This blog examines the transmission of the Masoretic Decalogue sections: Deut. 5: 6-17 and Exodus 20: 2-13 to the Septuagint Greek translation and the Hebrew Nash Papyrus.
To understand the Septuagint and
Nash Papyrus texts, and how they relate to the Masoretic Hebrew text -- and why
any changes occurred -- requires a somewhat circuitous path.
We begin with the Deuteronomy Decalogue
text because that is the version that most influenced the Deuteronomy and
Exodus Decalogue texts in the Septuagint and
also the Hebrew Nash Papyrus.
Deut.
5: 6-17
In Deut. 5: 6-17 Moses goes over the 10
commandment given at Mount Sinai some 40 years before; commandments which were
engraved into two stone tablets still stored in the Ark of the Covenant.
Moses, in a sermon just days before his
death, reviews them for the new generation who were not alive at Mount Sinai
and who are about to cross the Jordan and conquer Canaan without him.
As argued in the previous blog “Deut.
ch.5 vs Exod. Ch.20”, the many changes in wording and extra clauses,
etc. were not the result of a 120 year old man’s faulty memory but a
conscious decision to clarify and forewarn.
Moses, as the good shepherd, did not
alter the obligations of Exodus 20: 2-13. No Mitzvah
requirement was removed and none was added.
But he chose his wording to make the
Exodus text more relevant and clear to his audience of the very young (all
under age 40). The flock who was about to face new
opportunities when conquering the ‘promised land’ and pitfalls that were not ‘imminent’ 40
years before at Mount Sinai.
Moses knew that young people can be
impulsive, carried away by emotions and had a limited range of thought:
focusing mostly on the ME and immediate events.
His pastoral adjustments to the text of Exodus --readily on hand on the two
Tablets of Testimony -- showed a great understanding of human psychology and the
young.
It is therefore noteworthy that his paraphrase version was not only
preserved in the Greek Septuagint
Deuteronomy 5 section, but also superimposed almost entirely onto the
Exodus Mount Sinai revelation text in the Septuagint.
As well, Moses’ paraphrase has been preserved on a papyrus fragment called
the Nash
Papyrus where it appears in Hebrew, and, like the Septuagint, is superimposed over the Masoretic Exodus text.
Septuagint Greek Translation (English translations of the Decalogue Deuteronomy and Exodus texts – side by side –are at the end.)
It was, according to one tradition,
commissioned by Ptolemy II Philadelphus
(285–247
BCE) and carried out by 70 Jewish scholars: hence its abridged name of LXX. [i]
It may also have been commissioned by
its ultimate users: the ordinary Jews of Alexandria and Egypt.
While Aramaic continued to be the
ordinary language of the Holy Land and ancient Mesopotamia and Babylon, Egypt,
since the time of Alexander the Great, became Greek speaking.
Hebrew had long ago stopped being a
living language and survived only in ancient religious texts such as the Chumash, other Scriptural additions,
Psalms and in prayers.
For the large
Jewish community in Egypt who wished to maintain Judaism and be able to read
and understand the holy texts --as fewer and fewer could read and understand
Hebrew -- a Greek transition became essential.
The Chumash, the core of Jewish beliefs and
commandments, was translated first, in the mid-3rd century BCE. The remaining holy scriptures of the Tanach were translated into Greek and
added to the Septuagint during the 2nd century BCE and later on.
Its editors,
thankfully, included many other texts deemed ‘holy’ that were not included in
the Tanach.
Jerome, when
he was sent to the Middle East to research and create a Latin Bible
translation, stumbled upon the extra texts in the Septuagint and added them to his Vulgate Bible (405 CE) with the label “apocrypha” meaning ‘hidden’[ii].
The texts
include 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees (the only contemporary
sources for the revolt and Maccabee rule), Judith
(who slew an enemy general in her tent and, in Medieval Midrashim, became associated with Chanukah[iii]),
Susanna (the false accused virtuous
woman saved by Daniel[iv]),
Tobias (a Job-like account), Baruch (Jeremiah’s scribe) and three
books of ‘wisdom’ advice[v].
Deut. 5: 6-17 Septuagint
and Masoretic Tradition
Is the Septuagint translation the same as the
ancient Masoretic Torah text which we still use today?
Below is a
comparison chart.
·
Additional
wording not in the Hebrew is highlighted in BLUE.
·
Deletions
from the Masoretic text are in RED and UNDERLINED.
·
Equally
valid but different synonyms in JPS and Septuagint
are in RED.
·
Word
choices in JPS and Septuagint that
meaningfully differ are highlighted in YELLOW.
·
Changes
in word order are highlighted in yellow with BLUE
lettering.
·
Translations
that differ meaningfully from Masoretic text are in Green highlighting.
|
Masoretic Hebrew and JPS (1917) translation[vi]
Deut. ch 5 |
Elperon’s translation
of Septuagint
Deut. ch. 5[vii] |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
6 I am the Lord thy God,
who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 7
Thou shalt have no other gods before my face. 8 Thou shalt not make to
thyself an image, nor likeness of any thing, whatever things [are] in the heaven above, and whatever [are] in the earth beneath, and whatever [are] in the waters under the earth. 9 Thou shalt not bow down
to them, nor shalt thou serve them; for I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God,
visiting the sins of the fathers
upon the children to the third and fourth generation to them that hate me, 10 and doing mercifully to thousands of them that love me, and that keep my commandments. 11 Thou shalt not take the
name of the Lord thy God in vain, for the Lord thy God
will certainly
not acquit him that
takes his name in vain. 12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God commanded thee. 13 Six days thou shalt work, and thou shalt do all thy works; 14 but on the seventh day
[is] the sabbath of the Lord thy God: thou shalt do in it no work, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, thy man-servant, and thy maid-servant, thine ox, and thine ass, and all thy cattle, and the stranger that sojourns in the midst of thee; that thy man-servant may rest, and thy maid, and thine ox, as well as thou. 15 And thou shalt remember
that thou wast a slave
in the land of Egypt, and the Lord thy God brought thee out
thence with a mighty hand, and a high arm: therefore the Lord appointed thee to keep the sabbath day and to sanctify it. 16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the
Lord thy God commanded thee; that it may be well with thee,
and that thou may live long upon the land, which the Lord thy God gives thee. 17 Thou shalt not commit murder. 18 Thou shalt not commit adultery. 19 Thou shalt not steal. 20 Thou shalt not
bear false witness against thy neighbour.
21 Thou shalt not covet
thy neighbour’s wife; thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, nor his field, nor his man-servant, nor his maid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any beast of his, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s. |
Chart analysis
The Septuagint Deut. 5:6-17 is very, very close to the original
Masoretic text and at times a more ‘literal’ translation than the JPS
(1917).
‘Face’ is exactly the Hebrew פָּנָי . And the JPS’s “servant” is less
accurate than the Septuagint’s
“slave’ for עֶבֶד הָיִיתָ בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם,.
The most significant differences between the Septuagint and Masoretic texts are:
1.
2. Septuagint adds the words ‘thy ox’
at the end of the Sabbath (Commandment
#4), and “any beast/cattle” in the ending to Commandment #10. Both these additions appear in the Nash
papyrus.
3. For
Commandments 7-8-9-10, the Septuagint
omits the conjunctive “AND” / “ו” of וְלֹא.
The Nash Papyrus similarly omits the “AND” as this is in line with the Masoretic
Exodus 20 wording.
4. The Septuagint and Masoretic texts differ twice
in their references to God. In the second half of
the 3rd commandment, the Masoretic uses only the 4
letter name of God (the Tetragrammaton) but the Septuagint uses the Tetragrammaton + your God יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, .
And at
the end of the Shabbat commandment, the Septuagint
use the Tetragrammaton alone while the Masoretic has יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ .
5.
The
Septuagint ends the Shabbat commandment
copying its opening wording to keep “the Sabbath and
sanctify it”,
הַשַּׁבָּת, לְקַדְּשׁו while the
Masoretic has just הַשַּׁבָּת.
CONCLUSION re: Deut. 5:6-17 versions
There are very
few differences between the Septuagint
and the Masoretic text.
Some words are
added as ‘clarifications’, the conjunction “AND” is removed, and the order of
two clauses reversed.
Exodus 20: 2-13:
Septuagint and Masoretic Tradition
Is the Septuagint translation of Exod. 20: 2-13 the same as the ancient Masoretic Torah text which we still use today?
Below is a comparison chart.
·
Additional
wording not in the Hebrew is highlighted in BLUE.
·
Deletions
from the Masoretic text are in RED and UNDERLINED.
·
Equally
valid but different synonyms in JPS and Septuagint
are in RED.
·
Word
choices in JPS and Septuagint that
meaningfully differ are highlighted in YELLOW.
·
Changes
in word order are highlighted in yellow with BLUE
lettering.
·
Translations
that differ meaningfully from Masoretic text are in RED
and highlighted in GREEN.
|
Masoretic
Hebrew and JPS (1917)
Exodus ch.
20 translation[viii] |
Elperon’s translation
of the Septuagint Exodus ch. 20 [ix] |
|
|
2 I am the
Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3
Thou shalt have no other gods beside
me. 4 Thou shalt not make to thyself an idol, nor likeness of anything,
whatever things are in the heaven above, and whatever are in the earth
beneath, and whatever are in the waters under the earth. 5 Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor serve them; for I am the Lord thy
God, a jealous God, recompensing the sins of the fathers upon the
children, to the third and fourth generation to them that hate me, 6 and bestowing mercy on them that love me to
thousands [of them], and on them that keep my commandments. 7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord thy God will not acquit him that takes
his name in vain. 8 Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy. 9 Six days thou shalt labour, and shalt perform all thy work.
10 But on the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God; on it thou
shalt do no work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy servant nor
thy maidservant, thine ox
nor thine ass,
nor any cattle of thine, nor the stranger that sojourns with thee. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heaven and the earth, and the sea
and all things in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord
blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it. 12 Honour thy father and thy mother, that it
may be well with thee, and that thou may live long on the good land, which the Lord thy God gives to thee. 13 Thou shalt not commit
adultery. 14 Thou shalt not steal. 15 Thou shalt not kill. 16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. 17 Thou shalt not covet thy
neighbour’s wife; thou shalt not
covet thy neighbour’s house; nor his field, nor his servant, nor his maid, nor his ox, nor his
ass, nor any of his cattle, nor whatever
belongs to thy neighbour. |
Analysis
·
The Septuagint
text in the 1st commandment surprisingly alters the Hebrew עַל-פָּנָי to “beside
me” πλὴν ἐμοῦ. In Deuteronomy, the Septuagint had the proper, literal transition of “before my face” πρὸ προσώπου μου– but not here.
·
Septuagint also reverses
the word order of לַאֲלָפִים—לְאֹהֲבַי placing ‘loved ones” before “generations”. This is surprising
as the verse is identical to Deut. 5:9 where the Septuagint has the correct word order.
·
The Sabbath commandment has added “nor thy ox nor thy ass”. This is identical to the Septuagint Deuteronomy text – which is
an exact copy of Moses’ words in the Masoretic text there.
·
In 5th commandment re: parents, the Septuagint repeats the extra phrase “that it may be well with thee” from
Moses’ Deuteronomy text.
·
As well, in 5th commandment it adds the word ‘good’ before land, γῆς τῆς ἀγαθῆς. This is a unique change.
·
Commandments #6, #7, #8 have a radically different order
in the Septuagint: Murder is THIRD, Stealing is SECOND, and
Adultery is FIRST.
This ‘inversion’ is unique. Even the Hebrew Nash Papyrus only switched
Adultery to first place and Murder to second place.
|
Masoretic |
Septuagint |
|
Thou shalt not steal. |
Thou shalt not commit
adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not kill. |
·
Commandment #10 lists lusting for a neighbour’s wife
FIRST. This is the same as Moses’ Deuteronomy text
-- and the Nash Papyrus.
·
The Septuagint
adds to the list of animals in Commandment #10
“nor any of his cattle” after ox and ass. This matches the Septuagint Deuteronomy text.
Conclusion
The Septuagint text of Exodus 20: 2-13 is
similar to the Masoretic text but the differences are notable.
Additional wording
and extra clauses added are identical to its own Septuagint Deut. 5: 6-17 text, and, in fact, are ‘copied’ from Moses’
Masoretic Deuteronomy text.
The sole new word is “good” referring to the ‘promised land’ in Commandment #5.
The one major change here – and it is unique -- is the order of the crimes of Adultery, Theft and Murder. The Masoretic tradition in both Deuteronomy and Exodus is Murder, Adultery and Theft.
However, both Septuagint versions place Adultery first.
Septuagint synchronization
It is highly unlikely the Greek translator(s) had any reason or motive to better ‘synchronize’ the wording of Exod. 20: 2-13 and Deut. 5: 6-17.
The superimposition of Moses’ Deut. 5: 6-17 over the Exodus 20:2-13 text -- only keeping the Shabbat commandment justification: ‘the 6 days of Creation’ – must have been already there in the Hebrew Torah scroll they translated.
This sheet of papyrus was found in Egypt in 1898 by L.W. Nash and is now
dated to between 150 and 100 B.C.E.[x] The fragment is 25 lines long and contains a version of the Decalogue followed by the opening of Shema Yisrael where the sheet fragment ends.
Apparently, there was a common tradition of saying the Decalogue and Shema together.
As reported by C. F. Burkitt in 1903, it has a number of differences in
wording and order from both the Exodus ch. 20 text and the Deuteronomy ch.5
versions, and seems to be based on a long lost Hebrew version used for
the Greek Septuagint[xi].
How long, and how far afield from Egypt was the original, ‘modified’ Torah
scroll used in services and copied, is unknown.
The Nash Papyrus proves it – or a later copy of it –was still available in
Egypt during the 2nd century BCE -- some 100 years after the Septuagint.
Analysis
The Nash Papyrus is in Hebrew, so a direct comparison with the Masoretic
texts is possible. As the Commandment #4, Shabbat, has as its
justification “the 6 Days of Creation”, the Nash is intended to be a ‘copy’ of
the Exodus 20:2-13 Decalogue.
But a comparison with both Decalogues is illuminating.
The chart below compares every ‘change’ between the Nash Papyrus, the
Exodus Decalogue and Deut. 5: 6-17.
·
If the wording is the same in all three, BLACK is used.
·
If the Nash matches only the Exodus text, they are in RED.
·
If the Nash matches only Deuteronomy, they are in BLUE
and underlined.
·
Any words Nash adds to either Decalogue is
underlined in BLACK.
·
Deuteronomy wording that is missing in Nash is in YELLOW highlighting.
SINGLE
WORDS
|
commandment |
Masoretic
Deut.ch 5 |
Masoretic Exod. 20 |
Nash
- Exodus 20 |
|
#4 |
וֹרמשָׁ “Guard” |
זָכוֹר “Remember” |
זָכוֹר “Remember” |
|
#9 |
אשָׁוְ עֵד “ a false witness” |
עֵד שָׁקֶר – “lying witness” |
שָׁוְא עֵד “ a false witness” |
|
#7-8-9-10 |
וְלֹא. “AND not” |
NO ‘AND” |
אלֹ “Not” |
|
#10 |
COVET” תַחְמֹד for the ‘wife’ |
COVET” תַחְמֹד for the ‘wife’ |
COVET” תַחְמֹד for the ‘wife’ |
|
|
“DESIRE”
תִתְאַוֶּה for a neighbour’s ‘other
possessions’ |
COVET” תַחְמֹד for the ‘wife’ |
“DESIRE” תִתְאַוֶּה
for a neighbour’s ‘other possessions’ |
|
#10 |
“land” שָׂדֵהו |
-- NOTHING -- |
“land” שָׂדֵהו |
Additional
clauses Moses adds in Deut. ch. 5
WORD
ORDER
|
Masoretic Deut. ch 5 |
Masoretic Exod. Ch 20 |
Nash - Exodus 20 |
||||||
|
No murder לֹא תִרְצָח, |
|
No adultery |
||||||
|
No adultery |
תִנְאָף לֹא |
No murder |
||||||
|
No theft |
לֹא תִגְנֹב |
No theft |
||||||
|
|
|
FINDINGS:
The Nash Exodus text is very, very similar in wording to Moses’
Deut. ch. 5.
It copies Deuteronomy’s word choices in key situations:
a. for false witness שָׁוְא
עֵד rather than Exodus’ עֵד
שָׁקֶר – “lying witness”
b. in Commandment
#10, Deuteronomy’s תִתְאַוֶּה ”to DESIRE” for a neighbours house and
property, while reserving תַחְמֹד ‘COVET” exclusively for the
‘wife’
In fact, it only keeps two things from the original Exodus version:
1. The word זָכוֹר"Remember" for the Shabbat Commandment #4
2. And the Shabbat ‘justification’ related to the ‘6 Days of
Creation’.
Deletions and changes re: the Deut. ch.5 texts are:
1.
Deuteronomy’s obvious “cross references “as
the LORD thy God commanded thee” are dropped for
Commandments #4 and #5. After all, the
Nash text is ‘supposed’ to be Exodus 20 -- so they are ‘unnecessary’.
2.
Moses’ uses the conjunctive “AND” “וְ" to link commandments #6-#7-#8- #9-#10. Nash, instead, follows the Exodus 20
‘separate sentence’ format.
3.
Nash deletes the
add-on at the end of the Shabbat commandment in Deuteronomy re: male and female
servants. It is already covered within the Exodus text and Moses has it appear twice
in Deuteronomy – for emphasis.
4.
Nash changes
somewhat the order of the Social Contract commandments by placing Adultery first
-- before Murder.
The scribe may have done
so to parallel Commandment #10 in Deuteronomy where “Coveting a neighbour’s
wife” is also placed first.
CONCLUSION re: Nash Papyrus
If the Nash text had used as the
‘justification’ for Shabbat Deuteronomy’s “Exodus from slavery” instead of the
“Creation in 6 Days”, it would have been seen as a copy of the Deuteronomy text
with a few, minor changes.
But it is clear that the scribe who
created the Hebrew Torah scroll from which the Nash text for Exodus ch.20 was copied, had
a more complex ‘purpose’.
He superimposed nearly all of the Deut.
ch. 5 text into the location of the Exodus ch. 20 version: duplicating all of
Moses ‘clarifications’ and ‘preferred word choices’, while carefully –
consciously -- removing unneccesary cross reference clauses, unnecessary “AND”
conjunctions, and deleting Moses’ awkward and redundant ending to Shabbat, ”that thy man-servant and thy maid-servant may rest
as well as thou”.
The
scribe’s placement of “You shall not commit adultery” as the first sin on the Social Contract
table #2, is in line with Moses’ moving
the prohibition against “lusting for a neighbour’s wife” to very front of the
last commandment.
Put simply, the scribe who wrote the Torah
scroll from which the Nash text was copied, was no simple scribe.
Far from it.
He was a thoughtful, master
editor, who preferred Moses’ more detailed version of these 10 commandments
and ‘copied them over’ to where – in his mind -- they also should have been: in
Exodus 20.
And it was his Torah scroll that was not
only used for the Nash Papyrus but also the Septuagint.
That is why the Septuagint’s Exodus and Deuteronomy Decalogues are essentially mirror
images in wording (aside from the Shabbat commandment) and match the Nash
papyrus Hebrew text.
Changes
by the translator
The unique order for the Exodus crimes
of Adultery, Theft and Murder, is most likely due to the Greek translator. The
Nash Torah source already had Adultery first, and the translator reversed
Murder and Theft.
I believe the translator is also responsible
for the addition of the Greek word for “good” when referring to the ‘promised
land’.
The transposing scribe
Who was this master scribe and when and
where did he live, is unknown.
But we can surmise that he lived and
worked in Egypt, in the early 3rd century BCE at
the latest.
After all, his Torah scroll – or a later
‘faithful’ copy -- was available for Septuagint
translation in Alexandria in the mid-3rd century BCE[xii].
And it – or a ‘faithful’ later Hebrew
Torah copy – was in circulation a hundred years thereafter: to be copied onto
the Nash Papyrus for a pious Jewish patron who was still able to read Hebrew.
Motivation
The role of
a Torah scribe is to be a human ‘photo copier’.
He is
trained to do just one thing and one thing only: on a new, blank piece of
parchment, transcribe a Torah scroll lying before him: LETTER BY LETTER, WORD
BY WORD, SPACE BY SPACE.
Skill at
penmanship and the ability to focus, focus, focus are the essentials.
But never ‘editing’ the
text.
Scribes can,
in error, omit a letter or word or duplicate a letter or word. A sloppy, novice
scribe can even leave out a line of text or write it down twice, but he or his
supervisor should catch it when doing the normal, standard ‘check’.
So how did a
Torah scroll emerge that superimposed the Hebrew of Deut. 5: 6-17 almost
totally over the location of the Exodus text, Exod. 20: 2-13?
They are on
parchment over 50 sheets apart and thousands of words apart.
Option #1
One might think the transposition was out of necessity
and desperation.
A scribe was given the task of ‘repairing’ a Torah
scroll that had been damaged in the Exodus Decalogue section.
Parchment scrolls can remain intact
for many decades and even more than 100 years but only if stored properly. Major changes in temperature and major changes
in humidity ‘flex’ the animal skin material, causing it to stretch or shrink –
thereby ‘harming’ the ink lettering painted on.
Lettering can also undergo damage if poor ink was used that tends to flake
off. Or the parchment was not properly coated to
allow the ink ‘to stick’.
Scrolls also get damaged by storage
in wet, damp areas, and also by fire.
I have seen with my own eyes or heard
from scribe experts all of the above.
So, for any of the aforementioned
reasons, the scribe who transposed the Deut. ch.5 text may have be given a
Torah scroll to fix that had the Exodus section partially damaged: i.e., from Commandment
#5, ‘Honour your parents’ to the end.
And he had no other Torah scroll on
hand to copy as a model.
Out of desperation—to meet his
financial obligation to his paying patron – he decided to copy over the Deut. ch.
5 text. After all, Exodus and
Deuteronomy are identical in wording for the first three commandments, the
Exodus Shabbat commandment’s “creation in 6 Days’ was kept, and no obligation was
removed and no obligation was added.
However, this ‘desperation theory’
does not hold up.
This scribe does not merely copy over
Deut. ch. 5 from the start of Commandment #5, but he inserts parts of Moses’
Deuteronomy text in Commandment #4 while leaving out others, and he similarly
edits Commandment #5 as well. And reversing the crimes of Murder and Adultery
was not a slip of the pen.
Our scribe is not merely a scribe
acting out of desperate necessity.
His changes are carefully thought out
and premeditated.
Option #2
So why would this scribe take it upon
himself to ‘edit’ the Exodus section to match Moses’ Deuteronomy version: essentially,
just keeping the “ זָכוֹר/ Remember” and “Six days of Creation’
from the original Exodus text?
He would have believed, as a trained
Torah scribe that the Torah text is holy and the word of God as dictated to
Moses.
Even the omission of one letter or
word or other error makes the Torah scroll invalid
until repaired.
So why would a master scribe, a pious
Jew whose job was to reproduce God’s holy words accurately, decide to break
ranks and consciously edit?
I can only think of one reason: to
resolve the ancient rabbinic problem of how Deut. ch. 5 differs from Exod. ch. 20.
As explained in the previous blog, Deut.
ch.5 vs Exod. ch.20, rabbinic tradition has always assumed Moses in
Deut. ch.5 was trying to ‘quote’
Exodus ch.20.
The idea
that Moses at Mount Sinai heard the Deut. ch.5 version while the people heard
the Exodus ch.20 version has long been ‘accepted orthodoxy’ throughout the
Middle Ages and up to today.
It is the
explanation cited by Hertz in his The
Pentateuch and Haftorahs (1958), page
766 commentary to verse 12 and in the Art Scroll Chumash (7th ed. 1997) page 969 commentary to verse 12.
Only Ibn Ezra, in the 12 century CE,
was bold enough to state the simultaneous two speakings in one’ theory was
“contrary to reason.”[xiii]
It is therefore possible some highly
learned scribe -- in Egypt, no later than the early 3rd century BCE
-- decided his Torah scroll would end such argument and confusion.
And he considered the Deuteronomy
text more detailed and, therefore, better.
So he carefully
superimposed Deut. 5: 6-17 over Exod. 20: 2-13.
After all, Commandments
#1, #2 and #3 were identical, so there was no editing to do there. And he kept Exodus’ Commandments #6, #7 and
#8 without the extra ‘AND / וְ “ linking as in
Deuteronomy.
Only
Commandments #4, #5, #9 and #10 had significant changes in Moses’ Deuteronomy,
and here he felt free to ‘adjust’ what he transposed from Moses Deuteronomy.
Remember, his
editing, like Moses’ Deuteronomy paraphrase, did not remove a single
commandment given at Sinai nor add a single ‘new’ commandment.
The Divine
intent and Tablet obligations remained one and the same.
Consequences
This
‘revised’ Torah scroll was directly -- or from a later copy –used for the major Greek translation of the Septuagint
in the mid-3rd century BCE. And that Septuagint
translation was used and recopied for centuries by the Greek speaking Jews of
Alexandria and Egypt, and by Jews throughout the Western Roman Empire who were
Greek speakers.
Its Hebrew
text was still in circulation during the 2nd century BCE in Egypt;
to be copied into the Nash Papyrus ‘pocket’ prayer – alongside Shema.
Fortunately,
the original Torah text, the Masoretic tradition, remained intact north and
north-east of Egypt: in the Holy Land itself and the lands of ancient
Mesopotamia and Babylon.
Additional Note: Nash Papyrus
The Nash papyrus fragment ends with the first verse of Shema Yisrael as noted at the outset.
But between
the last word of Commandment #10 and the Shema,
the Nash has the following, intervening verse.
Nash Papyrus, lines
22-23
And these are the statutes and the judgements that Moses commanded the
Children of Israel in the Wilderness, when they went forth from the land of
Egypt.
It is not written as a continuation
of the Decalogue as there is a large blank space in between. But the Shema begins immediately after this
verse on the same line.
The above verse is not found in
the Hebrew Chumash. It is also not found anywhere in the Septuagint Greek translation.
It is a composite ‘mixture’ which begins
with the opening words of Deut. 6:1 --which precedes Shema, Deut. 6: 4-9 -- then quickly
goes off to refer to the Wilderness and Exodus from Egypt: in a modified
version of Exod. 19:1 which starts the Mount Sinai ‘experience’.
It is unclear
from the fragment whether the complete papyrus just had the first paragraph of Shema Yisrael as a standalone, Deut.
6:4-9, or included the second stanza, Vehayah, Deut. 11: 13-21, or even the
third stanza on Tzizit, Num.15: 38-41.
But this unique verse was clearly
intended to go with -- and to remind its reader -- that the Shema and its commandments are a Divine
obligation; an obligation recorded by Moses in Deuteronomy, but which was
actually, originally proclaimed at the Mount Sinai revelation.
So, we see here again an effort to
unify the words of Deuteronomy with the experience at Mount Sinai 40 years
before.
This, to me, suggests the Nash Papyrus
text, though from the 2nd century BCE, was itself copied from an older
‘pocket prayer scroll’ which originated with the master editor scribe who
created the synchronized Decalogue Torah
version it preserves.
As there is no such verse in the
Greek Septuagint translation from its ‘revised’ Torah scroll, it must have been
created for and added to the ‘pocket prayer scroll’ by the pray scroll’s
author: the master editor scribe who lived in the early 3rd century
at the latest.
The Decalogue ‘merging’ in the Nash (and Septuagint) and this added ‘newly created’ introduction verse to Shema -- placed between the Decalogue
and Shema --reflect a singular
mindset.
Namely, the pious belief that the
commandments Moses mentions in his final sermons at age 120 are all repeats
of what was Divinely given at Mount Sinai.
A view that has been the orthodox
Jewish rabbinic position to this day[xiv].
Moses would not have needed to spend
40 days up on Mount Sinai (twice) to hear and have etched in stone just 10 commandments.
All 613 commandments were passed on
to him.
To quote Rashi on Exod. 24:12[xv]:
את
לחת האבן והתורה והמצוה אשר כתבתי להורתם [AND I WILL GIVE THEE]
THE TABLETS OF STONE, AND THE LAW, AND THE COMMANDMENT WHICH I HAVE WRITTEN TO
TEACH THEM — All the six hundred and thirteen commandments are implicitly
contained in the Ten Commandments and may therefore be regarded as having been
written on the tablets. Rabbi Saadia specified in the אזהרות which he has
composed those commandments which may be associated with each of the Ten
Commandments.
In brief, the
Nash Papyrus ‘source’ created a ‘revision’ Hebrew Torah text so seamless that
no one doubted that the ‘revised’ Exodus ch. 20 text was not the original
dating to Mount Sinai.
And so the Greek translators did their job
properly and transcribed the Hebrew before them to Greek – faithfully.
The master editor
Hebrew scribe had succeeded in his mission.
Additional Note: Torah Scroll
accuracy standard
As mentioned previously,
Torah scribes are supposed to be highly skilled human ‘photocopiers’. If one word has a letter missing or added,
or even a letter flacked off or even partially flacked, the Torah is put aside
until repaired.
For every
letter and every word must be identical to the Masoretic traditional
text passed on for generations.
Today,
computerized scanners with proper software can check an entire Torah scroll
quickly. Even before this, at every
Torah reading ‘crosschecks’ are in place: thanks to Gutenberg and the invention
of the printing press by 1440 CE[xvi].
In January, 1482,
in Bologna, the first printed text of the Chumash
was published – with Masoretic vowel markings and cantillation marks[xvii].
And ever
since, printed copies and bilingual translations of the Chumash have abounded.
Today, at home, in preparation for the public reading of the Torah scroll, a baal Koreh practices with a special book which has the Torah scroll vowel-less text and a parallel Masoretic vowel and cantillation marked equivalent.
He reviews
the upcoming reading passage to ensure that when before the congregation, he does
not mispronounce even one Holy word – or he has to re-read aloud the
entire verse.
Beside him on
the reader’s platform are two others with printed Masoretic book copies of the Chumash and whose job it is to stay just
ahead of the reader’s pace and stop him if he mispronounces a word or skips a
word.
This on site double
check is only possible thanks to the mass production (and reduced cost)
of such Chumash books.
It is this
‘printed’ copies technology that has allowed for a standard of uniformity
that did not exist in the ancient world.
The Hebrew
Torah scroll underlying the Nash Papyrus and the Septuagint – whether commission by a pharaoh or the prosperous
Jewish community -- would have been a highly regarded and prestigious scroll from a scribe famous for the quality of
his script and lettering.
The fact he
altered some of the Masoretic text wording of Exodus to match Moses’
Deuteronomy was probably ‘unknown’ to his Torah scroll patron(s) and subsequent
owners -- as Torah scrolls were rare.
And even if
they were known, the Torah scroll may well have been deemed ‘acceptable’.
Norman Solomon in ch. 8
of his Torah from Heaven:
Reconstruction of Faith (Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2012)
reviews the history of Torah scroll divergence and efforts at standardization.
In academic circles, the source Torah scroll underlying the Nash Papyrus
and the Septuagint is called a vorlage,
a lost master text. From the German meaning prototype or template[xviii].
During the Second Temple era (c.
520 BCE to 70 AD) three ‘master’ scrolls where kept at the Temple so if anyone
had a Torah scroll and thought it had an ‘incorrect’ word, it could be brought
to Jerusalem and cross checked.
The rule was
as follows:
If the
suspect Torah wording matched two ‘master’ Torahs, it was deemed kosher and acceptable for use[xix].
In other
words, the three ‘master’ Torahs were not 100% identical, but ‘similar’ enough
to be considered ‘correctly’ reflecting the Divine intent.
Solomon also points out that one scribe who lived during the 2nd century CE and was famous for the beauty of his writing and scrolls, always wrote in the passage where God covered Adam and Eve’s nakedness with clothing from animal skins כָּתְנוֹת עוֹר (Gen. 3:21), רוא כָּתְנוֹת - clothing of (Divine) ‘light’.
No one listening to such a Torah reading would have noticed the spelling difference as the letters sound the same.
But when
someone caught ‘this change’, he refused to alter his spelling – seeing a
mystical element that he believed in.
This scribe
was the Rabbi Meir praised in the Talmud, and the above is one of three
divergences noted in the midrash Berashit
Rabbah.
It is
believed Rabbi Meir’s scroll was the same Torah scroll brought to Rome after the failure of the Great Revolt and destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 CE.
It was
acquired by the synagogue of Asverus and has since been called the Severus Scroll. It contains 30 divergences from the
Masoretic text tradition.[xx]
The real push
for standardization did not come until the Masoretes – based in Tiberius and
Jerusalem -- had done their work (5th to 10th century CE).
They created Torah
reading guides to ensure baal
korehs would not accidentally mispronounce any of the words of the Divine
Torah, and also to aid Torah scholars in their studies.
Their guides included the following:
1. A meticulously hand written copy of the Torah scroll text as passed down from generation to generation – with margin notes for each time a word was ‘deficient’ according to the rules of Hebrew grammar and spelling.
The
Torah scroll text would not be altered as it is Divinely inspired, but a
marginal note would give the correct spelling.
Often,
this would be the replacement of a י (Yud)
by a ו (vav) – or the reverse[xxi]. Sometimes, a letter would be missing or extra
letter added[xxii].
Rarely, two words are merged as one.[xxiii]
In all,
there are well over 1200 such instances in the entire Tanach with the Chumash accounting for 67 of these.[xxiv]
2. Newly created system of dots and
dashes for vowel sounds
3. Newly created marks for the proper,
traditional chanting of the Torah when read in public. Cantillation
marks are usually above the consonants but at times below them.
Two families
of such Masoretes became famous for their guides: works that took multi-generations to fully complete the 24 volumes of the Tanach.
Aaron ben
Moses ben Asher (10th century) became the most famous of his family line.
Maimonides highly regarded his guide: consulting it himself for his own Torah scroll, and recommending it to others. It eventually settled in Aleppo and is called the Crown of Aleppo or the Aleppo Codex.
It is the
oldest surviving Masoretic guide and only one of two that has survived into the
20th century.
With the
growing threat of violence against the Jewish community in Syrian during the
Israel War of Independence, pages of the Codex were secretly smuggled from its
home in the Aleppo synagogue before rioting mobs burned it down in 1948[xxv].
Today, only
294 of its 380 pages are known to exist, and they are now kept at the Ben-Zvi
Institute in Israel[xxvi].
The other
surviving, Medieval guide – which is still fully intact -- is the Leningrad Codex whose colophon dates it
to 1008/9 CE and states it was copied from a Aaron ben Moses ben Asher
manuscript in Cairo.[xxvii]
There was also
a second, competing Masorete school, led by ben Naphtali, and his work was
preferred by Saadia Gaon[xxviii].
But the ben
Asher guide and its vowel system won out.
No copies of
ben Naphtali’s guide survived the Middle Ages[xxix].
There are
some 875 differences noted by David Kimchi, Norzi and others.[xxx] Nearly all deal with which part of a word
accents, but some 90 relate to other issues including word spelling and
pronunciation, i.e., Keri Uchteev[xxxi].
The next
effort at standardization took place in the early 13th century by
Meir ben Todroas Halevi Abulafia of Toledo.
After
comparing Torah scroll variations he could access, he created his own Torah text which tried to ‘resolve’ differences.
His
reputation was so great that scribes from far off Germany and Morocco came to copy his new “model” Torah and its standardizations.[xxxii]
As noted by Solomon, our tradition of stopping the public reading of the Torah scroll if a single letter looks ‘defective’, is in line with the ruling of Sephardi Joseph Karo (died 1575), the author of the Shulchan Aruch. It is based on Talmud Bavli, Ketubot 19b where Rabbi Ammi rules a Torah scroll with a word defect must be corrected within 30 days[xxxiii].
But Karo’s 16th
century contemporary, Ashkenazi Moses Isserles ruled:
“[we stop] if it is a proper mistake,
but another Torah should not be brought out on account of plene [extra letter] and
defective [missing letter] since our Torah scrolls are not so accurate that we could say that one is better than
another.”
( My brackets and red underlining)
As noted by Norman Solomon, even the Talmud admitted long ago that “we are no longer expert in counting either the letters or the words of the Torah.” (Talmud Bavli, Kiddushin 30a).[xxxiv]
The issue of
Torah Scroll ‘accuracy’ and ‘acceptability’ gained a new twist once Yemenite Jews came en masse to Israel. Their
ancient Torah scrolls contain divergences from the now standardized Masoretic
text.
Rabbi Abdulah
Sumak of Bagdad (d. 1889) had rules Yemenite Torahs were invalid.
But Rabbi
Ovadiah Yosef, the Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel (1972-83), ruled they were
’kosher’ and even someone who is not Yemenite can validly read from such a
Torah scroll.[xxxv]
CONCLUSION
The challenge
of the Torah scribe, to be a human ‘photo copier’, has never been easy and
‘consistency’ and word ‘accuracy’ have been issues going back to at least
Second Temple times.
Masoretes, in
their efforts at ‘standardization’, ended up with two schools with different
views as to the correct text of “Torah from Sinai”.
Efforts at
standardization continued into the higher Middle Ages and into Modern Times.
Today, publishers
of Chumash and Tanach rely on the complete Leningrad Codex and cross check with
the surviving Aleppo Codex were ’differences’ appear.
Today, computer
scanning helps quickly check and find any flaws in a Torah scroll. But to do so,
the computer software must have a pre-set ‘master’ Masoretic text ‘yardstick’
that someone has chosen as the ‘correct’ model.
The Nash
Papyrus and the Septuagint attest to
Torah scroll diversity going back to at least the early 3rd
century BCE, and in light of the history recounted by Solomon, it is best to
focus on the ‘ideas’ and ‘intent’ of the Torah/Chumash text: rather than fixate on ‘exact’ wording and spelling,
etc.
Norman
Solomon did not delve into the volage
behind the Septuagint and Nash
Papyrus, but the above analysis makes clear its ‘source’ master scribe was
comfortable ‘adjusting’ the Masoretic text.
He was certainly a highly trained and pious Jew: trying to reconcile Deut. 5 and Exod. 20 in the ‘name of Heaven’.
Lastly, efforts
by Kabbalists and other mystics to find secret meaning in extra dots above
words or change in letter size, or the tradition that Rabbi Akiva would find a ‘hidden
meaning’ in even the crowns of letters as recorded in Talmud Bavli Menachot 29b – a lengthy 3 paragraph dialogue
between God and Moses, no less – are acts of piety, if on shaky ground.
The opening verse of Shema Yisroel, Deut. 6: 4, is illustrative.
In siddurim, the last letter of the word Shema and the final letter of Echad are enlarged. This follows the lettering
as found in Masoretic Torah scrolls and goes all the way back to at least the Leningrad
Codex (1008/9 CE).[xxxvi]
|
ד שְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל:
יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ, יְהוָה אֶחָד. |
4 Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD
is one. |
Medieval commentators saw the enlarged letters as a secret message: as together they spell ד ע “witness”[xxxvii].
But in the Nash Papyrus, from the second century BCE, there is no such capitalization. Just look at the last 2 lines of the fragment below.
The end of
the word Shema is missing but there
is no question the last full line has Echad
אחד in normal size letters.
[i] See Sefaria, Deut. 6:4 right margin.
Click on manuscript and Leningrad
Codex page appears. Or see modern script copy pdf, page 157 at
https://www.seforimonline.org/pdf/252%20%5BWestminster%20Leningrad%20Codex%20Manuscript%2C%20%2C%20London%2C%202005%2C%20%D7%9B%D7%AA%D7%91%20%D7%99%D7%93%20%D7%9C%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%92%D7%A8%D7%93%20%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%93%D7%A7%D7%A1%2C%20%2C%20%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%93%D7%95%D7%9F%2C%20%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%A1%27%D7%94%5D.pdf
NASH PAPYRUS
Translation: from https://words.usask.ca/historyofthebook/2020/11/25/deconstructing-the-nash-papyrus/
Below are the Greek Septuagint Exodus
and Deuteronomy Decalogue texts in translation.
(https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/septuagint/chapter.asp?book=2&page=20 and https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/septuagint/chapter.asp?book=5&page=5 )
|
|
DEUTEONOMY ch. 5 6 I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out
of the house of bondage. 7 Thou shalt have no other gods before my face. 8
Thou shalt not make to thyself an image, nor likeness of any thing, whatever
things [are] in the heaven above, and whatever [are] in the earth beneath,
and whatever [are] in the waters under the earth. 9 Thou shalt not bow down
to them, nor shalt thou serve them; for I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God,
visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth
generation to them that hate me, 10 and doing mercifully to thousands of them
that love me, and that keep my commandments. 11 Thou shalt not take the name
of the Lord thy God in vain, for the Lord thy God will certainly not acquit
him that takes his name in vain. 12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as
the Lord thy God commanded thee. 13 Six days thou shalt work, and thou shalt
do all thy works; 14 but on the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the Lord thy
God: thou shalt do in it no work, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, thy
man-servant, and thy maid-servant, thine ox, and thine ass, and all thy
cattle, and the stranger that sojourns in the midst of thee; that thy
man-servant may rest, and thy maid, and thine ox, as well as thou. 15 And
thou shalt remember that thou wast a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord
thy God brought thee out thence with a mighty hand, and a high arm: therefore
the Lord appointed thee to keep the sabbath day and to sanctify it. 16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the Lord thy
God commanded thee; that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest live
long upon the land, which the Lord thy God gives thee. 17 Thou shalt not
commit murder. 18 Thou shalt not commit adultery. 19 Thou shalt not steal. 20
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. 21 Thou shalt not
covet thy neighbour’s wife; thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, nor his
field, nor his man-servant, nor his maid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any
beast of his, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s. |
[v] See list with link descriptions at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_Vulgate
[x] Wikipedia, “Nash Papyrus”.
[xi]
See Wikipedia, ibid. and THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW 15 (1903)
392-408, “ THE HEBREW PAPYRUS OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS’ by F. C. Burkitt,
especially 397 – 399.)
[xii] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint#:~:text=The%20Greek%20Old%20Testament%2C%20or,biblical%20apocrypha%2C%20and%20deuterocanonical%20books
[xiii] See Soncino Chumash: the five books of Moses with
Haftaroth (1947 ed.) commentary page 458.
[xiv] See last paragraph at https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/246632/jewish/The-Revelation-on-Mount-Sinai.htm and more detailed account with
citations at https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4755814/jewish/Why-Only-Ten-Commandments-at-Sinai.htm
Also
see section “Ten or 613? “ at https://www.aish.com/h/sh/se/48971836.html
[xv] See right sidebar at https://www.sefaria.org/Exodus?lang=bi&p2=Exodus.24.12&lang2=en
[xix]
Norman Solomon, Torah from Heaven: Reconstruction of Faith (Littman Library of Jewish
Civilization, 2012) ch. 8.
[xx] Ibid.
[xxi] See RCA Siddur Avodat Halev (revised 2018) Psalms 71, 73, 77 margins
[xxii]
Ibid, Psalms 51, 73 and 55
margin
[xxiii]
Ibid. Palms 10 and 55 margin
[xxiv] See https://www.tanakhml.org/d71.php2xml?sfr=1&prq=8] which has a total count of 1276. In particular, the Chumash has 67: Gen. 16, Exod. 12, Lev. 5, Numb. 9, Deut. 25
[xxv] As reported by Judy Feld Carr.
[xxvi]
Norman Solomon, Torah from Heaven: Reconstruction of Faith (Littman Library of Jewish
Civilization, 2012) ch. 8.
[xxix]
See Wikipedia entry on “ben Naphtali”. It notes a reconstruction based on the available list of
differences and fragments was carried
out in 1965 by Lazar Lipschütz.
He
sees only about 860
differences:”about nine-tenths of which refer to the placing of the accents מתג
and געיא. The remaining ones have reference to דגש and רפה, to vowels, accents, and consonantal
spelling”.
[xxxi] Ibid.
[xxxii]
Norman Solomon, Torah from Heaven: Reconstruction of Faith (Littman Library of Jewish
Civilization, 2012) ch. 8.
[xxxiii]
Ibid.
[xxxiv]
Ibid.
[xxxv]
Ibid.
[xxxvi] See Sefaria, Deut. 6:4 right margin. Click on manuscript and Leningrad Codex page appears. Or see modern script copy pdf, page 157 at
https://www.seforimonline.org/pdf/252%20%5BWestminster%20Leningrad%20Codex%20Manuscript%2C%20%2C%20London%2C%202005%2C%20%D7%9B%D7%AA%D7%91%20%D7%99%D7%93%20%D7%9C%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%92%D7%A8%D7%93%20%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%93%D7%A7%D7%A1%2C%20%2C%20%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%93%D7%95%D7%9F%2C%20%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%A1%27%D7%94%5D.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment