In the interesting discussion of Davies and Gmirkin, both, along with
everyone else in print to my knowledge, assume CD 6.10-11 refers
to a future Teacher of Righteousness, from the authoring perspective.
Repeatedly in scholarly discussions this is asserted and assumed without
apparent need for defense or justification or argument--this point is taken
for
granted. To quote most recently:
On May 13 Russ Gmirkin:
after the death of the Teacher the exiles in Damascus did indeed look
forward to the rise of a new Teacher in CD 6.10-11 as well as (or rather,
equivalently) the rise of a new Interpreter of the Law (CD 7.18-19; 4QFlor
1-3 i 11-12).
On May 15 Philip Davies:
Only CD 6 is pre-teacher and that does not allude to a historical figure
but a future one.
And one hundred other Qumran scholarly luminaries could be
quoted saying essentially the same thing concerning the tense
structure.
Steudel's 1993 article debunking the notion that the expression
"end of days" means "future" in Qumran texts is well-known and
widely accepted. But there is like a psychological disconnect in
Qumran scholarship here--what is accepted as a valid argument by
Steudel as a general statement is somehow not applied in the specific
instance of CD 6.10-11, sometimes by the same scholars in the same
book or article without apparent awareness of contradiction.
Sometime I would be interested in hearing scholarly engagement--none
is known to me so far--with the substance of my argument on CD 6.10-11
published in 2001 in _4Q Pesher Nahum: A Critical Edition_, pp. 686-689.
For the benefit of those without easy access to my book, I give the argument
in summarized/shortened form here. First the text, not from any
fragment found at Qumran but from the medieval CD copy:
"And the 'ruler'--this is the Interpreter of the Law, of whom
Isaiah said [Isa 54.16] 'he makes an instrument to carry out
his works'. And the 'nobles of the people'--these are the ones
coming to excavate the well with the statutes which were
ordained by the Ruler to walk in them in the entire time of
wickedness, and without them (the statutes) they will not
obtain until the rise of the Teacher of Righteousness at the
end of days." (CD 6.7-11)
a) The first point of my argument is the notice that the
final phrase, which I have attempted to render literally
above--"without them (the statutes) they will not obtain
until ..."--is incoherent and ungrammatical; there is an object
missing following Y$YGW. "Obtain" _what_??
b) The sense of the structure as commonly read of a past
Interpreter of the Law and a future TR is not in agreement
with the rest of CD, which otherwise is highly redundant
and repetitive in its motifs and language. The expected
structure is that the TR has given rules which are
to be practiced throughout the age of wickedness, which
is currently ongoing (from the authorial perspective of CD).
not yet completed. The "time of wickedness" is the present
age, the same as "the last days" (parallels at CD 1.5;
4.12-13; 6.14; 20.15-20; 12.23). In this construction elsewhere
in CD, the start of the TR's activity is past; he is not awaited
to arise only at the conclusion of the present age.
c) The key words at CD 6.10-11 are only in the medieval copy,
CD, and not in any 4Q fragment (4Q266 Frag. 3 has this area of
CD but the key lines of CD 6.7-11a are almost entirely lost in
lacunas). In light of numerous known minor variants in CD
compared to 4Q fragments there is a legitimate question whether
CD 6.10-11 may be another case involving scribal error.
The verb N$G, "reach, overtake, attain", is attested in
biblical Hebrew only in hiphil according to BDB, and is hiphil
in this instance in CD. The missing object for Y$YGW at CD 6.11
suggests the possibility of minor corruption in the text at this
point.
d) Comparative parallels suggest the expected missing object
for Y$YGW should be some word for "wisdom" or "knowledge",
e.g. 4Q525 2-3 ii 3, )$RY )DM H$YG XWKMH, "blessed is the
man who attains wisdom".
e) Therefore the proposal is that the original text read:
"But without them (the statutes) they will not
obtain {the knowledge of the law. And the 'instrument'--
this is the T}eacher of Righteousness at the end
of days."
The expression MD( TWRH, "knowledge of the law", occurs
in MMT (4Q398 14-17 ii 4; 4Q399 2.1). MD( is used parallel
with XKMH at 2 Chron. 1.10-12 and Dan 1.4. Therefore
MD( TWRH is an excellent reconstructed object for Y$YGW
of CD 6.10-11.
f) That expression would end that sentence. Then a new
sentence would begin with a requotation of KLY, "instrument",
from the previously quoted line from Isa 54.16 two lines earlier
at CD 6.8. The noun KLY of that quotation would be expected to
be requoted and interpreted, like MXWQQ of CD 6.4 with which
it reads in parallel. But KLY is not requoted and interpreted in
existing CD, although a reading of the relevant lines suggest that
it ought to be.
g) The interpretive correspondence of KLY will have been the
TR. As the "staff" (= Interpreter of the law) gives the means
for the people to dig the "well" (= the law), so the
"instrument" gives the means to carry out M($YHW,
works/deeds (compare M($Y HTWRH of 4QMMT).
h) After this reconstruction the TR reads in the present as
expected. He exists in "the last days" just as the "chosen ones
of Israel, the ones called by name" of CD 4.3-4 exist "in the last
days".
i) It may be suggested that by homoioteleuton the ends of the words
TWRH and MWRH were confused. A copying scribe skipped over three
words from the first -WRH to the word following the second -WRH. By
a further garbling of pronunciation the sounds in MD( TWRH became (D (MD
YWRH, the CD reading. In the reconstructed original there is no
unprecedented syntax in which B)XRYT HYMYM follows an (D expression
set in the future. Unprecedented notions of a doubled or future Teacher
also disappear. For the sense of the reconstructed original compare CD
20.27-28:
"But all the ones holding firmly to these precepts, to go out and
go in according to the law, they are to listen to the voice of the
Teacher and they are not to reject the righteous statutes (XQY
HTsDQ) when they hear them."
j) After the reconstruction, CD 6.2-11 refers to the same figure in
three ways: as Interpreter of the Law, Ruler, and Teacher of Righteousness.
Compare CD 4.2-4 in which the same righteous ones are named in two ways.
"'The priests'--these are the _repentant ones of Israel_, the ones
going out from the land of Judah, and the ones joined to them.
And 'the sons of Zadok'--these are the _chosen ones of Israel_,
the ones called by name, the ones standing in the last days."
k) Whether or not the preceding proposed reconstruction of CD 6.10-11
is accepted, the existing CD reading cannot be invoked as the basis for
global interpretive arguments affecting Qumran texts, because it is not
clear what the Qumran texts read at this point. Again, the missing direct
object of Y$YGW suggests something is amiss in the CD copy.
In light of the present analysis, arguments that the Interpeter of the
Law refers to a figure in a precursor movement prior to the Teacher
have no foundation, since this cannot be established independently on
the basis of readings in actual Qumran texts.
So that I am not misquoted, please note that nothing here represents
a proposal to emend a _Qumran_ text, for there is no Qumran text for
CD 6.10-11a in existence to emend. It is evaluation of a medieval copy
of a Qumran text which is at issue.
Greg Doudna
Bellingham, Washington
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
g-Megillot mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
