero que no aparece en la Biblia hebrea. Todos los capitulos del Calila comienzan con un diâlogo entre el rey y su filôsofo. En el texto árabe de Ibn al-Muqaffa' el rey se dirige al "filôsofo Paydeba." En la antigua version eastellana el rey habia con "su filôsofo" o "el filôsofo." En la version hebrea de Rabbi Yoel el rey hace preguntas a "Sendebar el filôsofo," pero Ya'äqob ben El'azar hace su propia traducciôn biblica, poética y etimolôgica del término llamando al filôsofo (este filôsofo protagonista de los diâlogos que encabezan todos los capitulos del Calila) dod hofemot. Dod, segûn sus acepciones en hebreo biblico, puede significar "amor, amigo, amado o amante," pudiendo entenderse, por tanto, la expresiôn como "amor a la sabiduria," "amigo o amante de la sabiduria" o "amado por la sabiduria." Para el término "sabiduria" en esta expresiôn utiliza Ben El'azar la forma plural hokmot al estilo del libro biblico de Proverbios. 3 Aparte de esta traducciôn especifica del término dedicada a un filôsofo determinado, en el fragmento de la introduction donde se trata el viaje de Barzuyah a la India, al describir al personaje, se hace mention, tanto en el texto árabe de Ibn al-Muqaffa' como en la version eastellana alfonsi, a sus conocimientos de filosofia. Asi se expresa Ibn al-Muqaffa': "incansable en la busca del saber, en el estudio de libros de filosofia y en la práctica adecuada de sus conocimientos" (traduction de M. Villegas, 58); en la version alfonsi encontramos: "era fisico conosçido, era sabio et filôsofo" (99); pero en Ben El'azar: "A su conocimiento de la medicina se unian otros saberes secretos maravillosos (hokmot 'âherot ta 'à3

Asi aparece por ejemplo en Prov 1,20; 9,1; 24,7.

lumot nifla'ot)" (319), lo cual se encuentra reflejado también en el ms. P: "e con la sçiencia e la fisica que auié, auiesse otros muchos buenos saberes muy marauillosos" (Solà-Solé 117; Lacarra 692). En otros pasajes de ese mismo fragmento cuando en las otras versiones aparece el término "ftlôsofos" referido a los filôsofos de la India, en Ben El'azar encontramos, por ejemplo: "Se dirigiô a los sabios de India y a sus entendidos (wa-yelek 'elbafeme bodu wé-'elnëbonebem)" (319), y a condnuaciôn: "Lei los libros de vuestros sabios y los escritos de vuestros entendidos (kitbe nèbonehem)," frase que no dene parelelo en la version alfonsi, pero que el ms. P, presunto traductor de Ben El'azar, vierte: "Yo fallé scripto en los libros de vuestros sabios et en los scriptos de vuestros ftlôsofos" (Lacarra 693; Solà-Solé 118). Esto ocurre en mâs casos a lo largo de la introducdon del Calila, como, por ejemplo, cuando vuelve Barzuyah a Persia y se présenta ante el rey. En la version alfonsi se dice: "Et este rey era muy acuçioso en allegar el saber et en amar los filôsofos mâs que a otri" (101), Ben El'azar: "Desde aquel dia amô Anuxirwán a los sabios y honrô a los inteligentes (ha-nëbonim)" (320). Y el traductor del ms. P: "Et de aquel dia adelante amô Nosrroan a los sabios, et onrrô a los filôsofos" (Lacarra 694; Solà-Solé 119). Con lo cual se podria deducir que Ben El'azar utiliza el término nabon en lugar de filosof, filôsofo. Pero hay algo mâs, generalmente aparecen en la misma frase palabras relacionadas con bakam y nabon, y casualmente en la Biblia hebrea de las 21 veces que aparece nabon y formas derivadas, 18 lo hace junto a baj^am ο formas derivadas en claro paralelismo de significado (por ej. Gn 41,33,39, varios casos del libro de Proverbios, etc.). Ben El'azar, pues, en este caso utiliza expresiones puramente biblicas al usar el término hebreo nëbonim en lugar de "filôsofos" como sucede en las otras versiones. Sin embargo, el redactor del ms. P si emplea el término "filôsofos," lo cual hace pensar que además de su fuente principal, la version de Ben El'azar, contaba con otras, probablemente árabes, como antes indiqué. Otro pasaje indicadvo de la hebraizaciôn del texto por parte de Ben El'azar es, en mi opinion, el que reproduce la autobiografia de Barzuyah, historia que se refiere mâs a la búsqueda de la perfecciôn, de un ideal de vida, que a los acontecimientos y datos que conforman la existencia de un hombre. La primera etapa del desarrollo humano y espiritual de Barzuyah se concentra en el estudio de la medicina y en su prácdca con los enfermos. Barzuyah dene una larga condenda consigo mismo para no caer en la tentaciôn de ser como los médicos que curan por dinero y no se interesan realmente por los enfermos. Pero llegado, por asi decirlo, a la perfecciôn en la prácrica de la medicina, Barzuyah se plantea lo siguiente, cito el texto de Ibn al-Muqaffa', por ser el mâs breve, en esencia coinciden las versiones: "Enfonces contemplé qué es la medicina y comprendi que el médico no puede sanar definidvamente a ningûn enfermo con sus remedios. Y como no hallé modo de devolver la salud con certeza de no volver nunca mâs la enfermedad, decidi que el saber de la vida perdurable es el ùnico que salva de todos los danos, tuve en poco la medicina y deseé conocer la religion" (traducciôn de M. Villegas 71). La bûsqueda de la religion verdadera por parte de Barzuyah ocupa el siguiente fragmento y, sin encontrar ninguna que le satisfaga plenamente, decide finalmente seguir la religion de sus padres, aunque con la reserva de que podrian estar equivocados. Pero la bûsqueda de la perfecciôn

continua. El texto árabe de Ibn al-Muqaffa' llega a la conclusion de que el ideal está en el ascetismo: "Yo nunca mâs volvi a prestar atenciôn al mundo y sus placeres: renuncié a él, lo esquivé y decidí que la devotion prépara a la vida eterna, igual que el padre educa al hijo, porque hallé que es la puerta a la dicha perdurable" (Villegas 76). A continuation el texto árabe utiliza en diversas ocasiones la palabra %âhid para referirse al asceta y ^uhādat para el ascetismo. En la versiôn eastellana alfonsi encontramos lo siguiente: "Et quanto mâs pensé en las cosas deste mundo et en sus sabores, tanto mâs lo despreçié. Et tove por bien de me anparar con la religion et despreçiar este mundo." (113). Donde en árabe aparece, por ejemplo, "abrazar la ascesis." (Villegas 77) en castellano tenemos "tomar religion." (114), en árabe "me acomodé definitivamente al ascetismo" (Villegas 78), castellano: "et torné en mi escoger la religion" (115), etc. Ya'aqob ben El'azar elige para expresar ese ideal de vida un término netamente judio y del que es muy dificil proporcionar una traducciôn exacta, el término hasid. "Mi corazôn cerrô los ojos ante las preocupaciones terrenales (Jamal ba-'ares) y volviό hacia el desierto su rostro (Nm 24,1). Alli comprend! que la rectitud (sedeq) asegura el descanso para el mundo venidero y la piedad (hesed) deja alli en herencia el sosiego." (326). "Vi que sobre el piadoso (hasid) reposa la Se&nah y en su aima habita la serenidad y la gracia. Cuando se humilia, la Šékjnah lo ensalza. Cuando es parco en saciarse, el espiritu de la generosidad lo sostiene. Está contento con su parte y es rico (Aboi 4,1)." (326). El hasid en el tratado Abot de la Mišnah aparece como el opuesto al "malvado," raša' (p.e. Abot 5,10,11,13,14, etc.), es el hombre bueno, el virtuoso, pero no el "asceta." Veamos lo que hace el traductor del ms. P.: "Et desque conosçy que ésta es la mejor carrera, çerré los ojos de non querer de-los viçios deste siglo, et pues por que me fizjesse hermitano" (Lacarra 700; Solà-Solé 126). En otros lugares cuando en Ben El'azar aparece el término hasid, en el ms. P se encuentra a veces la expresiôn "omne bueno" como traducciôn de hasid, pero en otros casos encontramos lo siguiente: por ejemplo, cuando en el texto de Ben El'azar leemos: "Sin embargo, me di cuenta de que el camino del piadoso (hasid) es recto y vi que sus medios de vida son escasos. Come sin saciarse, bebe sin embriagarse." (326-27), en el ms. P encontramos: "Pero que conosçy que muy buena es esta carrera et muy derecha, vy otrosy que es su vida [del] hermjtano muy lazrada et con grand mengua de mal comer et de mal beuer..." (Lacarra 701; Solà-Solé 126). Y en otro lugar del texto de Ben El'azar se dice: "Y después de haber dicho: —Me apartaré del camino de los piadosos (hasidim), pues es angosto, dije: - " Q u é pequefia es esta angustia frente a mi salir al camino agradable, largo y bueno, hacia la tierra buena y ancha" (327). En el lugar paralelo del texto árabe aparece también el término "ascetismo," en el texto castellano alfonsi "religiôn" y en el ms. P.: "Et después que auié puesto en my voluntad por que me tolliesse de la carrera de los buenos hermitanos, porque era mucho angosta su vida, etc." (Lacarra 701; Solà-Solé 127). De nuevo el redactor del ms. P da muestras de utilizar otras fuentes, probablemente árabes, como ya indiqué, ya que nos habia del "hermitafio," término mucho más acorde con el ydhid, "asceta," árabe que con el hasid utilizado por Ben El'azar.

Quisiera ahora poner de relieve una vez más el importandsimo papel desempefiado por los judios en la transmisiôn del Calila a oeeidente. Es muy posible que los autores de las versiones de que tratamos, tanto de las hebreas como de las castellanas, fueran judios. En el caso de las versiones hebreas parece estar fuera de discusiôn que R. Yo'el y Ya'äqob ben El'azar eran judios. El conocimiento del hebreo por parte del autor de la version reflejada en el ms. P. hace suponer que también se trataba de un judio, un judio castellano como apunta Solà-Solé (106). Por otra parte, la version castellana alfonsi refleja ciertos hebraismos, como por ejemplo el uso frecuente de la expresiôn del Eclesiastés: "Dixe en mi coraçôn," lo que podria indicar un traductor judio, lo cual no séria nada extrano tratândose de un traductor alfonsi. El traductor al ladn del Calila, Juan de Capua, también era un judio converso. Sin embargo, aunque los traductores fueran judios, los lectores a los que estaban desdnadas las obras eran diversos, quizás se deban a ello los diferentes enfoques. Volviendo al ultimo ejemplo expuesto, podemos suponer que la version castellana alfonsi tenia como objedvo a lectores mayoritariamente crisdanos, de ahi que Barzuyah ensalce el hecho de "entrar en religion" ο hacerse monje, lo cual dene cierto paralelismo con el asceta árabe y el ermitafio del ms. P, pero Ben El'azar se dirige a la comunidad judia, por eso el hasid representa el ideal de perfecciôn.

Referencias Cacho Blecua, J. M. y Lacarra, M. J. eds. 1985. Calila e Dimna. Madrid: Castalia. Cheikho, L. La version arabe de Kaltlah et Dimnah. Amsterdam: Apa-Philo Press. David, Y. 1992—93. The love stories ofJacob ben Elea^ar (1170—1233?). Critical edition with introduction and commentary. Tel-Aviv: Tel-Aviv University. Derenbourg, J. ed. 1881. Deux versions hebràiques du livre de Kalilâh et Dimnâh. Paris: F.

Vieweg, Libraire-Éditeur. Galmés de Fuentes, A. 1955 ss. "Influencias sintácticas y estilisticas del árabe en la prosa medieval castellana." BRAE 35, 1955, 213-75; 415-451; 36, 1956, 65-131; 255-307. , 1956. Injluencias sintacticasy estilisticas de! arabe en la prosa medieval Madrid. Ibn al—Muqaffa'. 1991. Abdalä Benalmocaffa, Calila y Dimna. Introducdon, traducciôn y

notas de Marcelino Villegas. Madrid: Alianza Editorial. Keller, J. E. y Linker, R. W. 1967. El libro de Calila e Digna. Madrid: CSIC, Clàsicos Hispânicos. Lacarra, Maria J. 1984. "Un fragmento inédito del Calila e Dimna (Ms. P)." El Crotalôn: Anuario de Filologia Espaiiola I, 679—706. Navarro Peiro, A. 1988. Narrativa bispanobebrea (siglos XII—XV).

Introduction y selection de

relatosy cuentos. Côrdoba: El Almendro. Solà-Solé, Josep M. 1984. "El Calila e Digna castellano traducido del hebreo." En Hispania Judaica. Ill: Language. Ed. J. M. Solà-Solé, S. G. Armistcad, H. Silverman. Barcelona: Puvill Libros S. Α., 103-131. Sprengling, M. 1924. "Kalila Studies." I. The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Lite-

ratures 40, 2, 81-97.

T H E SEFER HAHAYYIM

IN ITS

LATIN-CHRISTIAN ENVIRONMENT GEROLD NECKER Freie Universität Berlin, G e r m a n y

Sefer haHayyim, The Book of Life, is a well-known book title in the Jewish tradition. Usually it refers to the ritual handbook of burial ceremonies. But, of course, there are some "Books of Life" composed by individuals, like the Sefer haHayyim of Hayyim ben Bezalel, the brother of the Maharal, who wrote his ethical classic in Worms, one of the centers in which Hasidut Ashkena£ had flourished more than three centuries earlier. However, Gershom Scholem had neither of these two books in mind when, in 1925, he wrote his famous letter to Hayyim (Nahman) Bialik.1 Anticipating his forthcoming appointment to the chair of Kabbala at the newly established Hebrew University, Scholem tried to outline in a programmatic manner his personal project to evaluate the most intrinsic elements of Jewish Mysticism. Interestingly enough, it is not the Book Bahir that Scholem put at the top of his list of important kabbalistic works needing a critical edition, but the Sefer haHayyim. In spite of the importance that Scholem claimed for the Sefer haHayyim in his kabbalistic top ten, most of the research on it since then, however, was not done by Scholem himself but by Josef Dan. The latter analyzed the Book of Life in the framework of his important book The Esoteric Theology of Ashkenazi Hasidism (Jerusalem 1968) and described it as an encyclopedic and systematic work of ethic-mystical content, created by an independent circle within the Ashkenazi culture at the turn of the 13th century. Dan argued that already the literary character and the special affinity of the Book of Life to the teachings of Abraham ibn Ezra clearly set it apart from the esoteric theology of the school founded by Yehuda heHasid and continued by his disciple Elazar of Worms. However, analyzing the relationship between The Book ofLife and other works of the Haside Ashkenaζ doesn't help that much to identify the historical and local setting of the Book of Life, not to speak of the author of this anonymous work. The only point of reference Josef Dan could rely on was the polemical treatise Kiav Tamim by Moshe ben Hisdai Taku, who criticized Abraham ibn Ezra precisely because he considered him to be the author of the Book of Life. The quotations in the Klav Tamim, which was written, as Josef Dan showed, in the early twenties of the 13th century, thus fix the terminus ante quem about fifty years earlier than the oldest known manuscript of the Book of Life. It was Moritz Steinschneider who listed in his description of this Munich manuscript (cod. heb. 207) some of the French le'aym (like animal) found in the

1

Shapiro, A. ed. 1975. Oevarim be-Go. Vol. 1, Tel Aviv, 59-63.

Book of Ufe and hence suggested, that it originated in France.2 Moritz Güdemann, however, maintained that one of these le'a^m is of German origin: in the Book of Life it says that "the rising wetness of the soil is called ηώία ( 3 ".(‫ ניבלה‬Of course there is an affinity to the Old German "nebul" or the Middle High German "nebel." 4 But one should consider that up to the 13th century, when the French word "brouillard" become generally accepted for the meaning "moisture," the Ladn "nebula" had been used in the whole Gallic-Romanic area in a variety of spelling, like "nevla," "nivle" or "nebla" which seems to better fit the vocalized foreign word in the Book of Life.5 Regarding the le'asgm, there is an addirional hint of the Book of Life's French origin. In a still unconsidered part of some manuscripts of the Book of Life, namely in the context of an explanation of the holy names of God one reads the statement that even in the idiom (‫)מבטא‬ of the gentiles the name of God has the same gematria: ‫אהיה‬, God's name according to Exodus 3,14, is equivalent to the numerical value of the Hebrew characters for the French name of God, "Dieu" (‫—)דיאי‬that means that the sum of ‫ אהיה‬and "Dieu" is equally 21.6 Now, it would be very surprising to find a proof of this kind within the literature of the Haside Ashkenaz, who belonged to the school of Yehuda heHasid. On the other hand, there is evidence that for the French Jews it was not unusual to swear in the French name for God, and that Rabbi Isaac ben Abraham of Sens (‫ )הריצב״א‬permitted this habit by regarding "Dieu" as a foreign but fitting expression for the name of God. 7 To sum up the introductory questions: the Book of Ufe was certainly written only after the lifetime of Abraham ibn Ezra, but the latter's works put such a stamp on it that the first author who quoted the Book of Life in the first third of the 13th century ascribed it to Abraham ibn Ezra; the still unknown author of the Book of Life was a contemporary of Yehuda heHasid, but seems to have had no contact to the Bet Midrash of Worms; and the language of the Book of Ufe

2

‫נ‬

4 5

6

Steinschneider, M. 1895. Die hebraeischen Handschriften der k. Hof-und Staatsbibliothek in Muenchen. 2nd ed. München, 88 (No. 2 0 7 ) : . ‫ל‬ ‫מ‬ ‫י‬ ‫נ‬ ‫א‬ ‫וקיטור הוא ה ל ח ו ת שעולה מן הארץ שקורץ ניבלה‬, Ms. Munich 207, [11] 12b, c (in the Munich Ms. there are two folio pages counted as number 9; from page 9 onwards the numbers in brackets refer to this wrong paginadon of the MS). Cf. Kluge, F. 1989. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Berlin. Cf. Wartburg, W. v. 1955 Französisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch. Vol. 7, Basel, 69-72. In Northern Italy, where the Munich manuscript was written in 1268, the word "nebla" was used as late as the 13th century. Ms. Budapest 271, 363:‫ ;ואפי׳ ב מ ב ט א עולם אהיה דיאו והוא לשון יווני‬Ms. Oxford 1569: ‫ עולה‬instead of ‫ ;עולם‬note that the book of Life does not emphasize the Latin "deus", but the Greek

θεός! 7

Cf. Shlomo ben Adret, Responsa, vol. 1, Jerusalem 1958, 288 (paragraph 854): ‫ומעשה היה בא בימי‬ ‫ר״י בר׳ אברהם ]באחר[ שנשבע בשם דיא״ו והתיר‬. Cf. also the following example: ‫מעשה באדם א ח ד‬ ‫שהתנה עם חבירו תנאים הרבה לעשות כך וכך ו פ ת ח ו לפניו ח מ ש ה חומשי תורה ונשבע ואמר כך יעזור לי‬ ...‫ והשיב כך נראה בעיני‬.‫ ושאלו לרבנו יצחק בר׳ אברהם ז״ל‬.‫ והתורה הזאת שאקיים אלו התנאים‬.‫דיאון‬ ‫ מ כ ל מקום מ ה שהוסיף אחר כך והתורה‬,‫ כך יעזור לי דיאון השם‬,‫פי ש ב ת ח ל ת דבריו אמר אדם זה‬-‫אף־על‬ .‫ אבל שבועה בספר תורה אין כאן‬,‫הזאת לאו אאזכרות דידה משתבע אלא אגוילי ושבועה בשם יש כאן‬ ‫פי שלא הזכיר א ת השם אלא בכינוי ולא בלשון הקודש שבועה בכל לשון שבועה היא‬-‫על‬-‫אפ‬..., quoted from Urbach, Ε. Ε. 1955. The Tosaphists: Their Histoiy, Writings and Methods. (Hebr.) Jerusalem, 224.

indicates that it stemmed from one of the Ashkenazi communities of Northern France. In the following discussion I would like to point out some short, enigmatic statements in the Book of Life that could shed light on the mystery of the date and circumstances of the Book of Life's actual composition. These statements can be better understood when they are seen in the context of the Latin-Christian environment in which the Book of Life originated. A first historical allusion to the historical setting of the Book of Life may be found in the following parable: "A parable of truth (‫)משל אמת‬. A king has no right to expel a house-owner out of the very house he (once) gave him, unless (the house-owner) consents. Neither is it right to bring passers-by in this house, unless (the house-owner) gives his consent. The enlightened will understand." 8 This parable about the king and the house-owner differs in a striking manner from other parables found in the Book of Life. Although it is introduced and concluded with the same words that frame most of the book's other parables, especially those which hint at "secrets" not fully explained by the author, the parable of the king and the house-owner doesn't seem to be a mashal at all. It lacks the constituents of a mashal·. a story—whether with a concluding lesson as in rabbinical parables or without one, as in mystic parables, which assume that those who are enlightened already know the hidden meaning. It would not have been too difficult for the author of our parable to tell it as a real mashal. One can easily imagine a story about a king and a house-owner concluding with: "a king has no right to throw a house-owner out of the very house he once gave him." This so-called "parable of truth" 9 however, doesn't even read like the concluding sentences of a mashal. The twice formulated restriction, "unless he gives his consent," reminds one rather of legal requirements. But why and for what purpose should the author make such statements as if they were a ‫ ?משל אמת‬There is some evidence to suggest that the missing story in this parable is not fiction at all but a historical event, and that the author wanted at least to mention the facts of expulsion and confiscated property, but covered them up just out of fear. The first and only medieval king up to the end of the 12,h century who expelled the Jews from his royal domain was Philip II Augustus of France. Moreover, the years of his reign from 1180 to 1223 mark exacdy the timespan, in which the Book of Life was probably written. Immediately after Philip II came to power, he arrested the Jews living in the Ile de France in order to extort money from them. After his edict of annulment of all debits to the Jews by 8

9

‫מ ש ל א מ ת כי אין נכון ל מ ל ך להוציא בעל הבית מביתו שנתן לו כי אם ברשותו וגם אין נכון לשום עליו‬ ‫עוברים ושבים כי אם ברשותו והמשכיל יבין‬. MS Munich 207 fol. [16] 17a. The only other occurrence of the expression ‫ מ ש ל א מ ת‬in the Book of Life shows that its author used it as a synonym for ‫ סוד נכבד ומשל אמת( סוד נכבד‬MS Munich 207, fol. 4b); the expression (like the concluding ‫ )והמשכיל יבין‬is evidendy inspired by the ‫ סודות‬and ‫ חידות‬of Abraham ibn Ezra's allegorical quest for philosophical truth. But in this case, as 1 will try to show, the author of the Book of Life does not want to give a mysdcal or philosophical hint, but a historical one. Moreover, the "king" represents here obviously not—as usual in parables—"the Holy One, blessed be he".

payment of one fifth to the royal crown, the expulsion was Philip's final attempt to confiscate Jewish property. He expelled the Jews who lived in the still very small royal domain as early as 1182 and confiscated their houses. However, in 1198 he allowed the Jews to return, obviously because he wanted to condnue his predatory policy. If the historical context of the expulsion is reflected in the parable of the king and the house-owner, one has to ask, what is meant by the restriction "unless the house-owner gives his consent." Legally it seems to imply, that a house-owner, who is living in a house which belongs to the royal domain—that is to say he received permission from the king to live in it—could not be forced out of his right of residence. According to the parable, the same applies to the accommodation of strangers. Only if the house-owner agrees to let somebody stay in his house, can his place of residence be shared by or leased to others. Thus the message of the parable could imply, that the expulsion of the Jews was unlawful, because they were not given the opportunity to consent to leave their houses. The problem with this legal interpretation in the context of our historical perspective is the halachic prohibition for Jews against letting non-Jews use their property. This could be permitted only if idol worship was excluded.10 But the case of renting a house to non-Jews clearly opens the door to the danger of idolatry. However, we can cite a tosafistic decision, which allows us to assume that the Jews in Paris around 1200 might indeed have rented their houses to non-Jews. The Tosafist who permitted his fellow Jews to let non-Jews live in their houses is Hayyim ben Hananel haKohen. He stated that the term "your house" found in Deuteronomy 7,26 can only be applied in its full meaning to the Land of Israel; therefore he permitted anyone who setded outside of the Land of Israel, which he regarded as a ‫"( ישיבה ארעית בלבד‬only a temporary setdement"), to rent his house even to idol worshippers.11 Since 1171 R. Hayyim belonged to the community of Paris and experienced the expulsion of 1182. Perhaps one could even consider whether R. Hayyim himself might not have written the Sefer baHajyimi In any case, the origin of the Book of Life within the royal domain under the reign of Philip II Augustus is not without any plausibility. In the last part of this lecture I would like to discuss a remarkable polemic found in the Book of Life. The parable of the king and the house-owner, as I have tried to show, hints not at a mystical or philosophical, but a historical truth, and has no connection to its context in the Book of Life whatsoever. The polemic statements, however, are well situated in the theological context of the Book of Life, because they all belong to the major theme that concerned the author of this treatise: the teaching of the divine glory (‫)תורת הכבוד‬. The Book of Life states, that the divine glory is the will of God, the divine principle of immanence in the whole universe, the source of wisdom and the goal of the human soul. For the

10

11

See Herzog, I. 1965. The Main Institutions of ]ewisb Law. Vol. 1: The Law of Property, Lond o n / N e w York, 333 ff. Cf. Urbach, Ε. Ε. 1955. The Tosaphists: Their History, Writings and Methods. (Hebr.) Jerusalem, 108 f.

soul it is possible to ascend by way of acdvating his intellectual faculty, presupposing or implying the right ethical behavior. As Joseph Dan already pointed out, this seems to be a very philosophical perspective. 12 The author of the Book of Life had not intended to uncover the sources of this rational attitude towards the divine glory. But he explicidy tried to prevent misunderstandings of his attitude: Those, who turn themselves into a divinity, err thinking that the glory of God rests upon them and that they are associated with God. The wicked said (Jes 14,14): "I will be equal to the Most High," and the Pharaoh said (Ex 5,2): "who is God?" ... (and they believe that...) they are associated with Him and have the permission to act as they wish on earth, as it is written in the book.13 The text provokes two questions: where do these men belong who are in such a bad state of hubris and what exacdy is their theological claim? Of course, the scriptural references to Pharaoh (who said: "who is God?") and the Babylonian king (who said: "I will be equal to the Most High") do not imply that the author of the Book of Life restricted "wickedness" to men of power. He accuses them, firsdy, of claiming to be in possession of God's glory and, secondly, of alleging the impossibility of their doing wrong. This sounds like a heresy with certain libertine tendencies, or at least the possibility of libertinism. Such a heresy was not unknown in Northern France at the end of the 12th century. The leading adherents of this sect were all pupils of Amalrikus of Bene, who, in Paris, taught certain extreme pantheistic ideas, based on the still popular work De Divisionae Naturae by Johannes Scotus Eriugena. Some time before Amalrikus died in 1206, he had been forced to withdraw certain statements. 14 But the followers of Amalrikus went a step further: they combined the pantheistic worldview with the eschatological teaching of Joachim of Fiore, and proclaimed the beginning of the third and last era in history, the "Age of the Holy Spirit." They regarded themselves as protagonists of their own missionary message: everybody who had the insight, wisdom and knowledge of the sect entered the state of the Holy Spirit. The starring point of the "New Age" was in Paris at the beginning of the 13th century. But the authorities and church officials took ruthless action against this spiritual movement. After 1210 all adherents of the new religion were killed or arrested and their teachings condemned. In the polemical treatise Contra Amaurianos by Garnerius of Rochefort, dating from around 1210, the teachings of the sect are described as follows: Another heresy of theirs is their reference to apostolic authority, saying 'God operates everything in everybody' (IKor 12,6), to which they add: consequendy good as well as evil. Therefore, somebody who recognizes that God is 12 Cf. Dan.J. The Esoteric Theology of Ashkenasj Hasidism. (Hebr.), 156. 13 ‫ ופרעה א מ ׳ מ י יי ) כ י‬.‫ ואמי הרשע ארמי לעליון‬.‫כי סבורים שבכבוד השם חונה עליהם ויהיו שותפים לשם‬ ‫ ( הם שותפים אליו והרשות בידם לעשות בארץ כ ל מה שהם רוצים כאשר כתוב בספר‬. . . ‫( סבורים כ י‬Ms. Munich 207, fol. [13] 14b). 14

E.g. "Membra sumus corporis Christi", but Grundmann, H. 1977. Religiöse Bewegungen im Mittelal1er. Darmstadt, 360 ff., notes that this is nothing but Pauline theology (Ephes 5,30); thus one has to assume a special meaning of these words of Amalrikus and obviously other heretical dicta by him, which have unfortunately not been transmitted by chroniclers (like Guilelmus Brito).

operating everything through him cannot sin. Not to him but to God does the sinning have to be ascribed; thus they draw the wrong conclusion, that nobody is in need of penitence.15 In a more moralistic way Caesarius of Heisterbach summarizes the "blasphemy" of the Amalrikans: If somebody is (in the state) of the Spirit, they say, and commits acts of fornicadon or pollutes himself with another depravity, this is not a sin, because this spirit, who is God, is totally separated from the flesh (and) cannot sin, and man (alike), who is nothing, cannot sin, as long as this spirit, who is God, is in him.16 The Christian polemic stresses quite the same crucial claims that are attacked in the Book of Life: human agency is divine agency and sins are justified. Undoubtedly the author of the Book of Life lived in a specific historical context that forced him to take a stand on the theological challenges of his time. He writes: If a man, be it a heretic (‫ )מין‬or a non-Jew (‫)גוי‬, who denies (the existence of) God, argues: Can anything on earth be done without the wül of God? You should answer him: Of course, several crueldes, robberies and adulteries; several sinners are born on earth, who provoke his honorable Name, blessed be he.17 Unlike his Christian contemporaries, the author of the Book of Life is not so much concerned with the libertine implications of the heretics. While the Christian polemicists concentrate on their refutation of any "apologetics of sin," the Book of Life attacks rigorous determinism which undermines freedom of choice. Every human deed on earth, be it good or bad, has been written before the creation in the heavenly Book of Life. But as soon as man is performing those deeds, he bears the full responsibility for his agency alone. Even if doomed to live under bad circumstances, he could have prevented bad deeds, because theoretically at least man has the freedom of choice. It is not too far fetched that an author with such a realistic but not very optimistic worldview should try to refute both, the purely astrological fatalism which turns man into a will-less robot, as well as the euphoric fatalism spread by believers in the "New Age," who turned the teaching of divine immanence into the divination of "trash." I am well aware of the methodological problem inherent in this preliminary comparison of theological polemics in the Book of Life with a contemporary

15

"Secundam eorum heresim sumunt ex auctoritate apostoli dicenus: Deus operatur omnia in omnibus; unde inferunt: ergo tarn bona quam mala. Ergo qui cognoscit deum in se omnia operari, peccare non potest. Et sic deo, et non sibi, attribuunt, quod peccant; et sic neminem penitenda indigere menduntur." (Baeumker, C. 1926. ed. Tractatus contra Amaurianos. Muenster, 9). 16 "Si aliquis in spiritu est, aiebant, et faciat fornicadonem, vel aliqua alia polludone polluatur, non est ei peccatum, quia ille spiritus, qui est deus, omnino separatus in carne non est potest peccare, et homo, qui nihil est, non potest peccare, quamdiu ille spiritus, qui est deus, est in eo." (Strange, J. ed. 1851. OialogusMiraculorum, Koeln-Bonn-Bruessel, 304 f.). 17 ‫אם ישיב אדם מין או גוי שאין מאמין על עיקר וכי יש דבר בעשות בעול׳ שאין חפץ השם תשיב ל ו ודאי י ש‬ ‫ויש כ מ ה חמסים ו כ מ ה גזילות ו כ מ ה ניאופים כ מ ה רשעים באין לעולם שמכעיסין את שמו הנכבד שיתברך‬ (MS Munich 207, fol. 6b).

Christian heretical movement. 1 ‫ ״‬Why and for what purpose would the author of the Book of Ufe attack religious attitudes that have obviously nothing to do with the serious difficulties which the Jewish communities had to face during the period of a Crusader-society humiliated by Saladin's capture of Jerusalem in 1187? In other words: why would a Jewish author ponder theological peculiarities of his Latin-Christian environment? There are very few known examples of Jewish intellectuals concerning themselves at all with Christian heresies in the Middle Ages.19 Perhaps Garnerius of Rochefort, the author of Contra AmauHanos, offers a clue to the possible motive of the Jewish polemics in the Book of Life. He quotes the Amalrikans as saying: "When the Jews have the true insight that we have, there is no need to baptize them." 20 In this way any Jew with a vaguely sensed messianic yearning but no inclination to apostasy could have joined the apocalyptic party of the "New Age." This kind of danger lurking in the Latin-Christian environment makes Jewish polemics against a Christian heresy at least understandable. But the truth is that the author of the Book of Ufe tells us nothing about any Jewish circles or individuals who were in contact with or offered sympathy to such groups. No Christian heresy is named in the Book of Ufe. To sum up the questions I raised and the answers I tried to give: It seems that one can be sure only about what has been said in the first part, that the Book of Ufe was written in Northern France. But with regard to the historical setting there is no proof whatsoever. The quotations cited from the Book of Ufe cannot be treated with virtual certainty as parallels to contemporary thinking or contemporary events. What I have tried to show is, that some short, enigmatic statements in the Book of Ufe can consistendy be connected with the history of the outgoing 12th century. In view of the seventy years of research that have passed since Gershom Scholem wrote his letter to Hayyim Nahman Bialik, this conclusion is nothing more than a starting point. But I hope that future research will be able to bring further evidence, that the author of the Book of Ufe lived in Paris and wrote his ethical and somewhat philosophical treatise after the expulsion in 1182.

18 19

20

I am grateful to Prof. Josef Dan for drawing my attention to this point. An interesting example is a Hebrew polemical treatise, composed at the earliest in the late 12th century, edited by Talmage, F. 1967. "An Hebrew Polemical Treatise." HThR 60, 323-348, which argues against both, Catharism as well as Christianity. "Si iudeus habet cognitionem ueritatis, quam habemus, non oportet ut baptizetur." Contra Amaurianos, 17.

L A OBRA RESPUESTAS A LOS

IMPOSTORES,

ATRIBUIDA A PROFIAT D u R A N JOSÉ-VICENTE NICLÔS Spain

Introducdon La obra Teshubot be-Anshe 'Aven ("Respuestas a los impostores") se le atribuye a Profiat Durán. En los manuscritos en que se conserva, aparece como un apéndice de la obra Kelimmat ha-Goyyim del mismo autor. 1 La atribuciôn al docto judio hispano del s. XV parece posible, aunque no segura. Un modvo de duda podria ser la cita en tercera persona, en el interior de la obra, de Efodi (Profiat Durán) que podria interpretarse como una mcnciôn de un autor diferente: Pero todos estos nombres fueron pronunciados sobre Ezequias, de acuerdo con Profiat Durán (Efodi) en uno de los capitulos, que compuso para poner al descubierto su vergüenza y la vergüenza de su religion: "Después de nosotros vendrá un pueblo" (3* Respuesta). La dataciôn de la obra Kelimmat ha-Goyyim es discudda por los especialistas. La fecha mâs corriente la situa hacia el 1397. R. W. Emery ofrece una nueva dataciôn de las dos principales obras polémicas de Durán: Al tehi keAboteka y Kelimmat ha-Goyyim2 A partir de documentos en referencia a Profiat, hallados en Perpignan, y la menor repercusiôn en esta ciudad de los acontecimientos del 1391, concluye que la primera de estas obras séria escrita antes de su baudsmo forzado, que data hacia mayo de 1392. La segunda, el Kelimmat, séria escrita en una fecha posterior, tal vez en torno al 1397, pero figuraria escrita antes de su baudsmo para evitar los riesgos de la Inquisiciôn.' El periodo producdvo de Profiat se considéra comprendido en una docena de anos (1391-1403) por lo que las Teshubot be-Anshe Aven debieron escribirse, entre 1397 y 1403, como concreciôn práctica de algunos aspectos del Kelimmat ha-Goyyim para uso de algunas aljamas del reino de Aragon, que pedirian orientaciôn sobre el tema. La ultima fecha, 1403, es la que se atribuye a su obra gramatical Ma'aseh Έ/od de problemárica totalmente diferente. Segûn R. W. Emery, el autor naciô en torno a 1340-1345 por lo que escribe estas obras en una edad madura. 4

1

2 3

4

Obra editada por Posnasky, S. 1913. "Kelimmat ha-Goyyim." Ha-Tso/e le-Hokmat Yisra'el, 100180; 1914, 35-132. Reediciôn: Jerusalén 1972,1, 99-113; 142-180; II, 35-48; 81-96. Y por Talmage F. 1981. The Polemical writings ofProphiat Duran (Hebr.). Jerusalén. De la primera existe una ediciôn alemana: Sei nicht wie deine Vaeter. Ed. B. B. Strauss. Berlin 1920. Emery, R. W. "The Efodi." 334-335. Sobre la formaciôn cienafica, fllosôfica y religiosa que recibian los judios en el sur de Francia, véase Twersky, I. 1968. "Aspects of the Social and Cultural History of the Provençal Jewry." CHM XI, 185-297. Emery, R. W. "The Efodi." 331. '

El tema de sus obras de polémica anteriores nos puede ayudar a situar el contexto de estas Teshubot u "objeciones" a los impostores ο falsarios. En Al-tehi keAvoteba ("No seas como ms padres") Profiat se dirige a un converso y le reprocha irônicamente haber abandonado los principios de una religion racional: No seas como tus padres, que fueron obligados por los fundamentos del intelecto a aceptar los principios especulativos de las matemáticas, laßsicaj la metafisica. En la segunda obra, Keltmmat ha-Gojyim, tal como senala F. Talmage, se propone emplear el método historicista para argumentar que el crisdanismo es producto de un desarrollo histôrico que comienza con Pablo, dene su culmen en los edictos de los Emperadores, como Constandno, y continua con los eclesiâsticos y teôlogos actuales. Tal como lo expresa F. Talmage: El método historicista de Duran, que es la piedra angular de su ataque contra el crisdanismo en el Kelimmat ha-Goyyim, ha de verse desde este contexto. Duran intenta demostrar que el crisdanismo contemporâneo es el producto de un largo desarrollo. Y, a lo largo del dempo, los principes de la Iglesia (desde sus palabras: los "teôlogos," los "inteligentes," los impostores") elaboraron, confundieron y falsificaron las intenciones de los fundadores, Jesus y sus discipulos, a los que se refiere como "aquellos que yerran."5 Los "impostores" son también llamados, al inicio de la obra, "el pueblo que camina en tinieblas" (R.l) (Is 9,1), frente a Israel que camina a la luz de la ley mosaica. En la segunda objeciôn, dirigida a "los quejerran con 'mentiray violencia' (Os 12,2) (R2), alude a otro de los temas del Kelimmat ba-Gojyim, el de que los cristianos han falsificado citas de la Biblia judia o deformado su significado en sus comentarios. Los cinco Teshubot u "objeciones" que contiene la obra nos pueden ayudar a recrear la temática y el ambiente de las famosas disputas medievales. En la Edad Media tuvieron lugar algunas disputas solemnes ante personajes relevantes de la realeza y principes de la Iglesia, como la disputa de Barcelona de 1263; además tenían lugar otras disputas, de carácter ordinario, en las que tomaban parte los predicadores con autorizaciôn de los reyes; y, finalmente, podian, bajo determinadas circunstancias, obligar a los judios a asisdr a sus predicaciones. 6 El primer tipo de disputa, solemne o culta, tenia el Talmud como telôn de fondo de la

5

Véase Talmage, F. 1981. "The Polemical Writings of Profiat Duran." Immanuel 13, 78: "Duran's historicist method, which is the cornestone of his attack against Christianity in 'Kelimat haGoyyim,' ought to be seen within this context. Duran attemps to demonstrate that contemporary Christianity is the outcome of a long development and that, over the course of time, the heads of the Church (in his words 'the theologians,' 'the clever ones,' 'the deceivers') elaborated, confused and falsified the intentions of the founders, Jesus and his disciples, to whom he refers as 'those who err'." Véase: Kelimmat ha-Goyyim, cap. 4. El método historicista lo tomaria de Levi ben Abraham ben Hayyim en su obra "Liviat Hen." Yeshurun (Kobak) 8, 1872, 1-12.

6

Véase Coll, J. M. 1946. "Escuelas de lenguas orientales en los siglos XIII y XIV." Analecta Sacra Tarraconense 19, 217 ss. Sobre algunas disputas solemnes: Maccoby, H. 1993.Judaism on Trial. London. Disputa de Barcelona de 1263 entre Mestre Mossé de Girona i Trau Pau Christià. Ed. E. Feliu. Barcelona 1985. Sobre las misiones de los predicadores, especialmente Vicente Ferrer Baer, Y. 1981. Historia de los judios en la Espana cristiana. Madrid, 2, 443 ss., 483-485. Robles, A. 1996. "San Vicente Ferrer en el contexto del diâlogo: las minorias religiosas." Escritos de! Vedat 26,141-175.

discusiôn acerca del Mesias.7 De las disputas del segundo y tercer dpo, tal vez, podemos encontrar un eco en la obrita de Profiat Durán, que condene cinco Respuestas a temas de la predicaciôn ο evangelizaciôn crisdana, basada en temas biblicos. A los supuestos "impostores" se les présenta cinco objeciones: 1) La Torah présenta promesas espirituales, no solo carnales, en relaciôn a las contenidas en el Evangelio. 2) La cita "su nombre será por siempre, ante el sol" 8 (Sal 72,17) se refiere a la fama guerrera de David, y no a otro Mesias. 3) El anuncio del Emmanuel, con los signos que le acompanan (Is 7,15) y los dtulos que le son impuestos (Is 9,5) obdenen un cumplimiento en la figura del rey Ezequias. 4) El salmo 110,1.4, con los temas de la entronizaciôn del Mesias y la ofrenda sacerdotal, se refieren a los consejos del rey David a su hijo Salomon. 5) Los milagros mencionados en la Biblia judia y crisdana, tema de mucha fuerza la en devociôn popular medieval, se deciden con un balance favorable a los realizados por los profetas Elias y Eliseo. El género literario responde al de las disputas medievales dialogadas. En el caso présente no se ofrece la argumentaciôn del crisdano, sino la objeciôn ο respuesta de su interlocutor judio. El final de varias de ellas ofrece, como colofôn, este ambiente dialécrico de disputa: "En toda ocasiôn en que se mencione (la cita, el ritulo mesiânico), su respuesta es rápida" (R. 3/4/5). N o se trata, pues, de "Respuestas" rabinicas ('Teshubot) a problemas planteados en el interior de la aljama ο comunidad. 9 La "primera objeciôn" es la mâs extensa. Frente a quien argumenta el carácter espiritual de las promesas del pacto crisdano, la respuesta muestra que la ley mosaica cumple los requisitos de una ley espiritual, dirigida a un pueblo pardcularmente querido por Dios, rey del universo: "Y seréis para mi un pueblo de reyes y una naciôn santa" (Ex 19,6) . Y es algo conocido claramente que los reyes no acumularon otro tesoro que el de perlas preciosas, en que se hallase bienes magnificos y perdurables para siempre. Esta sanddad y esta elecciôn se refieren en concreto al aima, que procédé de Dios y es como una "1ámpara de la divinidad" en la que Dios insufla su espiritu para hacerla inmortal, desde la creaciôn del Génesis. Como consecuencia de su amor este aima recibe, además, la felicidad eterna, que no es algo natural sino de carácter milagroso, mientras las aimas injustas son arrancadas de la vida por su culpa (Lv 22,9). En efecto, mientras la permanencia del alma es algo natural desde el punto de vista de la metafisica griega, al no ser una realidad compuesta, la plenitud de la felicidad, por el cumplimiento de los preceptos, es algo milagroso: Igual que el padre no transmite a su hijo, amado y querido a si, mâs que las cosas ocultas en su tesoro, del mismo modo El comunica su amor con el objeto mâs precioso entre sus tesoros, que es la pervivencia del alma, la cual consiste 7

8

9

Véase Jerônimo de Santa Fe. El tratado "De Iudaids erroribus ex Talmut. " Ed. M. Or fall. Madrid, 1987. Pacios, A. 1957. La disputa de Tortosa. Madrid, 58-77. Para la traducciôn de estos versiculos hemos consultado, aparte de la Vulgata (Vg): La Bible. Trad. A. Chouraqui. Brepols 1989; S agrada Biblia, version critica sobre los textos hebreo, arameo y griego. Trad. F. Cantera-M. Iglesias, Madrid 1979. Véase "Responsa." Encyclopedia Judaica. Jerusalem, 14, 1971, 83-90.

en un deleite maravilloso y eterno, que ni puede ser imaginado ni sopesado por el intelecto humano. Como dijo el profeta: "jamás (...) ojo ha visto, 'Elohim, fuera de Ti, que obre con quien en El confia" (Is 64,3). Y el alma es arrancada de la vida feliz a causa de sus pecados. Las ceremonias de que habia la Ley de expiaciôn por los pecados que efectuaba el Sacerdote y el ayuno que se realizaba el dia de la Expiaciôn ο Yom Kippur (Lv 4,26.35; Lv 16,30), son una prueba, en la Ley, de estas promesas y amenazas espirituales. La respuesta sobre la Ley termina con una cita no literal de Maimônides, Perek He/ek 10 que abunda sobre lo mismo, la gracia de Dios como ayuda para el cumplimiento de los preceptos: Maimônides escribiô en Pereq He/ek: "la recompensa de felicidad y el castigo que se menciona en la Ley , tal como se expresa, tiene este sentido: si guardas mis mandamientos, te ayudaré a cumplirlos y te alejaré todas las cosas que te impidan guardarlos. Ya que el hombre no puede dar culto al Creador si está enfermo, con hambre o sed. Por eso Dios les promete que apartará de ellos toda estrechez, se volverân sanos y vivirân en paz tranquila, para que cumplan y den culto a Dios (bendito sea) y consigan la vida eterna, que es el mundo futuro. Por tanto, la intenciôn de cumplir los preceptos no es que se multipliquen las cosechas, se prolonguen los anos del hombre y la salud de sus euerpos, sino que se les ayudará desde el Cielo, por su cumplimiento, con todas estas cosas. Las "objeciones" 2 - 4 condenen el anâlisis de versiculos biblicos segûn un método histôrico-literal de exégesis, para contradecir la aplicaciôn de la teologia cristiana a Jesûs de Nazaret. Son versos citados en los escritos cristianos del Nuevo Testamento, por lo que su uso en la polémica podia ser frecuente. En concreto, la "segunda objeciôn o respuesta" analiza el salmo 72, en torno al pasaje: "sea su nombre por siempre, ante el sol" (v.17)," desde un punto de vista filolôgico. Lifne ha-shemesh, viene a decir Durán, significa "en presencia," es decir, todo el tiempo que dure el sol, y no "antes o mâs allà que el sol." El anâlisis de la palabrayitton, para que muchas traducciones dan, como conjetura "permanecerá," se hace desde las palabras "progenie y prole" (Is 14,22) (nin u-neked). Se argumenta que el nombre del personaje al que se refiere el salmo es como la progenie, el hijo o el nieto, que perdura a través de las generaciones. Jacob ben Re'uben (Lib. III) habia ya presentado la exégesis que ofrece aqui Profiat, aplicando el verso a Salomon, ante quien vienen todas las naciones, y hasta la reina de Saba, en busca de su sabiduria. Dice ben Re'uben: Todo esto le sucediô a Salomon, pues si se dijera de él (Jesus), jcômo se aplicaria a él la Escritura: "Que se postren ante él todos los reyes, que le sirvan todas las naciones; que traiga la bendiciôn a las naciones y lo proclamen dicho-

10

11

Introducciôn al tratado Sanhédrin en su "Comentario a la Mishna." Véase el texto árabe original y la traducciôn hebrea en: Mose Maimûni's Einleitung Chelek. Ed. J. Hölzer. Berlin, 1901, 15. A.Chouraqui: "Son nom est pérennité, face au soleil lnôn est son nom." Cantera-Iglesias: "Sea su nombre por siempre, cual el sol perdure su nombre;" Vg: "erit nomen eius in aeternum ultra solem perseverahit nomen eius."

so"? Ello sucediô cuando fue ungido Salomon como rey bajo David, su padre (cf. 2Cr11).' 2 La misma exégesis la hallamos en el comentario a los salmos del polemista, contemporâneo de Durán, Shem Tob ben Shaprut (Lib. VIII cap.5). La "tercera objeciôn" versa sobre el orâculo de Is 7 y los epitetos de Is 9,5. El autor, al analizar Is 7, "le pondrà por nombre Emmanuel," lo descompone en dos partes: el orâculo de la doncella encinta que da a luz un hijo, llamado Emmanuel (7,14) y la nociôn de signo (Is 7,11) como término filosôficoteolôgico.13 Este texto es una cita favorita de la discusiôn medieval judeocrisdana. La exégesis de Profiat, a través de citas sobre la dedicaciôn de altares en Israel, y de textos mesiânicos, muestra que el nombre Dios-con-Nosotros (Emmanuel) debe ir ligado a la historia de Israel como pueblo escogido. Y anade que, el Mesias, cuando venga, traerá la paz sobre Israel: Lo contradictorio de sus palabras se muestra de forma evidente a parur de Abrahán, pues cuando el àngel le advirdô que no sacrificase a su hijo, Abrahán llamô a aquel lugar "Dios ve" (Gn 22,24). Lo mismo Moisés, cuando se confirmô su victoria frente a 'Amalec y su pueblo, construyô un altar y lo llamô "Dios es mi bandera" (Ex 17,15). De igual forma cuando Jacob se libro de las intrigas de Labán: "Fue Jacob a Salem y construyô un altar, y le llamô: el Senor Dios de Israel" (Gn 33,20). Cuando se le apareciô el àngel a Gedeôn, temiô morir, por haberlo contemplado, pero éste (bendito sea) le dijo: "No temas, no morirâs." Y construyô un altar al que llamô: Dios de la pa£ Sobre nuestro Mesias dice Jeremias: "En sus dias se salvarà Judá e Israel vivirá en paz. Y le liamarán asi: 'El Senor es nuestra salvaciôn"' (Jr 23,6). El anâlisis del término "senal" ο "signo" se realiza desde la vision historicista de este autor, donde el signo ha de aludir a un significado histôrico concreto posterior. Ello se contrapone a la nociôn tipolôgico-escatolôgica que usa la exégesis crisdana, para la cual el significado es asimismo algo perteneciente al àmbito de lo metafôrico, moral ο espiritual: En cuanto a los signos que solicitaron los profetas, todos ellos son anteriores al hecho; pero este signo sucediô quinientos anos antes del nacimiento de Jesus: cuando Moisés fue enviado a Israel, en Egipto, tenia dudas sobre si le creerian. De manera que Dios se le apareciô (bendito sea) y le dio très signos para que se los mostrase: el bastôn, la lepra y el agua que se volviô sangre (Ex 4.7). Lo mismo cuando se apareciô el ângel a Gedeôn. Este anâlisis se inicia en el libro Sefer ha-Berìt,U escrito en el sur de Francia dos siglos antes, hacia finales del XII, por Josef Qimhi. En el diâlogo que compone la 12 13

14

Lib. III, ed.Rosenthal, 74 (traducimos del hebreo). Sobre la profecia biblica y el senddo del signo en la exégesis actual, véase Erhard, Β. "The Immanuel Prophecy of Isaiah 7:10-17 and its Messianic Interpretation." En Die Hebräische Bibel und ihre zweifache Nachgeschichte. Ed. B. Erhard. Neukirchen-Vluin 1990, 225-240. Irsigler, H. 1985. "Zeichen und Bezeichnetes injes. 7,1-17: Nouzien zum Immanueltext." Biblische Notizen 29, 75114. Loza, J. 1991. "El mcsianismo del orâculo del Emmanuel en su conjunto (Is 7: 1-17)." Anamnesis 1, 41-66 . Niclôs, J. V. 1995. Hispania Sacra 47, 249-298. La primera ediciôn hebrea la realizô Talmage, F. 1974. Sefer ha-Berit (The Book of the Covenant and other writings). Jerusalén: Bialik Institute. El propio

obra de Qimhi, el maestro judio está de acuerdo con los cristianos en que la palabra signo désigna algo portentoso e inimitable, milagroso en suma y que refuerza la confianza, pero es una nota necesaria de su definition el que "haya de presentarse antes del hecho" al que apunta. 15 Por eso no admite que el nacimiento de Jesus, siete siglos posterior a estos hechos, pueda ser un signo de la desapariciôn de los enemigos que ponen sido a Jerusalén. Un anâlisis semejante es el que sigue Durán. A continuation se analizan los epitetos de Is 9,5, que Durán divide en dos partes: los que designan atributos excelentes pertenecen a Dios: Es posible explicarlo como que Dios (Bendito sea) que es maravilloso consejero y Dios poderoso, Padre eterno, llame al joven Principe de la paz y lo que le dice a continuaciôn. "He puesto sobre su hombro el principado," pues poseerá la plenitud del principado y el mando, para gobernar sobre sus enemigos, como dice después, ("afianzará) el trono y el reino de David" (Ibid. 6). Esta exégesis o comentario procédé de Rashi y tiene por objeto argumentar que el profeta Isaias tan solo aplica al futuro Mesîas un titulo que no pueda crear ningûn tipo de confusion acerca de que se träte de un ser divino y no un simple hombre. 16 Profiat insiste en que ni Jesus ni sus discipulos subieron a trono aiguno, ni siquiera disfrutaron de paz en ningûn momento de su vida, sino que murieron de forma ignominiosa. Para ello aduce el testimonio de la misma literatura cristiana:17 Y sus discipulos mâs grandes murieron y no con una muerte corriente. Pues en el ano segundo del reinado del Cesar Nerôn se presentaron Pedro y Pablo en Roma y fueron sentenciados, por propagar la religion de Jesus. En su literatura esta escrito que Pablo, en el momento final, volviô su faz hacia el altar y rezô en la lengua sagrada. De igual forma fue lapidado Esteban, y la mayoria, casi todos, recibieron crueles sentencias. La literatura apôcrifa cristiana relata, en las "Actas de Pedro y Pablo," como éste ûltimo Apôstol fue decapitado en la via Ostiense de Roma, al ser ciudadano del Imperio, y de su cuello saliô leche, alusiôn a la sabiduria de su doctrina. En la "Pasiôn del Apôstol Pablo" se nos dice que, en el momento de separarse su cabeza del cuerpo, "resonô claramente en hebreo el nombre del Senor Jesucristo:"

15 16 17

Talmage realizô la version inglesa, eon introducciôn y notas, Book of the Covenant. Toronto: Pontifical Institute for Mediaeval Studies. 1972; ofrece dos extractos de la obra en: Disputation and Dialogue: Reading in the Judeo-Christian Encounter. New York 1975. Ed. Niclôs, J.V. lin. 809. 826-831. Segûn la exegesis de Rashi. Véase Miqra'ot Gedolot. Jerusalem 1974, IV, a.l. Otros exégetas judios medievales argumentan desde el segundo término: "Principe de la paz." y senalan que la paz mesiánica se halla ausente en los dias de Jesús, de la primera Iglesia, y, mâs aún, en los tiempos medievales, con la rivalidad entre el islam y el cristianismo. Véase Ibn Shaprut, Ehen Bohan, (Libro sobre Isaias, III) cp. 3: "No me argumentes con que se le Uama "Senor de la Paz," pues asi se llamaba Absalôn, que fue alguien belicoso, sin que persiguiera la paz o tuviera paz (...) En los dias de Jesus comenzô el destierro, contrario a la salud."

El verdugo, tras alzar su brazo en alto, golpeô con Ímpetu y seccionô su cabeza. En el momento en que la cabeza se separô del cuerpo, resonô claramente en lengua hebrea el nombre de Nuestro Senor Jesucristo.18 La "cuarta objeciôn" hace referenda a una cita del Sal 110,1 que es el texto de la Biblia Hebrea mâs citado en el Nuevo Testamento, bien sea en una perspecdva escatolôgica, para entender la condiciôn de Jesus, el Cristo resucitado, 19 ο el juicio ante las autoridades civiles ο religiosas que le conduciria a la muerte. 20 En el evangelio de Mateo el mismo Jesus parece aplicarse indirectamente este versiculo (Mt 22,42^14). De entre estas citas, interesa a la polémica, sobre todo, la de la Epistola a los Hebreos, debido a que es el texto que présenta la conexiôn mâs clara con Gn 14,18-20 y ofrece la aplicaciôn de este texto a la Eucarisda y al culto celeste crisdano. En Hb 1,5-14, exordio de la Carta a los Hebreos, el nombre de Hijo de Dios se le da a Jesus como a un ser superior a los àngeles; más adelante, Hb 7, aparece la tradiciôn que vincula la figura de Melquisedec con Abrahán y el Sumo Sacerdocio, desde la ciudad de Salem. Con ello, el autor de la epistola ha realizado la conexiôn entre el culto crisdano terreno ("pan y vino") y el culto celeste, superior al de los àngeles. Profiat rechaza estas conexiones desde su vision historicista: en el Salmo 110, objeta, no es David quien habla a un Mesias superior a los àngeles (como en Hb 1,5-14); es Dios quien habla a David y le promete la victoria en sus batalias pasadas. Y, además, el culto que realiza el pueblo de Israel, pueblo escogido, hace descender la providencia divina desde la Jerusalén celeste sobre la Jerusalén de aqui abajo, con lo que se garandza su carácter espiritual:

18

19

20

Segûn relatan las "Actas de Pedro y Pablo." Pablo, como ciudadano romano, fue decapitado en la via Osriense, y de su cuello saliô leche, mientras que a Pedro se le apareciô Jesus y le dijo: "A donde vas" {Quo vadis) y volviô a Roma para ser crucificado boca a bajo. Véase el texto griego y ladno en: Passio Sanctorum Apostolotum Petri et Pauli. Ed. R. A. Lipsius. Lipsiae, 1891, I, 169-179; Pass. Apost. Petri et Pauli; Ibid.. 230-234. Posiblemente Profiat se refiere al altar de Jerusalén cuando habla de Pablo. En la "Pasiôn del Apôstol Pablo" se nos dice que en el momento de separarse su cabeza del cuerpo "resonô claramente en hebreo el nombre del Senor Jesucristo": spiculato uero bracchium in altum eleuans cum uirtute percussit et caput eius abscidit, quod postquam a corpore praecisum fuit, nomen domini Iesu Christi hebraice dara uoce personuit ( Passio Sant. Paul. Apost., 40; véase también: 169-179; 230-234). Aparece 19 veces citado en el Nuevo Testamento. Véase, del Agua, A. 1984. "Derâs cdstolôgico del Salmo 110 en el Nuevo Testamento." Simposio biblico Espanol (Salamanca 1982). Ed. N. Fernández Marcos. Madrid, 637-662. Gourgues, M. 1975. " 'Le Seigneur dit a Mon Seigneur'. L'applicarion christologique du Psaume 110: 1 dans le Nouveau Testament," Paris. Hengel, M. 1995. '"Sit at m Right Hand'. The Enthronement of Christ at the Right Hand of God and Psalm 110: 1." En Studies in Early Christology. Edinburgh, 19-225 . Dupont, J. "Assis à la droite de Dieu." L'interprétation du Ps 110,1 dans le Nouveau Testament." En Nouvelles études sur les Actes des Apôtres. Paris, 210-295. Maier, F.W. 1932. "Ps 110,1 (LXX 109,1) im Zusammenhang von 1 Kor 15,24-26." Biblische Zeitschrift 20, 139-156. Galitis, G. A. 1980. "The Christological Hymn of the Philippians and the Psalm 109." Bulletin of Biblical Studies 2, 86-98 . De Kruif), Th. C. 1993. "The Priest-King Melchizedec: The Recepdon of Gen 14,18-20 in the Episde to the Hebrews mediated by Psalm 110." Bijdragen 54, 393-406. Linton, O. 1960/61. "The Trial of Jesus and the Interpretation of Psalm CX." New Testament Studies 7, 258-262.

De igual forma: "Dios habita en Siôn, pues Dios la ha escogido" (Sal 132,13). El modvo son las ofrendas, las oraciones, y el culto tributado en el Templo de Jerusalén de abajo, que esta fundada frente a la Jerusalén de arriba. Desde alli ascienden como algo grato a su presencia (bendita sea), y se difunde la providencia (bendita sea) sobre nuestra comunidad, perfeccionada por sus acciones. Por eso, a continuaciôn, en la interpretation del versiculo 4, Profiat idendfica a David con el "rey justo" y victorioso en sus batallas terrestres a quien el sacerdote ofrece simbôlicamente présentes: El salmo ensefia que fue compuesto con modvo de David y sus guerras, en especial la gran guerra que libro con el rey de Aram, y los reyes que le acompafiaban, cuando matô a setecientos Caballeros y cuarenta mil caballos (cf. 2Sam 8,4). El realismo en la description de las batallas de David invalidaria la aplicaciôn de las ofrendas al culto ceremonial o eucaristico cristiano, con indicaciones que dan a conocer que el autor conocia algo de la teologia sobre este sacramento en el crisdanismo: Argumenten que se trata del pan y el vino: que se pronuncia el misterio sobre ellos por el sacerdote, y deja el vino de ser vino aunque no desaparece; "ni se apaga ni débilita su vigor" (Dt 33,7), ni cambia su sabor; recibe la forma de la divinidad, y eso mismo es el cuerpo de su Dios para ellos. Presentan como prueba lo que está escrito en la Ley: "Y Melquisedec, rey de Salem, presentô pan y vino" (Gn 14,18), etc. Y quieren decir que David aludia a ello cuando dijo: "Tu eres sacerdote eterno segûn el rito de Melquisedec," acerca del pan y el vino. Para Profiat, "tu eres sacerdote eterno" significa la realeza que se mantuvo a través de Salomon, "segûn la verdad." La "quinta objeciôn," finalmente, trata un tema muy usual en la predication y evangelization crisdana medievales, sobre todo en los ambientes de culto po21

pular, como es el de los milagros, a veces con un uso pastoral excesivo. La argumentation de Durán consiste en intentar probar que, si Jesus es Dios porque realizô milagros, lo mismo realizaron los profetas, sobre todo Elias y Eliseo, sin que por ello sean tenidos por dioses. Es mâs, el criterio de Dt 13 pone en guardia frente a quien realiza signos o milagros y predica una religion diferente: Si surge en medio de d un profeta o un intérprete de suenos que te propone una serial o un prodigio, una vez cumplida la senal o prodigio, te propone. 'Vayamos tras otros dioses, que tu no conoces, para darles culto'; no escuches las palabras de tal profeta no los suenos de tal intérprete. Es que el Senor vuestro Dios quiere probaros (v. 2—4).

21

Véase Boesch, S. 1992. "Uso e abuso del miracolo nella cultura altomedievale." En Les fonctions des saints dans le monde occidental. Ed. J. I. Tiliette. Rome, 109-122.

Segûn este criterio de autendficaciôn de la profecia, que sigue Durán, 22 la veracidad de un profeta viene confirmada por los milagros que realiza. Pero tal verificaciôn puede aplicarse ûnicamente para confirmar que su mensaje está de acuerdo con la razôn. Profiat aduce la cita de Dt 13,2 y la conformidad con la naturaleza del milagro como signo de autendcidad del signo milagroso: (‫׳‬Acaso no nos es permiddo agarrarnos a la pericopa Re'e? ,;Qué hay que hacer "con el profeta o vidente que suena" (Dt 13,2), incluso que realice un signo o prodigio extrano, fuera de la naturaleza, en el cielo o en la uerra. Incluso si se cumple el signo o el prodigio, sin embargo muéstrame, jcômo se le juzga? (jCômo se le tratarâ? Si dices: 1Por qué? Dios (bendito sea) no tiene poder para cambiar la naturaleza? jNo se encontrarâ rápida respuesta: "Es que el Senor, vuestro Dios, quiere probaros, para saber si realmente amáis al Senor, con todo vuestro corazôn y con todo vuestro ser" (Dt 13,4). La alusiôn, en la polémica, al tema de los milagros de Jesûs ya aparece en el "Libro de Néstor el Sacerdote" (Sefer Nestor ha-Komer). La lista de milagros de Elias y de Eliseo, que cierra las "Respuestas" (seis milagros de Elias y doce de Eliseo) insiste en el carácter portentoso de los milagros del Antiguo Testamento: Si pasamos a examinar los prodigios que hicieron los profetas entre nosotros: mira lo que hizo Elias con la viuda, cuando ordenô Dios prepararle algo de comer, y no tenia a mano mâs que un poco de harina y de aceite en la artesa. Dijo la viuda que si le preparaba una torta con la harina y el aceite, moririan de hambre ella y su hijo (IRe 17,12). Y (Elias) le respondiô: "Asi dice el Senor (Dios de Israel): No faltarà harina en la dnaja ni aceite (en la orza)" (v.14). Y asi fue. De igual forma resucitô al hijo de esta mujer con su oraciôn, como está escrito alli mismo (IRe 17,17-24). De la misma manera hizo bajar fuego del cielo sobre el altar que habia construido, para destruir los profetas de Baal (IRe 18,20-40). Del mismo modo hizo descender la lluvia con su oraciôn, después de una sequía de muchos anos (Ibid. 41—46). De igual forma, cuando huia de Jezabel cayô dormido. Y, entonces, el ângel del Senor se le acercô: "Comiô, bebiô y anduvo con las fuerzas de aquel alimento" (IRe 19,5—8). También consumiô por el fuego, por dos veces, a los mensajeros de Ocozias (2Re 1,10—12). Además se dividieron las aguas del Jordân, para él y Eliseo, cuando Elias golpeô el agua con el manto que se habia quitado, al ascender en medio del torbellino hasta el cielo (2Re 2,8.11.14). Estas listas de milagros de la Biblia judia aparecen en autores contemporâneos, lo cual parece indicar que existian colecciones de ellos con finalidad apologética. Ibn Shaprut, en su glosa al evangelio de Mateo (9,32-38) escribe: Aunque admitamos que Jesus hizo todos estos milagros, cosa que no es admidda por nosotros, la comunidad judia, con todo no existe por esto superioridad para Jesus, hasta el punto de que admitamos su divinidad. Pues los profetas hicieron muchas cosas mâs: Moisés en Egipto y en el mar y el desierto. Josué que hizo detenerse el disco solar y lunar (Jos 10,12). Isaias que hizo volverse hacia atrás el sol en su carrera (Is 38,8). Eliseo que euro la lepra de Nehe22

Berger, D. 1979. The ]emsh Christian Debate in the Middle Ages. A Critical Edition of the Nisgachon Vetus with an Introduction, Translation and Commentary. Philadelphia. En Josef Qimhi, tin. 324-326, 331-335, 1181-1190 (ed.J. V. Niclôs).

mán, con sola su palabra; y resucitô muertos, incluso tras su muerte. Y cuantos otros milagros, cuéntelos cada cual.23

Conclusion Como comentamos al principio, los Teshubot be-Anshe Aven suelen ir como apéndice de la obra Kelimmat ha-Goyyim. Como tal, se encuentra en una docena de manuscritos, de los s. X V I - X V I I , en las Bibliotecas de Parma, Budapest (Biblioteca Kaufmann), Moscû (colecciôn Ginzburg) y del Jewish Theological Seminary de Nueva York. Damos a condnuaciôn la localizaciôn del manuscrito y la sigla con que lo identificamos: 1 Bl Budapest A 18/3, fol. 144-152 2 B2 Budapest A 299/4, fol.74-87 3 Ml Moscû 162/7, fol. 170-171 4 M2 Moscû 314,9, fol.239-243 5 M3 Moscû 363,3, fol.33a-38a 6 NI N.Y. Mic 2282/2, fol.34-38 7 N2 N.Y. Mic 2423/2, fol.37-42 8 N3 N.Y. Mic 2224/2, fol.35b-41a 9 PI Parma 124,3, fol.27-30 10 P2 Parma 120,2, (2564)fol.66-73 11 P4 Parma 122,2, fol.155-160 12 P5 Parma 1269/2, fol. 19-22 Tras esta presentaciôn de la obra atribuida a Profiat Durán, Teshubot be-Anshe Aven podemos resumir asi su interés para el investigador en temas de polémica judeo-cristiana del siglo XIV. En primer lugar, continua el método historicista que ya habia utilizado Profiat en otras obras, como el Kelimmat ha-Goyyim ("La destxucciôn de los gentiles"). En segundo lugar, utiliza con soltura buen nûmero de fuentes anteriores, como son Maimônides, Josef Qimhi, Rashi, Jacob ben Re'uben y pertenece al circulo de pensamiento de Shem Tob ibn Shaprut de Tudela, contemporâneo suyo. Por ûltimo, por tratarse de una obra de breves dimensiones, podemos percibir, a lo largo de su estructura, cuâles son las lineas de fuerza en la polémica. Son las que hemos tratado de poner de relieve durante la presentaciôn de esta obra.

23

Traducimos del manuscrito de la Biblioteca Neofiti, de Roma, 11,17, fol. 229b.

N U E V O S DATOS SOBRE LAS SINAGOGAS DE LA COMUNIDAD JUDIA DE G1RONA SÎLVIA PLANAS I MARCÉ Institut d'Estudis Nahmànides, Girona, Spain

Introducdon Lo primero que cabe preguntarse ante esta comunicaciôn realizada por el Instituto de Esmdios Nahmànides, del Patronato Municipal Call de Girona, es el porqué de un nuevo trabajo sobre el tema de las sinagogas de Girona. Con las invesdgaciones de la doctora Angels Masiá y de la doctora Carme Badle, (1953-1959), y la invesugaciôn del profesor José Luis Lacave (1992), ademàs de todos los trabajos de los historiadores locales como J. Marqués, J. Calzada y E. Mirambell, parecia ya cerrado el problema de las sinagogas de la comunidad judia de Girona, y todos los posteriores invesdgadores y estudiosos del tema han dado por sentado que la base aportada por los citados invesdgadores es la correcta, y que no hay dudas sobre la ubicaciôn de las sinagogas gerundenses. Sin embargo, a la luz de recientes descubrimientos documentales y de nuevas interpretaciones de los datos disponibles sobre los judios de los siglos XIV y XV, aparece la duda: jrealmente la comunidad judia gerundense nunca dispuso de mâs de una sinagoga en funcionamiento para realizar sus ritos y esmdios? Debemos aclarar, de entrada, que no contamos con ningún dpo de aportaciôn arqueolôgica material y directa, es decir, el barrio judio no ha sido excavado ni ha sido objeto de un estudio arqueolôgico detallado, no se ha hallado ningún resto ni estructura que pudiera indicar que aquello era ο habia sido sinagoga. Si existe, sin embargo, un trabajo excelente y documentado con gran detalle, sobre la arqueologia general del barrio judio de la ciudad. Es el estudio realizado por la Associaciô Arqueolôgica de Girona, Elsjueus i la dutat de Girona, que basàndose en documentos inéditos y esmdios ya publicados, llega a delimitar con espléndida precision la estructura urbana del Call entre los siglos XII y XV. Pero para este trabajo de invesugaciôn, los autores se basaron también en los datos, anâlisis y teorias asentadas por los anteriores invesdgadores. Es decir, que hasta la fecha, la teoria aceptada y no cuesdonada es la existencia de très sinagogas, nunca coexistentes, nunca coetâneas, sino sucesivas en el dempo, en très espacios disuntos de lo que fuera el barrio judio de la Girona medieval. Sin embargo, la comunidad gerundense fue importante. Durante el siglo XIII llegô a contar con casi mil aimas, que constituian el 10% de la poblaciôn de la ciudad. En el barrio judio prosperaba la acdvidad mcrcantil, el trabajo artesano, crecia un incipiente sistema de banca, y, lo que es mâs destacable, florecia con luz propia una escuela de pensamiento misrico que dio gran fama a la Girona

judia. La llamada Escuela de Cába1a de Girona fue sin lugar a dudas un elemento clave en el desarrollo del pensamiento judio medieval, y las obras y esmdios de los cabalistas gerundenses tuvieron difusiôn universal. Por todo ello, nos parece licito afirmar que debiô de existir mâs de una sinagoga a la vez, para el servicio de la comunidad, una comunidad grande, importante, rica, activa intelectual y culturalmente, y con una escuela de mistica importantisima, a la que résulta por lo menos extrano imaginar en una única y pequena sinagoga, utilizada por todos los miembros y para todos los esmdios, rituales y discusiones... Este trabajo se propone aportar datos que pueden confirmar la existencia de más de una sinagoga simultânea en uso, para la comunidad judia gerundense. Al menos, dos sinagogas, segûn se desprende de los documentos analizados, estuvieron activas al mismo tiempo. La de Girona era una comunidad de hombres ricos, de familias que jugaron un papel decisivo en la misma historia de la ciudad, y que tenian constantes relaciones con la Corte, como los Ravaya, una comunidad de nûcleos de poder institutional como el de los Saltell o el de los Sabarra y los Caravita; una comunidad de judios piadosos y enriquecidos culturalmente, con bibliotecas extensas e importantes, como Mossé Falcô, o Astruc Aninai, o Mair Bellshom, o Nassim Ferrer; una comunidad que dio figuras deslumbrantes para el judaismo, como Ezra ben Menahem, Azriel Gerondi o el propio Mossé ben Nahman. Una comunidad, en fin, que es lôgico suponer necesitaba de algûn espacio mayor, o de mâs de un espacio destinado al estudio, a la purification, a la oraciôn y a la liturgia.

Las très sinagogas sucesivas de Girona Estado de la eues t ion Hasta el présente, la teoria y la documentation corroboran la idea de la existencia de très sinagogas o escuelas judaicas en la Girona medieval, que hubieran sido sucesivas en el tiempo y se hubieran ubicado en très espacios distintos, perfectamente establecidos y delimitados por los esmdios y los documentos de referencia. Asi, una PRIMERA SINAGOGA se habria abierto en los tiempos initiales de la comunidad judia gerundense; cuando las supuestas (y decimos supuestas porque el documento que detalla este hecho es una copia del siglo XVIII conservada en el Archivo Capitular, y no un documento original del siglo IX,1) veinticinco familias judias se establecieron en la ciudad de Girona, a finales del siglo IX, debieron de destinar un espacio—edificio entero o habitaciôn—a su culto y rimai; por ello, erigieron una sinagoga, ο quizá reutilizaron un edificio que ya exisda, como sinagoga. Una primera sinagoga, pues, que se erigiria muy cerca de

Copia del juieio efeetuado por el eonde-obispo Mirô de Besalu en 982, en el que se establece por sentencia que el predio de Juigües (cercano a Figueres, Alt Empordà), pertenece al abad de Ripoll, y antes habia pertenecido a los judios que lo permutaron con el conde Delà, a cambio de casas sitas en la ciudad de Girona.

la catedral, y de la cual sabemos, por referenda documental, 2 que lindaba a poniente con una casa ο palacio del conde Borrell, que éste vendiô en el mes de agosto del ano 988 al obispo de la ciudad, Gotmar III. Al norte se levantaba el edificio de la catedral de Girona. Por lo tanto, la existencia de una primera sinagoga, la mâs andgua y la inicial de la comunidad judia gerundense, pone de manifiesto que dicha comunidad debia estar ya bien organizada en época tan temprana como el siglo X, y que contaba con los espacios necesarios para poder llevar a cabo la vida comunitaria y religiosa prescrita por su Ley. Será al cabo de algunos anos, unos cincuenta, quizá, cuando los judios de Girona empezarán a ocupar zonas mâs bajas de la ciudad medieval, algo alejadas ya del recinto de la catedral. Los vemos teniendo casas y bienes en la zona de las murallas méridionales, cerca del rio Onyar, en los anos 1036 y 1040.‫ י‬Viven ya, entremezclados con los crisdanos, en lo que muy pronto se convertira en su barrio propio, el Call. La primera menciôn documental del barrio de los judios en Girona, el "callo judaico," es del ano 1160, y relata que Bernât, sacristán de la catedral de Girona, concede a un judio llamado Mordechai y a su hijo Mossé Batlle las casas situadas en el "callo judaico." Asi, se desprende que las primeras ocupaciones judias en este espacio entre la calle actual de la Força y la Catedral datan de, como minimo, inicios del siglo XII. 4 El ano 1160 marca el inicio de la urbanizaciôn de la zona del rio Onyar, al sur de la ciudad. Desde este momento, y durante los siglos XII y XIII hubo una gran aedvidad constructora, que supuso el engrandecimiento de la zona urbana de la ciudad, y con ello, la ampliaciôn del espacio ocupado por los judios. El Call se estaba configurando ya como un espacio judio. La comunidad judia, en este dempo, está ya plenamente estructurada; dispone, al menos desde 1207,5 de un terreno propio donde enterrar a sus muertos (Montjuic), y dene un papel ya importante dentro de la economia y la sociedad gerundenses.6 Porque es ciertamente en este dempo, a mediados del siglo XIII, cuando la comunidad de Girona conoce su momento de màximo esplendor: la aedvidad econômica y financiera de los judios gerundenses está en su momento àlgido, actúan como comisarios polidcos del monarca, son amigos personales de las clases diligentes y de la Corte, crecen demogrâficamente, desarrollan una importante aedvidad cultural, ciendfica, intelectual, y crean la escuela de câbala de Girona. Entre los judios médiévales, Girona es conocida con el nombre de "Ciudad Madré de Israel..." En este dempo, los judios viven ya en su espacio propio, en su recinto urbano que aún no es un recinto de réclusion y de casdgo, pero que si es ya un espacio de y para la comunidad, un lugar donde llevar a término una vida correcta dentro de las pautas de la Ley Judia, una zona urbana 2 ‫נ‬

4 5

6

El documento tampoco es original, sino una copia del historiador Gaspar Roig i Jalpi, en 1664. Jacob i Balncûica, hebreos, denen casas cercanas a la muralla meridional y a la via publica en el ano 1036. Las casas que compra Mordechai ya habian sido de su padre y de sus antepasados. Documento que acredita la existencia de un cementerio judio, un alodium hebreorum, en Montjuïc (Monte Judaico) ACSG, Llibre Verd, junio, 13, 1207. Bondia Gracia, judio de Girona, es baile real en 1233, de toda Catalufia.

donde el ser judio puede ser cumplido con todas sus normas y detalles, porque dispone de los edificios, complejos y elementos necesarios para llevar a cabo una existencia judia: un mercado propio, un lugar donde sacrificar a los animales según el rimai de xehita, uno o varios hornos comunitarios donde cocer las mayot, una pescaderia con pescado apto para el consumo, un edificio destinado a acoger a enfermos y a huérfanos, una escuela, unos banos o miqwé para la purificaciôn rimai, y, sobre todo, la o las sinagogas.

Teorias sobre las dos sinagogas de Girona en los siglos xm-xv Segûn las invesdgaciones realizadas y publicadas hasta la fecha, el tema de las sinagogas gerundenses se resolveria del modo siguiente: A principios del siglo XII la comunidad judia de Girona desplaza su nûcleo vital, es decir, casas donde viven y trabajan, y lugar de reunion y estudio, o sea, Sinagoga, desde la parte mâs al norte de la ciudad, cercana a la catedral, a un punto mâs bajo, aûn dentro del casco urbano primidvo, que empezará a configurarse como barrio judio propio. En este Call recién creado, los judios necesitan absolutamente tener una Sinagoga. Por ello, es de suponer que a inicios del siglo XII se construye o se adapta un viejo edificio como sinagoga en este barrio judio ya estructurado que es el Call: en 1160 aparece mencionado el "call judaico," en el cual debe existir un edificio destinado al culto y al estudio. Ο sea, una S E G U N D A S I N A G O G A se erige a partir, como minimo, de 1160, en un punto de la actual calle de la Força, cerca de la muralla que linda con el rio por la parte oeste de la ciudad. El punto donde se alzaba ha podido ser delimitado gracias al estudio y anâlisis de los documentos de diversos archivos de Girona, trabajo realizado por la Associaciô Arqueolôgica de Girona en 1995. Asi, se ha constatado que la sinagoga ocupaba el espacio de la actual casa nûmero 21 de la calle de la Força, en la parte oeste de dicha calle, lindando por el extremo occidental con la propia muralla de las Ballesterias, que cerraba en la edad media el recinto gôtico de la ciudad. Esta sinagoga contaba con un espacio dedicado al estudio, con un miqwé y con un portico de acceso, y se accedia a ella a través de una callejuela abierta en el lado sur, actualmente desaparecida.7 Esta sinagoga se habia erigido, quizás con una simple adaptation de espacio fisico, sobre lo que anteriormente habria sido una capilla cristiana con invocation a San Lorenzo. Quizás los judios permutan con los canônigos del cabildo de la catedral este edificio, antigua capilla de san Lorenzo, en desuso o abandonado, por las estructuras que poseen al lado de la catedral: los canônigos harán un mejor uso de estas estructuras, anejas a las dependencias catedralicias, del mismo modo que los judios se beneficiarán mucho mâs de la antigua capilla, que convertida en sinagoga será el centro, tanto fisico como espiritual, de la incipiente comunidad. La misma sinagoga es la que se venderá, el dia 12 de julio de 1492, por el precio de 10 florenos de oro de Aragon. La venta la realizarân, Marc Enric, presbitero de la catedral, déclara que una vez entrô en la siangoga "dintre lo pad de la sinagoga unt es lo pad e lo bany" (Calzada, J. 1988. "Les sinagogues de Girona." En Per a una historia de la Gironajueva. Ed. D. Romano. Girona: Ajuntament de Girona, I, 256)

en nombre de la comunidad, Lleô Aninai, Salomô Esdres, Salomô Samuel, Levi Isaac, rectores de la aljama; compra la finca Pere Gerald de Terrades, canônigo y sacristán mayor de la Catedral. En el momento de la venta, el complejo no ejercia de sinagoga acdva, y estaba en desuso, segûn especifican los vendedores en el contrato. 8 Existen aûn mâs datos sobre la llamada "segunda sinagoga" de Girona: segûn los documentos, fue este complejo el que se clausurô, en 1415, como consecuencia de la orden del Papa Benito XIII a raiz de la Disputa de Tortosa; la orden papal dejaba claro que deberían clausurarse las sinagogas mâs grandes y lujosas de las comunidades, ο las que hubieran sido andguamente lugares de culto crisdano.9 El dia 10 de noviembre de 1415 el vicario de Girona Guillem Mariner ftrma una carta dirigida al Papa en la que se le noufica que "sinagogam ipsam claudi precepi et mandavi," una sinagoga, dice, que "In callo judaico civitads Gerundae loco videlizet ubi judeorum ipsius civitads existit complantata antiquitus erat ecclesia.10 Pero el cierre de la sinagoga no durô mucho dempo: en el mes de mayo de 1416, y por orden del infante Alfonso el Magnânimo, la sinagoga de la calle de la Força se abre de nuevo al culto. De todos modos, el uso de esta sinagoga no fue, a partir de ese momento, muy largo: en 1442 un documento afirma que la antigua sinagoga judia está en desuso desde hace mâs de 20 anos, ο sea, que el abandono definitivo, seguramente por el mal estado en que se hallaba, se produjo en torno al 1422. Josep Calzada Oliveras, eminente arqueôlogo gerundense, afirma en uno de sus escritos: "els jueus de Girona tingueren pit i gallardia per a construir-en una altra (sinagoga)."11 Ο sea, presupone que la sinagoga de sant Llorenç y la sinagoga ûltima, activa hasta 1492, fueron absolutamente consecutivas en el tiempo: el cierre y desuso de una, la primera, supuso la apertura inmediata de la otra, la segunda. Ο sea, la sinagoga que se erigiô en el actual Centre Bonastruc ça Porta, llamada la "tercera sinagoga" se abriô al culto y al estudio en 1422 y a causa del cierre de la otra ûnica sinagoga de Girona. De la misma opinion es Carme Batlle, que afirma que "la segunda sinagoga, (fué) una casa dentro del call habiïtada para el culto a consecuencia de la perdida del primer edificio."12 Esta TERCERA SINAGOGA fue vendida también en 1492 por los secretarios de la aljama: Lleô Aninai, Salomô Esdres, Salomô Samuel, y Levi Isaac, por el precio de 32 libras de moneda corriente. En el acta de venta, firmada el dia 9 de julio de 1492, se especifica que la transacciôn es de una finca propiedad de la comunidad judia, que contiene diversas estructuras, ο sea, las escuelas de los

8 9 10

11

12

AHG, G, Pere escuder, vol. 93, fol. 145. A D G , Secciô C, Processos Varis (1416). Masia, M". A, "Aportaciones al estudio del call gerundense." En Per a una historia de ta Girona jueva. I, 221. Los judios de Girona, cesada la sinagoga, tuvieron coraje para construir otra. Calzada, J. "Les sinagogues de Girona." En Per a una historia de ta Gironajueva. I, 263. Batlle, C. "Las dos sinagogas de Gerona." En Per a una historia de la Gironajueva. I, 230.

judios y la de las judias, el hospital y los banos, unidas entre ellas y formando, juntas, un mismo complejo comunal.13 Como conclusion a todas estas invesdgaciones, esmdios y trabajos realizados hasta el momento, se deduce que : a) La comunidad judia de Girona dispuso, entre los siglos XIII y XV, de dos sinagogas disdntas y consecudvas en el dempo. b) La denominada "Mayor," la mâs andgua e importante, se habn'a abierto a inicios del siglo XIII y se habria clausurado y entrado en desuso a inicios del siglo XV, a causa de la disposiciôn papal, pero también a causa del empobrecimiento de la comunidad y el recluimiento del bario judio. Esta sinagoga es la que habn'a estado en la parte de poniente del Call, ο sea, en el lado izquierdo de la actual calle de la Força, lindando con la muralla de las Ballesterias. A partir de inicios del siglo XV hubiera quedado fuera del recinto judio ο Call. c) La tercera y ultima sinagoga, abierta en el centro del Call reducido del siglo XV; habria sido dispuesta como sinagoga, con sus escuelas, hospital y banos, solo a causa del cierre y desuso de la anterior, y habria estado activa únicamente unos setenta anos, es decir, desde los anos 20 del siglo XV hasta 1492. Es la sinagoga que habria ocupado el espacio del actual edificio del "Centre Bonastruc ça Porta."

Nueva teoria acerca de las sinagogas de Girona Sin embargo, las conclusiones establecidas a partir de los esmdios y anâlisis anteriores no resultan, a nuestro entender, del todo claros ni convincentes. De entrada, cabe preguntarse por qué se presupone la existencia de una única sinagoga para la comunidad gerundense. ,;Por qué no pensar que podian haber sido dos, ο más, los edificios comunitarios desrinados al culto, al ritual, al estudio y a otras muy diversas ocupaciones y funciones de la comunidad judia medieval? <‫׳‬Qué regia, documento o evidencia arqueolôgica nos obliga a concluir de este modo? Ninguna. En realidad, es tan lôgico y licito pensar en una sola sinagoga como en dos ο más, para la comunidad de 1000 personas que llegô a tener la aljama de Girona en el siglo XIII. Si tenemos en cuenta los documentos, vemos que el dia 10 de noviembre de 1415 se clausura la sinagoga, supuestamente la ûnica de los judios de Girona. No se reabrirá hasta el mes de mayo de 1416. Durante este tiempo, 6 meses como minimo, ^debemos suponer que los judios de Girona quedaron y vivieron sin sinagoga? Es poco probable. Creemos mâs lôgico suponer que si se cerrô una sinagoga, demasiado lujosa o grande, o en este caso, ubicada precisamente en el antiguo edificio de una capilla cristiana, fue precisamente porqué la comunidad disponia de otra sinagoga o espacio donde poder reunirse, celebrar sus ritos y esmdios y cumplir

13

AHG, G l , Prot. 496, Nicolau Roca: "les escoles de dita aljama dejueus i de les dones delsjueus de Girona, i l'hospita!i els banjs." En Marqués, J. 1987. "La sinagoga situada a ponent del carrere de la Força." Jornades d'His/oria dels Jueus de Catalunya, 231.

con sus deberes como judios. El judaismo no estaba, aún, prohibido, y para cumplir con el judaismo era evidentemente necesaria una sinagoga. Por lo tanto, proponemos pensar que se cerrô la sinagoga Mayor de Girona, la mâs antigua, la mâs importante, aquella sobre la cual debiô haberse colocado la 1ápida invocauva que se halla actualmente en el Museo Arqueolôgico. Una sinagoga abierta seguramente a inicios del siglo XIII, ο a finales del XII, que debiô de haber albergado a los estudiosos de la câbala gerundense. Y se cerrô porque, a partir del mismo momento del cierre, los judios de Girona disponian de otro recinto, de otro lugar donde estudiar y rezar, de otra sinagoga. Asi, entra en juego la llamada "tercera sinagoga," ubicada en medio del Call del siglo XV, en el recinto delimitado explicitamente como judio. Debiô ser una sinagoga menor y de construcciôn más reciente, que se mantuvo abierta y en uso hasta la expulsion. Pero es que además disponemos hoy de dos documentes inéditos que son la prueba mâs fehaciente de la coexistencia de dos sinagogas en Girona, en el espacio del Call y en el mimo periodo cronolôgico. Se trata de dos documentos de venta, en los cuales los vendedores son los mismos para los dos casos: los tutores de los hijos huérfanos y herederos de Boniuhà Isaac, judio de la villa de Castellô d'Empûries. En el dia 16 de noviembre de 1373, los tutores mencionados, Astruc Isaac, Salomô Isaac, Iucef Isaac i Astruc Isaac, suponemos que hermanos del difunto, con el consentimiento de los jueces de la aljama de Girona, miembros del BetDin, Bondia Falcô, Taros Asdrai, Astruc Vides, venden al judio de Girona Astruc Mercadell "medio banco que tenia en propiedad el difunto Boniuà Isaac, en la sinagoga menor de los judios de Girona: "scbola inferiorijudeorumgerundae"u por el precio de 55 sueldos de moneda corriente. Y a condnuaciôn, en acta del mismo dia y en nombre de las mismas personas, los mismos judios tutores de los hijos de Boniuà Isaac venden a Jacob Abraham judio de Girona, un banco entero en la sinagoga major de los judios de Girona "scbola maiori," por el precio de 15 libras y 5 sueldos de moneda corriente.15 Alli donde podemos documentar con tanta claridad una "Sinagoga Mayor," la "scbola maiori, " es evidente que, como minimo, exisda también una "Sinagoga menor," la "schoia inferiori judeorum.6‫ יי‬Y a pardr de estos dos documentos inéditos del Archivo Histôrico de Girona, queda demostrado de forma clara la existencia de una sinagoga mayor y de otra sinagoga menor, ambas en el Call de Girona y en uso de la comunidad judia, a finales del siglo XIV, como minimo en concreto en el ano de 1373.

14 15 16

AHG, G5, Prot.404, Francesc de Cantallops, fol. 67 r/v. AHG, G5, Prot. 404, fol. 63-64. Assis, Y. T. 1997. The Golden Age of Aragonese Jewry. Oxford: Littman.

Conclusiones de los anâlisis documentâtes Por lo tanto, a partir del estudio de los documentos y sobre todo gracias al anâlisis de estos dos ûltimos documentos inéditos fechados en 1373, podemos establecer la conclusion siguiente: La juderia de Girona, importante en nûmero, con considerable influencia social y econômica en toda la estructura de la ciudad, disponia, a finales del siglo XIV, de, como minimo, dos sinagogas donde realizar sus ritos y esmdios. Una de las sinagogas era considerada y denominada "Escuela Mayor," y con ello suponemos que debia tratarse de la mâs importante, y seguramente la principal y mâs anugua. La otra viene denominada como "Escuela Menor," y con ello pues suponemos que debia tratarse de la segunda sinagoga en importancia, y seguramente la mâs reciente. Siguiendo esta teoria, parece jusdficado pues concluir que: a) La llamada "sinagoga mayor" debia ser la que se erigia a poniente de la calle actual de la Força, en la época "carrer Major del Call Judaic."17 Se trata de la que tradicionalmente se ha venido llamando la "segunda sinagoga de Girona," y de la cual sabemos a través de los documentos que tenia un espacio propio para las mujeres, un portico y patio y un pozo que aparece mencionado como "el pozo de la sinagoga." Por el norte, la sinagoga limitaba con la casa propiedad de Vidal Ravaia, judio de Girona; por el este, con la calle pûblica, calle mayor del Call; por el oeste, con la muralla de las Ballesterias; y por el sur, con la casa propiedad de Astruc Caravida, judio destacado de la aljama de Girona. El acceso a esta sinagoga era a través de una puerta lateral, por su pane sur, que se abria sobre una callejuela estrecha actualmente desaparecida. Esta sinagoga mayor debiô de abrirse como tal en los ûltimos anos del siglo XII o a inicios del XIII, a juzgar por los documentos. Estaria activa durante todo el siglo XIII y también durante el XIV. Debiô ser la primera sinagoga del Call judio una vez este barrio se hubo formado, y probablemente era la sinagoga que acogiô los esmdios de câbala y mistica judia, y los sermones del rabi ben Nahman. En 1373 aparece mencionada como la "Scholam Maiorem" de los judios de Girona. En 1415 fue clausurada, por orden del Papa, y reabierta al culto y al estudio en 1416. En 1422 debiô de abandonarse su uso como lugar de estudio y oraciôn. En 1432 estaba en manos del converso Francesc Gracian, del judio Bondia Gracia, que debia tener algo asi como el usufructo; porque la propiedad de la sinagoga continuaba en manos de la aljama de Girona, cuyo consejo general vendiô la finca el dia 12 de julio de 1492, con modvo de la expulsion. b) La llamada "sinagoga menor," o "schola inferiori," debiô erigirse en el espacio que actualmente ocupa el Centre Bonastruc ça Porta, en pleno centro del call judio del siglo XV. En este espacio comprendido entre la calle de la Força (en la época, llamada calle de Sant Llorenç, y anteriormente, Major del Call), y la casa de los Aninai, familia ilustre de la aljama de Girona. La calle que 17

ACG, Llibre d'Arxivacions de la Pia Almoina del Pa de la Seu.

daba acceso a la sinagoga era la que, a résultas de la reducciôn del barrio judio a mediados del siglo XV se denominaria "calle mayor del Call," y que en época anterior se conocia como "Calle de Aninai," por estar en ella la casa de esta familia. Esta sinagoga tenia un pado con portico, un espacio desdnado al estudio, una llamada "escuela de mujeres," unos banos ο miqwé y unas habitaciones destinadas a hospital y orfanato de la comunidad. La segunda sinagoga debiô de construirse como minimo a mediados del siglo XIV, a juzgar por el documento de 1373 que la menciona. Y estaria activa durante parte del siglo XIV y todo el siglo XV. Se vendiô, también a causa de la expulsion, el dia 9 de julio de 1492.

Apéndice Transcripciôn de los dos documentos del Archivo Historico de Girona Documento 1 Abraham Struchi judeus Gerundae et Struch Issachi, Salomonus Issachi, Abraham Issachi et Juceffus Issachi, judei de figueriis grads et ex certa scienda nominibus nostris propriis per nos et nostros (necnon et ego dictus Struchus Issachi velint tutor et nomine rutorio Infantum pupillorum filiorum et heredim boniuha Issachi quondam judei castilionis Impuriarum fratris mei de consensum et voluntatem bondia falconi Thoroci Asdray et Struchi Vides judeorum Gerundae iudicum vocatorum ebrayce bezdin super hoc per curiam Gerundae assignatorum de consensum quorum constat per instrumentum ebraycum inde die presend confectum pro alimentando dictos pupillos cum no habeam abpresens aliqua bona mobilia dictorum pupillorum de quibus ipsos valeam alimentäre vendimus nominibus predicris vobis Jaco Abrahahe judeo Gerundae presend tamquem plus oferend et dann factam inde diligenu indagare per michelem durandi curritorem publicum civitads Gerundae et vestris et quibus voluerids per perpetuo Quondam sirium sive locum sededum quod seu quem nos nominibus predicds scilicet ego dictus abraam Struchi quo ad medietatem et nos alii predicri et died pupilli quo ad aliam medietatem habemus et possidemus per indiviso in scola maiori judeorum Gerundae scilicet in quondam bancho quod se tenet cum pariete qui est versus oriente in capite cuius siquidem banchi est situm quonddam sirium magister vitalis lobelli judeus et aliud caput ipsius banchi est heredum den Zarch quondam judei de oloto Et sedenus in dicto sido quod vobis vendimus tenent faciem versus occidentem et a circio se tenet dictum situm quod nobis vendimus cum quondam sido heredum bonastruch de casdlione quondam judei castilionis Impuriarum et a meridie cum quodam sido issachi de magistro judei Gerundae. Quam vendidone vobis et vestris et quibus voluntads per perpetuo facimus nominibus predicds de predicto sido seu loco sedendi cum intrandbus exidbus juribus et pertineneiis suis universis pro ut melius ad vestrum et vestrorum bonum et sanum intellectum possit intelligere sicum dieu precio videlicet quindem librarum et quinque solidos monete barchinonensis de temo de quo precio ego dictus abraham Struchi habui et recepi medietatem et alia medietatem habuimus et recepimus nos alii supradicd scilicet qualibet vestrum quintam partem ipsius medietaris necnon et ergo dictus tutor quinta partem pertinentem dicucs pupillis Et ideo renunciando exceptorum peccunie non numerate et non recepte in died precii per modum predictum a vobis non habid et non recepri et doli et legi qua deeeptus ultra (...diam) iusd precii subvenit damus et scientes remittimus nominibus predicds vobis et vestris perpetuo siqud per dicta vendido modo valet aut decerto valebit predo antedicto. Consdtuentes nos dictos nominubus predicta que vobis vendimus vestro vestrorumque nomine possidere vel quasi donate et inde possessione tarn de iure quam de facto adeptus futuris universale. In quam intrandi ad spiscendi et recumendi plenam vobis vestris damus et confitemus pottestatem Cedendo nihilhominus et dando quibus super nominibus vobis et vestris et quibus voluerids proprio in predicris omnia iura et loca nostra et dictorum pupillorum omnesque vobis radones et acciones reales et personales et alia quascumque nobis et dicris pupillis ibi et inde perdnenris et perrinere

debentis quo quomodo Quibus iuribus et accionibus predicds possiris vos et vestris et quos voluerids super predicds ud agere et excepiri in iudicio et extra tam in agendo quam in defendendo quoque in curds aliis mediis et contra quasqumque personas pro tu nos dicris nominibus facere poteamus ante habuimus (di) instrumend et confeccione. Consdtuends eriam ac faciends nominibus permissis vos et vestros et quos voluerids propio in predicds vos domos et procures tu iurem vestram propria ad faciendum inde omnes vestras voluntates Et sit aliquo retentum quem in predicds non faciamus ullomodo promitdus nominibus super dicds vobis et vestris quoque predictum situm quod vobis vendimus faciens dicds nominibus vos et vestros et quos vouleritis proprio habere tenere ac edam possidere in pace et securitate contra cunctas personas scilicet ego dictus abraam struchi quo ad medietatem et nos alii predicd et died pupilli quo ad aliam medietatem scilicet qualibet nostrum et died pupilli quo ad quinta partem. Et vobis vestris inde firmiter teneri promitimus quibus super nominibus iuxta emdium promissum de emissione omneque dampno nihilhominibus et inte licis et extra Et pro huis attendenus et complendends ac per fuma et legali emissione eorundem obligamus nos omnes predicd scilicet qualibet nostrum per dicta sua parte vobis et vestris omnia bona nostra ubique habita et habenda et edam ego dictus struchi issachi nomine tutorio dictorum pupillorum per eorum parte omnia sua bona presentia et futura ubique iurantes edam sponte per deum et super decern precepta legis que deus dedit moysi in monte sinay a nobis corporaliter tacta predictam vendidonem cosndtudonem aliqua radonem iure vel modo. Et ad maiore firmitate predictorum tradimus nominibus predicds a nobis quisquam cum quator aliis tre iux morem ebreorum Et ego struch abrahe deuslocrega filius died abraham struchi verem radonem maioris etads. Et ego dictus Raymundus de spasenso tutor died venerabilis hugued de burdilis predicds consensio et eiusdem autoritatem meam pr(..) testes johanes de valdemia parator et Guillelmus ferrary scriptor Gerundae. AHG, Protocols Notarial, Notaria G5, vol. 404, fol. 64v/65r

Documento 2 Struchus issachi Salomonis issachi abraam issachi juceffus issachi judei de figueriys Grads et ex certa scienda nominibus nostris propriis per nos et nostros necnon et ego dictus struchus issachi velut tutor et nomine tutorio infantum pupillorum filiorum et heredum bonjuhe issachi quondam judei casdlionis impuriarum fratres mei consensum et voluntate bondia falconi thorocy asdray et struch vides iudeorum Gerunde iudicum vocatorum ebrayce bezdim super hoc per curiam Gerunde assignatorum de consensum quorum constat tu et proprio per instrumentum ebraycum inde dei presend confectum pro alimentando dictos pupillos cum non habeamus in presens aliqua bona mobilia dictorum pupillorum de quibus ipsos valeant alimentäre vendimus nominibus predicds vobis strucho mercadilli iudeo Gerudnae presend tamque plenus offerenri et dandi facta inde diligenri indagine per michaelem durandi curritore publicum civitads gerundae et vestris et quibus voluerids proprio medium situm quod nos nominibus predicds habemus et tenemus et possidemus per indivisso in scola inferiori iudeorum gerundae sciliter in quodam bancho qui se tenet cum pariete qui est versus circium in capite cuius banchi est situm quoddam situm uxoris vitalis caravida iudei Gerundae et aliud caput dieu banchi est salomonis adret iudei gerundae Et sedentes in dicto medio sido quod nobis vendimus tenent faciem versus meridiem et ab ocidente se tenet dictum medium situm cum quodam medio sido uxoris issachi de magistro iudei Gerundae quod emit ab abraam struchi judeo et ab oriente se tenet cum quondam sido bonafilie matre vestre quam vendidonem vobis et vestris et quibus voluerids proprio faeimus nominibus predicds de predicto medio sido quod vobis vendimus cum intrandbus exidbus et aliis iuribus et perdnentiis suis pro tu melius et utilius ad vestrum vestrorumque bonum et Sanum intellectum perquisit intelligi sicum dici predo videlicet Quinquaginta quinque solidos barchinonensis de terno de quo predo quilibet nostrum habuit et reeepit quintam partem necnon et ego dictus tutor quinta parte pertinente dicds pupillis Et ideo renunciando excepcioni peccunie non numerate et non reeepte et doli et legi qua deeepris videlicet (...) iusd precii subuerint damus et scientes remitimus nominibus predicds vobis et vestris proprio siqud plurius dicta vendido modo valet aut decerto valebit predo antedicto Consdtuends nos dicds nominibus parte dicta vobis vendimus vestro vestrorumque nominem possiderem vel quasi donet inde posessionem tam de iure quam de facto adeptus futuris corporale inqua intrandi ad seipiscendi et rednendi plenam vobis et vestris damus et confittemus pottestatem Cedendo nihilhominus et dando quibus super radonibus vobis et vestris et quibus voluerids proprio in predicds omnia iura et loca nostra et dictorum pupillorum omnesque voces vicis rationes et aedones

reales et personales et alias quascumque nobis et dictis pupillis ibi et indi perdnends debends quoquomodo Quibus iuribus et accionibus predicds possids vos et vestris et quos voulerids super predicds ud agere et experiri in iudicio et extra tam in agendo quam in defendendo quam in cuncds aliis modo et certa quascumque personas prout nos nominibus predicds facere poteamus et inde habendi conffeccionem Consdtuentes edam et facientes vos et vestros et quos voulerids in predicds vestros domos et procures tu in rem vestram propria ad faciendum inde vestras voluntates promittimus edam nominibus predicds vobis et vestris quoque predicta que vobis vendimus faciemus vos et vestros et quos volueriris proprio habere tenere ac edam possidere in pare consensum contra cunctas personas scilicet quilibet nostrum et dieu pupilli quo ad quinta parte Et vobis et vestris inde firmiter teneri promittimus quibus super nominibus iuxta modum promissum de eviccionem omnique dampno missionibus et interesse licis et exetera Et per hiis attendends et cum plebendis ac pro firma et legali animore et interesse eorundem obligadonibus omnes predicds scilicet qualibet nostrum per dicta sua parte vobis et vestris omnia bona nostra ubique habita et habenda et edam ago deitus struchi issachi nominem tutorio dictorum pupillorum pro eorum parte omnia sua bona presenda et futura ubique iurantes edam sponte per deum et super decern preeepta legis que deus dedit moysei in monte sinay a nobis corporaliter tacte predictam vendidonem et omnia supradicta rata et firma semper habere attendere et complire et unilaterus consdtuire aliqua radone iuro vel modo. De ad maiorem firmitatem predictorum trahimus nominibus predicds a vobis quiam cum quatuor aliis tre iux morem ebreorum Et ego dictus Michael durandi curritor publicus et iuratus curie et Civitads Gerundae dico et reffero quod ego substani et encantani privata et publiche per dictam scolam dictum medio sido et nullum januei emptore qui maius predum nec edam tantum in dicto medio sido obtelerit se datum cum quantum dictus struchi mercadilli emptor predictus obtulit qui in eodem obtulit se daturum precium memoratum Testes bartholomeus segur argenterius et Guillelmus scriptor Gerundae. AHG, Notaria G5,volum 404, fol. 67 r/v

T O D R O S FRENTE A T O D R O S D o s ESCRITORES HEBREOS DE T O L E D O EN EL SIGLO X I I I ÁNGEL SÀENZ-BADILLOS Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain

La familia Abulafiah jugô un papel muy destacado en la vida cultural de la ciudad de Toledo durante el siglo XIII. Aunque no llegara a ser una de las familias más directamente influyentes en la vida de la Corte, los numerosos personajes con este nombre que aparecen en la documentation de la época1 permiten suponer que su peso especifico era muy notable. A pesar de ser originarios de alAndalus, la historia particular de buena parte de sus miembros no anima sin más a identificarlos a todos ellos con lo que se considéra caracteristico del espiritu andalusi. Vamos a centrarnos en dos miembros de esta familia que representan dos formas totalmente distintas de vivir el judaismo en Toledo durante el siglo XIII, Todros ben Yosef ha-Levi Abulafiah, el Rab, y Todros ben Yëhudah ha-Levi Abulafiah, el poeta. Dejando aparte otros aspectos de sus personalidades, nos fijaremos sobre todo en su actividad literaria y en especial en sus mutuas relaciones. Todros ben Yosef ha-Levi Abulafiah de Toledo (ca. 1220-1298), el Rab, fue almojarife de la Reina y una de las máximas autoridades talmûdicas durante el reinado de Alfonso X, juez y diligente espiritual indiscutible de la comunidad de Toledo. Desde luego, la poesia no era para él sino algo muy marginal.2 Su papel en la Toledo de Alfonso X es similar al que representa Nahmánides en Barcelona en tiempo de Jaime I: sin procéder de los estratos mâs elevados de la nobleza, los dos asumen la direction de la comunidad con intention de hacerla volver a los valores tradicionales del judaismo evitando las frivolidades extraíìas de origen andalusi.3 A mediados de siglo, cuando las heridas de la controversia sobre Maimônides estaban todavia frescas, la aljama de Toledo habia ofrecido su liderazgo al conocido moralista anti-maimonideo Yonah Girondi, que se ocuparia de procurar la reforma de costumbres de los judios de la corte hasta su muerte en 1263. Si algunas de las familias judias mâs notables de la ciu1

2

3

Cf. Chapira, B. 1941/45. "Contribution à l'étude du Divan de Todros Ben Iehouda Halévi Aboulafia." REJ 6, 1-33. Sobre el Rah Todros, cf. Schirmann, J. 1997. The History of Hebrew Poetry in Christian Spain and Southern France. Edited, Supplemented and Annotated by E. Fleischer (Hebr.). Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Ben-Zvi Institute, 377 s.; Baer, Y. 1937. , Todros ben Yëhudah ha-Levi u-zémano." Zion 2, 19-55, 29 ss., y 1981. Historia de los Judios en la Espana Cristiana. Madrid: Altalena, 95, 102, 104, 196,206,713. Cf. Septimus, B. 1979. "Piety and Power in Thirteenth-Century Catalonia." Studies in Medieval Jewish History and Literature. Ed. I. Twersky. Cambridge/Mass., 197—230.

dad habian mostrado su simpada por Maimônides en los anos treinta, quedaba bien claro quiénes habian sido Ios ganadores de la disputa. Y durante la mayor parte del periodo alfonsi el heredero espiritual de Yonah Girondi séria el Rab Todros, nombrado Nasi', ο "principe" de las aljamas de Castilla. No creia en la filosofia andalusi, ni tampoco en los valores estédcos de esa cultura, prefiriendo dedicarse a la Câbala y la piedad. Su gran presdgio, y seguramente la protecciôn de la Reina, le salvaron del encarcelamiento al que sometiô el Rey Alfonso a gran numéro de judios de Toledo en 1281, tras la "traiciôn" de Don Çag de la Maleha que le costaria la vida. El Rab Todros aprovechô la ocasiôn para intentar enderezar lo que consideraba costumbres libres y disolutas de su comunidad, especialmente el trato sexual frecuente con las criadas musulmanas. En su famoso sermon animaba al arrepentimiento a los que por entonces se encontraban en la càrcel, entre los que se contaba su pariente, Todros el poeta.4 Respaldado por otras autoridades rabinicas, culpaba de lo ocurrido a la vida licenciosa de los jôvenes cortesanos. Era una manera particular de interpretar los hechos, ya que el viejo monarca no buscaba probablemente otra cosa que resarcirse de la pérdida del dinero que Don Çag habia desviado hacia el Infante Don Sancho, y una vez obtenido un elevado rescate, dejô salir a todos los judios de la càrcel. Pero el cautiverio habia representado una verdadera conmociôn para la comunidad: el poeta lo comparaba con "la destrucciôn de Sodoma y Gomorra" (De 29,22), y, segûn sus palabras, los cautivos se comprometieron a observar todas las miswot, tanto las fâciles como las dificiles, jurando en particular no tocar a las muchachas.5 No está claro el parentesco exacto entre el Rab Todros y el poeta Todros ben Yëhudah ha-Levi Abulafiah, varios anos mâs joven. También T°dros el poeta participô en la vida de la corte y en las finanzas, al servicio de Alfonso el Sabio y Sancho IV. La poesia le brotaba de dentro con extraordinaria facilidad; en su amplia obra poética se incluyen buen nûmero de panegiricos dedicados a los miembros del reducido grupo de la mâs alta nobleza judia de Toledo, sus protectores y mecenas. Tras una juventud despreocupada y alegre, la experiencia del cautiverio y la aceptaciôn de la reforma moral emprendida por el Rab Todros debieron de influir no poco en él y cambiaron su actitud ante la vida, afectando a su sistema andalusi de valores.6 (fCuâl es la imagen del Rab que aparece en la obra de Todros el poeta? La relaciôn no séria nunca de igual a igual. En parte quizá debido a la diferencia de 4

5

6

El sermon ha sido adecuadamente comentado por Baer 1981: 206 ss. Véase 'Oron, M. 1983. "Dérasato sel R. Todros ben Yosef ha-Levi Abulafiah lé-tiqqun ha-middot wê-ha-musar," Da 'at 11,47-51. ko! ha-nogea' bè-'ofrah 10' yiqqahet ba-'äJarah, se dice en el encabezamiento del poema ylgon ha-tekYellin, D. ed. 1932-36. Can Hammeshatim we-hahidoth. Diwan of Don Tadros son of Yehuda Abu-l'Âfiah. Jerusalem 11,1, n° 595, 85. Recuérdese bl-'ahäkat na'àrah, Yellin, II, 1, 130, n° 721. Véase también hä-mar iaj2 ha-dèfral, Yellin, I, 187 ss., n° 433, sobre un escândalo amoroso del poeta, recriminado por Yosef ben Todros. Ver asimismo su defensa de las dos criadas, musulmana y judia, ante Yosef ibn al-Saraqosd, yldid 'e! tahflkeni, Yellin, II, 1, 50, n" 542. Pueden verse igualmente las páginas que le dedica R. Brann, en The Compunctious Poet, Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991, 143-157.

edad (cerca de 25 anos), y en parte por su distinta categoria social, el poeta escribe siempre desde una position de inferior, con el respeto que debe el protegido a su patrono ο protector. Las costumbres libres del joven Todros, y la acdtud de moralista severo representada por el Rab no nos hacen presagiar que se diera entre ellos un buen entendimiento. Sin embargo, nuestras fuentes literarias no nos permiten tampoco constatar un enfrentamiento directo del joven poeta con su pariente; todo lo más, observamos que éste intenta controlar al joven con fama de frivolo, quien le corresponde con alusiones un tanto ambiguas.7 A pesar de que en el dtwān se recogen numerosos poemas escritos por otros poetas de la época que mantuvieron correspondencia con Todros, el Rab no parece que le contestara; ni tampoco queda constancia, como en otros casos, de que nuestro poeta lo esperara o se lo pidiera. Bien disdnta acdtud es la que el Rab muestra hacia Abraham Bedersi, al que responde en diversas ocasiones. La figura del Rab se encuentra entre las más repeddamente mencionadas en el dīwān del poeta Todros. Son muchos los nombres honorificos con los que Todros el poeta se refiere a él: es el "principe de los principes,"8 el "más noble de los nobles,"9 Rab recto, famoso, perfecto,10 "padre de los poetas,"11 "noble de corazôn, sabio, de grandes obras," 12 etc. En sus panegiricos utiliza motivos convencionales para exaltar su grandeza personal, su extremada generosidad, y sus cualidades literarias. Hay detalles que nos invitan a pensar, con todo, que las alabanzas son de carácter general y no necesariamente sinceras. Entre otras muchas referencias directas e indirectas, el poeta dedicô al Rah un notable grupo de poemas breves, sobre temas muy disdntos, dividido en diez secciones, y con dos introducciones en prosa rimada, una en árabe y otra en hebreo. Está formado por 133 poemas de encomio, de amor, del vino, de la namraleza ο los cantos, y otros de tema más trascendente.13 De acuerdo con Baer estarian escritos antes de 1280, y probablemente antes del viaje real a Francia en 1275 (Baer 1937: 30). Segûn la introduction en árabe, cada section deberia tener 50 versos (cosa que no ocurre en los poemas editados). No es la única colecciôn de poemas divididos en diez secciones: en el dïwân se encuentra otra bastante similar de estructura y temádca (esta vez con técnica de tajnīs), aún más larga, en honor de Šê10m0h ben Saddoq.14 ,;Qué senddo dene el que en sus anos jôvenes ese poeta con fama de frivolo dedique estos poemas de tema profano, siguiendo las convenciones àraboandalusies, a la máxima autoridad religiosa de la ciudad? Sin duda hay aspectos que se nos escapan, pero lo primero que se nos ocurre es que posiblemente el 7 8

9 10 11 12 13

14

Véase el poema me-ha-glkir Todros, Yellin, 1, 165, n° 420. sar ba-iarim, Yellin, 1, be'urim wl-he'arot, 26, en la introducdon a las diez secciones en honor del Rah. nidtk kol-ha-nidikim, Yellin, I, 165, n° 419, v. 21. Yellin, I, be'urim wl-he'arot, 27. afci ha-mliortrim, Yellin, I, 166 s., n° 421, Encabezamiento en be'urim wl-he'arot, 112. y'edammu ki ?lman, Yellin, I, 62, n° 169, v. 15. Yellin, I, 33-66. La estructura de este grupo de poemas, dice E. Fleischer (en Schirmann 1997: 378, η. 47), sigue la del 'Anaq de Moseh ibn 'Ezra'. Sin embargo, Todros renuncia en estos poemas a la técnica del taynis. Yellin, I, 67-112, nos. 182-388.

Rab como buen intelectual, a pesar de su fama de rigido asceta, no podia rechazar este dpo de poesia profana, muestra de la mejor cultura del pasado, sino que debia tomarla como un halago. Por otra parte, la técnica seguida por el poeta Todros, muy sutil, nos dice como deben leerse estos poemas, puesto que muchos de ellos van acompanados de su correspondiente clave interpretativa. Ya en la introducciôn en árabe anuncia que al principio y fin de cada secciôn ha incluido poemas en honor del Rab. En la primera secciôn, dedicada a los elogios en honor de este personaje se subraya que solo él es digno de alabanza;15 no parece adecuado empezar hablando de placeres, por lo que va delante su elogio. Los restantes poemas de esta secciôn alaban su generosidad (n° 51), su estirpe (n° 52), sus buenas obras (n° 53); se le llama "nube propicia" y "mar" (n° 54, 55), "sol de jusdcia" (n° 56, 58, 61); se dice que hay una acequia en su mano (n° 57), mar y fuego (n° 59, 60), etc., siempre en el mismo tono hiperbôlico. Resumiendo: la grandeza del Rab es superior a lo que de él pueda decir el poeta (n° 66, n° 50). La secciôn segunda, dedicada a poemas de amor, ofrece la clave en el primer poema. El poeta se présenta como "rey con el amor como huestes," y establece el conocido contraste con el Rab: "Poeta" y "Amante" son mis nombres, "Principe" y "Grande" los del Rah, por mi pasiôn y sus admirables virtudes, por mi lenguaje y sus précisas sentencias. Mis amigas son las ciervas del amor, las ciencias son sus solas companeras.'6 La grandeza del homenajeado arranca de su amor a la ciencia, de sus escritos, que se comparan con el rostro de la bella: "los câlamos que usa son sus lanzas de batalla" (v. 11). Los poemas de la secciôn están en la linea de los poemas andalusies sobre "corzos" y "ciervas." La clave interpretadva la ofrecen los ûltimos versos: la bella, que conforme a la convenciôn tradicional dene veneno para sus enemigos y miel para sus amantes, es figura del encomiado, del Rab: Hay en su boca ponzona para sus enemigos y la miel mâs dulce para sus amantes. Asi, igual que hay muerte para los adversarios, hay para todos bâlsamo de vida en la mano del Rab·17 Algo parecido ocurre en la secciôn tercera, que glosa los efectos del amor. Segûn los ûldmos versos, el "corzo" y el Rab siguen una conducta paralela: El corzo acrecienta sus cualidades, como el Rajj Todros las virtudes de sus padres.18

15 16 17 18

ylhaShk let Yellin I, 33, n° 49, v. 2. 'àni me/et, Yellin, I, 37, n° 67, w . 5-7. ia'ârah 'aie lehyah, Yellin, I, 40, n° 82, w . 2-3. wi-ha-yofi le'at, Yellin, I, 43, n° 93, v. 6.

En la cuarta section, que trata del gozo de disfrutar del amor de la "cierva," el poeta juega de nuevo con el contraste entre su propia persona, para quien el amor résulta imprescindible, y el Rab, modelo de generosidad; o entre el censor, una especie de tacano, y el siempre dadivoso senor. 19 En la section quinta, sobre la vejez, la relation es más sutil: el canto del poeta al Rab saben apreciarlo y gustarlo pardcularmente los ancianos. 20 En la section sexta, sobre "el llanto de las palomas" explica el poeta que lo que en realidad hacen éstas es "cantar las bondades del Rab."21 Y al recoger un tema tan convencional como las 1ágrimas de amor derramadas por las pupilas: Es por que el Rah mora en su interior, y sus manos vierten lluvias de larguezas.22 El vino, al que se dedica la section séptima, va inseparablemente unido al canto de las bondades del Rah•23 Y cuando él bebe, "su rostro gana aún más en hermosura." 24 La belleza de los jardines, a la que consagra la section octava, recuerda también la grandeza, la hermosura y la generosidad del Rah· No sé, hermanos mios, si derramaron agua las nubes y brotaron lirios en el jardin, o si es el senor, cuyas manos vierten lluvia de largueza y rostros desconocidos resplandecen.25 En la section novena, alabanza de la propia poesia, destaca también desde el principio la figura del homenajeado, que "todo lo que desea es esparcir sus riquezas y recoger alabanzas." 26 Mi poesia es el collar en el cuello de sus favores, y yo llevo en mi cuello el collar de sus mercedes.27 La ultima section se dedica al temor de Dios: Bendita sea la Roca que me ayudô, y puso en mi boca estas nitidas palabras. El Tiempo dio esplendor al Rab e hizo que con su hermosura embelleciera los libros.28 De esta manera, nuestro poeta ofrece una nueva lectura de los géneros traditionales de la poesia andalusi, de sus imágenes y modvos mâs convencionales, que no dene más remedio que halagar a ese intelectual que lidera la vida judia de Toledo. <;Es una excusa para poder practicar los géneros andalusies en un am19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

bi-merik ‫י‬ek'atab, Yellin, I, 47, 113. %êman qara ' ki-yom mo 'ed, Yellin, I, 48, n° 115. 'Shi kofer ll-yonim, Yellin, I, 52, n° 131, v. 3. 'â&iççk, 10 'të-heieq,Yellin, I, 55, n° 146, v. 2. yldiday ba-'äüiot, Yellin, I, 55, n° 147. " 'èbi kofer ß-rak, Yellin, I, 59, n° 159, v. 1. /o1 'eda'b 'ahay, Yellin, I, 61, n° 168. yldammu ki ^èman, Yellin, I, 62, n° 169, v. 12.

27

"dlkai mah-nehlSak, Yellin, I, 64, n° 172, v. 17.

28

yêkorak fur, Yellin, I, 66, n° 181.

biente poco propicio? jSe txasluce únicamente un sentimiento de admiraciôn hacia el poderoso? En el dîwân se recogen otros muchos poemas dedicados igualmente al Rab en las ocasiones más diversas. Yellin incluye otra secciôn de poemas en honor del mismo personaje, con una elegia por su muerte. 29 En diversos panegiricos el poeta célébra en tono hiperbôlico sus virtudes, y de modo especial su gran generosidad. 30 Uno de los elogios dene forma de àrbol, con el virtuosismo al gusto de la época.31 Al Rab le preocupa la frivolidad de su pariente, y le comenta en una ocasiôn por carta que él y su hijo han oido que no se ocupa de cuesdones de hala&ah. Todros le responde que dedica medio dia al esmdio, en particular a la poesia y las ciencias.32 La relaciôn de protegido / patrono se ve claramente en otro poema realista, en el que el poeta se dirige al Rab pidiéndole una mula, ya que se le ha muerto su montura. 33 Puede haber algo de ironia en la peticiôn, dejando entrever que la generosidad del personaje no llega tan lejos. En otro panegirico compara la saliva de la sëbiyah con la poesia del Rab: Es su saliva dulce cual la miel, como si tu poesia, Rah, hubiera gustado, ο recordara tu nombre. jQué preciosa es tu poesia para todos!, y para mi, jqué grata, bella, hermosa y deleitable!34 Y en un nuevo encomio escrito con ocasiôn de la "venida del Rab" Todros alude también a sus versos con alabanzas convencionales: Si compone un poema, sus preciosas gargantas dicen: ",;Es un poema, ο un collar de nuestras joyas?" Si recita un proverbio, de él dicen los ârboles del conocimiento: "^Es esto nuestro fruto?"35 Cuando el poeta Todros está en la càrcel (1281), suplica a su pariente en 147 (150) versos que le ayude a salir de alli.36 ^Como voy a sufrir, si tengo un Rah como baluarte? !Proclama liberaciôn de mi prisiôn, acerca el dempo de la libertad y el ano de mi redenciôn!37 Très de las moaxajas escritas por el poeta Todros están dedicadas asimismo al Rab; dos de ellas denen la jarcha en romance, y la tercera en árabe. La técnica es

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Yellin, I, 164—184, nos. 419—432. nëdik kol-ha-nëdikim, n° 419, v. 21. 'agffd bë-bolyom, Yellin, I, 180, n° 430. me-ha-gêkir Todros, Yellin, I, 165, n° 420. lakya'àtu firay, Yellin, I, 179, n° 429. mahyafitah, Yellin, I, 167, n° 421, w . 6-7. liwyat lëwiyenu, Yellin, I, 177, n° 427, w . 9 s. Para Fleischer (en Schirmann 1997: 383, n. 63), es uno de los poemas mâs destacados del dîwân. 'ànabem /
similar en las très: una primera parte en forma de poema amoroso relativo al "ciervo" o la "corza" deja paso, a partir de la tercera estrofa, al encomio destacando la grandeza y generosidad del personaje, y el refugio que el poeta encuentra en él. Las manos del Rab, dice Todros, fueron creadas "para empufiar en dia de batalla la lanza, y el câlamo, y para que las besen y para dar abundantes riquezas." Destacaria asi, de nuevo, su calidad de escritor. En una de ellas, la hija de Edom se dirige al Rab con un canto de amor: "ya lo se ke otri amés, a(d) mibe tú no(n) qéres," bello testimonio de la fidelidad de este personaje a su pueblo. 38 Con ocasiôn de la muerte del Rab, que dene lugar en 1298, el poeta Todros escribe una elegia de 99 versos, 39 en la que, segûn las convenciones andalusies, se hace intervenir en el luto a los astros, los signos del zodiaco, etc.; se dice de él entre otras cosas: Disfrutaba con temas de câbala y misterios profundos, sin errar con ideas extrafias. (v. 47) Pero la admiration por el Rab no parece haber sido el ûnico sentimiento que se refleja en el dïwân del poeta: en un grupo de poemas escrito en honor de Yosef ben Todros, hijo del Rah, en un momento en el que su importancia en la corte supera a la de su padre, el poeta juega con la ambigüedad, con el tôpico de "la poesia como mentira," para censurar con ironia la falta de generosidad del Rah: "<-qué dene que ver la liberalidad con él?" Si parece ser un benefactor es solo gracias a su hijo Yosef. 40 El encabezamiento de uno de los poemas mâs conocidos, dirigido asimismo a Yosef, indica que el poeta trataba de aplacar al Rah tras haberle cridcado. El poema, un prodigio de refinamiento estético, se deleita de nuevo en el juego con la verdad y la mentira de la poesia; alude a su reproche a Rab Todros, "padre de las alabanzas," con palabras igualmente ambiguas: ",·puede haber algo tan vacio como la mentira de maldecirle?"41 Quizá aqui tengamos la clave de anteriores palabras equivocas. La poesia, al fin y al cabo, no dene que decir la verdad, y el pariente poderoso no le parecia en realidad a nuestro poeta ni muy generoso ni muy buen escritor. Aparte de esta informaciôn directa, no es mucho mâs lo que sabemos sobre la acdvidad poédca del Rab. Conocemos algunos poemas suyos breves, como los que intercambiô con Abraham Bedersi con ocasiôn de su viaje con los Reyes al sur de Francia en 1275.42 El intercambiô de poemas entre ambos résulta interesante por varios motivos: en primer lugar, para constatar el prestigio del que 38

39 4(1

41 42

Se trata de nefe! ièkiyyah, Yellin, II, 2, moax. 29 s., n° 23; ta-nèdod me bëfci, 30 s., n° 24, y ‫י‬oferyimtaq, 32, n° 25. hà-nagi'ah ha-mi'erah, Yellin, I, 181, n° 431. Cf. hâ-lekje! li, Yellin, I, 185, n° 432. Véanse las interesantes observaciones que hace Brann 1991: 152 s. miSorer 10 'yidabber, Yellin, I, 173 s., n° 424. Véase el libro MaSkiyot kesef de M. Thama, Amsterdam 1765, 23b-26a, en el que se imprimen buen numéro de los textos poédcos y cartas de ese intercambiô segûn el ms. de la British Library, Ms. Or. Add. 27.168, 21 ss. Cf. sobre el tema Schirmann, H. 1979. "'Iyyunim bë-qobbe? ha-širim wé-ha-méliçot sel Abraham ha-Bederši." En Studies in the History of Hebrew Poetry and Drama (Hebr.). Jerusalem: Mossad Bialik, 409 s.; Baer: 1981, 95 s., 102.

goza el Rab en el sur de Francia; las palabras de Abraham Bedersí son muy significadvas, y aun contando con el tono hiperbôlico habitual en los panegiricos, hay un sentimiento claro de admiraciôn por quien goza del alto favor de los Reyes de Castilla.43 A eso se suma la esdma de su calidad de poeta: en la descripciôn que hace el manuscrito sobre el Rab le llama "sabio y experto en candcos" ('arum ^êmirot, f. 21); y entre otros calificativos el Bedersi se refiere al Rab como "el de gratas canciones" (rtë'im sçmirol). El Rab se cuenta entre los "cantores" (mēš0rerim), mientras que él es tan solo de la categoria de los "porteros" (io'àrim, f. 21ab). La almra artistica de los poemas que se intercambian no es muy elevada, pero están elaborados dentro de las categorias estéticas de la época: respuestas en el mismo tono, a veces con la misma rima y metro, versos breves, muy retôricos, llenos de aliteraciones y juegos de palabras, a veces con rima tajnis, versos en los que todas las palabras condenen una letra del alfabeto (como el lamed), etc. Uno de los poemas que escribe el Rab de esa manera, conceptual y no demasiado inspirada, dice asi: Me son muy gratas tus palabras, y jcômo se compromete mi corazôn por el depôsito de tu poesia, de abundantes aguas? r Quién irrumpirá, acercàndose con un poema para luchar condgo? pues tu entendimiento jquién lo mide?, ο ,:quién pelea condgo? Con las dos hijas del poema se ha desposado hoy, pues su amor es un depôsito en d que te ama en abundancia.44 Un conocido poema del Bedersi sobre el câlamo y la espada,45 inspirado en unos versos árabes, está escrito en honor del Rab, y el poeta provenzal se lo enviô con ocasiôn de esa visita.46 Cuando esos hechos quedaban ya lejos, Abraham Bedersi enviô al Rab Todros un panegirico parodiando una parte de la haggadab de Pesab, a la que respondiô el Rab con unos versos no conservados en los que condnuaba la parodia; el Bedersi contestô de nuevo en la misma linea.47 Tampoco son muestra de altas aptitudes poéticas los seis versos de carácter didâctico con los que comienza el Rab su obra cabalistica Ša'ar ha-ra^im, explicando el contenido y el nombre del libro, de acuerdo con una practica muy común en los siglos XII y XIII, y precediendo a unas 1íneas en prosa rimada.48 Lo mismo puede decirse de unos versos breves al final del libro con el acrôstico de su nombre. Hay también algunos versos similares en su Sefer 'osar ha-kabod. Es-

43 44 45 46

47

48

Si no interpreto mal sus palabras, Bedersi llega a llamar al RaJj "rey de Israel," melek Isra'el. f. 21. iihefca mè'odye'erab, f. 21b. 'en 'efita bi-bkot, Schirmann, Ha-firah ba-'ikrit bi-Sfaradu-bl-Prvvencc. II, 470, n° 402. Es también digno de notarse el hecho de que en el intercambio de poemas se introduce una problemarica sobre la raíz de kidude V/ (Job 41,11), que se discudô ya en al-Andalus en el siglo X, en dempo de Ménahem y Dünas; todo indica que la poesia y la filologia siguen hermanadas. El Bedersi sosdene, en contra del Rab, que debe incluirse en la raiz kdd (f. 22b). Véase Ménahem, Mahberet. Ed. A. Sàenz-Badillos, Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1986 , 123*; Dünas ben Labrat, TèJufc0/. Ed. A. Saenz-Badillos, Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1980, 26*, 32. Véase el comentario de Davidson, I. 1907. Parody in Jewish Literature. New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 16 ss. Ed. M. Kushnir-'Oron, Jerusalem 1989, 43 s.

cribiô asimismo un widdui para el dia de Kippur: ribbono sel 'olam 10 ' bë-miqreh.v> Ninguna de esas composiciones nos révéla condiciones poéticas dignas de especial menciôn, y su fuente de inspiration dene poco que ver con al-Andalus. La obra poética de estos dos escritores hebreos de la Toledo de la segunda mitad del siglo XIII représenta, como vemos, dos modos completamente disdntos de entender el judaismo. Uno, manteniendo vivos los valores andalusies y defendiendo la libertad personal; el otro, fiel a una linea mâs traditional y cerrada que trata de implantarse con beligerancia. Se reflejan en ellos las tendencias plurales y divergentes que se daban entre la elite intelectual de la comunidad toledana.

49

Comentado por L. Zunz, Literaturgeschichte, 481.

G L I EBREI DI SICILIA ALLA LUCE DELLE FONTI NOTARILI DEL XV SECOLO ANGELA SCANDALIATO Scciacca-AG-, Italy

Lo spoglio degli atti notarili negli Archivi siciliani, sporadico e frammentario fino agü anni 70, è diventato più sistemadco ncll'ultimo decennio anche per effetto della ristampa del Codice Diplomatico dei Giudei di Sicilia dei fratelli Lagumina che ha risvegliato l'interesse degli studiosi per l'ebraismo isolano, ma soprattutto per l'impegno di due studiosi: Carmelo Trasseiii, che negli scorsi decenni cerco di attirare l'attenzione degli storici sulla specificità dell'ebraismo siciliano, e Benedetto Rocco che, con competenza specifica, ha studiato documend ed epigrafi in giudeo arabo rinvenud nell'isola. Più che dagli atti ufficiali, già ampiamente smdiati, riguardanti i rapporti tra l'autorità regia o viceregia e le comunità, la realtà dell'ebraismo siciliano, sia con riferimento all'attività delle comunità organizzate e ai rapporti interni, in modo più vivace e puntuale, sia per quanto attiene la sfera privata, sta emergendo dalla lettura delle carte notarili ancora in parte inesplorate. Numerose negli Archivi di Palermo, Termini Imerese, Trapani, Sciacca, relative prevalentemente al XV secolo, esigue e non molto significative quelle rimaste in altri Archivi della Sicilia orientale che tuttavia meritano di essere prese in considerazione per inquadrare nella giusta prospettiva la storia degli ebrei siciliani. Alcuni documenti sono stati formnatamente utilizzati nei decenni scorsi da storici locali prima del definitivo deterioramento o della perdita dei registri notarili, come nel caso di Catania, Mazara del Vallo, Modica. Le ricerche iniziate negli anni scorsi consentono già di sviluppare un lavoro storiografico più ampio rispetto al passato e di inquadrare l'ebraismo siciliano, quasi senza soluzione di continuità fino alla espulsione del 1492, nella complessa realtà mediterranea medioevale, partendo dai documenti della Genizah di Fustat ricchi di informazioni sulla condizione degli ebrei siciliani nell'Alto Medioevo. E' stato possibile procedere in modo meno approssimativo alla identificazione di alcuni siti ebraici, dei relativi quartieri e Muschite, (come venivano chiamate nell'isola le sinagoghe), ricavare notizie attendibili sulla entità numerica della popolazione, sulla cultura e il grado d'istruzione, l'organizzazione comunitaria, la vita sociale e religiosa, i rapporti con l'etnia dominante. Gli ebrei siciliani si rivolgevano ai notai cristiani anche per regolare giuridicamenti i rapporti interni alla comunità. Testamenti, donazioni, contratti matrimoniali, processi di divorzio, sentenze arbitral!, venivano, in un primo tempo, registrati da notai ebrei delle comunità in giudeo-arabo, in arabicu (com'è

specificato in un documento dell'Archivio di Stato di Trapani)1 e come si evince da annotazioni nella stessa lingua, al margine di alcuni contratti;2 successivamente venivano riscdtd con formulari divers! presso i notai cristiani per garantirne la validità giuridica erga omnes. Nulla sembra essere rimasto degli archivi sinagogali se non qualche frammento di rollo della Torà su supporto pergamenaceo dciclato per rilegare alcuni registri notarili, importante mttavia ai fini della ricerca linguisdca e del Iavoro di ricognizione degli studiosi sulla cosiddetta Genisgab Ita/iana.1 Abbiamo nodzia dei notai ebrei di diverse comunità e della loro atuvità anche come sacerdoti, scannatori rituali ed esperd nelle lingue, araba , ladna, siciliana. A Palermo per esempio, nel 1483 il notaio Benedetto de Geraci, traduce dal giudeo-arabo in siciliano l'intera Ketubbab del matrimonio tra Efraim Xifuni ed Ester Aurifici e rilascia tale documento a richiesta delle pard per la soluzione di un processo civile. II documento veramente raro, insieme a due inventari dotali anch'essi tradotti in siciliano dallo stesso notaio, ha una notevole rilevanza antropologica oltre che linguisdca, perché ci rivela in modo più diretto le consuemdini matrimoniali degli ebrei siciliani.4 Com'è stato più volte osservato, l'uso dell'arabo, nella lingua parlata, rispondeva per gli ebrei alia necessità di mantenere l'identità culmrale di fronte ai siciliani di religione crisdana e lingua neo-ladna; l'uso dell'alfabeto ebraico li disdngueva dagli arabi musulmani.5 Le frequend migrazioni di ebrei nel mediterraneo facilitarono la soprawivenza dell'arabo, parecchi giudei sono definid barbarosi, cioè proveniend dal Nord Africa, mentre d'altra parte parecchi ebrei siciliani si recavano per modvi culturali e commerciali nel Maghreb, in Egitto, a Malta, in Spagna. L'arabo era dunque parlato non solo da turgbimanni cioè interpreti ο da mercand che scrivevano le lettere di cambio in muriscu, ma da gente comune. Dagli atd notarili emerge che il siciliano era la lingua della vita materiale e quoddiana; in siciliano sono infatd riportate nei documend intere frasi che ebrei rivolgono a interlocutor! crisriani.6 Mancano invece nei protocolli notarili le Ketubbot parzialmente redatte in aramaico e gli inventari dotali in giudeo-arabo, che rimanevano documend interni alla comunità. Secondo lo studioso siciliano Benedetto Rocco che per primo nell'isola ha studiato in modo sistemadco il giudeo-arabo usato in tali atd, si tratterebbe di un dialetto dell'occidente ricco di termini siciliani arabizzad e trascritto in caratteri ebraici. 1

2

‫נ‬ 4

5 6

Archivio di Stato di Trapani (d'ora in poi AST), notai defunti, not. F. Milo, reg. 8623, cc. 280r-v, 24 Giugno 1442. Ibid. not. N. Cirami cc. 248r-260v, 1441-42, cit. in Scandaliato, A. 1998. "Momentii di vita ebraica a Trapani nel Quattrocento." In Gli Ebrei in Sidlia da! Tardoantico al Medioevo, Studi in onore di Möns. Benedetto Rocco. Palermo: Flaccovio. Cfr. Perani, M. 1997. "La Geniza Italiana." EAJS 2, 15-21. Rocco, B.-Giuffrida, A. 1976. "Documend giudeo-arabi nel XV sec. A Palermo." Studi Magrebini 8, 53-109. Ibid. Es. Archivio di Stato di Sciacca (d'ora in poi ASS) notai defunti, not. A. Liotta reg. 2, c.125 e sgg. 30 ott. 1435, cit. in Scandaliato, A. -Gerardi, M. 1996. "Gli Ebrei in Sicilia nel Medioevo: Cultura e Lingua." Arch. St. Sic. I, 116-133.

Di un privilegio speciale, risalente probabilmente all'età dei Martini, godevano gli ebrei di Sciacca, città demaniale fornita di caricatore per l'ammasso e l'esportazione del grano, e di Caltabellotta, città feudale poco distante, interessata al commercio granario: potevano apporre la loro firma in giudeoarabo al margine di alcuni contratti specie testament!. Tale caratteristica fino ad oggi non è stata rilevata in nessuna altra comunità dell'isola, anche se non è stato possibile finora darne una spiegazione documentata. 7 Durante la mia ricerca condotta all'Archivio di Stato di Sciacca insieme alla Dott.ssa Gerardi, mi sono imbattuta in alcuni contratu, specie donazioni e testamend, più raramente semplici vendite, che portavano al margine firme in giudeo-arabo di ebrei maggiorend chiamad a testimoniare, com'è possibile appurare attraverso la traduzione ladna dei nomi che talora il notaio crisdano registra nella stessa pagina. Di queste singolari firme si sta interessando Monsignor Rocco da noi informato qualche anno fa. Infatd gli atd con firme in giudeo-arabo pubblicad alla metà degli anni '70 dallo stesso Rocco e da Giuffrida, considerad allora una rarità, si riferiscono ad un notaio che alla metà del Quattrocento rogava a Sciacca, i cui registri, non si sa per quali vie, sono finid nell'Archivio di Stato di Palermo. Che le giudecche di Sciacca e Caltabellotta si trovassero nella prima metà del Quattrocento in una situazione favorevole economicamente e culturalmente, è testimoniato da un numéro consistente di contratd in cui sono menzionau ebrei e dalla fondazione a Sciacca di una Yeshibah. Si tratta dello Studium sono nel 1447 per iniziadva del banchiere David de Minachem e di Stella la moglie, con regolare autorizzazione del sovrano a teuere scholas seu Studium sue legis per gli studenti ebrei di tutta l'isola.s Le vicende dello Studium, travagliate sia a causa delle rivalità interne tra la famiglia del rettore Levi de Sagictono e quella dei Minachem, sia per l'ostilità delle autorità cristiane, si possono seguire fino all'espulsione del 1492 attraverso gli atd dei notai di Sciacca. La documentazione esaminata lascia supporre che, prima del XV secolo, nell'isola non ci fossero vere e proprie Accademie, e che gli studenti ebrei, tranne qualche raro caso ben conosciuto e documentato di studente medico ammesso nella Università di Padova,9 si recassero nella penisola iberica per perfezionare il loro corso di studi. Sono documentât! rabbini maestri di Legge spagnoli presenti nell'isola, ma evidentemente il loro numéro non era sufficiente per venire incontro alle richieste. Già alla fine del XIII secolo problemi rituali delle comunità venivano risolti con la consulenza di rabbini spagnoli; probabilmente il rito siciliano era molto simile a quello delle comunità del Nord Africa e della Spagna. Nel 1417 Giona magister di Catalogna, si sposta da Palermo, dove teneva uno Studium, a Trapani per la mancanza in quella giudecca di un rabbino e dajan.w Ma nell'isola sono anche documentât! maestri spagnoli che le famiglie abbienti chiamavano nell'isola per l'istruzione elementare dei figli, come quel Bonamicus che a Polizzi nel 1436 stipulé un contratto con il medico Benedetto 7

8 9 10

Ibid. not. A. Liotta, reg. 2, ce. 221-222, 18-7-1436, cit. in Scandaliato, A-Gerardi, M. 1995. "Studium Iudeorum Terre Sacce." Italia]udaica, 438—452. Ibid Lagumina, G. B., 1990. Codice Diplomatico dei Giudei di Sicilia. Palermo, I, 330. Scandaliato, A.-Gerardi, M. " Gli Ebrei in Sicilia...," 127.

Chachim per insegnare ai figli e ai nipoti lectiones débitas et consuetas prout erant dicte lectiones et uniusquisque eorum capaces in ebraico. Lo stesso maestro si impegnava a eommentare i Profeti il Sabato nella Sinagoga per coloro che l'avessero chiesto e a predicarvi tutd gli altri giorni festivi; avrebbe ricevuto per ogni alunno un'onza l'anno e tre onze per le prediche." Il primo tentadvo di aprire uno Studium cioè una Yesbibab siciliana con rabbini e studenti dell'isola a Sciacca rispondeva alla necessità di evitare il disagio dei viaggi, le spese e la lontananza che costringevano i giovani, spesso già impegnad in pacta sponsalia a lasciare alle spose le lettere di ripudio: quod eunte dicto sponso ad Studium, teneatur et sicpromisit idem sponsus ...ab eo dimictere repudium more iudeorum eo non veniente infra tempus annorum decern, è règistrato in un documento del XV secolo.12 Attraverso atd dello stesso archivio di Sciacca, mi è stato possibile inserire il quardere ebraico di Caltabellotta, prima d'ora sconosciuto, nel contesto della città medioevale, all'interno della seconda cinta di mura, indicato nei documend come quardere di li mura. Una traccia materiale importante è stata rinvenuta, durante i numerosi sopralluoghi nel sito, una lapide sepolcrale sul portale di una casa13 molto vicina ad un gruppo di abitazioni che cosdtuivano il complesso sinagogale del XV secolo, individuato grazie alia dettagliata descrizione dell'atto di vendita sdlato dal notaio Verderame di Caltabellotta nel 1492. Dell'anuca Sinagoga che è attualmente oggetto di studio interdisciplinare, rimangono un arco quattrocentesco, il sistema di cortili, il pozzo. Nell'individuazione del complesso della mescbita si sta rivelando importante l'analisi di due documend, da me già parzialmente pubblicari, che descrivono dettagliatamente i luoghi, i confini e la distribuzione dei locali; non sembra casuale il fatto che si trovi nella Via delle Scuole. II complesso delle costruzioni comprendeva la mescbita vera e propria dove si svolgevano i rid bominum et feminarum soleratam subius et super con cortile e cisterna per le abluzioni, una casa cum cbinissia in cui abitava il maestro di scuola rabbi Nissim de Sagictono, i balnea cum cortile in quibus balneabant dich judei.14 Altra giudecca idendficata attraverso atd notarili è quella di Termini Imerese, l'andca Imera, che nel Quattrocento ospito una ricca comunità ebraica, in stretto contatto con quella di Palermo. I documend del locale Archivio consentono di conoscere le consuetudini seguite dagli ebrei in materia di diritto successorio e matrimoniale. Particolarmente interessante il divorzio tra Lazzaro Sacerdote leader della comunità e la moglie Perna perché costei è indecrepita senectutus et non potest cum eodem La^arofiliosprocreare...xs In realtà la donna otdene il divorzio da Lazzaro dopo anni in cui i due stent in rixis et litigiis rinunziando con una donacionem irrevocabilem inter vivos ai suoi beni dotali. Perna sacrifica la sua dote e i 11 12

13 14

15

Ibid., 124. Archivio di Stato Termini Imerese (d'ora in poi ASTI), notai defunti, not. Antonio Bonafede, reg. 12840, 17 Marzo 14. Scandaliato, A. 1993. "La Giudecca di Caltabellotta nel XV sec." La FardeHiana 12, 1-17 Ibid., il documento si trova in ASS. notai defunti, not. P. Buscemi reg 30, cc. 81r-v, 10 dicembre 1492. ASTI, notai defunti. Not. Girolamo La Tegera. reg. 12843, 19 ottobre 1463, XII Ind., cit. in Scandaliato, Α. 1993-94 "La Giudecca di Termini Imerese nel XV secolo: il divorzio tra Lazzaro Sacerdote e Perna." Acc. Sc. Lett. Arti, Palermo, 9-26.

beni familiari cui ha diritto avendo contratto matrimonio alla latina, cioè a comunione di beni. L'altro tipo di matrimonio che gli ebrei siciliani potevano scegliere era quello alia greca che invece prevedeva la separazione dei beni.16 L'atto di divorzio illumina la condizione femminile ebraica nel Medioevo e il progressivo mutamento della psicologia della donna, del suo ruolo in seno alia famiglia.17 Attraverso una protesta contro i giudici spirimali della comunità di Sciacca accusati di parzialità nella causa di divorzio fra Ricca e Sabatino de Accavo, abbiamo alcune informazioni sulla procedura seguita in tali casi: non si potevano rilasciare copie degli atti processuali al marito prima di essere interrogato, era data la possibilità alla donna di avere concessi tre termini per la sentenza.18 Nel contesto si fa riferimento ad errori di procedura giudiziaria e a due diverse interpretazioni della legge mosaica che lasciano intravedere i conflitti tra famiglie rivali per assicurarsi una sentenza favorevole. Si registra inoltre una simazione generale di incertezza del diritto dovuta a difficoltà di interpretazione in sede locale. Dall'Archivio di Stato di Trapani provengono interessanti documenti, in uno dei quali è narrata la storia di Conmayra Cuyno la quale denunzia il cognato Nachono Levi perché in base alia legge sul levirato voleva costringerla a sposarlo; per spiegare le sue motivazioni, temendo una sentenza sfavorevole, la donna si rivolge alla più alta carica ebraica dell'isola negli anni '40, il Dienchelele Moise de Bonavoglia medico favorito di re Alfonso il Magnanimo, esponente di una categoria che nell'isola godeva di notevoli privilegi.19 Anche il già citato Lazzaro Sacerdote di Termini era uno di questi medici che esercitavano ufficialmente la loro professione anche tra i cristiani. In un documento del 1463 si dice infatti che i giurati della città assegnavano a Lazzaro Sacerdote un terreno per fabbricare, attentis quamplurimis serviciis prestitis per eum universitati dicte terre de eius magisterio phisice et cirugie.20 Dopo il divorzio da Perna, aveva sposato la figlia di Ioseph e Garufa Abudarem, altra nota famiglia di Palermo.21 La figlia Pace sposando Salomone Gasseni figlio del maestro Moysi Gasseni di Palermo, probabilmente anche lui medico, riceverà in dote dal padre fra beni e somme di denaro una dote di 400 onze, un vero patrimonio. II matrimonio era stato contratto con regime patrimoniale alla greca, compatibile, come si specifica nell'atto dotale, col matrimonio ebraico: ita quod numquam bona confunduntur more ebrayco.22 Altro personaggio singolare della comunità di Termini era Brachono Taguil, esercitava un ufficio pubblico come luogotenente del secreto della città, caso veramente unico nell'isola nel XV secolo, per quanto ne sappiamo, che rivela il notevole livello di integrazione degli ebrei nella realtà sociale di Termini e gli 16 17

18 19 20 21 22

Ibid. Cfr. Scandaliato, A. 1991. "La donna ebrea siciliana nel Medioevo." La Fardetliana 61-70, e inoltre Scandaliato, A. 1997. "La donna ebrea nella società mediterranea medioevale." Materia Giudaica 3. ASS. notai defunti, not. A.Liotta, reg. 25, 23 Marzo 1473. Cfr. nota 2. ASTI, notai defunti, not. G. La Tegera, reg. 12843, 5 settembre 1463, XII Indizione. Ibid, not A. Bonafede, reg. 12838-01, 8 gennaio, III Ind. 1470. Ibid. cfr. nota 11.

spazi offerti a singoli personaggi ebrei cui veniva ufficialmente riconosciuta una particolare capacità ο professionalità,23 nonostante le numerose restrizioni giuridiche. Un precedente del genere troviamo nel XIII sec. a Messina dove un certo Gaudius ebreus era notaio della zecca efidelisdell'imperatore Federico II.24 Da un altro documento dell'Archivio di Termini, sappiamo di un certo Aron Cassuni cioè in siciliano Kassem che da Nicosia si spostava a Caccamo, città vicina a Termini, e in altre città dell'isola, per scannare omnia animalia dicte judaice et docere officium ebraicum ai giovani della comunità.25 Lo shohet siciliano spesso svolgeva funzioni di presbitero e tabellionatus cioè notaio. Le comunità più grandi disponevano di amanuensi il cui lavoro conosciamo attraverso un contratto notarile di Trapani. Un certo Machalufo Chilfa il 19 luglio del 1470 s'impegna in un contratto con Jacob de Sadono a copiare il libro Genesis et omnes propbecujas Prophetarum, con le seguenu clausole: l'amanuense avrebbe ricevuto una certa quandtà di pergamena, avrebbe dovuto rispettare le misure e il upo di scrittura suggeriu dal suo committente, ad instar lictere seu gaibarum licterarum quaterni existentis in posse ipsius Jacob bine ad menses sex...26 e consegnare il lavoro entro sei mesi il lavoro, pena la restituzione di onze e pergamena. Nelle due onze era compresa anche la copia di quoddam ufficium ebraico per tutto l'anno con gli stessi caratteri del libro in possesso di Nissim de Nissim. Documend dello stesso Archivio hanno consendto di ricostruire la storia di una nota famiglia di banchieri, i Sala, il cui ruolo politico come mediatori tra la comunità e il potere centrale e come ambasciatori dei sovrani, fin dal periodo dei Martini, è ben noto agli studiosi. Oggi è possibile conoscere il vissuto dei singoli membri, le vicende familiari, entrare nella loro casa, immaginarne la vita quotidiana. La storia della famiglia Sala di Trapani è il primo passo di una ricerca sulle oligarchie ebraiche dell'isola che conto di portare avanti. Scarse e frammentarie sono invece le notizie sulla giudecca di Siracusa, la seconda per importanza dopo Palermo, per quanto riguarda l'ultimo periodo di permanenza degli ebrei nell'isola; gli atti dei notai del locale Archivio seppur esigui numericamente, consentono di visualizzare in modo chiaro sulla base di dati certi e non su ipotesi, i con fini dell'insediamento ebraico nel cuore dell'isola di Ortigia, che agli studiosi di architettura è apparso un'eccezione per la sua collocazione all'interno delle mura cittadine fin dai secoli precedenti il XV. 23

24

25 26

Ibid. not. A. Bonafede, reg. 12834, c. 81, 17 luglio 1438. Questo interessante documento è la protesta di due crisdani Pericono de Castellano e Filippo Lumbardo tutori degli eredi di Nicolà de Ugone udversus et contra Brachono Taguil iudeum iocumtenentem secret: terre Thermarum, in quanto privati, dai proprietari di alcune terre vicine, del diritto ad udlizzare l'acqua della fonte di Termini, in base ad un privilegio concesso alla famiglia da re Federico per l'atdvità del loro mulino, inatdvo da quattro anni per carenza di acqua usata invece per irrigazione. Nonostante i due si fossero rivolri insistentemente al secreto della città per essere reintegrad nei loro diritri, non avevano ricevuto nessuna risposta. La protesta viene ora fatta anche contro il Taguil suo luogotenente che avuta copia della diffida, respondit... quodfaciet responsionem cum diiigenti consilio. Simonsohn, S. 1997. The Jews in Siciiy, Leiden-New York-Koln: Brill I, doc. 217, 16 Dicembre 1239, 456. Cfr. nota 14. Scandaliato, A. 1996. "Il contratto di un copista ebreo a Trapani nel 1470." Sefer Yuhasin 12, 4 1 43.

Vi si parla della Rua Larga dove sorgevano le case palachate di alcuni maggiorenu: i Sigilmes, i De Missina, del palazzo del Rais de Ragusa, della Ruga Sancti Philippi che si slargava sulla platea judaice dove sorgeva anche la meschita con ingresso principale sulla piazza, della platea parva su cui si affacciavano botteghe e taverne. Abbiamo oggi la certezza che la meschita non si trovava dove poi sorse la Chiesa di S. Filippo, com'è stato erroneamente scritto, ma in altro luogo della stessa piazza, data l'esistenza della Chiesa nel Quattrocento. Sono documentai numerosi trappeti per la molitura delle olive di proprietà di ebrei, diverse società per il commercio nel Nord Africa, frequenüssimi contatu con l'isola di Malta, non solo per motivi commercial!, ( molto venduto in quegli anni il cotone maltese), ma anche per la gestione di proprietà immobiliari.27 I pochi documend del XV secolo rimandano l'immagine di una comunità ancora fiorente proiettata come ai tempi della Genizah nei paesi che si affacciano sul Mediterrâneo. La vita culturale che aveva contraddistinto la comunità siracusana nei secoli precedend rimanc intensa fino all'espulsione: si conoscono infatu alcuni manoscritd ebraici del Quattrocento e copie di libri cabbalisdci, opera dell'amanuense siracusano Sabadno Aniello.28 Bisogna, riteniamo, intensificare il lavoro di analisi documentaria per far luce su fenomeni quali l'espulsione del 1492 e il marranesimo, ancora poco esplorad dagli studiosi. Siamo tuttavia in grado di fornire alcuni dad proveniend da due soli documend, sulla espulsione degli ebrei da Trapani dove in pochi giorni nell'agosto del 1492 s'imbarcano più di settecento ebrei i cui maggiorenu s'impegnano finanziariamente a saldare il conto del viaggio che Ii avrebbe condotti nel regno di Napoli. Ma gli atti notarili non si limitano a registrare numeri, ci consentono di ricostruire talvolta storie di intere famiglie, di awertire il dramma delle scelte dei singoli e dei loro parenu: abiurare e convertirsi o abbandonare tutto e ricominciare ad errare. Uno dei contratti prevedeva che i parvuli iudei fino a sette anni sarebbero stari computad due per uno, non compresi infantibus in uberibus matruum, ma la clausola più importante che suona come orgogliosa affermazione della idendtà ebraica, è la promessa che il patrono della nave teneaturfacere cameras de Sabatis in dicta navi ad espensas dictipatroni.™ I documend aprono spaccati di vita quoddiana e familiare e possibilità di ricerca che non è compito della nostra breve relazione approfondire. Altre norizie sull'espulsione ci vengono dai notai di Sciacca; attraverso gli atu di vendita effettuati al momento della partenza nel 1492 e altri contratti dell'anno successivo è stato possibile risalire al numéro esatto degli ebrei della comunità saccense costituita da 1286 individui,3" e correggendo i dati forniti da altri studiosi, confermare un dato demografico già rilevato qualche anno fa attraverso

27

28

29 30

Archivio di Stato di Siracusa, notai defunti, reg. 10244, ce. 73r-v, 19 Gennaio 1481, e ce. 164r-v, 166r; ce. 105 r-v, 17 luglio 1485; ce. 99v, 101r, 3 luglio 1485. I manoscritd si trovano nella Biblioteca Vadcana; dobbiamo questa informazione alla Dott.ssa Nadia Zeldes che ringraziamo. Scandaliato, A. "Momend di vita ebraica...." 189-194. Scandaliato, A.-Gerardi, M. "Note sugli ebrei di Sciacca alla fine del XV secolo." In Gli Ebrei di Sicilia dalTardoantico..., 221-241.

uno scrutinio elettorale degli inizi del secolo.31 L'espulsione créa un complicate intreccio di relazioni e accordi txa ebrei e cristiani che in parte è dettato da una lunga tradizione di convivenza, in parte dalle necessità del momento e dal bisogno di cedere ai compromessi per ridurre gli svantaggi di una più che difficile situazione. Desidero infine inserire in questo contesto anche una interessante notizia: ho rinvenuto, qualche giorno fa, tra gli atd del notaio Amato Bellomo di Sciacca un contratto che consente di ubicare il cimitero ebraico di Caltabellotta in contrada grudiceHi,1,2 nel luogo dove sorge una necropoli con tombe a grotdcella artificiale.33 Ma a questo punto la parola passa agli archeologi. I dad che abbiamo finora fornito, si tratta certo di poche nodzie, dovrebbero tuttavia indurci, riteniamo, a ridimensionare parzialmente il giudizio dato alla fine del XV secolo sull'ebraismo siciliano dall'ebreo Obadia da Bertinoro, di passaggio nell'isola durante il suo viaggio per la Palesdna:34 che la secolare convivenza tra ebrei e cristiani nell'isola, considéré come una minaccia e un rischio per l'identità ebraica, e quello di quanti oggi, con ancora minor prudenza e con più grande pregiudizio, continuano a ripetere certi luoghi comuni.

31 32 33 34

Ibid. 1992. La Giudecca di Sciacca tra XIV e XV secolo. Castelvetrano, 27-30. ASS, notai defunti, Not. Amato Bellomo, reg. 19, cc. 40, 4 Marzo 1464. Giustolisi, V. 1981. Camico, Triocala, Caltabellotta. Palermo. Ovadya Yare da Bertinoro, Letten dalla Terra Santa. Versione italiana di Busi, G. 1991 Rimini: Luisè, 12.

T H E H E B R E W POETS OF C H R I S T I A N SPAIN AND THE ARABIC LITERARY HERITAGE ARIE SCHIPPERS

University of Amsterdam, The Neteherlands In this paper I will deal with an aspect of the question of how long the Arabic influence persisted in the system of medieval secular Hebrew poetry, and what is the literary impact of the Arabic literary tradition on the Hebrew poets of Christian Spain. The aim here is to determine to what extent the Hebrew poets of Christian Spain are in contact with a direct living Arabic poetic tradition. In the minds of the medieval Hebrew literate persons themselves Yehudah ha-Levi (1075-1141; Tudela) was the last and also the best poet of this Spanish Hebrew tradition, but a century and a half later Todros Abu 'l-'Afiyah (1247-1306; Toledo) was still very much in touch with the Arabic poetic tradition. In this paper I will investigate to what extent this is also true for other poets of Christian Spain, especially those who lived in more peripheric territories such as Josef Ibn Zabara of Barcelona who lived in the twelfth century, and Meshullam de Piera of Gerona (lived until 1258—1260). I will make some remarks about the connection with the Arabic tradition in the work of the four mentioned poets, first two classicists in this respect, then two poets with looser ties with Arabic: 1. Yehudah ha-Levi; 2. Todros Abu 'l-'Afiyah; 3. Josef ibn Zabara; and 4. Meshullam de Piera, focusing on Josef ibn Zabarah as far as the last two poets are concerned, and limiting myself to a conelusive note on Meshullam de Piera. Yehudah ha-Levi trained himself from the very outset in composing poems in the Arabic tradition. One of the remarkable poems in his youth is the poem on the departure of a certain Yishaq [ha-Yatom/ Ibn Ghiyath]1 in which he copied and translated an Arabic poem by Ibn Shuhayd, a poet who lived in Cordoba from 992—1035.2 Ibn Shuhayd made a poem with which he scandalized an eminent Cordoban woman who visited the mosque to worship God. Yehudah ha-Levi in his poem, translated the lines by Ibn Shuhayd and added some lines Ratzaby, Y. 1970, made the discovery of this translation in his article "Petiha meturgemet be-shir-perud le-rabbi Yehudah ha-Levi" in Biqqoret u-Farshanut 1, 46-50. The addressee of the poem, a certain Ishaq, can be possibly identified by using Saenz-Badillos, A. and Targarona, Borrás,J. 1988. Diccionario de autoresjudios (Sefarad. Siglos X-XV). Cordoba: El Almendro, s.v. Yishaq. Ibn Shuhayd was the author of a kind of prose treatise with poetic quotations called The Familiar Spirits and Inspiring Demons, which he wrote in 1025. Ibn Shuhayd deals in this work with the valley of the spirits which is situated in one of the spheres of the Ptolemaic cosmos, to which he himself was elevated. The persona Ibn Shuhayd in this story shows his interest for naturally gifted poets, and detests critics and pedantic scholars. The poet meets the inspiring spirits of the great poets of Arabic literature, such as the wine poet Abu Nuwas (768—817). Before Abu Nuwas' spirit, he recites this poem which had great success with him. The familiar spirit of Abu Nuwas, now considers Ibn Shuhayd as a qualified poet.

on the departure of Ishaq. This poem reads as follows (the numbers between brackets refer to the Arabic original):3 (1) "A woman looking out from under the veil of her veils, going was she on the ways of rightnesses [i.e. to perform her religious dudes]."4 (2) She advanced with her child seeking a place of rest to separate herself from worldliness in the manner of those who practice piety and devotion. (3) She looked like a svelte gazelle sent out fondling a young, in the height of mountains. (5) She grew frightened from concern for her little one, so I called out: "Be calm, do not be afraid, ο companion of young roes!" (6) Then she turned away, and, as she made haste [to flee] (2Sam 4:4), pillars of her spices filled the sides."5 (4) She went sofdy (Isa 8:6) and slowly [calmly] until she traversed the den of young lions. (6b) They [the pillars of spices] were in the track of the hem of her robe in the form of a snake, camphire with spikenard (Song 4:13). Like the treading of the footsteps of Yishaq when he stood there to kiss his beloved ones on Mount Bether (Song 2:17) [the mountain of the clefts = separations?]. After his departure they returned in order to kiss the place of his feet and to lick the dust. And they found like honey its taste and smell, bringing again the spirits to the corpses. It is amazing how such an irreverent and scandalous poem can be used as an introduction to a departure poem by Yehudah ha-Levi. To discover such adapted translations of Arabic poems into Hebrew seems to me still to be a rewarding and honourable objective in present-day research. Tracing Arabic sources and Hebrew-Arabic parallels helps studying the process of poetic adaptation and the artistic disposition and preference of individual poets. The above poem cannot be interpreted without knowing its source.

3

4

5

The translation from the Hebrew from: Yehudah ha-Levi, Diwan. Ed. H. Brody 1904/5664, II, Berlin, 235, 1-10. For the Arabic text (between brackets the order of the Dhakhirah), see Ibn Bassam, Abu Ί-Hasan Ali Kitab al-Dhakhirahfi mahasin ahl al-jasjrah, ed. Ihsan Abbas 1399/ 1979. Beyrouth. I: I, 264; Al-Maqqari al-Tilimsani, Ahmad Ibn Muhammad (died 1041/1631). Naß al-Tib min Ghusn al-Andalus al-ratib, ed. Ihsan Abbas 1388/1968 Beyrouth, I, 623; Monroe, J. T. 1971. The Treatise of Familiar Spirits and Demons, by Abu Amir ibn Sbuhaid al-Ashja'i, al-Andalusi (Intraduction, translation and notes). Los Angeles: UCLA, 67 . Ibn Shuhayd (1969), Diwan. Cairo , 94-96; cf. Monroe 1971: note 53: "According to Ibn Khaqan the poet used to sit with his friends at the portal of the Great Mosque of Cordoba next to the minaret. He adds: 'Behold there was a daughter of one of the notables of Cordoba accompanied by slave girls who veiled and concealed her. And she sought a place for private converse with her Lord, desiring a spot where she might beseech pardon for her sins. She was veiled to prevent her being observed and was alert against that possibility while before her went a child of hers. So when her eye fell upon Abu 'Amir she turned away hurriedly and went off in distress, fearing lest he be inspired by her and divulge her name. So when he saw her he improvised these lines of poetry wherein he dishonored her and made her notorious'." The original Arabic line (6) is translated into Hebrew by lines 5 and 7.

Al-Harizi (1170—1235; originally from Andalusia, but lived in Provence and travelled to the East), who came himself with a revival in Classicism based upon Arabic literary models, praises Yehudah ha-Levi because of his classicism.6 Al-Harizi was apparendy not so sadsfied with the poets coming from the Chrisdan North of Spain where the ues with Arabic culture were lesser. In the maqama of the poets of Andalusia the narrator expressed the view, that Yehudah is the last of the Hebrew poets. "He came with a treasure of poetry and the booty of its whole treasury. He took all the objects of his longing with him, went out and shut the door after his departure. All the ones that came after him to learn the craft of his poetry did not even approach the dust of his carriages, whereas all the poets tried to overhear some of his words or to kiss his footprints." This same feeling is fostered in the eighteenth maqama of the time of the Hebrew poets. The narrator pays a visit to Jerusalem, where he gathers with the chosen of Israel. There the view that after Yehudah ha-Levi, Hebrew poetry went into decline is again expressed. Moreover, it is explained why Hebrew poetry failed to flower in the other Jewish communities outside Spain. The poets are divided into five categories; Solomon ibn Gabirol belonging to the highest rank. To the second rank belongs the poetry of Yehudah ha-Levi, Abraham and Moses ibn Ezra. T o the third rank the rest of the Spanish poets, among them Yosef ibn Zabara. But was there really a decline of Arabic influence on Hebrew literature? As far as the dominance of Arabic culture is concerned, Scheindlin expressed it thus: "Castilian Jewry retained its ties with Arabic and Arabic culture longer. Toledo had been a major centre of Arabic civilisation prior to its reconquest in 477/1085, and Arabic continued to be spoken there long after it was forgotten in Aragon. Jews in Castile continued to bear Arabic traditions." Some centuries afterwards we find even the important Hebrew poet in the Arabic tradition Todros Abu 'l-'Afiyah (1247-1306), who lived in the time of Alphonse the Wise (1221—1284) who copied from nearby Classical Arabic examples e.g. deriving from the poet al-Mutanabbi (915-955). A famous line by al-Mutanabbi which served as an example for Todros Abu Ί-'Afiyah read as follows: If there is a laudatory poem, why should it always be preceded by an erotic introduction. Why should every eloquent poet be a fool of love, composing a poem. My love however for Abdallah [his Maecenas] is nearer to me, because every poem of mine ends and starts with his name.7 This is an interesting cri-de-coeur against the tyranny of the literary convention of the nasib or erotic beginning of a poem, and it is significant that Todros Abu Ί-'Afiyah uses this Mutanabbian theme 8 on two occasions in his oeuvre. 9 1 think 6

7 8

Both maqamat mentioned hereafter are included in Schirmann, H. [(.] 1954/1960. Ha-Sbirab ha-lbrit bi-SJarad u-be-Provtnce. Tel Aviv, Jerusalem: Bialik, II a, 103-115 and 131-151. Al-Mutanabbi, Diwan, ed. Dieterici 1861. Berlin, poem n°. 184, 1-2. Mentioned by Yellin, D. 1940. (rcpr. 1972). Torat ha-Shirah has-Sefardit. Jerusalem, 75.

that it is useful to know that Todros twice imitated an Arabic example. The two excerpts read as follows (no. 49: 8-12; and no. 25: 1-5): 10 Truly it is not beautiful to praise the lord with a poem that has words of love in the beginning And the poets who preceded, stammered in their judgement (Sanh 111b) and they have done abominable works, there is nobody who did good. (Ps 14:1) It was them, who first mentioned love, whose praise was provided with all the flowers of the language and riches of words The power of what they wanted to say they destroyed therewith, because they came weary at the laudatory passage Therefore: When I write a poem, my tongue starts and ends with praise And: Truly let the sayers of proverbs not make precede every praise with words of lunadcs, Only because they want to make their poem somewhat longer and they could not find enough laudatory motifs. With love and other things they destroy therefore many of their poems. Now I have found the ruler Yishaq, great in wondrous deeds, numerous in benefits. Therefore, when I make a poem for his glory, I begin and end with his praise. The imitation by Todros Abu Ί-'Afiyah is a larger elaboration of a motif found in the poetry by al-Mutanabbi. But Todros Abu Ί-'Afiyah was perhaps one of the exceptions, due to the fact that he was educated in Toledo. For generally a change had taken place in the Hebrew poetic style in Spain because of the abrupt end of Judeo-Arabic literature in Spain after the persecutions of the Almohad rulers. Catalonia had never been deeply Arabised and seemed to be less under the influence of Arabic culture, and Talmudic and Kabbalistic writings became more in vogue. Scheindlin11 noticed that Hebrew literature fell silent for the space of about a generation; then, at the time of its rebirth in Christian territory, Hebrew literary prose appeared, "in the form of narratives in rhymed prose with short poems inserted, a pattern derived from the Arabic maqama." Scheindlin stresses that most of the Hebrew fictions in rhymed prose are different in ways that seem to link them to the nascent Romance literatures. In this connection he mentions The Book of Delight by Joseph b. Zabara of Barcelona, "a lengthy continuous narrative that displays features linking it to both cultures." In his view the narratives of this period recall the romance more than

9

10

11

Brann, R. 1991 dedicates an ample analysis to one of these poems, see his The Compunctious Poet. Cultural Ambiguity and Hebrew Poetry in Muslim Spain. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 154-156. Quoted from Todros Abu Ί-'Afiya, Can ham-Meshalim we-ha-Hidot, Diwan, ed. D. Yellin, Jerusalem 1932 (I). Scheindlin, R. P. 1994. "The Jews in Muslim Spain." In The Legacy of Muslim Spain. Ed. S. Kh. Jayyusi. Leiden: Brill, 198 ff.

they do the maqama, although he stresses that not enough research is done on the possible symbiosis of the Chrisdan with the Arabic-speaking world at the end of the 12th century. In this respect I want to dwell shortly upon some Arabic feamres in the Book of Delight (Sefer Sha'shu'im) of Ibn Zabara, the poet who has been considered of third range by al-Harizi. Josef Ibn Zabara's book has a frame-story in which the writer's persona himself plays a role.12 A man called Enan invites Josef to go on a journey. Some stories are told within the frame of it. During the journey there are many different discussions, for instance, on food and eadng, but also on behaviour and law, and the stories are told when the occasion jusdfies it. At the end of the journey, Josef and Enan, who appears to be a devil, arrive in Enan's town, and in the final passage of the book the author's persona expresses a profound disgust with the townspeople because of their materialism, their lack of interest for literature and their lack of wisdom, and wants to leave the town. He then directs himself towards Sheshet Ibn Benveniste as a generous patron, the Friend of Generosity—as he calls him according to the Arabic poedc custom— in the typical manner of the Arabic qasida where often after an atrocious overnight journey, the poet calls for the help of his generous patron. Josef ibn Zabara describes him as follows: He is a man of wisdom and discernment, a master of kindness and faith, great in works and good deeds. To sing all his praises, to enumerate all his qualities, was wearisome. He is a prince and a noble in Israel, dealing with the holy nation in faith and governing the people of God. He is esteemed as is the merit of his soul—the great prince Rabana Sheshet ibn Benveniste, may his memory be a blessing and a pride so long as the city's gates turn upon their hinges. Wisdom calls him "my bosom friend and companion;" Faith "my beloved and neighbor;" Governance calls him "my redeemer and comrade;" Generosity "my gende one and delight;" Loving Kindness calls him "my fellow and peer;" and Righteousness "my intimate and associate." The many pronouncements, in this last part of the book, against slander which is called the greatest sin, make us suppose that just like the Arabic poet al-Mutanabbi and so many other poets before him, he suffered from the slander at the court of his patron and wanted to accuse his rivals. Some of this is also to be found in the dedicatory poem of the book to the patron by Ibn Zabara, although in the poem most allusions are apparendy to Enan. The poem can be considered somewhat simple as far as the rhyme on the first person singular perfect on -ti is concerned. My portion from Time—since the day I left him— is my sleep because every night I dream of him.

12

See for this author: Hadas, M. 1932. The Book of Delight by Joseph ben Meir Zabara. With an introducdon by M. Sherwood. New York; Berger, Y. 1928, "Le-toledot meqorotav we-hashpa'ato al Sefer Sha'ashu'im le r' Yosef ben Me'ir Ibn Zabara." Ha-Zofeh le-Hokhmat Yisra'el 12 , 227-241. Dishon, Y. 1985. Sefer Sha'ashu'im te-Yosef Ibn Zabara. Jerusalem. The texts translated from the Hebrew are from: Davidson, I. 1914. A Book of Medieval Lore by Joseph Ben Meir Ibn Zabara. New York; idem 1925. Berlin.

And my destiny is that I remember him above my cup, truly I have mixed my wine with the waters of my tears. To cleanse my cheek from the blood which I have shed on my face, I washed it away with the waters of my tears. Were there not the heat of the fire of my heart which I kindled, I had it almost drowned in the river of my weeping. My indignation is against Time because of a foolish person whose request I granted taking me for a visit to him so that I cried to Time: "I wonder how I could bear this burden upon my shoulders as if I felt the weight of both Mount Thabor and Mount Nophel together." When my name would sound like his name, I would detest it and when it would have a body, I would burn it. I would change his surname to insult him. Even when his name were very sweet, I would change it into bitter. When he would touch my clothes, I would take them off and wash them with soda and soap. Were it not that I had to keep the honour of my soul, and were it not that I had to revere my precious sense, I would have slain him with the spirit of my mouth without a sword, even I would have slaughtered him as an oxen or a ram. In spite of the poor rhyme of the poem and the cheap metre (corresponding with Arab ha%aj), it contains well-known Arab modfs such as the appearance of the phantom of the beloved in the poet's dream, the mixing of the wine with the waters of his tears, the red and white tears, the contrast between the fire in the heart kindled by the poet's sorrow and the river of his weeping caused by the same sorrow, and finally the poet's indignation against Time. But not only in the acceptance poem, also in the poems inserted in the frame story of his Book of Delight Ibn Zabara refers to Arab motifs. If we omit from consideration the acceptance qasidah directed to the Maecenas, the twenty fragmentary poems contained in this work, probably written by him— except for one or two— , do contain some Arabic themes, but are, for the most part, satirical. Some Arabic motifs are: the "cups splendid as stars rising in the hands of the boon companions which have their sunset in their mouths" (no. 5), and the love motifs in the fragment from Yehudah ha-Levi "The face of the beloved splendid as the sun, and the hair dark as the night;" other motifs are "the beloved as a gazelle so mentioned because of its eyes, and the eyes which are red because of the blood of the hearts they spilled" as well as "the eyes of the beloved are sharp knives" (nos. 15-17). His satirical poetry (nos. 9, 11-14; 18; 19-22) can be very Arabic as well, although one cannot prove it. The bulk of the poetry is strophic—not a very classical feature. 13 Thus our conclusion can be that, the passage by al-Harizi maintaining that Ibn Zabara is a poet of third range, has to be confirmed in the sense that ibn Zabara was not a real Classicist poet closely following the Arabic model. 14

13

14

Ibn Zabara's didactic poem on The Soul does not count as real poetry, according to Arabic standards. Cf. Schirmann 1954/1960: 145.

If we look at other Arabic features, then we find Arabic sciences: some mental states and diseases are expressly menuoned by their Arabic names (sometimes written phonetically) in the book, as are many medical and moral sentences, put in the mouth of Greek philosophers but found mainly in Arabic sources (also Andalusian such as the Kitab Alif Ba')15 and moral anecdotes of Arab origin from a variety of sources discovered by Ratzabi in the last decennia,16 not to speak of the Arabic or Oriental background of most of the fifteen stories that are told in the Book. Especially interesting was the discovery some years ago by Marzolph 17 of the Arabic origin of Ibn Zabara's last story about slander which sows discord between a man and his wife, and which leads to the dead of both. 18 In fact, Ibn Zabara combines poetry and prose, story telling, proverbs and wisdom literature. His ideal was perhaps not to make a great poetic oeuvre, but to make a work within the tradition of Arabic adab, the literary etiquette of the court. He is also part of the courtly surroundings, where he apparendy had to suffer from the same inconveniences from which poets such as al-Mutanabbi or Ibn Zaydun were suffering at Arab courts: incapable rivals, the whims of a patron, and illiteracy among the courtiers. Ibn Zabara is proof perhaps that not following all the aspects of the Classical style of Arabic poetry does not necessarily mean that he was not influenced to a great extent by Arab culmre. For Meshullam de Piera, who also was not such a classical poet in the Arabic style, it is perhaps too early to judge." Among the fifty poems written by Meshullam we do not find poems built to a great extent on traditional Arabic motifs. 20 This poet has some laudatory poems, a few elegies and about ten polemic poems. Very much outside the 7\rabic tradition are his poems against the Hebrew version of Maimonides' Guide, the More ha-Nebukhim. Various kinds of Kabbalistic and theological subjects are treated which give the poems a totally different character. Ross Brann called the voice of his poetic persona far more complex than the genre-determined voices of Andalusia, e.g. in his enigmatic epistolary ode to Nahmanides, the exegete, kabbalist, and communal authority. De Piera's "lyrical prelude" (the conven15

16

17

18 19

20

Sheikh al-Balawi (1132-1207 Malaga). Kitab AlifBa', I, 396-400; see Hadas, M. 1936-37. "Joseph ibn Zabara and Diogenes Laeruus." Jewish Quarterly Review 27, 151-154. Ratzaby, Y. 1970. "Meqorot la-pitgamim be-Sefer Sha'ashu'im." Sefer Hayyim Shirmann. Qovet% Mehqarim. Ed. A. Abramson. & A. Mirsky. Jerusalem 371-392; and idem 1976. "Pitgamim araviyyim be-Sefer Sha'ashu'im.". Biqqoret u-Parshanut 9-10, 176-196. Marzolph, U. 1992. Arabia Ridens. Die humoristische Kur^pro^a derfrühen Adab-Literatur im internationalen Traditionsgeflecht. Frankfurt am Main, I, 209. Cf. Don Juan Manuel, El Conde Lucanot. Ed. M. Blecua. 1971 (2). Madrid, 206-212. Cf. Scheindlin loc.cit:, Brann 1991: 141 ff.; and the works mendoned by Sàenz-Badillos, Α. 1998. "The poetry of Spanish Kabbalists." In Jewish Studies in a New Europe. Ed. U. Haxen. Copenhagen, 672 ff.; Schippers, A. 1993, "La vie culturelle dans la marche d'Espagne et son role dans le développement de la littérature hébraïque médiévale en Provence. Le cas du poète Meshullam de Piera (d. après 1260)." In Bonnerot, O. H. Histoire, Littérature et Poétique des Marches. Strasbourg: Société Française de Littérature Générale et Comparée, 145-158 and Schirmann, H. 1997. Toldot ha-Shira ha-ibrit bi-Sfarad ha-no^rit u-wi-drom Zarfat. Jerusalem, 293-321. Brody, H. 1938. "Shire Meshullam ben Shelomoh da Piera." Studies of the Research Institute for Hebrew Poetry 4, 12-117.

tional introduction in the Hebrew neoclassical qasida II: 1-38) revolves around a highly conventional theme, i.e. the poet's love for his (female) beloved. But the personages of this lyric, as in many of de Piera's poems, show a world foreign to Andalusian tradition. In the mentioned lyrical prelude the poet even celebrates old age and he dismisses the love and attachments that abound in youth. These kinds of themes are totally contrary to those we were accustomed to in Arabic poetry: complaints about old age and the departure of youth such as in the poetry of Ibn Khafajah. However, it should be borne in mind that in Classical Arabic literature as well, it is always possible to reflect on tradidonal themes. One only has to think of al-Mutanabbi and al-Ma'arri (d. 1058). One should remember that one of the first poets in Hebrew Andalusian literature, Dunash ibn Labrat, already reflected on the Arabic theme of the invitation to wine drinking, which he twisted around by saying that, with the present situation of Mount Zion in mind, he was not in the mood to drink wine. A remarkable poem by Meshullam de Piera is his last, in which he celebrated the conquest of Palestine by the Mongols (1258-60), understanding it as a prèsage of the near Messianic liberation of the land of Israel.21 Be that as it may, modern scholarship generally agrees with the fact that Meshullam de Piera's poetry abandons the poetics of the old classical Andalusian categories, and is looking for a new path for literature, although Scheindlin considers Meshullam da Piera as one of the poets who continued to write Arabic-style secular poetry. In fact the tides of his poems are still in Arabic. We have different opinions on this question from Ross Brann, Norman Roth, Angel Sàenz-Badillos, Raymond Scheindlin, and Ezra Fleischer. Perhaps we have to wait until more statistics become available, or until we suddenly discover Arabic poems which could have been a model for some of his poems, although a living Arab tradition upheld by Arab poets failed at that time in those surroundings.

Hebrew & Arabic texts 1. Text by Ibn Shuhayd (see note 3) ^ t l j ^ j à J I j
LALCJ

£LL‫־‬JL.y1 j j L J j i J‫>־״‬J

^Ú5JI ^L· ojj^ï'j-liLij ‫י · י‬ V j-^-û ^ Γ1 I 11‫(־‬j >' ·IL»‫•יי י‬I.‫ * ן‬m

*

jejJI JJLa^ ^jlfÍi Cj11 -v. a . • •• 11 j . *.C jl J

• ‫ • ־‬I -> ‫׳‬ .

! ^ 1 ji V » 1A L : CJ-JJLUI gU.t.ll

21

Ja-i.

^1c

ι μ ϋ ‫^ ־‬jU 1j11a. o^x-ijj / I‫׳‬

LfLij

.

r

-

‫׳‬-I‫״ ׳•׳‬I ' j * i J j j

H. Schirmann mentioned this for the first time in his article published in ber 6205.

Ha-ares 23,

1940, num-

‫)‪2. Text by Yehudah ha-Levi (see note 3‬‬ ‫ונשקפת בעד סתרי סתרים‬ ‫מנהלת בנה לתור מנוחה‬ ‫ונמשלה כאילה שלוחה‬ ‫וחרדה על בנה ואקראה לה‬ ‫ופנתה להלך ויהי בחפזו‬ ‫והלכת לאטה מעדנות‬ ‫והן על עקבות שולי מעילה‬ ‫כמדרך פעמי יצחק בעמדו‬ ‫ושבו אחרי נסעו לנשק‬ ‫ומצאו כדבש טעמו וריחו‬

‫והלכת בדרכי הישרים‬ ‫להבדל בדרך הנזירים‬ ‫אשר תרעה צבי במרום הררים‬ ‫לאט אל תרגזו רעית עפרים‬ ‫ומלאו תימרות בשמה עברים‬ ‫עדי כי עברה במעון כפירים‬ ‫דמות נחש נרדים עם כפרים‬ ‫לנשק אהביו על‪-‬הר בתרים‬ ‫מקום רגליו וללחך העפרים‬ ‫ישובב הנשמות לפגרים‪.‬‬

‫‪3. Text by al-Mutanabbi‬‬ ‫‪ ILà‬ן·‪AÏll* .__._....‬‬ ‫‪J i s Ijl‬‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫׳·‬ ‫‪* 1 1‬‬ ‫‪0-11.<_iLi^jl jl «JJI‬‬

‫‪11‬‬

‫׳· ‪·#‬‬

‫·‪I‬‬ ‫י«‬

‫*‬

‫'‬

‫' ‪í‬‬

‫}‪JS,‬׳ ‪I jJL-i J Ù Ç j . r. à‬‬ ‫' • ׳‪1‬‬

‫!_<‬

‫‪f I‬‬

‫‪,‬‬

‫‪t‬‬

‫‪J.j Λ-JI ^ jJ I‬‬

‫‪4. Text by Todros Abu '1- 'Afiyah‬‬ ‫אמת‪ ,‬לא נאוה הרב להלל‬ ‫ושרים קדמו פקו פלילה‬ ‫אשר הם זוכרים חשקם בראשית‬ ‫וחזק מעניהם בו יכלו‬ ‫ועל כן בעשותי שיר‪ ,‬לשוני‬

‫בשיר דובר עגבים בתהלה‬ ‫והשחיתו והתעיבו עלילה‬ ‫תהלתם בכל‪-‬ציץ ניב ומלה‬ ‫ויבואו יעפים לתהלה‬ ‫במהלל הגביר החל וכלה‪.‬‬

‫‪5. Text by Todros Abu 7- 'Afiyah‬‬ ‫אמת‪ ,‬לא קדמו נושאי משלים‬ ‫לבד כי חפצו שירם להאריך‬ ‫ובחשק ובדברים אחרים‬ ‫ועתה‪ ,‬הגביר יצחק מצאתיו‬ ‫ועל כן בעשותי שיר להודו‬

‫בראש כל‪-‬מהלל דברי התולים‬ ‫ולא מצאו אנוש רב מהללים‬ ‫לזאת הרב זמיריהם מכלים‬ ‫גדול המעללים רב פעלים‬ ‫במהלליו אני מתחיל ומשלים‪.‬‬

‫‪6. Text by Josef ibn Zabara‬‬ ‫מנתי מזמן‪ ,‬מיום עזבתיו‪,‬‬ ‫וכוסי‪ ,‬כי עלי‪-‬כוסי זכרתיו‪,‬‬ ‫להדיח לחי מדם שפכתיו‬ ‫ולולי חם יקוד לבי נפחתיו‬ ‫חמסי על‪-‬זמן לכסיל שמעתיו‬ ‫ואתמה איך עלי‪-‬שכמי סבלתיו‬ ‫וכי נקרא שמי כשמו געלתיו‬ ‫וכנויו לבוז לו החלפתיו‬ ‫ולו נגע במלבושי פשטתיו‬ ‫ולולי כי כבוד נפשי שמרתיו‬ ‫ברוח פי בלי חרב הרגתיו‬

‫שנתי‪ ,‬כי בכל‪-‬ליל חלמתיו‬ ‫אבל ייני במי דמעי מסכתיו‬ ‫עלי‪-‬פני‪ ,‬במי עיני רחצתיו‬ ‫בנחל הבכי כמעט גרפתיו‬ ‫הביאני ראותו עד‪-‬קראתיו‬ ‫ועם תבור והר‪-‬נופל שקלתיו‬ ‫ואלו יהיה‪-‬לו נוף שרפתיו‬ ‫והוא מתוק ואם אל‪-‬מר הפכתיו‬ ‫ובנתר ובברית כבסתיו‬ ‫ומהחל יקר שכלי הדרתיו‬ ‫אבל כשור וכתיש טבחתיו‪.‬‬

MEDIEVAL STYLISTIC AS STYLISTIC EXEGESIS G A T E 33 O F SEFER

TAHKEMONI

AND LAMENTATIONS 2 DAVID SIMHA SEGAL Ben-Gurion University, Israel Sefer Tahkemoni of Judah Alharizi (1165-1225)1 is a brilliant compendium of autonomous narratives, satires, fantasies, sober and mock debates, prayers, and—in no small measure—rhetorical extravaganzas. An unusual tour-de-force is gate (chapter) 33,2 where the protagonist "extemporaneously" pours forth twenty-two two-stich double homonym rhymes, the first of which follows: ‫אמרנה היא עדי רוץנים וע(רים‬ ‫אסירה‬ ‫מלך‬ τ 11 ‫וכל* ז‬ ‫ ו‬V ‫מלכה‬ V •I ‫והיא‬ Τ I ‫־‬ ‫בחיקה‬ ‫נפשי‬ ‫היתה‬ ‫אמונה‬ ‫״‬ ‫ ״‬I I ~ TIT τ ‫ן־‬ ‫אסירה‬ ‫לא‬ ‫מלבבי‬ ‫כן‬ ‫ואל‬ τ · *‫ו‬ · τ ‫ · ן‬1 ·· - ‫ן‬

·I

The literal translation is: "Faith is the adornment of rulers and princes; she is queen, with every king her prisoner. My soul was reared in her bosom; therefore I shall not remove her from my heart." This poem is followed by twenty-one others in strict alphabetical sequence—the first and last word of each stich of the second poem beginning with the letter ‫ב‬, of the third—with the letter ‫ ;ג‬and so on, with all poems adhering to the strict requirements of the quantitative meters of the Hebrew verse of Spain. Moreover, every poem is of the genre of ‫הגות‬, or reflection, proclaiming or preaching adherence to the moral life, especially penitence. Now if all these verbal pyrotechnics were not enough, there is yet a hidden achievement not even mentioned in the protagonist's self-praise (typically lavish) at the gate's start and close; namely, the first and last poems share a root: ‫ לא‬and ‫ ;ולא‬the second and twenty-first poems share four roots ‫״‬. , ]‫ לב‬...‫לבבות‬ ‫ כי‬...‫ תמצא‬...‫ וטוב‬in the second poem, versus ‫ אמצאה‬...‫ טוב‬...‫ כי‬...‫ לבבי‬in the twenty-first; and so on, until this pairing pattern—herein referred to as FCB (full concentric bracketing)—is completed, with roots shared in poems eleven and twelve. And there is more: the whole is preceded by a non-metric rhymed prose adjuration toward moral living, with the rhyme words comprising full homonyms. A careful reading of both texts as one shows that the described pattern obtains here as well—but indisputably with pun-linkage as a secondary, yet necessary, component: at one point the matching words must be ‫ אל‬and

1

2

‫ ת ל אביב‬,‫ רבי יהודה אלחריזי תחכמוני‬,‫ טופורובסקי‬.‫ י‬For the latest biographical information on the author, see Sadan, Y. 1996. "Judah Alharizi as a Cultural Crossroads." (Hebr.)..16- 7,68‫פעמים‬ ‫טופורובסקי‬, 275-81.

‫אל'הים‬.‫ י‬This fact calls for the recognition of pun-links in FCB in the metric poems alone. The table of FCB in the poems of gate 33 of Sefer Tabkemoni is presented in chart 1 at the end of this article. Now this singular structure is not the invention of Alharizi: it is found in the Bible, and that in two side-by-side locations—chapters one and two of Lamentations.4 One possible meaning of the phenomenon has been posited: the emphasizing of major, if not central, statements of verses 11 and 12 specifically: in chapter one, the cry to God and onlookers to behold the intensity of Divine punishment; and in chapter two, the fainting and dying of children and infants on their mothers' breasts.5 For purposes of comparison, we shall look only at chapter two here, and that through the eyes of Alharizi; i.e., containing pun linkage as well.6 Now further examination of the poems of Gate 33 reveals that FCB obtains when one halves the poems into two groups—1-11 and 12-22—with the central poem in each being 6 and 17 respectively!7 In the second grouping, there are no pairings that are solely pun linkages; in the first grouping, two—and these, more than any other, abound in pun links, with several words comprising the same letters as their paired words, but reversed; or containing all the letters of the paired word. Now given Alharizi's overall imitation of the Lamentations stylistic, the question arises whether he here outdoes his biblical model—or further imitates. The latter seems the more likely, when one examines each half of Lamentations 2.s There we find an abundance of paired words—and, let it be emphasized, not predominandy the words that one might expect—prepositions (‫ על‬,‫ )אל‬or adjectives (3‫—)ל‬but such words as ‫( ארמנותיה‬w. 5-7, in precisely that form), ‫שחת‬ 5—6), in precisely that form),‫ מועד‬and7—6)‫ ; ) ה ׳‬and no less than four shared words linking w . 15 and 19 (disregarding word-play correspondence) and three words, in w . 17 and 18. In addition, many of the pun links are strong: . : , ‫ב ח ר‬ ‫ אכלה‬...‫( כל‬v. 3) versus ‫( בריחיה מלכה‬v. 9); and, in w . 4 and 8, including a shared two-word term, we have ‫ קד׳‬7/77...‫ ]?אבלו‬...‫ן‬1‫ בת־צי‬nain versus 7jw7 ‫ציון‬-‫כאויב בת‬. What could this stylistic signify in both texts? Now if the proposed logic of FCB in Lamentations is the focusing on a central message, this does not seem to be the case in the poem sequence of Gate 33: neither poems 11 and 12, nor 6

‫נ‬

4

5 6

7 8

That we are confronted with happenstance here is hardly plausible, given the extraordinary constraints that our author has placed upon himself. The text of the entire rhymed prose secdon; of all the metric poems; and a chart of the correspondence of paired words—may be seen in a forthcoming article by the writer, ‫״חיקויי דגם כיאסטי ייחודי מ ס פ ר איכה בתוך השירה העברית‬ ‫מספרד״‬, to appear in the series ‫מסורת הפיוט‬, published by Bar Ilan University. Condamin, A. 1933. Poèmes de ta Bible. Paris, 47-50; Renkema, J. 1988. "The Literary Structure of Lamentadons." In The Structural Analysis of Biblical Poetry. Ed. W. van der Meer, J. C. de Moor, et al. Supplement # 74 of The journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 294-396, especially 294-320. Renkema, 297 and 314. For the findings of FCB in Lamentations 2, which expand upon the findings of Condamin and Renkema, who did not take cognizance of shared prepositions or puns, see table two at the end of this article. See table three at the end of this article. See table four at the end of this article.

and 17, seem especially potent or thematically central; and unlike Lamentations, progression in argument, and indeed the entire narrative element, is entirely absent. Perhaps there is another significance in Lamentations—and Sefer Tahkemoni—to FCB of the whole and of the halves. In Lamentations, there is a pronounced reiteration of the theme of Divine wrath and Israel's suffering, and many specific roots and phrases recur. FCB augments such repetition: many more verses Enking together, with the result of intensifying the somber, even bitter, tone of the text; conversely, in Gate 33 of Sefer Tahkemoni, the overall didacticism is further hammered home—most likely, again, for a handful of readers—by this scheme. However, as is not the case in Lamentations, the ultimate effect of FCB in Gate 33 is encouraging: while the text remains sober, the addressee is assured felicity if he lives ethically, following Divine command in avoidance of the pitfalls of unbridled desire. Now if our author did indeed imitate so very complex and covert a biblical structure, why was he loath to proclaim his stunning achievement? At least two reasons suggest themselves: the stylistic of Lamentations itself was never openly discussed in Jewish sources; hence Alharizi mirrors and continues a tradition of esotericism. Secondly and relatedly, our author, both in his introduction and variously in his book, was a declared champion of the Hebrew language and its literature vis-a-vis Arabic letters;9 perhaps he displayed herein, if only for a handful of readers, yet another and very Jewish proof of the superiority of his work. All this being said, the full significance of FCB in both Lamentadons and Sefer Tahkemoni must wait upon a fuller examination of both sources—first and foremost to determine to what degree the schemes exist in both; and if other and related patterns obtain as well.10

9

10

For e x a m p l e , 1 1 8;20.9-14,.9,1‫טפרובסקי‬,U. 1-6. Alharizi's response, and others', to Arabic claims of superiority ("Arabiyeh"), will be considered in an analysis of Alharizi's introducdon to Sefer Tahkemoni in The Book of Tahkemoni by Judah Alharizi, translated and annotated, with an introducdon by David Segal (Littman Library of Jewish Civilization—forthcoming). It is the author's intention to demonstrate, in a larger study now in preparation, yet further covert pattemings in Gate 33: lateral pairing—linkages between the rhymed prose secdon and the metric poems when placed side by side; full concatenation—the repetition of one or more words, and often one or more word-play links, in every two consecutive poems; alternate-poem concatenation; the echoing of words of poem 1, whether through root repetition (mosdy) and word play (occasionally), in all other poems; and the last poem's echoing, in similar fashion, all preceding poems. It will then be shown that all these patterns can be seen to obtain in chapters 1, 2 and 3 of Lamentadons, when the same standards of linkage are applied—a phenomenon noted nowhere else (thus far) in the Bible. As well, it shall be shown that the patterns of lateral pairing and FCB can be demonstrated between every two pairings of chapters 1, 2 and 3. Considerarion will be given to whether or not any such patterns, if even partial, can be detected in chapters 4 and 5. Finally, the complex issue of whether or not said patterns are intentional in the biblical text, or merely reflect the reading of Alharizi and other medieval Hebrew poets—as refleeted in their poetic practice—shall be addressed.

‫‪TABLE O N E‬‬ ‫‪Bracketing‬‬

‫‪Gate 33: Full Concentric‬‬

‫א‬

‫וכל‪...‬מלבב‪ ,‬לא‬

‫ת‬

‫ב‬

‫לבב‪1‬ת‪...‬לבך‪...‬ד‪ //‬ו ט ו ב‬ ‫תמצא‪...‬בי‪;...‬׳עק^‪7/7‬‬ ‫גלעד‪...‬הזמן‬ ‫האל‪...‬לב‪...‬א>י‪/7‬ע‬ ‫ד ״ *ן‬ ‫··‬ ‫‪·· τ‬‬

‫ש‬

‫ה‬ ‫ו‬ ‫ז‬ ‫ח‬

‫כצר?! ך‪...‬ע ל‬ ‫אנוש‪...‬לחוטאה‬ ‫אמת‪...‬אלמות ע ל‬ ‫נפשי‪...‬נפשו‪/7>...‬‬ ‫‪...‬ולאל‪...‬על‬ ‫‬‫‪·· T t‬‬ ‫אדם‪>...‬א‬ ‫ען‪...0‬כי‪...‬אלהיו״‪.‬פל ‪τ τ‬‬ ‫‪τ‬‬ ‫‪τ vi‬‬ ‫·‬ ‫‪rt‬‬ ‫ר‬ ‫‪...‬רק‪...‬תבל‪...‬ימיו‬ ‫י ‪ "t‬רבר‬ ‫‪TT‬‬ ‫·· · ·‬ ‫‪/‬‬ ‫‬‫מים‪...‬לשאול ‪/‬ולא‬ ‫כמו‬ ‫· ‪t‬‬ ‫־ •‬ ‫‪/‬‬ ‫לך‪/7*7...‬‬ ‫ן (‪τ ! 1‬‬ ‫לו‪ ...‬ב ע ת‬

‫ג‬ ‫ד‬

‫ט‬ ‫י‬ ‫כ‬

‫ר‬ ‫ק‬ ‫ו‬ ‫צ‬ ‫פ‬ ‫ע‬ ‫ס‬ ‫נ‬ ‫מ‬ ‫ל‬

‫‪Tahkemoni‬‬

‫‪Sefer‬‬

‫תכלה‬ ‫תבל‪...‬בלי‪...‬בלי ‪τ t · ·ι‬‬ ‫וי‬ ‫·‪ ē‬״‬ ‫תכלה‬ ‫תבל‪...‬אל·‪·• 1‬אל‪...‬לו ןו ל א · ‪τ :‬‬ ‫·‪.· ·.‬׳‬ ‫לבבי‪3...‬י ט ו ב ‪ /‬ונוח‬ ‫·‬ ‫ו ‪·T‬‬ ‫‪...‬יהיהי׳עפ״ד‪,‬‬ ‫אמצאהי׳עמד‪τ - v i · ,‬‬ ‫‪TT‬‬ ‫‪ « ν‬ו‪τ‬‬ ‫ע ל הזמן‬ ‫ואל‪...‬לבית‬ ‫‪ 1‬י·‬ ‫בלי‪...‬לבי‪...‬אל ‪-1‬‬ ‫··‬ ‫· ·‬ ‫‪* /‬‬ ‫צדו•‪...‬עלי‪...‬צדו‬ ‫מחטא‪ ...‬אנוש‬ ‫ה‪-I‬ל א ‪ . . .‬ה‪τ‬א··ל ‪ . . .‬ת ם ‪ . . .‬א ו ת ו ‪ . . .‬ע‪T T‬ל י ו‬ ‫מלאה‪...‬‬ ‫ש ם ‪τ ·· t‬‬ ‫ו‪I‬א‪-‬ל ‪ . . .‬נ‪-‬פ‪τ ι‬‬ ‫‪:‬עלם‬ ‫לאל לא‪Τ VI ν‬‬ ‫‪·· /‬‬ ‫‪...‬כל‬ ‫הכי‪...‬אדם‬ ‫אליהינו‬ ‫‪τ‬‬ ‫ ‪·· τ -t‬‬‫‪TT‬‬ ‫ן‪· -‬‬ ‫‪·· VI‬‬ ‫ךברהאל‪!?...‬ברות‬ ‫מורים‬ ‫‪...‬מורים‪...‬אולי‬ ‫אחרי שכלך‬ ‫אחרי‪...‬לך‬ ‫ו‪ t‬א‪τ‬ר!ח ו ת‪r‬י ו ‪ . . .‬ל ו ‪ . . .‬ו בו·‪,‬ע ת ‪I. . .‬ל יך‬

‫‪Numbers (Hebrew letters) refer to the stanzas in their acrostic ordering.‬‬ ‫‪Pun linkages are indicated by italicization.‬‬ ‫‪TABLE T w o‬‬ ‫‪Bracketing‬‬

‫‪Full Concentric‬‬

‫באפו‪...‬בת‪...‬יש'ךאל ול'א‪...‬ביום א פ ו כ ב‬ ‫א‬ ‫כא‬ ‫ל א ]ולא[ ח מ ל ‪ . . .‬ל א ר ץ‬ ‫ב‬ ‫כ‬ ‫ג ^צ‪...‬אכלה‬ ‫יט‬ ‫ד כ‪:‬ל‪...‬שפך כאיש‬ ‫יה‬ ‫אדני‪...‬בבת‬ ‫ה‬ ‫יז‬ ‫]׳חמס‪rt...‬׳‪...‬בזעם‬ ‫ו‬ ‫טז‬ ‫אויב‪...‬אדקעל‪/‬יד‪...,‬כיום‬ ‫ז‬ ‫טי‬ ‫ב\ז‪...‬מבלע‬ ‫ח‬ ‫יד‬ ‫ט נביאיה ל'א‪...‬חזון‬ ‫יג‬ ‫ידמו‪...‬בת‪-‬ציון‪...‬בתול'ת י ר ו ש ל ם‬ ‫י‬ ‫יב‬ ‫יא ^ ד ‪ . . .‬נ ש פ ך ‪ . . .‬ב ע ט ף ‪ . . .‬ב ר ח ב ו ת‬

‫‪Chapter2:‬‬

‫‪Lamentations‬‬

‫כיום‪...‬ולא‪...‬ביום‬ ‫‪ Τ‬מ‪ I‬ל‪Τ‬ת‬ ‫לארץ‪...‬ל'א‪ Τ‬ח‬ ‫‪I νττ‬‬ ‫תאכלנה‬ ‫שפכי‪7...‬ג‪7‬יא׳ע ‪τ‬כ ל‬ ‫‪/‬‬ ‫· ‪· I‬‬ ‫אדני‪...‬בת‪...‬בת‬ ‫״‬ ‫ן‪τ -‬‬

‫‪...ψ‬אשר‪...‬ורביתי‬

‫י‪...‬זמם‪;]...‬שימח‬ ‫‪η‬‬ ‫אויביך‪...‬אקל‪...·7‬היום‪...‬דאיע‬ ‫עליך‪...‬על ‪ -‬ב ת‬ ‫נביאיך חזו‪...‬ול'א‪...‬ויחזו‬ ‫א ד מ ה ‪ . . .‬ה ב ת י ר ו ש ל ם ‪ . . .‬ב ת ו ל ת בת‪-‬ציון‬ ‫ב ה ת ע ט פ ם כחלל ב ר ה ב ו ת ‪ . . .‬ב ה ש ת פ ן‬

‫‪Numbers (Hebrew letters) refer to biblical verses.‬‬ ‫‪Pun linkages are indicated by italicizadon.‬‬

‫‪534‬‬

‫‪DAVID SIMHA SEGAL‬‬ ‫‪TABLE THREE‬‬ ‫‪Sefer Tahkemoni Gate 33: FCB by Halves‬‬ ‫מלך‪...‬ועל‬ ‫מלכה ‪τ t‬וכל ‪- ι /7,‬׳‪...‬ד‪1‬רשי ו‬ ‫‪τ/‬‬ ‫·*־־‪··%‬‬ ‫‪τ‬״‬

‫הובן‪...‬ולעבודת אלהיך‪...‬‬ ‫לך‬ ‫לו‪...‬עולמך‬ ‫וידרש‬ ‫ימאס‪...‬תבל״ ‪I · I‬‬ ‫״‬ ‫· ‪IT‬־‬ ‫ימאסו‪...‬מים‬

‫כל‪-‬ןקר‬ ‫‪...‬יקר‬ ‫ט‬ ‫בים‪...‬דעו•‬ ‫ח‬ ‫עדי‪...‬לה‪....‬‬ ‫ולאלעשיד‬ ‫ןךע‪...‬ןךע‪...‬תקצר‪yivbv...‬‬ ‫‪...‬רצ‪...‬יזרעה‪...‬יקצרה‪...‬זרוע‬ ‫‪ /‬־‬ ‫· ן‪ 1‬ן ‪τ‬‬ ‫·‪rit‬‬ ‫״‬ ‫תקצר‪...‬חטא‬ ‫‪...‬יקצרה‬ ‫רק‪...‬ש;?‪...,‬לחוטאה‬ ‫ו ‪τ‬‬ ‫‪ /‬ן‬ ‫‪/ -‬‬

‫•‬

‫יד‪...‬אליהם‪...‬‬ ‫רק עליצךךצ‪1‬ר‬ ‫‪...‬ברגע‪...‬ךצ‬ ‫הצל‪...ρ-\...‬הריק‬ ‫הצל‪...‬קד‪...‬הריק‬ ‫כצל‪...‬כ*פ‪7‬ל‪...‬רק‬

‫ו‬

‫לבבו‪...‬‬ ‫לוחץ‬ ‫לו‪...‬בלב‬ ‫לבכם‬ ‫האל‪...‬היואת · ו ‪ν‬‬ ‫‪ν vi‬‬ ‫דבר • ··‬ ‫ן*‬ ‫‪<'/V‬׳‪7‬‬ ‫לאל‬ ‫׳׳‪...7‬הכי ׳‪7/‬״‪.‬על‬ ‫ק׳צ‬ ‫‪...‬מאמרינו‪^...‬‬ ‫‪...bm‬בעם‪...‬מלאה‬ ‫‪/‬״‪r‬‬ ‫‪ /‬־‬ ‫ו‪-‬‬ ‫‪...‬לאל‬ ‫׳*‪,7TK../77.‬״‪.‬עליו‬ ‫‪...‬עד ה‪...‬קלעי ם‬ ‫ועלו‪...‬יהיה>?‬ ‫אל מחיל‪...‬׳נ׳גפ‪7/‬ת‬

‫ת‬ ‫ש‬ ‫ר‬ ‫ק‬ ‫צ‬ ‫צ‬ ‫פ‬

‫תבל‪...‬בלי‪...‬בלי‬ ‫תבל‪^...‬‬ ‫לבבי‪...‬אל‪...‬דעיד‬ ‫התאוד־‪...,‬יהיה‬ ‫כלם‪...‬על‬ ‫‪ΤΝ‬‬ ‫‪...‬כי פ<ד >‪/7‬ק‪.‬ע‬ ‫קלעים‪bx...‬‬ ‫‪...bw‬קלעים‬ ‫צדו•‪...‬עלי‪...‬‬ ‫צדו•‪...‬עדי‬ ‫חטאי עלי‬

‫מחטא ועלו‬

‫‪*Solely pun linkage.‬‬ ‫‪Stanzas are listed by order of alphabetic acrostic.‬‬

‫‪TABLE FOUR‬‬

‫‪Lamentations Chapter2: FCB by Halves‬‬ ‫בת‪...‬ארץ‪...‬׳׳ע ‪7‬׳‪ >Λ‬ולא‬

‫יא‬ ‫י‬

‫)?(לא ך‪1‬לא[‪...‬ב\ז‪-‬יה‪71‬ה‬ ‫*‬

‫‪,‬‬

‫בחר‬ ‫‪· rt τ‬‬ ‫א‪7‬י׳ג‪.‬״בת‪-‬ציון^‬ ‫‪...‬חמתו‬

‫‪r!r‬‬

‫״לארץ·'‬ ‫‪...‬כל‪...‬אכלה‬

‫‪TV‬ה‬ ‫אדני וכ א ו··י ב ‪. . .‬־א‪I‬ר ‪I‬מ נ ו ת י‬ ‫היה ו‪τ -‬‬ ‫‪rr‬‬

‫‪...‬בבת‪-‬יהורה‬ ‫‪τ t‬‬ ‫‪-t‬‬ ‫‪Š‬‬ ‫‪v7‬שחת‪,TV/V7...7/...‬‬ ‫‪T‬‬ ‫ה ‪TT‬‬ ‫·‬

‫יב‬ ‫יג‬ ‫יד‬ ‫טו‬

‫ו‬

‫*‬

‫לאמתם‪...‬ברחבות‪...‬אל‬ ‫ד׳ב‪.../7‬בתולת בת‪ ...‬כ;ם‬ ‫נביאיך‪"^...‬‬ ‫כל‪...‬ראשם‪...‬‬ ‫עליך ‪-‬כ ‪-‬פ ·י ם‬ ‫‪τ‬‬ ‫‪Τ‬‬ ‫‪|| · - τ‬‬

‫ירושלים‪...‬‬ ‫‪ΤΤ ι‬י‬

‫כלילת‬ ‫‪ /‬י ־‬

‫ט‬ ‫ח‬ ‫ז‬

‫‪T‬‬

‫אלני‪...‬אויב‪...‬ארמנותיה‬ ‫ ו ו ·‪τ·.‬‬‫״‬ ‫ן‪τ -‬‬ ‫‪/‬‬

‫ז ה׳‪...‬מועד‬ ‫מועד‪.1‬״ה׳‪...‬מועד‬

‫כב‬ ‫כא‬ ‫כ‬ ‫יט‬

‫ו‪Τ‬‬

‫טז‬ ‫כל‪...‬היום‬ ‫ט ז עליך‪...‬אויביך‪...‬אמרו‬ ‫אויב‬ ‫ע ל־י ך‬ ‫·א ‪ι‬מ ‪τ‬ר ת ו ‪. . .‬‬ ‫‪..‬‬ ‫·‪rf‬‬ ‫‪Τ‬‬

‫‪...‬בתולת‬ ‫‪t‬‬ ‫ו‬ ‫מלכה‬ ‫בריחיה ‪ -‬ן ‪R‬‬ ‫· ‪R V‬‬ ‫חומת בת‪-‬ציון‪...‬ו?אבל‬

‫י·‬

‫··‬

‫שךות‪7...‬ד‪]...‬ינאץ‬

‫לאךץ‪...‬בת‬ ‫לארץ‪...‬בת‪...‬ד‪7/‬דיד‪ (?)7‬לארץ‬

‫יח‬

‫‪/‬‬

‫ולא‪...‬ורביתי‬ ‫‪ι‬י י‬

‫בתול'תי‪...‬בז‪7‬ע‬ ‫עוללת‪...‬עללי‪...‬ונביא‬

‫אשמרות‪...‬כפרך‬

‫^‪...‬עולליך‬

‫‪...‬בראש כ ל‬ ‫יומם‪.‬״>‪7‬‬

‫אל‪...naV...‬אל‪...‬אל‬ ‫יח‬ ‫מימי‪>7...‬א‬ ‫יז‬ ‫‪/ /‬‬ ‫‪. . .‬‬

‫‪*Solely pun linkage.‬‬

ALKULLIYYAT

T H E GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO T A N H U M HAYERUSHALMI'S COMMENTARY ON THE BIBLE H AD ASS A SHY Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel Tanhum ben Yosef haYerushalmi mentioned the book aIKullijyat in his commentary on the Bible, Kitab al'ljav^ walBeiyan, and in alMurshid alKafi, his lexicon to Maimonides' Mishneh Torab. From these references one could get a general idea about some of the subjects of this book. In the introducdon to his edition of Tanhum's commentary on Habakkuk 1 Münk expressed his sorrow that this important book was lost. Some fifty years later, in 1891, Harkavy found this book in the library in St. Petersburg and described it.2 There was a list of names of writers in it as well of some of their books which served as sources for Tanhum. Some of the names were of Karaites and Harkavy assumed that these names were inserted by a Karaite. Later that year Israelsohn wrote 3 about Hayyuj's four books mentioned in that list, the first three of which had been known long ago. It was the first time the name of his fourth book, Kitab alNutaf, was clear, and so was its contents. In September 1991 I did not find alKullijyat in the catalogue of Tanhum's manuscripts in Saltikov-Schedrin Library in Leningrad (now the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg). Checking all his manuscripts I found two exemplars of this book. Each of them had its binding loose, pages of the beginning and of the end and elsewhere missing, and others misplaced. One of the manuscripts' script reminded me Tanhum's handwriting in the few pages of his lexicon which I had found in the Geniza in Cambridge, 4 and of another manuscript of the lexicon which was kept in Leningrad, the letters Kaf-Tav. In these manuscripts the lexicographer edited his second edition of the lexicon on the written version of his first edition. After having compared carefully the equivalent letters and other components of the script, it was obvious that this exemplar of alKullijyat was an autograph. Moreover, there were no signs of any interpolation of names or any other words in the manuscript, so the list of names, Rabbanites and Karaites alike, is the list which Tanhum himself wrote. The two manuscripts of alKullijyat are not identical and they differ in some details from 1 2 3 4

Münk, S. 1843. Commentaire de R Tanhum de Jerusalem sur Hahakkouk. Paris, 5. Harkavy, A. 1891. Studien und Mittheilungen Va. St. Petersburg, 36, 131-132. Israelsohn, I. 1889. "L'ouvrage perdu dejehouda Hajjoudj." REJ 19, 306-310. Shy, H. 1976. "The original version of Tanhum's lexicon 'alMurshid alKafi'." (Hebr.). Leshonenu 41, 29-40.

each other in the similar parts which were left in them. They should be examined carefully in the different passages left in them in order to try and get as close as possible to the original verse as it was written. This paper is based on the autograph only. Tanhum never mendoned any name of a Karaite neither in his lexicon nor in his commentary on the Bible. Even when he quoted Abraham Ibn Ezra's explanadon which stated right at the beginning that it was the commentary of Yefet, the Karaite exegete, Tanhum ignored it and treated it as if it were Ibn Ezra's commentary. No doubt Tanhum was familiar with the list of sources which was written in the introduction of Ibn Ezra's book M0ī(najim, but he followed it only in a few details of his own list. For instance, Tanhum must have known the contents of Hayyuj's fourth book, as well as its Arab name, Kitab alNutaf, and could not have learned it from Ibn Ezra's list. Why did Tanhum include those names of Karaites in his list of sources? If we read carefully Tanhum's words introducing his list, we find the answer to this question. He said that the following was a list of the names of authors of books some of which he saw and used, and others he only heard about. From the way he wrote the names of the Karaites it seems that he was not familiar with them and therefore did not write their full names or any detail about them. Here follows the list, divided into three categories: a) Sahl b. Masliah, Yefet, Benjamin, Daniel haNasi and Shemuel haNagid and others. b) R. Saadia, Adonim b. Tamim, Yehuda b. Quraysh, Menahem b. Saruq, Adonim b. Labrat, David author of ba'Egron and others. c) Yehuda Hayyuj, Rav Hay, Abu'lWalid Ibn Janah, Moshe b. Giqatila, Yehuda b. Bal'am, Levi b. alTaban, Abraham b. Ezra, Moshe b. Ezra, Yehuda haLevi, Yaaqov author of alKitab alKamil. Finally he wrote that the man who is above any person of any category is Maimonides. Tanhum added that there were others the books of whom he used, but the two persons he relied upon most of all were Maimonides for philosophical, theological and halachic explanations, and Ibn Janah for philological and exegetical explanations, and they were "the central pillar on which the house rests" (based on Judg 16, 26). Maimonides believed that each Jew should have at home, in addition to the Bible, the Halacha which is the Oral Law, and for this purpose he composed his codex Mishneh Torah, in Hebrew, the language of the Torah. Tanhum undertook the task to enable the Jews to understand both, the Bible and Mishneh Torah. He wrote injudaeo Arabic his commentary on the Bible, and explained in the same language the difficult Hebrew words of Mishneh Torah in his lexicon alMurshid alKafi. After many years he added to these two works the book alKullijyat, the General Introduction, in order to provide the reader with more tools to understand the Bible. In the introduction of alKullijyat he described the way he composed this book. Having read many books of his predecessors, he decided to write down for himself and for his offspring all the important things, and maybe it could

help others as well, as this collection could save people from reading many books, especially at that time when one could not get them, anyway not everywhere. So he collected everything necessary to know before reading the Bible. Tanhum made sure that everybody knew how it was composed. For instance, in the introducdon to his commentary on the Prophets he stated that he repeated it for the sake of somebody who did not read it in alKullijyat, and studying his commentary might think that he (Tanhum) claimed to be the author of all these explanadons. He added that in fact this is the way everybody writes: each author always has before him everything written on the subject. He summarizes it according to his knowledge, experience and needs. Each writer continues to write from the point where his predecessor stopped. Lifetime of a person is limited, and so are his abilities, and no one can accomplish writing about any subject starting from the beginning. There will always come after him another person who will start from the point where he stopped. Here Tanhum mentioned Aristode who was great, but others followed who added to his writings. Galen laid the foundation of medicine, but others came after him and wrote things which he had not thought of. Ibn Sina himself wrote a few books, short and long, almost about the same subject, with a different approach towards some parts of it. Each writer has his own point of view and writes and arranges the book according to his own judgement. As said above, Tanhum appreciated Ibn Janah highly and his books were his important sources, but he wrote that even he did not invent Hebrew linguistics, but read what others had written before him. Tanhum mentioned in different places that Ibn Janah followed Hayyuj who established the principal rule in Hebrew Grammar, which states that there is no root of less than three consonants. Maybe Tanhum knew as well about Ibn Janah's other sources, books of grammar of the Arab language which he used, as Dan Becker showed in his important book. 5 AlKullijyat starts with an introduction, and then the chapters of the book follow. Each of them is dedicated to some subject of the biblical language and its grammar, or to an exegetical theme. There were as it seems at least thirty eight chapters, although their numeration should be still examined. Each chapter has a caption which defines its contents, but not all of the captions came down to us, and the contents of a chapter can be retrieved from the end of the previous chapter, in case other pages of the chapter are missing. Ilan Eldar drew my attention to a few pages which he found in the Geniza in Cambridge. Although the pages are cut, some of the captions were preserved. They belong to the list of all the chapters of the book with their captions, which was written probably at the beginning of the book, after the introduction. This "Table of Contents" is very interesting and adds information about the book. We do not know much about Tanhum and his life, and it was not even clear when he lived. Then from the caption of an elegy which his son the poet Yosef haYerushalmi wrote we know that Tanhum died after the news of the horrible fate of the Jewish congregation in Akko reached Fustat in Egypt. It happened in 1291 when the last fortress of the Crusaders yielded to the Mohammedans. 5

Becker, D. 1998. Arabic sources 0/R. Jonah Ibn Janah's grammar. (Hebr.) Tel Aviv.

From his full name we know that Tanhum was a Rabbi, as was his father Rabbi Yosef. Maybe he was as well the head of a congregadon in Fustat, because he explained in the introducdon of alKulliyyat that he had not much time to write, because he was occupied with necessary things which he had to do. Tanhum, and especially his son, were friends with David the grandson of Maimônides.6 His knowledge of Hebrew as well as Arabic is obvious from all his writings. In the introduction he quoted stanzas of poems written by Yehuda ben Shabtay, Yehuda haLevi, alHarizi and others. He wrote that he read books of sciences and philosophy, and was going to derive of them what was necessary for his commentaries. The Sages and members of the Sanhédrin and courts of law studied philosophy and different sciences. They learned natural sciences and knew everything about growing different kinds of plants and trees in different seasons and used it for the laws of Kil'ajim as well as of Ma'aserot. For fixing the Jewish calendar and its intercalation in the Diaspora they had to know astronomy and arithmetic. The Geonim as well studied sciences and philosophy, especially R. Saadia Gaon, R. Hay Gaon and R. Shemuel ben Hofni and R. Bahya the Dayyan and others. Tanhum wrote that every Jew could study sciences only after having learned the Bible and the Halacha. He could study languages as well. He emphasized that a Jew could learn Greek, and rejected the common belief that it was forbidden. In fact it says that a Jew should not teach his son Greek, but it is not written that he himself should not learn this language. From his explanations in his lexicon it seems that he learned Greek. Tanhum was a great philologist and a rational sober exegete in his time, and was called "Ibn Ezra of the Orient." 7 He dedicated a chapter in his book to "Ba'alat Ov," the Woman Medium of En Dor. Tanhum did not accept this story as written. He believed that it was not the full story which came down to us, and had it come complete, it would be obvious as he understood it. Tanhum explained that the woman recognized King Saul when he came in, and since everybody knew Shemuel, she could tell him how he looked and what was his attire. Virtually she did not see Shemuel and did not hear from him what was going to happen. Tanhum followed the way of interpretation of Saadia Gaon and Shemuel ben Hofni, who did not believe that the text there should be understood literally. Tanhum quoted another explanation saying that the woman fancied everything, and invented the whole story. Tanhum's main purpose in his commentary was that the text be clear to the reader and he stated in his introduction to alKullijyat that if there was any need to explain an allegoric text, first it should be explained literally, and only afterwards one could explain otherwise. Indeed first he explained the book of Jonah almost literally, and then started again from the beginning explaining the allegoric meaning of the book. In the chapters of the book he wrote about the metaphors and rhetorical language of the prophets, and explained the anthro6 7

Mann, J. 1931. Texts and Studies. Vol. I. Philadelphia, 420. Poznanski, S. 1900. "Tanhoum Yerouschalmi et son Commentaire sur le livre de Jonas." REJ 40, 135.

pomorphic expressions as phrases adapted to human understanding. He wrote about Qeri and Kedv in the Bible, meaning a written word which is read as if it were a different one. He wrote about the contradictory things written in the Bible, and about the different names of the same person, or place. He wrote about the chronological order which was not kept in the Bible and about other things. Tanhum wrote about the Prophets, their vast knowledge and understanding and their modesty, and the difference between them and the people who claimed to have experienced prophecy but were false prophets. Tanhum believed that one should know the rules of the Hebrew language, and in various chapters of the book he wrote about the different letters and the gutturals, the vowels and kinds of dagesh, the verbs and their conjugation, the various irregular verbs. He explained phrases in which singular was used instead of plural and vice versa. He believed that a person who studied alKulliyjat could understand what is written in the Bible. It seems that Tanhum wrote alKulliyyat many years after having finished his commentary on the Bible and his lexicon to Maimonides' Mishneh Torah. He summed up in it some of the subjects which he mentioned in his works, and added the description of the Biblical language, its features and the exegetical and philosophical issues which he did not explain in his commentary. Tanhum learned the books of grammar and commentary which preceded him, and made very good use of them. He decided in each issue what he accepted and what he rejected of his predecessors' explanations. His works are a treasure of older exegetical and grammatical writings which did not come down to us.

E L DIWAN

DE § C L O M O H DE PIERA

ESTADO DE LA CUESTION JUDIT TARGARONA BORRÂS Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain ŠC10m0h ben MešuMam de Piera naciô a mediados del siglo XIV, en el seno de una de las grandes familias judias de Catalufia1 originaria de Piera,2 un municipio del parddo judicial de Igualada perteneciente a la provincia de Barcelona. 3 Se gloria de ser descendiente directo de M C šuHam ben S l 'lomoh de Piera, el gran poeta de Gerona, nacido un siglo largo antes que él, y se complace al citar sus versos como modelo a seguir en su propia conducta: 4 Lo que me has dicho no me hará cambiar, pues yo obro segûn lo que me enseno el sabio poeta, mi antcpasado, jel parecido de nuestros nombres me complace, me halaga y me enorgullece enormemente! El, en una perla del collar de sus poemas, ensenaba al hombre la ciencia de la conducta del amor al prôjimo. Decia: Me dejo llevar por el consejo de los amigos aunque en mi interior juzgue lo contrario de los que me aconsejan... Mi corazôn se avergüenza del oprobio de quien me ofende y a los que me ultrajan les digo que la culpa es toda mia.5 Le consideraba el mejor de los poetas, solo comparable a Y c hudah ha-Levi y Šl'10m0h ibn Gabirol: 6 MCšu11am ben S'iomoh fue el Senor. Su brazo conquistô los dominios de los poetas. Pactô la Alianza de la Lengua, entre el lenguaje poédco y su bella estructura, intérprete del enigma de dichos insondables. De la primera etapa de su vida se sabe muy poco. 7 Podemos afirmar que el ano 1391 no residia con sus hijos en Zaragoza—el ûnico lugar en el que la presencia 1 2

3 4

5

6 7

Baer 1981: 414. Aunque "De Piera" parece ya el apellido de la familia, significa "originario de Piera" y debe transcribirse con la pardcula separada. N o es de extrafiar las diferentes formas en que su nombre aparece en los manuscritos ya que reflejan la grafïa catalana "de" ‫ דיפיארה‬etc. o su pronunciaciôn / d a / ‫דאפיירה‬. Ver p. ej.: Neubauer 1886: 1110 (Index of Geografical Names). Mss. A. (f. 220v), B. (f. 117r), BG. (f. 59v); G. (f. 142); E. (f. 88r). También en Bernstein 1942: I (Introducdon) y Schirmann-Fleischer 1997, 580, nota 1, se hace referencia a una parte de esta cita. Cf. también Kaminka 1891-93: 23. Hu' ha-^man, Brody 1938: 81, n° 36, w . 21 y 28. Estos dos versos de MCšuHam de Piera figuran en la ediciôn de S. Bernstein como un poema de S'iomoh de Piera (nimíak 'āni). Bernstein 1942: 112, n° 125. Bii'al b'-nefeS, Bernstein 1942: 33, n° 16, w . 22-23. Ver Brody 1893: 8 ss.; Schirmann 1954-60: 564 ss.; Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 580 ss. etc.

del "buen rey Don Juan" en el verano-otofio de 1391 impidiô que se propagaran los sangrientos sueesos que tuvieron lugar en otras parte del reino como Baleares, Valencia ο Cataluna 8 —por un largo poema de 136 versos, numéro, que según el simân, equivale al término hebreo ‫" קול‬voz," en el que pretende ‫להרים‬ ‫" בזמירים קול דברים‬Hacer oir con los versos la voz de los hechos," 9 lo que convierte a los 136 versos de su poema en la "Voz" que, dentro de las convenciones prosôdicas y la estructura clàsica de la casida, va a narrar los terribles acontecimientos que le tocô vivir, las matanzas del ano 1391 cuando "su casa" fue asaltada, se llevaron a sus hijos "todavia sin casar"—y de quienes ya nunca volviô a tener nodeias. En esos versos dice con amargura que "no sabe donde están," "ni si los vendieron ο si los degollaron, ο si sobre la hoguera de su lumbre su carne está quemada." 10 Estuvo al servicio de très generaciones de una de las mâs importantes familias judias de la Corona de Aragon, la de los Ben Labi,11 que, como alguna otra de Zaragoza, recibiô el apellido "de la Caballeria," por su relaciôn de dependencia con los Caballeros de la Orden de los Templarios. 12 S e lomoh ben M e sul lam de Piera actuô como secretario ο escriba de uno de sus mâs nobles miembros, Don Sdomoh ben Labi,13 quien también gozô de presdgio como filôsofo y poeta. De él se nos han conservado algunos poemas, 14 y en la pagina del titulo del manuscrito 1227 de la Bodleian Library se le atribuye la traducciôn del tratado fîlosôfico Ha- 'emunah ha-ramah de Abraham ibn Daud—el mismo texto que fue editado por S. Weil con traducciôn alemana en Frankfurt, 1852.13 De Piera desempenô funciones parecidas para el hijo de éste, D o n Benvenist ben S e lomoh ben Labi—que a decir de Y. Baer fue el ultimo judio aragonés con influencia polidea 16 —y fue el preceptor de sus nietos. Al igual que su padre, Don Benvenist ben Labi fue mucho mâs que un adinerado e influyente cortesano, no fue poeta, pero si un erudito. Durante casi dos décadas, desde inmediatamente después de las persecuciones de 1391 hasta el 8 9

10

11

12 13

14 15

Baer 1981: 386 ss. y 396. Simân inédito, cf. ms. A. (f. 16r y 47v); B. (f. 151v); BG. f. (24v); G. (f. 3); E. (f. 36r). ‫ו י ו ק ע ו ק ו ל תרועה או *ןוןרים‬ ‫>\כו)א ו ז ו ר י ם הן^רים‬ ‫זר ?דיירים‬$> , ?; , ‫ל ?ירים ץ‬1‫>יק‬ ‫ל דלרים‬1‫הרים ?זהירים ק‬1;‫׳‬ Qplot k'li—a continuation del simân anteriormente m e n c i o n a d o — w . 47-55. El poema esta inédito, pero estos versos han sido publicados por Baer 1959: 306, trad, espanola Baer 1981: 414. Ver Caballeria (farmlia) en Baer 1981: 801. Cf. también Serrano y Sanz 1918: 31; Vendre» 1943; Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 582, nota 8; Huss 1987-88: 503-4, nota 6. Bernstein 1937: 345. En los Mss. B. (ff. I63r ss.) y G. (ff. 16 ss.), tras el epigrafe ‫מ נ ח ת ש ל ו ח ה ל מ א י ש ט ר י יוסף כן יחייא‬ ‫" ז״ל בשם ש ל מ ה כן לביא ז״ל‬ofrenda presentada a Mestre Yosef ben Yahya en nombre de S'iomoh ben Labi," cstán los poemas que S'Iomoh de Piera enviô a Yosef ben Yahya en nombre de su patron—con el acrôsdco ‫—אני ש ל מ ה בן לביא ע ב ד ך הקטן‬y las respuestas de éste. Cf. también Steinschneider 1875: XV, 55. Bernstein 1937b y Schirmann 1954-60: 555-557. Sin embargo esta nodeia es incorrecta. La version al hebreo de esta obra es de 1826 y fue hecha en Padua por Yism'ael M'nahem ‫פיראריס‬. La fecha d e 1478 q u e figura e n el m a n u s c r i t o es también una i n v e n c i ô n (S'lomoh ben Labi muriô a finales del siglo XIV). Cf. N e u b a u e r

1886: 433. 16

Baer 1981: 445; cf. también Brody 1893: 10, nota 1.

ano 1412, ano de su muerte, 17 su casa se convirdô en el centro de la vida in telectual de la nobleza de Zaragoza, y él en el gran mecenas de intelectuales, poetas y escritores.18 Fue un impulsor de las letras hebreas y favoreciô la traducciôn al hebreo de textos arabes y latinos; 19 sabemos que el ano 1394 él mismo tradujo La aritmética de Nicômaco de Gerasa,20 y un poco mâs tarde su hijo, Don Vidal Benvenist ben Labi, una obra médica de YCh0šu'a ha-Lorqi, a la que puso por titulo Gerem ha-ma'âlot21 Don Benvenist ben Labi logrô congregar a un importante grupo de sabios y estudiosos venidos de todas partes, conocedores de las très grandes lenguas clàsicas, el hebreo, el arabe y el latin, y que, desde luego, utilizaban para el dia a dia las lenguas vernâculas, especialmente el aragonés y el catalan. Todos ellos sentian gran interés por las ciencias, la medicina, las matemáticas, la filosofia etc., pero muy especialmente por la lengua hebrea, a la que querian devolver, gracias a su pluma, el esplendor de antano. S c lomoh ben Mesul lam de Piera fue el aima de ese renacimiento. Al morir sus hijos, hizo de la poesia su heredera. En el encabezamiento en prosa que introduce uno de sus poemas nos dice:22 Por (mi) pecado se irritô (el Senor) contra mis hijos y la obra de mis manos. Expérimenté momentos de amarga reflexion, en los que dije no desear que condnuaran pasando los dias. Enfonces se me revelaron los secretos de los tiempos y se me dieron a conocer sus misteriosos caminos, elegi su senda y compuse este poema jsea mi memorial y mi advertencia!... Cuando perecieron mis hijos por causa de aquellos aciagos dias, yo ya era viejo, y para que se recordara mi nombre en las generaciones venideras le di al poema el nombre de Yeled iÇqunim "hijo nacido en la vejez." Y a continuation compuso un largo poema de 257 versos, tantos como el valor numérico de las letras que forman las palabras ‫( ילד זקונים‬Ge 44,20). El poeta, al igual que Jacob, se considéra un "padre anciano," fecundo solo gracias a la poesia. Poeta y maestro de poetas. Con S c lomoh ben Mešu11am de Piera se produjo un fenômeno totalmente nuevo en la historia de la poesia hebrea en Espana: organizô y fue el centro indiscutable de un grupo de poetas mâs jôvenes que él como Don Vidal Benvenist ben Labi, Don Vidal ben Benvenist, 23 ŠCmue1 Bonastruc, 17

18 19 20 21 22 23

Conocemos el ano exacto de su muerte por el poemilla £man darak que acompafia a la endecha que escribiô S'iomoh para la ocasiôn, y cuyo encabezamiento es: "itmdn respecto al ano de su muerte." Bernstein 1942: 13, n° 2a. Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 582. Ver. Huss 1987-88, 503, nota 6. Ms. Bodl. 2774, ff. 46v-59r. Segûn Huss 1987-88, loc. cit. se conservan al menos siete manuscritos de esta obra. B'- 'efesyad, Bernstein 1942: 1, n° 1. N o coincido con el Prof. E. Fleischer (Cf. Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 603) en que la confusion en la idendficaciôn y en los nombres de estos poetas esté ya del todo resuelta. Es cierto que en los ff. 107r-149v del manuscrito de la Bodleian Library 1984 se editan los "Poemas de Vidal Benvenist" y su correspondencia con Vidal ben Labi, dejando claro que estos eran sus respecdvos nombres, pero en los restante manuscritos son muchas—y generalmente bastante confu-

Sdomoh Bonafed... etc.24 Todos ellos, en palabras de H. Schirmann, "se sendan vinculados por una especie de pacto de amigos... y se veian a si mismos como représentantes de la poesia hebrea en Espana en aquel momento." 25 Durante esas décadas de renacimiento se enviaron cartas en forma de poemas y tomaron parte en justas y disputas. Se dieron a si mismos los nombres de kat ha-nflorerim "grupo de los poetas," y 'ädat ο hebrat nogmm "banda" ο "tropa de mûsicos." 26 En castellano se les conoce como los poetas del Circulo de Zaragoza. Fueron la élite de la nobleza y la intelectualidad judia que en aquel momento se congregaba en Zaragoza bajo el patrocinio de la familia Ben Labi y el magisterio de Sdomoh de Piera. Lo dice el propio poeta en versos como éstos:27 Me basta el que me haya ungido mi Destino Caudillo de la "tropa de poetas y mûsicos," que los que sahen tarier evoquen mi nombre con los grandes poetas de todos los tiempos. Que se le haya otorgado a mi poesia la dignidad mâs alta por encima de los demás poetas, sobre todos los géneros. Muriô pasados los setenta anos, poco después de la Disputa de Tortosa. Suele decirse que fue la conversion de su discipulo y amigo Don Vidal Benvenist ben Labi—quien, al morir su padre en 1412, se habia converddo también en su patrôn—la que condicionô la suya, pero no tenemos ningún texto que corrobore este ultimo extremo. En cuanto al hecho mismo de convertirse, básicamente disponemos de dos tesdmonios: 28 1. Un poemilla de très versos 'im šakbuk, que De Piera no incluyô en su Diwân, y una hiriente respuesta—bat Sor kf-^onab, atribuida por todos los manuscritos sin excepciôn a Don Vidal.25 Estos poemas se nos han transmiddo en dos ver-

sas—las referencias a estos poetas y a otros miembros de la familia Ben Labi. Además S'lomoh Bonafed, en sus poemas, siempre menciona a Vidal Benvenist como Ben Benvenist (la métrica no permite Benveniste), cf Bodleian 1984 (ff. 48r; 85r; 103r etc.) y el ms. Cincinnad 500 (f. 45) parece corregir ‫ דון וידאל בנבנשת‬por ‫דון וידאל ן׳ בנבנשת‬. Hasta no disponer de una ediciôn cridca del Diwân de De Piera, prefiero respetar la lectura de Bonafed—que es también la mâs usual en su correspondencia con De Piera: Vidal ben Benvenist (cf. mss. A. f. 216r marg y 221 r marg; BG. F. 50v; E. f, 77r; K. 10r etc.) y Vidal (Benvenist) ben Labi (cf. mss. A. ff. 137r, 142r, 144v; BG. ff. 73v.75r.77v.; G. ff. 70.73.75.77; Ε. ff. 106v. 109r. 113r. etc.). 24

En el epigrafe del poema If ne Ìewi dice De Piera: "volvi a escdbir al mencionado sabio cuando empezaba a relacionarse con el "gupo de los poetas" [‫]כת המשוררים‬." Bernstein 1942: 61, n° 57. N o cabe duda de que se trataba de un grupo organizado, aunque suelen incluirse en él todos los poetas de la época que siguieron los patrones estédeos marcados por De Piera. 25 Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 602. 26 Vardi 1996: 1 ss. 27 R'-'efesyaii, Bernstein 1942: 1, n° 1, w . 187-189; 200-201. 28 Cf. Baer 1959: 349 ss. Trad. esp. 479 ss. Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 591. 29 Este Vidal "ist natürlich nicht der Konvertit," dice ya Baer 1929: 798, aunque luego cambia de opinion y habla del otro Don Vidal: "los poetas sadricos de enfonces pusieron en boca del 'principal traidor,' Don Vidal, la respuesta merecida a su companero y maestro...". Baer 1981: 479. Vardi 1986-1987: I, 4: III, 14, se lo atribuye sin dudar a "Vidal Benvenist." Quisiera enfadzar

s i o n e s c o n v a r i a n t e s s i g n i f i c a t i v a s , 3 0 y h a n s i d o e d i t a d o s al m e n o s e n n u e v e o c a s i o n e s — a u n q u e nunca criticamente—e interpretados de m u y diferente forma." E n la v e r s i o n I, la i n t r u d u c c i ô n a

'im šak'hu&

es: " P o e m a q u e e n v i ô E n S c l o m o h

d e Piera c u a n d o se c o n v i r t i ô [ ‫ ] כ ש נ ש ת מ ד‬p a s a d o s l o s s e t e n t a a n o s a s u a m i g o D o n Vidal;" 3 2 y e n el e n c a b e z a m i e n t o a

bat Sor k'-^ona

d e la v e r s i o n II se a l u d e

"al p o e t a q u e c o n s u p e c a d o se h i z o m e r e c e d o r d e la m u e r t e . " 2.

E l s e g u n d o t e s t i m o n i o e s el d e S c l o m o h B o n a f e d , e s p e c i a l m e n t e l o s v e r s o s

q u e dirige a " l o s r e y e s d e la p o e s i a . . . , al a n c i a n o p o e t a E n S c l o m o h d e Piera y al sabio D o n Vidal b e n Labi" d à n d o l e s n u e v a s pruebas de su amistad aunque ellos "al final t r a n s g r e d i e r a n s u p a c t o c o n la p o e s i a [ 3 3 " , [ ‫ ש י ר‬o "violaran el p r e c e p t o 3 4 d e la l e n g u a h e b r e a y la p o é u c a [ ‫ " ] מ ל י צ ה‬y l a m e n t a n d o s u " c a m b i o "

[‫]תמורתם‬

— g e n e r a l m e n t e se interpréta c o m o " c o n v e r s i o n " — d e s p u é s d e tantos a n o s . 3 5 Y . B a e r v e e n e s t o s t e x t o s u n a p r u e b a i n c u e s d o n a b l e d e la c o n v e r s i o n d e

De

Piera 3 6 y — a u n q u e e n b u e n a m e d i d a s e a n c o n f u s o s o e s t é n m a n i p u l a d o s — p a r c c e n reflejar cl c o n v e n c i m i e n t o d e s u s a u t o r e s s o b r e e s t e h e c h o , h e c h o q u e p o r o t r a parte, n o i m p i d i ô la e n o r m e d i f u s i ô n d e s u p o e s i a ni d e s u " m a n u a l para l o s p o e t a s , " el

'Imre n0'aš,y

conservado también en n u m e r o s o s manuscritos. Es des-

c o n c e r t a n t e , sin e m b a r g o , q u e e s t o haya s u s c i t a d o m u c h o m â s i n t e r é s q u e la e d i t i o n y el e s t u d i o d e s u o b r a , t o d a v e z q u e se d e s c o n o c e n t o d o s l o s d e t a l l e s d e s u c o n v e r s i o n y él n u n c a a l u d e a e l l o e n s u s p o e m a s . E l P r o f e s o r H . S c h i r m a n n , e n s u g r a n t r a t a d o s o b r e p o e s i a e n la E s p a f i a Cristiana, r e c i e n t e m e n t e e d i t a d o y a n o t a d o p o r E . F l e i s c h e r , d e d i c a a S c l o m o h

ben

M c s u l l a m d e Piera el c a p i t u l o i n m e d i a t a m e n t e p o s t e r i o r al titulado: " O c a s o d e la p o e s i a h e b r e a e n E s p a f i a , " 3 8 l o q u e d a u n a i d e a d e la v a l o r a c i ô n q u e le m e r e c e . La realidad e s q u e s u o b r a , al igual q u e la d e l o s û l d m o s p o e t a s h e b r e o s d e S e f a -

que la lectura de los manuscrito es simplemente ‫דון וידאל‬. Además tampoco esta incluido en la secciôn de "Poemas de Vidal Benvenist" del ms. B. 30 Version 1: Ms. M. (f. 95v y 128v) y version II. Mss. A. (f. 234v); BG.( 169v) y E. (231v). 31 Luzzatto 1882: 734; Kaminka 1891-1893: 23 nota 1; Baer 1929: 798; Samuel 1937: 482; Bernstein 1937: 364; Idem. 1945-46: 2; Baer 1959: 349 s.; Habermann 1964: 25 s.; Vardi 19861987: I, 4: III, 14. Las cuatro primeras ediciones editan la version de M. Bernstein 1937 se basa fundamentalmente en los Ms. A. y GB., luego tanto él como las restantes ediciones mezclan los textos y los epígrafes. 32 Solo ms. M. (f. 95v). La version II comienza: "Poema del Maestro, el Rabino, R. S r lomoh de Piera por el distanciamiento [‫ ]התנכרות‬de los amigos." 33 Ī*lite Sir, Ms.Bodl. 1984 f. 24v, v. 34. Kaminka 1926: 288; Patai 1939: 73. Bejarano 1989: 230. 34 Is 24,5. 35 'Im ha-'emet. Ms. Bodl. 1984 f. 82r. Editado por Baer 1926: 987; 1959: 348 s.; Gross 1993: 54. 36 Baer 1959: 534, nota 78. Para otros textos de Bonafed relacionados con este mismo tema, ver Gross 1993. 37 Editado parcialmente en Amsterdam, 1765, por M. Tamah. También el prôlogo de esta obra ha sido editado. Cf. Tauber 1924: 25. 38 Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 580-600.

rad, e s p o c o c o n o c i d a , h a s i d o p o c o e s t u d i a d a 3 9 y ni siquiera e s t á e d i t a d a e n s u totalidad.40 T a l v e z el h e c h o d e q u e S. B e r n s t e i n diera a l o s p o e m a s d e D e Piera p u b l i c a d o s p o r él el n o m b r e d e

The Diwan*{

ha d i s t o r s i o n a d o el a l c a n c e d e s u o b r a , ya

q u e e s t a m u y l e j o s d e ser el Diwan—por

m u y a n a c r ô n i c o q u e p u e d a resultar e s t e

t é r m i n o a f i n a l e s d e l s i g l o XIV p r i n c i p i o s d e l X V — c o m p i l a d o y e d i t a d o p o r el propio poeta. A l igual q u e a l g u n o s d e l o s g r a n d e s p o e t a s a n d a l u s i e s , Š d 0 m 0 h d e Piera t u v o buen cuidado en copiar personalmente

sus p o e m a s , i n c l u y e n d o — c u a n d o

le

p a r e c i ô o p o r t u n o — l o s d e s u s i n t e r l o c u t o r e s ; les p u s o e n c a b e z a m i e n t o s ο e p í g r a f e s c o n s u s c o m e n t a r i o s , e n p r i m e r a p e r s o n a , e x p l i c a n d o s o m e r a m e n t e las circ u n s t a n c i a s e n las q u e f u e r o n e s c r i t o s , i n d i c a n d o l o s d e s d n a t a r i o s e t c . S i n e m b a r g o , n i n g u n a d e las c o p i a s del Diwân

d e q u e d i s p o n e m o s e s a u t ô g r a f a , ni é s t e

se c o n s e r v a c o m p l e t o e n ningún manuscrito, y — l o m â s p o e m a s del

Diwân, y

importante—muchos

n o s o l o l o s d e D e Piera, f u e r o n c o p i a d o s e n o t r o s m a n u s -

c r i t o s , e n f o r m a d e quntres,

en un intento de recopilaciôn de poesias de otros

autores ο de ediciôn de los p o e m a s considerados mâs relevantes. P o r e s o — y a u n q u e tal v e z n u n c a s e a p o s i b l e s a b e r e x a c t a m e n t e c o m o era el Diwân

original

d e S c l o m o h d e P i e r a — s o n s u s t a n c i a l e s las d i f e r e n c i a s q u e hay e n t r e u n o s m a n u s c r i t o s — ο p a r t e s d e l o s m i s m o s c o n las a n o t a c i o n e s d e D e P i e r a — y l o s restantes.42 La d i f e r e n c i a m â s i m p o r t a n t e e s q u e el Diwân E n la p r á c d c a t o t a l i d a d d e l o s m a n u s c r i t o s d e l

formaba una unidad coherente.

Diwân,

los p o e m a s s o n los mis-

m o s y s e e n c u e n t r a n e n el m i s m o o r d e n — y o c u r r e igual c o n las d i f e r e n t e s c o rrespondencias. Hay grupos de p o e m a s idéndcos, introducidos por encabezam i e n t o s d e D e Piera y s e g u i d o s d e t e x t o s e n p r o s a r i m a d a , e m p e d r a d o s d e citas b i b l i c a s , q u e — s a l v o e x c e p c i o n e s — n o s o n cartas i n d e p e n d i e n t e s , s i n o rûbricas d e l o s a u t o r e s d e l o s p o e m a s . F i n a l m e n t e "al d o r s o d e la carta" ( ‫ ) ע ל ה כ ת ב‬, s e c o n s i g n a la d e d i c a t o r i a , y e n m u c h a s o c a s i o n e s el n o m b r e d e l d e s d n a t a r i o d e la carta. S o l o las s e c u e n c i a s e n t r e l o s d i f e r e n t e s g r u p o s n o s i e m p r e c o i n c i d e n , h a y c a m b i o s d e o r d e n y l a g u n a s e n m u c h o s m a n u s c r i t o s , l o q u e h a c e q u e la e d i c i ô n cririca y c o m p l é t a d e l Diwân

e n la q u e e s t o y t r a b a j a n d o i m p l i q u e u n a real re-

c o n s t r u c c i ô n del m i s m o . P o r p o n e r u n e j e m p l o : E l Diwân

d e D e Piera se e n c u e n t r a e n el m s . B. a partir

d e l f. 150r, p e r o e n l o s ff. 1 0 7 r - 1 4 9 v d i c e c o n t e n e r l o s " P o e m a s d e V i d a l B e n venist,"43 algunos de los c u a l e s — l o s m â s s i g n i f i c a d v o s — s e encuentran también e n el l o s m s s . d e l Diwân

39 40

41 42 43

d e D e Piera. L o s e p i g r a f e s s o n m u y d i f e r e n t e s , y s i e m -

Ver. Scheindlin 1997: 25 ss. Vardi 1 ss.,· Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 543 ss. Cf. Schirmann-Fleischer 1997: 543 ss. Ver bibliografîa sobre estos poetas en la Memorias de Licenciatura de M. Huss y T. Vardi. Part I, New York 1942; Part II {Sin qodei) HUCA 19, 1945-56, 1-74. Ver los manuscritos en referencias. Ver nota 23. El Diwan de S c lomoh Bonafed está en los ff. lr-107v de este mismo manuscrito.

pre e s t á n c o r r e g i d o s y a d a p t a d o s p o r el e d i t o r d e l l o s " P o e m a s d e V i d a l B e n v e nist" 4 4 c o m o s e refleja, e n t r e o t r o s , e n l o s d e

lason rrtdabberet:K

1. Diwân de D e Piera: BG. (f. 52r) y E. (f. 77v).4<> ‫הולך רכיל‬ ‫מצאו‬

, ‫א ח ר י כן כי ה ק י פ ו ת ק ו פ ו ת הימים ויהי כ מ ח ר י ש‬

‫מאשר לא‬

‫מ ר כ ב ו ת זמיריו‬

‫וישלח חצי צבא שירים שקולים‬ 47

‫פעמי‬

‫אחרו‬

‫מ ט ע מ י כי‬

, ‫ויקץ כישן ו כ א י ש מ ל ח מ ו ת‬

:‫ וכה אמר‬/ ‫בכבודי‬

‫ויהי‬

‫לו‬

‫הגיד‬ .‫מענה‬

‫ ובהם הקל מ ע ט‬,‫רבים ונכבדים‬

2 . 1 . P o e m a s d e V i d a l B e n v e n i s t . E l M s . B. (f. 1 0 9 v ) . ‫לחרוזים‬

‫מענה‬

‫בפיו שיר‬

‫בא‬

‫דאפיירה‬

‫לאנשלמה‬

‫הבלי הזמן לא‬

‫בנבנשת‬

‫וידאל‬

‫ש ל ח דון‬

‫ ולטרדות‬.‫לבי עלוז וכר‬

‫כתב‬

‫המתחילים‬

‫ו ה ו ג ד לדון ו י ד א ל ה נ ד כי א נ ש ל מ ה ה מ ש ו ר ר הנז׳ מ ת פ א ר עליו‬ 48

:‫ויען אליו‬

,‫חדש‬

.‫לאמרידירמה‬

2 . 2 . P o e m a s d e D e Piera. E l M s . K . (f. 1 0 v ) ‫זה‬

‫ועל‬

‫ ויהי‬.‫ע ל ו ז כי ק ר ב ו ימיך ב׳ מ ת ח י ל א נ ו ש ק מ ו ש ת י עיניו בשינו‬

‫מתחיל‬

‫לבי‬

‫אמר‬

‫ א׳‬. ‫ח ש ו ב י ם‬

,‫בנבשת‬

,‫השיבו‬

‫באן‬

‫מענה לא‬

‫ שירים‬,‫תשובתו‬

‫בן‬ ‫מצא‬

‫ וכה‬.‫ב מ ל ח מ ת תנופה‬

‫וידאל‬

‫דון‬

‫לו‬

‫ה מ ש ו ר ר פיירה‬

‫השיב‬

‫ולא‬

‫שלח‬

‫הימים‬

‫ש ל מ ה פיירה כי ע ל כי ל א‬

‫כר״י‬

‫ארבו‬

‫לדון וידאל ויהי כ מ ח ר י ש ו ה ש י ב לו‬

‫ונאמר‬ 49

E n el Diwân

‫כי‬

‫המשורר‬

:‫אמר‬

d e D e Piera el " p o e t a d i f a m a d o " i n t r o d u c e s u s v e r s o s c o n u n a s

l i n e a s — e n p r o s a r i m a d a — e n las q u e aclara q u e f u e R. A s t r u k h a - L e v i q u i e n le a d v i r d ô q u e S d o m o h d e c i a q u e s e retrasaba r e s p o n d e r " p o r falta d e inspira-

44

El texto de los poemas es excelente; en general fueron copiados por profesionales y se nos han transmiddo sin demasiadas variantes. Por eso las mejores lecturas, ο las lecturas originales, deben ser determinadas de acuerdo a los criterios de la cridca textual y no simplemente a la antigüedad de los manuscritos. 45 Este poema ha sido editado por Vardi 1986-87: III 6 ss., n° 9 y 1996: 140 ss. 46 En este caso concreto solo estos dos manuscritos conservan el encabezamiento del Diwân de De Piera. Los otros manuscritos omiten este poema. 47 "Pasaron muchos dias y, como él seguia callado, un chismoso le dijo de mi parte que los 'pasos de los carros de guerra de sus poemas' (|u 5,28) se estaban retrasando porque no encontraban ('trobaban") respuesta. Entonces se despertô como si estuviera dormido, como un guerrero, y lanzô sus fléchas, un ejéreito de muchos y excelentes poemas escandidos, con los que, en cierto modo, menoscababa mi honra. Eso dijo: ..." 48 "Carta que enviô Don Vidal Benvenist a de Piera en respuesta a los versos cuyas primeras palabras son libbi 'ä/οζ... etc. Debido a los aciagos dempos no habia compuesto ningún nuevo poema, entonces le dijeron al mencionado Don Vidal que el dicho poeta, En S'iomoh, se vanagloriaba de ser me jor poeta que él. Asi le respondiô: ..." 49 ‫ ״‬γ e j p 0 e t a piera enviô en respuesta a estos versos (a ruah \•emirot etc.) unos importantes poemas. El primero comienza Ubi 'àlo\ ki qarbu yamet y el segundo 'enoi qamu ?te 'enaw If-Seko. Y como pasaban muchos dias sin que Don Vidal ben Benvenist le respondiera, el disdnguido poeta S'iomoh Piera dijo que no lo hacia porque no encontraba ('trobaba') respuesta. Se lo dijeron a Don Vidal, quien se mantenia en silencio, como callado y le respondiô pasando al ataque. Y eso es !0 que dijo:..."

c i ô n , " y q u e s u s p o e m a s "eran s o m b r i o s . " E s t a s lineas e s t á n f i r m a d a s p o r " B e n B e n v e n i s t b e n L a b i " ( B G . ) 5 0 o B e n v e n i s t b e n L a b i (E.). E l m s . B . d e n e t a m b i é n e s e t e x t o , p e r o s i n firma. La lectura d e l Diwan

e s la original, y si el p a s o d e la p r i m e r a a la tercera p e r -

s o n a — y n o al r ê v é s — n o q u e d a r a s u f i c i e n t e m e n t e c l a r o e n e s t e p o e m a , e n o t r a c o r r e s p o n d e n c i a q u e m a n t u v i e r o n l o s m i s m o s p o e t a s n o deja lugar a d u d a s :

1. Encabezamientos al poema de Vidal daLlah fmol^

a) Diwan de De Piera: BG. (f. 60r) y E. (f. 89r): ,‫כבטיט‬

‫ומכביד עלי‬

‫טורד‬

‫ת ח ת דלף‬

‫היום ואני יושב בביתי‬

‫ויהי‬

‫ויוסף עוד ה מ ש ו ר ר ה ח כ ם הנ״ז ש א ת משליו מ ר א ה טלפיו ל ת ת כבוד‬ :‫וכה אמר‬

.‫ובקרבו ארבו להחזיק בדעתו הקדום‬

‫לשמי‬

b) P o e m a s d e V i d a l B e n v e n i s t . E l m s . B. (f. 117r): . ‫ה מ ש ו ר ר דון וידאל ב נ ב נ ש ת ש א ת מ ש ל ו‬ 2. E n c a b e z a m i e n t o s al p o e m a

52

mi-qol hämon (\uc Š

C

‫ויוסף‬

10m0h e n v i ô c o m o respuesta

a daLlah fmol. a)

Mss. del

Diwan q u e

editan

daLlah fmolY>G.

(f. 61 vr) y E . (f. 90r):

:‫ואען ואומר‬ b) M s s d e l

Diwan q u e

omiten

daLlah fmol Κ.

.‫גם אני ל א א ח ש ך פי‬

(f. 2 2 1 r ) y G . f. 1 4 2 )

,‫היום ואני יושב בביתי ת ח ת דלף טורד ו מ כ ב י ד עלי עבטיט‬

‫ויהיה‬

‫ויוסף עוד ה מ ש ו ר ר ה ח כ ם הנ״ז ש א ת משליו מ ר א ה טלפיו ל ת ת כבוד‬ .‫א ח ש ך פי‬

‫ גם אני ל א‬. ‫ב ד ע ת ו ה ק ד ו ם‬

‫ובקרבו ארבו להחזיק‬

‫לשמי‬

:‫ואעןואומר‬ c)

P o e m a s d e V i d a l B e n v e n i s t . E l m s . B. (f. 1 1 8 v ) : ‫ [ י ו ש ב ב ב י ת ו ת ח ת ד ל ף ט ו ר ד‬5 5 ‫ה י ו ם ואג» ] א נ ש ל מ ה ד א פ י א י ר‬ ‫שאת משליו‬

‫ה מ ש ו ר ר דון וידאל‬

‫עוד‬

‫ ויוסף‬,‫עליו עבטיט‬

‫ויהיה‬ ‫ומכביד‬

‫מראה טלפיו לתת כבוד לשמו ובקרבו ארבו להחזיק בדעתו‬

‫כטרד‬

: ‫ ויאן ו י א מ ר‬.‫ וגם ה ו א ל א ח ש ך פיו‬. ‫ה ק ד ו ם‬ T e n e m o s très e d i c i o n e s d i f e r e n t e s d e l m i s m o e n c a b e z a m i e n t o d e e s t e g r u p o d e p o e m a s basadas en los m i s m o s textos. A . E l t e x t o m â s p r o x i m o al Diwan

original e s el d e l o s m s s . B G y E :

1. (a) " Y u n dia q u e y o e s t a b a s e n t a d o e n m i c a s a b a j o u n a lluvia i n c e s a n t e , e m p a p a d o d e barro, el d i c h o s a b i o p o e t a v o l v i ô a recitar s u s p o e m a s , a l a b â n d o -

50 51 52 53

Por esta razôn en Neubauer-Cowley 1966: 433 se atribuye este poema a R. Benvenist ben Labi. Editado por Schirmann 1954-60: 597 s., n° 442; Vardi 1986-87: III 11 ss., n° 11 y 1996: 146 ss. Poema editado por Schirmann 1954-60: 574 s., n° 427 (versos 1-18); Vardi 1996: 149 ss. Nota al margen.

m e e n a p a r i e n c i a (lit. m o s t r a n d o s u p e z u n a ) , p e r o e n s u interior, s u argucia era m a n t e n e r s e e n s u a n t e r i o r o p i n i o n . E s o dijo": +

daLlah fmol

de Vidal.

2. (a) " Y o t a m p o c o q u e q u e d é caUado, r e s p o n d i y dije": +

mi-qol hämon d e

ŠC10m0h. B. L o s mss. A. y G . o m i t e n

daLlah fmol.

Sustituyen ‫ " וכה א מ ר‬E s o dijo" del epígra-

f e 1 (a) p o r el t e x t o c o m p l e t o del 2 (a). C. L o s p o e m a s d e " V i d a l B e n v e n i s t . " E l m s . B.: 1 (b) E n lugar d e l e p í g r a f e 1 (a) dice: "el p o e t a V i d a l B e n v e n i s t v o l v i ô a recitar s u s p o e m a s " +

daLlah fmol.

2 (c) S u lectura e s s e c u n d a r i a . C o r r i g e " y o " p o r " E n S c l o m o h d e P i e r a " — e n el m a r g e n — y c o p i a e x a c t a m e n t e el m i s m o t e x t o d e A . y G . , t o d o él e n tercera persona + E l Diwdn

mi-qol hàmon. d e D e Piera e x i s t e t o d a v i a , y — a u n q u e c o m o s e ha d i c h o , e s t á i n c o m -

p l e t o y tiene g r a n d e s l a g u n a s y d i f e r e n c i a s s e g û n l o s m a n u s c r i t o s — e n s u m a y o r parte p u e d e ser r e c o n s t r u i d o . L o s m s s . B G . y E . l o i n t r o d u c e n c o n la s i g u i e n t e portada: ‫זה ה ס פ ר ה נ ו ת ן א מ ר י ש פ ר ד ב ר י פי ח כ ם ח ן ב ש י ר י ם ת מ י ר י ם מ ה ו ד ר י ם מ פ ז י ק ר י ם‬ ‫ ו כ ת ב י ם ו מ ל י צ ו ת י פ ו ת ל מ ש ו ר ר ה ג ד ו ל ה ח כ ם ה ר ׳ ש ל מ ה ב ן מ ש ל ם ד א פ י י ר ה‬. " E s t e libro c o n t i e n e ' h e r m o s o s d i c h o s , ' 5 4 palabras d e l o s l a b i o s d e l g r a t o s a b i o , c o n p o e m a s y e l e g a n t e s c a n t o s m á s p r e c i o s o s q u e el o r o , y c o n e s c r i t o s y t e x t o s e n p r o s a r i m a d a d e l g r a n p o e t a , el s a b i o R. S c l o m o h b e n M c s u l l a m d e P i e r a . " E n el c o n j u n t o d e l o s m a n u s c r i t o s se h a n c o n s e r v a d o u n total d e u n o s 3 6 2 p o e m a s d e D e Piera, la m a y o r i a c o n e s t r u c t u r a d e

casida

y métros convenciona-

l e s — s o l o 3 5 s o n m o a x a j a s , varias d e ellas c o m p o s i c i o n e s 1itúrgicas. A d e m á s hay 4 8 p o e m a s de otros autores c o n quien m a n t u v o correspondencia. El n û m e r o de v e r s o s d e las p o e s i a s e s m u y variable: j u n t o a l a r g o s p o e m a s — c o m o el s e n a l a d o anteriormente de 256 versos, ο

hdbalim naflu,

un p o e m a de 2 1 8 dedicado a Meir

Alguadex,55 otros c i n c o de más de 100 versos, 4 2 de entre 5 0 y 100 y 9 4 de entre 10 a 5 0 — h a y un gran n û m e r o de poemillas y

simanim d e

m e n o s de 5 versos,

u n o s 2 2 3 , y a p r o x i m a d a m e n t e u n o s 4 4 d e m e n o s d e 10. D e t o d o s estos p o e m a s , alrededor de 150 están todavia e n manuscrito, y lo que es peor, los que han sido editados lo han s i d o — s a l v o su correspondencia c o n M o s e h A b a s 5 6 — s e p a r â n d o l o s de sus g r u p o s r e s p e c d v o s y de sus textos en p r o s a . 5 7 A s i e s t a p o e s i a , ya d e p o r si c o n c e p t u a l y o s c u r a , e s a û n m u c h o

mâs

dificil d e c o m p r e n d e r . E s p e r o q u e la p u b l i c a c i ô n d e l Diwan

d e D e Piera, e n el q u e e s t o y t r a b a j a n d o ,

r e s c a t e d e l o l v i d o a e s t e g r a n p o e t a . T o d a v i a e s t á p o r e x p l i c a r el p o r q u é 54

55 56 57

su

Esta expresiôn ‫( הנותן אמרי שפר‬Ge 49,21) es utilizada por los copistas de manuscritos hebreos desde el siglo XII. Cf. Steinschneider 1937: 47-48. Cf. Bernstein 1958. Habermann 1964. Otros textos del Diwan de S'lomoh de Piera han sido editados por: Brody 1893: 6 ss. (ediciôn de algunas cartas); Brody H.-Wiener 1923: 322-329. Pero, muy especial mente por Bernstein 1934— 35; 1936-37; 1937; 1942; 1945-46; 1958 y 1958b. Cf. también Baer 1929: 798; 1959: 305-308; Schirmann 1954-60: 564-581; Vardi 1986-87; 1996 y Yarden 1971-1972.

p o e s i a — d e s e r i t a c o m o anclada en el pasado, sin la gracia y el lirismo de la andalusi, impenetrable a las nuevas corrientes del R e n a c i m i e n t o — f u e el u n i c o m o d e l o a seguir p o r t o d o s los p o e t a s de su u e m p o .

Manuscritos Diwân de De Piera: A. B. BG. G. E.

N e w York, JTS, Mic. 1488, ( E N A 1381). O x f o r d , Bodleian Library 1984, Mic. 155, ff. 150r ss. O x f o r d , Bodleian Library 2769, Heb. f. 11. Berlin, Staatsbibliothek 114 Ms. Or. f. 1959, (Fischl 51). Cambridge, University Library, Add. 1061/7.

Poemas de De Piera y otros autores B. Κ. M.

O x f o r d , Bodleian Library 1984, Mic. 155, ff. 107r-149v. Cincinnati, Hebrew Union Colege 315. London, T h e Bridsh Museum 930, Add. 27.168.

Referencias Baer, F. (Y). 1929. Die Juden im Christlichen Spanien. Vol. I. Aragonien und Navarra. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. , 1959, 2' ed. Toledot ha-yhudim bi-Sfarad ha-nosrit. Tel Aviv: A m O v e d Ltd. Publishers. , 1981. Historia de losjudios en ta Fspana cristiana. Trad. esp. J. L. Lacave. Madrid: Altalena. Bejarano, A. M a . 1989. S'lomoh Bonafed, poeta y potemista hebreo (s. XIV-XV). Tesis Doctoral inédita presentada en la Universidad de Barcelona. Bernstein, S. 1934—35. "Al-hamarat dato ha-m c dummah sei ha-m c sorer R. S c lomoh de Piera." Ha-Hed 10, 28 ss. , 1936-37. "Šire ha-qodes še1 R. Š<10'‫־‬m0h de Piera." Tarbi^ 7, 335-244. , 1937. "Sire D o n Vidal Yosef ibn Labi." Tarbiz 8, 345. , 1937b. "Š C ne piyyutim 1‫־‬-R. S'lomoh ben Labi." Horeb 3, 1937, 101-106. , 1942. Diwân fel S'lomoh ben M'Sullam de Piera. Part. I. N e w York: Alim Publication. , 1945-46. "Diwân sire ha-qodes sel R. Š10‫־‬m0h de Piera." Part. II. HUCA 19, 1 - 7 4 . , 1958. "Sir r-hil lah sel S e lomoh de Piera li-k‫־‬hod rabbah sel Qastilyah R. Me'ir Alguadex." Sinai, Sefer yofcel, 205—219. , 1958b. "Š C ride širim sel Š C 10m0h ben M C šu1iam de Piera." Horek 13, 148 ss. Brody, H. 1893. Beiträge Salomo da-Pieras Leben und Werke (K S'lomoh de Piera. Dbarim ahadim 'odotat W-'odot s'faraw 'im tose'ot mi-širaw). Berlin: H. Itzkowski. , 1938. "Šire M‫־‬šuHam ben S'lomoh de Piera." YHHSY 4, 1-107. Brody H.-Wiener, M. 1923, 2' ed. Mikhar ha-širah ba-'ikrit. Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 322-329. Gross, A. 1993. "Ha-m c sorer Š C 10m0h Bonafed u-m c 'ora'ot doro." The Frank Talmage memorial Volume. I, Hebr. See. Ed. by Β. Walfish. Haifa, 35-61. Huss, M. 1986-87. M'lisat Ffer uf-Dinah. Tesina inédita. Jerusalem. , 1987-88. "Li-šC'e1at z e huto sei m ' h a b e r M'lisat 'Efer w^-Dinah." M'hqart Y'ruïalaim fr sifrut 'ikrit 10-11, 503 ss. Habermann, Α. M. 1964. "Iggerot Š C 10m0h de Piera l c -Moseh Abbas." Osaryhude S'farad 7, 24-42.

Kaminka, Α. 1891-1893. "R. Mešu1-1am de Piera. D'barim 'ahadim l e -tolodotaw mi-q c sat mi-sirotaw." Ha-Hoqer(ed. S. Fuchs) 2,1, 23-28. , 1926. "Širim u-melisot le ha-Rabi ŠC10m0h ben R c uben Bonafed. " Ha-sofeh t-ho&nat Israel, 288-295. Luzzatto, S. D. 1882. '1\grot Sadal. Ed. by S. Eisig Graber. Fünfter Band. Przemysl: Zupnik / Knoller. Neubauer, A. 1886. Catalogue of the Hebrew Mansucripts in the Bodleian Libraiy. Oxford. Neubauer, A.-Cowlwy, E. 1906. Catalogue of the Hebrew Mansucripts in the Bodleian Libraiy. Vol 2. Oxford. Patay, Y. 1939. "Šire hol sel Ši0m0h Bonafed." Mi-sfuneb ha-širab. Jerusalem, 67-85. Samuel, S. 1937. "Der Dichter Salomo ben Meschullam Dapiera und die Frage seines Glaubenswechsels." Monatschrift fur Geschichle und Wissenschaft des Judentums 81, 4 8 1 496. Scheindlin, R. P. 1997. "Secular Hebrew Poetry in fiftëenth-Century Spain." Crisis and Creativity in the Sephardic World 1391-1648. Ed. by B. R. Gampel. New York. Schirmann, H. 1954—60, 2" ed. Hebrew Poetry in Spain and Provence. (Hebr.). Vol 2. Jerusalem-Tel Aviv: The Bialik Institute and Dvir Co. Schirmann, H.-Fleischer, E. 1997. The History of Hebrew Poetry in Christian Spain and Southenι Prance. Edited, Supplemented and Annotated by E. Fleischer. (Hebr.). Jerusalem: The Magnes Press-Ben-Zvi Institute. Serrano y Sanz, M. 1918. Origenes de ta domination espanola en América. Vol. 1. Madrid. Steinschneider, M. 1875. "Poeten und Polemiker in Nordspanien um 1400." Hebräische Bibliographie XV-XVII. , 1937, 2' ed. Vorlesungen über die Kunde hebräischer Handschriften, deren Sammlungen und Verzeichnisse. Jerusalem: Bamberger / Wahrmann. Tauber, 1924—25. "Sefer 'imre no'as 1i-Š10m0h de Piera." Kiryat Sefer 1, 62 ss. Vardi, T. 1986—87. Sire Don Vidal Benvenist. Memoria de licenciatura inédita. Jerusalem. , 1996. The "Group ofpoets" in Saragossa. Secular poetry. (Hebr.). Thesis for the degree of PhD. Hebrew University. Jerusalén. Vendrell, F., 1943. "Aportaciones documentales para el estudio de la familia Caballeria." Sefarad 115-154. Yarden, D. 1971-1972. "S<1Ūšah sire kahod w-ididut hadašim S c lomoh de Piera." Yeruialayim 5.6, 461-465.

L A CONTRADICCIÔN

DEL H ERE JE1

D E ISAAC B E N P O L G A R CARLOS DEL VALLE CSIC, Madrid, Spain U n o d e l o s a c o n t e c i m i e n t o s m á s r e l e v a n t e s e n la juderia c a s t e l l a n a d e la p r i m e r a m i t a d d e l s i g l o XIV f u e la c o n v e r s i o n d e A b n e r d e B u r g o s , a c o m i e n z o s d e l o s a i i o s 2 0 . 2 H a y d i v e r s o s c r i t e r i o s para calibrar e s a i m p o r t a n c i a . U n o d e e l l o s e s , sin d u d a , el n u m é r o d e c o n t r o v e r s i a s q u e ha g e n e r a d o , el n u m é r o d e i m p u g n a d o r e s q u e h a s u s c i t a d o . P u e s b i e n , r e s p e c t o al n u m é r o d e r e f u t a d o r e s la cifra e s bastante considerable.3 E l p r i m e r o d e los contradictores e i m p u g n a d o r e s d e A b n e r fue Isaac b e n P o l g a r . 4 A b n e r le llama el " o m n e d e m i varaia" (el h o m b r e d e m i " n u e s t r o contradezidor"5 y B e n Polgar lo califica c o m o "mi

condenda),

rival."6

1

Las abreviaturas que se utilizarân en este trabajo son las siguientes: Baer, "Sheridim" (Baer, F. 1935. "Sheridim mi-meshorere Qastilia ba-me'a ha-14." Minha le David. Jerusalén, 197-204). 'Ezer ÇE^er ha-Dat le-R. Yishaq Polqar. Ed. J. Le vinger . Tel Aviv 1984). Ofrenda (Ofrenda de Zelos [Minhat Kena'ot] und Libro de la Ley. Ed. W. Mettmann. Obladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1992). Roth, "Isaac" (Roth, Ν. 1992. "Isaac Polgar y su libro contra unconverso." En Polémica judeocristiana. Estudios. Ed. C. del Valle. Madrid: Aben Ezra Ed, 67-74). Teshubat (Abner de Burgos, Teshubat Appiqoros: Ms. 2440 de la Biblioteca Paladna de Parma, fols. 2r-9r). Tesbubot (Abner de Burgos, Teshubot la-Meharef: version castellana segûn el Ms. Vat. Lat 6423; version hebrea según Ms. de la Biblioteca Palatina de Parma, De-Rossi 533). Wolf (Wolf, J.Chr. 1715-33. Bib/iotheca Hebraea. Hamburg).

2

Véase mi estudio "El libro de las Batallas de Dios de Abner de Burgos." En La polémica judeocristiana. Estudios. Ed. C. del Valle. Madrid: Aben Ezra Ediciones, 1992, 77. Polemizaron con Abner, entre otros: Isaac Polgar, R. Yehoshua, Yosef Shalom, Isaac Natán, Moisés Narboni, Shemtov Ibn Shaprut, Moisés Cohen de Tordesillas, Isaac de Acre. Ysach ben Polgar (Libro del Zelo de Dios, Ms. Vadc. Lat., fol. laa); Yishaq bar Yosef Polgar (E^er 98); Don Zaq Ibn Polgar (Samuel ben Yosef Ibn Sason, Baer, "Sheridim" 200); Norman Roth, ("Isaac Polgar y su libro contra un converso." En Polémicajudeocristiana. Estudios. Ed. C. del Valle. Madrid: Aben Ezra Ediciones, 1992, 67-73, p. 68) senala que en la onomâsdca judia hispana aparecen los gendlicios Enpollegar (Burgos, 1207), Pulligar (Jerez, 1266). Pilar Leon Tello (Judios de Toledo. Madrid: CSIC, 1979, II: 198) documenta la existencia de Yuçaf de Pulgar. Pero ante la evidencia manuscrita, contemporânea al autor, no dene justification aducir otras formas posibles de pronunciation (Pulgar, Policar, Pollegar); véase Baer, I. 1981. Historia de los judios de la Espana cristiana. Madrid: Altalena, 807, del que penden Saenz Badillos, A.-Targarona Borrâs, J. 1988. Diecionario de autores judios (Sefarad. Siglos X-XV). Côrdoba: Ed. El Almendro, 168; Orfali, M. 1998. Biblioteca de Autores lôgtcos hispanojudios (siglos XI—XV). Granada: Universidad de Granada, 135. [Nota de los editores: Sin embargo, Sëmu'el ibn Sason, poeta castellano coetâneo del autor, en un poema hebreo que le dedica recoge su nombre como ‫"( פלקאר‬Polqar" ο "Polcar"), haciéndolo rimar con palabras hebreas terminadas en -qar, comoyaqar, daqar, saqar, etc., cf. Sefer atne ha-ioham. Ediciôn de H. Chamiel. Israel: Mahbarot lê-sifrut, 1962,100, n° 67],

3

4

5 6

Ofrenda 43,51. Teshubot la-Meharef 42aa; "es posible que alguien sospeche que Salomon profesaba esta creencia corrupta (de la astrologia), como pensaron Ben Ezra, R. Judâ el Ρίο y el conocido rival mio" ( Έ ^ τ 122, 130).

E s b i e n p o c o l o q u e s a b e m o s d e la v i d a p e r s o n a l d e I s a a c b e n P o l g a r . P o r el e s t r e c h o c o n t a c t o q u e m a n t u v o c o n A b n e r d e B u r g o s , hay q u e p e n s a r q u e e s t u v o y residiô e n Burgos; durante un u e m p o s a b e m o s q u e residiô e n Avila.7 Isaac fue discipulo d e A b n e r . E n e s t o n o cabe duda ninguna. Se d e b e precis a m e n t e a s u c o n d i t i o n d e d i s c i p u l o el q u e B e n P o l g a r , b a s a d o e n u n a a m p l i a t r a d i c i ô n rabinica, afirmara q u e " d o n d e hay p r o f a n a t i o n d e l n o m b r e d e

Dios,

n o hay lugar para la h o n r a d e l m a e s t r o , " " j u s d f i c a n d o d e e s t a m a n e r a s u d e r e c h o y o b l i g a t i o n d e i m p u g n a r a s u a n t i g u o m a e s t r o . E n o t r o lugar, B e n P o l g a r s e r e f i e r e a la a n t i g u a a m i s t a d q u e le unia c o n A b n e r , a b a s e d e la c u a l le p i d i ô u n e j e m p l a r d e l libro q u e a c a b a b a d e editar r e f u t a n d o el j u d a i s m o . 9 H a y o t r o testim o n i o d e B e n P o l g a r q u e c o n f i r m a s u e s t r e c h a r e l a c i ô n c o n él: " E n u n d e m p o — d i c e — l o a s e g u r o , e s t u v e u n i d o a u n h o m b r e q u e era u n e x p e r t o , c o n o c e d o r d e l o s c a m i n o s d e la L e y y d e la

filosofia,

q u e llegaba h a s t a el f o n d o d e las

cosas. Su c o r a z ô n lo apartô de los c a m i n o s de nuestra Ley. Su n o m b r e antiguo era R. A b n e r . " 1 0 P e r o el t e s t i m o n i o d e A b n e r e s c o n t u n d e n t e y n o a d m i t e réplica. I b n P o l g a r frecuentô desde nino una escuela regentada por Abner: "Tu frecuentaste

mi

e s c u e l a d e s d e q u e tu eras p e q u e n o y y o te queria c o m o a m i m i s m a a l m a , " dice. 1 1 D e n t r o d e la m i s m a linea e s c r i b e A b n e r : " E m â s , p o r q u e Y s a a c el d i c h o f f u e m u c h o mi amigo en otro

tiempo

que éramos c o m p a n e r o s e n rrazôn del e s m d i o

e d e l a p r e n d e r e n o n tenia p o r g u y s a d o d e barajar c o n él n i n d e f f a z e r l e a s s a n a r p o r ninguna guissa."12 A b n e r refleja el talante racionalista d e I s a a c b e n P o l g a r y d a u n d e t a l l e d e él q u e e s dificil d e c o m p r o b a r , y, e n parte, d e creer. A f i r m a q u e él j u n t o c o n o t r o s i n t e r c e d i ô a n t e c i e r t o s p r e l a d o s c r i s t i a n o s para q u e q u e m a s e n el T a l m u d . 1 3

7 8

9

10 11

12 13

Roth, "Isaac" 68. N o me Consta su estancia en Valladolid (Roth, Ibid.). Teshubat Appiqoros, Ms. Parma 2440. La veneraciôn del maestro es una obligaciôn religiosa ("Pirqe R. Meir." En Taylor, Ch. 1877. Sayings of the Jewish Fa/hers. Cambridge, 1:114; Isaac Aboab, 1708. Almenara de la lu%. Amsterdam, 122). Transgredir las palabras del sabio era severamente casrigado (Ber 4b) El autor del Sefer ha-Hinnuk afirma que la obligaciôn de obedecer al maestro incumbe aun cuando uno sepa que el sabio yerra (Sefer ha-Hinnuch. Ed. Charles Wengrow, Jerusalem-New York, 1984, precepto nr. 496). Pero "en todos los asuntos donde hay profanaciôn del nombre de Dios, no hay que tener en cuenta la honra del maestro" (Yosef Caro, Yore De'a, párrafo 242, p. 260; Shulhan Arukh. Ed. Zvi H. Preisler. Jerusalem 1993). "Le hice una pedciôn, a base de la anrigua amistad, de que me enviara una copia del libro que niega las verdades, deshace la andgua alianza y la fe, a fin de que pueda perseguirlo y conminarlo y cual lodo hollarlo" (Teshubat Appiqoros, fol. 2a). •EZerÚ0. "...lo que tú usseste en mi escuella desde quando fuste pequeno e que te amava como mi alma...; aunque mucho te pessa, yo so tu maestro" (Teshubol la-Meharef fol. 46aa). En funciôn de su condiciôn de maestro, Abner se sorprende que Ben Polgar pueda saber cosas que no sepa su macstro (Ibid., 46aa). Ofrenda 15. "E creerán lo que tesdguaron sobre d e sobre algunos de tus compaiiones, ca pidiedes a algunos obispos poderosos de parte del Papa que quemassen el Talmud de los judios e lo astragassen del mundo, sinon que non se nos aguisô nin nos ayudô Dios a ello, ca non quisso que se perdiessen todas aquéllas margaritas e las melezinas de las aimas que son en él, las quales cossas son sperança de los justos de Israel e Dios verdadero sabe quànto me trabaié por que non se quemasse" (Teshubol 62bb—63aa).

D e l p r e s t i g i o s o c i a l d e B e n P o l g a r d a t e s t i m o n i o el p o e t a S a m u e l b e n Y o s e f I b n S a s ô n , q u e se dirige a él c o n l o s a p e l a d v o s d e " p r i n c i p e , s e n o r , rav;" s e n a l a s u s e s m d i o s e n las c i e n c i a s s a g r a d a s , T o r à , M i s n á , y e n a s t r o n o m i a ,

filosofia

y medi-

cina; destaca t a m b i é n su c o n d i c i ô n de poeta.14 I b n P o l g a r e s a u t o r d e u n a o b r a literaria, a p o l o g é t i c a ,

filosôfica,

exegédca.15

Escribiô: a) U n t r a t a d o a p o l o g é d c o , la o b r a q u e A b n e r l l a m a " L i b r o ο Carta d e las deshonras." b) " E ç î t

ha-Dat " E l

S o c o r r o d e la religion." 1 6

c) U n l i b r o r e f u t a n d o la a s t r o l o g i a : " L i b r o d e n e g a r e d e s m e n t i r la a s t r o logia;"

17

e n o t r o lugar, l l a m a d o " L i b r o d e d e s m e n t i m i e n t o d e la a s t r o l o g i a . " 1 8

I b n Polgar d e n o m i n a esta obra

Ma'amar be-akhashat ba-istagninut

"Tratado del

d e s m e n t i m i e n t o d e la a s t r o l o g i a . " 1 9 d) " L i b r o d e la e s p e r a n z a . " 2 0

e) Musar ha-Banim "Libro de la educaciôn de los hijos." 21 f) C o m e n t a r i o d e l libro d e l o s S a l m o s . 2 2 g) C o m e n t a r i o del Q o h é l e t . 2 3 h) C o m e n t a r i o d e la p e r i c o p a d e la c r e a c i ô n . 2 4 i) G l o s a a Is 6 6 , 17. 2 3 j) I b n P o l g a r c o m p l é t é t a m b i é n la t r a d u c c i ô n h e b r e a d e la o b r a d e A l g a zel, "Las I n t e n c i o n e s de los

filôsofos,"

que habia sido c o m e n z a d a p o r Isaac

Albalag.26 14 15

16

17

18 19

20

21 22 23 24 25 26

Baer, "Sheridim," 4. Ibn Polgar se define a si mismo como "el que estudia la Tora y al dempo ama la ciencia de la investigaciôn, Isaac bar Yosef" (E%er 98). Abner lo define como critico y analista: "contradezidor, rrenegado, que ha uuso de escodrinar mucho e de buscar rrescano pequeno en màrmor lezne" (Teshubot 46bb). Editado criticamente por Jacob Levinger (Έ!çer ha-Dat ie-R. Yishaq Poiqar. Tel Aviv, University, 1984); anteriormente habia sido editada por George S. Belasco (The Support of Faith of Rabbi Isaac Puigar. London, J. Jacobs, 1906; reediciôn anastárica en Jerusalén, 1970); buena parte del libro II habia sido publicada por E. Askenazi (Ta'am %eqenim. Frankfurt/M, 1854, 12-19); cinco fragmentos aislados de los dos primeros libros fueron publicados por A. Jellinek en Qontres Rambam. Viena, 1893, 27-37; dos fragmentos del libro V fueron editados por I. Loeb, en RE] 18, 1889, 66-70; el Libro II del Έ%er ha-Dat fue publicado previamente por Jacob Levinger ("Ahbir Mahbéret le-R. Yishaq Polqar." Daat 9, 1982, 105-133). "Vy un libro que conpuso un judio que ha nombre Ysaach ben Polgar, el qual libro llamô por nombre 'Libro de negar e desmentir la astrologia'." (Ofrenda 15); "en el otro libro que conpossiste para negar la astrologia." (Teshubot 46aa). Ofrenda 19. Ε%er 123. Se han difundido nodeias erradas sobre la existencia de esta obra en la version casteliana, que supuestamente estaria en el Ms. Lat. 6423 de la Biblioteca Vaticana (Marx, A. 1926. "The Correspondence between the Rabbis." HUCA 3, 324; De Rossi, I. B. 1803. Mss. Codices hebraid biblioth. I. B. de-Rossi. Parmae, 74; Wölfl: 687; Roth, "Isaac," 68). "Et esto es otrossi como lo que escriviste en otro libro terçero que llameste libro de la esperança" (Teshubot 46ab). E^er 158. E^fr 131. E^er 121, 123. EZerS9. Teshubot 80ba. Roth, "Isaac," 71.

D e las o b r a s m e n e i o n a d a s d e I s a a c I b n P o l g a r , s o l o n o s q u e d a n d o s — e l e s c r i t o a p o l o g é d c o y el

Έ%er ba-Dat, a u n q u e

e s p r o b a b l e q u e e n e s t a u l t i m a o b r a , aparte

del e s c r i t o a p o l o g é d c o q u e ha s i d o r e a b s o r b i d o y r e e l a b o r a d o ( L i b r o I), s e e n c u e n t r e n t a m b i é n r e a b s o r b i d o s el " L i b r o d e l d e s m e n t i m i e n t o d e la a s t r o l o g i a " ( L i b r o III d e l Έ%er ba-Dat)

y el " L i b r o d e la E s p e r a n z a " ( L i b r o V d e l

er ba-

Dat). A b n e r d e B u r g o s c o n o c i ô très e s c r i t o s d e Polgar: 2 7 el e s c r i t o a p o l o g é d c o , el libro c o n t r a la a s t r o l o g i a y cl " L i b r o d e la E s p e r a n z a . " E l e s c r i t o q u e n o s i n t e r e s a aqui e s el e s c r i t o a p o l o g é d c o , al q u e A b n e r r e p e d d a s v e c e s llama "libro d e las d e s s o n r a s , " 2 8 o t a m b i é n "Carta d e las d e s s o n ras," 2 9 o , s i m p l e m e n t e , "libro d e s s o n r a d o , " 3 0 e s d e c i r ,

Sefer o Iggéret ba-Harefot.M

E s t e e s e v i d e n t e m e n t e el n o m b r e c o n el q u e A b n e r d e n o m i n a d e s p e c d v a m e n t e la o b r a d e I b n Polgar. P e r o t a n t o A b n e r c o m o I b n P o l g a r n o s h a n d e j a d o el n o m b r e o r i g i n a r i o d e l o p ù s c u l o : " L i b r o d e la c o n t r a d i ç i ô n d e l H e r e g e " — e n la traducciôn eastellana d e Abner;32

original h e b r e o d e I b n

P o l g a r , 3 3 o , e n o t r o lugar,

"Contradiction del H e -

Teshubat Appiqoros, e n el Teshubat Appiqoros we-orhotam

reje y d e s u s c a m i n o s . " 3 4 V e r e m o s p o s t e r i o r m e n t e q u e el o p u s c u l o q u e c o n s d m y e el l i b r o p r i m e r o d e l ba-Dat

e s f u n d a m e n t a l m e n t e la m i s m a o b r a a p o l o g é d c o - p o l é m i c a q u e ha-

bia e s c r i t o o r i g i n a r i a m e n t e p o r s e p a r a d o . N o p u e d e c a b e r p o r t a n t o d u d a a l g u n a q u e el

Appiqoros we-orhotam

Teshubat Appiqoros

o

Teshubat

e s la m i s m a o b r a q u e A b n e r llama " L i b r o d e la c o n t r a d i c -

c i ô n d e l h e r e j e " o q u e d e s p e c d v a m e n t e d e n o m i n a " L i b r o / Carta d e las d e s h o n rras" (Iggéret ha-Harefof).

C o n v i e n e pues que e n adelante se d e n o m i n e a este

o p u s c u l o c o n su verdadero n o m b r e , El Libro

Teshubat Appiqoros s e

Teshubat Appiqoros.

e n c u e n t r a e n m a n u s c r i t o u n i c o , el M s . 2 4 4 0 d e

la B i b l i o t e c a P a l a d n a d e P a r m a (fol. 2 a - 9 a ) . 3 5 E l p r i m e r o d e l o s f o l i o s e s t á d e t e riorado,

d e m o d o q u e hay e s p a c i o s y lineas n o l e g i b l e s . E l r e s t o d e l e s c r i t o e s t á

e n b u e n e s t a d o . H a s t a el p r é s e n t é n o t e n g o n o t i c i a d e q u e haya s i d o p u b l i c a d o . La o c a s i ô n d e la c o m p o s i c i ô n d e l o p u s c u l o a p o l o g é d c o f u e la c o n v e r s i o n d e A b n e r d e B u r g o s al c r i s d a n i s m o y s u c a m p a n a m i s i o n e r a s o b r e l o s j u d i o s . B e n Polgar c o m i e n z a su escrito dirigiéndolo a Abner: " A A l f o n s o , que se v o l v i ô de l o s c a m i n o s d e la L e y d e l o s h e b r e o s , l l a m a d o a n d g u a m e n t e R. A b n e r . " 3 6 F u e u n a o b r a d e A b n e r e n la q u e a t a c a b a al j u d a i s m o , d a n d o s e n u d o literal a las " h a g g a d o t , " la q u e m o d v ô la r e a c t i o n d e B e n P o l g a r , a n i m a d o a d e m á s p o r

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

"Estos trres libros tuyos" (Teshubot 46ba). Teshubol 59ba, 59bb, 63aa, 83ab et passim. Teshubol 80ab. Teshubol 45ba. Teshubol( Hebr.) Ofienda 19. Έ φ 30. E?er 76. De-Rossi, I. B. 1802. Mss. Codices Hebraic! Bibtioth. 1. B. De-Rossi, Parmae, Ms. nr. 533,1. Teshubat Appiqoros, fol. 2a. Ben Polgar envio una copia de su escrito a cada una de las aljamas de Casdlla. Abner senala que no se hizo con una de aquéllas copias sino unos diez afios después (Teshubol 41 ba).

l o s c o m p a n e r o s d e s u c i r c u l o d e r e l a c i ô n . C u a n d o a n o s m â s tarde B e n P o l g a r r e h i z o y a m p l i f i e d el o p û s c u l o , s e n a l a q u e f u e m o v i d o a e s e r i b i r la o b r a p o r l o s a p ô s t a t a s q u e p r o c l a m a b a n la i n a n i d a d d e l j u d a i s m o . 3 7 N o e s t á c l a r o c u à l f u e la o b r a d e A b n e r q u e m o d v ô el e s c r i t o d e B e n P o l g a r , p e r o b i e n p u d o s e r el " L i b r o d e las Batallas d e l S e n o r . " 3 8 H a y i n d i c i o s d e q u e la p o l é m i c a e n t r e I s a a c y A b n e r fuera a n t e r i o r i n c l u s o al p e r i o d o d e la c o n v e r s i o n o f i c i a l y p u b l i c a d e A b n e r al c r i s t i a n i s m o . T a l c o m o narra B e n P o l g a r , e n u n a o c a s i ô n , p a r e c e q u e a n t e s d e la c o n v e r s i o n , A b n e r le p r e g u n t ô a B e n P o l g a r si d a b a c r é d i t o a las palabras d e l o s s a b i o s t a l m û d i c o s ; a n t e la r e s p u e s t a a f i r m a t i v a d e é s t e , A b n e r le d i j o q u e a b a s e d e las p a l a b r a s y d i c h o s d e l o s s a b i o s r a b i n i c o s le d e m o s t r a r i a q u e la L e y d e l o s j u d i o s s e h a b i a h e c h o baldia y m i s e r a , c o m o u n a m u j e r a la q u e d i v o r c i a r a el m a r i d o , y q u e n e cesitaban una Ley nueva.39 La c o n f r o n t a c i ô n e n t r e I s a a c y A b n e r n o s o l o f u e literaria. B e n P o l g a r l o c o m b a d ô y r e b a d ô e n varias d e s u s o b r a s : c i ô n d e la a s t r o l o g i a , "

Sefer E ^ r ha-Dat.

Teshubat Appiqoros, " L i b r o

d e la n e g a -

La c o n f r o n t a c i ô n f u e a s i m i s m o d e o r -

d e n p e r s o n a l , a n i v e l d e calle. S e g û n d e c l a r a c i ô n d e A b n e r , I s a a c a p r o v e c h a b a la o c a s i ô n a n t e c u a l q u i e r v i a n d a n t e ο t r a n s e û n t e para a r r e m e t e r c o n t r a él y r e b a tirle. 4 0 E l d u e l o e n t r e I s a a c b e n P o l g a r y A b n e r f u e tan n o t o r i o q u e u n p o e t a castellano c o n t e m p o r â n e o , Samuel ben Y o s e f Ibn Sason, en u n o s versos

que

d i r i g i ô a I s a a c b e n P o l g a r , decia: "Arroja s u s d a r d o s c o n t r a el c u e r p o d e l m a e s tro d e la Ley. D e s e n v a i n a s u e s p a d a c o n t r a (el p r o p i o ) m a e s t r o , al q u e traspasa."'‫״‬ A b n e r c o m b a d ô t a m b i é n a B e n P o l g a r c o n s u p l u m a ; c o n t r a él d i r i g i ô al

Teshubot ta-Meharef'Cnâcas Teshubat Appiqoros d e I b n P o l g a r ,

m e n o s d o s d e s u s o b r a s : las e n el q u e r e b a t e la

c o n t r a el c a l u m n i a d o r , " y el " L i b r o d e l c e l o d e

D i o s , " e n el q u e i m p u g n a el libro d e I b n P o l g a r c o n t r a la a s t r o l o g i a . 4 2 La o b r a d e B e n P o l g a r , m â s q u e p o l é m i c a , e s a p o l o g é d c a , e s d e c i r , n o p r e t e n d e refutar, e n p r i m e r lugar, el c r i s r i a n i s m o , s i n o m o s t r a r la v e r d a d d e l judaism o . T a m b i é n e s i m p o r t a n t e el m é t o d o d e a r g u m e n t a c i ô n . I b n P o l g a r n o a r g u y e 37

38

39 40 41

42

"Hemos vivido bajo la promesa de nuestra Torà; hemos descansado a la sombra de nuestros preceptos; hemos crecido en nuestras creencias por las que nos hemos hecho culpables; hemos obrado neciamente y de lo que hemos hecho nos arrepentimos" ( 30). Sobre el Libro de las Batallas del Senor, véase mi estudio "El libro de las Batallas de Dios de Abner de Burgos." En Polémica judeomstiana. Estudios. Ed. C. del Valle. Madrid: Aben Ezra Ediciones, 1992, 75-119. Para Baer (Tarbi^ 11, 1940, 188) pudiera haber sido "El Mostrador de Jusdcia." Pero es probable que el "Mostrador" sea posterior, pues segun dice Abner (Teshubot 46bb) en él muestra que los crisrianos creen en las cuatro verdades que Ben Polgar senala en el capitulo II de la Teshubat Appiqoros, dando pues la impresiôn de que está respondiendo al ataque de éste. En la segunda redaction de la Teshubat Appiqoros, si parece que Abner ya habia escrito el "Mostrador." La poesia initial introductoria comenzaba: Le-More tsédeq (esto es, al Mostrador de Jusdcia). E%ER 60. Teshubot 41 bb. Baer, "Sheridim," 4. Ibn Polgar estimaba que la comunidad judia tenia buena parte de responsabilidad en la apostasia de Abner cuando éste expuso ideas erradas en su libro "El nuevo fïlosofar" y no fue publicamente contradicho (Teshubat, cap. 5). Véase Alfonso de Valladolid (Abner de Burgos), Ofrenda de Zelos (Minhat Kena'ot) und Libro de la Ley. Ed. Walter Mettmann. Opladen, Westdeutscher Verlag, 1992.

d e s d e la E s c r i t u r a , s i n o d e s d e la a r g u m e n t a c i ô n f i l o s ô f i c a . E l s e situa p u e s d e n t r o d e las o b r a s a p o l o g é d c a s / p o l é m i c a s

Teshubat Appiqoros

de corte

fiat

filosôfico,

Ta'anot d e M o i s é s b e n S a l o m o n d e S a l e r n o , Al-Tehi ke-Aboteka D u r á n , Bittu/ 'Iqqare dat ha-Notsrim d e C r e s c a s . . .

c o m o las

de Pro-

La b a s e d e la a r g u m e n t a c i ô n d e P o l g a r e s s i m p l e . E l h o m b r e e s u n ser s o c i a l p o r naturaleza. N o s o l o v i v e e n s o c i e d a d , n e c e s i t a d e la s o c i e d a d , n e c e s i t a d e l o s o t r o s i n d i v i d u o s para s u n o r m a l d e s a r r o l l o . 4 3 P o r o t r a parte, el h o m b r e e s u n ser r a c i o n a l q u e , e n c u a n t o racional, n e c e s i t a c r e e r y c o n o c e r u n a serie d e v e r d a d e s e l e m e n t a l e s q u e n e c e s i t a para c o n s e g u i r s u f e l i c i d a d ultima. P e r o el h o m b r e , e n c u a n t o ser n e c e s i t a d o e i m p e r f e c t o , n o d i s p o n e s i e m p r e d e d e m p o y d e c u a l i d a d e s para d e s c u b r i r p o r si m i s m o e s a s v e r d a d e s . D e ahi q u e s e a n e c e s a r i a u n a L e y q u e r é g u l é las r e l a c i o n e s e n t r e l o s h o m b r e s y p r o p o r c i o n e al h o m b r e el c o n o c i m i e n t o d e las v e r d a d e s f u n d a m e n t a l e s q u e n e c e s i t a para s u p l e n o d e s a r r o l l o ( C a p i t u l o I). Las v e r d a d e s f u n d a m e n t a l e s s o n s o l o cuatro: - c r e e r e n la e x i s t e n c i a d e D i o s - c r e e r en Su unidad —creer q u e D i o s n o e s c u e r p o - c r e e r q u e n o e s u n a f u e r z a e n u n c u e r p o ( C a p i t u l o II). P o r o t r a parte, las r e l a c i o n e s s o c i a l e s d e l h o m b r e a b a r c a n las o b l i g a c i o n e s c o n s i g o m i s m o , o b l i g a c i o n e s c o n l o s m i e m b r o s d e s u familia y o b l i g a c i o n e s c o n l o s d e m á s h o m b r e s ( C a p i t u l o III). 44 S o l o la L e y m o s a i c a p r o p o r c i o n a al h o m b r e las v e r d a d e s f u n d a m e n t a l e s q u e h a d e c r e e r y c o n o c e r c o n la n o r m a d v a i m p r e s c i n d i b l e d e s u c o n d u c t a ; la L e y m o s a i c a a c d v a el i n t e l e c t o h u m a n o . D e ahi, p o r t a n t o , q u e la r e l i g i o n judaica s e a la v e r d a d e r a ( C a p i t u l o IV). E l c a p i t u l o V e s el q u e se sale d e la linea

filosôfica.

M u e s t r a q u e la c r e e n c i a

e n el M e s î a s n o e s f u n d a m e n t a l e n la r e l i g i o n judia y q u e el M e s î a s n o h a v e n i d o , s e n a l a n d o q u e t o d a v i a n o s e h a n c u m p l i d o las E s c r i t u r a s y s i g u i e n d o e n e s t o el e s q u e m a tradicional. A b n e r d e B u r g o s c o n o c i ô e s t e e s c r i t o d e I b n P o l g a r , el m i s m o e s c r i t o q u e n o s o t r o s t e n e m o s , ya q u e e n varias o c a s i o n e s s e n a l a q u e el e s c r i t o se c o m p o n i a d e c i n c o c a p i t u l o s y r e p r o d u c e a l g u n o s t e x t o s q u e c o i n c i d e n l i t e r a l m e n t e c o n el de nuestro opusculo. A b n e r c o n t e s t ô a este escrito c o n sus

Teshubot la-Meharej>5

M â s tarde, I b n P o l g a r reelaboraria el t e x t o y l o ampliaria, d a n d o c o m o res u l t a d o u n n u e v o o p u s c u l o , el L i b r o I del

ΈφΓ ha-Dat,

que es

m e n t e el m i s m o a n t i g u o , d e tal m a n e r a q u e c o n s e r v a el m i s m o

fundamental-

timlo.

Pero Ben

P o l g a r h i z o ciertas a d i c i o n e s m o t i v a d a s p o r la critica d e A b n e r : c o n v e n i e n c i a d e la e x i s t e n c i a d e u n b u e n g u i a o lider para la c o n d u c t i o n d e la c o m u n i d a d , c o m o e s el c a s o d e M o i s é s e n Israel; la p e r d u r a c i ô n d e la c a u t i v i d a d y el r e t r a s o d e la v e n i d a d e l M e s î a s n o s o n p r u e b a d e q u e a Israel le faite la v e r d a d ; i n t e r p r e t a c i ô n

43 44

45

Estas ideas las recoge de la Guia II, 40. En este respecto, la Ley mosaica es tan perfecta que Ben Polgar cree que nadie puede dejarla por carencia de recdtud en sus preceptos ('E^er 37). Teshubot 42aa.

m e t a f ô r i c a d e las " h a g g a d o t " y d e las " d e r a s h o t . " 4 6 E l r e s u l t a d o final d e la reelab o r a c i ô n f u e u n o p û s c u l o d e o c h o c a p i t u l o s f r e n t e a l o s c i n c o iniciales. E l e s c r i t o , c o m o d i j i m o s , m u e s t r a la v e r d a d d e l j u d a i s m o , p e r o

implicita-

m e n t e i n c l u y e u n a crírica d e l c r i s r i a n i s m o . Para P o l g a r el c r i s t i a n i s m o n i e g a v a rios d e l o s c u a t r o p r i n c i p i o s f u n d a m e n t a l e s , ya q u e , al a d m i t i r la T r i n i d a d , n i e g a la u n i d a d d e D i o s y s u a b s o l u t a s i m p l i c i d a d . A l m i s m o d e m p o , a t e n t a c o n t r a a l g u n o s d e l o s p r i n c i p i o s d e recta c o n d u c t a . 4 7 L a p r e s e n t a c i ô n q u e h a c e I b n P o l g a r d e la m a t e r i a e s original, a u n q u e

en

cuanto a contenido dene dependencia manifiesta de Maimônides y de los filôsof o s árabes. 4 8 L a p r e g u n t a q u e hay q u e h a c e r s e e s si e s c o r r e c t a la i n t e r p r e t a c i ô n q u e h a c e A b n e r d e la m e n t e d e I s a a c b e n P o l g a r . Para A b n e r , B e n P o l g a r e s u n p e n s a d o r d e m e n t e a v e r r o i s t a , a p a r t a d o c o m o tal d e la o r t o d o x i a judia. E s t á c l a r o q u e A b n e r atribuye a B e n P o l g a r a c r i t u d e s a v e r r o i s t a s c o n t r a r i a s a la o r t o d o x i a rabinica: P r e d o m i n i o e x c e s i v o d e la r a z ô n , e t e r n i d a d d e l m u n d o , a l m a u n i v e r s a l , n e g a c i ô n d e la p r o v i d e n c i a d i v i n a . 4 9

Predominio excesivo de la razôn S e g û n la i n t e r p r e t a c i ô n q u e h a c e A b n e r , para P o l g a r l o q u e s a l v a n s o n las i d e a s , i d e a s q u e el h o m b r e p u e d e c o n s e g u i r p o r el e s t u d i o d e las c i e n c i a s o , d e m o d o fâcil, p o r la t r a d i c i ô n , p o r la f e e n la L e y m o s a i c a . P o l g a r l l e g a b a a e l l o a b a s e d e la n a t u r a l e z a r a c i o n a l d e l h o m b r e e n c u a n t o ser racional. L o s

mandamientos

d e n e n s o l o u n f i n p r o p e d é u d c o — p o n e r al a i m a e n d i s p o s i c i ô n d e a l c a n z a r las i d e a s . Para A b n e r e s t a acritud n o e s la d e u n h o m b r e c r e y e n t e , s i n o la d e u n p e n s a d o r racionalista. D i c e asi: 5 0 M a s el qui cree en aquella m a n e r a p r i m e r a q u e dixiéssemos d e q u e quâles o b r a s d e los m a n d a m i e n t o s d e la Ley s s o n para m e s t e r d e la sciencia d e la p h i l o s o p h i a , n o n cree en la Ley d e M o y s s é n e en sus p r o p h e t a s e en sus ssabios della, sinon en la Ley d e los p h i l ô s o p h o s en q u a n t o s o n p h i l ô s o p h o s e q u e a m a n las sciencias m â s q u e t o d a s las otras cossas. Para P o l g a r , s i e m p r e s e g û n la i n t e r p r e t a c i ô n d e A b n e r , n o p u e d e d a r s e a c a b a m i e n t o d e l ser d e l h o m b r e , n o p u e d e el h o m b r e a l c a n z a r s u f i n û l t i m o , s u felicid a d final y v e r d a d e r a sin " a q u e l l o s e n t e n d i m i e n t o s f i l o s ô f i c o s . " 5 1 46

Segûn Ibn Polgar, Abner abandonô el judaismo por una falsa interpretaciôn literal de las "haggadot" ( E ^ í t 6 3 ) .

47

48 49

50 51

"Ο existe una Ley que impida y obstaculice al hombre alcanzar su fin cual es la Ley que se fundamenta sobre creencias que son contrarias a la verdad, que permite a sus adeptos todo dpo de comidas y todo dpo de fornication y otras cosas que no puedo poner por escrito en un libro?" (Teshubat, cap. IV). E^FRLOO, 118, 84, 101,164. Véase Gershenzon, Sh. G. 1984. A Study ofTeshuvot la-Meharef by Abner of Burgos. University Microfilms International, The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, disertaciôn doctoral, 66. Abner destaca en varias ocasiones el carácter racionalista de Ben Polgar: "Saliste de la Ley de los judios e de todas las otras leyes" (Teshubot 89ba). Teshubot 453b. "Et contra tú dizes que non puede ser el conplimiento del omne menos de aquellos entendimientos philossoficos" ('Teshubot 43aa). La perfecciôn ú1dma según Aristoteles y según Maimôni-

Eternidad del mundo Al hablar del "tetragrama," q u e muestra

tiempo

f u t u r o , s e n a l a A b n e r q u e el

N o m b r e d i v i n o indica que es causa a n t e c e d e n t e del m u n d o , c o n

antecedencia

t e m p o r a l y causal, y h a c e o b s e r v a r q u e e s t o t e n d r á q u e resultar d u r o a I s a a c b e n P o l g a r . 5 2 E s t á claro, p u e s , q u e para A b n e r , I b n P o l g a r s e i n c l i n a b a a c r e e r e n la eternidad del m u n d o .

Alma universal S e g û n la i n t e r p r e t a c i ô n d e A b n e r , para B e n P o l g a r tras la m u e r t e n o e s el a i m a i n d i v i d u a l la q u e p e r m a n e c e s i n o el a l m a u n i v e r s a l ; u t i l i z a n d o s u t e r m i n o l o g i a , l o q u e queda del alma de R u b é n es lo m i s m o que lo q u e queda del alma de S i m o n . D e ahi, p o r c o n s i g u i e n t e , q u e c o m o tal haya q u e n e g a r la r e t r i b u t i o n , ya q u e n o h a b r á d i f e r e n c i a e n t r e las a i m a s . 5 3

Providencia divina A b n e r a c h a c a a B e n P o l g a r n e g a r la P r o v i d e n c i a d i v i n a , " q u e D i o s n o

tiene

m i e n t e s " y q u e n o c o n o c e las o b r a s particulares a n t e s d e q u e s e a n . 5 4 L e critica p o r n o incluir e n las v e r d a d e s f u n d a m e n t a l e s l o q u e e s el f i n e i n t e n t i o n d e t o d a s las c r e e n c i a s d e la L e y , " q u e e s c r e e n q u e D i o s

tiene

m i e n t e s e n las c o s a s

b a x a s e q u e d a r r e t r i b u ç i o n e s p o r las o b r a s q u e l o m n e f f a ç e . " 5 5 N o c a b e , p u e s , duda ninguna que A b n e r hace de B e n Polgar un averroista, d e f e n s o r de aquéllas ideas que caracterizaron a algunos de los averroistas judios.56 R e s p e c t o al p r i m e r p u n t o , el p r e d o m i n i o e x c e s i v o d e l i n t e l e c t o , A b n e r n o e x a g e r a . E n el c a p i t u l o IV d e l Teshubat

Appiqoros,

I b n P o l g a r d i c e q u e si el h o m -

b r e l o g r a p r o y e c t a r s u r e f l e x i o n c o n s t a n t e " s o b r e las c i e n c i a s y c o n o c i m i e n t o s v e r d a d e r o s , u n i e n d o la parte p e n s a n t e d e s u a l m a c o n la f u e n t e d e la q u e deriv a , " m a n t e n i e n d o a raya las p a s i o n e s d e l c u e r p o , el h o m b r e c o n s e g u i r à la v i d a e t e r n a . A p a r e c e , p u e s , ahi c l a r o q u e l o i m p o r t a n t e para c o n s e g u i r el fin d e l h o m b r e s o n los c o n o c i m i e n t o s y que los preceptos de conducta n o s o n mâs que

52

53

54 55 56

des es tener un entendimiento en aeto, es deeir, conocer todo lo que el hombre es capaz de conocer (De anima III, 4-5; Guia I, 68; III, 27). "Et esto es porque aquel nonbre onrrado tetragramaton, que segund la gramádca del ebrayco muestra denpo fiat, muestra de que es él causa antecedente al mundo, antecedençia tenporal e anteçedençia caussal, sinon que yo sé que te sera duro a d ser Dios anteçedente al mundo antecedencia temporal, mas non es éste logar de lo provar" (Teshubot 49bb). "E esto es en que firmô en él, ssegund sus palavras, que lo que fincô del alma de Rrubén después de la muerte non es ssinon lo que finca del alma de Simon. Ca se endebda desto a dezir que non ay pena ninguna al malo, nin galardon al bueno, quando non ovyere departimiento entre las almas, en guysa que fuesse la una otra cosa que la otra e non avria avantaja uno sobre otro, nin justo cumplido ssobre justo non cumplido, nin malo non cumplido sobre malo cumplido" (Ofrenda 65); ..."en que denes que non ha departimiento al otro mundo entre las aimas de los omnes de la una a la otra e que non abrán alla pena nin galardon" ('Teshubot 63ab, 46ab). Teshubot 46ab; Ofrenda 61. Teshubot 46aa. Cfr. Gershenzon 1984: 66; S. Buenaventura, Collations on the Six Days. Tr. José de Vinck. Paterson. St. Anthony Guild, 1970, 96-97.

m e d i o para q u e el i n t e l e c t o a c t ú e , para q u e p a s e d e p o t e n c i a a a c t o . 5 7 E l v e r d a d e r o s e r d e l h o m b r e e s t á e n el i n t e l e c t o , d e tal m a n e r a q u e I b n P o l g a r afirma: " E l h o m b r e v e r d a d e r o e s el p e n s a m i e n t o , la c o n c e p c i ô n i n t e l e c t i v a , la i m a g e n d e D i o s . " 5 8 C o n r e s a b i o s n e o p l a t ô n i c o s d i c e q u e el e n t e n d i m i e n t o e s el " e s p e j o p u l i d o , el e s p e j o s a n t o q u e brilla, e n el q u e e s t á n las f o r m a s d e t o d o s l o s s e r e s c r e a d o s . " 5 9 L a v e r d a d , el c o n o c i m i e n t o d e la v e r d a d , e s el f i n d e n u e s t r a felicid a d . 6 0 L a a c t u a l i z a c i ô n d e l e n t e n d i m i e n t o e s el o b j e d v o d e la e s p e c i e h u m a n a , " p o r c u y a c a u s a v i e n e (el h o m b r e ) al m u n d o . " 6 1 E l "climax" de esta exaltaciôn del e n t e n d i m i e n t o se alcanza c u a n d o I b n Polg a r a f i r m a : " L a s c i e n c i a s v e r d a d e r a s s o n la s a l v a c i ô n d e l alma." 6 2 P r o b a b l e m e n t e n a d i e , e n t o d a la historia d e l j u d a i s m o sefardi, e x p r e s ô c o m o B e n P o l g a r la r e l e v a n c i a d e la c i e n c i a y d e l e s t u d i o . Para c o m p l e t a r la v i s i o n d e I b n P o l g a r , r e p a s e m o s b r e v e m e n t e l o s o t r o s très p u n t o s q u e e n p r i n c i p i o le d e f i n i r i a n c o m o averroista: e t e r n i d a d d e l

mundo,

alma universal, providencia. E n c u a n t o al p r i m e r o , I b n P o l g a r d e f i e n d e u n a c r e a c i ô n e t e r n a d e l m u n d o , una creaciôn p e r m a n e n t e , c o n d n u a ; B e n Polgar estima que esta creaciôn es m â s a d e c u a d a q u e u n a c r e a c i ô n t e m p o r a l , p u n t u a l , d e la q u e s e d e s e n t e n d i e r a tras la creaciôn.63 E n c u a n t o al p u n t o s e g u n d o , e s t á c l a r o q u e para B e n P o l g a r el a i m a e s inm o r t a l , p e r o n o q u e d a c l a r o si e s a i n m o r t a l i d a d e s i n d i v i d u a l ο u n i v e r s a l . 6 4 E n c u a n t o a la p r o v i d e n c i a , B e n P o l g a r d e f e n d i a i n d u d a b l e m e n t e s u e x i s t e n cia, t a n t o la p r o v i d e n c i a u n i v e r s a l c o m o la particular. 6 5 Ú n i c a m e n t e , q u e

Ibn

P o l g a r n i e g a q u e D i o s c o n o z c a el p o s i b l e a n t e s d e q u e s u c e d a 6 6 ο q u e c o n o z c a l o s a c t o s v o l u n t a r i o s a n t e s d e q u e t e n g a n lugar. A h i estriba la r a z ô n p o r la q u e A b n e r n i e g a la p r o v i d e n c i a e n P o l g a r .

57

58

Abner destaca la diferente acdtud de judios y crisdanos frente a los mandamientos. Los judios aceptan todo lo que les dicen los sabios sobre los mandamientos; los crisdanos solo los reciben si los acepta el entendimiento (Teshubot 83ba). E ç r 49.

59

E^r88.

60

E^r36.

61

62 63 64 65 66

E^r43.

Teshubat, cap. 4. E^FR 102. E ^ f r 3 1 , 50s. E^r135. E^ír137.

N E W C L U E S FROM AN E N C O U N T E R WITH O L D SPANISH JOSEPH YAHALOM T h e H e b r e w University, J e r u s a l e m , Israel T e s t i m o n y f r o m a rural c o u r t in n o r t h e r n S p a i n , p r e s e r v e d in a letter o f a d v o cacy for an unfortunate J e w i s h convert, bears w i t n e s s to the fierce disturbances that o v e r c a m e t h e r e g i o n ' s J e w i s h p o p u l a t i o n . T h e p u r p o s e o f t h e letter w a s t o arouse the sympathy o f near and distant J e w i s h c o m m u n i t i e s , and to encourage t h e m t o o p e n their h e a r t s a n d p u r s e s t o this w o m a n . I n f i n e c a l l i g r a p h y , o n a large p i e c e o f p a r c h m e n t , t h e c o u r t s c r i b e c o m p o s e d m o v i n g d o c u m e n t s that w e r e i n t e n d e d f o r d i s p l a y in s y n a g o g u e s . ' S i m i l a r d o c u m e n t s are k n o w n

from

outside Spain t h r o u g h o u t the Jewish diaspora. T h e K i e v c o m m u n i t y , for example, turned to "holy c o m m u n i t i e s

scattered

a c r o s s t h e e a r t h " as it s e n t o u t a m a n w h o w a s , as t h e y p u t it, " a m o n g t h e g o o d s o u l s . . . o n e o f t h e g i v e r s a n d n o t o n e o f t h e takers, b u t a d e c r e e h a s b e e n p a s s e d a g a i n s t h i m . " It s e e m s h e h a d r u n i n t o t r o u b l e a n d m i s f o r t u n e w h e n h e s i g n e d as a g u a r a n t o r f o r a l o a n t h a t h i s b r o t h e r t o o k f r o m s o m e g e n t i l e s . T h e b r o t h e r w a s r o b b e d , and his creditors p r o m p t l y threw h i m into prison, w h e r e h e s p e n t a full year b e f o r e t h e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y w a s a b l e t o r e d e e m h i m . T h e c o m m u n i t y n o w s o u g h t to r e c o u p the m o n e y they had s p e n t o n the r e d e m p t i o n , and disp a t c h e d this p o o r m a n w i t h their letter s e e k i n g s u p p o r t . 2 T h e f i g u r e s s o l i c i t i n g c o n t r i b u t i o n s f r o m t h e v a r i o u s c o m m u n i t i e s are d e s c r i b e d in t h e letters in s u c h a w a y t h a t e a c h d o c u m e n t s e r v e d as a n a u t o n o m o u s s o l i c i t o r o n b e h a l f o f t h e u n f o r t u n a t e s o u l w h o p r e s e n t e d it. T h i s is e v i d e n t first o f all f r o m t h e u n i q u e c a l l i g r a p h y , w h i c h i m m e d i a t e l y attracts t h e e y e a n d , s e c o n d , f r o m t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e e v e n t s that h a v e b e f a l l e n t h e p e r s o n in n e e d , e v e n t s t h a t h a v e n o t l e f t h i m o r h e r in a particularly p e r s u a s i v e f r a m e o f m i n d . A f r a g m e n t o f a calligraphic letter m e n t i o n s a m a n " a n e x t r e m e l y s h y m a n " w h o h a d r e c e n t l y b e e n r e l e a s e d f r o m p r i s o n . T h e w r i t e r s o f t h e letter a d d r e s s its a n o n y m o u s r e c i p i e n t s , b e s e e c h i n g t h e m t o take pity o n t h e m a n a n d

show

m e r c y . A b o v e all, it says, " d o n o t require h i m t o s p e a k in p u b l i c in o r d e r t o p l e a d f o r h i s m o n e y , " f o r this will c a u s e h i m g r e a t h u m i l i a t i o n . 3 A n o t h e r letter t h a t w a s i s s u e d f r o m G r a n a d a in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e e l e v e n t h - c e n t u r y is carried b y a m a n w h o s e f a t h e r w a s a m o n g t h o s e w h o h a d a c c e s s t o t h e c o u r t o f t h e king. T h e letter c a n b e d a t e d b y its r e f e r e n c e t o G r a n a d a as t h e city o f

Shmuel

H a N a g i d a n d h i s s o n Y e h o s e f . T h e letter c o u l d easily h a v e b e e n w r i t t e n d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d o f u n r e s t that b r o u g h t a b o u t t h e m u r d e r o f Y e h o s e f ( 1 0 6 6 ) a n d t h e

1 2 3

See Goitein, S. D. 1971. A Mediterranean Society, II: The Community. California, 169-170. See Golb, N. and Pritsak, O. 1982. Kha^arian Hebrew Documents of the Tenth Century. London, 1-32. See Cambridge, Genizah CoUeedon. University Library, T-S 8.71.

d e s t r u c t i o n o f t h e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y ' s p r e f e r e n t i a l s t a t u s in B e r b e r G r a n a d a . T h e m a n ' s s h y n e s s a n d s o c i a l s t a n d i n g p r e c l u d e d his e v e n t u r n i n g t o t h e c o u r t s t o ask that t h e y i s s u e a letter t o s u p p o r t h i m in his s e a r c h f o r s u s t e n a n c e . 4 ( T h e n a g a i n it is p o s s i b l e that t h e l a n g u a g e h e r e a n d in t h e o t h e r letters m e r e l y r e f l e c t s a n e p i s t o l a r y c o n v e n t i o n s p e c i f i c t o this s o r t o f d o c u m e n t . ) T w o letters f r o m M u n o in o l d Castile 5 tell o f a f e m a l e c o n v e r t t o J u d a i s m w h o had left an extremely wealthy h o u s e h o l d and w a s b e i n g p u r s u e d by m e m b e r s o f h e r C h r i s t i a n family, w h o w e r e n o t w i l l i n g t o s u r r e n d e r their h o l d

on

her. T h e w o m a n ' s n a m e is n o t m e n t i o n e d in e i t h e r o f t h e letters, b u t t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e t w o letters s e e m s p l a i n o n t h e f a c e o f t h e e v i d e n c e — t h e s h a p e o f t h e large p i e c e s o f p a r c h m e n t s a n d t h e f o r m o f t h e script. Clearly t h e y w e r e written by the s a m e scribe. Additional e v i d e n c e for the c o n n e c t i o n

be-

t w e e n t h e t w o letters e m e r g e s f r o m their c o n t e n t . B o t h r e f e r t o a w o m a n w h o s e h u s b a n d w a s killed a n d w h o s e relatives are in c o n s t a n t p u r s u i t o f her. T h e first letter ( A ) w a s w r i t t e n t o s o l i c i t s u p p o r t o f t h e w o m a n in h e r e f f o r t s t o r e d e e m t w o o f h e r c h i l d r e n , w h o w e r e t a k e n c a p t i v e in t h e p o g r o m s in w h i c h h e r h u s b a n d w a s m u r d e r e d . T h e s e c o n d letter (B) w a s w r i t t e n t o h e l p h e r raise m o n e y t o r e p a y t h e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y o f N a j e r a f o r t h e c o s t o f h e r r e d e m p t i o n . I f in fact t h e t w o letters r e f e r t o t h e s a m e w o m a n , t h e n w e c a n c o n c l u d e t h a t s h e h a d e x t e n d e d c o n t a c t w i t h t h e M u n o c o m m u n i t y . T h e first letter w a s w r i t t e n f o r h e r a f t e r s h e h a d l i v e d t h e r e f o r six years, a n d t h e s e c o n d w a s w r i t t e n a f t e r s h e h a d l i v e d t h e r e a n o t h e r year, at a d i f f e r e n t p o i n t in t i m e . S h e h a d c o m e t o M u n o f r o m N a r b o n n e , w h e r e s h e w a s m a r r i e d t o R. D a v i d . I n o r d e r t o c o n v e r t t o Judaism, s h e left her wealthy family behind. T h e n a m e o f t h e city m e n t i o n e d in letter B , N a j e r a , led its d i s c o v e r e r a n d first p u b l i s h e r , E l i y a h u A s h t o r , t o b e l i e v e that t h e letter w a s s e n t f r o m that city. F r o m t h e n e w l y d i s c o v e r e d s e c t i o n , h o w e v e r , w h e r e t h e city is m e n t i o n e d a s e c o n d time (line 4), w e learn that t h e N a j e r a m a t t e r w a s p a s s e d o n t o a c o u r t in a d i f f e r e n t t o w n , a n d this s e e m s t o h a v e b e e n t h e s a m e M u n o that w a s m e n t i o n e d in t h e first letter. It s t a n d s t o r e a s o n that this t o w n c o u l d n o t h a v e b e e n far f r o m N a j e r a . I n fact, t h e r e w a s a c o n s i d e r a b l e J e w i s h p o p u l a t i o n in B u r g o s , t h e capital o f o l d Castile, near w h i c h there w a s a place called M u n o . In the fortress o f Burg o s , t h e C i d , as a w e l l - k n o w n p a s s a g e in t h e e p o n y m o u s p o e m tells u s , f o u n d the J e w i s h m e r c h a n t s w h o lent h i m the m o n e y h e n e e d e d for his battles. (Litde d i d h e realize that it w a s t h e s e J e w s a n d their d o c u m e n t s — a n d n o t t h e p o e m b e a r i n g his n a m e — t h a t w o u l d p r e s e r v e o u r earliest e v i d e n c e o f o l d R o m a n c e . ) T h e e s c a p e r o u t e m u s t h a v e t a k e n R. D a v i d a n d his c o n v e r t w i f e f r o m N a r b o n n e via t h e F r e n c h r o u t e t o S a n t i a g o d e C o m p o s t e l a , a r o u t e w h i c h w a s ind e e d in c o m m o n u s e at t h e t i m e . T h e final third o f t h e e l e v e n t h c e n t u r y — t h e p r e s u m e d p e r i o d d u r i n g w h i c h t h e s e e v e n t s t o o k p l a c e — s a w an a n n u a l i n c r e a s e in t h e n u m b e r o f p e o p l e m a k ing pilgrimages f r o m France and other countries to Santiago de

4 5

Compostela.

Ibid., T-S 20.24. See E. Engel's article in this volume. The texts of the letters is presented there in the appendix. We are grateful to Ms. Gabriella Kadosh for her holographic reconstrucdon of the second letter.

T r a v e l t o t h e t o w n w a s usually s w i f t , a l o n g t h e m a i n c o m m e r c i a l arteries, a n d B u r g o s w a s o n e o f the m o s t i m p o r t a n t o f these c o m m e r c i a l t o w n s a l o n g the r o u t e . T h e e c o n o m i c b o o m t h e r e d r e w J e w s f r o m t h e M u s l i m s o u t h as w e l l , a n d o u r f r i g h t e n e d c o u p l e c o u l d easily h a v e f o u n d r e f u g e in o n e o f t h e s m a l l e r satell i t e - t o w n s a r o u n d B u r g o s , w i t h J e w s w h o h a d a l s o r e c e n d y arrived in t h e area. T h e c o u r t s c r i b e w h o w r o t e t h e letters clearly p o s s e s s e d a k n o w l e d g e o f H e b r e w t h a t h e h a d n o t a c q u i r e d locally. T h i s w e c a n d e d u c e f r o m t h e A n d a l u s i a n style o f h i s script. N e v e r t h e l e s s , it s e e m s t h a t t h e m a n ' s e d u c a d o n w a s d e f e c t i v e , a n d c e r t a i n v u l g a r s p e l l i n g s in t h e letter b e t r a y his actual a c c e n t . T h e s m a l l c o m m u nity o f M u n o a p p a r e n t l y w a s n o t a b l e t o p r o v i d e f o r a s c r i b e w i t h a m o r e c o m plete H e b r e w education, and e v e n the w i t n e s s e s did n o t sign the d o c u m e n t o n their o w n , e v i d e n d y b e c a u s e t h e y w e r e illiterate. 6 R. A v r a h a m I b n D a u d ' s testim o n y r e g a r d i n g t h e f o r m a t i o n o f a c e n t e r o f T o r a h s t u d y in S p a i n is w e l l k n o w n : " T h e p e o p l e o f S p a i n w e r e n o t w e l l - v e r s e d in t h e t e a c h i n g s o f o u r rabbis." 7 L i k e w i s e R. M o s h e i b n E z r a , a w e l l - k n o w n p o e t in a f a m o u s M u s l i m c e n ter, G r a n a d a , c o m p l a i n s o f t h e l o w cultural l e v e l o f t h e J e w s o f C h r i s t i a n S p a i n in t h e n o r t h . D u r i n g o n e o f t h e d i s t u r b a n c e s , h e , t o o , w a s d e t a i n e d in a f o r t r e s s in t h e hills o f Castile, w h e r e h e h a d arrived at t h e e n d o f t h e e l e v e n t h c e n t u r y . H e d e s c r i b e s h i s f e e l i n g s w i t h regard t o t h e J e w s o f t h e r e g i o n as f o l l o w s : " W o e f o r t h e l a n d o n w h i c h t h e r e is n o c o m p a n i o n . . . " A n d in o t h e r p o e m s f r o m t h e s a m e p e r i o d o f his life h e writes: "I sit d e s o l a t e a m o n g b a r b a r i a n s . . . their ears are t o o dull t o u n d e r s t a n d w h a t I say . . . T i m e h a s s e n t m e t o a l a n d / in w h i c h m y i n t e n t i o n s a n d n o t i o n s are c o n f u s e d — / by p e o p l e w h o are b o o r i s h a n d s l o w o f speech."8 W e f i n d c o n f i r m a t i o n o f this s i t u a t i o n f r o m o u r t w o d o c u m e n t s . T h e i r v u l g a r i z e d s p e l l i n g p a s s e s o n i m p o r t a n t i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t b o t h t h e writer's u n f a miliarity w i t h H e b r e w o r t h o g r a p h i c c o n v e n t i o n s a n d t h e quality o f h i s H e b r e w . F o r e x a m p l e , he p r o n o u n c e s a series o f

qamats a n d hataf qamats,

in t h e traditional

S p a n i s h p r o n u n c i a t i o n o f H e b r e w a - o . T h e w o r d ‫[ ט ה ו ר ה‬tahora] in letter A ( 2 ) , is w r i t t e n w i t h a vav a f t e r t h e heb, w h i c h r e f l e c t s this k i n d o f p r o n u n c i a t i o n d o c u mented

already in t h e w r i t i n g o f t h e early S p a n i s h g r a m m a r i a n

R.

Yehuda

H a y y u j . 9 A n o t h e r S p a n i s h - H e b r e w link c a n b e d e t e c t e d in t h e f o r m o u r s c r i b e

6

7

8

9

Cf. the question sent from Tarragona to R. Shlomo ben Avraham Adrat, who was acdve in Barcelona during the 13lh century: He said to a certain student: "Write: 'And so he instructed that it be signed', because he docs not know how to write ... and you said that in your land there are many bills on which is written 'so and so instructed that it be signed'." See Sepher She'e/ot uTshuvot HaRashba. 1958, Part IV, No. 191. The Book of Tradition. Ed. G. Cohen. Philadelphia, 1967, 47-48. See also Ta-Shma, I. 1974. "Jewish Judiciary and Law in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries in Spain (as Reflected in the Responsa of Alfasi." Shenaton Ha-Mishpat Halm 1, 353-372 (for information on the situation of Torah study according to responsa literature of R. Itzhak Alfasi). Also Sklare, D. E. 1998. "R David Ben Se'adja at-Ger and His Work Al- Hawri." Te'uda 14, 103-123, and especially 113. See Moshe Ibn Ezra, Shim Hol. Ed. H. Brody. Berlin 1935, volume I, 36 (Poem 36: mah li wetinman, stanza 8); 102 (Poem 101: Yom hanedod hamar vehanimhar, stanza 2); 66 (Poem 67: 'Ad an begalut, stanza 18); 149 (Poem 145\ Aharyemei hashaharutpanu, stanzas 5-6). The earliest evidence of a pronunciation of this sort, na'omi, is found in the writings of the grammarian Yehuda Hayyuj in his Kitab at-tanqit. Ed. J. V. Nutt. London and Berlin, 1870, xiv. See Ben-Hayyim, Z. 1954. Studies in the Traditions of the Hebrew Language. Madrid-Barcelona, 72-73,

employs

for the w o r d

‫ מ י ש ג י ח‬, in letter A ( 1 9 ) , w h i c h a p p a r e n t l y r e f l e c t s

the

m o v e m e n t f r o m t h e v o w e l a b e f o r e a s e r i e s o f sk a n d šk c o n s o n a n t s ( p r o b a b l y Ig as w e l l ) t o t h e v o w e l e. T h i s is h o w t h e s p e a k e r s o f J u d e z m o p r o n o u n c e e v e n

eskena^f; a n d in t h i r t e e n t h - c e n t u r y d o c u m e n t s w e f i n d t h e S p a n i s h n a m e Ascarel w r i t t e n as Escarel, a n d s o o n . 1 0 N o t e a l s o t h e f a m o u s m e d i e v a l s p a n i s h mesquino, f r o m t h e A r a b i c maskin. today the w o r d ‫אשכנזי‬:

A n o t h e r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f J e w i s h S p a n i s h is t h e u s e o f m a s c u line n o u n s t h a t e n d i n H e b r e w w i t h a, e v e n if t h e v o w e l is n o t actually in t h e final p o s i t i o n , as i f t h e y w e r e i n t h e f e m i n i n e g e n d e r . C f . la kemed

( ‫ ) ק מ י ע‬a n d la

k m d ( " ‫ ) ה ״ ש מ ע‬. " I n o u r letter w e f i n d t h e H e b r e w w o r d ‫ מ א ו ר ע‬w r i t t e n , w i t h t h e l e t t e r ‫ ה‬at t h e e n d , a n d w i t h it t h e f e m i n i n e f o r m o f t h e relative

pronoun:

‫ מ א ו ר ע ה ז ו‬B ( 1 5 ) . It is a l s o p o s s i b l e that w e s e e this f o r m again (if this is n o t a n i n f l e c t i o n o f t h e 3rd p e r s o n ) in B ( 4 ) . I f w e w a n t e d t o transliterate t h e w o r d , w e h a d h a v e t o w r i t e s o m e t h i n g like

meord,

a n d it s e e m s that t h e l e t t e r ‫ ה‬at t h e e n d

o f t h e w o r d is a l s o u s e d as a n e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e typical f e m i n i n e f o r m a l s o f o r o t h e r f e m i n i n e w o r d s that e n d in H e b r e w w i t h a ÌT I n a n y e v e n t , a at t h e e n d o f t h e w o r d i n d i c a t e s t h e f e m i n i n e f o r m o f a n o u n in S p a n i s h as w e l l . S p a n i s h l o a n - w o r d s , t o o , are u s e d in t h e letter. S o t h e flax g a r m e n t

‫קמיסה‬

‫ ש ל פ ש ת ן‬B ( 6 ) , is t h e article o f c l o t h i n g w h i c h w a s t o b e w o r n b y t h e c o n v e r t w h e n s h e w a s b u r n e d at t h e stake. T h i s w o u l d s e e m t o b e o n e o f t h e earliest pieces o f e v i d e n c e w e have referring to a precedent to the n o t o r i o u s auto-da-fé o f t h e C h r i s t i a n I n q u i s i t i o n in S p a i n . T h e s e c o n d w o r d is a l s o clearly S p a n i s h ,

casi

( a l m o s t ) , t h o u g h in its b e i n g l i n k e d t o t h e H e b r e w ‫ ק א ס י מ י מ ה ש ז י מ ן‬B ( 9 ) , a n d

in its f r a g m e n t e d c o n t e x t , it is n o t clear w h a t t h e p r e c i s e m e a n i n g o f t h e t e r m was. T h e e f f e c t s o f S p a n i s h s y n t a x c a n a l s o b e d e t e c t e d in t h e letters, as s t r u c t u r e s typical o f R o m a n c e l a n g u a g e s m a k e a n a p p e a r a n c e . S o , f o r i n s t a n c e , t h e w r i t e r o f t h e letter d e s c r i b e s ‫( י ו ש ת א‬Ius ία), t h e y o u n g d a u g h t e r w h o w a s t a k e n captive: " A n d she w a s o f three y e a r < s > " (‫ )מן ש ל ש ה שנים‬A(18). T h i s n o d o u b t contains an e c h o o f the Spanish f o r m

de très anos.n

The Hebrew preposition ‫מן‬

0)í), w h i c h f o r o n e r e a s o n o r a n o t h e r is n o t j o i n e d t o t h e f o l l o w i n g w o r d , p o i n t s at a similar d i r e c t i o n ; t h e i n d e p e n d e n t S p a n i s h de. W e s e e a similar p h e n o m e n o n in t h e p h r a s i n g u s e d t o e x p r e s s t h e a m o u n t o f t i m e that h a s p a s s e d s i n c e t h e w o m a n ' s r e a p p e a r a n c e in t h e p l a c e in q u e s t i o n :

10

11 12

and Yeivin, I. 1980. "Shinuy Eikhut shel Hatafim." Leshonenu 44, 163-184. Dodi, A. 1982. "Leniqudo shel Sidur Minhag Sefarad shebiKtav Yad min haMeah hatetvav." Balshanut Ivrit 33, 161. See Bunis, D. M. 1981. The Hebrew and Aramaic Component ofJudezmo—A Phonological and Morpho• logical Analysis. Columbia U. Dissertation, 65. I would like to thank my learned friends I. Benabu and S. Cantor for their assistance with the comparisons to Romance languages. See Bunis 1981: 172. Cf. loan translations from Italian in Noy, D. 1993. Jewish Inscriptions of Western Europe. Vol. I., Cambridge, 165-167. Golb considers this and other similar linguistic phenomena mentioned direedy after it to be a Gallicism and he demonstrates the Provencal equivalent à-n-elo. See Golb, N. 1969. "Monieux." Proceedings of the American philosophical Soäety 113, 72, n. 11.

B ( l l ) ‫נ מ צ א ה < העניה עד ש ב א ת אצלינו היום כ מ ו שנה‬ H e r e w e find the interference o f the Spanish structure

‫>לא‬

como hoy hace un ano, w i t h

t h e H e b r e w ‫ ( כ מ ו‬p r o n o u n c e d " k e m o " ) s t a n d i n g in f o r t h e S p a n i s h como.‫ יי‬Finally t h e r e is t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e w r e t c h e d w o m a n ' s p o v e r t y a n d inability t o p r o v i d e a n i n c o m e f o r herself: A(20) ‫ונשתיירה ב צ מ א ובעירום ו ב ח ו ס ר כ ל ולא יש ל ה מ ה שתוציא ע ל ע צ מ ה‬ H e r e o n e n e e d s t o recall t h e S p a n i s h

no tiene quegastaren si misma.

14

I f w e are in fact d e a l i n g h e r e w i t h t h e s t o r y o f t h e hard t i m e s e x p e r i e n c e d by t h e c o n v e r t w h o m a r r i e d a relative o f R. T o d r o s H a N a s i (the s e c o n d h a l f o f t h e e l e v e n t h c e n t u r y ) , t h e n apart f r o m t h e i n t r i g u i n g line o f e v e n t s d e p i c t e d in t h e letters, their l a n g u a g e s p e a k s f o r itself. It a l s o s p e a k s f o r t h e g e n e r a l l y c o m p l e x linguistic state o f t h i n g s in t h e area o f M u n o , at a n early s t a g e in t h e h i s t o r y o f O l d Castile. T h i s is a p e r i o d f r o m w h i c h w e h a v e f e w e x t a n t e x a m p l e s o f t h e o l d R o m a n c e dialect, a n d m o s t o f t h e s e i n v o l v e t h e n a m e s o f p l a n t s a n d o t h e r agricultural t e r m s f r o m t h e rural r e g i o n . 1 5 T h e first r e c o r d e d i n s t a n c e s o f R o m a n c e l a n g u a g e a p p e a r , as is w e l l k n o w n , f r o m t h e final c o u p l e t s o f H e b r e w a n d Arab i c u r b a n e p o e t r y , w r i t t e n b y m e n , w h e r e i n t h e s u f f e r i n g s in l o v e o f 'rustic' y o u n g w o m e n are g i v e n v o i c e . I n o n e o f t h e s e a y o u n g w o m a n c o m p l a i n s that E a s t e r t i m e h a s c o m e a n d h e r l o v e r still h a s n o t returned:

elu / com caned meu corajon por elu.u>

Venid la pasca edyo sin

It is p o s s i b l e that t h e s i t u a t i o n t h e y o u n g

w o m a n s p e a k s o f refers n o t o n l y t o t h e b l o s s o m i n g o f f e e l i n g s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s p r i n g a n d t o t h e w e l l - k n o w n c o n v e n t i o n o f l o v e p o e t r y o f this s o r t , b u t a l s o t o s o m e t h i n g else. It m a y refer as w e l l t o w o r k c y c l e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e rural s e t ting,

and specifically to the despair resulting f r o m the unfulfilled h o p e for the

r e m r n o f her l o v e r t o t h e village in t h e spring. M o s t o f t h e e v i d e n c e that w e h a v e o f this s o r t ( f r o m kharjas)

dates back n o

earlier t h a n t h e e n d o f t h e e l e v e n t h c e n t u r y , a n d it h a s b e e n p a s s e d o n t o u s in H e b r e w o r A r a b i c c h a r a c t e r s , as part o f H e b r e w o r A r a b i c

muwaßahat

(girdle

p o e m s ) . T h e elitist (high) literary c o n t e x t , i n t o w h i c h t h e y o u n g w o m a n ' s s p e e c h 13

14

15

16

Cf. in a document written already in the tenth century by Menahem Ibn Saruq, who was born in Tortosa: ‫( היום כמו שש שנים בא אלינו איש יהודי‬Kokovtsov, P. Κ. 1932 Emisko-Kha^arskaya Perepiska etc., St. Petersburg, 17. And Cf. Ben Yehuda, Ε. A Complete Dictionary of Ancient and Modern Hebrew. Vol. IV, 2000 (all examples are by authors of Spanish origin). ISam 9,20 and Arabic non Spanish parallels, however, without the pardcle, suggest the possibility of independent developments which were specially reinforced within the Iberian linguisdc situation. (Thanks to Prof. J. Blau, F. Corriente and M. Mishor for their helpful remarks). See Scheiber, A. 1979. "New Texts from the Geniza Concerning the Proselytes." HUCA, 50, 278, 281. See Wassserstein, D. J. 1991 "The Language Situation in al-Andalus." Studies in the MuwaSSah and the KJiaija. Ed. A.Jones and R. Hitchcock. Oxford, 1-15. See Stem, S. M. 1974. Hispano-Arabic Strophic Poetry. Oxford, 135, and Jones, A. 1988. Romance Kharjas in Andalusian Arabic Muwaššah Poetry—A Palaeographical Analysis. Oxford, 101-105. Cf. also Benabu, I and Yahalom, J. 1986. "The Importance of the Genizah Manuscripts for the Establishment of the Text of the Hispano-Romance Kharjas in Hebrew Characters." Romance Philology 40, 154—155. An anonymous poet puts the concluding passage in the mouth a young woman whom he calls ofrat benotyishuv. See Schirmann, J. 1965. Shirim Hadashim min haCeni^ah. Jerusalem, 341 (variant readings).

is artificially w o r k e d , w o u l d a l s o s e e m t o u n d e r m i n e t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f t h e l i n e s a n d their reliability as e v i d e n c e o f early R o m a n c e as a s p o k e n l a n g u a g e .

And

e v e n t h o u g h w e are d e a l i n g , in t h e c a s e o f t h e M u n o letters, w i t h actual d o c u m e n t s f r o m t h e p e r i o d in q u e s t i o n , t h e s e d o c u m e n t s c o n t a i n a n e v e n m o r e d i s tant e c h o o f o l d S p a n i s h t h a n t h e khaijas,

as t h e e c h o e s are h e a r d o n l y t h r o u g h

t h e b u f f e r o f l o a n translations. N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e t r a g e d y o f t h e c o n v e r t a n d t h e s t o r y o f h e r d i s t i n g u i s h e d h u s b a n d ' s d e m i s e a l s o h a p p e n t o tell, in their w a y , t h e life s t o r y o f an a n c i e n t s p o k e n l a n g u a g e . T h a n k s t o t h e d e f e c t i v e e d u c a t i o n o f a J e w i s h s c r i b e in a small rural t o w n in t h e v i c i n i t y o f B u r g o s , h e r s t o r y s h i n e s t h r o u g h t h e m a n y flaws in t h e scribe's writing. B u t this is n o t w h a t h e h a d in m i n d , as his s o l e p u r p o s e in w r i t i n g t h e letter w a s o f c o u r s e t o tell o f t h e fate t o w h i c h t h e u n f o r t u n a t e c o n v e r t h a d c o m e . L e t us, t h e n , h o n o r t h e scribe's w i s h e s a n d return t o t h e s t o r y itself. W e will try t o r e c o n s t r u c t t h e s t o r y o f t h e w o m a n as it c o m e s d o w n t o u s f r o m t h e t w o letters that a p p a r e n d y w e r e w r i t t e n in t h e s a m e p l a c e at a n interval o f o n l y a f e w years. B o t h o f t h e letters b e l o n g t o t h e S p a n i s h c h a p t e r o f t h e c o n v e r t ' s life, a f t e r s h e had c o m p l e t e d her c o n v e r s i o n and left P r o v e n c e behind. T h e story itself s e e m s t o b e m i s s i n g an e p i l o g u e , s e t in F u s t a t (old C a i r o ) , w h e r e t h e c o n v e r t w o u n d u p , w i t h h e r t w o letters, a f t e r h a v i n g fled f r o m t h e area u n d e r C h r i s t i a n c o n t r o l . B u t t h e letters tell u s n o t h i n g a b o u t this M u s l i m c h a p t e r in h e r life. T h e little w e k n o w a b o u t t h e o t h e r c h a p t e r s a m o u n t s t o this: A w o m a n o f c o n s i d e r able s o c i a l s t a n d i n g c o n v e r t e d t o J u d a i s m a n d married o n e R. D a v i d , w h o w a s related t o R. T o d r o s N a r b o n n i (the e l e v e n t h - c e n t u r y N a s i ) . 1 7 T h e letters t h e m s e l v e s tell o f t h e s e c o n d c h a p t e r in h e r l i f e — t h e e p i s o d e s at M u n o a n d N a j e r a . T h e N a r b o n n e b a c k g r o u n d e m e r g e s at this p o i n t in t h e

figure

of Yom

Τον

N a r b o n n i , w h o a c c o m p a n i e s t h e w o m a n o n h e r d i f f i c u l t p a t h . H e is w i l l i n g t o p a y t h e thirty dinars, f r o m his o w n p o c k e t , f o r h e r r e d e m p t i o n , a n d t h e r e b y s a v e h e r f r o m t h e d e a t h at t h e s t a k e t o w h i c h s h e h a d b e e n c o n d e m n e d in N a j e r a . B u t t h e w o m a n ' s t r o u b l e s h a d b e g u n l o n g a g o in N a r b o n n e , w h e r e h e r f a m ily p u r s u e d her. I n fear o f t h e m , s h e fled, as w e h a v e n o t e d , w i t h R. D a v i d , h e r h u s b a n d , a l o n g t h e F r e n c h r o u t e t o S a n t i a g o d e C o m p o s t e l a , a n d s e t d e d in M u n o . It w a s t h e r e that s h e m e t t h e u n f o r t u n a t e fate o f t h e p e o p l e o f h e r a d o p t e d faith. T h e J e w s o f M u n o w e r e s u b j e c t e d t o f i e r c e p o g r o m s a n d m a n y o f t h e m w e r e killed b y t h e

rioters.

R. D a v i d w a s killed in t h e s y n a g o g u e , a n d t h e

t w o c h i l d r e n w i t h h i m at t h e t i m e , Y a a k o v a n d Iusta, w e r e t a k e n c a p t i v e . T h e n e w l y w i d o w e d y o u n g w o m a n , w i t h an i n f a n t at h e r breast, s e t o u t in s e a r c h o f t h e c a p t i v e s , h o p i n g t o r e d e e m t h e m . A l o n g t h e w a y s h e relied o n t h e charity o f v a r i o u s J e w i s h c o m m u n i t i e s , a n d w a s a s s i s t e d b y t h e first letter, f r o m t h e c o m m u n i t y o f M u n o . I f in fact t h e s e c o n d letter refers t o t h e s a m e w o m a n , t h e n w e c a n c o n c l u d e that s h e remarried a n d s e t d e d in t h e t o w n o f N a j e r a , s o m e

fifty

miles f r o m M u n o . H e r n e w - f o u n d happiness was short-lived, h o w e v e r , and the s e c o n d h u s b a n d s o o n l e a r n e d that his w i f e ' s relatives w e r e l o o k i n g f o r her. T h i s

17

See Golb, (n. 2, above), 68 ff. Mann had already made this identification. On female converts and marriage in the middle ages and the complications involved in such marriages, cf. Friedman, M. A. 1986. Rjbuy Nashim beYisratl•—Meqorot Hadashim miGem^atQahir. Jerusalem, 335-339.

w a s an especially serious matter in light o f the m o u n t i n g religious t e n s i o n o f the p e r i o d o f t h e R e c o n q u e s t and the wars b e t w e e n the C h r i s d a n s and the M u s l i m s . J u d g m e n t w a s p a s s e d o n the w o m a n , and the flax h o o d w o r n by t h o s e w h o w e r e b u r n e d at the stake w a s readied f o r her. A r e d e m p d o n f u n d w a s hastily o r g a n i z e d in Najera. F i v e dinars w e r e c o l l e c t e d in the first r o u n d o f c o n t r i b u d o n s , and the r e m a i n i n g thirty dinars w e r e p r o v i d e d by Y o m Τ ο ν

Narbonni.

T h e thirty-five dinars w e r e u s e d to bribe c h u r c h o f f i c i a l s and s m u g g l e

the

w o m a n o u t o f the city at m i d n i g h t . Y o m Τ ο ν , w h o w a s c o n f i d e n t that the w o m a n w o u l d p r o m p t l y r e i m b u r s e h i m , f o l l o w e d the n e x t day, b u t by t h e n s h e had d i s a p p e a r e d w i t h o u t a trace. R o u g h l y a year b e f o r e the s e c o n d letter w a s written, a d r a m a d c d e v e l o p m e n t t o o k place in the narradve w h e n the w o m a n reappeared, n o w p r e g n a n t , at M u n o . A p p a r e n d y a certain s u m o f m o n e y had b e e n held f o r her there, and after s h e g a v e birth t o a girl, the c o m m u n i t y d e c i d e d t o s u p p o r t her. S h e w a s n o t p r e p a r e d to part w i t h any o f this s u p p o r t m o n e y in o r d e r t o repay Y o m

Τον

N a r b o n n i , t h o u g h she w a s willing t o pay h i m back gradually w i t h her o w n m o n e y . A s a gesture o f g o o d will s h e e v e n s e n t o n a p i e c e o f e x p e n s i v e fabric that w a s in her p o s s e s s i o n and w o r t h o n e and a half g o l d c o i n s . T h e c o m m u n i t y w e n t t o great l e n g t h s t o k e e p the parries c a l m and c o m e u p w i t h the r e m a i n i n g m o n e y t o pay o f f her debt. A t the letter's c o n c l u s i o n w e learn that the c o m m u nity p e r s u a d e d a m a n n a m e d M o s h e bar A y a s h t o h e l p o u t in the appeal for f u n d s . In the e n d , the w o m a n had t o raise o n l y e l e v e n dinars. T h e c o u r t t h e n f i n i s h e d wriring the letter and the c o n v e r t f o l d e d the first letter i n t o the s e c o n d , and set o u t o n her w a y — t o w a r d the areas u n d e r M u s l i m d o m i n a t i o n .

CLASSICAL K N O W L E D G E I N B O N A F O U X ' S H E B R E W TRANSLATION OF B O E T H I U S ' DE

CONSOLATIONE

PHILOSOPHIAE

IRENE E. ZWIEP University o f A m s t e r d a m , T h e N e t h e r l a n d s T h i s p a p e r will d e a l w i t h a t o p i c t h a t h a s h e l d m y i n t e r e s t e v e r s i n c e I c h a n g e d t h e c o u r s e o f m y s t u d i e s , already q u i t e s o m e t i m e a g o , a n d s w i t c h e d f r o m r e a d ing Classics t o H e b r e w and, m o r e specifically, to the study o f m e d i e v a l J e w i s h texts. S o m e h o w I r e t a i n e d t h e w i s h t o c o m b i n e b o t h d i s c i p l i n e s , a w i s h t h a t p e r h a p s m i g h t h a v e b e e n l e s s futile h a d I c h o s e n t o f o c u s o n a d i f f e r e n t p e r i o d in J e w i s h h i s t o r y . O f c o u r s e I k n e w t h a t t h e r e w o u l d b e a m p l e o c c a s i o n f o r w i t nessing the medieval Jewish philosophers w r e s d e with, for example, s u c h anc i e n t c l a s s i c a l a u t h o r i t i e s as A r i s t o d e a n d G a l e n ; y e t I s e c r e d y — a n d

vainly—

kept h o p i n g for an o c c a s i o n w h e r e H o r a c e m i g h t m e e t , for instance, J u d a h haL e v i o r , o n l y slightly m o r e p l a u s i b l e , w h e r e M e s h u l l a m d a Piera w o u l d b e c a u g h t quodng Ovid. A t s o m e p o i n t , m y a t t e n t i o n w a s d r a w n t o a treatise w h i c h , t h o u g h p r e sumably quite

sui generis

in J e w i s h literary h i s t o r y , p r o v e d t o b e a g o o d o p p o r t u -

nity f o r o b s e r v i n g a m e d i e v a l J e w i s h s c h o l a r at w o r k , i n t e r p r e t i n g a n d a d a p t i n g t h e "classical t r a d i t i o n " in o n e o f its m o s t a u t h e n t i c a n d d i r e c t m a n i f e s t a t i o n s . I n C e n t r a l - I t a l y , in 1 4 2 3 , A z a r i a h b e n J o s e f i b n A b b a Mari, a l s o k n o w n as B o n a f o u x B o n f i l Astruc, a r e f u g e e f r o m the religious p e r s e c u t i o n s that had s c o u r g e d t h e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t i e s o f C a t a l o n i a s i n c e 1 3 9 1 , c o m p l e t e d h i s H e b r e w translation

of

De Consolatione Philosophiae.·

T h e Latin " C o n s o l a t i o n o f P h i l o s o p h y " had

b e e n w r i t t e n a l m o s t 9 0 0 years earlier b y t h e R o m a n p h i l o s o p h e r a n d s t a t e s m a n A n i c i u s M a n l i u s S e v e r i n u s B o e t h i u s , w h i l e h e w a s a w a i t i n g h i s e x e c u t i o n , in a p r i s o n n e a r P a v i a , in t h e year 5 2 4 . W r i t t e n in p r o s e a l t e r n a t i n g w i t h p o e t r y a n d m o v i n g " f r o m Stoic moralism to Platonic transcendence,"2 the

Consolatio

was a

h i g h l y c o m p l e x w o r k : a p o l o g y , c o n s o l a t i o n , p r o t r e p t i c , t h e o l o g i c a l treatise a n d

1

2

Ed. Sierra, S. J. 1967. Boesjo: De Consolatione Philosophiae tradusjone ebraica di Avaria ben R Joseph ibn Abba Mari detto Bonafous Bonfil Astruc 5183-142}. Turin/Jerusalem: Insdtuto di Studi Ebraici Scuola Rabbiniea "S. H. Margulies-Disegni." Both in the introducdon (p. 27) and in the preface to his Hebrew version of a medical work by Zahrawi (cf. Sierra 1967: xi), Bonafoux refers to his being exiled from his "[cursed] homeland, where life had been good and he had wanted nothing." This is generally taken as an indication that he had left the town of Perpignan in Catalonia in the wake of the persecutions of 1391 or 1412-15. Chadwick, H. 1981a. Boethius: The Consolations of Music, Logic, Theology, and Philosophy. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 228.

p h i l o s o p h i c a l d i a l o g u e in o n e . 3 Still, if o n e w i s h e s t o s u m m a r i z e t h e w o r k b y its central t h e m e , o n e m i g h t d e f i n e B o e t h i u s ' Consolation

as t h e intellectual m a n i -

f e s t o o f t h e h u m a n s o u l striving t o return t o t h e s u p r e m e g o o d , t h e

summum

bonum, w h i c h is ultimately f o u n d in G o d , w h o is G o o d n e s s a n d w h o f o r s e e s all. Y e t f o r all t h e s e p i o u s n o u o n s , the

Consolatio

has b e e n labelled "notoriously

n o t a Chrisdan" piece o f work.4 A n d jusdy so, for fundamental Chrisdan issues, s u c h as t h e f o r g i v e n e s s f o r o u r sins, s a l v a d o n t h r o u g h Christ, a n d life eternal, are c o n s p i c u o u s l y a b s e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e b o o k . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d o n e c a n n o t a c c u s e B o e t h i u s o f c r y p t o - p a g a n i s m , f o r h e h a d t a k e n great care t o d e s c r i b e t h o s e N e o p l a t o n i c t h e o r i e s that m i g h t p r o v e o f f e n s i v e t o t h e C h r i s t i a n r e a d e r in a m a n n e r that w a s w h o l l y c o m p a t i b l e w i t h A u g u s t i n ' s v e r s i o n o f Christianity. 5 F o r B o n a f o u x B o n fil A s t r u c , it w a s crystal clear. I n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o h i s H e b r e w v e r s i o n , w h e r e h e r e c a p i t u l a t e s a f e w facts, n o t all o f t h e m equally c o r r e c t , o n B o e t h i u s ' fate a n d a u t h o r s h i p , 6 h e e x p l i c i d y i n t r o d u c e d h i m as t h e a u t h o r o f a b o o k w h i c h w a s n o t o n l y o f u n i v e r s a l quality, b u t a l s o c o n t a i n e d "all t h e w i s d o m a n d k n o w l e d g e o f t h e C h r i s t i a n s " 7 — t h e v e r y C h r i s t i a n s , by t h e w a y , that w e r e s t r o n g l y r e p r i m a n d e d f o r their b e l i e f in t h e T r i n i t y a n d in a c o r p o r e a l G o d in t h e o p e n i n g v e r s e s o f t h e s a m e i n t r o d u c t i o n . 8 Given

the

Consolatio's

ambiguous,

part-Christian,

part-pagan,

orientation,

B o n a f o u x ' s C h r i s t i a n c o n t e m p o r a r i e s will hardly h a v e read B o e t h i u s ' w o r k b e c a u s e o f t h e f u n d a m e n t a l C h r i s t i a n w i s d o m a n d k n o w l e d g e it s u p p o s e d l y c o n t a i n e d — o t h e r , truly Christian, c l a s s i c s w o u l d h a v e c a t e r e d t o t h o s e n e e d s . Y e t it h a s b e e n d e m o n s t r a t e d that is w a s p r e c i s e l y d u r i n g t h e 14 , h a n d 15 t h c e n t u r i e s that t h e

Consolatio

e n j o y e d a great, if s o m e w h a t b e l a t e d , p o p u l a r i t y in S p a i n . Its

f a m e s e e m s t o h a v e b e e n e s p e c i a l l y g r e a t in B o n a f o u x ' s n a t i v e c o u n t r y C a t a l o nia, w h e r e an u n p r e c e d e n t e d n u m b e r o f Latin a n d v e r n a c u l a r v e r s i o n s a p p e a r t o h a v e c i r c u l a t e d a m o n g t h e aristocracy a n d a m o n g m e m b e r s o f t h e D o m i n i c a n o r d e r , that h a d always s h o w n a great i n t e r e s t in t h e (pagan) c l a s s i c s . 9 T h e r e f o r e it w a s p r o b a b l y d u e t o p r o c e s s e s o f a c c u l t u r a t i o n rather t h a n t o r e l i g i o u s p r è s sure that B o n a f o u x felt p r o m p t e d t o translate B o e t h i u s ' m a s t e r p i e c e , 1 0 e v e n if t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n d o e s c o n t a i n s o m e r e f e r e n c e s o f a r e l i g i o u s p o l e m i c a l nature.

3

4 5 6

7 8

9

10

For a characterization of the eclectic nature of the De Consolationc, cf. Crabbe, A. 1981. "Literary Design in the De Consolatione Philosophiae." In Boethius: His Life, Thought, and Influence. Ed. M. Gibson. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 238 ff. Chadwick, H. 1981. "Introducdon." Ed. M. Gibson, 10. Chadwick 1981a: 249. Ed. Sierra 1967: 28, where Bonafoux described how "this [Chrisdan], whose name is Boeci Deconsolatione," one of the notables of Rome, was denounced and imprisoned in Ravenna, where he wrote the book that gave him his nickname. Thereupon "his head was cut off in Pavia; the Christians call him Severino, and he dwells with the saints." Ibid. Ibid., 27; Bonafoux hastened to add that, in spite of its Chrisdan orientadon, the Consolatio consistendy postulated the belief in God's unity and in divine retribudon. Briesemeister, D. 1990. "The Consolatio Philosophiae of Boethius in Medieval Spain." ]ournal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 53,61-71. Briesemeister's (1990: 63) somewhat rash characterzadon of Bonafoux's translation as "a fascinating example of the intellectual exchange still practised among Jews and Christians, and the cultural community that existed between them in the fifteenth century before the Expulsion"

I f a n y t h i n g , t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s first o f all s e r v e t o i n d i c a t e that, f o r a J e w i s h translator like B o n a f o u x , r e a d i n g t h e w o r k o f a classical a u t h o r c o u l d b e q u i t e a c o m p l e x p r o c e d u r e , that c o n f r o n t e d h i m w i t h b o t h p a g a n a n d q u i t y a n d c o n t e m p o r a r y C h r i s t i a n culture. S i m u l t a n e o u s l y , t h e v e r y fact that t h e p a g a n t e x t r e a c h e d h i m via a " C h r i s t i a n r o u t e " m a k e s it d i f f i c u l t f o r u s t o d e t e r m i n e B o n a f o u x ' s o w n historical a p p r o a c h t o antiquity per se. I n o r d e r t o o f f e r s o m e rudim e n t a r y i n s i g h t i n t o this i s s u e , t h e p r e s e n t p a p e r will briefly d i s c u s s a f e w s p e cifically " p a g a n " e l e m e n t s in t h e text, that will h a v e p o s e d a p r o b l e m t o m e d i e val J e w i s h a n d C h r i s t i a n r e a d e r s alike. E i t h e r b e c a u s e t h e s e r e a d e r s w e r e u n f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e life a n d mores o f a n t i q u e

times

too

to catch the m e a n i n g o f a

certain term o r c o n c e p t , or b e c a u s e o n e o f the m a n y learned allusions to f a m o u s personae

or events f r o m ancient history and m y t h o l o g y w o u l d be t o o o b s c u r e to

p a s s o v e r w i t h o u t f u r t h e r c o m m e n t , o r e l s e , b e c a u s e t h e y felt t h e y h a d t o o b j e c t to a passage o n theological or philosophical grounds." A n d finally, b e s i d e s t h o s e p r o b l e m s that a r o s e f r o m t h e c o n t e n t s o f a n a n c i e n t literary c o m p o s i t i o n , t h e r e w a s o f c o u r s e t h e o v e r a l l q u e s t i o n o f its f o r m . A t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e Consolatio

(I m . 1), f o r e x a m p l e , B o e t h i u s h a d c o n d u c t e d

a f o r m a l d e b a t e w i t h O v i d , t h e k i n g o f e l e g i a c p o e t s , w h o s e exilic p o e m

Tristia

e c h o e s a m o n g t h e l i n e s o f B o e t h i u s ' first m e t r e . I n t h e n e x t p r o s e s e c t i o n (I pr. i), in a f a m o u s p a s s a g e , t h e L a d y P h i l o s o p h y v e h e m e n t l y d i s m i s s e d t h o s e M u s e s o f poetry, calling t h e m

scenicas meretriculas

("theatrical harlots"), w h o o n l y m a d e

things w o r s e for the afflicted philosopher. A n d indeed, f r o m then o n the elegiac d y s t i c h o n d o e s n o t a p p e a r again. 1 2 B o n a f o u x , h o w e v e r , translated b o t h t h e p o e m s a n d t h e p r o s e s e c t i o n s in a n o f t e n literal, b u t at t i m e s q u i t e p a r a p h r a s t i c p r o s e , a n d m e r e l y a c k n o w l e d g e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f e a c h s e c t i o n , w h e t h e r t h e f o l l o w i n g h a d originally b e e n w r i t t e n in t h e f o r m o f a

shir o r

of a

dibbur.

In tune

w i t h his g e n e r a l l y q u i t e literal m o d e o f t r a n s l a t i o n — d i s c r e p a n c i e s in t h e H e b r e w t e x t are t h e r e f o r e q u i t e s i g n i f i c a n t — B o n a f o u x p r e s e r v e d t h e p a s s a g e

dealing

w i t h t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f t h e M u s e s , b u t n o t w i t h o u t s t r i p p i n g it o f its m e t a p h o r i cal d i c t i o n . T h u s h e i d e n t i f i e d B o e t h i u s ' " M u s e s w h o d i c t a t e d t h e w o r d s o f h i s g r i e f ' with "the sciences o f

tsachot a n d melitsah"

that a d m i t t e d l y s e e m s o m e w h a t

l o s t in t h e w i d e r H e b r e w c o n t e x t . 1 3 B u t let u s n o w m m t o e a c h o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s m e n t i o n e d earlier. First w e shall t h r o w a — p e r f o r c e rather c u r s o r y — g l a n c e at B o n a f o u x ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f m y t h o l o g i c a l material, w h i c h s e e m s t o o f f e r us s o m e i n d i c a t i o n o f at least o n e

11

12 13

seems corroborated by recent insights into the work of the Hebrew poets in Saragossa during the period 1390-1420, whose atdtude and work "may actually reflect analogous trends in the larger Spanish society"; cf. Scheindlin, R. P. 1997. "Secular Hebrew Poetry in Fifteenth-Century Spain." In Crisis and Creativity in the Sephardic World: 1391-1648. Ed. B. Gampel. New York: Columbia University Press, 34 ff. For late-medieval Chrisdan attitudes towards classical, pagan, literature, cf. e.g. Smalley, B. 1960. English Friars and Antitquity in the Early Fourteenth Century. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Cf. Crabbe 1981: 244-50! Compare the Latin "Quae uhi poeticas Musas vidit nostro adsistentes torofletibusquemeis verba dictante with Bonafoux's paraphrase "And when this woman (i.e. the Lady Philosophy) saw the sciences of tsachot and me/itsah, that were more likely to enhance my grief than comfort me," ed. Sierra 1967: 34.

s o u r c e that h e l p e d h i m i d e n t i f y t h e p r o t a g o n i s t s o f t h e a n c i e n t m y t h s , w h o m B o e t h i u s ' original r e a d e r s h i p h a d still b e e n familiar. I n t h e

Consolatio

with book

I V m . vii, t h e l a b o u r s o f H e r c u l e s are listed in o r d e r t o s u b s t a n t i a t e t h e c l a i m , that "earth o v e r c o m e o f f e r s u s t h e stars as a r e w a r d "

(superata tellus sidera donat).

I n t h e h e y d a y o f t h e R e n a i s s a n c e , an a u t h o r c o u l d p r o b a b l y r e c k o n w i t h a " w i d e d i s s e m i n a t i o n o f t h e k n o w l e d g e o f G r a e c o - R o m a n literature a n d t h e cultural tradition o f t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d " 1 4 a m o n g t h e J e w s o f Italy. I n 1 4 2 3 , h o w e v e r , B o n a f o u x still c h o s e t o recast B o e t h i u s ' h i g h l y allusive p o e m in t h e f o r m o f a t h o r o u g h l y paraphrastic a n d d i d a c t i c historical narrative. 1 5 T h u s h e e x p l a i n e d , that " t h e d o g C e r b e r u s " is k n o w n a m o n g t h e

ha-shir we-ba-melitsab

as t h e

shomer gehinnom,

chakhame

t h e g u a r d o f H e l l . H e related h o w ,

a c c o r d i n g t o t h o s e s a m e p o e t s , H e r c u l e s h a d t o s t a n d o n his t o e s in o r d e r t o s u p p o r t t h e h e a v e n s , w h e n A t l a s w a s t o o tired t o p e r f o r m his task. A n d h e s u p p l i e d v a r i o u s details as t o h o w t h e f e a r s o m e C a c u s l o o t e d c a t d e , a n d l e d t h e m t o his c a v e t h r o u g h n a r r o w c a n y o n s , w h e r e B o e t h i u s h a d l i m i t e d h i m s e l f t o t h e o b s e r v a t i o n that

Cacus Evandri satiavit iras,

that C a c u s ' d e a t h h a d s a t i s f i e d t h e

w r a t h o f t h e A r c a d i a n daemon E v a n d e r . B u t w h e n h e d e s c r i b e d , h o w

Hercules

p i e r c e d t h e birds o f S t y m p h a l u s w i t h his a r r o w s , an i n t e r e s t i n g c o n t a m i n a t i o n occurred.

Boethius' unspecified

niqra'im arpe'i,

volucres

(birds)

are i n t r o d u c e d

as

ha-ofot ha-

as " t h e birds that are c a l l e d H a r p i e s . " It is this i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f

S t y m p h a l u s ' birds w i t h t h e r a p a c i o u s H a r p i e s that p u t s u s o n t h e trail, by app r o x i m a t i o n at least, o f t h e s o u r c e o f B o n a f o u x ' s e x p l a n a t o r y narrations. T h a t s o u r c e , in o n e f o r m o r an o t h e r , w a s t h e narrative-historical rather t h a n moralizing

Consolatio-commo.nx.2sy

by

Nicholas

Trevet,

an

early-fourteenth-

c e n t u r y British D o m i n i c a n (d. a f t e r c. 1 3 3 4 ) , w h o s e f a m e as a c o m m e n t a t o r o f t h e Latin, p a g a n , classics w a s w i d e s p r e a d already d u r i n g his l i f e t i m e . 1 6 H i s

Con-

.r0/0/?0-commentary, o f w h i c h m o r e t h a n o n e h u n d r e d m a n u s c r i p t s are k n o w n , w a s m u c h u s e d t h r o u g h o u t E u r o p e , a n d S p a i n w a s certainly n o

exception.17

N e v e r t h e l e s s it m a y b e d i f f i c u l t t o d e t e r m i n e , in w h i c h f o r m T r e v e t ' s c o m m e n tary h a d b e e n available t o B o n a f o u x . T h e c o n t e m p o r a r y

Catalan t r a n s l a t i o n s

by

t h e D o m i n i c a n friars S a p l a n a a n d P e r e B o r r o h a v e b e e n b a d l y p r e s e r v e d ; A n t o n i o G i n e b r a d a ' s a d a p t a t i o n o f S a p l a n a , w r i t t e n a r o u n d t h e year 1 3 9 0 , d o e s n o t q u o t e T r e v e t . 1 8 P r o f e s s o r M a u r o Z o n t a h a s i n f o r m e d m e , that t h e Sefer

Meshiv Nafsbi,

Menachem

t h e o n l y o t h e r m e d i e v a l H e b r e w Consolatio-translation k n o w n t o -

day, c a n b e m i e d o u t as an i n t e r m e d i a r y . 1 9

14 15 16

17 18 19

Schulvass, M. A. 1973. The Jews in the World of the Renaissance. Leiden: Brill, 289-95. Ed. Sierra 1967: 122 ff. For Trevet's biography, cf. Smalley 1960: 58-64; for his Gwwojk/w-commentary, cf. esp. Minnis, A.J. "Aspects of the Medieval French and English Tradiuons of the De Consolatione Philosophiae." Gibson 1981, 314 f., and idem. 1982. Chaucer and Pagan Antiquity. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer/Rowman and Litdefield, 10 f. Briesemeister 1990: 63. Ibid., 63 ff. The Sefer Menachem Nafshi is generally attributed to the 14lh-century Aragonese physician Samuel Benveniste, whose name also occurs on various occasions in the grammatical work of Bonafoux's older contemporary and fellow-countryman Profiat Duran.

A n a d d i t i o n a l d r a w b a c k is p r e s e n t e d by t h e fact, that t h e late E d m u n d T . Silk's edition o f Trevet's

Exposicio... super Boecio de Consolacio

has n e v e r b e e n published.

Y e t e v e n a c u r s o r y c o m p a r i s o n w i t h w h a t is readily available o f t h e Latin original 2 0 s h o w s c o n s i d e r a b l e c o i n c i d e n c e s b e t w e e n B o n a f o u x ' s p a r a p h r a s e a n d T r e v e t ' s t r e a t m e n t o f t h e text. T h e e x p l a n a t i o n that C e r b e r u s g u a r d s t h e d o o r s o f H e l l a p p e a r s t o h a v e b e e n d e r i v e d f r o m T r e v e t ("id

est canem infernalem,"

he

a d d e d ) , as w a s t h e a d d i t i o n that t h e a p p l e s o f t h e H e s p e r i d e s , s t o l e n by H e r c u les, h a d b e e n

poma aurea, tappuche %ahav.

L i k e w i s e B o n a f o u x ' s c o n t e n t i o n , that

H e r c u l e s h a d killed o n e B u r s i r i d e s (Latin: Busiris), a cruel tyrant " w h o s e s p o r t it w a s t o k i d n a p a n d kill p e o p l e a n d f e e d their m e a t · t o t h e h o r s e s . " 2 1 It is q u i t e telling that, in this last e x a m p l e , B o n a f o u x " m i s q u o t e d " T r e v e t in e x a c t i y t h e s a m e w a y C h a u c e r d i d , w h e n h e b a s e d parts o f his E n g l i s h B o e t h i u s - t r a n s l a t i o n o f 1380 o n Trevet's commentary.22 T u r n i n g t o t h e n e x t c a t e g o r y , o n e w o u l d i m a g i n e that T r e v e t ' s w o r k c o u l d h a v e b e e n o f great u s e t o any translator o f t h e

Consolatio

trying t o c o m e t o g r i p s

w i t h t e r m i n o l o g y that r e p r e s e n t e d typical e l e m e n t s f r o m a n t i q u e life a n d culture. A n o b v i o u s locus t o c h e c k w o u l d b e B o n a f o u x ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e c o n c e p t o f " t r a g e d y , " m e n t i o n e d in t h e

Consolatio

II pr. ii, w h e r e it s e r v e d t o c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e

fate o f , a m o n g o t h e r s , C r o e s u s ( w h o w a s an I n d i a n rather t h a n a L y d i a n king, a c c o r d i n g t o o u r translator). 2 3 I n a S t o i c t r e a t m e n t o f Fortuna,

the Lady Philoso-

p h y p o s e s t o u s t h e rhetorical q u e s t i o n as t o " w h a t e l s e is t h e cry o f t r a g e d y

(tragoediarum clamor)

b u t a l a m e n t that h a p p y s t a t e s are o v e r t h r o w n b y t h e i n d i s -

criminate b l o w s o f fortune." B o n a f o u x ' s rendering o f the passage c o n v e y s the i m p r e s s i o n that h e w a s u n a c q u a i n t e d , b u t in n o w a y u n c o m f o r t a b l e , w i t h s o m e o f its e l e m e n t s . A s in t h e c a s e o f t h e Musas poeticas earlier, " t h e s c i e n c e s " o n c e m o r e m a k e their a p p e a r a n c e a n d take tragedy's p l a c e in " b e w a i l i n g t h e fact that t h e d i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e stars d e a l s o u t b l o w s w i t h o u t r e l e n t i n g , a n d that u n d e r its c o n s t a n t b l o w s , all g o o d a n d l u c k y t h i n g s turn." 2 4 G l o s s i n g t h e p a s s a g e in a d i f f e r e n t v e i n , N i c h o l a s T r e v e t h a d c h o s e n t o rely o n t h e c h a p t e r o n s c e n i c plays in I s i d o r e o f Seville's

Etymologiae

(XVIII.xliv), p e r -

h a p s b e c a u s e h e h a d f o u n d m u c h in t h e i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t o f b o o k II pr. ii t o s u b s t a n t i a t e I s i d o r e ' s v i e w that tragedy h a d m u c h t o d o w i t h sin. T h e r e f o r e T r e v e t c o n c l u d e d that "tragedy is p o e t r y a b o u t great i n i q u i t i e s b e g i n n i n g

from

p r o s p e r i t y a n d e n d i n g in adversity," t h u s i m p l y i n g that sin actually i n v i t e s trage d y . 2 5 I n o f f e r i n g this characteristically m e d i e v a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , h e w a s o f c o u r s e far r e m o v e d f r o m B o e t h i u s ' r h e t o r i c a l b e l i e f in t h e

20

21 22

23 24 25

indiscrete ictu,

the b l o w s w h i c h

Relevant material is found Minnis 1981: 347 ff. ("Appendix I: Chaucer's list of the labours of Hercules"). Ed. Sierra 1967: 123. Chaucer, Boece VII, 1. 2103 f: "He slow the crueel tyrant Busirus, and made his hors to frete hym, flessh and boon." As Minnis points out (1981: 348 f.) "[t]he story of Busiris, who murdered his guests, seems to have been confused with that of Diomede, king of Thrace, who fed his guests to his carnivorous horses (...) an easy mistake for Chaucer to make, especially if he were working from memory." Ed. Sierra 1967: 52. Ibid. Cf. Minnis 1982: 26 f.

f o r t u n e d e a l s o u t i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y , r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e a c t i o n s a n d t h e m o r a l state o f its s u b j e c t s ; a b e l i e f that actually u n d e r l i e s t h e e n t i r e s e c o n d b o o k o f t h e Con-

solatio

and provides a contrast to the Platonic solution to the p r o b l e m s o f Provi-

d e n c e a n d evil, p r e s e n t e d in t h e s e c o n d h a l f o f t h e b o o k . 2 6 O n e s o m e h o w f e e l s that T r e v e t ' s typically C h r i s t i a n m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , t h o u g h l i m i t e d t o a m i n u t e e l e m e n t in t h e text, r e v e a l s a c e r t a i n i n d i f f e r e n c e t o t h e o v e r a l l r h e t o r i c a n d arg u m e n t a t i o n o f the work. B y c o n t r a s t , B o n a f o u x ' s r e n d e r i n g o f t h e p a s s a g e is free f r o m m o r a l o v e r t o n e s , t h o u g h n o t f r o m d e t e r m i n i s m . R a t h e r characteristic is his a f o r e m e n t i o n e d

chokbmot (parallel t o t h e Musaspoeticas w h o b e c a m e chokbmot ha-shir we-ba-melitsab). H i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e L a t i n jortuna, r a n d o m

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f "tragedy" as the

fate, w i t h t h e c o u r s e a n d ruling p o w e r o f t h e stars m a y b e i n s p i r e d as m u c h b y his o w n w o r l d v i e w as b y t h e i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t . Q u o t i n g f r o m t h e final b o o k o f Homer's

Iliad',2‫י‬

B o e t h i u s h a d referred t o t h e t w o jars t h a t s t a n d

in lovis limine, o n

t h e t h r e s h o l d o f J u p i t e r , t h e o n e filled w i t h b l e s s i n g s , t h e o t h e r w i t h all evils. A c h i l l e s in t h e Iliad h a d referred t o t h e d e i t y Z e u s t h e T h u n d e r e r ; B o n a f o u x p r e f e r r e d t o take t h e s e w o r d s as a r e f e r e n c e t o t h e p l a n e t a r y s p h e r e , t h o u g h h e l o c a t e d t h e t w o jars

be-vet massai ha-kokhav,

in t h e h o u s e o f M e r c u r y , rather t h a n

that o f Jupiter. P e r h a p s this slight d e v i a t i o n w a s d e r i v e d f r o m t h e s a m e s o u r c e that h e l p e d B o n a f o u x s u p p l y t h e q u o t a t i o n f r o m t h e

Iliad,

w h i c h h a d b e e n re-

t a i n e d in G r e e k in B o e t h i u s ' original, w i t h an i m p e c c a b l e H e b r e w translation. I f w e m m t o B o n a f o u x ' s r e s p o n s e t o w h a t o n e m i g h t call t h e o v e r d y " p a g a n e l e m e n t s " in B o e t h i u s ' p h i l o s o p h y , w e o b s e r v e that B o n a f o u x s e e m s n o t

to

h a v e b e e n terribly o f f e n d e d by m o s t o f t h e N e o p l a t o n i c e l e m e n t s in B o e t h i u s ' t h o u g h t , e l e m e n t s s u c h t h e anima mundi,28

the pre-existence o f the soul and the

related p r i n c i p l e o f a n a m n e s i s , 2 9 w h i c h h a d s e r i o u s l y t r o u b l e d his C h r i s t i a n p r e c u r s o r s . H e translated B o e t h i u s ' a d m i t t e d l y rather c a u d o u s d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e t r a n s m i g r a t i o n o f t h e s o u l s 3 0 w i t h o u t trying t o m a k e it e v e n l e s s o f f e n s i v e o r t o e x p l i c i t l y r e c o n c i l e it w i t h t h e J e w i s h tradition, as A b r a v a n e l w o u l d d o nearly a c e n t u r y later. 31 H e did, o f c o u r s e , c o r r e c t B o e t h i u s ' p o e t i c a l l u s i o n t o t h e eternity o f t h e w o r l d a c c o r d i n g t o m e d i e v a l J e w i s h s t a n d a r d s , t h e r e b y s e r i o u s l y u p s e t t i n g s o m e o f t h e text's actual m e s s a g e . T h u s his a d a p t a t i o n s t r e s s e s

God's

e t e r n i t y rather t h a n that o f t h e w o r l d , i g n o r i n g B o e t h i u s ' i m p o r t a n t p o i n t that G o d h a d c r e a t e d t h e w o r l d o u t o f his G o o d n e s s o n l y , a n d a l m o s t s u r r e p t i t i o u s l y a d d i n g t h e , again typically m e d i e v a l , n o t i o n that G o d g u i d e s t h e s u b l u n a r w o r l d through the

inyane ha-sbamaim.32

T h e e x a m p l e s d i s c u s s e d a b o v e are b u t a f e w o f t h e n u m e r o u s

adaptations

t h a t B o n a f o u x d e v i s e d w h i l e w r i t i n g his H e b r e w v e r s i o n o f t h e Consolatio. 26 27

28 29 30 31

32

More

Chadwick 1981a: 228 f. Iliad xxiv.527: "You know that Zeus the Thunderer has two jars standing on the floor of his Palace, in which he keeps his gifts, the evils in one and the blessings in the other." De Consolatione Philosophiae III m. ix; Hebr. text ed Sierra 1967: 85 f. De Consolatione Philosophiae III m. xi; Hebr. text ed Sierra 1967: 93 f. De Consolatione Philosophiae IV pr. iii. Commentary on Deuteronomy 25:5; cf. Barzilay, I. E. 1967. Between Reason and Faith: Anti-Rationalism in Italian Jewish Thought (1250-1650). The Hague/Paris: Mouton, 93 f. Ed. Sierra 1967: 85 f.

than a translation, that H e b r e w v e r s i o n can b e read as a " m e d i e v a l i z a t i o n " o f B o e t h i u s , a Christian a u t h o r b e l o n g i n g t o an era w h i c h m e d i e v a l Christians at least w o u l d h a v e characterized as pagan antiquity. I have tried t o o u t l i n e n o t o n l y s o m e o f the p r o b l e m s w h i c h the c o n f r o n t a t i o n with pagan antiquity entailed f o r a J e w i s h translator, w h o s e intellectual b a c k g r o u n d w a s s o radically d i f f e r e n t f r o m that o f B o e t h i u s ' original a u d i e n c e , but also s o m e o f his s o l u t i o n s , in order t o d e t e r m i n e the limits o f the m e d i e v a l J e w i s h u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f classical m a t e rial against the b a c k g r o u n d o f c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s Christian attitudes.

PART FIVE THE STUDY OF JUDAISM MANUSCRIPTS, BOOKS, AND

MEDIA

T H E IMPACT O N J E W I S H S T U D I E S OF A C E N T U R Y OF G E N I Z A H RESEARCH STEFAN C . R E I F University of Cambridge, U K I h o p e that the righteous and learned souls o f the first-century J e w i s h scholars, Hillel and Shammai, will forgive m e if I c o m m e n c e this paper with a s o m e w h a t m o d i f i e d version o f a talmudic story 1 that reports their different r e s p o n s e s to the approach o f a candidate for c o n v e r s i o n to Judaism: It once happened that the organizer of a Jewish Studies conference came to a scholar and said him "Convince me of the importance of a century of Genizah research for Jewish studies while I stand on one foot." T h e scholar drove him off by flashing his laser pointer at him, saying "Either it is technical manuscript work of limited significance or its ramificadons are so major that your demand is totally unreasonable." Then he went to another scholar w h o said to him, "There is virtually no area of Jewish studies that has not been révolutionized by the Genizah finds. That is its overall significance. T h e rest is detail; go and research it." W h e n kindly invited by our disdnguished president to consider the c o n t r i b u d o n m a d e by the G e n i z a h texts to the field o f studies in w h i c h w e are all, in o n e way or another, a t t e m p d n g to specialize, I experienced feelings very akin to b o t h kinds o f r e s p o n s e s recorded in the original talmudic story and in m y m o d i f i c a d o n o f it. Is the invitauon o n e that is best declined o r is there s o m e p r o s p e c t o f r e s p o n d i n g to it in a meaningful and helpful way? T o d a y ' s field o f J e w i s h studies is u n d o u b t e d l y different f r o m the Wissenschaß des Judentums o f the nineteenth century. T h e subjects, periods and m e t h o d o l o g i e s s u b s u m e d under that general d d e are m u c h broader and are n o t necessarily c o n c e r n e d with manuscripts, cridcal e d i d o n s and religious history. A valid q u e s d o n is therefore w h e t h e r to v i e w a century o f G e n i z a h research as the technical treatment o f certain limited topics in medieval Jewish literature and history, with limited relevance to the broader academic discipline, or to c o n c l u d e that there is hardly an area o f J e w i s h studies that has not b e e n profoundly affected by these textual discoveries. If y o u are tempted to regard it as self-evident that G e n i z a h manuscripts are a m o n g the m o s t precious treasures o f Jewish literary history, consider, if you will, the suggestion m a d e by b o t h a distinguished scholar and an efficient librarian that it might have been advantageous if they had all b e e n burnt to a cinder. Babylonian Talmud, Sbabbat, f. 31a: 'It was once happened that a non-Jew came to Shammai, and said to him, "Convert me to Judaism, on the understanding that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Shammai drove him away with the measuring pole that he was holding in his hand. Then he went to Hillel, who agreed to convert him and said to him, "Avoid doing to anyone else what you would find objectionable: that is the whole Torah; all the rest is a matter of its explanauon; now go and study it."

T h e d i s t i n g u i s h e d A n g l o - J e w i s h t h e o l o g i a n a n d f o u n d e r o f Liberal J u d a i s m in England,

Claude

Goldsmid

Montefiore,

was

greatly

inspired

by

Solomon

S c h e c h t e r w h e n t h e y s m d i e d t o g e t h e r in Berlin in 1 8 8 2 a n d b r o u g h t h i m b a c k t o E n g l a n d as his m t o r in R a b b i n i c s . H e p r o v i d e d financial s u p p o r t f o r S c h e c h t e r ' s p o s t at t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f C a m b r i d g e a n d e n c o u r a g e d h i m t o w r i t e o n J e w i s h r e l i g i o u s i d e a s . 2 A s far as h e w a s c o n c e r n e d , t h e k i n d o f w o r k that h a d t o b e d o n e o n t h e G e n i z a h w a s o b s c u r e , trivial a n d u n s y s t e m a d c a n d S c h e c h t e r c o u l d s e r v e a m u c h b r o a d e r w o r l d o f l e a r n i n g if h e w r o t e a c o m p r e h e n s i v e s t u d y o f J e w i s h t h e o l o g y . A s M o n t e f i o r e h i m s e l f p u t it in a letter t o S c h e c h t e r o f 2 5 N o v e m b e r , 1901:3 If the G e n i z a h ruined the Big B o o k o n T h e o l o g y , w o u l d it had b e e n b u r n t in 1875. Y o u think m e a Philisdne. N o t so. But it m a k e s m e unalterably sad w h e n I see your u n i q u e p o w e r s n o t t u r n e d t o n o b l e a c c o u n t . A similar s e n t i m e n t w a s e x p r e s s e d at C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y Library in 1 9 2 7 . T h e n e w l y a p p o i n t e d U n i v e r s i t y Librarian, A . F. S c h o l f i e l d , w a s c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e a p p a r e n t lack o f p r o g r e s s o n m a k i n g t h e G e n i z a h material available t o s c h o l a r s a n d c a l l e d f o r r e p o r t s o n t h e c u r r e n t state o f affairs. O n e o f his s t a f f r e f e r r e d t o w h a t h e r e g a r d e d as s e c o n d - c l a s s biblical material a n d " r u b b i s h w h i c h h a s b e e n by v a r i o u s s c h o l a r s . " 4 A n o t h e r library assistant,

e x a m i n e d several

rimes

Bertram

Nightingale,

Charles

whose

alternative

view

had

apparendy

one been

s o u g h t b y S c h o l f i e l d , w a s e v e n l e s s r e s p e c t f u l o f t h e s e f r a g m e n t s , a n d l e s s loyal t o w h a t h e m i s g u i d e d l y s a w as t h e o u t d a t e d v i e w s o f t h e first G e n i z a h g e n e r a tion.

T h e b o x e s c o n t a i n e d " n o t h i n g o f a n y i n t e r e s t o r value. T h e late Librarian

[Francis J e n k i n s o n ] w o u l d n o t a l l o w a n y t h i n g t o b e d e s t r o y e d w h i c h is t h e o n l y r e a s o n w h y t h e y w e r e n o t b u r n e d years a g o . " 5 W o u l d J e w i s h scholarship and oriental curatorship indeed l o o k better today if t h e fates h a d n o t c h o s e n

to ignore

Montefiore's wish

and

Nightingale's

e v a l u a t i o n ? O r is t h e r e s o m e j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r their a n d similar f e e l i n g s o f s c e p t i c i s m a b o u t t h e v a l u e o f t h e G e n i z a h ? T h e o b j e c t o f this p a p e r is t o a t t e m p t t o a n s w e r t h e s e q u e s t i o n s by s u m m a r i z i n g the c o n t r i b u t i o n s m a d e by

Genizah

texts to various aspects o f J e w i s h studies, and by citing a f e w e x a m p l e s o f the k i n d o f m a n u s c r i p t s that h a v e b e e n d e c i p h e r e d a n d a n a l y s e d . It s h o u l d

then

b e c o m e a p p a r e n t w h a t all this m e a n s f o r a c e n t u r y o f p a s t a c a d e m i c d e v e l o p m e n t , as w e l l as f o r its e q u i v a l e n t o v e r t h e n e x t h u n d r e d years. W h a t I h o p e t o d e m o n s t r a t e is that t h e r e is u n d o u b t e d l y an e s s e n t i a l t e c h n i c a l s i d e t o G e n i z a h

2

‫נ‬

4

5

Bentwich, N. 1966. "Claude Montefiore and his Tutor in Rabbinics: Founders of Liberal and Conservadve Judaism." Southampton; Stein, J. B. 1977. Claude Goldsmid Montefiore on the Ancient Rabbis. Missoula; Bayme, S. 1982. "Claude Montefiore, Lily Montagu and the Origins of the Jewish Religious Union." Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society of England 27, 61-71; Kessler, Ε. 1989. An English Jew. The Life and Writings of Claude Montefiore. London. Stein, J. B. 1988. Lieber Freund: The Letters of Claude Goldsmid Montefiore to Solomon Schechter, 18851902. Lanham and London, 47. Reif, S. C. 1995-96. "One Hundred Years of Genizah Research at Cambridge." Jewish Book Annual 53, 17. The note, signed by "B. C. N." is dated 15 August, 1927, and is preserved in Taylor-Schechter departmental records at Cambridge University Library.

r e s e a r c h a n d an a s p e c t o f it that d e a l s w i t h m i n u t e literary, l i n g u i s d c a n d historical detail. A t t h e s a m e t i m e , I a m a n x i o u s t o p r o v e that t h e d i s c o v e r i e s a n d their i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a l s o reveal totally u n e x p e c t e d s c e n a r i o s a n d p e r m i t t h e

recon-

s t r u c t i o n , as w i t h a g i a n t jig-saw, o f a b r o a d p i c t u r e , d e p i c t i n g m u c h o f J e w i s h life as it w a s lived a b o u t a t h o u s a n d years a g o . I h a v e just c o m p l e t e d a v o l u m e that s e t s o u t t o e x p l a i n h o w , w h e r e a n d w h y t h e G e n i z a h a r c h i v e w a s a m a s s e d ; w h o t r a n s f e r r e d it t o f a m o u s r e s e a r c h libraries, particularly t o C a m b r i d g e

U n i v e r s i t y Library; a n d t h e m a n n e r in

which

s c h o l a r s h a v e e x p l o i t e d its c o n t e n t s s i n c e t h e last d e c a d e o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n tury. 6 W h a t h a s i n c i d e n t a l l y e m e r g e d is a r e m a r k a b l e tale o f c o m m u n a l p i e t y a n d superstition, scholarly c o - o p e r a t i o n and

rivalry,

a n d i n s t i t u t i o n a l care a n d n e -

g l e e t . T h a t tale is a t o p i c f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n e l s e w h e r e . W h a t is i m p o r t a n t in this p r e s e n t c o n t e x t is t h e fact that I h a v e , in t h e c o u r s e o f p r e p a r i n g that v o l u m e , r e c e n t l y a s s e s s e d t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h a n u m b e r o f areas o f J e w i s h s t u d i e s h a v e b e e n affected by G e n i z a h discoveries. I a m c o n s e q u e n d y able to o f f e r fresh and pertinent c o m m e n t s under the headings o f Bible, Rabbinics, History, Daily Life a n d Literacy. A l t h o u g h t h e r e are s o m e variants t o b e f o u n d in t h e G e n i z a h r e m n a n t s o f s c r o l l s a n d c o d i c e s ( t h e m s e l v e s s i g n i f i c a n t f o r t h e h i s t o r y o f scribal t e c h n i q u e s ) , t h e c o n s o n a n t a l t e x t w a s substantially as it is t o d a y . It is rather in t h e area o f v o c a l i z a t i o n that m a j o r d i s c o v e r i e s h a v e b e e n m a d e . It e m e r g e s that t h e r e w e r e three major systems, t w o emanating f r o m the H o l y Land and o n e f r o m Babylon, that w e r e in v o g u e a t h o u s a n d years a g o . T h e t e n t h - c e n t u r y T i b e r i a n s y s t e m o f B e n A s h e r that later c a m e t o b e r e g a r d e d as s t a n d a r d t o o k s o m e t w o o r t h r e e c e n t u r i e s t o e s t a b l i s h its d o m i n a n c e in t h e field. W h e t h e r i n s p i r e d by t h e Syriac C h r i s t i a n e x a m p l e , by M u s l i m c o n c e r n f o r t h e a c c u r a c y o f t h e Q u r ' a n , o r by an internal f e u d w i t h t h e Karaite J e w s w h o p r e f e r r e d t h e biblical t o t h e r a b b i n i c tradition, s u c h a t t e n t i o n t o t h e a c c u r a t e r e c o r d i n g o f t h e v o c a l i z e d t e x t l e f t its m a r k o n e x e g e s i s . T h e s c h o o l s o f M a s o r e t e s (literally, " t r a n s m i t t e r s " o r , p e r h a p s , " c o u n t e r s , " ) w h o s u r r o u n d e d t h e t e x t w i t h v o w e l p o i n t s , cantillation s i g n s a n d e x p l a n a t o r y n o t e s , inevitably r e c o r d e d

pari passu

their o w n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f its

m e a n i n g , o r t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g that t h e y h a d i n h e r i t e d f r o m g e n e r a t i o n s o f readers. 7 T h e i r m e t h o d i c a l a p p r o a c h a l s o e n c o u r a g e d t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h o s e H e b r e w p h i l o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s that p r o v i d e d t h e b a s i s f o r t h e literal i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e H e b r e w B i b l e in later m e d i e v a l a n d m o d e r n t i m e s . 8

6 7

8

Reif, S. C. From Cairo to Cambridge: A Tate of Genizah Treasure (scheduled for publication in 1999). Dotan, A. 1971. Encyclopaedia Judaica 16. Jerusalem, cols. 1401-82; Yeivin, I. 1980. Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah (English transladon of a Hebrew original). Missoula; Revell, E. J. 1970. Hebrew Texts with Palestinian Vocalisation. Toronto; and Davis, M. C. 1978, 1980. Hebrew Bible Manuscripts in the Cambridge Genizah Collections. Cambridge; (two volumes, and another two being prepared for the printer). See also the papers published in early issues of Textus and read at recent meetings of the Internadonal Organization for Masoretic Studies. For further details of the relevance of the Genizah to biblical studies, see Reif, S. C. 1994. "The Cairo Genizah and its Treasures, with Special Reference to Biblical Studies." In The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context. Ed. D. R. G. Beatrie and M.J. McNamara. Sheffield, 30-50. See, for example, Becker, D. 1992. "Traces of Judah Ibn Quraysh in Manuscript, particularly in Genizah Fragments" and Eldar, I. 1992. "Mukhtasar (an abridgement of) Hidayat al-Qari': A

T h e i n t e r e s t in m a k i n g s e n s e o f t h e H e b r e w t e x t w a s o f c o u r s e primarily i n s p i r e d b y its regular r e c i t a t i o n b e f o r e t h e c o n g r e g a t i o n in t h e s y n a g o g u e . T h e material f r o m t h e C a i r o G e n i z a h c o n f i r m s that t h e r e e x i s t e d a n n u a l B a b y l o n i a n a n d triennial P a l e s t i n i a n l e c t i o n a r i e s f o r b o t h p e n t a t e u c h a l a n d p r o p h e t i c readings. T h e y d i d , h o w e v e r , e x i s t in s u c h variety that it is i m p o s s i b l e t o i d e n t i f y a n y o n e o r d e r t h a t m a y b e traced b a c k t o t h e early Christian c e n t u r i e s . 9 I n a d d i t i o n t o H e b r e w l e c t i o n a r i e s u s e d b y t h e J e w s , P a l e s t i n i a n Syriac v e r s i o n s o f

the

C h r i s t i a n s c r i p t u r e s h a v e a l s o b e e n d i s c o v e r e d . T h e r a n g e o f biblical t r a n s l a t i o n s t o b e f o u n d in t h e G e n i z a h t e s t i f i e s t o t h e w i d e variety o f l a n g u a g e s in u s e w h e n that a r c h i v e w a s first built up. I n t h e p r e - I s l a m i c c e n t u r i e s , t h e d o m i n a n t lang u a g e o f t h e d i a s p o r a J e w s w a s G r e e k s o that it.is hardly s u r p r i s i n g t o f i n d 6 t h 7 , h c e n t u r y f r a g m e n t s o f t r a n s l a t i o n s first p r e p a r e d f o r t h e m b y A q u i l a s o m e 5 0 0 years earlier. 1 0 W a s it J e w s o r C h r i s t i a n s w h o w e r e u s i n g s u c h v e r s i o n s in t h e sixth century and h o w did they c o m e to be c o n s i g n e d to the G e n i z a h ? W h e t h e r o r n o t this A q u i l a is, as h a s s o m e t i m e s b e e n s u g g e s t e d , t o b e i d e n t i f i e d w i t h O n q e l o s , t h e r e p u t e d a u t h o r o f t h e m a i n a n d literal s y n a g o g a l t a r g u m , is n o t clarified b y t h e G e n i z a h texts. T h e y d o , n e v e r t h e l e s s , a d d c o n s i d e r a b l y t o o u r k n o w l e d g e o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f that p o p u l a r g e n r e o f A r a m a i c translation. V a r i o u s c o m p i l a t i o n s o f t a r g u m i c material, s o m e h i t h e r t o u n k n o w n , h a v e b e e n i d e n t i f i e d a m o n g t h e G e n i z a h texts. T h e y i n c l u d e l e n g t h y e l a b o r a t i o n s o f t h e text, p o e t i c v e r s i o n s o f t h e narratives, a n d h a l a k h i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f v e r s e s t h a t r u n c o u n t e r t o w h a t is f o u n d in t h e t a l m u d i c s o u r c e s . 1 1 B e c a u s e o f t h e a n c i e n t nature o f t h e c u s t o m t o translate t h e H e b r e w B i b l e i n t o A r a m a i c , it w a s n o t a b a n d o n e d w h e n A r a b i c r e p l a c e d A r a m a i c a n d G r e e k as t h e J e w i s h vernacular. Rather, it w a s i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o a trilingual v e r s i o n in w h i c h Arabic appeared side-by-side with H e b r e w and Aramaic. T h e Arabic rend e r i n g , w r i t t e n in H e b r e w c h a r a c t e r s a n d r e c o r d i n g t h e p o p u l a r dialect o f that S e m i t i c l a n g u a g e u s e d in t h e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t i e s , originally e x i s t e d in a variety o f f o r m s . T h e s e t h e n gradually g a v e w a y t o t h e v e r s i o n c r e a t e d b y t h e t e n t h -

9

10

11

grammatical Treatise discovered in the Genizah." In Genizah Research after Ninety Yean. The Case of Judaeo-Arabic. Ed. J. Blau and S. C. Reif. Cambridge, 14-21 and 67-73; and Téné, D. 1983. "Hashva'at Ha-Leshonot Viydi'at Ha-Lashon" in Hebrew Language Studies presented to Professor Zeev Ben-Hayyim (Hebr.). Ed. M. Bar-Asher, A. Dotan, G. B. Sarfari and D. Téné. Jerusalem, 237-87. Petuchowski, J. J. ed. 1970. Contributions to the Scientific Study of the Jewish Liturgy. New York, XVIIXXI; Wacholder, Β. Ζ. in the first prolegomenon to the reprint (New York, 1971) of J. Mann's The Bible as Read and Preached in the Old Synagogue. (Cincinnati, 1940 and 1966, with I. Sonne); and E. Fleischer's Hebrew articles, "Inquiries concerning the Triennial Reading of the Torah in Ancient Eretz-Israel." Hebrew Union College Annual 62, 1991, 43-61 and "Annual and Triennial Reading of the Bible in the Old Synagogue." Tarbi^ 61, 1992, 25-43. Lewis, A. S. and Gibson, M. D. 1900. Palestinian Syriac Texts from Palimpsest Fragments in the TaylorSchechter Collection. London; Sokoloff, M. and Yahalom, J. 1978. "Christian Palimpsests from the Cairo Geniza." Reme d'Histoire des Textes 8, 109-32; Burkitt, F. C. 1897. Fragments of the Books of Kings according to the Translation of Aquila. Cambridge, and Taylor, C. 1900. Hebrew-Greek Genizah Palimpsests from the Taylor-Schechter Collection. Cambridge; Müller-Kessler, C. and Sokoloff, M. 1997. The Christian Palestinian Aramaic Old Testament and Apocrypha Venion from the Early Period Groningen. Klein, M. L. 1986. Genizah Manuscripts of Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch (two vol.). Cincinnati, and Targum Manuscripts in the Cambridge Genizah Collections. Cambridge, 1992.

c e n t u r y r a b b i n i c a u t h o r i t y in B a b y l o n , Sa'adya b e n J o s e p h , w h i c h , like t h e targ u m o f O n q e l o s , b e c a m e t h e standard o n e . 1 2 It w a s Sa'adya w h o the rabbinic

traditions against their Karaite o p p o n e n t s .

championed

F o r their part,

the

K a r a i t e s a l s o m a d e a p o l e m i c a l p o i n t b y m e a n s o f a linguistic u s a g e . A t o n e p o i n t in their history, t h e y d e m o n s t r a t e d their i n d e p e n d e n t r e l i g i o u s i d e n t i t y b y r e c o r d i n g t h e t e x t o f t h e H e b r e w B i b l e in A r a b i c a n d n o t H e b r e w characters. 1 3 Scholarly understanding o f the d e v e l o p m e n t o f midrashim, t h r o u g h o u t the m i l l e n n i u m f o l l o w i n g the destruction o f the S e c o n d temple, also o w e s m u c h to G e n i z a h research. H i t h e r t o , t h e earliest m a n u s c r i p t s w e r e f r o m t h e initial p e r i o d o f A s h k e n a z i J e w r y in t h e w e s t . N o w , t h e r e are h u n d r e d s o f f r a g m e n t s w r i t t e n in t h e e a s t at a m u c h earlier d a t e a n d r e p r e s e n t i n g o l d e r textual traditions. W h a t is m o r e , n e w m i d r a s h i m , a n t h o l o g i e s a n d c o m m e n t a r i e s h a v e b e e n d i s c o v e r e d , b o t h h a l a k h i c a n d a g g a d i c in nature, a n d a n e w p i c t u r e h a s b e e n d r a w n o f t h e c o l o u r f u l a n d h e t e r o g e n e o u s J e w i s h e x e g e s i s o f t h e H e b r e w B i b l e in t h e early m i d d l e ages. 1 4 S u c h a v a r i e g a t e d a p p r o a c h g a v e w a y t o t h e m o r e linguistic a n d philological c o m m e n t a r i e s o f the tenth to the twelfth centuries, and the written e v i d e n c e f r o m t h e G e n i z a h r e c o r d s o n e o f t h e f a c t o r s that p r e c i p i t a t e d s u c h a c h a n g e . 1 5 It w a s e f f e c t e d b y t h e c e n t r a l i z e d a n d c e n t r a l i z i n g p o w e r s o f

12

13

14

15

the

Blau, J. "On a Fragment of the Oldest Judaeo-Arabic Bible Translation Extant." In Ninety Yean of Genizah Research (see n. 8 above), 31-39; and Baker, C. and Polliack, M. Arabic and Judaeo-Arabic Manuscripts in the Cambridge Genizah Collections (scheduled for publication in Cambridge, 1999). Khan, G. 1990. Karaite Bible Manuscripts from the Cairo Genizah. Cambridge, and Polliack, M. 1997. The Karaite Tradition of Arabic Bible Translation. Leiden, New York and Köln. Two helpful and reliable English guides to the whole midrashic field, as background to the relevance of the Genizah texts, are R. Kasher's article "Scripture in Rabbinic Literature" in Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity. Ed. J. Mulder and H. Sysling. Assen/Maastricht and Philadelphia, 547-94 and Stemberger's, G. 1996. Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash. Edinburgh, originally an updated version of Hermann Strack's classic, but now an important work in its own right, with the latest scholarly data. M. Gaster's midrashic pieces were reprinted in his three volumes Studies and Texts in Folklore: Magic, Mediaeval Romance, Hebrew Apocrypha and Samaritan Archaeology. London, 1925-28. For examples of the treatment of Genizah fragments of midrashim, see Sokoloff, M. 1982. The Geniza Fragments of Bereshit Rabba. Jerusalem, and Reif, S. C. 1982. "A Midrashic Anthology from the Genizah." In Interpreting the Hebrew Bible. Essays in Honour of E. I. J. Rosenthal. Ed. J. A. Emerton and S. C. Reif. Cambridge, 179-225. Hebrew volumes on the kind of unusual midrashim found in the Genizah include Wertheimer, S. Α. 1954. Batei Midrashot. Ed. A. J. Wertheimer. Jerusalem; Mann, J. The Bible as Read and Preached (see n. 9 above); Ginzberg, L. 1928. Genizah Studies in Memory of Doctor Solomon Schechter. 1. Midrash and Haggadah. New York; Rabinovitz, Ζ. M. 1976. Gin^e Midrash. Tel Aviv; and Kahana, M. 1995. Manuscripts of the Halakhic Midrashim: An Annotated Catalogue. Jerusalem. As far as rabbinic commentaries are concerned, M. Perez has, for example, published important fragments of the work of Judah Ibn Bal'am and Moses ibn Gikatilla in the Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 57, 1991, 1-16; Sinai 108, 1991, 7-17; Leshonenu 55, 1992, 315-22; Hebrew Union College Annual 63, 1993, 1-17; and Sinai 113, 1994, 262-76. M. Zucker did important work on Sa'adya's biblical scholarship in his Hebrew volumes Rav Saadya Gaon's Translation of the Torah. New York, 1959 and Saadya's Commentary on Genesis. New York, 1984, and Y. Ratzaby has published many additional fragments of Sa'adya's commentaries, as in Sinai 109, 1992, 9 7 117, 193-211; and Sinai 111, 1993, 1-26. Another important edition is that of Greenbaum, A. 1979. The Biblical Commentary of Rav Samuel ben Hofni Gaon according to Geniza Manuscripts (Hebr.). Jerusalem.

B a b y l o n i a n r a b b i n i c a u t h o r i t i e s in an e f f o r t t o t h w a r t Karaite e f f o r t s t o d i s c r e d i t r a b b i n i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as l a c k i n g t h e s e r i o u s a n d literal d i m e n s i o n . T h e r e are a l s o s o m e i n t r i g u i n g q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e link b e t w e e n t h e biblical a n d q u a s i - b i b l i c a l t e x t s that o c c u r b o t h a m o n g t h e literature o f t h e D e a d S e a s e c t a n d in t h e G e n i z a h c o r p o r a . It is s o m e t i m e s f o r g o t t e n that t h e first a n d f u l l e s t t e x t o f o n e o f t h e s e c t ' s m a j o r r e l i g i o u s tracts, t h e D a m a s c u s

Document

(or Z a d o k i t e F r a g m e n t s ) , c a m e t o light a m o n g t h e G e n i z a h f i n d s fifty years b e f o r e t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h e Q u m r a n c a v e s m a d e their s e n s a t i o n a l i m p a c t o n J e w i s h a n d C h r i s t i a n history. 1 6 N o r i n d e e d w o u l d it h a v e b e e n p o s s i b l e f o r t h e l o n g - l o s t H e b r e w t e x t o f t h e W i s d o m o f B e n Sira, w r i t t e n in t h e s e c o n d

pre-Christian

century, to have b e e n reconstructed w i t h o u t extensive input f r o m the fragments f o u n d in t h e B e n E z r a S y n a g o g u e . 1 7 B u t in w h i c h c o n t e x t d i d t h e s e t w o w o r k s c o n t i n u e t o circulate in t h e i n t e r v e n i n g c e n t u r i e s a n d w h o c o p i e d t h e m , a n d f o r w h a t p u r p o s e , in F a t i m i d Cairo? 1 8 It is n o t p e r h a p s s o r e m a r k a b l e t o f i n d v e r sions of

Toledot Yeshu, r e c o r d i n g

early J e w i s h f o l k l o r e a b o u t J e s u s , a m o n g t h e

fragments.19 O n the other hand, n o wholly satisfactory reason can be o f f e r e d for t h e e x i s t e n c e in t h e C a i r o J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y o f parts o f a N e s t o r i a n

Syriac

h y m n - b o o k . 2 0 Perhaps these t h i r t e e n t h — o r f o u r t e e n t h — c e n t u r y texts b e l o n g i n g t o a f e a s t o f t h e V i r g i n M a r y w e r e s o l d as s c r a p w h e n t h e N e s t o r i a n c o m m u n i t y f a d e d o u t o f e x i s t e n c e in C a i r o at that rime o r s h o r t l y a f t e r w a r d s . T h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n biblical a n d rabbinic literature b e c a m e p r o n o u n c e d only w h e n authors and scribes t o o k to prescribing and describing the c o n t e n t s o f their c o d i c e s in m o r e d e f i n i t i v e w a y s in t h e later m i d d l e a g e s . O n e s h o u l d n o t t h e r e f o r e b e s u r p r i s e d t o f i n d m i x t u r e s o f c o n t e n t s in early G e n i z a h f o l i o s , as in t h e c a s e o f t h e s c r a p o f a p r o p h e t i c l e c t i o n a r y that a l s o c o n t a i n s an early v e r s i o n

16

17

18

19

20

Schechter published the Zadokite or Damascus Document (CD) in the first volume of his Documerits of]ewish Sectaries under the sub-ride Fragments of a Zadokite Work. Cambridge, 1910. The literature relating to CD is helpfully summarised in the excellent bibliography provided by F. Garcia Marunez in Magen Broshi's The Damascus Document Reconsidered. Jerusalem, 1992. A symposium on CD, organised by Michael Stone and Esther Chazon for the Orion Institute, was recendy held in Jerusalem and the proceedings, including an article by Stefan C. Reif on the discovery and early study of CD, is scheduled for publication in the near future. The whole story of the Cambridge Genizah fragments of Ben Sira is told in S. C. Reif, "The Discovery of the Cambridge Genizah fragments of Ben Sira: Scholars and Texts" in the latest volume to cover research in the whole field, edited by P. C. Beentjes, The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research. Proceedings of the First InternationaI Ben Sira Conference, 28-31 July 1996, Soesterherg, Netherlands. Berlin and New York, 1997, 1-22. The issue of the relationship between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Genizah texts is summarized in Stefan C. Reif s entry "Cairo Genizah." In The Encyclopaedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, edited by L. H. Schiffman and J. C. VanderKam, Oxford and New York, 1998. See also the interesting exchange in Hebrew between Y. Erder and H. Ben-Shammai in a secdon entided "Discussion: Karaism and Apocryphic Literature." In Cathedra 42, 1987, 54—86. For a detailed bibliography relating to Toledot Yeshu, see R. Di Segni's Italian monograph II Vangelo del Ghetto. Rome, 1985. S. P. Brock has edited and published the Syriac liturgies from the Genizah in his articles "East Syrian Liturgical Fragments from the Cairo Genizah" and "Some Further East Syrian Liturgical Fragments from the Cairo Genizah." In Oriens Christianus 68, 1984, 58-79 and 74, 1990, 44—61.

o f a s y n a g o g a l b e n e d i c t i o n . 2 1 T h a t h a v i n g b e e n said, o n e m a y m o v e o n t o m o r e s p e c i f i c r a b b i n i c literature a n d a s s e s s h o w t h e G e n i z a h h a s c o n t r i b u t e d t o o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f its d e v e l o p m e n t in t h e g e o n i c p e r i o d a n d s o o n a f t e r w a r d s . It is n o t rare t o f i n d a m o n g G e n i z a h f r a g m e n t s t a l m u d i c s e c t i o n s , f r o m b o t h t h e Bavli a n d t h e Yerushalmi, post-Genizah

that w e r e later l o s t o r r e m o v e d , o r t o d i s c o v e r that

t e x t s h a v e attracted all m a n n e r o f a d h e s i o n s .

Sometimes

the

G e n i z a h t e x t is early e n o u g h t o s h e d light o n t h e o r i g i n s o f an e x p r e s s i o n that p u z z l e d later g e n e r a t i o n s . A n u n u s u a l linguistic u s a g e , a w o r d o f G r e e k o r P e r sian o r i g i n , t h e e x c h a n g e o f o n e letter f o r a n o t h e r , a f o r g o t t e n p l a c e n a m e , o r an u n e x p e c t e d a b b r e v i a t i o n — s u c h p h e n o m e n a o f t e n led t o c o r r u p t i o n s in t h e text a n d it is n o t u n u s u a l f o r G e n i z a h v e r s i o n s t o u n c o v e r a u t h e n t i c

readings.22

F r a g m e n t s o f i n c u n a b l e s a n d early e d i t i o n s o f t a l m u d i c t e x t s , s o m e o f t h e m o n v e l l u m , a n d m a n y o f t h e m f r o m S p a i n a n d P o r t u g a l , are a n o t h e r f e a t u r e , albeit a limited o n e , o f G e n i z a h collections.23 G e n i z a h versions also contribute to a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f linguistic d e v e l o p m e n t s . A clearer d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the W e s t e r n Aramaic o f Palestinian texts and the Eastern Aramaic o f

their

B a b y l o n i a n c o u n t e r p a r t s h a s b e c o m e p o s s i b l e , w i t h t h e result t h a t t h e r e l e v a n t dictionaries scratch.

24

and

grammars

have

been

improved

or,

indeed,

created

from

G l o s s e s o n t h e text, s o m e o f t h e m in J u d a e o - A r a b i c o r J u d a e o - G r e e k ,

h a v e h e l p e d t o r e s t o r e l o n g - l o s t m e a n i n g s , w h i l e t h e u s e in s o m e m a n u s c r i p t s o f v o w e l - p o i n t s , f o l l o w i n g a variety o f s y s t e m s , h a s e n a b l e d e x p e r t s in

Hebrew

linguistics to explain h o w different c o m m u n i t i e s p r o n o u n c e d the H e b r e w

of

their r a b b i n i c texts. 2 5 T w o o t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t s , that are certainly r e f l e c t e d in t h e G e n i z a h

evi-

d e n c e , w e r e t h e c r e a t i o n o f s u p p l e m e n t s t o t h e t a l m u d i c text, in t h e f o r m o f b r i e f , a d d i t i o n a l tractates in t h e earlier g e o n i c p e r i o d , a n d t h e c o m p i l a t i o n

of

c o m m e n t a r i e s at a later date. T h e m e s that are briefly treated in t h e s t a n d a r d tractates o f t h e t a l m u d i c a n d i m m e d i a t e p o s t - t a l m u d i c p e r i o d s , o r are dealt w i t h t h e r e in s c a t t e r e d s t a t e m e n t s a t t a c h e d t o v a r i o u s c o n t e x t s , are e x p a n d e d u p o n in

21

22

23 24

25

T-S A42.2; see Davis, Hebrew Bible Manuscripts (see n. 7 above), vol. 1, 221 and Reif, S. C. 1988. Published Material from the Cambridge Genizah Collections: A Bibliography 1896-1980. Cambridge, 42. For general guidance in English to scientific study of talmudic texts, see the details in the newly revised English version of Emil SchiirerV The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (17S B. C-A. D. 135) by Geza Vermes and Fergus Millar, vol. 1, Edinburgh, 1973, 68-118; the richly informative volume The Literature of the Sages. First Part: Oral Tora, Hatakha, Mishna, Tosefta, Talmud, Externa! Tractates. Ed. S. Safrai. Assen, Maastricht and Philadelphia, 1987; and G. Stemberger, Introduction (see n. 14 above). Dimitrovsky, H. Z. 1979. S'ride Bavli (2 vol.). New York. On the matter of the Aramaic used in the rabbinic tradition, ample literature is cited by M. Sokoloff in the collection of essays that he edited endded Arameans, Aramaic and the Aramaic Literary Tradition. Ramat Gan, 1983 and in his A Dictionary ofJewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period. Ramat Gan, 1990. Morag, S. 1988. Vocalised Talmudic Manuscripts in the Cambridge Genizah Collections. Cambridge; Brody, R. 1998. A Hand-list of Rabbinic Manuscripts in the Cambridge Genizah Collections. Cambridge; Danzig, N. 1997. A Catalogue of Fragments of Halakhah and Midrash from the Cairo Genizah in the El· kan Nathan Adler Collection of the Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America. New York and Jerusalem. See also the essays included in Mehqere Talmud: Talmudic Studies. Ed. J. Sussmann and D. Rosenthal. Jerusalem, 1990-93.

t h e s o - c a l l e d ' m i n o r tractates.' 2 6 I f t h e s e tractates c o n s t i t u t e t h e first s t a g e o f t h e p r o c e s s o f c o m m e n t a r y , t h e s e c o n d s t a g e is t o b e l o c a t e d in t h e

statements

m a d e by v a r i o u s g e o n i c a u t h o r i t i e s a b o u t t h e m e a n i n g o f i n d i v i d u a l t a l m u d i c p a s s a g e s a n d p r e s e r v e d in their r e s p o n s a . 2 7 T h e third s t a g e is t h a t o f t h e c o m p i l a t i o n o f r u n n i n g c o m m e n t a r i e s , s u c h as that w h i c h a p p e a r s t o h a v e b e e n u n d e r t a k e n in t h e B a b y l o n i a n c e n t r e o f P u m b e d i t a b y H a i G a o n in t h e t e n t h a n d e l e v e n t h c e n t u r i e s b u t m o s t o f w h i c h h a s b e e n l o s t , a n d that o f h i s later c o n t e m p o r a r y , H a n a n e l b e n H u s h i e l , in Q a y r a w a n , o n e o f t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t J e w ish c o m m u n i t i e s in N o r t h A f r i c a . 2 8 W h i l e i n v e s t i g a t i v e G e n i z a h s c h o l a r s h i p h a s p l a y e d a r o l e in t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e s e earlier d e v e l o p m e n t s , it h a s m a d e n o t h i n g s h o r t o f a m a s s i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e r e c o v e r y o f t h e later w o r k

of

N i s s i m b e n J a c o b i b n S h a h i n . F o r i n s t a n c e , in a w o r k w h o s e title m i g h t justifiably b e translated " A K e y t o t h e T a l m u d i c T r e a s u r e - C h e s t , " h e a s s i s t e d t h e s t u d e n t o f t h e v a s t t a l m u d i c literature b y p r o v i d i n g s o u r c e s a n d parallels f o r m a n y s t a t e m e n t s , as w e l l as e x p l a n a t i o n s o f m a n y r e c u r r e n t t h e m e s . 2 9 T h e early e x p a n s i o n o f h a l a k h i c g u i d a n c e h a s a l s o b e e n d o c u m e n t e d b y a c e n t e n a r y o f G e n i z a h s t u d y . T h e earlier d i s t i n c t i o n s b e t w e e n t h e

Babylonian

t a l m u d i c t r a d i t i o n s a n d their e q u i v a l e n t s in E r e t z Yisrael a l s o f o u n d later e x p r e s s i o n in t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f their r e s p e c t i v e l a w s a n d c u s t o m s . A s t h e B a b y l o n i a n t e a c h e r s a n d i n s t i t u t i o n s b e t w e e n a n d a r o u n d t h e Tigris a n d t h e E u p h r a t e s b e g a n t o g r o w in stature a n d i n f l u e n c e , s o it b e c a m e n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e P a l e s t i n i a n c o m m u n i t i e s t o p u t o n r e c o r d t h o s e i n s t a n c e s ( m a ' a s i m in H e b r e w ) in w h i c h t h e y d i f f e r e d . A b o d y o f literature t h u s c a m e i n t o b e i n g , p e r h a p s early in t h e s e v e n t h c e n t u r y , t h e p u r p o s e o f w h i c h w a s t o clarify, recall a n d m a i n t a i n t h e s e d i f f e r ences.30 T h e G e n i z a h has supplied additions and i m p r o v e m e n t s to the q u e s t i o n s 26 27

28

29

30

Lerner, Μ. Β. "The External Tractates." In The Literature of the Sages (see n. 22 above), 367-409. See, for example, the monumental work of Β. M. Lewin in his Osar Ha-Geonim published in 13 volumes between 1928 and 1962. Details of his publications are given in his Festschrift, Sefer HaYore/. B.M. Lewin (Hebr.). Ed. J. L. Fishman (Maimon). Jerusalem, 1940, 1-32. Brody has summarized such development in his essays on the Cairo Genizah included in Benjamin Richler's Hebrew Manuscripts: A Treasured Legacy. Cleveland and Jerusalem, 1990, and on "Terumatah shelHa-Geni^ah Le-Heqer Sifrut Ha-Ge'onim," scheduled for publication in Te'uda 15, edited by M. A. Friedman, probably in 1999. See also his important monograph The Geonim of Babylonia and the Shaping of Medieval Jewish Culture. New Haven and London, 1998. Among the Hebrew works of Shraga Abramson that are central to Genizah research are his Essa Meshali. Jerusalem, 1943; Ba-Merka^m Uva-Tefusot. Jerusalem, 1965,· R Nissim Gaon LibelliQuinque. Jerusalem, 1965; and Tnyanot Be-Sifrut Ha-Ge'onim. Jerusalem, 1974. See also the essays and bibliography in the memorial booklet produced by the Israel Academy Lt-Zikhro shel Shraga Abramson. Jerusalem, 1997. For the history of halakhah and of responsa literature, see Ginzberg, L. 1909. Geonica, (2 vols.). New York; Freehof, S. B. 1955. Responsa Literature. Philadelphia; Newman, J. 1969. Halachic Sources from the Beginning to the Ninth Century. Leiden; Schreiber, A. M. 1979. Jewish Law and DecisionMaking: A Study Through Time. Philadelphia; Urbach, Ε. Ε. 1986. The Halakhah: Its Sources and Development (E. T.). Jerusalem; Lewittes, M. 1987. Principles and Development of Jewish Law. New York; Dorff, Ε. Ν. and Rosett, A. 1988. A Living Tree: The Roots and Growth of Jewish Law. Albany; and Libson, G. 1996. "Halakhah and Law in the Period of the Geonim." In An Introduction to the History and Sources of Jewish Law. Ed. N. S. Hecht, B. S. Jackson, S. M. Passamaneck, D. Piattelli, and A. M. Rabello. Oxford, 197-250. On Samuel b. Hofni, see Sklare, D. E. 1996. Samuel ben Hofni Gaon and his Cultural World: Texts and Studies. Leiden, New York and Köln. See also Margaliot, M. 1973. Hilkhot Eres Yisra'elmin Ha-Geni^ah. Ed. I. Ta-Shma. Jerusalem.

a n d t h e h o m i l i e s o f t h e She'iltot,3'

as it h a s c o n t r i b u t e d b e t t e r t e x t s t o later c o m -

p i l a d o n s o f J e w i s h r e l i g i o u s l a w f r o m t h e g e o n i c p e r i o d , s u c h as t h e

Pesuqot a n d

the

Halakhot Gedolot.32

Halakhot

F r o m m a n y f r a g m e n t s p r e s e r v e d in t h e G e n i -

z a h , it e m e r g e s that a c e r t a i n P i r q o i b e n B a b o i , w h o s e n a m e is e i t h e r o f P e r s i a n o r i g i n o r p e r h a p s r e p r e s e n t s s o m e s o r t o f nom de plume,

d e c i d e d that t h e t i m e h a d

c o m e t o u s h e r in a n e w h a l a k h i c era a n d t o p u t an e n d t o a n y i n f l u e n c e that the t a l m u d i s t s o f t h e H o l y L a n d m i g h t still have. 3 ·' T h e later G e n i z a h material i n c l u d e s h u n d r e d s o f f r a g m e n t s o f t h e h a l a k h i c d i g e s t o f t h e B a b y l o n i a n T a l m u d that Isaac A l f a s i p r e p a r e d in t h e e l e v e n t h c e n tury. T h e first fully c o m p r e h e n s i v e c o d e o f J e w i s h c o d e ,

the Mishneh Torah

of

M a i m ô n i d e s , c o m p l e t e d in C a i r o in 1 1 8 0 is a l s o , n o t surprisingly, w e l l represented a m o n g the medieval fragments f r o m the B e n Ezra synagogue.34 Equally u n s u r p r i s i n g is t h e fact that m a n y o f t h e s e f r a g m e n t s c o v e r s u c h t h e m e s as ritual s l a u g h t e r a n d marital m a t t e r s , b o t h o f w h i c h i s s u e s w e r e o f m a j o r c o n c e r n t o t h e daily lives o f t h e c o m m u n i t y . I n t h e c a s e o f t h e latter, t h e r e are i m p o r t a n t r e m n a n t s o f P a l e s d n i a n r e l i g i o u s p r a c t i c e w h i c h d e m o n s t r a t e that in m a t t e r s o f p e r s o n a l status t h e é m i g r é s f r o m t h e H o l y L a n d s u c c e e d e d in m a i n t a i n i n g their h a l a k h i c individuality f o r s o m e t i m e . 3 5 V i a t h e G e n i z a h , h u n d r e d s o r m a y b e e v e n t h o u s a n d s o f a u t h e n t i c a n d original h a l a k h i c r e s p o n s e s h a v e n o w

been

r e c o v e r e d . T h e original g r o u p s o f d e c i s i o n s s e n t b y t h e a u t h o r i t y b y w a y o f g u i d a n c e to a n u m b e r o f questioners have surfaced. T h e y have retained the original f o r m u l a t i o n , w i t h t h e p r e f a c e s a n d c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h e a u t h o r , a n d t h e y o f t e n p r o v i d e u s w i t h his n a m e . M a n y t e x t s c a n n o w t h e r e f o r e b e traced t o their c o m p o s e r s a n d m a n y d e c i s i o n s that h a d b e e n l o s t o r f o r g o t t e n h a v e c o m e t o light. It s h o u l d n o t b e f o r g o t t e n that t h e r e are a l s o G e n i z a h r e s p o n s a t h a t d a t e f r o m the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, m a n y o f t h e m emanating f r o m M o s e s M a i m ô n i d e s h i m s e l f o r his s o n A b r a h a m , o c c a s i o n a l l y in their o w n h a n d s . 3 6 It is n o w clear that m o n o g r a p h s o n halakhic t h e m e s w e r e c o m p o s e d f r o m at least as early as t h e t e n t h c e n t u r y . Sa'adya m a y h a v e b e e n o n e o f t h e i n n o v a t o r s in this field; h e is certainly a m o n g t h o s e w h o s e w o r k s o n J e w i s h legal t h e m e s a p p e a r a m o n g t h e f r a g m e n t s . W h a t h a s b e e n r e c o v e r e d o f his s t u d y o f t h e laws

31 32

33 34

35

36

Brody, R. 1991. The Textual History of the She'iltot (Hebr.). New York and Jerusalem. Hildesheimer, Ε. ed. 1971, 1980. Sefer Halakhot Gedolot (Hebr.). 2 vols. Jerusalem; Danzig, N. 1993. introduction to Halakhot Pesuqot (Hebr.). New York. See the useful summary and bibliographical details in Encyclopaedia Judaica 13, cols. 560-61. The project of the Israel Academy of Sciences to describe all the fragments from the Genizah in the talmudic and midrashic fields (directed by Professor Jacob Sussmann of the Hebrew University) has produced a wealth of information in this connection; see also the volumes by Brody and Danzig cited in n. 25 above. Two comprehensive studies of marriage documents, customs and lawsuits are M. A. Friedman's Jewish Marriage in Palestine: A Cairo Geniza Study (2 vols.). Tel Aviv and New York, 1980, and his Jewish Polygyny in the Middle Ages: New Documents from the Cairo Geniza (Hebr.). Jerusalem, 1986. See S. Assafs Hebrew volumes Gaonic Responsa. Jerusalem, 1928; Gaonica. Jerusalem, 1933; Responsa Geonica. Jerusalem, 1942; Texts and Studies. Jerusalem, 1946 and Tequfat Ha-Geo'nim VeSifrutah. Jerusalem, 1955. J. Blau's edition of R Moses h. Maimon: Responsa, (4 vols.). Jerusalem, 1957-61 and 1986, contains substantial Genizah material and other examples may be found in various articles by M. A. Friedman, as listed in the various volumes of the Index of Articles on Jewish Studies published annually in Jerusalem, beginning in 1969.

o f i n h e r i t a n c e d o e s n o t i n c l u d e any r e f e r e n c e s t o s o u r c e s a n d m a y t h e r e f o r e b e a r e m n a n t o f a n a b b r e v i a t e d f o r m a t . A s far as his practical g u i d e t o J e w i s h rules o n testimonies and deeds

(Sefer Ha-Shetarvl) is

c o n c e r n e d , fifty G e n i z a h

frag-

m e n t s ( f o r t y o f t h e m in C a m b r i d g e ) h a v e p r o d u c e d s o m e 2 0 0 f o l i o s , a m o u n t i n g t o o v e r n i n e t y p e r c e n t o f t h e original w o r k . S i n c e t h e first s c i e n t i f i c e d i t i o n o f Sa'adya's p r a y e r - b o o k w a s p u b l i s h e d , a l m o s t sixty years a g o , m a n y m o r e fragm e n t s o f t h e w o r k h a v e b e e n l o c a t e d . S o m e o f Sa'adya's s u c c e s s o r s in t h e B a b y l o n i a n a c a d e m i e s f o l l o w e d his e x a m p l e a n d p r o d u c e d their o w n h a l a k h i c monographs.

37

H a i b e n Sherira G a o n a n d S a m u e l b e n H o f n i o f Sura

were

a m o n g t h e s e a n d t h e latter, t o g e t h e r w i t h Sa'adya h i m s e l f a n d t h e later s c h o l a r T a n h u m ben J o s e p h Yerushalmi, also wrote commentaries o n the H e b r e w Bible that d e m o n s t r a t e d h o w o n e c o u l d r e m a i n faithful t o t h e s o u r c e , a n d at t h e s a m e t i m e p r o v i d e rational a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l r e s p o n s e s t o t h e p r o b l e m s raised b y t h e texts. 3 8 I n t h e field o f r a b b i n i c liturgy, w h a t r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e f o u n d particularly e x c i t i n g h a s b e e n t h e s h e e r n o v e l t y o f s o m u c h o f t h e material. W h a t h a s b e e n revealed m a y be s u m m a r i z e d under s e v e n headings:39 a) N o v e l o r o t h e r w i s e u n k n o w n

benedictions

that w e r e

subsequendy

f o r g o t t e n or rejected for halakhic reasons. b) U n k n o w n t e x t s o f t h e m a j o r prayers a n d u n u s u a l e p i t h e t s f o r t h e sabb a t h a n d festival. c) I n d i c a t i o n s o f a m o r e e x t e n s i v e u s a g e o f t h e H e b r e w B i b l e ; o f n o v e l c e r e m o n i a l s in s i d e a n d o u t s i d e t h e s y n a g o g u e ; a n d o f t h e h o n o r i f i c m e n t i o n o f living personalities.

37

38

39

See Brody's article "Terumatah" cited in n. 28 above, and details of the work of M. Ben-Sasson and R. Brody on Sa'adya's Sefer Ha-Shetarot as discussed in Genizah Fragments 19/2, April, 1990, 2. See below on the matter of liturgical developments. Some of the history of Jewish biblical exegesis is covered in Reif, S. C. 1998. "Aspects of the Jewish Contribution to Biblical Interpretation" in The Cambridge Companion to Biblical Interpretation, Ed. J. Barton. Cambridge, 143-59 and there are important essays in this field as well as other Genizah topics in Genizah Research. Ed. Blau and Reif (see n. 8 above). For further details of the contribution of the Genizah to the scientific study of Jewish liturgy, see Reif, S. C. 1993. Judaism and Hebrew Prayer. Cambridge, especially 122-52; "The Genizah and Jewish Liturgy: Past Achievements and a Current Project." scheduled for publication in Medieval Encounters 5 (1999), part of the proceedings of a conference on 'Avodah and Ibada organized by Professor Seth Ward in March, 1998 at the University of Denver; and two Hebrew essays in volumes on Jewish liturgy currendy being edited byj. Tabory and containing the papers given at the Hebrew University's Institute for Advanced Studies in 1996-97. The edition of Saadya's prayerbook currendy available is that of Davidson, I., Assaf, S. and Joel, B. I. 1941. Siddur R. Saadja Gaon. Jerusalem, (2nd edition, Jerusalem, 1963) and the fullest study of the Palestinian rite to date is that of Fleischer, E. 1988. Eretçlsrael Prayer and Prayer Rituals as Portrayed in the Geniza Documents. Jerusalem. For a thorough guide to the bibliography on Jewish liturgical matters, see Tabory, J. 1992-93. Jewish Prayer and the Yearly Cycle: A List of Articles, supplement to Kiryat Sefer 64. Jerusalem, and a substantial collection of addenda to that publication that appeared together with his facsimile edition of the Hanau prayer-book of 1628 (Ed. J. Tabor)‫ ׳‬and M. Rapeld, Ramat Gan, 1994). Tabory has also surveyed the latest developments in the whole field in a Hebrew ardcle entitled "TefiHah" in supplementary volume 3 of the Encyclopaedia Hebraica (Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv, 1995), cols. 1061-68.

d) T h e i n c l u s i o n o f t h e T e n C o m m a n d m e n t s , t h e S o n g at t h e Sea, a n d v a r i o u s m y s t i c a l a n d m e s s i a n i c e x p a n s i o n s , as integral parts o f t h e liturgy. e) T h e m u t u a l a n d w i d e r i n f l u e n c e o f w h a t w e r e clearly t h e t w o m a j o r rites,

that is, t h o s e o f E r e t z Yisrael a n d B a b y l o n , a n d t h e s p e c i a l s u c c e s s o f t h e

latter. f) T h e u s e o f H e b r e w , A r a m a i c a n d J u d e o - A r a b i c n o t o n l y in prayers a n d liturgical p o e m s that h a d traditionally b e e n e x p r e s s e d in o n e o r o t h e r o f t h e s e particular l a n g u a g e s b u t a l s o in o t h e r c o n t e x t s . g) T h e w i d e d i s s e m i n a t i o n , a c c e p t a n c e a n d i n f l u e n c e a c h i e v e d b y liturgical p o e t r y . A s far as prayers f o r i n d i v i d u a l s are c o n c e r n e d , o n e o n G o d t o b l e s s t h e t w e l f t h c e n t u r y I m a m , a l - A m i r b i - ' a h k a m Allah, a n d read as f o l l o w s : 4 0 A n d w e pray for the life o f o u r distinguished sovereign lord and Muslim leader . . . c o m m a n d e r o f the faithful, and for the royal princes and for all the royal family, and for those w h o devotedly assist the king and for those w h o d o battie f o r h i m against his foes. May Almighty G o d c o m e t o their assistance and to o u r s , s u b d u e those w h o arise against us and against t h e m , and inspire t h e m t o deal kindly with us and with all his people, the h o u s e o f Israel, and let us say Amen. T h e t h o u s a n d s o f f o l i o s a n d h u n d r e d s o f a u t h o r s that t h e G e n i z a h h a s r e s t o r e d t o u s h a v e e f f e c t i v e l y c r e a t e d a w h o l e n e w field o f study. W h i l e t h e y o n c e h a d 4 0 , 0 0 0 c o m p o s i t i o n s available t o t h e m , t h e e n t h u s i a s t s f o r m e d i e v a l

Hebrew

p o e t r y n o w h a v e 1 5 0 % a d d i t i o n a l material t o c o n t e n d w i t h . Earlier s o m e o n p a p y r u s , p e r h a p s as early as t h e e i g h t h c e n t u r y — a r e n o w

texts— available,

a u t h o r s h i p is b e t t e r e s t a b l i s h e d , a n d w h o l e n e w s c h o o l s o f p o e t s h a v e

been

added to the history o f H e b r e w verse. W e have b e e n m a d e aware o f the degree t o w h i c h t h e w h o l e literary g e n r e b l o s s o m e d in g e o n i c P a l e s t i n e a n d it h a s e v e n b e e n s u g g e s t e d that it r e p r e s e n t e d t h e primary J e w i s h e n t e r t a i n m e n t o f t h e

time.

It is p o s s i b l e t o u n c o v e r t h e e m e r g e n c e o f a S a a d y a n i c s c h o o l in B a b y l o n a n d t o i d e n t i f y t h e linguistic a n d structural i n n o v a t i o n s that it daringly m a d e . C o m p a r i s o n s m a y b e m a d e b e t w e e n t h e style a n d c o n t e n t o f s u c h p o e m s a n d

those

c o m p o s e d in p l a c e s as far a w a y as B y z a n t i u m , Italy, N o r t h A f r i c a a n d Spain. 4 1

4(1

41

A detailed study of prayers for dignitaries, including T-S NS 110.26, here cited, has been produced by Fenton, P. B. 1984. 'Tefillah Be'ad Ha-Rashut U-Reshut B'ad Ha-Te₪ah." Mi-mi^rah Umi-Ma'arav 4, 7-21. See also Friedman, M. A. 1998. "R. Yehiel b. Elvakim's Responsum Permitting the Reshut." In Mas'at Moshe: Studies in Jewish and Islamic Culture Presented to Moshe Gil (Hebr.). Ed. E. Fleischer, M. A. Friedman, and J. L. Kraemer. Jerusalem, 328—67. On liturgical ceremonies around Jerusalem, see Ben-Shammai, H. "A Unique Lamentation on Jerusalem" and Fleischer, E. "Pilgrims' Prayer at the Gates of Jerusalem." In the Gil Pestschrift just noted, 93-102 and 298-327. The pioneering work was done by the late M. Zulay, A. M. Habermann, J. Schirmann, S. Spiegel and N. Allony. An excellent introduction to the whole subject, with an extensive bibliography, is Ezra Fleischer's Hebrew Liturgical Poetry in the Middle Ages. Jerusalem, 1975, and his own list of publications, prepared by T. Beeri and S. Ben-Ari, is to be found in the Hebrew Festschrift edited for him by S. Elizur, M. D. Herr, G. Shaked and A. Shinan entided Knesset E%ra: Literature and Life in the Synagogue: Studies Presented to E%ra Fleischer. Jerusalem, 1994. Outstanding Genizah research on poetry is also currently being done by J. Yahalom; see, for example, the Hebrew vol-

O n e o f t h e m o s t e x c i t i n g o f r e c e n t f i n d s relates t o a m a r r i e d c o u p l e , n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e f a m o u s t e n t h - c e n t u r y linguist a n d p o e t , D u n a s h i b n Labrat, a n d h i s w i f e . W h e n h e l e f t S p a i n s o o n a f t e r t h e birth o f their s o n , his w i f e w r o t e h i m a p o e m e x p r e s s i n g h e r s a d n e s s a n d q u e s t i o n i n g his loyalty. H i s lyrical reply assured her o f his faithfulness:42 She: W m h e r beloved r e m e m b e r the graceful hind O n the day o f separation, h e r only s o n o n her a r m O n the day s h e t o o k his m a n d e as a keepsake A n d as his keepsake he took h e r veil He: But h o w shall I betray a clever w o m a n like thee Surely G o d b o u n d us to the w i f e of o u r youth and if m y heart had plotted to a b a n d o n thee I w o u l d have cut it i n t o a t h o u s a n d pieces T h e r e is a l s o a w h o l e r a n g e o f m y s t i c a l material in t h e G e n i z a h , c a l l e d

hekhalot

literature b e c a u s e it p u r p o r t s t o d e s c r i b e t h e celestial p a l a c e s . T h e d i f f i c u l t y h e r e is in d a t i n g t h e o r i g i n s o f t h e s e traditions, e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e p r e c i s e c o n t e x t in w h i c h t h e y w e r e u s e d , a n d d e f i n i n g h o w t h e y related t o w h a t are r e g a r d e d as m o r e s t a n d a r d r a b b i n i c w o r k s . It is b y n o m e a n s clear w h e t h e r w h a t is f o u n d in t h e G e n i z a h is a m e r e r e m n a n t o f a r e l i g i o u s e x p r e s s i o n o n c e m u c h m o r e p o w e r f u l a n d i n f l u e n t i a l o r is a m o v e t o w a r d s t h e m o r e m y s t i c a l a n d spiritual in rea c t i o n t o t h e g r o w i n g centrality o f t h e h a l a k h i c v o i c e . S o m e h a v e a r g u e d that these texts represent the d e v o t i o n s o f pious individuals and small

mystical

g r o u p s while o t h e r s prefer to give t h e m a greater c o m m u n a l relevance within t h e r a b b i n i c p r a c t i c e o f t h e early m e d i e v a l p e r i o d . W h a t a l s o r e m a i n s t o b e claritied is w h e t h e r w h a t w e are s e e i n g is e v i d e n c e o f b o r r o w i n g s b y o n e s e t o f trad i d o n s f r o m a n o t h e r o r o v e r l a p s w i t h i n a r a b b i n i c J u d a i s m that w a s

broader

t h a n is s o m e t i m e s c r e d i t e d . 4 5

42

43

urnes A Collection of Geniza Fragments of Piyyute Yannai. Jerusalem, 1978; Liturgical Poems of Shim'on Bar Megas. Jerusalem, 1984; and Mahspr Eret% Israel: A Genizah Codex. Jerusalem, 1987. The English reader is best advised to consult, as an introductory volume, T. Carmi's Penguin Book of Hebrew Verse, Harmondsworth, 1981, at the beginning of which the editor righdy notes that "scholars are still engaged in the arduous task of processing thousands of manuscripts from the hoard of the Cairo Genizah." A fine example of the treatment of Genizah poetry is J. Yahalom's Palestinian Vocalised Pijyut Manuscripts in the Cambridge Genizah Collections. Cambridge, 1997. Fleischer's full treatment of the poem by Mrs Dunash (T-S NS 143.46) was published in Hebrew in his article "On Dunash Ben Labrat, his Wife and his Son: New Light on the Beginnings of the Hebrew-Spanish School." Jerusalem Studies in Hebrew Literature 5, 1984, 189-203. An English summary of the poems written by and in response to Mrs Dunash appeared in Genizah Fragments 7, April, 1984, 3. Schäfer, P. 1984. Geni^a-fragmente %ur Hekhalot Literatur. Tübingen; Fenton, P. B. 1981. The Treatise of the Pool London, and Deux traités de mystique juive. Lagrasse, 1987; Idel, M. 1984. Kabbalah: New Perspectives. New Haven and London; Goetschel, R. ed. 1987. Prière, Mystique et Judaïsme. Paris, especially P. S. Alexander's "Prayer in the Heikhalot Literature" on 43-64 ; Bar-Ilan, M. 1987. The Mysteries ofJewish Prayer and Hekhalot (Hebr.). Ramat-Gan; and Swartz, M. D. 1992. Mystical Prayer in Ancient Judaism: An Analysis of Ma'aseh Merkavah. Tübingen.

T h e n e x t area t o b e c o n s i d e r e d is that o f m o r e g e n e r a l historical d e v e l o p m e n t s . A s n o n - M u s l i m s , J e w s i n e v i t a b l y s u f f e r e d disabilities at all t i m e s a n d s e v e r e p e r s e c u t i o n o n o c c a s i o n b u t t h e d o m i n a n t t h e m e o f t h e G e n i z a h p e r i o d w a s that o f cultural s y m b i o s i s . 4 4 It is n o w clear that M u s l i m s , C h r i s t i a n s a n d J e w s in t h e E a s t d i d n o t live intellectually g h e t t o i s e d lives. T h e y w e r e a w a r e o f e a c h o t h e r ' s rel i g i o u s t e x t s a n d traditions, s o m e t i m e s r e c o r d i n g t h e s e in their o w n

languages

a n d literatures, a n d at o t h e r t i m e s s u b j e c t i n g t h e m t o c r i t i c i s m a n d e v e n deris i o n . I n a r e l i g i o u s d e b a t e w i t h R a b b a n i t e s a n d K a r a i t e s c o n d u c t e d at t h e e n d o f t h e t e n t h c e n t u r y , t h e F a t i m i d vizier, Y a ' q u b i b n Killis, a c o n v e r t f r o m J u d a i s m t o I s l a m , c i t e d t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e p r a y e r - b o o k o f Sa'adya b e n J o s e p h in o r d e r t o h e a p ridicule o n t h e J e w i s h liturgy. 4 5 R e l i g i o u s t h i n k e r s t o o k a c c o u n t o f w h a t w a s b e i n g said a n d w r i t t e n by t h e t h e o l o g i c a l o p p o s i t i o n , s o m u c h s o that it is at t i m e s p o s s i b l e t o r e c o n s t r u c t that o p p o s i t i o n b y w a y o f t h e v i e w s o f s u c h t h i n k ers. 4 6 A l t h o u g h t h e r e w a s t h e o c c a s i o n a l r o m a n t i c tryst b e t w e e n a m a n

and

w o m a n o f d i f f e r e n t religious allegiance, 4 7 intermarriage w a s n o t a p h e n o m e n o n o f t h e t i m e . C o n v e r s i o n , h o w e v e r , certainly w a s , e s p e c i a l l y o n t h e part o f t h o s e a n x i o u s t o c l i m b s o c i a l a n d political ladders. S o m e s u c h c o n v e r t s m a d e life d i f f i c u l t f o r their f o r m e r c o - r e l i g i o n i s t s w h i l e o t h e r s r e t a i n e d a certain s y m p a t h y f o r t h e m , e v e n e n g a g i n g t h e m in r e l i g i o u s d i a l o g u e s . B u t t h e m o v e m e n t w a s n o t a l w a y s in o n e d i r e c t i o n a n d there are a c c o u n t s o f M u s l i m a n d C h r i s t i a n a n g e r at c o n v e r s i o n s t o J u d a i s m . 4 8 T h e r e c o r d s o f rabbinical c o u r t s m a k e r e f e r e n c e t o a p p r o a c h e s m a d e by n o n - J e w s , w o m e n as w e l l as m e n , w h o w i s h e d t o t h r o w in

44

45

46

47

48

Goitein, S. D. 1955. Jews and Arabs: Their Contacts through the Ages. London, Melbourne and Henley; Rosenthal, E. I. J. 1961 .Judaism and Islam. London; Lewis, B. 1984. The Jews of Islam. Princeton; Cohen, M. R. and Udovitch, A. L. eds. 1989. Jews among Arabs: Contacts and Boundaries. Princeton; Stillman, N. A. 1979. The Jews of Arab Lands: a History and Source Book. Philadelphia. For more detailed examinadon of the social and polidcal status of Jews and Christians under Islam, see Bat Ye'or, The Dhimmi: Jews and Christians under Islam (E. T.). London, 1985, and The Dedine of Eastern Christianity under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude Seventh-Twentieth Century (E. T.). London, 1996, and P. B. Fenton, "Interfaith Relations as Reflected in the Genizah Documents." Bulletin of the Israeli Academic Center in Cairo 21, 1997, 26-30. For a number of important articles on the Genizah's contribution to more general historical developments, see Mas'at Moshe (see n. 40 above). Cohen, M. R. and Somekh, S. 1980. "In the Court of Ya'qub ibn Killis: A Fragment from the Cairo G e niz a h. " yemsh Quarterly Review 80, 283-314. H. Ben-Shammai has made interesting studies of the intellectual interchanges between Jews and Muslims, as in his article "Mediaeval History and Religious Thought," to be published in a forthcoming volume edited by S. C. Reif and scheduled to appear in 1999 in Cambridge University Library's Genizah Series published by Cambridge University Press. The theological tensions between Jews and Chrisdans are well exemplified in the excellent edition of The Polemic of Nestor the Priest by D. J. Lasker and S. Stroumsa (Hebr. and Eng.), 2 vols., Jerusalem, 1996. A remarkable account of a love affair between a Jew and a Christian is to be found in Or. 1080 J93; see Goitein, S. D. 1988. A Mediterranean Society, vol. 5. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 314—16 and Reif, Published Material (see n. 21 above), 406. On the matter of conversions, see Golb, N. 1965. "Notes on the Conversion of European Christians to Judaism in the Eleventh Century." Journal of Jewish Studies 16, 69-74, especially concerning T-S 12.732; Goitein, S. D. 1971 .A Mediterranean Society, vol. 2. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 299-311; and Stroumsa, S. 1990. "On Jewish Intellectual Converts to Islam in the Early Middle Ages." Pe'amim 42, 61-75.

their r e l i g i o u s lot w i t h t h e J e w s . 4 9 T h e G e n i z a h ' s m o s t f a m o u s a n d d e t a i l e d e x a m p l e o f a C h r i s t i a n c o n v e r t is o f c o u r s e O b a d i a h H a - G e r . 5 0 T h e r e is a l s o o n e r e m a r k a b l e C a m b r i d g e G e n i z a h d o c u m e n t , f r o m t h e late e l e v e n t h c e n t u r y , in w h i c h r e f e r e n c e is m a d e t o a J e w i s h h u s b a n d a n d a M u s l i m w i f e . T h e d a u g h t e r h a s b e e n w i t h h e r i m p o v e r i s h e d m o t h e r b u t is n o w o f f e r e d a b e t t e r s t a n d a r d o f l i v i n g by h e r a f f l u e n t father: 5 1 N o w , my d a u g h t e r , I d o n o t k n o w with w h o m the stock o f y o u r father, o r with the stock o f this I wish you to k n o w : even if they w a n t e d o w n d a u g h t e r , I w o u l d buy you and rescue you

you are, with the J e w s w h o are your m o t h e r , the Muslims. But to sell you to m e , w h o are m y f r o m their h a n d s .

T h e K a r a i t e s , f o r their part, w e r e n o m i n o r s e c t that b r o k e a w a y f r o m r a b b i n i c J u d a i s m a n d s o o n d e c l i n e d . M a n y G e n i z a h t e x t s testify t o t h e c o n s i d e r a b l e s u e c e s s o f their r e l i g i o u s p h i l o s o p h y , p r a c t i c e a n d c o m m u n a l life. Starting w i t h S c h e c h t e r ' s d i s c o v e r y o f t h e l a w - b o o k o f A n a n b e n D a v i d , t h e earliest p r o p o n e n t o f the m o v e m e n t , 5 2 a century o f research has d e m o n s t r a t e d the major role p l a y e d by t h e K a r a i t e s in t h e s o c i a l , e c o n o m i c , cultural a n d r e l i g i o u s d e v e l o p m e n t o f the J e w i s h c o m m u n i t i e s o f the N e a r East f r o m the eighth to the twelfth c e n t u r y . Firstly, it is clear that t h e y h a d a n u m b e r o f d o c t r i n e s , t r a d i t i o n s a n d linguistic t e r m s that are in t a n d e m w i t h t h o s e r e c o r d e d in t h e literature u n c o v e r e d in t h e D e a d S e a scrolls. It t h e r e f o r e s e e m s unlikely that their r e l i g i o u s c o m m i t m e n t s w e r e totally n o v e l a n d r e v o l u t i o n a r y . T h e i r i d e n t i t y in t h e

first

c e n t u r y o r t w o o f their d o c u m e n t e d activity w a s b y w a y o f s m a l l e r g r o u p s , s o m e t i m e s at t h e o l o g i c a l l o g g e r h e a d s , b u t gradually t h e s e a n t i - t a l m u d i c

sects

j o i n e d f o r c e s . T h i s u l t i m a t e l y led t o a b l o s s o m i n g o f Karaite c u l t u r e f r o m t h e t e n t h t o t h e t w e l f t h c e n t u r i e s , p r e c i s e l y t h e p e r i o d b e s t r e p r e s e n t e d in t h e G e n i z a h texts. S u c h t e x t s t e s t i f y t o c l o s e s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s a n d e v e n i n t e r m a r r i a g e , as w e l l as r e l i g i o u s d i f f e r e n c e s , b e t w e e n K a r a i t e s a n d R a b b a n i t e s . T h e

rabbinic

l e a d e r s h i p w a s s h a m e d b y t h e Karaite e x a m p l e i n t o d e m o n s t r a t i n g that t h e y t o o h a d a l o v e f o r H e b r e w a n d f o r t h e H e b r e w B i b l e a n d t h e q u a n t i t y a n d quality o f biblical e x e g e s i s b e c a m e t h e b e n e f i c i a r i e s . E v e n in t h e area o f r e l i g i o u s law, t h e Karaite c o n c e r n f o r f i x i n g their o w n c a l e n d a r , f o r k o s h e r f o o d , f o r ritual i m p u rity, f o r a v o i d i n g m a r r i a g e s b e t w e e n relatives, a n d f o r m a i n t a i n i n g a

fire-free

sabbath were strong e n o u g h to leave an impact o n rabbinic behaviour.

Some-

49

50

51

52

M. A. Friedman, Jewish Polygyny (see n. 35 above), especially 332-39, concerning converts, the subject of T-S G2.66 and T-S 12.232. Most of the relevant publications on the famous proselyte Obadiah are cited by Golb in his important article "The Music of Obadiah the Proselyte and his Conversion." Journal of Jewish Studies 18, 1967, 43-63 and the Cambridge Genizah fragments central to the story are T-S K5.41, T-S Misc.35.31,T-S 10K21 andT-S 8.271. The document is 0r.1080J21 at Cambridge University Library, published in English translation by S. D. Goitein in his "Parents and Children: A Geniza Study on the Medieval Jewish Family." Gratz College Annual ofJewish Studies 4, 1975, 55-57. Schechter, S. 1910. Documents of Jewish Sectaries, vol 2: Fragments of the Book of the Commandments of Anan. Cambridge.

t i m e s , t h e t a l m u d i c J e w s felt u n d e r p r e s s u r e t o i n t e n s i f y their o w n w h i l e in o t h e r c a s e s t h e y p o s i d v e l y

flaunted

strictness

their o w n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . 5 3

T h e e v i d e n c e a b o u t t h e K h a z a r s r e c o v e r e d f r o m m a n u s c r i p t s f o u n d in t h e G e n i z a h h a s g i v e n a jolt t o s c e p t i c i s m a b o u t t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f t h e t r a d i t i o n s a b o u t this m e d i e v a l J e w i s h k i n g d o m b e t w e e n t h e B l a c k S e a a n d t h e C a s p i a n . T h e r e is a n a c c o u n t o f h o w J e w s s e t t l e d a m o n g t h e K h a z a r s a n d i n f l u e n c e d t h e m t o a d o p t s u c h c u s t o m s as c i r c u m c i s i o n a n d t h e s a b b a t h . T h e

Khazarian

k i n g is r e p o r t e d t o h a v e b e e n i n f l u e n c e d by his w i f e a n d his J e w i s h m i n i s t e r t o c o n v e r t t o J u d a i s m a n d t o h a v e b e e n criticized b y t h e C h r i s t i a n a n d

Muslim

rulers f o r c o n t e m p l a t i n g s u c h a m o v e . I n a text at least a c e n t u r y o l d e r t h a n Judah Ha-Levi's

Ku^ari,

t h e tale is t o l d o f h o w l e a d i n g t e a c h e r s o f J u d a i s m ,

Christianity a n d I s l a m w e r e s u m m o n e d by t h e K h a z a r i a n k i n g t o d e b a t e

the

relative m e r i t s o f their r e l i g i o n s a n d h o w t h e J e w i s h v i e w w a s c o n f i r m e d by sac r e d t e x t s d i s c o v e r e d in a c a v e . W h a t is m o r e , t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e

between

K i n g J o s e p h a n d H i s d a i the d i p l o m a t is n o l o n g e r restricted t o o n e letter f r o m t h e S p a n i s h J e w i s h n o b l e m a n e n q u i r i n g a b o u t t h e o r i g i n s o f this s t r a n g e J e w i s h k i n g d o m , t h e nature o f its r e l i g i o u s p r a c t i c e a n d any i n f o r m a t i o n it h a s a b o u t the f u t u r e o f t h e w o r l d , a n d a reply f r o m t h e K h a z a r ruler that c o v e r s t h e c o n v e r s i o n , t h e nature o f local J u d a i s m , t h e royal family a n d w h a t is t o b e e x p e c t e d in t h e c o m i n g age. T h e r e is n o w a s e t o f c o r r e s p o n d e n c e that h a s r e c e n d y b e e n i n t e r p r e t e d as relating t o H i s d a i a n d t o u c h i n g o n t h e K h a z a r s , as w e l l as o n asp e c t s o f J e w i s h life in B y z a n t i u m , Italy a n d e a s t e r n E u r o p e . 5 4 If the G e n i z a h discoveries have illuminated o b s c u r e corners o f Khazar and Karaite h i s t o r y , t h e y h a v e a i m e d brilliant

flood-lights

at w h a t w e r e o n c e t h e dark

e x p a n s e s o f P a l e s t i n i a n J e w i s h history. F r o m k n o w i n g virtually n o t h i n g a b o u t h o w t h e J e w s o f t h e h o m e l a n d c o n d u c t e d their p e r s o n a l , p u b l i c a n d intellectual lives in t h e c e n t u r i e s i m m e d i a t e l y b e f o r e a n d a f t e r t h e C r u s a d e r i n v a s i o n that b e g a n in 1 0 9 9 , w e n o w h a v e a c c e s s t o a w e l t e r o f data a b o u t p e o p l e , p l a c e s a n d e v e n t s . It m r n s o u t that t h e J e w s w e r e e n c o u r a g e d t o r e s e t d e J e r u s a l e m a f t e r t h e A r a b c o n q u e s t o f t h e s e v e n t h c e n t u r y a n d that, d e s p i t e t h e d i f f i c u l t e c o n o m i c

53

54

Mann, J. 1931-35. Texts and Studies in Jewish History and Literature (2 vols.). Cincinnati and Philadelphia (and the reprint of Philadelphia-New York, 1991, with Gershon Cohen's important essay on "The Reconstruction of Gaonic History"); Karaite Anthology: Excerpts from the Early Literature. Ed. L. Nemoy. New Haven and London, 1952; Ankori, Z. 1959. Karaites in Byzantium: The Formatire Years 970-1)00. New York and Jerusalem; Wieder, Ν. 1962. The Judean Scrolls and Kuraism. London; Karaite Studies. Ed. P. Birnbaum. New York, 1971; Gil, M. 1981. The Tustahs: Family and Sect (Hebr.). Tel Aviv; Studies in Judaica, Karaitica and lstamica presented to L. Nemoy. Ed. S. R. Brunswick. Ramat Gan, 1982; Khan, G. Karaite Bible Manuscripts and Polliack, M. The Karaite Tradition (see η 13 above); Olszowy-Schlanger, J. 1998. Karaite Marriage Documents from the Cairo Geniza: Legal Tradition and Community Life in Mediaeval Egypt and Palestine. Leiden. The first Cambridge Genizah document to be published in connection with the Khazarian correspondence was T-S Misc.35.38, treated by Schechter, S. 1912-13. "An Unknown Khazar Document." Jewish Quarterly Review, N. S., 3, 181-219. P. Kokovtsov made a major contribution to the field in his Russian publications but there are comprehensive studies in English of the various manuscripts, also including T-S 12.122 (on Kiev), T-S J2.71 and T-S Misc.35.45, by D. M. Dunlop, The History of the Jewish Khazars. Princeton, 1954 and by Norman Golb and Omeljan Pritsak, Khazarian Hebrew Documents of the Tenth Century. Ithaca and London, 1982. A more popular and controversial study of the subject is Arthur Koesder's The Thirteenth Tribe. London, 1976.

c o n d i t i o n s a n d political u p h e a v a l s b r o u g h t a b o u t b y c o m p e t i n g M u s l i m c l a i m s t o t h e territory, c o m m u n i t i e s g r e w a n d

flourished.

F r a g m e n t s relate t o R a m l a as

t h e capital city a n d t o t h e h a v o c w r e a k e d t h e r e b y t h e terrible e a r t h q u a k e

of

1 0 3 3 , t o T y r e a n d A c r e as b u s y s e a p o r t s , t o T i b e r i a s as a c e n t r e o f T o r a h a n d textiles, a n d t o A s h k e l o n as a particularly s t r o n g f o r t r e s s . 5 5 It w a s p e r h a p s as a result o f t h e e a r t h q u a k e that part o f t h e s y n a g o g a l p r e m i s e s o f t h e P a l e s t i n i a n J e w s in R a m l a w a s still in a state o f m i n in 1 0 3 9 . T o o b t a i n f u n d i n g f o r repairs a n d m a i n t e n a n c e , t h e l e a d e r s l e a s e d part o f t h e p r o p e r t y t o a p r i v a t e i n d i v i d u a l , S e d a q a h , s o n o f Y e f e t , at a n a n n u a l rental o f h a l f a g o l d p i e c e . 5 6 T h e r e w e r e o f c o u r s e e v e n m o r e m i s e r a b l e t i m e s . D u r i n g t h e first h a l f o f t h e e l e v e n t h c e n t u r y , f o r i n s t a n c e , letters r e f e r t o t h e battles b e t w e e n B e d o u i n i n s u r g e n t s a n d t h e F a t i m i d rulers a n d p r o v i d e g r u e s o m e details o f t h e r o b b e r y , r a p e a n d c r i p p l i n g o v e r t a x a t i o n s u f f e r e d b y t h e local J e w s . 5 7 Later, J e w s f o u g h t a l o n g s i d e M u s l i m s in a d e s p e r a t e e f f o r t t o d e f e n d t h e H o l y L a n d a g a i n s t t h e C r u s a d e r attacks a n d , w h e n t h e y failed, t h o s e u n a b l e t o flee s u f f e r e d m a s s a c r e s o r c a p t u r e . A s s o m e e y e - w i t n e s s a c c o u n t s relate, m a j o r f u n d - r a i s i n g e f f o r t s h a d t o b e m a d e in o t h e r J e w i s h c e n t r e s t o p a y t h e r a n s o m s d e m a n d e d b y s o m e C h r i s t i a n s f o r t h e release o f J e w i s h p r i s o n e r s . T h o s e

who

d i d e s c a p e m a d e their w a y n o r t h w a r d s t o t h e cities o f t h e L e b a n e s e c o a s t o r s o u t h w a r d s t o E g y p t a n d m a n y d o c u m e n t s t e s t i f y t o their r e s i l i e n c e in m a i n t a i n i n g their t r a d i t i o n s a n d their i d e n t i t y f o r t w o o r t h r e e c e n t u r i e s . J e w s e v e n s u r v i v e d in small g r o u p s in C r u s a d e r P a l e s t i n e , r e m r n e d w i t h Saladin in 1 1 8 7 in larger n u m b e r s , a n d w e r e s t r e n g t h e n e d b y

'alijah f r o m

western Europe.58 T h e

later h i s t o r y o f P a l e s t i n i a n J e w r y is a l s o d o c u m e n t e d in t h e G e n i z a h . T h e r e are details o f p l a c e s o f p i l g r i m a g e a n d a c c o u n t s o f t h e m a j o r s e t t l e m e n t s in J e r u s a l e m a n d S a f e d in t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y . It e m e r g e s that f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e w a s p r o v i d e d b y E g y p t i a n J e w r y a n d t h e r e is c o r r e s p o n d e n c e that r e f e r s t o m a j o r r a b b i n i c f i g u r e s s u c h as J o s e p h K a r o a n d Isaac Luria. 5 9

55

56 57

58

59

For many years, Mann's The Jews in Egypt and in Palestine under the Fatimid Caliphs (reprinted edidon with preface and reader's guide by S. D. Goitein; two volumes in one; New York, 1970) was the most informative guide in English to the history of Palestinian Jewry in the Genizah period. It has now, however, been overtaken by the remarkably comprehensive treatment of the sources produced by M. Gil in A History of Palestine 634-1099. Cambridge, 1992 (based on the original 3 volume Hebrew edition. Palestine during the First Muslim Period (634-1099), Tel Aviv, 1983). Gil, Palestine (Hebrew edition), vol. 2, 419-20 on Add. 3358. War and Society in the Eastern Mediterranean, 7th-13th Centuries. Ed. Y. Lev. Leiden, New York and Köln, 1997, especially Elinoar Bareket's contribution "Personal Adversities of Jews during the Period of the Fatimid Wars in Eleventh Century Palestine." 153-62. Assaf, S. 1946. Texts and Studies (Hebr.). Jerusalem; Braslavi, J. 1954. Studies in our Country: its Past and Remains (Hebr.). Tel Aviv; Prawer, J. 1972. The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. London; Goitein, S. D. 1980. Palestinian Jewry in Early Islamic and Crusader Times in the Light of the Geniza Documents (Hebr.). Jerusalem; Prawer, J. ed. 1987. The History ofJerusalem: The Early Islamic Period 6)8-1099 (Hebr.). Jerusalem; Prawer, J. and Ben-Shammai, H. eds. 1991. The History ofJerusalem: Crusaders andAyyuhids (1099-1250) (Hebr.). Jerusalem. Immigration and pilgrimage to the Holy Land during the classical Genizah period is again dealt with by Gil in his History of Palestine (see n. 55 above), 609-31. There are numerous accounts of the general phenomenon during the late medieval and early modern periods; see, for example, on the Jewish side Adler, H. M. 1907. The Itinerary of Benjamin ofTudela. London, and on the Christian side Prescott, H. F. M. 1954. Jerusalem Journey: Pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the Fifteenth Century.

I n t e r e s t i n g l y , n e i t h e r B a b y l o n , w h i c h u l t i m a t e l y s u c c e e d e d in i m p o s i n g its halakhie authority o n m o s t o f the J e w i s h world, nor the c o m m u n i t y o f the H o l y Land w h i c h l o n g m a i n t a i n e d a m a j o r i n f l u e n c e in a n d a r o u n d t h e e a s t e r n M e d i t e r r a n e a n , c o u l d retain c o n t r o l o v e r t h e e x p a n d i n g c o m m u n i t i e s o f E g y p t ,

North

A f r i c a ( i n c l u d i n g t h e " b r i d g i n g " M e d i t e r r a n e a n i s l a n d o f Sicily) a n d S p a i n . T h e y l e f t i n d e l i b l e m a r k s o n t h e fabric o f J e w i s h r e l i g i o u s life t h e r e b u t , a f t e r t h e p o litical d e t e r i o r a t i o n in P a l e s t i n e a n d t h e d e c l i n e o f t h e B a b y l o n i a n g a o n a t e , t h e situation u n d e r w e n t considerable change. W h i l e allegiance had previously b e e n o w e d to the Babylonian and Palestinian academies and n o m o v e had b e e n m a d e w i t h o u t r e f e r e n c e t o their spiritual m e n t o r s , t h e w e s t e r n o r M a g h r e b i c o m m u n i ties c a m e o f age d u r i n g t h e classical G e n i z a h p e r i o d a n d d e v e l o p e d e n o u g h c o n f i d e n c e t o m a k e their o w n d e c i s i o n s . D o c u m e n t s relating t o s u c h c e n t r e s as Q a y r a w a n in T u n i s i a a n d A n d a l u s i a n S p a i n , a n d m a k i n g m e n t i o n o f their pers o n a l i t i e s a n d i n s t i t u t i o n s , d e m o n s t r a t e w i t h o u t d o u b t their n e w p o w e r s

not

o n l y in t h e social, e c o n o m i c a n d political fields b u t a l s o , c o n c o m i t a n d y , as J e w ish r e l i g i o u s t r e n d - s e t t e r s . T h i s is n o t t o say that t h e s e c o m m u n i t i e s t h e m s e l v e s w e r e free f r o m p e r s e c u t i o n a n d c o u l d e n j o y u n h a m p e r e d d e v e l o p m e n t . rising

p o w e r o f M u s l i m f a n a t i c i s m in S p a i n a n d N o r t h A f r i c a b r o u g h t

The their

g o l d e n a g e s t o an e n d in d u e c o u r s e b u t n o t b e f o r e t h e y h a d l e f t a r e m a r k a b l e literary a n d d o c u m e n t a r y heritage/ 11 ‫ ׳‬F o r t u n a t e l y f o r l o v e r s o f ( e w i s h history, t h e

60

London, and Once to Sinai: The Further Pilgrimage of Friar Felix Fabri. London, 1957. For details of a journey, see T-S Misc. 22.277 and special prayers are included in T-S Ar.53.2. The rediscovery of Kefar Marus through the Genizah documentadon is reported in Genizah Fragments 8, October, 1984, 4 and the relevant fragments are T-S K21.69, T-S Ar.49.164 and T-S AS 74.25 and 227. Details of Jewish connections between later Egypt and Palestine are given by Abraham David in Geniçih Fragments 15, April 1988, 2, on the basis of 0r.1080 J193 and T-S 13J24.21. For references to Joseph Karo, see Genizah Fragments 8, October, 1984, 2 and the original Genizah manuscripts T-S Misc.10.80 and 13J24.28, while the Luria's business ventures are documented in T-S 12.589 which was published by E. J. Worman, "Un Document concernant Isaac Louria." Revue des Etudes juives 57, 1909, 281-82. Hebrew publications include E. Reiner, 'Pilgrims and Pilgrimage to Eretz Yisrael 1099-1517' (doctoral dissertation), Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1988; Ilan, Z. and Damau, E. 1987. Meroth: The Ancient Jewish Village. Tel Aviv; Artom, M. E. and David, Α., 1997. From Italy to Jerusalem: The Letters of Rabbi Obadiah of Bertinoro from the Land of Israel. Ramat Gan; A. David's article on T-S Misc. 22.277 in Sefer Bar-Adon (Yisrael Am Va-Ares 7-8), Tel Aviv, 1994, 223-30. On the competing claims to leadership by the Palestinian, Babylonian and Egyptian Jews, and the development of other centres, see the volumes by Mann and Gil earlier mentioned, as well as Malter, H. 1921. Saadia Gaon: His Ufe and Works. Philadelphia; Cohen, M. R. 1980. Jewish SelfGovernment in Medieval Egypt: The Origins of the Office of Head of the Jews, ca. 1065-1126. Princeton; Grossman, A. 1984. The Babylonian Exilarchate in the Geonic Period (Hebr.). Jerusalem; Bareket, E. 1995. The Jewish Leadership in Fustat in the First Half of the Eleventh Centuty (Hebr.). Tel Aviv, and The Jews of Egypt 1007-1055 (Hebr.). Jerusalem, 1995, as well as her supplementary article "The Jewish Leadership in Fustat in the First Half of the Eleventh Century." Michael 14, 1997, 77-88; Ben-Sasson, M. 1991. The Jews of Sicily 825-1068: Documents and Sources (Hebr.) Jerusalem, and The Emergence of the Local Jewish Community in the Muslim World: Qayrawan 800-1057 (Hebr.). 2nd edition, Jerusalem, 1997; Gil, M. 1997. In the Kingdom of Ishmael(Hebr.). 4 vols., Tel Aviv and Jerusalem; see also, more generally, Ben-Sasson, M. 1997. "Cairo Genizah Treasures and their Contribution to Jewish Historiography." Bulletin of the Israeli Academic Center in Cairo 21, 3-12 and Gerber, J. S. 1997. "My Heart is in the East." In The Illustrated History of the Jewish People. Ed. N. De Lange. Toronto, 141-97. Much Genizah material is cited by E. Ashtor in his The Jews of Moslem Spain (3 vols.). Philadelphia, 1973-84 (based on the Hebrew edition of 1960-66) and the subject

m o v e m e n t o f t h e r e l e v a n t p o p u l a t i o n s , in t h e c a s e o f b o t h t h e P a l e s t i n i a n a n d t h e M a g h r e b i c e n t r e s , w a s in t h e d i r e c t i o n o f E g y p t , w h e r e C a i r o w a s ready t o b e c o m e t h e n e w h u b o f J e w i s h activity a n d t h e G e n i z a h d e p o s i t o r y w a s w a i t i n g t o a b s o r b their r e m a r k a b l e r e c o r d s . T h e s e r e c o r d s i n c l u d e clearer a n d m o r e p e r s o n a l a c c o u n t s o f t h e l i v e s a n d literary activity o f s o m e o f m e d i e v a l J e w r y ' s m o s t o u t s t a n d i n g figures. A l t h o u g h n o G e n i z a h f r a g m e n t h a s b e e n i d e n t i f i e d as c o n t a i n i n g t h e actual h a n d w r i t i n g o f Sa'adya, t h e r e are h u n d r e d s that r e c o r d his w o r k a n d clearly d e m o n s t r a t e that h e w a s t h e p i o n e e r in a n u m b e r o f fields. H e o f f e r e d n e w t r a n s l a t i o n s a n d c o m m e n t a r i e s o f t h e H e b r e w B i b l e a n d c o m p o s e d t h e first c o m p r e h e n s i v e a n t h o l o g y o f J e w i s h prayer a n d p o e t r y . H e i n t r o d u c e d a n e w t y p e o f literature w h i c h d e v o t e d single m o n o g r a p h s to individual subjects, and h e was responsible for p i o n e e r i n g d e v e l o p m e n t s in t h e u s e o f H e b r e w l a n g u a g e , the s t u d y o f H e b r e w grammar,

the presentation

of Jewish

religious

thought,

and

the

systematic

c h r o n i c l i n g o f J e w i s h legal p r o c e d u r e . A b o v e all, t h e f e w i n a c c u r a t e p i e c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t Sa'adya's life that c i r c u l a t e d a m o n g t h e l e a r n e d in t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y h a v e n o w b e e n r e p l a c e d by m o r e reliable data f r o m t h e G e n i z a h . Sa'adya e m e r g e s as a p o w e r f u l p o l e m i c i s t w h o e n g a g e d in c o n t r o v e r s i e s n o t o n l y w i t h t h e l o c a l B a b y l o n i a n l e a d e r s h i p b u t a l s o w i t h t h e J e w s o f E r e t z Israel in t h e matter o f the calendar, with the Karaites o n the subject o f J e w i s h theology, and w i t h s c e p t i c a l i n t e l l e c t u a l s r e g a r d i n g t h e validity o f t h e H e b r e w Bible. G i v e n t h e rich t e x t u r e o f his life, a n d t h e p r o l i f i c nature o f his literary p r o d u c t i v i t y , it is n o t s u r p r i s i n g that hardly a m o n t h p a s s e s w i t h o u t t h e d i s c o v e r y o f s o m e n e w G e n i z a h t e x t r e l a t i n g t o his p e r s o n a l a n d s c h o l a r l y activities. 6 1 A n o t h e r d i s t i n g u i s h e d m e d i e v a l J e w w h o s e life h a s b e e n r e m a r k a b l y illumin a t e d b y t h e m a n u s c r i p t s f r o m C a i r o is t h e p o e t a n d p h i l o s o p h e r f r o m M u s l i m Spain, Judah Ha-Levi. M o r e than a thousand G e n i z a h fragments provide

not

o n l y a d d i t i o n a l t e x t s o f his p o e t r y b u t a l s o details o f h i s stay in E g y p t t o w a r d s t h e e n d o f his life. It w a s a l w a y s w e l l k n o w n that h e s e t o u t f r o m h i s n a t i v e A n dalusia o n a p i l g r i m a g e t o t h e H o l y L a n d , w h e r e h e e x p e c t e d t o s p e n d his last d a y s , b u t it h a s n o w b e c o m e clear that h e s t o p p e d o f f in E g y p t f o r a f e w m o n t h s early in 1 1 4 1 a n d e n j o y e d a r e m a r k a b l e p e r i o d o f local a c c l a i m a n d p o etic p r o d u c t i v i t y . H e w a s t h e g u e s t o f h o n o u r at m a n y s o i r é e s a n d h e p e n n e d a n u m b e r o f lyrical c o m p o s i t i o n s in h o n o u r o f his p a t r o n s . C o n t r a r y t o w h a t tra-

61

is well summarized by J. S. Gerber, The Jews of Spain. New York, 1992. On the medieval history of Maghrebi Jewry, see Hirschberg, Η. Ζ. 1974—80. History of the Jews in North Africa (2 vols.). Leiden (based on the Hebrew edidon of Jerusalem, 1965). Schechter, S. 1903. Saadyana: Geniza Fragments of Writings of R Saadya Gaon and Others. Cambridge; Maker, H. 1921. Saadia Gaon: His Life and Works. Philadelphia; Skoss, S. 1955. Saadia Gaon: The Earliest Hebrew Grammarian. Philadelphia. Among the most important Hebrew reconstrucdons of his works that make significant use of Genizah material are Siddur R Saadja Gaon (see n. 39 above); the publicadons of M. Zucker and Y. Ratzaby noted in n. 15 above; and N. Allony, Ha'egron. Jerusalem, 1969. Currendy in the press is an ediuon of his systematic chronicling of Jewish legal procedure Sefer Ha-Shetarot (Book of Testimonies and Decrees) by M. Ben-Sasson and R. Brody. The 1995 conference of the Society for Judaeo-Arabic Studies held in Strasbourg was devoted to "Saadiah Gaon: Pioneer of Judaeo-Arabic" and the proceedings are now being prepared for publication by P. B. Fenton.

d i t i o n tells u s a b o u t u l t i m a t e s e t d e m e n t in t h e J e w i s h h o m e l a n d , m i g h t h e p e r h a p s h a v e e n d e d h i s d a y s in E g y p t in a d i z z y spell o f parties? T h a n k s t o t h e e a g l e e y e o f S h e l o m o D o v G o i t e i n , t h e s t o r y is n o w k n o w n t o h a v e a m o r e r o m a n t i c e n d i n g . I n a s m a l l f r a g m e n t o f a f e w l i n e s t h a t h e f o u n d in C a m b r i d g e in 1 9 7 5 , G o i t e i n w a s able t o d e c i p h e r t h e n a m e o f t h e f a m o u s p o e t a n d t h e i n f o r m a t i o n that h e s e t sail e a s t w a r d s f r o m A l e x a n d r i a o n 1 4 M a y , 1 1 4 1 , p r e s u m a b l y arriving in P a l e s t i n e w i t h i n t e n days. T h a t w o u l d h a v e g i v e n h i m a m o n t h t o visit t h e h o l y s i t e s b e f o r e his d e a t h in July, a p i l g r i m a g e b y h i m that is h i n t e d at, if n o t clearly s p e l t o u t , in a n o t h e r G e n i z a h text. A p p a r e n d y , t h e n , h i s Z i o n i s t a m b i d o n s , s o clearly e x p r e s s e d in his w r i t i n g s , w e r e finally realized. 6 2 L o n g b e f o r e the G e n i z a h discoveries w e r e m a d e , M a i m ô n i d e s w a s regarded as o n e o f J e w i s h history's g r e a t e s t figures. T h a t s u c h a r e p u t a t i o n w a s w e l l d e s e r v e d h a s b e c o m e clearer as s o m e sixty f r a g m e n t s in h i s o w n h a n d w r i t i n g a n d o t h e r s c l o s e l y relating t o h i m h a v e s u r f a c e d a m o n g t h e C a i r o t r e a s u r e s . F o l i o s f r o m d r a f t c o p i e s o f h i s t h r e e m o s t f a m o u s w o r k s o n t h e M i s h n a h , r a b b i n i c law, a n d J e w i s h p h i l o s o p h y s h o w h i m at w o r k a n d r e v e a l s o m e o f h i s

thought-

p a t t e r n s , particularly c o n c e r n i n g t h e o r d e r in w h i c h h e p r e s e n t e d his material, t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h h e justified his v i e w s , a n d t h e t e r m i n o l o g y that h e

em-

ployed. T h e degree to w h i c h he f o u n d time n o t only for c o m p o s i n g three o f J u d a i s m ' s m a j o r t e x t - b o o k s b u t a l s o s o m u c h e l s e b e s i d e s is c o n v i n c i n g l y d e m onstrated by the fragments f r o m the B e n Ezra synagogue.63 A s a medical expert w h o ran c l i n i c s in t h e I s l a m i c c o u r t o f w h a t w a s t h e n n e w C a i r o , h e w a s m u c h in d e m a n d f o r s p e c i a l i s t o p i n i o n , as w e l l as c o n s u l t a t i o n s a n d p r e s c r i p t i o n s , a n d t h e r e are e v e n a f e w s u r v i v o r s f r o m h i s m e d i c a l library. O n e l e n g t h y letter c o n tains m a n y c o m p l i m e n t s a b o u t R a m b a m ' s skill as a p h y s i c i a n a n d b e g s h i m t o a g r e e , r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e a m o u n t o f f e e s i n v o l v e d , t o take o n as a s m d e n t t h e writer's o w n son.64 T h e majority o f enquiries a d d r e s s e d to h i m w e r e o f c o u r s e o n m a t t e r s o f J e w i s h law. R u s h e d o f f h i s f e e t w i t h p r o f e s s i o n a l , literary a n d c o m m u n a l c o m m i t m e n t s , R a m b a m c o u l d rarely d o m o r e t h a n a p p e n d a b r i e f 62

63

64

Goitein, S. D. 1988. A Mediterranean Society (vol. 5). Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 448-50, 464—65 and his ardcle "The Biography of Rabbi Juda Ha-Levi in the Light of the Cairo Geniza Documents." Proceedings of the American Academy for Jeivish Research 28, 1959, 41-56; Fleischer, E. 1996. "The Essence of our Land and its Meaning': Towards a Portrait of Judah Halevi on the basis of Geniza Documents" (Hebr.). Pe'amim 68, 4—15; Yahalom, J. "Judah Halevi and Mediaeval Hebrew Poetry," to be published in the collection of essays being edited by S. C. Reif (see n. 46 above). The fragment about Ha-Levi's voyage to Palestine, T-S AS 146.6, was published by Goitein, "Did Yehuda Halevi arrive in the Holy Land?" (Hebr.). Tarbiç 46, 1977, 245-50. Details of the Maimônides autographs are to be found in S. D. Sassoon's list in the introduction to Maimonidis Commentarius in Mischnam. Ed. R. Edelmann. Hafniae, 1956, with facsimiles in plates XX-LXI, with addenda provided by S. Hopkins, "A New Autograph Fragment of Maimônides' Hilkhot Ha-Yerusha/mi." Journal of Semitic Studies 38, 1983, 273-96, which deals with Genizah fragments T-S Ar.34.169 and T - S F17.7a. For a general bibliography of publications on Maimonides in the European languages, see Lachterman, D. R. 1990. "Maimonidean Studies 195086." Maimonidean Studies 1, 197-216. The appeal to Maimônides to accept the writer's son as a medical student is in T-S 16.291 and has been edited and translated by J. Kraemer in his "Six Unpublished Maimônides Letters from the Cairo Genizah." Maimonidean Studies 2, 1991, 73-80 while his text on sexual potency is to be found in T - S Ar.44.79, as described by Isaacs H. D. and Baker, C. 1994. Medical and Para-Medical Manuscripts in the Cambridge Genizah Collections. Cambridge, 47.

d e c i s i o n t o t h e f o o t o f t h e e n q u i r y b u t t h e survival o f h u n d r e d s o f s u c h res p o n s a i n d i c a t e that h e d e a l t e f f i c i e n d y w i t h m a n y o f t h e q u e s t i o n s a d d r e s s e d t o h i m . 6 5 It t u r n s o u t that his rise t o f a m e a n d p o w e r in C a i r o w a s d u e at least in part t o his m a r r i a g e i n t o a l o c a l f a m i l y a n d his s u c c e s s f u l m o u n t i n g o f a f u n d r a i s i n g c a m p a i g n t h a t p e r m i t t e d t h e r a n s o m o f a large n u m b e r o f J e w i s h c a p tives.

W e a l s o n o w h a v e t e x t s t h a t s p e l l o u t his a p p o i n t m e n t as t h e o f f i c i a l h e a d

o f the Jewish c o m m u n i t y

(ra'is al-jahud) a n d

that testify t o his brother D a v i d ' s

last j o u r n e y b e f o r e h e w a s d r o w n e d o n a b u s i n e s s trip in t h e I n d i a n O c e a n . 6 6 T h e r e is a l s o t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f a m e e t i n g w i t h t h e g r e a t l e a d e r that w a s s i n g u larly friendly. T h e v i s i t o r w a s w a r m l y r e c e i v e d a n d e n t e r t a i n e d w i t h l e m o n c a k e s w h i l e h i s little s o n w a s a m u s e d by t h e leader's s o n , A b r a h a m . 6 7 M o s t p e o p l e are, h o w e v e r , n e i t h e r i n f l u e n t i a l l e a d e r s n o r f a m o u s

authors

a n d w h a t is particularly i n t r i g u i n g f o r a v e r a g e i n d i v i d u a l s o f t o d a y is t o b e g i v e n i n s i g h t s i n t o t h e l i v e s o f their p r e d e c e s s o r s o f yesteryear. T h i s is t h e k i n d o f i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t t h e G e n i z a h t e x t s are u n i q u e l y q u a l i f i e d t o p r o v i d e a n d t h e topics c o v e r e d range across a wide spectrum o f m u n d a n e matters, o f t e n corr e c t i n g w i d e s p r e a d m i s a p p r e h e n s i o n s a b o u t t h e true n a t u r e o f practical J e w i s h life a t h o u s a n d years a g o . 6 8 Marital a r r a n g e m e n t s ,

for instance, were by

no

m e a n s a l w a y s c o n t r o l l e d b y t h e m a l e t o t h e d e t r i m e n t o f t h e f e m a l e . It s e e m s t h a t w h e n R a b b a n i t e s m a r r i e d K a r a i t e s , it w a s p o s s i b l e t o m a k e a n a g r e e m e n t that w h e r e b y e a c h side agreed n o t to o f f e n d the religious susceptibilities o f the o t h e r . I n o n e s u c h m a r r i a g e , b e t w e e n t h e Karaite w o m a n , N e s i ' a h , d a u g h t e r o f M o s e s , and the leading Rabbanite, David, s o n o f Daniel, the

ketubbah,

dated

1 0 8 2 , s t i p u l a t e s p r e c i s e l y w h a t s h e will a n d will n o t d o in r e l i g i o u s m a t t e r s . S h e will n o t v i o l a t e h e r K a r a i t e c u s t o m s b y s i t t i n g w i t h h i m a n d e n j o y i n g t h e s a b b a t h lights, n o r will s h e e a t t h a t part o f t h e a n i m a l ' s tail that is p e r m i t t e d b y R a b b a n ite law. A s far as t h e c a l e n d a r is c o n c e r n e d , s h e r e f u s e s t o p r o f a n e a n y d a y d e -

65

66

67

68

For some examples of letters and decisions by Maimonides, see Kraemer's ardcle just mendoned and also his "Maimonides' Letters Yield their Secrets." Genizah Fragments 16, 1988, 3—4 and "Two Letters of Maimonides from the Cairo Geniza." Maimonidean Studies 1, 1990, 87-98; see also Goitein, S. D. 1971. A Mediterranean Society (vol. 2). Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 15961. The famous fragment containing his recommendation for Isaac al-Dar'i is T-S 12.192, one of the two letters edited by Kraemer in 1990. J. Blau's edition of R. Moses b. Maimon: Responsa (see n. 36 above) is an essential reference tool. Details of the biography of Maimonides supplied by Genizah material are provided by Goitein, S. D. 1973. Letters of Medieval Jewish Traders. Princeton, 207-12 and "Moses Maimonides, Man of Acdon: A Revision of the Master's Biography in Light of the Geniza Documents." In Hommage à Georges Vajda. Ed. G. Nahon and C. Touati. Louvain, 1980, 155-67; and Ben-Sasson, M. 1991. "Maimonides in Egypt: The First Stage." Maimonidean Studies 2, 3-30. The four fragments concerning his ransom, appointment, brother David and friendly meeting are T-S 16.9, T-S J2.78, 0r.1081 J1 and T-S 8J14.18. Fenton, P. B. 1982. "A Meeting with Maimonides." bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 45, 1-4, with two plates. For a general bibliography of publications on Maimonides in Hebrew, see Ben-Shammai, B. 1991. "Twenty-Five years of Maimonides Research: a Bibliography 1965-80." Maimonidean Studies 2, Hebrew secdon, 17-42. Except where otherwise indicated, much of the information given here about daily life is based on S. D. Goitein's classic set of volumes A Mediterranean Society (= Med. Soc., 5 vols, published respecrively in 1967, 1973, 1978, 1983 and 1988, plus a sixth index volume, prepared by Paula Sanders, published in 1993, all of them in Berkeley, Los Angeles and London).

clared t o b e a festival b y h e r s e c t , b u t s h e d o e s a g r e e t o o b s e r v e his r e l i g i o u s h o l i d a y s t o o . 6 9 T h e c o n d i t i o n s s e t b y t h e bride, Fa'iza, t h e d a u g h t e r o f S o l o m o n , in F u s t a t in 1 0 4 7 , i d e n t i f y h e r a n d h e r f a m i l y as p e o p l e w h o k n e w w h a t t h e y w a n t e d f r o m t h e b r i d e g r o o m , T u v i a , s o n o f Eli, a n d w e r e o b v i o u s l y v e r y m u c h c o n c e r n e d that h e m i g h t n o t b e able t o m e e t their s t a n d a r d s . T h e c e n t r a l part o f his d e c l a r a t i o n m a k e s i n t e r e s t i n g reading 7 0 : I shall b e h a v e t o w a r d s her in the way that fine J e w s b e h a v e t o w a r d s their d e cent wives .1 shall associate with g o o d m e n and n o t c o r r u p t o n e s . I shall n o t bring h o m e licendous individuals, b u f f o o n s , frivolous m e n , a n d g o o d - f o r nothings. I shall n o t e n t e r the h o m e o f a n y o n e attracted to licentious b e h a v iour, to c o r r u p t i o n and to revolting activities. I shall n o t associate with t h e m in eating, drinking o r any o t h e r activity. I shall n o t p u r c h a s e a slave-girl f o r myself, as long as this Fa'iza is my wife, unless she explicidy c o n s e n t s . I shall n o t leave Fustat, Egypt, to travel a b r o a d , unless she specifically agrees. Other, m o r e unfortunate w o m e n , were delighted to have the opportunity

to

marry at all. I n a c a s e b r o u g h t b e f o r e t h e r a b b i n i c c o u r t o f D a v i d , s o n o f A b r a h a m a n d g r a n d s o n o f M a i m ô n i d e s , a w o m a n a g r e e d that h e r f u t u r e h u s b a n d s h o u l d retain t h e right t o h a v e o t h e r w i v e s . S h e felt o b l i g a t e d t o h i m f o r h a v i n g r e s c u e d h e r f r o m h e r A r a b c a p t o r s by p a y i n g a r a n s o m a n d w a s o b v i o u s l y aware that h e r b a r g a i n i n g p o s i t i o n h a d b e e n w e a k e n e d by t h e fact t h a t t h e y h a d r a p e d her, t o g e t h e r w i t h a n u m b e r o f o t h e r J e w i s h w o m e n , d u r i n g captivity. 7 1 T h e r e w a s an e v e n s a d d e r e n d i n g t o a n o t h e r s t o r y w h i c h b e g a n w i t h t h e h u s b a n d g i v i n g his v e r y attractive w i f e a c o n d i t i o n a l d i v o r c e t o b e a c t i v a t e d if h e failed t o return f r o m a trip a b r o a d . A f t e r h i s l e n g t h y a b s e n c e , s h e t o o k a d v a n t a g e o f his o f f e r a n d married a h u s b a n d w i t h m o r e o p p o r t u n i t y t o stay at h o m e . W h e n t h e first h u s b a n d h e a r d o f this, h e r e t u r n e d h o m e a n d , in t h e p h y s i c a l c o n f r o n t a t i o n that f o l l o w e d , b o t h m e n a n d t h e w o m a n m e t their d e a t h s . 7 2 It s h o u l d n o t b e i m a g i n e d that all w o m e n f u n c t i o n e d o n l y as h o u s e w i v e s . S o m e p r o v i d e d m e d i c a l s e r v i c e s w h i l e o t h e r s s p e c i a l i z e d in w h o l e s a l e d e a l i n g , in t h e sale o f f l o u r , in t h e t e a c h i n g o f e m b r o i d e r y , in b o o k sales, o r in t h e m a k i n g o f p e r f u m e s . 7 3 O n e o f t h e m o s t r e m a r k a b l e w a s W u h s h a ( " D e s i r é e " ) , o r K a r i m a ("dear o n e " ) , d a u g h t e r o f A m m a r , w h o w a s i n d e p e n d e n t l y m i n d e d e n o u g h t o m a k e h e r o w n w a y in t h e

69

70

71

72 73

The topic of marriage is discussed in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 48-49 and in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 3, 47-159, especially 55-61, and some important fragments are T-S 18J4.5, T-S 20.6, T-S 13J25.20 and T-S 12.175. The "mixed" Karaite-Rabbanite marriage, T-S 24.1, was already dealt with by Schechter in Jewish Quarterly Review 13, 1901, 218-21 and is noted by Goitein in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 3, 158. On marriage, see M. A. Friedman, Jewish Marriage (see n. 35 above), especially vol. 1, 312-^46 and 379—450, and vol. 2, 1-88, and his Jewish Polygyny (see n. 35 above). The conditions extracted from Tuvia, son of Eli, recorded in T-S 20.160, are fully discussed and translated by Friedman in his article "Pre-Nuptial Agreements: A Geniza Study." Dine' Israel 6, 1975, C X I - C X I V , and noted by Goitein in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 3, 157. Friedman deals with the court record relating to the rape victim, T-S 8K13.11, in Jewish Polygyny (see n. 35 above), 95-106. Details of this crime passionnel, reported in T-S 8.111, are in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 3, 80-81. Goitein summarizes the broad activities of women in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 3, 312-59 and interesting examples of the professions they pursued are to be found in T-S 24.76, T-S 16.22, TS12.493, T-S 20.175 and T-S NS 320.7.

c o m m e r c i a l w o r l d , t o fight f o r h e r financial rights in b u s i n e s s d e a l s , a n d t o b u i l d u p a large f o r t u n e as a b a n k e r . 7 4 Whatever

financial

backing

they

enjoyed,

some

marriages

encountered

p r o b l e m s that i n v o l v e d t h e m in lidgarion, as is d o c u m e n t e d b y m a n y o f t h e court

records

preserved

in

the

Genizah.

One

woman

complained

to

the

a u t h o r i t i e s that in f i f t e e n years o f married life s h e h a d n o t o n l y r e c e i v e d n e i t h e r g i f t s , jewellery n o r c l o t h e s f r o m h e r h u s b a n d b u t that h e d i s t r e s s e d a n d b e a t her, a n d said that h e w o u l d d i v o r c e h e r o n l y if s h e r e n o u n c e d h e r rights t o a s e t d e m e n t . A n o t h e r u n f o r t u n a t e w i f e , in a bitter letter t o h e r u n c l e , b e w a i l s t r e a t m e n t s h e is r e c e i v i n g f r o m h e r h u s b a n d a n d h e r m o t h e r - i n - l a w .

the

Husbands

t o o s o m e t i m e s h a d c a u s e f o r c o m p l a i n t a n d s o m e t h r e a t e n e d t o ran o f f w i t h o u t d i v o r c i n g their w i v e s , l e a v i n g t h e m in a state o f marital l i m b o

(,agunah),

neither

d i v o r c e d n o r l i v i n g w i t h a h u s b a n d . O n e u n h a p p y m a n m a d e s u c h a threat in t h e c o n t e x t o f a d e m a n d t o t h e h e a d o f his c o m m u n i t y f o r a j u d g e m e n t that w o u l d release h i m f r o m s o m e o f t h e financial b u r d e n i n v o l v e d in m a k i n g a s e t t l e m e n t . H e c l a i m e d that t h e marriage h a d b e e n arranged a g a i n s t h i s will a n d that his w i f e ' s c h a r a c t e r a n d b e h a v i o u r w e r e s o i n t o l e r a b l e that t h r e e years w i t h h e r h a d s e e m e d t o h i m like t w e n t y . A n d n o w t h e final s t r a w h a d b e e n t h e arrival o f his m o t h e r - i n - l a w ! 7 5 O n e s t r o n g - m i n d e d w o m a n w a s a p p a l l e d by h e r h u s b a n d ' s a b s e n c e f r o m h o m e a n d t h e n e w s that h e m i g h t b e c o n t e m p l a d n g a trip t o T u r k e y . W r i u n g o n b e h a l f o f t h e w h o l e family, b o t h m a l e a n d f e m a l e , s h e l e c t u r e d h i m in n o u n c e r t a i n t e r m s a b o u t t h e d a m a g e that w o u l d b e d o n e t o their r e p u t a t i o n if h e s t a y e d a w a y a n d h o w s u c h b e h a v i o u r w o u l d a d v e r s e l y a f f e e t t h e m a r r i a g e p r o s p e c t s o f their s i n g l e d a u g h t e r . A d i s t i n g u i s h e d m e m b e r o f t h e c o m m u n i t y s u c h as h e s h o u l d rejoin his family a n d if t h e r e a s o n f o r his retic e n c e t o r e m r n w a s related t o tax p r o b l e m s , s h e s u g g e s t e d t h e n a m e o f a n e x p e r t w h o c o u l d o f f e r h i m s o u n d a d v i c e in this c o n n e c t i o n . 7 6 In the fields o f education and synagogal matters, s o m e w o m e n a t t e m p t e d to h a v e an i n f l u e n c e o n a r r a n g e m e n t s . O n e lady o f t h e h o u s e , clearly s o m e t h i n g o f a matriarch, a n d a s h r e w d o n e at that, t o o k t h e t r o u b l e o f s e n d i n g a H a n u k k a h g i f t t o h e r g r a n d c h i l d ' s private tutor. A m o t h e r a n d g r a n d m o t h e r m a d e a g e n e r o u s d o n a t i o n t o t h e c o m m u n i t y o n c o n d i t i o n that their s o n / g r a n d s o n w o u l d b e i n v i t e d t o u n d e r t a k e t h e p u b l i c r e a d i n g o f t h e E s t h e r scroll o n t h e f e a s t o f P u rim a n d d r e w u p a legal d o c u m e n t t o that e f f e c t , n o t o n l y t o p r o t e c t their in-

74

75

76

Goitein, "A Jewish Business Woman of the Eleventh Century." Seventy-Fifth Anniversary Volume of the Jewish Quarterly Review. Ed. A. A. Neuman and S. Zeitlin. Philadelphia, 1967, 225—47 and in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 3, 346-52, the details derived from Add. 3420d, T-S 8J5.5, T-S Ar.4.5, T-S 10J7.10, T-S Misc.8.102 and T-S AS 145.3. The wife/husband reladonship receives Goitein's attention in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 3, 160223, with the two bitter complaints to be found in T-S 8J22.27 and 10J9.13 noted by him on 186 and 175-76. Fragments that shed light on cases of wives being abandoned include T-S 12.179, TS 18J2.10 and C)r.1080J7, as discussed in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 58, and the dissatisfied husband, whose appeal is recorded in T-S 8J14.2, occurs in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 3, 204. F. Kobler included a translation of the angry wife's letter (T-S 13J21.10) in his Letters of Jews Throughout the Ages. London, 1953, vol. 1, 233-34, based on Mann's text in The Jews in Egypt (see n. 55 above), vol. 1, 242, but this is supplemented by the comments of J. Kraemer, "Spanish Ladies from the Cairo Geniza." Mediterranean Historical Review 6, 1991, 247-48.

v e s t m e n t , as it w e r e , b u t a l s o t o e n s u r e that t h e a r r a n g e m e n t c o u l d n o t b e c a n c e l l e d by t h e b o y ' s father. 7 7 A s far as b o y s w e r e c o n c e r n e d , e d u c a d o n a l activity at h o m e w a s s o o n c o m p l e m e n t e d b y a t t e n d a n c e at s c h o o l a n d t h e s t o r y t h e r e w a s a p p a r e n d y just as o f t e n o n e o f n a u g h t i n e s s as o f d i l i g e n c e . A s c r i b b l e d n o t e f r o m a rather c r o s s t e a c h e r i n f o r m e d t h e f a t h e r o f little A b u e l - H a s s a n that his s o n h a d at first b e e n m o s t c o n s c i e n t i o u s b u t that o n e o f the c l a s s , e g g e d o n by t h e o t h e r s , h a d s o o n p u t t o a s t o p t o this by b r e a k i n g t h e n e w c o m e r ' s w r i t i n g b o a r d . O n e t e a c h e r h a d t o a d m i t that h e h a d s m a c k e d his p u p i l e x c e s s i v e l y , a n d that if h e had b e e n a m o r e r o b u s t c h i l d h e m i g h t e v e n h a v e p u n i s h e d h i m m o r e , b u t all t o n o avail. 7 8 S o m e t e a c h e r s h a d t a k e n u p t h e p r o f e s s i o n as i m p o v e r i s h e d i m m i g r a n t s a n d p e r h a p s it w a s they w h o s u f f e r e d m o s t f r o m t h e late p a y m e n t o f f e e s T h e r e is certainly n o lack o f e v i d e n c e f o r s u c h tardy s e t t l e m e n t o f e d u c a d o n a l bills a n d G o i t e i n ' s t r a n s l a t i o n o f o n e f r a g m e n t e x e m p l i f i e s o n e s u c h sad s i t u a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e t e a c h e r a n d t h e c o m m u n a l treasurer r e g a r d i n g t h e f e e s o f t h e o r p h a n s in his s c h o o l : 7 9 I n o w ask your excellency to kindly give an o r d e r to pay m e their fees s o that I s h o u l d have s o m e t h i n g to s p e n d for the holidays. I might p e r h a p s like to taste a piece of meat, for I have n o t b o u g h t m e a t m o r e than eight times f r o m last P e n t e c o s t t o this Pentecost. G o d k n o w s that I w o u l d n o t have m e n d o n e d this to my lord, had I n o t k n o w n that my lord d o e s n o t tolerate such a state of affairs. D e s p i t e i n d i v i d u a l c a s e s t o t h e c o n t r a r y , travel w a s t h e e x c e p t i o n rather t h a n t h e rule f o r s c h o l a r s a n d f o r t h e m a n y c r a f t s m e n a n d a r t i s a n s — r e p r e s e n t e d in as m a n y as 2 5 0 d i f f e r e n t t r a d e s — t h e n l i v i n g in t h e E g y p t i a n J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y . 8 0 B u s i n e s s m e n , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , h a d t o travel t h e l e n g t h a n d b r e a d t h o f t h e Mediterranean, and to u n d e r t o o k v o y a g e s across the Indian O c e a n , to

make

their livings. S u c h trips n o t o n l y i n v o l v e d p a i n f u l s e p a r a t i o n s , s o m e t i m e s e v e n f o r a n u m b e r o f years; t h e y a l s o carried all t h e d a n g e r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a n y f o r m o f travel in t h o s e t u r b u l e n t times.81 W i d e varieties o f g o o d s , r a n g i n g f r o m b a l e s o f c l o t h , t h r o u g h a n i m a l h i d e s a n d articles o f c l o t h i n g , t o i t e m s o f f o o d a n d drink, w e r e i m p o r t e d a n d e x p o r t e d by t h e J e w i s h m e r c h a n t s o f C a i r o ( s o m e 77

78

79

80

81

One of the most important studies of educadonal material in the Genizah is Goitein's article "Side Lights on Jewish Education from the Cairo Geniza." Grcil^ College Anniversary Volume ( = C O 1 I ^ , eds. I. D. Passow and S. T. Lachs, Philadelphia, 1971, 83-110. The Purim reference (T-S NS J2) is cited there on 92-9 and the Hanukkah gift (T-S 12.425) is reported in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 188. The report about the failure of excessive physical punishment to make any impact, in the text of T-S 8J28.7, is translated by Goitein in CCAV (see n. 77 above), 91, together with the story of poor Abu el-Hassan's broken board (T-S Ar.53.65) on 92. The complaint about non-payment of fees (British Library, Or.5542.23) is translated by Goitein on 96-97 of the ardcle in CCA V (see n. 77 above). This estimate is offered by M. Ben-Sasson, "Cairo Genizah Treasures and their Contribution to Jewish Historiography." Bulletin of the Israeli Academic Center in Cairo 21, 1997, 9. The whole subject is dealt with by Goitein in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 273-352 and among the most important fragments are: T-S13J36.6, T-S 8J 19.27, T-S NS J3, T-S 10J17.18, T-S 10J18.1, T-S 13J20.25, T-S 8J28.12, T-S 24.78 and T-S 20.113. The most vivid description of a shipwreck occurs in T-S 12.114, David Kaufmann Collection XI and T-S 16.54; see Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 321.

t i m e s w o m e n as w e l l as m e n ) . 8 2 T h e i r primary c o n c e r n w a s n o t w i t h particular c o m m o d i t i e s b u t w i t h a n y t h i n g t h a t c o u l d k e e p their capital w o r k i n g f o r t h e m . A s o n e e n t r e p r e n e u r p u t it, " D o n o t l e a v e a s i n g l e p e n n y idle b u y w h e n

God

g i v e s y o u t h e c h a n c e a n d e x p o r t o n t h e first s h i p t o s e t sail." 8 3 H o n e s t y a n d trust b e t w e e n p a r t n e r s w a s n o t u n t y p i c a l o f b u s i n e s s life s i n c e joint c o m m e r c i a l v e n tures w e r e s o m e t i m e s a feature o f r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n g r o u p s o r f a m i l i e s f o r a n u m b e r o f generations. There were e v e n cases where Jews and Muslims

who

w e r e partners arranged for profits m a d e o n the sabbath to be directed only to t h e latter. 8 4 W h e n D a v i d b e n S o l o m o n w i s h e d t o m o v e a h u g e a m o u n t o f capital ( 6 0 0 p i e c e s o f silver) f r o m C a i r o t o Q a y r a w a n in 1 2 6 7 , h e a s k e d his friend I s a a c b e n A b r a h a m t o take t h e m o n e y as a l o a n f r o m h i m in E g y p t a n d t o repay it t o h i m later in t h e T u n i s i a n city. 8 5 P a y m e n t by c h e q u e rather t h a n b y c a s h w a s a l s o a p r o c e d u r e a d o p t e d in t h e G e n i z a h p e r i o d . Y o u d e p o s i t e d y o u r c a s h w i t h a banker or broker and y o u m a d e your payment by writing o n a piece o f paper the s u m in C o p t i c n u m e r a l s a n d w o r d s that t h e b a n k e r w a s t o p a y t h e s p e c i f i e d bearer, t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e d a t e , a n d a biblical v e r s e i n t e n d e d t o w a r d o f f a n y att e m p t at fraud! 8 6 F r o m s o m e a c c o u n t i n g r e c o r d s , it is clear that, in t w e l f t h c e n t u r y E g y p t , o n e c o l u m n w a s u s e d f o r d e b i t s a n d a n o t h e r f o r credits, at least t w o c e n t u r i e s b e f o r e this p r o c e d u r e w a s a d o p t e d in Italy a n d b e c a m e g e n e r a l l y standard. 8 7 A letter w r i t t e n f r o m A l e x a n d r i a t o Q a y r a w a n in 1 0 5 2 r e p o r t s that, in v i e w o f t h e u n s t a b l e s i t u a t i o n , t h e w r i t e r h a s just b u r i e d s o m e c a s h i n t h e earth. H e k n o w s that this will h o r r i f y his a s t u t e b u s i n e s s a s s o c i a t e , i n this c a s e his b r o t h e r , w h o p r e f e r s t o h a v e his m o n e y w o r k i n g f o r h i m , b u t h e c l a i m s that h e w o u l d rather h a v e c r i t i c i s m o n this s c o r e t h a n c e n s u r e f o r l o s i n g t h e m o n e y . 8 8 A s far as tax is c o n c e r n e d , J e w s w e r e d o u b l y u n f o r t u n a t e s i n c e e v e r y n o n M u s l i m w a s r e q u i r e d b y I s l a m i c l a w t o pay t h e g o v e r n m e n t a n a n n u a l p o l l tax o f 2 dinars (as m u c h as a l o w m o n t h l y w a g e ) , s i m p l y f o r e x i s t i n g , a n d as a n i n d i c a tion o f his i n f e r i o r status. J e w s f r o m o t h e r c o u n t r i e s w e r e a l s o o b l i g e d t o pay u p a n d t h e r e w a s e v e n a s p e c i a l o f f i c e t o deal w i t h t h o s e f r o m E r e t z Yisrael a n d its

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

For a survey of the range of medieval Jewish trade in the Mediterranean as known from the Genizah source, see Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 75-147 and 148-272. Notes advising a broad choice of commercial acuvides and concerning a businessman's lack of ready cash are in T-S 8J41.2, T-S 20.180, David Kaufmann Collecrion XXVIII and Dropsie College (now Center for Judaic Studies at the University of Pennsylvania) 389; see Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 200. Reladons between partners is covered in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 164—83 and it is P. B. Fenton who draws attention to the matter of sabbath profits in "Interfaith Relations as Reflected in the Genizah Documents." bulletin of the Israeli Academic Center in Cairo 21, 1997, 26. The movement of capital from Cairo to Qayrawan is reflected in the notarized document T-S 12.515, published byj. Mann, Texts and Studies (see n. 53 above), vol. 1, 360-61. Remnants of medieval cheques are located in T-S Ar.30.184 and noted in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 241. The relevance of the Genizah to the history of accounting has been demonstrated by M. Scorgie in his comments on T-S NS 321.7a and similar fragments in Genizah Fragments 29 (April, 1995), 2, based on his two 1994 articles in Accounting Business and Financial History and in Accounting Histonans'Journal. On the matter of the burial of cash, see T-S 13J26.9 in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 265.

e n v i r o n s t h e n r e s i d e n t in E g y p t . 8 9 A y o u n g m a n w r o t e t o his m o t h e r o f an incid e n t o n e Sunday morning. A s he set o u t o n a journey, a p o l i c e m a n challenged h i m : " D o y o u i n t e n d t o d e p a r t , still in p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e g o v e r n m e n t ' s u n p a i d p o l l tax? I shall n o t l e a v e y o u u n d l y o u a c c o m p a n y m e t o t h e p o l i c e station." 9 " O f t e n the c o m m u n i t y m a d e the p a y m e n t o n behalf o f especially needy or w o r thy i n d i v i d u a l s as part o f its g e n e r a l p o l i c y o f s o c i a l w e l f a r e , s o m e t i m e s r e s e r v i n g a n o n y m i t y f o r s o m e r e c i p i e n t s o f charity in o r d e r t o m a i n t a i n their dignity. 9 1 A n o t h e r , a n d e v e n m o r e u r g e n t drain o n c o m m u n a l r e s o u r c e s w a s t h e c o s t o f r a n s o m i n g c a p t i v e s . T h e s e sad v i c t i m s h a d n o t o n l y t o b e r a n s o m e d b u t a l s o clothed, maintained and sent h o m e . Meanwhile, the Muslim g o v e r n m e n t

in-

s i s t e d o n r e c e i v i n g t h e p o l l tax a n d p o r t d u t y o n b e h a l f o f e a c h o f t h e m . 9 2 T h e s y n a g o g a l affairs referred t o in t h e m a n u s c r i p t s f r o m m e d i e v a l E g y p t h a v e a familiar ring t o t h e m . T h e B a b y l o n i a n a n d P a l e s t i n i a n c o n g r e g a t i o n s in Fustat vied with each other for n e w m e m b e r s , the f o r m e r b o a s t i n g o f the h o n o u r s t h e y g a v e t o v i s i t o r s a n d t h e f i n e c a n t o r s t h e y e n g a g e d , w h i l e t h e latter parried w i t h c l a i m s that t h e y h a d m o r e attractive B i b l e s a n d T o r a h s c r o l l s (as w e l l as b e a u t i f u l c a r p e t s ) , that their s e r v i c e s w e r e s h o r t e r , a n d that y o u n g b o y s w e r e p e r m i t t e d t o take part in t h e s e r v i c e s . 9 3 A t t i m e s , t h e t e n s i o n s a b o u t w h o h a d t h e g r e a t e r a u t h o r i t y o v e r t h e w h o l e c o m m u n i t y g r e w s o g r e a t that r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s w e r e m a d e t o t h e M u s l i m c a l i p h a t e r e q u e s t i n g a ruling. 9 4 T h e r e are r e p o r t s o f b r a w l s , o f d i s g u s t w i t h l a s c i v i o u s b e h a v i o u r , a n d o f c o n g r e g a n t s b e i n g b a n n e d as p e r s i s t e n t t r o u b l e m a k e r s . A letter f r o m R a m l a in 1 0 5 2 r e p o r t s a p h y s i c a l f i g h t o n Y o m K i p p u r b e t w e e n J e w s f r o m T y r e a n d o t h e r s f r o m T i b e r i a s , w h i c h had t o b e h a l t e d b y t h e p o l i c e . 9 5 A b e a d l e is a c c u s e d o f c o n d u c t i n g h i m s e l f like a " b o s s " a n d n o t as a s e r v a n t o f t h e c o n g r e g a t i o n . A n o t h e r is u p b r a i d e d f o r ind u c i n g his w h o l e family o f f i f t e e n s o u l s t o take u p full b o a r d a n d r e s i d e n c e o n the synagogue

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

premises, and

f o r e v e n a l l o w i n g t h e m t o play w i t h

pigeons

Aspects of tax problems and related incidents are provided by Goitein in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 64 and 300, and Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 95-96 and 380-94. The account of the Sunday morning arrest is in T-S 13J16.10. Other relevant fragments are T-S 20.174, T-S 13J36.2, T-S 10J17.20, 0r.1080J87 and T-S 12.289. The general theme of charity is closely studied by M. Gil in his Documents of the Jewish Pious Foundations from the Cairo Geniza• Leiden, 1976 and Mark Cohen is currendy preparing a volume on communal payments for charitable purposes that are recorded in the Genizah texts. The ransoming of captives is touched upon by Mann, Texts and Studies (see n. 53 above), vol. 2, 344—45 and by Goitein in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 1, 329-30, Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 137-38, and Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 5, 373-76 and 462-64. The primary Genizah sources are T-S 13J34.3, T-S 10J24.9, T-S 12.238 and T-S 16.9. The particular tensions between Babylonian and Palestinian communities, such as those reflected in T-S 13J26.24, T-S 18J4.12, Alliance Israelite Universelle VII.A 17 and Dropsie College (now Center for Judaic Studies at the University of Pennsylvania) 354, are treated in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 52; Goitein, S. D. 1980. Palestinian Jewry in Early Islamic and Crusader Times in the Light of the Geniza Documents. Jerusalem, 52-69; Gil, M. A History of Palestine (see n. 55 above), paras. 762-72, 527-39; Reif, Hebrew Prayer (see n. 39 above), 154-64 and 181-91. Examples may be found in Khan, G. 1993. Arabic Inegal and Administrative Documents in the Cam• bridge Genizah Collections. Cambridge, 291-94. Reports of synagogal brawls, as summarized by Goitein in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 168, are found in T-S 13J 16.21, T-S Ar. 38.131 and Jewish Theological Seminary ENA 2736.20.

( b r e e d i n g a n d r a c i n g t h e m ? ) o n t h e r o o f . 9 6 S o m e t i m e s , it w a s t h e o f f i c i a l w h o did t h e c o m p l a i n i n g . A c a n t o r a s k e d M a i m o n i d e s f o r p e r m i s s i o n t o a b a n d o n t h e r e c i t a t i o n o f s o m e liturgical p o e m s i n t r o d u c e d in a small E g y p t i a n village w h e r e h e o f f i c i a t e d . A l t h o u g h h e r e c e i v e d a r e s p o n s e that w a s s y m p a t h e t i c t o his disa p p r o v a l o f t h e n o v e l p o e t r y , h e w a s a d v i s e d , f o r t h e s a k e o f c o m m u n a l harm o n y , t o c o n t i n u e t o recite it. 97 W i t h regard t o b r o a d e r c u l t u r e a n d its v a r i o u s a s p e c t s , it is hardly s u r p r i s i n g t o f i n d that s u c h

areas as m u s i c , art a n d t h e p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e s

reflect

the

a c h i e v e m e n t s a n d i n t e r e s t s o f t h e I s l a m i c w o r l d o f t h e day. 9 8 I l l n e s s a n d its treatment, for instance, were o f major c o n c e r n to the public and to the d o c t o r s , w h o c o n s e q u e n t l y represented o n e o f the m o s t important p r o f e s s i o n s .

They

f u n c t i o n e d n o t o n l y as m e d i c a l p r a c t i t i o n e r s b u t a l s o as p h a r m a c i s t s , u s i n g m a n y d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f p l a n t s , e a c h w i t h its o w n s p e c i a l e f f e c t . T h e m o s t

common

c o m p l a i n t s related t o t h e e y e s a n d t h e y w e r e f o r t u n a t e l y able, e v e n at that p e riod,

to p e r f o r m operations to r e m o v e growths and obstructions.

Headaches

a l s o t r o u b l e d m a n y f o l k a n d , in t h o s e c a s e s , in a d d i t i o n t o d r u g s , t h e y w e r e a b l e t o o f f e r s u c h e x t e r n a l t r e a t m e n t as c o l d c o m p r e s s e s .

Large n u m b e r s in

the

c o m m u n i t y w e r e t r o u b l e d by s e x u a l l y related m a t t e r s . M e n c a m e t o s e e d o c t o r s a b o u t i m p o t e n c e a n d fertility a n d w e r e a n x i o u s t o l o c a t e t h e b e s t a p h r o d i s i a c s . W o m e n asked a b o u t period pains and loss o f b l o o d , and a b o u t pregnancy and a b o r t i o n . T h e m e d i c a l e x p e r t s d i d their b e s t b u t t h e r e w e r e o f t e n tragic a s p e c t s t o t h e s e p r o b l e m s a b o u t w h i c h t h e y c o u l d d o little. T h e y a d v i s e d s e n s i b l e d i e t s , c a r e f u l h y g i e n e a n d t h e a v o i d a n c e o f e x c e s s in a n y h u m a n activity as t h e b e s t w a y s o f a v o i d i n g illness, particularly in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e d i g e s t i v e s y s t e m , b u t n o t all p a t i e n t s t o o k their a d v i c e . 9 9 A fair p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e m p r e f e r r e d t o s p e n d their m o n e y o n a s t r o l o g e r s , m a g i c i a n s a n d d i v i n e r s w h o g a v e t h e m a m u l e t s t o w e a r a n d f o r m u l a s t o recite, m a n y o f w h i c h w e r e later p r e s e r v e d in t h e G e n i zah. l , X ) T h e trained p r o f e s s i o n a l s r e s e n t e d s u c h p e o p l e as " q u a c k s " b u t d i d a c -

96

97

98

99

100

For the religiously questionable interests of the beadle, see T-S 18J4.12, discussed in the broader context of the activities of such officials in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 82-91. Fragments dealing with such correspondence conducted with Maimonides and his family are Or. 1080 J33, T-S 8J21.12 and T-S 12.608, as noted in Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 89, 160 and 219. The richest source for illustrated material in the Cambridge Genizah collections are the binders T-S K5 and K10, many of which have already been researched by Professor Bezalel Narkiss and his team of Jewish art historians in Jerusalem and published in the Journal of Jewish Art. The lioness may be viewed in T-S Ar. 51.60; the block-print in Or. 1080 J50 (see Genizah Fragments 5 (April, 1983), 1, and 6 (October, 1983), 4); and the musical notes of Obadiah in T-S K5.41. The medical data is derived from Isaacs and Baker, Medical and Para-Medical Manuscripts (see n. 64 above) which covers 1,616 Genizah fragments. The general informadon is owed to their introducrion, VII—XVII, and the details of particular diseases and treatments may be traced back to the relevant fragments by way of the excellent indexes. See also P. B. Fenton's brief but helpful summary "The Importance of the Cairo Genizah for the History of Medicine." Medical History 24,1980, 347-48. Some magical content occurs in the para-medical items described by Isaacs but more specific coverage is included in Naveh, J. and Shaked, S. 1985. Amulets and Magic Bowls: Aramaic lncantalions of Late Antiquity. Jerusalem and Leiden, and Magic Spells and Formulae: Aramaic Incantations of Late Antiquity. Jerusalem, 1993; Schiffman, L. and Swartz, 1992. M. Hebrew and Aramaic Incantation Texts from the Cairo Genizah: Selected Texts from the Taylor-Schechter Box Kt, Sheffield; and Schäfer, P.

k n o w l e d g e that t h e r e w a s a limit t o w h a t t h e y t h e m s e l v e s c o u l d d o . S o m e a d m i t t e d t o their p a d e n t s that true h e a l i n g w a s in t h e h a n d s o f h e a v e n . 1 0 1 I f w e m a y m o v e f r o m m u n d a n e m a t t e r s t o t h o s e o f a m o r e intellectual dim e n s i o n , s o m e c o m m e n t s are n o w in o r d e r o n b o o k s , l a n g u a g e s , literacy a n d e d u c a d o n . A l t h o u g h t h e n u m b e r o f c o m p l e t e H e b r e w c o d i c e s that h a v e surv i v e d f r o m t h e n i n t h a n d t e n t h c e n t u r i e s is still o n l y in s i n g l e f i g u r e s a n d their c o n t e n t p r e d o m i n a n t l y biblical, t h e e v i d e n c e o f t h e G e n i z a h l e a v e s little r o o m f o r d o u b t that m a n y o f its f r a g m e n t s originally b e l o n g e d t o c o d i c e s o f v a r i o u s t y p e s o f literature o r i g i n a t i n g in t h e oriental c o m m u n i t i e s o f t h o s e

centuries.

T h e H e b r e w c o d e x a p p a r e n d y m a d e its a p p e a r a n c e in t h e e i g h t h c e n t u r y , perh a p s u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f I s l a m , w h i c h h a d b o r r o w e d t h e m e d i u m f r o m the C h r i s t i a n a n d Classical w o r l d s . W i t h i n t h r e e c e n t u r i e s , it b e c a m e t h e standard m e d i u m f o r textual t r a n s m i s s i o n . Q u i r e s w e r e c o m p o s e d , c a t c h w o r d s i n c l u d e d , s e c t i o n s n u m e r a t e d , lines justified, m a r g i n s set, a n d t h e r u l i n g - b o a r d (mastara) w a s e m p l o y e d t o facilitate t h e p l a n n i n g o f t h e lines. S t u d i e s o f G e n i z a h fragm e n t s are gradually r e v e a l i n g h o w this w h o l e p r o c e s s d e v e l o p e d f r o m a p r i m i rive t o a fairly s o p h i s t i c a t e d level. 1 0 2 W h e r e there are s e t s o f v o l u m e s , there is i n e v i t a b l y a n e e d t o s t o r e t h e m t o g e t h e r . I n this c o n n e c t i o n , it h a s i n d e e d r e c e n t i y b e e n d e m o n s t r a t e d that in t h e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t i e s o f N o r t h A f r i c a in t h e n i n t h a n d t e n t h c e n t u r i e s t e x t s w e r e b e i n g w i d e l y c o p i e d a n d c i r c u l a t e d a n d that e x t e n s i v e libraries, c o v e r i n g v a r i o u s l a n g u a g e s , w e r e b e i n g a m a s s e d a n d s o l d . S u c h libraries i n c l u d e d n o t o n l y t h e classical J e w i s h s o u r c e s b u t a l s o t h e n e w e s t c o m m e n t a r i e s o n t h e o n e h a n d a n d

101

102

and Shaked, S. 1994, 1997. Magische Texte aus der Kairoer Geniza (two volumes so far published). Tübingen. The theological background is provided in Envisioning Magic: A Princeton Seminar and Symposium. Ed. P. Schäfer and H. G. Kippenberg. Leiden, New York and Köln, 1997, especially in the articles "Magic and Religion in Ancient Judaism" by Schäfer, 19—43; "Jewish Magic in the Greek Magical Papyri" by H. D. Betz, 45—63; and "On Judaism, Jewish Mysdcism and Magic" by M. Idel, 195-214. ' A delightful admission that healing is in God's hands is to be found in T-S AS 152.34, entry no. 1078 on 80 of the Isaacs volume (see n. 64 above), reproduced there in plates 16-17. Informadon about the Jewish adoption and use of the codex may be found in. Lieberman, S. 1962. Hellenism in Jewish Palestine: Studies in the Literary Transmission , Beliefs and Manners of Palestine in the I Century B. C. E.-4 Century C. E. (2nd edition). New York, 203-9; Turner, E. G. 1977. The Typology of the Early Codex. Philadelphia; Roberts, C. M. and Skeat, T. C. 1983. The Birth of the Codex (2nd edition), London; Rouse, R. H. and Rouse, M. A. 1983. "Codicology, Western European" in Dictionary of the Middle Ages (vol. 3). New York, 475-78; Beit-Arié, M. 1988. "How Hebrew Manuscripts are Made." In A Sign and a Witness: 2,000years of Hebrew Books and illustrated Manuscripts. Ed. L. S. Gold. New York and Oxford, 35-46; Resnick, I. M. 1992. "The Codex in Early Jewish and Christian Communities." Journal of Religious History 17, 1-17; Reif, S. C. 1993. "Codicological Aspects of Jewish Liturgical History." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 75, 117—31, and "The Genizah and Jewish Liturgy" (see n. 39 above). Papyrus is still used for some of the older Genizah material (e.g. T-S 6H9-21) and there are also examples of cloth being used for the recording of texts (e.g. T-S 16.31). See Sirat, C. 1985. Les papyrus en caract'eres hébraïques trouvés en Egypte. Paris, and her brief note on T-S 6H9-21 in Genizah Fragments 5, April, 1983, 3-4. See also Haran, M. 1988. "The Codex, the Pinax and the Wooden Slats." (Hebr.) Tarbìξ 57, 151-64, with an additional note in Tarbi^ 58, 1989, 523-24; Havlin, S. Z. 1990. "From Scroll to Codex." (Hebr.) Alei Sefer 16, 151-52 and 160-61; and Bar-Ilan, M. 1991. "HaMa'avar Mi-Megillah Le-Qodeqs." Sinai 107, 242-54. The pentateuchal codex was known to the oriental Jews as mashaf torah, as in e.g. T-S 12.791, or mashaf de-'orayta, as in e.g. T-S A41.41.

m o r e g e n e r a l l e a r n i n g o n t h e o t h e r . T h e y w e r e actively built u p b y i n d i v i d u a l s , s o m e t i m e s b u s i n e s s m e n rather t h a n s p e c i a l i z e d s c h o l a r s , a n d b y c o m m u n i d e s , t h r o u g h g i f t s , a p p e a l s a n d p u r c h a s e s , a n d t h e y w e r e m a d e available f o r a c a d e m i c u s e by s t u d e n t s a n d f o r ritual u s e b y c o n g r e g a n t s . B y c r e a t i n g , c o p y i n g a n d d i s s e m i n a t i n g t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h e s e libraries, t h e M a g h r e b i J e w s o f m e a n s i n t r o d u c e d a w i d e variety o f literary w o r k s t o o t h e r c o m m u n i t i e s a n d t h e r e b y e x e r c i s e d a p o w e r f u l i n f l u e n c e o n t h e l e v e l s o f J e w i s h cultural a c h i e v e m e n t .

The

i m p r e s s i v e c o n t e n t s o f t h e C a i r o G e n i z a h are in n o small d e g r e e d u e t o t h e arrival t h e r e o f m a n y J e w i s h r e f u g e e s f r o m T u n i s i a a n d t o t h e t r a n s f e r o f t h e b i b l i o graphical

riches

o f the N o r t h African c o m m u n i t i e s to the Egyptian centre.103

B o o k - l i s t s are a l s o a c o m m o n f e a t u r e o f t h e G e n i z a h d i s c o v e r i e s a n d d e m o n strate t h e e x i s t e n c e o f r e f e r e n c e literature f o r e d u c a t i o n a l activities by t h e c o m m u n i t y . B i b l e s , prayer b o o k s , t a l m u d i c texts a n d c o m m e n t a r i e s , J e w i s h legal a n d t h e o l o g i c a l tracts, as w e l l as s c i e n t i f i c , m e d i c a l a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l w o r k s , are a m o n g t h e i t e m s that are regularly listed, s o m e t i m e s in t h e c o n t e x t o f a p u b l i c sale. 1 0 4 W h i l e literacy m a y b e d e f i n e d as an a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h literature, it m a y m e a n , a n d i n d e e d m o r e o f t e n t o d a y d o e s m e a n , t h e ability t o read a n d w r i t e a language or m o r e than o n e language. A m o n g the oriental J e w s o f the G e n i z a h p e r i o d , H e b r e w , A r a m a i c a n d A r a b i c w e r e u s e d in a variety o f c o n t e x t s b y d i f ferent p e o p l e for sundry reasons, with each o f these languages exercising an influence o n the others. H e b r e w o b v i o u s l y c o n t i n u e d to b e the language o f the f o r m a l c y c l e s o f biblical r e a d i n g s , w a s a d o p t e d f o r m a s o r e t i c n o t e s o n t h e biblical text, a n d w a s r e t a i n e d as t h e l a n g u a g e o f m i d r a s h i m . It w a s a l s o u s e d f o r t h e s t a t u t o r y prayers a n d f o r t h e c o m p o s i t i o n o f liturgical p o e t r y , a l t h o u g h in t h e latter c a s e it m u s t b e s t r e s s e d that it t o o k o n all m a n n e r o f n o v e l linguistic e l e m e n t s in o r d e r t o a l l o w t h e p o e t s full rein f o r their lyrical originality. It r e m a i n e d t h e " h o l y t o n g u e " a n d l e f t a particularly s t r o n g linguistic l e g a c y w i t h t h e c o m m u n i t i e s that w e r e c l o s e l y i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e P a l e s t i n i a n c e n t r e , w h i c h h a d laid s o m u c h s t r e s s o n t h e H e b r e w B i b l e a n d s t u d i e s o f its linguistic structure. T h e r e w a s , h o w e v e r , c o n s t a n t t e n s i o n a b o u t w h e t h e r t h e biblical o r t h e r a b b i n i c variety o f H e b r e w w a s t h e a u t h o r i t a t i v e f o r m f o r p o s t - b i b l i c a l w o r k s , as w e l l as p e r -

103

104

For details of books, scribes and orality, see The Hebrew Book: An Historical Survey. Ed. R. Posner and I. Ta-Shma. Jerusalem, 1975; Beit-Arié, M. 1976. Hebrew Codicology. Paris (2nd edirion, Jerusalem, 1981); Goitein, Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 228-40; Reif, S. C. 1989. "Aspects of Mediaeval Jewish Literacy." In The Uses of Literacy in Early Mediaeval Europe, ed. R. McKitterick Cambridge, 134-55; Gerhardsson, 1961. Memory and Manuscript. Uppsala, Carruthers, M. J. 1990. The Book of Memory: A Study in Medieval Culture. Cambridge; and Graham, W. A. 1987. Beyond the Written Word: Oral Aspects of Scripture in the History of Religion. Cambridge (paperback edidon, 1993). For much information about libraries in the Genizah period, I am indebted to M. Ben-Sasson for providing as copy of his unpublished Hebrew paper "Sijriyot Ha-Magreb Bi-Geni^at Qahir." Goitein, Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 206 and 248, Med. Soc. 5, 3 - 4 and 425, and on the ransom of books (a Latin note is in T-S 12.722), see Med. Soc. 5, 85, 376 and 529. See also Goitein, S. D., 1988. "Books Migrant and Stationary: A Geniza Study." In Occident and Orient: A Tribute to the Memory of Alexander Scheiber. Ed. R. Dan. Budapest and Leiden, 179-98, citing T-S Ar.5.1 and T-S NS J271. The sale of the library of Rabbi Abraham Hasid is documented in T-S 20.44; see Worman, E. J. 1908. "Two Book Lists from the Cambridge Genizah Fragments." ]ewrsh Quarterly Review 20,450-63.

s i s t e n t c o m p e t i t i o n f r o m its t w o sister l a n g u a g e s . 1 0 5 A r a m a i c w a s restricted t o a m o r e s c h o l a r l y role, b e i n g u s e d f o r the T a l m u d , b o t h B a b y l o n i a n a n d P a l e s d n ian, a n d f o r c o m m e n t a r i e s o n it a n d c o d e s e x t r a c t e d f r o m it. It b e c a m e t h e language m o s t closely associated w i t h the theory and pracdce o f J e w i s h religious law. It w a s a l s o e m p l o y e d f o r t a r g u m i m a n d f o r s o m e parts o f t h e liturgy. S o m e o f t h e earliest prayers s u r v i v e d in A r a m a i c b e c a u s e t h e y h a d b e e n c o m p o s e d in w h a t h a d b e e n a p o p u l a r l a n g u a g e w h i l e s o m e o f t h e latest liturgical material w a s w r i t t e n in A r a m a i c b e c a u s e that g a v e it a h i g h l e v e l o f intellectual s o p h i s u c a tion. 1 0 6 Arabic w a s o f course the d o m i n a n t language o f the h u g e Islamic empire o f t h e G e n i z a h p e r i o d b u t t h e J e w s p r e f e r r e d t o read a n d w r i t e it in H e b r e w a n d n o t in A r a b i c script. T h i s A r a b i c , c u r r e n d y e n u d e d J u d a e o - A r a b i c ,

preserves

m o r e v e r n a c u l a r f o r m s a n d later d i a l e c d c a l f e a t u r e s t h a n classical M u s l i m A r a bic, a n d is a l s o c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f m a n y H e b r e w , as w e l l as s o m e A r a m a i c w o r d s a n d p h r a s e s . A r a b i c p r o p e r , if it m a y b e d e s c r i b e d as s u c h , w a s u s e d o n l y rarely by a m i n o r i t y o f J e w s , g e n e r a l l y t h o s e in a d m i n i s t r a t i v e , religious, m e d i c a l a n d c o m m e r c i a l p r o f e s s i o n s that i n v o l v e d c l o s e c o n t a c t w i t h t h e M u s l i m w o r l d . J u d a e o - A r a b i c , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , w a s s o w i d e s p r e a d that, a c c o r d i n g t o o n e e s t i m a t e , it is r e p r e s e n t e d in a l m o s t h a l f o f t h e t e x t s r e c o v e r e d f r o m t h e G e n i z a h . It w a s J u d a e o - A r a b i c that w a s c h o s e n f o r biblical c o m m e n tary a n d translation; f o r s t u d i e s o f r a b b i n i c literature a n d J e w i s h r e l i g i o u s law; a n d t o p r o v i d e g r a m m a t i c a l , liturgical a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l g u i d a n c e . F o l k l o r e a n d b e l l e s - l e t t r e s are w e l l r e p r e s e n t e d a n d t h e r e are i m p o r t a n t w o r k s in t h e fields o f s c i e n c e a n d m e d i c i n e . A m o n g t h e m o r e m u n d a n e i t e m s are letters, a c c o u n t s , lists a n d legal d o c u m e n t s . 1 0 7 B u t t h e s i t u a t i o n w a s n e v e r quite s o clear-cut. M u n d a n e letters w e r e a l s o w r i t t e n in H e b r e w , p o e m s w e r e c o m p o s e d in A r a m a i c , rubrics f o r t h e H e b r e w prayers w e r e c o u c h e d in J u d a e o - A r a b i c a n d

Hebrew

v o w e l - p o i n t s w e r e a t t a c h e d t o J u d a e o - A r a b i c texts. S o m e t i m e s t h e s a m e w o r k w a s c o m p o s e d in b o t h H e b r e w a n d J u d a e o - A r a b i c . 1 0 8

105

The development of Hebrew over the centuries and its varying form in different contexts is touched upon by Chomsky, W. 1964. Hebrew the Eternal Language. Philadelphia; Kutscher. Ε. Y. 1982. A History of the Hebrew Language. Ed. R. Kutscher. Jerusalem; and Saenz-Badillos, A. 1993. A Histoty of the Hebrew Language. (E. T.), Cambridge. 106 A useful summary of the various Aramaic dialects has been written by Beyer, K. 1986. The Ara• maic Language: Its Distribution and Sub-Divisions (E. T.), Göttingen, and important work has also been done by M. Sokoloff (see n. 24 above). 107 Basic work on Judaeo-Arabic as an independent Jewish language has been done by Joshua Blau, the world's expert in the field, in his The Emergente and Linguistic Background ofJudaeo-Arabic. Oxford, 1965; A Study of the Origins of Middle Arabic. Jerusalem, 1981; and Studies in Middle Arabic and its Judaeo-Arabic Variety. Jerusalem, 1988. Colin Baker has produced a useful summary of the relevant Genizah genres in his "Judaeo-Arabic Material in the Cambridge Genizah Collections." Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 58, 1995, 445-54; see also the essays on a variety of Judaeo-Arabic topics in Genizah Research, eds. Blau and Reif (see n. 8 above). The limited use of Arabic by Jews is explained by G. Khan in "The Arabic Fragments in the Cambridge Genizah Collections." Manuscripts of the Middle East 1, 1986, 54—60 and "Arabic Documents in the Cairo Genizah." Bulletin of the Israeli Academic Center in Cairo 21, 1997, 23-25. 108 ‫־[־‬he unusual occurrence of particular Jewish languages in unexpected contexts is noted and documented in S. C. Reif, "Aspects of Mediaeval Jewish Literacy" in R. McKitterick's volume (see n. 103 above), 148-49, and Khan has dealt with the Arabic transcriptions of the Hebrew Bi-

A s is w e l l k n o w , J e w i s h u s e o f l a n g u a g e s o t h e r t h a n H e b r e w b y w a y o f H e b r e w script and characterisdc, J e w i s h vocabulary, w a s n o t restricted to the Arabics p e a k i n g w o r l d . E l s e w h e r e t o o , t h e J e w s w e r e a n x i o u s t o h a v e their linguistic c a k e a n d t o eat it. W h i l e a s s i m i l a t i n g culturally by a d o p t i n g t h e l o c a l l a n g u a g e , t h e y m a i n t a i n e d their J e w i s h i d e n t i t y b y h e b r a i z i n g v a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f its f o r m . W h a t is p e r h a p s l e s s w i d e l y a p p r e c i a t e d is t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h s u c h J e w i s h lang u a g e s , d e f i n e d b y s o c i o - l i n g u i s t s as " e t h n o l e c t s , " are r e p r e s e n t e d a m o n g t h e G e n i z a h m a n u s c r i p t s . I n a d d i t i o n t o J u d a e o - A r a b i c , a l t h o u g h in m u c h m o r e limited

number,

the

Genizah

researcher encounters

t e x t s in

Judaeo-Greek,

J u d a e o - S p a n i s h , J u d a e o - G e r m a n ( Y i d d i s h ) a n d J u d a e o - P e r s i a n . A l t h o u g h w e are h e r e m o r e i n t e r e s t e d in t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f s u c h t e x t s f o r t h e h i s t o r y o f J e w i s h literacy a n d c u l t u r e , it s h o u l d n o t b e f o r g o t t e n that t h e y p r o v i d e e s s e n t i a l e v i d e n c e f o r t h o s e r e s e a r c h i n g t h e earliest h i s t o r i e s o f t h e n o n - S e m i t i c o n w h i c h t h e y are b a s e d .

languages

110

W h a t m a y b e said a b o u t t h e e x t e n t o f J e w i s h literacy s o m e e i g h t c e n t u r i e s a g o ? T h e e v i d e n c e f r o m t h e G e n i z a h c o n v i n c i n g l y d e m o n s t r a t e s that w r i t t e n material o f a great variety o f c o n t e n t e x i s t e d in t h e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y in a n d a r o u n d C a i r o f r o m t h e t e n t h t o t h e t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s . I n t h e r e g i o n o f at least 2 1 0 , 0 0 0 m a n u s c r i p t f r a g m e n t s , y i e l d i n g a total o f at least t h r e e t i m e s t h a t n u m ber o f individual leaves, the majority o f t h e m dating f r o m t h o s e centuries, have survived the ravages o f time and the elements, to excite the interest o f the m o d e m researcher. O n e m a y t h e r e f o r e c o n f i d e n t l y a s s u m e that t h e original h o a r d d e p o s i t e d in t h e B e n E z r a s y n a g o g u e w a s g r e a d y in e x c e s s o f that n u m b e r a n d i t s e l f r e p r e s e n t e d o n l y a p r o p o r t i o n o f w h a t w a s actually p r o d u c e d in t h e c o m m u n i t i e s in a n d a r o u n d C a i r o . " 1 It is t h e r e f o r e in n o w a y s u r p r i s i n g t o f i n d e v i -

109

110

111

ble in his Karaite Bible Manuscripts (see n. 13 above). The relationship between the different Jewish languages is discussed by Drory, R. 1986. The Emergence of Hebrew-Arabic Literary Contacts at the Beginning of the Tenth Century (Hebr.), Tel Aviv and by David Téné in his ardcle on comparative linguisdcs "Hashva'at Ha-Leshonof\see n. 8 above), 237-87. For some very helpful remarks and bibliography about "ethnolects," see "Adaptations of Hebrew Script." In two parts by B. Hary and H. I. Aronson, in The World's Writing Systems, Ed. P. T. Daniels and W. Bright. New York and Oxford, 1996, 727^12. Concerning the various "Jewish" languages, see the Haifa periodical Jewish Languages•, Bendavid, A. 1967. Lisbon Ha-Miqra U-leshon Hakhamim. Tel Aviv; Federbush, S. 1967. Ha-Lashon Ha '\vrit Be-Yisrael Uva-'Arnim. Jerusalem; Blau, J. 1961. A Grammar of Mediaeval Judaeo-Arabic. Jerusalem. The Judaeo-Greek texts have recendy been edited by N. de Lange in his Greek Jewish Texts from the Cairo Genizah. Tübingen, 1996; for some of the historical background, see Bowman, S. B. 1985. The Jews of Byzantium. Alabama. A brief guide to the Judaeo-Spanish Genizah items is E. Gutwirth and S. C. Reif, Ten Centuries ofHispano-Jewish Culture. Cambridge, 1992. In the matter of Yiddish items in the Genizah, Simon Hopkins provides information about new discoveries and those that preceded them in his ardcle "A Fragment of Pirqe Avot in Old Yiddish." Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies 1981 8/3, Jerusalem, 1982, 153-57, and "A Geniza Fragment of Pirqe Avot in Old Yiddish." Tarbi% 52, 1983, 459-67. The Genizah fragments here referred to are T-S Misc.36.L.1, T-S E3.114 and T-S 10K22. S. Shaked is the leading authority in the field of Judaeo-Persian and has summarized the situation and published some texts in his "Two JudaeoIranian Contributions: Fragments of Two Karaite Commentaries on Daniel in Judaeo-Persian." In Irano-Judaica: Studies Relating to Jewish Contacts with Persian Culture throughout the Ages, Ed. S. Shaked. Jerusalem, 1982, 304-22. See Goitein, Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 173; Beit-Arie, Hebrew Codicolog)‫( ׳‬see n. 103 above), 9 19; Hopkins, S. A. 1981. "The Oldest Dated Document in the Geniza?" In Studies in Judaism and

d e n c e o f a c o n c e r n o n t h e part o f adults that their c h i l d r e n , as i n d e e d

they

t h e m s e l v e s , s h o u l d e n j o y a r e a s o n a b l e level o f literacy. O n e f a t h e r w a s

con-

s c i o u s o f t h e fact that an o p p o r t u n i t y t o d e m o n s t r a t e his p r o w e s s in p u b l i c w a s a n e c e s s a r y i n c e n t i v e f o r his s o n . H e t h e r e f o r e i n s t r u c t e d his s o n ' s t e a c h e r t o p r e p a r e h i m f o r t h e r e c i t a t i o n in t h e s y n a g o g u e o f p a s s a g e s f r o m t h e P r o p h e t s a n d t h e E s t h e r Scroll. I f n u m e r a c y m a y b e i n c l u d e d u n d e r t h e g e n e r a l h e a d i n g o f literacy, it s h o u l d b e n o t e d that r e f e r e n c e s are a l s o f o u n d t o a r i t h m e t i c , alt h o u g h less frequently than to H e b r e w and Arabic. O n e m o t h e r had a contract d r a w n u p a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h h e r s o n w o u l d b e t a u g h t A r a b i c script a n d a r i t h m eric at an a g r e e d f e e o f t w o dinars. H i s l a n g u a g e l e s s o n s w e r e i n t e n d e d t o train h i m t o w r i t e a w e l l - c o m p o s e d A r a b i c letter w i t h o u t s p e l l i n g m i s t a k e s , w h i l e his e d u c a t i o n in a r i t h m e t i c a i m e d at m a s t e r y in t h e a b a c u s , d e c i m a l s , a n d a c c o u n t s . B e i n g largely p h o n e t i c , H e b r e w c o u l d b e t a u g h t analytically letter by letter, alt h o u g h t h e r e is e v i d e n c e o f at least o n e p e d a g o g i c a l i n n o v a t o r w h o p r e f e r r e d t h e g l o b a l m e t h o d . T h a t t e a c h e r , in a small p r o v i n c i a l t o w n in E g y p t in t h e t w e l f t h c e n t u r y , i n c u r r e d t h e w r a t h o f a rabbinic j u d g e in C a i r o w h o g a v e strict i n s t r u c rions

f o r h i m t o revert t o t h e m o r e traditional m e t h o d s . 1 1 2

Girls did n o t automatically receive s u c h an education but occasionally there w e r e p a r e n t s w h o m a d e special a r r a n g e m e n t s

f o r t h e m , usually f o r

biblical

studies. 1 1 ‫ י‬O n e m o t h e r w a s s o a n x i o u s that h e r d a u g h t e r s h o u l d r e c e i v e a s o u n d e d u c a t i o n that s h e m a d e a d e a t h - b e d r e q u e s t in a letter w r i t t e n in h e r o w n h a n d t o h e r sister. S h e a s k e d h e r t o take o n t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r e n s u r i n g this, alt h o u g h s h e w a s aware that this w o u l d strain t h e f a m i l y r e s o u r c e s . T h e t e x t is at o n c e m o v i n g a n d instructive, w e l l w o r t h citing, at least in part (in G o i t e i n ' s translation): 1 1 4 T h i s is to i n f o r m you, my lady, dear s i s t e r — m a y G o d accept m e as a r a n s o m f o r y o u — t h a t I have b e c o m e seriously ill with little h o p e of recovery, and I have d r e a m s indicating that my end is near. My lady, my m o s t urgent request o f you, if G o d , the exalted, indeed decrees my death, is that you take care o f my litde d a u g h t e r and m a k e e f f o r t s to give h e r an education, although I k n o w

Islam Presented to S. D. Goitein. Ed. S. Morag, I. Ben-Ami, and N. A. Stillman. Jerusalem, 83-98; and Reif, "Aspects" (see n. 103 above). 12 Genizah and other medieval material reladng to educadon is dealt with in the Hebrew volumes by Assaf, S. 1925-43. Meqorot Le-Toledot Ha-Hinukh be-Yisrae! (A vols.). Tel Aviv; Morris, N. 1960, 1964, 1977. A History of Jewish Education (3 vols.). Jerusalem; Goitein, S. D. 1962. Jewish Education in Muslim Countries based on Records from the Cairo Genista. Jerusalem; and Safran, J. 1983. Studies in the History of Jewish Education. Jerusalem. See also Goitein, Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 173—83 and 185-90 and his GCAV (see n. 77 above), 83-110. The fragments relating to the préparations for synagogal reading, to the study of Arabic and arithmetic, and to the global method are T-S Ar.30.36, T-S NS J401 and T-S 13J23.20, which are edited, translated and discussed by Goitein in GCAV (see n. 77 above), 89, 93-94, 97-99, 102, 106-7 and 109-10. ' ‫ נ‬On girls and women, see Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 183-85 and for women's letters see the forthcoming volume by J. Kraemer, Women's Letters from the Genizah. The loss of a litde girl who was a fine biblical scholar is recorded in Jewish Theological Seminary, ENA 2935.17 and dealt with by Goitein in GCAV (see n. 77 above), 87. 14 The woman's death-bed request occurs in Genizah Misc. 6* in the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary and receives the attention of Goitein in GCA V (see n. 77 above), 85-87 and 100-1.

well that I am asking you for something unreasonable, as there is not enough money—by my father—for support, let alone for formal instruction. H o w ever, she has a model in our saindy mother .my lady, only G o d knows how I wrote these lines! T h e fact that there are a n u m b e r o f letters in w h i c h w i v e s are directly addressed by their husbands, as against others in w h i c h a male colleague is requested to pass o n written information by w o r d o f m o u t h to the writer's s p o u s e , appears to d e m o n s t r a t e that w o m e n were n o t universally illiterate. Since there are specific letters and d o c u m e n t s written in female hands, it is clear that s o m e w o m e n were acquainted n o t only with reading but also with writing. It should, h o w e v e r , be a c k n o w l e d g e d that e v e n these occurrences are in the legal, c o m m u n a l and personal spheres, rather than in the literary. E v e n if Cairo was better k n o w n a m o n g the c o m m u n i t i e s o f the J e w i s h world for its e c o n o m i c activity than for its acad e m i e p r o w e s s , there are still clear indications in the G e n i z a h o f a fairly high level o f literacy. Scholarly notes, invitations to lectures, details o f refresher c o u r s e s — a l l p o i n t to an intense degree o f educational activity, while the remainder o f the e v i d e n c e c o n f i r m s that it was n o t an élitist or an exclusivist preoccupation. 1 1 5 H a v i n g ranged o v e r a w i d e area o f the G e n i z a h evidence, w e are n o w in a p o s i t i o n to deal with the question raised at the outset about the nature o f that material's impact o n J e w i s h studies. It s e e m s incontrovertible that these texts are n o t exclusively relevant to technical manuscript studies and to the c l o s e analysis o f authoritative religious literature but have m u c h to say about a great variety o f J e w i s h and general activities in the Mediterranean area o f the early medieval period. T h e y shed light o n many aspects o f political, social and culmral history and are therefore deserving o f the attention n o t only o f scholars c o m m i t t e d to deciphering and e d i d n g t h e m but also o f their colleagues t h r o u g h o u t the field o f J e w i s h studies w h o have broader intellectual interests. T h e y will certainly repay c l o s e examination in their s e c o n d century as they did in their first and there will be g o o d reason to be grateful that the h o p e s o f seeing t h e m burnt were n o t realized.

115

See Mann, J. 1921. "Listes des Livres provenant de la Gueniza." Revue des Etudes Juives 72, 163-83 and Texts and Studies (see η. 53 above), 643-84; and Goitein, Med. Soc. (see n. 68 above) 2, 191-

211.

RESOURCES IN J E W I S H S T U D I E S ON YOUR H O M E C O M P U T E R E D I T H LUBETSKI Yeshivah University, USA I feel a little like Hillel, the Talmudic sage, w h e n he w a s a p p r o a c h e d by a heathen w h o wanted to c o n v e r t and asked to be taught the w h o l e T o r a h o n o n e foot. Hillel at least had an answer: "What is hateful to y o u d o n o t d o to your fellow; the rest is c o m m e n t a r y , g o and learn it." (T: Sab. 31a). I a m n o t s o lucky. T h e w h o l e torah o f CD-ROMs and online sources c a n n o t be taught o n o n e f o o t , o r e v e n in o n e ardcle. T h e r e f o r e , w h a t is presented here is a s e l e c d o n o f the types o f resources available, with s o m e e x a m p l e s — a f e w d r o p s f r o m the Internet ocean. T h i s paper will give an o v e r v i e w about s o m e o f the material that can be retrieved through your h o m e computer. T h e addresses, listed at the end, will enable y o u g o to the sites and explore t h e m m o r e fully o n your o w n . T h e r e is an e x p l o s i o n o f textual material available via the c o m p u t e r . T h i s material is acc e s s e d primarily in t w o ways: by CD-ROM and by the Internet. T h e f o c u s o f this ardcle will be o n the Internet; but, I will m e n d o n a f e w CD-ROMs that y o u can purchase and install o n your h o m e c o m p u t e r .

Primary Texts: Imagine a tenth century rabbi in a small c o m m u n i t y far f r o m the centers o f Judaism. H e n e e d s an halachic o p i n i o n o n a particular issue. W h a t d o e s he do? H e s e n d s letters to learned sages t h r o u g h o u t the world. If fortunate, he will receive answers within the year. Picture a 1990's rabbi with the same p r o b l e m , or a scholar seeking an halachic judgement, and t o d a y — w i t h the click o f a m o u s e — this rabbi or scholar has a wealth o f o p i n i o n at his or her fingertips. T h o u s a n d s o f pages o f a b o v e program to w h i c h I only primary sources such also responsa literature and

basic J e w i s h texts have b e e n put o n CD-ROMs. T h e refer is the Bar-Ilan R e s p o n s a (1). It contains n o t as Bible and c o m m e n t a r i e s , T a l m u d , Midrash, but biographies.

Years ago, w h e n he was researching the topic "Dina D'Malcbuta, Dinah," Rabbi Dr. L e o L a n d m a n told m e he s p e n t w e e k s and m o n t h s trying to locate teshuvot dealing with this question. H e retrieved only a small p o r t i o n o f the available material. Recendy, w h e n he searched it again o n the Bar-Ilan R e s p o n s a , he was able to retrieve in minutes all the references f r o m o v e r 2 5 0 v o l u m e s , spanning the 11th through 20th centuries. T h e Bar-Ilan program is the only CD-ROM w h i c h p r o v i d e s responsa; but, other CD-ROMs provide an assortment o f primary materials. T h o u g h m o s t overlap, each o f the CD-ROMs has its o w n unique collection o f texts.

M o r e a n d m o r e primary s o u r c e s are a p p e a r i n g o n t h e I n t e r n e t . Y o u c a n f i n d t h e B i b l e , M i s h n a h , T o s e p h t a , T a l m u d a n d R a m b a m o n t h e I n t e r n e t a n d t h e y are fully s e a r c h a b l e . Israel h a s p o s t e d t h e s e t e x t s at a m a r v e l o u s site c a l l e d

Snunit,

m e a n i n g " s w a l l o w " (2). I n o r d e r t o u s e it, y o u will n e e d t o d o w n l o a d f o n t s . I n s t r u c t i o n s at t h e site are p r o v i d e d . A s a c a d e m i c s , y o u m i g h t n o t h a v e m u c h g o l d in y o u r p o c k e t s ; b u t , y o u c a n f i n d GOLD o n t h e Internet: that is t h e G e n i z a h O n - L i n e D a t a b a s e (4). W h i l e t h e r e are t e x t s in hard c o p y that list, d e s c r i b e a n d transcribe g e n i z a h f r a g m e n t s , P r i n c e t o n a n d C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i d e s are n o w p r o v i d i n g s o m e o f this i n f o r m a d o n o n - l i n e . T h o u g h t h e r e is n o t a great deal n o w , t h e r e will b e in t h e n e a r f u ture. S o m e g e n i z a h f r a g m e n t s c a n b e s e e n in full. D e t a i l e d a n n o t a t i o n s are p r o vided. A t t h e C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y site o n t h e W e b , o n e c a n s e a r c h t h e T a r g u m i c D a t a b a s e f o r f r a g m e n t s o f d i f f e r e n t T a r g u m i m . O n e e n t e r s a v e r s e a n d retrieves a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f any T a r g u m i c f r a g m e n t s that h a v e b e e n p o s t e d .

Reference Tools A CD-ROM t o a c c e s s a d d i t i o n a l textual material is

tory of the Hebrew Language

Maagatinr. Dictionary of the His-

(5). It c o v e r s t h e s e c o n d c e n t u r y B C E t o t h e m i d - f i f t h

C e n t u r y C E . W h i l e this 1 , 7 5 0 , 0 0 0 w o r d c o r p u s i n c l u d e s T a n n a i t i c literature a n d P a l e s t i n i a n T a l m u d — c o v e r e d b y o t h e r d a t a b a s e s — i t a d d s liturgical t e x t s , p o etry, D e a d S e a S c r o l l s , d o c u m e n t s a n d i n s c r i p t i o n s .

Library Catalogs W h e n y o u s e a r c h f o r material o n a n y s u b j e c t in t h e library, o r y o u just n e e d t o verify bibliographic information, y o u can access catalogs o f s o m e o f the great J u d a i c a r e s e a r c h libraries. It s h o u l d b e n o t e d , h o w e v e r , that n o t e v e r y t h i n g a library o w n s h a s b e e n e n t e r e d i n t o t h e c o m p u t e r . A v a l u a b l e r e s o u r c e is t h e Israeli library o n l i n e s y s t e m (6), w h i c h i n c l u d e s b e s i d e s t h e u n i v e r s i t y l i b r a r i e s — c o l l e g e a n d special libraries. E a c h o f t h e u n i v e r sity libraries l e a d s y o u t o a d d i t i o n a l s u b j e c t c o l l e c t i o n s a n d s p e c i a l libraries. F o r e x a m p l e , t h r o u g h H e b r e w U n i v e r s i t y , o n e c a n a c c e s s t h e M e l t o n Library f o r J e w i s h E d u c a t i o n in t h e D i a s p o r a . It is p o s s i b l e t o s e a r c h Israeli libraries individually b y a u t h o r , title a n d s u b ject. O r , o n e c a n s e a r c h all t h e Israeli u n i v e r s i t y libraries at o n c e by a u t h o r a n d tide.

I f y o u h a v e p r o p e r f o n t s capability y o u c a n s e a r c h in t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e

e n t r y (i.e., H e b r e w , A r a b i c , Cyrillic). O n e c a n a l s o a c c e s s J u d a i c a libraries a n d a r c h i v e s in d i f f e r e n t parts o f t h e w o r l d . T h e site is a r r a n g e d g e o g r a p h i c a l l y a n d p r o v i d e s direct links t o t h e libraries. F o r e x a m p l e , y o u c a n link d i r e c d y t o H e b r e w U n i v e r s i t y , t h e J e w i s h T h e o l o g i c a l S e m i n a r y o f A m e r i c a , a n d t o Y e s h i v a U n i v e r s i t y (7).

Periodical Indexes: Library c a t a l o g s p r o v i d e i n f o r m a d o n primarily a b o u t b o o k s . H o w d o e s o n e f i n d articles in p e r i o d i c a l s o r c h a p t e r s in c o l l e c t i o n s ? E v e r s i n c e 1 9 6 6 t h e r e h a s b e e n a m a r v e l o u s t o o l called t h e R a m b i , a n a c r o n y m f o r ‫ר ש י מ ת ה א מ ר י מ ב מ ד ע י ה י ה ד ו ת‬ o r in E n g l i s h

Index ofArticles on Jewish Studies

( 1 9 6 6 - ) (8). T h i s t o o l i n d e x e s s c h o l -

arly articles o f J e w i s h i n t e r e s t f r o m all journals w o r l d w i d e , in a n y l a n g u a g e (ine l u d i n g J a p a n e s e ) . T h i s is a n a n n u a l that is o n l i n e s i n c e 1 9 8 5 a n d c a n b e a c c e s s e d in R o m a n a n d H e b r e w characters. B e s i d e s t h e RAMBI, t h e Israeli Library S y s t e m o f f e r s o t h e r s p e c i a l i z e d ind e x e s a n d d a t a b a s e s , e a c h c o v e r i n g a d i f f e r e n t field: Y i d d i s h , H e b r a i c a , tisemitism,

an-

c o n t e m p o r a r y J e w r y , f i l m s , art, law.

A n o t h e r i n d e x o f i n t e r e s t is TOCS-IN (9) w h i c h is an a c r o n y m f o r

Table of

Contents of Journals of Interest to Classicists. The name may seem unrelated to our s u b j e c t ; b u t , a c o n s i d e r a b l e n u m b e r o f j u d a i c a articles c a n b e f o u n d there.

Electronic Journals T h e i n d e x e s d e s c r i b e d a b o v e i n d i c a t e o n l y t h e c i t a t i o n o f a journal article; b u t , t h e I n t e r n e t a l s o p r o v i d e s full-text p e r i o d i c a l s . S o m e are free; m o s t require a s u b s c r i p t i o n . H e r e are t w o w h i c h are gratis:

Jewish Studies Judaica and ejournal (10)

and JTS Magazine (formerly Masoret) (11). O n e o n l i n e journal that requires a s u b s c r i p t i o n is

Modern Judaism. S o m e

li-

braries p r o v i d e free a c c e s s f o r their p a t r o n s t o s u c h journals. T h e r e are lists o f o n l i n e p e r i o d i c a l s o n t h e I n t e r n e t . T h e lists are l o n g ; b u t , it s h o u l d b e n o t e d that m o s t are n o t free, n o r d o t h e y usually h a v e a large b a c k f i l e ( 1 2 , 1 3 ) .

Reviews S c h o l a r s a l s o c o n s u l t b o o k r e v i e w s , e i t h e r t o e v a l u a t e a particular t e x t o r as a m e a n s o f f i n d i n g o u t a b o u t r e c e n t b o o k s in their fields. F o r e x a m p l e :

IOU-

D A I O S (14) p o s t s r e v i e w s . B r y n M a w r (15), a m o r e e x t e n s i v e t o o l , r e v i e w s m a terial f o r classicists, i n c l u d i n g J u d a i c a . Η - J u d a i c a l s o h a s a small n u m b e r o f b o o k r e v i e w s (16).

Selected Subjects B e s i d e s t y p e s o f materials, t h e r e are sites f o r s p e c i f i c s u b j e c t s . F o r B i b l e , t h e r e is an e n o r m o u s a m o u n t o f material. I r e f e r y o u h e r e t o o n e p a g e w h i c h will lead y o u t o m a n y o t h e r s : Biblical R e s o u r c e s (17). In a d d i t i o n , t h e r e is a w o n d e r f u l n e w i n d e x t o biblical l i t e r a t u r e — B I L D I (18). T h i s c a n b e s e a r c h e d by k e y w o r d s in E n g l i s h . T h e s u b j e c t h e a d i n g s are primarily in G e r m a n ; b u t e v e n t u a l l y all will a l s o b e in E n g l i s h . F o r t h e D e a d S e a S c r o l l s , t h e O r i o n C e n t e r f o r t h e S t u d y o f D e a d S e a S c r o l l s a n d A s s o c i a t e d Literature p o s t s a h o m e p a g e w i t h m a n y res o u r c e s — i n c l u d i n g a n e x t e n s i v e b i b l i o g r a p h y (19). T h e r e are a n u m b e r o f S e p h a r d i c h o m e p a g e s — m o s d y c o n t a i n i n g p o p u l a r material. BZNET, a g a t e w a y t o S e p h a r d i c r e s o u r c e s , p r o v i d e s m a n y links t o o t h e r S e p h a r d i c p a g e s (20).

Since the E u r o p e a n A s s o c i a t i o n for Jewish Studies d e v o t e d a s e c d o n to Philo, I am lisdng a collection o f resources d e v o t e d to this p h i l o s o p h e r (21). A n t i s e m i t i s m is a broad subject also c o v e r e d by many sites. T h e r e is a page called A n t i s e m i t i s m Link Launcher that serves as a webliography, providing many links to anti-semitism and related subjects (22). Finally, the N e t has a great deal o f material o n J e w i s h w o m e n . T h e r e is b o t h a bibliography (23) as well as a webliography, a page that will link to m a n y others (24).

Directories O n e important aspect o f research is networking with other scholars. T h e r e f o r e a Directory o f J e w i s h Scholars (25) has b e e n created. Personally, I think it n e e d s m o r e input f r o m scholars to be useful. It s e e m s to be still in its formative stages.

Other Listserus Listservs are discussion g r o u p s according to subject areas. T h e r e are bibliographies o f listservs f r o m w h i c h to c h o o s e the o n e s m o s t appropriate to your interests. H — J u d a i c has c o m p i l e d such a list (26).

Gateways H o w d o y o u find the a b o v e material o n the Internet? A l m o s t anything o n the Internet can be f o u n d in a variety o f ways. It is as if the information is sitting o n a shelf in the c l o s e t o f the ballroom in a grand casde. Y o u can enter the casde through many different d o o r s and the ballroom f r o m any n u m b e r o f d o o r s , to find the specific location. T h e r e are a n u m b e r o f individuals w h o have organized Judaica resources o n the Internet. A great deal overlaps; but, each source has unique items and is organized differendy. Listed here ( 2 7 - 3 1 ) are a f e w gateways to Jewish materials.

Guides to the Jewish Internet F o r an extensive treatment o f Judaica o n the w e b , you can c o n s u l t b o o k s w h o s e authors have organized the sites into subject areas and have annotated the entries ( 3 2 - 3 4 ) . Again, all overlap, each with a unique approach. Since such b o o k s are o u t - o f - d a t e e v e n b e f o r e publication, D i a n e R o m m , author o f

The Jewish

Guide to the Internet has posted updates to her book on the web (35).

Conclusion A s g o o d as the World W i d e W e b s e e m s to be, it is still in its infancy. T h e r e are w o n d e r f u l tools o n it, and it is w o r t h exploring. Still, it has n o t m a d e b o o k s o b solete. A great deal is o n the Internet; m u c h m o r e is not. F o r t h o s e o f y o u w h o w o u l d rather use a b o o k , rest assured you are not totally o u t m o d e d . T h e Internet d o e s n o t supplant libraries; it s u p p l e m e n t s them. Years ago, w h e n I was a graduate student in J e w i s h Studies at Y e s h i v a University, m y teacher, P r o f e s s o r Irving A g u s , told the class that the m o s t i m p o r -

tant t h i n g t o d o w h e n starring r e s e a r c h is t o g o t o t h e library a n d d p y o u r h a t t o t h e librarian. L i f e h a s c h a n g e d c o n s i d e r a b l y s i n c e t h e n : first, it's n o t n e c e s s a r i l y a w o m a n librarian; s e c o n d , t h e m e n d o n ' t n e c e s s a r i l y w e a r hats; a n d finally, t h e r e s e a r c h e r is n o t n e c e s s a r i l y m a l e . W h a t h a s n ' t c h a n g e d , h o w e v e r , is t h e h e l p a librarian c a n o f f e r in f i n d i n g w h a t y o u n e e d — e s p e c i a l l y in this n e w t e c h n o l o g i cal w o r l d w i t h t h e ability t o d o r e s e a r c h g l o b a l l y . S o take a d v a n t a g e o f that v a l u able h u m a n r e s o u r c e . G o o d luck w i t h y o u r research!

JUDAICA RESOURCES O N L I N E I

ELECTRONIC TEXTS BASIC JEWISH TEXTS 1

B a r Ilan R e s p o n s a (CD ROM) [ T o r a h E d u c a d o n a l S o f t w a r e ]

2

Snunit—http://wwwl.snunit.kl2.il/

GENIZAH 3 4 II

http://

www.lib.cam.ac.uk/Taylor-Schechter/GOLD/

http://www.princeton.edu/~geniza/

REFERENCE TOOLS 5

MAAGARIM: H i s t o r i c a l D i c t i o n a r y o f t h e H e b r e w L a n g u a g e (CD-ROM) [email protected]

III LIBRARY CATALOGS 6

MAJOR ISRAELI LIBRARIES—telnet: r a m l . h u j i . a c . i l

7

JUDAICA LIBRARIES AND ARCHIVES ON THE WEB http://www.amherst.edu/~edstarr/judlibs.html

I V INDEXES 8 9 V

R A M B I — t e l n e t : r a m l . h u j i . a c . i l (at first s c r e e n t y p e l b rbi) Tocs-1N-ftp://ftp.chass.utoronto.ca/pub/tocs-in/Search.html

ELECTRONIC JOURNALS

10

Jewish Studies Judaic ejournal

11

JTS

12

PROJECT MUSE

http://www.coalliance.org/unitrec/ej000165.html Maga^ne-htvp·.//www.jtsa.edu/pubs/jtsmag/index.html

http://muse.jhu.edu/muse.html 13

ABZU HTΦ://WWW-OI.UCHICAGO.EDU/OI/DEΡT/RA/ABZU/ABZU_JOURNAL_INDEX.HTML

V I B O O K / C D ROM REVIEWS 14 15

IouDAios-http://listserv.lehigh.edu/lists/ioudaios-review/ B r y n M a w r Classical R e v i e w gopher://gopher.lib.virginia.edu/11 /alpha/ bmcr

16

H-Judaic-http://www.h-net.msu.edu/~judaic/

V I I SELECTED SUBJECTS 17 18

B1BLE-http://weber.u. washington.edu/~snoegel/okeanos.html B1LD1-http://starwww.uibk.ac.at/theologie/theologie-en.html

19

DEAD SEA S c R 0 L L S - h t t p : / / 0 r i 0 n . m s c s . h u j i . a e . i l / i n d e x . h t m l

20

SEPHARDIC-http://www.bsz.org/

21

PHiLO-http://www.hivolda.no/asf/kkf/philopag.html

22

ANT1SEM1T1SM-http://ucsu.colorado.edi/~jsu/antisemidsm.html#

23

WOMEN http://www.library.wisc.edu/libraries/WomensSmdies/jewwom/jwmn.ht

24

http://aleph.lib.ohio-state.edu/www/biblio.html#Websites

V I I I DIRECTORY OF JEWISH SCHOLARS 25.

http://www.h-net.msu.edu/-judaic/persondirectory.html

I X LISTSERVS 26

JEWISH STUDIES JUDAICA AND EJOURNAL LIST http://www.h-net.msu.edu/~judaic/lists.txt

X

GATEWAYS 27

W W W : H e b r a i c a and J u d a i c a o n the W e b http://columbia.edu/cu/libraries/indiv/area/Jewish/ http://www.columbia.edu/cu/cijs/wwweb.html

28

A s s o c i a t i o n o f J e w i s h Libraries H o m e P a g e s AJL-http://aleph.lib.ohio-state.edu/www Whats-New.html

29

P e n n Library J e w i s h I n t e r n e t R e s o u r c e s http://www.library.upenn.edu/cjs/intereso.html

30

N o r t h w e s t e r n U n i v e r s i t y Library http://www.library.nwu.edu/resources/judaica/

31

A c a d e m i c Jewish Studies (Dulsberg University) http://www.uni-duisburg.de/FBl/JSmdien/judaica.html

X I GUIDES TO THE JEWISH INTERNET 32

G r e e n , Irving.

Judaism on the Web. N e w

York: MIS Press and M & Τ

Books. 1997 33

Levin, Michael.

The Guide to the Jewish Internet.

S a n F r a n c i s c o . N o Starch

The Jewish Guide to the Internet.

N e w Jersey: J a s o n A r o n -

Press. 1 9 9 6 34

R o m m , Diane. s o n Inc. 1 9 9 6

35

Updates to # 3 3 - h t t p : / / w w w . u s c j . o r g / m e t n y / b e l l m o b / j n e t . h t m

CONSOLIDATED V S DISPERSED COLLECTIONS T H E CASE FOR AN INTERDISCIPLINARY A P P R O A C H J U D I T H NADLER University of Chicago Library, USA T h e topic o f m y talk is collection d e v e l o p m e n t in an interdisciplinary environment. My observations s t e m f r o m years o f experience in a research library serving a research c o n s t i t u e n c y — t h e University o f C h i c a g o Library at the University o f Chicago. O v e r the years I have held various p o s i t i o n s at the University Library, and for the past ten years I have served in the dual role o f Assistant D i r e c t o r o f Technical Services and Selector for Judaica. C o m p l e m e n t i n g the collection d e v e l o p m e n t aspects o f my responsibilities as Selector with the administrative / managerial responsibilities at the Assistant D i r e c t o r level, I m a n age a broad spectrum o f issues that provide the background for my observadons. IN SUMMARY: a) interdisciplinary study and teaching is best supported by collecd o n s that are d e v e l o p e d in an interdisciplinary setting, b) physically and bibliographically integrated collections benefit f r o m partnerships with the general collections, and c) the balance b e t w e e n collection resources and e c o n o m i c resources is m o r e equitably sustained in an interdisciplinary e n v i r o n m e n t . T o put my text into context:

The University T h e University o f Chicago, f o u n d e d in 1892, is a private, n o n d e n o m i n a t i o n a l , coeducational institution o f higher learning and research. It includes the undergraduate college, four graduate divisions o f Humanities, Social Science, Physical Sciences, and Biological Sciences, and six professional s c h o o l s . M o s t recent enrollment figures are 9 , 9 6 8 full-time students, o f w h i c h 6,453 were graduate enrollments and 3 , 5 1 5 were College enrollments. T h e r e are 1,186 faculty m e m b e r s . T h e graduate programs o f the University o f C h i c a g o regularly rank a m o n g the t o p h a l f - d o z e n nationally.

The Library Library collections, n u m b e r i n g m o r e than six million v o l u m e s , reflect the strengths and research interests o f the academic programs. T h e Library's online catalog is available locally and o f f - c a m p u s by free, r e m o t e access. A b o u t 2 million bibliographic records processed since 1975 are included in the Library's online catalog. A project is underway to add 1.3 million records online through

a m a j o r retrospective c o n v e r s i o n project to b e c o m p l e t e d by the year 2 0 0 0 . M o s t r e c e n t annual e x p e n d i m r e s total a p p r o x i m a t e l y $ 2 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . O f

these,

a p p r o x i m a t e l y 8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 are for a c q u i s i d o n o f c o l l e c d o n s .

The Graduate Program in Jewish Studies F r o m the b e g i n n i n g , the character o f J e w i s h Studies at C h i c a g o has b e e n o n e o f interdisciplinarity: faculty t e a c h i n g c o u r s e s have c o m e f r o m Classics, E n g l i s h , G e r m a n i c Studies, Linguistics, Music, N e a r E a s t e r n L a n g u a g e s and C i v i l i z a d o n s , P h i l o s o p h y , and Slavic L a n g u a g e s and Literatures in the H u m a n i t i e s D i v i s i o n ; f r o m History, Political S c i e n c e , P s y c h o l o g y , and the C o m m i t t e e

on

Social

T h o u g h t in the Social S c i e n c e s D i v i s i o n ; and f r o m the D i v i n i t y S c h o o l .

Ad-

v a n c e d d e g r e e s are o f f e r e d in Bible and the history o f J u d a i s m in the D i v i n i t y S c h o o l ; in Semitics, J e w i s h History, and H e b r e w Literature in the D e p a r t m e n t o f the N e a r E a s t e r n L a n g u a g e s and Civilizations; in M o d e r n J e w i s h H i s t o r y in the D e p a r t m e n t o f History; and in J e w i s h E t h n o m u s i c o l o g y in the D e p a r t m e n t o f Music. T h e r e c e n d y f o r m e d C o m m i t t e e o f J e w i s h Studies is the c o o r d i n a t i n g c e n t e r f o r all J e w i s h studies activities at the University. T h e s e include an undergraduate c o n c e n t r a t i o n and a n e w Master o f Arts in J e w i s h Studies and o n g o i n g P h . D . c o n c e n t r a t i o n s in various disciplines. T h e undergraduate c o n c e n t r a t i o n has b e e n ranked by the G o u r m a n rating as the n u m b e r o n e undergraduate p r o g r a m in J e w i s h Studies in the nation. T h i s ranking is d u e in part t o the interdisciplinary e m p h a s i s o f o u r c o u r s e s at C h i c a g o .

The collections of Jewish studies T h e Library's c o l l e c t i o n s o f H e b r a i c a and Judaica today include m o r e

than

1 4 0 , 0 0 0 physical v o l u m e s as well as rich r e s o u r c e s in m i c r o f o r m . A r e a s o f m a j o r c o l l e c t i o n strength are: T h e A n c i e n t N e a r East, J e w i s h life and c u l m r e in the G r e c o - R o m a n and Medieval world; R e n a i s s a n c e and M o d e r n W o r l d ; and C o n t e m p o r a r y Studies. R e f l e c t i v e o f the University's paradigm o f interdisciplinary research and teaching, the Judaica and Hebraica c o l l e c t i o n s are bibliographically and physically integrated w i t h the rest o f the c o l l e c t i o n s . Judaica and Hebraica e n r i c h the Library's general h o l d i n g s and are s t r e n g t h e n e d by the w e a l t h o f related and c o g n a t e materials available in the general c o l l e c t i o n s .

Collection history Judaica and Hebraica, and o u t s t a n d i n g library r e s o u r c e s t o s u p p o r t research and t e a c h i n g in t h e s e fields, have b e e n part o f the University o f C h i c a g o since its f o u n d i n g in 1891. Built by m a n y bibliographers and subject and language s p e cialists o v e r the years, the c o l l e c t i o n s are s h a p e d by s t a f f and faculty o f the U n i versity, by the individuals w h o s e private c o l l e c t i o n s h a v e b e e n acquired, and by the personalities and interests o f t h o s e w h o have b e e n instrumental in acquiring them.

The Collection

approach

O u r earliest acquisitions in Hebraica reflect a c o l l e c t i o n approach.

Hebraic

s c h o l a r s h i p w a s b r o u g h t to C h i c a g o by William Rainey Harper w h o , as the first president o f the University, g a v e i m p e t u s b o t h t o the rise o f the University and t o the study o f H e b r e w . O n July 3 0 , 1 8 9 1 , William Rainey Harper h a v i n g c o m p l e t e d his first m o n t h as president o f the University o f C h i c a g o , set o u t for Berlin. Harper w a s eager t o visit G e r m a n universides and to m e e t w i t h their leaders. A l s o , he w a s n o t u n m i n d f u l that the n e w University w o u l d require b o o k s and that Berlin w o u l d b e an excellent place to l o o k for t h e m . T h e full a c c o u n t o f this fascinating acquisition is a topic for a d i f f e r e n t talk, i m p o r t a n t here is that Harper's Berlin acquisition o f s o m e 5 7 , 6 3 0 v o l u m e s and 3 9 , 0 2 0 dissertations also i n c l u d e d m a n y w o r k s o f Christian Hebraists, thus c o n t r i b u t i n g t o the f o u n d a d o n s o f the J e w i s h study c o l l e c t i o n s at the University. T h e s e c o n d half o f the n i n e t e e n t h century w a s a period o f s t r o n g G e r m a n i n f l u e n c e u p o n A m e r i c a n intellectual life and educational institutions. T h e inspiration o f research-oriented faculty c a m e f r o m G e r m a n y as well, and in their e f f o r t s to build research libraries as rapidly as p o s s i b l e , A m e r i c a n institutions f r e q u e n d y resorted t o e n b l o c p u r c h a s e s o f private c o l l e c t i o n s o f G e r m a n s c h o l ars. T h e result o f this p h e n o m e n o n w a s the p u r c h a s e o f a n o t h e r acquisition o f H e b r a i c c o n t e n t , the library o f E r n s t W i l h e l m H e n g s t e n b e r g , a leading G e r m a n n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y Hebraic scholar at the University o f Berlin. T h e H e n g s t e n b e r g library o f o v e r 1 2 , 0 0 0 v o l u m e s , w a s eventually m o v e d to the University and c a m e to c o m p l e m e n t the rich c o l l e c t i o n o f Harper's Berlin purchase. A m o s t i m p o r t a n t c o l l e c t i o n acquisition o c c u r r e d o v e r a century later, w i t h the g i f t o f the L u d w i g R o s e n b e r g e r Library t o the University C h i c a g o Library. B e l o n g i n g decidedly t o the category o f Judaica, the R o s e n b e r g e r c o l l e c t i o n c o n tains o v e r 1 7 , 0 0 0 tides d o c u m e n t i n g the social, political, and cultural history o f the J e w i s h p e o p l e . W i t h i n this large b o d y , the c o l l e c t i o n heavily e m p h a s i z e s Jewry in w e s t e r n E u r o p e , b u t also c o v e r s J e w s in A m e r i c a and e v e n in the rem o t e C h i n e s e c o m m u n i t y w h i c h existed since antiquity. T h e c o l l e c t i o n is rich in material o n J e w s in their historical relationship w i t h m o d e r n socialism, and c o v erage o f J e w i s h e m a n c i p a t i o n in E n g l a n d is a l m o s t exhaustive. T h e c o l l e c t i o n also c o n t a i n s anti-Jewish writings, f r o m early p o l e m i c s t o the virulent publicarions o f G e r m a n N a t i o n a l Socialism, p r o v i d i n g a fullness o f J e w i s h e x p e r i e n c e in its m o s t broad, and at times distressing aspects.

The Selection

approach

C o l l e c t i o n - l e v e l acquisition is but o n e a p p r o a c h t o the c o m p l e x task o f collection d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e primary builders o f the c o l l e c t i o n s are the bibliographers and subject and language specialists w h o , w o r k i n g in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h faculty and m i n d f u l o f the g r o w i n g and c h a n g i n g interest and p r o g r a m s at the U n i v e r sity, h a v e built these c o l l e c t i o n s o v e r time. Bibliographer s e l e c t i o n and the ac-

quisition o f m a j o r c o l l e c t i o n s intertwine i n t o an extraordinary w e a l t h o f resources.

What is the role of the bibliographer in building the collections? I w o u l d like t o bring a q u o t e f r o m E d i t h and Meir Lubetski's

Libraiy Collection: a Resource Guide·.

Building a Judaica

" T o build a J e w i s h studies c o l l e c t i o n is n o t an

easy task. E a c h year, t h o u s a n d s o f i t e m s o f J e w i s h interest are p u b l i s h e d in vario u s c o u n t r i e s t h r o u g h o u t the w o r l d and in m a n y d i f f e r e n t languages. T h i s , in addition t o h u n d r e d s o f t h o u s a n d s o f Judaic materials that h a v e already b e e n p r o d u c e d t h r o u g h o u t the centuries represents a substantial b o d y o f literature. It is f r o m this vast array o f materials that librarians m u s t locate, identify, c h o o s e , and acquire Judaica and Hebraica." T h i s s t a t e m e n t , m a d e in 1 9 8 3 , is e v e n m o r e valid today. T h e o n e r o u s role o f building the c o l l e c t i o n s falls t o the bibliograp h e r w h o m u s t d e c i d e w h a t s h o u l d b e acquired and w h a t g a p s s h o u l d b e filled in s u p p o r t o f p r e s e n t and future p r o g r a m s .

From collection development to collection management. C o l l e c t i o n d e v e l o p m e n t d o e s n o t s t o p at acquiring the material. Rather, the bibliographer's role e x t e n d s to organizing, d e - s e l e c t i n g ( w e e d i n g ) , preserving, and replacing and reformatting. It e x t e n d s t o d e c i s i o n s o n physical p r e s e r v a t i o n (preserving the artifact) and intellectual preservation (preserving the c o n t e n t ) and d e c i s i o n s o n m a k i n g c o l l e c t i o n s d e s k - t o p available in digital f o r m . T h e s e m u l t i - f a c e t e d c o l l e c t i o n m a n a g e m e n t d e c i s i o n s call f o r a m u l t i - f a c e t e d d e c i s i o n making process.

What contributes to bibliographer success? E x c e l l e n t subject and language expertise. G o o d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the University e n v i r o n m e n t , studies, and p r o g r a m s . K n o w l e d g e o f the University's plans for future programs. O n g o i n g c o m m u n i c a t i o n and partnerships w i t h faculty. K n o w l e d g e o f r e s o u r c e s at o t h e r libraries. A d e q u a t e f u n d i n g t o s u p p o r t c o l l e c t i o n d e v e l o p m e n t at required levels.

Introducing the interdisciplinary approach Interdisciplinary c o l l e c t i o n d e v e l o p m e n t is o r g a n i z e d t o mirror the interdisciplinary o r g a n i z a t i o n o f k n o w l e d g e at the University. T h e i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e

of

k n o w l e d g e r e f l e c t e d in n e w m o d e s o f University study and t e a c h i n g is paralleled by i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e in factors g o v e r n i n g c o l l e c t i o n m a n a g e m e n t . W i t h i n a g r o u p o f selectors w i t h joint responsibility f o r allied areas, s e l e c t i o n d e c i s i o n s take o n the nature o f a g r o u p activity. Built in an interdisciplinary e n v i r o n m e n t , and m i n d f u l o f interdisciplinary n e e d s , the c o l l e c t i o n s reflect the c o l l e c t i v e w o r k o f m a n y bibliographers w h o have p o o l e d their k n o w l e d g e and talents in d e v e l o p ing c o l l e c t i o n s in s u p p o r t o f interdisciplinary s m d y and teaching.

What are the draw-backs ? Shared responsibility at the p o t e n d a l loss o f centralized o v e r v i e w m a y lead t o g a p s in the collection. Faculty resistance, the kind that p r e s e r v e d branch libraries d e s p i t e related e c o n o m i c considerations. P e r c e i v e d loss o f " c o n t r o l " o v e r a g i v e n subject discipline. P r e f e r e n c e for o n e central c o n t a c t p e r s o n in library/faculty interaction. T h e p e r c e p t i o n o f l o w e r e d prestige. I s s u e s o f bibliographic integration o f materials in d i f f e r e n t languages and alp h a b e t s ( r o m a n i z a t i o n vs vernacular scripts). I s s u e s o f physical integration (potential p r e f e r e n c e f o r "branch library" approach). Requires o n g o i n g attention t o and m a i n t e n a n c e o f collaborative w o r k styles.

What are the advantages? T h e c o l l e c t i o n s are s h a p e d to reflect interdisciplinary research at the University. C o l l e c t i o n organization reflects the interdisciplinary library u s e by faculty and students. T h e organization o f i n f o r m a t i o n (catalogs, classification) s u p p o r t s the interdisciplinary use o f materials. C o l l e c t i o n s and catalogs are n o t framed by subject categories. - C o l l e c t i o n s are bibliographically integrated. - C o l l e c t i o n s are physically integrated. Bibliographers p o o l their talents in collaborative d e v e l o p m e n t projects. A l l o w s m o r e flexible use o f staff. Library can draw f r o m existing expertise. R e d u c e s i m p a c t o f limited b u d g e t s . E n s u r e s an e v e n flow o f acquisitions o v e r time. E n s u r e s equitable share o f resources in special projects. -Retrospective conversion. —Preservation.

What Are Some of the Elements ofa Successful Interdisciplinary Collection Development Program? A w e l l - d e f i n e d c o l l e c t i o n d e v e l o p m e n t policy that is broadly d i s s e m i n a t e d to all parties i n v o l v e d . Sustained c o m m u n i c a t i o n and c o o p e r a t i v e w o r k styles a m o n g phers. Sustained c o o p e r a t i o n with faculty. O n g o i n g , shared, c o l l e c t i o n a s s e s s m e n t . Shared k n o w l e d g e o f p r e s e n t and future university programs. A g o o d referral s y s t e m for firm-ordered material. Shared access to v e n d o r listing and electronic files.

bibliogra-

Conclusion T h e g r o w i n g i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e o f k n o w l e d g e has lead t o t h e b l o s s o m i n g o f interdisciplinary research and t e a c h i n g at o u r universities. Increasingly, researchers d e p e n d o n c o n v e n i e n t and e f f e c t i v e bibliographic a c c e s s t o multiple b o d i e s o f literature. T h e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n centralization and decentralization is n o t n e w . T h e d e b a t e o v e r separate c o l l e c t i o n s v e r s u s physically and bibliographically integrated c o l l e c t i o n s and the t e n s i o n b e t w e e n d e s i g n a t i n g o n e subject specialist o v e r distributing responsibility a m o n g c o m p l e m e n t i n g subject experts, parallels this o n g o i n g debate. T h e r e p r o b a b l y is n o o n e m o d e l that fits all n e e d s . I d o b e l i e v e h o w e v e r , that a c a d e m i c libraries w i t h c o l l e c t i o n s and catalogs f r a m e d by subject categories fall short o f m e e t i n g the n e e d s o f interdisciplinary scholarship, and that an interdisciplinary a p p r o a c h to c o l l e c t i o n s and c o l l e c t i o n d e v e l o p m e n t is m o r e r e s p o n s i v e to the n e e d s o f scholars w h o w o r k w i t h i n an interdisciplinary paradigm.

A N E W G E N I Z A H FOR T H E N E W C E N T U R Y H E B R E W M A N U S C R I P T FRAGMENTS IN T H E EUROPEAN ARCHIVES T H E N E W F I N D I N G S OF G I R O N A

MAURO PERANI Università di Bologna, Italy J u s t a c e n t u r y a f t e r the m o s t i m p o r t a n t f i n d s d i s c o v e r e d in t h e C a i r o G e n i z a h by S. S c h e c h t e r , o n January 1 9 9 6 a c o n g r e s s w a s h e l d in J e r u s a l e m 1 o n t h e n e w l y f o u n d d i s c o v e r i e s in a n o t h e r " G e n i z a h , " s o called o n l y by a n a l o g y , a n d c o n s i s d n g in t h e a r c h i v e s o f t h e o l d c o n t i n e n t . T h e t e r m " E u r o p e a n G e n i z a h " refers t o t h e t h o u s a n d s of d e t a c h e d p a g e s w h i c h d u r i n g t h e p a s t c e n t u r i e s w e r e r e u s e d in b o o k b i n d i n g s a n d as c o v e r s o f archival registers o r b o o k s . T h e p a g e s w e r e f o u n d f o r t h e m o s t part in E u r o p e , in h u n d r e d s o f libraries, a r c h i v e s , a n d e v e n in p r i v a t e c o l l e c t i o n s , m a i n l y in Italy, G e r m a n y , Austria, H u n g a r y a n d r e c e n d y in S p a i n . A s o p p o s e d t o a b o u t 2 , 0 0 0 f r a g m e n t s f o u n d u p t o n o w in t h e o t h e r E u r o p e a n c o u n t r i e s , in Italy a l o n e , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p r e s e n t state o f r e s e a r c h w h i c h is far f r o m its c o n c l u s i o n , o v e r 6 , 0 0 0 f r a g m e n t s h a v e b e e n d i s c o v e r e d . O f this large n u m b e r a b o u t 4 , 8 0 0 h a v e b e e n f o u n d in E m i l i a R o m a g n a a l o n e . 2 I n fact t h e h i g h e s t n u m b e r o f f r a g m e n t s u p t o date h a s b e e n f o u n d in M o d e n a ( a b o u t 3,000) and B o l o g n a (about 850). T h e m a n u s c r i p t s f o u n d are d a t a b l e b a s e d o n p a l a e o g r a p h i c e v i d e n c e daring back to the eleventh through the sixteenth century. O n e difference b e t w e e n the "Italian G e n i z a h " a n d its E a s t E u r o p e a n a n d I b e r i a n c o u n t e r p a r t s is i n t h e orig i n o f t h e m a n u s c r i p t s . W h i l e , in fact, t h e f r a g m e n t s f o u n d in A u s t r i a a n d G e r m a n y are e x c l u s i v e l y A s h k e n a z i c a n d t h o s e o f t h e Iberian p e n i n s u l a are S e f a r d i c , t h o s e f o u n d in Italy are partially o f Italian o r i g i n (less t h a n o n e third), m o s t A s h k e n a z i c ( m o r e t h a n o n e third) a n d a l s o S e f a r d i c ( a b o u t o n e third). A s already p o i n t e d o u t , this fact r e f l e c t s t h e w a v e s o f H e b r e w i m m i g r a t i o n t o Italy f r o m o t h e r E u r o p e a n r e g i o n s . T h i s triple t y p o l o g y o f t h e w r i t i n g s , w e l l r e p r e s e n t e d e i t h e r in square o r in s e m i c u r s i v e script, w i t h s o m e rare e x c e p t i o n s in

The proceedings have recendy been published by E. Tabory and A. David: Ha-Gernsph ha-ltalqit. Jerusalem 1998; a report on this congress is presented by Perani, M. 1996. "Un convegno internazionale sui frammend ebraici rinvenuu negli archivi italiani (la "Ghenizàh italiana") e sul loro contributo alio studio del giudaismo, Gerusalemme 9 gennaio 1996." Rassegna degli Archivi di Stato 56, 104-118, also published in Rivista biblica (it.) 44, 1996, 493-503 and La rassegna mensile di Israel 63, 1997, 185-198. For more detailed information on the Italian archives where Hebrew fragments were uncovered and for the complete bibliography see my updated report: M. Perani, "II 'Progetto Frammend Ebraici in Italia' promosso da Giuseppe Sermoneta: scoperte recend e aggiornamento bibliografico." In Studi in memoria di J. B. Sermoneta, Italia. Ed. R. Bonfil and F. Parente. Jerusalem (to be published).

c u r s i v e , is c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e v a r i o u s t e c h n i q u e s o f ruling, p r i c k i n g a n d t h e c o m p o s i t i o n o f quires. M o s t o f t h e f r a g m e n t s f o u n d in t h e E u r o p e a n a r c h i v e s c o m e f r o m w h a t c a n b e c o n s i d e r e d t h e typical w o r k s c o n t a i n e d in J e w i s h libraries o f t h e late M i d d l e A g e s a n d R e n a i s s a n c e ; that is, t h e B i b l e , t h e T a l m u d a n d prayer b o o k s . B u t let u s n o w e x a m i n e t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t f i n d i n g s . F o r a m o r e e x h a u s t i v e r e p o r t o n f r a g m e n t s o f rare, l o s t o r e v e n u n k n o w n m e d i e v a l w o r k s I r e f e r t o t h e article o f S i m c h a E m a n u e l a n d o f t h e writer, r e c e n d y p u b l i s h e d . 3 T h e o v e r 3 0 0 s h e e t s o f T a l m u d Bavli a n d a d o z e n f r o m t h e Y e r u s h a l m i early m a n u s c r i p t s , as w e l l k n o w n , are o f great i m p o r t a n c e . A m o n g t h e m m a n y b i f o l i o s I f o u n d in Emilia R o m a g n a and Umbria b e l o n g to Sefardic manuscripts o f the twelfth and t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s , earlier t h a n t h e M u n i c h m a n u s c r i p t . A n o t h e r

important

f i n d are t h e 18 f r a g m e n t s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e s a m e M i s h n a h m a n u s c r i p t in Italian s q u a r e script o f t h e t w e l f t h c e n t u r y . 4 T h e t e x t is o f I t a l i a n - B y z a n t i n e t y p e a n d p r e s e n t s v a r i o u s similarities w i t h t h e K a u f m a n n c o d e x , g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d t h e o l d e s t a n d m o s t a c c u r a t e r e a d i n g o f t h e w o r k in o u r h a n d s . T h e w r i t i n g , t h e p h o n e t i c a n d m o r p h o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f H e b r e w , p u t this m a n u s c r i p t i n t o t h e P a l e s t i n i a n textual a n d linguistic tradition. T h e m o s t a n c i e n t m a n u s c r i p t f o u n d u p t o n o w in t h e " E u r o p e a n G e n i z a h " is a s h e e t a n d a c u t strip f r o m a n early

Tosefta

m a n u s c r i p t r e c e n d y f o u n d in N o r -

cia, c o n t a i n i n g part o f t h e treatise N e d a r i m w r i t t e n in o r i e n t a l s q u a r e script a n d d a t i n g b a c k c l o s e t o t h e year 1 0 0 3 - 4 . W e are s p e a k i n g a b o u t t h e earliest e x a m p i e o f that w o r k : in fact t h e E r f u r t m s . o f

Tosefta

dates f r o m the twelfth century,

that o f V i e n n a f r o m t h e f o u r t e e n t h a n d t h e L o n d o n m s . f r o m t h e f i f t e e n t h , in addition to s o m e Cairo G e n i z a h fragments.5 U n l i k e t h e f r a g m e n t s f o u n d in t h e C a i r o G e n i z a h , a m o n g t h o s e d i s c o v e r e d in Italy p r e v i o u s u n k n o w n w o r k s are n o t n u m e r o u s , b u t a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f u n k n o w n t e x t s h a v e b e e n f o u n d in t h e field o f liturgy a n d biblical e x e g e s i s . F r a g m e n t s o f a n u n k n o w n c o m m e n t a r y t o t h e P r o v e r b s in A s h k e n a z i c w r i t i n g o f t h e f o u r t e e n t h c e n t u r y h a v e b e e n f o u n d in t h e S t a t e A r c h i v e s in I m o l a : 6 in t h e s a m e a r c h i v e s I h a v e f o u n d an e n t i r e b i f o l i o , t h e c e n t r e p a g e s o f t h e quire, a total o f f o u r p a g e s o f t e x t c o n t a i n i n g t h e u n k n o w n c o m m e n t a r y o f Y o s e f b e n S h i m ' o n K a r a t o t h e P s a l m s in A s h k e n a z i c s e m i c u r s i v e w r i t i n g o f t h e t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r y . T h e c o m m e n t a r y g o e s f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g o f P s a l m 1 t o 17. P r o f e s s o r 3

4

5

6

Emanuel, S. 1997. "The 'European Genizah' and its Contribution to Jewish Studies." Henoch 19, 313—340; Perani, M. 1997. "Opere sconosciute o perdute dalla 'Genizah italiana'." Materia giudaica. Bollettino dell'Assoeiazione Italiana per lo Studio del Giudaismo 3, 17-23. The Nonantola fragments of this manuscript have been published by Ben-Ammi Zarfad, G. 1990. "Dappim mi-tokh Ketav-yad shel ha-Mishnah mi-'Genizat Italia'." Italia 9, 7-36; Idem, 1994. "Dappim nosafim mitok ktav-yad shel ha-Mishnah be-Italia." Italia 11, 9-38. M. Perani, "Il più antico frammento rinvenuto nella Genizah italiana: la Tosefta di Norcia." To be printed in the Proceedings of the Norcia Congress, March 22 1997, on the topics: I frammenti di codici medieval,Ί nelle testimonian^e dell'Archivio Storico del Comune di Norcia. I have published an Italian translation and the Hebrew text of this fragment, respectively: Perani, M.-Somekh, A. 1992. "Frammenti ebraici di un commento medievale sconosciuto a Proverbi e Giobbe." Annali di storia del/'esegesi 9/2, 589-610 and Perani, M. 1993. "Frammenti di un commento medievale sconosciuto a Proverbi e Giobbe nell'Archivio di Stato di Imola." Henoch 15, 47-64.

A v r a h a m G r o s s m a n h a s r e c e n t l y s t u d i e d s o m e f r a g m e n t s b e l o n g i n g t o this s a m e m a n u s c r i p t f o u n d in t h e State A r c h i v e s in B o l o g n a a n d o n e in t h e a r c h i v e s in I m o l a r e s p e c d v e l y c o n t a i n i n g parts o f t h e c o m m e n t a r i e s o n D e u t e r o n o m y a n d E x o d u s . H e h a s p r o v e n that this is t h e original l o s t Perush la-Torah

o f the same

Y o s e f K a r a , d e n y i n g t h e c l a i m s u p p o r t e d by m o s t s c h o l a r s that this a u t h o r d i d n o t w r i t e any c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e T o r a h , b u t that h e w o u l d h a v e o n l y g l o s s e d that o f Rashi. 7 O t h e r f r a g m e n t s o f this m a n u s c r i p t h a v e b e e n f o u n d in P i e v e di C e n t o c o n t a i n i n g a c o m m e n t a r y o n Micah and O s e a . In m y o p i n i o n e v e n these m u s t b e a s s i g n e d t o Y o s e f Kara: if t h e y are n o t his original c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e M i n o r P r o p h e t s , t h e y at least c o n t a i n large parts o f it, a n d this is clearly i n d i c a t e d b y t h e direct q u o t a d o n s f r o m i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s by his paternal u n c l e M e n a h e m ben Chelbo.8 A s Simcha E m a n u e l points out, A. Aptowitzer identified a version o f the T a l m u d Y e r u s h a l m i q u o t e d by A s h k e n a z i c s c h o l a r s o f t h e t w e l f t h a n d t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s , c o n t a i n i n g p a s s a g e s w h i c h are n o t p r e s e n t in t h e s t a n d a r d v e r s i o n in o u r h a n d s , as S e f e r Y e r u s h a l m i . 9 O n l y r e c e n t l y s o m e p a g e s f r o m t h a t w o r k w e r e f o u n d in d i f f e r e n t libraries in G e r m a n y . 1 0 A n o t h e r l o s t m e d i e v a l rabbinic w o r k o f w h i c h f o u r p a g e s h a v e r e c e n d y b e e n u n c o v e r e d f r o m t h e b i n d i n g s o f b o o k s in K r a k o w , P o l a n d , 1 1 is S e f e r H e f e t z , an early legal c o d e w r i t t e n d u r i n g t h e G e o n i c p e r i o d , w h i c h w a s k n o w n t o u s t h r o u g h its q u o t a t i o n s b y t h e T o s a p h i s t s . I n t h e State A r c h i v e in B o l o g n a I d i d r e c e n d y u n c o v e r t w o p a g e s a n d a c u t strip f r o m a n u n k n o w n c o m m e n t a r y t o J e r e m i a h a n d E z e k i e l . I n t h e o p i n i o n o f P r o f . A v r a h a m G r o s s m a n a n d m y s e l f , t h e y are part o f t h e l o s t c o m m e n t a r i e s t o t h e s e b o o k s o f A b r a h a m i b n E z r a , w h e r e a s P r o f . Uriel S i m o n is i n c l i n e d t o attribute t h e m t o a d i s c i p l e o f I b n E z r a w h o e x t e n s i v e l y c o p i e d h i s c o m m e n t a r ies. 1 2 I n t h e s a m e a r c h i v e o f B o l o g n a w a s f o u n d an a b r i d g e d v e r s i o n o f t h e c o m m e n t a r y o f R a b b i S a m s o n o f S e n s t o t h e M i s h n a i c o r d e r o f Tahorot.

In the Ar-

chivio Storico Comunale o f Pergola a bifolio was f o u n d containing o n o n e page Rabbi Hananel's c o m m e n t a r y to

Kiddushin

34b—35b, w i t h s o m e u n k n o w n pas-

s a g e s . I n t h e A r c h i v i o S t o r i c o C o m u n a l e o f M o d e n a a n d in that o f C o r r e g g i o a b o u t 5 pages f r o m the same manuscript were u n c o v e r e d , containing the unique r e m n a n t s o f l o s t R a b b i Isaiah di T r a n i ' s

Tosafot

o n T a l m u d i c treatises S h a b b a t ,

B e z a h a n d ' E r u v i n . A n e w c o m m e n t a r y t o T r a c t a t e N a z i r r e c e n d y f o u n d in B o -

7

8

9 10

11 12

See Grossman, A. 1992. "Mi-'Genizat Italia'. Seridim mi-Perush Rabbi Yosef Qara la-Torah." Peamim 52, 16-36; Idem, 1994. "Genuze Italia u-perushaw shel Rabbi Yosef Qara la-Miqra." In Ha-Miqra be-re'i mefareshaw. Sefer xjkkuron le-SarahQamin. Ed. S. Japhet. Jerusalem, 335—340. For this see Perani, M. 1993. "Frammend del commento originale di Yosef ben Shim'on Qara a Osea e Michea." Annali di storia delfesegesi, 10/2, 615-625. V. Aptowitzer, Introducdo ad Sefer Rabiah, Jerusalem 1938, 275-277. Sussmann, Y. 1994, "Seride Yerushalmi-Ketav-Yad Ashkenazi, Likrat Pitaron Hidat 'Sefer Yerushalmi'." Kove^atjad 12 (22), 1-120. Danzig, N. 1991. "The First Discovered Leaves of Sefer Hefes." JQR 82, 51-136. See the Hebrew text with an Italian transladon and an introduction published by Perani, M. 1996. "Frammenti del commento perduto di Abraham ibn Ezra ο di un suo discepolo a Geremia d Ezechiele dalla 'Genizah' di Bologna." Henoch 18, 283-326.

l o g n a S t a t e A r c h i v e (frr. 2 6 8 a n d 4 4 3 ) , w h i c h h a s b e e n i n c o r r e c d y i d e n t i f i e d as t h e l o s t c o m m e n t a r y o f R a s h i , is really o n e v e r s i o n o f t h e " C o m m e n t a r y M a y e n c e " o n this T r a c t a t e .

of

13

S o m e fragments o f scientific w o r k s c o n c e r n i n g medicine, a s t r o n o m y

and

p h i l o s o p h y h a v e a l s o b e e n f o u n d ; a m o n g t h e s e t h e r e are f o u r p a g e s o f a n u n k n o w n p h i l o s o p h i c a l w o r k c o n t a i n i n g a logical treatise w i t h a c r i t i c i s m o f t h e H e b r e w translation o f

Moreh ha-Nevukjm

by S h e m u e l I b n T i b b o n , a l s o f o u n d in

N o n a n t o l a (frr. 189-191). 1 ·»

A new Spanish Genizah The Girona Findings I n M a r c h 1 9 9 8 I d i s c o v e r e d b y c h a n c e in G i r o n a , d u r i n g a c o n g r e s s h e l d in this t o w n , a n e w i m p o r t a n t G e n i z a h w h i c h c o u l d a f f o r d u s great surprises. I k n e w o f s o m e H e b r e w m a n u s c r i p t f r a g m e n t s f o u n d in t h e M u n i c i p a l A r c h i v e , in t h e C a p i m l a r a n d D i o c e s a n A r c h i v e s in G i r o n a , B a r c e l o n a a n d o t h e r p l a c e s

in

S p a i n , partially p u b l i s h e d by A . D u r a n i S a n p e r e , 1 5 J. M . Millâs V a l l i c r o s a , E . C o r t e s a n d o t h e r s c h o l a r s . Mi11ás V a l l i c r o s a in 1 9 2 8 p u b l i s h e d t h e register o f a j e w i s h m o n e y l e n d e r f o u n d in a b i n d i n g , 1 6 a n d in 1 9 4 8 a f r a g m e n t f r o m t h e T a l m u d Y e r u s h a l m i a n d o t h e r f r a g m e n t s f o u n d in G i r o n a o r in o t h e r p l a c e s . 1 7 In 1951 the s a m e Spanish scholar p o i n t e d o u t the p h e n o m e n o n with

these

w o r d s : " N o e s la p r i m e r a v e z q u e c o n s t a t a m o s el h e c h o d e q u e l o s e n c u a d e r n a d o r e s j u d a i c o s d e C a t a l u n a — a r t e s a n i a a la q u e s e d e d i c a r o n c o n cierta p r e f e r e n c i a — e m p l e a r a n para l o s f o r r o s d e la c u b i e r t a s d e e n c u a d e r n a c i ô n h o j a s d e a n t i g u o s l i b r o s h e b r a i c o s , q u e estarian d e t e r i o r a d o s , o b i e n r e s t o s d e c u a d e m o s d e c u e n t a s , c u y a s a n o t a c i o n e s estarian ya c a d u c a d a s . " 1 8 Finally Mi11ás V a l l i c r o s a p u b l i s h e d in 1 9 5 3 a f i n e b i f o l i o c o n t a i n i n g a s e p h a r d i c B i b l e u n c o v e r e d in a b i n d i n g o f a register f r o m t h e year 1 5 4 9 k e p t in t h e A r x i u d e la Catedral in G i r o n a ; in 1 9 7 0 F. P é r e z C a s t r o p u b l i s h e d a b o u t t w e n t y H e b r e w f r a g m e n t s " e x t r a i d o s d e las g u a r d a s d e p r o c e s o s i n q u i s i t o r i a l e s para c u y a e n c u a d e r n a c i ô n s e u t i l i z a r o n p e d a z o s d e m a n u s c r i t o s h e b r e o s " u n c o v e r e d in t h e A r c h i v o H i s t ô r i c o N a c i o n a l in M a d r i d . " 1 9 I n t h e e i g h t i e s n e w f r a g m e n t s w e r e u n c o v e r e d in t h e t h e D i o c e s a n A r c h i v e s o f G i r o n a a n d p u b l i s h e d b y E n r i c C o r t è s in t h r e e articles in t h e " R e v i s t a Catalana d e T e o l o g i a . " I n this a r c h i v e a b o u t 1 1 0 f r a g m e n t s o f H e -

13

14

15

16

17

18 19

See Emanuel, S. "The 'European Genizah' Between Hope and Reality" (Hebr.). In Ha-Geni^ab ba-ltakjit. Ed. E. Tabory and A. David, 70-82. For this see Zonta, M. "I frammenri filosofici di Nonantola." In Vita e cultura ebraica nello stato estense. Ed. E. Fregni and M. Perani, 123-147. Duran i Sanpere, A. 1918-19. "Documents aljamiats de jueus catalans." Bulleti de la Biblioteca de Catalunya 5, 1918-1919, 137. Millâs Vallicrosa, J. M. 1928. "Pedta Iiis ta d'un prestamista jueu." Estudis Universitaris Catalans, 13, 288-290: Idem, 1951. "Restos de antiguos libros hebraicos." Anales del Instituto de Estudios Gerundenses 6, 323 [= Sefarad 12, 156-158], Idem, 1948. "Un fragmento del Talmud Jerosolimitano." Anales de! Instituto de Estudios Gerundenses 3‫ ״‬193. Idem, "Restos de andguos libros hebraicos," 157 in the text published in Sefarad. Pérez Castro, F. 1970. "Fragmentos de codices del Andguo Textamento hebreo en el Archivo Histôrico Nacional. I." Sefarad 30, 251-288, 256.

b r e w m a n u s c r i p t w e r e f o u n d , a l m o s t all w r i t t e n o n p a p e r s h e e t s , m a i n l y d e t a c h e d f r o m t h e b i n d i n g s o f registers a n d b o o k s f r o m t h e last d e c a d e o f t h e f o u r t e e n t h c e n t u r y . C o r t è s c a t a l o g u e d all 2 4 m a n u s c r i p t s , c o n t a i n i n g biblical, t a l m u d i c , liturgical, p h i l o s o p h i c a l a n d k a b b a l i s d c w o r k s . A m o n g t h e m a l s o an u n k n o w n k a b b a l i s d c p o e m is p r e s e n t . T a l m u d , A l f a s i ' s m e n t a r i e s t o t h e t a l m u d i c t r e a d s e s Berakhot

a n d Shabhat,

Halakot gedolot, c o m Piyyutim and philo-

s o p h i c a l w o r k s , are r e p r e s e n t e d in a d d i d o n t o t h e B i b l e . 2 0 A l s o J o s e L u i s L a c a v e p u b l i s h e d in 1 9 8 3 s o m e i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t s f o u n d in t h e b i n d i n g s o f notarial registers f o u n d in t h e M u n i c i p a l i t y A r c h i v e in T u d e l a . 2 1 O t h e r H e b r e w

frag-

m e n t s w e r e a l s o f o u n d in M a d r i d , B a r c e l o n a , N a v a r r a , T o l e d o a n d Z a r a g o z a ; I a m a l m o s t sure that h u n d r e d s o f localities t h r o u g h o u t S p a i n c o u l d c o n c e a l t h o u s a n d s o f H e b r e w r e - e m p l o y e d m a n u s c r i p t f r a g m e n t s in t h e b i n d i n g s o f their archives. B u t n o w let u s refer t o t h e n e w d i s c o v e r i e s I f o u n d in t h e A r x i u H i s t o r i c in G i r o n a . T h e r e are t h o u s a n d s o f f r a g m e n t s in notarial registers o f t h e f o u r t e e n t h a n d f i f t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s ; t h a n k s t o a p r e c i o u s s u g g e s t i o n o f t h e D i o c e s a n archiv i s t J o s e p Maria M a r q u é s , I carried o u t a n i n s p e c t i o n a n d I w a s a m a z e d by t h e impressive numbers o f paper sheets d i s m e m b e r e d from H e b r e w

manuscripts

a n d p a s t e d t o g e t h e r t o o b t a i n t h e c a r d b o a r d o f t h e b i n d i n g s o f t h e notarial r e g isters I s a w . T h e a b s o l u t e l y n e w d a t u m , if c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e a b o u t 6 , 0 0 0 f o l i o s f o u n d in t h e " E u r o p e a n G e n i z a h , " particularly in Italy, is t h e d a t e o f t h e ree m p l o y m e n t b e g i n n i n g in t h e first d e c a d e s o f t h e f o u r t e e n t h c e n t u r y , p r e c e d i n g that o f E u r o p e b y o n e o r e v e n t w o c e n t u r i e s . A n i n t e r e s t i n g d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e f r a g m e n t s u n c o v e r e d in S p a i n a n d t h o s e f o u n d in E u r o p e is that t h e f o r m e r a l m o s t all c o n s i s t o f p a p e r m a n u s c r i p t s , w h e r e a s t h e latter are a l m o s t all m e m b r a n a c e o u s a n d are r e u s e d as c o v e r s o f t h e registers. A n o t h e r d i f f e r e n c e is that t h e p a r c h m e n t folia f o u n d in E u r o p e are all f r o m literary w o r k s , w h e r e a s a m o n g t h e g i r o n e s e p a p e r m a n u s c r i p t f r a g m e n t s , a b o u t h a l f c o n t a i n literary w o r k s a n d t h e o t h e r h a l f c o n t a i n historical d o c u m e n t s o f J e w i s h c o m m u n i t i e s . W h a t is v e r y i m p r e s s i v e in t h e G i r o n a d i s c o v e r i e s is t h e early d a t e o f t h e first r e u s e o f t h e m a n u s c r i p t s in t h e third d e c a d e o f t h e f o u r t e e n t h c e n t u r y , w h i c h , t o b e s t o f m y k n o w l e d g e , h a s n o parallel in E u r o p e . I f w e c o n s i d e r t h a t it h a p p e n e d a b o u t a h u n d r e d years a f t e r t h e rise a n d t h e

flourishing

o f the G i r o n e s e

k a b b a l i s d c s c h o o l , w e c a n h o p e t o f i n d a n c i e n t o r e v e n rare a n d l o s t w o r k s in t h e m a n y h u n d r e d s o f s h e e t s , a f t e r their d e t a c h m e n t a n d r e s t o r a t i o n . A s is w e l l k n o w n , the H e b r e w b o o k s and the d o c u m e n t s b e l o n g i n g to the J e w s o f Spain b e f o r e t h e e x p u l s i o n w h i c h h a v e s u r v i v e d u p t o n o w are i n d e e d v e r y rare. I n fact m a n y , p e r h a p s m o s t , o f t h e m a n u s c r i p t s n o w in S p a i n w e r e b r o u g h t t h e r e 20

21

The fragments have been catalogued by Enric Cortès in these ardcles: "Fragments de manuscrits hebreus i arameus descoberts de nou a l'Arxiu Diocesà de Girona." Revista Catalana de Teologia 7, 1982, 1-56; Idem, "Una poesia cabalisdca desconeguda i uns fragments d'Ibn Guiat precedents de l'Arxiu Diocesà de Girona." Arxiu de Textos Catalans Antics 2, 1983, 7-21; Idem, "Fragments de manuscrits hebreus i arameus descoberts de nou a l'Arxiu Diocesà de Girona. II." Revista Catatana de Teologia 9, 1984, 83-100. Idem, "Fragments de manuscrits hebreus i arameus descoberts de nou a l'Arxiu Diocesà de Girona. III." Revista Catalana de Teologia 10, 1985, 31-52. Lacave, J. L. 1983. "Importante hallazgo de documentos hebreos en Tudela." Sefarad 43, 169179.

f r o m Italy and o t h e r c o u n t r i e s and o n l y a f e w n e v e r left Spain. T h i s c o n s i d é r a u o n clearly s h o w s h o w i m p o r t a n t the fragments are, r e p r e s e n d n g a large p r o p o r d o n o f m a n u s c r i p t s that n e v e r left Spain. T h e finds e x a m i n e d u p t o n o w are o f c o n s i d e r a b l e i m p o r t a n c e b o t h for the various fields o f J e w i s h Literature, and for the history o f the J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y in Spain b e f o r e the e x p u l s i o n . A m o n g the f r a g m e n t s f o u n d in the Municipal A r c h i v e in G i r o n a f o r e x a m p l e ,

some

i n t e r e s d n g d o c u m e n t s w e r e f o u n d c o n t a i n i n g lists o f the m e m b e r s o f the G i r o n e s e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y in the early f o u r t e e n t h century, n o d n g the f e e s they s h o u l d pay to o c c u p y their a s s i g n e d place in the s y n a g o g u e . In the Capitular and Historic A r c h i v e s o f that t o w n , p a g e s f r o m t w o u n k n o w n c o m m e n t a r i e s o n the T a l m u d by a S p a n i s h a u t h o r o f the f o u r t e e n t h century w e r e also f o u n d . A significant e x a m p l e is that o f the c o v e r o f the notarial register c o m p i l e d in 1 3 9 4 by the notary B e r e n g u e r Cappella. T h e cardboards o f the b i n d i n g w e r e o b t a i n e d p a s d n g 2 0 b i f o l i o s for a total o f 8 0 pages d i s m e m b e r e d f r o m a m a n u s c r i p t written in s e m i c u r s i v e sefardic w r i d n g f r o m the thirteenth century. W e are n o w p l a n n i n g to carry o u t a project o f c e n s o r i n g , d e t a c h i n g and c a t a l o g u i n g the H e b r e w m a n u s c r i p t f r a g m e n t s f o u n d in G i r o n a . T h e s a m e p h e n o m e n o n is probably w i d e s p r e a d in o t h e r localities o f Spain, b u t p e r h a p s n o t s o c o n s i d e r a b l e as in G i r o n a . T h o u s a n d s o f pages n o w still in the b i n d i n g s o f Spain h a v e p r e s e r v e d a significant part o f the H e b r e w m a n u s c r i p t s o w n e d by the J e w s o f the Iberian p e n i n s u l a b e f o r e their e x p u l s i o n for six o r s e v e n centuries. I'm a l m o s t sure that if systematic inquires w e r e undertaken, w e c o u l d u n c o v e r intere s t i n g r e m n a n t s o f historical d o c u m e n t s , rare, lost o r e v e n u n k n o w n w o r k s . T h e E u r o p e a n archives can, in c o n c l u s i o n , be d e f i n e d by analogy as a n e w G e n i z a h in w h i c h the scholars are d e t e r m i n e d to carry o u t n e w researches in the u p - c o m i n g decades.

S'R1DE1

SCHOCKEN-—"EINBANDFRAGMENTE"

OF HEBREW INCUNABULA AND P0STINCUNABULA AT THE SCHOCKEN INSTITUTE FOR JEWISH RESEARCH SILKE SCHAEPER J e w i s h N a t i o n a l and University Library, J e r u s a l e m , Israel Viele T a u s e n d e v o n B ü c h e r n sind s c h o n z u g r u n d e gegangen, i n d e m sie in zwei Teile zerfielen, auseinander gerieten u n d d a n n stückweise w e g g e w o r f e n w u r den. A b e r auch ein solcher Teil kann für d e n G e l e h r t e n , d e n Bibliothekar, d e n A n t i q u a r v o n Wichtigkeit w e r d e n , w e n n er aus älterer Zeit s t a m m t , b e s o n d e r e N o t i z e n v o n wissenschaftlichem W e r t enthält o d e r mit H o l z s c h n i t t e n ausgestattet ist. ( H a n s Bohatta, W i e n 1925) 1 P r i n t i n g w i t h m o v a b l e m e t a l t y p e b e g a n in 1 4 5 5 . U n t i l t h e e n d o f t h e c e n t u r y , a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 0 . 0 0 0 b o o k s w e r e i s s u e d , as w e l l as s o m e 1 0 . 0 0 0

broadsheets

a n d p a m p h l e t s . S i n c e m a n y o f t h e earliest p r i n t s w e r e layed o u t m u c h

like

m a n u s c r i p t s , h i s t o r i a n s o f early p r i n t i n g h a v e c o m e t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n 1 5 t h c e n t u r y prints, s o - c a l l e d i n c u n a b u l a , 2 a n d p o s t i n c u n a b u l a , prints i s s u e d b e t w e e n 1 5 0 1 - 1 5 5 0 . A l t h o u g h this p e r i o d i z a t i o n is n o t r e g a r d e d as a

comprehensive

c a t e g o r i z a t i o n a n y m o r e , b o t h t e r m s c o n t i n u e t o b e e m p l o y e d f o r t h e sake o f bibliographic uniformity. B e f o r e t h e S e c o n d W o r l d W a r , a b o u t a h u n d r e d i n c u n a b u l a p r i n t e d in H e b r e w letters w e r e k n o w n a n d 5 0 - 7 0 o t h e r prints w e r e c o n s i d e r e d p o s s i b l e c a n d i d a t e s . 3 T h e m o s t r e c e n t s u r v e y s list 1 3 9 H e b r e w i n c u n a b u l a a n d 5 6 p o s s i b l e c a n d i d a t e s 4 — t o g e t h e r less than 2 0 0

titles.

N o t a c c o u n t e d f o r are i n c u n a b u l a

c o n t a i n i n g single H e b r e w letters o r w o r d s 5 a n d b l o c k p r i n t s . 6 M a n y early prints h a v e r e a c h e d u s as f r a g m e n t s o n l y , called Einbandfragmente

in

German—pages

f r o m d i s c a r d e d b o o k s o r m a n u s c r i p t s that w e r e r e c y c l e d b y b o o k b i n d e r s .

1

2

3 4

5

6

Bohatta, H. 1925. "Über den terminus a quo bei der Bestimmung von Buchfragmenten." Gutenberg Festschrift. Ed. A. Ruppel. Mainz, 89. Incunabula period = the time when printing was still in infancy, in its "cradle" (ladn incunabula). Literally, the word incunabula means diapers or bandages used for wrapping infants, see Geldner, F. 1978. Inkunabelkunde. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1. Marx, A. 1925-26. "Literatur über hebräische Inkunabeln." Soncino-B/ätter I, 159-170. Offenberg, A. K. 1990, Hebrew incunabula in public collections: a first international census. Compiled in collaboration with C. Moed-van Walraven, Nieuwkoop: De Graaf, X X I I I and Offenberg, A. 1992. "Wat niet in de census Staat." In Festschrift for Bob de Graaf. Ed. A. Gerits. Amsterdam, 144-150. The first such print is considered to be Peter Schwarz (Nigri), Tractatus contra perfidos judaeos. Esslingen, 1475 (London, British Library, IB. 8926). Blockprints are woodcut pictures accompanied by text, either handwritten or cut in wood (xylograph). A two-colored xylographie blockprint in Hebrew, dated to the late 14th century, was found in the Cairo Geniza (Cambridge University Library, Or. 1080 J50).

T h e S c h o c k e n I n s t i t u t e f o r J e w i s h R e s e a r c h in J e r u s a l e m , f o r m e r l y t h e p r i v a t e library o f t h e b u s i n e s s m a n , p u b l i s h e r , z i o n i s t p h i l a n t h r o p i s t a n d b i b l i o p h i l e Salm a n S c h o c k e n ( 1 8 7 7 - 1 9 5 9 ) , belongs to the Jewish Theological Seminary

of

America since 1961. Schocken's collection o f around 12.000 printed Hebraica u s e d t o i n c l u d e o n e o f t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t c o l l e c t i o n s o f H e b r e w i n c u n a b u l a in the world.7 T h e m o s t valuable printed Hebraica f r o m Schocken's collection, 5 5 0 titles

a l t o g e t h e r , i n c l u d i n g H e b r e w i n c u n a b u l a a n d e x t r e m e l y rare 1 6 t h c e n t u r y

p r i n t s , w e r e d i s p e r s e d b y S a l m a n S c h o c k e n ' s heirs. 8 T h e c o l l e c t i o n h a s f u r t h e r b e e n d i m i n i s h e d b y t h e f t . R e c e n d y , thirty h i g h l y v a l u a b l e p r i n t e d H e b r a i c a h a v e b e e n r e p o r t e d s t o l e n . 9 T o m y u n d e r s t a n d i n g , t h e f r a g m e n t s listed h e r e f o r t h e first t i m e are " s ' r i d i m " in m o r e t h a n o n e s e n s e — n o t o n l y r e m n a n t s o f early prints that w e r e d e s t r o y e d o r that fell apart in t h e past, b u t a l s o r e m n a n t s o f a n o u t s t a n d i n g c o l l e c t i o n o f early H e b r e w p r i n t i n g that is c u r r e n d y d e s t r o y e d a n d t a k e n apart.

Shortlist of Incunabula and Post-Incunabula Fragments at The Schocken Institute for Jewish Research, Jerusalem10 Hebrew 1.

(in a l p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r , a c c o r d i n g t o O f f e n b e r g / C e n s u s 1 1 )

Incunabula

Bahia b e n Asher,

Perush ha-Torah,

Naples, 1492, 2 fragments.

O f f . / C e n s u s 8 ( n o t listed). 2.

Bible, [ N a p l e s ] ,

[ a b o u t 1 4 9 2 ] , 1 f r a g m e n t (quire 3 8 / a ) .

O f f . / C e n s u s 11 ( n o t listed). 3.

Bible/Genesis, Targum, Rashi comm.,

Hijar, 1 4 9 0 , o c t a v o , 1 l e a f ( G e n 4:7—7:6).

O f f . / C e n s u s 16 ( n o t listed). 4.

Bible. Former Propebts,

Leiria, 1 4 9 4 , O n e large a n d n u m e r o u s small f r a g m e n t s .

O f f . / C e n s u s 2 8 ( n o t listed). 5.

Bible/Isaiah and Jeremiah,

Lisbon, 1492, 6 fragments.

O f f . / C e n s u s 3 2 ( n o t listed).

7

8

9

10

11

Schocken donated 64 Hebrew incunabula to the Jewish Nadonal and University Library in 1931. When he died, his library included another 44 Hebrew incunabula. See my essays on the history of the Hebraica coUecdon, Schaeper, S. 1994. "Bibliophilie als kultureller Auftrag: die Geschichte der Schocken Bibüothek bis 1939." In Der Schocken Verlag/Berlin 1931-1938. Ed. S. Schreuder and C. Weber. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 347-359 and Schaeper, S. 1994. "Goldadern wertvollen jüdischen Lebens: Salman Schocken und seine Hebraica Sammlung." Jüdischer Almanach 1995. Frankfurt: Jüdischer Verlag, 121-135. 268 rides were sold at auction in 1993, see Important Hebrew books from the library of the late Salman Schocken, Sotheby's sale 93693, London, 1993. Some other tides were acquired by the Jewish Nadonal and University Library, see "Acquisition of the Schocken collection." Books and people I , 1991,2. See message by Naomi Steinberger, executive librarian at the Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York, "Missing books." On: Ha-Safran (electronic listserve of the Association of Judaica librarians), 28.9.1998. Most of the 31 books listed are posdncunabula or prints from the second half of the 16th century. I thank Dr. Shmuel Glick, director of the Schocken Institute, for granting me permission to publish the shortlist and reproductions of the Haggadah fragment. Offenberg 1990, see note 4.

Arba'a Turim/Tur Hoshen Misphat, P i o v e

6. J a c o b b e n A s h e r ,

di S a c c o , 1 4 7 5 , 12

fragments. O f f . / C e n s u s 61 (not listed). 7. J a c o b b e n A s h e r ,

Arba'a Timm/Orab Haim,

[ S o n c i n o ] , [about 1490], 1 frag-

m e n t (fol. 7 1 , paragraph 5 0 7 ?). O f f . / C e n s u s 6 2 (not listed). 8. J a c o b b e n A s h e r ,

Arba'a Turim/Orah Haim/Hilkbot Shabat,

Konstandnople,

1 4 9 3 , 4 fragments (paragraphs 2 6 3 , 2 6 4 , 2 6 9 [a f r a g m e n t w i t h text f r o m paragraphs 2 3 3 - 2 3 5 is stuck t o g e t h e r w i t h a f r a g m e n t o f

Talmud!Be^ab,

Son-

c i n o , 1 4 8 4 , fol. 3 1 / b ] ) . O f f . / C e n s u s 6 3 (listed). 9. J a c o b b e n A s h e r ,

Arba'a Turim/Jore De'a,

M a n t o v a / F e r r a r a , 1 4 7 7 , 2 frag-

m e n t s (fol. 16 ff. ?). O f f . / C e n s u s 7 0 ( n o t listed). 10. J a c o b b e n A s h e r ,

Arba'a Turim/Even ha-Eser,

Guadalajara, 1 4 9 0 , 1 leaf and

s o m e small fragments. O f f . / C e n s u s 7 3 ( n o t listed). 11. J a c o b b e n A s h e r ,

Arba'a Turim/Tur Hoshen Mishpat,

Guadalajara, 1 4 8 0 , 16

fragments. O f f . / C e n s u s 7 4 (listed). 12. J o s e p h b e n G o r i o n , Yosipon, [Mantova], [1474—1477], 3 fragments. O f f . / C e n s u s 7 9 (listed). 13. Kol Bo, [Italy], [about 1491], 2 fragments. O f f . / C e n s u s 81 (listed). 14. M a i m o n i d e s ,

Mishne Torah,

[ R o m e ?], [about 1475], 4 fragments.

O f f . / C e n s u s 87 ( n o t listed). 15. M a i m o n i d e s ,

Mishne Torah,

S o n c i n o , 1 4 9 0 , 4 fragments.

O f f . / C e n s u s 8 8 (listed). 16.

Mishnaiot w i t h

M a i m o n i d e s c o m m e n t a r y , N a p l e s , 1 4 9 2 , 14 fragments.

O f f . / C e n s u s 9 2 ( n o t listed, listed c o p y n o t in library a n y m o r e ) . 17. M o s e s o f C o u c y ,

Sefer Mi^yot Gadol,

s.l., 1 4 8 8 , 1 fragment.

O f f . / C e n s u s 9 5 (not listed). 18. D a v i d K i m c h i ,

Sefer ha-Shorashim,

N a p l e s , 1 4 9 1 , 3 fragments.

O f f . / C e n s u s 106 ( n o t listed). 19.

Talmud Babli/ Baba Kama, [Soncino],

[about 1489], 10 f r a g m e n t s (Wilna ed.:

4 2 / a [2 pieces], 4 6 / a , 4 8 / a , 9 4 / a , 9 8 / b [?], 9 9 / b , 1 0 0 / a , 1 0 3 / b ,

113/b,

141/a). O f f . / C e n s u s 116 ( n o t listed). 20.

Talmud Babli/ Baba Me^a,

[Soncino], [about 1489], 1 f r a g m e n t (Wilna ed.:

60/b). O f f . / C e n s u s 117 (not listed). 21.

Talmud Babli/ Berakhot,

S o n c i n o , 1 4 8 3 [or p o s s i b l y a later S o n c i n o print ?],

ca. 14 fragments (Wilna ed.: 1 9 / a , 3 8 / b , 4 9 / a , 4 9 / b , 5 0 / b , 5 1 / b , 5 2 / a , 5 5 / a , 5 6 / a , 6 1 / b [3 pieces, o n e stuck t o g e t h e r w i t h Tractate 3 2 / b ] , 6 2 / a [2 pieces], 6 2 / b , 6 3 / a [3 pieces], 6 3 / b ) . O f f . / C e n s u s 119 ( n o t listed).

Be^ah,

Soncino, 1484,

22.

Talmud Babli/ Be^ah, S o n c i n o ,

1 4 8 4 , 1 2 f r a g m e n t s ( W i l n a ed.: 2 / b , 4 / b , 1 7 / b ,

2 1 / b [ c o m p l . ] , 2 2 / a [ c o m p l . ] , 2 9 / a , 2 9 / b , 3 1 / b [ s m c k t o g e t h e r w i t h fragments o f Jacob ben Asher,

Arba'a Turim,

!Constantinople, 1493], 3 2 / a , 3 2 / b

[3 p i e c e s , o n e s m c k t o g e t h e r w i t h f r a g m e n t o f

Talmud/Berakhot,

Soncino,

1 4 8 3 , fol. 6 1 / b ] ) , f r a g m e n t s w e r e a c q u i r e d in 1 9 6 1 , 1 9 6 8 a n d 1 9 8 1 . O f f . / C e n s u s 1 2 2 ( 2 f r a g m e n t s listed). 23.

Talmud Babli/Gittin,

S o n c i n o , 1 4 8 8 , 13 f r a g m e n t s ( W i l n a ed.: 3 / a , 8 / b , 1 2 / a ,

16/a, bifolium 1 6 / a - 1 7 / a ,

17/b, 20/a, 57/a, 68/a, bifolium

68/b-70/a,

71/a). O f f . / C e n s u s 1 2 3 (listed). 24.

Talmud Babli/Hulin,

[ S o n c i n o ] , 1 4 8 9 [ p o s s i b l y 1 5 1 9 ?], 8 f r a g m e n t s ( W i l n a

ed.: 3 1 / a [3 p i e c e s ] , 3 1 / b , 3 2 / a , 3 2 / b [3 p i e c e s ] , 3 4 / a , 3 6 / b , 3 7 / a [4 p i e c e s ] , 39/a). O f f . / C e n s u s 1 2 6 ( n o t listed). 25.

[Iberian p e n i n s u l a ?], [14 l h c.], 2 l e a v e s ( W i l n a ed.: fol.

Talmud Babli/Hulin,

8 6 / a - 8 8 / a ) , not reproduced by Dimitrovsky.12 O f f . / C e n s u s 1 2 7 ( n o t listed). 26.

Talmud Babli/Shabat,

[ S o n c i n o ] , [ a b o u t 1 4 8 9 ] , 1 f r a g m e n t ( W i l n a ed.: 4 8 / a ) .

O f f . / C e n s u s 1 3 5 ( n o t listed). 2 7 . Haggadah

w i t h A r a b i c rubrics in H e b r e w letters, s.l., [ca. 1 4 7 7 - 8 7 ] ,

octavo

f o r m a t , 2 l e a v e s ( b i f o l i u m ) , i n c l u d e d in O f f . / W a t niet, 1 3 Y u d l o v / H a g g a d a h

Thesaurus 4, 1 4

G W 12113.15

N o t in O f f . / C e n s u s , s e e d e t a i l e d b i b l i o g r a p h i c d e s c r i p t i o n b e l o w .

Latin Incunabula 1.

Pantheologia,

R a i n e r i u s d e Pisis,

[ N u r e m b e r g ] , 12.11.1477, 1 l e a f (fol. 8 5 9 a ) ,

H C 1 3 0 1 8 , I S T C i r 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 . " N o t e : f r o m t h e library o f Karl W o l f s k e h l , p u r c h a s e d b y S a l m a n S c h o c k e n in 1 9 3 6 . 3. W e r n e r R o l e v i n c k ,

Fasciculus temporum,

[Strasbourg], [after 1 4 9 0 ] , 1 l e a f (fol.

7a), H C 6 9 1 5 , I S T C i r 0 0 2 7 5 0 0 0 . N o t e : f r o m t h e library o f Karl W o l f s k e h l , p u r c h a s e d b y S a l m a n S c h o c k e n in 1 9 3 6 .

Hebrew Postincunabula 1.

Bible/Pentateuch,

(in chronological order)

[Italy ?], [ca. 1 5 0 0 ] , f r a g m e n t s o f s e v e r a l p a g e s ( s o m e

in

m u l t i p l e c o p i e s ) , w i t h p a g i n a t i o n . N o t e : n o t similar t o i n c u n a b u l a u n i c u m in P a r m a ( O f f . 24). 1 7 12

13 14

15

16

Dimitrovsky, H. Z. 1979. S'ridei Bavli: fragments from Spanish and Portuguese Incunabula and sixteenth century printings of the Babylonian Talmud and Alfasi. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 2 vols., loose-leaf edition of facsimile reproductions, printed in 500 copies. Offenberg, A. 1992 (see note 4). Yudlov, Y. ed. The Haggadah Thesaurus. (Hebr.). Institute for Hebrew Bibliography. Jerusalem: Magnes Press. This bibliography lists 5000 Haggadot printed before 1960. Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, ed. by Staatsbibliothek %u Berlin. Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1978 ff. (continues Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke. Ed. Kommission für den Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Leipzig: Hiersemann, 1925-40). I thank Dr. Wolfram Kardorf of the Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, for identifying the two latin incunabula.

2. Talmud babli/Baba Batra, [Pesaro], [ca. 1501], 1 fragment (Wilna ed.: fol. 1 4 / b ) , H a b e r m a n n / S o n c i n o 48. 1 8 3. Talmud Babli/Sukka, p e s a r o ] , [ca. 1505], 1 fragment (Wilna ed.: fol. 2 0 / a ) , H a b e r m a n n / S o n c i n o 60. 4. Talmud Babli/Erumn, p e s a r o ] , [ca. 1505], 1 fragment (Wilna ed.: fol. 1 4 / b ) , H a b e r m a n n / S o n c i n o 61. 5. Bahia b e n Asher, Be'ur 'alha-Torah, [Pesaro], 1517, 2 fragments (quire 2 9 / b , o p e n i n g page o f D e u t e r o n , with w o o d c u t ) , H a b e r m a n n / S o n c i n o 64. 6. A s h e r b e n Yehiel, Hilkhot ketanot, V e n i c e , 1522, 14 leaves ( c o m p l e t e copy). 7. Talmud Babli/Me'ila, Kinian, Midot, Tamid, V e n i c e , 1523, 41 leaves (including c o l o p h o n ) . N o t e : a c o m p l e t e c o p y has 4 7 leaves. 8. Talmud Babli/Nedarim, V e n i c e , 1528, 2 fragments. 9. Talmud Babli/Nasir, V e n i c e , 1529, 9 fragments. 10. M o s e s M a i m o n i d e s , Mishne Torah, V e n i c e , 1550, 27 leaves. T w o o f the incunabula fragments issued by Iberian printers are unique: t w o leaves o f Tractate Hulin o f the Babylonian T a l m u d (no. 25) and a Haggadah fragment containing hebraized Arabic (no. 27), o n w h i c h I shall elaborate. ILLUSTRATION I

Haggadah with Arabic rubrics in Hebrew letters, s.l., [1477-1487], bifolium, recto, Jerusalern, Schocken Insdtute for Jewish Research, inventory no. 70130.

17 18

I thank Mr. Angelo Piatelli for autopsy of fragment at Parma. Habermann, A. 1933. The Soncinofamily ofprimers. (Hebr.). Vienna.

ILLUSTRATION 2

t

*

«·‫שהחי‬ ‫|^לילה‬-. ROOW^PÀRR-N»1‫ \ ^»׳‬, ^'^‫ךריבוע״ר»שס«ליעד‬

C ‫י‬ ‫ הורץ‬-a, ‫«תטיל הייני ע מ י ם חרס‬ AHV-ΉΟ ‫ה מ ה‬ ‫ ' ידיש כאן‬, . ‫י י‬

Haggadah w i t h Arabic rubrics in H e b r e w letters, s.L, [1477-1487], b i f o l i u m , verso, J e r u salem, S c h o c k e n Institute f o r J e w i s h Research, i n v e n t o r y n o . 70130 Bibliographic description:

Haggadah, letters,

s.l.e.a.,

N o r t h A f r i c a n rite, i n c l u d i n g A r a b i c rubrics p r i n t e d i n bifolium

(4

pages),

damaged,

decorated

with

Hebrew

primitive

a r c h - s h a p e d w o o d c u t d e c o r a t i o n ( t h r e e - l o b e d f o l i a g e scroll in f r a m e ) , s e f a r d i s q u a r e t y p e in t w o s i z e s , 1 4 l i n e s o f u n v o c a l i z e d text, o n e c o l u m n o f t e x t , t e x t size 6 x 8 c m , page size 10,5 χ 13,5, o c t a v o format, paper bears n o watermark. A m e m b e r o f t h e I n s t i t u t e f o r H e b r e w B i b l i o g r a p h y in J e r u s a l e m , t o w h o m I s h o w e d t h e Haggadah Haggadah

19

f r a g m e n t , r e c o g n i z e d t h a t it p r e s e n t e d a n a d d i t i o n t o a

f r a g m e n t o f e i g h t l e a v e s k e p t at t h e V i e n n a N a t i o n a l Library. 1 9

Roth, E. 1975. "500 Jahre Hebräischer Buchdruck." Udim 6, 93-106. See Haggadah Thesaurus 1997, no. 4.

ILLUSTRATION 3

ο

4

‫ו‬

‫נ‬

.‫י‬

cm Haggadah with Arabic rubrics in Hebrew letters, s.L, [1477-1487], fol. 4r, ritual illustration: "Maror," woodcut in black line technique, Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Papyrussammlung. Ernst Roth, w h o discovered and published the V i e n n a Haggadah

fragment,

has suggested that it was issued by a printer o f Iberian origin for a N o r t h African J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y and that it is the earliest Haggadah

printed with Arabic

<

rubrics. 2 0 B y t h e aid o f w a t e r m a r k analysis, 2 1 I a m n o w able t o a s c e r t a i n R o t h ' s assumption printed

that

the

Haggadot.

Vienna/Schocken

U p to n o w , the oldest

c o n s i d e r e d t o b e a n o t h e r Haggadah

Haggadah

Haggadah

counts

among

the

oldest

p r i n t e d in m o v a b l e letters w a s

o f I b e r i a n o r i g i n , p o s s i b l y p r i n t e d in G u a d a -

lajara, d a t e d 1 4 8 0 - 8 2 a c c o r d i n g t o w a t e r m a r k analysis. 2 2 F o l i o s 3 a n d 5 o f t h e V i e n n a f r a g m e n t b e a r t h e w a t e r m a r k d e s i g n "pair o f s c a l e s in a circle," in a l o c a t i o n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h o c t a v o f o r m a t . 2 3 1 c o m p a r e d t h e w a t e r m a r k f o u n d o n fol. 3, w h i c h is t h e m o r e d i s t i n c t i v e o f t h e t w o , w i t h vario u s w a t e r m a r k r e p e r t o r i e s . 2 4 1 a m listing t h e w a t e r m a r k r e p r o d u c t i o n s f o u n d t o b e m o s t similar in d e s i g n a n d w i d t h o f c h a i n lines: 1. 1 4 7 9 U d i n e

Piccard25 V / 2 0 1

identical, incl. w i d t h o f c h a i n l i n e s

2. 1 4 8 0 V e n i c e

Briquet 2 4 7 4

identical, incl. w i d t h o f c h a i n l i n e s

1480 Udine

var. i d e n t . 2 6

1482 Lucca

var. simil.

1482 Rhodes

var. simil.

3. 1 4 8 5 Ljubljana P i c c a r d V / 2 0 2

identical, incl. w i d t h o f c h a i n l i n e s

I n their a t t e m p t s t o f i n d a m e t h o d f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g an a p p r o x i m a t e t e r m i n u s a q u o f o r u n d a t e d d o c u m e n t s , p a p e r h i s t o r i a n s h a v e i n v e s t i g a t e d h o w l o n g indiv i d u a l p a p e r m o u l d s w e r e in u s e b y p a p e r m a k e r s a n d f o r h o w l o n g a c e r t a i n p a p e r s t o c k w a s k e p t b y s u c h d i f f e r e n t u s e r s as p r o f e s s i o n a l s c r i b e s , n o t a r i e s , i n d i v i d u a l s a n d printers. F a c t o r s s u c h as p a p e r f o r m a t , d o c u m e n t t y p e a n d m o u l d design have also to be taken into account.27

20

21

22

23

24

25

2b

27

"Das von uns jetzt behandelte Fragment kann gewiß als Restteil einer der ältesten Haggadoth angesehen werden, ohne uns auf die genaue Platzierung dieser Haggadah fesdegen zu wollen. Sie scheint jedenfalls die älteste zu sein mit Anweisungen in arabischer [emphasized in the original, S.Sch.] Sprache." (Roth 1975: 98). The Haggadah Thesaurus 1997 lists Seder Haggadah shelpessah im pitaron be-lashon aravi, (Egypt, 1834 or 1855) as the earliest Haggadah containing [hebraized] Arabic rubrics (no. 738). My research on watermarks in Hebrew incunabula was supported in 1996 by a grant from the Ruth Kahn-Ewer Memorial Fund for Research in Bibliography at the Ministry of Culture, Weifare and Sport, Israel. Jerusalem, Jewish Nadonal and University Library, RI Schocken 68, Off./Census 53. Donated by Salman Schocken in 1931. On the edge of the page, adjoining the inner margin. Pagination as published by Roth. I thank Dr. Johannes Diethart and Ms. Anna E. Bühlow of the Österreichische Nadonalbibliothek, Vienna, for finding and tracing the watermarks. The watermarks were traced from the felt-side. Watermark repertories are listed by Pulsiano, Ph. 1987. "A checklist of books and articles containing reproductions of watermarks." In Essays in Paper Analysis. Ed. S. Spector, Washington: Folger Books. I thank Dr. Frieder Schmidt and Ms. Andrea Lothe, Deutsches Buch- und Schriftmuseum/Deutsche Bücherei, Leipzig, who curate the museums outstanding /paperhistorical library and collections, for their kind assistance. Piccard, G. 1978. Wasserzeichen Waage, Die Wasserzeichenkartei Piccard im Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart. Findbuch 5, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Briquet, C. M. 1968. Les Filigranes: dictionnaire historique des marques du papier dès leur apparition vers 1282jusqu'en 1600. Amsterdam: Paper Publications Society, 4 vols. The accuracy of Briquet's terminology ("identical variant," "similar variant") has been questioned. For a general overview on dating by aid of watemark analysis, see the excellent summary by Bannasch, H. 1990. "Wasserzeichen als Datierungshilfe." In Zauberstoff Papier. Ed. J. Franzke, München: Hugendubel, 69-88.

I n t h e c a s e o f t h e f r a g m e n t in q u e s t i o n , I d e c i d e d t o f o l l o w A l l a n S t e v e n s o n , w h o s u g g e s t e d that pairs o f p a p e r m o u l d s w e r e p r o b a b l y n o t in u s e f o r m o r e t h a n o n e o r t w o years, u n l e s s several pairs o f m o u l d s w e r e u s e d at t h e s a m e t i m e , a n d that printers, u n l i k e s c r i b e s , d i d n o t k e e p p a p e r f o r l o n g b u t t e n d e d t o m n a certain p a p e r until it w a s u s e d up. 2 8 C o n s e q u e n d y , I d e d u c t e d t w o years f r o m t h e first d a t e a n d a d d e d t w o years t o t h e last d a t e o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e w a termark

repertories

and

propose

that

the

Vienna/Schocken

Haggadah

was

p r i n t e d s o m e t i m e b e t w e e n 1 4 7 7 - 1 4 8 7 . It m a y i n d e e d b e c o u n t e d a m o n g t h e oldest printed

Haggadot,

a n d m a y b e t h e earliest t o i n c l u d e d e c o r a t i v e a n d

ritual

illustrations. 2 9 I n t e r e s t i n g l y , t h e V i e n n a / S c h o c k e n Haggadah

is a l s o a rare s p e c i m e n o f early

A r a b i c printing. T h e e d i c t i s s u e d by t h e O t t o m a n ruler B a y e z i d II in 1 4 8 5 f o r b a d e M u s l i m s t o print A r a b i c letters, b u t p e r m i t t e d J e w s t o print in

Hebrew

l e t t e r s — o n e o f t h e r e a s o n s w h y A r a b i c p r i n t i n g b e g a n in C h r i s t i a n c o u n t r i e s a n d w h y t h e earliest p r i n t e d b o o k s i s s u e d in t h e M i d d l e E a s t a n d N o r t h A f r i c a ( I s t a n b u l , S a l o n i c a , S a f e d , D a m a s c u s , C a i r o , F e z ) w e r e in H e b r e w . 3 0 W o o d c u t A r a b i c w o r d s are first f o u n d in B e r n h a r d v o n B r e i d e n b a c h , Peregri-

natio in terram sanctam,

M a i n z , 1 4 8 6 a n d in

Hjpnerotomachia Poliphili,

Venice, Aldus

M a n u t i u s , 1499. 3 1 S i n g l e w o r d s in h e b r a i z e d A r a b i c c a n b e f o u n d in P e r e t z T r a b o t , Makre

Dardeke,

P e d r o d e Alcala,

Naples,

1 4 8 8 . 3 2 R o m a n i z e d A r a b i c is first f o u n d

Arte para ligeramente saber la lengua arauiga, G r a n a d a ,

w h e r e a s Kitab salat as-sawa-i,

in 1505,

F a n o , 1 5 1 4 , a C h r i s t i a n prayer b o o k , is c o n s i d e r e d

t o b e t h e first b o o k p r i n t e d in m o v a b l e A r a b i c letters. 3 3 C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e V i e n n a / S c h o c k e n Haggadah

c a n b e c o n s i d e r e d t h e earliest

print in m o v a b l e t y p e c o n t a i n i n g A r a b i c t e x t o f a n y l e n g t h .

28

29

30

31

32

33

Stevenson, A. 1968. Introduction to Briquet Jubilee edition. Ed. J. Simmons, Amsterdam: Paper Publicarions Society, I, *31 (facsimile of 1907 edidon, see note 26). A recent example for the use of watermark analysis in dating Hebraica is Bet-Arie, M. 1994. Catalogue of the Hebrew Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library. Supplement of addenda and corrigenda to vol. I (A. Neubaucr's catalogue), Ed. R. A. May. Oxford: Clarendon Press. See p. XXIX of introducdon. On the distincrion between decoradve and figurative Haggadah illustration see Frojmovic, E. 1996. "From Naples to Constantinople: the Aesop workshop's woodcuts in the oldest illustrated printed Haggadah." The Library 18, no. 2, 87. On the development of Arabic printing see Encyclopedia of Islam. 2nd ed., 1991, "matba'a." I thank Dr. Geoffrey Roper, Islamic Bibliography Unit, Cambridge University Library, for providing me with updated bibliographical information on the subject of earliest printing in Arabic. A page of this book showing Arabic, Hebrew and Greek woodcut letters is reproduced in Schramm, A. 1925. Die Inkunabeln. Leipzig: Deutsches Buchmuseum, 77. Off./Census 91. A short Hebrew introduction to the Bible, also intended to assist Italian Jewry in religious dispute with Christians and Muslims. Contains also words in hebraized Italian and hebraized French. Graf, G. 1944. Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur. Rom: Biblioteca Apostolica Varicana, I, 636. I thank my colleague Mr. Ephraim Wust, Jewish Nadonal and University Library, for this reference.