Tanach Thoughts

Yesterday in a certain waiting room I came across a book by Dr. Tzvi Betzer z"l, who was apparently a linguist, and who had passed away about 22 years ago, if I remember correctly. The book, dedicated in his memory, collected some (or perhaps all, I didn't check) of his various papers. Several caught my eye because they discussed topics that sounded relevant for some of my research interests. But one in particular seemed unusual. It was a short essay, more of a note, really, in terms of length, on the term "מסבות שם" (Mussabot Shem) which is typically translated something like "changed names". The term is used in Bamidbar 32:38  in reference to the Transjordanian cities captured by the Reuvenites and Gadites and resettled by their families. As mentioned above, the term is usually understood to refer to the literal names of the cities having been changed by the tribes, because the names had idolatrous connotations. However, strangely enough, in most cases we...

A strange idea just came to mind: In the past, some scholars have proposed identifying the minor judge Avdon ben Hillel ( Shoftim 12:13-15 ) with the minor judge Bedan ( Shmuel 1:12:11 ), because of the similarity of the name Bedan (בדן) with the end of Avdon's name (בדון), and the fact that Shmuel nonchalantly mentions Bedan though we the modern-day readers, have no earthly idea who he is. It's a fascinating proposal. I found myself thinking about this on Shabbat and today, and suddenly realized that Pir'aton, the hometown of Avdon, is in Menashe (having previously thought for some reason that it was in Ephraim). This is significant because Divrei Hayamim 1:7:17 mentions a descendant of Machir, son of Menashe, named Bedan! I have yet to check whether the chronology works out, but the possibility of another reference to Avdon/Bedan in Tanach is tantalizing. I'm probably not the first to wonder about this connection, though. But it's late and I'm typing from my ...

A few weeks ago, one of my papers was accepted for publication by the Jewish Bible Quarterly! It's a paper on Hoham, king of Chevron (Hebron) during the time of the Israelite conquest of Canaan in Sefer Yehoshua. Yep, my favorite: Writing about details in Tanach no one thinks about twice. In this case, the most anyone's done is suggest etymologies for his name. One scholar suggested an Anatolian etymology for his name, from " ẖuẖ(ẖ)a " , meaning ‘grandfather’, with an added Hebrew suffix of " (-a)m " . In the paper I suggest a biblically-rooted etymology, which connects him to various giants mentioned in other books of Tanach, and then propose some background for this otherwise obscure figure. I won't spoil much, but I'll definitely link it here once it goes online (should be in about half a year)! In other news, tomorrow I'll be delivering a lecture on my Levitical Cities paper. I'm super nervous about it. But, in other other news, a non-Tan...

Something interesting I noticed today while reading Rashi on Vayishlach. While discussing the wives of Esav, Rashi noted  that the wife called Ohalivamah (אהליבמה) bat Anah ( Beresheet 36:2 ) is the same as Yehudit (יהודית) bat Be'rei ( Beresheet 26:34 ). And that led me to wonder: In the Tanach (e.g. Yechezkel 23:4 ), and in later sources, especially piyyutim lamenting the destruction and exile ( some examples ), Judah is often called "Ohalivah", which is very similar to Ohalivamah, who is supposedly Yehudit (Judith, same root as Judah). It begs the questions: Why would Ohalivah/Judah be called after one of the wives of Esav, and is Ohalah (Israel in the same sources) also named after someone? (image taken from here )

So, exciting news, one of my papers has passed the first peer reviewer! He expressed interest in my general theory, but had a long list of issues with some of the specifics. Some I believe that I have to reject outright because these comments are unsubstantiated. The reviewer simply stated that he was uncertain about these points. I think that if I can sharpen other points based on the rest of the comments, then it'll be okay if I (politely) reject these. So, whilst searching for information that would strengthen the rest of my thesis, I came across something interesting: Both Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and Targum Yerushalmi to Devarim 1:44 translate "Seir" as "Gavla" (גבלא, Aramaic for Gebal). Now, Gebal is known as an ancient town in Sidon, and it eventually became known as Byblos. But Seir is in the south of Israel! So why would these targums identify Seir with Gebal? As it turns out, there was indeed a time when the region of Idumea (Edom) or Seir was known as...

So, a few minutes ago I submitted another Tanach-related paper to a fairly good Israeli Tanach journal. This is not my Levitical Cities paper. I decided to take an extended break from that one to clear my head and finish my BA schoolwork. During my spare time, I focused on three projects in particular: Two Tanach papers and a midrash paper. So, the first of these papers, which was submitted today, is about a curious verse in Melachim, which Biblical Criticism scholars have (naturally) thought to be distorted. I propose in the paper two chiddushim: The first explains why the verse is not distorted and in fact can be explained easily based on a phenomenon found in colloquial Hebrew throughout the ages (yup - from Tanachic times [including epigraphic sources!!] through modern Israeli Hebrew). The second proposes a new interpretation for the verse as a whole, drawing on symbolism and comparison to many other sources. I'd love to share more, but I'd like to see this thing get throug...