וַיִּשְׁמַע הַכְּנַעֲנִי מֶלֶךְ עֲרָד יֹשֵׁב הַנֶּגֶב כִּי בָּא יִשְׂרָאֵל דֶּרֶךְ הָאֲתָרִים וַיִּלָּחֶם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּשְׁבְּ מִמֶּנּוּ שֶׁבִי
KJ (King James translation): And when king Arad the Canaanite, which dwelt in the south, heard tell that Israel came by the way of the spies; then he fought against Israel, and took some of them prisoners.
BN (BibleNet translation): And the Kena'ani, the king of Arad, who dwelt in the Negev, heard tell that Yisra-El was coming by way of Atarim; and he fought against Yisra-El, and took some of them captive.
HA ATARIM: Numbers 32:3 has ATAROT, which is not this; ATAROT is spelled with a Tet (עֲטָר֤וֹת) where this has a Tav (אֲתָרִים); and this is HA ATARIM, with a definite article. There is no other mention of the place in the Tanach. KJ, and some others, reckon ATARIM as "spies", for which I can find no etymological base of any kind; perhaps they have recognised the Arabic word for "tracks", and assumed that the spies would have preferred tracks to open scrub...
VA YISHB: Or possibly VA YASHAB. Scholars seem to have got stuck with this one as well; most reckon it should be read as VA YISHB, which they also recognise is an impossibility by any known Yehudit rules of grammar from any period of its history, except perhaps one, to which I shall return in a moment.
The root is SHAVAH = "to transport into captivity", so there could be a missing Vav Medugash ending, which would render it grammatically correctly as VA YISHVU or VA YISHBU. See verse 29 below for the verb in proper usage.
As to the possible exception, Jeremiah 41:10 uses precisely the same construction, VA YISHB, and with its full pointing and cantillation markers it reads וַיִּ֣שְׁבְּ.
See also Ezra 2:1 which uses SHEVI for the captives in Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar.
21:2 VA YIDAR YISRA-EL NEDER LA YHVH VA YOMER IM NATON TITEN ET HA AM HA ZEH BE YADI VE HACHARAMTI ET AREYHEM
21:2 VA YIDAR YISRA-EL NEDER LA YHVH VA YOMER IM NATON TITEN ET HA AM HA ZEH BE YADI VE HACHARAMTI ET AREYHEM
וַיִּדַּר יִשְׂרָאֵל נֶדֶר לַיהוָה וַיֹּאמַר אִם נָתֹן תִּתֵּן אֶת הָעָם הַזֶּה בְּיָדִי וְהַחֲרַמְתִּי אֶת עָרֵיהֶם
KJ: And Israel vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou wilt indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy their cities.
BN: Then Yisra-El vowed a vow to YHVH, saying: "If you will indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy their cities."
Is YHVH saying this to Yisra-El, or Yisra-El to YHVH; the use of the first person is confusing? And indeed, both that and the use of Yisra-El in this manner, suggest that this chapter belongs to a different author, and quite probably to a different period of history as well. Can we infer Yirme-Yah (Jeremiah) from the first verse? Are we comfortable with this notion of conquest-with-destruction as being divinely sanctioned?
And do we accept that sudden leap of time in the last chapter, by consequence of which all this is happening thirty-seven years after heeding the spies and not trying to enter the land (rather than at the beginning of that period, which would make HA ATARIM as "the spies" make considerably more sense)?
Either way, at the end of that last chapter, Mosheh has tried to find a route through Edom, presumably to go and settle in the northern Nefud. Arad and the Negev are west of the river Yarden (Jordan); to come here from Kadesh clashes completely with this. To openly declare war suggests Yehoshu'a, not Mosheh. Once again we have to conclude that a hodge-podge of different versions have been gathered to make this Torah, and they do not always make a comfortable fit. The likelihood with this tale is that it is part of the Ach-Mousa history, his driving of the Hyksos out of Mitsrayim, which we have witnessed vaguely in these Toraic tales, and will witness in full when we reach the Book of Joshua.
21:3 VA YISHMA YHVH BE KOL YISRA-EL VA YITEN ET HA KENA'ANI VA YACHAREM ET'HEM VE ET AREYHEM VA YIKRA SHEM HA MAKOM CHARMAH
KJ: And the LORD hearkened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities: and he called the name of the place Hormah.
21:3 VA YISHMA YHVH BE KOL YISRA-EL VA YITEN ET HA KENA'ANI VA YACHAREM ET'HEM VE ET AREYHEM VA YIKRA SHEM HA MAKOM CHARMAH
וַיִּשְׁמַע יְהוָה בְּקוֹל יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַכְּנַעֲנִי וַיַּחֲרֵם אֶתְהֶם וְאֶת עָרֵיהֶם וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הַמָּקוֹם חָרְמָה
KJ: And the LORD hearkened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities: and he called the name of the place Hormah.
BN: And YHVH hearkened to the voice of Yisra-El, and delivered up the Kena'ani; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities; and the name of the place was called Charmah.
Which, if it had happened, would have allowed Yehoshu'a and Kalev to say to the people, see, we told you the other ten spies were being unnecessarily negative. If we can take Charmah, we can take the whole land... and even if we can't, trying will be better than this waterless and foodless desert...
CHARMAH: But we have been here before. In Numbers 14:45, when the Amelekites attacked, and "and the Kena'ani, who dwelt in that hill-country, came down, and smote them, and drove them back, all the way to Charmah." And not just been there before, but been further into Kena'an even than that, because in that fight they were driven back to Charmah - Mosheh re-tells the tale in Deuteronomy 1 (see especially v44), but the conquest of Chormah really belongs to Yehoshu'a, and can be found in Joshua 12:7 ff (especially 14), Joshua 15:30 and, somewhat confusingly, or else there were two towns named Chormah, in Joshua 19:4.
Having said which, the town is named CHORMAH here because YHVH YACHAREM, which is to say "destroyed", so the name means "ruins", just as did HA AI in Genesis 12:8 and 13:2 (Yehoshu'a will destroy it in Joshua 7/8).
pey break
21:4 VA YIS'U ME HOR HA HAR DERECH YAM SUPH LISVOV ET ERETS EDOM VA TIKTSAR NEPHESH HA AM BA DERECH
וַיִּסְעוּ מֵהֹר הָהָר דֶּרֶךְ יַם סוּף לִסְבֹב אֶת אֶרֶץ אֱדוֹם וַתִּקְצַר נֶפֶשׁ הָעָם בַּדָּרֶךְ
KJ: And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way of the Red sea, to compass the land of Edom: and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way.
BN: And they journeyed from Mount Hor by the way of the Red Sea, to circuit around the land of Edom; and the souls of the people became impatient because of the way.
They were at Mount Hor at the end of the last chapter, and buried Aharon there; so it appears that they then crossed due west into the Negev, defeated the Kena'ani there, but not only did they not then turn north, to enter Kena'an proper, which they had just demonstrated they had the military capacity to do, but they are now back at Mount Hor, and heading in precisely the opposite direction, southwards, needing to cross into the southern Nefud or northern Hejaz somewhere around today's Eilat or Aqaba - the precise route, incidentally, that Lawrence of Arabia took when he famously captured Aqaba from the desert.
LISVOV: In what way does this route circuit around Edom anyway? Unless, having gathered up the non-military from Mount Hor, they went west again, towards Charmah, and then turned south. But if that territory is now theirs by conquest, why down to the Red Sea anyway?
And presumably this is why "the souls of the people" became "impatient"? Because they thought as I did, that with this conquest they were now heading for the Promised Land. See the next verse for confirmation.
21:5 VA YEDABER HA AM B'ELOHIM U VE MOSHEH LAMAH HE'ELIYTUNU MI MITSRAYIM LAMUT BA MIDBAR KI EYN LECHEM VE EYN MAYIM VE NAPHSHENU KATSAH BA LECHEM HA KELOKEL
וַיְדַבֵּר הָעָם בֵּאלֹהִים וּבְמֹשֶׁה לָמָה הֶעֱלִיתֻנוּ מִמִּצְרַיִם לָמוּת בַּמִּדְבָּר כִּי אֵין לֶחֶם וְאֵין מַיִם וְנַפְשֵׁנוּ קָצָה בַּלֶּחֶם הַקְּלֹקֵל
KJ: And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.
BN: And the people spoke against Elohim, and against Mosheh: "Why have you brought us up out of Mitsrayim to die in the wilderness? For there is no bread, and there is no water; and our souls are sick to death of this apology for bread."
I have been colloquial with my translation here, but the tone is absolutely there in the Yehudit to justify it.
ELOHIM: Note that YHVH is not named in this verse, though it is he who responds in the next one. We have seen very little of Elohim in the Book of Numbers, so again we can feel free to wonder if this is not some other version which the Ezraic Redactor felt the need to incude, and here was a convenient place to do so. It would also help explain some of the inner contradictions of the text.
Note also that this was precisely the complaint that they made at the start of the last chapter (Numbers 20:2-5); and yet again we have an instance of something bad happening, on this occasion in Nature, for which human sin or rebellion is required as an explanation
21:6 VA YESHALACH YHVH BA AM ET HA NECHASHIM HA SERAPHIM VA YENASHCHU ET HA AM VA YAMAT AM RAV MI YISRA-EL
KJ: And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.
BN: Then YHVH sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people, and many people of Yisra-El died.
21:6 VA YESHALACH YHVH BA AM ET HA NECHASHIM HA SERAPHIM VA YENASHCHU ET HA AM VA YAMAT AM RAV MI YISRA-EL
וַיְשַׁלַּח יְהוָה בָּעָם אֵת הַנְּחָשִׁים הַשְּׂרָפִים וַיְנַשְּׁכוּ אֶת הָעָם וַיָּמָת עַם רָב מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל
KJ: And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.
BN: Then YHVH sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people, and many people of Yisra-El died.
Once again a natural incident occurs, and itbecomes attributed theologically; there wouldn't be snakes in these mountai ns if YHVH hadn't sent them, and YHVH wouldn't have sent them if we hadn't sinned. This is the faith position. On the other hand, we can also read it as YHVH having another of his bully-sulks and tantrums: no one contradicts or challenges me; I'm in charge. This is what happens to anyone disloyal or rebellious. Nice god either way.
NECHASHIM: Snakes, like the ones in the woods and marshes near your home, like the one that Chavah kept as her oracle in her sacred grove at Eden. The problem here is not the NECHASHIM, but the SERAPHIM.
SERAPHIM: For the moment, I simply note the word, and the presence of the creatures; wait for verse 8 ff (or if you lack patience, see my note to Numbers 17:2).
21:7 VA YAVO HA AM EL MOSHEH VA YOMRU CHATANU KI DIBARNU VA YHVH U VACH HITPALEL EL YHVH VE YASER ME ALEYNU ET HA NACHASH VA YITPALEL MOSHEH BE AD HA AM
וַיָּבֹא הָעָם אֶל מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמְרוּ חָטָאנוּ כִּי דִבַּרְנוּ בַיהוָה וָבָךְ הִתְפַּלֵּל אֶל יְהוָה וְיָסֵר מֵעָלֵינוּ אֶת הַנָּחָשׁ וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל מֹשֶׁה בְּעַד הָעָם
KJ: Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.
BN: Then the people came to Mosheh, saying: "We have sinned. By speaking against YHVH, and against you. Pray to YHVH for us. Ask him to take this snake away from us. And Mosheh prayed on behalf of the people.
HA NACHASH: Lots of them in the previous verse, and fiery; only one now, and flameless.
21:8 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH ASEH LECHA SARAPH VE SIM OTO AL NES VE HAYAH KOL HA NASHUCH VE RA'AH OTO VA CHAI
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה עֲשֵׂה לְךָ שָׂרָף וְשִׂים אֹתוֹ עַל נֵס וְהָיָה כָּל הַנָּשׁוּךְ וְרָאָה אֹתוֹ וָחָי
KJ: And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
BN: Then YHVH said to Mosheh: Make for yourself a seraph, and set it on a pole; and it shall come to pass that anyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.
SERAPH: Keeping in mind that this episode began with YHVH sending SERAPHIM - serpents - to bite the murmurers, the SERAPHIM in that verse are always translated as regular snakes, but the SERAPH here as "fiery serpent", even though it is the singular form of the same word - unless those vipers in verse 6 were fire-breathing dragons of the Arthurian or Reingoldian variety late versions of Chavah's oracular serpent in the garden of Eden, precursors of Lucifer (for whom see my notes on Geryon, in the chapter about the red heifer, Numbers 19). But let us say the SERAPH here is such: how do you make a fiery serpent? A brass serpent (as below), a wooden serpent, a clay serpent, easy. But a fiery one? And then, what happens to the fire when it is nailed to the pole? Once again look at the word SERAPH, and then note the word NES - which is indeed "a pole", but also "a miracle"!
BN: Then YHVH said to Mosheh: Make for yourself a seraph, and set it on a pole; and it shall come to pass that anyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.
SERAPH: Keeping in mind that this episode began with YHVH sending SERAPHIM - serpents - to bite the murmurers, the SERAPHIM in that verse are always translated as regular snakes, but the SERAPH here as "fiery serpent", even though it is the singular form of the same word - unless those vipers in verse 6 were fire-breathing dragons of the Arthurian or Reingoldian variety late versions of Chavah's oracular serpent in the garden of Eden, precursors of Lucifer (for whom see my notes on Geryon, in the chapter about the red heifer, Numbers 19). But let us say the SERAPH here is such: how do you make a fiery serpent? A brass serpent (as below), a wooden serpent, a clay serpent, easy. But a fiery one? And then, what happens to the fire when it is nailed to the pole? Once again look at the word SERAPH, and then note the word NES - which is indeed "a pole", but also "a miracle"!
(I have attached different links to the word SERAPHIM in this note).
And wait a moment: is this "fiery
serpent" the same one that Mosheh will be commanded to make later on (actually, the very next verse), as
his banner, Nechushtan?
Indeed, wait two more moments. First,
because: wasn't it with precisely such a serpent that Mosheh convinced Pharaoh
to let the people go (Exodus 7:9ff). And
second, because: does this not constitute the making of an or a graven image,
which is elsewhere prohibited (Exodus 20:3/4)?
VA CHAI: And how, just for the passing interest, does this particular piece of black magic actually work? Or is that why the seraph has to be placed on a NES?
21:9 VA YA'AS MOSHEH NECHASH NECHOSHET VA YESIMEHU AL HA NES VE HAYAH IM NASHACH HA NACHASH ET ISH VE HIBIT EL NECHASH HA NECHOSHET VA CHAI
וַיַּעַשׂ מֹשֶׁה נְחַשׁ נְחֹשֶׁת וַיְשִׂמֵהוּ עַל הַנֵּס וְהָיָה אִם נָשַׁךְ הַנָּחָשׁ אֶת אִישׁ וְהִבִּיט אֶל נְחַשׁ הַנְּחֹשֶׁת וָחָי
KJ: And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.
BN: And Mosheh made a serpent out of brass, and set it upon the pole; and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked at the brass serpent, he lived.
Even the writer seems to have recognised the implausibility of this fiery serpent, whilst simultaneously being unwilling to acknowledge the true nature of the SERAPH! So now it is NECHUSHTAN, a brass serpent, Mosheh's banner - for which, see the link; but also, remember the incident with Aharon's rod in Exodus 7:8-21, where his rod became a serpent, just as Mosheh's had done, and indeed those of Pharaoh's shamans too, in Exodus 4:3. So what was then a magic trick, and what had been forced to go on its belly as a punishment for causing Original Sin, is now the formal banner of Yisra-El! I leave sorting that one out to the theologians!
21:10 VA YIS'U BENEY YISRA-EL VA YACHANU BE OVOT
וַיִּסְעוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיַּחֲנוּ בְּאֹבֹת
BN: And the Beney Yisra-El journeyed, and pitched at Ovot.
Each place at which they stop turns out to have some sin or act of rebellion attached; presumably these were the aetiological myths connected to the shrines, and would have been recounted to or by the pilgrims, as part of the pilgrimage liturgy when they moved on from shrine to shrine, oasis to oasis. Later they became incorporated into the Mosheh mythology as pseudo-history, which enabled the Mosheh story, but also created a space in which to absorb, assimilate and thereby remove the original aetiology and superimpose the new theology - the standard method of cultural conquest by all peoples, throughout history. So we can read behind the Mosaic version what must have been the original: in the case of the last episode, an oasis known to be a favourite drinking-place for desert snakes, and therefore developed as a shrine to the serpent-deity.
And in the case of the current verse, the very word Ovot takes us directly to the Ba'alot Ov, who were "witches", which is to say mediums, or soothsayers, or seance-manageresses, or horoscope readers, or the owners of Glastonbury afghan-rug-and-celtic-harp-music-stores, or possibly the 1960s inhabitants of Haight-Ashbury; and who were prohibited in Leviticus 19:31. See 1 Samuel 28 for the details of what is technically known as necromancy, and then note the coincidence (?) that Mosheh in the last verse made himself what was actually a Rod of Asclepius rather than a caduceus pole (the former has one snake, the latter two), a healing instrument that most definitely breaches YHVH's commandments against superstition; and then using it as a means of overcoming death by black magic; and here are the Beney Yisra-El, immediately travelling on to consult a necromancer. This whole chapter surely must be the work of an entirely different author at an entirely different time.
21:11 VA YIS'U ME OVOT VA YACHANU BE IYEY HA AVARIM BA MIDBAR ASHER AL PENEY MO-AV MI MIZRACH HA SHEMESH
KJ: And they journeyed from Oboth, and pitched at Ijeabarim, in the wilderness which is before Moab, toward the sunrising.
BN: And they journeyed from Ovot, and pitched at Iyey Ha Avarim, in the wilderness before Mo-Av, toward the sunrise.
In verse 4 they were travelling south, going around Edom in order to get to the Red Sea. But Mo-Av is north of Edom, not south of it! And they had been prohibited from passing through Edom to get there, so they must have gone due east, into the Hejaz, and circuited around Edom - just as we were told they were going to do in verse 4; ony they didn't. Well they must have done now.
It may be pure coincidence, but - and you will need to follow the Yehudit to see this - they travelled "from Ovot to Mo-Av" - which is מֵאֹבֹת to מוֹאָב. Language games!
IYEY HA AVARIM: "on the border of Mo-Av" according to Numbers 33:44, when the Beney Yisra-El return here later on. And speaking of language games: AVARIM to IVRIM is simply a matter of how you read the word without the pointing. IYEY comes from the same root that gave the town of Ha Ai, which I mentioned in relation to Chormah, also at verse 4. So does IYEY HA AVARIM mean "destroyed by the Habiru"? And if so, are we again finding confirmation of Ach-Mousa's conquests, Hebraised as those of Mosheh, and especially Yehoshu'a?
וַיִּסְעוּ מֵאֹבֹת וַיַּחֲנוּ בְּעִיֵּי הָעֲבָרִים בַּמִּדְבָּר אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי מוֹאָב מִמִּזְרַח הַשָּׁמֶשׁ
KJ: And they journeyed from Oboth, and pitched at Ijeabarim, in the wilderness which is before Moab, toward the sunrising.
BN: And they journeyed from Ovot, and pitched at Iyey Ha Avarim, in the wilderness before Mo-Av, toward the sunrise.
It may be pure coincidence, but - and you will need to follow the Yehudit to see this - they travelled "from Ovot to Mo-Av" - which is מֵאֹבֹת to מוֹאָב. Language games!
IYEY HA AVARIM: "on the border of Mo-Av" according to Numbers 33:44, when the Beney Yisra-El return here later on. And speaking of language games: AVARIM to IVRIM is simply a matter of how you read the word without the pointing. IYEY comes from the same root that gave the town of Ha Ai, which I mentioned in relation to Chormah, also at verse 4. So does IYEY HA AVARIM mean "destroyed by the Habiru"? And if so, are we again finding confirmation of Ach-Mousa's conquests, Hebraised as those of Mosheh, and especially Yehoshu'a?
21:12 MI SHAM NASA'U VA YACHANU BE NACHAL ZERED
מִשָּׁם נָסָעוּ וַיַּחֲנוּ בְּנַחַל זָרֶד
KJ: From thence they removed, and pitched in the valley of Zared.
BN: From there they journeyed, and pitched in Wadi Zared.
NACHAL: Given that virtually every place named as a NACHAL in the Bible turns out to be named as a wadi today... though actually Zared is really the brook, and the Wadi is now called al-Hasa, because of the amazing gorge - click here to see it.
ZARED: Moving even further north, they are now virtually at the Dead Sea (Yam ha Melach) - but on the eastern side.
21:13 MI SHAM NASA'U VA YACHANU ME EVER ARNON ASHER BA MIDBAR HA YOTS'E MI GEVUL HA EMORI KI ARNON GEVUL MO-AV BEYN MO-AV U VEYN HA EMORI
מִשָּׁם נָסָעוּ וַיַּחֲנוּ מֵעֵבֶר אַרְנוֹן אֲשֶׁר בַּמִּדְבָּר הַיֹּצֵא מִגְּבֻל הָאֱמֹרִי כִּי אַרְנוֹן גְּבוּל מוֹאָב בֵּין מוֹאָב וּבֵין הָאֱמֹרִי
KJ: From thence they removed, and pitched on the other side of Arnon, which is in the wilderness that cometh out of the coasts of the Amorites: for Arnon is the border of Moab, between Moab and the Amorites.
BN: From there they travelled on, and pitched on the far side of the Arnon, which is in the wilderness, where it comes out of the border of the Emori. For Arnon is the border of Mo-Av, between Mo-Av and the Emori.
ARNON: Still further north - the Arnon flows into the Dead Sea about half-way down its eastern shore - click here.
EMORI: Amorites in most English translations.
21:14 AL KEN YE'AMER BE SEPHER MILCHAMOT YHVH ET VAHEV BE SUPHAH VE ET HA NECHALIM ARNON
עַל כֵּן יֵאָמַר בְּסֵפֶר מִלְחֲמֹת יְהוָה אֶת וָהֵב בְּסוּפָה וְאֶת הַנְּחָלִים אַרְנוֹן
KJ: Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the LORD, What he did in the Red sea, and in the brooks of Arnon,
BN: Which is why it is said in "The Book of the Wars of YHVH": "This is what he did at Suphah, and the valleys of Arnon...
VAHEV: There is no obvious root to explain this word as translated here. Is the initial Vav the conjunction "and"?; if so, the verb is HEV or HAV, and no such two-letter root is known (which doesn't mean there isn't one; just that none is known). Gesenius suggests YAHAV, which is logical, but then he explains it as "a rare and defective root", and claims to have found it in Chaldean and Ethiopic (Kushite). Is it perhaps the same verb that occurs in Psalm 55:23 (55:22 in some versions):
הַשְׁלֵ֤ךְ עַל יְהוָ֨ה יְהָבְךָ֮ וְה֪וּא יְכַ֫לְכְּלֶ֥ךָ לֹא יִתֵּ֖ן לְעוֹלָ֥ם מ֗וֹט לַצַּדִּֽיק
and in Psalm 29:1 as HAVU?
But in that case it means "give", and that too makes little sense here.
הָב֣וּ לַֽ֭יהוָה בְּנֵ֣י אֵלִ֑ים הָב֥וּ לַ֝יהוָ֗ה כָּב֥וֹד וָעֹֽז
But in that case it means "give", and that too makes little sense here.
SUPHAH: Generally assumed to be Yam Suph, the Red Sea, but a Suph is a rush or reed, and particularly (Exodus 2:3, Isaiah 19:6) those that grow in the River Nile and which are the vegetation most associated with Osher (Osiris) - the very bulrushes in which Mosheh was supposedly set afloat in his ark, and rescued by Pharaoh's daughter. Given that our alternative usage of HEV, as HAVU in Psalm 29, is a Psalm set in the "wilderness of Kadesh" (verse 8)...
Or perhaps VAHEV is the name of a place, and it should be pronounced with a soft Vav, in the Arabic manner, Waheb?
"The Book of the Wars of YHVH": a lengthier discussion of "Waheb", alongside a lengthier discussion of this mythological book, including multiple historical commentaries, both religious and secular, can be found here; I will be returning to it in discussion of the other songs in the verses that follow this (17-18, 27ff). It will be worthwhile looking at the Jewish Encyclopedia link here as well; the Nachmanides commentary to which it refers can be found here, with regrets that it doesn't come with an English translation.
21:15 VE ESHED HA NECHALIM ASHER NATAH LE SHEVET AR VE NISH'AN LI GEVUL MO-AV
וְאֶשֶׁד הַנְּחָלִים אֲשֶׁר נָטָה לְשֶׁבֶת עָר וְנִשְׁעַן לִגְבוּל מוֹאָב
KJ: And at the stream of the brooks that goeth down to the dwelling of Ar, and lieth upon the border of Moab.
BN: "And at the point of the valleys where it slopes toward the urban settlement at Ar, and thence down to the border of Mo-Av."
Horrible translation! SHEVET AR surely means an "urban settlement", not a seat. Why "lieth upon" (or "leans upon" in other translations)? "Slopes down to..."
AR: A variation of Ur? Or simply the root that yields any "city". Both, actually.
LI GEVUL: Or LIGVUL?
Note again that all the geographical description locates this on the east bank of the Dead Sea, nowhere near the Red Sea - essentially this is Nabataean Petra, but several centuries before the Nabataeans.
21:16 U MI SHAM BE'ERAH HI HA BE'ER ASHER AMAR YHVH LE MOSHEH ESOPH ET HA AM VE ETNAH LAHEM MAYIM
KJ: And from thence they went to Beer: that is the well whereof the LORD spake unto Moses, Gather the people together, and I will give them water.
BN: And from there to Be'er; that is the well about which YHVH said to Mosheh: Gather the people together, and I will give them water.
BEER: Definitely Be'er, not Beer - this is a water-shrine, not a pub.
KJ: Then Israel sang this song, Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it:
BN: Then Yisra-El sang this song: "Spring up, O well, sing unto it."
LI GEVUL: Or LIGVUL?
Note again that all the geographical description locates this on the east bank of the Dead Sea, nowhere near the Red Sea - essentially this is Nabataean Petra, but several centuries before the Nabataeans.
21:16 U MI SHAM BE'ERAH HI HA BE'ER ASHER AMAR YHVH LE MOSHEH ESOPH ET HA AM VE ETNAH LAHEM MAYIM
וּמִשָּׁם בְּאֵרָה הִוא הַבְּאֵר אֲשֶׁר אָמַר יְהוָה לְמֹשֶׁה אֱסֹף אֶת הָעָם וְאֶתְּנָה לָהֶם מָיִם
KJ: And from thence they went to Beer: that is the well whereof the LORD spake unto Moses, Gather the people together, and I will give them water.
BN: And from there to Be'er; that is the well about which YHVH said to Mosheh: Gather the people together, and I will give them water.
BEER: Definitely Be'er, not Beer - this is a water-shrine, not a pub.
BE'ER: As with Kadesh, which simply means "holy" and could therefore apply to any shrine, so Be'er simply means "well", as in a hole in the ground with drinkable water at the bottom. Generally there is a second name, as in Be'er Sheva and Be'er Lechi Ro'i, but there are also places in the world just known as Wells - click here, and here. So we have no idea where precisely this one was located.
ASHER AMAR: We also have no record of Mosheh being told this, at least not about this well - but it fits the pattern of several previous stories, in which the people, wandering in the desert, get thirsty, and Mosheh asks YHVH, and - because everything good has to be credited to YHVH, but everything bad to human wickedness - YHVH leads them to a well. Probably they knew where the next well was, from the fact that this pilgrimage around the shrines had been an annual event for centuries (though just as probably it had been suspended during the rule of the Hyksos and this tale of the Exodus was its resumption). The next verse endorses this - the people know the place through what is either a popular song, or more likely a traditional Psalm or hymn connected to this particular watering-place.
21:17 AZ YASHIR YISRA-EL ET HA SHIRAH HA ZOT ALI VE'ER ENU LAH
21:17 AZ YASHIR YISRA-EL ET HA SHIRAH HA ZOT ALI VE'ER ENU LAH
אָז יָשִׁיר יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת הַשִּׁירָה הַזֹּאת עֲלִי בְאֵר עֱנוּ לָהּ
KJ: Then Israel sang this song, Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it:
BN: Then Yisra-El sang this song: "Spring up, O well, sing unto it."
Is this perhaps another page from the Book of the Wars of YHVH? The context of the chapter makes it likely, but thus is liturgy, not martial chanting.
AZ YASHIR: A phrase which, to those who attend synagogue regularly, evokes an entirely different song, AZ YASHIR MOSHEH, the Song at the Red Sea of Exodus 15.
21:18 BE'ER CHAPHARU'AH SARIM KARU'AH NEDIVEY HA AM BIM'CHOKEK BE MISH'ANOTAM U MI MIDBAR MATANAH
KJ: The princes digged the well, the nobles of the people digged it, by the direction of the lawgiver, with their staves. And from the wilderness they went to Mattanah:
BN: "The well, which the princes dug, which the nobles of the people sanctified with their sceptres in the name of the law-giver, and for which they provided the financial support, bringing gifts from the wilderness...
21:18 BE'ER CHAPHARU'AH SARIM KARU'AH NEDIVEY HA AM BIM'CHOKEK BE MISH'ANOTAM U MI MIDBAR MATANAH
בְּאֵר חֲפָרוּהָ שָׂרִים כָּרוּהָ נְדִיבֵי הָעָם בִּמְחֹקֵק בְּמִשְׁעֲנֹתָם וּמִמִּדְבָּר מַתָּנָה
KJ: The princes digged the well, the nobles of the people digged it, by the direction of the lawgiver, with their staves. And from the wilderness they went to Mattanah:
BN: "The well, which the princes dug, which the nobles of the people sanctified with their sceptres in the name of the law-giver, and for which they provided the financial support, bringing gifts from the wilderness...
Are these still the words of the song, or a description of what happened after the singing? Nor is that question asked in jest - and for two reasons. First, because liturgy in a set place, or at a set time, often retells the reason for itself: so this could be the words of the song recalling the original establishment of the shrine at this well. Second, because the language of the next several verses (NACHALI-EL, BAMOT, ROSH HA PISGAH) could lead us from place to place, but it could just as easily keep us in the one place, and undertake several symbolic acts. My personal conviction is that it was the latter. See the notes that follow.
BIMCHOKEK: Is the law-giver Mosheh, or Ach-Mousa, renewing the ancient covenant and restoring the Pharaonic dynasty?
How do you "dig" with "a sceptre" - unless still more black magic is going on? This is more likely be a symbolic use of the sceptre, equivalent to an Archbishop raising his sceptre to make the sign of the Cross - an act of sanctifying of the well.
MISH'ANOTAM: A prop or means of support, usually food, but sometimes money. The staff carried by each tribal chieftain was a MATEH or a SHEVET, not a MISH'AN. Cf Isaiah 3:1 and Psalm 18:19.
MISH'ANOTAM: A prop or means of support, usually food, but sometimes money. The staff carried by each tribal chieftain was a MATEH or a SHEVET, not a MISH'AN. Cf Isaiah 3:1 and Psalm 18:19.
MATANAH: "a gift", and therefore likely to be named because offerings were brought here.
21:19 U MI MATANAH NACHALI-EL U MI NACHALI-EL BAMOT
וּמִמַּתָּנָה נַחֲלִיאֵל וּמִנַּחֲלִיאֵל בָּמוֹת
KJ: And from Mattanah to Nahaliel: and from Nahaliel to Bamoth:
BN: "And the gifts that they brought were all from their personal possessions; and they brought these personal possessions to the high place...
NACHALI-EL: A Nachal is a "possession"; but this is not the same as the "inheritance" of the land promised by YHVH to the Beney Yisra-El in Exodus 32:13 and elsewhere (though there are also MORASHAH and ACHUZAH for that "inheritance" - see my notes at Exodus 6:8 and Leviticus 27:20).
BAMOT: Once again a place-name that is really a reference to a sacred site (the bimah, the reading-desk in the modern synagogue, comes from the same root-word). And if we follow the chronology of these keywords/place-names: they dug the well, they agreed the donor list for maintaining it, they consecrated it, they established the locus for prayer and offerings, they brought those offerings.
21:20 U MI BAMOT HA GAI ASHER BI SEDEH MO-AV ROSH HA PISGAH VE NISHKAPHAH AL PENEY HA YESHIMON
וּמִבָּמוֹת הַגַּיְא אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׂדֵה מוֹאָב רֹאשׁ הַפִּסְגָּה וְנִשְׁקָפָה עַל פְּנֵי הַיְשִׁימֹן
KJ: And from Bamoth in the valley, that is in the country of Moab, to the top of Pisgah, which looketh toward Jeshimon.
BN: "And upwards from Bamot, which is the valley of the plains of Mo-Av, is the very summit, where it looks down on the desert."
ROSH HA PISGAH: Rosh means "source", not "top", though it is also used to mean "head"; Pisgah means "summit" rather than being a place-name; Rosh ha Pisgah therefore means the very pinnacle of the mountain and is not its name; and of course this is also the "name" of the very spot where Mosheh will later come to die (Deuteronomy 32:48-52); though that will be the summit of an entirely different mountain (the Valhalla of a very different Olympus?).
YESHIMON: Likewise this is not the name of a place, but a description of a landscape - desert, but MIDBAR tends to be used for sand-desert, and YESHIMON for scrub-desert - see for example Psalms 68:8, 78:40, and 106:14. And note that YESHIMON is almost exclusively a word used in liturgy!
And in my reading, that Pey break is there to let us know the song is now finished, and that what we just read was entirely the liturgy of a single water-shrine, and not the account of a set of journeys.
And in my reading, that Pey break is there to let us know the song is now finished, and that what we just read was entirely the liturgy of a single water-shrine, and not the account of a set of journeys.
pey break
וַיִּשְׁלַח יִשְׂרָאֵל מַלְאָכִים אֶל סִיחֹן מֶלֶךְ הָאֱמֹרִי לֵאמֹר
BN: Then Yisra-El sent messengers to Sichon king of the Emori, saying:
Once again this unusual use of Yisra-El, as though it were Ya'akov (Jacob) reincarnate, or the way we might today say that America has sent troops to somewhere, rather than naming the President who gave the order.
SICHON: Whose city was Cheshbon, which was in Mo-Av, east of the river Yarden. See also Psalm 135:11.
And if all those "place-names" were indeed place-names, and they have been travelling all this while, then we are looking down on the plains of Mo-Av from the summit of the mountain, and that does indeed mean Nevo, the mountain where Mosheh will later go to die. But why are they sending messages north and eastwards, and seeking routes north and eastwards, if their goal is westwards, and they just cleared the path by defeating the Kena'anim (verse 3)? If Sichon accepts the offer (see next verse) they will find themselves on the Golan heights, and coming down into Kena'an through the hostile territory of the Ashurim, who can be guaranteed not to let them pass through.
21:22 E'EBERAH VE ARTSECHA LO NITEH BE SADEH U VE CHEREM LO NISHTEH MEY VE'ER BE DERECH HA MELECH NELECH AD ASHER NA'AVOR GEVULECHA
KJ: Let me pass through thy land: we will not turn into the fields, or into the vineyards; we will not drink of the waters of the well: but we will go along by the king's high way, until we be past thy borders.
BN: "Let me pass through your land; we will not turn aside into any field, or any vineyard; we will not drink the water from the wells; we will go by the King's Highway, until we have passed your border."
21:22 E'EBERAH VE ARTSECHA LO NITEH BE SADEH U VE CHEREM LO NISHTEH MEY VE'ER BE DERECH HA MELECH NELECH AD ASHER NA'AVOR GEVULECHA
אֶעְבְּרָה בְאַרְצֶךָ לֹא נִטֶּה בְּשָׂדֶה וּבְכֶרֶם לֹא נִשְׁתֶּה מֵי בְאֵר בְּדֶרֶךְ הַמֶּלֶךְ נֵלֵךְ עַד אֲשֶׁר נַעֲבֹר גְּבֻלֶךָ
KJ: Let me pass through thy land: we will not turn into the fields, or into the vineyards; we will not drink of the waters of the well: but we will go along by the king's high way, until we be past thy borders.
BN: "Let me pass through your land; we will not turn aside into any field, or any vineyard; we will not drink the water from the wells; we will go by the King's Highway, until we have passed your border."
The same terms offered to Edom, and rejected by them - Numbers 20:17 (though this time he left out the historical pleading which is in Numbers 20:14-16).
DERECH HA MELECH:
"For generations, Shlomo, this land has been the key trading centre for the whole of the Levant. You have travelled through Sharon and seen them; you have visited the caravanserai. Every year thousands of donkeys and camels, trading in grain, in wine and olive oil, in perfumes and spices, in livestock, in dyes and textiles, follow the two major trade routes. That is our strength. It is quite simply impossible to move between the empires of Yavan and the Nile and the Pharat without crossing Erets Yisra-El. We are the world’s gatekeepers, the guardians of the toll-booths. You’ve travelled the roads. The Derech Ha Yam, the Highway of the Sea, which comes up from Lower Mitsrayim through the lands of the Bene Pelet; along the coast via Aza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Yafo and then inland through Aphek and along the Plain of Sharon, where it bifurcates; one route along the Valley of Yazar-El, and over the River Yarden into Ammon, and then on to Damasek and the great empire of Bav-El of the Bene Kessed beyond; the second fork continuing northwards through the Plain of Carm-El into the kingdoms of Tsur and Tsidon, into Aram and Ashur. Some of the most beautiful countryside in all the kingdom; some of the finest oases anywhere in the world. And the Derech Ha Melech, the King’s Highway, less beautiful but just as important, over the highlands of Gil-Yad, Ammon and Mo-Av, through the tribal lands of Menasheh and Gad and Re’u-Ven, all the way from Damasek in the north to Aqaba in the south by way of Ramot Gil-Yad, Gerasa, Rabat-Ammon, Dibbon, Sela..."From my novel "City of Peace", a life of King David.
וְלֹא נָתַן סִיחֹן אֶתיִשְׂרָאֵל עֲבֹר בִּגְבֻלוֹ וַיֶּאֱסֹף סִיחֹן אֶת כָּלמּוֹ וַיֵּצֵא לִקְרַאת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַמִּדְבָּרָה וַיָּבֹא יָהְצָה וַיִּלָּחֶם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל
KJ: And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass through his border: but Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out against Israel into the wilderness: and he came to Jahaz, and fought against Israel.
BN: But Sichon would not allow Yisra-El to pass through his border; rather, Sichon gathered all his people together, and went out against Yisra-El into the desert, and came to Yahtsah; and he fought against Yisra-El.
YAHTSAH: Or possibly YAH-TSAH, making it a Yah-name - but why would it be a Yah-name, in Mo-Av? Much more likely it is another CHORMAH and HA AI (for which see the previous chapter); from the root YAHATS meaning "to trample", so not the name of the place at all, but a description of what happened there (like Battle, just outside Hastings, where William the Conqueror defeated King Harold, and where a monument was erected, which became a shrine, around which a town grew up...). Though there is a place that may be named YAHATS, or may have the same intention as here, at Isaiah 15:4.
21:24 VA YAKEHU YISRA-EL LE PHI CHAREV VA YIYRASH ET ARTSO ME ARNON AD YABOK AD BENEY AMON KI AZ GEVUL BENEY AMON
וַיַּכֵּהוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפִי חָרֶב וַיִּירַשׁ אֶת אַרְצוֹ מֵאַרְנֹן עַד יַבֹּק עַד בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן כִּי עַז גְּבוּל בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן
KJ: And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from Arnon unto Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon: for the border of the children of Ammon was strong.
BN: And Yisra-El smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from the Arnon as far as the Yavok, as far as the Beney Amon; for the border of the Beney Amon was strong.
And if this is not an account of Ach-Mousa's conquests, what pray is it? (And if this is an account of the Mosheh and the slaves who fled from Egypt, and had nothing to eat but manna for forty years, where did they get the means to make or buy sufficient swords...)
21:25 VA YIKACH YISRA-EL ET KOL HE ARIM HA ELEH VA YESHEV YISRA-EL BE CHOL AREY HA EMORI BE CHESHBON U VE CHOL BENOTEYHA
וַיִּקַּח יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵת כָּל הֶעָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַיֵּשֶׁב יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכָל עָרֵי הָאֱמֹרִי בְּחֶשְׁבּוֹן וּבְכָל בְּנֹתֶיהָ
KJ: And Israel took all these cities: and Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon, and in all the villages thereof.
BN: And Yisra-El took all these cities; and Yisra-El dwelt in all the cities of the Emori, in Cheshbon, and in all its suburbs and surrounding villages.
BENOTEYHA: "Her daughters"; but used here to mean the subject cities of a city-state; important again in our understanding of the multiple usages of these familial terms. Now go back and look at all those other sons and daughters in the genealogical tables and tribal lists; how many of them were tribes, how many clans, how many towns and villages, and how many - probably very few - actually people.
21:26 KI CHESHBON IR SICHON MELECH HA EMORI HI VE HU NILCHAM BE MELECH MO-AV HA RISHON VA YIKACH ET KOL ARTSO MI YADO AD ARNON
כִּי חֶשְׁבּוֹן עִיר סִיחֹן מֶלֶךְ הָאֱמֹרִי הִוא וְהוּא נִלְחַם בְּמֶלֶךְ מוֹאָב הָרִאשׁוֹן וַיִּקַּח אֶת כָּל אַרְצוֹ מִיָּדוֹ עַד אַרְנֹן
KJ: For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon.
BN: For Cheshbon was the city of Sichon the king of the Emori, who had fought against the former king of Mo-Av, and taken all his land out of his hand, all the way to the Arnon.
21:27 AL KEN YOMRU HA MOSHLIM BO'U CHESHBON TIBANEH VE TIKONEN IR SICHON
עַל כֵּן יֹאמְרוּ הַמֹּשְׁלִים בֹּאוּ חֶשְׁבּוֹן תִּבָּנֶה וְתִכּוֹנֵן עִיר סִיחוֹן
KJ: Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say, Come into Heshbon, let the city of Sihon be built and prepared:
BN: Wherefore they that speak in parables say: "Come to Cheshbon! let the city of Sichon be built and established!..
MOSHLIM: The phrases that follow, as far as verse 30, do not sound like a parable; more like a poem or a triumphal song. Are we mis-translating MOSHLIM? What follows sounds rather more like a piece of Prophetic poetry - something, dare I suggest, rather Jeremiac (actually, the next verse has something decidedly Churchillian about it)?
Then is this too (and the verses that follow) a quote from the Book of the Wars of YHVH? See my notes to verse 14.
21:28 KI ESH YATS'AH ME CHESHBON LEHAVAH MI KIRYAT SICHON ACHLAH AR MO-AV BA'ALEY BAMOT ARNON
כִּי אֵשׁ יָצְאָה מֵחֶשְׁבּוֹן לֶהָבָה מִקִּרְיַת סִיחֹן אָכְלָה עָר מוֹאָב בַּעֲלֵי בָּמוֹת אַרְנֹן
KJ: For there is a fire gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon: it hath consumed Ar of Moab, and the lords of the high places of Arnon.
BN: "For a fire has been lit in Cheshbon, a flame from the city of Sichon; it has devoured Ar of Mo-Av, and the lords of the high places of Arnon...
BAMOT: "high places" - confirming my comment in verse 19.
But more significantly, SICHON, which I did not translate until now, allowing it to stand as a name. But names have meanings, and SICHON comes from the root SU'ACH, which means, in general, to sweep away, as has just happened to him, rendering him yet one more for our list: HA AI, CHORMAH, YAHTSAH and now SICHON.
But I wrote "in general", and you can find that generality as a name at 1 Chronicles 7:36; but there is also a rather more specific, and this is definitely a vulgarity of Yirme-Yah (Jeremiah), and not one that we would expect from, say Yesha-Yah (Isaiah) or Yechezke-El (Ezekiel), though Yesha-Yah does use the word, quite properly in the context, which is Isaiah 5:25. SUCHAH is "dung".
21:29 OY LECHA MO-AV AVADETA AM KEMOSH NATAN BANAV PELEYTIM U VENOTAV BA SHEVIT LE MELECH EMORI SICHON
אוֹי לְךָ מוֹאָב אָבַדְתָּ עַם כְּמוֹשׁ נָתַן בָּנָיו פְּלֵיטִם וּבְנֹתָיו בַּשְּׁבִית לְמֶלֶךְ אֱמֹרִי סִיחוֹן
KJ: Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon king of the Amorites.
BN: "Woe to you, Mo-Av! You are undone, you people of Chemosh. He has given up his sons as fugitives, and his daughters into captivity, to Sichon king of the Emori...
But this is a description of how Sichon became king in Cheshbon, and not what happened to him now, under Mosheh. The text is simply taking the opportunity to write up a well-known song, perhaps as a way of filling in the otherwise-gaps of history. The next verse may be the same, though it is usually read as the Mosaic addition.
But this is a description of how Sichon became king in Cheshbon, and not what happened to him now, under Mosheh. The text is simply taking the opportunity to write up a well-known song, perhaps as a way of filling in the otherwise-gaps of history. The next verse may be the same, though it is usually read as the Mosaic addition.
SHEVIT: see verse 1, above.
CHEMOSH: Which sounds like it ought to be the name of a place, but in fact it is the name of a god, the national deity of the Beney Mo-Av indeed. See the link.
21:30 VA NIRAM AVAD CHESHBON AD DIVON VA NASHIM AD NOPHACH ASHER AD MEY DEVA
KJ: We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon, and we have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba.
BN: "We have scattered them. Cheshbon is obliterated, all the way to Divon, and we have laid waste as far as Nophach, which reaches to Mey Deva.
NIRAM: The root is YARAH, which acquires many meanings, from "firing arrows" in 1 Samuel 20:36 - whence a YOREH is an archer in 1 Chronicles 10:3 and MOREH for the same in 1 Samuel 31:3 - to "casting lots" in Joshua 18:6, to "laying foundations", as in the pillar set up by Lavan in Genesis 31:51 or the "cornerstone" of Job 38:6, to "sprinkling water" in Hosea 6:3. The connection between these is the notion of "casting", though it has not been adapted in modern Ivrit for the movie industry.
DIVON: See the link.
NASHIM: The root here is SHAMEM, so really this should read VE NESHIMAM, but for some reason the second Mem has been dropped. The only reason I can think of for doing this is to make a word-play on VENOTAV in the previous verse. The "daughters" taken into captivity in the first of these are in fact towns and villages, the NASHIM (which should mean "women") in this verse are simply the entire destroyed people.
NOPHACH: See the link.
MEY DEVA: See the link.
21:31 VA YESHEV YISRA-EL BE ERETS HA EMORI
וַיֵּשֶׁב יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּאֶרֶץ הָאֱמֹרִי
KJ: Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites.
BN: Thus Yisra-El dwelt in the land of the Emori.
21:30 VA NIRAM AVAD CHESHBON AD DIVON VA NASHIM AD NOPHACH ASHER AD MEY DEVA
וַנִּירָם אָבַד חֶשְׁבּוֹן עַד דִּיבֹן וַנַּשִּׁים עַד נֹפַח אֲשֶׁר עַד מֵידְבָא
KJ: We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon, and we have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba.
BN: "We have scattered them. Cheshbon is obliterated, all the way to Divon, and we have laid waste as far as Nophach, which reaches to Mey Deva.
NIRAM: The root is YARAH, which acquires many meanings, from "firing arrows" in 1 Samuel 20:36 - whence a YOREH is an archer in 1 Chronicles 10:3 and MOREH for the same in 1 Samuel 31:3 - to "casting lots" in Joshua 18:6, to "laying foundations", as in the pillar set up by Lavan in Genesis 31:51 or the "cornerstone" of Job 38:6, to "sprinkling water" in Hosea 6:3. The connection between these is the notion of "casting", though it has not been adapted in modern Ivrit for the movie industry.
DIVON: See the link.
NASHIM: The root here is SHAMEM, so really this should read VE NESHIMAM, but for some reason the second Mem has been dropped. The only reason I can think of for doing this is to make a word-play on VENOTAV in the previous verse. The "daughters" taken into captivity in the first of these are in fact towns and villages, the NASHIM (which should mean "women") in this verse are simply the entire destroyed people.
NOPHACH: See the link.
MEY DEVA: See the link.
21:31 VA YESHEV YISRA-EL BE ERETS HA EMORI
KJ: Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites.
BN: Thus Yisra-El dwelt in the land of the Emori.
Compare this to the map at verse 11; you will see that the land taken will become the "inheritance" Re'u-Ven later on.
EMORI: But this never was the land of the Emori. We are in Mo-Av. We have been told repeatedly that we are in Mo-Av, and to the north is Amon, not Emor. As per the link to the name, the Emorites inhabited that area of Kena'an that would later become the "inheritance" of Ephrayim. Is this simply a scribal error? Or perhaps, based on the next verse, the Emori did originally live there, among the Beney Mo-Av, and were driven out... but this too doesn't work, because we have numerous statements in the earlier books of Torah, designating the territory of the Emori (see the link), sometimes using the name as a generality for the whole of Kena'an - think of the divisions of Essex, Middlesex, Wessex and Sussex for the English Saxons: definitely the same people ethnically, but East Saxons are East Saxons, and West Saxons are West Saxons.
21:32 VA YISHLACH MOSHEH LERAGEL ET YA'ZER VA YILKEDU BENOTEYHA VA YIYRASH ET HA EMORI ASHER SHAM
וַיִּשְׁלַח מֹשֶׁה לְרַגֵּל אֶת יַעְזֵר וַיִּלְכְּדוּ בְּנֹתֶיהָ ויירש (וַיּוֹרֶשׁ) אֶת הָאֱמֹרִי אֲשֶׁר שָׁם
KJ: And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took the villages thereof, and drove out the Amorites that were there.
BN: And Mosheh sent men to spy out Ya'zer, and they took its towns, and drove out the Emori that were there.
YA'ZER: Gesenius' description adds to our query about this being Emorite land at all: "a town in the tribe of Gad, near the land of the Ammonites, long subjected to the rule of the Moabites; its site was in the spot where now are the ruins called Sar".
So where does the verse in Ezekiel (16:3) now stand, the one that states "your mother was a Hittlte and your father was an Amorite", in relation to this?
And as to Mosheh: like Mahmoud in his latter years, the freedom campaigner, law-giver, man of peace, mercy, justice and compassion, turns into a marauding conqueror who wipes out tens of thousands. We have to be reading the story of Ach-Mousa, surely - or is a later military escapade being retroactively attributed?
21:33 VA YIPHNU VA YA'ALU DERECH HA BASHAN VA YETS'E OG MELECH HA BASHAN LIKRATAM HU VE CHOL AMO LA MILCHAMAH EDRE'I
וַיִּפְנוּ וַיַּעֲלוּ דֶּרֶךְ הַבָּשָׁן וַיֵּצֵא עוֹג מֶלֶךְ הַבָּשָׁן לִקְרָאתָם הוּא וְכָל עַמּוֹ לַמִּלְחָמָה אֶדְרֶעִי
KJ: And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle at Edrei.
BN: And they turned and went up through Bashan; and Og the king of Bashan came out against them, he and all his people, to battle at Edre'i.
BASHAN: Continuing ever further northwards, but still on the eastern side of the river Yarden. To get there, they would have needed to pass through part of Amon - so again we can assume Emori was a scribal error for Amoni.
OG: As in Og Magog, and Gog and Magog - the Mag part, incidentally, is the source of the Scottish Mac: Og son of Og, which gets mistaken into Christianity as Gog son of Gog.
EDRE'I: See the link.
21:34 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH AL TIRA OTO KI VE YADCHA NATATI OTO VE ET KOL AMO VE ET ARTSO VE ASIYTA LO KA ASHER ASIYTA LE SICHON MELECH HA EMORI ASHER YOSHEV BE CHESHBON
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה אַל תִּירָא אֹתוֹ כִּי בְיָדְךָ נָתַתִּי אֹתוֹ וְאֶת כָּל עַמּוֹ וְאֶת אַרְצוֹ וְעָשִׂיתָ לּוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתָ לְסִיחֹן מֶלֶךְ הָאֱמֹרִי אֲשֶׁר יוֹשֵׁב בְּחֶשְׁבּוֹן
KJ: And the LORD said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon.
BN: Then YHVH said to Mosheh: "Do not fear him; for I have delivered him into your hand, and all his people, and his land; and you shall do to him as you did to Sichon king of the Emori, who dwelt at Cheshbon."
21:35 VA YAKU OTO VE ET BANAV VE ET KOL AMO AD BILTI HISHIR LO SARID VA YIRSHU ET ARTSO
וַיַּכּוּ אֹתוֹ וְאֶת בָּנָיו וְאֶת כָּל עַמּוֹ עַד בִּלְתִּי הִשְׁאִיר לוֹ שָׂרִיד וַיִּירְשׁוּ אֶת אַרְצוֹ
KJ: So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land.
BN: So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was not a single one of his people left in existence; and they possessed his land.
Ah the barbarities we can permit ourselves, with God on our side! (the tale is retold, with much delight, at Joshua 12:4)
✡
I have included 22:1 here, because that is where the Sedra actually ends, despite Christian translations making the chapter division here. I have also re-included it in the following section, with the remainder of Chapter 22.
Chapter 22
22:1 VA YIS'U BENEY YISRA-EL VA YACHANU BE ARVOT MO-AV ME EVER LE YARDEN YERECHO
וַיִּסְעוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיַּחֲנוּ בְּעַרְבוֹת מוֹאָב מֵעֵבֶר לְיַרְדֵּן יְרֵחוֹ
KJ: And the children of Israel set forward, and pitched in the plains of Moab on this side Jordan by Jericho.
BN: And the Beney Yisra-El journeyed, and pitched in the plains of Mo-Av beyond the river Yarden at Yericho.
They will have needed to turn south (which is backward, not forward, as the KJ has it), and then cross the Yarden just before it bournes into the Dead Sea. More on this in my notes to the next chapter.
samech break
Copyright © 2020 David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press
No comments:
Post a Comment