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

Re: "para-biblical literature"

Dear Avigdor,

Thanks for the information: the text sounds interesting, but is it an
edition in English? it seems not, and I lack the prerequisites for reading
much else!

>He would strongly deny 
>that the canon was formed at any one conclave such as the one at Yavnh 
>which for you would indicate the post-destruction date.
I didn't have a precise event in mind, more a trend that I guess started
with the destruction of Jerusalem and may have finished in the sentiments of
that great scribe Ezra's pronouncement of a division in the sacred texts
between those open and those secret. The selection of these works seems to
have been in part based on political criteria.

>There may have been books 
>found at Qumran which were considered authoritative by certain branches 
>in Judaism, but (apart form possibly esther cf. Talmon in JDD) there are 
>no canonical books which   did not have sacred, atuhoritative status.
I had in mind the idea that the distribution of texts may show a preference:
for example, Deuteronomy is by far the most popular book of Moses, there are
more copies of some of the "para-biblical" texts than there are certain of
the ones that ended up in the canon. Does this represent more acceptance for
those later-to-become non-standard works.

>Many scholars will certainly want to disagree with certain of Haran's 
>suggestions and conclusions, but his work will have to be considered a 
>bench mark and new beginning in all canon-realted questions, including 
>the term para-biblical and the notion of bible not only at Qumran but in 
>all Jewish sects and daughter religions.  Read it!
If I can, I would definitely like to.


Ian Hutchesson

>> Personally, I find the term "biblical" being applied in the dss context
>> anachronistic and best defined as "referring to those books that would
>> become canonical" in that context. I think the evidence indicates that canon
>> was formed post first war. There doesn't seem to be any separation in the
>> Qumran corpus and the preservation caves attempted to save both types.
>> "para-biblical" has the same sort of connotations to it, ie referring to a
>> separation to come. I wonder if it is useful in the Qumran context?
>> Yours,
>> Ian Hutchesson