Sufficiency

Still working on the Psalms

2011-01-29T17:14:00.000-08:00

I continue to refine my reading of the psalms. I am updating all my translation posts from 2010 slowly over the next two years with a commentary on each psalm + link to the revised post, emerging at my newest blog http://poetryofchrist.blogspot.com. By the time I am through that will make 5 passes at least on every psalm. I am hoping for maximized intertextual reference, poetic form, and a study of the recurring words turned into a story - i.e. reading the Psalter in sequence.

Read over here - music and love

2010-08-29T18:15:00.000-07:00

I am annotating my recent spate of posts over here with music and colour - What a fabulous performance of Psalm 110 - Handel's Dixit Dominus I found.

You need to go and listen - and while you are listening, read the posts and help me correct my prosody and interpretations - where are you my readers?

If you get here by chance

2010-08-28T08:53:00.000-07:00

I have done a lot of work over at Dust - There's my translation of Qohelet in the style of Dr. Seuss and a third pass at the psalms concentrating of the first recurring usage of words in each psalm in sequence - treating the psalter as a gallery. Also there is a translation of the Song of Solomon. And some nice pictures. Flowers mostly.

Questions

2010-04-05T18:27:00.001-07:00

I have posted a change in direction - a bunch of questions here

Bob's log and Sufficiency now blogging at Me afar (out)

2010-03-20T13:25:00.000-07:00

Please update your links and readers to http://meafar.blogspot.com.That's where I will be posting 95% of the time - one person one blog till I run out of room again. I am working through the Song of Songs - No one should miss a verse or be averse to correcting me if necessary.

Taf

2010-03-15T09:39:00.000-07:00

ת

There are tons of tafs in מגילת רות, the scroll of Ruth. Of course it is a grammatical letter and so more common. The first thing to note about this last letter is how it substitutes for a ה when forming a construct. The root of that word above is מגלה, used for example in Psalm 40:7

בִּמְגִלַּת־סֵפֶר כָּתוּב עָלָי

In the scroll of the book it is written of me

מגלה is not a particularly common word (but a related word did occur this past Sunday morning in the lesson from Joshua 5:9,

הַיֹּום גַּלֹּותִי אֶת־חֶרְפַּת מִצְרַיִם מֵעֲלֵיכֶם

today I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you

hence the name Gilgal. (Who says etymology is unimportant - roll-scroll to you!) Note here too that the reproach has been modified from absolute to construct, from חרפה to חֶרְפַּת

This replacement occurs when adding an object pronoun to a feminine ending for a verb - how about this example from Ruth 2:13?

כִּי נִחַמְתָּנִי

for you have comforted me

This taf is a normal part of the second person qal perfect suffix. The additional nun helps identify the remainder of the suffix as a first person object pronoun.

A third suffix in which ת plays a part is the feminine plural (vav-taf or holem/taf ot). ת is also common in the role of prefix. Remember that א gives us a signal as a first person singular imperfect, ת is a signal as a second or third person singular or plural imperfect.

The whole of verse 13 illustrates all five of these uses

וַתֹּאמֶר
אֶמְצָא-חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ אֲדֹנִי
כִּי נִחַמְתָּנִי
וְכִי דִבַּרְתָּ עַל-לֵב שִׁפְחָתֶךָ
וְאָנֹכִי לֹא אֶהְיֶה כְּאַחַת שִׁפְחֹתֶיךָ

and she said,

taf prefix signals the third person imperfect (preterite)

let me find favor in your eyes my Lord

for you have comforted me

taf is the second person singular suffix (masculine in this case) qal perfect as is the first taf in the next line

for you have spoken to the heart of your handmaid

שפחה became שִׁפְחָתֶ forming construct from absolute

and I myself am not one or your handmaids

the holem-taf represents the feminine plural - in this case there is no vav with the taf to illustrate as a reading helper.

If we back up a bit to Ruth 1:8, we find another grammatical role for taf in the ending תֶם- for second person plural qal perfect. As noted previously, (Ruth - Vol 7 in The Anchor Bible by Edward Campbell, 1975) this masculine pattern may be a dual. The feminine תֶן is not found in Ruth (at least I could not see one).

כַּאֲשֶׁר עֲשִׂיתֶם עִם-הַמֵּתִים וְעִמָּדִי

Taf does have a number of words where it plays a part in the root. Even some of these like בַּיִת (house) may be derived from a verb in this case בָּנָה in this case ending in ה. As a final letter, it is third in מות, death, though is this a real tri-literal root or is the vav a meter here? The latter, I think.

But this exercise of reading Ruth letter by letter is now declared complete even though it could go on forever!
Time to tend another vineyard. I think I will retranslate the Song - in fact I think I will look at all the megillot and put these into my new/old peculiar Poetry and Flowers blog. I notice that this Sufficiency blog now has a backup larger than 4M so I think I will blog elsewhere. Look for me at the links and please do update your aggretors and stay in touch. Just look at all the grammatical letters here: 8 of 14, > 50%. Can you read this verse?

כַּרְמִי שֶׁלִּי לֹא נָטָרְתִּי

The Essence

2010-03-14T14:01:00.000-07:00

Henry Neufeld has posted briefly on Finding and Protecting the Essentials. There is probably a ton of stuff on this subject - essentials and Christianity - on the web ranging from the turgid to the polemical. (In my earlier days, I even wrote on it.) It can be a divisive subject. Perhaps that is why there are as many varieties of Christian denominations in North America as there are varieties of cheese in France. "Come ye out from among them and be separate. Touch nothing unclean." And so on.

I began to wonder though what I do regard as Essence - note the singular. And the capital. This morning there were 5 sermons from five lay women at the parish I used to attend. (Besides some other issues, I can't manage to sing the hymns in that hymn book without getting angry - but that is not the Essence). My wife was #4 of 5 and she was also singing the alto in the Et in Unum from the B Minor Mass so I decided to skip 'my' church this morning and attend at St John the Divine.

The third sermon was on the creative process of sculpting and was based on the healing of the leper. You remember (Matthew 8:1 and parallel)

"Lord, if you will, you can make me clean." And he stretched out his hand, and touched him, saying, "I will; be clean." And immediately the leprosy left him. And he charged him to tell no one

On the creative process, she emphasized the need to wait and in that one word, she communicated waiting on God for the inspiration, the aha moment. After that, she said, there is available all the necessary time for construction and there is no hurry. About this healing, she touched on the beauty of the choice of Jesus in healing the leper, that act of election that I have had coming into my mind these past several months, the freedom of God to act, and the recognition of that freedom in the leper. (Not to mention touch.)

As she said these things, I thought of the essence for me: (that's free association on my part!).

Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you (John 6:26 ff). This is part of a poetic chiastic structure which you can see at this link.

Let's see if I can copy it across - yup it's readable...

Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves.
    Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you; for on him has God the Father set his seal."
        Then they said to him, "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?" Jesus answered them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent." So they said to him, "Then what sign do you do, that we may see, and believe you? What work do you perform? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'" Jesus then said to them,
            "Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven; my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world." They said to him, "Lord, give us this bread always."
                Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst.
                    But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe.
                        All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out.
                            For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day."
                                The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, "I am the bread which came down from heaven." They said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, 'I have come down from heaven'?" Jesus answered them, "Do not murmur among yourselves.
                            No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.'
                        Every one who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me. Not that any one has seen the Father except him who is from God; he has seen the Father.
                    Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.
                I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die.
            I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."
        The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
    This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever."
This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.

This is Essence to me - but it can go by many names and it happens by the choice of God, not by my argumentation. As he lives, so I live, come what may. But there are others who do not know him as I have come to know him in part and who do not even know his name, who have no theology of incarnation. He is able to draw them to himself also, without turgidity or polemics. So may it be that the church might not water itself down, but also that it might not engage in defending its essentials with polemics and unreadable prose.

The ark will not stumble.

Ruth and Targum Ruth

2010-03-14T08:44:00.000-07:00

Chris Brady is just coming to his presentations of Ruth in the traditions of the Targumim. He writes:

This paper is part of my larger work on Targum Ruth. This summer I will be presenting a paper at IOTS on the character of Boaz in Tg Ruth. But first, we need to consider how Boaz is presented in the biblical text.

It's very timely for me that Chris would write this now. Readers of this blog will know that I have been living with the text of Ruth for more than a year and I am just finishing my bootstrap exercise of hearing the grammar of Hebrew by reading Ruth letter by letter to see how each letter sounds in the story. I was, months ago, particularly struck by 'tet', a letter I have named as scorekeeper for the grammatical first eleven (a cricket metaphor). Tet occurs in the word gleaning and 25% of the uses of this word occur in chapter 2 of Ruth.

When I began reading Ruth, I did immediately notice that it was a story meant to be performed. I imagined sitting around a campfire to hear it. I am hoping to continue telling it as story. It is the first book I attempted to read in Hebrew without helps (it was a failure for me a year ago as I read chapter 1 - now I think I am up to about 50% able to read without helps). It needs to find its audience in this strange time where purpose, poverty, and social relationships are not heard as story.

See also this paper on the use of the scrolls in Jewish Liturgy - the fascinating history related to the canonical order of the 5 scrolls is much later than one might think.

Sin /Shin

2010-03-13T12:29:00.000-08:00

ש
In contrast to samech, shin and sin are very common, but the grammatical use of shin is comparatively rare. Do we perceive its grammatical usage in Ruth? It is the weakest player on the first 11. It's curious that S in English is a common indicator of possessive and plural, but shin in Hebrew plays only one role as prefix though with several glosses - also, and 'that' which seems at first to be an abbreviation of the relative pronoun asher (very common in later Rabbinic writings - note the frequency here). BDB (p 979) thinks is is an original demonstrative particle. It qualifies for the first team - and it's a better fit than tet as the candidate to fill out the split of the alefbet in two equal halves that Saadya suggested.

Shin as a relative particle does not occur in Ruth but does in several Psalms and other parts of the wisdom literature. E.g. Psalm 122:3-4

יְרוּשָׁלִַם הַבְּנוּיָה כְּעִיר שֶׁחֻבְּרָה־לָּהּ יַחְדָּו

שֶׁשָּׁם עָלוּ שְׁבָטִים שִׁבְטֵי־יָהּ עֵדוּת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לְהֹדֹות לְשֵׁם יְהוָה

Jerusalem is built as a city which is coupled - belonging to her of his unity

that there the tribes go up, testimony to Israel to give thanks to the name of יְהוָה

I don't know what to make of the pronouns in that verse. How would you translate it? My Hebrew Latin concordance treats the word at the end of verse 3 almost as a synonym of יחד. For יחד yachad it gives: unitio, coniunctio, unitim, coniunctim (strange endings!). For יַחְדָּו yachadav it gives: coniunctim, una; simul, eodem tempore; pariter, pari modo; cuncti.

No one seems to translate the pronoun following the pual verb חבר which may be glossed among these: to unite, join, bind together, be joined, be coupled, be in league, heap up, have fellowship with, be compact, be a charmer - or your preference.

There is also a short word yod-shin comprised of the first team letters that might qualify as a grammatical use pointer. Yesh יֵשׁ - 'there is' is the opposite of 'ain אֵין - 'there is not'. I think I would include both as grammatical particles. Ruth 1:12, and 3:12 gives us instances of the former:

יֶשׁ־לִי תִקְוָה

there is to me hope

וְגַם יֵשׁ גֹּאֵל קָרֹוב מִמֶּנִּי

but surely there is a redeemer closer than I

One more post to go on Taf - itself a grammatical letter of considerable interest and importance.

Vengeance and violence

2010-03-09T23:10:00.000-08:00

David Ker has a provocative post. I admit I have not been reading all of David's posts - too many cartoons this year. I really am too serious. But this man is a creative writer and he is spending himself for others. And his questions have raised an abnormally 'interesting' conversation.

Why have I come to love the TNK and how do I put up with the fierce God of the OT? And not to mention the purity laws which I do not follow and the clobber texts and the desire for vengeance in the Psalms and the ban in Joshua and so on and on and on.

Over the years I have had various responses to these questions. I read Peter Craigie's The Problem of War in the Old Testament, and though I loved Peter before his untimely death years ago in a car accident, and I am delighted that his son Gregor is our morning show host on CBC Victoria, and though I have read the book twice, I cannot say that I understand the problem as problem or that I need to remember any particular solution. Craigie treats war as parable and stresses that the whole parable must be read to learn its lessons - not just the wars of conquest but also the defeats. His 120 page essay is not to be reduced to a soundbite. There is, however, more than war in the OT. But his suggested approaches are not why I love this human record.

I writing this after a busy and stretched day. I have been stretched in the exercise of rigid logic. How can I pretend to be a theologian or a Biblical interpreter when I understand how easy it is to be wrong. I have spent my life in software. I know bugs and incompleteness and unexpected results and things that won't ever deliver value. If such obvious things are incomplete, how can any reading of Scripture be complete? How can any one of us frame an argument that is without holes? How can the lawyers or the priests or the scribes or the scholars convince us of anything with accuracy?

They can't. Why then, would God be able to do it? He didn't. He lets consequences happen and we interpret within whatever framework we must. This is as true for 'His Word' as it is for any other book or set of books. There are all sorts of incompletenesses, errors, omissions, and things we read that we should not take as good examples.

Re the violence - I used to be an allegorizer. Amalekites are the flesh. Egypt is the world. Of temporizing use perhaps. I.e. only allegorize while you are treading water to catch your breath. In fact, Egypt is loved and so is Amalek. I have heard about Marcion - but the bridle of blood is no less evident in the NT. So how about a universalist absorption of violence? Isn't that what the cross has done? Maybe in part and maybe even theoretically, but practically, in the hands of Christendom, it has a bad reputation. The words won't justify the failure of action and the failure in action. Christendom needed to collapse and it has. Its teachers did not know their own story and did not know the power that this death accomplishes in those who hear. Nor did it acknowledge the rule of God "O'er heathen lands afar", where "thick darkness broodeth yet!" Such talk is colonial. It does not know of what Spirit it speaks.

But I am still stuck - so why do I spend my time reading TNK and that slowly? Not to justify it. But because it points me to a choice I do not seem to have invented, to an anointing not preached to me but which can be found, to a chosen nation and an anointed man, and to the way real things happen and real teaching to a real me as part of this election. This God is free. Free to chose or not. Free to ignore, Free to correct. I will know as I have been known. I have been known so I will know. I will read out and I will read in to these texts in the joy of the knowledge that has been read into me and that speaks in me.

There is so much hurt in this world. You can't move without noticing. How can one 'find words' to bring a hint of the comfort that is available to the elect but that is not yet entered into?

As Craigie writes at the end of his essay:

What is remarkable about the wars of Israel is the religious insight with which they were recorded and understood. God was believed to participate in human history; in this belief, the Israelites were not unique. But from no other Near Eastern nation did there emerge a vision of peace and an anticipation of the redemption of all mankind as there did from the disastrous defeat of the Hebrew people in war.

Perhaps I should have chosen the great lament of Psalm 89, but what occurs to me is the invitation from Psalm 34.

determined I sought יְהוָה and he heard me

and from all my fears he delivered me
him they paid attention to and were radiant
and their faces were not embarrassed

zis poor one calls and יְהוָה hears

Now you must read the whole acrostic diatribe on Psalm 34. David, it seems we have been wrestling with this question of our violence for some time. Don't let go till you are blessed.

Resh

2010-03-09T13:58:00.000-08:00

ר
Resh is common.It is not grammatical. If it is part of the word, it is part of the root. While it occurs frequently in Ruth, it is the first letter of only a few words, Ruth, famine, see, empty, wash, Ram. Curious, eh?

So if you see that you are empty and hungry, wash and anoint yourself...

אִם רֵיקָם וְרָעֵבָה תִּרְאֶה רָחַצְתְּ וָסַכְתְּ

(that is still all feminine singular - should the adjectives agree with the subject of the verb (you singular feminine)? Empty appears to be indeclinable. Hungry can take a feminine ending e.g. Psalm 107:9, נֶפֶשׁ רְעֵבָה).

We begin with Ruth 1:1

וַיְהִי רָעָב בָּאָרֶץ

famine in the land,

And we have empty twice, once in Ruth 1:21 and once in Ruth 3:17

רֵיקָם אֶל-חֲמוֹתֵךְ

empty to your mother-in-law

Wash is in Ruth 3:3

וְרָחַצְתְּ וָסַכְתְּ

so wash yourself and anoint yourself

פרק spells chapter - three of our most recent letters. And resh occurs many times as second and third letter of a root. So land / earth אָרֶץ above. And שאר bereft (also Ruth 1:5), אשר, the relative pronoun (anagram of bereft), עֶשֶׂר ten (also Ruth 4:2), said (frequent and part of the backbone of the story) e.g. וַתֹּאמֶר נָעֳמִי and Naomi said. Resh has a sad sound - so bitter קְרֶאןָ לִי מָרָא call me Mara, and after אחר. Resh and Dalet are easily confused, especially at lower point sizes. (Test yourself with the lower point sizes on this word.)

But resh is also in the blessing of Ruth 2:4, the origin of our liturgical greetings - how well can you read this without translation? After many grammar and reading lessons, I can do it. My hit rate for a random scriptural passage is about 50% after 3 years. I mean, about half the words I will have to look up - and I still need to stop and read and think. There is no auto-recognition yet.

וְהִנֵּה-בֹעַז בָּא מִבֵּית לֶחֶם
וַיֹּאמֶר לַקּוֹצְרִים
יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם
וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ
יְבָרֶכְךָ יְהוָה

Qof

2010-03-08T13:46:00.000-08:00

ק

Qof, the second part of minding my p's and q's will take us back over the gleaning - so we won't repeat everything we have covered with tet, a letter that gave more pleasure than expected. We also encountered harvest and reaper in the study of tsade. I have repeated a phrase or two just for eyeball practice. Thinking about sound, it seems really necessary to be able to distinguish with the ear many similar sounding guttural letters: chet, kaf, qof and their interactions with the many sibilants and dentals.

Ruth 1:6-7 - one might almost call qof a letter of hope. It occurs in the movement of the word to rise and in the visit of Hashem to his people and in the place prepared for us

וַתָּקָם הִיא וְכַלֹּתֶיהָ

and she arose, she and her daughters in law

...

כִּי-פָקַד יְהוָה אֶת-עַמּוֹ

that יְהוָה had visited his people

(place also in Ruth 3:4, 4:10)

וַתֵּצֵא מִן-הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר הָיְתָה-שָּׁמָּה

and she emerged from the place where she was

Ruth 1:9, bracket closed in Ruth 1:14 - it occurs in the kiss and in the call

וַתִּשַּׁק לָהֶן

וַתִּשֶּׂאנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה

and she kissed them

and they lifted up their voice and wept

Ruth 1:12 and in old age it is not absent even when expressly negated

כִּי זָקַנְתִּי מִהְיוֹת לְאִישׁ

כִּי אָמַרְתִּי יֶשׁ-לִי תִקְוָה

for I am too old to have a husband

for had I said there is hope for me

Ruth 1:14 (stay close also in Ruth 2:8, 21, 23) - see where else you find it - stay close.

וַתִּשֶּׂנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה עוֹד

וַתִּשַּׁק עָרְפָּה לַחֲמוֹתָהּ

וְרוּת דָּבְקָה בָּהּ

and they lifted up their voice and wept further

and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law

but Ruth stayed close to her

Ruth 1:17 - it is not even absent from burial

וְשָׁם אֶקָּבֵר

and there I am buried

Ruth 1:20 - and in the call of a lament, Hashem does not ignore it

אַל-תִּקְרֶאנָה לִי נָעֳמִי

קְרֶאןָ לִי מָרָא

do not call me Naomi

call me Mara

Ruth 1:21, (also for empty, Ruth 3:17). It embraces emptiness

אֲנִי מְלֵאָה הָלַכְתִּי

וְרֵיקָם הֱשִׁיבַנִי יְהוָה

לָמָּה תִקְרֶאנָה לִי נָעֳמִי

I myself full went away

and empty יְהוָה has returned me

why call me Naomi

Ruth 1:22 and speaks to us of gleaning, harvest,

בִּתְחִלַּת קְצִיר שְׂעֹרִים

at the beginning of the barley harvest

Ruth 2:3 and chance itself

וַתֵּלֶךְ וַתָּבוֹא וַתְּלַקֵּט

בַּשָּׂדֶה אַחֲרֵי הַקֹּצְרִים

וַיִּקֶר מִקְרֶהָ

חֶלְקַת הַשָּׂדֶה לְבֹעַז

and she went and she came and she gleaned

in the field after the reapers

and she happened to happen

on the part of the field of Boaz

Ruth 2:14 - Its end is feast

וַיִּצְבָּט-לָהּ קָלִי וַתֹּאכַל

and he heaped her parched grain and she ate

Ruth 2:20 (also Ruth 3:12) - it is in those that are near

קָרוֹב לָנוּ הָאִישׁ

near to us is the man

Ruth 3:1 (also for rest Ruth 3:18) and in rest

בִּתִּי הֲלֹא אֲבַקֶּשׁ-לָךְ מָנוֹחַ

my daughter do I not seek for you rest

Ruth 3:13-14 - and it will be in the morning

וְהָיָה בַבֹּקֶר

and it will be in the morning

Its sound continues in chapter 4 with several new words as if this is a sound that goes with new things in the completing of the story. Ruth 4:2 (got / took also in Ruth 4:13, 16). It is in the purchase of our body with the field.

וַיִּקַּח עֲשָׂרָה אֲנָשִׁים מִזִּקְנֵי הָעִיר

and he got ten men of the elders of the city

Ruth 4:3

חֶלְקַת הַשָּׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר לְאָחִינוּ לֶאֱלִימֶלֶךְ

the portion of the field of our brother Elimelek

Ruth 4:4 - This use of buy (here and in Ruth 4:5, 8, 9, 10) is of interest in considering the potential allegory of redemption and harvest in this story.Is this story an allegory of hope?

לֵאמֹר קְנֵה נֶגֶד הַיֹּשְׁבִים

to say will you buy before those sitting here

Ruth 4:16 - the last new word containing qof, unique in Ruth here, is the sound of a mother embracing her child.

וַתִּקַּח נָעֳמִי אֶת-הַיֶּלֶד

וַתְּשִׁתֵהוּ בְחֵיקָהּ

and Naomi got the child

and set him in her lap

The last qof comes with the hope invested in the Beloved king
Ruth 4:17

וַתִּקְרֶאנָה לוֹ הַשְּׁכֵנוֹת שֵׁם לֵאמֹר

יֻלַּד-בֵּן לְנָעֳמִי

וַתִּקְרֶאנָה שְׁמוֹ עוֹבֵד

הוּא אֲבִי-יִשַׁי אֲבִי דָוִד

and the women neighbours called him a name saying

a son is born to Naomi

and they called his name Obed.

He is the father of Jesse the father of David

OK what does this mean and why the big letters?

2010-03-06T17:11:00.000-08:00

Some letters may also be bolded but the text is too ambiguous to my eyes to be sure. The text occurs at the end of the Psalter. I will make a stab at it (better than Google's!) But I find it strange that there is no version of it on the web.

ח ז ק
סכום פסוקי דספר תהלים אלפים וחמש מאות ועשרים ושבעה.
וסימנו יי׳ אהבתי מעוץ ביתך ומקום משכן כבודך. וחציו
ויפתוהו בפיהם. וסדריו תשעה עשר. וסימנו המשביע בטוב עדיך:

Here's the first cut from Google translate:

Psalm verses sum Desperreau thousand five hundred and twenty-seven.Signaled Yi 'I loved your home and place of the tabernacle of Oz your honor. HalfOiftohu mouths. Arrange nine ten. Signaled Hmsbia well Adich:

Hmm seems to be missing something....
These words do not appear to be normal Biblical words. Some words I don't recognize so let's go one at a time.

? I can't find this one yet - related to sum?	סכום
verse - not in BDB but I can believe it	פסוקי
? not this one either but the last three letters are the common word - to recount or a book	דספר
prayers / psalms	תהלים
and five	וחמש
hundred	מאות
and twenty	ועשרים
seven	ושבעה
and he has marked them	וסימנו
Hashem	יי׳
I have loved	אהבתי
the habitation of	מעוץ
your house	ביתך
and the place of	ומקום
the dwelling of	משכן
your glory	כבודך
and its divisions	וחציו
and they will open it	ויפתוהו
in their mouths	בפיהם
and he has arranged it	וסדריו
nine	תשעה
ten	עשר
and he has marked them	וסימנו
the satisfaction - or an imperative? satisfy / promise	המשביע
in the good	בטוב
of your counsels	עדיך

So guessing away -- help --:

To grow strong (or strength)

The sum of the verses in the Book of the Psalms are five hundred and twenty seven and Hashem has marked them. I have loved the habitation of your house and the place of the dwelling of your glory. So its divisions will open it in their mouths and he has arranged it nine and ten. And he has marked them as satisfaction in the good of your counsels.

So I counted the verses - I get 2408 from my database but I better check further... And the sum of the verses as gematria is 41505. And the sum of the chapters 11325 - but who would want to know!

Tsade

2010-03-05T16:27:00.000-08:00

ץ צ
Words ending with tsade are not uncommon. Land or earth is present with us even as a 'borrowed' word in English in the phrase 'eretz Israel'. This letter has a formative potential in the sound of the story. It is repeated in some significant words. The anticipation of the 'ts' is in chapter 1, but it is the major sound of chapter 2 and after the first few verses of chapter 3 it ceases till the mention of Perez in chapter 4. I have not heard this in any reading I have heard but I am convinced it should be there. The reading at Mechon-Mamre is a little too monochromatic for my taste. Maybe some day I will record it in Hebrew. (but not for a while I assure you)

Here is the trailing 'ts' in the first verse, Ruth 1:1. I will leave the greening of the grammatical letters to you.

וַיְהִי רָעָב בָּאָרֶץ

and there was a famine in the land.

Again in Ruth 1:7,

לָשׁוּב אֶל-אֶרֶץ יְהוּדָה

to return to the land of Judah

and twice more in Ruth 2:10 - a related form

וַתִּשְׁתַּחוּ אָרְצָה

and bowed down to the earth

and Ruth 2:11

וְאֶרֶץ מוֹלַדְתֵּךְ

the land of your birth

Ruth 2:15 has another unique word - dipping in vinegar. This story lends itself to allegory. Do you think it will be revealed to me? Maybe I am old enough now not to consume the knowledge foolishly.

וְטָבַלְתְּ פִּתֵּךְ בַּחֹמֶץ

and dip your piece in the vinegar

Ruth 3:13 has the letter again in an allegorically significant word. When we get back to real story, we will hear it.

וְאִם-לֹא יַחְפֹּץ לְגָאֳלֵךְ

and if he is not pleased to redeem you

also 3 times in the proper name פָּרֶץ

There is only one word beginning with tsade in Ruth
Ruth 2:9

הֲלוֹא צִוִּיתִי אֶת-הַנְּעָרִים לְבִלְתִּי נָגְעֵךְ

have I not commanded the lads not to touch you

Ruth 2:15

וַיְצַו בֹּעַז אֶת-נְעָרָיו לֵאמֹר

and Boaz commanded his lads

Used again in Ruth 3:6

אֲשֶׁר-צִוַּתָּה חֲמוֹתָהּ

as her mother-in-law commanded

There are a number of words that contain the sound, some of them key repetitions or concepts in the tale.
Ruth 1:7, 1:13, 2:18, 2:22 come out

וַתֵּצֵא מִן-הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר הָיְתָה-שָּׁמָּה

and she came out from the place where she was

Ruth 1:9, 2:2, 2:10, 2:13 find

וּמְצֶאןָ מְנוּחָה

may you find rest

Ruth 1:18 (once only, also the last letter of this root, אָמֵץ)

וַתֵּרֶא כִּי-מִתְאַמֶּצֶת הִיא

and she saw that she was determined

Ruth 1:22, 2:21, 2:23 harvest

בִּתְחִלַּת קְצִיר שְׂעֹרִים

at the beginning of the harvest of barley

Ruth 2:3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14 reapers - as with gleaning, Ruth has more of these in one place than any other book.

בַּשָּׂדֶה אַחֲרֵי הַקֹּצְרִים

in the field after the reapers

Ruth 2:5, 6 standing - a better gloss is called for

הַנִּצָּב עַל-הַקּוֹצְרִים

standing by the reapers

Ruth 2:9 thirst

וְצָמִת וְהָלַכְתְּ אֶל-הַכֵּלִים

and you thirst, and you go to the vessels

Ruth 2:14 beside and heaped - this is a key part of the story too - Boaz is smitten

וַתֵּשֶׁב מִצַּד הַקֹּצְרִים

וַיִּצְבָּט-לָהּ קָלִי וַתֹּאכַל

and she herself sat beside the reapers

and he heaped her parched grain and she ate

Ruth 2:16 bundles

תָּשֹׁלּוּ לָהּ מִן-הַצְּבָתִים

draw out for her from the bundles

Ruth 3:3 wash

וְרָחַצְתְּ וָסַכְתְּ

so wash yourself and anoint yourself

Ruth 3:7 another preposition

וַיָּבֹא לִשְׁכַּב בִּקְצֵה הָעֲרֵמָה

and he came to lie down at the end of a heap

Ruth 3:8 and another preposition

וַיְהִי בַּחֲצִי הַלַּיְלָה

and it was the middle of the night

Then the sound stops till we find it in proper names in the middle and at the end.

פֶּרֶץ הוֹלִיד אֶת-חֶצְרוֹן

Perez bore Hetsron

10 Questions from Bishop Alan

2010-03-05T12:23:00.000-08:00

This looked like an interesting meme to me so I thought I would try it.I have not read any of the book that Bishop Alan discusses nor will I. Too busy.

Here are the 10 questions

What is the overarching story line of the Bible?
How should the Bible be understood?
Is God violent?
Who is Jesus and why is he important?
What is the Gospel?
What do we do about the Church?
Can we find a way to address human sexuality without fighting about it?
Can we find a better way of viewing the future?
How should followers of Jesus relate to people of other religions?
How can we translate our quest into action?

My short answers

A love song - see the The Song of Songs
Literally but paying attention to all sources of information scientific, literary, cultural, and theological.
No, but we are. And we are very good at justifying violence and retribution and attributing such to God. That is even more a projection than the attribution of love. God has demonstrated non-violence definitively in the person of Jesus.
Jesus exhibits God's character. As Harold Bloom notes The Lord of the Old Testament is anthropomorphic and the Jesus of the New Testament is theomorphic.
God is love - the anointing Spirit that God shares with us is the proof. Just take God seriously and ask the source of that love.
Rule in the midst of your enemies. (Psalm 110:2)
Yes. See point 1. The lovers are unmarried. Male or female, each of us can find the answer to the question through the anointing Spirit.
We need to work for hope and belonging as our local shelter 'Our Place' has as its motto. I don't know that the future is open to our gaze, but the present has need enough.
With respect. See point 1.
However we are called - so we had better be listening.

While I'm at this, a question that Mark Nanos asked me 4 years ago is still with me: If Jesus is the Messiah, why is the world still in such a state? I found a riposte to that question - not an answer. Why did prophecy cease in Israel? It is an equally loaded question of course and touches on the Muslim claim of Mohammad as the seal of the prophets. I may say I must respect other people's beliefs. But I don't agree with them. Is that possible? It is strange, because I have learned so much through the Jewish scriptures and so little through those of Islam. I often am angry at my own traditions of Christianity also. How can I even come to unity in myself and sing the Schema as I do every week in our Sunday School?

Take my ten answers as ten contradictions.

Habakkuk 3 - a second look

2010-03-05T08:45:00.000-08:00

First look is here. How do different parts of Scripture look to me when I get out of the poetry of the writings and read other books? Not impossibly different, but there are variations in words and bits of grammar that are strangely different from what I have so far seen. John Hobbins is hoping for some discussion of Hebrew verb forms and what we would see in them related to tense, aspect, and mood.

Here is one question that I noted on the grammar: what is the personal pronoun at the end of this verse, Habakkuk 3:4?

ד וְנֹגַהּ כָּאוֹר תִּהְיֶה
קַרְנַיִם מִיָּדוֹ לוֹ
וְשָׁם חֶבְיוֹן עֻזֹּה

Another fascinating commentary

2010-03-03T22:01:00.000-08:00

This week's commentary from JTS again has much to teach.

Rome and Greece

2010-03-03T19:28:00.000-08:00

Beloved, the time has come to return to story. I pull a section from the youth of Gaius in which he tells us of his upbringing at the hands of a tortured man who worked in Seneca's school nearly 80 years ago.

It wasn't just one person or place that influenced me. There were many over many years. I wonder when it was that my ears opened or in some ways when they closed. Discernment is both taking in and refusing to take in. And what content! First Seneca and his school: nine years at an impressionable age - from the fifteenth year of Tiberias until the first of my namesake Gaius Caligula. Such strength of tradition - Roman tradition with its momentum of conquest; Just do the training and you will rise into prominence and power - an understated motto of what was expected - Recti cultus pectora roborant - Right learning would make you strong. The Empire - just born and already corrupt - and it was pretending to know what was right. Nonetheless, it was an influence, this training. It fostered my natural striving. And I had interests to protect - even if only my own self-interest. The stories of that time impress their ignorance on me.

There was some attempt to teach us the conquered cultures. Besides Livy and Virgil for History and Catullus for entertainment, we studied Euclid, Aristotle, Plato, Homer, and some of the Jewish and Babylonian writings. It was necessary to know our borders. These last areas came under the subject of religion - taught on Mondays and Thursdays if I remember correctly. And of course, we had to give lip service to the deity of the Caesars and attend the sacrifices. Such ignorance! You would have thought the teachers would know more than they did but it turned out that our generation had to discover everything for ourselves. I shouldn't be so hard on some of them. They had the same ignorance to deal with as I had and a few did well, better in fact than some of my own generation who reduce some human complexities to a throw of the dice.

Seneca himself was a Stoic and demanded the same considerable self-denial from his staff. If he had not, I expect we would all have been swallowed up by the libertine spirit of the age. But the staff had absolute power over the students and trained us in the use of the same power.

This is a dangerous situation - allowing physical coercion and repressing other powers within the person without an adequate basis for human decisions. Stoicism is no match for the Spirit. A philosophy of denial cannot enable a new creation on its own. Some of us did not escape our childhood. All of us knew that one should avoid - how difficult it is to think back over this - should avoid any semblance of wrong-doing in the presence of one man, a representative of all that can be twisted in this human flesh. I think that there were only a few in each year that he had his eye on - to find them at fault so he could punish them. It was not the beating that was the danger but the method. Punishment was always in the morning before anyone else was awake. You spent the night in fear. The one to be punished had to wake him, then wait in his antechamber while he emptied his bladder. When you are naked on a man's lap absorbing the pain in your behind, you don't notice that he is taking pleasure in the presence of your body.

Of course as boys will, we boasted of our stripes, though they should have been considered shameful. But when you know that the shame is in the one who wields power, even a slave's stripes could be considered a source of pride. We were proud if our welts lasted longer than four weeks.

What foolishness this is, yet consider the knowledge that was in the boys that the master was not aware of. I still wonder how any adult system of discipline can allow the right of punishment to foster such a perverse completeness in a tortured person. It allowed a man to exercise what might have been legitimate correction but did not see that his motivation was based only on his own need for tenderness. This is what conceals a self-justifying lust. There is no doubt in my mind that he was incapable of satisfying his need except through this scheme of punishing others. I expect he was himself produced by similar abuse - but it is certain that he was unaware of any salvation from his condition - though he was the chief tutor in both religion and music. Like most people, he knew only the external control of the force of physical power, not wholeness in a new relationship.

Eventually - when I was about fourteen - I insisted he use a stick with me standing for the punishment. I think he knew that my request was made in knowledge of his need. Though the hurt was worse and I nearly fell down, he never trapped me for punishment again. Perhaps this is too close to the truth, too near the mark for us to examine any further. I expect my experience is not as uncommon as I think. The greater gifts are subject to greater distortions. I know this man was not the only influence on me - and he did manage to teach me some music.

Fortunately for me, another man, Cornelius Ligneus, took his place in my last two years in Rome. He was as opposite to the former as day and night. His son also taught at the school. These two demonstrated that the generations could succeed each other without dysfunction and that life and learning could be enjoyable. I loved how the father taught us foreign tongues. We had to read them as if they were alive and in actual use by others. He drew no attention to this. He just did it. I did not change at the time, but the seed of change had been sown within me without my knowing it.

I would be more comfortable talking about Samuel's influence, you know. I would rather leave my school years in the past. But at this stage, I have to acknowledge some debt and in doing so perhaps allow redemption to work itself further back into my time. It was because of Samuel in his earliest visits to Corinth that my parents became god-fearers. They drew the line at this acknowledgement. Though we children were taught the Hebrew story from our youth, my parents declined full entry into the covenant. Now I can see of course why the sign of the covenant is appropriate - it is a kind of death to human desire, an acknowledgement that life is from God and not from ourselves.

Death - we pagans pursued this image too in our sacrifices but only the Hebrews knew its significance. We kill to read entrails and know the will of the gods. They too killed but as a substitution for their own death and to cleanse the altar with the blood. Of course, they don't kill any more. We kill to appease the gods and say that they feast on the offerings. They killed to feast with God. What a pair of primitive histories!

Samuel was well acquainted with the sacrificial tradition, but he was more inclined to recognize the temple of hearth and home and the sacrifice of thanksgiving than to want to do the rites. He stressed the counter balancing interpretations of the prophets. After all, if God were hungry, would he ask us? And as for us Romans, we worshipped what were no gods at all - just images of our own foolishness.

I was lucky in Samuel. He was a teacher in Israel and wanted us in the covenant so that our share in the world to come would be assured. His struggle with the true circumcision was long and painful - such a severing of the old tradition, yet its completion also, in the very same sense that circumcision completes a man, as he himself had taught us. Through this Hebrew tradition, I saw the potential for another way of life. My Roman heart was no longer satisfied with conquest and submission to our own power.

Besides Samuel, first Prisca and Aquila, then Paul, Sosthenes, Crispus, and many others - not least Tertius, my slave, taught me the working out of my salvation.

Who understands these things in advance? And who knows the results in another person? Anger has a long reach. How is it that grace can prevail in the place of so many faults and so much resistance - and how is it that some may fail or at least seem to fail?

That tutor had a poor ending. He was discovered. After he was dismissed for misconduct, he was killed on the road while travelling back to his native Spain. Strange, you know, he once told me that my school days would be the best of my life. Perhaps they were for him - but for me, the best is yet to come and the present always exceeds the past in joy. I think even that unfortunate man could have profited from our Gospel if he had known it. Perhaps he yet has. I would like to think that all souls in torment will find that health, but how will they if we do not find a way to tell them? As for him, it is clear to me that he needed the touch of my body. Though he stole from me, unknowing, perhaps even then, I was part of the fringe of the garment that made him whole. I expect his illness was a thousand years old.

Bearing Sin

2010-03-02T07:47:00.000-08:00

This brief from JTS on the high priest is of interest to students of the cult in TNK and Hebrews. One day maybe I will have time to study this more.

Peh

2010-03-01T19:09:00.000-08:00

ף פ
Find the peh's. I am beginning to wonder how useful this exercise is - but it will get my eyes working again after two weeks without looking at Hebrew. And I had better mind my peh's and qof's for I am so prone to error and incompleteness. פ occurs somewhat rarely in the book of Ruth - about 42 times. We find it in the word for chapter, פרק and in the book or Ruth in some proper names: like אֶפְרָתִים Ephratites, עָרְפָּה Orpah and פֶּרֶץ Perez. It begins our tale with its characteristic burst of air.(I had always thought it was an odd looking letter - an upside down G. No wonder I sometimes pick up a piece of paper with Hebrew text on it upside down.)

וַיְהִי בִּימֵי שְׁפֹט הַשֹּׁפְטִים

Now there was in the days of the judgment of the judges,

The word for family has two shared letters with the word for judgment. Worse than searching by etymology is my searching for relationships between words by letters alone!

מִּשְׁפַּחַת אֱלִימֶלֶךְ

from the family of Elimelek

This word for family (?) also occurs as handmaid in the phrase 'your handmaid' (Ruth 2:13), שִׁפְחָתֶךָ- more to investigate. Why are these two words seemingly related as to root?

Peh is the first letter of a few words in Ruth - like visit,

כִּי-פָקַד יְהוָה אֶת-עַמּוֹ

that יְהוָה had visited his people

and separate

כִּי הַמָּוֶת יַפְרִיד בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵךְ

for only death will separate me from you

and work

יְשַׁלֵּם יְהוָה פָּעֳלֵךְ

יְהוָה make full your work

and face

וַתִּפֹּל עַל-פָּנֶיהָ

And she fell on her face

(It's not Linus tripping on his blanket.)
and piece

וְטָבַלְתְּ פִּתֵּךְ בַּחֹמֶץ

and dip your piece in the vinegar

For peh soffit, this letter at the end (סוף - hence soffit) of a word, we find a few also

כֹּה יַעֲשֶׂה יְהוָה לִי וְכֹה יוֹסִיף

this יְהוָה do to me and more

קְנֵה-לָךְ וַיִּשְׁלֹף נַעֲלוֹ

buy for yourself and he removed his sandal

Here are a pair of words identically spelled with reference to consonants but quite separate in their usage. The first (where) includes the word 'here', also used twice in Ruth 4:1-2. Where and here seem similarly related in English!

אֵיפֹה לִקַּטְתְּ הַיּוֹם וְאָנָה עָשִׂית

where did you glean today and where work

וַיְהִי כְּאֵיפָה שְׂעֹרִים

and there was about an ephah of barley

And there is a pairing of wings and spread - once relating to how Ruth has come to shelter under the wings of the Lord and once relating her invitation to Boaz.

וּפָרַשְׂתָּ כְנָפֶךָ עַל-אֲמָתְךָ

so spread your wings over your maidservant

נֶפֶשׁ is a common word with a peh but occurs only once in Ruth - in reference to the child Obed restoring the life of Naomi..

There are some rarer leftovers after this gleaning of words: Ruth 3:8

וַיֶּחֱרַד הָאִישׁ וַיִּלָּפֵת

and the man was afraid and turned himself

and Ruth 3:18

עַד אֲשֶׁר תֵּדְעִין אֵיךְ יִפֹּל דָּבָר

until you know how a thing will fall out

and Ruth 2:7

וְאָסַפְתִּי בָעֳמָרִים אַחֲרֵי הַקּוֹצְרִים

and gather among the sheaves after the reapers

Foolishly I found myself wondering if סוף and אסף were related (!) in that the soffit gathers the top of a wall to the roof as the wall and roof come to their respective ends. Lettrymology gone wild.
And there are a few more peh's: הַמִּטְפַּחַת - the cloak in Ruth 3:15

פְּלֹנִי אַלְמֹנִי - the coincidence in Ruth 4:1,

פֶּן - lest in Ruth 4:6

and לְפָנִים - before, in Ruth 4:7

and one final curious pair - Ruth 1:16 אַל-תִּפְגְּעִי-בִי do not force me and

Ruth 2:22 וְלֹא יִפְגְּעוּ-בָךְ that none force you

Books I read on my holidays

2010-02-28T09:07:00.000-08:00

Flowers and Plants of Hawaii and Tropical Trees of Hawaii, two little books by Paul Wood and Ron Dahlquist - teaching myself botany now! and The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Society a book about the occupation of Guernsey during the second world war. And finally Three Cups of Tea by Greg Mortenson and David Oliver Relin, a book with rather better policy direction and fulfillment than war allows.

Things you just can't believe

2010-02-27T17:04:00.000-08:00

Don't miss this one from Dr. Platypus.

New giveaway

2010-02-27T13:33:00.000-08:00

Joel is a clear thinker so this book will likely be worth buying or winning
Enter the contest to win here. You will find God Didn't say that on my blogroll too.

I can't find meaning

2010-02-15T09:38:00.000-08:00

Is there any word for meaning? People think that meaning is important, and sometime will use understanding as a synonym. But meaning itself seems to be a word not used in older translations of the Bible. In an English-Hebrew dictionary I found these glosses: רב משמעות, משמעי; שמשמעותו One can see that these are all derived from hearing.

How important is meaning?

It occurs to me that meaning may be deceptive. It may make us think we understand when we don't. It drives us to abstraction! rather than to reality. Of someone it is said (Isaiah 11:3) - how do I dare read this!

וַהֲרִיחֹו בְּיִרְאַת יְהוָה

וְלֹֽא־לְמַרְאֵה עֵינָיו יִשְׁפֹּוט

וְלֹֽא־לְמִשְׁמַע אָזְנָיו יֹוכִיחַ

Literally

and his breath (interpreting the infinitive as a noun) is the fear the the Lord

and not in the seeing of his eye will he judge

and not in the hearing of his ear will he rebuke

My Jerusalem Bible translates as follows

(The fear of YHWH is his breath).

He does not judge by appearences

he gives no verdict on hearsay

Including the parentheses in the translation - as if it were part of the prior verse. It then begins the second line as a new sentence. The third line contains 'the word' in question which the dictionary 'defines' as meaning 'meaning' - that which is heard. The only other place I see in the Biblical Hebrew corpus (based on BDB and its list of words) where this mem precedes shema` is in Isaiah 11:14.

There are 9 other places according to my Hebrew Latin lexicon: Isaiah 21:3, 33:15, 33:19, 59:1-2, Zechariah 7:11-12, Proverbs 28:9, and Ecclesiastes 1:8. On first glance these all appear to be straightforward usage of the mem as preposition in one or more of its usual senses. (The usage in Isaiah 1:3 could be pointed as an infinitive rather than as a noun.)

I am coming to the conclusion that meaning by itself is singularly unimportant. But 'what is heard' is of course not unimportant. Hear is the first word. But hear and do is better than hear and disappear. It is, I think, only in the doing that understanding and so 'meaning' is given.

Samech out of order

2010-02-14T17:32:00.000-08:00

I pushed the wrong buttons and published Samech after Ayin instead of before. Then today I read our Rector's invitation to imagine a teaching program that would introduce the unchurched to the Gospel. My initial thought is that it could all fit into the circle of Samech. What topics would you include in such an introduction?

I am by the way somewhat opposed to course programs that work from a confessional stance without the grounding of the more ancient narratives in the 'Old' Testament. I also think that the 'unchurched' may have more to offer than expected.

What would I fit into a Samech program? One might begin with the meaning of Samech סמך - to sustain. That captures time, life, and relationship in a word. (Psalm 145:14 - it's the 15th letter but there is a letter missing in the acrostic of Psalm 145.)

By the time I return from Hawaii, will there be a complete outline of a new program - maybe in the comments - for learning about the dwelling of God with us?

Or is this a meme - consider yourself tagged. What is the most important thing - or three most important things you would teach or present or whatever to the unchurched or to someone who had never heard the Gospel - or just what is the most important trio of things that you have in your tradition?

Samech

2010-02-13T14:50:00.001-08:00

ס
Samech is rare. The letter occurs only nine times in Ruth. Three of those are in the word חֶסֶד - kindness among other things, and one in a related root, חָסָה take refuge, or shelter, or trust.. E.g. Ruth 1:8

יעשה יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם חֶסֶד

may יְהוָה deal with you kindly

In Ruth 1:17, we have the word יָסַף for adding

כֹּה יַעֲשֶׂה יְהוָה לִי וְכֹה יוֹסִיף

this יְהוָה deal with me and more

Ruth 2:7 - gather אָסַף, seems very close to adding

וְאָסַפְתִּי בָעֳמָרִים אַחֲרֵי הַקּוֹצְרִים

and gather among the sheaves after the reapers

Ruth 2:12 (mysteriously connected to 3:9 by the word כנף). I doubt this is a structural accident.

אֲשֶׁר-בָּאת לַחֲסוֹת תַּחַת-כְּנָפָיו

to whom you came to take refuge under his wings

Ruth 2:20 - kindness again

אֲשֶׁר לֹא-עָזַב חַסְדּוֹ

who has not left off his kindness

Ruth 3:3 - anoint, a relatively rare word and not the usual one for anointing or anointed which are related to מָשַׁח. Some people distrust etymology but I find it fascinating. How does language work and how did it begin? This word סוך has three homonyms that I see when scanning BDB meaning come to an end, cease, and hedge or fence, and reeds. These last two meanings seem related to סָכַךְ from which we get the feast of tabernacles חַג הַסֻּכֹּות (Leviticus 23:34).

וְרָחַצְתְּ וָסַכְתְּ

so wash yourself and anoint yourself

Ruth 3:10 - kindness again

הֵיטַבְתְּ חַסְדֵּךְ

you have made good your kindness

Ruth 4:1 - two instances of 'turn aside', a word that is also spelled with a שׂ and can mean apostatize.

וַיֹּאמֶר סוּרָה שְׁבָה-פֹּה

פְּלֹנִי אַלְמֹנִי

וַיָּסַר וַיֵּשֵׁב

and he said turn aside sit here -

what a coincidence!

and he turned aside and sat down

Ayin

2010-02-13T14:50:00.000-08:00

ע
Ayin, in contrast to Samech, is not rare. The ancients liked this guttural. Naomi נָעֳמִי and Boaz בֹּעַז both have ayin in their name. Also Orpah עָרְפָּה. It also begins some common prepositions and words.If one was to include ayin in the grammatical team, it would be a strong player and bring in the heavy usage of the two character prepositions, עַל and עִם

Many verses repeat in these exercises - it is a reading game. If one actually reads all these posts here and on Bob's Log - (click the links to the letter by letter series on the sidebars) - one will begin to recognize both form and word in Hebrew. There is no substitute for repetition - it builds ze little grey cell connections. (Actually some of those cells might be green.)

Distinguish the differing words in the following verses. There are enough examples to learn all sorts of pronomial and personal suffixes.

Ruth 1:6

כִּי-פָקַד יְהוָה אֶת-עַמּוֹ

that יְהוָה had visited his people

Ruth 1:7 It's curious, don't you think, that people and 'with' are homonyms as far as consonants go. In this case, the differing pronunciation must have been critical - unless they derive from a similar experience - since one's people are those with whom one lives.

וּשְׁתֵּי כַלּוֹתֶיהָ עִמָּהּ

and her two daughters-in-law with her

Ruth 1:8 - the preposition עִמָּד is listed with עִם - as if a synonym - BDB p 767 -

יעשה יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם חֶסֶד

כַּאֲשֶׁר עֲשִׂיתֶם עִם-הַמֵּתִים וְעִמָּדִי

may יְהוָה deal with you kindly

as you have dealt with those who died and with me

This עִם is a very complex word. The definitions listed in Latin are simul, preterea, cum, contra, apud, prope; in domo, corpore, animo alic.; inter; ex vicinia, e domo, e potestate, ex animo. Oh if only I had learned Latin better! BDB lists with, against (with combative verb), towards, resemblance, of time = as long as, of locality, beside, close to, and many more. Nice example of the use of עִמָּד in Job 9:35.

אַֽדַבְּרָה וְלֹא אִירָאֶנּוּ כִּי לֹא־כֵן אָנֹכִי עִמָּדִי

I would speak and I would not fear him for not so am I with myself

BDB P 768 as if alone and in one's own consciousness whether of knowledge or memory or purpose.

Ruth 1:13-14 - here a pair of temporal words - until and further that look as if they might be related depending on the role of the vav. (BDB p 728-29 treats them together also).

הֲלָהֵן תְּשַׂבֵּרְנָה עַד אֲשֶׁר יִגְדָּלוּ

As if you could wait till such had grown?

וַתִּשֶּׂנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה עוֹד

and they lifted up their voice and wept further

Ruth 1:15-16 - her, your, and mine - these and Ruth 1:6 give four of the possessive pronouns as they attach to a noun

אֶל-עַמָּהּ וְאֶל-אֱלֹהֶיהָ

to her people and to her God

עַמֵּךְ עַמִּי

your people my people

Ruth 1:19 - another common noun,עִיר, city, and here and Ruth 2:7, another common preposition עַל with a host of meanings that seem to overlap somewhat with אֶל, used above.

וַתֵּהֹם כָּל-הָעִיר עֲלֵיהֶן

that all the city was excited concerning them

Ruth 2:7

וַיַּעַן הַנַּעַר הַנִּצָּב עַל-הַקּוֹצְרִים וַיֹּאמַר

and the lad standing by the reapers answered and he said

Vav again

2010-02-12T15:38:00.001-08:00

Just fooling around and I noticed that every verse in Ruth with the exception of 7 of them begins with a vav ו.

Nun

2010-02-10T14:30:00.000-08:00

ן נ

On words beginning with nun, like na`ar and na`arah - see lads and lasses

Grammatically, nun is used in the second person feminine plurals
e.g. Ruth 1:7

וַתֵּלַכְנָה בַדֶּרֶךְ

and they (i.e. the women) went on their way

and Ruth 1:8

לֵכְנָה שֹּׁבְנָה אִשָּׁה לְבֵית אִמָּהּ

Go - return - each to the house of her mother

and Ruth 1:9

וַתִּשֶּׂאנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה

and they lifted up their voice and wept

In Ruth 2:13 we have the object pronoun with the verb in a form that will receive it - the mem changing to a taf and followed by a nun so the yod can be attached.

כִּי נִחַמְתָּנִי

for you have comforted me

I can't avoid the word for 'giving'. It is a very commonly used verb with nun in both the first and third position of the radical. It occurs 8 times in Ruth: Ruth 1:6, 1:9, 2:18, 3:17, 4:7, 11, 12, 13. Can you find the word in the following?

כִּי-פָקַד יְהוָה אֶת-עַמּוֹ
לָתֵת לָהֶם לָחֶם

----

יִתֵּן יְהוָה לָכֶם וּמְצֶאןָ מְנוּחָה
אִשָּׁה בֵּית אִישָׁהּ

----

וַתּוֹצֵא וַתִּתֶּן-לָהּ
אֵת אֲשֶׁר-הוֹתִרָה מִשָּׂבְעָהּ

----

וַתֹּאמֶר שֵׁשׁ-הַשְּׂעֹרִים
הָאֵלֶּה נָתַן לִי

----

שָׁלַף אִישׁ נַעֲלוֹ וְנָתַן לְרֵעֵהוּ
וְזֹאת הַתְּעוּדָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל

----

יִתֵּן יְהוָה אֶת-הָאִשָּׁה הַבָּאָה אֶל-בֵּיתֶךָ

----

אֲשֶׁר יִתֵּן יְהוָה לְךָ מִן-הַנַּעֲרָה הַזֹּאת

----

וַיִּתֵּן יְהוָה לָהּ הֵרָיוֹן וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן

If I translate them, it will be too easy - right?

Demeaning meaning?

2010-02-10T10:04:00.000-08:00

Meaning can be mean, slighting the searcher, evading the evangelist, withdrawing itself from view. Why do we search for meaning and can we find it in text?

Why? - even the poet did not know?

No. The poet knew and wrote from knowledge, but it was not so mean a view as we would impose on the poem.

The meaning was not necessarily in natural or easy language. The idea was not the point. The point was engagement with mystery.

So meaning is not first able to be anything but potentiality till it is found by the reader. Then the poet rejoices.

Readers too might rejoice - but the real risk is that they will be cheated by preachers, carrying them to heights of fancy rather than joy.

Preachers are not the word, but its ministers, and the word does not have a meaning that can be taken away by observation as if we have control over it.

The meaning is in the interaction. The word is like a mirror which deflects the individual: either to life or not, to darkness or light. So the human diffracts by the word when engaged by it. Don't look away.

Mem

2010-02-08T17:19:00.000-08:00

ם מ
Mem doesn't have pages in BDB about itself - it's מן that does and the preposition when it clings on to a word loses its nun most of the time. This losing of letters cannot be ignored any more. Vav and yod appear and disappear as helpers of reading in full and defective spellings and 'nun' and 'he' appear and disappear if they are part of the root. Will we find examples? Just consider, if I were to look for nun - it wouldn't be there - so how will I find it? I am sure the weak consonants will appear when we need them.

Some things that we do with our gums, lips, teeth and throat are common to all tongues. I bet there is stuff on the web somewhere about sibilants (sounds like s), gutturals (from the throat), dentals (from the teeth), and labials (from the lips) and a bunch of other special terminology. How do the Hebrew letters stand in this area?

These are distracting question so I have pushed my meandering answer to the bottom of the post. Continuing with Ruth ...

Mem as a leading letter meaning 'from' is common

וַיֵּלֶךְ אִישׁ מִבֵּית לֶחֶם יְהוּדָה
לָגוּר בִּשְׂדֵי מוֹאָב

and a man went from the house of bread (Bethlehem) of Judah
to stay in the fields of Moab

also מִשְּׂדֵי from the fields - frequently repeated. and in Ruth 1:7 we have the full word (used 4 more times in the story)

וַתֵּצֵא מִן-הַמָּקוֹם

and she emerged from the place

I don't want to pass over Ruth 1:9. 'Find' is just mem as part of the root, but 'rest' appears to be a noun derived by the addition of a mem prefix from נוּחַ 'to rest'. This extended form of the word with a final 'he' is of significance in that it is used for the resting place for the ark of the covenant in Psalm 132 and for the name. (Is this also marriage related?)

וּמְצֶאןָ מְנוּחָה

may you find rest

Ruth 1:12 looks like an idiom - having and getting wife or husband will turn out to be significant - see this recent post by Kurk Gayle which poses some questions.

זָקַנְתִּי מִהְיוֹת לְאִישׁ

for I am too old to have a husband

Ruth 1:13 has what I thought was a comparative usage (also 3:12) but BDB notes this as a 'because of' usage rather than the usual 'from = separate from or out of' usage.

כִּי-מַר-לִי מְאֹד מִכֶּם

for bitterness to me is greater because of you

Ruth 2:1 (similar to 3:2) has an mem prefix to the word know יָדַע thus forming the noun acquaintance.

וּלְנָעֳמִי מוֹדָע לְאִישָׁהּ

Now for Naomi there was an acquaintance of her husband

Ruth 2:3 contains three mems - one with an apparently repeated root in two forms - again a noun derived from the verb, and the second a preposition but also preceding another derived noun again using mem.

וַיִּקֶר מִקְרֶהָ

חֶלְקַת הַשָּׂדֶה לְבֹעַז

אֲשֶׁר מִמִּשְׁפַּחַת אֱלִימֶלֶךְ

and she happened to happen

on the part of the field of Boaz

who was of the family of Elimelek

Ruth 2:7 gives us the preposition used with a temporal conjunction

וַתָּבוֹא וַתַּעֲמוֹד

מֵאָז הַבֹּקֶר וְעַד-עַתָּה

and she came and she remained

from then - the morning and until now

Ruth 2:8 gives us the preposition used with a demonstrative pronoun

וְגַם לֹא תַעֲבוּרִי מִזֶּה

and also do not pass beyond this one

In Ruth 2:14 we have again the fully spelled out preposition - one wonders, why spell it out sometimes and sometimes not?

וְאָכַלְתְּ מִן-הַלֶּחֶם

and eat of the bread

In Ruth 2:20, the preposition precedes a participle

קָרוֹב לָנוּ הָאִישׁ מִגֹּאֲלֵנוּ הוּא

near to us is the man and he our redeemer

Ruth 3:4 (sim 3:7, 3:8, 3:14) This word in the plural is again derived from the verb or even the singular noun together with a mem. (In this form only used in Ruth and once in Daniel 10:6)

וּבָאת וְגִלִּית מַרְגְּלֹתָיו

and you come and uncover his feet

Ruth 3:10 we might say 'from beginning to end'. I leave it in the awkward state.

הָאַחֲרוֹן מִן-הָרִאשׁוֹן

the end from the beginning

Ruth 3:12 - an unambigous comparative - but why two mems? My eldest son as a child could not say 'milk'. Repeated training produced mmmmm-nilk. M and N are by no means completely easy. I suspect nun has run from min and made mim because a second nun was needed for the pronoun affix. But I couldn't find a seconder for this conjecture. (Putnam did teach me a new word - nunnation - the disappearance of the nun. That could be a Poirot mystery.)

וְגַם יֵשׁ גֹּאֵל קָרוֹב מִמֶּנִּי

and moreover there is a redeemer closer than I

Addendum - letters and their sound classifications

This summary from Gesesius will save me some thinking - notice the distribution of the first 11 - the green grammatical group. I have a theory that they are 'easier' to pronounce and they make pronunciation of other letters easier especially when things need to be elided (like 'a' and 'an' in English).

(a) Gutturals

‎

א ה ע ח

(b) Palatals

ג כ‍ ק‎

ד ט ת‎

(d) Labials

ב פ‎

(e) Sibilants

ז שׁ שׂ ס צ‍‎

(f) Sonants

ו י | ר ל | נ‍ מ‍‎‎‎

א - guttural like a glottal stop in English - light
ב - must be a labial
ג - palatal - I can feel the palate 'g'
ד - dental
ה - guttural - light
ו - sonant - never seen this word before and neither has my dictionary! Sounds like it is missing a con as prefix. I think I know it as a voiced consonant. Most of the others are unvoiced except zayin, dalet, and gimel.
ז - sibilant
ח - guttural - heavy duty
ט - dental like its brother taf
י - sonant
כ - palatal (guttural?)
ל - sonant - the middle pair
מ - sonant - the last pair
נ - sonant - the last pair
ס - sibilant
ע - guttural - heavy
פ - labial (fricative?)
צ - sibilant
ק - palatal (guttural?)
ר - sonant - the middle pair - like the gutturals never takes a dagesh
ש - sibilant - ambiguous pronunciation without the diacritical mark
ת - dental

Post this one under humour

2010-02-08T13:28:00.001-08:00

Notes for Irshad's next book.

Clayboy on the 39 articles

2010-02-08T12:55:00.000-08:00

Doug Chaplin again has an intriguing post on the nature of Jesus related to Article XV of the 39 articles.

The article starts off with this phrase: Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things, sin only except, from which he was clearly void, both in his flesh, and in his spirit.

Void is a curious term for today - sounds like a method definition in a C# or java module. Meaning today - I don't return a value when executed. So when Jesus earthly life was executing (= running), with respect to sin, he did not return a value. Exactly the opposite is what I would expect. If the Father is doing the 'running' by the Spirit, then a continuous return = communications would be expected. Relationship never broken. Now this communication of mine is not in English.

It raises for me a question as to what our humanity is and what is the nature of sin in terms of my experience with systems and machines. The 19th century Frankenstein approach to humanity was that we are a clockwork finely tuned machine. This leaves no room for sin at all. It is pure determinism. Modern physics after quantum theory leaves no room for determinism of this sort. So what are we? (I have been reading some popular books on Entanglement, Infinity, and Quantum theory - so be prepared for some more strained analogies!)

Who am I and who is he - this Jesus whom Peter called the Christ, the son of the Living God? (Mark 8:27 and par.)

This is not a theological post (yet), but an anthropological one. A few weeks ago when reading Psalm 90, a teacher said to me. We are reading too much at once. How can God prosper the work of our hands when we are but a machine? We did not follow this comment up, but it has stayed with me. I think the notion that our humanity is mechanical is too simplistic. If indeed we are a wavefunction as quantum theory implies, then there are two of us as Paul noted, the old and the new. When we have passed through the split beam produced by our birth in the flesh and our birth in the cross, we are splattered into a diffraction pattern. The question is then - who will measure us that we might collapse the wavefunction and know who we are?

Our warning is not to collapse the wavefunction in the wrong way: Judge not, lest ye be judged, as our Lord said, and note also the envelope that Paul uses for his letter to the Romans (yes that letter to the Romans has a complex envelope: who are you to judge your sibling? Romans 14 closes this part of the envelope and the opening portion is in chapter 2. As I said elsewhere

When I read the closing bracket in chapter 14 - why do you judge your brother? I find the best answer is given by the Grand Inquisitor in The Brothers Karamazov - "because the people cannot stand the freedom You have placed them in". That is why we misread Romans. We have no capacity to judge till we have died.

In this life and the life of the world to come, we must respect the outer envelope of this letter - the obedience of faith. (Romans 1:5, 16:26) Yes I know there are disputes over the last chapter. There are lots of people who open letters and rip the envelope and toss it away.

So given the requirement of faith, is there any good news about our humanity to be gleaned from this article of religion? Here it is: the Anointed is without sin in the spirit and in the flesh. So how does this affect me or you? Can I participate in the unbroken and unbreakable communion that Jesus has? (He is implicitly being talked about here as the author and finisher of our faith.) Yes we can. (Someone else said that recently.) Does our choice effect a collapse of the wavefunction? Yes it does. Is that good news? Yes it is. Try it and see. You will discover a change in judgment. Here I quote a note from Ken Schenck this morning,1897. No church that is acquainted with the Holy Ghost will object.

So we have a measurement that we have measured. We have looked at the life of Jesus and it was good. We do not de-create ourselves as Job did, because this source of our light has appeared to our Leviathan and has made the beast acceptable. The accuser can no longer stand to accuse. This same Anointing is from the beginning and is thoroughly manifest in the canon. Time itself changes its character in our eyes, much as it changed when Einstein demonstrated dilation. Do not think it is imaginary. Negative numbers, complex numbers, and the probability cloud, in spite of the fact that no one understands them, have produced technological marvels. Enter then this marvelous cloud of unknowing by the door of faith and be thereby known. You will not find it void.

Re-organizing

2010-02-07T14:57:00.000-08:00

I switched my orientation from left to right so I could use the new page gadget. I have annotated my current blog list so I might get to know the people I am reading a bit better. Please let me know if you have a blog you think I should read.

I have also started using Google Analytics. So far, I am impressed with their features.

Lamed

2010-02-04T16:52:00.000-08:00

ל
Today's lesson is brought to us by the letter ל from the scroll of Ruth מגילת רות

This is another letter with several roles. Let us look at the examples to see the roles. A good place to start is with a phrase we saw in several earlier posts

לָתֵת לָהֶם לָחֶם

to give them bread

Five letters of the 9 in this phrase are playing grammatical roles. In English we always begin an infinitive with 'to'. While this is not the rule in Hebrew it also often happens as it does in the case of the first word, the infinitive of נתן, a word in which 2 of the three letters of the root disappear in this form! (I will postpone this discussion of missing letters till we get to נ.) Like English, the preposition ל can be used the way we use 'to'. In the second word, although often left as understood, we could have said 'to them' as seems to be the case in Hebrew. So this verb appears to require an indirect object with a preposition. Does that verb even appear without one? Or say with an attached object pronoun?

The preposition occurs frequently and is most often translated by 'to' in English. So in Ruth 1:7

לָשׁוּב אֶל-אֶרֶץ יְהוּדָה

to return to the land of Judah

and in Ruth 1:8

לֵכְנָה שֹּׁבְנָה אִשָּׁה לְבֵית אִמָּהּ

Go - return - each to the house of her mother

and in Ruth 1:9

יִתֵּן יְהוָה לָכֶם וּמְצֶאןָ מְנוּחָה

may יְהוָה give to you and may you find rest

and in Ruth 1:10

וַתֹּאמַרְנָה-לָּהּ
כִּי-אִתָּךְ נָשׁוּב לְעַמֵּךְ and they said to her
for with you we will return to your people

and so on.

Well - doesn't it just mean 'to' then. Not so fast. BDB lists more than 25 differing uses. We are just on the surface. We have two uses: with the verb - but infinitives don't require a preposition, so it is not exactly like English, and with nouns and pronouns. The correspondence between English and Hebrew verbs and their use of prepositions is varied. Sometimes it seems that Hebrew requires the preposition and English doesn't and sometimes it is the other way around. Lots of examples below for reading practice.

Ruth 1:12 and a similar use of לְאִישׁ in Ruth 1:13

זָקַנְתִּי מִהְיוֹת לְאִישׁ

כִּי אָמַרְתִּי יֶשׁ-לִי תִקְוָה

גַּם הָיִיתִי הַלַּיְלָה לְאִישׁ

for I am too old to have a husband

for had I said there is hope for me

even if there was tonight a husband

Ruth 1:20 has the use of the preposition where we omit it in English and a separate preposition I have translated as 'to' also

וַתֹּאמֶר אֲלֵיהֶן
אַל-תִּקְרֶאנָה לִי נָעֳמִי
קְרֶאןָ לִי מָרָא
כִּי-הֵמַר שַׁדַּי לִי מְאֹד

and she said to them
do not call me Naomi
call me Mara
for bitter is the Sufficient to me - greatly so

Ruth 2:1 has two more examples which I would render 'for' or 'of' in a awkward moment. 'Of' is a common usage particularly in the headings of the psalms.

וּלְנָעֳמִי מוֹדָע לְאִישָׁהּ

Now for Naomi there was an acquaintance of her husband

Ruth 2:14 has one attached to a time word

לְעֵת הָאֹכֶל גֹּשִׁי הֲלֹם

at the time of eating draw near here

Ruth 2:20

בָּרוּךְ הוּא לַיהוָה

Blessed be he from יהוָה

Ruth 4:3 has an interesting pair

חֶלְקַת הַשָּׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר לְאָחִינוּ לֶאֱלִימֶלֶךְ

the portion of the field of our brother Elimelek

Ruth 4:6. These examples make me ask why the second verb does not take a pronoun as object directly. There's a feel for the language here that I don't yet have. One exercise that might be useful is to list all the various ways one might say the same thing.

וַיֹּאמֶר הַגֹּאֵל לֹא אוּכַל לִגְאָל- לִי

and the redeemer said I cannot redeem her

Ruth 4:13 almost at the end of the whole story

וַיִּקַּח בֹּעַז אֶת-רוּת וַתְּהִי-לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה
וַיָּבֹא אֵלֶיהָ
וַיִּתֵּן יְהוָה לָהּ הֵרָיוֹן וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן

So Boaz got Ruth and she became his wife
and he came to her
and יְהוָה gave her conception and she bore a son

Ruth 4:16 a final example - I think there is no correspondence between the preposition and 'his'. It just came out that way!

וַתִּקַּח נָעֳמִי אֶת-הַיֶּלֶד
וַתְּשִׁתֵהוּ בְחֵיקָהּ
וַתְּהִי-לוֹ לְאֹמֶנֶת

and Naomi got the child
and set him in her lap
and became for him his support

Note 1: Henceforth no more transcription. (There are transcriptions in the previous posts in this series from dalet to kaf. ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ. And there are transcriptions in the series on Psalm 119 א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ). John Hobbins even wants to wean us from נְקֻדּוֹת the nikkudot, all those little dots and dashes, but I am not going there yet. Maybe after I have visited Israel in the fall but I doubt it even then - you can generally hum and haw between letters and beats but the diacritics help me see some patterns that are otherwise invisible (like most of that piel conjugation).

Note 2: I will continue to put my translations close to the Hebrew. That's the state I am in at the moment with respect to understanding. Reading is easier than a year ago, but memory is lagging. I don't want to trouble my readers with more difficulty than I can manage.

Begin soapbox. By the way, I might be wrong. Where I remember an acknowledgment, I will note it. If I forget you, shout. Hitherto note also - I am a devoted servant of the Beloved whose Name is blessed and who makes me happy in the midst of trouble. Happy as written in Psalm 1:1 and Proverbs 8:34, confident as noted in Psalm 91:15. There is no arguing this even if I fall away into depression and skepticism. Therefore I am not first a scholar, if indeed I will ever be one. I study the Bible but I am not first doing Biblical Studies because I am not disinterested. Professionals, squirm if you must. I have been trained in recognizing my errors and I know how to leave things incomplete but do not hesitate to correct me. I like interaction and I don't get much of it. It may be that the Bible in the hands of amateurs is like loaded weapons in the hands of children, but perhaps that is the nub of our problem. I make no apology to those who are objective and distanced from text or life. I don't see either as an option. End soapbox.

Proverbs 8

2010-02-02T13:53:00.000-08:00

Does not wisdom call
and understanding give her voice

from the hilltops
on the way
where the roads meet
she takes her stand

right by the gates
at the mouth of the town
from the entrance of the doors
she sings

To all humanity I call
my voice to the children of humus

understand, O naive, shrewdness
O simpletons, understand a heart

hear, for princely things I will speak
and from the parting of my lips things that are upright

for truth I muse with my gums
and an abomination to my lips is wickedness

of righteousness are all the words of my mouth
there is nothing in them twisted or perverse

all of them transparent to one who understands
and upright to those who find knowledge

receive my discipline and not silver
and knowledge rather than gold of choice

for better is wisdom than rubies
and all things to be desired are not to be compared with her

I, wisdom, live with shrewdness
and knowledge of purpose I find out

The fear of יְהוָה
to hate evil
Pride, arrogance, the way of evil
and the mouth of falsehoods I hate

To me is counsel and success
I am understanding
to me is strength

by me kings reign and rulers decree righteousness

by me leaders lead
and princes, all the judges of righteousness

as for me, I love all those loving me
and those who seek me will find me

wealth and glory are with me
substance of old and righteousness

better is my fruit than gold or fine gold
and my coming than silver of choice

in the path of righteousness I walk
in the middle of the roads of judgment

to allot to those loving me what is
and their storehouses I will fill

יְהוָה acquired me as the beginning of his way
before his works of old

from everlasting I was poured out
from the beginning
from before earth

when there were no depths I was begotten
when there were no fountains heavy with water

earlier than the mountains were sunk
in the presence of the hills I was begotten

as yet he had not made earth, the outside
or the beginning of the dust of the world

when he established the heavens, there was I
when he inscribed a circle on the face of the deep

when he encouraged the clouds above
to strengthen the fountains of the deep

when he set to the sea his decree
that the waters should not pass over his bidding
when he inscribed the foundations of earth

then I was beside him - faithful
and I was his delight
day by day
at play in his presence
at all times

at play in the world, his earth
and delighting in the children of humus

So now children, hear me
for happy they that keep my ways

hear discipline and be wise
and do not let go

happy is the human who hears me
keeping watch at my portals daily
guarding the posts of my doors

for who finds me finds life
and will obtain acceptance of יְהוָה

but who sins against me does violence to self
all hating me love death

Wisdom

2010-01-30T23:17:00.000-08:00

I have to do some immediate work on Proverbs 8 - as usual my rendering is structural and therefore married to the poet's sort order. Do not read poetry at speed. If there is only one thing I have learned from translating, it is to slow down and read a little rather than to skim and fail a lot. In what follows grammar is green - other colours mark the repetition of a word - the notes show an abstract form of the parallels in the poetry. It is easily seen that the poem is intricately wrought.

Wisdom is of course one of the sefirot. Many others are mentioned in this poem: understanding, knowledge, strength, determination, rule ... I do love numbers too (sfr means to enumerate) but that's not why I am reading this today - we are to read it on Monday at Bible Study - and this is my preparation. What does this chapter tell us about the Lord - the Spirit as teacher?

	a literal order translation	notes on the structure
א הֲלֹא-חָכְמָה תִקְרָא וּתְבוּנָה תִּתֵּן קוֹלָהּ	does not wisdom call and understanding give her voice	does not a b \|\| [does not ] a' b' a\|\|a' and b\|\|b' or read understanding as receiving from wisdom
ב בְּרֹאשׁ-מְרֹמִים עֲלֵי-דָרֶךְ בֵּית נְתִיבוֹת נִצָּבָה	from the hilltops on the way where the roads meet she takes her stand	Notice the three parallel places - i.e. everywhere in the country c\|\|c'\|\|c'' a d (lit - a house of roads = roadhouse?)
ג לְיַד-שְׁעָרִים לְפִי-קָרֶת מְבוֹא פְתָחִים תָּרֹנָּה	right by the gates at the mouth of the town from the entry of the doors she sings	here hear again three places - wisdom is not excluded from the city e\|\|e'\|\|e'' a f
ד אֲלֵיכֶם אִישִׁים אֶקְרָא וְקוֹלִי אֶל-בְּנֵי אָדָם	to all humanity I call my voice to the children of humus	g e(a) \|\| e'(a') g' the plural is oddly regular! (I did not render the conjunction)
ה הָבִינוּ פְתָאיִם עָרְמָה וּכְסִילִים הָבִינוּ לֵב	understand, O naive, shrewdness O simpletons, understand heart	b h i \|\| h' b i'
ו שִׁמְעוּ כִּי-נְגִידִים אֲדַבֵּר וּמִפְתַּח שְׂפָתַי מֵישָׁרִים	hear for princely things I will speak and from the parting of my lips things that are upright	j k a \|\| a' k'
ז כִּי-אֱמֶת יֶהְגֶּה חִכִּי וְתוֹעֲבַת שְׂפָתַי רֶשַׁע	for truth I muse with my gums and an abomination to my lips is wickedness	l a a'\|\|not a a'' not l
ח בְּצֶדֶק כָּל-אִמְרֵי-פִי אֵין בָּהֶם נִפְתָּל וְעִקֵּשׁ	of righteousness are all the words of my mouth there is nothing in them twisted or perverse	l a a'\|\|not a'' not l//
ט כֻּלָּם נְכֹחִים לַמֵּבִין וִישָׁרִים לְמֹצְאֵי דָעַת	all of them transparent to one who understands and upright to those who find knowledge	a k'' b\|\|k b'
י קְחוּ-מוּסָרִי וְאַל-כָּסֶף וְדַעַת מֵחָרוּץ נִבְחָר	receive my discipline and not silver and knowledge rather than gold of choice	j' a''' not m\|\|b' not m'
יא כִּי-טוֹבָה חָכְמָה מִפְּנִינִים וְכָל-חֲפָצִים לֹא יִשְׁווּ-בָהּ	for better is wisdom than rubies and all things to be desired are not to be compared with her	n comp a-o\|\|o' not comp a
יב אֲנִי-חָכְמָה שָׁכַנְתִּי עָרְמָה וְדַעַת מְזִמּוֹת אֶמְצָא	I wisdom live with shrewdness and knowledge of purpose I find out	a p i \|\| b'' p' - KJV witty inventions is hilarious!
יג יִרְאַת יְהוָה שְׂנֹאת-רָע גֵּאָה וְגָאוֹן וְדֶרֶךְ רָע וּפִי תַהְפֻּכוֹת שָׂנֵאתִי	the fear of יְהוָה to hate evil pride, arrogance, the way of evil and the mouth of falsehoods I hate	q _ r s t\|\|t'...s
יד לִי-עֵצָה וְתוּשִׁיָּה אֲנִי בִינָה לִי גְבוּרָה	to me is counsel and success I am understanding to me is strength	a u v\|\|a b\|\|a v'
טו בִּי מְלָכִים יִמְלֹכוּ וְרֹזְנִים יְחֹקְקוּ צֶדֶק	by me kings reign and rulers decree righteousness	a w w\|\|w' w' a
טז בִּי שָׂרִים יָשֹׂרוּ וּנְדִיבִים כָּל-שֹׁפְטֵי צֶדֶק	by me leaders lead and princes, all the judges of righteousness	a w''\|\|w''' w'''' a
יז אֲנִי אהביה (אֹהֲבַי) אֵהָב וּמְשַׁחֲרַי יִמְצָאֻנְנִי	I - all those loving me - I love and those who seek me will find me	(written) loving her and this is a real identifiable piel! a participle
יח עֹשֶׁר-וְכָבוֹד אִתִּי הוֹן עָתֵק וּצְדָקָה	wealth and glory are with me substance of old and righteousness	עָתֵק rare superb works, movable, durable, ancient -
יט טוֹב פִּרְיִי מֵחָרוּץ וּמִפָּז וּתְבוּאָתִי מִכֶּסֶף נִבְחָר	better is my fruit than gold or fine gold and my coming than silver of choice	חָרוּץ is a very strange metaphor for gold - cutting? see above 'm' - they are part of Job's Leviathan! (Job 41:30) his underparts are sharp potsherds he spreads cuttings (חָרוּץ) in the dirt
כ בְּאֹרַח-צְדָקָה אֲהַלֵּךְ בְּתוֹךְ נְתִיבוֹת מִשְׁפָּט	in the path of righteousness I walk in the middle of the roads of judgment	x y a \|\| x' y' I have run out of letters but you probably get the point already!
כא לְהַנְחִיל אֹהֲבַי יֵשׁ וְאֹצְרֹתֵיהֶם אֲמַלֵּא	to allot to those loving me what is and their storehouses I will fill	to them who received him gave he power to become children of God
כב יְהוָה קָנָנִי רֵאשִׁית דַּרְכּוֹ קֶדֶם מִפְעָלָיו מֵאָז	יְהוָה acquired me as the beginning of his way before his works of old	acquire - cf Ruth 4:10, beginning - cf Genesis 1:1
כג מֵעוֹלָם נִסַּכְתִּי מֵרֹאשׁ מִקַּדְמֵי-אָרֶץ	from everlasting I was established from the beginning from before earth	נסך to be anointed; to pour out as a libation
כד בְּאֵין-תְּהֹמוֹת חוֹלָלְתִּי בְּאֵין מַעְיָנוֹת נִכְבַּדֵּי-מָיִם	when there were no depths I was begotten when there were no fountains heavy with water	cf Genesis 1:2
כה בְּטֶרֶם הָרִים הָטְבָּעוּ לִפְנֵי גְבָעוֹת חוֹלָלְתִּי	earlier than the mountains were sunk in the presence of the hills I was begotten
כו עַד-לֹא עָשָׂה אֶרֶץ וְחוּצוֹת וְרֹאשׁ עַפְרוֹת תֵּבֵל	as yet he had not made earth, the outside or the beginning of the dust of the world
כז בַּהֲכִינוֹ שָׁמַיִם שָׁם אָנִי בְּחֻקוֹ חוּג עַל-פְּנֵי תְהוֹם	when he established the heavens, there was I when he inscribed a circle on the face of the deep	it's the same establish as psalm 90
כח בְּאַמְּצוֹ שְׁחָקִים מִמָּעַל בַּעֲזוֹז עִינוֹת תְּהוֹם	when he encouraged the clouds above to strengthen the fountains of the deep
כט בְּשׂוּמוֹ לַיָּם חֻקּוֹ וּמַיִם לֹא יַעַבְרוּ-פִיו בְּחוּקוֹ מוֹסְדֵי אָרֶץ	when he set to the sea his decree that the waters should not pass over his bidding when he inscribed the foundations of earth	his bidding - lit. his mouth
ל וָאֶהְיֶה אֶצְלוֹ אָמוֹן וָאֶהְיֶה שַׁעֲשׁוּעִים יוֹם יוֹם מְשַׂחֶקֶת לְפָנָיו בְּכָל-עֵת	then I was beside him - faithful and I was his delights day by day at play in his presence at all times	presence - lit faces another identifiable piel participle
לא מְשַׂחֶקֶת בְּתֵבֵל אַרְצוֹ וְשַׁעֲשֻׁעַי אֶת-בְּנֵי אָדָם	at play in the world, his earth and delighting in the children of humus
לב וְעַתָּה בָנִים שִׁמְעוּ-לִי וְאַשְׁרֵי דְּרָכַי יִשְׁמֹרוּ	so now children, hear me for happy they that keep my ways
לג שִׁמְעוּ מוּסָר וַחֲכָמוּ וְאַל-תִּפְרָעוּ	hear discipline and be wise and do not let go
לד אַשְׁרֵי אָדָם שֹׁמֵעַ-לִי לִשְׁקֹד עַל-דַּלְתֹתַי יוֹם יוֹם לִשְׁמֹר מְזוּזֹת פְּתָחָי	happy is the human who hears me keeping watch at my portals daily guarding the posts of my doors
לה כִּי מֹצְאִי מצאי (מָצָא) חַיִּים וַיָּפֶק רָצוֹן מֵיְהוָה	for who finds me finds life and will obtain acceptance of יְהוָה
לו וְחֹטְאִי חֹמֵס נַפְשׁוֹ כָּל-מְשַׂנְאַי אָהֲבוּ מָוֶת	but who sins against me does violence to self all hating me love death

Kaf

2010-01-28T19:34:00.000-08:00

ך כ
Kaf occurs frequently in its prefix and suffix roles. In its final form, besides being the last letter of some common words like king מלך and way דרך and walk הלך, it is the ubiquitous second person singular personal pronoun suffix.

Ruth 1:15 has many examples of ך
here it is twice as the second person singular pronoun as object of the verb

וַתֹּאמֶר רוּת אַל-תִּפְגְּעִי-בִי לְעָזְבֵךְ לָשׁוּב מֵאַחֲרָיִך

vàto)mer rvut )àl-tipg`y-by l`azbék lashvub mé)àxarayik
and Ruth said, do not force me to leave you, to turn back from following you

and in the next example it is as the last letter of the root ילך - the first occurrence is second person singular feminine, the second occurrence first person singular (both imperfect). The final form appears in the second instance since the word ends there. The non-final form appears in the first instance because of the feminine suffix that is part of the imperfect. (Note also the first letter of the common conjunction, ki, indicating cause or reason or just a particular form of coordination.)

כִּי אֶל-אֲשֶׁר תֵּלְכִי אֵלֵךְ וּבַאֲשֶׁר תָּלִינִי אָלִין
ky )el-)asher télky )élék vubà)asher talyny )alyn
for wherever you go I will go and in whatever you stop over I stop over

and in these two statements, it is the possessive second person singular pronoun

עַמֵּךְ עַמִּי וֵאלֹהַיִךְ אֱלֹהָי
`àmék `àmy vé)lohàyik )elohay
your people my people your God my God

I have not colored green all the grammatical letters above - I wonder how quickly recognition will become automatic.

Now to look at the prefix Kaf in Ruth, here are some of its uses. The first is in Ruth 1:4

וַיֵּשְׁבוּ שָׁם כְּעֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים

vàyéshbvu sham k`ser shanym
and they lived there about 10 years

Usually I think of the prefixed kaf as the word 'like' or 'as' but as with all prepositions, it refuses to stay in one box.

יעשה יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם חֶסֶד
כַּאֲשֶׁר עֲשִׂיתֶם עִם-הַמֵּתִים וְעִמָּדִי
y`aseh yy `imakem xsed
kà)asher `asytem `im-hàmétym v`imady

may יְהוָה deal with you with mercy

as you have dealt with those who died and with me

In its role as 'as' it is perilously close to the separate conjunction ki, also used in Ruth of course and very common - about 27 times in this story alone, as common as the use of 'for' in English. In the above verse, unmarked, there is another use of kaf as a grammatical letter - the first letter of the suffix כֶם meaning you plural masculine or in this case the possible dual feminine. - Let's wait for mem and nun before pursuing this lead. I don't want to make things up without examples.

Two Powers?

2010-01-24T09:27:00.000-08:00

There's lots of talk about two powers in the created order. I had not come across this phrase before. And it strikes me as wrong. I have not personally translated the verses M. Heiser is using for his argument, but my ears are blocked almost immediately. I prefer Harold Bloom's reading of Yahweh and Jesus than a kind of two-headed positive dualism. Traditional +/- dualism is also rejected in the OT. The archetypical rejection for me is the absence of the accuser in the epilogue of Job. One might also cite Revelation - the accuser of our companions is cast down. This makes Job a nice type of Jesus. But - remember this - I don't read theology, but I can't help doing it.

Over the past two months since a time of a strange command to me, I have been frequently heard to mutter - 'I don't know' as if I niftily listen to a silent question but know not the answer, the future, or how to respond. So I say to myself - am I under test? Who is the tester? Pick your power! I live through it with doing, waiting, hoping - if in fear, I hear - do not be afraid.

Some time later I wrote this scribble:

The Judge of all the earth is in human form.
Will the Judge of all the earth do wrong?
If you are the judge of all the earth,
why do you do what is hateful?
The world is telling you what is hateful to itself.
You say: the world rejected the Judge of all the earth.
No, it did not and does not.
It just knows when you are on a power trip.

What is the world that you have so judged it?
This thing was not done in a corner.
You say: are you greater than the Beloved disciple?
Not at all - does he speak of a second power?
Perhaps as world - the things of the world...
But any negative second power is defeated
because you the Judge of all the earth have in human form
expressed and lived the question of wholeness before all.

Psalms 90 and 91

2010-01-19T14:49:00.000-08:00

Any thoughts on these psalms - please join or kick off a discussion here.

Early Morning Thought

2010-01-17T16:37:00.000-08:00

The New Testament story in Greek, in its canonical form with all its argued uncertainties, the whole thing, is a translation, on behalf of the Gentiles, of the Hebrew experience of election. The Jews are the people who found these words. They are not the only people to have known election. The joy of their story is expressed throughout the Old Testament. How then should we view the anointing of these Scriptures both old and new? Not as magic. Fully human. Sufficient to reveal the purpose. Do other traditions help? To the extent that our shared humanity teaches us to listen.

Later - I was so moved by the post-communion hymn today. Four verses of Deck thyself my soul with gladness. It is as if my Lord was reminding me of the overabundance of his goodness in translation to the Greeks and to the English also.

1	Deck thyself, my soul, with gladness, leave the gloomy haunts of sadness, come into the daylight's splendor, there with joy thy praises render unto him whose grace unbounded hath this wondrous banquet founded; high o'er all the heavens he reigneth, yet to dwell with thee he deigneth.	3	Sun, who all my life dost brighten; Light, who dost my soul enlighten; Joy, the sweetest man e'er knoweth; Fount, whence all my being floweth: at thy feet I cry, my Maker, let me a fit partaker of this blessed food from heaven, for our good, thy glory, given.
2	Now I sink before thee lowly, filled with joy most deep and holy, as with trembling awe and wonder on thy mighty acts I ponder; how, by mystery surrounded, depths no man hath ever sounded, none may dare to pierce unbidden secrets that with thee are hidden.	4	Jesus, Bread of life, I pray thee, let me gladly here obey thee; never to my hurt invited, be thy love with love requited; from this banquet let me measure, Lord, how vast and deep its treasure; through the gifts thou here dost give me, as thy guest in heaven receive me.

Words: Johann Franck, 1645; trans. Catherine Winkworth, 1863 Music: Schmücke dich

If my early morning thought is a germ of truth, then I need a lot of work on my understanding of the NT. In particular, I need to note the connection of the Eucharist with the anointing and election in the Old Testament. After all, he gives us his body to eat and his blood to drink. This is more sweet even than words.

Prophets and kings desired to know these things.

Yod

2010-01-16T23:30:00.000-08:00

י
When I highlight yod in the book of Ruth, I get a mass of colour in every verse. Tet occurs a very few times in comparison.Yod is as frequent as vav but where vav begins only one root, itself, yod is the first letter of many roots.

I wonder how many verses we need to explore to get a representative sample of the functions of yod. I have picked one - Ruth 4:4 - let's see where it takes us. I have retained the transcription - just don't depend on it - cover it if you need it and learn to read the block letters. How many yods? How many functions of yod?

	English	Hebrew	Transcription
1	and I myself had said I will disclose in your ear to say	וַאֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי אֶגְלֶה אָזְנְךָ לֵאמֹר	và)any )amàrty )egleh )aznka lé)mor
2	will you buy before those sitting here	קְנֵה נֶגֶד הַיֹּשְׁבִים	qnéh neged hàyoshbym
3	and before these elders of my people	וְנֶגֶד זִקְנֵי עַמִּי	vneged ziqnéy `àmy
4	if you will redeem, redeem and if he will not redeem,	אִם-תִּגְאַל גְּאָל וְאִם-לֹא יִגְאַל	)im-tig)àl g)al v)im-lo) yig)àl
5	tell me and I will know	הַגִּידָה לִּי וְאֵדְעָה	hàgydah ly v)éd`ah
6	for there is none except you to redeem	כִּי אֵין זוּלָתְךָ לִגְאוֹל	ky )éyn zvulatka lig)vol
7	and I myself after you	וְאָנֹכִי אַחֲרֶיךָ	v)anoky )àxareyka
8	and he said I myself will redeem	וַיֹּאמֶר אָנֹכִי אֶגְאָל	vàyo)mer )anoky )eg)al

In line 1 we have a yod that is part of אֲנִי the standalone first person singular pronoun. The long form of this pronoun אָנֹכִי appears twice more (lines 7 and 8). I am wondering if, in this context of the meeting at the gate, this word has legal connotations.

In line 1 still there is a yod as the first person suffix of the qal perfect. In line two, those sitting here - or the inhabitants יֹּשְׁבִים from ישב shows the masculine plural (in which yod takes part) and the use of yod as an opening consonant. (Note its very own dagesh also.) In line 3 the two trailing yods of זִקְנֵי עַמִּי have different functions. The one on עַמִּי is a first person possessive pronoun. The other one (find it) is an abbreviated masculine plural which is often shortened or implied in a construct relationship - when two nouns are 'joined' to each other in succession.

In line 4 we have the function of yod in יִגְאַל as the third person singular masculine of the prefix conjugation, the imperfect.

Then in line 5 we have two new functions of yod - whew. The first is its appearance in the conjugation of נגד. This is in the word הַגִּידָה, the hiphil imperative. What's this - grammatical letters inserting themselves into the middle of a word! Perhaps this is an instance of a mater lectionis, a reader's helper. I can't find the form in Lambdin - but I do see some yods in some of the paradigms and they look like vowels. The second use of yod in this line is its attachment to the preposition לִּי as if he might have said 'say so to me'.

I had conniptions for a moment that tet was going to steal a place on the grammatical team - but I don't think so. But it is not a typo on page 277 of Putnam's online grammar. [Note that ט tet sometimes does replace ת taf after metathesis in the hithpael of verbs whose first letter is the sibilant צ tsade. This is the only case I have found of a true secondment of a letter from team 2 to team 1.] Again I have not found mention of this in other grammars that I have to hand.

In line 5 also, there is a missing yod, for as the first character of a root, it sometimes disappears in the imperfect (ידע is the root of אֵדְעָה). This is a subordinate clause and could be rendered 'so that I may know'.

In line 6 the two yods are just parts of the word - both acting as vowels really. In line 7, the yod appears to soften the link between the preposition and the pronoun. Line 8 has one yod as part of the preterite (imperfect with vav in the story line).

It seems that one verse was all we needed for this representative sample of the functions of yod. With 14 yods, 15 if you count the missing one, (check my counting), we have yod as a consonant, as a vowel, as a person pronoun, as the ending of the first person imperfect of the verb, as the masculine plural (with mem but also without) and as a smoothing of the sound between a preposition and its pronoun.

Well, well the Old Bishop in New Shoes?

2010-01-16T20:45:00.000-08:00

I was testing backup and things - and restore simply doesn't work in Blogger - get a crazy message - bX-qm5h6h - I know how backup and restore with XML is tricky - too many escape sequences sometimes. But blogger's doesn't work. So I explored the XML a bit and discovered a tag that went on for ever with the entirety of its content escaped - probably exceeded a tag limit somewhere. I scanned some content to see if the text is backed up - and it is - pretty well as are all retained comments.

While I was exploring the content - what should pop out but a comment in 2007 by nt Wrong - what? He didn't exist in those days. Well I will keep his current identity secret. But the current NTW was a prolific commenter in those days. And his secret is not secret.

I don't miss NT Wrong or his imitators. But I miss Iyov. There was a person who loved and encouraged. And where is scott of the lower case and Kathy?

Tet - don't leave me out

2010-01-16T11:02:00.000-08:00

ט

Why a second 't' in the middle of the letters? This I do not know. Why are there three s's and ts to boot? If there were not then the division into two groups of 11 would not work! There would be fewer letters to form the second team. Samech, Tet, Tsade sidelined! How unfair. This turned out to be a much longer post than I anticipated. The highlighted word is significant in Biblical teaching.

In Ruth there are almost more ט letters in the numbering system (9, 15, 16, 19 all have tet as part of the symbol) than there are in the text! But there are a few words - two stand out in particular: טוֹב + יָטַב five times and לָקַט to glean - which gets 10 hits in chapter 2 of Ruth out of of 37 in the Bible. Gleaning and harvest must be a theme of chapter 2 in this book. It sounds as if the story-teller is stressing the gleaning.

So here is the grammar of ט in Ruth. From it we see several forms of the verb, לָקַט. Let us first green the letters that form the affixes.

אֵלְכָה-נָּא הַשָּׂדֶה וַאֲלַקֳּטָה בַשִּׁבֳּלִים

)élkah-na) hàsadeh và)alàqa+ah bàshibalym
let me go please to the field and glean grain

Here we have a subordinate use of the imperfect - וַאֲלַקֳּטָה In English this might be rendered with "in order that I may glean" or "and glean" or "so I can glean" or "to glean" and probably even the literal "and I will glean" though this one depends on recognizing and as a conditional pronoun (which it can be in some languages). Is it frequent that the imperfect is used in this way?

וַתֵּלֶךְ וַתָּבוֹא וַתְּלַקֵּט
)élkah-na) hàsadeh và)alàqa+ah bàshibalym
and she went and she came and she gleaned

This reminds me of Caesar's veni, vidi, vinci - we have three first person imperfect verbs in a row connected by vav - each one preterite or 'converted' to the perfect. Each one is a completed part of the story.

וַתֹּאמֶר אֲלַקֳּטָה-נָּא וְאָסַפְתִּי בָעֳמָרִים אַחֲרֵי הַקּוֹצְרִים
vàto)mer )alàqa+ah-na) v)asàpty ba`amarym )àxaréy hàqvocrym

and she said, please let me glean and gather among the sheaves after the reapers

Now we have the same word as in the first example this time in reported rather than direct speech. The reporting has a feel of accuracy to it because of the repetition of 'please' and the following usage of vav introducing a subordinate clause. In my reading, she is already gleaning from permission granted by the lad. Boaz will confirm his decision and the implied delegated authority within the social reality of the time. (That reality is noted in the blessing and response - if the Lord is with them, surely they too can make good decisions.)

אַל-תֵּלְכִי לִלְקֹט בְּשָׂדֶה אַחֵר

)àl-télky lilqo+ bsadeh )àxér

do not go to glean in the field of another

Here again two consecutive verbs, the second as infinitive with a preceding preposition. The nature of this commandment is to confirm security. This will take some more pondering. The opening אַל-תֵּלְכִי is not an imperative but has the force of a strong invitation. Its context is elaborated on in the next verse - which we must leave until it is time for the story. (Aren't you impressed? I am actually reading this letter by letter before telling the story! Usually I act first and think later.)

וְטָבַלְתְּ פִּתֵּךְ בַּחֹמֶץ

v+abàlt piték bàxomec

and dip your piece in the vinegar

I mustn't leave this one out - what will be the significance of the shared meal. This is a good restaurant. Hot bread and dip at the meal. A second person feminine ending of the qal perfect - but preceded by the vav, a subordinate aspect yielding a present or future continuing action rather than a past event.

וַתָּקָם לְלַקֵּט וַיְצַו בֹּעַז אֶת-נְעָרָיו לֵאמֹר גַּם בֵּין הָעֳמָרִים תְּלַקֵּט
vàtaqam llàqé+ vàycàv bo`àz )et-n`arayv lé)mor gàm béyn ha`amarym tlàqé+

and she arose to glean and Boaz commanded his lads even between the sheaves let her glean

Back to gleaning - she arose - 3rd person feminine singular imperfect - preterite - the story continues. The glean following לְלַקֵּט is again infinitive with the preposition (though prepositions are not always used with the infinitive as they are in English). And Boaz commands his lads to make her job easy. The final glean in this phrase is taken as jussive - third person 'imperative'.

תָּשֹׁלּוּ לָהּ מִן-הַצְּבָתִים וַעֲזַבְתֶּם וְלִקְּטָה

tasholvu lah min-hàcbatym và`azàbtem vliq+ah

draw out for her from the bundles and leave and she will glean

Again we have two consecutive verbs at the end of the sentence, the second of which is the desired subordinate consequence of the action commanded by the first. It would be rendered "in order that she may glean".

וַתְּלַקֵּט בַּשָּׂדֶה עַד-הָעָרֶב וַתַּחְבֹּט אֵת אֲשֶׁר-לִקֵּטָה

vàtlàqé+ bàsadeh `àd-ha`areb vàtàxbo+ )ét )asher-liqé+ah
and she gleaned in the field till evening and she beat out what she gleaned

The story continues - third person feminine preterite at the beginning of the sentence and third person feminine perfect at the end. (OK it's piel - but I can't tell the difference between piel and qal.)

וַתֵּרֶא חֲמוֹתָהּ אֵת אֲשֶׁר-לִקֵּטָה

vàtére) xamvotah )ét )asher-liqé+ah

and her mother-in-law saw what she gleaned

The piel is repeated for her mother in law.

אֵיפֹה לִקַּטְתְּ הַיּוֹם וְאָנָה עָשִׂית

)éypoh liqà+t hàyvom v)anah `asyt

where did you glean today and where work

Two instances of the second person singular qal - the taf suffix form without the following 'a' vowel.

וַתִּדְבַּק בְּנַעֲרוֹת בֹּעַז לְלַקֵּט עַד-כְּלוֹת קְצִיר-הַשְּׂעֹרִים וּקְצִיר הַחִטִּים

vàto)mer na`amy )el-rvut kàlatah +vob bity ky téc)y `im-nà`arvotayv vlo) yipg`vu-bak bsadeh )àxér

so she stayed close with the lasses of Boaz to glean to the completion of the barley harvest and the wheat harvest

There a ט in the wheat too. And here are the uses of good. I will leave these for exercises in colouring and analysis. Copy the Hebrew by hand on paper and colour the letters of the grammar team. Which are verbs, which implied verbless single word clauses, which just an adverb.

טוֹב בִּתִּי כִּי תֵצְאִי עִם-נַעֲרוֹתָיו
+vob bity ky téc)y `im-nà`arvotayv

good my daughter to go out with his lasses

בִּתִּי הֲלֹא אֲבַקֶּשׁ-לָךְ מָנוֹחַ אֲשֶׁר יִיטַב-לָךְ

bity halo) )abàqesh-lak manvoàx )asher yy+àb-lak
my daughter do I not seek for you rest that it may be good for you

וַיֹּאמֶר בְּרוּכָה אַתְּ לַיהוָה בִּתִּי הֵיטַבְתְּ חַסְדֵּךְ

vàyo)mer brvukah )àt là-yy bity héy+àbt xàsdék

and he said you are blessed of יהוָה my daughter you have made good your mercy

אִם-יִגְאָלֵךְ טוֹב יִגְאָל

)im-yig)alék +vob yig)al

if he will redeem, good, let him redeem

כִּי כַלָּתֵךְ אֲשֶׁר-אֲהֵבַתֶךְ יְלָדַתּוּ אֲשֶׁר-הִיא טוֹבָה לָךְ מִשִּׁבְעָה בָּנִים
for your daughter-in-law who loves you and bore him is better to you than seven sons

Are those transcriptions useful? I am almost getting to the point where I can read them, but I hate reading transcriptions because I am never quite sure what they are putting in or leaving out in terms of sound. Besides you have to read forwards and backwards at the same time to understand them in relation to the Hebrew letters!

Translation Challenge

2010-01-14T17:20:00.000-08:00

The colorful God Didn't Say That blog has issues a challenge for Isaiah 28:16.

This is verse I lost years ago. I remembered it as 'the righteous are not in a hurry'. The sense of the verse to me relates to the idea of 'waiting'. It is critical skill in many contexts. Some problems go away without any action being taken. Some need to mature before intervention is going to be effective.

So here is the section of text:

לָכֵן כֹּה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה

הִנְנִי יִסַּד בְּצִיֹּון אָבֶן
אֶבֶן בֹּחַן

פִּנַּת יִקְרַת מוּסָד מוּסָּד

הַמַּאֲמִין לֹא יָחִישׁ

The first thing I note is that יָקַר is used 3 times in the corpus (Isaiah 13:12, 43:4). בֹּחַן is a unique usage of בָּחַן, to try or prove, examine, scrutinise. Joseph uses this word when proving his brothers (Genesis 42:15-16). Such proving is a theme in Job, the Psalms and Jeremiah. Next within this passage there are some repeated words. מוּסָד and אֶבֶן and they are not surrounding anything - just repeated twice in a row (though, on second thought, it is better to see יסד as repeating twice and surrounding the center - the center being 'tried and precious') . Also in this passage we get a proclamation from אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה the 'Lord God' or Adonai Hashem or My Lord Hashem. Also to be noted is that we do not have 'behold' but rather 'look at me'. That word hinneh seems to have a personal pronoun attached to it. I wouldn't throw it away - at least not till I had seen examples where it is a throwaway. The last word - יָחִישׁ - make haste is used frequently in the Psalms for the Lord making haste to help - so if Hashem is hasting, the believer need not. Job uses the word in his own defense (Job 31:5) in contrast to Zophar who tumbles over himself to say little (Job 20:2).

Therefore - thus says my Lord Hashem
Look at me - I establish in Zion a rock
a proven rock
a precious corner foundation established
the one believing will not be in a hurry

Heth - a strong guttural

2010-01-14T16:36:00.000-08:00

ח
This strong guttural ח is difficult to see and distinguish from ה in small text. Why would a language need all these letters that sound the same? It will become obvious that they are two very distinct letters. In contrast to ה, the letter ח does not take part in grammatical affixes and suffixes. The sound of ח occurs in Ruth in bread and mercy, the bread of Bethlehem בֵּית לֶחֶם and the mercy חֶסֶד of the covenant. Well perhaps I should not forget the name of מַחְלוֹן or the first הָאַחַת of the Moabite wives. The distinction between the two similar 'h' letters is clearly seen in the following three word snippet

לָתֵת לָהֶם לָחֶם

latét lahem laxm

to give to them bread

The word in the middle לָהֶם is 'to them' - preposition + pronoun affixed to it, comprised entirely from the set of 11 letters that take part in such close encounters of the grammatical kind. The final word לָחֶם is a noun all by itself without any grammatical affixes at all. The first word is from נתן - to give with only one letter left from the root due to the tendency of nun's to disappear.

Perhaps the central word of the Old Testament, a word meaning covenant mercy, lovingkindness, or even reproof, is this one, חֶסֶד that occurs three times in Ruth

יַעַשׂ יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם חֶסֶד

ya`ash yy `imakem xsed

may יְהוָה deal with you with mercy

That letter ח plays a part in rest also, a word used twice in Ruth.

יִתֵּן יְהוָה לָכֶם וּמְצֶאןָ מְנוּחָה

yitén yy lakem vumce)na mnvuxah

may יְהוָה give to you and may you find rest

and ח is part of mother in law not to mention various other nouns and long prepositions

וַתִּשַּׁק עָרְפָּה לַחֲמוֹתָהּ
and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law
vàtishàq `arpah làxamvotah
בִּתְחִלַּת קְצִיר שְׂעֹרִים
bitxilàt qcyr s`orym
at the commencement of the harvest of barley
חֶלְקַת הַשָּׂדֶה לְבֹעַז

xlqàt hàsadeh lbo`àz
on the part of the field belonging to Boaz
וְהָלַכְתְּ אַחֲרֵיהֶן
vhalàkt )àxaréyhen
and you go behind them
אֲשֶׁר-בָּאת לַחֲסוֹת תַּחַת-כְּנָפָיו
)asher-ba)t làxasvot tàxàt-knapayv
to whom you came to take refuge under his wings

But the words that begin with het - mercy and grace and life - not a bad lot

אַחַר אֲשֶׁר אֶמְצָא-חֵן בְּעֵינָיו
)àxàr )asher )emca)-xén b`éynayv
after the one in whose eyes I will find favor

אֶת-הַחַיִּים וְאֶת-הַמֵּתִים

)et-hàxàyym v)et-hàmétym
for the living and the dead

Tet ט is yet to come.

The son of a friend - first solo flight

2010-01-09T17:54:00.000-08:00

Check it out here

Zayin - a non grammatical letter

2010-01-09T11:22:00.000-08:00

ז
O how impatient - to think you can do three letters at once, zot! - as if non-grammatical letters are unimportant. You can't. חט will have to have their own posts as well. Why are you so anxious to get to the next letter of the first 11 when you know so little about anything? And ז is the first sibilant. What does grammar surround if not the substance?

Did I learn English grammar at one go? No - it took years and lots of repetition and I used the language with native unconscious feel and without the self-referential absorption of study. Sounds just were - neither spelled, nor analysed, nor even pondered.

There are some important words in Ruth that begin with these three letters. One at a time, here are some examples. The first usage for ז is the word for old. In this verse too is a form of construct of the infinitive of 'to be'. Besides vav, I think that the construct is another way of connecting words and I wonder to what extent it happens with sounds that are easy to elide.

כִּי זָקַנְתִּי מִהְיוֹת לְאִישׁ

ky zaqànty mihyvot l)ysh

for I am too old to have a husband

The elders זָקֵן occurs 4 times in chapter 4 balancing this one bitter aged woman in chapter 1. E.g. in this phrase from Ruth 4:4

וְנֶגֶד זִקְנֵי עַמִּי

vneged ziqnéy `àmy

and before the elders of my people

The pointers, demonstrative pronouns, זֹאת and זֶּה occur. There is a collection of these at the end of chapter 1 and the beginning of chapter 2.

וַתֹּאמַרְנָה הֲזֹאת נָעֳמִי

vàto)màrnah hazo)t na`amy

and the women said - is this Naomi?

לְמִי הַנַּעֲרָה הַזֹּאת

lmy hànà`arah hàzo)t

to whom the lass this one?

זֶה שִׁבְתָּהּ הַבַּיִת מְעָט

zeh shibtah hàbàyit m`a+

this sitting of her in the house a little

וְגַם לֹא תַעֲבוּרִי מִזֶּה

vgàm lo) tà`abvury mizeh

and even do not stray from this one

In reading the BDB section on this word, we might be tempted to think that in other Semitic languages, ז became a member of the first 11, playing a serious grammatical role even as a relative pronoun! There are other letters one might second to the team as well - like ח heth in order to include all the stand-alone pronouns in the grammatical word group. But I don't want to throw out Saadya's 10th century thesis too soon even if I have identified the wrong teams! Splitting 22 letters evenly into 2 groups has already been too useful a help to the eye and ear to aid understanding of this very foreign force.

The sibilant zayin plays an internal role in several words in this story - notably Bo'az, בֹּעַז, which of course occurs frequently. Is this name related to 'ear'? No - the ear is the slowest to grow, and this word might mean quickness.

וַאֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי אֶגְלֶה אָזְנְךָ

và)any )amàrty )egleh )aznka

and I myself will disclose in your ear

There are more words with zayin in Ruth related to seed and winnowing. I will leave them for a discourse on the story as a whole some day - perhaps concerning the fruitful harvest that comes from a suitable redemption.

Post number 666

2010-01-06T18:25:00.001-08:00

Haha - the last one missed by one. Rabbi Wolf is one I almost always read - here it is - the digital age and the presence of Hashem. Read it and enjoy.

Where were you when I created him gay?

2010-01-06T14:25:00.000-08:00

There has been a conversation here which like the dialogue in Job has multiple sides. There is little hope that people will stop misreading the creation narratives or the law. It is part of our growth to read and misread. Those who read wrong must learn to read right through the mercy or misery of others, and in the meanwhile they will dig themselves in as Eliphaz and his pals did to defend a view of God that is not how God works.

When Hashem responds, he is clear on two things. He is the creator even if creation is overbearing and brutal in its loveliness. And, secondly, he is the one who invites Leviathan and Behemoth to play. It is this that finally tips the balance for Job - who was right all along in his insistence that the Deuteronomic curses were applied to him in spite of his wholesome behaviour. Perhaps he had not known his own inner beast. Job learns from God as we also must - 'they shall all be taught by God'. And 'you have no need that any man should teach you'.

Part of the problem is whether we make ourselves judges and stop Jesus from saving people in the way he chooses to save them - and that includes our being saved as well. Why do we have this 'problem' of homosexual behaviour? Because we are to learn from it especially how to avoid some kinds of judgment about creation and redemption. Do I determine how God can act? How can I obey the faith in this situation? I can certainly get as overheated and allow myself to be as misread as anyone else.

There are those who say I have given up and that I should judge this 'sin' their way. It is not my research into the texts that stops me reading their way. Moreover, for me to succumb to argument would be to give in to wrong answers. I would be as those who search the scriptures like Eliphaz but fail to see the Beloved portrayed in them. Search the scriptures, by all means (literally, historically, philosophically, theologically) - but it is not in our laws and logic nor in our force that we find eternal life.

On the wisdom of praying

2010-01-03T19:32:00.000-08:00

When people tear into each other, it is always wise to pray. Take your time. Tearing into each other can be devastating even in the online world. One might be terminally embarrassed.

I am reading a lovely book - The Sisters of Sinai, by Janet Soskice. This is a light but substantial introduction for me into the history of 19th century knowledge acquisition in Oriental studies. The particular story is the discovery of a palimpsest of the four gospels in Syriac (1892). It reads like a travelogue and so is light and enjoyable as any Grand Tour hosted by a good travel writer. But there is a serious core of introduction to Biblical Studies in the period including some hasty actions by the righteous but non-academic Presbyterian sisters, old scholars jealous of claiming credit where they think it is due, and indignant monks. Janet Soskice is our lecturer here at UVIC over the next two weeks. I may give you a lowdown on her talks. (If I can still write after all this grammar study!)

It is true to say that credit and pride, knowledge and character, and some incumbent vulnerability are all on display in the blog world. And some actions - like labeling people or deleting comments that are not spam but with which you disagree, or whatever other horrible lack of cyber-hospitality you can imagine, might actually have deleterious effects. In the early days of 'online' when email was the rage, I knew people who 'had to take some offline time' - all the energy and fear and so on.

By the way - I like being corrected. So if you see any howlers in my posts, do say so. As I noted recently, I blog to learn. I do not have the limitations that 19th century people had since I can cross the Sinai with a good book and never have to learn to sit on a camel. (We are going to Israel in October - to see the RWB perform - and to see Israel. It should be warmer than Winnipeg.)

No sooner had I posted this than a similar invitation came from Bishop Alan - nice coincidence. Also grateful for the timely plug for Janet Soskice's book from Living Wittily.

Some random thoughts

2010-01-02T11:42:00.000-08:00

Here's a quote from baritone Thomas Hampson, 2010 New Year's interview. The performer is an antenna - bringing a message from the composer. His songs of Aaron Copland were a delight to hear. (example here.) Was it Copland who said, work like a dog so you can get out of the way?

Is this the job of a translator: pick up the message meant to be performed and recreate it for today's ears? Work like a dog so you can get out of the way. Or is it harder - must the translator create the very ear it seeks?

Vav - connector par excellence

2010-01-01T22:06:00.000-08:00

ו
Vav is the shortest section
8 columns in BDB
7 taken up with itself.
Of the other 10 words,
all are proper names or
unique textual misfits
except וָו the hook.

Clearly this letter names itself and itself only. In my Hebrew Latin concordance, listing every textual meme in TNK, Vav occupies 1/2 of a column in 6000 columns - that's about 0.000001 %. It lists 3 words, vav, vzr (?) Proverbs 21:8 and vlk - without definition, thought to be a misprint for ylk, whom we have met already. How errant that word is! (Joke). And vav itself is used only in Exodus for the building of the tabernacle.

Was vav the easiest letter to engrave and so a divider that became a hook? For all its rarity in the beginning of roots, I bet that vav begins more 'words' in Scripture than any other letter! It is everywhere as connector. And it is everywhere in differing roles.

וְהָיָה הַנַּעֲרָ אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיהָ הַטִּי־נָא כַדֵּךְ וְאֶשְׁתֶּה

vehaya hana`ar 'asher 'omar 'eleyah hati-na kadek v'eshtah

and let it be that the lad! lass to whom I will say - give please your jar that I may drink

Just look at all that grammar going on in this verse! That first word, וְהָיָה some would not divide since the vav defines the verb as preterite. But it is still a vav + a verb that could be recognized on its own as 3rd person masculine singular perfect, and the phrase vav-conversive, as if we are converting perfect to imperfect, is common in the literature. It is clear that it is the backbone of narrative. And here too it is translated in the jussive, like a third person imperative.

It was tricky to find an occurrence of 'I will say' that is not preterite in an English Bible. It occurs in direct speech. (This verse should have been more fully dealt with under aleph). And note that the text has the male form of lad נַּעֲרָ instead of the female form, lass נַעֲרָה - that we have seen so clearly in Ruth. (where is the 'he'?) It is read as lass though writ as lad. And what about those hooks? - One joins the text to the surrounding narrative and the other acts as a relative pronoun!

BDB lists several meanings for vav - and, or, but, and many more. But vav is not limited to connecting phrases with each other, it also plays significant grammatical roles as suffix - third person singular possessive for instance. So in Ruth we have already seen

וְשֵׁם אִשְׁתּוֹ נָעֳמִי

veshem ishto naomi

and the name of his wife, Naomi.

and for a plural example

אַחַר אֲשֶׁר אֶמְצָא-חֵן בְּעֵינָיו

'axar 'asher 'emtsa-xen be`eynaiv

after the one in whose [his] eyes I will find favor

lit: after the one that I will find favor in eyes of him

And vav is the third person plural ending for verbs - right across the board of all paradigms in all the conjugations. So when Mahlon and Chilion die - it reads

וַיָּמֻתוּ

vayamutu

and they died.

Hey - how do you pronounce this letter - it is all over the map! ve, va, u, o, v! Sometimes it behaves like a pure vowel and sometimes like a consonant. There are rules but I am lousy with rules. I simply can't remember them at my age (about 4). I think they have to be heard rather than visually memorized so that the light dance of the vav is known against the heavier gutturals of the other letters. Vav is like the fool in the Tarot pack - everywhere and yet nowhere - except in the tabernacle.

Besides the third person plural suffix of verbs, it also is in the second person masculine plural suffix of verbs in the imperfect. (I didn't find an example in Ruth - so none given for this exercise.) And with nun (always nu) it is in the first person plural perfect. This form does not occur in Ruth but the pronoun 'our' - with the same form nu occurs in Ruth 2:20

קָרוֹב לָנוּ הָאִישׁ מִגֹּאֲלֵנוּ הוּא

qarov lanu ha'ish migo'elnu hu

near to us is the man and he our redeemer

Hopefully this will allow me to see and hear more clearly what role vav is playing in the word whether attached in front of or after the root. I think that is enough for a first pass at this complex letter. We will see it again with taf in the formation of the feminine plural of a noun. Here's one from Ruth

עִם-נַעֲרוֹתָיו

im-na`arotaiv

with his lasses -

vav in two roles. It is a remarkable letter.

He - what the!

2010-01-01T10:38:00.000-08:00

ה
Have we got a lot to learn about the fifth letter? Probably, and I won't go too deep for a first foray. 'He' is first 'the' letter. It has its own word in the interjection הא (The first few do also: Aleph is itself a thousand, bet is almost a house, gml is payback, getting what you deserve, dalet - poor, weak - with a little help from a taf.)

The first use presented of ה in the grammar books is that of the definite article. Right at the beginning of Ruth, it appears in this construct phrase:

שְׁפֹט הַשֹּׁפְטִים

shpot hashoftim

in the judging of the judges

and immediately thereafter

וְשֵׁם הָאִישׁ אֱלִימֶלֶךְ

ve shem ha'ish 'elimelek -

and the name of the man was Elimelek.

Notice how English requires the definite article twice where Hebrew has it only once. What other uses of ה are in Ruth? Early in Ruth we get the standalone pronouns, hu הוּא for he (Ruth 1:1)

הוּא וְאִשְׁתּו וּשְׁנֵי בָנָיו

hie ve'ishto ushenei banaiv

he and his wife and his two sons

and hie הִיא for she (Ruth 1:3)

וַתִּשָּׁאֵר הִיא וּשְׁנֵי בָנֶיהָ

vetisher hie ushenei baneah

and she was bereaved and her two sons

In this last phrase we find a new usage of ה as a suffix indicating 'her' rather than the vav ו that is 'his'. With Elimelek's death, the sons have become her sons that were his sons. The trailing ה is very common in this story and very often indicates an aspect of the feminine whether of conjugation - third person singular, or second or third person plural or third person singular possessive pronoun.

In Ruth 1:11 we find the second major use of ה, the interrogative

הַעוֹד-לִי בָנִים בְּמֵעַי וְהָיוּ לָכֶם לַאֲנָשִׁים

ha`od li banaim bima`i lakem l'anoshim?

are there yet to me sons in my body that they might become husbands for you?

Here ה leads the sentence and indicates a question. There are several more questions in chapter 1 ending with this one:

הֲזֹאת נָעֳמִי

hazot na`omi

Is this Naomi?

In chapter 2, besides many definitives and interrogatives, I see this strange spelling of earth -

וַתִּשְׁתַּחוּ אָרְצָה

vetishtahu artzah

and she gave him a bow on her earth

She what! She gave him a curtsy? Well, it must be referring to her in order to get a third person out of it? I see it parsed as if it were a third person feminine singular hithpael form - i.e. reflexive. And hithpael is an interesting usage of ה but in the third person feminine, it disappears and becomes a taf. And why does this verb have that extra vav on the end of it? It doesn't look like hithpael to me - that would require no vav and an additional taf תִּתשְׁתַּח. So! I think it might be 'she gave him a bow on her earth' - or something to that effect. I had hoped Campbell might say something about this word but - not a word. I must be misreading the forms. Maybe someone will answer...

Most of the rest of the uses of ה in Ruth are definite, or feminine markers, or interrogative. BDB lists 13 subdivisions of the definite. I won't list them all - maybe in a deeper, later post, though one (the vocative BDB I.i. p 208) came up in discussion of Psalm 117 here. In Ruth we have at least one instance of 'tonight' (I.c. p207) = 'the night' הַלַּיְלָה and here is another that may fit somewhere:

לְעֵת הָאֹכֶל גֹּשִׁי הֲלֹם

le`et ha'okel gishi halom

at the time of eating draw near

The eating. A generic regular occurrence made specific. As another variation, Ruth 1:17 makes death definite (I h. p208)

כִּי הַמָּוֶת יַפְרִיד בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵךְ

ki hamavet yaphrid beini ubeinek

for only death will separate me and you

In Ruth 2:18 there is a new use of ה asking for recognition

וַתֹּוצֵא וַתִּתֶּן־לָהּ אֵת אֲשֶׁר־הֹותִרָה מִשָּׂבְעָהּ

vatotse vatiten-lah et asher-hotirah misavah

and she brought out and gave to her what she had left over after she was sated

The new one is the hiphil perfect prefix of יתר to be left over. Hiphil makes the root 'causative'. I have not yet dealt with the form or the grammar of verbs that lose letters when the grammatical ones become attached. This must be the I-yod form - and it looks as if it behaves according to what is expected of such a verb (Lambdin chapter 45). In the Hiphil, the yod becomes a vav! Aren't those grammatical letters something else! We must return to this when we get to yod.

A little tidbit on the bottom of page 222 in Lambdin notes how the hiphil of halek looks as if it were the hiphil of yelek. I already encountered this confusion of two verbs that are treated as one in the Hebrew concordance that I have. See note on Ruth 1:15-18.

And Happy New Year to you all.

Ruth 1:19-22 - Return to Bethlehem

2009-12-30T13:27:00.000-08:00

I had better keep going and not let my grammatical studies and reading of dictionaries take me too far away from story. (I have added an automated transcription - let the v's melt into the following vowel if it is a 'u'.)

וַתֵּלַכְנָה שְׁתֵּיהֶם עַד-בּוֹאָנָה בֵּית לָחֶם וַיְהִי כְּבוֹאָנָה בֵּית לֶחֶם וַתֵּהֹם כָּל-הָעִיר עֲלֵיהֶן וַתֹּאמַרְנָה הֲזֹאת נָעֳמִי	1.19	and the two of them went till they came to Bethlehem and it was as they came to Bethlehem that all the city was excited concerning them and the women said - is this Naomi?	It is a pleasure again to be in twos. Our story-teller loves the pairing of people. We should be getting better at grammar too - finally! וַתֵּלַכְנָה is the (guess before reading on) the third person plural feminine preterite. And the same form occurs with the next verb בּוֹאָנָה and that verb repeats immediately. Our story-teller is very fond of repetition. She takes nothing for granted. We do not have to fill in blanks. The form occurs again before the end of the verse. שְׁתֵּיהֶם is another instance of the archaic dual (per Campbell). In contrast עֲלֵיהֶן shows the normal feminine plural ending. vàtélàknah shtéyhem `àd-bvo)anah béyt laxm vàyhy kbvo)anah béyt lexm vàtéhom kal-ha`yr `aléyhen vàto)màrnah hazo)t na`amy
וַתֹּאמֶר אֲלֵיהֶן אַל-תִּקְרֶאנָה לִי נָעֳמִי קְרֶאןָ לִי מָרָא כִּי-הֵמַר שַׁדַּי לִי מְאֹד	1.20	and she said to them do not call me Naomi call me Mara for bitter is the Sufficient to me - greatly so	And she said -וַתֹּאמֶר third person singular feminine preterite of אמר. To them - אֲלֵיהֶן this time with the expected ending perhaps since there are many women. Another third person feminine plural imperfect - it seems that קרא is often followed by the preposition ל in this case with a first person singular pronoun. (I know someone named Mara - a dangerous anticipation, it seems to me.) One question in my mind is - do we hear Naomi praying her complaint? I have suggested we should read some of her words this way. vàto)mer )aléyhen )àl-tiqre)nah ly na`amy qre)na ly mara) ky-hémàr shàdày ly m)od
אֲנִי מְלֵאָה הָלַכְתִּי וְרֵיקָם הֱשִׁיבַנִי יְהוָה לָמָּה תִקְרֶאנָה לִי נָעֳמִי וַיהוָה עָנָה בִי וְשַׁדַּי הֵרַע לִי	1.21	I myself full went away and empty יְהוָה has returned me why call me Naomi for יְהוָה has answered me and the Sufficient brought trouble to me	Some sources name this word as the qal perfect of הלך rather than of יָלַךְ but as noted earlier, my more recent and Hebrew dictionaries do not distinguish these two verbs. I suspect that if we wrote out the entire paradigm for each that we could also not distinguish them - maybe later... )any mlé)ah halàkty vréyqam heshybàny yy lamah tiqre)nah ly na`amy và-yy `anah by vshàdày hérà` ly
וַתָּשָׁב נָעֳמִי וְרוּת הַמּוֹאֲבִיָּה כַלָּתָהּ עִמָּהּ הַשָּׁבָה מִשְּׂדֵי מוֹאָב וְהֵמָּה בָּאוּ בֵּית לֶחֶם בִּתְחִלַּת קְצִיר שְׂעֹרִים	1.22	So Naomi returned and Ruth the Moabite her daughter-in-law with her she returned from the fields or Moab and they came to Bethlehem at the commencement of the harvest of barley	Green is for grammar - have I missed any? Or included too many? Notice how 'ite' as an English appendage is a use of letter forms in a grammatical way. I doubt that the Latin alphabet applied to Languages that use it would divide itself neatly into two piles as Hebrew seems to have done. What is that word הֵמָּה? Stand alone pronoun or a story teller's word for 'what do you know'? The word for 'commencement' is also of interest - indistinguishable from profane! vàtashab na`amy vrvut hàmvo)abyah kàlatah `imah hàshabah misdéy mvo)ab vhémah ba)vu béyt lexm bitxilàt qcyr s`orym

Dalet - the second non-grammatical letter

2009-12-30T12:51:00.000-08:00

ד
The earliest word I remember that begins with Dalet is דרך. This word is a very good exercise in the distinction of letters. ד dalet, ר resh, and final kaf ך are an early source of confusing shapes for a new learner of the Hebrew written forms. We find this word in Ruth also

וַתֵּלַכְנָה בַדֶּרֶךְ לָשׁוּב אֶל-אֶרֶץ יְהוּדָה

and they went on the way to return to the land of Judah

vàtélàknah bàderek lashvub )el-)erec yhvudah

Other words in Ruth beginning with ד:

וְרוּת דָּבְקָה בָּהּ
vrvut dabqah bah

But Ruth stayed close to her -

to anticipate the other two uses of this word in Ruth, I preferred 'stay close' to the emotive 'clung'.

וַתֶּחְדַּל לְדַבֵּר אֵלֶיהָ

vàtexdàl ldàbér )éleyah

and she ceased speaking to her

(speak here דָּבָר, thing in 3:18)

אִם-דַּל וְאִם-עָשִׁיר
)im-dàl v)im-`ashyr

whether poor or wealthy

וְעֹבֵד הוֹלִיד אֶת-יִשָׁי וְיִשַׁי הוֹלִיד אֶת-דָּוִד

v`obéd hvolyd )et-yishay vyishày hvolyd )et-david

Ruth 4:22 hiphil perfect for bearing. This genealogy is referenced almost as is in Matthew.
Lots of dalet's in the middle of words - but few at the beginning. On to the grammatical ה 'he'.

Method

2009-12-28T12:25:00.000-08:00

I am beginning to think of method and I applied the sequence of things I am doing with Ruth to Psalm 117 here.

Gimel, the first of the non-grammatical letters

2009-12-24T20:09:00.000-08:00

ג
What can one say about a non-grammatical letter by itself? If we were singing, I would advise some to unvoice the consonant in order to keep the singing line 'forward'. G, especially Glo at this time of the year, is a difficult sound to sing on one accurate pitch. So the advice is think G, sing K or vice versa. But this is Hebrew and these are letters and I am not giving instruction but exploring sounds and function.

When one is reading a dictionary, besides its being a tiring exercise, one concentrates on the first few words at the beginning of a letter's dominance. For aleph, there was fresh (from which the month of אָבִיב and Passover) and then perish אָבַד! For bet, the preposition dominates the first few pages. For gimel, the words are all of pride and boasting (גָּאוֺן from גָּאָה to triumph). Another dominant G word in Ruth is for the kinsman redeemer גְּאָל.and we must deal with this at some point - I am still thinking of how that system 'worked' or not.

Here are some more of the words beginning with gimel in the book of Ruth:

לָגוּר בִּשְׂדֵי מוֹאָב

לָגוּר - to stay (preceded by the preposition in this case)

וַיָּמֻתוּ גַם-שְׁנֵיהֶם

גַם - even (a frequent word in Ruth - a story teller's word for emphasis) - and they died - even the two of them.

הֲלָהֵן תְּשַׂבֵּרְנָה עַד אֲשֶׁר יִגְדָּלוּ

יִגְדָּלוּ - gadol to grow, increase, magnify - in this case third person plural imperfect. Could you wait till they had grown up? The word doesn't begin with gimel, but the root does.

אִישׁ גִּבּוֹר חַיִל

גִּבּוֹר - strong (2:1) a man of strength and valor

לְעֵת הָאֹכֶל גֹּשִׁי הֲלֹם

גֹּשִׁי - draw near (second person feminine imperative) - aha but this root doesn't begin with gimel! The root is נגש but the nun drops out - being of a weak disposition

וְלֹא תִגְעֲרוּ-בָהּ

an example I used in the prior post also, the middle word is second person masculine plural imperfect - why is it translated as imperative? and do not rebuke her. Perhaps it could be read as in English as a future prohibition: and you will not rebuke her.

הִנֵּה-הוּא זֹרֶה אֶת-גֹּרֶן

גרן the threshing floor where Boaz winnows

וּבָאת וְגִלִּית מַרְגְּלֹתָיו

גלה to uncover - and you come and uncover his feet

וּפָרַשְׂתָּ כְנָפֶךָ עַל-אֲמָתְךָ כִּי גֹאֵל אָתָּה

גֹאֵל the redeemer - in this case the one redeeming, participle form. The one redeeming is you yourself.

Not very many words but a few (8) whose lead sound is G in the book of Ruth.

On each of the Hebrew letters - Bet

2009-12-24T17:03:00.000-08:00

The first in the series is here.

ב
Bet has an enormity of meanings. BDB lists all of these: in, among, within, into, on, at, by, against, down to, upon, with, and others. How can one approach such flexibility in a single initial letter!

The grammar books all introduce בּ simply, with a single word, usually in a house בבית or in the house בָבית. I admit it has taken me three years to dare to read the pages on in BDB. It was a cure for insomnia a few nights ago. Fascinating examples to be drawn out but let's see a few of the uses of ב in Ruth.

The traditional meaning 'in' occurs frequently, especially in the phrase בִּשְׂדֵי מוֹאָב in the fields of Moab. A rendering of 'against' is required for Naomi's statement: כִּי-יָצְאָה בִי יַד-יְהוָה for the hand of יְהוָה has come out against me. 'To' is needed for the very next verse: וְרוּת דָּבְקָה בָּהּ but Ruth stayed close to her.

Here is one related to field where rather than 'in', 'on' is intended: עֵינַיִךְ בַּשָּׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר-יִקְצֹרוּן your eyes on the field where they reap. And here a spot where it is demanded by the verb but would not be rendered in English: וְלֹא תִגְעֲרוּ-בָהּ and do not rebuke her. Altogether, a 'sounds like' or concordant translation is clearly impossible for this preposition.

BDB speaks of three broad classifications: beth vasculi, beth coniunctionis et viciniae, and beth auxilii but the 22 subsequent subclassifications in four major groups (I. In, II Denoting proximity, III With, IV with certain classes of verbs) do not use these divisions.

Exodus 6:3
appearing as 'as'

וָאֵרָא אֶל־אַבְרָהָם אֶל־יִצְחָק וְאֶֽל־יַעֲקֹב בְּאֵל שַׁדָּי וּשְׁמִי יְהוָה לֹא נֹודַעְתִּי לָהֶם

and I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai, but the name יְהוָה I was not known to them

Examples are everywhere - so no more multiplication. Bet keeps its place in the letters that act grammatically.

Christmas Newsletter

2009-12-21T19:13:00.000-08:00

Our annual letter is posted here. Merry Christmas to all my readers.

On each of the Hebrew letters, individually - Aleph

2009-12-20T15:54:00.000-08:00

How are the letters used? This is an open question and one that does not need to be answered by metaphorical interpretation. With the division of the 22 letters into two distinct subsets of 11 (here and here), I think it appropriate that I attempt to specify their individual grammatical roles. So when I see such and such a letter, what might I recognize as its role? This series will annotate the roles that I can identify from aleph to taf with examples.

א
א is a guttural and will therefore behave differently in some verbal paradigms - just how strangely, I do not yet know. א also may signal the first person singular imperfect (either masculine or feminine). It seems that with verbs beginning with א the consonant is not 'doubled'. So here is an example of this use of א with both types of verb - one beginning with aleph and one not. This is an example with several of the grammatical letters.

וְהָיָה הַנַּעֲרָ אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיהָ הַטִּי־נָא כַדֵּךְ וְאֶשְׁתֶּה

and let it be that the lass to whom I will say, give me please your pitcher that I may drink

Which of the four highlighted aleph's that 'begin' a word signals the first person imperfect? Not the first - that's part of the word asher, the relative pronoun. Not the third, that's a preposition with a third person feminine pronoun. Yes to the second, and note this is the same three consonants that we would see if the word was in the perfect 3rd person masculine singular אמר or with the vowels אָמַר. So without vowel markings we need to hear the 'future' rather than the past from the context.

And the fourth וְאֶשְׁתֶּה though itself preceded by a vav is also 'imperfect'. Here it seems that the imperfect covers potential future, and conditional or modal usage (as well as preterite - which might be translated as past or even continuous present). That verb 'drink' שתה has three of the grammatical consonants acting in non-grammatical ways. The form is first person imperfect. The verb type is III-ה. The name of this class of verbs including the numeral III means that the third consonant of the root - or the third 'radical' is ה.

Just for fun, this phrase has 6 consonants from group 2 out of a total of 31 (<20%). Of the remaining 27, I count 9 or 11 in grammatical roles (11 if I include prepositions and exclude 'please'). Including prepositions will eventually drag some consonants from group 2 to do duty in group 1.

וְהָיָה הַנַּעֲרָ אֲשֶׁר אֹמַר אֵלֶיהָ הַטִּי־נָא כַדֵּךְ וְאֶשְׁתה

Update:
As I have continued this series, I have concentrated more and more on reading Ruth 'letter by letter'. So Here are a few examples of aleph from Ruth (excluding the ones already covered here):

An obvious example of the grammatical use of this letter and taf also is in the direct object marker, e.g. in Ruth 1:6

כִּי-פָקַד יְהוָה אֶת-עַמּוֹ

that יְהוָה had visited his people

The imperfect appears first in Ruth 1:16, the famous lines that join Ruth to Naomi in spite of the 10 years of barrenness after having been 'taken' as a wife by foreigners (to her)

כִּי אֶל-אֲשֶׁר תֵּלְכִי אֵלֵךְ
וּבַאֲשֶׁר תָּלִינִי אָלִין

for wherever you go I go
and in whatever you stop over I stop over

In Ruth 1:18, here are two uses that illustrate aleph-taf when they are not the object marker and aleph as part of a common preposition. (I have not included stand-alone prepositions or stand-alone pronouns in my 'grammatical use' list since they stand alone and also include a few other stray non first 11 letters. Only 'tet' is allowed the privilege of acting as scorekeeper for the first 11 and that rarely.)

וַתֵּרֶא כִּי-מִתְאַמֶּצֶת הִיא

לָלֶכֶת אִתָּהּ
וַתֶּחְדַּל לְדַבֵּר אֵלֶיהָ

and she saw that she was determined
to go with her
and she ceased to speak with her

Bugs and Spirit - the inheritance of software

2009-12-20T13:02:00.000-08:00

I wrote this some time ago on another blog that I have turned into a test area. Some of the problems described were resolved with the SBL Hebrew font.

I wonder if the next generation will be able to handle the inheritance of software from the previous. How often will they mutter at the errors and shortcomings of their forebears. Forbearance may be in as short supply as knowledge.

For the record, software taught us our fallibility. I suspect it will continue so to teach. Most recently, besides following up and taking responsibility for my own errors, omissions, and accidental oversights, I have had the opportunity to see how confused left and right can be in the management of words on the page. How can I define the problem when successive versions of famous programs cannot handle the terrible complexity of left to right and right to left processing in the same document.

But let's give credit: they have tried - even though copy and paste sometimes reverses words, sometimes does not, and sometimes reverses letters. And having landed in the target document, the host program (vintage circa 2007-2008) sometimes cannot tell the difference between one word and another. Double-click, which usually selects a word, selects part of one word and part of another. The left hand part of the software is not letting the right hand know where it is!

To which hand do I submit the error report? To the source (which is correct in its apparent form) or to the target? And if I dared find the right forum, how long would it take to get a resolution?

I reported a problem some time ago to a major vendor. After dozens of clarifying emails, they finally 'got it' and said they had corrected the font spacing error. Well, I guess it depends on what platform you are using. It has never worked for me. I gave up. I still use the old run time where it works. Of course, all these combinations of complex cultural mixes are bound to create difficult software problems and mutual incompatibilities in format of the clipboard, and tables about fonts that refresh on some platforms and not others.

Even for the local single supplier of software, the process of managing and correcting software changes and fixes is one that has to be passed on to the next generation. What is it like? I think it is more like learning a language of courage than like following procedures. Procedures are important. Copy management is important. Knowing the history (source libraries) and the definitions (data models) are important. But there is no substitute for courage, learning, experimentation, patience, empathy, forbearance and discrimination - all features of the human enterprise that are of the spirit.

Ruth 1:15-18

2009-12-17T10:14:00.000-08:00

וַתֹּאמֶר הִנֵּה שָׁבָה יְבִמְתֵּךְ אֶל-עַמָּהּ וְאֶל-אֱלֹהֶיהָ שׁוּבִי אַחֲרֵי יְבִמְתֵּךְ

vat'omer hinneh shava yevimtek el-`amah ve'eloheiah shuvi 'axarei yevimtek

and she said, behold your sister-in-law returns to her people and to her God. You return also after your sister-in-law

It is difficult to see this as a brusque order. Perhaps she speaks out of bitterness and pity. Ten years of exile and no children. Hope but perhaps only for food for herself and an old age of solitude on a property that some distant family member must inherit. Go - you are better off without me. The colours show the division of the letters into two groups of 11 - the grammatical and those that do not take part in grammatical forms. Green and brown are the letters of the grammatical group of 11. If green they are acting as affix or in a preposition or pronoun. Only 4 letters in 42 in this verse are from the second 11, those letters that never act as prefix or suffix.

וַתֹּאמֶר רוּת אַל-תִּפְגְּעִי-בִי לְעָזְבֵךְ לָשׁוּב מֵאַחֲרָיִך

כִּי אֶל-אֲשֶׁר תֵּלְכִי אֵלֵךְ

וּבַאֲשֶׁר תָּלִינִי אָלִין

עַמֵּךְ עַמִּי

וֵאלֹהַיִךְ אֱלֹהָי

va to'amr rut 'al-tifg`i-vi le`azvek lashuv me'xareik

ki 'el-'asher telki 'elek
veba'asher talini 'alin
`amka `ami
ve'eloheik 'elohi

and Ruth said, do not force me to leave you to turn back from following you

for wherever you go I go

and in whatever you stop over I stop over

your people my people

your God my God

Ruth shows determination, love and faithfulness to one whom she will not abandon. Two words yelek and halek that look different and in earlier dictionaries were treated as different really seem the same word. Here my Hebrew-Latin concordance comes into its own with a full list of every form clearly showing they are, in Hebrew eyes, the same word. I wonder what will happen when I look at them grammatically in more detail. What weak consonants will disappear in the patterns?

בַּאֲשֶׁר תָּמוּתִי אָמוּת וְשָׁם אֶקָּבֵר

כֹּה יַעֲשֶׂה יְהוָה לִי וְכֹה יוֹסִיף

כִּי הַמָּוֶת יַפְרִיד בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵךְ

ba'asher tamuti 'amut vesham 'eqver

koh ya`aset יְהוָה li vekoh yusif
ki hamavet yafrid beini ubeinek

and where you die I die

and there I am buried

this יְהוָה do to me and more

for only death will separate me and you

One grammar book online makes the distinction between grammatical and semantic words. I personally find this unhelpful. Grammar does inform semantics. But it seems there are grammatical letters that make up entire strings of prepositions and pronouns.

וַתֵּרֶא כִּי-מִתְאַמֶּצֶת הִיא לָלֶכֶת אִתָּהּ וַתֶּחְדַּל לְדַבֵּר אֵלֶיהָ

vatere' ki-mit'amtset hie laleket 'attah vatexedal ledaver 'eleiah

and she saw that she was determined to go with her and she ceased speaking to her

Do you think that faith must be as determined as Ruth's? Is this not a bit like the parable of the importunate widow (Luke 18:1-9)? [verse 18 adjusted - interesting 'sounds alike' problem with דָּבָר as 'speak' and 'thing' here and in 3:18.]

The remaining 11 letters

2009-12-16T15:31:00.000-08:00

It's always tough on the remainder when the first team is picked. But perhaps the first 11 cannot do their job without the second team. For example lift up נָשָׂא uses letters from the first 11, but life חָיָה and salvation יְשׁוּעָה require help from the deeper gutturals, chet ח and ayin ע.

What are these remaining letters? And how do they divide? There is a nice page on the morphology of Hebrew verbs here. The first clues as to how the first 11 letters behave when they are not doing their grammatical work is in these two definitions that are perplexing to the student on first reading Hebrew verb paradigm charts.

Roots that contain a ו vav or a י yod as the 2nd letters are called hollow roots.

Roots that contain at least one of the weak letters, י yod, נ nun, ח ħet, ע ʻáyin, א álef, and ה hey, are called weak roots.

These six letters contain the four 'vowels' or 'reading helpers' matres lectiones all of which are in the first 11, and four of the gutturals with only ר resh missing.

What's left? ג gimel, ד dalet, ז zayin, ט tet, ס samech, צ tsade, פ peh, ק qoph, and ש sin (already implicit with shin - though I suppose we could give team 2 an extra player). [Note that ט tet sometimes does replace ת taf after metathesis in the hithpael of verbs whose first letter is the sibilant צ tsade. This is the only case I have found of a true secondment of a letter from team 2 to team 1.]

What can we tell about this second team and how it interacts with the first? Is there a sample set of code where we can observe the workings on the playing field? Perhaps Zephaniah 3:8 would be a good grammatical test... So first 11 are the letters that play a role in grammatical forms (G) and the consonant-only (C) team are the letters that do not. Where a G letter is acting as Consonant only, I will designate it as X, a G in C's clothing.

לָכֵן - GGG a preposition
חַכּוּ־לִי - CXG-GG a weak consonant and 4 grammatical letters with one acting as consonant
נְאֻם - GXX
יְהוָה - XXXX (Proper name)
לְיֹום - GXXX
קוּמִי - CXXG
לְעַד - GCC finally a word that uses more than one non-grammatical letter
כִּי - GG a preposition
מִשְׁפָּטִי - GXCCG
לֶאֱסֹף - GXCX
גֹּויִם - CXXG
לְקָבְצִי - GCXCG
מַמְלָכֹות - GXXXGG
לִשְׁפֹּךְ - GXCX
עֲלֵיהֶם - CGGGG - while ayin is not on the grammatical team, it is almost playing grammar here with its role in the preposition.
זַעְמִי - CCXG
כֹּל - GG
חֲרֹון - CCXX
אַפִּי - XCG
כִּי - GG
בְּאֵשׁ - GXX
קִנְאָתִי - CXXXG
תֵּאָכֵל - GXXX
כָּל־ - GG
הָאָֽרֶץ -GXCC

So for this verse that uses all the letters of the alef-bet we have 38 letters playing grammatical roles, 20 from the consonantal-only set, and 36 grammatical letters acting as consonants including 4 at my count that are matres lectiones. 40 percent (roughly) of the 94 letters in this verse are acting as grammatical clues and 79% of the letters used are those of the 'first 11', the set of letters that are used in prefixes and suffixes. I may have mistyped a G X or C but hopefully not.

A quick experiment on my poetry corpus shows that 75% of the letters in some 20,000 words are in the grammatical group!

From aleph to taf - my constitution

2009-12-16T11:54:00.000-08:00

Who speaks me into life? Who convicts me that I should die? Who revives me and gives life to my mortal body?

Let me divide the world in 2 - into two sets of eleven. Under aleph I am constituted. Aleph gives me a future as it is written: wherever you go, I will go - כִּי אֶל־אֲשֶׁר תֵּלְכִי אֵלֵךְ

Aleph has beginning but no ending and I am in it since I am first person imperfect and of common gender.

And I acknowledge the same by my mark - ת - my mark. Taf is also a continuing of my imperfection - so all imperfect verbs lead with taf when I take myself in the second person both individually and collectively or severally. Yod י and nun נ continue me, י in my female aspect and נ in the first person plural.

So letters 1, 10, 14, and 22 are singled out as grammatical markers. What others can we rope into the first 11? Vav ו (letter 6) is a natural - it is the universal connector. (Vav means hook in Hebrew and is used as a hook both in the construction of the tabernacle and in the construction of sentences and stories!) Taf and yod also connect: infinitives, nouns and pronouns and yod for me and thee has its own person. ה (letter 5) begins the reflexive (hitpael) as נ allows the passive (nifal). These two conspire into the feminine plural and so drag in ם mem (letter 13) as pluralizer of nouns and mem and caf כ (letter 11) as male second plural persons.

Now we have 8 of the first 11 - what are the others that Saadya chose that will reveal or let us hear his division of the alef-bet into two?

Two remaining candidates are ב bet (letter 2), and ל lamed (letter 12), who must join the already captured מ mem, נ nun, and ה he as common prefixes. And the third is שׁ shin (letter 21) in its abbreviating of asher אֲשֶׁר, a relative pronoun that evokes the assonance of Psalm 1. These are the 11 letters that form themselves and the other letters into their grammatical space. They comprise the full set of all prefixes and suffixes in Hebrew. Do they really speak me or constitute my assembly?

Note this - אִישׁ ish and אִשָּׁה ishah and their plurals אֲנָשִׁים and נָּשִׁים are all composed of these letters only! Could we divide all the words of Hebrew into piles - those that use the first 11, those that are used by the first eleven, those that are independent of them? How do the first 11 behave in their roots and stems?

And what of my being - if I chose to be הָיָה and share the becoming of יְהֹוָה Hashem, or what of my death מוּתי and my harvest יְבוּלי?

(I had to work to spell life, death and resurrection with my first 11 only. Yes, I used to play cricket too. Stimulus for this post here and here.)

Tears and Kisses 2 - Ruth 1:10-14

2009-12-12T18:02:00.000-08:00

This is part 4 of the story of Ruth being used as an aid to finding grammatical forms in context of a close reading of the story. Note these are my annotations of grammatical forms and surmises on meaning - and I may be mixed up.

וַתֹּאמַרְנָה-לָּהּ כִּי-אִתָּךְ נָשׁוּב לְעַמֵּךְ

vatomarna-lah ki-attak nashuv l`imek
and they said to her for with you we will return to your people

We have heard pronomial suffixes and here we note (though this has occurred already in the story) that pronouns attach to prepositions also. לָּהּ to her, אִתָּךְ with you. There are more to come in these 5 verses - hear them as we go. You will remember we started this story several months ago while round a campfire. The fire may have died down, but perk up, hear the original tongue and the story and its grammar too will sink in. (I restore an approximate transliteration to help with hearing.)

וַתֹּאמֶר נָעֳמִי שׁבְנָה בְנֹתַי לָמָּה תֵלַכְנָה עִמִּי

va-tomer na`omi: shovnah vanotai. lamah telaknah imi?
and Naomi said: turn back my daughters. Why would you go with me?

Imperative turn back and modal go following the interrogative lamah. It is the opposite order of these verbs to Naomi's initial plea in verse 8: לֵכְנָה שֹּׁבְנָה

הַעוֹד-לִי בָנִים בְּמֵעַי וְהָיוּ לָכֶם לַאֲנָשִׁים

ha`od-li vanaim bemei`ai lakem la'anoshim?
are there yet to me sons in my body that they might become husbands for you?

Another masculine plural ending (lakem) with feminine subject (or archaic feminine dual). Sons become husbands for wives who are childless through the living brother's taking responsibility to raise up children. The nature of this speech by Naomi is either comic or bitter. Would in fact the children of another father qualify in any case? Perhaps Ruth as story is undermining this tribal custom for as we will see, the near kinsman declines lest he damage his own children's inheritance and Boaz does not qualify as a brother either - though in claiming that relationship, he both undermines it and redefines it, perhaps eliminating the cause of casuistry.

שֹׁבְנָה בְנֹתַי לֵכְןָ כִּי זָקַנְתִּי מִהְיוֹת לְאִישׁ

shovnah vanotai, lekna, ki zaqanti mihyot l'ish
turn back my daughters, go, for I am too old to have a husband

Repeated imperatives - again opposite in order to verse 8. (Note the missing letter from לֵכְןָ - compare vs 8 לֵכְנָה). And the infinitive of 'to be' preceded by a mem (from) and used as a noun, and in construct form with the next noun, itself preceded by a lamed. Hebrew can string just about anything together to make a phrase of the form a of b. And it seems that the preposition 'to' is often used following a form of the verb 'to be'. (I may have to revise this observation - see Putnam chapters 15 and 16 where I can't find this example exactly).

כִּי אָמַרְתִּי יֶשׁ-לִי תִקְוָה גַּם הָיִיתִי הַלַּיְלָה לְאִישׁ וְגַם יָלַדְתִּי בָנִים

ki 'amarti yesh-li tikvah gam haiyiti halailah l'ish vgam yaladtu vanim
for had I said there is hope for me even if I had tonight a husband and even I bore sons?

Tone of voice indicate a question. She is straining credulity, as if to ask if there is any use at all for the Torah concerning brother-marriage for her. הָיִיתִי - haiyiti is first common singular form of Qal perfect - rendered here as conditional pluperfect, I had, in English - taking gam as conditional.

הֲלָהֵן תְּשַׂבֵּרְנָה עַד אֲשֶׁר יִגְדָּלוּ

halahen tsabernah ad asher yigdalu
For them? You could wait till such had grown?

תְּשַׂבֵּרְנָה is apparently of the Piel form. The doubled (the dot = dagesh) middle consonant tells you - but I can't distinguish Qal from Piel using the consonants only (except maybe for participles). The diacritical marks were not added till a 1000 years after the story was written. What am I missing?

הֲלָהֵן תֵּעָגֵנָה לְבִלְתִּי הֱיוֹת לְאִישׁ

halahen te`agenah lvilti heyot l'ish
For them? You would remain shut up without there being a husband?

הֲלָהֵן has a long note in Campbell. Is it the interrogative followed by 'to them'? No - it can't be a feminine 'them' since we are waiting for boys. Does it mean 'unless' or some conditional (so BDB p 530)? Or is it direct speech to God - as in the psalms? Naomi's prayer for her daughters.

אַל בְּנֹתַי כִּי-מַר-לִי מְאֹד מִכֶּם כִּי-יָצְאָה בִי יַד-יְהוָה

'al banotai ki-mar-li m'od mikem ki yats'ah yad-hashem
no my daughters for bitterness to me is great that for you

the hand of יְהוָה has come out against me

The idiom of this speech is difficult to hear - what modifies what? It makes good sense that Naomi should be bitter that her 'place' has involved the two daughters-in-law. Hence my third option for halahen.

וַתִּשֶּׂנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה עוֹד וַתִּשַּׁק עָרְפָּה לַחֲמוֹתָהּ

vatisnah qolon vativkenah `id vatishaq `arpah lehamotah
and they lifted up their voice and wept further and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law

Wept and kissed here closes the opening of kissed and wept in verse 9 -

וַתִּשַּׁק לָהֶן וַתִּשֶּׂאנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה

וְרוּת דָּבְקָה בָּהּ

verut davqa bah
but Ruth stayed close to her.

If Ruth had not stayed close, we would not still be telling this story.And she would not be in the New Testament as one of two examples of how God used the Levirate law before the Sadducees made such mockery of it..

Return from Moab - Ruth 1:7-9

2009-12-10T23:01:00.000-08:00

Now we're getting somewhere. If we were indeed hearing the story for the first time, we would not, as I have done, have read the story through several times, and translated it into our own tongue, and laboured carefully over every word to see if we could hear what those ancient children gathered around the fire might have heard. But we have looked at this story, and we have not understood it. We have been told it is good, but we have not had it told to us as a dramatic presentation that is meant to grip our life as we grasp in hope some promised blessing that we aren't quite sure we are a part of.

We knew we were in trouble - like Naomi, but we hear there was hope, that the One we hoped in had provided bread back home, so we turn back as she did

וַתֵּצֵא מִן-הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר הָיְתָה-שָּׁמָּה וּשְׁתֵּי כַלּוֹתֶיהָ עִמָּהּ
and she emerged from the place there where she was and her two daughters-in-law with her

The tense of our emergence is imperfect, but preceded by the vav, it is story and it is complete. We are on the way but we are perfected and are returning home. (There is trouble with this word game, so do be patient - even those who we do not want to share perfection with will not be without it in spite of our bitterness.)

We have emerged from the place - ha-maqom - which was ours. And we like Naomi are not alone.

וַתֵּלַכְנָה בַדֶּרֶךְ לָשׁוּב אֶל-אֶרֶץ יְהוּדָה

and they went on the way to return to the land of Judah

She realizes that they - third person feminine of the verb to walk יָלַךְ - should not come with her - ba-derek - in the way. How can she find them a spot in Bethlehem? Wouldn't they be better off here with their own people?

וַתֹּאמֶר נָעֳמִי לִשְׁתֵּי כַלֹּתֶיהָ לֵכְנָה שֹּׁבְנָה אִשָּׁה לְבֵית אִמָּהּ

and Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, Go - turn back - each to the house of her mother

Again we are hearing the vav+imperfect, also called preterite which is the backbone of story telling. And we see the word for two shanim adjusted to shtei for the feminine construct - well not exactly construct but it sounds like a similar structure - modifying the following feminine plural noun with the possessive female pronoun. כלה in the plural כלות then with the following ה for the possessive, dropping the vav and requiring a yod י to make it pronounceable? כַלֹּתֶיהָ (Lambdin lessons 19-20)

יעשה יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם חֶסֶד כַּאֲשֶׁר עֲשִׂיתֶם עִם-הַמֵּתִים וְעִמָּדִי

may יְהוָה deal with you with mercy as you have dealt with those who died and with me

We need mercy to learn grammar. Naomi is speaking. So no preterite, but direct speech, an imperfect form? Yes. But a jussive - a third person imperative - a plea - a prayer to Hashem for mercy as indeed we might pray for those who could not accompany us that they have mercy of that sort as we have intimated the beginnings of for ourselves. What is this 'with you' with a male second person plural ending immakem? These two are women - why is it not immaken, the female plural second person ending? (Seven times in Ruth we will find this anomolous apparently masculine ending in this highly gendered language - see Campbell page 65 where he surmises it is an archaic feminine dual ending.) The odd ending occurs again in this same phrase - עֲשִׂיתֶם. We would expect עֲשִׂיתֶן Mercy indeed.

יִתֵּן יְהוָה לָכֶם וּמְצֶאןָ מְנוּחָה אִשָּׁה בֵּית אִישָׁהּ

may יְהוָה give to you and may you find rest each in the house of her husband

Another jussive - and that word natan that loses letters if you look at it. And another masculine looking feminine dual! Or perhaps it just rhymes with verse 6 לָתֵת לָהֶם לָחֶם (to give - natan with nothing but a t to tell us - to them, bread). That they should find rest. We must look further to this word (מְנוּחָה) - it sounds like an important thing to find. (Is it perhaps related to the Greek of John 14 μονή? - pure hunch...) I am ignoring the form of find in this sentence. Campbell notes it as imperative but other sources I have do not. Is Naomi commanding יְהוָה - I can't quite understand if this is significant.

וַתִּשַּׁק לָהֶן וַתִּשֶּׂאנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה
and she kissed them and they lifted up their voice and wept

Note the female third person plural ending as expected here. And we are back to the story-telling sequence of preterites vav+imperfect. (Imperatives to come on the chiastic reprise in verses 11-12 if I remember).

It's a cliffhanger - an opening without a closing - to be continued...

Other human groupings in Ruth

2009-12-10T18:37:00.000-08:00

We have looked at ish and ishah, at immediate family relationships and in-laws, at the groups of workers and the elders, now at the more generic groups, excluding that last one - the kinsman redeemer.
Because we are looking at nouns, the grammar lessons are similar to the ones we have already seen: plurals, pronouns, male and female forms. What do the different groups mean semantically - i.e. what does it tell of personal and family relationships at this time in this society?

HEBREW	CH_VS	ENGLISH	NOTES
א וַיְהִי בִּימֵי שְׁפֹט הַשֹּׁפְטִים וַיְהִי רָעָב בָּאָרֶץ וַיֵּלֶךְ אִישׁ מִבֵּית לֶחֶם יְהוּדָה לָגוּר בִּשְׂדֵי מוֹאָב הוּא וְאִשְׁתּו וּשְׁנֵי בָנָיו	01.01	Now there was in the days of the judgment of the judges, and there was a famine in the land. and he went a man from the house of bread (Bethlehem) of Judah to stay in the fields of Moab he, his wife, and his two sons	This house is of course Bethlehem (remaining 4 occurrences not listed though Ephrata and Bethlehem are part of the story frame.)
ו וַתָּקָם הִיא וְכַלֹּתֶיהָ וַתָּשָׁב מִשְּׂדֵי מוֹאָב כִּי שָׁמְעָה בִּשְׂדֵה מוֹאָב כִּי-פָקַד יְהוָה אֶת-עַמּוֹ לָתֵת לָהֶם לָחֶם	01.06	and she arose, she and her daughters in law to return from the fields of Moab for she had heard in the fields of Moab that יְהוָה had visited his people to give to them bread	his people - 'people' is almost as important as 'God' in this story
ח וַתֹּאמֶר נָעֳמִי לִשְׁתֵּי כַלֹּתֶיהָ לֵכְנָה שֹּׁבְנָה אִשָּׁה לְבֵית אִמָּהּ יעשה יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם חֶסֶד כַּאֲשֶׁר עֲשִׂיתֶם עִם-הַמֵּתִים וְעִמָּדִי	01.08	and Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law Go - return - each to the house of her mother (a-b) may יְהוָה deal with you with mercy as you have dealt with those who died and with me	'house' as clan The issue of those who have died creates a separate collective in the story - but I did not list these here
ט יִתֵּן יְהוָה לָכֶם וּמְצֶאןָ מְנוּחָה אִשָּׁה בֵּית אִישָׁהּ וַתִּשַּׁק לָהֶן וַתִּשֶּׂאנָה קוֹלָן וַתִּבְכֶּינָה	01.09	may יְהוָה give to you and may you find rest each in the house of her husband and she kissed them and they lifted up their voice and wept	definiteness comes from the specifically modified noun following house
י וַתֹּאמַרְנָה-לָּהּ כִּי-אִתָּךְ נָשׁוּב לְעַמֵּךְ	01.10	and they said to her for with you we will return to your people	to-the-people-of-you (definiteness implied)
טו וַתֹּאמֶר הִנֵּה שָׁבָה יְבִמְתֵּךְ אֶל-עַמָּהּ וְאֶל-אֱלֹהֶיהָ שׁוּבִי אַחֲרֵי יְבִמְתֵּךְ	01.15	and she said, behold your sister-in-law returns to her people and to her God you return also after your sister-in-law	the-people-of-her (definiteness implied)
טז וַתֹּאמֶר רוּת אַל-תִּפְגְּעִי-בִי לְעָזְבֵךְ לָשׁוּב מֵאַחֲרָיִך כִּי אֶל-אֲשֶׁר תֵּלְכִי אֵלֵךְ וּבַאֲשֶׁר תָּלִינִי אָלִין עַמֵּךְ עַמִּי וֵאלֹהַיִךְ אֱלֹהָי	01.16	and Ruth said, do not force me to leave you to turn back from following you for wherever you go I go and in whatever you stop over I stop over your people my people your God my God
א וּלְנָעֳמִי מוֹדָע לְאִישָׁהּ אִישׁ גִּבּוֹר חַיִל מִּשְׁפַּחַת אֱלִימֶלֶךְ וּשְׁמוֹ בֹּעַז	02.01	Now for Naomi there was an acquaintance of her husband a man of strength and valor from the family of Elimelek and his name was Boaz	must investigate this word family more thoroughly along with the redeemer
ג וַתֵּלֶךְ וַתָּבוֹא וַתְּלַקֵּט בַּשָּׂדֶה אַחֲרֵי הַקֹּצְרִים וַיִּקֶר מִקְרֶהָ חֶלְקַת הַשָּׂדֶה לְבֹעַז אֲשֶׁר מִמִּשְׁפַּחַת אֱלִימֶלֶךְ	02.03	and she went and she came and she gleaned in the field after the reapers and she happened to happen on the part of the field of Boaz who was of the family of Elimelek	the reapers - may be the lads and lasses or all of them together
ד וְהִנֵּה-בֹעַז בָּא מִבֵּית לֶחֶם וַיֹּאמֶר לַקּוֹצְרִים יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ יְבָרֶכְךָ יְהוָה	02.04	and behold Boaz came from Bethlehem and he said to the reapers יְהוָה be with you and they said to him יְהוָה bless you
ה וַיֹּאמֶר בֹּעַז לְנַעֲרוֹ הַנִּצָּב עַל-הַקּוֹצְרִים לְמִי הַנַּעֲרָה הַזֹּאת	02.05	and Boaz said to his lad standing by the reapers who is that lass?
ו וַיַּעַן הַנַּעַר הַנִּצָּב עַל-הַקּוֹצְרִים וַיֹּאמַר נַעֲרָה מוֹאֲבִיָּה הִיא הַשָּׁבָה עִם-נָעֳמִי מִשְּׂדֵי מוֹאָב	02.06	and the lad standing by the reapers said that is the Moabite lass the one who returned with Naomi from the fields of Moab
ז וַתֹּאמֶר אֲלַקֳּטָה-נָּא וְאָסַפְתִּי בָעֳמָרִים אַחֲרֵי הַקּוֹצְרִים וַתָּבוֹא וַתַּעֲמוֹד מֵאָז הַבֹּקֶר וְעַד-עַתָּה זֶה שִׁבְתָּהּ הַבַּיִת מְעָט	02.07	and she said, please let me glean and gather among the sheaves after the reapers and she came and she remained from then - the morning and until now she sitting in the house a little
יא וַיַּעַן בֹּעַז וַיֹּאמֶר לָהּ הֻגֵּד הֻגַּד לִי כֹּל אֲשֶׁר-עָשִׂית אֶת-חֲמוֹתֵךְ אַחֲרֵי מוֹת אִישֵׁךְ וַתַּעַזְבִי אָבִיךְ וְאִמֵּךְ וְאֶרֶץ מוֹלַדְתֵּךְ וַתֵּלְכִי אֶל-עַם אֲשֶׁר לֹא-יָדַעַתְּ תְּמוֹל שִׁלְשׁוֹם	02.11	and Boaz answered and said to her to be shown, it has been shown to me all that you have done for your mother-in-law after the death of your husband and you left your father and your mother and the land of your birth and went to a people which you did not know before in times past	a people - unknown to her, so indefinite
יד וַיֹּאמֶר לָה בֹעַז לְעֵת הָאֹכֶל גֹּשִׁי הֲלֹם וְאָכַלְתְּ מִן-הַלֶּחֶם וְטָבַלְתְּ פִּתֵּךְ בַּחֹמֶץ וַתֵּשֶׁב מִצַּד הַקֹּצְרִים וַיִּצְבָּט-לָהּ קָלִי וַתֹּאכַל וַתִּשְׂבַּע וַתֹּתַר	02.14	and Boaz said to her at the time of eating draw near here and eat of the bread and dip your piece in the vinegar and she herself sat beside the reapers and he heaped her parched grain and she ate and she was sated and had leftovers
יא וְעַתָּה בִּתִּי אַל-תִּירְאִי כֹּל אֲשֶׁר-תֹּאמְרִי אֶעֱשֶׂה-לָּךְ כִּי יוֹדֵעַ כָּל-שַׁעַר עַמִּי כִּי אֵשֶׁת חַיִל אָתְּ	03.11	and now my daughter have no fear all that you say I will do for you for all the gate, my people, know that you are a woman of ability
יד וַתִּשְׁכַּב מַרְגְּלוֹתָו עַד-הַבֹּקֶר וַתָּקָם בְּטֶרֶם יַכִּיר אִישׁ אֶת-רֵעֵהוּ וַיֹּאמֶר אַל-יִוָּדַע כִּי-בָאָה הָאִשָּׁה הַגֹּרֶן	03.14	and she lay down at his feet till the morning and she rose before a man could recognize his friend and he said - let it not be known that the woman came to the threshing floor	friend - used only twice - perhaps not a significant structural element
ד וַאֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי אֶגְלֶה אָזְנְךָ לֵאמֹר קְנֵה נֶגֶד הַיֹּשְׁבִים וְנֶגֶד זִקְנֵי עַמִּי אִם-תִּגְאַל גְּאָל וְאִם-לֹא יִגְאַל הַגִּידָה לִּי וְאֵדְעָה כִּי אֵין זוּלָתְךָ לִגְאוֹל וְאָנֹכִי אַחֲרֶיךָ וַיֹּאמֶר אָנֹכִי אֶגְאָל	04.04	and I myself had said I will disclose in your ear to say will you buy before those sitting here and before these elders of my people if you will redeem, redeem and if he will not redeem, tell me and I will know for there is none except you to redeem and I myself after you and he said I myself will redeem
ז וְזֹאת לְפָנִים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל עַל-הַגְּאֻלָּה וְעַל-הַתְּמוּרָה לְקַיֵּם כָּל-דָּבָר שָׁלַף אִישׁ נַעֲלוֹ וְנָתַן לְרֵעֵהוּ וְזֹאת הַתְּעוּדָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל	04.07	and this before in Israel, on the redemption and on the exchange to raise any matter, a man would remove his sandal and give it to his friend and this was the attestation in Israel
ט וַיֹּאמֶר בֹּעַז לַזְּקֵנִים וְכָל-הָעָם עֵדִים אַתֶּם הַיּוֹם כִּי קָנִיתִי אֶת-כָּל-אֲשֶׁר לֶאֱלִימֶלֶךְ וְאֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר לְכִלְיוֹן וּמַחְלוֹן מִיַּד נָעֳמִי	04.09	and Boaz said to the elders and all the people witnesses you are today that I have bought all that was Elimelek's and all that was Chilion's and Mahlon's from the hand of Naomi
יא וַיֹּאמְרוּ כָּל-הָעָם אֲשֶׁר-בַּשַּׁעַר וְהַזְּקֵנִים--עֵדִים יִתֵּן יְהוָה אֶת-הָאִשָּׁה הַבָּאָה אֶל-בֵּיתֶךָ כְּרָחֵל וּכְלֵאָה אֲשֶׁר בָּנוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶם אֶת-בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וַעֲשֵׂה-חַיִל בְּאֶפְרָתָה וּקְרָא-שֵׁם בְּבֵית לָחֶם	04.11	and they said - all the people that were in the gate and the elders - witnesses let יְהוָה give to the wife coming to your house as to Rachel and as to Leah which two built the house of Israel and you do well in Ephratha and make a name in Bethlehem	house as clan and as people
יב וִיהִי בֵיתְךָ כְּבֵית פֶּרֶץ אֲשֶׁר-יָלְדָה תָמָר לִיהוּדָה--מִן-הַזֶּרַע אֲשֶׁר יִתֵּן יְהוָה לְךָ מִן-הַנַּעֲרָה הַזֹּאת	04.12	and let your house be as the house of Perez which Tamar bore to Judah from the seed which יְהוָה will give you from this lass

Lads and lasses in Ruth

2009-12-10T14:21:00.000-08:00

Here are the lads and lasses of chapter 2, the elders of chapter 4, and a pair of unique self-designations that Ruth makes for herself. We saw that family relationships dominate chapters 1 and 4. The family is also a thread through chapters 2 and 3 but there is considerable involvement of groups of non-family members. Lad נַעַר and lass נַעֲרָה are slightly archaic for us but I think reflect the contrast between youngster and elder זָקֵן in the story - also lad and lass sound alike in English as na`ar and na`arah do in Hebrew.

HEBREW	CH_VS	ENGLISH	NOTES
ה וַיֹּאמֶר בֹּעַז לְנַעֲרוֹ הַנִּצָּב עַל-הַקּוֹצְרִים לְמִי הַנַּעֲרָה הַזֹּאת	02.05	and Boaz said to his lad standing by the reapers who is that lass?	to the lad of him the lass
ו וַיַּעַן הַנַּעַר הַנִּצָּב עַל-הַקּוֹצְרִים וַיֹּאמַר נַעֲרָה מוֹאֲבִיָּה הִיא הַשָּׁבָה עִם-נָעֳמִי מִשְּׂדֵי מוֹאָב	02.06	and the lad standing by the reapers said that is the Moabite lass the one who returned with Naomi from the fields of Moab	the lass is definite due to the modifiers
ח וַיֹּאמֶר בֹּעַז אֶל-רוּת הֲלוֹא שָׁמַעַתְּ בִּתִּי אַל-תֵּלְכִי לִלְקֹט בְּשָׂדֶה אַחֵר וְגַם לֹא תַעֲבוּרִי מִזֶּה וְכֹה תִדְבָּקִין עִם-נַעֲרֹתָי	02.08	and Boaz said to Ruth do you not hear, my daughter do not go to glean in the field of another and also do not pass beyond this one but stay close here with my lasses	In these first three verses we have the definite using the definite article, the definite by association with Moab and Naomi, and the plural with the singular first person possessive pronoun with-the-lasses-of-me
ט עֵינַיִךְ בַּשָּׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר-יִקְצֹרוּן וְהָלַכְתְּ אַחֲרֵיהֶן הֲלוֹא צִוִּיתִי אֶת-הַנְּעָרִים לְבִלְתִּי נָגְעֵךְ וְצָמִת וְהָלַכְתְּ אֶל-הַכֵּלִים וְשָׁתִית מֵאֲשֶׁר יִשְׁאֲבוּן הַנְּעָרִים	02.09	your eyes on the field where they reap and you go behind them have I not instructed the lads not to touch you and you thirst, and you go to the vessels and drink from what the lads have drawn
יג וַתֹּאמֶר אֶמְצָא-חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ אֲדֹנִי כִּי נִחַמְתָּנִי וְכִי דִבַּרְתָּ עַל-לֵב שִׁפְחָתֶךָ וְאָנֹכִי לֹא אֶהְיֶה כְּאַחַת שִׁפְחֹתֶיךָ	02.13	and she said, let me find favor in your eyes my Lord for you have comforted me for you have spoken to the heart of your handmaid and I myself am not one or your handmaids	This self-descriptor is used only here - what is its significance?
טו וַתָּקָם לְלַקֵּט וַיְצַו בֹּעַז אֶת-נְעָרָיו לֵאמֹר גַּם בֵּין הָעֳמָרִים תְּלַקֵּט וְלֹא תַכְלִימוּהָ	02.15	and she arose to glean and Boaz said to his lads even between the sheaves let her glean and do not reproach her	note the direct object marker in Hebrew, but it is an indirect object in English
כא וַתֹּאמֶר רוּת הַמּוֹאֲבִיָּה גַּם כִּי-אָמַר אֵלַי עִם-הַנְּעָרִים אֲשֶׁר-לִי תִּדְבָּקִין עַד אִם-כִּלּוּ אֵת כָּל-הַקָּצִיר אֲשֶׁר-לִי	02.21	and Ruth the Moabite said for he even said to me with the lads that are mine stay close until they complete all the harvest that is mine
כב וַתֹּאמֶר נָעֳמִי אֶל-רוּת כַּלָּתָהּ טוֹב בִּתִּי כִּי תֵצְאִי עִם-נַעֲרוֹתָיו וְלֹא יִפְגְּעוּ-בָךְ בְּשָׂדֶה אַחֵר	02.22	and Naomi said to Ruth her daughter-in-law good my daughter to go out with his lasses that none force you into another field
כג וַתִּדְבַּק בְּנַעֲרוֹת בֹּעַז לְלַקֵּט עַד-כְּלוֹת קְצִיר-הַשְּׂעֹרִים וּקְצִיר הַחִטִּים וַתֵּשֶׁב אֶת-חֲמוֹתָהּ	02.23	so she stayed close with the lasses of Boaz to glean to the completion of the barley harvest and the wheat harvest and she lived with her mother-in-law
ב וְעַתָּה הֲלֹא בֹעַז מֹדַעְתָּנוּ אֲשֶׁר הָיִית אֶת-נַעֲרוֹתָיו הִנֵּה-הוּא זֹרֶה אֶת-גֹּרֶן הַשְּׂעֹרִים--הַלָּיְלָה	03.02	and now is not Boaz of our acquaintance whom you were with his lasses behold he winnows at the threshing-floor barley -- tonight
ט וַיֹּאמֶר מִי-אָתְּ וַתֹּאמֶר אָנֹכִי רוּת אֲמָתֶךָ וּפָרַשְׂתָּ כְנָפֶךָ עַל-אֲמָתְךָ כִּי גֹאֵל אָתָּה	03.09	and he said - who are you? and she said - I myself am Ruth your maidservant so spread your wings over your maidservant for the one redeeming is you yourself	another unique pair of self-descriptors from Ruth
ב וַיִּקַּח עֲשָׂרָה אֲנָשִׁים מִזִּקְנֵי הָעִיר וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁבוּ-פֹה וַיֵּשֵׁבוּ	04.02	and he got ten men of the elders of the city and he said sit here and they sat	the elders at the gate witness the redemption
ד וַאֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי אֶגְלֶה אָזְנְךָ לֵאמֹר קְנֵה נֶגֶד הַיֹּשְׁבִים וְנֶגֶד זִקְנֵי עַמִּי אִם-תִּגְאַל גְּאָל וְאִם-לֹא יִגְאַל הַגִּידָה לִּי וְאֵדְעָה כִּי אֵין זוּלָתְךָ לִגְאוֹל וְאָנֹכִי אַחֲרֶיךָ וַיֹּאמֶר אָנֹכִי אֶגְאָל	04.04	and I myself had said I will disclose in your ear to say will you buy before those sitting here and before these elders of my people if you will redeem, redeem and if he will not redeem, tell me and I will know for there is none except you to redeem and I myself after you and he said I myself will redeem
ט וַיֹּאמֶר בֹּעַז לַזְּקֵנִים וְכָל-הָעָם עֵדִים אַתֶּם הַיּוֹם כִּי קָנִיתִי אֶת-כָּל-אֲשֶׁר לֶאֱלִימֶלֶךְ וְאֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר לְכִלְיוֹן וּמַחְלוֹן מִיַּד נָעֳמִי	04.09	and Boaz said to the elders and all the people witnesses you are today that I have bought all that was Elimelek's and all that was Chilion's and Mahlon's from the hand of Naomi
יא וַיֹּאמְרוּ כָּל-הָעָם אֲשֶׁר-בַּשַּׁעַר וְהַזְּקֵנִים--עֵדִים יִתֵּן יְהוָה אֶת-הָאִשָּׁה הַבָּאָה אֶל-בֵּיתֶךָ כְּרָחֵל וּכְלֵאָה אֲשֶׁר בָּנוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶם אֶת-בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וַעֲשֵׂה-חַיִל בְּאֶפְרָתָה וּקְרָא-שֵׁם בְּבֵית לָחֶם	04.11	and they said - all the people that were in the gate and the elders - witnesses let יְהוָה give to the wife coming to your house as to Rachel and as to Leah which two built the house of Israel and you do well in Ephratha and make a name in Bethlehem
יב וִיהִי בֵיתְךָ כְּבֵית פֶּרֶץ אֲשֶׁר-יָלְדָה תָמָר לִיהוּדָה--מִן-הַזֶּרַע אֲשֶׁר יִתֵּן יְהוָה לְךָ מִן-הַנַּעֲרָה הַזֹּאת	04.12	and let your house be as the house of Perez which Tamar bore to Judah from the seed which יְהוָה will give you from this lass