words spoken by Jacob\u2019s sons, \u201cWe cannot \u2026 give our sister to a man who is uncircumcised, for that is a disgrace among us\u201d (Gen. 34:14). The reason, the angel of the Presence explains, is that those words are actually true: \u201cit is a reproach to Israel\u201d to indulge in intermarriage or even to look the other way when someone else does.
\n30:15. plague upon plague and curse upon curse These will strike Israel if it allows even one foreign woman in its midst. For this reason, even someone who \u201cblinds his eyes from those who cause defilement\u201d must be punished. This includes not only those who overlook intermarriage, but also those who \u201cdefile the sanctuary of the LORD and \u2026 those who profane His holy name\u201d\u2014all of these being forms of \u201cdefilement,\u201d but quite unrelated to the Dinah story.
\n30:18\u201320. Levi was chosen for the priesthood This ancient tradition is attested in the (original author\u2019s) book of Jubilees, ALD, and other texts; Jacob\u2019s son Levi had been chosen while he was still alive to become the ancestor of the priestly tribe in Israel. (There is no hint of this in Genesis, but it derived in part from Mal. 2:4\u20137.) These texts offered various reasons for Levi having been so honored: because he prayed a pious prayer (ALD 3:1\u201318; T. Levi 2:3\u201312); because Isaac prophetically designated him and his descendants to inherit the priesthood (Jub. 31:11\u201317); or because Levi was \u201cgiven to God\u201d as a result of Jacob\u2019s tithing of his sons (Jub. 32:3\u20138; Tg. Ps.-J. to Gen. 32:25; Pirke R. El. 37). This very multitude of explanations suggests that, while the tradition that Levi and his descendants were chosen during his own lifetime was widely known, there was no unanimity as to why. The Interpolator here adds another reason: it was as a result of his heroic slaughter of the Shechemites that Levi\u2019s tribe was chosen. Such an idea was not without its problems; if Levi had performed this righteous deed in company with his older brother Simeon, why did they not jointly share in the reward? It was well known, however, that one of the sons later born to Simeon was called \u201cSaul the son of the Canaanite woman\u201d (Gen. 46:10). For the Interpolator (and doubtless others as well), this very fact was proof that Simeon, in having relations with a Canaanite woman, had violated the very prohibition that had made the slaughter of the Shechemites meritorious in the first place. No priesthood for him!
\n30:19. a blessing and righteousness will be written (on high) as a testimony for him in the heavenly tablets Better: \u201ca blessing and righteousness [are entered] as a ruling for him.\u201d Apparently, this reward had not been written there forever, but was only now entered as a result of his actions.
\n30:20. And we will remember for a thousand generations the righteousness which a man did Better: \u201cthe [righteous deeds] which [this] man did.\u201d \u201cWe\u201d signifies \u201cthe angels.\u201d
\nall of the (appointed) times of the year This presumably means \u201cthroughout the year.\u201d
\n30:21\u201323. so that they might do it and be written down as friends In general, the Interpolator adds, people who keep God\u2019s laws and covenant are written down as friends on the heavenly tablets, while their opposites are written as enemies. This notion, characteristic of the Interpolator (see above Jub. 19:8), bespeaks a dualistic outlook known from the Dead Sea Scrolls and elsewhere. \u201cFriends\u201d are, more literally, \u201cthose who love [Me],\u201d and in using this word as well as in saying that they will be remembered \u201cfor a thousand generations,\u201d the Interpolator was evoking for readers the assertion in the Decalogue that God \u201cshows kindness to the thousandth generation of those who love Me and keep My commandments\u201d (Exod. 20:6). By contrast, the Interpolator says, those who \u201ctransgress [My laws] \u2026 will be recorded in the heavenly tablets as enemies,\u201d literally, \u201cthose who hate [Me].\u201d For such people, God \u201cvisits the guilt of the parents upon the children,\u201d etc. (Exod. 20:6). That is why \u201con the day that the children of Jacob killed Shechem he wrote \u2026 a book [better: a document was written] in heaven [attesting] that they did righteousness and uprightness.\u201d
\n30:24\u201325. And they brought forth Dinah The original author\u2019s narrative resumes where it left off in Jub. 30:17: Dinah is returned to her family, while her brothers \u201ctook captive everything that was in Shechem.\u201d Jubilees\u2019 author of course omits mention of \u201call their children and their wives\u201d (Gen. 34:29) in the list of booty that follows; if the point of the story was, for Jubilees\u2019 author, the horrors of contact with foreigners, surely they would not have taken any human prisoners. After the Shechem incident was over, Jacob expressed misgivings (Gen. 34:30), but this, Jubilees explains, was only because \u201che was afraid of those who inhabited the land,\u201d and not because there was anything morally questionable about slaughtering the entire population because of one rapist.
\n31:1\u20133. let us go up to Bethel Gen. 35:1\u20135 describes God\u2019s summons to Jacob to go to Bethel and \u201cbuild an altar,\u201d as well as the subsequent preparations for the trip. That passage does not specify the purpose of building an altar there, but Jubilees\u2019 author does here: it is to pay off \u201ca vow to Him who has been with me and has returned me unto this land.\u201d Jubilees makes no mention of God\u2019s ordering Jacob to Bethel\u2014the initiative seems here to come from Jacob. Jubilees does not want to imply (as Rabbinic sources later did) that Jacob had been negligent in not fulfilling his vow.
\n31:3. And he invited his father, Isaac But why had Jacob not simply built an altar at Bethel the first time and offered a sacrifice then and there, as Noah, Abraham, and other figures had done? According to Jubilees, in those ancient days the priesthood passed down the family line, one priest per generation (see above on 19:26, etc.). But Jacob was not a priest; his father, Isaac, was still the functioning priest of his generation. For that reason, even now Jacob cannot offer the sacrifice himself, but has to ask his father to come to Bethel and do it. Thus, having arrived at Bethel on another significant day, \u201cthe first of the seventh month\u201d (the \u201cDay of Trumpet Blasts,\u201d Lev. 23:23; Num. 29:1\u20136), Jacob invites his parents to Bethel, asking Isaac to officiate at the sacrifice.
\n31:4\u201312. Let my son Jacob come and let me see him before I die Isaac, apparently ill, declines, asking instead that Jacob come to him. Jacob does so, taking Levi and Judah along with him. Nothing of this visit is recounted in Genesis, but Jubilees cleverly \u201cdeduced\u201d its existence from the passing mention in Gen. 35:8 of the death of Rebecca\u2019s servant woman, a certain Deborah, at Bethel. After all, Jacob has recently returned to Canaan after a twenty-year stay in Laban\u2019s house in Aram; if he now arrives at Bethel and, shortly thereafter, Deborah dies there, what was she doing in Bethel? Surely she did not accompany Jacob to Aram 20 years earlier and remain with him until now! So it must be, Jubilees suggests, that after arriving in Bethel, Jacob went to visit his parents (who were then living near Hebron, \u201cat the house of his [Isaac\u2019s] father, Abraham, \u2026 [that is] the tower\u201d\u2014presumably the \u201ctower of Abraham\u201d; see above on 29:14\u201320). Jacob then must have returned to Bethel with his mother Rebecca and her servant Deborah, whereupon Deborah died at Bethel. This side trip to visit Isaac was extremely important for Jubilees\u2019 overall understanding of what went on at Bethel\u2014as he will now explain.
\n31:9. the darkness passed from the eyes of Isaac That is, his blindness (Gen. 27:1) suddenly abated.
\n31:12. a spirit of prophecy came down upon his mouth This spirit allowed him to offer his prophetic blessings of Levi and Judah.
\n31:14. serve in His sanctuary as the angels of the presence and the holy ones Better: \u201c[Levi will] serve in His sanctuary [on earth just] as the angels of the Presence and the holy ones [i.e., the angels of holiness].\u201d That is, just as they serve Him in the great, heavenly sanctuary that all Second Temple period writers believed existed just above the clouds.
\n31:15. become judges and rulers and leaders This reflects the priesthood throughout the post-exilic period, when there was no king and Judah had been, since the late 6th or early 5th century, a \u201ctemple state.\u201d In addition, \u201cThe word [Lat. \u2018speech\u2019] of the LORD they will speak righteously [better: faithfully], and all of his judgments [Lat. iudicia, i.e., laws] they will execute righteously [judge fairly] \u2026 they will tell My [Lat. \u2018His\u2019] ways to Jacob, and My paths to Israel.\u201d These words are an expansion of Moses\u2019s blessing of the Levites in Deut. 33:10 (and perhaps influenced as well by Mal. 2:6\u20137).
\nThe blessing of the LORD shall be placed in their mouth This is a reference to the priestly blessing in Num. 6:22\u201327.
\n30:16. You will be joined to the LORD Levi\u2019s name was explained in Gen. 29:34, but here Jubilees\u2019 author supplies a more dignified etymology, \u201cYou will be joined [teluvveh].\u201d
\n31:18\u201320. And to Judah he said What he said was \u201cBe a prince,\u201d that is, the political leader, \u201cyou and one of your sons\u201d; presumably, this \u201cson\u201d will rule in every generation, but doubtless Jubilees\u2019 author had in mind one son in particular, King David, a Judahite, whose fame will be one that \u201ctravels and goes about in all the lands and cities\u201d, though it is not impossible that the author is thinking of the messianic king to spring from David\u2019s descendants, about whom it was said that he would be \u201cthe expectation of the nations\u201d (Gen. 49:10 LXX). The same verse doubtless stands behind the further wish that \u201cthe nations fear before your face\u201d [i.e., be afraid of you].
\n31:22\u201325. And Jacob told his father everything during the night That is, how God had \u201cprotected him from all evil [better: every evil thing],\u201d an echo of Gen. 48:16, and \u201cdid not withhold his mercy and his righteousness from the son of his servant Isaac,\u201d a direct quotation from Gen. 24:27.
\n31:26\u201331. And in the morning Jacob then explains the purpose of his visit, the vow that he had made, but Isaac declines, being too infirm. He does, however, send Rebecca, and Deborah along with her, back to Bethel with Jacob; see above on 31:4\u201310. Jacob must at first have been perplexed\u2014who would officiate as a priest and receive his tithe?\u2014but then he recalled the prayer with which his father had blessed him and his two sons, Levi and Judah, and realized that Levi would become the next priest.
\n31:32. And thus it is ordained For the Interpolator, the fact that Isaac had blessed Levi and Judah \u201cdown here\u201d was another act of human initiative that could not seem to stand on its own. He therefore adds after this allusion to Isaac\u2019s blessing that the whole matter had been \u201cwritten \u2026 for them as an eternal testimony [better: ruling] in the heavenly tablets.\u201d
\n32:1\u20132. And Levi dreamed that he had been appointed This dream was another motif (cf. ALD 4:11\u201313; T. Levi 8) designed to confirm his selection as priest. The next morning, \u201cthe fourteenth of that [seventh] month\u201d (the day before another significant day, the 15th of the seventh month, which was also the start of Sukkot, the Festival of Booths), Jacob starts setting aside the things for his tithe.
\n32:3. And in those days Rachel conceived Benjamin This mention of Jacob\u2019s tithe serves as an introduction to another, quite separate tradition about how Levi came to be the priestly tribe: Jacob counted his sons for the purpose of giving God a tithe of them as well. Counting backward from his 12th son, Benjamin (then in utero), he arrived at Levi who, as number 10, therefore ought to be given to God as part of Jacob\u2019s vow to return to God a 10th of all he had acquired; in other words, Levi was a human tithe (cf. Pirke R. El. 37; Tg. Ps.-J. 32:25). Jacob therefore \u201cput garments of the priesthood upon him\u201d (no doubt given to him by Isaac) and \u201cfilled his hands,\u201d that is, ordained him for the priesthood.
\n32:4\u20137. on the fifteenth of this month This is referring to the seventh month, the time of the Festival of Booths (which had already been instituted as a festival by Abraham in Jub. 16:20\u201327), when Jacob brought forth a lavish set of sacrifices (cf. Num. 29:12\u201332).
\nThus he did at dawn for seven days in keeping with the festival that Abraham had instituted.
\n32:8\u20139. And he gave a tithe The laws of tithing in Num. 18:21, 24 (Levites are to receive all tithes) seem to contradict those of Deut. 14:22\u201329 (Levites get the full tithe once every three years; at other times, the owner consumes the tithe or its monetary equivalent at the Temple). Here, although the matter is far from clear, Jubilees\u2019 author seems to follow neither.
\n32:9b\u201315. Thus he tithed a second tithe Both the original author and the Interpolator had connected Abraham\u2019s tithe in Gen. 14:20 to the later laws of tithing (Lev. 27:30\u201333; Deut. 14:22\u201323); see above on Jub. 13:25\u201327. The Interpolator saw in the mention here of Jacob\u2019s payment of a tithe an opportunity to discourse on the institution of a second tithe, neglected by (or unknown to) Jubilees\u2019 author. Thus, once \u201cJacob gave his vow\u201d [better: what he had vowed; namely, a 10th of his property], he \u201ctithed a second tithe.\u201d The whole idea of a second tithe is the result of trying to reconcile the apparently contradictory instructions of Num. 18:21, 24 and Deut. 14:22\u201329. The Interpolator, the author of this passage, shares with Rabbinic Judaism the basic idea that there is a \u201csecond tithe,\u201d but his understanding of its nature is different from that of the Rabbis. In apparent agreement with Deut. 14:22\u201329, the Interpolator stipulates that this tithe is to be consumed (by the tithe\u2019s owner, though this is not specified) \u201cin the place where it is determined that His name shall dwell,\u201d that is, the Jerusalem Temple. He further stipulates that the tithe is to be given and consumed during its season.
\n32:12. in its year the grain will be eaten That is, previously harvested grain.
\nthe wine (will be drunk) until the days of the wine Better: \u201cuntil the time for the wine [i.e., the grape] harvest,\u201d and so forth.
\n32:14. And thus they shall eat it together in the sanctuary This alludes to Deut. 14:23.
\n32:15. the whole tithe of oxen and sheep is holy to the LORD and it will belong to the priests This seems closer to Num. 18:21, though there it is the Levites, and here the priests, who receive the tithe.
\n32:16. Jacob planned to build up that place That is, Bethel, the spot at which he had earlier seen his vision of the great ladder (Gen. 28) and had now offered sacrifices to God. Now he would turn it into a sacred precinct, \u201cto sanctify it and to make it eternally holy.\u201d
\n32:17\u201319. the LORD appeared to him The LORD also changed his name to Israel and blessed him (as in Gen. 35:9\u201312), saying \u201cI shall increase you and multiply you very much.\u201d 4Q223\u201324 uses the same verbs as Gen. 35:11, \u201cBe fruitful and multiply,\u201d turning these biblical words of blessing into a promise \u201cI will cause you to be fruitful and multiply.\u201d Jacob\u2019s descendants \u201cwill rule in all nations as they have desired\u201d (better: as they wish), confirming Isaac\u2019s words to Jacob in Gen. 27:29.
\n32:20\u201321. And He finished speaking with him, and He went up from him That is, God finished speaking and went up. No sooner was this divine encounter finished than Jacob had another: an angel appeared to him with seven tablets narrating what \u201cwould happen to him and to his sons during all the ages.\u201d
\n32:23. Do not build this place, and do not make it an eternal sanctuary The angel further instructed him not to do at Bethel what he had vowed. The reason for this instruction is clear: Although Bethel was a sacred spot in biblical times (and eventually the site of one of Jeroboam\u2019s two temples), the Torah mandated the building of a temple only in the one \u201cplace that the LORD your God will choose\u201d (Deut. 12:5), namely, Jerusalem. Jacob\u2019s vow to build a temple at Bethel could not, even retrospectively, be allowed to stand. What is more, Genesis never reports that Jacob did keep that part of his vow. Failure to keep a vow was a serious offense; so here, an angel officially relieves him of his responsibility.
\n32:23. Go to the house of Abraham, your father His house, according to Gen. 35:27, was in Hebron.
\n32:24. because you will die peacefully in Egypt These words seem a bit strange, indeed a non sequitur. \u201cAnd you will be buried honorably in this land\u201d seems to pick up on the previous command to go to the house of Abraham and Isaac (\u201cthis land\u201d clearly refers to Hebron).
\njust as you have seen and read, thus will everything come to pass The text now seems to return to the beginning of this passage in 32:21\u201322, when the angel shows Jacob the seven tablets: from here, the subject of the seven tablets continues to the end of the passage in 32:36. All this seems a bit suspicious. Indeed, the fact that Jacob has two divine visions the same night (vv. 17\u201319 and 21\u201326) in itself suggests that the second one is not the work of the original author. At the same time, it seems unlikely that the author of the second vision was the Interpolator: the second vision does not even identify the seven tablets as part of, or copied from, the Interpolator\u2019s beloved \u201cheavenly tablets\u201d! Moreover, the passage contains none of his characteristic expressions and it departs strikingly from his usual modus operandi, which, as we have seen, is to insert large chunks of text rather than interweaving smaller ones. One must therefore consider the possibility that the second vision was specially inserted here by some otherwise unknown third party.
\n32:27. And he observed there yet one (more) day The original author\u2019s narration resumes here. Having recounted Jacob\u2019s celebration of the seven-day Festival of Booths at Bethel (a festival that Abraham had initiated back in Jub. 16:20\u201327), the author sought to attribute to Jacob the institution of yet an eighth day of celebration following those seven days, as stipulated in the Torah (Lev. 23:34\u201336; Num. 29:35). He thus said that Jacob \u201cobserved there yet one (more) day,\u201d an eighth day of celebration after the Festival of Booths. Here, then, was another bit of the Torah\u2019s legislation that began with something initiated spontaneously by one of the patriarchs on his own. To back up this claim, Jubilees\u2019 author had a clever idea. This eighth-day celebration is referred to in the Torah as an atzeret, \u201cassembly\u201d (a name preserved in later Judaism, which still calls this holy day [yom shemini] atzeret). The reason for this name is not given in the Torah, but Jubilees\u2019 author sought to connect it to the verb atzar, \u201cretain, hold back.\u201d It was called that, he said, because Jacob had been \u201cheld back there one [more] day\u201d (Jub. 32:27 in the Latin translation). So once again, an altogether human circumstance\u2014Jacob\u2019s being \u201cheld back\u201d an extra day\u2014was responsible for one of the festive days eventually commanded in the Torah. Needless to say, the Interpolator did not like this explanation. He could not change what the original author had said, but he could, and did, add his own, altogether contrary explanation: Jacob may have decided to call this extra day atzeret, and the name may have stuck and even found its way into the Torah. But as for the day itself, its real name had always been \u201cAddition.\u201d That was the name that had been written on the heavenly tablets long before, \u201cbecause it [i.e., this eighth day of celebration] was added to the days of the Festival of Booths\u201d (Jub. 32:29 in the Latin translation). So Jacob may have given it his own name after having been \u201cheld back\u201d an extra day, but that was nothing unusual; Jacob also was the one, the Interpolator states, who started the custom of calling the Festival of Booths by the abbreviated name \u201cThe Festival.\u201d Thus did the Interpolator seek to undo the significance of the name atzeret as explained by Jubilees\u2019 original author. However, he made one mistake. In supporting his argument with this further claim that Jacob had also abbreviated the real name of \u201cthe Festival of Booths\u201d to \u201cthe Festival,\u201d he seems to have forgotten that the original author had already attributed that change to Abraham in Jub. 16:27. These two competing names (\u201cRetention\u201d and \u201cAddition\u201d) in one passage were confusing to later editors and\/or translators of Jubilees\u2014so they set about making the passage more consistent. The Ethiopic tradition bears witness to one attempt, which had changed Jub. 32:27 to read: \u201cAnd he called it \u2018Addition,\u2019 because the name was added,\u201d thus eradicating any trace of the clever argument of Jubilees\u2019 author (that it was called \u201cRetention\u201d because Jacob had been \u201cheld back there one [more] day\u201d). The Latin translation is closer to the original version, but\u2014also for reasons of consistency\u2014it erred in the opposite direction, modifying the Interpolator\u2019s last sentence (32:29) to read: \u201cAnd its name was called \u2018Retention\u2019 [replacing the Interpolator\u2019s \u2018Addition\u2019 but leaving the next words untouched] because it was added,\u201d an explanation that now makes no sense.
\n32:32\u201334. approached the land of Kabratan This is apparently based on a misunderstanding of Gen. 35:16: \u201csome distance (kivrat ha\u2019aretz) short of Ephrath.\u201d (Cf. LXX ad loc.: \u201cWhen he drew near a chabratha of land to enter Ephratha,\u201d in which chabratha is apparently taken as a specific measure of length; apparently Jubilees\u2019 author took the same word as a proper noun.) Thereafter Rachel died in childbirth and was buried near Bethlehem.
\n33:1\u20133. toward the south of Magdaladra\u2019ef Apparently in Heb. \u201cthe tower of Eder\u201d; see Gen. 35:21. This is perhaps identical to the \u201ctower of Abraham\u201d (above on 29:14\u201320). Having settled there, he and Leah went to visit his father, Isaac; this is apparently the visit referred to in Gen. 35:27 (which Jubilees\u2019 author seeks to locate before Reuben\u2019s sin, rather than after, according to the biblical order), mentioned here to explain Jacob\u2019s absence from the family compound.
\n33:2. And Reuben saw Bilhah It was thus during this absence that Reuben committed his sin with Bilhah (see Gen. 35:22; 49:3\u20134). Jubilees\u2019 author explains that it was the sight of Bilhah bathing that caused him to sin, a midrashic elaboration of Gen. 49:4, \u201cwanton as water.\u201d How can water be wanton? Ancient interpreters explained this phrase as meaning that Reuben had been \u201cwanton in [or \u2018through, on account of\u2019] water,\u201d namely, that he had spied on Bilhah bathing naked and that this was the cause of his sin.
\n33:3. alone in her house Bilhah was alone because Jacob had gone off to visit Isaac; for the same reason, Jacob\u2019s reproach of Reuben in Gen. 49:4 says \u201cYou [singular] went up on your father\u2019s bed,\u201d alone, because Bilhah was already there, fast asleep.
\n33:4. she uncovered the hem of her (skirt) The text is apparently confused here. Eth. kan\u0259f\u0259 refers to a wing or to the edge of a garment and reflects the Heb. kenaf. To uncover a man\u2019s kenaf is, in the biblical idiom, the untoward result of someone indulging in improper sexual relations or conduct with the man\u2019s wife (Deut. 23:1; 27:20)\u2014but it is always the man\u2019s kenaf that is uncovered. Perhaps the text nevertheless uses this expression to, as it were, explain the biblical idiom: Reuben literally exposed Bilhah\u2019s kenaf, which was rightly the exclusive property of her husband and, in that sense, \u201chis.\u201d If so, it would seem that the original text must have read: \u201cshe awakened and saw that Reuben was lying with her in bed and that he had uncovered the hem of her skirt [i.e., that he had had sexual relations with her] and she took hold of him [to restrain him from further offense] and shouted out when she realized that it was Reuben.\u201d In other words, Jubilees was at pains to assert that Bilhah was completely innocent and, as soon as she woke up, did all she could to restrain Reuben.
\n33:7\u20139. And when Jacob came and sought her As an innocent victim, Bilhah confides in Jacob when he returns, and he has no further relations with her. (This may imply that, according to pre-Rabbinic sources, even the innocent victim of rape is thereafter forbidden to her husband.) For Jubilees\u2019 author, the lesson is clear: \u201cany man who uncovers [the covering of his father, his act] is very evil because he is despicable before the LORD.\u201d
\n33:10\u201314. Therefore it is written and ordered Better: \u201cwritten and ordained.\u201d As so often, the Interpolator intervenes in an attempt to connect a story in Genesis with the Torah\u2019s later laws, in this case the Torah\u2019s prohibition of relations with one\u2019s father\u2019s wife, which, as usual, was written long before \u201cin the heavenly tablets.\u201d There it says that both the guilty parties \u201cshall certainly die together, the man who lies with his father\u2019s wife and also the wife.\u201d In fact, this prohibition was not only written once in the heavenly tablets (presumably in the verse corresponding to Lev. 20:11), but \u201cit is written a second time,\u201d that is, in that part of the heavenly tablets that corresponds to Deut. 27:20. There it says that \u201call the holy ones of the LORD,\u201d that is, the angels, \u201csaid \u2018So be it, so be it\u2019 [i.e., \u2018Amen, amen\u2019]\u201d to correspond to \u201cAnd all the people shall say Amen\u201d in Deut. 27:20. That the angels in heaven stand in for the Israelites on earth is no accident, since the Interpolator sees Israel as the circumcised, angel-like people (see above on 15:25\u201327).
\n33:15\u201316. And let them not say Having established this incident as the precedent for the later prohibition, the Interpolator takes up a matter not discussed by Jubilees\u2019 author, namely, the fact that Reuben\u2019s crime apparently went unpunished. His answer is that \u201cthe ordinance and judgment and law [perhaps, \u2018the statute and punishment of the law,\u2019 that is, of the Torah] had not been revealed till then (as) completed for everyone [better: fully revealed to all].\u201d The reason the Interpolator felt compelled to add this explanation is clear. His normal claim is that in any instance where the patriarchs seem to be initiating a law or practice on their own, they are actually acting in conformity to the statutes written long before in the heavenly tablets. But the case of Reuben and Bilhah seemed to contradict that principle; Reuben was punished, but not executed as he should have been. This case was thus different from all the others in which the Interpolator invoked the heavenly tablets. So he had no choice but to say that, while the \u201creal\u201d law already existed on the heavenly tablets, in this particular case what occurred was a nonprecedent: Jacob followed a \u201ctemporary ruling\u201d of his own and disinherited Reuben. The apparent justification for this is the Second Temple theme of \u201cfair warning\u201d: one cannot be punished unless prior warning has been given that the act involved is indeed an infraction that carries such-and-such a punishment. So Reuben was only disinherited. But from now on, the angel tells Moses, the penalty will be death.
\n33:18\u201320. God \u2026 does not accept persons or gifts This is the same warning he issued in 5:16. For the Interpolator, the story of Reuben and Bilhah is but one instance of the more general category of fornication, [that is, zenut], a sin altogether unbefitting Israel because it is \u201ca holy nation \u2026 a nation of priests, and a royal nation\u201d (derived from Exod. 19:6 \u201ca kingdom of priests and a holy nation\u201d).
\n33:21\u201323. Jacob and all his sons were traveling The genealogy presented dryly in Gen. 35:22\u201325 is taken as a hint that the children listed there accompanied Jacob on his trip (his second, according to Jubilees) to visit his father and mother, mentioned in Gen. 35:27.
\n34:1\u20132. Jacob sent his sons \u2026 to pasture their sheep in the field of Shechem Much later in the Genesis narrative, the aged Jacob is close to death. Turning to his son Joseph, he says, \u201cAnd now, I assign to you one portion more than to your brothers [lit. \u201cone shekhem more,\u201d a pun on the name of the city being given to Joseph], which I wrestled from the Amorites with my sword and bow\u201d (Gen. 48:22). There is no account in Genesis of any such military encounter between Jacob and the Amorites of Shechem. Here, Jubilees\u2019 author seeks to fill in the details. (A similar account appears in T. Jud. 3\u20137 and in Midrash Vayyissa\u2019u, a text that was later incorporated into Yal. Shim\u2019oni 1:135 and elsewhere.) Here, the Amorite kings\u2019 attack is reported to Jacob, who is at home with Levi, Judah, and Joseph (the \u201cgood\u201d sons).
\n34:4. And the kings of Tafu The names of the kings\u2019 home cities are somewhat different in the various versions of this tradition: Tafu is Tappuah (Josh. 16:8), Aresa is apparently a deformation of Hazor (Josh. 11:1), Seragan may be Zarethan (Josh. 3:16), Selo is Shiloh, Gaas is Ga\u2019ash (Josh. 24:30), Bethoron is apparently Beit Horon (Josh. 1:10), and Ma\u2019anisakir may be connected with Mahanayim (Gen. 32:2) or something like \u201cMahane Soker\u201d (some such place may be alluded to in the New Testament, John 4:5. (These names are repeated in a different order and spelling in 34:7.)
\n34:7\u20138. And he killed them in the field of Shechem Jacob arrives and defeats the coalition forces armed against them, imposing a \u201ctribute of five [better: a fifth] of the fruits of their land,\u201d which was paid \u201cuntil the day he [Jacob] and his sons went down into Egypt.\u201d For various reasons it seems that Jubilees\u2019 narrative of this war with the Amorites and the later war of Jacob\u2019s and Esau\u2019s sons (Jub. 38:1\u201314) derives from a still more ancient text recounting one or both of these wars. One indication of the independent existence of such a text is the awkward transition into this war material in Jubilees. Indeed, there is some indication that this underlying text may well have been written in Greek: that would explain the numerous spelling errors of Hebrew names in Midrash Vayyissa\u2019u, where, for example, the city Hazor is written as Hasor or Asor. If so, it may be that this section of Jubilees stems from a Hellenistic Jewish writer\u2019s heroic account\u2014written in Greek\u2014of the brave deeds of Jacob\u2019s son Judah and his brothers. It is not impossible to suppose that this heroic celebration of Jacob\u2019s sons was in fact part of the now-lost portion of Theodotus\u2019s ancient epic poem (entitled \u201cOn the Sons of Israel\u201d?), of which only a few fragments of the section on Dinah survive.
\n34:9. And he returned peacefully Following this war, Jacob \u201cmade peace with them,\u201d and they remained subordinated to him \u201cuntil the day that he and his sons went down to Egypt.\u201d This assertion appears to be modeled on the outcome of that other war, between Jacob and Esau (below, chap. 37), which concludes by saying that the Edomites \u201ccontinued paying tribute to Jacob until the day that he went down to Egypt\u201d (38:13).
\n34:10\u201312. he sent Joseph from his house That is, Jacob sent Joseph. Jubilees\u2019 author does not begin the long tale of Joseph and his brothers (Gen. 37:29\u201335) from the beginning. There is no mention here of Jacob\u2019s favoring Joseph and the \u201cornamented tunic\u201d he gave him (Gen. 37:3), nor of Joseph\u2019s childhood dreams (Gen. 37:5\u201311) and his brothers\u2019 resentment. Here, without explanation, his brothers treat him \u201cfraudulently\u201d (better: treacherously). Similarly, Jubilees\u2019 author reports that they repented (better: changed their minds) about killing him without any mention of Reuben\u2019s or Judah\u2019s role (Gen. 37:21\u201322, 26\u201327) in this change of plans. Like many Second Temple and Rabbinic sources, Jubilees\u2019 author identifies Potiphar, Joseph\u2019s owner, with \u201cPotiphera, priest of the city of Heliopolis\u201d (i.e., biblical On), the father of Joseph\u2019s wife in Gen. 41:45.
\n34:12\u201314. And the sons of Jacob slaughtered a kid Joseph\u2019s brothers send Joseph\u2019s garment, dipped in the slaughtered kid\u2019s blood, \u201con the tenth of the seventh month,\u201d the date of the Day of Atonement. Here, then, is another holy day rooted in the doings of the patriarchs. (Note that this is quite different from the Interpolator\u2019s precedent for, and understanding of, the Day of Atonement; see above on 5:17.) Jubilees stresses that Jacob \u201clamented all of that night\u201d because the Torah makes clear that observance of the Day of Atonement begins in the evening: \u201con the ninth day of the month, in the evening, from evening to evening you shall observe this Sabbath\u201d (Lev. 23:32).
\n34:15\u201317. And on that day Bilhah heard Thus, Bilhah and Dinah also died at this time, adding to the mourning that, for Jubilees\u2019 author (but not the Interpolator), characterizes this holy day. Bilhah was in Qafratef, which may represent Kafirat Efrayim, that is Chephirah (Josh. 9:17) in the territory of Ephraim. If so, this specification may have been made to suggest a connection between that place-name and kapparah (atonement).
\n34:18. Therefore it is decreed But not \u201cordained and written on the heavenly tablets,\u201d since this passage is being written by Jubilees\u2019 original author, not the Interpolator. The he-goat that Joseph\u2019s brothers had slaughtered (cf. Gen. 37:31) is now mentioned again (i.e., to \u201catone for them[selves] with a young kid\u201d) since it represents one of the main elements of the biblical Day of Atonement, the kid whose blood is taken behind the curtain of the sanctuary (Lev. 16:7). As a result, \u201cthis day is decreed so that they might mourn on it on account of their sins.\u201d (Mourning is, however, somewhat less than repentance). The mourning of this day serves the Israelites \u201cto purify themselves\u201d\u2014based on the use of \u201cpurify\u201d (letaher) in Lev. 16:30.
\n34:20. the sons of Jacob took wives for themselves No list of the wives of Jacob\u2019s sons appears in the Bible, although some of them are mentioned here and there in the narrative. Simeon\u2019s anonymous Canaanite wife (Gen. 46:10; see above on 30:18\u201320) is named here \u2018Adiba\u2019a; Levi\u2019s wife, Melka, also appears in T. Levi 11:1; Judah\u2019s wife, Betasu\u2019el, is the daughter (bat) of the Canaanite Shua in Gen. 38:2. But what of the strictures against marrying a Canaanite (above on 30:18\u201320)? In the case of Simeon, Jubilees\u2019 author had little choice: his Canaanite wife was a biblical fact. But Simeon is reported to have had other sons (Gen. 41:45), and these were presumably from a different woman (since only Saul is described as \u201cthe son of a Canaanite woman\u201d), so the author adds here that \u201cSimeon repented\u201d about having married a Canaanite, and \u201ctook another wife from Mesopotamia as his brothers had\u201d done. As for Judah, he did have three sons with Batshua, but these apparently died without issue; the tribe of Judah consists of the descendants of Judah and the non-Canaanite Tamar. Equally important, Jubilees\u2019 author mentions that Levi\u2019s wife, Melka, was \u201cfrom the daughters of Aram,\u201d indeed \u201cfrom the seed of the sons of Terah,\u201d in other words, from Abraham\u2019s extended family. The author could not have been happy about Joseph\u2019s Egyptian wife, Asenath, but this was another biblical fact, mentioned in Gen. 41:45; at least she was not a Canaanite.
\n35:1\u20138. Rebecca called to Jacob Rebecca is the powerful woman of Jubilees. Having already given her the lengthy blessing in chapter 25 above, Jubilees\u2019 author now assigns her another important role. Foreseeing her own death, she wishes to make sure that relations in her family will remain cordial\u2014that Jacob will properly honor his father and that he will deal peacefully with his brother Esau. She speaks with him directly on this point.
\n35:9\u201310. Make Esau swear that he will not harm Jacob Here the author has Rebecca complain bitterly about Esau, not only fearing his intentions about Jacob but telling Isaac that \u201che gathered your flocks and robbed all of your possessions before your face.\u201d (The apparent scriptural basis for this motif is Gen. 36:6: Esau took \u201call the property he had acquired in Canaan and he went to [some] land out of fear for [mippenei] his brother Jacob\u201d (my translation). How did he acquire this property, and why did he go off with it to a place far from Jacob\u2014if not that \u201call the property\u201d included things that rightly belonged to Isaac and might some day have been willed to Jacob?).
\n35:15. If he swears, he will not abide by his oath That is, \u201cif [Esau] swears\u201d; 4Q223\u201324 4QPapJubilees reads: \u201cIf he swears he will not keep and he will not d[o it].\u201d
\n35:16. But if he wishes to kill Jacob Esau will always lose, \u201cbecause the protector of Jacob is greater and mightier and more honored and praised than the protector of Esau\u201d: Esau is protected by a mere guardian angel, whereas Jacob is protected directly by God, as Deut. 32:8\u20139 states. See above on 16:17\u201318.
\n35:20\u201324. I ask of you on the day when I die Rebecca asks of Esau that \u201cyou and Jacob love one another\u201d and that \u201cone will not seek evil for his brother\u201d: this is Lev. 19:18, \u201cAnd you shall love your fellow like yourself,\u201d followed by the \u201cnegative Golden Rule,\u201d a common interpretation of this same verse; see also below on 36:7\u201311. One would expect that Esau would be presented here and henceforth in an entirely negative light, but the opposite seems to be true. He pledges his undying love for Jacob: \u201cJacob, my brother, I shall love more than all flesh \u2026 I swear to you that I will love him,\u201d Esau tells his mother. Was he lying? It would seem rather that he was quite sincere (immediately afterward, in Jub. 36:13\u201314, Esau voluntarily renounces all claims to the firstborn\u2019s double portion, even though Isaac offers it to him). indeed, Esau later seeks to keep his vow to love Jacob despite his own sons\u2019 vehement objections (37:2\u20137). The apparent reason for this virtuous side of Esau is that, for Jubilees\u2019 author, genealogy is ineluctable (see above on 12:1\u20138 concerning Terah\u2019s virtue). Esau is the son of the good Isaac and grandson of the even-better Abraham; he must have had good instincts, even if, as Isaac noted above, he did not respect his own vows.
\n35:25. And she called to Jacob in the sight of Esau That is, \u201c[in the presence of] Esau.\u201d Having secured Esau\u2019s promise to love Jacob, Rebecca then goes back to Jacob and obtains his pledge to act lovingly toward Esau. With the internal relations of her family now arranged, Rebecca dies. (Her death and burial are not reported directly in the Genesis narrative, but they are referred to in Jacob\u2019s words in Gen. 49:31.)
\n36:1\u20136. Isaac called his two sons Using the same phrasing as Jacob\u2019s words in Gen. 49:29\u201332, Isaac here requests to be buried in the cave of Machpelah. He then charges his sons that, \u201camong yourselves,\u201d you shall \u201cbe loving of your brothers as a man loves himself,\u201d a commandment later to be given in Lev. 19:18. (It seems that the phrase \u201camong yourselves\u201d is intended to limit the scope of this commandment, much as the Qumran community and others sought to limit it: it did not necessarily mean loving all humanity, nor even all Israel, but only some subsection thereof) and to avoid idolatry (Exod. 20:5), so that God will plant them (Isaac\u2019s descendants) \u201cas a righteous planting\u201d (above on 16:22\u201323).
\n36:8. no one will desire evil for his brother This is again the so-called \u201cnegative Golden Rule,\u201d a common interpretation of Lev. 19:18: do not do to anyone what you would not want done to you.
\n36:10. he will be wiped out from the book of the discipline of mankind This is an otherwise unknown, and rather strange, book. It seems possible that the \u201cbook of\u201d came from the next phrase, \u201che will not be written \u2026 in The Book of Life.\u201d Perhaps, then, the original text said that \u201cJust as He [God] burned Sodom, so too will He burn up his [the errant brother\u2019s] land and his city and everything which is his will be blotted out\u2014(as) an act of discipline\/punishment (musar) to mankind, and he himself will be blotted out from the book of life,\u201d the latter a common notion. If, subsequently, a scribe\u2019s eye jumped from the first \u201cblotted out\u201d to the second and he wrote \u201cblotted out from the book,\u201d he might then have caught the error and continued with the \u201cmusar [or Gk. paideia] of mankind,\u201d and ended the line as originally written, \u201cand he himself will be blotted out from the book of life.\u201d
\n36:12. And he divided all his possessions Although Jacob purchased the rights of the firstborn fair and square, Isaac nonetheless initially grants the larger (portion) of his property to Esau, in keeping with Deut. 21:15\u201317. But Esau nobly refuses, recounting how he sold the rights of the firstborn to Jacob.
\n36:15. my heart has not been grieved concerning the right of seniority lest you act perversely concerning it Better: \u201cyou have put my mind at ease about the birthright\u2014that you will not do anything unfortunate because of it\u201d\u2014a somewhat ironic observation in light of the mortal combat the two will shortly fall into because of the inheritance. Thereupon Isaac dies \u201cat the age of one hundred and eighty years,\u201d apparently in anno mundi 2162.
\n36:20. in Mount Hebron in the tower That Isaac had originally intended to leave to Esau (36:12) but which Esau ceded to Jacob. This is the same tower that Esau\u2019s sons will later attack.
\naccording to the commands which were revealed (and) according to the division of the days in his generations This is a difficult verse. The verse starts by asserting that Jacob \u201cworshiped the LORD with all of his [i.e., his whole] heart,\u201d just as would later be commanded in Deut. 10:12. But how exactly can one serve God without commandments to keep? The author therefore adds that Jacob served \u201caccording to the commands which were revealed [better: in accordance with the commandments that had been revealed]\u201d up to that point. These presumably included not only the things that had been commanded directly by God, such as circumcision (15:11), but the various things commanded by Israel\u2019s ancestors\u2014Enoch, Noah, Abraham, and so forth. See above on 21:5.
\n36:21\u201324. And Leah, his wife, died Leah too is buried in the cave of Machpelah (cf. Gen. 49:31\u201332). In fact, the Bible does not narrate Leah\u2019s death, but she must have died before Jacob did, since he mentions having buried her (Gen. 49:31). She was last seen alive and well in Jubilees at the time of the Reuben-Bilhah incident (Jub. 33:1), apparently in anno mundi 2143, 40 years or so before Jacob mentions having buried her. This allowed Jubilees some wide range for Leah\u2019s death; for reasons to be seen below, the author decided to locate her death in anno mundi 2167.
\n37:1. on the day that Isaac, the father of Jacob and Esau, died In blessing his son Esau (Gen. 27:39\u201340), Isaac had said to him, \u201cBy your sword you shall live, and you shall serve your brother; but when you grow restive, you shall break his yoke from your neck.\u201d (See above on 26:25\u201335, which, however, is based on a different interpretation of Gen. 27:39\u201340 from the one about to be used here.) Isaac may have been foretelling events in the distant future, but for Jubilees and other interpreters, this prophecy concerned not some later generation, but that of Esau and his sons. The account of Esau\u2019s war with his brother Jacob (Jub. 37:1\u201338:12) appears as well as in Midrash Vayyissa\u2019u, chapter 3, and was incorporated as well into Yal. Shim\u2019oni 1:138 and elsewhere. A considerably shorter account of this war appears in the Greek Testament of Judah section of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. The many common elements suggest that they stem from a common source and\/or that the later versions borrowed from earlier ones. The events leading up to the war start \u201con the day that Isaac \u2026 died.\u201d This is no coincidence: in Gen. 27:41, Esau said specifically, \u201cWhen the days of mourning my father arrive, I will kill my brother Jacob.\u201d Indeed, these words, along with Amos 1:11 (\u201cBecause he [Edom, i.e., Esau] chased after his brother with a sword and had no pity\u201d), provided a firm biblical basis for the idea that there had been a war between Jacob and Esau, even though the book of Genesis itself had not bothered to narrate those events. It is certainly noteworthy that, of all the different versions of this war, Jubilees has the only one that contains this chronological remark (in fact, one that conflicts with later details). Since this is the only firm chronological \u201canchor\u201d for this nonbiblical war, it stands to reason that Jubilees here preserves what was the original dating of this war. But there is a chronological problem in the Jubilees account of this war. According to Jubilees\u2019 reckoning, Isaac died in anno mundi 2162, five years before the death of Leah (above on 36:21). But\u2014also according to Jubilees\u2014Jacob \u201cwas lamenting [i.e., mourning for] Leah, his wife\u201d (37:14) when the war with Esau begins. So how can Jubilees say that the war broke out on the day that Isaac died, five years earlier? Here one cannot dismiss the discrepancy on the basis of a miscopied date in Jubilees\u2019 transmission: there can be no doubt that Jubilees first narrates the death of Isaac, then the death of Leah, and only after that the war between Jacob and Esau that allegedly began right after Isaac\u2019s death.
\n37:2\u20138. Because I sold my right of firstborn to Jacob Again, Esau is here presented in a relatively positive light. His narration is truthful, and although Isaac \u201cplaced me under his [Jacob\u2019s] hand,\u201d Esau accepts his father\u2019s decree. But if Esau\u2019s ancestry vouchsafes him a measure of virtue and filial piety, this is not true of his own sons, the children of \u201cforeign\u201d women: Echoing Gen. 27:40, they accuse Esau of willingly putting \u201cyour neck under his yoke.\u201d
\n37:9\u201310. they sent to Aram and to Aduram The spelling of this last name may have been influenced by the government official Adoram mentioned in 2 Sam. 20:24 and 1 Kings 12:18, but it seems likely that the original text was meant to evoke the city of Adora (Dura), five miles west southwest of Hebron (it is called Adoraim in 2 Chron. 11:9). If so, the text seems to be speaking of the eponymous founder of that city, a friend of Esau. In Jub. 38:3, he is called \u201cAduran the Aramean,\u201d but this would make little sense given the city\u2019s location on the border with Edom: he should more likely be \u201cAdura the Edomite.\u201d In light of this, the verse cited above should read: \u201cThey sent to Edom, to their father\u2019s friend Adura.\u201d Reinforced by their allies and mercenaries, \u201cfrom Moab \u2026 from the Ammonites \u2026 from Philistia \u2026 from Edom and from the Hurrians \u2026 and from the Kittim [perhaps Hittites]\u201d\u2014all of them enemies of Israel\u2014Esau\u2019s sons go on the attack.
\n37:13\u201316. But afterward he remembered Esau\u2019s waffling and ultimate transformation can only be understood in the light of the author\u2019s genealogical view of the world (above on 35:18\u201327): the son of Isaac and Rebecca could not be altogether bad\u2014indeed, he had been a loving brother until now. His sons, however, are half-breeds; they have no innate goodness. It is they, therefore, who persuade Esau to join them through a combination of threats and cajoling. At first \u201che was filled with wrath and indignation\u201d At their disobedience, but afterward he remembered his earlier hatred of Jacob and meanwhile forgot the oath that he swore to his father not to hurt Jacob. A weak character, lacking Jacob\u2019s innate qualities, Esau gives in, violating his oath in the process\u2014a grievous sin.
\n37:17. this the oath which you swore to your father? Indeed, it seems the not-very-bright Esau had simply forgotten his oath (4Q221 frag. 5:4 reads: \u201cand he did not remember the oath\u201d).
\n37:18. Mankind and beasts of the field have no righteous oath 4Q224 reads \u201cneither mankind nor snakes make reliable oaths,\u201d which sounds like a popular saying or proverb: don\u2019t trust people any more than you trust snakes! Esau adds: \u201cwhich they have surely sworn forever,\u201d that is, \u201ceven though they may swear it forever.\u201d
\n37:20. And if sucklings separate themselves from their mother, you would not be a brother to me A difficult verse, unfortunately missing in the Latin and Syriac texts, and in the Qumran fragments. The one promising element is the verb \u201cseparated,\u201d since this is reminiscent of the oracle given to Rebecca before the birth of Jacob and Esau, \u201cTwo nations are in your womb, and two peoples will be separated from your innards\u201d (Gen. 25:23). It would seem that Esau is evoking this oracle and saying something like: \u201cFrom the time we were separated from our mother, you have not been a brother to me.\u201d Thus, Charles\u2019s suggestion that the original text read: \u201cSince the twins [reading atbu\u2019\u0259 for a\u0163b\u0101t\u0259] were separated from their mother, you have not been a brother to me\u201d makes eminently good sense, though perhaps \u201csince we were separated at our mother\u2019s breasts\u201d might fit better with 4Q223\u201324 unit 2 col. 4:8. Charles further suggested transferring this sentence back to Jub. 37:19, since in its present location it interrupts the series of animal images that all express the same idea: \u201cI will never make peace with you.\u201d But that suggestion must now be rejected in the light of 4Q224 (unit 2, column 4, line 8), which preserves the words \u201cyou have n[ot] been a brother\u201d in the midst of all the animal imagery, supporting the idea that the Ethiopic text has located this sentence in precisely the right place, even if its wording has been somewhat garbled.
\n37:23. but you will have no peace Why did Jubilees\u2019 author treat at such great length an incident that, while it fleshes out the prophecy of Gen. 27:40, is certainly not part of the Genesis narrative itself, while at the same time he radically condensed other incidents that are treated in detail in Genesis? Surely this conflict could have been narrated in a sentence or two. But its importance to Jubilees\u2019 author lies in its historical significance. The Edomites, Israel\u2019s cousins despite their mixed genealogy, ought not to have been Israel\u2019s enemies; \u201cYou shall not hate an Edomite, for he is your kinsman,\u201d Deut. 23:8 commands. And yet, in post-exilic times, Edom was indeed hated, and hostility, rather than \u201cpeace,\u201d generally characterized Judea\u2019s view of Idumea. Jubilees\u2019 lengthy narration is designed to justify that hostility.
\n38:12\u201314. Jacob sent notice to his sons to make peace Jacob\u2019s sons, having pursued Esau\u2019s sons to Edom, let them live but \u201cplaced a yoke of servitude\u201d on Edom (again echoing Gen. 27:40) \u201cuntil the day he that he [Jacob] went down to Egypt.\u201d That the Edomites \u201chave not ceased from the yoke of servitude \u2026 until today\u201d contradicts the previous sentence (since certainly they did cease payment as soon as Jacob\u2019s family went down to Egypt). This suggests that this last sentence was added by a later writer or copyist toward the end of the 2nd century BCE, after John Hyrcanus had conquered Idumea (Edom).
\n38:15\u201324. And these are the kings This section is based on Gen. 36:31\u201342. \u201cBalaq, son of Be\u2019or\u201d appears as \u201cBela, son of Beor\u201d in Gen. 36:32 MT, while \u201cBalak\u201d appears in Gen. 36:32 LXX (perhaps through confusion of Balak son of Zippor and Balaam son of Beor, the two main figures in the narration of Num. 22\u201324). The other spellings in this chapter seem likewise to follow those of the LXX, probably introduced when the original Hebrew text of Jubilees was translated into Greek and\/or from Greek to Ethiopic.
\n39:6. he remembered \u2026 the words which Jacob, his father, used to read \u2026 no man \u2026 (may) fornicate with a woman who has a husband This is an exegetical motif originating in Gen. 49:24, \u201cBy the hands of [i.e., thanks to] the Mighty One of Jacob\u201d; the last phrase, avir ya\u2019akov, was apparently interpreted as aviv Ya\u2019akov, \u201chis father Jacob.\u201d Out of this developed the idea that, faced with the advances of Potiphar\u2019s wife, Jacob \u201cremembered his father\u2019s teachings.\u201d
\n39:6. the sin is written (on high) concerning him in the eternal books always before the LORD No mention here of the \u201cheavenly tablets,\u201d since this is being written by Jubilees\u2019 original author.
\n39:8. begged him (for) one year This is the author\u2019s interpretation of \u201cday after day\u201d (Gen. 39:10), but \u201che turned away and refused.\u201d
\n38:9. she embraced him and seized him That is, by his garment; Gen. 39:12.
\nAnd she shut the door \u2026 and he broke the door \u201cShut\u201d here means \u201clocked.\u201d This is a midrashic elaboration of the Genesis text, found as well in Joseph, 52 and the Qur\u2019an, Sura 12:25\u201329. The apparent textual basis for this narrative expansion is the presence of two verbs in Gen. 39:12, \u201che got away and escaped outside.\u201d Since the second verb specifies \u201coutside,\u201d the first seems to suggest that there was some obstacle to be overcome before Joseph could go outside.
\n39:10. Your Hebrew slave, whom you love, desired to seduce me \u201cWhom you love\u201d seems to be a mistake for \u201cwhom you have brought to us\u201d in Gen. 39:17, a copyist having apparently misarranged the consonants of heve\u2019ta as ahavta. Note that this error appears in 4Q223\u201324 unit 2 col. 5:3, where \u201cnow\u201d (\u2018atta) likewise seems to be a mistake for \u2019atta, that is, \u201cyou yourself.\u201d
\n39:11. in the place where the prisoners whom the king imprisoned stayed This somewhat wordier version of Gen. 39:20 MT (\u201cwhere the king\u2019s prisoners were held\u201d) matches the LXX\u2019s version.
\n39:14. he dwelt there two years See below on 46:1\u20134.
\n40:7. they proclaimed before him \u201cEl El wa Abirer\u201d This phrase corresponds to the apparently Egyptian word Abrek in Gen. 41:43. Charles suggested that it represents the Heb. El, El, ve\u2019abir El (God, God, and the mighty one of God), noting the parallel expression \u201cmighty one of God\u201d in Jos. Asen. 3:4; 18:1\u20132; and 21:21. The \u201cmighty one of God\u201d is certainly possible, but it is difficult to see how this could be derived from an original abrek: those same letters might better be understood as representing abirekha, \u201cyour mighty one.\u201d This possibility seems a bit more likely in the light of Jacob\u2019s blessing of Joseph in Gen. 49:22\u201326: there Jacob speaks of \u201cthe Mighty One of Jacob\u201d (abir Ya\u2019akov)\u2014that is, God\u2014having somehow saved his son Joseph. Here, then, the Egyptians would be made to be saying, \u201cGod, God is your [i.e., Joseph\u2019s] Mighty One.\u201d This is a reasonable guess, but still only a guess.
\n40:10. the daughter of Potiphar, the daughter of the priest of Heliopolis Here Jubilees is identifying Poti-phera of Gen. 41:45 with the Potiphar mentioned earlier; the same identification is found in the LXX, where both are called Petephres, as well as in the \u201cTestament of Joseph\u201d 18:3 and Gen. Rab. 86:3. It is certainly striking that Jubilees mentions this marriage at all (he certainly could have skipped it), since for him any close relations with non-Jews was a form of \u201cimpurity\u201d to be avoided at all cost. Perhaps significantly, he omits mention of the birth of the couple\u2019s two sons (Gen. 41:50\u201352).
\n41:1. Judah took a wife for Er \u2026 from the daughters of Aram, and her name was Tamar Hence, she was not a Canaanite. (Her origins are not specified in the biblical episode of Judah and Tamar; Gen. 38:1\u201330.)
\n41:2. he wanted to take a wife from his mother\u2019s people Again, an element not present in the biblical text. After Er\u2019s death Tamar is given to his younger brother Onan, in keeping with the law of levirate marriage (Deut. 25:5\u201310), but Onan refuses to have normal relations with her and is likewise killed by God. Judah then promises Tamar that she will be married to his third son, Sela (Shelah), but the villainous Bedsuel (Bat-Shua) did not permit him to marry her. Tamar remains a childless widow.
\n41:10. Let me enter into you Judah\u2019s words to Tamar in Gen. 38:16 might be interpreted as a crude proposal (NJPS translates, \u201cHere, let me sleep with you\u201d). To avoid giving this impression, Jubilees\u2019 author suggests that he really meant \u201cLet me enter your house\u201d (cf. Jub. 41:5) to which she responds, \u201cCome on.\u201d
\n41:14. his shepherd, an Adulamite This corresponds to \u201chis friend Hirah the Adullamite\u201d (Gen. 38:12). The Heb. re\u2019ehu can indeed be understood as either \u201chis friend\u201d or \u201chis shepherd,\u201d and the latter is the translation of the LXX. Jubilees\u2019 author, with his horror of close ties with non-Jews, would obviously prefer \u201chis shepherd\u201d as well.
\n41:17. Judah went to her father\u2019s house This is not stated in Gen. 38:24. The apparent reason is that Judah\u2019s words in Gen. 38:24, \u201cTake her out [plural] and let her be burned,\u201d have no specific addressee. The author therefore supplies one: \u201cher father and her brothers.\u201d
\n41:19\u201320. Tamar was more righteous than I Better: \u201cShe\u2019s right,\u201d or even \u201cShe wins [in a court case]\u201d; on the meaning of this idiom (cited from Gen. 38:26), see above 1:6. The biblical verse continues \u201cinasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shelah.\u201d Since the words translated \u201cinasmuch\u201d (ki al ken) contain the common term for \u201ctherefore\u201d (al ken), Jubilees\u2019 author inserted what would more properly follow such a \u201ctherefore,\u201d \u201clet them not burn her.\u201d He then inserts the words that had followed the \u201cinasmuch\u201d in Gen. 38:6, but in a new sense: \u201cAnd on account of that [namely, the fact that Judah had slept with her] she was not given to Selah [subsequently].\u201d If at first it was Bedsuel who prevented Selah from marrying Tamar, now it is the fact that Selah\u2019s father, Judah, has had relations with her that prevents him from marrying her, since that would be another form of defilement.
\n41:23\u201324. Judah knew that the deed which he did was evil Between the end of the story and the original author\u2019s conclusion (41:27\u201328), the Interpolator inserted this passage. He was concerned with an issue that Jubilees\u2019 author passed over, namely, why Judah was not punished for having relations with his daughter-in-law. The answer that the Interpolator provides is that Judah\u2014having sinned inadvertently\u2014\u201cbegan to mourn and make supplication before the LORD \u2026 and did not do it again.\u201d This is precisely the same understanding of sin and forgiveness embodied in the Interpolator\u2019s understanding of the Day of Atonement (above on 5:13\u201319). The Interpolator also mentions Judah\u2019s \u201cignorance\u201d (v. 25)\u2014he did not know that the woman was Tamar! (This too is reminiscent of the Interpolator\u2019s Day of Atonement, which provides forgiveness \u201cfrom all their error\u201d in Jub. 5:18.) In contrast to what the Interpolator wrote in the case of Reuben and Bilhah (above on 33:10\u201317), here he does not invoke the idea that the law and its punishment had not yet been publicly proclaimed (Jub. 33:16) as a mitigating factor. Rather, it is Judah\u2019s sincere repentance and his abandoning his inadvertent sin right away that win the day: as a result, \u201cwe [the angels of the Presence] told him in a dream that it was forgiven him.\u201d
\n41:25. And anyone \u2026 who lies with his mother-in-law, they shall burn with fire Better: \u201cdaughter-in-law.\u201d As with the case of Reuben and Bilhah (see above on 33:10\u201320), the Interpolator stresses that the facts of this particular case should not be taken as a precedent for leniency. Indeed, as so many times before, the Interpolator finds in this incident a connection between a narrative in Genesis and a law to be promulgated later at Mount Sinai: \u201cAnd you [Moses] command the children of Israel \u2026 [concerning someone] who lies with his daughter-in-law [Lev. 18:15; 20:12] or with his mother-in-law [Lev. 18:17]\u201d because in either case he has done something that is impure. This whole insertion by the Interpolator stands in contradiction to the original author\u2019s conclusion, which is found in the next two verses.
\n41:27\u201328. we told Judah that his two sons had not lain with her \u201cWe\u201d refers to angels. If so, then their marriages to Tamar had never been consummated and Judah was guilty of nothing\u2014so of course the Interpolator\u2019s account of Judah\u2019s repentance and his subsequently being forgiven make no sense. But the original author was in any case not interested in Judah\u2019s guilt or innocence, but in the status of his offspring, from whom the Jewish people are descended; therefore, after he asserted that the marriages were never consummated, he added that Judah\u2019s \u201cseed\u201d (offspring) was allowed to continue into the next generation and was not uprooted. It was quite simply unthinkable to the original author that Judah\u2019s descendants\u2014the Jews\u2014could be the product of an illicit union.
\n41:28. because in the integrity of his eyes Better: \u201cin all innocence,\u201d i.e., quite properly, and without ulterior motive.
\nhe went and sought judgment That is, he demanded punishment. This addresses an entirely separate question: on what basis could Judah have demanded in the biblical narrative that Tamar be burned (Gen. 38:24)? The author explains that he had acted quite properly, since this is what he had been taught by Abraham (see above on 20:1\u201310).
\n42:1\u201312. the famine began to come upon the land This section is a summary of Gen. 41:53\u201342:38.
\n42:11. perhaps he might become ill The Hebrew text says that Jacob fears that a mishap (ason) might befall Benjamin; this is a rare word, used only in the Joseph story (Gen. 42:4 and again in 42:38) and in Exod. 21:22\u201323. Translators were thus unsure of its meaning, as their varying translations attest. The LXX renders it in the Joseph story as \u201cbecome weak [or ill],\u201d and it is apparently that same tradition that influenced the rendering by Jubilees\u2019 author here: \u201cIf perhaps he became feverish on the way.\u201d
\n42:13. became severe in the land of Canaan and in all the earth This verse blends Gen. 41:57 (\u201cfor the famine had become severe throughout the world\u201d) with Gen. 43:1 (\u201cthe famine in the land was severe\u201d), specifying that the \u201cland\u201d was Canaan.
\nexcept in the land of Egypt. For many of the Egyptians stored up their grain for food after they saw that Joseph was gathering grain This verse seems to be an interpretation of Gen. 41:55, \u201cPharaoh said to the Egyptians, \u2018Go to Joseph; whatever he tells you, you shall do.\u2019 \u201d If all the Egyptians wished was to purchase grain, why did Joseph have to tell them what to do? Jubilees\u2019 author thus understood that Joseph instituted self-rationing among the people at the same time he himself began storing grain for the government; that is why the famine was severe everywhere except in the land of Egypt. (A Rabbinic tradition has it that Joseph told the Egyptians \u201cwhat to do\u201d in that he instructed them to be circumcised and convert to Judaism [Gen. Rab. 90:6]; apparently, then, later exegetes were equally puzzled by Gen. 41:55, even if the solution they proposed was altogether different from that of Jubilees.)
\n42:18\u201319. Place him in my hands Reuben\u2019s crude offer of his own two sons\u2019 lives as collateral for Benjamin (Gen. 42:37) is juxtaposed here to Judah\u2019s offer (Gen. 43:8), even though they are nine verses apart; Jacob accepts Judah\u2019s proposal, thus highlighting his greater trust in the latter.
\n42:20\u201323. he increased Benjamin\u2019s portion seven times Benjamin\u2019s portion is \u201cseven times more\u201d than those of his brothers, versus \u201cfive times\u201d in the MT; this variant may have been introduced by the Greek translator, since one extant LXX ms. has \u201csevenfold.\u201d
\n42:25. learn their thoughts, whether they had thoughts of peace for one another Genesis never explains why, once Joseph had succeeded in having Benjamin (his only full brother) brought to him, he did not reveal his identity right away. Did he wish to put his brothers through one last ordeal as revenge for all the suffering they had caused him? Rejecting any such notion, Jubilees\u2019 author asserts that Joseph still needed to test their intentions and, more specifically, whether, faced with the threat of having their youngest brother lost to them forever, they would stand idly by (as they had with Joseph himself).
\n43:2. The silver cup from which my lord drinks Jubilees\u2019 author omits the servant\u2019s mention that the \u201cstolen\u201d silver goblet is one that Joseph \u201cuses for divination\u201d (Gen. 44:5). instead, the servant simply says that it is the one \u201cfrom which my lord drinks.\u201d Joseph\u2019s later words to the same effect (\u201cDo you not know that a man like me practices divination?\u201d Gen. 44:15) are likewise changed: \u201cDid you not know that a man would be pleased with his cup as I am with this cup?\u201d (Jub. 43:10). The reason is that such divination is forbidden by the Torah (Lev. 19:26; Deut 18:10); for Jubilees, it was hardly credible that Joseph would have indulged in a practice God prohibited (or even to have claimed to do so as part of his Egyptian disguise). It is also noteworthy that Jubilees has once again slightly changed the order of things. In Genesis, Joseph asks two questions back to back: \u201cWhat is this deed that you have done? Do you not know that a man like me practices divination?\u201d The implication of the second question is that, thanks to divination, a \u201cman like me\u201d was bound to discover the brothers\u2019 theft of the goblet. But Jubilees\u2019 author has eliminated Joseph\u2019s first question and moved the second one a bit later to avoid any such implication. Now, he has Joseph refuse the brothers\u2019 offer to all become his slaves, saying \u201cI fear the LORD [better: I fear God],\u201d borrowing a phrase uttered by Joseph in similar circumstances in Gen. 42:18; he then has Joseph add, as if it were an afterthought summarizing the whole, sorry affair: \u201cDid you not know that a man would be pleased with his cup as I am with this cup? And [yet] you stole it from me!\u201d
\nhurry, bring (him) before I go to my judgment seat Jubilees\u2019 author added this detail to explain why Gen. 44:14 mentions that Joseph \u201cwas still there [in his house]\u201d when the brothers return: he had purposely stayed there and not gone to work.
\n43:14. Joseph saw that the heart of all of them was in accord one with another for good This settled the issue, raised above in 42:25, that was on Joseph\u2019s mind.
\n43:18. the LORD has sent me first to prepare before you so that many people might live This is the wisdom theme of the biblical story (Gen. 45:5; 50:20): the entire episode was part of God\u2019s great plan.
\n44:2\u20133. Jacob recalled the dream These verses are intended to explain Gen. 46:3, where God tells Jacob, \u201cFear not to go down to Egypt.\u201d Why should he be afraid? Certainly one reason might be the warning that God gave to Abraham in Gen. 15:13\u2014\u201cKnow that your offspring will be strangers in a land not theirs and they shall be enslaved and oppressed for four hundred years.\u201d But it is also possible that this verse alludes to the vision of the seven tablets (see above on Jub. 32:21): Jacob remembered reading in those tablets everything that would befall his sons in the future, including their enslavement in Egypt. For that reason, he \u201cwas planning to send [word] to Joseph\u201d saying that he would not be going down to Egypt after all. Unsure, however, he waited at Beer-sheba another seven days; then, on the 15th of the month, he observed the Festival of Firstfruits at its proper time (see above on 15:1), although all he had to offer was \u201cold wheat\u201d because of the famine.
\n44:5. on the sixteenth day the LORD appeared to him Why not on the 15th, the very day of the festival? It may be that the original verse was mistranslated or else deliberately altered by a copyist to fit the mention of the 16th in 44:8.
\n44:11\u201334. And these are the names of the sons of Jacob Jacob goes down to Egypt, sending Judah ahead to \u201cexamine the land of Goshen\u201d (cf. Gen. 46:28). The list of Jacob\u2019s descendants going to Egypt is based on Gen. 46:8\u201327. There was a problem with that list, however; the names totaled 69, not 70, as stated there. Various solutions were proposed by interpreters. Jubilees\u2019 author followed a different procedure for counting and provided different data, which allowed him to arrive at the desired total. Noteworthy is the fact that he assigned five sons to Dan, rather than one as in Gen. 46:23. The apparent basis for this liberty is the fact that the MT reads, \u201cAnd the sons of Dan, Hushim.\u201d The plural \u201csons\u201d was taken by Jubilees as a hint that there were sons other than Hushim who were not listed, presumably because \u201cthey died during the year they entered Egypt.\u201d He also gives an extra son to Naphtali, Iv. At the same time, he omits mentioning Er and Onan since, as Gen. 46:12 remarks, they had died in Canaan before the descent into Egypt (although Er and Onan are mentioned again in Jub. 44:34); and the grandsons of Judah, Hezron, and Hamul (Gen. 46:12) and of Asher, Heber, and Malchiel (Gen. 46:17).
\n45:1\u20133: And Israel entered into the land of Egypt Notably absent here are the face-to-face encounters between Pharaoh and Joseph\u2019s brothers and between Pharaoh and Jacob (Gen. 46:31\u201347:10). This is, once again, probably due to the author\u2019s horror of Jewish dealings with foreigners. Instead, Jubilees\u2019 author expands Jacob\u2019s words in Gen. 46:30 into words of blessing and thanksgiving directed to God, \u201cAnd now let the LORD \u2026 be blessed.\u201d
\n45:4. It is enough for me that I have seen your face while I was alive Charles reasonably suggests emending to \u201cthat you are still alive\u201d to bring the text in line with Gen. 46:30, \u201cNow I can die, having seen for myself that you are still alive.\u201d
\nfor the vision which I saw in Bethel was certainly true These words seem to have been tacked on as a reference to the seven tablets whose content Jacob had memorized (Jub. 32:21).
\n45:8\u201312. the land of Egypt suffered in view of the famine Better: \u201csuffered [because of] the famine.\u201d This passage condenses Gen. 47:13\u201327, omitting Joseph\u2019s dealings with the people (perhaps, once again, because of the contaminating contact with foreigners) and his purchase of the land for Pharaoh. The text also explains what Genesis does not, that the reason for the famine inside Egypt was that \u201cduring the seven years of famine,\u201d the Nile \u201cdid not irrigate except a few places,\u201d failing to water the surrounding countryside as it usually did. Once it was restored, Joseph \u201cgave seed \u2026 to the people\u201d so that they could sow their fields.
\n45:14. And Israel blessed his sons before he died The author omits the long account of Jacob\u2019s \u201cblessings\u201d of his sons in Gen. 49:1\u201328, summarizing these as telling them \u201ceverything which was going to happen to them\u201d in the future. Missing as well is the lengthy account of Jacob\u2019s earlier granting of a double portion of the inheritance to Joseph, his blessing of Ephraim and Manasseh, and his request to be buried in the cave of Machpelah (all in Gen. 48), though the doubled inheritance and burial are mentioned in passing, \u201che gave to Joseph a double portion.\u201d
\n45:15. he gave all of his books and his fathers\u2019 books to Levi This literary heritage originated with Enoch and Noah (4:17\u201323; 12:25\u201327); since these books are said to contain matters relevant to the priesthood (part of the priestly instructions later included in the ALD was known to the author of Jubilees), they are given to Levi.
\n46:1. each one loved his brother and each man helped his brother As per Lev. 19:18; see above on 20:2; 36:1\u201320.
\n46:2. there was no Satan or anything evil Better: \u201canyone evil.\u201d These are the forces of Mastema\u2014a 10th of his former troops\u2014who were allowed by God a continued existence after the Flood (Jub. 10:8\u20139); they still exist, but do not bother Israel so long as Joseph is alive. The word \u201cSatan\u201d here designates a type of wicked angel, and not the Satan known from elsewhere.
\n46:3. seventeen years he dwelt in the land of Canaan and ten years he remained as a slave The 17 years are based on Gen. 37:2, but the other figures are Jubilees\u2019 interpretation of the biblical data. Thus, the 10 years of Joseph\u2019s enslavement must have included the 3 years in prison mentioned here, since Pharaoh is informed about Joseph\u2019s abilities as a dream interpreter 2 years after his cupbearer\u2019s release (Gen. 41:1), at which time Joseph was 30 years old (Gen. 41:46). Moreover, since he is said to have died at the age of 110 (Gen. 50:26), this meant that Joseph ruled Egypt under Pharaoh for eighty years.
\n46:5\u20137. And he commanded the children of Israel One mystery for interpreters was Joseph\u2019s request that his brothers swear an oath to the effect that his remains would be transported for burial in Canaan \u201cwhen God takes notice\u201d of the Israelites in Egypt (Gen. 50:24\u201325; Exod. 13:19), presumably at the time of the exodus. His father, Jacob, had similarly requested to be buried in Canaan, but in his case his body was embalmed and transported there almost immediately (Gen. 50:2\u20135). Why did Joseph not request that the same procedure be followed after his own death? Jubilees\u2019 author explains that \u201cthe gates of Egypt were shut up\u201d after a war with Canaan \u201cand there was none who could leave or enter Egypt.\u201d Realizing this, Joseph had his brothers swear that, when in the future God should \u201ctake notice\u201d of their descendants, the people of Israel, they would be sure not leave his last remains behind.
\n46:9\u201310. the children of Israel brought forth the bones of the children of Jacob It is fine that Jacob and Joseph took pains to be buried in Canaan, but what about Levi, Judah, and the other brothers? Surely their remains were not left in Egypt! Yet the Bible had no account of their being buried anywhere. Several ancient sources filled this gap; Jubilees here recounts that the Israelites took advantage of an Egyptian sally into Canaan to bury the bones of all the brothers \u201cin the cave of Machpelah\u201d\u2014all except Joseph\u2019s bones, since he had previous had them take an oath that his bones would be removed \u201cwhen God takes notice\u201d of the Israelites at the time of the Exodus.
\n46:12. and he conceived an evil thought Better: \u201can evil plan.\u201d Pharaoh\u2019s words to his wise men in Exod. 1:9\u201310 were puzzling in one respect: he warns that the Israelites, now grown numerous, may join with Egypt\u2019s enemies \u201cand go up from the land [of Egypt].\u201d But since this was before the Israelites were enslaved, what should stop them from leaving Egypt right away if that is what they wanted? And why should they need to join with Egypt\u2019s enemies to do so? The clever solution of Jubilees\u2019 author was to have these words addressed to the \u201cnew king\u201d who rose over Egypt (Exod. 1:8). According to Jubilees\u2019 author, this was not an Egyptian king, but the king of Canaan who conquered Egypt and took over the throne. For him, that the Israelites might \u201cgo up from the land of Egypt\u201d was indeed a threat, because \u201ctheir hearts and their faces are upon land of Canaan\u201d: in biblical Heb. when a person\u2019s face is said to be \u201ctoward\u201d or \u201cupon\u201d something, this expresses a longing for or intention to go to it (see Jer. 1:13; 2 Chron. 32:2\u2014rather like the English expression \u201cto have one\u2019s eye on\u201d). In this case, the king is worried that the Israelites are planning, once they have the opportunity, to enter Canaan and conquer it. (Contrast Exod. Rab. 1:9, B. Sot. 11a, M. Tanh. Shemot 6, which see \u201cthey will go up from the land\u201d as a euphemism for \u201cwe [Egyptians] will be forced to leave the land.\u201d) To foil this plan, the Canaanite king of Egypt enslaved the Israelites.
\n46:14. And they built strengthened cities Rather, they \u201cfortified\u201d cities. This is an interpretation of Exod. 1:11 that appears as well in the LXX.
\n46:16 And the men of Egypt regarded the sons of Israel as defiled This reflects Exod. 1:12.
\n47:1. And you were born Here begins the somewhat incongruous section of Jubilees in which the angel of the Presence tells Moses about his own life\u2014not only his infancy, which Moses might not remember, but what happened after he was an adult as well.
\n47:2. throw all of their male children who were born into the river This is actually a gloss on the ambiguous decree of Exod. 1:22, \u201cEvery boy that is born you shall throw into the Nile.\u201d Every boy might seem to include the Egyptian newborns as well; Jubilees thus specifies that the decree applied only to the Israelites.
\n47:3\u20134. they reported concerning her That is, the existence of her newborn was reported to the authorities: this is Jubilees\u2019 innovation to explain why \u201cshe could no longer hide him\u201d (Exod. 2:3). Moses is then put in his special box by the river, but his mother continues to nurse him at night for seven days, while Miriam stands watch by day to protect him from the birds. (This is a narrative expansion of Exod. 2:4, \u201cAnd his sister stationed herself at a distance to know what would become of him.\u201d Why mention Miriam\u2019s role if it lasted only a few minutes or even a few hours? Jubilees therefore has it last seven days, necessitating that the baby also be nursed in the interim.)
\n47:5. Tharmuth This is the name given to Pharaoh\u2019s daughter here and in Josephus Ant. 2:224. (Artapanus calls her Merris, while Rabbinic tradition identifies her with \u201cBithiah the daughter of Pharaoh\u201d mentioned in 1 Chron. 4:15\u201317.)
\ntold her maids to fetch you \u201cMaids\u201d is better rendered as \u201cher maidservant.\u201d The Heb. says, \u201cshe sent forth her am[m]atah,\u201d which could mean her \u201cfemale slave\u201d or her \u201cforearm.\u201d The LXX has the former, as do the Ethiopic and Latin texts, but others adopted \u201cforearm.\u201d
\n47:9. And after this when you had grown It is not clear from Exod. 2:10 how old Moses was at the time he was brought back to Pharaoh\u2019s daughter. Presumably, if he had been given to his mother to nurse, he was brought to Pharaoh\u2019s daughter as soon as he was weaned. On the other hand, Moses seems later to know that he is one of the Hebrews and to identify with their plight (Exod. 2:11\u201312); would he do so if he had been raised in the royal palace from the age of three or four? It seems, therefore, that Jubilees\u2019 author saw two stages here: the child is brought to Pharaoh\u2019s daughter after weaning, perhaps to be officially \u201cadopted\u201d by her, \u201cand you became her son.\u201d But later he is returned to his father Amram for education: he \u201ctaught you writing\u201d (in Hebrew, of course; this would be necessary for Moses\u2019s later role in mediating the Torah). Moses stayed with Amram until he was 21 (\u201cthree weeks [of years]\u201d); he then returned to the court for 21 years more, until he was 42. (The motif of Moses\u2019s extensive education is found in other sources, apparently to explain Exod. 4:10: if Moses was not \u201ca man of words,\u201d did this not imply that he had never gone to school?)
\n47:10. your friend who was from the children of Israel The Hebrew man being beaten by an Egyptian in Exod. 2:11. The Latin text has simply \u201can Egyptian beating your brother.\u201d
\n48:1\u20132. you went and dwelt in the land of Midian No account is given here of Moses\u2019s encounter with the daughters of Jethro, a \u201cpriest of Midian\u201d (another foreigner!), and all that preceded his marriage to Jethro\u2019s daughter Zipporah.
\n48:2. And you know what was related to you on Mount Sinai That is, you know the story of the burning bush on Mount Horeb (Exod. 3:1\u20134:19). The Ethiopic text has: \u201cYou know who spoke to you on Mount Sinai,\u201d but this seems to be a mistake: what was said was that Moses had now to return to Egypt. On the other hand, the words \u201cYou know who spoke to you\u201d may allude to an ambiguity in the biblical narrative, whereby it is unclear whether Moses\u2019s interlocutor was an angel (Exod. 3:2) or God (Exod. 3:4)\u2014a problem that disturbed other interpreters. But if so, why did Jubilees not simply take a stand and say, \u201cYou know how God [or: an angel] spoke to you.\u201d On balance, it seems the Latin texts\u2019s \u201cwhat was spoken\u201d is to be preferred.
\nand what Prince Mastema desired to do with you \u201cPrince\u201d is better rendered as \u201cthe angel.\u201d In Exod. 4:24, \u201cthe LORD met him [Moses] and sought to kill him.\u201d To all interpreters, it seemed odd that God, having just commissioned Moses to return to Egypt, would now try to kill him; moreover, if an all-powerful God sought to kill Moses, why would He not succeed? Around this grew a rich set of exegetical traditions. One early solution, attested in the LXX, Targum Onkelos, and elsewhere, was to suppose that \u201cthe LORD\u201d was really a shorthand for \u201can angel of the LORD\u201d\u2014presumably a wicked angel, hence, here, the angel Mastema. This all occurs \u201cat the shelter\u201d\u2014corresponding to the Heb. malon (\u201csleeping place,\u201d later \u201cinn\u201d).
\n48:3. And I delivered you from his hand In the biblical account, it is the last-minute circumcision that saves Moses\u2019s life, but this apparently bothered Jubilees\u2019 author: instead, the angelic narrator of the book takes all the credit.
\n48:5. the LORD executed great vengeance upon them The list of plagues here includes dog flies in keeping with the LXX translation of the name of the fourth plague, arov (Exod. 8:17, 20). This same word was understood in Rabbinic tradition as a \u201cmixture\u201d of wild beasts.
\nupon all of their gods the LORD took vengeance This is a reference to Exod. 12:12 and Num. 33:4, puzzling to ancient interpreters because these verses do not say how God punished their gods. Jubilees\u2019 author supplied the obvious answer: he \u201cburned them with fire,\u201d that is, burned their statues. This accords with Moses\u2019s own words in Deut. 7:25, \u201cThe statues of their gods you shall burn with fire.\u201d
\n48:8. according to His covenant which he made with Abraham Abraham was told about the Egyptian enslavement and how, afterward, God would bring the Egyptians to justice (Gen. 15:13\u201314). Once again, it is a covenant with one of Israel\u2019s ancestors that the author chose to highlight.
\n48:10. Thus we let them do evil Jubilees\u2019 author here offers further information about his own view of the world\u2019s workings. (See also above on 10:8\u20139.) God is supremely powerful, but the wicked angel Mastema is nonetheless allowed some freedom to work evil in the world\u2014unless he is specifically restrained. (He is apparently not, for all that, the origin of all bad things that happen in the world\u2014not the full-blown Satan of later writings.) His presence is evoked here to answer a specific question that interpreters had about Pharaoh\u2019s \u201cwizards\/magicians\u201d and \u201cwise men\u201d: how was it that they seemed to have some sort of occult power, turning their staves into snakes as Moses did (Exod. 7:11\u201312) and apparently working other feats (Exod. 7:22;, 8:3)? The answer is that the angel Mastema \u201caided the magicians of the Egyptians\u201d (v. 9). The angel of the Presence adds that, although he and the other good angels allowed Pharaoh\u2019s wizards to do evil, they did not \u201cempower them with healing,\u201d that is, they did not let them undo the effects of the plagues. Moreover, after a while God \u201csmote them with evil wounds\u201d (v. 11; cf. Exod. 9:11) to prevent them from doing any further magic, which is why their intervention ceased after the fifth plague. Mastema had a further role: inciting the Egyptians to pursue the Israelites on their way out of Egypt. The angel reports: \u201cI stood between the Egyptians and Israel,\u201d a reference to \u201cthe angel of God\u201d mentioned in Exod. 14:19.
\n48:14. Just as the men of Egypt cast their sons That is, \u201c[the Israelites\u2019] sons.\u201d Jubilees sees in the drowning of the Egyptian forces at the Red Sea the principle of \u201cmeasure for measure\u201d: this was a just recompense for the Egyptians\u2019 drowning of the Israelite babies in the Nile (Exod. 1:22). And one thousand strong and ardent men \u2026 on account of one infant Cf. M. Sota, 1:9.
\n48:15. so that he might not accuse them Since \u201caccusing\u201d is Mastema\u2019s chief function; see above on 10:8\u20139.
\n48:16\u201317. help the Egyptians and pursue That is, \u201c[to] pursue [the Israelites].\u201d Jubilees adds that, although this was done by Mastema, it was really \u201cthe LORD our God\u201d who made the Egyptians stubborn \u201cso that he might smite [them] and throw them into the midst of sea.\u201d
\n48:18. they were requesting vessels and clothing From their neighbors (Exod. 12:35\u201336).
\nin exchange for the servitude which they subjected them to by force The Israelites did not wrongfully acquire these items; they merely took what was owed them for their years of forced labor.
\n48:19. we did not bring the children of Israel from Egypt in their nakedness That is, we did not bring them out of Egypt empty handed, thus confirming the promise in Exod. 3:21.
\n49:1. Remember the commandment which the LORD commanded you Having narrated in brief the events of the Exodus, the author introduces his review of the festival\u2019s laws; Moses is commanded to go over the laws \u201cconcerning the passover [better: the Passover sacrifice, the pesah], that you observe it in its time\u201d (the phrase used in Num. 9:2\u20133; 28:2; etc.), that is to say, beginning on the 14th of the first month, \u201cso that you might sacrifice it before it becomes evening and [thus] might eat it during the night.\u201d This sentence was intended to be followed immediately by vv. 18\u201321, which detail what \u201cbefore it becomes evening\u201d exactly means as well as how the paschal animal is to be slaughtered and cooked and where the festive meal is to be eaten.
\n49:2\u20134. All the powers of Mastema were sent to kill all of the firstborn With this verse the Interpolator introduced a long section about how the first Passover was observed in Egypt and other subjects neglected by Jubilees\u2019 author. While the Israelites were enjoying their celebration, Mastema\u2019s forces killed the Egyptian firstborn. This stands in striking contrast to the previous chapter, where Mastema was described as the Egyptians\u2019 ally, and it was God who killed the Egyptian firstborn (Jub. 48:5). This striking divergence is altogether characteristic of the Interpolator, who, unlike the original author, did not like the idea of angels (good or bad!) acting independently; they are merely agents of God\u2019s will, the good ones to do good and the bad ones to work evil, as God orders. (In fact, apart from this verse, the Interpolator never refers to Mastema at all; all other references to him are in passages written by the original author.) Furthermore, \u201call of the powers of Mastema\u201d is a concept unique to this passage, as is \u201cthe host of the LORD,\u201d presumably an army of good angels doing \u201ceverything which the LORD commanded them\u201d to do.
\n49:6. remained eating the flesh of the Passover and drinking wine \u201cFlesh of the Passover\u201d is better rendered as \u201cthe meat of the paschal sacrifice.\u201d The specification of wine suggests the wine used in the feasts of the Dead Sea Scrolls community (see 1Q28a col. 2:18, 20) as well as the later, Rabbinic stipulation of four cups of wine (M. Pes. 10:1).
\npraising and \u2026 glorifying Reminiscent of the hymns of the Therapeutae (Contempl. Life 80) or the Rabbinic recitation of the Hallel (M. Pes. 10:6\u20137; T. Pisha 8 states, \u201cThe Egyptian Passover required song and subsequent Passovers require song\u201d).
\n49:7. remember this day all the days of your life An allusion to Deut. 16:3 (\u201cSo that you remember the day of your going out of Egypt all the days of your life\u201d). Its evocation here is striking, since this same verse is evoked in the Passover Haggadah as part of what is to be mentioned on Passover eve (although Ben Zoma\u2019s explanation is taken from M. Ber. 1:9, where it has no connection to Passover). All these and the other connections mentioned in this commentary suggest that the Interpolator was familiar with Pharisaic (or proto-Pharisaic) laws and customs, something not evidenced in the original author.
\nyou will not delay (one) day from (its) day or from (one) month to (another) month One of the Interpolator\u2019s main themes: see above on 6:32\u201338. The mention of this possible delay leads to the subject of the \u201csecond Passover.\u201d
\n49:9. And (as for) the man who is purified Numbers 9:6\u201312 sets forth the provision for a \u201csecond Passover\u201d one month after the first, which is available to those \u201cwho are defiled by a corpse or are on a long journey\u201d (Num. 9:10) and are thus unable to keep the first Passover. The Interpolator here assumes a knowledge of this law and recapitulates only Num. 9:13, which forbids someone who is not defiled (i.e., \u201cthe man who is purified\u201d) from refraining to offer the paschal sacrifice in its proper time.
\n49:10. on its appointed day, on the fourteenth of the first month between the evenings Exod. 12:6; Num 9:3, 5.
\nfrom the third (part) of the day until the third (part) of the night That is, the period covering the slaughter of the animal until the end of the feast. The Interpolator goes on to explain:
\n49:12. it is not fitting to sacrifice it during any time of light except during the time of the border of evening That is, the darkening part of the day. The Interpolator\u2019s position is that the animal may not be sacrificed until the last third of the day, which sounds like a polemic against the Mishnaic dictum (M. Pes. 5:3) that the animal may be sacrificed anytime after midday. A position similar to the Interpolator\u2019s seems to be attributed to \u201cben Bathyra\u201d in Mek. R. Ish.: \u201cMake [one] evening for its slaughter and make [one] evening for its eating.\u201d
\nAnd they shall eat it \u2026 until a third of the night This runs counter to Exod. 12:10, which says \u201cuntil morning\u201d; the Mishnah sets midnight as the stopping point (M. Pes. 10:9; M. Zeb. 5:8; T. Pisha 5:13).
\n49:1. And they shall not eat it raw, but roasted in the fire, cooked with care This alludes to 2 Chron. 35:13, \u201cboiled\/cooked in fire,\u201d which blends the language of Exod. 12:8 (\u201croasted in fire\u201d) with that of Deut. 16:7 (\u201cboiled\/cooked\u201d).
\nbecause no bone of the children of Israel will be broken Cf. NT John 19:33\u201336.
\n49:14. And there is no passing over in it (one) day from (its) day This was perhaps a play on the word pasah\u2014see also above on 15:25\u201334 and on 49:7.
\n49:16\u201317. it is not fitting to eat it outside of the sanctuary of the LORD The sacrifice must be eaten, according to Deut. 16:5\u20137, \u201cin the place that the LORD your God will choose,\u201d that is, the Jerusalem Temple.
\nfacing Better: next to (Lat. secus, probably representing Heb. etzel, that is to say, in the courtyard next to).
\n49:17. because thus it is written and decreed that they shall eat it in the sanctuary of the LORD The Interpolator\u2019s insistence on this point appears to be polemical, since this too is in conflict with Rabbinic halakhah: the Mishnah (Makkot 3:3) permits the Passover sacrifice to be eaten anywhere within the city of Jerusalem: cf. m. Pesahim 7:9, 12.
\n49:18\u201321. whenever the children of Israel enter into the land Here the original author\u2019s text resumes where it left off at the end of chapter 48. He thus continues by saying that after the entry into the land of Canaan, the Israelites are to set up the tabernacle of the LORD. It will serve temporarily, he says, as the place for observing Passover, until a house is built in the name of the LORD, that is, the Jerusalem Temple. Jubilees\u2019 author then gives rules that will obtain on Passover in that sanctuary. His rules are less detailed than the Interpolator\u2019s, but basically the same: the proper time for the Passover sacrifice is on the third part of the day, after which its flesh is cooked in fire, and the meal is to be eaten within the court of the house, that is, the courtyard of the sanctuary\u2014unaware that these things will have already appeared in the Interpolator\u2019s insertion.
\n49:22\u201323. so that they might eat unleavened bread at this point, the Interpolator returns with a brief insertion covering something omitted entirely in the original author\u2019s work: \u201cthe feast of unleavened bread.\u201d It is to be celebrated for \u201cseven days to rejoice before the LORD.\u201d But if it is in commemoration of the fact that the Israelites prepared their bread \u201cwith nervousness [better: hastily] when you went out from Egypt,\u201d why should it last for seven days? The Interpolator\u2019s answer: it stretched from the beginning of the Exodus \u201cuntil you entered into the wilderness of Sur\u201d after having crossed the Red Sea.
\nSur Shur in Exod. 15:22.
\n50:1\u20133. And after this law I made you know the days of the Sabbaths in the wilderness of Sin The original author\u2019s account resumes where it left off in 49:21. The angel of the Presence notes that Moses and the Israelites were already told about observance of the Sabbath proper \u201cin the wilderness of Sin\u201d before arriving at Mount Sinai, specifically, the prohibition of gathering manna on the Sabbath (Exod. 16:22\u201330).
\n50:2. I also related to you the Sabbaths of the land That is, how the land is to lie fallow once every seven years (Lev. 25:2\u20137), and \u201cthe years of jubilee\u201d (Lev. 25:8\u201312).
\nBut its year I have not related to you \u201cI\u201d is the angel of the Presence, who has presumably not related the full details of the \u201cSabbaths of the land,\u201d including the remission of debts. This will be related in Deut. 15:1\u20136, since those details will not be relevant \u201cuntil you enter into the land which you will possess.\u201d
\n50:4\u20135. On account of this That is, in consideration of the units of seven days and seven years and seven-times-seven years (a jubilee), the angel of the Presence, speaking for God, says that He has arranged history so that \u201cfrom the days of Adam\u201d to this moment on Mount Sinai consists of \u201cforty-nine jubilees [plus] one week and two years,\u201d that is, another nine years. There are \u201cstill forty further years\u201d of wanderings in the wilderness before Israel can enter the land of Canaan. (Those 40 years, Jubilees implies, are not punishment for the sin of the cowardly spies [Num. 13:1\u201314:24], but are for \u201clearn[ing] the commands of the LORD\u201d before entering the Promised Land.) Adding 49 jubilees to those 40 years and the 7 + 2 years already mentioned, this means that Israel will cross the Jordan into its land exactly 50 jubilees after the creation of Adam. There could be no clearer sign, Jubilees\u2019 author implies, that all human history follows a pattern meticulously arranged by God. Therefore, however chaotic Israel\u2019s subsequent history may sometimes seem, it too is following a divinely ordered pattern: the Babylonian exile, the subsequent periods of Persian and Ptolemaic rule\u2014these are part of the many \u201cjubilees [that] will pass [by] until Israel is purified from all the sin of fornication, and defilement, and uncleanness, and sin and error.\u201d But that day will eventually arrive, and then Israel \u201cwill dwell in confidence in all the land\u201d (Deut. 33:28).
\n50:6\u201313. And behold the commandments of the Sabbaths The preceding lines sound like they should mark the end of the book\u2014and that seems to have been their original role. But apparently a very late editor or copyist (not the Interpolator) inserted the laws of vv. 6\u201313\u2014he put them here because the preceding section discusses the \u201cSabbaths of the land,\u201d but in this section, \u201cSabbath\u201d retains its more usual meaning, the seventh day of the week. This verbal link seemed sufficient to justify the insertion, but these verses are really intended to reword and supplement the Sabbath laws already presented by the Interpolator in Jub. 2:25\u201333.
\n50:8. Every man who will profane this day The further Sabbath prohibitions cover anyone (1) \u201cwho will lie with his wife\u201d on the Sabbath; (2) who \u201cwill discuss a matter [better: who speaks a word about something] that he will do [i.e., something he intends to undertake after the Sabbath] on it\u201d (i.e., discusses it on the Sabbath itself\u2014this is based on the prohibition of \u201cspeaking a word\u201d in Isa. 58:13), for example, discussing on the Sabbath a journey he is to set out on, or discussing any buying or selling he intends to do; (3) or who draws water on the Sabbath \u201cwhich was not prepared for him on the sixth day\u201d; (4) or who \u201clifts up anything that he will carry to take out of his tent or \u2026 his house.\u201d (Of these four, items 3 and 4 were already mentioned in Jub. 2:29\u201330.)
\n50:9. to eat and to drink and to rest On the positive side, the Sabbath is a time for enjoyment and refraining \u201cfrom all work of [on] that day and to bless the LORD your God\u201d (cf. Jub. 2:21). That it is a \u201cday of the holy kingdom\u201d sounds a bit like the Rabbinic phrase \u201ckingdom of heaven,\u201d which refers to God\u2019s sole mastery over all creation; presumably it is this divine mastery that is enacted every Sabbath.
\n50:10. to offer incense That is, to offer incense in the Temple. This reflects Exod. 30:8, as well as to \u201cbring gifts and sacrifices before the LORD for the days\u201d (i.e., the twice-daily tamid sacrifice; Num. 28:3\u20134) \u201cand the Sabbaths,\u201d that is, the temple offerings given regularly every Sabbath (Num. 28:9).
\n50:12. And (as for) any man who does work on it A further set of prohibitions; anyone who (5) goes on a journey; (6) plows a field; (7) kindles a fire; (8) rides on any animal; (9) travels the sea in a boat; (10) slaughters or kills anything, including even (11) slitting the throat of cattle (better: a domestic animal) or bird in preparation for eating it on the Sabbath; (12) catches either a wild animal, beast or bird or fish; (13) who fasts or (14) makes war\u2014anyone who does any of these on the Sabbath is subject to the death penalty. While some of these items are mentioned in the Torah\u2019s Sabbath laws, none was mentioned in Jub. 2:25\u201333.
\n50:13. according to the commands of the Sabbaths of the land All the foregoing things, the writer of this passage adds, are actually in keeping with the commandments for the Sabbaths of the land\u2014an extremely awkward attempt to return to the subject that preceded his insertion. With this, rather abruptly, the book ends.<\/p>\n
Pseudo-Jubilees<\/p>\n
James L. Kugel<\/p>\n
This text from Qumran consists of three fragments, of which the longest and most interesting is translated here. Pseudo-Jubilees acquired its name because, while 4Q225 (along with its related texts 4Q226 and 4Q227) seemed to recapitulate parts of Jubilees and share some of its terminology (for example, referring to its Satan-like figure as \u201cthe angel of Mastema\u201d), it was not an actual copy of the text of Jubilees itself. The manuscript fragments have been dated paleographically to the latter part of the 1st century BCE or the first decade or two of the Common Era, but its composition might be dated somewhat earlier.<\/p>\n
SIGNIFICANCE<\/p>\n
The text contains a retelling of Abraham\u2019s near-sacrifice of his son Isaac that is different from both the biblical account (Gen. 22) and the version in the book of Jubilees (chapter 18). In the climactic scene, as Abraham raises the knife to kill his son, the author of Pseudo-Jubilees describes two opposing groups of angels observing from above: the good angels are weeping at the prospect of Isaac\u2019s imminent death, while the wicked angels are chortling over the same outcome. The motif of weeping angels is known from later, Rabbinic texts, but their appearance here seems to have been designed to explain a troubling detail in Jubilees\u2019 version of the events; see comment below on 2:5\u20136.<\/p>\n
SUGGESTED READING<\/p>\n
Kugel, J. \u201cExegetical Notes on 4Q225 \u201cPseudo-Jubilees.\u201d DJD 13 (2006), 73\u201398.
\nVanderKam, J. C., and J. T. Milik. \u201c4Q Pseudo-Jubileesa.\u201d In Qumran Cave 4. VIII Parabiblical Texts Part 1, DJD 13, edited by H. Attridge, et al., 141\u201355. Oxford: Clarendon, 1994.<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
1:1\u20132. that s[oul] shall be cut off This is the punishment of karet, extirpation; see M. Karetot 1:1 for a Rabbinic list of the infractions for which karet is the stipulated penalty. While the reason for its evocation here is not obvious, since the continuation of the text concerns the story of Abraham, karet was perhaps mentioned because of the biblical prohibition of worshiping other gods, a severe infraction. The missing portion of this part of the text might thus have said that Abraham left Ur of the Chaldeans because the Chaldeans worshiped other gods (see Jub. 12:1\u20138); since, Pseudo-Jubilees would appear to say, anyone guilty of this sin \u201cshall be cut off from among his people,\u201d Abraham left Ur and \u201csettled in Haran twenty years.\u201d
\n1:3\u20134. behold I am childless and Eli[ezer] \u2026 will be my heir See Gen. 15:2\u20133.
\n1:5\u20138. This is the continuation of the same passage, Gen. 15:5\u20136.
\n1:9\u201310. And the angel of Ma[s] tema went [to G]od and accused Abraham regarding Isaac Ancient interpreters were puzzled as to why God should have put Abraham to a test (Gen. 22:1); did He not know its outcome in advance? One tradition held that Satan must have challenged God to test Abraham (just as Satan had done in Job 1:6\u201312); God certainly knew the outcome, but He accepted the challenge to prove Satan wrong. In Jubilees (17:16), as here, it is the wicked angel Mastema who issues the challenge. Mastema is said here to \u201caccuse\u201d (histim) Abraham, a Hebrew root apparently connected to that of Mastema\u2019s name. The Jubilees account does not specify that Mastema accused Abraham, only that there were \u201cwords in heaven,\u201d presumably spoken by other angels, in praise of Abraham. Here, by contrast, Mastema accuses Abraham \u201cregarding Isaac\u201d; this is close to the Talmudic version of this tradition, which holds that Satan accused Abraham of failing to offer adequate thanks to God at the banquet held at Isaac\u2019s weaning (Gen. 21:8) just before; see B. Sanh. 89b.
\n1:11\u201312. \u201cTake your son Isaac, [your] only on[e from Sarah, whom] you love\u201d Gen. 22:2 says, \u201cTake your son, your only one \u2026\u201d\u2014but of course Abraham had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. (Jubilees had apparently followed the text tradition that read \u201cyour beloved son,\u201d yedidekha, instead of MT yehidekha, \u201cyour only son.\u201d) Pseudo-Jubilees may have sought here to clarify the biblical verse as it appears in the MT by explaining that God was speaking of Abraham\u2019s \u201conly one from Sarah\u201d; Ishmael was the son of Hagar. Cf. Gen. Rab. 55:7.
\n1:12\u201313. on one of the [hig]h mountains Gen. 22:2 MT reads, \u201cand go to the land of Moriah,\u201d while the LXX has \u201cand go to the high land\u201d (perhaps reflecting eretz marom or the like), as does Jub. 18:2. Pseudo-Jubilees blends this with the end of the verse, \u201con one of the mountains that I will show to you.\u201d
\n1:13\u201314. from the wells ne[ar Gerar which his servants had dug] Gen. 26:15 refers to the Philistines having stopped up \u201cthe wells that his [Isaac\u2019s] father\u2019s servants had dug.\u201d However, the biblical narrative contains no previous mention of any such wells. Here Pseudo-Jubilees (or perhaps an older tradition that this text is citing) may have filled in the missing information: the wells in question were \u201cne[ar Gerar],\u201d which is where the wells are said to have been located (Gen. 26:17\u201318).
\n2:1. [and there was a] fire Gen. 22:4 says that \u201con the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw the place from afar.\u201d But how did Abraham know that that was the place? God had said he would \u201cshow\u201d it (Gen. 22:2). An ancient interpretive tradition held that the mountain was indicated by a cloud clinging to its top (Gen. Rab. 56:2), or by the divine presence (Shekhinah) hovering above it, in the form of \u201ca column of fire rising from earth to the heavens\u201d (Pirke R. El., chap. 31).
\n2:3\u20134. Abraham said to [his son Isaac, \u201cGod has said that you are to be the lamb that is] His.\u201d The biblical narrative presents Isaac as an altogether passive, and unknowing, victim. Ancient interpreters from the end of the 1st century BCE maintained that Isaac was in fact a willing martyr; a tradition found in Gen. Rab., Targum Neophyti, and elsewhere held that Abraham\u2019s words to Isaac in Gen. 22:8 could be read not as one sentence, but two: \u201cGod will see to it. The sheep for the burnt offering [is] my son.\u201d This conjectural restoration of the text of Pseudo-Jubilees is based on that tradition.
\n2:5\u20136. The angels of holiness \u2026 above [him, saying \u201cShall God annihilate] His sons from the earth? The angels of [Mastema stood opposite them in the heavens] Jub 18:16 had concluded the narrative by having God tell Abraham, \u201cI have made known to everyone that you are faithful.\u201d This was a recasting of God\u2019s words in Gen. 22:12, \u201cNow I know that you fear God.\u201d (\u201cNow I know\u201d might indicate that God previously had not known; to avoid such an impression, Jubilees preferred to read the biblical text as if it said, \u201cNow I have made known,\u201d appending the words \u201cto everyone\u201d to make that reading clear.) But who was \u201ceveryone\u201d? Pseudo-Jubilees created two groups of angels, one good and one wicked, to fill the sky with spectators who could constitute the \u201ceveryone\u201d in question.
\n2:10. the one who loves Me cannot be false Abraham was described in Isa. 41:8 as \u201cAbraham who loves me.\u201d This became a famous part of Abraham\u2019s reputation among ancient interpreters: he was \u201cthe one who loves God\u201d or sometimes a \u201cfriend of God.\u201d<\/p>\n
Pseudo-Philo, Book of Biblical Antiquities<\/p>\n
Howard Jacobson<\/p>\n
Book of Biblical Antiquities (also known as Liber antiquitatum biblicarum, or L.A.B.), is an example of a genre known as rewritten Bible. The author reviews the biblical narrative from Adam to David, adding, subtracting, embellishing, and revising. He covers biblical material from the book of Genesis through the books of Samuel. The work begins with genealogies from Adam to Noah and continues with stories, some biblical (e.g., the Flood, the Tower of Babel) and some extrabiblical (e.g., Abram\u2019s rescue from the burning furnace). Among important biblical episodes that are not included as part of the chronological narrative are Jacob\u2019s deception of his father, Joseph and Potifar\u2019s wife, Moses and the burning bush, the building of the Tabernacle in the desert, Moses begging to enter Canaan, the fall of the walls of Jericho.<\/p>\n
Authorship and History<\/p>\n
L.A.B. survives as a Latin text preserved in approximately 20 medieval manuscripts, the earliest of which dates to the 11th century. Internal evidence confirms that the work\u2019s original language was Hebrew and that the Latin text was translated from a Greek translation of the original Hebrew. Thus, our Latin text stands two stages removed from the original. It is therefore no surprise that it is riddled with corruption. The Latin text itself comes in two recensions. Sometimes one version preserves the superior reading, other times the other.
\nL.A.B was almost certainly written between 70 CE and 150 CE. L. Cohn established over a century ago that L.A.B. was written after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, an argument based on the importance of the date 17 Tammuz in L.A.B. and further developed by James and Howard Jacobson. An author writing in Hebrew in the decades following 70 CE was almost certainly living in Palestine. Thus, L.A.B. falls into the same category as 4 Esdras and 2 Baruch, works written in Hebrew in Palestine not long after the fall of the Second Temple and surviving only in translations at two stages from the original. And like those works, L.A.B. is a reaction and response to the catastrophe that had befallen the Jewish people.
\nThe manuscripts attribute L.A.B. to Philo of Alexandria. For many reasons this is impossible; in particular, because Philo did not know enough Hebrew to write in the language. We have no idea who the author of the work was. Indeed, in some sense it is problematic to speak of an author at all. The work as we have it is unquestionably the product of one formative mind, one shaping spirit, yet the contents of the book are so largely derivative that one tends to think of the author as the person who gave this work form rather than substance. Not only is the biblical narrative the foundation of the whole book, but even the deviations and embellishments probably come, in some measure, from a tradition that preceded our author. Still, the very act of selection is a matter of creative decision, and the work as a whole takes on an identity that is uniquely its own and far greater than the sum of its parts. In fairness, some of the substantive innovations in the book may indeed be the author\u2019s own work. But whoever the molder of L.A.B. was, we can feel certain that we will never know his identity.<\/p>\n
Significance<\/p>\n
As noted above, L.A.B. is one of a number of works that were written as a reaction to the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Second Temple. The many similarities among these works include themes, ideas, language, phrasing, and imagery. Regardless of which works influenced which others in this group, it seems a fair inference that these works, different though they are in certain respects, all derive from the same historical, cultural, and social context and were all drawing upon a common body of themes, ideas, and goals.
\nL.A.B. is perhaps the earliest extensive rewriting of the Bible that is firmly grounded in the Bible. Certainly, works derived from the biblical narrative already existed in the Hellenistic period. Ezekiel the Tragedian (2nd century BCE) produced some of the same kind of \u201crewritings\u201d found in L.A.B., but Ezekiel\u2019s work is not a predecessor of L.A.B. in any serious way. In L.A.B., the author presents his version of the Bible in biblical form; Ezekiel\u2019s interest is to completely change the form and format. The author of L.A.B. covers nearly the entire narrative portion of the Bible, whereas Ezekiel writes about a single\u2014if extended\u2014episode (the Exodus from Egypt). Joseph and Aseneth, unlike L.A.B., is a fictional narrative that takes off from one or two facts in the Bible and then goes its own independent route. Similarly, our surviving fragments of the treatise by Artapanus do not suggest that his work (written between the mid-3rd and early 1st centuries BCE) was a paraphrastic narrative of the Bible. The Genesis Apocryphon scroll found at Qumran (written in Aramaic) sometimes appears to be an imitation of the Bible, though its fragmentary nature makes this somewhat hard to judge. Although in Aramaic, it does sometimes come close to being an imitation of the Bible. Josephus\u2019s Jewish Antiquities contains similarities to L.A.B. (e.g., the tone and themes of Moses\u2019s speech during the Revolt of Korah [Ant. 4.40\u201350] mirror some invented speeches in L.A.B.). But Jewish Antiquities is written in a completely different (and nonbiblical) style, is highly rhetorical, and exhibits a degree of implicit authorial judgment that is absent in L.A.B.
\nThe Palestinian book of Jubilees (composed roughly when Ezekiel was writing) is, on the surface, quite similar to L.A.B. Although Jubilees covers biblical history only through the beginning of Moses\u2019s career, it is, like L.A.B., a continuous prose rewriting of the Bible. Of course, no one would mistake Jubilees for L.A.B.: their central themes are entirely different; the framework of the secret revelation to Moses used in Jubilees is an artifice absent from L.A.B.; and, perhaps most important, Jubilees does not read like an imitation of the Bible, whereas L.A.B. does. In spite of all this, among L.A.B.\u2019s antecedents, Jubilees is probably its closest cousin.
\nWith L.A.B. the genre seems to come to a dead halt; only centuries later does it revive. Among L.A.B.\u2019s descendants, surely the work closest to it is the much later Sefer ha-Yashar. L.A.B. is not only one of the earliest surviving works of Midrash, but by virtue of its extensive treatment of the post-Pentateuch historical narratives, it is indeed our single most important repository of midrashic exegesis on these books. Later Rabbinic midrashic texts on these books contain much material that is either derivative of L.A.B. or in the same tradition.
\nIf there is a single predominant theme in L.A.B., it is the following: No matter how much the Jewish people suffer, no matter how bleak their situation appears, God will never completely abandon God\u2019s people and in the end will grant salvation and triumph to the Jews.
\nFaced with a communal past filled with trauma and a present colored mainly by catastrophe, how did the author of L.A.B. attempt to convince a people that in the face of their current despair and disaster there was reason for hope and room for optimism? He did this by bringing to bear on his narrative a particularly pointed and tendentious interpretive perspective on Jewish history, centered on the role of God in history. Of course, the Bible portrays God as the prime mover in history, but L.A.B.\u2019s author goes even further, taking pains to emphasize that not only the positive events, but even the very disasters that befall the Jews, are God\u2019s doing. (To a lesser degree, the later prophets often do this as well, but again not to the degree that L.A.B. does.) But God does not act randomly; on the contrary, God acts with reason and consistency. Disasters are nothing but God\u2019s punishment for sin. In other words, God is in complete control. Since God is also truthful, the ultimate salvation of the Jews (in accord with God\u2019s promises) is assured, no matter how long it may take. When the Jews cease sinning grievously and devote themselves faithfully to God and the Law\u2014which is within their power and will at some point happen\u2014salvation will come (cf. L.A.B. 21:6).<\/p>\n
GUIDE TO READING<\/p>\n
Perhaps the most salient features of L.A.B.\u2019s author\u2019s writing are his profound familiarity with the Bible and his ability to fluently compose narrative in biblical style. The reader would do well to read L.A.B. with a Bible at hand, open to the pertinent biblical passage.<\/p>\n
SUGGESTED READING<\/p>\n
Cohn, L. \u201cAn Apocryphal Work Ascribed to Philo of Alexandria.\u201d Jewish Quarterly Review 10 (1898): 277\u2013332.
\nFeldman, L. H. \u201cProlegomenon.\u201d In The Biblical Antiquities of Philo, translated by M. R. James. New York: Ktav, 1971 (first published 1917 by SPCK).
\nFisk, Bruce N. Do You Not Remember. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.
\nHarrington, D. J., J. Cazeaux, C. Perrot, and P.-M. Bogaert. Pseudo-Philon: Les Antiquit\u00e9s Bibliques. Paris: Cerf, 1976.
\nJacobson, H. A Commentary on Pseudo-Philo\u2019s Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum. Leiden: Brill, 1996.
\nJames, M. R., trans. The Biblical Antiquities of Philo. New York: Ktav, 1971 (first published 1917 by SPCK).
\nMurphy, F. J. Pseudo-Philo: Rewriting the Bible. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
\nNickelsburg, G. W. E. Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah, revised ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005, 265\u201370.<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
The beginning of the world It is not entirely clear whether these words are the beginning of the sentence or a kind of heading. What is clear is that L.A.B.\u2019s author begins in the middle of things, taking for granted his audience\u2019s familiarity with Adam. Like the author of Sefer ha-Yashar, L.A.B.\u2019s author ignores the Bible\u2019s account of how the cosmos was created and begins his narrative with human beings (although on several occasion she also provides some cosmological speculation [e.g., L.A.B. 28:7\u20139]).
\n1.1 Noaba Numerous names occur in L.A.B. that have no clear source in the Bible. No general principle can apply here. Sometimes the names must be taken as inventions (names of women in particular, since the Bible gives far fewer female names than male ones), but on other occasions we need to recognize textual corruption and bring the names into accord with biblical parallels. Every case must be treated on its own. Here, the name Noaba has no ready parallel or explanation.
\n700 years Throughout L.A.B., and indeed generally in documents from antiquity, numbers pose a thorny problem. Textual transmission is often at its worst.
\n1:2. Suri, Slumiel Frequently, when the author of L.A.B. needs names for biblically unidentified characters in his narrative, he invents them or takes them\u2014sometimes in adapted form\u2014from elsewhere in the Bible. Thus, for example, in this passage, Anath comes from Judg. 3:31; Naat is probably Nahath, found at Gen. 36:13; and Zarama, Zasam, Maathal should probably be divided so as to give Zara, Maza, and Samma, the exact names that follow Nahath in Gen. 36:13.
\n1:8. 740 years This cannot be right, not merely because it differs from all other sources including the Masoretic Text (MT) and the Septuagint (LXX), but also because the age is completely out of line with the other pre-firstborn ages (i.e., the age that a man fathered his firstborn) in this section of L.A.B. (and thereby also gives Cainan an unacceptably long life span of 1250 years). We must read 170, as in Gen. 5:12 LXX.
\n1:19. This one will give rest The author of L.A.B. bases his significant etymology in the Heb. root n\u1e25, meaning \u201cto rest,\u201d while in the MT n\u1e25m means \u201cto console, comfort.\u201d In the Bible, the significant naming of Noah represents relief or comfort brought to humankind from the hard labor of daily existence. In L.A.B., Noah\u2019s naming is modified to provide a moral statement that stresses the difference between Noah and his contemporaries.
\n2:8. when the inhabitants of the earth began to do evil deeds Here, L.A.B.\u2019s author recounts the beginnings of immorality, in particular sexual immorality, and God\u2019s resultant displeasure. Cf. the opening verses of Gen. 6. midrashic exegesis later twisted Gen. 6:1 out of its natural sense to produce something similar to what L.A.B. has.
\nmen began to play the lyre This passage suggests an association between moral corruption and the introduction of music. Cf. Gen. Rab. 23:3, which reports that Jobal\u2019s half sister was known for playing on the timbrel while practicing idol worship.
\n2:9. in lead and tin and iron and copper and silver and gold As in the case of Iobal above, L.A.B.\u2019s author expands the biblical description to make Tobel the discoverer of all metallurgy (the Bible mentions only copper and iron, at Gen. 4:22).
\nbegan to \u2026 worship them As with Jobal above, the introduction of the arts of civilization brings with it concomitant moral degeneration. Rabbinic sources usually date the beginnings of idolatry to the time of Enosh (see, e.g., Tg. Jon. at Gen. 4:26). Given the discrepancy in ages between the brothers Cain and Seth, we could reasonably assume that Enosh and Tubalkain were contemporaries.
\n2:10. I have destroyed men on my behalf Midrashic traditions are divided in their portrayals of Lamech and his \u201csong,\u201d some painting it as self-condemnatory, the speech of an evil man, and others presenting it as exonerating a fundamentally good man. Clearly, L.A.B.\u2019s author follows the former tradition.
\n3:1\u20133. When men began to multiply upon the earth This passage is not so much a continuation or development of what preceded, but rather another tradition set down alongside it. At L.A.B. 2:8\u201310 we are told of the corruption that sets in among humankind because of the inventions and behavior of Lamech and his sons, with the resultant divine anger. Now L.A.B.\u2019s author describes the sinfulness wrought by the intermingling of the \u201csons of God\u201d with the \u201cdaughters of men,\u201d and God\u2019s ensuing wrath (cf. Gen. 6:1\u20137).
\n3:2. God said, \u201c\u2026 their years shall be 120\u201d An essentially verbatim quotation of Gen. 6:3. But the latter is not entirely clear. Do the words mean, \u201cthe limit to a person\u2019s life shall be 120 years\u201d or \u201chumankind shall now have [only] 120 more years of existence\u201d? The expanded sentence in L.A.B. reveals clearly how the author wants the verse to be understood here: God is giving humankind a period of 120 years in which to repent and change its ways and thereby avert the evil decree.
\nBut the crimes committed by their hands will not stop Humankind will persist in its evil deeds, and God\u2019s resolve becomes final. Tg. Neof. mirrors this interpretation, putting into God\u2019s mouth the words, \u201cI gave them a reprieve of 120 years in the hope that they might repent, but they did not.\u201d
\n3:3. all the things that grow on earth The corresponding biblical verse (Gen. 6:7) lists\u2014after humankind\u2014animals, birds, and creeping creatures. The author of L.A.B. does not include these; instead, he has only plant life (i.e., \u201cthe things that grow on earth\u201d), which is not included at Gen. 6:7. Possibly, L.A.B.\u2019s author deliberately avoids having God declare that he will destroy the nonhuman living creatures because the author, like others, was puzzled or even disturbed by the destruction of these (presumably) innocent creatures.
\n3:4. You will make it in the following way God\u2019s instructions are essentially an abbreviated quotation of the text in Gen. 6\u20137, with several changes in language and order. The elaborate architectural details given in the Bible are ignored.
\n3:5. Noah did what God commanded him Coming as it does after \u201cto eat,\u201d this sentence must be seen as a quotation not only of Gen. 7:5, but also of 6:22.
\nNoah did \u2026 forty nights This passage is a shortened form of Gen: 7:5\u201312.
\n3:6. It was then the sixteen hundred and fifty-second year A number of sources produce dates for the Flood close to L.A.B.\u2019s date of 1652. For example, the MT produces a date of 1656 (cf. S. Olam Rab.), Josephus gives a date of 1662 [Ant. 8.61\u201362]). Calculations based on the LXX (e.g., most patristic calculations) produce substantially later dates.
\nGod\u2019s creation of the heaven and earth Having begun with Adam, this is L.A.B.\u2019s first reference to God as creator.
\n3:8 This entire passage is essentially a quotation of Gen. 8:15\u201321a.
\nanimals and reptiles and birds and cattle A conflation of Gen. 8:17 and 8:19. The former verse contains all four classes, but has L.A.B.\u2019s second item in the fourth place; the latter verse, while only mentioning three classes, places reptiles between animals and birds as L.A.B. does.
\nit was accepted by the LORD like a restful scent The Bible states, \u201cGod smelled the sweet odor\u201d (Gen. 8:21). \u201cIt was accepted\u201d appears to have arisen generally from the context and is what the Targumin have here (Onkelos, Jonathan, Neofiti), \u201cGod received with favor the offering.\u201d The attempt at avoiding the anthropomorphism is apparent.
\n3:9. I will judge them by famine or by the sword or by fire or by pestilence This echoes the familiar refrain concerning punishments in Jeremiah (who typically mentions sword, famine, and pestilence; e.g., 14:12; 27:8). Fire comes from Isa. 66:16.
\nI will not again destroy the earth by the water of the flood This important passage conflates Gen. 8:21\u201322; 9:11, and 9:15 and represents one side in a major debate over the essence of God\u2019s oath and covenant here in Genesis. The author of L.A.B. interprets the oath as an assertion that God will never again destroy humankind by a flood (rather, God might use fire, famine, or other such means). This understanding is widely found also in midrashic texts (e.g., T. Ta\u2019an. 3:1). The opposing opinion holds that the oath commits God never to destroy the earth again, by any means (e.g., B. Zev. 116a; Gen. Rab. 39:6).
\nAs long as I remember \u2026 until time is fulfilled This is the first of many end-time passages in L.A.B. Most are to a small or large degree obscure. For the notion of the fulfilling of time, cf. Jer. 25:12; 29:10 (within a specific historical context and with exact numbers); Luke 21:24.
\n3:10 This account of judgment day (not so called in L.A.B.) bears striking similarities to that of 4 Esd. 7:31\u201344, which also mentions the resurrection of the dead, the absence of both light and darkness, and judgment according to strict canons of justice. This paragraph provides an instructive introduction to L.A.B.\u2019s eschatology After a set period of time, the regular phenomena of nature will cease. At that point God will resurrect all the dead and judge them according to their deserts. (Note that elsewhere in L.A.B., resurrection seems limited to the just; e.g., 19:12, 23:13). We are not told what will happen to those found guilty. For all the rest, presumably, there will be eternal life marked by perfect fertility in a new world. A few implications should be noted. First, at the end of their lives all human beings evidently suffer the same fate: death (which is a prolonged sleep). Resurrection of all the dead takes place at some distant time, not as a reward for anyone but rather as an intermediate stage in which all are judged. Punishment and reward are then allotted by God. God then creates a new world in which the righteous apparently live the same kind of physical existence as in the original world, except that all is perfect and everlasting. We might note at this point the absence of any allusions to the immortality of the soul, the Messianic Age, or paradise.
\ndarkness will be extinguished The idea that both light and darkness, day and night, will be absent during the end-time is not unique, appearing, for example, in 4 Ezra 7:40 and probably in the obscure verse at Zech. 14:7.
\nraise up from the earth those who are sleeping The notion of the dead as sleeping in the earth and capable of being awakened goes back to Isa. 26:19 and Dan. 12:2.
\ndeposit The Midrash too speaks of the dead in the earth as being the latter\u2019s pikadon\u2014that it must return when God demands (Pirke R. El. 34).
\nuntil I judge between soul and flesh God resurrects the \u201cdead\u201d in order to render final judgment upon them. L.A.B. here reflects two traditions found in Rabbinic literature: one, that the soul and the body appear before God for judgment as rival litigants (e.g., Mekhilta d\u2019-Rashbi); the other, that upon death the body goes to one place, the soul to another, and at the resurrection they are both brought before God for judgment (e.g, Sifre Deut. 306; cf. 4 Ezra 7:32).
\nthe underworld will close its mouth This must mean that the underworld will no longer receive any-one\u2014that is, that no one will die any more, rather than that the underworld will no longer release anyone for judgment. With this interpretation, 2 Bar. 21:23 is a good parallel.
\nno one who has been vindicated by me Like the words that immediately follow, this is probably an echo of Isa. 45:25.
\nThere will be another earth and another heaven An echo of Isa. 65:17 and 66:22.
\nan everlasting dwelling place The notion of eternity here probably derives from the implication present in Isa. 66:22 that the \u201cnew heavens and new earth\u201d will last forever (so understood, e.g., at Sifre Deut. 47).
\n3:11. man was made in the image of God Having skipped over the creation of Adam (Gen. 1), the author of L.A.B. now makes his first reference to the creation of humankind in the image of God.
\n3:12. a memorial of the covenant Similar attempts to circumvent the biblical statements which suggest that God needs a reminder are found in midrashic texts and later commentators. Note that at L.A.B. 4:5, the rainbow serves as a reminder only for humankind, not for God. This is the view of Midr. Ag. 22.
\n4:1 Chapter 4 gives the descendants of Noah at length. For problems with names in L.A.B., see comments on 1:1, Noaba, and 1:3, Naat \u2026 Anath.
\n4:3. These are the ones who were scattered abroad The sense suggests that this derives not merely from Gen. 10:5, but also from 10:32.\u201d
\n4:4 Gen. 10 specifies numerous cities and geographical areas for the descendants of Cham, two for those of Shem, and none for those of Japheth. Thus, the entire lengthy list here is the invention of L.A.B.\u2019s author.
\n4:5. they began to work the land and to sow upon it This apparent reference to the beginnings of agriculture seems a bit illogical given the earlier inclusion of \u201cseedtime and harvest\u201d at L.A.B. 3:9, but the author of L.A.B. frequently provides explicit mention of the origins of facets of human civilization. He makes the point that with the division of the earth among the three Noahide lines, three major cultural developments occurred: the establishment of agriculture, the building of cities, and the beginnings of astrology and presumably idol worship.
\n4:7. He began to be arrogant before the LORD The pejorative coloring of the biblical text (Gen. 10:8) here is common in midrashic exegesis. Tg. Jon. and Tg. Neof. (marginal gloss) at Gen. 10:8 make him \u201cgreat in sinfulness.\u201d
\n4:10. They took wives for themselves from the daughters of Joktan This intermarriage between the children of Joktan and Falech has no basis in the Bible. However, L.A.B.\u2019s author has clearly invented this as an important preliminary to his narrative of the story of Abraham, the tower, and the furnace, wherein Joktan will play a significant role. Abraham, who is (biblically) a descendant of Falech\u2019s son Ragau, now becomes a descendant of Joktan as well (and see L.A.B. 6:6).
\n4:11. From this one there will be born \u2026 one who Prophecies of the birth of great men are commonplace in the Midrash and the pseudepigrapha. Another prophecy about Abraham on the occasion of his birth can be found at Sefer ha-Yashar 24.
\nwill set his dwelling on high The text clearly refers to Abraham\u2019s abode and thus likely alludes to elonay mamre (e.g., Gen. 13:18; 18:1), taking mamre as if related to ram or marom.
\nwill be called perfect and blameless At Gen. 17:1, Abraham is tamim (Vulg. perfectus). The twofold modifier is meant to indicate both moral and physical perfection. The former sense, the basic one in the biblical text (NJPS: \u201cblameless\u201d), is represented by Tg. Neof.\u2019s expansion (\u201cbe whole in your good deeds\u201d), while the latter is represented in Tg. Jon. (\u201cbe whole in your body\u201d). The latter reflects the midrashic exegesis that Abraham was physically defective because of the flaw of the foreskin and became physically whole only upon circumcision (see, e.g., T. Ned. 2:5; Pirke R. El. 29 [init]). The author of L.A.B. incorporates both understandings of tamim here. Thus, the following reference to the covenant also has a twofold meaning: the covenant between God and Abraham in its broadest sense, and also the rite of circumcision (similarly in midrashic exegesis, e.g., B. Ned. 32a).
\n4:16. to pass their sons and daughters through fire The Bible occasionally makes exactly this connection between divination (kesamim) and child sacrifice; see 2 Kings 17:17; Deut. 18:10.
\nSerug and his sons did not walk in accord with them Terach\u2019s idolatry is familiar from the Midrash and the pseudepigrapha. The author of L.A.B. is presumably exonerating the entire line from Serug to Abraham from such charges. While such exoneration of Terach is rare in the Midrash, it is not without parallel (see, e.g., S. Eli. Rab. 5:27\u201328).
\n6:1. we will be fighting each other The desire to prevent warfare is also present in the account in Sefer ha-Yashar of the planning of the tower and in Josephus (Ant. 1.110\u201312).
\n6.2 In most midrashic elaborations of this story, one of two motivations, or goals, is clearly set forth Either the builders are actually constructing an instrument of idol worship or they are erecting a tower that will enable them to do battle with God in heaven. Neither motivation is apparent in L.A.B. The motivation in L.A.B. is remarkably close to that found in the Bible. First, there is some concern for \u201csecurity.\u201d Next, building a monument that will endure forever (or at least for a long time) will ensure that the builders\u2014i.e., their reputation\u2014shall long endure. This is why L.A.B.\u2019s author has them write their names on the bricks, for thereby their names shall literally exist as long as the tower does. (A secondary reason may be that the written names serve as a register of who has contributed, and who has not). Both in the Bible and in L.A.B. (also in Ant. 1.113\u201315), the very erection of such a tower\u2014or at least the thoughts that inspire it\u2014is seen as a hubristic act of rebellion against God, and so must be punished. But neither idolatry per se nor the idea of storming the heavens plays a role in L.A.B.
\n6:4. We know only the LORD, and him we worship In context this is best taken to mean, \u201cWhen you instruct us to commit this act of rebellion against God, we refuse to take orders from you, for we listen only to him\u201d (cf. \u201chim alone will we serve\u201d at L.A.B. 23:14).
\n6:6. He \u2026 was seeking a way to save them Both in its language and its plot, L.A.B. is influenced here by two biblical sources. The first is Dan. 6, wherein the enemies of Daniel accuse him to the king (as here the enemies of the 12 accuse them to Joktan) in order to have him thrown into the lions\u2019 den (here into the fire), but the king is reluctant and would like to save the victim (Dan. 6:15), as Joktan is described here. The second is the story of Joseph and his brothers at Gen. 37. There, the hostile brothers want to kill Joseph and throw him into a pit, but the senior brother (like Joktan here) is reluctant. L.A.B.\u2019s \u201cto save them from the hands of the people\u201d is a verbatim quote (mutatis mutandis) of Gen. 37:22.
\n6:9. God in whom you trust is mighty The plot element again comes from Dan. 6, wherein the ruler at once inflicts punishment upon the devout but expresses his assurance that God will save them. Even the language is similar (see Dan. 6:17).
\nGo and hide yourselves The theme of going into hiding from a hostile ruling power and drinking from a stream recalls Elijah in 1 Kings 17:2\u20137.
\nthe evil plan that they have planned to accomplish will not stand, because their devising is futile The traditional Psalmic theme of the vanity of human plans and machinations in the face of God\u2019s (e.g., Ps. 33:10\u201311; 94:11; Prov. 19:21).
\nWhen the seven days are complete \u2026 I will say to them In the broad lines of the plot here, L.A.B.\u2019s author may have been influenced by the story of Rahab and the spies in Josh. 2. Like Joktan here, Rahab conceals the heroes when their enemies come for them and tells them a false story about their escape. Also, both Rahab and Joktan make declarations of their belief in the rightness and superiority of the heroes\u2019 cause. The alleged nighttime escape also comes from the Rahab tale.
\n6:10. we are rescued from the hands of these arrogant men A line that is in both language and theme distinctly Psalmic.
\n6:11. Abram Abram is our hero\u2019s name until God changes it to Abraham.
\nIf I have escaped the fire, wild beasts will come The absolute fatalism in this passage is marked. Abram knows that if he is destined to die, nothing he can do will change that. Similarly, his faith in God is absolute. No matter what the circumstances, he is certain that God can save him if God so wills. The rhetoric of the passage is based on two biblical texts, primarily Amos 5:19 (\u201cAs if a man should run from a lion \/ And be attacked by a bear; \/ Or if he got indoors, \/ Should lean his hand on the wall \/ And be bitten by a snake\u201d), also 1 Kings 19:17 (\u201cWhoever escapes the sword of Hazael shall be slain by Jehu, and whoever escapes the sword of Jehu shall be slain by Elisha\u201d).
\n6:13. Deliver to us the men This is a reminiscence, possibly a calculated one, of the demands made by the men of Sodom at Gen. 19:5.
\n6:17. God stirred up a great earthquake The description of divine punishment here draws on several biblical passages: the account of the earthquake and fire that destroy Korah and his followers (Num. 16:31\u201335; this can be seen also at e.g. B. Sanh. 109a, where a third of the tower is swallowed up by the earth); the fire of God that appears suddenly and destroys the disgruntled, at Num. 11:3; and the fiery sparks (cf. \u201csparks of flame\u201d here) that issue from the furnace and kill the evil bystanders, at Dan. 3:22.
\n6:18 The narrative in chapter 6 brings together two common stories, the first being the biblical story of the tower of Babel, the second the Rabbinic story of Abraham\u2019s rescue from the furnace (passage from one to the other being made easy by the need for a furnace to bake the bricks). The connecting of these two tales is unique to L.A.B. In the Bible, no connection whatsoever exists between Abraham and the Tower, but Rabbinic literature does make some connections.
\n7:2. God saw the city The author of L.A.B. deliberately avoids the Bible\u2019s graphic anthropomorphizing here (Gen. 11:5: \u201cThe LORD came down to look\u201d).
\nneither will the earth endure nor will the heavens hold out This is the theme of cosmic empathetic morality, and while more common in the Greco-Roman world, it has a role in the Jewish world as well (cf., e.g., Jer. 2:12, with Kimchi\u2019s interpretation).
\n7:3. I will assign them to the cliffs God\u2019s declaration here is an expansion of the simple biblical \u201cThus the LORD scattered them\u201d (Gen. 11:8a) and involves the measure-for-measure punishment that the author of L.A.B. likes so much. Thus, the people who wanted to live together in unity will now be scattered all over in small groups; the people who wanted a \u201ccivilized\u201d life\u2014that is, to live in a city and occupy a huge building\u2014will now find themselves living in the wild, in huts, caves, or cliffs, more like wild beasts than civilized men.
\n7:4. In preference to all these I will choose my servant Abram The author of L.A.B. is not alone in connecting God\u2019s choice of Abram to the Tower story. Thus, at Pirke R. El. 24, God\u2019s decision to confound the builders of the tower is tied to his selection of Abram and his descendants. Already at Sifre Deut. 311\u201312, the explanation given for Deut. 32:8\u20139 is that setting \u201cthe divisions of man\u201d is a reference to God\u2019s scattering of the builders of the tower.
\nI did not destroy it For the tradition that the Land of Israel was not inundated by the Flood, see, for example, Gen. Rab. 32:10; also, the interesting variation at Pirke R. El. 23.
\n7:5. God \u2026 changed their appearances The author of L.A.B. is probably alluding here, in addition to the division of languages, to the division of humankind into varied physical features according to races and nationalities. The ancients were perfectly aware of and interested in the differences in physical appearance between geographically distinct peoples. The author of L.A.B. thus makes the Tower story an etiology not merely of humankind\u2019s different languages, but also of humankind\u2019s differing physical characteristics.
\n8:3. I will give to you from her an eternal seed The author of L.A.B. emphasizes God\u2019s guarantee of the eternity of the Jewish people from its beginnings in a more explicit way than the Bible has (cf., e.g., Gen. 13:15; 17:7\u20138).
\n8:6. Laban the Aramean This is the biblical expression (e.g., Gen. 31:20, 24). The rivalry between Jacob and Esau, the former\u2019s flight, and so on, are all passed over in silence.
\n8:7. killed their whole city The Bible has \u201cslew all the males\u201d (Gen. 34:25).
\n8:8. Job took her as a wife Dinah\u2019s identification as Job\u2019s wife is an old midrashic tradition. It is found in Aristeas, Testament of Job, and in Rabbinic texts such as Gen. Rab. 19:12. While the Bible does not name Job\u2019s wife, in L.A.B., Dinah is his lifelong spouse. Tradition was able to place Job in Jacob\u2019s time by identifying him with Jobab of Gen. 36:33.
\n8:9. they sold him into Egypt Here, L.A.B.\u2019s author echoes the words of Gen. 37:36, but he uses an entirely different tradition. For in our Gen. 37 narrative, the brothers have no part in the sale of Joseph into Egypt. But later exegetes revised the biblical narrative in such a way (perhaps growing out of Gen. 45:4: \u201cThen Joseph said to his brothers \u2026 I am \u2026 he whom you sold into Egypt.\u201d) as to make them the sellers of Joseph, and it is this tradition that L.A.B. follows.
\nfourteen years The Bible never reports how long Joseph resided in Potiphar\u2019s house, but it is clear that L.A.B.\u2019s \u201cfourteen years\u201d is grounded in the biblical account. At the time of his brethren\u2019s hostility and his sale into Egypt, Josephus (read: \u201cJoseph\u201d) is reported as being 17 (Gen. 37:2). When he appears before Pharaoh (Gen. 41:46), he is 30. As L.A.B.\u2019s author leaves out the episodes of Potiphar\u2019s wife and Joseph\u2019s imprisonment, the 14 years (counting inclusively) are all spent in Potiphar\u2019s service.
\n8:14. They \u2026 dwelled there 210 years A traditional number for the stay (or a particular portion of the stay) in Egypt. See, for example, Mek. d\u2019Rashbi on Exod. 12:40.
\n9:2 For a remarkable historical parallel to the resolution to become celibate rather than produce children who will not be allowed to observe the ways of the Torah, see Rabbi Ishmael\u2019s remarks at B. BB 60b (end); cf. T. Sot. 15:10.
\n9:3. Amram answered Amram appears with no introduction at all. The author of L.A.B. undoubtedly relies on his audience\u2019s knowledge. The story of the celibacy plan was common in the Midrash, but Amram was always represented as taking part in it. Only here in L.A.B. is he presented as opposing the plan. The pattern is the same as in L.A.B.\u2019s narrative of Abraham and the Tower. In each, a group of men is presented as faithful to God and adopting a particular plan. But one man stands apart from the group by virtue of his absolute, unyielding, and uncompromising confidence in God. Because of this he refuses to take part in the plan.
\nit is 350 years \u2026 it is 130 years The Rabbis long noted the contradiction between Gen. 15:13 (400 years) and Exod. 12:40\u201341 (430 years). They explained it (away) in several fashions. In L.A.B., however, the contradiction is preserved.
\n9:5. our mother Tamar A remarkable characterization of Tamar, especially when one recalls the injunction at B. Ber. 16b that only four women were to be given the title \u201cmother\u201d (Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah). It must have to do with the tradition that Tamar was the ancestress of King David (and so of the messiah). For the same reason, Ruth is sometimes counted as one of the matriarchs (e.g., Pesik. Rav Kah. 16).
\nIt is better \u2026 than to have intercourse with Gentiles The condemnation of intermarriage with Gentiles is frequent in L.A.B.
\n9:6. Who knows, perhaps A certain echo, probably conscious, of Mordecai\u2019s words to Esther at Esther 4:14. There, as here in L.A.B., these words offer hope at a moment of impending catastrophe for the Jewish people. The author of L.A.B. uses the same echo again at L.A.B. 30:4 and 39:3 in similar contexts and to the same effect.
\n9:7. Amram\u2019s plan has pleased me Once again, L.A.B. models his Amram upon Abraham (see comment on 9:3, Amram answered). Amram here, like Abraham in Gen. 22, shows absolute faith in God in circumstances where the life of his child is at stake, and once that faith has been demonstrated, God acknowledges that devotion and blesses the faithful man through his child.
\nI will do wonders \u2026 through him For the theme of God accomplishing his miracles through Moses, cf. Exod. 4:21; Deut. 34:11.
\n9:8. My spirit will not be a mediator We may have here an allusion to the notion that Moses functioned as an intermediary between God and the Jewish people. This is of course evident in the Bible, and the term itself (sarsur, \u201cmediator\u201d; Gk. mesites) is frequently used of Moses.
\n9:9. went out and took his wife That Amram is now retaking his wife (i.e., refusing to separate from her) becomes apparent from the following \u201ctook their own wives\u201d and \u201cthis man had one son,\u201d and so on.
\nthe others imitated him Just as in the Midrash, Amram\u2019s decision to live with his wife is immediately imitated by the others (B. Sot. 12a).
\n9:10. The spirit of God came upon Miriam one night Though some sources report a prophecy by Miriam concerning Moses the future savior (e.g. Mek. d\u2019Rashbi; B. Sot. 11b, 12b\u201313a) and others report a dream foretelling his birth (e.g., Amram\u2019s dream in Josephus), L.A.B. appears to be the only source that ties the prophetic dream to Miriam.
\na man was standing The language closely recalls that describing the appearance of the angel to Joshua at Josh. 5:13 and the appearance of a divine figure at Dan. 8:15, who proceeds to explain a vision (and is called Gabriel).
\nin a linen garment The figure in L.A.B. derives from the man in linen at Dan. 10\u201312.
\nthe child \u2026 will be cast into the water; likewise through him the water will be dried up This is but a slight variation on the common theme that the Egyptians were drowned in the Sea of Reeds because they drowned the Jewish children in the Nile.
\n9:12. Jochebed conceived \u2026 and hid him in her womb for three months The author of L.A.B. means that the pregnancy was concealed for three months, as is clear from the analogy to Tamar made at L.A.B. 9:5.
\nthe bark of a pine The Bible does not speak of wood at all, much less pine. Exod. 2:3 has tevat gome, \u201ca basket of bulrushes.\u201d
\n9:13. was born in the covenant of God and the covenant of his flesh For the explicit notion of \u201ccovenant of [in] the flesh,\u201d cf. Gen. 17:13.
\n9:15. Pharaoh\u2019s daughter came down \u2026 in accord with what she had seen in a dream The basic details\u2014the descent to the Nile by the daughter of Pharaoh to wash, accompanied by her maids, and the ensuing discovery of Moses\u2014are derived from the Exodus narrative. But the motivation for her descent (a dream) has no basis in the Bible. Midrashic embellishments there are, e.g. she had skin lesions (Tg. Jon. at Exod. 2:5; PRE 48); she was leprous [Exod. Rab. 1.23], there was a heat wave [Yashar 243]; she went to purify herself from idolatry [Exod. Rab. 1.23]. For a midrashic parallel, see Midr. Hag. at Gen. 23:1, where we read, with reference to Pro. 31:15 (\u201cShe rises while it is still night\u201d), that the verse alludes to the daughter of Pharaoh who had a divine vision that she would raise the future savior of Israel, and so she would go strolling by the Nile regularly, morning and evening. The association with \u201cnight\u201d of the Proverbs verse makes it likely that her vision was a dream.
\n9:16. his mother called him Melchiel That is, \u201cGod is my king.\u201d Although various midrashic sources enumerate many names for Moses (e.g., Chronicles of Jerahmeel 44.7; Sefer ha-Yashar 243), none appear to mention Malkiel or the like. Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 1.23) writes that, according to the initiates, after his assumption Moses was called \u201cMelchi,\u201d and Syncellus says that Moses\u2019s parents called him Melchias (which he explains as meaning \u201cking\u201d). But even closer parallels exist. Bar Hebraeus (pp. 102\u2013103) reports almost exactly what L.A.B. has, that \u201cMoses\u2019s parents called him Malkel,\u201d and Ishodad of Merv in his Commentary on Exodus says that Moses\u2019s parents called him Yamkil, which is probably a corruption of Malkel, since he proceeds to explain the name as meaning \u201cGod has ruled.\u201d
\n10:1. He sent Moses Cf. Ps. 105:26, \u201cHe sent His servant Moses.\u201d
\nten plagues The expression eser makot does not occur in the Bible (cf. Midr. Hag. at Deut. 26:8). Its presence here may be the earliest attested example of the phrase.
\npalpable darkness Derived from Exod. 10:21.
\n10:2. the heart of the Egyptians was hardened Close to L.A.B. is Exod. 14:17, wherein God is said to stiffen \u201cthe hearts of the Egyptians.\u201d
\nthe Red Sea The traditional translation (e.g., LXX) of the Bible\u2019s yam suf.
\n10:3. the children of Israel \u2026 were split in their opinions according to three plans So too in the Midrash, e.g., Tg. Jon. at Exod. 14:13\u201314. The notion of disagreement amongst the tribes at the Sea of Reeds derives from Ps. 68:28 The division of opinions here is typical of L.A.B. There are those who are willing to betray the just cause, those who are ready to commit suicide rather than becoming traitors, and those who will plan and fight against the wicked enemy. But the ideal (not represented here except in the actual outcome) is simply to put one\u2019s faith in God and let him save the day.
\n10:4. did you not say to me Moses\u2019s complaints to God that he has evidently not fulfilled the promises made upon commissioning Moses recall the latter\u2019s words at Exod. 5:22\u201323.
\n10:5. strike the sea No smiting of the sea occurs in the biblical narrative. The author of L.A.B., however, is not alone in making Moses strike the sea here. Indeed, this was a widespread tradition whose adherents included Philo, Ezekiel the Tragedian, and Josephus.
\nGod raged at the sea and it dried up Thus, L.A.B.\u2019s author makes it crystal clear that it is God, not Moses, who effects the miracle. This is almost an exact quotation of Ps. 106:9.
\n10:6. God dulled their minds This interpretation of the phrase \u201cGod hardened their hearts\u201d is indeed found in the Midrash. Thus, in Lekach Tov at Exod. 10:1 we read that the phrase means, \u201cI will give him dullness and folly.\u201d Furthermore, the notion that God somehow tricked the Egyptians into entering the sea, as is apparent in the next words (\u201cthey did not know that they were entering the sea\u201d) is also attested in midrashic literature. A brief mention in Mek. R. Ish. reports that God confused the Egyptians (cf. Exod. 14:24) so that they did not know what they were doing.
\n10:7. brought forth a well of water to follow them There was a targumic-midrashic tradition, rooted in Num. 21:16, of a well that accompanied the Jews through the desert.
\nWith a pillar of cloud The L.A.B.\u2019s list of four benefits conferred upon the Jews in the desert (manna, quail, well, pillars of cloud and fire) resembles the list of three benefits (manna, well, clouds) at Mek. Wayassa 5.
\n11:1. I will give a light to the world The traditional association of the Torah with light.
\n11:2. For three days let no man approach his wife The author of L.A.B. states explicitly and unambiguously that the period of celibacy is to last three days (cf. Exod. 19:15).
\nthis will serve as a witness The notion that the Torah shall serve as testimony (witness) is already in the Bible. Indeed, Deut. 31:26 (\u201cTake this book of Teaching \u2026 and let it remain there as a witness against you\u201d) is nearly our text exactly. The Midrash neatly draws on this theme to explain the motive for two tablets of the Law, so that they can serve as the requisite two witnesses (see Midr. Hag. at Exod. 31:18).
\n11:5. the mountains were ablaze with fire This is a quotation from Deuteronomy\u2019s account of revelation (4:11; 9:15).
\nthe earth trembled That the earth shook at Revelation is not part of the biblical narrative. But such tremors\u2014together with other spectacular natural (or supernatural) phenomena\u2014were commonly so attributed by midrashic exegetes on the basis of external biblical verses that they interpreted as referring to the Revelation.
\nflames of fire burned The reference to fire at Sinai (apart from mentions of lightning) is biblical (Exod. 19:18). See also Mek. d\u2019Rashbi.
\nwill not pass away Whether the author\u2019s repeated emphasis here on the permanence of the Torah is anti-Christian polemic is not clear.
\n11:6. the LORD spoke \u2026 all these words The text of L.A.B. contradicts what is implied by the account at Deut. 5:4 and is explicit in several midrashic accounts (e.g., Pesik. Rab. 22): that the Jewish people did not hear all the Ten Commandments directly from God. Other sources (including Philo and Josephus) maintain L.A.B.\u2019s author\u2019s view that they did.
\nneither shall you make any abomination The prohibition of images is spelled out in detail in Deut. 4:16\u201318. In that context, we have explicit references to the worship of \u201cthe sun, the moon, [the stars], all the host of the heavens,\u201d the very words L.A.B.\u2019s author uses here.
\nif they walk in the ways of their parents Similar qualifications of the biblical text are found in Rabbinic sources, e.g., Tg. Onk. at Exod. 34:17.
\n11:8. Keep the Sabbath day The text of L.A.B. here follows the version of Deut. 5:12 (\u201ckeep\u201d rather than \u201cremember\u201d). The Samaritan account of the Revelation both here and elsewhere in Exod. 20 follows the version of Deut. 5.
\npraise the LORD That the Sabbath is specially designated for the praise of God is a familiar notion. The Sabbath Psalm (Ps. 92) begins with the words, \u201cIt is good to praise the LORD, to sing hymns to your name, O Most High.\u201d Josephus (Ant. 7.305) says that David instructed the Levites to \u201csing hymns to God\u201d on Sabbaths and festivals. At Jub. 2:21 we read, \u201cthe Sabbath to eat and drink and bless God the creator.\u201d Bereshit Rabbati reports that the tradition of praising God on the Sabbath goes back to Adam himself
\nhe rested on it The Exodus verse has nothing corresponding to this, but L.A.B.\u2019s author is quoting from Gen. 2:3.
\n11:9. Honor your father and your mother \u2026 and then your light will rise up In the Bible, of the Ten Commandments only this one has a reward mentioned for keeping it (Exod. 20:12) and L.A.B.\u2019s author follows suit. Although it is not clear why this particular reward should be offered for filial respect, we have much the same tradition in Rabbinic texts. Thus, in Lekach Tov at Deut. 5:15 we read that light is sown for the person who honors his parents, and in Midr. Hag. at Exod. 20:12 this same notion is expressed negatively, that is, the one who curses his parents will have his light extinguished.
\nthe earth hasten its fruit There does not appear to be any parallel to the view expressed here\u2014that respect for one\u2019s parents will result in the bountiful fertility of the land\u2014but the reasoning behind it seems apparent. If people will give birth to good offspring, then the earth will give birth to good crops. Once again, the principle of measure for measure is operative here.
\nyou will not be without children Again, an addition to the biblical text. As with the earlier one (\u201cI will command the heaven\u201d etc.), the measure for measure principle is the determining factor. If you will be good children, then you will be rewarded with children.
\n11:13. You shall not covet \u2026 lest others should covet your land That coveting your neighbor\u2019s property results in the loss of your land (i.e., the Land of Israel) is stated explicitly at Pesik. Rab. 24.
\n11:15. he commanded him many things \u2026 and the water of Marah became sweet The narrative here violates the biblical chronology, since the episode of Marah (Exod. 15:23\u201326) comes before the revelation at Sinai.
\nshowed him the tree of life The Yalkut Makhiri at Prov. 3:18 attributes to the Mekhilta a tradition that the tree at Marah was the \u201ctree of life,\u201d exactly as in L.A.B.
\nwent up \u2026 and went down This is almost verbatim the description of the well at T. Suk. 3:11.
\nHe commanded him about the tabernacle The substance of the prescriptions touched upon in this sentence is presented in great detail at Exod. 25\u201330.
\nthe tabernacle of my glory will be among you L.A.B.\u2019s language is intended to reduce the anthropomorphism of the biblical text (Exod. 25:8: \u201cI will establish My abode in their midst\u201d), while using the same verbal root. The author adapts here the phrasing of Lev. 26:11.
\n12:1. light that could not be gazed upon This probably means \u201csuch that one cannot endure looking at it.\u201d This interpretation is supported by the narrative at Exod. 34:29\u201335, where Moses is ultimately compelled to don a veil in the presence of the Israelites. The Midrash puts it explicitly (Pesik. Rav Kah. 5): \u201cThey were unable to look upon his face.\u201d
\nthey did not recognize him. But when he had spoken, then they recognized him The failure of the Jews to recognize Moses on his descent is unique to L.A.B.
\n12:2. as the other nations have Essentially the same sort of addition is made here by Pirke R. El. 45, where the Jews tell Aaron, \u201cMake us a god like the gods of the Egyptians.\u201d
\nMoses has been taken from us For midrashic parallels to the theme that the people suspect that Moses has died, see, for example, Tg. Jon. at Exod. 32:1; B. Shab. 89a.
\nAaron said to them The author of L.A.B. throughout his account here seeks vigorously to paint Aaron in good colors and absolve him of guilt in the sin of the calf (note especially \u201cThey cast them\u201d at the end of L.A.B. 12:3). Other midrashic texts also try to justify Aaron, to varying degrees. See for example Pirke R. El. 45; Exod. Rab. 37:2.
\n12:3. so that the word \u2026 might be fulfilled No text other than L.A.B. sees God\u2019s words at Gen. 11:6 as a forecast of the calf.
\nAaron, however, fearful An extenuation of Aaron, exactly as at Tg. Jon., Tg. Neof., and the Fragment Targumim ad Exod. 32:5.
\nEach man asked his wife, and they gave immediately Although the Bible does not directly involve the women, it is clear from Exod. 32:2\u20133 that the women are included. Thus, L.A.B. follows here the tenor of the biblical narrative, in contrast to other midrashic texts that assert that the women refused to contribute their jewelry to the idolatrous activity.
\n12:4. the race of men will be to me like a drop from a pitcher The allusion is to Isa. 40:15.
\n12:5. He looked at the tablets and saw that they were not written upon It is a familiar midrash that when Moses broke the tablets, the writing flew off them. Avot R. Nat. A.2 and Midr. Hag. at Exod. 32:19 both (like L.A.B.) make the explicit point that Moses first looked at the tablets and noticed that the writing had vanished, and only then shattered them.
\n12:6. bitterness In this very context the Midrash too speaks of \u201cbitterness,\u201d saying that Moses, by pleading with God here, turned bitterness to sweetness (Exod. Rab. 43:3).
\non high That is, when Moses was on Mount Sinai.
\n12:7. Whoever had it in his will The Bible gives no explanation as to the purpose of the drinking, but the Rabbis took it as a \u201ctrial by fire,\u201d intended to determine degrees of guilt and innocence.
\nwhoever had consented under compulsion of fear The distinction between those who had desired the calf sincerely and those who had not is also present in the Midrash (see, e.g., Pirke R. El. 45; Midr. Hag. at Exod. 32:20).
\nhis tongue was cut off This presumably means that miraculously their tongues fell out.
\nhis face shone In the Targum on Song of Sol. 1:5 we read that when the Jews worshiped the calf, their faces became dark. But when they repented, their faces shone.
\n12:8. O God, you who have planted this vine Israel as a vine(yard) planted by God is a recurrent motif in L.A.B. (18:10\u201311; 23:11\u201312; 28:4; 30:4; 39:7). The notion of Israel as a people planted by God goes back to the Pentateuch (Exod. 15:17). The Midrash uses the Israel = Vineyard analogy in this very context (Exod. Rab. 43:9).
\nto your lofty seat The notion of the (metaphorical) vine (or tree) spreading aloft to great heights is present at Ps. 80:9\u201312 and Ezek. 31:3\u20138. But the notion of ascending to God\u2019s site is L.A.B.\u2019s.
\nuproot it Cf. Jer. 45:4; Ezek. 17:9; Matt. 15:13.
\ndry up its shoots Cf. Ezek. 17:9. Also implicit at Isa. 5:6.
\nset its roots in the deep \u2026 its shoots to your lofty seat For the picture of divine destruction extending from beneath the earth to high above, cf. Deut. 32:22.
\nif you \u2026 uproot it from the deep \u2026 no longer will the deep come to nourish it The commentators are silent on this apparently tautological passage. The author\u2019s point here may be to emphasize that God\u2019s entire creation was for the sake of Israel. Thus, in the metaphor, the function of the abyss is to nourish the vine (Israel) and that of the throne to refresh it. If the vine is destroyed, the abyss and the throne no longer have any purpose, and God\u2019s creation of them will have been in vain (cf. comment on L.A.B. 12:9, you have adorned your house).
\n12:9. you are he who are all light For God as \u201ccompletely light,\u201d see Yal. Shimoni 1:719.
\nyou have adorned your house The fundamental point is that God has appointed the world (or paradise) with all fashion of wondrous things, all for the sake of Israel (the vine).
\nroots of myrrh and costum The author of L.A.B. appears to know some botany. The costum plant is a root (Pliny the Elder, Nat. 12.41) and the myrrh tree was tapped from the root to the branches (Nat. 12.68).
\neven if you plant another vine This notion, that God may contemplate planting another vine\u2014that is, choosing another people to replace Israel\u2014is based on God\u2019s proposal in the Bible to destroy Israel and replace them with a people fathered by Moses (Exod. 32:10). Like L.A.B., the Midrash puts into Moses\u2019s mouth arguments (though different ones) to counter this plan of God\u2019s (see, e.g., B. Ber. 32a; Yal. Shimoni 1:392).
\n12:10. I pardon, in accord with your words The author of L.A.B. is here quoting God\u2019s words at Num. 14:20, in a similar context. Midrashic elaborations of the golden calf story commonly introduce God\u2019s declaration of forgiveness from Num. 14:20 (see, e.g., Deut. Rab. 3:15; Pirke R. El. 46, end).
\nCarve out \u2026 and write again The author of L.A.B. asserts that Moses wrote the second set of tablets. The biblical narrative supports both possibilities, that Moses wrote them and that God wrote them. The text of L.A.B. follows the clear statements at Exod. 34:27\u201328. The author also says explicitly that Moses hewed the first set of tablets (excideras priores), whereas the Bible unambiguously presents God as the maker of the first tablets (cf. especially Exod. 32:16; see too Deut. 5:18). Indeed, no other postbiblical source credits the making of the first tablets to Moses.
\n13:1. everything that was shown to him This is based upon the notion, touched upon in the Bible a few times and expanded in the Midrash, that God had shown Moses the \u201cblueprints\u201d of the tabernacle and its apparatus during the revelation at Sinai. (See, e.g., Exod. 25:40; 26:30; 27:8; Num. 8:4.)
\n13:3. If there will be leprosy in your land It is hard to understand why, of all the possibilities, L.A.B.\u2019s author chose to exemplify sacrifices with that tied to the leper. He may introduce it here in connection with the establishment of the Tabernacle because, according to the Midrash (see, e.g., Num. Rab. 7:1), the isolation of the leper from the community only began with the erection of the Tabernacle. The language in L.A.B. here is based on Lev. 13:9 and 14:34.
\n13:4 The order of the holidays that follow is chronological (beginning with the month of Nisan) and is that of Lev. 23 and Num. 28\u201329.
\nrejoice \u2026 on the festival of the unleavened bread Of particular interest here is that while the notion of rejoicing before God on the festivals is found in the Pentateuch regarding the Feast of Weeks and the Feast of Tabernacles, it is not found regarding Passover. Still, L.A.B. has considerable post-Pentateuch company in explicitly associating \u201cjoy\u201d with the celebration of the Passover (e.g., Ezra 6:22, Jub. 49:22).
\n13:5. On the festival of weeks That is, Pentecost. See Deut. 16:16. The name of the holiday is not mentioned in the Leviticus source.
\nmake me an offering in thanks for your crops There is an illuminating parallel from B. RH 16a: \u201cbring before me two loaves on Pentecost so that the fruit of your trees may be blessed.\u201d
\n13:6. the festival of trumpets That is, Rosh Hashanah.
\nI review creation Apparently a reference to the notion that God passes all of his creatures in review before him on this day (see M. RH 1:2).
\nthe fast of mercy That is, the Day of Atonement. The Rabbis emphasized the theme of mercy in connection with Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur (e.g., Pesik. Rav Kah. 23) and Fast Days were sometimes called \u201cdays of mercy\u201d (e.g., B. Ber. 29a).
\nyou will fast \u2026 for the sake of your souls In reference to Yom Kippur, Lev. 16:31 states, \u201cyou shall mortify your souls.\u201d The Vatican Fragment Targum paraphrases this exactly as in L.A.B.: \u201cyou shall fast for the sake of your souls.\u201d
\nso that the promises made to your fathers may be fulfilled The Rabbis made intimate connections between Yom Kippur and the patriarchs (especially Abraham). Thus, Abraham entered into the covenant of circumcision on Yom Kippur (Pirke R. El. 29). Some called the month of Tishrei \u201cthe month of the oath,\u201d since God had therein made his promise to Abraham (Gen. 22:16\u201318; see Lev. Rab. 29:9, with its stress on God\u2019s mercy in that month).
\n13:7. the festival of the booth That is, Sukkot, or the Feast of Tabernacles.
\nI will remember the whole earth with rain The Feast of Tabernacles was the occasion for water rituals and prayer for rain (e.g., M. Ta\u2019an. 1:1).
\n13:8. death was ordained for the generations of men The notion that death was introduced into the world as a result of Adam\u2019s sin was a minority Jewish opinion; see, for example, Tanhuma (Buber) 1:9a.
\n13:9. to show him the ways of paradise At 2 Bar. 4:5, God is said to have shown paradise to Moses at Mt. Sinai.
\n13.7\u201310 Difficult and obscure as much in this section is, nonetheless one can see in broad outline the essential point. The Feast of Tabernacles occasions the mention of God\u2019s blessing of rain; in turn, this recalls the Flood and humankind\u2019s sinfulness (including Adam\u2019s), which deprived humankind of God\u2019s greatest blessings. The Flood and destruction of humanity must serve as a warning to Israel, for just as humankind in general lost God\u2019s blessings by sinning, so too Israel can lose its blessings by sinning (L.A.B. 13:10). Note also that our section is a virtual doublet of L.A.B. 19:10. In both, God grants a vision to Moses, including the \u201cpaths of paradise.\u201d In both, the theme of rain irrigating the earth is important. In both, there appear to be references to (heavenly?) signs. In both, we hear of what humankind has lost because of its sins. But both conclude with the reassurance that God will remember his people in the end. Usually in midrashic texts, both the warnings and the visions granted to Moses occur shortly before his death, as is the case at L.A.B. 19:10.
\n14:1. to forty years The Bible merely says the census shall be of those 20 years and up, with no mention of an upper limit. However, L.A.B. 14:3 reveals clearly that L.A.B.\u2019s author means the basic census to be of those from 20 to 50. Thus, as often in L.A.B., corruption has taken place in the account of numbers. Once we realize that L.A.B.\u2019s author wrote \u201cfifty\u201d here, not forty, we can understand how he came to this innovation: he has taken the upper limit for the census of the Levites (Num. 4:3) and adopted it also for the people at large. Josephus does exactly the same thing (Ant. 3.288).
\n14:4. for all who saw my wonders This is a virtual quote of Num. 14:22, in the same kind of context and with the same point. God has punished precisely those who witnessed his great miracles in Egypt and nonetheless failed to believe in him. This is not the only theme from Num. 14 (the scouts episode) that L.A.B.\u2019s author has transferred here.
\nthey did not believe in me Another echo of the scouts story: Num. 14:11; Deut. 9:23.
\nthey should give to me offerings from their fruits \u201cOfferings\u201d refers to the so-called terumah offerings. Although the Bible does not stipulate the quantitative requirements for the terumah offerings, the Rabbis decided that the general standard should be 1\/50 (T. Ter. 5, especially 3, 8). The sense is clear: as a result and a reminder of God\u2019s saving 1\/50 of the people, the people are to make terumah offerings of 1\/50. The etiology is not unlike that for the biblical injunction to offer to God firstborn animals, for God saved the Jewish firstborn in Egypt at the time of the tenth plague (Exod. 13:11\u201315).
\n15:2. as weapons conquer lightning What underlies the use of this imagery in our context is the notion that lightning bolts are the weapons of God (e.g., 2 Sam. 22:15). Thus, humankind\u2019s weapons cannot defeat God\u2019s. The same applies to the stars in the preceding sentence, for they too are part of God\u2019s arsenal (cf. Judg. 5:20).
\nFor they saw That the scouts were accompanied by omens is a version not found elsewhere.
\nlightning from the stars It seems likely that L.A.B. is here alluding to the ancient notion that the phenomenon of lightning is connected to the stars. (See, e.g., Ep. ad Pyth. 2.101; 1 En. 42:1\u20132; 44:1.)
\n15:3. Joshua son of Nun The genealogy here does not match the details given at 1 Chron. 7:20\u201327, though the number of generations is exactly right and some of the names appear to be the same.
\n15:4. Are these the words that God spoke to us The author\u2019s use of God\u2019s promise of a land of milk and honey as a source of complaint in the mouth of Israelites comes from Num. 16:14 (lit., \u201cYou have not even brought us to a land flowing with milk and honey\u201d).
\n15:5. I will send the angel of my wrath The Bible speaks more than once of God sending his angel for the Jews in the desert (Exod. 23:20; 33:2), but these are for beneficent purposes (though 23:21 implies that the angel can also punish).
\nnot to plead for them For the angels specifically as intercessors, see T. Levi 3:5; 5:6; 1 En. 40:6. But God will forbid them here from pleading on Israel\u2019s behalf.
\nI will shut up their souls in the storehouses of darkness The exact and special nature of this place and punishment is unfortunately not spelled out. For Hell as a place of utter darkness, see, for example, 2 En. 10:2; S. Rab. d\u2019Bereshit 27.
\nI will tell my servants, their fathers The patriarchs are commonly portrayed in midrashic texts as concerned about the fate of their descendants. Particularly similar to L.A.B. here is a passage in Panim Aherim wherein God summons the patriarchs and complains to them that the Jewish people deserve to be destroyed because of their behavior in the time of Nebuchadnezzar.
\nYour offspring will be strangers in a land not their own Jub. 48:8 also explicitly connects God\u2019s rescue of the Jews from Egypt with the prophecy and promise at Gen. 15:13\u201314.
\nI \u2026 put the angels beneath their feet The author of L.A.B. is alluding to midrashic traditions that certain \u201cangels\u201d tried to prevent God from rescuing the Jews at the time of the Exodus, but God did not heed them (see, e.g., Exod. Rab. 21:7; Jub. 48:9\u201318).
\nplaced the cloud as shade for their heads A reference to the cloud as a source of shade during the daytime (Exod. 13:21), referred to by Moses in his plea before God at Num. 14:14.
\nshade There was a midrashic tradition that the sukkot in the desert to which the Bible refers does not mean real \u201chuts, dwellings,\u201d but simply alludes to the \u201cclouds of glory\u201d that God set over the people (see, e.g., Tg. Jon. and Onk. at Lev. 23:43; B. Suk. 11b).
\nI commanded the sea God\u2019s direct intervention is not part of the biblical narrative, but is found at Ps. 106:9 (and cf. L.A.B. 10:5).
\n15:6. Nothing like this ever happened This alludes not to all the events listed in the prior section, but only to the splitting of the sea (\u201cthe depths froze in front of them and walls of water stood forth\u201d) and signifies that the miracle at the sea was comparable to God\u2019s assemblage of the waters at the time of Creation. This association between these two events is found in some midrashic texts (e.g., Mek. Besh. 3; Exod. Rab. 21:6; Pirke R. El. 42).
\nI bent the heavens and descended These words are nearly an exact quotation of Ps. 18:10. That God tilted the heavens and thereby descended onto Mount Sinai is midrashic (see e.g. Mek. Bahodesh 9; cf. 4 Ezra 3:18).
\na lamp for my people In our context, it seems reasonable to assume that the light is the Torah (cf. L.A.B. 9:8; comment on 11:1).
\nI will do to them as they wished This alludes to the wish of the people expressed at Num. 14:2 and to God\u2019s explicit ironic declaration that he will fulfill their wish at Num. 14:28\u201329, though L.A.B.\u2019s author himself does not include this wish earlier at the relevant point of the narrative (L.A.B. 15:4).
\n15:7. let your mercy support us forever, and your kindness for many years The theme of God\u2019s mercy, the notion of \u201ceternity,\u201d and the parallel phrasing are all reminiscent of the Psalms. Unless there is a lacuna at this point in the text, the story of the scouts ends with Moses\u2019s plea to God. Not only is God\u2019s response not given (that can reasonably be taken for granted), but remarkably, the most important part of the story in the biblical context\u2014God\u2019s punishing the people with 40 years of wandering in the desert\u2014is completely passed over. It is not clear whether L.A.B.\u2019s author does this with the expectation that his audience will simply remember the outcome or in an attempt to turn the biblical story into a paradigm of God\u2019s mercy. Postbiblical exegetes (Jewish and Christian) often did precisely that, building on Num. 14:17\u201320 and making that theme the focus of the story.
\n16:1. he commanded him about the fringes. Then Korah \u2026 rebelled Rabbinic exegesis tied Korah\u2019s rebellion to the prescription on fringes (tzitzit), as a result of the juxtaposition of the revolt (at the beginning of Num. 16) to the law on fringes (at the end of Num. 15). See for example Tg. Jon. at Num. 16:2.
\n16:2. God was angry At Num. 16:15 it is Moses who is angered. God\u2019s anger is alluded to at 16:22. Sefer ha-Yashar 279 has just what L.A.B. has in this context. The author of L.A.B. turns what in the Bible is primarily a struggle between Moses and Korah into a battle between God and Korah.
\nI commanded the earth, and it gave me man The Bible reports that God created man from the dust of the earth (Gen. 2:7), but L.A.B.\u2019s language goes beyond the biblical wording. Still, Jewish sources do consider the earth as \u201cmother of all living creatures.\u201d
\nThe elder rose up and killed the younger Connecting the story of Korah to that of Cain\u2019s murder of Abel is midrashic (e.g., B. Sanh. 37b). But the connection between the two is considerably stronger in L.A.B. than in the talmudic passage and probably derives ultimately from the identical language at Gen. 4:11 and Num. 16:30 (cf. Lekach Tov at Num. 16:30). Korah and Cain are associated in a number of sources, for example, Jude 11.
\nThe reference to Cain and Abel as \u201cthe elder \u2026 the younger\u201d may be a residue of the midrashic tradition that the dispute between Cain and Abel arose because of the question of the relative status and rights of the older versus the younger brother (e.g., Tanh. Bereshit 1:9; Midr. Hag. at Gen. 4:8).
\nI \u2026 cursed the earth In the Bible, God curses the earth after the sin of Adam and Eve (Gen. 3:17). But when Cain murders Abel, God\u2019s curse is directed at Cain (Gen. 4:11). The author of L.A.B., like several midrashic sources, reinterprets Gen. 4:11 to turn it into a curse of the earth.
\n16:3. the thoughts of men are very polluted This probably echoes Gen. 6:5 and 8:21. At the end of this section, L.A.B.\u2019s author compares the fate of Korah and his followers to that of the generation of the Flood. The initial description of the rebels here is then also calculated to align them with the generation of the Flood.
\nit will swallow up body and soul together What underlies the point here is the biblical identification of the blood with the soul (Deut. 12:23). Thus, the earth has been prohibited since the time of Cain from swallowing blood (i.e., from taking possession of both body and soul). This prohibition is now rescinded, and by swallowing Korah and his followers alive, the earth takes possession of both body and soul. The Midrash makes the same point, declaring that only in the case of Korah and his followers did the earth receive both the body and the soul (Sefer Pitron Torah, 167).
\nThey will not die but waste away This clearly derives from the word hayim at Num. 16:30, 33 (\u201cThey went down alive into Sheol\u201d). The Midrash took this to mean that they abided alive in Sheol, being punished (e.g., Tanhuma [Buber] 4:47a; cf. Bar-Hebraeus at Num. 16:32).
\nThen they will die and not live In other words, when the resurrection of the dead comes about, Korah and his men, who have been enduring in the underworld, will then indeed die. Cf. perhaps the language and notion at Pirke R. El. 34, \u201cI will kill him with a second death from which there is no resurrection.\u201d The author of L.A.B. aligns himself with the hard-liners in the debate on the ultimate fate of Korah and his men (cf. M. Sanh. 10:3). In particular, the debate at Avot R. Nat. A.36 between Rabbis Eliezer and Joshua is over whether they will share in the resurrection.
\nthe place of destruction will not remember them When others will be restored to life, they will at last be put to death. Their wasting away in the underworld will come to an end; the underworld will have no further thoughts of them; they will be utterly, absolutely, and irretrievably dead.
\nI will not remember them In context, this must mean \u201cI will not remember them at the time of the resurrection\u201d; that is, they will not be resurrected for life (cf. above \u201cI will remember the world\u201d). The sentence that follows adds the Egyptians and the generation of the Flood to Korah. Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:2\u20134 gives a long list of those who have no share in the world to come, including Korah and his followers and the generation of the Flood. The Egyptians are not mentioned.
\n16:4. who had not joined with him in the plot The exoneration of the sons of Korah is based on two things: first, the assertion at Num. 26:11 that Korah\u2019s sons did not die (together with the rebels); and second, the frequent allusion to the \u201csons of Korah\u201d in the book of Psalms, evidently as having some role in the Temple service (e.g., Ps. 42:1; 44:1; 84:1). Like L.A.B., midrashic sources occasionally stress that Korah\u2019s sons did not take part in his rebellion (e.g., Lekach Tov at Num. 16:33; cf. Midr. Ps. 1:1, 6 [Buber] 14\u201315).
\n16:5. Our father begot us, but the LORD has fashioned us The notion that our biological father begot us, but God formed us may be related to the Rabbinic notion that God and biological parents are partners in the birth of a child (B. Nid. 31a)
\nif we walk in his ways, we will be his sons This theme is present at Deut. Rab. 7:9 and at Tanh. Ekev 5. Cf. Wis. 2:16, 18. The theme has its roots in Deut. 14:1 (cf. Exod. 4:22; Jer. 31:8; perhaps Deut. 32:5). For the opposite view, that God considers the Jews his children even when they sin, see Sifre Deut. 308.
\n16:6. His sons sent to him In the biblical narrative the earth splits open (Num. 16:31) and immediately thereafter (16:32) it swallows Korah and his men. The author of L.A.B. introduces a time lapse between the two stages, thereby emphasizing both the continuing possibility of repentance and forgiveness and the recalcitrance of Korah.
\nhe did not heed them The author identifies the rebellious Korah with the archvillain and enemy, Pharaoh. The Midrash occasionally associates Korah with Pharaoh (e.g., B. Pes. 119a; cf. Koran 29:39, 40:25).
\n17:1. the identity of the priestly family was revealed In the Bible, the question of the proper possessor of priestly status is inextricably woven into the story of Korah\u2019s rebellion from the very beginning. But in L.A.B., identification of the priestly family has no place in the episode of the rebellion and appears as an independent event that follows thereafter.
\n17:4. the assembly of the people became like the flock of sheep The comparison of Israel to sheep is commonplace, both in the Bible (cf. Num. 27:17) and afterward. The author of L.A.B. probably means no more than that. The Midrash compares the great number of Jacob\u2019s sheep with the large population of the people of Israel (Yal. Shimoni 2:551; cf. Gen. Rab. 73:11).
\nas the flocks brought forth \u2026 so the priesthood was established Thus, in essence, just as Jacob\u2019s rods established distinctions between the sheep, so Aaron\u2019s rod determined the distinctions between different groups of Israel and thereby defined the membership of the priesthood.
\n18:1. Sihon and Og, the kings of the Amorites The tale of the conquest of the Amorite kings is related in Num. 21.
\nhe apportioned all their land The author of L.A.B. gives us no indication that the area in question was divided among two and a half tribes, not the whole people.
\n18:2. in the reign of my father The invention of some such story, both here and in the Midrash, derives from Balak\u2019s words (Num. 22:6), \u201cI know that he whom you bless is blessed indeed, and he whom you curse is cursed.\u201d How, the exegete asks himself, does Balak know this? The result is a story such as is found here (and cf. Num. Rab. 19:30; 20:7).
\ncome and curse this people, and I will honor you very much Here, L.A.B.\u2019s author has conflated two passages, one from the first embassy sent by Balak to Balaam (Num. 22:6), the other from the second (22:17).
\n18:3. the spirit that is given to us is given for a time The reference here is probably to the spirit of God that enters into humans temporarily on the occasion of their inspiration. Evidence for such is at Num. 11:25\u201326 and in those passages in the Prophets where similar events are recounted (e.g. Judg. 11:29; 1 Sam. 10:10). In the case of Balaam this is explicit at Num. 24:2.
\n18:4. Why, LORD, do you test the human race? The theme of God testing people is common in the Bible. See, for example, Gen. 22:1; Exod. 16:4; Deut. 13:4. The point here appears to be that God tests Balaam with the question qui sunt viri (\u201cWho are the men who have come to you?\u201d). God of course knows the answer and tests Balaam\u2019s recognition of his omniscience. Balaam passes the test.
\nenlighten your servant if it be right that I go with them Balaam never actually puts the question to God in the biblical narrative.
\n18:5. I lifted him above the firmament and showed him This is a familiar postbiblical theme (an elaboration of Gen. 15:5). See, for example, Gen. Rab. 44:12.
\nin return for his blood I chose them This is remarkable, since in the biblical narrative no blood of Isaac is shed. Indeed, midrashic sources frequently refer to the sacrifice of the ram as representing \u201cblood instead of Isaac\u2019s blood\u201d (e.g., Tanh. Shlach 14; Sefer ha-Yashar 81; Gen. Rab. 56:9). Still, the Mekhilta d\u2019-Rashbi similarly indicates that some of Isaac\u2019s blood was indeed shed.
\nI chose them Presumably, the notion that Israel\u2019s election resulted from the offering of Isaac could be derived from God\u2019s (strictly speaking, the angel\u2019s) words to Abraham at the end of the episode (Gen. 22:16\u201318). But in fact the election has already been indicated in Gen. 15; 17, and 18. Rabbinic texts assert that notable benefits accrued to the Jewish people as a result of the Akedah\u2014for example, the liberation from Egypt (Mek. d\u2019Rashbi); the splitting of the Sea of Reeds (e.g., Mek. Besh. 3); the ultimate resurrection of the dead (Pesik. Rab Kah.)\u2014but no known texts explicitly name the election of the Jewish people as one of those benefits.
\n18:6. he wrestled with the angel who was in charge of hymns Jacob\u2019s wrestling partner is simply designated \u201ca man\u201d at Gen. 32:25, but has always (and with good reason: cf. 32:29, 31) been understood to be an angel. One midrashic source appears to agree with L.A.B. in making the wrestler the angel who was in charge of the heavenly singing (Yal. Shimoni 1:132). His need to rush off is thereby explained, since he must return to heaven to sing the morning hymn to God. Thus, three critical events in the history of the patriarchs are cited by God as indications that the Jews are a blessed people and cannot be cursed. First, the covenant of the pieces; second, the sacrifice of Isaac; and third, Jacob\u2019s wrestling with the angel of God. Each event is marked by God\u2019s blessing of the patriarch and his descendants (Gen. 15:5, 18; 22:17\u201318; 32:29\u201330).
\nif you curse them, who will there be to bless you? Should Balaam curse Israel, he will lose the possibility of being blessed himself. The Midrash makes this point explicit: Balaam calculated that should he curse Israel, he would be cursed, and so he chose to bless them (Midr. Ag. at Num. 24:9 [Buber] 143; cf. Tanhuma [Buber] 4:71b).
\n18:7. you will have your reward Balak speaks regularly of rewarding Balaam (cf. Num. 22:17\u201318, 37; 24:11).
\n18:8. the son of Zippor is a seer Although the Bible has nothing about Balak\u2019s being a \u201cseer,\u201d the Midrash does, and with the same kind of twist that L.A.B.\u2019s author gives it: Balak was a seer, but did not understand properly what he foresaw (Tanhuma [Buber] 4:68a).
\n18:9. His she-ass came The biblical story of Balaam and his ass is abridged and transformed. The whole point of the biblical episode is gone: God\u2019s anger (Num. 22:22) is not mentioned; nor is the angel\u2019s sword and near killing of Balaam (not to mention the speaking ass). In L.A.B. the tale has become nothing more than an epiphany for Balaam.
\n18:10. When he had seen part of the people, the spirit of God came upon him The concept of the \u201cspirit of God\u201d enters the Balaam story here from Num. 24:2. One can see how L.A.B.\u2019s author has stitched together 22:41 with 24:2, for the latter verse\u2019s reference to God\u2019s spirit follows immediately upon a statement that Balaam beheld the Jewish nation, just as at 22:41 (though the exact phrasing is different).
\nHe took up his poem The author of L.A.B. (like Ant. 4.112\u201317) contracts Balaam\u2019s four biblical oracles into one.
\nrun into the fire of those men For the notion that the Jewish people is a fire that consumes its enemies (either in this world or the next), see, for example, Obad. 18; Pirke R. El. 40.
\nto extinguish the light of the sun and to darken the light of the moon This text recalls apocalyptic visions like Isa. 13:10.
\nto destroy his vine For the notion of Israel as God\u2019s vine(yard), see Isa. 5; Jer. 12; and L.A.B. 12:8.
\n18:11. the time is coming Here, L.A.B.\u2019s author uses the familiar prophetic prlogue (very frequent in Jeremiah), though it does not occur in Balaam\u2019s oracles.
\nto persuade the LORD with gifts That God cannot be bribed is biblical (e.g., Deut. 10:17; 2 Chron. 19:7).
\nif anyone says to himself Probably the Psalmic yomar be-libo (e.g., Ps. 10:11; 14:1) of the fool or the sinner who questions the existence or omnipotence of God. The author of L.A.B. has transferred the theme to the national level, with perhaps some influence from passages like Exod. 32:12 and Deut. 9:28.
\nthere is little left of the holy spirit The Midrash reports (at the end of the episode, ad Num. 24:25) that the holy spirit departed from Balaam (Yal. Shimoni 1:771).
\n18:12. Moab will groan The author has transferred to Balaam\u2019s prophecy words from the bards\u2019 song on the defeat of Moab by the Amorites, with the groan here reasonably given to the Moabites (Num. 21:29, a verse echoed in L.A.B.\u2019s next clause too). Interestingly, the bards of the song at Num. 21:27\u201330 were said by the Midrash to have been Balaam and his father (Tanhuma [Buber] 4:65a).
\nMy prophecy will remain manifest, and my words will live on These words may allude to the permanent incorporation of part of Balaam\u2019s prophecy into the daily liturgy, at the beginning of the morning blessings.
\n18:13. Then Balaam said The version here\u2014in which Balaam advises Balak on how to lead Israel into sin and thereby defeat them\u2014is found in Rabbinic sources.
\nadorned with gold and precious stones It is remarkable that L.A.B.\u2019s author makes no mention whatsoever of idolatry here. While the biblical narrative is concerned with immoral sexual behavior, its text clearly indicates that such behavior is merely a prelude to the really grievous crime, that of idolatry. Similarly, Philo, Josephus, and Rabbinic elaborations never lose sight of the central place in the story of idol worship. The only other account I know that totally ignores the role of idolatry in this episode is that found at Sefer ha-Yashar 284.
\n18:14 The grievous punishment that befalls the Jews after their sinful behavior with the Midianite women (Num. 25:3\u20139) is passed over by L.A.B.\u2019s author, just as he ignores the serious punishments that followed the episodes of the golden calf and the slanderous scouts. L.A.B.\u2019s representation of Balaam is fundamentally a negative one and he can aptly be called a villain.
\n19:1. the nations Here, L.A.B.\u2019s author is probably alluding also to the war against the Midianites of Num. 31.
\n19:2. he will remember the covenant The same theme in contexts like ours can be found at Lev. 26:42, 44\u201345. The author of L.A.B. is at pains to emphasize that in the end God will remember the covenant and redeem his people.
\n19:3. shepherd like Moses The metaphor of Moses as shepherd of Israel is common in Rabbinic literature and also found in Philo (Moses 1.60\u201362; to which cf. Tanhuma [Buber] 2:4a). It is in fact already implicit in the Bible, for when God tells Moses of Moses\u2019s impending demise, Moses asks him to appoint a successor, so that the people will not be \u201clike sheep that have no shepherd\u201d (Num. 27:17).
\nsuch a judge Although Moses is never called a \u201cjudge\u201d in the biblical narrative (I exclude Exod. 2:14), of course he is one (e.g., Exod. 18:13, 16). References to Moses as mediator or intercessor include, for example, Exod. 32:30; 34:9; Num. 14:17\u201320.
\n19:4. But if we transgress The biblical narrative contains no such declaration from the people at Sinai.
\nyou will call the witness against us, and he will destroy us The notion that the heavens and earth, invoked by Moses as witnesses in his valedictory, will themselves punish the Jewish people should they fail to follow God\u2019s mandates is found at Sifre Deut. 306 (cf. Deut. Rab. 10:4).
\n19:5. you have eaten the bread of angels for forty years This description of manna goes back to Ps. 78:24\u201325 as interpreted in the LXX and the Talmud (B. Yoma 75b). Moses reminds the people of God\u2019s kindness in providing them with manna in the desert at Deut. 8:3, 16.
\nI bless your tribes This alludes to the tribe-by-tribe blessing Moses gives in Deut. 33.
\n19:6. for a time That God\u2019s abandonment of Israel is brief and temporary is emphasized explicitly at Isa. 54:7\u20138.
\n19:7. lest you see the graven images The reason given in L.A.B. for Moses\u2019s not entering the Land of Israel is unique.
\nI will show you the place The Bible reports that when Moses ascends the mountain, God shows him all the Promised Land (Deut. 34:1\u20134). The author of L.A.B. makes explicit that God shows Moses the center of his worship (Jerusalem). The Midrash goes even further, having God provide Moses with a vision of the constructed Temple itself (Sifre Deut. 357). This midrash then has God provide Moses a vision of the land occupied by invaders and the Temple destroyed, much like God\u2019s words to Moses here in L.A.B.
\nThat day was the seventeenth day of the fourth month Like L.A.B., Rabbinic texts give the 17th of Tammuz as the date of Moses\u2019s smashing of the tablets (e.g., M. Ta\u2019an. 4:6; S. Olam Rab. 6). If L.A.B. means here that the destruction of Jerusalem also occurred on the 17th, he is in agreement again with some Rabbinic and historical sources that date a key event in the downfall of the First or Second Temple to that day.
\n19:8 The author of L.A.B. completely ignores the biblical and postbiblical tradition that Moses pleads with God to allow him to enter the Promised Land. This is consistent with the author\u2019s alteration of the reason for God\u2019s decision to exclude Moses: In L.A.B., God keeps Moses out of Israel as a favor, to spare him seeing how low the people will sink there (see comment on 19:7, lest you see the graven images).
\nyour people \u2026 and your portion The language of Deut. 9:26, 29. The context too is essentially the same: Moses pleads before God to show mercy toward his people (cf. language and context at Joel 2:17).
\nyour portion The common notion of Israel as God\u2019s portion.
\n19:9. You called me The author of L.A.B. follows the biblical account (reiterated and explained in midrashic texts, e.g., Exod. Rab. 32:9) that, although the angel appeared to Moses, it was God himself who spoke to him.
\nby which they should live and enter upon as human beings This refers in essence to a common interpretation of Scripture: that God bestowed on the Jews his laws in order to give them life but not death (see, e.g., B. Sanh. 74a; T. Shab. 15:17). Consequently, when observance of the laws entails danger to life, God is indulgent. We may paraphrase L.A.B. as follows: \u201cLORD, you gave the Jews laws in order that they should gain life through them and that they should observe the laws, within the limitations imposed by one\u2019s human condition. For all human beings sometimes sin and so you must have mercy on them.\u201d
\nChastize them for a time, but not in anger L.A.B.\u2019s theme of God\u2019s punishing or abandoning Israel only for brief and temporary periods is here repeated (see L.A.B. 19:6; cf. 2 Bar. 4:1). \u201cNot in anger\u201d reflects the biblical theme that God should (or will) punish Israel, but not out of anger (see esp. Ps. 6:2; 38:2; Jer. 10:24).
\n19:10. Then the LORD showed him the land This kind of ascension-vision of the mysteries of nature is found in various Moses traditions.
\nthe place from which the clouds draw up water to water the whole earth This refers to the notion that the clouds draw their moisture from the depths, as put succinctly at Pirke R. El. 5 (end).
\nthe place in the firmament from which only the holy land drinks This is the tradition (Sifre Deut. 42; B. Ta\u2019an. 10a) that distinguishes the source of the rainfall for the land of Israel from that for the rest of the world.
\nthe holy land The phrase (in at least one form) goes back to Zech. 2:16.
\nthe place from which he rained down manna upon the people The image is the Bible\u2019s (Exod. 16:4; Ps. 78:24). The notion that the manna has a special place in the heavens seems present at B. Hag. 12b.
\nthe measurements of the sanctuary This must refer to the Temple and reflects the tradition preserved at Sifre Deut. 357, that God showed Moses the completed Temple.
\n19:11. Your staff \u2026 will serve as a witness \u2026 as a reminder The notion that Moses\u2019s rod will serve as a testimony and reminder for God, so that he will spare Israel when they sin, seems to occur nowhere outside this passage in L.A.B. That L.A.B.\u2019s author is deriving the essential theme here from the rainbow of the Flood story is explicit. Both the rainbow and the rod will serve to avert destruction.
\n19:12. All the angels will mourn over you That the angels mourn Moses is midrashic. See, for example, Sifre Deut. 355 and Avot R. Nat. B. 25 (end), where the angels actually recall the verse from Isaiah (57:2) cited above.
\nI will raise up you That God promised Moses that he would be resurrected is suggested at B. Sanh. 90b.
\n19:13. like a fleeting cloud To the psalmist\u2019s single simile (90:4), L.A.B.\u2019s author has added a second. He is thinking of the image at Job 7:9, an image incorporated into the High Holiday liturgy (\u201cA man\u2019s origins are from dust,\u201d etc.).
\nthey will be shortened On the eschatological shortening or speeding up of time, see, for example, 2 Bar. 20:1; 83:1; Mark 13:20. The notion does occasionally occur in Rabbinical texts. Thus, at B. BM 85b we read that if the patriarchs were alive to pray together, the messiah would come before his scheduled time. At B. Sanh. 98a we read that if Israel is meritorious, God will hasten to bring the salvation before its appointed time.
\nwill hurry to set and \u2026 will not abide A variation on the biblical notion that on the apocalyptic \u201cday of God\u201d the sun and moon will go dark.
\nthe place of sanctification that I showed you Presumably a reference to paradise, alluded to in the vision afforded Moses at L.A.B. 19:10. The phrase \u201cplace of sanctification\u201d recalls similar language used to refer to Jerusalem and the Temple (e.g., Isa. 52:1; 60:13; Ps. 24:3; Eccles. 8:10), and demonstrates clearly that L.A.B.\u2019s author follows the tradition that either identifies or strongly associates paradise with the \u201ccelestial\u201d Jerusalem.
\n19:14. If I can make another request of you Moses entreats God in language and tone borrowed from Abraham\u2019s famous pleading with God in Gen. 18.
\nhow much time \u2026 remains Numerous pseudepigraphic and Rabbinic texts seek to calculate the end-time, in spite of the injunction not to concern oneself with such matters (B. Meg. 3a, B. Sanh. 97b).
\n19:15. Four and a half have passed, two and a half remain The author of L.A.B., like others, will have thought of 7000 as the appropriate number for the duration of this world based on two things: the fact of the seven-day week and the regular interpretation (based on Ps. 90:4) that for God 1000 years is the equivalent of one day. Thus, the world lasts one week, that is, 7000 years. Inevitably there was confusion over the nature of the Sabbath of the week (i.e., the 7th millennium), and it was sometimes taken as a kind of intermediary period between this world and the next (e.g., S. Eli. Rab. 2; cf. B. RH 31a). As for the use of fractional numbers in apocalypses, this goes back to Daniel 7:25; 12:7 (\u201ca time, times, and half a time\u201d; cf. 9:27), a cryptic phrase which has been taken by a few interpreters to mean \u201ctwo and a half.\u201d
\n19:16. he was filled with understanding The Midrash reports that toward the end of his life, God took the tradition of wisdom from Moses and gave it to Joshua, rendering Moses incapable of understanding the exegesis of the Torah (Tanhuma [Buber] 5:7a).
\nas he had promised him An allusion to God\u2019s words at L.A.B. 19:12.
\nHe buried him with his own hands The language is strong, but both the Bible and the Rabbis often used such anthropomorphic language of God. The Talmud declares God\u2019s personal burial of Moses an act of kindness on his part (B. Sot. 14a).
\n20:2. Why do you mourn On Joshua\u2019s mourning for Moses, see, for example, Avot R. Nat. A.12; Sifre Deut. 305.
\n20:4. If \u2026 you be like your fathers, your affairs will be ruined The notion that the new generation should not be like the generation that went out of Egypt is implied at Num. 32:8, 14; cf. Ps. 78:8, 57. The language is based on passages like Zech. 1:4; 2 Chron. 30:7; Ps. 78:8.
\nwhat will become of the words that God spoke to your fathers Here, L.A.B. mirrors the Pentateuchal theme wherein Moses reminds God of his past promises when God is angry with the Jewish people (e.g., Exod. 32:13; Deut. 9:27).
\nthe LORD does not regard persons This is a quote of the biblical description of God as the honest judge (\u201cwho shows no favor and takes no bribe\u201d; Deut. 10:17).
\nbecause you sinned The notion that the nations will recognize that the downfall of Israel is due not to God\u2019s failure, but to Israel\u2019s sin and consequent punishment, is found at Deut. 29:21\u201327 and Jer. 22:8\u20139.
\n20:5. what Eldad and Medad prophesied The Bible (Num. 11:26) records the fact that Eldad and Medad prophesied, but unlike L.A.B., gives no indication as to the contents of their prophecies.
\n20:6. He summoned Cenaz The first mention of the mysterious Cenaz, who will play so important a role in L.A.B.
\n20:7. the people went up The author of L.A.B. completely ignores the tale of the fall of the walls of Jericho, summing up the entire story with a quote from the final verse of that story.
\n20:8. After Moses died, the manna stopped The Bible asserts that the manna now stopped (Josh. 5:12) and the Midrash claims that it had been a gift to the people from God for Moses\u2019s sake. With his passing, it ceased. The author of L.A.B. emphasizes this through the introductory words \u201cAfter Moses died.\u201d
\nThese are the three things For the tradition of the three blessings granted for the sake of the three leaders, see, for example, Mek. Wayassa 5; B. Ta\u2019an. 9a.
\nthe well of the water of Marah The well that accompanied the Jews in the desert for the sake of Miriam is found frequently in midrashic literature.
\n21:2. regulated the rain For God as the creator and regulator of rain, see, for example, Ps. 147:18; 148:4; Job 28:26; 36:27\u20138.
\nYou beyond all know \u2026 all generations before they are born These words of Joshua\u2019s bear a strong similarity to parts of the book of Job on matters like God\u2019s mysterious powers, God as the source of wisdom, the association of wisdom with the fear of God, and themes like natural phenomena and the birth of humankind (e.g., Job 28; 38; 39).
\nthey will not sin The connection between understanding or wisdom and righteous behavior is made commonly in Jewish texts (independently of Socrates!). See Deut. 32:6; Wis. 9:16\u201318.
\n21:3. when Achan stole from the proscribed In the narrative style typical of L.A.B., an important biblical episode that has been passed over without mention in its appropriate chronological context is later mentioned or even reported in detail.
\n21:4. even if our end be moving toward death, you \u2026 live on For the contrast between human mortality and God\u2019s immortality, with the corollary that God possesses the eternal continuing ability to act, see, for example, Sifre Deut. 330.
\nwho are before the world and after the world For the notion that God is both prior and posterior to the world, see e.g. the (liturgical) angelic text (at a point when God is contemplating the destruction of the world) at J. Ber. 9:2.
\nto prefer one generation to another Meaning that God can reject one generation, but still show favor to another (even a much later one) since he endures forever. Humans, on the contrary, whose life is limited and short and whose vision does not extend to the future, can do no such thing.
\nGod destroys the people whom he has chosen The theme that outsiders would say that God has destroyed or will destroy his chosen people is familiar from the Bible (see, e.g., Exod. 32:12; Num. 14:15\u201316). Another aspect of this theme (\u201cGod\u2019s reputation is at stake\u201d) will be picked up a few lines hence (L.A.B. 21:5).
\n21:5. fulfill those words This looks back to \u201cIf man cannot devise\u201d of L.A.B. 21:4 and reaffirms the point that God\u2019s reputation among the nations must be maintained. In pleading for Israel at Josh. 7:9, Joshua makes much the same point: if you [God] allow the Jewish people to be destroyed, \u201cwhat will you do about your great name?\u201d
\n21:6. the house of Israel will be like a dove In similar language the Targum and the Talmud say that \u201cthe congregation of Israel is compared to a dove\u201d (Targum at Ps. 56:1; B. Ber. 53b). Whether Israel is actually ever compared to a dove in the Bible is unclear. The stress is on the faithfulness of the dove, like the faithfulness of Israel, asserting that the dove is faithful to her spouse just as Israel is to hers (i.e., God); that the dove, no matter what the circumstances, will not abandon her nest. See too Shir Rab. 2:30 (at 2:14).
\ndoes not \u2026 forget her place The text here refers to the conventional theme of the dove\u2019s remarkable ability to always find its way home (cf. Isa. 60:8 and Noah\u2019s dove, Gen. 8:8\u201311).
\n21:7. Joshua went down to Gilgal The Joshua passage at 8:30\u201335 makes no mention of Gilgal. The author of L.A.B. has conflated two different episodes here, the erection of the altar and stones at Mount Ebal from Josh. 8:30\u201335, and the erection of stones at Gilgal (Josh. 4:20). One observation on this passage: Mount Ebal is explicitly mentioned, Mount Gerizim is not. To see this as part of a major anti-Samaritan tendency in L.A.B. is certainly an exaggeration. Still, it is possible that L.A.B.\u2019s author saw no reason to give prominence to the Samaritans\u2019 holy place and so chose to ignore it. On the other hand, since Mount Gerizim plays a role only in the context of the recitation of the blessings and curses\u2014a context not included here\u2014L.A.B.\u2019s author had no particular reason to mention it.
\n21:8. they all gave much praise in song The text now proceeds with an elaborate account of the celebratory festivities. Nothing of the sort appears in the Joshua narrative. Yet L.A.B.\u2019s author has not \u201cinvented\u201d his account, but rather pieced it together from several descriptions of significant celebrations in the Bible. Primary is the story of the restoration of the Holy Ark at 2 Sam. 6 and 1 Chron. 15\u201316; also of importance is the account of the transfer of the Ark to Solomon\u2019s Temple at 1 Kings 8.
\n21:9. Behold, our LORD has fulfilled The same sentiment is expressed twice by Solomon at the dedication of the Temple.
\n22:1. When Joshua \u2026 heard that the children \u2026 had built an altar This seems to directly contradict the biblical account at Josh. 22, which repeatedly emphasizes that although the two and a half tribes erected the altar, they did not offer any sacrifices or even intend to do so. The author of L.A.B. made this calculated change to afford himself the opportunity to belittle the importance of sacrifice (L.A.B. 22:5) and emphasize the importance of study (22:6), for an audience that no longer had the possibility of sacrifice.
\n22:3. Behold now, God has \u2026 set up a light that they may see In other words, God knows what is hidden, but he also provides the means for people to see. In our context, the point would be that God knows what our motivations are and has the power to enable us also to understand them.
\nhe himself knows \u2026 and the light abides with him A near quotation of Dan. 2:22. Note that it occurs in a passage where the recognition of God\u2019s omniscience is connected to gratitude to God for bestowing illumination upon human beings.
\nthat they will not say The author of L.A.B. has changed the dramatic nature of the biblical narrative by putting the charged words in the mouth of the children of the two and a half tribes who stand accused, rather than in the mouth of the children of the nine and half tribes doing the accusing.
\nour God is too far \u2026 for us to serve him This whole argument has no role in the biblical Joshua episode, but is to a degree based upon the recognition by Deuteronomy that at some point the altar of Jerusalem would be too far for many of the people to come regularly to make sacrifice and that this could produce problems (see especially Deut. 12:20\u201327).
\n22:5. Is not the LORD the king mightier The point is clear: genuine devotion to God is more important than offering him sacrifices. The form of the question together with the general context reveals that L.A.B.\u2019s author has 1 Sam. 15:22 in mind.
\nman-made altar The addition of the modifier here is particularly important. On the surface, this adaptation of the biblical episode appears to carry the same purport as the original: to condemn setting up a sacrificial sanctuary outside of the single designated one in the Land of Israel. But by adding the critical adjective \u201cman-made,\u201d the underlying point comes out, for all altars are \u201cmanmade.\u201d Thus, L.A.B.\u2019s author is inveighing against attaching great significance to sacrificial altars at all (cf. the thought and language in the post-70 passage at Sib. Or. 4:7\u201311, 27\u201330). This point is enhanced by Joshua\u2019s exhortation, in L.A.B. 22:6, to teach one\u2019s children \u201cthe Law and let them study it day and night.\u201d Thus, the real opposition in L.A.B.\u2019s account is not between the one authorized sanctuary and others that are not legitimate, but rather between the critical worship of God through study and the lesser form through sacrifice (as in B. Shab. 30a).
\nbecause of your foolishness As not infrequently in L.A.B., foolishness leads to sin.
\n22:6. destroy the altar Again, dramatically different from the Bible\u2019s account, where the altar is left standing.
\nthe LORD may be for them a witness and a judge Again, L.A.B.\u2019s author drastically alters the biblical account. Whereas there the altar is left standing as a witness (Josh. 22:27, 34), here the altar is destroyed but God plays the role of witness (and judge).
\na witness and a judge For God as judge, see, for example, Gen. 16:5; Judg. 11:27. The eternal God is here both witness and judge because he will not only testify against the people should they sin, but also decree and bring their punishment.
\n22:8. took them up to Shiloh The Bible does not tell us where the Tabernacle was transferred from. The text of L.A.B. agrees with Rabbinic tradition that the altar was removed to Shiloh from Gilgal (having resided there 14 years). See B. Zev. 118b; cf. S. Olam Rab. 11.
\nthe Urim and Tummim Though they are not mentioned in the Joshua narrative, they would naturally be found at the abode of the sanctuary where the high priest would serve.
\nEleazar \u2026 would teach them with the Urim For Eleazar as the utilizer of the Urim and Tummim in the time of Joshua, see Num. 27:21.
\n22:9. the house of the LORD For the expression of Solomon\u2019s Temple, see, for example, 1 Kings 7:40; 9:1.
\nin Jerusalem This is the only explicit mention of Jerusalem in L.A.B.
\nthey offered sacrifice there until that day The Rabbis calculated how long the period of worship at Shiloh was. See, for example, S. Olam Rab. 11 (369 years).
\nEleazar \u2026 the priest served in Shiloh Eleazar does not die until the last verse of the book of Joshua (24:33).
\n23:4. So says the LORD The long passage that follows is an elaboration of the straightforward history of the Jewish people given in Josh. 24.
\nThere was one rock from which I hewed out your father A reminiscence of Isa. 51:1\u20132. The author of L.A.B. understands the verses in a way both different from their natural sense and different from traditional exegesis. For both the verses and their usual interpretations clearly mean that Abraham is the rock from whence the Jewish people were hewn. In L.A.B., Abraham is hewn from the rock, thereby changing the whole point and purpose of the metaphor.
\none rock The Midrash calls Abraham the rock on which the world was created and uses the very word petra (\u201crock\u201d) (Yal. Shimoni 1:766).
\n23:5. were led astray Though the sentence accurately represents the narrative of Genesis, it deliberately ignores Joshua\u2019s explicit mention of the idolatry of Terach and the ancestors of the Jewish people (Josh. 24:2).
\n23:6. the place of fire wherein will be expiated the deeds of those who commit iniquity For the notion that some sinners are purified by fire after death, see, for example, T. Sanh. 13:3; Avot R. Nat. A41; B. RH 16b\u201317a.
\n23:8. I \u2026 formed him in the womb For the notion of God molding the embryo in the womb, see, for example, Isa. 44:24; 49:5; Jer. 1:5.
\nin the seventh month, her son will live The Rabbis believed that babies born at 7 months of gestation were viable, in contrast to those born at 8 months of gestation (see, e.g., Gen. Rab. 14:2).
\nrevealed the new age This may refer to the tradition of Isaac\u2019s vision at the time of the Akedah (e.g., Tg. Jon. at Gen. 22:10, he saw the heavenly angels; at Gen. 27:1, he saw the heavenly throne of glory). It also may refer to end-time prophecies put into the mouth of Isaac (e.g., Jub. 31:18\u201320).
\n23:9. Moses my beloved A phrase used several times of Moses in L.A.B. (e.g., 24:3; 35:3). See also Moses 1.156; Sib. Or. 2:245; Princ. 3.2.5.
\n23:10. congealed the flame of fire Descriptions of the Revelation at Sinai include on the one hand the vast turmoil and uproar of nature (winds, thunder, lightning, quakes, etc.\u2014see, e.g., L.A.B. 11:5), and on the other hand the absolute paralysis of nature. The former is emphasized at 11:5, the latter at length here, where everything comes to a standstill.
\nso that they would not ruin my covenant Apparently meaning that the frightening storms, thunder, and so on that accompany God\u2019s descent on Sinai might terrify the people to such an extent that they would decline to receive God\u2019s covenant (cf. Exod. 20:15\u201317). Thus, God renders the world perfectly quiet to allay the people\u2019s fear and to assure their acceptance of the covenant (cf. L.A.B.\u2019s next sentence).
\nI did not let my people be scattered The Midrash is filled with a variety of accounts as to how God supported the people at Sinai and enabled them to survive and receive the covenant (e.g., Mek. Bahodesh 9).
\n23:12. Behold, a faithful people The praise of Israel here is different in substance from that of the Deuteronomy source passage (4:6\u20138). The author of L.A.B. stresses that the people must be faithful to God.
\nthey had faith in the LORD The Bible is filled with statements of Israel\u2019s infidelity toward God, but does not often speak of their fidelity. Still, see Exod. 14:31, for example, for almost these exact words. The reverse scenario is envisioned in the declaration of the nations at Deut. 29:23.
\nI will command the rain and the dew The common blessing, but particularly appropriate in a passage where Israel is compared to a vine and sheep. Cf. especially the curse version at Isa. 5:6.
\n24:2. than to be blotted out from the land The traditional punishment threatened against the Jews in the Land of Israel (e.g., Deut. 4:26; Josh. 23:13, 15).
\n24:3 Here, the text echoes passages in the Bible where (farewell) blessings are accompanied by kisses (e.g., Gen. 32:1; 48:9\u201310; 2 Sam. 19:40; cf. L.A.B. 24:4).
\n24:4. Joshua laid himself on his bed The whole scene is loosely founded upon the archetypal deathbed narrative of Gen. 49. The dying man lies in his bed, summons his heirs or successor, foretells the future, blesses those with him, and dies.
\n24:6. Lament The central imagery of the lament, the dead man as eagle and lion, is lifted from David\u2019s lament for Saul and Jonathan, wherein the two are compared to eagles and lions (2 Sam. 1:23).
\nfor forty years The Bible gives no indication as to how long Joshua led the people. Midrashic texts calculate his tenure variously, most giving 28 years (e.g., S. Olam Rab. 12). None gives 40.
\n25:1. the land of Israel was peaceful A common phrase in the book of Judges (e.g., 3:11; 8:28).
\nPhilistines The biblical episode here deals with the Canaanites, not the Philistines.
\nCast lots From this point on, the narrative is distinctly influenced by the story of Achan in Joshua, beginning with God\u2019s instructions to cast lots (cf. Josh. 7:14).
\n25:2. First let us appoint a leader \u2026 and then let us cast the lot The assertion by the people that they desire a leader followed by instructions to choose one by lot is based upon the selection of Saul as king (1 Sam. 10:19\u201321), thus establishing a parallel between the selection of the first Judge and that of the first King of Israel.
\nCenaz One of the great mysteries of L.A.B. is how the (biblically) insignificant Cenaz came to occupy so large and important a role in this work. The first judge mentioned by name in the book of Judges is Othniel the son of Cenaz, who is said to have had one major military victory and to have ruled over the people for 40 years (Judg. 3:9\u201310). All we hear of Cenaz is that he was Othniel\u2019s father. Nor do other postbiblical texts build up Cenaz, with the exception of Josephus (Ant. 5.182\u201384), who simply substitutes Cenaz for Othniel. Perhaps we should view the matter not by asking, \u201cWhy is this Cenaz\u2014who does such notable things in L.A.B.\u2014unfamiliar to us?\u201d but rather by asking, \u201cWhat events surrounding Cenaz\u2019s tenure were important enough to justify giving him this role?\u201d In other words, perhaps L.A.B.\u2019s author wanted to incorporate in his history of Israel the elaborate nonbiblical stories that make up L.A.B. 25\u201328, and preferred to attach them to someone with no role in the biblical account aside from a brief mention of his existence. Thus, Cenaz may be merely the blank character upon whom significant events are imposed.
\n25:3. Even if someone from my own household comes out. L.A.B.\u2019s presentation here of Cenaz making such a declaration is modeled upon Saul\u2019s statement at 1 Sam. 14:39. L.A.B.\u2019s narrative here is based in part on that of 1 Sam. 14:37\u201342, wherein Saul inquires of the divine oracle whether to attack the Philistines, is then constrained to conduct a lot to determine where contamination among the people lies, and declares that whoever is found guilty will die, even if the guilty party turns out to be his own son.
\n25:5. blessed be the LORD A common biblical phrase, often (as here) followed by a relative clause (see, e.g., 2 Sam. 18:28; 1 Kings 8:56).
\nsummon Eleazar the priest One is surprised to find Eleazar alive and active, since in the Bible he dies at the end of the book of Joshua, and even L.A.B.\u2019s author did not mention him at L.A.B. 24:4.
\n25:7. he will resurrect the dead The resurrection of the dead is a favorite theme in L.A.B. The language here may mean that God will have mercy and therefore resurrect you. But it could just as well mean that when God resurrects everyone and judges them, then he will have mercy on you.
\n25:9 No obvious uniformity or monolithic principle links the sins listed here. Most involve no more than the intent to commit some sin; a few, the actual act. If any single theme seems to underlie most of the sins, it is the absence of faith in God.
\nWe desired The repeated theme of guilt over the intent to commit a crime is particularly strange given the general Rabbinic distaste for such a view. Still, we ought to note that the Talmud apparently makes an exception for idolatry (B. Kid. 39b) and it is the intent to commit that crime, in one form or another, that is mostly the case here.
\nWe desired to test the tabernacle, to see if it was holy The ministers of the sanctuary are found guilty of distrusting its sanctity.
\nto eat the flesh of our own children Apparently a reference to some religious ritualistic act of cannibalism.
\nto determine whether or not God cares for them Thus, the sin is not merely the vile act of eating one\u2019s children, but also an act intended, once again, to test God.
\nThe Amorites taught us what they did The \u201cways of the Amorites\u201d are frequently condemned in Rabbinic literature (see, e.g., T. Shab. 6\u20137). The elaborate list given here of sins committed by the people probably stems from a connection L.A.B.\u2019s author made between two biblical accounts: first, the warning that upon entering the land, the Canaanites (Amorites) must be driven out or destroyed so that the Jews do not learn their corrupt ways (Exod. 34:11\u201316; Deut. 18:9\u201314;<\/p>\n
@book{Feldman_Kugel_Schiffman_2013,
\nplace={Philadelphia},
\ntitle={Outside the Bible: Ancient Jewish Writings Related to Scripture: Commentary},
\nvolume={1\u20133},
\npublisher={The Jewish Publication Society},
\nyear={2013}}<\/p>\n
Exportiert aus Verbum, 14:20 25. Mai 2019.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
words spoken by Jacob\u2019s sons, \u201cWe cannot \u2026 give our sister to a man who is uncircumcised, for that is a disgrace among us\u201d (Gen. 34:14). The reason, the angel of the Presence explains, is that those words are actually true: \u201cit is a reproach to Israel\u201d to indulge in intermarriage or even to look … <\/p>\n