Home › Masoretic Text

Masoretic Text

A sheet of Aleppo codex , with many marginal notes Masoretic.

The Massor or Massorah ( Hebrew : , chain or tradition ) is a technical process, consisting of a system of critical notes on the external shape of the biblical text, aimed at preserving its exact, not only in the spelling of words, but also in its vocalization and accentuation for both its public reading for his private study. This version of the text, recognized as an authority within Judaism is called the Masoretic text. It is also widely used as a basis for the translation of the Old Testament in Protestant Bibles, and, more recently, Catholics.

The Massor is the product of a text attachment was probably initiated before the period Maccabean , by Jewish sages, the Soferim mainly mentioned in the Talmud, but Ezra could have been part .

The oldest known manuscripts containing substantial extracts from the Masoretic text dates back approximately to the ^ninth century CE and the Aleppo Codex (perhaps the first complete copy of the Masoretic text in a manuscript) dates from the ^tenth century CBS.

Summary

1 Etymology of the term
2 Language and forms of Massor
3 History of Massor

4 For the origins of Massor

4.1 Digital Massor
4.2 Massor exegetical

4.3 Massor grammar ^{Etymology of the term}

The use of the term "massorah () is taken from the Book of Ezekiel 20:37, where he has a sense of "links". The setting of the text was regarded as being similar in nature that to provide a link when setting text. When, over time, the Massor has become a traditional discipline, the term has been linked to the verb "transmit" and received the meaning of "tradition .

Language and forms of Massor

The Nash Papyrus (second century BC. CE) contains a portion of the pre-Masoretic text, particularly the Shema Israel and the Ten Commandments.

The language of the Masoretic notes consists of Hebrew and Western Aramaic dialect used in the Land of Israel . Chronologically speaking, Aramaic is placed between two periods of Hebrew, the oldest being pre-amoraque (prior to the ^third century CE), the latter being typical of the Arab period (c. 800 CE), and including terms as "letter" section , "Verse," "full," "defective," punctuate "," Mikra , "etc.. Aramaic elements can therefore be dated roughly between 200 and 800 CE.

The Masoretic notes are found in various forms:

elles peuvent, rarement, faire l'objet d'ouvrages spars, par exemple le ;
they are found more frequently in the margins of the text or in some cases, between lines of text.
- among these marginal notes, notes Masoretic surrounding the first word of each book of the Bible are called initial Massor;
- notes on the side margins or between the columns are called Massor parva (small Massor ") or Massor" internal Massor the parva contains:
  - notes on writing a full word or defective, that is to say, the presence or absence of masters lectionis therein ( sukkot , for example, can be written , which is the full form or , the defective form)
  - to letters written in a particular way (bigger or smaller than the main text, inverted, broken, etc..).
  - to words whose pronunciation during a public reading differs from what is written, and vice versa, and these notes are respectively called qeri and ketiv
- scores of top and bottom margins are the external or Massor Massor magna (great Massor "), whose notes are longer. The Massor magna is not printed in the BHS.
  The term is sometimes applied to the notes arranged by lexical end of printed books, however they are called more often Massor final or in rabbinic literature, concordance of Massor. The final Massor includes all items for which the longest space is insufficient margins, and its size is inversely proportional to the space allocated to the margins of the leaves. In the manuscripts, it also varies with ornamentation provided by the copyist to his notes, and the price that was paid to produce his notes.

History of Massor

The history of Massor can be divided into three periods:

a period of creation, from its beginnings to the introduction of evidence of vocalization. There are scattered references to this period in the Talmud and Midrash, as well as two minor treaties (treaties post-Mishnaic, undeveloped, yet preserved in the Talmud), Sefer Torah and Massekhet Massekhet Soferim ; the Didoue Hae'amim ( 69) from Ben Asher also refers to a chain of tradition Massor;
a period of reproduction, since the introduction of these signs to print the Massor in ( 1525 CE );
a period of textual criticism using Massor, from 1525 to today.

Fixing the Masoretic text

The five letters in Hebrew and Aramaic, whose final shape (in red) is unparalleled in the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet

The Hebrew text was in all probability written continuously without interruption. The first task had Masoretes:

the division into words, books, sections, paragraphs, verses, and clauses (probably in the order listed above)
fixing spelling, pronunciation and cantillation
the introduction or final adoption of Ktav Ashour (square Hebrew script), some letters contain, unlike Ktav ivri (the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet ), a variant of contextual word-final for five letters (mem, noun, Tsada, eg, kaf)
the list of letters, words, verses, etc..

The Soferim also introduced some textual changes to guard against blasphemy and related devices, called the Tikkun Soferim (amendments of the scribes). Similarly, the margin notation indicating the substitution of some words by others in readings, and vice versa, is sometimes considered a Soferim of kindness towards the text, they would not permit change every letter, but requiring a "comment" or a correction for aesthetic reasons, grammatical, theological, etc. . As any addition to the official text of the Bible would have been permitted, these Masoretes had to adopt other expedients, such as mark the various divisions by various spacers, parashiot. They also provided information on giving to education halakhic (deduction of a law) or aggadic (minus a parabola) with full or defective spelling of words, the particular form of letters (larger, smaller, broken, inverted, etc..), points and other signs.

Marginal notes were not permitted in the private copies. The first mention of such notes is found in the case of Rabbi Meir. The text was traditionally set called, particularly in relation to its spelling, Massoretes; the traditional pronunciation, Mikra (literally, "reading"), the division into verses and clauses, necessary for the proper recitation cantillation pissouq te'amim or hekhra.
It is difficult to determine Massor has the longest service. It is a part known as marginal notes were in use in the early ^second century , but there is every reason to believe that baratot Masoretic (exegetical traditions based on the Masoretic notes, which were not included in the Mishna, but some are found in the Gemara ) could not develop much later.

Several texts and Jewish writers of antiquity, we can conclude that the Masoretic text was set or was regarded as such, from the II ^th ACS , even a century earlier, and was seen as the exact transcription du textus receptus :

according to the Talmud , the Torah scroll original was exhibited in the courtyard of the temple available to copyists, among the dignitaries of the Temple were also paid correctors of Biblical texts ;
such a copy is mentioned in the Letter of Aristeas ;
Philo of Alexandria and Josephus argue that the text of the Torah has never been altered.

However, another oral tradition, perhaps the earlier reports that three books were found in the courtyard of the Temple, and each had variations compared to the other, we choose to follow these controversial passages version of two rolls of three .

Rabbinic Period

Assuming, however, the text set in the Second Temple period, they had still centuries to achieve some consistency among the copies in circulation. The standard text, if it existed, was in Jerusalem, and was customary for those who could get there, which was the case only a minority of Jews, other living in diaspora. The copyist errors appear to have been so frequent, that the sages of the ^second century CE have found it necessary to warn against bad copies.

The number of copies of the original text (presumed) is reduced drastically during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE , which reinforces the need for preservation of the text. New Greek translations by Aquila and Theodotion are also conducted in the following century, much more faithful than the Septuagint to what is currently known as the Masoretic text.

An emphasis on lexical details, including the spelling of a name, already serves as a basis for argument among the Pharisees , especially among Rabbi Akiva , who asserts that "Massor is a hedge to the Torah. "The concept of a perfect text, even in its sanctified consonantal bases, spread in the Jewish communities , with a lot of awards in the legal literature , the legendary tales , and Jewish thought , these measures become stricter lead to the declaration of Moses Maimonides , the XIII ^century , it was a deviation of a single letter is enough to make a Torah scroll invalid .

It was at an unknown date, but based on material tannaitic, what wrote the Treaty Soferim , by an author living in the land of Israel. Included in the treated juveniles , it summarizes the Halachot (rules) that a scribe must comply in the exercise of its function:

The first five chapters are slightly amplified reproduction of the Treaty Sefer Torah, the oldest on the rules to be observed by the scribes for the preparation and writing of Torah scrolls and other scriptures.
Chapters 6-9 are purely Masoretic.
Part Three begins with Chapter 10, deals with ritual questions.

If the work could not be older than the early ^ninth century CE, its Masoretic portions are older, two or three centuries. A comparison between this treaty and the Masoretic materials found in the Talmudic literature shows a consistent expansion of the lists of marginal notes. A critical comparison was established between parallel passages in Scripture. For the first time, rules are given regarding the unusual shapes of some letters and words, which the Talmud took note. The form in which the poems stichtomtrique Bible should be arranged is described in more detail than it was in the Talmud. It is also written in personal copies, the beginnings of verses were marked. Some reading in Chapter 13:1 mentions as accents, but those readings are suspect, given vocalization.

Age of Masoretes

The Masoretic text finally acquired its current dominance thanks to the reputation of Masoretes , meeting in schools of scribes and teachers of the Bible who worked between the ^seventh century and the ^eleventh century CE, established primarily to Tiberias , but also to Jerusalem and Babylonia. These schools are developing such prestige as to the accuracy and minimum error rate of their papers, their texts are set in authority over others .

They are also Masoretes who invent, develop and finalize the system of graphic signs that indicate the traditional pronunciation, syntactic construction, and cantillation the biblical text.

Differences between Babylonia and the Land of Israel, and between schools

In the chain of tradition quoted by Ben Asher, the first known name is that of a certain Nakka, who have emigrated during the persecutions of Tinneius Rufus (that occurred around the year 140 of the Common Era) to the land of Israel in Babylon, and had disclosed the Masoretic knowledge in the city of Nehardea. Tradition, containing eight names, dates from 340 CE . Differences between schools are rated as the ^third century CE .

Other differences, probably accentuated by the introduction of graphic signs for cantillation , emerging over time, not only local but regional: in Babylonia, the school of Sura in the tradition of his school, a standard codex embodying his reading, different from Nehardea , similar differences exist in the land of Israel, between the School of Jerusalem and that of Tiberias , which is required on all later.

At this time, the tradition has evolved, and Masoretes, preparing their codex, usually following a school, although they deal with the Codex standards at other schools, and note the differences.

Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali

In the first half of the ^tenth century CE, Aaron ben Moshe ben Asher and Moshe Ben Naphtali (more often called Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali) are the main Masoretes, both based in Tiberias. Each writes a standard codex of the Bible represents the tradition of their schools. The differences between these two rival schools are significant, yet minor, focusing more on the vocalization and accents that consonants also, Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali agree about the opposition of Masoretic other authorities, as Rabbi Pinhas (supposed to have lived about 750 CE by modern scholars) and Moshe Moheh.

Ben Asher is the last representative of an illustrious family of Masoretes, dating from the ^eighth century. It may or may not have espoused the cause of the Karaites , a current scripturalist opposed to Judaism based on the rabbinic tradition, also appeared in the ^eighth century CE. However, despite the rivalry between Ben Naphtali and the opposition of Saadia Gaon , the most prominent representative of the critical school Babylonian codex of Ben Asher became recognized as the standard text of the Bible.
However, no printed or manuscript, is based entirely on Ben Asher: The Aleppo Codex , annotated by his hand, has largely been lost or destroyed, although various efforts, including Mordechai Breuer and the university of Bar-Ilan have been undertaken to restore it. The codex Lenigrad , based on manuscripts corrected by Ben Asher, is preserved in its entirety, but Ben Asher did has probably ever seen.

If Ben Naphtali was likely a similar codex, it was totally lost.
It was also suggested that Ben Naphtali never existed, and that name, chosen according to the Bible, where Asher and Naphtali are two younger brothers of Zilpah and Bilhah , are used to designate any different tradition of that of Ben Asher. This is unlikely, given the existence of lists of places in the text where Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali agree among themselves to deny others the authorities.

In the Middle Ages

Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali Massor bring almost to completion. Subsequent additions made to the ^thirteenth century and ^fourteenth centuries by the successors of Masoretes the Nadanim (Ponctuateurs "), are few and usually written with an ink pen and a less dense finer, they generally focus on vowels and accents.

Considerable influence on the development and dissemination of the Masoretic littarture is exercised during the ^eleventh century , ^twelfth century and ^twelfth century by the Franco-German tossafists and their predecessors. Rabbeinu Gershom , his brother Makhir, Joseph Elem Tov ben Samuel (Joseph Bonfils) of Limoges, Rabbeinu Tam , Menahem ben Perez de Joigny, Perez ben Elijah of Corbeil, Paris Judah , Meir Spira , and Meir of Rothenburg perform compilations Masoretic, or additions on the subject. They are all more or less frequently cited in the marginalia of biblical codex and the work of contemporary and future Hebrew grammarians.

The Origins of Massor

Digital Massor

In classical antiquity, the scribes were paid by the number of stiches (worms). As the books in prose of the Bible had never been written in stiches, copyists assessed the amount of their work according to the number of letters, why they were called Soferim ("those who count") by the sages of the Talmud . Thus develops over time the "digital Massor," which includes and combines the various elements and phenomena of the text. For example:

verse (vayish'hat, "he sacrificed," that is to say, Leviticus 8:23 ) as half the number of verses from the Pentateuch
all names of God mentioned in connection with Abraham are holy, with the exception of Adonay (Gen. 28:3)
ten passages of the Pentateuch are punctuated

it is written three times in the Pentateuch then you should read (both are pronounced lo, but means "no," while means " Massor exegetical

The close relationship that existed before (since the Soferim up Amoraim included) between the one who taught the tradition and the one who taught Massor, these two functions are often combined in a single person, reports on the use of "Massor exegetical. "

Paradoxically, these exegeses Masoretic sometimes rely on different versions of the Masoretic text present . These variations are limited to writing full or defective in some words, that is to say whether a lectionis mater (a consonant used as a means of vocalization, such as vav , which may, depending on the circumstances, is act like a consonant, represented by / v /, or vowel, which can be / o / or / /) must be written or not a word somewhere in the text.

Massor grammar

Gen. 1:9 And God said "Let the waters gather."
The letters are black, the signs of vocalization in red signs cantillation blue.

One of the most important innovations of the invention is Massor then the introduction of a graphic system of vocalization and accentuation , representing the "Massor grammar," for having contributed to the emergence of Hebrew grammar.

Indeed, Masoretes, followed by grammarians of Hebrew, must differentiate between different forms of words found in the biblical text, gather the similar shapes in groups, record the particulars of the text, and develop rules of pronunciation and writing.
In doing so, they distinguish between letters and use only consonant letters can sometimes serve as consonants and vowels sometimes. Vocalization marks are the most important legacy bequeathed by Masoretes to grammarians. Their findings do show, however, no trace of grammatical categories or review forms of language as such, the Masoretic punctuation system responds more to a desire to preserve the text in its smallest nuances of pronunciation and spelling, than an intention to investigate language and its laws. As for Didoue e'amim ha-Ben Asher, the most prominent Masoretes of Galilee , which expose the general rules, especially about consonants and vowels, they already show the influence of Arabic grammar.
The views of Ben Asher grammar will also be challenged by Saadia Gaon , generally considered the father of the Hebrew grammar , which will also Arabic grammar as a model for his theories.

The Massor did not pave the path of least grammar Masoretic vocalization and the invention of grammarians allow signs to determine the laws of Hebrew phonetics and etymology. They see it as a necessary foundation, and a constituent part of the grammar, which explains the preservation of its study; conversely, "Nadanim (ponctuateurs)," Masoretes successors are also grammarians.

Constitution of the Massor

Marginal notes

Substitutions made during the public reading of the Bible took place in antiquity, they were then transcribed, in part or in whole, in marginal notes, which could appear only in private manuscripts. Frankel has shown that these were not unknown alternative readings of the Septuagint, and that it has often adopted.

These variants have different origins:

represent some variations between ancient manuscripts, and thus have a value for textual criticism ;
others are born of the need to replace faulty expressions, difficult and irregular, dialectical, unlikely or ill-sounding, for a correct reading, simpler, more appropriate, current or euphonic ;
a third class could have been introduced to attract attention to a homily or esoteric reading, supposedly included in the text ;
a final class, the later is due to variants found in the Talmudic literature . These alternatives are of three types:
- words to read (KERI) in lieu of those contained in the text (ketiv)
- words read but not written in the text (Keri bike ketiv)
- written words but unread (ketiv bike Keri).

One school of Masoretes used the word sebirin instead of Keri. The readers of this school are not yet generally accepted in Massor, which further indicates that they are misleading ("ouma'in).

The Tikkun Soferim

Tannaitic sources cite several passages of Scripture where it is inevitable to conclude that the present text differs from the old. The explanation for this phenomenon is given by the expression hakatouv kana (the "writing to use a different language," to avoid anthropomorphism and anthropopathisme). Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi , an Amora of the ^third century CE called this phenomenon "Tikkun Soferim," Amendment of the scribes , because he assumed due to Soferim themselves. This view was adopted in midrashim later , in the Masoretic works, they are attributed:

Ezra
Ezra and Nehemiah
Ezra and Soferim
Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai and Baruch

which is to have them back, in all cases, members of the Great Assembly.

Ben Asher notes that the phrase should not have been correct but Kanah Kinou hasoferim , but according to earlier sources, it is rather Kinou haktouvim, a term including a former variant was actually preserved .

The term tikkun Soferim was understood by different scholars in various ways:

According to some, it is corrections or changes directly to the biblical language, authorized by the homiletic Soferim for reasons, that is to say that the scribes interpreted assumed an understatement, and that this interpretation is the Tikkun Soferim.
For others, it is a mental change made by the original writers of the Scriptures themselves, that is to say that these, while refraining from putting pen to paper a consideration that the reader would deserve.
Given the various interpretations and the fact that neither the numbers nor the identity of the passages corrected by Soferim is well defined (the Mekhilta has 11, the Sifre 7, the Midrash Tanchuma 13, and Massor itself 15 or 18), S. Sachs and Barnes , who resumed without naming him, to come to the conclusion that the tradition of Tikkun Soferim reports to the Midrash rather than Massor; Tikkun if there is, it s therefore relates to an exegesis, not textual criticism, interpretation, not playback. The tradition of Tikkun is probably connected with the tradition which assigns the writing of several books of the Hebrew Bible to the people of the Great Assembly.

However, there are phenomena in the biblical text for which we are led to admit that at times at least some textual corrections were made. These corrections can be classified thus:

withdrawal of unseemly expressions used in reference to God, for example ("blessed") is replaces ("curse") in some passages.

substituting " YHWH "with" Elohim , "to limit the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton ^{Mikra and 'Ittour}

These two terms are among the oldest used to describe the activity of Soferim In gaoniques academies , Mikri Soferim ("reading of the Scribes") is understood as the change in the vocalization of words that we did in a break or after an article (eg, Erez, "land," said he-aretz, "land"); the iour Soferim ("Ornament of the Scribes") said the cancellation of certain passages in waw of conjunction, which induces a change of weather (halakhti, "I went," we-halakhti becomes, "and go") where these would result in a misreading.

It has been objected to this explanation the mikra should be included in the category of fixing pronunciation, while the part of iour qeri and ketiv. Various interpretations have been proposed by scholars, ancient and modern, but without providing a satisfactory solution.

Buildings "not decided"

The Masoretic text has a number of words (five according to the Talmud , eight officials said later) that do not hekhra (fixed pronunciation when reading traditional) but have a hashaa (suggested pronunciation).

According to the Talmud , this would indicate that the Masoretic notes Soferim did not rule on the question of whether the word belonged to the following clause or the preceding clause.

However, modern scholars reject this interpretation for two reasons:

Firstly, stress can set the construction of these words in a very defined. As even the servants would have despised the accentuation of their own tradition, which is unlikely, we can not conceive how to recite these words in public readings to indicate the pronunciation of the word was dubious: the reader would himself reported the construction not decided on the word preceding or following it;
Then, some of these words have meaning only when they are meaningful only if they are played in a given clause. Therefore, this tradition refers again to an exegesis and not a textual critic. It would be a type of construction, in which the word is understood as immediately following itself. The tradition has not decided whether these words should be read as is, or in connection with the next word.

Letters suspended

Four words appear in the Masoretic text with letters hung above the line. If it is known that one of them, ^{(Judges 18:30), is due for a correction of the original out of respect for Moses (), so you do not mind that some of his descendants gave themselves up to idolatry , the origin of the three others (Psalms 80:14, Job 38:13 & 15) is uncertain. According to some, it would be erroneously taken for letters capitalized, according to others, it's later additions of weak consonants, originally omitted.}

Words, punctuated

In two passages of the Bible, Psalms 27:13, for example, some words are marked by points above or below the letters (in some manuscripts, these points are replaced by horizontal lines or vertical), whose meaning is discussed:

for some it is originally of erasures;
for others, there are words missing in some manuscripts, the reading is doubtful;
for others, these points are a mnemonic device to indicate a reading that old homiletics authorities had connected with these words;
Finally, these points could have been used to warn against the failure of copyists textual elements that might at first sight or after comparison with parallel passages, seem superfluous.

The first two assumptions are not acceptable because such faulty readings would be part of Keri and ketiv, which are in doubt, set depending on the version of the majority of manuscripts.
However, the last two theories have equal probability.

Subsection vayehi binsoa haaron of Parshat Behaalotekha , flanked by two inverted noun

Letters reversed

In nine places in the Bible, special signs, called hafoukha noun (noun reversed) because of their resemblance to the letter nun (others see a resemblance to the rather resh letter or the letter kaf ).

According to S. Krauss , these signs were originally the equivalent of obelisk , and are important for textual criticism. They called him by shipoud (ram's horn), which would be the equivalent of shipoud paragraphos (), which had such a sign and also served the same purpose .

Massor the Targum Onelos

Imitating Massor the Hebrew Bible , similar work has been done for Onelos Targum , translation (paraphrase) classical Aramaic Pentateuch. It was first edited by A. Berlin (Leipzig, 1877) and S. Landauer (Amsterdam, 1896).

According to Berliner, the Targum Onelos Massor to have been compiled in the late ^ninth century , or early ^tenth century CE.

Critical Study of Massor

Textual Criticism

The textual criticism of the Massor consists mainly of a comparison of various versions and notes available. It therefore requires the collection of manuscripts and record their differences.

The Masoretes inaugurate the field, noting the next version to be correct by their school, that of others. In most manuscripts, there are inconsistencies between the text and Massor, which suggests that the notes were copied from other sources, or that one of them is not without errors. It is, among other things, the absence of such discrepancies in the Aleppo Codex , which makes it important document, the scribe who copied these notes (which we presume he is Ben Asher ) was probably wrote the original notes.

In the ^thirteenth century , Rabbi Meir ben Todros Ha-Levi Abulafia wrote the Sefer Torah Massoretes Seyag. An edition however will not be available until 1750, in Florence.

In the ^sixteenth century , Jacob ben Hayim ibn Adonijah , systematized the material he has collected and arranged the Massor in the second edition Bomberg Rabbinic Bible of (Venice, 1524-25). He introduced the Massor margin, and compiles at the end of a match book Masoretic notes that could not be inserted. This is the first treatise on Massor ever produced. Although filled with errors, this text was generally recognized as the Textus Receptus of Massor (Wrthwein 1995:39), and used for the English translation of the Old Testament in the Bible of King Jacques.
Elijah Levita is then greatly advance the critical study of his Massor Massoretes Massoretes-ha in 1538. The Tiberias his elder Johannes Buxtorf makes its research accessible to Christians, including inspiring Walton , author of the Polyglot Bible. He also compiled an extensive Masoretic concordance, Sefer HaZikronot preserved at the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris, this book was never published.

In the ^seventeenth century , Menachem di Lonzano composed a treatise on Massor the Pentateuch, entitled Or Torah, which is based Nortzi Yedidia (and Meir Abulafia's book) to compose his Minat Shai. This book, based on a scrupulous study of manuscripts, contains notes Masoretic interesting.

In the nineteenth ^century , many followers of the Science of Judaism are examining the issue, including A. Geiger , SD Luzzatto , S. Pinsker , S. Frensdorff , H. Graetz , J. Derenbourg , IH Weiss , W. Bacher , etc.. Furthermore, knowledge on Massor progresses through Christian Hebrew, including Franz Delitzsch , LH Strack , Ad Merx , and P. Kahle. The most notable is Christian David Ginsburg , a Jew by birth, who managed to compile all existing Masoretic notes in the world. Despite its voluntary conversion to Christianity, his edition of the Massor is considered the best reference on the subject, including the Jewish community .

Radical Critique

It was usually considered to ^twentieth century Masoretic text as the Pharisaic tradition itself, that is to say, a quality copy of the Textus Receptus entries considered by the Jews, they were received on Mount Sinai as they wanted, or composed from several independent sources, according to biblical criticism.

Fragment of the Book of Isaiah found in the first cave at Qumran. The Tetragrammaton appears in paleo-Hebrew characters

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls , dating from 150 ACS to 75 EC , significantly changed that perception: their analysis shows that the texts of this period did not show the scrupulous textual consistency was required in the following centuries. On the one hand, the rolls show minor spelling variations, as compared to the Masoretic text further between themselves. On the other hand, we find the Hebrew versions of variations between the Masoretic text and the Septuagint , which were previously regarded as amplifications and textual deviations when translating the Bible into Greek. The researchers conclude the existence of one or pre-Masoretic texts. According to L. Shiffman , 60% of the texts can be considered proto-Masoretic, 20% as typical of Qumran, but with bases in the proto-Masoretic texts, 5% as proto- Samaritan , 5% type septantique , and 10% unclassified .
Despite these variations, we can still consider most of the fragments from Qumran as closer to the Masoretic text than any other.

In addition, objections were made to defend the rule of Masoretic text: it is clear from the notes of correction alternatives and variations that Essene scribes allowed themselves to choose the version they considered the best among the various readings , moreover, according Gretchen Haas, most of the Masoretic texts away, including four type septuagintal manuscripts were found in cave 4, where the texts were not as carefully preserved and it is conjectured that this cave was a geniza where the texts were stored unserviceable because damaged or contain textual errors . Gil Student, an Orthodox rabbi, also offers an interpretation of these findings contrary to those of academics, but stressed the importance of the initial premise in the understanding of archaeological data .

References

See Neh 8:8 & Ezra 7:6, 11
Lane Fox, Robin , The Unauthorized Version, 1991 Editions Alfred A. Knopf, pp. 99-106, ISBN 0-394-57398-6 ; Tov, Emanuel , Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 1992, Fortress Press, p. 115, ISBN 0-8006-3429-2.
A fragment of the ^seventh century containing the Song of the Sea (Exodus 13:19-16:1) is one of the few surviving texts of the "window period" of biblical Hebrew texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls and the codex of Aleppo - see Rare scroll fragment to Be Unveiled , Jerusalem Post , May 21, 2007.
Bacher in JQR iii. 785; C. Lever in "Hebrew Union College Annual" of 1904. See also CNRTL
The entire corpus of Massor we have now comes from this region. However, Paul Kahle had discovered a fragment Massor Babylonian, which differs considerably from the text received in his terminology - P. Kahle, Der Text des Alten Testaments Masoretische der nach der Ueberlieferung Babylonischen Juden, "Leipzig, 1902
Pratico & Van Pelt, Basics of Biblical Hebrew, Zondervan. 2001. p. 406 ff
TB Ketubot 106a
Letter, 30, see Blau, "Studien zum Althebr. Buchwesen," p. 100
Introduction to the "Analysis of the Political Constitution of the Jews"
Against Apion i. 8
Soferim 6:4
Sir Godfrey Driver, Introduction to the Old Testament of the New Bible Franais , 1970
^{a , b , c and d} Menachem Cohen, The Idea of Sanctity Of The Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism in HaMikrah V'anachnu, ed. Uriel Simon, Yahadut U'Machshava HaMachon The Bat Z'mananu and Dvir, Tel Aviv, 1979
Mishneh Torah , Tefillin Hilkhot, veSifrei Mezuzot Torah 1:2
Ben Asher, Dikdoukei Te'amim, 69
see Ginsburg, "Introduction," p. 197
TB Kiddushin 30a, cf. Yer. Shekalim 5:1
Richard Gottheil & Wilhelm Bacher Hebrew Grammar , Jewish Encyclopedia , 1901-1906
"Vorstudien," pp. 220 et seq.
see Radak , introductory commentary to Joshua ; Eichhorn, "Einleitung," 148; Joseph ibn Wakare, in Steinschneider , "Jewish Literature," p. 270, note 15
See Abravanel , Introduction to comment Jeremiah
See Krochmal , Moreh Neboukhe Hazman, ch. 13; S. Bamberger, "Einleitung zu Tobiah b. Eliezer's Lea ob zu Ruth, "p. 39, note 1
See Minat Shai on Isaiah 36:12, Psalms 49:13, Eccl. 8:10; Luzzatto , Kerem Hemed, II Samuel 9:9 to 22:8
Bereshit Rabbah 49:7
see Midrash Tanchuma , Beshalla on Ex 15:7
Didoue e'amim-ha, " 57
Comp. Blau, Masoretische Untersuchungen, p. 50
Hemed Kerem, 9:57, note
Journal of Theological Studies, i. 387-414
Some of these alterations include some names of those theophorous would like Jehoahaz (instead of Yehoaaz) Eliya (instead of Eliyahu), etc.. but see JH Levy in JQR xv. 97 et seq. about it
Nedarim TB 37b
Yer. Avodah Zara 2:8
See Rashi ad loc.
Zeitschrift Stadium, 22:57
Treaty Soferim 6:1 & 2
See Pearl "etymologisches Studien," p. 41, note 1, p. xiv., col. 3
The Massorah on seforim online
L. Shiffman, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls: The History of Judaism, The Background of Christianity, the Lost Library of Qumran, Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1994
Gretchen Haas, quoted in Dead Sea Scrolls
Gil Student, On The Text Of The Torah , 2002, accessed 06/01/2008

Source

This article incorporates text from the Jewish Encyclopedia of 1901-1906 and article "Scribes" by I. Singer , M. Seligsohn , W. Bacher & JD Eisenstein , a publication now in the public domain.

God's Guarantees for Giving!

Categories

Live Search

Sign In

Masoretic Text

Summary

Language and forms of Massor