10:1 U VE HITPALEL EZRA U CHE HITVADOTO BOCHEH U MITNAPEL LIPHNEY BEIT HA ELOHIM NIKBETSU ELAV MI YISRA-EL KAHAL RAV ME'OD ANASHIM VE NASHIM VIYLADIM KI VACHU HA AM HARBEH VECHEH
וּכְהִתְפַּלֵּל עֶזְרָא וּכְהִתְוַדֹּתוֹ בֹּכֶה וּמִתְנַפֵּל לִפְנֵי בֵּית הָאֱלֹהִים נִקְבְּצוּ אֵלָיו מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל קָהָל רַב מְאֹד אֲנָשִׁים וְנָשִׁים וִילָדִים כִּי בָכוּ הָעָם הַרְבֵּה בֶכֶה
KJ (King James translation): Now when Ezra had prayed, and when he had confessed, weeping and casting himself down before the house of God, there assembled unto him out of Israel a very great congregation of men and women and children: for the people wept very sore.
BN (BibleNet translation): Now while Ezra prayed, and made confession, weeping and casting himself down before the house of Elohim, a very large congregation of men and women and children gathered together around him out of Yisra-El; for the people wept very sore.
U VA HITPALEL EZRA: 3rd person narrative again, as it was at the beginning; we have no idea who wrote this, or even when, but presumably he had Ezra's notes and memos available for quoting, which is why the tale gets told between 1st and 3rd person.
BEIT HA ELOHIM: is a surprisingly polytheistic term, but by no means its first usage in this book.
MITNAPHAL: This is neither genuflection nor prostration, but a description of how you get into one of those positions.It is not a mode of prayer that any modern Jew would recognise, but perhaps it may be comparable in some measure to the act of shockeling, though that is reckoned (I cannot explain why, but the link here claims it) to be rooted in Isaiah 58:5.
NIKBETSU: The word that will later yield Kibbutz, both the socialist farms in Medinat Yisra-El and the spiritual cooperative of the middle years of Rebbe Menachem-Mendl of Kocke.
KI VACHU HA AM HARBEH: Not, I think, to be taken literally. Either these were his fellow congregants, who had shared the religious worship with him, likewise fasting, saying selichot; or it is simply a general description of humanity in its standard mode, whingeing, moaning and whining about its circumstances, but passively complicitous with it until someone comes along and sorts it out for them. I fear, alas, that the latter is correct on this occasion. It usually is. And they have gathered around Ezra, because it is him that they are waiting for.
samech break
samech break
10:2 VA YA'AN SHECHAN-YAH VEN YECHI-EL MIBNEY (OLAM) EYLAM VA YOMER LE EZRA ANACHNU MA'ALNU VELOHEYNU VA NOSHEV NASHIM NACHRIYOT ME AMEY HA ARETS VE ATAH YESH MIKVEH LE YISRA-EL AL ZOT
וַיַּעַן שְׁכַנְיָה בֶן יְחִיאֵל מִבְּנֵי עוֹלָם וַיֹּאמֶר לְעֶזְרָא אֲנַחְנוּ מָעַלְנוּ בֵאלֹהֵינוּ וַנֹּשֶׁב נָשִׁים נָכְרִיּוֹת מֵעַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ וְעַתָּה יֵשׁ מִקְוֶה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל עַל זֹאת
BN: Then Shechan-Yah ben Yechi-El, one of the Beney Eylam, answered and said to Ezra, "We have broken faith with our god, and have married foreign women from among the peoples of the land. Yet now there is hope for Yisra-El concerning this matter...
SHECHAN-YAH: One, or more likely two men with the same name appeared in chapter 8, and Ezra appeared confused about both of them, unable to give either of them a definite patronymic. This may be one of them, or a third with the same name.
BEN YECHI-EL: An Ovad-Yah ben Yechi-El appeared in 8:9, but the Beney Eylam were given in verse 7, so this cannot be him.
OLAM: The entire universe! What a wonderful name for a tribe that would be, if only it were not a scribal error!
10:3 VE ATAH NICHRAT BRIT LELOHEYNU LEHOTSI CHOL NASHIM VE HA NOLAD ME HEM BA ATSAT ADONAI VE HA CHAREDIM BE MITSVAT ELOHEYNU VE CHA TORAH YE'ASEH
וְעַתָּה נִכְרָת בְּרִית לֵאלֹהֵינוּ לְהוֹצִיא כָל נָשִׁים וְהַנּוֹלָד מֵהֶם בַּעֲצַת אֲדֹנָי וְהַחֲרֵדִים בְּמִצְוַת אֱלֹהֵינוּ וְכַתּוֹרָה יֵעָשֶׂה
KJ: Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of your lordship, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our god; and let it be done according to the law.
BN: "Let us now make a formal agreement in the names of our gods, to send away all foreign wives, and any children born to them, and let it be done according to the counsel of your lordship, and of those who are devoted to the commandments of our gods, and according to the Torah...
NICHRAT BRIT: Yes, this is the same terminology that was used in the covenants with YHVH and Elohim in the Torah, but this is being made by humans, within the human realm, so we should not describe it as a "covenant".
LEHOTSI: "To make them go out", from the root YATSA - which sounds like they are not divorcing them, but only sending them back to their tribal origins, their families, and their children with them - though verses 15 onwards appear to insist that it is full divorce. Why is this phrasing significant? Because, if it is not full divorce, the men would be declaring themselves free to take Yisra-Eli wives, but not giving up property ownership of those wives, so that they would remain agunah, because they would lack a get - click here for an explanation of these terms, which are one of the major problems in the Jewish world to this day. My translation of verse 15, which is different from standard translations, understands that there is no written document but only a statement of divorce, but one that is being witnessed by two men, one of them an ordained priest, and therefore has equivalent status in law as a written get.
As with the tales of Kayin, Yishma-El and Esav, marrying women from outside the tribe was a problem for the Beney Yisra-El in Kena'an, because the custom there was for a man to join the woman's tribe (matrilocal marriage), rather than the other way around (patrilocal marriage) as among the Beney Yisra-El, and so the children could not be counted as Beney Yisra-El - the reason why Ya'akov adopted Yoseph and Asnat's boys, Ephrayim and Menasheh (Genesis 48:5). Most of the patriarchs marry Banot Yisra-El, so the issue doesn't arise, but it does with the Egyptian Hagar, whose son is fully accepted until he takes a non-Yisra-Eli bride, and it does with both the Aramit maidservants Zilpah and Bilhah, whose sons are fully recognised tribal patriarchs; and there is no suggestion that they needed to convert, any more than Rut the Bat Mo-Av did when she married Chilyon, or Bo'az later on; they have married into the Beney Yisra-El, and that is sufficient. So appears also to be the case with Mosheh, whose sons with the Midyanit Tsiporah were fully accepted - click here for more on this.
But here it appears to matter, and we are witnessing that important historical transition that Judaism normally claims only started in the period of the Crusades, where you need to have a halachically Jewish mother, and provably so by parental and even grandparental marriage documents, to be counted as Jewish. The reason given for this change is mass-rape - during the Crusades especially, when the soldiers-of-Christ sacked and pillaged their way across Europe in the name of the True Cross, a woman gang-raped and left pregnant could not know which of the men was the father, let alone whether the one who was was Jewish (the chances were zero anyway); but the child had to be carried, because abortions were not an option, and the child had to be brought up, and so the Rabbis declared that, if a midwife were present at the birth and could therefore vouch for the certainty, the child most definitely has a Jewish mother (even if she was herself a convert), and so the child is fully Jewish, and must be brought up as such.
Why could this option not be applied in Ezra's time, provided that the woman also committed to leading a "Jewish" life, abandoning her teraphim etc. Why could these women not do as Rut did, and simply make the declaration that she made to her mother-in-law (Ruth 1:16)
"Do not urge me to leave you, to turn back and not follow you. For wherever you go, I will go; wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your gods my gods."
- which, actually, they already had, hadn't they, when they made their marriage vows in the first place? But "conversion", even at this level, is not on offer - racial purity is now biological, a matter of heredity. The question "Who is a Jew?" is being asked.
And leaves us asking: what happens to these women now? In a patriarchal society, where the father, until marriage, and the husband afterwards (see Numbers 30) determine every detail of a woman's life, thought and action, and in this new Yehudah, where Ezra is creating what is effectively an apartheid state, these divorced women will have zero status. They are not simply being divorced, they are being cast out; maybe their family will take them back (cf Avi-Gayil, 1 Samuel 25), or they can sell themselves into slavery, or prostitution (cf Tamar), or become beggars... and this would remain an issue for many centuries yet to come, so much so that it became a central issue with Muhammad, who took rather more than the four permitted wives, and in almost every case did so for precisely the reason that Bo'az married Rut, to give her the security and provision and welfare that came from being formally attached.
ADONAI here refers to Ezra, not YHVH; they are addressing him as their leader. And sadly this confirms my rather despondent closing remark in the notes to verse 1.
10:4 KUM KI ALEYCHA HA DAVAR VA ANACHNU IMACH CHAZAK VA ASEH
קוּם כִּי עָלֶיךָ הַדָּבָר וַאֲנַחְנוּ עִמָּךְ חֲזַק וַעֲשֵׂה
KJ: Arise; for this matter belongeth unto thee: we also will be with thee: be of good courage, and do it.
BN (formal translation): "Arise, for this matter rests with you, and we are with you; be brave and do it."
BN (informal translation): "Come on, Ezra, enough praying. This is your big issue, and we're on your side. Let's bite the bullet and go do it."
KUM: "Arise" is far too formal. "Come on, get up" would be closer to the mark, or at least to the tone; surprisingly informal when addressing the Archbishop, but clearly these men were equals, and talked to each other as such.
CHAZAK: See my notes on this word in earlier chapters, though its intention is much more literal, much less literary, here.
pey break
10:5 VA YAKAM EZRA VA YASHB'A ET SAREY HA KOHANIM HA LEVIYIM VE CHOL YISRA-EL LA'ASOT KA DAVAR HA ZEH VA YISHAVE'U
וַיָּקָם עֶזְרָא וַיַּשְׁבַּע אֶת שָׂרֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם וְכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲשׂוֹת כַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה וַיִּשָּׁבֵעוּ
KJ: Then arose Ezra, and made the chief priests, the Levites, and all Israel, to swear that they should do according to this word. And they sware.
BN: Then Ezra got up, and made the chiefs of the Kohanim, the Leviyim, and all Yisra-El, swear that they would carry out this instruction. So they swore.
Yes, but now look at Nehemiah 13:23 ff, where clearly, several years later, they still had not fulfilled this vow; indeed, new marriages were being made, with non Banot Yisra-El.
10:6 VA YAKAM EZRA MI LIPHNEY BEIT HA ELOHIM VA YELECH EL LISHKAT YEHO-CHANAN BEN EL-YASHIV VA YELECH SHAM LECHEM LO ACHAL U MAYIM LO SHATAH KI MIT'ABEL AL MA'AL HA GOLAH
וַיָּקָם עֶזְרָא מִלִּפְנֵי בֵּית הָאֱלֹהִים וַיֵּלֶךְ אֶל לִשְׁכַּת יְהוֹחָנָן בֶּן אֶלְיָשִׁיב וַיֵּלֶךְ שָׁם לֶחֶם לֹא אָכַל וּמַיִם לֹא שָׁתָה כִּי מִתְאַבֵּל עַל מַעַל הַגּוֹלָה
KJ: Then Ezra rose up from before the house of God, and went into the chamber of Johanan the son of Eliashib: and when he came thither, he did eat no bread, nor drink water: for he mourned because of the transgression of them that had been carried away.
BN: Then Ezra withdrew from before the house of Elohim, and went into the cell of Yeho-Chanan ben El-Yashiv; and going there he ate no bread, nor drank any water, for he was in mourning for the faithlessness of those of the captivity.
Confirmation at last that he has indeed been fasting throughout the day.
LISHKAT: Given the connection to the porters and gatekeepers later in the chapter, do we read this as "cell", or as "lodge"? 1 Chronicles 9:26 uses the same word for the gatekeeper's lodge - only, it doesn't seem the likely place for Ezra to go and continue his fast.
The root is LASHACH, which literally means "to throw something/oneself down" (presumably it became used for the porters' and gatekeepers' lodge because parcels and luggage got thrown down there before dispersal to their proper homes), an act, when applied to people, not dissimilar from MITNAPHAL in verse 1. So why not "cell", and the inference that, as long ago as Solomonic times, the Temples functioned, at least at this level, in the same manner as mediaeval European monasteries, with cells in which the resident "priests" either lived, or at least spent periods of time, especially their Lenten months of Nazirut. Further evidence of this can be found through other usages of the word, for example at Ezekiel 40:17-45, which describe something precisely like a mediaeval monastic cloister, though some of the "cells" are store-rooms, and others offices; and also Nehemiah 10:39; though it must also be noted that the same word is used for a dining room in 1 Samuel 9:22, and as the study of the royal scribe (which may well be the same thing actually, if we think of someone like the Venerable Bede, who did all his work from his cell) in Jeremiah 36:12.
YEHO-CHANAN: see the link.
BEN EL-YASHIV: The patronymic recurs twice in this chapter, once among the Temple choir in verse 24, once among the Beney Zatu in verse 27. He also gets several mentions in Nechem-Yah, for which see the link below his name.
MA'AL HA GOLAH: Golah doesn't really mean "captivity", does it? Exile? As in GALUT?
samech break
10:7 VA YA'AVIYRU KOL BIYHUDAH VIYRU-SHALA'IM LE CHOL BENEY HA GOLAH LEHIKAVETS YERU-SHALA'IM
וַיַּעֲבִירוּ קוֹל בִּיהוּדָה וִירוּשָׁלִַם לְכֹל בְּנֵי הַגּוֹלָה לְהִקָּבֵץ יְרוּשָׁלִָם
KJ: And they made proclamation throughout Judah and Jerusalem unto all the children of the captivity, that they should gather themselves together unto Jerusalem;
BN: And they issued a proclamation throughout Yehudah and Yeru-Shala'im to all the children of the captivity, that they should gather in Yeru-Shala'im.
LEHIKAVETS YERU-SHALA'IM: Surely needs a preposition.
10:8 VE CHOL ASHER LO YAVO LISHLOSHET HA YAMIM KA ATSAT HA SARIM VE HA ZEKENIM YACHARAM KOL RECHUSHO VE HU YIBADEL MI KEHEL HA GOLAH
וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָבוֹא לִשְׁלֹשֶׁת הַיָּמִים כַּעֲצַת הַשָּׂרִים וְהַזְּקֵנִים יָחֳרַם כָּל רְכוּשׁוֹ וְהוּא יִבָּדֵל מִקְּהַל הַגּוֹלָה
KJ: And that whosoever would not come within three days, according to the counsel of the princes and the elders, all his substance should be forfeited, and himself separated from the congregation of those that had been carried away.
BN: And that whoever did not come within three days, based on the counsel of the clan-chiefs and the elders, all his substance would be forfeited, and himself expelled from the congregation of the captivity.
By coincidence, at the time of drafting this, I am reading, in the wake of his death, about the early years of Castro's rule in Cuba: how he rid himself of all his political opponents at home, either through death or exile; how, after the Bay of Pigs, he seized all the property of anyone who did not support his regime, which was many thousands of Cubans, as well as the nationalisation of every American asset from property to oil well. Oh, and did I forget to mention the abolition of democracy?
samech break
samech break
10:9 VA YIKAVTSU CHOL ANSHEY YEHUDAH U VIN-YAMIN YERU-SHALA'IM LISHLOSHET HA YAMIM HU CHODESH HA TESH'IY'I BE ESRIM BA CHODESH VA YESHVU CHOL HA AM BIR'CHOV BEIT HA ELOHIM MAR'IYDIM AL HA DAVAR U ME HA GESHAMIM
KJ: Then all the men of Judah and Benjamin gathered themselves together unto Jerusalem within three days. It was the ninth month, on the twentieth day of the month; and all the people sat in the street of the house of God, trembling because of this matter, and for the great rain.
וַיִּקָּבְצוּ כָל אַנְשֵׁי יְהוּדָה וּבִנְיָמִן יְרוּשָׁלִַם לִשְׁלֹשֶׁת הַיָּמִים הוּא חֹדֶשׁ הַתְּשִׁיעִי בְּעֶשְׂרִים בַּחֹדֶשׁ וַיֵּשְׁבוּ כָל הָעָם בִּרְחוֹב בֵּית הָאֱלֹהִים מַרְעִידִים עַל הַדָּבָר וּמֵהַגְּשָׁמִים
KJ: Then all the men of Judah and Benjamin gathered themselves together unto Jerusalem within three days. It was the ninth month, on the twentieth day of the month; and all the people sat in the street of the house of God, trembling because of this matter, and for the great rain.
BN: Then all the men of Yehudah and Vin-Yamin gathered in Yeru-Shala'im within the three days; it was the ninth month, on the twentieth day of the month; and all the people sat in the open square before the house of Elohim, trembling because of this matter, and because of the rain.
CHOL ANSHEY: is a neutral term, yet the translators all render it as "the men"; is this because the men knew what the gathering was about, and chose to leave their wives at home? Or has patriarchalism already become so deeply embedded that the women are simply "exempt from this time-bound commandment"?
VA YIKAVTSU: The same word used for the Ya'akov blessings in Genesis 49; given that Ezra is about to define the ethnic make-up of the people, and give each, so to speak, his inheritance, the choice of word here cannot be accidental. But see also my note to NIKBETSU at verse 1.
CHODESH HA TESH'IY'I: In the old calendar, which we know they are still using, this would have been Kislev, which is November-December; definitely the rainy season.
MEY HA GESHAMIM: Was there a rain-festival in the 9th month in Babylon? Shemini Atseret is the 8th day of Sukot in the 7th month, which is to say the 23rd of Tishrey; so it isn't that. In all honestly, I suspect the narrator is simply making the point that they came, because they were told to, and that unfortunately they got rained on, and had to put up with it, "based on the counsel of the clan-chiefs and the elders". Verse 13 wll confirm this, somewhat discontentedly.
pey break
10:10 VA YAKAM EZRA HA KOHEN VA YOMER AL'EHEM ATEM ME'ALTEM VA TOSHIYVU NASHIM NACHRIYOT LEHOSIPH AL ASHMAT YISRA-EL
וַיָּקָם עֶזְרָא הַכֹּהֵן וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם אַתֶּם מְעַלְתֶּם וַתֹּשִׁיבוּ נָשִׁים נָכְרִיּוֹת לְהוֹסִיף עַל אַשְׁמַת יִשְׂרָאֵל
KJ: And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel.
BN: And Ezra the priest stood up, and said to them, "You have broken faith by marrying foreign women, adding thereby to the guilt of Yisra-El...
EZRA HA KOHEN: when it suits he is Ezra the Scribe, otherwise this.
ME'ALTEM: almost any form of tresspass, sin or error comes under this verb; dozens of instances throughout the Tanach - click here.
10:11 VE ATAH TENU TODAH LA YHVH ELOHEY AVOTEYCHEM VA ASU RETSONO VE HIBADLU ME AMEY HA ARETS U MIN HA NASHIM HA NACHRIYOT
וְעַתָּה תְּנוּ תוֹדָה לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵי אֲבֹתֵיכֶם וַעֲשׂוּ רְצוֹנוֹ וְהִבָּדְלוּ מֵעַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ וּמִן הַנָּשִׁים הַנָּכְרִיּוֹת
KJ: Now therefore make confession unto the LORD God of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives.
BN: "Now therefore make confession to YHVH, the god of your ancestors, and do his will, and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from these foreign women."
Hopefully, as per my comment to verse 9, the men had left their wives at home, so they could make the vow now, in the safe conformity of Nuremburg Platz, under the supervision of the Ayatolla Khomeini, and go and explain in private later.
And somewhere in all this we need to draw comparison with Numbers 31 - where Mosheh doesn't simply allow the foreign wives, he regards the virgins as spoil and shares them out among his men.
10:12 VA YA'ANU CHOL HA KAHAL VA YOMRU KOL GADOL KEN KIDVARCHA ALEYNU LA'ASOT
וַיַּעֲנוּ כָל הַקָּהָל וַיֹּאמְרוּ קוֹל גָּדוֹל כֵּן כִּדְבָרְךָ עָלֵינוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת
KJ: Then all the congregation answered and said with a loud voice, As thou hast said, so must we do.
BN: Then all the congregation answered, and said with a loud voice, "As you have said, so must we do...
KEN KIDVARCHA: Once again recognisable as Yom Kippur liturgy (it occurs at the end of the "Shelosh-Esrey
Midot ha-Rachamim - The Thirteen Attributes of Divine Mercy", and again with "Ke Rachem" in "U-va le-Tsi'on"), though even there the source is Biblical - Numbers 14:20.
10:13 AVAL HA AM RAV VE HA ET GESHAMIM VE EYN KO'ACH LA'AMOD BACHUTS VE HA MELA'CHAH LO LE YOM ECHAD VE LO LISHNAYIM KI HIRBIYNU LIPHSH'OAH BA DAVAR HA ZEH
KJ: But the people are many, and it is a time of much rain, and we are not able to stand without, neither is this a work of one day or two: for we are many that have transgressed in this thing.
אֲבָל הָעָם רָב וְהָעֵת גְּשָׁמִים וְאֵין כֹּחַ לַעֲמוֹד בַּחוּץ וְהַמְּלָאכָה לֹא לְיוֹם אֶחָד וְלֹא לִשְׁנַיִם כִּי הִרְבִּינוּ לִפְשֹׁעַ בַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה
KJ: But the people are many, and it is a time of much rain, and we are not able to stand without, neither is this a work of one day or two: for we are many that have transgressed in this thing.
BN: "But we are talking about a large number of people, and the weather forecast is rain for the forseeable, and we are not willing to stand outside in it like this for much longer, nor is this a task that can be completed in one day or even two; and yes, we have greatly transgressed in this matter...
My translation may be slightly more colloquial than the actual words, but not more so than the clearly discernible tone. And isn't this just the best excuse for not making the world a better place: we can't tackle global warming right now because it's raining!
10:14 YA'AMDU NA SAREYNU LE CHOL HA KAHAL VE CHOL ASHER BE AREYNU HA HOSHIV NASHIM NACHRIYOT YAVO LE ITIM MEZUMANIM VE IMAHEM ZIKNEY IR VA IR VE SHOPHTEYHA AD LEHASHIV CHARON APH ELOHEYNU MIMENU AD LA DAVAR HA ZEH
יַעַמְדוּ נָא שָׂרֵינוּ לְכָל הַקָּהָל וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר בֶּעָרֵינוּ הַהֹשִׁיב נָשִׁים נָכְרִיּוֹת יָבֹא לְעִתִּים מְזֻמָּנִים וְעִמָּהֶם זִקְנֵי עִיר וָעִיר וְשֹׁפְטֶיהָ עַד לְהָשִׁיב חֲרוֹן אַף אֱלֹהֵינוּ מִמֶּנּוּ עַד לַדָּבָר הַזֶּה
KJ: Let now our rulers of all the congregation stand, and let all them which have taken strange wives in our cities come at appointed times, and with them the elders of every city, and the judges thereof, until the fierce wrath of our God for this matter be turned from us.
BN: "Let the leaders of all our communities stand, and let all of those who are in our cities and have married foreign women come at appointed times, and with them the elders of every city, and their judges, until the fierce wrath of our god be turned from us, as touching this matter...
Implying that the leaders are telling the people what they must do, but not role-modeling it themselves, a situation which is simply unacceptable to the common folk. "You do it first, and publicly..." But in fact there will turn out to be only two of the leadership to whom this applies (based on my translation of the next verse).
pey break
10:15 ACH YO-NATAN BEN ASAH-EL VE YACHZE-YAH VEN TIKVAH AMDU AL ZOT U MESHULAM VE SHABTAI HA LEVI AZARUM
אַךְ יוֹנָתָן בֶּן עֲשָׂהאֵל וְיַחְזְיָה בֶן תִּקְוָה עָמְדוּ עַל זֹאת וּמְשֻׁלָּם וְשַׁבְּתַי הַלֵּוִי עֲזָרֻם
KJ: Only Jonathan the son of Asahel and Jahaziah the son of Tikvah were employed about this matter: and Meshullam and Shabbethai the Levite helped them.
BN (provisional): But this turned out only to apply to Yo-Natan ben Asah-El and Yachze-Yah ven Tikvah, and Meshulam and Shabtai the Levite stood as witnesses for them.
AMDU: Every translation I can find insists that these "opposed" the matter, but I think they have this completely wrong; and frankly those translations, like the KJ here, don't make any sense in themselves, and even less in the context of the surrounding verses. AMDU is the same verb that was used in the previous verse, YA'AMDU NA SAREYNU, calling on the leaders to stand up and be counted, or separated from their foreign wives anyway; and then Yo-Natan and Yachze-Yah do precisely that, with Meshulam and Shabtai ha Levi presumably as their "witnesses", because it isn't enough just to take your shoe off and state "I divorce you", but there have to be two witnesses; actually, according to Deuteronomy 24, there really ought to be a written document, a "get", which is placed in the woman's hand (for which see my note to LE HOTSI at verse 3): but just imagine if they had brought the wives with them, and conducted this mass divorce, and all those abandoned women roaming around the city...
Why is it Yo-Natan ben Asah-El, but Yachze-Yah ven Tikvah - we witnessed this switching between BEN and VEN in a seemingly patterned manner with the lists of the returnees in an earlier chapter, and could offer no explanation for it then either.
10:16 VA YA'ASU CHEN BENEY HA GOLAH VA YIBADLU EZRA HA KOHEN ANASHIM RA'SHEY HA AVOT LE VEIT AVOTAM VE CHULAM BE SHEMOT VA YESHVU BE YOM ECHAD LA CHODESH HA ASIYRI LE DARYOSH HA DAVAR
KJ: And the children of the captivity did so. And Ezra the priest, with certain chief of the fathers, after the house of their fathers, and all of them by their names, were separated, and sat down in the first day of the tenth month to examine the matter.
וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כֵן בְּנֵי הַגּוֹלָה וַיִּבָּדְלוּ עֶזְרָא הַכֹּהֵן אֲנָשִׁים רָאשֵׁי הָאָבוֹת לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם וְכֻלָּם בְּשֵׁמוֹת וַיֵּשְׁבוּ בְּיוֹם אֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ הָעֲשִׂירִי לְדַרְיוֹשׁ הַדָּבָר
KJ: And the children of the captivity did so. And Ezra the priest, with certain chief of the fathers, after the house of their fathers, and all of them by their names, were separated, and sat down in the first day of the tenth month to examine the matter.
BN: So the children of the captivity did as they had committed to doing. And Ezra the Kohen, with appropriate clan-chiefs for each of the clans, formally processed the divorces, name by name; and they sat down on the first day of the tenth month to evaluate the matter.
DARYOSH: Which gives us the word DRASHAH for a seminar presentation on a piece of Torah or a colloquium trying to make sense of a written text; but isn't it also ironic in the circumstances, a play on their pronunciation of the Persian King Darius, which is Dar-Yavesh?
10:17 VA YECHALU VA CHOL ANASHIM HA HOSHIYVU NASHIM NACHRIYOT AD YOM ECHAD LA CHODESH HA RI'SHON
וַיְכַלּוּ בַכֹּל אֲנָשִׁים הַהֹשִׁיבוּ נָשִׁים נָכְרִיּוֹת עַד יוֹם אֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן
KJ: And they made an end with all the men that had taken strange wives by the first day of the first month.
BN: And they completed the process with all the men who had married foreign women by the first day of the first month.
Pey break
Three and a half months after the assembly (see verse 9). The impression is that they spent several days, or weeks even, on each case individually, no doubt hearing protests, and arguments, and pleas for special circumstances, dealing with each case on its merits, arranging the divorces and their consequences, until it was done. Or was it done? The next verses give us the full list of those affected, but verse 19 tells us that some only promised to do so, and may not actually have done so, and don't forget that one of the major complaints of Nechem-Yah, when he arrives thirteen years after this, and again when he returns for his second visit, is that so many of the Yehudim have taken foreign wives.
Pey break
10:18 VA YIMATS'E MIBNEY HA KOHANIM ASHER HOSHIYVU NASHIM NACHRIYOT MIBNEY YESHU'A BEN YO-TSADAK VE ECHAV MA'ASEY-YAH VE ELI-EZER VE YARIV U GEDAL-YAH
וַיִּמָּצֵא מִבְּנֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים אֲשֶׁר הֹשִׁיבוּ נָשִׁים נָכְרִיּוֹת מִבְּנֵי יֵשׁוּעַ בֶּן יוֹצָדָק וְאֶחָיו מַעֲשֵׂיָה וֶאֱלִיעֶזֶר וְיָרִיב וּגְדַלְיָה
KJ: And among the sons of the priests there were found that had taken strange wives: namely, of the sons of Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brethren; Maaseiah, and Eliezer, and Jarib, and Gedaliah.
BN: And among the Kohanim were found some who had married foreign women, such as the clan of Yeshu'a ben Yo-Tsadak and his brothers Ma'asey-Yah, Eli-Ezer, Yariv and Gedal-Yah.
MIBNEY HA KOHANIM: It isn't the "sons" of the priests who have taken the foreign wives, but the priests themselves - BENEY HA KOHANIM is simply the form in which the generalised priesthood is described in Yehudit, as we might say "the Guild of Prophets" or "the Worshipful Company of ...". And actually the "abomination" is much more serious in their cases because - click here; the Torah text detailing who a Kohen may and may not marry can be found at Leviticus 21:13-15.
Once again there appears to be part of a name missing. Standard translations render it as: "of the sons of Jeshua, the son of Jozadak, and his brethren, Maaseiah, and Eliezer, and Jarib, and Gedaliah", which names the father, which is odd, unless yet again Ezra can't remember the man's name. I hope my translation clarifies the matter without need of further explanation. Yeshu'a ben Yo-Tsadak appears at Ezra 3:2 as one of the priests who built the altar at the time of Zeru-Bavel.
10:19 VA YITNU YADAM LEHOTS'I NESHEYHEM VA ASHEMIM EYL STON AL ASHMATAM
וַיִּתְּנוּ יָדָם לְהוֹצִיא נְשֵׁיהֶם וַאֲשֵׁמִים אֵיל צֹאן עַל אַשְׁמָתָם
KJ: And they gave their hands that they would put away their wives; and being guilty, they offered a ram of the flock for their trespass.
BN: And they gave their hand that they would put away their wives; and, aknowledging their guilt, their sin offering was a ram from the flock.
I should love to know where it says that the sin-offering for this specific sin (and is it a chet, or a mechilah, or..? click here) is a ram: and specifically: must it be a yearling ram (the full list of sacrifices for sins can be found here)? And I ask only because, irreverent though it be, I am not as convinced as Ezra that a priest "giving his hand", which is to say "his word", means very much, especially when you read Nechem-Yah on the appalling state of the priesthood just a few years later (Nehemiah 13).
VA YITNU YADAM: A way of swearing an oath; the equivalent of today's hand-on-the-Bible, with or without a Bible.
VA YITNU YADAM: A way of swearing an oath; the equivalent of today's hand-on-the-Bible, with or without a Bible.
samech break
10:20 U MIBNEY IMER CHANANI U ZEVAD-YAH
וּמִבְּנֵי אִמֵּר חֲנָנִי וּזְבַדְיָה
KJ: And of the sons of Immer; Hanani, and Zebadiah.
BN: And among the Beney Imer, Chanani and Zevad-Yah.
What follows from this verse to the end is the list of whose who agreed to give up their foreign wives. Verses 20 to 22 do not state that these were Kohanim, but the fact that they are a continuation of verse 18, with a samech break after verse 22, and then verse 23 listing the Leviyim, makes it seem probable. Verse 25, after another samech break, then picks up Yisra-El, which is everyone else who wasn't a Kohen or Levi, so "probable" now becomes "certain". Most of the names have already cropped up in the earlier chapters; I have not undertaken further research on any of these names, as none appear to have any significance beyond this list.
BENEY IMER: see Ezra 2:37.
samech break
10:21 U MIB'NEY CHARIM MA'ASEY-YAH VE ELI-YAH U SHEM'A-YAH VIY'CHI-EL VE UZI-YAH
KJ: And of the sons of Harim; Maaseiah, and Elijah, and Shemaiah, and Jehiel, and Uzziah.
וּמִבְּנֵי חָרִם מַעֲשֵׂיָה וְאֵלִיָּה וּשְׁמַעְיָה וִיחִיאֵל וְעֻזִּיָּה
KJ: And of the sons of Harim; Maaseiah, and Elijah, and Shemaiah, and Jehiel, and Uzziah.
BN: And among the Beney Charim: Ma'asey-Yah, and Eli-Yah, and Shem'a-Yah, and Yechi-El, and Uzi-Yah.
A mere four out of three hundred and twenty - the total number of Beney Charim according to 2:32 and 2:39! See also verse 31, below.
While the establishment, or perhaps we should say "the re-establishment with variations" of the Temple cult includes the purging of foreign wives, it clearly does not yet include the purging of other gods and goddesses from the pantheon. Most of these are Yah names, still honouring the mother-goddess, and El, not Yahu, when it is the sun-god. The change is probably not that far away; but still not yet in place. We will know that it has come, when all the Yah names are suddenly masculinised as Yahu names - see for example, Matit-Yahu the High Priest of Modi'in, who will father the Hasmonean dynasty; but that is in the Apocrypha, not in the Tanach, and the change was probably then.
10:22 U MIBNEY PASH'CHUR EL-YO'EYNAI MA'ASEY-YAH YISHM'A-EL NETAN-EL YO-ZAVAD VE EL-ASAH
וּמִבְּנֵי פַּשְׁחוּר אֶלְיוֹעֵינַי מַעֲשֵׂיָה יִשְׁמָעֵאל נְתַנְאֵל יוֹזָבָד וְאֶלְעָשָׂה
KJ: And of the sons of Pashur; Elioenai, Maaseiah, Ishmael, Nethaneel, Jozabad, and Elasah.
BN: And among the Beney Pash'chur: El-Yo'eynai, Ma'asey-Yah, Yishm'a-El, Netan-El, Yo-Zavad, and El-Asah.
samech break
10:23 U MIN HA LEVIYIM YO-ZAVAD VE SHIM'I VE KELA-YAH HU KELIT'A PETACH-YAH YEHUDAH VE ELI-EZER
וּמִן הַלְוִיִּם יוֹזָבָד וְשִׁמְעִי וְקֵלָיָה הוּא קְלִיטָא פְּתַחְיָה יְהוּדָה וֶאֱלִיעֶזֶר
KJ: Also of the Levites; Jozabad, and Shimei, and Kelaiah, (the same is Kelita,) Pethahiah, Judah, and Eliezer.
BN: And among the Leviyim: Yo-Zavad, and Shim'i, and Kela-Yah (the one known as Kelita), Petach-Yah, Yehudah and Eli-Ezer.
KELA-YAH (HU KELIT'A): The former is Yehudit, the latter Aramit; the insinuation is that the Yehudim dropped or modified the Yah-suffix in Aramit, presumably for the same reason that many people once named Cohen are now called Craig, or Levi Lewis.
samech break
10:24 U MIN HA MESHORERIM EL-YASHIV U MIN HA SHO'ARIM SHALUM VA TELEM VE URI
וּמִן הַמְשֹׁרְרִים אֶלְיָשִׁיב וּמִן הַשֹּׁעֲרִים שַׁלֻּם וָטֶלֶם וְאוּרִי
KJ: Of the singers also; Eliashib: and of the porters; Shallum, and Telem, and Uri.
BN: And among the singers: El-Yashiv; and among the porters: Shalum, and Telem, and Uri.
None of these have family names, or Ezra didn't know them; they should all be Ben somebody.
SHALUM...TELEM: on the principle that we have witnessed that turns Tammuz into Shimshon, we might think that Shalum and Telem were the same name, one in Yehudit the other in Aramit; but in fact not, as Telem has a Tet (ת) not a Tav (ט).
samech break
10:25 U MI YISRA-EL MIBNEY PHAR'OSH RAM-YAH VE YIZI-YAH U MALKI-YAH U MI-YAMIN VE EL-AZAR U MALKI-YAH U VENA-YAH
וּמִיִּשְׂרָאֵל מִבְּנֵי פַרְעֹשׁ רַמְיָה וְיִזִּיָּה וּמַלְכִּיָּה וּמִיָּמִן וְאֶלְעָזָר וּמַלְכִּיָּה וּבְנָיָה
KJ: Moreover of Israel: of the sons of Parosh; Ramiah, and Jeziah, and Malchiah, and Miamin, and Eleazar, and Malchijah, and Benaiah.
BN: And as to Yisra-El: among the Beney Phar'osh: Ram-Yah, and Yizi-Yah, and Malki-Yah, and Mi-Yamin, and El-Azar, and Malki-Yah, and Bena-Yah.
MI-YAMIN: Is this another grammatical error, intending MI BENEY YAMIN? or is Mi-Yamin a name? I think the latter, but if it were the former, then Ezra would be making a distinction among the regular Yisra-Elim (anyone who is not a Kohen or a Levi counts as Yisra-El), separating the Beney Yehudah from the Beney Yamin, a logical enough thing to do given that they were the two surviving tribes, though the latter had been so far absorbed by this time as to be almost vanished. Remember that the land is now called Yehudah, though it includes the tribal territory of Bin-Yamin, but the capital is Yeru-Shala'im, which was Bin-Yamini tribal territory originally.
Constantly having two people with the same name, and no distinguishing patronymic, does not suggest that this was a list being drawn up for posterity; a contemporary secretary would likely have known the people and not required the patronymic.
RAM-YAH... MALKI-YAH: compound names like this one could be seen as a first phase of the masculinisation of the goddess, the male Ram and Melech married to the female Yah. But my use of the word "married" is the key: the name is in fact a reflection of a world-view in which the two halves of the creative drive are equal, albeit that the male usually comes first. That world-view will also change into one that is purely patriarchal, when Yah later becomes Yahu.
samech break
10:26 U MIBNEY EYLAM MATAN-YAH ZECHAR-YAH VIY'CHI-EL VE AVDI VIY'REMOT VE ELI-YAH
וּמִבְּנֵי עֵילָם מַתַּנְיָה זְכַרְיָה וִיחִיאֵל וְעַבְדִּי וִירֵמוֹת וְאֵלִיָּה
KJ: And of the sons of Elam; Mattaniah, Zechariah, and Jehiel, and Abdi, and Jeremoth, and Eliah.
BN: And among the Beney Eylam: Matan-Yah, Zechar-Yah, and Yechi-El, and Avdi, and Yeremot, and Eli-Yah.
Was there really a need to list them, and then publish the list? It feels like "naming and shaming", though I am sure the intention here is a kind of historic honour roll.
BENEY EYLAM: see Ezra 2:7, 4:9, 8:7.
samech break
samech break
10:27 U MI BENEY ZAT'U El-YO'EYNAI EL-YASHIV MATAN-YAH VE YEREMOT VE ZAVAD VA AZIZ'A
וּמִבְּנֵי זַתּוּא אֶלְיוֹעֵנַי אֶלְיָשִׁיב מַתַּנְיָה וִירֵמוֹת וְזָבָד וַעֲזִיזָא
KJ: And of the sons of Zattu; Elioenai, Eliashib, Mattaniah, and Jeremoth, and Zabad, and Aziza.
BN: And among the Beney Zatu: El-Yo'eynai, El-Yashiv, Matan-Yah, and Yeremot, and Zavad, and Aziz'a.
BENEY ZATU: see Ezra 2:8.
samech break
10:28 U MIBNEY BEVAI YEHO-CHANAN CHANAN-YAH ZAVAI ATLAI
וּמִבְּנֵי בֵּבָי יְהוֹחָנָן חֲנַנְיָה זַבַּי עַתְלָי
KJ: Of the sons also of Bebai; Jehohanan, Hananiah, Zabbai, and Athlai.
BN: And among the Beney Bevai: Yeho-Chanan, Chanan-Yah, Zavai, Atlai.
This time the sentence is flawed in both its syntax and its grammar - is Ezra lazy, or dyslectic, or is it, I have suggested many times, that he is simply scribbling a memo for a secretary, and it ended up as a historic document?
BENEY BEVAI: see Ezra 8:11.
10:29 U MIBNEY BANI MESHULAM MALUCH VA ADA-YAH YASHUV U SHE'AL (YEREMOT) VE RAMOT
(וּמִבְּנֵי בָּנִי מְשֻׁלָּם מַלּוּךְ וַעֲדָיָה יָשׁוּב וּשְׁאָל ירמות (וְרָמוֹת
KJ: And of the sons of Bani; Meshullam, Malluch, and Adaiah, Jashub, and Sheal, and Ramoth.
BN: And among the Beney Bani: Meshulam, Maluch, and Ada-Yah, Yashuv, and She'al, and Yeremot.
BENEY BANI: see Ezra 2:10, but also verse 34, below.
With all the names I am going by the Masoretic pointing; but I find some of the Masoretic pointing surprising. She'al, for example, is surely She'ol - Saul. Unpointed, Maluch might be Moloch, which is unlikely, but where did the name Maluch ever appear before, or after? (to which the answer is: verse 32; see my further note there).
VE RAMOT is given as a bracketed alternative. Ramot is also not a known name (for places yes, not for people - click here), though Ram is, alone and as part of a larger name, such as Av-Ram; whereas Yeremot has already appeared in this list (verse 27). On the other hand, we would not be questioning it if it were not for the grammar and syntax problem of the previous verse, which is repeated here if it is Yeremot, but not if it is Ramot - the absence of a conjunction ("and").
samech break
10:30 U MIBNEY PACHAT MO-AV ADN'A U CHELAL BENA-YAH MA'ASEY-YAH MATAN-YAH VETSAL-EL U VINU'I U MENASHEH
וּמִבְּנֵי פַּחַת מוֹאָב עַדְנָא וּכְלָל בְּנָיָה מַעֲשֵׂיָה מַתַּנְיָה בְצַלְאֵל, וּבִנּוּי וּמְנַשֶּׁה
KJ: And of the sons of Pahathmoab; Adna, and Chelal, Benaiah, Maaseiah, Mattaniah, Bezaleel, and Binnui, and Manasseh.
BN: And among the Beney Pachat Mo-Av: Adn'a, and Chelal, Bena-Yah, Ma'asey-Yah, Matan-Yah, Betsal-El, and Binu'i, and Menasheh.
Are these perhaps new names for a new epoch? When people join cults, especially new cults just beginning, symbolic names are normative: Shining Light, New Moon, Daughter Of Lilith, the kinds of names California hippies adopted under David Koresh (funny that he was named Koresh, after the Persian king who sent the cult-leader Ezra to Yisra-El). Does this help explain Ma'asey-Yah = "the Deeds of Yah", or Pachat Mo-Av (which means what anyway? Is it a variation on Pachad Yistchak?), or Matan-Yah, which is to Yah-Natan (Jonathan) what Teddy (Theodor) is to Dorothy (Dorothea).
PACHAT MO-AV: See Ezra 8:4.
samech break
10:31 U VENEY CHARIM ELI-EZER YISHI-YAH MALKI-YAH SHEM'A-YAH SHIM'ON
וּבְנֵי חָרִם אֱלִיעֶזֶר יִשִּׁיָּה מַלְכִּיָּה שְׁמַעְיָה שִׁמְעוֹן
KJ: And of the sons of Harim; Eliezer, Ishijah, Malchiah, Shemaiah, Shimeon,
BN: And among the Beney Charim: Eli-Ezer, Yishi-Yah, Malki-Yah, Shem'a-Yah, Shim'on.
U VENEY: Rather than MIBNEY which appears everywhere else.
Odd that these are named separately from the Beney Charim of verse 21; though several repeat (there may have been several with the same name of course); these are clan-members, or members of a guild, not necessarily biological siblings.
10:32 BIN-YAMIN MALUCH SHEMAR-YAH
בִּנְיָמִן מַלּוּךְ שְׁמַרְיָה
KJ: Benjamin, Malluch, and Shemariah.
BN: Bin-Yamin, Maluch, Shemar-Yah.
Still more Beney Charim. And a second Maluch. Which sets me wondering: Moloch was the principal god of the city of Sala'am before David conquered it, with the glades beneath the Hill of Evil Counsel where the fires of Moloch were lit for the sacrifices, and next to it the Hill of Tsi'on, with Sala'am at its summit, and the Tsi'un, the great brass obelisk of Moloch that gave the hill its original name, on the very summit of the summit. Perhaps, after Nebuchadnezzar took the majority of Yehudim into captivity, the cult of Moloch was revived in Yeru-Shala'im, as it had been under several Yehudi kings before then, and so there were indeed children given the name, in honour of the new deity. As per my note to verse 30, but applied by a diferent cult.
samech break
10:33 MIBNEY CHASHUM MATNAI MATATAH ZAVAD ELI-PHELET YEREMAI MENASHEH SHIM'I
KJ: Of the sons of Hashum; Mattenai, Mattathah, Zabad, Eliphelet, Jeremai, Manasseh, and Shimei.
BN: Among the Beney Chashum: Matnai, Matatah, Zavad, Eli-Phelet, Yeremai, Menasheh, Shim'i.
מִבְּנֵי חָשֻׁם מַתְּנַי מַתַּתָּה זָבָד אֱלִיפֶלֶט, יְרֵמַי מְנַשֶּׁה שִׁמְעִי
KJ: Of the sons of Hashum; Mattenai, Mattathah, Zabad, Eliphelet, Jeremai, Manasseh, and Shimei.
BN: Among the Beney Chashum: Matnai, Matatah, Zavad, Eli-Phelet, Yeremai, Menasheh, Shim'i.
BENEY CHASHUM: see Ezra 2:19.
MATATAH and YEREMAI are interesting; Matthew and Jeremy derive from them, but we know the sources better as Matit-Yahu and Yirme-Yahu. I have written previously (see verse 21) about the transitioning from bi-gendered polytheism to patriarchal omnideism, and these names definitely reflect that transition.
samech break
samech break
10:34 MIBNEY VANI MA'ADAI AM-RAM VE U-EL
KJ: Of the sons of Bani; Maadai, Amram, and Uel,
BN: Among the Beney Vani: Ma'adai, Am-Ram, and U-El.
מִבְּנֵי בָנִי מַעֲדַי עַמְרָם וְאוּאֵל
KJ: Of the sons of Bani; Maadai, Amram, and Uel,
BN: Among the Beney Vani: Ma'adai, Am-Ram, and U-El.
samech break; but I think on this occasion that may be a scribal error - normally the samech break is used to separate sections, but here the names that follow are from the same group; as are the names in the several verses that follow, and no samech break between any of them. (Possibly they were gathered from different lists, and this is why.)
The Beney Bani are already listed in verse 29. I wonder if, and the same applies to the Beney Charim, the list is in fact chronological, so they thought the clan or village had been wrapped up, but then it transpired there were others, who had hoped they could keep their foreign wives secret, but got found out! Or maybe there were just two clans, or two villages, with the same name (there are 33 Newcastles in the world after all, and funnily enough the same number of Springfields, just in the USA - and that doesn't include the one where Homer Simpson has a perfectly kosher wife)
10:35 BENA-YAH VED-YAH KELUHU
KJ: Benaiah, Bedeiah, Chelluh,
BN: Bena-Yah, Ved-Yah, Keluhu.
בְּנָיָה בֵדְיָה כְּלוּהוּ
KJ: Benaiah, Bedeiah, Chelluh,
BN: Bena-Yah, Ved-Yah, Keluhu.
KELUHU: Many English translations render this as Keluhi, though nothing in the Yehudit text suggests that the Vav should be a Yud; normally the Masoretes themselves would note this parenthetically if it were open to query, and for this one they have made the Vav medugash, emphasising that they believe it to be correct as Keluhu.
10:36 VAN-YAH MEREMOT EL-YASHIV
וַנְיָה מְרֵמוֹת אֶלְיָשִׁיב
KJ: Vaniah, Meremoth, Eliashib,
BN: Van-Yah, Meremot, El-Yashiv.
VAN-YAH: As in Russian Vanya? Or is that Va Ne-Yah. The former, most likely; generally the first name in the lines comes without a conjunction and we have seen a distinct absence of conjunctions throughout these lists.
10:37 MATAN-YAH MATNAI VE YA'ASAI
KJ: Mattaniah, Mattenai, and Jaasau,
BN: Matan-Yah, Matnai, and Ya'asai.
מַתַּנְיָה מַתְּנַי וְיַעֲשָׂי
KJ: Mattaniah, Mattenai, and Jaasau,
BN: Matan-Yah, Matnai, and Ya'asai.
Several Yehudit versions have YA'ASAI in brackets, and the unpointed YA'ASO in the main text; Sar Shalom regards YA'ASO as correct and doesn't even bother with the bracketed alternative... and it is interesting to see how often even the Masoretes, who were the experts in these matters, and lived much nearer the time, also found these names so unfamiliar that they could not be certain what they were.
10:38 U VANI U VINU'I SHIM'I
וּבָנִי וּבִנּוּי שִׁמְעִי
KJ: And Bani, and Binnui, Shimei,
BN: And Vani, and Vinu'i, Shim'i;
BN: And Vani, and Vinu'i, Shim'i;
VANI and VINU'I or BANI and BINU'I? Grammatically the former, in usage the latter.
10:39 VE SHELEM-YAH VE NATAN VE ADA'YAH
וְשֶׁלֶמְיָה וְנָתָן וַעֲדָיָה
KJ: And Shelemiah, and Nathan, and Adaiah,
BN: And Shelem-Yah, and Natan, and Ada-Yah;
This time there is a conjunction.
10:40 MACHNADVAI SHASHAI SHARAI
מַכְנַדְבַי שָׁשַׁי שָׁרָי
KJ: Machnadebai, Shashai, Sharai,
BN: Machnadvai, Shashai, Sharai;
BN: Machnadvai, Shashai, Sharai;
10:41 AZAR-EL VE SHELEM-YAH SHEMAR-YAH
KJ: Azareel, and Shelemiah, Shemariah,
BN: Azar-El, and Shelem-Yah, Shemar-Yah,
10:42 SHALUM AMAR-YAH YOSEPH
KJ: Shallum, Amariah, and Joseph.
BN: Shalum, Amar-Yah, Yoseph.
עֲזַרְאֵל וְשֶׁלֶמְיָהוּ שְׁמַרְיָה
KJ: Azareel, and Shelemiah, Shemariah,
BN: Azar-El, and Shelem-Yah, Shemar-Yah,
10:42 SHALUM AMAR-YAH YOSEPH
שַׁלּוּם אֲמַרְיָה יוֹסֵף
KJ: Shallum, Amariah, and Joseph.
BN: Shalum, Amar-Yah, Yoseph.
samech break
10:43 MIBNEY NEVO YE'I-EL MATIT-YAH ZAVAD ZEVIN'A YADAI VE YO-EL BENA-YAH
KJ: Of the sons of Nebo; Jeiel, Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, Jadau, and Joel, Benaiah.
BN: Among the Beney Nevo: Ye'i-El, Matit-Yah, Zavad, Zevin'a, Yadai, and Yo-El, Bena-Yah.
מִבְּנֵי נְבוֹ יְעִיאֵל מַתִּתְיָה זָבָד זְבִינָא ידו (יַדַּי) וְיוֹאֵל בְּנָיָה
KJ: Of the sons of Nebo; Jeiel, Mattithiah, Zabad, Zebina, Jadau, and Joel, Benaiah.
BN: Among the Beney Nevo: Ye'i-El, Matit-Yah, Zavad, Zevin'a, Yadai, and Yo-El, Bena-Yah.
BENEY NEVO: Given that we know that Nevo was a place, does this allow us to understand the Yisra-El list as being town-and-village based? See Ezra 2:29.
YADAI: The same issue here as with YA'ASAI (in brackets), and the unpointed YA'ASO, in verse 37; and the same again with NAS'U in the next verse. Scribal errors!
10:44 KOL ELEH NAS'I (NAS'U) NASHIM NACHRIYOT VE YESH MEHEM NASHIM VA YASIYMU BANIM
כָּל אֵלֶּה נשאי (נָשְׂאוּ) נָשִׁים נָכְרִיּוֹת; וְיֵשׁ מֵהֶם נָשִׁים, וַיָּשִׂימוּ בָּנִים
KJ: All these had taken strange wives: and some of them had wives by whom they had children.
BN: All these had taken foreign wives; and some of them had wives by whom they had children.
NAS'I (NAS'U): There is no grammatical form in Yehudit that would lead to NAS'I, so either this was a scribal error corrected by the Masoretic parenthesis, or perhaps it was Aramit and the Masoretes didn't realise it.
VA YASIMU BANIM: That's a new way of expressing it! Perhaps the word was chosen as a deliberate distraction from the unstated inference of this apalling list - are those children now "excommunicated", regarded as "mamzerim", not counted among the Yehudim but among the Goyim? Without this level of racial purity, the Jews would have died out as a people during the Babylonian exile, let alone through the 2000 years of exile across the world, with forced conversion at almost every point; and yet, and yet...
No comments:
Post a Comment