<<

MASORA’S CONTRIBUTION TO BIBLICAL STUDIES  REVIVAL OF AN ANCIENT TOOL

Aron Dotan

Modern biblical studies made substantial progress during the last decades. Many new or revived branches of study, developed in affili- ated fields, have become by consensus an integral part of biblical studies. While all the great changes took place and practically opened a new era in modern biblical studies, one field of research from ancient times, antedating many others, seems to have been left aside, neglected and forgotten by the major trend of biblical research, namely the Masora. This is an attempt to draw attention to the rich material of the Masora and to its great potential benefits to the study of the Hebrew text. Not only should it become a legitimate partner in biblical studies and an important player in the exegetical orchestra because of its mer- its, but also because, unlike other relatively modern auxiliary tools, it was conceived originally hundreds of years ago as a means to serve the biblical text. The Masora was originally not an independent field but right from its inception it came into being as a regular auxiliary tool accompanying the Hebrew text.1 It is true that for many years the Masora has not been at the center of interest and did not receive the treatment which it rightly deserved. But recent decades brought change and innovation to this field too. The continued efforts of great scholars of past centuries like Wolf Heiden- heim, Solomon Frensdorff, , and Paul Kahle, and in our times Gérard E. Weil, Yeivin, and Mordechai Breuer, brought new life into the ancient leaves of the Masora. New editions of prestigious texts have been published, biblical texts in different vocalizations (Tiberian, Babylonian and Palestinian) as well as independent works of Masora and affiliated subjects. The renewed study of all branches of Masora brought great progress in our insight and understanding of the Masora.

1 Cf. e.g. A. Dotan, “Masorah”, EJ, 13 (2007), pp. 603–656; M.J. Mulder, “The Transmission of the Biblical Text”, in: M.J. Mulder (ed.), Mikra, 1988, pp. 87–135. 58 aron dotan

The best indication of the growing interest in Masora can be seen as we follow the progressive linkage with the Masora in modern sci- entific Hebrew editions. The first two editions of Biblia Hebra- ica, edited by Rudolf Kittel (BH),2 appeared with no marginal Masora notes whatsoever. The third edition ofBiblia Hebraica edited by Paul Kahle (BHK),3 has the Masora parva of the B19a (L) displayed in its margins. The next edition, the Stutt- gartensia (BHS)4 has already both, the Masora parva in the margins and the Masora magna in a separate volume, although, alas, deviating extremely from the original manuscript. And finally, the last edition of (BHQ), which just started to appear,5 has one of its major advantages the genuine reprod uction of both Masoras. It is inconceivable that this potential contribution might be disregarded or even neglected in modern biblical studies. One preliminary terminological remark should be emphasized. It is important to distinguish clearly between the nominal concept “Masora” and the adjective form “masoretic”, which serves a much broader sense than just the adjective of “Masora”. “” refers to the Hebrew text, generally vocalized and accentuated the Tiberian way, as opposed to non-masoretic texts such as the Septua- gint Vorlage, the Samaritan and the like. The term Masora, with its basic sense of ‘transmission, tradition’, refers mainly to the whole bulk of additions to the Hebrew text serving for transmitting the exact tra- ditional reading and pronunciation of the text. This includes, in its wider sense, the vocalization marks, diacritical marks, accentuation marks and also all the marginal notes carrying textual information for the benefit of the scribe and the reader. The narrowest sense of Masora refers primarily to this last category.6 In what follows we shall deal mainly with Masora in its narrowest sense. The notes of Masora draw the attention of the reader, sometimes of the scribe, to forms in the text concerning which there is some pos- sibility of error that the reader or the scribe-copyist may make, that is: spelling with or without matres lectionis, certain vowels or accent

2 Leipzig, 1906 and Leipzig, 1913 (printed again Stuttgart, 1925). 3 Stuttgart, 1937, and several consequent reprints. 4 Stuttgart, 1977, also reprinted and emended several times. 5 So far three fascicles have appeared by the Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft Stuttgart: Megilloth 2004; Ezra and Nehemiah 2006; Deuteronomy 2007. 6 Cf. Dotan, “Masorah,” pp. 1418–9.