“The Sinai Revelation according to 4Q377 (Apocryphal Pentateuch B)”, Dead Sea Discoveries 18 (2011), pp. 155-172

Please download to get full document.

View again

All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
 14
 
  “The Sinai Revelation according to 4Q377 (Apocryphal Pentateuch B)”, Dead Sea Discoveries 18 (2011), pp. 155-172
Share
Transcript
  © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2011 DOI: 10.1163/156851711X570409 Dead Sea Discoveries 18 (2011) 155–172  brill.nl/dsd Te Sinai Revelation according to 4Q377 (  Apocryphal Pentateuch B  ) 1  Ariel Feldman arielfa@netvision.net.ilUniversity of Manchester  Abstract  Tis paper explores the reworking of the biblical Sinai accounts in 4Q377 3 ii.  While previous studies of 4Q377 focused on its depiction of Moses, the retelling of the Sinai theophany in this scroll has not received due attention. Te paper scrutinizes the intricate web of biblical allusions in 4Q377 3 ii and analyzes the ways in which it deals with the difficulties embedded in the accounts of the Sinai revelation in Exodus and Deuteronomy. It demonstrates that the scroll’s interpre-tation of these biblical texts exhibits several similarities with the later Jewish sources. Keywords 4Q377; Sinai; Moses; sancti󿬁cation; en Commandments Te scroll 4Q377, dated to the 󿬁rst half of the 󿬁rst century B.C.E., has survived in 󿬁ve fragments. 2  Tey contain a divine address featuring the Promise of the Land (frg. 1 i), a list of tribal representatives (frg. 2 i 2–7), a reworking of the story of Miriam’s leprosy (frg. 2 i 8–10), and an admon- 1  Tis article was written while I served as BA-AHRC-ESRC Visiting Fellow at the University of Manchester. I am grateful to my academic host, Prof. George J. Brooke, for his comments on the initial draft of this paper. Tis research was also supported by a grant from the Jewish Memorial Foundation. 2  See James C. VanderKam, Monica Brady, “377. 4QApocryphal Pentateuch B,” in Qumran Cave 4:XXVIII: Miscellanea, Part 2 (DJD 28; Oxford: Clarendon, 2001), 205–17.  156  A. Feldman / Dead Sea Discoveries 18 (2011) 155–172  itory discourse on the Sinai revelation (frg. 2 ii 3–12). 3  Scholarly discus-sion of 4Q377 has focused so far on its portrait of Moses. Yet, while much has been written on the scroll’s depiction of Moses as God’s anointed one, 4  speaking from His mouth as an angel, 5  its interpretation of the Sinai theo-phany in general has not received due attention. 6  Yet, as this paper demon-strates, 4Q377’s treatment of the Sinai revelation reveals several intriguing affinities with later Jewish sources. Tus it makes an important contribu-tion to our knowledge of the ancient Jewish interpretation of the biblical Sinai accounts. 3  Frg. 2 ii was recently re-edited in Émile Puech, “Le fragment 2 de 4Q377, Pentateuque Apocryphe B  : L’exaltation de Moïse,” RevQ 21/83 (2004): 469–75. 4  See Johannes Zimmermann,  Messianische exte aus Qumran (WUN 2.104; übingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 332–42; James E. Bowley, “Moses in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Living in the Shadow of God’s Anointed,” in Te Bible at Qumran: ext, Shape, and Interpretation (ed. Peter W. Flint; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerd-mans, 2001), 159–81 at 175–76; Geza G. Xeravits, King, Priest, Prophet: Positive Eschatological Protagonists of the Qumran Library (SDJ 47; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 124–27, 177–81; Heinz-Josef Fabry, “Mose, der ‘Gesalbte JHWHs’: Messianische  Aspekte der Mose Interpretation in Qumran,” in  Moses in Biblical and Extra-Biblical raditions (ed. Axel Graupner and Michael Wolter; BZAW 372; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007), 130–42; Alex P. Jassen,  Mediating the Divine: Prophecy and Reve-lation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second emple Literature (SDJ 68; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 100–102, 113–21. 5  See Crispin H. . Fletcher-Louis, “Some Re󿬂ections on Angelomorphic Humanity exts among the Dead Sea Scrolls,” DSD 7 (2000): 292–312; idem,  All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls (SDJ 62; Leiden: Brill, 2002), 141–49; Wido van Peursen, “Who Was Standing on the Mountain? Te Portrait of Moses in 4Q377,” in Graupner and Wolter, eds.,  Moses in Biblical and Extra-Biblical raditions  , 99–113; Phoebe Makiello, “Was Moses Considered to be an Angel by Tose at Qumran?” ibid . , 115–127; George J. Brooke, “Moses in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Looking at Mount Nebo from Qumran,” in La construction de la 󿬁gure de Moïse (ed. Tomas Römer; Suppl. ranseuphra-tène 13; Paris: Gabalda, 2007), 209–21 at 214–15, 220–21; Kristine J. Ruffatto, “Te Exaltation of Moses in 4Q374 and 4Q377: A Divinized Moses at Qumran?” (paper presented at the Second Enoch Graduate Student Conference, Princeton Teological Seminary, June 16–18, 2008). 6  See the brief discussions by van Peursen, “Portrait,” 101–3, 110–11; Jassen,  Mediating  , 116–19.   A. Feldman / Dead Sea Discoveries 18 (2011) 155–172 157 Te ext of 4Q377 2 ii[ ןעמל   8 ] ◦◦◦   הכיתפומו   7 [ הכיתותו ]  ̊   1[ ]  vacat    השומ   תוקוח וני י  2[   ]   12  ̊̊ כ   11 [ ל ]  ̊̊ ד  ̊ ג  ̊ ה   להקה   לוכ   שקהו   הוהי   תדע [   10 יע ]  ̊ מש   רמ [ יו   9 ]  ̊ ח יל ןעיו  3 [ הש ]  ̊ עיו   רומשיו   דומעי   ול   רש שי ה    ̇ רו  ̇ ר vac    13  [ ]  ̊ [ ] ◦ ̊ ש ◦ [ ] ◦◦  [ ] ◦ ל  4 וניתו יהול הוהי   רח תכללו   וחישמ   השומ   יפ 14  ̊ ה  ̊̊ ה [ י   תוו ]  ̇ צמ   לוכל  5 15 [ ] ◦◦ ̊ מה  ̊ ר די   רש כ   םינפ   ל םע   םינפ   ל רשי   להק [   ם ]  ̊ ע    ̇ ר  ̊    ̊ ד  ̊̊  vac   [   י ] ניס   רהמ   ונל  6  7  Te DJD edition has ] ◦ . Puech, “Le fragment,” 470, plausibly suggests that the short oblique stroke visible in the beginning of the line belongs to an alef   .  8  Tus reads the DJD edition. Strugnell read here ] ◦◦ ̊   (Raymond E. Brown et al., Preliminary Concordance to the Hebrew and Aramaic Fragments from Qumran II–X [Published privately, Göttingen, 1988], 3:1233). Puech, ibid., proposes ] לוכל . However, the tiny traces of ink are illegible. 9  Tus read VanderKam and Brady. Te vertical stroke with a hook-shaped top followed by a tiny trace of a vertical stroke (PAM 43.372) may also be read with Puech, ibid., as a vav and an alef   , ו יל [. 10  Puech, ibid., restores יל   יע ] מש . However, the lacuna may hardly accommo-date more than two letters. 11  Te DJD edition has ]  ̊ ם [ ] ◦◦◦◦ . On the photographs (PAM 41.892; 41.492; 43.372) traces of he  ,  gimel  , dalet and vav are visible. Terefore, one can read and restore here with Puech, ibid.: [ ל ]  ̊̊ ד  ̊̊ ה . 12  Te editors read here a 󿬁nal mem . However, Puech, ibid., correctly suggests that a base stroke and a bottom tip of a vertical stroke may belong to a medial kaf and a  yod  , ]   ] יכ . Tere is a blank space next to the  yod  . Apparently, the scroll read here יכ , and not יכ , as in line 8. Puech, ibid., 470, reads י ] כ , yet the lemma on p. 472 has correctly “ky[’.” 13  Tus reads the DJD edition. Strugnell read [ ו ] י [ ט ] פשמו [   ויר ]  ד [   לו ] כל  ( Pre-liminary Concordance  , 2:579). Puech, ibid., suggests ] השו ] מל   ול   עמשתו [   ר ] ה . Te traces of the second letter are consistent with both a medial kaf and a medial mem .  As to the rest of the letters, with an exception of the shin and the vav  /  yod  , they are very difficult to decipher. Terefore, no reading is offered here. 14  Te editors read ◦◦ [ ] ◦ מ   לוכל . However, Strugnell plausibly proposed הוה [ י   תו ] צמ   לוכל   (ibid., 3:1335). Tere seems to be enough space for the two vav letters, תווצ ] מ , as suggests Puech, ibid. 15  Tus reads the DJD edition. Strugnell suggested [ ה ] וצמה  (ibid.) Puech, ibid., proposes הלג ] תמה . Te base stroke of the second letter may also belong to a medial nun . Te bottom tips of the following two (or, probably, three) letters are illegible.  158  A. Feldman / Dead Sea Discoveries 18 (2011) 155–172   vac    םימש [ מ ]   הלעממ   הרוע ש ונ רה   16  ̊̊ ל  ̊ ד  ̊ ג    ̊ ת  ̊  ר [ ש ]  כו   והער   םע   שי 7 [ ]   והומכ   רוצ   ןי ו   וידעל  ̊    ̊ מ   הול ןי יכ    ̊ עידוהל   רה  ̇ ה   לע   דמע   ץר  ̊    ̊ ה   לעו  8 [ לוכו ]  לפה    ̊ ת  ̊̊ לוקמו   םיהול דו כ   ינפלמ   םתזח הידודערו   ונ  ̊ ע [ { ה ]  ̊ ד  ̊ ע  ̊ ה  } להקה  9 סכיו   ןנ  ̇ ע ם  ̇ יהול םע   םיהול ה   שי השומו  vacat    קחורמ   ודומעיו  10  ̊̊ ה  ̊̊ מכ [   ר ]  ̊ ש מ   ימ    ̊  יכ   והיפמ   ר די   ך למכו   ושדקה [ ] ◦   17  יכ   ןנ  ̇ ע  ̇ ה   וילע  11 19 ◦◦◦◦ [ ] ◦◦◦    ̊ ד  ̊ עלו   םלועמ { ל }   ו  ̊    ̇ ר נ   ול   רש ם ◦ [ 18 ו ]  ̊ צייו   םידס  ̇ ח   שי 12 bottom margin ranslation 20 1. [your] s[igns] and your wonders [ so that]2. they may understand the statutes of Moses. vac [ ]3. And Elibah   ̣ [ ]answered [and s]aid: ‘He[ar], congregation of YHWH, and pay attention, all the grea[t] assembly for [ ]4. to [ ] [ ] [ ] vacat Cursed is the man who will not arise and keep and d[o] 16  VanderKam and Brady read ר [ ] ◦   ש ◦◦ . Puech, ibid., proposes ותר פת .  According to the photographs (PAM 41.942; 43.372), the 󿬁rst letter is repre-sented by a tiny trace of ink. It appears above the hole in the parchment and may well be a right stroke of an alef   . Te following horizontal stroke with a serif at its left extremity suits a tav  . Next to it traces of a  gimel are visible (PAM 41.942). Dalet is represented by a vertical stroke and a trace of a horizontal stroke. Te fol-lowing vertical stroke may belong to a lamed  . Te last letter, read by the editors as a resh , seems to be a vav  , as suggests Puech. 17  Tus reads the DJD edition. Puech, ibid., 470, 474, proposes ד כ ] נ   יכ , yet notes that a trace of a vertical stroke visible before the lacuna may be variously interpreted. Given the uncertainty, no reading is offered here. 18  DJD edition has ] ◦ ויו . Florentino García Martínez and Eibert J. C. igchelaar, Te Dead Sea Scrolls: Study Edition (Leiden: Brill, 1997–98), 2:774, propose ] עדיו . Puech, ibid., 470, suggests ] דלויו . Te hook-shaped top of the third letter indicates that this is a vav or a  yod  . Te right extremity of an upper horizontal stroke visible to the left of the  yod (read as a lamed by Puech) and a vertical stroke curving to the left at its bottom (Puech’s dalet  ) may belong to a medial s    ̣ ade (cf. s    ̣ ade in רוצ   [line 8]). 19  Tus reads the DJD edition. Puech, ibid., suggests ינ מ [   והו ] מכ   ימ . However, only faint traces of ink have been preserved. Te last two letters may be read as a medial kaf (or a bet  ) and a  yod (or a vav  ). 20  Te translation is that of VanderKam and Brady, DJD 28:214, with slight adaptations.   A. Feldman / Dead Sea Discoveries 18 (2011) 155–172 159  5. all the com[mandments of Y]HWH through the mouth of Moses, his anointed one, and to follow YHWH, the God of our fathers, who is [ ] 6. to us from Mount Sin[ai.] vac  And he spoke wi[th ]the assembly of Israel face to face as a man speaks 7. with his friend and wh[e]n he showed us his greatness in a burning 󿬁re from above, [from] heaven. vac [ ] 8. And on the earth he stood, on the mountain, to make known that there is no god beside him and there is no rock like him. [And the entire] 9. assembly {the congrega[tion} ]answered. And a trembling seized them before the glory of God and because of the wondrous sounds, [ ]10. and they stood at a distance. vacat  And Moses, the man of God, is with God in the cloud. And the cloud covered11. him because [ ]when he was sancti󿬁ed, and as an angel he spoke from his mouth. For who is a mess[enger ] like him,12. a man of pious acts? And he comman[ded ] that were not created {to} from eternity and forever [ ] Elibah   ̣ [’s Curse wo words have survived in the 󿬁rst line of frg. 2 ii: “[your] s[igns] and your wonders.” Phrased as a second person address, they may constitute a part of a prayer. Te formulation “[so that] they may have an understand-ing” (line 2) suggests that this is a prayer on the behalf of the people of Israel. Although the identity of the speaker is unknown, the reference to Moses in the third person, “the statutes of Moses” (line 2), rules out the possibility that he is the one who is speaking here.Separated by a blank space, a lengthy second person address follows in lines 3–12. Te speaker is a certain ]  ̊ ח יל , or perhaps, ר ]  ̊ ח יל or ]  ̊    ̊  יל . 21   21  See note 8. Puech, “Le fragment,” 470–71, understands ו יל [ not as a name, but as a negation ל with a jussive ו י   written without a separating space. However, this interpretation contradicts the fact that in the Biblical and Qumran Hebrew the formula רמ יו  . . .   ןעיו   always precedes the direct speech. Terefore, the word in question is best understood as a personal name.
Related Search
Similar documents
View more
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x