A body refigured: the meaning and history of Hebrew BDN.

• Author: Mizrahi, Noam
• Position: Report

In memory of Moshe Weinfeld

INTRODUCTION

Two different corpora of ancient Hebrew display distinct usages of a noun spelled. [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] In Biblical Hebrew (= BH) it appears twice as a proper name, vocalized as [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1 Sam. 12:11; 1 Chr. 7:17). By contrast, in Qumran Hebrew (= QH) it appears several times as a common noun, both in the War Scroll (1QM 5:6,9,14) and in various passages of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. (1) For lexicographers of both corpora, this word has eluded full explanation in terms of its origin and range of meaning, and it is left as a disturbing crux in the various dictionaries and lexical treatments. The purpose of the present discussion is to offer a solution that would fit all usages in their respective contexts, and will also take into account considerations drawn from the realm of comparative Semitics.

For practical reasons it is preferable to begin with the late corpus (QH), rather than the early one (BH). Admittedly, this procedure may look as strange at first glance, since the Dead Sea scrolls are evidently later than the Hebrew Bible, having their linguistic background in the Greco-Roman period. Sometimes, however, QH sheds light on earlier strata, (2) and the word discussed constitutes an example of that.

CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS

The basic meaning of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in QH can be established by contextual analysis. It was well defined by Johannes van der Ploeg in his commentary on the War Scroll, (3) and his conclusions were later corroborated by Carol Newsom in her edition of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice. (4) By examining the actual usage of the word in various contexts, both scholars ognized that [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] must mean something like 'form, figure, pattern', (5) since it is synonymous with [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. (6) The semantic equivalence of these two words is particularly evident when comparing parallel expressions within practically identical formulations in the same column of the War Scroll: (7)

(a) "The shield (shall be) surrounded with a border patterned like a cord, with the design of a joint, a skillful work, in gold and silver, and bronze welded together, and precious stones, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (8) the work of a skillful craftsman" (1QM 5:5-6).

(b) "On the socket (shall be) three chiseled rings, with a border patterned like a cord, in gold, silver, and bronze welded together, as when patterned in a skillful design, and a joint; the d[e]sign shall be on both parts of the ring, around precious stones, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], the work of a skillful craftsman ..." (1QM 5:7-9).

(c) "The hilt of the sword (shall be) a selected horn, a skillful work, [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] in gold and silver, and precious stones" (1QM 5:14).

Comparable usages of the two lexemes are found also in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, although not in the same context (as in the War Scroll). The appositive [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] "works of wondrous embroideries, figures of living divine beings" in Song IX (4Q405 G 21 [= frg. 14 6']) can be compared to [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] "[sh]apes of living divine beings" in Song XI (4Q405 I 20 [= frg. 19d 4']), which is explained later on in the text as [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] "[spirits of] embroidery, (9) [fi]gures of the shapes of divine beings" (ibid., 21 [= frg. 19c-d 5']).

This passage from Song XI furnishes yet another kind of evidence for the semantic equivalence of [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Since the two terms are synonymous, they can be coupled as a construct phrase. In such a case the order of components may invert without affecting the meaning of the entire phrase (10) and indeed we find both possibilities attested in the Songs, i.e., both [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (line 21 [= 5']) and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (line 23 [= 7']), which are semanti-cally equivalent. (11)

ETYMOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

While the general meaning of the term was fairly clearly outlined, its etymon was not identified in a satisfying way. Previously, commentators on the War Scroll sought to explain it with the help of secondary meanings of Arabic [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Yigael Yadin was the first to follow this path, (12) and other such suggestions were surveyed by van der Ploeg, (13) who rejected them all, observing correctly that it is methodologically unreasonable to interpret a Hebrew word by applying to it meanings which are clearly inner-Arabic semantic developments. (14) Alternatively, Shaul Shaked made the suggestion that the term in question is a Persian loanword. (15) But this explanation also is not necessitated by the evidence, since the word demonstrates no apparent deviation from Hebrew morphology and phonology, unlike the other items discussed by Shaked, whose Iranian origin is indeed evident (the names [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], and the common nouns [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Perhaps the strangest hypothesis suggested thus far is the extremely forced assertion of Baruch Margalit that [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is derived from the verbal root b-d-y in the sense 'invent, fabricate', (l6) which is obviously untenable.

Surprisingly, no consideration was given to a much simpler explanation, namely, that Hebrew [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] is related to the fundamental denotation of Arabic [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], (17) or more specifically, the 'torso'. (18) Cognate words are attested in Ethiopic and Modern South Arabian dialects. (19) An even earlier cognate may be found in Akkadian padattum, (20) 'form, figure (of a man)', attested already in Old Babylonian. (21) It is therefore reasonable to assume that the mysterious word in question is actually a Common Semitic lexeme that originally had a concrete denotation--the body, or a certain part of it--but in Hebrew its usage was broadened by way of abstraction to denote 'form' or 'figure' in general.

If this etymon and its semantic development are correctly identified, the vocalization of the Hebrew form can be reconstructed as [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (realized as [bodon] in the Tiberian oral tradition), since the Proto-Semitic nominal pattern *qatal is preserved as such in Arabic, but both vowels were lengthened in its Hebrew reflex qatal. (22)

SEMANTIC PARALLELS

The semantic relation between 'body' (as reflected in Arabic) and 'form, figure' (as found in QH) is self-evident. Parallel cases in QH may nevertheless support this line of reasoning, as Hebrew [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] can be compared with other anatomical terms that shifted to the spatial or even architectural realm and vice versa.

(a) One such example is the lexeme [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] which occurs in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice: "high places of knowledge [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and at His footstool [...]" (4Q403 lii 2; Song VII). While not directly dependent on any specific biblical prooftext, this passage makes figurative use of a term denoting sacred 'high places', which is widely attested in BH. (23) This sense, however, is an abstraction of a more concrete one: 'back (of an animal or a person)'. (24) The original meaning persisted well into the Second Temple period, as testified by a parallelism in the War Scroll, which portrays God as a mighty and victorious warrior: [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] "Put Your hand on the neck of Your enemies, and Your foot upon the backs of the slain" (1QM 12:11). (25)

(b) The reverse semantic development may be demonstrated by the word [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. On the one hand, in the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice it...