The Power of Psalms in Post-Biblical Judaism: Liturgy, Ritual and Community (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity, 118) 9004678271, 9789004678279

Citation preview

The Power of Psalms in Post-Biblical Judaism

Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity ARBEITEN ZUR GESCHICHTE DES ANTIKEN JUDENTUMS UND DES URCHRISTENTUMS

Founding Editor Martin Hengel† (Tübingen) Executive Editors Cilliers Breytenbach (Berlin) Sacha Stern (London) Editorial Board Lutz Doering (Münster) – Judith Lieu (Cambridge) David Lincicum (Notre Dame) – AnneMarie Luijendijk (Princeton) Tessa Rajak (Reading/Oxford) – Amram Tropper ( Jerusalem) Christiane Zimmermann (Kiel)

volume 118

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/ajec

The Power of Psalms in Post-Biblical Judaism Liturgy, Ritual and Community Edited by

Claudia D. Bergmann Tessa Rajak Benedikt Kranemann Rebecca Ullrich

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Bergmann, Claudia D., editor. | Rajak, Tessa, editor. |  Kranemann, Benedikt, editor. | Ullrich, Rebecca, editor. Title: The power of Psalms in post-biblical Judaism : liturgy, ritual and  community / edited by Claudia D. Bergmann, Tessa Rajak, Benedikt Kranemann,  Rebecca Ullrich. Description: Leiden ; Boston : Brill, [2023] | Series: Ancient Judaism and  early Christianity, 1871-6636 ; volume 118 | Includes index. | Summary:  “The powerful poetry of the Hebrew Psalms articulates a unique range of  experience, even in translation. They explore the deepest concerns of  individuals and communities. They are central to the performance of  religion for both Jews and Christians. New discoveries, such as the  famous Dead Sea Scrolls, have transformed our view of their role in  Judaism, as has modern re-evaluation of the complicated relationship  between Judaism and Christianity. Here a group of leading scholars sheds  fresh light on the uses of the Psalms in post-biblical Jewish life in a  multi-cultural world”— Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2023030743 (print) | LCCN 2023030744 (ebook) | ISBN  9789004678279 (hardback) | ISBN 9789004678286 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Bible. Psalms—Use—Congresses. | Bible.  Psalms—Influence—Congresses. | Judaism—History—Post-exilic period,  586 B.C.-210 A.D.—Congresses | Jews—History—70—Congresses. Classification: LCC BS1430.55 .P69 2023 (print) | LCC BS1430.55 (ebook) |  DDC 223/.206—dc23/eng/20230722 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023030743 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023030744

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. issn 1871-6636 isbn 978-90-04-67827-9 (hardback) isbn 978-90-04-67828-6 (e-book) Copyright 2023 by Claudia D. Bergmann, Tessa Rajak, Benedikt Kranemann and Rebecca Ullrich. Published by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink, Brill mentis, Brill Wageningen Academic, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Böhlau and V&R unipress. Koninklijke Brill NV reserves the right to protect this publication against unauthorized use. Requests for re-use and/or translations must be addressed to Koninklijke Brill NV via brill.com or copyright.com. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

in memoriam James K. Aitken (1968–2023) Erhard S. Gerstenberger (1932–2023)

⸪

Contents Preface ix Acknowledgements xi Abbreviations xii Editors and Contributors xxi

Part 1 Introduction Introduction: New Approaches 3 Tessa Rajak Prologue: Looking Back at Patients’ Prayers in Babylonian Incantations and Hebrew Individual Complaint 17 Erhard S. Gerstenberger†

Part 2 The Psalms in the Second Temple Period Building a Community of the Elect through Psalms and Prayers Liturgy, Education, and Prophetic Interpretation 37 Mika S. Pajunen The Motif of the Heavenly Cult in the Psalms and at Qumran 60 Beate Ego Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106: Experiencing and Remembering the Past 83 Angela Kim Harkins The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting 105 James K. Aitken†

viii

Contents

Part 3 The Psalms in Late Antique Religious Poetry The Psalms Are Not Enough The Revolution of Hebrew Liturgical Poetry (Piyyut) in Late Antiquity 133 Ophir Münz-Manor The Prayers of Moses: Psalm 90 and Moses’s Refusal to Die 147 Laura S. Lieber

Part 4 The Psalms in Rabbinic and Medieval Judaism and Beyond The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism and Its Major Interpretations prior to and during the Middle Ages Approaches, Authorship, Genre, and Polemics 163 Isaac Kalimi Psalm 8 as a Case Study in “Embedded” Jewish Commentary 198 Alan Cooper The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms Recitation, Pesuqe de-Zimra 222 Ruth Langer Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual 241 Susanne Talabardon Index of Sources 261 Index of Names, Places and Subjects 272

Preface The international conference “Psalms in Rituals from Antiquity to the Present,” held on October 24–26, 2018, at the Max-Weber Kolleg in the University of Erfurt, Germany, aimed to showcase and also to build upon recent developments in what has become a very exciting field, bringing to it the distinctive perspective of the Research Centre “Dynamics of Jewish Ritual Practices in Pluralistic Contexts from Antiquity to the Present,” which hosted the event. The Research Centre, which was funded from 2015 to 2020 by the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), investigated the dynamic relationship of rituals in pluralistic contexts and specifically in Jewish and Christian religious traditions. While religious institutions often focus on tradition, invariability, and rootedness in history, the Research Centre has found and studied numerous examples of innovation and change in regard to religious ritual practices. This landmark conference approached the subject of the Psalms as a dynamic part of Jewish liturgy, ritual, and community formation from a broad perspective. Its purpose followed the Centre’s scholarly trajectory. “Dynamic” was understood as referring to the ability of these literary texts to be adapted to changing contexts and circumstances throughout history as Jewish ritual agents and institutions use them to express religious beliefs. It also refers to the fact that, in the case of the Psalms, text became ritual and thus part of lived ancient and modern religion. “Pluralistic” focused on the fact that the Psalms were and are part of religious practices that take place in diverse cultural and religious environments. Throughout time, they were claimed as ritual texts by different communities, Christian and Jewish alike, and used by religious institutions, movements, and individuals to express their differing identities through text and ritual. At most times, but especially during the Middle Ages, Jewish and Christian religious communities were more or less aware of each other’s religious practices, and they sometimes shaped their liturgy (and their use of the Psalms within that liturgy) in order to distinguish themselves from “the other,” to create and protect their own identity. In modern times, liturgies have also served to find common ground between the religions. The timing of the conference was felicitous, and we were able to bring together prominent scholars from around the globe who had already made notable contributions to the discussion of the early reception of the Psalms. All the speakers and the topics in the original conference have informed this final product. These were: Erhard Gerstenberger, Angela Kim Harkins, Beate Ego, Mika S. Pajunen (within the section “The Psalms in the Hebrew Bible and the Second Temple Period”), Günter Stemberger, Clemens Leonhard,

x

Preface

A. J. Berkovitz, Ophir Münz-Manor (within the section “The Psalms in Early Rabbinic Literature”), Esther Menn, Isaac Kalimi, Alan Cooper, Ruth Langer, Rebecca Ullrich (within the section “Psalms in Jewish Liturgy, Commentary, and Poetry”), Jürgen Bärsch, Harald Buchinger (within the section “Psalms in Christian Liturgy”), Andreas Haug, Bill Rebiger, Susanne Talbardon, and Benedikt Kranemann (within the section “Psalms and Performance”). Vered Raziel Kretzmer, Tina Betz and Maik Patzelt participated in the conference as Junior Researchers. This volume contains a selection of the papers delivered at that conference together with two additional papers, those of James Aitken and Laura S. Lieber, that were written specially for the volume. The selection here for the most part focuses on studying dynamic aspects of the internal Jewish development in particular contexts, rather than directly tackling questions about interactions with the non-Jewish world. To understand the role of the Psalms in the lives of Jews is already a huge undertaking. As will have emerged from this preface, we include here fundamental studies by leading voices in the field that both set the scene and bring new research to bear on key themes. Some authors are explicitly attentive to relationships or contrasts with Christianity. But all have been mindful that the dynamics of the Psalms within Judaism were conditioned by the broader context in which Jews operated and responsive to the project’s multi-cultural perspective. Claudia D. Bergmann Tessa Rajak

September 2023

Acknowledgements The editors wish to thank the members of the Research Centre “Dynamics of Jewish Ritual Practices in Pluralistic Contexts from Antiquity to the Present” at the Max-Weber-Kolleg of the University of Erfurt, which was funded from 2015 to 2020 by the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), Germany, by the Max-Weber-Kolleg, and by the University of Erfurt. They also wish to express their warm gratitude for the intellectual input, personal support and consistent encouragement of many individuals connected to the Research Centre. We thank especially Jörg Rüpke, Günter Stemberger, Judith Frishman, and Gerard Rouwhorst. The completion of this volume would not have been possible without the help of many people. Thomas R. Blanton IV was a skilled and careful copy editor for the book and a valued colleague in our discussions. Johanna Birkefeld, supported by the Professur für Liturgiewissenschaft of the University of Erfurt, checked the entire text for inconsistencies. Naomi Grützbach, funded by the University of Paderborn, as well as Raphael Neuschäfer, funded by the Professur für Liturgiewissenschaft of the University of Erfurt, assisted with the Index of Sources and the General Index. Heartfelt thanks also go to the anonymous referees from the AJEC Board for their helpful suggestions and comments and to our editors at Brill. The editors of this volume met when working within the Research Centre: Claudia D. Bergmann served as its coordinator, Tessa Rajak was a member of the Board of Directors, Benedikt Kranemann was its Director, and Rebecca Ullrich was a postdoctoral researcher in the Centre and an organiser of the conference “Psalms in Rituals from Antiquity to the Present.”

Abbreviations

Technical Abbreviations and Eras

abbrev. abbreviated ad loc. ad locum, at the place discussed b. ben (son of) BCE before the Common Era c. century ca. circa CE Common Era cf. confer, compare ch(s). chapter(s) d. died diss. dissertation ed(s). editor(s), edited by, edition e.g. exempli gratia, for example especially esp. ET English translation etc. et cetera, and so forth, and the rest fol(s). folio(s) Heb. Hebrew JPA Jewish Palestinian Aramaic l(l). line(s) lit. literally ms(s). manuscript(s) n(n). note(s) N.N. proper noun (name) no(s). number(s) n.p. no publisher passim here and there p(p). page(s) R. Rabbi repr. reprinted rev. revised (by), revision ser. series s.v. sub verbo, under the word trans. translator, translated by vers. version

Abbreviations videlicet, namely viz. vol(s). volume(s) v(v). verse(s)



Biblical and Other Ancient and Medieval Texts and Versions

1–2 Chr 1 Esd 1–2 Kgs 1–4 Macc 1–2 Sam 1Q34 1QHa–b 1QM 1QpPs 1QPsa, x 1QS 4Q174 4Q177 4Q286–289 4Q381 4Q400–407 4Q434–438 4Q503 4Q504 4Q506 4Q507–509 4Q510–511 4Q560 4QHa–e 4QMMT 4QpPsa–b 4QPsa–u 5Q14 11Q17 11QapocrPs 11QPsa–d ʿAbod. Zar. Abot

1–2 Chronicles 1 Esdras 1–2 Kings 1–4 Maccabees 1–2 Samuel 1QFestival Prayers 1QHodayota–b 1QWar Scroll 1QPsalms Pesher 1QPsalmsa, x 1QSerekh ha-Yaḥad 4QFlorilegium 4QCatena A 4QBerakhota–d 4QNon-Canonical Psalms B 4QSongs of the Sabbath Sacrifice 4QBarkhiNafshia–e 4QDaily Prayers 4QWords of the Luminariesa 4QWords of the Luminariesc 4QFestival Prayersa–c 4QSongs of the Sagea–b Exorcism Aramaic 4QHodayota–e 4QHalakic Letter (Miqṣat Maʿaśê ha-Torah) 4QPsalms Peshera–b 4QPsalmsa–u Curses 11QSongs of the Sabbath Sacrifice 11QApocryphal Psalms 11QPsalmsa–d Abodah Zarah Avot

xiii

xiv

Abbreviations

Abot R. Nat. Avot de Rabbi Natan Amos Amos Ant. Josephus, Jewish Antiquites b. Babylonian Talmud B. Bat. Bava Batra Ber. Berakhot Dan Daniel Deipn. Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae Deut Deuteronomy Eccl. Aristophanes, Ecclesiazusae Epict. Arrian, Discourses of Epictetus Exod Exodus Ezek Ezekiel Ezra Ezra Gen Genesis Gen. Rab. Genesis Rabbah Hag. Hagigah Isa Isaiah Jdt Judith Jer Jeremiah Job Job Josh Joshua Jub. Jubilees Judg Judges Ketub. Ketubbot Lev Leviticus Lev. Rab. Leviticus Rabbah LXX Septuagint m. Mishnah Mark Mark Matt Matthew MT Masoretic Text Neh Nehemiah NJPS Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures; The New JPS Translation according to the Traditional Hebrew Text. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1985 NRSV New Revised Standard Version Num Numbers Obad Obadiah Pesah. Pesahim Pesiq. Rab. Pesiqta Rabbati

xv

Abbreviations Prov Proverbs Ps(s) Psalm(s) Pss. Sol. Psalms of Solomon Qidd. Qiddushin Qoh Qoheleth Rab. Rabbah Sanh. Sanhedrin Shabb. Shabbat Sir Sirach (Ben Sira) Song Song of Songs Sotah Sotah Suppl. Euripides, Supplices t. Tosefta Tamid Tamid y. Jerusalem Talmud Yal. Yalqut Zech Zechariah Zohar Zohar



Journals and Series

ÄAT ABD ABG AIL AJEC AMD Annu Rev Anthropol ANRW

AOAT ArBib ASP ATDan AzTh BBB

Ägypten und Altes Testament Freedman, David Noel, ed. Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992 Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte Ancient Israel and Its Literature Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity Ancient Magic and Divination Annual Review of Anthropology Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Part 2, Principat. Edited by Hildegard Temporini and Wolfgang Haase. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1972– Alter Orient und Altes Testament The Aramaic Bible American Studies in Papyrology Acta Theologica Danica Arbeiten zur Theologie Bonner biblische Beiträge

xvi

Abbreviations

Blackwell Bible Commentary BBC Bib Biblica BiTS Biblical Tools and Studies BKAT Biblischer Kommentar, Altes Testament BRLA Brill Reference Library of Judaism BSJS Brill’s Series in Jewish Studies BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Chr.Mitt Mitteis, Ludwig, and Ulrich Wilcken. Grundzüge und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde. Band 2. Juristischer Teil, II Hälfte Chrestomathie. Leipzig and Berlin: Teubner, 1912. Nos. 1–500 ClQ Classical Quarterly ConBOT Coniectanea Biblica: Old Testament Series CognSci Cognitive Science CQS Companion to the Qumran Scrolls DCLY Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook DHL Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert DSD Dead Sea Discoveries DSS James H. Charlesworth, ed. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English Translations. 8 vols. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994– EB(B) Cassuto, Umberto, et al., eds. Encyclopaedia Biblica: Thesaurus rerum biblicarum alphabetico ordine digestus / Entsiklopedyah miqra‌ʾit: Otsar ha-yediʿot ʿal ha-mikra u-tekufato [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1950–1988 ECDSS Eerdmans Commentaries on the Dead Sea Scrolls ECh Bromiley, Geoffrey William, and Erwin Fahlbusch, eds. Encyclopedia of Christianity. 5 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998–2008 EDEJ Collins, John J., and Daniel C. Harlow, eds. The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010 EJ European Judaism EJJS European Journal of Jewish Studies EJL Early Judaism and Its Literature Ekstasis Ekstasis: Religious Experience from Antiquity to the Middle Ages EL Ephemerides Liturgicae

Abbreviations

xvii

Skolnik, Fred, and Michael Berenbaum, eds. Encyclopedia Judaica. 2nd ed. 22 vols. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007 ETCSL Black, J. A., G. Cunningham, J. Ebeling, E. Flückiger-Hawker, E. Robson, J. Taylor, and G. Zólyomi, eds. The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature. Oxford: Faculty of Oriental Studies, University of Oxford, 1998–2006. http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/ FAT Forschungen zum Alten Testament FB Forschung zur Bibel FOTL Forms of the Old Testament Literature FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments GBAO Göttinger Beiträge zum Alten Orient GHAT Göttinger Handkommentar zum Alten Testament GRBS Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies HBS Herders biblische Studien HeBAI Hebrew Bible and Ancient Israel Harvard Semitic Monographs HSM HSS Harvard Semitic Studies HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual IK Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Bonn: Habelt, 1972– IMétr Bernand, Étienne, ed. Inscriptions métriques de l’Égypte grécoromaine: Recherches sur la poésie épigrammatique des Grecs en Égypte. Annales littéraires de l’Université de Besançon 98. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1969 Intégrité Intégrité: A Faith and Learning Journal JAJ Journal of Ancient Judaism JAJSup Journal of Ancient Judaism Supplements JANES Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society JBTh Jahrbuch für biblische Theologie JCH Jewish and Christian Heritage J Cogn Cult Journal of Cognition and Culture JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies JHist Jewish History JJS Journal of Jewish Studies JJTP Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy JQR Jewish Quarterly Review JSJSup Journal for the Study of Judaism Supplement Series EncJud

xviii

Abbreviations

Journal of Semitic Studies Kabbalah: Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts Kirjath-Sepher Library of Christian Classics Leshonenu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects LHBOTS The Library of Hebrew Bible / Old Testament Studies LLJC Littman Library of Jewish Civilization LSTS The Library of Second Temple Studies MatTK Materiale Textkulturen MGWJ Monatschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums MSU Mitteilungen des Septuaginta-Unternehmens MTSR Method and Theory in the Study of Religion NLH New Literary History OA Opuscula Atheniensia OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis OTS Old Testament Studies OtSt Oudtestamentische Studiën La Parola del passato: Rivista di studi antichi ParPass PBl Pastoralblätter für Homiletik, Katechetik und Seelsorge P.Cair.Zenon Edgar, C. C., ed. Zenon Papyri. 5 vols. Cairo: L’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1925–1940 P.Eirene Bažant, Jan, et al., eds. Studia Graeca et Latina (Papyrologica). Prague: Institute for Classical Studies of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, 1998– PFES Publications of the Finnish Exegetical Society PJTC Perspectives on Jewish Texts and Contexts Poetica Poetica Poetics Poetics Poet. Today Poetics Today: International Journal for Theory and Analysis of Literature and Communication P.Petr. Mahaffy, J. P., ed. The Flinders Petrie Papyri. 3 vols. Dublin: Academy Press, 1891–1905 Proof Prooftexts: A Journal of Jewish Literary History PSI Papiri greci e latini. Pubblicazioni della Società italiana per la ricerca dei papiri greci e latini in Egitto. Firenze F. Le Monnier, 1912– Psychol Sci Psychological Science PTRS Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society R&T Religion and Theology

JSS Kabbalah KS LCC Leshonenu

Abbreviations

xix

Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale Revue biblique Religion Revue de Qumran Supplementi alla Rivista Biblica Religionsgeschichtliches Versuche und Vorarbeiten Salesianum Priesigke, Friedrich, et al., eds. Sammelbuch griechischer Urkunden aus Ägypten. Strassburg: Trübner; Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1915– SBB Stuttgarter biblische Beiträge SBLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series SBLSCS Society of Biblical Literature Septuagint and Cognate Studies SEG Hondius, Jacob E., et al., eds. Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum Leiden: Brill, 1923– SemCl Semitica et classica Sinai Sinai SJOT Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament Studies in Late Antiquity SLA SNTSU Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt SSFB Schriftreihe des Sonderforschungsbereichs STDJ Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah StPohl Studia Pohl Style Style SUNT Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments SUNYSJ SUNY Series in Judaica Tarbiz Tarbiz TLZ Theologische Literaturzeitung Trends Neurosci Trends in Neurosciences TSAJ Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum UPZ Wilcken, Ulrich, ed. Urkunden der Ptolemäerzeit (Ältere Funde). 2 vols. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1927–1957 VAWJ Veröffentlichungen der Akademie für die Wissenschaft des Judentums VF Verkündigung und Forschung VT Vetus Testamentum VTSup Supplements to Vetus Testamentum WA D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe). 73 vols. Weimar: Böhlau, 1883–2009 RA RB Religion RevQ RivBSup RVV Sal SB

xx WMANT WUNT YJS ZAW Zutot

Abbreviations Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Yale Judaica Series Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zutot: Perspectives on Jewish Culture

Editors and Contributors James Aitken† Professor of Hebrew and Early Jewish Studies, University of Cambridge Fellow of Fitzwilliam College (UK) Claudia D. Bergmann Professurvertreterin “Evangelische Theologie mit dem Schwerpunkt Biblische Exegese und Theologie” Universität Paderborn (Germany) Alan Cooper Elaine Ravich Professor of Jewish Studies The Jewish Theological Seminary (USA) Beate Ego Professor “Exegese und Theologie des Alten Testaments” Ruhr-Universität Bochum (Germany) Erhard Gerstenberger† Professor Emeritus “Altes Testament” Philipps-Universität Marburg (Germany) Angela Kim Harkins Associate Professor / Ordinary Professor Boston College School of Theology and Ministry (USA) Isaac Kalimi Professor Emeritus, Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz (Germany) The University of Chicago (USA) Benedikt Kranemann Professor of Liturgiewissenschaft/Liturgical Studies Katholisch-Theologische Fakultät, Universität Erfurt (Germany) Ruth Langer Professor of Jewish Studies and Comparative Theology, Theology Department Associate Director, Center for Christian-Jewish Learning Boston College (USA)

xxii

Editors and Contributors

Laura S. Lieber Professor of Religious Studies Duke University (USA) Ophir Münz-Manor Associate Professor of Rabbinic Culture and Dean of Academic Studies The Open University of Israel Mika S. Pajunen Academy of Finland Senior Research Fellow, University of Helsinki Alexander von Humboldt Fellow, University of Göttingen Tessa Rajak Professor of Ancient History Emerita, University of Reading (UK) Senior Research Fellow, Somerville College, University of Oxford (UK) Susanne Talabardon Professor of Jewish Studies Universität Bamberg (Germany) Rebecca Ullrich Postdoctoral Researcher Institute for Jewish Studies, Freie Universität Berlin (Germany)

Part 1 Introduction

∵

Introduction: New Approaches Tessa Rajak While the origins and earliest usage of the Psalms of the Hebrew Bible remain largely hidden in the history of Israel, the book of Psalms has a remarkable and often very tangible later history. Psalms became perhaps the richest of all biblical sources for liturgical texts, for private spiritual expression, and for reflection. For reasons that are not hard to fathom, they have been a vital element in religious rituals (in the widest sense) in many traditions. Both the genre and poetic literary form of the Psalms and the feeling they are capable of conveying of intimate connection to a gamut of human experience lent themselves readily to prayer, recitation, and song, making the Psalms probably the prime literary source for the performance of religion in Judaism and Christianity. Our understanding of what the Psalms have meant to Jews has been transformed in recent years. Two major factors would seem to have powered this transformation. The first of these is a dramatic development in the type and quantity of evidence at our disposal. This has opened up new perspectives on the Psalms and redefined research in the field. First and foremost, the results of several generations of intensive investigation of the Qumran documents reveal a living and developing Jewish world in which the Psalms (in particular a select number of them), additional Psalms, variations on Psalms, and interpretation of Psalms were evidently in dynamic use.1 The famous and rather well-preserved Psalms Scroll (11Q5) contains about fifty compositions, of which only forty are found in the Masoretic text, with divergences from the Hebrew Bible both in the order of the Psalms and their wording.2 A remarkable feature of the corpus of Qumran literature is the additional presence of distinctive types of psalm-like compositions whose liturgical uses, if any, remain opaque,

1 For Psalms and poetic prayers at Qumran, see Eileen Schuller, Non-Canonical Psalms from Qumran: A Pseudepigraphic Collection (Leiden: Brill, 1986); Bilhah Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry, STDJ 12 (Leiden: Brill, 1994); Mika S. Pajunen, “Reading Psalm and Prayer Manuscripts from Qumran,” in Material Aspects of Reading in Ancient and Medieval Cultures: Materiality, Presence and Performance, ed. Anna Krauß, Jonas Leipziger, and Friederike Schücking-Jungblut, MatTK 26 / SSFB 933 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2020), 55–70. 2 See Peter W. Flint, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Book of Psalms (Leiden: Brill, 1997).

© Tessa Rajak, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_002

4

Rajak

notably the Hodayot3 and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice.4 The Hodayot, also called “Thanksgiving Hymns” or “Thanksgiving Psalms” because of the common heading “I thank you…,” were among the first Dead Sea Scrolls to be discovered in the 1940s. They rest on ideas and themes from the Hebrew Bible, focusing on the contrast between God and the unworthy human condition. The Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice describe liturgical performance in the heavens, in the presence of God. Their headings refer to the maskil, the teacher, and they appear to be written for use on a series of Sabbaths. Alongside an interest in numbers and counting, and a taste for wordplay, the Songs of Sabbath Sacrifice operate with direct quotations from the Psalms and from other biblical texts. Before the Qumran discoveries, comparable literature was already familiar from other Second Temple or late antique contexts, notably the two Greek poetic collections known as the Psalms of Solomon and the Odes of Solomon. The Syriac tradition has preserved not only Psalm 151, a psalm put into David’s mouth that is also included in the Septuagint (as well as in a Hebrew version in the Qumran Psalms Scroll), but also four additional psalms. It is also worth remembering that the early songs and poems inserted into the narrative of the Hebrew Bible, such as the valedictory poems of Moses, the Song of Deborah, the prayer of Hannah, or the “last words” of David, are in some ways similar to psalms, and the same even applies to passages in the prophetic books such as the second chapter of the book of Jonah. But the documents discovered at Qumran provided a backcloth against which the culture of ancient Jewish poetry could be interrogated anew. Even though the Qumran texts raise perhaps more questions than they answer, they nonetheless serve wonderfully to expose a range of possibilities 3 For the Hodayot, see S. Holm-Nielsen, Hodayot: Psalms from Qumran, ATDan 2 (Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget, 1960); Esther G. Chazon, “Liturgical Function in the Cave 1 Hodayot Collection,” in Qumran Cave 1 Revisited: Texts from Cave 1 Sixty Years after Their Discovery; Proceedings of the Sixth Meeting of the IOQS in Ljubljana, ed. Daniel K. Falk, STDJ 48 (Leiden: Brill, 2011): 513–31; Esther G. Chazon, “Lowly to Lofty: The Hodayot’s Use of Liturgical Traditions to Shape Sectarian Identity and Religious Experience,” RevQ 26, no. 1 (2013): 3–19; John J. Collins, “Amazing Grace: The Transformation of the Thanksgiving Hymn at Qumran,” in Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions, ed. Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2004), 75–85. 4 Work on the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice has multiplied since Carol A. Newsom’s Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition, HSS 27 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985). For commentaries and translations of the entire corpus, see, among others, James H. Charlesworth and Carol A. Newsom, Angelic Liturgy: Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, DSS 4b (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999); Philip S. Alexander, The Mystical Texts: Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and Related Manuscripts, LSTS 61 / CQS 7 (London: T&T Clark, 2006); James R. Davila, Liturgical Works, ECDSS (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000).

Introduction: New Approaches

5

for creative interpretation and innovation around the biblical book of Psalms. Because the Dead Sea Scrolls survive divorced from their immediate social context (which is the case whether or not their connection with the Essene sect as described by Josephus be accepted), hard thinking is prompted on functional dividing lines within the corpus, and indeed more generally on the boundaries between liturgy and literature, between communal and private devotion, between song and prayer. The extent to which the texts stored at Qumran reflect also the mindset of Jewish groupings other than their local keepers, or indeed the beliefs of the “common Judaism” of the period, remains a matter of active discussion. But it is at any rate widely accepted that what survives of the Qumran library includes not only sectarian literature but also material drawn from other centers, including temple-based groupings in Jerusalem, even if the allocation of any particular work to one category or the other may remain contested. This means that any study of the Psalms and kindred literature at Qumran (including those in this volume) has evidential value and suggestive power beyond the specific environment of its origins. In this volume, Mika S. Pajunen, in “Building a Community of the Elect through Psalms and Prayers: Liturgy, Education, and Prophetic Interpretation,”5 focuses on the fluidity of the boundaries between the various categories of religious expression and activity during the Second Temple period, especially that between psalm and prayer. These genres were evidently recontextualized according to the changing needs of the user, and new uses were even found for some genres of psalm. The Qumran texts break open the categories. But the underlying theme throughout this poetry is praise of God, and penitential elements are subsumed within the theme. Beate Ego, in her discussion of “The Motif of the Heavenly Cult in the Psalms and at Qumran,”6 investigates the transference of the distinctive visualization of the angels praising and worshiping God, which begins in the Psalms themselves but is continued and expanded at Qumran. This motif has a function within ritual activity (in the widest sense), and Ego offers an experiential reading, finding within the texts themselves strategies for the formation of self and of community. Another significant addition to our body of evidence comes from a later stage in the development of Judaism. In the realm of religious poetry, painstaking work on previously unknown or unexplored manuscripts have transformed our grasp of the late antique and early medieval Hebrew piyyutim (hymns).7 5 Pp. 37–59. 6 Pp. 60–82. 7 Introductions to piyyut are still scarce. But see Ezra Fleischer, “Piyyut,” in vol. 2 of The Literature of the Sages, ed. Shmuel Safrai (Assen: Van Gorcum: 2006), 363–73; Laura S. Lieber,

6

Rajak

New poems by the well-known Palestinian exponents of the genre, Yose ben Yose and Eleazar Ha-Qallir, as well as the names of previously unknown poets have been revealed, mainly through the Cairo Geniza. A dexterous creativity with biblical quotation and allusion was at the heart of their endeavours, and in this the Psalms played a major part. In this volume, Ophir Münz-Manor’s essay “The Psalms Are Not Enough: The Revolution of Hebrew Liturgical Poetry (Piyyut) in Late Antiquity”8 situates this major new direction in Hebrew poetry both in relation to biblical precedents, especially the Psalms, and in the context of the East Byzantine Christian empire in which the virtuoso Jewish composers of this poetry lived and composed. Through comparisons between their salient linguistic and literary features and the versification of Psalms, he demonstrates how the response of the payyetanim was to generate on this platform a truly new form of liturgical expression, related to the changed needs of ritual performance at the end of the fourth century. Although little is known of where and how the payyetanim worked, one can grasp a broader contextualization; and Münz-Manor suggests that these Jewish poets also shared in a new, late antique poetics that transcended religious boundaries. He notices telling commonalities with Christian poetry in Syriac, in Samaritan Aramaic, and in Greek, written by, for example, Ephrem, Marqe, and Romanos. Laura S. Lieber’s study of Psalm 90, “The Prayers of Moses: Psalm 90 and Moses’s Refusal to Die,”9 derives rich fruits from a close study of Moses’s reflections on mortality in this Psalm alongside the piyyut of Eleazar ha-Qallir, with which it has deep affinities. She uncovers through deep reading the profound but often subtle impact of psalmic thought and phrase on this later literature, an impact surely more powerful than long verbatim citations or direct imitation. Some part of the rich collection of piyyutim was subsumed, unsurprisingly, into the Jewish liturgy, especially for the main festivals, although leading rabbis in Babylonia and Palestine appear to have frowned upon its inclusion. Much fine poetry no doubt remains lost to us forever. The second major change in the scholarly study of the Jewish dimension of the Psalms is the welcome disappearance in much biblical scholarship of that lingering supersessionism, by no means always conscious or intentional, which generated a strange (though not unfamiliar) dichotomy. On the one hand, a host of challenging problems has attracted scholarship of high quality Yannai on Genesis: An Invitation to Piyyut (Cincinnati: HUC Press, 2010). Much of the basic literature is in Hebrew: see Ezra Fleischer, Hebrew Liturgical Poetry in the Middle Ages [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Keter, 1975); Joseph Yahalom, The Language of Early Piyyut [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1985); Ophir Münz-Manor, Early Piyyut: An Annotated Anthology [Hebrew] (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press, 2015). 8 Pp. 133–146. 9 Pp. 147–160.

Introduction: New Approaches

7

over very many years. Among these well-known problems were the role of the Psalms in the ritual of ancient Israel; the validity of Near Eastern parallels; comparison between the Psalms and the songs and poems found in other biblical books; the vexed question of the dates and the contexts of origin of the Psalms; Davidic and other attributions, and the meaning and value of the titles affixed to many of them; and the division of the Psalter by genre and function. On the other hand, when it came to the subsequent reception of the Psalms, from the later (post-Hasmonean) Second Temple era to our own day, to their role in liturgy and in life, as source texts and as constant companions, the shift was dramatically towards Christian interpretation and Christian worship, while the equal, or possibly even greater importance of the Psalms to the Jewish world remained a blank. Some fine publications have now done much to remedy this failure, giving ample parallel coverage to the two traditions each in its own right, and making a start on the long but exciting journey of understanding the rich mutual interaction, both positive and negative, through the centuries.10 Influence could flow in either direction and could manifest sometimes as imitation and sometimes as the very opposite. Often, separation between Judaism and Christianity could be marked through silent but deliberate divergence, as in the Christian treatment of Psalm 22, so closely associated with Jesus on the cross. The main distinctions between the two traditions of interpretation and usage, and the question of how far these are time bound rather than intrinsic, will surely also continue to generate important lines of enquiry. Attention has long been given to the Christian prophetic interpretation of the Psalms: from the books of the New Testament onwards, they served as proof texts, demonstrating how prophecies made by David had been fulfilled within the writer’s situation and his or her community. Yet we have now become familiar with this mode of interpretation as characteristic equally of the pesher type of commentary in the Qumran literature, and thus as present at an even earlier date in Jewish thought. The entry of the many centuries of tradition of Jewish learning on Psalms into the scholarly mainstream will no doubt continue to widen interest in 10 Susan E. Gillingham, Psalms through the Centuries, 3 vols., BBC (Chichester: Blackwell, 2008–2022); Gillingham, Jewish and Christian Approaches to the Psalms (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013); Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler, eds., Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2004); Peter W. Flint and Patrick D. Miller Jr., The Book of Psalms, Composition and Reception (Leiden: Brill, 2005); Marianne Grohmann and Ya‌ʾir Zakovits, eds., Jewish and Christian Approaches to Psalms, HBS 57 (Freiburg: Herder, 2009); Abraham J. Berkovitz, “The Life of Psalms in Late Antiquity” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2018); John Barton, A History of the Bible: The Book and Its Faiths (London: Penguin, 2019), 116–41.

8

Rajak

what is specific to the Jewish understanding of the Bible.11 In this volume, Isaac Kalimi offers us a sense of the variety and scale of the history of post-Second Temple Jewish Psalms commentary produced by premodern rabbis and scholars in his survey, “The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism and Its Major Interpretations prior to and during the Middle Ages: Approaches, Authorship, Genre, and Polemics.”12 He takes a close look at seven outstanding texts that contain commentary on the Psalms: the late antique Targum to Psalms (discussed also by Alan Cooper), the essentially post-rabbinic aggadic Midrash to Psalms (known as shocher tov), and five important medieval commentaries. He shows how the continual search for new meanings in the Psalms became a vehicle not only for hard-core linguistic and thematic exegesis and more fanciful strings of allusion to biblical figures and ideas, but also for critique of perceived opponents, both on the inside (notably Karaites) and in the Christian world outside. This rich and often complex interpretative literature has to be understood within a context where halakic and aggadic midrash were formative factors in the relationship between Jewish practice and the biblical text. One might add that the impact of all this scholarly attention will have been felt in the observances and beliefs of the people, even if indirectly. This is not to say, however, that “psalms piety,” where people have recourse to psalms to express their relationship to God, may not have deeper or longer roots than written commentary. The repertoire of preferred psalms for liturgical usage developed somewhat differently between Judaism and Christianity.13 In Judaism, while the book of Psalms stood conspicuously outside the Torah readings and the cycle of haftarot, the book came often to be seen as consisting of five books, as a kind of parallel to the Torah (as well as containing nineteen sections). Some rabbinic tradition, instead of following the usual pattern of regarding the whole collection as Davidic, ascribed Psalms 90 to 100 to Moses himself, and Psalm 32 to Adam. A particular role for psalms and passages from psalms within the central devotional services of Judaism evolved gradually. Forty psalms are to be included in the daily and festival prayers according to the Mishnah. At least seventy-two individual psalms have been found to figure in the later liturgy, though not all of them with major roles in the worship of the synagogue, or 11

On the entry of Jewish biblical scholarship into the mainstream, see Alan Cooper, “Biblical Studies and Jewish Studies,” in The Oxford Handbook to Jewish Studies, ed. Martin Goodman, Jeremy Cohen, and David Sorkin (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 14–35. 12 Pp. 163–197. 13 Gillingham, Psalms through the Centuries, 2: 12, n. 6. So far, Psalms 1–72 have been covered.

Introduction: New Approaches

9

extensive histories within it.14 Psalm sequences very well known in the synagogue are the verses from Psalms 34 and 99 that accompany the Torah ritual of removal of scrolls from and replacement into the ark, and their processions around the prayer hall; Psalms 113–118, which make up the Hallel that is recited on major holidays; and Psalms 126 and 137, which figure in different versions of the Hebrew (and Aramaic) grace after meals.15 Günther Stemberger has suggested that, while the Hallel will undoubtedly have acquired some of its present form quite early in the rabbinic period, the interest of the rabbis themselves in this, as in other matters of synagogal practice, cannot be taken for granted.16 In the present volume, Ruth Langer, in “The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms Recitation, Pesuqe de-Zimra,”17 studies the evolution in the synagogue liturgy of the longest of these sequences, the “verses of song,” a string of six daily morning psalms (Psalms 145–150) plus a doxology, recited before prayer. Like other developments in the liturgy, the emergence of this practice can be traced back to the geonim, the heads of the rabbinical academies who were active predominantly in Babylonia during the eighth and ninth centuries CE. Langer traces its evolution via halakic discussions around the minute detail of the correct performance of this rite engaged in by succeeding generations of leaders, and continuing beyond the geonim to Maimonides and his contemporaries. It was these discussions that solidified practice for the future, though a degree of flexibility remained. Susanne Talabardon’s contribution, “Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual,”18 offers a vivid account of the manifold practical uses of psalms in the later religious context of the revolutionary religious movement of East European Hasidism. Here we find what is undoubtedly one of the richest and most suggestive records in the history of Judaism of dynamic popular uses of the Psalms. As we learn from Sefer Shimmush Tehillim, charismatic teachers among the followers of the Baʿal 14 15

Langer in this volume, citing Reif, pp. 222–240. Alan Cooper, “Some Aspects of Traditional Jewish Psalms Interpretation,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 256–57; Lawrence A. Hoffman, “Hallels, Midrash, Canon and Loss: Psalms in Jewish Liturgy,” in Attridge and Fassler, Psalms in Community, 33–57; Günter Stemberger, “Psalmen in Liturgie und Predigt der rabbinischen Zeit,” in Der Psalter in Judentum und Christentum: Norbert Lohfink zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Erich Zenger, HBS 18 (Freiburg: Herder, 1998), 199–213; Ilana Pardes and Ophir Münz-Manor, eds., Psalms In/On Jerusalem, PJTC 9 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2019); Robert Brody, “Liturgical Uses of the Psalms in the Gaonic Period,” in Prayers That Cite Scripture, ed. James L. Kugel (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006), 61–81. 16 Stemberger, “Psalmen in Liturgie.” 17 Pp. 222–240. 18 Pp. 241–259.

10

Rajak

Shem Tov invoked prescribed Psalms for healing, rescue, meditation and so on. Psalm 91 served for the expulsion of demons and evil spirits. The alphabetic acrostic of Psalm 119 (the longest in the canon) could save an entire city. Equally, the everyday recitation of psalms accorded with the simplicity of Hasidism, while impressive feats of complete or selective recitation suited the religious elite that circled around the Rebbe. Talabardon then shows how these systems drew on the mysticism of Isaac Luria and on the Lurianic Zohar that was created by his successors in Safed during the seventeenth century. The best-known addition from this source to the established liturgical psalm systems were Kabbalat Shabbat traditions, some of which are mainstream today, including the recitation of eight psalms (Psalms 92–99 and 29). Although many developments were specific to Judaism, significant overlaps between Jewish and Christian usage also evolved. Very familiar to us are the shared affection for Psalm 23, and the resonant sentences from Psalm 103 that form part of the current funeral service in both standard Jewish and many Christian traditions. This interaction is a very large subject on which Susan Gillingham’s project of detailed psalm-by-psalm analysis, in terms of the parallel histories of understanding and of usage in the two traditions, has already added many new insights.19 Furthermore, in both traditions, the relative importance of different psalms was far from static, and even the level of overall devotion to this literary corpus as a whole waxed and waned over time and varied across place, in response, no doubt, both to external forces and to an internal dynamic. There remains much to discover. Isaac Kalimi opens his essay20 with an eloquent account of the many ways in which psalms have been intrinsic to Jewish life during the ages. On the personal level, they have long had a role within regulated occasions—circumcision, weddings, and so forth—as well as offering resources for moments of personal thanksgiving, joy, relief, confession, need, or desperation. On the communal level, they have been a thread running through the rites of the synagogue and of study and prayer groups, differently in daily and in special services. On the other hand, as Stemberger has more than once reminded us, in historical terms, we simply do not know how highly the early rabbis valued the recitation of psalms.21 Ruth Langer’s investigation points in the same cautious direction.22 Also in this volume, Alan Cooper, in “Psalm 8 as a Case Study in ‘Embedded’ Jewish

19 20 21 22

Gillingham, Psalms through the Centuries, 2: 12, n. 6. See above on p. 8 and pp. 163–197. Stemberger, “Psalmen in Liturgie”. See the discussion above on p. 9 and pp. 222–240.

Introduction: New Approaches

11

Commentary,”23 downplays the extent and depth of synagogal attachment to the Psalms before the medieval period, insisting that it was only then that the ritual prominence of the main psalm sequences and the liturgical role of certain individual psalms was established in something like the form in which we know them today, and that it is all too easy to exaggerate premedieval attachment to the Psalms, whether in the synagogue or in private study. Even during the Middle Ages, it was not the habit for Jewish students to study the Psalms, as was systematically done in monasteries. Much rabbinic commentary on the Psalms was embedded within other commentaries. While the petihot (proems) to midrashic homilies characteristically worked with a citation from Psalms, Cooper points out that in this framework the purpose of the citation was not to elucidate the chosen psalm per se. Striking a different note of caution towards any assumption that the entire book of Psalms had always and everywhere a similar meaning and the same role among Jews, James Aitken writes in his contribution, “The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting,”24 on an early stage in the Jewish reception of the Psalms, the Greek translation of which became the Septuagint Psalter. His starting point is that the translation of the Psalms in the Greek Bible of the Hellenistic period stands out for a marked preference for word-for-word (“literal”) translation by comparison with the freedom shown by other Septuagint translators. While this did not exclude the use of idiomatic Greek or of rhetorical features in the writing, as he shows in detail, and while small theological tweaks can occasionally be detected, this approach scarcely allowed the translation to be a consistent receptacle for interpretation or a springboard for creativity. Nevertheless, Aitken’s close lexical study clearly demonstrates that the Psalms were considered alive and relevant because the translators’ choice of renderings accommodated them to their Egyptian Greek surroundings. The translators sometimes opted for Egyptian cultic terms, while sometimes they chose to describe God in terms not of concrete objects, as in the Hebrew Bible, but of active human agency, in the way that the Greeks spoke of their deities. These adjustments, however small and subtle, had a dynamic impact on the book. They must have opened the door for a less complicated acceptance of the Greek version of Psalms within the local cultural context, and beyond that, among future Jewish-Greek readers. This perhaps explains how the Psalms translation, which was apparently produced early in the history of the Septuagint, could achieve notable popularity, being echoed in other Septuagint translations and widely alluded to and quoted in apocryphal and 23 Pp. 198–221. 24 Pp. 105–130.

12

Rajak

pseudepigraphic texts.25 It might also be worth observing that the reticence of the Greek translation stands in sharp contrast to the freedom and inventiveness of the surviving Aramaic version, the Targum to Psalms.26 Exploring the uses of individual Psalms is an indispensable basis for such a journey through the two religious traditions, as well as being immensely rewarding in its own right. Our volume offers examples of close granular readings that point to larger conclusions. Susanne Talabardon’s study27 puts before us a full kabbalistic interpretation of Psalm 107. Angela Kim Harkins’s contribution, “Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106: Experiencing and Remembering the Past,”28 reads the language and structure of this psalm that can be readily interpreted in terms of cognitive theory and especially of the concept of “enactive reading,” where a ritual text powerfully impacts on hearers because it is designed to work on the visual imagination and on their other senses. The recitation of Israel’s past history in Psalm 106 and in parallel passages is brilliantly presented in terms of visualized spaces and also of all sorts of bodily activities whose description appeals to the kinesthetic senses. “Enactive reading” pinpoints the movement from text to perception and thus illuminates the strong impression that this and other Psalms can make during ritual prayer. In the case of this historical psalm, the emotional impact of Israel’s past is programmed to generate emotion within the people’s present ritual. Laura S. Lieber’s essay,29 through its virtuoso reading of Psalm 90, set against the vivid dramatization of Moses’s stormy conversation with God in Eleazar Ha-Qallir’s remarkable silluq, yields new insights into the two poems, and also into their dynamic relationship. Lieber goes a step beyond her analysis of the poetry to an attempt to envisage the enriched response to the psalm on the part of hearers who were familiar also with the presentation of the same situation in the silluq. Again, in the second part of his essay, Alan Cooper30 weaves observations on the meaning and style of the evocative hymn to creation and to God’s gift of the Torah in Psalm 8 into a rich and learned Jewish reception history of the psalm that uncovers its remarkable range of appearances 25

See further Staffan Olofsson, “The Psalter,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Septuagint, ed. Alison G. Salvesen and Timothy Michael Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021), 337–52, especially 346. 26 See Kalimi in this volume, pp. #, and Moshe M. Bernstein, “A Jewish Reading of Psalms: Some Observations on the Method of the Aramaic Targum,” in The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception, ed. Patrick D. Miller and Peter W. Flint, VTSup 99 (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 476–504. 27 Already mentioned above on p. 9. 28 Pp. 83–104. 29 See the discussion above on p. 6. 30 See above on p. 10.

Introduction: New Approaches

13

scattered among texts of different times, places, and types. Verses of the psalm are embedded and expounded within different interpretative themes, perhaps homiletical, perhaps philosophical. The psalm would thus have penetrated into people’s consciousness quite apart from any incorporation into ritual. It may also be observed that, when the Jewish reception of the Psalms is positioned center stage and put on an equal footing with the non-Jewish reception, new light is shed on some of the older questions around the biblical Psalter. Thus, the applicability of the form-critical categorization of the Psalms associated especially with the names of Hermann Gunkel (1862–1932) and Sigmund Mowinckel (1884–1965)31 seems less clear in the context of more holistic Jewish readings, for Jewish thought might be said to be characterized by the tendency to mix the modes of “petition,” “complaint,” “lament,” “praise,” “thanksgiving,” “history,” and so forth, as well as of a merging of the individual with the communal. The traditional superscription to Psalm 3 reads “a psalm of David when he fled from his son Absalom,” and Cooper has brought forward the commentary on this psalm in Midrash Tehillim to show us how in the rabbinic mind “lament and complaint are understood to be forms of thanksgiving.”32 The opening paper of the book, “Prologue: Looking Back at Patients’ Prayers in Babylonian Incantations and Hebrew Individual Complaint,”33 sets the scene for us by putting a twenty-first century spin on an approach that sits in the line of the great Psalms scholarship of the twentieth century. Erhard Gerstenberger, one of the most influential figures in Psalms research, has taken the opportunity to revisit a thesis formulated long ago in his Habilitationsschrift. He locates the origins of the so-called “complaint psalms” in the incantatory formulae of certain middle-Babylonian healing rituals conducted for patients by expert supplicators. Surviving texts from these rituals display striking congruence with the sequence of utterances in some psalms, in spite of the absence of the explicit framework of ritual healing in any of the latter. As Gerstenberger points out, recognition of the forms of psalms as determined by the concrete practices of a much earlier society (which had already in fact constituted a topic of major interest for Mowinckel), runs counter to the well-liked picture of their emerging from the mind of an individual Israelite creative author pouring 31

See Hermann Gunkel and Joachim Begrich, Einleitung in die Psalmen: Die Gattungen der religiösen Lyrik Israels, GHAT (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1933; English version: Introduction to Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel [Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1998]); Sigmund Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien (Kristiania [Oslo]: Dybwad, 1921–1924; English version: The Psalms in Israel’s Worship [Oxford: Blackwell, 1962; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004]). 32 Cooper, “Some Aspects,” 4. 33 Pp. 17–33.

14

Rajak

out his distress to his personal God. Hypotheses of ancient Near Eastern origins perhaps also destabilize interpretations that privilege generic division of the psalter into collections composed to serve an identifiable range of different public functions for the Psalmists’ own days, even if this consequence is not one that Gerstenberger himself explicitly draws out. The approach chimes with themes that will emerge in the course of our volume. Gerstenberger’s intriguing reconstruction proposes a truly dynamic history of transformation for one of the major themes within the book of Psalms. It is our hope that the studies presented here will offer new approaches and vantage points for exploring the Psalms and their rich reception history, as well as for the study of Jewish liturgy, practice, and values during a long and crucial period in their development. The depth and literary qualities of the Psalms have allowed them to resonate in countless contexts, both in ritual and communal worship and of course in private reflection and devotion, as well as in many particular activities, ranging from Torah reading to travel, from confession to consumption, and from mourning to magic. That extraordinary spectrum is hopefully reflected in the lively diversity of the contributions to this book. Bibliography Alexander, Philip S. The Mystical Texts: Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and Related Manuscripts. LSTS 61 / CQS 7. London: T&T Clark, 2006. Attridge, Harold W., and Margot E. Fassler, eds. Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2004. Barton, John. A History of the Bible: The Book and Its Faiths. London: Penguin, 2019. Berkovitz, Abraham J. “The Life of Psalms in Late Antiquity.” PhD diss., Princeton University, 2018. Bernstein, Moshe M. “A Jewish Reading of Psalms: Some Observations on the Method of the Aramaic Targum.” Pages 476–504 in The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception. Edited by Patrick D. Miller and Peter W. Flint. VTSup 99. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Brody, Robert. “Liturgical Uses of the Psalms in the Gaonic Period.” Pages 61–81 in Prayers That Cite Scripture. Edited by James L. Kugel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006. Charlesworth, James H., and Carol A. Newsom. Angelic Liturgy: Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. DSS 4b. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999. Chazon, Esther G. “Liturgical Function in the Cave 1 Hodayot Collection.” Pages 513–31 in Qumran Cave 1 Revisited: Texts from Cave 1 Sixty Years after Their Discovery;

Introduction: New Approaches

15

Proceedings of the Sixth Meeting of the IOQS in Ljubljana. Edited by Daniel K. Falk. STDJ 48. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Chazon, Esther G. “Lowly to Lofty: The Hodayot’s Use of Liturgical Traditions to Shape Sectarian Identity and Religious Experience.” RevQ 26, no. 1 (2013): 3–19. Collins, John J. “Amazing Grace: The Transformation of the Thanksgiving Hymn at Qumran.” Pages 75–85 in Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions. Edited by Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2004. Cooper, Alan. “Biblical Studies and Jewish Studies.” Pages 14–35 in The Oxford Handbook to Jewish Studies. Edited by Martin Goodman, Jeremy Cohen, and David Sorkin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Cooper, Alan. “Some Aspects of Traditional Jewish Psalms Interpretation.” Pages 253– 68 in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms. Edited by William P. Brown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Davila, James R. Liturgical Works. ECDSS. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Fleischer, Ezra. Hebrew Liturgical Poetry in the Middle Ages [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Keter, 1975. Fleischer, Ezra. “Piyyut.” Pages 363–73 in vol. 2 of The Literature of the Sages. Edited by Shmuel Safrai. Assen: Van Gorcum: 2006. Flint, Peter W. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Book of Psalms. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Flint, Peter W., and Patrick D. Miller Jr. The Book of Psalms, Composition and Reception. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Gillingham, Susan E. Jewish and Christian Approaches to the Psalms. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Gillingham, Susan E. Psalms through the Centuries. 3 vols. BBC. Chichester: Blackwell, 2008–2022. Grohmann, Marianne, and Ya‌ʾir Zakovits, eds. Jewish and Christian Approaches to Psalms. HBS 57. Freiburg: Herder, 2009. Gunkel, Hermann, and Joachim Begrich. Einleitung in die Psalmen: Die Gattungen der religiösen Lyrik Israels. GHAT. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1933. English version: Introduction to Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1998. Hoffman, Lawrence A. “Hallels, Midrash, Canon and Loss: Psalms in Jewish Liturgy.” Pages 33–57 in Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions. Edited by Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2004. Holm-Nielsen, S. Hodayot: Psalms from Qumran. ATDan 2. Aarhus: Universitetsforla��get, 1960. Lieber, Laura S. Yannai on Genesis: An Invitation to Piyyut. Cincinnati: HUC Press, 2010.

16

Rajak

Mowinckel, Sigmund. Psalmenstudien. Kristiania [Oslo]: Dybwad, 1921–1924. English version: The Psalms in Israel’s Worship. Oxford: Blackwell, 1962; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004. Münz-Manor, Ophir. Early Piyyut: An Annotated Anthology [Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press, 2015. Newsom, Carol A. Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition. HSS 27. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985. Nitzan, Bilhah. Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry. STDJ 12. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Olofsson, Staffan. “The Psalter.” Pages 337–52 in The Oxford Handbook of the Septuagint. Edited by Alison G. Salvesen and Timothy Michael Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. Pajunen, Mika S. “Reading Psalm and Prayer Manuscripts from Qumran.” Pages 55–70 in Material Aspects of Reading in Ancient and Medieval Cultures: Materiality, Presence and Performance. Edited by Anna Krauß, Jonas Leipziger, and Friederike Schücking-Jungblut. MatTK 26 / SSFB 933. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2020. Pardes, Ilana, and Ophir Münz-Manor, eds. Psalms In/On Jerusalem. PJTC 9. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2019. Schuller, Eileen. Non-Canonical Psalms from Qumran: A Pseudepigraphic Collection. Leiden: Brill, 1986. Stemberger, Günter. “Psalmen in Liturgie und Predigt der rabbinischen Zeit.” Pages 199–213 in Der Psalter in Judentum und Christentum: Norbert Lohfink zum 70. Geburtstag. Edited by Erich Zenger. HBS 18. Freiburg: Herder, 1998. Yahalom, Joseph. The Language of Early Piyyut [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1985.

Prologue: Looking Back at Patients’ Prayers in Babylonian Incantations and Hebrew Individual Complaint Erhard S. Gerstenberger†

Introduction

This article gives me the most welcome opportunity of presenting again my old thesis defended some forty years ago in regard to origin and use of Hebrew “complaints of the individual.”1 Not that I want to simply repeat my withered postulates, but to reflect them in the light of bygone research. The old assertions may be resumed more or less by the following statement: supplications to the deity for help in existential need as found in the Hebrew Psalter have been composed and transmitted to serve as central liturgical pieces in ancient Israelite healing and rehabilitation ceremonies. This flat attribution of individual complaint psalms to living ritual has been challenged2 or ignored. Ever since Gerald Wilson, Matthias Millard, Norbert Lohfink, Erich Zenger and others “discovered” the literary nature of Hebrew psalms and some of them created (also in the wake of Brevard S. Childs and Rolf Rendtorff) a theory of “canonical interpretation,” the intimate connection of written poems and songs with real, cultic life-situations was considered a secondary phenomenon at best. Written compositions were believed to originate from individual imagination and poetic artistry, an exclusively literary genre all by itself, carrying its own distinct meaning and theology independent of any social factors. The ability to write and compose literature was seen as the highest human achievement, fulfilled in genial persons of high intellectual erudition. In consequence, psalms experts made a point to focus on that final literary stage of the Psalter, when older oral or merely scribbled versions of prayers were put together to form a veritable “book” to the benefit of elite “readers.” Even Hermann Gunkel, the founder of the form-critical (oral) theory of exegesis believed that extant Hebrew complaints were learned poems 1 See my thesis of habilitation, Heidelberg University, 1970, “Der bittende Mensch,” published as Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Der bittende Mensch: Bittritual und Klagelied des Einzelnen im Alten Testament, WMANT 51 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980; repr. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009). 2 See Anna Elisa Zernecke, Gott und Mensch in Klagegebeten aus Israel und Mesopotamien, AOAT 387 (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2011), passim.

© Erhard S. Gerstenberger, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_003

18

Gerstenberger

leaning on and improving primitive popular matrixes (against his copioneer Sigmund Mowinckel).3 German and American exegetical tradition, especially represented by the scholars mentioned above, overemphasizes the autonomy of written texts for aesthetic, literary, philosophical, and dogmatic reasons. Newer research is moving away from such presuppositions and conclusions.4 How to approach the enigmatic state of affairs in psalms research? The psalms in the Psalter and the book itself—are they artful products of ancient scribes and scholars to be read by some literate contemporaries? Or do they belong to, in some way or other, cultic rituals with specific purposes? We want to concentrate our attention to “individual complaints” of the Hebrew Bible and proceed in the following way: First, there should be an investigation of the pertinent psalms, their language, structure, imagery, emotionality, and so on, which might give us some indication of the genre’s origin. Second, outward evidence should be tested before we come to some conclusions. 1

Internal Indications of the Sitz im Leben in Individual Complaints

The discussion about the life situations of biblical and other ancient texts of the past decades has at least sharpened recognition of one basic fact: we do not have immediate access to the living worlds of the past. There are only written records available, and they are never congruent with the past events, nor thoughts, nor feelings (in part, this is a general truth for all historical knowledge). Judged from afar, that is, from our present-day vantage points, we are able, at best, to approach real antique lives and doings a little bit. The distance we do overcome when searching for “historical reality” also depends on our capacity to abstract from our own patterns of thinking and judging (which is quite difficult!) and get some general feeling for ancient ways of experiencing the world, in our case: of using prayer texts. Some relevant issues may be raised in our quest for internal indications of the Sitz im Leben of Hebrew individual complaints. I use a modified selection

3 See Hermann Gunkel and Joachim Begrich, Einleitung in die Psalmen (Göttingen: Van­ denhoeck, 1933), 180–83; Joachim Begrich, “Die Vertrauensäußerungen im israelitischen Klagelied des Einzelnen und in seinem babylonischen Gegenstück,” ZAW 46 (1928): 248–59. Sigmund Mowinckel, together with the nordic “Myth and Ritual School,” was keenly aware of the close relationship between “texts” and “performance”; see Mowinkel, Religion und Kultus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck 1953). 4 See, e.g., David Willgren, The Formation of the “Book” of Psalms, FAT 2/88 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016).

PROLOGUE: PATIENTS ’ PRAYERS

19

of Gunkel-Begrich, Introduction to the Psalms (1933),5 which I also took as the basic stock of these prayers in my Psalms commentary. About forty poems altogether are on this list.6 Some of the texts are debatable, however. Does the Language and/or Style of These Prayers Give Hints as to Their Origin and Use? There is, for sure, a certain vocabulary for describing the supplicant’s dire situation, physically and mentally, for expressing the act of praying, for pleading with God and asking urgently for his help, for condemning adversaries, who are thought to have caused the distress (“workers of mischief” [poʿale ʿawen] and many other designations), for expressing trust in the Lord’s help and giving votes of thanksgivings.7 These and more semantic fields of articulation are perfectly fitting the language we may expect in a liturgical ceremony, and a lively one at that, judging from its high emotional momentum. Strong emotional expressions of “praying, pleading, entreating, crying, shouting,” and so on (see, e.g., šwʿ, piel [“cry out, scream”] in Ps 28:2; qrʾ [“shout, cry”] in Pss 28:1; 31:18; šʾg [“groan”] in Ps 38:9; pll, hithpael [“pray”] in Ps 5:4; ṣʿq [“cry out loud”] in Ps 77:2, etc.) occur frequently. Descriptions of despair, pain, frustration, and anxiety abound (see pug, niphal + dkh, niphal [“be worn out + crushed”] in Ps 38:9; leb ḥil + jirah wareʿad boʾ + ksh pallaṣut [“heart pounds + fear and trembling come + shaking all over”] in Ps 55:5–6). A similar uproar of emotions can be found in confrontations with “enemies,” urging petitions, and challenging questions to God (see Pss 109; 69; 88; 13; 42/43, etc.). But this type of vocabulary could also have been used by a writer in his study imagining a person suffering and praying, could it not (see Hannah’s prayer: 1 Sam 1:9–16; David’s penitence: 2 Sam 12:15b–23)?

1.1

1.2 High and Low Language to Distinguish Authorship? Could we or should we distinguish between high and low (= everyday) language hoping to get some tight argument for this or that area of life? Would it be helpful, for example, to make statistics of hapax legomena in our psalms, assuming that a higher rate of rare words would testify to an ingenious author writing for an exclusive readership? I do think the investigation would be fruitless, because there is a lack of documentary volume. Furthermore, the Hebrew 5 Gunkel and Begrich, Einleitung, 172–262. 6 The array is this: Pss 3–7; 11–13; 17; 22; 26–28; 31; 35; 38; 39; 40–43; 51; 54–57; 59; 61; 64; 69; 70; 71; 86; 88; 102; 109; 120; 130; 140–43 (cf. Gunkel and Begrich, Einleitung, 172–73). 7 For observations on vocabulary and style, see Gunkel and Begrich, Einleitung, e.g., 219–32, etc. Metaphoric language of the complaints also is quite significant; see William P. Brown, Seeing the Psalms: A Theology of Metaphor (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002).

20

Gerstenberger

individual complaints may not have been, according to my theory, common language poems. Rather, they probably have been composed for the suffering patient by the leader of ceremony, the “man of God,” or professional healer (see Elijah and Elisha sporadically in these functions: 1 Kings 17–2 Kings 13). Thus, I would expect professionality on every count, when it comes to the quality of Hebrew supplications. All activities, and there were many of them, in the realms of human-divine relations in the Hebrew Bible as well as in the Ancient Near East, be they of a priestly, shamanistic, or sapiential order, were loaded with high risks. Intermediaries between humans and God had to be aware of divine wrath, in case they might violate some spiritual etiquette; note Balaam’s difficulties in executing his conjurer’s tasks (Num 22–24) or the sacrilege of Aaron’s sons (Lev 10). Performers of rituals needed much knowledge of divine affairs, a solid experience and high sensibility in relating to the divinity. Most religions, therefore, commit their “men or women of God” of all varieties to long periods of apprenticeship, that is: to high professional standards. Is the Lively Imagery in Individual Complaints Conducive of a Particular Performance? We are certainly surprised to see the sufferer plagued by wandering dogs or aggressive bulls (Pss 22; 59), to notice how he or she is pushed into the netherworld (Ps 88; 69; 130), caught by evil hunters in a net (Pss 31; 35; 9/10; 25), persecuted by foes or even bad-natured friends (Pss 41; 55), accused by God (Pss 7; 17; 26), or forsaken by family and friends (Pss 40; 27). Strong and threatening images are used in most complaints.8 They do indicate a good amount of dramatic thinking and/or action; that is evident. Furthermore, would an observing writer really use the I-form to describe a supplicant in his or her anxiety (see the descriptions of Hannah and David, cited above)? Why would he or she write such personalized prayers in the first place? And by the way: Hebrew supplications going, as a rule, by the first person of the orans, seemingly are pleading for a divine response, which sometimes is given or at least hinted at in the texts (see Pss 3:5; 12:6; 13:4; 22:22 [“you have answered me!,” ʿanitani]; 27:14; 28:6; 31:23; 35:3; 38:16; 39:13; 51:10 [tašmiʿeni sason wesimḥah]; 54:4; 55:2–3, 23; 69:17; 86:1, 7, 17 [ʾot leṭobah]; 88:2–3; 102:2–3; 108:7 [waʿaneni]; 120:1; 123:3–8 [personal blessing?]; 130:5 [welidbaro hoḥalti]; 141:1; 143:1, 7–8 [hašmiʿeni ḥasdeka]).

1.3

8 See Brown, Seeing, 23–27.

PROLOGUE: PATIENTS ’ PRAYERS

21

Is the Structure of the Individual Complaints Typical for Liturgical Poetry? It has been recognized by many experts that the Hebrew supplications are not stereotyped, but unique compositions (with a few repetitions). Yet, they encompass diverse structural elements that are quite distinguishable in their liturgical functions, like invocation, affirmation of confidence, petition, complaint, imprecation, vow, and so on. In my commentary in the FOTL series,9 I try to give a diagram of every single psalm, and most commentators also do just the same. Hermann Gunkel called attention to the liturgical purpose of such psalmic structures, visible also when elements were repeated in one and the same poem (see Pss 17; 38; 59, etc.). 1.4

1.5 Themes of Complaint Psalms Themes and theological considerations (if openly addressed) of complaint psalms fit perfectly into an assumed ceremony for a suffering member of the ancient Israelite community. The fate of the supplicant is one center of attention. His or her condition is nearly hopeless. Ailments are ripping his body, possibly caused by neighbors or demons. His own involvement in misfortune and sickness is a steady problem: confessions of sins (see Pss 38; 51) are one way to regain the support of God. The other possibility (after a thorough screening of conscience, possibly by oracular sacrifice and diagnosis?) is protestation of innocence (see Pss 7; 17; 26). Ostracism from one’s own social group is a terrible threat (Pss 6; 41; 88). Imminent death is a topic, and sometimes is used as an argument to speed up the help of God (Ps 88: What does it benefit you, if your servant dies?). A second center of gravitation in complaint psalms are the destructive forces that cause all evil, which can be, as mentioned, one’s own misbehavior over against God, some personal foes such as demons, or the justified or unexplainable wrath of the Lord. With this last possibility, the problem of theodicy is touched upon. God is being approached in each prayer. God’s help is urgently requested. Each supplication tries to tear the sufferer out of his misery and anxiety. God is the one whose misericordia has been tested during generations. The plea for help is oriented to the special case at hand—the healer has enough diagnostic skill to select that prayer (or compose it for a special case?) which gives the best results for the case applied to. Bitter incursions against God may be an ultimate means 9 Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms, 2 vols., FOTL 14–15 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988–2001). Number, sequence, and quality of the complaint elements are flexible. Thus, a given psalm may feature a “confession of guilt” or a “protestation of innocence”; see Gerstenberger, Psalms, 1:11–14.

22

Gerstenberger

to move God to intervene (see Ps 88). God’s concern for the adorer and his sense for justice and mercy are the deepest theological problems of the genre. Are There Outright References to Ritual Activities or Implements in the Complaint Psalms? Yes, they do exist, even if decisive allusions may be missing. What we might expect: a clear depiction of the healing ritual as a whole, much more elaborated than in 2 Kings 5 (Elisha heals Naaman), 2 Kgs 4:32–37 (Elisha raises a dead boy), and Isaiah 38 (Isaiah cures king Hezekiah). The most precise but still incomplete presentation of a ritual in the Hebrew Scripture is Num 5:11–28, the administration of an ordeal over a suspect wife (but cf. Lev 11–15: cleansing rites). Here the leader of ceremony is a priest, and the decisive means to determine guilt or innocence is the “bitter water,” which will bring “the curse” over her if guilty. Ritual prescriptions like this are not mentioned in the Psalter. But there are some minor, yet noteworthy allusions to ritual details: the patient is soaking his bed with tears (Ps 6:7; cf. 22:3; 42:4; Isa 38:2–3; locale of prayer: private home!), he or she prepares a sacrifice, watching out for God’s help in the morning (Ps 5:4; locale: sacred place!). An oracular response is expected in Ps 35:3: “Say to me: ‘I am your salvation’” (cf. above, 1.3). Cleansing with hyssop (Ps 51:9; cf. Lev 14:4, etc.) was a widespread ritual procedure; wearing sackcloth as in mourning (see Pss 35:13; 69:12), and promises to offer thanksgiving sacrifices easily may belong to a ritual of supplication (see Pss 27:6; 116:17). A possibly ensuing sacrificial party certainly was a joyful feast of eating and drinking (see 2 Sam 15:7–9; Pss 22:26–27; 32:11; 107:8, 15, 22, 31, 42; 116:17–19). Also, the “cup of salvation” (Ps 116:13) may have been a part of a proper thanksgiving ritual. 1.6

1.7 Summary Gathering the internal evidence will not lead to a completely convincing result. There is no final plausibility for declaring Hebrew individual complaints the authentic poems used directly in healing and rehabilitation ceremonies. On the other hand, in some of the relevant psalms we notice rather strange passages which seem incompatible with the desperate prayers of suffering individuals; see the eschatological outlook in Ps 22:28–32, references to Israel and Zion (Ps 102:13–23), a verbatim oracle of salvation for a plurality of supplicants (Ps 12:6), in a style akin to the Pentateuch (cf. Exod 3:7–8a; Num 10:35). But there are signals that the genre of psalms in question can be derived from ancient ceremonial prayers to cure and restore sick people and those stricken by bad luck, social ostracism, dangerous omens, disturbing dreams, curses and demons, and other calamities of the ancient world. I would take the

PROLOGUE: PATIENTS ’ PRAYERS

23

following points on the list of positive indications: emotionality of language and imagery, the I/you opposition in most prayers (in regard to God and the “enemies”), the structure and purpose of the poems, and the ritual behavior of the speaker and ceremonial implements. Unfortunately, the human agents (supplicants, enemies, or “friends”) cannot be identified. The superscriptions of the poems, especially those mentioning David as the “reciter,” are secondary. Individual complaints are free of biographical details. This fact and the consonance of vocabulary, style, structure, and imagery raises the possibility that they have been professional formularies rather than unique, autobiographical statements. 2

External Evidence of a Ritual Background of Individual Complaints

In spite of the fact that comparative studies of Hebrew prayers started quite early after the discovery of pertinent cuneiform documents,10 the impact of such research on Old Testament Psalms interpretation was limited. Comparisons, for example, of genres of prayers usually would list similarities only to emphasize afterwards larger discrepancies and highlight allegedly unique particularities of the Hebrew tradition. This situation has changed drastically in recent times.11 Which Ancient Near Eastern Comparative Documents Are Available in Regard to Hebrew Psalms of Individual Complaint? Mostly from Middle Babylonian times, antedating the formation of the Old Testament by a millennium or so, archaeologists recovered from the tells of Mesopotamia collections of ritual texts dedicated to the healing of human disorders. Their names are, for example, šuilla (“hand-lifting”), maqlu (“roasting”), namburbi (“its dispersion”), šurpu (“burning”), and so on.12 Besides these and other compendiums of prescriptions, numerous independent “incantations” 2.1

10 See Heinrich Zimmern, Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Babylonischen Religion: Die Beschwö­ rungs­tafeln Šurpu (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1901); Walter G. Kunstmann, Die babylonische Gebets­beschwörung (Leipzig: Gräfenhainichen, 1932). 11 See, e.g., William P. Brown, ed., The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), part 1, 27–75. 12 See Stefan M. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung: Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Lösungsrituale (Namburbi) (Mainz: Zabern, 1994); Graham Cunningham, “Deliver Me from Evil”: Mesopotamian Incantations, 2500–1500 BCE, StPohl 17 (Rome: Istituto Biblico, 1997); Nils P. Heeßel, Babylonisch-Assyrische Diagnostik, AOAT 43 (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2000); Tzvi I. Abusch, Babylonian Witchcraft: Toward a History and Understanding of Babylonian Witchcraft Beliefs and Literature (Leiden: Brill,

24

Gerstenberger

(šiptu) exist. Many of the individual units clearly state their purpose: to cure physical or mental distress or to ward off demons and bad omens. Thus one of the fifty-plus namburbi prescriptions edited by Stefan Maul has this headline: “Namburbi against bad luck indicated by a dove or an unknown bird which intruded a house; in order that this bad luck might be prevented.”13 Other portents of evil in this collection include: strange appearances of snakes, dogs, or cats; fungus on the walls; intercourse with a goat; ominous sacrifices; celestial phenomena, and so on.14 Other compendiums and individual prescriptions, and there are hundreds of specimens in the museums, focus on bodily or psychic damages or threats. They all needed to be counteracted by the appropriate rituals along with being treated medically (see a Sumerian witness: Ninisinna instructs her son Damu in healing techniques).15 2.2 Healing Rituals and Individual Complaints The most intriguing feature of the mentioned “incantations” is the fact that in the center of the healing ritual, with all its purifications, exorcisms, preparatory blessings and prayers, sacred implements, and symbolic actions was the preformulated supplication of the patient, that is, a supplicatory (and incantational) prayer, with analogous elements over against Old Testament complaints of the individual (invocation, praise, affirmation of confidence, lament, petition, vow, etc.). And the leader of the performance always was a trained specialist, called mašmaššu, āšipu, or kalu.16 Now, these two points need to be elaborated and brought into a relation with Hebrew complaints of the individual. Whether or not such a comparison is legitimate we have to discuss thereafter. 2.3 The Babylonian Namburbi Ritual Stefan M. Maul, for example, describes carefully and in great detail the ritual of the Babylonian series namburbi,17 dedicated to the “dispersion of ills, which are threatening by bad omens” (namburbi = “its dispersion”). An extensive Sumerian and Akkadian literature of evil portents and deep-seated anxieties looms in the background of such healing rituals. After a thorough diagnosis

13 14 15 16 17

2002); Alan Lenzi and Anna E. Zernecke, eds., Reading Akkadian Prayers and Hymns (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2011). Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 244. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 227–505. ETCSL 4.22.1. See Lenzi and Zernecke, Reading Akkadian Prayers, passim. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 37–113.

PROLOGUE: PATIENTS ’ PRAYERS

25

of the patient’s afflictions and the expert’s suggestion of a relevant cure,18 the incantation expert (āšipu) as well as the sufferer had to undergo a period of purification and “sanctification” by taking ablutions and obeying dietary rules forbidding determined dishes.19 During the night before the ritual was staged, the āšipu prepared the “holy water” (agubbû) for ablutions, using intricate ingredients.20 A prayer for its effectiveness was in order.21 A specialty of the namburbi ritual was the formation of an image (a figurine) being able to substitute for that object which had shown the evil portent to the patient.22 The healing ceremony itself started with a sacrifice to three highest gods (Ea, Šamaš, Asalluḫi) who were to be entreated to undo the bad omen,23 a very complicated procedure involving a small altar (paṭiru), a choice of incenses on a special stand (nignakku), and sacrificial materials, prayers, and magic formulas. Interestingly, this sacrifice at the home of the patient, consisting of vegetables and drinks, “always occurred at early dawn”24 (cf. Ps 5:4: “O Lord, in the morning hear my voice, in the morning I sacrifice to you [ʾeʿerak leka = ‘I arrange for you’] and watch out for you”; small altars have been found in many old Israelite homes). The offering site was fenced off, and imagined evil persons were admonished: “Wicked tongues shall turn away”25 (a direct address of potential enemies, also found in Pss 4:3–5; 6:9; 52:3–7; 58:2–3; 62:4, 11). After the sacrifice had been accepted, according to Maul’s interpretation, and the high deities had assembled (perhaps represented by statues), the decisive part of the ritual began, a “juridical fight” before Šamaš, sun god and judge.26 In Maul’s understanding, the conjurer (āšipu) and the patient fight against the object which carried the evil portent, pleading for a reversal or dispersion of its destructive power. The patient had to approach the sacred sacrificial site, sometimes on the flat roof of his house, stepping onto a carpet of garden herbs (šammū kirî) with their purifying capacities.27 They, so to speak, sucked in the evil powers threatening the patient. But an essential part of the “law case” was the verbal petition for liberation from bad portents spoken by patient and conjurer.28 This liturgical, fixed prayer “in many rituals first was 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

See Heeßel, Babylonisch-Assyrische Diagnostik. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 39–41. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 41–46. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 45. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 46–47. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 48–57. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 48. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 55. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 60–71. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 61–66. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 67–69.

26

Gerstenberger

spoken by the conjurer for the patient. The latter, then, had to recite it after the conjurer.”29 Those fixed “sacred” words (which were thought to be the gift of the gods) “were then repeated three, sometimes seven times. But in addition, the affected person had the opportunity [according the ritual instructions] to articulate his or her personal affliction, pleas and wishes before the divine judge. … Such a ‘free prayer’ certainly did have a liberating effect, just like the oral confession in the Catholic Church.”30 An elaborate discussion of the “transfer of evil to the substitute figure,” the “removal of the substitute,” which now is the carrier of the evil (cf. Lev 16:5–22), and final purifications of the patient and his environment, as well as reintegration of the saved one into his social group and further prophylactic measures constitute the rest of Maul’s treatise.31 2.4 Supplication in Namburbi Ceremonies The supplication, spoken by conjurer and patient, really held the central place in all the concomitant rites and words. One example of a namburbi ceremony must suffice: (1) Incantation: Šamaš, king of heaven and earth, (2) lord over right and justice, (3) lord over the Anunna-gods, lord over the spirit of the dead, (4) whose “Yes” no other god (5) can change and whose decree (6) cannot be altered. (7) Šamaš, to revive the deadly ill, (8) to free the bound one, (9) is in your power! Šamaš, (10) I, your servant (11) N. N. son of N. N. whose (12) gods are Marduk (and) (13) Zarpanitum, (14) am standing before you now, yes, you. (15) I hold on to your seam. (16) Because of that evil which came out of the snake appearing in my house. (17) It did catch a prey. (18) I did see it. (19) Therefore I am afraid, terrified (20) and constantly put into panic. Let me pass (21) this evil, then (22) I shall always praise your great deeds, (23) and extol you! (24) People who shall see me (25–26) shall eternally praise you! Text of the incantation.32 The structural elements of the prayer are clearly visible: Praise of Šamaš (lines 1–9), self-presentation (10–14), affirmation of confidence (15), complaint (16–20a), petition (20b–21), vow to praise (22–23), witness to others (24–26a), scribal note (26b). With some particularities standing out (denomination as “incantation,” praising invocation, insertion of personal name, scribal note, 29 30 31 32

Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 67. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 69. The quoted paragraphs comprise Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 72–113. Maul, Zukunftsbewältigung, 297 (my translation from the German original).

PROLOGUE: PATIENTS ’ PRAYERS

27

lack of imprecations), the elements and their arrangement correspond to the ones found in Hebrew complaint psalms: invocation, affirmation of confi­ dence, petition, complaint, imprecation, vow, and so on.33 Other Babylonian petitionary rituals, like šuilla, eršaḫunga, eršemma, and so on, show prayers very similar to those of the patient/conjurer in the center of the healing ceremony.34 2.5 Priests and Singers Babylonian society was based on urban literate and administrative tradition. Written documents almost exclusively came to us by way of scribal schools in royal and temple administrations reflecting principally, as it were, the social structures, habits, and beliefs of urban classes. There existed, since Sumerian times, an elaborate system of liturgical ceremonies, dedicated, most of all, to the preservation of dynastic power. Priests, singers, and composers of hymns were employees of the urban or territorial ruler;35 the sacred place was the state temple, grandiosely exemplified by a hymn of Šulgi, second king of the third dynasty of Ur (2094–2047 BCE). Astounding is the richness of (mostly unidentified) liturgical genres in Sumerian; it does permit conclusions as to the wealth of ritual performances! Line 14: I, Šulgi, the king whose name is suitable for songs, 15: intend to be praised in my prayers and hymns. … 21: At the command of my sister Ĝestin-ana, 20: my scholars and composers of … have composed 22: adab, tigi, and malgatum hymns … 17: about how wise I am in attending upon the gods. … 29s: they have composed šir-gida songs, royal praise poetry, šumunša, kunĝar, and balbale compositions. 38/31: They composed for me gigid and zamzam songs about my manual skill.36 Royal ceremonial art was temple- and palace-bound and must be distinguished from the patient-oriented activities of the aforementioned “incantationexperts,” the professional curer and diagnostician. Mašmaššu, āšipu, and kalu were long-trained professionals, in possession of the proper healing rites, 33 34

See above, n. 9. See Gerstenberger, Psalms; Cunningham, “Deliver Me from Evil”; Lenzi and Zernecke, Reading Akkadian Prayers; Christopher G. Frechette, Mesopotamian Ritual-Prayers of “Hand-lifting” (Akkadian Šuillas): An Investigation of Function in Light of the Idiomatic Meaning of the Rubric, AOAT 379 (Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2012). 35 See Dahlia Shehata, Musiker und ihr vokales Repertoire: Untersuchungen zu Inhalt und Organisation von Musikerberufen und Liedgattungen in altbabylonischer Zeit, GBAO 3 (Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen, 2009). 36 ETCSL 2.4.2.05.

28

Gerstenberger

powerful implements, and conjuring texts; and ready to serve—for adequate remuneration—those people in need of medical and magical help. Both aspects, physical and mental health, in antiquity always went together. Various types of incantations already have been alluded to.37 Each conjurer may have been specialized in one or a few kinds of ritual, because—just like in the case of Navajo chanters38—there were numerous details to know and perform carefully. Little is known about the relationship of healers with the temple staffs. Presumably the fields of curing people and keeping up public order are far apart, although there may have been points of contact, possibly in the area of receiving visions or auditions from the deities. Since private homes of “conjurers” have been discovered by archaeologists,39 the possibility of freelance healers has been debated anew. In any case, the professional curer of prehistoric times apparently had survived in Mesopotamia even within urban bureaucratic societies. 2.6 Prayers of the Patient All known Mesopotamian rituals concerned with individual wellbeing, be they of the protection (prophylactic) or the curing type, cherish a personal prayer, sometimes with the personal name of the supplicant to be inserted at the beginning. The rites as a whole carry determined purposes, of course. They have been fashioned and tested by the enchanter specifically to ward off certain dangers caused by evil powers or to heal well-defined ills of a person. To give one more example of personal prayer, besides the Namburbi one cited above, a specimen of the šuilla series addressing the healing goddess Gula may be quoted: 1: O Gula, most exalted lady, merciful mother, who dwells in the pure heavens, 2: I call out to you, my lady, stand nearby and listen to me! 3: I seek you out, I turn to you, as the hem of my god(’s) and my goddess(’s) garment, I lay hold of your (garment’s) hem, 4: because judging the case, handing down the decision, 5: because restoring and maintaining well-being are within your power, 6: because you know to save, to spare, and to rescue. 7: O Gula, sublime lady, merciful mother, 8: among the myriads of stars of heaven, 9: O lady, to you I turn, my ears are attentive 37 See above, n. 10. In addition, see Tzvi I. Abusch and Daniel Schwemer, eds., Corpus of Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraft Rituals, AMD 8.1 (Leiden: Brill, 2010). 38 See Erhard S. Gerstenberger, “Navajo Chants, Babylonian Incantations, Old Testament Psalms: A Comparative Study of Healing Rituals,” Intégrité 17, no. 1 (2018): 16–35. 39 See Eleanor Robson, “The Tablet House,” RA 95 (2001): 39–66.

PROLOGUE: PATIENTS ’ PRAYERS

29

to you. 10: Receive my flour offering, accept my prayer. 11: Let me send you to my angry (personal) god (and) my angry (personal) goddess, 12: to the god of my city who is furious and enraged with me. 13: On account of oracles and dreams that are hounding me, 14: I am afraid and constantly anxious. 15: O Gula, most exalted lady, through the word of your august command, which is supreme in Ekur, 16: and your sure approval, which cannot be altered, 17: may my furious god turn back to me; may my angry goddess turn again to me with favor. 18: May the god of my city who is furious and enraged with me, 19: who is in rage, relent; who is incensed, be soothed. 20: O Gula, most exalted lady, who intercedes on behalf of the powerless, 21: with Marduk king of the gods, merciful lord, 22: intercede! Speak a favorable word! 23: May your wide canopy (of protection), your noble forgiveness be with me. 24: Provide a requital of favor and life for me, 25: that I may proclaim your greatness (and) resound your praises! 26: It is a wording of a lifted hand [šuilla] to Gula. 27: Its ritual: You prepare an assemblage of offerings in front of Gula …; you libate first-rate beer. You recite this incantation three times and the supplicant’s (lit., “his”) prayer will be heard.40 Like many other prayers in the Mesopotamian tradition, this šuilla has a scribal colophon (line 26) and a short ritual prescription (lines 27–28) indicating rites to be performed and words to be spoken. The addressee of these last two lines may be the conjurer. “You recite”41 then suggests his letting the patient repeat the prayer line by line. The body of the prayer shows the familiar structure of invocation and initial plea (lines 1–3), affirmation of confidence (lines 4–6), adoration and praise (lines 7–10), petition (lines 11–12), complaint (lines 13–14), invocation (lines 15–16), petition (lines 17–24), and vow to praise Gula (line 25). In comparison to Navajo prayers, the šuilla to Gula may put more emphasis on lauding the deity, asking for mediation between gods of different rankings, and may emphasize a little harder the ailments of the sufferer, but the basic scheme of a patient’s prayer is visible. In conjunction with overwhelming evidence for expert performance of healing rituals in ancient and present-day cultures, we may consider this ceremonial system a fairly constant anthropological feature.

40 41

See Lenzi and Zernecke, Reading Akkadian Prayers, 254. The causative form, “let him recite,” is also attested.

30 3

Gerstenberger

Hebrew Ritual Lost in Monotheism?

Considering the lapse of time between the second and first millennia, and likely differences of cultural and religious patterns in treating sickness, disabilities, and dangers to life, one has to ask whether or not we may adduce Babylonian evidence to explain Hebrew psalms of petition. My personal answer has been decidedly positive. Am I only a stubborn old man, taking this posture? I hope not. The argument is simply that human experiences in the face of destructive forces have been similar in all periods and cultures imaginable. References to Navajo chants above were to strengthen this argument.42 Consequently, we should not be surprised to find similar reactions over against danger and threatening death in Mesopotamian prayers. That prayer rituals, including, as it were, medical treatment, since prehistoric times have been practiced around the world could and should be verified by serious research. Shamanistic actions of the curing kind can be found in many cultures. Still, presupposing a human common stock of attitudes over against evil and its ritual combat, the obvious differences in Babylonian and Israelite tradition need to be discussed and, if possible, explained. On the whole, the external evidence of Babylonian patients’ prayers being the center of extensive healing rituals should give our argument a decisive push. How else could we explain the stately number of Old Testament individual complaints within the Psalter demonstrating such close relationship with their older Babylonian counterparts, in terms of language, structure, imagery, theological and anthropological outlook, and healing functionality? Together with internal evidence, discussed earlier, the two-pronged argument gains force and leads to the conclusion: Old Testament individual complaints, as preserved in the Psalter, must derive, one way or another, from older ritual prayers, probably used in ancient Israel the same way as the Babylonian supplications. Of course, this thesis needs to explain the lack of ritual prescriptions in the Hebrew complaint psalms. 3.1 On Comparing Babylonian and Israelite Supplicatory Prayers If we accept a good amount of congruence in attitude, language, imagery, style, structure, and purpose of the supplicatory prayers in Babylonia and Israel, apparent divergences (like: “too much submissive praise in Babylonian laments”43) are not very significant. Larger structural conformities (and the shared Sitz im Leben) guarantee a common relation or at least an affinity. More 42 43

See Gerstenberger, “Navajo Chants,” 16–35. See Begrich, “Vertrauensäußerungen,” 250–59.

PROLOGUE: PATIENTS ’ PRAYERS

31

serious is the lack of ritual prescription or performance in the Psalter. As said before: superscriptions of the psalms very probably are secondary insertions, perhaps with the sole exception of Ps 102:1 (“prayer of an oppressed person when weak and pouring out grief to the Lord”; cf. Hannah in 1 Sam 1:15). All other superscriptions reflect the times when the Jewish community of the Second Temple connected psalms with worship in temple or synagogue. And this vision may lead to a possible solution of the absence of ritual prescription. They in fact are partially present in sacrificial matters (see Lev 1–9; 10–15). Why would they be missing for prayer situations? 3.2 The Agent in Individual Complaints The other critical point is the agent in individual complaints. There is no indication of professional help for the supplicant in the Hebrew Psalter. Or could the nominal attributions to singers like Asaph, Korah, and Heman, perhaps in conjunction with the frequent expression lamnaṣṣeaḥ (“to the choir-leader”?), suggest an archaic relationship of prayers and professional proprietor? The constant first person of the speaker is not identified. Is there a conscious scheme behind this feature? Does an author or redactor of psalms want to open up the prayers to anyone who meets the imagined situation of distress? Even into the far future? Does he or she count on potential readers of these psalms rather than performing supplicants who get the words whispered or spoken to by the leader of ceremony? 3.3 Monolatry and Healing A possible explanation for the “loss” of ritual prescriptions and notifications about a leader of prayer ceremonies, respectively a shamanistic “man of God,” in the Psalter may be the general development toward a “monolatric” cult, centralized in temple rites for “all of Israel” and community centered, at the end a synagogal parish, which excluded all extracultic ceremonies outside the congregation. The text in Deut 18:9–11 strictly forbids any “divination, fortune-telling, sorcery,” and so on, practices linked to shamanistic healing activities. If this restriction of cultic action has been a realistic trait of emerging Judaism in the fifth and fourth centuries BCE, then we may understand that Jewish prayer services in case of existential need were drawn into the synagogal congregation, reformulated in the name of the one God of Israel, and stripped of shamanistic leaders and their extensive and offensive agenda of ritual prayer. Psalm 12, showing traces of community service for the needy, and the additions in Psalms 102 and 109, mentioned before, could be understood in the light of such a transformation of ritual; that is, the adoption of more ancient healing rites into the emerging Jewish community life. Healing, then,

32

Gerstenberger

always has been a central concern in all societies of all periods. We therefore may assume that the emerging Jewish community of the Persian period continued to use ancient patients’ prayers in their Torah-oriented casual services to rehabilitate the sick and evil-stricken members.

Conclusion

In conclusion: While vestiges of liturgical activities in the Hebrew psalms themselves are a patchwork only, the Babylonian texts give us—through hard work of specialists, to be sure—a fairly complete picture of healing rituals with all their subtleties in variated actions, verbal citations, and symbolic performances. Supplicatory prayer appears in a new frame. In all likelihood, not an identical but a very similar frame has to be imagined for Hebrew individual complaints. Recognizing social and religious changes in ancient Israel, we have to accept the notion of developing ceremonial contexts for petitionary prayer, as mentioned above. Bibliography Abusch, Tzvi I. Mesopotamian Witchcraft: Toward a History and Understanding of Babylonian Witchcraft Beliefs and Literature. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Abusch, Tzvi I., and Daniel Schwemer, eds. Corpus of Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraft Rituals. AMD 8.1. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Begrich, Joachim. “Die Vertrauensäußerungen im israelitischen Klagelied des Einzelnen und in seinem babylonischen Gegenstück.” ZAW 46 (1928): 221–60. Brown, William P. Seeing the Psalms: A Theology of Metaphor. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002. Brown, William P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Cunningham, Graham. “Deliver Me from Evil”: Mesopotamian Incantations, 2500–1500 BCE. StPohl 17. Rome: Istituto Biblico, 1997. Frechette, Christopher G. Mesopotamian Ritual-Prayers of “Hand-lifting” (Akkadian Šuillas): An Investigation of Function in Light of the Idiomatic Meaning of the Rubric. AOAT 379. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2012. Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Der bittende Mensch: Bittritual und Klagelied des Einzelnen im Alten Testament, WMANT 51. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980. Repr. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2010.

PROLOGUE: PATIENTS ’ PRAYERS

33

Gerstenberger, Erhard S. “Navajo Chants, Babylonian Incantations, Old Testament Psalms: A Comparative Study of Healing Rituals.” Intégrité 17, no. 1 (2018): 16–35. Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Psalms. 2 vols. FOTL 14–15. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988–2001. Gunkel, Hermann, and Begrich, Joachim. Einleitung in die Psalmen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck, 1933. Heeßel, Nils P. Babylonisch-Assyrische Diagnostik. AOAT 43. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2000. Kunstmann, Walter G. Die babylonische Gebetsbeschwörung. Leipzig: Gräfenhainichen, 1932. Lenzi, Alan, and Anna Elisa Zernecke, eds. Reading Akkadian Prayers and Hymns. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2011. Maul, Stefan M. Zukunftsbewältigung: Eine Untersuchung altorientalischen Denkens anhand der babylonisch-assyrischen Lösungsrituale (Namburbi). Mainz: Zabern, 1994. Mowinckel, Sigmund. Religion und Kultus. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck, 1953. Robson, Eleanor. “The Tablet House.” RA 95 (2001): 39–66. Shehata, Dahlia. Musiker und ihr vokales Repertoire: Untersuchungen zu Inhalt und Organisation von Musikerberufen und Liedgattungen in altbabylonischer Zeit. GBAO 3. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen, 2009. Willgren, David. The Formation of the “Book” of Psalms. FAT 2/88. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016. Zernecke, Anna Elisa. Gott und Mensch in Klagegebeten aus Israel und Mesopotamien. AOAT 387. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2011. Zimmern, Heinrich. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Babylonischen Religion: Die Beschwö­ rungstafeln Šurpu. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1901.

Part 2 The Psalms in the Second Temple Period

∵

Building a Community of the Elect through Psalms and Prayers Liturgy, Education, and Prophetic Interpretation Mika S. Pajunen As far as the overall number of manuscripts found in the eleven caves of Qumran reflects to some extent the relative importance of different literary genres for the community usually associated with these manuscripts, psalms and prayers can be seen as one of the most significant parts of this corpus. Of the roughly nine hundred manuscripts discovered in these caves, approximately one hundred forty have been classified by the editors of the editio princeps, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert 1–40, as preserving a psalm/prayer composition or, more typically, a collection of them.1 Thus, almost a sixth of the manuscripts fall under these rubrics. Furthermore, psalms and prayers appear as parts of other compositions, such as the Rule of the Community (1QS) and the War Scroll (1QM), as well; and they are used in a great number of other writings, perhaps most significantly as prophetic writings interpreted in the pesharim and other commentaries of the Qumran community.2 In my estimation, this widespread use of psalms and prayers, and the number of manuscripts preserving collections of them, attests to the profound importance of this literature for this particular community.3

1 See Emanuel Tov, Revised Lists of the Texts from the Judaean Desert (Leiden: Brill, 2010). 2 See, e.g., Jesper Høgenhaven, “Psalms as Prophecy: Qumran Evidence for the Reading of Psalms as Prophetic Text and the Formation of the Canon,” in Functions of Psalms and Prayers in the Late Second Temple Period, eds. Mika S. Pajunen and Jeremy Penner, BZAW 486 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017), 231–51. 3 Since the studies of Alison Schofield, From Qumran to the Yahad: A New Paradigm of Textual Development for the Community Rule, STDJ 77 (Leiden: Brill, 2009) and John J. Collins, Beyond the Qumran Community: The Sectarian Movement of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), the concept of a broader movement instead of just one community has been adopted by most scholars working on the Qumran manuscripts. While I share this widely held view that the community that appears to have inhabited the site of Khirbet Qumran in the first centuries BCE and CE was part of a wider movement spread across Judea and possibly even beyond, when talking about the particular collection of scrolls from the Qumran caves and its use and implications, it is prudent to limit the discussion to the community that lived at Khirbet Qumran and ostensibly had a direct connection with this manuscript collection, and in particular the Cave 4 collection of ca. six hundred manuscripts.

© Mika S. Pajunen, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_004

38

Pajunen

But the role of this literature in the life of the community has thus far been approached in a rather restricted fashion, mainly as part of liturgy.4 Yet it is undeniable that psalms and prayers were used in a number of different ways by Jewish groups such as the Qumran community in the late Second Temple period, and the scrolls attest to all these different overall uses. I have elsewhere approached this question more thoroughly and proposed a general development of the functions of psalms and prayers in Judaism during the Second Temple period.5 Here it is sufficient to say that at the time the great majority of the Qumran manuscripts were copied (ca. 100 BCE–70 CE), psalms and prayers appear to have been used in all Jewish groups that are represented by the preserved evidence as liturgical texts, educational material on theological and ethical matters as well as history, and as prophetic oracles. This plurality of use is evidenced, for example, by the Psalms of Solomon, Josephus’s writings, the New Testament, and large psalm compilations (MT, LXX, and 11QPsa), as well as the various compositions of psalms and prayers found at Qumran, and the attested use of such psalms and prayers in other writings. It should be readily apparent from this overview of the amount of available evidence that the present study will not be able to offer a comprehensive 4 E.g., Bilhah Nitzan, Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry, trans. J. Chipman, STDJ 12 (Leiden: Brill, 1994); Russell Arnold, The Social Role of Liturgy in the Religion of the Qumran Community, STDJ 60 (Leiden: Brill, 2006). While the other main uses of psalms—educational and prophetic—could also, at least sometimes, be connected with a liturgical setting, a differentiation of the apparent primary intended uses of specific psalms and psalm compilations into these three spheres is meaningful. They not only employ different formal elements related to such perspectives, but also often attest to slightly different lines of communication. Primarily liturgical material tends to be addressed directly to God, whereas potential educational material frequently addresses a human community or individual, or uses a more general descriptive style also found in wisdom literature. Prophetic passages in psalms might address either God or the human community, but tend to explicitly focus on the future and to interpret and mediate prophetic oracles. Moreover, some psalms and prayers are frequently used through quotations and allusions in other literary genres, such as commentary texts, wisdom texts, narratives, and letters, as educational or prophetic material. For examples, see Mika S. Pajunen, “The Influence of Societal Changes in the Late Second Temple Period on the Functions and Composition of Psalms,” SJOT 33, no. 2 (2019): 6–26. For lists of possible quotations and allusions to psalms, see Armin Lange and Matthias Weigold, Biblical Quotations and Allusions in Second Temple Jewish Literature, JAJSup 5 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011). Hence, categorizing all these diverse perspectives on psalms and their attested use under a general notion of liturgy needlessly confines the usage into one specific sphere of life, which contradicts the great variety of settings and uses attested in the preserved sources from the late Second Temple period. 5 See, especially, Pajunen, “Influence of Societal Changes,” 6–26; Mika S. Pajunen, “Differentiation of Form, Theme, and Changing Functions in Psalms and Prayers,” SJOT 33, no. 2 (2019): 106–18.

Building a Community of the Elect

39

or in-depth discussion of all of it. The aim here is rather to place the role of psalms and prayers in the Qumran community in the above broad spectrum of distinct uses attested in the sources and to highlight some of the main features that seem to be distinctive for this particular community. I will discuss the role of this literature through the above threefold division of liturgical, educational, and prophetic use; but before proceeding with this discussion, there are several methodological and theoretical issues that need to be briefly addressed. First, as is perhaps already apparent, a strict division between psalms and prayers is not made in this study. There has been a great deal of discussion recently about whether such a division is possible in Second Temple Jewish writings, and where such a line between psalms and prayers might be drawn.6 While some poetic collections could more reasonably be classified as psalms (e.g., the diverse manuscripts of Psalms from Qumran) and others as prayers (e.g., Daily Prayers [4Q503], Festival Prayers [1Q34, 4Q507–509], and the Words of the Luminaries [4Q504, 4Q506]), the line becomes hazy and potentially counterproductive when the evidence of use is brought into the discussion. Many psalms now in the MT Psalter are referred to as prayers of specific individuals in other literature, and this is especially true for the genre of individual laments; and, for instance, the song of Hannah in 1 Sam 2:1–10 is usually categorized as a psalm by scholars,7 yet it is introduced as a prayer in the narrative. There are also poetic compilations that include both kinds of material, which are labeled as praise psalms and as penitential prayers, such as 4QNon-Canonical Psalms B (4Q381).8 Broadly speaking, the scholarly proclivity for drawing a boundary between psalms and prayers seems to result, especially in the late Second Temple material, in an otiose dichotomy where nearly all poems with praise elements are classified as psalms (an exception being the Daily Prayers and Festival Prayers), and compositions with penitential or other petitionary elements are grouped under prayers. This kind of division is artificial and needlessly restrictive in respect to the late Second Temple period material, and hence will not be used in this study. It might be that a more meaningful distinction could be made at some point in the future that 6 For this discussion, see, e.g., Harm W. M. van Grol, “Psalm, Psalter, and Prayer,” in Prayer from Tobit to Qumran: Inaugural Conference of the ISDCL at Salzburg, Austria, 5–9 July 2003, eds. Renate Egger-Wenzel and Jeremy Corley, DCLY 2004 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004), 41–70. 7 See, e.g., James W. Watts, Psalm and Story: Inset Hymns in Hebrew Narrative, JSOTSup 139 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992); Steven Weitzman, Song and Story in Biblical Narrative: The History of a Literary Convention in Ancient Israel (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997). 8 See further, Mika S. Pajunen, The Land to the Elect and Justice for All: Reading Psalms in the Dead Sea Scrolls in Light of 4Q381, JAJSup 14 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013).

40

Pajunen

would better correspond to the emic evidence, including potential differences in views of diverse user communities during the Second Temple period, but this is not the place to go further into such a discussion. Another distinction is far more significant for this study: the one between writings of the Qumran movement/community itself and writings either predating it or contemporary compositions brought from elsewhere and potentially used by the community. This is a distinction that should be made but is notoriously difficult. In each of the three areas to be investigated, a differentiation will be made between the material considered to derive from the Qumran community and what has most likely been written by a person or group not belonging to this community or the larger movement. Mostly, the compositions commonly associated by scholars with the Qumran community are used as representatives of their distinct emphasis and use (such as the Community Rule, War Scroll, Berakhot [4Q286–287, 4Q289], Songs of the Sage [4Q510–511], and the Hodayot [1QHa–b, 4QHa–e]). Other compositions that will be referred to in this study, such as the psalms now in the MT Psalter, are equally well recognized as not deriving from this community. But there are borderline cases, such as the Barkhi Nafshi hymns (4Q434–438) and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (4Q400–407, 11Q17), that are completely compatible with the worldview and theology of the Qumran community as deduced from the writings typically associated with this group, but which do not contain the same explicit terminology used to describe the community as the “core” writings of the community. These two collections of hymns are each represented by a substantial number of manuscripts, and even if they were not composed by the community, they were clearly significant to them. As wholly compatible with their ideological and theological outlook, these hymns might even have been perceived at some point as writings of community members, even if that was not originally the case.9 They will hence be discussed in this study as potentially reinforcing specific ideological characteristics of the community, but this uncertainty concerning their provenance should be kept in mind. There are also similar questions of provenance concerning the writings most likely not written by the community, most of all regarding the diverse compilations that are found in the manuscripts from Qumran. It is almost impossible to say how many of them were compiled into specific collections by the Qumran community and not elsewhere. This question is not otherwise pertinent to the current investigation because the exact use of each of 9 See Carol A. Newsom, “‘Sectually Explicit’ Literature from Qumran,” in The Hebrew Bible and Its Interpreters, eds. David Noel Freedman, Baruch Halpern, and William H. C. Propp (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 167–87.

Building a Community of the Elect

41

these collections at Qumran is not investigated, but it is important whether the complete absence of certain psalms in these collections is by mere happenstance of scroll preservation, a matter of availability, or a deliberate choice by the Qumran community or some other scribal circles.10 Unfortunately, this matter cannot be decided here, and the apparent absence of something is generally not to be taken as proof of its nonexistence. Nevertheless, it is striking and worth noting that certain genres of psalms that do not fit with the predominant nature of the Qumran community’s own psalms and prayers or their theological outlook are almost entirely absent or only marginally present in the preserved evidence. These cases will be more properly introduced later in this study. The third and final theoretical issue is the paucity of evidence concerning the actual use of specific compilations of psalms and prayers. Sometimes a usage is suggested by superscripts (e.g., some psalms in the LXX Psalter, Festival Prayers, and Words of the Luminaries) or explicit references of usage in the texts themselves (e.g., Songs of the Sage), but mostly it can only be judged through the formal genre and thematic content of the composition and its literary context. The problem with this is that psalms and prayers were particularly susceptible to diverse uses in different communities, and it is possible that they were used in fashions not indicated by the superscripts or references in the text itself. Indeed, it is abundantly clear that psalms and prayers were recontextualized throughout the Second Temple period in accordance with the changing needs of the user communities, and even the use of some psalm genres altered.11 It is therefore almost impossible to pinpoint the usage of a particular psalm in a specific community with only internal evidence, much less to determine its possible originally intended usage. But the psalm’s genre and thematic content as well as its potential use in other literature can provide a range of possibilities that may have been actualized at specific points in time and in certain communities. The compositions of the Qumran community (esp. Hodayot) are particularly complex in this respect because they contain not only formal elements of praise psalms but also reflections on past events, theological and wisdom discourse, and prophetic passages concerning 10

11

Similar issues have also been discussed regarding the paucity of evidence for certain compositions of the Hebrew Bible, like Chronicles, at Qumran. See George J. Brooke, “The Books of Chronicles and the Scrolls from Qumran,” in Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld, eds. Robert Rezetko, Timothy H. Lim, and W. Brian Aucker, VTSup 113 (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 35–48; Mika S. Pajunen, “The Saga of Judah’s Kings Continues: The Reception of Chronicles in the Late Second Temple Period.” JBL 133 (2017): 589–608. See further, Pajunen, “Differentiation of Form,” 106–18.

42

Pajunen

the future (see Barkhi Nafshi hymns). Such psalms cannot simply be placed in one fixed category of use but were rather open to multiple uses in different kinds of settings, such as liturgy, communal education, and interpretation of the coming days.12 With these caveats in mind, some of the main ways in which psalms and prayers highlight certain features, and particularly some identity markers distinct to the Qumran community, will be discussed in the following. The role of psalms and prayers in the transmission of cultural memory and identity building of specific Second Temple Jewish communities is still a field that has been largely neglected. The seminal study of Carol Newsom in this area demonstrated how central the Hodayot psalms may have been for building and maintaining a communal identity at Qumran.13 Likewise, Marc Zvi Brettler has recently shown that psalms possibly contributed in a major way in the building of a distinct Jewish identity in the postexilic period,14 but much more work remains to be done in this field. One of the main obstacles to including psalms and prayers in such discussions has thus far been the tendency to relegate them solely to the realm of liturgy, without realizing that, as a communal activity, rituals, in a broader sense, provided an ample opportunity to influence the different Jewish communities.15 It has been amply shown above and in a great number of other studies that rituals, both religious and secular, have a key role in building and maintaining a shared communal identity and have the 12

A distinction has to be made here between function and setting. For example, rituals could well have included liturgical, educational, and prophetic psalms, nor is there any reason to assume that some liturgical psalms could not have been used in a primarily educational setting. For instance, the Psalms of Solomon include psalms from all of these perspectives, even if the main perspective used in the entire collection is an educational one. The distinctive feature in the Qumran community’s psalms is not that there are psalms written from all of these perspectives but that such perspectives are found in the Hodayot in such an intertwined manner. 13 Carol A. Newsom, The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran, STDJ 52 (Leiden: Brill, 2004). 14 Marc Zvi Brettler, “Those Who Pray Together Stay Together: The Role of Late Psalms in Creating Identity,” in Functions of Psalms and Prayers in the Late Second Temple Period, eds. Mika S. Pajunen and Jeremy Penner, BZAW 486 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017), 279–304. 15 See Jonathan Magonet’s description of the general nature of liturgy (Magonet, “On Reading Psalms as Liturgy: Psalms 96–99,” in The Shape and Shaping of the Book of Psalms: The Current State of Scholarship, ed. Nancy L. deClaissé-Walford, AIL 20 [Atlanta: SBL Press, 2014], 162): “Liturgies express and reinforce the identity and value systems of the particular community of worshipers. Moreover, they serve to link them with past and future generations of members of that community, as well as with similar communities elsewhere. Conversely, the use of particular formulations may consciously exclude others from participation. Liturgies are adapted, altered, and manipulated in the face of changes in the circumstances of the particular community.”

Building a Community of the Elect

43

potential to profoundly shape the beliefs and worldview of the participants.16 The actual effects such rituals had on ancient communities cannot be known, but it can reasonably be claimed that as texts probably used in such performative rituals and often crystallizing the theological and ideological views of their authors, these texts had a more profound potential for such effects on members of the communities than most other literary genres. Moreover, the use of psalms in the study of past events as well as concerning the potential prophesied future and their application in educational settings provide further evidence of the marked influence of these compositions on Jewish writers—and, by extension, their communities—of the late Second Temple period. While this study will only be able to scratch the surface in these matters, it can hopefully provide an impetus for more detailed studies and help in further raising scholarly awareness concerning the multitude of functions psalms and prayers had in Second Temple Judaism and their importance for its study. 1

Liturgical Use of Psalms and Prayers in the Qumran Community

I have elsewhere argued that the praise of God probably constituted the cornerstone of the whole late Second Temple Jewish liturgy.17 Nowhere is this predominance of praise more pronounced than in the writings of the Qumran community. While some previously unknown psalms and prayers, like the Words of the Luminaries, found in the caves of Qumran but composed before the community was active at Khirbet Qumran still contain some penitential elements, even these typically conclude in praise. Furthermore, while, as has been noted, the provenance of the compiling of the different collections of now-biblical psalms is uncertain, and at least some of the collections probably derive from outside Qumran,18 the predominance of psalms from the 16 See, for example, Joshua T. James, The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms, LHBOTS 658 (London: T&T Clark, 2017), 30–35; and the further studies cited there and in Newsom’s and Brettler’s studies referred to above. Note also the recent study of Judith H. Newman, Before the Bible: The Liturgical Body and the Formation of Scriptures in Early Judaism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), that considers the entwinement of prayer practices and Scripture formation. 17 Mika S. Pajunen, “The Praise of God and His Name as the Core of the Second Temple Liturgy,” ZAW 127 (2015): 475–88. 18 This can be judged by the paleographic date of several of the manuscripts that predate the habitation at Khirbet Qumran as well as anomalies found in several other manuscripts regarding scribal practices typical of the Qumran corpus. For scribal practices used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, see esp. Emanuel Tov, Scribal Practices and Approaches Reflected in the Texts Found in the Judean Desert, STDJ 54 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2004).

44

Pajunen

current books four and five of the Psalter that mostly contain praise is striking. Conversely, only ten (1QPsa, 4QPsa, 4QPsc, 4QPsf, 4QPsj, 4QPss, 4QPst, 4QPsu, 11QPsc, and 11QPsd) of the thirty-eight so-called psalms manuscripts from Qumran contain in their current state of preservation one or more of the individual laments that make up almost a third of the MT Psalter.19 Moreover, some of these collections most likely were not meant for liturgical use, although more work needs to be done to differentiate between various intentional manuscript layouts and their possible uses before such collections can be distinguished more firmly.20 It seems, therefore, undeniable that laments had a significantly lesser place in the Qumran psalms manuscripts than what their relative number in the MT Psalter could be claimed to indicate for some strand of Judaism in a certain prior period. This may be partly happenstance of scroll preservation, but definitely not entirely, and furthermore, is it just another coincidence that the extant pesharim commentaries of Psalms (1QpPs, 4QpPsa, 4QpPsb) reinterpret as prophecies almost exclusively psalms now in the early part of the Psalter, that is, the royal psalms and the laments, not the songs of praise that most clearly also continued to have a liturgical function?21 And the same seems to be true for other compositions, such as the Eschatological Midrash (4Q174, 4Q177), as well. Thus, it may well be that some of the now-biblical psalms did not have a liturgical use in the Qumran community but were rather recontextualized primarily as prophecies, whereas others continued to have a more active role in the liturgical life. Regardless of how the evidence of psalms and prayers from outside Qumran is evaluated, the psalms of the Qumran community itself stand out through 19

20

21

For example, according to Carleen Mandolfo, “Language of Lament in the Psalms,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 115, the MT Psalter has forty-two laments. In addition to the presence of some of these psalms in the Qumran manuscripts listed above, 11QPsa contains the Plea for Deliverance and Psalm 154, which contain certain elements of this genre. For some suggestions based on material indicators regarding the intended use of particular psalm and prayer manuscripts, see Daniel K. Falk, “Material Aspects of Prayer Manuscripts at Qumran,” in Literature or Liturgy? Early Christian Hymns and Prayers in Their Literary and Liturgical Context in Antiquity, eds. Clemens Leonhard and Hermut Löhr, WUNT 2/363 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), 33–88; Mika S. Pajunen, “Reading Psalm and Prayer Manuscripts from Qumran,” in Material Aspects of Reading in Ancient and Medieval Cultures: Materiality, Presence, and Performance, eds. Anna Krauß, Jonas Leipziger, and Friederike Schücking-Jungblut, MatTK 26 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2019). The same also seems to be largely the case with the use of psalms in the New Testament; see, e.g., Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 87.

Building a Community of the Elect

45

how all-encompassing the praise of God has become in them. In these texts, the praising and blessing elements permeate the whole liturgy to such an extent that even the protective songs against the demons, Songs of the Sage, are based on terrifying the evil spirits by praising the name of God. Another striking detail is the sheer number of previously unknown praise-oriented psalms and prayers, such as the Hodayot, Barkhi Nafshi hymns, Berakhot, Daily Prayers, Festival Prayers, Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, and the Songs of the Sage, from late Second Temple period Jewish groups. Most of these collections seem to be primarily intended for liturgical use, and they are all represented at Qumran by a substantial number of collections of different sizes. Some of the elements familiar from laments, such as descriptions of a situation of distress, are found on occasion in some of the Qumran community’s psalms, like the Hodayot. But they are embedded as individual elements into contexts of praise rather than forming a liturgical category of their own, and there are no pleas to the divine for assistance in these psalms as there are in the earlier lament psalms. The prominent role of such practices of praising and blessing God in the Qumran community is also explicitly displayed, for example, in the Song of the Maskil, which emphasizes the role of liturgical praise and blessing as the proper response to practically all occasions of everyday life (1QS X, 1–17). In light of the sheer number of fresh praise compositions, it is likely that the biblical psalms were somewhat bypassed in such liturgical practices in this particular community in favor of their own compositions and other pieces that were more directly in line with their own theological and ideological points of view. Some of the earlier psalms might have been used to augment the new psalms in the everyday liturgies of the community; but most of the earlier psalms were probably used in private piety, as was likely the case with Psalm 119; in specialized rituals, such as exorcism (esp. 11QapocrPs) or during the high festivals of the year like Passover; and some of them probably had no function in communal liturgies of the community. This claim has little basis in actual references in the sources that might indicate exactly which psalm(s) would have been employed in a certain setting. Instead, it mainly relies on the relative number of manuscripts containing different collections of psalms and prayers, their material formats, and indications of their potential use in the texts themselves. It can, however, be at least somewhat further substantiated by a development perceivable in the general liturgical outlook of the Qumran community. The community apparently grounded their liturgical praise in the notion that was developed in Judaism during the second century BCE that praising God was one of the reasons for the creation of humanity. This action was, moreover, firmly connected with the mandate of the elect; that is, the elect of God had a special obligation to

46

Pajunen

praise God, regardless of whether this elect group was perceived as the whole of humanity, the people of Israel, or a particular group within Israel, as the Qumran community seems to have believed (cf. Sir 17:9–10; Jub. 2:21; Festival Prayers [1Q34 3 I, 6–7]; 4QAdmonition on the Flood [4Q370 I, 1–2]).22 This perceived interconnection between election and praise may be one of the reasons for the centrality of praise in the Qumran community. The passage in Jubilees referred to above and, for example, the Song of the Three Young Men indicate, furthermore, that this praise of God was to be done together with the angels, and these notions are intertwined in some passages found in the psalms of the Qumran community. Such passages are found, for instance, in the Hodayot (e.g., 1QHa XI, 22–23) and the Songs of the Sage (4Q511 8 8–9), but are most prominent in the Berakhot and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. The referenced Hodayot passage expresses well this idea of praise being ordained as an obligation of humanity from the creation and to be done together with the angels: “And for man, you have allotted an eternal destiny with the spirits of knowledge, to praise your name together with shouts of joy, and to recount your wonders before all your creatures.”23 While this particular Hodayot passage describes the general idea that humanity should praise God as mandated at creation, the Berakhot in particular make it especially clear that the role is currently only meant for the Qumran community, the yahad, who will offer praises to God together with the angels (4Q286 2 and 7 i).24 An important factor to be noted is the frequently supposed connection between the Berakhot and the annual covenant renewal ritual described in the Qumran Community Rule:25 if they do describe the same 22 23

See further, Pajunen, “Praise of God,” 475–88. Translation by Michael O. Wise, Martin Abegg, and Edward Cook, “Hodayot, Hodayot-like, and Similar Texts,” in Poetic and Liturgical Texts, vol. 5 of Dead Sea Scrolls Reader, eds. Donald W. Parry and Emanuel Tov (Leiden: Brill, 2005). 24 There is an ongoing discussion concerning what exactly is meant by the joint praise of humans and angels, and whether it should be seen as a joint occasion of worship in which the human and angelic communities intertwine or rather as a simultaneous act of worship conducted by the angels in heaven and the human community on earth. Different texts might express slightly different ideas about this (see further, Esther Chazon, “Liturgical Communion with the Angels at Qumran,” in Sapiential, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumran: Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies Oslo 1998, Published in Memory of Maurice Baillet, eds. Daniel K. Falk, Florentino García Martínez, and Eileen M. Schuller, STDJ 35 [Leiden: Brill, 2000], 95–105), but mostly the texts seem to indicate a separation between the physical loci of the praising communities but assuming that it is done simultaneously and in the same general way by both. 25 See, for example, Bilhah Nitzan, “4QBerakhota–e (4Q286–90): A Covenantal Ceremony in the Light of Related Texts,” RevQ 16 (1995): 487–506; Nitzan, “The Benedictions from Qumran for the Annual Covenantal Ceremony,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls Fifty Years after

Building a Community of the Elect

47

ritual, the Berakhot display a change in the general liturgical outlook of the community. Unlike parts of the covenant renewal ritual in 1QS I, 16–II, 25, and most of the texts preceding the Qumran community mentioned in this study, the Berakhot are not centered on Israel as the covenant community. Actually, none of the fragments of 4QBerakhot contains a single mention of the law, the covenant, Israel, or the people or any figures connectable to it, such as Abraham, Moses, or Aaron. Indeed, there is a surprising absence of the nation’s past and any notion of its election in 4QBerakhot. Instead, all of the extant blessings are about God’s different works in creation, and for these the elect community of the yahad praises the name of God together with the angels. Similar motifs are also found in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, where the praise of God together with the angels is the central concept of the whole liturgy. But the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice do not focus on the creation, but rather on the different angelic beings offering praise simultaneously with the elect earthly community and on how the liturgy itself unfolds in the heavens. Moreover, some texts of the Qumran community seem to indicate a possible shift from a priest/Levite-led, nation-centered liturgy to a more general shared experience by the community. For instance, if the Berakhot are indeed from the annual covenant renewal ceremony, the praise of God the creator in them seems to have replaced Psalms 105 and 106 or similar prayers, such as the one found in Nehemiah 9, in that liturgy at some point. In the 1QSerekh ha-Yaḥad description of the ceremony, there is still a reference to relating God’s merciful deeds and the transgressions of the entire people in turn (1QS I, 21–24), whereas the Berakhot focus solely on the yahad and contain no references to the nation’s past.26 The description of the liturgy in 1QSerekh ha-Yaḥad also gives a prominent role to priests and Levites in the enactment of this ritual, but the Berakhot make no differentiation between the members of the community. A similar outlook is found in the Barkhi Nafshi hymns and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. Some other texts, like Songs of the Sage and some of the Hodayot, give a special role in the liturgical performance to the wisdom

26

Their Discovery: Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July 20–25, 1997, eds. Lawrence H. Schiffman, Emanuel Tov, and James C. VanderKam (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2000), 263–271; Chazon, “Liturgical Communion,” 95–105; Sarianna Metso, “Shifts in Covenantal Discourse in Second Temple Judaism,” in Scripture in Transition: Essays on Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo, eds. Anssi Voitila and Jutta Jokiranta, JSJSup 126 (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 497–512. On these aspects of the Berakhot, see further Mika S. Pajunen, “Creation as the Liturgical Nexus of the Blessings and Curses in 4QBerakhot,” in Ancient Readers and Their Scriptures: Engaging the Hebrew Bible in Early Judaism and Christianity, eds. Garrick Allen and John Dunne, AJEC 107 (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 27–39.

48

Pajunen

teacher, the maskil,27 perhaps providing another indication that the role of priests and Levites in the liturgical life of the community may have, at least later on during its existence, been more limited than, for instance, the description of the covenant renewal ceremony in 1QSerekh ha-Yaḥad would indicate. The influence of the worldview of the Qumran community and their theological views can also be seen in the distribution of the prominent new liturgical forms of the Second Temple period; namely, penitential prayer28 and incantations and apotropaic prayers used against demons.29 Incantations and apotropaic prayers are both well represented, not only in material probably deriving from outside Qumran (Jubilees, 4Q560, 5Q14, and 11QapocrPs) but also in the community’s own writings (Songs of the Sage and perhaps 4QIncantation). This is not surprising in a community that seems to have believed in the constant presence of both benevolent and malevolent spirits, also well represented in other writings, such as the War Scroll and Berakhot. It would have been crucial not only to join the angels in the praise of God, but also to protect the community from the intrusion of evil spirits, both by preemptive measures and by banishing any threats that materialized from this realm. The situation with penitential prayers is quite different. While some earlier material found at Qumran, like Words of the Luminaries and Psalms 51 and 154, contain elements of such prayers, none of the psalms or prayers more directly 27 The role of the maskil in the Qumran movement is close to the use of the concept in Daniel 11–12 and the understanding of the term by the LXX translators of the psalms, and, because of the number of available sources, much more evident than the debated use of the term in MT psalms. It definitely includes aspects related to wisdom and teaching as well as a liturgical role in the Qumran texts. For a classic study on the role of the maskil in the Qumran texts, see Carol A. Newsom, “The Sage in the Literature of Qumran: The Functions of the Maśkîl,” in The Sage in Israel and the Ancient Near East, eds. John G. Gammie and Leo G. Perdue (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 373–82. For the similarities between the maskil in Daniel and the texts of the Qumran movement, see, for instance, Charlotte Hempel, “Maskil(im) and Rabbim: From Daniel to Qumran,” in Biblical Traditions in Transmission: Essays in Honour of Michael A. Knibb, eds. Charlotte Hempel and Judith M. Lieu, JSJSup 111 (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 133–56. 28 See, e.g., Rodney A. Werline, Penitential Prayer in Second Temple Judaism: The Development of a Religious Institution, EJL 13 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998); David A. Lambert, How Repentance Became Biblical: Judaism, Christianity, and the Interpretation of Scripture (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016). 29 For these formal categories, see Esther Eshel, “Apotropaic Prayers in the Second Temple Period,” in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls; Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 19–23 January 2000, ed. Esther Chazon, STDJ 48 (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 69–88.

Building a Community of the Elect

49

connected with the community have such components. This is probably not to be taken as a self-righteousness in which the community would have seen its members as having been free of sin from the outset. Rather, the Hodayot frequently underline the sinful basic nature of all humans.30 The lack of penitential prayers is, thus, likely to be connected with the belief that human beings are incapable of changing this nature by themselves. It is only through the actions of God that the Hodayot psalmists perceive themselves to have gained insight that allows them to transcend this basic human nature, indeed even to perceive it as such, and to act in accordance with God’s will. As only God in his mercy is able to remove this basic sinful state and even to make humans aware of it, no human action can bring about freedom from sin.31 Penitential prayer is all about humans confessing their sins and entreating God to forgive them, which clashes with the notions that God’s merciful intervention is needed for humans even to be aware of their sinful nature and that mercy is God’s sovereign choice that cannot be earned through human actions. This issue is also linked with the idea of predestination that is found in some form in a few texts of the Qumran community (such as the Treatise of the Two Spirits), which would have further clashed with the idea that humans would have had free will in such matters as repentance. Only through God’s merciful intervention have the members of the Qumran community been freed from the sinful state of humans and being able to live in accordance with his will. These ideas come very close to some of Paul’s formulations concerning sin and divine mercy in the first century CE. The liturgical psalms and prayers from Qumran, therefore, show that the Qumran community emphasized praise of God probably even more than most other contemporary Jewish groups, and that their overall worldview and theological ideas seem to have further influenced their use of particular psalm and prayer genres, such as penitential prayer, blessings, curses, incantations, and apotropaic prayers.

30 31

See Newsom, Self as Symbolic Space, 191–286; David A. Lambert, “Was the Dead Sea Sect a Penitential Movement?,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls, eds. John J. Collins and Timothy H. Lim (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 501–31. Similar theological ideas are also found in the Barkhi Nafshi hymns; see further, Mika S. Pajunen, “Exodus and Exile as Prototypes of Justice: Prophecies in the Psalms of Solomon and the Barkhi Nafshi Hymns,” in Functions of Psalms and Prayers in the Late Second Temple Period, eds. Mika S. Pajunen and Jeremy Penner, BZAW 486 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017), 269–74.

50 2

Pajunen

Psalms and Prayers as Education on History and Theology

The educational use of psalms seems to have had a less prominent position in the Qumran community than in some other roughly contemporary Jewish groups, and in other cultures of the Greco-Roman world.32 Such an educational perspective is readily apparent in the Psalms of Solomon,33 the LXX superscripts of some psalms, Paul’s use of the psalms in his letters,34 and to some extent in the “final” form of the MT Psalter.35 Some of the material prone to such uses, like the so-called historical psalms,36 is also present in the Qumran scrolls, but its presence there is not in any way distinctive. Psalm 78 is preserved in at least three manuscripts (4QPse, 11QPsb, 11QPsd),37 Psalm 105 in two (4QPse, 11QPsa), Psalm 135 in three (4QPsk, 4QPsn, and 11QPsa), Psalm 136 in two (4QPsn, 11QPsa), and Psalm 106 might have been part of 4QPsalmsd, but this is only based on the word “halleluiah” that ends the psalm preceding Psalm 147 on the scroll. There is some overlap in several manuscripts containing more than one of these psalms, and, all in all, only six manuscripts out of the thirty-eight so-called psalms manuscripts contain parts of one or more of the so-called historical psalms in their present state of preservation. There are a few other psalms and prayers present in the Qumran manuscripts that have an emphasis on history of the people and education, such as 4QNon-Canonical Psalms B,38 and there are some notable clusters of such psalms with a similar emphasis in the psalms scrolls as well. For instance, the large collection of psalms in 11QPsalmsa usually has clusters of three to four psalms in sequence that display similar thematic motifs, and at the end of that collection there are four compositions that center on the figure of 32 33 34 35 36

37 38

For the educational use of songs in other ancient Mediterranean cultures, see Matthew E. Gordley, Teaching through Song in Antiquity: Didactic Hymnody among Greeks, Romans, Jews, and Christians, WUNT 2/302 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011). See, e.g., Pajunen, Land to the Elect, 79–90. See, for example, Marika Pulkkinen, “Teaching through the Psalms: Allusions to the Wilderness Tradition in 1 Corinthians 10,1–10 and the Origin of the Passage,” SJOT 33, no. 2 (2019): 86–105. See, e.g., Gerald H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, SBLDS 76 (Chico: Scholars Press, 1985). For these psalms, see Judith Gärtner, Die Geschichtspsalmen: Eine Studie zu den Psalmen 78, 105, 106, 135 und 136 als hermeneutische Schlüsseltexte im Psalter, FAT 84 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012); Anja Klein, Geschichte und Gebet: Die Rezeption der biblischen Geschichte in den Psalmen des Alten Testaments, FAT 94 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014). Manuscript 6Q5 might also have contained Psalm 78, but this identification is based on one partially preserved word and a possible reading of altogether four letters from two other words. For the educational emphasis of 4QNon-Canonical Psalms B, see Pajunen, Land to the Elect, 273–308.

Building a Community of the Elect

51

David (David’s Compositions, David’s Last Words, and Psalms 151A and 151B), split into two sections by Psalms 140 and 134 between them. All four of these compositions revolve around David and glorify God only through his actions on behalf of David. Together these four compositions present a picture of the pious king who began the institutionalized liturgical praise of God and who excelled in prophecy, wisdom, and war through his election. This emphasis on the paradigmatic figure of David is a feature that is not found in other psalm collections in such a concentrated fashion. For example, LXX Psalm 151 is educational as well, but rather concentrates on David as an example to follow, whereas Psalm 151A in 11QPsalmsa depicts David’s election as a unique historical occasion that cannot be emulated as such.39 There are, thus, compositions in the Qumran collection that do emphasize history (note also Words of the Luminaries) and there are also some psalms with ethical or wisdom instruction, but in relation to the remaining psalms and prayers from the Qumran collection, these psalms appear rather marginal. This overall tendency coincides rather well with the seeming general lack of particular interest in the history of Israel after Sinai in the Qumran collection.40 But there is a much more pronounced lack of psalm and prayer material deriving from the Qumran community that would emphasize education, either through educational terminology or being centered on the history of the community or ethical behavior expected from its members. This is a slight surprise because the role of the wisdom teacher, maskil, is underlined in many of the psalms and prayers of the movement (esp. Hodayot, Songs of the Sage, and the Song of the Maskil). Some scholars hold that the Hodayot contain historical clues,41 particularly to the speaker’s past (e.g., 1QHa X, 9–39; XII, 5–18; XIII, 5–19, 20–39; XV, 19–23), and regardless of whether they actually do, they could certainly have been perceived as containing them. Yet these are incidental remarks rather than the focal point of these Hodayot psalms. Similarly, some of the Barkhi Nafshi hymns reflect on the past of the community described in them, but these are not mentioned in order to teach the history of the movement as such but rather as a reflection of the past as a kind of realized eschatology (more on this below). The potential clues about historical events are hence embedded in a hermeneutical framework and do not give much if any historical information by themselves. Only if read together with the pesharim 39

For these distinct emphases and the relationship between the different versions of Psalm 151, see Mika S. Pajunen, “Psalms 151–155,” in Oxford Handbook of the Apocrypha, ed. Gerbern S. Oegema (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021), 423–448). 40 See, e.g., Pajunen, “Saga of Judah’s Kings,” 558–70. 41 See, e.g., Michael O. Wise, “The Origins and History of the Teacher’s Movement,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls, eds. Timothy H. Lim and John J. Collins (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 92–122.

52

Pajunen

and the Damascus Document might some such clues about communal history be perceived to exist in the Barkhi Nafshi hymns. Similarly, the place of ethical or wisdom instruction is rather limited in the community’s own psalms and prayers. Only the Hodayot really reflect on such ideas, and there are very few rubrics in them that would give an indication they were explicitly meant to teach such tenets to the community. They certainly accomplish this in a more incidental fashion by introducing many different perspectives that are constructed around some of the more fundamental theological premises of the community, such as predestination, the sovereignty of God and his actions, the sinful nature of human beings, and the like. But education is not in itself the pronounced purpose of these psalms; rather their aim is to give thanks to God for his merciful and wonderful acts on behalf of the community. It can, therefore, be concluded that the educational use of psalms seems to have had a less prominent place in the Qumran community than in some other contemporary Jewish groups. But before turning to the prophetic use of psalms, an important feature common to all the psalms of the Qumran community has to be highlighted. There is basically no mention of Israel, the nation, or any persons or events of its past in the psalms and prayers of the Qumran community. Nor is God the God of Israel, but rather the creator of all things. The community of the yahad has taken over the place of the elect as in the liturgical psalms and prayers of the community, and the dividing line is a cosmological one, the yahad and the angels against the wicked and demons, not Israel and the nations. Nor are the Hodayot offering a timeless wisdom open to everyone or to all of Israel, but one with a clearly formulated setting in this particular community (1QH VI, 18–22 and XII, 24–28), which is furthermore evident from the links between some of the Hodayot and the community organization in 1QSerekh ha-Yaḥad as well as a similar outlook on, for instance, predestination theology. This is not a community simply adopting the place of Israel as the elect and incorporating the nation’s past as part of its own but rather an elect group superseding the previous standing of Israel with God; hence, its own theology and history are those that matter. 3

Psalms as Prophecies

The prophetic use of psalms is readily apparent in the New Testament,42 the Psalms of Solomon end in a prophetic vision of the future (Pss. Sol. 17 and 18), 42 See, e.g., Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken, eds., The Psalms in the New Testament (London: T&T Clark, 2004).

Building a Community of the Elect

53

and Josephus uses Lamentations as prophecies concerning the doom of the Second Temple (Ant. 10.78–79). The writings of the Qumran community also offer rich material for this kind of use of psalms. Psalms were seen as part of the prophetic corpus and interpreted in the pesharim commentaries, and used as predictions of the future in the Eschatological Midrash, 11QMelchizedek, and other similar texts.43 In addition to the now-canonical psalms that were interpreted as prophecies, there are also some new prophetic psalms. Of the psalm collections predating the Qumran community, at least 4QNon-Canonical Psalms B contains a prophetic psalm concerning the expected future of an elect group.44 Similarly, at least one Barkhi Nafshi hymn in 4Q434 describes the expected future bliss of an elect group in Jerusalem.45 But even the psalms more clearly deriving from the Qumran community present some passages as divine revelations. The War Scroll (1QM 11) contains a psalmic prophecy of the end-time war, and, as already noted, the Hodayot contain some passages that are presented as prophecies (cf. 1QH VII, 19–20; XI, 15–18, 26–36; XII, 18–22; XIV, 29–33). It is furthermore obvious that the writer presents himself in many of the Hodayot as a chosen mediator of divine knowledge,46 and it is noteworthy that this speaker does not plead for the end of his enemies as the earlier psalmists do, but rather presents their judgment as an inevitable event, thus underlining his special status as a chosen mediator.47 It is, thus, well demonstrable that psalms were considered as prophecies by the Qumran community and that psalms were additionally considered a proper medium for further prophetic oracles. However, perhaps the most distinct use of psalms in this respect in the Qumran community is their use in what could be called realized eschatology. The psalms, and other passages considered as prophetic, were interpreted in light of the experiences of the group as predictions that had already come true (compare the use of psalms in the New Testament Gospels), and in such capacity acted as a kind of proof that further prophecies would continue to be fulfilled in the coming days. The prophetic use of psalms is in this way connected with recounting events in the community’s past and probably also with influencing how these events were viewed and presented. The pesharim are a prime example of this. They 43 44 45 46

47

Høgenhaven, “Psalms as Prophecy,” 231–51. Pajunen, Land to the Elect, esp. 171–82. Pajunen, “Exodus and Exile as Prototypes of Justice,” 260–63. See, e.g., Katri Antin, “Sages in the Divine Council: Transmitting Divine Knowledge in Sirach 24, 1 Enoch 14–16, Daniel 7, and in Two Hodayot Psalms (1QHa 12:6–13:6; 20:7–22:42),” in Crossing Imaginary Boundaries: The Dead Sea Scrolls in the Context of Second Temple Judaism, eds. Mika S. Pajunen and Hanna Tervanotko, PFES 108 (Helsinki: Finnish Exegetical Society, 2015), 182–209. Compare the prophetic utterances of Jesus in the Gospels.

54

Pajunen

do not interpret the prophetic texts mainly as something that will happen in the future but as something already fulfilled. Similarly, the Barkhi Nafshi hymns connect the fulfillment of prophecies, including psalms, with the past of an elect group, although they also emphasize that some prophesied divine actions are constantly in effect and give predictions concerning the future by interpreting anew some further prophecies. These hymns plainly speak of an elect group that appears to consider itself the heir to the promises God made to Israel and to be in the midst of a second, perfected exodus where the failings of the people during the previous exodus are not repeated.48 And this is again one of the points that should be emphasized: the past prophecies are firmly tied in with the experiences of the Qumran community. The future of the nation, or indeed its current state or past events on the national level, is not scrutinized in this respect; it is all about events that have somehow directly touched the Qumran community itself or its perceived enemies. Indeed some earlier psalms that rather clearly pertain to certain biblical figures are firmly recontextualized as prophecies concerning the community. For instance, Psalm 18, which is firmly tied to David through its use in 2 Samuel 22, is used in the Hodayot as a prophecy that pertained to the leader of the Qumran community. Similarly, while 4QPsalmsx may not originate in the Qumran community, the manuscript presents Nathan’s oracle, modified from its Psalm 89 form, as a constant collective promise by God to his elect instead of just to David and his descendants.49 That the Qumran community viewed Nathan’s oracle in a similar way, regardless of where 4QPsalmsx originated, is shown by its treatment in the Eschatological Midrash, where parts of the oracle are interpreted as pertaining to a future Messiah, the latter days, and the sons of light instead of David and his descendants (4Q174 1–2 + 2 1 I, 1–13). This kind of treatment of authoritative compositions again firmly shows that the Qumran community was not overly concerned with the nation’s past or even its future, but rather concentrated on the past, present, and expected future experiences of that particular group as the present elect of God. 4

Conclusions

The use of psalms and prayers in the Qumran community offers a vivid image of the potential ritual and other communal practices and some basic beliefs of 48 See further, Pajunen, “Exodus and Exile as Prototypes of Justice,” 264–74. 49 Mika S. Pajunen, “4QPsx: A Collective Interpretation of Psalm 89:20–38,” JBL 130 (2014): 479–95.

Building a Community of the Elect

55

that community. They offer perhaps the most profound reflection on theological ideas of the community, and through the prophetic use of psalms they also display how the community interpreted some of its past and what it expected to happen in the future. But perhaps the perspective that most thoroughly permeates this material from an ideological standpoint and governed its use by this community is their perception of themselves as the elect of God. The people of Israel as a whole are no longer seen as the elect by this group, but rather the yahad constitute the chosen remnant, and the psalms and prayers used by the community tended to reinforce this particular identity. Instead of a communion with the larger liturgical body of Israel, the community celebrates God the creator together with the angels; instead of the history of the entire people, the group’s past is recalled; instead of more general societal norms and values, the group’s theology is taught; and instead of a future as the elect people, the future of a chosen group is both prophesied by the contemporary mediators of the divine will and found embedded in prophecies made in the past. While the Qumran community does not seem to have been sectarian in the sense that they had closed themselves off from the world, their psalms and prayers demonstrate that their basic views were at least from some point onwards particularistic (some early texts, such as, 4QMMT, still tend to reflect voices of dialogue) in how they viewed their and other Jewish groups’ status regarding God and election.50 The rich psalm and prayer material from Qumran, therefore, provides scholars an opportunity both to see a fuller picture of the use of psalms in late Second Temple Judaism in general and to gain new insights into the particular Jewish community that seems to have at some point occupied Khirbet Qumran. However, as a rather large pool of comparative material, it not only allows the distinguishing of ideas and concepts distinct to the Qumran community, but also allows for a fuller appreciation of the emphasis of diverse other composers and users of psalms in the late Second Temple period, such as the group behind the Psalms of Solomon, the LXX form of the Psalter, or different early Christian writers and their communities.

50

Whether the Qumran community should be categorized as sectarian depends on the definition of sectarian, and other genres of texts, such as the rule texts, are much more central for deciding this issue than psalms and prayers. For a thorough discussion of this question, see Jutta Jokiranta, Social Identity and Sectarianism in the Qumran Movement, STDJ 105 (Leiden: Brill, 2012).

56

Pajunen

Bibliography Antin, Katri. “Sages in the Divine Council: Transmitting Divine Knowledge in Sirach 24, 1 Enoch 14–16, Daniel 7, and in Two Hodayot Psalms (1QHa 12:6–13:6; 20:7–22:42).” Pages 182–209 in Crossing Imaginary Boundaries: The Dead Sea Scrolls in the Context of Second Temple Judaism. Edited by Mika S. Pajunen and Hanna Tervanotko. PFES 108. Helsinki: Finnish Exegetical Society, 2015. Arnold, Russell. The Social Role of Liturgy in the Religion of the Qumran Community. STDJ 60. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Brettler, Marc. “Those Who Pray Together Stay Together: The Role of Late Psalms in Creating Identity.” Pages 279–304 in Functions of Psalms and Prayers in the Late Second Temple Period. Edited by Mika S. Pajunen and Jeremy Penner. BZAW 486. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017. Brooke, George J. “The Books of Chronicles and the Scrolls from Qumran.” Pages 35–48 in Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld, Edited by Robert Rezetko, Timothy H. Lim, and W. Brian Aucker. VTSup 113. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Chazon, Esther. “Liturgical Communion with the Angels at Qumran.” Pages 95–105 in Sapiential, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumran: Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies Oslo 1998, Published in Memory of Maurice Baillet. Edited by Daniel K. Falk, Florentino García Martínez, and Eileen M. Schuller. STDJ 35. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Collins, John J. Beyond the Qumran Community. The Sectarian Movement of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010. Eshel, Esther. “Apotropaic Prayers in the Second Temple Period.” Pages 69–88 in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls; Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 19–23 January 2000. Edited by Esther Chazon. STDJ 48. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Falk, Daniel K. “Material Aspects of Prayer Manuscripts at Qumran.” Pages 33–88 in Literature or Liturgy? Early Christian Hymns and Prayers in Their Literary and Liturgical Context in Antiquity. Edited by Clemens Leonhard and Hermut Löhr. WUNT 2/363. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Gärtner, Judith. Die Geschichtspsalmen: Eine Studie zu den Psalmen 78, 105, 106, 135 und 136 als hermeneutische Schlüsseltexte im Psalter. FAT 84. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012. Gordley, Matthew E. Teaching through Song in Antiquity: Didactic Hymnody among Greeks, Romans, Jews, and Christians. WUNT 2/302. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011. Grol, Harm W. M. van. “Psalm, Psalter, and Prayer.” Pages 41–70 in Prayer from Tobit to Qumran: Inaugural Conference of the ISDCL at Salzburg, Austria, 5–9 July 2003.

Building a Community of the Elect

57

Edited by Renate Egger‐Wenzel and Jeremy Corley. DCLY 2004. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004. Hays, Richard B. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. Hempel, Charlotte. “Maskil(im) and Rabbim: From Daniel to Qumran.” Pages 133–56 in Biblical Traditions in Transmission: Essays in Honour of Michael A. Knibb. Edited by Charlotte Hempel and Judith M. Lieu. JSJSup 111. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Høgenhaven, Jesper. “Psalms as Prophecy: Qumran Evidence for the Reading of Psalms as Prophetic Text and the Formation of the Canon.” Pages 231–51 in Functions of Psalms and Prayers in the Late Second Temple Period. Edited by Mika S. Pajunen and Jeremy Penner. BZAW 486. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017. James, Joshua T. The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms. LHBOTS 658. London: T&T Clark, 2017. Jokiranta, Jutta. Social Identity and Sectarianism in the Qumran Movement. STDJ 105. Leiden: Brill, 2012. Klein, Anja. Geschichte und Gebet: Die Rezeption der biblischen Geschichte in den Psalmen des Alten Testaments. FAT 94. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Lambert, David A. How Repentance Became Biblical: Judaism, Christianity, and the Interpretation of Scripture. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016. Lambert, David A. “Was the Dead Sea Sect a Penitential Movement?” Pages 501–31 in The Oxford Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by John J. Collins and Timothy H. Lim. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Lange, Armin, and Matthias Weigold. Biblical Quotations and Allusions in Second Temple Jewish Literature. JAJSup 5. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. Magonet, Jonathan. “On Reading Psalms as Liturgy: Psalms 96–99.” Pages 161–79 in The Shape and Shaping of the Book of Psalms: The Current State of Scholarship. Edited by Nancy L. deClaissé-Walford. AIL 20. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2014. Mandolfo, Carleen. “Language of Lament in the Psalms.” Pages 114–30 in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms. Edited by William P. Brown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Metso, Sarianna. “Shifts in Covenantal Discourse in Second Temple Judaism.” Pages 497–512 in Scripture in Transition: Essays on Septuagint, Hebrew Bible, and Dead Sea Scrolls in Honour of Raija Sollamo. Edited by Anssi Voitila and Jutta Jokiranta. JSJSup 126. Leiden: Brill, 2008. Moyise, Steve, and Maarten J. J. Menken, eds. The Psalms in the New Testament. London: T&T Clark, 2004. Newman, Judith H. Before the Bible: The Liturgical Body and the Formation of Scriptures in Early Judaism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018. Newsom, Carol A. “The Sage in the Literature of Qumran: The Functions of the Maśkîl.” Pages 373–82 in The Sage in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Edited by John G. Gammie and Leo G. Perdue. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

58

Pajunen

Newsom, Carol A. “‘Sectually Explicit’ Literature from Qumran.” Pages 167–87 in The Hebrew Bible and Its Interpreters. Edited by David Noel Freedman, Baruch Halpern, and William H. C. Propp. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990. Newsom, Carol A. The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran. STDJ 52. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Nitzan, Bilhah. “4QBerakhota–e (4Q286–90): A Covenantal Ceremony in the Light of Related Texts.” RevQ 16 (1995): 487–506. Nitzan, Bilhah. “The Benedictions from Qumran for the Annual Covenantal Ceremony.” Pages 263–71 in The Dead Sea Scrolls Fifty Years after Their Discovery: Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July 20–25, 1997. Edited by Lawrence H. Schiffman, Emanuel Tov, and James C. VanderKam. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2000. Nitzan, Bilhah. Qumran Prayer and Religious Poetry. Translated by J. Chipman. STDJ 12. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Pajunen, Mika S. “4QPsx: A Collective Interpretation of Psalm 89:20–38.” JBL 130 (2014): 479–95. Pajunen, Mika S. “Creation as the Liturgical Nexus of the Blessings and Curses in 4QBerakhot.” Pages 27–39 in Ancient Readers and Their Scriptures: Engaging the Hebrew Bible in Early Judaism and Christianity. Edited by Garrick Allen and John Dunne. AJEC 107. Leiden: Brill, 2018. Pajunen, Mika S. “Differentiation of Form, Theme, and Changing Functions in Psalms and Prayers.” SJOT 33, no. 2 (2019): 106–18. Pajunen, Mika S. “Exodus and Exile as Prototypes of Justice: Prophecies in the Psalms of Solomon and the Barkhi Nafshi Hymns.” Pages 252–76 in Functions of Psalms and Prayers in the Late Second Temple Period. Edited by Mika S. Pajunen and Jeremy Penner. BZAW 486. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017. Pajunen, Mika S. “The Influence of Societal Changes in the Late Second Temple Period on the Functions and Composition of Psalms.” SJOT 33, no. 2 (2019): 6–26. Pajunen, Mika S. The Land to the Elect and Justice for All: Reading Psalms in the Dead Sea Scrolls in Light of 4Q381. JAJSup 14. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013. Pajunen, Mika S. “The Praise of God and His Name as the Core of the Second Temple Liturgy.” ZAW 127 (2015): 475–88. Pajunen, Mika S. “Psalms 151–155.” Pages 423–448 in Oxford Handbook of the Apocrypha. Edited by Gerbern S. Oegema. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021. Pajunen, Mika S. “Reading Psalm and Prayer Manuscripts from Qumran.” In Material Aspects of Reading in Ancient and Medieval Cultures: Materiality, Presence, and Performance. Edited by Anna Krauß, Jonas Leipziger, and Friederike SchückingJungblut. MatTK 26. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2019. Pajunen, Mika S. “The Saga of Judah’s Kings Continues: The Reception of Chronicles in the Late Second Temple Period.” JBL 133 (2017): 589–608.

Building a Community of the Elect

59

Pulkkinen, Marika. “Teaching through the Psalms: Allusions to the Wilderness Tradition in 1 Corinthians 10,1–10 and the Origin of the Passage.” SJOT 33, no. 2 (2019): 86–105. Schofield, Alison. From Qumran to the Yahad: A New Paradigm of Textual Development for the Community Rule. STDJ 77. Leiden: Brill, 2009. Tov, Emanuel. Revised Lists of the Texts from the Judaean Desert. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Tov, Emanuel. Scribal Practices and Approaches Reflected in the Texts Found in the Judean Desert. STDJ 54. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2004. Watts, James W. Psalm and Story: Inset Hymns in Hebrew Narrative. JSOTSup 139. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992. Weitzman, Steven. Song and Story in Biblical Narrative: The History of a Literary Convention in Ancient Israel. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997. Werline, Rodney A. Penitential Prayer in Second Temple Judaism: The Development of a Religious Institution. EJL 13. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998. Wilson, Gerald H. The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter. SBLDS 76. Chico: Scholars Press, 1985. Wise, Michael O. “The Origins and History of the Teacher’s Movement.” Pages 92–122 in The Oxford Handbook of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Timothy H. Lim and John J. Collins. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Wise, Michael O., Martin Abegg, and Edward Cook. “Hodayot, Hodayot-like, and Similar Texts.” In Poetic and Liturgical Texts. Vol. 5 of Dead Sea Scrolls Reader. Edited by Donald W. Parry and Emanuel Tov. Leiden: Brill, 2005.

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult in the Psalms and at Qumran Beate Ego The idea of the praise of angelic beings in the heavenly world is a prominent theme that has played and continues to play an important role, in liturgy in particular.* An example of this can be found in the second verse of the chorale “Holy God, We Praise Thy Name”: Hark! the loud celestial hymn Angel choirs above are raising, Cherubim and seraphim, In unceasing chorus praising; Fill the heavens with sweet accord: Holy, holy, holy, Lord.1 There is a clear echo here of Isa 6:3, but the idea is also known to us from the biblical Psalms—Psalms 29, 103, or 148, for instance—and this motif is also found in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and the Hodayot, which were found among the Dead Seas Scrolls. This opens a wide window into the religious history of ancient Israel and ancient Judaism. The biblical Psalms are a collection of one hundred fifty songs, containing lament as well as praise, which has developed over centuries from the early royal period to the Hellenistic time.2 In addition, the Hodayot, a collection of about thirty songs of praise or prayers for salvation from distress and the transmission of secrets, probably date back to the second century BCE;3 and also the songs of the Sabbath, a poetic cycle of thirteen songs

* This article was translated from German by David Finch ([email protected]). 1 “Holy God, We Praise Thy Name,” translation by Clarence A. Walworthe (1820–1900) of the chorale Großer Gott, wir loben dich, by Ignaz Franz (Vienna, ca. 1774). 2 For an overview, see Reinhard Müller, “Psalmen (AT),” in Das wissenschaftliche Bibellexicon im Internet (Wibilex), Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft (https://www.bibelwissenschaft.de/wibi lex/das-bibellexikon/lexikon/sachwort/anzeigen/details/psalmen-at/ch/a939c011d1e80ab8 b2dc5a88c6efa035/). 3 4QHa, the oldest manuscript, was copied around 100–75 BCE; see Eileen Schuller, “Hodayot,” EDEJ, 747–49.

© Beate Ego, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_005

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

61

that describe the heavenly worship in a hymnal manner or invite the angels to praise, belong to this time.4 While Hebrew Bible scholarship has only recently begun to address this theme more intensively,5 in the context of research into Judaism in the ancient world, close attention has been paid for many years to the motif of divine worship in heaven. One thinks, for instance, of Hans Bietenhard’s groundbreaking work Die himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum, from 1951,6 or of the numerous publications on the Hodayot and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice from Qumran. Alongside a general description of the motif, the focus here is on the question of what the relation may be between the heavenly songs of praise of the angels and earthly worship or song in praise of God; that is, to what extent the concept of a “communion of worship of angels and human beings” can be applied here, or whether other ideas are required to enable the most precise formulation possible of the relations between these two fundamental categories.7 Considerations relating to ritual and identity are implicit in this context; an explicit investigation of these themes has yet to be conducted, and I am therefore pleased to have the opportunity to summarize and extend my earlier work on the subject of heavenly worship.8 My focus here will be on the biblical Psalms, first giving an account of the relevant material (part 1), then discussing the specific function of the motif in the context of “ritual and identity” (part 2); a short look at the Qumran texts (part 3) follows, and I conclude with a brief summing-up (part 4).

4 The manuscripts from Qumran are to be dated in the time from 75 BCE to 1 BCE; see Carol Newsom, “Songs of Sabbath Sacrifice,” EDEJ, 1246–48. 5 Beate Ego, “Der Lobpreis der himmlischen Wesen: Zur Traditionsgeschichte und Funktion eines biblischen Motivs,” in Gottesdienst und Engel im antiken Judentum und frühen Christentum, ed. Jörg Frey and Michael R. Jost, WUNT 2/446 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), 25–48. 6 Hans Bietenhard, Die himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum, WUNT 2 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1951), 123–36. 7 On the Hodayot, see Heinz-Wolfgang Kuhn, Enderwartung und gegenwärtiges Heil: Untersuchungen zu den Gemeindeliedern von Qumran mit einem Anhang über Eschatologie und Gegenwart in der Verkündigung Jesu, SNTSU 4 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 66–72. Carol Newsom’s interpretation of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice has been influential; see Newsom, Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition, HSS 27 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985), 52–58; 62–66. For an overview of research see Beate Ego, “‘Le Temple Imaginaire’: Himmlischer und irdischer Kultus im antiken Judentum am Beispiel der Sabbatopferlieder,” VF 56 (2011): 58–62 (with a summary of the relevant literature). 8 See Ego, “Lobpreis,” with further information on the research literature; see also Beate Ego, “Der Gottesdienst der Engel: Von den biblischen Psalmen zur jüdischen Mystik: Traditionskritische Überlegungen zu den Sabbatopferliedern von Qumran,” TLZ 140 (2015): 886–901.

62 1

Ego

Heavenly Worship in Biblical Psalms

In this part of my contribution I will present the most important biblical psalms in which the motif of heavenly worship appears; namely Psalm 29 as well as Psalms 96, 148, and 103. In addition, I refer here to the lines of development within the motif. Psalm 29 must be regarded as the oldest of these texts, since it shows obvious parallels to the Canaanite worldview. In contrast, Psalms 96, 103, and 148 show numerous features that belong to a later stage of Israelite religious history (e.g., Deuteronomistic elements, concepts of history, and angelology). The motif of the singing of praise in heaven is anchored in the wider concept and context of a heavenly council surrounding the divinity. In the West Semitic region, this idea was associated with the divinity El, and the beings serving and praising him were conceived of as divinities of lower rank. The idea of a heavenly council therefore implied from the outset a hierarchization of the pantheon. Besides praising the ruler, the role of the heavenly hosts is to offer counsel to the King of Heaven and to support him in military matters as “Lord of Hosts.”9 The transfer of this complex of motifs to the divinity YHWH, who can also be thought of as a king, plays a prominent role in the assertion of YHWH’s monolatric and monotheistic claims; his power being emphatically represented through the beings that surround him. Probably the oldest textual instance of the idea of heavenly beings praising God is found in the Hebrew Bible in Psalm 29. Numerous studies have elaborated and clarified the relation of this psalm to the Canaanite world view.10 9 On the motif of the heavenly council, see, e.g., E. Theodore Mullen, The Assembly of the Gods: The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature, HSM 24 (Chico: Scholars Press, 1980); Heinz-Dieter Neef, Gottes himmlischer Thronrat: Hintergrund und Bedeutung von sôd JHWH im Alten Testament, AzTh 79 (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1994). These works contain, however, relatively little information on the idea of heavenly worship. In general it is true to say that the various functions of the heavenly council (counsel, reverence, judgement, military support) require clearer definition, both individually and in their interrelations. See also Ellen White, Yahweh’s Council: Its Structure and Membership, FAT 2/65 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014). White ascribes the motif of the heavenly council only to those texts that name several divinities and include the motif of a court of judgement. Against this background, the texts with the motif of heavenly worship are in no way central to her considerations. 10 See Harold L. Ginsberg, “A Phoenician Hymn in the Psalter,” in Atti del XIX Congresso Internazionale degli Orientalisti: Roma, 23–29 settembre 1935 (Rome: Tipografia del Senato, 1935), 472–76; see also Andreas Wagner, with Johannes F. Diehl and Anja A. Diesel, “Von der Grammatik zum Kerygma: Neue grammatische Erkenntnisse und ihre Bedeutung für das Verständnis der Form und des Gehalts von Ps XXIX,” in Wagner, Beten und Bekennen: Über Psalmen (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2008), 149–50. For Ps 29, see

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

63

Thus in this psalm—to base our interpretation on the final form in which it has reached us11—El traditions are combined with elements of a Canaanite Baal hymn, and YHWH is represented both as an enigmatically and invisibly enthroned world king and as a warlike weather god. But in this context—as Andreas Wagner has pointed out—what is decisive is not only the content of what is transferred to YHWH … but the fact that the Israelitization of content occurs on the basis of an authentically Israelite poetic form, that of the hymn in the imperative, so that both form and content can be seen as indicators of Israelitization. The Israelite form provides the inner framework for the transfer to YHWH of elements of various traditions; in combination with the content ascribed to YHWH, a unified form and a unified message are forged from heterogeneous traditions.12 From the first verses of this psalm we find ourselves in the world of the gods, as the “sons of gods” (‫ )בני אלים‬are called upon to praise YHWH in a passage making climactic and impressive use of parallelismus membrorum: 1

Ascribe to YHWH, O sons of gods [‫]בני אלים‬, ascribe to YHWH glory and strength. 2 Ascribe to YHWH the glory of his name; worship YHWH in holy array.13

11

12 13

also Friedhelm Hartenstein, Die Unzugänglichkeit Gottes im Heiligtum: Jesaja 6 und der Wohnort JHWHs in der Jerusalemer Kulttradition, WMANT 75 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1997), 59–62; Reinhard Müller, Jahwe als Wettergott: Studien zur althebräischen Kultlyrik anhand ausgewählter Psalmen, BZAW 387 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008), 122–32; Hermann Spieckermann, Heilsgegenwart: Eine Theologie der Psalmen, FRLANT 148 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989), 165–79. On the possible genesis of this Psalm and its various stages of growth, see Jörg Jeremias, Das Königtum Gottes in den Psalmen: Israels Begegnung mit dem kanaanäischen Mythos in den Jahwe-Königs-Psalmen, FRLANT 141 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht), 1987, 41–44; Hartenstein, Unzugänglichkeit Gottes, 60. Andreas Wagner, Beten und Bekennen: Über Psalmen (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2008), 170. All biblical references are quoted according to NRSV (with slight literal adaptations; e.g., YHWH for “LORD”).

64

Ego

This is followed by hymnic declarations on the thunderous voice of YHWH, whose power is shown in the violence of storms14 that put the whole of nature in an uproar (vv. 3–9a). The psalm continues: 9b 10

and in his palace all cry, “Glory!” YHWH sits enthroned over the flood; YHWH sits enthroned as king for ever. 11 May YHWH give strength to his people! May YHWH bless his people with peace! Following the call to the heavenly beings to praise YHWH in verse 1, verses 9b–10 speak of praising the God-king and of his enthronement in the third person, in a manner which is unambiguously hymnic. The Psalm then ends with the wish that YHWH may give his people blessings and strength (v. 11). The relations between the God-king and the world are therefore expressed not only in the declarations of his power as felt in the storm (vv. 4–9a), but also through a subtle reference to the proceedings of earthly worship, which culminate in the gift of strength and blessings to his people (v. 11). The statement in verse 9b that in the palace of YHWH, all cry “glory” is ambiguous, as the Hebrew hekhal can refer both to the palace in the divine world and to the temple as the earthly palace of God, who is conceived of here as a king. The structure of the text, with the connection of motifs or key words to verse 1 (ascribing “glory”), as well as the immediate context of verse 10 (“YHWH enthroned”), make it probable that the reference here is principally to the palace as mythical residence of the divinity, and that the scene is most likely intended to be pictured as taking place in heaven.15 Nevertheless, there is a relation and a resonance here with divine worship in the temple in Jerusalem. Reinhard Müller has forcefully drawn our attention to this close relationship between the transcendent sphere and earthly worship. To use his terms, the background of myth and the foreground of worship are interfused here; and the palace (hekhal) of verse 9b is not only the palace of YHWH as king, in which the son of gods throw themselves at his feet, but also his temple on earth. This can be drawn from the fact that the opening invocations in verse 2 address the gods and suggest a mythical homage scene. The psalm, however, is composed for earthly worship. The cult in which 14 15

On the traditional relation of the kingship of God and thunder, see Wagner, Beten und Bekennen, 164. On the spatial structures of this psalm, see the remarks of Hartenstein, Unzugänglichkeit Gottes, 62–63; he stresses the mysterious and enigmatic nature of the divine throne.

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

65

the psalm is sung thus brings into view the invisible events that take place among the gods in heaven during which the worshiping congregation is united with the gods.16 The divinity presented in this psalm has, as it were, two sides. Verses 1–3 and 9b–10 describe the King of Heaven, while the central section of the psalm (vv. 4–9a) and the end (v. 11) depict the aspect of God that is turned towards the world. While one branch of Scripture places the motif of heavenly praise in the context of prophetic judgement,17 the mainstream of biblical tradition situates the motif within the context of hymnic speech. In this context, I will confine our focus here to the tradition as represented in the Psalms, and I will give three further examples. I would like first to look at Ps 96:7–13, which shows clear influences of Deutero-Isaian theology:18 7

8 9 10 11 12 13

Ascribe to YHWH, O families of the peoples, Ascribe to YHWH glory and strength! Ascribe to YHWH the glory due his name; bring an offering, and come into his courts! Worship YHWH in holy splendor; tremble before him, all the earth! Say among the nations, “YHWH is king! The world is firmly established, it shall never be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity.” Let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice; let the sea roar, and all that fills it; let the field exult, and everything in it! Then shall all the trees of the forest sing for joy before the YHWH; for he is coming, for he is coming to judge the earth. He will judge the world with righteousness, and the peoples with his truth.

It is interesting here in relation to the theme of heavenly worship that the heavens as a whole are enjoined to praise God; others to whom the call to praise is addressed are the earth, the sea with its creatures, fields and vegetation, 16 Müller, Jahwe, 125; see also Hartenstein, Unzugänglichkeit Gottes, 61. 17 In particular, Isa 6:1–13; see also Dan 7:9–11. 18 Jeremias, Königtum Gottes, 127.

66

Ego

and—specifically named—the trees of the wood. This enumeration, which follows on from the call to praise in verse 7, no longer employs the imperative, but the call to praise is now made in the third person, in the jussive mood. It is also noteworthy that while Psalm 96 is broadly dependent on Psalm 29, it transmutes its model in a quite specific way. The call to praise at the start of the psalm is addressed here not to the “sons of gods,” but rather to the peoples of the earth. As Jörg Jeremias has pointed out, this psalm thereby “translates” Psalm 29 “into the realm of history.”19 Alongside praise of the entire heaven, usually treated as a part of the whole of creation, we find praise by individual heavenly beings, as in Psalm 148. In the first part of this psalm, the heavenly elements are called upon to praise God: 1

Hallelujah! Praise YHWH from the heavens, praise him in the heights! 2 Praise him, all his angels, praise him, all his host! 3 Praise him, sun and moon, praise him, all you shining stars! 4 Praise him, you highest heavens, and you waters above the heavens! 5 Let them praise the name of YHWH! For he commanded and they were created. 6 And he established them for ever and ever; he fixed their bounds, which cannot be passed. The association here of the angels and the heavenly host with the various heavenly bodies, such as sun and moon, reflect the fact that for “the Israelite mind … clearly the images of the heavenly council and of the night sky strewn with stars [flowed] into each other,” so that “we may assume that for thought in antiquity, heavenly beings and observable phenomena in the heavens were distinguishable from each other only to a certain extent.”20 This enumeration of heavenly beings and elements—which, unlike in later texts, are presented 19 Jeremias, Königtum Gottes, 124. On the praise of the heavens as a whole, see also Ps 19, Ps 97, and Ps 89. In these later texts, YHWH is frequently no longer the direct object of praise, which is directed instead towards his particular attributes, such as his glory, as in Ps 19; his righteousness (Ps 97:6); or his miracles within history (Ps 89:6–7). 20 So the translation of Cornelis Houtman, Der Himmel im Alten Testament: Israels Weltbild und Weltanschauung, OtSt 30 (Leiden: Brill, 1993), 356; 170–71. Job 38:7 is relevant here: the “morning stars” and the “sons of God” are named in parallelismus membrorum.

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

67

in no clear hierarchy—is followed in the second part of the psalm by a call to praise addressed to the earthly world, sweeping in a wide arc from the creatures of the sea to meteorological elements such as fire, hail, snow, fog, and storm winds, to mountains, trees, land animals, and birds, then to various human groups such as kings and all peoples, princes and judges, young men and maidens, children and the old (Ps 148:7–13a). The praise itself is only briefly expressed here; each item is prefaced with the hymnic ki. The first part of the psalm ends with a reference to the world of creation and its laws: 5



Let them [i.e., all the previously named elements of the heavens] praise the name of YHWH! For he commanded and they were created.

The end of the Psalm speaks correspondingly YHWH’s power in history: 13

Let them [i.e., all the elements of the earth] praise the name of YHWH, for his name alone is exalted; his glory is above earth and heaven. 14 He has raised up a horn for his people, praise for all his saints, for the people of Israel who are close to him. Praise YHWH!

While the first part of the psalm looks towards the implications for worship of the theology of creation, the focus in the second part of the psalm is on God’s actions in history and their benefits for his people (Ps 148:14).21 Finally, as another important passage in the Hebrew Bible, we should mention Psalm 103. It begins with a call to the self to praise God, and the well-known words: “Bless YHWH, O my soul, and all that is in me, bless his holy name” (Ps 103:1). Then follows an extended praise of divine mercy, speaking of God’s 21

For the LXX, this presentation of the relevant material should include the song of praise of the three young men in the furnace, in the Additions to Daniel (Dan 3:52–90), where God, enthroned on high over the cherubim, is first praised in six benedictions (Dan 3:52–56); the hymn then continues with the call to praise: starting with those closest to God, the angels, it then descends by stages to the human world, down to the three men in the fire, who celebrate the miracle of their salvation with this psalm while in the very realm of death, but shielded by the angels as a visible sign of God’s presence. For a detailed discussion of this text, see Klaus Koch, Daniel: 1. Teilband; Dan 1–4, BKAT 22/1 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2005), 323–27; 333–75.

68

Ego

healing and forgiveness of sins, and the lowliness of mankind (Ps 103:3–18). Finally, the psalm closes with the words: 19

YHWH has established his throne in the heavens, and his kingdom rules over all. 20 Bless YHWH, O you his angels, you mighty ones [‫ ]גברי כח‬who do his bidding, obedient to his spoken word! 21 Bless YHWH, all his hosts [‫]כל צבאיו‬, his ministers that do his will! 22 Bless YHWH, all his works, in all places of his dominion. Bless YHWH, O my soul!

The praise of YHWH is explicitly located here in heaven, and in relation to various beings of the heavenly world. The psalm at this point addresses the messengers of God, calling on them to proclaim the praise of YHWH; this implies an integration of the figure of the messenger of YHWH (traditionally translated as “the angel of the Lord”), a figure originally and principally associated with the epiphany of YHWH on earth, into the overall conception of the heavenly council.22 In the mention of “the mighty ones” and of YHWH’s “hosts,” there also seems to be an echo of the older conception that associates the heavenly council with the idea of the “divine warrior.” The “sons of gods” who are called on in Psalm 29 to praise God are no longer present in this text, so that we may speak broadly in terms of a transformation of the heavenly beings who praise God. In addition, in this psalm the beings of YHWH’s wider creation are now also included in the call to praise. When they are exhorted to praise YHWH “in all places of his dominion,” a conception of YHWH’s praise is outlined that has in a sense cosmic dimensions. As to historical development of these traditions, we can discern two fundamental tendencies: 1. While in Psalm 29 the call to praise YHWH is addressed to one group only, that is, the “sons of gods,” in the majority of texts the call is to a choir that includes a variety of groups of heavenly beings (but not the “sons of gods”), as well as various elements of creation and a range of human 22

As to the different terms used for the heavenly beings in Ps 103:19–22, see Ann-Cathrin Fiß, “Lobe den Herrn, meine Seele!”: Psalm 103 in seinen Kontexten, WMANT 156 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2019), 238–254. My thanks to the author for making the as-yetunpublished manuscript available to me.

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

2.

2

69

beings. On the basis of this, we can speak of a “downgrading of heavenly beings.” As Michael Mach has clearly demonstrated in his book on angelology in early Judaism, this can be seen as part of a wider process of change within tradition and religious history, as the assertion of monotheism logically requires a turning away from the divine character of the beings making up the heavenly council.23 Accompanying this process is the tendency towards an enlargement of the choir called on to praise God. Psalm 148, for example, addresses the different heavenly elements such as the sun, the moon, and stars, as well as powers of the earthly natural and human world. Psalm 103 is particularly significant for the call to the self to praise God, with which it begins and ends. Ritual and Identity

Following this rough overview of the relevant textual material, the question arises of what conclusions, if any, we can draw concerning the role of these psalms in ritual contexts in the period of the Second Temple, and their significance for a process of “community formation.” As it is generally known, the question of the original place of the Psalms within the life of their society and their relation to ritual cannot be definitively answered. It does, however, on the whole seem highly probable that hymns such as Psalm 29, Psalms 96–99 on the kingship of YHWH, or Psalms 145–150 of the Minor Hallel belong in a liturgical context and can therefore be classified as ritual texts. Psalm 103, which begins with a call to the self to praise God, could also have served as a song of thanksgiving, and could therefore equally have had a place in collective life.24 In any case, we should work here on the basic assumption that these are texts that are not purely literary in character, but that can be contextualized within a ritual of prayer.25 23 Michael Mach, Entwicklungsstadien des jüdischen Engelglaubens in vorrabbinischer Zeit, TSAJ 34 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992), 20–21. The MT of Deut 32:43 points in a similar direction. In contrast to an older reading found in Qumran and in the LXX, it is no longer the sons of God but the peoples who are called on here to praise God. For further discussion of this, see Ego, “Lobpreis,” 41. 24 Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalmen 60–150, BKAT 15/2 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1989), 872. 25 See Erhard S. Gerstenberger, “Psalmen und Ritualpraxis,” in Ritual und Poesie: Formen und Orte religiöser Dichtung im Alten Orient, im Judentum und im Christentum, HBS 36, ed. Erich Zenger (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2003), 74: “Concerning the relations between the texts and ritual practices, and the extent to which we can imagine or guess

70

Ego

The starting point of my thoughts on the question of identity formation is the essay by Marc Zvi Brettler, “Those Who Pray Together Stay Together: The Role of Late Psalms in Creating Identity,” in the book Functions of Psalms and Prayers in Late Second Temple Judaism, edited by Mika S. Pajunen and published in 2017.26 In this context, Brettler emphasizes the importance of “foundation myths” and “shared societal beliefs” for the formation and reinforcement of group identity, and assembles a number of themes relevant to this, taken from books 4 and 5 of the Psalms. These include “Jerusalem as the center of Yehud,” “Yahweh’s incomparably and exclusivity,” “insisting on a particular version of past sacred history/myth,” “the place of the Torah,” “social issues,” and “theological issues.”27 Working on the basic assumption that prayers in the broadest sense create or confirm and consolidate identity, the further question arises of the meaning of the motif of heavenly praise in this context. Therefore I would like to situate the motif of worship in heaven within this wider tableau. If we examine the themes of these passages, first of all we are struck by the close relationship of the heavenly praise to the theology of creation. In Psalm 29, for instance, the power of YHWH’s thunder is the object of praise. Psalm 148 praises YHWH for his creation, naming in turn the heavens, angels, sun, and moon, as well as the waters above the heavens.28 This Psalm is characterized by a relation to an order of creation thought of in terms of law: God is explicitly said to have “fixed their [i.e., the heavenly bodies’] bounds, which

the existence of such practices, one thing is clear from the outset: texts themselves are neither lived rituals nor lived worship. At the most, they can give us more or less clear ideas about the proceedings of which they were or are an organic part. … These psalms are therefore at best parts or reflections of rituals and practices of worship. Conversely, however, I am personally convinced that all biblical texts are the product of communicative actions. Without a human, interactive community they are simply dead and without significance. Psalms, that is, prayers, songs, or meditations, presuppose for their realization the sounding board of religiously minded communities. For biblical antiquity it is difficult to conceive a purely individual use in a private context.” See also Gerstenberger, “Psalmen,” 87: “Collections, writings, or ‘books’ were used in the immediate context of the preparation and carrying out of ritual actions in the broadest sense, i.e., communal ceremonies involving groups under the guidance of specialists, to whom the written texts were available as a guide.” All quotations in this footnote are translated from German. 26 Marc Zvi Brettler, “Those Who Pray Together Stay Together: The Role of Late Psalms in Creating Identity,” in Functions of Psalms and Prayers in Second Temple Period, ed. Mika S. Pajunen and Jeremy Penner, BZAW 486 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017), 280. 27 Brettler, “Those Who Pray Together,” 288–95. 28 In relation to creation theology, see also Brettler, “Those Who Pray Together,” 291.

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

71

cannot be passed.”29 Psalm 103 also alludes to a concept of divine law, when the angels are spoken of as those who carry out God’s commands.30 But in order to assess the significance of the motif of heavenly praise as a whole, it is not enough to concentrate solely on the thematic content of the texts. What is much more decisive here is the linguistically pragmatic dimension of these utterances, the understanding of these texts as speech acts. It is true that, from a formal perspective, we can distinguish in these texts between the call to praise, in which the hearer is urged in the imperative to praise YHWH;31 the request to praise, in the third person plural of the preformative conjugation;32 and the description of praise, in the third person in either the preformative or afformative conjugation.33 Nevertheless, we cannot ascribe significance to these distinctions in terms of the intention of speech. Even though, in the superficial grammatical sense, a call to praise may be couched as a demand, according to Wagner the demand is not the actual intention of the utterance, rather it is “an utterance … that performs the praise for which it calls. … This is a kind of ‘rhetorical imperative,’ analogous to a ‘rhetorical question.’”34 In fact, we can see that all of these forms, the call to praise, the request to praise, and the description of praise, serve to carry out the praise of God. So what is the significance of those occasions when not only the powers of the earthly world, such as its congregations or its peoples, are called on to worship God, but also and in particular those of the heavenly world? Here it is useful to recall the insight that statements about the heavens can be said to express a particular view of the world. Franz Tóth, who has worked on the idea

29 30 31

Friederike Neumann, Schriftgelehrte Hymnen, BZAW 491 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 282–83. In relation to this, see the discussion in the work of Fiß, “Lobe den Herrn,” 305–306. Frank Crüsemann, Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus und Danklied in Israel, WMANT 32 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1969), 19–80. 32 Crüsemann, Studien, 184–91. 33 Alexandra Grund-Wittenberg, Die Himmel erzählen die Herrlichkeit Gottes: Psalm 19 im Kontext nachexilischer Toraweisheit, WMANT 103 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2004), 118–19; see also Lothar Ruppert, “Aufforderung an die Schöpfung zum Lob Gottes: Zur Literatur-, Form-, und Traditionskritik von Psalm 148,” in Freude an der Weisung des Herrn: Beiträge zur Theologie der Psalmen, ed. Ernst Haag and Frank-Lothar Hossfeld, SBB 13 (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1986), 275–96. The motif also appears in statement form, as in Job 38:6 or Neh 9:6–7. These passages are also referred to in Mach, Entwicklungsstadien, 20–21. 34 Wagner, Beten und Bekennen, 77–88, here 87. What is decisive in this context is the point that the call to praise is addressed to those who can hardly be seen as the real actors in the worship; for instance, peoples. There are also psalms, such as Pss 134 and 150, which contain only calls to praise; and we should mention here the call to the self to praise, as in Pss 103 and 104 (see Wagner, Beten und Bekennen, 82–84).

72

Ego

of heavenly worship in the book of Revelation, has defined this as “consciousness of the transcendence of worship”: Thus the consciousness of transcendence among elite exegetical, esoteric, or apocalyptic circles is focused on an ontologically and qualitatively different realm, on a heavenly dimension of reality, which in contrast to the horizontal two-dimensionality of historical consciousness is anchored vertically, as it were, in transcendence. The transcendental consciousness, precisely as worshipping consciousness, gains access to a third dimension in the understanding of reality, which alongside the bitemporal horizontal dimension, introduces the transcendent and spatial vertical dimension into its system of cognitive coordinates. Time and space are thus integrated into an overarching cognitive interpretative structure. The three-dimensional human being combines both historical and transcendent-religious consciousnesses into a complex interpretative schema applied to the temporal and spatial world in which he lives.35 The orientation towards the heavenly world leads in certain ways to a transition into a wider and ontologically distinct dimension, and therefore there exists a fundamental distinction between the praise of earthly beings, however mighty the choir, and the praise of heavenly beings. The purpose of the call to praise addressed to the heavenly world is not simply to amplify human praise:36 it is also an attempt to find a form of praise that is ultimately—in that it is categorically distinct from the earthly form—appropriate to the glory of God. Angels can therefore, to take up the theologian Gregor Etzelmüller’s formulation, be “understood as a field of resonance of the glory of God.”37 In the praise of the heavenly world, the greatness and numinousness of God are vividly and powerfully presented, and a form of language is found that does justice to the divine as “wholly other.” Michael Welker writes:

35

36 37

Franz Tóth, Der himmlische Kult: Wirklichkeitskonstruktion und Sinnbildung in der Johannesoffenbarung, ABG 22 (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2006), 24. The author refers to Walter Schulz, Metaphysik des Schwebens: Untersuchungen zu einer Geschichte der Ästhetik (Pfullingen: Neske, 1985). See Ruppert, “Aufforderung,” 234. Translated from German; see Gregor Etzelmüller, “Die Engel, die Toten und wir: Einige Überlegungen zur gottesdienstlichen Gemeinschaft und zur Verschränkung der Zeiten im Gottesdienst,” PBl 142 (2002): 138.

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

73

In the heavenly doxology, in the praise of God that propagates, extends, and gestures out beyond itself, the praise of an inestimably large number of servants of God who can themselves be seen as centers and representatives of earthly communion and power, the power and glory of God are mirrored and reflected. Paradoxically formulated, in this way the power and glory of God become conceivable even in their inconceivability. They are brought to a depiction: “heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you” (I Kings 8:27). The comprehension of the incomprehensibility and immeasurability of the divine potential for power and glory in heaven is a fundamental aspect of angelology. To express this, the biblical texts employ a basic structure of simple monocentric political concepts, which are quantitatively and dynamically escalated towards the indefinite.38 But what does this kind of speech act mean for the individual at prayer? In relation to this question, it seems significant that the praise of angels does not appear in isolation in these texts, but is connected with the praise of human beings and of the whole of creation. It may be useful here to refer back to the idea of a “community of worship,” which has been employed in scholarly discussions particularly of the Hodayot and of the Songs of Sabbath Sacrifice. Admittedly, at no point is it explicitly stated that the individual at prayer is singing his praise together with the angels, but the examples given here show that it is nevertheless legitimate to speak of an “implicit community of worship.” However, the texts pursue different strategies in relation to this: with the words “and in his palace all cry, ‘Glory!,’” Ps 29:9 alludes to the motif of a community of worship of human beings and the sons of gods, through the ambiguity of the term “temple,” which can refer both to the mythical throne of God in the heavenly world and to the material building of the temple in which worship takes place. Other passages, in which both heavenly and human beings are called upon to praise God, evoke through the parallelism of the call or request to praise a kind of “imagined community of worship.” Through this parallelism in the call to praise addressed to heavenly and to earthly beings

38

Translated from German; see Michael Welker, “Über Gottes Engel: Systematischtheologische Überlegungen im Anschluß an C. Westermann und H. Gese,” in Der eine Gott der beiden Testamente, ed. Yehoshua Amir, Ingo Baldermann and Bernd Janowski, JBTh 2 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1987), 198–99.

74

Ego

and, as in Psalm 148,39 to the works of creation as a whole, a large harmonic soundscape40 is imagined, whose universality mirrors the power and glory of God. All of creation thus becomes a space resonating with the greatness of the divine. Finally, Psalm 103 is of particular significance here, as the individual at prayer at the start of this psalm places himself explicitly as a part of the choir praising God, through the call to praise addressed to his own self. Whatever the differences between the individual texts, the individuals at prayer consistently integrate themselves through their speech acts into the structure of the cosmos as a whole, including the heavenly world, resulting in a “relativization of the individual perspective” and a transcending of the individual person.41 Through this praise, the individual at prayer attains a new identity, in the sense that he is now part of a new community, one which includes the heavenly beings and which is therefore categorically distinct from all earthly communities. As part of this imaginary soundscape, the individual at prayer transcends not only earthly space, but also earthly time. Thus when both heavenly and earthly beings are called to praise, the motif of heavenly worship also implies not least the desire of human beings for the perpetuation of their existence. Through reciting these hymns together, the group at prayer formulates important concepts of its religious symbolic system not simply in terms of content: the scenario of the speech act also creates a highly specific ambience that endows these concepts with an “aura of factuality,”42 and stabilizes the group as a community of worship for the future. 3

Qumran Texts

At this point I will turn to the texts from the Dead Sea. Within the genre of the psalm, it is the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and the Hodayot that are of particular relevance to the question of the significance of the motif of the heavenly worship. For this strand of traditions, it is important that a detailed 39 See also in relation to this the song of the three young men in the furnace in Dan 3:52–90. 40 Houtman, Himmel, 154, refers to the element of harmony: “A rejoicing cosmos is a cosmos in which harmony prevails, where the order set in place at the creation … functions in optima forma” (translated from German). 41 Welker, “Gottes Engel,” 198. 42 See Clifford Geertz, “Religion as a Cultural System,” in Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion, ed. Michael Banton (London: Tavistock, 1966), 4: in his famous paper, C. Geertz defines religion as “(1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.”

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

75

investigation of the motif of the cult community takes place. In the present context, we will have to content ourselves with a few basic observations; an extensive investigation of these themes must await a dedicated study. As I have argued elsewhere at greater length, I see the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice as belonging to the same line of historical tradition as the biblical Psalms, in particular Psalm 148, the “song of the three young men” in Dan 3:52–90 and Ps 19:1.43 A thread running through these is the element of the call to praise God and the description of the praise of God; these forms are greatly extended in the Sabbath Songs. This is, in my view, to be understood within a cosmological framework, including for the Sabbath Songs. To put it more directly: as in Ps 148:3, concealed behind the heavenly beings who are called upon to praise God are the stars and the planets. The scholar of religious studies Kocku von Stuckrad put forward a similar interpretation in the year 2000, sketching it in outline in a few pages. Von Stuckrad interprets the gates mentioned in the Sabbath Songs as “gates of heaven,” which are also central to the astronomy of the Book of Enoch (von Stuckrad gives no instances here). In addition, he plausibly argues that the mentions of “beams of light,” “flames of fire,” or “splendor,” which are conspicuous in the description of the heavenly world, ultimately refer to astral bodies. He argues that the fact that the number seven plays an important role in the representation of the angels (see here principally Songs 6, 7, and 8) would also support the idea of a cosmological relation of this kind, and that this structure based on the number seven could be interpreted as referring to planetary angels. Also notable in this context is the statement that the “spirits of living [g]odlike beings” move continuously with the glory of [the] chariots, and the mention that they “return on their paths”44 (4Q405 20ii 11–12). According to von Stuckrad, this terminology is also found in relevant Babylonian texts, where the reference is to the movements of the stars. The conclusions he draws from these observations are then briefly outlined in a few sentences: we can assume a relation of correspondence between earthly and heavenly worship, and that the priests are therefore bound into a process involving the whole of the cosmos, so that it was possible “to bring the temple liturgy into harmony with the entire cosmos, which 43

See Ego, “Gottesdienst der Engel.” Attention has already been drawn to the traditional and historical connections between the relevant psalms and the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice by Anna M. Schwemer, “Gott als König und seine Königsherrschaft in den Sabbatliedern von Qumran,” in Königsherrschaft Gottes und himmlischer Kult im Judentum, Urchristentum und in der hellenistischen Welt, ed. Martin Hengel and Anna M. Schwemer, WUNT 55 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991), 58–64. 44 Translation according to Carol Newsom; see Donald W. Parry and Emanuel Tov, eds., Poetic and Liturgical Texts, vol. 5 of The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader (Leiden: Brill, 2005).

76

Ego

itself resonates with the holiness and perfection of the divine.”45 But whereas in most instances in the Bible, the earthly world is integrated into the singing of praise, in the Sabbath Songs we find a clearly discernible focus on the heavenly world. This observation is relevant to our consideration of the thesis that the Sabbath Songs indicate a community of worship between angels and human beings. In the introduction to her edition of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, Carol Newsom has suggested an interpretation of the texts along these lines, and she has since then frequently been repeated in different variations.46 This is not the occasion to recount the whole history of research47—my own view is that where the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice are concerned, the idea of a community with the angels of this kind should be approached critically. It is clear, in fact, that the Sabbath Songs stand at a considerable distance from the concept of a communion with the angels, precisely because the Songs emphasize the disparity between the heavenly and the earthly. In the second Sabbath Song (4Q400 2 6–7), we find the rhetorical question: (6) How shall we be considered [among] them [i.e., the godlike beings in the heavenly dwelling]? And how shall our priesthood (be considered) in their dwellings? [What] is the offering of our tongues of dust (compared) with the knowledge of the g[ods? …].48 The Sabbath Songs seem therefore to insist on the transience of the condition humaine, and against this backdrop they draw a clear dividing line between the heavenly and the earthly.49 They do not express thoughts of a community 45

See Kocku von Stuckrad, Das Ringen um die Astrologie: Jüdische und christliche Beiträge zum antiken Zeitverständnis, RVV 49 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2000), 169–80. A cosmological interpretation of the Sabbath Songs has also recently been put forward in an article by Christian Stettler, “Astronomische Vorstellungen in den Sabbatopferliedern,” in Gottesdienst und Engel im antiken Judentum und frühen Christentum, ed. Jörg Frey and Michael R. Jost, WUNT 2/446 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017), 99–118. 46 See n. 4 above. 47 See Ego, “‘Le Temple Imaginaire,’” 59–62. 48 Quoted according to the translation of Newsom, Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition. 49 On the distinction between angels and human beings in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, see Esther G. Chazon, “Human and Angelic Prayer in Light of the Scrolls,” in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls; Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 19–23 January, 2000, ed. Esther G. Chazon, Ruth Clements, and Avital Pinnick,

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

77

of worship of the heavenly and earthly worlds, but rather an idea of a community of worship of all the heavenly powers, including the heavenly temple and its inventory. The power and glory of the ruler of heaven are thus placed commandingly in the foreground, and if we are to say what the meaning of these songs is, we must first and foremost stress the intention of praising God. But here, too, the earthly congregation enters into a particular space of resonance that joins together the members of the group reciting these words. In singing and handing down these songs to the future, the earthly community is also expressing the idea that they have access to a particular wisdom and knowledge concerning the secrets of the heavenly world, and articulating their understanding of themselves as a group possessing special knowledge. The Hodayot go one step further. As Angela Kim Harkins has impressively and convincingly argued in her study Reading with an “I” to the Heavens, the idea of heavenly worship can be understood here precisely as a leitmotif. Through their recitation of the songs and prayers, the community enters into the heavenly world to speak the praise of God there together with the angels. The entry into heaven is therefore the goal of the recitation of the songs, one which is attained in a neuropsychological sense through a process of “progressive spatialization.”50 Here we can say, as is unequivocal in 1QH XI, 22, that those at prayer “enter together [or in the Yaḥad] with the congregation sons of heaven.” And 1QH XXIII, 2i 10, one of the final passages of the cycle, has the phrase in order “to unite with the sons of heaven.”51 In this the Hodayot differ quite clearly from the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, which explicitly reject any such communion with heavenly beings. But the striking difference to the biblical Psalms is not only that the motif of a community of worship is explicitly named here, but more importantly that communion with the angels is the goal of a long journey and goes hand in hand with a transformation of the self. Angela Kim Harkins has stressed the role of the emotions in this, specifically the way in which a new human being is as it were created, through “the arousal of fear.” “Psychological aspects of horror” play a leading role in this, and these

50

51

STDJ 48 (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 35–47; see also Beate Ego, “Denkbilder für Gottes Einzigkeit, Herrlichkeit und Richtermacht: Himmelsvorstellungen im antiken Judentum,” in Der Himmel, ed. Dorothea Sattler and Samuel Vollenweider, JBTh 20 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2005), 151–88. Angela Kim Harkins, Reading with an “I” to the Heavens: Looking at the Qumran Hodayot through the Lens of Visionary Traditions, Ekstasis 3 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2012). On the subject of the “formation of the self” in the Hodayot, see also the study by Carol Newsom, The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran, STDJ 52 (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 191–286. See especially Harkins, Reading, 247–65. Texts quoted according to the translation of M. Wise, M. Abegg, and E. Cook; see Parry and Tov, Poetic and Liturgical Texts.

78

Ego

texts describe spaces containing a “religious geography of punishment” (1QH X, 22–32; 1QH XI, 6–19 + 20–37; 1QH XII, 6–XIII, 6; 1QH XIII, 7–21), and refer to a threat from attacks by enemies.52 The motif of enemies also makes clear that a particular group is explicitly defining itself here in opposition to another group, and separating itself off from them. But beyond this there are other aspects to consider. Just as significant for the understanding of the motif of heavenly worship is its connection with the so-called Niedrigkeitsdoxologien. “In the places where the Niedrigkeitsdoxo­ logien are especially pronounced, in IX, 20–37; XII, 6–XIII, 6; and XVI, 5–XVII, 36 they follow immediately after reports of heavenly ascent and communion with the angels.”53 These Niedrigkeitsdoxologien attest to the person at prayer’s awareness of their distance from the heavenly world, and their sense of being overpowered by the experience of heavenly reality.54 Moreover, we should also look at the motif in which the person at prayer asks for forgiveness of his sins, and perceives that he has already been instructed by God in the miraculous mysteries. One of the key instances of this is in the Hodayot, 1QH XI, 21–23 (1QH III, 21–23 in the old numbering), where it is said to God: “The perverse spirit You have cleansed from great transgression, that he might take his stand with the host of the holy ones.” According to 1QH XII, 27 the person at prayer can say: “But by me You have illuminated the face of many … and have strengthened them uncountable times. For you have given me the understanding of the mysteries of Your wonders, and in Your wondrous council you have confirmed me.”55 It is the task of both of these elements, the motif of forgiveness of sins and the motif of instruction, to overcome the ontological distance between the lowly human being and the fullness of power of the heavenly world, and in doing so these elements also play a decisive role in the process of the “formation of a new self.”

52 53 54 55

Harkins, Reading, 130–52. Harkins, Reading, 129, listing further literature. On the Niedrigkeitsdoxologien, see the important study by Hermann Lichtenberger, Studien zum Menschenbild in den Texten der Qumrangemeinde, SUNT 15 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980), 73–93. Harkins, Reading, 256–57. For further passages in the Hodayot relating to the instruction of human beings, see Beate Ego, “Zwischen Gabe und Aufgabe: Theologische Implikationen des Lernens in der alttestamentliche und antik-jüdischen Überlieferung,” in Religiöses Lernen in der bibli­schen, frühjüdischen und frühchristlichen Überlieferung, ed. Beate Ego und Helmut Merkel, WUNT 180 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 15–22.

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

4

79

Conclusion

As I have shown, the motif of the heavenly praise is embedded in a complex context of Traditionsgeschichte. A reading of the biblical Psalms together with the texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls makes clear that the idea of a community of worship is already present in the Hebrew Bible and that this concept is continued theologically in the later texts, in that they articulate the difference between the heavenly and earthly worlds in different ways. Although the theme of the sinful human being and of human lowliness is expressed in Psalm 103, it is not placed here in an explicit relation to heavenly praise. It is true that the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice emphasize human distance from worship in heaven, but they nevertheless set out detailed knowledge of events in the heavenly world, and thereby present those who recite them as possessing knowledge of the divine secrets. Finally, the Hodayot show a way to a “formation of the self” that explicitly unites human beings and angels in the singing of divine praise, and it is God’s forgiveness and guidance that make this way a possibility. Bibliography Bietenhard, Hans. Die himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum. WUNT 2. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1951. Brettler, Marc Zvi. “Those Who Pray Together Stay Together: The Role of Late Psalms in Creating Identity.” Pages 277–304 in Functions of Psalms and Prayers in the Late Second Temple Period. Edited by Mika S. Pajunen and Jeremy Penner. BZAW 486. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017. Chazon, Esther G. “Human and Angelic Prayer in Light of the Scrolls.” Pages 35–47 in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls; Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, 19–23 January, 2000. Edited by Esther G. Chazon, Ruth Clements, and Avital Pinnick. STDJ 48. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Crüsemann, Frank, Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus und Danklied in Israel. WMANT 32. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1969. Ego, Beate. “Denkbilder für Gottes Einzigkeit, Herrlichkeit und Richtermacht: Himmels­vor­stellungen im antiken Judentum.” Pages 151–88 in Der Himmel. Edited by Dorothea Sattler and Samuel Vollenweider. JBTh 20. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neu�� kirchener Verlag, 2005. Ego, Beate. “Der Gottesdienst der Engel: Von den biblischen Psalmen zur jüdischen Mystik: Traditionskritische Überlegungen zu den Sabbatopferliedern von Qumran.” TLZ 140 (2015): 886–901.

80

Ego

Ego, Beate. “Der Lobpreis der himmlischen Wesen: Zur Traditionsgeschichte und Funktion eines biblischen Motivs.” Pages 25–48 in Gottesdienst und Engel im antiken Judentum und frühen Christentum. Edited by Jörg Frey and Michael R. Jost. WUNT 2/446. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017. Ego, Beate. “‘Le Temple Imaginaire’: Himmlischer und irdischer Kultus im antiken Judentum am Beispiel der Sabbatopferlieder.” VF 56 (2011): 58–62. Ego, Beate. “Zwischen Gabe und Aufgabe: Theologische Implikationen des Lernens in der alttestamentlichen und antik-jüdischen Überlieferung.” Pages 1–26 in Religiöses Lernen in der biblischen, frühjüdischen und frühchristlichen Überlieferung. Edited by Beate Ego and Helmut Merkel. WUNT 180. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005. Etzelmüller, Gregor. “Die Engel, die Toten und wir: Einige Überlegungen zur gottes­ dienstlichen Gemeinschaft und zur Verschränkung der Zeiten im Gottesdienst.” PBl 142 (2002): 130–35. Fiß, Ann-Cathrin. “Lobe den Herrn, meine Seele!”: Psalm 103 in seinen Kontexten. WMANT 156. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2019. Geertz, Clifford. “Religion as a Cultural System.” Pages 1–46 in Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion. Edited by Michael Banton. London: Tavistock, 1966. Gerstenberger, Erhard S. “Psalmen und Ritualpraxis.” Pages 73–90 in Ritual und Poesie: Formen und Orte religiöser Dichtung im Alten Orient, im Judentum und im Christentum. HBS 36. Edited by Erich Zenger. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2003. Ginsberg, Harold L. “A Phoenician Hymn in the Psalter.” Pages 472–76 in Atti del XIX Congresso Internazionale degli Orientalisti: Roma, 23–29 settembre 1935. Rome: Tipografia del Senato, 1935. Grund-Wittenberg, Alexandra. Die Himmel erzählen die Herrlichkeit Gottes: Psalm 19 im Kontext nachexilischer Toraweisheit. WMANT 103. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2004. Harkins, Angela Kim. Reading with an “I” to the Heavens: Looking at the Qumran Hodayot through the Lens of Visionary Traditions. Ekstasis 3. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2012. Hartenstein, Friedhelm. Die Unzugänglichkeit Gottes im Heiligtum: Jesaja 6 und der Wohnort JHWHs in der Jerusalemer Kulttradition. WMANT 75. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1997. Houtman, Cornelis. Der Himmel im Alten Testament: Israels Weltbild und Weltanschauung. OtSt 30. Leiden: Brill, 1993. Jeremias, Jörg. Das Königtum Gottes in den Psalmen: Israels Begegnung mit dem kanaanäischen Mythos in den Jahwe-Königs-Psalmen. FRLANT 141. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1987. Koch, Klaus. Daniel: 1. Teilband; Dan 1–4. BKAT 22/1. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2005. Kraus, Hans-Joachim. Psalmen 60–150. BKAT 15/2. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1989.

The Motif of the Heavenly Cult

81

Kuhn, Heinz-Wolfgang. Enderwartung und gegenwärtiges Heil: Untersuchungen zu den Gemeindeliedern von Qumran mit einem Anhang über Eschatologie und Gegenwart in der Verkündigung Jesu. SNTSU 4. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966. Lichtenberger, Hermann. Studien zum Menschenbild in den Texten der Qumrangemeinde. SUNT 15. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980. Mach, Michael. Entwicklungsstadien des jüdischen Engelglaubens in vorrabbinischer Zeit. TSAJ 34. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992. Mullen, E. Theodore. The Assembly of the Gods: The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature. HSM 24. Chico: Scholars Press, 1980. Müller, Reinhard. Jahwe als Wettergott: Studien zur althebräischen Kultlyrik anhand ausgewählter Psalmen. BZAW 387. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008. Müller, Reinhard. “Psalmen (AT).” In Das wissenschaftliche Bibellexikon im Internet (Wibilex). Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft. https://www.bibelwissenschaft.de/wibilex /das-bibellexikon/lexikon/sachwort/anzeigen/details/psalmen-at/ch/a939c011d1e80 ab8b2dc5a88c6efa035/. Neef, Heinz-Dieter. Gottes himmlischer Thronrat: Hintergrund und Bedeutung von sôd JHWH im Alten Testament. AzTh 79. Stuttgart: Calwer, 1994. Neumann, Friederike. Schriftgelehrte Hymnen. BZAW 491. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016. Newsom, Carol. The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran. STDJ 52. Leiden: Brill, 2018. Newsom, Carol. “Songs of Sabbath Sacrifice.” EDEJ, 1246–48. Newsom, Carol. Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: A Critical Edition. HSS 27. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985. Parry, Donald W., and Emmanuel Tov, eds. Poetic and Liturgical Texts. Vol. 5 of The Dead Sea Scrolls Reader. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Ruppert, Lothar. “Aufforderung an die Schöpfung zum Lob Gottes: Zur Literatur-, Form-, und Traditionskritik von Psalm 148.” Pages 275–96 in Freude an der Weisung des Herrn: Beiträge zur Theologie der Psalmen. Edited by Ernst Haag and FrankLothar Hossfeld. SBB 13. Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1986. Schuller, Eileen. “Hodayot.” EDEJ, 747–49. Schulz, Walter. Metaphysik des Schwebens: Untersuchungen zu einer Geschichte der Ästhetik. Pfullingen: Neske, 1985. Schwemer, Anna M. “Gott als König und seine Königsherrschaft in den Sabbatliedern von Qumran.” Pages 45–118 in Königsherrschaft Gottes und himmlischer Kult im Judentum, Urchristentum und in der hellenistischen Welt. Edited by Martin Hengel and Anna M. Schwemer. WUNT 55. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991. Spieckermann, Hermann. Heilsgegenwart: Eine Theologie der Psalmen. FRLANT 148. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989. Stettler, Christian. “Astronomische Vorstellungen in den Sabbatopferliedern.” Pages 99–118 in Gottesdienst und Engel im antiken Judentum und frühen Christentum. Edited by Jörg Frey and Michael R. Jost. WUNT 2/446. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2017.

82

Ego

Stuckrad, Kocku von. Das Ringen um die Astrologie: Jüdische und christliche Beiträge zum antiken Zeitverständnis. RVV 49. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2000. Tóth, Franz. Der himmlische Kult: Wirklichkeitskonstruktion und Sinnbildung in der Johannesoffenbarung. ABG 22. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2006. Wagner, Andreas. Beten und Bekennen: Über Psalmen. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2008. Wagner, Andreas, with Johannes F. Diehl, and Anja A. Diesel. “Von der Grammatik zum Kerygma: Neue grammatische Erkenntnisse und ihre Bedeutung für das Verständnis der Form und des Gehalts von Ps XXIX.” Pages 148–71 in Wagner, Beten und Bekennen: Über Psalmen. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2008. Welker, Michael. “Über Gottes Engel: Systematisch-theologische Überlegungen im Anschluß an C. Westermann und H. Gese.” Pages 194–209 in Der eine Gott der beiden Testamente. Edited by Yehoshua Amir, Ingo Baldermann and Bernd Janowski. JBTh 2. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1987. White, Ellen. Yahweh’s Council: Its Structure and Membership. FAT 2/65. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106: Experiencing and Remembering the Past Angela Kim Harkins Psalm 106 is grouped with the so-called historical psalms, an identification that goes back to Hermann Gunkel’s 1933 study of Psalms, but which has never been a clearly identified category of psalms.1 This paper examines the role that emotional and spatial details about foundational events play in how the survey of Israel’s past in Psalm 106 may have been experienced by flesh-andblood readers in a ritual context. While many studies of the so-called historical psalms speak about the specific events detailed in the psalms—that is to say, what the psalms describe—or even when this psalm may have likely been written—that is to say, who authored or edited the psalm—this essay seeks to examine the ways in which we might imagine how these foundational narratives were experienced by flesh-and-blood readers. Using integrative approaches associated with cognitive literary studies, specifically ecocriticism, our discussion will focus especially on Psalm 106 and how emerging approaches can assist modern scholars in imagining how this psalm might have been imaginatively visualized and emotionally reexperienced in ritual contexts.

1 Psalms 78, and the two related psalms, 105 and 106, were identified as “legends” in Hermann Gunkel and Joachim Begrich’s study of forms, but they were not thought to constitute a distinct formal category; see Einleitung in die Psalmen: Die Gattungen der religiösen Lyrik Israels (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 324. Since Gunkel’s study, various psalms have been identified as “historical psalms” with lists ranging from Pss 78, 105, 106, 135, and 136; see Judith Gärtner, Die Geschichtspsalmen: Eine Studie zu den Psalmen 78, 105, 106, 135 und 136 als hermeneutische Schlüsseltexte im Psalter, FAT 84 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012); Gärtner, “The Historical Psalms: A Study of Psalms 78; 105; 106; 135, and 136 as Key Hermeneutical Texts in the Psalter,” HeBAI 4 (2015): 373–99; to lists that are far more inclusive (viz., Pss 78, 81, 95, 105–106, 114, 135–136); see Sophie Ramond, Les leçons et les énigmes du passé: Une exégèse intra-biblique des psaumes historique, BZAW 459 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2014); Ramond, “The Growth of the Scriptural Corpus by Successive Rewritings: The Case of the So-Called ‘Historical Psalms,’” HeBAI 4 (2015): 427–49; and Anja Klein, Geschichte und Gebet: Die Rezeption der biblischen Geschichte in den Psalmen des Alten Testaments, FAT 94 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014); Klein, “Praying Biblical History: The Phenomenon of History in the Psalms,” HeBAI 4 (2015): 400–426.

© Angela Kim Harkins, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_006

84 1

Harkins

How Will We Approach the Spaces in Psalm 106?

In Jonathan Z. Smith’s work To Take Place (1987), he famously noted that “ritual is, first and foremost, a mode of paying attention.” He goes on to say that place is that which “directs the attention.”2 How spaces achieve this effect on an individual’s experiencing of religion is the very question that Luther Martin sought to investigate in his study of cognition and experience.3 Martin’s essay marks a fruitful beginning to a way of thinking about how religious descriptions of space reflect in part the fundamental structures and cognitive processes of the human brain, influenced by both “mental representations” and cultural specificity.4 These neurological studies of the brain and its cognitive processes of spatial reasoning and experiencing show that descriptions of otherworldly spaces and places optimize features of the environment that are fitting to cultural and historical periods. For example, comparative studies of otherworldly spaces like paradise note a similarity between the way these spaces optimize features in the landscape. A wide range of cultures and peoples preserves some representation of paradise as an otherworldly space that expresses idealized and advantageous features from that culture’s geographical region, that is, safe spaces that are heavily resourced. At the same time, these environments include counterintuitive elements like divine inhabitants, talking animals, lack of conflict, disease, or perishability to remind readers that this is not the ordinary world.5 Jani Närhi argues well that these similarities, which persist across a wide range of religious traditions, show how speculative spaces, like 2 J. Z. Smith, To Take Place: Toward Theory in Ritual (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 103. 3 Luther H. Martin, “Do Rituals Do? And How Do They Do It? Cognition and the Study of Ritual,” in Introducing Religion: Essays in Honor of Jonathan Z. Smith, ed. Willi Braun and Russell T. McCutcheon (London: Equinox, 2008), 312. 4 Martin, “Do Rituals Do?,” 313–14: Martin refers to various studies by Eric R. Kandel (In Search of Memory [New York: Norton, 2006]) that identify certain pyramidal cells in the hippocampus that are activated when the subject moves from place to place. Certain regions in the brain, like the hippocampus or the related area known as the postsubiculum, may be responsible for governing various spatial processes and experiences like navigation and cognitive mapping, see Joseph LeDoux, Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are (New York: Penguin, 2002), 113. 5 On the counterintuitiveness of religious concepts, see Pascal Boyer, The Naturalness of Religious Ideas: A Cognitive Theory of Religion (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994); Boyer, Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought (New York: Basic Books, 2001); and Pascal Boyer and Charles Ramble, “Cognitive Templates for Religious Concepts: Cross-Cultural Evidence for Recall of Counter-intuitive representations,” CognSci 25 (2001): 535–64. Also, Ilkka Pyysiäinen, Marjaana Lindeman, and Timo Honkela, “Counterintuitiveness as the Hallmark of Religiosity,” Religion 33 (2003): 341–55.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

85

otherworldly paradise, are conceptually framed by lived experiences.6 In other words, everyday experiences of the environment help to predispose us to conceptualize what is considered desirable in otherworldly spaces and constrain what would otherwise be limitless possibilities about how we might imagine otherworldly spaces. Cognitive literary criticism brings together insights from the cognitive sciences and applies them to the reading of texts in ways that can be illuminating for scholars of the Psalms. Descriptions of literarily constructed spaces reflect aspects of lived experiences within actual spaces, such as how a person might be said to be orientated phenomenally within a specific space or how characters in texts interact with the environment, both emotionally and kinesthetically. Also, how readers might be asked to pay attention to how a narrative describes changes in the terrain; when and where landmarks appear to mark how far progress has been made on a journey. These are useful for thinking about Psalm 106 because they remind biblical scholars how texts might be imagined by flesh-and-blood readers. In foundational narratives in which spaces and the environment figure prominently, like creation stories or the wilderness sojourn, such details serve a pedagogical purpose to draw a reader deeply into the story of Israel, both emotionally and kinesthetically. Smith’s study of ritual was firstly concerned to examine how religious texts are experienced in different spatial contexts.7 His point was to say that ritual texts become sacred when they are performed in certain sacred places because the physicality of the context for the ritual can heighten and inform participants’ responses to the text. This discussion of Psalm 106, however, is slightly different in that it seeks to integrate how imagined religious spaces are conceptualized cognitively. What can we say about how flesh-and-blood readers imagine and experience the spaces described in the literary worlds constructed by a text like Psalm 106? How do readers perceive spaces in literarily constructed terrains generally, and based on what we know about cognitive processes for reading, how can we then extrapolate something about the ritual experience of this psalm? While commentaries discuss the internal literary tensions of various parts of this psalm, this discussion is concerned with the final form of the text.8 6 Jani Närhi (“Beautiful Reflections: The Cognitive and Evolutionary Foundations of Paradise Representations,” MTSR 20 [2008]: 360) writes, “Paradise representations represent modified versions of desirable natural entities within the boundaries of the properties of the experienced world and the cognitive functioning.” 7 Smith, To Take Place, 103. 8 Commentaries often note how this psalm contains diverging theological perspectives. Our study of the spatial imagery in Psalm 106 will be synchronic and inclusive. For a survey of

86

Harkins

Psalm 106 lies at a “seam” between the fourth and the fifth books of the Psalter—sections that are thought to have taken their present form relatively late.9 As the last psalm in book 4 of the psalter, verse 48 of that psalm has long been understood as the doxological closing of that collection as we know it from the Masoretic Text, functioning to delimit smaller units within the Psalter as a whole (see Pss 41:13; 72:18–20; 89:52). A late dating for Psalm 106 is suggested when we consider its appearance in other Second Temple literary contexts. Psalm 106, along with at least two other psalms from book 4, are presented within a ritual described in 1 Chronicles 16 in which the Levites lead a celebratory praise of God in a liturgical performance of a psalm that is attributed to David (1 Chr 16:7–36). The overlapping section that is found in both 1 Chr 16:34–36 and Psalm 106 is the petition and closing doxology (Ps 106:47–48). Psalm 106 makes several spatial references in its retelling of Israel’s story: Egypt (Ps 106:7, 21), the Yam-Suph (vv. 7, 9, 22), the abyss (v. 9), the desert (vv. 9, 14, 26), the camp (v. 16), land (vv. 17, 38), Horeb (v. 19), land of Ham (v. 22), “pleasant land” (v. 24), “the lands,” as in the nations (v. 27), Peor (v. 28), the waters of Meribah (v. 32), Canaan (v. 38). Each of these references somehow articulates the tragic failings of Israel and God’s fantastic and faithful acts of the form-critical analysis, see the summary in Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, A Commentary on Psalms 101–150, vol. 3 of Psalms, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011), 82–84. We follow Gerstenberger and others who situate Psalm 106 in a postexilic milieu; Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms and Lamentations, vol. 2 of Psalms, FOTL 15 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 244. Perhaps the complicated form-critical features of this psalm could be accounted for by Second Temple compositional techniques, which favored the reuse and recasting of scriptural passages in new prayers; see Judith H. Newman, Praying by the Book: The Scripturalization of Prayer in Second Temple Judaism, EJL 14 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999); James L. Kugel, ed., Prayers that Cite Scripture (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006). While Psalm 106 displays compositional strategies that are typical for Second Temple prayers, there is no clear-cut evidence of Psalm 106 among the Psalms manuscripts at Qumran, and it is not clearly attested among the supposed citations of it in 4Q380 frg. 1 I, 7–11 according to George J. Brooke, “Psalms 105 and 106 at Qumran,” RevQ 14, no. 2 (1989): 267–92. Further discussion of the Second Temple dating of this psalm may be found in n. 15 below and in section 4 of this essay. 9 The final shaping of the one hundred fifty psalms that we encounter today in the MT psalter is a cumulative process that has taken place over a long period of time. Several theories have been set forth about the redaction of the final form of the MT psalter. Some key studies in this discussion: James A. Sanders, The Psalms Scroll of Qumrân (11QPsa), DJD IV (Oxford: Clarendon, 1965); Sanders, The Dead Sea Psalms Scroll (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1967); Gerald Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, SBLDS (Chico, CA: Society of Biblical Literature, 1985); Peter Flint, The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Book of Psalms, STDJ 17 (Leiden: Brill, 1997); Eva Mroczek, The Literary Imagination in Jewish Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016).

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

87

deliverance within a paradigmatic past. These concrete spatial details appeal to our own lived experiences of how we interact with space and our environment, and our own natural proclivities to pay attention to signposts and landmarks. By engaging a text imaginatively, readers may also participate in various cognitive processes of navigation, map-making, and “wayfinding.”10 These predispositions to become attentive to place references in literary narratives reflect at some evolutionary level our flesh-and-blood tendency as sojourners to pay careful attention when in a new terrain so that we can retrace our steps and find our way back home. Such approaches recognize how powerfully spaces, even those that can be visited only in texts, appeal to the sensibilities of the people and the experiences that are associated with them. The specific references to key spaces stimulating cognitive processes allow a reader’s concrete visualization of the landscape to take on an egocentric vividness and thus could be said to play a pedagogical role in heightening the imaginative remembering of foundational narratives. A consideration of these cognitive processes may help scholars appreciate how Psalm 106’s referencing of spaces could be an especially strategic way of experiencing this text in a ritual context. This study is especially interested in considering how spaces are conceptualized dynamically, as more than just an imagined setting for foundational events. We will examine how the spaces associated with Israel’s wilderness period go from being two-dimensional backgrounds to becoming threedimensional landscapes into which later readers could hope to traverse. To do this, we will consider multiple elements of Psalm 106 as strategic details that assist in the achievement of vividness and immersive experiencing for a reader: (1) the presentation of those figures whom one would likely encounter in these spaces and (2) the use of concrete kinesthetic language about the body. Named heroes from Israel’s past, the bodiless God, and the environment itself are all embodied with vivid kinesthetic language, thus allowing the past to take on qualities of solidity and depth in the imagination. Cognitive literary approaches such as ecocriticism link dynamic, embodied aspects of imagining literary spaces to the ways in which that text resembles our own lived experiences in relation to our environments. Our own memories about spaces are often not simply of the buildings or the furniture, but rather are textured by the emotional memories of the people and events that took place there and our own recollections of the sensory perceptions had in that 10

Nancy Easterlin, A Biocultural Approach to Literary Theory and Interpretation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012); Easterlin, “Cognitive Ecocriticism: Human Wayfinding, Sociality, and Literary Interpretation,” in Introduction to Cognitive Cultural Studies, ed. Lisa Zunshine (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010), 257–74.

88

Harkins

space. Approaches like ecocriticism draw our attention to how spaces in texts are more than just two-dimensional backgrounds for narrated events by asking us to notice how literary descriptions of spaces reflect aspects of our own lived experiences.11 In the case of the wilderness space in Psalm 106 and the lengthy confession of sins that is detailed in verses 7–39, a reader is expected to respond emotionally to this psalm, to take on the emotional dispositions of an Israel who has failed (v. 6) by hearing these stories of wilderness wanderings. Cognitive approaches speak to how a text like Psalm 106 might describe space and the foundational events that transpire therein in a manner such that actual flesh-and-blood readers might also participate in the experiencing of foundational moments—a key consideration for ritual experiences that seek to achieve an experience of simultaneity between the past and the present moment. The emotion-laden descriptions of these foundational spaces serve a strategic role in generating a lasting experience of pivotal events for a ritual participant, one that could be described as an experience of simultaneity between the past and the present moment, and another that could be understood as providing access to a palpable sense of God’s presence for later readers. 2

People and Places: The Arousing Responses to the Spaces in Psalm 106

Nancy Easterlin writes that “locations realize their significance in the presence of persons, just as persons develop their significance in concrete and specific locations.”12 References to spaces in Psalm 106 are highly personalized and vividly express the emotional events that took place there. The psalm’s frequent reference to named figures, both good (Moses, Aaron, Phinehas) and bad (Dathan and Abiram) assists in the remembering process. For readers and hearers who are familiar with the foundational stories in which these figures make their appearance, the emotions associated with those dramatic events lend vividness to the wilderness places. Significantly, the verses that introduce the retelling of Israel’s wilderness experiences at Ps 106:6 explicitly enscript the emotions of guilty Israel within the reader through the first common plural voice: “We have sinned with our ancestors; we have done iniquity; we have

11 Yi-Fu Tuan, Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1977), 157; Easterlin, “Cognitive Ecocriticism,” 259–61. 12 Easterlin, Biocultural Approach, 110.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

89

been wicked” (v. 6).13 This rhetorical move highlights the intended effect of the psalm’s aim to bring the present reader to an experience of simultaneity with ancient Israel through the retelling of the events of the wilderness journey. Explicit reference to named individuals from Israel’s history occur with some frequency: Moses (vv. 16, 23, 32), Aaron (v. 16), Dathan, Abiram (v. 17), and Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron (v. 30). It is worth mentioning that book 4 of the Psalter is notable for its significant concentration of references to the figure of Moses. Three of these eight citations of the name Moses appear in this psalm: Pss 77:20; 90:1; 99:6; 103:7; 105:26; 106:16; 106:23; 106:32.14 The psalm retells the stories of Israel’s failings through a series of vignettes in which key figures guide a reader through various moments in Israel’s wilderness journey story, beginning with the fantastic events in Egypt and the crossing of the Yam-Suph in verses 7–11. The psalmist makes a notable choice to use a rare expression for Egypt, the “land of Ham” (‫ ) ֶא ֶרץ ָחם‬in verse 22. This move to give a personalized name to the foreign land by invoking one of Noah’s sons is also deployed in the closely related Psalm 105 at verses 23 and 27 (cf. Ps 78:51: the “tents of Ham”).15 What effect is gained by using certain uncommon expressions for spaces in Psalm 106? Is there a difference to speaking about the “land of Ham” (v. 22) instead of Egypt? Or “desert” ‫( יְ ִׁשימֹון‬v. 14) instead of “wilderness” ‫( ִמ ְד ָּבר‬vv. 9, 13 Translations are my own unless noted otherwise. 14 Robert E. Wallace argues that book 4 should be considered primarily through this Mosaic emphasis; Wallace, The Narrative Effect of Book IV of the Hebrew Psalter (New York: Lang, 2007), 93–94. 15 It may be worth noting that outside of the primordial history in the book of Genesis, references to Ham occur only in the Second Temple book of 1 Chronicles (1 Chr 1:4, 8; 4:40). The Chronicler’s reuse of the concluding verses of Ps 106:47–48 in a psalm attributed to David (1 Chr 16:7–36) is well known, but very little has been done on the psalm in 1 Chr 16:8–36. Recent discussions of this text are part of the increased interest in Second Temple prayers that has characterized the past thirty years. See Andrew E. Hill, “Patchwork Poetry of Reasoned Verse? Connective Structure in 1 Chronicles XVI,” VT 33, no. 1 (1983): 97–101; Harm van Grol, “1 Chronicles 16: The Chronicler’s Psalm and Its View of History,” in Rewriting Biblical History: Essays on Chronicles and Ben Sira in Honor of Pancratius C. Beentjes, ed. Jeremy Corley and Harm van Grol (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011), 97–121; L. C. Jonker, “The Chronicler Singing Psalms: Revisiting the Chronicler’s Psalm in 1 Chronicles 16,” in ‘My Spirit at Rest in the North Country’ (Zechariah 6:8): Collected Communications to the XXth Congress of the IOSOT, Helsinki 2010 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2011), 115–30; K. Nielsen, “Whose Song of Praise: Reflections on the Purpose of the Psalm in 1 Chronicles 16,” in The Chronicler as Author: Studies in Text and Texture, ed. M. Patrick Graham and Steven L. McKenzie (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), 327–36.

90

Harkins

14, 26)? The choices used in describing spaces suggests, at the very least, that the psalmist seeks to construct a more complex understanding of these places. These space references also serve as landmarks for Israel’s experiences, along with the memorable people and the events that take place in those spaces. The psalmist’s particular retelling of history succeeds in deepening the emotional response that a reader or hearer might have to these foundational narratives by scaffolding memories of prior texts and figures from Israel’s past. Spaces become more personal and dynamic by naming the figures who are associated with it and by attributing language about a sensing body to them. Encountering the Personalities of Psalm 106 through the Construction of a Sensing Body A significant space that appears in Psalm 106 is the vast wilderness that is traversed by the Israelites upon leaving Egypt, prior to the entry into the promised land (Ps 106:7–33). Various emotionally charged events from this paradigmatic period are retold in Psalm 106, such as the people’s insatiable cravings for food and their wasting disease (Ps 106:14–15). Shortly after this report, mention is made of Dathan’s and Abiram’s envious resentment against the pair Moses and Aaron (Ps 106:16), and the ill fate of that duo along with their followers (vv. 17–18; cf. Num 16). Horeb and the ignominious golden calf serve as the climactic event of the wilderness space, with the sin of the calf taking center stage in the psalmist’s dramatic retelling, occurring at roughly the midway point of the psalm (Ps 106:19–23). The psalm then turns to the dramatic events that took place at Baal-Peor where Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, demonstrated his zeal for the LORD in a spectacular way, by taking matters into his own hands.16 According to the psalmist, his zealous act “was reckoned to him as an act of righteousness, for all generations eternally” (‫וַ ֵּת ָח ֶׁשב לֹו ִל ְצ ָד ָקה ְלד ֹר‬ ‫ד־עֹולם‬ ָ ‫ ;וָ ד ֹר ַע‬Ps 106:31). The book of Numbers praises Phinehas for having effectively “turned my [i.e., God’s] wrath from Israel” (‫ת־ח ָמ ִתי ֵמ ַעל ְּבנֵ י־יִ ְׂש ָר ֵאל‬ ֲ ‫; ֵה ִׁשיב ֶא‬ Num 25:11). Interestingly, the psalmist has transferred these words of praise from Phinehas to Moses in Ps 106:23: “he [i.e., Moses] turned his [i.e., God’s] wrath” (‫) ְל ָה ִׁשיב ֲח ָמתֹו ֵמ ַה ְׁש ִחית‬. Perhaps this strategic revision is an example of how memories of the past are elastic and allow for a misremembering—we will return to this phenomenon later in this essay. For now, it is worth noting that both Moses and Phinehas are wilderness heroes who take a stand (‫עמד‬, used in v. 23 for Moses and v. 30 for Phinehas) and successfully redirect God’s anger from Israel. 2.1

16

Joseph Blenkinsopp, “The Baal Peor Episode Revisited (Num 25, 1–18),” Bib 93 (2012): 86–97.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

91

Significantly, however, the story of Baal Peor and Phinehas’s zeal is one that valorizes an event that takes place at one of the final stops in the wilderness journey, just prior to the entry into the land (Num 33:49).17 Joseph Blenkinsopp makes the point that the census that occurs shortly after this event at Baal Peor, in the plains of Moab, marks a turning point or a “break between the generations” in the wilderness.18 According to the psalmist, once Israel leaves the wilderness and enters into the land, the crimes get progressively worse. In this later context, readers can remember how heroic individuals like Phinehas have risen in Israel’s past and how heroes could arise in the future, giving significance to the opening verses in Ps 106:3 that extols “the one who does an act of righteousness at all times” (‫ל־עת‬ ֵ ‫)ע ֵֹׂשה ְצ ָד ָקה ְב ָכ‬. The exemplary acts of Moses and Phinehas mirror one another, yet the psalmist closes the wilderness stories with reference to the scene at Meribah, the place where Moses uttered regrettable words that resulted in denying him entry into the promised land (Num 20:1–13; cf. Exod 17:1–7). The figure of Moses, named with some frequency for this psalm, is one who also gains depth as a character, given the events at Meribah. It may be the case that the primary purpose of introducing the story of Meribah at this point is to indict the people for pushing Moses to this breaking point, thus further intensifying the regret that readers of this psalm are intended to feel. It also effectively shows that during times of duress, even Moses departed from his exemplary faithful role. In this way, the characters who figure into the paradigmatic scenes of the wilderness could be said to remind the reader that the vicissitudes of Moses’s life resemble life as lived. This too is an interesting instance of how the memory of the wilderness period is stretched and transformed by the psalmist in a way that departs slightly from the Pentateuchal record. The remainder of the psalm continues through to the settlement of the land, including the period of the monarchy and the various cultic abuses during that time (Ps 106:34–39). The final section (Ps 106:40–46) is strongly Deuteronomistic and reminiscent of the cycle of events from the book of Judges (e.g., Judg 3:9, 15; 4:3; 6:1, 7; 10:10–16; 13:1), with the psalm concluding on a promising note that reiterates God’s unfailing fidelity and loyalty (Ps 106:44–46) and a doxology (Ps 106:47–48, cf. 1 Chr 16:34–36).

17 18

Blenkinsopp, “Baal Peor Episode,” 86. Blenkinsopp, “Baal Peor Episode,” 86; so too, Hos 9:10 notes that Baal Peor is a turning point for Israel, where things become progressively worse.

92

Harkins

2.2 Sensory Language about the Body in Psalm 106 In her study “Body Images in the Psalms,” Susanne Gillmayr-Bucher makes the point that language about the body provides a way for readers to access the experiences that are described by the psalmist.19 In the case of Psalm 106, Israel is characterized by bodily activities that presume the natural extension of the body, specifically those that center around the appetitive activity of the mouth and lips. Not only do these bodily references include the gustatory perceptions of taste—part of the sensory experiences of cultic sacrifice—they also include those of speech, a sensory perception that Yael Avrahami has well argued should be recognized as one of as many as seven ways of conceptualizing the sensing body in the Hebrew Bible.20 In addition to speech, Avrahami argues well for the sense of locomotion, which we will discuss in a later section of this paper. 2.2.1 Sensory Perception in Human Bodies The vividness of the wilderness is achieved, in part, by the use of sensory language that can be mapped onto the body, specifically the organ of the mouth and the multiple experiences that are governed by it, like eating, coughing, hunger, speech (complaining), and singing praise. These kinesthetic sensory details allow the present reader to imagine the scene through the experiential frames of ordinary life, making the scene more vivid. The classic image of the Israelites craving various foods that they delighted to eat in Egypt (Ps 106:14) is contrasted with the coughing affliction popularly known as consumption, a wasting disease that was thought to have been tuberculosis (v. 15). The image of the dull-eyed ox ploddingly moving his maw as he chews slowly on grass (Ps 106:20) brings to mind an image of a mouth that was in constant motion, in the act of grumbling against God in the desert (v. 25).21 So too, the mouths of the Israelites “consumed the sacrifices of the dead” at Baal-Peor (Ps 106:28). Their unfailing rebelliousness is identified as the cause for the hasty words that 19 Susanne Gillmayr-Bucher, “Body Images in the Psalms,” JSOT 28, no. 3 (2004): 301–26. 20 Yael Avrahami’s work has shown well that ancient Israel imagined embodied perceptions differently from most modern Western readers. Instead of the five senses, sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch, which are known classically from Aristotle, ancient Israel conceptualized the body through seven primary sensory experiences: seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, locomotion, and speech; see Yael Avrahami, The Senses of Scripture: Sensory Perception in the Hebrew Bible (Sheffield: T&T Clark, 2012), 5–6. 21 The scene in Ps 106:24–27 is a slight departure from the literary style of the psalm in that it does not retell Israel’s sins through any single named individual. This brief episode retrojects the image of the scattering of the people as a prescient warning that goes back to Israel’s very beginnings in the wilderness—the language that is found here harks back to Ezekiel 20; see the discussion in the later part of this paper.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

93

were then “on the lips” of Moses at Meribah (Ps 106:32–33). It is this mouth that eventually cries out and turns toward God who then hears Israel in verse 44 (cf. Solomon’s penitential prayer at 1 Kgs 8:28). These references to the mouth and the kinesthetic experiences that are associated with the sensing bodies of named individuals in the wilderness trace a journey that begins with the jubilant rescue in the exodus from Egypt, moves through various scenes of rebellion, and ultimately culminates in crying out to God (Ps 106:44). Tracing the movements of the psalm through the referential language around the mouth—the organ of eating, coughing, complaining, speaking, and crying out to God—illustrates how the psalmist’s retelling of Israel’s history could be understood to guide a present reader’s own experience of transformation as he or she reads Psalm 106 from beginning to end. 2.2.2

Sensory Perception of Non-Human Bodies (or, How to Think in a Vivid Way about the Spaces in Psalm 106) Readers can be powerfully moved by details that describe the sea, the wilderness, and the earth, as they are led through those paradigmatic spaces by Israel’s heroes. They are reminded of the fantastic events that took place in those spaces: the crossing of the sea (Ps 106:9–11), the opening of the earth (v. 17), and the flaming fire (v. 18). Emerging approaches associated with cognitive literary studies can help link the dynamic embodied aspects of textualized spaces to embodied enactive processes. Selective use of such approaches such as ecocriticism can help to express how Psalm 106 is able to achieve a kind of vivid presentation of the foundational events in the wilderness. Such descriptions could allow flesh-and-blood readers to access a sensory-rich understanding of the story that is being described. This is one way to imagine how the language in Psalm 106 could contribute to the experiencing of ritual simultaneity between the foundational moment of the wilderness and a flesh-and-blood reader who stands at a much later moment in time. Extraordinary events in the wilderness narrative are depicted with counterintuitive language about the body that vividly expresses sensory perception. These biblical spaces can become more vivid and three-dimensional when they are presented with the kinesthetic language that we otherwise reserve for the body’s experiences.22 While we expect named heroes such as Moses or Phinehas to be depicted with concrete kinesthetic language, applying kinesthetic language to that which lacks a bodily form can effectively achieve the effect of sensory presence. This psalm is not unusual in its language for God; Israel’s God is depicted with agency and with concrete language. Even though God is not thought to 22

Elaine Scarry, Dreaming by the Book (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), 10–30.

94

Harkins

have a physical body, YHWH is able to effect remarkably physical outcomes throughout the story.23 “He rebukes [‫ ]וַ ּיִ גְ ַער‬the sea”—even though God has no physical mouth—and “he leads them” )‫ּיֹול ֵיכם‬ ִ ַ‫)ו‬, even though God has no legs for walking (Ps 106:9). The psalm also describes God as having an extended body: “he raised his hand against them” (Ps 106:26). God can “see” Israel’s distress (Ps 106:44), even though he has no physical eyes, and he can “hear” Israel’s cries, even though he has no ears. God raises his “hand” and resolves to make them fall in the wilderness (Ps 106:26). So, too, he scatters and disperses the Israelites even though he has no arm (Ps 106:27). Spaces like the watery depths and the earth are described with concrete kinesthetic language about the body that apply vivid sensory language in a counterintuitive way by making the environment an active agent in the psalm. The sea is rebuked and effectively retreats (Ps 106:9) and becomes dry (v. 11). The earth opens up to swallow and effectively entomb Dathan, Abiram, and their ilk (Ps 106:17). A raging fire burns hot against the wicked ones (Ps 106:18). When these spaces are depicted with vivid kinesthetic traits, it gives the environment greater solidity and depth. When the otherwise transcendent God is described as having an extended body, God substantially gains in sensory presence. These accounts of the environs and the bodiless deity engaging in kinesthetic activity produce significant effects on the reader by generating a deep engagement precisely because of their fantastic elements. The “otherness” of the spaces that we encounter in religious narratives is often due to their counterintuitive details that remind us that this text is describing a space that is somehow different from our ordinary lived spaces.24 As Laura Feldt has shown in her study of the Exodus narratives, the successive description of miraculous events forces a reader to slow down and ponder more deeply that which is being described.25 In the case of Psalm 106, the mysterious fire that breaks 23

For discussions of YHWH’s body, see Benjamin D. Sommers, The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009). 24 In her cross-cultural study of paradise, familiar and recognizable traits recur with counter-intuitive details that remind readers that these spaces are otherworldly; Närhi, “Beautiful Reflections,” 339–65. On the counterintuitiveness of religions, see Boyer, Religion Explained, 79. Unexpected aspects of religious narrative that are often debated as being miraculous or magical can be generally referenced under this larger category of the counterintuitive; see I. Pyysiäinen, Magic, Miracles, and Religious Belief: A Scientist’s Perspective (Lanham, MD: Altamira, 2004), 81–89. 25 Laura Feldt, “Religious Narrative and the Literary Fantastic: Ambiguity and Uncertainty in Ex. 1–18,” Religion 41, no. 2 (2011): 251–83; Feldt, “Fantastic Re-Collection: Cultural vs. Autobiographical Memory in the Exodus Narrative,” in Religious Narrative, Cognition and Culture: Image and Word in the Mind of Narrative, ed. Armin W. Geertz and Jeppe S. Jensen (London: Equinox, 2011), 191–208. Feldt does well to follow Pyysiäinen by subsuming all

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

95

forth and burns hot against the wicked ones (v. 18) is a vibrant image of the wilderness environment that is not fully explained to the reader—is this YHWH or is it something else?26 The unexpected ways that kinesthetic traits are attached to nonhuman beings in Psalm 106 assist in defamiliarizing the environment and thus cause the reader to slow down, thereby increasing the emotional effects of the retelling.27 3

Enactive Processes: Moving from Text to Experience

Emerging approaches to the phenomenological study of ancient religion are increasingly aware of how scholars have been overly preoccupied with texts and words, with little regard for how the body is engaged in processes of reading or how cognitive processes take place during lived experiences of rituals.28 Considering the embodied aspects of ritual reading and remembering seeks to integrate the mind, body, and culture, thus overcoming the artificial Cartesian dualism that segregates the mind from the body. The embodied responses to an imaginative reading of Psalm 106 is one that is dynamic and achieves a high level of emotional intensity. Spaces in religious texts are more than just two-dimensional settings for an event—they are three-dimensional virtual worlds in which foundational events take place. While we cannot examine easily the cognitive processes that take place during actual ritual experiences, we can study how reading or the imaginative listening to things that are being read can be experienced in the mind at the level of cognitive processes. Literary theorists have long recognized how our attention is especially stimulated by kinesthetic language and descriptions of sensory experiences.29 As fantastic elements as part of the counterintuitiveness of religious narrative, without parsing through the magical or miraculous debates concerning their cause. 26 Deena Grant, “Fire and the Body of Yahweh,” JSOT 40 (2015): 139–61. 27 David S. Miall and Don Kuiken, “Foregrounding, Defamiliarization, and Affect: Response to Literary Stories,” Poetics 22 (1994): 389–407. Images that have more dynamic qualities have a greater chance of eliciting an emotional response from a reader; see Elspeth Jajdelska, Christopher Butler, Steve Kelly, Allan McNeill, and Katie Overy, “Crying, Moving, and Keeping It Whole: What Makes Literary Description Vivid?” Poet. Today 31, no. 3 (2010): 433–63. 28 Armin Geertz, “Global Perspectives on Methodology in the Study of Religion,” MTSR 12 (2000): 49–73, esp. 70–71; also Geertz, “Brain, Body and Culture: A Biocultural Theory of Religion,” MTSR 22 (2010): 304–21. 29 Nancy K. Speer, Jeremy R. Reynolds, Khena M. Swallow, and Jeffrey M. Zacks, “Reading Stories Activates Neural Representations of Visual and Motor Experiences,” Psychol Sci 20, no. 8 (2009): 989–99.

96

Harkins

we learn more about how individuals interact with the space and the effects of kinesthetic language especially, we can appreciate how the psalmist’s choices to describe the environment, namely, the sea, the earth, and the wilderness, with language of the body is thus an effective way of lending greater solidity to those spaces.30 Reading allows for an experiencing of that which is described in the text through sensorimotor processes engaged during enactivism.31 Experiential frames from real-life experiences are used when reading about similar situations to allow for an even greater depth of understanding when reading literary narrative.32 In the case of Psalm 106, kinesthetic language about craving, coughing, chewing, consuming, complaining, and crying out can be imagined from the reader’s own experiential frame and allow a reader to access the experiences of the figures in the psalm. So, too, language about God or the environment can help a reader to perceive these figures more vividly in mental imaging. This kind of imaginative reading is also a generative process whereby a sensory representation of foundational spaces is reproduced in a malleable way in the reader’s mind—the resulting experiential frame can then be updated or changed to accommodate new information from the reader’s own experiences or time. It is these processes that allow for experiences of deep empathy with characters in a narrative or the capacity to be moved to tears when reading. Enactive reading generates experiences of phenomenal presence and relies on literary cues that include spatial descriptions and kinesthetic language about the body. The consideration of the embodied cognitive processes involved in moving from text to experience may illuminate why Second Temple compositional techniques for prayers favored the reuse of older narratives, established literary elements, imagery, vocabulary, and scenarios. The role of Scripture in the composition of new psalms is more than just cloaking the innovative text in the authoritative garb of known scriptural traditions. How a text is told—its literary style, its use of voice, its concrete language, its references to the body and narrative pace; in other words, the way it reuses language and imagery 30 Scarry, Dreaming by the Book. 31 Marco Caracciolo, The Experientiality of Narrative: An Enactivist Approach (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2014). 32 Lawrence W. Barsalou, Aron K. Barbey, W. Kyle Simmons, and Ava Santos, “Embodiment in Religious Knowledge,” J Cogn Cult 5 (2005): 14–57. Speer et al, “Reading Stories,” 989–90; Anežka Kuzmičová, “Literary Narrative and Mental Imagery: A View from Embodied Cognition,” Style 48 (2014): 275–93. Even allowing for the natural variation in sensory experiences that can be expected over any given population, there is the general recognition that sensory and motor faculties of the brain are aroused and active during this kind of reading.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

97

from well-known, highly-charged foundational narratives—seeks to direct a reader’s and hearer’s imagination, resulting in a deeper experience of the teaching that is being imparted. Discussions of ritual experiencing should take into consideration the multisensory effects of enactive reading. What does this process of enactive reading do and how can it illuminate our understanding of the experience of praying psalms in ritual contexts? On the one hand, the reuse of scripturalizing language in the writing of new prayers in the Second Temple period intentionally draws on the emotional impact of the scripturalized narrative past in new compositions and carries it into the present moment. The present is understood through the words of the past, achieving an experience of simultaneity in the ritual moment. On the other hand, it is also the case that the immersive reading of these foundational events about Israel’s failings in the wilderness can generate actual emotional experiences of regret and longing in the ritual participant. The embodiment of performative emotions in prayer can be understood as an imitative process, one in which readers are asked to mirror the experiences in the text. Similar to the ways in which memory works, the process of reconstructing memory is not one of slavish mechanical reproduction, but rather one that allows for the phenomenon of “false memory-making,” a curious process that, interestingly, seems to have an adaptive advantage. Rather than a slavish mechanical reproduction, remembering is a dynamic process in which, surprisingly, misremembering is the desired goal; it is here when adaptive modification and the updating of memories take place. This process of memory construction and reconstruction shows characteristics of elasticity33 and, paradoxically, frees us from determinism by allowing for individualized and diverse responses to ritual experiences. 4

Situating Psalm 106 in Israel’s History

There are compelling reasons to consider Psalm 106 from a Second Temple context. In contrast to H. Neil Richardson’s proposal that the core narrative of Psalm 106 emerged from the historical context of the eighth century BCE, Psalm 106 can be reasonably situated in the Second Temple period.34 A refer33

Joff Lee, “Reconsolidation: Maintaining Memory Relevance,” Trends Neurosci 32 (2009): 413–420. According to Joff Lee, “the capacity for plastic changes in memory strength or content following memory retrieval seems potentially adaptive in terms of maintaining a memory’s relevance in guiding future behavior.” 34 H. Neil Richardson, “Psalm 106: Yahweh’s Succoring Love Saves from the Death of a Broken Covenant,” in Love and Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of Marvin H. Pope, ed. J. H. Marks and R. M. Good (Guilford, CT: Four Quarters, 1987), 191–203, 197; see too

98

Harkins

ence to the exile in Ps 106:26–27 suggests that the event of the exile was already ordained from the very start, in the wilderness period, largely as a consequence of the rebellion that took place there: “Thus he raised his hand against them (and resolved) to make them fall in the wilderness; to make their seed fall among the nations by dispersing them among the lands.” Gili Kugler’s essay notes that this expression, “to raise or lift the hand,” which appears in Ps 106:26, is one that also appears several times in Ezek 20:5, 6, 15, 23.35 The idea that God resolved to scatter the Israelites among the nations on account of their disobedience in the wilderness is similarly articulated in Ezek 20:23: “Also, I raised my hand against them in the desert (and resolved) to scatter them among the nations and to disperse them in the lands.” In her essay, Kugler concludes that the chapter from Ezekiel precedes the thoughts expressed by the psalmist. The later psalm adapts and softens the stronger language found in Ezekiel 20 to resist the overly deterministic theology of that book by allowing for the possibility that crying out to God can somehow influence God in the present day (Ps 106:47; cf. Ps 106:4 and 47 LXX).36 In her conclusion, Kugler notes how key individuals in Israel’s history were able to redirect God’s anger against Israel through their zeal, thus offering Second Temple readers a model to do similarly by enacting the emotions and zeal of the heroic figures who are named in the psalm and by crying out to the LORD. We will return to her salutary analysis in the closing comments of this paper. 5

Conclusion

Consideration of the cognitive process of enactive reading, a kind of imaginative reading in which sensorimotor processes are engaged phenomenologically, can broaden and deepen our understanding of how Second Temple psalms may have been experienced by later readers within ritual contexts. Michael Swartz does well to remind us that the process of reading in ritual contexts is far more complex and physical than most text-based scholars keep in mind: “Indeed, the force of recitation needs to be taken quite seriously as a potent form of ritual behavior and as an example of the actualization of sacred space

35 36

Gili Kugler’s arguments against this dating in her essay, “The Dual Role of Historiography in Psalm 106: Justifying the Present Distress and Demonstrating the Individual’s Potential Contribution,” ZAW 126, no. 4 (2014): 546–53. She argues well that this psalm expresses a view that resists Ezekiel’s highly deterministic theology. Kugler, “Dual Role of Historiography,” 548–49. Kugler, “Dual Role of Historiography,” 550–52.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

99

in time. Memorization, recitation and performance, we must remember, are physical acts, requiring intensive preparation, stamina, and physical prowess.”37 Compositional techniques that imitate Scripture or redeploy scriptural language and biblical forms can be understood to arouse strong emotions within the individuals who read and hear Psalm 106, thereby providing them access to a participatory reexperiencing of foundational events. The literary style and vividness of Psalm 106 offer later readers a way of accessing the events from a long-ago foundational moment in ways that can be engaged readily by a reader’s body (that is, emotionally and with first-hand vividness), and thus reexperienced by different groups through time. In the process, vivid memories can be updated in their details to meet the needs of new circumstances while retaining their emotionally compelling contours.38 The psalmist’s words in Ps 106:44–48 provide scripted emotional experiences for the reader in his/her present circumstances to guide his/her remembering of the history. Thus they become brought into the wilderness drama through the psalm’s retelling of foundational events during the process of ritual reading. Our attention to the body and its embodied experiences reintroduces the individual within a conversation about the psalms that has all too often favored a flat-footed understanding of community/communities in antiquity. Often these references to groups lack complexity or they overdetermine ritual experiences by presuming that the effects of ritual were the same in each and every participant.39 We do well to remember that the ancient reader was not predetermined to conform to the large systematic ritual experiences often 37 Michael D. Swartz, “Ritual about Myth about Ritual: Towards an Understanding of the Avodah in the Rabbinic Period,” JJTP 6 (1997): 153. See too, Ophir Münz-Manor, “Narrating Salvation: Verbal Sacrifices in Late Antique Liturgical Poetry,” in Jews, Christians, and the Roman Empire: The Poetics of Power in Late Antiquity, ed. Annette Y. Reed and N. Dohrmann (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013), 154–66, 315–19. 38 See Pascal Boyer, “What is Memory For? Functions of Recall in Cognition and Culture,” in Memory in Mind and Culture, ed. Pascal Boyer and James V. Wertsch (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 3–28. Vivid egocentric episodic memories have an elasticity that allows them to be constructed and reconstructed. It is this cognitive process that allows for the adaptive capacity of memories to be reconstructed in imagining future scenarios; see Daniel L. Schacter and Donna Rose Addis, “The Cognitive Neuroscience of Constructive Memory: Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future,” PTRS 362 (2007): 773–86. 39 The increased interest in the experiences of the individual reflects a larger disciplinary shift in anthropology and other areas of the social sciences; see Robert Desjarlais and C. Jason Throop, “Phenomenological Approaches in Anthropology,” Annu Rev Anthropol 40 (2011): 87–102; also see Stanley Stowers, “The Concept of ‘Community’ and the History of Early Christianity,” MTSR 23 (2011): 238–56; Jörg Rüpke, On Roman Religion: Lived Religion and the Individual in Ancient Rome (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2016).

100

Harkins

constructed by scholars. While these scripted emotional responses in the psalm may cultivate a particular predisposition, they do not predetermine any individual to have any single particular experience. Memory-making and remaking processes acknowledge that there is a plasticity to how we remember, which allows our past to be creatively updated in the present moment and in anticipation of future needs. For example, we might consider how the transfer of praise from Phinehas, whom readers know from Num 25:11, to Moses in Ps 106:23 could be said to update the historical memory strategically in light of the changing circumstances of the Second Temple period. In so doing, the psalm introduces the possibility that acts of righteousness are not fixed to any one individual. Rather than overdetermine the figures from the wilderness period, the psalm enlivens the figures and imparts a malleability to the foundational story that implicates later readers and hearers, who might then imagine their own responses to the recasting of history in Psalm 106. One effect of this imaginative engagement is to embolden readers to stand and perform their own acts of righteousness in their own day. Redistributing the praising of righteous acts from Phinehas to Moses allows for the possibility that a Second Temple reader of this text might also be similarly implicated in the narrative. This study has shown how kinesthetic and sensory language are instrumental in helping a reader to achieve a sense of presence for both the foundational space of the wilderness and the divine. And so, while we have spent a great deal of space in this essay considering how spaces and places are imagined and experienced with vividness, it is the case that the greater sensory awareness of the wilderness environment contributes to a reader’s ability to experience another nonhuman figure in the narrative, namely God. Encountering the divine in the ritual moment—however that ritual moment is imagined—is something that would resonate with readers in the uncertainty of the Second Temple period. A greater perception of God’s presence when reading about the foundational events described in Psalm 106 engages the imaginative cognitive processes that are used for future-thinking and decision-making processes. Thus, as a reader experiences the spaces and divine presence in this psalm, the decision-making processes that urge the emulation of heroic virtue, such as that performed by Phinehas and Moses, become optimized. Bibliography Avrahami, Yael. The Senses of Scripture: Sensory Perception in the Hebrew Bible. Sheffield: T&T Clark, 2012.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

101

Barsalou, Lawrence W., Aron K. Barbey, W. Kyle Simmons, and Ava Santos. “Embodiment in Religious Knowledge.” J Cogn Cult 5 (2005): 14–57. Blenkinsopp, Joseph. “The Baal Peor Episode Revisited (Num 25, 1–18).” Bib 93 (2012): 86–97. Boyer, Pascal. The Naturalness of Religious Ideas: A Cognitive Theory of Religion. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. Boyer, Pascal. Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought. New York: Basic Books, 2001. Boyer, Pascal. “What is Memory For? Functions of Recall in Cognition and Culture.” Pages 3–28 in Memory in Mind and Culture. Edited by Pascal Boyer and James V. Wertsch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Boyer, Pascal, and Charles Ramble. “Cognitive Templates for Religious Concepts: Cross-Cultural Evidence for Recall of Counter-intuitive Representations.” CognSci 25 (2001): 535–64. Brooke, George J. “Psalms 105 and 106 at Qumran.” RevQ 14, no. 2 (1989): 267–92. Caracciolo, Marco. The Experientiality of Narrative: An Enactivist Approach. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2014. Desjarlais, Robert and C. Jason Throop. “Phenomenological Approaches in Anthropology.” Annu Rev Anthropol 40 (2011): 87–102. Easterlin, Nancy. A Biocultural Approach to Literary Theory and Interpretation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012. Easterlin, Nancy. “Cognitive Ecocriticism: Human Wayfinding, Sociality, and Literary Interpretation.” Pages 257–74 in Introduction to Cognitive Cultural Studies. Edited by Lisa Zunshine. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010. Feldt, Laura. “Fantastic Re-Collection: Cultural vs. Autobiographical Memory in the Exodus Narrative.” Pages 191–208 in Religious Narrative, Cognition and Culture: Image and Word in the Mind of Narrative. Edited by Armin W. Geertz and Jeppe S. Jensen. London: Equinox, 2011. Feldt, Laura. “Religious Narrative and the Literary Fantastic: Ambiguity and Uncertainty in Ex. 1–18.” Religion 41, no. 2 (2011): 251–83. Flint, Peter. The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Book of Psalms. STDJ 17. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Gärtner, Judith. Die Geschichtspsalmen: Eine Studie zu den Psalmen 78, 105, 106, 135 und 136 als hermeneutische Schlüsseltexte im Psalter. FAT 84. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012. Gärtner, Judith. “The Historical Psalms: A Study of Psalms 78; 105; 106; 135, and 136 as Key Hermeneutical Texts in the Psalter.” HeBAI 4 (2015): 373–99. Geertz, Armin. “Brain, Body and Culture: A Biocultural Theory of Religion.” MTSR 22 (2010): 304–21. Geertz, Armin. “Global Perspectives on Methodology in the Study of Religion.” MTSR 12 (2000): 49–73.

102

Harkins

Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Psalms and Lamentations. Vol. 2 of Psalms. FOTL 15. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001. Gillmayr-Bucher, Susanne. “Body Images in the Psalms.” JSOT 28, no. 3 (2004): 301–26. Grant, Deena. “Fire and the Body of Yahweh.” JSOT 40 (2015): 139–61. Grol, Harm van. “1 Chronicles 16: The Chronicler’s Psalm and Its View of History.” Pages 97–121 in Rewriting Biblical History: Essays on Chronicles and Ben Sira in Honor of Pancratius C. Beentjes. Edited by Jeremy Corley and Harm van Grol. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011. Gunkel, Hermann, and Joachim Begrich. Einleitung in die Psalmen: Die Gattungen der religiösen Lyrik Israels. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966. Hill, Andrew E. “Patchwork Poetry of Reasoned Verse? Connective Structure in 1 Chronicles XVI.” VT 33, no. 1 (1983): 97–101. Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. A Commentary on Psalms 101–150. Vol. 3 of Psalms. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011. Jajdelska, Elspeth, Christopher Butler, Steve Kelly, Allan McNeill, and Katie Overy. “Crying, Moving, and Keeping It Whole: What Makes Literary Description Vivid?” Poet. Today 31, no. 3 (2010): 433–63. Jonker, L. C. “The Chronicler Singing Psalms: Revisiting the Chronicler’s Psalm in 1 Chronicles 16.” Pages 115–30 in ‘My Spirit at Rest in the North Country’ (Zechariah 6:8): Collected Communications to the XXth Congress of the IOSOT, Helsinki 2010. Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2011. Kandel, Eric R. In Search of Memory. New York: Norton, 2006. Klein, Anja. Geschichte und Gebet: Die Rezeption der biblischen Geschichte in den Psalmen des Alten Testaments. FAT 94. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Klein, Anja. “Praying Biblical History: The Phenomenon of History in the Psalms.” HeBAI 4 (2015): 400–426. Kugel, James L., ed. Prayers that Cite Scripture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006. Kugler, Gili. “The Dual Role of Historiography in Psalm 106: Justifying the Present Distress and Demonstrating the Individual’s Potential Contribution.” ZAW 126, no. 4 (2014): 546–53. Kuzmičová, Anežka. “Literary Narrative and Mental Imagery: A View from Embodied Cognition.” Style 48 (2014): 275–93. LeDoux, Joseph. Synaptic Self: How Our Brains Become Who We Are. New York: Penguin, 2002. Lee, Joff. “Reconsolidation: Maintaining Memory Relevance.” Trends Neurosci 32 (2009): 413–420. Martin, Luther H. “Do Rituals Do? And How Do They Do It? Cognition and the Study of Ritual.” Pages 311–25 in Introducing Religion: Essays in Honor of Jonathan Z. Smith. Edited by Willi Braun and Russell T. McCutcheon. London: Equinox, 2008.

Retelling Foundational Events in Psalm 106

103

Miall, David S., and Don Kuiken. “Foregrounding, Defamiliarization, and Affect: Response to Literary Stories.” Poetics 22 (1994): 389–407. Mroczek, Eva. The Literary Imagination in Jewish Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Münz-Manor, Ophir. “Narrating Salvation: Verbal Sacrifices in Late Antique Liturgical Poetry.” Pages 154–66, 315–19 in Jews, Christians, and the Roman Empire: The Poetics of Power in Late Antiquity. Edited by Annette Y. Reed and N. Dohrmann. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013. Närhi, Jani. “Beautiful Reflections: The Cognitive and Evolutionary Foundations of Paradise Representations.” MTSR 20 (2008): 339–65. Newman, Judith H. Praying by the Book: The Scripturalization of Prayer in Second Temple Judaism. EJL 14. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999. Nielsen, K. “Whose Song of Praise: Reflections on the Purpose of the Psalm in 1 Chronicles 16.” Pages 327–36 in The Chronicler as Author: Studies in Text and Texture. Edited by M. Patrick Graham and Steven L. McKenzie. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. Pyysiäinen, Ilkka. Magic, Miracles, and Religious Belief: A Scientist’s Perspective. Lanham, MD: Altamira, 2004. Pyysiäinen, Ilkka, Marjaana Lindeman, and Timo Honkela. “Counterintuitiveness as the Hallmark of Religiosity.” Religion 33 (2003): 341–55. Ramond, Sophie. “The Growth of the Scriptural Corpus by Successive Rewritings: The Case of the So-Called ‘Historical Psalms.’” HeBAI 4 (2015): 427–49. Ramond, Sophie. Les leçons et les énigmes du passé: Une exégèse intra-biblique des psaumes historique. BZAW 459. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2014. Richardson, H. Neil. “Psalm 106: Yahweh’s Succoring Love Saves from the Death of a Broken Covenant.” Pages 191–203 in Love and Death in the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of Marvin H. Pope. Edited by J. H. Marks and R. M. Good. Guilford, CT: Four Quarters, 1987. Rüpke, Jörg. On Roman Religion: Lived Religion and the Individual in Ancient Rome. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2016. Sanders, James A. The Dead Sea Psalms Scroll. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1967. Sanders, James A. The Psalms Scroll of Qumrân (11QPsa). DJD IV. Oxford: Clarendon, 1965. Scarry, Elaine. Dreaming by the Book. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001. Schacter, Daniel L., and Donna Rose Addis. “The Cognitive Neuroscience of Constructive Memory: Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future.” PTRS 362 (2007): 773–86. Smith, J. Z. To Take Place: Toward Theory in Ritual. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.

104

Harkins

Sommers, Benjamin D. The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Speer, Nancy K., Jeremy R. Reynolds, Khena M. Swallow, and Jeffrey M. Zacks. “Reading Stories Activates Neural Representations of Visual and Motor Experiences.” Psychol Sci 20, no. 8 (2009): 989–99. Stowers, Stanley. “The Concept of ‘Community’ and the History of Early Christianity.” MTSR 23 (2011): 238–56. Swartz, Michael D. “Ritual about Myth about Ritual: Towards an Understanding of the Avodah in the Rabbinic Period.” JJTP 6 (1997): 135–55. Tuan, Yi-Fu. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1977. Wallace, Robert E. The Narrative Effect of Book IV of the Hebrew Psalter. New York: Lang, 2007. Wilson, Gerald. The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter. SBLDS. Chico, CA: Society of Biblical Literature, 1985.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting James K. Aitken† The Greek version of the Psalms, found in what is now the Septuagint, might not be an obvious candidate for finding evidence of ritual or liturgical practice. The Hebrew Psalms were translated into Greek in a formal style, following closely the word order of the Hebrew source and showing little variation in word choice. Often the same Greek words are chosen to translate consistently their equivalent Hebrew words, and sometimes one Greek word even translates many different Hebrew ones. There is overall an apparent reticence to include additional words or expansive idiomatic additions to improve either the clarity or readability of the Psalms. As a result Henry St. J. Thackeray relegated the Psalms to his category of “indifferent” translations.1 Although Thackeray’s classifications tended to confuse translation technique with register of Greek, it is indicative of the fact that the translation method leads to an apparently plain and unadorned translation. The beauty of the imagery in a psalm such as Psalm 46 (45 in Greek) is lost in the formal equivalence of the translation: ‫ֹלהים‬ ֑ ִ ‫יר־א‬ ֱ ‫נָ ָ֗הר ְפּ ָל ֗ ָגיו יְ ַשׂ ְמּ ֥חוּ ִע‬

τοῦ ποταμοῦ τὰ ὁρμήματα εὐφραίνουσιν τὴν πόλιν τοῦ θεοῦ· (Ps 46[45]:5) The rapids of the river cheer the city of the God.2 The meaning remains, but it falls short in any attempt to add poetic or literary effect. The word order of the Hebrew is preserved, and there is no intention to paraphrase or express by anything other than two nouns for “running water” in a genitive relationship. The translator might have chosen from a range of Greek words, such as the poetic ἐπιρροή, ῥεῖθρον, or νασμός for river. The torrents might have been rendered by ῥοή, ἀπορροή, ῥεῦμα, or χεῦμα, or by the adjectives χειμάρροος or ἀσταγής. But they were not. The Greek τὰ ὁρμήματα (cf. Prov 21:1) expresses the motion of the waters but is not distinctive of a river. This is a measure of the translator’s method, but one that leaves little room for interpretative analysis. 1 Henry St-J. Thackeray, Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek (According to the Septuagint) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909), 13. 2 Translations are those of the author unless indicated otherwise.

© James K. Aitken, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_007

106

Aitken

The consistent representation in Greek of elements in the Hebrew can also lead to what appear to be Hebraisms or unidiomatic Greek renderings. Psalm 63(62) may serve as an example: ‫י־ח ֶרב ְמ ָנ֖ת ֻשׁ ָע ִ ֣לים יִ ְהיֽ וּ‬ ֑ ָ ‫ירהוּ ַעל־יְ ֵד‬ ֥ ֻ ִ‫יַ גּ‬

They shall be given over to the power of the sword, they shall be prey for jackals. (NRSV) παραδοθήσονται εἰς χεῖρας ῥομφαίας, μερίδες ἀλωπέκων ἔσονται. (Ps 63[62]:11) They will be handed over to the hands of the sword, They will be portions for foxes. In this example the Hebrew ‫יָ ד‬, “hand,” is found in its common instrumental sense when paired with a preposition—“by means of”—or, in the NRSV translation, “by the power of.” The rendering into Greek of ‫ יָ ד‬by χείρ, “hand,” is standard, but when accompanied by a preposition this Greek noun normally has a locative function and not an instrumental one that we see in the Hebrew—locative “at hand” or “in the presence of” or literally “hands.” It is therefore deemed to be a Hebraism in a case such as this.3 Even though the syntax of the verb and preposition plus the plural of χείρ is standard in Greek,4 it does not in Greek convey the Hebrew idiom.5 Likewise, in 11b the translator has chosen μερίς, “part, portion,”6 for Hebrew ‫ ְמנָ ת‬, “portion,” which is the consistent equivalent throughout the Septuagint (e.g., Jer 13:25; 2 Chr 31:3, 4). It does not appear, however, to convey the nuance of the verse that the opponents will be the share that foxes will feast upon. The translation “prey” (NETS) for μερίς is a contextual interpretation and does not represent the “stereotyped translation” of the Greek. 3 So Eberhard Bons and Ralph Brucker, “Psalmoi / Das Buch der Psalmen,” in Handbuch zur Septuaginta, 1: Einleitung in die Septuaginta, ed. Siegfried Kreuzer (Gütersloh: Gütersloher, 2016), 345; Raija Sollamo, Renderings of Hebrew Semiprepositions in the Septuagint, DHL 19 (Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1979), 156–60. Sollamo recognises that the Greek expression in itself is idiomatic Greek of the period (Renderings, 168, 333–35), but since it is an apparently stereotyped rendering of the Hebrew it falls into a category of “slavish renderings” that are unidiomatic or Hebraistic (160, 179). 4 Sollamo, Renderings, 167–69. 5 The translation, therefore, of NETS, “the power of the sword,” renders the sense of the Hebrew rather than the Greek. 6 LSJ, s.v. “μερίς.”

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

107

As illustrated by these examples, the translator can be seen as following a method that permitted little room for interpretation and even less for adaptation to its liturgical setting.7 It is perhaps more suited to the school room than to the synagogue.8 The translation style is often compared to the later kaige translation method, and the Psalms are seen as a precursor of that method, following very closely the Hebrew word order and lexemes.9 This points to an approximate date for the translation since we know the kaige method had developed by the first century BCE, even though it is not to be seen as a unified translation school.10 As a precursor to it, the Psalms translation can be placed in the second century BCE, corroborated by allusions to it in other translations and writings.11 Other factors, some of which will be highlighted below, also assist in locating it geographically and render it probable that it derived from Egypt.12 We should pause at this point and recognise that this translation method, however, can be more sophisticated than it at first seems. Renewed appreciation of the translation method across the Septuagint has been a feature of recent scholarship, and especially appreciation of the careful balancing 7

On the problem of interpretation, see Al Pietersma, “Exegesis in the Septuagint: Possibilities and Limits (The Psalter as a Case in Point),” in Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures, ed. W. Kraus and R. Glenn Wooden, SBLSCS 53 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006), 38–39. 8 For the educational context of the Septuagint, see Sebastian P. Brock, “The Phenomenon of the Septuagint,” OTS 17 (1972): 16; Albert Pietersma, “A New Paradigm for Addressing Old Questions: The Relevance of the Interlinear Model for the Study of the Septuagint,” in Bible and Computer: The Stellenbosch AIBI-6 Conference; Proceedings of the Association Internationale Bible et Informatique “From Alpha to Byte.” University of Stellenbosch 17–21 July, 2000, ed. J. Cook (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 337–64. 9 Olivier Munnich, “Contribution à l’étude de la première révision de la Septante,” ANRW 2.20.1: 192–220; Staffan Olofsson, “The Kaige Group and the Septuagint Book of Psalms,” in IX Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies: Cambridge, 1995, ed. B. A. Taylor, SBLSCS 45 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 204. Peter J. Gentry, “The Greek Psalter and the καίγε Tradition: Methodological Questions,” in The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma, ed. R. J. V. Hiebert, C. E. Cox, and P. J. Gentry, JSOTSup 332 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 87. 10 This date has been confirmed by the kaige Minor Prophets Scroll: Emanuel Tov, The Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Naḥal Ḥever (8HevXIIgr), with the collaboration of Robert A. Kraft and a Contribution by P. J. Parsons, DJD VIII (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990). 11 Tyler F. Williams, “Towards a Date for the Old Greek Psalter,” in The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma, ed. R. J. V. Hiebert, C. E. Cox and P. J. Gentry, JSOTSupp 332 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 248–76. 12 For an overview see James K. Aitken, “Psalms,” in The T&T Clark Companion to the Septuagint, ed. James K. Aitken (London: T&T Clark, 2015), 321–23; Bons and Brucker, “Psalmoi,” 346–67.

108

Aitken

between representation of the Hebrew and expression in Greek idiom.13 At the same time, specific recognition of the ability of the Psalms translator has also been noted.14 Anneli Aejmelaeus’s assessment is informative in this regard: the prevailing opinion about the Greek Psalter may be that it contains dreadfully poor poetry. Of course, this is true if we compare it to classical Greek poetry. But if one considers the constraints within which the translator worked, one cannot avoid the impression that he did rather well after all.15 While some have suggested that there is extensive interpretation within the Greek Psalms, this position has often been disputed.16 On a less ambitious level, one can at least observe how the choice of translation equivalents can often result in a theological emphasis not present in the Hebrew. Thus, the focus on ethical or legal terms such as ἀδικία, “injustice,” and ἀνομία, “lawlessness,” adds a particular colour to the translation.17 This renewed appreciation allows us to examine some subtle choices of vocabulary in the translation. We will begin with a discussion of the Greek of the Psalms, showing both the use of idiomatic Greek, despite occasional interference from Hebrew, and the selection of literary vocabulary. This will lay the foundation for looking at three aspects of the translation that suggest that aural and cultic aspects of the translation are prominent. These three features are suggestive of the social context in which the translator worked and the effect that had on his translation choices. Thus, rhetorical tropes in the 13 James K. Aitken, “The Origins of καίγε,” in Biblical Greek in Context, ed. James K. Aitken and T. V. Evans, BiTS 22 (Leuven: Peeters, 2015), 21–40. 14 James K. Aitken, “Jewish Worship amid Greeks: The Lexical Context of the Old Greek Psalter,” in Temples, Texts and Traditions, ed. T. McLay (London: T&T Clark, 2015), 48–70; Eberhard Bons, “Rhetorical Devices in the Septuagint Psalter,” in Et sapienter et eloquenter: Studies on Rhetorical and Stylistic Features of the Septuagint, ed. Eberhard Bons and T. J. Kraus, FRLANT 241 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 69–82; Folker Siegert, Zwischen Hebräischer Bibel und Altem Testament: Eine Einführung in die Septuaginta (Münster: Lit, 2001), 311. 15 Anneli Aejmelaeus, “Characterizing Criteria for the Characterization of the Septuagint Translators: Experimenting on the Greek Psalter,” in The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma, ed. R. J. V. Hiebert, C. E. Cox, and P. J. Gentry (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 72. 16 For interpretative readings, see in particular Joachim Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, WUNT 2/76 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995); Holger Gzella, Lebenszeit und Ewigkeit: Studien zur Eschatologie und Anthropologie des Septuaginta-Psalters, BBB 134 (Berlin: Philo, 2002). For criticism, see, e.g., Albert Pietersma, “LXX Exegesis and the Superscriptions of the Greek Psalter,” in The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception, ed. Peter W. Flint and Patrick D. Miller, VTS 99 (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 443–75. 17 Frank Austermann, Von der Tora zum Nomos: Untersuchungen zur Übersetzungsweise und Interpretation im Septuaginta-Psalter, MSU 27 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003).

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

109

translation appear despite the translation method, and indicate attention to the aural qualities of the translation. As we will discuss, this need not arise from an actual spoken context for the translation, but is a contributing factor to the other evidence presented. Thus, second we will look at the use of vocabulary that derives from local cultic contexts in Egypt and indicates the cultic awareness of the translator. Finally, we will consider the translation of divine descriptions that also appear to come from the Egyptian context. These appear to be actual functional translations of the Hebrew descriptions and draw upon practice in Egypt. We can therefore see how the oral and social contexts of the translation can be determined, and from this tentative conclusions can be drawn about the use of the Psalms in a potentially liturgical context. 1

The Translator and His Greek

It should be possible to distinguish Greek register from translation technique, although such a distinction is not always clearly made in scholarship. The translation method of following consistently the Hebrew results in a frequency of forms that would not be expected in Greek compositions, and at times the consistent rendering of a word can produce idiom that is unattested elsewhere in Greek. Nevertheless, despite these infelicities, lexical choice sometimes conveys sensitivity to Greek style and idiom and a preference for literary forms or obscure terms. The movement to a close representation of the Hebrew requires a careful negotiation between adhering to the Hebrew word order and idiom, on the one hand, and working within the limits what is permissible in Greek grammar and idiom.18 In the example presented above of Ps 63(62):11, the expression εἰς χεῖρας ῥομφαίας appears odd in Greek only if we expect it to represent the Hebrew idiom (“by means of” or “by the power of”). Rather, while it represents the Hebrew words, it also provides a different and yet meaningful idiom in Greek. The task is to interpret what the translator is aiming to do, and how the Greek operates. In Greek εἰς χεῖρας is a frequent idiom for engaging in hand-to-hand combat, or more broadly meeting in battle, and such an understanding would fit the context. καὶ ἑκατέρων τῶν στρατοπέδων τὰ ἔσχατα οὐκ ἦλθεν ἐς χεῖρας, ἀλλὰ τὸ αὐτὸ ἔπαθεν· 18 See John A. L. Lee, The Greek of the Pentateuch: Grinfield Lectures on the Septuagint 2011–2012 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), on Hebrew interference.

110

Aitken

The furthest parts of both armies never came to join in combat, but were hindered by the same cause. (Thucydides, Hist. 4.96.2) In this sense the Greek is intelligible. The one oddity is the appearance of the genitive ῥομφαίας. It is unexpected in Greek to have a genitive following, since normally εἰς χεῖρας appears absolutely, as in the quotation above from Thucydides.19 The “hands” also imply a human agent, whereas in the Psalms the agent seems to be the sword (ῥομφαία). Nevertheless, this can be seen either as a poetic personification (the sword doing the fighting), or an attributive genitive describing the type of combat (combat by the sword). Despite the appearance of “hands” in the Greek idiom, the expression refers to close combat that can include other weapons, as seen in Xenophon: When they came to a hand-to-hand encounter [εἰς χεῖρας ἦλθον], all of the Greeks who struck anyone broke their spears, while the barbarians, being armed with javelins of cornel-wood, speedily killed twelve men and two horses. (Xenophon, Hell. 3.4.14)20 Although the translator, therefore, is representing the Hebrew, the Greek is intelligible in its own right, if one accepts subtle divergence in meaning from the Hebrew alongside individual poetic expression.21 Relegation of the Greek idiom to an appendix and emphasizing the adherence to the Hebrew only present part of the picture.22 The Greek is a sophisticated matching of the Hebrew words while offering an idiom in Greek that conveys the sense of the passage without necessarily the function of the Hebrew construction. The genitive is the one outstanding divergence from Greek idiom, but is something that a language user could have said as it lies within the possibilities of the Greek language and the function of the genitive.23 19 Sollamo, Renderings, 168, 335. 20 See too UPZ 1 79, lines 6–7 (159 BCE), where a man is described as having a sword (μάχαιρα) in his hand and entering a house to fight (εἰς χε[ῖ]ρας). See also Sollamo, Renderings, 335. 21 For the meaning of the power of someone, see Polybius. Polyb. 23.13.2: “nor was he ever deserted by those who had once joined him or submitted to him” (κοινωνησάντων καὶ δόντων ἑαυτοὺς εἰς χεῖρας). 22 In Sollamo’s discussion the fact that the Greek is idiomatic is mentioned, but all the examples from non-biblical sources are in an appendix with little comment (Renderings, 333–35). 23 See too the discussion in Marieke Dhont, Style and Context of Old Greek Job, JSJSup 183 (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 136–38, where she focuses upon the semantic interference of the Hebrew, which leads to later writers using the lexeme χείρ with the Hebrew sense.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

111

It is easy to point out occasional surprising renderings in Greek, but they need to be balanced by the more frequent sensitive and intelligible readings. Thus, the translation in Ps 35(34):3 of Hebrew “to empty out the spear” as “to pour out the sword” (ἔκχεον ῥομφαίαν) has been deemed “decidedly unidiomatic Greek” (NETS 543). It is an understandable rendering of the Hebrew ‫ריק‬, hiphil: “to empty,” but unusual for the sword, where we expect another idiom (e.g., σπάω, Ps 37[36]:14; ἐκκενόω, Ezek 28:7; 30:11).24 The choice of ἐκχέω does come close to a Greek idiom since the verb can be used of sending out arrows (Homer, Od. 22.3; cf. 24.178, ταχέας δ᾽ ἐκχεύατ᾽ ὀϊστοὺς). This makes more sense with plural objects, but the singular “spear” is still the same idiom for the verb. In contrast to this unique instance, we can point to sensitivity of idiom, once more using the example of weapons. When the Hebrew verb ‫דרך‬, “to tread upon,” is used of the bow it denotes the practice of treading on the bow to string it.25 In every instance that this appears in the Psalms, it is translated by the verb denoting “stretching” the string, in accordance with the idiom rather than the lexical meaning of the Hebrew:26 ‫ַק ְׁש ּ֥תֹו ָ ֝ד ַ ֗רְך ַ �וֽיְ כֹונְ ֶנ ָֽה‬

τὸ τόξον αὐτοῦ ἐνέτεινεν καὶ ἡτοίμασεν αὐτὸ (Ps 7:13) He has stretched the bow and prepared it. Meanwhile whenever the Hebrew verb ‫ דרך‬appears in the hiphil with the meaning “to lead,” it is rendered by the verb ὁδηγέω, “to lead.”27 ὁδήγησόν με ἐπὶ τὴν ἀλήθειάν σου (Ps 25[24]:5) Lead me in your truth. Finally, in one instance the Hebrew verb in the hiphil denotes “to tread upon” (with the object being threatening animals), and the translator chooses a different but appropriate Greek verb:

But elsewhere Greek verb is always used of ‫ׁשפך‬. The same LXX rendering of the Hebrew can be found at Mal 3:10. 25 John A. Emerton, “Treading the Bow,” VT 53 (2003): 465–86, esp. 467–68. 26 See Pss 7:13; 11(10):2; 37[36]:14; 58[57]:8; 64[63]:4. 27 Pss 25(24):5, 9; 107(106):7; 119(118):35. 24

112

Aitken

ἐπ̓ ἀσπίδα καὶ βασιλίσκον ἐπιβήσῃ (Ps 91[90]:13) On asp and cobra you will tread. This is a simple illustration of the ability of the translator and his sensitivity to Greek idiom. Conventional examples such as this of the translator following Greek idiom can be overlooked when focus is placed on the unusual or isolated examples. The translator followed a translation method that did not allow for much deviation in word order or consistent equivalence, but he was still able to display some sensitivity and subtlety in his lexical choices. The vocabulary choices of the translator also suggest the translator paid some attention to the literary nature of the material he was translating. While he did not write in the highest register of Greek, he occasionally shows a sensitivity to Greek lexical choices. Some words are of a higher literary register, appearing almost exclusively in Greek literature, while other words are rare or invented terms. The latter might seem contradictory to the inclusion of literary words, but creative use of vocabulary and coining of new words can be a sign of an educated writer and an attempt to raise the register of the work.28 The exclusively poetic word βλέφαρον, “eye,” (in the plural βλέφαρα, as is standard in Greek) appears twice (Pss 11[10]:4; 132[131]:4) but seems only to have been chosen when a second word for “eyes” was needed. It is in both cases in parallelism with ὀφθαλμός (Hebrew ‫ ) ַעיִ ן‬and, as always throughout the Septuagint, represents ‫ ַע ְפ ַע ַּפיִ ם‬, “eyelids.” εἰ δώσω ὕπνον τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς μου καὶ τοῖς βλεφάροις μου νυσταγμόν (Ps 132[131]:4) if I will give sleep to my eyes and slumber to my eyelids (NETS) That this word also appears in Job, Proverbs, and Sirach suggests it is preferred by the more literary-minded of the translators,29 although the pursuit of variation may be a driving factor for the choice. Nevertheless, other distinctive words can be noted. In Ps 47(46):42 “beauty,” for example, is expressed by καλλονή, a 28 See James K. Aitken, “Neologisms: A Septuagint Problem,” in Interested Readers: Essays on the Hebrew Bible in Honor of David J. A. Clines, ed. James K. Aitken, J. M. S. Clines and C. M. Maier (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2013), 315–29. 29 On the problems of literary classification, see John A. L. Lee, “The Literary Greek of Septuagint Isaiah,” SemCl 7 (2014): 135–46.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

113

rarer form of κάλλος, while in Ps 49(48):11 ἄνους denotes the “stupid,” a contracted form of ἄνοος.30 Some terms associated with literature could also recall mythological scenarios, namely ἑωσφόρος, “the Morning Star” (Ps 110[109]:3), sometimes associated in Greek tradition with Aphrodite, and γηγενής, “earthborn,” sometimes connected with titans and giants (Ps 49[48]:3). Among new words appearing in the Psalms are the adjective ὀξυγράφος, “writing fast,” as a description of a pen (Ps 45[44]:2), ἀνθρωπάρεσκος, “manpleaser” (Ps 53[52]:6), as a marker of the wicked, and ἰσόψυχος, “equal friend” (Ps 55[54]:14). Related to the latter word we also find ὀλιγοψυχία (Ps 54:9), known already from Exod 6:9 and possibly alluding to that passage. A pompous word is appropriate to express pomposity, and such is μεγαλορρημονέω, “to be a boaster” (Ps 35[34]:26; 38[37]:17; 55[54:13]), also found at Ezek 35:13, Obad 12, and Jdt 6:17. These are natural formations in Greek, and we cannot be certain that they have never been used before in Greek, especially when appearing in multiple Septuagint books, but their rarity in our sources would suggest that they would have been recognised as erudite or even recondite-sounding words in the translation. An example of a rare word, for example, but already attested in Isocrates and a mere morphological variation of more common words, is καταποντισμός, “drowning” (Ps 52[51]:6).31 Another example is συγκαταβαίνω, “to go down together” (Ps 49[48]:18), for the simple Hebrew ‫ירד‬. As a compound form of a common verb it is very rare, but the ease of its formation is demonstrated by its appearance in a Greek document at a similar time (BGU 6.1301 l. 14 [late Hellenistic]) and comparable formations appearing in Greek (συνκαταπλευσάσης: P.Col 4.83 l. 11 [245–244 BCE]; [σ]υ̣νκαταχ[ωρί]σαι, Chr.Mitt 227 l. 19 [189 CE]; συγκαταχωρισθῆναι, P.Eirene 4 30 A.26 [early Roman]). Such complex words or rare formations add to the literary feel of the translation. The ability to neologize is a literary feature, but new forms can also serve to convey elements of the Hebrew.32 In representing grammatical features from the Hebrew neologisation certainly draws attention to the oddity of the Greek, and yet it can also point to the sophistication of the author or translator. The translator, for example, occasionally follows his predecessors in choosing word formations in order to represent Hebrew verbal forms. This becomes a notable feature of the kaige tradition,33 but is already clearly favoured by the Psalms translator. Thus, the hiphil form is often rendered by the productive 30

In the LXX καλλονή is found 1 Macc 2:12; Ps 46:5; 77:61; Wis 13:3, 5; Sir 6:15; 31:23; PsSol 12:2; ἄνους is also found at Prov 13:14; Hos 7:11; 2 Macc 11:13. See also the use of εὐπρέπεια, favoured by the Psalms translator. 31 LSJ, s.v. “καταποντισμός.” 32 Aitken, “Neologisms”, 315–29. 33 See Tov, Greek Minor Prophets Scroll.

114

Aitken

ending -ίζω in Greek, which can have a factitive or causative function.34 As verbs in -ίζω are often denominatives, constructed from nominal forms, the translators could easily construct new words on the analogy of established formations in Greek such as κατοικίζω, γνωρίζω, and ὀργίζω. Examples of new formations in Greek that had already entered the language before the Septuagint are διασκορπίζω, “to scatter” (Pss 22[21]:15; 53[52]:6, etc.), and the graphic verb ἀποκεφαλίζω, “to behead” (Ps 151:7; cf. Arrian, Epict. 1.1.24). We then find in the Septuagint what seem to be new words such as συνετίζω, “to instruct, make understand” (Pss 16[15]:7; 32[31]:8, etc.); ἀκουτίζω, “to cause to hear”; ῥαντίζω, “to purify from cleansing” (Ps 51[50]:9);35 and κερατίζω, “to butt with horns” (Ps 44[43]:6; first used in Exod 21:28). An effective use of these verb forms can seen in Ps 51(50):9–10. The parallelism between each verse is created by the opening hiphil verb in the Hebrew, which is then represented in Greek by two rare verbal forms in -ίζω. ῥαντιεῖς με ὑσσώπῳ, καὶ καθαρισθήσομαι· πλυνεῖς με, καὶ ὑπὲρ χιόνα λευκανθήσομαι. ἀκουτιεῖς με ἀγαλλίασιν καὶ εὐφροσύνην· ἀγαλλιάσονται ὀστᾶ τεταπεινωμένα. Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones that you have crushed rejoice. (NETS) The verb ῥαντίζω, “to sprinkle, purify,” is very rare outside of the Septuagint, while ἀκουτίζω, “to cause to hear,” appears to be a new formation in the Septuagint. These techniques and literary elements establish the creativity of the translation within the confines of the restrictive translation method. They also point to our next category of rhetorical features that are evident and serve as an indicator of the readability of the translation. 34

For its “factitive” meaning, see Evert van Emde Boas, Albert Rijksbaron, Luuk Huitink, Mathieu de Bakker, Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019), 23.48, n.1. On the causative, see Takamitsu Muraoka, A Syntax of Septuagint Greek (Leuven: Peeters, 2016), 586. 35 This verb is already used in Lev 6:20. It might have had wider currency in sources no longer extant as it does appear in later non-Jewish sources, including Athenaeus, Deipn. 12.521a (third century CE).

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

2

115

Rhetorical Features of the Translation

It has already been recognized that there are rhetorical features in the Greek Psalter, some naturally arising from the parallelism of the Hebrew poetry, but also many features not dependent on the Hebrew.36 In more recent publications Eberhard Bons has drawn attention to various rhetorical features and they are easy to identify.37 As a translation with a high degree of lexical equivalence, it is informative if the translator was nonetheless able to introduce rhetorical tropes and display a concern for the form even within the restrictions of his translation technique. Aejmelaeus suggests there is more to be discovered on the qualitative side.38 A brief overview of the types of device can be given. Anaphora and paronomasia are simple devices that the translator manages to produce in the Greek even when it is not generated but translating the Hebrew.39 Anaphora, or repetition of sound, is achieved through the choice of compound forms of verbs. Sometimes the compound forms have a nuance that is important for the conveying the Hebrew sense, but often it is unnecessary, especially where there is no equivalent to such compound forms in Hebrew. καταδιώξαι ἄρα ὁ ἐχθρὸς τὴν ψυχήν μου καὶ καταλάβοι καὶ καταπατήσαι εἰς γῆν τὴν ζωήν μου καὶ τὴν δόξαν μου εἰς χοῦν κατασκηνώσαι. (Ps 7:6) May the enemy pursue and overtake my soul and trample my life to the ground and make my glory encamp in the dust. (NETS) A similar use of the κατα prefix is found in Ps 55(54): καταπόντισον, κύριε, καὶ καταδίελε τὰς γλώσσας αὐτῶν (Ps 55[54]:10) Drown, O Lord, and confuse their speech. (NETS)

36 See John A. L. Lee, “Translations of the Old Testament. I. Greek,” in Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period, 330 BC–AD 400, ed. Stanley E. Porter (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 775–84. 37 Eberhard Bons, “Rhetorical Devices,” 69–82; Bons and Brucker, “Psalmoi: Das Buch der Psalmen,” 346. 38 Aejmelaeus, “Characterizing Criteria,” 73. 39 Bons and Brucker, “Psalmoi,” 346.

116

Aitken

The same technique is used for συν prefixes too: συνέσεισας τὴν γῆν καὶ συνετάραξας αὐτήν· ἴασαι τὰ συντρίμματα αὐτῆς, ὅτι ἐσαλεύθη. (Ps 60[59]:4) You caused the land to quake and threw it into confusion; heal its fractures, because it was shaken. (NETS) τόξον συντρίψει καὶ συγκλάσει ὅπλον (Ps 46[45]:10) He will shatter bow and break armor. (NETS) Paronomasia, or the matching of sounds, is seen in an example from Ps 61(60), where there is first a partial matching in sound (σκηνώματί) that is then followed by the verb and noun matching in a figura etymologica that is not motivated by the Hebrew: παροικήσω ἐν τῷ σκηνώματί σου εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, σκεπασθήσομαι ἐν σκέπῃ τῶν πτερύγων σου. (Ps 61[60]:5) I will sojourn in your covert forever, find shelter in the shelter of your wings. Sounds effects are also achieved through the rhetorical matching of noun prefixes as in the alpha privative of ἐν γῇ ἐρήμῳ καὶ ἀβάτῳ καὶ ἀνύδρῳ (Ps 63[62]:2), a phrase appearing twice as well in Jeremiah (2:6; 51[28]:43).40 In the next example we see a variation of the prefix before “God” (ἐν/ἐπί), when the Hebrew has in each case a beth. ἐν τῷ θεῷ ἐπαινέσω τοὺς λόγους μου [ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν].41 ἐπὶ τῷ θεῷ ἤλπισα, οὐ φοβηθήσομαι· τί ποιήσει μοι σάρξ; (Ps 56[55]:5[6]) In God I will commend my words; in God I hoped; I will not fear what flesh may do to me. (NETS)

40 Cf. Bons, “Rhetorical Devices,” 72. For alpha privative see also Ps 91:7. 41 The expression ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν is included in Rahlfs’s text, but the manuscript support is weak.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

117

There may be semantic considerations for the verb, but this seems unlikely when ἐλπίζω in the Septuagint elsewhere can be followed by ἐπί, ἐν, or the simple dative. Where the Hebrew preferred repetition, the translator seems to have preferred variation.42 Examples of such phenomena can be multiplied, but one extended example will suffice to conclude this point.43 καρδίαν καθαρὰν κτίσον ἐν ἐμοί, ὁ θεός, καὶ πνεῦμα εὐθὲς ἐγκαίνισον ἐν τοῖς ἐγκάτοις μου. (Ps [51]50:12) A pure heart create in me, O God, and an honest spirit renew within my being. [Heb: qereb] Here the triple alliteration of the letter kappa (καρδίαν καθαρὰν κτίσον) may well be unintentional. The Hebrew Masoretic Text most likely represents in this case the Vorlage of the translation, since the Greek equivalents for each of the Hebrew words are standard elsewhere in Psalms and indeed more generally in the Septuagint. Therefore, the translation arises from giving the standard equivalents of the Hebrew. However, this alliteration may not have gone unnoticed by the translator and could have been the motivation for drawing out another one in the second half of the verse (ἐγκαίνισον ἐν τοῖς ἐγκάτοις μου) where the verb ἐγκαινίζω is standard, but the choice of ἔγκατον, “entrails,” is unique to this occurrence in the Septuagint (contrary to LSJ).44 The phrase continues the kappa alliteration and coordinates the two words with the ἐν- prefix. The rhetorical features of the Greek Psalms might lead us to conclude that the translator saw the psalms as poetical texts or texts to be expressed in a liturgical context. If this were the case it would be important evidence both for the reception of the psalms in ancient Judaism and for the translator’s purpose. However, to derive this conclusion we have to understand the function of rhetorical features in the educational context of the Greco-Roman world, and the use of rhetorical lexis in other works. The attention to aural aspects of writing is natural for anyone composing works, especially if in antiquity, 42 Contrast though Ps 56[55]:11[10] where ἐπὶ τῷ … αἰνέσω is repeated, and variation is instead sought in the divine designation and the term for “word.” 43 Discussed by Bons, “Rhetorical Devices,” 72–73; and James K. Aitken, “Divine Epithets in the Greek Psalms: Cultural Accommodation and Translatability,” in Divine Names on the Spot: Towards a Dynamic Approach of Divine Denominations in Greek and Semitic Contexts, ed. T. Galoppin and C. Bonnet, OBO 293 (Leuven: Peeters, 2021), 188–89. 44 LSJ, s.v. “ἔγκατα.”

118

Aitken

although not universally, reading involved uttering the words by the reader. An author would be attuned to the sound of the words. As a result, we find in the Septuagint rhetorical features in many books, although notably more in the Pentateuch where the Hebrew seems to be poetic.45 Even documentary papyri contain comparable rhetorical techniques. 3

Cultic Terms

The presence of terms known from small Greek cults and especially those from Egypt is an indicator that the translator was aware of the cultic context of the Psalms and that he may not have read them as mere poetry.46 The adjective εὐείλατος, “merciful” (a derivative of ἵλημι), was at one time only known from the Septuagint, eliciting some attention when it first appeared in a papyrus.47 The cognate verb εὐιλατεύω, apparently a denominative from the adjective, is still only attested in the Septuagint and quotations from it. For the adjective εὐείλατος we now have approximately forty attestations in papyri and inscrip�tions serving as a synonym of ἵλαος, a frequent adjective in the Orphic hymns (e.g., 17b.9; 18.19).48 In the Septuagint εὐείλατος is found as an equivalent of the vague Hebrew ‫נ ֵֹׂשא‬:49 κύριε ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν, σὺ ἐπήκουες αὐτῶν· ὁ θεός, σὺ εὐίλατος ἐγίνου αὐτοῖς καὶ ἐκδικῶν ἐπὶ πάντα τὰ ἐπιτηδεύματα αὐτῶν. (Ps. 98:8) O Lord our God, you heard them; O God, you were merciful to them, although taking vengeance on all their devices. 45 See James K. Aitken, “The Significance of Rhetoric in the Greek Pentateuch,” in On Stone and Scroll, ed. James K. Aitken, K. J. Dell, and B. A. Mastin, BZAW 420 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011), 507–22. 46 Full discussion in James K. Aitken, “Jewish Worship amid Greeks”; cf. Orsolina Montevecchi, “Quaedam de graecitate psalmorum cum papyris comparata,” in Bibbia e papiri: Luce dai papiri sulla bibbia greca (Barcelona: Institut de Teologia Fonamental, Seminari de Papirologia, 1999), 97–120. 47 J. P. Mahaffy, The Flinders Petrie Papyri: With Transcriptions, Commentaries and Index, vol. 2 (Dublin: Academy House, 1893), 46. 48 So V. F. Vanderlip, The Four Greek Hymns of Isidorus and the Cult of Isis, ASP 12 (Toronto: Hakkert, 1972), 62. 49 Also found with reference to the language of prayer in 1 Esd 8:53.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

119

Albert Pietersma proposes that εὐείλατος is well attested in the papyri alone and thus contributes to his argument for an Egyptian setting of the Psalms.50 Our earliest example is indeed to be found in papyri, in an interesting text from the Zenon archive (12th Feb., 257 BCE). This is a petition from one Zoilos to Apollonios to build a temple for the god Sarapis somewhere along the coast, or more likely in the region of Memphis.51 Zoilos advises Apollonios: καλῶς οὖν ἔχει, Ἀπολλώνιε, ἐπακολουθῆσαί σε τοῖς ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ προστάγμασιν, ὅπως ἂν εὐίλατός σοι ὑπάρχων ὁ Σάραπις (P.Cair.Zen. 1 59034.19) It seemed fitting, therefore, Apollonios, that you heed the orders of the god, so that Sarapis might be merciful to you. Although this is an equivalent example to the Septuagint ones, with reference to divine mercy, we find a year later a “secular” use pertaining to the king (256–255 BCE): οὕτω γὰρ [ἔστα]ι τυχεῖν καὶ τὸν [ὕστερον χ]ρόνον εὐιλάτου τοῦ βασιλ[έως]. (P.Petr. 2.13 Fr19, l. 3) For thus you will find the king even in the future propitious. A similar example of royal favour is found in an Egyptian papyrus (PSI 4.392r, l. 6) from the year 242–241 BCE, and again in a papyrus from Memphis in the first century BCE (UPZ 1.109, l. 6 [98 BCE]). Given that divine qualities are often given to the Ptolemy, this is nothing surprising. As the adjective εὐείλατος had already been in use since at least the mid-third century BCE of divine favour, it was a natural choice for the translator of the Psalms.52 Further examples of the adjective in reference to divinities appear in the curse tablets from Knidos in Asia Minor. In a number of cases, the writer asks whether the person by whom she has been wronged may find Demeter and Kore εὐείλατος, whether he confesses or not.

50 51 52

Albert Pietersma, “The Place of Origin of the Old Greek Psalter,” in The World of the Aramaeans, vol. 1: Biblical Studies in Honour of Paul-Eugène Dion, ed. P. M. M. Daviau, J. W. Wevers, and M. Weigl, JSOTS 324 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 270. The location is disputed. See K. J. Rigsby, “Founding a Sarapeum,” GRBS 42 (2001): 119–21, who takes a more local view that it was in Memphis. Note too UPZ 2.199, l. 8 (20th Nov., 131 BCE) where it is used of the god Amonrasonter.

120

Aitken

καὶ μὴ γένοιτο |εὐειλάτ[ου] τυ-|χεῖν Δάματρο̣[ς], |ἀλλὰ μεγάλα-|ς βασάνους βας-|ανιζομένα (IK I 147 A.24) And if this does not happen [return of property, etc.], (I ask) that he does not find Demeter propitious, but that he is tormented by tumultuous torments. The expression in these texts is formulaic and repetitious, but regular in its reference to these minor deities.53 In other appearances through the centuries one can see that cult figures are often the ones who are sought out as εὐείλατος: Sarapis (above), Amonrasonter (Egypt, 131 BCE: UPZ 2.199, l. 8), Pan (Egypt, 20 CE: SB 5. 8581, l. 5), Men Tyrannos (Attica, first century CE: IG II/III2 1, 1365, l. 25; 1366, ll. 11, 26), or simply “the gods” (Maeonia, Asia Minor, first century CE: TAM V 1–2 167a, l. 13). It is perhaps as a term peculiar to these minor and syncretistic cults where the roots of the religious use lie.54 This brings us back to Egypt once more since one additional occurrence of the word must be noted, this time on the gates of the temple of Hermouthis and Isis in the Fayyum (Medinet Madi). In one of the four hymns said to be written by a certain Isidorus, the author concludes his address to the goddess with the words: Κλῦθι ἐμῶν εὐχῶν, μεγαλοσθενὲς οὐνομ’ ἔχουσ[α εὐείλατος ἐμοί τε γείνου, λύπης μ’ ἀνάπαυσον ἁπάσης. Hear my prayers, you of the most powerful name, and be merciful to me, relieving me of all pain (Isidorus, Hymn I.35–36 [IMétr 175])

53

54

The full listing of occurrences in the curse inscriptions to Demeter (and Kore) from the second and first centuries BCE (23 in total): IK I 147 A.24; 150A l. 4, 9; 151 ll. 5, 10; 152A ll. 5, 8; 152B l. 7; 154 ll. 12, 14; 158A ll. 6, 8; 256A l. 24; 260 ll. 5, 10; 261 ll. 4, 9; 263 ll. 4, 6; 264 l. 6; 266 ll. 12, 13; 270 l. 6. A geographically distant example is a first-century BCE grafitto from Pompeii (SEG 30.1180). Found in the temple of Isis it is possible the unnamed gods are Egyptian and that the dedicator, Philadelphus, is himself Egyptian (SEG 30.1180, p. 325; S. De Caro, “Novità isiache dalla Campania,” La Parola del passato: Rivista di studi antichi 49 [1994]: 8). In addition to this Pompeian graffito, Seneca’s knowledge of the word in 54 CE (death of Claudius) is notable, and appears to be an allusion that cannot be identified. Seneca, divi claudii apocolocyntosis 8.3 166: deus fieri vult: parum est quod templum in Britannia habet, quod hunc barbari colunt et ut deum orant μωροῦ εὐϊλάτου τυχεῖν.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

121

The four hymns to Isis seem to pre-date 80 BCE, although such precision is not beyond doubt. It is perhaps significant that this is the conclusion of the first hymn since the final section often seems to have more Koine and fewer classicizing features. The author asks that the goddess be εὐείλατος, notably using the same verb γίνομαι as Ps. 98(99):8. This example provides further attestation of the application of the adjective in Egypt as elsewhere to a deity, and once more not to one of the gods of the Olympian pantheon. It seems from the examples of εὐείλατος found in different locations that we have a shared epithet for a divinity in appeals and prayers, and for the most part it is used of small cults rather than traditional Greek religion. From this the Jewish translators of the Bible also drew. Another adjective, ἐλεήμων, “pitiful, merciful,” is used frequently of God in the Psalms: καὶ σύ, κύριε ὁ θεός, οἰκτίρμων καὶ ἐλεήμων (Ps 85:15) For you, Lord God, are compassionate and merciful. Although this adjective does appear in earlier Greek literature, it gains a particular resonance in the Greek Psalms. It too might have been be used in appeals in Ptolemaic Egypt to the monarch, since we find the cognate ἐλεημοσύνη used in a petition. In P.Cair.Zen.3.59495 (mid-third century BCE) two swineherds appeal to Zenon against an accusation, concluding: πρὸς σὲ οὖν | καταφυγγάνομεν, ἵνα ἐλεημοσύνης τύχωμεν. We have therefore made recourse to you, that we might obtain clemency. One can note here the standard language of appeal in the verb καταφυγγάνω (cognate with καταφυγή), and the rare request for ἐλεημοσύνη, “pity.” The specific use, however, of the adjective ἐλεήμων as a predicate of a god is once more found in one of the first-century BCE hymns to Isis: πυθομένη εὐχῶν, μελανηφόρε Ἶσι ἐλήμων (Isidorus, Hymn III [IMétr 175 iii] 34) Hear my prayers, black-wearing Isis, the merciful. The adjective ἐλ(ε)ήμων here functions in a similar way to εὐείλατος in the first hymn of Isidorus, bringing the hymn to a close and justifying why Isis might

122

Aitken

hear the petitioner’s prayers. The two words appear synonymous. As with εὐείλατος, the word is not used of the traditional Greek pantheon but of a “new” deity in Greek tradition. Other more familiar vocabulary also seems to derive from cultic uses, if not always deriving directly form the language used in Egypt. The verb εὐχαριστέω, “to give thanks,” is found in various prayer texts of the Septuagint (Jdt 8:25; 2 Macc 1:11) but not in the Psalms. Although it cannot be used as direct evidence for the setting of the Greek Psalms, it does contribute to the wider picture of the language adopted for praise of God among Greek-speaking Jews. The verb is well attested in documentary sources given its general sense of giving thanks. Its application in a religious context once more proves informative. In papyri it is found as early as the second century (168) BCE in a letter from a wife to her husband, who is detained in the Sarapeum in Memphis: ἐπὶ μὲν τῶι ἐρρῶσθα[ί] σε | εὐθέως τοῖς θεοῖς εὐχαρίστουν (UPZ 1.59) For the news that you are well, I straightaway thanked the gods.55 In the context of the Sarapeum, the gods are probably those of Egypt, including Sarapis. In a letter on an ostracon from the first or second century CE found in Wâdi Fawâkhir, the writer specifically gives thanks to the god Sarapis: Κᾶσις Πρεῖσκος Γερμανῷ τῷ ἀδ[ελφῷ χαίρειν.] εὐχαριστῶ τῷ Σεράπιδι … (SB 6.9017, no. 23, ll. 1–2) We find similar formulations in other Egyptian inscriptions, such as to Isis (first or second century CE): Ἴσιδι Ἀκοαῖς Διονύσιος υἱὸς Ἀπαουὴρ εὐχαριστῶ. (SEG 20:700) Elsewhere it is simply the more conventional “to the gods” (217 BCE): εὐχαριστῶν τοῖς θεοῖς (SEG 8:467, l. 26). This verb, therefore, is also shared by the Septuagint translators and the worshippers of eastern cults in the Mediterranean. A well-known equivalent in the Septuagint is the verb εὐλογέω and its cognates. It continues the meaning from classical Greek of “to give thanks” or 55 R. S. Bagnall and R. Cribiore, Women’s Letters from Ancient Egypt, 300 BC–AD 800 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006), 111.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

123

“praise” (Aristophanes, Eccl. 454), and its use in praising a deity is not unknown either (Euripides, Suppl. 927). What is distinctive about the Septuagint use is both its frequency and its apparent extension of meaning in the sense of “to bless,” especially of God blessing humans. This arose from lexical stereotyping, where the Hebrew ‫ ברך‬was translated by εὐλογέω both when it denoted “to praise” (God as object) and when it denoted “to bless.” What is of interest is the very choice of the verb εὐλογέω in the first place rather than any alternatives. At first sight the inscriptional evidence of the use of the verb εὐλογέω and the noun εὐλογία in confessions from northeast Lydia and Sardis of the early Roman period (e.g., SEG 38:1234) seems too distant for its relevance to the Septuagint. Henry W. Pleket, however, has argued that these represent a longer tradition of praise of deities, and by this stage reflects an institutionalization of this sort of divine praise.56 In these Lydian inscriptions the principal god praised is Men. In Egypt we find the best examples, if fewer than the Lydian inscriptions. In El Armana there is the ambiguous graffito εὐλογῶ τὸν [θεόν] (SB 1:3692), while in Antinooupolis a Greek who identifies himself as Thracian (Θρᾶιξ) praises both Pan, the god who follows the right path, εὐλογ[ῶ] τὸν Εὔο[δο]ν θεόν (SB 5:8562, l. 3), and Isis, εὐλογῶ τὴν Εἶσιν (SB 5:8563, 3). It seems likely that the terms form part of Greek religious language and therefore are presumably an autonomous development in Greek, rather than arising from Jewish influence. The cultic terms discussed here are used of such gods as Isis, Men, and Sarapis as well as the Jewish god, perhaps pointing to the fact that in some ways their views of god were similar, confirmed by their adoption of similar titles.57 We have a shared usage of Greek language for similar purposes, possibly avoiding terms used of the Greek pantheon and bringing into common use lesser known terms. 4

Divine Titles

The terms used to describe God shed one final light on the translator’s conception of the Psalms. God is frequently praised in metaphorical terms using words for physical objects such as rock (Hebrew ‫ ֶס ַלע‬or ‫)צּור‬, shield (‫) ָמגֵ ן‬, fortress or stronghold (‫ ָמעֹוז‬or ‫)עֹז‬, and place of refuge (‫ ַמ ְח ֶסה‬, ‫מ ְשּׂגָ ב‬ ̣ ) or place of 56 Henry W. Pleket, “Religious History as the History of Mentality: The ‘Believer’ as Servant of the Deity in the Greek World,” in Faith, Hope and Worship: Aspects of Religious Mentality in the Ancient World, ed. H. S. Versnel (Leiden: Brill, 1981), 152–92. 57 Gerhard van den Heever, “Redescribing Graeco-Roman Antiquity: On Religion and History of Religion,” R&T 12 (2005): 214.

124

Aitken

shelter (‫צּודה‬ ָ ‫) ְמ‬. It is unclear whether we should call them metaphors, attributes, or titles, but they function to portray the nature of god and his activity. When rendered into Greek we see how these terms reflect a variety of translation methods but often ones not giving precise equivalents to the Hebrew.58 The result is a colourful description of the god of Israel, as for example (beginning with the Hebrew version): The Lord is my rock [‫ ] ֶס ַלע‬and my fortress [‫צּודה‬ ָ ‫ ] ְמ‬and my deliverer [‫פלט‬, piel participle] My god is my stone [‫]צּור‬, and I shall seek refuge in him My shield [‫ ] ָמגֵ ן‬and horn of my salvation and my stronghold [‫] ִמ ְׂשּגָ ב‬. κύριος στερέωμά μου καὶ καταφυγή μου καὶ ῥύστης μου, ὁ θεός μου βοηθός μου, καὶ ἐλπιῶ ἐπ᾿ αὐτόν, ὑπερασπιστής μου καὶ κέρας σωτηρίας μου, ἀντιλήμπτωρ μου. (Ps 18[17]:3) The Lord is my firmness and my place of refuge and my rescuer; my God is my helper, and I will trust in him, my shield-bearer and horn of my deliverance, my protector. The tendency in scholarship has been to observe how the Greek uses fewer visual depictions of God; hence, rather than objects, we have active persons.59 God is no longer a rock, place of refuge or shield, but a helper (βοηθός), a protector (ἀντιλήμπτωρ), and a shield-bearer (ὑπερασπιστής). However, a somewhat negative approach of earlier scholarship, which recognised the problem for the translators of presenting god as a rock, has persisted. The differences are considered as theologically motivated, on the basis that the translator “altered these expressions that violated his conception of the spiritual nature of God.”60 In response, Staffan Olofsson focuses on translation method,61 but also sees a theological intention in the rendering of inanimate objects behind the terms 58 See further Aitken, “Divine Epithets.” 59 M. Flashar, “Exegetische Studien zum Septuagintapsalter,” ZAW 32 (1912): 243–44. 60 Howard M. Erwin, “Theological Aspects of the Septuagint of the Book of Psalms,” ThD diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 1962, 7 (cited in Staffan Olofsson, God Is My Rock: A Study of Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis in the Septuagint, ConBOT 31 [Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1990], 7). Less problematic but still limiting is the idea of the suppression of these Hebrew titles: Anna Passoni Dell’Acqua, “Innovazioni lessicali e attributi divini: Una caratteristica del Giudaismo alessandrino?” in R. Fabris, ed., La parola di Dio cresceva (At 12,24): Scritti in onore di C. M. Martini nel suo 70º compleanno, RivBSup 33 (Bologna: EDB, 1998), 87–108; Fabris, “La metafora biblica di Dio come roccia e la sua soppressione nelle antiche versioni,” EL 91, no. 6 (1977): 417–53. 61 Olofsson, God Is My Rock, 21–22.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

125

in two respects. He sees a tendency in the translation to emphasize divine transcendence, freeing the God from associations with material objects. This reflects the earlier view of Howard M. Erwin (on the spiritual nature of God) that the translation was intentionally avoiding something, and intentionally adding a new spiritual direction. There are problems with such a concept, both in its latent anti-Jewish sentiments and in its supposed evolutionary model of divine understanding. The tendency then in Septuagint scholarship is to focus on the transfer or not from the Hebrew into the Greek. There are alternative choices that the translator could have taken. Since the descriptive terms in Hebrew refer to the physicality of the protection from God, largely representative of his residence in the temple on a high mountain, geographic adjectives could have been chosen by the translators. If they had wished to avoid the supposedly problematic “rock” or “fortress,” they might have chosen a cultic term that specifies God as deriving from Zion or Jerusalem. Such a toponymic epithet would have been in conformity with one of the Greek conventions for epithets (such as Artemis Ephesia). The toponym might have been avoided, though, as it could imply polytheism or at least a denial of universalism, indicating that the god of Israel is the god of the local cult and not other centres or cities. Instead, the alternative convention of choosing a divine function for an epithet is preferred. This still does not avoid the perception that other gods might offer other functions, but here the concatenation of the multiple epithets serves to emphasise the one God is sufficient. See how similar terms from the previous examples build towards the all-protective power given by God: ἔλεός μου καὶ καταφυγή μου, ἀντιλήμπτωρ μου καὶ ῥύστης μου, ὑπερασπιστής μου, καὶ ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ ἤλπισα, ὁ ὑποτάσσων τὸν λαόν μου ὑπ᾿ ἐμέ. (Ps 144[143]:2) My mercy [Heb.: ‫ ֶח ֶסד‬, “kindness”62] and my place of refuge [“shelter,” ‫צּודה‬ ָ ‫] ְמ‬, my protector [“stronghold,” ‫ ] ִמ ְׂשּגָ ב‬and my rescuer [“deliverance,” ‫]פלט‬, my shield-bearer [“shield,” ‫] ָמגֵ ן‬, and in him I trusted, the one who places my people under my protection.

62

Some English translations (e.g., NRSV) have emended the opening word to “my rock” in the light of parallel passages elsewhere and the pairing with “shelter.” Since the Greek translator obviously had before him a Hebrew text similar to ours, there is no need to emend for our purposes.

126

Aitken

Appreciation of the translator’s method is apparent when the descriptors are understood in the context of Greek divine epithets. While some of the terms are not found elsewhere in Greek religion, they do conform to epithetic practices in Greek. Although the Hebrew may indicate metaphors or poetic descriptions of god, in Greek they become titles of divine functions. We may therefore legitimately call them epithets, conforming as they do in form and meaning to functional epithets of deities. They should properly be called poetic epithets as part of the literary creation of the translators rather than actual terms used by everyday users,63 but such a distinction cannot be fully drawn, especially when we have little epigraphic evidence of Jewish cultic practice in this time. One type of Greek epithet employs substantives as epithets, such as Apollo Iatros, “the Doctor,”64 and this we see in the use in the Psalms of ὑπερασπιστής, “shield bearer.” The titles βασιλεύς, “king,” or κύριος, “lord,” perhaps serve similar duty to ἄναξ of Zeus. Many epithets are functional, and while some of those in the Septuagint or their meanings are not attested elsewhere, their form is not unexpected. God as ἀντιλήμπτωρ or ῥύστης is not a far cry from the common epithet σωτήρ or σώτειρα. Indeed, masculine σωτήρ is of course also used as a divine title in the Psalms (Ps 24[23]:5). At times a term may be a substantivized participle, as we find in Ps 17(16):7: ὁ σῴζων τοὺς ἐλπίζοντας ἐπὶ σέ, “the one who saves those that trust in you.” This is again similar to the participial formation of βροντῶν, “one who thunders,” for Zeus. One distinctive element in the Psalms epithets is the use of the possessive (“my protector”; “my rescuer”). This designation of a “personal god” is untypical of Greek epithets, but common in Semitic languages. As Robert Parker notes, in a case where a Phrygian appeals to “Artimis, my great god,” he marks himself out as a barbarian by this use of the possessive, along with the spelling of the name.65 It is of course natural for the translators to make use of the possibilities of word formation in the Greek language in this way. It is nonetheless also a reminder that when choosing their translation options, they were thinking about the opportunities in Greek and not only the limitations in rendering the Hebrew. Significantly, the phenomenon of translating nouns applied to God is in conformity with methods of creating epithets in Greek. The Septuagint translation, therefore, would have sounded to a Greek ear as an appropriate form of praising the deity. 63 64 65

See Robert Parker, “The Problem of the Greek Cult Epithet,” OA 28 (1990): 173–83, on the distinction but also on the problems of drawing a rigid separation between them. Simon Hornblower, “Lykophron and Epigraphy: The Value and Function of Cult Epithets in the Alexandra,” CQ 64 (2014): 91–92. Robert Parker, Greek Gods Abroad: Names, Natures and Transformations (Oakland: University of California Press, 2017), 119.

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

5

127

Conclusion

The Greek Psalms appear at first sight to be of negligible value for appreciating the cultic contexts in which they might have been used. The translation method employed left little room for poetic elaboration or exegetical development. And yet the translator did manage, through careful lexical choices, to reflect a cultic setting. Rhetorical features indicated an attention to the sound of the Greek that would have aided reading. Specific cultic terms used of God but shared with their neighbours suggest that the Psalms were viewed within the cultic domains of Egypt. And the development of metaphors of God into Greek-style epithets assisted in transporting the Psalms into a world of Greek deities. These methods indicate that the translator, and perhaps his community around him, were engaged in the language of Hellenistic cults and deities, and saw their own Hebrew tradition as fitting into that world, once translated into Greek. The accommodation made was subtle and small, on the level of lexemes, but had a significant impact. The translator might have made some of these changes unconsciously and then it shows him as a translator of his time. He might also have made some adaptations consciously, as a way of presenting his translation as speaking with the religious vocabulary of contemporary cults. Whichever it is, it allowed the Psalms to be seen as worthy of being copied and transmitted first among Greek-speaking Jews, and then among Christians.66 The translation was successful, both in its attempt to render the Hebrew in an intelligible Greek and in its production of a text that had lasting importance for subsequent communities. Bibliography Aejmelaeus, Anneli. “Characterizing Criteria for the Characterization of the Septuagint Translators: Experimenting on the Greek Psalter.” Pages 54–73 in The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma. Edited by R. J. V. Hiebert, C. E. Cox, and P. J. Gentry. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Aitken, James K. “Divine Epithets in the Greek Psalms: Cultural Accommodation and Translatability.” Pages 185–205 in Divine Names on the Spot: Towards a Dynamic Approach of Divine Denominations in Greek and Semitic Contexts. Edited by T. Galoppin and C. Bonnet. OBO 293. Leuven: Peeters, 2021. 66

For one example of the reception history among Christians, see Dirk J. Human and Gert J. Steyn, Psalms and Hebrews: Studies in Reception (London: T&T Clark, 2010).

128

Aitken

Aitken, James K. “Jewish Worship amid Greeks: The Lexical Context of the Old Greek Psalter.” Pages 48–70 in Temples, Texts and Traditions. Edited by Tim McLay. London: T&T Clark, 2015. Aitken, James K. “Neologisms: A Septuagint Problem.” Pages 315–29 in Interested Readers: Essays on the Hebrew Bible in Honor of David J. A. Clines. Edited by J. K. Aitken, J. M. S. Clines, and C. M. Maier. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2013. Aitken, James K. “Psalms.” Pages 320–34 In The T&T Clark Companion to the Septuagint. Edited by James K. Aitken. London: T&T Clark, 2015. Aitken, James K. “The Origins of καίγε.” Pages 21–40 in Biblical Greek in Context: Essays in Honour of John A. L. Lee. Edited by James K. Aitken and T. V. Evans. BiTS 22. Leuven: Peeters, 2015. Aitken, James K. “The Significance of Rhetoric in the Greek Pentateuch.” Pages 507–22 in On Stone and Scroll. Edited by James K. Aitken, K. J. Dell, and B. A. Mastin. BZAW 420. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011. Austermann, Frank. Von der Tora zum Nomos: Untersuchungen zur Übersetzungsweise und Interpretation im Septuaginta-Psalter. MSU 27. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003. Bagnall, Roger S. and Raffaella Cribiore. Women’s Letters from Ancient Egypt, 300 BC– AD 800. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006. Bons, Eberhard. “Rhetorical Devices in the Septuagint Psalter.” Pages 69–82 in Et sapienter et eloquenter: Studies on Rhetorical and Stylistic Features of the Septuagint. Edited by Eberhard Bons and Thomas J. Kraus. FRLANT 241. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. Bons, Eberhard, and Ralph Brucker. “Psalmoi / Das Buch der Psalmen.” Pages 333–353 in Einleitung in die Septuaginta. Vol. 1 of Handbuch zur Septuaginta. Edited by Siegfried Kreuzer. Gütersloh: Gütersloher, 2016. Brock, Sebastian P. “The Phenomenon of the Septuagint.” OTS 17 (1972): 11–36. De Caro, S. “Novità isiache dalla Campania.” ParPass 49 (1994): 7–21. Emde Boas, Evert van, Albert Rijksbaron, Luuk Huitink, Mathieu de Bakker. Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. Emerton, John A. “Treading the Bow.” VT 53 (2003): 465–486. Erwin, Howard M. “Theological Aspects of the Septuagint of the Book of Psalms.” ThD diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 1962. Fabris, R. “La metafora biblica di Dio come roccia e la sua soppressione nelle antiche versioni.” EL 91, no. 6 (1977): 417–53. Flashar, Martin. “Exegetische Studien zum Septuagintapsalter.” ZAW 32 (1912): 243–44. Gentry, Peter J. “The Greek Psalter and the καίγε Tradition: Methodological Questions.” Pages 74–97 in The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma. Edited by

The Septuagint Psalms and Their Setting

129

R. J. V. Hiebert, C. E. Cox, and P. J. Gentry. JSOTSup 332. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Gzella, Holger. Lebenszeit und Ewigkeit: Studien zur Eschatologie und Anthropologie des Septuaginta-Psalters. BBB 134. Berlin: Philo, 2002. Heever, Gerhard van den. “Redescribing Graeco-Roman Antiquity: On Religion and History of Religion.” R&T 12 (2005): 211–38. Hornblower, Simon. “Lykophron and Epigraphy: The Value and Function of Cult Epithets in the Alexandra.” ClQ 64 (2014): 91–120. Human, Dirk J. and Gert J. Steyn. Psalms and Hebrews: Studies in Reception. London: T&T Clark, 2010. Lee, John A. L. “The Literary Greek of Septuagint Isaiah.” SemCl 7 (2014): 135–46. Lee, John A. L. “Translations of the Old Testament. I. Greek.” Pages 775–84 in Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period, 330 B.C.–A.D. 400. Edited by Stanley E. Porter. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Lee, John A. L. The Greek of the Pentateuch: Grinfield Lectures on the Septuagint 2011–2012. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. Dhont, Marieke. Style and Context of Old Greek Job. JSJSup 183. Leiden: Brill, 2018. Montevecchi, Orsolina. “Quaedam de graecitate psalmorum cum papyris comparata.” Pages 97–120 in Bibbia e papiri: Luce dai papiri sulla bibbia greca. Barcelona: Institut de Teologia Fonamental, Seminari de Papirologia, 1999. Munnich, Olivier. “Contribution à l’étude de la première révision de la Septante.” ANRW 2.20.1: 192–220. Muraoka, Takamitsu. A Syntax of Septuagint Greek. Leuven: Peeters, 2016. Olofsson, Staffan. “The Kaige Group and the Septuagint Book of Psalms.” Pages 189–230 in IX Congress of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies: Cambridge, 1995. Edited by B. A. Taylor. SBLSCS 45. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997. Olofsson, Staffan. God Is My Rock: A Study of Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis in the Septuagint. ConBOT 31. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1990. Parker, Robert. “The Problem of the Greek Cult Epithet.” OA 28 (1990): 173–83. Parker, Robert. Greek Gods Abroad: Names, Natures and Transformations. Oakland, Calif.: University of California Press, 2017. Passoni Dell’Acqua, Anna. “Innovazioni lessicali e attributi divini: Una caratteristica del Giudaismo alessandrino?” Pages 87–108 in La parola di Dio cresceva (At 12,24): Scritti in onore di C. M. Martini nel suo 70º compleanno. Edited by R. Fabris. RivBSup 33. Bologna: EDB, 1998. Pietersma, Albert. “Exegesis in the Septuagint: Possibilities and Limits (The Psalter as a Case in Point).” Pages 33–45 in Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scriptures. Edited by W. Kraus and R. Glenn Wooden. SBLSCS 53. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006.

130

Aitken

Pietersma, Albert. “A New Paradigm for Addressing Old Questions: The Relevance of the Interlinear Model for the Study of the Septuagint.” Pages 337–64 in Bible and Computer: The Stellenbosch AIBI-6 Conference; Proceedings of the Association Internationale Bible et Informatique “From Alpha to Byte.” University of Stellenbosch 17–21 July, 2000. Edited by J. Cook. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Pietersma, Albert. “LXX Exegesis and the Superscriptions of the Greek Psalter.” Pages 443–75 in The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception. Edited by Peter W. Flint and Patrick D. Miller. VTSup 99. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Pietersma, Albert. “The Place of Origin of the Old Greek Psalter.” Pages 252–74 in Biblical Studies in Honour of Paul-Eugène Dion. Vol. 1 of The World of the Aramaeans. Edited by P. M. M. Daviau, J. W. Wevers, and M. Weigl. JSOTSup 324. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Pleket, Henry W. “Religious History as the History of Mentality: The ‘Believer’ as Servant of the Deity in the Greek World.” Pages 152–92 in Faith, Hope and Worship: Aspects of Religious Mentality in the Ancient World. Edited by H. S. Versnel. Leiden: Brill, 1981. Rigsby, Kent J. “Founding a Sarapeum.” GRBS 42 (2001): 117–24. Schaper, Joachim. Eschatology in the Greek Psalter. WUNT 2/76. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995. Siegert, Folker. Zwischen Hebräischer Bibel und Altem Testament: Eine Einführung in die Septuaginta. Münster: Lit, 2001. Sollamo, Raija. Renderings of Hebrew Semiprepositions in the Septuagint. DHL 19. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, 1979. Thackeray, Henry St-J. Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek (According to the Septuagint). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909. Tov, Emanuel. The Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Naḥal Ḥever (8HevXIIgr). DJD VIII. Oxford: Clarendon, 1990. Vanderlip, Vera F. The Four Greek Hymns of Isidorus and the Cult of Isis. ASP 12. Toronto: Hakkert, 1972. Williams, Tyler F. “Towards a Date for the Old Greek Psalter.” Pages 248–76 in The Old Greek Psalter: Studies in Honour of Albert Pietersma. Edited by R. J. V. Hiebert, C. E. Cox, and P. J. Gentry. JSOTSup 332. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.

Part 3 The Psalms in Late Antique Religious Poetry

∵

The Psalms Are Not Enough

The Revolution of Hebrew Liturgical Poetry (Piyyut) in Late Antiquity Ophir Münz-Manor Hebrew liturgical poetry (piyyut) came into existence sometime in the late fourth or early fifth century of the Common Era in Palestine.1 The hundreds of years that stretch between the rise of piyyut and the decline of biblical poetry raise a curious question:2 What is the relation between these two bodies of literature; that is, is piyyut similar to or different from the poetic tradition of the Bible? Or in other words, does piyyut continues the biblical tradition of versification or creates a new one? The answers do not have to be binary, of course; and variation and complexity are almost always part of any literary or cultural system. Yet I argue that piyyut differs considerably from biblical poetry, and particularly from the psalms, and that in many ways it revolutionized the Hebrew poetic tradition. In what follows, I exemplify the prosodic and poetic differences between the two corpora, with a special emphasis on the book of Psalms. The psalms have always played a significant role in Jewish cult. Some psalms were recited as part of the sacrificial rituals in the temple in Jerusalem,3 and after its destruction in 70 CE, they gradually became part of rabbinic, postsacrificial liturgy. The most notable impact of the book of Psalms on rabbinic prayer is the recitation of the Hallel (Hebrew, “praise”), Psalms 113–118, which are recited during holidays and festivals.4 Another remarkable instance is the 1 See Laura Lieber, Yannai on Genesis: An Invitation to Piyyut (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 2010), 1–20; Michael Rand, “Fundamentals of the Study of Piyyut,” in Literature or Liturgy? Early Christian Hymns and Prayers in Their Literary and Liturgical Context in Antiquity, ed. Clemens Leonhard and Hermut Löhr (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), 107–25. 2 The oldest example of poetry written in the biblical style is the “Hodayot Scroll” from Qumran, dated to the first century before the Common Era. See Wout Jac. van Bekkum, “Qumran Poetry and Piyyut: Some Observations on Hebrew Poetic Traditions in Biblical and Post-Biblical Times,” Zutot 2, no. 1 (2002): 26–33. 3 Gary A. Anderson, “The Praise of God as a Cultic Event,” in Priesthood and Cult in Ancient Israel, ed. Gary Anderson and Saul M. Olyan (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), 15–33. 4 The custom dates back to the days of the temple, in which the Hallel was recited during the paschal sacrifice. On the Hallel, see Reuven Hammer, “Hallel: A Liturgical Composition Celebrating the Exodus,” in The Experience of Jewish Liturgy: Studies Dedicated to Menachem Schmelzer, ed. Debra Reed Blank (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 101–113.

© Ophir Münz-Manor, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_008

134

Münz-Manor

recitation of Psalms 120–134, the so-called shire hamaʿalot (Hebrew, “songs of ascents”), which serve as a prelude to the morning service.5 This section was expanded gradually until it reached in the early Middle Ages its final form, the so-called pesuqe de-zimra (“verses of chant”), an extensive selection of psalms and some other biblical poetic selections that opens the morning services. In addition, entire psalms were inserted regularly into the statutory text of the liturgy as interludes;6 and in numerous cases, verses from the psalms were interwoven (verbatim or not) into the statutory texts and also into piyyutim. That said, the incorporation of biblical (poetic) language in piyyut is only partially related to the question of its innovative poetic and liturgical nature, as it draws regularly on biblical language, whether in prose or in verse. It is hard to determine what were the exact historical and literary Sitze im Leben of the book of Psalms, which in itself is a composite work, of course, but it suffices to say that in most cases its context was not, strictly speaking, cultic (even if later its cultic aspects developed).7 Piyyut, in contrast, was composed from the outset as liturgical poetry, namely performative verse with a concrete functional setting.8 Piyyutim were performed as part of the synagogal liturgy, mostly on shabbatot and festivals but also on ordinary days, within the synagogue in front a relatively diverse audience, including unlettered men and women.9 Unfortunately, we cannot say much more about the historical—let alone social—contexts of piyyut. Our knowledge of the circumstances in which it emerged is scant: we do not possess any manual of poetry writing or other metapoetic references, and in many cases the only contemporaneous evidence for the existence of this liturgical poetry is the poetry itself.

5 In fact, the opening section of the morning service is much more complex and contains many other psalms and biblical sections. The historical development of this section is still mostly unknown. For now, see Loren Crow, The Songs of Ascents (Psalms 120–134): Their Place in Israelite History and Religion (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature Press, 1996); Ezra Fleischer, Eretz-Yisrael Prayer and Prayer Rituals as Portrayed in the Geniza Documents [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1988). 6 On the role of the psalms in late antique and medieval Jewish liturgy, see Robert Brody, “Liturgical Uses of the Book of Psalms,” in Prayers That Cite Scripture: Biblical Quotation in Jewish Prayers from Antiquity through the Middle Ages, ed. James Kugel (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006), 61–81. 7 Anderson, “Praise of God.” 8 This explains in part the departure of the payyetanim from the biblical model of the psalms, alongside the fact that the nature of late antique liturgy was very different from rituals in biblical times. 9 Ophir Münz-Manor and Thomas Arentzen, “Soundscapes of Salvation: Resounding Refrains in Jewish and Christian Liturgical Poems,” SLA 3, no. 1 (2019): 36–55.

The Psalms Are Not Enough

135

Having said that, it is worthwhile noting that the study of piyyut also suffers from lack of concrete historical context as to its inception. Some scholars assert that the statutory prayers became dull because of their repetitive nature.10 According to this view, the payyetanim sought to revive the liturgy with their innovative poetic compositions. Others argue that the rise of piyyut relates to the new kinds of religiosity that emerged in this period, most notably the rise of nonsacrificial rituals.11 This last point is of great importance since piyyut emerged in tandem with Christian liturgical poetry, mostly in the eastern part of the Byzantine Empire. From the fourth century CE onwards, liturgical poets writing in Syriac, Samaritan Aramaic, and Greek (and the names of Ephrem, Marqe, and Romanos come to mind) employed poetic and prosodic features that are reminiscent of Hebrew liturgical verse. In all of these poetic traditions, the poets “diverted” from preceding biblical and classical models that were available to them and created a new, late antique, Near Eastern poetics that transcended the boundaries of religious denominations.12 This trajectory becomes clearer when we compare it to contemporary poetry, written in Greek and Latin, in the western parts of the Roman/Byzantine Empire. Here, religious poetry composed by authors such as Gregory Nazianzus or Ambrose was much closer to the biblical models, especially to the psalms.13

10

This is the theory of Ezra Fleischer, one of the greatest scholars of piyyut in the twentieth century. See Ezra Fleischer, “Piyyut,” in Midrash and Targum, Liturgy, Poetry, Mysticism, Contracts, Inscriptions, Ancient Science, and the Languages of Rabbinic Literature, vol. 2 of The Literature of the Sages, ed. Shmuel Safrai (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2006), 363–74. 11 See Ophir Münz-Manor, “Narrating Salvation: Verbal Sacrifices in Late Antique Liturgical Poetry,” in Jews, Christians, and the Roman Empire: The Poetics of Power Late Antiquity, ed. Natalie B. Dohrmann and Annette Yoshiko Reed (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013), 154–66, 315–19. 12 See Ophir Münz-Manor, “Liturgical Poetry in the Late Antique Near East: A Comparative Approach,” JAJ 1, no. 3 (2010): 336–61; Wout Jac. van Bekkum, “Jewish and Christian Hymnody in the Early Byzantine Period,” in The Jewish-Greek Tradition in Antiquity and the Byzantine Empire, ed. James K. Aitken and James Carleton Paget (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 261–78. 13 See Peter L. Gilbert, On God and Man: Theological Poetry of St. Gregory of Nazianzus (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001); C. Milovanovic-Barham, “Gregory of Nazianzus: Ars Poetica (in suos versus: Carmen 2.1.39),” JECS 5 (1997): 497–510; for Ambrose, see Jan den Boeft, “Cantatur ad Delectationem: Ambrose’s Lyric Poetry,” in Poetry and Exegesis in Premodern Latin Christianity: The Encounter between Classical and Christian Strategies of Interpretation, ed. Willemien Otten and Karla Pollmann (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 425–40.

136 1

Münz-Manor

The Poetic Line in Piyyut

Let us now examine in detail some of the major structural characteristics of piyyut vis-à-vis biblical poetry. A good starting point for the comparison between biblical poetry and piyyut is the question of the poetic line. In his book, On Biblical Poetry, F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp makes considerable efforts to prove that biblical poetry features a defined, stable, and identifiable poetic line.14 The main obstacle to defining a biblical poetic line is of course the lack of a meter. The question whether one can speak about meter in biblical poetry or about a defined and stable poetic line in biblical poetry falls outside of the boundaries of this article.15 What is clear is that there is no question whatsoever regarding the poetic line in piyyut, which is well defined by a number of poetic and prosodic elements. Let me exemplify it by means of two examples, the first from a piyyut by Yose ben Yose, the fifth-century payyetan:16 ‫ אאפדנו מלוכה‬/ ‫ אספרה כבודו‬/ ‫ אשירה עוזו‬/ ‫אהללה אלהי‬ ‫ יאתה מלוכה‬/ ‫ אנווהו כי לו‬/ ‫ אשר שח ופעל‬/ ‫אשגב לפועל‬ ‫ גודל המלוכה‬/ ‫ ולו נאה שיח‬/ ‫ כי צבאו אני‬/ ‫בעוזו אשנן‬ 17‫ ולמי המלוכה‬/ ‫ למי שאת ויתר עז‬/ ‫ ברוב עם אדבר‬/ ‫בקהל אבשר‬

Ahalela elohai / ashira uzu / asapra kevodo / aapdeno melucha Asagev lapoel / asher sach ufaal / anavehu ki lo / yaata melucha Beuzu ashanen / ki tsevao ani / velo naeh siach / godel hamelucha Bakahal avaser / berov am adaber / lemi set veyeter oz / ulemi hamelucha I shall praise my God / sing his mightiness / recount his glory / and vest him with kingship I shall exalt God / who said and created / I shall adorn him because / he is fit for kingship I shall recount his mightiness / because I am his host / and he deserves recounting / the greatness of kingship In the congregation I shall apprise / amid the people I shall relate / who bears and has strength / and who has the kingship 14 F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp, On Biblical Poetry (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). 15 James Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981). 16 Since I focus here on the structural building blocks of piyyut and not its content, I provide the Hebrew original alongside an English transliteration and literal translation. All translations are by the author. 17 Aharon Mirsky, Piyyutei Yose ben Yose [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Bialik, 1991), 270–72.

The Psalms Are Not Enough

137

The payyetanic poetic line in this case is clearly delineated by these devices: (1) the alphabetic acrostic letter at the beginning of the line; (2) the refrain word ‫“( מלוכה‬kingship”) at the end of the line, and (3) the division of the line into four equal parts. Similar devices, it should be stressed, are not incidental in piyyut, and they appear (in this combination or another) in each and every payyetanic composition. The robustness of the poetic line was strengthened starting with the sixth century, when rhyme became an obligatory feature of piyyut, as well as numerous structural devices. These features gave rise also to a larger unit, the stanza: ‫ אשירה נא לידידי‬/ ‫שיר‬ ‫ בכרמי עין גדי‬/ ‫ישקני‬ ‫ כפר נרדי‬/ ‫לריח‬ ‫ לקרית מועדי‬/ ‫משכני‬ ‫ ואתה מגן בעדי‬/ ‫שחורה אני‬ ‫ ביום מאסי‬/ ‫אל תראוני‬ ‫ חלקי וכוסי‬/ ‫הגידה לי‬ ‫ תכפר ותפר כעסי‬/ ‫אם‬ ‫ השישי עושי‬/ ‫לסוסתי‬ 18‫ לתחיה טללי רסיסי‬/ ‫נאוו‬

Shir / ashira nah leyedidi Yishakeni / becharmei ein gedi Lereich / kofer nardi Moshcheni / leqiryat moadi Shchora ani / veatah magen beodi Al tiruni / beyom moasi Hagida li / chelki vechosi Im / techaper vetafer keasi Lesusati / hasisi osi Naavu / letchia talelei resisi Song / I shall sing to my friend He shall kiss me / in the vineyards of Ein Gedi The smell / of a cluster of henna blossoms 18

Ophir Münz-Manor, Early Piyyut: An Annotated Anthology [Hebrew] (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press, 2015), 91.

138

Münz-Manor

Draw me / to the city of my festivals I am dark / and you guard me Do not gaze at me / in the day of neglection Tell me / my share and my cup If / you atone and revoke my anger To a mare / rejoice my maker Beautiful / is the dew of deliverance In this example, from a piyyut by Yannai, the sixth century CE poet, we can notice several of these features at work: (1) Each line opens with the first word of each verse in the Song of Songs scroll. (2) The alphabetic acrostic word that comes in the second word of each stanza: ‫ א‬in the first stanza and ‫ ב‬in the second. (3) The rhyme ‫( די‬in the first stanza) and ‫( סי‬in the second stanza) at the end of each line. The variations are endless, and each payyetan developed his own poetic and prosodic style; and ultimately the poetic line is robust and the entire composition systematic. This stands in stark contrast to biblical poetry, where such high standardization does not exist. The biblical poetic line is based almost entirely on the celebrated parallelismus membrorum, which does regulate the poetic line, although in a much looser way than piyyut.19 2

Acrostics, Refrains, and Meters in Piyyut

Let me elaborate now on the relations between the payyetanic use of acrostics and refrains and their biblical counterparts. As is well known, the acrostic is found already in Scripture (for example in Psalm 145, which is indeed very popular in Jewish liturgy).20 There is no doubt that biblical acrostics served as a model for the late antique poets when they decided to employ this structural device. This, however, is not sufficient to explain the renaissance experienced by acrostics in piyyut. In other words, the existence of the ancient source in itself cannot explain how, after hundreds of years during which it was almost entirely out of use, the alphabetic acrostic became an obligatory device in

19 Kugel, Idea of Biblical Poetry. 20 In the Hebrew Bible, the alphabetic acrostic is attested, for example, in Psalm 119, Proverbs 31, and Lamentations 1–4. See Derek Krueger, Writing and Holiness: The Practice of Authorship in the Early Christian East (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 169–74.

The Psalms Are Not Enough

139

piyyut. Moreover, the payyetanim took the acrostics one step further, and at an early stage started using it in order to inscribe their names in the piyyutim. The refrain is another case in point. Like other poetic devices in the emerging “school” of Near Eastern liturgical poetry, the refrain has biblical antecedents. However, from a marginal device in biblical poetry, the refrain became central in late antique hymnography.21 This shift relates in some ways also to the increasing use of psalms in Christian and Jewish liturgies in the late antique period, mostly since some psalms also have a refrain (e.g., Ps 136). However, the possible connection between the role of refrains in liturgical poetry and in psalmody falls outside the scope of this article, and anyway the development of the liturgical use of the psalter remains understudied, especially in Jewish liturgy.22 In the payyetanic tradition, the refrain is a word, a poetic line, or a stanza that is repeated by the congregants at fixed intervals during the performance of the poem. Here lies the great merit of the refrain—it allows the audience to take part in the performance vocally; they are not reduced to passive listeners, but get to sing along.23 Let me exemplify the use of a refrain in piyyut in the context of the Psalter by looking at the opening of a qina (elegy or lament for the Ninth of Av) that dates to the fourth or fifth century of the Common Era. The qina juxtaposes the lament on the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple with verses from the book of Psalms and with an extraordinary lament of the signs of the zodiac. Here are the introductory stanzas and the refrain: ‫אז בחטאינו חרב מקדש ובעוונותינו נשרף היכל‬ ‫בארץ חוברה לה קשרו מספד וצבא השמים נשאו קינה‬

24‫ תרחם ציון ותבנה חומות ירושלים‬/ ‫עד אנה בכיה בציון ומספד בירושלים‬ Then because of our sins the temple was destroyed And because of our transgressions the sanctuary was burned In the city that is bound, a lament was heard While the heavens pronounced a qina. How long must Zion cry and Jerusalem mourn? Take pity on Zion, rebuild the walls of Jerusalem! 21 On this trajectory, see Münz-Manor, “Liturgical Poetry,” 336–61. 22 See Paul F. Bradshaw, Daily Prayer in the Early Church: A Study of the Origin and Early Development of the Divine Office (London: SPCK, 1981), 57–64; Abraham Jacob Berkovitz, The Life of Psalms in Late Antiquity (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2018), 165–290. 23 Münz-Manor and Arentzen, “Soundscapes of Salvation.” 24 Münz-Manor, Early Piyyut, 37.

140

Münz-Manor

A look at the refrain exemplifies its merit in the context of the qina, the Ninth of Av, and the usage of the book of Psalms. The first part of the refrain poses a question formulated in a parallelistic fashion, one reminiscent of biblical poetry, with a perfect equation of Zion and Jerusalem, and crying and mourning. The second part of the refrain adds more complexity as it also echoes its first part but in an optimistic key, again paralleling Zion and Jerusalem with a meaningful shift of the verbs, which are now in the future/imperative mode and addressed to God: “Take pity on Zion, rebuild the walls of Jerusalem!” Thematically, the conclusive part of the refrain fuses in a sophisticated manner two verses from the book of Psalms: Ps 51:20 (“Show goodness in your pleasure to Zion, rebuild the walls of Jerusalem”) and Ps 102:14 (“You, may you rise, have mercy on Zion, for it is the hour to pity her, for the fixed time has come”). Both psalms are highly appropriate in the context of the qina: the first concludes a petitionary prayer of David after Nathan rebuked him for the Bathsheba affair; the latter, similarly, presents the prayer of a person whom God had deserted and whose enemies chastise him. Here too the speaker begs God to rebuild Zion and reclaim its sovereignty. Finally let me say something about payyetanic meter. In ancient Semitic poetry, and in this context, it is biblical poetry that is of primary importance, there existed only one principle for the organization of the poetic line: parallelism. Every single line of biblical poetry is built symmetrically, but there is no regularity either in the number of stichs in every line or in the length of the poetic lines themselves.25 In contrast to classical Greek and Latin poetry, in which every poetic line is subject to a basic, unified metrical pattern, there is no such system either in biblical poetry or in other poetic corpora from the Ancient Near East. At the most, it is possible to identify some sort of regularity in them—in the number of stresses, syllables, or other units—a regularity that is not obligatory, and in any case, not systematic. In contrast, in piyyut one notes an insistence on a regular, primarily fourpart, division of the poetic line in its entirety. The rise of this obligatory principle in the poetic corpora discussed here cannot be explained as an accident either, in particular on account of the fact that, as mentioned above, before us is a revolutionary innovation in the history of poetry composed in Semitic languages. The later poets instituted another great innovation: the counting of units that are precisely defined (to one degree or another), which are repeated in all of the lines of the poem and serve to organize them from beginning to end. Indeed, in every one of the branches of the poetic tradition, the poets counted different units. For example, the Syriac poets counted syllables, in 25

Kugel, Idea of Biblical Poetry.

The Psalms Are Not Enough

141

most cases twelve or fourteen syllables in every line.26 In Jewish and Samaritan poetry from the fourth and fifth centuries CE, the reigning principle was “the four-part rhythm” (‫)מקצב מרובע‬, as it is termed in the scholarly literature. This “meter” counted accented words, according to a division of two main stresses in every one of the four stichs.27 The counting principle is also preserved in the “metrical” system known as “word meter” (‫)משקל התיבות‬, which is known from a limited number of Hebrew poems (for an example, see below). The “word meter” stipulates a fixed number of words in every line. From the point of view of rhythm, this is a loose “meter” indeed, since in it a very short and a very long word are reckoned as being equivalent for purposes of the word count. However, it is precisely this fact that underscores the principle underlying the system that is at work in the poetry of the late antique period: the specification of a basic number of units that undergirds all of the lines of the poem. In this regard, therefore, by instituting a fixed number of countable units in every line of a given poem, the eastern poets approached their colleagues composing in Greek and Latin, who continued to employ quantitative meters. 3

Linguistic and Literary Aspects of Piyyut

Like prosody, the language of piyyut also differs from Biblical Hebrew, although to a lesser extent. In essence, the payyetanic language constitutes a separate stratum in the history of the Hebrew language,28 although it is much closer to Biblical Hebrew than to contemporaneous Rabbinic Hebrew. In the context of the present discussion, this fact is very interesting: on the one hand, the payyetanim distanced themselves from the poetic and prosodic style of biblical poetry while maintaining closer relations to biblical language; and, on the other hand, they composed piyyutim that were part of rabbinic liturgy yet not in the rabbinic idiom. But the proximity of payyetanic Hebrew to Biblical 26 27

28

For meter in Syriac poetry, see Sebastian Brock, St. Ephrem the Syrian, Hymns on Paradise (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1990), 36–39. From the strictly prosodic point of view, this is not a precise meter, but despite this, the poet did count a fixed number of units in every line. In later stages, around the sixth and seventh centuries CE, Hebrew poetry switched to a freer stress meter, though care was taken to impose the pattern throughout the whole composition (or, occasionally, within every one of its parts). For meter in ancient Hebrew poetry, see Benjamin Harshav, The History of Hebrew Versification from the Bible to Modernism [Hebrew] (Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press, 2008), 41–55. Joseph Yahalom, The Language of Early Piyyut [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1985), Hebrew; Michael Rand, Introduction to the Grammar of Hebrew Poetry in Byzantine Palestine (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2006).

142

Münz-Manor

Hebrew should be taken with a grain of salt; when we compare payyetanic Hebrew to the language of later, medieval Hebrew poetry (liturgical and nonliturgical alike), the latter is much more similar to the biblical model. We can conclude then that payyetanic Hebrew is inspired by Biblical Hebrew but has unique characteristics. Michael Rand, who published a monograph on payyetanic Hebrew summarized this nicely: piyyut’s “Hebrew is largely based on Biblical Hebrew but it is not simply a slavish imitation thereof.”29 In a nutshell, the language of piyyut is characterized by its tendency to shorten verbal forms (for example, ‫ חז‬instead of ‫“[ חזה‬saw”] or ‫ פץ‬instead of ‫“[ פצה‬said”]), to shorten noun forms (‫ נשם‬instead of ‫“[ נשמה‬soul”] or ‫ עלץ‬instead of ‫“[ עליצות‬joyfulness”]), and by the introduction of numerous neologisms or unorthodox use of roots. Exactly these novelties set piyyut apart from Biblical Hebrew, and they were the basis for harsh criticism of the language of piyyut by medieval and modern sages and scholars. The scapegoat for these accusations was the iconic payyetan Eleazar Berabbi Kallir, as can be found in the writings of Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089–1167)30 as well in works by Mendele Mocher Sforim (S. J. Abramowitch; 1836–1917) and Hayim Nahman Bialik (1873–1934).31 It is worthwhile noting that also in regard to the status and nature of figurative language, piyyut is different from the psalms. Whereas the latter make extensive use of metaphors, similes and other figurative devices, the former is relatively lean in them. Elsewhere I have analyzed in depth figurative language in piyyut, and indeed, one of the conclusions was that the payyetanim made extensive use of another (nonfigurative) device, the epithet, to compensate, as it were, for the marginal role of metaphors and the like.32 The analysis of major literary and rhetorical traits of piyyut reveals some meaningful differences from the psalms. Most notably is the nature of the poetic “I” in piyyut. To be sure, many piyyutim employ a speaker that uses the first person singular; however, it is obvious that this is a communal “I,” which is 29 Rand, Introduction, 23. 30 See Ruth Langer, “Kalir Was a Tanna: Rabbenu Tam’s Invocation of Antiquity in Defense of the Ashkenazi Payyetanic Tradition,” HUCA 67 (1996): 102–106; Joseph Yahalom, “The Poetics of Spanish Piyyut in Light of Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Critique of its Pre-Spanish Prece­ dents,” in Abraham Ibn Ezra and His Age: Proceedings of the International Symposium, Madrid 1989, ed. Fernando Díaz-Esteban (Madrid: Asociacíon Española de Orientalistas, 1990), 387–92. 31 See: Joseph Yahalom, Poetry and Society in Jewish Galilee of Late Antiquity [Hebrew] (Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad, 1999), 78–83. 32 Ophir Münz-Manor, “Figurative Language in Early Piyyut,” in Giving a Diamond: Essays in Honor of Joseph Yahalom on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday, ed. Wout Jac. van Bekkum and Naoya Katsumata (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 51–68.

The Psalms Are Not Enough

143

metonymic to the entire congregation.33 This poetic persona is altogether different from the speaker in numerous psalms, which relates the genuine experience of an individual. In that sense, one can say that by and large the psalms are lyrical, whereas piyyut is epic. Indeed, the epic nature of the piyyut is noticeable; most of the piyyutim have a distinct narrative nature, as many of them retell biblical stories. In other cases, especially in the so-called Seder Avodah genre, the epic nature is even more pronounced.34 It is true that there are examples for “epic” poetry in the Bible (the Song at the Sea is an excellent early example, as well as Pss 105–106), and one can find here the foundation for the epic style in later piyyut; however, like in the case of the acrostic and the refrain, here too a marginal feature of biblical poetry becomes a cornerstone of piyyut. Finally, I will note the complex compositional structure of most of the piyyutim and their length, which often stretched over hundreds of poetic lines. In comparison, the psalms are poetic miniatures. 4

Final Observations

With the rise of piyyut, we witness a revolution in the poetics and prosody of Hebrew poetry. In the course of the article, I sought to exemplify these changes; however, a word of caution is in place here: one should be cautious when using the term revolution. Very few cultural or literary phenomena adhere to the binary opposition of evolution or revolution. More than anything else, it is the “volution” component in these two words, the English rendition of the Latin verb volvere, “to roll,” that describes much more accurately the historical process that brings about novelties and that brought about piyyut. As Tzetan Todorov once wrote about literary genres: “From where do genres come? Quite simply, from other genres. A new genre is always the transformation of one or several old genres: by inversion, by displacement, by combination.”35 The payyetanim knew their Bible very well; they quoted it time and again in their compositions. Here and there, they even referred explicitly or implicitly to

33

On the dynamics between the “I” and the “We” in piyyut, see Tzvi Novick, “‘Let Me Flee for Help …’: Israel as ‘I’ and the Teqiʿot of Yose ben Yose,” EJJS 8 (2014): 145–72; Michael D. Swartz, “Rhetorical Indications of the Poet’s Craft in the Ancient Synagogue,” in Beyond Priesthood: Religious Entrepreneurs and Innovators in the Imperial Era, ed. Richard L. Gordon, Jörg Rüpke, and Georgia Petridou (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017), 231–51. 34 Münz-Manor, “Narrating Salvation.” 35 Tzvetan Todorov, “The Origin of Genres,” NLH 8, no. 1 (1976): 169.

144

Münz-Manor

biblical poetry or followed the ancient model—as in the case of the acrostics and refrains—but at the same time, they revolutionized the use of it. The fact that the piyyut is still relatively an understudied field leads sometimes to misconceptions, such as the recent description of piyyut as a “poetic imitation of psalmody.”36 I believe I was able to demonstrate in this article that piyyut is anything but an imitation of the psalms or any other sort of Hebrew ancient poetry. This does not mean that piyyut does not belong to the reception history of biblical poetry and of psalmody. After all, the poetry of the bible was esteemed by the payyetanim; perhaps they did not want to step into the shoes of David or Moses, two great biblical poets, as it were, and anyway the aesthetics of Late Antiquity and the context of the liturgy required new forms and new aesthetics. In that sense, and à la Todorov, the decision to write poetry in a new key in itself constitutes a direct relation to the old, biblical, one. At the end of the day, piyyut and the psalms dovetailed perfectly in the liturgy, and offered to the congregants and to later generations a genuine blend of old and new. Bibliography Anderson, Gary A. “The Praise of God as a Cultic Event.” Pages 15–33 in Priesthood and Cult in Ancient Israel. Edited by Gary A. Anderson and Saul M. Olyan. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991. Bekkum, Wout Jac. van. “Jewish and Christian Hymnody in the Early Byzantine Period.” Pages 261–78 in The Jewish-Greek Tradition in Antiquity and the Byzantine Empire. Edited by James K. Aitken and James Carleton Paget. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Bekkum, Wout Jac. van. “Qumran Poetry and Piyyut: Some Observations on Hebrew Poetic Traditions in Biblical and Post-Biblical Times.” Zutot 2, no. 1 (2002): 26–33. Berkovitz, Abraham Jacob. The Life of Psalms in Late Antiquity. PhD diss., Princeton University, 2018. Boeft, Jan den. “Cantatur ad Delectationem: Ambrose’s Lyric Poetry.” Pages 425–40 in Poetry and Exegesis in Premodern Latin Christianity: The Encounter between Classical and Christian Strategies of Interpretation. Edited by Willemien Otten and Karla Pollmann. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Bradshaw, Paul F. Daily Prayer in the Early Church: A Study of the Origin and Early Development of the Divine Office. London: SPCK, 1981. 36

See Susan Gillingham, Psalms Through the Centuries (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008), 120.

The Psalms Are Not Enough

145

Brock, Sebastian. St. Ephrem the Syrian, Hymns on Paradise. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1990. Brody, Robert. “Liturgical Uses of the Book of Psalms.” Pages 61–81 in Prayers That Cite Scripture: Biblical Quotation in Jewish Prayers from Antiquity through the Middle Ages. Edited by James Kugel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006. Crow, Loren. The Songs of Ascents (Psalms 120–134): Their Place in Israelite History and Religion. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature Press, 1996. Dobbs-Allsopp, F. W. On Biblical Poetry. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Fleischer, Ezra. Eretz-Yisrael Prayer and Prayer Rituals as Portrayed in the Geniza Documents [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1988. Fleischer, Ezra. “Piyyut.” Pages 363–74 in Midrash and Targum, Liturgy, Poetry, Mysticism, Contracts, Inscriptions, Ancient Science, and the Languages of Rabbinic Literature, vol. 2 of The Literature of the Sages. Edited by Shmuel Safrai. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2006. Gilbert, Peter L. On God and Man: Theological Poetry of St. Gregory of Nazianzus. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001. Gillingham, Susan. Psalms Through the Centuries. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008. Hammer, Reuven. “Hallel: A Liturgical Composition Celebrating the Exodus.” Pages 101–113 in The Experience of Jewish Liturgy: Studies Dedicated to Menachem Schmelzer. Edited by Debra Reed Blank. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Harshav, Benjamin. The History of Hebrew Versification from the Bible to Modernism [Hebrew]. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press, 2008. Krueger, Derek. Writing and Holiness: The Practice of Authorship in the Early Christian East. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. Kugel, James. The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981. Langer, Ruth. “Kalir Was a Tanna: Rabbenu Tam’s Invocation of Antiquity in Defense of the Ashkenazi Payyetanic Tradition.” HUCA 67 (1996): 102–106. Lieber, Laura. Yannai on Genesis: An Invitation to Piyyut. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 2010. Milovanovic-Barham, C. “Gregory of Nazianzus: Ars Poetica (in suos versus: Carmen 2.1.39).” JECS 5 (1997): 497–510. Mirsky, Aharon. Piyyutei Yose ben Yose [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Bialik, 1991. Münz-Manor, Ophir. Early Piyyut: An Annotated Anthology [Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press, 2015. Münz-Manor, Ophir. “Figurative Language in Early Piyyut.” Pages 51–68 in Giving a Diamond: Essays in Honor of Joseph Yahalom on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday. Edited by Wout Jac. van Bekkum and Naoya Katsumata. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Münz-Manor, Ophir. “Liturgical Poetry in the Late Antique Near East: A Comparative Approach.” JAJ 1, no. 3 (2010): 336–61.

146

Münz-Manor

Münz-Manor, Ophir. “Narrating Salvation: Verbal Sacrifices in Late Antique Liturgical Poetry.” Pages 154–66, 315–19 in Jews, Christians, and the Roman Empire: The Poetics of Power Late Antiquity. Edited by Natalie B. Dohrmann and Annette Yoshiko Reed. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013. Münz-Manor, Ophir, and Thomas Arentzen. “Soundscapes of Salvation: Resounding Refrains in Jewish and Christian Liturgical Poems.” SLA 3, no. 1 (2019): 36–55. Novick, Tzvi. “‘Let Me Flee for Help …’: Israel as ‘I’ and the Teqiʿot of Yose ben Yose.” EJJS 8 (2014): 145–72. Rand, Michael. “Fundamentals of the Study of Piyyut.” Pages 107–125 in Literature or Liturgy? Early Christian Hymns and Prayers in Their Literary and Liturgical Context in Antiquity. Edited by Clemens Leonhard and Hermut Löhr. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Rand, Michael. Introduction to the Grammar of Hebrew Poetry in Byzantine Palestine. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2006. Swartz, Michael D. “Rhetorical Indications of the Poet’s Craft in the Ancient Synagogue.” Pages 231–51 in Beyond Priesthood: Religious Entrepreneurs and Innovators in the Imperial Era. Edited by Richard L. Gordon, Jörg Rüpke, and Georgia Petridou. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2017. Todorov, Tzvetan. “The Origin of Genres.” NLH 8, no. 1 (1976): 159–70. Yahalom, Joseph. The Language of Early Piyyut [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1985. Yahalom, Joseph. “The Poetics of Spanish Piyyut in Light of Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Critique of its Pre-Spanish Precedents.” Pages 387–92 in Abraham Ibn Ezra and His Age: Proceedings of the International Symposium, Madrid 1989. Edited by Fernando Díaz-Esteban. Madrid: Asociacíon Española de Orientalistas, 1990. Yahalom, Joseph. Poetry and Society in Jewish Galilee of Late Antiquity [Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: Hakibutz Hameuchad, 1999.

The Prayers of Moses: Psalm 90 and Moses’s Refusal to Die Laura S. Lieber While Moses’s voice dominates throughout the Torah, most of his speech consists of prose; unlike David, Moses is the law-giver, not a hymnographer. Nonetheless, Moses is credited with the recitation or authorship of three distinct poems: his two valedictory poems in Deuteronomy (“the Song of Moses” in Deut 32 and “the Blessing of Moses” in Deut 33) and Psalm 90, which bears the superscription, “A prayer of Moses, the man of God” (‫תפלה למשה איש‬ ‫ ;האלהים‬Ps 90:1).1 These poems share a sense of context: the two compositions from Deuteronomy occur immediately prior to Moses’s death, while Psalm 90 contains poignant reflections on mortality. The perception that Moses felt an affinity for poetic diction at the end of his life may thus be traced to the biblical text. In late antiquity—a period when liturgical poetry emerged as a major mode of cultural expression—we find a significant quantity of poetry in Moses’s voice, including compositions that expand upon and dramatize Moses’s final hours. At first reading, these late antique poems seem quite different in both form and function from biblical poetry; and yet, upon closer reading it is possible to trace affinities between biblical poetry, including Psalms, and postbiblical hymnic compositions. In the present essay, we will consider how Psalm 90, “the prayer of Moses,” in fact can be read as anticipating the dramatic, multivoiced poetic unit (called a silluq) by Eleazar ha-Qallir (Galilee, late sixth–early seventh c. CE). After examining how Psalm 90 contains within itself rhetorical and thematic elements that embed dramatic potential, we will see how Qallir activates that potential in his own presentation of Moses’s fervent prayers for 1 The ascription of Psalm 90 to Moses appears in the Masoretic text. In the LXX (where it is Psalm 89), the MT’s heading is rendered straightforwardly in Greek (προσευχὴ τοῦ Μωυσῆ ἀνθρώπου τοῦ θεοῦ); unfortunately, this psalm is not among the texts preserved in 11QPsaa. On psalmic superscription, see Nancy L. de Claissé-Walford, “The Meta-Narrative of the Psalter,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 363–76. For an analysis of Psalm 90, and a concise summary of how contemporary scholars have generally approached it, see Richard J. Clifford, “Psalm 90: Wisdom Meditation or Communal Lament?” in The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception, ed. Peter W. Flint and Patrick D. Miller, Jr. (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 190–205. Also noteworthy is Brevard S. Childs, “Psalm Titles and Their Midrashic Exegesis,” JSS 16, no. 2 (1977): 137–50.

© Laura S. Lieber, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_009

148

Lieber

life. We will also consider how an appreciation for the silluq’s sense of drama can help shape our understanding of the psalm, and how Qallir and others in late antiquity, shaped by their own performance-saturated environment, may have heard a psalm presented as being in the voice of Moses. 1

Psalm 90: Potential Drama

Psalm 90 consists of seventeen verses, and presents a mixture of moods and voices. While the heading indicates that the psalm is in the voice of Moses, the speaker employs the first-person plural—“we,” “us,” and “our”—throughout.2 The rhetorical audience of the composition, however, is God, whom the speaker addresses directly, as “you.” The psalm initially alternates between juxtapositions of divine eternality and human finitude (vv. 2–6, 10), and segues from the experience of mortality to the experience of divine judgment (vv. 7–9, 11). The composition then segues to reflecting on the wisdom that comes from mortality (v. 12) and appeals to God for mercy, seeking goodness to counterbalance suffering (vv. 13–17). The poet does not present the limited human lifespan as punishment, but as a motivation to heed the divine call to repent; similarly, divine fury manifests both as a force of nature—a natural consequence of human transgression—and as intentional justice. Both humans and God are called to “turn”: in verse 3, God commands mortals to turn (‫שובו‬ ‫)בני אדם‬, while in verse 13, the speaker calls on God to do the same (‫)שובה ה׳‬. The final two lines revisit and rework the opening verses, suggesting that offspring constitute a kind of immortality (v. 16, “Let your deeds be seen by your servants, your glory by their children”) while divine favor—the complement to divine wrath—permits one’s works to endure beyond a lifespan (v. 17). The desire for such immortality, through progeny and productivity, constitutes the petitions that conclude the psalm. The psalm is written in a single voice—that of Moses—speaking on behalf of the community to the deity. The poem is not, in and of itself, a drama, 2 It is worth noting that rabbinic writers refer to a tradition in which Pss 90–100 are ascribed to Moses; see discussion in A. J. Berkovitz, “Beyond Attribution and Authority: The Case of Psalms in Rabbinic Hermeneutics,” in Rethinking ‘Authority’ in Late Antiquity: Authorship, Law, and Transmission in Jewish and Christian Tradition, ed. A. J. Berkovitz and Mark Letteney (New York: Routledge, 2018), 57–77. Moses is mentioned seven other times in the Psalter, in Ps 77:21, 99:6; 103:7; 105:26; and 106:16, 23, 32. All but the first of these mentions occur in “Book Four” of the Psalter (Pss 90–106); see J. Clinton McCann, Jr., “The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter: Psalms in Their Literary Context,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 357–60; and Susan Gillingham, “Psalms 90–106: Book Four and the Covenant with David,” EJ 48, no. 2 (2015): 83–101.

The Prayers of Moses

149

although it embeds a quotation (God’s decree in v. 3), so in some sense its rhetoric is more complex than a simple monologue. Furthermore, the psalm’s own language suggests the presence of others: first, it speaks directly and emphatically to God, employing imperatives, petitions, and rhetorical questions; and second, through its use of the first-person plural “we,” it acknowledges the presence of other mortals. The speaker is a singular voice, but not alone. The vivid imagery and dynamic vocabulary (e.g., withering grass consumed by fiery wrath) also compel the listeners’ imaginations with a forcefulness reminiscent of the rhetorical techniques known in Greco-Roman antiquity as ekphrasis and energeia.3 Even the flow of the poem, with its shifting moods and concerns, resembles something of a soliloquy. If we hear this psalm in Moses’s voice, as an example of what orators in late antiquity would have recognized as ethopoeia (speech-in-character), it is easy to understand how it could reflect his thoughts during his final hours. The collective voice suits his role as the spokesman for the people, the chosen interface between Israel and God, mediating divine wrath and seeking divine favor, and calling on both parties to “turn.” The musing on mortality befits someone who knows his life is coming to an end, while the petitions and demands suggest the difficulty he feels in easily accepting his fate; the final verses, however, indicate a kind of optative acceptance, or at least resignation. The poetic imagery—metaphor and simile, and a literary vividness that recalls what writers in late antiquity could recognize as ekphrasis and energeia—may seem remote from Moses’s idiom, but the discussions of wrath and grace, transgression and forgiveness, easily find a home in Mosaic discourse. The association of this psalm with Moses imbues it with layers of additional resonance, even as, in turn, the psalm provides a model for a poetic Moses holding forth in a show of public introspection prior to his death. Certainly to a listener or reader from late antiquity, this psalm would have been heard as being “in the voice of Moses,” as speech-in-his-character. 2

Qallir’s Silluq: Drama Realized

Where Psalm 90 encodes the potential for readings that both introduce performative elements (e.g., multiple voices and dramatic arcs and tensions) and rhetorical techniques (including versions of ekphrasis and energeia), Eleazar ha-Qallir’s silluq, composed for an occasion when the Torah reading began 3 On the technique of ekphrasis and the genre of ekphrastic poetry, see especially Ruth Webb, Ekphrasis, Imagination and Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory and Practice (Surrey, UK: Ashgate, 2009).

150

Lieber

with Deut 33:1 (“This is the blessing with which Moses, the man of God, bade the Israelites farewell before he died”), fully realizes these possibilities. We cannot know whether Qallir had Psalm 90 specifically in mind as he composed this piyyut, but his multivocal composition, whether consciously or not, can be read as an elaboration of this implicit intertext. In short, Psalm 90 could be drama; Qallir’s silluq is. The silluq (lit., “conclusion” or “transition”) is the seventh and final unit of a longer composition belonging to the genre of Jewish liturgical poetry known as a qedushta.4 The qedushta derives its name from the third blessing of the Amidah, known as the qedushah, on the topic of God’s holiness. Every qedush­ta, by definition, culminates in the rapturous recitation of Isa 6:3 (“Holy, holy, holy [qadosh, qadosh, qadosh] is YHWH of Hosts! The whole earth is filled with his glory!”); the silluq constitutes the transition from the piyyut back to the statutory (prose) liturgy. While the silluq is the final unit of the qedushta, in the case of Qallir’s qedushta for Deut 33:1, it constitutes the majority of the work: it is 328 lines long, while units 1–6 total 195 lines all together.5 The two units that precede the silluq introduce the narrative motif of Moses’s attempts to avert his fate, but those two units feature only two voices, those of Moses and God; the silluq, by contrast, features a roster of dramatis personae who serve as potential intermediaries for the prophet and, in the case of the Angel of Death, an antagonist. As lengthy as the silluq is, it can be summarized relatively quickly. The poem opens with the narrator presenting a litany of rhetorical questions, all variants on the opening line, “Who is a man who lives and does not see death?” (l. 1)—itself a quotation not from Psalm 90 but a few verses earlier in the psalter, Ps 89:49. The poet moves from this philosophical line of musing to the death scene of Moses: “And then, when the Rock speaks before him: ‘Lo, it approaches—the day of your death!’ (Deut 31:14)” (l. 15).6 Moses’s response to this news is unambiguous: “Anguish seized him, and trembling terrors / and he broke out in a sweat, in agitation” (ll. 16–17). In the following lines, he pleads 4 For the history of this important genre of Hebrew poetry, see Shulamit Elizur, Sod Meshalshei Qodesh: The Qedushta from Its Origins until the Time of Rabbi Elʿazar Berabbi Qillir [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 2019). 5 The texts of Qallir’s silluq for Gen 33:1, “What Man Lives and Does Not See Death?” (Davidson 1861‫)א‬, is available online, via the Historical Dictionary Project of the Hebrew Language Academy (Ma‌ʾagarim): https://maagarim.hebrew-academy.org.il/Pages/PMain.aspx ?mishibbur=599050&mm15=000080005010%2001&mismilla=[2,3,4] (last accessed 3 January 2022). It was first published by Hayyim (Heinrich) Brody in Kobez al Jad: Minora Manuscripta Hebraica 1.9 (Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 1936): 16–23. 6 Unless otherwise noted, the translations are the author’s.

The Prayers of Moses

151

vigorously for his life, but is answered not by God, but by a heavenly voice. The next hundred lines (specifically, ll. 18–131) consist of a back-and-forth dialogue between Moses and the heavenly voice. The heavenly voice reminds Moses of how his most vaunted ancestors and kin—Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Aaron—succumbed to death, and each time Moses counters how he possesses virtues they lacked.7 The heavenly voice, whether worn down or persuaded by Moses of his uniqueness, concedes that Moses does, in fact, differ from other mortals but avers that the decree cannot be undone. Moses’s remarkable life merits celebration and its end will be marked by mourning, but come to an end it must. Eventually, the heavenly voice rebukes him—“What is all this noise you are making?” (l. 128)—and refuses to engage further; Moses takes his complaint elsewhere. He turns, in rapid succession, to “the heavenly prince” who governs that day (ll. 132–45), who expresses confusion at Moses’s grief and resistance; Moses then appeals to the heavens and earth, who manifest grief but powerlessness in face of the divine decree (ll. 146–60). Unwilling to relent, Moses turns to Sandalfon and Metatron (ll. 161–69), thus enacting a version of a heavenly ascent familiar from hekhalot mysticism; only he is turned away from the divine presence, and knowledge from beyond the curtain merely confirms his doom (ll. 170–72); in grief he confides his doom to his kinsfolk and people (ll. 173–238). The scene then cuts from Moses and the people mourning to the heavenly realm, where one angel—revealed to be the Angel of Death—volunteers to take Moses’s soul (l. 239). Moses greets this final interlocutor with anger rather than grief, and quickly the Angel of Death flees in terror, crying out: “Have pity on me, O Moses!” (l. 255). And yet, as if this outburst of anger has effected some kind of emotional release, Moses turns and speaks to his own soul in a mixture of grief, resignation, and weariness, and tells it: “Return, O my soul, to your (eternal) rest” (l. 271). As Moses weeps, God kisses him, takes his soul, and wraps his body in his cloak of righteousness (ll. 275–81). The poem concludes with a depiction of the heavenly hosts mourning Moses, and offers an image of his funerary rites, imagery which segues seamlessly into a vivid depiction of the angelic realm and provides a transition to the rapturous recitation of the Qedushah, the threefold repetition of “holy” from Isa 6:3, the centerpiece of the third blessing of the Amidah. 7 The Heavenly Voice’s philosophical argumentation resembles the body of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic eulogy poems, but where the JPA poetry employs rhetorical questions—implying as a matter of course that all mortals die—Moses actively responds to the points rather than acquiescing to such logic. For the JPA poems, see Laura S. Lieber, Jewish Aramaic Poetry from Antiquity (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 147–49; the original texts are available through the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon, http://cal.huc.edu/ (last accessed 13 January 2022).

152

Lieber

The relationship between Psalm 90 and Qallir’s silluq is not necessarily a linear one of direct dependency; the two works differ significantly in form, and even elements such as the personality of Moses—Qallir’s emotionally volatile figure compared to the more stoic voice of the psalm—diverge greatly. Nevertheless, we can assume Qallir was familiar with the biblical poem, and it is possible to read the silluq as a kind of extension of or riff on Psalm 90. For example, where the Psalm states, “You have set our iniquities before you / our hidden sins in the light of your face” (Ps 90:8), we can hear Moses’s prompt for arguing his innocence in the silluq: were one to spread out the sins of Moses, one would behold—comparatively, at least—nothing.8 And in the verse, “You return man to dust; / You decreed, ‘Return you mortals!’” (Psa. 90:3), we hear God’s consistent, insistent reply. Looking beyond specific phrases, however, three elements of the psalm anticipate the dramatic narrative presented by Qallir. To be sure, various other works—notably the rich aggadic traditions surrounding the death of Moses and a body of eulogy poetry such as we find in the Jewish Palestinian Aramaic corpus—constitute important connective tissue between the world of the psalmist and that of Qallir, but the psalm itself can be seen as an essential, if almost ephemeral, element of the matrix from which later poetic creativity, not just of content and motifs but rhetoric and delivery, emerged.9 Of the performative elements in Psalm 90, one that Qallir draws out and makes explicit is the sense of community: the “we” of the psalm becomes a vocal ensemble in the silluq. While the psalm speaks collectively of the human experience of mortality, Qallir dramatizes the lesson by creating a scene in which Moses and the Israelites perform their grief, prior to his death: And he said to them: “A decree was decreed against me from on high, “To lie among his pious, faithful ones.” And then Moses lifted up his voice, 8 See, by contrast, the rahitim by Pinchas ha-Cohen, a liturgical poet of the period after Qallir; this poem can be found in Shulamit Elizur, The Liturgical Poems of Rabbi Pinhas Ha-Cohen (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 2004), 559–69. Pinchas ha-Cohen’s poem is also discussed by Raymond Scheindlin in his essay, “Moses Pleads with God: Why Must I Die?,” The Torah.com, https://www.thetorah.com/article/moses-pleads-with-god-why-must-i-die (last accessed 27 December 2021). 9 On the relationship between midrash and liturgical poetry, see Tzvi Novick, Piyyut and Midrash: Form, Genre, and History (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2019). While prose midrashim often preserve the most elaborate articulations of rabbinic expansions of biblical narratives, liturgical poets were active participants in this lively exegetical culture; see Laura S. Lieber, Yannai on Genesis: An Invitation to Piyyut (Cincinnati: HUC Press, 2010), 132–90.

The Prayers of Moses

153

And wept with his entire congregation; He lifted up his two hands and raised his voice, And all Israel, his mighty multitude, Fell before him and wept for him, And they made sad little sounds, and mourned him, And they drew near to him, bewailing him, And tribe by tribe, each noting his greatness, And prince by prince, each noting his splendid praiseworthiness And friend by friend, each noting his mighty power And band by band, each noting his powerful authority And pious one by pious one, each noting his fiery labors, And righteous one by righteous one, each noting his wrathful downfall, Embracing him and acclaiming him (ll. 189–204) The poet conjures in the imaginations of his listeners a vision of a mourning procession led by Moses himself; the impetus to imagine this as a funeral is signaled by the mention a few lines earlier of professional mourners (“women to mourn him” in line 181). Moses inaugurates the ritual when he stands before the community, announces God’s decree against him, and lifts his hands in a kind of formal (but also emotional) gesture. In response to his raised hands, the people fall down, and then, weeping, they approach him in a manner that is likewise suggestive of ritual, even if spontaneously enacted: tribe, prince, friend, band, pious, and righteous, each category of community station rehearses an element of Moses’s glory, as a kind of farewell litany. Moses resists death but witnesses at least some of his funeral. This collective constitutes the “we” that grapples with mortality in the psalm. Just as the collective identity of the speaker illustrates an affinity between Psalm 90 and Qallir’s silluq, so, too, does the role of God as its rhetorical “audience.” The psalm consistently speaks to God directly, using the second person, “you.” In the silluq, as soon as Moses hears news of his impending demise, we are told: Anguish seized him, and trembling and terrors And he broke out in a sweat, in agitation And he says: “Grant me life, O Rock, O Pure One, and I shall not die” (ll. 16–18) Having heard the decree of mortality—a scenario that echoes Psa. 90:3— Moses immediately turns to petition the source of the decision, asking God to reconsider. In the psalm, God is silent—spoken to, but never speaking, aside

154

Lieber

from the quotation in verse 3; similarly, God only speaks once, and by means of a quotation, in the silluq, when he states: “the Rock speaks before him: ‘Lo, it approaches—the day of your death!’ (Deut 31:14).” God never speaks to Moses again in the silluq, but does, at the poem’s conclusion, act: And the Eternal God kissed him with a kiss, And held his soul close, And enveloped him in the bonds of life, And in the cloak of his righteousness he wrapped him (ll. 278–81) In the silluq, Moses (in a fashion akin to Job) demands a hearing, an account of divine justice in the face of perceived injustice. Unlike Job, he does not receive words from heaven, although he hears much from heavenly emissaries (the heavenly voice, the heavenly bodies of the sun and moon, Sandalfon and Metatron, and the Angel of Death). Instead, God responds to Moses’s words with actions, gentle and tender, but nonetheless final. While we can discern affinities between Psalm 90 and the silluq in terms of both speakers/actors (Moses and the community) and audience (God), perhaps the most significant resonance occurs at the level of narrative arc. In each work, Moses can be seen as the “dramatic lead”—the psalm is presented as his prayer, and in the silluq, he is the central figure in every scene. In each composition, Moses seems to move through a range of emotions, from the philosophical to the fearful to a kind of acceptance. The speaker of the psalm, presented as Moses, opens with a recognition of divine eternality, which constitutes a foil to human transience; the silluq begins with an emphatic litany stressing the inevitability of death. Each work places the responsibility for mortality with God: in the third verse of the Psalm, God decrees, “Return, you mortals,” the word “turn” (‫ )שובו‬punning on the way flesh returns to dust and the way mortality can inspire repentance (‫ ;)תשובה‬in the silluq, God states, “Lo, it approaches—the day of your death,” a quotation from Deut 31:14, spoken to Moses directly in both its original context and in the poem, but reflective of the mortal condition more generally. Every human will hear this summons. The central portion of each work, for all the differences in their length and construction, reflects some level of anxiety about this natural condition. The psalmist juxtaposes mortality with divine anger—God’s just but nonetheless fearsome response to how humans spend their limited time alive. In the silluq, the poet explicitly foregrounds Moses’s fear and draws out questions of divine justice, manifest in resistance to the divine imperative, in ways the psalmist only suggests one might feel. Where the psalmist attempts

The Prayers of Moses

155

to contextualize the divine command, in the silluq, Moses immediately and vehemently objects. His appeal to God goes unanswered, however; only various lesser parties—heavenly voices, heavenly bodies, and angels—respond to his anguish with various expressions of irritation, helplessness, compassion, or confusion at Moses’s outbursts. The most anyone can do is mourn alongside Moses as his end draws ever nearer. Moses’s noisy reluctance in the piyyut does have a parallel in the psalm, however, in verse 13, where the psalmist pleads for God to also “turn”—a term that can have connotations of not only of presence but, as in verse 3, repentance: “turn, O YHWH … and change our mind” (‫)שובה ה׳ … והנחם‬. Just as God wishes mortals to repent and change their ways, mortals hope for God to relent and change God’s mind. This same hope sustains Moses throughout his quest in the silluq to avoid death. Moses in the Psalm, like Moses in the piyyut, petitions God to do something other than what he said. In the psalm, a catalyst for human action is fear of divine wrath; in the silluq, it is Moses’s anger, which collapses into sheer and utter grief and longing, that moves God to act. The Angel of Death volunteers to take Moses’s life, and God grants it permission; but confronted by Moses’s rage at the angel’s presumption, the angel of death flees. Moses, still furious, holds forth but quickly succumbs to his own exhaustion, and at last, he himself relents, and grants his own soul permission to leave him. He accepts his fate; and God, with tremendous tenderness, takes Moses’s soul away, in wordless intimacy. The psalm, as noted above, concludes by suggesting that progeny and accomplishments can lend humans a kind of immortality, and joy, beyond mere extension of an individual life, and so, too, Moses acknowledges in the silluq—as does the poet, who pivots from Moses’s death to the liturgical moment of his present tense, segueing from Moses’s otherworldly funeral to the spectacle of angelic worship. The simple presence of the synagogue congregation, united with each other and the heavenly hosts in prayer, in the presence of scrolls that record the words of Moses, embodies the legacy for which Moses prayed as he bade his soul farewell. 3

Reading Across Time

The comparison between Psalm 90 and Qallir’s silluq should not be taken as suggesting a linear, direct relationship, as if the late antique payyetan explicitly riffed on the biblical text. For all the subtle affinities, the two works differ greatly, even simply from the perspective of voice: the psalm is entirely direct address in a singular voice, and while we can discern movement through its

156

Lieber

verses, it lacks any overt motion or action; the silluq, by contrast, includes a significant amount of narration, and features a number of distinctive characters dramatizing a linear plot. To borrow terms from Greek poetry, the psalm is closer to “lyric,” while the silluq is more akin to “drama.”10 And yet, for all the differences in genre, the two works can also be seen as mutually intertextual: biblical language suffuses the silluq, but the silluq’s worldview shapes how the psalm would have been heard. Reading Psalm 90 and Qallir’s silluq together, both alongside and against each other, despite (and even because of) their differences, helps us, as modern readers, to imagine how Qallir, writing in a period steeped in spectacle, declamation, theater, and rhetorical performance might have imagined the Psalm. For Qallir, Psalm 90 constituted part of his inherited sacred canon, one which he quite likely experienced in some fashion (liturgical or otherwise) as a living, performed text. Although we do not know how Qallir experienced Psalm 90, if he did so at all, his own composition alerts us to performance conventions of his own period, and how those could plausibly have been retrojected in some fashion, intentionally or implicitly, by the poet and other members of his community. Qallir’s silluq can be understood as a kind of drama: multiple characters engage each other in dialogue, knit together by the words of a narrator and a plot that moves the main character forward in time, even as it engages its listeners both imaginatively (appealing to their imaginations to envision the scenes through vivid, sensorially rich language) and actively (notably in the concluding lines where the listeners join in the recitation of the Qedushah). Qallir makes ample use of techniques that would have been familiar to other performers from late antiquity, such as orators and actors, including speech-in-character (ethopoeia), rhetorical vividness (ekphrasis and energeia), and audience participation (particularly through refrains, which function in a fashion akin to acclamation).11 To a community steeped in such performative conventions, for whom theater was particularly ubiquitous, not only would the dramatic nature of Qallir’s poem make intuitive sense, but they would have been primed to hear a work such as Psalm 90—clearly indicated as being in Moses’s voice—in 10

11

One might argue that other forms of piyyutim, notably the Avodah poetry composed for Yom Kippur, reflects a Jewish recovery of the epic impulse; see Michael Swartz and Joseph Yahalom, Avodah: Ancient Poems for Yom Kippur (University Park: Penn State University Press, 2004). On the Greek rhetorical exercises, see George A. Kennedy, ed. and trans., Progymnasmata: Greek Textbooks of Prose Composition and Rhetoric (Leiden: Brill, 2003); and for examples of such exercises, see Craig A. Gibson, trans., Libanius’s Progymnasmata: Model Exercises in Greek Prose Composition and Rhetoric (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2008).

The Prayers of Moses

157

similar terms, as a kind of soliloquy, or perhaps even a visible trace of a more complicated, but similarly themed drama. The philosophical-poetic voice of Moses in the psalm in some sense authorizes Qallir’s more elaborate development of this mode of speech in his own work. Qallir’s composition, it must be noted, taps into a long tradition of works embellishing Moses’s last hours of life, including his stubborn resistance of the divine imperative, a motif attested already in Sifre Deuteronomy, §305, in which Moses chastises the Angel of Death for presuming to take his life and then goes missing.12 While Qallir’s silluq is one of the earlier piyyutim to embellish the episode, and its most elaborate expansion, the evidence from other prose sources preceding or originating in his milieu indicate that his community would be primed to hear Psalm 90 through this filter, as well.13 Indeed, while the initial impulse is to read the two pieces chronologically, the later work in light of the earlier—that is, to examine Qallir through the lens of the Psalm—the reverse dynamic should be taken at least as seriously: hearing the psalm through the filter of the silluq and other works from late antiquity.

12

The relevant passage states in full: “At that same hour, the Holy Blessed One said to the Angel of Death, ‘Go and fetch the soul of Moses for Me.’ The Angel went and stood before Moses, and said to him: ‘Moses, give me your soul!’ Moses responded: ‘Where I sit, you have no right even to stand, and yet you dare say to me, Give me your soul?!’ Moses thus rebuked him, and the Angel left, chastened. The Angel of Death then went back and reported to the Almighty, whereupon the Holy Blessed One told him once more: ‘Go and fetch his soul for Me!’ So the Angel went looking for him at his place, but could not find him. He went to the Sea (of Reeds) and asked it, ‘Moses—have you seen him?’ The sea replied, ‘Since the day that he made Israel pass through me, I have not seen him.’ He then went to the mountains and hills and asked them, ‘Moses—have you seen him?’ They replied, ‘Since the day that Israel received the Torah on Mount Sinai, we have not seen him.’ He thereupon went to Gehinnom and asked it, ‘Moses—have you seen him?’ It replied, ‘I have heard his name, but I have not seen him.’ He then went to the ministering angels and asked them, ‘Moses—have you seen him?’ They replied, ‘Go and ask mortals.’ He finally went to Israel and asked them, ‘Moses—have you seen him?’ They said to him, ‘God has fathomed his way (Job 28:23)—He has concealed him from the life of the World-to-Come, and no one knows of him; as it is written, ‘And He buried him …’ (Deut. 34:6)” (S. Horovitz and Louis Finkelstein, eds. Sifre on Deuteronomy [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1969], 323–26, §305). On the motif of Moses resisting death, which in prose sources is quite well attested, see Rella Kushelevsky, Moses and the Angel of Death (New York: Peter Lang, 1995). Note, too, the discussion in Louis Feldman, Philo’s Portrayal of Moses in the Context of Ancient Judaism (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2008), 230–31. 13 While some Jewish (Hebrew and Aramaic) poetry on this motif may be contemporary with Qallir, none inarguably predate his lifetime, and it becomes more popular in the centuries after Qallir.

158 4

Lieber

A Future More Vivid

In the corpus of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic poems, we find one poem (Poem #40) that depicts a scene that resembles what we find in Qallir’s silluq: God informs Moses that his lifespan has reached its end; but rather than accept this decree, Moses turns and confronts Adam, the ancestor whose transgression introduced mortality into the world.14 Elsewhere in the Jewish Palestinian Aramaic corpus, we find a series of eulogy poems, composed for different categories of individuals (man, woman, kohen, child), many of which echo the kind of stoic, philosophical argumentation offered by the Heavenly Voice in Qallir’s composition: death is universal, so why does Moses resist?15 And yet, where the Jewish Palestinian Aramaic poems pose rhetorical questions, Qallir’s Moses offers rebuttals. The Jewish Palestinian Aramaic poems themselves constitute only a small part of the exegetical-liturgical poetry that was immensely popular among Jews, Christians, and Samaritans in late antiquity. For such communities, it would only be natural to hear the valedictory poetry in Deuteronomy and the prayer in Psalm 90 as ancient variants of familiar modes of expression: both elaborations of biblical narratives and funerary laments. By reading Psalm 90 and Qallir’s silluq together, we are able to appreciate both works in more detail and to pay greater attention to subtle elements that each work highlights in the other. The contrast sharpens our awareness of the dramatic, performative elements of the late antique composition, which reflects an era when theater and performance were ubiquitous, and in which liturgical works often reveal traces of their dynamic delivery and appeal as popular entertainments that afforded listeners a licit alternative to shows unsanctioned by religious authorities. Reading the two works together also helps us imagine how listeners in late antiquity, primed by a culture steeped in spectacle and expectations of performance, would hear their own sacred texts, how they would project their conventions and expectations back into the biblical world. The heading, already present in the Masoretic text, indicates that Psalm 90 is in the voice of Moses; to late antique readers and, particularly, to anyone familiar with rhetorical education, this would resonate with the exercise in which orators practiced speaking in character (ethopoeia). Both Psalm 90 and Qallir’s silluq can be heard as responses to the prompt: How does Moses respond to the news that he is about to die? As different as the two 14

Jewish Palestinian Aramaic Poem #40. The original is available through the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon, http://cal.huc.edu/ (last accessed 13 January 2022); for the English, see Lieber, Jewish Aramaic Poetry from Antiquity, 147–49. 15 JPA Poems #51–66. The original texts are available through the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon, http://cal.huc.edu/ (last accessed 13 January 2022); for translations, see Lieber, Jewish Aramaic Poetry from Antiquity, 177–209.

The Prayers of Moses

159

works are, they would have been understood as participating in this larger history of imaginative exegesis—one that for Qallir was both novel even as it was deeply traditional. In Psalm 90, Qallir heard Moses’s voice, and in his own composition, he amplified it and, as it were, brought it to a new stage. Bibliography Berkovitz, A. J. “Beyond Attribution and Authority: The Case of Psalms in Rabbinic Hermeneutics.” Pages 57–77 in Rethinking ‘Authority’ in Late Antiquity: Authorship, Law, and Transmission in Jewish and Christian Tradition. Edited by A. J. Berkovitz and Mark Letteney. New York: Routledge, 2018. Childs, Brevard S. “Psalm Titles and Their Midrashic Exegesis.” JSS 16, no. 2 (1977): 137–50. Clifford, Richard J. “Psalm 90: Wisdom Meditation or Communal Lament?” Pages 190–205 in The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception. Edited by Peter W. Flint and Patrick D. Miller, Jr. Leiden: Brill, 2005. de Claissé-Walford, Nancy L. “The Meta-Narrative of the Psalter.” Pages 363–76 in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms. Edited by William P. Brown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Elizur, Shulamit. The Liturgical Poems of Rabbi Pinhas Ha-Cohen. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 2004. Elizur, Shulamit. Sod Meshalshei Qodesh: The Qedushta from Its Origins until the Time of Rabbi Elʿazar Berabbi Qillir [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 2019. Feldman, Louis. Philo’s Portrayal of Moses in the Context of Ancient Judaism. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2008. Gibson, Craig A., trans. Libanius’s Progymnasmata: Model Exercises in Greek Prose Composition and Rhetoric. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2008. Gillingham, Susan. “Psalms 90–106: Book Four and the Covenant with David.” EJ 48, no. 2 (2015): 83–101. Horovitz, S., and Louis Finkelstein, eds. Sifre on Deuteronomy. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1969. Kennedy, George A., ed. and trans. Progymnasmata: Greek Textbooks of Prose Composition and Rhetoric. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Kushelevsky, Rella. Moses and the Angel of Death. New York: Peter Lang, 1995. Lieber, Laura S. Jewish Aramaic Poetry from Antiquity. Leiden: Brill, 2018. Lieber, Laura S. Yannai on Genesis: An Invitation to Piyyut. Cincinnati: HUC Press, 2010. McCann, J. Clinton, Jr. “The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter: Psalms in Their Literary Context.” Pages 357–60 in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms. Edited by William P. Brown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.

160

Lieber

Novick, Tzvi. Piyyut and Midrash: Form, Genre, and History. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2019. Qillir, Elʿazar Berabbi. “What Man Lives and Does Not See Death?” Historical Dictionary Project of the Hebrew Language Academy (Ma‌ʾagarim). https://maagarim .hebrew-academy.org.il/Pages/PMain.aspx?mishibbur=599050&mm15=00008000 5010%2001&mismilla=[2,3,4]. Last accessed 3 January 2022. Originally published by Hayyim (Heinrich) Brody. Pages 16–23 in Kobez al Jad: Minora Manuscripta Hebraica 1.9. Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 1936. Scheindlin, Raymond. “Moses Pleads with God: Why Must I Die?” The Torah.com. https://www.thetorah.com/article/moses-pleads-with-god-why-must-i-die. Last accessed 27 December 2021. Swartz, Michael, and Joseph Yahalom. Avodah: Ancient Poems for Yom Kippur. University Park: Penn State University Press, 2004. Webb, Ruth. Ekphrasis, Imagination and Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory and Practice. Surrey, UK: Ashgate, 2009.

Part 4 The Psalms in Rabbinic and Medieval Judaism and Beyond

∵

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism and Its Major Interpretations prior to and during the Middle Ages Approaches, Authorship, Genre, and Polemics Isaac Kalimi The purpose of this study is, first and foremost, to discuss the centrality of the book of Psalms among the Jews and in Judaism.1 Further, it presents an outline of seven exemplars—the most important and influential rabbinic exegetical works on Psalms, in the time span before and during the medieval period. This includes Targum Psalms and Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov (“Seeking Good”), which both originated sometime in the talmudic period but continued to extend and develop afterwards, as well as five prominent medieval commentaries written by Saadia Gaon, Moses ha-Cohen ibn Gikatilla, Rashi, Abraham ibn Ezra, and David Kimhi. The goal is to introduce briefly each of the interpretative works, and then to focus on selected aspects of them: the commentators’ distinct exegetical methods, their approaches towards the questions of the authorship and genre of Psalms, and polemics with inside (e.g., Karaites) and outside (e.g., Christians) opponents—all illustrated with specific examples. My purpose is to survey, analyze, and synthesize the approaches, and to show the various trends that the rabbinic Psalms’ interpretation took in the span of these periods. Although I am aware of the medieval Karaite commentaries and their importance for the development of Jewish biblical exegesis as a whole, and the great impact that some of them had on the analyzed commentaries, such as the ones by Saadia Gaon and Abraham ibn Ezra,2 due to limited space, their investigation goes beyond the scope of the present study.

1 This study is based on the lecture commissioned for the Psalms conference, University of Erfurt, Max-Weber-Kolleg (2018). An earlier version was published in Review of Rabbinic Judaism 23 (2020), 229–259. The version published here is reworked, with some additional material. All the translations are of the author, unless noted otherwise. 2 See Isaac Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible: Jewish Interpretation, Sectarianism and Polemic from Temple to Talmud and Beyond, BRLA 54 (Leiden: Brill, 2017), 8, 231–49, and below in the discussion about Saadia Gaon (§3.1) and Abraham ibn Ezra (§3.4).

© Isaac Kalimi, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_010

164 1

Kalimi

The Centrality of Psalms among the Jews and in Judaism

The very first two verses of the book of Psalms refer to the Torah: “Happy is the man who does not follow the advice of the wicked, or take the path that sinners tread, or sit in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the Torah of the Lord, and on his Torah he meditates day and night” (‫אשרי האיש אשר לא הלך בעצת‬

‫ כי אם בתורת יהוה חפצו ובתורתו‬,‫רשעים ובדרך חטאים לא עמד ובמושב לצים לא ישב‬ ‫ ;יהגה יומם ולילה‬Ps 1:1–2). No wonder therefore that Midrash Psalms Shocher

Tov compares the Psalms to the Torah, and David to Moses, stating: “[As] Moses gave five books of Torah to Israel, so David gave five books of Psalms to Israel” (‫ דוד נתן חמשה ספרים שבתהלים‬,‫משה נתן חמשה חומשי תורה לישראל‬ ‫ ;לישראל‬Midrash Psalms 1:2).3 As such, the book of Psalms gained the status of a “Second Torah” given to David, as described by Saadia Gaon.4 The high estimation and great importance of the book in Judaism and in Jewish life, religion, and culture is indisputable, and comparable only to that of the Torah, the holiest Scripture of Judaism.5 Psalms has become one of the most popular and adored books among the Jews, whenever and wherever they lived. The book has been studied and interpreted in all periods, and by all Jewish denominations. Psalms from the book were sung every day in the temple. Among the Dead Sea scrolls, thirty-nine manuscripts of the book of Psalms (which is known from Miqtsat Ma‌ʿase ha-Torah as “[the writings] of Davi[d …]”; 4QMMT, C, line 10)6 were found (most of which are fragmentary)—more than were preserved for any other

3 For the tradition of ascribing the book of Psalms to King David, see also below, §2.2; §3.3 (“Authorship and Genre”), and nn. 43 and 69. 4 See Uriel Simon, Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms: From Saadya Gaon to Abraham Ibn Ezra [Hebrew] (Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1982), 13; Simon, Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms: From Saadya Gaon to Abraham Ibn Ezra, trans. Lenn J. Schramm, SUNYSJ (New York: State University of New York Press, 1991), 1 (subsequent references give page numbers in the English translation in parentheses). 5 Similarly, in the Christian world, Martin Luther independently called the book of Psalms “eine kleine Biblia” (“a little Bible”); see Martin Luther, “Zweite Vorrede auf den Psalter (1528),” in Luthers Vorreden zur Bibel, ed. Heinrich Bornkamm and Karin Bornkamm, 3rd ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989), 64–69, esp. 65. Generally speaking, Psalms has an important place also in the Christian literature and liturgy. Psalms and Isaiah are the most used books of the Hebrew Bible by the authors of the New Testament; see, for instance, the collection of articles edited by Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken, The Psalms in the New Testament (London: T&T Clark International, 2004), and additional bibliography there. 6 See Elisha Qimron and John Strugnell, Miqsat Ma‌ʿase ha-Torah, vol. 5 of Qumran Cave 4, DJD 10 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), 58 (text); 59 (translation). See also 2 Macc 2:13.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

165

biblical book.7 Psalms was one of only a handful of biblical books (mainly prophetic) for which a pesher (i.e., “interpretation”) has been found.8 Similarly, innumerable copies of the book were found in the genizah of the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Cairo, from the Middle Ages through the nineteenth century. These testify to the broad popularity of the book among various Jewish communities in different times and places. Moreover, countless idioms, verses, collections of verses, paragraphs, and psalms from the book are integrated into the Jews’ daily and holiday liturgies in the siddurim and mahzorim.9 Songs, prayers, laments, and verses from the book are cited not only on specific occasions in the communal or national life, such as at festivals, in public mourning, or in emergency and disaster situations, but also in the everyday lives of ordinary Jews, including marriage certificates (ketuboth),10 circumcision ceremonies,11 and popular songs.12 The popularity and usage of Psalms is obvious also from its use for magical purposes. Thus, for instance, Sefer Shimmush Tehillim (“The Book of the Use of Psalms”) from the eleventh century counts sixty-five psalms (especially Psalms 11, 23, 83, 90, 91, 93, 119) that are used for such a purpose.13 Similarly, the

7 See Peter W. Flint, The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Book of Psalms, STDJ 17 (Leiden: Brill, 1997); Eugene C. Ulrich, “An Index of the Passages in the Biblical Manuscripts from the Judean Desert (Part 2: Isaiah–Chronicles),” DSD 2 (1995): 86–107, esp. 98–104. However, Mroczek disputes that all of these should be seen as copies of “the Book of Psalms” as we understand it; these texts reflect a range of contents and sequences, very few of which correspond to the Masoretic form of the book; see Eva Mroczek, The Literary Imagination in Jewish Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 25–33. 8 Further on this issue, see George J. Brooke, “The Psalms in Early Jewish Literature in the Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Moyise and Menken, Psalms in the New Testament, 5–24. 9 For example, Pesuqe de-Zimra (mainly Psalms 100, 105–109, 150, 135), Kabbalat Shabbat (Psalms 95–99 + 29 + 92–93), Hallel (mainly Psalms 113–18), Birkat ha-Mazon (Psalm 137; on Sabbath and holidays: Psalm 126), and Tachanun (according to the Ashkenazi custom; Psalm 6). 10 See the collections of ketuboth in the Israel National Library: http://web.nli.org.il/sites /NLI/English/collections/jewish-collection/ketubbot/Pages/collections.aspx. 11 Psalm 137:5–6 (“If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither! Let my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth, if I do not remember you, if I do not set Jerusalem above my highest joy”; NRSV), is cited in every ketubah, and said by the groom in every marriage ceremony; it is said by the father during the circumcision ceremony of his son as well. 12 For example, Ps 34:13–15 [ET: Ps 34:12–14] (…‫ )מי האיש החפץ חיים‬is used by the singer Nechama Hendel in her album of 1965; Ps 147:12 (…‫ )שבחי ירושלם את יהוה‬and Ps 71:8–9 (…‫ )אל תשליכני לעת זקנה‬is used by Avihu Medina in his album of 2004. 13 See Bill Rebiger, Sefer Shimmush Tehillim: Buch vom magischen Gebrauch der Psalmen; Edition, Übersetzung und Kommentar, TSAJ 137 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), and additional bibliography there.

166

Kalimi

book is used extensively in kabbalistic texts and rituals for healing.14 In fact, until the present day many Jews carry a small book of Psalms with them in their pockets, and read from it in any spare time that may they have. In addition, every synagogue holds, alongside the prayer books (siddurim), numerous copies of both the Torah and Psalms, far beyond those of any prophetic, historical, or other hagiographic book of the Hebrew Bible. Furthermore, readers all over have regularly described their own current social, economic, physical, and spiritual conditions using the poetic words so well expressed already in Psalms. Several psalms have been read in a prophetic or eschatological sense, as if they described the future destiny of the Israelite/Jewish people.15 As such, the Psalms have seen as a well, from which the oppressed people drink. It played an important role in maintaining the inspirations and hopes of individuals as well as the collective people of Israel throughout their long and bitter exile. Although there is no haftarah that is taken from the book of Psalms, this does not imply any inferiority of the book among the Jews. Most probably, this is due to the principle decision of the sages to take the haftarah reading permanently from the second part of the Hebrew Bible, the Prophets (Nebiim), which is considered to hold the second level of holiness after the Torah, rather than from the Writings (Ketubim), where Psalms is classified. Accordingly, the haftarah of the Torah portion Parashat Haazinu (“The Song of Moses”; Deut 32), is taken from 2 Samuel 22, even though there is a parallel text in Psalm 18.16 Also, unlike the Torah and Megillat Esther, which are written on parchment and read publicly in the synagogues, the book of Psalms as a whole is not read from beginning to end in public, and therefore also it need not be written on parchment. But, in fact this issue never detracted from the Psalms’ popularity and centrality and in Judaism. Given this enormous influence of the Psalms among the Jewish people and within Judaism, it should not be surprising that interpretation of the book has also been widespread in all periods, places, and denominations.

14 See Susanne Talabardon, “Psalms in Kabalistic Texts and Ritual,” in this volume, 242–259. 15 See, for example, Ps 80:15–20 [ET: Ps 80:14–19]; Ps 102:14–29 [ET: Ps 102:13–28]; Ps 104:35; Ps 110; and below, §2.1 (5); §2.2; §3.3. 16 See Isaac Kalimi, The Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature: A Historical Journey (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009), 182.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

2

167

Jewish Psalms’ Interpretive Works that Originated in the Talmudic Period

2.1 Targum Psalms There is no clear-cut indication inside or outside of Targum Psalms itself regarding how, when, or where it took form.17 Concerning its origins, it is notable that an Aramaic version of Ps 22:2a [ET: Ps 22:1a], for the phrase ‫אלי אלי‬ ‫“( למה עזבתני‬My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”; NRSV), already preserved in transliterated form in the first century CE Christian Gospels of Mark 15:34 and Matt 27:46 (Luke and John do not have it), where Jesus cried out on the cross. In both cases, the translation is very similar to that found in Targum Psalms: Targum Psalms 22:2: ‫ מטול מה שבקתני‬18‫אלי אלי‬ Mark 15:34: ελωι ελωι λεμα σαβαχθανι Matt 27:46: ηλι ηλι λεμα σαβαχθανι Though the similarity is notable, it does not prove that this part of the Targum already existed in the first century—much less that the entire Targum Psalms as we have it had already been completed by that time—because there is nothing unusual in this Aramaic translation that would require direct dependence, and in any case, the phrasing is not identical.19 Still, this implies that Aramaic translations of at least some of the Psalms were known by the first century CE, at the latest. Seemingly, the composition of the Targum began some time before the completion of the Babylonian Talmud (ca. 500 CE); and due to lack of any reference to Islamic matters, it was completed prior to the appearance of Islam in the land of Israel (635 CE).20 17 The term targum (Akkadian: targumannu) is a biblical hapax legomenon, and appears only in Ezra 4:7, meaning “translate, mediate (from one language to another).” In rabbinic literature, the term refers to Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible, and means “translation” as well as “interpretation.” 18 Textual variant: ‫אלהי אלהי‬. 19 See Philip Alexander, “Targum, Targumim,” ABD 6:320–31, esp. 326. For a possible relationship between Targum Psalms and the New Testament, see Francis J. Moloney, “The Targum on Ps. 8 and the New Testament,” Sal 37 (1975): 326–36. 20 See the survey by Otto Komlós, “Distinctive Features in the Targum of Psalms” [Hebrew], in Studies in the Bible Presented to Professor M. H. Segal by His Colleagues and Students, ed. Jehoshua M. Grintz and Jacob Liver (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1964), 265–70, esp. 265; Komlós, The Bible in the Light of the Aramaic Translations [Hebrew] (Tel Aviv: Dvir,

168

Kalimi

Targum Psalms shares many exegetical methods and linguistic similarities with Targum Job, and both have often been transmitted in the same manuscripts. Therefore, Wilhelm (Benjamin Zeev) Bacher assumed that these Targumim were prepared by one and the same translator.21 However, given the likelihood that the composition (Entstehungszeit) of Targum Psalms continued over multiple generations, this assumption faces difficulties. 2.1.1 Translational/Exegetical Approaches to and Authorship of Psalms There are several translation methods that Targum Psalms shares with other Targumim, such as avoiding anthropomorphism or pictorial depictions of God.22 Nevertheless, this Targum moves between translation of the biblical text according to its simple/plain meaning (peshat), according to its context, syntax, and the usual meaning and connotations of the words in Hebrew,23 and midrashic-aggadic paraphrase of the biblical text, which is often much freer and expansive; for example: 1. On Ps 45:1, ‫למנצח על שושנים לבני קרח‬, he writes: ‫לשבחא על יתבי סנהדרין‬ ‫“( דמשה דאתמר בנבואה על ידיהון דבני קורח‬To the singer. For those who sit in the Council [lit., ‘Sanhedrin’] of Moses: that which was spoken through the prophecy by the sons of Korah”).24 2. For the phrase: ‫( למנצח על יונת אלם רחקים‬Ps 56:1), he writes: 25‫לשבחא‬ ‫על כנישתא דישראל דמתילא ליונה שתוקא בעדן די מתרחקין מן קרויהון וחזרין‬ ‫“( ומשבחין למרי עלמא היך דוד מכיר ושלים‬To the singer. Concerning the

3.

Assembly of Israel that may be compared to a silent dove, at the time when they are far from their cities, and they sing to the Lord of the World, like David the humble and blameless one”).26 The Targumist interprets the title ‫ עדות‬in Ps 60:1 as an allusion to the treaty between Jacob and Laban, where the word ‫עדה‬/‫ עד‬appears (Gen 31:44–54): ‫“( לשבחא על עתיק סהדותא די בני יעקב ולבן‬To the singer: concerning the ancient testimony that was between Jacob and Laban”).27

1973), 68–69; see also David M. Stec, The Targum of Psalms: Translated with a Critical Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes, ArBib 16 (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 1–2. 21 See Wilhelm Bacher, “Das Targum zu den Psalmen,” MGWJ 21 (1872): 408–16, 463–73; also, Stec, Targum of Psalms, 1–22; Bernard Grossfeld and S. David Sterling, “Bible: Targums to the Hagiographa,” EncJud, 593–95. 22 See Komlós, Bible in the Light of the Aramaic Translations, 68, 69. 23 So, for instance, the Targum on Psalm 1. 24 Translation from Stec, Targum of Psalms, 95; italics original, to indicate differences from the MT. 25 The term ‫ למנצח‬is always translated as ‫לשבחא‬, that is, “to the singer.” 26 Translation from Stec, Targum of Psalms, 113. 27 Translation from Stec, Targum of Psalms, 119.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

169

4.

Similarly, on Ps 69:1, ‫למנצח על שושנים לדוד‬, he writes: ‫לשבחא על גלות‬ ‫“( סנהדרין על יד דוד‬To the singer: concerning the exiles of the Sanhedrin. By David”).28 The translation of ‫ שושנים‬as ‫סנהדרין‬, probably follows the Babylonian Talmud (Sanh. 36a), where ‫( סוגה בשושנים‬Song 7:3) is expounded as “Sanhedrin.”29 5. On Ps 14:1, …‫למנצח לדוד אמר נבל בלבו‬, the Targumist writes: ‫לשבחא ברוח‬ …‫“( נבואה על דוד אמר שטיא בלבביה‬To the singer. When the spirit of prophecy was upon David, the fool has said in his heart …”).30 Likewise Psalm 78 opens with the headline ‫משכיל לאסף‬. The Targumist writes: ‫שכלא דרוח‬ ‫“( קדשא על ידוי דאסף‬The insight of the holy spirit by Asaph”).31 Occasionally the Targum uses folk etymologies. For example, the word ‫מכתם‬ that appears in the titles of Psalms 16 and 56–60, is translated ‫ מכיך ושלים‬in Ps 56:1; 57:1; 58:1; and 59:1, as if it was a combination of two words: ‫ מכיך‬and ‫תם‬, “humble and blameless.” This method is also known from the Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 10b and Midrash Psalms 9:7; 56:1, which likewise split the word to two, ‫ מך‬and ‫תם‬, and apply it to David.32 The word “king” (‫ )מלך‬sometimes is translated as if refers to the King Messiah (‫ ;מלך משיחא‬see for example, the Targum on Ps 21:2, 8; 45:3; 61:7; 72:1).33 For the phrase: ‫למנצח על הגתית‬, the Targumist writes: ‫( לשבחא על כנורא דאייתי מגת‬Ps 8:1; “To the singer with violin, which is imported from Gath,” the Philistine city), ‫( דאתיא מן גת‬Ps 81:1), and ‫( דאתיא מגת‬Ps 84:1).34 As an integral part of the classical rabbinic literature, and in accordance with the position of other talmudic rabbis,35 the Targum affirms that the book of Psalms has been composed by David and other poets in “the Holy Spirit” 28 Translations of the Targum from Stec, Targum of Psalms, 134. See also Horst Dietrich Preuß, “Die Psalmenüberschriften in Targum und Midrasch,” ZAW 71 (1959): 44–54; and compare Komlós, Bible in the Light of the Aramaic Translations, 70–72. 29 See Komlós, Bible in the Light of the Aramaic Translations, 71. 30 Translation from Stec, The Targum of Psalms, 44. Interestingly, the Targum on the parallel text in Ps 53:1–2 is different than here, and the words “spirit of prophecy” do not appear there. 31 Translation from Stec, Targum of Psalms, 151. 32 See also Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible, 83 n. 33. For the English translation of these psalms, see Stec, Targum of Psalms, 46, 113, 115, 116, 117. 33 See Harold Eugene Hill, Messianic Expectations in the Targum to the Psalms (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958); Komlós, Bible in the Light of the Aramaic Translations, 69. 34 See Otto Komlós, “Targumim: 2. Targum Psalms” [Hebrew], EB(B), 756. 35 See above, §1, and below, §2.2. On the impact of the Davidic attribution on Jewish Psalms interpretation, see Alan Cooper, “On the Typology of Jewish Psalms Interpretation,” in Biblical Interpretation in Judaism and Christianity, ed. Isaac Kalimi and Peter J. Hass, LHBOTS 439 (London: T&T Clark, 2006), 79–90.

170

Kalimi

(‫ )רוח קדשא‬or by “prophecy”—a position that is later followed also by some medieval commentators, such as Rashi.36 2.2 Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov37 is mainly an aggadic collection of rabbinic interpretations, homilies, and legends related to most chapters of the biblical book of Psalms. It probably contains some material from the Midrash Tehillim or Sefer Tillim Aggadah (‫ )ספר תילים אגדה‬that is mentioned in other rabbinic sources;38 however, it is not identical to it.39 This midrash comprises two distinct sections: the first, oldest, and largest section contains midrashim on Psalms 1–118; the second section offers midrashim on Psalms 119–50 (however, it wants midrashim on Psalms 123 and 133). These two sections differ distinctively in their thematic, linguistic, and stylistic features.40 The primary editing time (Entstehungszeit) of the first section was begun sometime in the talmudic period (ca. the third to fifth centuries CE), and it continued developing gradually for several centuries (Wirkungszeit). The editing of the first section was probably completed at some point in the eleventh century, however, before the compilation of the midrashic anthology Yalqut Shimoni (ca. 1200–1300 CE). By contrast, most of the midrashim in the second section were collected and added sometime after the compilation of Yalqut Shimoni.41 36 37

See below, §3.3. It is so named because of its opening verse, which quotes from Prov 11:27, ‫יְב ֵקׁש‬ ַ ,‫ש ֵֹחר טֹוב‬ ‫ ָרצֹון‬. Some scholars named it also Aggadat Tehillim/Tillim, acknowledging its literary genre. See, for example, Rashi’s commentary on Deut 33:7; Judg 6:1; Ps 41:4 (ET: Ps 41:3); Ps 64:2 (ET: Ps 64:1; Aggadat Tehillim); Ps 78:38; Ps 86:2, 3; Qoh 11:7 (Aggadat Tillim). 38 For example, y. Ketub. 12:3 (35a); b. Qidd. 33a; ʿAbod. Zar. 19a; Midrash Genesis Rabbah 33:2; see Julius Theodor and Chanoch Albeck, eds., Bereschit Rabba mit kritischem Apparat und Kommentar, 2nd ed., 4 vols., VAWJ (Jerusalem: Wahrmann, 1965), 1:307. 39 See Yaacov Elbaum, “Midrash Tehillim,” EncJud 11:1519–20, esp. 1520. 40 See Leopold Zunz, Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, historisch entwickelt: Ein Beitrag zur Alterthumskunde und biblischen Kritik, zur Literatur- und Religionsgeschichte, 2nd ed. (Frankfurt a.M.: Verlag J. Kauffmann, 1892; reprinted, Hildesheim: Olms, 1966), 278–80; translated in Hebrew as Zunz, Haderashot Beyisrael Vehishtalshelutan Hahistorit, trans. M. A. Zak; ed. Chanoch Albeck (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1974), 131–32, 407–12; Salomon Buber, Midrash Tehillim (Vilna: Romm, 1886–1893; repr., Jerusalem: Wagshel, 1977), 8–9, 18, 109–10, 507–508 n. a; Elbaum, “Midrash Tehillim,” 1519; see also Günter Stemberger, Einleitung in Talmud und Midrasch, 8th ed. (Munich: Beck, 1992), 315; Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible, 72–74. 41 The midrashim on Psalms 122, 124–30 and 132–37 are drawn verbatim from Yalqut Shimoni, while the compiler of Yalqut Shimoni utilized Midrash Shocher Tov on Psalms 1–118 as one of his sources (for the list of the midrashim from Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov on Ps 1–118 that were used by Yalqut Shimoni’s compiler(s), as well as the

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

171

The names of the editors of the midrash, as well as the exact place(s) of its composition are unknown. Nevertheless, the language, the style, the manner of sermonizing, the sources upon which this midrash was based, the names of amoraim mentioned in it, and the many citations from the Jerusalem Talmud all imply that the main work was edited in Galilee.42 2.2.1 Exegetical Approaches and View of the Authorship of Psalms Some sayings scattered in Midrash Psalms disclose the basic concepts of this collection. As already mentioned, this midrash states that “David gave five books of Psalms to Israel”; that is, David is solely responsible for the entire biblical book of Psalms (with the cooperation of ten elders),43 “by the Holy Spirit” (‫)ברוח הקדש‬. For instance, Midrash Psalms 17:9 states: “Five times in the book of Psalms David asked the Holy One, blessed be he, to arise: four times against the four kingdoms, for by the help of the Holy Spirit David saw how the four kingdoms would oppress Israel.” Thus, the rabbis were aware of later events mentioned in the book, such as regarding the temple that built after David’s death (e.g., Ps 92:14 [ET: Ps 92:13]; Ps 134; Ps 135), the destruction of the Kingdom of Israel (e.g., Ps 80), the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians (Ps 79) and its walls (Ps 51:20 [ET: 51:18]), the exile “by the rivers of Babylon” (Ps 137), and the restoration from exile and rebuilding of Jerusalem (Pss 126–27). Consequently, in Midrash Psalms 4:1 it is stated: ‫רבי יהודה אומר כל‬ ‫“( מה שאמר דוד כנגדו וכנגד כל ישראל אמר‬Rabbi Yehuda said: All that David says [in the book of Psalms] is said of himself and of all Israel”).44 This is repeated, with a bit of additional detail, in Midrash Psalms 18:1: character of the manuscript(s) that he used, see Buber, Midrash Tehillim, 60–66, 116–27). Furthermore, in the Thessaloniki edition, midrashim on Psalms 123 and 131 do not appear at all. The midrashim on these chapters in the Buber edition (Buber, Midrash Tehillim, 509, 515) have been reconstructed by Solomon Buber himself: for Psalm 131, he drew material from the Jerusalem Talmud and Numbers Rabbah; for Psalm 123, from Pesiqta Rabbati and Sifre; see Buber, Midrash Tehillim, 9, 507–508 note a. 42 See Buber, Midrash Tehillim, 4. 43 See b. Baba Batra 14b–15a: ,‫ על ידי אדם הראשון‬:‫דוד כתב ספר תהלים על ידי עשרה זקנים‬ ‫ ועל ידי אסף‬,‫ ועל ידי ידותון‬,‫ ועל ידי הימן‬,‫ ועל ידי משה‬,‫ ועל ידי אברהם‬,‫על ידי מלכי צדק‬ ֹ‫“( ועל ידי שלשה בני קרח‬David wrote the book of Psalms, including in it the work of ten elders, namely, Adam, the first, Melchizedek, Abraham, Moses, Heman, Yeduthun, Asaph, and the three sons of Korah”). Compare Midrash Psalms 1:1, 6: ‫אלו עשרה בני אדם שאמרו‬ ‫ ושלשה בני קרח‬,‫ ואסף‬,‫ ושלמה‬,‫ ודוד‬,‫ ומשה‬,‫ אברהם‬,‫ ומלכי צדק‬,‫ אדם‬:‫ ואלו הן‬,‫ספר תהלים‬ (“These are ten people who wrote [lit., ‘said’] the book of Psalms, and these are: Adam, and Melchizedek, Abraham, and Moses, and David, and Solomon, and Assaf, and three sons of Korah”); and see also 2 Macc 2:13, which refers to “the writing of David.” 44 Buber, Midrash Tehillim, 40.

172

Kalimi ‫ כל שאמר דוד בספרו כנגדו וכנגד כל ישראל וכנגד‬:‫רבי יודן אומר בשם רבי יהודה‬ .‫כל העתים אמרו‬

Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda: All that David says in his book [i.e., Psalms] applies to himself, to all Israel, and to all times [to come].45 The rabbis of Midrash Psalms therefore consider and interpret the book of Psalms not only as a compilation that mirrors some personal prayers, songs, and biographical items of the historical King David in the past, but also as a reflection of the individual and national events of Israel in the present, as well as in the future.46 Obviously, the rabbis lack historical perspective regarding the origin and the development of ancient Israelite literature, thought, and religion. They do not focus on the sources of Psalms or its historical, literary, and textual development, but on its final (Masoretic) form, as they do in fact for the whole Hebrew Bible. They studied the book of Psalms in the traditional sense in which it was accepted into the Jewish canon, including its traditional attribution to King David. As is common in the midrashic literature, in this one also the rabbis avoid criticizing David and the other patriarchs and founding leaders of Israel. Though they usually maintain the biblical verdict on most issues, in the case of David and some other key figures, they soften or deny the biblical condemnations. For instance, Midrash Psalms 4:2 mitigates the case of David’s affair with Bathsheba (2 Sam 11–12), by saying that God already forgave David (2 Sam 12:13). In other words, the rabbis attempt to remove the dark sides of the king who founded the Davidic dynasty and from whose descendants will appear Messiah, and considered him to be responsible for the entire book of Psalms. Furthermore, among many other features of midrashic and aggadic interpretation in general, and Midrash Psalms in particular, it is worth mentioning also the following: (1) Each psalm is read in the wider perspective of the book of Psalms, and of the entire biblical canon. (2) The differences in genre, style, and language between the texts were not ignored completely, but they do 45 Buber, Midrash Tehillim, 135. 46 This method is adopted also by some other Jewish Psalms commentators in the late medieval and early modern periods, such as Obadiah Sforno (ca. 1475–1550), and Moses Elsheikh (1508–1593); see Cooper, “On the Typology,” 83–90.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

173

not play a decisive role in their exegetical activities. (3) Midrash Psalms regularly lists several distinct opinions regarding various biblical texts and themes, often introduced by the expression “another interpretation,” without judging between them.47 2.3 Polemics with Christians The rabbis expound many texts and themes according to their own contemporary social, religious, and historical circumstances. Thus, several texts in Midrash Psalms appear to polemicize against Christians (the Minim) and their theological principles.48 For instance, the concept of forgiveness by God has been expressed already in Leviticus 16; Ps 86:5; Ps 103:3; and Ps 130:4. The rabbis stress this point in Midrash Psalms 17:8; 22:7; 104:2, saying that God is the only authority able to forgive transgressions. Midrash Psalms 17:8 states: “‘Show your marvelous lovingkindness’ (Ps 17:7): David said to the Holy One, blessed be he: Master of the world, give me of that marvelous ointment which is yours. And what is that? It is pardon and forgiveness, as is said ‘The Lord … who forgives all your iniquity; who heals all your disease’ [Ps 103:3].” Yet, this theological view is different from that in Christianity. In the Letter to the Colossians (1:14), for example, it is said: “Through whom [i.e., Jesus] our release is secured, the forgiveness of sins.” Complete forgiveness can be given by Jesus (Mark 2:5–12; and parallels). Jesus’s behavior shows that “forgiveness is central and not peripheral to his ministry. He gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45). He was the Lamb of God (John 1:36).”49 Perhaps the rabbis, who denied the divinity of Jesus, emphasized God’s unique prerogative to forgive sin as a challenge to such claims regarding Jesus’s ability to do so.50 The dispute with and statements against the Christians and their oppression, appear in several places in Midrash Psalms, such as 5:9 (“as you will make judgement to Edom [i.e., Christians]”; 97:1; 140:10, 12, 13).

47 48

On these and other issues, see in detail Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible, 72–89. On the Minim, see Isaac Kalimi, Early Jewish Exegesis and Theological Controversy: Studies in Scriptures in the Shadow of Internal and External Controversies, JCH 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum [now under Brill, Leiden], 2002), 61–87, with additional primary and secondary literature there. 49 C. Gestrich and J. Zehner, “Forgiveness,” ECh 2:330–34, esp. 331–32. 50 See Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible, 85.

174 3

Kalimi

The Major Rabbinic Psalms Commentaries from the Middle Ages

3.1 Saadia Gaon The great theologian, exegete, and grammarian, Rab Saadia Gaon (abbreviated Rasag; born in Dilaz [Faiyum district, Egypt], 882–942 CE; died in Baghdad), translated and interpreted the biblical books in Arabic—the everyday language of the Jews in the Islamic realm. He focused, first and foremost, on those books that were used in ordinary life, in Jewish liturgy and ceremonies in synagogues, as well as the prophetic and wisdom literature that supported his philosophical-theological views. Thus, he worked on Psalms, alongside the Torah, the Five Scrolls (Megillot), and some other prophetic and hagiographical books, but not on the early and late biblical historical books.51 3.1.1 Authorship, Genre, and Interpretative Approach Saadia Gaon wrote two introductions to the Book of Psalms: a short one, and another that is eleven times longer, in which he details his concept regarding the nature of the book and his own interpretative methods.52 He not only considers songs such as Psalm 137 (“By the rivers of Babylon”) to be prophecy,53 but he reads the entire book of Psalms in this way. Saadia sees the book as a whole—including all the personal prayers and songs to the Almighty—as prophetic guidance from the King and Prophet David to Israel, as he states in the introduction to his commentary: ‫ ולבאר שהמטרה‬,‫והדבר אשר הביאני להקדים חלקים אלו בהקדמת הספר הזה‬ ‫ הוא מפני שראיתי אחדים מאומתנו מדמים שספר זה‬,‫בכולם סביב הצווי והאזהרה‬ ‫ ונראה לי כי הסיבה שגרמה להם דמיון זה מה שמוצאים‬.‫דוד הנביא אמרו מפי עצמו‬ ‫ כיון שהוא‬,‫ דבר זה גרם להם והביאם לסטות מליחסו אל ה׳‬.‫בו הרבה מן תפילות‬ ‫ ואומר שהוא כולו דיבור אלוהי‬,‫בלשון בני אדם… ולכן ראיתי לגלות כל עניני ספר זה‬ ‫ ויזכיר‬,‫ יצוהו ויזהירהו ויזרזהו וייראהו ויתאר לו רוממות כבודו‬,‫מה שמדבר ה׳ לעבדו‬ .‫לו שהוא חלש לפניו ושהוא נצרך אליו‬

What has brought me to include these matters in the introduction to this book and explain that all of them aim at commandment and prohibition is that I have seen some of our nation who imagine that this book 51

For a detailed discussion and bibliography, see Kalimi, Retelling of Chronicles, 191–93; Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible, 231–38. 52 See the discussion by Simon, Four Approaches, 13–54, esp. 13–14 (English version: 1–57, esp. 1–2, and the bibliography on 42, n. 3). 53 As, for instance, in Rashi’s commentary on the chapter (see below, section 3.3).

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

175

was written by the prophet David from his own [lit., “from himself”]. And it seems to me that the reason that they were considered so is due to many prayers that they find in the book. This has caused them not to attribute it to the Lord, since it is in the speech of men; in particular, they came to do so because they use it in their prayers. Therefore, I have seen fit to reveal the entire meaning of this book: I say that it is all divine speech, what the master says to his servant, commanding him and warning him and encouraging him and threatening him and describing to him his exalting glory, and reminding him that he is weak before him and dependent upon him.54 Indeed, the characterization of David also as a prophet stems from biblical texts such as 2 Sam 23:1–3a (“The God of Israel has spoken / the Rock of Israel has said to me …”), 1 Chr 22:8; 28:3 (“God said to me …”), and Neh 12:24 (“David, the man of God”).55 By classifying all the psalms in the book as prophetic writing, Saadia enhances their divine origin and authority. However, in the same breath he ignores the overall uniqueness of the book in the biblical literature as a diverse collection of prayers, hymns, laments, and other kinds of songs. He also ignores the many musical terms and different authors’ names that appear in the titles of particular psalms. He overlooks the fact that the book of Psalms is not included in the second section of the Jewish Bible—“the Prophets”—but rather in the third one—“the Writings.” Moreover, Saadia’s attribution of the entire book to David stands in contradiction to the opinion of the rabbis of the Baraita in the Babylonian Talmud, Baba Batra 14b–15a, that David composed the book of Psalms in cooperation with ten elders. It also contradicts the rabbis’ saying in Midrash Psalms 1:6.56 Thus, Saadia’s consideration of Psalms as a kind of divine prophecy, full of commandments and warnings, complicates and clouds the interpretation of the book, rather than clarifying it. Why did Saadia choose such an uneasy direction? Perhaps Moshe Zucker is correct that this is an example of Saadia’s uncompromising struggle with the Karaites, who rejected the official liturgy of the rabbis (the siddur and the 54 55

56

The citation is from Saadia’s long introduction to his commentary on Psalms; see Simon, Four Approaches, 17 (ET: 5). The Qumranic community developed the biblical tradition and refers to David as a prophet in a text known as “David’s Compositions,” which appears in 11QPsalmsa col. 27, lines 2–11. According to this text, David composed three thousand six hundred songs to be sung before the altar, “all through the spirit of prophecy which had been given him from before the Most High”; see Florentino García Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, 2nd ed., trans. Wilfred G. E. Watson (Leiden: Brill, 1996), 309. For the citations, see above, note 43.

176

Kalimi

mahzorim) and insisted that the Psalms should constitute the only legitimate prayer book. Saadia instead claims that the Psalms are not a prayer book at all, but rather a book of prophecy.57 3.2 Moses Hacohen ibn Gikatilla The phenomenal grammarian, poet, and exegete, Rabbi Moses Hacohen ibn Gikatilla (with variants Giqatila/Chiquitilla; Spain, eleventh century CE), composed commentaries—all in Arabic—on several biblical books, including Psalms. Unfortunately, his commentary on Psalms did not survive intact. As of today, only a few fragments from the commentary are preserved, including one in the Firkovitch Collection in Saint Petersburg (MS 3583 [285]),58 and two tiny fragments from the Cairo Genizah (commentary on Ps 34:10–14; 35:10–13).59 Thus, the main sources for reconstructing ibn Gikatilla’s commentary on Psalms, and for understanding his general approach and exegetical methods, are the 151 scattered citations from it in Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra’s Psalms introductions and commentary (e.g., Ps 73:10, 21; 76:5, 11, 12; 78:39, 57) (particularly those where ibn Ezra mentions Gikatilla’s name), and the five citations by Rabbi Tanhum Yerushalmi, which are collected by Samuel Poznanski in his 1895 dissertation.60 3.2.1 Authorship, Genre, and Exegetical Approach Ibn Gikatilla opens a new direction in Psalms interpretation. In contrast to the traditional approach of the talmudic rabbis, and to that of Saadia Gaon, he considers the book of Psalms merely to be a collection of nonprophetic songs and prayers, which were written in various times by different authors.61 Accordingly, he points out straightforwardly that not only Psalm 137, but also some other psalms—based on their content—were written in the exilic period in Babylon. For example, in his commentary on Psalms 42:1 and 47:1, ibn Ezra reports that Gikatilla claims that “this psalm was written in Babylon.” More­ over, as Poznanski stated, according to Gikatilla, Psalms 102 and 106 were most 57 58 59 60 61

See Moshe Zucker, “Remarks on Rasag’s Introduction to Psalms” [Hebrew], Leshonenu 33 (1969): 223–30, esp. 225; Simon, Four Approaches, 17–18 (English version: 5–7), and there a detailed discussion and critique of Zucker. See Simon, Four Approaches, 103 (English version: 119). See Nehemiah Aloni, “Fragments from Commentary of Rabbi Moses haCohen ibn Gikatilla” [Hebrew], Sinai 24 (1949): 138–47; Simon, Four Approaches, 104 (ET: 120). Samuel Poznanski, Mose B. Samuel Hakkohen Ibn Chiquitilla: Nebst den Fragmenten seiner Schriften; Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Bibelexegese und der hebräischen Sprachwissenschaft im Mittelalter (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1895). See Simon, Four Approaches, 96–120 (ET: 113–44).

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

177

likely also written in Babylon (see ibn Ezra’s Psalms commentary on 102:15; 106:47), while the last two verses of Psalms 51 (vv. 20–21) are an addition to the psalm of David by someone in Babylon.62 In other words, ibn Gikatilla denies what the sages say in the Baraita about the authorship of the book of Psalms, which had been followed by almost all the Psalms commentators until him, and by many others after him. Although Saadia Gaon also offered a different explanation than the classical rabbis, it was not the same as ibn Gikatilla’s conclusion that some Psalms postdate David. For such an opinion, he was sharply criticized by Rabbi Yehuda ibn Balaam and others. Nonetheless, when a psalm that otherwise appears to be late but also carries the name of David at its head, ibn Gikatilla goes looking for alternative solutions. For example, psalm 122, which opens with the phrase: ,‫שיר המעלות לדוד‬ ‫“( שמחתי באמרים לי בית יהוה נלך‬A song of ascents of David: I was glad when they said to me, ‘Let us go to the House of the Lord’”; NRSV, slightly modified), implies that the House of the Lord has already been completed. Since this happened only after David’s death by his son Solomon, Gikatilla offers a harmonistic interpretation. In his commentary on this psalm, ibn Ezra cites Gikatilla’s comment: ‫אמר רבי משה כי זה השיר אמרו דוד שיאמר עם הזמירות בבית השם בעת‬ ‫“( שיבנה הבית‬Rabbi Moshe said that this song was said by David, which would be said with the chanting at the House of the Lord, when the house would be built”). Similarly, the last two verses of Psalm 51 are spoken from the perspective of an author in the Babylonian Exile. However, its heading attributes it to David: ‫“( למנצח מזמור לדוד‬a psalm of David”), and even gives it a clear date (“when the prophet Nathan came to him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba”), and the language of the verses 3–19 is in the first person. Rather than denying that the whole psalm could have been written by David, in this case ibn Gikatilla’s solution is to attribute only the last two verses, with their reference to the ruins of the temple and Jerusalem, to a later author in Babylonia (‫אחד מהחסידים‬ ‫)שהיה בבבל‬.63 3.3 Shlomo Yitzhaki (Rashi) Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki (or ben Yitzhak, best known by his acronym “Rashi”; Troyes, Champagne, France 1040–1105 CE), wrote commentaries on all the 62

63

See Poznanski, Mose B. Samuel Hakkohen Ibn Chiquitilla, 31–32, 176; Simon, Four Approaches, 104–5, 114–15 (ET: 120–21, 131–33). Simon lists fourteen psalms that ibn Gikatilla dated late: Psalms 42, 46, 47, 76, 78, 79, 81, 84, 89, 102, 106, 119, 137, and 51:20–21 [ET: Ps 51:18–19]; and probably also Psalms 43 and 126. For some additional examples, see Simon, Four Approaches, 115–19 (ET: 133–37).

178

Kalimi

biblical books except for Job 40:25–42:17, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles.64 Rashi’s biblical and talmudic commentaries have had an immense influence on his and later generations, all over the Jewish world. 3.3.1 Exegetical Methods In his commentaries, Rashi repeatedly stresses his goal to interpret the Scriptures according to the simple/plain meaning of the text, as well as according to the Aggadah that points to it. For instance, in his commentary on Gen 3:8, he writes: ‫וישמע—יש מדרשי אגדה רבים וכבר סדרום רבותינו על מכונם בב״ר ובשאר‬ ‫מדרשות; ואני לא באתי אלא לפשוטו של מקרא ולאגדה המישבת דברי המקרא‬ .‫דבר דבור על אפניו‬

“And they heard”—There are many midrashic explanations and our teachers have already collected them in their appropriate places in Genesis Rabbah and in other midrashim. I, however, am only concerned with the simple/plain meaning of Scripture and with such Aggadot that explain the words of Scripture in a manner that fits in with them.65 This interpretive method also serves Rashi in his commentary on Psalms.66 He explains the biblical text first according to what he considers the simple meaning, but from time to time he also cites interpretations from the endless ocean of the talmudic, targumic, and midrashic literature, and medieval sages. Occasionally he also interprets the text allegorically as referring to all Israel / the Jewish people. For example, in his commentary on Ps 22:1–7, Rashi comments:

64

On this issue, see the discussion by Isaac Kalimi, “History of Interpretation: The Book of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition; From Daniel to Spinoza,” RB 105 (1998): 5–41, esp. 34–35; Kalimi, Retelling of Chronicles, 209–16; Mayer Irwin Gruber, Rashi’s Commentary on Psalms, BRLA 18 (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 63–75. 65 See also Rashi’s commentary on Gen 3:23, 24; 6:9; 33:13; Jer 33:25; and the introduction to his commentary on Song 1:1. On Rashi’s interpretive methods, see S. Kamin, Rashi’s Exegetical Categorization: In Respect to the Distinction Between Peshat and Derash [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1986). 66 The best comprehensive study on Rashi’s commentary on the book of Psalms is the monumental work by Gruber, Rashi’s Commentary on Psalms. Gruber investigated the commentary from various angels, translated it into English, and accompanied it with many valuable notes.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

179

‫ ד״א על כנסת ישראל שהיא אילת אהבים [משלי‬.‫על אילת השחר—שם כלי שיר‬ ‫ ומנחם פתר אילת‬,‫ ורבותינו דרשוהו באסתר‬.]‫י‬:‫יט] הנשקפה כמו שחר [שה״ש ו‬:‫ה‬ …‫לשון מעוז כמו אילותי לעזרתי חושה‬

“On Ayelet Hashahar”—the name of a musical instrument. Another interpretation: [the Scripture speaks] about the congregation of Israel that she is “a loving doe” [Prov 5:19] that “looks like dawn” [Song 6:10 (ET: 6:9)]; and our rabbis explained [in Midrash Psalms 22:1] that it applies to Esther, and Menachem solved “Eilat” as a stronghold like “Eilothi,” hurry to help me. Although in his commentary on Ps 23:2, Rashi refers to the historical David, still he interprets the text as the rabbis in the Midrash Psalms did: ,‫ למה נקרא שמו יער חרת? שהיה מנוגב כחרס‬.‫ומזמור זה אמר דוד ביער חרת‬ .)‫והרטיבו הקב״ה מטוב של העולם הבא (מדרש תהלים‬

And this psalm was said by David [as he was] in the forest of Hereth [1 Sam 22:5]. Why was it name called “the forest of Hereth”? Because it was wiped out like clay, and the Holy One, blessed be he, brought there [lit., “watered it with”] the goodness of the world to come [hereafter] (Midrash Psalms [23:6]). Moreover, as he does in his commentaries on other biblical books, also in his Psalms commentary Rashi uses foreign words—usually French but sometimes also German—to explain Hebrew vocabulary (e.g., Ps 22:1, 16; 116:11). He also uses other interpretative methods, such as ‫( סרס המקרא ודרשהו‬i.e., “change [the order of the words in] the verse and comment on it”; see e.g., Sifre Numbers, piska 68), for example, in his commentary on Ps 22:30–31. Likewise, he draws from the writings of the grammarians Menachem ben Saruk (e.g., Ps 22:1, 16 [ET: Ps 22:1, 15]; 137:3), and Donash ben Labrat (e.g., Ps 23:4), and he cites comments and homilies by Rabbi Moshe haDarshan of Narbonne (Southeast France).67

67

For example, in his comment on Ps 60:4 (ET: Ps 60:2) he writes: “It originated in the writing of Rabbi Moshe ha-Darshan” (see also Ps 45:2 [ET: Ps 45:1]; 68:17 [ET: Ps 68:16]). On Ps 62:12 [ET: Ps 62:11] and 80:6 [ET: Ps 80:5] he notes: “This I studied from the comments [‫מיסודו של‬/‫ ]מדברי‬of Rabbi Moshe ha-Darshan” (cf. Gen 35:8; Deut 21:14). See also Rashi’s commentary on Gen 48:7; Num 8:7; 11:20, 21; 15:41; 19:22; 26:24; Deut 27:24; Josh 5:9; Prov 5:19; 26:10; Job 36:1.

180

Kalimi

3.3.2 Authorship and Genre Rashi’s distinctive interpretative approaches towards the book of Psalms, its authorship, and genre are reflected in several places in his work. He opens his commentary on the book by declaring: ‫ בהלל בתפלה‬,‫ בשיר‬,‫ במזמור‬,‫ בנגון‬,‫ בנצוח‬:‫בעשרה לשונות של זמר נאמר ספר זה‬ ‫ מלכי‬,‫ אדם‬:‫ בהללויה—כנגד עשרה בני אדם שאמרוהו‬,‫ באשרי‬,‫ בהודאה‬,‫בברכה‬ ‫ יש‬:‫ וחלוקין על ידותון‬.‫ ושלשה בני קרח‬,‫ אסף‬,‫ שלמה‬,‫ דוד‬,‫ משה‬,‫ אברהם‬,‫צדק‬ ‫ ויש מפרשים אין ידותון שבספר זה אלא‬.‫אומרים אדם היה כמו שכתוב בדברי הימים‬ .‫שם הדתות והדינים של גיזרות שעברו עליו ועל ישראל‬-‫על‬

With ten languages of lyric [lit., “song”] was this book said—with nitzuakh, with niggun, with psalm, with song, with praise, with prayer, with blessing, with thanksgiving, with laudation, with hallelujah, corresponding to the ten persons who said it: Adam, Melchizedek, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Asaph, and the three sons of Korah. And they differ on Jeduthun: there are those who say he was a person as it is written [about] in [1] Chronicles [16:38], and there are those who say, [the] “Jeduthun” that is in this book only refers to the laws [‫ ]דת‬and the judgments of the decrees that have gone over him and over Israel.68 Being aware of diverse literary genres (e.g., songs, prayers, complaints), and the differing liturgical terms, musical instruments, and authors’ names mentioned in the opening verses of various psalms, Rashi concludes that David was not the sole author of the whole book, but just of those psalms that carry his name69 and those for which no name is mentioned (anonymous). All other psalms come from the hands of other authors, as the names of them appear at the beginning of those psalms. Consequently, David was the author of some of the Psalms and an editor of the whole book. As noted, this approach is not new. It is spelled out already by the rabbis of the Baraita that is cited in the Babylonian Talmud, Baba Batra 14b–15a, as well as in Midrash Psalms 1:6.70

68 On Rashi’s introduction to Psalms, see Gruber, Rashi’s Commentary on Psalms, 165–69. 69 There are seventy-three psalms where the name “David” appears. In addition, Ps 139:16 is ascribed to Adam (however, not in the psalm itself); Psalm 110 mentions Melchizedek; Psalm 90 is ascribed to Moses; Psalm 127 to Solomon; Psalms 50, 73–83 to Asaph; and Psalms 42, 44–49, 84, 85, 87, and 88 to “the sons of Korah”; Abraham is also traditionally identified with Ethan the Ezrahite in Ps 89:1. 70 For the citation, see above, n. 43.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

181

Furthermore, Rashi was also aware that those peoples mentioned at the beginning of some psalms lived in different epochs, and in addition there are also various historical themes and events that are mentioned in the book that are later than David. In such cases as well, Rashi follows the talmudic rabbis who consider the book of Psalms to have been written in the Holy Spirit (b. Ber. 4b; Pesah. 117a). For example, he interprets Ps 127:1 as if David said it in the Holy Spirit concerning Solomon: ‫שיר המעלות לשלמה—שיר זה אמר דוד על שלמה בנו שצפה ברוח הקודש שעתיד‬ .‫לבנות בית המקדש ובו ביום ישא שלמה את בת פרעה‬

“Song of the Virtues to Solomon”—This song David said about his son Solomon for he [= David] foresaw by prophetic vision [lit., “by the Holy Spirit”] that he [= Solomon] will build the temple, and on that same day, Solomon would marry Pharaoh’s daughter [1 Kgs 3:1]. Rashi expounded some repeated phrases in Psalms also according to this method; that is, as if they were said by David while referring to future personalities. For instance, the phrase ‫אמר נבל בלבו אין אלהים השחיתו והתעיבו עלילה‬ ‫עול] אין עשה טוב‬/[ (“A fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is no one who does good”), appears in Ps 14:1, and once again in Ps 53:2 [ET: Ps 53:1]. Rashi notes in both places that each phrase refers to a foreign ruler who destroyed the Jerusalem Temple: the first phrase refers to Nebuchadnezzar, who destroyed the First Temple; the second one to Titus, who destroyed the Second Temple. On the one hand, sometimes Rashi explains the biblical text against what he considers its historical background. For example, in his commentary on Ps 23:4, he writes: ‫גם כי אלך בגיא צלמות—בארץ חושך—ועל מדבר זיף אמר‬: “‘Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death’—in a dark land—this refers to the wilderness of Ziph” (i.e., where Saul pursued David; 1 Sam 23:14–15; 26:1–2; Ps 54:2 [ET: Ps 54:1]). Likewise, he writes concerning Ps 116:1: ‫אהבתי כי‬ ‫“( ישמע ה׳ את קולי—כך אמר דוד לאחר שנפטר שאול והוא מלך‬I love [the Lord], because he has heard my voice: So David said after Saul passed away and he became a king”). On the other hand, Rashi interprets many psalms about the people of Israel and its past, present, or future to have been prophesied by David. For example, he interprets Ps 22:2 [ET: Ps 22:1]: ‫אלי אלי למה עזבתני—עתידה היא [= כנסת‬ ‫ ואמר דוד תפלה זו על העתיד‬,‫ישראל] ללכת בגולה‬. (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me: she [= the congregation of Israel] is destined to go into exile, and

182

Kalimi

David said this prayer with reference to the future”). On Ps 22:7 [ET: Ps 22:6], ‫“( ואנכי תולעת ולא איש‬I am a worm and not a man”), he writes: ‫כל ישראל מכנה‬ ‫“( כאיש אחד‬all of Israel calls as one person”). He explains that Ps 22:22 [ET: Ps 22:21] concerns the past of Israel: ‫ זה האמורי אשר כגובה ארזים‬,‫הושיעני מפי אריה—כאשר מקרני ראמים עניתני‬ .‫גבהו שלשים ואחד מלכים‬

Save me from the mouth of a lion—when the horns of reems (or, wild oxen) answered me, it is [a metaphor for] the Amorites who are as tall as cedars [Amos 2:9], [that is] thirty-one kings [see Josh 12:9–24]. Meanwhile he interprets Ps 22:27 [ET: Ps 22:26], ‫“( יאכלו ענוים וישבעו‬The poor [or, ‘afflicted’] shall eat and be satisfied”), Rashi comments: ‫יאכלו ענוים—לעת‬ ‫“( הגאולה לימות המשיח‬The poor [or, ‘afflicted’] shall eat—at the time of the redemption, in the messianic era”). And regarding Ps 22:28 [ET: Ps 22:27] he writes: ‫יזכרו וישובו אל ה׳—יזכרו האומות הרעה שמצאתנו כשיראו את הטובה וישובו‬ .‫אל ה׳‬

Remember and return to God—the nations will remember the evil that has found us, when they will see the good that [God did to us in the messianic era] then they will return to the Lord. 3.3.3 Polemic against Christians In his Psalms commentary, Rashi polemicizes against Christian doctrines and christological interpretations of the book, more than in any of his commentaries on other biblical books. Many of those polemics have been omitted, replaced, altered, or “corrected” by the Christian censors.71 For example, the 71

On the attempts to restrict literary freedom of the Jews, and the Christian censorship of various Jewish writings, including biblical commentaries and talmudic passages, see William Popper, The Censorship of Hebrew Books (New York: Ktav, 1969), esp. 12 n. 33; 65, 69, 90–91, 112 (regarding the banning of the commentaries of Rashi and Kimhi to the “Old Testament,” because “these works contained things contrary to our faith, especially in regard to the Prophets.”), 85 (regarding Rashi’s commentary on Song 1:5), 96–97. Popper (Censorship, 12 n. 33) says that those who undertook the first burning of the Talmud also examined the “Gloss of Solomon of Troyes.” See also Amnon Raz-Karkotzkin, The Censor, the Editor, and the Text: The Catholic Church and the Shaping of the Jewish Canon in the Sixteenth Century, trans. J. Feldman (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007), esp. 75, 82, 136–40.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

183

censored form of Rashi’s comment on Ps 2:1, as it appears in the Rabbinic Bible (Mikraot Gedolot), is: ‫ ולפי משמעו יהיה‬,‫רבותינו דרשו את הענין על המלך המשיח‬ .‫“( נכון לפותרו על דוד עצמו‬Our rabbis interpreted [this chapter] concerning the King Messiah, but according to its [simple] meaning it is correct to interpret it concerning David himself”). However, the original version, which survived in a manuscript in the library of Moscow, is: ‫רבים מתלמידי ישו דרשו את הענין על מלך‬ ‫ ולתשובת המינים נכון לפותרו על דוד עצמו‬,‫“( המשיח‬Many of the disciples of Jesus apply this passage to messiah, but in order to refute the Minim, this passage should be applied to David”). Similarly, Rashi interpreted Ps 21:2.72 Rashi considered Christians to be the enemy of God and his people, Israel, who will be severely punished for all the evil acts that they did to Israel. In the messianic era, they will repent, accept Judaism, and join the Jewish people.73 In many places in his commentary, Rashi uses the name “Esau” for Christians. Thus, for instance, in his comment on Ps 9:1, Rashi encourages the Jews in his contemporary exile, and wishes that Esau and his descendants would be erased from the earth (see also his comments on Ps 9:7, 8, 20 [ET: Ps 9:6, 7, 19]; 39:2; 65:6 [ET: Ps 65:5]; 77:5 [ET: Ps 77:4]; 80:20 [ET: Ps 80:19]; 86:6, among many other biblical texts).74 Apparently, Rashi composed his commentary on Psalms after the destruction of the Jewish communities in the Rhineland (Speyer, Worms, and Mainz) by the Crusaders in 1096 CE.75 As one who studied in Worms and Mainz, and had close friends, teachers, and students there, the disastrous evil acts of the Christians against the Jews had an immense impact on him and his exegesis. 72 See Gilad J. J. Gevaryahu, “Variants in Rashi on Psalms, and the Censor” [Hebrew], in Studies in Bible and Jewish Thought: Festschrift H. M. Y. Gevaryahu, ed. Ben Zion Luria (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1989), 248–61, esp. 252–53; Abraham Grossman, “Rashi’s Commentary on Psalms and the Jewish-Christian Polemics” [Hebrew], in Studies in Bible and Education: Presented to Prof. Moshe Arend, ed. Dov Rappel (Jerusalem: Touro College, 1996), 59–74, esp. 61 (Grossman uses a different version of Rashi’s text), and there additional examples and bibliography. On this issue see also Isaac Baer, “Rashi and the Historical Reality of His Time” [Hebrew], Tarbiz 20 (1949): 320–32, esp. 331–32; Michael A. Signer, “King/Messiah: Rashi’s Exegesis of Psalm 2,” Proof 3 (1983): 273–78; Robert A. Harris, “Rashi and the ‘Messianic’ Psalms,” in Birkat Shalom: Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature, and Postbiblical Judaism Presented to Shalom M. Paul on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, 2 vols., ed. Chaim Cohen et al. (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2008), 2:845–62. 73 See, for example, Rashi’s commentary on Ps 22:28 (ET: Ps 22:27, cited above), and Psalms 48, 66, 96, 115; see Grossman, “Rashi’s Commentary,” 59, 63–67. 74 See further Rashi’s commentary on Ps 68:32 (ET: Ps 68:31); 75:11 (ET: Ps 75:10); 140:10 (ET: Ps 140:9); 144:3; Zech 9:4, 9; Dan 11:14; see Grossman, “Rashi’s Commentary,” 63–67; Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible, 104–105. 75 See Baer, “Rashi,” 325; Grossman, “Rashi’s Commentary,” 60.

184

Kalimi

This led Rashi to sharply dispute with the Christians and their christological exegesis and beliefs. In the same breath, he also attempted to encourage the Jews to continue keeping their own religious heritage and hope for better times. 3.4 Abraham Ibn Ezra The well-known poet, grammarian, and exegete, Rabbi Abraham (ben Meir) ibn Ezra (acronym: Raaba; born in Tudela [Spain], 1089/1090–1164, died, most probably, in London), composed commentaries on almost all the biblical books. However, unfortunately not all of these have survived.76 Thus his commentaries on the books of Jeremiah,77 Ezekiel,78 and the books of the Former Prophets (Joshua,79 Judges,80 Samuel,81 and Kings82) were lost.83 By contrast, commentaries of ibn Ezra have survived on the Torah (two), Five Megillot (two on the Song of Songs and two on Esther), Isaiah, Twelve Minor Prophets, a short commentary on Job and Daniel, and a full commentary on Psalms. 3.4.1 Authorship, Genre and Exegetical Approaches In his introduction to the book of Psalms, ibn Ezra presents three approaches regarding the book’s dating, authorship, and literary genre. The first approach is that of Saadia Gaon, and the second is that of Moses ha-Cohen ibn Gikatilla. However, he neither considers all the psalms to be prophecies of David as Rasag does, nor accepts that the book is a compilation of nonprophetic prayers and songs, written in different times and by various authors, as ibn Gikatilla does. Raaba goes further and suggests his own approach—a third one: ‫ וכל‬.…‫ כי זה הספר כולו נאמר ברוח הקודש‬,‫ודעתי נוטה עם דברי הקדמונים ז״ל‬ ,‫ או לאחד מן המשוררים המתנבאים על דוד‬,‫מזמור כתוב בראשו לדוד הוא לדוד‬ ‫ שגם הוא לאחד מהמשוררים על‬,)‫על דרך לשלמה אלהים משפטיך למלך תן (ע״ב‬ ‫ [ו]אולי הם‬,‫ יתכן שאינן לדוד‬,‫ והמזמורים שאין כתו׳ בראשם שם אדם‬.…‫שלמה‬

76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

On ibn Ezra, see Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible, pp. 238–49. See ibn Ezra’s commentary on Lev 20:20, which refers to his commentary on Jeremiah. Referred to in ibn Ezra’s short commentary on Exod 28:41. Referred to in ibn Ezra’s commentary on Deut 32:4. Referred to in ibn Ezra’s commentaries on Deut 29:19 and 33:2. See Raaba’s short commentary on Exod 27:21 and his commentary on Ps 51:2, which refers to his commentary on 1 Sam 3:3 and 2 Sam 11–12. See also Rabbi David Kimhi’s commentary on 1 Sam 27:10, who mentions Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra’s commentary, ad loc. See Raaba’s commentary on Deut 21:17, which refers to his commentary on 2 Kgs 2:9. He probably also interpreted the books of Proverbs, Ezra, and Nehemiah. The commentaries on Ezra-Nehemiah in the Rabbinic Bible (Mikraot Gedolot) are ascribed to ibn Ezra but, in fact, not composed by him, but rather by Rabbi Moshe Kimhi.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

185

‫ וזה מפורש‬.‫ והוא לדוד‬,‫ שאין שם שם דוד‬,)‫ כמזמור הודו ליי קראו בשמו (ק״ה‬,‫לדוד‬ .‫ ונתנו לאסף המשורר‬,‫ כי דוד חיברו על הארון‬,)‫ ז‬,‫בדברי הימים (דה״א טז‬

I tend to agree with the sages [/ talmudic rabbis], may their memory be a blessing, that this entire book is divinely inspired. … Every psalm that says in its heading le-David is by David, or one of the poets prophesying about David, like “Of Solomon. O God, endow the king with your judgement” (psalm 72), which is also by one the poets [and] about Solomon. … Those psalms that have no one’s name in the heading may not be by David,84 or again they may be, like “Praise the Lord, call on his name,” (psalm 105) which has no ascription to David but is by him, since it is said explicitly in Chronicles (1 Chr 16:7) that David wrote it about the ark, and gave it to Asaph the singer.85 According to this approach, ibn Ezra interprets various psalms, for example: (1) On Ps 43:3–5, ,‫שלח אורך ואמתך המה ינחוני יביאוני אל הר קדשך ואל משכנותיך‬ ‫“( ואבואה אל מזבח אלהים אל אל שמחת גילי… מה תשתוחחי נפשי ומה תהמי עלי‬O send out your light and your truth; let them lead me; let them bring me to your holy mountain and to your dwellings, then I will go to the altar of God, to God my exceeding joy. … Why are you cast down, O my soul, why are you disquieted within me …”); ibn Ezra says: ‫ מה‬,…‫ ומשכנותיך—העזרות העתידות להבנות בבית שלישי‬,‫הר קדשך—הר המוריה‬ .‫תשתוחחי—ברוח הקודש שיוחיל ישראל אל השם‬

“Your holy mountain”—Mount Moriah; “to your dwellings”—the future chambers to be built in the Third House/Temple …; “why are you disquieted within me”—in the Holy Spirit, which Israel will appeal to God. (2) In his commentary on Ps 51:20 (ET: 51:18), ‫היטיבה ברצונך את־ציון תבנה‬ ‫“( חומות ירוׁשלם‬Do good to Zion in your good pleasure, build the walls of Jerusalem”), he writes: ‫“( גם נכון הוא שנאמר ברוח הקודש‬It is also true that it is said by the Holy Spirit”). (3) Regarding Ps 122:1–3, ‫שיר המעלות לדוד שמחתי באמרים לי בית יהוה נלך עמדות‬ ‫ ירושלם הבנויה כעיר שחברה לה יחדו‬,‫“( היו רגלינו בשעריך ירושלם‬A song of ascents 84 85

This stands just in opposite to Rashi’s opinion, who attribute such psalms also to David; see above, §3.3.2. See Simon, Four Approaches, 121–248, esp. 147–48 (English version: 330, 332–33; see also 145–295).

186

Kalimi

of David. I was glad when they said to me, ‘Let us go to the house of the Lord!’ Our feet are standing within your gates, O Jerusalem. Jerusalem—built as a city that is bound firmly together”), he says: ‫ויש אומרים על הבית השלישי כל אחד מישראל אומרים שמחתי באומרים הם עולי‬ ‫ ירושלים היתה דומה בשלוש רגלים למדינה שהתחברו אליה כל בנותיה‬.…‫רגלים‬ .‫מסביב בעת הפחד‬

There are those who say that this refers to the Third Temple, and every one of Israel says that I was glad to say that they are pilgrims. … In Three Festivals, Jerusalem was like a country that all its surrounding villages joined up with, as it is in the time of fear. (4) On Ps 126:1, ‫“( שיר המעלות בשוב יהוה את שיבת ציון היינו כחלמים‬A song of ascents, when the Lord restored the fortunes of Zion, we were like those who dream”), ibn Ezra quotes the words of ibn Gikatilla and the Karaite sage Yhudah, and comments: .‫ אין אדם רואה בהקיץ הפלא הזה רק בחלום‬.‫כן יאמר ישראל בשוב השם שבותם‬ So shall Israel say when God will return them [to Zion]. No one sees this miraculous awakening but only in a dream. These passages from ibn Ezra’s commentary on Psalms show that he attempts to find a “golden way” between Saadia and ibn Gikatilla. He attributes some psalms to the Holy Spirit, but not to a later author or to the “prophet” David. 3.5 David Kimhi Rabbi David Kimhi (acronym: Radak; Narbonne [Provence, southeastern France]; ca. 1160–1235), was a philologist and exegete. He wrote comprehensive commentaries not only on Psalms, but also on the book of Genesis, on the Former and Latter Prophets, and on Chronicles.86 86

The attribution of the commentary on Proverbs to Radak has been challenged by Naomi Grunhaus. Following a meticulous investigation, she states that “the most logical conclusion is that Radak did not write the commentary” on Proverbs. See Naomi Grunhaus, “The Commentary of Rabbi David Kimhi on Proverbs: A Case of Mistaken Attribution,” JJS 54 (2003): 311–27, esp. 326. On Radak, his exegetical activities, and methods, see Ezra Zion Melamed, Bible Commentators [Hebrew], 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1978), 2:719–932; Frank Ephraim Talmage, David Kimhi: The Man and the Commentaries (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975); Mordechai Cohen, “The Qimhi Family,” in

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

187

3.5.1 Authorship, Genre and Exegetical Approaches In the introduction to his commentary on Psalms, Radak attempts to mark a distinction between “prophecy” and “speaking in the Holy Spirit.” Like Rashi and ibn Ezra, he follows the talmudic rabbis in their view that the book of Psalms has been written by David in the Holy Spirit, including all those psalms that mention “Babylonian and other exiles.”87 One unique characteristic of Radak’s commentary on the Psalms—and not the only one—is his inclusive approach. He examines the biblical text within its immediate and wider contexts, from various viewpoints: philological, textual, theological, midrashic, and sometimes also historical. He uses intensively the Psalms commentaries that were available to him in Narbonne, including in the talmudic-midrashic literature, as well as those written by Sephardic or Ashkenazic exegetes, such as Rashi, Abraham ibn Ezra, and his father, Joseph Kimhi. 3.5.2 Anti-Christian Polemics David Kimhi did not hesitate to speak against those peoples who did evil to Israel, and he was confident that God exacted from them the vengeance of Israel.88 He often disputed with Christian theology and christological interpretation, in which verses of the Psalms were applied to Jesus. He usually did so either at the beginning or at end of his commentary on the chapter. For

87

88

Hebrew Bible / Old Testament: The History of Its Interpretation, ed. Magne Sæbø, 3 vols. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), 1.2:388–415, esp. 396–415, and the earlier bibliography listed on 388–89. See Abraham Darom, Rabbi David Kimhi: The Complete Commentary on Psalms [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook, 1967), 7–8. On David Kimhi’s commentary on the book of Psalms and its manuscripts, see Ezra Zion Melamed, “Radak’s Commentary on Psalms” [Hebrew], in Biblical Studies in Texts, Translations and Commentators (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1984), 359–419. See Kimhi’s introduction to his commentary on the Latter Prophets, at the beginning of the book of Isaiah: ,‫ שהם ישעיהו‬,‫ ארבע ספרים אלו‬:‫אמר דוד בר יוסף בן קמחי הספרדי‬ ‫ וגם יש בהם נבאות‬,‫ יחזקאל ותרי עשר הם נבאות ותוכחות ונחמות על ישראל‬,‫ירמיהו‬ ‫ נכתבו בין הנבאות בכתבי הקודש כמו‬,‫ ולפי שהרעו לישראל‬.‫לאומות העולם על פורענותם‬ .‫ להודיע כי נקם מהם הקב״ה נקמת ישראל‬,‫שנבאו הנביאים עליהם‬. “David son of Joseph son of Kimhi, the Sephardi, said ‘These four books, which are Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve, these are prophecies, and rebukes and comforts concerning Israel, and also there is in them prophecies to the nations of the world concerning their calamity. And because they were wicked to Israel, they are written among the prophecies in the Holy Scriptures, such as those which came to the prophets concerning them, to announce that the Holy One, blessed be he, will execute the vengeance of Israel from them.’” Though Radak refers here to the past, most likely he alludes to his own time as well.

188

Kalimi

example, in his commentary on Psalm 22, Radak writes concerning the last verse, 32 (ET: Ps 22:31): .‫ והוא מספר כל הרעות שעשו לו ישראל‬,‫וזה המזמור פרשו אותו הערלים על ישו‬ .‫ וכן כל המזמור‬,‫ אלי אלי למה עזבתני‬:‫והנה צועק הבן לאב מתוך הצרות ואומר‬ ‫ לשון כי יכרה איש בור (שמות‬:‫ושיבשו מלת כארי ידי ורגלי [פסוק יזג] ואמר כארו‬ ‫ ונפשו לא‬,‫ והטעה אותם הפסוק‬.‫ שתקעו מסמרים בידיו וברגליו כשתלו אותו‬,)‫לג‬,‫כא‬ ‫ והוא לא רצה‬,‫ כי זה הוא אלוה שיכרעו לפניו כל יורדי עפר‬:‫ ואמרו‬,]‫חיה [פסוק לג‬ ,‫ כי בתנאי זה ירד לקחת בשר שיהרגו הבשר ויושעו בזה יורדי גהינם‬,‫לחיות נפשו‬ .‫לפיכך לא רצה לחיות את נפשו אלא מסר עצמו ביד ההורגים אותו‬ ‫ועתה ישמיעו לאזנם מה שפיהם מדבר! הם אומרים כי לא רצה לחיות את נפשו‬ ‫ אלי אלי למה עזבתני רחוק‬: ‫ אם כן למה היה צועק‬,‫ולהצילה מיד ההורגים אותו‬ .‫ אם הוא אלוה הוא עצמו יושיע עצמו‬,‫ והוא לא רצה להיות נושע?… ועוד‬,‫מישועתי‬ ‫ שהם מהללים‬:‫ והם המריעים לו? והיאך אמר‬,]‫ תהלות ישראל [פסוק דא‬:‫ועוד שאמר‬ ‫ לא היה‬,‫ ואם הוא כמו שהם אומרים‬,]‫ בך בטחו אבותינו [פסוק דב‬:‫האל? ועוד אמר‬ …!]‫לו אלא אב אחד? ועוד האלוה יאמר על עצמו שהוא תולעת ולא איש [פסוק זא‬ ‫ כי והלל‬,‫ והנה כזב‬.‫ והאלוה אין לו אחים‬,]‫ אספרה שמך לאחי [פסוק כאא‬:‫ואמר‬ ‫ [וישתחו לפניך] כל משפחות‬:‫ ואמר‬.…‫ והנה הוא לא ניצל‬,‫וההודאה אחר ההצלה הם‬ 89.‫ והנה היהודים והישמעאלים לא יאמינו בו‬,]‫גוים [פסוק כחב‬

The uncircumcised [people; i.e., the Christians] interpret this psalm about Jesus and all the evil that the Jews did to him. [They refer the Scripture] to the son [= Jesus, who] shouts to the father [= God] out of the troubles and says, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” and in this way [they interpret] also the whole psalm. And they disrupt the words: ‫( כארי ידי ורגלי‬verse 17c), and say [that it is] ‫כארו‬, thus [explaining it in the sense of], “For a man shall dig [‫ ]יכרה‬a pit” (Exod 21:33) as [though it described those] who stuck nails in his hands and feet when they [= the Jews] hanged him [= Jesus]. And the verse “and his soul shall not live” [30c] leads them astray, for they say that this one is God, before whom all who go down to the dust will bow, [yet] they say that he [Jesus] did not want to live his life, because on this condition he came down in order that his flesh will be killed, and all those that should go to Gehenna will be saved by this. Thus, he did not want to live his life, but handed himself over to his killers. Now, they should listen to what their mouth is talking about! They say that he did not want to save his life and [did not want] to be saved from his killers. But if so, why did he shout, “My God, my God, why have you 89

See Darom, Rabbi David Kimhi, 58.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

189

forsaken me? [Why are you so] far from helping me?” Did he not want to be saved? … Furthermore, if he is God himself, so let him save himself. And yet he also said: “praises of Israel” [verse 4a], and they applaud him? And how can they say that they praise God? And he said: “In you have our fathers trusted” [verse 4b], and [at the same time] they say, he had only one father? Will God say of himself that he is “a worm and not a man” [verse 7a]! … and say: “I will tell your name to my brother” [verse 21a], for the Lord has no brothers. And here is a lie, because praise and thanks for the rescue are here, [but] he is not saved. … He said: “[And worship before you] all the families of nations” [verse 28b], but the Jews and the Ishmaelites [= Muslims] do not believe in him.90 In this way, Radak emphasizes that Psalm 22, which is used already in the New Testament (e.g., Mark 15:34; Matt 27:46),91 raises difficulties for Christian theology, as some Christian theologians themselves have acknowledged.92 Another example is Radak’s commentary on Ps 72:1, ‫לשלמה—אלהים משפטיך‬ ‫“( למלך תן וצדקתך לבן מלך‬To Solomon—O God, give the king your justice, and your righteousness to a king’s son”), where he writes: ,‫והנוצרים מפרשים זה המזמור על ישו הנוצרי ואומרים כי הוא שלמה שהשלום שלו‬ ‫ ואתה תשבר דבריהם לפניהם‬.…‫ זהו האלוהות שירד מן השמים‬.…‫וכי הוא בן מלך‬ ‫… ועוד‬ .‫ מלך ובן מלך‬,‫ אלהים‬:‫ אתם אומרים כי בפסוק הזה השלוש‬:‫ותאמר להם‬ ‫ למה שאל שיתן האב לבן משפטיו וצדקתו?… ועוד מה שאמר ישאו הרים‬:‫אמור‬ 93.‫ והנה לא היה שלום בימי ישו הנוצרי‬,)‫שלום לעם (פסוק ג‬

And the Christians [lit. the Nazarenes] interpret this psalm concerning Jesus the Nazarene, and say that he is Solomon because the peace is his, and that he is the son of the king. … That this is the divinity that descended from heaven. … And you shall break their words before them and say to them: “You say that this verse refers to the trinity: God, king, 90

Does Radak refer here to Jerome who states that “the entire psalm” refers to Christ / predicts Jesus? See Saint Jerome, Commentarioli in psalmos: Anmerkungen zum Psalter, trans. Siegfried Risse (Tournhout: Brepols, 2005), 52–54, 62–64, 120–23. 91 See above, §2.1 and the discussion there. 92 See, for instance (although centuries later on), the commentary of Martin Luther on the verse, where he stresses this point very clearly: “Now what it means to be forsaken by God, no man can understand” (“Was nu das sei, von Gott verlassen sein, versteht kein Mensch”); see Luther on Ps 22:2, in Erwin Mülhaupt, ed., D. Martin Luthers Psalmen-Auslegung, 3 vols. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1959–1965), 1:294. 93 See Darom, Rabbi David Kimhi, 160. The text appears at the end of Radak’s commentary on psalm 72, and see next footnote.

190

Kalimi

and son of the king. …” Also say: “Why should the father give his son his judgments and his righteousness? …” Further, it says: “May the mountains yield peace for the people” (verse 3), but there was no peace in the time of Jesus the Nazarene.94 These and other examples illustrate Radak’s deep encounter with Christian Psalms exegesis and theology, and how sharply he argued against them, without any fear or restriction.95 No wonder, therefore, that similar to Rashi’s commentary on Psalms, Radak’s commentaries, especially the one on Psalms, were also subject to Christian censorship in certain periods and lands: the censors deleted, inverted, and rewrote his polemics and anti-Christian comments, disputes, and statements concerning Jesus, as well as his references to Israel’s exile and messianic redemption.96 Furthermore, in the first half of the sixteenth century, in his Lectures on Psalms, Martin Luther (1483–1546) states that “Every prophecy and prophet must be understood as referring to Christ the Lord.” Further he complains that “there are some [Christians] who interpret many psalms not prophetically [i.e., allegorically regarding Jesus], but rather historically, and [by doing] so they justify the Hebrews’ rabbis, who are falsifiers and inventers of the vanities of the Jews.”97 Luther did not refer to specific Jewish Psalms commentator(s), but most likely Rashi and Radak were on his list. In the last quarter of the sixteenth century, the archbishop of Milan, Carl/Charles Borromeo (1538–1584), whose “method of censorship was destruction,” forbade the printing of, among

94

Note that Rashi also interpreted this psalm while polemicizing against Christian christological interpretation. 95 Other examples appear in Radak’s commentary on psalm 2 (at the end); Ps 7:8 (ET: Ps 7:7); Ps 19:10 (ET: Ps 19:9); Ps 21 (at the beginning); Ps 22 (at the end); Ps 45 (at the end); Ps 87 (at the end); Ps 110 (at the end). All these passages of Radak’s commentary on Psalms are censored even in the editions of the Rabbinic Bible. They were printed separately, and Abraham Darom reinserted them back in appropriate places in Radak’s commentary. 96 See Darom, Rabbi David Kimhi, 5–6, see also Federica Francesconi, “‘This Passage Can Also Be Read Differently …’: How Jews and Christians Censored Hebrew Texts in Early Modern Modena,” JHist 26 (2012): 139–60, though neither discusses any examples. See also Popper, Censorship of Hebrew Books, 12 n. 33, 65, 69, 90–91, 112; Raz-Krakotzkin, Censor, 75, 82, 139. 97 “Jede Prophezeiung und jeder Prophet muss so verstanden werden, dass sie sich auf Christus, den Herrn, beziehen. … Einige erklären viele Psalmen nicht prophetisch sondern historisch, indem sie bestimmten hebräischen Rabbinern folgen, die Fälscher und Erfinder der Eitelkeiten der Juden sind” (WA vol. 10, p. 7); see also Luther, Lectures on Genesis (WA vol. 42, pp. 173–174, 367–377).

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

191

others, Bible “commentaries like Kimḥi to Psalms.”98 Nonetheless, there were some Christian theologians who praised Radak for his fine Bible commentaries, including the one on Psalms. Thus, for instance, the Swiss reformer, John Calvin (1509–1564), usually treats the Jewish interpreters as a group, and he regularly dismisses them as blind for failing to recognize Christ in the Old Testament; but on matters of detail he sometimes follows particular Jewish interpreters, including David Kimhi. In his comment on Ps 112:5, Calvin refers to him as “the most correct interpreter among the rabbis.”99 4

Conclusion

This study focuses on seven most important rabbinic exegetical compositions on Psalms from before and during the medieval period. It examines their main exegetical approaches, questions of authorship, genre, and their encounters and disputes with Christians and Christianity. The study opens with Jewish interpretive works on Psalms that originated in the talmudic period or before but continued to develop for many years further. This includes Targum Psalms, which presumably began to be written some time before the conclusion of the Babylonian Talmud, and was finished before the Muslim conquest of the land of Israel. The Targum moves between literal and midrashic translation of the biblical text, while occasionally using folk etymologies but avoiding anthropomorphism. It maintains that David was the one who authored the book by the Holy Spirit, assisted by ten elders. The compilation of Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov originated sometime in the talmudic era, and continued to develop over centuries. The rabbis of this work also ascribe the Psalms’ authorship to David and ten elders, and expound the psalms as if they refer to David’s prayers, songs, and biography, as well as to the people of Israel in all times, because David said them by the Holy Spirit. They explained many texts considering their own contemporary religious and sociohistorical circumstances, including disputes with Christians, their theological principles, and christological interpretation of Psalms. Further, five major rabbinic Psalms commentaries from the Middle Ages are discussed. Saadia Gaon and Moshe ibn Gikatilla presented commentaries 98

99

See Popper, Censorship of Hebrew Books, 96–97. Borromeo also banned the printing of “prayer-books, because they showed cabbalistic tendencies; Abraham ibn Ezra’s Commentaries, because they contained heresies and errors against the Bible” (Popper, Censorship of Hebrew Books, 97). See Joseph Haroutunian and Louise Pettibone Smith, eds., Calvin: Commentaries, LCC 23 (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1958), 23.

192

Kalimi

that show alternative approaches to Psalms interpretation than those found by the classical talmudic rabbis. Saadia considers the entire book of Psalms to be prophecy from David. Thus, he enhances the divine origin and authority of the book, but ignores its uniqueness in the Bible as collection of prayers and songs, and therefore complicates its interpretation. By contrast, ibn Gikatilla considers Psalms to be a collection of nonprophetic songs and prayers, which were written by many authors in different times. In fact, this approach represents the dawn of the historical-critical method to Psalms interpretation. As such, it offers clear evidence of the courageous and innovative exegetical activities of the Middle East and Sephardic Jewish sages. In his commentary on Psalms, Rashi returns to or simply continues the talmudic approaches. He employs his well-known interpretive methods that could be found in his other commentaries on Scripture: emphasizing the “simple meaning” of the text, although in fact many times he follows talmudicmidrashic exegesis, even when it deviates from the simple meaning, either as an alternative explanation, or complementary, or an important didactical one. He relates various psalms to the personal biography of King David, as well as to the collective history of Israel in the past. He considers David to be the author of many psalms and “editor” of the whole book, to which ten elders also contributed. Rashi views David as one who had foreseen the Jewish destiny in advance. Since the commentary was probably written during or shortly after the destruction of the Jewish communities in the Rhineland by the Crusaders (1096 CE), Rashi relates many psalms with his contemporary tragic events. In his Psalms commentary more than anywhere else in his exegetical works, Rashi polemicizes intensively with Christians and their allegorical interpretations. Abraham ibn Ezra suggests another approach, by which he often mediates or harmonizes between the opposing approaches of Saadia and ibn Gikatilla, though he mainly follows the talmudic sages in arguing that Psalms has been written “in the Holy Spirit,” directly by David and the poets of his time. It is surprising, however, that in comparison to his critical notes on various verses in the Torah (e.g., Gen 36:31, 32–33; Deut 1:1),100 ibn Ezra does not adopt completely the approach of ibn Gikatilla, but rather “walks between the drops.” Perhaps he attempted to prevent the potential aggravation of his audience, who piously followed the classical Jewish tradition. Thus, he mediates between the methods of the talmudic sages and the oriental and Sephardic commentators Saadia Gaon and ibn Gikatilla. 100 See Kalimi, Fighting Over the Bible, 94–95.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

193

David Kimhi distinguishes between “prophecy” and poetry that has been said “in the Holy Spirit,” and principally follows the talmudic rabbis and Rashi in seeing the book of Psalms as written by David in the Holy Spirit, while denying its prophetic origin per se. His commentary takes an inclusive approach: it is very comprehensive and deals with various kinds of exegetical issues that the biblical text raises. It examines the text within its close and broader contexts, from diverse viewpoints, and compiles also ideas from his predecessors. Kimhi often sharply disputes with Christian theology, dogmas, and christological interpretation of “the book of David.” All in all, the Jewish sages struggled between the traditional concepts and their own innovative expounding of Psalms. In their commentaries, they disputed with their insider and outsider opponents and responded to the circumstances and the surrounding societies within which the Jewish people lived. Some of these commentaries, such as that of Rashi and Radak, are cited by Christian commentators, and the latter is among the crowning achievements of medieval Jewish biblical interpretation. The interpretative activities of the commentators are shaped by their sociohistorical contexts at their own times and environments: On the one hand, Saadia Gaon translated the scripture into Arabic in order to make it available for his close community as well as for the all Jews in the Islamic lands. Saadia and ibn Ezra much disputed with the Karaite leaders and their Bible interpreters, and attempted to minimize their influence. On the other hand, some rabbis of Midrash Psalms, Rashi, and Radak often dispute with Christians and attempt to invalidate their influence. 5

Impact History (Wirkungsgeschichte)

Psalms has a central place among Jews and in Judaism. It is widely respected, as evident from the several surviving sources through all generations until the current days. Accordingly, many interpretative works have been written on the book. Not all the seven commentaries that discussed here have been used and influenced equally. Targum Psalms and Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov expound numerous texts and topics in midrashic and aggadic methods, and not once within their contemporary social, religious, and historical setting. They both deeply stemmed from, based on, and are part and parcel of classical rabbinic literature. Also, they are polemicizing with Christians. Still, Targum Psalms utilized particularly among the Jews in the Land of Israel, and Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov seemingly was spread out in more Jewish communities than the Targum.

194

Kalimi

Similarly, Rashi’s commentary on Psalms contains not only the simple meaning of the text but also a huge amount of talmudic-midrashic material. Like Rashi’s other biblical and talmudic commentaries, the one on Psalms have had an enormous influence on his and coming generations all over the Jewish world. Furthermore, Rashi not only polemicizes with Christians and Christian doctrines and interpretation of the book. He also laments his oppressed and wounded people, and in the same breath also attempts to encourage them to continue keeping their religious tradition. He strives to open new avenues of hope for a better future to come, when God will redeem Israel and exact the vengeance of his people. As such, it became a trunk of hope and strength for the Jewish people. His exegesis also reached to some Christian scholars, especially through the converted Jews such as Nicholas of Lyra. Unlike these commentaries that are part of or based on the traditional rabbinic literature, commentaries by the Sephardic sages, such as that of Saadia Gaon, who wrote under the Islamic realm, mostly studied at the oriental Jewish communities. Saadia struggled particularly with the Karaites, who mostly lived in the Near Eastern lands, and rejected the rabbinic interpretation of the Scriptures. The Psalms commentary by Abraham ibn Ezra follows some rabbinic sources and that of Saadia Gaon, but also strives to achieve the plain meaning of the biblical text. Similar to Saadia Gaon, he also polemicizes with the Karaite exegetes. Nonetheless, it was less spread out in the Ashkenazi’s communities. The pioneer and courageous commentary of Moses ha-Cohen ibn Gikatilla on Psalms that detached from the rabbinic tradition and opened a new path in the book’s exegesis did not take root in many Jewish communities, and in fact only some citations from it remained. In his comprehensive commentary on Psalms, David Kimhi did not hesitate to speak against those who did evil to Jews. He encountered the Christian Psalms exegesis and theology, and frequently disputed with Christian theology and christological interpretations. Similar to Rashi’s commentary on Psalms, Kimhi’s one also was subject to the Christian censorship. Furthermore, Martin Luther complains that some Christians interpret psalms not allegorically about Jesus, but rather historically, and thus they justify the Jewish rabbis. Although Luther did not refer to specific Jewish Psalms commentators, most likely Rashi and Kimhi were on his list. In the last quarter of the sixteenth century, the archbishop of Milan, Carl/Charles Borromeo, forbade printing of “commentaries like Kimhi to Psalms.” However, still there were some Christian theologians who praised Radak for his fine Bible commentaries, including the one on Psalms. Thus, in his comment on Ps 112:5, John Calvin refers to Kimhi as “the most correct interpreter among the rabbis.”

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

195

Bibliography Alexander, Philip. “Targum, Targumim.” ABD 6:320–31. Aloni, Nehemiah. “Fragments from Commentary of Rabbi Moses haCohen ibn Gikatilla” [Hebrew]. Sinai 24 (1949): 138–47. Bacher, Wilhelm. “Das Targum zu den Psalmen.” MGWJ 21 (1872): 408–16, 463–73. Baer, Isaac. “Rashi and the Historical Reality of His Time” [Hebrew]. Tarbiz 20 (1949): 320–32. Brooke, George J. “The Psalms in Early Jewish Literature in the Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 5–24 in The Psalms in the New Testament. Edited by Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken. London: T&T Clark International, 2004. Buber, Salomon. Midrash Tehillim. Vilna: Romm, 1886–1893. Repr., Jerusalem: Wagshel, 1977. Cohen, Mordechai. “The Qimhi Family.” Pages 388–415 in vol. 1, pt. 2, of Hebrew Bible / Old Testament: The History of Its Interpretation. Edited by Magne Sæbø. 3 vols. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000. Cooper, Alan. “On the Typology of Jewish Psalms Interpretation.” Pages 79–90 in Biblical Interpretation in Judaism and Christianity. Edited by Isaac Kalimi and Peter J. Hass. LHBOTS 439. London: T&T Clark, 2006. Darom, Abraham. Rabbi David Kimhi: The Complete Commentary on Psalms [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Mosad haRav Kook, 1967. Elbaum, Yaacov. “Midrash Tehillim.” EncJud 11:1519–20. Flint, Peter W. The Dead Sea Psalms Scrolls and the Book of Psalms. STDJ 17. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Francesconi, Federica. “‘This Passage Can Also Be Read Differently …’: How Jews and Christians Censored Hebrew Texts in Early Modern Modena.” JHist 26 (2012): 139–60. García Martínez, Florentino. The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English. 2nd ed. Translated by Wilfred G. E. Watson. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Gestrich, C. and J. Zehner. “Forgiveness.” ECh 2:330–34. Gevaryahu, Gilad. J. J. “Variants in Rashi on Psalms, and the Censor” [Hebrew]. Pages 248–61 in Studies in Bible and Jewish Thought: Festschrift H. M. Y. Gevaryahu. Edited by Ben Zion Luria. Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1989. Grossfeld, Bernard and S. David Sterling. “Bible: Targums to the Hagiographa.” EncJud, 593–95. Grossman, Abraham. “Rashi’s Commentary on Psalms and the Jewish-Christian Pole­ mics” [Hebrew]. Pages 59–74 in Studies in Bible and Education: Presented to Prof. Moshe Arend. Edited by Dov Rappel. Jerusalem: Touro College, 1996. Gruber, Mayer Irwin. Rashi’s Commentary on Psalms. BRLA 18. Leiden: Brill, 2004.

196

Kalimi

Grunhaus, Naomi. “The Commentary of Rabbi David Kimhi on Proverbs: A Case of Mistaken Attribution.” JJS 54 (2003): 311–27. Haroutunian, Joseph and Louise Pettibone Smith, eds. Calvin: Commentaries. LCC 23. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1958. Harris, Robert A. “Rashi and the ‘Messianic’ Psalms.” Pages 845–62 in vol. 2 of Birkat Shalom: Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature, and Postbiblical Judaism Presented to Shalom M. Paul on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday. 2 vols. Edited by Chaim Cohen, Victor Avigdor Hurowitz, Avi Hurvitz, Yochanan Muffs, Baruch J. Schwartz, and Jeffrey H. Tigay. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2008. Hill, Harold Eugene. Messianic Expectations in the Targum to the Psalms. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1958. Jerome, Saint. Commentarioli in psalmos: Anmerkungen zum Psalter. Translated by Siegfried Risse. Tournhout: Brepols, 2005. Kalimi, Isaac. Early Jewish Exegesis and Theological Controversy: Studies in Scriptures in the Shadow of Internal and External Controversies. JCH 2. Assen: Van Gorcum [now under: Brill, Leiden], 2002. Kalimi, Isaac. Fighting Over the Bible: Jewish Interpretation, Sectarianism and Polemic from Temple to Talmud and Beyond. BRLA 54. Leiden: Brill, 2017. Kalimi, Isaac. “History of Interpretation: The Book of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition; From Daniel to Spinoza.” RB 105 (1998): 5–41. Kalimi, Isaac. The Retelling of Chronicles in Jewish Tradition and Literature: A Historical Journey. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009. Kamin, Sarah. Rashi’s Exegetical Categorization: In Respect to the Distinction Between Peshat and Derash [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1986. Komlós, Otto. The Bible in the Light of the Aramaic Translations [Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1973. Komlós, Otto. “Distinctive Features in the Targum of Psalms” [Hebrew]. Pages 265–70 in Studies in the Bible Presented to Professor M. H. Segal by His Colleagues and Students. Edited by Jehoshua M. Grintz and Jacob Liver. Jerusalem: Kiryat Sefer, 1964. Komlós, Otto. “Targumim: 2. Targum Psalms” [Hebrew]. EB(B), 756. Luther, Martin. “Zweite Vorrede auf den Psalter (1528).” Pages 64–69 in Luthers Vorreden zur Bibel. Bornkamm, Heinrich, and Karin Bornkamm, eds. 3rd ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989. Melamed, Ezra Zion. Bible Commentators [Hebrew]. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1978. Melamed, Ezra Zion. “Radak’s Commentary on Psalms” [Hebrew]. Pages 359–419 in Biblical Studies in Texts, Translations and Commentators. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1984. Moloney, Francis J. “The Targum on Ps. 8 and the New Testament.” Sal 37 (1975): 326–36. Moyise, Steve, and Maarten J. J. Menken, eds. The Psalms in the New Testament. London: T&T Clark International, 2004.

The Centrality of the Book of Psalms in Judaism

197

Mroczek, Eva. The Literary Imagination in Jewish Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Mülhaupt, Erwin, ed. D. Martin Luthers Psalmen-Auslegung. 3 vols. Göttingen: Vanden­ hoeck & Ruprecht, 1959–1965. Popper, William. The Censorship of Hebrew Books. New York: Ktav, 1969. Poznanski, Samuel. Mose B. Samuel Hakkohen Ibn Chiquitilla: Nebst den Fragmenten seiner Schriften; Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Bibelexegese und der hebräischen Sprachwissenschaft im Mittelalter. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1895. Preuß, Horst Dietrich. “Die Psalmenüberschriften in Targum und Midrasch.” ZAW 71 (1959): 44–54. Qimron, Elisha and John Strugnell. Miqsat Ma‌ʿase ha-Torah. Vol. 5 of Qumran Cave 4. DJD 10. Oxford: Clarendon, 1994. Raz-Karkotzkin, Amnon. The Censor, the Editor, and the Text: The Catholic Church and the Shaping of the Jewish Canon in the Sixteenth Century. Translated by J. Feldman. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007. Rebiger, Bill. Sefer Shimmush Tehillim: Buch vom magischen Gebrauch der Psalmen; Edition, Übersetzung und Kommentar. TSAJ 137. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Signer, Michael A. “King/Messiah: Rashi’s Exegesis of Psalm 2.” Proof 3 (1983): 273–78. Simon, Uriel. Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms: From Saadya Gaon to Abraham Ibn Ezra [Hebrew]. Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1982. Simon, Uriel. Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms: From Saadya Gaon to Abraham Ibn Ezra. Translated by Lenn J. Schramm. SUNYSJ. New York: State University of New York Press, 1991. Stec, David M. The Targum of Psalms: Translated with a Critical Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes. ArBib 16. London: T&T Clark, 2004. Stemberger, Günter. Einleitung in Talmud und Midrasch. 8th ed. Munich: Beck, 1992. Talmage, Frank Ephraim. David Kimhi: The Man and the Commentaries. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975. Theodor, Julius and Chanoch Albeck, eds. Bereschit Rabba mit kritischem Apparat und Kommentar. 2nd ed. 4 vols. VAWJ. Jerusalem: Wahrmann, 1965. Ulrich, Eugene C. “An Index of the Passages in the Biblical Manuscripts from the Judean Desert (Part 2: Isaiah–Chronicles).” DSD 2 (1995): 86–107. Zucker, Moshe. “Remarks on Rasag’s Introduction to Psalms” [Hebrew]. Leshonenu 33 (1969): 223–30. Zunz, Leopold. Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, historisch entwickelt: Ein Beitrag zur Alterthumskunde und biblischen Kritik, zur Literatur- und Religionsgeschichte. 2nd ed. Frankfurt a.M.: Verlag J. Kauffmann, 1892; reprinted, Hildesheim: Olms, 1966. Zunz, Leopold. Haderashot Beyisrael Vehishtalshelutan Hahistorit. Translated in Hebrew by M. A. Zak. Edited by Chanoch Albeck. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1974.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study in “Embedded” Jewish Commentary Alan Cooper 1

Jewish Reception of Psalms1

For the most part, the biblical books that comprise the third division of the Jewish canon, the Writings (Ketuvim) or Hagiographa, are neither prominent in liturgy nor central to the traditional curriculum of study. That characterization takes in a considerable portion of the book of Psalms.2 While the psalms play a variety of roles in Jewish religious life, they occupy an ambivalent place in both formal liturgy and study. Confident statements about their use in communal and private settings, especially in antiquity, tend to founder for lack of evidence.3 While the relatively many Psalms manuscripts discovered in the caves around Qumran (roughly forty of them) indicate the popularity of the psalms, they do not specify what they were used for. If, as the meager evidence suggests, they were not prepared for liturgical use,4 the Qumran situation might have paralleled that of the ancient synagogue elsewhere. Aside from possible exceptions such as the Daily Psalms and the Festival Hallel, psalms do not seem to have been ubiquitous in synagogue rites.

1 These introductory remarks are adapted from my article “Some Aspects of Traditional Jewish Psalms Interpretation,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 253–68. 2 For an overview, see my article “Aspects of Jewish Reception of the Ketuvim (Writings),” in The Oxford Handbook of the Writings of the Hebrew Bible, ed. Donn F. Morgan (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), 430–46. 3 For a comprehensive survey of the evidence accompanied by detailed analysis, see Abraham Jacob Berkovitz, “The Life of Psalms in Late Antiquity” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2018). I would like to thank Dr. Berkovitz for sharing his work prior to its publication. Berkovitz rightly criticizes me for overreliance on textual evidence. He writes (218), “When combined with textual sources, material evidence provides firm footing for the existence of Psalm piety” in antiquity, by which he means “pietistic and magical engagement” with psalms. See esp. his rich discussion on pp. 77–88; 232–277. 4 On Qumran liturgies, see Daniel K. Falk, Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayers in the Dead Sea Scrolls, STDJ 27 (Leiden: Brill, 1998).

© Alan Cooper, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_011

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

199

Psalms were incorporated into the public liturgies only gradually during the geonic period and later,5 clustering in certain portions of the service (never the main part), roughly a third of them in recurrent use. The retrojection of later liturgical practice into ancient times is anachronistic, and one might say the same about the contemplative, meditative, and magical practices6 that characterize the later popular use of psalms, although they may have existed in nascent forms in antiquity. Just as it is uncertain what role the psalms played in early synagogue liturgy, it also is unclear if and how Jews studied them, whether privately or in the academy. Early Christian schools, especially monastic schools, introduced young initiates to the study of Scripture through the psalms and selected New Testament texts. According to the fourth-century Rule of Pachomius, for example, newcomers are supposed to commit psalms to memory and recite them as they go about their daily chores.7 Regimens of psalms recitation abound in Jewish sources, but they are later and possibly influenced by Christian monasticism. The abundant citation of verses from Psalms in midrashic homilies and anthologies suggests that the most likely setting for the rabbinic use of psalms was in public teaching. In a story about Ben Azzai recounted in Leviticus Rabba 16:4,8 the sage describes the process of expounding Torah as ‫מחריז דברי תורה לנביאים ודברי נביאים לכתובים‬

5 See Robert Brody, “Liturgical Uses of the Book of Psalms in the Geonic Period,” in Prayers That Cite Scripture, ed. James L. Kugel (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006), 61–81; Berkovitz, “Life of Psalms,” 154–80. 6 For possible magical use at Qumran, see Ida Fröhlich, “Healing with Psalms,” in Prayer and Poetry in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature: Essays in Honor of Eileen Schuller on the Occasion of Her 65th Birthday, ed. Jeremy Penner, Ken M. Penner, and Cecilia Wasssen, STDJ 98 (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 198–215. For the medieval and early modern period, see Bill Rebiger, Sefer Shimmush Tehillim: Buch vom magischen Gebrauch der Psalmen; Edition, Übersetzung und Kommentar, TSAJ 137 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 1–34. For a compendium of folkways and popular practices, see Simhah Avraham Ashlag, Sefer tefilot David ben Yishai (Bene-Berak: Merkaz Torani Moharil Ashlag, 1994). 7 See H. I. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity (New York: Mentor, 1964), 440. On the culture of psalm piety in early Christianity, see Derek A. Olsen, The Honey of Souls: Cassiodorus and the Interpretation of Psalms in the Early Medieval West (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2017), 1–26; Berkovitz, “Life of Psalms,” 222–33. 8 Unless otherwise noted, rabbinic and later Jewish texts are cited from the digital files of the Bar-Ilan University Responsa Project, Responsa Project: The Database for Jewish Studies, https://www.responsa.co.il/.

200

Cooper

stringing words of the Torah together with those of the Prophets, and words of the Prophets with those of the Writings.9 The majority of classical midrashic proems (petihta‌ʾot) link expositions of verses from the psalms to the Torah text under discussion. As a result, hardly a verse of Psalms goes without comment in the rabbinic corpus, but the focus is rarely on the psalm per se. In a fine article on the translation technique of the Aramaic Targum of Psalms, Moshe Bernstein correctly observed that we do not know why the Targum was composed.10 It is possible that the Targum’s simplifying and dramatizing tendencies,11 coupled with its eschewal of polemic, indicate pedagogical intent, but that is just speculation. One could make a similar claim for Midrash Tehillim (“The Midrash on Psalms”), a charming and eclectic compilation probably culled from sermons and other sources. As is the case with all the compilatory midrashim, however, its social setting cannot be determined with any confidence. In the Jewish curricula of the medieval period, the psalms fell into the same desuetude as the rest of the Bible, perhaps more so. As Ephraim Kanarfogel succinctly remarks about the academies of medieval Ashkenaz, for example, “The low priority given to biblical studies, especially the study of Nevi’im and Ketuvim [which include the psalms] … has been amply documented.”12 Even authorities who argued in favor of the study of Scripture justified it principally as a means of enabling the student to cope with the biblical citations in Talmudic literature. Since citations from the psalms do not abound in legal discourse, there would be little occasion to study the psalms in depth. To be sure, the study of the Bible was taken more seriously in many Sephardic communities, but as Frank Talmage observes, “one must not lose sight of the fact that Mediterranean European Judaism in this period, no less than its Ashkenazic counterpart, was rabbinic Judaism, and officially, and for most, in practice, Talmud was the mainstay of the educational program.”13 9 Translations are my own unless noted otherwise. 10 Moshe J. Bernstein, “A Jewish Reading of Psalms: Some Observations on the Method of the Aramaic Targum,” in The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception, ed. Patrick D. Miller and Peter W. Flint, VTSup 99 (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 476–504. 11 On the latter, see esp. O. Komlos, “Distinctive Features in the Targum of Psalms” [Hebrew], in Studies in the Bible Presented to M. H. Segal, ed. J. M. Grintz and J. Liver (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher, 1964), 265–70. 12 Ephraim Kanarfogel, Jewish Education and Society in the High Middle Ages (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1992), 88. 13 Frank Talmage, “Keep Your Sons from Scripture: The Bible in Medieval Jewish Scholarship and Spirituality,” in Understanding Scripture: Explorations of Jewish and Christian

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

201

It is no surprise, then, that in comparison with Torah commentary, Jewish commentary on the book of Psalms from the medieval and early modern periods is a succession of peaks and valleys with relatively few of the former.14 On the other hand, many interesting interpretations of psalms do not appear in Psalms commentaries but are embedded either in commentaries on other texts or in works of other genres. The midrashic proem (petihta) already provides a model for such embedded commentary. Following the midrashic precedent, the medieval Torah commentator Bahya b. Asher (1255–1340) introduces each Torah pericope (parashah) with an interpretation of a verse from Proverbs. In previous articles I have discussed a beautiful interpretation of Lamentations 3 embedded in a sixteenth-century sermon on the character and purpose of Israel’s suffering,15 and an interpretation of the image of the “strange woman” in Proverbs that is found in the responsa literature.16 Additional cases in point may be found in the reception of Psalm 8 in late medieval and early modern sources, based on midrashic antecedents to which I now turn. 2

Psalm 8 and Its Jewish Reception

Psalm 8 1For the leader; on the gittith. A psalm of David. 2O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name throughout the earth, You who have covered the heavens with Your splendor! 3From the mouths of infants and sucklings You have founded strength on account of Your foes, to put an end to enemy and avenger. 4When I behold Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and stars that You set in place,

:‫(א) ַל ְמנַ ֵּצ ַח ַעל ַהּגִ ִּתית ִמזְ מֹור ְל ָדוִ ד‬ ‫(ב) ה׳ ֲאד ֹנֵ ינּו ָמה ַא ִּדיר ִׁש ְמָך ְּב ָכל‬ :‫הֹודָך ַעל ַה ָּׁש ָמיִ ם‬ ְ ‫ָה ָא ֶרץ ֲא ֶׁשר ְּתנָ ה‬ ‫עֹול ִלים וְ י ֹנְ ִקים יִ ַּס ְד ָּת עֹז ְל ַמ ַען‬ ְ ‫(ג) ִמ ִּפי‬ :‫ּומ ְתנַ ֵּקם‬ ִ ‫צֹור ֶריָך ְל ַה ְׁש ִּבית אֹויֵב‬ ְ ‫(ד) ִּכי ֶא ְר ֶאה ָׁש ֶמיָך ַמ ֲע ֵׂשה ֶא ְצ ְּבע ֶֹתיָך‬ :‫כֹוכ ִבים ֲא ֶׁשר ּכֹונָ נְ ָּתה‬ ָ ְ‫יָ ֵר ַח ו‬

Traditions of Interpretation, ed. Clemens Thoma and Michael Wyschogrod (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist, 1987), 84. 14 See Uriel Simon, Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms from Saadiah Gaon to Abraham Ibn Ezra (Albany: SUNY Press, 1991); Cooper, “Some Aspects.” 15 Alan Cooper, “The Message of Lamentations,” JANES 28 (2002): 1–18. 16 Alan Cooper, “‘The Lord Grants Wisdom:’ The World-view of Proverbs 1–9,” in Bringing the Hidden to Light: Studies in Honor of Stephen A. Geller, ed. Kathryn F. Kravitz and Diane M. Sharon (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2007), 29–43.

202 5what is man that You have been mindful of him, mortal man that You have taken note of him, 6that You have made him little less than divine, and adorned him with glory and majesty; 7You have made him master over Your handiwork, laying the world at his feet, 8sheep and oxen, all of them, and wild beasts, too; 9the birds of the heavens, the fish of the sea, whatever travels the paths of the seas. 10O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name throughout the earth!17

Cooper

‫ּובן ָא ָדם ִּכי‬ ֶ ‫(ה) ָמה ֱאנֹוׁש ִּכי ִתזְ ְּכ ֶרּנּו‬ :‫ִת ְפ ְק ֶדּנּו‬ ‫ֹלהים וְ ָכבֹוד וְ ָה ָדר‬ ִ ‫(ו) וַ ְּת ַח ְּס ֵרהּו ְּמ ַעט ֵמ ֱא‬ :‫ְּת ַע ְּט ֵרהּו‬ ‫(ז) ַּת ְמ ִׁש ֵילהּו ְּב ַמ ֲע ֵׂשי יָ ֶדיָך ּכֹל ַׁש ָּתה‬ :‫ַת ַחת ַרגְ ָליו‬ :‫(ח) צֹנֶ ה וַ ֲא ָל ִפים ֻּכ ָּלם וְ גַ ם ַּב ֲהמֹות ָׂש ָדי‬ ‫(ט) ִצּפֹור ָׁש ַמיִ ם ְּודגֵ י ַהּיָ ם ע ֵֹבר ָא ְרחֹות‬ :‫ִיַּמים‬

:‫(י) ה׳ ֲאד ֹנֵ ינּו ָמה ַא ִּדיר ִׁש ְמָך ְּב ָכל ָה ָא ֶרץ‬

Psalm 8 is a peculiar sort of hymn, and there has been extensive debate among biblical scholars about its genre and setting.18 Many commentators label it a “Hymn to Creation,” noting its affinities with Genesis 1 and Psalm 104, among other texts. Erhard Gerstenberger calls it a “hymn of synagogal community,”19 which is ironic in view of how rarely the psalm is attested in its entirety in known synagogue rites.20 It is found in the evening (maariv) service in some

17

Unless noted otherwise, translations of biblical passages are those of the NJPS. While this translation serves as a base text, it may be modified to fit the context in which a verse is cited. 18 The most comprehensive study of Psalm 8 to date, including an extensive bibliography, is Helmut Schnieringer, Psalm 8: Text—Gestalt—Bedeutung, Ä AT 59 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2004). Another fine recent treatment is Esther Brünenberg, Der Mensch in Gottes Herrlichkeit: Psalm 8 und seine Rezeption im Neuen Testament, FB 119 (Würzburg: Echter, 2009), esp. 25–134. In the introduction to the main part of her study, Brünenberg provides a thorough review of textual, compositional, intertextual, and interpretive issues. A study that focuses on the history of reception is S. E. Gillingham, “Psalm 8 through the Looking Glass: Reception History of a Multi‐faceted Psalm,” in Diachronic and Synchronic: Reading the Psalms in Real Time; Proceedings of the Baylor Symposium on the Book of Psalms, ed. Joel S. Burnett (London: T&T Clark, 2008), 167–96. 19 Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 1: With an Introduction to Cultic Poetry, FOTL (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988), 67. Against the classification of the psalm as a hymn, see Henning Graf Reventlow, “Der Psalm 8,” Poetica 1 (1967): 304–32, esp. 309–11. 20 With thanks to Professors Ruth Langer and Stefan Reif for consultation in this matter.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

203

German siddurim21 and in some Yemenite services,22 and in the recondite liturgy for yom kippur qatan.23 Elijah of Vilna designated it as the psalm for Simhath Torah,24 and Jacob Emden assigned it to the Sabbath on which the first portion of the Torah (parashat bereshit) is read.25 The Conservative Movement adopted it as the special psalm for Rosh Hashanah.26 Apart from liturgical use, the psalm is cited frequently in Jewish literature, primarily because of the way it is understood to express the idea that God’s awesome power as Creator (Ps 8:2, 4) is coupled with God’s gracious empowerment of humans with mastery over the natural world (Ps 8:5–9).27 For the Jewish people, that power is attainable solely by means of Torah, God’s most gracious gift of all. 3

God’s Providential Concern for Humanity: The Gift of Wisdom

That basic understanding of the psalm comes to the fore in several rabbinic narratives in which the ministering angels remonstrate with God about divine benefactions to humankind. The second pericope in Midrash Tehillim on Psalm 8 begins, ,‫אמר רבי מצינו בשלשה מקומות שהיו המלאכים מדיינין כנגד הקדוש ברוך הוא‬ .‫ ובמשכן‬,‫ במתן תורה‬,‫באדם‬

21 22

Seligmann Baer, Seder avodat Yisra‌ʾel (Rödelheim: Lehrberger, 1901), 170. Noted as “customary” (rather than obligatory) in Yoseph Kafah, ed., Siddur siah Yerushalayim, 6th ed. (Kiryat Ono: Mekhon Mishnat ha-Rambam, 2004/2005), part 1, 139–40; 348–49. 23 Aryeh Leib Gordon, ed., Siddur otzar ha-tefillot (Vilna: Romm, 1915), 878–79. Yom kippur qatan denotes the eve of the new month, first attested as a day of fasting and repentance among the sixteenth-century kabbalists in Safed. 24 According to Issachar Baer ben Tanhum, Maʿaseh Rav (Warsaw: Bomberg, 1858), Hilkhot sukkah, §234. 25 Jacob Emden, Siddur beit Yaʿaqov (also known as Siddur Emden or Siddur yavetz) (Warsaw: Israel Alapin, 1880/1881), 258. 26 Edward Feld, ed., Mahzor lev shalem la-Yamim ha-Nora‌ʾim (New York: Rabbinical Assembly, 2010), 42, although the marginal reference to Abudarham (ad loc.) is incorrect: he provides no basis for this use of the psalm. 27 See, e.g., Saadia Gaon, Emunot ve-deʿot IV:1: “[O]ur Lord has informed us through His prophets that man has been shown preference by Him above all His creatures,” adducing Gen 1:28 and Ps 8:2 as proof texts. Citing Saadia Gaon, The Book of Beliefs and Opinions, trans. Samuel Rosenblatt, YJS 1 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948), 181.

204

Cooper

Rabbi said, “We find in three places that the angels argued against the Holy One: with respect to the [creation of] Adam;28 about the giving of Torah; and concerning the Tabernacle.” God’s responses to the angelic complaints center around two themes: the superiority of (imperfect) humanity to the (perfect) angels in certain respects, and more importantly, the providential care that God lavishes upon humans by creating them, and upon the Jewish people by giving them the Torah and choosing to dwell among them. Midrash Tehillim continues: ‫ ואמר להם‬,‫ נמלך במלאכים‬,‫באדם כשבקש הקדוש ברוך הוא לבראות את האדם‬ .‫ אמר להם מחר תראו חכמתו‬,‫ אמרו לו מה אנוש כי תזכרנו‬,‫נעשה אדם‬

Concerning Adam, when God wished to create the human, God consulted the angels, saying to them, “Let us make man” (Gen 1:26). They responded, “What is man that you are mindful of him” (Ps 8:5). God replied, “Soon you will see his wisdom.”29 As soon as Adam is created, God assembles the land animals before the angels and asks them to name each creature. They are unable to do so. They get their comeuppance when God calls on Adam to undertake the task, which he does with success, wisely ascertaining the very name that God had predetermined for each animal. Continuing the human tour de force, Adam goes on to discern both his own name and God’s, all in order to demonstrate his superior wisdom to the skeptical angels. The section concludes with God saying, .‫ ואתם אומרים מה אנוש כי תזכרנו‬,‫ראו מה חכמתו‬ See how great30 his wisdom is, yet you say, “What is man that you are mindful of him?” 28 See also b. Sanh. 38b. 29 See also Qurʾan 2:30–34. With thanks to Dr. Marcel Poorthuis for reminding me of this important parallel. 30 Literally, “see what his wisdom is,” echoing the language of the psalm. Many commentators observe the ambiguity of the particle ‫“( מה‬what”). As David Kimhi notes in his commentary on v. 5, ‫ כי הוא להגדלה וזה להקטנה‬,‫ומה אנוש הוא היפך מה אדיר שמך‬, “The ‘what’ of ‘what is man’ is the opposite of ‘how [mah] majestic is your name’ (v. 2): that one is for aggrandizement and this one is for diminution.” See the discussion of Joseph Albo below, n. 31.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

205

The notion that what distinguishes humanity from the rest of creation is “wisdom” finds more elaborate expression, including creative interpretation of Psalm 8, in Joseph Albo’s philosophical treatise, Sefer ha-ʿikkarim. Biographical details about Albo (ca. 1380–1444) are sparse.31 Born in Aragon, he studied with Hasdai Crescas and was a prominent participant in the Disputation at Tortosa (1413–1414). Following the destruction of his community in 1415, he moved to Castile, where he served as a preacher and communal leader. His reputation is based almost entirely on his Sefer ha-ʿikkarim, which he finished around 1425. Book 4, chapter 10 of the treatise32 includes Albo’s discussion of the concept of divine providence. He offers two kinds of “arguments derived from the intellect” to demonstrate the veracity of providence.33 Albo reasons (following Maimonides, Guide III:18) that human intelligence is superior to that of the animals precisely so that people who perfect their intellects will be able to recognize and benefit from divine providence. He continues with the statement, ‫וכן מצינו בדוד המלך עליו השלום מביא ראיה על היות ההשגחה האלהית דבקה‬ .‫ במזמור ה׳ אדונינו מה אדיר שמך בכל הארץ‬,‫בעולם השפל מן הכח השכלי שבאדם‬

David also uses the intellectual faculty in man as a proof that divine providence takes care of the sublunar world: “O Lord, our Lord, what majesty is there in your name in all the earth!” (Ps 8:2) Adopting the skepticism of the angels in the midrash, Albo suggests that the word ‫ מה‬in verse 2 is derogatory. The psalmist wonders, “What worth and glory can there be for your name upon all the earth, seeing that ‘You have put your majesty above the heavens.’” He means that in principle, there is no creature on earth with the capacity to discern God’s glory. “But when I consider the matter carefully,” he continues, “I find that ‘out of the mouth of babes and sucklings you have founded strength (v. 3),’” in other words, by means of “valid 31 See Dror Ehrlich, “Joseph Albo,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries /albo-joseph/. 32 Citing Joseph Albo, Sefer ha-ʿikkarim: Book of Principles, ed. and trans. Isaac Husik, 4 vols. in 5 (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1946), 4/1: 76–90. I cite Husik’s translation with slight alteration, especially to biblical quotations. 33 See J. David Bleich, “Providence in the Philosophy of Hasdai Crescas and Joseph Albo,” in Hazon Nahum: Studies in Jewish Law, Thought, and History Presented to Dr. Norman Lamm on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday, ed. Yaakov Elman and Jeffrey S. Gurock (New York: Yeshiva University Press, 1997), 311–58.

206

Cooper

propositions or principles, which are innate in man and not derived from experience and habit.” These first principles (the “babes,” as it were) prove the reality of providence, refuting the adversaries (Ps 8:3) who torment the poor and the needy and follow their own desires because they deny providence.34 Now Albo turns his attention to the rest of Psalm 8, the purpose of which is to expound “at length” the same theme that the psalmist had stated briefly. At first, in beholding the wonders of creation, “I say in my heart, ‘What is man…?’ For man is nothing in comparison with their nobility, and he is not worthy of divine providence, since he is a lowly creature made of waste matter and a putrid drop” (cf. m. Abot 3:1). Nevertheless, God has imbued humans with a quality that makes them “but little lower than the angels” (Ps 8:6) in that they “possess an intellectual faculty.” The intellect is what gives the human mastery over creation (Ps 8:7–9), ‫שבזולתו לא היה אפשר לו ולא היה ראוי לכבוש כל הבעלי חיים שהם חזקים‬ ‫ותקיפים ממנו להיות כלם תחת רגליו וגם לא לתת בים דרך ובמים עזים נתיבה וכל זה‬ .‫ממה שיורה שהכח האלהי מעורב בו על ידי שכלי ושיש בו מדעת קונו‬

for without it he could not have subdued, and would not have been worthy of subduing, all the animals, which are stronger and mightier than he, and of putting them all under his feet; nor could he have made a way in the sea and a path in the mighty waters; all of which shows that the divine power mingles with him through his intellect and he has some of the knowledge of his Maker. Thus, God’s majesty (Ps 8:10) is evident from the gracious bestowal of a rational faculty upon “so coarse a matter” as humans. The genius of the divine artisan is manifest “when he bestows perfection upon an inferior material that is far from perfection,” namely humanity.35 And so, the psalmist concludes, “O Lord, our Lord, how glorious is Thy name in all the earth!” Now the word ‫“( מה‬how”) 34

See also Eliezer Ashkenazi (1512–1585), Maʿase bereshit 16; also, more concisely, Maʿaseh Mitzrayim 24 (the author’s commentary on the Passover Haggadah). Ashkenazi cites Psalm 8 in his defense of individual providence (‫)השגחה פרטית‬: the enemies of v. 3 are those who erroneously claim that since God placed his splendor in heaven, his providence does not extend over the earth (‫)שנתן הודו על השמים ואינו משגיח על הארץ‬. Refutation comes “from the mouths of infants and sucklings.” See Eliezer Ashkenazi, Gedolim maʿase H.: Derushim…, 2 vols. (Jerusalem: Merkaz ha-sefer, [2005]), 1:167–70; 2:141. 35 See also Judah Moscato (ca. 1530–ca. 1593), Nefutsot Yehudah (Warsaw: Goldman, 1871), sermon 34, 92b. Moscato expounds the paradoxical superiority of human beings over the angels in an elaborate interpretation of Psalm 8.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

207

magnifies God’s greatness. “Although the heavens are made of a much nobler material than the sublunar creatures, nevertheless, from the rational faculty in man, we can infer” God’s providential care of humanity in the sublunar world. 4

God’s Gracious Gift to Israel: The Torah

That care continues in God’s decision to reveal the divine Torah to the Israelites. In an explicit reprise of the story about Adam,36 the Israelites demonstrate their worthiness by joining Moses in singing the “Song at the Sea” (Exod 15:1–18). Suckling infants and even fetuses in the womb join the chorus! The angels who had evoked Psalm 8 in order to complain about the creation of Adam look on, and God gloats: ‫בואו וראו שירה שבני אומרין לפני אף הן כיון שראו אמרו שירה מה שירה אמרו ה׳‬ .‫אדוננו מה אדיר שמך בכל הארץ מפי עוללים ויונקים וגו׳ ה׳ אדוננו‬

“Come and see the song that my children sing in my presence.” When they saw, even [the angels] sang. What did they sing? “O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name throughout the earth. … From the mouths of infants and sucklings. … O Lord, our Lord.” (Ps 8:2, 3, 10) Still, when God is about to reveal the Torah to Moses37 at Sinai, the angels protest that the Torah belongs in heaven rather than on earth, and that humans

36 See t. Sotah (Lieberman) 6:2–5. For parallels, see Saul Lieberman, Tosefta kifshutah, Seder Nashim (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 2007), 668–69. 37 The Tosefta text just cited suggests that the identification of the “man” of Psalm 8 with Adam is primary, a notion that seems to be confirmed by a large and varied corpus of Jewish texts from the Hellenistic and Roman periods. For an extensive collection of these sources—which would have been unknown to the medieval and early modern Jewish authors who are the subject of this essay—see Mark Stephen Kinzer, “‘All Things Under His Feet’: Psalm 8 in the New Testament and in Other Jewish Literature of Late Antiquity” (PhD diss., University of Michigan, 1995), https://www.markkinzer.com/atuhf. I agree with Kinzer’s comment (206), “Moses is viewed in relation to Adam, and Sinai in relation to Eden; therefore, any application of Ps 8 to Moses and Sinai in the rabbinic writings builds upon earlier interpretations of that psalm which applied it to Adam and the angels.” The question is the extent to which the Jewish identification of Moses as a second Adam is a response to early Christian appropriation of the Adam traditions for Jesus. This important matter falls outside the scope of the present essay; see Joel Marcus, “Son of Man as Son of Adam,” RB 110 (2003): 38–61; 370–86.

208

Cooper

are not worthy to receive it. A story found in b. Shabb. 88b–89a and parallels38 begins as follows: ‫ואמר רבי יהושע בן לוי בשעה שעלה משה למרום אמרו מלאכי השרת לפני הקדוש‬ ‫ברוך הוא רבונו של עולם מה לילוד אשה בינינו אמר להן לקבל תורה בא אמרו‬ ‫לפניו חמודה גנוזה … אתה מבקש ליתנה לבשר ודם מה אנוש כי תזכרנו ובן אדם כי‬ .‫תפקדנו ה׳ אדנינו מה אדיר שמך בכל הארץ אשר תנה הודך על השמים‬

And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: When Moses ascended on high, the ministering angels said before God: “Master of the Universe, what is one born of a woman doing among us?” God replied to them, “He came to receive the Torah.” The angels replied, “The Torah is a hidden treasure…, and you wish to give it to flesh and blood? ‘What is man that you have been mindful of him, mortal man that you have taken note of him?’” (Ps 8:5). [On the contrary,] “O Lord our Lord, how glorious is your name in all the earth such that your majesty [= the Torah] is placed above the heavens.” (Ps 8:2) The angels (as it were) take verse 2 as if it were prescriptive rather than descriptive. In other words, God’s ‫“( הוד‬majesty, splendor”)—identified with the Torah—should remain on high rather than descend to earth. As Rashi puts it in his commentary on Ps 8:2, “Those below are not worthy for your Presence to dwell among them.” In the version of the story in Midrash Tehillim, the angels explain why they are worthier of possessing the Torah than humans, declaring,39 ‫ ה׳ אדונינו מה אדיר שמך בכל הארץ אשר תנה הודך על‬,‫מה אנוש כי תזכרנו‬ ‫ למה שאנו‬,‫ אמרו לפניו רבונו של עולם נאה הוא לך שתתן תורה בשמים‬,‫השמים‬ ‫ מוטב שתהא‬,‫ ותורתך עץ חיים‬,‫ אנו חיים‬,‫ והיא טהורה וקדושה‬,‫קדושים וטהורים‬ .‫אצלנו‬

“What is man that you are mindful of him? O Lord, our Lord, how excellent is your name in all the earth, yet surely above the heavens set your glory” (Ps 8:2, 5 [in reverse order]). [By this they meant:] “Master of the 38 See also Abot R. Nat., version A, ch. 2; Pesiq. Rab. (Ish-Shalom) 25; Salomon Buber, ed., Midrash Aggadah (Vienna: Fante, 1894) on Numbers 17; Yal. Shimoni Tehillim, §641; Salomon Buber, ed., Yalqut ha-Makkiri ʿal sefer Tehillim, 2 vols. (Berdichev: Sheftel, 1899), 1:26a. 39 Adapting the translation of William G. Braude, The Midrash on Psalms, 2 vols., YJS 13 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), 1:121.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

209

universe! It would be more fitting for you to set forth the Torah in heaven. Why? Because we are holy and pure, and it, too, is pure and holy. We are eternally alive, and your Torah is the tree of life. It would be better if the Torah were with us.” In both versions, the remainder of the story is devoted to refutation of the angels’ objections, based not on the character of humans in general or of Moses in particular, but on the substance of the Torah. In the Talmud tale, God empowers Moses with knowledge of the Torah’s contents. Thus armed, Moses rebukes the angels, saying to them, “Did you descend to Egypt? Were you enslaved to Pharaoh? Why should the Torah be yours?” Then he runs through several laws, including Sabbath rest, honoring parents, and prohibition of adultery, that have no conceivable relevance for angels.40 Finally, the angels capitulate: ‫מיד הודו לו להקדוש ברוך הוא שנאמר ה׳ אדנינו מה אדיר שמך וגו׳ ואילו תנה הודך‬ ‫על השמים לא כתיב מיד כל אחד ואחד נעשה לו אוהב ומסר לו דבר שנאמר עלית‬ .‫למרום שבית שבי לקחת מתנות באדם בשכר שקראוך אדם לקחת מתנות‬

Immediately they praised God, as it is stated (Ps 8:10): “O Lord our Lord, how glorious is your name in all the earth” [although, in contrast to Ps 8:2,] “such that your majesty is placed above the heavens” is not written.41 Immediately, each and every [angel] became enamored of Moses and passed something to him, as it is stated: “You went up on high, you took a captive [i.e., the Torah], you took gifts on account of man.” (Ps 68:19)42

40 In Midrash Tehillim, God asserts that the Torah does not belong with the angels because while they do not reproduce or experience death, impurity, and illness, the Torah is replete with provisions related to those earthly concerns. 41 The angels now agreed that it was appropriate to locate the Torah on earth for the benefit of human beings. 42 For a lengthy commentary on the Talmudic text that focuses on the question of how a spiritual entity, namely the Torah, can be situated among corporeal humans rather than abiding with the angels, see Judah Loew ben Bezalel (Maharal, ca. 1520–1609 CE), Sefer Tiferet Yisra‌ʾel, ed. Yehoshua Hartman, 3 vols. (Jerusalem: Makhon Yerushalayim, 2000), ch. 24, 1:350–69. Maharal insists that it would have been impossible for Moses to receive the Torah were it not for his unique “preparation and quality of character” (‫)הכנה ובחינה‬, which made him in effect an “intermediary” (‫ )אמצעי‬between the lower and upper worlds.

210

Cooper

The essence of the story is beautifully captured in Eleazar Kalir’s epic piyyut (liturgical poem) for Shavuot, Erets matah ve-raʿashah (“The Earth Tottered and Quaked”).43 In their terror at hearing God’s word at Sinai, the people plead with Moses to serve as their emissary. God summons Moses, raises him up into the cloud, and speaks with him face to face (lines 586–94). When Moses ascends (lines 595–600): ‫ ואמרו לו‬44‫ידודון ידודון רעשו למולו \ ודברו לצור‬ ‫מה אנוש כי תגדלו \ ומה תחשבו למקומינו להעלו‬ ‫קניין שעשעים להנחילו \ והשיבם אל הניחו לו‬ ‫מאז חשקתיו להגדילו \ ולהכנס לפנים רשות נתתי לו‬ ‫שבוית מרום לתת לו \ מנת חלקו וגורלו‬ ‫ללמד לבניו כל אשר ידובר בו‬

A rough translation: The angels [cf. Ps 68:13] raged against him / They spoke to the Rock and said to Him, / “What is man that you aggrandize him / And why did you consider raising him to our place / To grant him the most delightful possession?” [cf. Prov 8:30] / God answered them: “Let him be. / Of yore I wished to aggrandize him / And grant him permission to enter within / To give him the one captive on high [the Torah; cf. Ps 68:19] / As his portion and lot / To teach his children everything of which it speaks.” A shorter rendering of the story by the eleventh-century poet Benjamin bar Shemuel45 begins with these lines: ‫בעלותו ההרה לקבל יקרת פנינים‬ ‫נועדו יחד כתי שנאנים‬ ‫ילוד אשה דוה מה טיבו בעליונים‬ ‫מרום ענם כי הורשה ברשיונים‬

43 44 45

Shulamit Elizur, Rabbi Elʿazar Birabbi Kiliri: Qedushta‌ʾot le-yom mattan torah (Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 2000), quotation on 133. With thanks to my colleague, Prof. Menahem Schmelzer, for directing me to this source. See Elizur’s note on this reading (Elizur, Rabbi Elʿazar, 133). Yonah Frankel, Mahzor Shavuot (Jerusalem: Koren, 2000), 155–56. On the controversy surrounding the poet’s provenance (France or Byzantium?), see Ezra Fleisher, “Azharot le-R. Binyamin (bar Shemuel) payetan,” Kovetz al yad, n.s. 11 (21), pt. 1 (1984/1985): 8–12.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

211

When [Moses] ascended the mountain to receive the most precious of jewels [cf. Prov 3:15] / The hosts of angels gathered together: / “What is a weakling born of woman doing among those on high?” / The Exalted One answered them: “He has been permitted.” The poem continues with a description of the angel Metatron revealing “wondrous knowledge” to Moses, including secrets that had not been divulged even to the patriarchs.46 While the rabbinic texts and associated liturgical poems open exciting possibilities for the interpretation of Psalm 8, they do not realize those possibilities, merely hinting at them. After citing Ps 8:2, for example, Midrash Tehillim veers away from the psalm into proof texts from Job and Isaiah. In his commentary Hiddushei aggadot on Shabbat 88b–89a, Shmuel Eideles (Maharsha, 1555–1631) states that the Talmud “abbreviated” (‫ )קיצר‬its discussion of the verses of Psalm 8 and pertinent midrashim.47 He discusses some implications of the Talmudic story for the interpretation of verses 3 and 7–9, but it remains for other commentators to take up the challenge of interpreting the entire psalm in the light of the midrashic themes. Those themes come up only sporadically in the standard commentaries (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Kimhi), so one must turn to less well-known works.48 In the rest of this paper, I will discuss two interpretations of the psalm from the sixteenth century, the first embedded in a Torah commentary, and the second in a philosophical treatise. 5

The Jewish People Empowered by Torah: Abraham Saba and Moses Almosnino

The Torah commentary is Tseror ha-mor by Abraham Saba (1440–1508 CE). Saba’s life was a virtual chronicle of Jewish suffering following the expulsion 46 See also Midrash otiyot de-Rabbi Akiva ha-shalem, version A, in Shlomo Aharon Wertheimer, Bate Midrashot, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Jerusalem: Ktav va-sefer, 1967/1968), 2:354–55. In the midrash, the other angels ask Metatron why he would share the secrets with a mortal who is subject to all manner of impurity. He answers simply, “God gave me permission.” 47 For Maharsha, the dispute between the angels and God is not about whether humans should be given access to the Torah per se, but to its hidden meaning (nistar, raz). The applicability of the Torah’s externals (viz., the laws) to life on earth is obvious; not so the esoteric aspect. See also Joseph Delmedigo (1591–1655 CE), Matsref le-hokhma (Warsaw: Thursch, 1890), ch. 9, 53–56. 48 Among commentaries, see esp. Moses Alshekh, Sefer Romemut El, ed. David Ohayon (Bnei Brak: self-published, 1992), 44–53.

212

Cooper

of the Jews from Spain.49 He endured exile, imprisonment, the forced baptism of his children, and the loss of his books and manuscripts. Finally, he made his way to Morocco, where he reconstructed his lost Torah commentary from memory while earning a living as an itinerant preacher until his death in circa 1508. Tseror ha-mor exhibits the characteristic extravagance of late medieval homiletical commentary in its diffuseness and eclecticism, and in the continual tug of war between the search for novelty on the one hand, and allegiance to prior interpretation on the other. A full exploration of the give and take between Saba and his sources would be a worthwhile undertaking, but in this paper, I will take up only his appropriation of Psalm 8. In his commentary on Deuteronomy 32 (the “Song of Moses”), Saba follows the lead of Ramban and others in viewing the text not as a retrospective and prophetic statement that is limited to the biblical period, but as a sweeping panorama of all Jewish history from the election of the Jews until their imminent redemption from exile. Such a panorama naturally demands a weighty introduction, which is why Moses calls upon the heavens and the earth, no less, to pay attention. He begins his poetic oration with the words, “Give ear O heavens, let me speak; let the earth hear the words I utter” (Deut 32:1). Saba offers several different interpretations of that opening address. In one of them, he comments that with this utterance, Moses announces that he is “at a higher level than the heavens, that heaven and earth are subordinate to him, and that they must obey by ceasing their motion in his presence.” Lest some fool think that the cessation of planetary motion would mean the end of the world, Moses offers an immediate corrective by saying “May my discourse come down as the rain, my speech distill as the dew” (Deut 32:2). The rains will continue—not via the heavens, however, but directly by means of Moses’s Torah, “which is called living waters.” “The prophet or righteous person who is a master of Torah,” Saba affirms, “is superior to the angels and the heavens.” Because that assertion calls to mind the traditional interpretation of Psalm 8, Saba now turns his attention to the psalm. The framing verse (Ps 8:2//10), “How majestic is Your name throughout the earth,” Saba states, ‫רצה להודיע מעלת האדם השלם אשר הוא עולה בחכמתו על הגרמים השמימיים ועל‬ .‫המלאכים עד שבסבת האדם [השלם] גדולת השם נודעת בעולם‬

asserts the superiority of the perfected person [the Maimonidean term for one who has attained knowledge of God], who exceeds in wisdom 49

See Abraham Gross, Iberian Jewry from Twilight to Dawn: The World of Rabbi Abraham Saba, BSJS 10 (Leiden: Brill, 1995).

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

213

the celestial bodies and the angels, to the extent that it is because of the perfected person that God’s greatness is made known in the world. God’s majesty is thus manifest primarily on earth, and the splendor bestowed upon the heavens in the second half of Ps 8:2 is a mere reflection of human merit. He writes, “[The heavens] possess no light in their own right, but by the agency of the person who bestows light upon them through the light of Torah.” Should anyone ask how this light comes to humanity in the first place, the answer may be found in the next verse of the psalm, “From the mouths of infants and sucklings You have founded strength”: the world exists only “for the sake of the utterances of children who are occupied in Torah study” (b. Shabb. 119b), the Torah naturally being the “strength” of the verse that will enable the Jews to “put an end to enemy and avenger,” as the verse concludes. By the power of Torah, humans can gain dominion over both the upper and lower worlds. Quoting a kabbalistic interpretation of Exod 19:3,50 “Moses ascended to God,” Saba comments, “Other people only rise to the level of greatness or wealth or kingship, but Moses rose to the level of God, which is what is meant by ‘You have made him little less than divine,’” in Ps 8:6. This exaltedness gives Moses, and likewise the perfected person, dominion over both the upper and lower worlds, to which the psalm alludes in verses 6–9. In Ps 8:6b, it is that person who is the source of “glory and majesty” in the upper world, while verses 7–9 depict human mastery over the lower world. Finally, Saba is ready to summarize his interpretation and direct his reader’s attention back to Deuteronomy 32. The concluding refrain of the psalm, he writes, “teaches us about the superiority of the person to the heavens, since it is the person who provides light to the heavens through the agency of Torah. And that is what is meant by ‘Give ear, O heavens’”: the cessation of planetary motion does not mean the end of the world; instead, natural bounty will flow directly from its ultimate source, the Torah, the power that Moses invokes when he “proclaims the name of the Lord” in Deut 32:3. Popular preaching is at the heart of Saba’s commentary throughout Tseror ha-mor, most certainly in the selection under discussion. The preacher assures his listeners or readers of the power that is within their grasp: through Torah, they can gain control over their shattered world, overcoming their earthly travails and achieving redemption. By expanding and elaborating on motifs derived from the earlier interpretation of Psalm 8 in dialogue with the Deuteronomy text, Saba develops a thicker reading of the psalm than that of his predecessors. When he circles back to the Torah text after engaging the 50 Zohar 2:79b.

214

Cooper

psalm, in effect teaching that the two texts share a common theme, he deepens and bolsters the message of encouragement that he wishes to convey to his audience. The second of my exemplary commentators, Moses Almosnino (ca. 1515–ca. 1580 CE),51 similarly creates a dialogic interplay—not between Psalm 8 and another text, however, but between the psalm and the principal philosophical theme of his discourse. Almosnino, who was born a few years after Saba’s death, was a leading intellectual figure in the second generation of the Spanish diaspora. Educated in the yeshiva of Joseph Taitazak in Salonika, one of the foremost centers of Jewish intellectual activity in the mid-sixteenth century, he went on to become one of the leading preachers of the Jewish community there. His writings, which include commentaries, sermons, and philosophical works, demonstrate the breadth of his religious and secular learning. Almosnino’s Tefilla le-moshe52 is an Aristotelian treatise ostensibly about Torah as the means through which an individual can attain perfection and felicity. Actually, much of it centers on the major concern of most Spanish preaching during the generations following the expulsion, namely that the Jews should not despair of redemption in the face of their misery. As Almosnino puts it at the beginning of chapter 1, part 3 (the section of the book that will concern us here), ‫אחר אשר ביארתי לך בחלק הקודם לזה שאין ראוי האדם השלם שיהיה בועט‬ ‫ ראיתי לבאר לך עוד בחלק הזה איך ראוי שישמח בהם ויטה שכמו‬,‫ביסורין חלילה‬ ‫ עד שישוב הסבלנות בו קנין קיים בנפשו שהיא מעלה‬,‫לסבול אותם בסבר פנים יפות‬ .‫מהמעלות הגדולות להשגת האושר האמיתי‬

Now that I have explained in the previous part that it is unfitting for the perfected person to protest against afflictions, I intend to explain to you further in this part that it is proper to rejoice in them, bearing them in good spirit, until one internalizes the attribute of patience, one of the greatest virtues necessary for the attainment of true felicity. Towards the end of the section he describes the entire first portion of his treatise as

51 52

See Meir Zvi Bnaya, Mosheh Almosnino of Salonika: His Life and Work [Hebrew] (Tel Aviv: Diaspora Research Center, Tel Aviv University, 1996). Moses Almosnino, Sefer tefilla le-moshe (Tel Aviv: Ha-makhon le-heqer yahadut Saloniki, 1977/1978), 73–88, esp. 86–88.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

215

‫ ואיך היא סבת שלמות‬,‫ביאור התועלות הגדולות הנמשכות מתורתנו הקדושה‬ .‫תמימות האדם להגיע אל ההצלחה האחרונה והאושר האמיתי‬

an explanation of the great benefits deriving from our holy Torah, how it is the cause of total human perfection, the attainment of ultimate felicity and true happiness. The key to success, as one might expect in this context, is for the individual to achieve harmony of body and soul, the respective corporeal and spiritual aspects of the person that are continually in conflict. And so, Almosnino writes, “When one endeavors to suppress the matter to the form [that is, the corporeal to the spiritual], one ascends above the separate intelligences [the angels] in a certain respect.” Since the composite nature of the human impedes the quest for perfection, people must expend great effort to overcome it, unlike the heavenly bodies and the angels, which God created in a state of perfect simplicity. The contrast between humanity and the celestial entities, Almosnino states, is the subject of Psalm 8. When the psalmist says, “O Lord, our Lord, how majestic is Your name throughout the earth,” he means that the majesty of God’s name is manifest in people who perfect themselves by free will, unlike the heavenly bodies upon which God already has bestowed eternal perfection. Almosnino finds a rabbinic parallel in a well-known passage from b. Ketub. 5a, which he quotes in an idiosyncratic version. The work of the heavens and the earth demands less expenditure of effort than the work of the righteous, the former requiring only one hand (based on Isa 45:13), and the latter requiring two (following Exod 15:17). Almosnino elaborates as follows: “The [rabbis] alluded in this manner to the two parts of the person—the matter and the form—or to the two possible extremes of human action, either good or evil, such as is not the case with the creation of the heavenly bodies, which are not composed of opposing components.” In contrast to the divine majesty embodied in freely chosen human action, when the psalmist refers to “You who have covered the heavens with Your splendor” in verse 2, he means to say that whatever qualities the heavens may possess, they receive no credit for them because they have no more or less than what God has given them: God formed them from the first in their present state of perfection. Such perfection was absent from humankind at the time of creation, and had to be acquired “little by little,” Almosnino claims. The first step in that acquisition is the education of children, so “from the mouths of infants and sucklings you have founded strength.” The Torah taught to children is like the solid foundation of a building that can ascend to great heights: it provides the

216

Cooper

people with the strength to defeat their enemies both on high and in the world below, whether they be unfavorable astrological signs or earthly foes. “And that,” Almosnino asserts, “is the correct proof that ‘the work of the righteous is greater than the work of the heavens.’” With his operative exegetical principle in place, Almosnino moves quickly through the rest of the psalm. He writes: ,‫וביאר עוד הראיה הזאת באומרו כי אראה שמיך מעשה אצבעתיך וכו׳ מה אנוש וכו׳‬ ‫ירצה כשאני מסתכל בשמיך ואני רואה שהם מעשה אצבעתיך וכן כשאני מסתכל‬ ‫ מזה‬,‫בירח וכוכבים ואני רואה שאתה כוננת אותם כמות שהם עתה בכל שלמותם‬ ‫ וזה שיגיע למדרגת שיהיה ראוי להיות‬,‫אני גוזר ואומר מה אנוש על דרך מה רב טובך‬ .‫ וזה אומרו כי תזכרנו ובן אדם כי תפקדנו‬,‫מושגח מאתך‬

[The psalmist] further expounded this proof in saying, “When I behold your heavens, the work of your fingers. … What is man, etc.” He means, when I observe your heavens and discern that they are your handiwork, and likewise when I observe the moon and the stars and discern that you set them in place just as they are now in all their perfection, this enables me to declare, “How great is man!” after the fashion of “How abundant is your goodness!” (Ps 31:20), referring to someone who has attained the level of being worthy of your providence, as it says, “that you have been mindful of him, mortal man that you have taken note of him.” For Almosnino, the verbs ‫( זכר‬NJPS “be mindful”) and ‫“( פקד‬take note”) in verse 5 are freighted with connotations of God’s providential concern for the righteous. Human achievement is to be measured in relation to one’s worthiness to benefit from that concern. People are “a little less than divine” in the sense that they are capable of evil, unlike the angels. Although angels are in possession of will, evil action is impossible for them. On the other hand, when people overcome their evil impulse and freely choose the good, God adorns them “with glory and majesty.” In verse 7, the NJPS translation renders the verb ‫ תמשילהו‬as “you have made him master.” Almosnino draws on another sense of ‫משל‬, “to liken or compare,” and suggests that in glorifying the righteous, God likens them to the heavens. As he puts it, “just as the heavens rule over things in the lower world, everything subject to them, so all other species are dominated by the perfected ones, in the sense that you have appointed and placed them under the dominion of humanity.” The psalmist elaborates by depicting the animal kingdom that is under the sway of the righteous in verses 8–9, and then concludes with a reaffirmation of

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

217

what Almosnino takes to be the purpose of the psalm, that God’s majesty finds its place in the world in the human effort to attain perfection. Although Almosnino’s means of expression differs markedly from Albo’s and Saba’s, their respective interpretations of Psalm 8 are similar in thrust. All three use Psalm 8 as a medium for conveying important Jewish concepts about the relationship between God and humanity, holding out for their audiences the hope that in striving for “perfection” as defined in Jewish terms, they can overcome their misery and achieve redemption. Embedding the interpretation of the psalm in writings about other texts or themes turns a text that normally is peripheral to the course of study into the center of attention. It serves not only to thicken the reading of the psalm, but also to demonstrate the essential unity and contiguity of Jewish literature and thought through time and space. One way or another, traditional Jewish teaching comes back to the same fundamental set of themes: God, creation, revelation, providence, and redemption. Again and again, commentators demonstrate how vital teachings around those themes may be discovered, sometimes surprisingly, in the sacred texts. And that is how psalms are studied in the living community—not as part of an academic curriculum, but as texts that respond to the religious needs and concerns of the moment. In his form-critical analysis of the psalm, Gerstenberger comments, “I believe that the experience of a general instability of life gave rise to psalms such as Psalm 8.” He goes on to include “periods of distress, persecution, and oppression” among the experiences that the psalm might have been intended to address. The message of the psalm, he writes, “is to comfort shaken members of small communities in a more or less hostile world.”53 That view undoubtedly would have been shared by Albo, Saba, and Almosnino: Albo was caught up in Jewish/Christian disputation and forced to move when his community was decimated; Saba was a victim of the expulsion of the Jews from the Iberian Peninsula; and Almosnino was trying to cope with the aftermath of the expulsion in preaching to a community of exiles and their descendants. The means of coping was not to incorporate the psalm into ritual performance, but to interpret it in a manner that demonstrates its connection to and relevance for the lives of the interpreter’s audience. With relatively few exceptions (sometimes overemphasized by modern scholars), the goal of traditional Jewish biblical commentary has not been to figure out what texts mean in an abstract sense, but what they mean and why they matter for a specific community in particular circumstances. The needs of the audience suggest both the choice of the text and the homiletical logic of its interpretation. 53

Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 1, 71–72.

218

Cooper

That approach to Psalm 8 persists in pious Jewish teaching to the present day. In 1997, a book was published under the title The Book of Psalms with the Commentary of Jonah Gerondi.54 Gerondi (ca. 1200–1263) did not actually write a Psalms commentary, so this was yet another in the long line of compilatory works, gathering up the author’s scattered remarks about psalms from his various writings. Following a longstanding Jewish practice, the editor, Yitzchak Ben Shoshan, included in the volume a commentary of his own, one that takes up considerably more space than his gleanings from Gerondi. Ben-Shoshan’s discussion of Psalm 8 stands in the same homiletical tradition as Albo’s, Saba’s, and Almosnino’s. He writes: Humans are the crown of creation in that when they serve God despite their evil inclination, they overcome it, purifying their corporeal bodies through study and observance and repairing the evil so that it becomes good, and this is their greatest merit. … The purpose of creation is to repair all the evil so that it is all transformed into good at the end of days, when God will reign over all the earth. At that time, he concludes, God’s majesty truly will pervade the world, “and it is all because Israel has received the Torah.” Bibliography Albo, Joseph. Sefer ha-ʿikkarim: Book of Principles. Edited and translated by Isaac Husik. 4 vols. in 5. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1946. Almosnino, Moses. Sefer tefilla le-moshe. Tel Aviv: Ha-makhon le-heqer yahadut Saloniki, 1977/1978. Alshekh, Moses. Sefer Romemut El. Edited by David Ohayon. Bnei Brak: self-published, 1992. Ashkenazi, Eliezer. Gedolim maʿase H.: Derushim …. 2 vols. Jerusalem: Merkaz ha-sefer, [2005]. Ashlag, Simhah Avraham. Sefer tefilot David ben Yishai. Bene-Berak: Merkaz Torani Moharil Ashlag, 1994. Baer, Seligmann. Seder avodat Yisra‌ʾel. Rödelheim: Lehrberger, 1901. Bar-Ilan University Responsa Project. Responsa Project: The Database for Jewish Studies. https://www.responsa.co.il/. 54

Yitzchak Ben Shoshan, Sefer tehillim im peirush Rabbeinu Yonah he-hasid Gerondi (Modiʿin: self-published, 1996/1997), 21–22.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

219

Ben Shoshan, Yitzchak. Sefer tehillim im peirush Rabbeinu Yonah he-hasid Gerondi. Modiʿin: self-published, 1996/1997. Berkovitz, Abraham Jacob. “The Life of Psalms in Late Antiquity.” PhD diss., Princeton University, 2018. Bernstein, Moshe J. “A Jewish Reading of Psalms: Some Observations on the Method of the Aramaic Targum.” Pages 476–504 in The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception, Edited by Patrick D. Miller and Peter W. Flint. VTSup 99. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Bleich, J. David. “Providence in the Philosophy of Hasdai Crescas and Joseph Albo.” Pages 311–58 in Hazon Nahum: Studies in Jewish Law, Thought, and History Presented to Dr. Norman Lamm on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday. Edited by Yaakov Elman and Jeffrey S. Gurock. New York: Yeshiva University Press, 1997. Bnaya, Meir Zvi. Mosheh Almosnino of Salonika: His Life and Work [Hebrew]. Tel Aviv: Diaspora Research Center, Tel Aviv University, 1996. Braude, William G. The Midrash on Psalms. 2 vols. YJS 13. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959. Brody, Robert. “Liturgical Uses of the Book of Psalms in the Geonic Period.” Pages 61–81 in Prayers That Cite Scripture. Edited by James L. Kugel. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006. Brünenberg, Esther. Der Mensch in Gottes Herrlichkeit: Psalm 8 und seine Rezeption im Neuen Testament. FB 119. Würzburg: Echter, 2009. Buber, Salomon, ed. Midrash Aggadah. Vienna: Fante, 1894. Buber, Salomon. Yalqut ha-Makkiri ʿal sefer Tehillim. 2 vols. Berdichev: Sheftel, 1899. Cooper, Alan. “Aspects of Jewish Reception of the Ketuvim (Writings).” Pages 430–46 in The Oxford Handbook of the Writings of the Hebrew Bible. Edited by Donn F. Morgan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. Cooper, Alan. “‘The Lord Grants Wisdom:’ The World-view of Proverbs 1–9.” Pages 29–43 in Bringing the Hidden to Light: Studies in Honor of Stephen A. Geller. Edited by Kathryn F. Kravitz and Diane M. Sharon. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2007. Cooper, Alan. “The Message of Lamentations.” JANES 28 (2002): 1–18. Cooper, Alan. “Some Aspects of Traditional Jewish Psalms Interpretation.” Pages 253– 68 in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms. Edited by William P. Brown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Delmedigo, Joseph. Matsref le-hokhma. Warsaw: Thursch, 1890. Ehrlich, Dror. “Joseph Albo.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016 /entries/albo-joseph/. Elizur, Shulamit. Rabbi Elʿazar Birabbi Kiliri: Qedushta‌ʾot le-yom mattan torah. Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 2000. Emden, Jacob. Siddur beth Yaʿaqov. Warsaw: Israel Alapin, 1880/1881.

220

Cooper

Falk, Daniel K. Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayers in the Dead Sea Scrolls. STDJ 27. Leiden: Brill, 1998. Feld, Edward, ed. Mahzor lev shalem la-Yamim ha-Nora‌ʾim. New York: Rabbinical Assembly, 2010. Fleisher, Ezra. “Azharot le-R. Binyamin (bar Shemuel) payetan.” Kovetz al yad, n.s. 11 (21), pt. 1 (1984/1985): 8–12. Frankel, Yonah. Mahzor Shavuot. Jerusalem: Koren, 2000. Fröhlich, Ida. “Healing with Psalms.” Pages 198–215 in Prayer and Poetry in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature: Essays in Honor of Eileen Schuller on the Occasion of Her 65th Birthday. Edited by Jeremy Penner, Ken M. Penner, and Cecilia Wassen. STDJ 98. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Psalms, Part 1: With an Introduction to Cultic Poetry. FOTL 14. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988. Gillingham, S. E. “Psalm 8 through the Looking Glass: Reception History of a Multi‐faceted Psalm.” Pages 167–196 in Diachronic and Synchronic: Reading the Psalms in Real Time; Proceedings of the Baylor Symposium on the Book of Psalms. Edited by Joel S. Burnett. London: T&T Clark, 2008. Gordon, Aryeh Leib, ed. Siddur otzar ha-tefillot. Vilna: Romm, 1915. Gross, Abraham. Iberian Jewry from Twilight to Dawn: The World of Rabbi Abraham Saba. BSJS 10. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Issachar Baer ben Tanhum. Maʿaseh Rav. Warsaw: Bomberg, 1858. Judah Loew ben Bezalel. Sefer Tiferet Yisra‌ʾel. Edited by Yehoshua Hartman. 3 vols. Jerusalem: Makhon Yerushalayim, 2000. Kafah, Yoseph, ed. Siddur siah Yerushalayim. 6th ed. Kiryat Ono: Mekhon Mishnat ha-Rambam, 2004/2005. Kanarfogel, Ephraim. Jewish Education and Society in the High Middle Ages. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1992. Kinzer, Mark Stephen. “‘All Things Under His Feet’: Psalm 8 in the New Testament and in Other Jewish Literature of Late Antiquity.” PhD diss., University of Michigan, 1995. Komlos, O. “Distinctive Features in the Targum of Psalms” [Hebrew]. Pages 265–70 in Studies in the Bible Presented to M. H. Segal. Edited by J. M. Grintz and J. Liver. Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher, 1964. Lieberman, Saul. Tosefta kifshutah, Seder Nashim. New York: Jewish Theological Semi­ nary, 2007. Marcus, Joel. “Son of Man as Son of Adam.” RB 110 (2003): 38–61; 370–86. Marrou, H. I. A History of Education in Antiquity. New York: Mentor, 1964. Moscato, Judah. Nefutsot Yehudah. Warsaw: Goldman, 1871. Olsen, Derek A. The Honey of Souls: Cassiodorus and the Interpretation of Psalms in the Early Medieval West. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2017.

Psalm 8 as a Case Study

221

Rebiger, Bill. Sefer Shimmush Tehillim: Buch vom magischen Gebrauch der Psalmen; Edition, Übersetzung und Kommentar. TSAJ 137. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Reventlow, Henning Graf. “Der Psalm 8.” Poetica 1 (1967): 304–32. Saadia Gaon. The Book of Beliefs and Opinions. Translated by Samuel Rosenblatt. YJS 1. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948. Schnieringer, Helmut. Psalm 8: Text—Gestalt—Bedeutung. Ä AT 59. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2004. Simon, Uriel. Four Approaches to the Book of Psalms from Saadiah Gaon to Abraham Ibn Ezra. Albany: SUNY Press, 1991. Talmage, Frank. “Keep Your Sons from Scripture: The Bible in Medieval Jewish Scholarship and Spirituality.” Pages 81–101 in Understanding Scripture: Explorations of Jewish and Christian Traditions of Interpretation. Edited by Clemens Thoma and Michael Wyschogrod. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist, 1987. Wertheimer, Shlomo Aharon. Bate Midrashot. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Jerusalem: Ktav va-sefer, 1967/1968.

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms Recitation, Pesuqe de-Zimra Ruth Langer Stefan Reif’s addendum to his essay “The Bible in the Liturgy” in the Jewish Study Bible, called “Some Liturgical Uses of Psalms in Jewish Tradition,” lists seventy-two individual psalms.1 This admittedly partial list thus covers almost half of the Psalter. Not all of these psalms have deep histories of Jewish liturgical use. Some appear only in individual rites; others are recited only in conjunction with specific occasional actions.2 Contrast this rich use of Psalms with the conclusion of A. J. Berkovitz in his dissertation that, with the exception of Psalm 145, formal liturgical recitation of specific psalms daily and weekly cannot be documented before the geonic era; that is, the eighth or ninth centuries.3 However, he says, “psalms piety,” the custom among Jews (and Christians) of probably all social strata to express their love of God through recitation of psalms or verses thereof, was widespread in the world into which rabbinic Judaism emerged. In many cases, favorite texts migrated into the formal liturgical use of later generations.4 The largest group of these became the independent liturgical complex known as pesuqe de-zimra (“the verses of song”) that was prefaced to the extant statutory core of the morning liturgy. Later rites primarily followed the Babylonian geonic precedents for this. This essay examines evidence for the emergence of this precedent. 1 Stefan C. Reif, addendum to Reif, “The Bible in the Liturgy,” in The Jewish Study Bible: Tanakh Translation, ed. Adele Berlin and Marc Z. Brettler (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 1947–48. The same list appears in Ruth Langer, rev. of Reif, “Bible in the Liturgy,” in The Jewish Study Bible: Tanakh Translation, 2nd ed., ed. Adele Berlin and Marc Z. Brettler (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 2066–67. Reif derived his list from Seligman Baer’s Seder Avodat Yisrael (Rödelheim: Leerberger, 1868), which also apparently influenced the authorized Ashkenazi rite in Great Britain as published by rabbis Singer and Hertz (Langer email correspondence April 3–4, 2018, with Alan Cooper, citing his correspondence with Reif). 2 Like Ps 1 for the unveiling of a tombstone. 3 The geonim were the heads of rabbinic academies in both the Land of Israel and Babylonia in about the last third of the first millennium CE. In Babylonia, there were usually two rival academies. 4 Abraham Jacob Berkovitz, “The Life of Psalms in Late Antiquity” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2018), chs. 4–5, esp. 255. Psalms piety continues today, with traditions of reading the entire Psalter over the course of a week or a month, or reciting specific appropriate psalms or even the entire Psalter for a particular personal need like for someone’s return to health. All these are particularly, though not exclusively, traditional women’s forms of piety.

© Ruth Langer, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_012

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

1

223

Classical Rabbinic Discussions

Two rabbinic sources apparently point to this liturgical context. From the Babylonian geonim on, many before Berkovitz understood these sources as talmudic-era evidence for the existence of pesuqe de-zimra.5 This granted this complex a significant level of halakhic authority, obligating Jews to recite these psalms and justifying invoking God’s name in the blessings framing it.6 This also shaped their discussions of pesuqe de-zimra and its details, and hence the ways that Jewish worshipers came to understand it. However, there is good reason to question this reading. Both sources appear first and only in the Babylonian Talmud. The first source, b. Ber. 4b, records a tradition in the name of Rabbi Elazar bar Avina, a third-generation amora from the Land of Israel, that anyone who recites Psalm 145 daily7 inherits eternity. Berkovitz and Günter Stemberger argue that this represents a pietistic, non-liturgical custom that rabbinic liturgy formally adopted in the amoraic period.8 Even the anonymous redactional layer of the Babylonian Talmud 5 See, for example, Ismar Elbogen, Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History, trans. Raymond P. Scheindlin (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America; New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1993), 73; or Ezra Fleischer, Eretz-Israel Prayer and Prayer Rituals as Portrayed in the Geniza Documents [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1988), 242. Exceptions include: Stefan C. Reif, Judaism and Hebrew Prayer: New Perspectives on Jewish Liturgical History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 130, 136; and Robert Brody, “Liturgical Uses of the Book of Psalms in the Geonic Period,” in Prayers That Cite Scripture, ed. James L. Kugel (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006), 69. 6 Because improper invocation of the divine name might violate the commandment of not “taking God’s name in vain,” the statutory blessing formula came to be limited to occasions specifically authorized by the Babylonian Talmud. On this, see Ruth Langer, To Worship God Properly: Tensions between Liturgical Custom and Halakhah in Judaism (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1998), 41–109. 7 Reading with Berkovitz, “Life of Psalms,” 247–48, according to Mss. Paris 671 and the marginal correction on Ms. Florence II.1.7 (National Library of Israel, Babylonian Talmud FIR NAZ Magl. II.I.7, 17–18; http://web.nli.org.il/sites/NLI/Hebrew/digitallibrary/pages/viewer.aspx? &presentorid=MANUSCRIPTS&docid=PNX_MANUSCRIPTS000197895-1#|FL50769299), and not thrice daily as in other manuscripts and the printed editions. These apparently updated the frequency to match their own customs. Geonic texts support this reading. See Robert Brody, ed., Teshuvot Rav Natronai ben Hilai Gaon (Jerusalem: Makhon Ofek, 1994), nos. 35, 38; E. D. Goldschmidt, ed., Seder Rav Amram Gaon (Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook, 1971); Seder pesuqe de-zimrah, 9, no. 12; Seder sheini ve-hamishi, 60, no. 103, which also cite the Berakhot text without specifying a frequency of daily recitation. For Natronai, this allows for debate about the required frequency. Most of these texts also have Rabbi Elazar citing a Rabbi Avina, which in light of the context also seems a clear error. 8 Günter Stemberger, “Psalmen in Liturgie und Predigt in der rabbinischen Zeit,” in Biblische Traditionen im rabbinischen Judentum, vol. 1 of Judaica Minora, TSAJ 133 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 229.

224

Langer

struggles to explain the choice of this particular psalm, suggesting ultimately that the reason lies in its combination of characteristics: its acrostic and its petition for divine generosity. It is not clear that this discussion describes a widespread liturgical behavior. The versions of the Talmud that we have received,9 though, refer to this Psalm as “ashre,” that is, by the first word of the cento10 of verses that came to introduce it. This, Berkovitz argues, reflects that the Babylonian Talmud already knew that this originally pietistic custom relating just to the Psalm had evolved into a liturgical custom that embedded the Psalm in a matrix of other Psalms verses, minimally Pss 84:4(5) and 144:15 before, and 115:18 after.11 We should note, though, that both Talmuds record Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi as teaching that Ps 84:4(5), “Happy are those who live in your house, ever singing your praise” (NRSV), midrashically supports the Mishnah’s requirement to set a proper mood before beginning to pray.12 Additionally, some geonic sources refer to this psalm by its biblical incipit, not as ashre.13 Thus, this verse and Psalm 145 also functioned independently, and reference to one does not necessarily imply the other. The second source, b. Shabb. 118b, records Rabbi Yosi’s14 various pietistic aspirations, the second of which is that he be among those who complete Hallel every day. To this, the anonymous Babylonian redactors object that daily recitation of the Hallel psalms (Pss 113–18) is blasphemous because these psalms are reserved for special occasions. Their resolution is that Rabbi Yosi 9

With the exception of Ms. Paris 671, which Berkovitz, “Life of Psalms,” 183, argues represents a harmonization of the text and not an authentic tradition. Note though that Brody, Teshuvot Rav Natronai Gaon, 38, also mentions just “tehillah ledavid.” 10 See Ruth Langer, “Biblical Texts in Jewish Prayers: Their History and Function,” in Jewish and Christian Liturgy and Worship: New Insights into Its History and Interaction, ed. Albert Gerhards and Clemens Leonhard (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 70–79, where I argue for the appropriateness of this term for these collections of verses. 11 Berkovitz, “Life of Psalms,” ch. 5 especially; Stemberger, “Psalmen in Liturgie,” 229. See too Lawrence A. Hoffman, “Hallels, Midrash, Canon, and Loss: Psalms in Jewish Liturgy,” in Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical and Artistic Traditions, ed. Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003), 36–37. 12 See y. Ber. 5:1, 8d; b. Ber. 32b. 13 Brody, Teshuvot Rav Natronai Gaon, no. 38. However, in the version of this responsum found in the Goldschmidt edition of the Seder Rav Amram Gaon, 60, no. 102, the instruction is only to recite “the first chapter.” Citations in the Mahzor Vitry and Siddur Rashi gloss this: “of Psalms, which is ‘A Psalm of David.’” 14 There are several rabbis by this name. Most presume that this was the fourth generation tanna, Rabbi Yosi ben Ḥalafta. However, the Talmud does not introduce these texts using the technical language for tannaitic traditions, and this appears only in the Babylonian Talmud, opening the possibility it reflects a Babylonian reality.

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

225

was really referring to pesuqe de-zimra, “verses of song.” Berkovitz suggests that Rabbi Yosi probably was seeking to recite Psalms 113–18 daily as a mark of piety, and that the later rabbis were seeking to control such piety. Therefore, they redirected it to a (then) nonliturgical realm of psalms recitation.15 What the Talmud means by “verses of song” is also obscure. Speculation suggests that it could literally have been a composition constructed of appropriate verses, as indeed becomes integral to this liturgical complex.16 However, in Babylonian geonic texts, the term definitely refers to the larger complex recognizable to us, specifically to Psalm 145 (in expanded version) through Psalm 150, with the repeated halleluyah that characterizes Psalms 146–150.17 The geonim justify and base the obligation to recite these psalms primarily on these two talmudic traditions, but they reinforce it with m. Ber. 5:1’s requirement that one enter prayer in an appropriately serious mood.18 2

Geonic-Era Discussions

2.1 Massekhet Soferim 18:1 A putatively geonic-era source that reflects a more elaborate rite appears in the so-called minor tractate, Soferim. However, scholars dispute the provenance of this text. The editor of the only critical edition, Michael Higger, suggests that although this work basically reflects the rite of the Land of Israel, this specific passage reflects an addition by an editor following the Babylonian rite.19 But his observation may be too simple. Based on geniza evidence, Ezra Fleischer argues that Soferim fundamentally represents a rite of the Land of Israel. 15 16 17 18

Berkovitz, “Life of Psalms,” 254. See, for example, Brody, “Liturgical Uses,” 69. Berkovitz, “Life of Psalms,” 254–56. Goldschmidt, Seder Rav Amram Gaon, 60, no. 102, citing Rav Natronai Gaon. This remains important in later medieval discussions. See the Tosafot, Ber. 31a, s.v. rabbanan and the Pisqe Ri”az (Rabbi Yeshayah son of Rabbi Eliyah Ditrani, 12th–13th c. Italy) Berakhot 5.1.1. For a summary of meanings attributed to the recitation of pesuqe de-zimra, especially in subsequent centuries and by kabbalists, see Reuven Kimelman’s forthcoming The Rhetoric of the Jewish Liturgy: A Historical and Literary Commentary to the Prayer Book, LLJC (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, forthcoming), conclusions to chapter 5. 19 Michael Higger, ed., Massekhet Soferim (New York: Devei Rabbanan, 1937), 80–81, 308–10 (the text itself with notes, numbered 18:1). His base text is Ms. Oxford 370.12 (Oppenheim 726) early 14th c., France?, ff. 215r–v, numbered there ch. 17:11 (available at University of Oxford, Digital Bodleian, Talmudic Miscellany, https://digital.bodle ian.ox.ac.uk/inquire/p/2f338985-61b6-4077-bcda-d1041c4debff). See also Ezra Fleischer, Eretz-Israel, 163 n. 11, 188–92.

226

Langer

However, he also demonstrates the great variation that the rites of the Land of Israel show for this liturgical complex. He identifies Soferim 18 specifically as representing a mixed rite of a border area.20 Debra Reed Blank observes that Soferim 10–21 first appears in Ashkenaz, both in manuscripts and in citations, and suggests that this may indicate that its origins were “very likely written outside of Palestine and Babylonia, possibly in Italy or Byzantium, prior to the eleventh century”; that is, in a diaspora location that would reflect a mixture of influences from the two geonic centers.21 This phenomenon of mixed rites may be a larger phenomenon that requires more direct attention. I have suggested that liturgical rites act like linguistic dialects in presenting a spectrum of shifting characteristics across a geographical area. Consequently, there is great natural variation; before printing, “pure” rites can only be a heuristic created by scholars.22 A subsequent study to this one that carefully investigates the evolution of pesuqe de-zimra in the various European rites is needed before this matter can be resolved adequately. Soferim 18:1 reads: But one must recite after “yehi khavod” “The Eternal is King” (Ps 97) and “A song, sing to the Eternal” (Ps 98), according to the teachings of the scribes, and after that “Praise the Eternal, call on His name” and the six daily songs. For Rabbi Yosi said: May my portion be with those who pray these six songs daily. They said: Why should one mention David in the Psalm “Praise the Eternal, call on His name”? So that one will mention priests, Levites, and Israelites every day.23 All agree that this passage, which describes the liturgy for the celebration of the New Month (Rosh Ḥodesh), demonstrates characteristics known from different centers.24 As Ezra Fleischer demonstrates, the rite of the Land of Israel 20 21

22 23

24

Ezra Fleischer, Eretz-Israel, 200. On the textual history of Soferim, see Debra Reed Blank, “It’s Time to Take Another Look at ‘Our Little Sister’ Soferim: A Bibliographic Essay,” JQR 90, nos. 1–2 (1999): 4–5 n. 10. See also Debra Blank Reed, Soferim: A Commentary to Chapters 10–12 and a Reconsideration of the Evidence (PhD diss., Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1998), 10, 62–72. See Ruth Langer, “Mapping Medieval Rites: A Methodological Proposal,” in Jewish Prayer: New Perspectives, ed. Uri Ehrlich (Beer Sheva: Ben Gurion University, 2016), 31–70. The syntax of this last sentence is problematic. Higger, Massekhet Soferim, based on Ms. Munich 95, has added the word “to be,” enabling my still somewhat illogical translation. Without this word, it is possible that the answer is “Priests, Levites, and Israelites say it daily”—which does not answer the question properly either. This passage serves as a transition from the materials Higger (Massekhet Soferim) numbers as chapter 17, on Torah readings, concluding with Rosh Ḥodesh, to chapter 18, on

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

227

designated Psalm 98 for the New Month, originally reciting it in the evening and only later moving it to the morning too.25 Because there it appeared with the standard daily morning Psalms liturgy,26 Soferim then describes that. However, this account has not reached us in a form reflecting the morning psalms recitation of the rite of the Land of Israel, Psalms 120–36, extended sometimes to Psalms 120–50 on Sabbaths and holidays; that is, many more than six psalms.27 Soferim supports its “six” by citing the Babylonian talmudic passage about Rabbi Yosi’s aspiration to recite Hallel (psalms of praise) daily and, deliberately or not, reinterprets it by transmitting the word as “hallalu” (“these”).28 This necessitates introducing an explanatory gloss, “six songs.” These are understood universally and probably correctly as the six daily psalms of the Babylonian rite, Psalms 145–50 (rather than the six Psalms of Hallel, Pss 113–18). If Soferim reflects the rite of the Land of Israel here at all, this text is more coherent with “mixed rites,” for which there is extensive evidence in the geniza,29 that insert these final psalms of the Psalter into the rite of the Land of Israel, especially on Sabbaths and holidays. Soferim also knows the accompaniment of these psalms with centos of verses, compositions constructed from concatenated full verses. Its “yehi khavod” definitely refers to one of these centos; these words appear biblically only in Ps 104:31, so this cannot designate the beginning of a psalm. All rites today include this heavily psalm-inflected cento (albeit with differences in its precise verses).30 Similarly, Soferim’s reference to “Praise the Eternal, call on psalms recited on special days, beginning with Rosh Ḥodesh. It could therefore belong with either set of materials. In Ms. Oxford 370.12, it concludes chapter 17. For an analysis of the redactional history of the entire chapter, see Brody, “Liturgical Uses,” 78–80. 25 Fleischer, Eretz-Israel, 164, 173. 26 As opposed to the Babylonian rite, which (eventually) recited a psalm for each day according to m. Tamid 7:4, and concluded the service with it. See Fleischer, Eretz-Israel, 163. 27 Fleischer, Eretz-Israel, ch. 4 passim, especially 242. There are substantial variations among the manuscripts he presents. He suggests that the two systems were in competition with one another, at least in Fustat. 28 Stemberger, “Psalmen in Liturgie,” 229, indicates this, but does not develop its consequences. Brody, “Liturgical Uses,” 78, 80, 80 n. 71, accepts Fleischer’s supposition that this represents an attempt to introduce change in the rite of the Land of Israel, but he is doubtful whether the motivating factor is Babylonian practice. 29 A geniza is a place for storing worn-out but holy documents. The Cairo Geniza came to scholarly attention in the late nineteenth century from the synagogue that had preserved the rite of the Land of Israel into the thirteenth century. Most of the surviving documents date from the eleventh century and later. 30 The variants of this text deserve study, from its geniza forms on. In the contemporary Ashkenazi rite, these verses are: Pss 104:31, 113:2–4, 135:13, 103:19; 1 Chr 16:31; a “pseudoverse”

228

Langer

his name” points to another cento, one that in the Land of Israel frequently followed yehi khavod.31 These words do appear at the beginning of Psalm 105, but as Higger points out, the discussion that ends Soferim’s passage only makes sense if we read these words to refer to the lengthy significantly parallel psalm-like selection from 1 Chr 16:8–36 (which also appears in all rites today at some point before the six psalms).32 Some of the geniza fragments suggest, though, that this cento stood alone in the rite of the Land of Israel, at least at times, functioning as if a psalm.33 This is not surprising, as it is a combination of close parallels to Ps 105:1–15 and Psalm 96.34 2.2 The Emerging Babylonian Complex When was this cluster of six psalms chosen? Those who contend that it dates to the days of the Talmud, together with its blessings, cannot offer proof beyond the conventional readings of the talmudic sources discussed above.35 However, geonic discussions and the somewhat later geniza evidence provide a terminus ad quem for the emergence of this psalms-centered introduction to the morning service in less and more elaborate forms in the rites of Babylonia and the Land of Israel. The remainder of this essay will focus on the Babylonian rite, that which was the primary influence on later rites.36 built of psalm verse fragments; Pss 10:16, 33:10; Prov 19:21; Pss 33:11, 33:9, 132:13, 135:4, 44:14, 78:38, 20:10. 31 In contrast to the reverse order in later European rites. 32 Contra Higger’s (Massekhet Soferim) initial identification of this reference as being to Ps 105 in his note to the text. Fleischer, Eretz-Israel, 188, presumes the reading offered here and does not mention Ps 105. 33 See the texts that Fleischer publishes, Eretz- Israel, especially 191–98, and according to the index of prayer texts. 34 See the discussion of the liturgical use of this text in the tabernacle and temple in Seder Olam Rabba 14. See also Israel M. Ta-Shma, “Three Discussions about Prayer” [Hebrew], in Atarah Leḥayyim: Studies in Talmudic and Rabbinic Literature in Honor of Professor Hayim Zalman Dimitrovsky, ed. Daniel Boyarin (Jerusalem: Magnes, 2000), 567–72. Ta-Shma points to the absence of this text in Babylonia and the Babylonian-influenced rites of Iberia through the medieval period. He does not explain its universal appearance in contemporary forms of these rites. 35 See n. 5 above. 36 The rite of the Land of Israel itself ceased to exist by the end of the thirteenth century; it had some continuing influence on various other rites. Ezra Fleischer has discussed the extant, if complexly incomplete, evidence for it at length in Eretz-Israel, chs. 3–4. For a discussion of the gradual diminution of what was apparently the last remnant of this rite in “pure” form, in Fustat, see Vered Raziel-Kretzmer, “How Late was the Palestinian Rite Practiced in Egypt? New Evidence from the Cairo Geniza [Hebrew],” Tarbiz 85, no. 2 (2018): 309–36.

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

229

The earliest known Babylonian geonic references to this complex address irregular situations. Rav Yehudai Gaon (mid-eighth c., Sura) instructed that a person who recites pesuqe de-zimra after rather than before the main prayers omits the blessing normally preceding the psalms because he has already recited the blessing for study that precedes the shema.37 In other words, Yehudai knew this complex but considered its psalms recitation an act of biblical text study.38 A more widely quoted ruling addresses how the latecomer to the synagogue should abbreviate this section of the service. We learn of it through a responsum39 written about a century later circa 875 CE by Rav Natronai Gaon, head of the Babylonian academy in Sura, which reads: They asked before Rav Natronai Gaon of blessed memory: If someone enters the synagogue and finds the congregation praying, but he has not yet recited pesuqe de-zimra: should he join the congregation at their point in the liturgy (if he found them already reciting shema)? After he concludes his prayer, should he then go back and recite pesuqe de-zimra?40 He answered thus: When the sages enacted [the liturgy], they did it this way: one recites pesuqe de-zimra and then prays, for Rabbi Simlai expounded, “One should always praise God first and then pray [i.e., petition]” (b. Ber. 32a; b. ʿAbod. Zar. 7b). We heard from Mar the son of R. Moshe Gaon of blessed memory that he heard from his teachers that: if [the latecomer] finds the community [already] worshiping but it will not delay him [to the point that he cannot catch up], he recites [the blessing] “King extolled with songs of praise,”41 and recites the first chapter (= Ps 145) and skips and recites “praise God in

37

Benjamin Manasseh Lewin, Otzar Hageonim, 2 vols. (Jerusalem: Wagshel, 1984), 1:31, no. 58, citing from Teshuvot ha-Geonim Liq, no. 48. 38 Israel M. Ta-Shma, “Pesuqe de-Zimra and Their Status in the Order of Prayer” [Hebrew], in Sefer Hazikkaron le-Professor Zeʾev Falk: Ma‌ʾamarim bemadaʿei hayahadut uvisheʾelot hashaʿah, ed. R. Horowitz, Nitai Shinan, Michael Corinaldi (Jerusalem: Makhon Schechter, 2005), 271. 39 A responsum is a genre of literature that emerged in the geonic period of “responses” to questions posed to important rabbis. Rav Yehudai’s instruction is also a responsum. 40 Perhaps as Rav Yehudai recommends. 41 The concluding formula of the blessing preceding the recitation of pesuqe de-zimra, perhaps indicating a longer text. Translation of Jonathan Sacks, The Koren Siddur (Jerusalem: Koren Publishers, 2009), 64.

230

Langer

His holiness” (= Ps 150) and concludes,42 and then hurries and prays with the congregation. However, there is something despicable in reciting pesuqe de-zimra after one prays, to recite praise after petition. But if he does not have sufficient time even to do as we have explained, he should not recite it after his prayer, because when they enacted it, they did not enact it to be recited after the prayer but rather before it.43 Thus, in the time of R. Moshe Gaon’s son’s teachers, that is, in the early- to mid-ninth century at the latest, at least in the Babylonian geonic academy at Sura, the six psalms were established liturgy. Nevertheless, protocols did not yet exist for their recitation by one who arrived sufficiently late for services that reciting these psalms would make it impossible for him to join the prayer quorum for subsequent and more important parts of the liturgy. The “ideal” latecomer should therefore abbreviate pesuqe de-zimra to a symbolic minimum: its first and last psalms and its blessings. Rav Natronai Gaon repurposes here yet another talmudic tradition, a midrash in the name of Rabbi Simlai which derives the obligation to praise God first from Moses’s precedent in Deut 3:23. The text in b. ʿAbod. Zar. 7b invokes this within a debate over where personal petitions belong within the amidah.44 Natronai applies this principle to larger liturgical structures. Pesuqe de-zimra constitutes “praise”—in contrast to Yehudai’s casting them as study45— and Rabbi Simlai’s “pray” now refers broadly to praying all the core statutory prayers. We have received Rav Natronai’s responsum in fullest form through its inclusion in the Seder Rav Amram Gaon.46 This complete order of prayer, written by Natronai’s contemporary and rival, Rav Amram Gaon, is a lengthy responsum sent to Spain. We almost certainly have not received Amram’s original prayer texts, and thus cannot rely on his list of the contents of pesuqe de-zimra. 42 Brody, Teshuvot Rav Natronai Gaon, no. 12, 1:116 n. 4, suggests that this points to yishtabaḥ, the blessing concluding pesuqe de-zimra. Brody, no. 9, 1:111 n. 22, suggests that Natronai did not understand this to be a blessing independent of the one preceding the psalms, as indicated by his not including it in his list of the hundred blessings to be recited daily. 43 Brody, Teshuvot Rav Natronai Gaon, no. 12, 1:115–17. Brody presents the version of this responsum that was preserved in the prayer book of Natronai’s rival, the Seder Rav Amram Gaon; Goldschmidt, Seder Rav Amram Gaon, 60, §102. Brody’s corrections to Goldschmidt in Teshuvot Rav Natronai Gaon, 1:337, do not change the substance of the text. 44 The parallel in b. Ber. 32a is in a collection of teachings about prayer derived from Moses’s precedents. 45 Ta-Shma, “Pesuqe de-Zimra,” 270–71. 46 Brody, Teshuvot Rav Natronai Gaon, 115–16 n. 1.

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

231

Note, though, that all manuscripts include the cento yehi khavod. However, most scholars consider the discussions about prayers in the manuscripts to be reasonably reliable.47 Amram presents pesuqe de-zimra as the beginning of public prayer: the synagogue’s ḥazzan (prayer leader) stands up to lead its opening and closing blessings. The opening blessing has no fixed text: Amram differentiates without judgement between that of the cities and of his academy.48 He also knows the expansion of Psalm 145 by verses before and after. Amram stresses that, with the addition of Ps 115:18 at the end of Psalm 145, the series of six psalms (Pss 145–50) constitutes one “halleluyah after halleluyah”; that is, this word closes and begins each psalm. Citing b. Ber. 4b, he also requires kavvanah (“intentionality”) in reciting Psalm 145.49 Amram’s conclusion to this section adds another element not documentable earlier: the requirement that one not converse between pesuqe de-zimra and the next liturgical complex, the recitation of shema and its blessings.50 In other words, while he does not invoke it explicitly, he introduces the classical rabbinic concept of semikhut, a required juxtaposition between two ritual acts (or the opposite, a prohibition of hefseq, interruption). The text in t. Ber. 1:2 presents this concept as guiding the superpietists’ timing of shema, so that it could be juxtaposed to the amidah, the liturgical complex following it; that juxtaposition had become generally required in the morning.51 The omission of pesuqe de-zimra from talmudic lists of necessary juxtapositions also supports the argument that it was not yet a developed liturgical complex. We 47

The Goldschmidt edition is based on the earliest available manuscripts, but these are ca. five hundred years later than the original and almost certainly contain scribal adaptations to their own rites. Goldschmidt distinguishes between more and less certain texts by typefaces. A clear example of the variation among the manuscripts appears in the Sabbath morning pesuqe de-zimra, where Goldschmidt, 69, §20, needs to present a synoptic edition of the manuscripts. Yehi khavod, with less variation, is the only addition to the Psalms in any manuscript. 48 Goldschmidt, Seder Rav Amram Gaon, 7–8, §9–10. 49 Goldschmidt, Seder Rav Amram Gaon, 9, §11–12. Hoffman, “Hallels,” 35, notes the circularity of Amram’s argument here, as he has to create the chain by adding a verse to the end of Ps 145. 50 Goldschmidt, Seder Rav Amram Gaon, 10, §14. 51 The text in t. Ber. 3:6 adds the idea that one’s “words,” i.e., personal prayers, should not interrupt the juxtaposition between shema and amidah. This enters the talmudic discussions with the conclusion that it applies to the morning service, but not to a bedtime shema. See y. Ber. 1:1, 2d; b. Ber. 12a. Amram’s expansion generates a prohibition of conversing between the opening blessing of pesuqe de-zimra and the completion of the amidah. See the citation from Alfasi below and also Simha Emanuel, ed., Teshuvot ha-Geonim ha-Ḥadashot (Jerusalem: Ofeq, 1995), 32, no. 33 (755). Emanuel identifies the author as the 11th–12th c. Rabbi Yehuda ben Barzilai of Barcelona.

232

Langer

can compare Amram’s invocation of this principle to Natronai’s repurposed expectation that praise precedes petition. Both seek creatively to reinforce the authority of this new liturgical structure with talmudic precedents, one halakic, the other midrashic. About a half-century later, circa 925 CE, the Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon, a less popular and hence more precisely preserved text,52 is more uncertain about the obligation to recite these psalms, although it includes them in all morning services. Saadya introduces his discussion, indicating, “our nation has volunteered to recite songs from the book of praises of the Holy One, and before them and after them two blessings.” “Volunteer” indicates a recognition that the Mishnah and Talmud do not require this liturgical complex, unlike those following it, and it consequently has a lesser halakhic status.53 Therefore, there is no need to discern how talmudic precedents govern it. Saadya continues, in his liturgy for the individual, with details that mostly confirm the outline of Amram’s rite: an opening blessing,54 the cento yehi khavod, two ashre (“happy are”) verses (Pss 84:5, 144:15), followed by the six psalms. It is ambiguous here whether the ashre verses conclude yehi khavod or introduce Psalm 145, and Saadya does not indicate that Ps 115:18 concludes that Psalm. Saadya adds the doxological Ps 89:52(53) and 1 Chr 29:13 before the concluding blessing. He also notes that there is a custom to follow this blessing with Exod 14:30–15:26, but indicates that “even though this is nice, there is no obligation or need,” perhaps implying by contrast that there is some level of obligation for the preceding 52 But not entirely so. The published version is based on the only significantly complete manuscript to survive; see Israel Davidson, Simha Assaf, and B. Issachar Joel, eds., Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Mekitze Nirdamim, 1985). Naphtali Wieder, “The Adaptation of Saʿadya’s Siddur for Practical Use: Character and Purpose of the Siddur” [Hebrew], in The Formation of Jewish Liturgy in the East and the West: A Collection of Essays (Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute / Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, 1998), 561–621, esp. 566, points out that many copyists reworked the siddur to make it more user-friendly. Even so, only scattered fragments of these copies survive. Its Judeo-Arabic, first translated into Hebrew for this modern edition, limited its audience. 53 Nonetheless, he takes no issue with the recitation of these blessings as non-talmudic. Those who argue that he took a principled objection to non-talmudic benedictions must take this into account. For a discussion of this issue, see Langer, To Worship God Properly, 56–58. 54 His text is different from that found in the manuscripts of Amram. Note also that Naphtali Wieder, “Fourteen New Genizah-Fragments of Saadya’s Siddur Together with a Reproduction of a Missing Part,” in Saadya Studies: In Commemoration of the One Thousandth Anniversary of the Death of R. Saadya Gaon, ed. Erwin Isak Jakob Rosenthal (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1943), 268, published an even shorter version of the blessing. The version for public recitation in Davidson, Assaf, and Joel, Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon, 35, is yet shorter.

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

233

psalms.55 He does not explain the choice of passages when he lists them.56 Like Amram, he indicates that pesuqe de-zimra begins the public gathering for morning prayer.57 On the Sabbath and festivals, he provides much-expanded versions of the blessings, both the hymnic barukh she-amar (“blessed is the one who spoke …”) before the opening blessing and nishmat kol ḥai (“the breath of all the living”) before the concluding blessing. He expands the weekday psalms only with Psalm 92 (and according to some manuscripts, Ps 93 as well).58 At the far western end of the Islamic world, but continuing geonic traditions, R. Yitzḥaq Alfasi (Rif, 1013 CE, Algeria–1103 CE, Cordoba) refers to a simple Babylonian version of this ritual recitation of psalms in his codification of the talmudic halakhic traditions. After juxtaposing the traditions from b. Ber. 4b and b. Shabb. 118a, he makes their application to pesuqe de-zimra explicit, writing: What are [pesuqe de-zimra]? From Psalm 145 to Psalm 150, and the rabbis decreed to recite a blessing before them and a blessing after them. What are these? Barukh she-amar and yishtabaḥ. Therefore they required that a person should not speak from when he begins barukh she-amar until he completes the eighteen benedictions (amidah).59 Thus, he understands these six psalms (with no additions) to be Rabbi Yosi’s daily Hallel. He adds a prohibition similar to Amram’s against speaking between these psalms and the shema complex that follows. However, unlike Amram, he integrates this juxtaposition with the preexistent juxtaposition of shema and amidah. Saadya’s sense of the secondary nature of pesuqe de-zimra is also very evident in Maimonides’s (d. 1204 CE, Cairo) Mishneh Torah. The first two sections of his Sefer Ahavah (“Book of [Expressing] Love [for God]”) cover the laws of 55 56 57 58

Davidson, Assaf, and Joel, Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon, 32–34. Davidson, Assaf, and Joel, Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon, 33, 35. Davidson, Assaf, and Joel, Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon, 35. Davidson, Assaf, and Joel, Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon, 118–20. On festivals (but not on Yom Kippur), he skips the incipit of Ps 92 with its explicit reference to the Sabbath. He also acknowledges in the midst of his discussion of the qedusha de-sidra that some insert Psalm 19 into it on the Sabbath, and that there is nothing wrong with this addition (Davidson, Assaf, and Joel, Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon, 40–41). The editors’ note questions when this would occur, as the qedusha de-sidra is generally recited only at the beginning of the Sabbath afternoon service, and inserting a psalm into it is not common practice. Even though this psalm does later enter rites for the Sabbath morning, this seems irrelevant to a discussion of pesuqe de-zimra. 59 Rif, Ber. 23a.

234

Langer

shema, and of tefillah (prayer, i.e., amidah) with the priestly benediction. In other words, pesuqe de-zimra does not receive its own category of laws. The second section opens with discussions of laws that apply both to private and to public prayer. Under private prayer, he discusses the “other blessings that the sages enacted to recite daily,” all talmudic, beginning with those associated with bedtime, continuing through the processes of waking, arising, and early morning Torah study.60 Finally, still in the context of private prayer, he writes: 7:12. The sages praised the one who recites songs from the Book of Psalms every day, from Psalm 145 to the end of the book. They were already accustomed to recite verses before them and after them. They established a blessing before the Psalms which is “barukh she-amar” [“blessed is the One who spoke”] and a blessing after them, which is “yishtabaḥ” [“may he be praised”]. After that one blesses over the recitation of shema and recites shema. 7:13. There are places where they were accustomed to recite the Song at the Sea (Exod 15) every day after they bless yishtabaḥ, and after that, they bless over shema. And there are places where they recite Moses’s Song (Deut 32). And there are individuals who recite both songs, all according to custom. For Maimonides, this liturgy remains in the context of private prayer; his description of public prayer explicitly begins with kaddish and barekhu; that is, the elements that follow pesuqe de-zimra.61 Maimonides never identifies his sources in his code. His supercommentators all presume that 7:12’s opening sentence paraphrases b. Shabb. 118b and explain “completing the Hallel” in light of subsequent medieval custom. Retrospectively, the intent of Maimonides’s next sentence, “They were already accustomed to recite verses before them and after them,” seems obvious, but the story we have traced here raises questions. The prayer book text that accompanies this section of Maimonides’s code, preserved in the Cairo Geniza in a manuscript containing Maimonides’s own signature, provides the best answers.62 Maimonides’s code opens this complex’s daily recitation 60 Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Sefer Ahavah, Laws of Prayer and the Priestly Benediction 7:1. 61 Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Sefer Ahavah 9:1. Ch. 8 deals with the general performance of public prayer. 62 Published by E. D. Goldschmidt, “The Oxford Ms. of Maimonides’ Book of Prayer,” [Hebrew] in On Jewish Liturgy: Essays on Prayer and Religious Poetry, 2nd ed. (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1980), 187–216. Goldschmidt (“Oxford Ms.,” 188–90) argues that it is fairly certain that this is a manuscript that Maimonides himself approved of and hence signed, although it is possible that the prayer book section was added after his approval, given the

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

235

with the elaborate form of the blessing barukh she-amar,63 found in Saadya only for the Sabbaths and holidays (and apparently not at all in Amram). The instruction follows that “one should recite these verses,” that is, 7:12’s “verses before them,” followed by the full details of the cento yehi khavod,64 a text encountered already in Soferim, Amram, Saadya, and geniza manuscripts of the rite of the Land of Israel. This cento concludes with the two verses beginning “ashre” (“happy are”) often associated with Psalm 145,65 followed immediately by the instruction to “recite from ‘A praise. Of David. I will extol you my God and King’ (Ps 145:1) to the end of the Book of Psalms.”66 Unlike in the Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon, the placement of this instruction makes unambiguous that all the verses belong to the cento beginning yehi khavod, and none are associated with Psalm 145. Like Saadya, Maimonides is silent about an added halleluyah verse (Ps 115:18) at the conclusion of Psalm 145. Maimonides differs from his known predecessors in the verses he lists “after” these Psalms. Saadya had included two doxological verses at this point, Ps 89:52(53) and 1 Chr 29:13. Maimonides’ list seems to be an expansion on this, though the extensive corrections to his manuscript challenge an accurate presentation. His list reads: Ps 89:52(53); a nonbiblical riff on this which replaces “blessed be the Eternal forever” (‫ )ברוך ה׳ לעולם‬with “the Eternal will reign forever” (‫ימלוך ה׳ לעולם‬, or, corrected in a gloss to the full Ps 146:10); 1 Chr 29:10–13 (however, in the Oxford manuscript, someone has drawn a line indicating that the list of verses ends with 29:10); and Neh 9:5b.67 In his prayer book, Maimonides supplies the text of the blessing following the Psalms, followed by a brief instruction to recite according to local custom the “song” in its totality; that is, Exodus 15.68 He then turns to Sabbath elaborations on this complex, indicating that “on the Sabbath, all the people were accustomed to add this text (nishmat kol ḥai) before this [closing] blessing,” and he provides that lengthy text in full too.69 Finally, he comments:

location of the signature. However, Goldschmidt argues additionally for Maimonidean authorship of the liturgical text, based on its references to the halakhic text. He argues that this is Maimonides’s own preferred rite and represents a local Egyptian hybrid rite. 63 Goldschmidt, “Oxford Ms.,” 193, lines 6–14. 64 Goldschmidt, “Oxford Ms.,” 193, lines 15–24. 65 Pss 84:5, 144:15. Goldschmidt, “Oxford Ms.,” 193, lines 25–26. The use of these verses as transitional texts is also evident the layout of Italian-rite prayer books. 66 Goldschmidt, “Oxford Ms.,” 193, line 27. 67 Goldschmidt, “Oxford Ms.,” 193, line 27, to 194, line 7. The Oxford ms. suggests that he intended more of the last passage, but as the Yemenite rite, which followed Maimonides closely, contains only this verse, it is unlikely. 68 Goldschmidt, “Oxford Ms.,” 194, lines 12–13. 69 Goldschmidt, “Oxford Ms.,” 194, line 13, to 195, line 8.

236

Langer

They were also accustomed to recite Psalm 92 in its entirety before they began the “verses of songs [sic]” on the Sabbath and on Yom Kippur. And there are places where they were accustomed on Sabbaths to recite Psalm 136 before the “verses of songs”; and there are places where they were accustomed to recite the Songs of Ascent (Psalms 120–34), all according to local custom.70 In other words, Maimonides knew and accepted versions of pesuqe de-zimra that expanded significantly upon that of the Babylonian geonim. As Ezra Fleischer has demonstrated, the elements named here are particularly characteristic of the rite of the Land of Israel: the recitation of the psalm of the day began there in the evening service and migrated to the morning also; and Psalms 120–34 formed the core of its regular recitation of Psalms.71 Thus, Maimonides’ reference to “local custom” reflects the persistence of that rite or its influence. Maimonides’ toleration suggests he considered pesuqe de-zimra a (somewhat) flexible liturgical element.72 However, we possibly err in presuming clear boundaries between the rites. Maimonides may have encountered in Egypt (or elsewhere) a rich variety of very local customs, not so clearly identified with one rabbinic center or the other. Either way, Maimonides’ acceptance of these varying customs helped permit the persistence of stark differences in the ways that subsequent rites elaborated on the Babylonian geonic core. Maimonides’ technical terminology in his discussions of pesuqe de-zimra is significant. In his code, Maimonides employed the verb “accustomed” about reciting the verses framing Psalms 145–50, the Song at the Sea, and his list of other expansions. “Custom” carries real halakhic weight in rabbinic thinking, especially from the medieval period on, but it denotes a lower level of obligation, a precedent with its source in actual practice rather than in the written or oral Torah.73 In other words, Maimonides implies that should one choose to omit or add to these particular elements of pesuqe de-zimra, it would be of little consequence. In contrast, Maimonides, like Alfasi, points to a proper rabbinic legal endorsement and uses the verb “tiqqenu” (“decreed, enacted, established”) with regard to the blessings framing this liturgical element. This is necessary: a blessing’s formulaic invocation of the divine name carries halakhic 70 71 72

Goldschmidt, “Oxford Ms.,” 195, lines 13–16. Fleischer, Eretz-Israel, chs. 3–4 passim. If this observation is correct, then it also dates this part of Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, or at least this editing of it, to his time in Egypt. 73 See Menachem Elon, Jewish Law: History, Sources, Principles, 4 vols., trans. Bernard Auerbach and Melvin J. Sykes (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1994), vol. 2, ch. 22, “Custom: Operation and Categories.”

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

237

consequences.74 However, Maimonides does not use fully halakhic language about pesuqe de-zimra as a liturgical complex, indicating only that “the sages praised” the daily recitation of Psalms 145–50; this apparently reflects the late origin of the liturgical complex and the fact that recitation of biblical texts is never halakhically problematic. He himself does not even hint at its being a talmudic expectation by invoking language of the relevant talmudic sources. While some small details differ, we find more or less the same picture in the approximately contemporaneous Siddur Rabbenu Shelomo b’Rabbi Natan, a text that was apparently produced somewhere in the Middle East before the thirteenth century (the earliest manuscript contains a colophon with the year 1203 CE).75 3

Conclusion

In other words, there is strong evidence that the official Babylonian(-influenced) rabbinic leadership advocated reciting the core six psalms, preceded only by the cento yehi khavod, and often followed by one or more doxological verses. Simple blessings usually surrounded this complex on weekdays; in some places, both were elaborated on the Sabbath. This core seems to have achieved reasonable stability, and additions to it, when made, were inserted before and/or after it, especially on the Sabbath. The choice of particular texts in particular rites seems to have become a fait accompli by the time we reach the High Middle Ages. To the extent rabbis then felt any need to justify the choice of these texts, they employed the small number of talmudic traditions as precedents, readings that, as A. J. Berkovitz has argued, do not necessarily reflect the Talmud’s original intent.76 74 See n. 50 above regarding Saadya’s lack of concern for this. Maimonides’ own objections to blessings not found in the Talmud were important in the emerging discourse around this issue. See Langer, To Worship God Properly, 89–91. 75 Nineteenth-century scholars misidentified the author as coming from Sigilmassa in Morocco. See Shelomo Zucker and Ephraim West, “The Eastern Origin of the Siddur R. Shelomo b’Rabbi Natan and its Errant Connection to North Africa” [Hebrew], KS 64, no. 2 (1992): 737–46. See also the rebuttal to the basis for the linchpin of their identification of the prayer book’s provenance: Mordecai Akiva Friedman, “A Note on the Matter of the Place of the Siddur of R. Shelomo b’Rabbi Natan” [Hebrew], KS 68 (1998): 151–54. The text itself was first published, only in a Hebrew translation according to a single manuscript with a problematic introduction, by Shemuel Haggai, ed., Siddur Rabbenu Shelomo b’Rabbi Natan (Jerusalem: n.p., 1995). In this edition, the weekday pesuqe de-zimra appear on 9–10, the Sabbath on 33–34. 76 Berkovitz, “Life of Psalms,” esp. 253–56.

238

Langer

Yet, flexibility around this core seems to have remained characteristic of this part of the liturgy as the various rites of the High Middle Ages took form, and pesuqe de-zimra continued to expand, especially on Sabbaths and other special days. Careful study of the preserved manuscripts of the medieval rites is needed to determine how and when the longer lists of psalms known from today’s rites emerged, and the degree of variation present within any particular region.77 These data will also shed light on the perpetual question in Jewish liturgical studies of the different degrees of influence the rites of Babylonia and the Land of Israel had on later communities. Even the picture offered here of the emergence of morning psalms recitation in rabbinic Jewish practice is only partial and blurry. A full, well-focused picture may never be possible, but certainly cannot rely just on the published liturgical texts of the centuries when pesuqe de-zimra emerged. While Ezra Fleischer published rich data for the rite of the Land of Israel, an equivalent study of the geniza manuscripts of the Babylonian rite remains a desideratum. This also requires careful attention to the reality that there were not starkly defined boundaries between rites, especially rites from Babylonia and the Land of Israel, whose manuscripts ended up preserved in Egypt. Without discovery of equivalent treasure troves of manuscripts from other corners of the Jewish world, there will always be much we do not know. Bibliography Baer, Seligman. Seder Avodat Yisrael. Rödelheim: Leerberger, 1868. Berkovitz, Abraham Jacob. “The Life of Psalms in Late Antiquity.” PhD diss., Princeton University, 2018. Blank, Debra Reed. “It’s Time to Take Another Look at ‘Our Little Sister’ Soferim: A Bibliographic Essay.” JQR 90, nos. 1–2 (1999): 1–26. Blank, Debra Reed. Soferim: A Commentary to Chapters 10–12 and a Reconsideration of the Evidence. PhD diss., Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1998. Brody, Robert. “Liturgical Uses of the Book of Psalms in the Geonic Period.” Pages 61–81 in Prayers That Cite Scripture. Edited by James L. Kugel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006. Brody, Robert, ed. Teshuvot Rav Natronai ben Hilai Gaon. Jerusalem: Makhon Ofek, 1994.

77 Ta-Shma’s study of a single passage invokes medieval rabbinic texts but only a single liturgical manuscript. See his “Three Discussions,” 567–72.

The Early Medieval Emergence of Jewish Daily Morning Psalms

239

Davidson, Israel, Simha Assaf, and B. Issachar Joel, eds. Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Meqitsei Nirdamim, 1985. Elbogen, Ismar. Jewish Liturgy: A Comprehensive History. Translated by Raymond P. Scheindlin. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America; New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1993. Elon, Menachem. Jewish Law: History, Sources, Principles. 4 vols. Translated by Bernard Auerbach and Melvin J. Sykes. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1994. Emanuel, Simha, ed. Teshuvot ha-Geonim ha-Ḥadashot. Jerusalem: Ofeq, 1995. Fleischer, Ezra. Eretz-Israel Prayer and Prayer Rituals as Portrayed in the Geniza Documents [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1988. Friedman, Mordecai Akiva. “A Note on the Matter of the Place of the Siddur of R. Shelomo b’Rabbi Natan” [Hebrew]. KS 68 (1998): 151–54. Goldschmidt, E. D. “The Oxford Ms. of Maimonides’ Book of Prayer” [Hebrew]. Pages 187–216 in On Jewish Liturgy: Essays on Prayer and Religious Poetry. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1980. Goldschmidt, E. D., ed. Seder Rav Amram Gaon. Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook, 1971. Haggai, Shemuel, ed. Siddur Rabbenu Shelomo b’Rabbi Natan. Jerusalem: n.p., 1995. Higger, Michael, ed. Massekhet Soferim. New York: Devei Rabbanan, 1937. Hoffman, Lawrence A. “Hallels, Midrash, Canon, and Loss: Psalms in Jewish Liturgy.” Pages 33–57 in Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical and Artistic Traditions, edited by Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. Kimelman, Reuven. The Rhetoric of the Jewish Liturgy: A Historical and Literary Commentary to the Prayer Book. LLJC. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, forthcoming. Langer, Ruth. “Biblical Texts in Jewish Prayers: Their History and Function.” Pages 63– 90 in Jewish and Christian Liturgy and Worship: New Insights into Its History and Interaction. Edited by Albert Gerhards and Clemens Leonhard. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Langer, Ruth. “Mapping Medieval Rites: A Methodological Proposal.” Pages 31–70 in Jewish Prayer: New Perspectives. Edited by Uri Ehrlich. Beer Sheva: Ben Gurion University, 2016. Langer, Ruth. Revision of Stephan C. Reif, “The Bible in the Liturgy.” Pages 2057–67 in The Jewish Study Bible: Tanakh Translation. 2nd ed. Edited by Adele Berlin and Marc Z. Brettler. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Langer, Ruth. To Worship God Properly: Tensions between Liturgical Custom and Halakhah in Judaism. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1998. Lewin, Benjamin Manasseh. Otzar Hageonim. 2 vols. Jerusalem: Wagshel, 1984. Raziel-Kretzmer, Vered. “How Late was the Palestinian Rite Practiced in Egypt? New Evidence from the Cairo Geniza” [Hebrew]. Tarbiz 85, no. 2 (2018): 309–36.

240

Langer

Reif, Stefan C. “The Bible in the Liturgy.” Pages 1937–48 in The Jewish Study Bible: Tanakh Translation. Edited by Adele Berlin and Marc Z. Brettler. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Reif, Stefan C. Judaism and Hebrew Prayer: New Perspectives on Jewish Liturgical History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Sacks, Jonathan. The Koren Siddur. Jerusalem: Koren Publishers, 2009. Stemberger, Günter. “Psalmen in Liturgie und Predigt in der Rabbinischen Zeit.” Pages 221–33 in Biblische Traditionen im rabbinischen Judentum. Vol. 1 of Judaica Minora. TSAJ 133. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Ta-Shma, Israel M. “Pesuqe de-Zimra and Their Status in the Order of Prayer” [Hebrew]. Pages 269–75 in Sefer Hazikkaron le-Professor Zeʾev Falk: Ma‌ʾamarim bemadaʿei hayahadut uvisheʾelot hashaʿah. Edited by R. Horowitz, Nitai Shinan, and Michael Corinaldi. Jerusalem: Makhon Schechter, 2005. Ta-Shma, Israel M. “Three Discussions about Prayer” [Hebrew]. Pages 555–72 in Atarah Leḥayyim: Studies in Talmudic and Rabbinic Literature in Honor of Professor Hayim Zalman Dimitrovsky. Edited by Daniel Boyarin. Jerusalem: Magnes, 2000. Wieder, Naphtali. “The Adaptation of Saʿadya’s Siddur for Practical Use: Character and Purpose of the Siddur” [Hebrew]. Pages 561–621 in The Formation of Jewish Liturgy in the East and the West: A Collection of Essays. Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute / Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, 1998. Wieder, Naphtali. “Fourteen New Genizah-Fragments of Saadya’s Siddur Together with a Reproduction of a Missing Part.” Pages 243–83 in Saadya Studies: In Commemoration of the One Thousandth Anniversary of the Death of R. Saadya Gaon. Edited by Erwin Isak Jakob Rosenthal. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1943. Zucker, Shelomo, and Ephraim West. “The Eastern Origin of the Siddur R. Shelomo b’Rabbi Natan and its Errant Connection to North Africa” [Hebrew]. KS 64, no. 2 (1992): 737–46.

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual Susanne Talabardon It has been only in the last decade that researchers have adequately taken into account the enormous impact of Kabbalah on practical issues of Jewish life, such as liturgy and custom.1 This is all the more astonishing because (at least Lurianic) Kabbalah was most interested in shaping prayer, rite, and feasts. Lawrence Fine writes: Lurianic Kabbalah was no mere theoretical system or set of intellectual or theological abstractions dressed up in mythic guise. Rather, … Lurianic Kabbalah was first and foremost a lived and living phenomenon, the actual social world of a discrete, historically observable community.2 The same holds true for most of the Hasidic systems which were (and are) strongly influenced by kabbalistic systems—Lurianic and other. This eastern European Hasidism, which began to flourish in the eighteenth century, has contributed the so-called ultra-orthodoxy (Haredi Judaism) until today. It seems, therefore, justified to follow the kabbalistic use of psalms, so to speak, back in time—from current rituals to its medieval (theoretical) origins. This essay is intended to show the practical use of psalms in quite different realms of spiritual life, leading back from Hasidic to kabbalistic communities. 1

The Charismatic Use of Psalms as Depicted by Hasidic Legend

The use of psalms (tehillim) for healing or rescuing purposes has a long and rich history in Jewish tradition.3 Although legends on the theurgic use of psalms can be found everywhere in the universe of Hasidic storytelling, we

1 See Morris M. Faierstein, Jewish Customs of Kabbalistic Origin: Their History and Practice (Boston: Academic Studies Press, 2013), x; Lawrence Fine, Physician of the Soul, Healer of the Cosmos: Isaac Luria and His Kabbalistic Fellowship (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), 10–11. 2 Fine, Physician, 10. 3 See Bill Rebiger, Sefer Shimmush Tehillim: Buch vom magischen Gebrauch der Psalmen; Edition, Übersetzung und Kommentar, TSAJ 137 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 2–12.

© Susanne Talabardon, 2023 | doi:10.1163/9789004678286_013

242

Talabardon

will confine ourselves to the quasicanonical Shivhe ha-Besht,4 the main hagiographic collection on the founder of eastern European Hasidism, Israel ben Eliezer (1699–1760), the famous Baʿal Shem Tov.5 The Shivhe ha-Besht show a wide-ranging use of psalms in the process of healing,6 rescuing,7 or meditation.8 The most explicit example among the narratives recounts the protection of an entire town from the Cossacks: Let me write a little in praise of the Rabbi9 when he was the head of the court in the holy community of Nemirov, one year after the flight. … He said: “Go to the beth-hamidrash and see whether they have finished the prayer.” I went and they were still praying “Happy are they”10 and “A Redeemer shall come to Zion.”11 I returned to his house … [and] said that they had finished the prayer, since I imagined that indeed they had. He began to put on the tefillin, and I knew that he was about to go to the beth-hamidrash. I went before him and found that someone was standing 4 Dov Baer ben Samuel of Linits, Dan Ben Amos, and Jerome R. Mintz, In Praise of the Baal Shem Tov [Shivhei ha-Besht]: The Earliest Collection of Legends about the Founder of Hasidism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1972). The first printed edition was published in 1815, more than fifty-five years after the death of its main hero. Besht is the acronym of Baal Shem Tov. The Shivhe ha-Besht were composed and modelled after the Shivhe ha-Ari, the likewise almost canonical hagiography on Isaac Luria (1534–1572), most influential kabbalist of the Safed/Tzefat community. 5 It is Hasidic historiography that considered the Ba‌ʿal Shem Tov to be the founder of the movement. In fact, East European Hasidism began to develop only after his death. See Immanuel Etkes, The Besht: Magician, Mystic, and Leader (Hanover: University Press of New England / Brandeis University Press, 2005); Moshe Rosman, Founder of Hasidism: A Quest for the Historical Baʿal Shem Tov (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996). 6 See Dov Baer ben Samuel, Ben Amos, and Mintz, In Praise, 76–78, 81–84 (failing). 7 See Dov Baer ben Samuel, Ben Amos, and Mintz, In Praise, 184 (exorcism), 195–96 (magic use). 8 See Dov Baer ben Samuel, Ben Amos, and Mintz, In Praise, 128–29. 9 Jaakov Joseph haKohen Katz of Polonoye (d. 1783), one of the most important companions and followers of the Besht. Because of his adherence to the Besht, he was repeatedly persecuted. A short biographical article is provided by Haviva Pedaya, “Yaʿakov Yosef of Polnoye,” in The YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Yaakov_Yosef_of_Polnoye. 10 “Happy are they” (‫ )אשרי‬is a liturgical piece almost at the end of the shaharit (morning service), which consists of Pss 84:5; 144:15–145:21. It is followed by qedusha de-sidra (see footnote 11), kaddish, alenu, and a concluding hymn. 11 “A Redeemer shall come to Zion” (‫)ובא לציון גואל‬, a liturgical piece, as well composed of biblical verses. It is known as ‫ ;קדושא דסדרא‬see Ismar Elbogen, Der jüdische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung (Hildesheim: Olms, 1995), 79.

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

243

before the ark reciting the Psalms as if asleep. … The rabbi ordered all the synagogues in the community to recite the Psalm “Happy are they that are upright in the way”12 especially the verse starting with the letters N-E-M-I-R-O-V and R-E-N-D S-A-T-A-N,13 combined with the name Y-A-H-W-E-H and before that they were to recite chapter eighty-three.14 They would say every day after prayer, “May it be the will of our fathers.”15 When the rabbi came to the beth-hamidrash and heard the recitation of the Psalms, he became angry and he said: “I cannot endure you anymore. Each of you is thinking all kinds of thoughts about me. I warn you. Do not make light of the Kedarites.”16 From there he went to the synagogue, and his anger subsided. … During the day he gathered the school children in the synagogue and ordered them to recite ninety-one times: Let the graciousness of the Lord our God be upon us. Before minha they heard that on the previous night the Kedarites had advanced half a verst nearer Tulchin. Thank God the Ishmaelites17 sent a pasha after them and the Kedarites retreated. The charismatic hero knows of an approaching danger brought about by (presumptive) Tatar gangs threatening the Jewish community of Niemirów (near Winnyzja). Without imparting his insights, he orders the community to recite a specific sequence of psalms, dominated by Psalm 119 and Psalm 83.

12 ‫( אשרי תמימי דרך ההלכים בתורת ה׳‬Ps 119:1). 13 Psalm 119 is an alphabetical acrostic. The community was asked to recite Ps 119:105–112 (N), Ps 119:97–108 (M), etc., as well as the verses of Psalm 119, which begin with ‫קרע שטן‬ (“rend Satan”). After every letter, they had to insert the verses that begin with the letters of the tetragrammaton (Ps 119:73–79; 33–40; 41–48; 33–40). 14 Psalm 83. 15 ‫( יהי רצון‬yehi ratson) marks the beginning of many prayers; see Macy Nulman, The Encyclopedia of Jewish Prayer: Ashkenazic and Sephardic Rites (Northvale, NJ: Aronson, 1996), 368–373. Here, it probably means to be the traditional prayer for healing and saving (“May it be thy will, Y′, my God and God of my fathers, that you send quickly complete healing from the heaven”). 16 Qedar was a nomadic tribe in the Arabia. The name is to be found in Gen 25:3 (and 1 Chron 1:29) as one of the sons of Ishmael. Their social and economic life is reflected in Isa 60:7; Jer 49:28–29, 31–32; Ezek 27:21; Ps 120:5; Song 1:5). Here, the anachronistic “Kedarites” could apply to nomadic folks in the East like the Tartars. 17 Probably the Turks (Ottomans). Pasha (in Hebrew: ‫ ;פאסי‬Turkish Paşa).

244

Talabardon

The late gaonic Sefer Shimmush Tehillim18 designates Psalm 83, “Psalm of Asaph” beginning with “O God, do not be silent; do not hold aloof,”19 as “for the war” (‫ )למלחמה‬and specifies: “Write [the Psalm] and hang it round your neck and they will not defeat you. And even if they would defeat you, they won’t harm you.”20 Psalm 119, by far the longest psalm in the Hebrew Bible, provides without a doubt a lot of possible useful applications.21 But, as Joshua Trachtenberg notes,22 it could also save an entire city: “[The Sefer Shimmush Tehillim] reports a tradition that when a city is endangered it may be saved by reciting in order all those Psalms whose initial letters spell out the name of the city.” Manifestly and despite everything, the communal prayer in Niemirów did not gain the required intensity. The charismatic hero, thus, resorted to his last means: the prayer of the innocent children, which is traditionally considered to be very effective. The children were ordered to recite Ps 90:17aα (“Let the graciousness of the Lord our God be upon us”) “ninety-one times.”23 This prescription points to a widespread application of Psalm 91, which was to repel demons.24

18 Rebiger, Shimmush Tehillim, 15. See Joshua Trachtenberg, Jewish Magic and Superstition: A Study in Folk Religion (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 109: “The book Shimmush Tehillim, ‘The (Magical) Use of the Psalms,’ the most popular work on this subject, opens with the words, ‘The entire Torah is composed of the names of God, and in consequence it has the property of saving and protecting man.’ This little work— frequently reprinted in pocket size, and translated into several European languages— achieved the distinction of being placed on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum of the Catholic Church. The Psalms, in general, were very highly regarded for their potency, as well as for their beauty and religious fervour. Tehillim were read upon all critical occasions in the life of the people or of the individual; the entire book of Psalms was read through each week as a part of the ritual. In fact, a late work has it that this weekly recital constitutes the most effective protection of a community against harm.” 19 NJPS translation. 20 Rebiger, Shimmush Tehillim, 150 (§91, editio princeps, Sabbioneta, 1551). 21 See Rebiger, Shimmush Tehillim, 172–84. 22 Trachtenberg, Jewish Magic, 109. 23 Ps 90:17, the last verse of Psalm 90, was often added to Psalm 91: “Possibly as a result of a statement by Rashi, the Shir shel Pegaʿim [Psalm 91] came to be denoted by the opening words of the final verse of Ps. 90 (Vayehi Noʿam), whether because Ps. 91 began with this sentence at that time, as indeed it does in several old manuscripts, or because the two were read in conjunction” (Trachtenberg, Jewish Magic, 113). 24 See Rebiger, Shimmush Tehillim, 268: “Ps 91 ist ohne Zweifel der klassische Psalm in der jüdischen und christlichen Magie. Die Belege für seinen magischen Gebrauch sind so­wohl im Judentum als auch im Christentum äußerst zahlreich.”

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

245

The most popular selection from the Bible thus used was the so-called Shir shel Pegaʿim, commonly interpreted the “anti-demonic Psalm”. … During the Middle Ages Ps. 91 was employed at every opportunity, as well as at certain stated times, to obviate the ever-present danger from the evil spirits. … The traditional explanation of its effectiveness was twofold: it contains mystical names of God; it comprises words (the final verse was repeated to make up the total), corresponding with the 130 years during which Adam had relations with demons while he was separated from Eve. We need not seek so far for an explanation, however; the plain sense of the Psalm indicates such an obvious employment. … It appeared frequently in magical formulas intended to drive off demons and to counteract magic, and was recited at funerals, when the spirits were unusually active, and upon all other such critical occasions. Such employment did not exhaust the potentialities of the Psalm. Because the letter zayin is not to be found in it, it was believed to serve as a protection against all weapons (also zayin in Hebrew—puns were often turned to magical use), and itself to serve in place of a weapon when one was needed.25 The simultaneous use of powerful psalms and innocent children helped to fight off the substantial danger for the community. The charismatic hero’s directive of praying specific tehillim proves to be influenced both by old traditions (as to the application of Psalms 119 and 91) and recent kabbalistic interpretations. 2

The Everyday Commitment to Psalms in Hasidic Groups

Integrating psalms into a daily spiritual routine describes pious practice in both (traditional) Jewish and Christian denominations. Either knowing them by heart or reading them from small booklets belongs to the “normal” religious life of many people. The hanhagot26 of prominent Hasidic masters testify to their high appreciation of tehillim: He should keep a Book of Psalms with him always, and whenever he has a free moment, he should say a Psalm. This recitation does not require 25 Trachtenberg, Jewish Magic, 112–13. 26 Hanhagot (‫ )הנהגות‬is a widespread genre of Jewish ethical literature containing collections of short sentences on proper behavior. See Lawrence Fine, Safed Spirituality: Rules of Mystical Piety, the Beginning of Wisdom (New York: Paulist, 1984), 27–29; or (kind of standard reference) Zeʾev Gries, Conduct Literature (Regimen Vitae): Its History and Place in the Life of Beshtian Hasidism [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1989), 11–21.

246

Talabardon

kavvanah, and we will receive the same reward as for studying the most difficult parts of the Talmud.27 “Saying” psalms offers an opportunity for the semi- or uneducated people to participate in the core of Jewish spirituality. Neither Talmudic nor kabbalistic erudition is needed for the proper use of psalms. Especially among the followers and descendants of the Baʿal Shem Tov, reciting the one hundred fifty tehillim—with or without kavvanah—was held in high esteem. This practice was meant to provide atonement and penitence (‫)תשובה‬, helped to gain essential knowledge about oneself,28 or to support the request for rescue in certain cases of emergency. He [Nahman of Bratslav] also had the practice of chanting only the verses in the Psalms speaking of prayer and the cry to God. He would go through the entire Book of Psalms on one stretch, saying only those verses and leaving out the rest.29 For Nahman of Bratslav (1772–1810), the famous great-grandson of the Besht, the psalms afforded a bridge between specified liturgical forms and individual expressions of spiritual needs. Additionally, the mere recitation of biblical texts came close to his ideal of principal simplicity in faith, which he stressed time and again in his theoretical treatises.30 Inspired by kabbalistic models, Nahman furthermore developed his famous tiqqun hakelali (‫תקון הכללי‬, “general remedy”) in order to atone for (sexual) sins. Given the biographical setting of its “revelation,” his newly established “remedy” had strong messianic

27 ‫צוואת ר׳ משה מיפראג‬, 20b, no. 8, cited in Yitzhak Buxbaum, Jewish Spiritual Practices (Jerusalem: Aronson, 1999), 352. Kavvanah (‫ )קוונה‬denotes a mystical concept of concentration and alignment in the recitation of liturgical texts. 28 So, for instance Nahman of Bratslav: “The essence of the recital of psalms is to say all the psalms about yourself, and to find yourself in each and every psalm. For the psalms were made for all the people of Israel in general and for each one in particular. The wars that every person has with his evil inclination and everything that takes place in his life, are all present in the psalms and explained there” (‫לקותי עצות המשולש‬, vol. 5, ‫ תפילה‬15; cited in Buxbaum, Jewish Spiritual Practices, 355). 29 ‫ שבחי הר״ן‬10, cited in Aryeh Kaplan, ed., Rabbi Nachman’s Wisdom: Shevachay HaRan, Sichos HaRan (Brooklyn: Breslov Research Institute, 1973), 11. 30 Zvi Mark, Mysticism and Madness: The Religious Thought of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav (London: Continuum, 2009), 17–24 and passim.

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

247

overtones.31 As many comparable kabbalistic settings, Nahman’s tiqqun consists of psalms; more specifically, ten of them: Many great Tzadikim sought this remedy and worked hard to find it. Some never had any idea at all of the true remedy. … This is entirely new and is a wonderful and awesome remedy. If you can immerse in a Mikvah and then say the Ten Psalms it is certainly best. But even if you are sick or travelling and cannot immerse, saying the Psalms alone is a great remedy. If you can say the Psalms with devotion and feeling, it is best. But saying the words alone also helps. This remedy has not been revealed since the time of creation. … These Ten Psalms, however, are a most wonderful and precious remedy. Bear witness to my words. When my days are over and I leave this world, I will still intercede for anyone who comes to my grave, says these Ten Psalms and gives a penny to charity. No matter how great his sins, I will do everything in my power, spanning the length and breadth of the creation to cleanse and protect him. I am very positive in everything I say. But I am most positive in regard to the great benefit of these Ten Psalms. These are the Ten Psalms: Psalms 16, 32, 41, 42, 59, 77, 90, 105, 137, 150.32 Nahman constructed an entire theological system around his tiqqun.33 He was convinced, then, that his instructions would lead to an individual purification process in three stages: rectification of speech (‫)דבור‬, sin, and—finally— business practices (!). If only the mind could be elevated, all the other things “are rectified by themselves.”34 With his “general remedy,” Nahman strove to complete and perfect the Lurianic tiqqunim35 and to adapt them to his own messianic interpretation.

31 See Yehuda Liebes, “Ha-Tikkun Ha-Kelali of R. Nahman of Bratslav and Its Sabbatean Links,” in Studies in Jewish Myth and Messianism (Albany: SUNY Press, 1992), 115–50; Mendel Piekarz, Studies in Bratslav Hasidism [Hebrew], 2nd ed. (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1995), 56–82; Arthur Green, Tormented Master: The Life and Spiritual Quest of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav (Woodstock: University of Alabama Press, 1992), 200–220. A tiqqun (‫ ;תקון‬Heb. “repair”) is a kabbalistic concept to “repair” sins and personal failures. 32 ‫שיחות הר״ן‬ §141 (144–47), translation: Kaplan, Wisdom, 273–75. 33 Liqqute Mohara”n 1:29.10–11; 2:92. 34 Liqqute Mohara”n 1:29.10. A similar use of Psalms to “elevate the mind” is to be found with Mordechai of Tchernobyl (1770–1837) in his Hanhagot Tsaddikim (‫ הנהגות צדיקים‬68, §19) or Kalonymos Kalmian Shpiro of Piaseczno (1889–1943) in his ‫( הכשרת האברכים‬fol. 47b). 35 See the section “Tiqqunim” below.

248 3

Talabardon

A Beshtian Interpretation of Psalm 107?

It seems commonplace for the historical research of Hasidism that the Ba’al Shem Tov did not leave many (authentic) writings.36 His teachings were for the most part disseminated through the writings of his disciples—such as the aforementioned Jaakov Joseph of Polonoye. Several years after his death in 1760, therefore, his followers set out to compile those traditions into anthologies, of which Keter Shem Tov (1784) was the first. This collection was likewise the first source to mention the Besht’s commentary to Psalm 107 (‫פרוש על הודו‬, “Commentary to Hodu”).37 Moshe Rosman, by contrast, holds that he was not its actual author.38 Be it as it may, the short piece of text provides valuable insights into early interpretations of psalms as against a Lurianic background and provides, thus, a bridge between Hasidic and Lurianic theory and practice in respect of psalms. Whereas the Sefer Shimmush Tehillim does not see Psalm 107 as a liturgical or theological heavyweight, several Lurianic prayer books (siddurim) from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries include it as an overture to the late afternoon (minhah) service on Friday. Several sources connect the recitation of Psalm 107 to the Besht.39 Indeed, by our words it will all be understood according to what is known from the kavvanot of the Ar”i, z”l,40 [concerning] the great holiness of the Afternoon Prayer of the Sabbath Eve, and the ascent of the life-souls, spirits and souls (nefesh, ruah, neshamah).41 And for this [reason] the 36 See Rosman, Founder, 97–148; Rachel Elior, The Mystical Origins of Hasidism (Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2008), 60–71. 37 Rivka Schatz-Uffenheimer, Hasidism as Mysticism: Quiestistic Elements in Eighteenth Century Hasidic Thought (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 342. SchatzUffenheimer presents an introduction, translation, and commentary of the Beshtian ‫ פרוש על הודו‬as an appendix to her chef-d’oeuvre, “Hasidism as Mysticism” (see 342–82), from which we quote hereafter. 38 See Rosman, Founder, 122. Rosman argues with an older tradition that attributes the text to Menachem Mendel of Bar, a contemporary kabbalist and early companion of the Besht. 39 Sefer Shimmush Tehillim (§116), 165, considers Psalm 107 as a remedy against fever. Older Lurianic siddurim use Psalm 105 (also beginning with hodu) instead of Psalm 107, which was to a much greater degree recited on Passover evenings. See Schatz-Uffenheimer, Hasidism, 342–45. 40 Acronym for Elohi Rabbi Yitshak (‫—)אלוהי ר׳ יצחק‬Isaac Luria. 41 The traditional tripartite human soul consisting of nefesh (‫ ;נפש‬anima, animalis), ruah (‫ ;רוח‬intellectus), and neshamah (‫“ ;נשמה‬awareness of God”).

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

249

Besht and his disciples came and instituted that one should recite Hodu42 at the beginning, in the sense of a thanksgiving offering.43 The reason why the Besht or one of his companions inaugurated the custom and/or wrote the commentary44 is deeply rooted in some of the most important kabbalistic myths, such as the hieros gamos between the female and the male emanations45 of the revealed godhead, or the eschatological restoration (tiqqun) by collecting the divine sparks (nitsutsot, ‫)נצוצות‬. The commentary explains: “O give thanks to the Lord, for He is good; for his mercy endureth for ever” [Ps 107:1]. It is already known that there is nothing in the world in which there were not holy sparks (nitsutsot), only that they are embodied there in the secret of transmigration (gilgul), and they themselves are in the secret of the life of the seven kings who died [i.e., the kings of Edom, mentioned in Gen 36:1–19],46 which require a great tiqqun by means of the deeds of the lower [creatures; i.e., man]. And on the eve of the holy Sabbath they ascend from their embodiment in the shells (qelippot)47 to the realm of holiness, to the supernal Sabbath, which is [the Sefirah of] Binah. … For on the Sabbath there is rest for all, and Binah and Tifʾeret come from the space of the Father to the Orchard.48 42 Psalm 107. 43 Yehuda Zvi of Razdil, ‫( דעת קדושים‬Lemberg: [n.p.], 1848), quoted after SchatzUffenheimer, Hasidism, 348. 44 In the present context, the actual author is less important than the surely testified use of the psalm. 45 Several kabbalistic systems posit a ten-part structure of the revealed godhead, called sefirot. Sefirot are, thus, emanations of the concealed divinity. The term stems from a late-antique philosophical treatise, which founds the creation on the ten cardinal numbers (sefirot/‫)ספירות‬. 46 See Zohar 3:135a–b. Before even the structure of the emanation was set up the highest sphere of the revealed godhead constructed “kings” (a structure of divine attributes), which could not consist because they were mere judgement without mercy. 47 The “shells” (Heb. ‫ )קליפות‬are terms from the central cosmological myth of Luria’s kabbalistic system. They refer to the remnants of the light (vessels of light) left in the empty space after the first (and failed) attempt to create the world. These did not withstand the intense light of the Eternal and broke (see Shevirat Kelim, or “breaking the vessels”). In doing so, they associated themselves with a portion of the divine spark of light contained in them, which must be returned to God before the dawn of redemption (tiqqun). In a sense, the “shells” serve in the Lurianic Kabbalah and in many Hasidic systems as a metaphor for evil. 48 Exposition to the Commentary of Psalm 107, see Schatz-Uffenheimer, Hasidism, 354.

250

Talabardon

kabbalistic thinking is platonic in its core: all earthly processes have a heavenly counterpart. Both spheres are thus closely interrelated. One of its central mythical pieces involves the idea that the (earthly) Shabbat—done correctly—will lead to harmony and blessing in heavenly spheres—a well-being that finds its main expression in a holy wedding between the most important mythic protagonists within the sefirot: the (male) Tifʾeret and the (female) Malkhut/Shekhinah. Even the qelippot, epitome of lost hope in the universe, could, on Shabbat, hope to return to the realm of holiness. The earthly Sabbath has—as everything else—a heavenly counterpart among the Sefirot, more precisely the third sefirah, Binah (‫)בינה‬, also identified as “the upper mother.” Binah represents the realization of the second sefirah’s (Hokhmah/‫ )חוכמה‬pure potentiality. Hokhmah, which means “wisdom,” is identified as “the father.” Both “mother” (III) and “father” (II) transmit their blessing to the central sefirah, Tifʾeret (VI)—the potential husband of Malkhut/Shekhinah (X), the “orchard.”49 The tenth sefirah represents the “lower mother,” the (heavenly) archetype of Israel. On Sabbath, as the commentary explains, two important redemptive acts can be put into action: the elevation of the shells as well as the aforementioned hieros gamos. How could a psalm help to accomplish the great undertaking? To substantiate this claim, the author of the small treatise accesses gematria, a current method in kabbalistic hermeneutics. Gematria (Heb. ‫גמטריא‬, from the Greek γεωμετρία or γραμματεία) builds on the numerical value of the letters and the relations between terms of the same alphanumerical “quantity.” And this is what is written, Hodu (“give thanks”), which in gematria equals ʾEhyeh (“I shall be”; cf. Ex. 3:14); and every ʾehyeh is an attribute of Keter, and this is the secret of why we recite on Sabbath Keter. …50 “For He is Good”51—refers to the Sephirah of Yesod, which is called “good”—for it draws down the drop [i.e., of male seed] to Malkhut, which is called “world,” from Tifʾeret, her husband. And this is what is said, “His mercy (ḥasdo) endureth forever”52—that is Ḥesed vav—refers to [Ḥesed] in gematria is seventy-two, which is the drop [of seed] that descended via the seventy-two vav, which refers to Tifʾeret—and understand.53 49

The Roman numerals following some terms refer to the positions assigned each member as diagrammed on the kabbalistic “Tree of Life.” 50 The author refers to the poem/prayer “A crown shall be given to you” (‫)כתר יתנו לך‬, which is part of the additional [mussaf] prayer of the Sephardic rite. 51 Ps 107:1aβ. 52 Ps 107:1b. 53 Exposition to the Commentary of Psalm 107; see Schatz-Uffenheimer, Hasidism, 354.

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

251

This short excerpt paradigmatically shows many essential characteristics of kabbalistic hermeneutics and represents one of its central myths. The first word of Psalm 107—“give thanks” (‫—)הודו‬is related to the famous ehyeh asher ehyeh of Exod 3:14. As a matter of fact, both hodu (‫ )הודו‬and ehyeh (‫ )אהיה‬share the same numerical value (21). Many kabbalistic systems interpret ehyeh as a divine epithet, intended to characterize Keter (I)—the highest and quasitranscendent sphere of the divine Nothing. As the commentary has it, the very beginning of Psalm 107 leads the praying community to the highest sefirah and provides a connection between the additional mussaf prayer and the subsequent minhah (afternoon) service. Moreover, Ps 107:1 hints to the concealed meaning of Sabbath—when the heavenly wedding is to take place. The author draws on often used paradigms of kabbalistic interpretation to introduce the three main actors—Yesod (IX), Tifʾeret (VI), and Malkhut (X)—of the sacred play. Yesod, the heavenly symbol of male fertility, conveys the “seed” (a symbol of heavenly blessing) from Tifʾeret, the groom, to Malkhut, the heavenly bride. The lowest sefirah, Malkhut, represents not only the heavenly archetype of Israel, but also God’s earthly presence, as it is conceived in many biblical and postbiblical texts that see Israel as God’s share in humanity. In its assertion that “his mercy [hasdo] endureth forever” (Ps 107:1b) hints to Tifʾeret, the commentary, again, seeks support with gematria. The numerical value of Hesed (‫)חסד‬, seventy-two, indeed plays an important role in kabbalistic thinking. Since late antiquity,54 Jewish esoteric tradition has extensively reflected on the “complex divine name” (‫)שם המפורש‬. This idea is built on three verses of the Exodus narrative (Exod 14:19–21), which curiously consists of exactly seventy-two letters each. In rabbinic midrash, where the idea of a seventy-two-letter name is already to be found,55 it is identified with God’s activity as redeemer. Esoteric tradition teaches that Malkhut-Shekhina (X) is engraved by three sets of the seventy-two letters, thus referring to the sefirot Hesed (IV), Gevurah (V), and Tifʾeret (VI), which are in turn identified with Abraham (IV), Isaac (V), and Jacob (VI). Rabbi Shimʿon said, “Elʿazar, my son, come and see this secret! When the Holy Ancient One illumines the King, He transmits to Him holy supernal crowns. When these reach Him, the patriarchs are crowned, and

54

See the impressive list of sources in Daniel Chanan Matt, The Zohar: Pritzker Edition, 12 vols. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004–), 4:258, n. 216. 55 See, e.g., Gen. Rab. 44.9, Lev. Rab. 23.2.

252

Talabardon

then—consummation of all. Then Matronita56 sets out on Her journeys with that consummation of the patriarchs, and when She is crowned by them all, She is blessed and invested with authority over all.”57 Here, a Zoharic version of the heavenly unification adds to the myth presented in the Psalms commentary. Keter (I; “the Holy Ancient One”) transmits his power to “the king” (the Sefirot, IV–IX), symbolized in crowns of seventy-two letters. The patriarchs (IV–VI) set out to adorn the bride (“Matronita,” X), which is thus empowered to enter the earthly realms. Psalm 107:1, as the author of the commentary asserts, alludes to this very same process. Reciting the verses in prayer, in our case the “His mercy [hasdo] endureth forever” (Ps 107:1b), represents, thus, a theurgical act. While quoting them in the opening part of the minhah service, the holy community actively promotes the heavenly union between Tifʾeret and Malkhut. 4

The Kabbalistic Origins of Hasidic Prayer

The idea of a theurgical use of psalms in liturgical practice mainly stems from Lurianic circles, which began to develop in the city of Zefat/Safed in the seventeenth century.58 While there is no evidence that the authors of the Zohar transformed their theosophical concepts into (theurgical) practice and everyday life, the Safed community and its predecessors in Adrianople did just that.59 Isaac Luria played a crucial role, although he led the community for only two years. In the two short years until his own death in August 1572, he transformed the whole world of Jewish mysticism through his lifestyle, his writings, and the much more voluminous writings based on his teachings that were composed by his disciples. Not only did the Lurianic school reinterpret the Zoharic tradition, but it also transformed Jewish religious practice.60

56 Malkhut-Shekhina (X). 57 Zohar 2:52a (Matt). 58 See Solomon Schechter, “Safed in the Sixteenth Century, A City of Legists and Mystics,” in Studies in Judaism, 2nd ser. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1908), 202–85; still one of the best descriptions of that outstanding kabbalist community. 59 The kabbalistic circle around Joseph Taitazak; see Faierstein, Customs, xviii. 60 See Faierstein, Customs, xx.

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

253

Within the rituals and customs which were staged and enacted in the northern Galilee were several practices in which psalms played a crucial role. These included primarily the tiqqunim61—that is, the tiqqun layla—the newly installed framework of the Birkat ha-mazon (blessing after meals), the High Holiday psalms,62 and the Kabbalat Shabbat. 5

Tiqqunim

Tiqqunim are a series of texts which are studied or recited as part or as the core of a mystical ritual. Normally, they consist of biblical, rabbinic, or Zoharic texts. The idea and theoretical base of many tiqqunim was developed by the authors of the manuscripts which were to become the Zohar,63 whereas its practical configuration was shaped by Safed circles. A good example provides the tiqqun leil Shavuot, which is “described” in the Zohar (I:8a and III:97a–98a, b)—but was only practiced from the sixteenth century onwards.64 During tiqqun leil Shavuot, a kind of learning vigil which took place on the first night of Shavuot, the recitation (or “learning”) of psalms did not play a formative role.65 Similar rituals exist for Pesach (tiqqun for the seventh night of Passover) and Rosh Hodesh.66 By contrast, the tiqqun hatsot, a midnight vigil to mourn the destruction of the Second Temple, leads to Psalm 114.67 It is the oldest (and maybe, most important) of all tiqqunim and alludes to Talmudic sources. Some of them 61

See Mosheh Halamish, Kabbalah in Liturgy, Halakah, and Customs [Hebrew] (Ramat-Gan: Bar Ilan Press, 2000), 326–30; 537–612. 62 During the High Holidays, the following psalms were to be recited: Psalm 27 twice a day from the first of Elul until Hoshana rabbah. Psalm 24 in the nights of Rosh ha Shanah and Yom Kippur at the end of Maariv. Psalm 131 during the Ten Days of repentance. See Halamish, Kabbalah, 326. 63 Daniel Abrams, “The Invention of the Zohar as a Book: On the Assumptions and Expectations of the Kabbalists and Modern Scholars,” Kabbalah 19 (2009): 10: “The Zohar was neither written, nor edited, nor distributed as a book by the various figures who produced the various literary units which were later known by the name Zohar.” 64 See Faierstein, Customs, 83–91. 65 The oldest report of tiqqun leil Shavuot, a letter of Shlomo Alkabez, referring to an event in 1543, mentions the reading of Psalms 19 and 68, maybe Psalm 119. See R. J. Zwi Werblowsky, “The Safed Revival and Its Aftermath,” in From the Sixteenth-Century Revival to the Present, vol. 2 of Jewish Spirituality: From the Bible Through the Middle Ages, ed. Arthur Green (New York: Crossroads, 1994), 13. 66 See Meʾir Benayahu, “The Order of the Tikkun for the Seventh Night of Passover” [Hebrew], KS 52, no. 4 (1977): 818–33. 67 See Fine, Safed Spirituality, 43 (quoting Hanhagot of Abraham Galante, §6).

254

Talabardon

stress the special importance of midnight studies of the Torah.68 Zoharic texts extensively reflect on them and repeatedly stress their importance. Rabbi Elʿazar and Rabbi Yose were sitting one night, engaged in Torah. They awoke before the night split. … Rabbi Elʿazar said, “Now is the time when the blessed Holy One enters the Garden of Eden to delight with the righteous. … For night is divided into three aspects, through its twelve recorded hours; … those twelve are divided into three aspects among which are distributed three camps of holy angels. The first camp is appointed for the first four hours in the beginning of night to praise their Lord. What do they say? ‘The earth and her fullness are YHVH’s’ … (Psalms 24:1–4). The second camp is appointed for the following four hours, and they chant song only for the two hours, until the night is split and the blessed Holy One enters the Garden of Eden. These are the mourners of Zion, those who weep over the destruction of the temple. At the beginning of the middle four hours they open, saying ‘By the rivers of Babylon’ … (Ps. 137:1), and conclude: ‘Remember, O YHVH, the Edomites on the day of Jerusalem,’ [saying: ‘Raze it, raze it to its foundation!’] (Psalms 137:7).”69 As in the case of the other tiqqunim, it was only the Safed community that developed a full-fledged ritual in the basis of the Zoharic reflections. The rituals were reported in the writings of Hayim Vital (1542–1620)70 and Meir Poppers (ca. 1624–1662), both disciples of Luria. It evolved into three parts: the tiqqun Rahel (mourning the Temple), tiqqun Leah (hoping for redemption), and tiqqun Nefesh, which refers to the repeatedly mentioned Zoharic myth of the inner-sefirotic unio mystica. The ritual study of the psalms helps, here again, to adorn the bride Malkhut-Shekhina for her marital union with Tifʾeret. Tiqqun hatsot quickly spread to Europe. The ritual is to be found in Moshe ben Machir’s Sefer Seder Hayom (Venice, 1599) as well as in the popular behavioral code Brantshpigl (Kraków, 1596).71

68 See b. Hag. 12b, b. Ber. 3a; Matt, Zohar, 6:111, n. 14, provides many other examples of rabbinic and Zoharic references to tiqqun hatsot. 69 Zohar, 2:195b–196a. 70 Hayyim Vital, ‫( שער הקוונות‬Vilna: [n.p.], 1880), 1:374a–379b. 71 Mosheh ibn Makhir, ‫( סדר היום‬Warsaw: [n.p.], 1876), 36–39; Sigrid Riedel, ed., Moses Henochs Altschul-Jeruschalmi “Brantspigl”: Transkribiert und ediert nach der Erstausgabe Krakau 1596 (Frankfurt: Lang, 1993), 274–84; see Morris M. Faierstein, “The Brantshpigl (1596) and the Popularization of Kabbalah,” Kabbalah 27 (2012): 173–93. Elijah de Vidas,

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

6

255

Birkat Ha-Mason

A similar phenomenon could be observed with the grace after meals (birkat ha-mason). As with tiqqun hatsot, a rabbinic saying72 lies at the root of the newly established ritual. Several medieval authorities thus suggest Torah study before birkat ha-mason.73 Eventually, it was the Safed kabbalist Elijah de Vidas (1518–1587), disciple of both Cordovero and Luria, author of the famous ethical treatise Reshit Hokhmah, who suggested that the recitation of psalms could—at least for simple folk—should replace Torah study: There are those who are accustomed to sing songs or Psalms after the meal. It is a lovely custom to be absolved of punishment. However, the primary thing is to quote some law or new interpretation, verse, or aggadah, since there are three groups: Completely righteous [scholars], those are the ones who spoke about Torah; intermediary [ordinary] people, [who recite] the Psalms; the evildoers, who do nothing.74 To implement the quotation of psalms around the birkat ha-mason, Psalm 137 (on workdays) and Psalm 126 (on Sabbaths) were chosen to be read before the prayer. The reason for that choice was, again, a Zoharic remark75 to remember the destroyed altar at one’s table at home. 7

Kabbalat Shabbat

The probably best-known and most elaborated ritual of all kabbalistic customs involving psalms is Kabbalat Shabbat. The Hebrew verb underlying the term (‫לקבל‬/‫)להקביל‬76 points to a double meaning of the rite, which is to “take upon ‫ראשית חוכמה‬, abbrev. vers. (Warsaw: [n.p.], 1886), Sha‌ʿar Ahavah III (see Fine, Safed Spirituality, 138–41). 72 M. Abot 3:3: “If three had eaten at one table and had not spoken over it words of Torah, it is as though they had eaten of the sacrifice of the dead, for it is written, ‘For all the tables are full of vomit and filth’ [Isa. 28:8].” 73 See Matt, Zohar, 2:153b. 74 Vidas, ‫ראשית חוכמה‬, 435 f (Sha‌ʿar Qedusha 15). Quoted after Faierstein, Customs, 19. 75 Matt, Zohar, 2:157b. 76 Leqabbel: “to receive, to accept”; lehaqbil: “to greet.” The history of the term (which was originally of halakic use) unfolds in Arthur Green, “Some Aspects of Qabbalat Shabbat,” in Sabbath: Idea, History, Reality, ed. Gerald J. Blidstein (Beer Sheva: Ben Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2004), 96–97.

256

Talabardon

oneself” (i.e., to accept) the commandment of keeping Shabbat and, secondly, to welcome the “princess Shabbat” as a guest.77 Again, we observe a Talmudic dictum (b. Shabb. 119a) as the starting point of the ritual, which is embellished by kabbalistic concept and, finally, put into practice in Safed. But, as a result of the complexity of the Kabbalat Shabbat, a variety of forms were developed even in the first decenniums. Some left the synagogues and went out to the fields, some stayed inside.78 Different texts were compiled by different masters.79 Kabbalat Shabbat—as it is widely practiced today—comprises six psalms (denoting the weekdays), the famous poem Lekha Dodi, and two other psalms (92 and 93) that represent Shabbat. The six weekday psalms were first mentioned by the end of the sixteenth century. Some are accustomed to recite “Let us go forth in joy,” Psalm 95 and 96, 97, and 98, as well as the psalm “Ascribe to the Lord, O sons of the mighty ([Psalm] 29).” For all these psalms teach of qabbalat shabbat and the rule of heaven, which spreads forth through all the worlds on Sabbath eve. All the qelippot are hidden away and secreted in fear and trembling before Her. This is made explicit in Psalm 98 [99]: “The Lord rules, the nations fear.” In these psalms we are helping the side of holiness to cause the shekhinah to rule over the world. The prayer leader then begins “A Psalm for the Sabbath Day” (Psalm 92). He stands before the ark and says: “Bless the Lord to whom blessing is due!”80 The Kabbalat Shabbat of Sefer Hekal ha-Qodesh does not include a Lekha Dodi. It mentions five psalms explicitly, one implicitly. The prevailing idea is, again, that God’s reign (theocracy) could be brought about by human actions. Praying (psalms) is interpreted as a sort of theurgic act: while reciting them, the texts strengthen the “holy side,” the ten holy sefirot, to rule over nature As in ‫קבלת פנים‬. Compare Faierstein, Customs, 33–34. A third (kabbalistic) dimension of Kabbalat Sabbath is Kabbalat neshamah yeterah (‫—)קבלת נשמה יתרה‬the receiving the sabbatical “extra-soul” (see Green, Aspects, 98–101). 78 See Green, Aspects, 102–104. 79 The most comprehensive essay on Kabbalat Shabbat is Reuven Kimelmans, The Mystical Meaning of Lekhah Dodi and Kabbalat Shabbat [Hebrew] (Jerusalem: Magnes, 2002). Compare Elliot K. Ginsburg, Sod ha-Shabbat: The Mystery of the Sabbath (Albany: SUNY Press, 1989) as well as Ginsburg, The Sabbath in Classical Kabbalah (Albany: SUNY Press, 1989). 80 Moshe Elbaz, ‫( ספר היכל הקודש‬Amsterdam: [n.p.], 1653); quoted after Green, Aspects, 105–106. 77

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

257

and humanity. The qelippot, the shells of impurity, will be concealed—and not elevated as in Hasidic interpretations. This early Safed understanding of the Kabbalat Shabbat customs appears strikingly unpretentious. Kabbalistic myths seem put in the rear; the interpretation of the six psalms resemble biblical literal sense. Obviously, Moshe Elbaz’s work only reflects the starting point of a longer development of the ritual and its interpretation. It would be very interesting to investigate its further development as well as the history of printing kabbalistic liturgical literature. But that would be another story. 8

Conclusion

The small expedition into esoteric uses of psalms demonstrates, once again, the intense hermeneutical work on biblical and Talmudic sources by Jewish elites from the thirteenth century onwards. One can easily discern different stages of processing texts, beginning with the Zoharic strands that probably postulated practice, up to Hasidic masters who transformed given mystical customs according to their theoretical needs. The masters of Zefat positioned themselves in the very center of tradition building: acting on Zoharic descriptions, adapting them to daily practice, working out additional mythic foundations. East European Hasidism multiplied the esoteric and exoteric applications of psalms. The bandwidth of their spiritual use within Hasidic groups ranges from daily praying of simple followers to sophisticated theurgic rituals capable of healing people or saving entire communities. Bibliography Abrams, Daniel. “The Invention of the Zohar as a Book: On the Assumptions and Expectations of the Kabbalists and Modern Scholars.” Kabbalah 19 (2009): 7–142. Benayahu, Meʾir. “The Order of the Tikkun for the Seventh Night of Passover” [Hebrew]. KS 52, no. 4 (1977): 818–33. Buxbaum, Yitzhak. Jewish Spiritual Practices. Jerusalem: Aronson, 1999. Dov Baer ben Samuel of Linits; Dan Ben Amos; and Jerome R. Mintz. In Praise of the Baal Shem Tov [Shivhei ha-Besht]: The Earliest Collection of Legends about the Founder of Hasidism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1972. Elbaz, Moshe. ‫ספר היכל הקודש‬. Amsterdam: [n.p.], 1653. Elbogen, Ismar. Der jüdische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung. Hildesheim: Olms, 1995.

258

Talabardon

Elior, Rachel. The Mystical Origins of Hasidism. Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2008. Etkes, Immanuel. The Besht: Magician, Mystic, and Leader. Hanover: University Press of New England / Brandeis University Press, 2005. Faierstein, Morris M. “The Brantshpigl (1596) and the Popularization of Kabbalah.” Kabbalah 27 (2012): 173–93. Faierstein, Morris M. Jewish Customs of Kabbalistic Origin: Their History and Practice. Boston: Academic Studies Press, 2013. Fine, Lawrence. Physician of the Soul, Healer of the Cosmos: Isaac Luria and His Kabbalistic Fellowship. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003. Fine, Lawrence. Safed Spirituality: Rules of Mystical Piety, the Beginning of Wisdom. New York: Paulist, 1984. Ginsburg, Elliot K. The Sabbath in Classical Kabbalah. Albany: SUNY Press, 1989. Ginsburg, Elliot K. Sod ha-Shabbat: The Mystery of the Sabbath. Albany: SUNY Press, 1989. Green, Arthur. “Some Aspects of Qabbalat Shabbat.” Pages 95–118 in Sabbath: Idea, History, Reality. Edited by Gerald J. Blidstein. Beer Sheva: Ben Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2004. Green, Arthur. Tormented Master: The Life and Spiritual Quest of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav. Woodstock: University of Alabama Press, 1992. Gries, Zeʾev. Conduct Literature (Regimen Vitae): Its History and Place in the Life of Beshtian Hasidism [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1989. Halamish, Mosheh. Kabbalah in Liturgy, Halakah, and Customs [Hebrew]. Ramat-Gan: Bar Ilan Press, 2000. Kaplan, Aryeh, ed. Rabbi Nachman’s Wisdom: Shevachay HaRan, Sichos HaRan. Brooklyn: Breslov Research Institute, 1973. Kimelmans, Reuven. The Mystical Meaning of Lekhah Dodi and Kabbalat Shabbat [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Magnes, 2002. Liebes, Yehuda. “Ha-Tikkun Ha-Kelali of R. Nahman of Bratslav and Its Sabbatean Links.” Pages 115–50 in Studies in Jewish Myth and Messianism. Albany: SUNY Press, 1992. Mark, Zvi. Mysticism and Madness: The Religious Thought of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav. London: Continuum, 2009. Matt, Daniel Chanan. The Zohar: Pritzker Edition. 12 vols. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004–. Mosheh ibn Makhir. ‫סדר היום‬. Warsaw: [n.p.], 1876. Nulman, Macy. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Prayer: Ashkenazic and Sephardic Rites. Northvale, NJ: Aronson, 1996. Pedaya, Haviva. “Yaʿakov Yosef of Polnoye.” In The YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe. YIVO Institute for Jewish Research. http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/arti cle.aspx/Yaakov_Yosef_of_Polnoye.

Psalms in Kabbalistic Texts and Ritual

259

Piekarz, Mendel. Studies in Bratslav Hasidism [Hebrew]. 2nd ed. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1995. Rebiger, Bill. Sefer Shimmush Tehillim: Buch vom magischen Gebrauch der Psalmen; Edition, Übersetzung und Kommentar. TSAJ 137. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Riedel, Sigrid, ed. Moses Henochs Altschul-Jeruschalmi “Brantspigl”: Transkribiert und ediert nach der Erstausgabe Krakau 1596. Frankfurt: Lang, 1993. Rosman, Moshe. Founder of Hasidism: A Quest for the Historical Baʿal Shem Tov. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996. Schatz-Uffenheimer, Rivka. Hasidism as Mysticism: Quiestistic Elements in Eighteenth Century Hasidic Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993. Schechter, Solomon. “Safed in the Sixteenth Century, A City of Legists and Mystics.” Pages 202–85 in Studies in Judaism. 2nd ser. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1908. Trachtenberg, Joshua. Jewish Magic and Superstition: A Study in Folk Religion. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. Vidas, Elijah de. ‫ראשית חוכמה‬. Abbrev. vers. Warsaw: [n.p.], 1886. Vital, Hayyim. ‫שער הקוונות‬. Vilna: [n.p.], 1880. Werblowsky, R. J. Zwi. “The Safed Revival and Its Aftermath.” Pages 7–33 in From the Sixteenth-Century Revival to the Present. Vol. 2 of Jewish Spirituality: From the Bible Through the Middle Ages. Edited by Arthur Green. New York: Crossroads, 1994. Yehuda Zvi of Razdil. ‫דעת קדושים‬. Lemberg: [n.p.], 1848.

Index of Sources Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Genesis (Gen) 1:26 1:28 3:8 3:23 3:24 6:9 25:3 31:44–54 33:1 33:13 35:8 36:1–19 36:31, 32–33 48:7

204 203n 178 178n 178n 178n 243n 168 150n 178n 179n 249 192 179n

Exodus (Exod) 3:7–8a 3:14 14:19–21 14:30–15:26 15 15:1–18 15:17 17:1–7 19:3 21:33 27:21

22 251 251 232 234 207 215 91 213 188 184n

Leviticus (Lev) 1–9 10 10–15 11–15 14:4 16 16:5–22 20:20

31 20 31 22 22 173 26 184n

Numbers (Num) 5:11–28 8:7 10:35 20:1–13

22 179n 22 91

22–24 25:1–18 25:11 33:49

20 90n 90, 100 91

Deuteronomy (Deut) 1:1 3:23 18:9–1 21:17 31:14 32 32:1 32:2 32:3 32:43 33 33:1 34:6

192 230 31 184n 150, 154 145 212 212 213 69n 145 150 157n

Joshua (Josh) 12:9–24

184

Judges (Judg) 3:9, 15 4:3 6:1, 7 10:10–16 13:1

91 91 91 91 91

1 Samuel (1 Sam) 1:9–16 1:15 2:1–10 3:3 23:14–15 26:1–2 27:10

19 31 39 184n 182 182 184n

2 Samuel (2 Sam) 11–12 12:13 12:15b–23 15:7–9 22 23:1–3a

172 172 19 22 166 175

262

Index of Sources

1 Kings (1 Kgs) 3:1 8:27 8:28 13 17–2 Kgs 13

181 73 93 20 20

2 Kings (2 Kgs) 1 Kgs 17–2 Kgs 13 4:32–37 5

20 22 22

Isaiah (Isa) 6:3 28:8 38 38:2–3 45:13 60:7

61 255n 22 22 215 243n

Jeremiah (Jer) 2:6 33:25 49:28–29 51:43

116 178n 244n 116

Ezekiel (Ezek) 20:5 20:23 27:21 28:7 30:11

6, 15, 23 98 98 243n 111 111

Amos (Am) 2:9

182

Psalms (Ps) 1:1–2 2 2:1 3 3:5 3–7 4:3–5 5:4 6 6:7 6:9

164 183n 184 13 20 19n 25 19, 22, 25 21 22 25

7 7:13 8 8:1 8:2 8:2, 4 8:2, 5 8:2, 3, 10 8:3 8:5 8:5–9 8:6 8:7–9 8:10 9:1 9/10 11–13 11:4 12 12:6 13 13:4 14:1 16 16:7 17 17:7 18 18:3 19 19:1 21:2 22 22:1–7 22:3 22:15 22:22 22:26–27 22:28–32 23 23:2 24:5 25 25:5 26 26–28 27 27:6

20, 21 111 12, 210 169 203n, 205, 208, 210 203 208 207 205, 206 204, 208 203 206 206 206, 209, 212 183 20 19n 112 31 20 19 20 181 169 112 19n, 20, 21 126 54, 166 124 66n 75 183 19n, 7, 20 178 22 114 20 22 22 10 179 126 20 111 20, 21 19n 20 22

263

Index of Sources 1 Kings (1 Kgs) (cont.) 27:14 28:1 28:2 28:6 29 29:1–2 29:9 31 31:18 31:20 31:23 32 32:8 32:11 34 34:10–14 35 35:3 35:10–13 35:13 35:26 37:14 38 38:9 38:16 38:17 39 39:13 40 40–43 41 41:13 42 42:1 42:4 43 43:3–5 44:6 45:2 46:5 46:10 47:1 47:42 49:3 49:11 49:18 50:12

20 19 19 20 10, 68, 69 69n 73 19n, 20 19 216 20 8 112 22 9 176 19n, 20 20, 22 176 22 113 111 21 19 20 113 19n 20 20 19n 20, 21 86 19 176 22 19 185 112 112 113n 116 176 112 112 112 112 117

51 51:9 51:9–10 51:10 51:20 52:3–7 52:6 53:2 53:6 54:2 54:4 54–57 55 55:2–3, 23 55:5–6 55:10 55:13 55:14 59–60 56:1 56:5 57:1 58:1 58:2–3 59 59:1 60:1 60:4 61 61:5 62:4, 11 63 63:2 63:11 64 64:4 68:13 68:19 69 69:1 69:12 69:17 70 71 71:8–9 72 72:1 72:18–20

19n, 21 22 112 20 171 25 113 181 112 181 20 19n 20, 112 20 19 112 113 113 169 169 116 169 169 22 19n, 20, 21 169 168 179n 19n, 119 119 25 106 119 106, 109 19n 116 210 209, 210 19n, 19, 20 169 22 20 19n 19n 165n 185 189 86

264 1 Kings (1 Kgs) (cont.) 77 77:2 77:20 77:21 78 78:51 79 80 81:1 83 84:1 84:4 84:5 85:15 86 86:1, 7, 17 86:5 88 88:2–3 89 89:49 89:52 90 90:17a 90–100 90–106 90:1 90:2–6, 10 90:3 90:7–9, 11 90:8 90:12 90:13 90:16 90:17 90:13–17 91 91:13 92 92–99 92:14 93 95 96 96–99 96:7 96:7–13

Index of Sources 247 19 89 148 84n 89 171 171 169 243, 243n 169 224 235n, 242n 121 19n 20 173 19n, 19, 21, 22 20 66n 150 86 6, 12 244 8 148n 89 148 148 148 152 148 148 148 244, 244n 148 10 112 233, 233n 10 171 233 83n 69n 69 69n 65

97 226, 66n 98 226 98:8 118, 121 99 9 99:6 89, 148 100 165n 102 19n, 31 102:1 31 102:2–3 20 102:13–23 22 102:14 140 103 10, 67, 69, 71 103:1 67 103:3 173 103:3–18 68 103:7 89, 148n 103:19–22 68, 68n 104 202 104:31 227 104:35 166n 105 228n 105:1–15 228 105–106 83n 105:23, 27 89 105:26 89, 148n 106 12, 50, 86, 88, 90, 92 106:3 91 106:6 88 106:7, 21 86 106:9 86, 94 106:7, 9, 22 86 106:7–11 89 106:7–33 90 106:7–39 86 106:9 94 106:9–11 93 106:9, 14, 26 86, 89 106:11 106:14 89, 92 106:14–15 90 106:15 92 106:16 86, 89, 90 106:16, 23, 32 89 106:17 89, 93, 94 106:17, 38 86 106:17–18 90 106:18 93, 94, 95 106:19 86

265

Index of Sources 1 Kings (1 Kgs) (cont.) 106:19–23 90 106:20 92 106:22 86, 89 106:23 89, 90, 100 106:24 86 106:24–27 92n 106:25 92 106:26 94, 98 106:26–27 98 106:27 86, 94 106:28 86, 92 106:30 89 106:31 90 106:32 86, 89 106:32–33 93 106:34–39 91 106:38 86 106:40–46 91 106:44 93, 94 106:44–46 91 106:44–48 91, 106:47 98 106:47–48 86, 89n, 91 107 12 107:1 249, 251 107:1b 250n, 251 107:8, 15, 22, 31, 42 22 108:7 20 109 19n,19, 31 110:3 113 113–118 9, 224, 227 115:18 224 116:1 181 116:13 22 116:17 22 116:17–19 22 119 10, 45, 138, 243, 243n, 244, 244n 119:1 243 119:35 243n 119:97–108 243n 120 19n 120–134 134, 134n 120–136 227 120–150 227 120:1 20

120:5 122 123:3–8 126 126:1 126–27 130 130–43 130:4 130:5 131 132:4 134 135 136 137 137:1 137:5–6 137:7 140 141:1 143:1, 7–8 144:2 144:15 145 145–150 146–150 146:10 147 147:12 148 148:1–6 148:3 148:7–13a 148:14 148:19–22 150 151 151A 151B 154 Proverbs (Prov) 3:15 5:19 8:30 11:27

224n 170n 20 9 186 171 19n, 20 19n 173 20 171n, 253n 112 171 171 83n 9, 171, 165n 254 165n 254 51 20 20 125 224 224 9, 227 69 235 50 165n 70 75 67 67 71n, 225 4 51 51 44n, 48 210 179 210 170n

266

Index of Sources

Job (Job) 28:23 38:6 38:7

157n 71n 66n

Song of Songs (Song) 1:1 1:5 6:10 7:3

178n 182n 179 169

Daniel (Dan) 3:52–90

75

Nehemiah (Neh) 9 9:5b 12:24

235 175

1 Chronicles (1 Chr) 1:4 1:29 4:40 8 16:7 16:7–36 16:8–36 16:34–36 16:38 22:8 28:3 29:10–13 29:13

89n 243n 89n 89n 185 86, 89n 89n 86, 91 180 175 175 235 235

Septuagint Exodus (Exod) LXX 6:9 21:28

113 114

Leviticus (Lev) LXX 6:20

114

2 Chronicles (2 Chr) LXX 31:3, 4 106 Judith (Jdt) LXX 6:17 8:25

113 122

1 Maccabees (1 Macc) 2:12 113n 2 Maccabees (2 Macc) 1:11 122 11:13 113n Psalms (Ps) LXX 7:6 7:13 10:4 15:7 16:7 17:3 21:15 23:5 24:5 31:8 34:3 34:26 36:14 37:17 43:6 44:2 45:5 45:10 46:5 48:3 48:11 48:18 50:9 50:9–10 51:12 52:6 54 54:9 54:10 54:13 54:14 55:6 59:4 60 60:5 62 62:2 62:11 63:4 77:61 86:15 89

115 111 112 114 126 124 114 116 111 114 111 113 111 113 114 113 105 116 112, 113n 113 113 113 114 114 113, 117 113, 114 114 113 115 113 113 116 116 116 116 106 116 106, 109 179 113n 121 147

267

Index of Sources Psalms (Ps) LXX (cont.) 90:13 112 99:8 117, 121 106:4 98 106:47 98 109:3 113 118:35 131:4 112 143:2 125 151 151 51 151:7 114 Proverbs (Prov) LXX 13:14 21:1

113n 105

Wisdom 13:3, 5

113n

Sirach/Ben Sira (Sir) 6:15 113n 17:9–10 46 31:23 113n Psalms of Solomon (Pss. Sol.) 12:2 113n 17 52 18 52 Hosea (Hos) LXX 7:11

113n

Obadia (Obad) LXX 12

113

Jeremiah (Jer) LXX 2:6 13:25 28:43

116 106 116

Ezekiel (Ezek) LXX 35:13

111

Deuterocanonical Books Jubilees (Jub.) 2:21 46 Odes of Solomon 4

Ancient Jewish Writers Josephus Ant. 10.78–79

53

Qumran Scrolls 1QH (Hodayot) 40, 41, 45, 46, 49, 51, 52, 53, 60, 73, 74, 77, 78, 79 1QM (War Scroll) 37, 40, 48, 53 1QPs 44 1QpPs 44 1QS (Rule of the Community) 37, 40, 45, 47, 48, 51 1Q34 (Festival Prayers) 39, 45, 46 1Q503 39 4QH (Hodayot) 40, 41, 45, 49, 51, 52, 60, 73, 74, 77, 79 4QIncantation 48 4QMMT 55 4QPs 44, 50, 54 4QpPs 44 4Q174 (Eschatological Midrash) 44, 53, 54 4Q177 (Eschatological Midrash) 44, 53 4Q286–287 (Berakhot) 40, 45, 46, 47n, 48 4Q289 (Berakhot) 40, 45, 46, 47n, 48 4Q370 (Admonition on the Flood) 46 4Q381 (4QNon-Canonical Psalm B) 39, 50, 50n, 53 4Q400–407 (Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice) 40, 45, 46, 47, 60, 73, 75, 76, 79 4Q434–438 (Barkhi Nafshi hymns) 40, 42, 45, 47, 51, 52, 53, 54 4Q503 (Daily Prayers) 39, 45 4Q504 (Words of the Luminaries) 39, 41, 48, 51 4Q506 (Words of the Luminaries) 39, 41, 48, 51 4Q507–509 (Festival Prayers) 39, 41, 45

268

Index of Sources

4Q510–511 (Songs of the Sage) 40, 41, 45, 46, 47, 48, 51 4Q560 48 5Q14 48 6Q5 50 11QMelchizedek 53 11QapocrPs 45, 48 11QPs 38, 44, 50, 51, 147n, 175n 11Q17 (Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice) 40, 45, 46, 47, 60, 73, 74, 75, 76, 79 New Testament

Homer Od. 22.3 Od. 24.178

111 111

Isidorus Hymn I.35–36 Hymn III 34

120 121

Orphic hymns 17b.9 18.19

118 118

Pachomius Rule of Pachomius 199 P.Cair.Zen. 1 59034.19 3.59495

117 121

P.Col 4.83 1. 11

113

P.Eirene 4 30 A.26

113

P.Petr. 2.13 Fr19, 1.3

119

Thucydides Hist. 4.96.2

110

Greco-Roman Literature and Early Christian Writings

Xenophon Hell. 3.4.14

110

Aristophanes Eccl. 454

123

Targum

Arrian Epict. 1.1.24

114

BGU 6.1301 1. 14

113

Chr.Mitt 227 1. 19

113

Euripides Suppl. 927

123

Matthew (Matt) 27:46

189

Mark (Mark) 2:5–12 10:45 15:34

173 173 189

John 1:36

173

Letter to the Colossians 1:14 173

Targum Psalms 14:1 22:2 45:1 56:1 60:1 69:1

169 167 168 168, 169 168 169

Midrashim Genesis Rabbah (ed. Theodor/Albeck) 33:2 170n

269

Index of Sources Leviticus Rabbah 16:4

199

Midrash Aggadah (ed. Buber) on Num 17 208n

Babylonian Talmud b.ʿAbod. Zar. 7b b.ʿAbod. Zar. 19a b.B. Bat. 14b–15a b.Ber. 3a b.Ber. 4b b.Ber. 12a b.Ber. 32a b.Ber. 32b b.Hag. 12b b.Pes. 117a b.Qidd. 33a b.Sanh. 38b b.Shabb. 88b–89a b.Shabb. 118a b.Shabb. 118b b.Shabb. 119a b.Shabb. 119b b.Sotah 10b

230 170n 175, 179 254n 181, 223, 231 231n 230n 224n 254n 181 170n 204n 208 233 224, 234 256 213 169

Midrash Tehillim/Midrash Psalms Shocher Tov (ed. Buber) 1:1, 6 171n 1:2 164 1:6 175, 180 4:1 171 5:9 173 8:2 203 9:7 169 17:8 173 17:9 171 18:1 171–172 22:7 173 56:1 169 97:1 173 104:2 173 140:10, 12, 13 173

External Tractate and Related Works

Sifre Deuteronomy (ed. Horovitz/Finkelstein) §305 157

Avot de Rabbi Natan ch. 2 208n

Sifre Numbers 68

Massekhet Soferim (ed. Higger) 18:1 225–228

179

Mishna m.Ber. 5:1 m.Avot 3:1 3:3

Gaonic Works 225 206 255n

Tosefta t.Ber. 1:2 t.Ber. 3:6 t.Sotah 6:2–5

231 231 207n

Palestinian Talmud y.Ber. 1:1, 2d 231n y.Ber 5:1, 8d 224n y.Ketub. 12:3, 35a 170n

Saadya Gaon: Emunot ve-deʿot IV:1 203 Otzar Ha-Geonim (ed. Lewin) 1:31, no. 58 229n Seder Rav Amram Gaon (ed. Goldschmidt) 7–8, no. 9–10 231n 9, no. 11–12 231n 10, no. 14 231n 60, no. 102 224n, 225, 230n 69, no. 20 231n Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon (ed. Davidson, Assaf, Joel) 32–24 233n 33 233n

270 Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon (cont.) 35 233n 40–41 233n 118–20 233 Teshuvot he-Geonimha-Hadashot (ed. Emanuel) 32, no 33 231n Teshuvot Rav Natronai Gaon (ed. Brody) no. 9, 1:111 230n no. 12, 1:116 230n no. 12, 1:115–17 230n no. 38 224n Medieval Midrash Midrash otiyot de-Rabbi Akiva ha-shalem, (ed. Wertheimer) 2:354–55 211n Yalqut ha-Makkiri ʿal sefer Tehillim (ed. Buber) 1:26a 208n Medieval Literature and Bible Exegesis Josef Albo, Sefer ha-ʿikkarim (ed. Husik) vol. 4/1: 76–90 205n Moses Almosnino, Tefilla le-moshe 73–88 214n Joseph Delmedigo, Matsref le-hokhma ch. 9, 53–56 211n Jonah Gerondi, Commentary on Psalms on Ps 8 218 Raaba (Abraham ibn Ezra) on Exod 27:21 184n on Exod 28:41 184n on Deut 21:17 184n on Deut 29:19 184n on Deut 32:4 184n on Lev 20:20 184n

Index of Sources on Ps, Introduction 184–185 on Ps 43:3–5 185 on Ps 42:1 176 on Ps 47:1 176 on Ps 51:2 184n on Ps 51:20 185 on Ps 102:15 177 on Ps 106:47 177 on Ps 122 177, 185–186 on Ps 126:1 186 Radak (David Kimhi) on Ps 2 on Ps 7:8 on Ps 8:5 on Ps 19:10 on Ps 21 on Ps 22 on Ps 45 on Ps 72:1 on Ps 87 on Ps 110

190n 190n 204n 190n 190n 188–189; 190 190n 189–190 190n 190n

Rashi (Shlomo ben Yitzhak) on Deut 33:7 170n on Gen 3:8 178 on Gen 3:23–24 178n on Gen 6:9 178n on Gen 33:13 178n on Jer 33:25 178n on Judge 6:1 170n on Ps, Introduction 180 on Ps 2:1 183 on Ps 9:1 183 on Ps 22:1–7 178–179, 181–182 on Ps 22:30–31 179, 182 on Ps 23:2–4 179, 181 on Ps 41:4 170n on Ps 60:4 179n on Ps 64:2 170n on Ps 78:38 170n on Ps 86:2 170,n37 on Ps 116:1 181 on Ps 116:11 179 on Ps 127:1 181 on Ps 137:3 179 on Qoh 11:7 170n on Song 1:1 178n

271

Index of Sources Abraham Saba, Tseror ha-mor on Deut 32 212

Seder Avodat Yisraʾel (Baer) 170 203n

Kabbalistic/Hasidic Literature

Siddur beit Yaʿaqov (Emden) 258 203n

Zohar 1:8a 2:52a 2:79b 2:153b 2:157b 2:195b–196a 3:97a–98a,b 3:135a–b 6:111, n. 14

253 252n 213n 255n 255n 254n 253 249n 254n

Besht (Israel ben Eliezer), Pirush al Hodu (ed. Schatz-Uffenheimer) pp. 342–45 248n p. 348 249 p. 354 249n, 250 Besht (Israel ben Eliezer), Shivhe ha-Besht (ed. ben Samuel/Ben Amos/Mintz) pp. 76–78 242n pp. 81–84 242n pp. 128–29 242n p. 184 242n pp. 195–96 242n Nahman of Bratslav, Shivhe ha-Ran (ed. Kaplan) §10 246 §141 247 Sefer Shimmush Tehillim (ed. Rebiger) p. 150 244 pp. 172–84 244 p. 165 248 Liturgical Works Mahzor lev-shalem la-Yamim ha-Noraʾim (ed. Feld) 42 203n

Siddur otzar ha-tefillot (ed. Gordon) 878–79 203n Siddur siah Yerushalayim (ed. Kafah) part 1, 139–40 203n Piyyutim and Prayer texts ashrei 224, 232 barekhu 234 barukh she-amar 233 birkat ha-mazon 253, 255 erets matah ve-raʿashah 210 kaddish 234 lekha dodi 256 nishmat kol hai 233 maariv 202 pesuqe de-zimra 134, 222–223, 228–229 qedusha de-sidra 233n, 242n shire hamaʿalot 134 tiqqun hatsot 253 tiqqun leil Shavuot 253 yehi khavod 226, 227–228, 231–232, 237 yehi ratzon 243n Islamic Literature Qurʾan 2:30–34

204n

Index of Names, Places and Subjects Aaron 20, 47, 88, 89, 90, 151 Abiram 88, 89, 90, 94 Abraham 47, 151, 171, 180, 251 Abraham ibn Ezra 141, 142, 163, 164, 176, 184, 187, 192, 194 Absalom 13 acrostic 10, 137, 138, 143, 224, 243n Adam 8, 151, 158, 171, 180, 204, 207, 245 Adrianople 252 Aejmelaeus, Anneli 108, 115 afternoon service (minhah) 233n, 248 Aitken, James 11, 105 Akkadian 24, 27, 29, 167 Albo, Joseph 204, 205, 206, 217, 219 Alfasi, R. Yitzhaq 231, 233, 236 Algeria 233 Almosnino, Moses 211, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 220 Ambrose 135, 144 Amidah 150, 151, 230, 231, 233 Amonrasonter 119, 120 Amram Gaon 223n, 224n, 230 angel/angels 5, 46, 47, 48, 52, 55, 56, 60, 61, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 150, 151, 154, 155, 157, 178, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 215, 216, 254 Antinooupolis 123 Aphrodite 113 Apollo Iatro 126 Apollonios 119 Aragon 205 Asaph 31, 169, 180, 185, 244 Ashkenaz 187, 194, 200, 226, 227 Ashkenazi, Eliezer 206n Baʿal Shem Tov (also: Israel ben Eliezer) 10, 242, 246, 248 Babylonia 6, 9, 30, 177, 222, 228, 238 Bacher, Wilhelm (Benjamin Zeev) 168 Baghdad 174 Bahya b. Asher 201 Balaam 20 Bathsheba 140, 172, 177 Ben Azzai 199

Benjamin bar Shemuel 210 Berkovitz, A.J. 222, 223, 224, 225, 238 Bernstein, Moshe 200 Bialik, Hayim Nahman 142 Birkat ha-Mason 253, 255 Blank, Debra Reed 226 Blenkinsopp, Joseph 91 blessing/blessings 20n, 24, 45, 47, 49, 64, 147, 150, 151, 223, 228, 229, 229n, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 250, 251, 253 body/bodies 12, 21, 24, 55, 87, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 96, 99, 151, 215 heavenly bodies 66, 71, 75, 154, 155, 213 Bons, Eberhard 115 Borromeo, Carl/Charles 190, 191n, 194 Brettler, Marc Zvi 42, 43n, 70 Byzantium 210n, 226 Cairo 233 Cairo Geniza 6, 165, 176, 227n, 234 Calvin, John 191, 194 Canaan/Canaanite 62, 63, 86  Castile 205 censor/censors/censorship 182, 183n, 190, 194 cento 224, 227, 228, 213, 232, 235, 237 Champagne 177 Childs, Brevard S. 17 Chiquitilla (also see Giqatila and Gikatilla), Moses Hacohen 176 Christianity 3, 7, 8, 173, 191 commentary 7, 178, 84, 191, 201, 206n, 211, 212, 213, 217, 218 on Psalms 8, 11, 13, 187, 189, 19, 21, 174, 175n, 176, 177, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 185, 186, 190n, 192, 193, 194, 204n, 208, 248, 251, 252 community/communities 5, 7, 21, 31, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 69, 73, 74, 76, 77, 99, 127, 148, 152, 153, 154, 156, 157, 175n, 193, 202, 205, 214, 217, 229, 241, 242, 243, 245, 251, 252, 254 Cooper, Alan 8, 10, 11, 12, 13

273

Index of Names, Places and Subjects Cordoba 233 Crescas, Hasdai 205 cult 64, 74, 120, 125

Five Scrolls/Megillot 174, 184 Fleischer, Ezra 135n, 225, 226, 228n, 236, 238 France 177, 179, 186, 210n, 225n

Damu 24 Dathan 88, 89, 90, 94 David/Davidic 4, 7, 8, 13, 19, 20, 23, 51, 54, 86, 89n, 140, 144, 147, 164, 168, 169, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 179, 181, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 191, 192, 193, 205, 224n, 226, 235 Deborah 4 Demeter 119, 120n demon/demons 10, 21, 22, 24, 45, 48, 52, 244, 245 Dilaz 174 Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W. 136 Donash ben Labrat 179

Galilee 147, 171, 253 Gath 169 Gehenna 188 genre 3, 5, 6, 7, 17, 18, 22, 22170n, n, 23, 27, 37, 38n, 39, 41, 43, 44n, 49, 55n, 74, 149n, 150, 156, 164, 172, 174, 180, 187, 191, 201, 202, 229n, 245n complaint 13, 17, 18, 19n, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 29, 30, 31, 31, 151, 180, 190 lament 13, 24, 39, 44, 45, 139, 158, 165, 175 gematria 250, 251 geonim 9, 222n, 223, 225, 236 Gerondi, Jonah 218 Gerstenberger, Erhard 13, 86n, 202, 217 Gikatilla (also see Giqatila and Chiquitilla), Moses Hacohen 163, 176, 177, 184, 186, 191, 192, 194 Gillingham, Susan 7n, 8n, 10, 10n, 144n, 148n, 202n Gillmayr-Bucher, Susanne 92 Giqatila (also see Chiquitilla and Gikatilla), Moses Hacohen 176 Gula 28, 29 Gunkel, Hermann 13, 17, 19, 21, 83

Easterlin, Nancy 88 ecocriticism 87, 88, 93 education/educational 38, 39, 42, 42n, 43, 50, 50n, 51, 52, 107n, 117, 158, 200n, 215 Ego, Beate 5 Egypt/Egyptian 11, 86, 89, 90, 92, 93, 107, 109, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 127, 174, 209, 235n, 236, 238 Elbaz, Moshe 257 Eleazar ha-Qallir/Qallir/Berabbi Kallir 6, 12, 142, 147, 148, 149, 150, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 157n, 158, 159 Elezar bar Avina 223 Elijah 20 Elijah of Vilna 203 Elija de Vidas 255 Elisha 20, 22 Emden, Jacob 203 Ephrem 6, 135 epiphany 68 epithet/epithets 121, 125, 126, 127, 142, 251 Erwin, Howard M. 125 eschatology 53 Ethan the Ezrahite 180 evening service (maariv) 201, 236, 253n exorcism 24, 45 Ezekiel 98, 184, 187n Fayyum 120 Feldt, Laura 94

haftarah 166 Hallel 9, 69, 133, 198, 224, 227, 233, 234 Ham 86, 89n hanhagot 245 Hannah 4, 19, 31, 39 Harkins, Angela Kim 12, 77 Hasidism 9, 10, 241 hekhalot mysticism 151 Heman 31, 171n hermeneutics, kabbalistic 250  Hermouthis 120 Hezekiah 22 Higger, Michael 225, 228, 228n Hodayot 3, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 60, 61, 73, 74, 77, 78, 79, 133n Horeb 86, 90 identity 42, 55, 61, 69, 70, 74, 153 Isaac 151, 251 Isidorus 120, 121

274 Isis 120, 121, 122, 123 Israel/Israelite 3, 7, 12, 17, 21, 22, 25, 30, 31, 32, 47, 51, 52, 54, 55, 60, 62, 83, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 97, 98, 149, 150, 157n, 166, 171, 172, 174, 178, 183, 187, 190, 192, 201, 207, 218, 250 god of 124, 125 land of 167, 191, 193, 222n, 223, 225, 226, 227, 228, 235, 236, 238 people of 46, 181, 246n Italy 225n, 226 Jaakov Joseph (haKohen Katz) of Polonoye  242n, 248  Jacob 151, 168, 251 Juda Loew ben Bezalel (Maharal) 209n Jerusalem 5, 53, 64, 70, 125, 133, 139, 140, 171, 177, 186 Jesus 7, 167, 173, 183, 187, 188, 189, 190, 194, 207n Josephus 5, 38, 53 Kabbalah/Kabbalat Shabbat 10, 253, 255, 256, 257 Kabbalah, Lurianic 10, 241, 247, 248, 252 Kalimi, Isaac 8, 10, 12n Kanarfogel, Ephraim 200 Karaites 8, 163, 176, 194 Kimhi, David (see Radak) 163, 184n, 186, 191, 193, 194, 211 Kimhi, Joseph 187 Knidos 119 Korah 31, 168, 171n, 180 Kore 119, 120n Kugler, Gili 98 Laban 168 Langer, Ruth 9, 10, 221n Lekha Dodi 256 Lieber, Laura S. 6, 12 liturgy 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 37, 39, 39n, 42, 43, 45, 47, 60, 75, 133, 134, 135, 138, 139234, 238, 141, 144, 150, 164n, 174, 176, 198, 203, 222, 223, 226, 227, 229, 230, 232, 241 Lohfink, Norbert 17 London 184  Luria, Isaac 10, 242n, 249n, 252, 254, 255 Luther, Martin 84, 164n, 189n, 190, 194 Lydia 123

Index of Names, Places and Subjects magic/magical 14, 25, 94n, 95n, 198n, 199, 245 mahzor/mahzorim 165, 176, 224n Maimonides 9, 205, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237 Mainz 183 Malkhut 250, 251, 252, 254 Marduk 26, 29 Marqe 6, 135 maskil 4, 48, 48n, 51 Maul, Stefan M. 24, 24n, 25, 26 Melchizedek 171n, 180 Memphis 119, 122 Menachem ben Saruk 179 Mendele Mocher Sforim 242  Meriba 86, 9123, 28, 93 Mesopotamia/Mesopotamian 29, 30 Messiah 54, 169, 172, 183 Metatron 151, 154, 211 midrash/midrashim/midrashic 8, 11, 152n, 168, 170, 171, 171n, 172, 178, 187, 191, 192, 193, 194, 199, 200, 201, 205, 211, 224, 232, 251 Milan 190, 194 Millard, Matthias 17 Moab 91 Mordechai of Tchernobyl 247n Moscato, Jehuda 206n morning service 134, 134n, 228, 231n, 232, 242n Morocco 212, 237n Moscow 183 Moses 4, 6, 8, 12, 47, 88, 89, 91, 93, 100, 144, 145, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 163, 164, 166, 168, 171n, 180, 207, 108, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 230, 234 Moshe Gaon, R. 229, 230 Moshe haDarshan 179, 179n mourning 14, 22, 151, 153, 165, 254 Münz-Manor, Ophir 6 Naaman 22 Nahman of Bratslav 246 Narbonne 179, 186, 187 Närhi, Jani 84 Nathan 54, 140, 177 Natronai Gaon 223n, 229, 231, 232 Nazianzus, Gregory 135 Nebuchadnezzar 181 Newson, Carol 42, 76

Index of Names, Places and Subjects Nicholas of Lyre 194 Niemirów 243, 244 Ninisinna 24 Ninth of Av 139, 140 Noah 89, 151 Olofsson, Staffan 124 oracles 29, 38, 53 Oxford Ms. 235 Pachomius, Rule of 199 Pajunen, Mika S. 5, 70 Palestine 6, 133, 226 Pan 120, 123 Parker, Robert 126 payyetanim/payyetanic 6, 134n, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 155 pesuqe de-Zimra 9, 134, 222, 225, 225n, 226, 229, 230, 231, 233, 234, 236, 237, 238 performance 3, 4, 6, 9, 18n, 20, 24, 27, 29, 30, 47, 86, 99, 139, 148, 156, 158, 234n Philistine 169 Phrygia/Phrygian 126 Pietersma, Albert 119 piyyut/piyyutim 5, 6, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 150, 155, 156n, 157, 210 Pleket, Henry W. 123 poet/poetry/poetic 4, 5, 6, 12, 21, 27, 1078, 115, 118, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 147, 150, 151n, 152, 156, 157n, 158, 193 Poppers, Meir 254 Poznanski, Samuel 176 prayer 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54, 55, 70, 71, 73, 74, 77, 78, 89n, 93, 96, 97, 120, 121, 122, 133, 135, 140, 148, 154, 155, 158, 165, 166, 172, 174, 175, 176, 180, 182, 184, 191, 192, 225, 229, 230, 231, 233, 234, 235, 241, 242, 243, 244, 246, 248, 251, 252, 255, 256 Ptolemy 119 prophecy/prophecies/prophetic/prophet 4, 7, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42n, 44, 51, 52, 53, 53n, 54, 55, 65, 150, 166, 169n, 170, 174, 175, 176, 181, 184, 186, 187, 190, 192, 193, 212 purification/purifications 24, 25, 26 

275 qedushta/Qedushah 150, 151, 156, 233n, 242n qina 139, 140 Qumran/Khirbet Qumran 3, 4, 5, 7, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 60, 61, 69n, 74, 86n, 133n, 175n, 198, 199n Radak, see David Kimhi 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 193, 194 Ramban 212 Rand, Michael 142 Rashi/Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki/ben Yitzhak  163, 170, 170n, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185n, 187, 190, 192, 193, 194, 208, 211, 244n refrain 137, 138, 139, 140, 143, 156, 213 Reif, Stefan 9n, 202n, 222 Rendtorff, Rolf 17 responsa literature 201 Rhineland 183, 192 rite/rites Babylonian 26, 27, 28, 29, 31 of the land of Israel 22, 226, 227, 235, 236 medieval 9, 151, 222, 225, 232, 233n, 237, 238 mixed 226 synagogue 10, 198, 202 ritual activity 5, 22, 23, 43, 70n, 88, 95, 98, 100, 135, 153, 244n, 254, 256 of ancient Israel 7, 22, 30, 86, 134n, 153 agent 97 covenant renewal 46, 47 experience 85, 88, 95, 97, 98, 99 healing 13, 22, 24, 25, 28, 30, 32, 166 identity 69 participant 88, 97 performance 6, 20, 27, 31, 85, 93, 105, 217, 233, 253 sacrificial 133 text 12, 23, 29, 85, 99 Romanos 6, 135 Rosh Hashanah 203 Rosman, Moshe 248 Saadia/Saadya Gaon 163, 164, 174, 175, 176, 177, 184, 186, 191, 192, 193, 194, 203n, 232, 233, 235, 237n Saba, Abraham 211, 212, 213, 214, 217, 218

276 Sabbath/Shabbat/shabbatot 4, 134, 208, 209, 227, 231n, 233, 235, 23255, 2567, 238, 248, 249, 250, 251, 253, 256 Safed 10, 203n, 242n, 252, 253, 254, 257 Saint Petersburg 176 Sandalfon 151, 154 Sarapis 119, 120, 122, 123 Sardis 123 Second Temple 4, 5, 7, 31, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 48, 53, 55, 69, 86, 89n, 96, 97, 98, 100, 182, 153 Sefer Shimmush Tehillim 9, 165, 244, 248 Sefer Tillim Aggadah 170 sefirah/sefirot 249, 250, 251, 254, 256 Sforim, Mendele Mocher 242 Shekhinah 250 shema 229, 231, 233, 234 shire hamaʿalot 134  Shmuel Eideles (Maharsha) 211 Shocher Tov 8, 164, 170, 191, 193 siddur/siddurim 165, 166, 176, 203, 232n, 248 silluq 12, 147, 148, 149, 150, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158 Simhath 203 sin/sins/sinful/sinners 21, 49, 52, 78, 79, 88, 90, 92n, 152, 164, 173, 246, 247 Sinai 51, 157n, 207, 210 Simlai, Rabbi 229, 230  Smith, Jonathan Z. 84, 85 Soferim 225, 226, 227, 228, 235 Solomon 93, 171n, 177, 181, 185, 189 Spain 176, 184, 212, 230 Speyer 183  star/stars 28, 66, 69, 75, 113, 216 Stemberger, Günter 9, 10, 223 Stuckrad, Kocku von 75 Swartz, Michael 98 Taitazak, Joseph 214 Talabardon, Susanne 9, 10, 12 Tanhum Yerushalmi, Rabbi 176 teaching/teachings 48n, 97, 199, 214, 217, 224, 230n, 248, 252 Thackeray, Henry St. J. 105 Thucydides 110 Tifʾeret 249, 250, 251, 252 tiqqun/tiqqunim 246, 247, 249, 253, 254, 255 Titus 181 Todorov, Tzetan 143, 144 Torah 8, 9, 12, 14, 32, 70, 147, 149, 157n, 164, 166, 174, 184, 192, 199, 200, 201, 204, 207,

Index of Names, Places and Subjects 208, 209, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 226n, 234, 236, 254, 255 Tortosa 205 Tosefta 207n Trachtenberg, Joshua 244 Traditionsgeschichte 79 transcendence 72, 125 translation/translations 4n, 11, 12, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 117, 124, 125, 126, 127, 167, 168, 169, 191, 200, 210, 216, 226n Tudela 184 Tulchin 243 Tyrannos 120 Vidas, Elijah de 255 visualization 5, 87 Vital, Hayim 254 Wadi Fawàkhir 122 Wilson, Gerald 17 Winnyzja 243 wisdom 38n, 41, 47, 48n, 51, 52, 77, 148, 203, 204 worship/worshipers 5, 7, 8, 14, 31, 42n, 46n, 61, 62, 64, 65, 67, 70, 71n, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 122, 155, 223, 229n Worms 183 Xenophon 110 Yalqut Shimoni 170 Yannai 138 yehi khavod 226, 227, 228, 231, 232, 235, 237 Yehoshua ben Levi 208, 224 Yehuda, Rabbi 171, 172 Yehuda ibn Balaam, Rabbi 177 Yehudai Gaon 229 Yitzchak Ben Shoshan 218 yom kippur qatan 203, 203n Yose ben Yose 6, 136 Yosi, Rabbi 224, 225, 227, 233 Zarpanitum 26 Zenger, Erich 17 Zenon 119, 121 Zion 22, 125, 139, 140, 242, 254 Ziph 181 Zoilos 119 Zucker, Moshe 175