[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: orion Essenes = 'osey hatorah?

stephen goranson wrote:

> First, Hebrew is a more likely source for self-designation of Essenes,
> as the torah is in Hebrew. Second, both of these Aramaic proposals can
> be shown to have arisen in the history of scholarship as
> misunderstandings, misunderstandings, e.g., of Maccabees and of De Vita
> Contemplativa. Third,  I do not think 4QAramaic Levi does include this
> Aramaic root. (In the orion archives, this was discussed by Robert
> Kugler, Michael Stone, and others.) Even if one concludes it does
> appear in that little fragment, that is merely once.

Another consideration:  if 4QAramaic Levi does contain the root, does
Levi's likely place in the entire collection tell us anything about
whether the presence of a root is likely to shed light on the self
designation of the group?  I tend to associate 4QAramaic Levi with
Aramaic Enoch as literature produced prior to the distinctive body of
literature unique to the scroll collection, of a related perspective but
perhaps inherited by the group that produced the later work.  Should one
look to such a document for the self-designation of the group that
produced the distinctive body of literature?  Does the preference for
Hebrew in that body of literature suggest anything about the language of
any potential self-designation -- aside from the fact that the Torah is
in Hebrew?

David Suter
Saint Martin's College

David W. Suter, Ph.D.
Professor of Religious Studies
Saint Martin's College, Lacey, WA 98503
For private reply, e-mail to "David W. Suter" <dsuter@crc.stmartin.edu>
To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to majordomo@panda.mscc.huji.ac.il with
the message: "unsubscribe Orion." For more information on the Orion Center
or for Orion archives, visit our web site http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il.