Torah, Composition

In the 1950s, Yehezkel Kaufmann challenged the regnant Graf-Wellhausen Hypothesis that the Priestly Text was the final Pentateuchal source to be written, and that it dates to the Post-Exilic Period. One pillar of his argument is that the Priestly Text seems wholly ignorant of Deuteronomy’s 7^th century B.C.E. law of centralization of worship, and thus dates to earlier in the First Temple period. And yet, a closer look at P’s laws shows that it is simply taking centralization for granted.

Well, we can theoretically arrive at a 3^rd century B.C.E. archetype by using the conservative Masoretic Text (MT) as the default and comparing it with non-harmonistic variants in the Septuagint (LXX), Samaritan Pentateuch (SP), and Qumran fragments. But textual criticism offers little help in understanding what the text of the Torah looked like at an earlier stage, or how and when it was composed.

In the biblical narrative (Genesis 26, 28), Esau marries Judith, Basemath, and Mahalath. A later genealogical list of Edomite clans (Genesis 36) says that he married Adah, Aholibamah, and Basemath. To make sense of this contradiction, medieval commentaries offer creative backstories, yielding different tallies for the total number of Esau’s wives.

The book of Kings recounts how all Ten Tribes were exiled by the Assyrians and replaced by foreigners, and Ezra–Nehemiah rejects them as non-Israelites. Yet other biblical and Second Temple texts, along with the archaeological record, show that northern Israelites continued to live in Samaria well into the Second Temple period. Far from vanishing, the northern tribes maintained a temple and priesthood that cooperated with their southern neighbors and played a role in shaping the Pentateuch.

Is “kingdom” in Biblical Hebrew, מַמְלָכָה mamlakha or מַלְכוּת malkhut? How does the Bible express that something is prohibited? Many linguistic scholars posit that it depends on the dialect, CBH or LBH. Does statistical analysis support this conclusion?

In biblical times, scraps of writing were stored together in jars, likely based on theme or topic, and these collections were combined and edited into our biblical books. Similarly, Talmudic pericopae began with collections of legal or wise sayings written on pitqi, “scraps,” and stored together in jars, or on a pinqas, wooden slats bound together.

Both namburbi anti-omen rituals (1^st millennium B.C.E.) and priestly Torah rituals were preserved in collections in multiple versions that show evidence of intertextuality and innovation. Were these rituals meant to be performed?

Examining ancient Egyptian papyri, as well as scrolls from animal skins in Levantine sites such as Deir Alla and Qumran, highlights how scribes would add text to preexisting scrolls and showcases the limited size of scrolls intended for regular use.

The story of the ancestors in Genesis serves as a prequel to that of Moses in Exodus. Originally, however, each were self-standing accounts of Israel’s origin. They were combined for the first time by the Priestly author in the post-exilic period.

In revenge for the Midianite seduction, Phinehas takes the sacred utensils from the Tabernacle and leads the war against Midian. Many details in this story contradict other Priestly texts, giving us a glimpse into how the Priestly Torah was compiled.

In the Persian period, the Torah, which is made up of various law collections, was ascribed to Moses as revealed by YHWH. A parallel development was taking place in Achaemenid Persia that sheds light on this process: The sacred texts called the Avesta, that contain the law​​ (dāta) and tradition (daēnā) of Zoroastrianism​, were being collectively ascribed to Zarathustra (Zoroaster) as revealed by Ahuramazdā.

Jewish and Christian tradition ascribes authorship of the Pentateuch to Moses in the 13^th century B.C.E. Is this what the Pentateuch itself implies about who wrote it and when?

Thoughts on Torah Min HaShamayim

Ancient scribes would write as if Moses was the author, or they would claim that a tradition was originally stated by Moses, but they did not intend to convey a historical fact with this description. Instead, they meant that a given tradition was “authentically” Jewish, or God’s will and that Moses would have approved. I call this phenomenon “Mosaic Discourse.”

Bewildered, Rashi asks: why does Deuteronomy record Aaron’s death at Moserah, not Mt. Hor as in Numbers? Also, why does this scene intrude in the middle of Moses’ description of his (second) forty-day stay upon Mount Horeb? Indeed, Rashi is picking up on an editorial insertion.

Deuteronomy, or Mishneh Torah, means “repetition of the law,” however, the author of Deuteronomy does not present the book as a repetition, but as the original revelation to Moses at Horeb, written down on the Plains of Moab.

Before the Five Books of Moses were compiled as a complete work, evidence from Deuteronomy as well as from Joshua and Kings shows that Deuteronomy itself was known as “the Torah.”

If the people are thirsty for lack of water, why complain to Moses that they “have no grain or pomegranates”? Together with other textual anomalies, this narrative discontinuity suggests that interwoven into the water-at-Merivah story is a fragment from a different story: the missing opening verses of the non-Priestly account of the spies.