The birth of the lemma: The restrictive reinterpretation of the covenant code's manumission law by the holiness code (Leviticus 25:44-46)

Journal of Biblical Literature

Volumn 124, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 617-639

  Levinson, Bernard M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 62449266342     PISSN: 00219231     EISSN: 19343876     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/30041061     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. On the meaning of the protasis, see Bernard M. Levinson, "The 'Effected Object' in Contractual Legal Language: The Semantics of 'If You Purchase a Hebrew Slave' (Exod. xxi 2)," VT 56 (2006) (in press)
2. and the (Exod 21:7-11) respectively
3. rather than the verbal construction shared by Exod 21:5
4. and Lev 25:46
5. On that basis, the formulation in Lev 25:46
6. cannot be derived from Deut 15:17a
7. The principle of chiastic or inverted citation is technically called "Seidel's Law," after its discoverer: M. Seidel, "Parallels between Isaiah and Psalms," Sinai 38 (1955-56): 149-72, 229-40, 272-80, 335-55, at p. 150
8. P. Beentjes, "Inverted Quotations in the Bible: A Neglected Stylistic Pattern," Bib 63 (1982): 506-23
9. and Benjamin D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40-66 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998), 35 and 219 nn. 11-12
10. For a fuller discussion of this and related editorial markers, see Bernard M. Levinson, Deuteronomy and the Hermeneutics of Legal Innovation (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 17-20
11. Note the distinctive causative formulation, "to enslave" (Lev 25:39, 46)
12. Hos 12:13 [12]
13. Ezek 29:20)
14. Lev 25:39, 46
15. Deut 15:19; 21:3 [pu'al]
16. Isa 14:3 [pu'al]
17. Jer 22:13; 25:14; 27:7; 30:8; 34:9-10
18. Ezek 34:27)
19. See also A. W. Streane, The Double Text of Jeremiah (Massoretic and Alexandrian) Compared Together with an Appendix on the Old Latin Evidence (Cambridge: Deighton Bell; London: George Bell, 1896), 182
20. See Alfred Cholewiński, Heiligkeitgesetz und Deuteronomium: Eine vergleichende Studie (AnBib 66; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1976), 245
21. and, incisively, Grünwaldt, Heiligkeitsgesetz, 329-30
22. reworks and transforms both Deut 15:12-18
23. and Exod 21:2-6 (pp. 329-30; and 333). He does not recognize the reuse noted here, however
24. Note the extended discussion of this alleged syntagm by Milgrom, Leviticus 23-27, 2171-72
25. The twelve attestations of in the absolute are: Gen 47:11
26. Lev 14:34; 25:45, 46
27. Num 27:4; 32:5, 22, 29
28. Deut 32:49
29. Ezek 44:28; 45:5, 8
30. The fifty-four inflected forms of are distributed across the following forty-eight verses: Gen 17:8; 23:4, 9, 20; 36:43; 48:4; 49:30; 50.13
31. Lev 14:34; 25.10, 13, 24, 25, 27, 28, 32, 33 (bis), 34, 41; 27:16, 21, 22, 24, 28
32. Num 27:7; 32:32; 35:2, 8, 28
33. Josh 21:12, 41; 22:4, 9, 19 (bis)
34. Ezek 44:28; 45:6, 7 (bis); 46:16, 18 (thrice); 48:20, 21, 22 (bis)
35. Ps 2:8
36. Neh 11:3
37. 1 Chr 7:28; 9:2
38. and 2 Chr 11:14; 31:1
39. Lev 14:34; 25:10, 13, 24, 25, 27, 28, 32, 33 (bis); 27:16, 21, 22, 28
40. Num 35:2, 28
41. Josh 21:12; 22:4, 9,19
42. Ezek 44:28; 46.16; 46:18 (thrice)
43. Ps 2:8
44. Neh 11:3
45. 1 Chr 7:28; 9:2
46. 2 Chr 11:14; and 31:1
47. (once: Lev 25:41)
48. (once: Lev 27:24)
49. (twice: Num 27:7; 32:32)
50. (twice: Num 35:8
51. Josh 21:41)
52. (once: Josh 22:19)
53. (six times: Ezek 45:6, 7 [bis]; 48:20, 21, 22)
54. (once: Ezek 48:22)
55. and (three times: Gen 17:8; 48:4
56. Lev 25:34)
57. Lev 25:34
58. Apart from the case under discussion, there are eight additional attestations of clause or verse initial: Isa 25:2; 34:10; 47:7; 60:21
59. Pss 89:29; 119:89, 93
60. and 2 Chr 2:3
61. Similarly, Moshe A. Zipor, The Peshitta Version of Leviticus with a Commentary (in Hebrew; Jerusalem: Simor, 2003), 219
62. and to real property (Lev 25:34; 27:16)
63. Noting the analogical reasoning and for the translation, see Herbert Danby, The Mishnah: Translated from the Hebrew with Introduction and Brief Explanatory Notes (Oxford: Oxford University Pess, 1933), 321-22 and 321 n. 19
64. John William Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Leviticus (SBLSCS 44; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 429
65. Theophile Meek, "Leviticus," in The Complete Bible: An American Translation (ed. J. M. Powis Smith, Edgar J. Goodspeed et al.; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1939), 90-117, at 115
66. and, as if equivalent, "property for all time" (Lev 25:46
67. Milgrom distinguishes between the two formulae in terms of their application to Levitical land (v. 34) or to slaves as chattel that can be inherited (v. 46; see idem, Leviticus 23-27, 2230)
68. see idem, The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary [New York: W. W. Norton, 2004], 658)
69. and Andreas Ruwe, "Heiligkeitgesetz" und " Priesterschrift": Literaturgeschichtliche und rechtssystematische Untersuchungen zu Leviticus 17,1-26,2 (FAT 26; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 342
70. See John Van Seters, "The Law of the Hebrew Slave," ZAW 108 (1996): 534-46, at 538
71. For an analysis, see Bernard M. Levinson, "Is the Covenant Code an Exilic Composition? A Response to John Van Seters," in In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar (ed. John Day; JSOTSup 406; London/New York: T&T Clark, 2004), 272-325
72. For an evaluation, see Bernard M. Levinson, "The Manumission of Hermeneutics: The Slave Laws of the Pentateuch as a Challenge to Contemporary Pentateuchal Theory," in Congress Volume: Leiden 2004 (ed. André Lemaire; VTSup 109; Leiden: Brill, 2006), 282-322 (in press)
73. Van Seters, "Hebrew Slave," 534-46 = Law Book for the Diaspora, 272-325
74. See Grünwaldt, Heiligkeitsgesetz, 329-30
75. and Levinson, "Manumission of Hermeneutics."
76. Lev 25:39a)
77. For the influence of cuneiform law on biblical legal syntax, with special attention to the protasis markers, see Levinson and Zahn, "Revelation Regained," 295-346 (with bibliography)
78. Japhet, "Relationship between the Legal Corpora," 63-89
79. Milgrom, Leviticus 23-27, 2212-41, 2251-57
80. As regards the problem of the second person versus the "expected" third person in Exod 21:2a
81. see Lothar Perlitt, "'Ein einzig Volk von Brüdern": Zur deuteronomistischen Herkunft der biblischen Bezeichnung 'Bruder,'" in Kirche: Festschrift für Günther Bornkamm zum 75. Geburtstag (ed. Dieter Lührmann and Georg Strecker; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1980), 27-52
82. He gives as examples Deut 15:19; 17:2, 8; 21:1; 22:6, 22; 24:7
83. The nip'al formulation in Lev 25:39a
84. That nip'al form expresses the reciprocal/reflexive idea that is the original semantic function of the conjugation; the passive represents a secondary development. Almost certainly at issue in the nip'al verb at Deut 15:12
85. See Elliger, Leviticus, 341
86. On these examples, see Jeffrey H. Tigay, The Evolution of the Gilgamesh Epic (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982), 75-76, 95
87. and idem, "Conflation as a Redactional Technique," in Empirical Models for Biblical Criticism (ed. Jeffrey H. Tigay; Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985), 53-96, at 74
88. and idem, Deuteronomy and the Hermeneutics of Legal Innovation, 17-20
89. Grünwaldt allows the possibility, properly on a case-by-case basis, that the Numeruswechsel need not automatically serve as a literary-critical criterion but may point to the reception of older traditions. Yet as regards Lev 25:44-46, he inconsistently accepts that the plural section represents a later addition (Zusatz), without considering alternative possibilities
90. and Levinson, Deuteronomy, 30
91. Meir Paran, "Literary Features of the Priestly Code: Stylistic Patterns, Idioms, and Structures" (in Hebrew; Ph.D. diss., Hebrew University, 1983), 15-19, 259-61
92. idem, Forms of the Priestly Style, 29-34
93. Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (2nd ed.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1988), 166-69
94. Adrian Schenker, "Der Boden und seine Produktivität im Sabbat- und Jubeljahr: Das dominium terrae in Ex. 23:10-11 und Lev 25:2-12," in Recht und Kult im Alten Testament: Achtzehn Studien, 123-33
95. repr., Leuven: University Press/Peeters, 1987), 235-41
96. Similarly, in Jub. 20:2
97. (David Lambert, "Last Testaments in the Book of Jubilees," DSD 11 [2004]: 82-107, at 90)
98. The adverb is attested only in Leviticus 25 (w. 25:43, 46, 53)
99. Exod 1:13-14 (P)
100. and in Lev 25:39, 46
101. (Similarly, Grünwaldt, Heiligkeitsgcsetz, 330.)
102. There would be no reason for the Priestly author of Exod 1:13-14 to have changed the key verb
103. employed in Lev 25:43, 46 if these verses stood before him